ticman
Jan 25, 08:37 AM
I am using the Barely There case mate. I got the case that is slightly rubberized as the smooth ones I thought would get very fingerprinted and be slippery.
Happy with my red case.
Happy with my red case.
japanime
Mar 29, 05:57 PM
Sounds very subjective when you give no cost of living comparisons.
The cost of living in Japan is very comparable to that of the United States. VERY. And I speak from experience, having lived both in rural and metro America as well as rural and metro Japan.
And you are the one who brought up "happy" employees. How do you objectively measure "happiness"?
The cost of living in Japan is very comparable to that of the United States. VERY. And I speak from experience, having lived both in rural and metro America as well as rural and metro Japan.
And you are the one who brought up "happy" employees. How do you objectively measure "happiness"?
Malcster
Sep 11, 05:49 AM
Its simple.
We get:
MBP updates and maybe MB updates
10.4.8
Movie Store
6G iPod (not touchscreen) & Nano updates
One More Thing....Media streaming device (Cube re-incarnation) or headless tower (unlikely)
Thats it.
Too early i think for 10.4.8, replace it with iTunes 7 and i think your set ;)
Still not sure they will distract from the movie stuff with MBP, MB or other hardware updates except the streaming video stuff (as it ties into movies)
We get:
MBP updates and maybe MB updates
10.4.8
Movie Store
6G iPod (not touchscreen) & Nano updates
One More Thing....Media streaming device (Cube re-incarnation) or headless tower (unlikely)
Thats it.
Too early i think for 10.4.8, replace it with iTunes 7 and i think your set ;)
Still not sure they will distract from the movie stuff with MBP, MB or other hardware updates except the streaming video stuff (as it ties into movies)
Mr. Wonderful
Apr 25, 03:28 PM
You guys do realize that a 27" iMac would have to be 4K to possess a PPI over 300 and therefore be a "Retina Display?"
And that's when a 2K monitor (the LUM-560) is going for $66,000?
Yeah. Have fun with your $122,000 iMac.
And that's when a 2K monitor (the LUM-560) is going for $66,000?
Yeah. Have fun with your $122,000 iMac.
kingsmuse
Apr 6, 05:53 PM
To each his one, yes; but exactly what does Android offer as a platform than iOS doesn't--and I don't mean multiple download sources. What "... more or different things..." are you doing on Android that can't be done on iOS?
-Sync wirelessly (No more messing with that iTunes syncing madness)
-SD Card (Expandable storage)
-File manager (Operates more like a PC)
-Can actually attach files in the stock E-Mail app (IPad cannot)
-Photo file management in stock photo app (Not possible in iPad without iTunes syncing madness)
-USB Port (This is HUGE)
-HDMI (Also pretty huge)
-Decent cameras
-Flash
-UI looks very cool.
Haven`t held a Xoom yet so just working from posted specs..
But I do have an iPad 1. Quite a disappointing experience for a power user.
The games rock though!!
-Sync wirelessly (No more messing with that iTunes syncing madness)
-SD Card (Expandable storage)
-File manager (Operates more like a PC)
-Can actually attach files in the stock E-Mail app (IPad cannot)
-Photo file management in stock photo app (Not possible in iPad without iTunes syncing madness)
-USB Port (This is HUGE)
-HDMI (Also pretty huge)
-Decent cameras
-Flash
-UI looks very cool.
Haven`t held a Xoom yet so just working from posted specs..
But I do have an iPad 1. Quite a disappointing experience for a power user.
The games rock though!!
Small White Car
May 4, 02:50 PM
I wonder if Apple will start selling an 'App Store USB Drive' in the future.
Much like you can launch Disk Utility from a DVD, you could perhaps launch the app store from this drive. Log in and download the OS you need. If you've already paid for it, it's free. If not, buy it now.
Perhaps all Macs will come with one soon. You'll never have to worry about WHICH software you have...just use the drive. Download 10.7 with it soon or 10.8 later...doesn't matter, you just use the same drive to download anything.
The licence is only for one computer.
If you want to install it on a different machine you must install the original copy first.
The Mac App Store says:
"You can install apps on every Mac you use and even download them again."
That implies that if I go on a friend's computer for 5 minutes once a year I could install Lion on it for no charge.
It's only Macs you've logged into using your iTunes account. In theory this is MORE restrictive. In the past I could buy 1 Tiger disk and put it anywhere and everywhere. No one would know.
With now with Lion and this app-store method, I've gotta be logged in to my friend's computer, giving him access to download apps using my name...and using my gift-card money I've inputted. Hmm...doesn't sound like such a good deal anymore.
Much like you can launch Disk Utility from a DVD, you could perhaps launch the app store from this drive. Log in and download the OS you need. If you've already paid for it, it's free. If not, buy it now.
Perhaps all Macs will come with one soon. You'll never have to worry about WHICH software you have...just use the drive. Download 10.7 with it soon or 10.8 later...doesn't matter, you just use the same drive to download anything.
The licence is only for one computer.
If you want to install it on a different machine you must install the original copy first.
The Mac App Store says:
"You can install apps on every Mac you use and even download them again."
That implies that if I go on a friend's computer for 5 minutes once a year I could install Lion on it for no charge.
It's only Macs you've logged into using your iTunes account. In theory this is MORE restrictive. In the past I could buy 1 Tiger disk and put it anywhere and everywhere. No one would know.
With now with Lion and this app-store method, I've gotta be logged in to my friend's computer, giving him access to download apps using my name...and using my gift-card money I've inputted. Hmm...doesn't sound like such a good deal anymore.
deepledee
Jul 30, 11:51 PM
No one is better than apple at keeping announcements of their products under wraps and other than one thing i might believe that this rumor is true. For any phone to be released in the US, it must apply and receive approval by the FCC. This information is always available to the public and that is why no phone can be released "secretly." The press would have wind of its approval by now if they do intend to announce the launch at the August conference...
sorry guys, i like the rest of you eagerly await an apple iphone
http://www.macrumors.com/images/macrumorsthreadlogo.gif (http://www.macrumors.com)
Contrary to recent reports (http://www.macrumors.com/pages/2006/03/20060330174059.shtml), Engadget says that Apple's rumored "iPhone" may appear as early as August (http://www.engadget.com/2006/07/29/wild-speculation-iphone-to-launch-in-august/).
It has been well-established that Apple has been working on an Apple-branded phone for some time, however the release date has been difficult to pinpoint. Recently, various patents (1 (http://www.macrumors.com/pages/2006/05/20060505202447.shtml), 2 (http://www.macrumors.com/pages/2006/06/20060614074411.shtml)) have been uncovered regarding Apple's cell phone technology and Peter Oppenheimer made comments (http://www.macnn.com/articles/06/07/20/merrill.upgrades.aapl/) during Apple's Q3 2006 conference call virtually acknowledging Apple's work on the product, stating "We're not sitting around doing nothing" with regard to cell phones.
sorry guys, i like the rest of you eagerly await an apple iphone
http://www.macrumors.com/images/macrumorsthreadlogo.gif (http://www.macrumors.com)
Contrary to recent reports (http://www.macrumors.com/pages/2006/03/20060330174059.shtml), Engadget says that Apple's rumored "iPhone" may appear as early as August (http://www.engadget.com/2006/07/29/wild-speculation-iphone-to-launch-in-august/).
It has been well-established that Apple has been working on an Apple-branded phone for some time, however the release date has been difficult to pinpoint. Recently, various patents (1 (http://www.macrumors.com/pages/2006/05/20060505202447.shtml), 2 (http://www.macrumors.com/pages/2006/06/20060614074411.shtml)) have been uncovered regarding Apple's cell phone technology and Peter Oppenheimer made comments (http://www.macnn.com/articles/06/07/20/merrill.upgrades.aapl/) during Apple's Q3 2006 conference call virtually acknowledging Apple's work on the product, stating "We're not sitting around doing nothing" with regard to cell phones.
dethmaShine
May 4, 03:17 PM
I'm the one that raised the point in the first place! I think I set the context!
Exactly. You did set the context but you did fall out your words when you said that MAS download would be a better thing to exploit which in any case, not true.
Just like 'small white car' corrected you, there's nothing worse than an unrestricted Mac OS Install Disk. Simple.
I do. I don't have any need to violate it. I only have one Mac.
All of my computers have a fully licenced copy of Windows XP or 7 on them.
It's great. Good that you don't. Just saying that EULA doesn't hold a candle in practicality and can be easily exploited. I can illegally install the OS on a laptop in front of Apple and they cannot do anything. Not that they care, but even if they did, they couldn't.
Exactly. You did set the context but you did fall out your words when you said that MAS download would be a better thing to exploit which in any case, not true.
Just like 'small white car' corrected you, there's nothing worse than an unrestricted Mac OS Install Disk. Simple.
I do. I don't have any need to violate it. I only have one Mac.
All of my computers have a fully licenced copy of Windows XP or 7 on them.
It's great. Good that you don't. Just saying that EULA doesn't hold a candle in practicality and can be easily exploited. I can illegally install the OS on a laptop in front of Apple and they cannot do anything. Not that they care, but even if they did, they couldn't.
thisisahughes
Mar 29, 09:29 AM
wirelessly syncing my phone would be heaven
dreams.....
dreams.....
doubleusn
Mar 28, 09:45 AM
Maybe not at WWDC, but I don't see them waiting till Fall to put out new iPhone hardware, hold iOS5 till then, maybe, but not new hardware.
They risk losing people to Android, WebOS, etc... as the remaining iPhone3GS people all start coming off of contract, and nobody will go iPhone4 knowing 5 is just months away.
This waiting around also gives 3GS users a few months to check out other products (new Pre w/WebOS, etc). Apple does not want people looking around during that break time.
They risk losing people to Android, WebOS, etc... as the remaining iPhone3GS people all start coming off of contract, and nobody will go iPhone4 knowing 5 is just months away.
This waiting around also gives 3GS users a few months to check out other products (new Pre w/WebOS, etc). Apple does not want people looking around during that break time.
ariza910
Aug 11, 12:43 PM
Yes, actualy all the worlds puppies will die
Everyone waiting on the Core 2 Duo MacBook needs to get a clue.
It's the same folks who were falling over waiting to WWDC to come so they could order their Core 2 Duo MacBooks after the keynote!
Apple IS NOT going to move the MacBook to a Core 2 Duo until they've updated:
1) MacBook Pro
2) iMac
3) Maybe even Mac Mini, since it's been out forever!
The MacBook is barely three months old. It may get a speed bump and/or price cut soon, but won't get a new chip.
All of you saying Apple has to upgrade it to a Core 2 Duo to complete with Dell, HP, etc - why? Why do they HAVE to? Will they explode if they don't? Will the sun stop shining? Will all the world's puppies die?
Of course they'll upgrade it eventually. That doesn't mean it needs to be upgraded as soon as the chips are available. If you look at other PC maker's sites, most of their machines don't even have the Core Duo chips yet; there's no rush.
You can't claim Apple will inevitable act a certain way now that they're on Intel chips; you don't know that. They have no history of using Intel chips. Just because your bright minds think it would be a good idea to move the MB line to the latest and greatest chip whenever a new one is released by Intel because "that's what the other guys are doing," it doesn't mean Apple agrees with you.
What we DO know for a fact is Apple like to differentiate between consumer and pro lines, and Apple has never been one to put the latest chips into the iMac or Mac Mini level machines - and I don't see either of that changing.
Everyone waiting on the Core 2 Duo MacBook needs to get a clue.
It's the same folks who were falling over waiting to WWDC to come so they could order their Core 2 Duo MacBooks after the keynote!
Apple IS NOT going to move the MacBook to a Core 2 Duo until they've updated:
1) MacBook Pro
2) iMac
3) Maybe even Mac Mini, since it's been out forever!
The MacBook is barely three months old. It may get a speed bump and/or price cut soon, but won't get a new chip.
All of you saying Apple has to upgrade it to a Core 2 Duo to complete with Dell, HP, etc - why? Why do they HAVE to? Will they explode if they don't? Will the sun stop shining? Will all the world's puppies die?
Of course they'll upgrade it eventually. That doesn't mean it needs to be upgraded as soon as the chips are available. If you look at other PC maker's sites, most of their machines don't even have the Core Duo chips yet; there's no rush.
You can't claim Apple will inevitable act a certain way now that they're on Intel chips; you don't know that. They have no history of using Intel chips. Just because your bright minds think it would be a good idea to move the MB line to the latest and greatest chip whenever a new one is released by Intel because "that's what the other guys are doing," it doesn't mean Apple agrees with you.
What we DO know for a fact is Apple like to differentiate between consumer and pro lines, and Apple has never been one to put the latest chips into the iMac or Mac Mini level machines - and I don't see either of that changing.
TigerWoodsIV
May 6, 12:42 AM
This would be a huge mistake. I could almost see Apple getting cocky and trying to pull it off again, but with the 3D chip technology announced by Intel the other day and the rapid pace they are innovating and shrinking chips while lower voltage in their planned chips, I think that if anything it'd be the opposite and Intel would move into mobile devices. ARM won't have anything on Intel's PC chips 2 years down the road.
It's not like Intel is getting complacent. They are boosting performance and increasing efficiency at a very fast pace, and with the huge lead they already have over ARM in the PC environment, how is it possible that they would catch up?
It's not like Intel is getting complacent. They are boosting performance and increasing efficiency at a very fast pace, and with the huge lead they already have over ARM in the PC environment, how is it possible that they would catch up?
eenu
Aug 11, 03:29 PM
So what is there to expect before MWSF?
Well, new iPods, for one:
Full Screen Video iPod, possibly with accompanying new iTunes service.
Redesigned-nano + upgraded
Updated shuffle (finally)
Also, new hardware:
New chips for MBP + possible case redesign
New chips for iMac too
-=|Mgkwho
The MBP will be done on a random day. Its a 'Pro' model andParis is more for the consumer goods like iMacs and iPods etc
Well, new iPods, for one:
Full Screen Video iPod, possibly with accompanying new iTunes service.
Redesigned-nano + upgraded
Updated shuffle (finally)
Also, new hardware:
New chips for MBP + possible case redesign
New chips for iMac too
-=|Mgkwho
The MBP will be done on a random day. Its a 'Pro' model andParis is more for the consumer goods like iMacs and iPods etc
adbe
Mar 26, 10:31 PM
For anyone thinking Apple will release a new iPad in the fall... don't bet on it. The last two releases have shown that it takes AT LEAST several months before supply is able to adequately meet demand--especially when you look at it from a worldwide perspective. Do you really think they'd risk a shortage during the holiday season? Not a chance.
What if the 3 was pitched as a new tier, rather than a replacement? A retina class screen would probably still squash the margins to levels unacceptable to Apple. If they could simply sell the device for a higher price point, or slightly drop the iPad2s price point, then there's no real shortage risk.
What if the 3 was pitched as a new tier, rather than a replacement? A retina class screen would probably still squash the margins to levels unacceptable to Apple. If they could simply sell the device for a higher price point, or slightly drop the iPad2s price point, then there's no real shortage risk.
silentnite
Apr 25, 11:44 AM
Good answer, that's the same thing my attorney said to do. Deny everything.:D
Popeye206
Apr 7, 10:50 AM
LOL! So Apple's ability to control a consumer market is a good thing? Tell me you're not that naive.
LOL! I love it when someone calls someone else "naive" when the opposite is true just based on their statement! Funny isn't it?
LOL! I love it when someone calls someone else "naive" when the opposite is true just based on their statement! Funny isn't it?
-aggie-
May 4, 10:39 AM
The other downside is we have half our health and action points. I'm not sure how big of a trap we can see early in a game, but if it has 3 or more that wipes out a whole team possibly.
KnightWRX
Apr 11, 07:17 AM
are we still debating over this?
Yes, because the uninitiated that claim this is ambiguous keep popping up. Oh wait...
if we stay to basic math, it depends on how you read the / sign
If you read it as anything other than a division, you need to go back to school.
it is poorly written (or more likely purposely ambiguously written)
Only for those with a lack of understanding of basic math. Again, the problem is not the equation per say, it's the people that don't understand mathematics.
New RayBan Wayfarer RB2140
Yes, because the uninitiated that claim this is ambiguous keep popping up. Oh wait...
if we stay to basic math, it depends on how you read the / sign
If you read it as anything other than a division, you need to go back to school.
it is poorly written (or more likely purposely ambiguously written)
Only for those with a lack of understanding of basic math. Again, the problem is not the equation per say, it's the people that don't understand mathematics.
adbe
Mar 29, 02:48 PM
Or perhaps the entire debacle at Foxconn has fallen on deaf ears?
;)
Foxconn is Taiwanese.
;)
Foxconn is Taiwanese.
d0minick
Mar 31, 08:12 AM
I've been using the inverted scrolling for a few weeks. At first, it was very weird and found myself scrolling the wrong way often. However, after a few day, I started to "get" the metaphor and it became natural. Now when I go to work and use their computers, I feel the scrolling on XP is the opposite of what feels natural.
If it only took me a few days to reverse over a decade of training and muscle memory, then maybe it's not that a stupid setting.
LMAO, come on man!
You changed your ways to suit the OS? I'd understand if you were use to inverted but the OP is correct. It should not be defaulted inverted.
I bet you were also "holding it wrong". I love my apple gadgets, but thats a bit borderline ridiculous.
If it only took me a few days to reverse over a decade of training and muscle memory, then maybe it's not that a stupid setting.
LMAO, come on man!
You changed your ways to suit the OS? I'd understand if you were use to inverted but the OP is correct. It should not be defaulted inverted.
I bet you were also "holding it wrong". I love my apple gadgets, but thats a bit borderline ridiculous.
Cavepainter
Mar 30, 02:36 PM
I hardly think $1 for 20 gigabytes of available anywhere storage is very unreasonable.
Maybe that rate wouldn't be bad, but if you read the article, that's not what they're charging. Beyond the initial free amount, its $1 per 1 gig, not $1 per 20 gigs. A terabyte per year is a thousand dollars a year. That's not too cheap. And this isn't including bandwidth usage, which is gonna cost money too, of course. Plus, what do you think, are these rates and bandwidth usage costs gonna be higher or lower in the future?
They (banks) aren't storing physical cash somewhere anymore, it's all just a line of electronic code that states what your balance is.
Well, it actually it still exists as money, but of course banks aren't storing it all in a vault- they're loaning it out to other people, at rates 10 to 100 times greater than the interest rate they are offering you for using that money- and they're using your money to make them money. I'm sure they could loan out money at much lower rates and still do fine, but that's what we're used to paying, so there you go. But anyway, back on track-
If you want premium content, you pay for it.
That premium content you're happy to be paying lots of money for is actually making the provider plenty of money on the back end too- remember cable and satellite television still has plenty of advertisements. Again, they could probably charge you a third of what you currently pay and it would still be profitable. (I'm just sayin'...)
People just think it's ridiculous to spend money on music because avenues have popped up where you can get it for free.
True, but for me, no, I actually buy my music and support the artists- I just think its ridiculous to buy my music and pay someone else over and over and over again, forever, just to be able listen to it.
I have 2 computers at home, a laptop, a phone that has storage, a DVR, even my Xbox can store music files..... How nice to be able to visit my parents, or go on vacation, or be at a friend's house, log on to their computer, and have my entire music library instantly available at my fingertips.
80 gigs of music in a computer's memory doesn't actually "weigh" all that much. You can have all those files right there on your devices right now, unless you have terabytes of things to store. As storage continues to grow on computers, I think you'll find that the prices will be more and more appealing for larger and larger amounts of storage.
Look, I understand your points, and if you have multiple platforms that need to share and sync enormous amounts of files, that can be a challenge and the cloud would be convenient. But for the amount of music and photography and other files I have and the way I would store it and access it, I personally would rather just have all the files I need right there on my computer at my fingertips without having to pay someone to access it from a remote location. You're certainly free to spend money to access things you already purchased, but its not for me. To each their own.
Maybe that rate wouldn't be bad, but if you read the article, that's not what they're charging. Beyond the initial free amount, its $1 per 1 gig, not $1 per 20 gigs. A terabyte per year is a thousand dollars a year. That's not too cheap. And this isn't including bandwidth usage, which is gonna cost money too, of course. Plus, what do you think, are these rates and bandwidth usage costs gonna be higher or lower in the future?
They (banks) aren't storing physical cash somewhere anymore, it's all just a line of electronic code that states what your balance is.
Well, it actually it still exists as money, but of course banks aren't storing it all in a vault- they're loaning it out to other people, at rates 10 to 100 times greater than the interest rate they are offering you for using that money- and they're using your money to make them money. I'm sure they could loan out money at much lower rates and still do fine, but that's what we're used to paying, so there you go. But anyway, back on track-
If you want premium content, you pay for it.
That premium content you're happy to be paying lots of money for is actually making the provider plenty of money on the back end too- remember cable and satellite television still has plenty of advertisements. Again, they could probably charge you a third of what you currently pay and it would still be profitable. (I'm just sayin'...)
People just think it's ridiculous to spend money on music because avenues have popped up where you can get it for free.
True, but for me, no, I actually buy my music and support the artists- I just think its ridiculous to buy my music and pay someone else over and over and over again, forever, just to be able listen to it.
I have 2 computers at home, a laptop, a phone that has storage, a DVR, even my Xbox can store music files..... How nice to be able to visit my parents, or go on vacation, or be at a friend's house, log on to their computer, and have my entire music library instantly available at my fingertips.
80 gigs of music in a computer's memory doesn't actually "weigh" all that much. You can have all those files right there on your devices right now, unless you have terabytes of things to store. As storage continues to grow on computers, I think you'll find that the prices will be more and more appealing for larger and larger amounts of storage.
Look, I understand your points, and if you have multiple platforms that need to share and sync enormous amounts of files, that can be a challenge and the cloud would be convenient. But for the amount of music and photography and other files I have and the way I would store it and access it, I personally would rather just have all the files I need right there on my computer at my fingertips without having to pay someone to access it from a remote location. You're certainly free to spend money to access things you already purchased, but its not for me. To each their own.
ChrisA
Aug 7, 06:02 PM
.... I have 3meg internet service and I cannot tell a difference between wired and wifi. My wireless will hit ~10mb/s transfer if I'm moving a large file from one computer to another. Obviously, that 10mb/s is faster then my 3meg internet service. My internet service is the bottleneck, not the wireless..
That works for you because you only use the network to connect to the Internet. For someone with a larger setup who keeps all the user files (and home folders) on a file server wireles is not fast enough. You really need gigabit Ethernet to make it work transparently. One you put the home folders on a server then your users can walk up to ANY random machine, log in and see there own desktop and their own files. You get the effect of Sun's Scott Mcneally's famos quote "The network is the computer."
You talk about "moving a large file from one computer to another." with a fastr network you would not care what computer a file was on and have no need to move it. With fast enough network remote files are faster than local files because the remote file server can be very high performance. We have one of those here wioth about a hundred or so SCSI drives in it. Pulling data off 100+ drives at one, in parllel is very fast.
One other thing with wireless that 56Kbps is a shared resource. Every computer has to wait it. If you have a wired network every wire carries twice the nominal bandwidth and it is not shared. The "bottle neck" is the bandwidth of the switch backplane which typically ismany gitabits.
So, bottom line. Lots of people need this. some home users don't but these new machines are not designed for home users
That works for you because you only use the network to connect to the Internet. For someone with a larger setup who keeps all the user files (and home folders) on a file server wireles is not fast enough. You really need gigabit Ethernet to make it work transparently. One you put the home folders on a server then your users can walk up to ANY random machine, log in and see there own desktop and their own files. You get the effect of Sun's Scott Mcneally's famos quote "The network is the computer."
You talk about "moving a large file from one computer to another." with a fastr network you would not care what computer a file was on and have no need to move it. With fast enough network remote files are faster than local files because the remote file server can be very high performance. We have one of those here wioth about a hundred or so SCSI drives in it. Pulling data off 100+ drives at one, in parllel is very fast.
One other thing with wireless that 56Kbps is a shared resource. Every computer has to wait it. If you have a wired network every wire carries twice the nominal bandwidth and it is not shared. The "bottle neck" is the bandwidth of the switch backplane which typically ismany gitabits.
So, bottom line. Lots of people need this. some home users don't but these new machines are not designed for home users
genetechnics
Jul 30, 06:14 AM
Without even getting into new things, they could just do it well. Cell phones have interfaces like goats. Every single one of them.
David:cool:
So we need cell computers.
http://geocities.com/gene_technics
David:cool:
So we need cell computers.
http://geocities.com/gene_technics
Don't panic
May 3, 12:22 PM
In the meanwhile, the villain...
so is the turn of the villain simultaneous to the heroes (meaning he can communicate/implement his moves at any time) or do turns alternate (and if they do, do they in singles or in pairs)?
what's the point of having 'rounds'?
is there a time-limit to the villain's decision before it defaults in no-action, 1 point accrued?
(i know i am a pain, but i want the rules to be clear)
so is the turn of the villain simultaneous to the heroes (meaning he can communicate/implement his moves at any time) or do turns alternate (and if they do, do they in singles or in pairs)?
what's the point of having 'rounds'?
is there a time-limit to the villain's decision before it defaults in no-action, 1 point accrued?
(i know i am a pain, but i want the rules to be clear)
No comments:
Post a Comment