Quote Originally Posted by Raven2014 View Post
<snip>
Let's recap:

You point to something that never did X. At all. And you say "Hey, it was far from perfect, but at least it gave X a shot." But it didn't. It didn't even make the attempt. It was just bloated pretense.

As such, when you point to it and say "That's what we should look to [instead]" especially in the context of suggestions that would almost certainly be lower cost and more comprehensively effective, it sounds a whole lot like you'd rather have bloated pretense.

You clearly don't consider those past attempts as just bloated pretense, but you have yet to (A) generalize what you're looking for to the point that the examples (e.g., MP management or Enmity management) you're choosing would ever have been attempted, or (B) point out what you actually want, gameplay-wise, that could inform anyone else to how you possibly look at those past examples and see something attempted that would be worth revitalizing, let why you'd frame all that in the way you have (because that shit sure wasn't management and yet you keep talking about "management").

If you want "meaningful MP management," then no example from this game --which has never had it-- is going to help you with that. So come up with it on your own. Describe. Define. Detail.

If you want anyone to see anything lucrative in that vision, especially when you keep treating it as mutually exclusive to solutions typically held as both more practical and broadly applicable, then elaborate.