question about combos

[Bayohne]

One misconception I'd like to stamp out now is the fact that these self-combos aren't a replacement for the previous battle regimen system. It would be best if you could look at them as an entirely new system.

Another thing I wanted to mention was the fact that the team is working on making it easy to visualize how to continue your combo. They're working to get it in by 1.20 but it's not a guarantee yet.

[Kiote]

One misconception I'd like to stamp out now is the fact that these self-combos aren't a replacement for the previous battle regimen system.

So, they are a replacement for the battle regimen system?

[DNO]

So, they are a replacement for the battle regimen system?

whaa...... how............... wow.

[Valen]

So, they are a replacement for the battle regimen system?

Agree, Kiote. The way Bayohne wrote it makes me understand that the new combos are in fact a replacement for the battle regimen. If he is "stamping out" the "misconception" that "the self-combos AREN'T a replacement", it means they are indeed a replacement.

I do believe he meant the opposite though, as stated by his "entirely new system" affirmative.

Yours sincerely,
Valen

[Davorok]

In standard written English, when two negatives are used in one sentence, the negatives are understood to cancel one another and produce a weakened affirmative. However, in many dialects, the second negative is employed as an intensifier and should be understood as strengthening the negation rather than removing it.

Unfortunately the last statement, "It would be best if you could look at them as an entirely new system." does not entirely clear up the confusion as an "entirely new system" can still be a replacement for the old system or it could be an entirely new system alongside the entirely new system that replaces the old one.

"It's a separate system" may have been a better choice if it is indeed an entirely new system. ;>P

[NoctisUmbra]

In standard written English, when two negatives are used in one sentence, the negatives are understood to cancel one another and produce a weakened affirmative. However, in many dialects, the second negative is employed as an intensifier and should be understood as strengthening the negation rather than removing it.

Unfortunately the last statement, "It would be best if you could look at them as an entirely new system." does not entirely clear up the confusion as an "entirely new system" can still be a replacement for the old system or it could be an entirely new system alongside the entirely new system that replaces the old one.

"It's a separate system" may have been a better choice if it is indeed an entirely new system. ;>P

DING! Davarok Treewolf has attained Devil's Advocate level 2.

[Davorok]

DING! Davarok Treewolf has attained Devil's Advocate level 2.

Thank you Bayohne and Kiote. I couldn't have done it without you.

[Rentahamster]

So, they are a replacement for the battle regimen system?

It would be best if you could look at them as an entirely new system.

It would be best if you could look at them as an entirely new system.

[REDace0]

So, they are a replacement for the battle regimen system?

You may technically be correct in pointing out some less than ideal phrasing, but by referring to the self combos not being a replacement for the battle regimen system as a 'fact', Bayohne implies that it cannot be the 'misconception' mentioned.

[Kiote]

You may technically be correct in pointing out some less than ideal phrasing, but by referring to the self combos not being a replacement for the battle regimen system as a 'fact', Bayohne implies that it cannot be the 'misconception' mentioned.

I wasn't trying to point out bad phrasing, i want him to reconfirm in real Words what he means.

What he said literally means that the Combo system IS a replacement for Battle regimes.