The Mana World Forums

This topic, first and foremost, is my scratch pad/manifesto/stream of consciousness on various components of the game and what the light of my perspective casts upon them.

Whenever I feel like it, I will post new entries here talking about the quest of the month, or an underdocumented element that's been with us for a while, or future plans for the game that I've overheard, or whatever. Feel free to chime in with your responses. Maybe you'll even be inspired to start your own similar style of topic if you take a different approach to playing, and we will be all the richer for hearing it.

For those who don't know me in the game or where I come from, a not-so-brief introduction:
-I represent the purest style of tank possible in the game. 1/1/102/1/15/87, and there are even plans to abandon the 15 at a specific point in the future.
-Yes, it takes an extremely long time to level up with a profile like that. I'm not keeping track, but it took at least several months to make the most recent trip from 81 up to 82. Not to say anything of the seventeen longer journeys that will follow.
-No, I don't mind this.
-In a group attack, my low damage output works against me in awarding XP, and especially in the winner-take-all nature of awarding drops.
-I don't mind that either. I know of these shortcomings in the path I take, and yet I still choose it.
-If I have one regret about my role, it's that I can often be ineffective at drawing the attention of hard-to-hit monsters (such as floating skulls) away from players who would rather not have them in their face (which runs counter to why characters like me exist). With a magic score of -430, #itenplz is a long way off.
-A player's INT stat often has little to do with that of their characters', and I like to find places in the game where that separation makes itself apparent.
-I know the game currently places almost no premium whatsoever on character preservation. For my own sake (and for no other reason at the moment), I do what I can to persevere anyway.
-I go into battle knowing what my limits are. Part of this is just because when the battles take as long as they do, it doesn't take very many of them before I become familiar with the way they play out.
-I have triumphed over Xakelbael the Dark without the help of any other players.
-One of the most relaxing things in the game for me is a nice, calm, out-of-the-way fight to the death against a gang of three skeletons. Sometimes a fourth one will join in, thinking it found a day spa or something, but generally that doesn't last long. Three is truly the magic number here.
-I believe in the power of minimizing maintenance costs. A victory obtained in such a way that your reward is firmly established as such, and is not subject to erosion in your pursuit of future rewards (and so on in an endless cycle), is infinitely more valuable in the long run.
-Despite my considerable stay here (probably within the oldest 1% of existing accounts, though I have no way to confirm this), I have never even possessed as much as 750,000 GP at any point. When you don't need to buy everything left and right, the money you have is just less important, period, and thus there's little reason to hunt for GP as a primary goal.
-I stand ready for death to strike at almost any moment. Not surprisingly, it almost never does. The key is that by being prepared for it, I aim to have a positive effect on keeping everyone protected. Myself, and you as well should we ever meet. That is, after all, why I am here.

And now you can finally hear my Undying Thoughts.

1. Yeti Math

The first time I took on the yeti quest battle minigame, I was in a group of four players. The other three all died in the first seven minutes, leaving me to protect Cindy singlehandedly (assuming, like so many things in the game do, that the hand with the shield in it is all tied up and unusable for anything else).

My thought was that if this minigame was set up like the Candor battle, then I could just wait out the waves and claim a victory on that front. The nice thing about the new setting is that yetis are only one type of monster, unlike in Candor where the JackOs will always gain separation on the fallen, who always gain separation on the skulls. Combined with the fact that yeti speed comes close to matching player speed, so that there's less of a need to keep a precise rhythm of stopping and starting in a latency-prone environment, that adds up to mean that it's much easier to guide a herd of yetis around safely than it is to try to run around through a bunch of random crap. So I kept dodging them for a while, and every so often I would get enough separation that a single yeti would end up splitting off from the rest of the pack, which was my cue to drag it over to (101,44) in the top left and dispose of it 1-on-1 just to make life that little bit easier. (Even then I preferred to stake out the top left rather than the bottom right, because there's less stuff to run into that can potentially slow you down up there, and also because it provides a wider angle from which to make an escape in case the herd finds you and gets close enough to swarm in.) As an added bonus, that meant I could actually send out messages during that time instead of having to devote the keyboard to constantly running.

Anyway, that kept going, and going, and no end in sight. By the time I had heard that no, it's not the same as Candor and there is no decision on points after a certain number of rounds, the fight had lasted an hour and a half, and a huge crowd had built up outside the door, unable to get in because allowing players to join the game in progress would be a pretty stupid thing to do. At that point I counted 12 yetis left in the pack. It was an eminently winnable situation, given that I still wasn't dead, but my kills were timing in at anywhere from 8 to 11 minutes, so any victory I could have managed would have taken at least two additional hours, during which time everyone else would still be unable to participate. So I made the decision to sign out and back in, ending the game and unblocking the door.

(Happy ending: The huge crowd came in and easily triumphed in the next game, at which point I received a wooden staff and surprisingly got a message for being over the 50% weight limit, since the staff misreported its weight as 10 at the time despite actually weighing 1000. Even so, I decided why the hell not and joined a smaller group in taking on a second go-round right away. With the staff in inventory, and no sources of healing whatsoever for the duration of the game, I managed to live through that one too, ending with 5 HP.)

But enough about personal stories. You're here for Yeti Math. (And other Undying Thoughts, but right now that's Yeti Math.)

Anyway, shortly after that debacle, the powers that be rightfully decided that no player should ever tie up a room like that for so long (especially when it's a key step in a quest with very high player demand) and instituted a time limit. Unlike in Candor, though, you don't win at the time limit--instead, at 43 minutes 38 seconds, and every 2 minutes thereafter, it summons about 50 yetis at a time, which is a large enough quantity for that size room to ensure that unless you're just a couple hits away from winning when the first horde comes, you lose. So now you have a time limit as well as a goal (kill every yeti that gets spawned before that time). But what are the requirements to come in on goal?

Here's a simple way to break it down:
The first player in the game causes 19 yetis to spawn (1 special spawn in wave 0 + 1+1+1+1+2+2+2+2+3+3).
Each additional player causes an average of 5 yetis to spawn (even players starting with the 2nd are responsible for 4, in waves 3/4/7/8; odd players starting with the 3rd are responsible for 6, in waves 1/2/5/6/9/10), and takes 22 seconds off the time limit (at least until you get to the 60th player, but good luck ever finding a party that big to play).

That's enough information to compile a chart with, summarizing demands on the players (assuming no one is lost mid-fight): *TPK = time per player per kill, the pace that each player needs to average in order to come in on time

So from this we can see:
[*] 16 players is the ideal number to go into battle with, in terms of providing the most accommodation to players' raw damage output.
[*] The odd-even split is significant, with odd numbers of players (beyond a certain point) providing a more difficult scenario than what they'd get whether they gained or lost a player
[*] The 22-second penalty ends up having a larger bearing than I thought it was going to have before I ran the numbers. Mostly this is due to its efficacy in reducing the asymptotic case to a 4:24 TPK requirement, so that an infinitude of players are no better off than a group of three.
[*] I don't deal damage anywhere near fast enough to keep up with any of those figures.

Some further manipulation of numbers is possible. In the most favorable, 16-player case (where each player only needs to keep up a clip averaging 1 kill per 6:34 to beat the time limit), to use terminology from other games in the genre, that works out to about 21.5 damage per second. Most of my shots against the yeti fall into three varieties--130s, 1s, and 0s--and the yeti's stats are positioned well enough that there aren't nearly as many 130s as there would need to be to keep up that 21.5 clip. Indeed, everything except magical hits and critical hits has a guaranteed 60% taken off the top, which puts quite a damper on the normal rate of damage you might be used to. If you've been around a while, you probably hit harder than me, and probably a lot harder than 21.5 in normal circumstances. Checking your damage rate against a yeti is still worth a try, with the proviso that the ice maze map doesn't really give you very nice opportunities to try your hand at a 1-on-1 yeti fight with no distractions.

So it would seem that having someone like me, with about a 10-minute average kill time, in the battle would be a liability, right? Perhaps. But recall that so far, I've only touched on the damage-dealing capabilities of players. And the chart above had a proviso to it: "assuming no one is lost in mid-fight."

Let's go back to the theoretical 16-player battle where each player can kill a yeti in exactly 6:34. Remember, that's the "just barely" time: if everyone keeps up that clip, they'll finish just a few seconds before the fire alarm goes off, and a minor slip-up from that pace might be enough to spell disaster. Another thing to take note of: at 17:20 in, all 93 yetis have had a chance to spawn, but the players have only had time to kill 42 of them. So there are 51 left in the room, or more than three per player. From experience, I can say that the full defensive package is enough to go toe-to-toe with two yetis at once--they'll net some positive damage through auto-recovery, but it's slow enough that you get 6-8 minutes before you have to heal or change plans. Three, however, is where swarm bonus kicks in, and it's a disaster in the making. If you attempt to stand there and take the hits, they'll get in for about 100% damage every minute, so you either have to fight on the run or go through healing items so fast that you'll wonder why you haven't choked to death.

And each of the players has to keep up that 6:34 pace through all of it. Sure you can try to drag some to the extremities of the room so that they won't bother anyone. Is that even remotely feasible with a population of 51, though? And unless you're dropping lightning bolts behind you, time spent running and herding the enemies is time not spent killing. And there goes another 6:34...

The key is that there's actually quite a large variance in players' kill times. The idea of 16 theoretical players who all kill at the same clip and all deciding to show up at once is obviously a nonsensical depiction of the player demographic. With players who use lightning as a primary weapon, they can clock kills in a minute or less--so far below the required average that they can afford to have a 10-minute clocker or two around to play the "nose tackle" position: drawing double teams so the playmakers can shine without as much interference. Because having me run into a potential ambush and take somewhere in the range of 1 to 30 is much better than having it happen to the guy or girl who would take 300 from it, and if our next big electrifying superstar finishes up their flash photography session with one mythical beast, they have a pretty good idea of where to find the next one in line if I'm holding them for that express purpose. It's conceivable that a Pikachu imitator could try to herd the whole kit'n'caboodle around at once, but since the target suffers from hit stun while everyone else in the pack doesn't, that sounds really easy to screw up from lag if nothing else. I haven't seen a topic speaking on the other side of the story yet, but it seems both roles can appreciate the other's presence there.

So show me a group of 6- or even 5-minute clockers attempting the event, and I'll show you a train wreck waiting to happen. I'd go in to try and divert the train but what would be the point?

As a stat junkie, what is the reasoning behind the high luck as opposed to Dex?

I already have to commit a bunch of points to luck on account of the current monster variety. That doesn't leave much left, so my accuracy's not going to be that good anyway. Figure that an extra point of luck is good for 3 additional hits per 1000 swings, while an extra point of dexterity is normally good for 10 hits over the same sampling period. However, the 3 hits are always full damage hits, while the 10 are subject to the normal randomized range (albeit with the low end of the range increased by a bit). Particularly against high level monsters, it's easily possible for me to see numbers of 39 or less pop up, which is the break-even point where 3 hits are as good as 10. Also figure that if you like to fight Jack O a lot, no amount of dexterity will ever have any effect on your non-magical, non-critical accuracy unless you can get it to 216 minus your level, a proposition that isn't currently possible with the state of equipment. So in that case the dexterity points are good for 0 hits instead of 10, and all they accomplish is bumping up the damage range that small bit.

And hey, you never know when a production monster with luck 80 is going to find its way into the game. (Actually you might know, if you keep in contact with the content development team, but if you do then good for you.)

2. Benchmarks

After a level up, one of the first things I do is go over my combat benchmarks to see what's changed as a result of the extra stats. Benchmarks are basically a series of battles against all the different high-end monsters to see how long it takes me to beat them, how many of them it takes before any damage sticks on me (in excess of autorecovery), and how long I have before something unfortunate happens once they reach that critical mass. You can use them to get a detailed picture of how combat plays out for me, and possibly breathe a sigh of relief that you don't take anywhere near this long to kill stuff.

I know there's a movement brewing to rewrite player and monster stats, to make the combat experience...different. More balanced, some say. I'd like to know what they see as a balanced environment, and I offer this general overview of the current state of affairs in case it helps them pinpoint just what I should and shouldn't be allowed to do. Go ahead and chime in with your thoughts on that.

Jack O (J): kill time 25-35 min; threshold 2; survival time 3 min. This battle, more than anything, was changed with the introduction of the rock knife, since that increases the recovery interval to +25 instead of +24, and a long track record of testing indicates an average of about 24.6 damage over that time. So yeah. Since it pretty much fights the autorecover to a draw (just now slightly to the other side), J plus anything else means the "anything else" is getting free hits, and can basically KO as though I was fighting while carrying too much in inventory. (For something like a lone snake, that would take about 25 minutes, just for the record.) This isn't the most efficient monster for me to fight as far as XP to time, but definitely is as far as XP per keypress, about as good as you can ever get on that front without resorting to a bot or additional accounts.

Fire Skull (R), Poison Skull (P): kill time 20-23 min; threshold 6; survival time 2 min. These things, on the other hand, are just about (but not quite) the worst wastes of time in the game to me. They bite the dust a bit faster than Jack O, but with a much lower reward. The current kill time actually improves significantly on the L81 benchmark, a sign that the difference in luck is passing through a phase where it's becoming the main factor in determining fight times. And again, lack of accuracy means I can't even do much to pull them away from a player who can't take the heat (or the sludge), so I generally don't spend much time around these. (Let alone in quantities of six or more, except in a place like Candor where that can be unavoidable toward the end.)

Lady Skeleton (L): kill time 4-5 min; threshold 4; survival time 10+ min. Definitely some misses in this battle (come to think of it, in more than one sense), but at a tolerable rate, such that there's normally plenty of time to pull away their attention if I'm called upon to be your guardian and you wind up in trouble with these things. This is one of a few cases where I can live with a swarm that reaches "critical mass" numbers, because their clawing away is slow enough that I'll be able to take one of them out first to reduce their numbers to 3, but it's a reminder that even for me, standing and meditating in the middle of the graveyard isn't such a good idea.

Skeleton (S): kill time 3:00-3:30; threshold 4-5; survival time 8+ min (vs. 4) / 2 min (vs. 5). As I mentioned, skeletons have almost a calming effect. As long as I don't get an unprepared player pummeling on one up close so that they take a 328 before I can intervene, they're easy to keep under control even with the relatively fast movement speed. That and their lifespan (er...deathspan?) is short enough for the XP involved to make this a relatively efficient venture for me, insofar as anything I do on offense could be considered efficient. The huge range of variance on skeleton damage means that even though three of them get enough of a swarm bonus to actually hit numbers above 1, they still get so many hits in the low end of the range that it's not close to a threat until the fourth comes in.

Zombie (Z): kill time 8-10 min; threshold 3; survival time <2 min. I don't deal as much with zombies as the various types of skeletons, because they normally only spawn in crowded areas of the graveyard, and it's easier for other players in a group to keep them in check than it is for me to (mostly because the long hit-stun has no value to me), so in that situation I'm normally left to gather up the non-zombie monsters.

Fallen (F): kill time 6-7 min; threshold 2; survival time 8 min. Like skeletons, the fallen make for a generally efficient opponent where available; they're my go-to choice of target in a Candor battle, and a fight with the lone specimen in TARDIS-land makes for a nice break after I finish up guard duty on the yeti room, graveyard, or wherever else I may be called upon.

Poltergeist (G): kill time 3:30-4:00; threshold 4-5; survival time 12+ min (vs. 4) / 8 min (vs. 5). It seems this exists mainly for those who can cope with it but aren't yet tough enough to deal with the higher damage output of wisps. It's only a bit longer and less efficient than a wisp battle for me, but it is noticeably so.

Spectre (C): kill time 80-?? min; threshold 5; survival time 4 min. This has to be the most pointless of all monsters for my profile, and I'd imagine for a good number of others as well. It's just a skull that plays nice and doesn't get in your way, but even though you can pursue the first hit for free, doesn't mean there's much of a reason to (except that a recently added quest now calls for a single spectre powder--oh joy!) Currently spectres are benchmarked through only a single fight, because it just takes that long, and it's hard enough to hold down one enemy for that amount of time without someone finding you and contributing damage (thereby spoiling the benchmark). The actual range may trend shorter or longer, but I don't expect to find out any time soon.

Wisp (W): kill time 2:30-3:00; threshold 3-4; survival time 8+ min (vs. 3) / 1 min (vs. 4). On the other hand, different roles play into different monsters, and the wisp is just about ideal for me. They're probably my most time-efficient source of XP (definitely so among monsters that give out 1000 or more XP at a time). Their low level compared to most other monsters on the list means that they actually put up a decent number of missed attacks themselves, and since missing resets the swarm bonus, a 3-wisp fight is subject to pretty high variance and occasionally they just let me stay around indefinitely. In fact, just a few points in agility would probably be enough to ensure that fight flips in my favor. Plus, wisps are great because I can provoke them and then let you join in (you'll probably even get more XP out of the deal because that's just how it goes) without even putting you in any danger. I wouldn't want you to die, right? Well, unless you're a wisp. Or one of the other benchmark monsters.

Terranite (T): kill time 6-8 min; threshold 3; survival time 1 min. It's like they really made a second zombie: only available in one far-off map, generally appearing in high-traffic spots therein, and of course the similar damage profile. Terranite's faster attack speed is significant, such that a combo like TSS actually brings inevitability with it, while ZSS doesn't. At least TSS isn't all that common a scenario, because the places it can come up will usually have nuisance monsters like red slimes or spiders to buff the swarm bonus well beyond 3. Unless you want to drag them a hundred squares or so to a clear area of the map, and over a distance that long the skeletons will usually gain separation anyway. Better for your health, at least.

Ice Element (I): kill time 4:30-6:00; threshold 4-5; survival time 25+ min (vs. 4) / 4-5 min (vs. 5). To me this is just a slightly worse poltergeist. Longer time, lower reward. That's just how things can go in the game. Different strolls for different roles, they say. Or something like that.

Yeti (Y): kill time 10-13 min; threshold 2-3; survival time 7-15 min (vs. 2) / <1 min (vs. 3). This was cited at a shorter figure in Yeti Math, because that was when I still had a setzer (the -3 Sword of Brightness) instead of a rock knife (the -1 Magna Sword of Illumination), and then the level up probably knocked some fraction of a minute off. The YY fight, more so than any other possible set of opponents, comes down to how the mutations ended up. If they're weak yetis, then two of them won't even do anything if I'm standing still. As they end up with more favorable mutations, they can in fact overcome that barrier, and possibly even in a shorter time than it takes for me to return the favor. Obviously, three or more yetis at once would be a bloodbath, or even just one of them with two partners as inconspicuous as ice goblins. Score one for nuisance factor. Or don't.

I really like what you're doing. I look forward to more thoughts. This is the most interesting thread that is purely game oriented I've read in a while.

I agree with big crunch... Very good topic.

I have one question: In your Benchmarks you use "warlord plate + Warlord Helmet" or "Robe + Silk Headband"?

Presumably both at once.


---Freeyorp

Actually only one and a half, but close enough. (Wrong helmet.) Which makes a perfect segue to a post I was planning on bringing up at some later point anyway.

3. Avatar

If there's one thing that stays constant in this game, it's that players come and go a lot. Particularly on the going side, there's the potential for some pretty spectacular displays from a character that's reached the end of his or her value-generating line.

Such was the case in 2008 when Adril decided to leave the game and give away all of his possessions, which included a multitude of rare items from being in charge of a clan. Seeing as I was there watching it go down, I decided to partake of some of the farewell gifts because hey, free items! As it turns out, one of the items I got was a piece of armor that he had kept equipped before dropping it directly on the trade window. Shortly after the proceedings were all done, I would notice something strange: the inventory window showed that the new armor was already equipped, despite the same being true of my existing sweater (and my appearance hadn't changed at all). Furthermore, the character stats window showed a higher defense than before, as though it were applying the +27 in place of (but not in addition to) the +6.

As it turns out, the character database apparently keeps two entries per equipment slot (I don't know the full details, but if I was able to read at least my own entry in that database, that would go a long way to figuring out just what's at play here). For the most part, one of those entries is purely cosmetic, telling the server which set of sprites everyone's client should display for that slot. The other entry is the functional one, responsible for the actual adjustment to armor defense, other stats where applicable, and magic bonus or penalty. And for a time, by equipping the "functional" item, dropping it while it was still equipped, equipping a "cosmetic" item that uses the same slot, picking up your dropped item, and finally walking to a different map, it was possible to create a desync between the two. This desync would last until the next time you unequipped one of those items, or equipped something new over top of that slot. And so such scenes as the one from my forum avatar became possible, thanks to a defense stat of 176 as shown by the stock client. (It would have been 177 except that the glove slot was seemingly immune to the desync, so for consistency of character I keep the white gloves and perpetually stand one point below maximum in that regard. Of course now the figures involved are 179 and 180, thanks to the rock knife.)

Fast forward to early 2009. Word had spread about the potential for this trick, and someone or other had found an actual side effect that was functionally different than anything you could do without it. See, it considers the supposedly equipped items one at a time, and applies their function if and only if adding their "location equipped" to the total bitmask does anything to change it. So you could get it to consider a sword (bitmask location: 2) which initializes with perfectly good values for weapon damage and attack type, then have it consider a bow (bitmask location: 34 = 32 + 2). This application can't set the 2 bit, since it's already been set, but it sets the 32 bit just fine and that's enough to apply some functions from the bow. It doesn't change weapon damage or attack type now that they're properly initialized, but it would add 5 to the range anyway. So you would have a sword that was capable of hitting at a distance, without needing to worry about expenditure on arrows. This had kill-stealing ramifications, and attacking the other one of the bow's bitmask bits (applying a shield for 32, then the bow to set the 2 this time) was also possible, allowing a player to get the bow's damage schedule without suffering the penalty of forgoing a shield. Neither of these effects were possible except by using the desync to get the bow equipped alongside something else that would normally cause a bitmask clash with it. So just like the fast-attack bug of old days, they implemented a fix. In this case, if a player would drop an item while it still has the "equipped" attribute set, instead it becomes unequipped first, then they can proceed with the drop. This prevented any further equipment desyncs from being set up, and over the next few weeks, the team made a point to crack down on anyone observed hitting a sword animation at unnatural distances.

That was almost two years ago. And I'm still here, aware that any change I make in any of four equipment slots, even for a moment, will be irreversible. In order to hang on to this unique combination of appearance and capability, it precludes taking part in the latest fashion of the month (OH BOY! HATS!), or experimenting with any other role that's better served by a different set of equipment, or upgrading to any better armor that comes around (of course, none of the armor released over that time has been better suited to me),or even getting the wrong random number at the wrong time (as could have happened during the halloween 2009 quest, but fortunately I just got dumped off in the snake pit instead). The speed quest would be pretty simple to do...assuming commitment meant nothing to me. And if that was the case, I certainly wouldn't be in a position to write about most of the stuff in this topic.

In fact, for a brief time last year there was a call to revitalize the crackdown and extend it to anyone who had slots still affected by the desync, even for only cosmetic effects. The claim was that the way the game had handled the drop code before was a bug, and all effects of that bug should be stricken from the record. It was as though they pulled a player aside to tell them "Oh, it looks like you got 5 million XP back in the days of the fast attack bug that wouldn't be possible without it. We're going to have to level you down because you never should have attained your current level." My response was to lay low for a while, as a newfound fugitive of sorts, until the buzz died down and the players behind it (mainly Katze, Crush, and Cotillion from what I remember) seemed to have moved on. Supposedly there was even a consensus on the GM board to lock me up in the botcheck map until I complied, but at the present time the GMs don't seem to have a problem with me, and based on Big Crunch's post, at least some actively support what I am.

My thoughts on the matter are: inimitability (in a form that's immune to even throwing millions of GP at it) is nice and all, and if nothing else I've had that for almost two years. But wouldn't it be great if this idea of a visual avatar, completely independent of the equipment your character actually uses in battle, catches on as a standard? After all, that's one of the benefits to operating in a digital environment: the world is at our whims, and not the other way around (for example, there's no requirement on the forums that your avatar has to be a verified personal photo of yourself). Who's to say it's inconsistent to look angelic while fighting the very incarnations of evil and death?

Proposal: In the items window, where equipment has a button labeled "Equip", add a new button, this one labeled "Dress". The new button would have the same effect as Equip if there's currently nothing equipped to the slot, but if there was something already, it would manipulate the character state values in whatever way is required to get the effect that the existing item would remain the functional one for that slot, and the new item would be the visual-only one. To prevent the old functional exploits from popping up, there would ideally be a server-side rejection of any attempt to dress an item whose location bitmask & 34 is a nonzero value. I haven't read over most of the eA code yet, but I might even be able to implement a change like this if you decide to make it...and if I know what the new function needs to do on a technical basis. I could get that last part fairly quickly if only I could look over my own entry as it currently exists in the character DB, but the only way that would happen is if someone with filesystem-level access to the server was able and willing to go through the trouble of isolating my line therein and sending it to me. It's a stretch, but it would be appreciated.

And now this is where your thoughts come in. You may never have known what's it's like to be me, let alone in this aspect, but is there any good reason why you and everyone else shouldn't have back the opportunity to find out?

I'm not crazy...I'm just out to change the world.
"But how do you think you can do that? You're just one person"
Maybe...it's my destiny...