(07-08-2016, 04:37 PM)Shannon Wrote: I have narrowed down the goal scripting for DMSI 2.2 to five options. Hopefully I can get the winner today and perhaps start building.

(07-08-2016, 06:54 PM)Shannon Wrote: There are a lot of different types of women I am testing this against, for the guys, and men for the ladies.

The women in particular who respond to Option 1 are generally "Soft" in that they are innocent, gentle, nice, normal, kind, sweet, etc. Generally skittish and relatively inexperienced. About 40% of virgins fall here.

"Medium" is women who are between soft and hard in terms of how they want to be treated. Surprisingly, most strippers in their teens and 20's fall here instead of "hard", while most teenage girls who are not strippers fall into "hard". In fact, unsurprisingly, it seems most women fall here (in medium). Most bartendresses, most waitresses, some teenage girls, most randomly encountered "bored housewives", most women you would encounter at the beach, and about 40% of virgins. This is the option leading the pack so far for successful responses for women.

Then you have your "hard" types, who tend to want extreme treatment from men, and this includes (surprisingly) most teenage girls, porn stars, some randomly encountered "bored housewives" you might meet while shopping, most nude models for A/V modeling, bikini models, some women you would encounter at the beach, some teenage strippers, and some bartendresses. About 20% of virgins, and the ones who are most likely to become pregnant during defloration.

All three will be affected by each option, but each option peaks for the types mentioned as being "most X".

(07-08-2016, 09:28 PM)Shannon Wrote: I'm trying to tune "Medium" to be the best all-rounder, since it wins the bell curve test.

(07-09-2016, 11:17 AM)Minititan Wrote: This makes me happy. It's been so hard to post and follow as I've not had a day off since V2.1 came out, although I'm feeling good on the sub I feel it lacks a certain kick, I don't doubt that it's making me more attractive but the effects seem to be more internal than external compared with v1.

(07-10-2016, 12:53 AM)Shannon Wrote: Yes, in a day at most I should be ready to build V2.2.

You all who are testing V2.2, and who wish to do so in a contributing manner, please stop testing V2.1 immediately and remain subliminal free until the 17th of this month, when I release V2.2 or rebuild it after doing internal testing for the next 7 days.

(07-11-2016, 12:02 AM)Tobi Wrote: if we ran 2.2 dmsi without the seven day gap would that cause a lot of problems?

(07-11-2016, 12:05 AM)Shannon Wrote: There will be a period of time during which 2.1 is directly contradicting 2.2 and neither will work well or fully. Some things are the same between them, but not everything. You're going to do better to wait.

Shannon Wrote:I have decided to do a little more work on DMSI 2.2 before I build it.

To be done:
Double check goal phrasing.
Transplant some of the scripting from E2 that will make it easier for guys with blockages and inexperience to make their way to success with the program by (eventually) dissolving the blockages and moving past them.
And, as always happens, I have found a couple of areas I can tweak, so I will be tweaking the PPVS module and the ACSMA module, which will hopefully make them broader in impact and more effective.

This should take a day, maybe two. We are still on track for the 17th.