Anouleth

It's better to have one ruleset for both capturing and rescuing instead of two, which makes the game more complicated without necessarily adding interesting gameplay.

There's also the possibility that Clinton gets indicted over the email scandal, which I don't think is very likely but could still happen.

Dota 2 uses Pseudo-random distribution where certain attack procs have their probability modified based on previous misses and hits. The net effect is that you're less likely to get two bashes in a row (for example) but also less likely to go 15 attacks without getting a single bash.

The great nation of X has been divided. After the death of the king with no clear heir, his relations now fight to secure their claim to the throne by force. Eventually foreign nations try to interfere in the conflict to further their own interests. However, a more sinister threat lurks in the shadows, plotting to take advantage of the chaos for their own nefarious ends. Rather than the main character being a prince, you play as a noble who must take sides in the conflict. Definitely no steampunk or magitech.

Yeah but multiple other people in this topic have said that Menmus can recruit her by talking to her. I don't really care that much either way but I'd like to have a straight answer because it's not clear whether this is a bug or not.

I can't recruit Cattleya by talking to her with Menmus in Chapter 2. She still joins at the end of the chapter but it's quite annoying to have an enemy Myrmidon running around that I can't do anything about.

So what I'm taking away from this is that Dalshin is less valuable than one Physic staff. Harder to transport, as well.

New York is also Trump's home turf. New York isn't a particularly conventional Democrat stronghold; I can see New Yorkers being willing to side with Trump in the same way that Boris Johnson enjoys high popularity among Londoners (despite London leaning towards Labour in general elections). (I'm aware that Hillary Clinton was Senator for New York but she's not really seen as a "native" in the same way as Trump.)

I'm enjoying the chapter, but is Keith female on purpose?

It's very hard to convict someone of false accusations, because you have to prove beyond reasonable doubt that Ghomeshi didn't rape them, something that is likely not possible.

Awakening actually has the worst system mechanically. The problem being that supports are so ridiculously strong that you always end up stapling Robin and Robin's S-support together and just having them duo the entire game. There's almost no reason to ever do anything else. Even the total absence of a support system would have been preferable, because at least that wouldn't massively incentivize one strategy over everything.

No, it's not a failure on the study of economics; all soft sciences have problems replicating their findings and the fact that the minimum wage is heavily politicized (by people like you) doesn't help. More often than not, minimum wage increases are small scale. I would have absolutely no problem with a small increase in the minimum wage, or even chaining it to inflation as should have been done many years ago. And if the studies are all over the place, why did you say "decades of data supported by literally hundreds of top experts in the field"? I'm not assuming that. But even it's only only 1% or 0.5%, it's still contractionary (meaning that it will have effects on aggregate demand and the economy as a whole) and it's still affecting people on the scale of hundreds of thousands, if not millions. That's the gamble you're making with people's lives. 4% seems like a worst-case disaster that I don't think is very likely. But way more than 4% are going to be affected by this, and not all for the better. (not to mention that the effects of min. wage increases aren't necessarily immediate; it may be that some employers can indeed afford higher wages in the short term but that if the economy were to go into recession again, they'd have to lay off more employees than they would otherwise.)

Except here, and here. I could probably find more; we could spend all day firing studies at each other since there are probably hundreds out there for each of our particular viewpoints. Given that the evidence is not helping us, I think it's completely reasonable to conclude that basic demand curves hold and that increasing the price of something will cause people to buy less of it. If 4% of the US workforce loses their jobs, that's an unmitigated disaster. We're talking about millions of people being fired and families having to go hungry. The effect is more than 30bn, because aggregate demand will also fall and cause more job losses. That's not even accounting for the many people who work above the minimum wage and for less than $15. It seems crazy to me that you can be so unconcerned about the prospect of millions of people, most of whom are below the poverty line to begin with, losing their jobs.

Absolutely everything we know about economics suggests that when you make something more expensive, people will buy less of it. The evidence is not 100% clear but minimum wages probably have a negative impact on employment, it's just that historically minimum wages have been set low enough to not have a large disemployment effect. Stumbling and Mumbling has a good post on it. Plus, I might well ask you; if apparently raising the minimum wage to 15 dollars will have no negative impacts whatsoever and you think there's zero chance of anyone losing their job as a result, why stop there? Why not raise the minimum wage to $100? Or a thousand dollars? Since apparently it's just free money that appears out of the ether and will have no effect on employment or prices. (Note that I am in general in favor of a minimum wage, preferably chained to inflation. But we should not underestimate the danger of disemployment effects which disproportionately effect the poor.)

Fire Emblem is focused around melee combat with swords, axes and lances, which haven't been used for over a hundred years in any kinds of war. Fire Emblem is focused around individual characters and relationships, which are irrelevant in a mechanistic future dominated by clones and AIs. Fire Emblem has a strong element of magic which doesn't make sense in a universe that has embraced a scientific view of the world. Fire Emblem works on a two dimensional grid. Space is three dimensional. And so on. Fire Emblem just makes more sense in the context of a medieval low-magic fantasy universe than soft-sci-fi grand opera. And to be honest, if you don't like Fire Emblem, why don't you just leave? I'm sick of people who hate Fire Emblem trying to change it into something it's not. Go play any of the countless soft-sci-fi JRPGs out there. There isn't exactly a shortage.

None of that explains why minimum wage needs to be raised. If a minimum wage rise causes workers currently working at the minimum wage to lose their jobs, then they will be much worse off. As difficult as it is to raise a family on minimum wage it's even harder to raise a family on nothing. Everything else comes down to this; whether or not a minimum wage increase will have a disemployment effect. And it's not really clear what the answer is.

The gameplay of Fire Emblem doesn't translate well to a futuristic theme, I think.

I agree that reducing the various loopholes and deductions in the tax code would be desirable (with maybe leaving in the charitable donation exception), but I would like to see it be at least somewhat progressive. Also even according to a right-wing author that likes the tax plan overall, it's not really flat (since the big deductions for health insurance and mortgages are still in there), it will benefit the rich more than the poor, and it will cost billions. Relying on public opinion to punish private businesses for discriminating is as effective as relying on public opinion to punish politicians for governing badly. Sometimes discriminatory practices become publicized and customers vote with their feet in a way that corrects discrimination. Other times, the public aren't informed or don't care. And sometimes the public is misinformed and will punish the wrong business! A restaurant is a good example of when it's easy to discriminate against a business whose practices you disapprove of; eating out is a luxury and a social activity meaning it can be used to signal, restaurant-goers have a lot of choice and flexibility, and restaurants rely mainly on their reputation and image to do well. It's a lot rarer that consumers will punish a bank or a chemical manufacturer. Secondly while I appreciate the right of businesses to discriminate, I think there's also a danger when businesses collude in order to discriminate (for example as businesses in the Jim Crow South colluded to discriminate against blacks). It's one thing for a business to refuse to serve you when you can go elsewhere, but if many businesses refuse to serve or hire you, it's quite another thing.

I personally blame the Lords Appellant. Basically everything bad that happened after 1400 was probably their fault.

Firstly, Rolf is already as useless as a character can be. He is Peak Useless. Secondly, the presence of another useless archer wouldn't make Rolf any more or less useless, any more than the presence of Barth is the reason why Wendy sucks.

Because it would be boring if every weapon type worked the same way?

Generally when jobs are lost, that results in higher unemployment; and higher unemployment always disproportionately affects the poor and minorities. While I think the minimum wage is a good thing I really don't think that the possibility of minimum-wage workers becoming unemployed is something that can just be casually dismissed. I think that $15 is way too high, for instance. I think the best thing to do would be to make it $10, chain it to core inflation, and come back in five years and see if it's safe to raise it again.

Yeah, but different positions on the weapon triangle isn't really justification for giving Wyverns Axes instead of Lances. WTA itself is only worth 1MT and 10HIT, which by your own admission isn't meaningful at all. I would personally like to see the weapon types better differentiated. But as long as they remain in their current state it doesn't really matter which one you use, except that Axes are slightly stronger in most situations. In that light, I don't see how the switch "increases diversity" (as it was claimed earlier). If anything it decreases diversity because part of what made axes unique was that not a lot of units used them, and that they had WTA against Lances which were very common. To be honest, I think that switching Wyverns to Axes is the worst possible move they could have made. It ended up making Wyverns even stronger in FE9/10/11/12/13. It didn't meaningfully distinguish Pegasus Knights and Wyverns. It made Axes less special and interesting. It would have been better to switch one of the flying classes to Swords or even Bows, which would have helped balance out the whole "flying units are usually ridiculous" thing.

No it isn't. We had three weapon types before we had the weapon triangle. Many SRPGs and RPGs and even Roguelikes that don't have a weapon triangle still have different weapon types. The idea is that different types of physical fighters should have different capabilities. Nothing dictates that different weapon types should have perfectly identical availability. If anything, I think that's a bad thing; it makes different weapon types more homogeneous and interchangeable. It's cool to have units like DS Minerva and Lex that use weapons that aren't easily accessible otherwise. I'm referring specifically to those games in which Wyverns got Axes (rather than Swords + Lances). That is to say, FE9, 10, 11, 12, and 13. And there's little doubt that Axes were better than Lances in most of those games (FE11 excepted, because the game gives you far more good lance-users than axe-users). While I wouldn't object to a sword-using flying class, I think three flying classes is too many. I'd rather either Wyverns or Pegasi be retired, or even both of them.

That's incorrect. Rescue was good precisely because it had downsides and tradeoffs associated with it. I don't see how blatant power creep and stat inflation are good for the series, nor do I see any value in mechanics that don't involve real decision-making. And there's almost no decision-making associated with Pair Up.