Anouleth
-
Posts
7,588 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Events
Posts posted by Anouleth
-
-
Lances, because Wyverns are already way too strong. Switching Wyverns from Lances to Axes amounted to a straight buff with no associated downsides and no real change in the way they played.
-
i like the idea of having a second wave of characters in the midgame that can replace your B-team with the potential to become (or be integrated into) your new A-team with a little love. from a feels standpoint, it's like promoting your own U21s in football manager. gameplay-wise, it's fun to create my own ubermenschen and see how they turn out.
caveat this may not be actually good for gameplay, but at least the awankening implementation (have not played fartes yet, presume it's similar) made me adjust in the midgame to slide a person or three out for the kids of my star players to create new star players, and that pandered to me personally.
Yeah, it's called "recruiting units throughout the whole game". Plenty of games before Awakening have had useful units join during the midgame, such as Percival or Dean or Sety or Pent or Gerik or Tanith or the Hawkboys or Catria/Palla or the Sable Knights.
I get the appeal of children. It's powergaming, getting a little boner over how ridiculously overpowered your units are when they solo the final chapter with a rusty length of pipe while taking zero damage. I don't think it's particularly good gameplay, however.
-
nah, i really like the direction fe has taken from a gameplay perspective
Really? From a gameplay perspective, I don't think Fates/Awakening children really add that much.
I really enjoy it. I really like characters in general except for a few and I like how the personality is related to the parents. Ophelia and Soleil are gonna be my favorite in Fates. I do agree that how they were put in is kind of cringe worthy, secluded realm? Nothings perfect so I won't say anythung negative. If they added a great reason then I would be 100% satisfied. No, Awakening was not my first game, FE8 was my first so I am use to the old one and I like both.
Not having child characters doesn't mean the cast needs to be smaller. Ophelia and Soleil could still be in the game, just not be Odin's/Lazward's children.
-
Is this how far this conversation has sunk? If you want to debate gun control, or religious motivations for political choices, wouldn't it be better to take either of them to its own thread?
As it stands, it sounds to me like the conversation about an "actual act of rebellion in America" has run its course. There are idiots on both sides (seriously, wtf is up with you, federal judge? They served their sentences and had already been released! seriously, wtf is up with you, protestors/insurrectionists? an armed takeover of a federal building is NOT the solution to your problem!) and the whole thing is obviously a debacle from every angle.
Beyond that, it's just being used as a proxy for other issues.
You haven't even mentioned the horrendously awful media coverage where multiple prominent media sites had fits over an Ammon Bundy impersonator on Twitter.
-
yes, because the specification of safety is completely useless. of course an activity that has been defined to not hurt anyone won't hurt anyone. safe pedophilia is a victimless activity. safe cocaine use is a victimless activity. safe drunk driving is a victimless activity.
with this trick of language here i've made statements that are factually correct yet mostly worthless.
Actually, there's no such thing as "safe drunk driving"; when you drive, you contribute to air pollution through car exhaust. And air pollution kills people. Lots of people, in the millions, in fact.
We can go ahead and say that it's impossible for anyone to drive safely; drunk or otherwise.
-
First: what are natural rights, and why is the right to bear arms one of them?
Second: I agree that there would be a black market associated with assault weapons. However, the considerable amount of effort one would have to go through to get a gun in this environment would make it next to impossible to mobilize a full on rebellion. The criminal underworld still would have guns, sure, but gun control never was meant to stop them, it was supposed to stop maniacs and these fuckholes. Once again, the objective should be to make armed rebellion as difficult as possible.
And... why? The risk of an armed rebellion successfully toppling the US government is zero.
Secondly, I take issue with the claim that "gun control was not meant to stop crime". That's never been true; gun control has always been meant to stop crime. You think the United Kingdom, which hasn't seen a battle on it's territory in over three hundred years, restricted handguns because they thought that there was a risk of armed rebellion? Because you're seriously deluded if you believe that.
-
Oh goddammit. These people are rebelling because they don't want their neighbors to face justice. The precedent of violent rebellion should not be set. Also, don't pull a reverse racism on me, if black people were doing this it would be just as bad.
As far as I know, nobody has actually been hurt or injured, so I don't know if it really justifies the label of "violent rebellion" just yet. Fort Sumner this ain't.
I know everyone here is eager to see some people get killed, but let's not get ahead of ourselves.
When you live in a country, under a government, you've already given up some of your freedom. For example, most governments don't allow you to walk up to a random person and murder them. Or set fire to the house of someone you don't like.
These guys apparently broke federal laws, and are not willing to accept the consequences of those actions. Furthermore, instead of using more acceptable ways of getting redress (appeal, writing to politicians, protesting with signs in front of their state capital building), they've chosen to trespass on a federal compound. Any claim to being wronged they had flew out the window with their actions - it tells me they respect the law only when it's convenient for them.
That's the entire definition of civil disobedience; refusing to follow laws and regulations, whether that's in the form of refusing to pay income taxes, sit-ins, or destroying draft cards (during the Vietnam War, for instance).
-
Thracia, no frills, no fuss. Dudes give bonuses to each other and that's it.
Honorable mention to Genealogy for experimenting with non-standard rewards for building supports.
-
Regardless of whether or not Rey is a Mary-Sue, there's no doubt she's a weak character and there's no doubt that she has some Sue qualities that don't help.
Other points:
- I also think that after IV and VI, the reveal and then speedy destruction of the Starkiller Base was very underwhelming. When the first Death Star is destroyed, it's cool. When the second Death Star is destroyed, it's also cool. But I found it hard to care about the fate of Starkiller base.
- Why is it possible for someone to just jump in the Millennium Falcon and fly it away? Shouldn't stealing a ship like that be slightly more difficult? Why is there so little security?
- Quipping levels are elevated in this instalment, not quite as high as an MCU movie but still dangerous.
- I think that while this movie is not amazing, it's still good and there's potential for a great VIII on the level of V. IV, which this movie aped, was not that strong either.
-
Well the argument is that businesses that have to pay higher wages pass those extra costs to customers, and rise of costs => inflation. But people also argue that the current minimum is outdated because of inflation that happened from between when it was set and now.
I dunno, I did study economics, but my conclusion was that it's all a bunch of bullshit that's just used by lobbyists to justify whatever policies they want passed.
I don't think anyone really argues that higher minimum wages would cause prices to rise except indirectly. If stores could raise their prices and get more revenue, they would, regardless of how much they pay their employees; forcing them to pay their employees more doesn't add any extra incentive to raising prices. Rather, the argument is that a higher minimum wage is a disincentive to hiring new workers and might encourage businesses to get rid of some of their minimum wage workers. It might also cause small businesses that are barely profitable to go under.
This argument is extremely sound. It's pretty basic in economics that if you force people to pay more for something (in this case labour) they will buy less of it. The only problem is that it's hard to find evidence for it actually working that way in the real world and in fact there is some evidence that seems to show that it has little or no effect on employment, in defiance of what seems to be fairly basic economics.
-
Not sure why this is news, even back in the 1800s anthropologists categorized Indian and Middle Eastern people under "Caucasoid" along with white Europeans.
-
What kind of logic is this? You're pretty much just saying "Stop playing the game because I don't like why you play it."
People don't all play games strictly for the gameplay. Not to mention support conversations do have a very clear purpose, to give more development to characters.
I'm saying that they're wasting their time and money. The support conversations are available online, to read, for nothing. I also don't see "character development" as being a worthy goal.
-
Where are the support systems for FE3, 4, 5, 11 and 12?
People who only care about the conversations shouldn't be playing FE anyway. Ideally they'd get rid of the conversations entirely, it's become increasingly clear that they're an unwelcome distraction to the game and don't really serve any kind of purpose.Say what you will about the quality, the 3ds games' support system is much more streamlined and convenient than the games of fe's past. With the revoking of a support limit, we can see more than one full support chain of a character per playthrough, which is a really dumb rule for someone who only cares about the conversations.
And for that reason I think that the FE10 support system is best.
-
honestly more excited about bayonetta, we already got anime swordsdudes coming out of our ears but no sexy bondage demons with magic hair
-
Hitler, however, was actually very committed to the idea of coming to power in Germany within the framework of the law, so I don't know what you're talking about there. The Nazis came to power entirely legally, until they changed the law of course, but they did that legally, too.
Well, except for setting the Reichstag on fire. And trying to organize a coup. And sending thugs to beat up and harass political opponents. Except for the time when he was actually imprisoned and the Nazi Party banned.
-
The Communists were not guilty of hate speech. Once again, you absolutely need to have a very clear line that cannot be crossed, and that line should be hate speech. Hitler was very clearly violating the German constitution, and it was the duty of the Reichstag and the German people to not let him get away with it, but they were absolutely on board.
I thought you earlier said that Lenin should have been censored? And now you accept that a hate speech law as narrowly defined as the one you suggest would not have actually criminalized Communists (even though as political movements go, Communism was pretty damned dangerous).
And what exactly would a hate speech law have done to stop Hitler? Giving that Hitler was already openly ignoring the law in order to subvert the democratic process, what makes you think that another law would have suddenly solved the huge problems of Weimar Germany?
I recall in my own country, a few years back there were scandals surrounding the illegal actions of some tabloid papers in order to gather stories, mainly illegal bribes to the police and voicemail hacking. Huge outcry, cries of "Something Must Be Done", demands for increased regulation of the press. Except that everything that had happened was already against the law, it's just that the police weren't interested in enforcing it! There's a temptation, and it's a terrible one, to create new laws to fix problems when all the tools to fix those problems already exist within the law.
-
I concede, I concede, I was just playing devil's advocate. And I will say that more often than not freedom of speech has actually initially at least led to totalitarianism. If people like Jean Paul Marat, Hitler, and Lenin had been censored, a lot of lives would have been saved.
If Hitler had not been able to ban the Communist Party and use paramilitary violence to suppress and intimidate voters, a lot of lives might have been saved too. He seized power only due to the very tactics that you yourself endorse!
-
Didn't he say something about deporting all the migrants from Syria once he's President? I could be remembering wrong, in which case my bad. And it is dealing with the state using force on its people; it's arguably inciting violence, but I mainly said it to be argumentative, and do not care enough to get into a debate about it.
Then all calls for state action are "inciting violence", since all state action implicitly carries the threat of force. People don't pay taxes because they want to, it's because the police will come into your home and arrest you if you don't, and if you resist that arrest they could kill you. Does that mean that anyone who wants to raise taxes is inciting violence, because they're implicitly saying that people who don't pay that tax should be arrested and sent to jail? Of course not.
-
That's not what I was saying, although Trumps declaration that he planned to force all Muslim immigrants in the US to leave could be interpreted as inciting someone to violence.
Firstly, that's not what he said. What Trump called for is a ban on all Muslim immigration. That's not the same thing as deporting all existing immigrants.
Secondly, how is that an incitement to violence?
-
-
Yes, how dare people ask for a safe haven away from all the bullying and discrimination they may face throughout their lives. [/sarcasm]
Look, the way I see it, there's enough bad stuff in the world as it is. What's wrong with a place folks can feel safe in?
Because explicitly, they're attempting to create this "safe haven" through no-platforming people who have done nothing other than voice a contradictory opinion. If people want to create tolerant organizations where bullying and discrimination aren't tolerated and Germaine Greer isn't allowed to speak, they're entitled to do so, but what they're not entitled to do is to try and no-platform Germaine Greer and prevent her from speaking anywhere.
-
Lol Rubio
Doesn't that break the balance of powers though? Flagrantly disregarding a perfectly legitimate decision by trying to overturn it with new Justices? I know new Justices get appointed, but how often do they completely overturn something like that.
This is nothing new; threatening to pack the Supreme Court has been standard tactics since FDR. And Bernie Sanders has committed to nominating Justices that would overturn Citizens United.
-
I'm thrilled to see updates to the combat system. Gaming has changed a lot since FF7 was originally released, and there has been improvements on how combat can be done in an RPG. I still have my original copy on PS1 if I end up not liking it at least. I'm really hoping they do something to make certain things less grindy. I don't have it in me to dump another 200 hours into the game.
There are ways to update an ATB system without completely replacing it with something unrelated. Even looking back to FFX and FFX-2 (which were popular games), they found ways to make turn based and ATB systems fresh and interesting.
-
Brits were the bad guys there. Im pretty sure forcing narcotics upon a country that banned them is not so "Good" per se.
Does that mean that Mexicans are bad guys because they traffic narcotics into the United States despite that also being against the law?
Do you prefer Wyvern Riders starting off with lances or axes?
in General Fire Emblem
Posted
Why is that a bother? Axes and Lances are functionally very similar. Diversity of weapon types is not a meaningful goal when those weapon types function the same way.
In addition, the fact that only Fighters/Barbarians use axes is a good thing because they're historically a weak class and are stronger when they have uncontested access to strong axes such as the Hero Axe. Part of what makes Lex good is that he's virtually the only unit that can use Axes (except for promoted Lachesis and Arden).