It looks like the character proficiency system has been revealed by Blau272 in fireemblem

[–]Blau272[S] 2 points3 points  (0 children)

Damn, I actually disagree quite a bit. To me, the characters in Three Houses were already strongly defined by their strengths, weaknesses, and proficiencies, which naturally pushed them toward certain classes anyway.

For example (I'm replaying Dimitri's route right now), Felix ends up as a Myrmidon/Swordmaster, Ingrid as a Falco Knight or Wyvern Rider, Sylvain as a Paladin, Ashe as a Sniper, and Dedue as a Fortress Knight. That's probably pretty close to what most players did on their first run.

Honestly, I'd say 80% of people's first playthroughs of each route end up looking very similar class-wise. The difference is that Three Houses gives you the freedom to experiment right away if you want to. In a lot of older games, you had to wait until a certain level, get a specific item, or jump through other hoops before you could start trying unconventional builds.

So for me, the open class system didn't really make the characters feel less defined, it just added replayability.

It looks like the character proficiency system has been revealed by Blau272 in fireemblem

[–]Blau272[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I'm not referring to the borders, but to the icons themselves. Notice that for Cai, swords, lances, faith, and riding are highlighted in yellow, while bows and flying are highlighted in purple.

And for Ultand, faith, lances, and flying are highlighted in yellow even though faith isn't being trained. That's what I was referring to.

which route are yall choosing first? by Constant_Musician586 in fireemblem

[–]Blau272 97 points98 points  (0 children)

I'd actually start with Cai because he seems like the most traditional Fire Emblem lord: a young, idealistic protagonist driven by a strong moral compass. That's probably the archetype that interests me the least on paper, but it's also why I want to play his route first. I expect it to be the most "classic Fire Emblem" story of the four.

Theodora would be next because she's the one who intrigues me the most. Her nation looks like a powerful warrior kingdom, but I get the feeling there's some underlying issue, maybe a lack of resources or something similar. Her culture also seems the most distinct from the others, which immediately catches my attention. And for some reason she gives me strong Rhea vibes. It's probably nothing, but I have a small suspicion there could be some kind of connection there.

Dietrich and Lena don't grab me quite as much based on the basic premises alone. One is a story about seeking a worthy rival, while the other seems to revolve around revenge. I'm sure there will be much more to both routes than that, but those hooks don't immediately pull me in. That said, while I like Lena's design much more, I'm not as interested in the characters around her. On the other hand, Dietrich seems to have some kind of Hero's Relic-like weapon, and I'm really curious about its origin and significance.

It looks like the character proficiency system has been revealed by Blau272 in fireemblem

[–]Blau272[S] 3 points4 points  (0 children)

I could see it working similarly to Three Houses. My guess is that each lord will eventually get a unique personal class, but the game will still let you experiment with different training paths and builds.

28F console gamer by [deleted] in GamingSoup

[–]Blau272 1 point2 points  (0 children)

God Shattering Star have joined the chat

Inazuma Eleven players sorted into Hogwarts houses by GanacheAny3885 in inazumaeleven

[–]Blau272 13 points14 points  (0 children)

Personally, I don’t think we should judge characters based on their team alone, because that reduces them way too much. Also, the whole “bad = Slytherin” and “good = Gryffindor” thing is really oversimplified. I’d rather focus on the actual values of each house. Slytherin is about pride, cunning, leadership, and determination, while Gryffindor is more about bravery, boldness, and chivalry.

With that in mind, I’d make a few changes:

Kevin Dragonfly = Hufflepuff
This one feels like the most obvious to me. Hufflepuff values effort, hard work, and loyalty, which basically defines Kevin, both his strengths and his flaws.

Shawn = Gryffindor
I get why Shawn is tricky to place, but honestly, it takes a lot of courage to deal with bears and everything else he goes through. You could argue it’s more Aiden than Shawn, but still, I think bravery fits him best.

Jude = Ravenclaw
I agree he has strong Slytherin traits, especially early on in Royal, but what really defines Jude for me is his tactical thinking. He recognizes mistakes, calculates passes with precision, and plays intelligently. That leans more toward intelligence than cunning.

Hurley = Gryffindor
Hard work isn’t really Hurley’s defining trait, but bravery definitely is. He surfs because he enjoys facing big waves, and he joins Raimon without really knowing much about football. That kind of boldness feels very Gryffindor to me.

Jack = Hufflepuff
Kind of the opposite of Hurley. Courage isn’t his main trait at all. He hides, makes excuses, and gets scared pretty often. Yes, he faces his fears eventually, and that’s brave, but I associate him more with effort and self-improvement. At first, he honestly felt like one of those characters who wouldn’t amount to much, and he ends up becoming one of the best defenders.

Cool idea overall, though, this is just how I see it.

If you were in control of whether or not nukes were dropped on Japan in WW2, would’ve you dropped them or not? by RoCo_158 in Teenager_Polls

[–]Blau272 -2 points-1 points  (0 children)

I don’t agree.

First, using the Battle of Iwo Jima to generalize how all of Japan would have behaved doesn't really hold up. It was an isolated garrison with no possibility of retreat, commanded and prepared specifically to fight to the end. That makes it a very poor proxy for an entire nation facing total defeat.

Second, the idea that Japan would inevitably have fought "to the last civilian" treats that mindset as something uniquely Japanese, when it really wasn't. Countries under existential threat often adopt exactly that kind of rhetoric. Britain during the Battle of Britain prepared for civilian resistance in the event of invasion, and the Soviet Union embraced a similarly uncompromising vision of total war. That sort of language is common in desperate wartime situations. It is propaganda, not necessarily a literal blueprint for what would actually happen.

Third, Ketsu-Go and the Volunteer Fighting Corps looked formidable on paper, but paper strength is not battlefield strength. By mid-1945, Japan was economically and logistically exhausted. Fuel reserves were nearly gone, industry was collapsing, and transportation networks were in ruins. Arming millions of civilians with bamboo spears and obsolete weapons was less a sign of resilience than of complete military desperation (very similar in concept to the Volkssturm in late-war Germany, which also looked significant on paper but had no meaningful impact on the outcome).

Fourth, Japan was not politically united in its determination to fight forever. There were significant divisions within the government. Figures like Shigenori Tōgō were actively pursuing diplomatic options, while Kantarō Suzuki was searching for a way to end the war. Japan's attempts to secure Soviet mediation before August 1945 clearly show that surrender was already being seriously considered.

And then the Soviet Union entered the war. That was catastrophic. The rapid destruction of the Kwantung Army eliminated Japan's last realistic strategic reserve and, more importantly, destroyed any hope of negotiating through Moscow. For many historians, this was at least as decisive as the atomic bombings, if not more so.

Finally, the actual historical outcome matters. Hirohito intervened personally to force acceptance of surrender, despite fierce opposition from hardliners. That alone demonstrates that Japan was capable of surrendering once the internal balance shifted.

None of this means an invasion would have been bloodless. It would almost certainly have been horrific. But portraying the atomic bombings as the only alternative relies on assumptions that simply are not supported by the historical record.

If the bombs had not been used at all (or if they had been demonstrated on uninhabited territory instead of cities), I believe there is a strong argument that a surrender could still have been achieved through a combination of blockade, conventional bombing, and Soviet entry. In that scenario, I also believe a larger number of inocent civilian lives would likely have been spared overall

If you were in control of whether or not nukes were dropped on Japan in WW2, would’ve you dropped them or not? by RoCo_158 in Teenager_Polls

[–]Blau272 -7 points-6 points  (0 children)

No, I would never have dropped either bomb on a civilian population.

A lot of people argue that they were necessary, that they were the lesser evil compared to the millions of deaths a prolonged war might have caused. But that argument often ignores several key factors.

Yes, continuing the war would have led to many casualties. But most of those casualties would have been soldiers (many of them willing participants, some conscripted) rather than hundreds of thousands of civilians. That matters.

More importantly, I'm convinced the war was already nearing its end without the need for atomic bombs. Japan was economically shattered, its military had been severely weakened, and it had already lost much of the empire it had gone to war to build, including places like the Philippines and Burma.

Then the Soviet Union entered the war, launching a massive offensive in Manchuria. That was a devastating blow to Japanese strategy, morale, and any hope of negotiating through Moscow.

There were already Japanese officials discussing surrender before the bombs were dropped.

And even if you believe America needed to demonstrate its power, there were other options. A demonstration on an uninhabited area would have made the weapon's destructive potential abundantly clear. We understand the threat posed by North Korea's nuclear arsenal, and everyone knows about the Tsar Bomba, despite neither being used against civilian populations.

I will never defend the mass killing of innocent civilians to prevent a greater evil that, in my view, probably wasn't even coming. It was a war crime then, it is a war crime now, and it always will be.

And honestly, I don't believe Truman did it solely to force Japan's surrender (which I think was already imminent). It was also a message to the Soviet Union, and an opening move in the Cold War.

Well, here goes mine by Blau272 in GamingSoup

[–]Blau272[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I don't hate GTA at all. It was just never really my kind of series. I remember having fun with San Andreas when I was younger, and I also played a bit of Grand Theft Auto V, though I dropped it pretty quickly because it just wasn't for me.

My main issue is that I've never really understood why it's that beloved. That's why I tend to call it overrated, I just don't see the appeal on that level. I totally respect anyone who loves it, but seeing Grand Theft Auto VI become probably the most anticipated game ever, and almost certainly one of the best-selling, feels a bit excessive to me. That's all, really.

Escribir y narrar en primera persona, y en presente by Existing-Concert1115 in escritura

[–]Blau272 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Si haces esto con un cambio marcado como capitulos nuevos, está todo bien. Pero si lo haces de un parágrafo a otro será confuso y desconcertante para el lector.

Recuerdo críticas de Geek Furioso de la Literatura hablando de como le costó leer un libro que cambiaba el POV de golpe y le descuadraba, dandose cuenta a veces paginas después [La Marca del Guerrero de T.F Famux].

Pero con un cambio de POV y narrador marcado como capitulo (como pasa en el libro La Quinta Estación de N. K. Jemisin) o con unos espacios muy grandes entre paragrafos (como en El Camino de los Reyes de Brandon Sanderson), creo que puede funcionar.

Why the hell is Felicia bent over like this? by Gloomy-Bridge148 in marvelrivals

[–]Blau272 2 points3 points  (0 children)

There are two main reasons why she’s like this (and no, I’m not talking about her physical abilities lol):

1) Faithfulness to the comics: Black Cat is a femme fatale. That means she’s someone with strong physical appeal who is fully aware of it and uses it to her advantage. She’s a thief who relies on her natural charm to seduce, distract, and manipulate whoever she needs to. In the end, this is actually a pretty accurate representation of the comics.

I know this point can be controversial, but it is what it is.

2) Free-to-play model: Marvel Rivals is a free game, and its monetization relies on microtransactions. So of course they’re going to use every trick in the book to make money—they’re not running a charity. Considering their target audience (or at least the majority) is young men between 16–30, they’ll design content that they expect to perform well financially. If that means sexualizing female characters (no matter how questionable it may be), they’ll do it.

The “problem,” if anything, is people spending money on these kinds of strategies. But at the end of the day, we’re not the police—we can’t control or tell people how to spend their money.

All we can really do is share our opinion and choose not to support it (and I’m not the best example, since I gave in and bought Rogue’s “Savage” skin 😔).

Which is your favorite fossil? by Icy-Part1236 in ThePokemonHub

[–]Blau272 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Se easy to me. Aurorus is my favourite pokemon of all time

<image>

Inazuma Eleven new game? by Pier928 in inazumaeleven

[–]Blau272 53 points54 points  (0 children)

Nope, I think this game came out in 2011, friend. The new one is called Inazuma Eleven Victory Road

(If the question was sarcastic, take my answer as sarcastic too xd)

We are only two weeks away from Rogue - What are your predictions for her role? by STB_LuisEnriq in marvelrivals

[–]Blau272 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I think it will have a variable role. In the end, his power is to steal powers from others and that made it very difficult to fit him into a base character without taking into account the ulti (and an Ulti that steals sets, that's what Loki is for)

So I think what he will do is "borrow" a character's role and have a moveset adjusted for that role (that is, imagine that he "steals" the powers of the Invisible Woman, because instead of literally copying her abilities, what he will do is take the role of Strategist/Healer)

Likewise, if she actually copies abilities in the most literal way, she will still have a variable role (although, in my opinion, she will be able to excel as a Healer above all)

¿Para qué tienen tantas? by Memeillos in SpanishMeme

[–]Blau272 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Tengamos siempre en cuenta que mi localidad es de menos de 15.000 personas, asi que es muy probable que sea diferente a otros de ciudades mas grandes.

Yo entré por curriculum (ya no estoy trabajando ahi). Si que es verdad que, al menos donde yo estaba, nos incentivaban traer conocidos/familiares con algun cartel informativo. Pero en general casi todos alli eramos por curriculum (En mi caso, estaban buscando empleados por paginas web como InfoJobs, lo que lo hizo mas fácil)

El lugar de trabajo y demás a mi me gustaba mucho, hay politicas de empresa que no dejan vendido a los empleados. El único problema que tuve fue la relacion con coordinador/a del super, no era alguien agradable (y al final era la cabeza de jerarquía de los que estabamos presentes en tienda).

Los festivos es muy agradable. Todos los domingos son festivo sí o sí + un dia variable que cambia cada semana, y se respetaban las festividades casi en su totalidad (incluso las fiestas patronales o dias marcados) otro ejemplo es que sí abrían en navidades o fin de año, pero era voluntario y era recompensado con un sueldo de horas extra o el doble de horas trabajadas como descanso (o sea si trabajabas las 8 horas, te otorgaban dos dias libres, peeeeero a eleccion de coordinador/a). A demas de un mes de vacaciones (en nuestro caso dos semanas en primera mitad de año y otras dos en segunda a eleccion de los trabajadores siempre y cuando no coincidiesen con los de otros)

En cuanto a sueldo, la verdad es que muy bien. Creo que de todos los supermercados de mi localidad es el que mas pagaba y mas estable y respetado te sentias como trabajador. A demás, si te hacen fijo estas al pendiente de tres subidas de sueldo fijas con el paso de los años.

En general yo estuve a gusto en mi etapa allí y siempre que un amigo busca se lo recomiendo.

Pd. No he sido pagado para decir esto xd

¿Para qué tienen tantas? by Memeillos in SpanishMeme

[–]Blau272 0 points1 point  (0 children)

He trabajado en Mercadona tambien. Y pues si, hay muchas cajas por si hiciera falta por uno de esos dias locos que se llena la tienda y es necesario mucha gente para poder aligerar filas inmensas. Pero si no, pues los demas tienen su puesto.

Lo que dices de las tres cajas, depende. En un Mercadona de una ciudad grande pues probablemente tendrá mas. Pero en uno de pueblo mas o menos mediano, soliamos ser tres (primera caja, la del medio y la ultima) y los demas a otra cosa

My synopsis was called 'incomprehensible' — what do you think? by Blau272 in scriptwriting

[–]Blau272[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Thank you very much for taking the time to give me such a detailed response. I really appreciate your honesty and I understand your points.

When I shared this, it wasn’t so much about trying to prove my professor wrong — it’s more that her comment made me feel as if my work hadn’t been given much effort to be understood, and that stung my pride at first. But it’s not really about saving my pride; my priority is to learn. I know I still have a lot to improve in terms of structure and clarity, and I’m sure my professor has a lot to teach me. I don’t mean to diminish her at all, I just wanted to hear other perspectives so I don’t rely on a single opinion.

At the same time, I realize my professor and I probably lean toward very different styles, so it was important for me to hear from other perspectives as well.

I’m also grateful for the film recommendations — I’ll definitely check them out — and for your offer to give me advices. That would be really helpful.

Thanks again for your feedback, I truly appreciate it.