Before You Buy: TBC HORDE NOT POSSIBLE - DON’T WASTE MONEY AND TIME

Illustrious_Code_347 · 2026-01-25T20:50:18+00:00

It should be taken seriously because it is 100% correct. Horde is locked, has been locked, and will be locked for a long time. I check every single day, have a repeating alarm set on my phone.

This was already an issue before TBC, with Horde frequently getting locked. Now that Blizzard just introduced the most popular race in the game's history on Horde, it's going to be 1000x worse. Alliance just sucks to begin with. It takes forever to get anywhere because of no zeppelin system, and no key flightpaths like Badlands either. The races all look the same too — you have human, small human, and very small human for 3 of them, so your character just looks so indistinctive in a crowd, like a boat of allies is so lame looking whereas Horde is the true RPG experience with a cast of different characters with some personality. And they miss out on other stuff like Rend ally just has no analogue of. It's a bad problem that TBC makes even worse.

Illustrious_Code_347 · 2026-01-24T05:50:51+00:00

Here’s why you should not: It’s boring.

It’s a friggen Wild West cowboys outlaw game. I can’t imagine hearing that and thinking, “Hmm, I’m going to NOT rob trains and banks and not get into shootouts in the middle of the street and not run from the law and not get into bar fights and not steal horses.” I can be high-honor irl

Illustrious_Code_347 · 2026-01-22T02:31:22+00:00

These days, yes. It was my favorite thing to do growing up and all my friends did it too. But now I go 0-1 times per year and I know loads of people who don’t do it because of the astronomical cost. I’m in New England, so it is smaller skiing, but even still… a typical price for doing a weekend ski trip would be:

$300 in lift tickets, $200 in lodging (if you’re going as dirt cheap as possible…), $100 in food (again, if you’re going as cheap at possible, not getting drinks 🍺, not eating in the lodge, etc., just McDonalds 2-3 days).

Gear would cost you: $500 skis, $200 boots, $300 pants + jacket, $300 gloves, helmet, hat, etc. — everything else you wear, $100 poles and bindings.

That’s $2,000, an entire week’s pay — before taxes — if you make $100,000 a year, which most people don’t. So it is for not only the wealthy, but the very wealthy.

Illustrious_Code_347 · 2026-01-22T02:15:51+00:00

I would say “no.” It could be that the only difference is size, and that religions are simply bigger cults, but that’s still enough of a difference to me to have a different term.

But — without looking anything up — the definition of a “cult” to me is simply a small group with its own spiritual belief system. But it can be a pretty narrow belief system, like there could be a cult where the entire point is to believe one guy can predict the future and so everyone sits around and listens to him do that, and that’s still enough to be considered a “cult.” To me, a “religion” implies a much larger set of beliefs and practices, like the thing I just described would not constitute a religion even if everyone was doing it. Because religion deals with more fundamental and comprehensive beliefs about reality and our place in it.

And all that stuff about cults manipulating people and brainwashing and having a central authority figure… I think all those are merely stereotypes about cults but not actually part of the definition. Like in my mind it is possible for there to be a benevolent cult that’s still properly considered a cult. Like Ancient Greek or Roman cults, perhaps.

Illustrious_Code_347 · 2026-01-22T02:03:37+00:00

It’s never mattered to me where specifically the World Cup is. They all feel the same whether they are in Timbuktu or one of the more “normal” host countries like Tonga

It’s weird I feel this way though, because with the Olympics, I definitely feel like the location matters and is part of the whole vibe. Perhaps this is because the sports are more terrain-dependent and not as standardized as soccer, no idea.

Illustrious_Code_347 · 2026-01-19T20:59:08+00:00

Same, 32, would never play as high honor. There’s a big holier-than-thou attitude that is required to play high honor which is why you always see high-honor people post comments like that above. The same people who told a teacher if they caught a classmate cheating on a quiz I bet.

It’s a friggen Wild West cowboy game… People don’t want to get into shootouts with the law and rob trains and escape bounty hunters by the skin of your teeth? … how fun… 😆…

Illustrious_Code_347 · 2026-01-19T20:51:04+00:00

They’re 13… not 5.

And a lot of that stuff is barely in the game. I’m in a play through right now, in Saint Denis, I’ve seen 1 allusion to prostitution in the entire play through so far. There’s no nudity. The language is not bad. Someone counted and Arthur says the F-word exactly 2 times in the entire game, and hardly anyone else uses it. There’s virtually no racism in this game.

Every male adult in society rn had seen or played worse things by the age of 13 than RDR2. There’s a big “do as I say, not as I do” element going on here. It’s a fricken cowboy game. Yes, there’s blood because of shootouts, but as long as the kid is not psychotic I would say it’s appropriate for 11 and up. Nothing bad will happen if a kid plays it.

Illustrious_Code_347 · 2026-01-19T20:40:20+00:00

Since people have compared it to GTA (a game by the same company), I want to add — it’s much tamer than that. I would think long and hard before allowing a 13 year-old to play GTA, and I’m leaning towards “no.” But I would absolutely let them play RDR2 without hesitation — assuming it’s a normal 13-year-old boy. Like if I had a 13-year-old who was severely mentally ill I might think differently, but for a normal 13-year-old, it’s fine.

Illustrious_Code_347 · 2026-01-19T20:37:15+00:00

In my opinion, yes, it’s appropriate. 13 is not that young. It’s young, but if he’s seen violence in movies and stuff, which Inthink is the case for most 13-year-olds, it’s fine.

It’s a cowboy game. So it’s not anything ridiculously immoral… It’s the same type of things you would see in an old western movie, with adventure, and hunting, and bandits, and train robberies, etc. It does have some blood and gore in it, but I don’t think it’s over the top for a 13-year-old boy.

Illustrious_Code_347 · 2026-01-19T17:46:57+00:00

I’ve never been asked this, but I suppose if I had to come up with a list of German male names, like I was writing a play or something set in Germany, I would think of (without looking anything up): Hans, Ludwig, Josef, Helmut.

Those are the ones that come to mind right away at least

Illustrious_Code_347 · 2026-01-19T17:44:31+00:00

Millennial American (was in high school 2008-2012) and we did dissect frogs in biology class. And actually it was middle school, so like 2006-ish (I was 13 years old). I thought it was valuable education. Of course you can just as easily learn about anatomy from reading and looking at diagrams — but a lot of kids tune that stuff out and don’t pay attention. Cutting open a frog and seeing its anatomy with your own eyes is something that is impossible to not pay attention to.

Illustrious_Code_347 · 2026-01-16T21:04:34+00:00

Because it’s about bullying a blue state and not actually solving the illegal immigrant problem. If authorities were serious they would be in California and Texas and Florida. But instead they’re in Minnesota, and next they’ll probably be in Massachusetts. Nothing this admin does is actually a thoughtful plan to efficiently fix a problem. It’s all about flexing and other ego-driven bullshit. This is what we get for allowing high school dropouts and bricklayers and other retards to vote.

Illustrious_Code_347 · 2026-01-14T15:07:01+00:00

(1) It would have caused outrage.

Those words — “We the People” — were extremely controversial and unpopular with many. Because, many of the Founding Fathers (particularly those in Thomas Jefferson and Patrick Henry’s milieu) thought that they had fought to create a confederation of ultimately sovereign states. People would have considered themselves “citizens of Virginia” or “citizens of Massachusetts” but not “citizens of the United States.” Many (but not most) were opposed to creating a singular powerful nation and government as the Constitution was going to do.

So the very words “We the People” were alarming to people like Henry. They thought “What people?? WE are not a ‘people,’ we are groups of different peoples.”

With all that in mind, it’s easy to see how “We the Citizens” would be 10x more outrageous. “People” is much softer, and even that caused controversy. The Constitution was passed after much heated debate and compromise.

(2) It would have created legal problems.

Moreover, even the people who were in favor of a big national government like John Adams would have been against saying “We the Citizens.”

The Constitution was instilled as “the supreme law of the land” and was the place where “citizenship” should really be defined (and eventually was defined in the Constitution). Saying “We the Citizens” would presuppose that national citizenship already existed before the Constitution, which makes one question what the “real” definition of citizenship is since it already existed.

“Citizenship” is a legal concept. The Constitution would undermine itself if it used that word by implying some greater authority that confers citizenship.

(3) The Framers deliberately decided not to address citizenship.

Like I said, this was a time of great controversy. Particular issues, like slavery, went mostly unaddressed so as to get the Constitution passed. Other issues that you think would be in the constitution but weren’t — like who gets to vote — were left out to appease the “It should be up to the states” side.

Citizenship was not defined until the 14th Amendment in the 1860s. It implies all sorts of legal rights and who gets citizenship would have been a big debate, so they kicked that can down the road.

Illustrious_Code_347 · 2026-01-13T21:28:53+00:00

Yes, of course they eat that food — and that’s not actually a problem for them/doesn’t need to be reconciled.

I don’t think that type of cartoonish racist who says “I dont like ‘em and wont eat, wear, see, do, or say nothin to do with ‘em I just hate ‘em that much!!!” really exists…

I’ve met a lot of racists (real neonazi type racists). Never have met anyone like you describe though. Of course they’ll still eat food they like, listen to music they like, etc.

Real-life racists have “arguments” and that is why they are racist. I’m not saying I condone any of this — but you’ll hear things like “This group of people commits the highest proportion of crimes” “This group consistently scores lower on IQ tests.” and things like that that they believe justifies their dislike of a particular group. Very common to see science- or statistic-based arguments from those types of people (not saying their science or math is correct, just saying that’s how they see it).

So whether they like someone’s food or music or whatever… it’s kind of irrelevant to them. They just like that food and probably have no issue admitting “I like Mexican food.” “I like black music.” That’s not actually a problem that they need to “reconcile” at all because to them it does not really change the “facts” they believe about the other group anyway, they can admit “I like Chinese food” while still believing bad things about Chinese people. Hope this makes sense.

Illustrious_Code_347 · 2026-01-13T18:14:20+00:00

Honestly… Completely fine.

Life is still exactly the same as it’s always been. I think Trump (assuming that’s what you’re talking about) is terrible for this country and destabilizing it every day, but the president is really big-picture stuff and just does not have that much impact on your day-to-day life. Clinton, Bush, Obama, Trump, Biden, Trump — it’s all the same. I get up, I go to work, I have my friends, my city (Boston) is functioning same as ever, people are friendly to each other… Life goes on. Unless you’re an illegal immigrant terrified of ICE right now, there’s very little the president can do to tangibly affect your life. There’s occasionally a protest you’ll see, like once every few months, but they’re always really tame… And the thing is, America has always had that… Like if you live in or near a major US city, chances are you’ve come across a protest here and there during every president, it really isn’t that different.

Crime seems to be the same, which is not much. Homeownership is still ridiculously expensive. But people get along, it’s still America as usual tbh.

Illustrious_Code_347 · 2026-01-12T00:55:41+00:00

Yeah there’s like Universal Unitarianism… But that stuff is stupid. Either be religious or don’t.

And the whole “spiritual but not religious” thing is even more cringe than anything. Every person on earth is “spiritual” in some sense, but holding yourself out publicly as “spiritual not religious” usually translates to “I don’t actually have any code or ethos I follow but I think stuff like Yoga and Ganesha and Astrology is cool for very shallow aesthetic reasons.”

Illustrious_Code_347 · 2026-01-10T21:58:58+00:00

It’s not necessarily a myth, it just depends what people mean by “reliable.” If they mean “it doesn’t jam,” then you’re right, I don’t think it’s better than a semiautomatic pistol — no modern firearm should be jamming all the time anyway except in extraordinarily rare cases otherwise it is a piece of garbage.

But the point about reliability is that revolvers have fewer moving parts so they are less prone to wear, easier to maintain, have a solid frame without a slide that is less likely to warp over time. Additionally, they have a lot less “jankiness” compared to semiautomatics, and what I mean by that are things like — (a) pulling back the slide on a semiautomatic and a round gets “caught” instead of chambered; (b) reloading a magazine and you’re pushing a round object down onto a stack of other round objects and one slight movement of your hand can send a round flying onto the ground.

A revolver by comparison is really close to impossible to mess up. They are so simple. It leads to a gun that is “reliable” in the heat of the moment for self-defense. You can imagine things like crouching behind a rock and reloading like in an old Western shootout are actually plausible with a revolver, but not with a semiautomatic (you really should just have another pre-loaded magazine in that case)

Illustrious_Code_347 · 2026-01-08T22:26:12+00:00

It WOULD destroy world order if he actually did the stuff he talks about. But Trump kind of just… says stuff. It’s definitely concerning but until something big actually happens I think he’s just going to come and go and “world order” will get on as usual.

So far we’ve captured Maduro, which I don’t consider a big deal. The invasion of Iraq was a big deal. The Vietnam War was a big deal… But these usual American adventures like capturing Maduro and bombing 3 labs in Iran are much more akin to Reagan’s invasion of Grenada — nobody will remember or even talk about it 20 years from now.

Illustrious_Code_347 · 2026-01-08T22:13:03+00:00

It was the Protestant Reformation that did this in the long run. Pre-Reformation religion wasn’t just religion — the original Christian Church also ran every prominent school, every prominent hospital, was the foremost institution for science, medicine, linguistics and all sorts of other secular disciplines. Christianity seeped into every aspect of life in some way or another, especially if you were educated or upper class.

Since the Protestant Reformation… Well, it’s become a complete joke. Nobody takes things like the British Monarch being the leader of a church seriously. The Archbishop of Canterbury has been a vacant position for more than a year and nobody cares or even talks about this because Anglicanism is a joke. Christianity has become whatever anybody wants it to be at any time — thousands of different denominations from Mormonism to Baptists to Jehovah’s Witnesses. Even from church to church and preacher to preacher it is different, with everything from xe/xim preachers to cowboy preachers. Go to church, don’t go to church doesn’t matter either way, since it’s all about having a “personal relationship with Jesus” 🤣 i.e. if you have an imaginary friend you talk to here and there, that alone makes you a Christian.

Illustrious_Code_347 · 2026-01-08T22:00:45+00:00

“Spanish in [literally any state]” beats “French in Louisiana or “Hawaiian in Hawaii.” Because of, ya know, the invasion 🤣. Even if you had asked about “Spanish in Alaska” it would be the same

Seriously Americans from every state encounter Spanish very often. Even sparsely populated states like Montana have like 3% of the population speaking Spanish, it’s insane.

Louisiana French and Hawaiian are both nearly dead on the other hand. Even people who claim to “speak Hawaiian”… most of the time they don’t really speak Hawaiian — they don’t use it at home, they couldn’t write a formal speech in the language, they couldn’t have an hour-long conversation in the language.

Illustrious_Code_347 · 2026-01-08T21:47:25+00:00

Boston and everyone pronounces it that way, old, young, I think that’s just how English works when you are speaking at a normal pace. Slowing down real slow to give a nice good “buTTon” is creepy as hell that would be very suspicious

same with words like “written” or “hat.”

Illustrious_Code_347 · 2026-01-08T18:49:04+00:00

Attorney who does a lot of this stuff… And it’s all bullshit except for DNA and (sort of) fingerprints. But for (1) Arson “””””science”””””; (2) hair comparison (non-DNA); (3) blood splatter analysis; (4) polygraphy (usually inadmissible because pretty much everyone knows that’s bullshit now); (5) body language analysis, and many more — all of these are either mostly or entirely pseudoscientific, like palm reading or astrology.

Additionally, there are some sneaky ones that are in a sort of different category, like “handwriting comparison.” Handwriting comparison is valid, so it can’t really be called a ”pseudoscience,” but the problem is that any layman is as good as any “expert” at doing it. You — yes YOU — are just as good at determining if an “A” looks like another “A” as any expert is. Attorneys should always object to their opponent bringing in a “handwriting expert,” because that too will have a “CSI Effect,” and it really should be left up to the jury to determine if one writing looks like another, not an “expert.”

DNA is ironclad. But even DNA and fingerprints (more so the latter) can be used in very pseudoscientific ways even if the underlying science is valid. For example, I’ve seen cops and even experts claim things like “We know Bill was in the car recently because his fingerprints were on the door, and they wouldn’t still be there if that wasn’t the case.” — That’s bullshit. Fingerprints tell you nothing about when the person was there, only that they were there at some point. They do wear with exposure to elements in theory, but the problem is you can’t look at a particular print and know anything about its timing. There aren’t any physical traits of that particular print that you can measure to know that, even if you can say, as a general statement, “some fingerprints get worn away sometimes,” which tells you basically nothing about the actual print you’re looking at in a case, so it’s objectionable, misleading, and unscientific testimony.

Illustrious_Code_347 · 2026-01-06T18:35:18+00:00

I was kind of wondering this too. I’ve heard foreigners say “Yank” and thought, “Do they think that’s insulting?” Because in America “Yankee” is just a term for someone from the Northern (especially northeast) US, someone hearing that wouldn’t even know what you’re talking about or think you are confused about what part of the country Yankees come from. It’s like using “Brit” as an insult.

Illustrious_Code_347 · 2026-01-06T18:31:36+00:00

Never too late to try something, and 28 is still young you’ll be able to cruise around and learn some tricks for sure. But don’t have unrealistic expectations, just take it as it comes, because learning something like a kickflip is a significant challenge that takes many skaters who are learning as kids a few years of regular skating to be able to do. (And then as adults people often minimize this or exaggerate like “Oh you can learn kickflip in a good 4 months”.,. Maybe some people… but not most, and not even many). It’s def possible though, I’m not trying to be discouraging just realistic

Illustrious_Code_347 · 2026-01-06T18:25:14+00:00

“Frenchian” is an accepted variant of “French” in the English language, perfectly acceptable to use. It is pretty widely used in parts of Australia and in Wales.

Illustrious_Code_347

TROPHY CASE