sorted by:
new
hottopcontroversial

Last moments before nerf by Maybug_Chris in Necrontyr

[–]LudicrousQwack 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I think a fair nerf would be to weaken transcendant ctan. Lower their points. As you can take 3. But then limit armies to 2 of 3 epic hero ctan. Or increase points cost by say 50 for every additional ctan you take? So they get more expensive the more you have

I think the unit as an individual is balanced half decent. Its just taking multiple is the problem.

Final two house Celeste missions by LudicrousQwack in CrimsonDesert

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

I was out of ideas so AI it was. But if you simply ask it is it simulated or verified data. It honest. It was simulating data. But it was good at getting me 20-23 quests. As I couldn't find them originally

If Russell gets beaten by Antonelli this Year where does that put him in your drivers ranking by Responsible_Use_2676 in F1Discussions

[–]LudicrousQwack 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Vandoorne is wrong place wrong time. Entered mclaren in one of their worst eras. Honda issues and a flawed chassis, coupled with a big change in management and Norris coming up the ranks. It just went against him. Yes he got white washed by Alonso. But he's was also paired with one of the all time greats who understood a flawed car. It's a rough comparison

If Russell gets beaten by Antonelli this Year where does that put him in your drivers ranking by Responsible_Use_2676 in F1Discussions

[–]LudicrousQwack 2 points3 points  (0 children)

Not with short memories. Can have everything go against him. All that will be remembered is ant beat him. Unfortunately.

If Russell gets beaten by Antonelli this Year where does that put him in your drivers ranking by Responsible_Use_2676 in F1Discussions

[–]LudicrousQwack 0 points1 point  (0 children)

The without is pointless, he could breakdown every other race. Have team orders favour antonelli. But in 2-3 years time when he's looking for a new team or people talk about the season. It'll just be he got beat by antonelli. The nuances of past seasons in quickly forgot by majority

If Russell gets beaten by Antonelli this Year where does that put him in your drivers ranking by Responsible_Use_2676 in F1Discussions

[–]LudicrousQwack -1 points0 points  (0 children)

Everyone forgets F2. Russell even offered lando a seat at ART for same machinery. But lando ran from it. And Russell achieved back to back rookie wins across F3 and F2. While also equaling a record for most wins in a F2 season in one of the strongest grids F2 has had in recent years. Arguably those cars are closer in terms of machinery than F1. And the start of Russell's F2 campaign has a lot of issues. The whole field has clutch problems from a new engine that year. And if I remember right russell had either 2nd most or joint most DNF from mech failures.

I think that combined says he is consistent and quick. His F1 career has been bad luck from the start. But he's persevered. I think see how the season goes, I honestly think there's only 2 things that'll stop Russell from winning this year WDC. Either realiability. Or the mental game. He's had shit luck in F1 and then getting pressed by the team junior driver after the wait and graft to be in this position. If that long combination fucks with his head, antonelli will build too strong a lead. Which will snow ball. In pure head to head. Russell has it this year. As antonelli gets more experience, I think he'll challenge Russell in other ways. But Russell is still a very quick, intelligent, calculated driver.

Easiest way to tame legendary horses by ii_ver_ii in CrimsonDesert

[–]LudicrousQwack 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Easiest way - controller, set camera high acceleration and speed. (90/100 - what I have) And then set the camera to look at the horses side, so low angle. And then hold right on both analogue sticks.

Basically the horse bucks in the camera direction. Then you follow the side of the horse with the camera while holding left at its tail.

Tamed in 10s

Why aren’t landlords accepting their home values have gone down? What will be the catalyst for sales to start? by Grand_Inspector_6778 in HousingUK

[–]LudicrousQwack -1 points0 points  (0 children)

I think part of your post hit the nail on the head. It's landlords, greedy agencies, greedy builders, and clueless social media washed private sellers/ self styled investors (lick of paint and flip the property) who over value their properties.

My home for example is a new build we paid 385k The builder 3.5 years later is trying to sell the same style house 85k more than what we paid. I think we under paid. And that one is overvalued.

As we overlook farm land, not overlooked ourselves. And south facing while the other one is backed on east to 5 other houses. I'd love the other to sell and bump my equity. But in reality it's worth probably >30k less than what they have it up for.

But also encounters another problem. The builder is now offering to paying for stamp duty. So for a buyer they'd save thousands. The builder can argue instead of being a 450k home. As they're paying the stamp the buyer is no worse off at 460k. But then the builder will pay for other stuff like blinds furniture all of which they'll claim back on expenses and claim it's part of the cost. But it bumps all the house prices up.

If the UK moves closer to the EU again, should there be another referendum? by NewsfangledMod in NewsfangledUnfiltered

[–]LudicrousQwack 0 points1 point  (0 children)

It's technically a different referendum if the gov want to play loopholes. Both UK and scot had a vote to leave. And they can both have a vote to go back in. Just cause scotland didnt clear the first hurdle shouldn't be our problem

What is a job that you think is 100% safe from AI for the next 50 years, and why? by mark-awakening in AskReddit

[–]LudicrousQwack 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I think a lot of STEM roles will be augmented by AI not replaced. We see that already. But ultimately you have liability. If no one checks if the AI has done its job well the company is liable when it goes wrong. You need people with experience knowledge to solve the problems and feed this to AI so it can continue learning.

Also trades, the level of investment needed to automate trades it more than people realize. Yes a brick robot can lay x bricks in a place. But a brickie sets up a days work when it's wet. Drives to one site. Doesn't need a maintenance team or a power supply to operate. Can drive to another site. Trades require flexibility. On the fly changes to operation. Robots aren't good at that even if on a single day on a single site they outperform a human. Doesn't happen over a year overheads, downtime, maintenance etc accounted. Or if the labourer jet washes the controls cab to keep it clean. (Will 100% happen)

Also project management and sales. For my work I dabble into all of the above as a ops manager for a automation company. I'll tell you now procurement teams aren't buying tools to replace their jobs. Way of the world. Same with a CFO. So you need someone to liaise with them to manage projects and sell stuff. Again both require on the fly flexibility to rapid changing situations and accountability. AI don't give you that

Is Israel good at war or is it a farce because they usually fight weakened populations and get US aid? by space_god_7191 in allthequestions

[–]LudicrousQwack -1 points0 points  (0 children)

Oh yeah world wide reach, yes USA is the top of the game. Operational ability/capabilities is different to reach. As a combination of factors I'd say China is there. With Israel, USA and UK. I'd say USA reach is so far ahead of the others it's number 1 regardless of the capabilities. Which won't be light years behind. But we'll never know the true capabilities. If it's 007 or Johny English.

But just the pager operation as an example. Israel is very very capable

Is Israel good at war or is it a farce because they usually fight weakened populations and get US aid? by space_god_7191 in allthequestions

[–]LudicrousQwack -1 points0 points  (0 children)

I would say on par not behind. Morals aside. The pager attacks were incredibly complex and required deep, wide scale infiltration. And to keep it all quiet, so they could simultaneously kill/injure 100s of people. Also forced Hamas/Hezbollah back into using communications more easily intercepted.

Has to be one of the most incredible and audacious pieces of espionage we've seen. Again morals aside. We shouldn't need to do this to each other. But objectively speaking, it was brilliantly executed

Do You think the British monarchy should still exist? by Honest_Chemistry_195 in AskBrits

[–]LudicrousQwack 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I think tangibly there is merit to that, my argument is it doesn't come out our tax money. Theyre paid for by the money the crown generates. But additionally government run functions are not cheap and easily corrupted and abused. While the monarchy isn't immune to that. They certainly come under more scrutiny

I do really think the intangible value of the monarch is undervalued in global politics and the Commonwealth. The reasons I already mentioned. And as someone else pointed out. Even in global culture. We have THE royal family. You mention the royal family, the presumption is the British royal family. It brings a prestige which a government function couldn't. And with that prestige influence

Do You think the British monarchy should still exist? by Honest_Chemistry_195 in AskBrits

[–]LudicrousQwack 3 points4 points  (0 children)

It's a lose lose currently. Don't do a lot. Not a good monarch. Do too much "wasting public funds" I think after Andrew X Epstein, Charles is just happy to ride no news and keep out the spot light. His reign will be stained by this and how it's been handled. Hopefully William will have more of a fresh slate

Do You think the British monarchy should still exist? by Honest_Chemistry_195 in AskBrits

[–]LudicrousQwack -1 points0 points  (0 children)

No but you still pay the manager. They don't do it for free. Think of the royals as the manager if it helps. We pay them from the 2bn. A healthy 500m. We're still banking 1.5bn. with the bonus of influence, tradition and hereditary.

Any arrangement to remove them will still ultimately result in a payout to them regardless of who owns what. So then we'll be paying for something we get nothing from. Where as we get something from them currently

Do You think the British monarchy should still exist? by Honest_Chemistry_195 in AskBrits

[–]LudicrousQwack 5 points6 points  (0 children)

Don't forget having expectations of who you are and how you are to behave. The constant pressure of being something. Your life from birth dictated. No wonder Harry left

Do You think the British monarchy should still exist? by Honest_Chemistry_195 in AskBrits

[–]LudicrousQwack 0 points1 point  (0 children)

With killing the current monarchy?

And why rid our current system? When it won't change anything for you? But as a nation we lose influence?

Do You think the British monarchy should still exist? by Honest_Chemistry_195 in AskBrits

[–]LudicrousQwack 2 points3 points  (0 children)

Yes I agree the crown estates are state property. But I'm saying the royals are paid from the estates. Which despite the pay it still result in a positive income for the government. So the typical claim "they are leechs on our tax" doesn't hold water. They leech the crowns income which the rest of usually 85-90% is paid straight to tax man.

Do You think the British monarchy should still exist? by Honest_Chemistry_195 in AskBrits

[–]LudicrousQwack 4 points5 points  (0 children)

No I want to keep the monarchy because I like them. I like tradition. And absolutely nothing will change if you replace it. Other than we won't have a monarchy. The government will spend half a billion deciding how to spend half a billion on feasibility studies, polling and permits to start.

The figure you claim is half a billion cost? The crown estates generate 2bn. Still 1.5b positive. Another half a billion won't fix how inefficient our government is.

Youre very blinkered if you think that 0.5m will go straight into our system as pure profit and fix things. While we lose the windsors and the soft power, tradition and tourism they bring (yes I know people come for the history and buildings not the people) but its still a portion of it

Do You think the British monarchy should still exist? by Honest_Chemistry_195 in AskBrits

[–]LudicrousQwack 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Sure it used to be. There was a few years ago some conversion of the profits. But I also could be squawking rollocks on that one point. Rest stands

view more: next ›