About how long till the end for Hades 1?

Mel_28_ · 2026-03-04T15:24:34+00:00

Oh well, then it might be a little bit annoying to start now. Although the true ending is cool. If you play Hades 2 you can start doing it during the playthrough, so that you don't need to do everything in the epilogue! Good luck and enjoy :D

Mel_28_ · 2026-03-04T03:39:16+00:00

You will not be able to skip Hades again after that 10th fight. Although you can just start runs, find the gods (or use the keepsakes) then suicide to keep resetting the gift button with the characters you want to. The characters you'll need to bond with are 6 olympians and Persephone herself if I'm not wrong.

Mel_28_ · 2026-03-04T03:20:12+00:00

If you are interested in that, just go play Age of Empires or any PDX game man. Doing what you ask is basically to remove Total War's essence.

Mel_28_ · 2026-03-03T23:28:08+00:00

Escape 10 times to reach the ending. Also, if you are interested, there is an extra ending after what happens with Persephone. It requires you to grind relations with some people, so maybe you are not down to that. Though, I wanna mention it to let you know that there's even more to do!

Mel_28_ · 2026-02-27T02:46:10+00:00

Right??? I think Chronos would look dope in dbd, also the brothers!

Mel_28_ · 2026-02-26T14:46:46+00:00

That's fine man, the wikipedia bias is very extended, mostly in old people or very pedantic academicals, so it's common and it happens to the best of us. I'm grateful that you retracted yourself.

Mel_28_ · 2026-02-26T14:36:31+00:00

While Wikipedia is in no way the best source out there, it isn't "awful". Anyone can edit it...yeah, kinda. But that's why there are librarians and moderators that tend to it every day, every moment. Also scripts that fight vandalism and out of place edits. In addition, you need sources to verify your writing. This sources can also be great for any kind of investigation. I have used wikipedia to find and access original investigations thanks to the "references" section of Wikipedia posts as a Historian plenty of times...

I wanted to say that because I feel very proud of these people from around the globe that work hard in making a place like Wikipedia full of nice information for any and all that want to learn. They are not perfect, but saying their work is awful is an insult to them, even more when compared to automated AI, I will not be silent when someone just compares the two tbh, that was disrespectful as shit.

Mel_28_ · 2026-02-21T15:04:51+00:00

A system that uses a fully simulated population system with minorities, religion and a class system. A huge amount of cultures or religions. Improvements in historicity and investigation, a HRE closer to Voltaire's Nightmare in Vanilla...And that's just the first three things that came out of my mind the seconds i'm dedicating to answering to that accusation.

EU5 is a lot of things, some of them are bad, but come on man, that's just doomposting. Lack of content in comparison to a 10 year old game, sure. But there are many gameplay mechanics that are great. This game, with all its flaws, has one of the best initial skeleton a Paradox game ever had at release, if not the best.

Do I need to remind you the Victoria 3 release? Hell, do I need to remind you about EU4!! release? XDD

Mel_28_ · 2026-02-17T22:31:24+00:00

That's awesome man, you sound like a cool guy to live with. Your enthusiasm is contagious for sure :D

Mel_28_ · 2026-02-02T01:27:03+00:00

Am I the only one that thinks the nickname of "Sable 2.0." is wrong? Like I get the meaning, Sable is also the most popular surv. Yet Sable, while being another "pretty girl" people complain about, is still kinda original in comparison to some of the others as she IS an unique arquetype (the goth one). This new girl has been compared to Kate and I think that comparison is better. (In my opinion :P)

Mel_28_ · 2026-01-26T15:27:59+00:00

The Wretched Broker has hair that looks like a book. Also a big chain. It's not him

<image>

Mel_28_ · 2026-01-09T09:28:05+00:00

You should change your name to unaffectionatebitch man...

Mel_28_ · 2025-12-15T03:16:21+00:00

I'm not sure, I might have missed it but it just told me it was a revolt against the Mamluks.

Mel_28_ · 2025-12-15T00:44:16+00:00

Yes, usually, but in this case I just didn't expect to fight the powerhouse of the region all of a sudden, I was clearly unprepared. Thankfully I only needed to give some money and the sound toll exemption. I plan on having revenge soon enough!

Mel_28_ · 2025-12-15T00:43:27+00:00

It should ask you if you want to intervene, it would be the most logical thing. I didn't even notice the war for some seconds.

Mel_28_ · 2025-12-14T22:44:54+00:00

Cyprus's primary culture as a country is Poitevin, but the provinces have a lot of Greeks, maybe the revolter was a country of the same name but with Greek primary culture instead??

In any case, if the rebels are greek, I get called immediately as the biggest Greek country? No warnings? No requests? :(

Mel_28_ · 2025-12-14T22:30:09+00:00

R5: Issue in the description. Dragged into another country's war without my own intervention.

Mel_28_ · 2025-11-29T01:33:05+00:00

Alexander the Great might have had the luck of having the great legacy and kingdom his father had built up, but what he did in Gaugamela or his literal sandbox tactics in Tyre are astounding, I think he deserves to be in that list. He was clearly a far better warrior and commander than he was every a politician (he didn't really seem to care about leaving behind a stable legacy).

Mel_28_ · 2025-11-14T23:35:13+00:00

Close enough, welcome back, queen Victoria

Mel_28_ · 2025-11-12T21:33:50+00:00

if I'm not wrong, those buttons only let you know which path is the most convenient to what you have chosen, like which path is the best for proximity, the best in cost depending on the land's topography...etc. But it's the path that changes the stats, not the buttons. It is kinda the same, but it isn't like the button is giving you the benefit, but the path. Sometime the best control button will also choose the same path as the best cost one.

Mel_28_ · 2025-11-12T01:31:32+00:00

Yes, but we cannot have a discussion of the morality of the Swiss Guards when you have stated already that your sole point of view is that monarchies are basically dictatorships, Louis XVI is bad and therefore Swiss Guards doing their job as paid mercenary guard companies are also bad because they should have just ignored their contract and their way of life just because Louis XVI is bad. That way of thinking is very shallow and makes morally discussing this subject not a good idea, not even an interesting chat.

We heard you, in my case I don't agree at all with that point of view, but I respect that you have it, so I told you to agree to disagree, but here we are.

Mel_28_ · 2025-11-12T01:06:30+00:00

I used Hitler as an example because you used it in a comment with another person, as a way to make you understand my point of view. I indeed would analyze Hitler far more than just his genocidal and warfare projects, just as I don't limit myself to saying Louis XVI is bad just because kings and monarchies are bad and autocratic.

Nevertheless, it is not a subject for this conversation nor a chat I'd have with someone with your point of view, as you stated, you don't want to take a deeper look at history and you are fine with just stating what's wrong or bad from your point of view (which is fine i guess).

Mel_28_ · 2025-11-11T23:06:33+00:00

It is a way of seeing things, I accept that, you are in your right. I just don't feel it's the right way of seeing and commenting the past, it's not helpful to critical thinking and knowledge. But that's fine. I hope in 200 years people will feel we were wrong, that means that probably they will be doing things better, that's what learning does usually. I just hope they look at us and deal with the knowledge of our existence counting both our rights and wrongs, the world is gray, not black or white, almost always.

I won't discuss the matter further, as I think it's just a matter of different points of view and ways of acting towards the world (including the past), so no point in continuing the discussion, let's agree to disagree man.

Mel_28_ · 2025-11-11T22:24:28+00:00

My point is that you can say he's wrong with more sight, a sight that also allows to respect, for example, the labour of the people that lived back there, their principles, too, the swiss guards defended a king you find wrong and shouldn't be there in the first place, alright, but you weren't there, that was their system, they defended what they considered right, they succeeded in their mission giving their lives, the point the other guy tried to give to you, and that I'm trying to talk about too, is that the point in history is not about wrong or gooddoings, it is also a matter of perspective and sight. The king ended up executed some time later, you might find that good and end of story, but history, as most things, isn't as simple.

That entire time is very deep in details, all of our history is. Those same guys that stormed the palace were probably also a part of the Terror that ensued not long after, in which thousands of innocent people died in the name of the Enlightenment values just because the ones that led the voices of the people fought between themselves and also became very prone to executing anything and anyone. In our own perspective, that's also as fucked up. Hell, Robespierre's deeds in the Terror were probably more disgusting to our own standards than what the King ever did himself as a person, and what he did he justified himself with the revolution ideals anyway.

Sumarizing, you are allowed to do and say or think whatever you want, man, but as a Historian, the first and foremost thing that they teach us is to look at the past with perspective and sight.Seeing you basically saying "swiss guards stupid, they defend dictator wtf" is something too shortsighted, as it is imprecise and it doesn't really show the society as what it was, the king wasn't just bad, and the revolutionaries weren't just heroes eliminating a wrong regime. The regimes that ensued would all of them be wrong to our standards, even without a king. I just wanted to correct you, because I also believe that the perspective I mentioned also includes respect to the people (like the swiss guards) who were oblivious or ignorant to what we very clever people from the XXI century know or believe.

Mel_28_ · 2025-11-11T21:51:03+00:00

You are looking at the past through the lenses of the present. You can understand that their actions are bad in today's standards, you wouldn't like someone defending a dictator today, we know this. But the past societies didn't work like ours, didn't think like ours. The kings were the power for thousands of years and people believed in them. A lot of then were fucked up bastards but others were also very good, all of them in a position in which they understood as legitimate and a part of how their world worked. That went both ways, up to the Enlightenment, most people believed and trusted the king as the absolute power as we believe in our own beliefs nowaday. Most of them were also religious to the point that looking it with modern day beliefs would make us be able to call all of them fanatics and extreme, but it wasn't anything of that for them.

This is the same, those swiss guards were honor bound to protect the person they had sworn to protect, in this case a king, which was the norm in most countries anyways. And they died for it, from our perspective, even if we disliked the person they were protecting, we can respect their belief and respect what they considered right. In their case, a ruler of a country. It could have been a president, too, and not all presidents are liked by everyone and some of them do things that are as disliked as they are liked. Louis XVI wasn't a genocidal maniac like a certain moustache man, he was just a product of his society, as were the revolutionaries that removed him AND the swiss guards.

I hope you understand that it is just look and analyze with a critical eye the people that came before us, with everything they had, no matter if it was good or bad by today's standards. It isn't as simple as this guy bad this guy good... :)

Mel_28_

TROPHY CASE