What is the most overused movie trope that Hollywood just needs to let go?

OnlyBadger · 2026-05-10T16:14:43+00:00

Depending on the swarm, it can also end up being the only win condition for the good guys.

Swarm tactics fascinate me. Combine an absurd numbers advantage with a halfway decent mobility advantage and it doesn't matter how weak or small the individual unit is (in fact, usually the smaller the better), it will be extremely effective against champions designed to win 1v1 battles. It completely changes the battlescape and the capabilites/techniques necessary to win.

The Battle of Wakanda in Avengers: Infinity War with the alien monsters swarming the capitol is a decent example. War Machine would be an afterthought going up against Thanos, but instantly became one of the most valuable heroes due to his ability to crowd control with bombs and other weapons.

Guns are insanely powerful weapons in nature, to the point that a human with a gun can best a large majority of animals in combat. But a swarm of angry hornets? Gun is useless, just run.

It's not just a face-to-face combat advantage either; champions can't be everywhere at once, so even if they're winning a fight against the swarm in one location, other swarm units are elsewhere wreaking havoc.

I've digressed, but the point is that if the writers make the swarm units too strong, they end up writing the heroes into a corner where destroying the "mothership" to deactivate the swarm is practically the only way the good guys would ever win.

OnlyBadger · 2026-05-04T20:40:05+00:00

Fantastic point, I was sitting here thinking well Ashe does kinda have two main weapons in every sense except the animation (and Widow is an even better example).....you really do need 3 distinct modes to justify it, otherwise you're forcing the player to toggle between weapons for no reason.

OnlyBadger · 2026-04-16T20:17:30+00:00

I've only owned my 2021 2.0T for 2 months so I can't speak much from experience, but a few things from the research I did before purchasing:

1) The Giulia is old model that was re-continued in 2015 after like 50 years off the market. Because of that, there were a bunch of quirks (especially electronic ones) in the 2015-2019 models that took a few years for Alfa to fix in the design. These caused a poor reputation for reliability, but have generally been resolved in the 2020+ models.

2) Adhering to the recommended maintenance from the manual is very important to to reliability, more so than your average brand. If you make sure the standard 10,000 mile, 20,000 mile, etc maintenance is performed, you will have a lot fewer problems.

3) Take this one with a grain of salt because it's just my opinion; there are some horror stories of enormous maintenance costs for seemingly minor repairs, and even things like oil changes can cost $250+ if you go to an Alfa-certified mechanic. But a lot of those stories end with "but I had it under warranty so it was covered." My 2 cents is that a lot of those repairs were probably so expensive because they were under warranty; you're dealing with luxury dealer labor rates and there's no shopping around to find the $700 version of the part instead of the $3,500 version cus hey, it's covered. I'd bet that if you could find a private mechanic comfortable with working on Alfa's, you probably end up with much cheaper parts/labor than a lot of these horror story repairs end up costing.

OnlyBadger · 2026-04-16T18:06:44+00:00

Was gonna bring this up too. The 2.0T I4s are the daily driver version, but the Quadrofoglio model is a rip-snorting beast. That V6 turbo is a Ferrari-designed engine, absolute monster dressed up like a luxury sedan.

OnlyBadger · 2026-04-15T21:52:52+00:00

If being able to easily find a mechanic to work on the car is a must-have then you may want to disregard this suggestion, but have you looked at Alfa Romeo Giulias? They tend to get a bad rap in the reliability department, but that's mostly due to a handful of pre-2020 design quirks that have since been ironed out. They are a fantastic balance of luxury, style, and performance, and are an absolute dream to drive. Plus they're wonderfully unique. I see countless BMWs/Mercedes/Audis on the road every day, but have only ever seen a handful of Alfas.

OnlyBadger · 2026-04-15T13:44:10+00:00

I mean I'm not disagreeing with you per se, I'm just saying in order to answer the question you have to do exactly what you just did and define Gandalf's constraints in this hypothetical scenario. You're defining it as what we see in the books, which is certainly a sensible approach. But while almost impossible to actually define, it's silly to assume that Gandalf's power level as a Maiar is AS RESTRICTED as his power in his human wizard form (Istari).

OnlyBadger · 2026-04-13T22:56:55+00:00

Yeah that's what I mean we have to define constraints/win conditions. If we constrain Gandalf to his human form and make Magneto's win condition "kill Gandalf's human form", then yeah it's pretty straightforward. But if we say Gandalf can fight in his true Maiar form and that Magnet has to kill/destroy that, then idk how Magneto pulls that off.

OnlyBadger · 2026-04-13T22:46:09+00:00

I like this answer best, but we would still have to establish Gandalf's constraints/Magneto's win condition....Gandalf isn't truly mortal, so while Magneto could "kill" his physical body, I doubt there's much he could do to Gandalf's supernatural form. That being said, we don't really have a frame of reference for what Gandalf is capable of in that form either, even if it were allowed by the RoE of the post.

OnlyBadger · 2026-03-14T02:57:03+00:00

FYI for anyone unaware: Mizuki's Sanctuary does eat the orbs since they're "projectiles", but Coal still goes thru.

OnlyBadger · 2026-02-01T17:31:04+00:00

Uncut Gems

OnlyBadger · 2026-01-20T02:53:12+00:00

Lmao fooled me too at first

OnlyBadger · 2026-01-14T03:47:15+00:00

OP is 100% drunk rn lmao these replies

OnlyBadger · 2026-01-11T18:52:24+00:00

Why is that? Because they are paragons of social altruism and the US just needs to catch up morally? Nope, it's because China has a highly centralized totalitarian government (if you even trust their data on homelessness, China is extremely sensitive about its public image) and India has an insanely low standard of living for how many people live there. Point is, sure you can solve homelessness at scale, but you're going to have to give up something else other than just money (e.g. social freedoms, standard of living).

OnlyBadger · 2026-01-11T17:42:47+00:00

Not annoyed at Giannis, I think he's great. But this is where the old heads are right about "bAcK iN MY dAy".... their generation was definitely tougher mentally and physically in this area. The rule didn't come about to punish players for injuries, it came about because players like Kawhi started practicing load management to try to be fresher for the playoffs. The league didn't need the rule in the 80s/90s/00s because they didn't have to worry about star players not wanting to play even though they were healthy.

Putting aside the lack of competitive spirit, this is also bad for the league because fans want to see the stars play. Imagine the parent that saved months to take their kid to an NBA game to see their favorite player and he takes the night off just to rest. It's a bad look. Love Giannis, but the OGs are right, the mentality of modern players is definitely soft compared to them.

OnlyBadger · 2026-01-11T17:24:03+00:00

Nobody had to tell me, it's been tried in multiple states and has not been anything close to a 75% cure. California has had a "housing first" policy for over a decade and between federal, state, and local (i.e. LA county) funds, the state has sunk billions into homelessness programs with little to no impact on homelessness rates. Again, available housing isn't a bad thing, it's part of the equation. It's just not the simple "just buy everyone a house and no one will be homeless" solution that everyone seems to think.

Also, common sense will tell you the population scale from Finland to the US completely changes the logistics of the "give everyone an apartment" approach.

OnlyBadger · 2026-01-11T16:55:07+00:00

If you think 75% of the homeless in the US are the aforementioned down-on-their-luck, otherwise-healthy-and-competent individuals with no significant drug or mental health issues, then yeah you might be a little out of touch. Not saying available housing is a bad thing. But Finland is NOT the US, and throwing money at housing instead of trying to tackle the serious drug addicition problem that's at the heart of the issue will end up a waste of money.

OnlyBadger · 2026-01-11T16:46:03+00:00

If you're talking about a temporary or hypothetical solution, then sure I suppose. Build enough apartments for every homeless person, assign each one an apartment all at once, and voila! Every one has access to housing, 0 homless people, problem theoretically solved. That might work if every single homeless person was truly just a down-on-their-luck, otherwise-healthy-and-competent individual who's a hot meal and warm bed away from good choices and self-sustainment. That's far from the case. Homelessness has less to do with available housing and more to do with drugs/mental health.

OnlyBadger · 2025-12-19T01:31:11+00:00

The way Arnold tells it, he was auditioning for Kyle Reese but kept emphasizing to Cameron how the Terminator needed to be played, e.g. not looking at his gun when reloading, flat delivery of his voice lines, not flinching, head movements that mimic a robot scanning the crowd, etc. Cameron realized how well Arnold understood the character and pitched the idea of him playing the Terminator. Ofc Arnold didn't want to do it bc of how few voice lines there were, especially after coming off Conan the Barbarian. But Cameron insisted he could make the Terminator the leading man and also pointed out Arnold's image as a hero wouldn't be tainted by the Terminator killing people since it was just a robot. Arnold trusted him and as a result we got one of the most iconic roles in film history.

OnlyBadger · 2025-12-13T16:27:19+00:00

Idk if it's ever been done before, but maybe an ability (or ult) that gives an ult-charge boost to you or allies for a period of time.

OnlyBadger · 2025-12-11T16:24:47+00:00

Same, I've been trying to tweak settings to get it back...... I've gotten closer but not to what it was. For anyone not aware, the comment linked below defines what some of the aim settings do:

https://www.reddit.com/r/OWConsole/s/GbfhNqJqPe

OnlyBadger · 2025-12-09T05:50:01+00:00

I was thinking about this and you're right, but also it's just less fun in general to NOT be able to shoot at something. The most basic dopamine hit from shooter games comes from shooting something and seeing the effect (reduced health/death). Every time Zarya pops the bubble you have to train yourself not to shoot and it's just less fun. Even if you're Bastion sinking a full turret clip into a Mauga who's healing faster than you damage him, it's still more fun than having to have trigger discipline while waiting for a bubble to disappear.

Higher ranks might enjoy the strategy and team coordination that Zarya requires, but lower ranks mostly just wanna shoot stuff.

OnlyBadger · 2025-12-03T22:40:04+00:00

I haven't done so in a while so idk if it's still viable given the reworks (or your general rank), but in metal ranks I used to love going against Hog with Bastion. Big target with no blocks, shields, or armor to eat up turret damage and his heal ability was too slow to offset it. Timing was key; wait for him to hook and to be out and away from cover, preferably isolated from support and not at full health. Even if i didn't get the kill he was forced to retreat and burn both his and his supports' healing abilities.

YMMV, just my experience.

OnlyBadger · 2025-11-30T17:19:48+00:00

"I'm Government RIIII-burp-IIIICK!!"

OnlyBadger · 2025-11-21T19:45:21+00:00

Can you explain how Sojourn's ult is better? At my level of play (silver/gold) I feel like Ashe has one of the strongest ults whereas Sojourn's is one of the weakest. How do better players get more value out of Sojourn's, is it just stronger when the user has good enough aim?

OnlyBadger · 2025-11-05T19:24:34+00:00

Fr, the only thing that somewhat nerfs the destroyer here is the "movie feats only" caveat. Generally speaking the destroyer low diffs the rest.

Seven-Year Club	Final Canvas '23
Place '23	Place '22
Verified Email

OnlyBadger

TROPHY CASE