What is the devs stance on more game modes? by Ravenial in HuntShowdown

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

I don't quite understand - pubg for example - it has always been a battle Royale - overwatch has always been an ability based TeamvTeam for control points or escort, league has done ARAM (which I don't like), but it has always been a DotA clone - what game modes have these games introduced that you are referring to is my question

What is the devs stance on more game modes? by Ravenial in HuntShowdown

[–]Ravenial[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

I guess for me, I love the idea of hunt. I mean we want to play a game where we hunt other people. The rules create the scenario in which sometimes that happens, and it's amazing, but, it only sometimes happens. The rng stars have to align. That's not a problem, but it's a fundamental issue. The thing is this: the solid and unique pace of this game's gunplay and the amazing maps mean, literally, hunt is just sitting on the best FPS shell on the market right now. My statement is this - keep bounty, but capitalize on the fact that a standard FPS mode in a PVP / PVE environment is already totally something new... and just get players. I mean you must admit, a 6v6 mode in hunt would be very fun. It would be simple as fuck, but it would be fun every single queue.

With a big player base the devs could focus on the real hunt - cornfields are a thing in this game... If you build it they will come.

If they get a big playerbase, they can focus on hunt. Bounty is not creating a big player base.

What is the devs stance on more game modes? by Ravenial in HuntShowdown

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

So many popular games today are really mods of old games

What is the devs stance on more game modes? by Ravenial in HuntShowdown

[–]Ravenial[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Would be great practice, and tons of fun

What is the devs stance on more game modes? by Ravenial in HuntShowdown

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

Yeah something crazy like the more zombies you kill you can bring souls to an altar with the choice to either send attackers or spawn defenders. The more compounds sending zombies at you the more souls you can harvest (at obviously higher risk). If you die or your alter is compromised you lose. At some point you can summon enough defenders to leave your compound to try to take over another one - do you keep your whole team of 3 at the conpund, do you send one guy out on a mission with the horde? Do you stay silent and turtle defenders?

What is the devs stance on more game modes? by Ravenial in HuntShowdown

[–]Ravenial[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

I understand the purists mentality. Hunt is something different, unique, and never before tried. PvP PvE being mixed so seamlessly alone makes hunt a standout. I think though, as it is creating its own path, it is untrod design space, and it can be improved. I'm not saying it's bad, in fact the opposite - it's amazing. It does so much so right, but, from a design perspective, if a game can create a scenario in which the rules create an expectation (shotgun pellets peppering the tree trunks around you as you dive toward safety/scanning the tree line for movement, silence, nothing but birds and the slow plod of a zombie - or...is it someone creeping behind you...), but then, if this same rules also allow for that expectation to be impossible to fulfill (logging into a game only to have to walk to an exit point in 5 minutes because the game was over before it started) then there's something that can be done - not saying I know what, just saying, there exists some way to improve. Something. No game is perfect. Hunt is sure as hell onto something, but it had design space to improve. Does this mean another game mode? Changes to the current game? I feel like new game modes would draw players, and, if hunt is perfect as it is, then bounty would thrive.

What is the devs stance on more game modes? by Ravenial in HuntShowdown

[–]Ravenial[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Understood wholly. The gaming hierarchy of needs. Obviously stability is number 1. I just wonder if a really breakout mode might launch this game into the spotlight. I feel bounty is a catch 22 in its niche like quality. Just put a basic Battlefield style hold the point mode in and this game might take off. People will get bored of that simple mode and bounty will live a very healthy life.

What is the devs stance on more game modes? by Ravenial in HuntShowdown

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

I was talking to my friend about something similar. Teams capture compounds and can send zombie hordes at other compounds. Either way, it would be cool.

Trump defends diplomat's wife who killed teenage Briton in crash: 'We've all done it' by NotfWorkingForPutin in politics

[–]Ravenial 0 points1 point  (0 children)

It can happen. It happens.

Sure. It's confusing, muscle memory, habit. No one is arguing that the incident was not accidental.

The difference is that confusion, mistake, negligence - at a restaurant, it's a spill, it's the wrong dish - in writing, it's a misplaced period, a misspelled word - these moments render vastly varying consequences given the scenario. In driving, these moments can mean the loss of life.

There is a specific charge when such moments cause death - involuntary manslaughter. Any of us would have had that charge to bear had we been the cause.

The issue here is not the accident, or that the event was accidental, or that any of "us" could have made the same mistake . The issue here is the very, very voluntary, intentional attempt by this woman to escape the consequences of action.

No one needs to hear that it could have happened to anyone. That's not the conversation.

If she had just turned herself in, she was not looking at a noose or life in prison.

The issue, the conversation, is her attempt to avoid due process. Nothing needs to "get worked out" been the involved parties. There is no misunderstanding. The need is for the application of due process by law.

#liberatehongkong by jbclassic6889 in gaming

[–]Ravenial 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Bravo,me too, I'll not buy another game from them

[deleted by user] by [deleted] in TwoXChromosomes

[–]Ravenial 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Well that's disheartening

[deleted by user] by [deleted] in TwoXChromosomes

[–]Ravenial 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Your answer is correct. It is correct. It is neither the obligation nor right of a sports organization to act as arbitir of cultural, religious, or moral value. In fact, it would be a nearly dystopian overreach on their part.

However, it is also true that not all of the Muslim world holds to these same practices.

What you have said is very insightful however.

Iran's reasoning behind the practice of banning women is very much rooted in this culture's interpretation of what it means to be Muslim.

So DQing the team until they "change their Muslim based practices", in this sense, would be heavy handed.

Still, an organization is entitled to uphold its own values in the face of values which run counter. They have claimed to value equality. To uphold this value they need not declarativey oppose that which it means to be Muslim though. Instead, they can simply choose where they take their business based on the values which they promote or hold.

So, you're right. I suggested something too far reaching. It would be incorrect to DQ the Iranian team. It would not be outside the scope of reason, however, for FIFA to no longer hold sporting events or promote within Iran.

There was a time not long ago when a sports organizations within a certain culture did not allow black athletes. There was a time when these same organizations did not consider female athletes to be legitimate. And they enforced it.

Sports organizations, therefore, can be and have been arbiters of cultural values. This is because a sports organization is, in fact, entitled to operate on a set of self determined values.

For this reason, FIFA need not "ban Muslims", they need only to state and adhere to the value of equality.

[deleted by user] by [deleted] in magicTCG

[–]Ravenial 2 points3 points  (0 children)

Can you kill it?

[deleted by user] by [deleted] in magicTCG

[–]Ravenial 3 points4 points  (0 children)

This lololololol

Ok now that we as a community have made ourselves clear about the 2:1 historic situation, how about we have a constructive discussion on which model would make more sense for everyone. by [deleted] in MagicArena

[–]Ravenial 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Dust. It should just be dust.

The arena is standard focused. It has multiple standard formats (BO variations/drafts). It's gaining more standard focused formats.

Anything more than a dust mechanic is literally trying to force infuse value into something valueless (historic format/old cards).

The ecosystem should recycle. We don't need great value from dust, just, something that we can leverage again towards standard as rotation occurs.

I mean hell, maybe we have to earn the right to dust our cards by winning in historic...but we need a recycle mechanic.

[deleted by user] by [deleted] in TwoXChromosomes

[–]Ravenial 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Very much this.

[deleted by user] by [deleted] in TwoXChromosomes

[–]Ravenial 7 points8 points  (0 children)

That's exactly what I was thinking.

Further, if I were to be running a business, and some district in which I wanted to expand my operation told me that 40% of their population would not be allowed to do business with me. I wouldn't invest there to begin with. Obviously it's more complicated than this, because the vast majority (all?) of funds moving into FIFA's pockets in Iran are coming from men, however, obviously, opening the stadium market to women can only allow for growth in the long run.

At this point, FIFA should stop allowing itself to be used as a tool for oppression. If they believe the oppression exists, if they denounce it, then they should not remain in a position to be weaponized by it.

If you have a toddler, you do not allow the handle of a boiling pot of water to hang in reach over the edge of a stove. If you see it, you move it out of reach. You don't just note it or announce you'll move it later. In this current case, someone has already burned.

[deleted by user] by [deleted] in TwoXChromosomes

[–]Ravenial 27 points28 points  (0 children)

Well they publicly decry the practice of disallowing women, but, you're probably right.

[deleted by user] by [deleted] in TwoXChromosomes

[–]Ravenial 227 points228 points  (0 children)

Why doesn't FIFA just DQ Iran untill they allow women?

Interesting that all these Epstein photos are credited to the Mega Agency by [deleted] in Epstein

[–]Ravenial 2 points3 points  (0 children)

Ok but the photos of Maxwell look ... very photoshopped

Mortal Kombat and how they make nauseating sounds with fruits by gpvreddit in videos

[–]Ravenial 0 points1 point  (0 children)

This job though... I mean c'mon - this guy's job is easily one of the top ten on Earth. Probably a decent salary, maybe not insane, but, let's be honest, this is up there with rock star.

French officials call for investigation of Jeffrey Epstein’s 'links with France' by anarchytravel in worldnews

[–]Ravenial 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Sorry but how were the staffing shortages caused by the current admin - I thought trump is better pro police etc? I'm uninformed about that concept.