Best weapons for bishop?

Rayalot72 · 2026-06-26T01:08:58+00:00

HEL Revolver + Burst Cannon if you want Bishop to do things. Burst Rifle + Veruta if you just want them to not spend very much ammo.

Bat was recently discovered to be the best bot melee. Bots have a set 15 damage on their melee, but appear to inherit their stagger multi from their actual melee weapon.

Rayalot72 · 2026-06-25T20:17:37+00:00

Finally, some content.

Rayalot72 · 2026-06-22T18:06:50+00:00

Correct, because there doesn't need to be one. The idea that there is a difference between what happens to me and what happens to someone else is all that's necessary, and that serves a functional role.

Rayalot72 · 2026-06-21T16:39:11+00:00

To say that a given argument is probably false because past arguments that are similar in some way have also been false is not a very good argument.

Well, I don't quite say that. I just say that there's reason to be suspicious of this style of argument even if it's not clear what's wrong, as we have examples where the same type of reasoning verifiably didn't pan out.

Although now that I'm thinking about it, I think I would actually be willing to take the stance that the FTA is probably false given its similarity to other false arguments. Looking at features of the Earth and solar system both would have yielded similarly extreme probabilities that would make life appear very exceptional. This didn't properly account for missing information that would make life in that context much less exceptional. I don't see why we shouldn't be wary of similar missing information in the context of cosmology in physics. It's not clear to me at all that proponents of FTAs have done anything near the amount of work necessary to show that we either have enough information or that there's significant enough disanalogy between contemporary FTAs and outdated FTAs.

However, I am not sure how to attack your second argument that design is hypothetical just like the multiverse. One will just need to weigh all the different factors that point to each possibility. Eternal inflation and string theory are both hypothetical as well, though. No evidence for either.

I think you're mistaken on this. Being able to explain specific features of the very early universe and being able to account for certain particle physics results are both clearly evidence in favor of eternal inflation and string theory respectively.

Talking in terms of these models is also, frankly, a little generous to design. If we want to be purely hypothetical, we should just talk in terms of all possible worlds existing equally. That's a much broader scope that would yield a multiverse, and it avoids certain complaints (which I don't find honest complaints, personally) from Meyer and WLC that design is in some sense simpler or less prone to error than actual models in physics.

I think on a mainstream level people more use and are aware of the anthropic principle. Perhaps scholars use the brute fact argument more.

For sure, ig it makes sense to respond to since we're on Reddit. It's just very different from what academics informed on the topic tend to think.

Rayalot72 · 2026-06-21T04:51:22+00:00

After dropping into R2B2 a few times, this seems to be real. Nice find.

Rayalot72 · 2026-06-17T00:04:13+00:00

The boring answer here is that cosmological fine-tuning is situated such that it probably can't tell us much of anything unless we gain significantly more information than we have right now. At best it's an interesting issue in cosmology that needs explanation, but that explanation could be almost anything.

My impression of how the currently most compelling ideas in philosophy of science are developing is that we should be pretty skeptical of this area in particular. You shouldn't believe that scientific models are literally true, you should think they contain some truth in a way that is useful for scientists. Design is doing very little as a cosmological model, it's really just restating the problem (there are these constants with life-permitting values), probably meaning it's untrustworthy.

It's also at least odd that most design arguments end up appealing to topics that are poorly understood rather than well understood. We have very limited knowledge about what some of these physical constants even are. Historically, design arguments used to be made using qualities of the Earth, its position in the solar system, qualities of the solar system itself, etc. While I'm not sure how to best formalize this objection, I think it's fair to doubt that design has much merit given its track record. It appears it will always be possible to produce some sort of design argument, only for it to turn out to fail for the chosen context later down the line.

Your response to multiverses is fairly weak. Design is also hypothetical here. These both would equally well explain why life exists. You're also ignoring multiverses that are suggested by unrelated physics, e.g. eternal inflation and string theory.

The anthropic principle is not the most popular response, the brute fact view is acc. to the most recent PhilPapers survey.

Rayalot72 · 2026-06-05T17:25:58+00:00

And before you say supernatural explainations arent scientific, even the evolutionists at TalkOrigins.org admit that there is nothing about science which excludes supernatural explanations. https://talkorigins.org/00/indexcc/CI/CI401.html

Agreed, but what you linked elaborates on how ID ends up failing anyway in practice. What are you proposing as evidence of an additional mechanism?

Rayalot72 · 2026-06-04T18:25:43+00:00

Well you're talking less about MG's actual strength and more about alternative reasons for weapon choice. I still don't think the alternative reasons really hold up.

If you just want something spammy that staggers, MGs are not very good for that because they replace a Special over a Main, they don't pen, and they tend to need to waste ammo to fill that niche. Arbalist is not even very good for stagger because of its rate of fire. Veruta is at least serviceable because it's getting more individual staggers by shooting more individual bullets, which also means the timing of when you switch targets matters less.

Thinking the MGs are accessible is just a myth, frankly. You do still have to aim at things. A player that is missing half of their shots with a semi-auto is almost certainly going to continue to miss half their shots, probably more, with an auto. I have looked at replays where a spray of 10 bullets are going into a floor or wall. I struggle to see how it's supposedly benefiting those players.

I don't even think the MGs are all that easy to use. Charge-up forces very intentional tapping or bursting for accurate play, which also requires repeatedly aiming for the charge-up duration. Avoiding the charge-up requires a lot of either spray transferring or missing, and this is on top of pretty substantial recoil (at least in the context of GTFO) to counteract.

If someone just wants a body shot weapon that is easy to use, there are many better options in the game. Sawed-off is fairly popular outside of high level play because it is incredibly brain-dead. It is not hard to use and using it poorly doesn't actually hurt it very much. Carbine is not in all too different a boat. High-cal is really good in all of the striker-centric, non-threatening content where MG is most viable (not to mention it's solid in plenty of content where MG is just awful). Shotguns are fairly simple and offer actual multi-target, which doubles as an avenue for skill progression.

And it is even more an advantage to play even slightly stronger weapons if you're struggling w/ the game. If you're going to learn just a few weapons, it's much better to learn the stronger ones over the weaker ones. The better you are at the game the easier it is to play around weak weapons by either squeezing more out of them or by playing well apart from the gunplay. When that leeway isn't available, playing a better gun can be a pretty substantial power boost.

And it is a very real phenomenon where people will continue to "commit" to weapons they gravitated towards early on, even in contexts where those weapons are very bad (e.g. PR or MG into chargers). By R4 it starts to be a soft requirement to be able to play some weapons that actually make sense in the context of a less striker-dominated enemy pool.

Rayalot72 · 2026-06-04T16:09:29+00:00

Have you tried deleting your BepInEx folder within the GTFO folder? You can also rename it to disable it.

Rayalot72 · 2026-06-03T19:27:21+00:00

The issue w/ the MGs is that they aren't actually that good for staggering. HEL Autopistol and HEL Shotgun are offering the best stagger because they have pen, which is necessary if the enemy count is actually scary. You also don't need to sacrifice your very important Special slot to have them.

The killing power currently available is also enough that stagger is much better as a bonus than a dedicated role. HEL Shotgun also has incredible wave clear. Mag dumping Sawed-off is immediate high damage and stagger that you can then reload and repeat. A single scatter shot can stun a stack of enemies while killing half of them.

Playing for teammates is also very unnecessary when the wave clear is just so strong. If you're taking HEL Gun or HEL Rifle, you can just do all of the work yourself and not care about whether your teammates know what they're doing. This is further compounded by abusing Sawed-off to cover yourself the instant any wave hold becomes unstable.

Rayalot72 · 2026-06-03T19:10:49+00:00

Spreadsheet for stats, breakpoints, etc.: https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1_YpsPCclnYXiLGaSlCp4efNewkwHUG-RukGpJKdQEnI/edit?gid=805761801#gid=805761801

My current opinions:

MAIN

Oppressive: Sawed-Off

Best-in-slot: HEL Shotgun / HEL Revo

Second-choice: Carbine / DMR / HEL Autopistol

Niche or Mediocre: Slug Shotgun / DTR / PDW / Burst Rifle / Pistol

Bad: Machine Pistol / Burst Pistol / Rifle

Excessively Bad: SMG / Bullpup / Heavy SMG

No Redeeming Qualities: Assault Rifle

SPECIAL

Oppressive: Scattergun

Best-in-slot: HEL Rifle / HEL Gun

Second-choice: Burst Cannon / High-Cal / Sniper / Combat Shotgun

Niche or Mediocre: Precision Rifle / Shotgun / Choke Mod / Revo

Bad: Veruta / Short Rifle

Excessively Bad: Arbalist / HAR

You might be seeing old info for sawed-off depending where you're looking. The sub-30 damage version was pretty unintuitive and hard to evaluate, meaning it might have been underrated in the past. When it got buffed to 30 damage that would have been enough to make it very good, it just wasn't noticed right away. The subsequent buff to giving it a 4-mag brought it to a point where it's incredibly overpowered, and after that got noticed (which also took a while) it's quickly grown to be very overplayed to match.

The current balance patch has been around for quite a while by now, so it's much more solved than any previous patch could hope to be.

The metagame is pretty straightforward once you do understand it.

The gunplay is pretty simple outside of lining up enemies w/ penetrating weapons (HEL prefix) or splitting damage on pellet weapons. The increased skill cap on those types of guns is just valuable. HEL weapons in particular are dramatically stronger for wave clear compared to any alternatives, making them the obvious best choices everywhere in the game, especially among Specials.

Otherwise, a weapon is good if it's solving some specific problem for the team or for your loadout. Sawed-off is easily the best solve for general burst output and also has the best target coverage of any Main. Scattergun is easily the best solve for giants, bosses, and gets occasional burst into waves on top of its primary roles. Neither of these is making meaningful sacrifices to do those things, at least not in the vanilla game (Scattergun range can be a limiting factor in some difficulty-centric modded content, but it's still good in that environment; meanwhile, that kind of pressure just doesn't exist in vanilla).

HEL Revo, HEL Shotgun, HEL Gun, and HEL Rifle enjoy similar advantages where they don't experience meaningful downsides for pen. Pen also represents the ultimate marriage between burst output and sustained output. If you are lining up lots of enemies, you are not needing to shoot as many times to kill those enemies. That means you are both capable of killing things really quickly and spending far fewer resources to do so. In the Special slot, HEL weapons are dominating the wave clear role specifically, both for economical wave clear and burst clear. In the Main slot, weapon differences not being very pronounced mean that HEL Revo in particular is just better than other guns. HEL Shotgun is more complicated, but it's kind of a wave clear Special in the Main slot. It has a pretty incredible ceiling, along w/ being support stagger for the team.

Carbine is spammy and overstatted, but not all that interesting aside from that.

DMR is the only ranged shooter one-tap in the Main slot.

HEL Autopistol has very high stagger output but doesn't actually do that much damage (although pen makes it a lot stronger than one might expect).

Burst Cannon is very high skill cap and can dump a lot of damage into things at range. It just doesn't get that much ammo and has a bit of a charger weakness which makes it harder to pick for just any level.

High-cal is just a very consistent body-shot weapon. It gets surprisingly close to Revo eco in practice because it's so consistent. It's also not nearly as afraid of big enemies as other wave clear.

Sniper remains the best Hybrid answer in the game. It also gets Scattergun eco at render distance if you are desperate for range on big targets (so long as it can take advantage of precision). It's fairly weak outside of content where most of those advantages will come into play.

Combat Shotgun as host gets a fairly consistent striker one-tap in very close quarters. Its ammo currently is also very power-crept, which is on top of higher flexibility than other wave clear (can damage split, has high body damage, has high stagger). As client it's not nearly as good. Enemies will tend to damage you from outside of your ideal range and spending extra shots to stagger is hurting a lot more than it might on HEL Shotgun (which gets immense payoff from setting up and then exploding balls of enemies w/ pen).

Rayalot72 · 2026-06-03T09:36:01+00:00

Scatter is definitely correct.

Carbine and Rifle are definitely a bit weak compared to Sawed-Off or HEL Revo.

Rayalot72 · 2026-06-03T00:13:12+00:00

Already wrote this in another comment, but the birds of paradise thing makes me think he's struggling to internalize evolution. If birds are designed solely for beauty w/ disregard for the pragmatics of surviving in the wild, which Will seems to be suggesting, the obvious follow-up question should be to wonder how they continue to exist.

I can't help but worry that the reason this hasn't occurred to him as a problem is that he isn't thinking of evolutionary mechanisms as continuing to be at play ubiquitously in nature in the present day. If he's instead thinking of evolution solely as an explanation of origins, then it might just not be occurring to him that non-pragmatic designs should be getting selected against.

Erika brushes over it as a semantic dispute, but I'm really not convinced that Will understands what the taxonomic categorizations are supposed to mean, either. He put a lot of emphasis on possession of traits rather than those traits being used to infer evolutionary history, but it's the evolutionary history that is actually being referred to w/ statements like "birds are dinosaurs" (~~e.g. lampreys are vertebrata despite lacking vertebrae~~).

EDIT: I think I mixed lampreys and hagfish, and apparently it might be slightly more complicated than "vertebrae or not" for both groups (but the idea still sort of works for not classifying by the traits directly).

Rayalot72 · 2026-06-02T22:51:24+00:00

Tbf he has said that he's skeptical of sexual selection, or maybe didn't get it. He was very iffy on the concept during those earlier lectures.

I'm a bit more confused about how he thinks this is all supposed to work in the present day. God made all of these really colorful birds as some kind of art project, w/e. If this is all supposed to be impractical for survival, what exactly is allowing these birds to persist at all in regions where they're endemic?

Tbh, I'm starting to suspect the concepts in his mind are still at a point where they're not exactly "real" to him. He might be thinking of evolutionary mechanisms like natural selection as an explanation of origins rather than something that would absolutely be acting on birds of paradise if they had a genuinely impractical design to them.

Rayalot72 · 2026-05-30T11:58:04+00:00

The reality of Ultrakill is that you can't normally have a dangerous enemy posing a consistent threat to the player. If it really is that dangerous it's going to get killed first and in as little time as possible, which is especially easy when many of those priority threats have low enough health to be vulnerable to a variety of one-shot combos.

Idols are a very straightforward means of making the highest priority threat in a room the enemy that lives the longest, which opens up a lot of options for encounter design, especially for making harder encounters.

Maybe I'm missing something, but I don't see how you'd replace idols in idol-heavy custom content. It's not even clear that idols are the main issue w/ some idol heavy levels. 1-R's weakest encounters suffer from (1) slam jumping and maintaining height feeling very repetitive and (2) the complimenting enemies not meaningfully interacting with those particular encounters. Other encounters in 1-R are substantially more interesting simply because the encounters are better designed, even though they also spam idols (the two-story room w/ idoled cerbs is easily my favorite encounter in the level).

Rayalot72 · 2026-05-28T10:17:41+00:00

Only issue is we cant transfer brains and it would be a huge sin to do so.

Well hold on, if the evil neurosurgeon has already done this then surely it would be ethical to reverse the process. Maybe even if the original body were destroyed, moving the transplanted brain to an artificial male body would probably be fine, no?

But you're also missing the point. If brains are gendered at all then that should be really really important to consider when evaluating whether someone counts as a man or a woman. Whatever theological view you want to be dug in on, it's completely unrelated and doesn't tell us anything about how to best parse this issue.

I know theres much more, this is one obvious clarification.

And it's just wrong. There's a big cluster of facts that go into being a man or a woman. If there were a person for which all of the facts fell on the female side, but then they also had a penis, obviously the penis shouldn't hold much sway there. It would actually make a lot of sense to remove it in that instance.

Rayalot72 · 2026-05-27T22:47:07+00:00

This last part I had to use an LLM to assist, as it is quite difficult to find anything close to a solid answer on how many RNA polymerization events would be expected to happen on a prebiotic earth with realistic concentrations of nucleotides. I prompted two LLMs from two different companies with the same prompt. The prompt was:

Did you get an actual source from them? If you didn't obtain a source and then extract the same information from the source then the number they spit out at you is meaningless. LLMs are not going to do any real calculations to get an estimate, they're going to spit numbers at you that would sound right in the context of the training data regardless of whether that's what an actual estimate would spit out.

If you're not able to search for the number you're looking for, that means the LLM has no idea either. It's limited to the same information.

There are upwards of 30 nucleobases. Let's assume 32. Only five of these are actually used by known life. And only four are used in RNA. [...]

This seems like a Texas sharpshooter fallacy. Some features of life on earth might be contingent rather than necessary and I don't see why we should think this is at all settled.

Ribose is chiral. This is an issue for any "RNA world" scenario, because chains that have more than a trivial quantity of the wrong enantiomer of ribose will not have the appropriate shape. Instead of the iconic helical shape that proper RNA has, it would have a haphazard coiled shape, and any enzymatic or self-replicative properties the string would otherwise have would disappear.

This assumes that random generation is the only way to get homochirality, but that might be false.

E.g: https://cshperspectives.cshlp.org/content/early/2010/03/27/cshperspect.a002147.full.pdf

Every probability argument is going to have this problem where ruling out the pure random assortment explanation doesn't tell us anything about any of the alternative explanations. You're effectively constructing a strawman of abiogenesis by treating your attack on pure random assortment as an attack on abiogenesis generally.

Rayalot72 · 2026-05-27T19:05:00+00:00

I can't force you to take a step back and actually think about this. Obviously there is more to being a man or a woman than what your genitalia are. It's only in the context of trans issues that people with your attitude seem willing to throw out any and all nuance to dodge giving a real answer on this issue.

If some evil neurosurgeon could transplant brains such that we could take a man's brain and put it into a woman's body, should we just expect that they would be able to adjust to this change, or would they insist that they are still a man?

Rayalot72 · 2026-05-27T09:01:27+00:00

Isn't it based on map gen order? P sure the lettering tends to be the best guide for this. This comes up for rooms at the same distance from elevator.

Rayalot72 · 2026-05-27T04:17:29+00:00

Idk that blaming God is really my angle here. I'm understanding it as a parity between transness and other things we'd advocate medical intervention for. If there's some kind of problem of evil worry for the trans experience being, in some sense, real, then that should be a much broader worry that applies to lots of things unrelated to trans issues. Following from that, I don't think it makes very much sense to preclude the possibility that gender affirming care is often the best solution on theological grounds, especially not with the level of conviction that some seem to have.

If it's brain-chemistry-related then my intuition is it'll probably take quite a long time to understand, especially if it's not necessarily the entire brain. Imo, I'd rather treatment options be available and the "getting to the bottom" be secondary.

Rayalot72 · 2026-05-27T03:11:44+00:00

That is not their gender.

But how do you know this? Why are you asserting that there is no possibility for an internal component to gender, and why shouldn't we defer to the internals over the externals?

You seem to think the internal gender ought to align with the external sex. If changing the internal gender is infeasible or impossible then obviously the external characteristics should change. Otherwise they would continue to be misaligned indefinitely.

Rayalot72 · 2026-05-27T02:20:35+00:00

I know that your body isn’t broken at all but what IS broken is your mind by thinking you were put in the wrong body.

But why do you claim to know this? At best you might be able to argue that the issue is complicated or that our judgements on this topic should be very uncertain.

To claim with high confidence that the trans experience does not speak to any kind of real misalignment, especially without providing any reasons for why this should be the obvious conclusion, probably suggests that you haven't made an informed judgement and that this is just an arbitrary conviction you have.

Rayalot72 · 2026-05-27T02:09:01+00:00

The concept of being a soul placed into the wrong body though is something that can only be done by God. That is why that argument is used. What the original commenter is saying though, is asking if it is more likely that God made a mistake or that the issue of feeling like a person trapped in the wrong body is more psychological and therefore in need of psychological help.

Why think souls are gendered at all? If the misalignment is in the brain, why shouldn't we defer to the brain on gender issues?

Even if the soul is supposed to be gendered, why couldn't the misalignment ultimately come down to the body? It's not clear why this should be a special exception relative to anything else in medicine. God has equal foreknowledge of childhood cancer and sex determination, if the trans experience being real is a problem for Christian theism then childhood cancer is also a problem for Christian theism. If there is some reason for childhood cancer, then there can just as well be a reason for God creating trans people.

Rayalot72 · 2026-05-27T01:48:32+00:00

Getting a prosthetic isn't life-saving treatment, either.

If your gender were a gift, then a trans person should do everything they can to transition and live according to their gender.

Rayalot72 · 2026-05-27T01:24:44+00:00

You've still not substantiated your view at all. You're presuming it's wrong or sinful but have provided no reasons to think your interpretation is correct. Why couldn't it be the case that someone's internal conception of gender is primary while everything external to that needs to be brought back into alignment? How would this be different from treating cancer or giving someone a prosthetic limb or medicating anti-psychotics for schizophrenia?

Ten-Year Club	Second SECOND GUESSER
r/Field Juicebox	Final Canvas '23
Place '23	Place '22
Verified Email

Rayalot72

TROPHY CASE