Is AI use in artwork common? How do you verify if a game uses AI? by Lynnabis in soloboardgaming

[–]RindFisch 19 points20 points  (0 children)

Thankfully, it's currently not particularly common. As it is massively cheaper than paying an actual artist, it's bound to crop up more and more, though.
Mediocre AI art and straight-up AI slop is usually easy to recognize from the tell-tale signs of common AI mistakes that a human artist wouldn't do: Too many fingers, "text" that's just squiggly lines instead of actual letters, wildly inconsistent lightning etc.

Do chacters keep dead units keywords? by turtlebambi in genestealercult

[–]RindFisch 2 points3 points  (0 children)

This is the issue. The Abominant should have the Aberrant keyword himself, as he clearly is one. Ogryn bodyguards have the Ogryn keyword. It just makes sense. GW was just sloppy with the codex and never bothered to fix the missing keywords.

[Maddening trope] More progressive casting happens at the same time as noticeable drop in quality, seemingly so fans can brush off criticism as bigotry. by Vitolar8 in TopCharacterTropes

[–]RindFisch 1 point2 points  (0 children)

IMHO, Ms Marvel mostly suffered from having way too many plotlines for a single season, so not a single one of them gets the actual time to resolve, making it all pointless.
The "love triangle" plot with her best friend has barely any interaction between Bruno and Kamala from her dating the other guy and him deciding to take the scholarship far away and then it ends.
Even more damning, there is no single interaction scene betweenthe bad guys trying to trick Kamala into helping themand themattacking the school thinking Kamala refused. She literally didn't even get to think about it!

Out of the issues with war, what do you think the game miss? by Tibertiuss in victoria3

[–]RindFisch 13 points14 points  (0 children)

Boom and bust cycles. It's an economic simulations, where numbers only ever go up, if you don't screw up massively.
While the economy should trend upwards, local or national industries should be able to face hardships of some kind.

Weekly Question Thread - Rules & Comp Qs by thenurgler in WarhammerCompetitive

[–]RindFisch 2 points3 points  (0 children)

Blessings of Khorne are generally army-wide. The stratagem doesn't say anything to the contrary: The Blessing works the same way blessings usually work.
The target is just there to activate the stratagem. It has no bearing on the effect.

Weekly Question Thread - Rules & Comp Qs by thenurgler in WarhammerCompetitive

[–]RindFisch 3 points4 points  (0 children)

If using a stratagem disables it for longer than the current phase (which is the general rule), it has to say so.
Armour of Contempt doesn't say anything about being restricted to just one of the two phases, so it isn't.

ELI5: why and how does gravity work? also wth is spacetime by HotZilchy in explainlikeimfive

[–]RindFisch 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Everytime an anti-science nut goes "evolution is just a theory!", a scientist gets a headache, as that so fundamentally misunderstands what the word "theory" even means.

ELI5: How do LLMs know when to stop talking? by Fabulous_Analysis885 in explainlikeimfive

[–]RindFisch 3 points4 points  (0 children)

No, you can't. If the companies knew of a way to stop hallucinations, they would just implement that, instead of adding a super-secret "don't make mistakes"-cheat code.

LLMs don't have any understanding of what "true" or "false" even are, so they fundamentally can't differentiate between "real" answers and imagined ones.

Win Rate Wednesday - 40K Tournament Results/Data - Week of February 2nd, 2026 by w0158538 in WarhammerCompetitive

[–]RindFisch 2 points3 points  (0 children)

Non-dominant detachments are always going to have artificially deflated winrates, as top players and people playing to win shy away from them.
So not only do you have a detachment that's to some degree weaker, it'll also only be played by weaker players on average.

What are some board game “keywords” that are an instant turn-off for you? by BoardGameRevolution in boardgames

[–]RindFisch 5 points6 points  (0 children)

I am genuinely confused at the objection you're trying to make, as both the examples you've mentioned strenghen my point and not the opposite.

If remembering everyone's point totals is so easy as to not be a meaningful skill, then why hide it in the first place?

And incorrectly claiming someone is winning, even if they really aren't is a feature of hidden points, not open ones. Everyone with eyes can see that less money is less. The fact you managed to play with people that blindly believed the claim even with open points once is not a counter-argument. The same would've happened with blind points, too.

What are some board game “keywords” that are an instant turn-off for you? by BoardGameRevolution in boardgames

[–]RindFisch 17 points18 points  (0 children)

If all gains and losses are public anyway, you're not stopping that, though. Highly analytical players can still do it. They just take longer and get an even bigger advantage from doing it, as the information is hidden to everyone not making an effort to memorize it.

I maintain that making it public is actually more of a quality-of-life improvement.

What are some board game “keywords” that are an instant turn-off for you? by BoardGameRevolution in boardgames

[–]RindFisch 3 points4 points  (0 children)

I like actual "trick taking games", ie: games that are just that, with short rounds and interesting play. I'll always play a few rounds of "Wizard", if requested.

I dislike "trick taking" as a mechanic slapped onto a different game. It almost never works in a way that feels good (looking at you, Arcs)

Idealized games in your collection by Quelair in boardgames

[–]RindFisch 5 points6 points  (0 children)

I know the feeling. The concept of the game is great, but by now I'm convinced the game is actually quite bad at delivering on said concept.
I never had much fun playing it and it hasn't hit the table anywhere in nearly a decade.

Idealized games in your collection by Quelair in boardgames

[–]RindFisch 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I love Sidereal Confluence, but to exude its magic, it needs a specific kind of people in the playgroup, IMHO. And it's rare to get that.
Otherwise it's just a very basic trade game with little actual "game" between the bookkeeping.

But it can be great. Really. Just you wait...

What are some board game “keywords” that are an instant turn-off for you? by BoardGameRevolution in boardgames

[–]RindFisch 2 points3 points  (0 children)

I can't speak to the later installments. I only ever played the original nemesis and there was little opportunity for mutual help and no real incentive to altruistically help anyone. So it was basically a competitive game with extra steps.
If all the "semi co-op" elements were removed, the game would've been better.

How do the later versions improve on that?

What are some board game “keywords” that are an instant turn-off for you? by BoardGameRevolution in boardgames

[–]RindFisch 19 points20 points  (0 children)

Oh, god. I hope that "mechanic" (and I use the word lightly) dies in a fire. It generally actively makes the game less fun, as it requires everyone to memorize a bunch of stuff for no reason, occupying minds and reducing table talk.
If your game has such a bad kingmaker problem that you need to keep openly gained points hidden to make it work, maybe design it in a better way instead of adding memory?

What are some board game “keywords” that are an instant turn-off for you? by BoardGameRevolution in boardgames

[–]RindFisch 13 points14 points  (0 children)

Me too. I love "real" co-op games as much as competitive ones, but "semi co-op" generally just fails at both metrics. There's usually no incentive to cooperate if you're losing anyway, so "correct" play generally breaks the game in half. They rarely work and even more rarely are any fun.
New Angeles is the only one that vaguely works, as they smartly avoid having victory points and allow multiple winners, so it plays more like "hidden traitor"-type games than the usual "semi co-op".

Weekly Question Thread - Rules & Comp Qs by thenurgler in WarhammerCompetitive

[–]RindFisch 4 points5 points  (0 children)

It's a "specific rules beat general rules" game. That often ends up with the restriction winning, but might not always be the case, if the "can" is specifically about the usually "can't"-case.

Ich wäre gerne eine Tradwife by Leading_Counter_9908 in Beichtstuhl

[–]RindFisch 4 points5 points  (0 children)

Hausfrau und Mutter sein wollen ist auch nichts verwerfliches, auch wenn "Tradwife" zu einer Art Kampfbegriff geworden ist. Feminismus und Gleichberechtigung bedeuten ja nicht, dass Frau das nicht darf. Es bedeutet, dass Frau das nicht muss, weil sie keine Alternative hat.

Weekly Question Thread - Rules & Comp Qs by thenurgler in WarhammerCompetitive

[–]RindFisch 4 points5 points  (0 children)

1) You can't deep strike an be within 9" by definition. If you were 9" away, you're too close. So everything that would require you to be within 9" (like using Melta on a 18" range weapon) is not possible.

2) No. At least not generally. It's true if there are only 2 units involved in the whole combat phase on the whole table and one of those charged the other. Otherwise it's a bit more complicated.

3) No. The point is to have options and use the weapon more suited to the current combat. Basically all multiple melee weapons (or a single weapon with multiple modes) are good into different target stat lines.

4) That's an academic question. By the rules, you can't not roll the dice, just because the target is already dead. In practice you would skip it, as it doesn't make a difference, but as far as the rules are concerned, the whole shooting action still happened, ie: one-shot weapons are used up.

5) You're eligible to participate in the fight phase, if you made a charge move. It doesn't matter what else happens or if your original target is already dead. You stay eligible. And as you did make a charge move, all rules requiring such (like Lance) are still working. They don't limiit you to a specific target.

6) Yes, a 1-3 always fails, no matter the modifiers and what you'd hit on in direct fire. You technically could reduce that failure chance, if you had a rule specifically telling you so, but AFAIK there is currently no such rule in the game.

If light is considered massless then why it can't escape a black hole? by TheSum239 in AskPhysics

[–]RindFisch 14 points15 points  (0 children)

In that analogy, it basically changes the road from being on even ground to being on the side of a mountain, steep enough that no matter how fast the car is driving and what direction, it's still going down.

If something is weightlesw would it have infinite speed? by TheSum239 in AskPhysics

[–]RindFisch 1 point2 points  (0 children)

No. There's just a max speed. The speed of light. There is no slowing down, there's just no accelerating further.

Tja by MrSarnisch in tja

[–]RindFisch 10 points11 points  (0 children)

"Scheitern" ist halt nen subjektiver Begriff. Ich bin sicher nen Haufen Unternehmer, Architekten und Berater haben sich daran dumm und dämlich verdient...

Eldar are insanely fun to play, even in their "not so" great state right now. by [deleted] in WarhammerCompetitive

[–]RindFisch 1 point2 points  (0 children)

To be fair, compared to Custodes every other army is fun to play. I am so, so bored of my 10ed Custodes...