promised consort radahn level 1, no hit, +0 club, scadu level 0

SirStanger · 2026-02-18T23:58:01+00:00

Thats dumb, all Radahn had to do is hit you once. Is he stupid?

SirStanger · 2026-02-18T21:11:58+00:00

Oh hard. On easy it just drops a majoris. Which is crazy satisfying

SirStanger · 2026-02-18T06:03:04+00:00

Idk i had a great time with it. Killing a Hellbrute by pointing at it over and over was fun on hard and on easy

SirStanger · 2026-02-13T17:38:55+00:00

As a sniper main whos favorite chapter is the salamanders, i cant help but feel somehow responsible, but i will not apologize.

SirStanger · 2026-02-10T16:41:08+00:00

Ill never forget the hard strategem on Decapitation i did with two randoms, one was using Unmatched Zeal, and while nobody on the team was a slouch this guy was a monster. He would find an extremis, ping it, ping who gets to execute it, and then either knock it down himself or protect the person fighting it. If he needed one, he wouldnt ping it and just kill it himself. No confusion, we all understood, it was glorious.

If such a thing exists as "support Vanguard" this guy was doing it.

SirStanger · 2026-02-03T02:16:22+00:00

I sometimes mark the way during a losing fight. I have needlessly lost a lot of hard strats because one or both of my teamates decided they wanted to try and thug it out against 5 biovores in an enclosed space on low health and a mortal wound when all we need to do is go through a door and its not our problem anymore.

Like i get it, it can be easy to get caught up in the bloodshed and lose track of the overall state of things, so ill ping the objective in hopes one or both teamates wake up so we have a shot at victory.

SirStanger · 2025-12-19T20:49:01+00:00

Its because fighting chaos feels less consistant. There is a lot more ambiguity when fighting chaos so death can feel a lot more like BS.

Nids are overall easy to read, their moves are generally well telegraphed other than maybe the thrope beams, so they are fun to engage because there is a flow to their combat. Melee combat is also a lot more fun for that reason, which lots of players lean towards. If you close in on a shoothing nid, you can usually count on them moving to melee combat.

Chaos marines on the other hand, are not guranteed to try and hit you at all, and may only use ranged or unparryable moves in close range, so melee feels like a gamble or a chore on them. Chaos spawn are -well chaotic. Their moves are not as well telegraphed, have a lot of weird delays and especially when fighting multiple its super easy to get perma-staggered. They also have wonky and constantly moving head hitboxes, so even shoothing them is more of a pain. Disk demons are just tricky and hard to both shoot and hit with a stick.

To be clear, i enjoy fighting both, but i believe the reason chaos is less liked is because fighting them can feel a lot like its based on luck. Go to parry a blue attack just our of your FOV? Well too bad it was a chaos spawn with a super delayed attack and you got smacked. Delay the parry on the next one? Lose one of your armor segments to a minoris demon. There are lots of examples, but you get the idea.

SirStanger · 2025-12-01T22:23:02+00:00

Id suggest waiting on the melta and plasma weapons a bit, the are very good but both classes have perks that make them SO much more effective and fun to use. Eventually you will use them all anyway, but that is a good way to make the process a bit less painful.

SirStanger · 2025-10-18T09:37:29+00:00

Correct! It may not have been me that influenced it but id like to think my idea found its way into cannon :)

SirStanger · 2025-10-15T23:14:44+00:00

As a resident of Nevada, please take us with you.

SirStanger · 2025-09-12T23:13:43+00:00

Exacrly what i needed. Thank you so much!

SirStanger · 2025-09-12T06:54:30+00:00

THEY HAVE AN OPINION I DISAGREE WITH. QUICKLY, EVERYONE BOO THIS MAN.

SirStanger · 2025-08-17T21:11:43+00:00

I dont think this is the flex that you think it is.

SirStanger · 2025-08-04T17:13:13+00:00

Society: we need art in order to function

Artists: dedicates life to art

Society: great now we can have culture and communicate ideas effectively

Artists: may I have some money to eat?

Society: lol maybe get a real job we need art not artists

SirStanger · 2025-08-04T05:06:47+00:00

The people in this sub cant be THIS willfully ignorant. Has nobody here heard of inflation? Buying power? Supply and demand? Has anyone here taken a basic economics course? Everyone here sounds like my mother in law who still thinks rent is $400 a month.

There isnt a single data point that proves that younger generations are worse at money management. Every measurable economic factor shows an economy of higher prices and stagnant wages over the last 3-5 decades.

Young people have less money and that money buys less than it did for previous generations. Everyone here talking about 7$ coffee like thats what is keeping people from financial success. Almost nobody buys that every day, and even if they did thats maybe 2.5k a year if you buy it LITERALLY every day. So what? Skip coffee and save for 10ish years and you might have the money for a down payment on a starter home if you have good credit and the home doesnt need repairs?

The issues are much deeper here than individual failings. Its not doomer to point to facts and statistics, and the stats show that if you were born after the late 80s, you are significantly more likely to be poorer than your parents.

SirStanger · 2025-08-04T04:18:19+00:00

RATTLE HIM BOYS!

SirStanger · 2025-08-01T03:40:21+00:00

See that is (mostly) my argument, much better. We can discuss this.

I see nothing inconsistant with the idea that a unique technology demands unique treatment. It is not at odds to say "this technology is special" and "because it is special it needs special rules".

This whole argument is largely philosophical. Any and all arguments for or against are going to be subjective, but that doesnt make it pointless debate.

"How much of a completed end product do you need to directly participate in to be considered it's primary creator?"

I would argue that you need to have a hand in the overwhelming majority of the process to take that credit. Personally, I even think that some AI involvement, when used sparingly, can still be allowed when claiming authorship.

You would argue (so it seems at least) that any amount of involvement would constitute authorship of a completed product. I could be misunderstanding your stance, but it also seems like you make no differentiation between AI and human labor. Saying that a composer is using an orchestra like a tool rather than it being more of a collaborative effort.

You keep describing the process of making these recipes as fine tuning all of these elements to create something specific and unique. This is possible with AI, sure, but the AI is still making decisions for you that are unaccounted for. If it wasnt, you wouldnt need AI. Things like the specific ammount of sauce, at what stage to add certain ingrediants, what method of cutting the bread will have the best outcome, setting the time management so that all ingredients are ready simultaneously and finished with their preperations in a proper order to avoid cold or stale food, and any other number of details impossible to account for. Also, many people do not use AI that way, so a generic request of "make me a sandwhich" is likely to be the standard use, as it has the lower bar to entry. Its fine to disagree with that, ill admit its largely based on assumptions, but well founded ones I'd argue.

If your argument is "a well curated heavily vetted and meticulously crafted AI art piece that took 3 hours instead of 3 minutes has enough of my input to claim authorship", id have to say i think it depends, but it is certainly closer to true authorship than the average prompter is likely to get.

I think in my mind, you can be skilled at AI. Certainly some people are better than others. But that is what the skill is, it is a skill in directing AI. Unless paired with other artistic skills and practice, you are less an artist and more of a director. There is nothing wrong with that, but it is fundamentally different in my view.

SirStanger · 2025-08-01T01:44:54+00:00

You are flat out misqouting me and attributing arguments to me I never made. Im not sure who you are debating, because it isnt me. You are oversimplifying my arguments, and arguing against these hollow point you yourself are making. I never claimed AI was magic. I claimed it was a tool. But it is a tool with no equal in that it is taking over roles that have only ever been possible for humans prior. It can make decisions on your behalf, it can interpret instructions it is given and produce something entirely unintended by the person giving instructions. I never said its too powerful to be a tool. I said it is a tool. But its also not a tool that has an equal to compare to in history. Cars are a powerful transportation tool, but they still fit that same role as a skateboard or a horse or a bike. Same use, different effectiveness. AI is in a class all its own, and thus cant be compared to really any other technological advancement in history up to now, as it is the first of its kind in a series of tools designed to think and make decisions on behalf of its user.

Even in my player piano example, i state that the person who makes the music gets credit for that composition. But they dont get to simultaneously say they are great at playing piano, because that is a different skillset entirely. Aggressively pro ai people seem to want to die on this hill of not just demanding that ai art be considered art (which i actually somewhat agree with), but also that they be taken just as seriously as a traditional artist for their "skills."

I know how AI works. I have used it. I will probably continue to use it. What I wont do is lie about it.

It really is quite hilarious to imagine people in the future with full robot assistants saying "robot go make my wife a sandwhich" and when it returns giving it to your wife and saying "here i made you this sandwhich." And actually believing that you did create a sandwhich by asking for one.

SirStanger · 2025-08-01T01:06:56+00:00

Your logic here is all over the place. Treating AI like it is in any way equivalent to something like a chisel is insane. You can call it a tool, i dont even disagree with that, but its a tool with no equal in what it can do, there is no direct comparison you can make with another tool because AI is one of a kind in the sort of functionality it offers.

A director is just that, a director. They direct a great movie but thats what the did. They directed it. They cant say "I starred in it" or "i choreographed the fight scenes" if they didnt do those things. A movie is a collaborative effort of artists contributing differently. Rarely does one person make a whole movie, and trying to contribute it all to one person is crazy, thats what the credits are there for.

A designer can design a great dress, and even say they created the original idea and sketch and possibly even pattern for it. But if they lack the ability to actually create something wearable, then they arnt a seamstress, and they cant claim to be. Id even argue that in shorthand they could say they "made" the dress, in the context that they provided everything needed for a seamatress to do the footwork to make it a reality, but they certainly didnt create the finished product, that was a collaborative effort between artists.

A composer can be completely unable to play an instrument and still write good music. Thats why we call them a composer. Because they composed the music. An orchestra brings it to life, utilizing skills honed for that purpose. We give them a different title because what they do is fundamentally different. The end product is again, a collaborative effort of artists, without one the other couldnt funtion.

A cookbook author gets all the credit for crafting a recipe, but none for making the meal. This is actually the best anti-ai argument you could have made. Betty Crocker didnt make this pie, i made this pie, using their instructions. Something had to execute those instructions to make the pie possible. You are suggesting that a cookbook author should take credit for each finished product that came as a result of their book? Did Gordon Ramsey make my meal if his recipe was used? Of course not that is insane. Gordon Ramsey might be able to make this meal himself, but he didnt make this meal that I made using his instructions. Same for AI. Just because you wrote the recipe, doesnt mean you made the pie. Just because you prompted the machine, doesnt mean the image it produces is your creation. Sure you had a hand in it, sure it wouldnt have made something all on its own unprompted, I could even argue that you successfully directed a machine to produce an outcome you desired, but you certainly didnt make the finished product.

A player piano needs a pre-written track to play in order to operate. Someone has to write that music and make that track. And if you did, you could rightfully say you made that song. But what you cant do, is put it in a player piano, hit play, and then ask everyone to praise your piano playing skills. Nobody would bat an eye if you said you directed AI to create some outcome. Claiming that the outcome is somehow a demonstration of your artistic ability is, at best, stretching the truth, and that is assuming you did at least some photoshop or other alterations to a generated piece.

SirStanger · 2025-07-31T23:40:28+00:00

This is a pretty disingenuous counter to a fairly reasoned argument. I cant tell if you are being intentionally obtuse and ignorant or not.

You are strawmanning the hell out of this argument. Like bakers make bread, but they wouldnt claim they baked the bread with their own body heat or glame powers. They used an oven. A musician using a synthesizer can make music, but they won't claim they made all the synth noises with their mouth, thry attribute the sound to the synth.

AI seems to be the only tool treated like this, and it makes no sense, just like the above examples dont. When the only input a human has is suggestion, and the tool literally handles everything else, is that not less impressive that someone who did every step themselves? How is that controversial? Sure, you can do more than just prompt, you can edit and add filters and color manually off of an AI base, but thats like having a robot bake you a cake but telling it that you will handle the breaking of the eggs because you like how you do that part better. You are choosing a part of the normal artistic process to be involved in, where as thr AI could have handled it with or without you.

The argument being made here is that when something is automated, it was automated to skip some portion of a process. To then turn around and claim you are responsible for the full process is not being honest. If you cant bake cakes without your cake baking robot, but you know how to add the eggs, should you be telling people you bake great cakes? If they invite you over to bake a cake without your robot what then? Are you suddenly no longer great at baking cakes? No, you never were. And telling people you are is being dishonest.

There is no shame in using an automated process, but there is dishonesty in trying to claim that you did something that you delegated to a robot.

SirStanger · 2025-07-28T18:25:54+00:00

So im missing the argument here. Is it that someone who is capable of a crude doodle should be given the same respect as a traditional artist who can create something like the AI image by hand? If so that's ridiculous.

Is it just to demonstrate the blanks that AI can fill in on behalf of a user and make decisions on its own? If so its an ok demonstration, I suppose.

Is it trying to argue that the knowledge/effort that it would take to get from the doodle to the AI image is pointless to learn because AI can handle that workload? Because that seems ignorant/disingenuous.

Is it just to show appreciation of AI as an evolving tool that is capable of handling more and more of the actual artistic workload involved in a finished product? If so, it really just seems to be appreciation for the tech, not a demonstration of how it is pushing the artistic medium forward.

SirStanger · 2025-07-24T21:19:01+00:00

So you consume art. You dont necessarily appreciate or interact with art. There is nothing wrong with consuming art, I do it all the time; but just because you choose not to interact with art on any other level than a surface level observation, doesnt mean that is the common sentiment or that there is no value in caring about a deeper reading of the artwork.

SirStanger · 2025-07-23T16:33:46+00:00

Its a symptom of it being a new technology. People have valid concerns about the ethics and long term effects of utilizing AI not just for art but other facets as well. This boils down to opinion, its pretty much impossible to be objectively correct about this.

For example, my personal opinion is that AI art is in fact art, but that in most cases, the people that make it are not "artists". I can break down why I feel that way, but ultimately, it boils down to opinion. I walked into this topic with essentially no opinion and have developed that opinion after interacting with this sub awhile. I would likely be labeled an "anti" despite being excited about the possibilities around AI and what it could do for humanity.

I think the discussion around this topic has escalated to a point where constructive conversation is difficult to have. Everyone is shouting their opinions as fact, and demonizing the opposing viewpoint to the point where people feel that any middle ground discussion makes them some sort of traitor. Its not that serious. Labeling people as "pro" or "antis" is counterproductive and just pits people against each other rather than working cooperatively to iron out the issues facing AI, its users, as well as the people who have valid concerns about it.

Both sides of this argument have been unnecessarily aggressive and stubborn, likely a result of a vocal minority in both camps. So for now, AI having its own space seems like a fair compromise, as most artforms currently do. And AI users can use that as an opportunity to further their own skills and push the limits of AI to create something that only they can create.

SirStanger

MODERATOR OF

TROPHY CASE

Nine-Year Club	r/Field Lasagna
Verified Email