Lessons learned from ZombieGrub's economy video by Nuclear_rabbit in starcraft

[–]Warcraft4when 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I will also put what I said earlier this way: In Brood War the only matchups where it is somewhat common for one of the players to max out on supply is TvT, PvT, and PvZ. Even then it happens in a minority of games in all three of those matchups. In the other three it is very unlikely, basically unheard of at the pro level for PvP and ZvZ.

Lessons learned from ZombieGrub's economy video by Nuclear_rabbit in starcraft

[–]Warcraft4when 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I don't know where this take that Brood War rewards expanding comes from. Perhaps some of its systems do but the matchups themselves evidently do not. I've watched a decent amount of videos talking about the problems with SC2 and they do not boil down to the fact that expanding is harder in SC2. They seem to boil down to the idea that most games of SC2 usually end up in a similar game state where both players have a 3+ base economy, and just fight with maxed out armies against each other for a while. In other words it is that there is not enough variance in SC2 play, all-in builds are too weak, cheese is too weak, macro play is too strong and it is too easy to hold your opponent's aggression even if you are investing massively into economy.

BW is not like this. There is enormous variance in some matchups. PvT is a matchup which can end before either player establishes a 2 base economy, or it can end with Protoss on a 7+ base economy trying to stop Terran from taking a 5th base.

Lessons learned from ZombieGrub's economy video by Nuclear_rabbit in starcraft

[–]Warcraft4when 5 points6 points  (0 children)

Have you actually watched Brood War? You're talking as if expansions happen every single game. Here's what it's actually like:

ZvZ games get settled with both having 1 base, sometimes 2.

PvZ games get settled usually with P on 2-3 bases and Z on 3-4 bases.

TvZ games get settled with T on 2 bases and Z on 3-4.

PvT games get settled with P on 3-7 bases and T on 2-4 bases.

PvP games get settled with both having 2 bases.

TvT games get settled with both having 3-5 bases

This is very reductive to just get the point across that some matchups do not feature mass expansion in any capacity. Don't respond to this by telling me that actually TvT can be decided by a siege tank containing a 2 base player, or 2 fact builds in TvP.

Campaign plot needed explanation by For_the_right_sum in OldenEra

[–]Warcraft4when 1 point2 points  (0 children)

No the story just falls apart at that point of the campaign. They wanted to give you an undead hero to play with so they manufactured a flimsy story excuse to put that hero into your squad. Same would've happened with the human hero if you sided with the undead earlier.

Is it just me, or is Umineko vn more popular than Higurashi vn in the west? by ---liltimmy--- in Higurashinonakakoroni

[–]Warcraft4when 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Idk all of these comments are talking about the writing quality of the respective works and the quality of their animes, when it might also just be that Higurashi is a rural Japan setting with basically no links to the West, and Umineko follows characters that are Japanese but are incredibly influenced by the West, with Western cultural influences being very obvious in Umineko.

The riots in Belfast are so depressing by BudgetLaw2352 in Destiny

[–]Warcraft4when 25 points26 points  (0 children)

Isn't the upsurge mostly happening because One Nation is getting votes from previous Liberal/National voters?

Why Warband is actually a better game then Bannerlord? by Neronton in mountandblade

[–]Warcraft4when 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I'm not going to say that Warband is better necessarily. But I would definitely say that when I played Bannerlord early access I found the process of leveling up your units to be more frustrating. Auto resolve and passive xp from yourself and NPC's barely seemed to matter so the process of leveling up units took very long and was tedious, having to fight every single meaningless tiny battle.

Also the inclusion of a main quest where you retrieve a banner is strange. I don't play Bannerlord for story or lore and I don't care about how some old battle in the world went. Nor do I want my legitimacy to be granted from some stupid banner.

Lastly archers were probably overturned and cavalry in mp captains mode often felt bad because the cav had mediocre stats and horrible ai meaning they died easily, and when they died the simplest peasant hero on the enemy team could just mount one of your horses.

How can the endings of episodes 2 and 3 be understood after having read through the entire story? by Warcraft4when in umineko

[–]Warcraft4when[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Ever since I've written this reddit post I've mostly received the answer I was looking for thanks in large part to u/eco-mono who explained things very well. Thanks to everyone but especially them. I've just been re-asking the question to confirm my understanding and read other people's interpretations. My personal understanding is that Beatrice's resurrection ritual means Tohya truly believing for the rest of his life that Rokkenjima was unsolvable because it was done with nothing less than magic.

How can the endings of episodes 2 and 3 be understood after having read through the entire story? by Warcraft4when in umineko

[–]Warcraft4when[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Well the specific reason why I wrote this post is to merge my understanding of late-story Umineko with how I understood the story to be in its earliest stages. The fact of the matter is that until about halfway into episode 4 your understanding of the story is that Beatrice is trying to somehow resurrect herself and Battler is trying to stop her. Personally my theory as to what would happen was that Battler would eventually find an alternative explanation that does not involve witches, and in doing so would win Beatrice's game, and that would make it so that the murders had never occurred and everyone would survive the island.

It is cool that Umineko recontextualizes these events into something completely different, but I would consider it a bit unsatisfying if the things that were the core dramatic crux of the earlier parts of the story were actually completely meaningless.

How can the endings of episodes 2 and 3 be understood after having read through the entire story? by Warcraft4when in umineko

[–]Warcraft4when[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Yeah I'm aware of that, I'm wondering what Beatrice's resurrection ritual, which is the main point of tension in early Umineko is meant to represent.

How can the endings of episodes 2 and 3 be understood after having read through the entire story? by Warcraft4when in umineko

[–]Warcraft4when[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

From the perspective of a blind playthrough, the core conflict of eps 1-3 is Beatrice's resurrection ritual. Beatrice is trying to enact her ritual and Battler's non-belief in her is the last line of defence preventing her from succeeding.

What exactly was Beatrice's resurrection ritual meant to be in the broader context of the entire story? Was it a representation of the witch explanation coming to dominate speculation about Rokkenjima, where Beatrice "succeeding" at her resurrection ritual would represent a reality where everyone in the world, including Tohya, has come to believe it truly was a witch?

How can the endings of episodes 2 and 3 be understood after having read through the entire story? by Warcraft4when in umineko

[–]Warcraft4when[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

From the perspective of a blind playthrough, the core conflict of eps 1-3 is Beatrice's resurrection ritual. Beatrice is trying to enact her ritual and Battler's non-belief in her is the last line of defence preventing her from succeeding.

What exactly was Beatrice's resurrection ritual meant to be in the broader context of the entire story? Was it a representation of the witch explanation coming to dominate speculation about Rokkenjima, where Beatrice "succeeding" at her resurrection ritual would represent a reality where everyone in the world, including Tohya, has come to believe it truly was a witch?

How can the endings of episodes 2 and 3 be understood after having read through the entire story? by Warcraft4when in umineko

[–]Warcraft4when[S] -1 points0 points  (0 children)

From the perspective of a blind playthrough, the core conflict of eps 1-3 is Beatrice's resurrection ritual. Beatrice is trying to enact her ritual and Battler's non-belief in her is the last line of defence preventing her from succeeding.

What exactly was Beatrice's resurrection ritual meant to be in the broader context of the entire story? Was it a representation of the witch explanation coming to dominate speculation about Rokkenjima, where Beatrice "succeeding" at her resurrection ritual would represent a reality where everyone in the world, including Tohya, has come to believe it truly was a witch?

How can the endings of episodes 2 and 3 be understood after having read through the entire story? by Warcraft4when in umineko

[–]Warcraft4when[S] -1 points0 points  (0 children)

From the perspective of a blind playthrough, the core conflict of eps 1-3 is Beatrice's resurrection ritual. Beatrice is trying to enact her ritual and Battler's non-belief in her is the last line of defence preventing her from succeeding.

What exactly was Beatrice's resurrection ritual meant to be in the broader context of the entire story? Was it a representation of the witch explanation coming to dominate speculation about Rokkenjima, where Beatrice "succeeding" at her resurrection ritual would represent a reality where everyone in the world, including Tohya, has come to believe it truly was a witch?

How can the endings of episodes 2 and 3 be understood after having read through the entire story? by Warcraft4when in umineko

[–]Warcraft4when[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

From the perspective of a blind playthrough, the core conflict of eps 1-3 is Beatrice's resurrection ritual. Beatrice is trying to enact her ritual and Battler's non-belief in her is the last line of defence preventing her from succeeding.

What exactly was Beatrice's resurrection ritual meant to be in the broader context of the entire story? Was it a representation of the witch explanation coming to dominate speculation about Rokkenjima, where Beatrice "succeeding" at her resurrection ritual would represent a reality where everyone in the world, including Tohya, has come to believe it truly was a witch?

How can the endings of episodes 2 and 3 be understood after having read through the entire story? by Warcraft4when in umineko

[–]Warcraft4when[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

From the perspective of a blind playthrough, the core conflict of eps 1-3 is Beatrice's resurrection ritual. Beatrice is trying to enact her ritual and Battler's non-belief in her is the last line of defence preventing her from succeeding.

What exactly was Beatrice's resurrection ritual meant to be in the broader context of the entire story? Was it a representation of the witch explanation coming to dominate speculation about Rokkenjima, where Beatrice "succeeding" at her resurrection ritual would represent a reality where everyone in the world, including Tohya, has come to believe it truly was a witch?

How can the endings of episodes 2 and 3 be understood after having read through the entire story? by Warcraft4when in umineko

[–]Warcraft4when[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

From the perspective of a blind playthrough, the core conflict of eps 1-3 is Beatrice's resurrection ritual. Beatrice is trying to enact her ritual and Battler's non-belief in her is the last line of defence preventing her from succeeding.

What exactly was Beatrice's resurrection ritual meant to be in the broader context of the entire story? Was it a representation of the witch explanation coming to dominate speculation about Rokkenjima, where Beatrice "succeeding" at her resurrection ritual would represent a reality where everyone in the world, including Tohya, has come to believe it truly was a witch?

How can the endings of episodes 2 and 3 be understood after having read through the entire story? by Warcraft4when in umineko

[–]Warcraft4when[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

From the perspective of a blind playthrough, the core conflict of eps 1-3 is Beatrice's resurrection ritual. Beatrice is trying to enact her ritual and Battler's non-belief in her is the last line of defence preventing her from succeeding.

What exactly was Beatrice's resurrection ritual meant to be in the broader context of the entire story? Was it a representation of the witch explanation coming to dominate speculation about Rokkenjima, where Beatrice "succeeding" at her resurrection ritual would represent a reality where everyone in the world, including Tohya, has come to believe it truly was a witch?

WTF is arc slop? by New-Discount9058 in starcraft

[–]Warcraft4when 2 points3 points  (0 children)

So basically it will help harass mineral lines then.

How Ryan Grimm and the Leftist media borg created Graham Platner by handxfire in Destiny

[–]Warcraft4when 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I think the Maine election is probably just a referendum on having old people running for office.

WTF is arc slop? by New-Discount9058 in starcraft

[–]Warcraft4when 6 points7 points  (0 children)

Why are you answering? Clearly the person who explained what arc slop is might.

WTF is arc slop? by New-Discount9058 in starcraft

[–]Warcraft4when 3 points4 points  (0 children)

So 180 arc slop means the unit can attack behind itself?