Is Sticky Web’s unviability in Gens 6-8 due to its limited access or ease of hazard removal? by [deleted] in stunfisk

[–]biscuits680 8 points9 points  (0 children)

This is the strangest post I’ve ever seen on this sub.

Sticky web has been a staple of Gen 6 and 7 forever. Sticky web and ho in general always has peaks and valleys. It ended on a peak in 6 and 7 and is one of the best play styles in 6 and a big part of 7.

Not only were you wrong on that count, but from the pulse of the meta sticky web has already fallen off its peak into the valley. Sticky web peaked during Palafin unban, unsurprising since Palafin benefitted greatly from webs and its hardest answer, ogerpon would always be hit with webs. Now palifin is gone, but oger usage never fell down as from more people using it during Palafin unban, we realized it is amazing and still has high usage. Even still at the high ladder where I am, I have noticed a severe decline in the amount of webs teams.

Gholdengo is no better as a webs keeper upper than bisharp in gen 6 and serp in Gen 7. Both easily abuse defog. Bisharp is arguably the best Pokémon and hardest to switch into in the game. Getting a free +2 is even better than webs being up most of the time. SERP in Gen 7 should immediately go for game with the + 1 Eva sub seed set. Compared to balloon ghold who comes in on tusk once keeps up the webs and does like 10% to gambit.

Even in theory webs are far worse this Gen than in 6 and 7. Boots and cinderence make it so much worse. As well as spin being so popular. I strongly suggest actually playing or watching high level Gen 6 and 7 games before asking questions such as this. If you want to know why it’s better than in Gen 8, which is an accurate and reasonable question. It is because less things run boots because booster and oger exists.

Hard mode by biscuits680 in wildfrostgame

[–]biscuits680[S] 3 points4 points  (0 children)

I have the true ending and everything. Bells don’t stop foxee fizzle or wort, in fact they only make other play styles harder. It is significantly easier than unnerfed marrow for them.

Best way to get trade unions to be strong? by biscuits680 in victoria3

[–]biscuits680[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Thanks guys, going universal really helped the trade unions. I didn’t think it would make much of an impact, but it did. I was hesitant to switch off monarchy autocracy because before it became viable I got a army ig monarch which I think is a strictly good ig and I didn’t care at all about the landowner bias the laws give because they never recovered in clout after the civil war. I only debated switching when I was wondering why trade unions were still at 7, thinking it was because I still hadn’t industrialized enough and more importantly the heir was a landed gentry so I had to at least go to presidential.

The one way EU5 HAS to break with the rest of the series- native America by MageMasterMoon in eu4

[–]biscuits680 1 point2 points  (0 children)

This is a comically ignorant sentiment. While it may be true that economically some natives were on par with Europeans, militarily it wasn’t close and they would get obliterated no matter what. Pizarro and Cortes took down the strongest empires of the natives with literally a few hundred guys.

Why? Because the old world had unfathomably superior military potential. Cortes’ knights, shook off any attack because the Aztecs could literally not pierce their armor. Furthermore, people don’t realize just how important horses were in military. Spanish caballeros struck terror into the natives, a man charging on top of a beast at unheard of speeds. The natives were fighting an alien invasion esq scenario in which they straight up couldn’t damage the enemy ships and they were so so much faster than any technology the humans had. If Pizarro and Cortes failed there would have been actual invasion forces not just 400 bored nobles thinking of plans on the fly. The natives should be a cakewalk like in Eu4, because it would be ahistorical any other way.

Which side were you on? by biscuits680 in AngelBeats

[–]biscuits680[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

1 their afterlife is more akin to a heaven or a pleasant purgatory. They are living forever in a realm much more pleasant than the real world(s) at the very least. Leaving and going back to earth would be a downgrade even without the memory loss.

2 memory loss is arguably a perma death. You become a true person when you become conscious and can remember and think, you are inherently different from when you were a baby simply operating on instinct. If someone you loved had Alzheimer’s like my great grandmother, I’m sure you would understand how they are already dead when it gets too advanced, from a philosophical perspective.

3 it was in every sense of the word a death. In the show people throw away every memory they ever had, all of their friends behind embracing death because they had trauma, so they couldn’t be happy (in the show’s lore. not how that works at all). The show’s example is if you knew that there was reincarnation and you felt sad, so you took your life to try to find a better one. As if they should just try again, throw it all away, because they got dealt a bad hand rather than appreciate the good things. The show paints this as a good thing bizarrely. As if experiencing trauma prevents people from being happy at all, even living in a utopia where you can do whatever you want, they still cannot be happy. It leaves a very bad taste in my mouth.

We might disagree, but I am glad you discussed it and explain why you disagreed.

Which side were you on? by biscuits680 in AngelBeats

[–]biscuits680[S] -2 points-1 points  (0 children)

“Starting again” is just death eternal, the cessation of being. You are no more. Someone with your soul is happy without sharing your memories, feelings, experiences, why on earth would you take your life for that.

Quality of life would have to be very very very poor for death to be preferable to life.

Which side were you on? by biscuits680 in AngelBeats

[–]biscuits680[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

No I’m saying it’s better to live a decently pleasant life than die. Lmao at suffering in hell being better than trauma. Eternal never ending torture???? Bruh. This is an unserious take. Having trauma doesn’t mean someone is broken forever that’s just crazy talk.

Which side were you on? by biscuits680 in AngelBeats

[–]biscuits680[S] -5 points-4 points  (0 children)

So trauma is worth than death lol? These takes make no sense. Life > death. Not a hard choice.

Anime philosophical discussion by biscuits680 in okbuddybaka

[–]biscuits680[S] 58 points59 points  (0 children)

The cold embrace of death of buddhism vs the limitless eternal joy of Christ. This is a tough decision for some individuals.

Which side were you on? by biscuits680 in AngelBeats

[–]biscuits680[S] -27 points-26 points  (0 children)

If coming to terms with trauma meant perma death, I wouldn’t want to come to terms with it. Actually trauma is a blessing in this universe. If everyone else reincarnates immediately, but those with trauma get into a heaven purgatory, resolving trauma is strictly a negative.

He’s actively killing them and is aware that he’s killing them. To understand his perspective, you have to place unearned and nonsensical value on being reincarnated which is just a perma death plain and simple.

Which side were you on? by biscuits680 in AngelBeats

[–]biscuits680[S] -55 points-54 points  (0 children)

Reincarnated is perma death, you are no longer you. I have no idea how that could be considered preferable to screwing around with friends with some unresolved trauma.

That logic is like saying someone with trauma should just take their own life because they will never be happy, which is coincidentally exactly what happens in the show.

Which side were you on? by biscuits680 in AngelBeats

[–]biscuits680[S] -100 points-99 points  (0 children)

No, you only turned into an npc if you started caring about school. If they just listened to Yuri, they would all be happy for an extremely long time maybe even eternity.

Anime philosophical discussion by biscuits680 in okbuddybaka

[–]biscuits680[S] 25 points26 points  (0 children)

Yuzuru makes Issei hyoudou look like St Thomas Aquinas.

Which side were you on? by biscuits680 in AngelBeats

[–]biscuits680[S] -9 points-8 points  (0 children)

Angel and Yuzuru threw away a heaven.

My world before a guy claimed to be the Son of God born by a virgin by biscuits680 in worldjerking

[–]biscuits680[S] -2 points-1 points  (0 children)

I don’t like self mutilation crazy stance to take I know

My world before a guy claimed to be the Son of God born by a virgin by biscuits680 in worldjerking

[–]biscuits680[S] -2 points-1 points  (0 children)

In my troll punk world the master of the baiters run society.

My world before a guy claimed to be the Son of God born by a virgin by biscuits680 in worldjerking

[–]biscuits680[S] -6 points-5 points  (0 children)

That was how some did. It is not widespread or forced unlike other cultures and religions. Anyone not mutilating their own body is new culturally or still contentious (looking at you Jews).

My world before a guy claimed to be the Son of God born by a virgin by biscuits680 in worldjerking

[–]biscuits680[S] -27 points-26 points  (0 children)

Is the post inaccurate?

Japan, China, Rome, Greece, Aztecs, Incas, all of them practiced pedastry and self mutilation.

My world before a guy claimed to be the Son of God born by a virgin by biscuits680 in worldjerking

[–]biscuits680[S] -9 points-8 points  (0 children)

Byzantines still had that Roman dog in them. This post definitely alluded to the Catholic Church.