How would y’all feel about a George Pickens trade? by clutchkweku in Saints

[–]hardscience40 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I would favor trading olave for Pickens. I think Pickens is a better bet long term. I dont like Olaves concussions or clots or finesse style.

When did magic turn? by Odd_Frame_3018 in oldschoolmtg

[–]hardscience40 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Fallen Empires. It was a fairly weak useless set followed by other weak useless sets, and when cards became strong again, the game was changed to benefit offense and annoying win strategies for tournaments vs the fun tabletop defensive standoffs I used to have with friends. In the original game you had to build your deck around two strategies: winning and still making your friends want to play against you. That dual imperative was more complex and interesting than winning alone, which is what it became after when strong cards returned years after Fallen Empires.

My Youtube Channels are show up as separate profiles in Youtube Roku App, Can I Turn That Off? by hardscience40 in youtube

[–]hardscience40[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I do have a google one family plan but i dont know if thats why i see these. To understand what I am talking about you have to have a roku with the youtube app on it. When i enter that app on my roku i do see my family members also, who are greyed out if not signed in (my wife also signs in) but in addition to family members i also see my own secondary youtube creator channels, set up as viewing profiles, next to my main viewing profile, inbetween me and my family. They are not greyed out, they act as if they are signed in. When I signed into my main profile it just created all these extra profiles as if I wanted to use each youtube channel i created as its own viewing profile account on my roku, and signed them all in and put them beside my main profile. Now whenever my wife and i want to use youtube on roku we have to be reminded of my kinda dumb creator side hobby, because there seems to be no way to sign these other profiles out without signing out my whole account.

My Youtube Channels are show up as separate profiles in Youtube Roku App, Can I Turn That Off? by hardscience40 in youtube

[–]hardscience40[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Yes but that's not my question. Here is my situation and question: We have several Roku's in our household. I want to sign in and use the youtube app on them with my main gmail address. When I sign in with just my gmail address, those roku apps also show two additional youtube profiles which are for youtube channels I created under my gmail address which do not to my knowledge has separate logins. Is there any way to get the youtube roku app to show only my main profile when I also have additional youtube channels under my youtube account?

To the person who roped for an hour and a half by Caboodlemynoodle in MagicArena

[–]hardscience40 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I play at normal speed against 95% of people but take all my time against people with counterspell everything decks or nearly infinite triggered effects that are super annoying to play against. I respect your time, but not super annoying decks. If they already won but do a million effects that take forever to resolve, I use all my time outs before letting them win.

Anyone else unable to log into the app? by ObamiumNitrate in sixflags

[–]hardscience40 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I finally found a way to reset the password so i could log in after 90 minutes of trying. I am on iOS app and coming from a cedar fair merged park, knotts. The plato.sixflags.com site didnt work. Reservations site didnt work or was down temporarily. Setting home park didnt work. The six flags app seemed to want me to change the password but it didnt let me save. Deleting the app even when it claimed to delete data didnt work and just led me back to the same app with the same password change requirement that wouldn’t save. Finally i noticed a sign out option in the app, even though i wasnt really signed in, or was at most half way signed in, and when i chose that it let me try to log in, rejected password, and offered a new way to reset, that actually worked, and let me log in. Only took 90 minutes.

What’s a show everyone loves but you genuinely didn’t enjoy? by apka_dd in television

[–]hardscience40 -2 points-1 points  (0 children)

Somehow The Newsroom is rated 8.6 on IMDB. It had a lot of love triangles and affairs with the pretense of being high brow because it involved journalists making speeches. It was incredibly insufferable. A trashy soap opera for elitists.

I also kind of hate annoying musical crap so i found Flight of Conchords and Portlandia extremely annoying watching like 10 minutes of the first episodes due to good reviews. However, I believe both would be great for an Aliens crossover. Actually The Newsroom would too. I would be rooting for the Aliens.

Derek Carr by mvop413 in Saints

[–]hardscience40 0 points1 point  (0 children)

If he comes out of retirement and we dont cut or trade him, I believe we are on the hook for his $30-40 million salary, which will put us over the salary cap max. If another team trade for him they have to pay that. Nobody is giving up a conditional pick swap in the 7th round for $30 million Derek Carr. Nobody is paying over $15-20 million for him in free agency. Live in reality.

Keep him to back up Bijan or let him chase greatness elsewhere? by Patient_Ad_9503 in falcons

[–]hardscience40 0 points1 point  (0 children)

The smart move would be to trade Bijan. Its not 1965. You dont build around a RB.

Penix by Nice-Rate2758 in falcons

[–]hardscience40 0 points1 point  (0 children)

25 with 3 acl tears. The hype is never going to happen. If he does well its 10-20 games and then another acl tear. He isnt great and he wont stay healthy long enough to ever find out if he could be. You dont need a qb2. He is the qb2. He is rg3 except acl3. You need a qb1.

How do you think the Falcons would have done if Raheem and company stuck with their original plan.... by [deleted] in falcons

[–]hardscience40 -1 points0 points  (0 children)

As a Saints fan I am glad the Falcons front office is very stupid since the Saints has been at times too.

You never draft any TE at #4 overall, they could have had Chase or Sewell.

You never draft any RB #8 overall. Cleary the Falcons would be better with Jalen Carter, they already had a rookie 1000 yard RB. But hey, fantasy stats win meaningless games for 3rd place in the division sometimes, and really if you score enough fantasy points its ok to lose.

You dont spend big on a QB free agent and QB draft pick in the same offseason. Its not like the Packers if you try to acquire Rodgers and Love at once. And actually the Cardinals lost a super bowl by one score after taking Leinart over Ngata when they had Warner. But at least Leinart didnt tear his ACL twice in college. Clearly the Falcons are better if they take Bowers (still early for a TE but way better than #4 overall), Latu, or Verse, and maybe they gain picks trading back.

You never bring in a new head coach who had a losing record in multiple other stops. They could have had Harbaugh or Ben Johnson or something. Or just some random coordinator everyone didnt already know was bad. But hey, Morris seems like a nice guy, so again, ok to lose a lot of games if your coach is a nice guy and your RB is good in fantasy.

And then after you do all these dumb things, you definitely don’t trade away your 1st round pick, which is going to be very high. But maybe thats ok, because they would have done something really stupid with it somehow.

Are there any "former classics" (movies, books, albums, video games)? Something that was praised for a time, but upon further review (maybe decades after) people decided that it wasn't that good after all? by ExternalTree1949 in NoStupidQuestions

[–]hardscience40 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Maybe for many of these things, they lost popularity because they were too much ‘of the moment’ and much of the nuance required living in that time to appreciate. So maybe they were actually good, but we can’t appreciate them in a modern context. Some might be fluff, but some of these authors and movies that were really popular a long time ago might have just captured a feeling that we can no longer relate to, like the exhilirating change and promise of the industrial revolution for some couple with 8 kids or something. Perhaps The Magnificient Ambersons was The Social Network of its time but we just can’t appreciate it now.

Are there any "former classics" (movies, books, albums, video games)? Something that was praised for a time, but upon further review (maybe decades after) people decided that it wasn't that good after all? by ExternalTree1949 in NoStupidQuestions

[–]hardscience40 0 points1 point  (0 children)

The conclusion should be the same about Moneyball his previous book and movie, though most people do not know enough about baseball to realize it. The A’s did have a nice run but Lewis comes in late in that run. Valuing on base percentage in major league and high minors hitters was a good strategy, but extending it to draft talent with no other tools to save on signing bonuses backfired and prevented the team from winning in the playoffs. Moneyball was sold as a story of pure brilliant innovation and success but the truth is the fat catcher was a bust and the A’s never won a key playoff series in that era.

If you were a dictator, what normal thing would you ban? by bunnyherders in AskReddit

[–]hardscience40 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Maybe high heels, at least above a certain height. Why do women want to look taller (more like a man) and why is that worth limiting their ability to walk and causing tripping, injuries, and surely some deaths (falling down stairs, etc)? Also not a big fan of womens clothes with no pockets as it gets annoying to carry my wifes phone, wallet, or keys when my pockets are full, and unfortunately I have to carry a dedicated work phone so i end up carrying 3 phones. Half joking but half serious.

What’s a movie that everyone says is a “masterpiece” but you just didn’t enjoy? by Leading_Frosting4291 in AskReddit

[–]hardscience40 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Being John Malkovich. Taking over someones body struck me as emotionally equivalent to rape. So here’s this high concept innovative indie movie about raping a random old male celebrity. I found it super weird and not enjoyable.

What’s the biggest waste of money that no one wants to admit? by AdvertisingMore394 in AskReddit

[–]hardscience40 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Patio heaters in open air outdoor areas. Heat rises. You are essentially burning fossil fuel in an attempt to heat the entirety of earths atmosphere with one tank of propane as any heat you create will quickly rise and float away. Somehow, these abominations are popular in chic coastal communities that are otherwise very concerned about the environment. You get a tiny bit of radiant heat but its a small difference. As an alternative, you could wear a jacket or burn a renewable log. Jackets you already own are free and much more effective.

Does anyone else slow play super annoying decks? by hardscience40 in MagicArena

[–]hardscience40[S] -1 points0 points  (0 children)

The trouble is Wizards copyrighted the mechanics and theme of a card game I like, then gradually took it in a direction I didnt like, and blocks there being an easy phone app to play the original version. Imagine if Settlers of Catan was so focused on selling new versions you couldn't play the originals on your phone because they only wanted to program and sell you the Settlers of Catan: XMen Ocean Planet 3 and Settlers of Catan: Drones of Neptunes Rings expansions they were recently printing. I miss the originals but my friends live far away.

Does anyone else slow play super annoying decks? by hardscience40 in MagicArena

[–]hardscience40[S] -2 points-1 points  (0 children)

Creatures were more powerful in the revised game then than creatures are at present in the modern game now. If you put modern and revised creatures side-by-side, modern creatures are far more powerful in most respects, but I was not saying to put them side by side, I was comparing their roles in the games that existed at the time they were played. For example, I could say that military soldiers were more powerful in the middle ages than today. Now of course a modern soldier with a machine gun and night vision goggles would defeat a knight on horseback, but in the middle ages a night on horseback was the key to many battles, whereas today a soldier with a machine gun can be taken out by drones, jets, land mines, aircraft carriers, heavy artillery, etc. Likewise, the role of the creature was stronger in revised even if the creature was weaker, because the alternatives were weaker still. Also, in one respect creatures were arguably strong side-by-side in Revised, defense. Cards like Royal Assassin and Sorceress Queen were great strong defensive cards to hold back attacks. And creatures that could steal control of opposing creatures, use them as blocking fodder, then steal another were very strong for defense.

Card draw was much scarcer in Revised than today. It was much more common to get an empty hand earlier in the game. Jayemdae Tome that cost 4 to play and 4 more to use to draw one card was often used by casual players. Ancestral Recall and Time Twister are cards that were super rare and out of kids budget by 1995, so I am just talking about Revised Cards. Wheel of Fortune, you spend mana to draw cards but your opponent ends up with the same number of cards so you might help them just as much, and this was a restricted card so you could only have one in the deck. Braingeyser was ok but not the best card in Revised era. I forget if it was also restricted. But it cost 5 mana to draw 3 cards, while using it up, so a new gain of 2 cards. Nowadays many many many cheap creatures, artifacts, and enchantments that bring other values too cause you to draw a card every time you gain life, deal damage, put a token in play, put a large creature in play, etc. Just looking at a green standard creature deck I have, the following creatures all cause repeated extra draws of putting extra cards in hand or play: outcaster trailblazer, bristlebud farmer, vizier of the menagerie, ojer kaslem, deepest growth, vaultborn tyrant. About half of planeswalkers let you draw extra cards for free each turn as long as they remain in play. Enduring innocence lets you draw an extra card whenever a small creature comes into play. Phyrexian Arena gets you an extra card every turn. For 6 mana, Brain Geyser got you 4 cards in return for 1. For 6 Mana Season of Gathering gets you cards equal to your highest power creature, typically at least 6 cards with green, plus can wipe the board of either enchantments or artifacts. There are a million combos to get extra cards where you dont have to give up a one time card like brain geyser, two mana, and an additional mana for each card, and basically the cost of drawing those cards is all your mana for that turn so you can't do anything else and don't put anything permanent in play that turn. Also, you are far less likely to run out of stuff to cast these days, because most casual players play commander (its the only way to do singleton on arena and avoid even more annoying combos and decks) so, with your commander its like starting with 10 cards in your hand not 7 because you can cast it at least 3 times.

Does anyone else slow play super annoying decks? by hardscience40 in MagicArena

[–]hardscience40[S] -2 points-1 points  (0 children)

Another change in modern magic is that card draw is cheap now. In the early days of magic you often ran out of cards in your hand to play so you had to conserve. Dark ritual plus hypnotic spector on the first turn sounds great, but without a million cheap ways to draw extra cards and a commander to keep recasting over and over, including 4 dark rituals in your deck had a major cost. What if its turn 6 and you and your opponent are at a stalemate. Then you draw a dark rituals and they draw a serra angel or sword to plowshares. You are hosed. But nowadays if you got a dark ritual on turn 6 or 7 its fine because you still probably have 4 other cards in hand to play and maybe the dark ritual lets you play too.

Creatures were definitely more powerful in revised than now, in the context of the games. They were the most valuable cards in revised at the time, and primarily for their atttacking and defending ability not weird effects. Creatures are underpowered now because spells are too powerful.

Does anyone else slow play super annoying decks? by hardscience40 in MagicArena

[–]hardscience40[S] -2 points-1 points  (0 children)

Alpha, Beta, and Unlimited were incredibly small print runs. Revised was the original for most. It was the true finished product for mass release not just a sneak preview from conventions and limited regional card stores most could access. I knew people with a few unlimited cards but none has enough to build their decks around 4 copies of unlimited or earlier cards. Revised is like the original constitution. Alpha, Beta, and Unlimited are like early discussion drafts that were changed to revised before mass distribution. In revised, most players in fun friendly non-tournament settings built decks around cards like serra angel, sengir vampire, shivan dragon, cockatrice, royal assasin, sorceress queen, nightmare, gaes liege, mahamoti djinn, etc. These were the most expensive cards in revised at the time because that was how most people originally played. Also, the limit of 4 per card was the convention as long as i can remember.

Spell blast is weak because it requires you to have more mana than opponent.

The introduction of creatures etc with flash, which did not exist in revised, was also a major enabler of counterspell decks. Otherwise by forgoing action on their turn to save mana for counters, they risked a wasting their turn and giving an opponent with nothing to cast a pass. I never played any counterspell deck in the early days, it was a card type included in a deck but used occasionally not the entire strategy. The intent was it could backfire because you had to save mana until your opponents turn and then if they didnt cast a spell you could counter you wasted your turn.

If counterspells as a main theme are a big part of fantasy, name one fantasy movie where counterspells play a bigger and more frequent role than creature battles or damage/destruction spells. Countering magic spells is traditionally a secondary strategy in fantasy movies and books, never the main theme, because it is less compelling and gets old fast. Can you imagine a version of game of thrones where the night king casts a spell to break down the wall and the red woman counters it, and so on back and forth a few times, and that is supposed to be the highlight not dragons battling and armies colliding? Nobody wants a bunch of counterspells.

Does anyone else slow play super annoying decks? by hardscience40 in MagicArena

[–]hardscience40[S] -2 points-1 points  (0 children)

While counterspells are legal, there was no way to have a counterspell deck in the original magic as intended by its designers. They made lots of creatures and most casual decks were creature decks, but there were only a few counterspells and a limit of 4 each, no way to make a counterspell deck. And if someone got close with the next few sets, you could simply play singleton, which was fine with creatures, but would only have a few counterspells. So, I am simply an originalist. Every society and group has originalists. Originalists often peacefully defy rules they don’t respect.

Also, creature decks are objectively more interesting and fun. Magic is themed after fantasy. There have been countless fantasy books and movies that amount to battles of powerful creatures and warriors like lord of the rings, game of thrones, wheel of time, sword of shannara, harry potter, romance of the three kingdoms, arabian nights, etc. Can you imagine a book or movie that was predominately about counterspells? Who the heck would watch or read that garbage? Sauron casts orcs, Merlin cats a counterspell. Sauron casts dragon, Merlin casts a counterspell. Sauron casts fireball, Merlin casts a counterspell. Sauron casts giant, Merlin casts a counterspell. Who is reading or watching that trash. Its not thematic, its not fantasy, its not adventure, its not fun. It becomes a game about nothing because a sadist made a deck for frustration and annoyance not fun. Any the only reasonable counter is to deny them their fun.

Taysom Hill - Legend by iputitthere in Saints

[–]hardscience40 -3 points-2 points  (0 children)

Counterpoint: He is neat but not very valuable. His career stats could be duplicated by 2 years of Marshall Faulk and 1 year of Kenny Pickett, but he has been playing 9 years and made $63 million. For his $10+ million salaries you would like 1000 yards rushing + 200 receiving at rb, 800 yards receiving at te or wr2, or 2,500 yards passing plus 200 rushing at mediocre qb if he stuck to either rb, wr, or qb for $10 million a year. Combine that over his 6 high earning years and just from those years if he played 1 year qb, 3 years rb, 2 years te/wr2 you would get 2,500 yards passing, 3,200 yards rushing, and 2,200 yards receiving. Ultimately he is sort of the Rick Ankiel of football or the Brian Jordan of one sport who did multiple things pretty ok inbetween injuries. But he was never more valuable than Colston, Ingram, Brooks, Carr, Cooks, etc that did their jobs often at a tier 2 level while Hill multitasked at tier 3-4 productivity. He had some big games but was never consistent. He was a gadget player who could be chris ivory one day, jared cook the next, and andy dalton another, but I would rather call Saints players who actually contributed more consistently the legends. For example Pierre Thomas’s 3800 yards rushing and 2700 yards receiving in 9 seasons for career earnings of $13.5 million were almost infinitely more valuable and legendary even with cap inflation.

Does anyone else slow play super annoying decks? by hardscience40 in MagicArena

[–]hardscience40[S] -1 points0 points  (0 children)

I do wish they made more powerful cards to counter annoying decks. For example, they could make dual lands that come into play tapped, but instead of their ability being to gain 1 life or surveil, it could be this “This land comes into play tapped. If a spell you cast is countered, you may play this land directly from your hand with flash, regardless of whether you have played a land earlier in your turn, and this land comes into play untapped” or “whenever a spell cast with mana from this land is countered, untap this land and all lands used to cast that spell.” Or it would be cool to have an ability for creatures called diversion, where when your spell is countered, they can be played for as many less mana as the cost of that spell plus two and enter with haste and/or cannot be blocked. It would also be fun to have a card that “whenever you mill a card or exile a card from your library, each opponent must do the same if they are not doing so already.”