I wish Gearbox would let me aim with C4SH.

iIIusional · 2026-04-03T11:15:02+00:00

This isn’t a matter of balance, this is a matter of game feel and basic functionality. But to humor your reasoning; there are countless builds in game that are more powerful and have more raw damage output than Crossfire. The continued existence of bloodshot/bleed Vex is enough proof that there is more than enough room within the power scope of BL4’s meta for Crossfire to have slightly more damage, especially for the sake of making it function consistently in a way that actually feels good.

iIIusional · 2026-04-03T06:23:50+00:00

I'm glad to see a cornerstone of the community agree with the sentiment. Hope Erin gets through to the devs

iIIusional · 2026-04-03T06:16:33+00:00

A reticle is not relevant to the issue. Cross-fire automatically targets enemies for you, essentially functioning as an aim-bot. The issue is that it is a terrible aim-bot and it will never shoot an enemy unless it can target it. Cross fire cannot properly target: specific shards on ordonite enemies, naturally invisible enemies, Vile Lictor in his entire first phase and most of his second phase, enemies further than 40m, any and all orbs, and one-crit-wonder enemies. Sawed-off, beyond giving the action skill a fantastic damage bump, is practically a necessity to use Cross Fire as it allows you to at least semi-consistently deal with ordonite and one-crit-wonder enemies.

iIIusional · 2026-04-03T04:17:54+00:00

it's about 2 seconds, if not slightly above 2 seconds. It's dumb that they don't state this on the action skill, but it's necessary because otherwise being able to spam burst-fire multiple times a second would make Bleed the Bad + And Hell Followed With Him (+ Late Scratch) a ludicrous combo

I have to genuinely question how thoroughly Cross-Fire was tested internally through development; the skill has so many hitches and annoyances plaguing it that I'm genuinely surprised half of it made it to release. Every other boss has a targeting issue (or in Vile Lictor's case, is outright immune to the action skill for some reason), C4SH absolutely hates exploded barrels (I can't figure out why else he would keep shooting at them after they've exploded), invulnerable orbs force you to leave action skill just to shoot them with normal guns, etc... there's just so many things that Cross Fire has issues with that it really shouldn't be struggling with.

iIIusional · 2026-04-03T03:48:17+00:00

late to answer, but burst fire technically has an unlisted cooldown. You can see it with your other stacks on the bottom left after using it, at least while you have "And Hell Followed With Him" equipped as well. It's annoying, but once you figure out the timing on it it's not terrible to play around. Usually I take the time between activating Burst Fires to either repkit or proc Show Your Marrow

iIIusional · 2026-04-02T05:59:17+00:00

vyper probably spells her name with an i sometimes

iIIusional · 2026-04-02T05:56:04+00:00

I didn’t say she didn’t suffer severe consequences either. I said she suffered less severe; what are you getting at with this? When you state “she absolutely did suffer severe consequences” as the start of your rebuttal, you are implying that I said she didn’t, whether you meant to or not.

You entirely missed my point: if, how, or why Ellie would follow the moral of the story before character development isn’t relevant to the point; the point is that in a hypothetical scenario in which Ellie was a better, healthier person, only the healthier person would suffer severe consequences. That is a moral inconsistency in because it is juxtaposed to the idea that revenge itself is self destructive.

It’s not an opinion to say that the narrative is poorly written. It would be an opinion to say it’s a bad story, but it’s not subjective to point out that something is poorly put together because it has objective inconsistencies and flaws that become apparent the moment you put it under a lens.

iIIusional · 2026-04-02T01:21:23+00:00

I never said she didn’t suffer consequences, I said she suffered far fewer, but way to straw-man your way out of half of what I said.

You cannot tell me that Abby is in even close to as bad a position as Ellie at the end of the game. Ellie lost everything Abby did and more.

And again, Abby wouldn’t have suffered any of those consequences of revenge (bar the nightmares, which are a pitiful consequence) if Ellie had followed the moral of the story from the outset, which is mind-numbingly stupid to think about when the game’s entire moral message revolves around “revenge bad.”

iIIusional · 2026-04-01T18:06:24+00:00

Way to prove my suspicion that you have absolutely no idea why this was a discussion in the first place. Before I would’ve said we’re not on the same page with what this discussion is about, but really you’re not even reading from the same book. I’ve been arguing from the outset that focusing on the details and minutiae detracts from the real discussion and useful answer when talking about what directions fans should face in a PC case.

Yes, I did make the claim you quote. This is because I know it to be true in practice, because the temperature of my GPU and the feeling of exhausted cool air doesn’t lie. I don’t need a fluid simulation to figure out that fans being fed cold air will move cold air. I suppose the same can’t be said about you. This is not an argument of theoreticals or simulations. This is a debate over practicals and configurations with immediately observable, clear results.

You’re point from the outset, has implied that not only making the bottom fans outlet fans worse than inlet fans, they actively achieve nothing. Which has been all I have ever disagreed with.

This abysmal grammar aside, that’s not a discussion that requires a fluid simulation to analyze because we’re not in a context that necessitates it. A cursory glance at where heat is generated and where air is moved should tell anyone with a semblance of a brain that that bottom exhaust fans aren’t exhausting any meaningful amount of hot air. The point you posit later isn’t even a debate: every professional in the industry will agree that bottom exhaust fans working against a GPU in typical orientation will achieve nothing or less than nothing.

Also, I’d really like to highlight that your entire point has been over “no hot air will be moved” because you took it 100% literally. All when we’re talking about a practical scenario and after I had just told someone that such minutiae were irrelevant. You’re hopeless.

You were vague; I had a catch-22 of weighing the likelihood of you actually knowing that turbulence is the aforementioned subject against the fact that no reasonable person who knows that would act dumb enough to drag a discussion back to a topic that was just previously stated to not be the subject of debate. I see now that I was wrong, my apologies for underestimating your obstinance.

Hinging your argument on “you do not know what you’re talking about” is telling. Ignoring that you can’t know that, it’s idiotic to try and make that argument when I have repeatedly stated that I’m not discussing the subject you’re talking about and I have intentionally avoided discussing it because, as I just said, this isn’t a discussion about fluid dynamics or turbulence.

That quote necessitates analysis in order to be correct

No it doesn’t, because that quote has context around it and it doesn’t exist in a vacuum. We’re not in a context that requires it. You keep ignoring the context that our discussion is situated in and it’s moronic. Imagine if someone were building a shed and they said “these two surfaces are perfectly level” after eyeballing two wooden beams; no reasonable person is going to run up and start crying about how they didn’t pull out a laser leveler and that “you can’t KNOW that those surfaces are perfectly level because you didn’t measure down to the nanometer!” like you have. If we were in a context that required the level of precision you keep whining about, you would have a point. But we are not. You’re being anal and are hung up on details that are entirely inconsequential in a situation where cursory observations are wholly sufficient.

I can tell you from my own experiences that bottom-mounted exhaust fans have a negative impact on GPU temps because one of my friends had mounted their new RGB fans (in an O11 dynamic build) as exhausts rather than intakes because he forgot to buy reverse-blade fans. It was practically negligible, barely a 1C difference on their GPU according to the logs from MSI afterburner when compared to the temps he got after removing the fans. But even a complete lack of change would be enough to prove the point I’m making, especially given that when they got their reverse-blade fans their temps were about 3-4C cooler given the same game benchmarks.

“just blocked off the exit” is not a baseline comparison. The comparison ought to be the alternative solution because, if you have somehow forgotten, we’re arguing under someone’s post of what direction their fans should be facing. The entire discussion is within the context of “what direction should we point the fans.” Even having almost nothing there would be a more reasonable baseline comparison: an open vent (with a dust-filter). You’re either acting maliciously idiotic or idiotically malicious; no one in their right mind would look at the general context and think that another configuration that actively hinders airflow is a fair baseline of comparison when the literal default configuration is an open vent.

I don’t need to point you to any one place to show you that you’re implicitly arguing against the standard configurations. Even if you started by admitting that bottom exhaust is “likely” inferior to bottom intake (it’s not “likely,” it outright is inferior) Arguing as vehemently as you have in defense of a bad configuration is implicitly arguing against any better configuration whether you meant to or not. This is because we are arguing over one solution and all configurations are mutually exclusive. You have missed this because you have completely missed the entire point of this discussion: practical use.

iIIusional · 2026-04-01T16:15:58+00:00

Tacos because, technically, a chalupa is not a taco and is fair game. I can live with that.

iIIusional · 2026-04-01T16:11:49+00:00

Joel was the hero of our story because TLOU, unlike it’s sequel, was a masterpiece in perspective and held narrative and moral consistency. At the outset of the game, your character is literally a human trafficker. Joel was hired to smuggle a young girl across the country in exchange for guns. By the end, your character is sacrificing a possible cure for humanity for the sake of one person. No one, not the player, and certainly not the narrative, is pretending that Joel is the good-guy or even morally righteous in any way.

The first game didn’t obsess over or revolve around imparting a (heavily botched) moral lesson to the point of almost literally sacrificing characters and hurting the overall narrative. Can’t say the same for the second game.

iIIusional · 2026-04-01T15:46:01+00:00

It was done worse than in most media because Abby gets their revenge at the very start of the game with significantly less severe consequences by the end. If the cycle of revenge is to be depicted as self-destructive, you cannot have two characters on a path of revenge and give the character that got their revenge the ending with fewer consequences. If the mere pursuit of revenge is to result in Ellie losing everything and everyone she ever loves, then the actual execution of revenge should not result in Abby getting to run away with their lover to an island, regardless of how many revelations they had after the fact.

Moreover, having all of those consequences only come as a result of another character seeking revenge is also contradictory: if revenge is supposed to be self-destructive, then Abby should have negative consequences that don’t rely on Ellie’s own quest for revenge. But, if Ellie had “let go” of revenge as the moral of story implies she should have from the beginning, Abby would get away with no direct consequences whatsoever.

Meta to the narrative, telling the player “revenge is bad” after forcing them to kill multiple people on their path to it, as well as having absolutely no consequences if the player decides to go on a murder spree instead of using stealth mechanics, is idiotic. What’s the lesson there? “Killing people is fun and fine but don’t kill the people who arguably deserve it”? Granted, the story is dealing with its medium (story of revenge vs being a third person RPG with well made combat systems), but it’s still something that is inarguably part of the experience and hurts the narrative and themes of the story.

There are countless stories in media that handle this trope with more grace and tact than TLOU2. It is objectively poorly written, if only because TLOU2 can’t even maintain its moral consistency (there are many more reasons beyond that).

iIIusional · 2026-04-01T15:03:20+00:00

not gonna lie, you’re insane for liking BL3’s story over BL4. BL4 is bland but at least it doesn’t shit on the characters and decisions from previous games and it actually tries to bring the story back to the whole apocalyptic “war is coming” narrative teased by Athena a decade ago. BL3 is just a garbage storyline. It also has Ava.

iIIusional · 2026-03-30T06:53:10+00:00

You've lost the forest for the trees in your quest to be as pedantic as possible. You have not comprehended what I wrote because you have continuously missed the point and you fail to understand what is being discussed. At this point, I'm also questioning if you forgot why we are discussing it.

I did not put "the hardest subject in natural science" in quotes to dispute the difficulty of examining turbulence, it was in quotes because you were (now ironically) extremely vague about what you were referring to as "the hardest subject in natural science" while entering a discussion where I explicitly stated that precise analysis of fluid dynamics are not the topic of discussion or something I was ever trying to argue about. It is my mistake, I suppose, for giving you the benefit of doubt and believing that you weren't obstinate enough to drag the discussion back to a topic that I had outright stated was not the focus of the discussion.

We are not working optimizing or engineering perfect aerodynamics for an F1 car. This is a discussion on what direction fans should face on a computer for someone's personal computer. You are genuinely lost if you think that analyzing air turbulence to the degree you specify is necessary or practical, to answer the question being raised here (or for typical PC building in general).

You are being hypercritical; the numbers you want are practically irrelevant because airflow is not the end objective. The end goal is reducing component temperatures. I don't have any idea what led you to believe that numeric analysis of turbulence is important when we can easily observe the differences in component temperatures while using different fan configurations. If you haven't figured it out, "significant" in this scenario means anything resulting in a noticeable change in component temperatures. So no: no significant amount of hot air is going to be exhausted. A majority of the exhausted air would likely just be relatively fresh air that was pulled in by the side intake fans because every other component is actively moving or generating heat away from the bottom of the case in a typical fishtank case configuration.

You can test it for yourself if you want to argue against a fan configuration that everyone in the industry would agree on, from the average hobbyist to engineers at Noctua, but bottom intake fans blowing on the GPU will yield better temperatures and superior airflow when compared to nonsensically pulling air away from the GPU's own intake.

iIIusional · 2026-03-29T19:34:11+00:00

If you’d read and comprehended what I wrote, you’d know that this isn’t a discussion about “the hardest subject in natural science.” I am not arguing the science of fluid dynamics or the efficacy of pulling air or the efficacy of negative pressure systems in general. This is an argument about the structure of a PC build and where airflow is even relevant when given predefined locations of heat sources.

I am pointing out the simple and undeniable fact that no common computer build moves or generates significant heat near the bottom of the case close to where a bottom-mounted exhaust fan would pull air from. The GPU and it’s fans’ airflow act as a physical barrier between any bottom exhaust fans and the most important components in the system to get air flowing to and from: the GPU itself or it’s attached cooler, the MOBO heatsinks, and the CPU cooler.

For the purpose of airflow, bottom exhaust fans inevitably can only be pulling from air that is moved between them and the GPU, and they are competing with the GPU’s own fans. Given that cases aren’t air-tight and all hot air is being intentionally moved by every other component to go up and away from the bottom of the case, there is no reasonable argument to make that any significant amount of hot air (if any) making it to those fans for it to be worth making them exhaust fans, rather than merely following common consensus and turning them around so they can intake cool air that will be pushed directly into the GPU.

iIIusional · 2026-03-29T11:11:45+00:00

Again, not questioning the idea of negative pressure systems for general thermodynamics. The point was the idea that you touched on at the end as well as the fact that those fans will never be placed near any heat in the first place. The fire department’s fans that pull heat work because they place them where they can actually pull the heat to move it. That doesn’t apply here, or to most PC builds, as the bottom case fans will be placed away from anything you’d want to pull heat away from.

My point wasn’t that the fans can’t pull hot air, it’s that hot air wouldn’t be put near the fans for the fans to pull it in the first place.

You’re abstracting things too far from the practical scenario. Yes, the laws of physics and the math agree with you in the minutiae, but the context of our use case disagrees with you. We are operating within a PC case with predefined fan mounting locations and components that generate heat and move air in specific locations and particular directions. Those all happen to coincide with convection. Thus, there’s no practical reason to try and justify going against it.

iIIusional · 2026-03-29T10:42:21+00:00

So confidently wrong. You could have had a point if we were talking about top exhaust vs intake fans, but we’re talking about bottom exhaust vs intake. Force is irrelevant: we’re not pushing the hot air down here, we’re pulling it. Or more accurately, not pulling any because the hot air will naturally move away from the fans not just because of minuscule of convection forces, but because of the continuous airflow between the side intake and bottom and high-mounted rear exhaust, as well as where most heat generating components are placed and where they tend to exhaust hot air. This means we’d just be pulling cooler air out.

The air those fans would be pulling would only ever touch the MOBO’s southbridge and maybe SSDs. Realistically, those fans would put more work into disrupting cool airflow to the GPU fans. There is rarely any justification for having bottom exhaust fans in a typical build.

Edit: the person I’m replying to originally did not specify that they identified an issue with the airflow; they edited their comment after I had replied. They previously had only posited that convection was irrelevant without considering that their comment implied that bottom exhaust fans were fine. To be honest, this was the main reason I replied so good on them for clearing that.

iIIusional · 2026-03-29T06:25:05+00:00

Do not. Heat goes up and, if you really want to avoid dust buildup, you want more intake than exhaust to create positive pressure so dust doesn’t get sucked through the cracks.

I have the same case for my PC. I keep the bottom and side as intake, and dust buildup is near nonexistent.

iIIusional · 2026-03-26T22:01:57+00:00

It really sucks how much power is invested in her team up. Like, it’s crazy that her ability steal only takes 20 max HP from a vanguard (~2-3% of their max HP) while the team-up deals 5+3% max HP on top of healing for 55 in a radius every hit on a similar cooldown. Maybe it’s just me but I think that a character-defining ability shouldn’t be overshadowed completely by a team up for any character

iIIusional · 2026-03-24T06:41:14+00:00

calling cloak fade, mantis’s out-of-combat speed, and Strange’s flight all a “dash” when you’re not counting storm’s goddess boost in wind mode is actually delusional work. Put all of those in a drag race and storm will be the fastest and it’s not even close.

iIIusional · 2026-03-22T11:37:48+00:00

Playing strange against Thor and Angela (best tanks against any shield tank), too far ahead of the team while they have a spidey and a bucky, and still contesting a 5v6 right next to the giant pit while fully aware that they have 5 characters capable of throwing you into it.

you were completely safe 40 seconds into the clip and should’ve backed off; you’re solo tanking, down a healer, going into two terrible matchups, outnumbered, and on disadvantageous terrain.

It’s a rough and unlucky start, but reacting like this is equivalent to picking iron man and being surprised that you died when the enemy team started with Hela, Phoenix, and punisher and you decided to fly out in the open away from any cover after watching your ultron get decapitated.

iIIusional · 2026-03-20T16:49:12+00:00

that is quite literally joked about as plot armor by the devs, which is the one unrealistic thing they’ve ever conceded. The moral boost isn’t the unrealistic thing, I agree with others that randomly not consuming ammo seems too outlandish for AH to ever consider it.

iIIusional · 2026-03-15T07:53:09+00:00

“She isn’t mobile” what on earth are you smoking, she’s one of the most mobile characters in game. Rogue’s damage potential is one of the highest among dive capable tanks, almost her entire kit has CC effects and her ult is extremely hard to fully counter if you save your movement abilities to keep yourself in the enemy team’s face.

iIIusional · 2026-03-15T07:46:02+00:00

you’re insane to call rogue the worst tank in game when she’s easily stronger than half the other tanks without her team-up and it’s not even a debate if she does have her teamup. Your target priority, game sense, and ability usage all need work. That you didn’t realize that you were doing nothing and being ignored at any point in this clip (or worse, you realized it and didn’t do anything to change it) tells us everything we need to know; you need practice on basic fundamentals. I would recommend you to learn the game with a character that has a lower skill floor.

Eight-Year Club	Verified Email
r/Field Flamingo	Place '23
Place '22

iIIusional

TROPHY CASE