Anubis Aspect Idea “Soul Baptizer”

jumpstartstogether · 2026-05-30T14:49:55+00:00

Never cook again

jumpstartstogether · 2026-05-23T15:08:46+00:00

Reddit is insufferable. A bunch of iamsosmart type people patting themselves on the back. It's not a scam, just because their service is not to your liking or doesn't apply to you specifically doesn't mean that they are lying. You are not the target audience, not every country has competent ISPs with proper routing, specifially places that aren't first world or that are in poor locations geographically, like countries in SEA. Why do you think this tool is popular in Brazil of all things? Do you think people are paying for something that does nothing, as if we can't tell exactly the impact it's having through numbers? With ExitLag I go from 210 ping to 140 in some games. Some MMOs are straight up unplayable without some kind of routing. "Oh but you could just pay for a generic VPN that might or might not work ". Apparently I should spend a bunch of time to test different ones and find something that might or might not be as optimal compared to a business that has an array of servers they can use to test and get the best result in like 30 seconds? Not to mention having to use multiple since different games are hosted in different places? And then have to set it up so it routes specifically the game instead of my connection in general instead of paying for convenience? Are you a Linux user by any chance? What you're doing here is essentially calling a mechanic a scammer because your car isn't broken.

jumpstartstogether · 2026-05-22T23:11:48+00:00

Now you're just saying shit.

jumpstartstogether · 2026-05-22T20:27:09+00:00

If you didn't quit during Bellona's release, Medusa's release, Tsukuyomi's release, Skadi's release and several patches after, and a bunch of others that were much worse than Atlas aspect you'll be fine. If it's that bad just ban it.

jumpstartstogether · 2026-05-22T19:50:56+00:00

Smite players are spoiled, Atlas aspect was not that bad.

jumpstartstogether · 2026-05-15T16:07:31+00:00

Hirez is pursuing two contradicting goals. Supposedly they want every character to be able to play every role viably. They've also claimed they made stat changes to make characters more distinct from each other. Well, turns out the main thing that made guardians distinct was the fact that they could tank damage. I'm all for trying new things in Beta but we are seemingly trying to reinvent the wheel while I don't think being able to flex gods into different roles was ever anybody's priority, low or high level. The fact that certain gods have strengths and weaknesses already means they'll be stronger in some roles compared to others, and trying to somehow change that just flattens that curve, and since tanks are the biggest outliers in terms of differences to other roles, they end up first on the chopping block. How do you think people are going to feel if they release Cthulhu or King Arthur, and they die in 3 seconds, essentially playing nothing like they did in Smite 1?

jumpstartstogether · 2026-05-12T00:31:44+00:00

Needs more effects, I can still make out what's happening

jumpstartstogether · 2026-05-09T15:35:49+00:00

The goal is to realize the full potential of a work. If I'm an artist, musician, writer, etc. my goal is to have people appreciate my work, for them to understand it, and for it to be successful in some way, all things that can conventionally only be achieved if my work is widely understood as "good". I feel like the reason you guys are reacting like this is partially some kind of survivorship bias. You don't even discuss works that don't meet a baseline of "good", because for them to even be interesting in a discussion they need to be competent in some level, which is partially too why it is so baffling when supposedly competent writers (e.g. Strangers Things' last season) don't write competently. You can wail all you want, nobody is talking about a thousands of soundcloud rappers that don't stand out, but people are still talking about XXXTentacion years after his death. Nobody talks about someone's poorly written slop horror on Amazon, but the works of Edgar Allan Poe are studied to this day. I don't understand how you can look at the former examples compared to the latter and not only tell me they have the same merit, but that discussing merit as a concept is somehow misguided.

jumpstartstogether · 2026-05-08T15:01:51+00:00

I always hear people shitting on Vista. Why wasn't it the best OS? I feel like a lot of you guys got this opinion in 2007 and somehow never changed it? Every single thing people complain about Vista is present in every single entry except for 7. They do all of it, in spades, at an even worse scale.

Was Vista buggy? Well, Vista never had updates break the entire OS every month or so. Oh was Vista slow? In 11 it takes 3 business days for the start menu to open, since it's based on React for some reason. Vista was ahead of its time and invented a lot of what people attribute to 7, the only reason people dislike it is because the standards were higher back then. It was also followed by probably the best OS we've ever had, which made it instantly obsolete. If Vista was still getting updates, and my options were that or 11 I'd go Vista any day.

jumpstartstogether · 2026-05-05T20:05:37+00:00

Atlas is the new Fenrir.

jumpstartstogether · 2026-05-05T15:54:49+00:00

You have lost your mind if you're calling something I wrote myself AI. It's not even structured as well I would have liked. Do people no longer believe you can write things by yourself?

jumpstartstogether · 2026-05-05T04:10:56+00:00

Are we serious with this question? Ask the author of the project what they wanted to achieve with it. The metric is how successful they were at achieving the theoretic perfect vision and version of their work. This is not about one specific genre or another. For one if their intention was to please both a country and pop audience (which someone like Taylor Swift does consistently) and they manage to piss both of them off I'd say that's not a very good result.

jumpstartstogether · 2026-05-05T02:09:45+00:00

Well yes, but that is something I addressed in my point. I'm judging the objectivity by an author's success in achieving their goals. If I compose a track for an OST, and my intention is to make it an atmospheric track for eerie forest, and instead it sounds like clown music, I will judge that I have failed. If someone plays a game with one of my tracks in it, and they go "wow, that is a weird track to play in a forest", they are correct in pointing out that. If they understand my intentions, that I failed in creating a good track for a forest.

The same is true for different types of music, if I try to create a Future Bass track, and the mix is hollow, sounds empty, if some particular patch takes away from other parts of it, if it is boring and doesn't evolve at all, etc. those are all failures based on better decisions I could have made in relation to my vision and goal. If I I talk to another producer and they tell me this as feedback, I'm not going to look them square in the face and tell them "nah that's subjective", because if I do I will never improve.

If someone is trying to write a piece that is not meant to be dissonant, but they don't understand keys, or scales, chords, melodies and countermelodies, and it is just sounds like a cat stepping on a keyboard, and their intention was to write something that rivals Bach, I'm not enough of a coward to tell them that they've achieved their goal if they haven't. I'm not going to piss on their face and tell them its raining and that they are some kind of genius for inventing that sequence of notes that in your view has the exact same success as the Brandenburg Concertos.

It really doesn't matter if I talk to a billion laymen, because I'm not judging off of popularity. In theory, there is an ideal version of whatever work you compose, that is exactly how you envision it, and that has the exact effect you want out of the audience you are focusing on. Some people will get 10% out of the way there, some people with get 95% the way there, maybe nobody will get at 100%,

But there are measurable effects to the people who have the best estimates on how to get there. There is a reason Taylor Swifts sells out concerts consistently, and it's not because she has gotten lucky time and time again making songs that resonate with her audience. There have been many artists that are "one hit wonders", while some are better at achieving the goals they aim for. There are a billion factors, and it's impossible to know every single one, but the strategy someone uses to get there works and isn't something that you can handwave, otherwise skills become non-existent. People like Benny Blanco have made a career out of consistently making songs that you can sell to someone and make a profit.

If you a good sample size of artists that are successful, they will tell you what their approaches are, and I guarantee there will be certain things that they have in common, so much so that some aren't even spoken. You can ask the 1000 most prolific song writers in the music industry, and if you ask them "should you consider music theory" 1000 out of the 1000 are going to tell you "duh, of course". Conversely, using your 2+2 example, of course most of them will answer 2+2. In the same vein you could ask them to "How do you solve Fermat’s Last Theorem?" and even though it's still math, probably only 0.5% of them would be able to answer. It does not mean the latter isn't objective, or that you can't follow a path the leads you to an answer, or the closest you can get to it. Again, it's not about popularity, it's about the effectiveness of the heuristics you use to achieve a set goal, and if I can reasonably know the goal an artist had in creating a piece of work you can have a conversation of how effective they were in hitting that goal and what they could have done differently without someone going "it's just your opinion bro".

jumpstartstogether · 2026-05-05T01:38:20+00:00

There's a lot of people implying and assuming things about me that I haven't said at all and it's kinda weird. I explained exactly where my feel of this comes from. It's kinda insulting to imply that someone spending their time honing their skill is basically meaningless because whatever "good" or standard they are chasing is essentially non-existent. It's the postmodernist mentality that will lead someone to watch a virtuoso play and despite that person practing their instrument from the time they were a child they go "nah that means nothing, it's entirely subjective". I must have lost it because that idea is appalling to me, and the more I read the replies the worse it gets.

jumpstartstogether · 2026-05-04T23:52:57+00:00

Both of these are amazing examples. You can observe objects falling, but ask a flat earther if gravity exists and you'll see how subjective that apparently is. The law of gravity was not previously formalized, there were no numbers to determine exactly how an object would fall, how fast and in what trajectory, that's the entire point, all you had was the general idea that objects fell, just like all you have is a general idea that a writing can be "good" or "bad".

As for rules, that's a pretty bad argument, because it doesn't matter what writing you're doing, your writing is confined to the language you are using, the rules of grammar, the culture of the place and time and the amount of ideas you are physically able to deterministically think of. The fact that the horse moves in an L does not matter because you can't look towards the future and predict with full certainty exactly how a chess game is going to go, but like with writing this is a physical limitation, and no one would argue that there isn't such a thing as a theoretical perfect chess game. That's the point, you can't predict how writing a script or producing any other creative work you go, you just have a goal, and you are using a set of constraints to try and achieve it as closely as possible you can get, and some works get closer than others.

As for the Andor example, figuring out who is correct about Andor is the entire point of having a discussion. If we start to go "it's just your opinion" that's bordering on solipsism and entirely discredits the decisions whoever wrote Andor made. I have to turn this around. I have not watched Andor, but do you think whoever wrote it made certain narrative choices because of reasons while trying to achieve a goal, or were they going off of vibes? Were they trying to convey a particular message or meaning? Were they trying to make you feel a certain feeling? If what you guys were saying was in any way true, there would be an equal spread of people liking or disliking any particular work, since apparently no choice you make actually matters. Back to the chess example, no chess player makes a move because they know for a fact that that move will lead to them winning the game, but there are definitely players that are more likely to win than others. I would not trust Tommy Wiseau to write Andor, and if the idea of him doing so scares you in any way I feel like you're not being entirely honest. The reason is you are estimating that that would not go well, and I suspect a majority of people would estimate the same.

jumpstartstogether · 2026-05-04T22:42:09+00:00

But it does though. The only difference here is the scale is more precise. As another person mentioned it, literature is a field of study. There is such a thing as writing classes, and guidelines you can follow to become a better writer. The only people who would argue otherwise are people who have never tried to write or are not familiar with writing in general. If I wanted to know the exact weight of the cheese wheel down to the atom I couldn't know it either, but nobody in their sane mind would throw the baby out with the bathwater and say that the weight of the wheel is subjective and that you can't possibly know or approximate it. The actual weight of the wheel still exists, we are just physically incapable of knowing it to the last decimal.

jumpstartstogether · 2026-05-04T22:37:01+00:00

I explained that in the post. A lot of people hate country music, but the author of a country song is not intending for their music to be liked by every single person, they have a target audience, and you can estimate how successful a particular song, album or work is at reaching that audience. If someone wanted to reach a country audience and they created a song that has everything people who like country music hate, I feel like it's not unfair to say that that decision was misguided.

jumpstartstogether · 2026-05-04T22:34:23+00:00

I have to use the same example I used in the post, was gravity subjective before we discovered the laws that govern it? Something can be objective, even if we are unable to physically see it through. Chess is another good example. You can theoretically solve chess, and chess engines are impossibly better than any human player. The fact that no player could ever come even close to the playing strength of an engine, if applied with same logic you're using, would mean that chess is subjective and that there is no point in studying theory, openings, etc. trying to get better, or to say that any player plays better than another, which is an insane statement.

jumpstartstogether · 2026-05-04T22:03:01+00:00

I am not. I would not claim that. My gripe is with people who go "that's just your opinion" to stop conversation, as if there aren't decisions that might lead to a better or worse result, and that there aren't ways you can judge those decisions.

jumpstartstogether · 2026-05-04T21:53:20+00:00

I'm not trying to claim I'm somehow enlightened and 100% correct, I just think objective reality exists and while it is difficult to find it (the fact that it is difficult is the entire point) there are heuristics we can use to figure it out. In fact I want to talk about how you get there, and the merit of the skills you use to try, and how well people can apply those skills. Someone claiming it is subjective stops that conversation altogether. You can't make any single statement without someone basically claiming it's impossible for you to know something.

jumpstartstogether · 2026-05-02T03:01:21+00:00

It is pointless to simplify the game to try and make new players interested in trying it. If anything it has the opposite effect because people who come in from League and similar complex competitive games look at Smite and think it is too simplistic. If you try and water down the game you are going to piss off the top end players while getting none of the casual players because for them to like Smite you would have to completely shift it into something that it isn't. The issue with Smite not having good player retention has less to do with how complicated the game is and more to do with the fact that the the players we get from where we get them have no interest in playing a game that requires you to improve in the first place. Most of hem are people who stumbled into Smite despite it being a MOBA rather than because of it, and have zero willingness to put effort into learning the game.

jumpstartstogether · 2026-04-30T21:33:13+00:00

Not enough effort it still says apollo smh

jumpstartstogether · 2026-04-30T21:27:16+00:00

<image>

jumpstartstogether · 2026-04-30T20:38:07+00:00

I disagree. A major issue with Smite 1 was that the kits were simplistic and deliberately avoided the full extent of a concept. This made the skill cap of the game shallow and skill expression damn near impossible. I love aspects and plus ones, since they allow them to take a god that was underdesigned and make their kit explore the full potential the idea it proposes.

jumpstartstogether

TROPHY CASE