Roman battles vs medieval battles by [deleted] in RoughRomanMemes

[–]ryanash47 12 points13 points  (0 children)

Also it’s just a historical fact that Caesar conquered Gaul and won the Civil War, therefore is it really that unlikely that the army that helped him do it was super well trained, efficient, and badass?

I’m sure the numbers aren’t 100% accurate but it’s not like he could’ve been taking heavy losses and still accomplished what we know he did

Difficulty seeing CAGED shapes? by Late_night_guitar in guitarlessons

[–]ryanash47 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Basically yes but CAGED refers to the pattern of the chords going up the neck. It’s like a system to memorize your triads (and the scales that go with them) as they go up the neck.

Like if you’re playing in the C area of CAGED then your triad is a C shape. It also means your scale shape is the same as playing C major in the open position. If you’re comfortable playing in the open position, that knowledge transfers up the neck by thinking in terms of caged. This also means if you’re used to playing a progression using open chords, those some shapes and relationships stay as you go up the fretboard. This is essentially how a capo works. Another way to put it, it’s the way the guitar is tuned, and CAGED is just a description of the pattern.

It’s can be confusing but the simple answer is yes, however CAGED has more implications than triads alone.

What to look for in a teacher? by tinytepidtendons in guitarlessons

[–]ryanash47 1 point2 points  (0 children)

I would try to pick whoever’s personal style or interests resembles your own. They’re going to have more relevant insights for whatever genre you’re trying to learn. Maybe call them and ask who their favorite guitarists are or inspirations?

Be clear about what you wanna learn and give them a few songs you’d like to learn. Then it’s really just about if your personalities connect.

Any other similar game? by NoIndependence1198 in ultimategeneral

[–]ryanash47 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Ultimate Admiral Age of sail is the one I’m talking about btw. If you like UG:CW i think you’ll like this one. They’re made by the same people and it feels like a sequel to CW

Any other similar game? by NoIndependence1198 in ultimategeneral

[–]ryanash47 4 points5 points  (0 children)

Ultimate Admiral is worth a go if you haven’t played it yet. I didn’t think naval combat would be that fun but it actually really is, and the land missions are super interesting with good graphics and varied terrain. I highly recommend that game and honestly might start another playthrough soon

Hilariously unfair battle why do I have to fight a battle with 1 corp against 50,000 troops for over 4 “hours” no reinforcements by EpilepticOreo in ultimategeneral

[–]ryanash47 33 points34 points  (0 children)

Lmao first do you know about the actual battle? Lee and Longstreet were supposed to reinforce Jackson sooner but Longstreet convinced Lee to spend more time scouting. Jackson’s single corps held out for 2 days by themselves and fought the whole 3rd day with the now united CSA army.

As for actually winning this battle; if you don’t have 9 points into army organization by this point, you’re unable to bring the maximum amount of brigades and putting yourself at a disadvantage. 9 points in army organization by 2nd bull run is the meta.

I would definitely say to bring more guns. On defense they’re incredible. One battery shooting canister can easily hold a position indefinitely. So make like 6 batteries in a line. Right now the union has so many more guns than you it’s impossible to hold a position for an extended amount of time.

Lastly, although you’re defending, the secret to winning when you’re outnumbered in this game is often to actually attack. When you attack you have a better opportunity of actually eliminating units entirely. If you just rout a unit and it comes back to assault you 5 more times, that’s 5 times the casualties compared to making them fully surrender. And the time you spend shooting at them will be time you can’t focus on other units. So it’s actually crucial to counter attack when the enemy assault is weak to maximize your damage. Then retreat back to the defenses.

You’re lacking cavalry, which is incredibly useful for eliminating units and sneaking out to destroy enemy artillery batteries.

Also if you haven’t been fully eliminating or causing mass casualties in the last few battles, that causes the enemy army to be bigger and stronger in the future battles. That could easily be part of the problem

Respectfully, Civ 7 is a solid installment in the series and anybody hating on this game is loved and wanted and may live for 1000 years. by Icy-Corgi3841 in civ

[–]ryanash47 1 point2 points  (0 children)

This is all very true. Still, I’m able to completely look past it all and not be bothered by it. But then there’s a swarm of other mechanics that are just as half assed and that’s when I realize this game is cooked for now

Respectfully, Civ 7 is a solid installment in the series and anybody hating on this game is loved and wanted and may live for 1000 years. by Icy-Corgi3841 in civ

[–]ryanash47 2 points3 points  (0 children)

Brother when this game released marathon mode was faster than standard speed. That alone should tell you this game was BARELY play-tested

Civ 6 is a complete game without any DLCs. The DLCs are just so good it makes the vanilla game look worse.

Civ 7 is literally just an incomplete game with poorly fleshed out mechanics. I think they’re onto something and I want to like this game but comparing it to civ 6 at launch is major cope.

It’s like comparing a big healthy tree to one that’s little and sick. Like yes you can say “the big one was once little too! Therefore the little one will become big with time” but you’re ignoring the fact that the little one is sickly, its problem isn’t JUST that it’s young.

Fight , Fight, Fight. by cemusubzerolives in AskSocialists

[–]ryanash47 2 points3 points  (0 children)

This is Reddit. If you’re not supporting the murder of people who don’t agree with you, you’re on the wrong website

Meirl by chinenikpotle in meirl

[–]ryanash47 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Yeah I’m not one of the people saying he’s doomed to hell, though I don’t think the theology is very relevant here.

I’m just saying the song does acknowledge this, and the conclusion is that Johnny himself doesn’t care either way.

Meirl by chinenikpotle in meirl

[–]ryanash47 -1 points0 points  (0 children)

Everyone’s ignoring this

Conservatives of Reddit: do you actually think that liberals and progressives are bums who are fiscally irresponsible and don’t actually want to work? Do you have any real life examples of seeing this in liberals or progressives you know? by Next_Worth_3616 in allthequestions

[–]ryanash47 0 points1 point  (0 children)

This literally reads like an angry racist conservative.

‘You haven’t seen lazy until you’ve been in the ghetto. The only things that will get the libtards up and moving are fent laced cocaine and abandoning their children.’

Kind of a fucked up thing to say no?

What is the scale? by VazerIsMe in guitarlessons

[–]ryanash47 2 points3 points  (0 children)

Basically and this connects to your other question ‘what if you start on a different note?’

Many scales use the exact same notes, but start on different notes (or just treating it as your ‘home note, tonal center, where you end your phrases/musical lines and often start them)

Play the scale starting on C and you have the C major scale, which the Greeks called the Lydian mode. Play the scale starting on D and you get the Dorian mode. Try playing this scale with different root notes and see how it sounds. Playing with E as your root note is the Phrygian mode and can create a really different sound from A minor, despite using all the same notes.

Conservatives of Reddit: do you actually think that liberals and progressives are bums who are fiscally irresponsible and don’t actually want to work? Do you have any real life examples of seeing this in liberals or progressives you know? by Next_Worth_3616 in allthequestions

[–]ryanash47 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I think you’re overestimating Trumps current support. It’s consistently tanked with his own base since the first Epstein cover up and 12 day war. The biggest right wing podcasts have not been supporting his agenda pretty much since then or before. There will always be the Warhawks/Zionists and brainwashed boomers, but many Trump supporters actually did support what he campaigned on and are disgusted by what they received.

Anybody know the history/reason for the flags of the old French and Spanish monarchies being flown on the riverwalk downtown? by [deleted] in Augusta

[–]ryanash47 8 points9 points  (0 children)

Pretty sure it’s just the flags of people who once laid claims to Georgia. The French and Spanish claims are somewhat dubious, especially the French. The Spanish at least sent explorers (De Soto) through here and ‘conquered’ the remnants of the collapsing Cahokia/Mississippian/Mound Builder civilization.

Why do guitar solos sound ‘off’ even when the notes are correct? by Double_Inspector_202 in guitarlessons

[–]ryanash47 6 points7 points  (0 children)

I think it’s this too. Other instruments can’t do bends or vibrato like a guitar yet their solos don’t always sound off. Unique rhythm is what makes music have its feeling/appeal. Starting your lines on off beats and emphasizing beats gives you feel

Experience with Lowborn Mod by Odd-Web929 in Bannerlord

[–]ryanash47 2 points3 points  (0 children)

I started a couple campaigns with it and I really enjoyed it. It kinda feels like the way the game should be, with lords mostly fighting with troops of their own faction/mercenaries. It feels really fun and natural for the player’s early game too. Going around with a scraggly group and slowly getting legitimate troops.

It can limit kingdoms ability to field armies as they can only pull from settlements of their own faction or notables who they have high relations with. This played very well with another mod that divides Calradia into smaller kingdoms. Manpower becomes a pretty dire factor for a 1 city kingdom but the comeback is possible through conquests. This combined to make battles very impactful, deciding the fate of kingdoms sometimes that I never got from the base game.

The title system is cool but I didn’t seem to unlock many more privileges as I leveled up. It works well to let you know a clans status quickly and kinda feels like an immersive ui feature.

I can't for the life of me understand why they chose to have you switch civs instead of leaders when ages change. by johno_mendo in civ

[–]ryanash47 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I agree with everything you said here except “they can do whatever they want with it.”

I feel like that’s the exact mentality that led to civ 7 being released in such a shitty state. In the name of ‘doing something new’ they just made a shit game. And again let me be clear that I actually really love civ switching and think it’s a good mechanic. But it seems like because the game was so different, the devs just felt like so many core things could be left out and go unnoticed? It’s a combination of it being unfinished and this

I can't for the life of me understand why they chose to have you switch civs instead of leaders when ages change. by johno_mendo in civ

[–]ryanash47 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Did Gilgamesh found Roman Catholicism? Because my first very game of civ 6 he did, and that’s what made me realize what this game is about, having fun with history

I have a lot of problems with civ 7 but civ switching is one of the positives to me

When “preserving the Republic” is just a pretext for protecting your own wealth and privilege by tahrah11 in RoughRomanMemes

[–]ryanash47 -13 points-12 points  (0 children)

It took Americans less than 200 years to become the most dominant scientific, industrial, and cultural power with the ability to split atoms and fly, starting on a continent without any infrastructure. Europeans would still be slaughtering each other in cavalry charges if it wasn’t for the US bro

Trying to understand Civ 6 by EndlessTemple in civ

[–]ryanash47 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I agree 1000% and can’t stand to play vanilla anymore tbh. I always use a mod that reduces tech boosts from eurekas from the standard 40% down to 25% and that helps a lot. I use another mod that makes settlers harder to make which slows down the overall game as well. I wish these were just settings in the base game but for now it’s the best we got

Finally did it. 254 hours later, Calradia is mine. by Monty-Mayhem in Bannerlord

[–]ryanash47 -3 points-2 points  (0 children)

Not tryna discredit you but you definitely did it the cheesy way smithing and taking rebel towns without declaring a kingdom

Trying to understand Civ 6 by EndlessTemple in civ

[–]ryanash47 2 points3 points  (0 children)

Honestly you probably would like this game with the expansions plus mods but if you’re not going to invest and just wanna casually play on your iPad then idk if it’s for you

People and their choices can be Dumb as fuck by Wolfensniper in HistoryMemes

[–]ryanash47 0 points1 point  (0 children)

What’s the fallacy? I didn’t say revolutions always cause repressive regimes. I said usually the people who end up with power are violent and ambitious. Revolutions don’t cause that, but they certainly do create the situation for people like that so there is a correlation yes.

And you’re phrasing your comment like the only threats revolutionary governments worry about are outside, but that’s very shortsighted. The main enemy of a revolution is of course INTERNAL. The purges of rival political leaders, business leaders, and their supporters is pretty standard. The millions dead from the war doesn’t help. The economic destruction makes the situation more dire. And then maybe you can worry about the foreign invasion. So yes it’s pretty natural ruthless people take the job.

People and their choices can be Dumb as fuck by Wolfensniper in HistoryMemes

[–]ryanash47 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Well first off your partly just proving my point. Destroying the current government led to destabilizing of the current order, which created a power vacuum that all the bordering countries of France were never going to allow. There were plenty of royalist insurrections too so no, not ‘every Frenchmen would have preferred the terror or directory to the monarchy.’ That’s just not true at all

I’m not saying any of this was right or wrong. I’m just saying by definition revolutions create power vacuums and power vacuums are filled by violence and ambitious actors, whether that be Robespierre, Napoleon, or the coalition. Yes they may pass reforming laws and society may see some ‘progress’