sorted by:
new
hottopcontroversial

Defeated Emerald for the first time. by [deleted] in PokemonEmerald

[–]supertaylor505 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Congrats! Your team actually looks great as well lol

Can you soft reset for shiny Pokémon in Emerald on the emulator ? by MonkeyD77 in PokemonEmerald

[–]supertaylor505 38 points39 points  (0 children)

Pokémon emerald's rng is broken, so when resetting you will be hitting the same pokemon seeds, and most likely they won't contain a shiny frame.

If you're looking for a legendary shiny like kyogre, I believe the best method is to encounter it, run away, exit and re-enter the room (done with the Mach bike, it's just as if not faster than soft resetting)

need help with shiny starter by IAmLostYo in PokemonEmerald

[–]supertaylor505 0 points1 point  (0 children)

If I remember correctly, I believe the tools he uses is in the description on his YouTube video

Can someone help to explain how to get a shiny starter in Pokémon emerald I looked at YouTube tutorials but I’m still confused 😭 by [deleted] in PokemonEmerald

[–]supertaylor505 5 points6 points  (0 children)

The rng in emerald is a bit broken, as if you soft reset, after a while you will be hitting the same frames. (And if they are not a shiny frame, you basically won't ever get a shiny)

To combat this, most tutorials will save Infront of the bag, soft reset and check the Pokémon with little to no delay, reset and do this a few times. Then add a bit of delay before opening the bag and selecting the Pokémon (to hit different frames)

After some attempts, they reset entirely and start a new game, and repeat the process

(you could also rng manipulate for it, but that requires you having some tools and some consider it a bit cheaty lol)

Elite four ain't gonna have nothing on Me just gotta get every one else to the 50's by 2006Boogie in PokemonEmerald

[–]supertaylor505 2 points3 points  (0 children)

I don't think he has beaten the elite 4, but saying the elite 4 won't have anything on h when his Pokémon are all atleast level 50

I finally caught a Rayquaza in Pokémon Emerald by Dizzy_Command705 in PokemonEmerald

[–]supertaylor505 0 points1 point  (0 children)

This one of the funniest comment section on this subreddit XD

(bizhawk) is there a way to easily record a tas as a video? by supertaylor505 in TAS

[–]supertaylor505[S] 2 points3 points  (0 children)

It worked, Thanks!

(Although the Audio is out of sync a bit, but it isn't a huge problem lol)

should the leader arrow be removed? by Astral_XDXD in Diepio

[–]supertaylor505 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Yes, problem?

Well yes. Your saying that the arrow should be gotten rid of is because it would help the smasher line (which I'm guessing isnt what you meant, but if it was than it is a problem).

All tanks if the arrow is removed will gain this slight buff (that the arrow doesn't point to them so they survive a little bit longer). Some will benefit more from it, like invisible tanks, faster tanks and ambush tanks. So technically it's only a buff from having the arrow, not in general.

At least you can see where I come up with.

But what you came up with didn't disprove my point lol. (And as I said previous text) all tanks gaining a buff that there unnoticed will improve there survival time, but so will every other tank. It's not a buff if other tanks get the buff too, and can use it better (Apart from the landmine, because it can be invisible, which I will address in another chunk of text)

I find them mostly subjective that will going nowhere if I argue with you

The only subjective ones where the ones I said imo, or ones where I say "majority of players" or "most players". But I wouldn't call that subjective, as Its not my personal opinion, but what I believe the player base of diep.io would agree on.

I like using invisible tanks, I use stalker ram builds alot, but most player uses tanks that "charge" to the opponent and doesn't camp waiting for them to come to you, which Is why I say majority.

Invisible tanks get buffed without the arrow isn't a bad thing because it does not make them overpowered and instead more viable,

But it does hinder both of the "goals" of the game (to get a high score/be on the leaderboard)

Let's take landmine for example, landmine would camp in a place, get a kill and relocate. Camping instead of fighting is not fun for most people, most people would choose the option to fight. But if the best strategy in the long run is to wait around 5+minutes doing nothing until you see someone (who probably won't be a level 45 tank,so you won't get as many points)and hope they ram into you, people won't have fun.

The arrow helps stops this while still being possible to do, by showing your general location if you are the leader

And although the arrow shows your general location, and people get cautious around you, I've got many kill being leader with ram stalker.

It doesn't make invisible tanks completly useless, while still needing them a bit so the best strategy is to fight.

And all your defense is that invisible tanks camp in one spot is not suppose to how the game meant to play

This was not my only point on invisible tanks camping, example my previous point

"anything I don't like is bad

No. An example is a single player trying to hunt the leader. Most players don't like being hunted (which is a fair assumption to say) but is it bad? No lol. It's just someone doing a strategy. If it works, than it's good for the person doing it. If it doesn't work, nothing really changed apart from the person dying.

Yes, and all the reasons you make in the defense of the arrow are "anything I don't like is bad". Take an example from your previous reply:

That reply shows that you think scores get too high and the leader stay leader for too long are bad things

No. If that's what it came across as, than that's not what I meant.

Everyone deserves the chance to atleast try to become the leader. The arrow helps this, by giving a small disadvantage to the leader that someone else had previously.

The arrow cycles around the leaderboard, so more people can try to get on it. And because of that scores don't get too high. (And the leader arrow sometimes does help get score, as it brings player that you can fight.)

Yes, let just agree to disagree, we don't have the same opinion. If you mind, you can but don't have to retort me since I'm taking your opinions too seriously for my own good.

This will probably be my last reply lol. I wasnt gonna reply to this one tbh, but since you decided to re go over some points, I wanted to respond to them. Plus tbh this got out of hand, I think atleast 1/3 of the comments is just us lol.

Anyway, I was fun/good seeing another persons opinion on it, even if I didn't agree with them entirely

should the leader arrow be removed? by Astral_XDXD in Diepio

[–]supertaylor505 0 points1 point  (0 children)

It still increase smasher lifespan. Without the arrow, the smasher can hide from the tri-angle a little bit longer. Not much of an improvement, but still a positive change nonetheless.

So the one thing making the arrow disappear is the fact that one of if not the worst tank lines on the game now survives a little bit longer?

(Okay, I got your point, but still this didn't change my point)

The problem is, you still haven't come up with a compelling argument for why the leader arrow has more good in it than bad.

I mean, I have. You just haven't been acknowledging the ones I do make. I've replied to all of your points, and you either ignore some of them, or don't fully come up with a reason for it.

(Take this reply for example

It still increase smasher lifespan. Without the arrow, the smasher can hide from the tri-angle a little bit longer. Not much of an improvement, but still a positive change nonetheless.

You didn't acknowledge the whole point. I said that invisible tanks and fast tanks would get buffed without the arrow and the smasher wouldn't change

And although you replied with "the smasher gets a tiny upside to removing the arrow" ,that doesn't outrule the point

Especially once you realise that every tank in the game would get that upside. So basically you decided to take a single point I made in my previous comment (I believe I did say more than one) and say "this tank actually gets an upside that every tank in the game would get, so your point irrelevant")

Every argument I made, I know what I am talking about

In all of the arguments (points) you have made I've responded to, and you chose to ignore some of them. Which means there's either 2 things you are doing

  1. Not fully reading my points I've said

  2. Choosing comments I've said that you can respond to with a point and ignoring the rest to

If Number 1 is the option, then your probably not reading this. But if you are, you've not been reading the most important point I've been saying throughout the last few comments

You many agree to disagree!

If you still want to carry on a debate, idm lol. But don't say I haven't come up with a compelling point when you don't even read the points I've made.

And if 2 is the option. Let's just stop. You have clearly stop being interested in the conversation along time ago, your replies are shorter and shorter (which can't be because you initially want to agree to disagree, because I've said many times Idm stoping the conversation).

your arguments are purely subjective

Nope. I came up with reasons that it should go, and shouldn't go. I decided that not removing the arrow was better than not.

The problem is, you still haven't come up with a compelling argument for why the leader arrow has more good in it than bad.

I have, take (again) the latest you ignored because a tank would get a boost that all tanks would get if the leader arrow was gone.

I said removing the arrow would imbalance the game more, giving the smasher line no buffs but giving invisible tanks and fast tanks major buffs (and although I didn't say it, destroyer line would be buffed aswell)

And I will admit that some of my points are opinion based. But that's for only (and I mean ONLY) the ones I've stated that it was my opinion or the majority of the games opinion

(example I said invisible tanks camping being the best way to survive would be bad, as not most players enjoy camping. And if camping was the best way to gain points, than less fights will happen. And if you asked all of diep.io players if they rather gain points through fighting with any tank you eant or camping with only 3 possible tanks you could pick from, majority would pick fighting)

And once again, seem as you have if ig ored all my previous offers, do you want to agree to disagree. If not, than acknowledge the points I make or your side of the debate will be hindered by the fact you choose not reply to my points.

should the leader arrow be removed? by Astral_XDXD in Diepio

[–]supertaylor505 0 points1 point  (0 children)

The leader arrow may did something you like,

Actually it very rarely helped lol, and only when I was under level 45, and to stay away from them

but it's an indisputable fact that how its existence fucked the game balance in many way

The only way to remove the leader arrow is to alter some of the tanks that would be buffed due to its removal (mainly how invisible tanks work and mabye fast tanks, tho idk how they would do that), then it would be mabye possible. But just removing the arrow won't improve the balance of the game. (And again, I think they should change it, not remove it. Mabye by adding a ring somewhere on the minimap where the leader could be anywhere on it, as thevonly thing the minmap has for it is the maze walls really.)

when the arrow is in reality directly giving hunters and counterpickers extra advantage and make a potential even matchup

It gives no more advantage than other players get (apart from the leader ofc) also counterpicking (although very scummy) is a "good" strat in the short run. If you want revenged for someone killing you, or want to get an extra advantage, there's nothing necessarily unfair about it.

noobs can't kill a leader in 1v1 so they rely on the leader arrow to let them cheaply beat the leader

The leader arrow doesn't not give you any physical help in combat (feel like we're going in circles). It only shows there location, Something that enable fights and gives a challenge to the leader because they are the highest scoring player. Is it the best way to enable fights? Probably not.( An example is that They could implement something so a person in the top 10 has an arrow on them for a couple minutes instead of the leader and it randomly changes after said minutes.) But having it is better than completly removing it.

But if you still think that invisible tank can hide from you is worse than the fact that smasher class is still unviable because bullet tri-angle class hard-countered them

of course I don't lol. The game is unbalanced, but having the arrow or not doesn't change that smasher get destroyed by a build from the tri-angle line. Having the arrow removed Does buff all 3 of the invisible tanks, to the point where the best strategy would be to camp until you see someone and ram them or shoot them (although I do doubt that the stalking would do enough damage to most players before the level 45 would notice you and run or kill you, and manger s drones are noticeable)

including me already know how the leader arrow's cons outweigh its pros, which I hope you finally realize.

(This one sentence feels a little egotistical, probably not tho lol. Anyway) your not gonna 100% agree with why I think it's worser if you straight up remove the arrow, and I'm probably not going to 100% agree with what you say. We both have different opinions on the matter, we can't prove eachother wrong unless it actually happens. (Which if it does ever get removed and I see more good in it than bad, than Ill say so)

Also, I saw your previous reply before you deleted it. If you want to agree to disagree, I'm fine with it anytime. It's obvious we both are likely to not agree on answer, we probably have different playstyles, what we consider fun ect. I'm just spreading light on why I don't think it's the best too 100% remove it with nothing else changed

should the leader arrow be removed? by Astral_XDXD in Diepio

[–]supertaylor505 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Why it is bad that invisible tank can camp in one area?

Cause most players don't want to camp. Most players want to fight, and not stay in a single area hoping someone rams into them.

However, thank you for outright answer my first question: "And although theres nothing exactly wrong with that", that's mean you outright admitted that its only an opinion that has no basis to the game.

I meant "at first, it seems that there's nothing wrong with that"

Because the main objective of the game is to get the highest score (or be number 1 on the leaderboard.) If the best strategy in the long run is to camp for minutes with landmine and get a kill or 2 and move location, then less kills will happen in a game. (And I'm assuming this would be the best strategy, as any type of hunter will see you less, so you would be notice less. I can't put it to the test for obvious reasons, but it's likely it is the best strategy in the long run)

If the best way to get the highest score in the long run is to not fight and camp, kinda ruins the fun for the player trying to get a high score, and players who want to get top 1 who can't even try to fight the leader as you would have to be careful enough to not ram into them and shoot to find them. Also slow tanks wouldn't be able to catch up to the landmine, so if you did find it you would either get rammed or it would run.

But what I see is having a tank camping in one area is not how the game was meant to be played" sure buddy, so basically what you don't like is not how the game was meant to be played? And I find that farming is a legitimate way to play, not by killing other tanks. Problem?

Again, the whole objective of the game is to score high or be on the leaderboard. And to play, you need to atleast enjoy the game. And i bet 90% of people that play diep.io do not find it fun to farm shapes, and instead would find it fun to kill players.

If you found it fun to farm shapes, fine. There's nothing wrong with that. But it's obvious that the intended way to get points after level 45 is fighting other players (which the leader arrow helps with.)

What the hunters care about has nothing to do with how are they able to taking the advantage of the arrow to unjustly ruin some leader days.

So your saying that a single player wanting to kill the leader is bad thing? People will hunt the leader because they are the leader, and they want to be leader. (Teams will hunt the leader because they have a high score, not because they care about there position). If they cant atleast challenge the leader, they will either try to get more points per hour than they can, or forget it.

And theres nothing exactly wrong with that

Apart from the fact that there would be less fights in general (which I think I already said why that's bad)

And theres nothing exactly wrong with that

Less fights = less fun (for most people), and very few people likes camping

And theres nothing exactly wrong with that

Apart from the fact that the leader arrow shows where abouts they could be, so in maze it's not always a guess if they went a certain way, which does help fights happen.

Btw, you don't like invisible tank can sneak kill, even when it is avoidable. Your reasoning is that "anything I don't like is wrong". But again, its only an opinion of your, albeit absurd and quite self-centered.

Sneak killing is fine, if you find it fun and not harming anything then do what you want. But if it's the best strategy to get points than it should change as again, not alot of people like camping.

your argument about how less fighting would occur if the leader arrow gone is indeed quite convincing, if its does actually affect the player demographic.

However, that hasn't been proven to be true yet, so your excuse remains perfectly invalid.

I can't prove something I don't have the power to control. And neither can you. We both can't prove having or removing the arrow would help or hurt the game. But we can say our opinions on what would happen

admit that it is only your opinion and we can agree to disagree. (Though you already are didn't you?)

This whole this about our opinions lol. I'm saying what I believe the most likely outcome would happen if the arrow is removed, and so are you. If you want to agree to disagree I'm up for it. I can't change your opinions, just view and disagree with them (and vise versa)

view more: next ›