Please help contribute to the Reddit categorization project here

    Friendly_Fire

    + friends - friends
    21,473 link karma
    54,472 comment karma
    send message redditor for

    [–] SLPT - Always carry zip ties. Friendly_Fire 13 points ago in ShittyLifeProTips

    So between two double parked cars, in the completely full parking lot, this lady walked up to yours to put a note? Cool story bro.

    [–] SLPT - Always carry zip ties. Friendly_Fire -3 points ago in ShittyLifeProTips

    But you said your friend double parked. Does that not mean he was in two spots?

    [–] SLPT - Always carry zip ties. Friendly_Fire 33 points ago in ShittyLifeProTips

    Okay reason through this with me. You said yourself, your friend "double parked". This means they were in two spots.

    Instead of splitting a spot to stay next to the original douche bag, why not move fully over into the next spot, stopping the issue from propagating?

    [–] Could Amazon’s “New World” Be the Next Blockbuster MMO? Friendly_Fire 1 points ago in New_World_MMO

    There is no question that the only way to tank someone is when they're off a horse.

    You're moving the goalpost from "ganking" to "ganking on a mount", but you are still incorrect. Direwolf gank squads are common in Albion and 100% the best way to gank if you have more than two people. They are effective enough at ganking to generate very large internet debates about their very existence and whether they make ganking too easy:

    https://forum.albiononline.com/index.php/Thread/95954-Is-this-open-world-meta-acceptable

    And really the best way to gank is with a nightmare in your direwolf squad but that's too expensive to be a normal thing in case another direwolf gank group gets you (RIP https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QZ5AChBdhow)


    The harsh truth here is that at launch, ganking was absurdly easy and no brain. You could basically run down anyone you spotted with a small group and no effort. The people who quit over the demount nerf were simply bad, and wanted to be able to kill people with no effort and little risk.

    Though you are totally right that a lot of people were mad about it, many claiming to quit over it. I don't know what SBI could have done, they had to fix the completely imbalanced ganking meta. Of all the examples of people over-reacting to changes that are clearly good for a game, this might be the worst response I've seen.

    [–] Could Amazon’s “New World” Be the Next Blockbuster MMO? Friendly_Fire 1 points ago in New_World_MMO

    There are certainly some lessons to learn from Albion, but what you listed is not one of them. Solo warbow ganking videos are literally one of the most common videos posted to the Albion subreddit. Neither warbows nor ganking were killed.

    https://www.reddit.com/r/albiononline/search?q=warbow&restrict_sr=on&sort=relevance&t=all

    Personally I'd say the biggest lesson from AO is give people a purpose. At some point, people get tired of killing each other for the sake of it, even if the PvP is good. This isn't just an AO problem either. Planetside 2, for instance, was a fantastic MMOFPS with great combat. But I still tired of it in a few months because it was the same meaningless battles over and over.

    I think goals and achievements, especially competitive ones, for people to strive for would be very healthy. In many areas too, not just PvP. This is something themeparks naturally do better than sandboxes.

    The other "lesson" from AO they should watch out for is how exactly the classless system works. I think AO loses a bit of the MMORPG magic because everyone can easily use a mid tier version of every weapon and piece of gear. Sure you have to grind to get the most power with it, but there's really no uniqueness to people's builds. You just pick the right weapon for the job, which ends up not feeling like an MMORPG much at all.

    [–] Amazon's MMO New World shows off new environment screens, begins alpha test Friendly_Fire 1 points ago in MMORPG

    That's called purposeless PvP.

    Ganking and looting are far from "purposeless" in a sandbox game. Right off the back, stealing people's stuff can make you a lot of money. More important is how it impacts the economy and risk/reward mechanisms. For instance, consider gathering. Without any risk, tons of people will gather for money, and that will make the profit gained from gathering low. High supply and all that. Turns it into a big time sink.

    Now you could have rare stuff you have to find, but that just comes down to RNG "did you stumble across the diamond node" or not. What gankers due is offer a reward for a risk. Good gatherers learn how to sneak through dangerous areas, how to evade ganks, and thus can earn far more per hour spent. Suddenly gathering has gone from "boring time sink" to "challenging, skill-based activity".

    I do partly agree with you. I think it's better for a game to be split between open PvP, and not. Enough space for the "care-bears" to be able to play, and for new players to learn. I mean, everyone is scared the first time they play a full-loot game. However, the best stuff, the best resources, dungeons, areas, etc. should all be in open PvP area. Basically, where the big boys play. Make the reward worth the risk, and hopefully more players will learn to explore out into these dangerous areas at their own pace.

    That's ideally what Amazon is doing with their sandbox game.

    [–] Vegan Hostility Over a Picture of a Kitten With Her Pierced Ears in r/iamatotalpieceofshit Friendly_Fire -1 points ago in SubredditDrama

    There's not a flaw with eating meat either. Most people agree with not wanting to cause suffering to other creatures, it's really just where you draw the line. The line of whats "too much suffering" and "this animal has an inherent right to live, suffering aside" vary per person.

    [–] Amazon's MMO New World shows off new environment screens, begins alpha test Friendly_Fire 3 points ago in MMORPG

    The 500 people is just for preliminary testing, they've already said they are aiming for 10,000+. A big point in their scant interviews is they developed technology to share the computation load over their cloud systems. So a "server" isn't literally one machine, but a network of actual servers.

    As long as micro-transactions are just cosmetic who cares. If it's P2W, especially when it's P2Play, I'm with you.

    [–] Crabs and lobsters deserve protection from being cooked alive Friendly_Fire -1 points ago in philosophy

    This is all true. However, as the comment was about "animal welfare people", I assume their goal is to do something to help with animal welfare.

    [–] Cozy Sunday’s Friendly_Fire 0 points ago in aww

    You still can't post it, because it's still imaginary. I'm out until you do, so this is pretty much it then. Have fun in your fantasy world.

    [–] Cozy Sunday’s Friendly_Fire 0 points ago in aww

    It's pretty damn hard to google for things that don't exist, which is of course why you refuse to just post this "data".

    It's clear you're hysterical trying to defend your own hypocrisy. Thank goodness this is over the internet, or you probably would have already attacked me given your violent nature.

    [–] Cozy Sunday’s Friendly_Fire 0 points ago in aww

    If you're not going to link this imaginary data of yours, there's no point in responding. I gave you a link with a whole list of sources. You're just saying "google it" for something that doesn't exist.

    [–] Cozy Sunday’s Friendly_Fire 1 points ago in aww

    There is no statistic that shows women are the more violent sex. Are you perhaps trying to pretend that "domestic violence" is a stand-in for all violence?

    [–] Cozy Sunday’s Friendly_Fire 1 points ago in aww

    Old ass numbers? Are you 13 or something? That was only seven years ago, do you think the differences in violence between men/women have had some fundamental shift in the last seven years?

    And if arrests aren't a metric that satisfies you, which metric would? Because they all show the same thing, men commit violence FAR more often than women.

    Sounds like you're just making excuses to deny the fundamental fact that violence is in your nature.

    [–] Cozy Sunday’s Friendly_Fire 1 points ago in aww

    Lol what fantasy world do you live in? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sex_differences_in_crime

    2011 arrest data from the FBI:[48]

    Males constituted 98.9% of those arrested for forcible rape[48]

    Males constituted 87.9% of those arrested for robbery[48]

    Males constituted 85.0% of those arrested for burglary[48]

    Males constituted 83.0% of those arrested for arson.[48]

    Males constituted 81.7% of those arrested for vandalism.[48]

    Males constituted 81.5% of those arrested for motor-vehicle theft.[48]

    Males constituted 79.7% of those arrested for offenses against family and children.[48]

    Males constituted 77.8% of those arrested for aggravated assault[48]

    Males constituted 58.7% of those arrested for fraud.[48]

    Males constituted 57.3% of those arrested for larceny-theft.[48]

    Males constituted 51.3% of those arrested for embezzlement.[48]

    [–] The design directions for characters is problematic, featuring reworked Torb Friendly_Fire 2 points ago in Overwatch

    Do you like the game and the direction it's going in?

    Yes

    Do you prefer a amalgamation of airquotes "damage" heroes instead of more specialized roles?

    No, I also greatly appreciate asymmetric hero design. Fortunately, Blizzard have not been compromising on that. Neither Torb nor Sym have become more like other heroes. Especially the Sym rework, which made her more unique.

    I for one would like to play a character geared specifically for defending things in a game where half the time playing you are defending something. I think the concept of characters with roles is great.

    Here is your issue. This is going to sound condescending, but there is no way around it. You have a really shallow understanding about how Overwatch works. "Defending" is barely a thing in Overwatch.

    95% of the time, Overwatch is just about winning the team fight. You need to defend a capture point? Win the team fight, then they can't attack it. If you need to attack it, when the team fight, then there is no one there to stop you from capping it. Want to push or stop a payload? It's the exact same thing. Important things like spawn advantages swap around. One point the attackers have the advantage, the next the defenders do. The spawn advantage changes how team fights play out, but it's not due to attacking/defending.

    There are rare times that the difference between objectives for defending/attack come into play (like overtime pushes), but it's far too rare to base a hero's design on.

    So what turned out with Overwatch was that if you design a hero based on "defending" and not being able to take a straight fight, they end up garbage. As the community learned how to actually play, not just running around in quickplay playing team death match, these heroes became irrelevant.


    Torb fills the exact same role now. He's still a pseudo-DPS who in exchange has a turret compete. He still has an ult that is a powerful area denial tool. Exactly what it did before, though in a different way. The only thing he lost was being an armor vending machine, which was not unique, engaging, or strategic. Hardly a loss for the hero design.

    [–] Cozy Sunday’s Friendly_Fire -3 points ago in aww

    You're a guy, right? You've seen the statistics on violence, and the overwhelming difference between men and women? Clearly, due to the enormous amounts of violence human males commit (much more than pitbulls) it must be in their nature.

    Would you prefer to be euthanized for others safety or locked up for the rest of your life?

    [–] vegans shouldn’t drive Friendly_Fire -1 points ago in memes

    Smoking bees does not harm them, and while the bee keepers take some of the honey, they also provide them with safe protect homes and access to ample food. It's clearly a mutually beneficial relationship.

    [–] vegans shouldn’t drive Friendly_Fire 1 points ago in memes

    Not all vegans are against eating honey.

    That's why I said generally, because I know it's not universal. It seems from my experience it is the majority, however.

    I've also read debates whether "back-yard chicken eggs" would be vegan or not. I think that's a similar thread. Are you against causing any suffering for animals, or have you just decided that using anything produced by animals is bad, whether it involved harming them at all or not?

    [–] vegans shouldn’t drive Friendly_Fire 1 points ago in memes

    Vegans don't support the exploitation of animals. By eating honey, you are participating in the exploitation of bees (which are animals).

    This is a very weak deflection. You're trying to swap the ethical reasoning with the (flawed) principle that comes out of it. Why are vegans against the exploitation of animals, and not plants for instance? Let's try to keep this short, and recognize it's going to come down to suffering and harm to animals.

    Basically any reason you could come up with that "exploitation of animals is bad" doesn't apply to bees in the first place. An individual bee cannot suffer. The practice of bee keeping is very helpful for those hives, making it a clearly mutually beneficial relationship. There's simply no coherent path from the principles that drive veganism, to not consuming honey.

    The cause is as I said. People just simplified down a principle and are religiously apply it to all situations, regardless of whether it makes sense.

    [–] vegans shouldn’t drive Friendly_Fire 1 points ago in memes

    It's not "cognitive dissonance" to recognize nuance in both the world and ethics. It takes a child-like, black and white view of ethics to reason that honey is a problem.

    The core of veganism can be a coherent position, of course. If you think we shouldn't kill/harm animals, then it's certainly reasonable to say "that means more than just not eating them, but not using leather or other animal products that require killing/harming them".

    As I said, it seems most vegans take it too far. Honey is my go-to test. If you are against honey, it means you are not against harming or killing animals, but just a blind devotion to the "no animal products" commandment. Regardless if it's an animal that barely has a nervous system, and that bee-keeping is very beneficial for the species.

    [–] vegans shouldn’t drive Friendly_Fire 1 points ago in memes

    It’s as easy as saying “hey i’d rather sweeten this with apples instead of bee vomit”. Smoking them out of their hive and taking the food they made for themselves is kinda fucked up whether they can suffer or not anyways.

    I'm just going to skip down to this comment because it's more interesting. The idea that it is "fucked up" to take bee honey as if they have property rights we are violating or something. Bee keepers are beneficial for hives, and help sustain bee populations. They provide safe, protected homes with access to ample food for the bees.

    This is the extremism I was talking about. You have a mutually beneficial relationship between two species, no suffering, but you're still against it. Because in your puritanical drive to follow the principles of veganism, you've extended them to an irrational degree.

    [–] vegans shouldn’t drive Friendly_Fire -5 points ago in memes

    That statement might hold true for vegetarians, but vegans (generally) have taken the position to a ridiculous extreme. I mean honey? Really? If you have an issue with honey you've gone past "legitimate ethical considerations" and into "irrational religious-like zeal for avoiding animal products".

    [–] Could Amazon’s “New World” Be the Next Blockbuster MMO? Friendly_Fire 2 points ago in MMORPG

    "Sandbox" is a flag that the game won't be a low-quality single-player campaign you can do with other people so they call it an "MMO". I get 20 years ago instanced theme-park garbage was the cutting edge, but there's no reason to settle for that now.