battlewraith

Lol yeah ok. I was fairly frequently verbally berated for attacking people in pvp zones. The funniest one was when I was solo on a brute against a team of eight and they said they were going to petition me for ganking.

Pvp in this game is pretty much deathmatch. The simple objective is to kill other players, which means the most important aspect of the engagement is damage spam. And this leads to a situation where skill in an encounter boils down to finding and locking on to a target with the rest of the team, firing simultaneously, and then cycling on to the next target as quickly as possible while evading any incoming spike launched at you. It's like having several people hammering away at the same whack-a-mole table. There's teamwork and coordination in pve but it's nothing like this sort of activity. What this game needed was some sort of goal oriented pvp. The closest it got was base raids which didn't last very long and wasn't a great example of the idea. I played Battleborn while it was around and there was a popular pvp mode called Incursion. Something like this is what I feel coh needed: There were 2 teams of 5. Each team had a base on one side of the map with a large shielded sentinel robot. At the start of the match, the bases would start manufacturing little minion robots. Left to their own devices, these robots would cross to the other team's base and attack the enemy sentinel. These robots did a lot more damage to the sentinel robot's shields than player attacks. Players would level up during the match by getting xp from destroying enemy players and minion bots. They could also fight for shards that appeared in order to buy turrets, as well as freeing monster npcs that could help taking down the enemy sentinel. The match was over when a sentinel was destroyed or the match timer ran out. If the time ran out, then the game scored your team's overall performance--how many minions did you kill, how many players did you defeat, how many things did you build, etc. Not just one metric. I think a scenario like that would've been awesome for coh, different powersets and ATs would've offered great strategic variety to the match. And it would've appealed to a wider variety of players and playstyles.

The arguments that there is pve content in the pvp zones are equivocating two senses of the phrase "pve". Yes, if you are fighting an npc in a pvp zone there is truth to the description that you are doing player versus environment. Beyond that basic description, the statement is false. While in the zone you are flagged for pvp. The mechanics of the pvp zone differ from the mechanics of pve areas of the game. And the purpose and design of the zone is to facilitate pvp encounters. There is also the strawman being presented here that zone pvp does not also encompass interactions with npcs. The infamous Twixt used to teleport people into clusters of npcs in order to kill them. One way to get rid of something like rad infection used to be jumping into a cluster of npcs and aggroing them onto the enemy player.

Pvp mechanics are applied to your character whether or not anyone else is in the zone, along with the countdown that indicates when you are vulnerable to attack from other players. You know...because it's a pvp zone.

There are tons of things in the game that are not controlled by players, whether in pvp or not. This includes fundamentals like the game engine itself and the various assets that constitute the world. So if we followed this rich vein of logic to its conclusion, pvp would be something like floating in an existential void and using the power of your imagination to pew pew some abstract object that would represent another player,

The lore badge is not in the zone. The plaque is. Everything in the pvp zone IS automatically pvp content. You can split hairs all day, it doesn't change anything.

This is a suggestion thread. I don't think the intent was to give you a platform to complain about 90% of a group of players being childish pricks and trolls, whether you believe that to be true or not. I suggest you stick to the topic. He was referencing open world pvp in other games. This game does not have open world pvp. I suggest he stick to the topic as well. I was basically asking him what he hopes to accomplish with his sweeping generalizations about the overwhelming majority of a certain kind of player. I think that's pretty obviously a bad road to go down.

That hasn't been my experience in other games. And this game doesn't have open-world pvp. So are you disparaging other types of players in order to start a flame war or what?

Anyone that is interested in getting these rewards should just be happy that, given the current state of the game, its trivially easy. You were supposed to face the risk of fighting other players. That risk is mostly absent now. If the devs were going to do anything regarding pvp zones, it should be something to benefit players who are actually looking to pvp. Not soothing the anxiety of people who want it to be even easier to get the goodies.

I think that's just a weird feeling you have. I used to duo with my friend's Inv/Em tank in zones back then. The thing that made EM a good choice for pvp was burst damage, not stun. Slotting for stun would've been counterproductive.

This is the best Batman film imo. It's very well crafted to make the idea of Batman and what he does grounded in reality and plausible. It has some superhero action movie bits but the majority of it is like a suspense drama. He actually does detective work. He's also relatively new at it and makes mistakes. I wasn't too thrilled based on the trailers but I'm really pleasantly surprised with this one.

Combined with those other responses it sounds like gatekeeping.

Doesn't /jranger have a negative connotation? I thought it was akin to saying "no that's a stupid idea." If someone asks a factual question--"can I use a purple enhancement at lvl 2?" You don't type jranger. Or do you?

I already got some fanart for that baby!:

Lol oh no. You don't sound outraged at all. Stop your tantrum long enough to follow the script. He asked me if I would cast it that way. I am not Disney. It's a hypothetical question. Sorry to hear about the traumas you've suffered at the hands of Brie Larson and the like. Get some therapy. mmmmmkkthxbai

Absolutely there are non Asgardians residing in Asgard. I'm not disputing that. The point is that Heimdall and Valkyrie are two white Asgardian characters from the comics who were cast as other ethnicities in the MCU. I'm not talking about non Asgardian residents of Asgard. You keep glossing this over. What specifically about the canon comic source material justifies the casting of Idris Elba as Heimdall or Tessa Thompson as Valkyrie? They were both native Asgardians in the comics--meaning members of the caucasian Asgardian species. That's canon. Hold on there. Is that your actual logic? It makes absolutely no sense. This is what I'm getting: Kirby created a race of white gods. He also had some non white people from other races living with them. Guess I'm fine doing some colorblind casting of a couple of these white gods. Tolkien created a race of white elves. He also had some non white people from other races living with them. Is it ok to colorblind cast a couple characters--oh hell no! That is a double standard. Would I cast non-blacks as natives of Wakanda? Maybe. Depends on the script. There are reasonable narrative justifications for some additional diversity in Wakanda, particularly with the events of Endgame and the current focus on the multiverse.

The furred cap looks Mongolian. The horns look Norse. The strappy skirt bits look Roman. The cowl looks European. Boots are superhero. Big blobby mace and bracer with dagger on it --who knows. Real abundantly clear. Here's another image: But if I'm following your logic here--since Kirby included what you take to be a non white character residing in Asgard then the MCU's inclusive casting is alright. Idris Elba as Heimdall works because not everyone who lives in Asgard is white. Is that correct? If so, that is the weirdest flimsiest justification for a non traditional casting I've ever heard. If you were to apply this rationale consistently to other properties then the casting in ROP shouldn't be a problem. Middle Earth has non whites in it. Therefore some casting of elves and dwarves as non white should be fine. Otherwise there's a double standard.

Were these men shown to be consistently in the employ of Morgoth or Sauron in Middle Earth? He is not only a literary critic, he was a member of Tolkien's literary society along with people like C.S. Lewis. The interview I quoted literally comments on his anxiety over the authenticity of the work. I don't feel the need to pursue this further. If you want to go further with it, go where I told you. Also do more reading on issues related to translation and publication in general. Except that Hogun is not Asian. His lands and people were destroyed. He has strength and durability typical of the people of Asgard so he's not human. The only thing Asian about him is the headgear which is reminiscent of something Mongolian. And maybe the mustache which varies from 70s pornstar to fu manchu depending on who's drawing him. His skintone in the comics is the same as Thor's. People decided to cast Hogun with actors of Asian descent and you're incorporating that into your understanding of the character. Based on that image alone, I'd cast Dan Severn to play Hogun. And you completely dodged the casting of Heimdall, who is supposed to be Sif's brother.

I said that Kirby did not reimagine Asgardians as black or Asian. What does Hogun, who is not Asgardian, have to do with anything? The Asgardian people. Not the residents of Asgard. This is so tedious and petty man, Seriously.

That's not what I said. I said To the extent that they relate to the people of Middle Earth, they are antagonists. I believe the rundown I cited supports this. It's not a question of accuracy. It relates to authorial intent. Tolkien had published works and then he had a plethora of notes, correspondences, related articles, etc. NerdoftheRings appears to take all of these things as straightup canon. I already said where I was getting that. I'm not going to start posting sections of Tolkien criticism here, dig for yourself. If I had read the Christopher Tolkien first, I wouldn't have even referenced anyone else because that interview perfectly sums up the point I was trying to get across. J.R.R. Tolkien described Christopher as his chief critic and collaborator. I went over the challenges of publishing the Silmarillion, and Christopher Tolkien's feelings about it. The point is that the guy closest to Tolkien, who was in charge of editing and interpreting the work, had reservations about the published work because he had to inject himself into it. It is not, strictly speaking, Tolkien's work. There are even living authors who feel that their works are significantly changed through the course of translation and editing. That's why you have don't just have a single translation or edit of classic texts.

Woooosh! Another point goes sailing majestically over your head. Did you have the same outrage over the MCU Thor movies? Based on what I've seen so far, it looks like that is the closest parallel to what Rings of Power is doing in terms of casting. Norse mythology doesn't indicate that there are black or Asian Asgardians. Kirby's comic book imagining doesn't either. I don't know what the reason was behind this casting. But all that mattered in the end was that they were good movies with good performances. There is a cottage industry of outrage peddlers on youtube and social media. Algorithms on sites like Facebook and youtube have been shown to favor controversy in terms of searches, etc. because it drives traffic. So yeah, you can show an abundance of rage over this issue, including the cancel-culturish drive to downvote the trailers and promotional materials. I'll wait until September when the thing actually airs to try to gauge the general reaction.

You should know, I answered basically the same question back on Wednesday.

You should read that interview with Christopher Tolkien I posted. He hated the Jackson movies and said they eviscerated his father's work. When given the opportunity, he would not meet with Jackson. This was the foremost authority on respecting the source material. I've been over this again and again in this thread--Jackson made significant changes to the story in order to make it entertaining and appealing to his audience. It's arbitrary and hypocritical to across the board say that similar changes cannot be made in another derivative work. Execution matters. If it's done well, it will be a success. If not, it will fail. Even if it fails it might draw in new fans to the series. To give non white actors an opportunity to take part in the project. To signal to fans that there is diversity in this world--rather than waiting on some hypothetical epic concerning the easterlings or the Haradrim that probably nobody is thinking of doing. To cater to people that would like to see a few people that look like them. We've been over this. Hearing reasons like this again is not going to sway you if it hasn't already. That has to do with your politics as much as the showrunners. People huh? Who are these people? You're not just griping about what you want are you? Luminara's post from Friday about adaptions and their relation to source material was very eloquently stated. If that didn't get through to you, nothing I say is likely to either.

I honestly don't know how you can ignore what's staring you right in the face. These elves are, as you say, dark because they had not seen the light of the blessed realms. They weren't just unwilling to take the journey west, They ignored the call to do so. This doesn't mean they were evil, but it is absolutely indicative of a moral failing in the context of the spirituality of this world: they were not following the dictates of the higher powers. Now, aside from that we know next to nothing about them. So casting a non-white ethnicity as a dark elf in a derivative work would be bad because.................................................why? I was going off of the Silmarillion wikipedia entry. If you dig through their citations there are some interesting sources. The most relevant one to this discussion is probably a rare interview that Christopher Tolkien gave the French magazine Le Monde. https://web.archive.org/web/20170423160837/https://www.worldcrunch.com/culture-society/my-father039s-quotevisceratedquot-work-son-of-hobbit-scribe-jrr-tolkien-finally-speaks-out When Tolkien died, Christopher received his papers--70 boxes, each stuffed with thousands of handwritten pages. Hardly anything numbered or dated. Even worse, to protect the original documents the son worked from photocopies, which made dating things even more difficult. In the article, Christopher describes himself as a historian and interpreter of the work. He had this to say about the Silmarillion: First in England, then in France, he reassembled the parts of The Silmarillion, making it more coherent, added padding here and there, and published the book in 1977, with some remorse. "Right away I thought that the book was good, but a little false, in the sense that I had had to invent some passages," he explains. At the time, he even had a worrying dream. "I was in my father's office at Oxford. He came in and started looking for something with great anxiety. Then I realized in horror that it was The Silmarillion, and I was terrified at the thought that he would discover what I had done."