Connection ErrorBad RequestThis page went staleSession ExpiredSign in requiredForbiddenNot FoundToo Many RequestsServer ErrorBad GatewayService UnavailableGateway TimeoutHTTP Version Not Supported
Session Expired
Your session has expired. Please log in to continue.
Sign in required
You need an account to do that. Sign in or create one — it only takes a minute.
This page went stale
Your security token was rejected, usually because the page sat open too long or you signed in elsewhere. Nothing was saved. Reload the page and try again.
Request Failed
We encountered an issue while processing your request.
Please check your internet connection and try again.
Error Details:
Share Link
Posts from Sacred Haven of DebaucheryAuto-translated
I will also address the last remaining unresolved point between us.
M: a parasitic, vile creature that feeds off Warlords. K: is this a case of someone being overly sensitive about Warlords, or is it just spreading negativity? (This is the first mention of the first and second points in our conversation; I didn't have any of this in my original post.) M: is this a case of someone being overly sensitive about Battlecraze, or is it just spreading negativity? (A counter-argument.) K: no, but you don't say anything other than "garbage" and "overly sensitive." (Distorting the facts, you said it yourself, and now you're getting upset about a similar response.) M: so, the post "is this a case of someone being overly sensitive about Warlords, or is it just spreading negativity?" belongs to me? (A counter-argument, a reminder.) K: I didn't respond to that; I responded to this (quotes reply number three, my first counter-argument in this text).
And what were you trying to say? That you responded to me not with a counter-argument using the same method, but "just like that," "in general," when you said, "you don't say anything other than 'garbage' and 'overly sensitive'?" How did Rhevny exaggerate?... "You write that in every other message"? Is that what you meant? You probably have proof, right? Rhevny didn't provide me with proof, and he wouldn't have been able to if he had tried, because he exaggerated.
“The last unresolved issue between us,” as I understand it, was the only core point of discussion for you. I already wrote about this: Князь_OMEGA
Ignoring what I write about various strategies, campaigns, and so on, you get upset about the phrase with the word “batthurt” and the assumption that you either haven’t played the game or have played it little.
In your favorite post 40080, I asked what your post meant; you could have answered it however you wanted. Instead, in post 40081, you decided to ask me the same question (to which I gave a normal answer in the next post 40082), fairly returning it, but then you yourself answered it by writing that my post is an "unsubstantiated batthurt/dumping of garbage." If you, who understands the nuances of "metaphors" and "normal discussions," cannot see the difference between my post and yours, and why I responded to your last sentence so sharply, then I doubt your ability to engage in normal arguments.
I have answered the question that bothered you so much.
It's hard to find a game that's more boring in terms of gameplay. I've tried to play it many times, and each time I'd fall asleep at the keyboard with square marks imprinted on my face. Build a base, build units, kill everyone. This was often the case, for example, in C&C, but in C&C, there's high-tech futurism, spiced up with a certain plot, map design, and engaging gameplay. This was the case in the Age of Empires, but in the Age of Empires, there were historical, epic battles with huge, meticulously crafted maps, allowing you to role-play as great figures of the past. This was the case, for example, in Warcraft III, but new fans praise it for its plot, characters, and the atmosphere of the universe. This was the case in Dawn of War, but the fanboys still get excited just from the possibility of playing a tabletop game on a computer with miniatures wearing shoulder pads in a grimdark future with titanic robots, chainswords, and spaceship-cathedrals. This was the case in StarCraft, for example, but even there, there are enough characters, there's a plot, and the three factions are meticulously developed and differ in everything.
But what does Battlecry have? It has build a base, build units, kill everyone. The only bone for a reasonable person is the ability to level up a hero. The second bone, for the masses, is a million races, consisting of one model with different skins and stats. A hundred elves! Two hundred humans! A race of minotaurs. A minotaur worker, a minotaur warrior, a minotaur archer, a minotaur riding a minotaur. "Sir, scouts have detected a band of minotaurs nearby!" says the scout during the briefing. Okay, I'll send a squad of Nidhogg warriors to meet them. Regular dwarves, dark dwarves. Dark humans. Light humans. Dark elves, light elves. Forest elves. Jelly elves. High elves. Low elves. "Twenty-eight character classes" is written on Wikipedia. I think on the boxes with the disk, "completely in Russian from Seventh Wolf," they wrote the same thing: a hundred races, two hundred classes, three hundred spells! Immerse yourself in a mysterious world full of dangers and defeat your enemies! Kill enemies, even yourself! There are five missions in the game? More than four huge worlds!
A completely soulless, vile piece of garbage, parasitizing on the original "Warlords," which had plenty of mythical creatures, but there wasn't such mass-produced crap.
This is what the argument started with, guys! Lokki didn't like Battlecry because THAT WAS the case, blah blah, he doesn't like the gameplay. It's a matter of taste. He just expressed it in an overly butthurt way and, as he likes to do, as if it were the truth.
Tomorrow holds no promises Except the ones we've made
Actually, you're having a perfectly normal discussion, as you're sticking to the chosen topic.
Really? The game stopped being discussed after the first two posts, and then it turned into "you said this," "no, I said that," "no, it's this," and so on. That's why I didn't want to continue the "discussion." By the way, going back a few pages, thanks for reminding me about Battlecry – I downloaded it and am playing it a bit.
it was the only core of the discussion for you I doubt your ability to have a normal argument
And you keep going. You can't have a discussion in a neutral tone - so you try to attack my personality, okay.
but you answered it yourself, writing that my post was an "unsubstantiated rant/a pile of crap"
The imprint of my own palm is forever etched on my face. I wasn't talking about your post with some descriptions of units and other fanboy fluff, but about your phrase about ranting and crap, about the fact that you considered it a solid argument. I guess I overestimated you. Maybe I should have put it in quotes or used bold text, just like "there are five missions in the game," just like "one hundred races, two hundred classes," just like "would you like to fight with knives?", just like "you're obsessed with orcs," just like "narcissist." Easy mode for the little ones. Holy Emperor, you can't tell what was said and what it refers to, and you build your entire further conversation on that basis. Oh my God. Well, this will be a lesson for me.
You are ignoring the condition again. If you don't see the difference between my post and yours, and why I responded to your last sentence so sharply, then I doubt your ability to have a normal discussion.
That is, you are highlighting only what offends you, without seeing the conditions.
I wasn't talking about your post with descriptions of units and other fanboy stuff, but about your phrase about being upset and throwing garbage.
Yes, but for some reason, after quoting that phrase, you didn't say that it was a throw of garbage. Instead, when summarizing my entire response, you wrote exactly that, so I concluded that you weren't talking about the specific phrase, but about the entire post.
That's it. I offered to drop it twice. Now I'm dropping it.
Смысла нет, но вы держитесь там. Удачи, здоровья, хорошего настроения! И пока в кармане пачка милкиуэйев - значит все не так уж плохо на сегодняшний день
Really? The discussion about the game stopped after the first two posts, and then it turned into "you said this," "no, I said that," "no, it's this," and so on. That's why I didn't want to continue the "discussion."
This is a clarification of the argument and the issue of personal attacks. I meant that they at least didn't switch from discussing the game to discussing game journalists, from that to Nomad, from Nomad to Lurk, and so on, as often happens in similar arguments.
Where do we go? Where do we end up when we save the world?
I didn't know about Nomad until I visited Lurk ;) And I only started occasionally checking Lurk around April. Before that, I hadn't been there even once.
Is there going to be any mafia-style gameplay here? I saw something about the 20th in the thread; does that mean the sign-up will open then?
I didn't even notice this post from Arandor. In principle, I've already submitted everything and could run it, although right now I'd rather be a player than a host.
Arandor
kcfgogbfalgfl