Recent posts by Ryan002 on Kongregate

Flag Post

Topic: General Tyrant Discussion / Suggestions

Bounty Hunters. Units that generate small amounts of gold when they destroy other units. :)

 
Flag Post

Topic: General Gaming / One Man's War

I know most people think of massive battles when it comes to historical wargames, but just for once, what I’d like to see is an RPG that, as much as possible, examines the experiences of the average soldier.

A lot of games focus on squads, companies, etc. but after a while they tend to look the same. What would be really different would be an RPG that examines how an exhausted GI pushes an AT gun up an ice slicked hill, or how he copes with M1 thumb after failing a weapons check.

What about a sophisticated background system, factoring in things like susceptibility to night blindness, or the ache in the ankle from an old fracture? Or even being easily stressed by social conflict (making the handling of officers and fellow soldiers tougher than actual combat).

Would it also be impossible to examine the emotional and social background of a character more? The scoring system need not focus purely on military objectives; it could perhaps track how the soldier maintains ties with his buddies or his family back home.

Getting a letter telling him his fiance is dumping him, or that his bother died in an accident, should profoundly affect someone in the field. And how about illnesses, like gangrene or even a simple flu?

I don’t believe it’s impossible to build an RPG system that focuses on these aspects instead of just…killing things by the dozen. XPs can be awarded for objectives, instead of killing enemies. Properly done, a game like that could be fun even if the character never actually enters combat.

 
Flag Post

Topic: Serious Discussion / My English teachers

When you say you are “losing your English” are you referring specifically to:

1) The loss of your accent or

2) An actual decline in your vocabulary range, coupled with increasingly habitual grammatical errors or

3) Increasingly habitual use of Spanglish or words from other Creole languages (local slang / dialect, etc.)

The three are quite different. If you are worried about the loss of your accent, I’d say don’t worry about it. It will come back to you very quickly. Losing your accent is like getting a suntan because you’ve moved to the tropics. It’s your immediate environment that causes it. There are non-native English speakers who wish they could lose theirs, they’ll tell you how difficult it really is. A heavy accent is not indicative of poor English.

If the situation is (2) or (3), you are right, your English is getting worse. Inform your parents. What I would suggest is that you make a habit of keeping a blog or journal. Write in as formal a style as you are able and subject it to public scrutiny. Write at least one essay every day and let it be checked by someone proficient in English.

One very certain way to tell if you are getting worse is to look at the length of your sentences. Good command of English manifests in short, terse sentences. If you are getting wordy, your vocabulary is probably degenerating (it’s a common misconception that a huge vocabulary results in longer sentences).

There is a big differance between learning a language as a native tounge, and learning it in a formal sense. Don’t assume that, because your teachers are not native speakers, they are worse at it.

 
Flag Post

Topic: Serious Discussion / World War II

If they were the ones who had the bomb, they would have dropped it on you without a moment’s hesitation.

 
Flag Post

Topic: Serious Discussion / should homosexuals be allowed in the military?

There was a gay person in my unit. As far as I recall, he was no more or less competent than any other straight soldier. When you eat across from the guy, crawl through the mud with him, get cramped in the back of a C-130 for hours with him and sleep, curse, skive, stand sentry duty etc. with the guy it really stops to matter.

As for the personal comfort of others, or about relationships, I’d say its a very poorly disciplined military that can’t handle such issues. People who cannot follow orders and cannot maintain professional behaviour should not be in the military at all. Anyone who cannot handle that much should not be near multi-million dollar weaponry, or be entrusted with the security of their country.

 
Flag Post

Topic: Serious Discussion / Article claims "Political Correctness" led to global crisis

One thing does occur to me though. Given that minority groups are credit risks, the refusal to extend credit to them traps them in a vicious cycle. Home ownership is a step on the road to financial well-being. Minority groups who don’t qualify for loans, and who can’t enter the market on an equal footing, end up using less than orthodox methods of acquring what they need. Predictably, these unstable methods eventually fall apart, thus reinforcing their place as credit risks.

 
Flag Post

Topic: Serious Discussion / Article claims "Political Correctness" led to global crisis

In the Stratis Times today there is an article by a former professor of economics from the London School of Economics. E.J. Mishan is also the author of Cost-Beneft Analysis and The Costs of Economic Growth, as well as some other books. He wrote the following:

“Just what caused the economic downturn? There is a widespread but vague belief that it was the colossal sums that financial institutions invested in sub-prime mortgaes created chiefly in the United States.

My own understanding, however, is that the cause can be traced to the pressures of “poltiical correctness” in America: Financial institution, habitually reluctant to take the risks involved in lending to minorities – in particular blacks and Hispanics – were charged with racial discrimination. they came under pressure to prove their enlightened credentials by lending to minorities on equal terms. Gradually succumbing to such pressure, they upgraded the creditworthiness of minorities. Soon, hundreds of thousands of houses were being built as mortgage lenders became emboldened to lend 90 percent or more of the purchase price of houses sold to minorities, whose employment prospects were uncertain and whose incomes were relatively low."

The entire article is on page A 18 of the Straits Times Review & Forum (17th March 2009).

Well, I don’t live in America, but the assertion catches me off guard. This is the first time I have heard the accusation being made. There are no references to specific cases given, but I wonder if those of you living in America can shed some light on this. Exactly how accurate are Mishan’s statements?

 
Flag Post

Topic: Serious Discussion / Evolution vs. Creation

I’m Catholic.

In Genesis, God creates the sun after he says “Let there be light”.

This doesn’t mean I don’t believe the sun isn’t a source of light.

In the Book of Samuel, King Saul hires a necromancer to summon the ghost of a dead prophet.

I don’t believe speaking to the dead is literally possible.

I could mention a lot of other things I don’t believe possible in a literal sense, that are in the Bible. But really, I’m not going to make a list, and simplfy this drastically by saying I’m all for evolution and it doesn’t conflict with my religion. Because I understand the concept of a metaphor.

 
Flag Post

Topic: Serious Discussion / I knew the Girl Scouts were corrupt! (GSR!)

Did you know that the Girl Guides publish a book titled Whippings and Lashings? Look it up. It’s right up there with Scouts in Bondage. (No really, google it. I jest you not).

 
Flag Post

Topic: Serious Discussion / Bombs or Banks?

Purely overused stereotypes? This is a negative quality, that an argument may resort to stereotypes for practicality?

“…though they suffer the same bereavement, women are wounded more deeply than men, savage peoples more deeply than the peaceful and civilized, the educated, than the uneducated”.

Is the Consolation then a lesser product on the basis of its crass stereotyping? Venture into your library and burn the works of Seneca. Reach out and dump Conrad into the trash, (Heart of Darkness is choked with generalizations), rip out the pages of The Sign of Four, Arthur Conan Doyle’s arguments on rationalism and logic are disqualified by racial profiling. Heap scorn upon Hawthorne for his generalization of the upper middle class (he uses stereotypes similar to mine), laugh off the works of Rosseau (noble savage indeed, how we can we generalize all “primitive” persons), pull down the writings of Orwell and Huxley (how dare they stereotype as they do in Animal Farm or Brave New World!) Smash upon the mantelpiece those carefully assembled works of Balzac, and let join the list Ibsen, Strindberg, Shakespeare (remember Shylock?) and lets lend merit only based on the total lack of generalization. Replace Radcliffe with Reynolds and turn everything into an impossibly ambiguous, completely inoffensive statement.

I refuse to share in the effort however.

(There’s your argumentation by force. Sort of. If I could do that kind of thing I would have passed an exam sometime you know :p )

 
Flag Post

Topic: Serious Discussion / Bombs or Banks?

You know what…

Enough with this nonsense about nuclear war. I know it sounds shallow, but after a lot of careful contemplation, I’ve come to realize that we shouldn’t really care much. Because it makes very little difference on an individual basis.

In the event of these global catastrophes, we’d all die, yes. However, and this is a big “however”, we’re pretty much capable of dying in road accidents, contracting terminal illnesses, etc. anyway. So what difference, really, does it make whether we die from nuclear fallout or from an unlucky accident involving a vending machine, a lack of quarters and a loose power cord? Pollution might cause the world to end but how different is this, really, from me dying of some lazy @#$% chucking his TV out the 2nd floor window and lodging a huge box of wires in my skull?

I’d further highlight that the vast majority of deaths do not, in fact, come from nuclear war or pollution (well maybe in a very long and indirect way for the latter) but from RSAs (Really Stupid Accidents). If there is any sort of WMD that I am truly worried about, its RSAs, which we really can’t get rid off no matter how many security council resolutions are passed. I am willing to bet more than anything that Nissan and Ford have produced more machines which have killed people than Dassault or Steyr. Have you seen the number of deaths from road related RSAs? I would have better chances with the 29th on the shores of Normandy than I would out on the road everyday, so don’t talk to me about the threat of nuclear holocaust (which is imaginary) when I have the threat of Mr. Quek who backs out his driveway at 450 mph (which is real) whenever I walk by.

Now some people are going to point out that in one instance (RSA), it would mean only the death of a scattered few or an individual, such as myself, as opposed to the deaths of millions of others. Obviously, my life doesn’t count for that much. (Well gee, thanks for the ego boost there you @$$wipe) Now you may be right, but the thing is, it doesn’t change how its not relevant to me. Does that sound cocky and vain? Well okay, maybe a little.

All I’m saying is that it doesn’t make a difference to me whether I die from a RSA or a mushroom cloud, both are just unfortunate incidents. It just doesn’t matter on a personal level. If my worrying about it could change it, I’d gnaw my fingernails till my teeth go blunt, I really would.

But getting paranoid about it doesn’t help does it? Remember the 80’s?

All these nuclear protesters are making me feel bad because they’re suggesting I should feel bad. Really, it’s not the measure of their affliction that makes them feel bad, just their will to feel bad about it. What sort of perverse, collective, artificial sadness and rage is this? There’s just something deeply off putting about nuclear protest groups.

I don’t have any urge to attack nuclear physicists or politicians despite their nuclear bombs. I’d rather take a 2×4 to a banker any day. If you people in these nuclear protest groups had the right idea, you’d switch your targets to the real threat: those plastic, no-personality yuppie bankers whose idea of wit and charm is to point at their expensive car and live under the disgusting impression that all partners are bought (only theirs are, but try telling them, they’ll never understand it).

A nuclear physicist who talks to me about the power of the atom, the consequences of fallout, and is torn everyday by the terrible necessity of his work? I could listen for hours and empathize.

But some yuppie who reduces all relationships to the level of financial transactions and can’t talk about anything other than share prices? Well his parents should be ashamed, and the only thing that stops me from strangling him with his tie is effective local law enforcement.

Which allows me to conclude by saying that if you’re a banker, I’d rather risk dying in a nuclear war than hanging around with you. And most of your other fake friends would too. So get a life; change your profession.

And don’t expect to see my agreeing with any anti-nuclear lobbyists anytime soon. You people freak me out.

 
Flag Post

Topic: Serious Discussion / What is your goal in life?

To live in such a way that, if I were to drop dead right now, the only sorrow and regret would be amongst the people who knew me.

(Which is a nice phrase somewhat ruined by the fact that the dead may not be able to feel sorrow and regret anyway, thus rendering invalid the suggestion that I lived well, but if I were any good as a writer my novels would be on your shelf. Oh well).

 
Flag Post

Topic: General Gaming / Best Pioneers

I’ve been thinking a lot lately about some forgotten companies that were pioneers in the gaming industry. Those of you not gaming in the 80’s or before probably won’t know these, but as for those of you who are, you’ll remember them I’m sure. So share a bit about which one was tops for you, and why. (Not listed in any order)

1) Bullfrog (Syndicate, Populous, Dungeon Keeper)

2) Origins (Wing Commander series)

3) Lucasarts (X-Wing, Secret of Monkey Island, Day of the Tentacle) <— How could you not know this company if you had a computer in the 80’s?!

4) Sierra (Police Quest, Space Quest, Quest for Glory)<—Ditto!

5) SSI (Eye of the Beholder, Champions of Kryyn)

6) Infogrammes (Alone in the Dark series)

7) Delphine (Future Wars, Another World, Flashback)

8) Accolade (Double Dragon, Battle Isle, Waxworks)

9) New World Computing (Might and Magic series)

10) Legend Entertainment (Spellcasting 101, Eric the Unready, Star Control)

 
Flag Post

Topic: Serious Discussion / On this list?

http://www.tibet.com/Resolution/index.html

This is a good compilation of noteworthy resolutions toward Tibet by many international communities.

Just yesterday China declared a “People’s War” on Tibet, and given a deadline about 30 mins from the time I write this for protestors to disperse. Troops are already marshalled and over the past few months, police have been turning on monks and unarmed protestors. Some protestors have already been dragged off, their whereabouts remain unknown.

 
Flag Post

Topic: Serious Discussion / On this list?

Bangladesh, Bhutan, Botswana, Burundi, China, Congo, Cuba, India, Indonesia, Madagascar, Morocco, Nepal, Niger, Nigeria, Pakistan, Peru, Qatar, Russian Federation, Sri Lanka, Sudan, Venezuela and Zambia.

Is your country on this list?

No offence to you personally, but I hate your government for supporting the no-action motion against China, especially when people in Tibet are being hauled off to concentration camps. Tonight at midnight, when the deadline is crossed, Chinese troops will massacre every protestor in sight, and probably many others who are not. Entire families will vanish and never be seen again, and monasteries that are centuries old will be pillaged and burnt to the ground.

It is my opinion that your governments are spineless, irresponsible and revolting. The next time any one of your hypocritical politicians even utters a word about Iraq, I intend to throw the nearest, sharpest object I can find at them. Please send to your respective officials my worst regards, and I sincerely hope they all slowly bleed to death in a ditch somewhere. In the event that you do not support your country’s actions, please try to help by writing letters, attending rallies or perhaps systematically setting fire to the policy makers.

Thank you, and may every member of the CCP burn in hell. I hope the Olympic Games in that polluted sewer they call a city are a dismal failure and boycotted by every decent athlete.

 
Flag Post

Topic: Serious Discussion / If you were a terrorist how would you attack?

It depends on what sort of terrorist I am. For religious extremists, gaining popular support is secondary to simply killing the enemy. For political extremists, gaining status as freedom fighter rather than terrorist is of prime importance. The latter, like the Viet Cong, operate largely on home ground. The former will operate more often on foreign soil.

The trick is to stay mobile and hit in many places simultaneously. I’d plant IEDs in several scattered locations then set them all off at once. When the authorities are scattered, I have time to snipe and move, and escape before I’m cornered. Transport systems like trains stops and bus depots are the best, since its easy to predict when they will be busy. This also has the effect of damaging the transport infrastructure. Another good spot will be near busy road junctions, where bombs can be timed to go off at the red light, and may cause collateral damage through panicked drivers as well. Since bombs can be remotely detonated, I can probably snipe at civilians while they go off, the blasts covering detection of my shots for a few minutes. As an added bonus, people who try to tend to the wounded are usually stationary, providing easy targets. I’d plant two sets of bombs, the second set timed to go off about 15 minutes after the first. This will catch the paramedics and police officers in the second blast, after they arrive to help.

 
Flag Post

Topic: Serious Discussion / The Earth is Flat

You have got to see this…

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wppjYDj9JUc

 
Flag Post

Topic: Serious Discussion / Homosexuality; A Choice, or a Trait?

Kyriva, there’s really no way to give an answer as it varies between each individual. If I reverse the situation, deciding to become homosexual despite being on an innate level heterosexual, I would give myself some very slim odds. But I’d still assume some possibility. I will emphasise however that I believe it is unnatural for a gay person to condition himself to be straight. However, I also believe that in individuals who truly show the desire to fight what they are, the potential exists to defy their nature. Anorexics clearly demonstrate the ability to override the instinct for self-preservation, which is supposedly even stronger than the sex drive. I suppose this makes my answer to the question (as to whether is a trait or a choice) “mostly a trait”. Its my stubborn insistence on a degree of free will that stops me ever admitting anything is fixed in the psyche.

 
Flag Post

Topic: General Gaming / Games Warning List

K, I spent a lot of money on some really horrible PC games lately so here’s a friendly warning in case you are eyeing the same titles.

1) Supreme Commander
2) Theatre of War
3) Hellgate London

S’all.

 
Flag Post

Topic: Serious Discussion / Homosexuality; A Choice, or a Trait?

I think its both a choice and a trait. Some people really are wired that way. They can choose to live with it, or fight against it. Part of being human is always knowing we can try to be what we are not. Neither option, going with it or fighting it, is particularly relevant imo. As long as its not hurting me, they can do what they like.

 
Flag Post

Topic: Serious Discussion / what country will be the next to declare full-scale war?

You want my bet? China. And I don’t care where my anscestors hail from I will be the first on the front lines against them.

 
Flag Post

Topic: Serious Discussion / Satan!

I’m sorry, but at what point did we agree, at any rate, that it is always absolutely wrong to kill?

 
Flag Post

Topic: Serious Discussion / what country will be the next to declare full-scale war?

Who the hell would Siberia want to fight with? And for what?

 
Flag Post

Topic: Serious Discussion / "That's Gay"

I wouldn’t be so sure about that oddball. I’m fairly confident that people don’t choose to be gay, a pedophile or a rapist simply because they prefer the lifestyle. That’s a little like saying obese people are that way because they actually enjoy being in that state. It’s more than a little over the top.

Anyway, I’ve said before that no two Christians are alike and I’m going to go ahead and disagree with you there oddball. The gays who choose to believe they are Christian have as much right to do so as you have the right to feel offended about it. There are many different interpretations of Christianity, however much any denomination may want to assert that theirs is the sole, correct version.

That said, I think that when people say “that’s gay” they don’t deliberately mean to imply that gay is bad, any more than a person who exclaims “Jesus Christ” actually means for Jesus to hear his prayer, or someone saying “f*** you” means to express sexual desire. Its probably as instinctive as a shout of pain when we rip our toenail on a brick or walk into a lamp post.

Admittedly though, I don’t hear gay people yelling “that’s hetero”…so maybe even if it is unintentional it indicates a latent prejudice.

 
Flag Post

Topic: Serious Discussion / Satan!

I know all Satanists aern’t law breaking rebels. In fact, I’d expect most of them to be even more restricted and law abiding than most Christians. There is very little differance between a strait jacketed middle class capitalist and a serious satanist. (The less serious ones, the kids who just like the music and the decadence, are smart enough to eventually outgrow it and turn to greater Messiahs like Hendrix). My entire complaint against satanism, if you had carefully read my post, should be obvious. My point is that satanism is just as restrictive and hidebound as any other religion. A satanist (of the LaVeyan sort) is far more controlled and tempered than, say, a terrorist who is willing to cause massive chaos in the name of her faith. (And don’t say that’s “good”, because really, you’re not supposed to be “good”). LaVey’s ambling rants about not sacrificing animals and, ironically, justice, amounts to nothing more than a sentimental New Age alternative (but stiffer, since the rituals are codified and written down). Its like a sort of diluted, burgeoise version of Wicca. Dabbling in designer darkness, as Pratchett would put it.

Compare LaVey’s “God is dead” essay in the Satanic Bible to Nietzche’s Zarathusthra, or even to Milton’s Paradise Lost. It will become blatantly obvious that LaVey did not escape, but tightened, the trap he believed he was in.