alanschu

Yes the Nartwark has rejoined us. All hail the Unity.

Errr, not necessarily. If you can cast 5 spells in 10 seconds that each do 1000 damage, you do 5k damage or 500 dps. If you can cast 2 spells in 10 seconds that each do 8000 damage, you do 16k damage or 800 dps.

I've never heard of that, but I don't know why Blizzard is tying it to LAN, since they could just, y'know, fix b.net instead. I'm not privy to either codebase, so I can only make assumptions for why they wouldn't choose to, y'know, fix battle.net instead. Perhaps they see this as a cheaper overall solution (including lost sales for those that are upset about it).

I could see it. A sort of "all sales are final" from the weapons dealer. I imagine that's pretty much the way it is in real life too haha. Not that I have spoken with weapons dealers >.>

If this is the case then I roll my eyes a bit less at the anti-piracy motives.

Dalish

Wow I missed a lot of lore type conversations!!!

Heh, something happened in that trailer I didn't experience in my playthrough!! (Loads Human Noble origin again)

Just because you did stuff in the heat of the moment, doesn't make you a hypocrite for telling me otherwise right now. Perhaps well experienced

I'm open to suggestions haha. Walsingham's additional idea seems complicated to put into effect.

It's a SpikeTV show, they're going to find anyone that will talk about stuff that makes for good entertainment. Especially if it's good rugged tough-guy man entertainment. If he was the only person out of 1000 that felt that way, they'd still put him on the show. This is the same show that polls women in various countries how likely they are to perform various sexual acts. The source is hardly ironclad. I'd probably trust Wikipedia more, and I felt sheepish quoting it! Just because SEALs sometimes choose to carry them, doesn't mean that Michael Thorton does, or will even have access to them.

I don't think his point was that you needed battle.net. Can you use it to play Warcraft 3 over battle.net though? If you can, then this starts to actually make sense as an anti-piracy measure, which before seemed pretty bollocks to me.

What exactly does neither here nor there mean in this case? Why should MT only carry what's common? Why shouldn't he? Or, more importantly, why should the devs spend time working on implementing pistols, rather than something else? If you're going to grant options "just because" then you run the risk of feature creep. Why not single SMGs? Why not sawed off shotguns? Why not lever action rifles? Look at it this way, if Michael Thorton only had access to revolvers, unless there's a contextual reason why, it'd seem unusual and jarring to the setting. If Michael Thorton only has access to modern semi-automatic pistols, then people say "hey it'd be cool if he had a revolver."

I never said it was a common load out. I just said some choose to carry it. SEALS are allowed to choose their sidearms last time I checked. Also, it is mentioned in an episode of MANswers. The episode about the S&W .500 Magnum to be precise. Also, I never said that their .357 magnum revolvers would be super awesome guns that are totally superior to every other sidearm and that they would always carry them. You can't silence a revolver, so obviously in ops where you need a silenced weapon, they would carry something else or at least a second pistol. I just said that because SEALS sometimes choose to carry them, there is obviously some advatages to having them. Here is the episode in which it is mentioned: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3UKu2zbMHJ0 Keep in mind, the dude speaking is a retired SWAT Officer. He's not a SEAL, but he is not a civilian either. My guess is when you want a lighweight, reliable "backup" gun for long range shooting, that is when you would carry it. Your quoting MANswers as your source? What's next, Spetsnaz will dominate the Green Beret's because Deadliest Warriors said so?

Oh, my friendship with the roommate is permanently marred. It's unfortunate because I once referred to him as the equivalent of my brother, but alas. There ARE some fun group activities that are done, and maintaining a somewhat respectable interaction with each other means that I'll still be able to take part in the larger group activities that happen. But perhaps you're right. I'll think on this.

Hahaha yeah. Though honestly, that sort of campyness has always been present in BioWare's writing.

Okay this is me bouncing an idea off you guys (rather than waiting until after the fact haha). I'm curious how honest my roommate will be if I start asking some questions, and I totally agree with theslug that if confronted, he'll deny everything. I'd also like to have a talk with her because things have gotten stupid lately. My idea is to ask that the three of us get together and talk, and I mention that things have seemed awkward between her and I, and things have been tense between he and I. I can manipulate the conversation in a way quite easily that I don't tip that I have "additional information." The advantages of this is that I am hoping that knowing someone else is there they'll choose to be honest because he'll know that he has given different answers to me than he has given to her. Otherwise, I'll know that he is lying directly to my face. She'll know it too. Depending on what her reactions are, I'll know if she's lying for him. Then things change and I move on as those two people are no longer worth my time. If they are honest with me, then maybe we can start to work things out.

There's probably more instances that you can name where the cinematography of a movie is absolutely hideous. It sounds like a supply issue. There's more movies.

Cheers Aristes. I post here because it's safely anonymous so people can unleash their thunder and really nothing changes

Now you're just giving me ideas!

Agreed. That only sounds like something that would be fun to do, but I wouldn't really want to deal with the consequences of it haha.

Haha, i think that that might be tricky given I have no assurances of what he does or does not leak.

I used to think so to be honest. I am pretty sure he was part of the rumour mongering from god knows how long ago (like two halloweens ago). I know he used to be bitchy about the fact that I'd spend time with her. I just assumed he was jealous because I wasn't doing stuff with him. Though he has a girlfriend now (for about the past 6 months or so). EDIT: Oh, I think I remember what it was now. I believe he was bitching to her that he is sick of me bringing it up, even though he's given me no indication that he'd rather I not mention it to him.

Meh, I certainly don't consider sneaking behind my roommate's (and friend's) back to be much else than a despicable thing to do. I'm okay with it I haven't confronted him yet, as I just found out today before heading out to work. In a personal email (not to her obviously) I mentioned that things seemed to be getting more and more awkward around her, so I was deleting her from my life (which actually isn't that far from the truth, things did seem to be getting progressively awkward around her). So I canceled some upcoming plans, namely my attendance at a Star Wars Marathon and being able to be a sub for beach volleyball. She sent my roommate an email saying that I was acting weird and stuff, and he basically told her why. It wasn't quite full disclosure, but acknowledging to her that the decisions that I make are because of her crosses the line as far as I'm concerned. In this email, he also made some comments to her about how he should tell me to just get over it since it's been almost a year (which is probably a fair statement haha. I don't remember the exact words. He either said he has [which he hasn't] or he will [which I doubt]). There was other stuff in there that I don't really remember. I didn't have much time to dwell over the email as I had to get to work.