Bay 12 Games Forum

Or you could just stick blades on the front and back of your car.

Accelerate, stop, reverse, stop, accelerate, stop, reverse... Soon, you'll have about 600 zombie corpses all on one street!

Well, if Nautical Nonsense be something you wish...

I think you tell the firemen to go back to their engine to make them go away.

Spoiler: I am itching for a chance to use this image at the first opportunity I find now (click to show/hide)

Hahaha, brilliant.

It's the January patch. Bunch of balance, mostly with MBTs, some optimization, and SMGs.

Servers aren't back up yet, so don't expect to try it out any time soon.

There's been a distinct lack of Zombie RTS's on the market. You've got my interest.

Sigh... if only political science wasn't an oxymoron and was actually scientific then at least the discussions would be more interesting.

Observe phenomenon, form hypothesis, design experiment, create small country for hosting experiment, run experiment, interpret results.  Oh, and of course step X: get funded.

What seems to happen: One side presents argument, another a different argument, some bad to fair data gets presented, sides dismiss each others data (often because it is bad, of course), and then the same argument happens again / on other forums / etc over and over again and never seems to evolve anywhere except that no one ever changes an opinion, and nothing gets logged into any database that people look at (or at least take the time to anyway) to see what the real facts are.

Politics operates on such a huge scale, though, that the combined human factor is capable of destroying even flawless systems. It's impossible to understand why a system works in one place and doesn't in another without an in-depth examination of qualities that are, by nature of their complexity, not quantifiable.

I don't really think there is any lack of understanding between the principle flamers.  Aqizzer was able to precisely predict what GreatJustices next post would be...

I'm talking about understanding ideologies, not people.

Actually, no. The only way to win a political discussion is to understand that the only person's views you will change are your own. If you get nothing out of the discussion worth thinking about, you just wasted your time. In particular, you should view it as a self-examination through Socratic process. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Socratic_method

It's perfectly possible to learn about something and not agree with it. I can learn about Communism, for example, but decide that Capitalism is better for our society. I can even accept the virtues of Communism just as much as I can abhor the vices of Capitalism. Because I understand both, my opinion that Capitalism is better is strengthened, whereas before it was simply blind acceptance of something I was familiar with. Understanding and learning about different views may even lead to the development of a new solution, which is just as valuable.

That's what the conversation should be about, not proving one view better or "right". What's better or right for me may not be for someone else, but both of us should be able to understand and accept each other's opinions. Whether or one someone is converted in the course of the conversation is just an occasional side effect of an open and civil conversation. The important thing is whether or not someone learned something.

Either that or I'm completely misinterpreting what you're trying to say.


I'm going to quit trying to respond to all the ninjas now.