

The Terrorists Have Won
#41
Posted 13 April 2017 - 01:38 AM
The Manbaby: threaten to quit spending $$$ or refund X Y Z mechpack as a goto strategy. They make a very destructive whalesound which can shelve any feature it comes in contact with.
#42
Posted 13 April 2017 - 01:39 AM
#44
Posted 13 April 2017 - 01:43 AM
#45
Posted 13 April 2017 - 01:48 AM
Darth Hotz, on 13 April 2017 - 01:39 AM, said:
Social Justice MechWarrior appears on queue!
#46
Posted 13 April 2017 - 01:48 AM
This latest Hero wave was really starting to skid around at the top of the slippery slope of P2W, and im very glad PGI have realised and backtracked.
Ill be buying the Hellbringer hero now, even though i dont need it for the Omnipod.
#47
Posted 13 April 2017 - 01:49 AM
It's great that PGI did that because that shwos they care about these things.
Edited by Lily from animove, 13 April 2017 - 03:09 AM.
#48
Posted 13 April 2017 - 01:51 AM
Whew...
Sorry.
Sooo..what's goin on?
Man.
Drank way to much last night.
Ugh.
So what is this?
Somethin' 'bout more clan mechs?
Somethin' 'bout whining?
...
K.
Goin back to bed.
#50
Posted 13 April 2017 - 02:41 AM
Kin3ticX, on 13 April 2017 - 01:48 AM, said:
Social Justice MechWarrior appears on queue!
Has nothing to do with social justice. Has much to do with the adequacy of the words used for the title of this thread. Do you think it is appropriate to write "The terrorists won" when talking about the redesign of some virtual mechs in a computer game? I dont.
#51
Posted 13 April 2017 - 03:10 AM
Darth Hotz, on 13 April 2017 - 02:41 AM, said:
Has nothing to do with social justice. Has much to do with the adequacy of the words used for the title of this thread. Do you think it is appropriate to write "The terrorists won" when talking about the redesign of some virtual mechs in a computer game? I dont.
terrorists are usually those against an existing system. So it looks like form a wallet warrior point of view that someone saw some nice wallet advatanges incoming and is now a bit mad at those rebels/terrorists.
#52
Posted 13 April 2017 - 03:21 AM
Lily from animove, on 13 April 2017 - 03:10 AM, said:
terrorists are usually those against an existing system. So it looks like form a wallet warrior point of view that someone saw some nice wallet advatanges incoming and is now a bit mad at those rebels/terrorists.
If only Bernie Sanders would have won we could force all the whales to melt down their Gold Mechs and give every player an urbanmech
He can still win (he cant)
Now we have Hero Mechs killing everything, you cant even play this game anymore with cbill mechs (you can)
#53
Posted 13 April 2017 - 03:21 AM
#54
Posted 13 April 2017 - 03:26 AM
Shifty McSwift, on 13 April 2017 - 03:21 AM, said:
yeha nice definition, still wrong. Because it would make every country bombing in the past world wars terrorists. The only true difference is, that terrorists don't have a real accepted gouvernment behind what they do. The rest is just similar to a guerilla war like behavior. it is an attemp of establsiehd politicians to give someone a bad image. So the term is highly subjective.
#55
Posted 13 April 2017 - 03:35 AM
Lily from animove, on 13 April 2017 - 03:26 AM, said:
yeha nice definition, still wrong. Because it would make every country bombing in the past world wars terrorists. The only true difference is, that terrorists don't have a real accepted gouvernment behind what they do. The rest is just similar to a guerilla war like behavior. it is an attemp of establsiehd politicians to give someone a bad image. So the term is highly subjective.
No because the definition exclusively defines the act of targeting civilians, as in directly and purposely killing non combatants. It is a sort of loophole in language when you consider things like drone strikes killing civilians as they weren't the direct target, this is where collateral damage as a term comes in.
In historical examples like firebombing/nuking of Japanese cities it could definitely be argued as such, but most of these definitions as we know them now were crafted or given new meaning during a post WW2 world. The definitions of course favor those who had the power to write or rewrite them.
#56
Posted 13 April 2017 - 03:38 AM
Shifty McSwift, on 13 April 2017 - 03:35 AM, said:
No because the definition exclusively defines the act of targeting civilians, as in directly and purposely killing non combatants. It is a sort of loophole in language when you consider things like drone strikes killing civilians as they weren't the direct target, this is where collateral damage as a term comes in.
In historical examples like firebombing/nuking of Japanese cities it could definitely be argued as such, but most of these definitions as we know them now were crafted or given new meaning during a post WW2 world. The definitions of course favor those who had the power to write or rewrite them.
you cna still bet your butt that if a war happens today between bigger nations they would still very clearly bomb civilians too, it is an illusion that wars are kept clean.
#57
Posted 13 April 2017 - 03:49 AM
Lily from animove, on 13 April 2017 - 03:38 AM, said:
you cna still bet your butt that if a war happens today between bigger nations they would still very clearly bomb civilians too, it is an illusion that wars are kept clean.
Depends on circumstance. I could probably argue that the act of continuing to bomb targets that your own intelligence has shown to often be faulty, to the point where you are at times, just killing civilians could be construed as terrorism, though I doubt the ones in power would become subject to law or morality all of a sudden.
I could also argue that quite a number of attacks that have been considered terrorist attacks, really weren't, as that idea of specifically targeting civilians vs collateral damage is a double edged blade (cuts both ways).
But again the contemporary definition is as I stated, and should really remain as such, if you start applying that to non violent discourse, considering those contemporary definitions, you can end up with serious problems, like non violent political dissidents being treated in the same category as people who purposely kill civilians to serve their cause.
Edited by Shifty McSwift, 13 April 2017 - 03:50 AM.
#58
Posted 13 April 2017 - 03:55 AM
#59
Posted 13 April 2017 - 04:00 AM
Mikato Soul, on 12 April 2017 - 07:30 PM, said:
The same people who whined about it, wouldn't have the skill to make any difference with or with out them anyways. Instead they are just stifling creativity and mech science for every one else.
Congratulations, the terrorists have won.
*Edit:C bill variants I dig, but there are still several nerfed variants that will never have their full glory.
https://mwomercs.com...clan-hero-mechs
Terrorists? Really?
Are you that f*#&%)# stupid?!
It would appear so.
#60
Posted 13 April 2017 - 04:19 AM
1 user(s) are reading this topic
0 members, 1 guests, 0 anonymous users