Noxilicious

Just to clarify, EATs are restricted to a side only during their creation. Once a Kheldian or Soldier hits 20, they can side-switch using tips and morality missions just like any other AT.

Isn't that true for most ATs? Scrappers, Blasters, Tankers, Corruptors and Stalkers and several more have their "Inherent" power baked into their primary powers, while the Inherent power does nothing mechanically and only says "hey this is my gimmick".

Either way the VEAT's inherent is being a ******* VEAT. It's the best inherent.

Does this go for VEATs, too? From what I know VEATs have higher base recovery and regeneration, so they would benefit from Stamina more. Is a PerfShift still a better choice for the third slot on VEATs?

CBeet won. Thread over.

Form your own teams. You got your own idea of what you wanna do in the game, and that's perfectly cool, but if nobody is forming a team that suits you, it's up to you to form one instead.

I don't really enjoy speedruns. If someone else does it's fine, but they're just not my cuppa tea. So when I recruit people for a TF or SF, I tell'em it's an "XP/shards run". That doesn't mean cleaning the maps from every single enemy, but it clearly gets across the idea that we'll spend a lot of time actually fighting enemies. The people that join me know this. Whether they join me because they love mowing down armies or because they want their reward drops, they know there's gonna be little to no stealthing.

Being the leader also means you can deal with the specifics. While it's understood we'll be fighting through the valley, how we tackle the Fifth Column camp can differ. One time I suggested we tackle the AVs on their platforms before dealing with the computer, and we did that. Another time I had a nigh-invincible team, so we took on the computer as someone pulled both AVs complete with their mobs. In one particular ITF we were doing super-well, so I suggested in the final mission that we split the team in half and take both paths leading to Romulus, and make a race out of it.

The nice thing about being a team-leader is that you can generally run things how you like them. As long as it agrees with the general idea of the run (speed, kills, etc), people are willing to just listen and do things your way. Sometimes you got one or two members that don't hear you or something and head off somewhere else, but generally once they realise the team's somewhere else they come join you, or ask what's up and then come join you.

Assuming there's no chance you will ever lead a team though (some people just hate the star that much), all you can really do is ask the TF leader whether they're recruiting a kills run or a speed run and then join if it's the former or politely decline if it's the latter. At least that's what I do when I don't feel like running a TF myself.

Of course everyone has the right to express themselves however they choose to, and condemning people based on how they choose to express themselves is nothing short of bigoted.

The thing is, though, that Sister Psyche isn't a woman. She's someone's idea of a woman. There's no woman named Shalice Tilman that ever came to Paragon Studio and collaborated with the devs on the design of her costume. When people criticise her costume they don't criticise someone's decision to wear that costume, they find someone's design decisions for a female character's costume objectionable.

Put shortly, it's entirely possible to both support and defend a woman's right to wear whatever she wants and at the same time object to a female character's design.

But even if you think the costume is empowering or demeaning, I have a hard time seeing Sister Psyche's pose as nothing but outright objectifying. It's the kind of breasts-and-butt-out pose that, if you try doing it at home, it's unnatural and uncomfortable at best and actually painful at worst. It's a pose that serves no purpose other than to emphasise her, well, breasts and butt for the sake of emphasising it. It's certainly not an expression of Sister Psyche's sexuality, even ignoring how uncomfortable the position is, because it's pretty safe to assume that when you're terrified half-to-death by an apocalyptic meteor shower expressing your sexual autonomy is not someone's first concern.

So really, all it says is "here's some woman's assets to look at!" It emphasises them and reduces the character to them. It's objectifying.

You're right, I guess I am just overreacting. I mean, it's not like actual people of colour have their skin digitally whitened because whiter means sexier and more marketable. That never happens.

And even if it did happen, it's not like some simple advertisement would harm people, right? Why would anyone feel othered and alienated by these things?

Test what exactly? How sensitive players are to bigotry? With how much casual sexism and racism they can get away with? Are the devs some clever masterminds that create a picture loaded with subtle discrimination in the hopes the player-base will rise up to prove their empathy?

Seriously, what the hell does this test?

Whether it was intentional or accidental doesn't change the fact it deserves some calling-out. In fact, if it was accidental it deserves it even more so because that makes it that subtle, casual kind of racism that's so easy to miss. Very few people are intentionally bigoted, but it doesn't stop us from being bigoted anyway.

And honestly? While I doubt the people involved in that picture out and out hate people of colour, I wouldn't be surprised if someone consciously decided to white-wash Babs because they consider a black Babs less marketable and less relatable.

Do you have a lot of knockback protection IO stuffs in your build? Because according to ingame numbers Rooted and Granite Armor grant 10 knockback protection each, so without any further protection a mag 23 knockback attack would still get through.

I think this part says a lot. What oneself considers "sly", everyone else might just consider condescending and smug.

Since the person talked about isn't here, I wanna propose an alternate interpretion of what happened. I wasn't on that BAF but from reading reading the OP's post here's what I imagine ****'s story would be like:
We've got a BAF, the first two phases go by smashingly and everyone's prepping up for the prisoner phase. The leader says that choke-points are the way to go, but the OP thinks that instead of consolidating on the chokepoints to rain AoEs and such it means spreading yourself thinly on the pathways. **** sees that the OP is a fair aways away from the chokepoints and throws him a tell saying something like "Get to the [insert swear word here] to the chokepoint and help!". Maybe she was just frustrated that day or maybe she's just the kind who swears casually, who knows?

The OP only sees the swear-word and immediately decides to himself that she must be a pretty dumb person, so naturally her idea of the chokepoint strategy is wrong. He's not shy to "slyly" tell her how dumb she looks to him for using a naughty word and that he'll keep doing whatetever it is he's doing because it's clearly correct. **** just replies again, telling him to get the [swear word] to the chokepoints, and a back and forth continues where the OP responds with "unoffensive" tells that nevertheless boil down to telling her that she's an idiot and that he's smarter and better than her. Dealing with that condescension **** gets angrier and angrier and in turn uses more and more swear words, which in turn make the OP just dismiss her much more strongly. Eventually she realises he's a lost cause who won't stop with his better-than-you talk and actually follow the strategy and kicks him from the team.

Now here on the forum he talks about how she's clearly emotionally unstable because she got angry at his constant barrage of patronisation and condescension, and how she will flip at you if you even minorly divert from a plan while ignoring the fact that, if his post is anything to go by, he rigidly insisted that his idea of chokepoints, to spread out, is the correct one.

Lastly I want to call attention to the fact that in his edit he sighs about having to remove her name even though he never said anything vulgar to merit censorship. It's that whole focus on vulgarity that gives me the impression the OP thinks the difference between offensive and unoffensive is the inclusion or lack of swear words so he never considered that what he considered "sly" was easily and heavily insulting to someone else.

I wasn't there. I could be wrong and she really was a raging berserker who loses all control if you stand even a single milimeter away from the acceptable gathering spots. We can't know for certain what happened, but it's as EmperorSteele said, something just struck me as fishy about the OP's post.

And really, I find it incredibly difficult to consider someone objective when they're disappointed they're not allowed to publicly shame someone even though they totally weren't vulgar.

TL;DR: I like playing make-believe that I'm a lawyer.