St0ner

Originally Posted by Practical

I either didn't explain the situation correctly or I'm too thick to understand the solution (with the latter being a definite possibility).

When I logged into my character, I hit him with a respec. When I started the respec, the Fitness pool was visible and remained so throughout the process.

When my wife attempted to respec, the Fitness pool was visible for her, too...until she selected the first power out of her Primary. As soon as she hit 'Next', the entire Fitness pool disappeared from the screen. The third column went completely blank. She proceeded to select more powers to see if it would appear (and even chose some Power Pool powers just to make sure there wasn't something wrong with her third column), but everything went smoothly...other than having the Fitness pool reappear.

Admittedly, she never completed the respec, but she was only one power choice away from doing so and Fitness never came back. It's odd that I had the Fitness pool on my screen the whole time (and even slotted it), but on hers, it disappeared. Any thoughts?

Originally Posted by Clebstein

I'm sure this is old news to a lot of people, but some people don't read up on the details of issues before they're released.

Maybe I'm alone here, but I HATE HATE HATE HATE HATE HATE HATE having to do missions to unlock content. It's probably the biggest complaint I have with the game. Capes, Auras, ITF, even Patron powers. It is so irritating to have to do a certain arc just to be able to go do some thing fun/interesting. I have like four level 50s who can't access capes just it's such a pain to unlock them.

I've been told it's a short arc, but I really don't care...Having to do it on every toon I want Incarnate access on would be so tedious. I didn't think it would be easy or quick to be able to become Incarnate, but having to do a story arc is just annoying. I don't expect to use the Incarnate system at all.

Originally Posted by BafflingBeerMan

I am sure there will be idiots in any group. But I think just like now, people need and will tolerate some idiocy as long as the overall safety and well-being isn't threatened. These people who do idiotic stuff often provide other benefits that their (hopefully temporary) idiocy can excuse

Take the example of Andrea and Amy last night. Andrea should have put a bullet in Amy's head ASAP and everyone knew it. But they let her have her moment (or idiocy, if you are thinking it that way). Why? In part because she had a gun. Can you imagine what would have happened if Daryl had crossbowed Amy from a distance? I am sure Andrea would have turned around a fired wildly at him, endangering the rest of the group. I also think that between Laurie's conversation with Rick and Andrea's use of a gun, she is a valuable "commodity" in that she is another body that can defend the group at large.

Or, in the case of Jim, waiting to make a decision was somewhat idiotic, but was also in part to insure the safety of the group in the future. How so, you might ask. While Jim was obviously bitten, they waited to see what his condition was. Could you imagine what it would imply if he was shot as soon as the bite was discovered? It would mean that anytime someone was injured by what may have been a zombie attack they would have to be killed. If Rick went into the woods and got scratched by a tree limb and fired his gun at a bunny, but missed and he came back, what would happen? Would people notice the scratch, remember hearing the gunshot, and think Rick was attacked by a zombie and kill him? Even if he insisted he wasn't? I think that's what Rick (and the show) was trying to say with the Jim situation: the line can constantly change especially in a situation where fear is the primary motivator.

Zombie tales, and apocalyptic stories in general, tend to show that all idiocy leads to danger and death for dramatic reasons, but I am not sure that is the case in real life. We have the Darwin Awards, sure, but I think the real dangerous idiocy comes from complacency. When we are too used to living in times when nothing can possibly harm us. In an apocalpyse-scenario, we will have lapses of judgement that could lead to danger, but, alas, that could happen to anyone. From the suicidal guy who just can't take it anymore and runs into a horde or strong-willed leader who hasn't gotten a lot of sleep lately and won't allow for a moment of rest, lest something bad happens (which, according to fiction, insures something will happen). You are as likely to have that lapse as is Person X. That's why there needs to be some leeway, I think.

You also have to remember, if an apocalyptic event happens suddenly or irrationally, like a zombie outbreak, a lot, a lot of people are going to be in shock. It is easy for all of us to watch TDW and say "Oh, we'd do this or prevent that" because we are witnessing events from afar, emotionally removed from that universe. Add in the shock of actually living these sorts of events and we go back to letting raw emotion guide us and leading to those lapse of judgements.

Actually, I think that would make a good zombie flick: a nerd (like us) being the natural leader due to his or her immersion into zombie pop culture and immediately recognizing that head shots work, what tropes to avoid, etc. Could be done in the style of Shaun of the Dead, tongue-in-cheek.

Originally Posted by Lothic

Frankly both you and Luminara could be lying about your survivalist theories/credentials as far as I'm concerned. But based purely on what you've both written just in this thread alone I'm more inclined to give Luminara the benefit of the doubt before you. Until you figure out why I'll just hope for your sake a civilization-ending apocalypse (zombie or otherwise) never happens to you.

Originally Posted by BafflingBeerMan

Eventually, you (the general you. Or, in other words, we) are going to need somebody's help. Currently, we are living in luxury, compared to what it would be like in any sort of apocalypse: zombie, nuclear, or robot ninja. We have our basic needs taken care of already: food (just go to the grocery store), electricity (provided), medical care (past basic first aid). There are survivalist out there and they may play MMOs, so they may actual post on these boards. But is there are loners, they aren't suited to take on any incoming threat. Not enough ammo, and one loner against a horde of attackers will eventually die. Can't be on guard 24/7, ome mistake and that's it.

There is a reason why humans formed groups, even back in the nomadic days. It is somewhat possible to find group of people all cutthroat, willing to send each other up the river to save their own skin, but in the longterm, a person survives by finding a mutually beneficial group so that a division of labor and responsibility can be meted out to keep everyone safe and sheltered.

People like Bear Gryllis can survive in the wild. But can they survive in the wild where there is a constant unknown threat lurking? Zombies aren't like bears. You can't spot their lairs, you can't scare them off or play dead and you have to constantly be on the look out for them. More importantly, can survivalists like Survivorman stay in those conditions for a variable amount of time? They may have to keep moving, which in of itself, is a tiring experience.

In the end, an apocalypse survivor is going to need other people. For that extra meal, extra level of defense, for that shelter. And needing other people dictates following some sort of basic level of deceny. That may not mean saying your Ps and Qs, but it does mean not turning on each other (which I believe is a major reoccuring theme in The Walking Dead and most zombie films. As soon as one in the group thinks their methodology or their own hide is better than everyone else's, things go to hell in a handbasket)

Originally Posted by Luminara

And I'm not the illiterate macho man spewing hot air and BS.

You know the only other thing hot air and BS comes from? An *******. Might want to reconsider your role model.



Not a chance.



Twenty five years practicing survivalism. I've walked miles with a collapsed lung, spent weeks nursing third degree burns, stitched my own leg after opening it up with a machete, gone without food for ten days, camped out in a foot of snow, started a fire in a thunderstorm... I'll forget more about how to survive than you'll ever learn.



You aren't charming enough to get me to stop on my way out of the hot zone, you aren't bright enough to con me into stopping and you certainly aren't going to convince me to turn around and rescue you when you're waving a weapon. And if you're just shooting anyone you happen to see, you'll be dead before the zombies find you. You keep yammering on with this idiotic "I'm the toughest mothertougher that ever toughed" foolishness, but it's not proving anything except your own inability to think more than a few seconds ahead of your actions.

Survival is a matter of using your brain, not your balls. Shooting random strangers to distract zombies will accomplish nothing useful or positive. You drive away anyone who might be willing to help you, you attract zombies and people who are like you, who will just as readily shoot you as you would them, and you "win" nothing except a greater chance of dying sooner.

Daryl's smart, or at least smart enough to survive. He knows when to shut his mouth, put it back in his pants and follow the leader. He chooses to stick with the group and take orders, because he knows his own limitations. You're no Daryl. You're Ed. And you'll end up like Ed.

Originally Posted by Luminara

Well, frankly, it's clear that you won't be one of those last ones standing, unless you're being kept alive by someone with far more knowledge and less hostility toward his fellow men/women.

You aren't a practicing survivalist, that's obvious. You wouldn't be posting in a nerd fight, about a television show, on a game forum if you were, and you damn sure wouldn't be so quick to discount how useful other people are to have around, if for no reason other than to alleviate the stress of being alone. Survivalism is using every tool to lean the odds in your favor, no matter how worthless it may appear to be, because the least thing may prove to be the most important and useful, and that includes other people. You don't throw things away until they're beyond hope of repair and there's nothing else you can salvage from them, if you're trying to survive. That includes companions.

You also clearly don't have any military training, or at least none above scrubbing toilets and hating your drill sergeant for "picking on you". If you were properly trained, and any of it had penetrated, you'd recognize the value of troop morale, something which is definitely not best served by arbitrary executions or testosterone-fueled attitude. Or sheer stupidity, like wanting to murder other people simply rather than try to help them because they aren't offering any immediate benefit, despite the fact that they also aren't an immediate danger.

If you had any experience of any kind from either source, you'd also be aware that no-one, not even the most proficient survivalist or most perfectly trained soldier, has every skill necessary for survival alone, a point which the writers deliberately drove home by showing Andrea and Amy fishing, Daryl hunting, Dale and Jim repairing vehicles, Rick and Shane leading and Glenn bringing tactical skill to the group.

Bottom line, you can sit there and bluster into your keyboard until the cows come home, but it's not fooling anyone and if there were an "apacolipse", throwing adolescent bravado at the zombies won't save your ***. You don't have the experience, raw knowledge or skill to keep yourself alive, much less make decisions on who else lives or dies, so you'd best hope that anyone you do find yourself tagging along with are more humane than you want to portray yourself as being.

Originally Posted by Frogfather

Okay....the sister thing Im trying to justify. They wanted a goodbye scene between the sisters and I get it. Maybe the older sister just knew they reanimate slowly....if thats the case Im okay with that.

As for the guy that was bitten...with no solid evidence that the virus is transferred that way are you going to off him in such a cold manner. For example the wife was bitten then died, then reanimated....it would seem to me that theres a certain amount of time in there....maybe the virus only reanimates dead flesh? Maybe the bite kills through natural infection then the virus works its magic...maybe 1% of the population is immune or somesuch. All zombie tropes that have been done before.

They just dont know....as was evidenced by the deer from a couple episodes back. Anecdotal evidence is not enough to just off someone the minute theyre bitten. I think you take precautions, I think you tie the guy to a chair or tree and watch him. But thats just me.

--Frog

Originally Posted by Luminara

Andrea clearly knew what she was doing. She knew how long it would take for Amy to turn, she knew how to finish it, she had the gun cocked and ready. She was in control of the situation, and she needed the time to grieve.



That would be inhumane, and clearly, these survivors (excluding Daryl) are as concerned about retaining their humanity and compassion as they are about their survival. Jim wasn't suffering initially, he wasn't an immediate threat, so shooting him then and there would be a cold, heartless action. One which would lead to more extreme behaviors later, like shooting everyone who stubbed their toes or came back from the woods with a scratch, "just to be safe".

It's noteworthy that Daryl, after so vehemently stating that he'd expect someone to pull the trigger on him if he were bitten, couldn't do it when he had the opportunity to put Jim out of his misery. He looked at Jim, with that crossbow drawn, loaded and ready, and no-one to stop him... and he just lowered his eyes and walked away, sorrow for Jim showing on his face.

Humanity. Treating your fellow man/woman with dignity, even if they're dead or dying. If you sacrifice that, you're really no better than the zombies, you're just a different kind of walking dead. That message should be obvious by now. They've all but flat out said it at least once in every episode.

Originally Posted by eryq2

I just rolled a SS/Fire brute to farm with. Man, is FA weak imo. I am popping as many greens as i can and thats at 0x8 with 0 bosses. Im farming the liberate TV mish redside.

I don't have any purples in this build because i tried to build for survivability. Running the missions before the farm, i died 4 times before i could kill a Super Arachnoid boss. No toon have i ever ran in 6 years has ever felt so weak. It may be me, but i have a SD scrapper that can stand in the middle of mobs set to 0x8 while i afk, but not on this brute.

Maybe i just need some help on FA slotting but ouch did i fail. lol.