Superleap Hurts...Why?

I don't need a thesaurus.

^_^

Truthfully, most of these terms are from my line of work, which happens to be the English language. Previously teacher, currently freelance writer for commission, articles, gaming, ghostwriting and the like.

Basically, how to make yourself understood and to give the desired impression is my trade. I prefer to keep things unemotional, dry and technical when I am analyzing the language of a piece of writing. I generally only use the particular voice you describe above in such cases.

It is rather boring for a story.

As to the formatting. Indentations are usually impractical to use on forums such as these, in addition, such analysis is best made with short, unambiguous sentences. As such, there is a lot of skipping of lines. Regardless of how it looks, it is the most effective formatting for being clearly understood.

Now, if you want to find something more like a conversational tone with me, look above to the post relating to my Champions PnP experience. It was written without much regard for grammar or even effectiveness for story, that's basically just me ranting. For my story writing check the link in my signature.

Also, no, posting like the above is not the only way to get your views across. It is not even a particularly good way to really get a view across, it has a terrible lack of voice. For getting personal views across, it is best to fall somewhere between that and the already referenced post wherein I am ranting. Emotional content is rather important to a persuasive piece.

I was not writing to be persuasive, however. I was merely analyzing, which does not require emotional content and, in fact, is better served with a complete lack of emotion.

Bah, at least we have some endurance left when we arrive.

I wasn't questioning his education; if he had taken speech classes, he would have realised that was the point - that he felt the need to point it out was the issue, not the fact that what he pointed out was true (it is). I never denied that what he pointed out was true - only that it was needless to point it out.

I find it interesting that you think I'm showing off my public school and local university education and seem to consider me somewhere between the picky, fastidious clerk and the self-important intellectual.

Of course, I think my only comment on education was the mention was of the basic freshman rhetoric class required by most universities and the fact that I was a teacher. Everything else was related to discussion of my profession not my education. Anybody who makes the language their profession is likely to be similarly precise at need. It is not a matter of fancy education. It is a matter of use.

I am able to cook, for example, I know how to run most of the positions available in a restaurant by nature of long hours working in restaurants. However, it is not my profession and it hasn't been my job for some years, as such I am not going to be as skilled as I could be. However, I deal with writing and analysis of language on a day-by-day basis. Naturally this produces a higher level of skill with the language based on an education that is available to the average person who pays attention in high school.

Your comment is, of course, a clear exaggeration of the voice I have adopted here. This is another tactic which can be effective but has its weaknesses. Namely, it suggests that you have no real argument against any points made but have either taken offense or felt that your pride won't allow you to back down.

I am curious as to what you will do with this comment. I've provided a fair amount of fuel for you to target. I must admit that while there isn't much need for this discussion, I enjoy seeing what sort of amusing thing you might respond with next.

This I wouldn't mind for the simple fact that it would be funny to watch a truck slam into a behemoth and it would be a very fun superheroish thing to do. Also, the added complexity to fighting in the streets would be interesting.

If cars did do damage, like they do in Freedom Force, then you would more often find me street sweeping so that I could play aggro pinball in traffic and watch the baddies getting bounced off different cars. Heck, if they added damage and KB then might be given a more substantial object within the map.

Then we could ride the cars and shoot or fight from the top of a moving truck or on a moving speed boat.

That would be awesome, especially if your in a fight with a tsoo martial artist and KB him into traffic and watch him torn apart by environment (moving traffic) or simply KB him into a tree and turn to fight his comrades while he has to catch up.

Yeah, fighting from car-top to car-top on a busy street would be great.

Adding the ability to inflict damage to moving vehicles isn't directly related to the physics engine making it impossible to ride on moving objects. The two have no direct relation to each other. Actually, the more i think about it the harder it seems to me to implement damage and KB for vehicles in a way that works how players would want it to work, so adding that capability might require an overhaul or replacement of the game engine anyway.

Most likely, but still would be fun.

I also wish the vehicles in the War Zone would actually shoot.

There are some things about Champions Online that I like (even though it was overall rather aggravating), and the ability to fight dinosaurs, wolves, and tanks is among those. Granted, the war zone vehicles would be on our side. But I'd like to have my characters fight a main battle tank.

The Sky Raiders skiffs are cool, but there could always be more of that.

I've always known it would be difficult to do. I got a reply from... Castle? Years back on the subject of car surfing. Heck it might have been pohsyb. On the other hand that's been said for years. Maybe it's time they actually considered it. If for no other reason than for finally letting me ride that damn blimp.

Just Ask Danson and Highsmith about that from the movie The Other Guys.... [Minor Spoilers]

What's your definition of "super" anyway? Because I'm pretty sure the majority of characters in this game aren't Superman or Hulk, or people who could fall from orbit and just stand up and keep walking. Most of my characters are natural or magic. Relatively killable people who use weapons, strategy, or special techniques and abilities to fight. That doesn't mean you can throw them off a building and they'd be totally fine. I'm sure if my widow fell off a building she'd put a crack in the pavement. And then be moved to a closed casket.

Batman is a pretty badass normal. But if he fell off a buliding, he'd either do something fancy like glide down with a cape, or "take some falling damage" when he splatted on the pavement.

Originally Posted by PRAF68_EU Dispari has more than enough credability, and certainly doesn't need to borrow any from you.

Super Jump doesn't hurt. Sometimes the landing does though.

No, I won't - that joke's just too easy

Look, it's not always about you. Really.

Absolutely. i would love to be able to ride on the blimp and go car surfing.

I miss being able to "ski Mt. Rikti', where you could fly or jump up onto the force field surrounding the mothership and slide down the slope, angling back and forth as you slid.

As I recall, there was a time when you could die from falling off a building. They added code years ago so that you would always have at least 1 hp left, no matter how far you fell.

And maybe I'm just imagining things, but I seem to recall that if you did fall and get killed, then instead of just lying on the ground, you actually cracked the pavement and got embedded in it.

You, sir, have won *nods*

Originally Posted by Zwillinger GG, I would tell you that "I am killing you with my mind", but I couldn't find an emoticon to properly express my sentiment.

Originally Posted by Captain_Photon NOTE: The Incarnate System is basically farming for IOs on a larger scale, and with more obtrusive lore.

I believe that change happened in beta.

Yeah but you didn't super leap down to the ground. You super lept off a building and fell to the ground.

Super leaping doesn't hurt, landing after it does. (In some cases.)

QFT!

I have more fliers than any other travel power, and I'm quite okay with this. In fact, if fliers hit a building at 60MPH I think they should get stunned and lose 80% of their health and then fall until they hit the ground (and take additional damage, up to and including death if the damage would be more than 20%). Or if the fall is long enough, until the stun wears off and they can turn fly back on.

But the crashing into the wall damage should be completely unresistable. If they survive the fall or turn fly back on, the game should spawn immediately 5 +4 Ranged Attack flying bosses and Lt.s Perma-aggrod to the player and ignoring stealth to finish off the last 20% of health.

I sincerely think this should be the penalty for flying into a wall at 60MPH

Well he has hang gliding capes and super grappling guns and who knows what ever other devices with the sole purpose of making sure he doesn't fall too fast and hit the ground too hard. I'm guess that he's not doing that for dramatics, but he has a genuine fear that falling off the highest roofs in Gotham would kill him. Otherwise why have all the "anti cratering" devices.