1132 réponses à ce sujet

[Cainhurst Crow]

David, its 6 in the morning, don't you texans have church or some crap to do?

[Grand Admiral Cheesecake]

Wulfram wrote...

billy the squid wrote...

How did you work that out? Your logarithimc maths is wrong. If your logarithm base is 1 of 300, as in it took one year for the Reapers to conquer the galaxy, then your logarithm is infinity. So it took the Reapers an infinity amount of time to conquer the galaxy? In fact they're still doing it now.

Well, they didn't exterminate the Protheans.  Javik survived, the Conduit scientists survived.  Someone will always survive, but it shouldn't matter too much so long as they destroy enough to make the survival of the civilisation unviable.

I'm still giving massive props to the Counduit scientists for going through with project F*** da reapahz.

[Grand Admiral Cheesecake]

Darth Brotarian wrote...

David, its 6 in the morning, don't you texans have church or some crap to do?

Fool! He's getting ready for his intro physics class!

Modifié par Grand Admiral Cheesecake, 18 août 2013 - 11:50 .

[David7204]

My intro to physics class was four years ago as a junior in high school.

[billy the squid]

David7204 wrote...

billy the squid wrote...

How did you work that out? Your logarithimc maths is wrong. If your logarithm base is 1 of 300, as in it took one year for the Reapers to conquer the galaxy, then your logarithm is infinity. So it took the Reapers an infinity amount of time to conquer the galaxy? In fact they're still doing it now.

You need to stop confusing your little hallucinations with things I've actually said.

I never proposed an actual equation. I merely said that Reapers harvest rate would be logarithmic, in the sense that they would harvest a lot of people early on and less people as times goes by. Which is perfectly true.

Whatever equation you dreamed up is a figment of your imagination. It was a quick, effective example to illustrate a completely valid point.

Also, you're completely wrong. It works both ways. Interest rates affects economic policy, and economic policy affects interest rates.

So in effect, you were pulling numbers out of your arse then. 

No it doesn't. Interest rates are dictated by the central bank, you do not base an economic policy around interest rates, they are used to drive economies, limit inflation and part of expansionary economics.

You do not create an expansionary economic policy to adjust interest rates you plank, they are adjusted to meet inflationary targets and adjust the M1 or create an expansionary economic policy.

Modifié par billy the squid, 18 août 2013 - 11:54 .

[Grand Admiral Cheesecake]

David7204 wrote...

My intro to physics class was four years ago as a junior in high school.

Sure it was Davey, was it before or after your advanced Heroism class?

[David7204]

billy the squid wrote...

So in effect, you were pulling numbers out of your arse then. 

Uh, yes. To illustrate a very general example. Not to find a specific value. Making up numbers to use in quick examples is not only perfectly reasonable but incredibly common.

Modifié par David7204, 18 août 2013 - 12:04 .

[David7204]

billy the squid wrote...

So in effect, you were pulling numbers out of your arse then. 

No it doesn't. Interest rates are dictated by the central bank, you do not base an economic policy around interest rates, they are used to drive economies, limit inflation and part of expansionary economics.

You do not create an expansionary economic policy to adjust interest rates you plank, they are adjusted to meet inflationary targets and adjust the M1 or create an expansionary economic policy.

The central bank does not set the interest rate by saying 'The interest rate is whatever.' Not for private banks, anyway. At least in the United States. I don't know about wherever you live.

They do it by economic policy. In this case particular case, usually by increasing or decreasing the money supply. Which is absolutely monetary policy.

Monetary policy used to adjust interest rates.

Modifié par David7204, 18 août 2013 - 12:01 .

[Synergizer]

What if...
The Mass Effect Reaper Trilogy is done, time to move on. Mass Effect 1 was good, with more variation in locations, a Mako that is easier to drive, no crazy bouncing during combat, and a better inventory manager, ME1 would be world class.

Anyway, ME2 dealt with the Collectors on purpose, since the Reapers were taking the long way to our galaxy, Shepard needed some new enemy to face, although personally I'd prefer Shepard faced off against Cerberus in ME2 rather than introduce an entirely new species we've never heard of before. Introducing a new protagonist to replace Shepard in ME2 would have been a very bad idea. If you consider how different each game is to the last, throw in my point about Collectors never being mentioned in ME1, and ME2 would seem like a stand alone game even more if it had a different hero.

[David7204]

I like your avatar.

[MegaSovereign]

Darth Brotarian wrote...

David, its 6 in the morning, don't you texans have church or some crap to do?

Nope, we like to get into internet arguments like the good Lord intended.

[Grand Admiral Cheesecake]

MegaSovereign wrote...

Darth Brotarian wrote...

David, its 6 in the morning, don't you texans have church or some crap to do?

Nope, we like to get into internet arguments like the good Lord intended.

Our David is a just and heroic god.

[Steelcan]

Grand Admiral Cheesecake wrote...

David7204 wrote...

My intro to physics class was four years ago as a junior in high school.

Sure it was Davey, was it before or after your advanced Heroism class?

It was right after his Video Game Making course

[David7204]

It was, actually.

Physics, that is.

Modifié par David7204, 18 août 2013 - 12:16 .

[billy the squid]

David7204 wrote...

billy the squid wrote...

So in effect, you were pulling numbers out of your arse then. 

No it doesn't. Interest rates are dictated by the central bank, you do not base an economic policy around interest rates, they are used to drive economies, limit inflation and part of expansionary economics.

You do not create an expansionary economic policy to adjust interest rates you plank, they are adjusted to meet inflationary targets and adjust the M1 or create an expansionary economic policy.

The central bank does not set the interest rate by saying 'The interest rate is whatever.' Not for private banks, anyway. At least in the United States. I don't know about wherever you live.

They do it by economic policy. In this case particular case, usually by increasing or decreasing the money supply. Which is absolutely monetary policy.

Monetary policy used to adjust interest rates.

Yes they do, it's based on data. It's called the base rate of interest. Private banks then base their interest on that base rate as they borrow money from the central bank to supply the wider economy. The central bank's underlying regime is to maintail consistant inflation and stability in the market, which it does by adjusting interest rates and monetary supply by providing liquidity. Central banks are nominally independent of the sitting government.

This would also be why economic policies which may change every 4 years aren't used as a way to affect monetary policy or it throws the entire financial system into a mess.

The economic policy is dictated by the current sitting government, be it deflationary, inflationary or expansive, export based, which is based upon the Macroeconomics of the market, to effect a change and carry out the economic policy the government uses monetary policy to do so ie: asking the central bank to change interest rate after meeting with the Chancellor of the Exchequer, central banks do not change interest rates on a whim.

And economic policy is not monetary policy, they are different. The latter is used to effect the former not the other way around! My God.

The point of lowering base interest is to effect the economic policy of expansionary economics to combat low growth. Interest rates do not fix depressed economies without economic policy, so you don't implement an economic policy to create a monetary change which won't fix the problem in the first place. 

Modifié par billy the squid, 18 août 2013 - 12:23 .

[Xilizhra]

I think the personal attacks are getting rather thick on the ground here.

Anyway, I sort of lost track of the discussion. I suppose my opinion is that ME3... could have been done as a conventional victory, maybe, but Shepard's not really the sort of person to be directly involved and would only do prep work. As it stands, while simply gathering troops for a big delaying action frequently doesn't feel that heroic, it's sort of close to the best Bioware could really do, keeping the Reaper plot.

[Br3admax]

NeonFlux117 wrote...

David7204 wrote...

That is complete nonsense. ME 3 is a not a 'bro shooter' at all. In fact, it has significantly more character interactions than ME 1.

oh come on man, it's a third person shooter with some RPG elements (ME1 and ME2 are both RPG's with action elements). And the character interactions you're talking about are the stuff that's not in the convo wheel. Stuff like James and Garru's mess hall scene (which is epic BTW). And the MP is all bro shooter, Gears of War esque type of horde mode. And the Multiplayer is a significant part of ME3. It was really well done, and obviously a lot of effort was put into it. I know in ME2, they wanted MP, but decide not to because there was no time and they wanted to make the SP the focal point. 

I would argue that ME2 was a lot more shooter than any of them though. Sure you can stomp husk heads like any 
Gear soldier in 3, but 2 tried to make it as barebones as possible.

[David7204]

This is America, and we ain't got no Chancellor of the Exchequer. We ain't got no 'base rate of interest' either. We have the discount rate, which is what the Fed lends money out to banks on. But that's generally higher than the market rate.

Modifié par David7204, 18 août 2013 - 12:23 .

[Karlone123]

I would simply prefer that the Reaper plot make sense.

[Synergizer]

If you're now debating the weakness of the Reaper forces, I'd interject with the concept based around the ancient AI aka the "reapers" being primarily tasked with finding a solution to preserve organic life. I doubt the AI was close-minded to other solutions, as we all know, the actions of Shepard forced the AI to reconsider its current solution.

The argument that the reapers MUST only be defeated by direct force or finding a weakness implies that the AI behind the reapers would not be reasonable, note that it allowed for co-operative forces to communicate with it via the crucible after all. The extended cut implies that the galaxy would lose against the Reapers if they chose to fight them, but could survive by communicating with the AI commanding the Reapers.

Some old military strategy for you: "Do I not destroy my enemies when I make them my friends?”

[Grand Admiral Cheesecake]

Synergizer wrote...


Some old military strategy for you: "Do I not destroy my enemies when I make them my friends?”

I'd really rather just straight up destroy that particular enemy. I don't need robotic cuttlefish buddies.

[Steelcan]

Synergizer wrote...

The argument that the reapers MUST only be defeated by direct force or finding a weakness implies that the AI behind the reapers would not be reasonable, note that it allowed for co-operative forces to communicate with it via the crucible after all.

When the AI behind them is as retarded as the Catalyst, negotiations aren't going to be fruitful.

Modifié par Steelcan, 18 août 2013 - 12:32 .

[billy the squid]

David7204 wrote...

This is America, and we ain't got no Chancellor of the Exchequer. We ain't got no 'base rate of interest' either. We have the discount rate, which is what the Fed lends money out to banks on. But that's generally higher than the market rate.

Yes you do. Its called the Federal Funds Rate. That is your base rate of interest. And no it's not higher that the market rate, its the equivalent of the LIBOR rate for interbank lending and what market rates are based on. Unless your market rate is currently less than 0.25% the Fed's rate of interest.

Just stop, you haven't got a bloody clue what your talking about. I'd say I'm surprised that I know more about your monetary and economics system than you do, but I'm not.

Modifié par billy the squid, 18 août 2013 - 12:35 .

[Karlone123]

Grand Admiral Cheesecake wrote...

Synergizer wrote...


Some old military strategy for you: "Do I not destroy my enemies when I make them my friends?”

I'd really rather just straight up destroy that particular enemy. I don't need robotic cuttlefish buddies.

We have to take EDI with us everywhere, we don't need another one.

[Br3admax]

Actual the other banks charge a little more interest. Gotta make a profit somehow.