After reading this thread, the following statement came to mind. It's happening every time I see an Aizen thread lately:

After reading this thread, the following statement came to mind. It's happening every time I see an Aizen thread lately:

the main point of the op is that i made no sense to force us to play through DA2 with avalie as the only sheild tank. She was not tall or big or had any musicle mass that i could see.
Then you didn't look close enough.
1. Actually, they have. The shield bash knocking down the gate was a placeholder animation.
2. Quite a few cultures had female warriors and no real life warrior could compate to a video game one, male or female
3. But you can see how a man can?
It's a troll thread
the main point of the op is that i made no sense to force us to play through DA2 with avalie as the only sheild tank. She was not tall or big or had any musicle mass that i could see.
But if you praise real life woman warriors, that mean it has less to do with Aveline being a woman warrior, and more to do with her lack of mass (that lack of mass being less because she is a woman and more because of her body type). But your original post says it is because she is a woman. I am so confused.
Incidentally, in the opening you can see her exposed arms, and they are pretty sinewy.
Of course it makes no sense for Aveline to be a tank. Didn't you listen to Isabela? She's a woman-shaped battering ram. Get a clue, OP.
Cuz nubian queens were body builders and romans were WoW gamers.
no they were known as legendary battle stratiegs that were unmatch by any one of that time. They are mentiond in the bible as well. romans were powerful but the one time they tried nubia they ralize just how far apart they were in strenth. The queens were monster to their enemys.
If Nakano Takeko were in Dragon Age, she would be Qunari, and she would respond, "No."
I mean, look at those EYES. They burn the SOUL.
Sexy dragon lady>scary samurai lady.
![]()
But if you praise real life woman warriors, that mean it has less to do with Aveline being a woman warrior, and more to do with her lack of mass (that lack of mass being less because she is a woman and more because of her body type). But your original post says it is because she is a woman. I am so confused.
Incidentally, in the opening you can see her exposed arms, and they are pretty sinewy.
i could say the same about alister but men have always been known as naturaly phsicaly stronger than women.its only in our socity that this way of think is look at as wrong. So cassadra should not be a tank or at least the only one.
Sexy dragon lady>scary samurai lady.
Amen. And that's why we have sexy women battering down steel gates.
i could say the same about alister but men have always been known as naturaly phsicaly stronger than women.its only in our socity that this way of think is look at as wrong. So cassadra should not be a tank or at least the only one.
So why the praise for Ethiopian warrior queens and such? It really muddies what you're saying and makes your stance unclear.
i could say the same about alister but men have always been known as naturaly phsicaly stronger than women.its only in our socity that this way of think is look at as wrong. So cassadra should not be a tank or at least the only one.
Do you know that the inborn natural difference is only about 10-15%? Which means that on average 90-85% men/women have the same capabilities. But that is before nurture comes into play.
the main point of the op is that i made no sense
You're right, you do make no sense.
So why the praise for Ethiopian warrior queens and such? It really muddies what you're saying and makes your stance unclear.
that likely the point... or he really likes warrior women.
So why the praise for Ethiopian warrior queens and such? It really muddies what you're saying and makes your stance unclear.
did i ever say i was completly againts women warrior? archers roughs and mage makes more sense. But a female tank? sorry no
that likely the point... or he really likes warrior women.
trying to figure me out is like trying to pull the moon out of a pond
did i ever say i was completly againts women warrior? archers roughs and mage makes more sense. But a female tank? sorry no
The title of the thread?
did i ever say i was completly againts women warrior? archers roughs and mage makes more sense. But a female tank? sorry no
It did come across that way, yes.
did i ever say i was completly againts women warrior? archers roughs and mage makes more sense. But a female tank? sorry no
Uhuh, 3 times.
Do you know that the inborn natural difference is only about 10-15%? Which means that on average 90-85% men/women have the same capabilities. But that is before nurture comes into play.
this is what i mean. All they gotta do is threw a random statment out their and say "Scienctific study shows" and any1 will belive it.
trying to figure me out is like trying to pull the moon out of a pond
since when were you under the impression I hadn't
People seem to have problem with understanding the entertainment value of this thread. Some hardheads are throwing around even banns.
There seem to be lack of understanding that op means Aveline is not suited for the task physically, even this is just a game. In a way op is still correct. Those examples we have seen here are 1 out of 10000 woman who were able to take part in the battles in old times (modern day not withstanding because firearms). The crude fact is that men are more suited in physical fights, in times when sword and axe were weapons to be used women were not part of the battlefield crew. Simple as that. And tank in those times were large men wealding large weapons. As an example axe men who were used in armies to shock and awe enemies with their size and power.
The title of the thread?
let me explain
this is what i mean. All they gotta do is threw a random statment out their and say "Scienctific study shows" and any1 will belive it.
Why not? Sounds reasonable.