Social NintenZone Social 5 - Thanks, Everyone

[Tree Gelbman]

The reasons why Mei are overpowered are that she has range in her primary fire, range in her secondary fire, she can heal herself to full health, she has a wall that has far too much health to the point it gets really annoying in modes like Capture the Flag. You can practically see the strategy coming from a mile away when you see a Mei on the enemy team.

And it's just to the point where if I see her cute chubby round face coming my way I accept my death because the character is just the most annoying thing about Overwatch.

 

[redfeatherraven]

Yeah, except no. Scrub Meis are still pretty inept at taking out even the faster heroes like Solider and Sombra.

Symmetra does some damage for me because of her long range but even she falls pray to the overpowered queen of Ice.

The character simply needs a giant ****ing nerf or retooling. She's essentially a beginner's cheat box as is.

That's possible.

Orrrrrr.

She could just be desperately annoying to fight.

Additional notes:

Of those, Pharah is probably the easiest to stay at range with. Justice rains from above and all that. Stay well away from corridors and enclosed spaces - anywhere that short range cryo can easily reach - and try to keep to high ceilings or open air. Worst case, stay behind your Reinhardt and let him get frozen first.

Mind, if the Mei picks you off while airborne, at that point I think you've just sorely underestimated the Mei player you're dealing with.

 

[Tree Gelbman]

Still with the advice maintaining she needs a nerf.

Granted I don't play much of anyone of the three suggested she's weak against other than Junkrat.

Still for someone who was pretty much created to be a counter to Roadhog. She has too much of an effect on OTHER heroes.

She's gotta get that nerf and it puzzles me after all the complaining since release for it, she still has yet to get it.

Also competitive tiers do not equal the majority of gameplay, bud. Most people aren't picking up Overwatch to be competitive. They're picking it up for fun.

 

[Deleted member]

Never assume common sense is common among everyone in the world. That's a bad way to debate.

Well, it still wasn't a debate, again, it's just surprising.

If they don't know, explain. If they do know, cool. It's understandable he thought it was common sense. However, that doesn't make it a constructive point to make either way and still adds nothing of use to the conversation. The point is to always try to help somebody remember or teach them something if they're wrong.

He was questioning why someone that lives and interacts with western society, I'm the one with the debate mind set, Shisho is a lot more casual and a lot less carefree with his attitude.

I stopped using common sense as a legit point when I realized that it's actually subjective. What's easy for one person to understand may not for another. People think differently. Could be mental issues, different opinions, etc. I get why he said it. But it still was an issue because it provided nothing constructive.

Sure, fair enough. But again, I'm pretty sure "Hmmmm, how can I be constructive" wasn't on his mind(In fact I doubt it's on anyone's mind most of the time.), again, it was just bizarre to him.

And yes, you have to remember that education has changed a lot. As you said, some things aren't as emphasized. Hell, I don't remember anything about Biology outside of high school, and about all I remember at best was DNA stuff, and barely. I'm pretty sure Math, Health, Gym, and Social Studies were significantly higher points at where I went to. Another thing is that I went to Catholic Schools. Evolution was definitely not a high priority due to that at the time. Thankfully that's changed a lot, but it wasn't when I went there. I don't remember honestly any Biology stuff during Grade School. Now, it could be because I had zero interest in it, or it was because it wasn't taught properly. I don't remember. But yeah, as you said, different priorities now.

Sure, but keep in mind, insects being animals in no big, giant controversy.(Until now, I guess.) I some people mistake humans for not being animals, but the thing is that obviously him and I would know the reasons why someone would not know that.

But someone not knowing that insects are animals? That's a pretty weird statement to hear especially when it's something that's acknowledged even by people who go out of their way to defy everything scientific. And for the record, people can believe whatever they want to themselves, but it's good to be corrected if misinformation is corrected.

Shisho wasn't exactly rude, you see, you're exaggerating. You can't take everything he says to heart, he's one of my best friends but he talks to me like cranky old man too. It's just not his general tone when it comes to posts. There's TONS of members here like that.

 

[PsychoIncarnate]

Insects are a type of crustacean though, and crustaceans are animals

 

[Deleted member]

Animal: a living organism that feeds on organic matter, typically having specialized sense organs and nervous system and able to respond rapidly to stimuli.


Insects are most definitely animals.

Insects are a type of crustacean though, and crustaceans are animals

That's not what this discussion is about though, it's about the reaction to the statement that they aren't.

 

[PsychoIncarnate]

That's not what this discussion is about though, it's about the reaction to the statement that they aren't.

I'm trying to figure out what the hell is the context to this statement

 

[Aetheri]

I'm pretty sure fungi are in their own category apart from plantae and anamalia.

There are some things I'm not sure why I know, and that's one of them.

They are....they are classed within their own Kingdom much like plants and animals have their own kingdoms also, but going back (way back) they likely shared a common ancestor with animals before branching off separately into fungi...

It's honestly kinda strange to think about...look at a mushroom and look at a flower and knowing that you have more in common with the mushroom...

Insects are a type of crustacean though, and crustaceans are animals

I feel like you're joking but I'm honestly not sure if you are...

But if you're not

 

[allison]

Everyone knows insects are actually plants

 

[Swamp Sensei]

Insects are a type of crustacean though

No they are not!

Insects have a distinct set of characteristics which all must have if they are insects. They must have three pairs of legs (even though sometimes they may appear different as larvae, such as caterpillars), a set of mouth parts, and a head, thorax, and abdomen.

Arachnids have eight legs, and examples are spiders, ticks, and mites.

Crustaceans have hard body shells and are usually aquatic, although some, such as woodlice, live on land.

 

[PsychoIncarnate]

They are....they are classed within their own Kingdom much like plants and animals have their own kingdoms also, but going back (way back) they likely shared a common ancestor with animals before branching off separately into fungi...

It's honestly kinda strange to think about...look at a mushroom and look at a flower and knowing that you have more in common with the mushroom...


I feel like you're joking but I'm honestly not sure if you are...

But if you're not

Nope, I'm not joking. Insects are now classified as a form of crustacean

 

[Tree Gelbman]

I love how 80 percent of the thread is ''Insects, man."

Meanwhile I'm just over here with another person making up the other ten percent about an Overwatch character.

Basically this thread in a nutshell.

 

[Deleted member]

I'm trying to figure out what the hell is the context to this statement

We're not discussing whether or not insects are animals. We're discussing some drama caused by that statement.

But most people don't really read these discussions, so I'm not surprised.

 

[allison]

Ducks are really protists, which is why they can only be seen under a microscope.

 

[N3ON]

Someone needs to call up Oasis to drop some buggy knowledge for you dummies.

 

[Deleted member]

Nope, I'm not joking. Insects are now classified as a form of crustacean

Nah, both crustaceans and insects are classified under arthropods.

Someone needs to call up Oasis to drop some buggy knowledge for you dummies.

You have no proof that I'm not Oasis.

 

[Swamp Sensei]

Nope, I'm not joking. Insects are now classified as a form of crustacean

Give me proof.

 

[N3ON]

Bats are birds.

 

[PsychoIncarnate]

No they are not!

1. Insects (“Hexapoda”) are not a sister group of crustaceans, as was indicated by some molecular studies. Nor are they the sister group of myriapods, the traditional arrangement supported by morphology. Instead, insects are nested within crustaceans (see Figure 1). In the same sense that birds are dinosaurs, then, insects are crustaceans.

2. The sister group of insects within crustaceans comprises two rather obscure taxa that were long thought to be primitive: the cephalocarids and the remipedes. Regier et al., however, find these two groups (see below) belong to the monophyletic clade called Xenocarida. Their “primitiveness” is thus deceptive. Now the fact that some crustaceans, like the Xenocarida, are more closely related to insects than to other crustaceans means that the group “Crustacea” is paraphyletic, since, by not including insects, it doesn’t include all descendants of the common ancestor. If we want to be punctilious taxonomists, we’d have to dump the name “Crustacea”, or else reclassify insects as crustaceans.

3. The Mandibulata, mandible-carrying arthropods, is now confirmed as a real monophyletic group, since the myriapods now join all the other mandible-bearing beasts, as they should.

Maybe this seems arcane to those who aren’t interested in arthropods, but it really does seem to settle long-standing questions about where the insects came from. And it sets the standard for the numbers of species and genes that should be included in a good phylogenetic analysis.


Also

https://decapoda.nhm.org/outreach/InsectCrustaceaNHM.pdf

 

[redfeatherraven]

Still with the advice maintaining she needs a nerf.

Granted I don't play much of anyone of the three suggested she's weak against other than Junkrat.

She's gotta get that nerf and it puzzles me after all the complaining since release for it, she still has yet to get it.

She really doesn't need one.

You wanna beat Mei, fight her outside her own terms.

List the characters you usually use and the maps and parts of those maps you're having trouble with. I'll try to help.

Since you mentioned Junkrat, let me know how you typically use him.

Also competitive tiers do not equal the majority of gameplay, bud. Most people aren't picking up Overwatch to be competitive. They're picking it up for fun.

So like me maining Pika in Melee?

Preacher, choir. Trust me.

Doesn't change my statements yet. Let's solve the problem.

I love how 80 percent of the thread is ''Insects, man."

Meanwhile I'm just over here with another percent making up the other ten percent about an Overwatch character.

Basically this thread in a nutshell.

Def.

 

[N3ON]

You have no proof that I'm not Oasis.

If you were Oasis our bdsm conversation would've gone very differently. ;P

 

[Deleted member]

1. Insects (“Hexapoda”) are not a sister group of crustaceans, as was indicated by some molecular studies. Nor are they the sister group of myriapods, the traditional arrangement supported by morphology. Instead, insects are nested within crustaceans (see Figure 1). In the same sense that birds are dinosaurs, then, insects are crustaceans.

2. The sister group of insects within crustaceans comprises two rather obscure taxa that were long thought to be primitive: the cephalocarids and the remipedes. Regier et al., however, find these two groups (see below) belong to the monophyletic clade called Xenocarida. Their “primitiveness” is thus deceptive. Now the fact that some crustaceans, like the Xenocarida, are more closely related to insects than to other crustaceans means that the group “Crustacea” is paraphyletic, since, by not including insects, it doesn’t include all descendants of the common ancestor. If we want to be punctilious taxonomists, we’d have to dump the name “Crustacea”, or else reclassify insects as crustaceans.

3. The Mandibulata, mandible-carrying arthropods, is now confirmed as a real monophyletic group, since the myriapods now join all the other mandible-bearing beasts, as they should.

Maybe this seems arcane to those who aren’t interested in arthropods, but it really does seem to settle long-standing questions about where the insects came from. And it sets the standard for the numbers of species and genes that should be included in a good phylogenetic analysis.


Also

https://decapoda.nhm.org/outreach/InsectCrustaceaNHM.pdf

Nope, I see why what you're talking about now, but you're stating it incorrectly. That doesn't mean that insects are crustaceans, it just means that they descend from them.(Which I already knew.) Just like how birds aren't dinosaurs, although they descend from dinosaurs and are very closely related.

 

[PsychoIncarnate]

Nope, I see why what you're talking about now, but you're stating it incorrectly. That doesn't mean that insects are crustaceans, it just means that they descend from them.(Which I already knew.) Just like how birds aren't dinosaurs, although they descend from dinosaurs and are very closely related.

Well, regardless they are "Pancrustaceans"

Apparently this is a debate of whether "Insects are crustaceans" that plagues arthropod sites

 

[Deleted member]

Well, regardless they are "Pancrustaceans"

Apparently this is a debate of whether "Insects are crustaceans" that plagues arthropod sites

They're definitely closely related, but insects still don't have crustacean qualities, so they aren't crustacean.

 

[Aetheri]

1. Insects (“Hexapoda”) are not a sister group of crustaceans, as was indicated by some molecular studies. Nor are they the sister group of myriapods, the traditional arrangement supported by morphology. Instead, insects are nested within crustaceans (see Figure 1). In the same sense that birds are dinosaurs, then, insects are crustaceans.

2. The sister group of insects within crustaceans comprises two rather obscure taxa that were long thought to be primitive: the cephalocarids and the remipedes. Regier et al., however, find these two groups (see below) belong to the monophyletic clade called Xenocarida. Their “primitiveness” is thus deceptive. Now the fact that some crustaceans, like the Xenocarida, are more closely related to insects than to other crustaceans means that the group “Crustacea” is paraphyletic, since, by not including insects, it doesn’t include all descendants of the common ancestor. If we want to be punctilious taxonomists, we’d have to dump the name “Crustacea”, or else reclassify insects as crustaceans.

3. The Mandibulata, mandible-carrying arthropods, is now confirmed as a real monophyletic group, since the myriapods now join all the other mandible-bearing beasts, as they should.

Maybe this seems arcane to those who aren’t interested in arthropods, but it really does seem to settle long-standing questions about where the insects came from. And it sets the standard for the numbers of species and genes that should be included in a good phylogenetic analysis.


Also

https://decapoda.nhm.org/outreach/InsectCrustaceaNHM.pdf

This is almost as messed up as the 'Crocodiles are birds not reptiles' studies...

This doesn't really prove that they are crustaceans though, just a common ancestry...which makes sense looking at them...



Long story short, I will gladly eat Crustaceans but as for insects....well actually that depends but generally I'll only eat Crustaceans...

 

[PsychoIncarnate]

A couple months ago Hexapoda were listed AS crustaceans online

Last week Myriapods were listed within Pancrustacea

Arthropod classification seems to change rapidly and without consensus

 

[Aetheri]

Man....I don't know what's more confusing...



The Classification of Living Things

or Breath of the Wild's Timeline placement...
(seriously though there's so many damn contradictions in BotW it's not even funny, and it's hard to tell if some evidence is actual evidence or if it's just an easter egg or reference, I still think it's Child timeline though)

 

[PsychoIncarnate]

This is almost as messed up as the 'Crocodiles are birds not reptiles' studies...

This doesn't really prove that they are crustaceans though, just a common ancestry...which makes sense looking at them...



Long story short, I will gladly eat Crustaceans but as for insects....well actually that depends but generally I'll only eat Crustaceans...

I know exactly what you're talking about

because Crocodiles, birds and dinosaurs are all "Archosaurs"

 

[allison]

Ducks are really protists, which is why they can only be seen under a microscope.

More science facts:

• Isaac Newton was a nerd who got beat up by an apple. As revenge, he invented gravity, thus tethering all life forms to the earth.
• Most "buildings" aren't buildings. Technically, they are edifices.
• The only reason to use the word "edifice" is to show off the fact that you know the word "edifice".
• Celsius is always colder than Fahrenheit because the numbers are lower.

 

[PsychoIncarnate]

More science facts:

• Isaac Newton was a nerd who got beat up by an apple. As revenge, he invented gravity, thus tethering all life forms to the earth.
• Most "buildings" aren't buildings. Technically, they are edifices.
• The only reason to use the word "edifice" is to show off the fact that you know the word "edifice".
• Celsius is always colder than Fahrenheit because the numbers are lower.

How many people can you fit into your edifices?

 

[Deleted member]

A couple months ago Hexapoda were listed AS crustaceans online

Last week Myriapods were listed within Pancrustacea

Arthropod classification seems to change rapidly and without consensus

Is this from the same source or multiple? Because if it's from multiple, then keep in mind there's many different classification systems, they're not all the same. Even one term or classification can have many different meaning/a different placement in classification.

 

[Verde Coeden Scalesworth]

Well, it still wasn't a debate, again, it's just surprising.

The reaction was a problem however. But I already pointed out why more than once.

He was questioning why someone that lives and interacts with western society, I'm the one with the debate mind set, Shisho is a lot more casual and a lot less carefree with his attitude.

As I said, the reaction to it was overall poor and didn't help the situation at hand.

Sure, fair enough. But again, I'm pretty sure "Hmmmm, how can I be constructive" wasn't on his mind(In fact I doubt it's on anyone's mind most of the time.), again, it was just bizarre to him.

Even outside of a debate, you should be constructive here. His statement really didn't help the situation. Debate or not, that kind of response was poor.

Sure, but keep in mind, insects being animals in no big, giant controversy.(Until now, I guess.) I some people mistake humans for not being animals, but the thing is that obviously him and I would know the reasons why someone would not know that.

Nobody is really making a controversy over that point anyway. Everybody agrees that they're animals. There was a debate(and yes, I was clearly debating) why it makes sense some might not know that. It was a hypothetical situation.

But someone not knowing that insects are animals? That's a pretty weird statement to hear especially when it's something that's acknowledged even by people who go out of their way to defy everything scientific. And for the record, people can believe whatever they want to themselves, but it's good to be corrected if misinformation is corrected.

Yes, but he didn't correct anything. And that was the actual problem. Nothing wrong with correcting anything(also nobody was saying they weren't animals anyway. They were giving hypotheticals of why people might believe differently).

Shisho wasn't exactly rude, you see, you're exaggerating. You can't take everything he says to heart, he's one of my best friends but he talks to me like cranky old man too. It's just not his general tone when it comes to posts. There's TONS of members here like that.

If a person is cranky towards me, I'll still call them out on it because I do not enjoy being talked to like that. Realistically, my response made sense. A lot of people really hate being cranked at. Not saying you should expect an annoyed response by default(because everybody thinks differently), but I reply immediately to stuff like that with annoyance automatically. Wasn't saying he was being rude anyway. Not being constructive = /=being rude. If he was outright being rude, I wouldn't have even replied. Would've just either ignored it, or if it was outright flaming, another action would've been taken(I can't really delve into this much). I was solely pointing out why his statement bothered me.

Either way, this is really off-topic and there's a lot of misunderstandings going on. Let's either move this to PM or just let it drop. I got nothing against you or him either. Never did.

 

[allison]

How many people can you fit into your edifices?

 

[PsychoIncarnate]

Is this from the same source or multiple? Because if it's from multiple, then keep in mind there's many different classification systems, they're not all the same. Even one term or classification can have many different meaning/a different placement in classification.

Kind of a combination of both

Also use wikipedia as a source, which is probably not a good idea

As it changes daily

 

[Deleted member]

The reaction was a problem however. But I already pointed out why more than once.


As I said, the reaction to it was overall poor and didn't help the situation at hand.


Even outside of a debate, you should be constructive here. His statement really didn't help the situation. Debate or not, that kind of response was poor.


Nobody is really making a controversy over that point anyway. Everybody agrees that they're animals. There was a debate(and yes, I was clearly debating) why it makes sense some might not know that. It was a hypothetical situation.


Yes, but he didn't correct anything. And that was the actual problem. Nothing wrong with correcting anything(also nobody was saying they weren't animals anyway. They were giving hypotheticals of why people might believe differently).


If a person is cranky towards me, I'll still call them out on it because I do not enjoy being talked to like that. Realistically, my response made sense. A lot of people really hate being cranked at. Not saying you should expect an annoyed response by default(because everybody thinks differently), but I reply immediately to stuff like that with annoyance automatically. Wasn't saying he was being rude anyway. Not being constructive = being rude. If he was outright being rude, I wouldn't have even replied. Would've just either ignored it, or if it was outright flaming, another action would've been taken(I can't really delve into this much). I was solely pointing out why his statement bothered me.

Either way, this is really off-topic and there's a lot of misunderstandings going on. Let's either move this to PM or just let it drop. I got nothing against you or him either. Never did.

It you're making superficial rules, I've never heard anyone ever talk about a forum as if it was a presidential debate in all of my years of being on them, including this one. I don't even mean cranky as if he's seriously cranky, it's pretty comical if anything, in fact. If it wasn't, then I wouldn't use a silly word like cranky. Unlike some actually degrading people, but no one really ever complains about them for whatever reason.

All he really did was state why it was pretty weird, which I'd argue is pretty reasonable. He was basically just wondering why someone wouldn't know that an insect, it's not like he called anyone ********. It's not even like he's some top class wealthy private school student, he's a student in Brazil, which from what I've heard doesn't have the best education system to say the least.

>Off topic
>Literally the main topic of the thread for awhile

Kind of a combination of both

Also use wikipedia as a source, which is probably not a good idea

As it changes daily

Yeah, if something's constantly changing on Wikipedia, it's probably not reliable. I usually try to look into multiple scientific sources.

 

[Verde Coeden Scalesworth]

Stuff

Let me rephrase. This is completely off-topic. Any other replies should be taken to PM if you still wish to discuss it. If you don't wish to, let's just let it drop with no more replies to that.

-----------------

Anyway, I recently watched a Zelda II 3D playthrough. It was a quick game made, as it only contained one dungeon. Done very well, though. It was a dungeon crawler style, bar the gameplay staying the same. Only thing that made the game clearly hard was how the camera design made some stuff near impossible. Jumping sucked, but the timing for enemy attacking wasn't that bad. However, platforming ended with death for the LPer at least twice. He never died any other time, though. Also, it contained stores, using the experience system more as money. I think it was basically Zelda II's world and enemies but with the Zelda I money mechanics. What is notable is that all the experience given literally gave that much rupees instead.

 

[Verde Coeden Scalesworth]

Important double post. Mostly cause this is a mod statement.

Image-only posts are spam and considering against the rules. Always add more content, including relevant words. You can even start another conversation too. The image having some words on it does not circumvent this rule.

Also, do not reply to this message in general(PM or otherwise). It's just a friendly reminder to everyone.

 

[Strider_Bond00J]

So it seems the reviews on Yooka-Laylee are a bit all over the place. I'll probably wait on a Switch port myself, since I'd probably get a kick to have that sort of N64 Rare style on a Nintendo platform again. I do at least hope that Playtonic see some success in it, and if they feel like it, maybe try to nurture a new franchise...? But I'm just wishful thinking for a product that's not officially out on the market or even in my collection. I don't know where it'll go from here, but I hope that by the time I get to it, I find some enjoyment out of the final product.

something something isopods are samurai bug warriors who belong to the human form of destruction.

 

[Aurane]

Also, do not reply to this message in general(PM or otherwise)

I got to ask; Is this some form of new policy or something? You're the only mod I've seen type this in reminder posts in all the years I've been here. Just curious.

 

[Verde Coeden Scalesworth]

I got to ask; Is this some form of new policy or something? You're the only mod I've seen type this in reminder posts in all the years I've been here. Just curious.

It's because people constantly question what I say, which undermines my authority, which also means other people don't take the mod statements seriously. The disclaimer actually helps prevent this.

It's just how I mod specifically, though.