Okay, wow, that is impressive. I am impressed.
P.S.
Congratulations! You were actually right about something! Can you tell the difference?
Unneeded explicitly personal attack is unneeded.
I agree, I felt sort of bad about it, but there was a good reason for it too. You see, your statements are reliable incapable of determining accuracy and inaccuracy. If you are just a troll, then good for you! Well done! Advanced troll achievement gained!
If not, then that statement is for you, and it is not an insult, it is am honest, if rhetorical, question. And an honest congratulations on your achievement. If that is the case then you clearly suffer from a very profound lack of awareness about how deduction works and I expect that you find yourself wrong about a great many things where you can't just shout people down. A bit more consideration might help you a great deal. Likely though, you are instead on the receiving end of such treatment, as is so often the case with such things... I really can't help you but do wish you the best.
If, on the other hand, we are trying to balance out personal attacks...
RAM comes to make up more stuff trying to "counter" it.
the stuff you post is blatantly false.
your baseless assumptions.
I'm fine with arguing/discussing this kind of stuff with other people, but really.
Other people don't just make up stuff
at least he makes an effort to actually support his arguments. You, on the other hand...
as always, blatantly untrue.
if you actually read
RAM pretends
Either RAM conveniently ignored this, or just doesn't understand this.
If any of these statements were justified, then they would be legitimate criticisms. They are not. They are just slander. They look like a malicious attempt to sideline someone by spreading false rumours. You have often claimed all of these things. "Enough repetition makes something true" perhaps? Not once have you actually presented an argument to justify them. If you are not going to establish what, specifically, I am presenting as false evidence, then these are purely insults, and far more perverse and malicious than than any mere slight on your character.
RAM comes to make up more stuff trying to "counter" it.
Also in response to the "A mist cloud would likely be blown away":
Nope.
See our "channeling mist" spell which explicitly works against wind by being continuously generated, which is the same thing a Tower of Mist would be doing. Actually, I just know you'll say "NUH-UH" then make up another thing saying that technically it doesn't work. But let me pre-emptively prove you wrong:
Obscuring Mist: Cloaks a squad in a fog cloud, hiding their numbers and equipment, and making them harder to hit at range.
Variant (Channeled Fog): A denser form of Obscuring mist, continuously generated.
Revision: Channeled Fog [5]
Rather than just casting a cloud of mist and moving it about at will, our Mages have learned how to continuously conjure the fog. This means the cloud will grow larger and larger the longer they stand still, and moving will leave a trail of fog. This leaves more ambiguity as to how many men are hidden in the mist, and natural wind can't dispell the fog quickly enough to leave the men uncovered. Only time will tell if the Moskurg's control of the weather will be enough to dispell our cover.
And I don't believe they've ever actually countered this. It's just not particularly useful. But even if I missed something and it's not viable because of wind (if you do want to say this, please bring evidence for once), do you know how we can fix that? More mist. Do you know what makes a lot more mist? Towers of Mist.
It is nice to finally see an attempt to argue something. You are sadly wrong here. As I posted shortly afterwards, there is a direct quote from The G.M. that the fog is blown by wind. Channelled fog is generated at the point of origin continuously and then obeys the wind. A fog tower would produce enough fog to cover an entire region. It would, however, not cover the region, it would only cover the parts that the wind blew it towards. Likely toward the tundra.
Now, granted, there may be ways around this. Perhaps some sort of magical "ladder" that exists in all places and the fog can link to this and "climb" it. Or perhaps the fog is just faster than the winds that the enemy uses to oppose it. Or perhaps the fog is not material fog and doesn't respond to physical impetus. The fog's points of origin might be numerous and distant and thus can be moved to account for the wind and spread everywhere regardless. There are possibilities, but as it stands, fog is useless against wind unless you can put the fog-generator ahead of the thing that you are trying to hide, and make the fog-generator extremely obvious in the process.
RAM comes to make up more stuff trying to "counter" it.
Personally, I feel that recharging a magem in an hour would be optimistic, a day would be pessimistic, a week would be something that we ought to be prepared for, five minutes would be a thousand birthdays at once, and "enough to maintain a third of our current rate of fire" would be something that we can potentially hope for, but really shouldn't.
Note how RAM is using this as evidence, yet it's literally just baseless assumptions. And I mean "baseless". There is no base to this statement. You're just saying "Well, I bet this is going to be bad, so therefore I'm right at saying it's bad!" like in nearly every argument you've made recently.
And here, again, you try to defend your statements. But can't help throwing out generalised slurs and consistently fail to have a valid statement. You are hinging your argument on me making unfounded statements about your design. I have not here made any unfounded statement about your design. I made it very clear that it was just my personal opinion as to what was likely. If I had cited it as fact then you would have had a point, but as it is I just presented what were very clearly my own opinions as to what we could expect and left it to others to discern if they agreed. You could have freely made your own personal opinions as to what the likely outcomes would be, that would have been a valid opposition, instead you just accused me of lying when my statement did not, in fact, contain any data that could have been reasonably construed as a lie even if it were completely inaccurate. <-and there is reasoning, not the finest ever, but an actual attempt to convey some justification for my position. Rather than just stating that my opponent is incompetent and failing to support the statement.
I am just looking for a little recognition that Chiefwaffles is slandering my ability to justify my statements, and is doing so with nothing to support those claims. We are both entitled to our own opinions. We can clearly state that one another are wrong. But making a concerted effort to establish that someone has no validity had better be backed up by some valid arguments or else it is just trying to murder someone. Which is exactly the correct term to use when you try to completely annul someone's presence.
Electricity doesn't just take the path of least resistance. It takes all paths. It's just that some materials are resistive enough to make the amount of electricity passing through negligible.
That may be true, I wouldn't know, but negligible quantities are not important.
Note that lighting goes from the sky to the ground. Air does conduct. Not well, but it does do it. Faraday cages work. You put a person in the middle, even a tall person, they will be safe. The path through the air and through the person is a path, most notably, the shortest path by distance, but it is not electrocuted...
The problem with steel is that it's not a great conductor
Not compared to copper, no, but compared to a human? It is actually quite rather good.
Observe the combat phase where Moskurg introduced their counter:
Titled "Heretics Fallacy", this frightening spell allows user to exert greater control over where and how lightning strikes. They can't force it to perform impossible tasks, but they can encourage it to flow through an Arstotzkan soldier rather than down a lightning rod.
"They can't force it to perform impossible tasks" means essentially that they can path the lightning through the air to the armor. But to counter resistive crystal layering, they'd have to fundamentally break some very fundamental laws of how electricity works. Way more-so than they currently are.
Nope, they are breaking them completely right now. I am pretty sure that what that statement actually means is "lightning won't currently path through a window, up a flight of stairs, through a keyhole, along a curtain-rail, into a human head, and then down a drain. Which, ironically, would be more possible than ignoring a lightning rod. It would just need the right conductors in the right places to form the right path...
TL;DR: Electricity largely goes through the path of least resistance. When a human is in conductive armor, electricity will largely go through the human instead of the ground. When the human is covered by resistive crystal, electricity will largely go through the ground instead of through the human.
Which is why Faraday Cages are not a real thing.
Now, sure, magic lightning is obviously weird, so your made-up story about how lightning works ais as good as anyone's, but if we are talking about real lightning, then no, just no, not even a little bit.
Author
Topic: Wands Race - [Arstotzka] {COMPLETED} (Read 393596 times)