VivaLebowski

EBA Battlegroup: 1 Submarine, 2 Destroyers, 3 Missile Cruisers, 1 Carrier. Transferring 10 F-18's and 12 F-22's to the Carrier. Industrial capacity from Pennsylvania has been transferred to Doc for the time being. Completed production of last three, so have 5 more MBT's, mobile AA, and 2000 additional infantry. Recruiting 5 additional MBT's and 2000 infantry.

IDK seems like maybe they should save the sprees for the special weapons...and it would be kinda silly having a spree with the rockets seeing as how its only 4 shots. Of course, when you have a weapon like the Halo 3 Beam rifle that is functionally the same as the Sniper it should count for these sprees. I just feel like we don't want medal creep so they start losing their value.

'Ello and Welcome.

Building 5 MBT's, 5 Mobile AA. Recruiting an additional 2,000 Troops. (We are allowed to recruit troops right?) Current EBA Territories: Florida (Doc) Penn. (Viva) Del (Viva). EBA Battlegroup: 1 Submarine, 2 Destroyers, 3 Missile Cruisers. Current Delaware Unit Totals: -6,000 Militia -4,000 Paratroopers -6 Coastal Defense Batteries -6 Guided Missile AA Batteries -1 B-2 Stealth Bomber -2 B-52 Bombers -2 AC-130 -2 C-130 Transports -2 Warthog Ground attack planes -12 F-22 Raptors. -25 Abrams MBT's -10 F-18's -5 Mobile AA

I'm going to respond here beacuse you asked me some specific questions there, but after this I'm not going to reply anymore, which you want anyway. 1) "I just don't see any reason why you would?" I have been engaging in a pretty serious discussion about the repurcussions about people trying to "reform" or change behavior in an internet behavior. Obviously I don't dismiss it out of hand as being simply trivial. All that said, I draw the line at comparing yourself to "great men" in history. To be honest, in most contexts, even serious ones, when people start talking about themselves in such tones as "great men" of history I am inclined to remind them to take the context and themselves less seriously beacuse in most cases, even relatively important ones, they shouldn't be proudly talking about themselves that way. Its innapropriate beacuse its against common decency and its doubly innapropriate beacuse the context is not one about "great historical events". 2)"I am merely getting the ball rolling." I've heard. I'm merely asking how you specifically plan on implementing that, or think it should be implemented. 3) "you think tearing them down with well constructed passive aggressive posts is a great way to show yourself as a friendly and community supportive member?" I'm not tearing "them" down. I'm talking specifically to you. And I'm not even trying to tear you down. I'm just trying to get a feel for what you believe is appropriate, based on what you posted, and arguing against those elements of your thought which I disagree with. Beacuse I find this argument interesting. There's nothing more pernicous to it than that. I'm glad you think my posts are well constructed though . Also to reiterate, I don't object to people reforming their behavior. I'm a fan of reform...as long as its from the individual...so I'm naturally inclined to suspect and argue against anything which seems to be inclined against mobilizing people collectively to restrict the speech of others. Naturally, you disagree with that characterization of your position, and that is precisely the argument we have been having. I meant no more harm than that. 4) "And for the record, why should I or anyone else HAVE to tolerate any behavior in which it demeans, insults or aggressively hurts anyone?" Beacuse you already do? Beacuse such toleration is the basis of freedom of speech. I'm going to blow your mind here: When you suggest I think all teenagers and kids are immature, you demean me. When I accuse you of internet fascism, I am insulting you. When anyone makes any even mildly contradictory argument or any statement in a condescending tone, when anyone criticizes someones arguments as says "do you have malformed intentions?"...these staements are insulting, demeaning and hurtfull. But rather they are "insulting" or "demeaning" has absolutely nothing to do with rather the statements are true or not, nor are insulting or demeaning statements restricted to expressions of racism or slurs or what have you that you or I don't have a basic right to say them. IDK what your idea of "toleration" is and IDK what your idea of "intolerance" is but the reality is you have been tolerating condescending jerks, idiots, as well as people who simply disagree with you your entire life and likely are going to continue to do so. You have been tolerating me (at least up until you threatened me with the moderators) even though I have suggested that all sorts of bad things about you. Toleration does not equal acceptance...it means you allow the thing to happen without trying to bring the force of authority to bear to stop it. It means you live with it, in other words. And as I said, you have been "tolerating" all sorts of insulting and hurtfull things your entire life. Me suggesting you are engaging in internet fascism is hurtfull, is it not? And yet, you have tolerated it, at least up until this point? And the point at which you stop tolerating discension such as myself is the point at which this community really does start stamping out the opinions of people who disagree with them. 5) "All I want is for people to not be as rude and intolerant to each-other within the game." Do you want that, or do you want MLG users (to bring back the group you specifically highlighted) to stop posting things you happen to disagree with in the community? The distinction is important. Do you simply want to encourage people to stop calling eachother names, or do you want "competitive" minded players to shut up and stop criticizing Halo 4 and 343 and dividing the community? Dividing the community is bad. Restricting freedom of speech is way way worse. And specifically mentioning a group of people you happen to disagree with in the context of a discussion about getting everyone togethor to "reform" behavior must be treated with suspicion. It's (once again) like politicians trying to encourage "civility" and "bipartisanship" and then proceeding to organize boycotts of media organizations they happen to disagree with. Of course, they have the right to do that, just as you have the right and freedom to call in the moderators and try to get them to shut me down here. That doesnt mean you should. And even if its not the government restricting free speech, any time a group of people get togethor to censor people they disagree with, you are attacking freedom of speech. Of course, there's logical limits to freedom of speech. Theres a whole lot of useless garbage which communites are perfectly justified in banning, locking, and deleting. But theres stuff which needs to be protected. Context is everything here. But I will shut up now, becuse you threatened me with the moderators. If you want to validate the suspicioun of someone who thinks you might have "dictatorial" tendancies, you can hardly do better than talking about yourself as a great man in history and then forcing me to shut my mouth.

But would this still work with Matchmaking? The matchmaking system that Halo has implemented is very good...and I play BF3 quite a bit so I know a bit bout that.

There should be an award for belated introductions lol. Welcome to the forums ZB.

You know that all sounded really good...but I'd kinda like you to address that part about "not tolerating intolerance" before you go back into cliche mode. I'd also like you to address exactly how individuals who are following what you want to do should be interacting with MLG people, for instance, who disagree with you and the rest of us. I was making some none-too subtle allegations that the road your on is leading to softcore internet fascism and I was expecting an angry but succint response, not more lovy-dovy cliches. I realize we have been having a pretty in depth and serious discussion about whats going on here, but can we please remember that this is just the internet? An internet forum over a video game. I mean, yeah, I connected the discussion to big dramatic and pretty serious things, cultural trends, fascism, and what not...And I also know that this community is a not insubstantial part of allot of people's lives...but really, when it comes right down to it, what happens here is not that THAT important and talking about yourself as leading us all towards a better path in the context of great men in History is just silly. What, are you a Great man in history like George Washington? Of course thats not what you were probably thinking of, but really, this is a video game forum. You should remember that and take it a tad less seriously.

Building 5 MBT's, 5 Mobile AA, and 2 F-18's. Current EBA Territories: Florida (Doc) Penn. (Viva) Del (Viva). EBA Battlegroup: 1 Submarine, 2 Destroyers, 3 Missile Cruisers. Current Delaware Unit Totals: -6,000 Militia -4,000 Paratroopers -6 Coastal Defense Batteries -6 Guided Missile AA Batteries -1 B-2 Stealth Bomber -2 B-52 Bombers -2 AC-130 -2 C-130 Transports -2 Warthog Ground attack planes -12 F-22 Raptors. -20 Abrams MBT's -8 F-18's

With Banshee's the only real "rocket" threat is from Missile pods in H3 and we get that beeping tone to alert us. I would assume the first person mode in Vehicles would keep the motion detector handy so you would not be completely blind visa-vi people trying to jack your vehicle. And of course, it hast to be a choice.

Almost certainly. But...if you preorder from Amazon with the fastest shipping theres a small chance you'll get it the day before it is officially released. I got GoW2 that way haha. Total advert for Amazon right there...

Heres the reason 343 really does things: For Gameplay. 343 will not hesistate to do something which makes little sense canonically and then make up a BS excuse for it (as Bungie did with AA's in Reach). Not that this is a bad thing mind you, as long as the gameplay change is appropriate. Having the DMR, BR is possible now that we have loadouts so its okay for weapons to be a little bit redundant.

What mode and map were you playing?

The only time I ever had a thread "deleted" was when they moved it to a different section of the forum when they were updating the forum. Keep an eye on that

As long as there is a choice this means nothing but good for vehicle combat.

@ Twinreaper "I know my stuff, please don't try to argue it" All I'm gonna say is the texture quality in the BOII trailer actively looked worse than previous iterations of CoD. Thats it. This might be a design decision to move more resources to other stuff. Of course, I big part of Halo is that it has always had more interestng, vibrant character models and designs, which is hardly surprising when you have Sci Fi versus a present or near-present setting.

What do you want to do with your "cause" Twin? Do you merely want people who already agree with you to further reform their behavior? What is your objective? How are you going to apply yourself to accomplishing these goals? At first I was responding to what I thought a well intentioned but needless thread about civlity and unity. With your second post, you seemed to suggest that you had a particular problem with one group, MLG users. And, after rereading your earlier post, I noticed that you suggested that intolerance will not be tolerated. What are you going to do? Try to shut down the threads of MLG users who are being "intolerant" of casual players? Frankly, thats just kinda creepy. I don't want to throw labels like fascistic or dictatorial around but honestly, I think those terms apply pretty well whenever anyone starts talking about not tolerating intolerance. Intolerance is precisely the thing that needs to be tolerated. Theres no point restricting freedom of speech if your only going to apply it to people who are agreeable to you! But more to the point, I just really want to know, how are you going to reform and unite the Halo community? I ain't going to say anything more in response to you until I have a clearer idea of what you actually want to do. I bet you don't want to implement some conspiratorial dictatorship. I don't think you have "fascistic" tendencies or that you want to exclude MLG users and other groups who actively disagree with you. That would just be silly. And I will bet good money that when you read my bit about Freedom of Speech you immeadiately though "Well I wasnt suggesting that we should restricts anyones freedom of speech!" But I do think you have your priorities in the wrong place. And I just want to help you realize that saying you want to make everything civil and unite the community and get rid of intolerance is good, but actually doing that might cost allot more than its worth. I'm saying that, even when it comes to things like internet speech, the road to hell is paved with good intentions.That is all I am trying to say here. And in response to you and TrueGostlyOtto, nowhere did I suggest that all young people and teenagers are immature. And I would never suggest that we should kick people out and reject them based on age. But the simple truth is, and we all know it, that allot of young people can act prett dumb and make mistakes before they learn better. Thats all I meant by that. Is there something wrong with suggesting that we are going to need to tolerate a certain amount of immaturity from younger users who are not immature? I was saying this in the context of "tolerating" a certain amount of idiocy, not restricting it. I was holding up misbehaving young community members as an example of a group which needs to be tolerated, to a certain extent. I was defending younger users, even the stupid ones! So please don't suggest that I was generalizing all younger people as behaving such and such or that I was saying we should somehow exclude them. My point was precisely the opposite...that we must tolerate them even when they are being annoying (within reason of course). Also, with response to your thing about me supporting Obama, Im gonna make sure this doesnt turn into an argument about politics, so Imma shut the f' up about that right now. PS. Truthfully, I find this a very intriguing argument. So, in accordance with the values which you yourself have laid out, lets keep it civil. And honestly, your criticisms of people's behavior is perfectly valid. I just worry about what you actually want to do to reform it. And if you actively don't have any sort of plan of action here, then my criticism of your post is simply beacuse I think its more of the silly, redundant, and vague calls to "civility" and "politeness" that we hear so much from people everywhere.

Great idea...would be hard for 343 to implement though...take allot of resources. I suspect thats the real reason they ditched Elites in Multiplayer as well.

And I thought I was late with three weeks! Welcome good sir.

No, I don't care to facilitate a change. I'm going to mind my own business. And here's why: In your first post you made a call to unity and to end pettiness and yet in your second post your blaming one group as being a high contributor to the problem. Do you see the contradiction here? My point isnt that your wrong about that group. I ain't saying they ain't ********. I kinda agree with you on that. My point is, whenever people talk about "oh lets unite and stop bickering" its really beacuse they want one particular group to stfu and agree with them. Its like when Democrats or Republicans get up on a stage and say "Oh we need to unite, we need to make progress, we need to be Bipartisan BUT ITS THOSE PEOPLES FAULT WE ARENT!". These guys don't really care about uniting or increased civility...all they care about is shaming the people who oppose their opinions into shutting up and toeing their line. From what I just read, what you really seem to want is "unity" and "civility" so you can get that MLG group which you have problems with to shut up when really what we need is more debate so we can settle these arguments the old fashioned way. More civility would be nice, but theres no need to be internet nazi's to stamp out incivility. Besides, The MLG types are going to lose, Halo is already lost to them, and soon they will abandon the cause. You don't need to rally the community to stamp out their opinions beacuse their opinions are going to be defunct...very shortly now. So no, I don't feel the need to cause change beacuse change is going to happen regardless. The people who post here, who agree with you? They already agreed with you! You telling them what they already know and wanted to hear is not going to change a damn thing. Also, with regards to new users who are "selfish" and what not, please remember that theres going to be allot of little kids and teenagers coming into this. Its inevitable. I was an @sshole when I first started posting in video game forums. So your going to have to tolerate a certain amount of annoying behavior. You don't have to accept it. You certainly shouldnt like it. But you can live with it, hell you have been this entire time as is. Lastly, if you think the problem of general ****iness on the internet is getting worse, than your problem isnt just with the internet community, its with Western culture in general. Your problem is with the giant cultural trends which effect every part of our lives not just the goings ons in our little corner of cyberspace. So take it up with that. Start thinking, discussing and arguing about religion and idealogy and morality with people around you in your daily lives beacuse thats really where your problem is. If you don't want to do that...if you don't want to do that, just mind your own business. Other than that, don't worry about what happens on the internet so much, beacuse theres not much you can do to stop it short of reforming and reversing the cultural trends of today. The world needs way less activists and way more people who are just willing to live their own lives well. Beacuse really, the only way things really change is when people change, as individuals, from the inside. This isn't to say that I have an attitude of callous indifference towards many of the things which typically result in a mobilization of allot of people towards a common cause...I'm not going to callously look down my nose at the Red Cross, aid relief, Military service, charity, etc etc. But when it comes to speech? To what people say? Individuality is the rule when it comes to that. PS. You also talked about how people in other communities laughed at us. LOL! This is the internet. If they actually are that invested, that stupid, to do that, who gives a flying f*ck what they think? For the love of god, I like how we have a sense of community, but lets stop thinking about ourselves as a collective mass that needs to defend against other groups and restructure ourselves, and think more in terms of "we are individuals who need to mind our own business". PSS. I am not a Ron Paul supporter

on

Building 5 additional MBT's and 4 more F-18's.

I hope they bring back the silenced SMG from ODST.

If CoD really wanted to copy Halo, it would set itself 500 years in the future and have humans using projectile weapons which would not be out of place in World War 2. Just saying...

I don't remember the sword being OP in Halo 3...then again, I wasn't involved in the community so I wouldn't know if others thought so. It just seems like sword blocking was invented to solve a problem which only Bungie thought was a problem...