AceCephalon

You know, I thought about it after reading the comments here, and I’ve thought of one possible explanation for MM-DD-YYYY, that being the order you effectively get the useful information from a date.

Going by DD-MM-YYYY, you read the first part, and that tells you the day in a month, but not which month, just skimming that first section gives you no actually useful information about how near or far it is without reading the second.

Doing MM-DD-YYYY on the other hand, you first read the month, which immediately tells you what part of a year it is, and if it’s relatively sooner or later, and then reading the second part of the date just gives more precision, rather than the whole useful answer.

So basically, it makes it easier to skim dates within a year with more useful information listed first, whereas putting the year first would just delay or offset that same skimming method.

Day first gives a range of error between 0 and roughly 330 days without reading further, whereas Month first gives a range of error of only up to 28 to 30 days depending on the month.

Wait a minute, something feels off…

Think of it like this: Arrowhead, the developers, spent almost 8 years developing the game, getting funding throughout from Sony, which managed the publishing side of things so they could focus on game development.

Then, around 6 months before release, over 7 years of development up to that point, Sony wanted PSN to be required for the game, and clearly by release time, that was not enough time to even implement or test that well enough.

Their hands were tied years in advance, they couldn’t just let almost 8 years of their development time go to waste over one decision by their publisher, nor could they reasonably go against the publisher or get a new publisher only about 6 months before release.

On their end, they didn’t do anything particularly wrong, unless they could see the future over 7 years before and realize Sony was going to practically pull the rug out from under them with everything in Sony’s favor, a decision only actually made far more recently.

What’s odd is I instantly recognized how to type on that type of phone, but I’m from roughly gen Z.

Ah, hadn’t seen the patch notes for when they did that, with it being in the game like that for so long, but fair enough for that getting changed.

I’d say they’re relatively side grades that comes down to smaller differences. Namely that the Kuva Nukor has an extra 2 meters range on the chain effect, but the Tenet Cycron has innate punch through, and can chain 2 times from each target hit with the main beam, vs the Nukor chaining 2 times from just the initial target normally.

Specifically, the Tenet Cycron has chains 7 meters from target, the Kuva Nukor has chains 9 meters from target, but the Tenet Cycron can potentially chain to more targets at closer range due to punch through.

Other specifics include the Tenet Cycron having 28 meters range vs 29 meters for the Kuva Nukor, which isn’t much difference, as well as Tenet Cycron having a slightly higher base fire rate, which means the lower status chance evens out quickly.

And potentially more or less relevant, the Tenet Cycron has recharging ammo, as opposed to the regular reloading of Kuva Nukor, they roughly add up to the same reload time of 2 seconds for a full reload it seems, but the recharge can be partial in less time in addition to not needing ammo pickups, but the Kuva Nukor can fire longer without reloading.

Oh, and I nearly forgot, the Kuva Nukor causes the hidden microwave status effect, which counts as a status for galvanized status mods and certain other effects, the status itself just makes the hit body part a bit larger and thus easier to hit so long as other parts don’t cover it from also getting affected by it.

Yep, that actual chance at learning something instead of being blindly insulted anyway is such a refreshing change.

And especially never admit you’re totally not running Windows on a Protogen because you couldn’t be bothered to modify it.

This, but every time my dad randomly wants to take me out somewhere because he saw a girl someplace and wants me to meet them because what I can only really term as “Girl”. Problem for him being that I have no interest just because there happens to be a girl. If I’m going to meet someone for some reason, I’d really rather have say an interest in common or something else of that sort, not just blind chance because they happen to be a certain gender.

Yeah, it seems like part of being ace/aro is that understanding of what it’s like to not be exactly straight, in whichever way is specific to their kind of asexuality/aromanticism. So in general it can be way easier to understand other people being different, even if the understanding of how it feels to have attraction to someone may or may not be there. And so ace/aro people tend to be more inclusive, sometimes even more so than other parts of LGBTQIA+ it feels like.

And on that sex repulsed vs sex neutral/favorable balance, it seemed like it was a hard balance to keep there. I myself am sex repulsed, but I’m not going to complain just because someone else isn’t. If anything, I’m quite supportive of people being comfortable with what they do or don’t enjoy. So I’m not entirely sure what would avert that constant back and forth shifting of overall tone.

Yeah, I agree with that similarity to Warframe’s level of developer interaction.

Sure, in the past they’ve been slower to respond to feedback about problems, and often times old things have fallen out of relevance because something else just outright does the same thing, and more, but better.

But as it is now, DE really seems to be prioritizing listening to feedback, almost exponentially so, and as an example, bringing things up to par with what they should be at the current level of the game, a concept that much more rarely got the implementation it deserved in years before.

The term “boy’s club” here is really not generalizing “men” or “boys” as a whole, but rather it’s by its usage criticizing the specific group mentality it describes, that of a group of “boys” who treat women with less respect than each other, or otherwise exclude said women, as in at least some cultures is common from some generally younger “boys” who haven’t really matured past a mentality usually developed from a young age, because they lack the experience to know it’s wrong.

Would it be a bolder statement from a toaster? I mean- boop beep.

And both of you are very much valid, as well as anyone should be. Differences of sexuality makes no person lesser for them. So what if someone is attracted or not attracted to any specific thing? We’re all people nonetheless.

• An Asexual and Aromantic Person