DHCs have a base damage of 174.
Photon Torpedoes have a base damage of 1352.
In a six second period, you will have fired four shots from the DHC. This would be (4 * 174) / 6 = 116 DPS.
In a six second period, you will have fired a single Photon Torpedo. This would be 1352 / 6 = 225.3 DPS.
If you had 4x DHCs and fired them over a period of six seconds, you would have fired sixteen shots. This would be (4 * (4 * 174)) / 6 = 464 DPS.
If you had 4x Photon Torpedoes and fired them over a period of six seconds, you would have fired four torpedoes. This would be (4 * 1352) / 6 = 901.3 DPS.
If you had 4x DHCs and fired them over a period of twelve seconds, you would have fired twenty-eight shots. This would be (4 * (7 * 174)) / 6 = 812 DPS.
If you had 4x Photon Torpedoes and fired them over a period of twelve seconds, you would have fired eight torpedoes. This would be (8 * 1352) / 6 = 1802.7 DPS.
You get the picture so far, right? How about with a Beam Array for that?
A Beam Array has a base damage of 100.
In a six second period, you will have fired five shots from the Beam Array. This would be (5 * 100) / 6 = 83.3 DPS.
If you had 4x Beam Arrays and fired them over a period of six seconds, you would have fired twenty shots. This would be (4 * (5 * 100)) / 6 = 333.3 DPS.
If you had 4x Beam Arrays and fired them over a period of twelve seconds, you would have fired thirty-six shots. This would be (4 * (9 * 100)) / 6 = 600 DPS.
Unless we also give the target unlimited hull as well, something's going to happen there, eh?
We can sit here looking at this for hours on end...and it would be pointless.
DHCs do not have 250 degree arcs. They do not have an ability that increases their firing rate by 125% against a single target while also adding in a second target for up to a 250% increase in the rate of fire within that 250 degree arc. Nor is that something that Torps can do.
But it's not like the content, the maps, the spawns, the number of mobs or anything is designed to take advantage of anything like that...right?
Change the content...guess what happens to that advantage?
And I don't know why I needed to type out this massively TLDR post for you to see something that should have been obvious...
...but please return to your whining that won't fix a thing and wonder why the devs are ignoring you. They're not looking at the content either, and everything is fine with their little tests. So you're ignoring the content while in the content and looking buffs. They're ignoring the content while not in the content and seeing it's all good. Maybe if you stopped ignoring the content while in it and maybe they tested in the content...
...yeah and unicorns TRIBBLE rainbows. So carry on...whatever.
Say you bought four 250GB hard drives...when they come out with a 1TB hard drive, did you ask for a refund on your four 250GB hard drives? You knew that at one point folks were running with wee smaller drives than the 250GB and that larger drives were a thing of the past - a thing of the future, but you still bought the 250GB drives knowing that, right? Cause they provided you with what you wanted when you had them...you got use out of them, yeah? And you've still got 1TB total storage, so you haven't lost anything there either, eh?
Have you gotten use out of the additional BOFF slots? Would think so, otherwise you wouldn't have kept buying them like you did. Now, with the changes...are you losing anything? Nope, haven't lost any function there. You've got all your guys with all their abilities still (outside of Cryptic totally TRIBBLE things up and totally TRIBBLE things up).
So somebody can come along and buy a 1TB drive...didn't change anything for you.
So somebody can come along and run with fewer BOFF slots...didn't change anything for you.
Hell, there are already folks that run with fewer BOFF slots. They don't feel the inconvenience of having to hit up the trainer if they need to change something or hitting up somebody else.
So why do you feel the need to ask for some kind of compensation? They should compensate you for your having made use of the slots for however long you did while not losing anything because of the changes.
Yes, I know - this is the STO forums and it makes perfect sense for somebody on the forums to ask for stuff like that. I might have a post count that suggests that I live here, but yeah - no, I live out in the real world...I don't get how some of the folks manage that with the stuff they ask for here on the forums. Are they posting from some sort of "special" home...?
...but why do so many people wait until the last minute to do so?
How about a car analogy...well, kind of a car analogy, eh? Everybody just loves car analogies! Though, this isn't really a car analogy...but it's got cars in it!
So, there's you know - driver education and stuff. Folks go through learning all sorts of things before they even get in a car, right? Then when they get in the car, it's usually going over all sorts of basics. They might drive around an empty mall parking lot, then some back streets that are quiet or rural roads, then get into some light traffic, etc, etc, etc...working their way up to all sorts of things, right?
Why do so many folks in STO like to hop in the car for what appears to be the first time and get on the highway at rush hour?
Everyone has to learn at some point...so how about they freakin' start learning at the point they should, eh?
Yep, just because something wasn't shown on screen doesn't mean that nothing happened off screen. We learned as kids while playing peekaboo that they weren't disappearing from existence...yeah? Or is it a case that you believe that one of the greatest breakthroughs of the future was no longer needing to have a bowel movement?
Otherwise known as a larger potential customer base and increased potential revenue streams. It had nothing to do with any equality garbage outside of being able to line his pockets equally from as many sources as possible. I'm so tired of it being made out to be that anything was on the threshold...if it had been a decade earlier, twenty years earlier, then that might have been the case. Capitalizing on what was already going on, even doing so based on corporate directives because of changes in the law and the rest...no, it wasn't some progressive movement - it was just making money off of the wave that was already there...not making waves.
Yep, just because something wasn't shown on screen doesn't mean that nothing happened off screen. We learned as kids while playing peekaboo that they weren't disappearing from existence...yeah? Or is it a case that you believe that one of the greatest breakthroughs of the future was no longer needing to have a bowel movement?
Transporter refinement. They beam their excrement out into space. Never tailgate a Galaxy-class.
So, there's you know - driver education and stuff. Folks go through learning all sorts of things before they even get in a car, right? Then when they get in the car, it's usually going over all sorts of basics. They might drive around an empty mall parking lot, then some back streets that are quiet or rural roads, then get into some light traffic, etc, etc, etc...working their way up to all sorts of things, right?
Why do so many folks in STO like to hop in the car for what appears to be the first time and get on the highway at rush hour?
Everyone has to learn at some point...so how about they freakin' start learning at the point they should, eh?
Your important question, that you created yet another thread to address, is so important a question that it has already been raised countless times in all the countless recent other threads. Don't get me wrong, it's an important question. But did you really need to create yet another thread for it? That's got nothing to do with the importance of the question...that's all about your self-importance.
You could replace every word on the forums with gorn and outside the lost of two sub-sections it would be a plus to the state of the forums and game as a whole.
Would it? Cause not everybody wants the same thing. Hell, Cryptic might want to consider doing a second Star Trek MMO themselves...would be easier, could give Group A something closer to what they want and Group B something closer to what they want. Wouldn't be a case of trying to appease both Group A and Group B...ticking off both groups in the process.
Most of the things I've seen folks ask for...wouldn't be a game I'd go anywhere near.
Different folks want different things. I'd love for there to be another Star Trek MMO out there that provided the stuff those folks want...so they could TRIBBLE off. Might give Cryptic some time to address the actual bugs in the game rather than having to try to change so many soiled diapers.
How many people from Group A aren't playing this game cause of stuff done for Group B? How many people from Group B aren't playing game cause of stuff done for Group A?
Yeah, have multiple games...increase the playerbase of each by doing so.
And people wonder why the devs don't hang out with us. The fact you put this thread here and not in ten forward really helps to prove these forums are a crapshoot of ideas.
D. Antirrhopus is about Abian in stage (i.e. a bit over 120 MYA); we have confirmed quill feathers on the wings of Velociraptor mongoliensis and Rahonavis ostromi had full-on flight capabilities; both were Campanian to Masstrichtian (75 MYA or thereabouts). Biologically, Deinonychus would've had wings for climbing assistance (think a giant killer chukar), balance, and other movement-assistance.
I fail to see how draggy wings assist in movement or balance. Feathers would actually be a major encumbrance for climbing a tree or grasping and grappling with prey. There is no biological advantage to sporting flight feathers on a flightless predator. And I think ascribing wing feathers to all dromaeosaurids because somebody found what looked like six quill TRIBBLE on the forearm of a single specimen of Velociraptor is rather jumping to conclusions a bit.
For a relatively slow ambush predator, with jaws that could snap a human femur like a chew toy, those would've been really useful. We can't be absolutely certain about wing feathers on D. Antirrhopus just yet, but it seems almost certain.
I'm not sure where you're getting "relatively slow" from. The minimum estimated sprint speed I've seen for Deinonychus is 50+kp/h (don't remember where) and that was based on comparing its foot-tibia ratio to an ostrich. I think that paper drastically overstates the role that foot length relative to lower leg length plays in an animal's top speed. (Just look the legs of a cheetah. Yes, it's a quadruped an has a totally different running mechanic, but if you're going to argue that foot traction is the limiting factor in your top speed, sorry, argument invalid.) Stride length, musculature of the hips, and (hello!) thermoregulation are far more important biomechanical factors in determining the top speed of a land animal. That's another strike against arguing that all theropods are covered in feathers, by the way.
Also, like most modern raptors (i.e. accipitriform birds) dromaeosaurids likely had larger females than males.
Perhaps, but size does not necessarily denote social status.
Take orcas. Male orcas are much larger than females, and yet orca pods are matriarchal.
Yes, scary lizard dinos look cool. But a 200-pound death turkey with stronger jaws than a full-size gator is scarier.
TEHO. Jurassic Park came out when I was eight. And I think snakes and lizards are cuter than birds.
Anyway, my Deinons are not true specimens of D. antirrhopus (they're sapient, for a start) and any deviations from the species baseline (whatever that looked like - there is no way to know, paleontology is a field of educated guesswork) I claim as "creative license." I do strive to be more accurate than Spielberg, at least.
...Oh, baby, you know, I've really got to leave you / Oh, I can hear it callin 'me / I said don't you hear it callin' me the way it used to do?...
- Anne Bredon
@worffan101, from the "How Have Your Characters Evolved?" thread:
I fail to see how draggy wings assist in movement or balance. Feathers would actually be a major encumbrance for climbing a tree or grasping and grappling with prey. There is no biological advantage to sporting flight feathers on a flightless predator. And I think ascribing wing feathers to all dromaeosaurids because somebody found what looked like six quill TRIBBLE on the forearm of a single specimen of Velociraptor is rather jumping to conclusions a bit.
This is incorrect, given the anatomical structure of a dromaeosaurid wing. And if you've seen the actual fossil (or good pictures thereof, as I have), it's pretty clear that those aren't concretions sticking out of the wing. We also have feather pits from several other species.
You may be confused because of the improper hand pronation in Ostrom's original diagram. Later research has shown that the bunny-rabbit style hands with the palms facing down would have been painful if not outright impossible for the living animal to maintain. Like a human with the elbow facing forward and the palms facing outwards.
In the living animal, the wing feathers would have been invaluable for climbing, being splayed against the surface in the flight stroke. Modern chukar partridges do this all the time; in fact, if you try to keep chukar or other similar quail the juveniles will climb any available surface when their flight feathers begin to come in.
In a predatory dromaeosaur, the feathers would have rested against the flanks of the prey animal, the raptor on the back with the arms used as pitons to hold it in place as the jaws snapped the neck. Calculations have even relatively gracile dromaeosaurs having stronger bite forces in PSI terms than equally-sized alligators. Small arboreal species such as Microraptor and Sinornithosaurus seem to have been specialists in small vertebrates and large invertebrates.
The toe-claws, despite not having the muscular power or tendon hookups for an eviscerating kick, did have ligaments and muscles that would have made them suitable climbing aids, like a mountaineer's spikes. These would have been used to climb the back of a large prey animal, the arms used to help ratchet the predator up.
Furthermore, we have access to Rahonavis, which despite Feduccia's complaints is unlikely to be a chimera (Feduccia's a BANDit, and so can't stand the existence of an indisputably winged dromaeosaur) due to the in situ structure of the fossil and the differences in the structure of the wings between the specimen and birds found in the same locality. This is a dromaeosaur with flight-capable wings; it lacks fully avian flight characteristics, but Novas et al (2013) found evidence of strong deltoids, indicating a bat-like flight stroke.
I'm not sure where you're getting "relatively slow" from. The minimum estimated sprint speed I've seen for Deinonychus is 50+kp/h (don't remember where) and that was based on comparing its foot-tibia ratio to an ostrich. I think that paper drastically overstates the role that foot length relative to lower leg length plays in an animal's top speed. (Just look the legs of a cheetah. Yes, it's a quadruped an has a totally different running mechanic, but if you're going to argue that foot traction is the limiting factor in your top speed, sorry, argument invalid.) Stride length, musculature of the hips, and (hello!) thermoregulation are far more important biomechanical factors in determining the top speed of a land animal. That's another strike against arguing that all theropods are covered in feathers, by the way.
1. Most small theropods were endothermic, much like modern birds, based on bone analysis (and yes, you can tell the difference). Sampson and others postulate that large theropods and most ornithopods may have been semi-endothermic, or "mesothermic"; capable of thermoregulation but not as obligately or effectively as true endotherms. This has held up so far to bone analysis.
2. There's a difference between sprint speed and distance running speed. A cheetah can sprint much faster than a wolf, but the wolf will outrun it every time if the chase lasts longer than a minute, because the cheetah simply can't keep up that speed.
3. Muscle-scar analysis has shown that most dromaeosaurs were extremely good leapers; this has not to my knowledge been done for D. antirrhopus yet, but it has been shown for several velociraptorines and unenlagines, which makes sense given the piton claws, bone-snapping jaws and gripper claws of most species.
Perhaps, but size does not necessarily denote social status.
Take orcas. Male orcas are much larger than females, and yet orca pods are matriarchal.
TEHO. Jurassic Park came out when I was eight. And I think snakes and lizards are cuter than birds.
1. Dromaeosaurids are literally the sister taxon to stem Aves. The comparison's pretty valid in this case.
2. Pack-hunting in Deinonychus is disputed; the specimens in question may have been caught in a flash-flood while scavenging, or otherwise gathered around an already-dead animal.
3. Jurassic Park. That thing is the bane of every paleontologist. The mere mention of the sprinting tyrannosaur and the venom-spitting Dilophosaurus makes my eye twitch.
And while I respect your opinion (despite holding the opposite view, although I do find snakes and lizards cool--especially this guy, this guy, and these guys), you're trying to state that the sister taxon of stem Aves, a subtaxon of a subtaxon of Dinosauria, a taxon whose basal traits seem to include protofeathers at a minimum*, were lizard-like and featherless, despite having multiple confirmed fully-feathered relatives, which is patently ridiculous from a taxonomic POV.
Summary:
1. I'll admit to taking this one a little personally; this is my personal field of interest, the thing I've been studying nonstop since I was 4 years old, that I pride myself on keeping myself up on and plan to pursue as a career despite the sh*tty job prospects. I have to say that I'm a little insulted, although I'm unsure if that's maybe because I'm exhausted and have a migraine or not.
Basically how you'd feel if I said that everything you know about military hardware and engineering is actually the opposite of what it is.
2. Personal feelings aside. It's after 11 here and I'm exhausted. I recommend reading Prum (2002), Prum (2003), anything by Naish, anything by Lamanna, Carpenter, or Sampson, and for certain Nesbitt (2010) for archosaur phylogeny in general. Those should give you a decent foundation in archosaur and avian phylogeny.
3. Do not trust a word Alan Feduccia says. He's been caught quote-mining, cherry-picking, and using falsified data on dozens of occasions. In paleontological circles, his name is mud. C.F. Prum (2003)**
4. It's almost midnight now, and I'm exhausted and in pain from a miserable headache. Sorry if any of this was offensive.
Anyway, my Deinons are not true specimens of D. antirrhopus (they're sapient, for a start) and any deviations from the species baseline (whatever that looked like - there is no way to know, paleontology is a field of educated guesswork) I claim as "creative license." I do strive to be more accurate than Spielberg, at least.
And that creative license is your right. Just stating the currently-accepted theories regarding dinosaur paleobiology.
*We have multiple specimens of feathered ornithopods, such as Tianyulong, making it extremely likely that stage 1 or higher protofeathers are a basal trait for the Dinosauria.
**Here's a review of a paper done by one of Feduccia's closest colleagues. Quick and Ruben (2009)'s quote mining, use of obviously outdated anatomical diagrams, and selective misuse of data are typical BANDit tactics. Yes, there is a small group of people who for whatever reason think that birds can't possibly be dinosaurs. Yes, their definition of birds is about as constant as the wind. No, the broader scientific community does not have any respect for them.
Proto-wings could also serve as stabilizers for a sprinting, leaping predator; in fact, I can see how developing the ability to glide for a distance after leaping could give one an evolutionary advantage.
Also, having watched birds fight, I can say that when the one on the bottom is trying to get away, the one on the top certainly seems to get a lot of use out of flapping to maintain balance.
So yes, I can see why such creatures might well have begun the development of feathered wings.
Only one of those had my DPS contribution higher than my Tank or Heal contribution.
I'm not a DPSer. 4 of those were 19k and 1 was barely a hair over 20k. I'm just not a DPSer...Hell, I'm a Sci...I like flying support. I like things shooting at me instead of others, I like tossing heals if folks need them, I like buffing allies and debuffing enemies.
That's not using FAW with CrtDx3/x4 Arrays...it's using the innate Subsystem Targeting of the Sarr Theln with [Acc]x2[Over] arrays.
Dropping out Scattering, Science Fleet, Intel Fleet...charge in and grab stuff with DOFF'd TBR so it shoots at me instead of others, bunch of debuffing so everybody takes less damage and does more damage.
It's a support build...
...but based on what you said there and what the parses show, I'm ruining folks ability to do something? If they built a better healer, they'd outheal me. If they built a better tank, they'd outtank me. And if it's a case that's it so DPS focused, then everybody should be outDPSing me.
Just because somebody's flying a tank or a healer...doesn't mean they can't put out some DPS in this game with the way debuff stacking works - all the ratios/percentages in place.
Hell, before DR I ran an Orion Engineer in a Marauder...and the percentages oft weren't that different. It would be awesome when somebody would come along and outDPS me...but I'd still be rocking the tank and heal aspect. I always expected that to be the case, FFS, I was an Eng in a Marauder - I should have always been on the bottom for damage out. But meh...no.
Trying to institute a MMO Trinity isn't going to change that...short of setting requirements so there can only be one tank, one healer, and then the DPS...so the tanks/healers don't have to worry about looking bad compared to another tank/healer.
When we play through the content, and we're the only one there - we've got to do all three...and that's how I play.
Wanting to go through and change things for a MMO Trinity - you're basically wanting to nerf everybody's damage resistance, nerf everybody's damage, nerf everybody's healing, buff NPCs for their damage resistance, their damage, and their healing - while going through and tweaking the damage resistance, damage, and healing of specific players so that everybody can go play together...just because some players can't figure out how to play?
It's Star Trek...did the USS Enterprise sit there putting a call out for some DPS to come along because they couldn't do damage? Did they sit there putting a call out for some heals because they couldn't do repairs?
Nope...they did damage, took damage, and repaired damage.
I don't need that MMO Trinity garbage to come along and TRIBBLE that up too.
And yeah, folks could easily come along and both outtank/outheal me while also outDPSing me, cause I'm just not that good at this game...people are far too eager to blame everything and everyone but themselves.
edit: Meh, that was silly of me just to look at the damage in - could be low resists, etc. How about Attacks In while looking at the base damage in vs. applied damage in, eh? Damage / BaseDamage...with a lower percentage being better. Will use the same order as the Damage In from above. Will list the DPS as the third line.
1431 attacks in (50.017% of attacks), 786, 375, 135, 134
24.7%, 36.2%, 32.5%, 39.9%, 60.3%
19.1k, 10.1k, 12.9k, 4.8k, 4.9k
1933 attacks in (60.52% of attacks), 428, 222, 293, 318
25.9%, 45.4%, 42.6%, 28.3%, 37.2%
20.2k, 4.6k, 2.0k, 4.4k, 13.9k
610 attacks in (39.38% of attacks), 386, 510, 31, 12
24.5%, 41.9%, 25.9%, 33.7%, 43.7%
19.3k, 16.7k, 18.4k, 4.0k, 10.3k
1514 attacks in (41.525% of attacks), 727, 776, 269, 360
25.1%, 39.9%, 40.0%, 49.8%, 33.2%
19.6k, 9.6k, 6.3k 4.2k, 4.2k
2313 attacks in (63.231% of attacks), 507, 385, 262, 191
25.4%, 42.3%, 30.6%, 34.1%, 39.4%
19.5k, 6.2k, 7.8k, 4.3k, 3.9k
STO Member since February 2009. I Was A Trekkie Before It Was Cool ... Sept. 8th, 1966 ... Not To Mention Before Most Folks Around Here Were Born! Forever a STO Veteran-Minion
I found that highly insulting, especially as I already explained the reason I find it highly insulting upthread.
My age does not make my points less valid, and from the perspective of academic integrity I am deeply insulted at your insinuation that I am confusing my opinions with testable facts.
Again, I've been studying this subject since I was 4, and have been reading technical papers in the field of paleontology for around a decade. I have practical experience in both paleontology and ornithology, and have taken multiple upper-level biology courses as a part-time student before even applying to college for full-time enrollment. I know what I'm talking about, and I will be insulted by anyone short of Sterling freaking Nesbitt himself telling me otherwise.
It's 11:30 at night here, and this thread's been derailed enough. If you really want to continue this, I will be back tomorrow.
I wasn't trying to insult you. I was trying to get you to stop and think about how you want to be perceived by your peers. Please read what I said again, with this in mind.
However much you've studied any subject, whatever your equivalent level of education is, whatever experience you've gained in life so far, there is simply no escaping the fact that you're talking to people who have way more life experience than you do, just by virtue of the simple measure that we've lived longer.
If you want to argue with adults, then you need to argue like an adult. That means letting go of your ego and pride, learning to separate opinion from facts, and acknowledging that beyond academia where you live now there's this place called the real world where everything you think you know will some day be challenged.
I don't mean to insult you. I like you. I don't want to see you embarrass yourself. But you keep getting stuck in these argumentative feedback loops - whether we're talking about paleontology, or climate change, or Islam, or Janeway's many, many character flaws - where you know you're "right" no matter what anyone else has to say and you keep repeating your arguments over and over ad nauseum. (Like you just did again in the post I quoted.)
That is what smacks of immaturity and childishness, and betrays the intelligent, well-reasoned adult I know you can be.
...Oh, baby, you know, I've really got to leave you / Oh, I can hear it callin 'me / I said don't you hear it callin' me the way it used to do?...
- Anne Bredon
In the matter of paleontology, however, it would appear Worffan can speak with authority. And requiring that one be employed in a given field before one can speak on it seems a tad overbearing to me - by those standards, I would be unable to be consulted as even a minor authority on anything, because currently no one is paying me to do anything.
Yet I have a fair education in astrophysics, due to my eclectic reading habits; I can also discuss matters relating to nuclear weapons and their use (and misuse) due to my Air Force service (wrote and maintained software used in creating and updating the Single Integrated Operating Plan, NATO's nuclear-war blueprint), and scream uselessly at the television whenever matters pertaining to nuclear power plants or video games are discussed in popular TV programs. (I was exposed to only the last ten minutes or so of a Scorpion episode in which the Big Bad was trying to destroy a nuke plant, and the heroes were crawling through pipes and whatnot to stop him, and I thought I was going to have an aneurysm for a moment.)
Lots of folks don't like the idea that therapods almost certainly had feathers. I'm not sure why; I think it's fascinating. The fact remains, however, that available evidence supports the contention that they did. And given Worffan's level of interest in and research on the topic, rejecting his expertise out of hand simply because he's not a professional paleontologist seems a tad high-handed.
Seriously? I just looked at Discovery Channel right now. You know what is playing as I type this? Moonshiners, Street Outlaws, Behind Bars, Naked and Afraid, and Epic RVs. Nearly everything on that channel is stupid. So the only way to stop that is to completely get rid of the channel, which I doubt they will ever do.
Seriously? I just looked at Discovery Channel right now. You know what is playing as I type this? Moonshiners, Street Outlaws, Behind Bars, Naked and Afraid, and Epic RVs. Nearly everything on that channel is stupid. So the only way to stop that is to completely get rid of the channel, which I doubt they will ever do.
Ugh, I'm replying to a post in the thread instead of a reply to a post in another thread and I'm quoting what I'm replying to as well...I'm all sorts of fail this morning; but yeah, it's been a trip forever with so many channels...
Used to be just the joke about MTV not showing music videos - but there are all sorts of channels not showing what you'd think they'd show, whether talking about Discovery, History, etc, etc, etc. Animal Planet is a trip with their "surprisingly human" - should be "surprisingly about humans"... Though, the biggest trip for me is wrestling on SyFy...really?
Or worse yet, reality shows on TLC. Do you remember when that used to be The Learning Channel? Since when is watching a fat woman try to squeeze into a topless wedding dress considered educational?
Discovery just got a new head - he promises to bring this sort of thing under control (starting with no more "specials" involving people being eaten by snakes or implying Megalodon still cruises the ocean).
@worffan101, from the "How Have Your Characters Evolved?" thread (again):
I wasn't trying to insult you. I was trying to get you to stop and think about how you want to be perceived by your peers. Please read what I said again, with this in mind.
However much you've studied any subject, whatever your equivalent level of education is, whatever experience you've gained in life so far, there is simply no escaping the fact that you're talking to people who have way more life experience than you do, just by virtue of the simple measure that we've lived longer.
If you want to argue with adults, then you need to argue like an adult. That means letting go of your ego and pride, learning to separate opinion from facts, and acknowledging that beyond academia where you live now there's this place called the real world where everything you think you know will some day be challenged.
I don't mean to insult you. I like you. I don't want to see you embarrass yourself. But you keep getting stuck in these argumentative feedback loops - whether we're talking about paleontology, or climate change, or Islam, or Janeway's many, many character flaws - where you know you're "right" no matter what anyone else has to say and you keep repeating your arguments over and over ad nauseum. (Like you just did again in the post I quoted.)
That is what smacks of immaturity and childishness, and betrays the intelligent, well-reasoned adult I know you can be.
The highlighted part is the insulting part, because in matters like science experience means jack sh*t. You can be the oldest, most life-experienced guy on the planet, and if you quote-mine and cherry-pick data you're still not going to get any respect at all from the paleontological community.
I'll let jonsills explain why I find your attitude hypocritical because I don't have to type this out.
In the matter of paleontology, however, it would appear Worffan can speak with authority. And requiring that one be employed in a given field before one can speak on it seems a tad overbearing to me - by those standards, I would be unable to be consulted as even a minor authority on anything, because currently no one is paying me to do anything.
Yet I have a fair education in astrophysics, due to my eclectic reading habits; I can also discuss matters relating to nuclear weapons and their use (and misuse) due to my Air Force service (wrote and maintained software used in creating and updating the Single Integrated Operating Plan, NATO's nuclear-war blueprint), and scream uselessly at the television whenever matters pertaining to nuclear power plants or video games are discussed in popular TV programs. (I was exposed to only the last ten minutes or so of a Scorpion episode in which the Big Bad was trying to destroy a nuke plant, and the heroes were crawling through pipes and whatnot to stop him, and I thought I was going to have an aneurysm for a moment.)
Lots of folks don't like the idea that therapods almost certainly had feathers. I'm not sure why; I think it's fascinating. The fact remains, however, that available evidence supports the contention that they did. And given Worffan's level of interest in and research on the topic, rejecting his expertise out of hand simply because he's not a professional paleontologist seems a tad high-handed.
The highlighted part is the insulting part, because in matters like science experience means jack sh*t. You can be the oldest, most life-experienced guy on the planet, and if you quote-mine and cherry-pick data you're still not going to get any respect at all from the paleontological community.
I'll let jonsills explain why I find your attitude hypocritical because I don't have to type this out.
It seems to me that you're able to quote mine with the best of them. :rolleyes:
Dammit, worffie, drop the egotistical bullsh*t for a just a minute, quit looking for an insult, and read what I'm trying too tell you.
If you don't want to be treated like a child, then stop acting like one.
...Oh, baby, you know, I've really got to leave you / Oh, I can hear it callin 'me / I said don't you hear it callin' me the way it used to do?...
- Anne Bredon
Comments
Photon Torpedoes have a base damage of 1352.
In a six second period, you will have fired four shots from the DHC. This would be (4 * 174) / 6 = 116 DPS.
In a six second period, you will have fired a single Photon Torpedo. This would be 1352 / 6 = 225.3 DPS.
If you had 4x DHCs and fired them over a period of six seconds, you would have fired sixteen shots. This would be (4 * (4 * 174)) / 6 = 464 DPS.
If you had 4x Photon Torpedoes and fired them over a period of six seconds, you would have fired four torpedoes. This would be (4 * 1352) / 6 = 901.3 DPS.
If you had 4x DHCs and fired them over a period of twelve seconds, you would have fired twenty-eight shots. This would be (4 * (7 * 174)) / 6 = 812 DPS.
If you had 4x Photon Torpedoes and fired them over a period of twelve seconds, you would have fired eight torpedoes. This would be (8 * 1352) / 6 = 1802.7 DPS.
You get the picture so far, right? How about with a Beam Array for that?
A Beam Array has a base damage of 100.
In a six second period, you will have fired five shots from the Beam Array. This would be (5 * 100) / 6 = 83.3 DPS.
If you had 4x Beam Arrays and fired them over a period of six seconds, you would have fired twenty shots. This would be (4 * (5 * 100)) / 6 = 333.3 DPS.
If you had 4x Beam Arrays and fired them over a period of twelve seconds, you would have fired thirty-six shots. This would be (4 * (9 * 100)) / 6 = 600 DPS.
So at twelve second in, we're looking at:
DHCs - 812 DPS.
Beam Arrays - 600 DPS.
Photon Torpedoes - 1802.7 DPS.
Let's make all of these G14 w/ [CrtD]s...say it's a 100% CrtH...eh?
Mk I - Mk XII: +120%
Mk XIII: +40%
Mk XIV: +70%
Uncommon - Ultra Rare: +10%
Epic: +5%
[Ac/Dm]: +5%
Need to work in some Weapons Training and Energy/Projectile Training, right?
9 Weapon: +49.5%
9 Energy/Projectile: +49.5%
Slap on some G14 Advanced Tac Consoles, yeah?
4x G14 Locators: +150%
Okay then, let's take a look at what we've got so far.
120 + 40 + 70 + 10 + 5 + 5 + 49.5 + 49.5 + 150 = 499 / 100 = 4.99
DHCs - 812 * (1 + 4.99) = 4863.9
Beam Arrays - 600 * (1 + 4.99) = 3594
Photon Torpedoes - 1802.7 * (1 + 4.99) = 10798.2
Okay then, we were going to work in some [CrtD] there...
Base Critical Severity: 50%
4x CrtD: 80%
DHCs also have another 10%.
50 + 80 = 130 / 100 = 1.3
50 + 80 + 10 = 140 / 100 = 1.4
DHCs - 4863.9 * (1 + 1.4) = 11673.4
Beam Arrays - 3594 * (1 + 1.3) = 8266.2
Photon Torpedoes - 10798.2 * (1 + 1.3) = 24835.9
Doh, can't forget the Weapon Power! Let's fudge 125 all the time!
DHCs - 11673.4 * (1 + 1.5) = 29183.5
Beam Arrays - 8266.2 * (1 + 1.5) = 20665.5
Photon Torpedoes - 24835.9 * (1 + 0) = 24835.9
But yeah, let's make this at just inside 10km out, eh?
DHCs - 29183.5 * 0.4 = 11673.4
Beam Arrays - 20665.5 * 0.64 = 13225.9
Photon Torpedoes - 24835.9 * 1.0 = 24835.9
But, but, but...shields! Yes, against a NPC with infinite shields...
DHCs - 1167.3 Hull DPS, 9035.2 Shield DPS; 10202.5
Beam Arrays - 1322.6 Hull DPS, 10236.9 Shield DPS; 11559.5
Photon Torpedoes - 2483.6 Hull DPS, 4805.8 Shield DPS; 7289.4
Let's work in some Enhanced Armor Penetration to that...
DHCs - 1737.4 Hull DPS, 9035.2 Shield DPS; 10772.6
Beam Arrays - 1968.6 Hull DPS, 10236.9 Shield DPS; 12205.5
Photon Torpedoes - 3696.6 Hull DPS, 4805.8 Shield DPS; 8502.4
Unless we also give the target unlimited hull as well, something's going to happen there, eh?
We can sit here looking at this for hours on end...and it would be pointless.
DHCs do not have 250 degree arcs. They do not have an ability that increases their firing rate by 125% against a single target while also adding in a second target for up to a 250% increase in the rate of fire within that 250 degree arc. Nor is that something that Torps can do.
But it's not like the content, the maps, the spawns, the number of mobs or anything is designed to take advantage of anything like that...right?
Change the content...guess what happens to that advantage?
And I don't know why I needed to type out this massively TLDR post for you to see something that should have been obvious...
...but please return to your whining that won't fix a thing and wonder why the devs are ignoring you. They're not looking at the content either, and everything is fine with their little tests. So you're ignoring the content while in the content and looking buffs. They're ignoring the content while not in the content and seeing it's all good. Maybe if you stopped ignoring the content while in it and maybe they tested in the content...
...yeah and unicorns TRIBBLE rainbows. So carry on...whatever.
Have you gotten use out of the additional BOFF slots? Would think so, otherwise you wouldn't have kept buying them like you did. Now, with the changes...are you losing anything? Nope, haven't lost any function there. You've got all your guys with all their abilities still (outside of Cryptic totally TRIBBLE things up and totally TRIBBLE things up).
So somebody can come along and buy a 1TB drive...didn't change anything for you.
So somebody can come along and run with fewer BOFF slots...didn't change anything for you.
Hell, there are already folks that run with fewer BOFF slots. They don't feel the inconvenience of having to hit up the trainer if they need to change something or hitting up somebody else.
So why do you feel the need to ask for some kind of compensation? They should compensate you for your having made use of the slots for however long you did while not losing anything because of the changes.
Yes, I know - this is the STO forums and it makes perfect sense for somebody on the forums to ask for stuff like that. I might have a post count that suggests that I live here, but yeah - no, I live out in the real world...I don't get how some of the folks manage that with the stuff they ask for here on the forums. Are they posting from some sort of "special" home...?
...but why do so many people wait until the last minute to do so?
How about a car analogy...well, kind of a car analogy, eh? Everybody just loves car analogies! Though, this isn't really a car analogy...but it's got cars in it!
So, there's you know - driver education and stuff. Folks go through learning all sorts of things before they even get in a car, right? Then when they get in the car, it's usually going over all sorts of basics. They might drive around an empty mall parking lot, then some back streets that are quiet or rural roads, then get into some light traffic, etc, etc, etc...working their way up to all sorts of things, right?
Why do so many folks in STO like to hop in the car for what appears to be the first time and get on the highway at rush hour?
Everyone has to learn at some point...so how about they freakin' start learning at the point they should, eh?
Taking this as a sig if I can.
Update: Can't
Most of the things I've seen folks ask for...wouldn't be a game I'd go anywhere near.
Different folks want different things. I'd love for there to be another Star Trek MMO out there that provided the stuff those folks want...so they could TRIBBLE off. Might give Cryptic some time to address the actual bugs in the game rather than having to try to change so many soiled diapers.
How many people from Group A aren't playing this game cause of stuff done for Group B? How many people from Group B aren't playing game cause of stuff done for Group A?
Yeah, have multiple games...increase the playerbase of each by doing so.
I'm not sure where you're getting "relatively slow" from. The minimum estimated sprint speed I've seen for Deinonychus is 50+kp/h (don't remember where) and that was based on comparing its foot-tibia ratio to an ostrich. I think that paper drastically overstates the role that foot length relative to lower leg length plays in an animal's top speed. (Just look the legs of a cheetah. Yes, it's a quadruped an has a totally different running mechanic, but if you're going to argue that foot traction is the limiting factor in your top speed, sorry, argument invalid.) Stride length, musculature of the hips, and (hello!) thermoregulation are far more important biomechanical factors in determining the top speed of a land animal. That's another strike against arguing that all theropods are covered in feathers, by the way.
Perhaps, but size does not necessarily denote social status.
Take orcas. Male orcas are much larger than females, and yet orca pods are matriarchal.
TEHO. Jurassic Park came out when I was eight. And I think snakes and lizards are cuter than birds.
Anyway, my Deinons are not true specimens of D. antirrhopus (they're sapient, for a start) and any deviations from the species baseline (whatever that looked like - there is no way to know, paleontology is a field of educated guesswork) I claim as "creative license." I do strive to be more accurate than Spielberg, at least.
...Oh, baby, you know, I've really got to leave you / Oh, I can hear it callin 'me / I said don't you hear it callin' me the way it used to do?...
- Anne Bredon
You may be confused because of the improper hand pronation in Ostrom's original diagram. Later research has shown that the bunny-rabbit style hands with the palms facing down would have been painful if not outright impossible for the living animal to maintain. Like a human with the elbow facing forward and the palms facing outwards.
In the living animal, the wing feathers would have been invaluable for climbing, being splayed against the surface in the flight stroke. Modern chukar partridges do this all the time; in fact, if you try to keep chukar or other similar quail the juveniles will climb any available surface when their flight feathers begin to come in.
In a predatory dromaeosaur, the feathers would have rested against the flanks of the prey animal, the raptor on the back with the arms used as pitons to hold it in place as the jaws snapped the neck. Calculations have even relatively gracile dromaeosaurs having stronger bite forces in PSI terms than equally-sized alligators. Small arboreal species such as Microraptor and Sinornithosaurus seem to have been specialists in small vertebrates and large invertebrates.
The toe-claws, despite not having the muscular power or tendon hookups for an eviscerating kick, did have ligaments and muscles that would have made them suitable climbing aids, like a mountaineer's spikes. These would have been used to climb the back of a large prey animal, the arms used to help ratchet the predator up.
Furthermore, we have access to Rahonavis, which despite Feduccia's complaints is unlikely to be a chimera (Feduccia's a BANDit, and so can't stand the existence of an indisputably winged dromaeosaur) due to the in situ structure of the fossil and the differences in the structure of the wings between the specimen and birds found in the same locality. This is a dromaeosaur with flight-capable wings; it lacks fully avian flight characteristics, but Novas et al (2013) found evidence of strong deltoids, indicating a bat-like flight stroke. 1. Most small theropods were endothermic, much like modern birds, based on bone analysis (and yes, you can tell the difference). Sampson and others postulate that large theropods and most ornithopods may have been semi-endothermic, or "mesothermic"; capable of thermoregulation but not as obligately or effectively as true endotherms. This has held up so far to bone analysis.
2. There's a difference between sprint speed and distance running speed. A cheetah can sprint much faster than a wolf, but the wolf will outrun it every time if the chase lasts longer than a minute, because the cheetah simply can't keep up that speed.
3. Muscle-scar analysis has shown that most dromaeosaurs were extremely good leapers; this has not to my knowledge been done for D. antirrhopus yet, but it has been shown for several velociraptorines and unenlagines, which makes sense given the piton claws, bone-snapping jaws and gripper claws of most species. 1. Dromaeosaurids are literally the sister taxon to stem Aves. The comparison's pretty valid in this case.
2. Pack-hunting in Deinonychus is disputed; the specimens in question may have been caught in a flash-flood while scavenging, or otherwise gathered around an already-dead animal.
3. Jurassic Park. That thing is the bane of every paleontologist. The mere mention of the sprinting tyrannosaur and the venom-spitting Dilophosaurus makes my eye twitch.
And while I respect your opinion (despite holding the opposite view, although I do find snakes and lizards cool--especially this guy, this guy, and these guys), you're trying to state that the sister taxon of stem Aves, a subtaxon of a subtaxon of Dinosauria, a taxon whose basal traits seem to include protofeathers at a minimum*, were lizard-like and featherless, despite having multiple confirmed fully-feathered relatives, which is patently ridiculous from a taxonomic POV.
Summary:
1. I'll admit to taking this one a little personally; this is my personal field of interest, the thing I've been studying nonstop since I was 4 years old, that I pride myself on keeping myself up on and plan to pursue as a career despite the sh*tty job prospects. I have to say that I'm a little insulted, although I'm unsure if that's maybe because I'm exhausted and have a migraine or not.
Basically how you'd feel if I said that everything you know about military hardware and engineering is actually the opposite of what it is.
2. Personal feelings aside. It's after 11 here and I'm exhausted. I recommend reading Prum (2002), Prum (2003), anything by Naish, anything by Lamanna, Carpenter, or Sampson, and for certain Nesbitt (2010) for archosaur phylogeny in general. Those should give you a decent foundation in archosaur and avian phylogeny.
3. Do not trust a word Alan Feduccia says. He's been caught quote-mining, cherry-picking, and using falsified data on dozens of occasions. In paleontological circles, his name is mud. C.F. Prum (2003)**
4. It's almost midnight now, and I'm exhausted and in pain from a miserable headache. Sorry if any of this was offensive.
And that creative license is your right. Just stating the currently-accepted theories regarding dinosaur paleobiology.
*We have multiple specimens of feathered ornithopods, such as Tianyulong, making it extremely likely that stage 1 or higher protofeathers are a basal trait for the Dinosauria.
**Here's a review of a paper done by one of Feduccia's closest colleagues. Quick and Ruben (2009)'s quote mining, use of obviously outdated anatomical diagrams, and selective misuse of data are typical BANDit tactics. Yes, there is a small group of people who for whatever reason think that birds can't possibly be dinosaurs. Yes, their definition of birds is about as constant as the wind. No, the broader scientific community does not have any respect for them.
Also, having watched birds fight, I can say that when the one on the bottom is trying to get away, the one on the top certainly seems to get a lot of use out of flapping to maintain balance.
So yes, I can see why such creatures might well have begun the development of feathered wings.
37.114% damage done, 38.292% damage in, 48.901% heal out
10.5m damage done, 2nd 7.1m, 3rd 5.4m, 4th 2.7m, 5th 2.6m
770.9k damage in, 2nd 600.9k, 3rd 294.3k, 4th 185.6k, 5th 161.6k
684.9k heal out, 2nd 487k, 3rd 150.5k, 4th 45.7k, 5th 32.5k
44.84% damage done, 51.896% damage in, 63.612% heal out
12.2m damage done, 2nd 8.3m, 3rd 2.8m, 4th 2.6m, 5th 1.2m
988.4k damage in, 2nd 297.3k, 3rd 239.7k, 4th 210.8k, 5th 168.3k
975.9k heal out, 2nd 200k, 3rd 169.8k, 4th 123.1k, 5th 65.3k
28.219% damage done, 38.426% damage in, 50.206% heal out
7.9m damage done, 2nd 7.4m, 3rd 6.8m, 4th 4.1m, 5th 1.6m
388.7k damage in, 2nd 322.6k, 3rd 246.3k, 4th 50.2k, 5th 3.6k
399k heal out, 2nd 234.6k, 3rd 130.5k, 4th 29k, 5th 1.6k
44.927% damage done, 29.384% damage in, 38.894% heal out
12.9m damage done, 2nd 6.1m, 3rd 4.1m, 4th 2.8m, 5th 2.7m
776.5k damage in, 2nd 744.6k, 3rd 612.4k, 4th 298.7k, 5th 210.4k
579.2k heal out, 2nd 360.7k, 3rd 216.7k, 4th 210.2k, 5th 122.2k
46.687% damage done, 49.565% damage in, 54.819% heal out
12.9m damage done, 2nd 5.2m, 3rd 4.1m, 4th 2.9m, 5th 2.6m
1.0m damage in, 2nd 410.2k, 3rd 338.1k, 4th 200.9k, 5th 90.1k
857.7k heal out, 2nd 265.6k, 3rd 232.8k, 4th 137.9k, 5th 70.6k
Only one of those had my DPS contribution higher than my Tank or Heal contribution.
I'm not a DPSer. 4 of those were 19k and 1 was barely a hair over 20k. I'm just not a DPSer...Hell, I'm a Sci...I like flying support. I like things shooting at me instead of others, I like tossing heals if folks need them, I like buffing allies and debuffing enemies.
That's not using FAW with CrtDx3/x4 Arrays...it's using the innate Subsystem Targeting of the Sarr Theln with [Acc]x2[Over] arrays.
BOFF layout for 4 of them..
TT1, APB1, TS3
EPtS1, AtS1
EPtW1, IT1
TSS1, ST2, TR2, TBR3
PH1, HE2
...for the first one
TT1, APB1, TS3
EPtS1, AtS1
EPtA1, IT1
TSS1, ST2, GW1, TBR3
PH1, HE2
Dropping out Scattering, Science Fleet, Intel Fleet...charge in and grab stuff with DOFF'd TBR so it shoots at me instead of others, bunch of debuffing so everybody takes less damage and does more damage.
It's a support build...
...but based on what you said there and what the parses show, I'm ruining folks ability to do something? If they built a better healer, they'd outheal me. If they built a better tank, they'd outtank me. And if it's a case that's it so DPS focused, then everybody should be outDPSing me.
Just because somebody's flying a tank or a healer...doesn't mean they can't put out some DPS in this game with the way debuff stacking works - all the ratios/percentages in place.
Hell, before DR I ran an Orion Engineer in a Marauder...and the percentages oft weren't that different. It would be awesome when somebody would come along and outDPS me...but I'd still be rocking the tank and heal aspect. I always expected that to be the case, FFS, I was an Eng in a Marauder - I should have always been on the bottom for damage out. But meh...no.
Trying to institute a MMO Trinity isn't going to change that...short of setting requirements so there can only be one tank, one healer, and then the DPS...so the tanks/healers don't have to worry about looking bad compared to another tank/healer.
When we play through the content, and we're the only one there - we've got to do all three...and that's how I play.
Wanting to go through and change things for a MMO Trinity - you're basically wanting to nerf everybody's damage resistance, nerf everybody's damage, nerf everybody's healing, buff NPCs for their damage resistance, their damage, and their healing - while going through and tweaking the damage resistance, damage, and healing of specific players so that everybody can go play together...just because some players can't figure out how to play?
It's Star Trek...did the USS Enterprise sit there putting a call out for some DPS to come along because they couldn't do damage? Did they sit there putting a call out for some heals because they couldn't do repairs?
Nope...they did damage, took damage, and repaired damage.
I don't need that MMO Trinity garbage to come along and TRIBBLE that up too.
And yeah, folks could easily come along and both outtank/outheal me while also outDPSing me, cause I'm just not that good at this game...people are far too eager to blame everything and everyone but themselves.
edit: Meh, that was silly of me just to look at the damage in - could be low resists, etc. How about Attacks In while looking at the base damage in vs. applied damage in, eh? Damage / BaseDamage...with a lower percentage being better. Will use the same order as the Damage In from above. Will list the DPS as the third line.
1431 attacks in (50.017% of attacks), 786, 375, 135, 134
24.7%, 36.2%, 32.5%, 39.9%, 60.3%
19.1k, 10.1k, 12.9k, 4.8k, 4.9k
1933 attacks in (60.52% of attacks), 428, 222, 293, 318
25.9%, 45.4%, 42.6%, 28.3%, 37.2%
20.2k, 4.6k, 2.0k, 4.4k, 13.9k
610 attacks in (39.38% of attacks), 386, 510, 31, 12
24.5%, 41.9%, 25.9%, 33.7%, 43.7%
19.3k, 16.7k, 18.4k, 4.0k, 10.3k
1514 attacks in (41.525% of attacks), 727, 776, 269, 360
25.1%, 39.9%, 40.0%, 49.8%, 33.2%
19.6k, 9.6k, 6.3k 4.2k, 4.2k
2313 attacks in (63.231% of attacks), 507, 385, 262, 191
25.4%, 42.3%, 30.6%, 34.1%, 39.4%
19.5k, 6.2k, 7.8k, 4.3k, 3.9k
:cool:
I Was A Trekkie Before It Was Cool ... Sept. 8th, 1966 ... Not To Mention Before Most Folks Around Here Were Born!
Forever a STO Veteran-Minion
I wasn't trying to insult you. I was trying to get you to stop and think about how you want to be perceived by your peers. Please read what I said again, with this in mind.
However much you've studied any subject, whatever your equivalent level of education is, whatever experience you've gained in life so far, there is simply no escaping the fact that you're talking to people who have way more life experience than you do, just by virtue of the simple measure that we've lived longer.
If you want to argue with adults, then you need to argue like an adult. That means letting go of your ego and pride, learning to separate opinion from facts, and acknowledging that beyond academia where you live now there's this place called the real world where everything you think you know will some day be challenged.
I don't mean to insult you. I like you. I don't want to see you embarrass yourself. But you keep getting stuck in these argumentative feedback loops - whether we're talking about paleontology, or climate change, or Islam, or Janeway's many, many character flaws - where you know you're "right" no matter what anyone else has to say and you keep repeating your arguments over and over ad nauseum. (Like you just did again in the post I quoted.)
That is what smacks of immaturity and childishness, and betrays the intelligent, well-reasoned adult I know you can be.
...Oh, baby, you know, I've really got to leave you / Oh, I can hear it callin 'me / I said don't you hear it callin' me the way it used to do?...
- Anne Bredon
My Ship Builds: USS Conqueror, HMS Victorious, HMS Concord, ISS Queen Elizabeth, Black Widow III
Click here to view my DeviantArt.
Yet I have a fair education in astrophysics, due to my eclectic reading habits; I can also discuss matters relating to nuclear weapons and their use (and misuse) due to my Air Force service (wrote and maintained software used in creating and updating the Single Integrated Operating Plan, NATO's nuclear-war blueprint), and scream uselessly at the television whenever matters pertaining to nuclear power plants or video games are discussed in popular TV programs. (I was exposed to only the last ten minutes or so of a Scorpion episode in which the Big Bad was trying to destroy a nuke plant, and the heroes were crawling through pipes and whatnot to stop him, and I thought I was going to have an aneurysm for a moment.)
Lots of folks don't like the idea that therapods almost certainly had feathers. I'm not sure why; I think it's fascinating. The fact remains, however, that available evidence supports the contention that they did. And given Worffan's level of interest in and research on the topic, rejecting his expertise out of hand simply because he's not a professional paleontologist seems a tad high-handed.
My Ship Builds: USS Conqueror, HMS Victorious, HMS Concord, ISS Queen Elizabeth, Black Widow III
Click here to view my DeviantArt.
Ugh, I'm replying to a post in the thread instead of a reply to a post in another thread and I'm quoting what I'm replying to as well...I'm all sorts of fail this morning; but yeah, it's been a trip forever with so many channels...
Used to be just the joke about MTV not showing music videos - but there are all sorts of channels not showing what you'd think they'd show, whether talking about Discovery, History, etc, etc, etc. Animal Planet is a trip with their "surprisingly human" - should be "surprisingly about humans"... Though, the biggest trip for me is wrestling on SyFy...really?
My Ship Builds: USS Conqueror, HMS Victorious, HMS Concord, ISS Queen Elizabeth, Black Widow III
Click here to view my DeviantArt.
Pro wrestling, and science fiction... both equally far from reality, maybe?
I'll let jonsills explain why I find your attitude hypocritical because I don't have to type this out.
It seems to me that you're able to quote mine with the best of them. :rolleyes:
Dammit, worffie, drop the egotistical bullsh*t for a just a minute, quit looking for an insult, and read what I'm trying too tell you.
If you don't want to be treated like a child, then stop acting like one.
...Oh, baby, you know, I've really got to leave you / Oh, I can hear it callin 'me / I said don't you hear it callin' me the way it used to do?...
- Anne Bredon