Jump to content

Welcome to Yugioh Card Maker Forum
Register now to gain access to all of our features. Once registered and logged in, you will be able to create topics, post replies to existing threads, give reputation to your fellow members, get your own private messenger, post status updates, manage your profile and so much more. This message will be removed once you have signed in.
Login to Account Create an Account

vla1ne

vla1ne

Member Since 19 Feb 2013
Member ID: 659,748
Currently Not online
Offline Last Active Today, 04:19 PM
***--

#7104823 Three California Initiative Makes November Ballot

Posted by vla1ne on 15 June 2018 - 07:10 PM

If you've been hearing about it since late 2016, might I ask which plans you were referring to? As Striker noted, Tim Draper had previously tried to split up California into six states, so while Californians wanting to split up is indeed nothing new (Draper makes the point), more often than not these plans fail. People want a State of Jefferson, and it still hasn't happened yet. I agree that California Republicans would want to break apart because of that Democrat majority; that was the entire point of my previous posts, and it's why I believe they want this; they think it will give them a greater chance at gaining seats.

 

Most of these laws you're citing seem to specifically be angering Republicans/conservatives, which are a minority in this state, so it's hard to believe that it's only a "small majority" supporting laws when it's a minority that's frustrated with gun laws being restricted (Which we actually need, since the common evidence in response to mass shootings suggests that countries with stricter gun laws have significantly fewer mass shootings than we do), and "illegal immigrants" only ever seems to Mexicans, so the racial bias is blatantly apparent that I find it hard to sympathize with the conservatives who would be upset about it. Again, we as a state wanted this; while it may not sit well with conservatives, plenty of people who resent our leniency towards immigration and offering sanctuary states already do not live here to begin with, so they have no real say in whether or not the state should be split.

 

Has California actually been pushing towards socialism? As far as I can tell, that's only ever been a third party interpretation, usually describing "policies in California that I personally don't like" as socialism, and is reducing the ideology to a buzzword that means nothing over than to attach a negative connotation to make California sound more evil than it actually is. Not to mention that quite frankly, the majority of these complaints all stem back to Jerry Brown, whose term is finally coming to end this year anyway, yet he's treated as if he'll somehow still be around for years to come, to the point that Yes California has been trying to designate him as their president. I don't see much merit in basing your entire strategy rejecting one person when the passage of time is more likely to oust him. I know that you and I have talked about STI's before, so I'm not going to repeat that.

 

California has a budget surplus, so your claim that the state is going broke is categorically false, as is your claim that immigrants don't put anything back, as evidenced by them collectively paying $1.53B. So I will argue against a clean break, because if your reasoning for breaking up California is based on completely false claims, then you are offering no persuasive reason to divide the state. Forgive me if I'm not going to sympathize with whatever red California finds reprehensible, and this is not an issue about mitigating conflict, especially when they lack a perspective worth compromising with.

since late 2016, there was talk of republicans wanting to split the state into three. while it did get some vocal support from a few people in california, it was little more than a rumor mill at the time. wasn't expecting it to actually gain traction enough to get proposed. it may well be their attempt to get more seats, but it does the same for democrats to a far greater extent, the most populated sections of the new california would lean heavily democrat, so if this were simply to get more seats, that would be somewhat foolish, since while the change would give them more seats, it would have little if any impact of substance. possibly enough to backfire into their faces, as winter's post claims it removes any future chance of a super majority

 

 

Not getting into the gun debate here, that's it's own topic, especially when you get tangled up in the "what can kill more people faster" part of it, where everything get's thrown into the ring and nobody listens to reason till you lay it out bare. as for illegal immigration, you said the exact word yourself, yet possibly overlooked it: ILLEGAL. and don't play the "we only target mexico" card, we are right next to mexico, can you name another country that's close enough to swim here from in droves to the extent mexico can? or another country close to us that can smuggle in immigrants, guns, and drugs at the rate mexico does? of course we target mostly mexicans, because it's mostly mexicans who come here illegally, and it's extremely simple to deport illegal mexicans in far greater numbers, because they're right next to us. unless you know of a large number of illegal canadians breaking across the border that i'm unaware of?  as for resenting leniency, i can't name one person who has said they want less legal immigration, and nobody has been against making the legal immigration process smoother and less cluttered than it is now. it's the fact that california is actually allowing illegal immigrants, with no background checks, to come over in any numbers they can, and hindering cooperation for safe and efficient removal of said illegal immigrants, which hurts mexico as much, if not more than america, but is also another discussion that i can make another thread for if you'd like. as far as californians not liking the ballot, that'll be demonstrated by the vote in november. arguing about what people want here is pointless when we'll have a guaranteed answer in a few months time. it's like brexit, or trump, incredibly unpopular coverage, and shit on by all sides at first, but has more than enough potential to make a surprise upset.

 

 

pushing towards socialism would be increasing the volume of public services that are sponsored by the state. does california do that? pretty sure it does. redistribution of wealth is another trait of socialism. yes, the government does it as well, but california's state laws push this far harder than the government does. but i am insanely shit at arguing whether or not some country or another is socialist, especially since whenever socialism fails, the "it's not real socialism" card is never far behind. so have some links, all read through and double checked by yours truly:

the first, pointing out that california, for all it's glory, has been losing quite a bit on the "quality of life" front: http://www.latimes.c...0201-story.html

the second, explaining, in better terms than i, why and how, california is becoming more and more socialist: https://www.ocregist...t-to-socialism/

the third details the desire for california to continue down it's currently sworn path, and details where exactly the end of that path may well lead. it's arguably the weakest of the 3 for the claim that it's socialist, but it outlines enough claims that the specifics can be held back in favor of the sentiment supporting the claim: http://thefederalist...cialist-utopia/

the passage of time may well oust jerry, but can you honestly say the trend of california is leading to anything remotely red? in fact, the blue surge has effectively helped drive out conservatives who lived there, aligning more than well enough with your claim that those who disagree don't live there (because many of them have either left, or are planning to)

 

 

yeah, that's nice, they put back over a billion dollars yearly... too bad they take out about 20 billion yearly. what you forgot to factor with your argument isn't what they contribute, but what they cost, i'm willing to change my mind if you've got that 20 billion link stashed in the back to counter the claim, but one billion is pennies on the dollar compared to what it costs to keep illegal immigrants. sure, they pay taxes when they buy goods and services, but where do they get the money to buy said goods? what services do they provide to afford said services? what taxes are they paying when they get those under-the-table checks? there's a lot going into them, that they do not reciprocate, by simple virtue of not being legally registered. 


  • Dad likes this


#7104624 [SOFU/SJMP] "C"

Posted by vla1ne on 14 June 2018 - 06:18 PM

gokipole is pretty nice. you'll likely be running 2 3-of normal bugs for variance, and while one is probably gonna be sentai shine, the other one could very well be either killer needle or insect knight. summoning either one pops anything higher than 19-2k, and gives you a 2k body in return, so it's not like you'll be in immediate danger from doing so. also, you can pull off some basic link shenanigans using beetron and gokipole, while possibly getting a search if, for whatever reason, you didn't already use a gokipole that turn. in fact, it's pretty decent support for the bee archetype in general.

 

the field spell, the art is godly, the effect though, that's it's own level of nice. assuming you crash a gokipole into your opponent's bigger monster, you can essentially search an insect knight, and mill a sentai shine, thus popping a monster that's 19+ off gokipole, and swarming the field with 3 sentai shine. it's not an overwhelming field, but if you'r opponent's running something like trickstars or sky strikers, 2k is strong enough to run over the majority of their monsters, and if there's one that happens to be higher than 2k, the gokipole pop will likely have taken care of it. leaving you 3 monsters, and, hopefully, potential to do some decent damage, alongside whatever link shennanigans that you may be capable of post battle phase. not the most powerful play ever, but definitely interesting. (i mean, it's still using normal monsters to do said things, so it's not likely to be very OP either way.)

 

 

considering the field spell gives you 3 monsters to grave imediately, and the general swarming support insects have (though older, they do have some pretty good cards for field swarming), i'd say black iron "C" has some pretty simple conditions (now if it said zombie...) the nuke effect on a 2800 body ensures that you'll be beating down practically everything your opponent has, one way or another. surprisingly, only the weakest monsters have a decent chance at surviving, but i suppose that was the intent from the start.




#7103873 YCM Awards 2018

Posted by vla1ne on 09 June 2018 - 10:56 PM

Rising Star: Tbh, i haven't seen much of the newest guys here, so i'll abstain.  
 
Cardmaker Star: Dova
 
Writing Star: If Black D'sceptyr is active in the role/writing section, then i vote for them. that one post in the TCG section was wonderful, and if their posts in roleplaying is anything like that, then they can have my vote.
 
Artistic Star: Thar
 
Critic Star: Shradow
 
Reality Star: ...Winter
 
Comedy Star:Mutant Monster RAEG-HAPYP
 
Classic Star: Mitch, or Whatever name happens to be currently blended in the mitcher
 
Star manager: I swear, i miss legend zero, but in his absence, gonna have to say black.
 
StAr MoNsTeR: Tsumugi Shiraui, AKA the only monster to actually get me into a good anime.

  • Dad likes this


#7103555 YCM Awards 2018

Posted by vla1ne on 07 June 2018 - 09:14 PM

commenting as a placeholder so i don't forget. gonna take some time to think on it, but i'll be back to actually respond properly.




#7103365 Obesity

Posted by vla1ne on 06 June 2018 - 06:20 PM

What makes you say this?

not to speak for him, but people cannot, and should not be babied on the government's dollar. that's essentially making taxpayers pay for the personal choices of others. as far as obesity goes, what business does the government have in mandating dietary regimens and restricting foods? those are personal choices, and no government in the world should want to, or have to, look after every person in their respective country to see if they've been eating like a good boy. it is not only time consuming, it wastes money that could be spent bettering the status of the country in other ways. the freedom to make your own choices comes with being an adult, and as sad as it is, some adults will inevitably find ways to screw up somehow. 


  • Dad likes this


#7101929 Ireland votes to repeal 8th amendment, legalising abortion

Posted by vla1ne on 27 May 2018 - 09:45 AM

That must be why China is scrapping their child limitation policy, why Japan is throwing money at parents to have more kids, and why Eastern Europe is doing more and more to limit abortions and increase birth rates

 

You're not entirely wrong, just lacking context, we do have a lot of population, but that's cuz most of that population is old and will be dead in a few years. 

my dude, that's not fair and you know it. china's scrapping the limitation because of the conditions it forces upon people, and the damage said blanket restrictions cause to familes as a whole. they're slowly choosing a healthier option (or at least trying to) as far as japan throwing money at people to have children, their young men are more frequently giving up on supporting families, and the expectations of society. as such, the family unit is being broken apart, and there's worries about the future of the Japanese citizens, culture, and society as a result. It has very little to do with abortion. if anything though, both cases prove that having the government meddling in your ability to have children (either banning it, or forcing it) is a terrible idea overall, not only because it helps politics to become the problem, instead of the desire and ability to support a family, but it provides all the wrong incentives, in relation to a lasting family unit. (and i would argue that it cannot provide the correct incentives, but that's a different argument entirely)

 

 

I personally don't like abortion, and i would rather nobody ever have, or have to have one, but it has to be understood that that is not my choice to make (unless it were my potential child). not is it the choice of the fetus, nor is it the choice of the government, it is the choice of the would be parents, the people who will be responsible for struggling through the birth, and may well have to care for the child. some choose to have the child, and give them up for adoption, some choose not to have the child, and save their bodies and wallets, the strain of having said child, others chose to have the child, and go on to raise said child with as much love and care as they can, some have the child, break up, and raise the child in the pieces left, often perpetuating the cycle. even more should never reproduce in the first place, but do so anyways, because the government provides incentives to do so. ect, ect. there's an infinite number of what-if's, and moral posturing, but the fact is, the choice belongs to the people who are going to be giving birth and (likely) raising that child. nobody else. not even the fetus, matters in that decision (while it is the topic of the decision and discussion, it does not, and cannot, have any say, beyond it's very existence).

 

adding the caveat, because somebody is bound to go there, i do believe abortion past the point where said fetus can live outside the womb on it's own, is fucking inhumane. if you've waited that long, then you may as well fucking have the child. there's nothing to be gained from aborting something that's already ready to be born. (not in a machine, not as a test tube baby, but actually on it's own, medical issues notwithstanding) 




#7094659 [CYHO] Zirdras, the Magicrystal Dragon

Posted by vla1ne on 13 April 2018 - 07:02 PM

for the ghost girls to fit my description, the "specific thing" would have to be "play Yu-Gi-Oh"

The conditions for their use are far more prominent than S/T removal, and even as you said, all this does it recover what was removed, rather than do something about what did it.

this triggers on ANY removal though (banish, pop, send, trap eater, ect). and gives you ANY S/T from your grave or banished zone. not just the card that got hit, but ANY S/T card that you have used prior. all the while giving your field a new body. if you run a deck with valuable continuous S/T, or even valuable normal S/T, this card can be your insurance on them, and it can kick from hand or grave, so there's little if any risk involved. cards like CDI, master peace, that one pendulum magician, ghost ogre, whatever else your opponent might use to remove your card, this gives you back any S/T in your grave or banished. that's definitely prominent enough to warrant a second look.




#7093215 Russian agents have been pretending to be furries on Tumblr

Posted by vla1ne on 07 April 2018 - 06:19 AM

“The idea of Boris and Natasha generating pro-Trump furry porn is too delicious. But it’s no less worrying than any other influence exerted by foreign agents.”

What kind of influence is Russia exerting here that they’re scared of? I can’t stop laughing at this. How the hell does furry porn help Trump?

furry voters make up 34.5% of trumps voter base, didn't you know? russia's probably seeking to double that number by 2020.




#7088311 Morality in politics

Posted by vla1ne on 17 March 2018 - 06:10 PM

Stay on topic.

If you want a thread on morality in politics, feel free to create one.

well i'm not very invested in russia colluding with america, but i've got my share of thoughts on morality in politics. and seeing as it was looking to bleed out into the other thread (and it occasionally bleeds out elsewhere when politics is involved) i thought i'd start the topic this time, instead of jumping in two to three pages like like i usually end up doing.

 

so discuss as you like, what is your opinion on morality in politics? what guides your moral compass? how important is it to you? what lines can you accept being crossed, what lines make a candidate politically dead to you? and if you have time, why do you hold said beliefs? Or, you can just poke at somebody else's beliefs, either one is fine.

 

starting off

  • Dad likes this


#7088136 [CYHO] Metaphys Ascension

Posted by vla1ne on 16 March 2018 - 08:08 PM

I mean, Gold Sarc being an immediate searcher rather than having to wait until the next Standby Phase is a real help.  Also Executor not minusing as hard on-summon should be beneficial as well.

 

Not having played the deck irl (and thus, take my words with a grain of salt), it feels like the deck has a bit of a U.A. Syndrome in really wanting another low level Metaphys that can start plays.  Anyone able to confirm/deny this?

yes. for the love of god(s) yes. the deck can get going a hell of a lot easier than U.A. can, but the problem  is still there. a second (or third) level 4 or lower, with some form of hand/grave banishing compatibility, would make the deck far more consistent than it is now, while also making executor far easier to drop.




#7088133 Mekk-Knight Avram (Complex TCG lore revealed)

Posted by vla1ne on 16 March 2018 - 08:00 PM

this is legit? i hope the guy who did this just quit his job if so. messing with card names is one thing, but messing with our access to card lore? that's a whole other level of intolerable.




#7087287 Consecrated Light + Shadow-Imprisoning Mirror

Posted by vla1ne on 12 March 2018 - 06:21 PM

while consecrated would prevent attacks, and shadow would stop monsters on field, it would not stop your opponent from summoning a non-dark monster under lair, or using non-dark monster effects in grave. lair only makes monsters on the field dark, meaning you can still summon anything that's not inherently light, or activate the effects on non-dark monsters in grave. if you want to pick out 2 cards you can use, it'd be better to just stick with the standard skill/mind/soul drains. 

 

on the other hand, both are, for the most part, excellent counters to the deck.




#7087248 Herald of Perfection

Posted by vla1ne on 12 March 2018 - 03:15 PM

if you just have one herald, if your opponet kaijus it you can't negate anything with the herald

while you can't be kaiju'd, you also lose resources too quickly. there's no reason not to have 2-3 copies in deck of herald of perfection, but dropping 2 copies to field gives you nothing that 1 cannot already accomplish. if your opponent kaijus you in heralds,they still have to go the extra mile to kill you, and even i you have a 2nd herald on board, you are still forced to deal with the fact that heralds burn can through their resources very quickly. on the other hand, having a herald and a saphira on board, means that you are replenishing advantage far faster, and while losing a herald may hurt, you will still have not only enough resources to bounce back quickly, you will still have a monster on board.

 

in short, getting kaiju'd hurts a 2 herald field more than a 1 herald field 1 saphira field. for the simple reason that you are not regaining your resources under a 2 herald field. yes, you keep your negation monster, but you are not getting anything back from said monster. meaning If they break your board, you are no longer able to sustain an offence or defense.




#7087215 What would you do if you became the POTUS?

Posted by vla1ne on 12 March 2018 - 12:28 PM

a bit on the older side, but seeing as it's still first page, it counts. 

 

i would also invest money into a program called the Sunrise initiative, ensuring that america stays ahead in the race to build the most powerful mobile suits, going down in history as the strongest president on anti zeon policy.

 

spring boarding off of jessie's idea, while i'd pull out of as many foreign engagements as possible (no point protecting others if we end up killing ourselves) i'd actually help out mexico. as our neighboring country, they have too many problems within, and as we see time and again, the issues in mexico are so damn numerous that they are continuing to spill across our border to this day. i'd work to repair our jobs and establish proper american infrastructure, with perks for american based businesses, but beyond even that, i'd stop sending money overseas, be it for wars, or foreign aid, it'd all need to face cuts. maintaining the military is fine, we need to have the ability to act should it come down to that, but deploying them far and wide as we currently are, is something our country can't afford while it's this deep in debt. nor can we afford to sustain other countries while we struggle to pay for our own

 

in addition to this, while hopefully trump will get around to it like he claimed, i would close as many loopholes as possible for million and billionaires, but try to provide new ones, at fair rates, based upon them leaving money (and keeping workers hired at fair wages) in america. i know we can't afford to give free tax breaks, but without them, you can't really keep businesses interested in staying.

 

back to mexico, while i'm still in agreement with the wall, it would only be a stopgap on the issue, mexico, as our neighboring country, has become far too foul with corruption and drugs. if i were to lend aid to any counry, in an attempt to improve it, my target would be mexico. much of the drug problem in america, is filtered through mexico, as are many of the illegal weapons and many illegal immigrants. improving mexico, would be like taking care of the weeds in the garden next door. it may not solve everything, but it would at the very least, be a solid start.

 

lastly that i can think of, i would attempt to work with state legislature, to ensure that the wil of the states, and the will of the federal government, not only reflected the will of the people, but was capable of upholding all principles of the constitution. and by this, i mean wiping out as much corruption as possible within all levels of government, to the best of my ability, be it weakening the hold of lobbyists, or removing the ability for legislature to contain more than one general topic at a time. no more unrelated bills coasting by under the shadow of things that the people truly want, no more lobbyists or large businesses holding more power in their words than the people themselves. and no more politicians who are dug too deep in their own corruption to hear what actual people are saying. that said,i would also not jump to and fro with the will of the people. mass kneejerk reaction does not make for good legislature.




#7087199 Crimson Nova Trinity the Dark Cubic Lord

Posted by vla1ne on 12 March 2018 - 11:12 AM

i mean, with ring of destruction, you can jank your opponent to death, but while the effect is ungodly powerful, the summoning condition makes it not worth the effort. it's strong, and if you drop it, you've likely got game that turn, but in order to drop it, you need to invest a serious amount of cards in deck to it basic crimson nova is already good enough. if you drop this, and they have an answer, you've likely lost at minimum 4 cards. and if you're missing even 1 piece, you can't even drop this. that said, it's insanely strong, and if you want to try running it, then the reward, while overshadowed by much easier methods, is worth the effort. i can respect those who wish to bring out the hard bosses.