What folks do need to stop doing though, is act as if religion is to science what chaos is to order, or what cold is to warmth. The two don't need to cancel eachother out. They never have. Even Descarted uttered the theory that the universe adheres to rules of physics without denouncing the possibility of a god.
Why didn't you use "What creation is to evolution" in your examples? Ah, right.
I'm not an atheist. I'm a scientist. Science is based on probabilities, not absolutes.
There might be an afterlife or a god. I don't know the answer. What I do know, however, is that anyone who claims to know the answer does so with no evidence beyond faith.
Are we immortal? Yes and no. Our bodies can die, yet they are permanently bound to our souls until death. In that sense, we are both mortal in flesh and immortal in soul. This creates an interesting conflict for someone who believes in the immortal soul: In one sense, our ignorant humanity writhes with ambition to accomplish as much as possible before our bodily death, as if it's all we have... and yet our bodies can sense the eternal span of the soul, even if it's only a subconscious whisper, which allows us to do things like love and self-sacrifice. That's why even someone who doesn't believe in God has these capacities, even though God is the author of love and self-sacrifice. In our humanity, both of these things make absolutely no sense: loving and self-sacrifice accomplish nothing according to our ambition, and in fact can cause backsliding or suffering.
The most interesting thing of all is that when we consider an interesting, meaningful life, it includes things like worldly accomplishments, yet almost always has to include something about love and self-sacrifice as well. So to answer your question, even a strict atheist has the ability to love and sacrifice himself, even if he doesn't know why he does it or where it comes from, therefore a fully meaningful life can be achieved. This implies that even an atheist can find himself in heaven when he dies... of that I'm not certain. I suppose it depends on whether you think acting in a loving, self-sacrificing way is belief in God in the most basic of forms or not. And, of course, it all depends on God's mercy.
I would say that a truly interesting and meaningful life always results in an eternal, heavenly life.
Fact is that this is nothing more than wishful thinking.
You might find it comforting to believe that you're not going to completely die, and that's your belief. You're entitled to that.
However it is absolutely unfounded and without even a shred of verifiable evidence. With that in mind, you are not entitled to talk as if you know the answer.
Waste of time entering this debate though. The human mind is hardwired to not accept conflicting information, so if you believe you're immortal, great. Though until you can provide verifiable evidence, your belief is superstition only.
I miss some cliffs, rocks, coral reefs that would make the terrain not been so plain. I want to be able to escape from my enemies by dodging the obstacles in my way out.
I agree. I'm leaving aesthetics until later though. The map is pretty new.
This map is ideal for a football waterpolo mode. Right now, ships are able to push objects in their way. You can make it so players have to push a buoy and bring it to their base in order to sum a point.
Well from what I've seen, the game seems to be very much "capture the flag" right now, where the flag is gold minerals. It's certainly an interesting concept though, and I do plan to add alternate modes such as 2v2v2 and FFA. Might never get played but hey, I love FFA and it's my map so fuck yeah.
Ships are too big. You could make all tower weapons only take up a 1x1 cell, including ultimate ones. This way, you would have enough free cells in your ship without having to make ships so big.
I fully agree. Scaling is something I'm working on. Making everything 1x1 and reducing ship size is certainly an option. Right now I'm thinking of making the 1x1 hardpoints into 2x2 and adjusting their stats to compensate. Though 1x1 hardpoints for all really simplifies the internal calculations which is a definite plus.
I love Fleet Assault, but it has so many fundamental problems.
1) Text. Wow, text everywhere. I recommend reducing it to the minimum amount needed to convey each weapon's point.
2) Useless weapons. I'm not going to buy a Machine Gun when I can afford an Autocannon. This rule really ruins half the equipment, especially the defensive stuff. I really recommend removing 90% of the weapons, and making the remaining 10% upgradeable into the 90% you removed. This slashes redundancy completely and makes the shop UI less of a train wreck.
3) Carrier equipment. Not sure why you changed these from having a build time to being a long cd weapon, but it sucks. Recommend separating them from the inventory entirely and just allow players to purchase ships. Capships will rebuild them, while squads add the bought ship to their formation (the bought ones don't get inventories).
4) The dreadnaught's speed is a joke. Twice I got as far as a dreadnaught, and both times I just had to leave the game out of boredom. It takes 4 minutes to travel from base to base. Insane. No endgame squad ship. Not a huge issue but rather sucks that the only endgame ship is the slugnaught.
5) Lack of feedback on YOUR weapon hits. I'm really clueless as to when I've scored a hit vs when I miss vs when an ally hits. Recommend some feedback, perhaps a damage number?
6) Income is completely random. There's so many npcs and shots fired that landing the killing blow is really just down to chance. Recommend some area or contribution based income.
If you really believe that I could state similar things such as "There is zero difference between 'there is no point to living' and 'the point to living is to have fun' ".
Is this a joke?
My comparison is the scientific vs religious explanation for major life questions such as "Why are we here", "Where did we come from" and "What happens after death" and the subsequent increases in human knowledge as a result of these being answered.
Your comparison appears to be the life outlook between a Blink 182 fan and Hugh Hefner.
But whether you believe or not (or rather, 'why' you belief or not) is a different question though, I guess. I was just trying to point out that your 'religion has stopped science' (or 'human advancement as a whole', if you'd be willing to go that far) is an outdated argument. Not saying religion has never in any way prohibited any kind of science from happening, but the "the church kept everyone stupid from 500 to 1600" argument is such a gross and ridiculous overstatement I can't even begin to explain it.
Can you attach a credible source to this claim? I can't find a single article that supports your claim, let alone enough to render it an "outdated argument".
0
Why didn't you use "What creation is to evolution" in your examples? Ah, right.
0
I'm not an atheist. I'm a scientist. Science is based on probabilities, not absolutes.
There might be an afterlife or a god. I don't know the answer. What I do know, however, is that anyone who claims to know the answer does so with no evidence beyond faith.
0
I'm not trying to impose my "truth" on you. I oppose the idea of anyone claiming to know the unknowable.
"I don't know" is a perfectly acceptable answer. "I know that my unverifiable claim is true" is dangerous.
0
Fact is that this is nothing more than wishful thinking.
You might find it comforting to believe that you're not going to completely die, and that's your belief. You're entitled to that.
However it is absolutely unfounded and without even a shred of verifiable evidence. With that in mind, you are not entitled to talk as if you know the answer.
Waste of time entering this debate though. The human mind is hardwired to not accept conflicting information, so if you believe you're immortal, great. Though until you can provide verifiable evidence, your belief is superstition only.
0
I agree. I'm leaving aesthetics until later though. The map is pretty new.
Well from what I've seen, the game seems to be very much "capture the flag" right now, where the flag is gold minerals. It's certainly an interesting concept though, and I do plan to add alternate modes such as 2v2v2 and FFA. Might never get played but hey, I love FFA and it's my map so fuck yeah.
I fully agree. Scaling is something I'm working on. Making everything 1x1 and reducing ship size is certainly an option. Right now I'm thinking of making the 1x1 hardpoints into 2x2 and adjusting their stats to compensate. Though 1x1 hardpoints for all really simplifies the internal calculations which is a definite plus.
@Kildare88: Go
I'll reply to you in your thread to dodge the derails for now.
0
Archons
0
Marine - Reaper
0
Roach - Queen - Hydra
0
Just open the siege tank's weapon and right click->reset to default on it's area damage effect then use zerglings.
0
I love Fleet Assault, but it has so many fundamental problems.
1) Text. Wow, text everywhere. I recommend reducing it to the minimum amount needed to convey each weapon's point.
2) Useless weapons. I'm not going to buy a Machine Gun when I can afford an Autocannon. This rule really ruins half the equipment, especially the defensive stuff. I really recommend removing 90% of the weapons, and making the remaining 10% upgradeable into the 90% you removed. This slashes redundancy completely and makes the shop UI less of a train wreck.
3) Carrier equipment. Not sure why you changed these from having a build time to being a long cd weapon, but it sucks. Recommend separating them from the inventory entirely and just allow players to purchase ships. Capships will rebuild them, while squads add the bought ship to their formation (the bought ones don't get inventories).
4) The dreadnaught's speed is a joke. Twice I got as far as a dreadnaught, and both times I just had to leave the game out of boredom. It takes 4 minutes to travel from base to base. Insane. No endgame squad ship. Not a huge issue but rather sucks that the only endgame ship is the slugnaught.
5) Lack of feedback on YOUR weapon hits. I'm really clueless as to when I've scored a hit vs when I miss vs when an ally hits. Recommend some feedback, perhaps a damage number?
6) Income is completely random. There's so many npcs and shots fired that landing the killing blow is really just down to chance. Recommend some area or contribution based income.
Just my thoughts.
0
My first project, Catalyst, is basically identical to this. It's still on bnet and the source file is on this site.
Wouldn't advise using it's code as I sucked back then, but might serve as inspiration and you're free to rip the terrain.
0
You think Earth is 10k years old.
You think women are inferior.
You think America invented the car.
You think Europeans drive on the left.
Entertaining.
0
Is this a joke?
My comparison is the scientific vs religious explanation for major life questions such as "Why are we here", "Where did we come from" and "What happens after death" and the subsequent increases in human knowledge as a result of these being answered.
Your comparison appears to be the life outlook between a Blink 182 fan and Hugh Hefner.
Well they sure claim to have all the answers.
Can you attach a credible source to this claim? I can't find a single article that supports your claim, let alone enough to render it an "outdated argument".
0
Wish I had a bot.
0
That terrain is a 5 minute job. Why wait weeks for someone else to do it?