u/Martel732

Yeah to the extent that a 4 minute mile now would put you noticably behind the winners of a elite competition.

Yeah, a 4 minute mile was thought to be a near impossibility at one time. And while still impressive running a 4 minutes mile would put you noticably behind the top elite runners now.

The modern US could absolutely occupy every country of 1950 Earth. It wouldn't take nearly as much manpower with drones, satellites and telecommunications giving the US an information advantage no one else could compete with. There would be mountains and forests were resistance groups would hide. But the cities and centers of economy and industrial activity would be controlled. 

According to OP the US is not concerned about civilian causalities and the 1950s have no real counter to drones, helicopters, modern tanks and aircrafts. 

Assuming the US is going all out it could probably raise and army at least the size it had in WW2, which was about 16 million people, though not all in combat roles. If about 1/4 of those were put into combat roles that would give about 20,000 people per country for occupation. Which should be sufficient given the extreme tech disparity.

He does this with almost laughable ease. There are plenty of people who are being manipulated by our current "AI" which isn't even sentient and isn't actually trying to manipulate them itself. I don't even think it would take Ultron a year.

Every time there is a new human Green Lantern Hal does one squat.

The reason most Necrons are still asleep is because they are waiting for Argenta to pass away.

I mean honestly Peace Pilgrims would probably work pretty well for Bretonnia. I would imagine they deal no damage but have high defense. If they could just tar pit enemy units long enough for the cav to arrive they would work well for early to mid game.

Yeah, that is the one. It wasn't a bad movie but I would hope for something better for the first Zelda film. And to make matters worse that is the best reviewed movie from that writer.

I think he is the most hopeful DC character. I think he would qualify. Mostly I think a Blue/Green Lantern Superman and Lois story would be fun. The two colors work well together so having a couple's space adventure would be interesting to me.

Sure some high rated Rotten Tomato movies are pretty safe. But, the majority of the highest rated movies were milestone movies that have withstood the test of time.

I want a little controversy or ambiguity, i.e. something that’s divisive and initiates discourse. Whether it is due to people not understanding it, being too true to the source material, etc.

Sure some movies in the 60-70% can be fantastic but divisive movies. mother! for instance is considered by some to be a masterpiece and others (like me) hate it. Dogma is a classic to me and is only 72%, and is better than a lot of 90% movies.

However that is not the type of movies T.S. Nowlin (the writer of Zelda) has made. He wrote the Maze Runner movies, the Adam Project and Pacific Rim: Uprising. Those movies aren't rated low because they are controversial or discourse initiating. They are low rated because they are bland movies that just aren't that good.

I fully hope to be wrong and that the Zelda movie ends up being fantastic. But, if I was in charge I wouldn't have chosen the writer for Pacific Rim: Uprising to write the movie.

Hot take I prefer the Hoskins movie to the newer ones. It is still terrible but it is at least interesting.

I am pretty skeptical the writer on the movie has a spotty record. His highest rated film is 68% on Rotten Tomatoes and most are in the 40 or 50%. And the directors record is only slightly better. Hopefully this will be a step up in quality for them.

Also, I don't know how others feel but I though the Mario movies were god-awful. They felt more like a series of clips loosely strung together as opposed to a story. I am hoping the Zelda movie stays far away from that format.

Not really it would arguably work better as stories wouldn't retread the same story beats. And characters would be allowed more growth that was sustained. The only real hindrance is convincing readers that the superheroes should be allowed to grow and change.

That sounds like a really cool idea. I like building a larger cosmic community. I like DC space stories but things often seem segmented into little corners. Having the Lanterns being a connective element for galactic stories I think works well. 

I also like having more of focus on other Lantern Corps. I wish writers were more willing to having focus on character who weren't Greens.

The Imperium is a misery engine that feeds the Chaos Gods. The Imperium isn't an necessary evil, it unnecessary evil that creates more perpetual evil. The God Emperor doomed the Galaxy.

Even if they won in the set up to this scenario it is still a Skynet that had to fight hard against a ragtag human resistance.

My take for some of the heroes in this situation:

Superman becomes a Blue Lantern and Lois becomes a Green Lantern. With a comic about them going on cosmic adventures. And almost Star Trek vibe of them exploring and helping across the Universe. Supergirl becomes the primary "Super" of Earth while Jon continues to develop into the eventual successor.

Batman dies alongside the Joker. Tim Drake joins the Justice League as an inventor/mastermind. Damian is the street level Batman patrolling Gotham city. Dick assumes a mentor role for the wider hero community. Training and preparing young heroes.

Wonder Woman ascends to full godhood, she now deals heavily with divine politics. A new character gets empowered by Diana as the new Wonder Woman. The new character is not an Amazon but impressed Diana with her since of justice and determination.

Cyborg while trying to prevent Brainiac from taking over the Earth inadvertently creates a new artificial life form. Artifice, as the being becomes known, ends up joining the Justice League.

It is important to remember that Skynet was losing the war. Which is whey they sent Arnold back in time. 

The scattered post nuclear Holocaust human resistance was able to defeat Skynet. The Helghan Empire is going to have no difficulty.

I think Oberyn could convince him. Ned showed several times that he is as willing to bend his personal honor for the sake of his family. 

I think Oberyn could point out that dying a pointless death in a fight he can't win would put his family in a dangerous position. And also appealing to Ned's sense of justice. They both lost beloved sisters, and Ned could give Oberyn the chance to being justice to her killer.

I like swords!

I think it is for quite a few reasons including sieges:

1. There are just more battles, old historical Total Wars had smaller maps. I don't remember off the top of my head but I think most older Total War games had around 100 settlements. Versus Immortal Empires which has like 500. You could feel like you have completed a campaign much sooner in the older games. Versus now when conquering the same amount of territory looks like only a fraction of the map.

2. Maps were better. Maps in WH3 try too hard. I feel like 90% of maps in WH3 have weirdly large hills, randomly placed forests and weird layouts. To me positioning armies in the game often feels more frustrating than an interesting tactical challenge. Especially when trying to judge the often pretty random line of sight issues with ranged units. I will try to position my troops in a way that gives them a clear line of fire only to discover that they are off by a millimeter and harmlessly fire into the ground or air. And siege maps are often a convoluted mess that neither benefits the defender nor is engaging as the attacker. My siege strategy is often to just pick the enemy apart with a powerful flying spellcaster lord which is time consuming but generally the best way to preserve my army.

3. Battle are often forgone conclusions. I don't see much of a point in fighting a battle between my doomstack and army of 5 tier 1 units. There isn't any point in sitting through the load times for those battles.

4. This may be more of personal issue but I can get annoyed about enemy units constantly running from my army. So if I see that auto-resolve is going to wipe out the enemy army I prefer that than manually fighting the battle and risking that enough of the enemy escapes, so that I have to continue chasing them down. Even if it ends up costing me more loses on my side.

It is almost certainly because players are likely to be the attacker way more often than the defender during a siege. And honestly I sort of agree. I think it would be tedious if more than half the battle you manually fought were long arduous sieges where you tried to take the enemy's city.

Made worse by the AI's tendency to avoid field battles. As much as some commenters will disagree I think complex defender-advantage sieges would kill the game. People would get burned out and stop playing. Especially given that the majority of players are pretty casual. The people commenting here are likely more invested in the game and more likely to min-max armies to make sieges easier. Things would be rougher for someone that just sits down to play an hour or two everyone once in a while recruiting the units they think are cool.

And the maps are huge now, we are no longer in the era where the entire country of France has one city. Which means even more sieges. If it was up to me my solution would be to make sieges only happen at a limited number of locations with the vast majority of battles happening on the field.

I have no interest in actually making a video game but his videos are very interesting look into problem solving and design iteration. And how designs have to take into account human perception and technological limitations.

Exclusive footage from the movie's premiere.

My understanding is generally what happens is a writer has an idea for a story but no studio cares about Johnny Jerkoffs "Generic Space Adventure". So then Johnny then finds a popular IP and tells the studio that he wants to adapt a story with a built in massive fanbase just like "Game of Thrones" or "Lord of the Rings". The studio remembers how much money those made and greenlights the project. Then Johnny just uses he "Generic Space Adventure" story with some names changed.