JasonM

Tag-Heuer-Renault-Aston Martin powered!

42 minutes ago, Avenged said:

Fighting Force?

Fuck that shit, Gimme Freedom Force 3

Freedom Force and Freedom Force Vs the Third Reich are still the two best comic-book games ever made.

2 hours ago, Chris2K said:

Renault have unveiled their livery:

I for one am happy to see some yellow on the grid again.

Love the look of this, very striking and will help up liven up the grid filled with dark cars.

Orlando Magic lineup, roundup:
PG's: These guys are your go-to playmakers and P&R ballhandlers
Brandon Jennings:  spot up threes - 6th man, or starting PG
Elfrid Payton: spot up threes, defensive specialist - Starting Pointguard or defensive roleplayer
CJ Watson: Three point specialist - Roleplayer, Veteran
Shabazz Napier: Shit Defender, decent shooter - Warm Body

SG's: These guys will often be offensive minded guards, sometimes taller than the PG's and depending on their height could be SFs
Victor Oladipo: All-round shooter, Good defender, Good playmaker - Star player, starting SG always
Evan Fournier: Spot up threes, good inside game, bad everything else - Starting SF or roleplayer
Mario Hezonja: Good shooter, bad everything else - Future starter & Roleplayer
Devyn Marble: - Shit at everything, warm body

No natural SF's on the Magic

PF's: These are more mobile big-men, most have some form of mid-range game and defensive skill
Aaron Gordon: Good defender/rebounder, average shooter, crazy athletics - Starting PF/SF
Ersan Ilyasova: Good spot up big, average defense, decent rebounds - Bench scorer or starting PF
Andrew Nicholson: Good shooter, average defense... Ersan lite - Bench scorer

C's: Biggest players on the team, they'll be the best post players and rebounders
Nikola Vucevic: Great inside scorer, great midrange, good defense rebounds - Star Player, Starting C
Jason Smith: Good mid-range, SHIT rebounds - Warm body center
Dewayne Dedmon: No scoring ability, good rebounding - Defensive roleplayer

Lineup I would use:
PG: Elfrid Payton - Young, and can defend pretty well and shoot from range.
SG: Victor Oladipo - Duh
SF: Evan Fournier - Toss-up between Gordon and Fournier, but Fournier wins because he's got a shot
PF: Ersan Ilyasova - Gordon is the better player, but Ersan adds more scoring options and spaces the floor
C: Nikola Vucevic - Duh
6: Brandon Jennings - He's a great pick and roll guy who can add scoring off the bench
7: Aaron Gordon - Number one big off the bench
8: CJ Watson - Number two guard who can score
9: Andrew Nicholson - Number two big who can score
10: Mario Hezonja - Swingman guard who can play 2-3 and score
11: Smith or Dedmon - You want a mid-range shooter or rebounder?
12: Napier - Scoring player who can't defend at the end of the bench
Reserves: Dedmon/Smith, Marble

As far as trading goes, I would NOT trade Ilyasova away. Even though technically he's a worse player than Aaron Gordon, he can drain open threes at an alarming rate. Even if the Owner willed it, I would only really trade him unless you can get an all-round SF/PF in return.

Your mean stars are Vucevic and Oladipo though, Oladipo can be a tough one to learn to use since he's an iso-player and iso is hard, but he can score from almost all positions, and in a few seasons will be Kobe-lite. And as far as Vucevic is concerned, I suggest you go into training mode and learn post moves because he is DOMINANT at the post game, give him the ball in the post and go to work on whoever is near him. And if that doesn't work he can hit the midrange too! And he has great badges all-round.

The Magic don't have a bad team, they're just young and wildly inconsistent. They got shooters who are average defenders, and average shooters that are great defenders, and everything in between. And they're wicked young to boot, with only two replaceable players being over 30!

Edit: Having done a quick glance in MyGM with the Magic, I've found these trades for Smith... (PS: I won't be giving away any first round picks)
- Smith to Washington for Anderson & Eddie
Trade nothing for two nothings? Smith is useless, and you're trading him away (to please your boss) by adding two warm bodies on 1 year deals.
- Smith/Nicholson to Minnesota for '17 1st round pick & Rudez
Rudez is a shitty SF, but he's on a 1 year deal and you'll get a first round pick in 2017!
- Smith/Jennings/'16 Por2nd to Washington for Kelly Oubre Jr & Nenê
You'll lose some 'oomph' on offense with the loss of Brandon (and you might find it unrealistic to trade him away). Oubre is 19 years old and can become a star in a few seasons with his B+ potential, and Nenê is a much more useful center than either Smith or Dedmon, which will add a pretty good defensive center off the bench...
- Smith/Oladipo/'18 2nd to Milwaukee for Khris Middleton & Jerryd Bayless
Now before you tell me i'm crazy... Khris Middleton is only 1 year older, and he's 6ft7 SG with equal scoring ability and slightly worse defensive ability... You might be able to contemplate this one a little...
 

11 hours ago, Cymbols said:

I mean, they score 95% of the time they attack, I score 50-66% of the time I attack, so unless I spam 3 pointers, which makes it even more difficult to score, I'm losing always.

Oh, and I don't know how to dunk.

It plays well though, so I'll love it once I understand it I'm sure.

Dunking is going to the basket holding the turbo (R2/RT) and either using the shot stick or the shoot button.
Defending is all about forcing your opponent into shitty shots, and trying to actually steal the ball is a very very far second. The moment you press the reach-in button you leave yourself open for the player you're guarding to sprint past you and go for a drive on net, which means the other defenders have to collapse to stop him, which means that someone on the outside will get open for an open three pointer.

The biggest tip I can give you is to stay between the player and the basket (duh), which you can make easier through using the LT/L2 to play tighter defense and 'lock' more onto the player with the ball so that your player will keep himself pointed towards the ball handler he's defending.

Also, try to use the block button as little as possible (Y/Triangle) when you're playing outside. You can raise your players arm with the right stick, which at range can often be enough to force the miss without you leaving your feet. The moment you jump for a block you become vulnerable to pump fakes and drives to the hoop, since you'll be unable to react in time.

Also in the post, use the LT to stay attached to the guy with the ball, and try to 'push back' with the movement stick so that he won't back you down until you're underneath the basket. Don't try to steal the ball, unless you're extremely confident of getting it like a big man starting to actually dribble it facing the basket (as opposed to posting up, back to the basket) but still this is tricky and risky, and unless you're in a mismatch where you're a guard, you'll probably miss the swipe, foul him, or give him an uncontested shot.

To further clarify on the 'block' button, you only really use this in situations where you're confident you can significantly alter (or block) the shot from the opponent. Examples are when you're running back on a fast break and you need to try something, or perhaps a player has left his feet already and you know he won't be able to run past you. You're better off being a little bit late on the jump than biting on a pump fake, because even if you're a little late you'll still add pressure to the shooter.

And as always, know your personnel and know the personnel of your opponent. Know what they're good at, and try to exploit the things they're bad at... For example I got ruined by the 76ers as the Mavs, because they had Embiid/Noel/Okafor which allowed them to bully me inside on defense AND offense, so they grabbed a fucktonne of boards... But at the same time I was able to beat the Warriors because I had plenty of quick guards who could stay close to the likes of Curry and Thompson, so they couldn't explode on me.
More often than not, if you know what a player is good at (or bad at), you can defend them better.

For example you don't want to get guys like Drummond, Whiteside, D. Jordan near the basket because they're great hook-shot players and they can even dunk over some players... But if they get the ball in the post and you force them into taking shots, their efficiency drops dramatically.
Of course, Superstar players are superstars for a reason, and guys like Anthony Davis and Chris Bosh can murder you on any given night, but you can still make their jobs hard by simply contesting and keeping them away from easy buckets.

Also, as Trey has said. Quick AI players are absolutely devastating, and those will be the hardest to stop when you're starting out, and will continue being a bitch to defend even as you become more experienced at the game. Especially if they just iso-spam you for 20 seconds until you give them a single inch to make a shot in.

General Defensive Tips:
1: Play smart defense, don't leave your feet unless you know they're shooting it.
1a: It's better to be a tad late on jumping to stop a shot, than biting on the fake and giving them an easy run to the hoop.
2: Know what the opposition players are good at, and learn to put them into situations that they're not good at.
3: Use the LT to stay on your man, and use the shot-stick to challenge them.
3a: Don't perma-challenge with the shot-stick, because it does make your player harder to move around.
4: Stay between the ball and basket, move diagonally to cut them off.
5: Don't try to steal unless you're prepared to give the ball handler a run at the basket if it fails
6: Let them pass it around, as long as they're passing it to someone who has a defender on it... Having THEM run out the clock is a viable defensive strategy.

Offensive tip:
L1, L1, L1 - Learn the Pick and Roll, it's the most successful and easy play in basketball for a reason.
A good P&R gives you at least three-four options, you can try to score with the ballhandler either through a pull-up shot(1), or try a lay-up/dunk(2). You can dish it to the guy setting the pick(3), or you can 'kick' it outside to an open player for a shot(4). You can even have the pick setter 'fade' instead of 'roll', which means he looks to leak to the outside for a jumpshot, great for example with Ersan Ilyasova.

You can set 'custom' P&R's too, by pressing L1/LB, and holding the corresponding player button of who you want to have set the pick. This way you could even run Pick and Roll's between your two guards, or with the small forward, or any other combination.

TL;dr - Practice makes kinda-perfect

2 minutes ago, Cymbols said:

Why is my guy's family black when my guy looks like Andi Weimann?

Because Spike Lee doesn't believe in white basketball players

4 minutes ago, Colly said:

Does Rhodey die on there?

Just wait when Terrence Howard shows up in the next Marvel film after Civil War, and he'll be the twin brother also named Rhodey.

17 minutes ago, Colly said:

This reads like a cracker joke and I'm hugely disappointed there's no punchline.

Don't have an issue with the line though, by comparison to Avengers gear Spidey does look like he's in pyjamas.

Doesn't help that the costume is pretty CG and seemingly has no texture, so it really looks like a tight fitting pair of pajamas.

COTA has announced that Taylor Swift will be having her only concert in 2016 on the Saturday before the Grand Prix, anyone with Saturday (or weekend) tickets will automatically be able to attend said Taylor Swift concert.

Swift isn't exactly in the same demographic as petrolheads, but the odds are she'll be in the demo for their wives/daughters(/sons?) and other people that you might attend a F1 race with. Smart doing by COTA to attach arguably the biggest act in music to the event, and seeing it is her only concert this year it'll get plenty of buyers even from people that don't want to watch racing.

With F1 plodding along in terms of US popularity, this would be the best way for the USGP to be organized, by having a major act on the saturday to help boost exposure and ticket sales. With just the announcement they've managed to get into many forms of media they ordinarily wouldn't have even been granted a passing mention.

And if it rains again this year, Taylor can help them to... shake it off... ^{I'll just leave now}

People tend to forget that Shaq was absolutely unstoppable in his prime, this was a guy that would back any defender into the post before turning around and dunking it in your face because he was 7ft1 and was built like a freight train. This was a guy that could simply win you games from the post for forty minutes per game, and either score a point on you, get fouled and go to the line, or be able to kick it out to Kobe Bryant who was just as talented as he was.

People crap on the Hack-a-shaq and his terrible free throw shooting, but he was going to the stripe for 9 free throw shots on average for his career with a career high average of 13.1 in 00/01. Despite him being 50/50 from the stripe, that's still an ungodly amount of free throws attempted that broke even the staunchest hack-teams. And at the same time he was getting more than 10 rebounds a game, two blocks a game, and even two assists per game.

And despite not being a three point shooter, or him being a shit free throw shooter. He led the league in Effective Field Goal % six times, and five times he led the league in PER.

Shaq defined an era by being a dominant scorer and a dominant defender, and even in his twilight years where he was hampered by knee injuries he was a dominant player that nobody had an answer for. Where Wilt dominated a league that hadn't yet figured out true defense (60s basketball was a shooting gallery), Shaq dominated a league in a time where defenses where the toughest and nastiest as they came. With people like Ben Wallace, Dennis Rodman, Hakeem, David Robinson, Dikembe, 'Lonzo, etc. being there to try and stop him. Shaq played in a time where arguably there were the most star centers in the league, and he dominated every single one of them. He was on a whole different level.

And Steph is doing the same for guards/shooters right now... Because you have a league right now that has bonafide superstars and MVP contenders like KD, LeBron (maybe not this year), Harden, Westbrook, Kawhi, Chris Paul... And Steph is so dominant that we automatically think less of those other players, despite most of that list putting up MVP numbers for themselves.

KD is putting up 28-8R-5A-1S-1B on 51% FG, 39% 3pt, 89.5% FT, and is only second to Curry in TS%. And despite he's on the path to a 50-40-90 season, nobody notices it because Curry over in Oakland is putting up 50-45-90 like it's nothing.
Harden for all his flaws is putting up 29-6.5R-7A-1.7S, yet nobody bats an eye because Curry is just better.
Westbrook is averaging 24-7.5R-10A-2S, but Curry is just better.

All those players are putting up career years with legendary stats, but all of them are being outshined by Stephen Curry because he's the Shaq of shooters. He can do whatever he wants, and he'll drain five threes a game, and will at this rate get 400 threes, and a 50-40-90, and be the most efficient player on the field DESPITE shooting eleven threes a game, which in no way should be possible. The next guy behind him on the three point list is his teammate Klay, and he's drained 100 threes less than him.

Steph is simply sensational and inexpiable in every way. And this is really just a start of a new era in NBA basketball, the era of the super-elite shooters that can score in even the most wildest of situations from ranges that nobody should ever shoot at.

Episode 10 is the mid-season finale which aired in december. Tonight is the beginning of the second part of the season with Episode 11

Christ, I think i'm done with the Mavs this year... Losing to the Clips isn't a bad thing, but between going for the OT record and Chandler Parsons flip-flopping between being great and poor I'm getting really really tired with their shit right now.

One stretch they go 4-1, and beat the Warriors and the Bulls. Then at other stretches they drop matches against the Timberwolves and the Nuggets. It's downright infuriating to experience, and at this point I'd accept Dirk retiring if it meant Cuban finally saw the light and started a proper rebuild instead of throwing together parts that kinda work, but really only delay the inevitable and force the team into deeper shit once Dirk finally hangs it up.

Sauber, the TNA of F1

Spoiler warning for a film from 2014, so don't read past the first sentence upcoming if you don't want to be spoilered.

So I watched 'Fury' the other day, the tank-film with Brad Pitt. And I'm extremely conflicted about whether i loved the film, or hated it a lot.

I have spoilered it... for spoilers, and also because it's a lengthy little writeups about both what I loved and hated about the film, so read at your own peril.

There's the cast, which is downright phenomenal and perfect. There's the acting, which is also harrowing and poignant in a way that really no other WW2 film has ever managed to do. Rather than romanticising the war, it instead paints the grittiest and nastiest possible picture in showing that WW2 is the deadliest war ever for a reason.

But then it slowly started going off the rails for me. First of all, Ayer's fetish for exploding bodyparts became downright slapstick and ridiculous at a certain point, which every battle scene needing at least one or more heads/legs/arms/bodies exploding in ridiculous gore that for me felt too over-the-top and took me right out of the scenes.

There's a scene early on where a tank is hit by a Panzerfaust from a German kid-soldier, and it ended with the commander of that tank, on fire, managing to somehow grab his sidearm and shooting himself through the head. It was jarring, and instead of making it more 'gritty', it instead undermined the tones because in no situation could a man on fire make the conscious decision to shoot himself, they would be too much in shock and writhing in pain to even contemplate anything other than scream for help towards his comrades. At that point, I was already having doubts about the film.

Then the first big action scene happened, with the tanks storming an entrenched position. In a way this was the least offensive action scene in the film, and despite some issues with combat logic, the battle was gory and bloody (Plus exploding head because nazi's apparently don't duck or get out of the way when a tank is slowly chugging in their direction...). The scene that followed was jarring, but in a good way as it showed that the Americans were just about as depraved as the Germans are.

At this point the film goes along quite well, at least until they face off against the Tiger tank. And I want to preface the following rant by saying that I can easily suspend my disbelief in a lot of films, yet the Tiger scene managed to throw me right out of the film in the worst way. The Tiger shows up, and everyone knows Tigers are killing machine tanks that take no shit from puny little Shermans (lets ignore the fact these Shermans had 76mm cannons that could go up against Tigers at this stage in the war). The first 'mistake' both the Sherman's and the Tiger made was to fire whilst driving (Rule of cool, so I won't hold it against them.), Also, another exploding head, yay!

So the Sherman's storm the superior Tiger, and the Tiger does the only logical thing when you're in a superior tank with a superior gun against multiple weaker targets... You charge straight ahead at them and close the distance so that you give the weaker enemies a fair shot at making a kill, pure combat logic... Well, the two non-hero Sherman's go up in flames as expected, Fury & Tiger have a little ballet until Fury gets two shots on the ass and kills the Tiger, gunning down the people coming out of the tank for good measure because fuck Nazi's.

The tank scene is ridiculous, but at this point it's well within taking liberties for the sake of having a sweet action scene.

The town/city scenes are actually pretty well made, and like before the Americans show they're about as depraved as the Germans... Yet Fury Commander and Rookie show their human sides to make clear they're not utter monsters... PS: As expected, in the short action scene a GI got his leg blown square off, because war is hell and Ayer needs to show off his fetish...

[rant-start]

The film goes on, until we get to our climax where Fury is stranded at the middle of a crossroad with a broken thread that can't be fixed. To make matters worse, they're low on supplies and there's 2000 highly trained SS troops coming their way toting plenty of Panzerfausts to turn the little Sherman that could into dust.

So the hero's do what any hero would do, they're gonna make a stand to make sure the Nehtzees aren't going to make it to the city...
So the Heroes bunker down, set a trap, share a few stories before the storm comes. It's also night in like five minutes even though it was bright outside just a few minutes ago, but we gotta set a mood here.

The SS come over the hill, they spot the little Fury that could. And they got a bunch of choices to make.
A: Don't take any risks, and start pelting that thing from range using the Panzerfausts they were toting in their establishing shot.
B: Don't take any risks, and move around the tank with a wide berth and completely negate it as a danger.
C: Take all the risks, magically forget that they have anti-tank weaponry until the last few minutes, and just go full on Human Wave on that one tank they could so easily avoid, costing them over two-thirds of their unit for practically no gain other than a 'moral victory' over those dirty American pigs.

You can probably guess what decision the 2000 elitely trained SturmStaffel soldiers made... Yeah.

And at this point the film turns into a total shitshow that defies every sense of common sense in favour of just a good old-fashioned Hollywood killfest where the five tankers lay waste to over a thousand Germans who so expertly try to rush a single piece of armour that otherwise posed no real danger. Because Germans are dumb, and Americans are smart and brave and awesome, and we need more dakka to kill these Germans that are running at our tank like a bunch of lemmings on crack.

As the battle rages on, the germans finally remember they had anti-tank weaponry at their disposal all this time. So they crack open a few crates (even though they were physically carrying Panzerfausts earlier?), and they finally start using some sense of logic in their actions (not really, most troops still run around like headless chickens. Especially after the German commander made a big speech before sending them out on a true WW1-style blind charge). And in using their rockets we get a nice exploding chest as our first hero perishes to those nasty Germans.

At this point the battle starts to slow down, Hero's start dying one by one (someones chest explodes by being directly hit by a panzerfaust, cuz. Ayer). Brad Pitt makes a final stand to show how much of a badass Brad Pitt is (because he is), and he's taken out by multiple shots from a sniper, before falling back into the tank where he and rookie share a few parting words as the Germans toss in a few of the longest-fused grenades in the world, giving Rookie a chance to escape from the bottom hatch and avoid the explosion that kills Brad Pitt (Rest in Pitt brave soldier), rookie hides as an SS soldier sees him but ignores him because not all SS are evil, and we need that aesop after all.

Rookie goes back into the tank, and somehow Brad Pitt (and all others that died in the tank) are practically unscathed after two grenades exploded in a small metal box on wheels. Because you can't un-blemish Brad Pitt, after all.

And the film ends with the now harrowed and scarred rookie being led away by the cavalry to what hopefully is a mental hospital where he can recover from being in this film...

[/rant]

Closing stuff:
Now, you might be reading this, and you might be saying 'why is this guy ranting so much for a film he hated so much', but there's the hiccup. I didn't hate the film, I feel it had one of the strongest and best acting-casts in recent memory. All five of the main characters had good and bad qualities, some more bad than others, but they truly felt like humans that had gone through three years of utter hell together and would die for each other just the same. The film showed the brutal and un-glamorous side of the war, and showed that the Allies weren't the perfect chivalrous do-gooders that entertainment pictures them to be. 

It showed me that a guy like Shia LeBeouf (despite him being insane) has insane acting chops, and the dialogue between all the characters was downright top notch and humanized them whilst at the same time harrowing you through their actions.
But in the same way the characters and acting make the film phenomenal, the action scenes instead do the exact opposite by being just absolute utter dogshite without any coherent structure or soul to them. They make no sense, they have no flow, it's like a complete 180 compared to the non-action scenes, it's there because someone felt the film needed action scenes rather than it being a character-drama. It's gore for the sake of gore, it's action for the sake of action, it's shit exploding for the sake of shit exploding, and no real 'soul' in it's action. It's the Saving Private Ryan opening scene turned up to 11 'just cuz', and every action scene is that scene up to a point where it burns me out at how stupid those scenes are because it shits on common human logic (That's not even accounting for the non-existence of realistic military tactics, which in a way can be defended on the sake that it's an action flick first and foremost)... This is the first film that has managed to shatter my disbelief, and i've watched everything from Plan 9, to Star Trek 5, to Uwe Boll and Michael Bay stuff, many of which I've enjoyed for one reason or another.

At the same time this is one of my most favourite movies, and my most hated movies I have ever seen. And I can't decide whether I should hate it or love it more...
And I had to get this massive rant off my chest because I am so extremely conflicted right now...
 

So what I wonder is if such a drug is otc or whether it's on prescription? Because surely having a long-running prescription can help her prove it's for health reasons.

Still, it's refreshing to see an athlete (wo-)man up for their mistakes and don't blame shit on jet fuel infused stale horse meat like every other person that pops a drug test.

1 hour ago, TMM said:

Blade

I'm not even mad, I would be hype as shit for a new Blade Trilogy

2 hours ago, Bobfoc said:

Is the career mode like Fight Night's in that you end up fighting the same people two or three times before retiring? I always felt that it could have done with a bit more variety, so I'd be disappointed if that were the case.

I know that from the past UFC games that you'd have a pretty diverse schedule on the way up (sometimes a rematch or two if you're not the unbeaten type.) But when you get to the top, you'll face a carousel of top tier fighters. So say you beat GSP for the title, you then face Hendricks, then face Lawler, then Bendo, then back to GSP and so forth.)

But with the roster as it is this year, that might become less of a problem. In the past years it was also a 'problem' that your fighter could have a maximum of 48 fights, which is a lot by modern standards, so the late-game was mostly just solidifying your badassness by beating up on those same guys... Or 'genned' fighters because the others have retired.

With the way modern UFC works, most people fight 2-3 fights max a year... Barring Donald Cerrone who fights every two weeks because he's insane... And only the elite fighters really stick around for stretches longer than 5 years, which means that those guys often have around 20 fights in their UFC careers and a couple of them outside the UFC.

Only an extremely small group of people ever have over 30 fights in the UFC.
For example Robbie Lawler (who'se been on/off active in UFC) has 37 career fights, with 16 of those fights happening in the UFC (9 of them in his current run). Current Welterweight Champ Conor McGregor has had 7 UFC fights out of 21 fights total. Johny Hendricks has had 16 UFC fights out of 21 fights, and he's been active in UFC since 2009...

So yeah, having a career mode where you can fight 48 times is fun and all, but it's ridiculously rare and you're gonna be having quite a few rematches in that timespan. I'd say it would be 'better' if they set a career-end date, like start in 2016 and quitting in 2030 for a very generous 14 year career. At a rate of 3 fights a year that'd give you 42 fights... so yeah.

18 minutes ago, Gazz said:

I imagine it will play the same as the last one, looks nice, absolutely garbage control system.

From what i've seen from demo footage, the control system has been tightened up quite a bit and it's a whole lot less 'floaty' and overly heavy than the first game. The first game looked like they were moving around in molasses for many moves, but UFC 2 has seemingly become a whole lot 'quick' feeling and better flowing.

Again, that's what I took from footage and having seen lots of videos of the first game too.

That's one spectacular roster of fighters, easily the biggest one ever of all UFC Games. Also apparently you're able to play career mode as a female fighter too now, so you can aspire to become the next Ronda Rousey (by getting beat up by Holly Holm, of course!)

It's a shame I don't have a next gen console, because the game looks brilliant

Goaltending is disturbing a shot that's on the way down and above the rim or on a trajectory towards the rim. And like you've said, this prevents it that a tall guy can camp next to the basket, and simply swat away every shot that's aimed at the basket. You can block it on it's way up, but the moment it starts going down you can't touch it until it either whiffs, or hits the rim and becomes 'loose'. 'Goaltending' gives the shooting team the points that the player would get if it went in, so either 3 or 2 points...

Same rule exists on the offense, and any offensive player touching the rim or the ball whilst it's above it will cause the shot to be called off and offensive interference to be called. For the same reason, to prevent a +7ft guy to just camp under the basket and start giving his shooters a helping hand.

The only exception to basket interference is dunking, where the dunking player is allowed to hold himself up on the rim for a short moment to ensure he can land in a safe manner. But players can get called for a technical foul (one free throw + possession) if they take too long to let go.

Other rules to prevent 'camping' are the 3 seconds in the key rule, which means that no player may stand in the painted area unengaged for more than three seconds, longer than that the play is called dead. If the call is against the offense, the defensive team gets the ball to inbound. If it's against the defense, the offense gets an open free throw (players behind the halfway line) and the ball on the side.

Finally there's the 5 second rule, which means that a player with the ball can't have his back to the basket for longer than five seconds. This is to prevent bigger players from simply holding the ball for a long time and backing his defender underneath the basket for an easy layup/dunk. This rule is often called the 'Charles Barkley rule', since Sir Charles was notorious for simply bullying his way into the paint with his back to the basket, wasting a lot of time and often giving him an unfair advantage (since the defense can try to stop him, but can't overplay him for fear of fouling him).

7 hours ago, apsham said:

It'd be more akin to Rune Factory then since the RF game is basically everything you said added on from the Harvest Moon games. It's a tad bit interesting to me, but the new Story of Seasons comes out March 1st so I might have to forgo it based off that alone.

This is fair enough, I for one do not own a 3DS, so being able to have a Harvest Moon(-esque) game on PC after all these years is extremely exciting.

On 25-2-2016 at 15:14, Meacon said:

Wait, is Lucifer a comic book or are we considering The Bible a comic?  

I dunno, Jesus is a pretty huge Gary Stu... Dude even got revived after being killed off. Sounds like a comic to me.

So today saw the release of Stardew Valley, and whoever has played Harvest Moon in the past will no doubt recognize the gameplay in this huge homage towards the Harvest Moon / Rune Factory games. And I gotta say, having seen videos of it, I decided to buy the game on day 1 for an extremely fair 14 bucks on the Humble store (it gives a bigger cut to the dev, and the price was the same).

The game has been developed over the past three years by only one developer, with minimal help from others in this task. And in many ways it's not just a bonafide Harvest Moon type game, it adds to that by giving people an RPG mechanic, quest systems, a more robust friendship/courting system, more animals and crops, and even a combat system for people who rather fight monsters to make money rather than grow crops.

If you've played games like Harvest Moon and Rune Factory in the past, this game is definitely one to watch. And for 14 bucks it's a very cheap outlay for a game that's not early access or crowdfunded in a big way.

He's been on track to get podium's last year, but he's had some really bad luck coupled with generally the car being behind Merc/Ferrari/Williams... But Checo has shown that there are chances to get there.

12 hours ago, Hellraiser said:

Because I didn't enjoy it. When I first watched it I made it through the first two episodes. And there was nothing in there that compelled me to continue. It didn't hook me. I meant to eventually watch the rest of it because everyone else was talking about how good it was but until the trailers for season 2 were released I couldn't be bothered.

It wasn't all bad. The best thing about the season for me was Vincent D'Onofrio as Wilson Fisk. Once they introduced him in the final scene episode 3 it became easier for me to watch because D'Onofrio was so god in this role and I wanted to see where they were going with his character If I made it to that point in my first try I probably would've continued to watch.

Fair points really. As a whole I tend to not judge any series by it's first half season, because more often than not it's not going to be good and mostly 'feeling out' episodes where they showcase the characters on display, and give them defined personalities so that the viewers have something to hold on.

'Hero' series suffer from this more than other series, it seems. Arrow/Flash all had rough first seasons. Agents of Shield was extremely hit and miss until it really got into the intrigue aspects. Netflix released a small study where it showed that most people got 'hooked' (committed to watching until the end) by Daredevil around episode 5, which if you look at what plot points happen at that point it makes a whole lot of sense.

Jessica Jones started weakish too in that sense, there wasn't a real sense of direction until Kilgrave popped up.

Basically the thing connecting all series is that they need a convincing foil to pop up and give the 'good guys' someone to fight, or at least a goal to work up to. Whether that's Wilson Fisk preparing to take control of Hell's Kitchen, or HYDRA rearing it's ugly head and taking over from inside.

But yeah, I can totally understand people being less than sold on Daredevil if they judge it purely from the first three or so episodes... But I don't think there are many series out there that truly manage to captivate viewers in the first episodes, unless they got a REALLY good cast and plot to start out with. Whether it's Blacklist, Game of Thrones, House of Cards, or any superhero series.