Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Our newest playground

Collapse
This is a sticky topic.
X
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Our newest playground

    Welcome to the newest addition to WAB! A complete new sub-fourm dedicated to all those What-if scenarios and discussion that seem to pop up every few minutes. We will need to move and shuffle some threads around, but you are free to start right away. But please keep in mind that this is not a complete free for all. For example talking about how the ACW would have turned out with the South winning at Gettysburg is fine, but not what effect modern tanks would have had on Alexander's campaigns.

  • #2
    So does that mean the MEU in Rome is out?
    Meddle not in the affairs of dragons, for you are crunchy and taste good with ketchup.

    Abusing Yellow is meant to be a labor of love, not something you sell to the highest bidder.

    Comment


    • #3
      Well there will be some exceptions for the "classics". Romans vs Monguls, Knights vs Samurais and so on might not have been very..likely scenarios but are still part of WAB. The crazier your idea is, the better you have to be at selling it. We'll see how it goes and adjust the rules/abuse of our power accordingly.

      Comment


      • #4
        Also, if you find threads that should be moved here, feel free to post a link here.

        Comment


        • #5
          Originally posted by Tarek Morgen View Post
          The crazier your idea is, the better you have to be at selling it.
          I'm running a scenario on another forum with a heavy military focus that would basically violate the "time-shift" restriction placed above. It's about shifting a modern country back to WW1. Entirely. Total timeline currently currently encompasses 65,000 words - in short descriptions. It'd be interesting to overhaul some parts of it based on feedback from WAB. Crazy enough to disqualify?

          Comment


          • #6
            Weeeellll, my daughter did ask me who would win, Gandalf vs Dumbledore. Any takers?
            In the realm of spirit, seek clarity; in the material world, seek utility.

            Leibniz

            Comment


            • #7
              Parihaka Reply

              "Weeeellll, my daughter did ask me who would win, Gandalf vs Dumbledore. Any takers?"

              And your answer, sir?:pop:

              I know mine but...you first.
              "This aggression will not stand, man!" Jeff Lebowski
              "The only true currency in this bankrupt world is what you share with someone else when you're uncool." Lester Bangs

              Comment


              • #8
                Gandalf hands down. He was a minor deity (a Maiar) origionaly called Olorin.

                Comment


                • #9
                  Originally posted by Parihaka View Post
                  Weeeellll, my daughter did ask me who would win, Gandalf vs Dumbledore. Any takers?
                  If you did not answer Gandalf in a heartbeat, you are raising your kid wrong.

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Originally posted by S2 View Post
                    "Weeeellll, my daughter did ask me who would win, Gandalf vs Dumbledore. Any takers?"

                    And your answer, sir?:pop:

                    I know mine but...you first.
                    Gandalf. Irrespective of quality of magical capabilities, he had been around a lot longer and had a damn site more combat experience against a lot tougher foes than Dumbledore. She didn't like the answer though. "but daddy, Dumbledore had style and a Phoenix" Ah well....
                    In the realm of spirit, seek clarity; in the material world, seek utility.

                    Leibniz

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      Hmmm, it seems cynical adult males are all on the same page... Sorry, and you snapper
                      In the realm of spirit, seek clarity; in the material world, seek utility.

                      Leibniz

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        Does Aragorn beat Harry Potter?

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          On a serious note, the staff will to keep discussions with-in..let's say sane and somewhat adult limits. We are worried quite a bit about what kind of attention this place might draw (Most will remember the X vs Y, no nukes/allies thread of ages past). Yet we do realize that some of our greatest discussions started with a “What if....”

                          Should these guidelines still sound a bit unclear to you...well that is because they are. We are simply not completely sure how this will turn out and thus simply plan on enforcing/making up the rules as we go along.

                          Regarding Parihaka's comment...I myself consider teaching your kids the superiority of Tolkien's work over Harry Potter as a very serious matter. Letting your kids experiment with HP might lead them to believe that it is even acceptable to read Twilight...and that is just wrong. Sick and wrong.

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            100% agree to that. Tolkien was a scholar, Rowling is an author.

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              This will come as blasphemy but I didn't enjoy LOTR that much. I had guard duty on a remote base for a week, and I took the full, massive, three books in one and read the whole damn thing.

                              It sucked.

                              It was long, drawn out, excessive rambling on where no detail at all was needed, and a thoroughly far-from-enjoyable experience. Not what I'm looking for in a book. The movies were even worse by hardly following the books, but most movies are worse than the book.

                              And then we get to HP. The first book came out when I was in 5th grade and was geared towards kids, something LOTS most definitely wasn't. Books 2 and 3 were okay but getting repetitive. Book 4 had some interesting parts but was mostly boring, and books 5 and 6 just plain sucked. Book 7 was by far the worst of the lot, except for the last 100 pages where there finally was a grand melee, but even that lacked the luster and action of a really good battle sequence.

                              Not that I'm not a fan of the fantasy novels. Just the opposite, I read plenty of fantasy. One of my favorite fantasy series' was the Belgariad and the Mallorean by David Eddings. Belgarath, the main sorcerer from those two series' was bloody awesome. He was a drunk, a thief, loose with women and proprieties in general, and was 7,000 years old and the most powerful man alive.

                              In the final aggregation, they both sucked. Gandalf would have kicked Dumbledore's ass because he wasn't a pussy, but Belgarath would have kicked both their asses
                              Meddle not in the affairs of dragons, for you are crunchy and taste good with ketchup.

                              Abusing Yellow is meant to be a labor of love, not something you sell to the highest bidder.

                              Comment

                              Working...
                              X