Prospect_b

Cantabrian circle tactics

Have no fears, correction man has arrived, unleashing the power of nitpickery. 1. You go from saying, he's a descendant of a viking who (force-)settled in normandy, SO he is french? By that same logic, he (or at least his descendants) are genuinely English once they settle there. I have no idea what William TC would declare himself to be (my guess would be "Norman(dian)" - but it certainly wasn't "French". 2. "entire English dynasty vassal to the King of France" -> true, at least concerning their lands in "France" (Normandy, Aquitaine, etc) "claims to THE french land and the French crown" -> NOT true. He had claims of course on the titles and lands he had in "France", but not on the entirety of "France", let alone the French crown. That dispute would spring up once the Capet line almost died out and they had to search for very far away family members (i.e. the 100yrs war, centuries away) (don't understand the sentence with trade mark etc) 3. Wut? 4. As known, the HRE was not Holy, nor Roman, nor an Empire. But neither was it ever "France, Italy and Germany" combined. Charles the Great (are you dutch by any chance? In English they generally refer to him as Charlemagne) Empire was not the HRE. That is 2 centuries later.

Well, I'm certainly a critical WG customer, I don't have the Roma (not interested), but from what I have seen, thanks for making it a balanced boat. And Thank you a bazillion times for reinstating BBs with citadels!

Meanwhile, in ranked, every BB rushes into that cap, desperately trying to get that "unsinkable" ribbon... How? Why?

much irony indeed. http://www.iep.utm.edu/argument/

Emphasis on majority. Can't wait to see players without a payfast posting new and wonderful threads when there is a next tier 7 ranked

Can you stop the flooding of this forum already. While vaguely amusing at first, it really is getting annoying and tiresome. Thx

And the January 2018 pure comedy gold award goes to...

Proper Latin is Latin until +- the fifth century. Often Boëthius (de consolatione philosophiae) will be indicated as one of the last true Latin works. After that period Latin was still used for a whole long time, in the church (hence, ecclesiastical latin), in the administration and in intellectual circles. That ended somewhere mid 19th century. For example Newton just wrote his treatises (the motion and the countermotion and gravity, you know) in Latin Hence that distinction. Goes somewhat like Archaic Latin - Classical Latin - Medieval Latin - Modern/scientific Latin. Anyway, appears I was wrong here. For some reason dominare gave me the feeling of being medieval Latin (church Latin), but when you asked about it now, I had a quick search and it also appears in classical texts. My apologies. At least, in a certain form (dominare doesn't exist, it's dominari) Which means, "ad vires dominandos" would be correct as well. Still doesn't sounds nice, if you ask me ;) --- edit: Simple parallel. A lot of us here in the forum and ingame are no native English speakers, including me. We use English as lingua franca. Imagine a discussion you heard on teamspeak or the like between e.g. a Norwegian and a Bulgarian guy. Would a native speaker classify it as proper?

Thx. Can't follow the entirety of this forum. No clue why they disable it btw.

1 You want so say smt like "To dominate men"? (although, you are saying, to dominate A man) I'm impressed with the gerund, though if using an object, you should use a gerundive. Also, dominare isn't true Latin. Also, you should use "vir", not "homo". Accusative is correct. I'd chose for "imperare". -> "Ad vires imperandos" 2 "I am out of your hand"? Not sure what you're going for, smt like "can't touch me"? "out of someone hands" is a contemporary expression anyway. 3 "I am without limit"? Sure, but you don't say "ego sum", and the ablative of fines is fini. -> "Sum sine fini" 4 "'we don't cap"? Cute. Though the 1st plural would be capimUs and if I'm not mistaken that you're trying for some irony here, I would go for "We shall not cap!" -> "Non capiemus"

let's call that plan B, shall we?

Only if you drink it with moderation... Tbh, I understand what you say, variation is the key. Hint:

Yea, it is extremely impolite of the MM not to wait for that lone hipper... Tsschhh.

What a coincidence: the vast majority of pilots in a BB with untouchable citadel and inaccurate guns does that too!

I am very happy to hear someone say this. I've only unlocked it not so long ago, no I never had it in any pre-nerfed state, and on most maps I simply don't like it, especially in the current meta. BBs hugging closely in the middle of nowhere, near some cosy islands. I can fly like a butterfly and sting like a bee as much as I want , but at a certain point I will hear that extreme damage sound. Especially with that range. Never used it as it is so frowned upon, might give it a try.

since when is a pen 2/3 of the full dmg?

Sigh. I needed to keep it a little light, because of sensitivities But you asked. Your question is understandable by the way. You'd think the fellator would be classified as the active one, cause he does something, while the other one just takes it. Though, irrumare; the verb, was in essence not "getting/receiving fellatio" (which, indeed, sounds passive), but, forcing someone to perform fellatio.. In essence, oral rape. So that makes the other one the one being raped - which is, of course, passive. Very much linked to the whole shame thing related to the passive one, i.e. the fellator. (compare to modern expressions as "lick my ba**s, or s**k my d**k". If performed, those actions are not physically painful, but very psychologically and socially pain - and shameful) We also have reports of soldiers in antiquity, raping the conquered soldiers, both in this and in the other way. Male soldiers, that is. (you thought taking pictures in prisons was bad...) The "active" role was in essence synonym with the "dominant" one. In an extremely masculine culture as the Romans it explains the extreme taboo that laid upon the passive/dominated role. A similar thing can be observed in the "pederasty" (NOT the same as today) in ancient greece, where the older man was not supposed to undergo said passive acts. There it can even seen grammatically: the older man was called erastès, the younger one eromenos, which are derived from the same verb (eraein), but the first from the active and the second from the passive participle...

LOL @Altsak Ok, so I understood what you were (quite pathetically) trying to say, so I googled "how to say motherf* in latin", and you must have copy pasted some expression of those idiot sites. Sorry if this feels agressive but I hate people abusing languages they don't know anything about, just to sound "cool", while in essence it only sounds, and is, utterly idiotic. Your sentence means: "Praetor, in your face [and in] your mother who is a guy that fellates other men". Or something like that because that sentence is semantically and syntactically flawed. I do wonder if you even know what a praetor is. That expression on one of those sites must have made some stupid attempt, based upon a verse of Catullus - " praesertim quibus esset irrumator praetor", i.e. "especially concerning those to whom the governor was a cocks**er"... If you really need to sound cool in a language or a culture that you clearly know nothing about (quia quidquid Latine dictum sit altum videtur, amiright? ), it would be "in faciem tuam, fututor matris" - which still would be stupid because "in your face" is a very typical contemporary expression, and hence untranslatable - the same for "motherf*", but at least the insult would be understood. --- Some higher culture for the interested. Romans had a certain tolerance for homosexual expressions, starting from the premisse that being the active role is accepted, being the passive one, is absolutely not. Hence in both possible expressions of physical sexuality have two concepts. For the oral component, this would be: irruminator: the one who gets the fellatio - which is why making a translation of "motherf*" based on this term utterly ludicrous fellator: the one who performs the fellatio

Who the hell made this abomination of a sentence?

Hmm, I don't understand your attitude towards me tbh. I saw some comments of other ppl being quite agressive, but my question was just that, a question. Because you said Well, I like cruisers, and I don't like playing so passive for most of the time in most games either, but that is what happens when there are too much battleships that all want to shoot the xp pinata's that a lot of cruisers are. By playing passive, that role can reverse. Would I find it more fun to play more agressive? Yes, absolutely. At the same time, when I would do that, I would die in 5 minutes with barely any results an no influence on winning or losing, so in that regard it isn't fun at all. That has nothing to do with your implication towards "stats" - because stats are a longterm view. I want a particular game to be fun and good, and those two fall together with me. Or at least as many particular games, won't be possible every single one of course. That's why I asked about your own experiences in that regard, hence my comment about your yorck, cause having that ship implies you had some experience with cruiserlife, including the horror that is tier 5 and 6 matchmaking for cruisers. It will even be more fun if you ever get to the Hipper, trust me... And being the wise old man that you are, I leave it up to you as why I won't dignify your other remarks and implications with an answer.

You're only at Friant. Come and reply your own question when further in that tree ;-)

proactive censorship, it's called

Because one of the decent things about this game is the modelling of ships, which is sufficient for me. And fluorescent camo's based upon a cartoon with constantly screaming girls with severe borderline pathology is quite disruptive for that.

Isn't that just to hide those ships in my port? Can't check cause server error... I do hope you're being sarcastic, right?