This thread made by yours truly is created for the purpose of exchanging ideas, theories, philosophies whether it be Toribash or general idealism, so no vulgar humor please.

My philosophy has always been simplicity and fortitude, why take a long complicated path when a shortcut lies before you? why go for a decapitation when you can simply dq?. I suppose my point is doing what is required comes before anything else, I have carried this ideal my whole life so when I play in-game I often move few joints which gets me called ''stiff '' and '' noob'' but I see beauty in this simplicity for simplicity is complexity at it's finest.

A good part of it is sportsmanship and showmanship
Plus it's about having fun, taking the easy way to a win often ruins that fun for you, your opponent, and the spectators

I suppose that's a matter of opinion then the showmanship I can your see your point though, some folks want to see a pro be a pro, but the matter of fun is a different matter there's nothing I love more than a technically sound precise motion leading to a seemingly effortless fight personally.

This would be a nice quote, but it doesn't follow my beliefs. I think you're still learning on how to become more realistic ingame on multiplayer. Those few joint movements can be apart of a dead combination that you have yet to find. Complexity cannot be without the simplistic move for each joint. Each joint reacts a different way. Each joint counter reacts another joint to do another movement. Find the right reactions and you'll come up with something nice. It's just like cooking. Pineapples and cookies probably aren't the best combination, but milk and cookies is way better.

I'm completely fine with you being "simplistic" but I would like to see you challenging yourself. I find the game boring when I can't come up with new counters and new ways to disqualify or dismember players. I try to challenge myself, and I'm trying to come up with a new aikido.tbm opener.



Okay, so my idea for real life aspects.
I think it would be so great if someone could figure out how to compact a full electric or motor scooter that folds up into the size of a laptop.

This would change the way of our transportation. I would definitely love to try to sketch what this would look like, or how the "folds" would work. I'm not really artistic if I try to do something without it coming naturally, so that's probably not going to happen. I also see it as impossible for our current technology and physics understandings to create such a thing. Hopefully I get to see something similar to my idea before the day of my death.

Being simple is a challenge from my view for simple is just that...simple also simple to beat not to mention it isn't easy to dissect complicated moves to counter them with only a few joints, like beating a shooting game with a bb gun.

And as far as your real life idea that would truly be a grand thing to see vehicles would be greatly reduced in pollution and all that jazz we would probably have hover-boards and jet-packs no doubt.

I once had a theory of everyone wearing a small pack about the size of a carton of cigarettes and attaching them via strap onto their arms. The purpose of these packs would be to convert all of their energy used through the into a clean and free source of energy, if there were facilities stationed around each respective country to collect and distribute said collected energy.

Simple is never good, nor is being over the top any good either. I do not believe in shortcuts or longcuts. I do over satisfactory but not a miracle worker. Shortcuts are generally bad because in the end shortcuts will hit you a deadend, figuring that you have to takethe long way. To keep balance I always stick with neutralism because it will not have major effects, nor overthrow the balance of life. Neutral although does not mean "maybe", it means inbetween.

Neutrality is as simple as simple can get though, an object shall remain motionless until acted upon although remaining neutral gives you a better perspective and sense of when to strike, it also implies that you be struck first. so in neutrality there is no victory if there is no confrontation but since there will be a fight the neutral force will always take the first blow will it not?.

Thread stickied.
This shit is important.

Yes, but yet again neutral is in between. Simple can a word to describe yet simple is such a strong word on a scale and neutral is yet again in between. As to the victim of attacks, he does not defend himself nor attack but the attacker continously misses as he is offensive but not fully which gives the concept of inbetween.

Well albeit true I suppose neutrality will always remain just that...neutral although it has it's advantages it's biggest hinder is that since it neither supports offense or defense it can be overwhelmed by either of them. For without a stable stance you are more capable to be swept off your feet by swift offense offense or subdued by heavy defense.