Mathew Steel

Simply, my driving test is tomorrow (first one) and I'm absolutely bricking it. If anyone has some advice, I'd love to hear it. Or even fake reassurance :P? Thanks all!

So, I know this thread is fairly idle now, but I had to laugh seeing these comments, thought it might amuse some of you: "The BBC 'left wing'! Says more about your interpretation of the world and as for 'oxygen', Trump has been overdosing for quite some time via many outlets!" "Left wing BBC!?On political issues, no, clearly very much right wing. Why on earth do you think they are to the left?" I wasn't aware that so many people genuinely believe the BBC is right wing...I've said myself, I'm more libertarian, but this is just nonsense!

Between the first and second For Honor betas, I managed to put in just over 30 hours into the game. This review will be based off the second beta. I should add there will be another beta on the 9th of February (this month) for those of you who are still contemplating purchasing the game. The Concept For Honor is a close combat, middle-aged themed game. ?The fighting has a fairly complex system to it. There are three different positions to attack from, left, right, and above. This is done by moving the analogue stick in one of these directions, and then striking your enemy. The same applies for blocking. Each type of player has its own attacks and blocks. Some have shields, some have two handed weapons, some have two, single-handed weapons. Of course, these different outfits sacrifice either speed, attack or defence, in turn of one of the previous. There are moves than cannot be blocked, and the defender must dodge in the correct direction in order to avoid damage. There is also a stamina system in the game. Certain attacks, dodges and blocks use different amounts of stamina. Stamina is replenished over time by not using these moves.? There are several different game modes in the game. Dominion being the most popular. For those of you who have played Battlefield or Call of Duty, this will be very similar to Conquest (Battlefield) of Domination (CoD). There are three areas, A, B and C. A and C on either end of the map, and B in the middle. However, the B area is not captured by the players, but instead by AI grunts. These grunts are small ground soldiers, who by themselves cannot kill enough soldiers to advance up the area. Without real player interaction, the grunts would be at a stalemate in the middle of B. Real players must kill enemy grunts in order for their team's grunts to advance and capture the point. Those grunts will then maintain control of B, until enemy player interaction is made. Be wary, the grunts deal little damage, but if you spend too much time teasing them, in a large group, they will definitely kill you, especially if you are on low health. The other gamemodes being various player limits of duels. 1v1, 2v2, and 4v4 (as of the beta). Players are put into 1v1 situations, until all enemy players are killed. Be aware, there are some players who will run straight into someone else's duel, in order to have a numbers advantage and quickly kill off one of the enemy players. This is uncommon, as many of the players in the game are ex-Chivalry players, who tend to have some "honour" when it comes to duels. There are other confirmed gamemodes, however, I don't feel I'm in the position to comment on those. Environmental Factors Whilst the way to win your fights is usually through pure combat. There are certain map factors than players can use in order to kill their opponents quicker. Some maps have springs, shooting out powerful bursts of water up. Pushing your opponents into these springs, either through a shove, or tackle, can deal considerable damage. As well as this, enemies can be pushed off cliffs in order to send them into a no-revive state. Or, pushed off a ledge or a ladder, in order to put the enemy into a down-but-not-out state. As the name suggests, enemies in the DBNO state can be revived by allies. Factions Now is a good time to explain the different classes and factions. At the start of the game, players will choose a faction. This can be changed at any time. The only difference in which faction you choose, is your emblem shape, and your influence on the Territory Conquer Game. The Territory Conquer Game is a worldwide, live game that is affected each time a player finishes a game. Every match completed, players are granted the option to "deploy assets", this is simply choosing a title area on the map, for your faction to attack/defend, depending on whether they are in their own territory, or the enemies. This is updated every 12 hours. From my experience, Vikings tend to have the most gained territory. This isn't down to number of players in that faction. In fact, Vikings seemed to be the least popular faction, however, they were the most active in this territory game. Your chosen faction has no effect on which characters you may play as. Just because you chose the Viking faction, does not mean you are exempt from playing a Knight or a Samurai. However, your deployable assets will be helping the Viking faction. Classes In the finished game, each faction will have 4 classes. These classes are not exact across all factions. Each class has its own advantages and disadvantages. I like to describe the class system as a game of rock, paper, scissors, and malleable stone. What I mean by this, is that some classes specialise in attack, or defence. However, there are some that are all-rounders. They don't specialise in attack or defence, but instead have a balance. Certain classes counter others. For example, a heavy against a speed, tends to create unpredictable results and is mainly down to player skill, not class ability. Whereas a heavy against a balanced class, tends to lead to the balanced class having an advantage.? I don't wish to go in-depth into every class, as these classes are subject to change. What I will say is that player skill is a huge factor in this game. If you can learn the movesets of a certain class to perfection, 9/10, you will win a duel against the class that would counter you. However, there are many extremely skilled players in this game. So make sure you practice :D Summary For Honor is a great game for those of you who enjoy games such as Chivalry. The skill and patience one puts into this game, will result in great fun. If you learn the game, and it does take some getting used to, you'll succeed. Of course, it's not everyone's cup of tea. Those of you who are skeptical, I urge you to sign up for the upcoming beta. In terms of optimisation, with all settings maxed, my game did not go below 60 FPS at 1080p. I'm currently using a GTX 1070 and an i7, so my results aren't really applicable to all PCs. However, Watchdogs 2 is truly trash in terms of optimisation, even on this setup. I will say, this game is INSANELY better with a controller. If you have one, I strongly recommend using it over your mouse and keyboard. I'm sure there are things I missed, so if anyone has any questions, feel free to ask :)? EDIT: Please no hate for the American spelling of "For Honor". It's the way the title of the game is spelt, and so I stuck to that.

Perhaps we agree on more than I originally thought! :D I understand this, and it's exactly why I won't identify by party. We have a statue of Aneurin Bevan in Cardiff, and it's a good reminder as to what the NHS is meant to be. It's sad seeing what is happening to it. Corbyn, whether you like him or not, certainly seems to feel strongly about the NHS, and whether his actions would synchronise with those words is another matter, but his beliefs, or what he makes his beliefs out to be, are certainly ones I can relate to. I'm also glad that you can see what is slowly happening to the NHS. To me at least, it's painfully apparent that our government is trying to privatise it. PS: Sorry for the double reply, I'd already posted as you did the same, and it seemed peculiar to add this unrelated reply to the one I gave to Eagle :)? EDIT: Can I just add. Because I genuinely am confused, why on earth does the SNP complain that Scotland's vote was that they wanted to remain, when they know that they're part of the UK? I get they want to leave the UK, but that's not relevant.

I get that you're cautious with this, but I promise you, what I've cited, is correct. If you really want to, I'm sure there are people who can translate it for you, but it's more or less the same word for word. The issue is, Islam as a culture isn't great. Take these countries where Islam is the main religion. Women are treated like dirt, there's rape and constant crime without punishment. You can argue it's because they haven't developed as a country yet, but ask yourself, what's the reason for that? If all our beliefs were founded on Islamic beliefs, I can't say we'd be much different to the likes of Saudi Arabia.? As to your point about diversity. I wouldn't say it's that important. If we have diversity - great, if not, it's honestly not a big deal. If the moral belief is that we are all equal, no matter what our race, gender, age and class is, then diversity shouldn't be an issue. Religious diversity. Well, why is that important? It's unlikely it'll change the beliefs of people that already have a faith, and if our country became a religious country once again, I certainly wouldn't decide to become Christian.? Maybe I'm being narrow-minded there, so if anyone has a different opinion, I'd be interested to hear of it.

No, I wouldn't argue it's violent. But I wouldn't say it's peaceful. It's just...a religion. Haha!

I'll answer your question politely, Eagle. Seeing as you seem to just be genuinely curious. First of all, when we say Islam is not a peaceful religion, we do not mean due to it's actions. For example, the Crusades weren't exactly the best times for Christianity, yet people don't claim that Christianity is hateful. Secondly, there are certainly things in the Bible that one would find appalling. Deuteronomy 10:20 would be one of the best examples of this in my eyes. However, the difference between Christianity and Islam is that Christianity has had a lot of reformation. The second testament for example, has been adapted from the first to be more in-line with today's values. So you may ask, isn't this just Christianity covering up its tracks? To some degree, some may say yes. Yet, another difference between the religions is that the Bible was supposedly written by the followers of Jesus, these stories and beliefs are from what Jesus had apparently said. There is no solid proof that this is true (I am hypothesizing here, I'm not religious, and I don't really believe any of this happened regardless, but that's irrelevant).? Islam on the other hand, claims that their teachings are the exact teachings of Allah, who is supposedly all-mighty, and always right. This means that Islam cannot be adapted to suit today's standards, as this would be going against the teachings of Allah. Now, whilst there certainly are good teaching in Islam, the negatives, although may not outnumber the positives, certainly overpower them. There are references to Mohammed having sexual relations with a 9 year old. Of course, in the time this was written, those values were acceptable, and that's the issue with this. Islam cannot be adapted, and so their archaic beliefs cannot be modernised. Hence the reason he is labeled a rapist, because it would class as statutory/direct rape, (I add the extra "direct rape" because I don't think any 9 year old would give consent to this). Because of this, many Muslims have tried arguing that these writings are all lies, and going against their own beliefs, claiming "This is not Islam" as I'm sure you have seen before. There's a specific part of the Quran that explains the reason for ISIS; Quran 8:12 - "I will cast terror into the hearts of those that disbelieve. Therefore strike off their heads, and strike off every fingertip of them."? The very thing that ISIS are infamous for doing. Also; 003:090 Khan - "Those who reject faith, after they have accepted it, never will their repentance be accepted." As you can see, both these things are very difficult to misinterpret. There are also references in the Quran to Mohammed himself giving orders to his men to kill those who are disbelievers of Allah. The Jews were very much victims of this. Whilst it's clearly apparent that not every Muslim is aware of this, and nor would every Muslim follow this. The argument that Islam isn't peaceful, is not to say all Muslims are evil. The argument is that the religion itself is not peaceful, not the people following it. That's why there is such a moral panic of when it comes to Muslims entering the country, as their religion is unforgiving to those who aren't believers. So, when it comes to a secular country such as the UK, it's a big risk for us to allow a huge number of Muslims into the country, just IN CASE, they are part of the minority that are hardcore believers. I don't like the term extremist. It's got a bad definition now, as if it means someone who doesn't understand ?their religion, and not what it should mean - someone who follows even the sinister and cruel parts of their religion.

I must say, I agree with pretty much everything you said, Chris. I think it's fair to say you and I differ when it comes to quite a few political opinions. I'm not too fussed on Theresa May and her cabinet. Jeremy Hunt is another someone that's an annoyance to me, although I'm not sure of your opinion on him. However, it's nice being in a community [here] where we can have civil disagreements and also agree when we feel is right. Just felt like making that point! I've made one or two political posts in the past, and looking back at those now, makes me cringe. I was one of the people I hate. Labeling anyone who has even remotely strict views on immigration a racist. Being totally narrow-minded when it came to other viewpoints. Simply, being young and naive. I like to think that today, and this goes for all of us, that we're more open and understanding to other opinions, especially those of a political nature.? You mentioned news companies pushing their own agenda. I personally, would consider myself more liberal, but even I can see sometimes that the BBC and similar news agencies, push a very left-sided view. Not all the time, there are some articles that are truly factual, but not always. Yet, I think it's fair to also point out that there are many very right-sided agendas being pushed by other companies such as The Sun and The Daily Mail (I should add, I'm using companies for want of a better word, my mind has drawn a blank right now). Media is extremely influential, especially on a younger audience, such as myself. It's important to take everything we read with a pinch of salt, check other articles by other reporters and so on. Even news agencies (again, want of a better word) such as The Guardian, that aren't owned by a head-man, have a slight bias to one side of the table. I think for us to get anywhere, we need to stop identifying our political viewpoints, by party. I'd say I'm a fan of Corbyn (yes I know, the IRA stuff is appalling, but that's not why I like him). However, I don't consider myself a labour member. Simply because there are too many strings attached to saying that. Until we can make everyone realise that not everyone in one group is the same, which seems obvious on paper, then I won't identify via party, but instead, just give my opinions on a topic-by-topic answer. What I will say, is that people need to stop denying these leaders as their leaders. I dislike May, but I don't want her to fail. Her decisions will decide the social and political direction of our country, it would be stupid to wish her the worst. The same applies in the US, with Trump. No, I don't like the EU referendum result, I don't like that May is our Prime Minister, HOWEVER, what I dislike even more is people picking and leaving democracy, so it suits them 100% of the time.? I should add, what I've said here is on a general level, I'm not directing my words at anyone in particular. Just some more brain food, I guess!

Yes, exactly. Trump is going to make poor decisions, that not everyone will agree with. But I'm sure he'll do some good for the US. Whether the positives will outweigh the negatives, that I'm not so sure. However, only time will tell.

Of course, I completely understand Trump's reasoning behind the bans. However, I don't agree with the ban. People will call me a "libtard" and so on, I honestly don't care. I'm not so arrogant to say that I'm right, nor am I going to label someone a racist for being a nationalist. Yet, my beliefs are my beliefs. It's a paradox. Either: - We let them all in and face the inevitability of a terrorist attack ? OR - We don't let anyone in, and stand idly by whilst innocent people suffer, due to something we've indirectly contributed to It's difficult to find a happy medium on this matter. So until someone comes up with a better plan, I think it's difficult for us to criticize Trump on this matter. ON THE OTHER HAND, him stopping funding on abortion related services is absolutely appalling. His "Alternative facts" idea, is nothing but hilarious garbage. And his lack of self-investigation into statistics which he spreads around, suggests incompetence on that topic.

I was thinking that myself. Whilst what he has done has been questionable, I have to admire the fact that he's stuck his promise. It's a shame we can't say the same here in the UK (still wondering where that 350mil has gone).? Maybe Trump will turn around and surprise us all! Although, so far, from what he's already done, I very much doubt that. Again, I like that he's repeated that he'll listen to what his second hand men have to say, and take their word over his. For example, with the water boarding. If he doesn't, then I'm sure he'll have a lot of unhappy citizens. I suppose it's quite relevant to point out that a petition in the UK to not invite him to a state visit, has had over 800,000 signatures. Meaning, it must be considered for a debate in parliament (100,000 signatures being the minimum for that). Whether I've signed that or not - I'll leave that a mystery :P EDIT: Just saw, the government has rejected to cancel the state visit, saying it would "Undo everything."

The ban consists of the countries that are predominantly Muslim. I don't say this next part to be rude or mean, it's the truth - Islam is not a peaceful religion. There are parts of it that encourage peace, but others that are sickening. I won't go into too much detail, but look up some of the passages, such as Quran 4:24, are simply immoral and foul. Islam being a peaceful religion is not entirely true. It's used countless times by many supporters of Islam, even by myself when I was younger. Again, I'm not saying that Muslims are not peaceful, but IS work on Islamic ideologies. That's a fact. Regardless, my intention in the reply was not to criticise Islam, but since it added to my point, I felt I should include it. I'm glad I could answer your question, and I would like to re-emphasise, I'm not anti-religion. I just think we need to be more honest about some religious teachings.? Apologies to anyone I may have upset in my response.

As far as I know, Trump can only be removed from presidency if he breaks the rules. The three main ones being:? - Real criminality - Abuses of power - Violation of public trust Even then, it is up to the House of Representatives on whether Trump will be removed from office. Trump's actions in this first week have been interesting to say the least. I understand why he's doing what he's doing, and to be fair, it'll likely reduce the counts of terrorism in the US. However, there are other ways of doing so that won't cause such a backlash. Without trying to start a political war here, ISIS works on Islamic beliefs, but that's not me saying that no Muslims can be trusted. There are plenty of awful things in the majority of religions, but the people following the religions are wise enough to not follow it word for word. Most religions today have had reformation, or modernisation. This Muslim ban, (which is being covered up as a "country ban" which is total rubbish), is not the answer to an ongoing issue. Here in the UK, I feel we should be helping these refugees, and if it were totally safe to let all refugees in, I would. But I'm not naive, I know it's a high risk allowing refugees into our country.? My issue is that we, along with the US, have bombed these countries over and over again, and the results are refugees, yet we don't want to accept it as our problem. I get called out for being anti-patriotic a lot, I'm not. I like my country, but I don't agree with everything we do. Our government right now is allowing its own healthcare to fail, in order to privatise it later on, yet so many people seem to be ignoring that or denying it. The world is a mess right now, and whilst I've gone off topic in my reply, I hope the first part has answered your question somewhat.? I wish you well, Eagle. EDIT: Reading over this, I come off as very strong. I'm strong minded, and very set in my own beliefs. If anyone disagrees with me however, that's totally fine. In fact, it's more interesting discussing with people who have different values, that way you question your own.? Also, when I say the world is a mess, I mean from a country-by-country perspective. My personal life, is fairly great, compared to the lives a lot of people live.? I also want to emphasise that I am in no way against religious followers. I'm not against Muslims, or Christians, and so on, it would be ignorant and plain stupidity to believe that all Christians or all Muslims follow the darkest parts of their religion.?

I know I'm repeating myself here, but these photos are just stunning! As Crusader said, I love to see the white snow, it really adds to the beauty of the place. However, unlike Crusader, I myself am experiencing the cold, without the snow, because that's apparently how Wales works :P

My apologies also, happy birthday! :D Those photos are absolutely stunning. Your city certainly has the perfect aesthetics for some great photography. I look forward to coming back to see more as you continue to upload!

Those photos are great, truly beautiful. Being in Wales, I never see sights like that. I have a few photos on my camera role of the Welsh landscape, lots of greenery and mountains! When I get a chance to upload them from my phone, I'll be sure to do so! I also have quite a few from my time in Rome, although, I'm not sure whether it would be better to keep it to pictures of our own area or not? :) As for wanting to stop and take pictures of what you see, do it! I enjoy seeing photos of landscapes and interesting areas. As long as you're not taking photos of your food and uploading it, then I'd strongly encourage you to take the photos if that's what you enjoy :D

There's going to be a lot of controversy in this thread, I imagine. However, I feel like this is good a place as any to express my views. My values, opinions and outlook on things have changed significantly throughout this year. I look back at myself just a few months ago and think, "What an *****." I don't like how I used to think and how I used to see things in black and white, although, I suppose that's just a part of growing up. I'm currently only 17 writing this and I know a few months down the line, I'll likely look at this thread and again think, "What an *****." We'll see! 1. 2016 has been "The Year of Unnecessary Labels" as I like to label it (irony). What I mean by this is people constantly needing to identify themselves and others through labels. I've had this come up so many times, for example,? "Do you believe in equal rights?"? "Yes." "You're a feminist!" "No, I'm not." You can have a set of beliefs without being tied to a group. I love pasta, but I have no intention of labeling myself as some pasta-connoisseur, or of joining any pasta lovers forum. All in all, my first wish for 2017, is to stop using stupid, narrow-minded labels. 2. New genders, new pronouns. Before anyone starts a revolt against me, please read this in its entirety. I'll say first off, that to me there are 2 genders. That may seem a bit ignorant, and perhaps it is, especially since I study sociology and psychology. Nonetheless, I believe there are two genders. HOWEVER, I have no issue with people identifying as a gender that does not correspond with their biological sex. What I do have a problem with, is being forced to use made-up pronouns in order to not "offend" anyone ("offend" is going to be a keyword in this thread). I am fine with referring to someone as "he" or "she" even if it isn't their sex, I'll respect that, but the idea of me using "ze" and "zir" is, to put it lightly, a joke. You can't be "non-binary" it makes no sense grammatically, nor logically. I may be ignorant and arrogant in believing this, but too many people use these labels?simply to "stand out".? My second wish then, is for people to stop limiting freedom of speech. I understand, people say horrific things, however, they should not be required by law?to stop. Any morally sane human being knows that "Kill all the filthy xxx" is wrong. We don't need a legislation to tell us that. 3. Being offended. I'm fully aware taking offense is something we automatically do. What I fail to believe is that it's natural. Nobody is born sensitive. Can we stop taking offence to ridiculous things. A friend of Carrie Fisher made a tweet saying (this isn't word for word) "The first thing I noticed was her beauty, then I realised how witty and funny she was." For some reason, people actually took offence to this! Arguing that noticing her beauty before anything is a narrow-minded thing to do! I hope everyone here can see how much easier it is to assess beauty before anything else, since to realise someone is witty and funny, THEY ACTUALLY HAVE TO SAY OR DO SOMETHING WITTY OR FUNNY! Why is that such a difficult concept for people to understand? My 3rd wish is to stop raising children to take offence to things. Especially those things they don't agree with. 4. That leads me to my last wish. Arrogance. For one, anyone noticed that people, from either side of political parties, behave the same? With Obama, all the right-winged people started shouting that this was the end, saying that "He's not from here!" As if that somehow makes a difference. Now, with Trump, all the left-winged people have started shouting "We're so scared as to what will happen to us!" Here's your answer. Nothing.? Secondly, people have different opinions, but we are so damn good at ignoring them, simply because the idea of our own morals and values being challenged, scares us. We are too afraid to change our views because somehow that would be admitting defeat. I'm tired of radicals. Whether they're left-winged or right-winged. Whether they are religious, or secular. Radicalism is stupidity, and stupidity is loss.? There's so much more I wish would change for 2017, and I know I haven't worded these as well as one could. I just wanted to vent my thoughts on this year. I know it's become a cliche to say "2016 has been the worst year ever." However, from the bottom of my heart, for me personally, it has been.

Again, here's another - 4F10-C0EA-7778-899F Also again, enjoy :D

Here's another - 457TC-BBAYL-D8JMP Enjoy :)

Merry Christmas to you all! I have a free Crusader 2 mini-campaign DLC code if anyone would be interested as a Christmas present :D I wish you all the best!?

I see! I did come across the SASR when looking it up, however, the documentary I watched referred to them as SAS, which is likely where I got confused! Thank you very much for the explanation. I agree, the SAS are certainly good at what they do! Watching the Iranian Embassy Siege really is something. To think that was 36 years ago!

Recently, I've been watching a lot of documentaries on the SAS and Navy Seals, simply out of interest. The SAS is obviously a British army regiment/counter-terrorism unit, however, watching a documentary, the SAS has HQs run by other nationalities. For example, there was one in Perth, Australia, ran by Australian SAS members. I'm just curious to know why and how? I was under the impression that the SAS was a British-only regiment, however, now I feel quite ignorant :P? Secondly, the training for both units seems very intense and merciless. The SAS use a "silent run" tactic, where no positive nor negative feedback is given. I assume this is to get them prepared for the worse. Am I wrong in believing in actual scenarios, squads are very supportive of one another on a tactical and "emotional" (for want of a better word) level. Any help is appreciated! Also, hope everyone is well, and Merry Christmas to those who celebrate it :D

It doesn't always get the recognition it deserves, but a trumpet is one hell of a difficult instrument to play! I applaud you on being able to play it :D I can currently play 7 songs without the sheets, which is good enough for me right now. I'm happy playing little melodies that I make up on the spot. Grades aren't really my thing but I can appreciate those that put in the effort!

Stronghold seems to be one of those very nostalgic games. I find myself going back to it after a while, playing it for a week or so, then leaving it again for a few months. Not because I don't enjoy it. It's just the way things turn out :D

Haha! Honestly, I was making sure I wasn't being silly. I read it and had to think about it for a minute, lol.