What's with all of the female units?

The new Heroes games produced by Ubisoft. Please specify which game you are referring to in your post.

Moderator: Moderators

User avatar
Fewtger
Peasant
Peasant
Posts: 50
Joined: 16 Jul 2008

Postby Fewtger » May 10 2011, 20:36

Nah, they're all on top of the Giant Elephant, next to the Titans en Djinni.

User avatar
Slayer of Cliffracers
Hunter
Hunter
Posts: 549
Joined: 11 Jul 2006
Location: Gateshead, England.

Postby Slayer of Cliffracers » May 11 2011, 10:03

Mlai wrote:Real warriors ON HORSES.

Foot soldiers do not wear sabatons (metal feet coverings). For an obvious reason: they have to march.

Which is the same reason why foot soldiers do not wear full plate.

Oh and how about the Academy Mages? Matriarchs have a hard time marching because they wear platforms? How about 70 years-old men with bad backs? You suppose they have to march?

Oh, what's that? They use MAGIC?


Given that all Knights often faught on foot too Mlai in certain circumstances it really is not true what you say.
Working on tracking the locations of Heroes IV battles. Stage 6 of campaign map finished, all initial Heroes IV campaigns mapped.

http://www.celestialheavens.com/forums/ ... hp?t=11973

User avatar
Mlai
Scout
Scout
Posts: 152
Joined: 08 Dec 2007

Postby Mlai » May 11 2011, 15:15

Given that the definition of a knight is...

http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/knight

Definition of KNIGHT
1
a (1) : a mounted man-at-arms serving a feudal superior;


... I think I'll just stop typing here.

MattII
Demon
Demon
Posts: 309
Joined: 06 Jan 2006
Location: New Zealand

Postby MattII » May 11 2011, 19:25

And I'll just say Agincourt.

User avatar
ThunderTitan
Perpetual Poster
Perpetual Poster
Posts: 23266
Joined: 06 Jan 2006
Location: Now/here
Contact:

Postby ThunderTitan » May 22 2011, 20:47

Mlai wrote:Given that the definition of a knight is...

http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/knight

Definition of KNIGHT
1
a (1) : a mounted man-at-arms serving a feudal superior;


... I think I'll just stop typing here.



That isn't actually true, because there where plenty of other horse mounted warriors at the time. Even within the Anglo-French zone of culture.


MattII wrote:
ThunderTitan wrote:Pretty sure that was my point... that Moor is a general term for north african muslims with perhaps certain more distinct connotations based on the time it was being used.

Um...
ThunderTitan wrote:No, moors was a word the spanish used for most "brown" people...


Notice the quotes?


MattII wrote:1870 actually. I'd call 1860 pretty impressive when you consider that it wasn't even rediscovered (the previous discovery/ies were never followed up) until 1769, and settlement didn't really start until the 19th century (the first colonist child was born in 1815). Things weren't perfect of course, there was still an inbred racism amongst some of the colonists, and the Land Wars in 1860 did the Maori no good, nor did the assimilation or Maori culture..


Yeah, a few years isn't exactly very impressive...
Disclaimer: May contain sarcasm!
I have never faked a sarcasm in my entire life. - ???
"With ABC deleting dynamite gags from cartoons, do you find that your children are using explosives less frequently?" — Mark LoPresti

Alt-0128: €

Image

User avatar
Mlai
Scout
Scout
Posts: 152
Joined: 08 Dec 2007

Postby Mlai » May 23 2011, 12:56

Exercise in logic:

1. Not all horse-mounted warriors are knights.
2. But all knights are horse-mounted warriors.

Or something like that. How do those things go?

User avatar
Slayer of Cliffracers
Hunter
Hunter
Posts: 549
Joined: 11 Jul 2006
Location: Gateshead, England.

Postby Slayer of Cliffracers » May 23 2011, 16:28

Mlai wrote:Exercise in logic:

1. Not all horse-mounted warriors are knights.
2. But all knights are horse-mounted warriors.

Or something like that. How do those things go?


Knights fighting on foot

The set is named 'Knights and Foot Soldiers', though in fact for the most part the foot soldiers are also knights. The normal infantry would have been poorly equipped and clothed, with far less armour than the figures here. However, although knights preferred to fight mounted, circumstances dictated that they often had to fight on foot, particularly later in the war, which mostly consisted of sieges.


So Knights did historically fight on foot.
Working on tracking the locations of Heroes IV battles. Stage 6 of campaign map finished, all initial Heroes IV campaigns mapped.



http://www.celestialheavens.com/forums/ ... hp?t=11973

User avatar
ThunderTitan
Perpetual Poster
Perpetual Poster
Posts: 23266
Joined: 06 Jan 2006
Location: Now/here
Contact:

Postby ThunderTitan » May 23 2011, 20:39

Mlai wrote:Exercise in logic:

1. Not all horse-mounted warriors are knights.
2. But all knights are horse-mounted warriors.

Or something like that. How do those things go?



Thing is, a knight isn't a mounted warrior so much as simply a feudal position of a guy that had his own troops, the real reason why they where on a horse most of the time is because they had the money for it and it was seen as a better weapon... but there are plenty of examples of knights going on foot when the method of warfare used demanded it...

So the 2nd one isn't 100% true...
Disclaimer: May contain sarcasm!

I have never faked a sarcasm in my entire life. - ???
"With ABC deleting dynamite gags from cartoons, do you find that your children are using explosives less frequently?" — Mark LoPresti

Alt-0128: €


Image

User avatar
Mlai
Scout
Scout
Posts: 152
Joined: 08 Dec 2007

Postby Mlai » May 24 2011, 15:19

Knights do fight on foot, because they are humans with legs. But they are meant to fight as cavalry, and they would prefer to fight as mounted given the option, because they have the money for it (related to their feudal status) and because it's BETTER.

Jesus, you pretty much said the same things yourself. What are you guys even arguing about? "Knights are not mounted warriors... er, not 100% anyways!" Well, yeah, and kickboxers don't just kick you and box you in a streetfight, duh. Maybe just admit that I'm right on an obvious issue?

User avatar
ThunderTitan
Perpetual Poster
Perpetual Poster
Posts: 23266
Joined: 06 Jan 2006
Location: Now/here
Contact:

Postby ThunderTitan » May 24 2011, 15:49

Mlai wrote: and because it's BETTER.


Tell that to the french at Agincourt...




Mlai wrote: Jesus, you pretty much said the same things yourself. What are you guys even arguing about? "Knights are not mounted warriors... er, not 100% anyways!" Well, yeah, and kickboxers don't just kick you and box you in a streetfight, duh. Maybe just admit that I'm right on an obvious issue?


Some knights fought exclusively on foot, look it up (i do believe it was later, after teh 14th century or so).
Disclaimer: May contain sarcasm!

I have never faked a sarcasm in my entire life. - ???
"With ABC deleting dynamite gags from cartoons, do you find that your children are using explosives less frequently?" — Mark LoPresti

Alt-0128: €


Image

User avatar
Slayer of Cliffracers
Hunter
Hunter
Posts: 549
Joined: 11 Jul 2006
Location: Gateshead, England.

Postby Slayer of Cliffracers » Jun 4 2011, 20:23

Mlai wrote:Knights do fight on foot, because they are humans with legs. But they are meant to fight as cavalry, and they would prefer to fight as mounted given the option, because they have the money for it (related to their feudal status) and because it's BETTER.

Jesus, you pretty much said the same things yourself. What are you guys even arguing about? "Knights are not mounted warriors... er, not 100% anyways!" Well, yeah, and kickboxers don't just kick you and box you in a streetfight, duh. Maybe just admit that I'm right on an obvious issue?


The debate really wasn't about knights, it was about whether whether foot armour in armour is realistic or not. Wearing boots with metal on the outside would do far less damage to your feet in battle than the damage which could be done to your feet if you wore normal boots. So the loss in speed is a trade-off, plus said shoes are heavier than normal and balance out the weight of the rest of the armour perhaps.

You aren't wearing said shoes when marching across the countryside. One could make the same argument about the shadow matriarch I guess, but there is no benefit to wearing those shoes and plenty of costs.

Yes the shadow matriarch is a spell-castle/shooter and doesn't usually spend much time running fast across the battlefield but this doesn't mean that they don't have to move quickly. Think about it they have to move fast.

1. When deploying on the battlefield to engaget the enemy in the first place.
2. When dodging enemy magic (fireballs and stuff).
3. When moving from fire to 'reload' position (think that generally only the first and second rank can fire without endangering their fellows).
4. When engaging in close combat.

The latter is the crucial element because as Perseus is told in Clash of the Titans 'you fall you die'. But the others are no less troublesome. If you fall when trying to take cover from a fireball then crispy matriarch. Or if you fall down a slope full of sharp rocks then you are no less trouble.
Working on tracking the locations of Heroes IV battles. Stage 6 of campaign map finished, all initial Heroes IV campaigns mapped.



http://www.celestialheavens.com/forums/ ... hp?t=11973

User avatar
BloodFuryFan
Leprechaun
Leprechaun
Posts: 4
Joined: 05 Jun 2011

Postby BloodFuryFan » Jun 5 2011, 21:18

*I saw this topic and thought I would make an account just to enter this "fierce" debate, very interesting I will say...and slightly ridiculous.

Hey, to begin I'm a fan of Dungeon in H3 and H5. Both for the same reason...I like the look of them. They have the dragons, the minotaurs and I think the addition of the dark elves compliment the Dungeon ethos which I think is "beautiful but deadly". If you want ugly go to Inferno!

The black dragon started this off. It is an epically cool, beautiful unit that has some killer potential from the moment you release it onto the battlefield. In my view, the Black Dragon is no different to the Dark Elf Blood Fury. Both are superior when it comes to looks, however both hold the killing edge on their competitors.

Look at this way, if you were a male Iguana and saw a female Black Dragon floating around in the sky you would think she was the porn-star of the reptile world.

As for the clothing choice itself you guys have been discussing, this is fantasy...in a lot of fantasy dark elves scream seduction and back-stabbery. If you want an explanation for why they can wear high heels and run like banshees on the high wind, then answer me why a giant fire breathing lizard or fully grown man can fly with wings that could barely support a fruit bat.

If "I had" to explain it I would say:

1. Elves are naturally as light as feathers, heels and armour don't make much of an impact.

2. They have really really strong foot muscles and can bear the tremendous pressure exerted on their heels.

3. I dunno, as kids maybe they tighten a screw around their heels to make them feel no pain later on.

4. Maybe heels are better for kicking your average peasant in the face with.

Do we really care? They look sexy, their trained killers and in combination with the rest of the dungeon arsenal they win me lots of battles! lol


Blood Furies, Assassins and Matriarchs FTW!


Too many creatures in H6 you have no clue what it is. This is HOMM I don't want original creatures you dreamed up out of your head, UbiHole.


I also agree with this to some extent, but new creatures not realised in the Might and Magic universe could be good that would not look out of place. I dunno, maybe a giant walrus or golden minoton might be good. Sorry, Eye of Tiger coming to mind.

COME ON! Replace the golem with a Minoton! That would be cool!


http://www.monstercommute.com/wp-conten ... inoton.jpg

User avatar
Slayer of Cliffracers
Hunter
Hunter
Posts: 549
Joined: 11 Jul 2006
Location: Gateshead, England.

Postby Slayer of Cliffracers » Jun 6 2011, 13:56

BloodFuryFan wrote:Hey, to begin I'm a fan of Dungeon in H3 and H5. Both for the same reason...I like the look of them. They have the dragons, the minotaurs and I think the addition of the dark elves compliment the Dungeon ethos which I think is "beautiful but deadly". If you want ugly go to Inferno!


I have nothing against the addition of dark elves nor with them "being beautiful but deadly". It's just the ridiculously impractical nature of the clothing renders them less "beautiful but deadly" and more "beautiful and silly". It's how they depicted that is problematic, they simply do not wear clothing that is remotely practical for their appointed role and the ultimate effect makes them look silly.

BloodFuryFan wrote:The black dragon started this off. It is an epically cool, beautiful unit that has some killer potential from the moment you release it onto the battlefield. In my view, the Black Dragon is no different to the Dark Elf Blood Fury. Both are superior when it comes to looks, however both hold the killing edge on their competitors.

Look at this way, if you were a male Iguana and saw a female Black Dragon floating around in the sky you would think she was the porn-star of the reptile world.


The Black Dragon is in no way comparable to the blood fury. The black dragon is a creature whose form is utterly practical, it has wings and legs which appear functional. Nothing to inhibit it's sheer deadlyness (and that creature would be deadly even without the ability to breathe fire).

The Blood Furies and Matriarchs don't look like anything other than porn-stars pretending to be something deadly and failing rather badly. They are simply the worst models (not concepts) ever made in any Heroes game yet.

This is tantamount to the poorly disguised misogyny of Ubisoft, it's doesn't matter if a woman is actually able to do anything as long as she's sexy; and sexy means actually seeming able to do anything but also somehow the deadliest model in the game; computer games force us to reconcile the impossible contradiction that our vision of women creates when applied to a wargame.

BloodFuryFan wrote:As for the clothing choice itself you guys have been discussing, this is fantasy...in a lot of fantasy dark elves scream seduction and back-stabbery. If you want an explanation for why they can wear high heels and run like banshees on the high wind, then answer me why a giant fire breathing lizard or fully grown man can fly with wings that could barely support a fruit bat.


Yes Warhammer did it first with the witch elves but then even the witch elves wear reasonably practical clothing (by comparison). At least they wear normal boots they could actually run in. And only a few models wear clothing/armour that would actually hurt the wearer if they tried to go at any kind of speed.

Ubisoft took a bad development and then made it worse. And when you refer to wings that could barely support a fruit bat have you actually ever looked at the wings of angels or black dragons? They are equal or greater to the height and width of the creatures bodies, which if I remember is what you need to have functional wings.

BloodFuryFan wrote:1. Elves are naturally as light as feathers, heels and armour don't make much of an impact.


Heels is not an impediment due merely to their weight and the armour they wear is hardely substantial enough to make much of a weight effect.

BloodFuryFan wrote:2. They have really really strong foot muscles and can bear the tremendous pressure exerted on their heels.


It's not the muscles that have to bear the pressure, it's the bones. And again it's not only the pressure that is the problem.

BloodFuryFan wrote:3. I dunno, as kids maybe they tighten a screw around their heels to make them feel no pain later on.


In which case the kids would grow up barely able to walk at best.

BloodFuryFan wrote:4. Maybe heels are better for kicking your average peasant in the face with.


Then add a spike to the end of your shoes. Doesn't cause you any serious impediment unlike high heels.

BloodFuryFan wrote:Do we really care? They look sexy, their trained killers and in combination with the rest of the dungeon arsenal they win me lots of battles! lol


Do you really like high heels that much? Does you version of sexy depend upon wearing high heels and other ridiculously self-harming, uncomfortable and impractical clothing?

I have never said that the blood furies and matriarchs should be ugly, nor even that they must be modestly dressed. What I've said is they should be depicted wearing clothing that is remotely practical, indeed there are number of ways we can make the existing models better while making them at least as sexy as they are the moment.

Blood Fury
1. Remove unnessery and superflous 'armour' that adds less to protection compared to the degree it is a hindrance. Replace with cloth or remove all-together.
2. Remove metal wires, jewelry, amulets and chains altogether or place them on a cloth background. Use tattoos instead if you wish to add detail to bare skin.
3. If the model is to wear any armour at all, remember that armour is worn over clothing and not instead of it. Make sure that it would not inhibit movement. This is crucial because the only armour they presently wear of any real protective value is their leg armour and this is done completely wrongly. There should be a clear and visible distinction between the armour worn on the upper leg, lower leg, knee caps and their boots.

Shadow Matriach
1. Remove all the armour worn by the model, she is a spell-caster/shooter not a melee fighter.
2. The Shadow Matriarch should wear more either clothing than the blood fury because clothing generally designates authority and lack of clothing designates lack of authority by contrast. She should either wear a rather posh-looking dress or wear *even less* than the blood fury if the dark elves are of the opposite opinion (nudity=authority). If they are of this opinion then they should make a big deal of their nakedness, they musn't be 'just naked' but must have lots of tatoos, piercings or jewelry to make their nudity 'special' and not just taking their clothes off.
3. Remove metal wires and chains or place them on a cloth background. However because moving around very fast is not the models primary function they can wear amulets and other jewelry on bare skin.
Working on tracking the locations of Heroes IV battles. Stage 6 of campaign map finished, all initial Heroes IV campaigns mapped.



http://www.celestialheavens.com/forums/ ... hp?t=11973

User avatar
BloodFuryFan
Leprechaun
Leprechaun
Posts: 4
Joined: 05 Jun 2011

Postby BloodFuryFan » Jun 7 2011, 16:40

Nice post, I feel converted to your point of view!

Ok, looking at it from a point of being practical, I agree minor changes must be made to the next edition of dark elves if they are to be included as part of the Dungeon faction (I personally hope they will be included)

Based on your evidence and argument I will agree they should wear practical footwear for battle and remove the spiked heels, it just would not help their speed at all (There speed being the most crucial factor in their success, along with looks)

Overall I have come to the conclusion that Dark Elves should be dressed in a scantilly clad manor based on the heirachy you put forward. (The less clothes, the more powerful)

The Blood Fury should retain the armour that is light and "fit for purpose" and keep the hosiery. Not only does the hosiery provide a base for her minor armour, it also gives her something down there. I agree with your point on tattoos, they are cool on Dark Elves.

Basically this: http://suptg.thisisnotatrueending.com/a ... 158231.jpg

BUT WITH MUCH LESS ARMOUR, she must be fast! and also none of that head crap should be there! Restrictions should be removed!

The Shadow Matriarch should have less covering her legs and have no armour...except maybe some detail on her gauntlets, I find the curved metal spikes on there cool and imagine if someone ran at her with a blade and her magic/whip failed, she would atleast have some defence on her arms to sheild a blade or teeth from her face.

* Nudity=Authority

I see N = A as perfect for the Dark Elves, since all the assassins and male characters who

User avatar
ThunderTitan
Perpetual Poster
Perpetual Poster
Posts: 23266
Joined: 06 Jan 2006
Location: Now/here
Contact:

Postby ThunderTitan » Jun 7 2011, 21:16

BloodFuryFan wrote:1. Elves are naturally as light as feathers, heels and armour don't make much of an impact.



Add steel to a feather... see how light it is...
Disclaimer: May contain sarcasm!

I have never faked a sarcasm in my entire life. - ???
"With ABC deleting dynamite gags from cartoons, do you find that your children are using explosives less frequently?" — Mark LoPresti

Alt-0128: €


Image

User avatar
Slayer of Cliffracers
Hunter
Hunter
Posts: 549
Joined: 11 Jul 2006
Location: Gateshead, England.

Postby Slayer of Cliffracers » Jun 8 2011, 14:12

BloodFuryFan wrote:Ok, looking at it from a point of being practical, I agree minor changes must be made to the next edition of dark elves if they are to be included as part of the Dungeon faction (I personally hope they will be included)

Based on your evidence and argument I will agree they should wear practical footwear for battle and remove the spiked heels, it just would not help their speed at all (There speed being the most crucial factor in their success, along with looks)


Footwear is a start but plenty of other changes needed to the model as well. Basically it takes more than shoes to be able to run fast in a certain type of gear.

Given that Blood Furies manage to do just as well against the likes of earth elementals as against male dark elves I doubt that looks is really a key factor in their arsenal. :) :)

BloodFuryFan wrote:Overall I have come to the conclusion that Dark Elves should be dressed in a scantilly clad manor based on the heirachy you put forward. (The less clothes, the more powerful)


That heirachy isn't really consistantly applied though. The blood fury (of higher status) is far better dressed than the blood maiden (i.e. one wouldn't actually get a close up look at her private parts if the model actually had any :devious: :devious: ). The shadow matriarch is dressed to the same amount as the matriarch.

BloodFuryFan wrote:The Blood Fury should retain the armour that is light and "fit for purpose" and keep the hosiery. Not only does the hosiery provide a base for her minor armour, it also gives her something down there. I agree with your point on tattoos, they are cool on Dark Elves.


The only armour the blood fury should have *is* their leg-armour (and the hosiery that it's worn on). The reason is that for a unit like that leg armour is actually the only form of armour that there is any point in wearing, because if you're injured in the legs then you movement is impaired and thus you cannot keep up with your sisters or fight (you are dead basically). All other armour though is just extra encumberance that just slows you down.

The reason we have tatoos is that metal jewelry is a hazard when running very fast and we need something to add detail to all that naked skin instead.

BloodFuryFan wrote:Basically this: http://suptg.thisisnotatrueending.com/a ... 158231.jpg

BUT WITH MUCH LESS ARMOUR, she must be fast! and also none of that head crap should be there! Restrictions should be removed!


I'm not sure why you chose this character given that she would actually be incapable of moving given how self-destructive and restrictive her clothing actually is. One does not wear sharp metal against one's flesh, especially not sharp metal.

While she does have a seperate kneecap segmant on her leg armour (otherwise you can't run basically) there is no real seperation between her leg armour and her shoes, similar to how it is on the blood fury.

There also needs to be a soft-backing to the leg-armour which has to be visible at the back and side of the legs and in clear sections (think about baseball players leg armour). This allows them to move quickly but also protects their legs.

The shoes of the blood maiden should not be armoured. This is because there is little real risk that anyone would actually manage to land a blow on her shoes anyway compared to the loss of mobility. What she should have however is spikes running forward in a diagonal direction from the top of her shoes. This is because what is scared of is being stepped on by her opponants, the diagonal direction is important as it allows her to easily remove the spikes *from* the feet of her opponants.

Maybe I should draw the four female dark elf units?

BloodFuryFan wrote:The Shadow Matriarch should have less covering her legs and have no armour...except maybe some detail on her gauntlets, I find the curved metal spikes on there cool and imagine if someone ran at her with a blade and her magic/whip failed, she would atleast have some defence on her arms to sheild a blade or teeth from her face.

* Nudity=Authority

I see N = A as perfect for the Dark Elves, since all the assassins and male characters who


Except that Ashan dark elves don't come across as exactly a sexist bunch. There's nothing exactly low-status neccesarily about the likes of grim raiders or even assasins. Or men in general given how many male warlocks there are and that male dark elf characters (like Raelag) are always treated with a lot of respect and given authority by others.

Nobody seems to think it improper that Raelag is clan-lord (they don't use the term clan-lady). The only sense to which men are the low-status lot is in regard to religion, you have a all-female priesthood that technically holds supreme power, but to all intents and purposes is happy to delagate that power to often male clanlords who do most of the actual ruling.

Children are apparantly raised at the Temple rather than by their mothers, but I doubt it's the shadow matriarchs that actually spend most of their time telling bed-time stories to the children or for that matter suckling them. So it is fairly evident we have a fair number of low-status women looking after everyone's children 'for' the shadow matriarchs.

So it's more a point that we have a religious matriarchy ruling over everyone else; male and female alike and quite happy to elevate certain males to effective de-facto power as clan-lords over 'their' low-ranking sisters.

I shall take it that the dark elves have a complicated relationship to nudity. In the town as depicted in the game, they appear to have made a centrally located and massive completely naked female statue; we shall assume that this statue is depicting Malassa in a human form.

Nudity then could be seen as reflecting Malassa, so the less clothing a woman wears then the closer she is to Malassa. But if a woman goes around naked she is effectively claiming that she *is* Malassa's personal representative on earth.

So the matriarchs would then reserve the right to wear very little to reflect their relative closeness to Malassa (and thus superior position).

With the men however it's more simple. The matriarchs write the rules as to how much clothing it is acceptable (or perhaps legal) for a dark elf of a particular station to wear.

The matriarchs aren't bothered about female nudity except that they see it as 'revealing Malassa' which only they are allowed to do (but only so much). They are bothered about male nudity for more usual reasons, they don't want to be too easily distracted from their duties to Malassa by hot male dark elves trying to seduce them. If you look at the default warlock (who is male) you'll see that they are even wearing face-masks.

The highest status male dark elves thus wear as much clothing as the lowest status (the scouts) because male nudity is simply considered obscene rather than a sign of status either way.
Working on tracking the locations of Heroes IV battles. Stage 6 of campaign map finished, all initial Heroes IV campaigns mapped.



http://www.celestialheavens.com/forums/ ... hp?t=11973

User avatar
Mlai
Scout
Scout
Posts: 152
Joined: 08 Dec 2007

Postby Mlai » Jun 8 2011, 16:08

Haha, interesting DE social/religious theories there, Slayer. I like them!

So basically the males wear burqas, while females exalt the nude female form the same way the Greeks exalted the nude male form.

I also agree that the DE females could use some changes to their dress/armour without losing their seductive theme.

User avatar
ThunderTitan
Perpetual Poster
Perpetual Poster
Posts: 23266
Joined: 06 Jan 2006
Location: Now/here
Contact:

Postby ThunderTitan » Jun 8 2011, 16:17

Well that does make more sense then what we do IRL... i mean men are pretty ugly, and women pretty, so why not cover the disgusting and show the prettiness...
Disclaimer: May contain sarcasm!

I have never faked a sarcasm in my entire life. - ???
"With ABC deleting dynamite gags from cartoons, do you find that your children are using explosives less frequently?" — Mark LoPresti

Alt-0128: €


Image

User avatar
Mlai
Scout
Scout
Posts: 152
Joined: 08 Dec 2007

Postby Mlai » Jun 9 2011, 2:30

Men can be ideal, whatever type of ideal you may prefer:
Image Image

User avatar
ThunderTitan
Perpetual Poster
Perpetual Poster
Posts: 23266
Joined: 06 Jan 2006
Location: Now/here
Contact:

Postby ThunderTitan » Jun 9 2011, 6:19

Women just have awful tastes, if they didn't they'd all be lesbians...

And steroid-head and sleepy-face are great examples of that actually...
Disclaimer: May contain sarcasm!

I have never faked a sarcasm in my entire life. - ???
"With ABC deleting dynamite gags from cartoons, do you find that your children are using explosives less frequently?" — Mark LoPresti

Alt-0128: €


Image


Return to “Heroes V-VI”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 15 guests