Deck skirting ideas

Steam Deck

2021.07.15 18:56 Successful-Wasabi704 Steam Deck

Dollar-for-dollar, the best ally money could buy.

2019.10.21 05:05 Madmaan PioneerMTG

The Pioneer Format of Magic: the Gathering. From Return to Ravnica Forwards.

2011.09.13 03:51 ultilink Magic The Gathering Deckbuilding

A subreddit created for the discussion of Magic the Gathering decks, ideas, card combos, and strategies.

2023.06.07 13:33 Dano_44 Modern Warfare 2 Remastered on Steam Deck? (DODI Release)

I can not get the DODI release of MW2 Remastered to start up on Steam Deck.
(This is the Remastered Version of Modern Warfare 2, not the OG and not the newly released Modern Warfare II).
Has anyone done this? I have tried various Proton versions including the latest GE fork and have added the Visual C+ Fixes, to no avail. I get a splash screen asking if I want to start in Safe Mode, but that's it.
Any ideas would be appreciated, thanks!
submitted by Dano_44 to PiratedGames [link] [comments]

2023.06.07 13:32 winterwalkerland Work issues

I have an off feeling lately after working for months with my immediate boss. I cant help but feel that my ideas and work arent properly recognized.
First, my boss took an idea i said from a casual conversation in the office and my boss used that idea as the main topic/message of our campaign. I was never credited for the idea I contributed and my boss also said that the campaign was her legacy.
Second, after finishing the deck on the campaign, i was about to send it to my boss’ superior for review, but told me that she will send it instead. There was a positive feedback on the deck but for my boss only. I understand that my boss provided insights on the structure and aesthetics of the deck, but I was never credited by her boss for the dirty work I did. My boss also never mentioned my name as a contributor.
Third, I feel that my boss is minimizing my contributions by saying she can do some of my tasks faster. But when she does the task herself she also utilized the same amount of time i used.
I just feel awful rn and appreciate suggestions how to deal.
submitted by winterwalkerland to OffMyChestPH [link] [comments]

2023.06.07 13:07 Eravar1 An argument for printing more bad cards

Bad cards in trading card games have annoyed me for years. As a kid, there was nothing more irritating than saving 12 bucks for 3 packs, pulling 50 cent rares out of all of them, and going home disappointed. I read the justifications and the columns and forums and heard what other players at my LGS said in support of bad cards, of course, but I never really understood any of it until I played LoR.

I believe that LoR is actually worse off for the lack of substandard cards, and if you bear with me for a bit, I'll explain why. I understand that it's a little late to have discussions about their design philosophy, given how many sets they've already released and the players that will expect newer sets to be largely similar, but I hope some discourse about it may put certain cards in LoR into new perspective for players here.

Why do you want to pull bad cards?

Well, first of all, I don't want to pull weaker cards. That's the tradeoff that's made in exchange for all the benefits that bad cards bring to the table. At the same time, I believe that LoR is better able to support the addition of mediocre cards as compared to other games, on account of the monetization model. Cards, especially at the common and rare level, are plentiful in this game, and you get the bulk of the cards you need through crafting. Between how easy it is to complete your collection, and the reduced significance of pulls in this game, it's not a huge loss if your weekly vault has 10 more unplayable uncommons.


Ever since Expeditions got silently erased from the game, some players (myself included) have been waiting (on distilled copium) for a new limited format to be introduced to this game. However, I'll be the first to admit that Expeditions wasn't always the most fun, and I think a big factor for that is the card pool.
For the three of us unfamiliar with Expeditions, it was a sort of draft format that used to be in the game. Cards were split into "buckets" under a theme, and you were given 3 options 15 times to draft a deck.
The thing is, there's basically no way to do it wrong. The majority of the cards are playable in some way, and synergy is even explicitly offered to you. In fact, a challenge that my friends and I used to do was to just click on the center bucket repeatedly until we got a full deck, and we would still easily get 7 win runs.
Diversifying the power level of cards can introduce more choices into a hypothetical limited format, rewarding player skill, and increasing the card pool stops all the decks from feeling same-ish. Seriously, if anybody remembers Expeditions, sometimes it feels like you're just going through the motions to determine the number of each card you have in your deck. Wasn't really engaging for more than a week or two.

Effect Redundancy

In a similar vein, having effect redundancy in weaker cards is nice. Let's take a look at Cunning Kitten - interesting effect, comes with an upside with a hoop to jump through, looks like the payoff might almost justify the setup. Almost. Because the fact of the matter is, while Iterative Improvement is a good card, and slamming 5/5s that replace themselves is good value for cost, they're still just 2 mana 5/5s coming out on like turn 6 on average. The effect and idea is interesting, but it's not really worth building around.
Thought experiment. Let's say we introduce a 4 mana 3/4 and a 6 mana 5/6 with similar effects. And let's look at the setup - Iterative Improvement is a great card, maybe even too great. Bump up the cost to 3, remove the +1/+1 effect, you've got yourself a strictly worse ItIm. A bad card by most measures - yet can you justify playing a worse ItIm just to have a 5th and 6th copy in a deck that really wants the copy effect?
Having cards that can ask that kind of question opens whole new avenues to deckbuilding in this game, especially for the jank player that just really, really wants to see 3 different Shark Chariot effects pop off on turn 7.

Absolute Nonsense and Epic Cards

Sometimes, different cards appeal to different players. I make no secret of the fact that I'm an extremely competitive player, and I evaluate all cards presented to me on that scale. But there are other sides to this game too - back when Ryze was first announced (and before he started tanking all the vitriol from the community), we had jank players working day in and day out in the hopes of bumping his winrate above 29% and actually seeing that victory animation maybe half the time. Howling Abyss, Priestess of Desert Light and Secret Keeper might not be the best idea to ever slam on a board, but we have players that live for it anyways. And don't even get me started on Heart of the Fluft, I swear it's basically a mini-cult at this point.
Having more complete jank can help more casual players feel like there's more to the game than loading up Seraphine Ezreal and making value trades for 20 turns. In fact, we have some of those cards in the game already, they just tend to be gated at Epic cards. And can I just say, Epic cards were absolutely the most miserable part of finishing my collection? We get almost none of them! The vast majority of my green shards went towards crafting them, and we're hiding an entire subsection of cards behind that 3600 (1200*3) shard buy-in?
A nice example I like to point to is the famous (or infamous) Magic card One with Nothing. In fact, there's a very nice YouTube video discussing exactly why it's such an amazing terrible card. For 1 mana, you have the privilege of discarding your hand - it's an effect that seems completely idiotic at first glance, but the synergies it offers are unbelievably tempting. It's unmatched for what it does, even if what it does is speedrun your game loss.
I, for one, would be happier with more broad, "powerful" effects of that category, and less "gain a keyword" or "give me +1/+1" effects.

Power Level in a Vacuum and Understanding Cards

The power level of a card is always relative to the other options available, and it cannot exist in a vacuum. Radiant Strike, for example, is a completely unplayable card - 1 mana for +1/+1, it's completely outclassed by Catch!. In a similar vein, Elixir of Iron is a strong combat trick in standard, but that's because Troll Chant is off the table. Yet our evaluation of card strength is almost completely flat - with so few duplicate effects at similar costs, the nearest example I can point to for Radiant Strike and Catch! is Battlefield Prowess.
Yet it's in this comparison that we understand exactly why Battlefield Prowess is such a terrible card. Grant is stronger than Give, after all, so why is Battlefield Prowess worse than Radiant Strike?
In asking this question, we understand the value of hidden information, of flexibility, of priority and the cost of an action. We understand the innate cost of a card - both the opportunity cost in deck building, and the opportunity cost of being able to draw literally anything other than Battlefield Prowess.
In my opinion, LoR has precious few opportunities for players to learn basic concepts such as these, because no questions ever need be asked. In my preparation for the Runeterra Open, I've had the opportunity to speak to other players about their prep work and opinions on the metagame. Through these talks, I've realised that some players that made it to Masters lack the knowledge of basic concepts like what I just pointed out with Battlefield Prowess.
Somewhat counterintuitively, including bad cards might help new players improve at the game far faster.

Of course, these are just my thoughts and opinions. Do let me know what you guys think, we can try and get a discussion going!
submitted by Eravar1 to LegendsOfRuneterra [link] [comments]

2023.06.07 13:02 L0tusL3afs Net budget decks less value than precon but still worth it?

Dear EDH Community,
I started playing EDH since 5 months and began with a lorehold legacies precon which I slowly upgraded over the weeks. Now I'm searching for a new deck to switch things up and I love the idea of budget net decks because my play group doesn't own high power decks.
I found some commander quarters budget decks I loved (f.e. Yarok budget or Teysa) and tried to buy them on cardmarket. But instead of the suggested $25 price it got up to $50 dollars ($35 Cards / $15 Shipping).
So I get a $50 deck with a cardvalue about $35 and precons nowadays have a much higher cardvalue (for example my osgir precon with $40 market price and cardvalue about $110). Is it even worth it to buy net budget decks if the price is as high as a precon but the value is much lower?
Tl;dr: is it worth to buy a net budget deck if the price is the same like a precon but the cardvalue much lower? And can they even compete with higher costed decks?
Thanks in advance!
submitted by L0tusL3afs to EDH [link] [comments]

2023.06.07 13:01 Zwiebeloger Want to start with the NISEI - starterdecks and also, how many sleeves and what colors?

I bought the main starter box for the original netrunner but never played it. Now I think about downloading and printing the NISEI starterset. For that I wonder if there are some good starterdecks to get some good examples for runners and corp playstyles I can print out to get some decks stored. Also I want to go to my FLGS today and wonder how many sleeves I will need and if it is a good idea to use another color for the corpo and the netrunner decks ... I think this would be a good idea since the print and play comes without background image ...
Also I donwloaded the german version of the base print and play. My friend doesn't speak english, so we go to the german files ... What else would you recommend for the start?
Edit: also is there a deckbuilding site like netrunnerdb with the NISEI cards?
submitted by Zwiebeloger to Netrunner [link] [comments]

2023.06.07 12:36 derp-vader2 Decking over patio surrounded by 3 walls

Decking with walls on 3 sides - Do I need posts?
I'm planning on building a substructure for composite decking and I'm struggling to find advice that fits my scenario. It will be slightly raised as my house is on a slight hill. The space is an old concrete patio, surrounded by: the house on one side, a small extension, a garden wall and then the 4th side leads down the hill to the rest of the garden. Due to the concrete patio underneath, digging holes for posts would be a pretty big job, so my current plan is to use wall plates to hang the decking. I'd put one plate on the house with joists hangers and joists running towards the garden. These joists would then be supported by two joists running perpendicular underneath at the far end, also hung from wall plates. The space is probably only 2m x 2m.
Does this sound like a sensible idea? I guess I'm only concerned about the expansion of the joists that are running between the extension and the garden wall. Can't find much online about building a raised deck in a space surrounded by 3 walls...
Appreciate any advice!
submitted by derp-vader2 to Decks [link] [comments]

2023.06.07 12:14 TheRev1982 PPSSPP Emulation Help...

Hello all,
I class myself as fairly tech savvy and have set up lots of emulators with the Steam Deck however I have having problems with PPSSPP.
I cannot get games to play without huge slowdown spikes. Wipeout Pulse/Pure are the main culprits. I have tried the following:-
Emudeck PPSSPP
Standalone PPSSPP
Different backends (Vulkan/OpenGL)
SMT On/Off
Limiting the PSP clock speed within PPSSPP.

I just cannot get the games to run smoothly yet I have watched others gameplay on Youtube who have no issues at all.
Does anyone have any ideas what I may be doing wrong?
Thank you.
submitted by TheRev1982 to SteamDeck [link] [comments]

2023.06.07 11:56 Olfasonsonk How to get back into paper Magic?

Hello, me and my friend used to play a little Magic in high school, more than a decade ago. I also dabbled in Arena for a little bit, so we are familiar with the game rules and have some very basic deck building knowledge
We are both big fans of LOTR and decided we want to try it out. We currently have 0 MTG cards.
What's the best value approach to this? Buying starter packs with prebuilt decks and just go with that? I feel like playing the same basic decks would get stale it worth complimenting starter pack with a few boosters? Or would the amount of boosters needed to do anything meaningful just be too much? Can we stick just with LOTR expansions or is it a good idea to mix in some Core Set boosters or other expansions?
Maybe it's better to just omit the starter packs and just go with boosters and play some kind of a sealed format? Or are there any other options?
And what about commander? We never played that format and are just aware of it's basic rules. Is going that route a better idea for fun longevity per $ spent, and how expensive is building a commander deck versus options I proposed above?
Thanks and sorry if this is a common kind of question.
submitted by Olfasonsonk to mtg [link] [comments]

2023.06.07 11:46 dragonkingabc123 New player here

I'm fairly new to playing magic. I get most of the mechanics. And used to play yugioh a lot. I even had a single black white deck in high school. But I recently downloaded this game and have no idea where to even BEGIN to build my own deck thus far I've been playing with the decks that they give you pre-made. My favorite so far is the black white starter deck you get from the starter deck challenge. I was told to be careful not to waste my first deck. I've thought about using one of my wild cards to add. one of the Kaya planeswalkers to that black white Samarai deck. I was just wondering if anyone has any tips or recommendations on where to begin looking for what I should build a deck around or how to find cards that will have synergy. Etc etc
Edit: Just looked into Kaya and it says that she can't be played in current standard, what does that mean?
submitted by dragonkingabc123 to MagicArena [link] [comments]

2023.06.07 11:28 derp-vader2 Decking with walls on 3 sides - Do I need posts?

I'm planning on building a substructure for composite decking and I'm struggling to find advice that fits my scenario. It will be slightly raised as my house is on a slight hill. The space is an old concrete patio, surrounded by: the house on one side, a small extension, a garden wall and then the 4th side leads down the hill to the rest of the garden. Due to the concrete patio underneath, digging holes for posts would be a pretty big job, so my current plan is to use wall plates to hang the decking. I'd put one plate on the house with joists hangers and joists running towards the garden. These joists would then be supported by two joists running perpendicular underneath at the far end, also hung from wall plates. The space is probably only 2m x 2m.
Does this sound like a sensible idea? I guess I'm only concerned about the expansion of the joists that are running between the extension and the garden wall. Can't find much online about building a raised deck in a space surrounded by 3 walls...
Appreciate any advice!
submitted by derp-vader2 to DIYUK [link] [comments]

2023.06.07 11:23 The_Atlas_Broadcast Flex slots for Flicker

I'm currently brewing a lot of variations on UW Flicker, with a more tempo-control bent than Familiars combo. The intended win condition is to leverage Monarchy/Initiative and then Stonehorn lock myself into a win.
Firstly, is this an objectively worse idea than playing Familiars? My first instinct is "yes, because if it were better, people would be playing it instead" -- but I'm seeing it as more similar to Orzhov Ephemerate than a traditional combo deck.
Secondly, I'm weighing up a lot of flex-slot options to play as 2-of creatures, allowing me to round out a toolbox playstyle. Current contenders include:
Does anyone have suggestions for other inclusions here? I'm already running a "standard" package of Archaeomancer, Stonehorn, etc.
submitted by The_Atlas_Broadcast to Pauper [link] [comments]

2023.06.07 11:06 Mindless_Vehicle_651 Vintage hi-fi art installation with 500+ working pieces

Vintage hi-fi art installation with 500+ working pieces
Hi guys,
recently I came across a collector of vintage hi-fi and old TV's (see post here: and now I wanted to pick your brains with the following idea.
On discussions with a friend of mine who is an art directovideographer he suggested I explored the idea of the "Babel Tower" by Cildo Meireles on show at Tate Modern in London.
I think it is an amazing idea and we could easily put this forward to a Portuguese Gallery and make the owner proud (collector is Portuguese and nearing 70, with some health issues...).
What do you think it would be the biggest obstacles?
The equipment wouldn't be displayed as Cildo's tower but using the collectors metal shelving displays, so that we already have, we would just need to paint them and maybe solder a couple of levels on to the top... if you look at the image of the green metal storage, there are 5 rows, we could make it 7 or 8 for a more dramatic height? He has another 5 or 6 full of gear just like this one.
We would like the equipment to be ON all the time (for the duration of a potential exhibition, which could be 8 hours one every day...).
Cildo's Babel is on all the time and all the radios make sound, I wonder how we could make a selection of tape decks or reel-to-reel work on command/remote?
Otherwise it could be just the tuners playing just like Cildo's.
Thanks for your opinions!
submitted by Mindless_Vehicle_651 to vintageaudio [link] [comments]

2023.06.07 10:02 cz75gh What is your ideal game length for maximum enjoyment?

As per the title, the idea is to gauge general sentiment towards what you think how long games should last to be interesting and engaging. Since aggro decks usually close the game around Turn 5-6 I didn't think it necessary to add a Turn 5 or below option, but if that's your opinion, make sure to comment below and I will update this post accordingly.
View Poll
submitted by cz75gh to Shadowverse [link] [comments]

2023.06.07 09:23 namretsbol Natural monuments

Natural monuments
Made this rainbow monuments deck. It's fun to play but somewhat underpowered. Any ideas how to fix it?
submitted by namretsbol to cuecardgameAvid [link] [comments]

2023.06.07 09:21 Harry_is_white_hot I'm not buying the whole "We have no data on crash retrievals" narrative being pushed by Gough et. al. and the Pentagon. There is an enormous amount of declassified and sanitized information available in DoD and DoE holdings, including organization names, addresses, and telephone numbers.

I'm not buying the whole

Don't know where to look
There is a lot of scientific data holdings from EG&G, Los Alamos and Lawrence Livermore National Laboratories regarding Bluegill Triple Prime shootdown, crash and retrieval. These excerpts of transcripts from the Nevada Test Site Oral History archives by former EG&G staff involved in the Operation Fishbowl tests describe the scientific instruments used in the Bluegill Triple Prime shot, the KC-135 platforms they operated from and how they were calibrated. (Interviewer questions in italics).
Interview with Peter Henry Zavattaro (EG&G) May 31, 2005
"Shortly after I got started in this, we got involved with Los Alamos [National Laboratory] oratory] on a project called—well, we were building a system called a Z system, and this was designed to—this was a pre-Vela [Uniform] activity and it was designed to look at air fluorescence of a nuclear burst out of space, out in the outer atmosphere. The X-rays would impinge on the atmosphere and light it up at certain precise wavelengths. So we built this system to look at that. And it was deployed around the world. (pg 2)
Dominic was the Pacific test program and, was kind of a period where we tested, I guess it was over 100 tests, every day almost. And I was supporting a branch of the Air Force at the time. And we had a KC-135 that was filled with instrumentation, cameras, antennas. We looked at electromagnetic pulses and photographed things. And we flew on the airplane. Whenever there was a test, we would fly down to Christmas Island or wherever the test was, collect data, and fly back. Lived in Oahu, so we worked out of Hickam Air Force Base [Hawaii] for months and months.
In July of ‘62, I think it was ‘62, [07/09/1962] we started the high-altitude series, which the first test was Starfish. Starfish was a large-yield device, 400 miles up or something. It’s in the book someplace. [DOE/NV—209 Rev 15 December 2000]
But anyway that lit up the whole sky. You could see that the sky turned green from Hawaii to Samoa. It was just spectacular. I had a copy of Life Magazine that had that on the cover and I can’t find it.
It would be in ‘62; ‘62 issue of Life. But after that particular test, there was concerns about what the Russians were doing, and the plane that I was supporting went to Russia. I stayed in Hawaii and took a trailer of equipment, and the government rented a freighter, a Portuguese freighter called Private Frank J. Petracka. My trailer was strapped to one of the holds on this freighter and we went down to Johnson Island, and I spent forty-six days anchored off Johnson Island looking at the rest of the high-altitude series plus some atmospheric shots. The shots down there, the famous one was Bluegill because it took them three tries to actually get that successfully fired. The first one blew up on the pad. The second one blew up shortly after launch, so there were parts of rocket motors and things falling down. And the third test was successful. (pg. 4)
(Zavattaro is mistaken here - it was the 4th test of the Bluegill device that was successful).
But after Dominic was over, I became more involved with Los Alamos. The first thing that happened after the test series was over was coming up with a readiness program for resuming testing in the Pacific, and that was called the Future Off-Continent Program, FOC. And I worked on that until the program was cancelled. Basically, it was a clause in one of the safeguards, Safeguard C, that said we had to be prepared to promptly resume atmospheric testing in the Pacific. So they came up with a concept for that exercise. The concept was that to so that to solve some of the logistics problems of the past test series—because weather in the Pacific is really spotty. You never know where you can see things. So the concept was they would have a flying experiment. They would have the drop plane fly and they would have an array of airplanes follow it and they would find some nice clear place in the Pacific and fire the test. So this was the concept, and to support that, each of the labs had designed an aircraft for experimentation. Sandia had their own, [Lawrence] Livermore [National Laboratory] had their own, and Los Alamos had their own. So they modified these three aircraft, which were called NC-135s, which were refuelable KC-135s, at Fort Worth [Texas]. General Dynamics modified the planes. And I supported—we would go down and we designed the camera mounts and a lot of the stuff that went on the air—a lot of the supporting infrastructure, cameras and things, that went on the airplanes. And then after they completed them, they moved them to Kirtland Air Force Base [New Mexico]; Holmes and Narver designed an array of pad, three pads, for the aircraft, and they were stationed down there. And we had an array of trailers and we staffed it with people from Boston. The first test of this system was called Crosscheck, and we had an experiment. We went out to the Pacific and checked out with a flare and cameras and the whole nine yards to see if everything worked. (pg 5)
What was going on in Boston, supporting Los Alamos, was looking at the high altitude data. We were digitizing all the thousands of frames of data that we had from the highaltitude tests with very sophisticated digitizing equipment at the time. And the lab felt that the arrangement was too costly to have this interface, so they wanted us to move our resources that supported them to Los Alamos, and that’s when we basically opened the office there. I moved to Los Alamos in ’70 to set up an engineering department; and I moved about, I think it was thirteen or fourteen people that worked for me from Boston to Los Alamos."
Now, which division or group were you supporting at Los Alamos?
This was J-10.
J-10 was the field division, the real test division, and at that time that was the biggest, the key group. It was headed up by a guy named Herman Hoerlin who was a quite famous scientist from Germany, and he was a very interesting guy. (pg 9)
And who was the head of J-Division then?
It went through a few people. Herman Hoerlin, after Herman left, God, I can’t— A whole bunch of people. Don [Donald M.] Kerr was there for a while. Hard to remember all these things. It’s been so many years. (pg.11).

Interview with James Arnold Hodges (EG&G) January 17 2005
"Well, not originally. Actually, I went into that pretty quick, too, into the taking pictures. I worked with Harry Smith who had some cameras called, oh, well, what were those called? We were up at Building 400 and we had rotor cameras. They had a rotor in them that turned 4,000 rps [rotations per second] and they would—oh, streak cameras, that’s what they were called. When the bomb went off, they made a streak with time and that showed you, since you knew what the speed of the rotor was and how long the film was, it showed you how big the fireball got. They used that for measurements on the yield, yield measurements. And I did that quite a while. When I wasn’t doing the streak camera measurements, I was working in the office in the other photo camera stations. We had photo stations everywhere sitting out there with cameras in them, all types of cameras, all speeds from Rapatronic cameras that took a picture in four billionths of a second to so-called cloud cameras that took a picture every few seconds and traced the cloud as it was going up. (pg. 4)
Some of the pictures that we took are still classified. One of them was taken by a Rapatronic camera. I had a streak camera with a sixteen-foot telescope on it and it looked right into the cab of the tower and you could see the case of the bomb. We have a picture of a crack appearing in the case as it started to blow up. That picture’s still classified. And then I took one at Johnston Island from the deck of the Boxer, that’s an old aircraft carrier with an old wood deck, it was an old one. And they classified the picture because it was some clouds which had, of course, the aerial bomb went off way up in the atmosphere and there was a cloud shaped like an angel, so they said, Oh, we don’t dare publish that picture. People will say we’re punching a hole in the sky and all the air’s going to run out and everything else. And so they classified that picture, and as far as I know, it’s still classified. I don’t think it was ever released. (pg.6)
I was there for the so-called high altitude sun tests. We took pictures from a high altitude airplane.
So you took pictures from the plane.
Yes. Of the sun. I don’t remember just why.
And did you take those, or again did you have equipment set up to do that?
We had equipment set up to do it. I shot some stills from Johnston Island, from the deck of the carrier, I shot some of those stills. That’s in fact the one where the angel was, I shot that one. And like I say, that one’s hid somewhere far, far down in the—
So none of your stuff ever went out to the media or the press.
This was just all for in-house EG&G?
Yeah. I guess since then they released some of the shots. (pg.25)

Interview with Vernon Henry Jones (EG&G) October 4, 2005
"Right. Now physically what happened with the film? Because I have no idea. The cameras are there. You remove the cameras. How does that work?
Cameras, no. We would remove the film only from all of them. Some of them, you just take the film reel out of them and we had regular film-carrying cases that we would put the film in. Some of them had film magazines on top of them. Some of them were quite large. Like the Fastax camera had a thousand-foot roll of 35-millimeter film on top of it. The Fastax, the name of the camera, it was a real high-speed camera, and it would go through that whole thousand feet of film in one and a half seconds.
No way!
Oh, yes! You should hear that camera when it ran. It was like, stand back!
In what sense?
Noisy! The noise would scare you, hearing that thing wind up the way it did. That camera had a drive motor on the film feed and the take-up spool. That’s how fast that turkey went. So there was probably an average, I don’t know, six to eight cameras in each station. Some were small; some were there for just cloud cover, to see which way the cloud went after the shot. Of course they were real slow-speed cameras. And the others, we had the Mitchell that generally ran at a hundred frames per second. I don’t know offhand what they were really after, but it was one of the cameras, and various other ones in there. We had some high-speed Eastman cameras, slowspeed Triads, and others, I don’t recall their names. (pg.11)
Photo. Setting up field photo. Now there were other people helping me some at times, but for the most part I did the majority of that by myself. A lot of the cameras were mounted on a tripod, small cameras. The camera was called by letters GSAP, which stood for Gunsight Aerial Photography-type camera. It’s a little bitty thing, run on 24 volts, had a fifty-foot roll of 16-millimeter film in them. These were all over the place, taking pictures of all these different things (pg. 52)

Interview with Wayne Albert Violette (EG&G) January 12, 2005
"This was actually done on film. When the bomb would go off, there would be oscilloscope traces recorded and it would record like the alpha growth rate of the bomb. The first few thousandths of a millionth or nanoseconds of the bomb going off is what the critical information was because after that it was all over.
And is that what you guys looked at?
Yes, the first few nanoseconds. That’s where they would get most of their information as far as the effectiveness of the bomb and the efficiency of it, and I’m not sure what the physicists were really looking at, but the alpha growth rate was primarily what we were looking at, right at the very beginning. (pg.10)
I was also sent for two or three weeks to Albuquerque to work on some of the—I think KC-135s, they’re 707s, I believe—was the civilian name for the planes. We went back and we worked on those for putting equipment in them; they were preparing if they went to atmospheric testing again. These had a big window on one side and the equipment was set to where they could take pictures out of it. I had my particular little thing to do, installing certain equipment, so I wasn’t privy to a lot of the details of what they were doing. But that was very interesting, too, to go back there and just be part of it. Sandia built the bombs, and Sandia Labs was back there. (pg.13).
We didn’t process—we came up with negatives. They would look at the negative. It was actually a negative image. It looked like a dark image on a light background, rather than the white image on the dark background. When we would set the equipment up, we would have to get them focused exactly. Very critical on focus and getting the right intensity so they would be the best image possible. We used a lot of Polaroid film doing that. We’d go through boxes and boxes of Polaroid film on the setup of it. The actual photo, though, was then done on an actual negative. So I know Polaroid must’ve made a lot of money off the test site because we used a lot of that, and yellow tape." (pg.15)
Military v Civilian control
It also appears that there were problems within the U.S. Government bureaucracy regarding the military maintaining control over nuclear weapons. This is rectified somehow by the wording in the Atomic Energy Act of 1954, and is explained here by the Defence Special Weapons Agency's Associate Dean Byron L. Ristvet.
Interview with Byron Leo Ristvet, (DSWA) April 17, 2006
"So the British never had that civilian control quandary that we did. And let me just tell you bluntly, when Truman wanted the Atomic Energy Commission created and in civilian control because he didn’t trust the military, guess who was his strongest supporter? George C. Marshall. Leslie Groves. They both testified secretly at the time that they did not want the production of weapons under the services. They wanted the control of special nuclear material, the design, and the production to remain totally a civilian enterprise.
And what was, their reasoning there again? Was it the knowledge?
No, their reasoning was, is they just felt that the military shouldn’t be in control of such awesome power, that the Constitution had basically said civilians should be in power, and so this way it made it very positive. I think had the Goldwater-Nichols Act been in place where the secretary of war and the secretary of the Navy had control over the CNO and over the chief of staff of the Army who at that time reported directly to the president. It would’ve been different. But the Defense Department really didn’t gain the civilian control power until ’85.
Well, you know, there were changes, and the biggest change to the Atomic Energy Act was ’54, when the military was allowed to have custody of special nuclear material. Prior to that it was always under the control of the AEC, and that was because we were going to these sealed designs, and even where the what’s called the capsule ball assembly was not inserted into the high explosive, it was still carried on the weapon; it was integral to the weapon and you couldn’t manually insert it in flight, it was automatically inserted in flight, and as a result, you had to grant the custody—plus the response times were getting less and less and less. You know, the late forties, three days. By the time you were in ’54, you were getting down to three-or-four-hour kind of response times, about half the time it takes to fly over the poles. By the time you were in the late fifties, you had missiles. Of course we didn’t know the missile gap was sort of nonexistent, but in ’58 the response time was getting down to thirty minutes. And by the time you were in the ’66-’67 time frame, when the Russians had their first fleet ballistic submarines, you were now down to fifteen-minute response time. That’s why the Cuban missile crisis in ’62 was such a huge thing, because now you were looking at seven-or-eight-minute response times. (pg.32)
This is of interest here because according to the Majestic Documents, it was claimed by Allen Dulles that these changes to the Atomic Energy Act 1954 allowed him exclude President John F. Kennedy from knowing the details of the MJ-12 program:

Dulles response to President Kennedy
It would be interesting to know if Pharis Williams and Oke Shannon had any involvement with the J-10 group at Los Alamos or have knowledge of the Bluegill Triple Prime anomaly.
For the past five years, Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory (LLNL) weapon physicist Greg Spriggs and a crack team of film experts, archivists and software developers have been on a mission to hunt down, scan, reanalyze and declassify film recordings of the U.S. atmospheric nuclear tests. In this video, Lab science communicator Maren Hunsberger interviews Greg Spriggs to answer some of the most frequently asked questions we've received about the test films since sharing them on YouTube.
Digitization of atmospheric test films ongoing at LLNL:

The Pentagon doesn't seem to be trying too hard to find the data.
submitted by Harry_is_white_hot to UFOB [link] [comments]

2023.06.07 09:13 Cazime-Dez Where should I go to get roms for Yuzu?

I got a Steam Deck a while back and I've been dying to get some Switch games on it to play on Yuzu--but I have no idea where to go to get them. Anyone have any advice? I have a switch myself, but hate the hardware (stick drift and the like), and have no idea how to dump games. I'm pretty sure I also don't have the hardware for it.
submitted by Cazime-Dez to NewYuzuPiracy [link] [comments]

2023.06.07 09:13 Ok_Contribution1461 Recurring dreams of Aquarium I’m not inside of it. I’m admiring from outside.

I am a vivid dreamer but rarely do I get recurrent themes. Lately I’ve been seeing aquariums, usually in the form that I forgot I’ve had several aquariums and didn’t care for them but somehow fish and plants in them have flourished and I have trouble understanding it. Some of the tanks are empty though. Those which are doing well I keep admiring and watching them from outside.
Yesterday I dreamt of a close friend, she was getting married and took me to shopping for the wedding dress. She chose a dress of which it’s skirt was completely made of a real aquarium. Again lots of fish inside.
Any ideas on this theme’s meaning?
submitted by Ok_Contribution1461 to Dreams [link] [comments]

2023.06.07 08:34 EsteveKameStyle Earth Machine Deck ?

Hi I’m searching a possible Earth Machine deck list, I usually play pure Machina but well it does not work that well against(Machina my beloved) 😔 highly tier deck so maybe mixed it a bit could help, if someone has any idea/deck list/advise ^
submitted by EsteveKameStyle to Yugioh101 [link] [comments]

2023.06.07 08:33 Desperate-Fail8444 LU forum Challange: the mermaid

LU forum Challange: the mermaid
This outfit, like most of my outfits was inspired by the idea of an ethereal mermaid (which I find is largely a LU way of building an Outfit?) . The dress, which I'm using as a skirt here, is sheer, and apart called 'the liquid dress', i also got Contacts with subtle Lilac hints to complete this look. The base colour was the idea of 'still water at dawn' :')
submitted by Desperate-Fail8444 to RitaFourEssenceSystem [link] [comments]

2023.06.07 08:25 Shiki_a_planeswalker Midweek Magic - Historic Pauper lists

Hello everyone! I've come up with some lists for this Midweek Magic event, 6 in total, and this time we can show a little more love for the Pauper, a format which is often underappreciated.
We could have Pauper or Artisan in MTGA, but... well, at least we have some people giving some attention to those formats in the Discord. The community of Magic is truly passionate.
I was not able to test all of my lists because I didn't have enough wildcards. So, I've come with an idea: create lists with cards which are important pieces of decks in other formats. Most people playing should have those cards or if you want to dive into other formats it can be interesting have them in your pool.
I will be highlighting those cards using bold and italic letters !
Those cards can be important pieces of combos, cool cards in various strategies or simply very powerful cards. If you have some spare wildcards I would recommend craft them.
And I have to say: I'm not a professional deck builder, I just want to share some of my brews somewhere. Enjoy!

List of decks:
My personal choice. I've built this deck for the Explorer Pauper event some time ago, but now we have a new powerful tool: Faithless Looting. An amazing card in reanimator lists (just to give a single example of many possibilities) and here we use it to enable the madness cards. Voldaren Epicure is a card that I had great expectations, and see it in Boros Convoke and Red Kudoltha (oh, we don't have Kuldoltha Rebirth in Arena... but you should check this deck in Pauper) gives me joy.
"Gleeful Demolition stares in the distance"
I've been trying some different things: Ragged Recluse and Cabal Initiate. Personally I feel that this list is far from being finely tuned, but it have everything I love in Magic: choices! Should I send the Fiery Temper to the face or use it to remove a key creature? I must wait to crack this blood or try to hit the third land drop? We have different angles to approach every situation. With this deck every match will be on the verge of insanity!

Another personal letter of love. When I started playing pauper my first deck was a mono black zombie tribal. Even my favorite magic card of all time was there: Carrion Feeder (bring my boy, or my girl... my rotten corpse to Arena, please). So I wanted to create something similar to this special deck for me.
Sure, we have Gempalm Polluter and Ghoulraiser in Arena... but there are so many cool cards missing. Some cards like Shambling Ghast, Lazotep Reaver and Putrid Goblin can be very effective in sacrifice shells, but the most proeminent card here is (for me, at least) Deadly Dispute. Every deck with sacrifice and black can use it effectively (hello Rakdos Sacrifice). And treasures are simply powerful.

They live, they die, they live again! This deck use synergies of small and dispensable cratures to draw cards, eliminate enemy threats and put a big Bayou Groff in the field.
Shambling Ghast and Deadly Dispute are back, but it's kinda boring bring up the same relevant cards, so I have an honorable mention to the Young Wolf! Yawgmoth, Thran Physician is legal in Historic, and can combo quite easily with our wolf. You just need an aristocrat effect around to win the game on the spot. Oh, you don't have one? You are lucky to have two wolfs in your side, so you can draw cards until you hit it. Who needs Griselbrand?

A classic green philosophy: "go big and trample them"! We have ways to accelerate our curve to reach the top of our mana curve as soon as possible and some card draw to keep the pressure. Interaction? Well... "go big and trample them"! (ok, some fight or damage spells could be useful, fine...)
Jewel Thief was quite good while the meta in standart revolved around The Wandering Emperor, but the highlight of the deck could not be dedicated to another card if not to another fundamental point of a magic game: mana. You need mana to cast spells (generally), so accelerate your mana curve can be decisive to a game. A classic green philosophy: "mana, elf, go" . So we have both Llanowar Elves and Elvish Mystic fullfilling this position. G devotion, Elves, Gruul Stompy, Greasefang... so many decks where the difference when landing your haymaker a turn earlier can be the path to the victory.
(honorable mentions to Winding Way and Jaspera Sentinel)

Affinity. Indeed a powerful mechanic that dominates even the most powerful formats. Here we have a deck which resembles to the Pauper version. We have many sinergies here: indestructible lands and Cleansing Wildfire, Kor Skyfisher to recast different artifacts (like Navigator Compass to gain life), Etherium Spinner (the central point of this build) and big creatures to swarm the board. Relic of Progenitus is a great common graveyard hate...
Yet, I didn't showed my true highlight. Like I said, this is a very personal interpretation, and those cards are amazing and there are many more that didn't make the final list (Ichor Wellspring and Gearseeker Serpent just to name a few). But there is a simples card that deserves your attention. It is so simple but you can see it in many different formats and strategies: Thraben Inspector. A simple 1/2 that investigates. You can find it in Pauper, Pioneer, Explorer (hello again, convoke decks). Because of his cheap cost and resistent body, his delayed draw, his ability to produce an artifact. He was always there. And I hope to see him for a long time.
Thraben Inspector: “If you’ve been at this as long as I have, nothing can surprise you. That’s the hope, at least.”

And here we are to the last, but not least important deck! This decks revolves around Breathless Knight, a 2/2 creature with flying and lifelink for 3 mana. Not amazing even for pauper standards, but it can grow if a creature (or himself) enters the battlefield from your graveyard (or if you cast it from there).
Again, Putrid Goblin and Deadly Dispute are amazing magic cards and I will stress that again (I think you can notice a pattern when I say that Carrion Feeder is my favorite card...), but as I said before, my intention is to not repeat the same cards, it's boring... but they are staples. They simply are powerful. Sure, Recomission can be very effective, but you shouldn't play it instead of a Priest of Fell Rites in a Greasefang deck, for example.

Putrid Goblin. Deadly Dispute. Elvish Mystic. Faithless Looting. Thraben Inspector.
Common cards, with extraordinary powers.
Even some forgettable card like Breathless Knight or Bayou Groff can be amazing in the right situation, with the right sinergy. Limited formats even bring the light of day to a random 2/3 lifelink creature.
Every card contain extraordinary powers. And we choose them to make them special. That's magic.
submitted by Shiki_a_planeswalker to MagicArena [link] [comments]

2023.06.07 08:19 SUPERetnad01 Myrel, soldier girl

I'm working on a soldier tribal deck with [[Myrel, Shield of Argive]] as the commander. This is my first real deck, so I'm looking for some advice here.
( )
You might be wondering what happened to V1. Well, when I played V1 at my LGS, I realized there was no interaction, so I decided to create a new version, V2. In the latest iteration, V2, I added some tutors to the deck to hopefully increase its consistency.
The main idea behind the deck is quite simple: I want to have soldiers on the board and then attack with Myrel to create more soldiers.
To boost my damage output, I've included cards like [[Cathar's Crusade]], [[Goldnight Commander]], and [[Coat of Arms]].
To ensure Myrel survives or connects when attacking, I've included cards like [[Authority of Consuls]], [[Commander's Plate]], [[Bastion Protector]] and [[Mother of Runes]].
Additionally, I've included soldier generators such as [[Darien, King of Kjeldor]], [[Elspeth, Sun's Champion]], [[Captain of the Watch]], and [[Call the Coppercoats]].
Any suggestions or advice you can provide for improving this deck would be greatly appreciated!
submitted by SUPERetnad01 to EDHBrews [link] [comments]

2023.06.07 08:18 IHitSeeker Anyone tried a thopter deck in standard ? I'm not the best at deck building and I really like the idea of this deck i just feel like its not working in standard. This is the list I have so far but its obviously not there yet and some card were mostly thrown in to fill up the deck at the end.

Anyone tried a thopter deck in standard ? I'm not the best at deck building and I really like the idea of this deck i just feel like its not working in standard. This is the list I have so far but its obviously not there yet and some card were mostly thrown in to fill up the deck at the end. submitted by IHitSeeker to MagicArena [link] [comments]