RiseofSpectrum

It's an odd voice. Light but with a heavy "undertone", if I could describe it that way. I'm somewhere around the high baritone / low tenor mark.

I've done the MBTI test several times on several sites. I always get INTP. So I assume logical.

They would never accept that as it would make their position on the 2020 Presidential Election weaker. The only way they would be willing to do so is if such proposal came from their own camp in the first place.

I'm pretty sure voting is a democratic thing in it of itself.

If I was an American citizen, I would have voted for the Republicans, to be fair. It is true any party on the Executive branch needs a strong opposition on the houses, but I don't like the direction in which the Democratic Party is going.

Let's list off some examples... Crusader Kings 2 - The Sunset Invasion DLC. It's, well... just not feasible. I just can't quite see how a civilization so technologically backwards could ever pose as a credible threat to Western Europe. I understand this was to balance things out as Western Europe almost never has to face a horde unlike the East, who often have their hands filled with the Turks and the Mongols, but... seriously, this just kills my suspension of disbelief. Total War Attila - Cavalry OP pls nerf. Also, try playing as the Western Roman Empire on Hard Mode and survive. I dare you. Fallout New Vegas - Great game overall, but it takes a while until the plot opens up for you. The first part of the game is rather tedious and it always feels like a chore until you finally reach Vegas. Sonic the Hedgehog 3 and Knuckles - Marble Garden and Sandopolis. These two stages really overstay their welcome. I actually dislike Marble Garden more than Sandopolis, mainly because the level design isn't as open. Total War Rome 2 - Rome is just too damn powerful. It wasn't enough for the designers to give them a very powerful infantry, they also gave them the best artillery in the game, as well as the one thing that makes them truly overpowered: Auxilary Barracks, which allows you to recruit units from conquered factions. Before long, you'll compensate your weak links in the army with proper skirmishers, like the Balearic Slingers; Peltasts; and Archers, as well as getting good cavalry, be it Celtic or Macedonian. The only factions that have an array of units close to quality are Egypt and the Seleucid Empire, but their good troops don't come until the late game, whereas Rome has pretty decent units from the start.

It's pretty chill here in Portugal. Lots of graffitti, but the chances of getting mugged are not likely at all. Of being conned if you're a tourist, on the other hand...

Yeeesh. As of this very moment, I've been through 20 hours without sleeping. Quite ironic I saw this topic. Anyway, about 40 to 45 hours is my record. Something I've done on several occasions, I might add. When I was younger, it was a tradition for me to wake up early in the morning and not sleeping during New Year's Eve. I've done this about 4 or 5 times, and that's not counting the times I partied and ended up not sleeping that night either.

Mid-to-Late Republican Rome all the way to Early Imperial Rome. The slow, but steady transformation of what was a reasonably functional republic into an autocracy is a warning to all those who do not want to see their own Republics to degenerate. Also, some really interesting stories and figures in there. Also, early Mesopotamian history. I've been trying to figure out how did Sargon the Great overthrow Ur-Zubaba and overtook Lugal-Zagesi as the most powerful man in Mesopotamia, but there's really nothing I can come up with except for mere speculation. Also, quite a few more really interesting figures such as Naram-Sin, Ur-Nammu, and of course, Hammurabi.

I've had some nightmares in my life. Of course I've had some of the more common ones where my teeth begin falling off or where I lose some of my fingers. Ironically though, my reaction while dreaming these is really... tame, like "Oh well, couldn't hold on to these forever". As for the biggest nightmare, well, one I remember when I was about 12, where I came across a church, found a statue of the Virgin Mary and she started talking to me, and as the conversation resumed, her voice and face slowly morphed into that of a demon. Needless to say, I was absolutely terrified.

It's what I do. Seriously though, the past few years, since 2008, to be more precise, I've correctly predicted the winner of every Euro and World Cup. The only exception is 2016 (but, seriously, no one could predict that). I would really like it if Croatia would win it, but honestly, only the football gods can screw with France's odds now. Oh, and Belgium's gonna wreck England.

So it will seem as if it will be France, Belgium, Croatia and England. Dear me, quality-wise this has to be the worst final 4 since 2002.

Well, I thought Spain would be eliminated in the quarters by Croatia. Didn't imagine they would go back to their pre-2010 ways and choke immediately at the first parking bus they faced.

Ricardo for Cedric's pretty simple: it's sacrificing defensive cohesion for attacking prowess. Not like it mattered anyway, considering Portugal spent its time passing the ball around Uruguay's box. This... was a pretty dumb decision. With its centre-backs really old, it was necessary to have another defensive-minded fast man capable of compensating for the lack of speed. At the end of the day, Ricardo did what was expected him: was pretty decent attacking, but was fragile defensively. Bernardo Silva was completely wasted throughout the tournament. He is not a winger, he's a 10. At the second half, he was put in the middle and played one hell of a match. Quaresma coming in was also another poor decision. Quaresma barely wins out one-on-ones anymore, if that's what Santos was looking for, he should've sent in Gelson. Guedes has been completely off. I don't understand why would you discard the duo (Ronaldo and André Silva) that scored a combined 24 goals during qualifying just to have him on. Once André Silva was in, Portugal finally had some presence in Uruguay's box. The problem was, by then, it was way too late. Finally, Ronaldo was totally and utterly wasted. First by being paired up with a man who isn't even a striker, and then by not being a striker at all. Ronaldo is a second striker. He needs that consistent presence of another man on the centre-backs so he can be freed and do his magic. I am utterly dismayed. This squad is so much better than the 2016 one, and was completely wasted by an out-of-touch old man who's too afraid to actually have these talented young men actually play what they know.

Jesus Christ, these were some terrible options. Ricardo for Cedric means even more fragility towards the defensive sector, and Guedes has been completely off form this World Cup. We can circle the ball all around Uruguay's box if we want to, but where are the men inside the box to actually make sure opportunities are created? Why is Ronaldo, our best header, having to stray into the wing while Guedes, who's not in any way a prolific header, stays in the box? I swear to Jesus I don't understand it.

Alright, I'll talk about the teams I consider to be either S-tier or A-tier. S-tier: France, Brazil, Croatia, Spain France: The thing about France is... they have a really good team all-around, and their manager isn't bad. Yes, they haven't impressed so far, but really though, no team's been consistently good throughout this tournament with the exception of Belgium (though beating small fries is no impressive feat). Also, they have a fairly easy path to the semis where Brazil will be their first real challenge. Speaking of which... Brazil: This is probably the best all-around team in the tournament. This isn't the absolute mediocre side from the last World Cup, but your standard very talented Brazilian team, well-covered in every position from goalkeeper to striker. So, why wouldn't I put them as winners? The reason why I hold Brazil back is the reason why Brazil is always held back: management. Brazilian coaches are pretty much tactically awful, and it is only the vast array of talent that has been hiding that deffeciency for so long. However, with football being so tactical today, I don't think the talent will be enough to deliver a World Cup, though facing a front trio composed of Neymar, Coutinho and Firmino is a very scary notion. Croatia: The real dark horse of this tournament. Croatia is a well-compact, all-around solid team with a few stand-out names elevating this team from a decent one to a real contender. The stand out names are abviously Modric and Rakitic. But take a good look at their roles: they're midfielders. And a very good midfielder elevates a team more than a very good striker (just ask Poland). Tireless, intelligent and selfless. Spain: Player-wise, it is comparable to Brazil, however, tactically, they're far, far superior. In normal circumstances, with Germany out, I would say Spain would immediately become the favorites to win the World Cup. The problem is they just changed manager right before the World Cup started, and that already very nearly cost them the 1st place of their group. A new manager means new ideas and thoughts, and that will always take a toll on the team. A-tier: Portugal, Belgium, Mexico, Colombia, Uruguay Portugal: I often hear that Belgium is an underrated side, yet no team has been underrated more than the Portuguese. This is somewhat understandable, as Portugal play a Greece-style god-awfully painful to watch football. But just because it's an unlikeable style, doesn't mean they're bad at it. In fact, they play as Greece played even better than the Greeks themselves. For all the criticism Portugal was given for their poor showings, it's not like Spain was did much better in group B. Also, it is extremely wrong to assume Portugal is Ronaldo + 10 players. You face them with that mentality, and they will punish you for it. Pepe may be really old, but he's still a very good defender. Patrício may be a relative unknown, but he's been (in my mind) in the Top 10 best keepers in the world for a few years now. William Carvalho may be incredibly slow, but you wouldn't come across many midfielders who pass the ball as well as he does, and you're still forgetting the "jokers" of the team, Bernardo Silva, Quaresma and André Silva, who can out of the blue make a great performance and decide the game in Portugal's favor. Belgium: Belgium is this generation's pre-WC winners Spain. A very good team all-around, but never really going to win it until they become a truly ground-breaking team. Yes, they have the best attack of the tournament so far, but beating up Panama isn't that much of a noteworthy achievement. Neither it is beating Tunisia and England. I'd like to see Belgium facing a Brazil, or a Spain, just so we can get a real glimpse at what their worth. I know friendlies aren't worth much, but Portugal and Belgium have faced each other in two recent friendlies. In both, Portugal outplayed them, and in no way did Belgium impress me in those matches. And that's the closest thing to a contender I've seen Belgium coming up against. Mexico: Yet another seriously underrated team. Player-wise, they don't even compare to Belgium and Portugal, but their tactical organization is some of the best I've seen in this World Cup. I absolutely loved their counter-attacking capabilites, and some of their players stand out. Herrera is ever-present, absolutely pressing-monster that blocks out the other team's build-up play. Lozano, Corona and Chicharito work well together when launching a counter-attack. Oh, and I love Ochoa. Not a Top 10 Keeper, but very very close to it. Colombia: It's very, very simple to explain where the quality of this team lies: James Rodriguez. This man is Colombia, as shown by the qualifiers. But even if you prevent him from taking control of the match (which is no easy feat), it doesn't necessarily prevent this team from actually outplaying you. Uruguay: A well-compact, well-disciplined team with the likes of Suarez and Cavanni to inject some real danger to any opposing team. They're not the best team out there, but, much like Portugal, they're not down and out until you absolutely bury them. There's quite a noticeable gap between the S-tier and A-tier teams, but within the tiers, the teams are actually pretty close. And, by the way, I expect the exact opposite from Uruguay-Portugal, very few goals, if any at all.

Yes, Uruguay can indeed beat Portugal. However, looking at both teams, Portugal just seems to have a better set of players all around. Uruguay got in the easiest group of the tournament, and were very unconvincing against the more defensive-minded Saudi Arabia and Egypt (Portugal also is a very much defensive-minded team). Also, Portugal is a very difficult team to beat. One may outplay them, but they're never out of the fight. Then again, I'm portuguese, so I may be biased. Croatia has a decent manager now, and I think they're around the 2nd or 3rd strongest team in the tournament. They already beat Spain, deservedly, two years ago, and the remaining probable adversaries, Colombia and Denmark, just aren't up to par with that team. Currently, the teams still in the tournament are, in my opinion, as followed, from best to worst: 1-France 2-Brazil 3-Croatia 4-Spain 5-Portugal 6-Belgium 7- Mexico 8-Colombia 9-Uruguay 10-England 11-Switzerland 12-Argentina 13-Sweden 14-Denmark 15-Japan 16-Russia. If you wish for any justification regarding any country's position, I'll gladly give it you.

France, Portugal, Brazil, Belgium, Spain, Croatia, Switzerland, Colombia to go to the quarter finals. Then it's France, Brazil, Croatia (that's right), Colombia Then it'll be like this: 1st France, 2nd Croatia, 3rd Brazil, 4th Colombia

Not really surprised by this result. This Argentina side has been really poor for the past few years and it only made it to the World Cup by having Messi carrying it in the qualifiers. And Croatia is a great team all-around with a nice amount of world-class players. Modric, Rakitic, Kovacic, Perisic and Mandzukic are players of a calibre any team would like to have. This Croatia side just two years ago deservedly beat Spain and absolutely dicked all over Portugal in the Euro 2016. Granted, Portugal did manage to eliminate them, but were otherwise utterly dominated on the pitch.

Belgium does have a great team on paper. However, they've had that great team on paper for quite a few years. So far, however, it has been more of a collection of talented individuals rather than a great team. That's why people see Belgium as a dark horse. Spain and and especially Portugal were god-awful against Iran and Morocco respectively, but did get away with a victory. I expect a Spain-Russia and a Uruguay-Portugal in the last 16.

What is truly odd so far is, with the exception of Belgium (potential dark horse of the tournament), none of the favorites have stepped up: Brazil drew against Switzerland, Germany lost to Mexico, and Spain was stopped in its tracks by a Ronaldo in God Mode. To add this even further, teams you would at least expect to do well disappointed in the first round: Argentina shocklingly drew against Iceland and Colombia lost to Japan. We're probably going to have a big match already in the last 16 (Germany vs. Brazil).

From what I've seen so far, Spain seems to be the strongest candidate. They have the most defined style of football so far, and it was only due to a few silly mistakes they allowed Portugal to score 3 goals on them. It's still early, of course, but so far I'm more inclined to believe Spain will win it. Disappointed with Brazil and Germany. Don't understand why Firmino doesn't play, and, without a proper striker, Germany look toothless. I liked Mexico and Portugal a lot. Both surprised me by their defensive cohesion in relative to their opponents, but most importantly, both teams seem deadly on the counter attack, all they need is a little better definition in the final pass and they could very well invoke terror on any team.