Donut @ Donut @leminal.space

Posts

2

Comments

320

Joined

2 yr. ago

It's a simpler game for sure. There were only 4 civilizations (Norse, Egyptian, Greek, Atlantian) and they were all very different from one another compared to AoE. Each civilization had multiple deities to choose from for some more specific buffs and abilities. Every type had unique mythical units as well, and these units are quite large so maps felt a bit smaller in comparison. Overall the maps were smaller than AoE anyway, but not in a bad way.

Then instead of stone there was favor, a resource like the rest (food, wood, gold), acquired by putting townies at your temple to pray. All in all it was pretty similar to AoE but it felt a lot less serious. I played a lot at LAN parties and we always had a blast though!

That template is part of the problem

Fucking finally. I love a funny joke but if you're looking for serious reviews, you currently have to wade through a sea of trolls, jokes and copy-pasted meme reviews in order to figure out if a game is interesting to you.

Community features are cool but if you're the most popular platform of your kind, you're gonna attract a lot of trolls who's content can be really out there. Filters are a good solution to this!

When they sue you for libel, they will have to prove that you knew you were lying and still went ahead with it, in order to damage or disparage the other party.

This goes the same for Trump: can you prove he knows he's lying?

Edit: in other, better words:

The legal definition of lying is that someone spread false information with knowledge that the information was false.

In general, a journalist cannot establish whether a person did or did not have prior knowledge, so we don't use the term. It keeps us from getting sued.

Because lying means the liar knows they are lying. Stating a falsehood means you don't have to have the intent of lying.

This comes down to libel. Journalists would like not to get sued because they think someone is lying instead of just claiming things they believe in, misguided as it is.

Stop expecting handouts with 0 effort especially when the answer is one tap away.

Read the article and find out

It's a setting, someone posted a similar thread https://lemmy.dbzer0.com/post/24295861

Chiming in here to not mess with top level comments. Thanks OP, you're awesome.

multiplayer game that has no more players

'i got bored of it and so did almost everyone else.'

Sounds like the same thing to me, unless you mean the servers would be down for the multiplayer game and nobody can play it anymore.

With this gift link I still had to login or pay. Maybe it doesn't work for my region?

I've seen the archive links on posts of yours though, so I appreciate that a lot.

I see you added two paragraphs so let me respond to those separately.

You're making a lot of assumptions about my environment. I'm using an Android app, and I see no archive link options anywhere. Nor do I even browse my "home" instance, it was just an arbitrary choice to make an account there.

12ft.io doesn't even work on most websites for me. I've tried, but it would always break the page or just give me an error.

Lastly, only OP can put an archive link in the body. So even if I archived something and shared the link, it's still less accessible than OP including a link in the body.

What do conspiracies have to do with this? It's about making news accessible

Why should the onus fall on the people who are interested in the news, if the OP can include it by default? Or better yet, let's have a bot that does it automatically.

Edit: it also communicates to me that OP is not interested in discussions, but just here to flaunt a headline that nobody can investigate without having to put effort in.

Make the bar as low as possible. Be accessible.

Paywall (pay or login), please share an archive link to promote discussions

Going too slow (currently) doesn't heat up the tyre enough to get grippy, so that would just cause a literal slide-show.

You can point to Pirelli for that one, but it doesn't change the current situation

If done well it's called constructive feedback, not bad communication.

The problem is that many folks feel like it's the only feedback tool in the toolbox, and the praises can seem less sincere over time, as some managers think they need to find something positive every single time. This can make it less efficient or sincere, so it's good to have some variety.

I know this isn't what you want to hear, but they are basically saying that you wouldn't be a good fit with the team.

Now as for the exact reasoning they will probably not tell you, as ambiguous rejections are easier to manage. But to me that sounds like they think you need guidance / support that they cannot offer (read: don't have the budget for).

Not saying I agree with any of it, mind you. Just giving my interpretation

You got some answers about visibility and safety, but let me add some details about the tires.

Wet tires are meant for conditions where it's absolutely pouring down. They can disperse 85 liters (_{22 gallons) of water at 300 km/h (}186 m/h) per second per tyre. That's a crazy amount of water, and conditions aren't bad enough usually to warrant this.

And then if it is warranted, you can ask yourself whether it's still safe due to visibility and low grip due to cold tyres.

Intermediates can displace about half of the water at 300 km/h per tyre, and this covers it most of the times.