• 0 Posts
  • 91 Comments
Joined 1 year ago
cake
Cake day: June 8th, 2023

help-circle










  • Yeah the more I look into it, I see that it takes direct inspiration from Total Annihilation and SupCom. I messaged my friends who used to play Forged Alliance with me and at least a couple of them have already played this game.

    I’ve been waiting for over a decade for a new game in this mold. It’s not just an RTS, it’s a very specific kind of strategic RTS that has a much greater scale than a tactical RTS like Starcraft. I like that it’s more focused on macro than micro.

    And the fact you can do 16 player matches is just epic. Supreme Commander was originally limited to 4v4 and then they eventually modded in the ability to play 6v6, but it would frequently cause the framerate to drop to slideshow levels. Can’t wait to try this game out!







  • If this is your definition of “objective”, something you can say about the books in the Bible, sure bro I guess.

    Seriously? What a ridiculous, intellectually dishonest false equivalency. Why not respond to the remainder of my argument? Do you actually doubt whether the Ancient Greeks existed?

    To me objective means it can be empirically proven: 2+2=4. Earth is the third planet from the Sun. Water at sea level boils at 100c. Etc.

    Pure empiricism is pure nonsense. Objective truths exist independently of individual minds, while subjective truths exist within minds.

    History is composed of a series of events that physically occurred on Planet Earth within the past ~5k years, and were recorded in written form by human beings. Human beings were born, did certain things, wrote them down, and died. We can dig up their remains and verify many of the things they wrote via empirical, scientific methodologies. You can choose to doubt various interpretations of the facts, but your delusions cannot change the inherent reality that lies within.

    Your choice to contest the validity of history is demonstrative of a profoundly irrational mindset, because you are rejecting verifiable information in favor of your own subjective assumptions. You would prefer that history not be objective, because you wish to believe your own subjective version of history as an emotional coping mechanism.


  • This quote is completely nonsensical. He's always rambled like an idiot, but this is on another level.

    You don’t have to imagine what a Kamala Harris presidency would be, because you’re living through that nightmare right now. And it is a nightmare. It’s a nightmare. And you’re going to stop inflation, but we’re going to have a crash, and we’re going to have a crash like a 1929 crash if she gets in. You saw a gentleman yesterday who got up one of the top analysts in the world, frankly, and, said that if Trump is elected, he predicts and he’s predicting you have a stock market crash like 1929. He also said the only time and the only reason the stock market has gone up, even though it had some bad moments recently. But I think we’ll take, I think we’ll take a substantial lead.


    So embarrassing.


  • There is nothing “objective” about History, it is an educated guess.

    A lack of absolute certainty does not equate to a lack of objectivity. You’re right that history is necessarily written by individuals who have biases. But it is also written by many individuals from different perspectives and correlated with a variety of other sources of knowledge, such as archeology, geology, etc.

    For another example think about what the Greeks wrote about the Persians during their many wars, and vice versa. They are conflicrive accounts. Both biased and political. So again, what history is correct, objective?

    They are conflicting on some things, but they also agree on many things. For instance, I’m sure we can agree that the Greeks and Persians existed, controlled large empires, fought wars against each other, etc. Historians are trained to analyze all of the documents available from all perspectives and arrive at the most objective conclusion that they can muster.

    I strongly oppose the postmodern attitude that everything is subjective. It’s good to remember the limits of our knowledge, but to completely discard an academic field such as history as entirely subjective is quite absurd.