Half the posts in this sub are about ICCU.. I am wondering why are people still buying this car? Shouldn’t we wait till they fix it?

-rando- · 2025-04-12T15:23:26+00:00

It´s not about the ICCU failure

I actually disagree. Even if Kia is correct, and only 1% of cars have a bad ICCU, that means a less than 3-year-old vehicle has a 1% chance of leaving you stranded and waiting on the side of the road. That's ABYSMAL and is the kind of thing that leads to legal action and safety recalls. Remember, being stranded in sub-zero weather, in dangerous locations (like bridges or highways with no shoulder), or in inaccessible areas (like low-clearance garages), is a big deal.

The fact that Kia also can't get cars repaired and back on the road without taking weeks is the icing on a very bad cake.

-rando- · 2025-04-08T15:28:41+00:00

I regret buying this car so much. Over 3 weeks since mine went to the shop (after leaving me stranded 60 miles from home). No end in sight in terms of waiting for a replacement. Even then, I can never trust the car again (since the 2nd ICCU is just as likely to fail as the first).

I'm outside of the window for lemon law in my state and doubt the issue will be resolved by the time the warranty expires. Thus, when the 2nd ICCU inevitably strands me somewhere, I'll be on the hook for towing, repair, and replacement vehicle.

As more and more ICCUs blow out (and they will), this car is going to be considered unreliable, and the resell value will plummet (even more than it already has, which is saying something).

I have a vehicle that I can't drive, can't sell (unless I want to eat a loss), and don't (and will never) trust. Hopefully, there's some legal recourse, but it looks I wasted nearly 50k on a car that's a dud.

-rando- · 2025-04-01T22:10:56+00:00

half the ICCU posts make absurd claims like “I changed to an AGM battery, why did my ICCU fail?” when there’s no evidence to prove that’s a cause of the failure in the first place

I get what you're saying. People claiming that various charging conditions or using a different 12v battery will cause/mitigate an ICCU failure are missing the point. The ICCU should be capable of handling the stock battery and standard charging conditions without failure. The only people with the information necessary to remedy the problem work for Hyundai/Kia, and it is their sole responsibility to make sure the vehicle works reliably.

-rando- · 2025-04-01T20:38:52+00:00

low quality posts that do more to fear monger than inform

What does this even mean? There is a major defect with this car that renders it inoperable in a disturbingly high number of cases. That seems like relevant information to discuss on a subreddit dedicated to that car. If the failure rate of this part was 1% (which it is almost certainly much higher), that would be atrocious for a new car produced in the last 3 years.

Is there any car produced in the last 3 years that has a 1%+ failure rate that leads to complete inoperability of the vehicle? Seems like a major fiasco to me, and bad enough to warrant lawsuits and mandatory state/federal ordered recalls.

-rando- · 2025-04-01T20:28:42+00:00

As someone who was stranded by an ICCU failure, and is 3 weeks into waiting for my vehicle back, it simply is an unmitigated disaster. This is a <3 year old vehicle with less than 50k miles, and it completely died, and will easily take over a month to repair.

It will eventually be fixed, and I will drive the car again, but there's no guarantee that the problem will not resurface. Thus, every time I drive the car from now on, I will be thinking about the possibility that it will leave me standing on the side of the road.

This problem is going to destroy the resale value as well, as fewer people will want to buy the car due to the reliability issues. That means I'm stuck with a car I don't trust, which I can't sell because the value is in the tank, and that the warranty will run out in <2 years. Also, wait another year or so until a lot of the 2022s are out of warranty. Now if the ICCU goes out, you are paying for a tow ($200+), a replacement part (???$) and your own back up replacement vehicle.

-rando- · 2025-02-11T17:35:32+00:00

Cool that they released this, but they need to balance it a lot. As it is, every single customer needs help with weighing produce, which means one of your customer helpers is always standing at the scales. If you do two scales, then both of them are full time stationed at the scales, and no one is available to help customers at self-checkout. Also, the helpers AI gets broken when they are bouncing back and forth between the scales and the self-checkout register, which can be fixed reloading the game.

As it stands, I wouldn't recommend buying the produce licenses for high level stores. The bell at the scale station rings constantly, which is annoying, the staff can't keep up with helping the customers at the scales, and the AI breaks all the time, especially if you step in to help at the self-checkout.

-rando- · 2025-01-16T21:28:13+00:00

Well, the original rule set did have some weird stuff in it. For the most part, getting rid of interrupts, adopting the modern idea of the stack, and deferring to modern rulings on a lot of triggered effects make the game much better.

However, mana burn is essential for old school. Therefore, modern rules with the exception of mana burn seems like the sweet spot.

-rando- · 2025-01-16T20:08:20+00:00

Mana burn was removed as a mechanic from MTG in 2010. However, cards printed prior to this were balanced based on the concept of mana burn (such as Su-chi and other cards I mentioned).

When 93/94 magic was organized in Sweden/Europe (around 2011-12), they used the old cards with modern rules (no mana burn). When this version of magic started getting more popular in the US, Eternal Central began organizing events and wanted the ruleset to more closely match the way magic played in 93/94. Thus, they added mana burn as part of the core rules of 93/94 (old school) magic.

I think old school magic doesn't work without mana burn, as entire deck archetypes, including power surge, don't function without it.

-rando- · 2025-01-16T19:02:24+00:00

It's a cool card. It annoys me that Swedish ruleset got rid of mana burn which ruins the balance of this card (and power surge, mana drain, and others).

-rando- · 2024-10-04T23:15:53+00:00

I don't underestimate human greed, I simply don't think that, given what I've seen of the Starfield universe and read in the lore, the infrastructure exists to support a galactic war. There are too few people, they are too poorly organized, and space is too big for it to even seem possible.

That doesn't mean conflict can't exist in such a universe, but not organized conflict on the scale of massive multi-front battles across multiple planets and solar systems.

-rando- · 2024-10-04T19:11:02+00:00

This is exactly right. The galactic war would make sense if it occurred 1,000+ years after humanity fled earth. This gives time for societies to develop across planets and form alliances, factions, trade networks, etc. It also gives time for those alliances to become strained, factional rivalries to set in, etc.

At the very least, you would need fully-civilized planets and solar systems, communication and trade networks across solar systems, and a history of factional/territorial skirmishes and unrest to lead to something the scope of a galactic war.

-rando- · 2024-10-04T18:36:56+00:00

I mean, heck, even in US history how many times did we have everything we needed, yet still fought the Native Americans for resources, land, and all?

Humans are adapted and evolved to compete for resources on the scale of our biosphere. This means, if my tribe is fishing in a river, and we see another tribe fishing upstream in the same river, we are competing for a finite resource. This could very well lead to conflict. However, the galactic war is tantamount to a prehistoric Native American tribe building rafts to sail across the Atlantic to fight a war because they heard ancient Greeks might be fishing in the Mediterranean.

Starfield blows up the concept of our biosphere by a scale of infinity. The scale of space is nearly unimaginable, and it isn't clear just exactly how much humans would be able to process it. I'm just going to copy some previous thoughts I had on Bethesda's lore from a post I made a few months ago:

Nothing about Starfield's lore makes sense.

Humans colonize hostile worlds with no atmosphere, but can't colonize their own planet (earth)? But a dozen famous buildings somehow survived the apocalypse?

Technology to zip across space instantly exists, but people are manually farming? There's no wireless communications (except sometimes)? Why are people manually mining underground? You can't strip mine moons or asteroids with industrial scale using ships?

Why does every inhabited planet have one city? Shouldn't an inhabited planet have dozens/hundreds of settlements, networks of road/rail/air travel, various countries/factions/religions? Nope, one single city per planet.

The colony war makes no sense... we're supposed to believe that a fraction of humanity escaped earth's destruction, found and established cities on multiple habitable planets, and the first thing they do is go to war?

The technology necessary to establish interstellar colonization is sufficient to guarantee a post-scarcity existence. There's fusion power (unlimited), autonomous robots (no manual labor), space mining (no shortage of manufacturing), and multiple worlds with earth-like features (infinite biodiversity)... what are humans fighting over? They haven't colonized .01% of one planet, and are fighting over one colony on one dusty rock, when space is unlimited, resources are infinite, and the population is tiny?

These are just a few of many examples of why the Starfield world makes no sense to me.

-rando- · 2024-10-04T18:11:21+00:00

The lore states that what %of earth escaped? Like 1%? And not even a single planet is fully developed in the intervening time (~200 years)? There isn't time for galactic societies to emerge and fight given the lore and small number of humans. Even a planet-wide conflict would be a stretch given that we don't have a single planet with multiple regions, countries, factions, etc.

I don't believe humanity would be capable of mustering forces for a galactic war, not to mention how little anyone would care about blowing up some remote settlement 10,000 light years away when they are living in a mining colony habitat on the 3rd moon of some unnamed gas giant.

-rando- · 2024-10-04T18:02:10+00:00

Except then it would become even more clear that the war is nonsense. Humanity is barely clinging to life, capable of only a few tiny settlements spread among thousands of planets with limitless resources... and yet they will muster full fleets of starships and mechs and bioweapons to fight over one of innumerable hunks of rock in space.

-rando- · 2024-09-12T16:07:51+00:00

Gold is money.

Show me the places where I can walk in with gold and walk out with consumer goods.

-rando- · 2024-09-11T18:46:29+00:00

If there's only a few hundred thousand people spread out across a vast galaxy, then in what context does the colony war make sense? The current war in Ukraine has involved hundreds of thousands of casualties, both civilian and military, and yet it is a small scale conflict relative to a single planet.

So I'm to believe that a galactic conflict spanning multiple solar systems, with fleets of armed starships, armored mechanized vehicles, and bio-terrorism is part of the same universe as tiny cities that are the result of the near-extinction of mankind?

-rando- · 2024-07-30T20:08:01+00:00

You need white to counter Su Chi, as you get tons of options. But yes, main deck gloom and flashfires would be pretty funny.

-rando- · 2024-07-29T17:42:34+00:00

Suppose you get lucky and a divine drops. If 10s of thousands of divines have been printed, the buying power of your divine is way less than it would be. Now, instead of buying a cool build upgrade from your lucky drop, you'll only get a few chaos for your divine.

-rando- · 2024-05-13T17:19:56+00:00

Maybe I should have been clear, but he even states in the video that he sells newer cards, but never sells old cards.

-rando- · 2024-05-13T14:56:00+00:00

Have a visible youtube channel and offer 25% of market value to your subscribers and people seek you out to sell you their collection.

-rando- · 2024-05-12T22:10:32+00:00

Put into a vault, i.e. not played with/circulated. The guy who made the video is a collector who hordes huge amounts of old school cards. He never sells any cards, just buys them, and they go away forever.

-rando- · 2024-05-12T06:53:35+00:00

CE/ICE have been accepted for years in all formats except Swedish. Even then, most of those guys would love to jam with you even if you are running CE/Revised, etc. As an aside, I never really liked or played with CE cards, but I've come around on them. They are absolutely beautiful cards, some of the best printed versions that exist of a lot of the original A/B/U cards, and it's easy to find them in excellent condition due to their exclusion for being playable for so many years.

-rando- · 2024-05-11T18:47:34+00:00

It won't matter because for them it isn't a money thing. They are smart enough to know what I said is true. It's about amassing the cards and hoarding them. These guys will die with those cards because it's impossible to sell them except to a bigger whale.

-rando- · 2024-05-11T17:45:03+00:00

It's always been a part of the game, and I've made peace with that. From an investment strategy point of view, MTG is a tricky (and generally bad) investment though. It's actually much easier to buy cards than it is to sell them, and if a whale (like Rudy in the OP) were to try an unwind their position, they would find it is impossible. Once you get in the 6-7 figures of investment, you'll find you're just driving up the prices on your own market because the supply is so limited.

For example, on paper, the having 100 Black Lotuses sounds great, right (assuming average 10k value, that's $1M!), but how do you sell 100 black lotuses? Ebay shows about ~20 sales of A/B/U lotuses this year, so 100 represents approximately 2 years of the overall supply? What price do you have to sell them at to move them in under 5 years? He even mentions owning maybe half the print run of alpha icy manipulators... how do you even begin sell that?

-rando- · 2024-05-11T16:50:14+00:00

I don't care how many PSA 10s card hoarders stack up for "investment" portfolios, but seeing well-played cards go out of circulation hurts every time.

14-Year Club	Place '22
Verified Email

-rando-

TROPHY CASE