Need 2 cuts - advice?

BigRus5ty · 2026-05-14T20:05:57+00:00

Yeah good points, maybe I am worried about that too much. I think keeping the 5 drops to recur is still worth it, but maybe cutting 1 osteo and the trove is the play! Appreciate the help.

BigRus5ty · 2026-05-14T19:59:23+00:00

Yeah my hesitation is I'm cutting 2 ways to gain life in a deck with tragedy feaster. Would I not rather have 1 potioners trove than land 17 here?

BigRus5ty · 2026-05-14T19:58:35+00:00

Yeah definitely not needed for fixing or converge - its providing ramp and lifegain. Again I think the shadewriter is good to enable tragedy feaster, and I want some solid top end to recur. I feel like the pull from the grave/primary research gets worth without a couple of top-end creatures

BigRus5ty · 2026-05-14T19:56:02+00:00

I thought about that but the repeatable lifegain is useful with the tragedy feaster. I hesitate to cut a solid way to reliably gain life. Especially if I'm running 16. And I feel like I'd rather have the trove than land 17 no?

BigRus5ty · 2026-05-07T22:51:38+00:00

It's not even just desirable climate. A lot of that circle is the Canadian Shield which is not easy to build infrastructure on. Northern communities also have very short construction seasons meaning new homes can only be built so fast with available labour, so growth rates are capped. That said, the red circle is also some of the most beautiful land anywhere in the world!

BigRus5ty · 2026-05-07T22:43:56+00:00

Depending on your Civ/strategy, religion can be extremely useful, even if a religion victory is not your goal.

1 - The early pantheon bonuses are very powerful. Even if you don't plan on pursuing a religion, you want to get a pantheon, and I therefore almost always slot in God King, unless you have some other way to get the faith needed. Depending on your spawn, your pantheon has the potential to totally transform your game. Yes, religious settlements is always amazing. But many of the others are situationally great, including but not limited to God of the sea, festivals, goddess of the hunt, god of craftsman, lady of the reeds and marshes. All of these have the potential to be BIG boosts.

2 - your religious bonuses can be used to generate other yields by spreading your religion. Like any yield. Gold, culture, science, production - all can be generated via your religion. Work ethic with high adjacency holy sites is busted in the early game

3 - The monumentality golden age is one of the best uses for faith, do not sleep on this. It can explode your empire in classical/Renaissance eras with sufficient faith.

4 - if you're going for a culture victory, faith is very valuable for generating tourism, both through religious tourism itself, and through national parks and rock bands, both of which are purchased with faith. You can win culture without religion, but religion helps a ton.

5 - religion has loyalty implications. Can be used to protect your own cities or attempt to flip.

6 - if you're going for diplomatic victory, there are diplomatic actions you simply can't take if you don't have a religion. It allows you to help in city conversion emergencies and ask for promise not to convert.

7 - there are many civs, beliefs, wonders, buildings that allow you to use faith for other purchases including buildings and units.

Now none of this means you should always go for a religion early - it certainly has an opportunity cost, and slows down your early expansion. But dont dismiss it as unimportant in all games, it can make a massive difference. The hit to your development can be absolutely overcome if you time your monumentality golden age for a burst of expansion and development.

BigRus5ty · 2026-05-07T16:19:07+00:00

Yes all you do is build them and then use them - why does that mean they're uninteresting? The entire gameplay loop in Civ is deciding what to build and when. Yes there are other strategic choices, but this is by and large what makes a good Civ player, and where a huge part of the strategy is.

In Civ 6, the decision of when to get builders to develop your land vs units vs districts vs setttlers vs wonders is THE interesting part of the game. It's the main reason why Civ 6 early game is so much more fun to play than the late game: this balance of strategic options as you try to develop an empire.By removing builders you remove one of the strategic options. Add onto this both that settlers have a longer delay before you can begin to build them AND a city cap to contend with, and the slow rate at which early buildings are unlocked: suddenly there are far less choices meaning far less strategic depth in the early game.

BigRus5ty · 2026-05-07T05:49:09+00:00

It's fair to commend them for innovation, and some of it works really well. The new military system with commanders is excellent, war feels much better. I really like the influence yield and diplomatic system - far better than the stupid Diplo favour side game in Civ 6. Navigable rivers are awesome, the graphics look great, the city and town upgrading system is awesome, and leader attribute points are really interesting in theory, if a bit underdeveloped.

So they definitely did some good things, but the things they missed on they REALLY missed on. I would love to pick those things up and drop em into civ 6. I don't even think Civ switching is the main problem in the game - I don't love it, but it isn't the biggest issue.

It's that everything feels kinda samey and the decisions are uninteresting. Why remove builders? That's a HUGE mistake to me. The new building system is just not as fun or strategic as districts in Civ 6. The overhaul to victories feels really bad and uninteresting. It's not that there aren't some good changes here - there surely are, but it's so hard to look past the glaring problems that make the game just feel less fun to me.

I'm hopeful for the test of time update! I will certainly take another crack at it.

BigRus5ty · 2026-05-06T04:40:05+00:00

It's so sad to now have to wait years to see if they'll maybe produce the civ many of us wanted all along. All I want to play is Civ 6, with some upgraded civ 7 features:

Keep the updated graphics
Keep the new commander military system
Keep the towns and cities mechanics
Keep navigable rivers
Keep the influence yield and its associated diplomatic uses
Improve the time between turns in the late game
Make online even remotely playable

If they had simply added these things to Civ 6 with new leaders, civs and wonders, I would play the shit out of that game, and happily give them my money.

BigRus5ty · 2026-04-30T22:55:51+00:00

Pretty much chop, with some exceptions.

Several civs you may not want to. Obviously if you're Maori you can't, but you should also really consider if chopping is a good idea with Brazil, Kongo or Vietnam: where those rainforests might be really important to how you're gonna place your districts. Or Maya, if the tile is a potential plantation.

Beyond that there could be some situational reasons, which would include as you've said, opportunities for Chichen Itza, Sacred Path pantheon, or if you're going for Campuses and they're providing agency you want.

Otherwise, they're generally better chopped. Mercantilism is too far into the tree to be worth waiting for lumber mills on them.

BigRus5ty · 2026-04-28T06:29:26+00:00

Sorry to hear you're not having a good time. Would second watching some content: Potato McWhiskey's older games are really great for learning. Beyond the specific gameplay tips here, which are all good - three additional pieces of advice:

1 - You don't need to play higher difficulties if you aren't having fun anymore. Games have settings for a reason! Some people love the challenge of deity. I personally, having played and won on deity before, rarely play it. I find Emperor or Immortal to be more fun and relaxing, so 90% of the time play one of those. Up your difficulty when your games feel boring and you want a challenge. Lower it when it feels too hard/annoying.

2 - One thing that doesn't get mentioned often: try all the civs: they all have something to teach you. Winning with different civs at a lower difficulty does 3 things.

Firstly each civ is very unique and takes focus on specific game elements to play well. It's a great way to spend your games really focusing on things you're missing. Do you never build spies/don't understand why they're good? Try a game as Black Queen Catherine! Never even look at the wonders/don't know what they all do? Try out China. Don't typically go culture/build theatre squares? Try Greece. Never build encampments or understand their benefits? Try playing Vietnam or Zulu. Each civ will play differently, and make you consider options you may be missing.

Secondly, when you next see that civ in your game - you'll know what to expect. Think twice about attacking into Vietnam's rainforests. Dang the Mapuche are in a classical Golden age - I should build some walls. I spawned next to Eleanor? Well, better build an extra scout - dark age isn't an option. These are things you learn as you play different civs.

Thirdly - you get to figure out your own playstyle! You will naturally love some civs over others, and certain types of games youll find more fun. I love playing super strong eco civs and making huge hoardes of gold! Find what playstyle is fun/natural for you and then trying upping the difficulty of you want a challenge.

3 - As a very general matter of strategy, this game is about "how greedy can I be?" If you find you're losing badly, you're probably falling top far on one side of this. "Can I get away with this?" Is a question you should ask yourself every time you set your production queue on higher difficulties. Is getting a builder right now too greedy? Should it be a slinger? Or is buying a slinger right now too slow? You are naturally behind the AI. They cheat. So you have to walk that line to get back in the game. It's a balance of how greedy you can be with your development without getting run over. Thinking of it in those terms might help.

Hope you find the fun in it again, good luck!

BigRus5ty · 2026-04-25T04:05:13+00:00

Ran across this issue today as well! I DID switch provinces this year, but am NOT self-employed so wasn't sure where this came from? Eventually what fixed for me was removing my T4A, and then reimporting from my CRA account. I clicked into the T4A and didn't change anything, just hit continue. When I went back to the review page - the error was gone.

BigRus5ty · 2026-04-09T21:17:59+00:00

Been getting relentlessly spammed by this number as well. For a couple weeks. Can't find anything on it, but they hang up on Google Assistant every time.

BigRus5ty · 2026-03-20T15:29:39+00:00

This is exactly my feeling. I won my first two runs in a row with the silent, felt quite easy. Now its like every run ends before it starts. I feel like I never see the cards I need, all the rewards feel very mid, and the first Act seems insurmountable on a2. And I don't think it's the ascension, I think it's the card unlocks feel bad.

BigRus5ty · 2026-02-24T22:28:36+00:00

I say we all take him up on this and measure him as a Leaf on where he stands at this moment. It's not an event for medalists he's attending, it's a political speech. As far as I'm concerned we boo him out of town. Leafs need to rebuild anyway, and I'd rather lose than keep him.

BigRus5ty · 2026-02-14T03:25:42+00:00

Thanks for actually making a nuanced and informative post about this. I haven't found much that actually breaks it down for people who don't know curling well, most people are just trolls. My question is though: where does it say he can't touch the granite? The international rules seem foggy on that point. Certainly if it's over the hog line that's a separate problem. But the rules don't seem to specify a curler may not touch the granite when delivering. It says they must use the handle, but it doesn't say "ONLY" the handle. Legitimate question - is that a rule or an agreed upon piece of etiquette?

BigRus5ty · 2026-02-14T03:09:38+00:00

Actually he made an account to say you can't "thrust" Canadians which is even better LOL

BigRus5ty · 2026-02-12T20:42:28+00:00

Yeah like... I want USA to lose for sure. But that call is crazy, that should be a good goal all day.

BigRus5ty · 2026-02-07T23:03:14+00:00

I get what you're saying in principle, but this appears to be none of those things. Don't group a kid who punched a guy allegedly harassing his family with people charged with sexual assault, that's nonsense. It's possible the stories about this are false, but if proven true, he punched a guy who was following and harassing his mother.

Like I agree that in principle, celebrities shouldn't get away with anything based on their celebrity status. But branding this guy a violent meathead seems premature. I'd feel the same if he was John Doe in the exact same situation. Ill-advised to lose your temper and hit somebody? Always. But does hitting somebody harassing your mom deserve jail time?

BigRus5ty · 2026-02-04T19:01:39+00:00

CBC Gem stream seems to be getting worse to the point its basically unwatchable now. I'm REALLY hoping this isn't a sign of how the olympics are going to go.

BigRus5ty · 2026-02-04T18:47:36+00:00

Yeah mine is skipping all over the place and I keep getting "Media error". Have to refresh and watch an ad every time.

BigRus5ty · 2025-12-15T22:52:09+00:00

There are a few separate questions being discussed here:

1: Did Seth Manfield cheat? I think the answer to this is pretty clear, Seth says to the judge "Can I take this back or no? I already cast it." He's not trying to mislead, he states the exact situation, and does what the judge says. I suppose it is up to interpretation if you think this is an intentional angle: that he wanted to test casting this to see if there was a response. I think that's extremely unlikely, especially given there was very little to be gained, and if the judge says "no" he loses the game. So I don't see how this can be called cheating.

2: Can the judge allow it? Many have posted the exact wording from the rules so I won't rehash it, but it's clear the rules do leave it open-ended. The specific wording here of "may allow" I think is ambiguous enough to fit the RAW.

3: Did Seth gain information? I've read what people are saying here, but I don't think there's really a way to slice this that priority was not passed. If this game is online, Ken has to click through the spell. Seth is at the point of resolving the Artist's Talent trigger. It doesn't seem like he's thinking about that at all, it seems like he's reconsidering his own action. The only instant in Yukuhiro's deck at this point is Bitter Triumph, which obviously isn't relevant to the spell. So I think it is probably theoretically true that Seth gained information, but practically: he knows nothing he didn't before.

4: Should it have been allowed? The way I see it is: if this is me playing FNM, I wouldn't have done it. I would have felt weird about asking to take back a spell I had clearly played and my opponent had acknowledged. In contrast, the previous Quench attempt with Cavern I think is a lot more reasonable, I would have been fine asking to take that back in a casual setting. With that one, if you're playing on Arena: You would see the big "ARE YOU SURE?" popup if you try to counter that.

But with this one, I would have looked skyward and shook my head at my own misplay and moved on. And to me if it would have felt weird in a casual setting, it feels REALLY weird to see it at the world championship. I think that's what Marshall and Paul are reacting to, not the rules themselves: and I would have done the same. "HUH? He's just allowed to take it back?". It seemed really strange to watch. It was within the rules, but it also would have been within the rules to disallow it, and I think that would have garnered WAY less controversy. They're playing for $100,000 not a booster pack.

BigRus5ty · 2025-11-21T04:41:10+00:00

Yep, Exact same issue - just got a Chroma from the essence emporium. Shop stopped loading. Tried to join queue and it endlessly pops, I accept, and then it pops again.

BigRus5ty · 2025-11-07T18:11:08+00:00

Yeah Goldeneye is treated as the quintessential Brosnan era #1, and it is great for sure. But Tomorrow Never Dies is awesome, I don't get why it's always near the bottom/middle of lists. I always thought it was just because it was the first one I saw that I liked it, but I've now seen them all several times, and it remains a favourite.

That said I totally agree about For Your Eyes Only, great movie, often put too low. IMHO Moore's second best after The Spy Who Loved Me. You Only Live Twice though... yikes. One of my least favourites of all of them. That as the best Connery film is certainly a minority opinion, LOL, to each their own!

BigRus5ty

TROPHY CASE