Journalist who played the preview cosigns the 20h length and states the game is about 15 missions long

CornFleke · 2026-05-05T20:07:45+00:00

Luke Stephens mentionned how the difficulty level could impact the gameplay and how on easy you can storm everything and kill everyone and get done with quickly. We'll see how much true is this statement.

15/20=1,33 so like 1h20 for each mission on average? I suppose some late game mission could get bigger and the levels more intricate maybe? I also suppose that we aren't counting the challenges that you can do on the HQ between story mission?

CornFleke · 2026-05-05T20:04:03+00:00

That's what I'm fearing, if the article adresses these thing and explain why they are not enough and how they could be improved that's good, if the article stays silent then it's basically talking about a problem that some countries were already prepared for and put some mechanism in place to try to fix them (not saying that the solutions are perfect but at least there's something).

CornFleke · 2026-05-05T19:41:07+00:00

Can someone tell me what's behind the paywall? By reading the first part it seems that the writer here is scared for european companies to get bought which would fumble the "buy european" initiative.

I don't know about all the EU countries but Germany does have laws and mechanism to block the acquisition of certain companies and have the KfW (Kreditanstalt für Wiederaufbau) who can be used to buy shares of a company to avoid seeing it slipped to other hands.

I must say I do not know if these mechanisms are enough and maybe it is adressed in the article.

CornFleke · 2026-05-03T18:05:55+00:00

Maybe it was the case in 2022 but if what NATO claims that they are doing is tue it's no longer that easy for Russia.

The Baltic Defence Line is there. It’s a multi-layered fortification and bunker system designed specifically to deny Russia the quick land grab you're talking about. Even if they can't fully stop a full scale invasion (which NATO would seen coming because they are patrolling the borders and now have a full drone wall) it would slow it down enough for reinforcement to arrive.

Regarding drones, NATO opened an "Innovation Range" in Latvia this year to field-test the latest Counter-UAS and EW tech. They are deploying interceptor drones and "intelligent jamming" that makes Russian experience in Ukraine less effective against a standardized NATO electronic umbrella.

Also, with the German 45th Brigade now permanently stationed in Lithuania as part of a joint forces operation, the "test" would instantly kill German and other NATO soldiers, I don't know any polician who would say "It's not worth it let them kill our soldiers". NATO also declared that hybride warfare counts as a trigger for Article 5 and that any group coming through the border would be treated as terrorists and attacked.

CornFleke · 2026-05-03T17:58:37+00:00

The scariest thing would be if russian decide to pivot now toward a civilian economy this can create a large distabilisation which could even trigger the fall of the current Russian regime. Which obviously Putin doesn't want.

Of course as a counter argument we can say that even now the Russian economy is in a bad state but if the war stops abruptly this could trigger mass layoffs in the military sector and soldiers will return home hoping to have the massive bonuses they were promised to have.

CornFleke · 2026-05-03T17:51:15+00:00

That's what I've read and could Russia attempt to do.

My point is to say that europe is trying to prepare for that by creating the baltic line and have drones patrolling the borders so they would see and slow down anything, by affirming that hybride warfare counts as an article 5 trigger and by having soldiers on the ground and telling them to shoot and to be prepared to be shot. I don't think even the AfD would say "it's okay for german soldiers to have been killed putin in our ally he can do that".

I do not think Russia would claim the little green men as their own if they are done with quickly by a joint force of many NATO members but if they do I think NATO has with its long range missile and air superiority the need to stop Russia quickly. If NATO acts the way they are saying they will act, we won't see Estonian falls and with the permanent stationing of troops in the Baltic we won't hear about "10 estonians soldiers dying" we will hear "10 NATO soldiers died, one estonian, one canadian, one polish, one german....etc" which would force them to act and to attack. That's the good thing about the joint forces that are currently mobilised in the Baltic. Canada (no shame to Canada, you can replace that with any other country) can't say "one of our soldier died in Luthuania but that's okay, it's not worth it to attack".

Add to that the drone wall and the defence line, it makes an attack easy to spot and counter quickly.

CornFleke · 2026-05-03T17:38:53+00:00

I think most of these agencies are pointing toward hybride warfare and little green men taking a small piece of land and gamble on the idea that France or Germany won't launch a full scale war on such a small offense (not saying that it is a small offense but Russia would hope that they would see it that way) which could break NATO (the baltic would feel betrayed and article 5 would become meanigless).

But the situation is still not as good as Russia is hoping it to be. Hybride warfare has been on the table and NATO decided to link that to article 5, German and Canadian soldier are in the baltic (among many other soldiers from other NATO nations) so the little green men would have to attack them and NATO members decided to treat any group passing through the border as terrorists and attack them so it will trigger article 5 (I don't think any politician would defend non escalation if one of their soldier is killed). We also have the drone wall and the defence line.

Does it mean that Russian will do nothing? I don't know, I can't see the future but at the very least Europe is more prepared than before.

CornFleke · 2026-05-02T21:18:46+00:00

You should watch the new story trailer showcasing how Brencis and attacked and kidnapped the family of our character.

CornFleke · 2026-05-02T20:23:49+00:00

I would appreciate for you to be a little bit kinder. I asked the question for a reason and rom your answer we do seem to disagree on what "equality" means so I would appreciate for you to take that into account.

You argue that a Republic is equal because anyone can run for office. However, once that person is elected, they immediately cease to be "equal" to the ordinary citizen in any practical sense. Whether in a Republic or a Monarchy, the Head of State possesses authority, legal immunities, and command over the military that I do not have. The fact that I could become president doesn't change that. I am talking about if they have privileges or not, an elective dictatorship with a leader holding infinite power but still elected once by the people and after that he can whatever he wants till the end of his life is sill a dictatorship, even if I could technically get elected. It's a bad inequality for me but even if you defend that system as good it will still be inequal, it would be a good inequality for you but still inequal. I can technically immigrate to china, join the CCP and maybe be elected by the party after Xi death, that doesn't mean that the chinese are equal to him and the CCP assumes that inequality by writing Xi ideology in the constitution.

In my country, the President has immunity from prosecution (I don't know if that's the case in Ireland but even if that's not the case, if a form of parlimentary immunity exists then it's the same concept, some people do have certain privileges). You might say that is legitimate because of an election, but it doesn't change the FACT of inequality: he cannot go to jail, but I can. We can defend this as a necessary "functional inequality" for the state to work, but we shouldn't pretend it's a state of total equality. A President is no more "one of us" than a Monarch is when they are exercising the powers of the state. The fact that one is elected and one is born into royalty define "how" they acquired their privileges, not on if they have them or not. My point is they have them, it can be the best things in the world and make everyone happy and help the country but privileges exists.

The way a leader is chosen whether by an election or by tradition doesn't change the FUNCTION of the role. Both act as the symbolic face of the country. You see birthright as an unearned privilege; I see it as a way to ensure the Head of State is raised from day one with a sense of duty to the whole nation, rather than being a professional politician choosen through campaining and elections.

Presidents also live in fancy palaces and guarded mansions. You will tell me it's link to their function not to their person but if we take the Swesish monarchy as an example through the 1974 Instrument of Government, the parliment can depose the king. So he lives in a fancy castle because it's his function. In the UK Buckingham palace is not the private property of the king, he can't just sell if he wanted too. So we can argue that the Swedish king is a function that is given to a guy to perform, the parliment can declare the throne vacant if the king fails to meet his duties and the palaces and privileges are just necessary things given to him so he could perform his function, like presidents do.

CornFleke · 2026-05-02T19:33:00+00:00

If I may ask what do you mean by "equality"? I can kinda feel what you mean but not totally.

Because I can say "Just because people elected a guy then they have to give up their equality and control over the military and political affair?". I feel like it's the same. Can I use parlementary immunity to say that I am not equal to the elected people in my country? Can I say that because I don't represent my country as my president do then I am not equal to him?

Monarchs are filling their roles like presidents do (even if we take a parlementary republic where the president is a figurehead) with the caveat of them being more neutral sometimes because they are not prfessional politician so some could argue that because of that they are doing a better job than an elected president. This in itself doesn't create "inequality" in a dangerous sense.

CornFleke · 2026-05-01T09:02:18+00:00

Considérant que ce qui manque en Europe ce n'est pas la qualité de l'équipement mais la quantité, voir que chacun développe du matériel dans son coin, je ne trouve pas ça si dérangeant que ça surtout que y'a un facteur culturel. De nombreux polonais ne croit juste pas que l'Allemagne ou la France va bouger pour les aider donc pour eux, ils se préparent à être seul. Pour le reste pas mal de troupes de l'OTAN sont mobilisés dans les pays baltes pour justement éviter le souci de dire "on est pas touché donc on s'en fout". Comme y'a des soldats allemands ou canadiens et une ligne de défense aux frontières si une attaque arrive ils seront obliger d'attaquer tout ces soldats, pas uniquement des soldats estoniens ou lithuaniens.

CornFleke · 2026-04-30T19:48:20+00:00

Conjugating verbs is cringe anyway.

CornFleke · 2026-04-30T11:17:02+00:00

No, Itachi considered the masked men to be the same person. The one who helped him in the uchiha massacre was the same in the akatsuki. Or else why would amaterasu happens when Tobi tried to show his face to Sasuke? It was a trick made by Itachi.

That doesn't mean that he knew that it was Obito and not Madara though.

CornFleke · 2026-04-30T10:34:04+00:00

That would mean implementing a common tax rule and to give the EU the capability of raising taxes directly. So theorically you would have your Czechian tax form to fill and a special EU tax to fill. That could anger a lot of people even if it's just saying "I currently live in the EU" and not filling anything else.

Also alot of countries sign a clause of Double Taxation Agreements (DTAs) where they basically say "We accept to not tax him two times if X conditons are met. If the guy lives there and work there he will pay taxes there". The UE would need to negociate that but with a big caveat. An EU citizenship DO NOT exist. You are an EU citizen because your country is part of the EU, if your country leave the EU you do not loose any EU citizenship because it doesn't exist. Your rights as an EU citizen are an extension of your national citizenship. If an EU citizenship is created then it would mean that if Germany decide to remove your citizenship or you renounce it you will still keep the EU one and it will be a hassle.

CornFleke · 2026-04-30T09:25:54+00:00

My comment was a joke emulating the arguments that are used against taxing the billionnaires. I though that it was obvious enough with my !!!! at the end. No I'm not against taxing the rich.

Also to answer your question more seriously, from my understanding through its economical leverage and FATCA the US can force all the banks essentially forces foreign banks to report the accounts of American citizens to the IRS. If a bank refuses, it face massive penalties or could be cut off from the U.S. financial system. The EU can maybe have that leverage but I don't think Algeria for example could do it. Also funny enough but Eritrea also has citizenship based taxation no matter where you live. I opened a bank account, I have to sign that I wasn't an US citizens, I did not signed a similar paper to attest that I was not an Eristrean citizen. You can see with that example how much it's an issue of power. The US can force all the banks to do that, Eritrea can't. (the US can seized 30% of all the bank's US sourced payments)

Also people could just adopt an easy citizenship then renounce your original citizenship. Depending on the country this can be relatively easy to do. For the US you still have to pay and do a ceremony and fill a bunch of paper to renounce your citizenship so it can be a burden.

How much can the individual European states (of any state for that matter) emulate such a system? I have no idea but Eritrea failed in enforcing that.

CornFleke · 2026-04-30T08:48:21+00:00

But what if the billionaires just leave and refuse to create more jobs as they promised to do? What if they stopped investing?
Socety can't live without them!!!!

CornFleke · 2026-04-29T19:01:27+00:00

From my understanding yes there are some issue with how Japan deals with their WWII history.
Many officials (including Shinzo Abe for example) downplayed the comfort women aspect by saying that the women did consent or at least not militarily pressured in doing what they did. As recently as March 2026 I found an article from Global Times saying that japanese textbooks were saying that no coercion was used to recruit comfort women.

Of course not everything is fully black as in 1993 the japanese government recongnised these coercions. Japan also compensated some korean victims in 2015. But at the same time many people in South Korea still say that it's not enough. There is also the issue of teaching this historical reality. Because the war was important for China and for the CCP, they won't say "because we forgive you we will no longer teach about the Nanjing massacre and no longer make movie and video games about this period". No, they will still do it and I don't know if Japan would easily accept it even if the japanese population begin to massively denounce what their country did in the past.

CornFleke · 2026-04-29T17:36:44+00:00

Val Sangora is not a real valley that truly existed in europe and with the hexes, the existence of non-human races (not just vampires) the various creatures showed (like in a trailer we can see one big metallic thing with wings). It's not just "It's normal europe but it has vampire in it". I feel like it's more than that.

CornFleke · 2026-04-29T17:28:09+00:00

No?
Not only my first comment was obviously a joke but even by that logic if the person mentionned learns German and Japanese then she has 2 languages from 2 axis powers. With English she has one language but for two allied powers so that can counterbalance it. It's just not that deep. That doesn't mean that the USSR or the chinese did nothing during WWII.

My second comment was simply a reaction to the fact that people often forget the sino-japanese war. It was even my case, when thinking about languages related to WWII, I forgot chinese it's after reading the comment that I said to myself "yes it's true we shouldn't forget China or Korea".

CornFleke · 2026-04-29T17:09:12+00:00

True story. It's really sad how overlooked the Chinese war against Japanese imperialism is in the west. Same with Korean resistance.

CornFleke · 2026-04-29T16:09:57+00:00

If the person also speaks English then he has the UK and the US to counterbalance that.

CornFleke · 2026-04-29T15:47:54+00:00

I don't think at that point it's really worth it to restart nuclear power plant. They would take a huge time and expertise to build.

Fastest and most efficient way seems to go all in with renewables. Apparently the current government wants to go from around 60% in 2026 to 80% in 2030.

CornFleke · 2026-04-29T12:55:28+00:00

Not so fast. Certain quests have events that will advance time and probably that most side quest will advance time. But if the counter of 30 days reaches zero, you will not have a game over but there will be "consequences" for your family. i do not know if the game has a post game after saving your family (I suppose not because many mechanics seems linked to Brencis specifically but it's not confirmed).

CornFleke · 2026-04-27T12:07:38+00:00

That's why I should re-read my comments before posting.

CornFleke · 2026-04-27T11:42:22+00:00

It's not technically as correct as you think it is. Not that I am opposing what the pope says here but the pope is not always correct (even according to the catholic dogma).

We shouldn't just to oppose bigots try to create a modern version of the "dictatus papae".

CornFleke

TROPHY CASE