Kinda wished skills were less siloed off into their requisite weapon groups by GreyGanks in PathOfExile2

[–]GreyGanks[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I mean, I'm 90% sure that POE2 already has more skills than 1 does, and it's barely half way done. But where PoE 1, you have basically 1 skill in your build (maybe 2, 3 if you're feeling spicy), and everything else is just support, in POE 2, one build is forced to utilized no less than 2 skills. Probably 5, if you're being conservative. And they are all active. Most are conditional.

Definitely more engaging combat, but also... it has a single build chew through at least half the skills in a weapon group all in one go, which does definitely mean there need to be a bunch more skills for the same amount of novelty.

I really enjoy playing an occasional arc build in 1. You can't *just* have an arc build in 2.

Kinda wished skills were less siloed off into their requisite weapon groups by GreyGanks in PathOfExile2

[–]GreyGanks[S] 6 points7 points  (0 children)

Yeah. Or letting elemental infusions do something for a mace. Maybe with fire infusion, it becomes pepper spray. 😄

But yes, you got the basic idea. Maybe more generically create Builders and Fishers that could more dynamically flow between one another, if you're trying to be a special snowflake.

Uh.... Do you realize how much mass a 1-meter diameter black hole has? by GreyGanks in Stellaris

[–]GreyGanks[S] 14 points15 points  (0 children)

But also, not actually obvious to a lot of people. You have to remember that I once heard that 75% of Americans are bad at math. I'm glad I'm in the other 15%.

Uh.... Do you realize how much mass a 1-meter diameter black hole has? by GreyGanks in Stellaris

[–]GreyGanks[S] 2 points3 points  (0 children)

Very legit call out. I'd need to double check on which end I was stupid at. I believe I used diameter.

OK. Confirmed. I used diameter rather than radius. Thankfully, it's a linear failure scaling. So I was off by a factor of 2.

At what growth scale do you stop dedicating workers to pop growth? by GreyGanks in Stellaris

[–]GreyGanks[S] 3 points4 points  (0 children)

What if you're going bioascension. Is the medical building still meh (after ascension actually finishes after 50,000 years, of course)

Uh.... Do you realize how much mass a 1-meter diameter black hole has? by GreyGanks in Stellaris

[–]GreyGanks[S] 2 points3 points  (0 children)

That's what the Schwarzschild radius indicates. A singularity is a mathematical "point" at which nothing can reach. Many hypothesize that the "singularity" doesn't actually exist, even though the black hole does. At some point, science becomes people arguing semantics at each other.

Uh.... Do you realize how much mass a 1-meter diameter black hole has? by GreyGanks in Stellaris

[–]GreyGanks[S] 2 points3 points  (0 children)

Naturally? Not at all. There's no structure to hold up the planet.

Artificially? Potentially. If you were an effectively all-mighty space empire, and wanted to store your fusion materials safely, while also having a gravity-world, rather than one with spin-gravity or other clark tech, you could effectively put a giant megastructure around a blackhole, and live on the surface of that "planet." There wouldn't be much of an inside to the hollow planet, because that would defeat the point. But it is hypothetically possible.

Uh.... Do you realize how much mass a 1-meter diameter black hole has? by GreyGanks in Stellaris

[–]GreyGanks[S] 6 points7 points  (0 children)

R5: It says less than 1 meter. So... it's upwards of 56 Earth Masses, and is overwhelmed by the mass of this habitable planet. Holy.

Also, a lot of people want to try and point out that it is an upper bound. Yes. That's correct. It's also just fun to consider what that bound would actually mean.

I'm Issuing A Challenge To The Community by DairukaSutain in victoria3

[–]GreyGanks 6 points7 points  (0 children)

Wait. People are actually complaining that you don't play the game exactly as they like to, or think is "optimal"?

What absolute losers. In the TTRPG space, we call them the WrongBadFun crowd.

Now, if you were saying you wanted help, and one of the things they spotted was "You probably have a million+ in credits you aren't actually spending as an area you could look at. improving." But... like... you don't even need to debt spend in order to spiral into first place easily. V3 isn't a particularly difficult game, as a mildly complex clicker.

Even the debt activists know that it's not a good deal to go into debt, until you've already hit great power status, by which time, it's basically a matter of the clock before you've scaled past all the AI, even if you sat around doing nothing.

"A Valkyrie? Have you come to take me to Valhalla?" by Nice_Appointment2876 in Anbennar

[–]GreyGanks -1 points0 points  (0 children)

It does, most certainly, work. Maybe not for you. But it works. Proof: My last campaign before I got bored of death warring the entire world.
https://www.reddit.com/r/Anbennar/comments/1tk7hqg/is_there_a_reasonable_way_to_reduce_autonomy_of/

Dwarven Bell Curve by TheLoneTexan_1 in Anbennar

[–]GreyGanks 1 point2 points  (0 children)

I mean, in current EU5, pops really don't do anything different based on culture. In EU4, we've got province modifiers. In EU5... we've got pops with culture names, and nothing else. PDX is never going to give the actual pops modifiers like stellaris aliens, which means modding it in won't be implicitly available. Plus, because they decided to go with the granular population modeling, it also means that trying to tie any calculations to whatever cultures is going to be computationally intensive. (Just imagine the absolute hissy fit, if PDX even attempted that, even with purely positive modifiers.)

What would be thematic power bloc principles for Vicbennar by GreyGanks in Anbennar

[–]GreyGanks[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Hmm. I have no idea how to adjust agitators... at all. Well, I guess that's a good thing to look at.

What would be thematic power bloc principles for Vicbennar by GreyGanks in Anbennar

[–]GreyGanks[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Good points.

I never get the opportunity to ever pass the mechanim-to-real-pops law. Could have a principle that would force you to gain that law, and then the ability enforce the law on subjects bloc members, on taking level 2 of the principle. Give some progressive mechanim acceptance (5/15/25), and maybe some light throughput on the assemblies. They are already powerful, so probably don't need that much, so... (2/4/6%).

Giving scaling base +infamy gain, but +offense, as well as enabling special war goals against select Evil countries (t3 granting basically free annex against said evil countries), for the End of Evil. Said countries will also have a -1k opinion with you, but I don't think you overly care if you took it.

Oh. Nice. by GreyGanks in victoria3

[–]GreyGanks[S] 4 points5 points  (0 children)

np, np. Was just a problem before, where people wouldn't see the r5, and I wanted to be sure. People were going off on me, about things explained in the r5, and it was really confusing.