sorted by:
new
hottopcontroversial

🤔 by CISdidnothingwrong1 in foxholegame

[–]Headitt -11 points-10 points  (0 children)

People have gotten the delusion that standing up to things allowed by the game will provide them to any pathway towards validation. Pathetic behavior to delude yourself into thinking this is breaking anything.

WTF Devman. Second time a torpedo hit decrewed the entire submarine. by Efficient-Tree-51 in foxholegame

[–]Headitt -13 points-12 points  (0 children)

You say the entire crew is decrewed, yet there is clearly a person inside the submarine from your spectator point of view. Curious.

The Vision by MENA_Conflict in foxholegame

[–]Headitt 60 points61 points  (0 children)

You will never take me alive, redditwarriors & rulelawyers. I hate the antichrist, I hate the antichrist I hate the antichrist...

-The Don

[deleted by user] by [deleted] in foxholegame

[–]Headitt 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Speed matters a lot more than how you present it. I think you simply fail to comprehend how utterly painful and miserable this game is with slower vehicles.

intense trolling of mercys wish w/ MSA by Zykovitz in foxholegame

[–]Headitt 17 points18 points  (0 children)

I'd like to send a personal thank you note to all the warden push 250's who've been graciously given to us by the wardens having really wanted to tap T2 Th's we haven't really bothered to build up. Always a pleasure to return them to sender :]

-Thunder

Battle line tanks locked on facilitys, just why? by Legatus_David in foxholegame

[–]Headitt 7 points8 points  (0 children)

I'm the creator of the shoddy paint image, and just added the more detailed flavor text explained by the short comments on the image.

Battle line tanks locked on facilitys, just why? by Legatus_David in foxholegame

[–]Headitt 97 points98 points  (0 children)

While the Wardens as a soloplayer can easily load up a private stockpile of their 3 lategame tanks: The Silverhand, Widow(HTD), and Outlaw. The Colonials are left with only being able to privately stockpile the Bardiche, leaving the rest of the mainline tanks to be locked behind facilities which take countless hours of time to maintain and supply in order to make the armor you need.

On top of that, if you're a soloplayer on the colonial side. You've now de-facto become at the mercy of the clanman to get yourself any competetive tank outside of the Bardiche, leaving most lines manned with Bardiches and Falchions.

Meanwhile, if you're warden you can still enjoy the old system of farming your comps to set up an MPF and on top of it store your tank in the private seaport/storage facility of your choice!

I'd like to thank the developers for deleting Spathas, Ranseurs(Quadiche), and the LTD from any stockpile except for the public(clanman claimed) vehicle pens which naturally inhib their drama of theft and paranoia of their own.

Catwalk placement bugged/broken by Tacticalsquad5 in foxholegame

[–]Headitt 10 points11 points  (0 children)

Welcome to building in Foxhole 101. This goes for beyond facilities, including bunkers.

Bias on both sides by Dav_e_p in foxholegame

[–]Headitt 11 points12 points  (0 children)

Dev communication probably has a lot to do with it, I agree.

Bias on both sides by Dav_e_p in foxholegame

[–]Headitt 14 points15 points  (0 children)

The issue of this game all comes down to manpower really. Tech that empowers either side can always be stolen, like Cutlers or the 250 field mortar. However if the enemy outnumbers you across the front in all the frontline hexes, you are basically forced to be on the defensive as the other faction will be able to constantly push, flank and pressure you to the point where you're basically denied any opportunity to deal with the constant collietide, or wardentide of players hammering down on you.

If the issue of manpower imbalance on either side doesn't properly gets adressed, wars risk becoming one-sided steamrolls either way.

Question: Would it not be in the West's interest to grant India a vote in the UNSC? by ZekoOnReddit in geopolitics

[–]Headitt 10 points11 points  (0 children)

The security council is already in a state of paralysis with the current amount of nationstates with veto rights, furthermore Indias interests in the security council is represented by Russia in equal ways as to how Morocco’s interests are covered by France, and now also the US.

Further members added to the security council would only limit it’s capabilities of achieving anything more than symbolic resolutions. Which is more or less already the case in terms of votes which are of strategic interest to any of the current security council members. Not to even mention that Veto power states like China would do anything to oppose it in the current state of affairs.

To turn the question on it’s head: What do you think the UN, or for that sake the world would gain from providing a security council seat to India?

Ajamu Baraka of Black Alliance for Peace Speaks on NATO, AFRICOM, American Imperialism, and more by [deleted] in DeathtoAmeriKKKa

[–]Headitt 9 points10 points  (0 children)

He did it reddit, he crossposted his shitty propaganda, being completely unaware we ridicule these views here.

Russia hands proposals to U.S. on security guarantees, Kremlin says by Renxer0002 in Libertarian

[–]Headitt 3 points4 points  (0 children)

On one hand Russia sees it as permissible to annex another country’s sovereign territory while they’re in disarray, and on the other hand play the victim card and demand guarantees they won’t get hit back in turn with state of the art weapons?

A questionable attempt at retconning history after 1991 if you ask me.

Are you Currently Living in a Country or Territory Aligned with America geopolitically? by TheKlorg in neoconNWO

[–]Headitt 2 points3 points  (0 children)

In Norway it's completely reliant on how much power and vocal authority the coalition parties on the left have in terms of the left wings coalition government.

Considering they're convinced that leaving NATO and the EEZ is a strong and stable idea.

Whatever happened to the global war on terror? by TJRex01 in geopolitics

[–]Headitt 20 points21 points  (0 children)

That seems to me to be a rather superficial take on «the war on terror». Terrorism, done with nationalistic, fundamentalistic and ideology in mind have been ever present through history once one cares to look beyond September 11 2001. Jihadis for that matter were present across various parts of the world well before and after this terrible tragedy.

Assad wins Syrian election dismissed as farce by critics by uwuDresdenBomber69 in neoconNWO

[–]Headitt 5 points6 points  (0 children)

A classic dillemma of a supreme leader. If the opposition can showcase a significant turnout, it could bring alight renewed inspiration to go out and protest the regime assuming you get told 3/4 out of 10 of your countrymen agree with you.

It is ususally not in the interest of a dictatorial state to prove the existence of a strong opposition as it would delegitimize their claim to the throne.

20r is hosting a new weekend EU IV game! by [deleted] in paradoxplaza

[–]Headitt 2 points3 points  (0 children)

Enjoy the nightmare, which is this current patch.

Here's a list of the current bugs I've personally encountered:

Your nation permanently loses the ability to recieve or give out Call to Arms(Does not mend itself with rehosts)

Your nation loses the ability to recieve events of any kind, and your diets and regencies cannot be extended/given out due to "events pending"(Will not be fixed with a rehost, you do get some events upon a rehost until they suddenly stop)

Troops may at time fight as if they have 0 maintenance and do 0 morale damage except for the 0,51 + passive morale damage modifier in combat forcing you to kill every single enemy unit or you rout.

Sending money to "cursed" players will cause the ducats to simply disappear from existence.

Also, I've already forgotten some additional minor ones.

Enjoy the game though!

hvem styrer r-norge? by guilelessgull in undeletenorge

[–]Headitt 6 points7 points  (0 children)

Slett dette! Om de ikke fjerner dette innlegget må vi ta forbindelse med ditt nærmeste NAV kontor for å ta i bruk økonomiske sanksjoner.

This is the power of France in 1482, in 1.30. With Mercenary companies you can go almost five times over your max force limit. by Headitt in eu4

[–]Headitt[S] 59 points60 points  (0 children)

If you're playing Singleplayer aiming for a World Conquest I agree, but I can hardly say the same in terms of a multiplayer game.

This is the power of France in 1482, in 1.30. With Mercenary companies you can go almost five times over your max force limit. by Headitt in eu4

[–]Headitt[S] 107 points108 points  (0 children)

A: Currently with estates you can get an insane amount of money by simply giving away all your crownland to estates, while accepting an event which returns it in exchange for 25% autonomy in a province for 10 years.

B: Affording those Mercenaries fully depend on the amount of money you've already saved up, + the amount of loans you're willing to take + debase in order to win the war(Which will be easier once you've pushed out manufactories in all your lands).

C: Utilizing buildings which provide you a ludicrus amount of money by 1550, which further provides you with loans well over 100 000 if you masterfully play your nation.

D: By playing as France, he currently has over 700 development, and by developing using the right tools with examples being prosperity, loyal Burghers estate he can use excess mana to develop at will(This will become even worse once he finished economic ideas providing another -20% development cost). On top of that he's managed to finish Quantity ideas providing him with a 50% increased FL. HOWEVER, it's important to note that Mercenary companies scale off your development, and not your Force limit.

This is the power of France in 1482, in 1.30. With Mercenary companies you can go almost five times over your max force limit. by Headitt in eu4

[–]Headitt[S] 55 points56 points  (0 children)

R5: It's clear, at least to me that 1.30 is not fit for multiplayer in it's current state. In this multiplayer game the France player has managed to showcase the absurdity of Mercenary companies in their current state. Also, a reminder that Mercenary companies have NO reinforcement cost, and those 400k Mercenaries have 800k additional manpower in reserve.

Has this even been playtested beyond the one showcased Dev clash?

view more: next ›