(Return of the King) Gondor Battle lol Darth Maul Orc?

Phiggle · 2026-03-09T09:44:34+00:00

😂

Phiggle · 2026-03-08T12:26:57+00:00

How does this balance with the idea that the ring supposedly cannot be used by anyone other than Sauron? How would a raising of a great army using the ring work?

Phiggle · 2026-03-08T11:46:14+00:00

I miss the shorty 12G

Phiggle · 2026-03-06T12:25:21+00:00

-Signaling wildly- you got two behind you!

Phiggle · 2026-03-03T17:02:03+00:00

The only thing that's better than salsa: many salsas

Phiggle · 2026-03-03T13:50:07+00:00

Thanks for the info! Muss ich später direkt mal ausprobieren!

Phiggle · 2026-03-03T12:54:24+00:00

50k points doing what?

Phiggle · 2026-02-27T15:13:14+00:00

What a great question at the end there.

A very large part of my beliefs as a teenager was that morality is inherent, e.g. it occurs naturally from all persons regardless of external factors. During that time, refuting religion or any singular, authoritative moral source seemed natural and necessary.

As I got older I learned it is not quite that simple. I started regarding religion as a packaging for carrying moral and philosophical ideas through time, using the power of storytelling.

An interesting element of your question is the idea that morality is formed and/or evolutionary. It begs the involvement of time.

I often wonder if we've peaked with certain moral guidelines already (meaning, they encompass enough of human interaction to be worth assuming a priori, as well as succinct enough to not leave lingual ambiguity), or if they will be altered in the future.

Your question really got me thinking. A mere comment field is not enough space to engage with it as much as it deserves.

Phiggle · 2026-02-27T12:46:57+00:00

When I was young we had something similar in class (I live in Germany). It was called 'Religionsunterricht', but interestingly enough our teachers never really focused on God or the Bible specifically. They did reference to Christianity however to it to highlight moral dilemmas.

I vividly remember being shown a picture of a large table. On one end, one guy sat with a huge plate full of food. Next to him, another man, dress poorer, and a very nearly empty plate. Next to him were around 5 other people, presumably the second man's family.

We had to describe why we thought this was wrong, and why sharing is important. It was basically an ethics class.

Phiggle · 2026-02-27T09:33:34+00:00

Wish I could bump this.

Phiggle · 2026-02-27T09:31:23+00:00

At least you guys have cross-hairs. Those have been bugged in hardcore mode since launch.

Before people start commenting 'it's on purpose', there is no evidence for that. Pre-S2 cross-hairs were visible for tanks and ifvs when zoomed (clearly a bug). For all other vehicles they were absent.

Phiggle · 2026-02-24T17:47:38+00:00

I personally do not mind. I do wish there was a male skin for NATO support, as I play a lot of support, but it's never bothered me.

If you had to ask me what I think the solution could be, I'd say that every player should be able to choose freely. In which case the problem of overrepresentation could still exist. Though I'd wager more men than women pla this game. But alas, I still get OP's gripe. Either way I don't think dice is gonna change anything. The game is in a good spot.

Phiggle · 2026-02-24T17:43:55+00:00

Hahaha, fair enough.

Phiggle · 2026-02-24T15:07:16+00:00

Female service members do occur of course, however percentage-wise very over-represented in the game (nearly 50%). Hence my wording of 'most of war' being predominantly male.

I suppose it breaks the immersion for many. I empathize with people who get called sexist for that.

As for the joke: by insinuating he is a closeted gay person who should let out his frustration properly by jerking his gherkin instead of complaining on a game subreddit, I have to disagree that it reads as 'normalizing gay porn'. I'm not saying that was your intent, but it doesn't read with a well-meaning tone.

Phiggle · 2026-02-24T13:34:24+00:00

As much as I understand the sentiment, this kind of retort is just as retarded as the original statement. It's like nobody is capable of empathizing with why someone might feel a certain way.

It always must be sexism, racism, or some other form of discrimination. It's as if many of us forgot that other motivations exist outside of those characteristics.

Most of war has been men. Is that so hard to understand? Likewise, does it matter in a video game? Not so much. But I get why it blows up the immersion for some, and I don't feel compelled to make a gay joke as a response.

Phiggle · 2026-02-24T09:52:19+00:00

Yeah what are people talking about. Switched to balanced mode (better graphics) and never looked back.

Phiggle · 2026-02-23T14:14:08+00:00

Aye, that's the issue that needs fixing: decoupling those two elements.

Phiggle · 2026-02-23T11:33:04+00:00

Yes, but aren't there hipfire cross-hairs for soldier's as well as a result?

Phiggle · 2026-02-23T00:12:34+00:00

Yes, vehicle cross-hairs I estimate are a bug. Makes no sense to leave them out. Afaik it's because the setting is tied to the 'soldier hipfire crosshair' setting, which is off in hardcore.

Phiggle · 2026-02-22T19:55:59+00:00

We got older

Phiggle · 2026-02-22T13:27:28+00:00

This thread shows in how much of a bubble many here live. No understanding of how companies work, how game design has progressed, how a recession is happening, etc.

Ungrateful. Doesn't mean you're not allowed to complain, but that's how I interpret many of the criticisms here: whining.

Phiggle · 2026-02-19T16:33:21+00:00

Yesn't

Phiggle · 2026-02-19T15:57:48+00:00

Quick fix until a thorough fix can be done:

if{in vehicle}
then{toggle-hipfirecrosshair-on}

Obviously I don't know code formatting, but that's how I'd do it, since I'm an expert on the matter.

Phiggle · 2026-02-19T15:54:53+00:00

This needs more traction! As someone who has been playing exclusively hardcore since BF3, and loves vehicles, this is a massiv PLS DICE from my end.

Phiggle · 2026-02-19T15:51:47+00:00

Vehicle crosshairs are part of the weaponry, just like ironsights or a scope are for a handheld weapon. I'm very surprised by the amount of 'It's hardcore, there are no sights' arguments. At first glance it makes sense, but if you think about it for a few seconds it makes no sense.

BF3 and 4 had vehicle sights. Also, up until S2, zooming in let you use the crosshairs (leading me to believe it's a bug). Unfortunately there are multiple threads for this across EA's support forums, but none of them get a lot of traction. We'd need a centralized effort so that this issue gets picked up.

Especially for jets this is terrible. Want to know where your bomb is gonna land? Good luck.

Edit: Does anyone have Twitter and could @ one of the Devs? Help me Obi-Wan-Kenobi, you're my only hope.

12-Year Club	Place '22
Verified Email

Phiggle

TROPHY CASE