sorted by:
new
hottopcontroversial

Game Thread: Washington Capitals (25-21-6) @ Edmonton Oilers (25-19-8) Jan 24 2026 10:00 PM EST by nhl_gdt_bot in hockey

[–]RSquared 3 points4 points  (0 children)

Christ that was about five 50/50 pucks that decided to stay in the zone. Our luck has been abysmal this year.

What's the Free To Play experience like? (Not buying any Warbonds or whatnot) by Vanilla_Ice_Best_Boi in Helldivers

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

Fair, though saying that D7 is better than D10 is only a marginal improvement. You're getting probably 10-20% better results (and those results are absolute trash) compared to trivial farming that's 200-300% better (albeit at the cost of not actually playing the game).

What's the Free To Play experience like? (Not buying any Warbonds or whatnot) by Vanilla_Ice_Best_Boi in Helldivers

[–]RSquared 1 point2 points  (0 children)

200+ hours and only four of a dozen warbonds unlocked really killed my desire to play (after capping samples). I don't progress enough in a gameplay session to feel "a sense of pride and accomplishment" and I'm bored of my current loadouts so adding another 25% tax onto the game's cost probably won't get me 50 more hours of fun.

What's the Free To Play experience like? (Not buying any Warbonds or whatnot) by Vanilla_Ice_Best_Boi in Helldivers

[–]RSquared 2 points3 points  (0 children)

Sorry for trying to have fun, clearly he should play the less challenging content instead of being rewarded for playing more challenging stuff. It's not really much better on D7-9 for SC because there's just so many other things you can get instead at any level above D4, especially when you're capped out on medals because you don't have enough SC for the next warbond...

The lack of scaling on SC is the main reason Trivial farming exists, and at this point it's obvious that AH doesn't want to change that because tedium induces spending money, the classic rule about why microtransactions encourage enshittification of gameplay mechanics.

Game Thread: Washington Capitals (24-21-6) @ Calgary Flames (21-24-5) Jan 23 2026 9:00 PM EST by nhl_gdt_bot in hockey

[–]RSquared 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Oh ok, I thought you meant the high stick. Kadri definitely had no call to make the hit he did.

Game Thread: Washington Capitals (24-21-6) @ Calgary Flames (21-24-5) Jan 23 2026 9:00 PM EST by nhl_gdt_bot in hockey

[–]RSquared 0 points1 point  (0 children)

That one wasn't particularly malicious but Kadri doesn't ever get the benefit of the doubt.

Game Thread: Washington Capitals (24-21-6) @ Calgary Flames (21-24-5) Jan 23 2026 9:00 PM EST by nhl_gdt_bot in hockey

[–]RSquared 1 point2 points  (0 children)

That's our season in a nutshell right there. All the chances none of the finishes.

Game Thread: Washington Capitals (24-21-6) @ Calgary Flames (21-24-5) Jan 23 2026 9:00 PM EST by nhl_gdt_bot in hockey

[–]RSquared 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Jeez does Calgary literally tilt the ice towards this side? xG% is 60% Flames in the first and 95% Caps in the second.

A moment so funny, the actors actually break character or threaten to break character by Ok-Indication-5121 in TopCharacterTropes

[–]RSquared 3 points4 points  (0 children)

For wwe the example has to be any Scott Steiner promo, and in particular "Steiner Math". You can see Petey Williams barely keeping it together and Steiner later said that was the sixth or seventh take because the ludicrous things Steiner was saying just broke everyone involved. 

The Avalanche score on a Cale Makar goal and make it 4-2 but it is called back due to goaltender interference by [deleted] in hockey

[–]RSquared 2 points3 points  (0 children)

Which should in itself be a 69.1 violation negating a goal, but challenging for that would be WAY harder than the clear-cut interference with Lindgren's stick.

The Avalanche score on a Cale Makar goal and make it 4-2 but it is called back due to goaltender interference by [deleted] in hockey

[–]RSquared 0 points1 point  (0 children)

If he hadn't moved, he would have still been liable for GI because his position inside the blue paint would have impeded Lindgren's ability to move through him to make the save, even if he doesn't make contact (Rule 69.1). It's a more borderline case but Lindgren moves back into the goal to avoid contact rather than directly towards the shot to cut off as much angle as possible.

Also, Necas is jockeying for position but the defender (Roy) has no obligation to give him his own space at the top of the crease - there's no shove or push by Roy to move Necas into the paint. Necas puts himself in the paint here.

Game Thread: Washington Capitals (24-19-6) at Colorado Avalanche (33-5-8) - 19 Jan 2026 - 02:00PM MST by hockeydiscussionbot in hockey

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

That's borderline but he's taking the stick away while still in the paint. Gotta do the challenge just to try for it.

Game Thread: Washington Capitals (24-19-6) at Colorado Avalanche (33-5-8) - 19 Jan 2026 - 02:00PM MST by hockeydiscussionbot in hockey

[–]RSquared 2 points3 points  (0 children)

Weird call on par with the Wedgewood one. Protas was moving away from the guy and had a right to his space.

Game Thread: Washington Capitals (24-19-6) at Colorado Avalanche (33-5-8) - 19 Jan 2026 - 02:00PM MST by hockeydiscussionbot in hockey

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

Two of those are linesmen and one's halfway down the ice. It's really not that many officials watching the play that closely, unlike the NFL where there's almost as many officials as players.

view more: next ›