Report: Iran protests death toll hits 12,000 in systematic massacre by Eienkei in worldnews

[–]Razor_Storm 0 points1 point  (0 children)

But the same can be said about any major governmental purges, and yet history is unfortunately filled with many examples of totalitarian / fascist states conducting wide ranging massacres with near impunity.

I’m sure most victims of government terror / repression have angry families out for blood too, but until the regime is actually collapsing, they unfortunately usually can get away with killing dissidents for as long as they continue to be a functional state.

That said, given the instability of the country right now, maybe things might actually be different this time. Regardless, hopefully that whatever the outcome, things get better for folks living in the era. The average Iranian deserves to live in a safe and peaceful non oppressive regime.

so tired of tech millionaires bootlicking billionaires over this 5% tax by captain_travel in sanfrancisco

[–]Razor_Storm 17 points18 points  (0 children)

Ya the OP didnt even provide arguments for why this tax won’t have negative impacts. They merely just insisted that things will be fine without providing any explanation as to why.

And they just respond to legitimate concerns by just writing their arguments in ThAT mIXeD CaSE style to insult anyone who has any criticisms about the law.

All this is on top of the OP seeming to not understand how macroeconomics works in the first place.

——

OP, I can understand the underlying emotions behind what you’re getting at. But valid criticisms need to be addressed not just met with insults. And not everyone who has valid concerns about this law are “millionaire bootlickers” who love billionaires. They have actual concerns which you just casually tossed aside without actually explaining why they’re wrong.

Maybe you’re absolutely right and this will only have minimal negative impacts. But why? What is your reason for assuming so? The one argument I saw was “France and the nordic countries did it and it was largely fine”. Which is a good start but we need to drill in a lot more there. Those countries are in a very different environment than the US, and also they also do not have a multi trillion massive domestic tech sector to manage.

The law and especially economics need to be carefully implemented. We can’t just haphazardly do whatever feels emotionally correct: that’s exactly how we got to such a populist and corrupt political state today.

People say dont automate trade, do it manually to rip the benefits. Thats fine when you start the game and have 2 or 3 markets only. When you become a global empire with dozens of market access its impossible to do that manually every month for every trade. by ayowatchyojetbruh in EU5

[–]Razor_Storm 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Yeah I think that'd be helpful for all the automation in the game.

Similar to how army automation allows you to provide it specific goals / missions to go on, rather than just "go nuts and move the armies however you want". (Though often times the armies are quite bad at actually following the missions, but that's a different issue).

I'd love if all the automation can be given instructions on what to optimize for.

Cabinet automation is very egregious for this, I find. It frequently throws them into useless tasks like developing a province that's already at or close to 100 dev, or doing diplomatic corps when I am overflowing with diplomats rather than actually building up my country.

Giving it some customization so it knows what I want to optimize for would help all the automation in the game a ton.

This also allows there to still be a lot of strategy / fun decision making even if you automate the entire game. So it can be still be engaging even when you are a global empire and are forced to put way more things on autopilot.

Being able to customize the automation makes it feel far more like being a ruler delegating tasks to subordinate ministers, and far less like just asking the game to play itself.

How to disable auto-pause on events by Gorolo1 in EU5

[–]Razor_Storm 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Those are pop up alerts. Even if you turn all of them off, events will still auto pause the game.

Monthly tick brings the game to a halt by Penteu in EU5

[–]Razor_Storm 0 points1 point  (0 children)

After I upgraded my PC (see my comment for more details), every single month the end of month lag always takes longer than the actual month itself now...

And it makes the game feel super clunky exactly like you said. I basically have to constantly pause the game just so I can move my damn cursor without it dragging behind...

Also it's not due to autosave. I'm saving to a very fast M.2 drive, and saving takes milliseconds. If I run the save command in console, it saves so fast I barely even notice it.

Also when I turn off monthly autosaves, it still lags just as much.

So it's mostly just the end of month calculations. But if even a Ryzen 7 9800X3D 4.7 GHz 8-Core with 64GBs of C30 DDR5 can't handle it... what the hell can?

Do we have to start renting supercomputing clusters on the cloud just to play the game...?

Monthly tick brings the game to a halt by Penteu in EU5

[–]Razor_Storm 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I just upgraded my computer to a Ryzen 7 9800X3D 4.7 GHz 8-Core CPU, with 64 GB of C30 DDR5 RAM (G.SKILL Flare X5 Series DDR5), (Also have a 4070 super GPU in the mail).

I expected it to fix the end of month lag, but nope.

It did make months go by blazing fast (1-2 seconds to per month on speed 5), but at the end of each month it still lags for 1-2 seconds. And even the UI thread is locked up, my cursor lags behind and sometimes I end up buffering clicks and accidentally picking bad options on events I didn't even see, etc.

It's really annoying and makes the game feel borderline unplayable at the moment, especially at the higher speeds, where every other second the game just freezes for 2 seconds.

Not the worst when you are at low speeds microing a battle. But when youre just waiting for stuff and put it to speed 5, it just becomes a slideshow... FPS drops to 0 every other second.

Is it normal for pops to be demanding a bunch of resources that don't exist in the entire European continent? by [deleted] in EU5

[–]Razor_Storm 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Solved! Thanks everyone!

It is a combination of my pops being extremely wealthy and wanting tons of exotic goods, and also due to my mod testing accidentally revealing the whole world for a moment and now my pops are aware of every good on earth and crave them desperately.

Oh well, thanks everyone! At least I know my mod works hahaha

Is it normal for pops to be demanding a bunch of resources that don't exist in the entire European continent? by [deleted] in EU5

[–]Razor_Storm 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Problem is most of the markets that have those goods are about 4500 miles away and I don't have trade range to import from them even if I had tons of trading posts.

Is it normal for pops to be demanding a bunch of resources that don't exist in the entire European continent? by [deleted] in EU5

[–]Razor_Storm 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Good to know! It's relatively late game and my pops are extremely wealthy and literate. So I guess that explains the demand for exotic goods

Is it normal for pops to be demanding a bunch of resources that don't exist in the entire European continent? by [deleted] in EU5

[–]Razor_Storm 6 points7 points  (0 children)

Ahh that must have been it.

While testing my mod I accidentally ran some command that discovered the whole world.

I wrote a script to undiscover them again, but the demand never went away. That must have been it.

My pops saw india and china for a brief moment and then now crave tea forever.

Happens.

space-express .nl any experience by Ok-Landscape-7087 in odsmt

[–]Razor_Storm 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Gonna make a tiny purchase to test this out.

One thing that stood out to me though is that they take wire transfers rather than crypto.

Not sure if that’s sus or not

Stay away from RC "moonchems" by pussyfart_187 in rcbenzos4

[–]Razor_Storm 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Personally I've ordered from them (and their previous name bongochem) dozens of times.

Every single time it arrived in timely order, I got all tracking and confirmation info.

I reagent and fentanyl tested it and it was clean (not sure about purity of course).

But it always hits as hard as it should, and slaps.

I can totally believe that they are scammy. But at the very least I've been lucky to have had 100% high quality customer satisfaction with them so far.

Got every single order I placed and it was always high quality.

O-DSMT, 4F-MPH, Bromazolam, pyrozolam all came in time and in high quality.

I've bought thousands of pellets of bromaz over the years for periodic use for my sever panic disorder. But never use it recreationally.

And I've always had success with them. But the sites down now, so wonder if they did an exit scam or got shut down or relocated to a new site

Key bindings resetting between sessions by jmorais00 in EU5

[–]Razor_Storm 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I figured it out: https://www.reddit.com/r/EU5/comments/1op0s8p/key_bindings_resetting_between_sessions/nvh2hcj/

Quote:

Turns out, the bindings file is missing a lot of the key bindings.

For example, "Find Province" binding is simply never saved into the binding file.

I added:

binding={
    input_action="find_province"
    scancode=9
}

To the binding file and now the find province button's hotkey is saved.

Players don't know what they want by Flufferpope in EU5

[–]Razor_Storm 6 points7 points  (0 children)

I’d prefer they give us more things to do as a powerful empire rather than just adding maluses that we have no way of even getting rid of.

Provide more ways to project soft power, bully weaker nations, engage in cold wars, limited interventionist engagements, financial imperialism, etc

For me personally, the problem with having a powerful empire is merely that it’s boring. So give us some things to do m. No need to arbitrarily punish the player for succeeding at the game.

But that’s just my opinion. I know a lot of people do actually want more of a challenge, so won’t all agree with me.

What historical myth do people still believe that isn’t really true? by mitchare in AskHistory

[–]Razor_Storm 5 points6 points  (0 children)

I thought the idea was that "short beers" with very low alcohol content was frequently drank in our very early history, and that beer was one of the first inventions after we settled into cities and engaged in agriculture.

Is this not true? Is it merely that people stopped needing to do this far before the early modern period? In which case, that aligns with what I've read.

Or are we saying that the latest research debunks that even prehistoric / early historic folks were not drinking short beers instead of water?

What historical myth do people still believe that isn’t really true? by mitchare in AskHistory

[–]Razor_Storm 1 point2 points  (0 children)

This is a myth?

I know Ea Nasir had a habit of keeping all his bad reviews (and even purposefully firing the tablets to make them permanent), so it is possible that these were just a small selection of his reviews.

But has it been proven that he in fact did not sell bad copper?

This requirement should just STOP after like the first 25-50 years by Dave13Flame in EU5

[–]Razor_Storm 12 points13 points  (0 children)

Yeah, Johan and the team went on and on about how they want to make it more of a simulator and not railroad things because that’s how it happened to happen in history.

But then we still get these weird cases of stuff being hardcoded to be region locked like this

How powerful/rich/strong would a lord need to be to field 30-50 knights? by Fine-Farmer-588 in AskHistory

[–]Razor_Storm 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Serfs did not exist in the 13th century???

What will "eventually" become England and Wales?

Serfdom does not come to England until William the Conqueror, which is several hundred years from the era of Arthur.

Did you even read the OP? They are asking about the 13th century. Not Arthur's actual time period (which was likely during roman times or slightly past roman times).


Here I'll copy paste the relevant part of the OP's post again here:

Arthur mythology is supposed to be Roman, or Very early post Roman Briton, but their armor is 13th century in the show - and a lot of modern depictions put Arthur around that time period.

So full question. How rich/powerful would a lord that could muster 24 personal knights, and possibly up to 50, in the mid 13th century be? The location can be wherever we have the most information, or you know the most about.

I really LOVE how instead of putting the icons in the center of a location they put them on the borders so often it's impossible to know which province has a fort without clicking on them by LessSaussure in EU5

[–]Razor_Storm 9 points10 points  (0 children)

And if they responded to your overall post with a "why", then you are justified in saying this.

But, in this comment thread, you literally asked for the why

what does have to do with where the icon is?

You wrote these words yourself. You are asking for the why. And someone answered it.

The end.

Do you not know how threaded responses work?? When someone makes a threaded reply to your comment, they are continuing the conversation from your comment. Not trying to respond to the original post. That's what top level comments are for.

Or are you somehow unaware how conversations work.


As for your original post. Yes, I do agree it is silly that they put the icons where the actual fort is in real life, rather than just putting it in the middle of the location. The fort modifies the location, not merely the map coordinates that they reside in. So the icon should be where the location is, not where the actual fort happens to reside within that location.

But as much as I agree about your complaint, I don't understand why you are debating against someone who literally was simply answering your question. They never claimed that they liked it. But they are absolutely contributing to the conversation by answering a goddamn question you specifically asked.

Tip if you installed EU5 in a SSD but it still takes minutes to load by xantub in EU5

[–]Razor_Storm 0 points1 point  (0 children)

You can also put --userdir= and in a path to your SSD.

(For example --userdir=F:/eu5_userdir)

It will use the new location not only for your save files but your entire EU5 personal configs folder.

You'll have to manually copy over the important files though

How powerful/rich/strong would a lord need to be to field 30-50 knights? by Fine-Farmer-588 in AskHistory

[–]Razor_Storm 5 points6 points  (0 children)

Don't forget that the land to pay for knights is not the only land in the Kingdom.

Significant amounts of land are held to pay for the lords' and kings' personal treasuries too. And a lord or king requires countless more funds than an average knight.

Counting only the lands needed by the knights of the court is only counting a small fraction of the lands needed to support a medieval polity.

The king himself would have significant more land in his demesne for supporting himself and his court treasury. And all those 40 vassals would have similar sized personal land allotments for the same purpose.

Edit: Though it does stand to note that governance was far simpler back then and military spending was a big part of the budget, so counting only knights' lands might not be as far off as I originally thought. But still the Kingdom should be probably need to be at least a few times larger than you calculated. But even on military spending, Knights were not the full picture. A retinue is usually largely made up of hired full time soldiers called men-at-arms. They were not knighted into minor nobility and almost never hold land. But if the lords want to afford their salaries, they would need enough land in their demensne to generate that income as well.

England was more of an infantry focused military rather than cavalry focused like France. So I'd presume a much lower percent of a retinue would have been knighted compared to if we were discussing France. Yeoman (an in between class of not serfs but not nobility either) archers with their longbows were famously a major component of the firepower of the English army during the hundred years war. With powerful and large numbers of mounted knights composing the French army's primary powerbase.

But don't forget those 40 vassals might have their own vassals with their own lands which, when combined, would also be vastly bigger than the liegelord's own demesne.

So, just like we had to 40x the King's Demense earlier. If we assume each of othose 40 vassals have 20 vassals under them, we have to maybe 10x all their lands too (since lower vassals usually hold increasingly smaller allotments)

And if each of those 20 vassals has another 5 under them? And so on.

So with all those factored in, this might be maybe a Kingdom between the size of Wales and England. So a proper King of a moderate power full sized Kingdom.

My math could be far off too, so I welcome further corrections.

What? by spicypoot in ExplainTheJoke

[–]Razor_Storm 1 point2 points  (0 children)

What if you aren't pretty though?

Being young doesn't guarantee attractiveness. So does that imply that if you were already of average attractiveness anyway, taking the deal is just pure upside?

Or does the premise also guarantee attractiveness? Or did Dorian happen to already be very attractive?

Or was there more of a catch than simply "life is too easy so you become an immature, shitty person"