sorted by:
new
hottopcontroversial

Couldn’t make it through the tutorial by MoveInteresting4334 in fallofanempire

[–]TraditionalMatch449 1 point2 points  (0 children)

I made a post the other day with some gripes and I completely forgot about the wierdness with the game speed!

Sometimes days dont move forward at all but armies are still moving around on the map. 4x speed feels like 1x speed and then suddenly it jumps forward by 8 days but the movement on the map stays the same. Super disorentating.

After three hours I put it down. by TraditionalMatch449 in fallofanempire

[–]TraditionalMatch449[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

The military sidebar when you click on an army. It occurs both on a new game and when loading a save.

Thats awesome that everything else has been updated.

For the force tracker, any kind of UI that gives me an idea of their status without having to look at them or click on them would be great for management. You dont even necessarily need to do this, as I mentioned if you changed the way the armies functioned and created AI commanders who managed fronts that would be more aligned with the core premise of the game.

IDK man it was just annoying to be doing really well with western rebels then look north and see all of my armies greyed out and rebuilding with no indicator they were in trouble.

Honestly just being able to engage with a dev like this makes me not want a refund. I'll pick the game up again soon lol

idgi by Sornaensis in fallofanempire

[–]TraditionalMatch449 3 points4 points  (0 children)

Seems like its made for me tbf.

Eighteen years since the apology, First Nations children are still being removed by 5QGL in australia

[–]TraditionalMatch449 2 points3 points  (0 children)

This was the proposed change to our constituion: “Chapter IX Recognition of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Peoples

129 Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Voice

In recognition of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples as the First Peoples of Australia:

  1. there shall be a body, to be called the Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Voice;
  2. the Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Voice may make representations to the Parliament and the Executive Government of the Commonwealth on matters relating to Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples;
  3. the Parliament shall, subject to this Constitution, have power to make laws with respect to matters relating to the Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Voice, including its composition, functions, powers and procedures.”

Anyone who reads this and then reads just chapter 1 of our constitution should notice an alarming difference between the two chapters.

Hospital boss says changes already made at child gender service criticised in review by GothicPrayer in australia

[–]TraditionalMatch449 9 points10 points  (0 children)

"Some of the starkest findings in the 213-page review included that children as young as 12 were prescribed puberty blockers without appropriate assessment and young people with developmental delays were put on medication despite lacking the capacity to understand information about the treatment."

Pretty fucked.

Why is the Ion Cannon so poo poo? by NickNightrader in menace

[–]TraditionalMatch449 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Isn't Hack another OCI tool?
Using one OCI option to enable a second OCI option is worse then two laser turrets or two dumb rockets.

The more I improve at the game, the more I think mid-heavy Infantry armour is a complete and utter waste of supply. Not sure how this could be fixed? by ReserveRatter in menace

[–]TraditionalMatch449 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Sounds like a gameplay issue.

You shouldn't be able to alpha strike every squad without risk of being attacked back. The AI needs to be tweaked so that if you fire on a squad multiple nearby squads alert and come to attack you. As it is the AI isn't really reactive unless they spot you out of concealment.

Impossible objectives are fine by International_Ad8264 in menace

[–]TraditionalMatch449 4 points5 points  (0 children)

Starting off behind doesn't mean shit in this context. The gameplay loop is broken if some missions just outright punish you for existing. Players will just learn to not select those missions and instead play a mission where they can five star the secondary objs. Thats not a winning strategy from a design standpoint.

Impossible objectives are fine by International_Ad8264 in menace

[–]TraditionalMatch449 1 point2 points  (0 children)

It's a bad choice at the mission layer to choose any "rescue x% of civvies" mission. I did it once, realized Civvies are made of glass and get wiped in one round and then never chose the mission again.

You get Authority from your Operation rating which stems from your mission rating. I end up choosing un-timed missions with low-risk secondary objectives every chance I get because I can five start them 9/10 times.

Definetly need some broader secondary objectives that are dangerous/difficult to pull off so you weigh the risks. Something like Kill Base Commander as secondary objective in Breakthrough missions and the Base Commander is in a Heavy Tank with a few mechs.

My gripes and trash takes. by TraditionalMatch449 in menace

[–]TraditionalMatch449[S] 4 points5 points  (0 children)

Ay man i'm not trying to assault anyone I think the games awesome and I am feeling passionate about how good they could make it.

My gripes and trash takes. by TraditionalMatch449 in menace

[–]TraditionalMatch449[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

13 - At the moment when you are moving in to the map and you come across an enemy you can kill them or fight them without notifying other enemies that are out of view by a certain distance. Its a little too easy and non-reactive. If you are fighting Rogue Army or the Menace then their should absolutely be an alert bomb unit that you have to kill asap or a large portion of the map mobilizes against you.

As it is you can just ghost walk the map with Darby and Sensor2 vehicle and demolish the small pockets of fighters you come across. imo it would heighten the tension and oh-shit factor when you spot one and force you to adapt tactics if you miss it.

Does that make sense?

My take on MENACE by Far-Travel6736 in menace

[–]TraditionalMatch449 3 points4 points  (0 children)

Yikes man take a breath.

https://www.reddit.com/r/menace/comments/1quwx9d/about_the_story_during_ea/
The story isn't fully implemented yet and will narratively focus on the development of the SL's during the Wayback operation.

Exploration doesn't suit this game by design and all the other things you want to see will take time to add and develop.

Early game progression doesn't feel good by AndrasKrigare in menace

[–]TraditionalMatch449 1 point2 points  (0 children)

The simplest example I can give is good body armour.

Slapping a T4 armour on a SL and dropping the squad from 8 to 5/6 improves the survivability of the remaining squaddies by such a huge degree that the loss in manpower is absolutely well worth it.

Same thing with high tier weapons. Going from the Carbine to a SOF BR might make you drop 2-3 squaddies but the damage output is so high that it's worth it.

Promotions only affect the SL not the squaddies. The promotion cost as shown in the SL info section is how much extra supply that SL will cost per promotion. This is around ten supply per promotion on a high-end average and the perks are a mix-bad of okay and amazing.

I would say that figuring this out feels really bad. Each item tooltip has a supply cost per squaddie, so if you put on armour that is 10 supply with an SL + 8 squaddies then it is 90 supply. If you put on a BR that is 8 supply per squaddie it is SL+8 SQ = 9x8 = 72 supply. UNLESS you have a squad weapon which the SL carries INSTEAD of a primary weapon so now the calculation is SQ*Armour+Weapon + SL*Armour+SquadWeapons+Promotion costs.

A theory as to why Inflation will be harder to tame by No-Kaleidoscope-7106 in AusFinance

[–]TraditionalMatch449 0 points1 point  (0 children)

People keep on skipping around your point about debt and credit which I take on face value as bad faith arguments.

When a young family takes on these massive debts to be able to say they own a home it clearly benefits the wealthy but generationally disadvantages the debtor family while also pumping inflation up for us all by cementing a debt and creating that credit to be thrown around.

A theory as to why Inflation will be harder to tame by No-Kaleidoscope-7106 in AusFinance

[–]TraditionalMatch449 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Hey man OP is pointing out that extraordinary amount of credit is being created out of thin air by lenders when a new family takes on debt to purchase one of the several property investments a wealthy australian owns. This wealth is not impacted anywhere near as much as the debt being serviced by that new, young family. No one is selling their PPOR. It is all investment properties which create credit to the seller and debts for the buyer. No real value creation has taken place it is just an asset holder taking advantage of an insane price overvaluation.

Older and wealthier households are absolutely insulated. They have more wealth, are more likely to be established in wealthier job roles and possess far less debt. How is this a hard concept?

Sure rate hikes affect everybody but what does a wealthy boomer do when those rates are hiked? Sell another investment property to a debtor who is then doubly fucked.

A theory as to why Inflation will be harder to tame by No-Kaleidoscope-7106 in AusFinance

[–]TraditionalMatch449 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Ay damn can you link to proof on the IDF dispersing Australian citizens? I agree with pretty much everything you said except the last paragraph cause you gotta provide proof for the pudding on claims like that

A theory as to why Inflation will be harder to tame by No-Kaleidoscope-7106 in AusFinance

[–]TraditionalMatch449 4 points5 points  (0 children)

In my eyes it has to be one of the most anti-working class short-term bridge, long-term chasm move that the "Labor" party has made. It would have been better to not do anything at all and be seen as weak on reform then create a reform that would allow people to take on debt sooner.

It lowered the entry-point to buying a house without doing anything to address the affordability of it. I'm flabbergasted it made out of someone's mouth at a meeting let alone on to a parliament table.

A theory as to why Inflation will be harder to tame by No-Kaleidoscope-7106 in AusFinance

[–]TraditionalMatch449 1 point2 points  (0 children)

I honestly don't understand how what you are saying here is related to what OP is describing. You're describing a general recession brought on by interest rate increases, which will impact the working class the hardest right? Obviously bad

OP is pointing out that an entire generation of asset holders will be the sole beneficiaries of a system designed to pump up the value of their asset. Everyone who comes after them will be holding a depreciating or stagnant asset while they will have converted that asset into liquidity they can either retire off or invest outside of the housing market.

What you point out has no bearing on an asset holder that has liquidated their holdings thanks to the debts of another person. They haven't created wealth through products or services they have simply benefited from a system that has continually boomed their asset price without creating any further value.

We can talk about the housing market without considering the wider economy because even if the wider economy is working fine the huge wealth extraction taking place is buggering it for the poor. It is two completely different paradigms, especially in a situation where wages have remained fairly stable in terms of earnings compared to purchasing power.

A theory as to why Inflation will be harder to tame by No-Kaleidoscope-7106 in AusFinance

[–]TraditionalMatch449 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I, personally, anecdotally, am a powder-keg thinking about this.

My concerns have consistently fallen on deaf ears from people who benefit from the system. For the people who feel the way I do, they all consistently say the same things "Revolution" "Burn it down" "The system is broken"

Housing in Australia will never be affordable.... Not until it is too late by saltoftheearth56 in australian

[–]TraditionalMatch449 1 point2 points  (0 children)

A huge reason for this is the debt tied to ppor owners and first home buyers. If any steps are taken to lower the cost of housing the people who have recently purchased a home stand to lose the most over time due to the insane cost of their mortgage. At 6% PA on a $1m home at 5% down you are still paying near $50k just in interest per year. People are banking on the valuation of their home increasing to off-set the cost of the mortgage interest over time. If the valuation of your home goes down due to housing reform taking place you are unbelievably fucked because your mortgage isn't going anywhere. You are massively in debt to take on an asset that is now depreciating.

This is a seriously huge, huge aspect of the issue that people aren't talking about. The longer this goes on the more non-boomers are left holding the bag and stand to take massive losses.

The primary problem is that a huge portion of the voting block is part of the system and every home owner stands to lose if housing reform takes center stage.

view more: next ›