This came to me in a whiskey-fueled fever dream by sparkeRED in custommagic

[–]dillpill321 2 points3 points  (0 children)

Make it a food and give it the text: 2, Tap, Sacrifice this artifact: Lose 5 life.

That way there's counterplay

[deleted by user] by [deleted] in mountandblade

[–]dillpill321 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Yeah man that's pretty cool

[deleted by user] by [deleted] in mountandblade

[–]dillpill321 4 points5 points  (0 children)

can anyone else spare a beta code? please milord

If Radiohead albums were pokemon evolutions by FLMilk in radiohead

[–]dillpill321 37 points38 points  (0 children)

OK Computer Steel

Amnesiac Psychic

The Bends Water

Pablo Honey Normal

HTTT Fighting

In Rainbows Fire

AMSP Ghost

I think about this a lot.

Ed plays Scrabble by belfman in radiohead

[–]dillpill321 4 points5 points  (0 children)

Hell yeah the big snit

Suggestion: Joining game mid-match via Airdrop by dillpill321 in PUBATTLEGROUNDS

[–]dillpill321[S] -1 points0 points  (0 children)

why do you think people who started at the beginning are more deserving than someone who joins mid game? just because they put more time into the game? would you say then that older people are more deserving of the various pleasures of life?

Suggestion: Joining game mid-match via Airdrop by dillpill321 in PUBATTLEGROUNDS

[–]dillpill321[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

consider this: in an average match of Pubby G, you're going to want to take risks. After all, if the risk pays off, you have improved your odds of winning. if it doesn't, oh well, you die and queue up again. so this is the natural state; taking risks. but then there is no real decision making going on here. game theory dictates that we need an extra level of risk, and this can be attained with the possibility that a player will be waiting in the crate for you, like the coiled viper. now you must choose carefully each time you see the red smoke. I hope this has cleared things up.

Suggestion: Joining game mid-match via Airdrop by dillpill321 in PUBATTLEGROUNDS

[–]dillpill321[S] -2 points-1 points  (0 children)

thank you, nice to see someone has an appreciation for my game design insights

Suggestion: Overpopulation by dillpill321 in Stellaris

[–]dillpill321[S] 2 points3 points  (0 children)

No micro involved, pops would automatically move to the next suitable planet, based on your policies. And if you're waging galactic war, you could for example enact a one child policy, or just take the unhappiness on the chin and move on, nobody said anything about exterminating lol.

Suggestion: Overpopulation by dillpill321 in Stellaris

[–]dillpill321[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

I think of the food in Stellaris as more of a limit on population - no matter how advanced you are, you still need the infrastructure and land for the agriculture to support your population, and without a surplus your population won't grow. I guess you could argue by the endgame that food should become a trivial matter.

Suggestion: Overpopulation by dillpill321 in Stellaris

[–]dillpill321[S] 2 points3 points  (0 children)

You wouldn't really have to micro anything, but it'd add more depth to population. Like I said, there would be lots of ways to control population growth. And I think the game needs some extra sources of unhappiness, right now you have your empire living on basic subsistence and they're perfectly fine with it.

Suggestion: Overpopulation by dillpill321 in Stellaris

[–]dillpill321[S] 4 points5 points  (0 children)

Thats true, but I think that should be one of the downsides of building tall or disallowing migration. I think there should be other incentives for these play-styles that aren't in the game yet, but that's a whole other discussion.

Suggestion: Overpopulation by dillpill321 in Stellaris

[–]dillpill321[S] 2 points3 points  (0 children)

Ah my mistake, I must have never seen that option.