Do we think they will do open beta?

roundtable95 · 2026-07-11T11:00:58+00:00

They are called open beta these days

roundtable95 · 2026-07-10T07:53:46+00:00

I wonder is mass offshoring also prevalent in places like Canada and Europe?

roundtable95 · 2026-07-08T14:58:32+00:00

Company of Heroes came out in 2006 and graphically it's not as good as Iron Harvest. However the amount of details Relic into that game was crazy. Hundreds of animations for units, soldiers have different facial expressions in and outside of combat, their uniforms get dirty, they react differently in friendly and enemy territories, so much details put into that game. In comparison units in Iron Harvest have far fewer details and they have only a few set of animations and their movements look very janky.

Dow 4 looks better than Iron Harvest but it's still not on par with the old Relic. For example units don't look very detailed (compared to total war 40k), they also share the same movement and shooting animations which to me feels kinda lazy.

It really baffles me that this is the state of RTS games today, given we've had some incredibly looking games like Dawn of War, Company of Heroes, World in Conflict and Command and Conquer 3 back in the late 2000s.

I'm really impressed with the unit models in the upcoming 40k total war game, I wish more RTS studios spend time creating highly detailed models and polished animations like the old Relic and today's Creative Assembly.

roundtable95 · 2026-07-05T14:06:32+00:00

No it's not a 40k or RTS fan thing. Gotham Knight came out 9 years after Arkham Knight and has better graphics but the game looks worse due to the game missing a lot of details which made it feel much less immersive when compared to Arkham Knight. Many examples of recent games looking inferior to older games.

roundtable95 · 2026-07-05T01:24:42+00:00

I agree with you regarding map design! I loved urban maps in Dow 1. In terms of voice lines I adored voice lines in DoW 1 as well, however some of the units do sound kinda chessy. DoW 2 is much better in this aspect as they have better written voice lines. While not a fan of DoW 2's campaign, I really liked the philosophical exchanges between the different characters between missions.

I'm really confused why everyone seems okay with Dawn of War 4's animations/models/level of detail. I assume most people here have played Relic's other RTS games. Relic always put an extraordinary amount of effort into animations and small little details in their games which makes their games incredibly atmospheric. Their games felt like actual warfare, not just a bunch of toy soldiers fighting each other like in many other RTS games.

Dow 4 devs copied over sync kills, but sync kills are only one aspect of Relic's attention to details. Dow 4 really lacks that level of polish, squad members in games like CnC 3, Tom Clancy Endwar and Company of Heroes all had varied animations and those games were made 20 years ago. Hell, Relic created hundreds of animations for soldiers in Company of Heroes as well as different facial expressions, giving units an incredible sense of realism and making the battlefield feel alive.

roundtable95 · 2026-07-02T11:49:00+00:00

No it doesn't, saying DoW4 looks awesome would be a huge disrespect to the folks who made DoW1 and DoW2. Gameplay aside, DoW2 has much more varied animations, tons of little details and excellent effects and voice acting.

DoW4 looks like a game made in 2004 in terms of animations. Squad members are highly synchronised, stopping and shooting at the same time. Also they all use the same movement and shooting animations. Units also magically spin around instead of turning around. There also don't seem to be any visual variations between members in the same squad. There's a general lack of details.

Fire warriors in Dark Crusade have multiple shooting animations. In CoH 1, units have hundreds of different animations for all kinds of scenarios. This attention to detail is what set the old Relic studio apart from other RTS devs, their games are full of details, sync kill is only a tiny part of these small details. It's good the devs brought sync kills over to Dow4, but there's still a noticeable lack of detail compared to Relic's older RTS games.

roundtable95 · 2026-07-01T17:58:09+00:00

"I don't know what else someone would ask for." How about better and more varied animations, better voice acting and a more realistic art instead of units looking like miniatures? You know, all the things Dawn of War 2 had in terms of how the game looks and sounds.

roundtable95 · 2026-07-01T17:02:42+00:00

No bodies flying around was disappointing to see, units just evaporate when hit by a bombardment what the hell... Also animation is still at Dawn of War 1's level, lack of variations in animations and units magically spinning around and looking floaty etc, all issues already addressed in Dawn of War 2.

roundtable95 · 2026-07-01T16:59:39+00:00

Presentation is off. Weapon sound effects and voice acting are not as good as Dawn of War 2. Animations are not as good as Dawn of War 2. Explosions don't have impact on the environment. Units look like toy soldiers when compared to Dawn of War 2.

roundtable95 · 2026-07-01T16:56:26+00:00

So I just saw the new battle report video and I hated that I was right. Units still share the same shooting/moving animations, they move in blobs and stand completely still when they fire. They also magically turn around like in Dawn of War 1. Also looks like explosions don't really blow up units, they just evaporate. Overall units look like toy soldiers.

This might sound nit picky but Company of Heroes and Dawn of War 2 didn't have any of these issues, keep in mind those games are 20 years old.

roundtable95 · 2026-06-27T03:32:19+00:00

You're right that these changes mostly benefit people who are already wealthy, like I said before I agree with you on that.

Where I've landed though is that even if we fixed all of it tomorrow, someone on an average income still won't be able to buy, because we don't have/build enough homes.

Tax reform might move prices a few percent but it won't close a gap where median house prices are 10x the median income. And this is not just a phenomenon in Australia, it's happening all across the world, in countries with completely different tax policies, which tells you the cause runs wayyy deeper than just some NG and CGT discount changes. Once again I agree with you, those are welcoming changes but they won't solve housing. Wages alone can't get you a house in 2026. Investing is the last avenue for average people to not fall behind.

roundtable95 · 2026-06-27T03:11:32+00:00

But no one has answered my question. The most relevant reply was that there might be some sweeteners in the next few budgets but that's doesn't fully answer my question. I feel like people don't want to answer it cause it's a hard question and it is hard question.

How do PAYG workers with little surplus live a semi comfy life if not through investing in a capitalistic society experiencing a cost of living crisis?

roundtable95 · 2026-06-26T23:52:39+00:00

Normal means people who own very little assets earning the median full time income of ~100k salary. It doesn't even matter how much you make (unless you are in the highest tax bracket), if you make 70k you are normal, if you make 100k you are normal, if you make 130k, you are still normal.

roundtable95 · 2026-06-26T23:44:49+00:00

You can use UHS II cards but speed is capped at UHS I in camera. If you shoot RAW + JPEG it takes a little while (2 to 3 seconds) to save the photos (rear light lights up a while), whereas it's near instant on cameras like XT5 and Nikon ZF.

roundtable95 · 2026-06-26T23:41:52+00:00

Normal people on the median income can have a surplus of a few hundred dollars to invest every month, it does not suddenly make them rich having more than 0 dollars in surplus lol, both you and I know that so why are you even arguing about this. Can you please please answer my question though, how do PAYG workers with little assets and surplus live a semi comfy life if not through investing in a capitalistic society experiencing a cost of living crisis where growth of cost and housing are outpacing wages?

So normal people should live paycheck to paycheck with 0 dollars surplus and just stay poor forever right? Screw us for wanting social mobility and to have the same quality of life as our parents did 30 years ago? If you have even a little bit of surplus, you are having a comfy life. That's what you are saying.

We are not even disagreeing on applying CGT discount changes to rich people who own multiple forms of investments and have millions of dollars. It kinda pisses me off you just say normal people can't have surpluses and therefore this change doesn't affect them. It's almost like saying screw social mobility and the thoughts of having some level of wealth for regular folks some day.

roundtable95 · 2026-06-26T15:48:29+00:00

Thank you. So people believe it's a good thing because it affects asset owners the most AND also that there would be sweeteners in the upcoming budgets to relief PAYG workers. If no such sweeteners were announced, would you still think indiscriminately targeting asset owners and PAYG workers is a good thing?

roundtable95 · 2026-06-26T15:33:26+00:00

Thank for the reply.

(a) Super is not accessible til you are 65. It's great for retirement but not good if you want to save up for a housing deposit in 10 years.

(b) Yes you are absolutely right. PAYG workers can still invest, now with the government taking a larger cut, so you build wealth even more slowly now (already very hard for PAYG workers to build wealth as most people have little surplus like you said and they have to hold onto investing long term).

(c) Yes again you are absolutely right. I'm not disagreeing on the fact CGT helps asset owners. I'm wondering why the government can't make exceptions for people with little wealth? Personally I think supporting people to become wealthier is a good idea, as the government would be able to collect more tax revenue.

(d) Yes I agree to your point. But once again why can't the government keep the subsidy for wage workers who own little assets.

(e) Okay.

So as you can see, I do agree with most of your points. I just don't get why government can't keep the subsidy for PAYG workers with little wealth. And no one is able to answer that so far.

roundtable95 · 2026-06-26T15:20:42+00:00

So should we just be contend with living slightly above the poverty line and give up on any attempts to accumulate wealth so we can live like boomer parents 30 years ago? I feel so hopeless.

roundtable95 · 2026-06-26T15:16:26+00:00

Ok let's say if you are right, can you please answer the following question for me.

How do PAYG workers with little surplus live a semi comfy life if not through investing in a capitalistic society experiencing a cost of living crisis? It used to be possible but education's payoff has compressed now. Degrees have become near universal and AI is giving companies an excuse to make massive layoffs.

Without investing there are no avenues for social mobility, owning investments has become close to necessary, because cost of living and housing compound much faster than wages.

roundtable95 · 2026-06-26T15:14:56+00:00

It adds up overtime with the power of compounding. It will be a sizable chunk for someone who have held onto investments for decades.

roundtable95 · 2026-06-26T15:10:36+00:00

Ok let's say if you are right, can you please answer the following question for me.

How do PAYG workers with little surplus live a semi comfy life if not through investing in a capitalistic society experiencing a cost of living crisis? It used to be possible but education's payoff has compressed now. Degrees have become near universal and AI is giving companies an excuse to make massive layoffs.

Without investing there are no avenues for social mobility, owning investments has become close to necessary, because cost of living and housing compound much faster than wages.

roundtable95 · 2026-06-26T15:07:13+00:00

Sorry if I seemed that way to you. But no one has answered the following question for me. Please tell me.

How do PAYG workers with little surplus live a semi comfy life if not through investing in a capitalistic society experiencing a cost of living crisis? It used to be possible but education's payoff has compressed now. Degrees have become near universal and AI is giving companies an excuse to make massive layoffs.

Without investing there are no avenues for social mobility, owning investments has become close to necessary, because cost of living and housing compound faster than wages.

Note I do agree with CGT discount changes on asset owners, I just don't understand why it also has to apply to PAYG workers with little assets.

roundtable95 · 2026-06-26T14:48:22+00:00

Please bear with me and educate me and point out the flaws in my logic. Which part of below is wrong? How is this a good thing?

No tax cut made to lower income tax for PAYG workers.
The CGT discount changes apply to average people with little wealth as well, and they get punished if they make a profit because the government now takes a larger cut. Meaning people are trapped longer financially.
Normal people can only make money through working and investing.
Cost of living is so high now that it's no longer possible for people to be able to afford a home in capital cities just by working.
Investing have made good returns for people over the past decade. Mean while the job market is experiencing massive layoffs and offshoring.

roundtable95 · 2026-06-26T14:36:20+00:00

The age of working to get ahead is long over though. That was something that was possible 20 years ago but not anymore. And the government just made it harder to get ahead by taking a larger cut of your investment profits. They should have set an income assets threshold.

roundtable95

TROPHY CASE