Resultados da pesquisa

So clown players aren't already just throwing them at their feet? Way easier than hucking them at range and running to them. The only difference is the survivor keeps the haste after getting smacked for coming into the cloud and if they're injured they're just going to go down anyway....

As of right now, there are no plans for a Switch release the devs have mentioned. Seeing as 1 still isn't on Switch, I wouldn't get your hopes up too much.

You said "I think any time there's a single passive player, the game takes longer than it needs to. Because they just won't do anything, and it can force other players to be passive to until someone throws. Terribly boring gameplay when this happens."

Some of the best games I've played lasted 2-3 hours and the 4 players left were all over 300+ troops strength....
Impatience has no place in a strategy game and will only rarely give you the win when the cards cooperate. (and the devs have me on perpetual 5 card sets anyway).

"The good fighters of old first put themselves beyond the possibility of defeat, and then waited for an opportunity of defeating the enemy.".

'Victorious warriors win first and then go to war, while defeated warriors go to war first and then seek to win' ...these are both quotes of Sun Tzu (art of war).

man said "advanced alteration" lmao.

crane belike ahh ♥♥♥♥ here we go again

Че на первом сезоне отыграл на 6к эло, потом типа решил показать что ты крутой игрок и поставил софт, но осторожно на 14 к всего, а потом решил сразу до 25к догнаться. И все за 200 каток, прям талант)

Originalmente postado por ABOUT CASTLE DRACHENFELS:

Originalmente postado por WootImNoob:

This doesn't matter if you can 1v1 the crisis.

Great, because you cant. So it matters.

And by your own logic. what you said about the needle doesnt matter if you can 1v1 the crisis. rofl

... Can you not 1v1 the crisis by 2450? Sorry bruv, I kinda assumed.

This is very much a 'skill issue' question, in that different people will have different answers. Since in my games I am usually able to defeat fallen empires before 2400, awakened empires once they emerge, and at least the first crisis to spawn after 2450, my assumption is the only thing that could stop me is having to nanny the galaxy at the same time.

I have essentially two anecdotes to inform my answer. I mentioned the first already: losing to cosmogenesis while fighting contingency. The second is invaders spawning while I fought the awakened hive. In both cases, I could've fought both individually, even both simultaneously, but divided attention is not a good thing to have in war. My weakness is attention - maybe yours isn't - so my answer to OP is 'a situation in which your attention is divided and you overlook the real threat'. This means player crises, not classic ones, since player crises can win without drawing your attention.

Originalmente postado por Zalzany:

The other big ones INCEST they don't like that MANY COUNTRIES HAVE LAWS against it even if its art. And the last one countries like Australia have laws against rape. Uk has it to like some smuck was crying about how BDSM got hit but only the dark stuff because UK law makers defination of forced sexual content was met.

... you're gonna rope UK and Australia into this? The "Dox yourself to use teh interwebs" and "ban My Hero Academia because anime bad" countries? You're really shooting yourself in the foot with this one ">>

Thanks my man, you are awesome. They were the exact concerns I had in mind. It is good to see non npc people out here.

Originalmente postado por Maizel:

It is a requirement for their kernel level anticheat. Secure boot checks signatures of the bootloader, if it is not signed, booting fails.

My objection is mainly that it is intrusive and ineffective against modern cheating. Modern cheats avoid the kernel. Also, there are many legitimate reason why one could be using unsigned bootloaders.

It effectively makes it so that you don't get to decide what you run anymore. The corporations that issue signatures do. Granted, one game requiring it is not a big deal, but if I learned something about corporations, is that they looooooove to lock people into using their software. This is basically a small example of what the Apple controversy was all about, that people couldn't jailbreak their Iphones, use their hardware how they want.

Not to mention that a multibillion company passes the buck to the end user, while they could have just given us a server browser and let us moderate our own servers. Much more effective against cheaters.

One really should question their motives in this.

If this thing snowballs, I unironically think that our pc's are going to be locked like that on the level of an Iphone. I really hope that doesn't happen, but yeah. You give these guys a finger, they take the whole arm. The state that modern gaming is in proves that already.