“Artist” needs to be in quotation marks.

Well… That would depend on how many people vote for a third party, doesn’t it?

I mean, I know Americans love telling other Americans that voting third party is a wasted vote, but that’s a self-fulfilling profacy. If everyone believes nobody is voting third party, then nobody will vote third party, so third parties never win, which will lead Americans to say that nobody votes for third parties.

Your first past the post system and your major news agencies who don’t have the decency to pretend to be impartial is really doing a number on your country.

That guy failed English literacy. Though… Honestly… Not surprising for a right wing American.

I want a foldable phone.

Phones have become larger abd flatter over the years, and they’re just uncomfortable to have in my pocket. A foldable phone will solve this issue.

I didn’t buy one yet due to not believing the tech is there yet. Screens are very scratchable and the battery life is poor.

Age of Empires II is honestly a somewhat strange combination of historical and not. Take, for example, the upgrade lines for certain units:

Militia -> Man-At-Arms -> Longswordsman -> Two-Handed Swordsman -> Champion.

So the skirmisher is a spear-throwing foot soldier with a shield. Historically a foot soldier would have a shield, a few throwing spears, and then a melee weapon. But in Age of Empires II the spear throwing and the melee are divided into two separate units.

Age of Empires II does have a light cavelry line, though, and they’re pretty quick. But only civs historically known for their good cavelry have bonuses towards them that make the viable (i.e. There are various steppe-civs in AoEII, as well as Mongols and Huns, and I’m sure Turks and Saracens have some benefit to light cav as well).

In this regard Age of Empires IV is more historically accurate, as that game can have completely unsymmetrical civs, whereas Age of Empires II has far more symmetrical gameplay.

Yeah, in Age of Empires II they’re more expensive than Skirmishers, who are archer-countering units. They’re also more expensive than regular archers, and that’s not going into the research that a good cavalry archer needs, as they’re also subject to some of the most expensive research options.

In Bannerlord you can get good horse archers only be recruiting young nobles. Then you have to spend time on levelling them up, because at the lower tiers they’re just not that good, and you risk a number of the dying before they reach a high enough level.

So between the two games I play that prominently feature horse archers, I’d say they’re managed pretty well, with the increased costs, slower training times, player skill, or levelling requirements.

Definitely more user friendly than Itch. Search filters are downright frustrating on Itch.

Never even heard of Game Jolt, so it can’t be that good or useful.

It’s not about Steam and Valve being beyond reproach for criticism. It’s that posts like OP are incredibly hyperbolic.

Steam is genuinely a good service, at least for now, for as long as the current people in charge stay in charge. And because they’re such a good service they have become the number one place where people look for games.

This attracts the occasional person like OP who tries really… really hard to make Valve look evil. And not just random people either, other platforms who either don’t have the resources, or don’t want to spend the resources, to make a service that can actually compete with Steam try to make Valve look like a villain too.

Claims that seems true on the surface, but are otherwise false (i.e. Valve has a monopoly), cases that are misrepresented (i.e. The case with Wolfire Games), or criticisms directed at Valve that aren’t specific to Valve or Steam (i.e. You don’t actually own your games) are often the go-to topics of posts like OP, and have been repeated hundreds of times (and debunked). At this point people are just sick of seeing it and will downvote on sight.

Yeah, because just mentioning someone using civilians as a shield is on its own bad enough. Anyone with half a brain cell would understand that’s bad without the need for specifically pointing it out.

Pretty sure, historically, they were also pretty powerful. I remember at one point reading about several nations that had serious issues with horse archers. A ranged unit of constant mobility, of course they’d be difficult to deal with.

How effective they are does depend on what kind of game you’re playing, however.

In Age of Empires II horse archers are only really good in those civilisations that have adequate research for them. And then it requires a good deal of player skill to micro the units to make use of their enhanced mobility.

In Mount and Blade Bannerlord it all depends on terrain. Horse archers are deadly on any sort of open terrain, but introduce trees or even a mild amount of rockiness and those horse archers are in a serious disadvantage.

It fascinates me how far we’re progressing in medical science. Never expected to ever see news like cures for HIV, tumours, and diabetes in my lifetime.

We are 8 billion people on Earth, and rising.

I am insulted by your lack of culture.

Pretty sure “and others” is doing a lot of work here.

And since we’re dropping the civil language; you can fuck right off, you art defiler worshipping cunt. Maybe there’s a warm spot in the jail cell next to these idiots.

https://youtu.be/8tIdCsMufIY

Climate change is a subject that has never left the spotlight. It’s more in the spotlight than ever, no thanks to Just Stop Oil. These guys are contributing absolutely nothing.

Right, I see you must have trouble reading.

There is no connection. That’s why it’s stupid.

Right, because we’re all talking about how greatly effective they are.

So delusional it’s actually the reality of the situation.

Tell me, how many oil companies have stopped doing oil since these started throwing soup?