bah, RTS sucks.
.
Al Qaeda tells China's Uyghurs to prepare for holy war
|
bah, RTS sucks.
.
RE: Al Qaeda tells China's Uyghurs to prepare for holy war
October 12, 2009 at 1:43 pm
(This post was last modified: October 12, 2009 at 1:52 pm by Violet.)
Hehe, that has happened before. Usually I build a dragoon force of 5-6 to support a trio of photon cannons supported by twin pylons. I am terribly weak to a well played zerg rush before the last of my dragoons are up... but after the very beginning of the game: I dominate. Thats why you focus on immediate defenses in the beginning, and hastily upgrade them past this point. I just love that about Starcraft: you can play any strategy, and still come out on top if you do it well enough ![]() ![]() I hate siege tanks, fyi... ![]() ![]() Anyway, applying it to the real world: depends on your location. Whateveristan and friends? I'm going to give up and run away ![]() ![]() (October 12, 2009 at 1:19 pm)theVOID Wrote: bah, RTS sucks. TBS is also awesome ^_^ The original Master of Orion... how I wish they would remake that game and improve its AI in just a few little ways and give the Mrrshans, Darlok, and other non-runaway empires a little more umph ^_^ The biggest flaw I ever found with it was that the AI didn't know how to use speed to its advantage. And it was a shame that you had to scrap ship models sometimes... esp. with a huge-ship design philosophy ![]() ![]() Civilization Revolution is really fun as well ![]() Anyway, RTS and TBS are fun gametypes for some of us... it's all subjective ![]() ![]() Please give me a home where cloud buffalo roam
Where the dear and the strangers can play
Where sometimes is heard a discouraging word
But the skies are not stormy all day
(October 12, 2009 at 9:05 am)downbeatplumb Wrote: On top ofeverything else its just too expensive, Do you know how much tanks cost these days. No I don't but I bet they are worth millions. Quote:Imagine what else one could do with that kind of money A shame indeed that it is wasted on the likes of mass-produced war machines. @saerules, a shame indeed, the US could be paying off the national debt with that amount of money serously!! What kinda of video games do you like to play the most saerules? (October 12, 2009 at 9:05 am)downbeatplumb Wrote: On top ofeverything else its just too expensive, Do you know how much tanks cost these days. I bet we can get cheap Chinese knock-off's. ![]()
Best regards,
Leo van Miert Horsepower is how hard you hit the wall --Torque is how far you take the wall with you ![]() RE: Al Qaeda tells China's Uyghurs to prepare for holy war
October 12, 2009 at 9:36 pm
(This post was last modified: October 12, 2009 at 9:36 pm by theblindferrengi.)
With only 40-120 million you can't do shit as a government, especially for a war. If that was 40-120 billion, it would be a notable chunk of waste, and if applied elsewhere could do some good, but just millions wouldn't make a dent in the US national debt, their current healthcare issues, or R&D.
Has anyone really been far even as decided to use even go want to do look more like?
"Giving money and power to government is like giving whiskey and car keys to teenage boys" - P.J. O'Rourke "Being powerful is like being a lady. If you have to tell people you are, you aren't." - Margaret Thatcher "Nothing succeeds like the appearance of success." - Christopher Lasch (October 12, 2009 at 9:36 pm)theblindferrengi Wrote: With only 40-120 million you can't do shit as a government, especially for a war. If that was 40-120 billion, it would be a notable chunk of waste, and if applied elsewhere could do some good, but just millions wouldn't make a dent in the US national debt, their current healthcare issues, or R&D. good point you have there TBF. RE: Al Qaeda tells China's Uyghurs to prepare for holy war
October 13, 2009 at 5:16 pm
(This post was last modified: October 13, 2009 at 5:57 pm by Violet.)
(October 12, 2009 at 9:36 pm)theblindferrengi Wrote: With only 40-120 million you can't do shit as a government, especially for a war. If that was 40-120 billion, it would be a notable chunk of waste, and if applied elsewhere could do some good, but just millions wouldn't make a dent in the US national debt, their current healthcare issues, or R&D. 40-120 million per tank. 2 tanks is 80-240 million. 100 tanks is 4000-12000 million. Assuming that the US has made 1000 tanks total (although I would think they have more)... then the cost would be between 40,000,000,000 USD and 120,000,000,000 USD Are you telling me you can't do something significant with 40-120 billion+? ![]() (Note, there was a reason I referred to it as 'mass-production'. ![]() amorpha Wrote:What kinda of video games do you like to play the most saerules?It would be hard for me to declare a favorite type... because I like a number of genres a great deal. I would say my most favored game-types are strategy, adventure, and shooter. I think a more telling aspect of me would be in which games I avoid. Luck and chance? Like the plague. Sports? Not interested in the slightest. Puzzle? Brief interest, rapid disinterest. Definitely strategy is my number one though... the moment is rare when I'm not thinking about how to perfect my strategies ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() As for adventures... I have so many RPGs in my cabinets that I will often play one for a few days, think about a different one... play that for a few days... think of a new one... process continues... until 2-3 months later I come back to the first one and wonder just where I left off. ![]() ![]() ![]() Lastly, but not least: I have a different approach to 'shooter's than I think many people ![]() ![]() ![]() Please give me a home where cloud buffalo roam
Where the dear and the strangers can play
Where sometimes is heard a discouraging word
But the skies are not stormy all day
Tanks cost less than 40 million each,
Quote:Over 8,800 M1 and M1A1 tanks have been produced.The m1 is the United States's main battle tank. Anyways, there is an enourmous cost of consumables for the military, fuel is one major expense, as an F-16 consumes fuel at a rate of 450 Litres/hour (118 gallons/hour), food for the thousands of troops currently deployed (MREs aren't cheap), replacement parts for machenery (tanks and helicopters are in constant need of maintanance). Just millions of dollars might be enough for a military like the Pontifical Swiss Guard, but just millions wouldnt last a month for any real military. 40 billion would be nice, buy a couple ships with that, or mabey a dozen planes. Still got to buy people and petrol though.
Has anyone really been far even as decided to use even go want to do look more like?
"Giving money and power to government is like giving whiskey and car keys to teenage boys" - P.J. O'Rourke "Being powerful is like being a lady. If you have to tell people you are, you aren't." - Margaret Thatcher "Nothing succeeds like the appearance of success." - Christopher Lasch
This discussion was derailed.
The point is, war is expensive, and the return doesn't go to the general public. Billions of tax dollars are given to military contracts that ends up lining the pockets of the extreme minority: shareholders and CEOs and whatnot. It's not sustainable, and creates are disturbing inbalance in power. Do we want weapons companies to run our countries? What if that war money was spent to provide universal healthcare? Or if that doesn't tickle your fancy, what if it never had to be collected from citizens in the first place? I think the entire world would be a better place without the Iraqi and Afghani wars.
- Meatball
|
« Next Oldest | Next Newest »
|