sp3ctr4l

joined 3 months ago
[–] sp3ctr4l 1 points 40 minutes ago* (last edited 37 minutes ago)

Then what you're looking for is roughly Squad.

Made by a team that originated as the mod developers behind Project Reality for BF2.

Currently though, it is going through a bit of an awkward phase as they are trying to transition from UE4 to UE5... but the UE4 version is still pretty solid.

Squad has less of an arcady gameplay style to it than BF proper, more milsim or milsim lite, the gameplay systems themselves reward and revolve more around being in a squad...

...fancier kit loadouts are limited for a whole team, takes multiple people to fully operate a tank or IFV, you actually have to be a pilot or crewman class to fly or drive something more conplex than basically a truck, lower TTK as weapon damages are more realistic, but also more fleshed out medical system...

... there are more gamemodes, many of which revolve much more around logistics and setting u0 and defending FOBs, you got AAS which roughly simulates a frontline by preventing the sort of willy nilly flag backcapping from BF games... flags are grouped together in sort of layers, and you can't capture any flag thats more than one layer away from the layer your team currently has...

Whole lotta gameplay tweaks, vehicles tend to respawn more slowly and players respawn more slowly, but anyway yeah, its a sort of hypothetical roughly modern era war setting, tons of factions.

Also I think there is a Starwars themed mod for it lol, there's ww2 mods for it, etc.

...

EDIT: As strongarm mentions, Hell Let Loose and the Arma series are also good choices, I am just biased because I was once part of the Project Reality team, way way back, hehehe.

[–] sp3ctr4l 2 points 5 hours ago* (last edited 5 hours ago)

lol, may I only half jokingly suggest money laundering via purchases and sales of artwork through a non profit?

Seems to be effectively legal, though a bit riskier in terms of bang for your buck these days.

[–] sp3ctr4l 0 points 5 hours ago* (last edited 5 hours ago)
  1. Them, still, because they are the ones who did the things.

This is like asking if I am still going to be blaming Japan for bombing Pearl Harbor, Andrew Jackson for the Trail of Tears.

  1. Well for example, Gen Z and Millenials have been, collectively, much more concerned about climate change and trying to have their voices heard, but the Boomers have also destroyed both the US Political System/Government and also Economy, and you... can't really socially act from a position of little to no social power.

Your framing of this question does two things:

It misses the point that climate change is a time sensitive issue with a window for being able to address it. That window is largely passed now, now we are in the stage of 'how do we mitigate/survive this' instead of 'how do we prevent this'.

And this is also victim blaming. Hey I burned down your house, why are you homeless, what are YOU doing to solve YOUR problem?

[–] sp3ctr4l 2 points 15 hours ago

I'm sorry, people still have or use these things?

Who is this stupid or lazy?

[–] sp3ctr4l 3 points 15 hours ago* (last edited 15 hours ago) (2 children)

'Boomers' as a term originated as, and is actually specific to American Baby Boomers.

The generation that lived through the most anomalous economic boom in US history, assumed that was actually normal, and consistently voted as a general block to ensure (among many other stupid things) that the climate would be destroyed for their grandchildren, children, and deliciously ironically, even themselves as they are now all set to retire....

... all when they had a disproportional amount of actual wealth, social power, thus ability to avert this, thus collective general responsibility for not doing so.

That is how any history books not written by Boomers will summarize this.

[–] sp3ctr4l 10 points 15 hours ago

Boomer not want regulate oil company because then Boomer 401k go down.

Oh no!

Boomer vote for moron who make 401k go down anyway, Boomer house burn down / wash away in flood / hurricane.

Sad, indeterminate Boomer noises

[–] sp3ctr4l 6 points 15 hours ago

Yes this is literally the entire point.

So people can shrug and go 'I dunno, thats what the machine said,' and then all possible recourse or negotiation stops.

... and what starts is our descent in WH40K style mystical reverence for the machine spirit, as all the remaining actually tech competent people are either forced into servitude or killed as heretics.

[–] sp3ctr4l 1 points 15 hours ago* (last edited 15 hours ago)

Stalin would be proud, great work Krasnov!

Ok, so, fuck it, I'm Moodys now.

From now on I am downgrading the BLS Jobs Report Data Quality Rating from Baa- to Ca.

What a fucking joke.

[–] sp3ctr4l 6 points 16 hours ago

Wish I could go with you.

[–] sp3ctr4l 3 points 16 hours ago

Uh here, you're free.

Huh, apparently your uh, "cubicle", was right next to the bathrooms.

sigh

There's a way to fix this, but I really don't want to have to report to my SCP handler again...

Whatever, I'm sure its fine, you're free!

 

Representative Al Green, a Texas Democrat, officially introduced new Articles of Impeachment against President Donald Trump on Tuesday.

"In starting his illegal and unconstitutional war with Iran without the constitutionally mandated consent of Congress or appropriate notice to Congress, President Trump acted in direct violation of the War Powers Clause of the Constitution," Green's articles state.

"President Trump has devolved and continues to devolve American democracy into authoritarianism by disregarding the separation of powers and now usurping congressional war powers."

This is a developing story and will be updated.

Round 3.

 

Representative Al Green, a Texas Democrat, officially introduced new Articles of Impeachment against President Donald Trump on Tuesday.

"In starting his illegal and unconstitutional war with Iran without the constitutionally mandated consent of Congress or appropriate notice to Congress, President Trump acted in direct violation of the War Powers Clause of the Constitution," Green's articles state.

"President Trump has devolved and continues to devolve American democracy into authoritarianism by disregarding the separation of powers and now usurping congressional war powers."

This is a developing story and will be updated.

Round 3.

 

Representative Al Green, a Texas Democrat, officially introduced new Articles of Impeachment against President Donald Trump on Tuesday.

"In starting his illegal and unconstitutional war with Iran without the constitutionally mandated consent of Congress or appropriate notice to Congress, President Trump acted in direct violation of the War Powers Clause of the Constitution," Green's articles state.

"President Trump has devolved and continues to devolve American democracy into authoritarianism by disregarding the separation of powers and now usurping congressional war powers."

This is a developing story and will be updated.

Round 3.

 

Representative Al Green, a Texas Democrat, officially introduced new Articles of Impeachment against President Donald Trump on Tuesday.

"In starting his illegal and unconstitutional war with Iran without the constitutionally mandated consent of Congress or appropriate notice to Congress, President Trump acted in direct violation of the War Powers Clause of the Constitution," Green's articles state.

"President Trump has devolved and continues to devolve American democracy into authoritarianism by disregarding the separation of powers and now usurping congressional war powers."

This is a developing story and will be updated.

Round 3.

 

Donald Trump’s “Border Czar” Tom Homan said Saturday the administration is planning to send in the National Guard Saturday evening to quell protests in Los Angeles.

“This is about enforcing the law, and again, we’re not going to apologize for doing it,” Homan said on Fox News. He continued: “We’re already ahead of the game. We were already mobilizing. We’re gonna bring National Guard in tonight. We’re gonna continue doing our job. We’re gonna push back on these people, and we’re gonna [enforce] the law.”

On Saturday night, following Homan’s on-camera remarks, both national Democratic and Republican figures were scrambling to figure out if he was just mouthing off, or if the federal troops were actually on their way, or just … what the hell was going on.

Two Trump administration officials say they learned about the alleged National Guard plans from journalists such as Rolling Stone’s who had reached out to them on Saturday evening, asking for clarification.

Homan did not immediately respond to messages seeking comment.

“The federal government is moving to take over the California National Guard and deploy 2,000 soldiers,” California Gov. Gavin Newsom (D) wrote on Bluesky Saturday evening. “That move is purposefully inflammatory and will only escalate tensions.”

He added, “LA authorities are able to access law enforcement assistance at a moment’s notice. We are in close coordination with the city and county, and there is currently no unmet need. The Guard has been admirably serving LA throughout recovery. This is the wrong mission and will erode public trust.”

The president can request, but not order, a governor to deploy their state’s National Guard. The governor can refuse the request, and Trump would not be allowed under the Constitution to send National Guard troops to California from other states. However, the Trump administration has previously mulled invoking the Insurrection Act, which could allow the president to deploy the U.S. military domestically, federalize the National Guard, and send in troops to quell uprisings or civil disorder.

Editorializing beyond here:

The Insurrectionist invokes the Insurrection Act.

 

Donald Trump’s “Border Czar” Tom Homan said Saturday the administration is planning to send in the National Guard Saturday evening to quell protests in Los Angeles.

“This is about enforcing the law, and again, we’re not going to apologize for doing it,” Homan said on Fox News. He continued: “We’re already ahead of the game. We were already mobilizing. We’re gonna bring National Guard in tonight. We’re gonna continue doing our job. We’re gonna push back on these people, and we’re gonna [enforce] the law.”

On Saturday night, following Homan’s on-camera remarks, both national Democratic and Republican figures were scrambling to figure out if he was just mouthing off, or if the federal troops were actually on their way, or just … what the hell was going on.

Two Trump administration officials say they learned about the alleged National Guard plans from journalists such as Rolling Stone’s who had reached out to them on Saturday evening, asking for clarification.

Homan did not immediately respond to messages seeking comment.

“The federal government is moving to take over the California National Guard and deploy 2,000 soldiers,” California Gov. Gavin Newsom (D) wrote on Bluesky Saturday evening. “That move is purposefully inflammatory and will only escalate tensions.”

He added, “LA authorities are able to access law enforcement assistance at a moment’s notice. We are in close coordination with the city and county, and there is currently no unmet need. The Guard has been admirably serving LA throughout recovery. This is the wrong mission and will erode public trust.”

The president can request, but not order, a governor to deploy their state’s National Guard. The governor can refuse the request, and Trump would not be allowed under the Constitution to send National Guard troops to California from other states. However, the Trump administration has previously mulled invoking the Insurrection Act, which could allow the president to deploy the U.S. military domestically, federalize the National Guard, and send in troops to quell uprisings or civil disorder.

Editorializing beyond here:

The Insurrectionist invokes the Insurrection Act.

 

Donald Trump’s “Border Czar” Tom Homan said Saturday the administration is planning to send in the National Guard Saturday evening to quell protests in Los Angeles.

“This is about enforcing the law, and again, we’re not going to apologize for doing it,” Homan said on Fox News. He continued: “We’re already ahead of the game. We were already mobilizing. We’re gonna bring National Guard in tonight. We’re gonna continue doing our job. We’re gonna push back on these people, and we’re gonna [enforce] the law.”

On Saturday night, following Homan’s on-camera remarks, both national Democratic and Republican figures were scrambling to figure out if he was just mouthing off, or if the federal troops were actually on their way, or just … what the hell was going on.

Two Trump administration officials say they learned about the alleged National Guard plans from journalists such as Rolling Stone’s who had reached out to them on Saturday evening, asking for clarification.

Homan did not immediately respond to messages seeking comment.

“The federal government is moving to take over the California National Guard and deploy 2,000 soldiers,” California Gov. Gavin Newsom (D) wrote on Bluesky Saturday evening. “That move is purposefully inflammatory and will only escalate tensions.”

He added, “LA authorities are able to access law enforcement assistance at a moment’s notice. We are in close coordination with the city and county, and there is currently no unmet need. The Guard has been admirably serving LA throughout recovery. This is the wrong mission and will erode public trust.”

The president can request, but not order, a governor to deploy their state’s National Guard. The governor can refuse the request, and Trump would not be allowed under the Constitution to send National Guard troops to California from other states. However, the Trump administration has previously mulled invoking the Insurrection Act, which could allow the president to deploy the U.S. military domestically, federalize the National Guard, and send in troops to quell uprisings or civil disorder.

Editorializing beyond here:

The Insurrectionist invokes the Insurrection Act

 

Donald Trump’s “Border Czar” Tom Homan said Saturday the administration is planning to send in the National Guard Saturday evening to quell protests in Los Angeles.

“This is about enforcing the law, and again, we’re not going to apologize for doing it,” Homan said on Fox News. He continued: “We’re already ahead of the game. We were already mobilizing. We’re gonna bring National Guard in tonight. We’re gonna continue doing our job. We’re gonna push back on these people, and we’re gonna [enforce] the law.”

On Saturday night, following Homan’s on-camera remarks, both national Democratic and Republican figures were scrambling to figure out if he was just mouthing off, or if the federal troops were actually on their way, or just … what the hell was going on.

Two Trump administration officials say they learned about the alleged National Guard plans from journalists such as Rolling Stone’s who had reached out to them on Saturday evening, asking for clarification.

Homan did not immediately respond to messages seeking comment.

“The federal government is moving to take over the California National Guard and deploy 2,000 soldiers,” California Gov. Gavin Newsom (D) wrote on Bluesky Saturday evening. “That move is purposefully inflammatory and will only escalate tensions.”

He added, “LA authorities are able to access law enforcement assistance at a moment’s notice. We are in close coordination with the city and county, and there is currently no unmet need. The Guard has been admirably serving LA throughout recovery. This is the wrong mission and will erode public trust.”

The president can request, but not order, a governor to deploy their state’s National Guard. The governor can refuse the request, and Trump would not be allowed under the Constitution to send National Guard troops to California from other states. However, the Trump administration has previously mulled invoking the Insurrection Act, which could allow the president to deploy the U.S. military domestically, federalize the National Guard, and send in troops to quell uprisings or civil disorder.

Editorializing beyond here:

The Insurrectionist invokes the Insurrection Act

 

Donald Trump’s “Border Czar” Tom Homan said Saturday the administration is planning to send in the National Guard Saturday evening to quell protests in Los Angeles.

“This is about enforcing the law, and again, we’re not going to apologize for doing it,” Homan said on Fox News. He continued: “We’re already ahead of the game. We were already mobilizing. We’re gonna bring National Guard in tonight. We’re gonna continue doing our job. We’re gonna push back on these people, and we’re gonna [enforce] the law.”

On Saturday night, following Homan’s on-camera remarks, both national Democratic and Republican figures were scrambling to figure out if he was just mouthing off, or if the federal troops were actually on their way, or just … what the hell was going on.

Two Trump administration officials say they learned about the alleged National Guard plans from journalists such as Rolling Stone’s who had reached out to them on Saturday evening, asking for clarification.

Homan did not immediately respond to messages seeking comment.

“The federal government is moving to take over the California National Guard and deploy 2,000 soldiers,” California Gov. Gavin Newsom (D) wrote on Bluesky Saturday evening. “That move is purposefully inflammatory and will only escalate tensions.”

He added, “LA authorities are able to access law enforcement assistance at a moment’s notice. We are in close coordination with the city and county, and there is currently no unmet need. The Guard has been admirably serving LA throughout recovery. This is the wrong mission and will erode public trust.”

The president can request, but not order, a governor to deploy their state’s National Guard. The governor can refuse the request, and Trump would not be allowed under the Constitution to send National Guard troops to California from other states. However, the Trump administration has previously mulled invoking the Insurrection Act, which could allow the president to deploy the U.S. military domestically, federalize the National Guard, and send in troops to quell uprisings or civil disorder.

Editorializing beyond here:

The Insurrectionist invokes the Insurrection Act.

 

House Republicans came together to pass their domestic policy megabill early Thursday, after weeks of internal conflict and last-minute intervention from President Donald Trump.

The 215-214 vote is a major victory for Speaker Mike Johnson, who largely kept his conference together after days of around-the-clock negotiations with holdouts. ... The bill includes a fresh round of tax cuts sought by Trump, as well as hundreds of billions of dollars in new funding for the military and border security.

...

This is arguably the most significant piece of Legislation that will ever be signed in the History of our Country!” Trump posted on Truth Social on Thursday morning. “Great job by Speaker Mike Johnson, and the House Leadership, and thank you to every Republican who voted YES on this Historic Bill! Now, it’s time for our friends in the United States Senate to get to work, and send this Bill to my desk AS SOON AS POSSIBLE!”

Democrats have their own names for the measure, including “the GOP tax scam” and “one big, ugly bill.” Minority party leaders are deriding the bill by pointing to nonpartisan forecasts that it would increase the federal deficit by trillions of dollars and cause more than 10 million people to lose health care coverage, while shifting resources away from the lowest-income households and to the wealthiest.

In a lengthy closing speech ahead of the final vote, House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries accused Republicans of bankrolling tax cuts for the rich with cuts to safety-net programs like Medicaid and SNAP food assistance.

“And people will die. That’s not hype. That’s not hyperbole. That’s not a hypothetical,” Jeffries said, before a heated exchange about “decorum” with the Republican presiding over the floor.

My own 'editorializing'/additional context beyond this point:

EDIT: Link to the bill itself on congress.gov:

https://www.congress.gov/bill/119th-congress/house-bill/1/all-info

Estimates are that 11 million will lose Medicaid coverage, 13 million will lose SNAP benefits, between $3.3 trillion and $3.8 trillion ... to nearly $6 trillion increase to the national debt... many, many other programs are directly cut back, and the existing 'PayGo' laws will force other cutbacks in things like Medicare from the overwhelming deficits this creates... if this passes the Senate, which seems likely, though some modifications also seem likely.

https://www.cbo.gov/publication/61420

https://www.crfb.org/blogs/breaking-down-one-big-beautiful-bill

Possibly also worth noting:

The House version writes into law the formal removal of the 'de minimis' import exception rule, so that means basically every US based, import reliant dropshipper no longer has a workable business model... thats now formally in the law, not just a flurry of Executive Orders.

Also, EV credits are over.

 

House Republicans came together to pass their domestic policy megabill early Thursday, after weeks of internal conflict and last-minute intervention from President Donald Trump.

The 215-214 vote is a major victory for Speaker Mike Johnson, who largely kept his conference together after days of around-the-clock negotiations with holdouts. ... The bill includes a fresh round of tax cuts sought by Trump, as well as hundreds of billions of dollars in new funding for the military and border security.

...

This is arguably the most significant piece of Legislation that will ever be signed in the History of our Country!” Trump posted on Truth Social on Thursday morning. “Great job by Speaker Mike Johnson, and the House Leadership, and thank you to every Republican who voted YES on this Historic Bill! Now, it’s time for our friends in the United States Senate to get to work, and send this Bill to my desk AS SOON AS POSSIBLE!”

Democrats have their own names for the measure, including “the GOP tax scam” and “one big, ugly bill.” Minority party leaders are deriding the bill by pointing to nonpartisan forecasts that it would increase the federal deficit by trillions of dollars and cause more than 10 million people to lose health care coverage, while shifting resources away from the lowest-income households and to the wealthiest.

In a lengthy closing speech ahead of the final vote, House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries accused Republicans of bankrolling tax cuts for the rich with cuts to safety-net programs like Medicaid and SNAP food assistance.

“And people will die. That’s not hype. That’s not hyperbole. That’s not a hypothetical,” Jeffries said, before a heated exchange about “decorum” with the Republican presiding over the floor.

My own 'editorializing'/additional context beyond this point:

EDIT: Link to the bill itself on congress.gov:

https://www.congress.gov/bill/119th-congress/house-bill/1/all-info

Estimates are that 11 million will lose Medicaid coverage, 13 million will lose SNAP benefits, between $3.3 trillion and $3.8 trillion ... to nearly $6 trillion increase to the national debt... many, many other programs are directly cut back, and the existing 'PayGo' laws will force other cutbacks in things like Medicare from the overwhelming deficits this creates... if this passes the Senate, which seems likely, though some modifications also seem likely.

https://www.cbo.gov/publication/61420

https://www.crfb.org/blogs/breaking-down-one-big-beautiful-bill

Possibly also worth noting:

The House version writes into law the formal removal of the 'de minimis' import exception rule, so that means basically every US based, import reliant dropshipper no longer has a workable business model... thats now formally in the law, not just a flurry of Executive Orders.

Also, EV credits are over.

 

House Republicans came together to pass their domestic policy megabill early Thursday, after weeks of internal conflict and last-minute intervention from President Donald Trump.

The 215-214 vote is a major victory for Speaker Mike Johnson, who largely kept his conference together after days of around-the-clock negotiations with holdouts. ... The bill includes a fresh round of tax cuts sought by Trump, as well as hundreds of billions of dollars in new funding for the military and border security.

...

This is arguably the most significant piece of Legislation that will ever be signed in the History of our Country!” Trump posted on Truth Social on Thursday morning. “Great job by Speaker Mike Johnson, and the House Leadership, and thank you to every Republican who voted YES on this Historic Bill! Now, it’s time for our friends in the United States Senate to get to work, and send this Bill to my desk AS SOON AS POSSIBLE!”

Democrats have their own names for the measure, including “the GOP tax scam” and “one big, ugly bill.” Minority party leaders are deriding the bill by pointing to nonpartisan forecasts that it would increase the federal deficit by trillions of dollars and cause more than 10 million people to lose health care coverage, while shifting resources away from the lowest-income households and to the wealthiest.

In a lengthy closing speech ahead of the final vote, House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries accused Republicans of bankrolling tax cuts for the rich with cuts to safety-net programs like Medicaid and SNAP food assistance.

“And people will die. That’s not hype. That’s not hyperbole. That’s not a hypothetical,” Jeffries said, before a heated exchange about “decorum” with the Republican presiding over the floor.

My own 'editorializing'/additional context beyond this point:

EDIT: Link to the bill itself on congress.gov:

https://www.congress.gov/bill/119th-congress/house-bill/1/all-info

Estimates are that 11 million will lose Medicaid coverage, 13 million will lose SNAP benefits, between $3.3 trillion and $3.8 trillion ... to nearly $6 trillion increase to the national debt... many, many other programs are directly cut back, and the existing 'PayGo' laws will force other cutbacks in things like Medicare from the overwhelming deficits this creates... if this passes the Senate, which seems likely, though some modifications also seem likely.

https://www.cbo.gov/publication/61420

https://www.crfb.org/blogs/breaking-down-one-big-beautiful-bill

Possibly also worth noting:

The House version writes into law the formal removal of the 'de minimis' import exception rule, so that means basically every US based, import reliant dropshipper no longer has a workable business model... thats now formally in the law, not just a flurry of Executive Orders.

Also, EV credits are over.

view more: next ›