Darkpriest

As i said. My main problem is the psi. For me that part could go completely the way of dodo. In the new.xcom it is at least limited to the LoS so it is bearable

I do not like the psi system in Xenonauts, I much rather prefer the LoS psi system of new XCOM... i feel like the game is cheating

Nice Christmas present from Lord Gaben to all the other poors on the interwebz. You all people should be happy to share with others!!! On a more serious note. F.U. Valve and your long response. I hope someone in US will sue you for big bucks for such a long response to this.

Nah KFC better than Bieber

I am no expert on military things, but this seems to be a fairly interesting read: http://breakingenergy.com/2015/12/23/the-turkish-russian-military-balance/

I guess people like Trump will be getting attention and support as long as absurd things like this exist: http://news.yahoo.com/video/anti-politically-correct-signs-draw-160107557.html

Heh, difference in the approach of various immigrants in west EU countries: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3325273/CCTV-catches-terrifying-moment-father-six-brutally-set-hooded-thugs-pickaxe-handle-targeted-blasphemer-converted-Islam-Christianity.html#ixzz3rykfsWQQ Some will try to kill you because you changed the faith (ME/NAfrica) while others will risk their health to defend you (CEE), when attacked by bandits.

Sounds plausible. Found the first game so bad I threw the towel in the ring before finishing it. Trust those sneaky aliens to not go home and give it a rest in a gentlemanly manner. Did they thwart us during our tea break like those pesky Romans? yes, they did. they even spilled the milk!

Thats xcom baby!!! But seriously that's some tough series of events. Did you skip some very large UFO earlier the same month?

Well on the bright side, if you will want to change something you will be able to. They will release basically everything to the modding community. You will be able to create completly new games with this.

Nice try, we were both white slavs, and she was the pretty one.

To be fair, research shows income over 70k dollars a year or somesuch doesn't meaningfully increase happiness, so there's that. It depends how much you have to work for it. Usually people have to spend significant amount of time at work, on top of a few years of experience, certificates, etc. to enter income that high. I know people basically tied to their BlackBerries (or some other similar device) and working even in their "off time". I remember myself doing stuff like waking up at 5-6 in the morning, to check some data and then push for reports to some shared service center in other timezone, which i could review before a management meeting at 10am, then you get a ton of various leads on projects, sales, etc. then in the evening you are still on the mobile phone/mail because in another timezone there might be something or someone that needs attention, etc. and then you go to sleep at around midnight. But there are also times where it is slightly slower paced and then you start to appreciate the higher income, and spend some more money on various means of entertainment or traveling - or invest in various things to retire at 50-55 and enjoy the life from there on. It is always funny when people who never really understood the concept of making money are demanding to take money from others and give it to them. Honestly, from my perspective, what's ultimately happened is that you've created this situation for yourself. You're deliberately doing the job of more than one person in order to promote yourself in the eyes of your bosses, which means you're effectively underpaid for your position, and are doing the job for "intangibles". The Studies have shown that a forced 2 week vacation every so often actually makes people happier because it allows them to reset and get their lives in order. As to the post/article I linked. My issue with it is that it doesn't differentiate between those who are working, but are still eligable for those social programs because the minimum wage is woefully inadequite for anyone to live on (seriously GD, we have two options, raise the minimum wage, or force McDonalds/Walmart to pay for the social programs their employees are forced to use), and those who are (in the words of the ex-friend) "getting free cell phones and complaining about how wealth needs to be redistributed". Sure, it was my choice to work hard, but it let me get from an entry level position to managing a 40mil BU within 5-6 years and then moved form there at a slower pace. Why should I be taxed extra for my already extra effort put into getting to where I am? Companies like Walmart have been known for their practices for a veeeery long time. Personally I find some of them disgusting, but if there are people willing to work for such a fee in certain conditions, why would you want to pay more? Nobody is telling them to work there at a gunpoint, right? When I was 30-31, together with my friend we decided to have an extended "gap year". During that time we traveled and talked about various things. At one point we decided to experiment, what would happen if we would start things over from the scratch. We both altered our resumes and concealed some of our experience, then moved to another country. We both found a simple job in NA for around 11-12 USD per hour. I was working in an entertainment, in some bigger company, my friend decided to work in a small food shop. After 6 months, I was praised for my work, had excellent rapport with clients, to the point where they were individually shaking my hand, and thanking me for the time spent with them, when it was my last week. I could have advanced there if I wanted to and i was getting a significant amount of cash in form of gratuity. My friend did even better, she managed to get to a position of a shop manager within 3 months, improving the client service, revenues and after 6 months she was even talking with the owner of the shop about possibility of introducing a new food product, which she tested on her own, where she would be getting 50% of revenue from it. We both were living for what we earned there, so I had to manage my small finance after spending around 700USD for a bachelors apartment, it wasn't the most comfortable life, but it was okish. I did not starve, I had cloths, and could go out for a beer or two once in a while with some people i've met there. The point is, if you really want, you can change the way you live and earn more money, even if you are coming as an "immigrant". The problem is that a lot of people simply do not want to do so, they go with an attitude that they just want to do the job with a minimum effort get the pay checque and then complain how hard it is for them. I know it first hand, I was working surrounded by such people in that 12USD per hour job. The only problem I found with things like hourly based job, was that the employee was not guaranteed to have those 40h a week. If companies can overstaff and then just have employees working for 28-30h a week as a "full time" job, then something is not ok with it. If I get a full FTE I should have it guaranteed that I will be working the FTE and not 60% of it.

There is always some trade off, and some people are willing to make some sacrifices in hopes of various other things that money might give them. Doesn't quite answer my question. Why should society as a whole incentivize people to ruin their physical and mental health in pursuit of the incentives said society offers for doing so? and the alternative is what? if people want recognition, want more money, want more goods, luxury items and such, why not let them do that? As it is, it gives you the choice. Ultimately it is YOUR choice, and every single decision has alternative costs. The problem I have with redistribution is that you want to take away from people who worked hard for what they have, just to give it to lazy/stupid/without foresight or otherwise people unable or unwilling to make decisions that would allow them to earn what they want. Why YOU as collective (you/me/society) should be the judge of someone else's life choices and their career? They know the trade offs they made and is up to those people, and not someone else to decide how their money should be spent. If it was legally acquired, then it's none of your or mine business. There are though universal values, that should be protected - personal safety, safety of your assets, personal freedom, basic medical help, in case of life threatening incidents, and environment of equal chances at the birth and elementary education. From there it is the life of your choices and choices of your family. EDIT: the best government would be the one, which takes only this much as to protect the values above, and was able to create laws that enable people to make more money and increase their standard of living through their own work. There would be some exceptions like disabled on birth and creating environment of as equal chances as you can get for them and those who had some unfortunate event and became disabled. You can argue on the form of certain laws regarding the various details, but government institutions should be minimal. Remember that redistribution beurocracy does not create any added value, it just takes away a portion of money you want to redistribute. The more money in redistribution cycle the higher % cost of it.

Sounds like a pretty miserable existence. Remind me again, what societal good is achieved by heavily incentivizing people to do that to themselves? yes, I can't say it's perfect, but then again people want to spend money, while not everyone is willing to earn it. There is always some trade off, and some people are willing to make some sacrifices in hopes of various other things that money might give them. Middle management is the worst though, and a lot of people burn out at that point. I had to take myself over a year of break from work, but then again i could use my assets to do so, travel around, do other various things, but i retained experience and achievements, that allowed me to come back to a well paid job, with better work/life balance.

To be fair, research shows income over 70k dollars a year or somesuch doesn't meaningfully increase happiness, so there's that. It depends how much you have to work for it. Usually people have to spend significant amount of time at work, on top of a few years of experience, certificates, etc. to enter income that high. I know people basically tied to their BlackBerries (or some other similar device) and working even in their "off time". I remember myself doing stuff like waking up at 5-6 in the morning, to check some data and then push for reports to some shared service center in other timezone, which i could review before a management meeting at 10am, then you get a ton of various leads on projects, sales, etc. then in the evening you are still on the mobile phone/mail because in another timezone there might be something or someone that needs attention, etc. and then you go to sleep at around midnight. But there are also times where it is slightly slower paced and then you start to appreciate the higher income, and spend some more money on various means of entertainment or traveling - or invest in various things to retire at 50-55 and enjoy the life from there on. It is always funny when people who never really understood the concept of making money are demanding to take money from others and give it to them.

Apparently Russians can escalate their air strikes even further and increase intensity for a long period of time... Seems Turkmen are on the receiving end http://finance.yahoo.com/news/ve-never-bombed-russias-military-160628287.html

Chaos Reborn? I pledged it and have it on Steam, but I've never actually played it. I don't know why. Yeah, that's the one. So far i heard only good stuff, but that might be biased as it was from some TB Geeks

Personally i find pheasants overrated. I'd rather have some well done duck with cranberries and some good B-deux to sip. The quality of life is fully on you and how well you can secure it. The only thing you need from the state is the protection of your property, personal freedom, and life and safety. Anything else should be on you. We can argue about cases when you were born disabled or became disabled due to some unfortunate event.

There is the strat geoscape but revamped. Instead of waiting for various events you are now driving which way to explore what sort of missions to go to and which "alien goals" to disrupt, slow down or even completly destroy. It seems to give way more agency to the player which i like. On the other hand they ditched the interception minigame due to the gameplay and setting features.

Did anyone of you tried the new baby from Mr. GOLLOP? I heard its pretty good but hard to master and fairly complex even for starters

I see nothing wrong in the beginning of that and fully agree. I did not read the rest though.

Well if there will be a gene therapy for it, this will only stgnate the positions of wealth and power. Rich will make sure tha their kids will be "smart" well educated and with a lot of financial assets. It will only limit the movement between the poor, the middle class and the rich. Today you can move up from poor to at least high middle class if you are smart and hard working. If the genetical advantage will be secured by the rich, you will not be able to make such a jump in your own lifetime you will need your lifetime and then your kids will have a shot at it if you will invest in that. I do not object any gene therapies as long as we wont move towards very uniform society. I'd rather have a world with humans enjoying healthy long life who are also smart and push civilization forward. That however is daydreaming for now. People will make a lot of money on this and it will be mostly for fairly wealthy people same as many today's medical practices

What do you mean little morals? If they can help the evolution why not. I do not see nothing less moral about it than for example altering a gender.

It was so goood. I was watching it live with little regard to my sleepig schedule. That guy has some cool brit accent and he makes it work. And Alliance is back