Binary Options Broker - how to choose the best one | A
Binary Trading - Binary Options Trading
Best Timing For Binary Options Trading - vistaacademy.co.za
Subreddit Demographic Survey 2019 : The Results
Subreddit Demographic Survey 2019
Once a year, this subreddit hosts a survey in order to get to know the community a little bit and in order to answer questions that are frequently asked here. Earlier this summer, a few thousand of you participated in a massive Subreddit Demographic Survey. Unfortunately during the process of collating results we lost contact with SailorMercure, who in previous years has completed all of the data analysis from the Google form responses. We were therefore required to collate and analyse the responses from the raw data via Excel. I attach the raw data below for those who would like to review it. For 2020 we will be rebuilding the survey from scratch. Raw Data Multiple areas of your life were probed: general a/s/l, education, finances, religious beliefs, marital status, etc. They are separated in 10 sections:
Career and Finances
Religion and Spirituality
Sexual and Romantic Life
Childhood and Family Life
Our sample is people from this subreddit who saw that we had a survey going on and were willing to complete the survey. A weekly stickied announcement was used to alert members of the community that a survey was being run.
5,976 participants over the course of two months at a subscriber count of 588,488 (total participant ratio of slightly >1%)
3.1 General Demographics
5,976 participants in total
18 or younger
19 to 24
25 to 29
30 to 34
35 to 39
40 to 44
45 to 49
50 to 54
55 to 59
60 to 64
65 to 69
70 to 74
75 or older
84.97% of the sub is under the age of 35.
Gender and Gender Identity
4,583 participants out of 5,976 (71.54%) were assigned the gender of female at birth, 1,393 (23.31%) were assigned the gender of male at birth. Today, 4,275 (70.4%) participants identify themselves as female, 1,420 (23.76%) as male, 239 (4.00%) as non binary and 42 (0.7%) as other (from lack of other options).
Because the list contains over 120 countries, we'll show the top 20 countries:
Country of birth
90.31% of the participants were born in these countries.
That one was difficult for many reasons and didn't encompass all possibilities simply from lack of knowledge.
Caucasian / White
Hispanic / Latinx
African Descent / Black
Indian / South Asian
Jewish (the ethnicity, not the religion)
Arab / Near Eastern / Middle Eastern
American Indian or Alaskan Native
Aboriginal / Australian
3.2 Education Level
5,976 participants in total
Current Level of Education
Highest Current Level of Education
Some college / university
Graduated high school / GED
Trade / Technical / Vocational training
Did not complete high school
Did not complete elementary school
Future Education Plans
I'm good where I am right now
Vocational / Trade / Technical training
Graduate high school / GED
Of our 5,976 participants, a total of 1,576 (26.37%) returned to higher education after a break of 3+ years, the other 4,400 (73.76%) did not.
I don't have a degree or a major
Information and Communication Technologies
Arts and Music
Literature and Languages
Fundamental and Applied Sciences
Teaching and Education Sciences
Economics and Politics
Social Sciences and Social Action
Environment and Sustainable Development
Administration and Management Sciences
Environmental Planning and Design
Theology and Religious Sciences
A number of you commented in the free-form field at the end of the survey, that your degree was not present and that it wasn't related to any of the listed ones. We will try to mitigate this in the next survey!
3.3 Career and Finances
Out of the 5,976 participants, 2,199 (36.80%) work in the field they majored in, 953 (15.95%) graduated but do not work in their original field. 1,645 (27.53%) are still studying. The remaining 1,179 (19.73%) are either retired, currently unemployed or out of the workforce for unspecified reasons. The top 10 industries our participants are working in are:
Health Care and Social Assistance
Arts, Entertainment, and Recreation
College, University, and Adult Education
Government and Public Administration
Finance and Insurance
Hotel and Food Services
Scientific or Technical Services
Information Services and Data Processing
*Note that "other", "I'm a student" and "currently unemployed" have been disgregarded for this part of the evaluation. Out of the 4,477 participants active in the workforce, the majority (1,632 or 36.45%) work between 40-50 hours per week, 34.73% (1,555) are working 30-40 hours weekly. Less than 6% work >50 h per week, and 23.87% (1,024 participants) less than 30 hours. 718 or 16.04% are taking over managerial responsibilities (ranging from Jr. to Sr. Management); 247 (5.52%) are self employed or partners. On a scale of 1 (lowest) to 10 (highest), the overwhelming majority (4,009 or 67.09%) indicated that career plays a very important role in their lives, attributing a score of 7 and higher. Only 663 (11.09%) gave it a score below 4, indicating a low importance. The importance of climbing the career ladder is very evenly distributed across all participants and ranges in a harmonized 7-12% range for each of the 10 steps of importance. 23.71% (1,417) of the participants are making extra income with a hobby or side job. From the 5,907 participants not already retired, the overwhelming majority of 3,608 (61.11%) does not actively seek early retirement. From those who are, most (1,024 / 17.34%) want to do so between 55-64; 7 and 11% respectively in the age brackets before or after. Less than 3.5% are looking for retirement below 45 years of age. 1,127 participants decided not to disclose their income brackets. The remaining 4,849 are distributed as follows:
$0 to $14,999
$15,000 to $29,999
$30,000 to $59,999
$60,000 to $89,999
$90,000 to $119,999
$120,000 to $149,999
$150,000 to $179,999
$180,000 to $209,999
$210,000 to $239,999
$240,000 to $269,999
$270,000 to $299,999
$300,000 or more
3.4 Child Status
5,976 participants in total 94.44% of the participants (5,644) would call themselves "childfree" (as opposed to 5.56% of the participants who would not call themselves childfree. However, only 68.51% of the participants (4,094) do not have children and do not want them in any capacity at any point of the future. The other 31.49% have a varying degree of indecision, child wanting or child having on their own or their (future) spouse's part. The 4,094 participants were made to participate in the following sections of the survey.
3.5 Current Location
4,094 childfree participants in total
There were more than 200 options of country, so we are showing the top 10 CF countries.
The Top 10 amounts to 87.98% of the childfree participants' current location.
Current Location Qualification
These participants would describe their current city, town or neighborhood as:
Tolerance to "Alternative Lifestyles" in Current Location
Single and dating around, but not looking for anything serious
Single and dating around, looking for something serious
Single and not looking
Non-monogamy (or nonmonogamy) is an umbrella term for every practice or philosophy of intimate relationship that does not strictly hew to the standards of monogamy, particularly that of having only one person with whom to exchange sex, love, and affection. 82.3% of the childfree participants do not practice ethical non-monogamy, as opposed to 17.7% who say they do.
Regarding to currently having a childfree or non childfree partner, excluding the 36.7% of childfree participants who said they do not have a partner at the moment. For this question only, only 2591 childfree participants are considered.
Non childfree partner
More than one partner; all childfree
More than one partner; some childfree
More than one partner; none childfree
Dating a Single Parent
Would the childfree participants be willing to date a single parent?
No, I'm not interested in single parents and their ties to parenting life
Yes, but only if it's a short term arrangement of some sort
Yes, whether for long term or short term, but with some conditions
Yes, whether for long term or short term, with no conditions
3.8 Childhood and Family Life
On a scale from 1 (very unhappy) to 10 (very happy), how would you rate your childhood?
4,094 childfree participants in total
No, I am not sterilized and, for medical, practical or other reasons, I do not need to be
No. However, I've been approved for the procedure and I'm waiting for the date to arrive
No. I am not sterilized and don't want to be
No. I want to be sterilized but I have started looking for a doctor (doctor shopping)
No. I want to be sterilized but I haven't started doctor shopping yet
Yes. I am sterilized
479 sterilized childfree participants in total
Age when starting doctor shopping or addressing issue with doctor
18 or younger
19 to 24
25 to 29
30 to 34
35 to 39
40 to 44
45 to 49
50 to 54
55 or older
Age at the time of sterilization
18 or younger
19 to 24
25 to 29
30 to 34
35 to 39
40 to 44
45 to 49
50 to 54
55 or older
Elapsed time between requesting procedure and undergoing procedure
Less than 3 months
Between 3 and 6 months
Between 6 and 9 months
Between 9 and 12 months
Between 12 and 18 months
Between 18 and 24 months
Between 24 and 30 months
Between 30 and 36 months
Between 3 and 5 years
Between 5 and 7 years
More than 7 years
How many doctors refused at first, before finding one who would accept?
None. The first doctor I asked said yes
One. The second doctor I asked said yes
Two. The third doctor I asked said yes
Three. The fourth doctor I asked said yes
Four. The fifth doctor I asked said yes
Five. The sixth doctor I asked said yes
Six. The seventh doctor I asked said yes
Seven. The eighth doctor I asked said yes
Eight. The ninth doctor I asked said yes
I asked more than 10 doctors before finding one who said yes
Approved, not Sterilized Yet
119 approved but not yet sterilised childfree participants in total. Owing to the zero participants who were approved but not yet sterilised in the 45+ age group in the 2018 survey, these categories were removed from the 2019 survey.
Age when starting doctor shopping or addressing issue with doctor
18 or younger
19 to 24
25 to 29
30 to 34
35 to 39
40 to 45
How many doctors refused at first, before finding one who would accept?
None. The first doctor I asked said yes
One. The second doctor I asked said yes
Two. The third doctor I asked said yes
Three. The fourth doctor I asked said yes
Four. The fifth doctor I asked said yes
Five. The sixth doctor I asked said yes
Six. The seventh doctor I asked said yes
Seven. The eighth doctor I asked said yes
Eight. The ninth doctor I asked said yes
I asked more than ten doctors before finding one who said yes
How long between starting doctor shopping and finding a doctor who said "Yes"?
Less than 3 months
3 to 6 months
6 to 9 months
9 to 12 months
12 to 18 months
18 to 24 months
24 to 30 months
30 to 36 months
3 to 5 years
5 to 7 years
More than 7 years
Age when receiving green light for sterilization procedure?
18 or younger
19 to 24
25 to 29
30 to 34
35 to 39
40 to 44
Not Sterilized Yet But Looking
328 searching childfree participants in total
How many doctors did you ask so far?
More than 10
How long have you been searching so far?
Less than 3 months
3 to 6 months
6 to 9 months
9 to 12 months
12 to 18 months
18 to 24 months
24 to 30 months
30 to 36 months
3 to 5 years
5 to 7 years
More than 7 years
At what age did you start searching?
18 or younger
19 to 24
25 to 29
30 to 34
35 to 39
40 to 44
45 to 54
4,094 childfree participants in total Only 1.1% of the childfree participants (46 out of 4094) literally owns a jetski, but 46.1% of the childfree participants (1889 out of 4094) figuratively owns a jetski. A figurative jetski is an expensive material possession that purchasing would have been almost impossible had you had children.
Primary Reason to Not Have Children
Aversion towards children ("I don't like children")
Current state of the world
Environmental (it includes overpopulation)
Eugenics ("I have "bad genes" ")
I already raised somebody else who isn't my child
Lack of interest towards parenthood ("I don't want to raise children")
Maybe interested for parenthood, but not suited for parenthood
Medical ("I have a condition that makes conceiving/bearing/birthing children difficult, dangerous or lethal")
Philosophical / Moral (e.g.: antinatalism)
Tokophobia (aversion/fear of pregnancy and/or chidlbirth)
Section 1 : General Demographics
The demographics remain largely consistent with the 2018 survey. 85% of the participants are under 35, compared with 87.5% of the subreddit in the 2018 survey. 71.54% of the subreddit identify as female, compared with 70.4% in the 2018 survey. This is in contrast to the overall membership of Reddit, estimated at 74% male according to Reddit's Wikipedia page [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reddit#Users_and_moderators]. There was a marked drop in the ratio of members who identify as heterosexual, from 67.7% in the 2018 survey to 54.89% in the 2019 survey. Ethnicity wise, 77% of members identified as primarily Caucasian, a slight drop from the 2018 survey, where 79.6% of members identified as primarily Caucasian. Further research may be useful to explore the unusually high female membership of /childfree and the potential reasons for this. It is possible that the results are skewed towards those more inclined to complete a survey. In the 2018 survey the userbase identified the following missing ethicities:
Nepali (or put "South Easian" instead of "Indian")
This has been rectified in the current 2019 survey.
Section 2 : Education level
As it did in the 2018 survey, this section highlights the stereotype of childfree people as being well educated. 4% of participants did not complete high school, which is a slight increase from the 2018 survey, where 3.1% of participants did not graduate high school. This could potentially be explained by the slightly higher percentage of participants under 18. 5.6% of participants were under 18 at the time of the 2018 survey, and 8.2% of participants were under 18 at the time of the 2019 survey. At the 2019 survey, the highest percentage of responses under the: What is your degree/major? question fell under "I don't have a degree or a major" (16.9%) and "other" (9.71%). However, of the participants who were able to select a degree and/or major, the most popular responses were:
Information and Communication Technologies
Arts and Music
Compared to the 2018 survey, health sciences have overtaken engineering, however the top 5 majors remain the same. There is significant diversity in the subreddit with regards to chosen degree/major.
Section 3 : Career and Finances
The highest percentage of participants (17.7%) listed themselves as a student. However, of those currently working, significant diversity in chosen field of employment was noted. This is consistent with the 2018 survey. The highest percentage of people working in one of the fields listed remains in Healthcare and Social Services. This is slightly down from the 2018 survey (9.9%) to 9.5%. One of the stereotypes of the childfree is of wealth. However this is not demonstrated in the survey results. 72.4% of participants earn under $60,000 USD per annum, while 87.5% earn under $90,000 per annum. 26.2% are earning under $15,000 per annum. The results remain largely consistent with the 2018 survey. 1127 participants, or 19% chose not to disclose this information. It is possible that this may have skewed the results if a significant proportion of these people were our high income earners, but impossible to explore. A majority of our participants work between 30 and 50 hours per week (71.2%) which is markedly increased from the 2018 survey, where 54.6% of participants worked between 30 and 50 hours per week.
Section 4 : Child Status
This section solely existed to sift the childfree from the fencesitters and the non childfree in order to get answers only from the childfree. Childfree, as it is defined in the subreddit, is "I do not have children nor want to have them in any capacity (biological, adopted, fostered, step- or other) at any point in the future." 68.5% of participants actually identify as childfree, slightly up from the 2018 survey, where 66.3% of participants identified as childfree. This is suprising in reflection of the overall reputation of the subreddit across reddit, where the subreddit is often described as an "echo chamber".
Section 5 : Current Location
The location responses are largely similar to the 2018 survey with a majority of participants living in a suburban and urban area. 86.7% of participants in the 2019 survey live in urban and suburban regions, with 87.6% of participants living in urban and suburban regions in the 2018 survey. There is likely a multifactorial reason for this, encompassing the younger, educated skew of participants and the easier access to universities and employment, and the fact that a majority of the population worldwide localises to urban centres. There may be an element of increased progressive social viewpoints and identities in urban regions, however this would need to be explored further from a sociological perspective to draw any definitive conclusions. A majority of our participants (60.9%) live in the USA. The United Kingdom (8.1%), Canada (7.9%), Australia (3.6%) and Germany (2.2%) encompass the next 4 most popular responses. Compared to the 2018 survey, there has been a slight drop in the USA membership (64%), United Kingdom membership (7.3%) Canadian membership (8.1%), Australian membership (3.8%). There has been a slight increase in German membership, up from 1.7%. This may reflect a growing globalisation of the childfree concept.
Section 6 : Religion and Spirituality
A majority of participants were raised Christian (64.1%) however the majority are currently aetheist (55.6%) or agnostic (20.25%). This is consistent with the 2018 survey results. A majority of participants (62.8%) rated religion as "not at all influential" to the childfree choice. This is consistent with the 2018 survey where 60.9% rated religion as "not at all influential". Despite the high percentage of participants who identify as aetheist or agnostic, this does not appear to be related to or have an impact on the childfree choice.
Section 7 : Romantic and Sexual Life
60.7% of our participants are in a relationship at the time of the survey. This is an almost identical result to the 2018 survey, where 60.6% of our participants were in a relationship. A notable proportion of our participants are listed as single and not looking (23.8%) which is consistent with the 2018 survey. Considering the frequent posts seeking dating advice as a childfree person, it is surprising that such a high proportion of the participants are not actively seeking out a relationship. Participants that practice ethical non-monogamy are unusual (17.7%) and this result is consistent with the results of the 2018 survey. Despite the reputuation for childfree people to live an unconventional lifestyle, this finding suggests that a majority of our participants are monogamous. 84.2% of participants with partners of some kind have at least one childfree partner. This is consistent with the often irreconcilable element of one party desiring children and the other wishing to abstain from having children.
Section 8 : Childhood and Family Life
Overall, the participants skew towards a happier childhood.
Section 9 : Sterilization
While just under half of our participants wish to be sterilised, 46.3%, only 11.7% have been successful in achieving sterilisation. This is likely due to overarching resistance from the medical profession however other factors such as the logistical elements of surgery and the cost may also contribute. This is also a decrease from the percentage of participants sterilised in the 2018 survey (14.8%). 31.1% of participants do not wish to be or need to be sterilised suggesting a partial element of satisfaction from temporary birth control methods or non-necessity from no sexual activity. Of the participants who did achieve sterilisation, a majority began the search between 19 and 29, with the highest proportion being in the 25-29 age group (33.2%) This is a drop from the 2018 survey where 37.9% of people who started the search were between 25-29. The majority of participants who sought out and were successful at achieving sterilisation, were again in the 25-29 age group (37.8%). This is consistent with the 2018 survey results. Over half of the participants who were sterilised had the procedure completed in less than 3 months (58.5%). This is a decline from the number of participants who achieved sterilisation in 3 months in the 2018 survey (68%). The proportion of participants who have had one or more doctors refuse to perform the procedure has stayed consistent between the two surveys.
Section 10 : Childfreedom
The main reasons for people chosing the childfree lifestyle are a lack of interest towards parenthood and an aversion towards children. Of the people surveyed 63.8% are pet owners, suggesting that this lack of interest towards parenthood does not necessarily mean a lack of interest in all forms of caretaking. The community skews towards a dislike of children overall which correlates well with the 81.4% of users choosing "no, I do not have, did not use to have and will not have a job that makes me heavily interact with children on a daily basis" in answer to, "do you have a job that heavily makes you interact with children on a daily basis?". A vast majority of the subreddit identifes as pro-choice (94.5%). This is likely due to a high level of concern about bodily autonomy and forced parenthood. However only 70% support financial abortion for the non-pregnant person in a relationship to sever all financial and parental ties with a child. 45.9% identify as feminist, however many users prefer to identify with egalitarianism or are unsure. Only 8% firmly do not identify as a feminist. Most of our users realised that did not want children young. 60% of participants knew they did not want children by the age of 18, with 96% of users realising this by age 30. This correlates well with the age distribution of participants. Despite this early realisation of our childfree stance, 80.4% of participants have been "bingoed" at some stage in their lives. Only 13% of participants are opposed to parents making posts on this subreddit. Bonus section: The Subreddit In light of the "State of the Subreddit" survey from 2018, some of the questions from this survey were added to the current Subreddit Survey 2019. By and large our participants were lurkers (66.17%). Our participants were divided on their favourite flairs with 33.34% selecting "I have no favourite". The next most favourite flair was "Rant", at 20.47%. Our participants were similarly divided on their least favourite flair, with 64.46% selecting "I have no least favourite". Potentially concerningly were the 42.01% of participants who selected "I have never participated on this sub", suggesting a disparity between members who contributed to this survey and members who actually participate in the subreddit. To further address this, next year's survey will clarify the "never participated" option by specifying that "never participated" means "never up/downvoting, reading posts or commenting" in addition to never posting. A small minority of the survey participants (6.18%) selected "yes" to allowing polite, well meaning lectures. An even smaller minority (2.76%) selected "yes" to allowing angry, trolling lectures. In response to this lectures remain not tolerated, and removed on sight or on report. Almost half of our users (49.95%) support the use of terms such as breeder, mombie/moo, daddict/duh on the subreddit, with a further 22.52% supporting use of these terms in context of bad parents only. In response to this use of the above and similar terms to describe parents remains permitted on ths subreddit. 55.3% of users support the use of terms to describe children such as crotchfruit on the subreddit, with a further 17.42% of users supporting the use of this and similar terms in context of bad children only. In response to this use of the above and similar terms to describe children remains permitted on ths subreddit. 56.03% of participants support allowing parents to post, with a further 28.77% supporting parent posts dependent on context. In response to this, parent posts will continue to be allowed on the subreddit. Furthermore 66.19% of participants support parents and non childfree making "I need your advice" posts, with a further 21.37% supporting these dependent on context. In light of these results we have decided to implement a new "regret" flair to better sort out parents from fencesitters, which will be trialed until the next subreddit survey due to concern from some of our members. 64.92% of participants support parents making "I support you guys" posts. Therefore, these will continue to be allowed. 71.03% of participants support under 18's who are childfree participating in the subreddit. Therefore we will continue to allow under 18's that stay within the overall Reddit age requirement. We asked participants their opinion on moving Rants and Brants to a stickied weekly thread. Slightly less than half (49.73%) selected leaving them as they are in their own posts. In light of the fact that Rants are one of the participant's favourite flairs, we will leave them as they are. There was divide among participants as to whether "newbie" questions should be removed. An even spread was noted among participants who selected remove and those who selected to leave them as is. We have therefore decided to leave them as is.
Thank you to our participants who contributed to the survey. To whoever commented, "Do I get a donut?", no you do not, but you get our appreciation for pushing through all of the questions! Overall there have been few significant changes in the community from 2018.
‘They are us’ – an urgent, uncomfortable call to action
"By Morgan Godfery | Contributing writer March 13, 2020 A proper reckoning with March 15 2019 demands that we take up a generations-long struggle to destroy all the exclusions that make up our society and produce the conditions we know as racism. An essay by Morgan Godfery. This work is made possible bySpinoff Members.
I was cleaning out the garage the other day and found an old Crusaders jersey. If I remember right it’s their team kit from 2005, the white knight sewn into the chest and the old Ford logo printed in the centre. The jersey itself is still as fresh as new paint, a novelty purchase from when we were passing through Christchurch on our way to Christmas in Oamaru. I was a year 9 in school and a Super 12 jersey was the kind of item you had, just so you could say you had one. This is about the same time it was still acceptable to whisper things like how the white players in the Crusaders were responsible for their team’s championship success, playing their footy with brains, and the problem with mid-table finishers like the Blues were too many brown boys who only knew how to throw their weight around. I’m not quite white-passing, but my upper middle-class accent, generally preppy affect, and not-quite-pasty-not-quite-brown skin makes me ethnically ambiguous enough that people are happy to share their thoughts about big Polynesian units, Asian immigrants, Muslim terrorists, and the Jews. The first time I remember running into entirely casual racism was in Christchurch, on the way back from that Christmas in Oamaru, when a retail worker caught up with me on the street apologising for short-changing me in store. I didn’t realise or particularly care, but years later I thought about his apology. “Sorry, I just Jew-ed you”. At the time it was nothing to me. In high school and later in my flat at Victoria that was just what people said. “Jewing” someone was a verb for ripping them off, taking an advantage, or just a way to give someone a bit of stick. In my experience it was especially popular with the Christ’s College boys, which probably has something to do with the city’s private schools inheriting their culture from Britain’s public schools. “A Jewish boy at a public school almost invariably had a bad time,” wrote Orwell in 1945. Things probably aren’t that much better in 2020. The other day I read an old mate – a private schooler too – on Facebook joking about how Jews are useless at sport. I suspect for good liberals this is probably shocking. This isn’t language that ever sneaks through our circles. But outside of our cosy hermetic world words like coconut, boonga, fob, wog, gook, curry muncher, towelhead, the hundred variations on the N word, and “Jew” as more than a noun are common currency. The stains from that vocabulary seep into every part of the culture and society, and nothing much has ever been done to wash it out. The first time I remember encountering deliberate, menacing racism is on the rugby paddock when a white coach was yelling at my mate on the wing “run you BLACK bastard”. I thought about that moment when spectators in Christchurch were caught vilifying Fijian player Sake Aca in 2015, screaming from the stands “black cunt”. Fandoms like to imagine their sports, multicultural rugby especially, as pure and independent realms (“a level playing field”) absent race, politics, or any disadvantage other than skill. It’s a seductive argument, I’ll concede that much, but it’s so self-evidently false it still surprises me every time someone insists on it earnestly. Sport? Not racist? In 2012 talkback callers and trolls went after then Blues coach Pat Lam and his family for the great crime of simply being Polynesian. In 2010 former All Black Andy Haden was put through the wringer for telling media the Crusaders only recruit a maximum three “darkies”, presumably to preserve the team’s famous brain-brawn balance. Even in the laudatory histories New Zealand rugby was, and probably remains, a notorious nexus for down home conservatives, know-nothing administrators, and out and out racists. In 1960 the rugby union sent the All Blacks on tour to Apartheid South Africa, waving the team off without any Māori players or officials in a remarkable sop to the country’s colour bar. In 1976 the national team were sent back, this time defying international calls to cut sporting ties with the racist state. In protest at the tour more than twenty African countries led a boycott at that year’s Olympics, a moral stand that should perpetually shame New Zealand Rugby. Not racist? As if. In an ideal world the Canterbury Crusaders would study this history, carefully considering whether their decision to retain the team name is another brick in rugby’s wall of shame. The managers might consider how “deus vult”, meaning God wills it, a battle cry from the first Crusade, and “Acre 1189”, a reference to a siege in the third Crusade, are URL shorthands and postscripts for white supremacist users constructing a historiography for their neo-fascist movement. The managers might also reflect on how real-life white supremacists in countries like Brazil, Norway, and Australia are adopting the Knights Templar, the Christian warrior monks who made up the crusading hordes, and the literal white knight that was formerly the Canterbury team’s logo, as their saints. 📷 CRUSADERS MASCOTS AT AMI STADIUM IN CHRISTCHURCH IN 2019. PHOTO: DAVID ROGERS/GETTY IMAGES. FEATURE IMAGE: FRIDAY PRAYERS AT AL NOOR MOSQUE ON MARCH 22, 2019. PHOTO BY SANKA VIDANAGAMA/NURPHOTO VIA GETTY IMAGES As it happens the team’s managers, after kicking the issue to a “market research” firm shortly after March 15, made the call to save the name. It’s an unconscionable decision, for obvious reasons, but the team bosses seem cognitively incapable of reasoning through the issue and its implications beyond mere “branding”. In a statement announcing the name-stay the team’s PR people wrote “for us, the Crusaders name is a reflection of the crusading spirit of this community,” as if it’s possible to just reframe the holy war using a press release. It’s a cretinous thing to do when not even a year earlier an alleged shooter undertook a massacre at the Al Noor and Linwood mosques as part of his own “crusade”. A28-year-old man is before the High Court facing 52 murder charges relating to the events of March 15. What we know about his life is little, save the things he was curating about himself online, which in this essay I treat with caution and scepticism. But it seems clear enough the Australian citizen was an obsessive for the Crusades, scribbling references to the religious war for the Holy Land across the weapon police accuse the man of using to carry out the massacre. Investigative reports note in his pilgrimage to Europe the 28-year-old – who pleaded not guilty to all charges – made particular visits to Christian-Muslim battlegrounds in the former Ottoman Empire, apparently as a tribute to the crusading warmongers he was so keen to match. To outsiders the obsession with this particular historical episode is probably bizarre, if not creepy. But in the nether world this man and his neo-fascist comrades inhabit they imagine they’re acting out the thesis and title in Samuel P Huntington’s The Clash of Civilisations. In his 1993 essay the American political scientist argues that in the immediate past global conflicts were between warring ideological factions – capitalism and communism – but post-Cold War conflict will centre between clashing civilisations. The West vs the rest. Christianity vs Islam. The Crusades II. In Huntington’s telling, and in the alleged shooter’s head, the West and the Islamic world are fated to compete. Yet that competition won’t centre over economic issues like stable oil supply lines, or even political issues like the territorial integrity of Western allies in the Middle East, instead the clash is meant to happen over Islam’s apparently regressive values and the West’s progressive tradition. It’s a striking thesis, especially for the generals and politicians who were hunting for cover for their military adventures in the Middle East and East Africa in the late 80s and early 90s. But it was always a notion that was impossible to apply, reducing the Islamic world to a series of stereotypes (it never had its enlightenment) and setting it against an equally reductive West (it did have its enlightenment). The late Edward Said, the Palestinian scholar, cut right to the heart of Huntington’s argument in identifying it wasn’t an argument at all – rather, he was “a partisan, an advocate of one so-called civilisation over all others” who maps billions of people into “vague” and “manipulable” abstractions and then presents it as a true account of the world. “Thus to build a conceptual framework around the notion of us-versus-them is in effect to pretend that the principal consideration is epistemological and natural – our civilisation is now and accepted, theirs is different and strange – whereas in fact the framework separating us from them is belligerent, constructed, and situational.” In other words, the thing separating the Christian us from the Islamic them, to the extent a clean separation is possible at all, is history – of colonialism, of Cold War power politics – and not immutable categories like “the West” or “the East”. That the categories exist at all are a function of history and political convenience, not a universal law stipulating conflict as the only end. Yet for the neo-fascists like the alleged shooter every thought they cherish orbits this particular rock: that the entire Islamic world is one dirty blob of terrorism, rape, and invasion, and that all its more than one billion members act with a single purpose and co-ordination unknown in the entire history of humanity. But why commit to a dichotomy so obviously stupid at all? The 28-year-old grew up in Grafton, a waterway town in northern New South Wales, and in his time on the Eastern seaboard it seems unlikely he ever actually met many Muslim people at all. In his own family’s account they were just ordinary Aussies. It’s impossible to interrogate the claim – every family thinks itself the norm and we can’t penetrate their private lives to investigate how true it is – yet the family were probably ordinary in one sense. They were unremarkable. Just another white family. The alleged shooter’s parents were in traditional jobs. Mum a teacher. Dad a rubbish man. The people who were closest to him – cousins, old school mates – pinpoint his OE to Europe as “the moment”. As RNZ reports in his manifesto the alleged shooter recounts his trip through North Korea and Pakistan, paying tribute to the locals’ kindness and hospitality (noticing the contradiction he explains he doesn’t hate the yellows and blacks who stay in their own “homelands”). Eventually he lands in Europe, road tripping France. In one passage he despairs that he can’t seem to find an all-white town or city. In another passage his travels take him, quite conveniently, to a cemetery for the European dead of the world wars. “I broke into tears, sobbing alone in the car,” he writes, mourning the apparent Islamification of Europe. “Why were we allowing these soldiers deaths to be in vain?” He didn’t realise that the dead he mourned died trying to kill people like him. In 2018 I wrote (presciently, without claiming too much credit for an insight this awful) that “white nationalism is, for the basement dwelling 4chaners, mouth breathing Redditors, and Youtube philosopher kings, nothing more than a desperate search for an alternative fatherland”. That search is what drove the alleged shooter from his Australian home. “The origin of my language is European, my culture is European, my political beliefs are European… most importantly, my blood is European”. To the alleged shooter his actual home was irredeemable. “What is an Australian but a drunk European?” In each claim is a desperate narcissism, reaching for an imaginary identity when your existing accomplishments don’t match your personal ambitions. It’s tempting to extend that psychoanalysis. The alleged shooter’s fetish for imaginary “whites” is a cover for the trauma of being a nothing, disembodied. Or maybe the urge to order and rank the world into competing civilisations is a neurosis, like stacking your knives and forks in a row. Perhaps the pleasure he takes in trolling is jouissance, a momentary transgression in the service of briefly feeling. Yet those readings are weightless if they stand alone. The alleged shooter’s interior life is relevant, certainly so for a conviction on murder, but studying the actually existing politics that shaped his positions and actions seems more important than base speculation. In The Invention of Tradition the historians Terence Ranger and Eric Hobsbawm argue that traditions, far from the ancient wisdoms of old, are often nothing more than recent beliefs that help foster a common identity when – to borrow from Said – “organic solidarities” like the family or village break down. The inventions are easy to spot in the courts and parliament where British ritual connects the two institutions to a pedigree and past that their move half away across the world broke. In the neo-fascist movement the inventions are slightly more subtle, taking actual historical happenings like the Crusades and pick-and-mixing the symbols (Knights Templar), battles (Acre 1189), and language (deus vult) that they can contort around the various anti-Muslim bigotries. The idea that traditions are a kind of stand-in where old connections break down seems especially apt in settler colonies where the relationship to the past and a present community often amounts to nothing more than a shopping list of shared habits and references. Gumboots as culture. I appreciate that description could come across as banal, or even malicious, but it gets close to the impulses apparently guiding the alleged shooter: the search for meaningful political connections and political community. As he saw it Australia had no identity to offer. Instead he found his connection in an “imagined community” – in violent European nationalisms – and online. “I am a racist”, the man writes in his manifesto. His neo-fascists comrades were too.
One of the first inspirations he cites is Luca Traini, a 28-year-old Italian neo-Nazi who, with a 9mm glock, went on a drive-by shooting injuring six African migrants in Macarata in 2018. The racist rampage lit a fuse under that year’s Italian general election. The left went after Matteo Salvini, the League Party leader, the same party in which Traini stood as a mayoral list candidate, for inspiring his violent work. In an ordinary election a political leader would make an immediate climb down, condemning Traini and his crimes. But Salvini, best known in the English-speaking world for closing harbours to refugees crossing the Med, was surprisingly consistent. He said the left had “blood on its hands” for packing the country with “illegal migrants”. The unspoken implication: Traini was doing his patriotic duty. The alleged shooter, watching on from another hemisphere, found a brother in arms. The two men had built their identities around all the same hatreds and had clothed their boogeymen in all the same threads. One stitch for migrant “invaders”. Two stiches for liberals and Marxists, and a needle for the “race traitors” among them. But where the twin gunmen’s hatred really met, transforming from online big noting to a real-life passion, was in protecting “their” women. Traini undertook his crime as an apparent act of revenge against the three Nigerian refugees in court for killing 18-year-old Pamela Mastropietro. In his manifesto the alleged shooter offers a similar provocation, taking 11-year-old Ebba Akerlund’s death as his red pill. In his self-mythologising, the Stockholm truck attack, a deadly terrorist attack that took Akerlund’s and four other lives, was his waking moment. “It was another terror attack in the seemingly never-ending attacks that had been occurring on a regular basis throughout my adult life,” he wrote. “But for some reason this was different”. What was that difference? Akerlund. An innocent. It’s a vile misuse – he doesn’t care for anyone or anything beyond himself – but the narrative demands an affect, the shooter turning in his coward’s rags for a knight’s armour. For neo-fascists it’s essential to tell their origin stories through the opposite sex. For aspiring movement leaders like the alleged shooter it’s the fight to protect the “virtue” of “our women” against “Muslim rapists” that forces their hand. For lurkers, shitposters, and like-avores it’s the feminists and “Staceys” who never recognise the genius and vigour of their own race (plain meaning: “women don’t want me”) who lead them into fascism. Santa Barbara shooter Elliot Rodger, a martyr for beta males, undertook his crimes and suicide as an apparent act of “retribution” against women for denying him the sex and love he thought of as his by right. This, not the customary declarations of love for the race, or even the thrill of sharing the same enemies, is usually the heart of online fascism – it’s a reaction against women. In Male Fantasies the German sociologist Klaus Theweleit argues the fascist men who fought against the Weimar Republic from 1918 to 1933, and who went on to prominent positions and a political home in the Nazi regime, were in their heads and hearts afraid of women. For the “Freikorps” there were two womanly classes: White Women, “the nurses” representing order and servitude to men and country; and Red Women, “the communists” representing disorder, whoring, and the end of patriotic men. The latter were the women the paramilitary movement were under an obligation to kill. In one speech a general complains that when “a few old girls get blown up the whole world starts screaming about bloodthirsty soldiers”. “As if women were always innocent,” he said. This is why every fascist movement purges women first – metaphorically and actually. In Ruth Ben-Ghiat’s Italian Fascism’s Empire Cinema the American historian describes how films under the Duce’s regime “remove the Italian woman from the colonial space”, portraying the colonies as where men might find purpose through trans-national thuggery, and attacking women’s emancipation at home as a “corrupting” force and a check on the people’s success. The alleged shooter undertook his killings with similar illusions. That he could forge a new identity in gun fire and blood, and that liberated women (and Jews) were responsible for his personal and racial decline. In his manifesto the opening line is “it’s the birth rates”, repeated three times. 📷 THE WELLINGTON 15/3 VIGIL HELD AT THE BASIN RESERVE (PHOTO BY ELIAS RODRIGUEZ/GETTY IMAGES) It’s easy to diagnose the same pathologies in his comrades. Game developers Zoë Quinn, Brianna Wu and media critic Anita Sarkeesian – the victims in 2014’s Gamergate troll – were made targets for harassment for no other reason than they were women crossing the border between a man’s stuff (the spacies) and a woman’s role (sex and housework). In New Zealand the death threats against Golriz Ghahraman, our first MP who arrived in New Zealand as a refugee, are so frequent Parliamentary Services ensures special protection for the Green MP. The critics go after Ghahraman for everything from fakery (her “CV” is a lie, she isn’t a “real refugee”) to acting as part of a globalist conspiracy to wipe out the white race. It’s impressively stupid, of course, but the point isn’t the truth in the charges. It’s that an Iranian-born woman sits in our parliament. The same trolls go for the prime minister on Twitter’s #TurnArdern hashtag too, condemning Jacinda as a lazy woman (#parttimePM) who coasts along on nothing more than her femininity (“she’s a pretty communist”). That’s hardly out of the ordinary, of course. In the 2000s print commentators were comfortable enough to throw equally chauvinist slurs at Helen Clark, using “Helengrad” for Clark as the controlling woman and “political dominatrix” for ball-breaking the men around her. The difference is today’s trolls serve their sexism with Islamophobia on top. Last year activist Rangi Kemara found a telling correlation between tweeters of Turn Ardern and tweeters of Islamophobia. The Christchurch man selling MAGA hats – “Make Ardern Go Away” – on TradeMe once wrote he would destroy “mosque after mosque till I am taken out”. Give me the misogynist, to corrupt an old saying, and I’ll show you the Islamophobe. Simone Weil, the French philosopher, would recognise in the turn to Europe – and the turn against women – a classic “uprooting”. In almost every country material comfort and security often rely on cutting the cord between a person, the past, and a present community: removing Indigenous people from their land; separating citizens from their homes and families in one place for work in another; and reducing people to their supposedly “innate” categories (race, gender, etc). These uprootings, in Weil’s words, are a “sickness of the soul” that leave men especially vulnerable to demagoguery. In their search for past and present connections they turn to “false conceptions” like patriotism and national greatness, and at the core of each in 2020: hatred for and fear of women.
What’s notable about this neo-fascist movement isn’t necessarily its reach but its mode. Online, yes, but more importantly: politically free. Other than finance, the alleged shooter had no political or bureaucratic restraints. He could post all the tell-tale things he apparently did, and it seemed neither the police nor the spy agencies would ever flag it. He could acquire the semi-automatic weapon the Crown charge him with using with nothing more than a gun licence – and the seller was under no obligation to log the purchase. And he could move between Australia and New Zealand’s practically open borders with only a passport and a straight face for the eGate. I hope you register the irony in this. Borders were the very thing the alleged shooter was desperate to enforce against the Muslim hordes. After moving to New Zealand, ostensibly to plan an attack back home, the 28-year-old found instead that “the invaders were in all of our lands”. Even at the bottom of the world in formerly lily-white Christchurch. “Nowhere was safe”, he wrote. The alleged shooter, in a bonfire of pomposity and self-regard, actually did think himself at the centre of a civilisational struggle between the out-bred West and Islam. In the mind of the manifesto writer, massacring Muslims would enforce the borders the supposed sell outs in government wouldn’t. But in allegedly killing the innocent people he did he wasn’t taking on a powerful soon-to-be majority. Rather, on one side is the 28-year-old with all his political and social freedoms, and on the other are the shooting’s victims who were living their lives under significant political and social restraints. The spy agencies were dedicating their resources to “Islamic terrorism”, not the alleged shooter’s terrorism. Police commit more resources to “street gangs” – that is, Māori – and barely even bother with the alleged shooter’s brothers and sisters in white power. The immigration department, as any anecdote can confirm, focuses disproportionate attention on non-white entries, and the only people who move freely between borders are people like the 28-year-old. In short: non-white people live their lives under scrutiny and surveillance. The government’s official response to the Christchurch shooting is to extend that scrutiny and surveillance to, well, white people. Jacinda Ardern is leading reforms to gun laws and the rules governing how online users share violent, racist, and other objectionable material. Last month the country’s top spies told a parliamentary select committee that they’re keeping watch on dozens of suspect characters. Police, even a year on, are still making home visits to destroy illegal weapons and otherwise interview lurkers and posters. The changes, taken together, rightly remove the freedom and options the alleged shooter had, and make it almost impossible for his comrades to organise. Yet as good and necessary as those changes are some of the structural conditions that produce the racial distinctions the alleged shooter holds so dear are left intact. In organised debating one of the famous moots is the “balloon debate”. In it each speaker, usually arguing on behalf of someone famous, proposes why the others shouldn’t toss him or her over the side of a hot air balloon in order to save the others. It’s a riveting hypothetical, placing six people in disaster’s mouth and exercising the collective choice to doom one and rescue the others. But for anyone who understands how it feels to have their apparent merits and demerits subject to “debate”, with someone else drawing up a balance sheet in red and black, it’s horrendous. The idea is we’re born equal, but after that all bets are off. This is what women, takatāpui, Māori, Muslims, and other deviations from the “norm” deal with most days. Are we worthy? It’s the same principle that organises immigration to New Zealand: who’s worthy? In our system the government literally attaches “points” to the world’s hopeful according to their potential for improving the lives of the hosts. Good English? Points. A tertiary qualification? Add to the tally. Assets? You’re basically in. The system’s political champions admire this approach for its rationality. Unlike the US where immigration sometimes relies on a lottery – eg the American Diversity Immigrant Visa – or just keen racism – i.e. the Muslim travel ban – New Zealand immigration is hassle-free and non-discriminatory. It’s a self-serving argument, of course, because an immigration system where the purpose and function is defining inclusions and exclusions (who’s in and who’s out) is never neutral. When Winston Peters calls for tighter English language requirements, for example, that’s really an argument for conferring an advantage on applicants from the Anglosphere over people with equivalent skills or greater need from other parts of the world. This isn’t explicitly discriminatory, at least in the sense the exclusionary threshold doesn’t depend on a person’s race, but the impact is racist in that one group of people (mostly white) enjoy an advantage over another group (mostly non-white) thanks to nothing more than the great good fortune of being born an English speaker. It’s a perversity. Yet this is what border systems, including our points system, do: they force you to think about inners and outers. The threshold between the worthy and the unworthy. This is one reason the refugee-led campaign to end the “family link policy” was so important. In removing the rule barring African and Middle Eastern refugees from settling in New Zealand (unless their family were already here) the campaigners saw to one of the worst racial exclusions our border system made. If you’re an optimist you might hope the other racist exclusions in our border laws – like The Citizenship (Western Samoa) Act, the legislation stripping Samoans of their Privy Council-confirmed New Zealand citizenship – are but a campaign away from abolition. I’m a pessimist. I suspect most people imagine borders as objects, a line in the ground demarcating our country from theirs. Yet the American southern border, as one example, is notable more for “the Wall’s” absence than its presence. The northern border is even less dramatic, a largely wide-open space with fences here and there to pen in the farm animals. In New Zealand airlines usually enforce the country’s borders thousands of kilometres from our actual line on the map. Under the Advance Passenger Screening programme carriers only board passengers with the appropriate documentation. 📷 A POLICE OFFICER DEMONSTRATES ILLEGAL GUN MODIFICATIONS. (PHOTO: RNZ / ANA TOVEY) It’s another marvellous technocratic achievement, appointing airline staff as de facto border patrol agents. But like the points system the screening programme’s impacts can end up perverse and racial making it almost impossible for refugees and asylum seekers from “non-visa waiver countries” (i.e. the developing world) from ever making it far enough to lodge a claim for protection in New Zealand. The programme, more than anything else, exposes borders for what they really are – a list of biased inclusions and exclusions – and the structural violence borders perform are in whom they include (the English-speaking, the educated, the wealthy) and who they exclude (the desperate, the poor, the mostly brown and black). The alleged shooter and the neo-fascist movement understand a struggle is happening over the nature and function of borders. This man recognised new borders – the “balkanisation of the US” – as the only way to guarantee “the future of the White race on the North American continent”. His comrades, like the neo-Nazi who went on a stabbing riot on a train in Oregon, claim their end goal is smashing the US into competing ethno-states. For them – and their king in President Trump – reconfiguring the borders, whether as policy changes to the inclusions and exclusions or new border lines entirely, is the best way to guarantee their political supremacy this century. Are borders by their very nature racist?
I took my last trip to Christchurch a month and a half after March 15. I had a speaking engagement with Network Waitangi Otautahi, the local tauiwi Treaty group. I thought about putting it off. Post-March 15 the only conversations that seem urgent and necessary are about March 15. Taking up space felt wrong, and even stepping off the plane felt intrusive. The city was grieving. Even the affect was off. People were unusually quiet in public spaces. In private one person I spoke to was literally in tears. We weren’t talking about March 15 at all but she was thinking about it every day. Even that felt like I was taking up space. Am I here to grieve too? I thought about Sam Neill breaking down in a taxi when the news broke, openly weeping, and how he took comfort from his Muslim driver. Hmmm. I spoke, in the end. Not entirely comfortably, but an intervention of one kind or another felt right after the racism debate went from “individual hate” to “firearms access” to “the internet”. Each is its own valid connection, sure, but it felt as if all the most important connections were missing. In the English-speaking world it’s fashionable to name private, individual acts as “racist”. The intolerant, unfair, or simply racial things that fall out of people’s mouths. Like “cheeky darkies” on the 7pm telly. But it’s unfashionable, of course, to name racist systems. Instead bureaucrats and opinion-makers opt for euphemisms like “unconscious bias”, reducing racism to a state of mind and not a systemic design. This is why I thought it important to issue a reminder, in the very small way that I could: racism is a social relation. It’s the principle governing the relationship between coloniser – the people who took this land and built the institutions to control and profit from it – and colonised, the people from whom the land was taken and the institutions built to protect and exploit the founding theft. The same principle shapes the relationship between citizens – people who enjoy all the rights the state confers – and non-citizens, outsiders who must prove their worth through their contribution to citizens. 📷 These are the systemic conditions that produce racism – unequal power relations – and it’s what makes it so easy to condemn the Māoris or the immigrants or whoever else. When one people are up and the other are down, and the scales are apparently resistant to any remedial attempts to balance them with Treaty settlements or an increase in the refugee and asylum seeker quota, it makes it seem as if their disadvantage is a state of nature and not a centuries-long project to exclude certain people from prosperity. To the alleged shooter his victims were by their very nature irredeemable, abusing the West’s generosity, and he understood himself as enacting the same permanent exclusions his ancestors made, from the Crusades to the war on terror. In this sense, the alleged shooter was an individual racist. Of course he was. But in another sense he was taking our exclusionary systems to their logical end. Is there any response to savagery like this? The government’s reforms are one. I entirely support them. And yet they fall so short. People will still define their identity in different nationalisms, just like the alleged shooter did, so long as there are racist border system to enforce them. Neo-fascists will still define their identities against women as long as there is an unequal “domestic sphere”, an unequal workplace, and a society where one group – men – accumulate and exercise disproportionate power over another – women, trans people, non-binary people. That makes the struggle against the alleged shooter’s politics longer than his trial, his probable conviction, and his probable imprisonment. It’s a generations-long struggle to destroy all the exclusions that make up our society and produce the conditions we know as racism. On my read Simone Weil’s original, vital insight is that as people and communities we find our identities in the obligations we owe – and in the obligations owed to us. In those reciprocal relationships we find meaning and purpose. In the give and take, in its delights and frustrations, and in the everyday work of making a home in these islands. This is where we find our roots, connecting to each other in different ways – whether as Māori or women or Muslims – but never excluding. “They are us” is an inclusion. They are us is an affirmation. They are us is also an urgent and uncomfortable call to action. As New Zealanders, it’s our responsibility to take on every exclusionary system, whether it’s racist borders or enduring gender roles. The memory of those who lost their lives on March 15 demands no less."
Hi guys, first off I just wanna say a huge thank you to you all for taking part in the survey! I was aiming for 5,000 within a week and we got 10,000 in less than 48 hours! I closed the survey off at 10,013 responders – sorry to all who didn’t get to take part, there will be more! Here is the information in a very simplified format. If you would like any more specifics please just ask below and I will try my best to help! Thank you all for taking part – hope you enjoyed it and hope you find some interest in the results! Please note – This information is not a representation of the entire Overwatch community/player base, but is a somewhat good indication of the users who frequent this Sub. Even so, there 10,000 responses while there are over a million subscribers so take the information with a grain of salt. Make of the following information what you will! Results are posted in order of most votes, second most, third most and least due to time constraints. I will post more later along with the actual raw data. UPDATE: Sorry it took so long, but here is a spreadsheet of all 10,013 responses for whoever is interested. Again guys, thanks for taking part! Link: https://goo.gl/JQgR54 Gender
Last – 40+ (0.9%) (combined % of all ages above 40)
North America (63.3%)
Australia & New Zealand (5.7%)
Last – South America (1.7%)
Between Launch and Christmas 2016 (35.8%)
Between January & March 2017 (8%)
Last – Between June 2017 and Now (5.1%)
Statements on Sexism/Racism/Homophobia
41.6% of Female players have been subject to, or have witnessed, sexist abuse on Overwatch.
24.8% have not.
20.9% do not use voice chat out of fear of being abused
9.2% do not use voice chat
The remainder do not remember if they have experienced it or not
23.1% of Male players have been subject to, or have witnessed, sexist abuse on Overwatch.
61% have not.
9% don’t use voice chat.
The remainder do not remember if they have experienced it or not
45.2% of players have been subject to, or have witnessed, racist abuse on Overwatch
54.8% of players have not
40.4% of players have been subject to, or have witnessed, homophobic abuse on Overwatch
59.6% have not
400 (99 votes)
250 (93 votes)
300 (89 votes)
Last – 155 (15 votes) | Also note, over 5820 different levels were recorded.
Most Played Hero
D. Va (8.3%)
Last – Torbjorn (0.5%)
9.7% have no favourite and choose the hero necessary for the team
Last – Bastion (1%) (no pun intended)
Class which needs a hero the most (even when Moira is considered)
Last – Offense (2.4%)
Class least fun to play
All are fun to play (26%)
Last – Offense (8.6%) (Many minute percentages were placed in the “other” category, stating a distaste for playing specific characters, but not classes)
Most played Game Mode
Quick Play (40.8%)
Most popular Skill Rating
Last – Bronze (2.7%)
Favourite Arcade Mode
Mystery Heroes (27.1%)
3v3 Elimination (8.8%)
Last – 6v6 Elimination (2%)
Would you consider playing Arcade even after you get all your loot boxes?
Maybe/Depends how I feel (50.4%)
Favourite Assault Map
Temple of Anubis (25.3%)
Volskaya Industries (18.4%)
Last – Horizon Lunar Colony (8.7%)
Favourite Hybrid Map
Kings Row (40.2%)
Last – Numbani (7.1%)
Favourite Escort Map
Watchpoint: Gibraltar (24.6%)
Route 66 (24.5%)
Last – No preference (9.2%)
Favourite Control Map
Lijiang Tower (28.7%)
Last – No preference (11.1%)
Favourite Arcade Map
Chateau Guillard (33.8%)
No Preference (25.8%)
Black Forest (16.4%)
Last – Castillo (7.1%)
Uprising 2017 (26.5%)
Enjoyed them all equally (23.2%)
Halloween Terror 2017 (14.3%)
Last – Summer Games 2016 (1.9%)
Loot Boxes Purchase Frequency
Never Purchase (50.1%)
Only at Events (46.1%)
Once every few Months (3.1%)
Last - Once a Month (0.5%)
Loot Boxes average spend per transaction
Last – 50$+ (5%)
Overwatch Improved in Year 2?
Yes it has (81%)
No improvement or decline (12.4%)
Overwatch community improved in Year 2?
No improvement or decline (32.5%)
Season Length - too long?
Fine the way it is (52%)
Yes – I get bored of it very quickly (26.1%)
Other responses/Unsure/Don’t know(21.9%)
Would you like a Clan System?
More options to spend Competitive Points on?
Is content released at a reasonable pace?
Would you consider paying for an expansion including an array of maps, characters, cosmetics, game modes or Story?
Would you like to see an Overwatch animated mini-series/movie?
Not concerned/don’t care (6.8%)
Would you like an Overwatch story mode?
Not concerned/don’t care (10%)
Have you lost interest since purchasing?
A little bit, I still play a lot though (50.8%)
Not at all, still play as much as when I first got it (21.9%)
A lot, I rarely play now (13.8%)
Last – Nope, I play even more now (13.5%)
Do you follow Overwatch ESports
Not really, but I’ve seen some matches (39%)
Console players, do you want a PTR?
What’s a PTR? (6.1%) #lul
Top 3 most recommended features – excluding Clans & Story Mode
Brexit. How did it come to this? As someone who was conflicted about the vote and who attempted to weigh up the arguments rationally, I would like to offer to the readers of reddit, a personal story of how my thinking evolved in the lead up to the vote, how I voted, and how my thoughts have developed since then. Rather than post a one-sided polemic, justifying a particular view, I want here to present my thoughts as accurately as I can describe them, including nuances and doubts along the way. That probably means I'll end up getting criticism from both sides - but perhaps some people might be interested and appreciate it. So, here goes... About Me Demographic information: white male, 40s. Rural working class by family background; middle class by education and profession. Voting affiliation: usually Conservative; formerly Liberal Democrat. Background I was never enthusiastic about the idea of the European Union, but rather saw it as a means to ensure trade and co-operation on a practical level. Certainly if you'd asked me 10 years ago, I would have argued that it's better to stay in to try to influence it for the better. But over the years, I had become less certain of this view, due to seemingly one-way ever-increasing centralization in the EU, towards something more akin to the United States. Actually worse, as I can foresee the EU taking more power from member states than does the US federal government, in some areas this is already the case in fact. At least the US has the 10th Amendment. But despite this strong skepticism of the EU institutions, I've always seen the other European countries as friendly, important allies, and want to see good trading, personal and cultural relationships across the continent of Europe. Therein lies my conflict. Influencing factors
The Euro. A single currency for the whole of Europe! What could possibly go wrong? As we know, plenty did go wrong. Perhaps this was the first indicator that something was seriously wrong at the heart of the EU project. It seemed to confirm a suspicion: that the philosophy of centralization and political integration was more important than practical economics. A generation of EU politicians, who so believed in the project, seemed to have allowed their utopian vision to override practical, pragmatic considerations. Furthermore, as the EU gets ever increasing powers, it will inevitably be run more in the interests of Euro members. As a non-Euro member, the UK would be particularly exposed to being forced into things against its national interest.
Government by continent. I am in favour of international trade and co-operation. But I really don't see why this has to be done to such a large extent at continent level. The idea of the EU seems to be predicated on having strong border on the outside and you're either in it or out of it. Sure, on a practical level, there may be some need for some Europe-wide institutions, and there are plenty of EU agencies that I'd be happy to part of. But for me the EU goes way beyond what is necessary or desirable. My preferred model would be less tied to continental masses. Especially when it comes to western democracies: I see no reason why links with Canada or Australia must necessarily be lesser than those with European countries. I am also skeptical of the need or benefit of a "European identity" that is distinct from people in other continents. Like how UKIP supporters are sometimes branded "little Englanders", I think that fanatical EU supporters can equally be branded "little Europeaners".
Localism. I am in favour of the decisions in general being taken and the most local level that makes practical sense. Indeed, the UK itself is too centralized too, and I would welcome more powers for cities and counties. Despite any claims to the contrary, the EU can and does make laws on things that could easily be left with member sates. The mantra is harmonisation, but that might be just another way of saying centralized control. Some things will necessarily require international bodies to decide upon, but where this is necessary, in many cases it might make more sense to have global bodies rather than continental ones.
The votes for prisoners judgement by the ECHR. It might seem esoteric - and before people jump in to say it: yes I know the ECHR is not an EU institution. But there was a lesson to be learned here, so let me explain. This was an outrageous decision and an affront to democracy. I was disgusted. Not just at the decision, which was offensive enough, but at the fact that there was apparently nothing that could be done about it. A court had ruled it, so that was that. In my view, the UK should have immediately left the ECHR in protest at this decision. Don't get me wrong, I am in favour of human rights law, and would happily subscribe to the basic text of European Convention on Human Rights. But what we had here was unaccountable judges overstepping their remit into areas of political policy, without being subject to democratic accountability: If it had been a UK judge, at least the Parliament could subsequently change the law. What this case showed to me, more than anything, was the absolute and critical importance of sovereignty and democratic accountability in a political system. While the ECHR might be relatively easily ignored for now, clearly this represents a danger: future outrageous judgements, perhaps next time by the ECJ, would be binding. So while not directly an EU issue, this case for me was critical in developing my thinking about questions of sovereignty.
The awkward UK. It always seems to be that we are the ones that are holding things in the EU back. Personally, I can't really understand why other countries seem happy to subordinate themselves. But if that's what they want, maybe we should just get out of the way and let them get on with it. On the other hand, by staying in, perhaps we could find common cause with others to offer a different vision for Europe - one that is more strictly limited to the practical needs of co-operation over trade.
The lead up to the vote When the referendum was announced, I wasn't clear how I would vote. I decided I would wait and see what David Cameron came back with after negotiating a so-called "reformed EU" package. Sadly, the answer was not much. Even in the face of one if its biggest members and contributors having serious doubts about even remaining a member, the inflexibility and zeal from the EU was undiminished. They were willing to call our bluff. I listened to the debates. Both campaigns in truth were awful. Whether it was the £350 million we send to the EU, or the £4300 a year worse off, there were stupid statistics being thrown around on both sides. The one thing that cut through was the "take back control" message. The reason this resonated, in my view, was that is crystallised in a neat phrase the pre-existing concerns over the sovereignty question. Apart from the fears that the economy would be worsened if we left, I don't remember a single convincing pro-EU argument being made from the Remain side. It might be have been put: "Vote Remain - the EU is a necessary evil"! If we were to Leave, I could see, there would be short term uncertainty and turmoil, and it would give the politicians on both sides of the channel a big headache. On the other hand, if we were to Remain, the forces in favour of centralizing the EU would see it as tacit approval for their plans. Still, leaving outright felt too extreme to me, too drastic. I was also put off by some of the more strident anti-immigration messages that were coming from certain Leave extremists, but there were plenty of mainstream politicians arguing what seemed to be a reasonable case for Leave (and I'm not counting Boris in that list). I found myself wishing there were another other alternative, a middle ground. But, it was a binary choice, so I had to pick a side. What should I do? In the end, I couldn't see how I could vote for doing nothing, which is what a Remain vote would be. A message had to be sent. Even if, as the polls were saying, Remain would win, a very close result might at least act as a warning. The day of the vote With some mixed feelings, I voted Leave. The immediate aftermath Watched the results coming in with some surprise, to say the least! Did I feel happy or joyful that my "side" had won? No, not really. I felt trepidation. Had I done the right thing? In truth, I wasn't sure. But, had I voted Remain and that side had won, I'm sure I would have felt a different set of anxieties - the consequence of having a vote where neither option is entirely satisfactory. The trouble with being on the winning side, is you are then partly responsible for what follows. There is a certain joyful freedom about being on the losing side - you can take the moral high ground at anything that goes wrong subsequently. Still, I did have a sense of optimism that despite the initial upheaval, a new beginning where the country reconnects more directly to the wider world was possible. Events since the vote There have been two events since the referendum that have caused me to question my vote:
Calling the 2017 general election. I am completely with Brenda from Bristol here. Having triggered Article 50, you would think the government would have been fully concentrating on the exit process and preparing a sensible new arrangement. But no, instead Mrs May decides to put selfish party advantage before that of the country. Although I was angry about that, I still voted Conservative, as the best hope for a decent Brexit deal.
The election of Donald Trump. What a disaster: America first, protectionism, and anti-free trade. My Leave vote had been in large part to have more global links and co-operation, but now this vision seemed a lot less likely. Leave and Trump voters are often mentioned in the same sentence, but my definition of Leave is virtually the complete opposite of Trump's policies.
Current state of play So how do I feel now? I still hope that a decent deal can be found that maximises trade and co-operation, but at a level that the UK as a whole feels comfortable with, both Leave and Remain voters. However I have my doubts, the referendum has opened up a cultural division that I don't see disappearing even after Brexit is complete. The whole country is still polarized as ever, and the issue has now become a matter of political identity - something I regret. Unsurprisingly, the EU institutions are intransigent and inflexible as ever, so getting a decent deal is not going to be easy. Does that mean Brexit should be cancelled and revert to the status quo? I don't see how that can happen either, the mistrust and negative feeling toward the EU institutions has only grown, and I wouldn't feel optimistic about that option either - the issues outlined above with the EU would still be there if we remained in on the same terms. In summary, I still have some hope that Leave will turn out to be the best long-term option, given the unfortunate binary nature of the vote, but wish a different solution could have been found - a genuinely reformed EU - that would have avoided having the vote in the first place, and potentially have been a more satisfactory outcome all round. Phew, that about sums it all up. Thanks for reading this long post. Edit: Some have asked me about the future arrangement and what kind of deal I think there should be, so I'm going to add a new section: Future I support the ongoing negotiations, and subscribe neither to the "relax, everything will be great" blind optimism of some Brexiteers, nor the "everything will be disaster, cancel it at once" cries of some Remainers. I think in the end, if a sensible compromise is found, it'll probably be less of a big deal than people are expecting. People will adapt to the new system and carry on as normal. As a mere layperson I can't say exactly what I think the deal should be, but my desire for us to be more interconnected directly with the wider world necessitates leaving the customs union - otherwise, there isn't really any point in Brexit at all! I am open to exploring EFTA-style arrangements though if they can be made fair to both sides. The atmosphere is tense at the moment but I think we all need to take a breath, remain calm, and hold our nerve, and then assess the final deal (both economic and sovereignty-wise) once negotiations are complete.
FULL Patch Notes Live transcript from PDXCon, featuring CK2, EU4, HoI4, and Stellaris!
TIDINGS FROM CRUSADER KINGS II, PATCHES 2.8.1 AND 2.8.2
AI realms spanning dozens of holdings with thousands of loyal warriors at their command will no longer put their hands up and agree to give you any tribute you want before any blood is spilled just because you rode up on them with your squad and demanded their lunch money in a gruff tone of voice.
Subsequent emperors of China will no longer take the excuse that you don’t have to travel to their court and prostrate yourselves before them because you, quote, “Already did that for the last guy and I’m pretty sure it still counts.”
No longer possible to behead Jiang for sleeping with your wife and then receive formal condolences from the Emperor of China for the death of your beloved mutual friend.
After six years, the AI now understands how holdings work.
We gave up on trying to teach vassals how the Byzantine administrative system because, let’s face it, even we don’t really have any clue - and decided to turn it off for everyone within an imperial administration except top-level rulers.
AI rulers should no longer revoke duchies, then see how upset it made their vassal and give it back, but then remember why they took it away in the first place and take it away again, but then they just can’t stand those sad puppy dog eyes Humbert is making and… hey, does this ale taste funny to you?
Eunuchs have been banned from Medieval Tinder.
The trade route tooltip will now tell you why your trade posts are making no money, such as if China is being a pain in the ass, everyone in the Tarim Basin has been killed by plague, everyone in the Tarim Basin has been killed by Mongols, or everyone in the Tarim Basin has killed one another.
The Imperial Court of China will no longer list all of the reasons the Emperor was thinking about granting your request, and only focus on the reasons he ultimately decided against it and sent your dumb ass packing back to Samarkand.
When using the border dispute CB, your advisers should no longer assure you of the submission of barons who have not been consulted at all about the change in administration yet.
Added a tooltip to explain why Blacksmith-senpai won’t ever notice you
Added another way to deal with Secret Bears. You know, other than the existing, highly effective way of turning them off forever in the game options menu.
The herald in charge of telling you what will happen if you become a Tributary of China should no longer ramble on so long that you fall asleep.
Targets who surrender to the Shatter Realm CB who own no land whatsoever in the target de jure area can no longer go, “Jokes on you, I’m just going to keep calling myself Emperor of Carpathia anyway!”
Fixed it being possible to end up as your own lover. We’re keeping that feature on the back burner in case we do an Alexander expansion for Imperator Rome.
Fixed the AI investing more money than they had in purchasing weapons, jewelry and armor, as this made them too difficult to tell apart from the player.
Updated the Investigate Artifact Rumors chain, making it possible for anyone to complete it ever.
Counts who successfully sacrifice hundreds of lives and two young, strong sons to become independent from a wicked duke who tortures children can no longer have their vassalage sold immediately back to that duke by the apathetic king they both serve.
Removed the ability for kinslayers who murdered a grandparent or grandchild to sometimes convince everyone they weren’t that close so it’s not such a big deal.
Breaking free of a tributary contract will no longer allow your suzerain to seize one more month’s worth of resources from you as a cleaning fee even though you SPENT LIKE 20 HOURS DUSTING SCRUBBING EVERYTHING SHARON! THAT APARTMENT WAS SPOTLESS!
If you dedicate a book to your rival, they will still be grateful but also suspicious of what kind of devious shit you’re trying to pull, here.
Fixed an event that would essentially lead you to write, “And this is where I would put the dedication to my loyal chancellor - IF I HAD ONE!”
The Chinese Emperor no longer accepts gifts of one-eyed, one-legged, bedridden leppers with smallpox to serve as potential concubines.
Newly-minted noblemen are no longer allowed to abandon their families at the castle of their previous lord when granted a title. Laramie is your son, and that means he’s your problem.
Female Muslim adventurers will no longer accept the excuse, “You can’t invade us! You’re a woman!” from their enemies.
Fixed nations that adopted Chinese Imperialism having their entire government snapped away by the Infinity Gauntlet when converting to EU4, as even Thanos agreed this was a statistical aberration.
Characters will no longer be pissed at you if they were removed from the council because they were hauled off by vikings or something. Even though it was your job to protect them. I bet they wish they had been Duke Baldric’s steward. He wouldn’t have let the castle fall and watched everyone sacrificed to Odin or sold to a slave market in Cordoba because he spent too much money on a fancy crown and couldn’t afford the Danegeld for the ransom. Why couldn’t you be more like Duke Baldric?
Relatives of the Chinese Emperor should no longer travel thousands of miles to Provence just so they can hang around at parties waiting to whip out the old, “Hey, do you even KNOW who my UNCLE is?”
Fixed yet another way you degenerates figured out to get around the no incest rules in the marriage code.
If you’re in the Hermetic order and you brew someone a potion, you will now stick around and act all excited to make them feel obligation to actually drink it and not dump it into the chamberpot.
Fixed a way secret bears could crash the game. Still unable to fix their tendency to crash its historical credibility.
Fixed some quartermasters in desert areas showing up with a bunch of normal horses with blankets stacked up like a hump on their backs and insisting that they were, indeed, the camels you asked for.
Added a way to find the Ark of the Covenant other than that super specific way that was never going to happen unless you read the game files and went for it specifically.
Fixed Medieval Tinder refusing to show you any matches during the first month your account was active.
Increased minimum province supply from 100 to 1000 to better keep in line with EU4’s model of attrition not really mattering much, as having you lose more men to attrition than battle casualties as was often the case in real life was considered too historically accurate.
You will now be forced to break up with your concubines before offering them to someone else as a concubine. This is 1169, not 1969.
Realms that consider you a threat that see your realm split in gavelkind will go, “Oh, I see. He’s an idiot,” and not worry too much about being conquered by you anymore.
Tribal vassals who have converted to a reformed pagan religion will no longer balk at the idea of feudalism, admitting they only adopted the new faith because they thought the robes and chanting seemed cool.
In realms with full gender equality, pretenders with weak claims who want to declare a succession war against a legitimate female liege will be told to go home and polish their shortsword.
Fired Prince Arthas from our AI programming team, so characters should no longer ship troops overseas by boat and then disband the boats and leave the army there forever.
The AI will now consider how OP the Catholic religion is with its bajillion holy orders when determining whether or not it’s a good idea to declare war.
The AI will no longer all abandon the siege of Jerusalem at once, with Godfrey claiming he thought Tancred was supposed to be in charge, Tancred claiming he thought Robert was supposed to be in charge, and Robert claiming he thought the other Robert was supposed to be in charge.
CTRL+click on campaign funds for cardinals and patricians will now send someone out to determine just how many people you need to pay off to win so you don’t have to waste a pfennig more of your wealth than is necessary to subvert the political process.
When hovering over your twin, the tooltip now says "Your Twin" rather than "Your BrotheSister", so you can be sure you’re banging your twin and not just some rando sibling.
“Unmarried Heir” alert no longer shows up if your heir lives in a different realm and is no longer returning your calls.
You will now be warned if you decide to disband a fleet in the middle of the sea that this will negatively impact the people onboard. Your fleetmaster had originally assumed you would be able to deduce this using common sense, but here we are.
Characters sent to China will no longer say they "died" in the tooltip when hovering over their age, because the Emperor assures you they are quite fine. They dictated this letter to you in Chinese that says so, so you have no reason to doubt.
Fixed a case where you might click “Ransom Prisoner”, and their captor would wheel out Jareth, the stableboy from Devon, instead of your only daughter, insisting that this is who you asked for and they’re not willing to negotiate on the price..
Fixed doing pretty much anything in the character finder causing the sorting order to break.
Content characters will no longer be less likely to discover plots, because they’re quite content NOT having a deadly viper in their bed and will take steps to ensure that does not happen.
A court physician who is dying of plague and bedridden will no longer be available to shove bees up the anuses of other characters dying of plague and bedridden in an attempt to cure them
Someone who holds no land in Aragon but claims to be Duke of a bunch of shit in Aragon (in duchies where they also own no land) in addition to King of Aragon will no longer be protected from having the kingdom usurped by someone who does actually own land there.
When participating in a ritual to honor the dead during a visit to China, you should no longer be prompted to honor a character who moved to China. Because those guys are totally still alive. We swear. They went hiking this weekend and probably won’t be back until after you leave but we’ll let them know you said hi.
Fixed an extremely rare situation in which a child could go into a coma, miraculously recover from being incapable and wake up as an adult, and still have their childhood personality traits, even though that sounds like a kickass 80s movie kinda like Big set in the middle ages.
The events that grant the Viking and Sea King traits no longer care about your gender. Only how many monks you can slaughter and how much of their gold you can haul off. It’s very progressive!
If China has gone isolationist, it is no longer possible to stand below the emperor’s window with a boombox held over your head playing that song you both really like until they agree to see you.
We’re still updating and balancing the Aztec religion for the benefit of Terrence in Allentown, PA who still plays with Sunset Invasion turned on.
Added in a historical Pope who was Pope for such a short time that we totally forgot he existed.
It’s no longer possible to expose a scandal to your target’s liege if the liege is four years old, because the Queen Regent is not going to let you explain to him what buggery is.
The Chinese Emperor will no longer blame you for the death of one of his courtiers if they were hauled off by vikings. Even though Duke Baldric would have protected his guest. Maybe the emperor should bestow his grace on a real leader like Duke Baldric instead!
Fixed so setting Mongol and Aztec invasions to “Random” in the game rules actually mean “at a random time, no less than 50 years after the start of the game”, as opposed to “almost always exactly 50 years ON THE DOT from the start of the game”.
Monastic Orders will no longer accept that you came home covered in blood from your “Penance” because you saw a vision of Christ and the blood squirted out of his palms and got all over your tabard and this is a sign of his favor, surely! It definitely had nothing to do with you marching into battle and cutting people’s limbs off while you were meant to be sequestered in prayer.
Fixed the War of the two Eriks leaving the rightful Erik independent if he loses
Prisoners who are not sacrificed in the ancestor worship events will no longer be so grateful that they become your best friend, despite still being imprisoned. I know Paradox is based in Stockholm but that seemed odd.
Incapable councilors will no longer somehow be able to successfully perform their duties, though you probably didn’t even notice this was happening before and applaud their herculean efforts, did you, you self-absorbed diva?
Some Satanic events that would previously declare you openly as a witch will allow you to assert that you are merely an ALLEGED witch, and everyone should calm down until more convincing evidence arises than all the infants who have been impaled on swords identical to the one you are carrying with that very specific style of ornamental crossguard known to be a signature of your personal smith.
TIDINGS FROM EUROPA UNIVERSALIS IV, PATCH 1.25.1
It is now impossible to get harsh treatment cost below 5, because no matter how pathetic the rebels look you still need to at least send one mean-looking constable to throw rocks at them until they go away.
Fixed all religion icons being offset in the ledger, which T.J. thought was being caused by him fucking up his mod and he spent like two hours trying to fix it. Thanks guys.
Nerfed mercenaries again because Army Professionalism apparently wasn’t enough of an incentive to stop you from spamming them.
Fixed Cleves having an actual Angel of Death on their payroll who could turn heretics to ash with a single glance.
Fixed that the game thought Shihr in Arabia was the capital of the Netherlands. Probably because of all the hash.
The AI should no longer refuse to end a war at 99% warscore even after decades because they would rather watch both nations collapse from war exhaustion than not get that sixth province they really wanted.
Fixed that the AI would always procrastinate exploring the Atlantic until they were done binging the most recent season of New Girl and petting their cat for two and a half hours.
TIDINGS FROM HEARTS OF IRON IV, PATCH 1.5.1 and 1.5.2
Fixed a case in which a division in Desperate mode would decide to retreat into the one province where they’d be even more screwed than they already were.
Added a tooltip that explains increased capacity for garrison orders, because none of the dev diaries did and nothing in-game did so we pretty much left everyone super fucking confused for the first week of 1.5.
Danzig for Guarantees now mentions getting Poznan as well. Hitler was trying to sneak that one in under the radar.
Added icons for German carrier CAS tech level 3, with a flavour names for if you somehow make it to 1945 and the Allies haven’t sunk all of your carriers yet.
Added an icon the for Attack Switzerland focu-I mean, uh… the… give Switzerland a hug focus. We would never invade you guys. Promise. Just keep all that gold safe.
Puyi should no longer wax rhapsodic about the virtues of independence from Japan if the Qing empire has already been restored and Tokyo is completely on fire.
Communist Japan can no longer leave 35 voicemails for Stalin asking if he’s changed his mind about volunteers once he’s told them he won’t be sending volunteers.
Just because Hitler is in the process of being overthrown by his own army no longer means other countries can’t stick with Appeasement, just to be safe.
Thanos will no longer snap and make half of Germany’s equipment disappear at the start of the Oppose Hitler civil war.
Communist Chinese focus tree now gets some infantry equipment production bonuses to make them actually playable.
Chinese factions should no longer be able to relocate their industry to secret, underground bases in states they do not control.
If Mussolini restores the Roman Empire, he can no longer decide to hold multiple triumphs for every successful campaign. Take it easy, Benny Boy.
If Mao takes over China politically, he will only have to deal with the fallout of his own poor decisions and not inherit the fallout of the poor decisions made by the preceding regime.
Removed a quantum entanglement scenario in which air wings could be fighting in more than one region at once, even though that Einstein guy was really keen to study it.
Surprise Attack Plan for civil wars should now work, because Corporal Heller has been reminded that you’re not supposed to yell SURPRISE ATTACK! and run toward the enemy before the surprise attack commences.
Japan should no longer be able to send commandos to covertly lay pavement for airbases in Manchuria, in full view of the enemy, if Japan does not control Manchuria.
Adjusted minimum and average death dates for Wilhelm II and von Mackensen so they might, like, get to participate in the war.
Fixed a bug where Stalin could assume direct control of countries with generic leaders like Agent Smith in the Matrix.
AI should no longer assign a bunch of tanks to a defensive order, demonstrating that they don’t really understand what tanks are for.
Fixed a number of issues with Romania in base game without DLCs enabled, if you for some weird reason want to play Romania without the DLC that makes them worth playing.
Poland is now less likely to join the Allies if they’ve given Germany all of the land they wanted and now the Soviets are hungrily eyeing the rest.
Now possible to demand your industrial designers make a StuG that looks like a Tiger II by selecting unit models in the division designer.
Fixed an issue where if the AI didn’t need any equipment right this second, it would lay off thousands of factory workers instead of trying to build up a stockpile of things it had plenty of raw materials to make.
AI Chinese Warlords fighting Japan will no longer sometimes decide they can handle it on their own and don’t need to be a part of this United Front nonsense.
Finland and the Baltic Countries will no longer refuse to trust Germany even once they’ve overthrown the Nazis and explicitly pledged to protect Finland and the Baltic Countries from Soviet aggression.
AI Germany may now decide to build some additional military factories before 1940.
Added a confirmation pop up while assigning every unit in army to a different army's front orders to prevent you from flipping yet another computer desk because you just ruined your complex invasion plan AGAIN
The Soviet scorched earth tactics now has a tooltip letting you know exactly how many innocent peasants lost everything in the name of their own supposed liberation.
Scorched Earth decisions are now hidden if there are no peasant hovels left to destroy.
You can no longer infinitely appropriate land for industry in the same state until it’s basically a small pocket of a Forge World from Warhammer 40K in the middle of the Chinese countryside.
Adjusted Polish and German provinces and states to make historical German WW1 borders possible, so don’t say we never did anything just because some geographical particularists made a fuss about it on the forums.
A Chinese power struggle should no longer end with multiple tags calling themselves China and refusing to recognize the other Chinas, even though this is what happened historically.
France will not immediately become a bloodthirsty killing machine if the Kaiser is restored to power.
Added an option to Chinese provocation event that allows Japan to nope the fuck out if things are looking really dicey.
Winter War peace treaty now appropriately hands over NOT ONE INCH MORE FINNISH SOIL than is absolutely necessary.
Generals with the Reckless trait will still be incautious, but there should be fewer reports of them charging a pillbox with a saber. We already tried that and it was called World War 1.
Changed mobilization impact from positive war support to the point that it has any effect whatsoever (up from none whatsoever).
Reworked the Manchukuo focus tree to make them actually playable (up from completely unplayable)
Manchus can now recruit the bandits instead of trying to fight them because, after all, we all want the same thing and it’s the Japanese to get the fuck out.
Manchukuo can now take a decision to allow them to build a lot of guns very quickly out of rocks and tape. They’re just not going to be especially reliable.
Made some things that used to cost a negligible amount of command power cost an amount that you may actually notice when it’s gone.
Countries with low war support are now more likely to surrender. Apparently that wasn’t a thing before now for some reason.
It should no longer be possible to gain a significant air superiority bonus on the ground using exclusively strategic bombers flying at such an altitude that you have to point them out to the enemy and say, “Aha! See those specks up there? Tremble in fear for they are your doooooom!”
Planes in general should now be less good at scaring the enemy but more good at actually getting kills on ground targets.
High-level radar will now assist all static AA guns in the same state, instead of folding their arms and refusing to speak to each other.
Static AA is really good now by the way.
Canada and Australia will now be somewhat less fucked by the Great Depression than the US is in 1936.
The German War Economy focus now requires that the German people actually want to go to war.
Political Power cost of renewing German Monopoly Money bills have been decreased, and they are now accepted at many locations that used to make fun of them.
Prevented various exploits that allowed naval transfer convoys to pose as a party of old whale fishermen just out for a nice trip around the North Atlantic, nothing to worry about, no Nazis in here, thereby allowing them to escape combat with a much larger fleet.
You will no longer receive naval combat reports about how your boats saw some other boats but no fighting happened.
You will no longer receive port strike notifications when someone at one of your ports thinks they saw an aircraft carrier but it never deployed any aircraft and then went away.
The Dutch can no longer ship the Kaiser off to Borneo to prevent Germany from rescuing him when their mainland holdings are overrun.
Imperial Germany now needs to prove themselves a right and proper asshole before Britain will kick them out of a faction.
Navies on convoy escort will no longer interpret their orders excessively literally and outright refuse to join any battles unless there are convoys to protect.
An already restored Austro-Hungarian Empire led by a Habsburg can no longer decide, “You know what? Fuck our ancient homeland,” and form Greater Hungary.
Panzer leaders are no longer prevented from gaining experience if there is EVEN ONE infantryman in their division.
Reworked the AI pathfinding so it shouldn’t try to use naval transport through the Strait of Gibraltar to get from Hamburg to Genoa when there is a friendly land route available.
Nuking Long Island now gives the same reduction in war support as if you’d hit Manhattan directly, even though most Manhattanites would probably thank you for doing so in real life.
Took some steps to fix the absolute clusterfuck that is the Yalta Conference event.
If an oppose Hitler civil war breaks out, the anti-Nazi side will no longer have to worry about honoring nor dealing with the backlash of their magical fun money.
Fixed an issue where the newspapers reporting on nuclear strikes might not be entirely sure where they happened.
Fixed the Hungarian media’s tendency to pull a Weekend at Bernie’s and try to maintain the illusion that their king is still alive and in good health even if that is not necessarily the case.
Warlords that inherit incompetent officers from the Nationalist military upon taking power no longer have to go, “Fuck, I guess we’re stuck with these bozos forever.”
Added a tooltip to help players struggling with the incomprehensible idea that they can’t get a treaty with the USSR if they’ve already signed the Anti-Soviet Pact.
Multiple peace conferences firing at the same time should no longer break everything forever.
TIDINGS FROM STELLARIS PATCH 2.0.1 and 2.0.2
Fixed an issue in which lesser species set to processing, grid amalgamation, and livestock purge types were simply being dumped into a canyon by lazy drones and thus producing no usable resources.
Hive Minds and Machine Empires will no longer dedicate large sections of their starbases to commerce stalls and merchant shipping berths that go completely unused as they have evolved beyond the concept of trade between individuals.
Auto-generated ships will no longer always choose the most suicidal combat computer available.
War Overview no longer attempts to calculate a winner in battles, because the dark void that seeks to swallow us all is the only true winner in war.
Marauder raiding fleets will no longer feel the need to obliterate everything in their path to steal some minerals from the spooky tree people.
If your leader becomes the Chosen One, you can now opt to become a Divine Empire by decision and regardless of ethics, given that all other government types have basically been proven wrong before your eyes.
Titans no longer feel the need to get into a particle lance-measuring contest with every other ship in the fleet by rushing into the fray where they’re going to get shot to shit with torpedoes and guarantee the battle won’t be a resource trade in your favor.
Having anything for your science ships to do at all in the mid and late game is now locked behind a tradition instead of technology.
It is now possible to use food in trade details, whereas previously even an empire facing mass starvation would tell you your sickening xeno-fruit wasn’t worth a single damn thing to them!
The Plunder wargoal now does something.
It is no longer possible to declare a Stop Colossus war just because an empire knows how to make a Colossus if they haven’t built actually built one yet. The American delegates to the United Nations of Earth Congress are very upset about this.
Added some new events to make neighboring the Marauders not just absolutely suck ass 24/7.
Getting Ring Worlds no longer takes up, like, all of your ascension perk slots to the point that it doesn’t even make sense to get them unless you’re super stoked about ring worlds.
The Erudite trait now makes leaders smart, not just miners and farmers. Having only the leaders be idiots in an otherwise sharp society seemed like something better suited for our historical games.
Wide empires no longer take such a harsh penalty to tradition costs, further reinforcing the fact that in Stellaris, if you want to play tall, you can go choke on a Blorg appendage.
We’ve learned from the rather unfortunate incident at Arcology Gamma that orbital habitats should probably not be entirely defenseless against ground invasions. If anyone is looking for a fixer-upper in close proximity to a lovely gas giant, we’re told the blood should come out of the floors, walls, and ceilings with diligent scrubbing.
Buffed Egalitarian ethic in an probably futile attempt to get any of you sadistic fucks to play a nice empire once in a while.
Militarists are no longer way better at fighting. They just give way fewer fucks about how badly the war is going. War is, after all, its own reward.
Asteroids will now mysteriously vanish from the galaxy 50 years after the game starts because again we don’t want to make things too hard on wide empires. They have so little going for them, you know?
Increased time limits of all Special Projects requiring a ship in orbit because, again, it was unfair to the poor wide empires who might have had to do something excruciating like have more science ships in different parts of their space as a balance against the overwhelming power their expansiveness granted them, in a way modeling the increased difficulty of governing that large an area of space.
The citizens back home will now care a little less that you’re sending their friends and loved ones to die in the depths of space if you assure them it’s for a good cause like freeing some aliens who didn’t ask for your help from a regime your government specifically doesn’t agree with.
Marauders who just took a bunch of an empire’s best stuff will now insist they allow time for that empire to make more cool stuff before they go take it all again.
If the Wraith leviathan wakes up and sees no one around, it will go back to bed for another bazillion years.
Unrest and unhappiness no longer reduces food production, because most pops realize that eating is still pretty important no matter how much the government sucks.
Happy slaves will now gain authoritarian attraction instead of egalitarian, because at this point there aren’t a whole lot of opportunities to make this game more fucked up that we won’t take.
It’s no longer possible to hide all the treasure beneath the golden citadel in the golden city of your solid gold capital world and convince the raiding Marauders that this bag of trinkets is the only wealth you have to give.
Increased Jump Drive cooldown from Situational to Probably Just Not Viable At This Point
Slowed down Forced Migration to give you more incentive to simply kill everyone if you want them gone quickly.
Precursor home systems are now much more likely to spawn somewhere that you will be able to reach without conquering half the galaxy to complete one quest.
Reduced tech cost per system from 2% to 1% because, again, we wouldn’t want to make playing wide any kind of trade-off.
You will no longer be restricted from declaring war to stop the bloodthirsty purifiers just because they don’t directly threaten you yet, forcing you to sit by and watch as they devour every empire around you while the council just shrugs.
To Boldly Go tradition now makes your science ships more likely to hit the GTFO button sooner rather than giving them a better chance of surviving long enough to hit it.
We couldn’t nerf Planetary Survey Corps to the point that it wasn’t amazing, and alas, it was too amazing for this galaxy. So we killed it.
Purifiers may now take the Nihilistic Acquisition perk, allowing them to consolidate xenos into a smaller area for more efficient genocide.
Executive Vigor no longer breaks the entire game.
The AI will now make a slightly greater effort to get its shit together when being attacked by the Great Khan.
AI will no longer Jump Drive out at the first sign of a Prethoryn ship and leave you to get devoured by a fleet that would have been easily defeatable if they had just stayed with you, thereby dooming the entire damn galaxy.
The Deep State of your empire has determined it is probably not worth building an entire Black Site just to spy on some miners operating an asteroid drill in an otherwise uninhabited system.
Forbade multiple auto-exploring science ships from doubling up to explore a single system because we’re pretty sure the captains were just using it as an excuse to meet up and bang.
Science ship captains no longer have plot armor when their ship is destroyed.
Determined Exterminators no longer have a mysterious interest in gardening.
Hive Mind governors can no longer rule with an iron fist over drones that are already part of the same, single will as them.
Fixed pretty much every other empire in the galaxy being Slaving Despots
Starbase designers will no longer build elaborate trading hubs in a system with a primitive empire and wonder why they aren’t flying their biplanes up to shop there.
Fixed an issue where Militarists, upon defeating the Prethoryn, would find their celebrations felt empty as they had already vanquished the greatest foe they would ever have the pleasure of meeting in battle, thus leaving the rest of their empire’s existence to stretch out into eternity as merely a denouement to the epic saga that has now transpired and passed irrecoverably into the annals of a glorious past. Ashes to ashes. Dust to dust.
Synthetically-ascended empires who have discovered the Ghost Signal will no longer assume it’s probably nothing and continue copying the unpatched code into all new units.
Fixed Curators giving wrong advice about the Wraith, then having to explain how very, very sorry they were about the loss of your entire fleet later.
Fixed a bug where the people building the ion cannon would sometimes forget to put in… the cannon part.
Awakened Empires no longer have the privilege of pointing out that a border is just, like, an imaginary line, man!
Fixed armies refusing to land on planets that had been taken over by ents, mutants, or other non-sapients because they felt they were, quote, “Not gettin’ paid enough for this shit.”
Fixed no one checking the blueprints for the ringworld until an entire system’s resources had been exhausted only to discover someone was off by like one ten thousandth of a percent somewhere and now the two ends of the loop don’t meet up. And it’s too late to do anything about it. It’s just going to stay that way now. Great job, idiots.
Added back in Will to Power as a unity ambition. Space Hitler is no longer boycotting the game.
You may now test fire planet crackers on uninhabited ring world segments, which is definitely a better use for them than trying to understand the history, technology, and downfall of a rich, hyper-advanced alien civilization.
Reduced firing speed and charge time on the Colossus to the point that you probably don’t have a prayer of stopping it.
Trickster admirals will now focus on fleeing in fear at the right moment, not necessarily fleeing quickly.
Nerfed xenomorph armies because let’s face it, their entire hive got schooled by a freight worker with a flamethrower and a glorified walking forklift.
Master Builders now makes orbital habitats not a huge waste of time and resources.
Fixed AI using jump drive in some cases where it shouldn't do so due to Jump Drive being really bad at all times.
A civilization that figures out how to build their own gateways will no longer be too confused to figure out how to use them until they’ve glanced at one left behind by someone else.
Fixed Google StarMaps sending ships several systems away for upgrades because it assumed “Nearest Starbase” didn’t include the one they were already at.
Fixed an issue where the unbidden could spawn in a system with a fortress world and be completely baffled about why their hyperdrives were nonfunctional, thus giving up on conquering the galaxy until they can reach tech support back in their home dimension.
Marauders no longer care if you’re poor. They’re going to take whatever shit’s not nailed down regardless.
The Unbidden and Prethoryns should no longer sometimes decide to designate a world just as somewhere chill to hang out rather than their usual MO of wiping out all higher forms of life everywhere.
AND NOW, SOME NEVER BEFORE RELEASED PATCH NOTES FROM DISTANT STARS AND THE 2.1 “NIVEN” PATCH!
Purchased the rights to several more seasons of Star Trek, increasing the total anomaly count by almost half.
Added three new leviathans to befriend. Go ahead. Poke it. I’m sure it won’t mind.
Added the L-Cluster, a mysterious area of space beyond the rim of the galaxy where I’m sure nothing bad happens ever.
Added binary star systems for those who don’t mind living in an unstable orbit that could send your entire civilization hurtling into the side of an unimaginably large nuclear furnace at any time.
Anomalies can no longer fail, because that added too much drama and excitement to the exploration phase. Instead, higher level anomalies will now simply take longer for lower-level scientists to research, replacing the tension of possibly losing your science officer with compelling Wait A Long Time While Nothing Happens gameplay.
Added Experimental Subsace Navigation which allows science ships to try and make it through Voyager again even though they know it’s never going to live up to TNG and DS9.
The Situation Log will now list anomalies so you don’t have to panic and drop everything when you find one because you know you won’t remember to come back to it ever if you don’t investigate it right when you find it.
It is no longer possible to take a species off of chemical bliss cold turkey and make all of their horrible withdrawal symptoms go away by offering them pamphlets about officer training school.
Enlightened primitives should no longer go, “Oh, you know what? You’re not the first spacefarers we’ve met. There was also that one time when we encountered- [proceeds to list every single empire in the entire galaxy.]”
[CiV VI] I've compiled my Ideas, and many of those I found throughout the sub, to create the ultimate Civ VI wishlist!
I appologize in advance as this post is offensively long. I mean, it's 5000 words with no TL:DR, so abandon all hope all ye who enter. I believe it covers all of the most common suggestions, and I've tried to make it all a little bit more out-there for the sake of flavour, but alas, please roast me merrily and have a lively discussion in the comments! Without further ado... Musings; Ultimate edition Tile Improvements Transport -4 Transport Improvements; Road, Railway, Highway and Maglev. These all have some difference in kind. -Roads are the cheapest and the lowest tech, working much as they do in Civ V, but boosting yield on some adjacent improvements such as trading posts/towns. -Railways have a limit on their distance from cities; about 5 tiles in the industrial era, increasing to 7 in the modern. This forces players to build cities closer together, and build the correct improvements, but railway benefits scale with population and aren't usable by enemy combatants. -Highways work like a straight upgrade of roads, except they allow cities within 5 tiles along a highway to pool food and production yields, but produces 'pollution', which reduces "health". -Maglev is a funky one for tech focused Civilizations. A maglev network connecting cities, irrespective of length, pools population(citizens available to work buildings), pools production and boosts science yield in both cities by ~30%, but otherwise functions like an expensive railway. Costs "energy" as well as about 4 gold per turn per tile. -Rivers work like roads, but with no maintenance and provide gold. Great rivers allow ships to sail through. Workers can eventually dig canals which act as artificial great rivers, and tunnels can be bored through mountains through which Railways, Highways and Maglev can travel. -Le Mountain Tunnels and pontoon bridges/undersea tunnels. Yield Improvements -Farms, Wells, Mines, Lumber mills, Plantations, Pastures, Camps and Quarries all work much the same as before, however Mines, Wells and Quarries produce 'pollution' as well as production. -Windmills and Watermills(by rivers), which can be built on top of Farms and Plantations, provide a small yield of production at no 'pollution' cost. Upon research of "Electricity", they produce an "energy" yield. -Once "Mechanization" technology is researched, the citizen assigned to a farm or plantation can be replaced with "energy" from appropriate buildings and improvements. The same is true for Mines, Wells and Quarries upon researching "Automation". -Wells can be built to provide adjacent tiles with fresh water. -Cottages double gold yield from surrounding tiles, provide 1 gold themselves. +1 gold with "Economics". Grow into Villages and then Towns which provide 3 gold base, 1 science, 1 production and 1 "energy", reduce crime and increase health. Strategic/Military Improvements -Forts can't be entered by enemy units without attacking. Area around forts are considered area of control, and give a land claim for a casus belli. Can upgrade to a military base, giving it an aircraft capacity and healing adjacent friendly units. -Add sentry turrets, which are effectively stationary units which can attack enemy units. Available on Ballistics, can upgrade on Robotics to attack autonomously, Rocketry to be able to fire rockets to destroy tanks. -Can build walls which provide a combat bonus to units inside, and drain movement points, as well as "outposts" which heal units in adjacent tiles. -Some units can build trenches and lay mines(requires "Gunpowder") which provide a defensive bonus/act as traps. Cities and Colonies -Global happiness replaced with city level "health" and "stability", which affect growth, "bandit" spawn rates and likelihood of rebellions. A city with very low/negative health has a chance of spawning a plague, which behaves almost like a Civ V religion, spreading to other cities via pressure from proximity and trade routes, however plagues can also infect units adjacent to an infected city, which can then infect other cities and units and so on and so forth. Stability is reduced the greater the minimum travel time from the capital to that city. -Workers can build districts adjacent to the original cities, which act as an extension of the city, reducing "crime", increasing "health", as well as allowing that city to build contextual buildings and units of the suburb's tile. If the population of a city grows too large without extra districts then 'health' and 'stability' decreases, spawning "slums" which in turn spawn bandits. The district can be specialized to be a stability boosting suburbs, health boosting parks, production boosting fabrics/shipyards, money boosting financial districts, culture boosting theatre districts, science boosting science parks and (upon researching hydroponics) food boosting vertical farms. If you play it smart, you can build 10 tile, 100+ pop megapoli by the end of the game. -From the renaissance era, 'colonists' (super-fast, cheap settlers) can found "colonies" as well. Colonies increase cost of techs and policies by ~75% less than normal cities and grow twice as fast, but have much less defence. They can't (initially) build any buildings, nor build units with production, but can spawn militiamen and mercenaries. All of their production goes into "levelling-up" the colony, from 0 up to 20~25, having at around level 15 the option to turn it into a proper city. At each level you are presented with a "random" dynamic event and options on how to handle it; the options you choose affect the direction your colony takes and the characteristics it has. For example; "Catholic refugees fleeing the Malian inquisition are huddled outside the gates, what is our course of action? Do we; let them in (+1 population, -1 health, +2 diplomacy FP), turn them away (-1 diplomacy FP, +2 food), or offer them refuge in exchange for military service (+1 military FP, a maintenance free unit appears, -1 food). By level 25, 25 of these decisions could have been made, and the colony would have an array of special attributes. But high level colonies would carry a large risk of spawning rebel units, so it's worth converting them to cities (which start with an array of buildings) anyway. Diplomacy -Casus Belli system; common complaint, common answer. Appropriate and adapt from paradox games. Potential cases include land claim (using forts and spies), espionage offence, liberation (low approval), holy war, ideological conflicts, imperial conquest, resource acquisition, diplomatic offence et cetera. All of these will reduce warmonger penalties with certain Civs for certain actions but aren't a get away with murder card. -Ultimata; Currently, there is no facility to threaten other civilizations. Ultimata remedy this and work thus; I demand something from another Civ in exchange for NOT declaring war. If they refuse the I automatically declare war on the next turn. -A focus points system. Civ actions, such as War, Threats, Wonders, Technologies, Trades, Quests and Civics earn focus points in Science, Economy, Religion, Culture, Military or Diplomacy; These give diplomacy bonuses, allow access to special quests, and allow special actions. -Taunt leaders back. This can give focus points. -7 types of non Civ actors; City-States, Nations, Tribes, Corporations(get to that later), Rebels(Specific-Hostile) and "Barbarians/Bandits"(Hostile). -City-States work much like they do in 5, except gold gifts are worth much less, and special quests and focus points are worth much more, and influence is instead 'spent' in order to gain things like world congress votes. Any allied city state can eventually be incorporated fully as a city. Eg. Florence, Milan, Singapore, Monaco, Malta, Honkers, Samarqand, Dubai, Abu Dhabi, Ife, Great Zimbabwe, Mombasa, Zanzibar etc. Limited to ~9 tiles. -Nations are like stripped down Civilizations; a halfway house between city states and full blown Civs. Limited to 4 cities, which must be contiguous, they offer a medium for proxy wars, advanced diplomacy, breakaway states and buffer states. They also conveniently add filler to the map, and can represent small or "failed" nations. eg. Scotland, Texas, California, Belgium, Wallachia, Aragon, Manchuria, New Zealand etc. -Tribes are an overhaul of Barbarians; Instead of automatically hostile units spawning from encampments, tribes act sort of like city states with no cities. They have territory, in which they have villages which occasionally spawn primitive military units and only primitive military units. There are no penalties for entering tribal territory as long as you aren't seen by any units, and you can even settle on top of their land. However, within these lies a moral choice; do you overpower tribes and take their land or try and bargain with and incorporate them peacefully? -Rebels are units which spawn in cities with a low 'stability' stat, and are always hostile to the Civ in which they are spawned. The 'strife' can be increased by enemy spies, ideology, large numbers of unemployed citizens and lack of gold/science buildings. If rebels capture a city, then they make a new 'Nation' or city state which can be bargained with like any other. -"Bandits" are the new Barbs, but as well as spawning in encampments they spawn in slums in civilized territory in response to overcrowding. They are more money focused in that any tile with a bandit unit on it yields negative gold per turn, and will set up their own improvements such as traps and dens. Can perhaps change name based on era and context (eg. Barbarian, Bandit, Pirate, Terrorist, Savage, Gangster, Mobster, Highwaymen etc).Their spawn rate inside Civs is reduced by presence of police buildings. -InfoAddict style information screens. Graphs for days! Also displayed are opinion modifiers, and the factors determining whether a Civ will accept any particular deal. Less hidden mechanics. -Ideology has more impact on diplomacy, with significantly different mechanics associated with each (get to that later), and being an extremely significant maker and breaker of relationships. -Add Chemical, Biological and Radiological weapons which carry a very significant diplomacy penalty, along with nukes. -One can choose to disobey resolutions or leave the world congress, incurring a large diplomatic penalty. -Establish pacts with nations and city states. -Can buy tiles from other actors. Tech -A less linear tech tree, starting off with a "core" set of techs arranged as they are but with cul-de-sac "branches" coming out of later eras, offering interesting technologies; broadly on spectrum from futuristic to retro-futuristic. The techs that all players need would all be in the core so they didn't have to specialize too much, but there would necessarily be a lot more techs. The ones further out on branches would only really useful for players either aiming for a Science victory or aiming for a specific bonus. -Civs are able to divide research, researching multiple techs at the same time, utilizing special specialists (heh) called scientists. Much like trade routes in BNW, each era would allow a certain base number of scientists, and then things such as wonders, city states, research agreements, social policies and such would add on to that. Scientists would each be able to research one tech at a time, but multiple scientists (up to -3~4) could be set to research the same tech at an accelerated rate. The rate at which scientists could research stuff will depend on several factors. Each could utilize the entire Civ's global science output, in addition to their home cities' science output and more beakers proportional to extra allocated gold. Scientists would be based in a specific city, and would use up ~3 food, ~3 base gold, and require certain buildings to be able to research techs at certain levels; Libraries for anything beyond the Ancient Era, A University for anything beyond Medieval, A Laboratory for anything beyond Industrial and so on. It would be most efficient to put lots in your capital, but you wouldn't necessarily have the food to do this. Having lots of extra scientists would not be worth the effort if you don't want to have a science victory, and having lots impairs your Civ in other ways. This is an effective nerf to tech, which otherwise is inherently OP. -New science buildings, such as Particle Accelerators, University Hospitals, Pharmacy-labs, Space-centres and the such in the late game. These would allow new lines of the tech tree, as well as providing bucket-loads of science, for a high price. -'Rationalism' perhaps split into two different policy branches, Rationalism and Ingenuity. Rationalism is best for tall/tech defence, augmenting the ability of cities to make and use science. Ingenuity best for wide, improving use of strategic resources and reverse engineering other Civs tech i.e. tech offense. -Research agreements allow one Civ greatly accelerated research into techs already researched by the other Civ, and a boost in global science output equal to that of the smaller Civ, and a two-for-one (maintenance wise) on two of their own scientist. When the agreement ends both players get a one-time tech boost. -High level spies can be used to take enemy scientists during a time of war. -Being allied with city states and minor nations allows you to initiate research agreements with them free of gold charge. -11/12 eras: Ancient, Archaic?? , Classical, Medieval, Renaissance, Enlightenment, Industrial, Modern, Atomic, Information, Genetic/Space and Synthetic eras. Science and Diplomacy win in Synthetic. Cultural in Genetic at earliest. Domination is Domination. -Revamped Science Victory. Perhaps, Instead of building a spaceship using Information era tech, you have to do special quests. Maybe upon researching a tech in the core of the Renaissance or the Enlightenment , you are alerted to the presence of a special quest for you to follow, and that other such quests are available upon researching specific technologies, which are located far out in the branches of subsequent eras, where non-science Civs daren't tread. The quests could range from "complete this national wonder", to "City state X has this item, acquire by any means necessary", to "Conduct a special research mission at X location". These quests would give special rewards, but would also give you items (all of which) you need to complete the science victory, possibly with an interstellar mission, maybe first contact, possibly artificial intelligence, I don't know. Stick with tradition; an interstellar mission. -More rubber banding in tech. "Core" technologies that have already been discovered by a met civilization will take ~40% less time to research, and units have a chance of "discovering" a technology when killing advanced enemy units or taking the city of a technologically superior foe. Late Game Horrors -Endgame apocalypse scenarios. In the late atomic era players would be notified of the possibility of a coming endgame scenario. There would be a set number of scenarios that would be presented, each with a different probability of advancing. The scenarios would begin at the start of the Information era and progress through different levels of increasingly severe effects. There would be runaway global warming with rising sea levels, desertification, flooding and such the like. A new ice age with falling sea levels, glaciations, deforestation, ecological collapse and so on. Then there could be Atmospheric Toxicity with algae blooms, poison winds, ozone holes and other ghastly stuff. Players can then either concentrate efforts to reverse the cataclysm, to the joy of weaker Civs and nations; or simply withstand it, much to the dismay of those you could help, using dome cities and similar. Perhaps persuading other Civilizations, Nations and City States to unite in efforts to prevent the cataclysm could become the new diplomatic victory. Beats buying city states. -Nukes become far more terrifying. Each nuke deployed would advance the endgame scenario significantly. To add to this, one nuke hit would turn any city district into a "Nuclear ruins" which spawns special Barbarian units called "Antmen", which drain health of all adjacent units and city districts. Fallout would prevent any food yield and pillage all tiles affected. Some splotches of fallout may end up all over the world in random places. -Nukes could be set to Dead Man's switch, meaning any nuclear attack on that Civilization would cause any nukes set to dead man's switch to fire at the belligerent's cities Civics and Social Policies -Add the quest system from IV and BE, as well as the quest decisions and such from the above two games and a splash of random event decisions from paradox. -In addition to Social Policies like in Civ V, have Civics which are a set of Binary choices taken ~2 times per era. These would be things like: Collectivism versus Individualism and Citizen Army (low maintenance) versus Mercenary (low production) in the early game, and Religious School versus Secular School in the late era, for example. These are the things ingrained into your Civ's culture. -Civs are given a "home turf" bonus depending on the terrain they spawn in. A Civ that spawns with more than 12 hills or desert tiles etc. within 3 tiles of the capital will gain a combat bonus and yield boosts relevant to that terrain type. -Ideologies, like those in BNW, stay, along with their "tenets". However, a new layer is added; "Internal Diplomacy" including an 'Election/Party' system for freedom, a 'Soviet' system for order and a 'Faction' system for autocracy. -In Civs following freedom, every few turns there would be an "Election" which would give 3 different parties, loosely modeled around Traditionalists/Conservatives, Liberals and Populists/Socialists, a certain amount of weighting/representation. Any particular action would have a certain approval with each party, and total approval (from all parties) gives bonuses or penalties. If total approval is at +80 then you are effectively in a mini Golden age. Less than -50 then you face civil disobedience and mass protest. For example, if you want to raise taxes, a large number of "traditionalists/conservatives" will make you pay, while a large number of "populists/socialists" will cheer you along. The representation of each party is dependent on several factors; large numbers of faith buildings and religious followers will help "traditionalism", culture buildings and high GPT would boost "liberalism", lots of factories or poor GPT helps "populism/socialism", gold buildings reduce "populism/socialism", and a Random Number Generator throws a boon to anyone going every few turns when there's an "election". The weighting of the RNG also throws back to the civics/social policies one takes in the early game; tradition helps traditionalists, liberty helps liberals and so on. Other social policies may change the Parties' opinions on certain actions; honour, for example, reduces opposition to war. -Order Civs have three 'soviets' in place of parties; Industrial workers (hammer), Agrarian Peasants (sickle) and Intellectuals (pen). Any action you take will reduce or increase "contentment" of each 'soviet'. Contentment of peasants affects food/growth, Industrial affects production/gold, and Intellectual affects science/culture. There are no 'elections' as with freedom, but weighting of the three soviets will depend on the amount of farms, factories and universities; if you don't have any farmers on the land you don't have to pander so much. Every ~10 turns, each soviet will set a quest (5-year-plan) such as: build a university in every city of population >6, secure a source of 6 unique luxuries, gain 10 population in X city and so on. Fulfilling these objectives will gain a boost to yields relevant to the soviet, as well as a quest decision, whilst their contentment will decrease if you fail the objective. Whilst at war these objectives are suspended. If you consistently succeed, gaining contentment and Great person points, then you get special great people called "Stakhanovites". Peasant Stakhanovites can found "ration" districts which expand the closest cities workable radius by one tile around them and boost growth by ~35%. Worker Stakhanovites can found "studio" districts which produce 10 hammers and increase build rate off units or buildings by 30%, and Intellectual Stakhanovites can produce a "Institute" district which boosts city science by 50% and culture by 40%, and gives a free scientist. They can also be expended to found a city with a full suite of growth, production or science buildings, or can found 'Order' corporations. Using Stakhanovites gives massive boosts to tourism, stability and "contentment" of the soviets. -Autocracy Civs instead must accommodate three 'factions'; the Generals, the Oligarchs and the Ministry. This, necessarily, is quite different to the others. The Generals become restless after long periods of peace, potentially sparking rebellions and mutiny, and so Autocratic states must be at war regularly or else the generals will reduce production, stability and culture. If one fails to acquire new resources and expand gold yields then gold, science and health are massively reduced. The Ministry is responsible for counter intelligence success and food yields, and failing to chastise offending civilizations and build new units causes growth to stunt, stability to decrease and spies to begin leveling down. Autocracy Civs can however by default work a greater radius around their cities, have no penalty for annexing territory, and get replacement workers called Labour Fronts which are quicker, pay no unit maintenance and can fight as a melee unit if enemy soldiers are within the Civ's territory. These are earned through keeping the ministry happy, along with bonuses to great people generation and shorter periods of resistance in captured cities. Keeping the generals happy provides combat bonuses, as well as increased stability and spawning of "Troopers" which are up to date military units free of maintenance with a combat bonus against rebels, enemy units in friendly territory, and units belonging to Nations and City States. Keeping the oligarchy happy will result in the spawn of Autocratic Corporations, and will give conquered cities free gold buildings. Corporations -Corporations behave like little city states (with no territory or cities), and can undertake many different projects with you. Depending on the corporation, they may be able to research technologies which you can then use, build buildings in your cities (some of which are unobtainable any other way), build and maintain improvements (some of which, again, are unique to corporations), spawn unique great people, field a private military/security force to use against barbarians, man culture buildings, establish trade routes and practically anything else. There are several types; tech-based corporations which help with science and give scientists, entertainment/travel corporations which help with culture and tourism, manufacturers which boost production etc. The catch is that you must attract corporations to set up in your cities by following policies which are friendly to them (low taxes) and having buildings and improvements which help them, such as banks and stock exchanges. Tech corporations want universities and labs, Pharmaceutical corporations want lots of unimproved tiles (especially jungle). Trade agreements and diplomacy also attract corporations and allow corporations to operate in multiple Civs to share luxuries, gold, science and culture; however the majority of the benefits go to the Civ with the corporate headquarters. Of course, different ideologies and tenets will be able to reap the benefits of corporations more efficiently. Freedom Civs are the natural choice for taking advantage of corporations, whilst Order Civs have a much harder time; they can only gain their own corporations using special great people. The rough order is; Freedom (Optimal), Freedom, Order (Optimal), Autocracy (Optimal), Autocracy, Order. With the right tenets, Order is decent for Corporations (China), whereas Autocracy locks you in to a kind of Autarky, whereby corporations are nigh impossible to attract if not created by Oligarchs. Gameplay Tweaks -Maps are largetiles are smaller; allow Civs to build extremely dense populations without feeling cramped. Countries such as the Netherlands, or England, if put directly into Civ V would effectively be 10 tiles of nothing but cities. -The vast number of notifications you get when it comes to the late game would be condensed into a "newspaper" which can be opened up and browsed for updates, rather than crowding your screen. Stories could be things like: "Owing to brilliant contributions to the research of Theology, Gottfried Leibniz has emerged as one of Medieval America's greatest Scientists!" and "King Alexander of Greece has completed the construction of his great Porcelain Tower!". -Ranged Units, Civilian Units, Infantry Units and Cavalry/Siege Units can fit on different "layers" in each tile. Each unit more than the 1st uses 1 food. If they consume more food than the tile can provide, and they are outside the workable radius of a non-starving friendly city, then they suffer attrition damage. -Addition of more Biomes. Gameplay-wise, there would only be the usual terrain types. However, some forests may appear as bamboo forests, some marshes as swamps or fens, some deserts have red sand and cacti etc. -Upgrade route for Scouts, going to Explorers and Recon units, as well as Snipers. Along with this: more customizability, and take out the "Great War" units, or put them earlier. Replace them with cold war era units, like Vulcan bombers, MIGs, "Choppers" etc. -Allow helicopter units to land between turns, allowing them to "refuel". Also allow air unit's like bombers to conduct a "Hail Mary", doubling range and damage but destroying the unit, with a chance of recovering the "pilots" for quicker replacement. -Incorporate the quest system/binary choices into religion: poly vs monotheistic etc. Just more customization in general. Allow cults to be founded with leftover beliefs once at the enlightenment era. Espionage (Shout-out to litriod) -If you put a "spy" into one of your own cities, they become an Agent, which work much like Civ V spies who are set to Counter-Intelligence. They will hunt foreign Spies in the city you send them to, but they won't necessarily kill them when they find them. Instead you are given several actions to choose from; Kill the Spy and send them back to their homeland as a warning, resulting in their leader disliking you, but other nations will then dislike them for spying on people. You can also send them home unharmed, and chastise their government for spying on you making the other Civ like you more for sparing their spy, but they'll send more your way in the future. Or you could allow the Spy to continue their job, with a catch; The Spy's government must pay you gold, you gain some of their intelligence, but the Spy will continue Spying on your people, and your Agent will not level up from the incident. -When you place a spy to a Friendly Civ's city, they become a Diplomat. Diplomats aren't hidden like Spies, and the foreign government always knows their location. Diplomats give you the ability to see all of the territory owned by the city they're in, not just the two rings around the city. Diplomats will also receive information from officials about events in their empire, working like the Spy's surveillance ability. However, the foreign officials won't give you unlimited Intel, and will inform you if they're plotting against you. Diplomats can allow you to trade World Congress votes with the nation in which they're operating, and each Diplomat you field will give you 1 bonus vote in the World Congress. When war is declared on the civilization housing the diplomat, they may be killed in the crossfire, and your Diplomats are at constant risk of assassination. -Spies placed in a Neutral Civilization's city become, well, Spies. Spies work much as they currently do: they do shady things under cover, and they risk getting caught and treated by the other player much as you could've treated theirs, but you can of course sacrifice your spy and not pay the tribute if they offer you such. Spies retain their previous abilities: stealing tech and surveillance, but also gain three new abilities; Assassination Sabotage and encouraging rebellion. Spies sent on assassination missions can kill Diplomats from other Civs. If you pull this off their home Civ will blame the civilization in which they had a diplomat, and if there are already tensions building this could start a war. Assassination is a dangerous business though, and you could fail in one of two ways. Either your spy could get caught, making both Civs distrust you, or your spy could fail to properly frame the host Civ, alerting both Civs to a plot but not telling them who by. After a successful or botched assassination, your Spy will flee the city to the Hideout for a turn or two. The second new ability is sabotage, which, if successful, delays that Civs current construction project for 2 turns. The third special ability of the Spy allows you to decease stability and increase the chance of a rebellion, requiring a decent amount of gold to send to the rebels, with greater amounts increasing rebellion chance. If they actually spawn, or are there already, you can still spend money to better equip the rebel units. All this can be a tad awkward if you are caught. -"Spies" in cities of Guarded or Hostile Civilizations, even if you're currently at war with them, will retain the title of Spy. Spies placed in these cities have a larger risk of capture, but they also have more potential for chaos. They retain their previous abilities: surveillance, stealing tech, spreading discontent, sabotage, assassination etc. but they also gain abilities for their assassinations and sabotage. Spies in this situation can also kill Great People and VIPs; If a Great Person is present you can choose to attempt a strike, killing them if you succeed. Choosing to target a VIP will, if they succeed, result in loss of 1 population and reduce production and stability by about 10% for 5 turns. Spies can also start an insurgency, suppressing production and health, or steal scientists. -When deploying "Spies" to a City state or Nation, you can set them either as Diplomats or Spies. They can do everything they could when in a proper Civ, but diplomats can trade technology, and "Shill" to increase influence/relations. Spies can Rig elections, increasing influence significantly, and also perform Coups d'état to either annex, puppet, change the ally (swap influence with the State's ally) or Change the ideology of the host State. Spies can also siphon off gold from said states. -Of course, "spies" can all be leveled up in their different roles. CIVS(must-haves marked with *) Europe *Great Britain- Victoria *France- Napoleon/Louis XIV *Rome- Augustus CaesaMarcus Aurelius *Germany- Otto von Bismarck *Russia- Catherine/Peter I *Greece- Alexander Picts- Nechtan Spain- Isabella Portugal- Maria I Yugoslavia- Josip Broz Tito Poland/Commonwealth- Sigismund II Austria- Maria Theresa Hungary- Coloman Kievan Rus'- Yaroslav' I Sweden- Gustav Adolf Denmark/Vikings- Harald Blatand Ottomans- Suleiman Kanuni Armenia- Tigranes Americas *USA- Abraham Lincoln Lakota- Crazy Horse Iroquois- Hiawatha Mississippians- Birdman? Inuit- Mikak Navajo- Chee Dodge Ute- Chipeta Mexico- Benito Juarez Canada- John Macdonald Shoshone- Pocatello *Aztecs- Montezuma Pacal-Maya Haiti- Toussaint L'Ouverture Gran Colombia- Simon Bolivar Brazil- Pedro II *Inca- Pachacuti Argentina- Juan Manuel de Rosas Africa *Mali- Mansa Musa *Egypt- Hatshepsut *Zulu- Shaka Ethiopia- Menelik II South Africa- Nelson Mandela Carthage- Dido/Hannibal Morocco- Abdul Ghalib Ashante- Osei Kofi Tutu Bornu- Idris Alooma Fulani- Bello Kongo- Lukemi lua Nimi Kitara- Ndahura Asia *Arabia- Muawiya I Babylon- Nebuchadnezzar II Hittites- Suppiluliuma Israel- Solomon *Persia- Cyrus Mughals- Akbar *India- Gandhi Gurkani- Timur *Mongolia- Genghis Khan *China- Yong-le/Wu Xetian *Japan- Meiji Vietnam- Trung(s) *Khmer- Jayavarman II Indonesia- Hayam Wuruk/ Gajah Mada Chola- Parantaka I Tibet- Songtsen Gampo Korea- Sejong Siam- Taksin Pacific Australia- John Curtin Maori- Te Rauangaanga Philippines- Dayang Kalangitan Polynesia- Kamehameha End So, now that's all done. Now to the arguments!
Australia Securities and Investment Commission: In choosing the Binary Options broker, the regulatory status of the brokerage firm should be your first consideration as a trader to protect you from scams. The only setback there is in being regulated by a regulator is the limit on traders being accepted primarily based on geographical location Binary Options Trading. Binary options is a simple trading instrument that can be used to earn money by guessing the future of the Forex, stocks, commodity and other prices. With binary options you either win if you guessed it right, or lose if you guessed it wrong. BinaryTrading.com is here to help you to win more often than lose. Binary Options Copy Trading Club is a group of full-time traders, trading binary options on the binary.com platform. Our trading results have proven to be successful in all market conditions and we invite you to join our Binary Options Copy Trading Club. Frequency 2 posts / month Since Feb 2018 Blog binaryoptionscopytrading.clu.. Perhaps one of the most critical of all the basic strategies a binary options trader can learn is the ‘Knock-On Effect’. In theory it is also sometimes called as ‘Market Pull Strategy’. The basic concept behind the strategy is that a movement of an option will have an effect on another option. Australian Binary Options Trading by Benjamin King / updated: May 3, 2018 Once you aware of the fact that there is more than one type of trade, you may find yourself with an entirely new question.
AUGUST 2020 TARGET WD LIMIT $5000 TRADING BINARY.COM
The products offered via this website include binary options, contracts for difference ("CFDs") and other complex derivatives. Trading binary options may not be suitable for everyone. Regulated Binary Options Brokers Australia, Binary Options Brokers Australia, Binary Options Australia, binary broker for Australian users, Trusted Binary Options Brokers Australia, Best Binary ... Naming the most beneficial buying and selling Binary Options System is demanding, just because Binary Options trading platforms and proprietary (bespoke) software package are Ordinarily a matter ... Enjoy the videos and music you love, upload original content, and share it all with friends, family, and the world on YouTube. Any questions, please post here or send to [email protected] AUTO TRADER ///// Automated trading for binary options with more then 150 strategies for free