I feel like your preference makes sense when aligned from the perspective of a conventional forum-like platform. However I’d argue that that’s missing a core part of what kbin is/was – and by extension what Mbin is – which is the microblog integration alongside the forum-like stuff. With that context in mind, boosts (or whatever term you want to use for “retweet”) make sense to integrate imo.

Whether or not you think Mbin should try to integrate the microblog side of things is of course a subjective - I personally think it’s a cool idea to try at least, but with how dominant lemmy has become it can be difficult to reconcile differences and incompatibilities between it and other software like Mbin.

Mbin has a specific and different meaning for the term “post” as used in the OP, so it’s one place where translating from lemmy or other “generic internet forum” jargon doesn’t work. It’s for microblog posts associated with a magazine that are independent of threads in that magazine.

E.g.: https://fedia.io/m/firefox/microblog has “posts” in Mbin terminology – though if I had to guess I think most Mbin users will use the qualified “microblog post” or similar if they actually mean to reference the Mbin meaning of the term.

“Comma-la” unfortunately doesn’t help much for people without US accents lol (though of course people in the US are who the question and answer are most relevant to). On first reading – without the accent or something close to it – it implies “kom-uh-luh”, whereas with the accent it implies something more like “kah-muh-luh”, just based on how people pronounce “comma” differently.

Imo after reading it, it doesn’t seem that crazy or off-brand anymore (so long as it gets fleshed out to use something not as transactionally-inefficient as bitcoin).

Edit: their related bitcoin guide has made me change my mind somewhat and think it’s a little crazy. I was viewing this as a stepping stone (almost a functional tech demo) towards something more reasonable, but now it doesn’t look like that’s necessarily what they had in mind @_@

I thought Frozen Synapse’s ability to let you simulate your opponent’s moves was super cool - surprised I didn’t end up seeing it in more strategy games (obviously not so much applicable to the normal real-time stuff though!).

Probably a quirk of having different software. I’m on Fedia which runs on mbin, as does kbin.run which MBM is on. You’re on lemmy, so I guess something was just handled differently for you (and most users!) vs kbin/mbin users.

FYI if you’re one of the people who just sees an image, the original includes a link to this:

https://www.gamesradar.com/games/roguelike/the-star-fox-style-roguelite-whose-dev-refused-to-use-ai-voices-to-cut-costs-is-adding-an-entire-anti-capitalist-revenge-campaign-about-a-cat-girl-destroying-ai/

SO comments are already CC-BY licensed (granted not -NC licensed, but still), but it doesn’t seem to have helped much.

Rise of Nations (originally released back in 2003) had/has some interesting ideas to reduce some of the busywork:

• Worker units will automatically try to gather/build nearby after a short (configurable) delay if they’re not doing anything.
• Cities (the main worker-producing structure) has a rally point option that’s essentially “all nearby empty resource gathering”, so you can queue a dozen workers and they’ll distribute themselves as they’re created.
• Production buildings can be set to loop over their current queue, letting you build continually without intervention as long as you maintain enough resources each time the queue “restocks”.
• Units that engage in combat without being given an explicit target will try (with modest success) to aim for nearby units which they counter.

For the most part, none of the implemented options are strictly better than micromanaging them yourself:

• You will always spend less time idling workers if you micromanage them yourself.
• The auto-rally-point doesn’t always prioritize the resources that you would if you did it yourself.
• Queueing additional units is slightly less resource-efficient than only building one thing at a time.
• Total DPS is higher if you manually micro effectively.

But the options are there when you need them, which I think is a a nice design. It doesn’t completely remove best-in-class players being rewarded for their speed as a player, but does raise the “speed floor”, allowing slower players to get more bang for their buck APM-wise, and compete a bit more on the strategy/tactics side of the game instead.

There are types of time management which I think can still be interesting. For example, are you able to afford – in the resources of time and attention – optimally micro’ing this important fight? Or are you going to have to yolo it a bit so that you can do multi-task economic tasks at the same time?

Some (much?) of the problem is that (for better or worse) skilled players can and will squeeze the game to optimality in terms of win rate, and that tends to collapse viable tactical and strategic choices. Once those choices have been optimised (the game is largely “solved”), the main way to get better is by being faster, not by being smarter.

That is indeed the very first criteria listed in the sidebar, despite you being showered in downvotes for saying it.

I wonder if patch support being pulled after 2 months is down to lower-than-expected sales; it’s certainly earlier than I would’ve expected on both the dev (HBS) and publisher (Paradox) side.

Edit: related news from October that I didn’t know about.

Thanks for the extra context!

I’m not sure if the image has since been updated, but the horn-y boy before/after isn’t the same image twice despite looking very similar. The left image has light-colored areas on the horns and some other similarly minor differences which are more noticeable when flicking between them but kinda hard to spot in a side-by-side.