geno

Yup, I have to say that I completely understand why some people like it - it adds to the chaos, and your job is to mitigate/control the chaos (by eg. choosing to use Magic Missile like you mentioned). It's just not something I personally enjoy. :D

I do agree with the person you're replying to, in that I'm not a huge fan of DnD mechanics - "works ok-ish" is what I would also say about them. It does do its job just fine, so this isn't a big issue by any means.

Related to game mechanics in BG3, my personal issues are as follows:

1. Heavy reliance on RNG in combat. In turn-based games, I always prefer game mechanics which work as I planned, maybe with small variance (i.e. look at Advance Wars). Basically I prefer when my planning is the part determining how the combat flows (damage or cc? Which target? Where do I move to?) - there'll always be some "I'm not sure what happens on next round" due to just not being able to know what the enemies will do on their turn, so I don't really need even more RNG in the form of hit/miss (& save) rolls. Basically: chess is a good game as it is, I wouldn't want to have a 50-50 coin toss determining if I can kill a unit or not.

   • I do think that some form of randomness is fine, but I don't like that there's just so many layers of RNG in all things. Damage abilities: first roll if you hit or miss, and if you hit, then the damage variance is often like 5d6 (5 to 30) - it's almost like doing two rolls to figure out if you actually deal any notable amount of damage or not.

2. Practically everything related to the resting mechanic. I really feel like I would enjoy the game more if I just had fully recharged spells (and other stuff) in the beginning of any fight - and obviously then balance the game with that in mind. Where needed, devs could tag a certain area as "no resets here" so you know you'll be forced to do a couple of fights in a row without resets.

   • One reason making me think this way is just the amount of available food, since you get more than enough resources to do a full rest after practically any fight anyway - so now it just becomes a QoL issue. It's not "do I want to use my resources to reset here?", in practice the choice is just "do I want to spend a couple of minutes going through loading screens?".
   • If there was less food available so that you'd need to be careful about when/where you do a full rest, progress through the game would be: go forward until you fail a fight, load the game, do a full rest, fight with full resources - this really doesn't sound fun in practice. I don't think there's a way to implement this style of a resting mechanic in such a way that I'd personally like it (at least without changing a lot more about the game).

I do want to finish this with another disclaimer that I do think BG3 is a great game, and these are really just minor issues - I completed it yesterday and enjoyed my time for the whole ~120 hours. But my two biggest issues that I can point out about the game's mechanics are both just base mechanics of DnD.

I found an article about it: https://www.macsmotorcitygarage.com/a-cool-idea-at-the-time-the-hurst-lightning-rods-shifter

Hurst Lightning Rods, an aftermarket performance shifter marketed in the 1980s

The Lightning Rods system was set up to work like any ordinary automatic gear selector, more or less, with a conventional PRND shift pattern (as shown in the top photo). The difference was in the two additional levers: the far right lever and release button performed the 1-2 upshift, while the middle lever and button performed the 2-3 upshift. Or the driver could simply leave the lever in D for Drive or OD for Overdrive and drive normally. In that regard, the Lightning Rods setup was not unlike the Hurst Dual Gate aka “His ‘n Her” shifters of previous years.

I have to say that I'm having issues understanding what this means in practice. :D

I'm using Windows as my daily driver due to prioritising gaming over everything else. But I also have a 8-year old laptop which is stuck with Win 7, and I've been wondering if I should just install Linux on it to try things out. In the past, I've only ever tried Linux for short times, never used Linux as my main OS or longer than a week.

With this context, I've had the "which distro should I choose?" on my mind a few times. There's some obvious and some non-obvious issues with this questionnaire. I'll just go over my thoughts step by step:

• "I want anonymous web browsing" and "distro which is supported by game publishers" can't be selected at the same time. Is this really true? I'm doubting my understanding of what "anonymous web browsing" actually means.

• "I often need help from others" and "I have already used Linux for some purposes" can't both be selected. Why? The logic behind this is "You have used Linux at some point, so you can clearly solve some problems without asking anyone". Makes no sense, and/or the questionnaire's creator thinks that Linux is impossible for newcomers. I have used Linux in the past and I'm generally good in troubleshooting, but anyway.

• "I want to use the default preset values in the installation assistant" is impossible to answer if I don't know which values are given as the default. My general answer would be "give me a default value for everything, but also let me change the things which I have an opinion about". An answer equal to this doesn't exist.

• Pre-installed programs: this does feel like it lacks the answer of "let me choose what to install during installation of OS", but I guess I can just skip this question without answering since I don't care.

• "There are many way to administrate a linux distribution" -> "I want to avoid systemd". I've never heard about systemd, and the explanation give on the page doesn't really help. For what reasons would I want to avoid it? My actual answer for this is "I really don't care", so I just skipped it.

About the result of the questionnaire: I did answer that "I'm fine with paying something", but it's not really something I aim for. The suggestions seem to tag "There is a non-free version available" as a plus for the distros, which really isn't what I answered - there's a difference between "I'm fine with something" and "I want something".

I also marked "supported by game publishers" with a star, because gaming is what I'm aiming to do on it. I have no idea if this even matters in practice, but it made sense as an answer when asked about. The smoothness of gaming experience will always be the primary reason for any choice of OS I'll make.

The first EIGHT answers on the list have either "Programs versions may not be up-to-date enough for gaming" or "May require additional configuration for gaming" as a downside/warning. The game publisher question is the only answer which I marked as important.

The first distro from the suggestions that included "supported by game publishers" is Linux Mint - which does match what I already had in mind, but I really feel like the ordering of the suggested distros feel off.

Short "review" about this: it really didn't help much. The list of suggestions is practically full of equally good distros, and I'm still stuck with the question "which one of these should I choose?". I only learned about more distros that I had never heard about before.

As for actually choosing the distro at some point later: I think that I'll just find out the top 5 most popular distros, and select from those. My reasoning for this is that it's much easier to find answers if/when I run into issues. Using a niche distro wouldn't really work for me - Linux isn't my hobby, I think OS is just a tool to run whatever programs/games I want to.

But this questionnaire doesn't have any data about popularity, so for my usecase, it lacks some information. I feel like it could use an additional question about "Are you fine with using a niche distro, or do you want to use a popular one?" - this question does have the issue of not being objective though, as there's no clear answer of what can be counted as "popular".

TL;DR good idea, but execution could be better.

Game of life?

Vast majority of it is active playing - I've thought about this earlier too, and I really rarely just afk or stand around while in game. Even if I'm just waiting for eg. raid to start, I usually just go do some gathering, pet battles, dailies, something.

Yup, that's what I used to get the number - along with an addon that saves all the data from different characters and sums up the played time of all of them. Last time I checked it showed over 1200 days (=28 800 hours) for me - but it's been a while since I checked the total, and it doesn't include characters in Classic (or deleted characters). So I just rounded it to 30k hours, close enough.

My most played character is my shaman, with 450 days (~11k hours) played - it was my main character from TBC to WoD (from 2007 to early 2015). Current main is Druid with 240 days (~6k hours). So these two characters alone are more than half of my total played time. :D

Roughly 30 000 hours in WoW. I've been playing it since 2005 - mostly active, only a couple of 1-6 month breaks.

Quick approximation - let's just ignore the exact dates:

• 18 years * 365 = 6570 days
• 30000 hours / 6570 days = ~4.57 hours/day

During the last 18 years, I've played an average of 4h 34min of WoW every day.

In other words: if I sleep 8 hours a day, during the last 18 years, I've spent about 28% of my waking hours playing WoW.

While I'm at it: I'm 34 years old. I have spent roughly 10% of my life playing WoW.

jfc lmao

Other MMOs: Guild Wars 1 & 2, FFXIV, are all between 1000-1500 hours each.

Outside of MMOs, the #1 is probably Trackmania (2020) at ~600 hours.

...what

...I guess it was indeed a disaster because I can't remember even hearing that name before.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bebo

originally operated from 2005 until its bankruptcy in 2013

It was announced in January 2021 that it would be returning as a new social media site the month after. By May 2022, it had once again been shut down, without having ever left beta testing.

What are you talking about? I used it like 2 days ago last time, no plugins. Not sure if there's a hotkey for reopening a closed window (ctrl shift T?), but you can find it from the menu in upper right corner of the browser.