this post was submitted on 10 May 2026
254 points (98.8% liked)

Ask Lemmy

39494 readers
1797 users here now

A Fediverse community for open-ended, thought provoking questions


Rules: (interactive)


1) Be nice and; have funDoxxing, trolling, sealioning, racism, toxicity and dog-whistling are not welcomed in AskLemmy. Remember what your mother said: if you can't say something nice, don't say anything at all. In addition, the site-wide Lemmy.world terms of service also apply here. Please familiarize yourself with them


2) All posts must end with a '?'This is sort of like Jeopardy. Please phrase all post titles in the form of a proper question ending with ?


3) No spamPlease do not flood the community with nonsense. Actual suspected spammers will be banned on site. No astroturfing.


4) NSFW is okay, within reasonJust remember to tag posts with either a content warning or a [NSFW] tag. Overtly sexual posts are not allowed, please direct them to either !asklemmyafterdark@lemmy.world or !asklemmynsfw@lemmynsfw.com. NSFW comments should be restricted to posts tagged [NSFW].


5) This is not a support community.
It is not a place for 'how do I?', type questions. If you have any questions regarding the site itself or would like to report a community, please direct them to Lemmy.world Support or email info@lemmy.world. For other questions check our partnered communities list, or use the search function.


6) No US Politics.
Please don't post about current US Politics. If you need to do this, try !politicaldiscussion@lemmy.world or !askusa@discuss.online


Reminder: The terms of service apply here too.

Partnered Communities:

Tech Support

No Stupid Questions

You Should Know

Reddit

Jokes

Ask Ouija


Logo design credit goes to: tubbadu


founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
 

In the Lord of the Rings fandom there's a persistent debate whether balrogs, or Durin's Bane specifically, have wings. The text in Fellowship is ambiguous whether what it is describing are literal wings or something else wing-like.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[โ€“] Fizz@lemmy.nz 13 points 2 days ago* (last edited 2 days ago) (1 children)

In the RTS game beyond all reason there is a long ongoing debate thread where people would argue for removing the ability to co-op(one of bars unique mechanics)

In BAR you generally play team games up to 8v8 and can instantly send resources to other players. You can also transfer units. This is pretty cool it allows you to work together to get higher tech things faster. 2 people sharing 1 lab is more efficient than 2 people making a lab each. So obviously the higher ranked games devolved into the most fucking degenerate co-op tactics. Cheese or be cheesed. Lanes decided by which good player gets more boosts. You'd end up in games where your role is to be a battery and make energy for the first few mins. You would end up losing your lane at 3mins because the other team boosted your lane then once you die they go boost the other side. You'd have the top players in the team forcing the bottom players to be a boost for them because them getting ahead is far more valuable. It was fun in the beginning but got very bad.

So top players were arguing that there needed to be a fix and tried to discuss what it should be and more casual players would constantly argue that it wasnt a problem, it was a skill issue, it was fun etc, someone just needs to counter it.

The solution people wanted was a resource tax but it required engine work. But its been done now, we got the engine work and its a toggle on setting so those who want it can and those who dont can leave it off. The "coop is a problem" thread is still going but i dont know what the new arguments are about.

[โ€“] hansolo@lemmy.today 2 points 1 day ago

I only play BAR in skirmishes, never online. Love the game, but so rarely play as to not know how to co-op well.

That being said, this is how colonial era wars worked. You're the battery that was India in WWII? Or are you the UK making units?