site banner
PaperclipPerfector  18hr ago (text post)   795 thread views

Friday Fun Thread for June 26, 2026

Be advised: this thread is not for serious in-depth discussion of weighty topics (we have a link for that), this thread is not for anything Culture War related. This thread is for Fun. You got jokes? Share 'em. You got silly questions? Ask 'em.

Top Bottom Old Controversial Comments
Jump in the discussion.

No email address required.

Video game thread

What are you playing this week, and what games are you looking forward to in the remainder of 2026?

I played a bit of Moomintroll - Winter's Warmth lately. It's very wholesome.

Thinking of starting a playthrough of either a solid CRPG or a first person RPG like the Gothic 1 Remake.

Just had to point this out:

I looked through alternatives to my fav strategy game Civ V, and thought back to Humankind which I played for a bit a few years ago. The promo pic/logo is so on the nose. So woke. Ferocious white woman leading a male black doctor by the hand into the future. Female flintlock wielding revolutionary. Common.

Civ IV is the best Civ.

Broke Take: Civ IV is the best civ game
Woke Take: Civ V + Vox Populi is the best civ game
Bespoke Take: Civ VII is the best civ game.

Fight me...

Civ IV has bad graphics and a doomstack problem, terrain is pretty much pointless. It requires little in the way of tactical knowledge. If I wanted to play something with randomly deep systems and a bad UX I'd play dwarf fortress. Most of the problems Civ V has also applies doubly to Civ 4.

Civ V needs a mod to make it playable. Enough said. Base game has huge problems with wonder-spamming and cities being pointlessly stacked much like Civ IV's armies. Later Civ's actually made city location and building placement meaningful beyond just "build it here for the resources it hits". The culture traditions are basic as hell and pretty much do have optimal choices leading to a massive reduction in build diversity.

"Civ VII is the best" is a nuclear hot take. I can only aspire to such heights of picking fights.

I just went and replayed Civ V this evening and it gave me a good perspective on all the things Civ 6 and Civ 7 have done better that I should be greatful for.

I think the towns and cities distinction is far more interesting than the cities only. The pointlessness of most luxury resources other than just box checking was improved upon. Weather and terrain effects were good. I think adjacency bonuses make for a more interesting settling dynamic around city planning and location, beyond the usual "find a 3 radius that doesn't overlap" or a strategic choke point. Culture is actually a bit more interesting, it's not just a collect resource-take bonus. I think 7 created the Culture Tree "tech" tree and separated it from the Science Tech Tree. I find that much more challenging, enjoyable and allows for greater complexity of play. It also helped the wonder spamming problem by splitting wonders. Actually having to place the wonders also helps not spamming them. This is getting long, but I could ramble on about how 6 and 7 are better than 5. (it's been awhile since I've played 4).

Oh, I agree that Civ 6 is better than 5 (though I still enjoy 5 and go back to it sometimes).. I just don't think Civ 7 is particularly good, let alone better than other Civ games. They made their main design objective for the game solving a problem I didn't agree was a problem (late game snowballing) using methods that I think aren't fun to play (era transitions and forced civ switching, though at least they dropped the latter). Pretty poor showing from Firaxis, IMO.

What is this place?

This website is a place for people who want to move past shady thinking and test their ideas in a court of people who don't all share the same biases. Our goal is to optimize for light, not heat; this is a group effort, and all commentators are asked to do their part.

The weekly Culture War threads host the most controversial topics and are the most visible aspect of The Motte. However, many other topics are appropriate here. We encourage people to post anything related to science, politics, or philosophy; if in doubt, post!

Check out The Vault for an archive of old quality posts. You are encouraged to crosspost these elsewhere.


Why are you called The Motte?

A motte is a stone keep on a raised earthwork common in early medieval fortifications. More pertinently, it's an element in a rhetorical move called a "Motte-and-Bailey", originally identified by philosopher Nicholas Shackel. It describes the tendency in discourse for people to move from a controversial but high value claim to a defensible but less exciting one upon any resistance to the former. He likens this to the medieval fortification, where a desirable land (the bailey) is abandoned when in danger for the more easily defended motte. In Shackel's words, "The Motte represents the defensible but undesired propositions to which one retreats when hard pressed."

On The Motte, always attempt to remain inside your defensible territory, even if you are not being pressed.


New post guidelines

If you're posting something that isn't related to the culture war, we encourage you to post a thread for it. A submission statement is highly appreciated, but isn't necessary for text posts or links to largely-text posts such as blogs or news articles; if we're unsure of the value of your post, we might remove it until you add a submission statement. A submission statement is required for non-text sources (videos, podcasts, images).

Culture war posts go in the culture war thread; all links must either include a submission statement or significant commentary. Bare links without those will be removed.

If in doubt, please post it!


Rules


Recommended Posts And Communities

Recommended Realtime Chats