Суки

Трошки оффтопна новина від підписника

Наразі готується до релізу 7 номерна частина компʼютерної гри Civilization, Реліз намічено на 15 лютого 2025 року. Це глобальна покрокова стратегія. Наразі розробники представляють нації (фракції) та їх умовних лідерів котрі будуть у грі на момент релізу. І російську імперію представляє така собі Катерина. Далі цікавіше абілки (унікальні вміння) цієї фракції будуть:
Prosveshchenie
Westernization
Obshchina
General Moroz
Також фракція має два унікальні юніти
Cossack
Katyusha Rocket Launcher
Далі лишаю цитату з презентації фракції на англійській мові
«Caught between the eternal question of Russia's role as part of Europe and the Russian dusha, or soul, the Romanov reign held at the center of its ideology a model of "enlightened absolutism.“»
Тут навіть Гугл переклад дозволяє відчути посил даного тексту.
І на останок Британська Імперія не буду представлена на релізі цієї гри.

Видео презентация от «товарищей» разработчиков

https://youtu.be/OXz9kj8SpJE?si=sMObOUDCwyI7WpGH

Мої 5 копійок або чому ця новина виклика зацікавлення та певні емоції.
Гра не 3 ешелону. Це культова серія з великою аудиторією та фан базою
Допустимо, що біс із додаванням русні в 2025 році в компʼютерну гру. Бо це просто фракція не більше того. Як мінімум цікавий крок
Вибір лідера та відносно цього лідера спеціального юніту виглядає, як знущання та паплюження історії.
Опис та вміння фракції це взагалі дикий «крінж».
Загалом кожний пункт можна розписати ширше, але не бачу в тому сенсу. І не має сенсу боротися за відміну фракції чи взагалі гри. Але просто для себе хто не в курсі чи хто планував собі придбати за 3000 тисячі гривень базова версія. Чи потрібно воно вам. Та звернути увагу взагалі на Take-Two Interactive. Дуже сумнівну гру вони ведуть, ой дуже сумнівну, намагаючись робити кульбіти і загравати не з таким вже і великим ринком «руськоговорящіх».
Дуже класно в руку всіляким карзо-яшоваровим підігріти тезу про «нєтакіх руськіх» та «загадочную руську душу».
P.S. Про шизанутого Ганді я знаю, але це не про те.

Goooo?...
🔺️🔺️🔺️🔺️🔺️🔺️🔺️
ПІДТРИМАЙТЕ ПО 3 ГРН:
Важливий #ЗБІР пілотам дронів з 5 ОШБ на зброю!
- PayPal: petrenkoandryi@gmail.com
- Monobank: send.monobank.ua/jar/5UWtYEFB1V
- PrivatBank: privat24.ua/send/d0nml
🔻🔻🔻🔻🔻🔻🔻
За донат 500 грн — отримайте кружку від автора:
@PetrenkoAndryi

Русня отправила "волонтеров" из оккупированного Луганска очищать пляжи Черного моря от мазута.

Потому шо не жалко, это ж лынырийцы, а не кацапы

Це краще шо я бачив з ілоною)

Або це)

Азарьонок настільки тупий шо зізнався публічно в тому шо є діючим працівником спецслужб Білорусі

Відеофакт

Газовая гонка вооружений.

То, что раху ждут печальные перспективы на газовых рынках - уже видно невооруженным глазом. Но русня пытается встрять в проекты. которые могут замедлить падение. Что-то мне подсказывает, что ни один из крупных геополитических игроков не заинтересован в этом, поэтому, вангую, что будут нежданчики.

Раунд!

Смоленское быдло, почему тебе не нравится движуха???

Пацаны с ЗСУ старались, а ты ебалом воротишь…

Совсем страх потеряла, псина???

Орешник коли, он поможет

Инфа сотка

Zero tolerance

#жрите

At the same time, European security officials have accused Russia of using proxies to carry out hundreds of arson attacks, railway bombings and smaller sabotage operations aimed at sowing discord in Europe and undermining support for Ukraine.

Against this backdrop, the damage to seabed systems has increased Europe's sense of being under siege. German Defence Minister Boris Pistorius called the November anchor drag incident "sabotage" and said that "no one believes that these cables were accidentally severed". A few weeks later, Finnish President Alexander Stubb said that the Christmas incident was "definitely" linked to Russia.Experts also said that the incidents on the seabed fit into the scheme of Russian aggression.

The cable breaks "could very well be accidental accidents," said Eric Ciaramella, a senior fellow at the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace who previously served as the deputy national intelligence officer for Russia. "But it's hard to rule out a coordinated Russian campaign, with Moscow's intelligence services trying to assassinate German business leaders, setting fire to factories across Europe and planting bombs on cargo planes," he said.

Some critics of Russia have rejected the view of Western spy agencies that the underwater damage was most likely caused by accidents rather than Russia. Pekka Tovere, who represents Finland in the European Parliament and previously served as the country's military intelligence chief, said the seabed incidents were part of a "typical hybrid operation" by Moscow.
"The most important thing in any hybrid operation is denial," Toveri said. According to him, the Russian intelligence services may have managed to leave "no evidence that could be used in court", but to claim that these were accidents "is complete nonsense".

Toviri and others cite anomalies in the vessels' behaviour, as well as evidence that Russia has devoted significant resources for decades - including a special military unit known as the General Staff's Main Directorate for Deep Sea Research - to mapping the western seabed infrastructure and identifying its vulnerabilities.
At least two of the ships suspected of causing the damage appear to have extended their anchors 100 miles or more across the seabed. According to Tovary, a ship that accidentally drops an anchor will immediately be so noticeably off course that the crew will struggle to stop the vessel and assess the damage.

Mike Plunkett, a maritime expert at safety research firm Janes, said that "as well as a very loud splash, there will also be a lot of noise from the anchor chain flying out the hatch." He described the likelihood of three anchor fall incidents in the Baltic region from 2023 as "vanishingly small", although not zero. But he said it was extremely difficult to prove deliberate sabotage.

Suspicions are heightened by the timing of the incidents. The most recent incidents, in November and December, damaged undersea power lines at a time when the Baltic states are stepping up efforts to decouple their power grids from Russia, a move that has taken on particular urgency following Russia's invasion of Ukraine in 2022.

There are also reasons to question why russia would risk attacking underwater systems on waterways currently laid out by naTo member states. This could jeopardise the oil smuggling operations that Russia relies on to finance its war in Ukraine, and possibly provoke more aggressive efforts by Western governments to cut off Russia's access to the North Atlantic.

At the Baltic Summit in Helsinki on 14 January, NATO Secretary General Mark Rutte announced plans for new patrols with frigates, aircraft, submarine satellites and a "small fleet of maritime drones" designed to detect underwater sabotage.

Despite advances in underwater surveillance capabilities, proving involvement in the attacks has proved difficult.

👇👇

The bombing of the Nord Stream gas pipeline between Russia and Germany in September 2022 was initially widely blamed on Russia, but is now believed to have been carried out by a senior Ukrainian military officer with close ties to the country's intelligence services.

Finland took a more aggressive approach to the cable damage incident on 25 December, forcing the Eagle S to enter Finnish waters before police and the coastguard boarded the vessel by helicopter. Crew members suspected of being on duty when the anchor was damaged have been banned from leaving Finland while the investigation continues.
A Scandinavian official briefed on the investigation said the conditions on the tanker were dire. "We have always assumed that shadow fleet vessels are in poor condition," the official said. "But it turned out to be even worse than we thought."

Hermann Ljungberg, a lawyer representing the owner of the Eagle S, acknowledged in a telephone interview that the vessel was carrying Russian oil, but denied that it was a violation of international law or that the crew had deliberately caused damage.

European security officials said that Finland's main intelligence service agrees with its Western counterparts that the 25 December incident was an accident, although they cautioned that it may not be possible to rule out a Russian role.

A spokeswoman for Finland's National Bureau of Investigation, which is investigating the Eagle S incident, said the bureau's investigation "is still open and it is too early to draw any final conclusions about the causes or combination of causes that led to the damage."

Comment. In short, "it's not that clear cut".

Therefore, I suggest that the authors of the "article" go for the rubles - the work is done, it's time to ask for payment

Well, given that I don't have a Pulitzer Prize, but I do have a little critical thinking, I will now show you with short examples that the authors of the "article" are openly manipulating and bullshitting to smear Russia. Let's go

The basis of the article is based on the fact that there is no evidence that this was done by the Russians or in the interests of the Russian Federation + that it has not been proven that the severing of the cables was a deliberate sabotage, not an "accident"

Therefore, I suggest you think about what evidence would convince the authors of the "article" of the direct involvement of the Russian Federation in the above incidents, but what is not fucking evidence. Now I'll show you how white goes black, don't switch the channel

The first piece of evidence is that the anchor used to sever the submarine cables must have the word "fuck" on the metal. Thus, it is possible to obtain indirect evidence of Russian involvement in sabotage

But it is "unknown" who made this inscription. Maybe it was Ukrainians who sold the anchor to accuse the Russians of sabotage

Evidence two. The anchor that severed the submarine cables is painted in the colours of the Russian flag. I agree that the evidence is indirect, but it's at least something - enough for an article in the Washington Post

This is also bullshit

It is "unknown" who painted the anchor

It is "unknown" whether these are really the colours of the Russian flag

"It is not known" why the anchor was painted, maybe it was just a coincidence

Evidence three - at the site of the submarine cable break, on the sand, an inscription was found - fuck you for proving anything, you fucking gays, ehhhh-. This is also indirect evidence, but it is very easy to write about a "possible Russian trace" in the sabotage, which has not been proven, because

"It is not known" whether it was written by Russians

"It is not known" whether it is written in Russian

"It is not known" whether there were foreign divers or deep-sea facilities at the site of the cable break that had the technical ability to write this

In short, you can't prove anything to us - it's not "all that clear" and you don't fuck with us, right?

Evidence four - the Russian flag was installed at the site of the cable break.

👇👇👇