As a r/CTH grognard, I personally would want to be able to get the old sub culture back, but I suppose that time erodes all things & that you can't really turn its hands backwards 
1nt3rd1m3nt10n4l
joined 2 years ago
Dig tunnels under the pavement.
Who Moderates the Moderators? 
Modern day settlements feel like stale Lego bricks, I don't enjoy the limited number of building spots, or how each settlement is more or less locked in to specific buildings by default.
That's the part of it that I'm agreeing with you on, though.
My issue with going back to old TW, is that while I will agree that there are certain things that feel better about how it plays, and settlements feel like actual places instead of just production hubs; almost every faction feels basically identical in how they play with only the most marginal possible variations in roster. This is less true in Rome 1 of course, but it's especially so in Med2, and Shogun 2, even though I do still like both those games.
TWWH, I believe, is for all it's flaws a genuine advancement in design, because it gave CA license to experiment with hard asymmetries between faction rosters & campaign mechanics.
The first time I played a half-life game was back when The Orange Box came out & I had the same opinion back then as I do now.
(because of course they're incomplete as they are!)
Aren't we though, isn't that the whole point of having social solidarity with other people? If you don't need anyone else, why would you ever care about the state of society?
Why wouldn't you just be a Randian, then?
A few weeks ago I met a system and was thinking about the possibility of a relationship with them, but they said they were taken so I was friendzoned. A few days ago they said they were willing to try polyamory again and want to date me and join my swarm, but one of their members has some creepy incel behaviours and I want to deprogram the alt right shit in his head before I get too close to him, so I friendzoned them.
This is entirely illegible to me, lmao.
what societal change do you think needs to occur about this issue?
IMO, I think it's worthwhile for society to take an active interest in helping integrate kids & young people who are lagging behind socially. There are programs that claim to try to do this today, but I didn't really ever get any help, I just got told what to do & that I'd go in a windowless box if I didn't do that.
If you get to be 30 & you're still in that position, like I am idk how much there is that can be done, because a lot of the contributing factors to the issue have become ossified/terminal.
Socialization is very much a "rich get richer, poor get poorer" (if you'll excuse the analogy) situation, in my experience.
teaching them not to treat relationships as status signifiers or commodities.
Well the problem is that relationships aren't status signifiers. They are status, in the most concrete way possible.
Edit: Like it's an old truism, that certain kinds of guys will deliberately pursue making money more than actually trying to build their social skills directly because it can open more doors for you socially & "romantically".
Edit 2: What I'm getting at here is that "status" is an inherently social concept. It has to do with the people who you interact with on a day-to-day basis, & what you can expect from your interactions with them. In this sense, yes, somebody who doesn't have a lot of friends or any romantic partners, is objectively socially inferior to somebody who does. They are, by definition, valued less by the the people around them & are less socially integrated, as a consequence of that. And that itself will usually be the consequence of the person in question possessing some quality that is considered inferior by the society they live in.
The whole issue I think is something that just isn't really well addressed by any contemporary discussion on the matter, I think.
Why do you have to jiggle the control stick in order to detach parts from constructs.
Because 
I don't even understand why people want that, it sounds like shit; tbh.