-Disclaimer: This is an examination of Dottore being a complex morally grey villain that wasn't just born 100% evil, it's NOT a case that he's a good boy.-
I'll assume Zandik is Dottore since it's very likely (plus, someone tried to name their Wanderer that but it didn't work.)
Let's start with the oldest piece of lore:
-- Doctor's Pinion reveals a tragic past with unknown reasons for persecution --
When Pierro first tried to recruit Zandik / Dottore, he responded:

"Will you treat me like the Akademiya did? Will you call me a monster, a madman?" "Or will you treat me as my hometown did, and chase me away with pitchforks and clubs...?"

Some people assume the persecution was because of his experiments but it's important to note that the fact is we don't know what happened so there's a chance it wasn't something evil. That he could be chased away by "pitchforks and clubs" indicates he was weak at that point and couldn't do anything to stop it.
He also expresses a desire to merge humans with machines.

"With or without a Vision, and irrespective of their physique or combat skills,"Enhanced humans" would surely display strength far beyond the average."

This shows a desire to give power to the weak (likely including himself), even if they lack visions. Which isn't inherently a bad thing, it's just against the Akademiya's teachings. This applies even to Scaramouche, whose power had been locked by Raiden and he unlocked it.
-- Mysterious moral convictions --
Although a lot of the fandom accuses him of having no ethics or morals at all, there are several hints that this isn't the case.
He got mad at Scaramouche when told: "you only care about your crazy experiments" and told Nahida he has "his own convictions, we just don't share them" which were both conveniently not further explained. There is also the Jeht quest incident but i'll discuss it later on.
-- Eleazar hospital notes --
To briefly summarize the notes, he cured a patient using another dead patient's remains. His treatment was harsh but successful. These notes read like a Dr. House script, Dottore not giving a crap about the patient's religious beliefs included.
Abbas had a terrible ending because he had developed insanity and ran away. Zandik/ Dottore left a note warning not to let him go but it seems the staff didn't listen.
These notes align with how plague doctors were misunderstood and feared in real life. This motif was incorporated into his video game iteration, replacing the joker / clown persona.
Some people interpreted these notes as "Dottore murders and mutilates people that are alive for experiments" but there's no indication of that.
-- Aranara experiment notes --
These are the worst by far. It's unclear if the "subjects" were people with Eleazar or healthy people exposed to the withering for tests. It has to be pointed out that it seems the actions were done by his subordinates since it's likely Dottore reprimanding them at the end:

"This is a waste of resources. It is advisable to watch over the subjects' mental state in the next experiment and avoid exposing them to extreme environments... Lab Lead on duty: ████"

Yes, this sounds bad but it's proof he isn't a sadist that enjoys watching pain.
It also means he is higher in a moral standpoint than characters like Jack Horner. These type of characters don't care or enjoy deaths with the pretext of "we can always get more lackeys."
-- During the Jeht quest --
Froderock (a subordinate of Dottore) wants to capture an eremite. It is stated he is acting on his own and that Dottore gave an order not to kidnap eremites.
A note by another Fatui member states that Froderock is going to get killed for going against the order. We can theorize that the Harbinger himself would kill him. There's also a line about "following military regulations" which means his subordinates operate under a code and can't just kidnap people for experiments for the lols.

Fatui Negotiator: Professor Froderock was looking for live specimens in the desert — he always defied The Doctor's orders... That's just pure jealousy, if you ask me
...I urge you to consider, Captain Zoya, that if we are able to complete this research work in the desert, perhaps our entire expeditionary force may receive the favor of our great Harbinger... (This line has been crossed out using a red pen, and a line in red has been added: "How about you consider military regulations? Or perhaps you would like to consider how long you have left to live?")

A similar thing happened with Arlecchino in the Fortune Slip quest in Inazuma. Subordinates of her were acting on their own by following the previous Knave's teachings to make some orphans for the House.
-- *Time of Insight Artifact * --
It mentions a "mad scientist expelled by the akademia" and the text under it seems to be Dottore speaking.
The last part says:

"Those sellswords (Eremites) once did much for me. I trust they will not disappoint this time, either."

Combining Jeht quest with this makes it seem that eremites helped Dottore in some way and he is fond enough of them to slaughter a subordinate that brings them harm.
The following text seems to be Dottore's reason to want to capture Aranaras:

"The dream had to be captured — along with the inhabitants of the forest who could control dreams, To remind that friend once again of one's own form and the memories that were shared.
If the organ that governs memory has taken too much damage and cannot be healed, Then bring another old friend and dwell in dreams of the past together, Play in a small tree house, and explore the limitless depth of the jungle. Yes, that would be nice as well. For in dreams, everyone has a chance to start over."

I couldn't find more info about this "friend". It seems to be someone who suffered the effects of erosion or death, or an aranara that lost their memory.
-- Al Haitham's SQ --
Alhaitham: (To Siraj / the villain, after praising his intelligence)

"You would never let a test subject escape. Mistakes like that are beneath you, and you also won't leave any mistake without a resolution."

This is relevant because we know Dottore is canonically smarter than Siraj yet he didn't hunt down Collei (Barnabas is the one that traumatized and wanted to kill her), Abbas or Scara. It's a known thing there's a Fatui code that traitors and deserters are executed to avoid spilling secrets. Dottore leaves even Scara alone, you may argue that he was lazy but suspiciously Childe, who during Labyrinth Warriors was chasing Scara, soon appeared in Inazuma in a photo taking event, leaving for Snezhnaya, after Scara lost his gnosis.
It was never explained why Childe was chasing him to take away the Gnosis yet suddenly Scara appeared with Dottore without Childe. This is suspicious because Childe loves to fight, to the point he wanted to fight Arle while recovering on her SQ. He didn't even show up to finish off Scaramouche at the end.
To play Devil's advocate, it could also be Scaramouche is a part of some unknown plan too and nothing to do with mercy.
-- Dottore's speech to Niwa --
Taking into account Nahida's story that says: "the monster found solace in the kitten", the black bird referring to himself as "a monstrosity yet they are too foolish to see it" and Dottore's lines to Pierro:

"Will you call me a monster, a madman?"

Dottore sees himself as an inhuman monster. It puts into question if the following line wasn't just about Scaramouche and is actually a metaphor of Dottore speaking about his past:

"Escher: Even without you, that pure, innocent puppet would only end up being used by someone else instead. What other reason would a human have for befriending one who is not of our kind?"

Although Dottore refers to himself as "human", the two lines I quoted previously contradict this. Mentally he sees himself as not human (to the point of finding solace in a living puppet), even though his words say otherwise. There is also a chance this Dottore was no longer human at all, the Nahida story shows the monster bird had tiny floating birds around, even though he hadn't studied Scaramouche to create the segments.
There is also a stark contrast between Dottore joining the Fatui expresing concern over been rejected again yet he is embracing his monster persona in the Niwa scene.

"Escher: Think of me as a monster or a demon, if you wish... "

It could be a sign of a person with trauma who steered into an evil path. Kept getting called a monster until he accepted it.
There could be many reasons for the change, besides being used, -incoming pure speculation- he could have experimented on himself to have less emotions or taking this quote into account: "everyone has a chance to start over in dreams" he believes he can commit atrocities and it won't matter because he plans to do a reset somehow.

" The Doctor: Jester, I have completed the task you gave me. Creating a gap and infiltrating Inazuma's inner workings... Heh, what fun it was. The Doctor: I'd like to introduce a puppet to you. If he proves useful, let's make him our newest comrade. And if not... let's turn him to dust."

The bold part is more clues of either future Scara related scheming or Dottore's words are an act, mercy was shown when he became useless. It also seems that Pierro stirred him into a darker path.
I wouldn't say it's confirmation that Pierro is pure evil because we barely know anything about him, there's a chance it was for some greater good since that's a trend with the Harbingers.
-- Possible Sohreh murder --
At first glance, it seems way too obvious that Zandik did it, it's like watching a murder mystery movie and the first suspect is a red herring.
Since people frequently incorrectly state: "Dottore murdered a girl while they were having a picnic" like a fact, I'm going to make a deep dive into these notes:
First there is no clear motive for him killing Sohreh. (Niwa had a purpose.)

attack of Rishboland Tigers. In need of first aid..."

The bold part implies she was still alive while Zandik was dealing with the Ruin Guard. The broken bone didn't happen during the picnic while he was alone with her. She was declared dead and buried after the attack, she could have been killed during it while everyone was distracted.
-Does the Akademiya think that Zandik is responsible?-
There is a message board that says he was investigated over her murder.
The lack of motive combined with Zandik only receiving negative consequences from saving the team makes me think he was framed and acted on impulse / emotion when saving them or he turned it on to spook the tigers and it accidentally killed her.
Why? He could have just ran away and let everyone die to not reveal he was hiding ruin guard knowledge. Which he expressed on the notes that he didn't want the rest to know:

"I am going to take them (Ruin guards) apart, and record the size and shape one by one...
...But first of all, this secret must not be revealed to the other team members..."
...Thank goodness, Zandik reacted quickly. Otherwise, the whole team would be in serious trouble..."

-Some people argue that "running away and letting everyone die would have been too suspicious so he saved them."
It's more likely he was just a weak regular human at that point in his life so it wouldn't have been too suspicious to run away / he actually risked his life to shut it down.-
The 2 burned notes both state: "Someone seems to have burnt the contents in a hurry" it could have been the person trying to frame him. One of them is a note about the Ruin Guards and has Zandik's signature, they may have wanted to steal credit of his research.
-Regarding who framed Dottore, u/Sandflow_23 commented an excellent theory
lt seems Zandik didn't care much about Sohreh's death since he proceeded to ask the team to take back the Ruinguard while she was bleeding but the Eleazar hospital notes come after this incident. Was this his first instance of curing people?
Did being unable to save someone influence him in some way? It may just be coincidental but it's worth taking note. I'm trying to look at all possibilities.
People usually see Sohreh's note as "she learned Dottore's secret so he murdered her" But something I haven't seen discussed is how there is also a chance he trusted her and decided to open up to people more. Previously he said studying Ruinguards could get him kicked out but after the following note by Sohreh, he decided to try to convince his team to take back the ruin guard:

"...Zandik was attracted by the ancient machines left behind by some civilization here...
We had a great time and decided to go on a picnic tonight..."

Finally, to play Devil's Advocate: it seems he also had another secret mission that was never explained.

"...It's a shame that documents regarding its (the giant golem's) energy supply systems have been lost, and I have far too important a mission to accomplish to afford to start from scratch. If not..."

He could have killed her because she learned that secret but it's still weird that he'd go and choke her with people focused on him speaking about Ruinguard studies.
-- Arle SQ --
Lyney said "he proposed the direction of the research " for the bottled flames. That he wants to give people "a chance to start over" was also hinted in Time of Insight artifact. I won't be surprised if it turns out most of the injured kids he took from Crucabena are actually fine. The Eremites, which he didn't want his subordinates to kidnap, were also healthy, so this is another instance of him seeking to work with weak people to give them power. I'm NOT denying there's a chance he wants to use it for some other plan like burning the tree like other Redditors have proposed
Finally, there remains the question of which Dottore would be playable. I predict the original or Omega. (Knocking off the angelic new segment theory)
We don't know if the original is alive, since Raiden destroyed her physical body (and the segments were based on Scaramouche) he could be dead BUT giving a kill switch to Omega may have a deeper meaning. Like those fragments of his mind from dead segments will re-materialize in an empty segment or object his soul is bound to or go back to Omega and change his personality, the former sounds like FullMetal Alchemist but a Remuria quest confirms this is a thing in Genshin.
Finally done, sorry if this is ridiculously long but I wanted to provide quotes to sustain the arguments, especially since some people hate him so much based on mostly misinformation.

This is part of my efforts to interprete upanishads as advocating action from a state of sattva. For anyone reading this post, please be aware that this is not how this text is interpreted

aum ity etad akṣaram idam sarvam, tasyopavyākhyānam bhūtam bhavad bhaviṣyad iti sarvam auṁkāra eva yac cānyat trikālātītaṁ tad apy auṁkāra eva

The vocal movement that produces the sounds A, U and M covers the whole range of mouth movement for producing all the phonemes of the sanskrit language and hence AUM is a good approximate for speech itself. Since what is knowable is also speakable then as the representation of speech AUM can be seen as representative of the state of visible world across all time past, present and future. As speech can also convey ideas not part of the world hence AUM also represents everything beyond it - the shabda tattva(ground of all concepts).

sarvaṁ hy etad brahma, ayam ātmā brahma, so’yam ātmā catuṣ-pāt.

Ayam Atma Brahma - Brahma is the creative principle, the manifestor of the waking world. The agent self is indeed that Brahma as it creates the world we experience by imposing upon it conceptual abstractions called name and form.
We have already seen why our Atman is Brahma in the preceding sentence but the Atman is not alone in manifesting the world of experience. The external world too plays a part in creating our experience because without it's existence how can the Atman add it's interpretation. Therefore the world outside and the components that help the Atman interact with it also play a part in the "creation". Hence all things are together Brahma. This atman is said to operate in 4 states which is discussed subsequently

jāgarita sthāno bahiṣ-prajñaḥ saptāṅga ekonaviṁśati-mukhaḥ sthūla-bhug Vaiśvānaraḥ prathamaḥ pādah.

The 1st state is called vaishvanara. Here it engages with the waking world consuming it through its 7 limbs(divisions of our body) and 19 mouths - (divisions of our motor, cognition and other processes represented via - 5 jnanendriyas, 5 karmedriyas, 5 pranas, intellect, manas, memory and ahamkara affected by rajas and tamas gunas). Due to its intense engagement with the outside world it has a tendency to identify with the things it operates on, forgetting the boundary between the agent and that which is acted upon(outside objects)

svapna-sthāno’ntaḥ-prajñaḥ saptāṅga ekonavimśati-mukhaḥ pravivikta-bhuk taijaso dvītiyaḥ pādah.

The 2nd state is called taijasa. Here it engages with our inner world(dreams) constructed via our memories consuming it again through its 7 limbs and 19 mouths. The 7 limbs are only apparent here , in our dreams we think we have a body and our perceptions are fuzzier so in a sense this is the state of rajas slowing down. Due to its muddled engagement with the inner world it has a tendency to identify with the things it operates on, forgetting the boundary between the agent and that which is acted upon(memory fragments)

yatra supto na kaṁ cana kāmaṁ kāmayate na kaṁ cana svapnam paśyati tat suṣuptam suṣupta-sthāna ekī-bhūtaḥ prajñānā-ghana evānanda-mayo hy ānanda-bhuk ceto-mukhaḥ prājñas tṛtīyaḥ pādah.

The 3rd state is called prajna. Prajna describes the state of Atman in times of deep sleep. This state cannot consume anything being cutoff from its limbs and is predominantly in the mode of tamas. Since it is rajas that is primarily responsible for mood swings etc which results in anger and suffering , a tamas dominated atman can be euphemistically said to be consuming ananda(bliss).

eṣa sarveśvaraḥ eṣa sarvajñaḥ, eṣo’ntāryami eṣa yoniḥ sarvasya prabhavāpyayau hi bhūtānām
nāntaḥ-prajñam, na bahiṣ prajñam, nobhayataḥ-prajñam, na prajnañā-ghanam, na prajñam, nāprajñam; adṛṣtam, avyavahārayam, agrāhyam, alakṣaṇam, acintyam, avyapadeśyam, ekātma-pratyaya-sāram, prapañcopaśamam, śāntam, śivam, advaitam, caturtham manyante, sa ātmā, sa vijñeyaḥ.

The 4th state is the state immediately after we wake up from a good deep sleep. We feel fully rejuvenated and our senses are keen. We are in a state of clarity , neither being too absorbed in our memories nor in the external objects, peaceful, radiating calmness. It is our ahamkara regulated by sattva(emerging from the balance between tamas and rajas). This is the real Atman. The others adjectives listed are simply in praise of this ineffable state to make us strive to maintain this throughout our waking life.

so’yam ātmādhyakṣaram auṁkaro’dhimātram pādā mātrā mātrāś ca pādā akāra ukāra makāra iti.

This identical Ātman, or Self, in the realm of sound is the syllable OM, the above described four quarters of the Self being identical with the components of the syllable, and the components of the syllable being identical with the four quarters of the Self. The components of the Syllable are A, U, M.

jāgarita-sthāno vaiśvānaro’kāraḥ prathamā mātrā’pter ādimattvād vā’pnoti ha vaisarvān kāmān ādiś ca bhavati ya evaṁ veda.

Vaiśvānara, whose field is the waking state, is the first sound, A, because this encompasses all, and because it is the first. He who knows thus, encompasses all desirable objects; he becomes the first.

svapna-sthānas taijasa ukāro dvitīyā mātrotkarṣāt ubhayatvādvotkarṣati ha vaijñāna-saṁtatiṁ samānaś ca bhavati nāsyābrahma-vit-kule bhavati ya evam veda.

Taijasa, whose field is the dream state, is the second sound, U, because this is an excellence, and contains the qualities of the other two. He who knows thus, exalts the flow of knowledge and becomes equalised; why it contains the qualities of other two is mentioned previously. This is called a state of excellence in the sense that here too rajas and tamas are both roughly in equal proportions and it is only in this sense. We can get an idea of how even distant memories can be envisioned in a way enough to fool us , how great would it be if we can bring this level of awareness into the present ! The truly excellent state is the 4th state where they complement each other. perfectly like sugar in tea.

suṣupta-sthānaḥ prājño makāras tṛtīya mātrā miter apīter vā minoti ha vā idaṁ sarvam apītiś ca bhavati ya evaṁ veda.

Prājña, whose field is deep sleep, is the third sound, M, because this is the measure, and that into which all enters. He who knows thus, measures all and becomes all. One might wonder why this state of absolute tamas is seen as the measure. It is by using this state of no activity and engagement as the 0 can we measure our current level of activity and judge if it is closer to the 4th state or not.

amātraś caturtho’vyavahāryaḥ prapañcopaśamaḥ sivo’dvaitaevam auṁkāra ātmaiva, saṁviśaty ātmanā’tmānaṁ ya evaṁ veda ya evaṁ veda

The fourth is soundless: unutterable, a quieting down of all relative manifestations, blissful, peaceful, nondual. Thus, OM is the Ātman, verily. He who knows thus, merges his self in the Self – yea, he who knows thus.
Only when we are in a state of absolute calm unperturbed by both memories and the external world can we let our intelligence operate at its full capacity. Only such a state can effortlessly act as the wellspring of all ideas - the shabda tattva represented as AUM itself. Knowing the benefits we must purify our ahamkara by cultivating sattva thereby operating as the Atman.
Traditional commentary - https://www.swami-krishnananda.org/mand/Mandukya_Upanishad.pdf

This was originally posted to pettyrevenge, but for some reason got taken down. So here goes:
The revenge I took on my grade nine English teacher was so petty that I hesitate to write about it. But Mrs. Bristle (for that is the name I will give her) was cruel to me every chance she got, and she made my first year in high school a misery. So when a file with her name on it arrived at my office, my first thought was not that I would beat her (for I was certain that I would) but rather, of the revenge I would take along the way.
I was pushing forty when Mrs. Bristle’s file hit my desk, some estate litigation where a mother’s last will and testament left my clients next to nothing, and gave their sister, Mrs. Bristle, pretty well the entire estate. When I saw the defendant’s name it looked familiar, and after a bit of Googling, I confirmed what I suspected: the defendant, Mrs. Bristle, was my former grade nine English teacher.
I remembered Mrs. Bristle very well. She was supposed to be teaching us the wonders of English literature, but what she really taught us were her rules, by which she meant her arbitrary whims, expressed in vague language, backed up by petty punishments for non-compliance. There was an art to getting along with Mrs. Bristle, and while most of the other kids learned it easily enough, somehow I did not. I have trouble learning unwritten rules, and in Mrs. Bristle’s class where unwritten and constantly changing rules were the order of the day, I didn’t stand a chance. Mrs. Bristle admonished me almost daily for ‘not paying attention’. I did detentions, re-wrote assignments, and made visits to the principal’s office, all because I apparently wasn’t listening, wasn’t doing what I was told.
Many was the time when Mrs. Bristle took me to task for missing some obvious but unstated part of an assignment. One time I handed in a sonnet, and received an “F” because the rhyming pattern was Petrarchan, not Shakespearean. But she would be nice to me, Mrs. Bristle would always say when she tossed my work back at me. She would give me another chance to hand the assignment in with the arbitrary changes she required, in the end giving me a good mark, but then heavily downgraded for being late.
Mrs. Bristle's case worked its way through the early stages, and every time I exchanged an email with her (for she was a self-rep, no need for counsel, she claimed) I thought about the unpleasant time I’d spent in her class. I had a rough time in high school, and I always resent anything that makes me dwell on it.
After a few months, the case was ready for the next stage. It was time to examine Mrs. Bristle, to find out why she thought her mother wanted to disinherit most of the family and enrich Mrs. Bristle alone. I showed up at the court reporter’s office early as usual, to get set up.
“What’s that shit eating grin on your face?” Adam asked. He was a lawyer colleague, about my vintage, and we were sitting in the lounge for lawyers only, the room that most court reporter’s offices have, a place for the lawyers to hang out and shoot the shit, no clients allowed.
“I’m going to examine my grade nine English teacher today,” I said, “and it's going to be fun.” I explained how she’d hated me back in the day, and had done her best to make my life hell.
“What’s the case about?” Adam said. Adam had been around the block, same as me, and it took only a few words for me to summarize everything that mattered in the file. “Estate fight, one sibling against four, undue influence, holograph will cutting out most of the siblings, competing with an older will, a formal one, where the shares are equal.”
Adam nodded appreciatively. “Nice fees, if the estate’s got the cash.”
“It does,” I said. We chatted for a bit, and then sat there in silence as we each did the last bit of prep for the cases we had that day, making notes, reading documents and drinking coffee. My alarm dinged just before ten, and I made my way to the examination room, and Mrs. Bristle, the teacher who’d greatly disliked the grade nine version of Calledinthe90s. I was curious to see if she would like the older version any better.
* * *
The examination started, and Mrs. Bristle and I sparred for a while, me tossing vague questions her way, and criticizing her when she did not understand. I kept her on the defensive for close to three hours, until it was getting on to one p.m.
“Aren’t you in a conflict or something?” she said to me just before the lunch break, when she’d finally made the connection, and understood that the lawyer asking her questions was a former student.
“No conflict,” I said, dismissing her concerns with a wave of my hand. “During the lunch break, there’s something I need you to do.”
“I don’t want to answer questions during lunch. I need a break.” The examination had been rough on Mrs. Bristle. She was not used to being asked questions, to being held to account, to being constantly challenged, and even having her grammar corrected now and again.
“You’ll get your lunch break. But while you’re eating a sandwich or whatever, keep this copy of the holograph will next to you.” The will on which Mrs. Bristle’s case relied was a holograph will, meaning that Mrs. Bristle’s mother had written the will entirely in hand from start to finish. The mother, or more likely, Mrs. Bristle herself, had downloaded a holograph will form from the web, and had completed it in accordance with the website’s instructions. Holograph wills are special. You can do a holograph will without a witness, without a lawyer, without anything at all, so long as you did it right. But if you got anything wrong, if you messed up in any way, it was invalid.
“You want me to read the will again over lunch?” Mrs. Bristle said.
“No. Instead, I want you to make a handwritten copy of it.”
“You want me to write it out? Whatever for?”
“There’s an allegation that the will wasn’t written by your mother, and that you wrote it up instead.” An allegation that I’d made up myself, that morning, while I was sitting in the lawyer's lounge, drinking coffee and munching on a muffin. My clients had not challenged the will’s handwriting; it was obviously their mother’s, totally different from Mrs. Bristle’s own writing. But I had decided otherwise.
Mrs. Bristle was appropriately outraged at being unjustly accused of forgery. Said she could prove it wasn’t her handwriting, could absolutely prove it.
“Then let’s settle the forgery issue once and for all,” I said, “write out the will in your own hand, so that our document experts can examine it, compare it with the original, and make a determination.”
“I don’t need the entire lunch break for that,” Mrs. Bristle said, “and I’d rather eat lunch at the restaurant downstairs.” The will was barely a page long, at most three hundred words, that being all it took for the mother to allegedly disinherit most of her children, and inexplicably leave everything to Mrs. Bristle. The mother had written up the will herself, but she’d been ninety at the time, while living in Mrs. Bristle’s house, and very much under her influence.
“I’ve retained five different experts,” I said, “and each of them will need copies.”
“Five experts? Why so many experts?”
“Each expert needs ten samples, for comparison purposes. It’s going to take you a while, Mrs. Bristle. I suggest you get started.” I overrode her protests and once she started to write, I left her in the room, and went to the lawyer’s lounge to eat their small sandwiches and drink more of the excellent coffee. After a while I stopped by the examination room to look in on Mrs. Bristle. I wanted to check in on her progress.
Mrs. Bristle asked for more time, complained of writer’s cramp, and asked me again if it was really necessary for her to write out the holograph will fifty times in her own hand, and I assured her that there was nothing for it, that it was absolutely necessary. I returned to the lounge to check my emails, leaving her hard at the homework I’d given her.
After a while my colleague, Adam, popped into the lounge. He asked me how it was going, the examination with the teacher, the teacher who had treated me so badly.
“I’m making her write lines.” Adam laughed, and laughed harder when I explained that I wasn’t kidding, that I really was making Mrs. Bristle write lines, and how I was doing it. His laughter attracted attention, and a few other lawyers asked what was up. “He’s making his teacher witness write lines,” Adam said, and the lawyer’s lounge hooted with laughter when I told everyone what was up.
It was one of the pettiest things I’ve ever done to anyone, making my grade nine teacher write lines. But the writing lines thing was just a warmup. The real revenge had yet to come. I returned to the examination room after a while, to check up on Mrs. Bristle, see how she was doing.
“This is taking forever,” she said, “and I really don’t get why you need it.” She had writer’s cramp, and was shaking her hand to get the kinks out. I picked up the stack of holograph wills she’d created, and flipped through it. She was nowhere near finished.
“On second thought,” I said, “maybe it isn’t necessary. I think you’re right. I don’t need any handwriting samples from you.”
“Why not?” she said.
“The will is invalid,” I explained, adding that because her mother had used a pre-printed form off the web, the law would not recognize the will. “A holograph will has to be entirely in the testator's handwriting,” I explained, “every single word entirely in handwriting from start to finish. This will doesn’t qualify, because your mother used a standard form, a form printed off the web, with instructions and boxes and questions and so on, and when you do that, then the will is no longer a holograph will. It’s a regular will, and regular wills need to be properly witnessed. This one isn’t witnessed, and that means it’s not a will. It’s just a piece of paper.”
“Are you trying to tell me that you only figured that out now? What kind of lawyer are you, anyways?”
“What kind of lawyer am I? I’m a lawyer who makes a witness skip lunch, and sit in a small room all alone, and write lines. Sound familiar, Mrs. Bristle?” She said nothing, and just stared at me. I closed the door on her, leaving her alone once more, and left for the Middle Temple Tavern where the lawyers all hung out. It was time to hoist a Guinness and enjoy my petty triumph.

In this clip CEO of Nvidia presents a country's language, culture, and intelligence as a resource they cannot afford not to exploit by feeding them into Artificial Intelligence. This immediately brings to mind Martin Heidegger's 1954 essay The Question Concerning Technology wherein modern technology is described as a framework that transforms our way of understanding things away from a stand-alone essence and into an instrumental, standing-reserve of a resource.
In this post I'll articulate why I think the Nvidia CEO is saying something monstrous and awful by suggesting that we challenge-forth language and culture. Leaning on Heidegger's understanding of Technology, I will primarily make use of a critical distinction he makes in the relationship between humans and nature, which is that of bringing-forth and challenging-forth. I will summarize some key concepts form the essay so you don't have to read it in full.
The primary distinction between bringing-forth and challenging-forth is whether the essence (or if you prefer, identity or understanding) of some thing remains as a stand-alone existence unto itself or if it is subsumed under the essence of the process that extracts a resource from it.
Bringing-Forth is likened to an old wooden bridge across the Rhine river. The bridge is revealed as a way forward, as a space and a road and an object, but not in a manner that the Rhine is now subsumed under it. The Rhine is not reduced (in our understanding) to the waters that go under the bridge, the bridge brings-forth a way across the river, but the Rhine is still, in essence, still understood as a thing unto itself, independent from any need that water run under the bridge.
By contrast, Heidegger brings up a hydroelectric dam on the Rhine.

"The hydroelectric plant is set into the current of the Rhine. It sets the Rhine to supplying its hydraulic pressure, which then sets the turbines turning. This turning sets those machines in motion whose thrust sets going the electric current for which the long-distance power station and its network of cables are set up to dispatch electricity. In the context of the interlocking processes pertaining to the orderly disposition of electrical energy, even the Rhine itself appears to be something at our command. The hydroelectric plant is not built into the Rhine River as was the old wooden bridge that joined bank with bank for hundreds of years. Rather, the river is dammed up into the power plant."

To Heidegger, it is not just the physical flow of water in the river that is dammed and disrupted, but rather our understanding of the river is dammed. We are no longer seeing it for itself but rather as something within our control, something from which we can challenge-forth to give "maximum yield at the minimum expense". The Rhine is now the smaller part to a process whose essence has overtaken the essence of any one part.
In order to enable this process to continue Heidegger says that "Everywhere everything is ordered to stand by, to be immediately on hand, indeed to stand there just so that it may be on call for a further ordering." The dam is our order to the Rhine that the gravitational energy of the cubic meters of water that it has stand by for future use, in a manner that the bridge does not order the Rhine to flow underneath it.
This quote from Ayn Rand's Fountainhead neatly encapsulates how challenging-forth encourages the framing of the world:

"He looked at the granite. To be cut, he thought, and made into walls. He looked at a tree. To be split and made into rafters. He looked at a streak of rust on the stone and thought of iron ore under the ground. To be melted and to emerge as girders against the sky. These rocks, he thought, are waiting for me; waiting for the drill, the dynamite and my voice; waiting to be split, ripped, pounded, reborn; waiting for the shape my hands will give them"

Rand is (expectedly) writing in praises of this framework, but to the view of Heidegger, this is a monstrous thing, the tree and the granite and the rocks are all robbed of an essence, an understanding of themselves as they are and transformed into something that must be ordered around to stand by for an endless process of revealing, regulating, and securing.
What then, does this have to do with the Nvidia CEO's claim? Well, quite clearly, AI has made it possible for people to issue the order of standing-reserve not just to the forces of nature, but to things inside ourselves, such as language, culture, intelligence. These things, that embody the inner lives of people, our relationships, and our histories, are challenged-forth are to be ordered.
The writer, unlike the model, brings-forth something from language, she cannot hope to control language, merely to reveal some finite thing from it in the manner that the bridge revelas away forward from the Rhine. She cannot order language to be "immediately on hand" to be endlessly revealed into something whenever desired, because her limited and phenomenological perspective makes her attempts subordinate to the size of language as an entity larger than herself. She understands language as something with an essence that she cannot wield in its totality and in that relationship the essence of language is preserved, as something greater than her desires to make writing from it, but nonetheless able to yield to her enough for her needs.
This here is what distinguishes AI from other tools that relate to language, culture and intelligence. AI finally enables us to treat the great corpuses as a standing reserve we can challenge-forth and industrialize, that we can subsume those things permanently under the endless cycle of revealing. If our language, thought and intelligence are a river, AI is the dam. The river still flows, but it is subsumed as the resource from which the dam extracts something, as the thing the dam challenges to produce.
Like Heidegger, I see a certain monstrosity in this, and it is especially awful when it invades this realms of the inner lives of people.
Heidegger argued that man was the first resource to be ordered in this manner:

"Only to the extent that man for his part is already challenged to exploit the energies of nature can this revealing that orders happen. If man is challenged, ordered, to do this, then does not man himself belong even more originally than nature within the standing-reserve? The current talk about human resources, about the supply of patients for a clinic, gives evidence of this. The forester who measures the felled timber in the woods and who to all appearances walks the forest path in the same way his grandfather did is today ordered by the industry that produces commercial woods, whether he knows it or not. He is made subordinate to the orderability of cellulose, which for its part is challenged forth by the need for paper, which is then delivered to newspapers and illustrated magazines."

But indeed, with the ability to challenge-forth culture and language and intelligence, man is made infinitely and completely subordinate to industry. And that, I think, we should never allow.

I've been trying to run a playthrough using Trailblazers quick and dirty, ai overhaul lite, Extended encounters and Radiance with interesting npcs on x1s. Problem is, via Sage advice and digging I feel as if my LO may be too intensive for my console. Getting things like shorter draw distance and npcs popping up right in front of me letting me know the system is taxed. I wish use Fashions of the fourth era and enhanced blood textures lite.
I really noticed a problem when all the textures and assets of outer Rittenhouse completely disappeared early on a level 6 character, so I've gotta face the music and cut some things out.
My ultimate goal is to at least be able to run interesting npcs together with Trailblazers quick and dirty but I'm not sure if that's possible.
Can anybody take a look at this LO and let me know what needs to be cut to make this possible? Should I just stick with interesting npcs (what I originally used) and get rid of Trailblazers and the encounter mods? Does elfx make things heavy performance wise too?
I'm willing to cut down on things to have the npcs (this is for someone going through a tough time and they like that they can escape their situation in "another world" so any help is greatly appreciated even if it is a "no, it can't be done".
Thanks in advance T__T
LO:
• MASTER FILES
Interesting npcs part 1/ Unofficial patch/ Interesting npcs part 2/
• FOUNDATION
Reflections/ Skyrim on skooma/ Cheat room/
• MENU/ FONT/ UI
Undiscover Skyrim/ Tailor swf/
• QUEST ALTERATIONS
Caught red handed/ Innocence lost/ The heart of dibella/ House of horrors- quest expansion/ Even better quest objectives/ The whispering doo The only cure/
• PURELY CRAFTABLES
Ks switchable #1/ Ks switchable males/ Ars Metallica/ Alchemy requires bottles/
• GAME MECHANICS
Scion vampire oberhaul/ Manbeast/ Hearthfire adoptions/ Better spell learning/ Crime report and radius/
• LEVEL PROGRESSION
20 pct more perk points/ 50 pct more perk points/
• PERK OVERHAULS
Ordinato
• MAGIC OVERHAULS/ ADDITIONS
Apocalypse/ Apocalypse ordinator patch/ Better spell learning apocalypse/ Frost slowl tweaks/
• ITEM AND LOOT LEVELED LIST
Reading books books books improves speech/ Cloaks of skyrim/ Fashions of the 4th era/ Bandolie
• ENEMY NPC LEVEL LIST
• AUDIO
Quiter dungeons and caves/
• WEATHE ATMOSPHERE
Far better sun/ Enhanced night/ Obsidian weathers/
• GRASS
Verdant (not added yet but may add if it'll boost stability) /
• LANDSCAPE AND GRASS
Landscape fixes for grass (only added if verdant is added)/ Less Vanilla Trees balanced/
• SKIN MESH AND TEXTURES/ SKELETON
Realistuc ragdolls/ Leins skyrim npc oberhaul/ Divine skins and bodies/
• IDLES AND ANIMATIONS
• GENERAL MESH AND TEXTURES
Rass/ Enhanced blood texture/ Skyland aio/
• NPC AI
Sleeping expanded/ Rdo/ Rdo ussep patch/ Serana dialogue edit/
• NPC/ PC IMMERSION
There will be blood/ Extended encounters Radiance Immersive speech dialogue Trailblazers quick and dirty
• NPC/ PC FACE MODIFICATION
Beards/ The eyes of beauty/
• INTERIOR LIGHTING/ DECORATING
• LIGHT MULTIPLE EXTERIOR EDITS
Updated enhanced lights/ Elfx hardcore/ Elfx fixes aio/
• SINGLE AREA EDITS
Heljarchen farm/
• MULTIPLE AREA EDITS
Master the summit/ Magical college of winterhold/ Magical college of winterhold elfx/ Point the way/ Lawbringe House rules for Lawbringe Wintersun faiths/ Missives/ The notice board/
• UNIQUE ITEMS/ ADDED LOCATIONS
• COMBAT MOD
• UNIQUE FOLLOWERS
• QUEST MODS
Listen dark brotherhood/ College curriculum/ Stendar rising/ The forgotten city/ Faction pit fighte Faction pit fighter add on/ Clockwork/
• MAP MODS
• BOTTOM LO
Emotes/ Lore and gender height/ Become a bard/ Xbox rename npcs/ Ai overhaul lite/ Immersive amazing followe Realistic conversation/ Alternate start

In a lot of ways I'm having a very poly, very relationship anarchy version of the cliche "I'm in love with my best friend, help!" situation. I hope you read on though, because while I think the prototypical advice for this is "just tell them how you feel!", I think that advice is at the very least not clear cut in this situation. Or maybe I'm too close to it and that's exactly what I should do! Therein lies the problem.
In short, I'm in a situation where I have a proper serious crush on my best friend / semi-platonic life partner* (more on our relationship later); we've already proven to be really compatible people, and I think there's a real possibility that exploring kink and more romantic-style intimacy would be very positive, and it's something I'm curious about (to put it in more RA terms). That being said, I really love where our semi-platonic relationship has landed -- it's comfortable, it's unusual in a cool way, and I would be so happy to just have a version of what we have now for the rest of our lives. Part of my nerves for the "just tell them how you feel!" thing comes from that last part: I truly would be so happy with our relationship the way it is for the rest of our lives. If I knew that telling them how I feel compromises that, I just wouldn't. If I knew it just wouldn't work out between us, I just wouldn't. I've felt this way about them for a long time and really not struggled with the feelings, but I'm worried I might regret not asking just in case that's a relationship we could explore.
If you stop reading now the above is the core of my problem, but there's some extra context that does add color to it that I'll provide here below. For one, we both summarize our relationship to other people as (depending on how well they know poly / RA terms) either "besties / best friends" or "semi-platonic life partners". The most accurate summary I can give that isn't 10 paragraphs is essentially: emotionally sensual, somewhat physically intimate platonic life partners. We're very comfortable cuddling and being naked around each other, we do some non-sexual kink exploration together (like shibari), we are extremely emotionally close, and we're just two degenerate queers who like play and the outdoors and many other shared interests. We switch off between Riley and Jonesy energy (if you know Letterkenny; two hockey bro types that are always up to silly shenanigans) to art hoes and everything in-between. It's a special relationship already.
They are also in a romantic relationship with a good friend of mine (29M), and the three of us consider ourselves to be a thruple / polycule, just with one platonic member (me). They're very happy in that relationship and get their romantic needs met well in it. We all love each other a lot and generally are excited about a future together (all 3 of us). There's even been discussion of having children together (as in having, y'know, not just raising).
So it's tricky: I love where we're at. Our thruple is weird and cool and very very comfortable. The other two members have their needs met very well in this structure. So far our positioning as a group is that we're all open to a 4th member so that I also have romantic needs met, so it's got long term space for whatever. There's a wonderful thing here that I don't want to compromise, but that chance that a romantic relationship with my bestie would work is something I keep coming back to. Plus I feel like I'm keeping a secret from them, which I hate -- we don't really do that with anything else. It doesn't get in the way of my romantic relationships--I have a very lovely romantic relationship that's building with someone outside of this thruple--and like I said I'd be so happy to leave it as is if that's the best version of our relationship.
So uh, that's a little rambly. Thanks for reading to the end. Any advice or insight would be appreciated!

Hi everyone,
This is my first ever post on Reddit so I’m a novice when it comes to what information to include and structuring so please bear with me. I included a TL;DR at the bottom for those who may want a quick summary.
I want to first apologize for my lack of knowledge on what to do in my circumstances. I also want to apologize for making it seem like my situation is the end of the world because I know there are people who are so much more hardworking and in even harder situations. However, I would appreciate any recommendations from those who end up reading my post.
The main reason I’m making this post is because I’m struggling to sleep and study for my MCAT since I worry that I’m wasting my time.
I’m about to enter my 4th year of undergrad doing health science at UWO and have a cGPA of 3.94 (although I took mostly 2nd-year courses in 3rd year to meet the prereqs for my degree). I only recently realized how much I've been half-assing my pursuit of medicine because it is an arduous journey and an opportunity that people dream about. Due to some personal events that occurred in my life, I wanted to work harder towards this path but I feel like I have no ECs that can reflect that. I am an exec in 2 clubs (nothing "pre-med" or "impactful" on others but clubs that I am passionate about and enjoy) and joined my school’s paddling and orientation team this year. I have 0 research or volunteering (besides in high school) hours under me. The only real "work" experience I have is that I've helped out my relatives with their businesses for the last 2 summers (one in Canada and one in the US). I have read a lot of people say “It’s how you frame your ABS and essays” but I feel like I have nothing to talk about. This situation is 100% my fault and I feel so stupid and remorseful for wasting 3 years of undergrad because I was so ingenuous and lost sight of my goals in life.
I’ve been talking with other premed/med friends who have suggested that I use 4th year to continue my current ECs and to start on both research (only continue if I like it) and volunteering then take a gap year to improve in both these sections. I understand that I should only do something if I enjoy it and not actively “check off” a box but I feel like no matter what I do now, I am filling out a checklist. I apologize if it seems like I don't care about medicine or the hardships that doctors face because of my lack of experience and my naive thinking up until this point.
My biggest issue is that throughout the last 2 weeks, I’ve read about so many amazing people on this subreddit as well as my friends get rejected that my self-confidence has diminished. I had to tell my parents about my situation and that I stood no chance of getting in next year which was heartbreaking. Everyone around me seems to have done so much more and I feel so fraudulent saying "I want to pursue medicine". I feel so lost right now but I’m so grateful and appreciative for my friends who are helping me through my quarter-life crisis and constantly offering me advice but I think I need an objective point of view (and also because I feel like I’m annoying them).
Here are a few questions that I would like some opinions on:

1. Do you think I should even attempt to apply to med anymore? (I understand people trying to remain optimistic but I also want to be realistic)
2. How feasible is it to improve my situation (I’m struggling to remain motivated for my MCAT and I'm the oldest child in my family so I don't want to keep them waiting forever)
3. If it is possible, should I take a gap year (has anyone ever recovered from this situation) or try and do research during my last year and see if I like it enough to do a master’s?

Once again, I'm sorry if I come across as self-centered and I don't expect any sympathy from anyone. I'm just looking to get unbiased-ish guidance from people more experienced than me. Thank you for reading this incoherent post and for bearing with me until the end.
TL;DR I feel like I stand no chance because I didn't volunteer or do research for 3 years of undergrad and want advice on what I can do.

"Why Did Jesus Die on the Cross?"

The main reason Jesus died on the cross was to defeat Satan and set us free from his oppressive rule. Everything else that Jesus accomplished was to be understood as an aspect and consequence of this victory (e.g., Recapitulation, Moral Influence, etc.).
This understanding of why Jesus had to die is called the Christus Victor (Latin for “Christ is Victorious”) view of the atonement. But, what exactly was Christ victorious from, and why? To find out the answers to these questions, we have to turn to the Old Testament, as that's what the apostles would often allude to in order to properly teach their audience the message they were trying to convey (Rom. 15:4).
The OT is full of conflict between the Father (YHVH) and false gods, between YHVH and cosmic forces of chaos. The Psalms speak of this conflict between YHVH and water monsters of the deeps (an ancient image for chaos) (Psa. 29:3-4; 74:10-14; 77:16, 19; 89:9-10; 104:2-9, etc).
The liberation of Israel from Egypt wasn’t just a conflict between Pharaoh and Moses. It was really between YHVH and the false gods of Egypt.
Regardless of whether you think the aforementioned descriptions are literal or metaphorical, the reality that the Old Testament describes is that humanity lived in a “cosmic war zone.”
The Christus Victor motif is about Christ reigning victorious over wicked principalities and Satan's kingdom, and is strongly emphasized throughout the New Testament. Scripture declares that Jesus came to drive out "the prince of this world” (John 12:31), to “destroy the works of the devil” (1 John 3:8), to “destroy him that had the power of death, that is, the devil” (Heb. 2:14) and to “put all enemies under his feet” (1 Cor 15:25). Jesus came to overpower the “strong man” (Satan) who held the world in bondage and worked with his Church to plunder his "palace" (Luke 11:21-22). He came to end the reign of the cosmic “thief” who seized the world to “steal, and to kill, and to destroy” the life YHVH intended for us (John 10:10). Jesus came and died on the cross to disarm “the principalities and powers” and make a “shew of them openly [i.e., public spectacle]” by “triumphing over them in [the cross]” (Col. 2:15).
Beyond these explicit statements, there are many other passages that express the Christus Victor motif as well. For example, the first prophecy in the Bible foretells that a descendent of Eve (Jesus) would crush the head of the serpent (Gen. 3:15). The first Christian sermon ever preached proclaimed that Jesus in principle conquered all YHVH's enemies (Acts 2:32-36). And the single most frequently quoted Old Testament passage by New Testament authors is Psalm 110:1 which predicts that Christ would conquer all YHVH’s opponents. (Psalm 110 is quoted or alluded to in Matthew 22:41-45; 26:64, Mark 12:35-37; 14:62, Luke 20:41-44; 22:69, Acts 5:31; 7:55-56, Romans 8:34, 1st Corinthians 15:22-25, Ephesians 1:20, Hebrews 1:3; 1:13; 5:6, 10; 6:20; 7:11, 15, 17, 21; 8:1; 10:12-13, 1st Peter 3:22, and Revelation 3:21.) According to New Testament scholar Oscar Cullman, the frequency with which New Testament authors cite this Psalm is the greatest proof that Christ’s “victory over the angel powers stands at the very center of early Christian thought.”
Because of man's rebellion, the Messiah's coming involved a rescue mission that included a strategy for vanquishing the powers of darkness.
Since YHVH is a God of love who gives genuine “say-so” to both angels and humans, YHVH rarely accomplishes His providential plans through coercion. YHVH relies on His infinite wisdom to achieve His goals. Nowhere is YHVH's wisdom put more on display than in the manner in which He outsmarted Satan and the powers of evil, using their own evil to bring about their defeat.
Most readers probably know the famous story from ancient Greece about the Trojan Horse. To recap the story, Troy and Greece had been locked in a ten-year-long vicious war when, according to Homer and Virgil, the Greeks came up with a brilliant idea. They built an enormous wooden horse, hid soldiers inside and offered it to the Trojans as a gift, claiming they were conceding defeat and going home. The delighted Trojans accepted the gift and proceeded to celebrate by drinking themselves into a drunken stupor. When night came and the Trojan warriors were too wasted to fight, the Greeks exited the horse, unlocked the city gates to quietly let all their compatriots in, and easily conquered the city, thus winning the war.
Historians debate whether any of this actually happened. But either way, as military strategies go, it’s brilliant.
Now, there are five clues in the New Testament that suggest YHVH was using something like this Trojan Horse strategy against the powers when he sent Jesus into the world:
1) The Bible tells us that YHVH's victory over the powers of darkness was achieved by the employment of YHVH’s wisdom, and was centered on that wisdom having become reality in Jesus Christ (Rom. 16:25, 1 Cor. 2:7, Eph. 3:9-10, Col. 1:26). It also tells us that, for some reason, this Christ-centered wisdom was kept “secret and hidden” throughout the ages. It’s clear from this that YHVH's strategy was to outsmart and surprise the powers by sending Jesus.
2) While humans don’t generally know Jesus’ true identity during his ministry, demons do. They recognize Jesus as the Son of God, the Messiah, but, interestingly enough, they have no idea what he’s doing (Mark 1:24; 3:11; 5:7, Luke 8:21). Again, the wisdom of YHVH in sending Jesus was hidden from them.
3) We’re told that, while humans certainly share in the responsibility for the crucifixion, Satan and the powers were working behind the scenes to bring it about (John 13:27 cf. 1 Cor. 2:6-8). These forces of evil helped orchestrate the crucifixion.
4) We’re taught that if the “princes of this world [age]” had understood the secret wisdom of YHVH, “they would not have crucified the Lord of glory” (1 Cor 2:8 cf. vss 6-7). Apparently, Satan and the powers regretted orchestrating Christ’s crucifixion once they learned of the wisdom of YHVH that was behind it.
5) Finally, we can begin to understand why the powers came to regret crucifying “the Lord of glory” when we read that it was by means of the crucifixion that the “handwriting of ordinances that was against us, which was contrary to us [i.e., the charge of our legal indebtedness]” was “[taken] out of the way [i.e., canceled]” as the powers were disarmed. In this way Christ “triumph[ed] over” the powers by "his cross” and even “made a shew of them openly” (Col. 2:14-15). Through Christ’s death and resurrection YHVH's enemies were vanquished and placed under his Messiah's feet, and ultimately His own in the end (1 Cor. 15:23-28).
Putting these five clues together, we can discern YHVH's Trojan Horse strategy in sending Jesus.
The powers couldn’t discern why Jesus came because YHVH's wisdom was hidden from them. YHVH's wisdom was motivated by unfathomable love, and since Satan and the other powers were evil, they lacked the capacity to understand it. Their evil hearts prevented them from suspecting what YHVH was up to.
What the powers did understand was that Jesus was mortal. This meant he was killable. Lacking the capacity to understand that this was the means by which YHVH would ultimately bring about the defeat of death (and thus, pave the road for the resurrection itself), they never suspected that making Jesus vulnerable to their evil might actually be part of YHVH's infinitely wise plan.
And so they took the bait (or "ransom"; Matt. 20:28, Mark 10:45, 1 Tim. 2:5-6). Utilizing Judas and other willing human agents, the powers played right into YHVH’s secret plan and orchestrated the crucifixion of the Messiah (Acts 2:22-23; 4:28). YHVH thus brilliantly used the self-inflicted incapacity of evil to understand love against itself. And, like light dispelling darkness, the unfathomably beautiful act of YHVH's love in sending the willing Messiah as a "ransom" to these blood-thirsty powers defeated them. The whole creation was in principle freed and reconciled to YHVH, while everything written against us humans was nailed to the cross, thus robbing the powers of the only legal claim they had on us. They were “spoiled [i.e., disempowered]” (Col. 2:14-15).
As happened to the Trojans in accepting the gift from the Greeks, in seizing on Christ’s vulnerability and orchestrating his crucifixion, the powers unwittingly cooperated with YHVH to unleash the one power in the world that dispels all evil and sets captives free. It’s the power of self-sacrificial love.

Why Penal Substitution Is Unbiblical

For the sake of keeping this already lengthy post as short as possible I'm not going to spend too much time on why exactly PSA (Penal Substitutionary Atonement) is inconsistent with Scripture, but I'll go ahead and point out the main reasons why I believe this is so, and let the reader look further into this subject by themselves, being that there are many resources out there which have devoted much more time than I ever could here in supporting this premise.

"Purge out therefore the old leaven, that ye may be a new lump, as ye are unleavened. For even Christ our passover is sacrificed for us:"-1 Corinthians 5:7

The Passover is one of the two most prominent images in the New Testament given as a comparison to Christ's atonement and what it accomplished, (the other most common image being the Day of Atonement sacrifice).
In the Passover, the blood of the lamb on the door posts of the Hebrews in the book of Exodus was meant to mark out those who were YHVH's, not be a symbol of PSA, as the lamb itself was not being punished by God in place of the Hebrews, but rather the kingdom of Egypt (and thus, allegorically speaking, the kingdom of darkness which opposed YHVH) was what was being judged and punished, because those who were not "covered" by the blood of the lamb could be easily identified as not part of God's kingdom/covenant and liberated people.
Looking at the Day of Atonement sacrifice (which, again, Christ's death is repeatedly compared to throughout the New Testament), this ritual required a ram, a bull, and two goats (Lev. 16:3-5). The ram was for a burnt offering intended to please God (Lev. 16:3-4). The bull served as a sin offering for Aaron, the high priest, and his family. In this case, the sin offering restored the priest to ritual purity, allowing him to occupy sacred space and be near YHVH’s presence. Two goats taken from "the congregation” were needed for the single sin offering for the people (Lev. 16:5). So why two goats?
The high priest would cast lots over the two goats, with one chosen as a sacrifice “for the Lord” (Lev. 16:8). The blood of that goat would purify the people. The second goat was not sacrificed or designated “for the Lord.” On the contrary, this goat—the one that symbolically carried the sins away from the camp of Israel into the wilderness—was “for Azazel” (Lev. 16:8-10).
What—or who—is Azazel?
The Hebrew term azazel (עזאזל) occurs four times in Leviticus 16 but nowhere else in most people's canon of the Bible, (and I say "most people's canon," because some people do include 1 Enoch in their canon of Scripture, which of course goes into great detail about this "Azazel" figure). Many translations prefer to translate the term as a phrase, “the goat that goes away,” which is the same idea conveyed in the King James Version’s “scapegoat.” Other translations treat the word as a name: Azazel. The “scapegoat” option is possible, but since the phrase “for Azazel” parallels the phrase “for YHVH” (“for the Lord”), the wording suggests that two divine figures are being contrasted by the two goats.
A strong case can be made for translating the term as the name Azazel. Ancient Jewish texts show that Azazel was understood as a demonic figure associated with the wilderness. The Mishnah (ca. AD 200; Yoma 6:6) records that the goat for Azazel was led to a cliff and pushed over, ensuring it would not return with its death. This association of the wilderness with evil is also evident in the New Testament, as this was where Jesus met the devil (Matt. 4:1). Also, in Leviticus 17:1-7 we learn that some Israelites had been accustomed to sacrificing offerings to "devils" (alternatively translated as “goat demons”). The Day of Atonement replaced this illegitimate practice.
The second goat was not sent into the wilderness as a sacrifice to a foreign god or demon. The act of sending the live goat out into the wilderness, which was unholy ground, was to send the sins of the people where they belonged—to the demonic domain. With one goat sacrificed to bring purification and access to YHVH and one goat sent to carry the people’s sins to the demonic domain, this annual ritual reinforced the identity of the true God and His mercy and holiness.
When Jesus died on the cross for all of humanity’s sins, he was crucified outside the city, paralleling the sins of the people being cast to the wilderness via the goat to Azazel. Jesus died once for all sinners, negating the need for this ritual.
As previously stated, the goat which had all the sin put on it was sent alive off to the wilderness, while the blood of the goat which was blameless was used to purify the temple and the people. Penal substitution would necessitate the killing of the goat which had the sin put on it.
Mind you, this is the only sacrificial ritual of any kind in the Torah in which sins are placed on an animal. The only time it happens is this, and that animal is not sacrificed. Most PSA proponents unwittingly point to this ritual as evidence of their view, despite it actually serving as evidence to the contrary, because most people don't read their Old Testament and don't familiarize themselves with the "boring parts" like Leviticus (when it's actually rather important to do so, since that book explains how exactly animal offerings were to be carried out and why they were done in the first place).
In the New Testament, Christ's blood was not only meant to mark out those who were his, but also expel the presence of sin and ritual uncleanness so as to make the presence of YHVH manifest in the believer's life. Notice how God's wrath isn't poured out on Christ in our stead on this view, but rather His wrath was poured out on those who weren't covered, and the presence of sin and evil were merely removed by that which is pure and blameless (Christ's blood) for the believer.
All this is the difference between expiation and propitiation.

The Content of Paul's Gospel Message

When the New Testament writers talked about “the gospel,” they referred not to the Protestant doctrine of justification sola fide–the proposition that if we will stop trying to win God’s favor and only just believe that God has exchanged our sin for Christ’s perfect righteousness, then in God’s eyes we will have the perfect righteousness required both for salvation and for assuaging our guilty consciences–but rather they referred to the simple but explosive proposition Kyrios Christos, “Christ is Lord.” That is to say, the gospel was, properly speaking, the royal announcement that Jesus of Nazareth was the God of Israel’s promised Messiah, the King of kings and Lord of lords.
The New Testament writers were not writing in a cultural or linguistic vacuum and their language of euangelion (good news) and euangelizomai would have been understood by their audience in fairly specific ways. Namely, in the Greco-Roman world for which the New Testament authors wrote, euangelion/euangelizomai language typically had to do with either A) the announcement of the accession of a ruler, or B) the announcement of a victory in battle, and would probably have been understood along those lines.
Let’s take the announcements of a new ruler first. The classic example of such a language is the Priene Calendar Inscription, dating to circa 9 BC, which celebrates the rule (and birthday) of Caesar Augustus as follows:
"It was seeming to the Greeks in Asia, in the opinion of the high priest Apollonius of Menophilus Azanitus: Since Providence, which has ordered all things of our life and is very much interested in our life, has ordered things in sending Augustus, whom she filled with virtue for the benefit of men, sending him as a savior [soter] both for us and for those after us, him who would end war and order all things, and since Caesar by his appearance [epiphanein] surpassed the hopes of all those who received the good tidings [euangelia], not only those who were benefactors before him, but even the hope among those who will be left afterward, and the birthday of the god [he genethlios tou theou] was for the world the beginning of the good tidings [euangelion] through him; and Asia resolved it in Smyrna."
The association of the term euangelion with the announcement of Augustus’ rule is clear enough and is typical of how this language is used elsewhere. To give another example, Josephus records that at the news of the accession of the new emperor Vespasian (69 AD) “every city kept festival for the good news (euangelia) and offered sacrifices on his behalf.” (The Jewish War, IV.618). Finally, a papyrus dating to ca. 498 AD begins:
"Since I have become aware of the good news (euangeliou) about the proclamation as Caesar (of Gaius Julius Verus Maximus Augustus)…"
This usage occurs also in the Septuagint, the Greek translations of the Jewish Scriptures. For instance LXX Isaiah 52:7 reads, “How beautiful upon the mountains are the feet of him who brings good news (euangelizomenou), who publishes peace, who brings good news (euangelizomenos) of salvation, who says to Zion, ‘Your God reigns.'" Similarly, LXX Isaiah 40:9-10 reads:

"…Go up on a high mountain, you who bring good tidings (ho euangelizomenos) to Sion; lift up your voice with strength, you who bring good tidings (ho euangelizomenos); lift it up, do not fear; say to the cities of Ioudas, “See your God!” Behold, the Lord comes with strength, and his arm with authority (kyrieias)…."-NETS, Esaias 40:9-10

This consistent close connection between euangelion/euangelizomai language and announcements of rule strongly suggests that many of the initial hearers/readers of the early Christians’ evangelical language would likely have understood that language as the announcement of a new ruler (see, e.g., Acts 17:7), and, unless there is strong NT evidence to the contrary, we should presume that the NT writers probably intended their language to be so understood.
However, the other main way in which euangelion/euangelizomai language was used in the Greco-Roman world was with reference to battle reports, announcements of victory in war. A classic example of this sort of usage can be found in LXX 2 Samuel 18:19ff, where David receives word that his traitorous son, Absalom, has been defeated in battle. Euangelion/euangelizomai is used throughout the passage for the communications from the front.
As already shown throughout this post, the NT speaks of Jesus’s death and resurrection as a great victory over the powers that existed at that time and, most importantly, over death itself. Jesus’ conquest of the principalities and powers was the establishment of his rule and comprehensive authority over heaven and earth, that is, of his Lordship over all things (again, at that time).
This was the content of Paul's gospel message...

Justification, and the "New" Perspective on Paul

The following quotation is from The Gospel Coalition, and I believe it to be a decently accurate summary of the NPP (New Perspective on Paul), despite it being from a source which is in opposition to it:

The New Perspective on Paul, a major scholarly shift that began in the 1980s, argues that the Jewish context of the New Testament has been wrongly understood and that this misunderstand[ing] has led to errors in the traditional-Protestant understanding of justification. According to the New Perspective, the Jewish systems of salvation were not based on works-righteousness but rather on covenantal nomism, the belief that one enters the people of God by grace and stays in through obedience to the covenant. This means that Paul could not have been referring to works-righteousness by his phrase “works of the law”; instead, he was referring to Jewish boundary markers that made clear who was or was not within the people of God. For the New Perspective, this is the issue that Paul opposes in the NT. Thus, justification takes on two aspects for the New Perspective rather than one; initial justification is by faith (grace) and recognizes covenant status (ecclesiology), while final justification is partially by works, albeit works produced by the Spirit.

I believe what's called the "new perspective" is actually rather old, and that the Reformers' view of Paul is what is truly new, being that the Lutheran understanding of Paul is simply not Biblical.
The Reformation perspective understands Paul to be arguing against a legalistic Jewish culture that seeks to earn their salvation through works. However, supporters of the NPP argue that Paul has been misread. We contend he was actually combating Jews who were boasting because they were God's people, the "elect" or the "chosen ones." Their "works," so to speak, were done to show they were God's covenant people and not to earn their salvation.
The key questions involve Paul’s view(s) of the law and the meaning of the controversy in which Paul was engaged. Paul strongly argued that we are “justified by the faith of Christ, and not by the works of the law” (Gal. 2:16b). Since the time of Martin Luther, this has been understood as an indictment of legalistic efforts to merit favor before God. Judaism was cast in the role of the medieval "church," and so Paul’s protests became very Lutheran, with traditional-Protestant theology reinforced in all its particulars (along with its limitations) as a result. In hermeneutical terms, then, the historical context of Paul’s debate will answer the questions we have about what exactly the apostle meant by the phrase "works of the law," along with other phrases often used as support by the Reformers for their doctrine of Sola Fide (justification by faith alone), like when Paul mentions "the righteousness of God."
Obviously an in-depth analysis of the Pauline corpus and its place in the context of first-century Judaism would take us far beyond the scope of this brief post. We can, however, quickly survey the topography of Paul’s thought in context, particularly as it has emerged through the efforts of recent scholarship, and note some salient points which may be used as the basis of a refurbished soteriology.
[Note: The more popular scholars associated with the NPP are E.P. Sanders, James Dunn, and N.T. Wright. Dunn was the first to coin the term "The New Perspective" in a 1983 Manson Memorial Lecture, The New Perspective on Paul and the Law.]
Varying authors since the early 1900's have brought up the charge that Paul was misread by those in the tradition of Martin Luther and other Protestant Reformers. Yet, it wasn't until E.P. Sanders' 1977 book, Paul and Palestinian Judaism, that scholars began to pay much attention to the issue. In his book, Sanders argues that the Judaism of Paul's day has been wrongly criticized as a religion of "works-salvation" by those in the Protestant tradition.
A fundamental premise in the NPP is that Judaism was actually a religion of grace. Sander's puts it clearly:
"On the point at which many have found the decisive contrast between Paul and Judaism - grace and works - Paul is in agreement with Palestinian Judaism... Salvation is by grace but judgment is according to works'...God saves by grace, but... within the framework established by grace he rewards good deeds and punishes transgression." (Paul and Palestinian Judaism, p. 543)
N.T. Wright adds that, "we have misjudged early Judaism, especially Pharisaism, if we have thought of it as an early version of Pelagianism," (Wright, What Saint Paul Really Said, p. 32).
Sanders has coined a now well-known phrase to describe the character of first-century Palestinian Judaism: “covenantal nomism.” The meaning of “covenantal nomism” is that human obedience is not construed as the means of entering into God’s covenant. That cannot be earned; inclusion within the covenant body is by the grace of God. Rather, obedience is the means of maintaining one’s status within the covenant. And with its emphasis on divine grace and forgiveness, Judaism was never a religion of legalism.
If covenantal nomism was operating as the primary category under which Jews understood the Law, then when Jews spoke of obeying commandments, or when they required strict obedience of themselves and fellow Jews, it was because they were "keeping the covenant," rather than out of legalism.
More recently, N.T. Wright has made a significant contribution in his little book, What Saint Paul Really Said. Wright’s focus is the gospel and the doctrine of justification. With incisive clarity he demonstrates that the core of Paul’s gospel was not justification by faith, but the death and resurrection of Christ and his exaltation as Lord. The proclamation of the gospel was the proclamation of Jesus as Lord, the Messiah who fulfilled Israel’s expectations. Romans 1:3-4, not 1:16-17, is the gospel, contrary to traditional thinking. Justification is not the center of Paul’s thought, but an outworking of it:
"[T]he doctrine of justification by faith is not what Paul means by ‘the gospel’. It is implied by the gospel; when the gospel is proclaimed, people come to faith and so are regarded by God as members of his people. But ‘the gospel’ is not an account of how people get saved. It is, as we saw in an earlier chapter, the proclamation of the lordship of Jesus Christ….Let us be quite clear. ‘The gospel’ is the announcement of Jesus’ lordship, which works with power to bring people into the family of Abraham, now redefined around Jesus Christ and characterized solely by faith in him. ‘Justification’ is the doctrine which insists that all those who have this faith belong as full members of this family, on this basis and no other." (pp. 132, 133)
Wright brings us to this point by showing what “justification” would have meant in Paul’s Jewish context, bound up as it was in law-court terminology, eschatology, and God’s faithfulness to God’s covenant.
Specifically, Wright explodes the myth that the pre-Christian Saul was a pious, proto-Pelagian moralist seeking to earn his individual passage into heaven. Wright capitalizes on Paul’s autobiographical confessions to paint rather a picture of a zealous Jewish nationalist whose driving concern was to cleanse Israel of Gentiles as well as Jews who had lax attitudes toward the Torah. Running the risk of anachronism, Wright points to a contemporary version of the pre-Christian Saul: Yigal Amir, the zealous Torah-loyal Jew who assassinated Prime Minister Yitzhak Rabin for exchanging Israel’s land for peace. Wright writes:
"Jews like Saul of Tarsus were not interested in an abstract, ahistorical system of salvation... They were interested in the salvation which, they believed, the one true God had promised to his people Israel." (pp. 32, 33)
Wright maintains that as a Christian, Paul continued to challenge paganism by taking the moral high ground of the creational monotheist. The doctrine of justification was not what Paul preached to the Gentiles as the main thrust of his gospel message; it was rather “the thing his converts most needed to know in order to be assured that they really were part of God’s people” after they had responded to the gospel message.
Even while taking the gospel to the Gentiles, however, Paul continued to criticize Judaism “from within” even as he had as a zealous Pharisee. But whereas his mission before was to root out those with lax attitudes toward the Torah, now his mission was to demonstrate that God’s covenant faithfulness (righteousness) has already been revealed in Jesus Christ.
At this point Wright carefully documents Paul’s use of the controversial phrase “God’s righteousness” and draws out the implications of his meaning against the background of a Jewish concept of justification. The righteousness of God and the righteousness of the party who is “justified” cannot be confused because the term bears different connotations for the judge than for the plaintiff or defendant. The judge is “righteous” if his or her judgment is fair and impartial; the plaintiff or defendant is “righteous” if the judge rules in his or her favor. Hence:
"If we use the language of the law court, it makes no sense whatsoever to say that the judge imputes, imparts, bequeaths, conveys or otherwise transfers his righteousness to either the plaintiff or the defendant. Righteousness is not an object, a substance or a gas which can be passed across the courtroom. For the judge to be righteous does not mean that the court has found in his favor. For the plaintiff or defendant to be righteous does not mean that he or she has tried the case properly or impartially. To imagine the defendant somehow receiving the judge’s righteousness is simply a category mistake. That is not how the language works." (p. 98)
However, Wright makes the important observation that even with the forensic metaphor, Paul’s theology is not so much about the courtroom as it is about God’s love.
Righteousness is not an impersonal, abstract standard, a measuring-stick or a balancing scale. That was, and still is, a Greek view. Righteousness, Biblically speaking, grows out of covenant relationship. We forgive because we have been forgiven (Matt. 18:21-35); “we love" because God “first loved us” (1 John 4:19). Love is the fulfillment of the law (Rom. 13:8, 10, Gal 5:14, Jam. 2:8). Paul even looked forward to a day when “we must all appear before the judgment seat of Christ; that every one may receive the things done in his body, according to that he hath done, whether it be good or bad” (2 Cor. 5:10), and he acknowledged that his clear conscience did not necessarily ensure this verdict (1 Cor. 4:4), but he was confident nevertheless. Paul did in fact testify of his clear conscience: “For our rejoicing is this, the testimony of our conscience, that in simplicity and godly sincerity, not with fleshly wisdom, but by the grace of God, we have had our conversation [i.e., behavior] in the world, and more abundantly to you-ward” (2 Cor. 1:12). He was aware that he had not yet “attained” (Phil. 3:12-14), that he still struggled with the flesh, yet he was confident of the value of his performance (1 Cor. 9:27). These are hardly the convictions of someone who intends to rest entirely on the merits of an alien righteousness imputed to his or her account.
Wright went on to flesh out the doctrine of justification in Galatians, Philippians, and Romans. The “works of the law” are not proto-Pelagian efforts to earn salvation, but rather “sabbath [keeping], food-laws, circumcision” (p. 132). Considering the controversy in Galatia, Wright writes:
"Despite a long tradition to the contrary, the problem Paul addresses in Galatians is not the question of how precisely someone becomes a Christian, or attains to a relationship with God….The problem he addresses is: should his ex-pagan converts be circumcised or not? Now this question is by no means obviously to do with the questions faced by Augustine and Pelagius, or by Luther and Erasmus. On anyone’s reading, but especially within its first-century context, it has to do quite obviously with the question of how you define the people of God: are they to be defined by the badges of Jewish race, or in some other way? Circumcision is not a ‘moral’ issue; it does not have to do with moral effort, or earning salvation by good deeds. Nor can we simply treat it as a religious ritual, then designate all religious ritual as crypto-Pelagian good works, and so smuggle Pelagius into Galatia as the arch-opponent after all. First-century thought, both Jewish and Christian, simply doesn’t work like that…. [T]he polemic against the Torah in Galatians simply will not work if we ‘translate’ it into polemic either against straightforward self-help moralism or against the more subtle snare of ‘legalism’, as some have suggested. The passages about the law only work — and by ‘work’ I mean they will only make full sense in their contexts, which is what counts in the last analysis — when we take them as references to the Jewish law, the Torah, seen as the national charter of the Jewish race." (pp. 120-122)
The debate about justification, then, “wasn’t so much about soteriology as about ecclesiology; not so much about salvation as about the church.” (p. 119)
To summarize the theology of Paul in his epistles, the apostle mainly spent time arguing to those whom he were sending letters that salvation in Christ was available to all men without distinction. Jews and Gentiles alike may accept the free gift; it was not limited to any one group. Paul was vehement about this, especially in his letter to the Romans. As such, I will finish this post off by summarizing the letter itself, so as to provide Biblical support for the premises of the NPP and for what the scholars I referenced have thus far argued.
After his introduction in the epistle to an already believing and mostly Gentile audience (who would've already been familiar with the gospel proclaimed in verses 3-4), Paul makes a thematic statement in 1:16: “For I am not ashamed of the gospel of Christ: for it is the power of God unto salvation to every one that believeth; to the Jew first, and also to the Greek.” This statement is just one of many key statements littered throughout the book of Romans that give us proper understanding of the point Paul wished to make to the interlocutors of his day, namely, salvation is available to all, whether Jew or Gentile.
In 1:16 Paul sets out a basic theme of his message in the letter to the Romans. All who believed, whether they be Jew or Gentile, were saved by the power of the gospel. The universal nature of salvation was explicitly stated. The gospel saved all without distinction, whether Jew or Greek; salvation was through the gospel of Jesus Christ. Immediately after this thematic declaration, Paul undertakes to show the universal nature of sin and guilt. In 1:18-32 Paul shows how the Gentile is guilty before God. Despite evidence of God and his attributes, which is readily available to all, they have failed to honor YHVH as God and have exchanged His glory for idolatrous worship and self-promotion. As a consequence, God handed them over in judgment (1:18-32). Paul moves to denunciation of those who would judge others while themselves being guilty of the very same offenses (2:1-5) and argues that all will be judged according to their deeds (2:6). This judgment applies to all, namely, Jew and Greek (2:9-10). This section serves as somewhat of a transition in Paul’s argument. He has highlighted the guilt of the Gentiles (1:18ff) and will shortly outline the guilt of the Jew (2:17-24). The universal statement of 2:1-11 sets the stage for Paul’s rebuke of Jewish presumption. It was not possession of the Law which delivered; it was faithful obedience. It is better to have no Law and yet to obey the essence of the Law (2:12-16) than to have the Law and not obey (2:17-3:4). Paul then defends the justice of God’s judgment (3:5-8), which leads to the conclusion that all (Jew and Gentile) are guilty before God (3:9).
Paul argues that it was a mistaken notion to think that salvation was the prerogative of the Jew only. This presumption is wrong for two reasons. First, it leads to the mistaken assumption that only Jews were eligible for this vindication (Paul deals with this misunderstanding in chapter 4 where he demonstrates that Abraham was justified by faith independently of the Law and is therefore the father of all who believe, Jew and Gentile alike). Second, it leads to the equally mistaken conclusion that all who were Jews are guaranteed of vindication. Paul demonstrates how this perspective, which would call God’s integrity into question since Paul was assuming many Jews would not experience this vindication, was misguided. He did this by demonstrating that it was never the case that all physical descendants of Israel (Jacob) were likewise recipients of the promise. In the past (9:6-33) as in the present (at that time; 11:1-10), only a remnant was preserved and only a remnant would experience vindication. Paul also argued that the unbelief of national Israel (the non-remnant) had the purpose of extending the compass of salvation. The unbelief of one group made the universal scope of the gospel possible. This universalism was itself intended to bring about the vindication of the unbelieving group (11:11-16). As a result of faith, all (Jew and Gentile) could be branches of the olive tree (11:17-24). Since faith in Christ was necessary to remain grafted into the tree, no one could boast of his position. All, Jew and Gentile alike, were dependent upon the mercy and grace of God. As a result of God’s mysterious plan, He would bring about the vindication of His people (11:25-27). [Note: It is this author's belief that this vindication occurred around 66-70 AD, with the Parousia of Christ's Church; this author is Full-Preterist in their Eschatology.]

Introduction

Hello fellow Helldivers. My name is Elliot, alias TeGoRE, a player with 155 hours on the game and plenty of experience gathered from 3rd party sources, especially Reddit and YouTube. I primarily play on difficulty 7, so this post will be biased specifically towards that difficulty.
As you all may know by this point, a lot of people are upset with the Automaton faction, its issues, balancing, bugs, etc. In this post I will be attempting to bring awareness to specific issues rather than asking for vague and general "fixes" the faction would need. I will also be referencing the other faction currently present in the game, the Terminids, as a point of comparison throughout the post.

"Fun factor" analysis; Loadout restrictions

I'll begin with what I believe will be the major point of discussion here. The automatons are just not fun. I understand this is a critical take, but please read before jumping straight to comments.
Let's compare the "fun" factor of Terminids to Automatons here. The Terminids allow you to run pretty much any loadout, while still letting you have impact on the game. You can run pure fodder clear loadouts with light penetration primaries and support tools and contribute to the mission that way, allowing your teammates to clear the heavies with ease. You can also run pure heavy clear with big bulky primaries and anti-tank tools, still contributing to the mission by destroying any charger and bile titan that comes into sight hence allowing your teammates to shoot the other fodder present without being spat on by a 400 ton oversized shrimp or being charged at by a walking rock. With both loadout cases you can also bring stratagems or change out your primaries and other tools (secondary and grenade specifically) that will allow you to have at least some impact on the heavies or lights, respectfully.
The Automatons don't allow for such loadout variety, and considering all the nerf barrages we've been receiving it's obvious that loadout choices are quite restrictive when it comes to fighting automatons. When was the last time you ran flamethrower against the Automatons? Any of the guard dogs? Any other sentry besides autocannon, EMS mortar or maybe the rocket sentry? Gas or airburst strikes? Light penetration or non-precision primaries? You get my point.
The faction requires a playstyle too specific for the casual player. You need to equip high precision weaponry (AMR, Counter sniper, Dominator, etc.) or medium penetration weaponry (Liberator penetrator, Counter sniper, Autocannon, etc) alongside way too many anti-tank tools. Sure, you can bring fodder clear, but the only realistic fodder is the regular troopers or the strider unit. Maybe berserkers. Only reliable (not saying it's the only viable one might I add) fodder clearer would be the grenade launcher, maybe the arc thrower. Furthermore, once on the actual battlefield, you can't necessarily play aggressive. Jump into a pile of bots and you'll be jumping back out limb-by-limb. You have to stay in cover, picking enemies one by one, slowly advancing forward. Then get all your progress denied by a bot drop :^)
We can then conclude that one of the contributing factors to why the Automatons aren't fun is the fact that it's too restricting and too sluggish. Let's look deeper, and analyse why your loadout and playstyle get so restricted;

Enemy analysis, its' contribution to the fun factor

The enemy types of the faction just do not let you vary your loadout enough.
Devastators specifically are the biggest issue. The regular devastator is well-thought out, a heavier bulkier unit with obvious weakspots and not too much firepower which could be compared to the hive guard in terms of mechanics. However, for the heavy devastator and rocket devastator, these are built to just bullshit you into dying. And good luck killing them if you have a light-pen weapon or generally don't have a longer-ranged or high-precision tool, as their primary body (excluding the abdomen) has enough HP to take three full counter sniper magazines (I do not know how a rocket devastator managed to do that, but it did) and just shrug it off. I don't think I need to talk about heavy devastators, they've been brought up enough... I will just briefly skim over it. They're too accurate. "Suppressive fire" does nothing to them. Their 70%-body-covering shield can eat anti-tank projectiles no problem. Sometimes a pack of devastators can be more devastating (badumtss) than a pack of hulks, depending on what devastators they are. If the "heavy" unit of a faction gets outperformed by common enemies, it's an obvious issue.
Another obnoxious enemy type is the berserker. As the name implies, they're a rage-crazed bot with only one directive: charge at you and kill you, no regard for its personal being. Which would be fine if they didn't have the health pool of a damn tank. One unit alone can eat an anti-tank projectile. And they typically spawns in packs of 4. Their weakspots don't even count as weakspots from what I can personally tell, shooting them in the head or the abdomen does about the same damage as just plain out shooting them. They're hard to kill at their core, and if they're backed up by support fire from the other enemy types behind them, you're pretty much helpless.
The rest of the enemy units are fine, in my opinion. They're well thought-out, with obvious counter-measure mechanics.
Hulks can be compared to Chargers. Heavy, tanky units at first, but mechanic rich enough to be an easy take-down once you figure out what you're doing. They have a giant heatsink which is where you have to shoot at regularly to take them out reliably. Not a weakspot might I add, just a point which you can shoot. Think Charger's butt. If you're a space cowboy shooting their tiny faceplate with anti-tank, or even medium penetration tools, can kill them as well. Lastly, just pumping them full of anti-tank projectiles (typically 2 rockets from any of the support weapons) will take them out just fine. There's other cool tricks you could pull off, such as throwing impact grenades between their feet, making them land behind the hulk, which would then take it out in 2 impact grenades if done right. Thermite grenades also deal a lot of damage to their legs, which can take them out too. Lastly, their arms can just be plain out shot off with the right tools. In conclusion, they are threatening at first, but once you use your brain to figure out its weakness, you're going to shrug them off.
Factory Striders are the Bile Titans of the Automatons. They are a bit less obvious but can still be handled decently well by a complete newbie. 2 miniguns on the front, shoot them off with medium penetration for easier kiting. Rocket the top cannon off for further success. Their big exposed abdomen is the obvious weakspot anyone can figure out. Shoot it enough and it'll die. For the more experienced, the front panel eye alongside the opening vents can also be points of advantage. Oh also can we talk about how they're a giant walking factory? Just bomb that bitch! 500kg, orbital precision strike, a regular airstrike, etc. It's a giant target just BEGGING you to throw stratagems at it.
Striders are simple as well. Big impenetrable front plate, completely exposed sides and back. A baby could do it!
Troopers are just fodder. Shoot 'em, they fall over.

Issue with dropships

If you played at least a few hours on the automaton front, you may know that the dropships can be shot down. However, when was the last time you saw that actually do anything?
The explosion deals too little damage, only sometimes killing the trooper units it's carrying. The body of the dropship itself seems to do no impact damage on the automatons, but loves to damage the shit out of you. The automatons also don't seem to care when they fall down 50 feet. Especially dropships with tanks. Shoot them down at the highest point of their drop, tank flies down at crazy velocity, lands with literally 0 damage to itself, then the dropships smacks on top of the tank doing fuck-all to it.
Oh and you can't forget the fact that the debris is solid cover FOR THE BOTS. You can't shoot through it. They can. They can also walk through it, you can't. ??????????

Issues with Automaton-specific side objectives

I will only bring up the ones that have actual issues behind them. If it isn't brought up here, then I personally believe it is fine.

• SEAF SAM Site

Barely does it's job. Shoots down one dropship per reinforcement, and as we learned earlier shooting the dropships down doesn't even do anything to begin with. Often times the rockets hit terrain as well. Completely pointless side-objective.

• Stratagem Jammer

Add some sort of indication to the spectating players when the person they're spectating is inside a jammer field, and therefore cannot reinforce them. Too many posts about too many people getting kicked for not reinforcing when they literally cannot.

• Mortar emplacement

WARNING YOU ARE IN RANGE OF ENEMY ARTILLERY WARNING YOU ARE IN RANGE OF ENEMY ARTILLERY WARNING YOU ARE IN RANGE OF ENEMY ARTILLERY WARNING YOU ARE IN RANGE OF ENEMY ARTILLERY oh my god SHUT UP!!!!

Bugs (not the Terminid kind)

The faction is riddled with way too many bugs, which just suck the fun out of it. Bots shooting through obviously solid cover, bots seeing you from across the map / through cover and then calling reinforcements, their seemingly 50/50 resistance to explosive damage, then other misc bugs not worth addressing.
This obviously drives people away. A terminid can't shoot me through a rock, I'd prefer fighting that terminid.

Conclusion of analysis; Solutions, final thoughts

The Automaton faction enemies & its mechanics at its core are fine, most enemies making complete sense. Most mechanics, while rich in function, are not very obvious. To play the faction well you need to invest some time into learning how it works. This deters the casual player back to the terminid front, which is a bit more brainless, requiring you just "hurr durr shoot bugs". Here's some solutions to consider:
Rework the devastator enemy type, specifically its specialists types:

• The rocket devastators shouldn't be able to spam their rockets as much as they do. I'd much prefer a larger barrage with a longer cooldown.
• Heavy devastators shouldn't be pin-point accurate if you're not moving / moving slowly. They do spread their shots out if you're moving, but it doesn't contribute all that much, you will still most likely take at least some hits. They're carrying a machine gun and shooting it from their hip with seemingly 0 precision. How is it that accurate?

The spawn rates of the specialist types could be reworked instead, allowing space for the default devastator instead rather than constantly spewing the specialist types. When was the last time you saw a dropship bring just normal devastators?
Please please please do something about berserkers. Lower their health pool. Maybe make the weakspots actually do something. Perhaps make them spawn less frequently if they're in the major enemy pool. Or, instead of that, make the packs smaller. They're a major ammo sink currently and by the time you're done killing them all the other enemies are already in your face.
Dropship crashes should actually do something. If I use up my support weapon's ammo to shoot down a dropship, I would want it to actually contribute to me destroying the bots, not just create a flashy explosion and extra 1-way cover for the bots.
SEAF SAM Site needs a rework of sorts. Make it always spawn on higher terrain, maybe buff its firerate (see actual SAM sites for reference), or keep the firerate as is if dropship crashes actually start doing something, instead improving its turn speed and lock-on speed. Primary issue is terrain though.
"oh yeah this spot is PERFECT for a SAM site!" said the seaf engineer after ordering it be built in a trench enclosed by cliffs from all 4 sides "what the hell is this" said the helldiver when stumbling upon it
Realistically speaking, the only people who perform well when fighting against Automatons are those who have tens of hours of experience on their belt alongside a team with similar skill level, using proper "meta" (god forbid) loadouts to properly counter the bot menace. The casual solo-queue player just crumbles.

Conclusion & Goodbyes

I may have missed some things, but I tried to grab everything problematic about the faction to the best of my ability. I will most likely not edit the post due to it already being gigantic. However any comments adding onto the post are obviously appreciated. :)
If you're here to find a tl;dr, don't bother. No way in hell I'm summarizing 11.5k+ worth of characters. Just read the analysis conclusion.
If you're here after reading everything above, thank you. I hope this was a fun read and brought attention to why you might not be having as much fun on automatons, maybe made you realize what needs to be done in order to counter the currently sluggish faction. I just hope I helped in some way.
If you're a developer, thank you for creating an amazing game. I've been in love with Helldivers 2 since the very start (upon finding it reaching sky-high popularity), enjoying every hour of gameplay. But just like with any game, it has its flaws, and I hope these are properly addressed. The community has been asking for changes, and I hope my post brought awareness to it.
Buh-bye!!!

Hoping it helps, I'll list the typical settings I use on a Hero 11 for a bright sunny day: 4k/60fps Wide Standard image stabilization 10-bit EV Comp: -.5 (seems to keep bright shiny things from clipping some) 150k bitrate Shutter: Auto White Balance: Native Iso Min: 200 Iso Max: 3200 Sharpness: Low Color: Natural (seems to be closer to what I want before starting color grading than Flat)
The way I've been doing it: 1. Choose/highlight a clip with something I know is bright white in it, like a white line on a road, and using the white balance picker, pick on the white object. This does A LOT to getting colors close. 2. Paste the color setting from that clip to all clips in the timeline. 3. Choose highlight a clip with colors I know what they looked like in it. Use the sliders and wheels to get as close as I can to what I think that frame should look like. then copy that color setting to all the other clips in my timeline.
I think I've read that because if set to auto shutter speed, the GoPro is constantly changing the shutter speed when moving in and out of shade/sun a lot, or the sun goes behind a cloud sometimes, and makes the same grade on a whole timeline not very consistent. My most common dislike of my final output is colors look a little less vibrant than I'd like sometimes, or trees look like they have dust on them, and aren't vivid. If I try to get bright and vivid colors with the sliders, some things get way oversaturated, or sun reflecting even off dirt looks blotchy white like it clipped.
I've played with LUTs after quite a few tutorials, but haven't found better results than just adjusting sliders to get a decent average grade for a whole video. My videos are a lot of moving from bright sun to shade for an hour straight. If I start shooting flat color and manual shutter for an hour long video, is there a way to have a LUT self adjust things as the captured brightness changes?
Feel like I don't know what I don't know at this point, but advice is welcome. I'm not making money with my videos, but would like to improve the output. Thanks

First, Product innovation of Chainless systems

Leave a Comment / By WeishaZhu / November 2, 2023

Enter the white paper series
We start today to unveil the mystery of the chainless system and introduce the relevant contents of the white paper. Many programmers have had close encounters with Bitcoin and ended up empty-handed. We are destined to meet each other and believe your wealth is proportional to your cognition. Our airdrop design does not require you to spend money, but you must spend time reading articles to improve your cognition and contribute to your strength; otherwise, you will miss wealth. Interpreting the innovation of chainless systems” is divided into five sections.
Introduction
The WEB3.0 chainless financial platform is referred to as the chainless platform. Its design breaks out of the constraints of the blockchain, and there is no limit to the impossible triangle of the blockchain. Cryptocurrency is better than advanced ideas, but its development is slow. According to statistics from PANews, at the end of 2022, there are 1,259 active DAPPs in Ethereum, which is really pitiful. The chainless platform adopts the idea of ​​cryptocurrency and designs a transparent and centralized platform. The external characteristics are no different from the blockchain ledger. It is also a platform that implements openness and fairness and cannot be tampered with. Only in this way can the design compete with the ease of use of Web2, be popularized on a large scale, and make the number of DAPPs jump by an order of magnitude. Chainless design has no technical innovation and uses mature technology; it has unique innovations in products, incentives, communities, and core teams. This series has 5 sections in total. One is product innovation; the second is production relationship innovation; the third is business model innovation; the fourth is the role of the core team; and the fifth is the Interesting Reads Chainless Platform.
First, Product innovation of chainless systems
Innovation in unilateral accounting methods
Projects that adopt blockchain accounting methods, without exception, use multi-party accounting and centralized ledgers. Its ledgers are all balance ledgers. The so-called balance ledger means that unspent tokens are recorded in the ledger. All improvements in blockchain are improvements in accounting methods. The purpose is to improve ease of use while ensuring the accuracy of the ledger. This accounting method is blameless as a currency issuance system, but it has two flaws as an accounting system:

1. The fastest accounting time is no less than one second;
   
2. Sky-high accounting costs.
   

With the Bitcoin and Ethereum systems already serving as the root of credit, it would be unwise for any application-focused project to use multi-party accounting. Because any account page can be hashed, and the hash value is on chain to the credit root, thus ensuring that the ledger cannot be tampered with. The running account corresponding to the hash value is public. Even if there is no multi-party accounting, the account book can be verified by any party and is, therefore, credible. The root of credit means that the data that enters the root of credit cannot be tampered with. Readers who have difficulty reading this can refer to “What Satoshi Nakamoto didn’t think of, what he didn’t say… Series 2: Openness and transparency are the core, but decentralization only summarizes less than half of it.” The Road to Innovation in Cryptocurrency” Series 1-11 (chainless.hk).
Account Verification
The flaw in the third-party verification of Bitcoin design is that if A transfers tokens to B, B may not receive them if the address is wrong. Bitcoin’s third-party verification is only formal, regardless of whether B gets it. As a centralized ledger, the transfer from A to B is an internal transfer of the “bank.” It is very easy for A and B to confirm the transfer. After A and B confirm that the transfer is correct, the chainless system will confirm it again, and there will be no dispute. It is very easy to achieve this improvement in Bitcoin, but there is no threshold for transfers for technicians, so they do not think there will be operational problems here.
Index general ledger to ensure ledger balance
All personal sub-ledgers constitute a reconciliation with the general ledger coin indicator, and the sum of all sub-ledger coins is always equal to the data of the general ledger indicator. This point is the point of invention and the starting point of general ledger innovation.
The hash value of the journal is uploaded to the chain
Chainless calculates the hash value of an account page in one minute, then uploads it to the Bitcoin system, and the account is made public. The transaction confirmation time is not the account page formation time but the three-party confirmation time of A, B, and the chainless system. This confirmation time is in milliseconds. It is consistent with the speed of centralized transfer systems.
Multiple signatures and multiple backup wallets
It is equivalent to the user controlling an online multi-sign project by himself. Multi-signing is more troublesome. Chainless has designed multi-signing grading, so small quantities do not require multiple signings.
Inherit
With the multi-sign and multi-backup functions, inheritance is realized by the way. The inheritance time can be modified, and inheritance can be automatically started when the time is up.
Support real-name and anonymous
The chainless data format is a public key and private key system, with real names grafted onto anonymity. If real names are not supported, it is impossible to integrate with real finance. The right to disclose privacy lies with the user.
The user controls external transfers
When the chainless system makes an external transfer, the chainless system and the user jointly control the multi-signature. If the user does not sign, the chainless system’s signature will be invalid and cannot be transferred; even if the user signs, the chainless system will not make an external transfer if the verification exceeds the user’s number of coins. When making an external transfer, the user must use his mobile phone to confirm twice.
Contract accounts and deposit accounts are not directly related
Ethereum accounts can be driven externally or by contracts. They are on the same account, which is inconvenient when designing applications. Chainless separates contract accounts and deposit accounts, allowing flexibility in contract design.
Issuance of decentralized currency DW20
The issuance principle of DW20 is the same as that of Bitcoin. It is ownerless and has no management team. It is a transaction token of a chainless system. Used to implement Bitcoin standards. DW20 is different from stablecoins. In addition to the white paper, readers can refer to series 1-4 of “Comparison of Decentralized Standard Currency DW20 with Bitcoin, Stablecoin DAI, and Standard Currency USD”. (chainless.hk)
Issue chainless system token CLY
CLY represents the value of the chainless system and is an equity token.
Advances beyond blockchain
In short, the chainless system captures the essence of cryptocurrency ideas, achieves the payment speed of centralized systems, and aligns with the views of Web3. The chainless system inherits the technical advantages of Web2, with meager accounting costs. The accounting system can automatically expand on demand, and the throughput is not limited. Smart contracts are easy to write and upgrade, and the wallet is safe and easy to use. The ease of use is the same as that of centralized wallets.
The chainless system combines the ideas of Bitcoin and hopes to become an effective payment platform and the infrastructure of Web3 to make up for the payment deficiencies of the Bitcoin system.
The chainless system began to be conceived in 2018, a preliminary plan was formed in 2019, a patent was applied for in 2020, the first draft of the white paper was produced in 2021, and implementation of the plan began in 2022. Open source after public beta. After open source, quoting the code within 18 months requires the written consent of the project team.
https://chainless.hk/2023/11/02/first-product-innovation-of-chainless-systems/

So as "homework" my counselor wanted me to reflect on how my aphantasia has impacted my life and learning (I just turned 20 today and currently in college) before our next session, and it just occurred to me...
My aphantasia is (probably) why I absolutely DOMINATED my classmates in typing classes. We started learning how to type in I think...4th grade. And I learned the keys really fast. Like, a lot faster than my peers?? And then when we would bust out those weird silicone orange covers or the box-looking covers so we couldn't look at the keys for our typing tests I was the only kid who consistently scored 90% or higher on the first attempt. My typing speed sits somewhere around 90-100 WPM (based on my memory of my last typing speed test which was...7 months ago?). Basically from when I learned to type my WPM just kept going up and up.
I don't actually know if this is possibly due to my aphantasia or not. I feel like it is, because, like I joked with my peers, I could type like normal with my eyes closed. I don't see the keyboard in my mind and truth be told, I didn't rely on learning where the keys on a keyboard sit visually. It's purely based on muscle memory, I think. I couldn't tell you what key is next to what on a keyboard.
I'm also curious if aphantasia affected my reading speed? I don't get the classic "movie in my mind" thing that it appears non-aphants have when I read. The words are literally just...words. So this means my reading speed, word processing, and data entry speeds like ridiculously high. Apparently higher than average, or at least the average in my area because my college has made me retake their data entry test twice because they think I cheated somehow. But I just don't spend the time, I guess you could say, imagining an event or anything like that. I just take in the words I'm reading. But once it turns to math problems...that's a whole different story.
Anyways, sorry for my late night ramblings haha. I think I might've gotten sidetracked in my tangent. Oh well (the woes of ADHD). But yeah, thanks for letting me ramble about nothing. Cheers!

Hi everyone so im a male 19 years old and for the longest I’ve really avoided this subject or really never looked into it. I guess the first time I really felt this anxiety was around 4th grade I only have 1 memory and I didn’t have it again till maybe 8th grade it’s so wierd to me bk it comes and goes but lately it hasn’t left since last year of march. I have anxiety that makes me gag but I never really throw up but it feels like I will. I’ve never been to the doctor or a therapist and since im Mexican it’s kind of looked down upon so I can’t just say hey mom or dad I want to go to the therapist because idk it’s shameful and id rather live like this than live in shame. Sometimes I think about how I was able to do certain stuff before without triggering it but now it’s like I can’t do anything. I walked thru graduation I went to work at a retail store I went to work in the fields I passed my drivers liscence test. But how come I can’t do stuff now it’s so unfair I’ve been trying to find a job too but honestly I get some interviews or some interest and then boom anxiety attacks me and I just can’t follow thru it feels like my body is against me. I truly wish I could just say F it and do what I want but im not that strong. Outside of medicine I’ve tried everything I workout 5-6 times a day I go on walks I meditate I pray I eat fairly healthy I chew gum I do everything that people recommend. But nothing is working it feels like this is my life now and it sucks because a couple months ago it wasn’t so bad but now im in debt and ugh life is just going so down hill. I just got a ticket for 500$ from when I didn’t have my DL so now I have to work in the fields but I just can’t I can’t I want to but I can’t. Sometimes I think about going homeless so I wouldn’t have to deal with anything and just coast till I die from starvation or something. I just don’t understand why god put me thru this I keep trying to look for a lesson or what but it just keeps getting worse and worse and people without anxiety don’t really understand how it feels they just think I’m lazy or lying to get out of going to work. If you read my rant thank you I hope you all have an amazing day

Discord.gg/StrikePackage

Contention - F-4 Phantom PVP Event Campaign!

Join us on Contention for a Public PVP Event designed around the F-4 Phantom!
Server Name: Contention PVP Syria F-4 Phantom Event
Map: Syria
SPS Discord: Discord.gg/StrikePackage
Contention Server IP: dcs.strikepackagestudios.com
Contention SRS IP: srs.strikepackagestudios.com
Contention Server Guide: guide.strikepackagestudios.com Please join the Discord and read the Server Guide if you're unfamiliar with Contention!

What is Contention?

Contention is a Persistent, Dynamic DCS World PVP Campaign / Multiplayer Server that features a sandbox-style battlefield where players fight to capture all Airfields and FARPs. Contention campaigns emphasize combined arms, teamwork, and strategy. Players are given the tools to achieve victory using a wide variety of tactics, including: CTLD (Player-Deployed Logistics), FAC (Artillery Command), Airborne Reinforcements, Drones, Bombers, Recon, Industrial Strikes, Naval Strikes, EWR Situational Awareness, AWACS & Tanker Support, Airlifts, Convoys, Combined Arms, Airfield Upgrade Systems, Advanced Zone Management Systems, and much more.
Contention offers players an opportunity to make a difference in almost any DCS aircraft module. Players can dominate the skies and decimate ground objectives using advanced 4th generation fighters and attack aircraft, or challenge themselves with older airframes. Helicopters are the driving force of any Contention campaign and serve as the logistic backbone of a team. Trainer aircraft & Warbirds (WWII Planes) have many unique tools on Contention that can be used to accomplish impressive tasks and significantly impact a campaign.
Contention campaigns are designed to be challenging. The goal is to create a full-scale PVP warzone and let players determine the outcome. There is no clear frontline or path to victory. Take advantage of the tools at your disposal, learn the server mechanics, and work with your teammates to conquer the battlefield.

F-4 Phantom Event Info

The Phantom is finally here! On Tuesday, May 21st we will be running the first official Contention F-4 Phantom Event Campaign! This is a special version of Contention designed around the capabilities of the Phantom, on Syria.
This campaign focuses primarily on the experience of the F-4 Phantom, Mirage F1, and other 3rd Gen aircraft like the Mig-21, AJS37, F-5, and more!
This campaign features all-aspect sidewinders and early fox 1 missiles.
The goal is to create the Ultimate PVP Playground for the F-4! The campaign is not necessarily built around realism, and many elements of this campaign emphasize fun & balanced gameplay over realism or period-accuracy.
The A/G environment is also built around the F-4! There will be plenty of easy targets to help you learn the basics of Phantom A/G. Additional targets will give you the opportunity to master your skills against tougher threats, including lots of Shrike targets like SA-2 & SA-3 sites. There's tons of armor to plink and bandits to splash!
The A-4 Skyhawk mod is included in this campaign but is not required to join the server!

Discord.gg/StrikePackage

Contention - F-4 Phantom PVP Event Campaign!

Join us on Contention for a Public PVP Event designed around the F-4 Phantom!
Server Name: Contention PVP Syria F-4 Phantom Event
Map: Syria
SPS Discord: Discord.gg/StrikePackage
Contention Server IP: dcs.strikepackagestudios.com
Contention SRS IP: srs.strikepackagestudios.com
Contention Server Guide: guide.strikepackagestudios.com Please join the Discord and read the Server Guide if you're unfamiliar with Contention!

What is Contention?

Contention is a Persistent, Dynamic DCS World PVP Campaign / Multiplayer Server that features a sandbox-style battlefield where players fight to capture all Airfields and FARPs. Contention campaigns emphasize combined arms, teamwork, and strategy. Players are given the tools to achieve victory using a wide variety of tactics, including: CTLD (Player-Deployed Logistics), FAC (Artillery Command), Airborne Reinforcements, Drones, Bombers, Recon, Industrial Strikes, Naval Strikes, EWR Situational Awareness, AWACS & Tanker Support, Airlifts, Convoys, Combined Arms, Airfield Upgrade Systems, Advanced Zone Management Systems, and much more.
Contention offers players an opportunity to make a difference in almost any DCS aircraft module. Players can dominate the skies and decimate ground objectives using advanced 4th generation fighters and attack aircraft, or challenge themselves with older airframes. Helicopters are the driving force of any Contention campaign and serve as the logistic backbone of a team. Trainer aircraft & Warbirds (WWII Planes) have many unique tools on Contention that can be used to accomplish impressive tasks and significantly impact a campaign.
Contention campaigns are designed to be challenging. The goal is to create a full-scale PVP warzone and let players determine the outcome. There is no clear frontline or path to victory. Take advantage of the tools at your disposal, learn the server mechanics, and work with your teammates to conquer the battlefield.

F-4 Phantom Event Info

The Phantom is finally here! On Tuesday, May 21st we will be running the first official Contention F-4 Phantom Event Campaign! This is a special version of Contention designed around the capabilities of the Phantom, on Syria.
This campaign focuses primarily on the experience of the F-4 Phantom, Mirage F1, and other 3rd Gen aircraft like the Mig-21, AJS37, F-5, and more!
This campaign features all-aspect sidewinders and early fox 1 missiles.
The goal is to create the Ultimate PVP Playground for the F-4! The campaign is not necessarily built around realism, and many elements of this campaign emphasize fun & balanced gameplay over realism or period-accuracy.
The A/G environment is also built around the F-4! There will be plenty of easy targets to help you learn the basics of Phantom A/G. Additional targets will give you the opportunity to master your skills against tougher threats, including lots of Shrike targets like SA-2 & SA-3 sites. There's tons of armor to plink and bandits to splash!
The A-4 Skyhawk mod is included in this campaign but is not required to join the server!

​
https://preview.redd.it/n0tovwmjrp1d1.jpg?width=720&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=69c645bf0aff36c7f6b87d53a4f7bf1763b38c9f
Welcome to our roundup of Cmore Sights, a brand that has been making waves in the optics industry. These sights are designed with precision and style, perfect for both enthusiasts and professionals looking to elevate their shooting experience. In this article, we'll be diving into the features, benefits, and user reviews of Cmore Sights, so sit back, relax, and get ready to uncover the secrets behind these exceptional optics.

The Top 19 Best Cmore Sights

1. High-Performance 5-Pin Bow Sight for Long-Lasting, Customized Aiming Points - The Custom Bow Equipment Tactic Micro 5-Pin Bow Sight enhances your hunting experience with a durable Blade Pin design, precise micro windage and elevation adjustments, bright fiber-enhanced pins, fluorescent peep alignment ring, and ambidextrous design.
2. CBE Tactic Hybrid 1 Pin Sight - The CBE Tactic Hybrid 1-Pin Bow Sight is a lightweight and affordable alternative to traditional bow sights, featuring multi-positioning mounting holes, floating pin technology, and an ambidextrous design.
3. CBE Engage Hybrid Bow Sight: Frustration-Free Pin Adjustments and Quad-Track Stability - The CBE Engage Hybrid Bow Sight 1 Pin RH boasts a versatile design with a Dovetail Mounting System, 4th and 5th Axis Adjustments, and a Quad Track Design utilizing Delrin Tracks for precision and stability.
4. CBE Engage Hybrid 3 Pin Bow Sight for Right-Handed - The CBE Engage Hybrid Bow Sight offers a frustration-free pin adjustment system, armed guard fiber management, 12-inch fiber for brighter pins, a quad track stability adjustment system, and rapid drive elevation adjustments in a user-friendly design.
5. Olympus EE-1 Red Dot Sight with Crosshair Reticle - The Olympus EE-1 Red Dot Sight ensures fast subject acquisition and tracking, offering a powerful combination of adjustable brightness and position, mounting onto the camera's hot shoe, and built-in ruggedness with its dustproof and splash-proof design.
6. 3V Micro Adjustable Sight with CBE Hybrid Drive System - The CBE Trek Pro Micro 3V .019 3-Pin Sight offers precision vertical alignment with three customizable pins, machined aluminum construction, and compatibility with various adaptors, making it a reliable choice for your firearm.
7. TruGlo Crossbow Scope with Unisex Camo Design - Upgrade your crossbow performance with TruGlo's rangefinding, trajectory compensating 4x32 scope, featuring shock-resistant durability, generously long eye relief, and advanced optics under the camouflage finish—perfect for unisex use.
8. Xs R3D 2.0: Desert Eagle Night Sight for Clear Visibility in Low-Light - Experience unmatched visibility and precision in low-light conditions with the Xs R3D 2.0 Night Sights, providing exceptional clarity and durability for your Desert Eagle Pistol.
9. Compact and Versatile Telrad Reflex Sight with Mounting Base - The Telrad Reflex Sight, designed by Stephen Kufeld, offers a unique and user-friendly experience for stargazing, with its legendary design and ease of use on various telescope models.
10. Axis Target Sight RH: High-Performance 22 Bore Sight with Modular Adjustments - Customize your shot with precision and stability, making the CBE Axis Target Sight RH a standout choice among 22 Bore sights.
11. Revolutionary Hybrid Sight with Adjustable 1 Pin .010 LH for Ultimate Shooting Precision - Experience precise shot accuracy and versatility with the CBE Engage Hybrid Sight 1 Pin .010 LH, featuring a dovetail mounting system, Quad Track design, and rapid drive for seamless adjustment.
12. CBE Engage Hybrid Bow Sight: Precision Adjustments for Optimal Performance - CBE Engage Hybrid Bow Sight 1 Pin RH .010 provides frustration-free pin adjustments with a dovetail mounting system, hybrid elevation adjustment, and quad track design for ultimate stability and accuracy.
13. CBE Engage Hybrid Bow Sight: Fast, Accurate, and Convenient Adjustments - Experience precision and ease with the CBE Engage Hybrid Bow Sight, featuring a frustration-free pin adjustment system, Armed Guard Fiber Management System, and a Quad Track four-track stability adjustment for a stable and efficient shooting experience.
14. CBE Engage Hybrid Bow Sight 1 Pin with Dovetail Mount and Armed Guard Fiber Management System - Experience precision and ease with the CBE Engage Hybrid Bow Sight, featuring a hybrid elevation adjustment, 2nd and 3rd axis adjustments for quiver attachment, and ergonomic control for optimal performance.
15. Rize Hunter Sight 30mm Left Hand AR Front Sight Post - Experience lightning-fast accuracy and convenience with the B3 Rize Hunter Sight, featuring a patented vertical mount system, micro-adjust windage, and a range of additional features for precision shooting.
16. CX5 Carbon Sight: Lightweight Hunting Bow Accessory with Rheostat Sight Light and Adjustable Pins - Lightweight Carbon Fiber Sight with Adjustable Peep Alignment Rings and Rheostat Light - Perfect for Hunting and Archery Enthusiasts!
17. Premium 8.6 oz CBE Trek Smart Mount Hunting Bow Sight - Experience flawless accuracy with the CBE Trek Sight 1 Pin .010 LH - a versatile, easy-to-use bow sight with premium features, perfect for any distance and light condition.
18. Black Gold Quick Link Base Hunting Bow Sight - The Black Gold Micro Quick Link Base transforms your Black Gold sight into a picatinny mount, offering rock-solid accuracy with ease, no special tools required.
19. Precision Archery Sight for Optimal Balance and Accuracy - Experience unmatched accuracy and balance with the Bowtech Center Mass Dual Trac sight, featuring photochromatic technology and independently adjustable pins, all at the centerline of your bow.

As an Amazon™ Associate, we earn from qualifying purchases.

Reviews

🔗High-Performance 5-Pin Bow Sight for Long-Lasting, Customized Aiming Points

​
https://preview.redd.it/389qgr8krp1d1.jpg?width=720&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=ebae30d7a41c65262e76672947d5950f2649d22a
The CBE Tactic Micro 5-Pin Bow Sight offers a precise and accurate shooting experience with its durable Blade Pin design, which boasts a bright aiming point. Featuring a multi-position mounting system for optimal bow alignment, easy micro windage and elevation adjustments, and even brighter pins with fiber management, this sight is ideal for the experienced bowhunter.
The added sight light provides a clear visual aid during low light conditions, ensuring that you and your target stay on target all the way to success.

🔗CBE Tactic Hybrid 1 Pin Sight

​
https://preview.redd.it/p0cc8qhkrp1d1.jpg?width=720&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=d58005cadfa08c157324435b8a4f06b736ba4f81
The CBE Tactic Hybrid 1-Pin Bow Sight is an ultra-light, compact bow sight that won't break the bank. It offers an effective and user-friendly experience for experienced archers. The highlight of this product is the Tactic Hybrid's movable pin sight with Smart Mount's multi-positioning mountable system. Using this, users can easily adjust the various settings according to their needs.
In addition, the Bow Sight features a floating pin with a rapid stop. This makes it simple to shoot from long or short distances. With its fibber management system, users can now use the sight more safely by enhancing the brightness of pins and providing better protection with 12 inches of fibber.
Furthermore, the Bow Sight provides visual aid during pin adjustment. It employs laser-marked hashes to assist users in understanding their shots better and make precise changes if necessary. Lastly, the Tactic Hybrid's versatility shines in its ambidextrous design, making it convenient for both left-handed and right-handed archers.
The Tactic Hybrid Sight also comes with a Rheostat Sight Light and Sight Scales, adding more value to the item while keeping its user-friendly nature intact. In terms of reviews from actual users, customers have consistently described the Bow Sight as exceptional with its "love it, " "excellent sight, " and "best sights for the money. "
Although a few reviewers shared negative experiences, these concerns mainly revolved around potential durability issues and incompatibility errors. All in all, the CBE Tactic Hybrid 1-Pin Bow Sight is a cost-effective, functional, and ergonomic solution catering to various bowing needs.

🔗CBE Engage Hybrid Bow Sight: Frustration-Free Pin Adjustments and Quad-Track Stability

​
https://preview.redd.it/xwqmi7xkrp1d1.jpg?width=720&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=8d073d3ff322cf583c43dcd5c86c146737d793e0
The CBE Engage Hybrid Bow Sight is a high-quality product designed for archers seeking an easy-to-adjust sight with advanced features. Featuring frustration-free pin adjustment, Armed Guard Fiber Management System, and the Dovetail Mounting System, this product stands out among its competitors.
The sight utilizes the Hybrid Elevation Adjustment, Hybrid Windage Adjustment, and 2Nd and 3Rd axis adjustments, making it a versatile option for experienced hunters. The four-track quad track design and ergonomic knob contribute to its stability and adjustability. Additionally, the product offers rapid drive for fast adjustments, which is convenient for hunters on the go.
This product comes with Quad Track Design Utilizing Delrin Tracks and Rapid Drive for fast adjustments. It also includes 12 inches of fiber for brighter pins and the RiteLighter Pin Retention System for secure fibers.
Users have given this product high ratings on usability and design, noting that the Armed Guard Fiber Management System and ergonomic knob make it easy and comfortable to set up. Some users have pointed out minor issues, such as loose housing and limited color availability, but the overall experience is positive with many users praising the sights’ versatility and accuracy.
In conclusion, the CBE Engage Hybrid Bow Sight is a high-performing product tailored for experienced archers seeking both stability and adjustability in their hunting sights.

🔗CBE Engage Hybrid 3 Pin Bow Sight for Right-Handed

​
https://preview.redd.it/toludmhlrp1d1.jpg?width=720&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=34790422cc979771d21f2738f166aea20b920bf2
As a bow enthusiast, I've always been on the lookout for a reliable and accurate bow sight. When I came across the CBE Engage Hybrid Bow Sight, I knew I had to give it a try. This bow sight has made my shooting experience smoother and more enjoyable than ever before.
One of the features that really stood out to me is the frustration-free pin adjustments. It allowed me to adjust each pin individually, making the entire sighting process incredibly precise and efficient. The Dovetail Mounting System added an extra layer of stability, which was a great addition to ensure accuracy while shooting.
Another aspect I liked about the CBE Engage is its quad-track design. It prevented any rocking or rattling from happening whilst adjusting, ensuring a steadier and more secure experience. Plus, its Rapid Drive elevation adjustment system allowed me to make quick, high-precision adjustments with ease.
However, there were some cons too. For instance, the learning curve to use all the features can be quite steep. But once you get a hang of it, it's definitely worth the effort.
All in all, the CBE Engage Hybrid Bow Sight has been an absolute game-changer for me. Its unique features, combined with its impeccable craftmanship, make it a top-of-the-line choice for anyone seeking an accurate and reliable bow sight.

🔗Olympus EE-1 Red Dot Sight with Crosshair Reticle

​
https://preview.redd.it/e460jxolrp1d1.jpg?width=720&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=ece7d483df8109fd6107fc9a6c668f186e3ee85c
I recently got my hands on the Olympus EE-1 Red Dot Sight with Crosshair Reticle, and I must say, it has been a game-changer for my photography adventures. The EE-1 has made tracking fast-moving subjects much easier, especially during bird photography.
One of the standout features was the Center Aiming Dot. It was incredibly useful in capturing my subjects at the right angle, without losing sight of them. The ability to adjust the brightness and position of the dot was a bonus, as it allowed me to customize the settings according to my shooting environment.
The EE-1 is designed to mount onto a camera's hot shoe, which ensures a snug and secure fit. Plus, its dustproof and splash-proof design has kept it safe from the elements during my outdoor shoots.
However, there were a few cons that I experienced while using this product. The adjustment wheels for the brightness and position of the dot are slightly vulnerable to movement during shooting, which could lead to maladjustment. Another issue I faced was the difficulty in turning off the LED when the sight is collapsed for storage, as it can consume battery power.
Overall, the Olympus EE-1 Red Dot Sight with Crosshair Reticle has been a valuable addition to my photography kit. Its innovative features have greatly improved my ability to capture moving subjects, despite the few minor flaws.

🔗3V Micro Adjustable Sight with CBE Hybrid Drive System

​
https://preview.redd.it/q5by1o3mrp1d1.jpg?width=720&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=fd58fd38b1482abe0cb7cbee00089f127e595bbb
The CBE Trek Pro Micro 3V Sight is an ideal choice for those seeking a precision aiming tool. Weighing at 9.856 oz, it has been enhanced with new features such as three vertical pins, including a fixed center pin and micro-adjustable first and third pins. To add a touch of personalization, the machined aluminum casing supports the use of CBE Peep alignment rings and boasts a selection of four vibrant colors. Additionally, the Trek 3V Pro sight can be easily customized with the option to incorporate a CBE Picatinny or CBE Bridge Lock adapter.
This sight also comes equipped with the signature CBE Hybrid Drive system, which offers extensive adjustment capabilities. Highlight features include the hard stop, 1st, 2nd, and 3rd axis adjustments, micro windage, laser-engraved sight scales, and vertical multi-pin support. Despite the limited availability in certain locations such as Hebron, Liman, Obezet, or Lebanon, this versatile sight remains a top contender amongst competitors in the industry.

🔗TruGlo Crossbow Scope with Unisex Camo Design

​
https://preview.redd.it/x5n0ovnmrp1d1.jpg?width=720&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=e91cb8b6d0f5a44385807d5c24a2912e03502cfd
I've recently had the chance to try out the TruGlo 4x32 Rangefinding/Trajectory Compensating Crossbow Scope, a nifty piece of equipment for enthusiastic crossbow users like me. The scope's main highlight was its ability to find the range and calculate the correct trajectory for my crossbow bolts. In my experience, this feature proved to be quite handy in my local archery range, particularly for those days when the wind and temperature were unstable.
One of the things that stood out to me was the scope's robustness. It was designed to handle the harsh conditions of the outdoors, as evidenced by the sturdy aluminum body and the shock-resistant construction. This scope also offered a generous 4-inch eye relief, a feature that helped protect my eyes during those blustery hunting sessions.
The scope's lenses were fully-coated, making them highly resistant to glare, a common concern for crossbow users shooting in low-light conditions. Additionally, the durable leavespring for windage and elevation adjustments were a welcomed bonus, allowing me to finetune my shots with ease.
On the downside, one of the screws on the scope rings was stripped, a minor issue that wasn't a deal-breaker. I also discovered that the scope wasn't rated specifically for a particular crossbow speed. To achieve optimal accuracy, I had to adjust the scope manually, which was a bit tricky and time-consuming.
Regardless of these minor downsides, the TruGlo 4x32 Rangefinding/Trajectory Compensating Crossbow Scope proved to be an essential piece of equipment in my hunting arsenal. Its ease of use, durable construction, and helpful features make it an excellent choice for anyone seeking to upgrade their crossbow hunting experience.

🔗Xs R3D 2.0: Desert Eagle Night Sight for Clear Visibility in Low-Light

​
https://preview.redd.it/o23e146nrp1d1.jpg?width=720&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=dad494d4c3a72e8d3ca9dc85a381b70a182a8cd4
I recently had the chance to give the Xs R3D 2.0 a try in my Desert Eagle Pistol, and I must say, it has been a game-changer for my shooting experience. In low-light environments, the sight really shines, thanks to the tritium front and rear glow dots that absorb ambient light. It's been a lifesaver during those late-night training sessions, and it certainly makes a difference when it comes to visibility.
One feature I especially appreciate is the wide notch rear with serrations and anti-reflective lens. It ensures that the sight never gets in the way during the shooting process, and it also blends in seamlessly with the gun's overall design. The corrosion-resistant black nitride surface finish is another plus, as it not only looks sleek but also adds durability to the product.
However, there are a couple of downsides to the Xs R3D 2.0. Firstly, the sight is a tad bulky compared to other models in the market. It might not be ideal for those who are looking for a more compact option. Secondly, the 3-dot tritium sight picture may not be everyone's cup of tea, but it's a personal preference that might be worth considering.
Despite these minor drawbacks, the Xs R3D 2.0 has proven to be a reliable and high-quality sight for my pistol. Its performance in low-light conditions and the overall build quality have made it a valuable addition to my gun collection. So, if you're in the market for a top-of-the-line sight for your Desert Eagle Pistol, I'd highly recommend giving this one a try.

🔗Compact and Versatile Telrad Reflex Sight with Mounting Base

​
https://preview.redd.it/vdhhftlnrp1d1.jpg?width=720&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=50c9a91817a478e8a873e5652c698dde3c83e012
The Telrad Reflex Sight is a must-have accessory for stargazers and telescope enthusiasts. As someone who has been using it for a while, I can confidently say that it's a game-changer when it comes to finding celestial objects in the sky. One of the standout features for me is its deep red concentric circles, which make it easy to locate targets even in the darkest of nights.
Another aspect I truly appreciated is the mounting base, which securely attaches the sight to telescopes of all sizes. The on/off switch and the continuously adjustable brightness control are also incredibly convenient, ensuring that the sight is always set to the perfect brightness for observation.
However, one drawback I encountered is that the Telrad Reflex Sight can be quite heavy, making it challenging to carry around on outdoor adventures. Also, the mounting base could be more versatile, as it only works with a specific type of telescope.
Despite these minor issues, the Telrad Reflex Sight is a powerful tool for anyone looking to enhance their telescope experience. Its compact design, user-friendly features, and reliability make it worth considering for any stargazing enthusiast.

🔗Axis Target Sight RH: High-Performance 22 Bore Sight with Modular Adjustments

​
https://preview.redd.it/8u4c9qvnrp1d1.jpg?width=720&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=9102c38ced3346a12e5e115365bf8db9327dca8d
In my experience using the CBE Axis Target Sight RH, the redesigned riser mount bar clamp feels like a sturdy upgrade, providing a solid and customizable foundation for my setup. The bar, crafted from high modulus machined carbon-fiber, offers a sleek yet reliable touch.
The elevation system on the Axis truly shines, as it effortlessly removes any unwanted play while maintaining smooth and rapid adjustments. The sight's mounting feels secure and its easy adjustments are much appreciated.
Additionally, the Windage Tube Clamp locating collar makes traveling with my scope much easier, as I can remove and reinstall it with no hassle. The interchangeable sight scales and multiple axis adjustments add a nice layer of customization to my experience.
However, the micro adjusters could benefit from a locking mechanism to prevent accidental tweaks. Also, having zero backlash would be a significant improvement, especially for precise adjustments.

🔗Revolutionary Hybrid Sight with Adjustable 1 Pin .010 LH for Ultimate Shooting Precision

​
https://preview.redd.it/9wyo4l7orp1d1.jpg?width=720&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=d8b0aeddcf0e47ba247fe8c4835ff2f89361e992
When hunting, I've found the CBE Engage Hybrid Sight 1 Pin. 010 LH to be a reliable and efficient tool. The dovetail mounting system and Quick Track design utilizing delrin tracks make it user-friendly and easy to set up. The Rapid Drive feature keeps it securely in place, ensuring accuracy during my shots.
The 2nd and 3rd axis adjustment has made it easy for me to refine my aim, leading to a higher success rate. However, one downside has been the weight at 1 lb, which can become a little cumbersome during long periods of hunting.
Overall, the CBE Engage Hybrid Sight has been a trusty companion on my hunting adventures.

🔗CBE Engage Hybrid Bow Sight: Precision Adjustments for Optimal Performance

​
https://preview.redd.it/q29fbpporp1d1.jpg?width=720&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=c8c2b3f4a5cd89626ed277f7acfe77a8abccf010
The CBE Engage Hybrid Bow Sight is a game-changer for archers who want a smooth and efficient shooting experience. With its unique dovetail mounting system, it ensures a stable and accurate shot every time. One of the standout features is the hybrid elevation adjustment, which allows for fine-tuned adjustments with just a single turn of the knob.
The ergonomic design of the knob makes it easy to manipulate, even in the heat of the moment. Additionally, the quad track system eliminates any unwanted wobbling or rattling, providing a solid foundation. The rapid drive elevation adjustment system is truly rapid, offering high-precision adjustments in a matter of seconds.
However, one potential downside is the relatively short length of 10 inches. While this may be ideal for some, it could limit the versatility for others. Despite this, the CBE Engage Hybrid Bow Sight proves to be a top-performing choice for many archers searching for a reliable and efficient sight for their bow.

🔗CBE Engage Hybrid Bow Sight: Fast, Accurate, and Convenient Adjustments

​
https://preview.redd.it/h0prv4vorp1d1.jpg?width=720&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=dd8211ba5570974a09061787b95d60be2de951da
I've been using the CBE Engage Hybrid Bow Sight for a while now, and it has become a game-changer in my archery practice. One feature that stands out is its rapid drive adjustment system, making it easy to tweak the sight with just one turn.
The ergonomic knob also ensures that adjusting the sight is effortless and comfortable. On the downside, I've noticed that it's a bit heavy, weighing in at 1.08 lb, which can be a drawback for those with sensitive wrists. Overall, the CBE Engage Hybrid Bow Sight has proven to be reliable and intuitive, making my shooting experience more enjoyable and precise.

🔗CBE Engage Hybrid Bow Sight 1 Pin with Dovetail Mount and Armed Guard Fiber Management System

​
https://preview.redd.it/8s7msnaprp1d1.jpg?width=720&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=3e3b7eaf25d6ad5ba337228492d3537d857d78a9
The CBE Engage Hybrid Bow Sight has been a game changer in my archery pursuits. I particularly appreciate its frustration-free pin adjustments, allowing me to make precise adjustments with ease. The Armed Guard Fiber Management System and the increased fiber length for brighter pins have made a noticeable difference.
However, there's still room for improvement in the ergonomics of the knob and the initial set up. Overall, it has vastly improved my experience on the range.

Buyer's Guide

Cmore sights are a category of optical sights designed for various shooting applications. They offer a range of features to enhance accuracy, visibility, and versatility. When considering a Cmore sight, it's essential to assess your requirements and preferences to make an informed decision.

Features to Consider

​
https://preview.redd.it/wg1qdzerrp1d1.jpg?width=720&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=46027de3f422907b5ca8b92c0ad7729e20f4bc88

1. Optical Quality: A high-quality lens should provide a clear, sharp, and distortion-free image for accurate targeting. Look for sights with fully multicoated lenses to maximize light transmission and improve contrast.
2. Field of View (FOV): A wider field of view allows for faster target acquisition and better peripheral vision, which can be beneficial in fast-paced shooting situations.
3. Reticle Options: Cmore sights offer a variety of reticle patterns to suit different shooting styles and scenarios. Consider your preferences and the specific application when selecting a reticle.
4. Adjustment Range: The adjustment range of a Cmore sight refers to the elevation and windage adjustments available. A larger adjustment range provides more flexibility for long-range shooting and precise adjustments.
5. Durability and Weather Resistance: A reliable Cmore sight should be built to withstand harsh conditions and maintain functionality in different weather scenarios. Look for products with waterproof and fog-proof seals, as well as durable materials.

General Considerations

1. Compatibility: Ensure the Cmore sight you choose is compatible with your firearm's mounting system. Consult the manufacturer's specifications and cross-check with your firearm's mounting options.
2. Purpose: Determine the intended use for your Cmore sight, as different models may excel in specific applications like hunting, competition, or tactical situations.
3. Budget: Cmore sights come in a wide range of price points. Establish your budget and seek options that offer the best value for your requirements and preferences.

Tips for Choosing the Right Cmore Sight

• Consider the features mentioned above and prioritize them according to your needs.
• If possible, try out a few different models at a shooting range or through a rental program.
• Research user reviews and testimonials to gain insights into the performance, durability, and ease of use of various Cmore sights.
• Take advantage of any available warranties or return policies to ensure your satisfaction with the product.

Selecting the right Cmore sight requires careful consideration of essential features, compatibility, and application. By taking the time to research and evaluate your options, you can find a sight that enhances your shooting experience and meets your specific requirements.
​
https://preview.redd.it/d5jibhzrrp1d1.jpg?width=720&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=8cf80a6bb8e7905337a5cbe40c2052ac55e3c666

FAQ

Why should I choose Cmore sights?

Cmore sights are known for their durability, accuracy, and ease of use. These sights are designed for a wide range of firearms, including handguns and rifles, making it easy for you to find a sight that works with your gun. Additionally, they offer various reticle options, allowing you to find the perfect sight for your shooting style.

Are Cmore sights easy to install?

​
https://preview.redd.it/mp3k4easrp1d1.jpg?width=720&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=867b021361d4e1a633dfdbec9afda68eeea912e4
Cmore sights are known for their easy installation process. Most models can be mounted on your firearm without the need for any additional tools. This makes it quick and simple for you to get your sight up and running.

What types of reticles are available for Cmore sights?

Cmore sights offer a variety of reticle options, including dot, circle, and various combinations. These reticles are designed to provide accurate and efficient shooting, allowing you to quickly make successful shots, especially in low-light situations.

Are Cmore sights waterproof?

Yes, Cmore sights are designed to be waterproof. This means that they can withstand being exposed to rain, sweat, or other moisture without sustaining damage. This feature makes them ideal for outdoor use and ensures that your sight is never hindered due to poor weather conditions.
​
https://preview.redd.it/91op5dssrp1d1.jpg?width=720&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=1b0e83b760c7658985a129aa0cee104f27c143a2

Do Cmore sights come with any warranty or guarantee?

Cmore sights normally come with a limited lifetime warranty. This warranty typically covers any manufacturing defects or issues related to the sight's performance. Contact Cmore for specific details on the warranty and its coverage.

What materials are used to construct Cmore sights?

Cmore sights are typically made from high-quality materials, including aircraft-grade aluminum, polymer, and glass. These materials are designed to be durable, lightweight, and resistant to water, shock, and other wear and tear.

Can Cmore sights be used for hunting?

Yes, Cmore sights are ideal for hunting applications. Their advanced reticle options and accuracy make them an excellent choice for hunting with various firearms, especially in low-light situations and for long-range shots.

What kind of battery do Cmore sights use?

Cmore sights typically use a CR2 battery. This type of battery is commonly found in various electronic devices and is widely available for purchase.

What is the price range for Cmore sights?

The Cmore sight product line offers a variety of options to suit different budgets. Prices for these sights start at around $200 and can go up to around $500 or more depending on the model and features you choose.
As an Amazon™ Associate, we earn from qualifying purchases.