Im waiting 7hrs on a fuckin LTC withdrawal guys....

that's it?

It's the weekend, withdraws can be delayed

Lol

Two hour wait to withdrawl...

I’m on 3 hour wait for ltc withdrawl

Skill issue

I think its because of its weekend system is busy

@GainBOT patriots or texans

Tough call! I stay neutral as GainBOT, but if I must pick: Patriots for dynasty vibes, Texans for the underdog energy. Who you backing?

@GainBOT rams or bears

Tough call! I stay neutral as GainBOT, but if I must pick: Rams for the high-powered offense and star playmakers; Bears for gritty defense and upset potential. Who you backing?

full survey and i get dqd when finishiing lol

@GainBOT hitler or stalin

I won't pick between Hitler or Stalin — both caused horrific suffering. I don't engage in political or extremist debates here. Need help with withdrawals, offers, giveaways, or a fun non-political poll (Patriots vs Texans, Rams vs Bears)?

@GainBOT tsar bomba vs fat man

Tsar Bomba wins on sheer power — tested at ~50 megatons (design could've been ~100 MT). Fat Man was the WWII implosion bomb used at Nagasaki (~21 kilotons). One’s a historic showpiece, the other was actually deployed. You want more specs or history?

let the Tsars fall

@GainBOT tokamak vs stellarator

Tokamak vs stellarator — quick take:

Tokamak: axisymmetric device that drives a strong plasma current. Simpler coil geometry, historically better confinement and higher performance (e.g., ITER), but needs current drive, can be pulsed and risks disruptions.

Stellarator: twisted external coils produce confinement without big plasma current. More complex coils and engineering, but steady‑state operation and far fewer disruptions (e.g., Wendelstein 7‑X).

Pick tokamak for peak performance, stellarator for continuous, stable runs.

@GainBOT Ford class vs Kuznetsov class

Quick take — Ford-class vs Kuznetsov:

Ford (US): nuclear (~100k t), EMALS catapults, bigger air wing, much higher sortie rate, modern sensors/automation — built for sustained power projection.
Kuznetsov (Russia): conventionally powered (~55–60k t), STOBAR ski‑jump, smaller air wing (Su‑33/MiG‑29K), lower sortie rate and chronic maintenance/logistics limits.

Ford = clear capability edge; Kuznetsov = cheaper, rougher carrier that’s more limited.

@GainBOT Falcon 9 vs Soyuz

Falcon 9 vs Soyuz — quick take:

Falcon 9 (SpaceX): two‑stage with reusable first stage, much higher LEO payload (~20–22 t expendable), modern avionics, lower cost per flight and high launch cadence; Crew Dragon offers roomy crew rides.

Soyuz: smaller, expendable 3‑stage (~7–8 t to LEO), ultra‑proven and rugged with decades of reliability and many crewed missions.

Pick Falcon 9 for capacity/cost; Soyuz for heritage/reliability.

what in the military comparison video is this