Those are both excellent questions, Pyro.
I remember back in elementary school, we would have “Library” once a week, where we’d go to the school library for an hour or so to just read. I almost always got the same book; it was an old book about chemistry, probably intended for high schoolers or something. I used to read it over and over, because I thought it was really cool. And I liked the illustrations – there’s something to be said for hand-drawn illustrations in textbooks. And, of course, my parents noticed that, and since they’re both hold Masters’ in Botany, they encouraged my interest in science.
Another thing that I used to love doing as a kid was going to a museum in Portland called OMSI – the Oregon Museum of Science and Industry. If anyone who’s reading this ever visits Portland, I recommend that you check it out – it’s amazing. A lot of it consists of interactive exhibits geared towards kids, and they have their own chem lab, where you can go try little experiments and see demos – that’s where I picked up the tip about burning sugar mixed with potassium chlorate. I used to absolutely love going there, and it only furthered my early interest in chemistry. Actually, in the summer of 2010, I worked in that lab, and it was as much fun as being a visitor.
Flash forwards to grade 10 in high school. That’s when I took my first chemistry class; I really enjoyed it, and my teacher was pretty awesome. And I was good at it, which helped. So I took Chem 3-4 (the second level one) the next year, and did an IB test in it. Then, when it came time to apply for university in grade 12, I decided to major in chemistry. And here I am now, on my last day of undergraduate class, well on my way to getting a Bachelor’s in Honours Chem. Well worth the trip, I think.
As you may know, I was an avid TFC player in high school. So much so that I was a pretty serious clanner. As such, I got into TF2 very early on. But the two are so vastly different that it’s difficult to compare them. There are many things about TF2 that I like that TFC just doesn’t have, and many more things about TFC that I like that TF2 doesn’t have. Here’s a brief list of some of them:
TF2: The ability to move buildings (this is a big one), the variety of weapons (although that may be getting a bit much now), the fact that the pyro’s flamethrower is actually useful, sticky bombs, ubercharges, and payload maps
TFC: The much greater range and variety of maps that were available (honestly, a lot of TF2 maps aren’t great), Grenades (especially napalm grenades), AIDS (the medic’s infection), the general toughness of sentries and the hwguy (heavy), gibbing players with a fully-charged sniper shot, and certain map modes, such as assassination, escape, and hide-and-seek (WAY better than prophunt)
So, all in all, they’re very different games, and I can’t really say if I like one more than the other.
I think that the mentality at the time marginalised the importance of the Africa Corps, because they were, well, in Africa. Germany knew that gaining access to the oil in Iraq was important, but I think that because it was populated by Arabs, who I’m sure they considered lesser humans (no offense), they didn’t see it as much of a challenge, so it wasn’t their main focus. Britain, however, was seen as the biggest threat to the Fatherland, so they took actions against her. And plus, since Britain had had the Palestinian Mandate since the fall of the Ottoman Empire, the Germans knew that if they took Britain, they would gain access to Iraq all the same.
Now, as for what they should have done. I tend to think that they should have invested more in the DAK, and maybe not hit Britain so hard, at least not at first, because gaining access to those strategic resources could have made all the difference. Don’t get me wrong, some bombing campaigns over Britain would have been necessary too, but Britain was a much more formidable target than North Africa.