|
Thanks, NYT! We're all going to diiiiiiiiiiiie.  Well, not really, but still. Not cool. Personally, I prefer to call the Dokdo/Takeshima... the Liancourt Rocks. 
|
#
?
Dec 10, 2013 03:50
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 28, 2024 13:24 |
|
|
Really I think the proper response is just to set up a little unmanned drone base that flies hundreds of quadcopters around the area identifying the poo poo out of themselves 24/7.
|
|
#
?
Dec 10, 2013 05:53
|
|
|
China isn't going to destroy the world with only 240 nukes.
|
|
#
?
Dec 10, 2013 06:08
|
|
|
Arglebargle III posted:Really I think the proper response is just to set up a little unmanned drone base that flies hundreds of quadcopters around the area identifying the poo poo out of themselves 24/7. Nah man, have the rocks be the deathmatch arena for each of the countries political leaders. Whoever survives last, wins them. And then we bomb it, so there is nothing to own.
|
|
#
?
Dec 10, 2013 15:24
|
|
|
Fojar38 posted:China isn't going to destroy the world with only 240 nukes. More importantly, some stupid loving rocks in the middle of nowhere are not worth going to war over for any of the parties involved in the disputes, never mind potential oil/gas fields, EEZ borders, fishing rights what have you. The insane cost of a war both diplomatically and economically due to disruption of trade dwarfs any potential gains any of the concerned parties could stand to receive. The only way you could reasonably be worried about a war over these disputes is if you believed the governments of China,South Korea, and/or Japan were run by lunatics. By keeping their status in a diplomatic limbo, nobody wins, but nobody loses either, hence no one loses face, and business goes on as usual.
|
|
#
?
Dec 10, 2013 15:43
|
|
|
This is what world trade networks look like in Europa Universalis IV, with colored trade nodes and arrows showing the permanent links.  It's a directed acyclic graph: "Sinks" that consume trade from other nodes but don't have any outgoing trade are in the Netherlands and Venice, while there are 4 sources in the Americas and 4 more in Asia, plus Australia. For world traders this map means it's really useful to hold on to places like the Gulf of Aden, Hangzhou (central China), and Mexico, because they determine where trade is going to go, and you generally want to direct it to a market your merchants control. Mexico can send trade value to Japan and China, while the Philippine trade can forward east to Panama, the Caribbean, and Europe, though at the 1444 start, the Philippines has almost no trade (only a couple "settled" provinces) and the Americas aren't trading with the Old World yet. Last edit I promise: Here's the political situation in 1444, for reference. This is a better version of the province map I posted a while ago. 
Vivian Darkbloom fucked around with this message at 17:47 on Dec 10, 2013 |
|
#
?
Dec 10, 2013 17:12
|
|
|
Protocol 5 posted:More importantly, some stupid loving rocks in the middle of nowhere are not worth going to war over for any of the parties involved in the disputes, never mind potential oil/gas fields, EEZ borders, fishing rights what have you. The insane cost of a war both diplomatically and economically due to disruption of trade dwarfs any potential gains any of the concerned parties could stand to receive. The only way you could reasonably be worried about a war over these disputes is if you believed the governments of China,South Korea, and/or Japan were run by lunatics. By keeping their status in a diplomatic limbo, nobody wins, but nobody loses either, hence no one loses face, and business goes on as usual. Counterpoint: 19th Century Europe and/or the Falklands. Nationalism isn't rational. Right now I agree it is the kind of stalemate you describe, but that can change pretty quickly.
|
|
#
?
Dec 10, 2013 22:31
|
|
|
Vivian Darkbloom posted:This is what world trade networks look like in Europa Universalis IV, with colored trade nodes and arrows showing the permanent links. I actually just got EUIV a little while ago and I've been having a hell of a time making any money, this is actually pretty helpful. I'm playing as France so maybe I'll try to take that drat node from Burgundy since it's a "sink".
|
|
#
?
Dec 10, 2013 22:34
|
|
|
Shbobdb posted:Counterpoint: 19th Century Europe and/or the Falklands. Nationalism isn't rational. Right now I agree it is the kind of stalemate you describe, but that can change pretty quickly. Brits actually live on Falklands though, that's a bunch of submerged islands. Not like it's impossible just very unlikely
|
|
#
?
Dec 10, 2013 22:43
|
|
|
Shbobdb posted:Counterpoint: 19th Century Europe and/or the Falklands. Nationalism isn't rational. Right now I agree it is the kind of stalemate you describe, but that can change pretty quickly. At least there were actually people living in the Falklands.
|
|
#
?
Dec 10, 2013 22:43
|
|
|
Vivian Darkbloom posted:This is what world trade networks look like in Europa Universalis IV, with colored trade nodes and arrows showing the permanent links. Paradox games actually bring a shitton of nationalism out in the open and its pretty funny. I'll see if I can go dig up some good examples.
|
|
#
?
Dec 11, 2013 03:09
|
|
|
There's a whole bunch of memes about "clay" and various balkan and romanian nationalism that's always mentioned in paradox related threads that I've never quite gotten but I just assume generic insane nationalism.
|
|
#
?
Dec 11, 2013 03:15
|
|
|
The clay thing comes from the youtube video "tupac serbia" https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4MuyLraUsh4 The Balkan nationalism joke is because of how often on the official Paradox forums Balkan nationalism came up. The official Paradox forums for a long time would have Balkan countries start yelling about historic injustices at any possible excuse. It was nearly impossible to find a thread that didn't mention it in some way.
|
|
#
?
Dec 11, 2013 03:42
|
|
|
Tupac serbia is a wonderfully bizarre parody. I've always wondered who the guy with the accordeon is.
|
|
#
?
Dec 11, 2013 03:50
|
|
|
Nowadays the nationalism has given way to an obsession with Byzantium. There's some kind of Serbian angle there, but I think it's mostly Roman fetishism since I see it coming from all corners.
|
|
#
?
Dec 11, 2013 03:55
|
|
|
Kavak posted:Nowadays the nationalism has given way to an obsession with Byzantium. There's some kind of Serbian angle there, but I think it's mostly Roman fetishism since I see it coming from all corners. I think Byzantium obsession has been a thing for longer than that, I have a Dutch friend who has been what I'd call a Byzantium fanboy for ages. It does seem co-morbid with playing Paradox games though, but maybe that's just because it's related to being a history nerd (like me) and history nerds play Paradox games (like me). I mean the Eastern Roman Empire is pretty cool, and there's a certain sense of revanchism/underdogism in it because of the perceived historiographical slights towards Byzantium. Possibly Islamophobia is involved?  The Roman Catholic Latin Empire, constituted from the Orthodox one after the sack of Constantinople by the crusaders of the Fourth Crusade in the beginning of the 1200s.
|
|
#
?
Dec 11, 2013 08:53
|
|
|
I think it's similar to how people love playing as Germany in the more modern games, just to imagine what might have been. Speaking of Paradox games and nationalism, I've always found it kind of odd that in Victoria II, they took care to even distinguish obscure cultures like Picard or Sorbian/Kashubian (Western Slavic, it's called in the game), but they apparently did not consider Scottish or Welsh to be cultures separate from 'British'. Same with 'Swiss'.
|
|
#
?
Dec 11, 2013 09:00
|
|
|
There's no Welsh or Scottish? That's amazing considering there's Yankee, Dixie, and Texan in there.
|
|
#
?
Dec 11, 2013 09:16
|
|
|
Paradox makes cultures based on both gameplay mechanics and actual cultures in real life. Wales and Scotland never had a serious violent revolution attempt in the time period and effectively followed the will of the English, like they had for the previous 400 years. Texans and the Dixies both did do a violent revolt. Paradox won't ever model subcultures as a separate culture and especially not as a part of a different culture group if it only results in ahistorical situations.
|
|
#
?
Dec 11, 2013 09:48
|
|
|
Picardiens, Occitans etc. never actually revolted either. e: or at least not in a way that was still relevant by the time the 19th century rolled around.
|
|
#
?
Dec 11, 2013 10:08
|
|
|
Fandyien posted:I actually just got EUIV a little while ago and I've been having a hell of a time making any money, this is actually pretty helpful. I'm playing as France so maybe I'll try to take that drat node from Burgundy since it's a "sink". I just attempted to explain the basics of trade in the EU4 LP I'm running.. there's some parts I'm still not great with, which is bad because I'm playing Genoa and I really need to maximize trade.
|
|
#
?
Dec 11, 2013 10:23
|
|
|
the jizz taxi posted:Picardiens, Occitans etc. never actually revolted either. Kavak posted:Nowadays the nationalism has given way to an obsession with Byzantium. There's some kind of Serbian angle there, but I think it's mostly Roman fetishism since I see it coming from all corners.
|
|
#
?
Dec 11, 2013 12:02
|
|
|
People have been obsessed with Byzantium since Constantinople fell, it's not really a new thing. It was the last surviving part of the Roman Empire + a major obstacle against those horrible Muslims + a major city after all. After it fell thousands from there made it their business to sell the legacy.
|
|
#
?
Dec 11, 2013 12:31
|
|
|
Byzantium is very conductive to wargaming. It has a distinctive visual style, pleasing shade of purple, pretty borders in almost every iteration, exotic enemies on every border, distinctive and varied infantry, cavalry, and sea gameplay, and it's declining startdates form a natural difficulty curve. Also it has lots of primary sources and a now-exotic culture which lends itself to let's plays. Also it's defensive disposition is attractive to players who hate losing progress. Baron Porkface fucked around with this message at 13:05 on Dec 11, 2013 |
|
#
?
Dec 11, 2013 13:01
|
|
|
A Buttery Pastry posted:But they were the subject of a campaign to assimilate them during the period (and a pretty successful one to boot), which I don't think is true for the Welsh and the Scots. Not that I entirely agree with the way Paradox handles cultures, but omitting the fact that France was much less homogenous in 1836 than it is today, to the point that Paris felt a need to impose itself culturally on the rest of France, would smell like the bad kind of revisionism to me. The Scots were totally subject to an assimilation campaign though. I'm not sure about the Welsh but the English were not nice at all in the 19th century. The Scottish Highlands were essentially depopulated and remain so to this day.
|
|
#
?
Dec 11, 2013 13:37
|
|
|
Arglebargle III posted:The Scots were totally subject to an assimilation campaign though. I'm not sure about the Welsh but the English were not nice at all in the 19th century. The Scottish Highlands were essentially depopulated and remain so to this day.
|
|
#
?
Dec 11, 2013 13:57
|
|
|
The assimilation campaign in Scotland wasn't the Highland Clearances, which were economic decisions made by individual landlords. Assimilation was more to do with the banning of Gaelic, the enforcement of English in schools, and the outlawry of various 'Highland' cultural traits such as the predecessor of the modern kilt. These were attempts to pacify the country after the 1745 rebellion led by Charles Stuart. It also wouldn't be accurate to split 'Highlanders' and 'Lowlanders' into two groups, because not only would nobody in the period have considered that distinction to be ethnic, any divide would be complicated by the languages. The circled area is the modern extent of the Scots language (a descendant of Old English). I personally wouldn't include the Shetlandic and Orcadian dialects in this because they're heavily Norse-influenced and not mutually intelligible with, say, Glasgow Scots. The north-west, i.e. the western Highlands, is also known as the Gàidhealtachd, or Gaelic-speaking region, but if you wanted to make this distinct you'd additionally need to have Ulster Scots, Irish Scots and Borderers as a minimum if you wanted to be consistent. e: It should be acknowledged that the exact 'language' status of Scots is disputed, more so now with the upcoming independence referendum, so there are pro-Union activists out there who would seriously disagree with the map I just posted. Obliterati fucked around with this message at 14:28 on Dec 11, 2013 |
|
#
?
Dec 11, 2013 14:15
|
|
|
Obliterati posted:The assimilation campaign in Scotland wasn't the Highland Clearances, which were economic decisions made by individual landlords. Obliterati posted:Assimilation was more to do with the banning of Gaelic, the enforcement of English in schools, and the outlawry of various 'Highland' cultural traits such as the predecessor of the modern kilt. These were attempts to pacify the country after the 1745 rebellion led by Charles Stuart. It also wouldn't be accurate to split 'Highlanders' and 'Lowlanders' into two groups, because not only would nobody in the period have considered that distinction to be ethnic, any divide would be complicated by the languages.
|
|
#
?
Dec 11, 2013 15:37
|
|
|
Arglebargle III posted:I'm not sure about the Welsh but the English were not nice at all in the 19th century. "No spitting, swearing, or speaking Welsh" Omitting those as cultural groups seems pretty unjustified. I think they probably just forgot. Any other major cultures that aren't represented in the game?
|
|
#
?
Dec 11, 2013 16:03
|
|
|
Koramei posted:"No spitting, swearing, or speaking Welsh" I'm not an ethnographer but out of cultures I'm familiar with, I noticed Frisian was also absent. And as mentioned earlier, the game treats 'Swiss' as one culture, while I'm pretty confident that German-speaking Swiss people see themselves as belonging to another culture than inhabitants of la Romandie. Doesn't mean they both can't feel Swiss nationalism, of course.
|
|
#
?
Dec 11, 2013 16:16
|
|
|
Koramei posted:"No spitting, swearing, or speaking Welsh" I think you can safely say they didn't forget, per say. It was almost certainly a gameplay decision, since Paradox went to pretty serious efforts to get a lot of African ethnicities and their locations right, as well as indigenous Asian/South American ones. I actually had a long discussion with a friend the other day about whether Victoria II needs more in some places to reflect multiculturalism in the U.S. and other immigrant nations but in general I think Paradox does a great job balancing reality and playability. Plus EUIV, which I picked up after putting just over a hundred hours into Vicky, seems to be a bit more intense about the micro-cultures. I know theres Picardie, Gascon, Occitan, and like five or six other cultures in France alone.
|
|
#
?
Dec 11, 2013 16:20
|
|
|
Koramei posted:Omitting those as cultural groups seems pretty unjustified. I think they probably just forgot. Any other major cultures that aren't represented in the game? The Bretons are completely absent. Part of the problem is that the way the game handles accepted cultures for each country is inadequate to represent the kind of nation building by language enforcement that went on in Britain and France (And elsewhere, for that matter), but there was a conversation we had with a developer in the Paradox thread here that indicated they didn't do enough research to understand the real history of Franco-Breton relations.
|
|
#
?
Dec 11, 2013 16:26
|
|
|
A Buttery Pastry posted:The intent might have been economic, but that doesn't mean it couldn't affect the assimilation campaign, does it? Nor that the landlords were at all sad to see non-English speakers go, even if their thinking was more along the line of the Highlanders leaving being a happy byproduct of them making more money, instead of the explicit goal. It's much easier to assimilate a culture if a bunch of them left "on their own" due to you taking their livelihood away. Sorry, should've pointed out Scots was also banned, to the point where many people today consider it bad English. What I'm trying to say is that some of this dichotomy was devised after the fact as the consequence of British policies throughout the country: the landowners making these decisions included both Scottish and English aristocracy, and the Clearances themselves were occurring in lowland areas in the same way they were in the Highlands (on much less scale). Gaels were certainly disproportionately affected by the Clearances making a significant majority of migrants, and yeah, this did help assimilation efforts. In particular the Scottish colonists of Nova Scotia were primarily Highlanders, to the point where a lot of 'Highland music' actually comes out of the traditions preserved there. It wouldn't be incorrect per se to divide the two, it's just that I would argue these are more subcultures than distinct cultures, perhaps like the difference between Yorkshire and Dorset. Whilst the Highlands were definitely specifically targeted, they were seen by the rulers as simply a variety of Scot. To this day, English conceptions of 'Scot' generally default to the Highland stereotypes - here's one from 1991:  On the assimilation of 'Highlanders' into the 'Lowlands' the most concrete remaining example would be The Hielanman's Umbrella, the bridge in the centre of Glasgow where incoming Highlanders waited for work. Definitely a thing, as locals felt the need to point out the distinction. Basically it's complicated and I'm only saying that from a Victoria perspective 'Scottish' is probably sufficient, although I broadly agree with what you're saying. It's just that you'd end up with Highland and Lowland states, which hasn't been the case since around the 7th century. If you were making a finer-grained game, say one that focused on the British Isles, adding that distinction would be more appropriate if you wanted two 'cultures' in Scotland.
|
|
#
?
Dec 11, 2013 16:33
|
|
|
Apparently Gaddafi really liked pitching the idea of splitting Switzerland: Which led me to this Strange Maps entry on three different Greater Switzerlands. Switzerland gets Savoy:  Switzerland gets Lombardy:  Switzerland gets everything (except Liechtenstein): 
|
|
#
?
Dec 11, 2013 16:41
|
|
|
Obliterati posted:In particular the Scottish colonists of Nova Scotia were primarily Highlanders, to the point where a lot of 'Highland music' actually comes out of the traditions preserved there.
|
|
#
?
Dec 11, 2013 16:45
|
|
|
Lord Hydronium posted:Apparently Gaddafi really liked pitching the idea of splitting Switzerland: Wow, the Gaddafi family was NOT happy with Switzerland: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Libya%96Switzerland_relations quote:At the 35th G8 summit, Gaddafi publicly called for the dissolution of Switzerland, its territory to be divided among France, Italy and Germany.[8] All seemingly sparked off because of the arrest of Hannibal gaddafi for domestic violence. catfry fucked around with this message at 19:10 on Dec 11, 2013 |
|
#
?
Dec 11, 2013 17:22
|
|
|
Fandyien posted:I think you can safely say they didn't forget, per say. It was almost certainly a gameplay decision, since Paradox went to pretty serious efforts to get a lot of African ethnicities and their locations right, as well as indigenous Asian/South American ones. the jizz taxi posted:I'm not an ethnographer but out of cultures I'm familiar with, I noticed Frisian was also absent. And as mentioned earlier, the game treats 'Swiss' as one culture, while I'm pretty confident that German-speaking Swiss people see themselves as belonging to another culture than inhabitants of la Romandie. Doesn't mean they both can't feel Swiss nationalism, of course. Obliterati posted:Scottish Culture And because we've been talking so much and not posting maps, here's quick one I made of the maximum extents of Switzerland if the current language balance had to be maintained.  Would've solved a whole lot of problems if that place had remained as neutral as Switzerland during the last 200 years. A Buttery Pastry fucked around with this message at 18:03 on Dec 11, 2013 |
|
#
?
Dec 11, 2013 17:58
|
|
|
catfry posted:All seemingly sparked of because of the arrest of Hannibal gaddafi for domestic violence. Pretty ironic since Switzerland's track record for women's rights is among the worst in Europe. Meanwhile, have this Medieval fever dream. Not gonna delve into the map's oddities, but it's interesting to see how, over time, 'Flanders' has come to denote an area different from what it used to. Practically speaking, it was most of the land from the North Sea to the Scheldt river, but apparently in the 19th century, when Belgium was formed and the westernmost parts of Flanders had long been lost to France, they decided to name the entire Dutch-speaking area of Belgium Flanders. I'm guessing they didn't call it Brabant or Limburg because the Netherlands also had provinces with that name. At any rate, that's the reason why within the State of Flanders, the provinces of West- and East-Flanders are the two westernmost provinces. 
|
|
#
?
Dec 11, 2013 18:43
|
|
|
Lord Hydronium posted:Switzerland gets everything (except Liechtenstein): Last time this got posted I made a map to see how it would look: 
|
|
#
?
Dec 11, 2013 19:25
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 28, 2024 13:24 |
|
|
I wonder if you take a map of Great European Countries, excluding the vast or temporary empires like Roman/Napelonic French/Nazi German, how much land would be left in 'core' territories vs overlap? Between the various Greater Germany, Poland, Hungary, Romania, Serbia, Bulgaria, Greece, and whatever else in the Balkans/Eastern Europe, I'm guessing there'd be around 25% left claimed by only one country.
|
|
#
?
Dec 11, 2013 21:45
|
|
