|
Wait. I've never seen Tintin in the Land of the Soviets anywhere, but I've read Tintin in the Congo in a bookstore. Why is it that the former's never been republished, whereas the latter has?
|
#
?
May 2, 2015 00:37
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 16, 2024 11:51 |
|
|
PittTheElder posted:Was there a legal definition of what exactly the current conflict was? Did the contemporaries see the 30YW as one giant thing, or are the conflicts against the Bohemians, Frederick V, Danes, Swedes, French, and Miscellaneous recognized as separate things? Does everybody stop caring about the difference two years in? Edit: Also, the treaties that ended it referred to all the parties of the conflict, so in a legal sense they definitely think it's one large thing (except for Saxony versus the HRE, since they switched sides again in 1635 and made a peace with the Emperor in the Peace of Prague. Since Saxony's the most important Protestant state, most of the rest of them went with it. That didn't stop the war, though). HEY GUNS fucked around with this message at 01:04 on May 2, 2015 |
|
#
?
May 2, 2015 00:53
|
|
|
Frostwerks posted:lol what Yeah I don't know, I think I confused the three vampire ladies or his visiting of the one girl nightly to drink her blood.
|
|
#
?
May 2, 2015 01:26
|
|
|
Phobophilia posted:I basically can't stand long running superhero comics and am only interested in them in an archaeological sense. As in, "oh ho ho ho, what did those wacky 50s era Americans enjoy?". 
|
|
#
?
May 2, 2015 01:30
|
|
|
HEY GAL posted:They seemed to see it as one giant thing at the time, whose subparts were related to one another (the Swedish thing piggybacked onto the Danish thing, for instance). People started calling it some version of "the Thirty Years' War" really early on. Any examples of a guy joining a regiment, having kids and fighting side by side with his kid(s) because the war just wouldn't loving end?
|
|
#
?
May 2, 2015 01:41
|
|
|
Trin Tragula posted:The Ottomans take the offensive on Gallipoli, to no great effect Not a WWI specific question, but when a military commander (from any period) drew up some plans to smash the other side's poo poo in, how would they factor in possible casualties? How can you reasonably estimate how many of your dudes are going to go down in the fracas? I can't imagine it not being an issue, but can't picture how it would be dealt with, especially with longer term strategic planning.
|
|
#
?
May 2, 2015 01:43
|
|
|
American.jpg
|
|
#
?
May 2, 2015 02:27
|
|
|
Nuclear War posted:Any examples of a guy joining a regiment, having kids and fighting side by side with his kid(s) because the war just wouldn't loving end? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ernesto_Montecuccoli is the uncle of: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Raimondo_Montecuccoli At least two out of three of Ottavio Piccolomini's children died either in combat or in a war-related context: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ottavio_Piccolomini#Death_and_legacy On the plebeian level, things were probably similar: 
|
|
#
?
May 2, 2015 03:04
|
|
|
That's not actually Iron Man, it's an entirely weirder superhero called T-Man. For Treasury Man. Because that's what the US Treasury needed, a secret agent.
|
|
#
?
May 2, 2015 05:06
|
|
|
MarsDragon posted:That's not actually Iron Man, it's an entirely weirder superhero called T-Man. For Treasury Man. Because that's what the US Treasury needed, a secret agent. That is literally what the Secret Service is, though?
|
|
#
?
May 2, 2015 05:07
|
|
|
MarsDragon posted:That's not actually Iron Man, it's an entirely weirder superhero called T-Man. For Treasury Man. Because that's what the US Treasury needed, a secret agent. Until fairly recently, the Secret Service was under the Treasury Department, so it's not that weird. It's original function was to use agents posing as vendors to sniff out corruption and fraud in government procurement during the Civil War. It took on the task of protecting Presidents later.
|
|
#
?
May 2, 2015 05:09
|
|
|
Phobophilia posted:Wait. I've never seen Tintin in the Land of the Soviets anywhere, but I've read Tintin in the Congo in a bookstore. Tintin in the Land of the Soviets has been re-released a couple of times, last time in 1999 for the 70th anniversary. It was commissioned by a belgian newspaper specifically as anti-communist propaganda and Hergé ended up more or less disowning it. Once he started re-doing/re-drawing and colouring his newspaper strips he decided to leave it out because he didn't like it. He also admitted that he did very little research on Soviet Russia. Of course, the fact that his re-drawing and colouring took place in 1942 could go some way to explain why he decided against including the hideously anti-communist work. Then again, Tintin in the Congo also ended up being changed upon re-release so that Tintin didn't literally blow up a rhino with a dynamite.
|
|
#
?
May 2, 2015 10:07
|
|
|
It's barely more ridiculous than what some of the less sane big game hunters did. 100 Years Ago My mission to ignore the Eastern Front for as long as possible comes to a screeching halt with the opening of the Gorlice-Tarnow Offensive, which is far too big and important to be ignored. The retreat to the GHQ Line is nearly complete, and a large helping of ANZACs give their lives to a fight that shows some signs of original thinking, but sadly also an overdose of optimism.
|
|
#
?
May 2, 2015 20:36
|
|
|
Urk. I just bought To End All Wars on Steam and naturally the first things I checked is the Royal Navy forces in the 1914 scenario. Oh dear God they've gotten a bunch of things messed up. Not with the actual forces, but a bunch of the admirals have bizarre attributes. William Goodenough, a model cruiser squadron commander who did Beatty's job for him at Jutland gets a -2 penalty to command abilities for no goddamned reason. Arbuthnot has a marker for recklessness but Beatty doesn't. Poor Troubridge of the Goeben chase is missing completely. Still it isn't all bad: Fisher gets Defiant, Eccentric Strategist, and Superior Tactician. Sums up the man quite well. Is there a level of wargame peeving beyond Grognard, because I think I'm well established there. Help me. Vincent Van Goatse fucked around with this message at 02:05 on May 3, 2015 |
|
#
?
May 3, 2015 02:03
|
|
|
Rage on their forums. You know you want to go full grog, do it
|
|
#
?
May 3, 2015 04:11
|
|
|
ALL-PRO SEXMAN posted:Urk. I got real mad when I realized that HoI 3 gave Joseph Reeves Old Guard, because he looks old 
|
|
#
?
May 3, 2015 04:21
|
|
|
ALL-PRO SEXMAN posted:Urk.
|
|
#
?
May 3, 2015 07:08
|
|
|
HEY GAL posted:i'll go you one better, i just found out that 1632 has a huge fan community. They write little serials. Ggh. That's the one with some All-American Small Town™ that ends up in 17th century Europe, right? *one  later*Hmm, it's published by Baen Books of John Ringo and various prolefeed "military sci-fi" crapfests fame. OK, dish on what's so specifically awful about 1632. I've never read it and I'm not going to. Vincent Van Goatse fucked around with this message at 07:50 on May 3, 2015 |
|
#
?
May 3, 2015 07:47
|
|
|
ALL-PRO SEXMAN posted:Hmm, it's published by Baen Books of John Ringo and various prolefeed "military sci-fi" crapfests fame. This one's written by a communist rather than a nazi though.
|
|
#
?
May 3, 2015 08:03
|
|
|
ALL-PRO SEXMAN posted:That's the one with some All-American Small Town™ that ends up in 17th century Europe, right?
|
|
#
?
May 3, 2015 08:19
|
|
|
HEY GAL posted:me neither, unless i'm payed to, but i heard they solve everyone's problems by their American Ingenuity And Grit, then ally with Sweden, because it's so progressive and amenable to 20th century American democracy. Sweden? The "depopulate the country by conscripting every young man the army gets their hands on" Sweden?
|
|
#
?
May 3, 2015 08:21
|
|
|
my dad posted:Sweden? The "depopulate the country by conscripting every young man the army gets their hands on" Sweden? yes, that one edit: quote:1632 And in northern Germany things couldn't get much worse. Famine. Disease. Religous war laying waste the cities. Only the aristocrats remained relatively unscathed; for the peasants, death was a mercy. HEY GUNS fucked around with this message at 08:39 on May 3, 2015 |
|
#
?
May 3, 2015 08:36
|
|
|
HEY GAL posted:yes, that one quote:Comprehensive Teacher's Guide available. 1. Place 1632 in classroom wastebasket. 2. Resume lesson.
|
|
#
?
May 3, 2015 08:46
|
|
|
HEY GAL posted:yes, that one Sounds like something that historians should pass around at parties, seeing how long each person can read it without either laughing or spiking it against the wall like a football.
|
|
#
?
May 3, 2015 08:51
|
|
|
which reminds me, in the world of actual history, yesterday i learned that vermouth or brandy was a popular breakfast drink for the officers who could afford it, and then they'd switch to wine or beer throughout the day
|
|
#
?
May 3, 2015 09:39
|
|
|
If someone wants to see how stupid it gets themselves, here you go.
|
|
#
?
May 3, 2015 09:58
|
|
|
ALL-PRO SEXMAN posted:Hmm, it's published by Baen Books of John Ringo and various prolefeed "military sci-fi" crapfests fame. Disclaimer: I used to read 1632 in high school and I'm something of a fan. The primary flaw of 1632 (and it does have many) is optimism - enormous, exuberant, freewheeling optimism. The author is basically in love with the American Ideal of Freedom, Liberty, and Democracy, and is completely sure that once people have it explained to them (and maybe the hardcases knocked over the head a few times) they'll fall in love with it too and work to make a better world for everyone, even if they're Germans from the 17th century. And not just Germans, either - he's quite confident that as everyone in the 17th century starts reading about "the other history" and all the technological advantages available, the world will inevitably start becoming more American if only to try and compete with the new nation. He does go some way towards acknowledging that there's going to be friction - ethnic tensions between Americans and Germans, reactionary opposition parties arising in parliament, a divergence of interests between the German-American state and the Swedes, just to name a few, but he usually waves his hands and insists that such issues can generally be marginalized and controlled without too much difficulty or even cost. That said, its primary flaw is also its saving grace. Cheery optimism and "I'm sure everything will work out all right if we just put our minds and shoulders to it!" may be ridiculously naive, but it's also refreshing and easy to read, and it is kind of nice to read a story written by someone who takes the Statue of Liberty's poem seriously and wants to see it live up to its promise. It's also tempered to an extent by the author's habit of taking on co-authors who tend to tamp down the excesses of his optimism (the first book was by far the worst for syrupy optimism), and the various co-authors provide different viewpoints and focuses that I honestly find pretty interesting - instead of focusing entirely on war and fancy new war-tech (though it does that quite a bit), there's often explorations on the economics, politics, and social aspects of what happens if you drop an American town into the middle of the 30 Years War and it DOESN'T get wiped out instantly. The anthologies HEY GAL mentioned are actually part of that - the quality of the stories is wildly suspect at best but do explore weird little side avenues of alt-history, both aspects of which are exemplified in a stupefyingly boring short story about the legalities of land ownership in 17th century Thuringia and how this affects American farmers seeking new land to till and German farmers seeking access to tractors. Don't get me wrong, though, it is a flawed series with a lot of problems, especially historical ones*, but while it is a guilty pleasure it is a pleasure all the same. And if nothing else, it got me interested in the 30 Years' War to begin with. *One major aspect that would probably drive HEY GAL insane - despite the series as a whole touching on a diverse cast of characters such as Wallenstein (who ends up running a more or less independent Bohemia), Cardinal-Infante Ferdinand (who carves out a constitutional monarchy in Holland), the Pope in Rome, Cardinal Richelieu, and Charles I, the series funnily enough almost entirely ignores, y'know, the Holy Roman Emperor. Despite being set primarily in the Holy Roman Empire. It's like he ceases entirely to exist after the Americans cause Gustav Adolf to go Super Saiyan.
|
|
#
?
May 3, 2015 10:01
|
|
|
Tomn posted:the legalities of land ownership in 17th century Thuringia Edit: How does the series treat Wallenstein? Because I think he's a fascinating person and every now and then I want to make a big old effort post on him. He could itemize a shipment of supplies down to the last pair of shoes, in the middle of planning battles would busy himself with making sure the citizens of his territories lived in buildings that were up to his standards, kept all the details for raising and provisioning his huge armies in his head and carried all that out more or less on his own...and had not a clue how human emotions worked, with the single exception of the part where people seek reward and shun punishment. He knew that he was making enemies though--his motto was Invita Invidia, In Spite Of Envy (Unwilling Envy?) Edit 2: another great Wallenstein anecdote has him stalking the perimeter of his besieged camp on the Alte Veste, throwing coins into the laps of the wounded to encourage the others. HEY GUNS fucked around with this message at 10:20 on May 3, 2015 |
|
#
?
May 3, 2015 10:03
|
|
|
HEY GAL posted:wait, now i'm interested Sadly, I don't know where exactly in the endless amount of Gazettes that story was, and Google isn't helping. Apparently there IS an essay about horse breeds of Germany in 1632 and the probable effects of mechanization on German agriculture in 1632, though! As for Wallenstein, pretty mixed. In the first book he's one of the Big Bads and gets his jaw shot off by a sniper (and there's an author's note raining calumny on his name and mentioning that a more gruesome end had been cut out), but I guess a later co-author or something convinced him otherwise because he later goes on to read in the "modern" history books about his getting assassinated and basically tells the Emperor to stick it where the sun doesn't shine, couping Bohemia as his personal kingdom (allying with the Americans because he figures they're the winning side now - no hard feelings about the shot-off jaw you'll note) and turning it into a realm of religious freedom and toleration for all - especially the Jews. He's also depicted as highly superstitious and into astrology, though, plus something of a hypochondriac. Overall, once you get past the first book, sort of an clever, eccentric pragmatist.
|
|
#
?
May 3, 2015 10:36
|
|
|
Tomn posted:clever, eccentric pragmatist. Edit: And this is the guy who kept kind of trying to make peace with the Swedes in 29/30 because a war involving Sweden was bad for the Baltic trading networks, I doubt he would have taken a shot-off jaw too personally, especially if money was involved Edit 2: The hypochondria is inaccurate, he actually was pretty sick. The superstition and astrology is debated, but everyone was into that poo poo then. The religious toleration is true--he doesn't care what, if anything, you believe or whether or not you're fresh from service with one of his enemies, if you're good at your job he'll let you stick around. Edit 3: Whether because of his health problems or just because he was kinda weird, he took baths frequently in water infused with sandalwood and rosemary. So we know what he would have smelled like. just thought i'd mention that HEY GUNS fucked around with this message at 11:05 on May 3, 2015 |
|
#
?
May 3, 2015 10:41
|
|
|
Hmm, I remember reading a book where dimensionally ported Americans team up with timelost Russian peasants to fight off intelligent velociraptors. I think I'll stick with that.
|
|
#
?
May 3, 2015 11:52
|
|
|
I think Tomn covered it best, but two additional bits: - There's a plot thread in one of the later books where the Americans run into a band of peasants running around guerillaing stray mercenary bands with a bunch of weaponry they had accumulated over the decades. The Americans initially assume that they've been inspired by the glorious light of freedom, before the peasants set them straight by rattling off all the various peasant revolts their fathers/grandfathers/extended family fought and died in. I think there's some line along the lines of 'the only thing your future history has taught us is that when we do win, make sure we don't get tricked by a bunch of bourgoise scum.' - Much later in the series (Swedish hijinks): Oxenstierna and Baner try to murder-coup Gustav Adolph and poo poo hits the fan.
|
|
#
?
May 3, 2015 12:07
|
|
|
It's so easy to mock the 1632 series (I dunno, I kinda liked the story about land ownership in Thuringia...I'm weird tho), but I get why people do. It is bad, seen in a broader context than alt-hist. It really is. But let's be brutally honest, most alt-history stories are bad. At least it's not as terrible as Turtledove.
|
|
#
?
May 3, 2015 12:13
|
|
|
I am bad because I unironically enjoy turtledove and I feel bad about that fact. 
|
|
#
?
May 3, 2015 14:13
|
|
|
Not bad, Klaus88. You just have terrible taste in alt-history authors.
|
|
#
?
May 3, 2015 15:29
|
|
|
Tomn posted:*One major aspect that would probably drive HEY GAL insane - despite the series as a whole touching on a diverse cast of characters such as Wallenstein (who ends up running a more or less independent Bohemia), Cardinal-Infante Ferdinand (who carves out a constitutional monarchy in Holland), the Pope in Rome, Cardinal Richelieu, and Charles I, the series funnily enough almost entirely ignores, y'know, the Holy Roman Emperor. Despite being set primarily in the Holy Roman Empire. It's like he ceases entirely to exist after the Americans cause Gustav Adolf to go Super Saiyan.
|
|
#
?
May 3, 2015 15:42
|
|
|
Further discussion of alt-history books should probably go into the alt-history thread,, like God intended. So back onto the subject of history, I've been slowly and painfully making my way through a history of the 30 Years' War, and at one point the Swedes are noted to have "captured 5,000 uniforms." This seems like a bit of a mixed blessing? On one hand, free clothes is pretty great I imagine and would have done a lot for morale, but on the other hand I had the impression that half the point of uniforms is to make sure you know who you can shoot and who you can't - wearing enemy uniforms, however comfortable, seems to defeat the purpose somewhat. Is there something I'm missing here, or is it purely a matter of expediency based on existing clothes getting completely worn out? Actually, for that matter, do we have any idea what the soldiers on the ground of the early modern era thought about uniforms? Liked because "hey, free clothes!", recognized for its tactical benefits, disliked because they're shittily made, disliked because they got in the way of individual stylistic preferences?
|
|
#
?
May 3, 2015 16:46
|
|
|
In an era when everybody fights in large formations and uniforms aren't really standardized I'd imagine that you identify friendly or enemy units by what flags they happen to be waving.
|
|
#
?
May 3, 2015 16:57
|
|
|
Well, it's not like the uniforms are the only sign showing what side you're on. During the 30YW you'd have regimental colors as well and with the fairly compact formations it's not likely for a guy to find himself face to face with another guy in the powder haze, separated from all the others, trying to figure out if they're on the same side.
|
|
#
?
May 3, 2015 16:57
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 16, 2024 11:51 |
|
|
Not to mention that in the days before actual industrial manufacture, clothes and cloth were expensive as poo poo.
|
|
#
?
May 3, 2015 17:07
|
|
