|
Tankbuster posted:pinoy power. The Philippines was rather powerful in V2 as well, because as in V3, Luzon and Visayas are population-dense, and it would have access to iron and coal, which means steel. What held it back in V2 was that Spain had to release the country, or it had to rebel and split off, but in V3 it already exists as its own separate playable nation as a puppet.
|
#
?
Mar 31, 2024 16:11
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 13, 2024 23:08 |
|
|
Orange Devil posted:My biggest question is "why Byzantium?" Because as a kid you were told the Roman Empire was the greatest thing ever but it fell in the 5th century but then once you are old enough to read wikipedia* you learned oh actually wait it didn't fall
|
|
#
?
Mar 31, 2024 19:46
|
|
|
There has been a weird growth of extremely online dudes who are super into Byzantium and Greek Orthodox Christianity in the past few years. I blame the History of Byzantium podcast.
|
|
#
?
Mar 31, 2024 23:05
|
|
|
I just thought they were neat in AOE2.
|
|
#
?
Apr 1, 2024 01:47
|
|
|
Tankbuster posted:I just thought they were neat in AOE2. Full tech tree and being too young and dumb to understand their weaknesses ftw
|
|
#
?
Apr 1, 2024 01:57
|
|
|
https://forum.paradoxplaza.com/forum/threads/byzantium-vs-eastern-roman-empire.1651075/
|
|
#
?
Apr 1, 2024 02:01
|
|
|
It was weird starting a random Civ4 game with Romans, Greeks, and Byzantines.
|
|
#
?
Apr 1, 2024 02:04
|
|
|
Tankbuster posted:I just thought they were neat in AOE2. the AOE2 Byzantines are a really strong civ in general.
|
|
#
?
Apr 1, 2024 02:18
|
|
|
Tankbuster posted:because it is a hard start and makes it fun to retake land yeah it's already got the imperial administrative structure + massive amounts of former claims with cool alt province names and can expand in any direction or play tall without it feeling implausible and starts with nothing in eu, ppl always like the clean slate minmax starts
|
|
#
?
Apr 1, 2024 02:18
|
|
|
gradenko_2000 posted:https://forum.paradoxplaza.com/forum/threads/byzantium-vs-eastern-roman-empire.1651075/ Is Johan ever going to unfuck Imperator: Rome, or free up the resources for that or...?
|
|
#
?
Apr 1, 2024 02:43
|
|
|
I:R is done. Their work on EUV has meiou and taxes modders and generally seems to be taking similar principles at simulating the world.
|
|
#
?
Apr 1, 2024 02:46
|
|
|
Tankbuster posted:because it is a hard start and makes it fun to retake land also later byzantium gives you starting provinces that are spread out in a very pleasing way
|
|
#
?
Apr 1, 2024 03:14
|
|
|
Victoria 3 Philippines campaign update: - we managed to pass Collectivized Agriculture, but not before perhaps the most CSPAM event I've seen so far:  - I tried to intervene in a Siamese worker's revolution, but they got crushed faster than I could ship troops over - literacy is now at 71.7% as of December 1902 - there are only 370 individuals in the upper class, from a high of 188,000 - there are 1.85 million people in the middle class - and the rest of the population, 8.75 million souls, are part of the glorious proletariat - the next goal is to keep every industry subsidized and expand as hard and as fast as we can possibly construct more factories to supercharge our GDP. Currently, we have a score of 705 prestige, and if we get another +35 prestige, which we can do from boosting our economy, we'll finally break into the ranks of the Great Powers
|
|
#
?
Apr 1, 2024 05:26
|
|
|
Fat-Lip-Sum-41.mp3 posted:It was weird starting a random Civ4 game with Romans, Greeks, and Byzantines. less weird than encountering prehistoric Americans led by Abraham Lincoln. like Boer propaganda about them being eternal inhabitants of South Africa
|
|
#
?
Apr 1, 2024 11:30
|
|
|
Megamissen posted:also later byzantium gives you starting provinces that are spread out in a very pleasing way Tankbuster posted:because it is a hard start and makes it fun to retake land FirstnameLastname posted:yeah it's already got the imperial administrative structure + massive amounts of former claims with cool alt province names and can expand in any direction or play tall without it feeling implausible and starts with nothing in eu, ppl always like the clean slate minmax starts
|
|
#
?
Apr 1, 2024 17:14
|
|
|
gradenko_2000 posted:so it's not just Dengist Haiti, it's also Belt-and-Road where you're investing a ton into developing the infrastructure That's how colonialism works. Colonial powers do export production methods and infrastructure to the colonies. The wealth is still extracted because the infrastructure does not benefit the living conditions of the locals but resource extraction, the production methods do not allow for the locals to enjoy the full value of the labour but let the metropole extract more value from their labour.
|
|
#
?
Apr 1, 2024 17:30
|
|
|
Lostconfused posted:That's how colonialism works. Colonial powers do export production methods and infrastructure to the colonies. The wealth is still extracted because the infrastructure does not benefit the living conditions of the locals but resource extraction, the production methods do not allow for the locals to enjoy the full value of the labour but let the metropole extract more value from their labour. this nuance is not present in Victoria 3
|
|
#
?
Apr 1, 2024 17:31
|
|
|
There is still some nuance, the bigger problem is that there is no incentive to abuse your unaccepted and lower class pops other than that's what you want to do.
|
|
#
?
Apr 1, 2024 17:40
|
|
|
Unless you're playing the Russian Empire. Then you can levy the harshest of taxes and abuse everyone, and the only people that matter (upper class landlords) will still love you. But playing a major power in Victoria 3 is just effortless when the computer nations are so mindless.
|
|
#
?
Apr 1, 2024 17:49
|
|
|
Lostconfused posted:That's how colonialism works. Colonial powers do export production methods and infrastructure to the colonies. The wealth is still extracted because the infrastructure does not benefit the living conditions of the locals but resource extraction, the production methods do not allow for the locals to enjoy the full value of the labour but let the metropole extract more value from their labour. I don't know if this is a derail, but I was just reading about an intensive debate that has been escalating in the Classics, as the discourse of "colonialism" is actually not descriptive of the dynamics of Greek and Roman colonies in the Mediterranean, yet because of the idk cultural milieu of the academy, you have people writing about Punics as "colonized people" and so on. With that region specifically, it's as if we can only conceptualize the founding of cities in North Africa in terms of the French Second Empire and Third Republic. We assume the relationship between "Europeans" and Berbers, Numidians, Punics etc. had racial and economic dynamics that are... you know, what France would do, rather than what evidence suggests. We should understand colonialism as something that can be expressed as a certain way under a certain mode of production, but from what I imagine are ideological blinders, people kind of project capitalism backwards through time. DJJIB-DJDCT has issued a correction as of 18:00 on Apr 1, 2024 |
|
#
?
Apr 1, 2024 17:56
|
|
|
If you're entering into trade with a lesser power to gobble up their resources, even if it's under the guise of free trade agreement, that's a colonialism. I think of British Isles denuding itself and grabbing any lumber outside the islands to manufacture its navy.
|
|
#
?
Apr 1, 2024 19:14
|
|
|
DJJIB-DJDCT posted:I don't know if this is a derail, but I was just reading about an intensive debate that has been escalating in the Classics, as the discourse of "colonialism" is actually not descriptive of the dynamics of Greek and Roman colonies in the Mediterranean, yet because of the idk cultural milieu of the academy, you have people writing about Punics as "colonized people" and so on. With that region specifically, it's as if we can only conceptualize the founding of cities in North Africa in terms of the French Second Empire and Third Republic. We assume the relationship between "Europeans" and Berbers, Numidians, Punics etc. had racial and economic dynamics that are... you know, what France would do, rather than what evidence suggests. I actually dropped a postgraduate coursework unit because the coordinator was very pro this sort of backwards analysis of ancient empires. I think the problem mostly arises from parts of the academy attempting to construct unified theories of what Empire is, which is impossible without a certain amount of unevidenced projection from either the past forwards, or in this case, from present post-colonial narratives backwards onto the past. This obsession with trying to find unified terminology to explain vast swathes of historical phenomena can only end in stupidity imo
|
|
#
?
Apr 1, 2024 23:25
|
|
|
Skaffen-Amtiskaw posted:If you're entering into trade with a lesser power to gobble up their resources, even if it's under the guise of free trade agreement, that's a colonialism. I think of British Isles denuding itself and grabbing any lumber outside the islands to manufacture its navy. What if you as a lesser power enter into trade with a greater power in order to get the money and machinery to industrialize? What if you're doing this against the will of your people? What if the people you're doing this against the will of are the landlords and clergy? I do think about colonialism, exploitation, and unequal exchanges. It would be nice if Vicky 3 did more with that. I would like the ability to do more mercantilism and make it so that the profits from high-priced goods (like opium) go to my merchants instead of those foreign farmers. Vicky 3 just doesn't let you have enough middlemen in general.
|
|
#
?
Apr 1, 2024 23:33
|
|
|
Endman posted:I actually dropped a postgraduate coursework unit because the coordinator was very pro this sort of backwards analysis of ancient empires. 100%. It's gone so far as people writing about continued evidence of tophets (so, infant sacrifice via immolation) after the Third Punic War as a form of anti-colonial resistance, which seems like something the Babylon Bee would write to parody liberal immorality if they were a little better read. I agree that there has to be a better way to express this, because of course Carthage was a colony and had colonies, so when that word is used to mean "power dynamics between Europeans and other people after Europeans had breechloading rifles and the malaria vaccine", we're practically wilfully misinterpreting history.
|
|
#
?
Apr 1, 2024 23:39
|
|
|
Now I’m imagining Scipio turning up to the Battle of Zama with a Gatling Gun like those games of Civilisation where things get hilariously unbalanced
|
|
#
?
Apr 1, 2024 23:50
|
|
|
Anyone played stellaris recently? Having the moment where I want to reinstall and play half a game before remembering its pretty boring
|
|
#
?
Apr 2, 2024 01:44
|
|
|
I did the same thing, it's a game that's far more fun to see people talking about than to actually play imo
|
|
#
?
Apr 2, 2024 03:51
|
|
|
DJJIB-DJDCT posted:I don't know if this is a derail, but I was just reading about an intensive debate that has been escalating in the Classics, as the discourse of "colonialism" is actually not descriptive of the dynamics of Greek and Roman colonies in the Mediterranean, yet because of the idk cultural milieu of the academy, you have people writing about Punics as "colonized people" and so on. With that region specifically, it's as if we can only conceptualize the founding of cities in North Africa in terms of the French Second Empire and Third Republic. We assume the relationship between "Europeans" and Berbers, Numidians, Punics etc. had racial and economic dynamics that are... you know, what France would do, rather than what evidence suggests. Wait has the difference between imperialism in the ancinet world, and the post 1500 modern one just completely collapsed in the academy? Like I clearly remember being taught that the racial politcs of the anicent world were nothing like that that justified slavery in the Modern period.
|
|
#
?
Apr 2, 2024 04:40
|
|
|
KomradeX posted:Wait has the difference between imperialism in the ancinet world, and the post 1500 modern one just completely collapsed in the academy? Like I clearly remember being taught that the racial politcs of the anicent world were nothing like that that justified slavery in the Modern period. Any good books on this? I just realized I can't confidently explain the difference.
|
|
#
?
Apr 2, 2024 05:45
|
|
|
BearsBearsBears posted:Any good books on this? I just realized I can't confidently explain the difference. an example of what I'm complaining about would be EMPIRE, COLONY, GENOCIDE: Conquest, Occupation, and Subaltern Resistance in World History and a response to it would be Ancient Colonizations: Analogy, Similarity and Difference. "In recent years the archaeological understanding of both Greek and Roman ‘colonisations’ has changed radically. One important element of that change has been the understanding that traditional loose analogy with Modern European Imperialism has been unproductive. However, while many scholars have pointed to the negative impact of such comparisons, there has as yet been no real attempt to understand the pervasiveness of the analogy. Nor has there been any attempt to assess the viability of analogy in general as a tool for understanding these ancient ‘colonisations’. In this book leading scholars in the field open the debate on this important issue. They expose the implicit comparisons that underlie some current interpretations and suggest ways in which modern analogies, rigorously constructed, can help to elucidate the processes of settlement and cultural interaction in the past."
|
|
#
?
Apr 2, 2024 06:05
|
|
|
BearsBearsBears posted:Any good books on this? I just realized I can't confidently explain the difference. Not that I remember, college was a long time ago now.and I always did better at medievaland modern history. But if I remember right it was about users for the land, Rome, Greece, etc, needed land to grow food and expand its living space for its population. Whereas post 1600 is about resource extraction, population transfer isn't really a core part of it. The exceptions we see are the US, Israel, and Nazi Germany, which combine the purpose of ancient imperialism with 19th century race "science." I'm sure FF or someone more knowledgeable could offer a more comprehensive answer than this glib half remembered anecdote
|
|
#
?
Apr 2, 2024 06:17
|
|
|
KomradeX posted:Not that I remember, college was a long time ago now.and I always did better at medievaland modern history. But if I remember right it was about users for the land, Rome, Greece, etc, needed land to grow food and expand its living space for its population. Whereas post 1600 is about resource extraction, population transfer isn't really a core part of it. The exceptions we see are the US, Israel, and Nazi Germany, which combine the purpose of ancient imperialism with 19th century race "science." I'm sure FF or someone more knowledgeable could offer a more comprehensive answer than this glib half remembered anecdote Spain did -massive- population transfers into Americas during its colonialism, both whites from the Metropole as well as slaves from Africa when native population died in large numbers. Russia also did massive population transfers during its colonization of Siberia. It's clearly not limited to US/Israel/Nazi Germany. Typo has issued a correction as of 14:57 on Apr 2, 2024 |
|
#
?
Apr 2, 2024 14:53
|
|
|
Eh, because race was constructed differently than in later British colonialism - mostly due to race in the English language sense emerging through the experience of India - the Spanish and Portuguese sent very very few women to the New World. The growth in population was not from the transfer of family units of penisulares, but through intermarriage creating new families with the indigenous, African, and mixed population. Almost the entirety of the first three generations of conquistadors married into aristocratic indigenous families, with only the very top strata gaining enough status to marry into the Spanish nobility and have a wife transported to the Americas. The maids and ladies in waiting of that Spanish wife were similarly penisulares, and their marriages were also a hot commodity, marrying the next strata of high status captains among the conquistadors. Very few Spanish men had the money and status to travel back to Spain, only those who had participated in the most successful expeditions. Of those, once they were ennobled and acquired lands in Spain, very few had the inclination to return to the Americas unless appointed to governorships. This is functionally similar to Roman military colonization, and the creation of Hellenistic society in the wake of Alexander: the creation of an admixed population through the injection of single men who had wealth and land but needed to source women locally to start families. The British system of maintaining as much racial separation as possible, up to and including the transportation of single and married European women and dependant children to military garrisons has a lot to do with India. Additionally, British North America did not have sophisticated indigenous societies with the agricultural carrying capacity for large populations after being ravaged by disease, so there were not enough women available locally for marriage. Where there were, as among the Iroquois, we see the British adaptation of "Hispanic" intermarriage patterns. Because the British romanticized some indigenous people, the Iroquois specifically, and compared them to Scots, intermarriage was viewed favourably, we see several celebrated creole leaders of indigenous polities, like Joseph Brant and John Norton. This is in contrast, to put it mildly, with British opinion of other indigenous societies in British North America, and even moreso how they viewed Australian Aborigines. In the case of Australia, Irish women were transported to the colony anyway, and naval officers had their wives and children sent also, following the model of India. In New Zealand, there was a mix of intermarriage and European female immigration.
|
|
#
?
Apr 2, 2024 16:23
|
|
|
Main Effort: 8:20AM Quite a lot of information to get across in this update.  The divisional HQ, including yours truly, has arrived in the area of operations via Highway B22. Immediately, I see a problem: 211th Guards Tank Regiment is here, in this traffic jam, rather than several kilometres south-west. Something I hadn't realized is that in Flashpoint Campaigns, once a mission starts, a unit cannot be given an order until it arrives on the map. Logically, this means a unit can only be given an order at the start of the next turn. This not only presents a problem with my desired march schedule, it presents another problem: We have contact, and I'd love to use our divisional helicopters to deal with it. The divisional helicopters arrive in the area of operations 5 minutes from now. But they will only be able to be given an order in 58 minutes.  This time I was visiting family for Easter and did not have access to a computer, so another staff player made the staff update. Divisional Recon has taken casualties just past Buckendorf. They've also identified and engaged a number of Abrams, and the player appears to be set on fighting instead of retreating.  As another staff member put it:   On the bright side, we have received an ELINT update. We chose to search for armour and personnel carriers, as this would give us a good idea of the general disposition of enemy forces. We also searched for artillery: this has not been identified. Either ELINT has failed, or the Paladins are located offmap, and not a threat until we progress further towards Bamberg. The enemy has correctly identified the two highways as the best route of advance. They also appear to have opted for a few stronger defensive forces, rather than a series of constant ambushes. Of course, this could be deceptive. We've identified APCs, reasoning that's where most of the infantry will be, but it's not impossible that there are some dismounts scattered around. Let's park that for a moment and refer back to our operational plan for the two regiments that have arrived: 211th Guards Tank Regiment, callsign TATIANA, and 45th GTR, callsign MARIA. The CIC insisted on regimental callsigns based on Romanov children, which I don't think is particularly communist, but I'm but a  MARIA has the longest route to run, and a relatively complex plan. If they continue as ordered, they will run into the enemy grouping west of Buckendorf. This isn't a bad thing, as this way they will soften then up for the 247th Motor Rifle Regiment that is supposed to advance along Highway B505.  TATIANA is the weakest offensive element, as they are to detach a battalion to act as security for Divisional assets. The plan is for them to engage the enemy near Hohenhausling, helping 17th GTR advance up Hwy B22. Another member of staff believes we should adjust the plan. Instead of MARIA and TATIANA acting as flank security for the main effort advancing along the two highways, they would serve to fix the enemy, 17th would depart from the highway and proceed straight west through the enemy engaged by TATIANA, and 247th would divert south-west to take advantage of weaker enemy defenses and potentially rush straight towards Bamberg to seize the river crossings.  It's tempting, but I'm a little skeptical. It seems to risk defeat in detail, as it is very possible that the enemy will manage to break out and engage our troops in the flank or rear, or charge straight at the divisional HQ. We also aren't completely certain that there aren't enemy dismounts already waiting in Bamberg, or that what is on the field now is the complete enemy force. It's very possible they will be receiving reinforcements throughout the operation, and we may be in for a nasty surprise in a few hours. We've decided to pass the staff update on to the CIC, and see how it plays out for another hour before we present the alternate plan. Now let's turn back our attention to what we can do about the Abrams engaging the divisional recon battalion. The flight of Hinds would be lovely, but won't be available for another hour. What are we dealing with? 1x Abrams 5818 latest spot 08:15 (company HQ) 4x Abrams 5718 latest spot 07:31 spotcode 112 4x Abrams 5619 latest spot 08:14 spotcode 110 I cannot fire at 5818, as friendlies are in that same hex. 5718 is not the freshest, but worth slinging some rounds. I order an immediate destruction fire mission (within game logic, 30 rounds as fast as possible), HE from one 152mm battalion, as well as 10 rounds of cluster munitions from another battalion. Within Flashpoint Campaigns, Soviet cluster munitions are the same as NATO, and have a HEAT effect. Unfortunately, my number of rounds is extremely limited. 5619 receives 18 cluster rounds from my third 152mm battalion. After this, two battalions are set to General Support for an hour - this means they will be receiving fire missions from the entire division. Pre-planned fires are a bit of an issue given the length of the command cycle and unpredictability of the pace of advance, so hopefully this will help for now. The third battalion is set for General Support for 30 minutes, then Counter-Battery. The Grads are set to Counter-Battery. I also advised TATIANA and MARIA to delegate their howitzers to Div Recon for 20 minutes, in case they manage to generate a fire mission on an updated Abrams spot. Now we wait. Next turn will be NATO.  What do you say, thread? Do we confront NATO head-on now, while we're certain of superior numbers and artillery support, or risk a major deviation from the plan and rush to Bamberg via the southern route?
|
|
#
?
Apr 2, 2024 19:20
|
|
|
Zeppelin Insanity posted:Divisional Recon has taken casualties just past Buckendorf. They've also identified and engaged a number of Abrams, and the player appears to be set on fighting instead of retreating. Ah, the opposite of succes. I sure hope y'all didn't reinforce them. I like the bypass plan, not going to lie. Especially with whatever this rear end bullshit is about only being able to send orders every 58 minutes, and everybody deciding to sit around jerking eachother off without orders. Orange Devil has issued a correction as of 19:42 on Apr 2, 2024 |
|
#
?
Apr 2, 2024 19:37
|
|
|
Typo posted:Spain did -massive- population transfers into Americas during its colonialism, both whites from the Metropole as well as slaves from Africa when native population died in large numbers. Russia also did massive population transfers during its colonization of Siberia. It's clearly not limited to US/Israel/Nazi Germany. as far as i know immigration to siberia was very limited until they got the trans-siberian railway up and running, which seems to argue against a deliberate policy of population transfer
|
|
#
?
Apr 2, 2024 19:51
|
|
|
also from one thing to another, i'm not a military man but it seems to me that you should maybe not have your recon guys engage in stand-up fights instead of doing their actual job
|
|
#
?
Apr 2, 2024 19:58
|
|
|
First of all great write up and very good analysis. I think you’re completely on the right track. The first thing I think you should try to make clear (this is every staff officer’s burden) is that the plan exists for a reason. You’re already fighting time - every improvisation takes place with that order delay, and things are only gonna get worse as combat develops. The temptation to just go bounding off road because there’s a hang up, is only going to make the chaos, and problem of time, terrain, and enemy, worse. Driving into unobserved terrain, without support, with an unknown enemy presence in near the top of the list of worst things you can do when getting into contact, because even if it feels like a chance to break free from a tough situation, it’s compounding problems and without any of the benefits of the plan. DJJIB-DJDCT has issued a correction as of 20:08 on Apr 2, 2024 |
|
#
?
Apr 2, 2024 20:05
|
|
|
Stay on the highway
|
|
#
?
Apr 2, 2024 22:41
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 13, 2024 23:08 |
|
|
Zeppelin Insanity posted:Unfortunately, my number of rounds is extremely limited. I hope you've reported this blunder to Stavka so it can be investigated and corrected.
|
|
#
?
Apr 2, 2024 23:10
|
|