Out of character thread XVI

[FactionHeir]

As part of the last cataclysm save (the 1340 start save) I planned to spawn a few extra uber armies for some of our major AI opponents, but far away from our borders. The idea being that they may pop up to cause problems for us many turns from now and perhaps provide short term crises as we all try to figure out who's going to be the unlucky guy who has to face them. If you would all prefer that I not do this, I won't.

I would prefer if that were Über-armies in terms of numbers, technology, composition, and upgrades, but not triple golds. Anything double silver or below but fully late era with all upgrades is fine by me.

[Zim]

:yes: I agree with the Uber-army idea, along with Factionheir's preference that it be less than triple gold chevron.

[Ramses II CP]

Heh, maybe give the AI some triple gold individual companies, but not whole armies in my book. Our combat model makes it so that we can't bring mutiple stacks to battle satisfactorily. :juggle2:

:egypt:

[Ignoramus]

Bad luck Zim. Wolfgang's annoyed that you got yourself killed, but Ignoramus fully understands.

[gibsonsg91921]

wow! ive read everything and peter has made another decree that oversteps the bounds of his power. we'll see how this plays out at the diet session. with elberhards wisdom and peters authority, who knows what we can accomplish! together we shall rule the galaxy!

[FactionHeir]

Such an acidic letter TC, I am surprised it could still be read in the first place :grin:

[gibsonsg91921]

furgin' durglers.

[GeneralHankerchief]

Debate alert gentlemen.

Kindly do not besmirch the good name of the IMS by your snipings at each other.

[FactionHeir]

You are just jealous that you don't have a scope on your rifle :clown:

The way the messages are presented makes them borderline acceptable to the IMS still I think.

[gibsonsg91921]

they are open letters, not snipings. lol

[AussieGiant]

I would prefer if that were Über-armies in terms of numbers, technology, composition, and upgrades, but not triple golds. Anything double silver or below but fully late era with all upgrades is fine by me.


I have a question FH...

Why shouldn't TC do that?

In fact why shouldn't it be done instead of dumping money into the AI's coffers.

It is clearly a very direct and impactful way of increasing the difficulty.

[Stuperman]

yeah, but if you have a chivalrous general triple golds do not rout, ever. it turns your battle lines into meat grinders, I'm inclined to agree with FH, 1 or 2 silver, plus upgrades.

[gibsonsg91921]

yeah, for me and ahhnuld with the high dread it'll be bad enough. just imagine how econ or PK would have been with chiv. or someone in the middle like a newly recruited general would have the worst trouble, having no benefits at all.

[AussieGiant]

yeah, but if you have a chivalrous general triple golds do not rout, ever. it turns your battle lines into meat grinders, I'm inclined to agree with FH, 1 or 2 silver, plus upgrades.

Ah ha...now I understand the issue.

I guess Arnold never had those problems...:beam:

Interesting to see how understanding the workings of the game in great detail can make or break an idea.

[Zim]

Ok, everyone, I finished the writeup for the Battle of Bruges. If it's confusoiler above each section of text contains the screenshots for it). Sorry about the low quality, I had to turn down quite a few settings to easily fight a siege assault with some 4,000+ soldiers. :shame:

Edit: Tincow, I think I forgot to include the battle odds in the set of stats for it I sent you. They were 2:1, in my favor, largely thanks to the English army being almost all dismounted knights.

[TinCow]

Just to keep you all informed, the lack of movement towards 1338 is because of Staufen. econ21 and I have been working on it, but it will likely take at least a few days to resolve. In the event that a full scale battle erupts, I may simply advance the game to 1338 so that the rest of you can keep going. Given the orders that we have received, I do not think I would allow further moves after Staufen anyway. Thus, there will be no penalty to the Staufen players for the game to be advanced before the battle is resolved (though for IC purposes, it will be resolved in 1336).

[GeneralHankerchief]

Here we go.

[FactionHeir]

Considering econ only gave an account but no game rules, links to old threads and set-ups, I am not sure whether there will be an actual battle just yet.

Seems more like a history thread to get the attention of everyone for the moment.

[GeneralHankerchief]

I disagree.

I think a battle is imminent, otherwise he wouldn't have put the year there. The cliffhanger was to leave us all guessing whether Hummel would have caught Ruppel's army while he was away, or whether Ruppel didn't leave and Hummel still sallied out, or whether he missed Ruppel entirely and an assault is imminent, or...

[AussieGiant]

Good god!!

Econ amazing stuff there in the Staufen preparations :balloon2:

I'd say we have another round of civil war about to occur.

I'm fairly impressed with how well it can be handled out of the game and then the results implement back into it.

[gibsonsg91921]

yeah, i have a feeling the diet session wont resolve everything

[Cecil XIX]

Good god!!

Econ amazing stuff there in the Staufen preparations :balloon2:

I'd say we have another round of civil war about to occur.

I'm fairly impressed with how well it can be handled out of the game and then the results implement back into it.

Indeed. I'd love to see how crazy things would be in a full-blown civil war without foreign enemies to distract us. Heck, I'd help with the workload myself to make it happen. (hint hint :yes:)

[TinCow]

I think we can officially say that FactionHeir has suffered the worst luck due to die roll of the cataclysm. His odds of being caught out of the camp were 33%, with success on a 3-6 on a d6. I rolled a 2. I guess that makes up for GH's cavalry in Bern.

[AussieGiant]

yeah, i have a feeling the diet session wont resolve everything

Gibbo, the Diet session would have to last about a month of real time and even then I'd say we wont have everything resolved.

This Crisis is a generational thing in my view. :laugh4:

And as I'm a little conceited about this "Most Famous General" moniker...now that Hans bit the bullet who's the General with the biggest "Arnold's" in the Reich now :2thumbsup:

[AussieGiant]

Indeed. I'd love to see how crazy things would be in a full-blown civil war without foreign enemies to distract us. Heck, I'd help with the workload myself to make it happen. (hint hint :yes:)

Cecil...dude...fella...don't go and spoil all the hard work we've put in together out east :beam:


edit; that is tough luck there with the dice roll. I was a play with zero luck in those types of games...it nearly scarred me for life when I was younger.

[Cecil XIX]

Cecil...dude...fella...don't go and spoil all the hard work we've put in together out east :beam:


edit; that is tough luck there with the dice roll. I was a play with zero luck in those types of games...it nearly scarred me for life when I was younger.

I was actually talking about GM work. But that sounds fun too. :2thumbsup:

[AussieGiant]

I was actually talking about GM work. But that sounds fun too. :2thumbsup:

Damn, I just put my foot into it :beam:

[gibsonsg91921]

haha nice job AG. u ruined it!

"We made a breakthrough in group!" - Scott Evil

"I had the group liquidated you little @#$%!" - Dr. Evil

[AussieGiant]

haha nice job AG. u ruined it!

"We made a breakthrough in group!" - Scott Evil

"I had the group liquidated you little @#$%!" - Dr. Evil

You know me Gibbo...I'm just here trying to help :clown:

[GeneralHankerchief]

I rolled a 2. I guess that makes up for GH's cavalry in Bern.

No it doesn't, since Dietrich's still dead. :furious3:

[Zim]

So, if Hummel manages to take out Ehrhart's army, does that mean that he'll get a chance to recruit troops before von Salza comes for him? :dizzy2:

[Ramses II CP]

Yeah, replays simply don't work consistently, and in my experience the more men on the field the less likely they are to function. I played with them quite a bit when planning out my next AAR and I couldn't get more than 1 in 5 to display a correct result, and almost all of those involved half stack or less forces on both sides.

Man, I'm tempted to have Fritz rebel just to get in on the PvP action. Alas, Fritzy has immense loyalty and his Duke and Prinz at the moment are his brother, so it just doesn't make any sense.

I hate to take sides, but Igno would have 0 trouble winning that battle with his 'real' general. In a custom battle it's going to be harder but I'd almost bet my life that the AI throws away their cavalry. Is there an actual structure on the map for him to use?

:egypt: (I sooooo want to try that custom mod after the battle is over)

[Privateerkev]

Man, I'm tempted to have Fritz rebel just to get in on the PvP action.

That was the real OOC reason driving Jan's actions from 1324 to 1332. Basically, I just wanted to get in on a cool PvP battle. I found good enough IC reasons to justify it and ran with it.

I'm amused that Jan's army is still around and being used for yet another PvP battle. Go Catholic Crusaders! :2thumbsup:

[Ignoramus]

That's why Wolfgang rebelled. It's just that I had a convenient IC justification. And it doesn't look like this will be my last PvP battle either.

[Ignoramus]

I can't find the data/ui/units/spain folder anywhere in my MTW2 folder.

[econ21]

I can't find the data/ui/units/spain folder anywhere in my MTW2 folder.

OK, it sounds like you have not unpacked M2TW. The first patch brought an unpacker utility that extracted many files that were previously compressed. Look at the M2TW readme for details of how the unpacker works. Extraction is mainly for modders who want to tinker with the files.

The problem with unpacking the files is that it requires a lot of space on your hard disk (the readme has the precise requirement). If this is an issue for you, you could try creating the folders you need for this mini-mod without running the unpacker. (Just create a ui folder in your data folder, then a units one in the ui folder and a spain one in the units one etc). The mod may work without extracting all the files although a modder like Factionheir might provide a more definitive answer on this. If it does not work, you may have to uninstall some things from your computer to create the space needed for the unpacker. (The more modern games seem to be the things that take up a lot of space.)

If you do have the space required, then run the unpacker and extract all the files. Note that there are two files you must delete after running the unpacker or your battles will always crash. (After I first used the unpacker, I spent some time pointless debugging an earlier mini mod I created when in fact it was fine and the issue was the two files.) The M2TW readme tells you which files those are. Try to run a normal custom battle to check you have run the unpacker properly. Then re-install kotorfix and then install the staufen_mod.

[FactionHeir]

No need to unpack. Too big a hassle. Just create the folders that are not there.
Actually, it would be best if econ reuploaded his mini mod but with the fodler structure already present so Ignoramus only has to copy it into his data (or M2TW) folder, similar to the fix. That way you also won't need the "copy of EDU".

I'd do it, but I won't be back for another 8 hours or so.

[econ21]

No need to unpack. Too big a hassle. Just create the folders that are not there.

Excellent, thanks! :bow:


Actually, it would be best if econ reuploaded his mini mod but with the fodler structure already present ... I'd do it, but I won't be back for another 8 hours or so.

Please could you? I don't know how to do that.


So, if Hummel manages to take out Ehrhart's army, does that mean that he'll get a chance to recruit troops before von Salza comes for him? :dizzy2:

Good question. I was thinking no, but on reflection I think that is too harsh given that Ehrhart is allowed to raise troops this turn and bring them back to Staufen. However, I don't think there would be a lot of rebels or any high quality rebels around Staufen instantly ready to join Hummel. There were none for Ehrhard and Staufen is the loyalist heartland.

So what I think is that, if he wins the sally, Hummel may use his 11 wealth to instantly buy some troops to field against Ehrhart when he returns (and von Salza too if he shows up). However, he is restricted to:
(a) two Free Company units - either Men at Arms or Longbows (at 4 wealth each)
and
(b) spend the remaining 3 wealth on any units that cost 2 wealth or less. Three units of fanatics are available at 1 wealth each, at a slight (1 in 6) risk of rekindling the war of reformation in Staufen.

Alternatively, if Hummel ends the turn not under siege, he could use his wealth to freely buy whatever Staufen can build. Given the situation, however, I think this option would be too much of a gamble for Ignoramus to want to take. He probably needs the troops this turn.


I hate to take sides, but Igno would have 0 trouble winning that battle with his 'real' general.

Well, I did wonder about modding his unit stats files to reflect the command ability of his real general. However, I figured fighting against the AI was a sufficient way to model that. The loyalists are taking quite a hit having their main army in the hands of the AI. If I put a player in the role of a captain - as I did at Bern - I think it would be harder for Ignoramus to win a PvP battle proper even if I modded the files to reflect his real general's stats.


Is there an actual structure on the map for him to use?

There is, but I don't want to reveal the map just yet.

[FactionHeir]

Please could you? I don't know how to do that.


Well, you'd basically want to create a data folder (empty). Open that folder and create the next folder etc. Basically what you wanted Ignoramus to do.
Then place the right files into the right folders and zip the whole thing.

It may sound strange that I can't do this while having access to a computer, but those permissions on college computers tend to be very limited without admin access.

[econ21]

Thanks again, Factionheir.

Following your instructions, I have repackaged the mod to make installation simpler. All Ignoramus needs to do is extract it to his main M2TW folder and it should create all the needed sub-folders.

http://www.totalwar.org/patrons/pbm/staufen2_mod.zip

[Ramses II CP]

If it were a PvP battle with those units I think Igno would have to hide behind the walls. :laugh4:

So if he can buy FC Longbowmen is he, in any future pvp siege, going to be able to plant their stakes in a gateway? That'd be quite a surprise for anyone thinking to quickly exploit a breach in a gate.

:egypt:

[econ21]

So if he can buy FC Longbowmen is he, in any future pvp siege, going to be able to plant their stakes in a gateway? That'd be quite a surprise for anyone thinking to quickly exploit a breach in a gate.


It's quite hard for me to handle things like stakes in a PvP battle, so I think I would say no. Also, it sounds rather "gamey". The gates presumably represent - as well as just the doors proper - some makeshift barricades etc that are more impressive than stakes.

[OverKnight]

I'm working on a revision of the Outremer charter for the next Diet Session. The Kingdom is now just two provinces (maybe :sweatdrop: ) and so it needs to be updated.

I've reviewed the charter but I have a few questions.

1. Jan was granted the county of Hamburg while he was still King? Did he get the +1 influence for this, and is this actually allowable? I thought the King had to temporarily renounce house ties.

2. The duration of the King's term is now one Diet session to another, correct?

3. Crusader Counts can't stack influence anymore from Crusader and regular Counties, correct?

4. Matthias is listed as having 6 influence. 2 is for being King, 1 is for being an ex-Chancellor and 2 is for his stats. Is the sixth for his Bavarian County?

5. Who gives build queues for Outremer Provinces, besides Antioch, not assigned to Counts, the King, the Kaiser, or the respective Dukes? (Acre, the only Ducal Zone left, would be given queues from Warluster?)

Some of this is going to change in my revision, I just want to get a sense of the past before moving on to the future.

[econ21]

Ignoramus is having trouble installing the mod. Can anyone else try to install it and see if they get Flemish pikemen (and odd unit sizes) for Spain in a custom battle? Preferrably a computer savy person like Factionheir. I just want to check the problem is not with the mini-mod.

BTW, uninstallation is easy - just delete the amended export_descr_unit.txt in your data folder and the amended battle_models.modeldb file in your data\unit_models folder. (There are backups of the originals in case you had unpacked and overwrote them.)

Thanks.

[Privateerkev]

I'm working on a revision of the Outremer charter for the next Diet Session. The Kingdom is now just two provinces (maybe :sweatdrop: ) and so it needs to be updated.

I've reviewed the charter but I have a few questions.

1. Jan was granted the county of Hamburg while he was still King? Did he get the +1 influence for this, and is this actually allowable? I thought King had to temporarily renounce house ties.

2. The duration of the King's term is now one Diet session to another, correct?

3. Crusader Counts can't stack influence anymore from Crusader and regular Counties, correct?

4. Matthias is listed as having 6 influence. 2 is for being King, 1 is for being an ex-Chancellor and 2 is for his stats. Is the sixth for his Bavarian County?

5. Who gives build queues for Outremer Provinces, besides Antioch, not assigned to Counts, the King, the Kaiser, or the respective Dukes? (Acre, the only Ducal Zone left, would be given queues from Warluster?)

Some of this is going to change in my revision, I just want to get a sense of the past before moving on to the future.

1.) Econ told me Jan got the Hamburg bonus. "Renouncing Ducal ties" was just politics. It isn't actually in the Charter. (per Econ)

2.) yup

3.) yup, just the King

4.) Sounds right as long as it doesn't hit the non-Kaiser cap. Is it 5 or 6?

5.) King does Antioch. Crusader Counts do their Crusader Counties. If there is not a Crusader Count, then the Dukes do their own Counties and Kaiser does Edessa.

[Zim]

I tried out the files. Spain has odd unit sizes and Flemish Pikemen. A possible side effect is that some units (peasant archers, militia crossbowmen) had odd unit sizes for both factions. Since he just recruited them, shouldn't Humme's peasant archers be full size?

Anyway, the files worked fine for me, but I've already unpacked.

[OverKnight]

1.) Econ told me Jan got the Hamburg bonus. "Renouncing Ducal ties" was just politics. It isn't actually in the Charter. (per Econ)

Ah...In the charter it says: "The King will temporarily renounce all loyalties to his House for the duration of his term". I would intepret this as he wouldn't be able to administer a County for a Duke, but Econ is the Kaiser. :laugh4: I might have to clarify this in the new document. Matt having six influence, more than all the Dukes, is kind of crazy.


5.) King does Antioch. Crusader Counts do their Crusader Counties. If there is not a Crusader Count, then the Dukes do their own Counties and Kaiser does Edessa.

With the loss of territories this whole apportionment system is shot to hell. It might have to be scrapped. I'll have to find a new way to keep the Dukes happy and entice nobles to come to Outremer despite being unable to stack influence.

[AussieGiant]

Didn't we specifically address the ability of the King to have more influence than Dukes at some point?

Or was that just versus crusader counts?

[Privateerkev]

Ah...In the charter it says: "The King will temporarily renounce all loyalties to his House for the duration of his term". I would intepret this as he wouldn't be able to administer a County for a Duke, but Econ is the Kaiser. :laugh4: I might have to clarify this in the new document. Matt having six influence, more than all the Dukes, is kind of crazy.

In an old PM, Econ said he conceptualized that part as meaning that the King will rule impartially. He never meant it to mean that the King actually leaves the House. Jan simply ruled that way due to his personal politics. So Jan never really "left" Franconia. He just acted that way.


I'll have to find a new way to keep the Dukes happy

Good luck with that... :laugh4:

[OverKnight]

Didn't we specifically address the ability of the King to have more influence than Dukes at some point?

Or was that just versus crusader counts?

Dukes get +3 influence, the King +2 and Counts +1. The only reason Matt is maxed out on inf (6) is because he gets the stats bonus (+2), the County of Milan (+1), ex-Chancellor (+1) and King (+2). Though officially in the Cataclysm thread, TC has removed Milan from Matt's entry once he became King.

[Privateerkev]

Wasn't that because Matt gave Milan up so it could go to Fred?

[econ21]

I tried out the files. Spain has odd unit sizes and Flemish Pikemen. A possible side effect is that some units (peasant archers, militia crossbowmen) had odd unit sizes for both factions. Since he just recruited them, shouldn't Humme's peasant archers be full size?

Anyway, the files worked fine for me, but I've already unpacked.

Thanks for the quick response. I thought it should be straightforward.

The odd unit sizes for both sides is intentional. Hummel's new archer unit will be represented by two 45 man units so that the loyalists can also have a half strength one. (The loyalists actually have a little more than 45 archers, but I've represented that by increasing their peasant crossbows correspondingly.)

[Zim]

Ah, that makes sense. :yes:

There's still the very real difference that Ignoramus has not unpacked his files, so my test may not be perfect. Still, at least it proves that the files are working.

[AussieGiant]

Dukes get +3 influence, the King +2 and Counts +1. The only reason Matt is maxed out on inf (6) is because he gets the stats bonus (+2), the County of Milan (+1), ex-Chancellor (+1) and King (+2). Though officially in the Cataclysm thread, TC has removed Milan from Matt's entry once he became King.

Understood. A number of unique combinations in your avatar OK...nice work :balloon2:

[FactionHeir]

Econ: Mod works perfectly and also no errors displayed.
And my installation is not unpacked either ~:)

[econ21]

Just to let people know, Ignoramus has until Thursday night (UK) time to install the mini-mod and fight his sally. Otherwise, it will be a PvP siege assault.

TinCow and I are keen to bring the cataclysm to a conclusion, so if the situation at Staufen is not resolved by Friday morning, we will move on to a new turn. We will resolve any remaining Staufen 1336 issues (e.g. a PvP battle) while other players make their 1338 moves.

[Ramses II CP]

Oooh, I'll install it later too, and I'm not unpacked.

:egypt:

[Stuperman]

Wasn't that because Matt gave Milan up so it could go to Fred?

There was talk of that, but Fred got Genoa, at least until Ajaccio is liberated.

[OverKnight]

Here's what TinCow said in the 1332 Cataclysm post:


Controlled Provinces: Milan (trade route blocked, religious warfare, and besieged – you’re lucky I’m still even listing it! Next turn I will cease, as you will be King of Outremer and be forced to renounce your ties to Bavaria.)

Please note, I'm not complaining, just clarifying. I actually agree with this interpretation of the rules.

[econ21]

On the King and his ties to his House, I guess it comes down to how you conceive of a County. I see it as belonging to the Count, in the first instance, and not the Duke. (If you are a bonded Count, the Duke can take it away from you, but until he does, it is yours.) So if you get promoted to King of Outremer, there's no reason you should lose your property.

The renouncing loyalties to your House bit is just that as King of Outremer, you should rule Outremer for the good of Outremer (and the Reich) - not favouring the interests of your House.

However, Dukes have become more politically powerful in KotoR than I intended, so it does not surprise me to see alternative conceptions.

More prosaically, I don't see how managing Hamburg should prejudice your rule of Outremer. But adhering to a "Franconia first" policy definitely could.

[TinCow]

Conrad Salier was forced to give up his Bavarian province due to being King. My statements were based on that precedent.

[Privateerkev]

I wished I kept those PM's with Econ about the King...

What we hammered out was:

King does not get blood transfusion. He stays in his house but he is "supposed to" rule impartially like the Kaiser is "supposed to" rule impartially.

County stays with the King unless/until the Duke takes it away if the King is a bonded Count.

It was Econ's idea to let Jan keep Hamburg. I initially resisted but Econ told me his logic. When the GM insists on giving your avatar more influence, you only resist so much... :laugh4:

King can keep posting in his House thread if the Duke allows it. This is where both me and Stig were wrong. But on different parts of the issue. Stig thought I could not post in the Franconian Hall because Jan was King. Jan could. I thought Stig could not stop me from posting as Duke. Ansehelm could.

We've had 4 Kings now and we keep going back and forth on what being King means. Each King has conceptualized their role differently. Which is cool. But some things could be a little better codified.

[Ramses II CP]

Notes on the Staufen setup:

Rebels:

Picture of army does not concur with text of army, one extra Free Company MAA in the picture.

Experience level for pikemen does not show in picture.

My florins left and troops do not agree with the picture (I show 8218 fl and 870 men with the 2nd MAA company).

Loyalists appear to match exactly, I have the same numbers in the picture.

Err, and to avoid spoilers there are some bits I need to pm to Econ. I made saves of the armies if those would be purposeful.

:egypt:

[FactionHeir]

As per Staufen battle notes, the notes surpass the picture, so there is no problem.
As for numbers and troop types not agreeing completely, that's intentional to minimize the amount of modding and in some regards limitations to minimum unit size that the game will allow in a custom game before crashing.

[econ21]

Picture of army does not concur with text of army, one extra Free Company MAA in the picture.

Experience level for pikemen does not show in picture.

Well spotted, thanks. Those are my errors. Hummel does have two Free Company MAA and I did forget the 1xp for the pikemen. :bow:

I'm still waiting to hear from Ignoramus whether he has installed the mod. When he has, we'll fix a time for me to send him the map name and he will have 3 hours to PM me a screenshot of the result. :couch:

[Zim]

Well spotted, thanks. Those are my errors. Hummel does have two Free Company MAA and I did forget the 1xp for the pikemen. :bow:

I'm still waiting to hear from Ignoramus whether he has installed the mod. When he has, we'll fix a time for me to send him the map name and he will have 3 hours to PM me a screenshot of the result. :couch:

I think Ignoramus is here in the States, and is fairly young. He could very well be in school right now. This might create a problem if, by the time he is able to come online, it is past midnight in the U.K. :yes:

[econ21]

I think Ignoramus is here in the States, and is fairly young. He could very well be in school right now.

He is on Australian time. He said he could fight the battle any time between 9am and 9pm, but that may have been optimistic. The deadline for getting a result is 24 hours from now.

[GeneralHankerchief]

He's an Aussie.

...and yeah, beaten to the punch again.

[Zim]

He is on Australian time. He said he could fight the battle any time between 9am and 9pm, but that may have been optimistic. The deadline for getting a result is 24 hours from now.

:oops: I stand corrected.

You know, if all the Aussies united together in an ingame Civil War, the rest of us would be in big trouble! :clown:

There's something especially cool about playing a game like this with people from at least three regions of the world very, very distant from eachother. :thumbsup:

[gibsonsg91921]

Yeah, I'm from the states along with PK and TC at least, ik econ and possibly OK are in england, aussiegiant is in switzerland, warluster and iggy are in australia, and theres plenty im missing this is just off the top of my head

[Privateerkev]

OK is in the states, but he has graveyard shift at work.

Zim is west coast. GH, OK, and TC are east coast. I'm Chicagoland.

EF is in England like Econ.

Others have been mentioned already.

[Zim]

OK is in the states, but he has graveyard shift at work.

Zim is west coast. GH, OK, and TC are east coast. I'm Chicagoland.

EF is in England like Econ.

Others have been mentioned already.

deguerra's in Australia, but is not an Aussie. :yes: I think Factionheir lives in the UK as well, but I'm not sure.

We're very international in a mostly English-speaking country sort of way. :clown:

[Privateerkev]

We're very international in a mostly English-speaking country sort of way. :clown:

Seeing as we mostly reside in England or English speaking former colonies, I am not too surprised that we speak English. :clown:

*edit*

I should say Britain since colonizing mainly done in the areas were talking about after the Act of Union...

[Zim]

Seeing as we mostly reside in England or English speaking former colonies, I am not too surprised that we speak English. :clown:

You wouldn't say that if you lived in Texas like I used to. ~;)

[gibsonsg91921]

haha well me and PK live in chicagoland so we know exactly what you're talking about bud. no offense, im all for immigration.

[Privateerkev]

Well, Texas was eventually taken over by colonists that came from a country that used to be colonized by Britain.

Hence... English as one of the major languages in Texas.

[Zim]

haha well me and PK live in chicagoland so we know exactly what you're talking about bud. no offense, im all for immigration.

Me, too. Living in Texas is certainly a good way to learn Spanish if nothing else.

I wasn't sure if Chicago was like that as well. A couple of people from Mexico I used to work with had some family there, but said they hated the weather. Too cold.

[Privateerkev]

Me, too. Living in Texas is certainly a good way to learn Spanish if nothing else.

I wasn't sure if Chicago was like that as well. A couple of people from Mexico I used to work with had some family there, but said they hated the weather. Too cold.

Chicagoland has an absolutely massive Latino population in some parts of the city and in some of the suburbs. I went to a Highschool next to Ohare Airport and it was over half Latino because housing is more affordable where it is loud from the planes.

As for immigration, my stance is a tad different from a lot of people. I advocate for the dissolution of the nation-state as a political structure so immigration becomes kind of moot if that ever gets realized. But until that happens, I'm up for taking care of whoever happens to make it here. If your here, your part of the system and society so you should benefit from everything that means.

[Stuperman]

Well, I'm in, as Bill O'Rielly would call it, Northern Canukistan, and close enough to Quebec to regret not paying more attention in French Class.

@Zim, no offence but your former workmate's family are wussies, It's gonna be -27 tonight, and I love it

[Privateerkev]

Another former British colony...

:laugh4:

[Zim]

As for immigration, my stance is a tad different from a lot of people. I advocate for the dissolution of the nation-state as a political structure so immigration becomes kind of moot if that ever gets realized. But until that happens, I'm up for taking care of whoever happens to make it here. If your here, your part of the system and society so you should benefit from everything that means.

I'm not sure the nation-state has outlived it usefulness yet, but the part in bold is pretty much the same as my feelings about immigration. I think if people want to come here to work we should make it easier for them to become legal. Aside from it being the moral thing to do, from a national security viewpoint it would be safer if we could keep better track of everyone (and thus be able to find the few people who really are dangerous) and it might make it harder for businesses to get away with paying people half of minimum wage just because they're undocumented and can't do anything about it.

Stuperman I know, but hey, one of them hadn't seen snow until it snowed at work one night (we get about one day of snow a year in Texas ~;p), so I guess they can be forgiven.

[Privateerkev]

I'm not sure the nation-state has outlived it usefulness yet, but the part in bold is pretty much the same as my feelings about immigration. I think if people want to come here to work we should make it easier for them to become legal. Aside from it being the moral thing to do, from a national security viewpoint it would be safer if we could keep better track of everyone (and thus be able to find the few people who really are dangerous) and it might make it harder for businesses to get away with paying people half of minimum wage just because they're undocumented and can't do anything about it.

I'm quite convinced that the nation-state is a horrible way to form governing bodies and will cause much death and suffering in the future. Drawing lines around geographical spaces and then making special rules for some people in those lines leads to a lot of trouble in my opinion.

As for immigration, it has to do with the fact that those people are... people. I don't care if you've lived here 100 years or 30 minutes. Once your in the social and cultural structure, I have an ability to help you through my tax money and civil instruments, like voting. So then I will do so. I would prefer if I could extend this to everyone on the planet but one thing at a time.

[Zim]

PK,
Well, with the growing importance of regional political entities over national ones, as well as truly global ones (like the U.N. or World Bank) it might only be a matter of time. Although growing movements for the political independence of small ethnic minorities in places like the European Union might be signs of a countervailing trend. I think any process that results in the end of the idea of the nation-state will take a very long time, with lots of hiccups and setbacks along the way.

In the meantime, I don't think they're all evil. Pre-state societies have rates of death by violence far higher than the most warlike nation states in history. If nothing else, nation-states have caused people to look beyond terms of their own family or tribe, and it's in such entities that truly developed theories of social justice have arisen. Now it's just a matter of consolidating them all into one, which might be the difficult part. :clown:

My views on immigration seem to be similiar to yours. :yes:

[Privateerkev]

I'm not advocating going back to feudalism. I just rather move towards a single global spanning government where todays nations are more like states in the US.

And I have no problem equating hyper-nationalism with "evil". World War One is but one example of the dark side of the nation-state.

The idea that I'm supposed to think and feel something different about someone just because they are on the other side of an arbitrarily drawn line, is completely anathema to everything I believe in.

[Zim]

So, to keep from being banned for hijacking the thread...:clown:

How about those rebels? What would the odds be for betting on Hummel beating out the Loyalists in the Civil War? 2:3, 1:2?

[Privateerkev]

Go back through the old OOC threads and you'll see us posting all sorts of goofy non-KotR related things.

I figure this thread is for community building. While spam is not allowed, general OOC conversation is. I could go and gab in the Frontroom or Backroom but I specifically like gabbing with you guys because we play together, and hence, I know you guys better than the other people on the board. :2thumbsup:

[Zim]

I'm not advocating going back to feudalism. I just rather move towards a single global spanning government where todays nations are more like states in the US.

And I have no problem equating hyper-nationalism with "evil". World War One is but one example of the dark side of the nation-state.

The idea that I'm supposed to think and feel something different about someone just because they are on the other side of an arbitrarily drawn line, is completely anathema to everything I believe in.

Hyper-Nationalism certainly has led to some terrible things, but something I read for a college class a long time ago stuck with me. Apparently the rate of death by violence in pre-state societies is dreadful, averaging about 1 in 3. Even the very worst Nation-States have never matched that. It was safer to be a German or a Jewish person in the first half of the 20th century, than to be, say, a Native American before Columbus, if your main concern is death by violence.

I read something interesting by a writer once who right up until about the beginning of the Second World War (he died before it came to a head). He was talking about nationalism, and why German nationalism at the time scared him. He said nationalism became especially dangerous when it moved from being proud of your country to being proud of being from your country(or of it's majority ethnicity, or whatever).

In the former you're presumably judging your country by some outside standard, and rightly or wrongly, find it measure's up well. In the latter he thought you would fall into the trap of thinking something is right or wrong depending on whether it fell in line with what your country was doing.

i.e. In the first case someone might be proud that the U.S. fought against Germany in the first World War, in the second someone might say that the Iraqi War is right because America is in it.

I thought it was pretty interesting, considering what actually happened regarding German nationalism after the
fellow died.

Edit: I know you're not arguing for a return to tribalism, PK, but after finding out we essentially agree I wanted to ramble a bit. :clown:

[Zim]

Go back through the old OOC threads and you'll see us posting all sorts of goofy non-KotR related things.

I figure this thread is for community building. While spam is not allowed, general OOC conversation is. I could go and gab in the Frontroom or Backroom but I specifically like gabbing with you guys because we play together, and hence, I know you guys better than the other people on the board. :2thumbsup:

It's also very nice to be able to say something political on a forum without initiating either a flame war or a bunch of mindless yes-man responses. :clown:

[Privateerkev]

Hyper-Nationalism certainly has led to some terrible things, but something I read for a college class a long time ago stuck with me. Apparently the rate of death by violence in pre-state societies is dreadful, averaging about 1 in 3. Even the very worst Nation-States have never matched that. It was safer to be a German or a Jewish person in the first half of the 20th century, than to be, say, a Native American before Columbus, if your main concern is death by violence.

Which is why I am not advocating going back to pre-state societies.

(I thought I said that earlier...) :smash:

:clown:

Though I might take issue with your implication that post-Columbus America was not deadly. Millions of indigenous people died from disease, overwork, and war as a direct result of European intervention.

Also my Polish step-grandfather has a thing or two to say about how deadly it was in in the first half of the 20th century since he spent all of World War 2 in Auschwitz as slave labor.

So, my point is, pre-state societies and nation-states were/are both deadly. I would prefer to have a government based on neither. I rather move forward and create something else that takes care of the greatest amount of people possible. And I know we're capable of it which makes me stubborn because I know we can do better than what we've done and what we have now. :yes:

[Ramses II CP]

Hummel pretty dramatically increased his odds by catching the loyalists with their general away. If he can wipe out, or even badly damage, the siege army and then recruit to spend his wealth then I'd put the odds at 1:1.

On the political front, just let me say that as much as I dislike the idea of nations, I find the notion of a world government utterly abhorrent. Politics is like any other industry, it's primary goal and purpose for existence is to continue itself. The larger you let it get, and the longer it exists continuously, the more of a people's resources it will mindlessly consume in bureaucracy and paper shifting. To make a government smaller you have to, literally, destroy it. Anything else just adds to it as you pile layers on layers struggling to control the corruption and waste.

From time to time the tree of liberty must be refreshed by the blood of patriots. (Paraphrased from Thomas Jefferson because I'm too lazy to look it up)

The more power you give someone the more power their successor will demand until you're left with none. This is the inevitable course of history, reversed only when outrage finally exceeds tolerance. If you're lucky, and most of us are, you'll live near the apex of a society and skate through without ever going hungry or having to worry too much about the theives at the top.

I hope my daughter is that lucky, but I wouldn't bet on it.

:egypt:

[Privateerkev]

Studying history for a living, the idea that anything is "inevitable" gives me pause. :yes:

[Zim]

I know, I just felt like rambling a bit. :clown:

I was just going by the numbers. A 33% chance of dying by violence is much worse than that experiences by any society based on nation states. Arguing against the pain of individuals would both accomplish little and make me feel like a jerk. :sweatdrop:

Despite the terrible injustices inflicted by the Spanish on the natives of central America (most under some kind of government that would have evolved into a nation state), I've always been taught that disease was a far greater culprit in the horrendous death rates than even the tendency for the Spanish to work slaves to death. A lot of the stories about the Spanish were propaganda spread by France and England, that we're only now learning is false.

The only thing that scares me about a worldwide nation-state is the kind of worry Ramses expressed.

Anyway, I'm off to church now, so no more debating for me. :clown: Feel free to refute my pathetic arguments. Oh, and Doug is playing his Teutonic save tonight, so we might have another of those "three turns in a few hours"
moments. :beam:


Which is why I am not advocating going back to pre-state societies.

(I thought I said that earlier...) :smash:

:clown:

Though I might take issue with your implication that post-Columbus America was not deadly. Millions of indigenous people died from disease, overwork, and war as a direct result of European intervention.

Also my Polish step-grandfather has a thing or two to say about how deadly it was in in the first half of the 20th century since he spent all of World War 2 in Auschwitz as slave labor.

So, my point is, pre-state societies and nation-states were/are both deadly. I would prefer to have a government based on neither. I rather move forward and create something else that takes care of the greatest amount of people possible. And I know we're capable of it which makes me stubborn because I know we can do better than what we've done and what we have now. :yes:

[Zim]

Studying history for a living, the idea that anything is "inevitable" gives me pause. :yes:

Studying politics for a living, the idea that any world state would be more concerned for the welfare of its people, and less with accruing power to itself, than every other state in history, gives me pause. :clown:

[Ramses II CP]

Then you're looking at it too closely. :laugh4: :inquisitive: (That really is supposed to be funny rather than me pretending to be an expert. I'm a duffer.)

Take the long view and ask yourself where civilization has existed continuously for a significant, from the long view, quantity of time without failing due to corruption or simple ineffectiveness or refreshing itself via rebellion. By the long view, I mean the long view of human existence and future potential. Our forms of power are ephemeral by their very nature, and better for it, but when they unravel... Cry Havoc and all that. I dread to think what the first failure of a world government will be like for it's people.

:egypt:

[Privateerkev]

Despite the terrible injustices inflicted by the Spanish on the natives of central America (most under some kind of government that would have evolved into a nation state), I've always been taught that disease was a far greater culprit in the horrendous death rates than even the tendency for the Spanish to work slaves to death. A lot of the stories about the Spanish were propaganda spread by France and England, that we're only now learning is false.


1.) Your assuming that indigenous societies would just "naturally" find their way into becoming a nation-state. Nations were not inevitable but created and then supported by a mythology that made them seem inevitable.

2.) Having done no small amount of reading about the Spanish Empire, I can tell you there is overwhelming historical evidence that many of those stories are true. But France and Britain were by no means innocent...

3.) Disease came about partly because some European settlers deliberately gave blankets from their smallpox wards to native tribes as "gifts". But even though some of it was by accident, it still happened because people from one area of the world, sailed to another area of the world and insisted on conquering and converting people that were doing quite fine on their own.

[gibsonsg91921]

PK, ur ideas are radical and idealist. I DIG EM! lol

but exactly. under these circumstances i dont care who comes in as long as theyre paying as much of their share of taxes as me (or in my case, my mom and dad)

[Privateerkev]

PK, ur ideas are radical and idealist. I DIG EM! lol

Thanks! :bow:

Though I am sad my ideas are considered radical... To me their like breathing air. :shame:

[deguerra]

am at work, so ill keep it brief. to add to your nationalism/nationstate debate:

i have to say i quite like where germany is at the moment. ever since ww2, germany has been a distnictly un-patriotic country, as even the slightest show of patriotism was percevied (or cried down) as far-right nationalism.

we do not learn our national anthem, we do not hoist our flags at many public buildings and are generally not taught to be proud of our country.

i have two insights on this:

1. patriotism is somewhat inevitable (yes, i used it because of previous discussion :P). as german patriotism was frowned upon, people instead showed patriotism for their states (bavaria, hamburg etc.) for their dialects or for their municipal regions. instead of having national festivals, we had smaller ones. the idea of becoming utterly unpatriotic seems not to work.

2. patriotism can be good. i was never proud of germany in my life until i left it. i think it had do to with the combination of seeing how other countries WERE patriotic and viewing germany from a distance for the first time, but i slowly began to not only accept but be happy with my heritage. to me now, being german is about reminding the world of what ultra-nationalism can lead to, and ironically, being proud of that role, perhaps i am guilty of a little nationalism.

i still think many countries go to far. the USA is always a prime example, but really many other countries are not that different. to be honest, I find that most every country's citizens have a lot to be proud of, and should be. it is only when it leads to degrading other countries...be it officially, in stereotypes or just by idiots on internet forums (:dizzy2: ) that I sometimes sit back and worry at the destination this world is heading to.

its good to see such open people as on this forum, and indeed i find myself more conservative than some of you. but that is for another time.

brief...hah

deguerra

[Privateerkev]

am at work, so ill keep it brief. to add to your nationalism/nationstate debate:

i have to say i quite like where germany is at the moment. ever since ww2, germany has been a distnictly un-patriotic country, as even the slightest show of patriotism was percevied (or cried down) as far-right nationalism.

we do not learn our national anthem, we do not hoist our flags at many public buildings and are generally not taught to be proud of our country.

i have two insights on this:

1. patriotism is somewhat inevitable (yes, i used it because of previous discussion :P). as german patriotism was frowned upon, people instead showed patriotism for their states (bavaria, hamburg etc.) for their dialects or for their municipal regions. instead of having national festivals, we had smaller ones. the idea of becoming utterly unpatriotic seems not to work.

2. patriotism can be good. i was never proud of germany in my life until i left it. i think it had do to with the combination of seeing how other countries WERE patriotic and viewing germany from a distance for the first time, but i slowly began to not only accept but be happy with my heritage. to me now, being german is about reminding the world of what ultra-nationalism can lead to, and ironically, being proud of that role, perhaps i am guilty of a little nationalism.

i still think many countries go to far. the USA is always a prime example, but really many other countries are not that different. to be honest, I find that most every country's citizens have a lot to be proud of, and should be. it is only when it leads to degrading other countries...be it officially, in stereotypes or just by idiots on internet forums (:dizzy2: ) that I sometimes sit back and worry at the destination this world is heading to.

its good to see such open people as on this forum, and indeed i find myself more conservative than some of you. but that is for another time.

brief...hah

deguerra

I found it interesting to hear your point of view with regards to being German. Germany has indeed been discouraged from being "nationalistic" which is ironic because they didn't exactly invent genocide. Genocide has been perpetrated by many countries including my own. But so many people treat the holocaust as somehow "worse" than your "run of the mill" genocide. So the idea that German nationalism is somehow more dangerous than other nationalisms has always bugged me.

And deguerra, I have found that many people find themselves more conservative than me. I have learned to just roll with it. :beam:

[gibsonsg91921]

yeah, if your ideas were accepted by the conservatives of the world, they would be fabulous. if people were perfect, communism would be great. unfortunately, people aren't perfect. call it adam and eve, call it ambition, call it whatever the @#$% you want, but people ain't perfect.

[RoadKill]

OK is in the states, but he has graveyard shift at work.

Zim is west coast. GH, OK, and TC are east coast. I'm Chicagoland.

EF is in England like Econ.

Others have been mentioned already.

GO CANADA!!!

Wait were talking about were we live in real life right?

[Zim]

1.) Your assuming that indigenous societies would just "naturally" find their way into becoming a nation-state. Nations were not inevitable but created and then supported by a mythology that made them seem inevitable..

Actually, I was talking about the Aztecs and Maya, and while the modern idea of a nation with a fixed ethnic makeup (something that applies to very few states in the world) might not have been inevitable, they certainly had the idea of states, and boundaries, and wars over said boundaries.



2.) Having done no small amount of reading about the Spanish Empire, I can tell you there is overwhelming historical evidence that many of those stories are true. But France and Britain were by no means innocent...

I can't argue with that, I just learned that many of the stories were false from one of my professors, who is considered one of the country's leading experts on Latin America. Well, that and things I learned and read while living in South America. :book: That doesn't mean I"m right, since people, even profesors, can pick ideas from all sorts of questionable sources, and even the good sources disagree at times. :dizzy:



3.) Disease came about partly because some European settlers deliberately gave blankets from their smallpox wards to native tribes as "gifts". But even though some of it was by accident, it still happened because people from one area of the world, sailed to another area of the world and insisted on conquering and converting people that were doing quite fine on their own.

Interesting, I was also taught in university that that was also quite possibly a myth, and at the very least much less common than supposed. Never mind that the common cold and several other diseases than small pox caused most of the deaths, and that the diseases spread quite quickly in areas where Europeans had little contact, without the need for a primitive, mostly ineffective form of biological warfare...

So, in your hypothetical world state, would travel be so restricted that none of the people from the other three inhabitants of the world would ever have made it to the Americas? :clown: Or, in a more modern example, no travel from Africa to better contain Aids and most of the world's current cases of smallpox, no travel from Asia if there's any risk of bird flu spreading?

I'd say with a common world government and a common economy diseases will spread not only much quicker than they had managed to back then, but probably even somewhat quicker than today. Either that, or freedom would be much more restricted for our own "good".

Edit: Kotr Thread: The new place for political discussion! :clown:

[deguerra]

well on the one hand, there are things that make the holocaust stand out, even beyond sheer numbers. but i dont want to go into those.

then theres that the holocaust is more recent history. sure, you could cite dafur in sudan as much more recent, but the thing with the holocaust is that obvioulsy after ww2, the world undivided attention was on europe. whereas nobody seemed or seems to care much about darfur, not that im advocating that this is in any way right, and not that i can honestly claim myself to be much better.

and i think a lot of making the holocaust somehow worse has to do with being able to live with being proud in one's own country (bringing us nicely back to patriotism :D). I think there is a perception that to admit that one's own country has done such unbelievable things would be somehow accepting that one's country is bad. As a German, and a proud German at that, I can say that there is more to be proud of in most countries than a small, albeit terrible period of history can erase. To me it is important firstly to look at history before the holocaust, and I find many things I can be proud of there. But much more importantly, I can look at history after the holocaust and I can honestly say I am proud with what Germany has become. We (as a country and a people) have our faults, quite a few even, and there is much that still needs to be done. But I think we have put behind us the terror of half a century, and can truly move on, certainly never to forget what happened, in fact to encourage remembrance at every opportunity, but to continue to strive to become a nation kids can be proud of in future.


I found it interesting to hear your point of view with regards to being German. Germany has indeed been discouraged from being "nationalistic" which is ironic because they didn't exactly invent genocide. Genocide has been perpetrated by many countries including my own. But so many people treat the holocaust as somehow "worse" than your "run of the mill" genocide. So the idea that German nationalism is somehow more dangerous than other nationalisms has always bugged me.

And deguerra, I have found that many people find themselves more conservative than me. I have learned to just roll with it. :beam:

[Privateerkev]

Actually, I was talking about the Aztecs and Maya, and while the modern idea of a nation with a fixed ethnic makeup (something that applies to very few states in the world) might not have been inevitable, they certainly had the idea of states, and boundaries, and wars over said boundaries.

Applying Western concepts to people not from the West tends to get messy. The indigenous people of South and Central America did not have an Enlightenment inspired nation-state with a citizen supported political and military structure. At the time, even the European countries didn't have these.


I can't argue with that, I just learned that many of the stories were false from one of my professors, who is considered one of the country's leading experts on Latin America. Well, that and things I learned and read while living in South America. :book: That doesn't mean I"m right, since people, even profesors, can pick ideas from all sorts of questionable sources, and even the good sources disagree at times. :dizzy:


One thing you learn is that no one really knows anything for sure. But, there tends to eventually be a consensus about things. And while details and degrees may be debated, there seems to be a general agreement that the Spaniards murdered, raped, and overworked the indigenous population of South and Central Americas, as well as the Caribbean.


Interesting, I was also taught in university that that was also quite possibly a myth, and at the very least much less common than supposed. Never mind that the common cold and several other diseases than small pox caused most of the deaths, and that the diseases spread quite quickly in areas where Europeans had little contact, without the need for a primitive, mostly ineffective form of biological warfare...

I think there is enough evidence to suggest that it did happen. True, a lot of it was by "accident". But, my original point was, that it happened because one group sailed over and conquered another group.


So, in your hypothetical world state, would travel be so restricted that none of the people from the other three inhabitants of the world would ever have made it to the Americas? :clown: Or, in a more modern example, no travel from Africa to better contain Aids and most of the world's current cases of smallpox, no travel from Asia if there's any risk of bird flu spreading?

I'm not trying to rewrite history. In my hypothetical world-state, it starts in the future, not in the past. I live in reality and try to change it. I don't try to rewrite history. Not sure where you were going with that one Zim.


I'd say with a common world government and a common economy diseases will spread not only much quicker than they had managed to back then, but probably even somewhat quicker than today. Either that, or freedom would be much more restricted for our own "good".

Not sure how your connecting those things. You can have disease policy at the same time you have a global spanning government. I feel your mixing apples and oranges here.

[Zim]

Applying Western concepts to people not from the West tends to get messy. The indigenous people of South and Central America did not have an Enlightenment inspired nation-state with a citizen supported political and military structure. At the time, even the European countries didn't have these.

If not even the European had an idea of a "nation" (and, defining the term in a certain way, I'm well aware that they didn't), I'm not sure how the Spanish actions would apply as the actions of a nation state. Your specific mention of them seemed to imply to me that you saw their actions in this way.

When I specifically mentioned precolombian native Americans, it was only in acknowledgement that tribal societies changed greatly after contact with the Spaniards and my point about rates of death by violence in them would apply less after this contact occurred, and was not a attempt to imply that things were perfectly fine in the region in the immediate post-Colombian period.




One thing you learn is that no one really knows anything for sure. But, there tends to eventually be a consensus about things. And while details and degrees may be debated, there seems to be a general agreement that the Spaniards murdered, raped, and overworked the indigenous population of South and Central Americas, as well as the Caribbean.

I didn't mean to say that they didn't, only that some very well educated people disagree about the extent, particularly in regard to certain English and French propaganda seeking to show the Spanish as inhuman. Given your opinion that the holocaust is not neccessarily among the worst cases of genocide, I am a little surprised that you view the Spanish treatment of Native Americans differently.




I think there is enough evidence to suggest that it did happen. True, a lot of it was by "accident". But, my original point was, that it happened because one group sailed over and conquered another group.

Actually, despite hearing the story again and again, I have never read a shred of actual evidence that it did happen. Not saying there isn't any, only that as far as I know it could be as much of a myth as, say, people before Columbus not knowing the Earth was round. Statements by Professors at my college suggest as much.




I'm not trying to rewrite history. In my hypothetical world-state, it starts in the future, not in the past. I live in reality and try to change it. I don't try to rewrite history. Not sure where you were going with that one Zim.

Not sure how your connecting those things. You can have disease policy at the same time you have a global spanning government. I feel your mixing apples and oranges here.

I feel that you were the one comparing unlike things. You acknowledge the lack of nation-states in Europe during this period, but put forth the proposition that the diseases spread by the Spaniards somehow put a blight on the concept of the Nation-State.

Nationalism was not the cause of the decimation by disease of Native populations. In a stateless world, or one with a world state, such a thing would be just as likely to happen once travel advanced to the point where these peoples could contact eachother. If the Spaniards were a peaceful post nation-state people, only seeking to trade, the diseases would liekly spread just as quickly and be just as deadly. Their intention to conquer the peoples of the region had relatively little bearing on this, as much effect as it had in other ways.

If you wish to attack the idea of the nation-state, you would do well not to blame it for things it did not directly cause. Of course, if your posts concerning Central America were only in response to something I said that was only a tertiary issue at best, we should probably drop it and move on to more productive and central topics in our discussion.

I am beginning to think that mixing history with our political discussion was a mistake. Perhaps we should get back to figuring the odds in the Hummel von Salza confrontation? :clown:

[FactionHeir]

I wake up and see 3 new pages and all full of politics :laugh4:

Still, you guys should hope no mod walks in and locks it down. ORG rules disallow real life politics debates outside the backroom (you can create a KOTR player only thread there too).

[AussieGiant]

Ok now I think we have reached a point where this discussion could take place in another thread?

[Privateerkev]

Zim,

Go back through our old posts, and you'll see it was actually you that brought up New Spain first with this quote:


Hyper-Nationalism certainly has led to some terrible things, but something I read for a college class a long time ago stuck with me. Apparently the rate of death by violence in pre-state societies is dreadful, averaging about 1 in 3. Even the very worst Nation-States have never matched that. It was safer to be a German or a Jewish person in the first half of the 20th century, than to be, say, a Native American before Columbus, if your main concern is death by violence.

This led to me talking about post-Columbus violence. I never meant to imply that it was the work of the Spanish nation-state.

As for the holocaust, I only meant that I don't see it as "different" from other acts of genocide. Whether it's worse or not is hard to say. What makes one genocide worse than another?

And to keep this post on-topic, how about that KotR game huh? :clown:

[Zim]

Ok now I think we have reached a point where this discussion could take place in another thread?

Actually, I'm about ready to drop it and move on to more casual topics, like the spread for the Hummel/Loyalist war.

Personally I see a slight overall advantage for the Loyalists. Even if Ignoramus gets to crush the hapless A.I. led besiegers, I still give a slight advantage to the Loyalists if they force a confrontation before the Cataclysm ends. I put them at a 3:2 advantage in favor of the Loyalists, with even odds if Ludwig were to march south with Jan's somewhat weakened army.

What about the rest of you guys?

P.S. :oops: Sorry, FH, after someone (I forget who) said discussion far off the topic of KOTR were common, I thought it was ok. I didn't know about the special rule regarding political discussions. If it makes a difference, I don't even think I have access to the backroom, it always shows up empty when I look at it. :clown:

Edit: P.P.S. I answered PK's last post via pm to avoid continuing to break ORG rules. I think I understand how we got mixed up now. ~:)

[AussieGiant]

I think your analysis is about right Zim.

I'm more interested in the Diet session in which both sides are going to get a roasting for disregarding a very clear and concise order from the Kaiser. :yes:

[Privateerkev]

Funny, we've talked about politics in here before. Didn't know about the rule. As for threadjacking the OOC thread, most of us are guilty of it. The game is slow right now anyways...

Plus, I saw Econ online when the discussion was going on and he obviously didn't say anything.

Who's up for a long in depth discussion on religion?

:clown:

[OverKnight]

I agree it's going to be one hell of a Diet Session. This will be the first time our characters have been in the same room for quite some time. I can only imagine some of the show downs and debates that will ensue. Will the Kaiser be able to achieve a detente? Can the various rebellions and grudges be solved by words alone? Of course if a Civil War is still on going, will both sides be invited to the Diet?

It's going to be messy. Should be fun as long as we stay IC and not stray too much.

[Privateerkev]

It will be weird considering who won't be there. Can you imagine a Diet where Jan is not yelling at someone? Someone else will have to fill the void. :clown:

[econ21]

Ignoramus logged on to the Org a couple of hours ago, but I have not heard from him about whether he has installed the mini-mod. His PM box is full again. Night is falling in Australia right now, so my hunch is that it he will not fight his sally before the deadline of 23.00 hours UK time tonight.

If so, we will move to a PvP siege assault at Staufen in 1336. Should that happen, to avoid holding up the game, TinCow will move the turn on to 1338 for players not involved in Staufen.

As we are on page 21, I'm closing this thread and starting a new OOC one.