2k17 /pol/

Grazyn · Post by **Grazyn** » Wed Jul 19, 2017 6:26 am #318164

Bottom post of the previous page:

Never seed

Screemonster · Wed Jul 19, 2017 9:49 pm

So HBO announced an alt-history series about "what if the south had successfully seceded from the union?" and naturally the pearl-clutchers are screeching about it

So far I've not seen anyone actually raise any specific complaints because it's only just been announced and nobody knows what the fuck's gonna happen in the show besides the broad premise, but boy oh boy they can imagine that it's going to be problematic and are all stepping up to tweet furiously because REEEEEE YOU CAN'T DO THAT
wild speculation abounds that they're certainly going to write the confederate side in a sympathetic/positive light and that slavery is going to be portrayed as good thing or something, based on no evidence whatsoever but they're guessing that's what's going to happen and getting mad about it anyway

meanwhile I'm sat here thinking "how the fuck is this any worse a concept than the man in the high castle which had literal nazis in it"

Super Aggro Crag · Wed Jul 19, 2017 9:59 pm

There was a movie about that

Screemonster · Wed Jul 19, 2017 10:08 pm

basically what's happening on twitter right now because nobody knows what the show is actually about is the "look how socially conscious I am" crowd's equivalent of imagining an argument in your head and then getting mad at the other person for what you imagined they would say

starmute · Post by **starmute** » Thu Jul 20, 2017 2:32 am #318544

Screemonster wrote:So HBO announced an alt-history series about "what if the south had successfully seceded from the union?" and naturally the pearl-clutchers are screeching about it

So far I've not seen anyone actually raise any specific complaints because it's only just been announced and nobody knows what the fuck's gonna happen in the show besides the broad premise, but boy oh boy they can imagine that it's going to be problematic and are all stepping up to tweet furiously because REEEEEE YOU CAN'T DO THAT
wild speculation abounds that they're certainly going to write the confederate side in a sympathetic/positive light and that slavery is going to be portrayed as good thing or something, based on no evidence whatsoever but they're guessing that's what's going to happen and getting mad about it anyway

meanwhile I'm sat here thinking "how the fuck is this any worse a concept than the man in the high castle which had literal nazis in it"

I hate southerners. They are the worst type of people. Something about the humidity, the amount of churches and the amount of complaining they do. Honestly I would be happy if they just renew "How its made".

ShadowDimentio · Thu Jul 20, 2017 3:51 am

Jesus man, what did the south ever do to you huh?

DemonFiren · Post by **DemonFiren** » Thu Jul 20, 2017 6:22 am #318594

I guess things like "be awful".

Grazyn · Post by **Grazyn** » Thu Jul 20, 2017 6:38 am #318601

Screemonster wrote:So HBO announced an alt-history series about "what if the south had successfully seceded from the union?" and naturally the pearl-clutchers are screeching about it

So far I've not seen anyone actually raise any specific complaints because it's only just been announced and nobody knows what the fuck's gonna happen in the show besides the broad premise, but boy oh boy they can imagine that it's going to be problematic and are all stepping up to tweet furiously because REEEEEE YOU CAN'T DO THAT
wild speculation abounds that they're certainly going to write the confederate side in a sympathetic/positive light and that slavery is going to be portrayed as good thing or something, based on no evidence whatsoever but they're guessing that's what's going to happen and getting mad about it anyway

meanwhile I'm sat here thinking "how the fuck is this any worse a concept than the man in the high castle which had literal nazis in it"

If Victoria 2 taught me anything, to survive as the confederacy after the war you have to stay allied to Great Britain, and hope they don't get in any war because you're gonna need their full military might every few years to repel the inevitable US attacks. Fucking yanks will NEVER forget their cores. Oh and you have to somehow find the time to industrialise because you don't have anything but cotton.

Incomptinence · Thu Jul 20, 2017 7:11 am

cottonpunk setting, giant walking war machines made out of cotton with slaves pulling on chains as the muscles

Grazyn · Post by **Grazyn** » Thu Jul 20, 2017 11:33 am #318658

IIRC you don't get any additional cores on the US, except for those randomly acquired before the war. After all, the war was to secede not to conquer the Union. You can probably overcome the slavery modifier but there are regions where it stacks on other negative ones from terrain and nobody will ever want to live there.

XSI · Post by **XSI** » Thu Jul 20, 2017 8:44 pm #318864

Historically nobody gave a shit about cotton at the time. They greatly overestimated their importance when the rest of the world was moving away from sails for coal based ships
So they don't get an economy either

ShadowDimentio · Thu Jul 20, 2017 8:56 pm

Not until they discover there's shitloads of coal and oil, anyways.

ThanatosRa · Post by **ThanatosRa** » Thu Jul 20, 2017 10:35 pm #318895

The Juice is Loose.

FantasticFwoosh · Thu Jul 20, 2017 11:05 pm

On parole.

InsaneHyena · Thu Jul 20, 2017 11:12 pm

ShadowDimentio wrote:Jesus man, what did the south ever do to you huh?

He's a shitlib, of course he hates the south.

Super Aggro Crag · Fri Jul 21, 2017 12:47 am

I hate the south too

Fuck atlanta

ColonicAcid · Sat Jul 22, 2017 12:06 am

stop making fucking notes polymer

my poor poor nose is going to get scratched the fuck up for the love of good dont force me to have to use a STRAW

Professor Hangar · Sat Jul 22, 2017 6:17 am

So basically, best case scenario for the Confederacy is to become a Third World country, maybe eventually a petrostate that's basically a more local version of Saudi Arabia.

They basically won the Civil War anyway in that they got to keep slavery-in-all-but-name for a century or so.

FantasticFwoosh · Sat Jul 22, 2017 7:39 am

Professor Hangar wrote:So basically, best case scenario for the Confederacy is to become a Third World country, maybe eventually a petrostate that's basically a more local version of Saudi Arabia.

They basically won the Civil War anyway in that they got to keep slavery-in-all-but-name for a century or so.

Literally Saudi Arabia, which to this day there are still slaves in the middle east.

XSI · Post by **XSI** » Sat Jul 22, 2017 7:02 pm #319314

>Sultanates
>Overpowered

Yes, but only for the first few generations. The AI is absolutely terrible at managing decadence and will collapse the whole thing after three or four
Not that this helps when it means the entire thing is taken over by a new dynasty that literally spawns from nowhere, so they can just continue blobbing where they left off.

XSI · Post by **XSI** » Sun Jul 23, 2017 12:19 am #319379

They get the most troops because they get to manage both castles and religious sites
Which means the average muslim AI ruler gets TWO holdings to get soldiers from rather than getting a pitiful 50-100 soldiers from a vassal priest, and they seem to be programmed to immediately try to claim these sites for themselves and oust any vassal that held them, even if it's family. This puts them at roughly the same as having two baronies as a catholic so it's a sizable advantage, but it's an even bigger advantage to players because the holy sites give more gold too, and players use the gold better than the AI
If you want to powergame it, start muslim and grab what you can, gather gold and such and then convert to what religion you really want when decadence starts getting high. It's not as good as being a reformed Norse merchant republic for breaking the game, but it's still going to let you rise far above everyone else.

That said, yes. The AI loves holy wars and Charlgemagne start France is terrible because the good laws don't even unlock until later

starmute · Post by **starmute** » Mon Jul 24, 2017 4:11 am #319653

ShadowDimentio wrote:Jesus man, what did the south ever do to you huh?

I just don't like the humidity and "wet heat". There's fucking tons of churches that occupy land that could be used commercially but the cities have horrible streets and people complain about poor city services (which makes sense because they have such low tax revenue) . Additionally I don't like people who celebrate traitors also sometimes they reinforce ignorance rather than correct it.

Positives:
That being said I like boiled peanuts. I haven't met many black people in my life so its kinda a novelty. I saw a gator that had a mouth the size of me.. and there are more people down here.

2/10 would not reccomend.

FantasticFwoosh wrote:
Literally Saudi Arabia, which to this day there are still slaves in the middle east.

The old confederacy was a bit unsustainable. Slave labor is actually much more expensive than machine labor. Look at the cotton gin vs picking out all those damn seeds by hand. I honestly don't think the south had enough "basic" resources to make slavery economically viable. Not to mention other countries were abolishing the practice, so the slave market was becoming more expensive. That being said losing Texas in particular would have made the north weaker due to the loss of oil. The south would lose iron, infrastructure and areas where innovation were taking place (IE new york was a powerhouse as far as invention, trading ect.

The confederacy would have to change. Even South African- apartheid policies probably wouldn't work due to the amount of black population in the South. Thus economic necessitate would end slavery and implement modern capitalistic tenancies.

Anyways as I see it, if the south won the civil war the "North" would be much weaker however the South would be a absolute shit-show due to resistance of economic necessity, infighting and economic decline.

CosmicScientist wrote:

I mean, they're still banging on about the gender pay gap in their regular time now rather than their """independent""" sections,
>BBC has a 10% gender pay gap which is below average BUT ONE IN EIGHT OF THE TOP PAID IS A WOMAAAN
>WOMAAAN DOING SAME JERBS NOT PAID THE SAME
>what are these same jobs? Are all of them the same jobs? Is the money being paid to anyone justified, not just by individual circumstance but the job they do? WHO CARES ABOUT CRITICAL ANALYSIS!
>sneak in ethnic representation because we need someone from every labelled background in the arbitrarily measured of >£150,000 top paid positions but let it slide because we only need to have a passing nod at this for reasons and we won't mention who should be earning X amount and why?

I don't want to be out of the loop but I really wish news reporting was held to a higher standard. It was even coming dangerously close to some media from across the pond when they were talking about social media backlash against the terminally ill, brain damaged child with parents wanting experimental American treatment to be approved of by some court in this country. It did feel very strange to walk into the living room earlier today to see a parent had put on I think it was Fox news and there were three female news casters complaining about a tweet being sexist against women and blah blah blah history of repression of women. Three female news casters having a bitch fest over a tweet by a nobody politician. I hope that's not how the news normally goes across the pond.

Look I'm not a cosmic scientist or anything but 1/8 people isn't that much. And you'd probably bitch too if you were paid 10% less. You can't please everyone, thats true but women still have problems with the glass ceiling.

Professor Hangar · Mon Jul 24, 2017 7:05 am

IIRC, the BBC is in its usual state when there's a conservative government in power; desperately trying to appear 'bipartisan' so it doesn't get its funding hacked to pieces again, and is still accused of being Communist propaganda anyway.

The realisation that most 'liberals' are actually centrists at best, since the right wing strategy of calling anyone who thinks you shouldn't get to fuck over everyone if you have more money a Communist has been incredibly effective.

XSI · Post by **XSI** » Mon Jul 24, 2017 7:28 am #319676

No, it's pretty obvious there is an agenda
It just happens that the old left-right thing is outdated and doesn't work anymore.

Sure, the 'liberals'/BBC may be centrists on the economic scale that was previously used to determine how left or right someone is politically, but they're still following and supporting an agenda on matters like social issues, nationalism/immigration, welfare, the EU, and so on.
Just because it doesn't fit the old definition of 'left' doesn't mean they're suddenly something else. It just means they use a different label

Just cut the funding entirely already. If they're not even going to pretend to be fair and balanced then you shouldn't have to pretend they're worth the money

Professor Hangar · Mon Jul 24, 2017 8:56 am

IIRC, the 'wage gap' is poorly represented since it's not necessarily women being paid less for the same work, but jobs which typically have more women than men- teaching, for example- pay way, way less than traditionally male jobs with a similar level of work.

Then again, there's pretty much an inverse correlation between how much you work and how much you get paid anyway.

Malkevin · Post by **Malkevin** » Mon Jul 24, 2017 1:15 pm #319731

Yep, it's the project leaders that earn the big bucks not the ones that actually do the work.

Worst is when you're a worker that's paid salary with no over time clause, so you end up doing a lot of unpaid work

DemonFiren · Post by **DemonFiren** » Mon Jul 24, 2017 1:39 pm #319734

You don't get money for work, you get money for already having money.

bman · Post by **bman** » Mon Jul 24, 2017 3:39 pm #319759

hey

what's going on in your countries?

Ikarrus · Post by **Ikarrus** » Mon Jul 24, 2017 4:51 pm #319768

Absolutely nothing of any substance

Post by **oranges** » Mon Jul 24, 2017 9:28 pm #319858

dunno about you but I'm living in a neoliberal paradise

XSI · Post by **XSI** » Mon Jul 24, 2017 9:46 pm #319871

Nothing here of any sort of interest

Aside from the usual bullshit, but if it's not new, its not news

starmute · Post by **starmute** » Tue Jul 25, 2017 2:54 am #319943

From what I've seen in my local politics Melaleuca is still ruling over my city and their corporation is buying up local farms and exploiting bills to give small farmers money. We still need more leyway in nuclear energy. And the blue angels visited my town while I was going away. Oh and the local paper is falling apart.

Corruption abounds in state politics. Thats about it.

Professor Hangar · Tue Jul 25, 2017 7:05 am

A couple of Greens politicians down under had to quit their seats because they'd forgotten to renounce their dual citizenship, which they may not have even been aware of.

Which has brought up further issues when another MP may have to resign his seat if his mother applies him for Italian citizenship whether or not he consents.

Post by **oranges** » Wed Jul 26, 2017 9:12 am #320377

I dunno about you guys but the fucking abbasid blob never collapses from decadence in my games

Malkevin · Post by **Malkevin** » Wed Jul 26, 2017 11:23 am #320399

Why is this the ck2 thread?

DemonFiren · Post by **DemonFiren** » Wed Jul 26, 2017 11:31 am #320401

there is no difference between ck2 and pol

XSI · Post by **XSI** » Wed Jul 26, 2017 3:48 pm #320446

Pretty much

But all of that really just shows that paradox can't into AI

Professor Hangar · Wed Jul 26, 2017 4:31 pm

To be fair, it's not like reality has been very impressive of late.

starmute · Post by **starmute** » Wed Jul 26, 2017 8:22 pm #320586

CosmicScientist wrote:>reality isn't impressive
>running each AI on its own processor, not because each one is intelligent and needs it but just because it can

Reality was never impressive. That's why we have video games now.

TheColdTurtle · Thu Jul 27, 2017 2:18 am

Starmute please seek help

starmute · Post by **starmute** » Thu Jul 27, 2017 4:09 am #320693

TheColdTurtle wrote:Starmute please seek help

The chaplain said I was fineeeeeeeee. Its not my fault I stole the clowns shoes and made him eat them

CosmicScientist wrote:
Reality is amazing.

Unless you have crippling personal problems that caused a void which games filled.
Hahahahahahaha

Is the creation better than the creator? It can be. There's a briliant simplicity in games where there is a begining a middle and a end with no uncertainty. Whereas my current lifestyle is wake up for work, eat breakfast, work, eat dinner and sleep whilst worrying about my time off. Video games are all fun. Reality not so much.

XSI · Post by **XSI** » Thu Jul 27, 2017 4:42 am #320696

Reality is shit not because anything intrinsic to reality, but because other people make it so

People being dicks to eachother, people being willing to work all day 7 days a week for minimum wage no benefits setting that as a standard, and people who just don't think before they act
Hell is other people, so try to be nice to eachother and we'll not be in hell. Just sort of purgatory for 80-120 years and then we die of old age

starmute · Post by **starmute** » Thu Jul 27, 2017 4:55 am #320699

XSI wrote:Reality is shit not because anything intrinsic to reality, but because other people make it so

People being dicks to eachother, people being willing to work all day 7 days a week for minimum wage no benefits setting that as a standard, and people who just don't think before they act
Hell is other people, so try to be nice to eachother and we'll not be in hell. Just sort of purgatory for 80-120 years and then we die of old age

Or whatever your religious equivalent. Anyways I think things can only go downhill as far as people goes. Hate to say it we make our own world painful.

DemonFiren · Post by **DemonFiren** » Thu Jul 27, 2017 7:56 am #320712

reality has the lizards we deserve
not the lizards we need right now

Post by **oranges** » Thu Jul 27, 2017 10:16 am #320729

what's your strat for fast blob in england, I usually settle for wessex start, capture 3 dukedoms and fast form wessex kingdom and then invite ducal claimaints to press claims over the remaining dukedoms.

also I form a one county republic under my vassalage nearly every game, does anyone else do this, they're absolute gold mines.

starmute · Post by **starmute** » Fri Jul 28, 2017 2:11 am #320932

CosmicScientist wrote: To make this relevant to politics. Screw Paradox for not making King Offa able to build his dyke and redraw the English/Welsh border that you see in later start dates and today's world (doesn't Paradox like cheesy quotes even if they never happened for events, "Get Offa me land!" anyone?). Hence why Powys is a titular duchy in later dates, Hereford and the other county no-one cares about because I don't live there are a part of the all powerful Mercia! Until I decide I want to be hipster British and claim my Welsh blood is better because we were here first/many invaders erased our culture and dragons are cooler/Normans destroyed the white and gold dragons.

WELSH CULTURE!!!

SOMEONE GET THE WELSH STICK!!!

[youtube] v=fHxO0UdpoxM [/youtube]

Fuck it I'm not good with youtube.

ShadowDimentio · Fri Jul 28, 2017 3:49 am

The Wall(TM) funding bill passed the House, coming soon to a border near you.

starmute · Post by **starmute** » Fri Jul 28, 2017 4:11 am #320959

ShadowDimentio wrote:The Wall(TM) funding bill passed the House, coming soon to a border near you.

We're paying for it. 1.6 billion dollars. And that's just a portion of the total 6.2 billion they need. (minus all the stuff that goes with it a whopping $166 billion)....

Not to get political or anything didn't he claim that he would make mexico pay for it (I know unlikely). Additionally this comes on the heels of the whole transgender thing where he claimed it cost too much (between $2.4 million and $8.4 million).

Anyways if you want me to cite sources it's pretty easy but yeah... great... that's how we should spend our tax dollars....

$20 says he doesn't balance the budget and we're going into debt this year as well. I mean that's not something abnormal nowadays but I hate it when a president does that.

ShadowDimentio · Fri Jul 28, 2017 4:17 am

starmute wrote:
ShadowDimentio wrote:The Wall(TM) funding bill passed the House, coming soon to a border near you.
We're paying for it. 1.6 billion dollars. And that's just a portion of the total 6.2 billion they need. Not to get political or anything didn't he claim that he would make mexico pay for it (I know unlikely). Additionally this comes on the heels of the whole transgender thing where he claimed it cost too much (between $2.4 million and $8.4 million).

Anyways if you want me to cite sources it's pretty easy but yeah... great... that's how we should spend our tax dollars....

Literally what? The wall funding and the army paying for transition surgeries are two totally different baskets of fruit that are totally incomparable.

And Mexico paying for it isn't off the table at all.

starmute · Post by **starmute** » Fri Jul 28, 2017 4:23 am #320961

ShadowDimentio wrote:
starmute wrote:
ShadowDimentio wrote:The Wall(TM) funding bill passed the House, coming soon to a border near you.
We're paying for it. 1.6 billion dollars. And that's just a portion of the total 6.2 billion they need. Not to get political or anything didn't he claim that he would make mexico pay for it (I know unlikely). Additionally this comes on the heels of the whole transgender thing where he claimed it cost too much (between $2.4 million and $8.4 million).

Anyways if you want me to cite sources it's pretty easy but yeah... great... that's how we should spend our tax dollars....
Literally what? The wall funding and the army paying for transition surgeries are two totally different baskets of fruit that are totally incomparable.

And Mexico paying for it isn't off the table at all.

How in the world are you going to get mexico to pay for something like that when it's a tenth of their GDP? How would mexico convince its voter, senators and congressmen to pay for something like that? That's like convincing North Korea to pray to our president every day for guidance.

Trump stated "....victory and cannot be burdened with the tremendous medical costs and disruption that transgender in the military would entail. Thank you"

Basicly transgender people in the military are too expensive and disruptive.

I simply stated transgender health care costs x amount and the wall costs x amount. The wall costs much much much more money in the end.

I'm not transgender, however I am frugal. This costs us a ton of money, and currently we're paying for it out of pocket.

ShadowDimentio · Fri Jul 28, 2017 4:42 am

>How do we get Mexico to pay for it

Not all at once you idiot, by sticking a small tax on Mexican goods then it'll slowly earn back the money for the wall.

>Comparing the wall and transgender surgeries

I already said they're incomparable. One is a public works project for the entire country and the other is a personal medical procedure for a miniscule group of people.

You're trying to look at the price tag of a hamburger and a car and compare the two as one being better than the other because it costs less. Stop.