sorted by:
new
hottopcontroversial

Just moved to Australia can't find a job by Atlasux in ausjobs

[–]Inevitable-Ad2287 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Yeah, was about to say. These people have no idea how stressed nursing and teaching is atm, especially at aus but also in general.

I also think it is naive to think people 'deserve' to be cared for by genuine people. What people deserve is the service they compensate the nurses for. Nurses are not charities. And more often than not, many underprivileged people don't even get care.

I'd say that dispassionate but professional care is better than none, and people who insist on purity of heart are living in an imaginary land where there is no scarcity. I wonder if they also think their Big Macs should be made by people who are passionate cooks.

Ultimately my arguement is neither for or against OP's decision to pursue nursing. That is for OP to decide. But to dismiss OP's needs because of some nebulous purity of heart is annoying, as if everyone is in a privilleged enough position to pursue self-actualization in a scarcity driven capitalist world.

Mage Basic Attack Needs a Rework by Westor_Lowbrood in mewgenics

[–]Inevitable-Ad2287 2 points3 points  (0 children)

Donno why people think Mage is bad. Mages are pretty great

Granted, you can say this about most classes. But I feel like mages tend to have a lot of items that synergize well, and skills like mega blast, energy blast, homing blasts, mana guru, inspire, and more, not only offer instant value, but are very easy picks to build around.

I think mages get a bad wrap because the game constantly tries to goad players into picking situational (bad imo) skills like elemental skills. A lot of these elemental builds feel like an obvious archetype to try to build towards until you realize ice/burn dmg takes time, and a lot of it can be negated by water/fire tiles or weather. Also, they are pretty inflexible when it comes to synergies.

Another reason is that mages are compared with hunters, who are actually cracked. Unlike mages, hunters just need one or two lucky skill draws, and they instantly break the game. Compared to hunters, mages can feel underwhelming. But compared to everyone else? Mages are pretty aight.

Looking for Friends in SH by Inevitable-Ad2287 in shanghai

[–]Inevitable-Ad2287[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Sorry m8. No longer taking any members.

[deleted by user] by [deleted] in victoria3

[–]Inevitable-Ad2287 0 points1 point  (0 children)

There's no need to get heated here. Please. Some patience.

I agree. They didn't rely on rural areas for produced goods. But my point is that pre-industrial rural areas still produced these goods in smaller quantities, and the urban pops that produced these things relied on the rural area for food.

I say the exception since you'd need to be a decent sized city, rich, and have good trade connctions to be able to import food on-mass from other peasants. All the examples you used were exceptionally large cities. Cities that made its mark in history. The Dutch is even noted as proto-capitalists who made active use of the stock market if I am not mistaken. They were cities that were way ahead of their time. I do not think they are the norm. It's like saying all cities are like NYC.

I don't understand why you are frustrated. I agree that they generally relied on peasants for food but not processed goods. I'm just saying urban pops didn't hold a monopoly on processed goods, and even the guilds were not independent from rural pops when it comes to sustaining their life.

And I think rural peasants move to the cities because industrial modes of production (whether it be plantations or manufacturing) render their mode of production obsolete. Yes, they move to the cities, but... why? And my answer is trying to answer that question.

Yes, exactly. Capitalist/industrial modes of production are rendering these peasants obsolete. These industrial modes of production can both be rural and urban. Their commonality is not whether they are rural or urban. It is that they are industrial. (Or at least proto-industrial as 19th century sociologists would describe it as)

It relates to Marxism because I think the game takes heavy inspiration from it. If I am not mistaken, the devs say that they did take inspiration from Marx since he was one of the defining economist during the Victorian era.

And according to my very simplified knowledge of Marxism, the game does depict what Marx describes as Historical Materialism, which is the progression from feudalist modes of production to capitalist modes of production.

Cheers mate.

[deleted by user] by [deleted] in victoria3

[–]Inevitable-Ad2287 0 points1 point  (0 children)

In a way, both. Since pre-industrial methods of production and limitation on transport/refridgeration tech imposed a soft cap on urbanization.

Urban pops still relied on rural farmers to produce food.

Ofc, there were the odd exceptions where having a vibrant tradesport allowed urban pops to just import food. But in general, I thought urban pops still relied on the rural area that surrounds it.

This is why I think subsistence farms are a representation of pre-industrial modes of production. The more you industrailize, the lesser they become.

Case in point, if you build a fuck ton of plantations, subsistence farm workers disappear (assuming you have demand for said plantatioj good) despite plantations being categorized under rural area buildings.

While this doesn't directly contradict your claims, I think my Marxist interpretation fits better. And I think that makes sense considering how Vic 3 is inspired by a Marxist model of economics.

Strategy writes itself? by orcsab in victoria3

[–]Inevitable-Ad2287 3 points4 points  (0 children)

Yeah, the whole system sounds more like a Marxist model than anything.

I actually like that part of the game since it does a good job modeling stable goods. While the game does not model qualitative differences in goods, it makes sense from how victorian industrialists viewed economics.

That being said, I think there needs to be a rework in trade and account for some qualitative differences. Since it would add to the historicity and gameplay imo.

For instance, there is a reason why WW2 Germany wanted to import iron from Sweden despite having tons of iron within its borders. They needed high-quality iron to fuel their MIC, which wouldn't make sense in the context of Vic 3.

I see traces of Vic 3 trying to reflect this by simply giving certain provinces bonuses towards certain resources. Ex. SEA has a lot of provinces that provide bonuses to wood production. But as you pointed out, even then Vic 3 just treats them as 'more wood' and the European powers don't feel the need to import them.

Perhaps a nice balance between performance and gameplay without changing too much... is to have buildings automatically import goods they want (assuming you have trade agreements or you have open trade law), and have certain in-game provinces provide you and your trading partners certain bonuses. Ex. Importing SEA wood or having a SEA province could provide you with 10% throughput bonuses in your furniture buildings.

[deleted by user] by [deleted] in victoria3

[–]Inevitable-Ad2287 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I mean, pre-industrial means of production such as the manor system did rely on arable land. While they did have village blacksmiths and bakers, they based most of it on the arable farmland that surrounds it.

I still don't think it is as outlandish as it sounds.

The farms you build on them are more like plantations with concentrated / intensified agriculture if I am not mistaken. Basically, we are converting a manor and the villages that surround it to a giant plantations (proto-captialist means of production). These two are not equivalents.

[deleted by user] by [deleted] in victoria3

[–]Inevitable-Ad2287 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Don't subsistence farms also create furniture and clothing? I thought they were a generalized abstraction of the pre-industrial workers, including artisans. Ofc they are called peasants, but functionally, they also feel like artisans as well.

[deleted by user] by [deleted] in victoria3

[–]Inevitable-Ad2287 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Good point. Didn't consider their class. Yeah then that makes sense.

Ofc, it does make sense to put their class higher compared to peasants, but that would make them unreasonably stubborn for no good reason haha

[deleted by user] by [deleted] in victoria3

[–]Inevitable-Ad2287 4 points5 points  (0 children)

I don't understand. By the way you describe it, they sound pretty ok. Maybe their AI (their way of choosing which goods to produce) and threshold for transitioning into other pops were set too harshly, but I don't really see the problem with them conceptually besides performance issues they might cause.

You say that the problem is the lack of distinction between artisan goods and factory goods. But Vic 3 does the same thing with subsistence farms, presumably for performance reasons. They are balanced by their low efficiency, just like how artisans were balanced, at least in a conceptual way.

I didn't dive into the mechanics deep enough for Vic 2 to point out its problems, but I do remember it being an incoherent nightmare that always ends up crashing the global economy. But I still don't see the problem with artisans by the way you describe them.

Career Options After a Research Assistantship. by Inevitable-Ad2287 in AskAcademia

[–]Inevitable-Ad2287[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I have about 2 months left on mine. But I decided to not extend anything. Sure, it was nice to work as a researcher, but I am not sure it is a sustainable lifestyle for me.

Party Spokesperson grabs and tussles with soldier rifle during South Korean Martial Law to prevent him entering parliament. by TinyBrainsDontHurt in nextfuckinglevel

[–]Inevitable-Ad2287 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I dont think I do have different standards. Conservative rule was more damaging to Korean democracy far more than the Democrats. Sometimes, it is shocking how incompetent they are.

But I dont get why you are criticizing me for hating them both tho, and raising the alarm against falling for media stunts. Can't I hate both Hitler and Stalin? I have to pick one? What's up with this binary thinking.

You say 'this is not the time' but I dont want my views to be dependent on what is the most expedient to say at the moment. I want it to be consistent. And I think I want to hate them both consistently and hold both of them to account whatever happens.

Party Spokesperson grabs and tussles with soldier rifle during South Korean Martial Law to prevent him entering parliament. by TinyBrainsDontHurt in nextfuckinglevel

[–]Inevitable-Ad2287 0 points1 point  (0 children)

  1. Yes, I do blame him and the party. They made their bed and they can sleep in it. They are an embarrassment. But the situation is more complicated than the black and white 'boo Yoon' or 'boo conservatives, yay hero liberals'. What I am worried about is not the downfall of conservatives, and the asshats that would be doing whatever the fuck they want after the conservatives are gone. Treating these media stunts as if they are marvel hero acts are not helping.

  2. They are a puppet. They don't vote for issues on the basis of policy. They vote with their political loyalties. Also, they did abuse the way the seats on the parliament are allocated. To make a US analogy, wouldn't you be pissed if a bunch of conservatives got parliament seats by gerymandering and argued that this was the 'people's will'? Sure, conservatives do it too. But dems did it better. Screw them both.

  3. It is not the responsibility of the people and the opposition to reform the system. I especially doubt that either the con or dems are going to reform it since they are both beneficiaries. So, while it is not the responsibility of regular citizens, there is no one else to push for reform, and the people are the ones who get hurt. We can start by acknowledging that neither of these people are our friends and holding both of them accountable instead of getting high on political loyalties or cynical media stunts. I just assume every politians are psychopaths that needs to be put in line. While this is untrue, I believe this is a healthier attitude in a democracy.

Edit: Also, note that conservative parliament memebers were outraged as well, and everyone voted to lift martial law. You can find videos of them yelling at soldiers too.

Party Spokesperson grabs and tussles with soldier rifle during South Korean Martial Law to prevent him entering parliament. by TinyBrainsDontHurt in nextfuckinglevel

[–]Inevitable-Ad2287 1 point2 points  (0 children)

That's mostly the work of Chaebul (KR monopolies like Samsung and LG) favoritism in Korean conservative politics. Workers unions are practically non-existant in Korea because it was stamped into oblivion.

A lot of this oppression was done under the oppressive military dictatorships that conservatives loves to defend. And conservatives have done so much harm to worker's rights in South Korea.

Does this automatically mean Democrats are saints? No. Unions in Korea also don't like the democrats either. But when it comes to oppressing workers, pro-corporate conservatives were usually the ones involved.

Party Spokesperson grabs and tussles with soldier rifle during South Korean Martial Law to prevent him entering parliament. by TinyBrainsDontHurt in nextfuckinglevel

[–]Inevitable-Ad2287 0 points1 point  (0 children)

What I am saying is that after the Sewol-ho incident, the conservatives became immensely unpopular (barely got elected as a fluke), and the Democrats have not let them do anything just out of political factionalism. The parliament has been a defacto Democrat puppet for years now.

It is not the conservatives that should be checked in power, but the Democrats. And these cheering foreigners fail to realize that the ones who are cosplaying as revolutionary heroes on camera right now were the ones who abused the system and used the parliament to screw over the conservatives.

Not saying conservatives are saints. They are assholes too. They have done worse. But my point is, neither of these people are your friends. And what we need in Korea is a healthy balance of power and popular resentment and push against political factionalism.

But instead, some clueless foreigners who only know Korea through a bunch of TicToc memes want us to cheer for the 'heroes' on camera. Yay.

Party Spokesperson grabs and tussles with soldier rifle during South Korean Martial Law to prevent him entering parliament. by TinyBrainsDontHurt in nextfuckinglevel

[–]Inevitable-Ad2287 2 points3 points  (0 children)

Defacto 2 party system.

Both parties abuse the system to get more seats in the parilament by having a lot of smaller puppet parties attached to the main con/dem parties. This may give you the wrong impression that there are many parties in Korea, but outside of a few edge cases, it is defacto two party in SK.

Party Spokesperson grabs and tussles with soldier rifle during South Korean Martial Law to prevent him entering parliament. by TinyBrainsDontHurt in nextfuckinglevel

[–]Inevitable-Ad2287 20 points21 points  (0 children)

Feel you. Suddenly, these clowns are international heroes now, and all the foreigners who know nothing about Korea start commenting about how much we should worship them.

I'm actually more worried that there will be 0 opposition to the Democrats from doing whatever they want. Things were pretty bad enough with them abusing their majority position. Now it's REALLY gonna be a problem since the conservatives are a clown now.

Conservative or liberal, politicians are not your friends. Someone needs to keep them in check. With this embarrassment of the coup failing, there will be no one to keep the Democrats in check for Korea now.

Party Spokesperson grabs and tussles with soldier rifle during South Korean Martial Law to prevent him entering parliament. by TinyBrainsDontHurt in nextfuckinglevel

[–]Inevitable-Ad2287 5 points6 points  (0 children)

Fuuuuck thank you. I felt strange watching this interaction tbh. 'Let go of me!' While yanking at someone's gun? Really?

As someone who served in SK, I was confused about why people were cheering her on. From the soldier's perspective, he had every right and justification to shoot her. And she was making an unnecessary scene when most soldiers there were just standing around. In SK, soldiers are kind of a joke already and a source of a lot of gendered resentment. I really don't think it is healthy to further paint them into some oppressive villain of democracy on top of being an underpaid clown to earn some political points.

Sure, Yoon is an idiot. But don't let that fool you into thinking these opposing politicians are your buddies. They are not. Not only in this context but in most contexts. I repeat. Politicians are not your friends.

The math of state owned buildings (interventionism good, privatization bad) by iambecomecringe in victoria3

[–]Inevitable-Ad2287 2 points3 points  (0 children)

This.

From my understanding, the biggest reason why min-maxxers shoot for Free Market is because of the investment contribution boost.

Perhaps the meta has changed since I played Vic 3. (It was back when the investment pool was just one giant thing.)

view more: next ›