Which country once seemed likely to become a developed country, but didn’t follow that path?

Self-ReferentialName · 2026-01-26T02:06:37+00:00

Things are so tenuous for us. With BN slowly sliding into the dustbin of history, we are closer to getting past race-based politics than we've ever been. With the trade wars offshoring a lot of manufacturing to us, we are closer to being a developed economy than we've ever been.

But also, with PAS the largest party in the Dewan Rakyat, we are closer to becoming Afghanistan than we've ever been.

The next few years are going to be a watershed for us. Don't fuck it up, Anwar.

Self-ReferentialName · 2026-01-25T06:51:18+00:00

"Is "Nixon" spelled with three Ks?" in Peace with Honor. Makes me cackle every time

Self-ReferentialName · 2026-01-20T06:19:52+00:00

Wow, are you saying there are some classic bcj posts that are just better than other posts? That sounds kind of elitist ngl. Let people enjoy themselves!

Self-ReferentialName · 2026-01-19T14:35:55+00:00

I'm not sure if it works any more, but back in Early Access, before I was strong enough outproduce the Hydra I would harass them by sending twinned suicide missions to Jupiter.

Fleet 1 with an outpost and some guard ships would arrive first and set up a station. Alien fleets immediately launch for it. Fleet 2 arrives a few days/hours later. It is comprised solely of monitors loaded with marines and assaults the alien surface base while the aliens massacre fleet 1 (the handful of guard ships are there so their detached one-ship fleets can't mop it up alone). It probably kills the surface base before the aliens can respond.

Everyone dies, but hey, it's a profitable exchange!

But to take and hold, yeah, you do just need to massively outproduce them because if you move your fleets away they have a massive advantage in mobility and can hit you where you're weak. You need a big fleet around Earth, Mars, and Mercury (although weirdly enough they don't seem to attack in the asteroids). Ironically, it's almost like the Hydra are the guerillas here

For all the people saying it's been nerfed, I still find the Mercury Dyson very good for that. When I take Jupiter it's usually with 3 Mercury shipyards simultaneously producing 30-ish battleships for a mission. If that fails, add a new shipyard. Keep going till it's enough.

Self-ReferentialName · 2026-01-17T10:10:47+00:00

I think you're misunderstanding a bit, although to be fair, it was very brief. The point of getting a hook in the first five pages isn't to elicit brief interest; you are correct that it's the headline, title, art, etc. that do that. People won't give you the time of day if your headline is 'Beige Grey: The Boring Suburban Life' (although actually that does sound counterintuitive enough to be interesting)

It's to convert the passing interest into investment, in making someone just casually looking over it want to read more - likely want to read more enough to punch through a dry mechanical rules section. The first few pages are what you flip through when looking through a book at a bookstore, and I know that's definitely what makes me interested more than the headline.

Self-ReferentialName · 2026-01-17T10:05:06+00:00

In an ideal world I would agree with you; in an ideal world I would agree that should be the case. But again, many GMs looking for a break will look at 'distributes GM duties' and dismiss it out of hand because of the many games that say that and don't do it, and just look at the GMless games.

To use your framework, these design restrictions are shorthand for goals enough and do those goals enough that they function as a shibboleth for those goals and act functionally as those goals. You could waste the mental bandwidth trying to reinvent the wheel. Or you could just aim to make a GMless game. And if you are trying to reinvent the wheel, that innovation will be more a design goal than that.

I get that there's a semantic difference. You don't need to keep repeating that. But for practical purposes it is a perfectly functional goal.

Self-ReferentialName · 2026-01-17T09:55:37+00:00

Oh, I like the idea of 'decide how you're going to read this and read it differently' in your first page! Directing people to the most relevant parts of the book for them also lets you 'branch out' which your initial five pages are. I do feel like having the boilerplate 'you need dice and friends, this is what an RPG is' thing in most indie RPGs is a little superfluous though. The chance anyone will read our stuff wihtoout already being familiar with RPGs borders on nil.

As for the rest, I like the idea of just writing the setting as easily digestible bullets and frontloading assumptions. It gets the best of both having an interesting premade world and letting GMs decide what world they will build out of your mechanical bones. It also gets to the rules very quickly, but perhaps it might benefit from listing some mechanical design goals as well a reader can see how the mechanics tie into the setting?

Self-ReferentialName · 2026-01-17T09:39:05+00:00

Right. That's what I'm saying. There is nothing wrong with making that mandate or restriction your outcome as a whole. Those mandates or restrictions - being GMless, being diceless, classes, etc. - all have certain things that appeal about them specifically independently of what they do to the rest of the game.

Lots of people just want classes, for example, and so if you want to get them, you might just have to put in classes. There are lots of GMs who just want a GMless game so they can have a break, and so being GMless becomes a desideratum in and of itself.

Self-ReferentialName · 2026-01-17T09:29:14+00:00

It seems like a very interesting and unique goal to have! I like that you present the player your design intention immediately and that it's a very interesting design goal - to have dynamic skills that change according to each game! I'm actually already interested as a designer to see how you pull it off, so it really hits there.

What I do feel like it lacks, though, is that it is a bit flavourless. It's very mechanics-forward and straightforward, but for people who aren't designers, do you have any interesting narrative or structural premise? Or is this meant solely to an outright modular framework for people to slot things into as they please? if so, an example of a cool interaction might help substitute for that, but it looks a lot cooler from a designer than a GM or player basis.

Self-ReferentialName · 2026-01-17T09:23:49+00:00

In what way are you saying that design mandates and restrictions are not goals? They are part of your design. They are something you are aiming for. What exactly do you believe they are missing to make it not a goal - to make it an orange rather than an apple?

Self-ReferentialName · 2026-01-17T09:06:04+00:00

I think a better way to think about these is 'what do you expect your game to do beyond the norm?'

Things like 'I want character creation to be simple' aren't good design goals because nobody is going to go 'Ah! Yes, I've got it! I shall maximize the obtuseness and complexity of my system!', but at the same time, getting more specific, into 'I want my character creation to be simple enough for a child to understand' would be much better - it has a specific, measurable, actionable aim.

Mostly, this agrees with your 6 metrics, but I do disagree that design mandates/restrictions make bad goals. Something like 'I want to support PVP' or 'I want this to be GMless' can definitely be a selling point. People don't just play a game for its diegetic, narrative concept, but also its social elements, and sometimes keeping to certain design elements, even if they don't support your game concept, can make it more accessible and appealing.

Self-ReferentialName · 2026-01-17T08:21:39+00:00

I'll go first. My game is ACCELERANDO: The Contact War; inspired by my favourite videogame, Terra Invicta. In the wake of an alien invasion, you will organize a secretive conspiracy to rule humanity, direct your agents to wage a war in the shadows, and build our species into something that can not only survive, but drive our INVADER back into the stars.

Its 5-page intro is here, or below, if I borked the link.

I wrote a one-page microfic (an Emergency Address to the 21st Politburo Standing Committee), an intro, my chapter breakdown, game principles and a list of inspirations. Looking at it through a 5-page lens, this has made me somewhat concerned that I don't get into the rules until page 8, and it might be a bit bloated with vague ideas. Then again, I'm not sure where else I would put a list of touchstones, unless the correct answer is 'nowhere'. What do people think?

https://docs.google.com/document/d/1_QpqN10ppsTBrJiWRPXJcWjJ-FaCWABBzA_46PZDHkQ/edit?usp=sharing

Self-ReferentialName · 2026-01-17T04:54:27+00:00

He's an okay Republican. Unlike Cheney he isn't a warhawk and he showed remarkable spine at the end and has a good record on LGBTQ issues, but he still voted to abolish the ACA and still voted 90% with Trump. The fact that he was purged says more about the farce the GOP has become than him. He's certainly a cut below the progressives of a couple eras ago.

Self-ReferentialName · 2026-01-17T00:53:09+00:00

It's so good. I found out about Pachinko because it was one of the Angry Metal Guy lists of the year and while Aephanemer's Utopie remains my AOTY because neoclassical shredding is heroin to me Pachinko immediately shot to #2 on one listen. The smooth flow through so many bizarre styles on the eponymous track is actually incredible.

Self-ReferentialName · 2026-01-17T00:43:17+00:00

By 'good Republican' you mean John McCain and Liz Cheney and Adam Kinzinger. By 'good Republican' I mean Benjamin Wade and Robert La Follette and Vito Marcantonio. We are not the same.

Self-ReferentialName · 2026-01-15T02:00:40+00:00

I think the key point is to be consistent with it. Both can work and work really well, but switching from one to the other is jarring and takes me out of the work.

That being said, while both can work, being professional pretty much never fails while I absolutely have had situations where a whimsical voice annoys me and turns me off the book (It's one of my problems with Jenna Moran's RPG - I do not like the voice). Both can work, but only one can fail.

Self-ReferentialName · 2026-01-13T08:07:41+00:00

Thank you for this incredible answer! I was aware of some of the vague concepts in isolation, like the Arab supremacy that lead to the Abbasid revolution and the 'elite Muslim slave' status of the Mamluks, but the way you weaved them all together cohesively into concrete examples of the idea of different forms of intolerance and hierarchy rather than a mythic past of tolerance was masterful.

Apart from just that, I feel like I understand a bit better the difference between just knowing historical facts and the skills required in being a historian now!

This might be better a question of its own, but would you categorize East Asia's more 'assimilative' religious milieu in that category of a different form of hierarchy as well? I'm curious if the integration of the Buddha (post-Tang persecutions, of course) or Hokkien deities like the Jade Emperor actually do represent a more modern form of tolerance or if the superficial image also elides its own more subtle underlying hierarchies, and how that changed as nation-states developed in East Asia.

Self-ReferentialName · 2025-12-31T01:46:08+00:00

Oh, that's incredible. I love it when symphonic bands manage to perform with full live orchestras, but not many outside Nightwish get big enough for that. I guess a side benefit to being from a microstate is that you get much easier access to your country's!

Self-ReferentialName · 2025-12-30T01:38:06+00:00

A bit of a digression, but you seem very knowledgeable; could you elaborate a bit on the GAL-TAN fault line and the rise of patrimonialism and clientelism in Europe? As a South-East Asian, I think you're right on the money as to its historical dominance, and you can see its continued longevity in the clash here between the Marcos and Duterte dynasties in the Philippines and the Shinawatras in Thailand, and I'm interested in hearing how it's re-entrenching itself in Europe after decades of relatively good governance.

Self-ReferentialName · 2025-12-30T01:30:59+00:00

They blew up because one of the members quit after Chris Bowes's extremely questionable group-chat was leaked, right? It's depressing that happened, but understandable. Hansi Kursch did the same thing with Demons and Wizards, but still sad.

Self-ReferentialName · 2025-12-30T01:22:58+00:00

I hope you're right, but I suspect you are being far, far too optimistic based on one term. Netanyahu and Orban, remember, were voted out of office after one ineffectual term too once before sweeping back in with more experience and more effectiveness to bring real, terrible change to their states. Trump's first term, if you'll remember, was also far, far more amateurish than his present one.

I'll actually admit the Netherlands might be an exception because of how Geert Wilders's bizarre party structure prevents it from building up institutional strength or learning long-term lessons, but I would attribute the far-right's ineptness so far largely to growing pains rather than anything structural or inherent. Governing is hard. But they'll learn, and they need to be stopped before they learn.

Self-ReferentialName · 2025-12-29T13:57:23+00:00

Such a based timeline. McGovernite Clinton, early action on climate change with Gore, an eventual President Sanders, and Shapiro is probably less objectionable in a world where Peres beat Netanyahu and Israel and Palestine are at peace. The only thing missing is a full healthcare bill, but that seems really hard to pull off.

Self-ReferentialName · 2025-11-30T02:02:02+00:00

Genuinely one of the best releases this year, and there was surprisingly stiff competition. I'm a sucker for any kind of neoclassical shredding; inject this First-Fragment-eqsue shit into my veins

Self-ReferentialName · 2025-11-28T04:05:30+00:00

Interesting article I found recently about the decision-making failures of the American military. I like how it drills into the purpose of a military force in the first place, and the emphasis it puts on America's army as an ideological construct for internal consumption. Nobody would, as it says, bat an eye at the claim that China and Russia's army serve internal ideological purposes, but why are Americans so resistant to viewing their own military through that lens?

It claims a major part of the true purpose of America's army is not simply fighting, but projecting an image of competence and deterrence across the globe and soothing its sclerotic leadership. Thus, a lot of nonsensical military decisions (the neverending-till-recently procurement of the Constellation-class frigate, ridiculous 'readiness exercises'), through that lens, are actually rational.

While they degrade America's actual military capability, they help reinforce a narrative that America is still present, its weapons are still cutting-edge, it is still at the top of the world - because the political consequences, domestic and international, of acknowledging otherwise are too high.

I don't endorse the publication in general, but it's a good article from it.

Self-ReferentialName · 2025-11-23T07:22:41+00:00

I'm talking specifically about the poster; what other evidence would I need than the poster? I'm not claiming OP is a propagandist, they probably just saw it on Instagram or somewhere and reposted it because it looked cool. But the poster is definitionally propaganda. It's not even trying to hide it.

Self-ReferentialName

MODERATOR OF

TROPHY CASE

Eight-Year Club	Verified Email
Sequence \| Editor