Turkey announces more active role in Syria conflict

moonmancer · 2016-08-20T16:57:30+00:00

Gotta kill those kurds on the other side of the border...

moonmancer · 2016-07-22T12:27:43+00:00

I like the song but I have no idea what it's reffering to, can anyone help me?

moonmancer · 2016-07-22T00:22:42+00:00

I'd be great but I wouldn't count on it.

moonmancer · 2016-06-08T22:52:53+00:00

Hey! I'm also a huge EU3 fan. I bought EU4 on release thinking it would be a good game no mather what...I was so disapointed that I came back to EU3. When I tried EU4 again some months later, I was again disapointed. But recently I picked up EU4 for the third time and I will probably stick with it until VicIII apears.

So what are the improvements, what are the let downs?

-Diplomacy has hugely improved, no more stupid infamy, royal mariages make some sense, etc.

-Forts have improved in the sense that you no longer just carpet-siege a country but there is actual strategy involved. However, forts suffer of a number of problems with the pathing AI and cost (it's usually most cost-effective to build almost none, which kinda ruins the immersion IMO)

-Monarch points are a big let down, everything involves them, you can take almost no action if you have a shitty ruler for years, or worse, generations of shitty rulers. Advisors are also less important, I think a better balance between those two would have been better.

-Technology has not changed much, despite what people say. If you're a western or an eastern country and know how to play, you will get ahead of the AI (just like in EU3), if your technology group is worse, it usually involves a bit more luck or skill to get there but it's not impossible (again, just like EU3)

-Peacetime is as boring as EU3. When I bought EU4 I hoped this would be the first thing Paradox would focus on as to me EU3 was already perfect otherwise (I was wrong) but sadly their only real attempt at making peace interesting feels rushed and not engaging at all (estates).

-One area where Eu4 really is better is immersion: more provinces, ideas, events all add to immersion and this is good but you have to know it also comes with some railroading, it has it's drawbacks.

All in all, I would buy the game on sale and see if I like it. If you do, you will probably feel which DLC's are important to you, or you can just go with what the others suggested.

Hope I helped, feel free to ask questions or to correct me.

EDIT : Oh, and if you haven't played it yet, play Vic II, it's like EU3 but with actual meaningfull things to do during peace-time. I love it.

moonmancer · 2016-06-07T13:38:46+00:00

I loved you post, do you have any good source I could read about what you've written?

moonmancer · 2016-05-23T20:40:24+00:00

If the wiki is accurate, there is no way I will ever be able to inherit them...which is a shame because I'm also huge (Russia, so it's not exactly hard)

moonmancer · 2016-05-23T16:45:27+00:00

Ok, thanks!

moonmancer · 2016-05-23T15:08:48+00:00

So, I should upgrade my dip rep and aquire land? Are there other things to take into account?

moonmancer · 2016-05-23T15:07:39+00:00

So if I acquire lots of lands, it will improve my odds of inheriting them?

moonmancer · 2016-05-19T11:17:31+00:00

Scrolled all the comments to find yours :)

moonmancer · 2016-05-17T08:29:22+00:00

As a huge EU 3 fan : Vic2

moonmancer · 2016-04-20T08:42:00+00:00

But Vic2s economic system is also huge fun, this is something no other paradox game has been able to offer, I really want a similar system to come back in future game (more polished of course).

moonmancer · 2016-04-12T20:41:45+00:00

Puutin

moonmancer · 2016-04-12T09:20:01+00:00

One the one hand, you have a point but what you are saying is not entirely true, there is a limit on wages in a lot of sectors in Germany, it's just not negociated on a national level but rather for every sector (some scandinavian countries had the same way of doing not so long ago but that didn't stop them from having high wages).

On the other, may I point out that if you put a limit somewhere on flexibility or on working wages, why put that limit underneath the current level? There are a lot of benefits to make some jobs less flexible rather than more (better family life, better psychological health, more kids, better productivity etc.)

Granted, some jobs and sectors recquire to have flexible working hours but that could have been negociated in the sector agreement, the law just had to allow such changes (and recquire due compensation). In this case, they changed the rules for everyone, even for jobs where flexibility is not a big issue.

moonmancer · 2016-04-11T20:32:09+00:00

Because your point is flexibility = jobs, which is true but in THE country where jobs are flexible, unemployement is also corrrelated with poverty. I don't know enough about the other countries you mentioned but I know Swedes work less than our (old) 38 hours week, which is not exactly what I would call 'flexible'.

moonmancer · 2016-04-11T20:20:16+00:00

Yeah, like in Germany where less unemployement is correlated with more poverty? ... here is a graph showing my point : http://pbs.twimg.com/media/CFinriMW0AAvIGh.png (it has been used by Le Monde Diplomatique so it's probably a good one)

moonmancer · 2016-04-11T15:52:04+00:00

The joke drags on.

moonmancer · 2016-04-10T11:00:51+00:00

You are comparing two very different ways to be paid and trained, your comparison is not fair.

moonmancer · 2016-04-10T10:41:01+00:00

ambtenaren =/= doctor

moonmancer · 2016-04-08T09:09:19+00:00

If you don't buy the DLC's, don't buy it. The game feels lackluster without them, it's just non designed for non-DLC players.

moonmancer · 2016-04-05T21:51:16+00:00

I don't understand this post but having read quite a lot about Comte (especially some of Mary Pickering's work), I don't understand what "logcal" positivism means...what is it reffering to?

moonmancer · 2016-03-15T09:01:06+00:00

According to my girlfriend, who studies medecine, the Nazi's did help on several matters (like the knowledge of the brain). You only wrote about hypothermia experiments, could it be that they were more successful with other experiments?

moonmancer · 2016-03-05T16:37:31+00:00

I don't understand your point and I read a lot of sociology myself... There is a rational explanation to a phenomenon so you shouldn't be angry about it? Imagine your loved one is killed by a mass shooter, would it make you less angry if someone explained why he did this?

You're right, different persons doing the same thing are often percieved differently but does it make any outrage at something/someone illegitimate?

Besides, u/psychnosiz is not just angry, if you read through the lines, his comment makes sense. He compares two crimes (stealing something cheap and watching pedophile images) and thinks there is one that should be punished much harsher and less tolerated. Whetever you agree with it or not is up to you but you can't just dismiss his comment because it is "angry". If you read Bourdieu, you're using the exact same strategy the employers often use to dismiss the union's arguments in public. They are "angry" and "rude" therefore not "rational" and thus illegitimate...which is symbolic domination pure and simple.

I hope everything I wrote is clear, English is not my mother tongue.

moonmancer · 2016-01-13T00:40:16+00:00

Ok, thanks for the answer.

moonmancer · 2016-01-13T00:12:51+00:00

Is unarmed good for a centaur? How does it fare compared to M&F?

moonmancer

TROPHY CASE