Nothing at all I am afraid, but people tend to post things that have no basis and one thing leads to the other.
Business as usual.
Legit Russia is [expletive deleted] terrible
- Thread starter Hamor
- Start date
-
We have updated our Community Code of Conduct. Please read through the new rules for the forum that are an integral part of Paradox Interactive’s User Agreement.
Nothing at all I am afraid, but people tend to post things that have no basis and one thing leads to the other.
Business as usual.
Nobody else is butthurt, and I did not throw slander. Please calm down. If you are butthurt about someone else, not me, calling your PhD in "BS" take it up with that person; don't throw that on me.
I said a PhD rarely applies, and was right - your PhD apparently doesn't apply. I also agreed with your original point, and further elaborated on a super power having global influence which seemed to be exactly in line with what YOU said about China not being a superpower only because it remained regional. In effect, I argued that your PhD means nothing but your statement about China is correct.
There really isn't a difference. In fact, what I said and what you said are so similar that I had to reread your posts like 4 times just be sure that you really were getting angry with me for effectively agreeing with you...
Unrivaled may be the only place where we differ. China is not a superpower because they don't have a global presence, but arguably, also because they are not leaps and bounds ahead of Japan or India yet. It is a big what-if to argue that China could be compared to Post-WW1 UK or Post-WW2 USA/USSR if they would merely exert some influence around the globe. My feeling is they'd be analogous to UK at the time (with Japan analogous to France). Still, all hypothetical.
The original topic was dumb. We've improved the thread. You're welcome
(Original topic was about Russia no longer being tier 1, which leads to discussion of should Russia be tier 1, which leads to discussion of great and super power status, which leads to butthurt)
Nobody else is butthurt, and I did not throw slander. Please calm down. If you are butthurt about someone else, not me, calling your PhD in "BS" take it up with that person; don't throw that on me.
I said a PhD rarely applies, and was right - your PhD apparently doesn't apply. I also agreed with your original point, and further elaborated on a super power having global influence which seemed to be exactly in line with what YOU said about China not being a superpower only because it remained regional. In effect, I argued that your PhD means nothing but your statement about China is correct.
There really isn't a difference. In fact, what I said and what you said are so similar that I had to reread your posts like 4 times just be sure that you really were getting angry with me for effectively agreeing with you...
Unrivaled may be the only place where we differ. China is not a superpower because they don't have a global presence, but arguably, also because they are not leaps and bounds ahead of Japan or India yet. It is a big what-if to argue that China could be compared to Post-WW1 UK or Post-WW2 USA/USSR if they would merely exert some influence around the globe. My feeling is they'd be analogous to UK at the time (with Japan analogous to France). Still, all hypothetical.
The original topic was dumb. We've improved the thread. You're welcome
(Original topic was about Russia no longer being tier 1, which leads to discussion of should Russia be tier 1, which leads to discussion of great and super power status, which leads to butthurt)
First of all lets get something straight: I am not angry with anybody. I am disappointed though to see something akin to:
You speculated and wrote a whole manifesto about a sarcastic comment of mine which you read wrong. Hence why I said you are butthurt. For all intents and purposes it was a figure of speech. I never said or meant anything of what you imply in there hence why I called you on slandering.
On the matters concerning Japan and India I have to disagree. I believe that China is indeed leaps bounds from both. Mainly because Japan is resource starved on its mainland and requires all of its manufacturing materials imported (i dont know about food).
And India due to the fact that their army is neither up to speed and they are not in the place to leverage their power at this point. I believe Delhi and Beijin will eventually have a power struggle, but I see China come on top due to having several decades headstart in consolidating (either with the good or bad meaning) several Asian nations on its side.
Last edited:
This is not slander. Having a PhD makes you an expert in only the field in which you have that PhD. I did not write a manifesto; I wrote two and a half lines. I wrote just as long, in that same post, in almost complete agreement with your point about China. Nothing I said slandered you. If you have a doctorate related to global politics or world history, fine, otherwise it has nothing to do with anything here. That's not slander.
Go ahead though and tell me what I "imply in there" since you seem to feel that it's so slanderous.
My whole insistence is on the thing is that I never said or implied that I am more intelligent or learned than others, I never demeaned or intended to demean anyone. I was just sarcastic where it was due.
I used the whole PHD thing as sarcasm and a figure of speech, I never said I am an expert in the topic at hand.
By reading the way you wrote the quoted passages above I got the impression you believed I did, hence why I insisted on clarifying it.
If you didn't mean it that way, then you have my apologies.
I used the whole PHD thing as sarcasm and a figure of speech, I never said I am an expert in the topic at hand.
By reading the way you wrote the quoted passages above I got the impression you believed I did, hence why I insisted on clarifying it.
If you didn't mean it that way, then you have my apologies.
I would suggest not posting your credentials at anonymous internet forum (where they don't matter anyway) if people mocking it will cause so much distress to you.
He didn't post his credentials. It was a figure of speech. He should have used "sarcasm" tag.
The figure of speech was meant as a reply to "Eh no. Please learn the meaning of the term super power." There was so much mentorship in this that I cannot blame Pilot for being sarcastic about it. I don't get how it escalated so quickly into broader discussion (completely out of propotion) about the relevance of PhD for posting in PDX forum.
Last edited:
A website I used to frequent had a place for threads like this.
I believe they called it the "Retard Rickshaw"
I believe they called it the "Retard Rickshaw"
I'm not sure the whole RRRP approach would work here for an official gaming forum like it did for FOH/MN/Rerolled, but I'd love to see it tried.
The failure of Napoleon in Russia was in not decisively engaging and breaking the Russian army, though not for lack of trying. So exactly where should Napoleon have committed these 30,000 troops? Where could Napolean have used 30,000 troops to force the Russian Army into an engagement? AFAIK Napoleon lacked the ability to teleport 30K soldiers to wherever Tsar Alexander I had his headquarters.
This would be better expressed as Net GDP. Russia has a much larger Net GDP than Sweden. You were literally just mocking Russian people for being poor.
Sad. This statement and those like it always seem to follow the most bizarre misinterpretations of history.
Last edited:
Oh well, I guess he saved himself there. Only a complete fool would refer to someone without a real blue water navy as a super power.
There is only one super power and that is the United States. The United States is the only super power as its power is at the moment undisputed. The peoples liberation army is basically an internal security force, its navy has few or no blue water capabilities. People really need to wait another 30-50 years before China is a super power.
I wonder why none cries about Theodoro being so weak? /sarcasm off
I have seen only once how Muscovy has collapsed: they were steamrolled by Denmark+Sweden+Norway, Kazan, Golden Horde and Novgorod. But then they recuperated and now are a GP again... Temportarily, since they are to be banished to Siberian tundras again by my small Theodoro )))
Edit: this is the 4th thread about Muscovy being weak. Lol, I've managed to form Russia as Ryazan (unfortunately, not in Ironman). So why complain about monstrous Muscovy with neat missions, free claims and weak (after all Rus cores are subjugated) Hordes at your side?
I have seen only once how Muscovy has collapsed: they were steamrolled by Denmark+Sweden+Norway, Kazan, Golden Horde and Novgorod. But then they recuperated and now are a GP again... Temportarily, since they are to be banished to Siberian tundras again by my small Theodoro )))
Edit: this is the 4th thread about Muscovy being weak. Lol, I've managed to form Russia as Ryazan (unfortunately, not in Ironman). So why complain about monstrous Muscovy with neat missions, free claims and weak (after all Rus cores are subjugated) Hordes at your side?
Last edited:
@OP. I can't say they are underpowered. By 1700 I was making 70-100 gold in profit a month with a 300k army (force limit was 330-350 i believe) Lucky Nations was on. having Sweden as an ally helps. I expanded all the way down into hungary and near the HRE. I could take china, or wipe out the nomads, push into asia minor, into germany, or take the rest of poland, should i feel like grinding it out. I had religious ideas so converting wasn't a problem which helps deal with rebellions.(I think there is a bonus to culture conversions, added to the NI, makes it easy to convert cultures. I didn't bother with the patriarch authority. My idea groups negated the purpose of me going down it, and saved me money as well. This is SP.
As a few posts that I have read have said, MP is about diplomacy. Russia imo is a late game power and are weakest in the early game.
As a few posts that I have read have said, MP is about diplomacy. Russia imo is a late game power and are weakest in the early game.
well iam an econ major and I just find it hilarious that someone would link GDP PER CAPITA to winning/losing a world war, or any war for that matter.
The US is in a million ways different from Russia. To arbitrarily select one difference, such as higher GDP per capita, and try to argue that somehow that was the key component is retarded.
The US is in a million ways different from Russia. To arbitrarily select one difference, such as higher GDP per capita, and try to argue that somehow that was the key component is retarded.
This thread gets one chance to return to the topic - Russia in EU4 - or I close it.
Discussion outside that topic belongs in the OT or history forums, thank you. Please PM me if anyone continues to drag it off-topic, and/or indulges in further nationalism.
Discussion outside that topic belongs in the OT or history forums, thank you. Please PM me if anyone continues to drag it off-topic, and/or indulges in further nationalism.
It's one thing to be unable to defeat rebels in colonies and islands, it's another if you can't beat them on your home turf.
After reading this thread, it made me want to play Muscovy again. For an experienced player I think they have an even better start than before 1.8. Day 0 rivals Novgord, Kazan, other then mission/declare Novgorod. Took 96 OE worth of territory, then press starting claim against Kazan for Perm's core. Aside from the truce timers which still slow eating Novgorod, the automatic CB against Kazan is excellent. With the trade and production changes as well, I had far more money than previously so could afford a level 2 admin advisor to start with.