chrisford

Members
  • Content count

    269
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by chrisford

  1. Per the Logistics page, under food: That's all I know. However, based on the wording of that section, it sounds like time is factored into the death rate too. Not feeding your people for one day is different, from, say, not feeding your people for two weeks.
  2. It may not even be in the game, i was merely thinking about any x factors that might have an effect. I know that you start getting positive results from feeding your people several types of food, perhaps one of those results would be an increase in the population growth rate.
  3. True, and inactive nations are probably negatively impacted by a lack of supply of food, energy, and infrastructure resources. Those most likely also have an impact on growth rates. Edit: I just thought of this as I walked away from my computer. In real life, developed nations tend to have lower population growth rates. I don't know if the developers have included that in the game, but it could be a possibility.
  4. You would also have to take into account for any laws that increase immigration, birth rate, etc. as those would affect your population growth. In Alpha, I remember seeing the death rates of inactive nations being 18.00. I don't know what caused it do that, but I always assumed it was the lack of land due to the constant raiding of said inactive nations.
  5. Rant:

    Not really going to argue what defines "economic collapse" (it's subjective, granted), but I'd just like to point out that the link you provided used the Great Depression as an example of an economic collapse in the introductory paragraph. If you're looking for "social unrest," I think the bank runs in '31 are sufficient enough. (As a side note, what does anyone know about the Nordic model? Countries that use that seem to be surprisingly successful.)
  6. Rant:

    I'm talking about '29-'33, not '08-'09. No other economical system can withstand it because no other economical system is capable of crashing like that. Said systems prevent such a thing from happening through regulation. On a further note, I wouldn't say that capitalism "withstood" the '29 crash, seeing that the economy didn't improve until regulation was put in place (granted, it's debated whether the New Deal improved or prolonged the Depression). The US economy really hasn't crashed since then, until '08.
  7. Rant:

    The US GDP dropped nearly fifty percent...that's more than just a growth decline. No economy just loses fifty percent of its output without something being horribly wrong.
  8. Rant:

    This system crashed the world economy (mainly in the United States) in the late 20s/early 30s. It doesn't work as efficiently as it sounds.
  9. World War III.

    Skimming the posts above, I noticed some proposing a new SDI. On that note, the US does have the capacity to shoot down ICBMs inbound from countries with small arsenals, say, North Korea, but the US (and any other country, for that matter) would succumb to a full scale nuclear attack from any of the major nuclear powers (MAD applies in any case).
  10. Maps

    I doubt that this is something that will be implemented, seeing that eventually the game will become too big to have a map. However, if you're dedicated to having a PT map, you could try out this thread, though it's been inactive for some time now.
  11. Will Russia Invade (Mainland) Ukraine

    History also tells us that Russia "protecting ethnic Russians" in a foreign region starts a world war. History then tells us that letting countries get away with annexation also starts a world war. History doesn't repeat itself, but it does rhyme.
  12. Currently, I believe that the game "learns" from the laws you pass, in a way. If you typically pass laws that tend to be on one side of the political spectrum, then, pass a law that is on the opposite side of the spectrum, it somehow affects your nation negatively. I believe I read a post by a mod stating that Chris eventually plans to make it so that if you pass a certain law, the "opposite" laws disappear, if that makes sense.
  13. 28 Billion Giveaway

    Nonono, the answer has to be Turkey.
  14. 28 Billion Giveaway

    Germany.
  15. World War III.

    Try again. An OPEC embargo would not effect the US as devastatingly as you think it would. (Also, Russia isn't part of OPEC, but I suppose you are suggesting Russia will influence them.) On the topic of a Russo-American war, the US can beat Russia (or China, for that matter) anywhere in the world except Russia (or China), hands down. The US has a indisputable global military presence. Russia and China do not. The US can impose its power just about anywhere in the world. Russia and China just can't. Russia's military, particularly its Navy and Air Force, is just too far outdated since the USSR (a strong air force is needed to perform even the most basic modern military strategy, Blitzkrieg). China's military, on the other hand, is speaking for itself during the search for the missing Malaysian jet. China supposedly sent the best ships they have to search for the jet; yet, they have been unproductive, and even counterproductive at times, during the search. Those ships that are searching have to be resupplied by Chinese navy supply ships rather than by foreign ports -- China lacks allies and friendly ports in the area. If they can't keep their ships supplied during a humanitarian effort, how could they keep their ships supplied during an all-out war against a military hyperpower?
  16. World War III.

    Alliances like the EU and NATO are not the same as "controlling" Europe. Europe is too vast and multicultural to control under one single state. Rome, on the other hand, became too large to control and administrate and collapsed due to barbarian raids from Germany and the Steppe. Given, there were a few other major economic and political issues at play, but controlling such a vast area certainly didn't help their disposition, militarily or politically.
  17. World War III.

    tl;dr. I'm not sure what I think about a WWIII. However, I will share something a former history teacher of mine, who served in West Germany during the 1980s, told me. Generally, any conventional war between the US and USSR would have started along the Iron Curtain. US war plans in the 80s had accounted for the massive size of the Soviet armies. The US believed that the Soviets would have pushed back NATO troops as far as France at the beginning of the war as the US deployed troops to Europe(the US didn't have a sizable army in Europe at the time like the Soviets did). When US reinforcements arrived to the front lines, it was believed that NATO troops would push the Soviets back due to their overexpansion (Europe is obviously too big to control, see Nazi Germany). At that point, NATO allies would have had to stop at preexisting borders. Advancing any further into the communist bloc would have, without a doubt, provoked the USSR to use tactical nukes against NATO troop movements. NATO would have responded with its own tactical nukes against Soviet troop movements. The nukes would have gotten bigger and bigger with each round, eventually reaching the use of ICBMs. In short, any war between nuclear powers would most likely become nuclear, whether it started that way or not.
  18. Reserve banks

    To emphasize on what SirWinkler said, the World Bank was basically the same thing as what you are proposing, except that it was on a worldwide scale, not alliance or national based. Players could invest money in it or withdraw money from it, almost like a checking account of sorts. You can collect interest by investing money in the Bank, or pay interest for money borrowed from the Bank. The interests were ridiculously low, however.
  19. Any benifits to war?

    I don't remember how it was buggy -- it's been over a year and a half since Alpha -- but I do remember it being buggy. I'm not entirely sure what you meant by the political aspect of war in the war system, but nations were able to declare peace during war in Alpha. I thought the same thing about income. I believe there should be some sort of law you can pass during war time that makes production of goods and income increase, however, such a law should have negative effects that balance out the benefits.
  20. Wealth Gaps/Inequality

    Capitalism and socialism are both fine as long as long as they are left checked. In pure capitalism, people become oppressed by a few. In communism, people become oppressed by a few (given, there is no government in pure communism, however, most communist states had to commit acts of genocide in order to become purely communist). Capitalism is not quick and easy. The Soviet Union's problem during its waning days was that Gorbachev tried to convert the USSR to a more capitalist society too quickly with his Perestroika and Glasnost policies. Those two policies alone, generally, were the primary causes of the collapse in '89-'91 China has learned from the USSR's mistakes. China, while maintaining a firm communist stance, has since begun to convert to a mixed economy much more slowly, and therefore will maintain a stable government as it transitions.
  21. Any benifits to war?

    Every battle that you engaged in gave you money and land (assuming you won) in return. When you won the war (you win the war by occupying 100% of your opponents territory), you would be given the option to choose the reparations you are given from the loser: land reparations, money reparations, or you could choose to limit the loser's military strength to 10,000 (similar to how the Allies limited the German military after World War 1). The war system in Alpha was buggy and broken, and, if I remember right, it had been reset multiple times. Several of the features weren't implemented (such as nukes -- I remember hearing nuclear weapons were going to be implemented at one point in Alpha, but don't quote me on that one). The only effective use of the war system was for larger nations to raid inactive nations for land, since land becomes incredibly expensive as your nation grows.
  22. "Live" income

    I asked the moderators about this a while back; I believe Chris said he planned to implement the live ticker at a later point in game development.
  23. Patch Notes Preview

    50% casualties seems ridiculously high to me, I crossed that one off of my list.
  24. mobile

    A mobile app would be a great way of raising money for the game, if considered. I wouldn't mind paying 99 cents for a PT app.
  25. ESO

    I received a key for the last test they did four-ish weeks ago. I also received an extra key in my email the other day to give to someone, so for those of you who might be interested, first come, first serve: 7RMJNL7K9D4E3LCGWARM Use it here. Also, I found ESO to be entirely uninteresting. The quests aren't nearly as developed as other Elder Scrolls games.