Matrix Games Forums

Forums  Register  Login  Photo Gallery  Member List  Search  Calendars  FAQ 

My Profile  Inbox  Address Book  My Subscription  My Forums  Log Out

RE: Taking enemy homeworlds way too easy?

 
View related threads: (in this forum | in all forums)

Logged in as: Guest
Users viewing this topic: none
  Printable Version
All Forums >> [New Releases from Matrix Games] >> Distant Worlds Series >> RE: Taking enemy homeworlds way too easy? Page: <<   < prev  1 2 3 4 [5]
Login
Message << Older Topic   Newer Topic >>
RE: Taking enemy homeworlds way too easy? - 1/24/2011 7:55:49 AM   
Kayoz


Posts: 1516
Joined: 12/20/2010
From: Timbuktu
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Jim D Burns

It was a rough estimate, but probably close to accurate. We’d need a population census report for the era, but considering about half of China was conquered by Japan, I doubt 1/3rd would be far from the truth. Countries that were totally or partially conquered during the war:

France, Belgium, Holland, Denmark, Germany, Italy, Poland, Yugoslavia, Greece, Bulgaria, Hungary, Rumania, Finland, big chunk of Russia, North Africa, about half of China (includes Manchuria and Korea), Burma, Siam, Philippines, Dutch East Indies, and Japan.

Jim



Wikipedia reference says different - rough estimate of the world population as of 1940 was 2.3 billion. You're claiming that approximately 750 million people were conquered or otherwise changed hands? That's TEN TIMES the population of Germany at the beginning of the war.

If your "rough estimate" is 1/3 of the world - then back up your statement. Where's your evidence?

And get your facts straight - you're including "half of China" - which is wrong. The Sino-Japanese war was officially July 7, 1937 – September 9, 1945, whereas WWII "officially" started September 1, 1939. You're erroneously padding your numbers by including an extraneous conflict.

(in reply to Jim D Burns)
Post #: 121
RE: Taking enemy homeworlds way too easy? - 1/24/2011 8:01:49 AM   
Kayoz


Posts: 1516
Joined: 12/20/2010
From: Timbuktu
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Shark7

His esitmate, considering the population concentrations, is probably not far off. And to be honest, Europe and Asia were far more populous than the Western Worlds (North and South America) at that point in time. Population in the America's in 1940 was somewhere around 260-300 million, for Asia was over over 1 billion, and Europe was ~600 million. Asia had at that time, and still does, roughly 60% of the world's population.


USA population as of 1/1/1939 was approximately 130 million, not 260-300 as you contend. Given your error in USA population estimate, his estimate is off by at LEAST a factor of 2-3.

(in reply to Shark7)
Post #: 122
RE: Taking enemy homeworlds way too easy? - 1/24/2011 10:45:49 AM   
Setekh


Posts: 178
Joined: 12/12/2010
From: Norfolk, England
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Jim D Burns


quote:

ORIGINAL: Kayoz
The original statement from Jimmy was:


Now you're just being an ass. PLONK


Some of your posts I found quite interesting and thought provoking, then I saw this garbage and the fact you flipped out when someone simply referred to you as "Jimmy" . It's quite hard to take someone seriously when ask them not to insult you and immediately call them an "ass" straight after. Not sure if this is some kind of troll attempt or what so I think I'll skip over that green button you're so fond of and just skip straight to 'report' instead.

_____________________________


(in reply to Jim D Burns)
Post #: 123
RE: Taking enemy homeworlds way too easy? - 1/24/2011 2:25:33 PM   
Shark7


Posts: 7860
Joined: 7/24/2007
From: The Big Nowhere
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Kayoz


quote:

ORIGINAL: Shark7

His esitmate, considering the population concentrations, is probably not far off. And to be honest, Europe and Asia were far more populous than the Western Worlds (North and South America) at that point in time. Population in the America's in 1940 was somewhere around 260-300 million, for Asia was over over 1 billion, and Europe was ~600 million. Asia had at that time, and still does, roughly 60% of the world's population.


USA population as of 1/1/1939 was approximately 130 million, not 260-300 as you contend. Given your error in USA population estimate, his estimate is off by at LEAST a factor of 2-3.


I am not off at all, you didn't read it, you just assumed..."in the Americas'"...that counts all of North and South America. I was counting all South American, Central American countries as well as the US and Canada.

_____________________________

Distant Worlds Fan

'When in doubt...attack!'

(in reply to Kayoz)
Post #: 124
RE: Taking enemy homeworlds way too easy? - 1/24/2011 2:28:16 PM   
Shark7


Posts: 7860
Joined: 7/24/2007
From: The Big Nowhere
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Setekh


quote:

ORIGINAL: Jim D Burns


quote:

ORIGINAL: Kayoz
The original statement from Jimmy was:


Now you're just being an ass. PLONK


Some of your posts I found quite interesting and thought provoking, then I saw this garbage and the fact you flipped out when someone simply referred to you as "Jimmy" . It's quite hard to take someone seriously when ask them not to insult you and immediately call them an "ass" straight after. Not sure if this is some kind of troll attempt or what so I think I'll skip over that green button you're so fond of and just skip straight to 'report' instead.


Kayoz seems to be reacting without understanding what is written, such as his assumption that my statement of a 260-300 million population of the America's (both north and south continents) referred only to the USA. When some one says 'the America's' it means both continents (at least where I am from).

_____________________________

Distant Worlds Fan

'When in doubt...attack!'

(in reply to Setekh)
Post #: 125
RE: Taking enemy homeworlds way too easy? - 1/24/2011 3:20:07 PM   
Kayoz


Posts: 1516
Joined: 12/20/2010
From: Timbuktu
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Shark7

Kayoz seems to be reacting without understanding what is written, such as his assumption that my statement of a 260-300 million population of the America's (both north and south continents) referred only to the USA. When some one says 'the America's' it means both continents (at least where I am from).



Actually, the mistake is yours.

"America" commonly refers to the USA. You used "America's" - indicating possessive of America, ie: America's population.

If you meant, "the Americas", then you should have used "the Americas' population" - which you did not do.

Basic grammar. Your mistake.

(in reply to Shark7)
Post #: 126
RE: Taking enemy homeworlds way too easy? - 1/24/2011 3:33:57 PM   
gmot


Posts: 123
Joined: 11/22/2010
Status: offline
Shark7 said "Population in the America's in 1940 was somewhere around 260-300 million".

It was obvious from the context that he was referring to the population of "the Americas", not "America." Regardless of a extra piece of punctuation.

It's obtuse to read it otherwise. And I'm Canadian, so I'm uniquely sensitive to this kind of thing...

Frankly Kayoz, your whole tone towards other people in this thread seems rude and dismissive, with uncalled for put-downs. Granted, Jim Burns shouldn't be so sensitive about being called Jimmy, but you seem eager to find slights in the most innocuous things people write. Chill out.

(in reply to Kayoz)
Post #: 127
RE: Taking enemy homeworlds way too easy? - 1/24/2011 3:52:42 PM   
Kayoz


Posts: 1516
Joined: 12/20/2010
From: Timbuktu
Status: offline
gmot -

The simple fact is that Shark made a mistake, such that the meaning of his sentence was muddled due to his grammatical errors. If I interpret his sentence in a manner that he didn't mean, then that's entirely his fault. His mistake has been quite visible since the time of his posting it, and he's referred back to it at least twice and NEVER corrected or clarified it.

I don't believe I'm being rude or dismissive. "Jimmy" is apparently insulting... um, sorry - but I'm at a loss to explain that one or know how to avoid it. I have no idea what I can do. Maybe Jimmy doesn't speak English as his native language.

As for dismissive, I've pointed out numerous issues with Jimmy's suggestion - how it affects game balance, economics and war weariness off the top of my head - and he has not once provided anything useful to defend his suggestion. I find his "oh, it's more realistic because WWII was long" completely nonsensical. And when his numerical claims are challenged, he fails to provide anything to back up his argument.

I'm merely pointing out the flaws in the suggestions - indicating how "fixing" one aspect can easily break another. You call it "dismissive" - I call it "constructive criticism".

(in reply to gmot)
Post #: 128
RE: Taking enemy homeworlds way too easy? - 1/24/2011 4:00:06 PM   
Data


Posts: 3909
Joined: 1/3/2011
Status: offline
one thing to note here, once someone tells you how they like to be called and you continue to call them otherwise then you really need to chill out...we're all 4x gamers here, we recognize provocation when we see it

_____________________________

...Igniting stellar cores....Recharging reactors...Recalibrating hyperdrives....

(in reply to Kayoz)
Post #: 129
RE: Taking enemy homeworlds way too easy? - 1/24/2011 4:00:42 PM   
gmot


Posts: 123
Joined: 11/22/2010
Status: offline
Then we'll have to agree to disagree on this. I would expect contributers to a forum to be able to still understand a sentence of which the meaning is perfectly clear, even with a misplaced piece of punctuation. I shall have to make sure I don't add an extra comma somewhere so that I don't get called out by you

Re constructive criticism vs. dismissive, of course you have the right (as everyone does) to critically evaluate other people's suggestions. An open exchange of ideas is part of why people post here. But if you don't yourself see a rude tone in some of your comments, then I'm sure there's nothing I can say that will help you with that.


(in reply to Kayoz)
Post #: 130
RE: Taking enemy homeworlds way too easy? - 1/24/2011 5:33:28 PM   
Shark7


Posts: 7860
Joined: 7/24/2007
From: The Big Nowhere
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Kayoz

gmot -

The simple fact is that Shark made a mistake, such that the meaning of his sentence was muddled due to his grammatical errors. If I interpret his sentence in a manner that he didn't mean, then that's entirely his fault. His mistake has been quite visible since the time of his posting it, and he's referred back to it at least twice and NEVER corrected or clarified it.

I don't believe I'm being rude or dismissive. "Jimmy" is apparently insulting... um, sorry - but I'm at a loss to explain that one or know how to avoid it. I have no idea what I can do. Maybe Jimmy doesn't speak English as his native language.

As for dismissive, I've pointed out numerous issues with Jimmy's suggestion - how it affects game balance, economics and war weariness off the top of my head - and he has not once provided anything useful to defend his suggestion. I find his "oh, it's more realistic because WWII was long" completely nonsensical. And when his numerical claims are challenged, he fails to provide anything to back up his argument.

I'm merely pointing out the flaws in the suggestions - indicating how "fixing" one aspect can easily break another. You call it "dismissive" - I call it "constructive criticism".


Seems you need to chill out yourself, quit nitpicking on details, and stop being so confrontational.

I also find it interesting that other posters to the forum understood the meaning of what I posted without problems, you alone have made an issue of it. Also, you might want to note that the person who resorts to insults, inflammatory statements or intentionally tries to goad an angry response out of another has already lost the debate...yes I am referring to your referring to Jim as 'Jimmy'. Your first use of it was condescending and you continue to do so.

At any rate, I'm not going to allow myself to be angered by anything posted here. Arguing amongst Grognards accomplishes nothing. As far as I'm concerned this conversation is over, and the mods might have to lock this thread as it is no longer on topic or accomplishing what it was intended to.

_____________________________

Distant Worlds Fan

'When in doubt...attack!'

(in reply to Kayoz)
Post #: 131
RE: Taking enemy homeworlds way too easy? - 1/24/2011 6:13:16 PM   
Kayoz


Posts: 1516
Joined: 12/20/2010
From: Timbuktu
Status: offline
As The Bard said, "What's in a name? that which we call a rose / By any other name would smell as sweet;". Calling Jimmy by any other name will not make him any less incapable of holding up to criticism.

As for criticism - you made a mistake. Your mistake, not mine. I interpreted your writing as best I could. If you don't want to be misinterpreted, then write more clearly - and learn basic English grammar. Why do you continue to make excuses to deflect attention from YOUR mistake, when you could acknowledge your mistake and get back to the issue at hand. If I'm being confrontational, then you're being evasive and trying to distract from your mistakes.

You still haven't explained why calling Jim as "Jimmy is offensive. I want you to call me, "Lord High Overlord of Studliness, Masculinity and Wittiness; Lord Protector of Code Reviews; Divine Patriarch of the Church of Zarquon and High Priest of All Jedi" - any other reference to me, I'll consider insulting. Happy now? You haven't supplied ONE SINGLE REFERENCE to support his claim that "Jimmy" is derogatory.

Interesting how you've descended to personal complaints, and have not once refuted any of the problems I've pointed out with the "suggestions".

(in reply to Shark7)
Post #: 132
RE: Taking enemy homeworlds way too easy? - 1/25/2011 7:38:23 AM   
Jim D Burns


Posts: 3953
Joined: 2/25/2002
From: Salida, CA.
Status: offline


quote:

ORIGINAL: Setekh
Some of your posts I found quite interesting and thought provoking, then I saw this garbage and the fact you flipped out when someone simply referred to you as "Jimmy" . It's quite hard to take someone seriously when ask them not to insult you and immediately call them an "ass" straight after. Not sure if this is some kind of troll attempt or what so I think I'll skip over that green button you're so fond of and just skip straight to 'report' instead.


The attempt at trolling was his not mine, and I did not “flip out” as you say. His initial use of the name Jimmy was done so in a condescending tone and was an intentional slight (he used an em dash to emphasize his point) used in an attempt to belittle me in the forum. I told him to use my proper name or not respond to my posts. A more than rational and reasonable reply.

I then went on to continue the discussion in a polite and rational tone. His second use of the name after I had told him to use my proper name was an obvious troll and used to insult me personally. I do not engage in such juvenile antics, so I’ve now placed him on ignore. On a side note, this is the first person I’ve ever used the green button on in all my years visiting this forum.

Jim


_____________________________


(in reply to Setekh)
Post #: 133
RE: Taking enemy homeworlds way too easy? - 1/25/2011 9:13:18 AM   
Kayoz


Posts: 1516
Joined: 12/20/2010
From: Timbuktu
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Jim D Burns

... done so in a condescending tone and was an intentional slight (he used an em dash to emphasize his point) used in an attempt to belittle me in the forum...


Bullcrap. There's no basis to that claim.

My initial use of "Jimmy" was:

quote:

Jimmy -

I don't see how slowing down ground combat will help.


That's hardly condescending. It's merely an explicit way of indicating to the reader who the message is directed at. You have still failed to provide anything to substantiate your claim that "Jimmy" is a derogatory term. Now you're reading "tone" and intent in 7-bit ASCII text - which is about on par with reading entrails and tarot cards.

Placing great importance and identity on one's name is a common phase that children go through when they're 12-15. It's usually about that age, when they try to find their identity by copying the behaviour and indeed the names of their heroes. Perhaps you should consider if you're watching too much Star Trek. Have you had tantrums over your parents' refusal to call you "Snoop" or "Blade"?

But don't worry about it - this will all pass with the dropping of your testicles.

(in reply to Jim D Burns)
Post #: 134
RE: Taking enemy homeworlds way too easy? - 1/25/2011 10:06:11 AM   
J HG T


Posts: 1093
Joined: 5/14/2010
From: Kiadia Prime
Status: offline
Kayoz. You really should stop that.
You've taken this whole think way too far for what it's worth. Just give it a rest and move on.


_____________________________

Nothing is impossible, not if you can imagine it!
"And they hurled themselves into the void of space with no fear."

(in reply to Kayoz)
Post #: 135
RE: Taking enemy homeworlds way too easy? - 1/25/2011 10:17:31 AM   
Kayoz


Posts: 1516
Joined: 12/20/2010
From: Timbuktu
Status: offline
You're probably right - I'm arguing with idiots that resort to personal attacks because they're incapable of defending their statements.

Alas, it's a rare event that one can find an opponent that can debate a point instead of throwing an emotional tantrum.

(in reply to J HG T)
Post #: 136
RE: Taking enemy homeworlds way too easy? - 1/25/2011 11:44:40 AM   
Setekh


Posts: 178
Joined: 12/12/2010
From: Norfolk, England
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Kayoz

But don't worry about it - this will all pass with the dropping of your testicles.

Now you're being just as bad.

Would appreciate it if a moderator could give this thread a good clean tbh.

_____________________________


(in reply to Kayoz)
Post #: 137
RE: Taking enemy homeworlds way too easy? - 1/25/2011 1:08:20 PM   
Kayoz


Posts: 1516
Joined: 12/20/2010
From: Timbuktu
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Setekh

Now you're being just as bad.


Yup. It's quite on purpose, to highlight the absurdity of his comments.

Edit -
You know, despite my repeated requests, I still haven't received any explanation as to why "Jimmy" is derogatory. I have friends named Robert, who are called "Bob". William becomes "Bill". Richard becomes "Dick". It seems that he's asserting that all these examples are insulting. If I've broken social convention - then so be it, I'll apologize. But I have not been provided with a shred of evidence that "Jimmy" is derogatory.

< Message edited by Kayoz -- 1/25/2011 2:02:24 PM >

(in reply to Setekh)
Post #: 138
RE: Taking enemy homeworlds way too easy? - 1/25/2011 2:54:58 PM   
gmot


Posts: 123
Joined: 11/22/2010
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Kayoz

You're probably right - I'm arguing with idiots that resort to personal attacks because they're incapable of defending their statements.

Alas, it's a rare event that one can find an opponent that can debate a point instead of throwing an emotional tantrum.


This made me laugh. Calling people idiots for resorting to personal attacks is an idiotic statement. You have some emotional tantrum issues to work out obviously.

(in reply to Kayoz)
Post #: 139
RE: Taking enemy homeworlds way too easy? - 1/25/2011 3:37:55 PM   
Kayoz


Posts: 1516
Joined: 12/20/2010
From: Timbuktu
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: gmot

This made me laugh. Calling people idiots for resorting to personal attacks is an idiotic statement. You have some emotional tantrum issues to work out obviously.


Such is your choice. I subscribe to the "eye for an eye" school of thought. Someone picks a fight with me, I'm happy to oblige.

As an aside, none of the problems I brought up with the suggestion were ever addressed. Personal insults and complaints over references - but nothing to defend the weaknesses I pointed out.

< Message edited by Kayoz -- 1/25/2011 3:40:50 PM >

(in reply to gmot)
Post #: 140
RE: Taking enemy homeworlds way too easy? - 1/25/2011 4:01:44 PM   
Data


Posts: 3909
Joined: 1/3/2011
Status: offline
you're constantly missing the point here so I'll repeat it
it doesn't matter for you how many variations of the same name there are, the only one that matters is the one that person wants; using any other and continuing to do so is a lack of basic good manners....you may need to check other types of forums or support groups before coming back to this one, as you obviously thrive on conflict and that's not the purpose of this community

< Message edited by Data -- 1/25/2011 4:02:16 PM >


_____________________________

...Igniting stellar cores....Recharging reactors...Recalibrating hyperdrives....

(in reply to Kayoz)
Post #: 141
RE: Taking enemy homeworlds way too easy? - 1/25/2011 4:28:52 PM   
gmot


Posts: 123
Joined: 11/22/2010
Status: offline
Agree with Data. Your philosophy of an "eye for an eye" is inane, childish and ridiculously out of place here. And you're not even following this so-called "school of thought" correctly. You have referred to other posters as "idiots". No one called you an idiot.

(in reply to Data)
Post #: 142
RE: Taking enemy homeworlds way too easy? - 1/25/2011 5:43:38 PM   
Gargoil

 

Posts: 389
Joined: 1/6/2008
Status: offline
Ladies and Gentlemen, your attention please....

Please stop feeding the troll.

Thank you.

(in reply to gmot)
Post #: 143
RE: Taking enemy homeworlds way too easy? - 1/25/2011 6:03:05 PM   
cmdrnarrain

 

Posts: 89
Joined: 4/21/2010
Status: offline
Kayoz,

I'm with you brother.  I have run up against this same crowd.  If you point out a flaw in the game they attack you personally, then call you a troll for defending yourself in a first grade version of "I've said it first, so am right and it couldn't possibly apply to me" crap.

So lets all get back to the issue - The AI is a push over and encourage the developer to find a solution.



_____________________________

"Good, evil... I'm the guy with the World Destroyer"

(in reply to Gargoil)
Post #: 144
Page:   <<   < prev  1 2 3 4 [5]
All Forums >> [New Releases from Matrix Games] >> Distant Worlds Series >> RE: Taking enemy homeworlds way too easy? Page: <<   < prev  1 2 3 4 [5]
Jump to:





New Messages No New Messages
Hot Topic w/ New Messages Hot Topic w/o New Messages
Locked w/ New Messages Locked w/o New Messages
 Post New Thread
 Reply to Message
 Post New Poll
 Submit Vote
 Delete My Own Post
 Delete My Own Thread
 Rate Posts


Forum Software © ASPPlayground.NET Advanced Edition 2.4.5 ANSI

0.156