Make a house rule in your multiplayer game if it really bothers you. Who cares if some dumbass wants to name their country something funny. Your wording is implying the following is somehow confirmed to be in the game by the way.Įven if this was in the game it would be a matter of the player being stupid, something you can't ever stop. they might be possible in the game)? When there is zero evidence for any of them? If one hangs around the forums long enough, it becomes apparent that many of the discussions are just rehashing of the above positions in regards to this or that.īecause your argument is framed around those examples as being even remotely relevant (i.e. The Rubberbanders generally subscribe to a more rigid view, in that while things could have happened it would eventually converge back in to "what historically happened" ( much like a rubber band contracting after being stretched, hence the name) they view only in truth only minor ( in impact) changes could have happened, seeing the dynamics that shaped history to be largely static.īoth camps can be reasonable and both camps can be crazy, typically the Chaos theorists sin by putting the cart ahead of the bull, by insufficiently explaining what led to x outcome, while the Rubberbanders sin by being very vulnerable to exceptionalism (and shoddy historiography), think "America could never be a Monarchy (or any other non-democratic regime) because it's America". (That's my two cents anyway, sorry for the long comment)Ĭlick to expand.There are essentially two schools of thought when it come to alt-history, the chaos theorists and the rubberbanders, the two fundamentally agree in that history happened for a reason, but they vastly disagree on what that reason is, for example the chaos theoreticians (who get the name from the idea that increadably minor events can have massive repercussions later on) who generally agree that history is shaped by dynamics, but those dynamics aren't static, and that ( in alt-history) they could have been changed, reversed, or just happen at different times at different places, not to mention overruled by new dynamics. In situations like that I could change it to something i found more plausible (idk, People's Republic of Egypt or something, you get the idea.) Flexible tools like this can be used to both increase and decrease immersion and I don't think they need to be scrapped just because there's a chance you might see a reddit screenshot where someone has renamed Canada "Syrupland." What if I have a communist revolution in Egypt and the name of the new country is something like "Nile Soviet Republic" as it is in HoI4. Patient: Doctor, doctor, it hurts when I do this.Īnd there are lots of situations where being able to change the name of the country would lead to more immersion. Are you worried that other people might use the mechanic to do things you think they shouldn't be allowed to? I'm reminded of this joke: On the topic of country name changes though, I don't see what the big deal is.
Jeez it seems like people really want to see a lot of things that people specifically came up with in that other thread as examples of things they don't want to see.įor real though, I don't really understand what you're worried about? Other than the name changer, what indication has there been that any of this stuff will be possible? It sort of just seems like putting complaints about CK3 mechanics you don't like into a Victoria 3 context.
0 kommentar(er)
