Advertisement
by Finland SSR » Fri Sep 04, 2015 10:21 pm
by Skeckoa » Fri Sep 04, 2015 10:24 pm
by Maklohi Vai » Fri Sep 04, 2015 10:41 pm
Ikania wrote:Argentarino wrote:I think a Black Sea idea would be very good. We would probably have a nation with a long, rich history, centered around a number of conflicts, as well as dealing with various issues such as Russia and maybe even the Syrian refugee problem, not to mention the inevitable ethnic and religious conflict. Alternatively, there could be a Middle Eastern scenario, though I am sure many would be cautious to enter into that kind of scenario.
The only reason I'd ever hold back on an Arab country is because people would RP outside the character of the region. We can't have gay marriage and a welfare state in the Gulf of Persia for God's sake. In Arabia they don't debate about gay marriage, they debate about punishment for being homosexual. We'd have to strictly enforce realism rules to ensure people wouldn't break character for the Muslim world, and that would be no fun.
by Costa Fierro » Sat Sep 05, 2015 2:29 am
Maklohi Vai wrote:And we know from Baltonia that enforcing realism isn't fun.
by CTALNH » Sat Sep 05, 2015 2:51 am
by Beta Test » Sat Sep 05, 2015 2:56 am
by Costa Fierro » Sat Sep 05, 2015 2:59 am
by CTALNH » Sat Sep 05, 2015 3:01 am
by MERIZoC » Sat Sep 05, 2015 6:04 am
Ikania wrote:Argentarino wrote:I think a Black Sea idea would be very good. We would probably have a nation with a long, rich history, centered around a number of conflicts, as well as dealing with various issues such as Russia and maybe even the Syrian refugee problem, not to mention the inevitable ethnic and religious conflict. Alternatively, there could be a Middle Eastern scenario, though I am sure many would be cautious to enter into that kind of scenario.
The only reason I'd ever hold back on an Arab country is because people would RP outside the character of the region. We can't have gay marriage and a welfare state in the Gulf of Persia for God's sake. In Arabia they don't debate about gay marriage, they debate about punishment for being homosexual. We'd have to strictly enforce realism rules to ensure people wouldn't break character for the Muslim world, and that would be no fun.
by Finland SSR » Sat Sep 05, 2015 6:12 am
by World Anarchic Union » Sat Sep 05, 2015 6:15 am
by Davincia » Sat Sep 05, 2015 6:21 am
by MERIZoC » Sat Sep 05, 2015 6:27 am
Davincia wrote:Considering how NSG is unilaterally leftist, having the next location be in Southeast Asia gives plenty of RP opportunities. Especially if we place it during (or after) the Vietnam War. We'd have to juggle between keeping out Chinese and American influence.
by Not a Bang but a Whimper » Sat Sep 05, 2015 6:41 am
Meroivinge wrote:The very fact that you would have doubts about whether to join a forum full of goddless commie islamofascist homosexual welfare-recipients instead of a forum built to celebrate the Greatest Christian country in all of history deeply concerns me.
Kautharr wrote:Back when that was how the world was, there was no gay or transgender people.
by The Sarian » Sat Sep 05, 2015 7:06 am
by Zurkerx » Sat Sep 05, 2015 7:12 am
Skeckoa wrote:I second what was said before about having a nationstate with a clear ethnic group. Lots of the fun of Aurentina was the fact that it was its own language and culture with a freaking language. That was sick.
Because, kind of annoyingly, we end up using a shitton of immigrant senators.
by Dejanic » Sat Sep 05, 2015 8:36 am
by New Werpland » Sat Sep 05, 2015 9:10 am
by Maklohi Vai » Sat Sep 05, 2015 9:23 am
Dejanic wrote:Costa Fierro wrote:
But going from one continuous liberal welfare state to another is?
That's nothing to do with the setting, but to do with the people. We could rp in the centre of Africa, or the middle East, and it'd still probably end up as a solidly left wing Social Democratic welfare state, assuming the imbalances are the same as Calverde.
But really, Aurentina was more balanced, and the right won a lot of elections. I don't have the statistics of which coalition won more, but It was pretty balanced if I can remember correctly, and when the left did win it was because of the backing of the ancient centre-right Prog-Cons.
Balatonia wasn't left wing dominated, it was dominated by "moderate parties". Every party that was centre-right, centre-left and centrist all grouped up together to create some shitty grand Centrist coalition, leaving the far-lefties and far-righties alone.
by Ikania » Sat Sep 05, 2015 10:54 am
by Kisinger » Sat Sep 05, 2015 11:29 am
Nanatsu no Tsuki wrote:Don't you dare take my other 75% orgasm. I'm a greedy womyn, influenced by the cold hard erection of the patriarchy.
by New Waterford » Sat Sep 05, 2015 11:34 am
Dejanic wrote:Costa Fierro wrote:
But going from one continuous liberal welfare state to another is?
That's nothing to do with the setting, but to do with the people. We could rp in the centre of Africa, or the middle East, and it'd still probably end up as a solidly left wing Social Democratic welfare state, assuming the imbalances are the same as Calverde.
But really, Aurentina was more balanced, and the right won a lot of elections. I don't have the statistics of which coalition won more, but It was pretty balanced if I can remember correctly, and when the left did win it was because of the backing of the ancient centre-right Prog-Cons.
Balatonia wasn't left wing dominated, it was dominated by "moderate parties". Every party that was centre-right, centre-left and centrist all grouped up together to create some shitty grand Centrist coalition, leaving the far-lefties and far-righties alone.
by Malgrave » Sat Sep 05, 2015 12:31 pm
Frenequesta wrote:Well-dressed mad scientists with an edge.
by The Sarian » Sat Sep 05, 2015 12:38 pm
Malgrave wrote:I'm rather sick and tired of hearing the argument that the left-wing killed Calaverde when in reality any perceived dominance was caused by a fractured (and at latter stages inactive) right-wing.
Advertisement
Users browsing this forum: No registered users
Advertisement