by Kiddian States » Fri Apr 15, 2022 5:31 am
by Islamic Holy Sites » Fri Apr 15, 2022 5:53 am
BREAKING NEWS: Galapagos war 4 might be coming | “Aursi among best Muqaddasi allies,”, says government official | Muqaddasi weapon industry expanding WIP
by Kiddian States » Fri Apr 15, 2022 6:36 am
Islamic Holy Sites wrote:Nice, but it would be good for something where someone suggests to make fictional animals instead of the seal
by Islamic Holy Sites » Fri Apr 15, 2022 6:41 am
BREAKING NEWS: Galapagos war 4 might be coming | “Aursi among best Muqaddasi allies,”, says government official | Muqaddasi weapon industry expanding WIP
by Kiddian States » Fri Apr 15, 2022 6:46 am
by Islamic Holy Sites » Fri Apr 15, 2022 6:47 am
BREAKING NEWS: Galapagos war 4 might be coming | “Aursi among best Muqaddasi allies,”, says government official | Muqaddasi weapon industry expanding WIP
by Wallowis » Fri Apr 15, 2022 6:54 am
Wallowis now the head of Cylis Treaty and Arbitration Organisation. ULIBOR disbanded by Wallowis. Wallowis passes act of permanent neutrality. Survey shows people disinterested in global politics. Wallowis on the fence over entry into World Assembly. Economy stagnating, economists warn.
Hispida wrote:english is a rather tough language. you can learn it through tough thorough thought, though.
by Islamic Holy Sites » Fri Apr 15, 2022 6:56 am
Wallowis wrote:Islamic Holy Sites wrote:I mean, someone says, ‘instead of @@ANIMAL@@ let’s do a unicorn’
Something like that
That wouldn't work though, because issues can't change your settings. If you picked the unicorn option, then you'd need to manually go to settings and change to unicorn or else it would make no sense.
BREAKING NEWS: Galapagos war 4 might be coming | “Aursi among best Muqaddasi allies,”, says government official | Muqaddasi weapon industry expanding WIP
by Wallowis » Fri Apr 15, 2022 6:57 am
Islamic Holy Sites wrote:Wallowis wrote:That wouldn't work though, because issues can't change your settings. If you picked the unicorn option, then you'd need to manually go to settings and change to unicorn or else it would make no sense.
No, because it wouldn’t change the national animal. So instead of the speckled mouse (for example) being on the seals, it would be a dragon. You get it?
Wallowis now the head of Cylis Treaty and Arbitration Organisation. ULIBOR disbanded by Wallowis. Wallowis passes act of permanent neutrality. Survey shows people disinterested in global politics. Wallowis on the fence over entry into World Assembly. Economy stagnating, economists warn.
Hispida wrote:english is a rather tough language. you can learn it through tough thorough thought, though.
by Burger Kings Kingdom » Fri Apr 15, 2022 7:17 am
by Kiddian States » Fri Apr 15, 2022 7:51 am
Burger Kings Kingdom wrote:I think the issue is missing a "Do nothing" option, where someone suggests you just leave the animal the same, and hope no one cares. Maybe the result could be something along the lines of, "citizens are expected not to mind that their patriotic symbols are more patriotic to other nations"
by Verdant Haven » Thu Apr 21, 2022 5:29 am
by Kiddian States » Thu Apr 21, 2022 6:33 am
Verdant Haven wrote:The idea is an interesting one, but in its current presentation I think it strains the bounds of credibility. Nobody realizing that you're using the wrong species for an extended period of time just doesn't strike me as realistic (if you have a real world example, I'm happy to be proven wrong!). I'm thinking of stuff like the incorrect orientation of the Wright Flyer on the new Ohio license plates, which was noticed and reported by the public within minutes of being unveiled. There are plenty of animal-obsessed kids, not to mention academic professionals, who would catch this kind of thing without even needing to think about it.
One possibility that could be worth pursuing, and might open up even more interesting responses, would be the re-classification by scientists of what was previously one species into two species. This happens constantly, and is certainly not without academic controversy at times, so it could be reasonable to suggest that after careful analysis of recently run genomic sequences some international scientific body has declared that @@ANIMAL@@ is actually two distinct species, with the less distinctive-looking species being identified with the player's nation, while the more camera-friendly version that was traditionally used now being specifically "foreign" in its range. That way there wasn't some big unbelievable mistake that was made – instead, the scientific consensus changed after the fact.
That opens up all sorts of interesting responses, from doubling down on the nobility and inner beauty of the more plain looking version, to banning science textbooks that teach the new information, to… you name it!
by Trotterdam » Thu Apr 21, 2022 7:04 am
There are examples of people making these kinds of mistakes in real life, but you're right that they usually get caught fairly quickly. Though depending on how high-profile the person who made the mistake was, it might still be noteworthy even if it's caught quickly.Verdant Haven wrote:Nobody realizing that you're using the wrong species for an extended period of time just doesn't strike me as realistic (if you have a real world example, I'm happy to be proven wrong!).
That still sounds questionable to me. If there is a clear visible difference between all @@ANIMALPLURAL@@ found in @@NAME@@ and the specific @@ANIMAL@@ used in the picture, someone would have noticed, regardless of whether that difference is formally considered to be a distinct species, a subspecies, or just a local color variation.Verdant Haven wrote:One possibility that could be worth pursuing, and might open up even more interesting responses, would be the re-classification by scientists of what was previously one species into two species. This happens constantly, and is certainly not without academic controversy at times, so it could be reasonable to suggest that after careful analysis of recently run genomic sequences some international scientific body has declared that @@ANIMAL@@ is actually two distinct species, with the less distinctive-looking species being identified with the player's nation, while the more camera-friendly version that was traditionally used now being specifically "foreign" in its range. That way there wasn't some big unbelievable mistake that was made – instead, the scientific consensus changed after the fact.
We already have issues about the national animal being endangered.Kiddian States wrote:Would the scientific community revising the natural habitat of ANIMAL to include only a tiny sliver in NAME work?
Like a team of scientists studied the iconic species, and found it didn’t inhabit the same territory it used to?
by Kiddian States » Thu Apr 21, 2022 8:50 am
Trotterdam wrote:There are examples of people making these kinds of mistakes in real life, but you're right that they usually get caught fairly quickly. Though depending on how high-profile the person who made the mistake was, it might still be noteworthy even if it's caught quickly.Verdant Haven wrote:Nobody realizing that you're using the wrong species for an extended period of time just doesn't strike me as realistic (if you have a real world example, I'm happy to be proven wrong!).
There are also cases of nations intentionally having national animals that aren't actually found within their borders, rather than it being a mistake. (The lion is the national animal of several European countries, including the Netherlands, England, and Norway, a place that I'm pretty sure they never inhabited even before overhunting caused them to be extirpated from Europe. The national animal of Scotland is the unicorn, which doesn't even exist.)
On a more meta level, keep in mind that you can't anticipate what players will enter as their national animal. It can be anything ranging from ridiculously common animals that are found everywhere, to iconic animals associated with one specific place that everyone knows, to fictional animals that don't exist in real life but are supposed to exist in that nation's in-character lore, to mythical animals that don't actually exist even in-character, to domesticated animals whose natural range in the wild is irrelevant, and numerous other things. I think players would dislike being told "nope, your national animal doesn't live here" when that goes against their roleplay lore, especially when that happens in only a minority of real-life nations and tends to be deliberate when it does happen.That still sounds questionable to me. If there is a clear visible difference between all @@ANIMALPLURAL@@ found in @@NAME@@ and the specific @@ANIMAL@@ used in the picture, someone would have noticed, regardless of whether that difference is formally considered to be a distinct species, a subspecies, or just a local color variation.Verdant Haven wrote:One possibility that could be worth pursuing, and might open up even more interesting responses, would be the re-classification by scientists of what was previously one species into two species. This happens constantly, and is certainly not without academic controversy at times, so it could be reasonable to suggest that after careful analysis of recently run genomic sequences some international scientific body has declared that @@ANIMAL@@ is actually two distinct species, with the less distinctive-looking species being identified with the player's nation, while the more camera-friendly version that was traditionally used now being specifically "foreign" in its range. That way there wasn't some big unbelievable mistake that was made – instead, the scientific consensus changed after the fact.We already have issues about the national animal being endangered.Kiddian States wrote:Would the scientific community revising the natural habitat of ANIMAL to include only a tiny sliver in NAME work?
Like a team of scientists studied the iconic species, and found it didn’t inhabit the same territory it used to?
by Kiddian States » Sat Apr 30, 2022 8:55 am
by Kiddian States » Sun May 22, 2022 11:39 am
by Kiddian States » Fri May 27, 2022 2:13 pm
by Socialist Ancomistan » Fri May 27, 2022 6:20 pm
by Kiddian States » Fri May 27, 2022 6:27 pm
Socialist Ancomistan wrote:I feel like this issue should only apply to nations who's national animal "teeters on the brink of extinction.* Otherwise, I'd imagine the nation doing a good job at preserving it's habitat and not running into that kind of a problem
by Kiddian States » Tue Jun 21, 2022 2:53 pm
by American Collectivism » Wed Jun 22, 2022 6:39 am
by Kiddian States » Wed Jun 22, 2022 10:42 am
American Collectivism wrote:Scenario 3 should be edited or removed IMO. The issue focuses on the national animal’s habitat, not the nation’s flag, especially because most nations in this game don’t have an animal on their flag. I would refer to the comment above which says to have an option keeping the status quo
by Australian rePublic » Sun Jun 26, 2022 12:37 am
by Kiddian States » Sun Jun 26, 2022 9:58 am
Australian rePublic wrote:Ummm... wouldn't you know where the animals are located before selecting a national animal? How did you not know this hundreds of years ago?
Advertisement
Users browsing this forum: No registered users
Advertisement