@saphroneth.bsky.social
That's not to say it's likely, just that the Romans being kicked out of Iberia and the Carthaginians (mainly Barcids) being able to use Iberian resources elsewhere doesn't feel inherently crazy. Unlike, say, Antiochus III pulling it off.
January 12, 2026 at 8:23 PM
That's not to say it's likely, just that the Romans being kicked out of Iberia and the Carthaginians (mainly Barcids) being able to use Iberian resources elsewhere doesn't feel inherently crazy. Unlike, say, Antiochus III pulling it off.
I tend to the idea that there *could* be a peace of exhaustion if Scipio Africanus's ridiculously contingent career doesn't go quite right. He's fighting uphill in Spain for quite some time and there are periods where it feels like the Romans in Italy are doing Things They Would Rather Not.
January 12, 2026 at 8:22 PM
I tend to the idea that there *could* be a peace of exhaustion if Scipio Africanus's ridiculously contingent career doesn't go quite right. He's fighting uphill in Spain for quite some time and there are periods where it feels like the Romans in Italy are doing Things They Would Rather Not.
What I mean by internal consistency is that, for example, it might give pause to regime supporters if they think of themselves as "preventing immigrants from doing crime" and they then destroy an American city block with high explosives. That's quite dissonant.
January 10, 2026 at 12:55 AM
What I mean by internal consistency is that, for example, it might give pause to regime supporters if they think of themselves as "preventing immigrants from doing crime" and they then destroy an American city block with high explosives. That's quite dissonant.
Not least because you need to present a credible internally consistent thesis *to your goons* about why what they're doing is good and works...
January 9, 2026 at 6:58 PM
Not least because you need to present a credible internally consistent thesis *to your goons* about why what they're doing is good and works...
A hostile force that literally does not care about keeping the civilian population intact, WITH the ability to use heavy military firepower on that population, can cause a lot of damage - but it can't really run a state durably.
January 9, 2026 at 6:56 PM
A hostile force that literally does not care about keeping the civilian population intact, WITH the ability to use heavy military firepower on that population, can cause a lot of damage - but it can't really run a state durably.
The issue here is not the ability to win a military confrontation, to my understanding - it's the ability to prevent serious clashes of that sort by keeping social order and keeping people under control. Goons rough up/cause terror, they don't flatten towns.
January 9, 2026 at 6:55 PM
The issue here is not the ability to win a military confrontation, to my understanding - it's the ability to prevent serious clashes of that sort by keeping social order and keeping people under control. Goons rough up/cause terror, they don't flatten towns.
A parallel might be that, for example, a film about a moment in WW2 can take as read that the viewer knows how the war ended...
January 7, 2026 at 3:36 PM
A parallel might be that, for example, a film about a moment in WW2 can take as read that the viewer knows how the war ended...
So in both cases it's "this amount of farmland produces enough food for a family" but for the Macedonian/Athenian case it's "...surplus to the amount needed by the actual farmers"
January 6, 2026 at 7:58 PM
So in both cases it's "this amount of farmland produces enough food for a family" but for the Macedonian/Athenian case it's "...surplus to the amount needed by the actual farmers"
What I'm getting at here is that in HoI you get the best returns on conquest by taking, like. France. The industrialized bits of the USSR. That kind of thing.
The return from conquering Africa is almost zero.
The return from conquering Africa is almost zero.
January 5, 2026 at 9:06 PM
What I'm getting at here is that in HoI you get the best returns on conquest by taking, like. France. The industrialized bits of the USSR. That kind of thing.
The return from conquering Africa is almost zero.
The return from conquering Africa is almost zero.
I suspect the issue that has to be worked around in HOI is that it sure *looks* from 20,000 feet like Germany took over those French factories and got them running again productively.
January 5, 2026 at 7:02 PM
I suspect the issue that has to be worked around in HOI is that it sure *looks* from 20,000 feet like Germany took over those French factories and got them running again productively.
My understanding is that the bit of conquest that helps you out in HOI is when you take factories.
And to be clear, "preindustrial-agrarian" basically refers to land *area* being the primary determinant of productivity; chemical fertilizer *alone* changes that dynamic. Haber killed it.
And to be clear, "preindustrial-agrarian" basically refers to land *area* being the primary determinant of productivity; chemical fertilizer *alone* changes that dynamic. Haber killed it.
January 5, 2026 at 7:01 PM
My understanding is that the bit of conquest that helps you out in HOI is when you take factories.
And to be clear, "preindustrial-agrarian" basically refers to land *area* being the primary determinant of productivity; chemical fertilizer *alone* changes that dynamic. Haber killed it.
And to be clear, "preindustrial-agrarian" basically refers to land *area* being the primary determinant of productivity; chemical fertilizer *alone* changes that dynamic. Haber killed it.
So the first bomb is Allied, it's just that if Oliphant doesn't get things rolling on a combined project you instead have a British project (probably in Canada, using Beauharnois hydro power) that's slower, cheaper and smaller - but before anyone else.
January 2, 2026 at 10:00 AM
So the first bomb is Allied, it's just that if Oliphant doesn't get things rolling on a combined project you instead have a British project (probably in Canada, using Beauharnois hydro power) that's slower, cheaper and smaller - but before anyone else.
I'd nuance this in one important way, which is that if the US doesn't get the bomb first I think the only way this happens is because the British bomb effort (which we know with hindsight had guessed basically right - HEU and gaseous diffusion - and had the F-P memo) doesn't share info/merge.
January 2, 2026 at 9:58 AM
I'd nuance this in one important way, which is that if the US doesn't get the bomb first I think the only way this happens is because the British bomb effort (which we know with hindsight had guessed basically right - HEU and gaseous diffusion - and had the F-P memo) doesn't share info/merge.
This is what happens when a young fellow reads the *whole* Tolkien.
I wonder if the entire Silmarillion is technically an appendix?
I wonder if the entire Silmarillion is technically an appendix?
December 31, 2025 at 4:46 PM
This is what happens when a young fellow reads the *whole* Tolkien.
I wonder if the entire Silmarillion is technically an appendix?
I wonder if the entire Silmarillion is technically an appendix?
The way to make the Democrats leery of moving right is not to make it so that it's very hard for the more left wing of the two parties to get left-leaning voters. Because at that point, the way to make it more likely that the more lefty party wins... is to tack right. It's tactics.
December 24, 2025 at 4:45 PM
The way to make the Democrats leery of moving right is not to make it so that it's very hard for the more left wing of the two parties to get left-leaning voters. Because at that point, the way to make it more likely that the more lefty party wins... is to tack right. It's tactics.
And Republican propaganda kinda lies a lot, priming a lot of people to believe the worst. A message from The Democrats which confirms that priming could easily do more harm than good.
Judge your vote by which one is the better choice.
Judge your vote by which one is the better choice.
December 24, 2025 at 4:42 PM
And Republican propaganda kinda lies a lot, priming a lot of people to believe the worst. A message from The Democrats which confirms that priming could easily do more harm than good.
Judge your vote by which one is the better choice.
Judge your vote by which one is the better choice.
...what it sounds like is "I want the police to not be there any more". And you cannot restrict who sees it.
This is why dogwhistles exist! They're intended to be messages FOR the base that the rest of the population don't understand the true meaning of.
This is why dogwhistles exist! They're intended to be messages FOR the base that the rest of the population don't understand the true meaning of.
December 24, 2025 at 4:40 PM
...what it sounds like is "I want the police to not be there any more". And you cannot restrict who sees it.
This is why dogwhistles exist! They're intended to be messages FOR the base that the rest of the population don't understand the true meaning of.
This is why dogwhistles exist! They're intended to be messages FOR the base that the rest of the population don't understand the true meaning of.
There is this persistent problem in communications which is that any message that is sent cannot be limited in who sees it, especially if sent publicly. This is why "defund the police" is a really TRICKY slogan - because to people whose opinion of the police is vaguely positive, a common view...
December 24, 2025 at 4:39 PM
There is this persistent problem in communications which is that any message that is sent cannot be limited in who sees it, especially if sent publicly. This is why "defund the police" is a really TRICKY slogan - because to people whose opinion of the police is vaguely positive, a common view...
My understanding is that archers kind of stood in a
\ \ \ \ \ \ \
type formation, so they were deep but all had a line of fire forwards?
But the bigger issue is that a *volley* is "everyone shoots at once". Archers shoot in their own time; musketeers volley, crossbows might IIRC.
\ \ \ \ \ \ \
type formation, so they were deep but all had a line of fire forwards?
But the bigger issue is that a *volley* is "everyone shoots at once". Archers shoot in their own time; musketeers volley, crossbows might IIRC.
December 24, 2025 at 1:09 PM
My understanding is that archers kind of stood in a
\ \ \ \ \ \ \
type formation, so they were deep but all had a line of fire forwards?
But the bigger issue is that a *volley* is "everyone shoots at once". Archers shoot in their own time; musketeers volley, crossbows might IIRC.
\ \ \ \ \ \ \
type formation, so they were deep but all had a line of fire forwards?
But the bigger issue is that a *volley* is "everyone shoots at once". Archers shoot in their own time; musketeers volley, crossbows might IIRC.
...which would, unfortunately, make it less likely that the Democrats get back in power, because of the reaction of the unfortunately large slice of the country who are mostly disengaged from politics. (This is the "single-signal multiple audiences" problem.)
December 24, 2025 at 9:51 AM
...which would, unfortunately, make it less likely that the Democrats get back in power, because of the reaction of the unfortunately large slice of the country who are mostly disengaged from politics. (This is the "single-signal multiple audiences" problem.)
That means fall back no more than 6 inches, and reform at the end.
If you'd fail even without the leadership modifiers, the unit breaks entirely.
So Warhammer: The Old World is... using a battle pulse model!
If you'd fail even without the leadership modifiers, the unit breaks entirely.
So Warhammer: The Old World is... using a battle pulse model!
December 24, 2025 at 1:47 AM
That means fall back no more than 6 inches, and reform at the end.
If you'd fail even without the leadership modifiers, the unit breaks entirely.
So Warhammer: The Old World is... using a battle pulse model!
If you'd fail even without the leadership modifiers, the unit breaks entirely.
So Warhammer: The Old World is... using a battle pulse model!
..if it lost, though if it broke it ran. The newer Old World rules (...terminology!) have it that if you lose a combat round then one of three things can happen.
Pass the leadership test: Give Ground, fall back 2 inches.
Fail because of leadership modifiers: Fall Back in Good Order.
Pass the leadership test: Give Ground, fall back 2 inches.
Fail because of leadership modifiers: Fall Back in Good Order.
December 24, 2025 at 1:46 AM
..if it lost, though if it broke it ran. The newer Old World rules (...terminology!) have it that if you lose a combat round then one of three things can happen.
Pass the leadership test: Give Ground, fall back 2 inches.
Fail because of leadership modifiers: Fall Back in Good Order.
Pass the leadership test: Give Ground, fall back 2 inches.
Fail because of leadership modifiers: Fall Back in Good Order.
This reminds me of the way the various editions of Warhammer Fantasy Battles have handled close combat. In the older 8th Edition this depth factor was represented by both bonuses for ranks and also "Steadfast" (the deeper unit could only "lose combat by 0"), meaning it was less liable to break...
December 24, 2025 at 1:43 AM
This reminds me of the way the various editions of Warhammer Fantasy Battles have handled close combat. In the older 8th Edition this depth factor was represented by both bonuses for ranks and also "Steadfast" (the deeper unit could only "lose combat by 0"), meaning it was less liable to break...
None of those things is a monolith. If this adjusts the opinions of a hundred generals so that one of them goes from "yes" to "no" and others go from "yes" to "yes..." then that is a good thing. And this admin doesn't have a lot of legitimacy to spare.
December 24, 2025 at 1:35 AM
None of those things is a monolith. If this adjusts the opinions of a hundred generals so that one of them goes from "yes" to "no" and others go from "yes" to "yes..." then that is a good thing. And this admin doesn't have a lot of legitimacy to spare.
It means that people told to deploy anyway are more likely to look at that ruling and disagree. Not all. But some. That's a good thing, whether or not this goes to violence - and it makes this going to violence less likely, which is also a good thing.
December 24, 2025 at 1:32 AM
It means that people told to deploy anyway are more likely to look at that ruling and disagree. Not all. But some. That's a good thing, whether or not this goes to violence - and it makes this going to violence less likely, which is also a good thing.