https://twitter.com/tannerjameswv/status/1248407153519366146?s=21 …https://twitter.com/TannerJamesWV/status/1248407153519366146 …
-
-
-
-
Okay, what's actually needed to win this war: - Industry - Oil - Electricity - State patriotism - A seaport (for trade outside the USA) or border with Canada/Mexico - A good governor - A viable export economy - Food - Potable water - Large population
Show this thread -
- Gun-toting populace also helps Anyways, outside of being targeted as the favorite it is REALLY HARD to argue against Texas here. It has all of this in spades, especially the state patriotism. Other interesting candidates: CA, PA, VA, and NY if it can hold its port.
Show this thread
End of conversation
New conversation -
-
-
Re: oil arguments. In WWI lots of countries imported/used coal still. https://encyclopedia.1914-1918-online.net/article/petroleum … In WWII Germany invaded Norway for it.
-
I was thinking that California could sel software for oil to foreign countries.
- 23 more replies
New conversation -
-
-
This is tough. What constitutes “winning”? In this scenario are we assuming that every state takes an immediate and irreversible “every state for themselves” stance? And if so, are states allowed to ally themselves with other nations?pic.twitter.com/xEQXCUUTZZ
-
Don’t know. Yes. They can trade with outside nations.
- 9 more replies
New conversation -
-
-
Top 4 is by population. I think FL wins most often. I've played enough strategy games to know the value of fighting out of a bottleneck. They have a clear path to conquer a couple more states without exposing themselves exponentially.pic.twitter.com/u9ZlVUcqnY
-
Good point re Florida’s position but other than that I think they’re screwed. No oil and no way to get it.
- 2 more replies
New conversation -
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.