Talk:Principia Moderni (Map Game)

Labelled Map


The map will only be up-to-date for five years at a time, and I'm not planning on doing it more than every few decades. This is just a guideline to help people understand the situation of the countries. Detectivekenny (Info; Talk) 04:16, October 19, 2011 (UTC)

War Algorithm
Location Location goes by capital city.
 * at the location of the war: 5
 * next to the location of the war: 4
 * close to the location of the war: 3
 * far from location of the war: 2
 * other side of the world: 1
 * Antarctica: 0

Tactical Advantage

 * attacker's advantage: 1
 * high ground: 2
 * Note: A country receives high ground if:

1) Its capital has a high topographical prominence, meaning it is surrounded by areas of significantly lower elevation. Even plateaus count, but it must be so that the enemy has to climb the mountain to capture the capital.

2) For countries being invaded from the coast, they get high ground if their capital is 300 m or higher.

3) A country invading via sea does not get high ground.

4) A country gets high ground if their capital is more than 300 m higher than the capitals of the neighboring countries.

5) A country invaded from a bordering country, and its capital is 500 m higher or more.

Strength

 * each country on a side of the war: 3
 * country has developed military: 1 for each turn dedicated to military or military technology in the last 15 years
 * expansion: -1 for every turn used for expansion in the past 10 years

Motive

 * motive is life or death (country's sovereign existence is threatened): 10
 * motive is religious: 7
 * motive is social or moral: 6
 * motive is political: 5
 * motive is economic: 3

If there are multiple motives, the one told to the army will be selected.

Chance
0 to 9 points will be awarded to each person based on chance. Factors will be the opponent's edit count (on Althist's main articles) and the precise time when the country declares war or acknowledges the other's declaration of war. The product of the non-zero digits of the time by UTC (0:00 yields 1) will be written as a percentage of the opponent's edit count at the exact time of the declaration. If the resulting number is less than one hundred percent, the reciprocal is taken. The result is multiplied by pi and the hundredths digit is the amount of points that person gets (e.g. 123.8377% yields 3). The algorithm is online for fairness, but I will be the moderator.

Other

 * Countries in civil disarray are able to resist invasion by a factor of 1.5. However, they may not take territory in another country.
 * If X countries attack another country, they have to take 100X/(X+2)% of their opponents' territory to facilitate a full government transplant.
 * Expansion into countries not fully united is multiplied by 1.5, but it does not affect how well the country fares in war if it wins the war.
 * Stability bonus points as calculated by the stability moderator.

Discussion
Vassals no longer have an effect on war? Kunarian 20:46, September 23, 2011 (UTC)

They do. They may be used as combatants, but expansion in countries with vassals is multiplied by 1.5. Detectivekenny (Info; Talk) 23:20, September 29, 2011 (UTC)

Stability
Each empire will have a stability score that they will factor in from 1700 onward. An ideal score is 1500 or greater. Those that keep these scores for decades will see an overall increase in military strength, bonus stability points, a bonus to algorythm outcomes, and other bonus things. If your score is below that, don't worry. However, you will lose at least 20 points for every turn that you don't work on your interior/change something. The weight of invasion, war-time unhappiness, and idiot emperors will increase how many stability points you lose. If your points drop below 500, you'll lose at least 30 stability points a turn (unless you work on it). If your stability points fall below 300, you have the option of spitting your empire for extra points. Once you hit less than 100, your empire collapses completely.
 * stability*power/50,000, rounded = bonus algorithm points
 * power = log (population)*50 + economic power
 * economic power =
 * urbanization (150 highly urbanized/industrial, 100 somewhat urbanized/commercial, 50 slightly urbanized/nodal, 0 rural society).
 * resources (50 precious metals, 100 widespread fertile soil, 50 some partly fertile soil, 50 important metals, e.g. iron, copper .etc)
 * funding system (100 effective tax system, 50 weak tax system, 20 each colony)
 * technology (350 digital, 300 radio, 200 telegram, 100 iron/steel, 50 bronze age, 0 stone age)
 * trade routes (50 for each major trade route - note a long border does not mean lots of trade)

Stability = Status Quo + Penalties to stability: Benifits to stability:
 * -20 every turn (-30 if stability lower than 500)
 * Territory (4 large empire such as China, 3.5 medium-large empire/state or kingdom such as Poland, 3 medium kingdom such as Nepal, 2.5 small kingdom or duchy such as Bhutan); note this aspect and governnent are not touched after the new government begins.
 * Stability begins at (Log (Population) (rounded)/Territory)*500 which is the nations status quo
 * Splitting territory into n parts equates stability to sqrt(n)*stability. You may divide into any plausible amount, but you must wait 100 years before dividing again.
 * Change of government resets stability automatically.
 * A country collapses when stability reaches below 300. The player must at that point create a new government or collapse completely into civil disarray.
 * Each non-improvement turn= -20
 * Wars lasting more than 5 years= -20
 * Nearby unrest= -10
 * Minor invasion= -50 (border skirmish)
 * Major invasion= -100 (15% of territory lost or one major city captured)
 * Less than 3 trade routes= -100 (as decided by mods)
 * -500*percent of territory lost in a war
 * War won in less than 5 years= +50
 * Every alliance= +10
 * Every major trade route= +5 (mods decide your number)
 * Every vassal= +20
 * Every colony= +20
 * Stability greater than 1500 for the last 25 years= +150
 * Economic improvement= +25
 * Religious/moral revival= +30
 * Infrastructure= +25
 * War= +10
 * Military development/expansion= +20
 * 100*percent of territory won in a war

Stability of Player-States and Bonus Angorithm Points

 * All Metals+Soil Quality


 * Stability - Status Quo

Discussion
If this is too complicated, the mods can always zap countries back in line CrimsonAssassin 04:21, September 16, 2011 (UTC)

This means that we're gonna have to use full turns in each turn to not lose points?And, about economic points, and if you don't have any idea about what are the resources of your country?--Collie Kaltenbrunner 07:29, September 16, 2011 (UTC)

Yes, but it's no big deal. It simulates most countries' rise and decline. Most European countries don't have that many resources, unfortunately, but if you get a colony you can add the resources. Detectivekenny (Info; Talk) 01:17, September 17, 2011 (UTC)

I have complied all the equations together via Excel. The main trade routes, resources, vassals, colonies .etc. Please notify me on my talk page if there are issues under a heading of (Your Nation) PM. Scandinator

China

 * Other Side of the World: 1
 * Strength: 9
 * Military Expansion: 16
 * Population: 2
 * Motive: (Political) 6
 * Participation: 10
 * Chance:
 * Editcount: 1560
 * 2x2x1=4
 * 1560/4= 390 xpi = 2450.442269800038726000861838958
 * Chance= 8


 * Owned area for 0 years= 0
 * Total= 52

Aztecs

 * At the Location of the War: 5
 * Strength: 4
 * High Ground: 2
 * Expansion: 0
 * Military Expansion: 0
 * Motive (Life or Death): 10
 * Participation: 10
 * Chance: 5 (Random)
 * Owned area for 151+ years: -5
 * Total= 31

Result
Chinese Victory. China is entitled to 25.3% of Aztec Territory

52/83=.6265

.6265-.5= .1265

.1265* 2= .2530

Treaty of Tallinn
This treaty, signed in the Capital of Estland, Tallinn, officialy ends the Third Russo-Swedish war. This treaty will determine the fate of Denmark, Estonia, Oldenburg, Doitsuchou, Livonia(liflandia)/Courland.(loopholes are in brackets)

Peace Terms

 * 1) Sweden and her coalition powers (those whom fought at Sweden's side) MUST akgnowledge their defeat in this conflict, and take on the burden of being responsible for this war. This includes providing war repatriatons of 1 million kronars to Russia, 2 million kronars to the AGC and half a million to Naples.(notice I said faught, not supported)
 * 2) The territory of Livonia is either become a vassal of or be annexed by Lithuania.
 * 3) The Gulf of FInland Islands are to be annexed by Russia, and the Islands of Saaremaa and Hiiuma are to be incorporated into Livonia.
 * 4) The Anglo-Geman Commonwealth will Be Granted the Eastern Oldenburg and Prussia
 * 5) Sweden will retain full control of Western Oldenburg, Doitsuchou, and Estland Proper(not including islands of Saaremaa and Hiiuma).
 * 6) Estland is not to engage in any military conflicts whatsoever against Russia, Anglo-Germany, Naples, China, or Hanthawaddy, same goes for Denmark (although this refers to the official danish army, you can still use it if you make a greater Swedish army)
 * 7) Estland will be allowed to remain Sweden's Vassal, and will not be annexed into Sweden Proper
 * 8) Denmark is to join in Personal Union or form a supernational confederation(like the KU before it) with Sweden, and not be annexed into Sweden Proper
 * 9) Sweden and Sweden Alone must rebuild any Neapolitan ships sunk, and help rebuild any Anglo-German ships sunk in some way or another(this can be covered by war reperations, and is included in the 2 million kronar reperations, if you dont want to send your craftsmen to rebuild them and keep them in sweden to rebuild your navy).
 * 10) Swedish military outposts in Estland must remain at an equal number or less than Russian ones(notice I said Swedish and not Estonian)
 * 11) Any violation of this treaty must be interpreted as an act of war, but a benifit of the doubt must be considered(comunications, even between generals to the king werent stelar in the 1680s)

Principia Moderni-related notes
Sweden can use this treaty in being angry so they attack Russia again around 1710 or something, so there can be an armed conflict that Russia wins under Peter I or something, as long as its orchestrated and everyone knows it's happening, like an extention of this war, like WWII was to WWI

Signatures
Signatory States: Winning Coalition, Loosing Coalition and neutral observer states.

Russia/Anglo-Germany (victorious) Coalition
Please sign as your king/leader/emperor's name and title(of a regent is present write the Regent's name and Title after the Name of the actual de jure ruler), folowed by 3 tiles. Vassals/Puppets may sign, and in the same manner as main nations. Use Russia and Kazakhstan's signaturea as examples.

Peter I and Ivan VI, Tsars of all Russias and Lithuania, Dominators of Livonia, Grand Dukes of the Caucasus, Chrimea, and the Far East, Rulers of Siberia and all their Posessions. Sophia Alexeyevna Romanova, Regent of all Russias and Lithuania.LxCaucassus

Anzer Talkan, Khazar of Kazakhstan and Vassal to Russia LxCaucassus

Ankar Azal, Emir of South Armenia(puppet to Russia) LxCaucassus

His Royal Majesty Angelo Entori King of Naples, Sovereign of the Neapolitan Empire, and Protector of the Faith. LurkerLordB

Pope Urban VI, Archbishop of Rome, Head of the Catholic Church, and Master of the Papal States. LurkerLordB

Suryamala, Emperor of Hanthawaddy, Bengal, and their possessions. Detectivekenny

His Majesty the King of the Germanic peoples and Emperor of the Imperial Anglo-German Commonwealth, Frederick the first, R. I.Zagoria 00:13, October 17, 2011 (UTC)

Swedish (Defeated) Coalition
Please sign as your king/leader/emperor's name and title(of a regent is present write the Regent's name and Title after the Name of the actual de jure ruler), folowed by 3 tiles. Vassals/Puppets may sign, and in the same manner as main nations. Use Russia and Kazakhstan's signaturea as examples.

Robert Bertrand, King of France as Robert III and King of the Burgundians as Robert I. Galaguerra1 01:17, October 16, 2011 (UTC)

Christina Alexandra, Queen of the Swedes, Norweigns, Goths and Vandals, Grand Princess of Finland, Duchess of Estonia, Holland and Karelia and Supreme ruler of the Swedish colonies.Scandinator

Discussion and Proposed Changes

 * You really wouldn't need all the free-ports stuff added, you could just say that you won't restrict German Ships sailing through the Danish islands. LurkerLordB 16:18, October 16, 2011 (UTC)

In fact, since for Brandenburg, Jutland is crucial for communications with England, it is very necessary.--Collie Kaltenbrunner 17:24, October 16, 2011 (UTC)

Why is it that, even though I won the war, I am losing more territory then I gained? I would like control of at least part of eastern OTL Netherlands.Zagoria 19:08, October 16, 2011 (UTC)

Yeah, they probably should give you a passage to the Atlantic there. If Zagoria doesn't accept the treaty, doesn't that mean that Germany keeps all of their prior territory, and then takes however much they earned from winning the war from Sweden? LurkerLordB 19:21, October 16, 2011 (UTC)

Since Anglo-Germany wants more, Naples and the Papal states withdrew from the treaty until Anglo-Germany's demands are met.LurkerLordB 21:41, October 16, 2011 (UTC)

To make it fair, Anglo-Germany should probably be given at least equal to the amount of territory they lost, if not a little extra since they actually won.LurkerLordB 21:41, October 16, 2011 (UTC)

If the Commonwealth don't have a coast to the Northern Sea, it will be de facto separated from its british territory, then Sweden will control the communication between the two provinces. May be, the Commonwealth can keep Holstein --Galaguerra1 22:11, October 16, 2011 (UTC)

BTW who removed me kinda saying that I control the Finnish Gulf Islands?(contro the Gulf of Finland). oh ya and I think I should Control Saaremaa and Hiiuma islands, which is what I meant in the COntols the entrance to the Gulf of finland term that Somebody erased. and at least give AGC control of the Trait of Jutland.LxCaucassus 22:22, October 16, 2011 (UTC)



I propose this(and edit treaty accordingly if approved)LxCaucassus 22:44, October 16, 2011 (UTC)

Naples and the Papal States will re-approve of it now that Germany has access to the atlantic. LurkerLordB 23:23, October 16, 2011 (UTC)

The Commonwealth will approve this treaty.Zagoria 00:09, October 17, 2011 (UTC)

Since Anglo-Germany now has a seaport, shouldn't the "free port" stuf be removed?LurkerLordB 00:50, October 17, 2011 (UTC)

Thanks for reminding me, i forgot to delete it.

Sweden rejects this edit and proposes that sweden retains the Netherlands and Doitsuchou and Oldenburg is split between the two nations. AGC thus gains Hamburg and other Altanic ports. I will post a map at around 5:00 UTC

Can I have OTL Friesland and Groningen too? Sweden is still getting far more territory than the Commonwealth, and plus Denmark has a much higher population and agriculture than Prussia. This way the Commonwealth gets more territory and population while Sweden gets to retain Amsterdam and the major ports.Zagoria 02:44, October 18, 2011 (UTC)

How about this new treaty:

LurkerLordB 02:01, October 17, 2011 (UTC)

The Incas ridiculous violations of the rules
Whoever plays as the Incas just recently came back and decided to godmod his empire to extents that make Januasary seem like a moderator. I think that the Inca's last turn should be revoked, and the user should either be temporarily banned from the game until he can learn to play by the rules, or the Incan Empire should be broken up and destroyed. LurkerLordB 18:13, October 16, 2011 (UTC)
 * 1) He stated that he already industrialized, despite the fact that industrialization is not scheduled to start until 1700, and begin in Russia and slowly spread outward from there.
 * 2) He brought his nation out of civil disarray without even mentioning it.
 * 3) He claims that his nation upgraded its military while he was gone, while in fact, if you don't post, your nation doesn't upgrade anything.
 * 4) He conquered two powerful kingdoms, Manoa and the other one I can't spell, without an algorithm or even a war.
 * 5) He expanded his nation more than twice its normal size in one year, a feat that is impossible and could never have occured.

dude, i have been expanding for at least 15 years and, probably more, as well as modernizing my army, navy and industrilaizing, no one ever update my maps and if I need to keep writing the exact same thing over and over and over and over, well you get the picture, check the archives. DeanSims 18:25, October 16, 2011 (UTC)

The moderators said you went into civil disarray, the Incas have been fighting eachother for the past decade or so, no time to improve. Plus, you still ignored the algorithm, as well as the rule that you cannot industrialize until after Russia (which will occur in 1700). You also did not post any of those past 15 years. If you didn't post it on the game, it didn't happen. LurkerLordB 19:19, October 16, 2011 (UTC)

It looks like the moderators already overruled your actions and reverted them. LurkerLordB 20:08, October 16, 2011 (UTC)

Not posting does not mean free expansion and industrialization. Not posting means "minor economic and military upgrades" at best. In fact, you didn't reply to my notice on your talk page, so I put your country into civil disarray. You're just going to have to work with what you got, starting from scratch. Detectivekenny (Info; Talk) 21:44, October 16, 2011 (UTC)

Division of France-Burgundy
I just want clarify the borders of Burgundy, now that is independent.

France conserves: Burgundy obtains: So I avoid any error in the next map. P.D.: Flanders is a colony? In thaht case, Jaeden would have four colonies--Galaguerra1 18:52, October 16, 2011 (UTC)
 * 1) France
 * 2) Haiti
 * 3) New France
 * 4) East Algeria.
 * 1) Franche-Comté
 * 2) Flanders
 * 3) Cote d'Ivoire
 * 4) Guinée
 * 5) West Algeria

No, flanders is a extension of Burgundy, a exclave between France, Sweden and Brandenburg.--Collie Kaltenbrunner 20:04, October 16, 2011 (UTC)

Industrializations


The map you have all been waiting for. It tells exactly when you may begin industrializing. But understand the stages of industrialization:

1) Beginning of industrialization: People move into the cities, and the steam engine may be utilized. Mass production may begin to replace cottage industries on a small scale.

2) Industrialization on a mass scale: Huge factories in cities, Industrial Revolution. Mining and hydraulics.

3) Fully industrialized: Trains and other steam-powered vehicles commonplace. Factories are scaled back and are made more efficient.

4) Transition from coal to other fossil fuels. Automobiles, etc. From here countries can make slow introductions of modern-day technology as long as it does not surpass OTL.

Here are the minimum dates:

Note: Any of this may change. Countries which make significant diplomacy, e.g. become vassalized under an industrial nation may industrialize sooner, although this will take a toll on the existing nation. There are other ways, too such as getting out of civil disarray, so if you have a question, ask. Also, if you have anything to add, please comment. Thanks! Detectivekenny (Info; Talk) 22:50, October 16, 2011 (UTC)

Discussion
The Russian Capital Will be moved to St Petersburg, it would make sense that St petersburg and Villnus were incorporated into the purple zone as lithuania has much coal(although siberia has ample wood and combustibles). Please, I want Siberia by 1700(Siberia-World's largest forest-wood-steam power), so please dont wage war on me untill 1710 and I wil use the multiple rivers to capitalize on gains faster(siberia literaly has hindreds of those!)and I have been expanding(by that point) into siberian territory for over 150 years!LxCaucassus 22:59, October 16, 2011 (UTC)

Could nations that lose/win wars move up or down on the scale? Also, what in-game differences does it make to be industrialized? Such as having a bonus in wars against nations that are further down the scale. (Naples seems to be fine on the scale). Also, that map is now out of date, as the treaty map was changed to give Germany more territory. Actually, how do all those little nations in former Turkey industrialize before Naples? If they are moved back, I will be fine. LurkerLordB 23:17, October 16, 2011 (UTC)

I understand Sweden is bordering the "Cradle" of Industrialization, I do not understand why they are red, I believe that only Russia and her affiliate states(close vassals like livonia(basicaly part of Lithuania) and Lithuania as it is in personal union thus an exteniton of Russia itself) should be red as the "initiators" of the Revolution, and Sweden should be Orange as before because it is not an Affiliate of Russia. But ultimately, its up to the mods. LxCaucassus 01:26, October 17, 2011 (UTC)

@LurkerLord B Well, I've been basically going off this map. There appears to be a linear relationship between distance from the "cradle" and industrialization time. Basically on that map, darkest green is "cradle of the Industrial Revolution." Next darkest is "countries industrialized by the mid-19th century." Then "countries industrialized at the end of the 19th century." The lightest shade is "countries weakly industrialized at the end of the 19th century." Seeing that this timeline would be more focused on eastern Europe, it is natural that the Turkish states have access to the technology first.

The method I used to determine when countries industrialize is:
 * Countries or colonies industrialize one step later than their first neighbor to industrialize.
 * Colonies/Vassals industrialize one step later than their home countries.

But of course, the map only shows the minimum date. For example, I doubt Bhutan would begin industrialization by 1775. It's hardly industrialized in OTL today. For blank (non-player) nations, I think I will have the industrialization occur at least 15 years later than the minimum, more so for the Turkish states, so don't fret. And I encourage some people to restrain.

Less industrialized countries will have the benefit of cultural unity and linguistic bonuses (colonies and nearby countries will be more likely to highly esteem your culture — more details later). Industrialized countries will receive colonial bonus as follows:
 * Stage 1: none
 * Stage 2: Expansion inland (on pixels that do not share a face or corner with the sea) is tripled.
 * Stage 3: Expansion inland is quintupled.
 * Stage 4: Expansion inland is septupled, and coastal expansion is doubled.

@LxCaucassus the "initiation" area is the heartland containing St. Petersburg and the surrounding area. Considering how close Sweden is to St. Petersburg, it is natural that Sweden begins to industrialize 25 years after Russia. Detectivekenny (Info; Talk) 01:30, October 17, 2011 (UTC)

It just seems strange that a tiny, landlocked indian nation would industrialize before a nation with large amounts of trade and an overseas empire. Trade and empires should probably factor in as well. LurkerLordB 01:37, October 17, 2011 (UTC)

@DK Russi will probably keep St Petersburg a bit less industrialised as it is a capital and industrialisation is well, naturaly a bit filty, but will still have it as a cradle because, well, its the capital, so I dont think that the "cradle"(purple) zone will go up to the kola because, well, its cold and well, not many people live there but archangel will be incorporated as a large port city, so the "initiation"(red) zone shouldnt go to sweden as I understand it, the cradle zone is where the first steps into industrialization occur, and the Initiation zone is where the actual first industrializations occur, so Sweden should be in the "Interception"(orange) zone as when true Russian Industrialization occurs in 1725 then Sweden can look at it and as Russia's direct neighbor "Intercept" Industrial Tech.LxCaucassus 01:48, October 17, 2011 (UTC)

@LurkerLordB There are some problems with that argument. The Moluccas Islanders conducted lots of trade but didn't industrialize much. Spain and Portugal had huge empires but didn't industrialize until later. Meanwhile, the landlocked country of Switzerland was among the first to industrialize. If you plant a colony close to Russia or a Russian colony, it might get you industrialized quicker.

Persia is definitely in the lineup to be industrialize. Kashmir, if that is what you are talking about, will probably not industrialize for several decades after what is shown by the map, even though it borders Persia. The map was drawn objectively without respect to culture, etc.

@LxCaucassus draw a map, but don't upload it over my map. Detectivekenny (Info; Talk) 01:50, October 17, 2011 (UTC)

I was actually talking about the Rapjts. But I get your point. LurkerLordB 01:55, October 17, 2011 (UTC)

I came up with neat names for the color stages, if everyone agrees, then they will mabe become official?

Purple: Cradle Zone (the Cradle of Industrialization: where It all began)

Red: Initiation Zone (initiates true large scale industrialization)

Orange: Interception Zone (intercepts industrial tech from initiators)

Yellow: Impact Zone (impact of Industrialization in Interceptor and Initiation/Cradle nations initiates industialization

Green: Immediate Fallout Zone (industrialization falls out into these nations, after every impact, there is fallout)

Turquoise: Scattered Fallout Zone (After Every impact there is fallout, and this fallout gets to its destination longer and further, and with less stuff, so longer to industrialize)

Blue: Catalyst Zone (the Impact(and its Fallout) acts like a catalyst here and initiates industrialization here)

Indigo: Fumble Zone (Industrialization just accidentally “fumbles” into the hands of these nations)

and here's my map proposalLxCaucassus 02:25, October 17, 2011 (UTC)



Vietnam is set to conquer a goodly portion of Persia in a war. Wouldn't that affect Vietnam's industrialization at all?

Yank 02:36, October 17, 2011 (UTC)

First, I'd like to say that I am grateful for having a good chunk of my territory in the Orange zone. I'd just like to request that the coast of China be more industrial. With the bout of colonialism and the massive amount of ship building that went on during and a bit after the later days of the Ming Dynasty, these cities would be a bit more populated and productive than they were OTL. Other than this, I have no complaints. CrimsonAssassin 03:33, October 17, 2011 (UTC)

This map is a bit outdated.Hungary annexed Galicia, and now has a land border with Lithuania.Thus shouldn't affect my industrialization?--Collie Kaltenbrunner 06:29, October 17, 2011 (UTC)

It would make sense if Sweden was red as I own the area around OTL St Petersburg.Scandinator


 * you're not getting my point: industrialization starts in the capital, then spreads to all of Russia, Initiating the revolution, then Neighboring naitons, like sweden, all "Intercept" the Industrialization in 1750. Its only light industrialization then, a bit more than venice, except with more machinery. IN OTL Industrialization stayed in england for pretty much the first 50-75 years. Itl go to Lithuania and Livonia because well, they're in personal union and like an extention to russia.LxCaucassus 00:24, October 18, 2011 (UTC)

How would having a nation be half-industrialized (like Russia and China at certain points) affect them? Do they get half the benefits of whatever step they are on, or what? LurkerLordB 21:31, October 17, 2011 (UTC)

@Crimson. It is up to you if you want to industrialize more along the coast than inland. Like you can industrialize Canton, Shanghai, and Amoy, but you probably won't have as many resources to use in the steppe. Use your best judgement.

@LxCaucassus. I am planning to not overcomplicate this. While your ideas are there, it is more relevant when a country can industrialize than how. This is just a matter of keeping plausibility.

@Scandinator/@Lxcaucassus. I'll make a compromise. Estonia can industrialize at the same time as red. But the rest of Sweden will industrialize with the orange.

@Yankovic270/@Collie Kaltenbrunner. The map is just a guideline. If the borders happen to change, it will affect how quickly you industrialize.

@LurkerLordB. Let's keep it at that you get the benefit one step before the colony. So if you have an orange country and a yellow colony, you get the benefits of the orangeness for that colony. Detectivekenny (Info; Talk) 00:44, October 18, 2011 (UTC)

That seems like a good idea. Western China saw a lot of activity military-wise along the Russian border when tensions with them were high. When tensions with Russia lowered and deals were made, the military members probabally stayed in the area. Eastern China saw tons activity because of said ship building. I'm thinking for plausibilities' sake. Is it okay to do both or something? CrimsonAssassin 01:42, October 18, 2011 (UTC)

The money has to come from somewhere. Looking at most industrial patterns in China today, I would guess the industrialization would start in East China, but of course it would have to be brought over via trade routes with Russia. So if you want to weakly industrialize in the west with orange, strongly industrialize on the coast with orange, and industrialize the rest of the country with yellow or later I'm fine with that. Just know the main concern here is budget and transportation. Detectivekenny (Info; Talk) 02:51, October 18, 2011 (UTC)

I believe Sweden would be able to industrialize at the same pace as Russia as Finland is within 100km of St Petersburg and the people would easily send the info to Sweden. I propose Sweden, Finland, Estonia are red and Norway, Denmark, Doitmania are orange Scandinator

Persian War
I've created this section for the algorithm for the upcoming Persian War.

Yank 02:39, October 17, 2011 (UTC)

Time for Colonial Expansion to pick up
http://thebrightestman.wikispaces.com/file/view/European_Empires_1700.gif/36083069/European_Empires_1700.gif

From this map, you can see how big the European empires were in 1700. All of them are huge compared to the current colonial empires that exist in this game. Should expansion be increased somewhat? (perhaps after 1700, if you want a nice round number) And before people say that it will increase with industrialization, note that none of the nations with empires on that map were industrialized yet (Britain was half a century later). LurkerLordB 02:27, October 18, 2011 (UTC)

The map is a little deceiving. There are many different types of colonies. It is clear that most of the inland areas on the map weren't settled at all by Europeans. For example, Zimbabwe did not have any Portuguese settlements, but they did have suzerainty over the Mwanamutapa kingdom. The intensive settlements, that are reflected by countries that still speak European languages like Latin America, South Africa, Quebec, and the United States, are the type of colony that exists mostly in Principia Moderni. Some countries have gained suzerainty over other countries, like China and Central America, Hanthawaddy and parts of Australia/Australasia, and others.

While you do have a point, just understand that for now we assume the maps are drawn differently. The Principia Moderni map is a little bit more precise and less Eurocentric, as is clearly and purposefully the case with the map you have shown, because the map intended to show European empires rather than a holistic map of the world.

In 1700 or 1716 (the halfway point of the game) I will permit players to make large claims. Detectivekenny (Info; Talk) 02:47, October 18, 2011 (UTC)

Issues with the new Map
I have a problem with the new map made for 1690. In 1686 I quite explicitly state that Vietnam takes control of Joseon's Asian colonies after they went back to being the world's "Hermit Kingdom". And later in the same turn the Chinese buy Hawaii to provide a convienient half-way point to California. Are we trying to keep Joseon's Empire in stasis (no matter how imblausible that is), or are we going to understand that the status quo doesn't matter as much when the user PitaKang has definitively left the picture.

Yank 18:41, October 18, 2011 (UTC)

Also, I established a colony on the Flaklands at 1689 --Galaguerra1 21:18, October 18, 2011 (UTC)

Kunarian Banned
Since Venice's user, Kunarian, has been blocked for a month (and since he is avoiding the block by using anonymous IPs, he'll probably be blocked for longer), should Venice be rendered inactive now, as it is obvious he will be missing far more than the 1 week of inactivity? Also, shouldn't we stop him from editting this page anonymously, as that would just be awarding him for circumnavigating a ban, instead of appealing it like normal? LurkerLordB 20:48, October 18, 2011 (UTC)

Well considering he has unrightfully banned me and I have taken it up with the other Brass, then we should wait until they have dealt with it before you take any action considering that the only reason I am curcumventing it is because he has unrightfully banned me. You need to look over the situation and then look over thing that have happened in the past you'll see that Lordganon has done this before and there have been complaints. Its hardly awarding me also, its simply acting neutral. - Kunarian

Ah, I didn't know you were protesting the ban. However, I would recommend not blatantly violating the ban, as that makes it seem as if you are the one who is violating the rules. I do think a month seemed unfair for what you did, maybe a couple days, but not a whole month. LurkerLordB 21:04, October 18, 2011 (UTC)

The only problem is that I can't protest it on my actual account and he doesn't want me to even be allowed the chance for my case to be looked over so continually blocks every IP, the only reason I am anoning is because he isn't letting me protest it. My only worry is that the other Brass may not be active enough. - Kunarian

Actually, I've done nothing wrong. He very badly ignored a warning, and is now spouting off about it, getting the block lengthened each time. For what he's done now, I could ban him permanently if I wanted. Haven't yet, but it's getting tempting. Nor has there ever been "complaints," so I really don't know where he got that from. Lordganon 21:27, October 18, 2011 (UTC)

Whether or not the block was just is not to be discussed on this page. In either case, Kunarian will serve his blocking. He has proved a fine member of the game so I don't see any reason to extend his time off the game or give him any of the consequences of banning. So we'll preserve Venice as is if and until Kunarian returns, unless it is clear that he will not return until the game is over. Detectivekenny (Info; Talk) 22:26, October 18, 2011 (UTC)

Agreed, Kenny. On all counts, actually. Lordganon 22:28, October 18, 2011 (UTC)

I assume that he won't be allowed to edit the game until his ban is up? LurkerLordB

Correct. There's no point to it, otherwise. Lordganon 22:43, October 18, 2011 (UTC)

Kunarian, I know you may have some legit things to say, but what's done is done. Just take your punishment, because arguing only exasperates the situation. I'd also prefer people to not talk about this matter on the talk page. CrimsonAssassin 23:26, October 18, 2011 (UTC)

Now, Kunarian had someone edit this page for him. Should this be allowed? (I am using this talk page as it directly affects this game, and this game only) LurkerLordB 22:19, October 19, 2011 (UTC)

Simply put, that's an attempt to go around the block. It's been extended to that account. Lordganon 08:17, October 20, 2011 (UTC)

Persia
I have officially signed up for this game and I am playing as Persia. I just want to remind you, nothing else more.

RandomWriterGuy 22:44, October 18, 2011 (UTC)

Vietnam currently has some dispute with Persia, and is about to attack. You should probably find out the cause of the tension and seek to resolve it before you are conquered. Welcome to the game! LurkerLordB 22:50, October 18, 2011 (UTC)

Vietnam, What Is It
(This is for the player of Vietnam ONLY)

Vietnam, what is it? LukerLordB said about some grievances to me. Tell me it.

RandomWriterGuy 23:01, October 18, 2011 (UTC)

Well this stinks. I had planned on conquering Persia. The first time Kunarian doesn't interfer with with me i find out Persia is occupied. This development is really pissing me off. Yank 03:18, October 19, 2011 (UTC)

I'm still attacking Persia. I've invested too much time and money to simply call it off, especially after the aborted Vietnamese-Irish War. Yank 03:24, October 19, 2011 (UTC)

Be nice. Detectivekenny (Info; Talk) 03:30, October 19, 2011 (UTC)

I'm sorry. I've calmed down somewhat. I just think it's kind of infuriating the way that every time I make such a big effort to win a war, something goes wrong. First Kunarian intervenes to save a country seemingly without an alliance or anything in the way to justify the intervention, and now the nation I plan on attacking has become played. It's like somethng is trying to thwart my every move. How long is Kunarian being banned for?

How about you hit the Mamluks???Scandinator

I could attack the Mamluks, or I can attack the Irish while Kunarian is still banned. That's why I asked how long he is banned for. Is he only banned a few days, or is he really banned a whole month?

I don't know but you will be supported by Sweden :D Scandinator

Look, Persia is bigger than Vietnam. Any chance of conquering me will be squashed.

RandomWriterGuy 05:58, October 23, 2011 (UTC)

Second Algerian War
I need somebody to make the algorithm for this conflict. I'm supported by Burgundy, Venice (confirmed before the ban of Kunarian), Milan, Naples and the Papal States (I think). --Galaguerra1 02:26, October 19, 2011 (UTC)

Naples and the Papal states are with you. LurkerLordB 02:28, October 19, 2011 (UTC)

This is my first algorithm as Minister of War Scandinator

France
Total: 65
 * Location (close to the location of the war): 3
 * Attacker's advantage: 1
 * France, Burgundy, Venice, Milan, Naples, Papal States, Doitmania, Sweden, Estonia, Denmark, AGC: 27
 * Motive (religious): 7
 * Population (10,000,000 to 100,000,000): 8
 * Military Expansion: 8
 * Expansion : 0
 * Chance: 1
 * UTC time: 18:19
 * Edit count: 166
 * (166/72)*pi=724.3 1 1%
 * Participating in the war: 10
 * Said country does not rule said area: 0

Ziyyanids
Total: 38
 * Location (at the war): 5
 * Ziyyanids: 3
 * Motive (life or death): 10
 * Population (100,000 to 1,000,000): 6
 * Military Expansion: 0
 * Expansion : 0
 * Chance: 9
 * Participating in the war: 10
 * Ruled area for 150+ years: -5

Result
To be redetermined, but French Victory. (65/103 -0,5 x 2)= 26.2% of Algerian territory.

Discussion
The war is being fought on Ziyyanid territory.so both countries not ruling said area is impossible.even if it was on the french colony, still some country has to rule the area, The motive is definitely religious.

Very good (because I win (?)). So, Burgundy will receive the half of the whole algerian territory...I annex Algeria or Can I make it a vassal? --Galaguerra1 16:46, October 19, 2011 (UTC)
 * It will be part of your colony, but if you want, you can turn your just-conquered part and your already-owned colony into a vassal.it still will count for colonial expansion anyway.--Collie Kaltenbrunner 19:38, October 19, 2011 (UTC)
 * Unfortunately, Naples and the Papal States just pulled out of the war because their king was assassinated by the Hafsids and they must concentrate all forces on attacking them. LurkerLordB 21:18, October 19, 2011 (UTC)
 * Now I have the Commonwealth on my side! ^^ --Galaguerra1 17:14, October 20, 2011 (UTC)

Naples
Total: 72
 * Location (close to the location of the war): 3
 * Attacker's advantage: 1
 * Naples, Papal States, Sweden, Denmark, Doimaina, Estonia, France, Algeria, Burgundy, Hungary: 30
 * Motive (religious): 7
 * Population (1,000,000 to 10,000,000): 7
 * Military Expansion: 10
 * Expansion : 0
 * Chance: 4
 * UTC time: 21:17
 * Edit count: 783
 * (783/14)*pi=175.70 4 7
 * Participating in the war: 10
 * Said country does not rule said area: 0

Hafsids
Total: 34
 * Location (at the war): 5
 * Hafsids: 3
 * Motive (life or death): 10
 * Population (100,000 to 1,000,000): 6
 * Military Expansion: 0
 * Expansion : 0
 * Chance: 5
 * Participating in the war: 10
 * Ruled area for 150+ years: -5

Result
Crushing Napolitian victory. Naples can annex (72/(72+34)*2)-1= 35.84% of Hafsid territory. The Hafsid government may be toppled.

Discussion
I am still confused how to get that second number for the chance thing. Naples wins either way, but it may determine whether or not it is high enough for the gove to be overthrown of Hafsids. Also, I thought that somewhere someone said that colonial expansion didn't count as expansion on the algorithm, but if it does, then I get -10 I believe. I still win though, but more narrowly. The Hafsid chance was generated off of this website, www.random.com I think. LurkerLordB 21:59, October 19, 2011 (UTC)

i think that the following number should be counted if the hundredth is zero.recalculating, you got roughly 27% of Hafsid territory.--Collie Kaltenbrunner 07:53, October 20, 2011 (UTC)

You did well for a first algorithm. Colonial expansion does not count and you overestimated you population. OTL Italy today only has 46 million. You would have around 6 to 8 million at most. Scandinator

Ah, thank you for clearing that up. LurkerLordB 01:43, October 20, 2011 (UTC)

The Hafsid total is 34, in fact.So, at best, you conquered only 24% of Hafsid territory.--Collie Kaltenbrunner 06:09, October 20, 2011 (UTC)

Lol, how did I miss that...Scandinator

I added the new numbers from Sweden and all joining, to take 27% of the territory. If it is alright with Scandinator, I won't give you any territory right now, but one I manage to topple the Hafisd government it can be divided, OK? Of course, if anyone else would like to join in the war, they would be welcome to do so. LurkerLordB 22:55, October 20, 2011 (UTC)

You have to get more than a third to take the government, right? LurkerLordB 21:52, October 21, 2011 (UTC)

Assuming that this was enough to overthrow the government of Hafsid, here is the division:

I would give France more, but he said he wanted only a tiny bit. If you want more, I'll just move the border slightly to the east. LurkerLordB 03:42, October 22, 2011 (UTC)

I gonna compensate it in the war against the Mamluks =) (I expect you to join me in that). That will be enough to expand Algeria to South. I just hope that the help of the AGC be enough to win the algerian war and conquer the whole algerian territory. --Galaguerra1 04:31, October 22, 2011 (UTC)

Hungary joined the war. if we win, i would like to get some territory around Tripoli and east of it if possible.--Collie Kaltenbrunner 07:44, October 22, 2011 (UTC)

The Hasfids have collapsed! I'm more than happy with the division.Scandinator

OK, I gave Hungary a small amount of territory on either side of Tripoli, and I gave Sweden some of the currently Neapolitan territory to compensate. Unfortunately, Hungarian Tripoli is "boxed in", so they won't be able to expand their colony unless they win a war against Naples or Sweden. However, Naples will agree to help them in their next war, with expectation of only a small amount of territory. LurkerLordB 15:26, October 22, 2011 (UTC)

Persia
Total: 62
 * Location (next to the location of the war): 4
 * Attacker's advantage: 1
 * Persia, Sweden, Denmark, Doimaina, Estonia, Algeria, Russia, Kazakhstan: 24
 * Motive (political): 5
 * Population (10,000,000 to 100,000,000): 8
 * Military Expansion: 1
 * Expansion : 0
 * Chance: 9
 * UTC time: 22:23
 * Edit count: 140
 * (140/24)*pi=1832.5 9 57%
 * Participating in the war: 10
 * Said country does not rule said area: 0

Kashmir
Total: 30
 * Location (at the war): 5
 * Kashmir: 3
 * Motive (life or death): 10
 * Population (100,000 to 1,000,000): 6
 * Military Expansion: 0
 * Expansion : 0
 * Chance (random.org): 1
 * Participating in the war: 10
 * Said country has ruled said area for 151+ years: -5

Result
Persian victory. Persia can annex (62/(62+30)*2)-1= 34.7% of Kashmiri territory. Kashmir Falls. Persia may do whatever the want with Kashmir, annex, vassalize, make puppet, etc...

Discussion
Fight them one more time and you will win. Scandinator

Oh hello there, I didn't even notice this. After I read the message above this one, I thought I rewrote my move in the Map Game. (Please, if I do anything wrong, tell me)

RandomWriterGuy 23:25, October 21, 2011 (UTC)

Algeria is supporting Persia. --Galaguerra1 18:44, October 22, 2011 (UTC)

France is not supporting Persia, just Algeria --Galaguerra1 06:04, October 23, 2011 (UTC)

China, I am going to need your support to be in my side in the Persian-Kashmirian War. if you goin me, I'll be able to conquer Kashmir in one move and I will promise not to attack you.

Also, for my Allies Russia and China, I was wondering if we can establish trade and economic relations with each other.

--RandomWriterGuy 23:01, October 23, 2011 (UTC)

Vietnamese-Keltic Union War Part Deux
This section is for the previously cancelled Vietnamese-Irish War. With Kunarian out of the way I can finally do what I wanted to do before he meddled in my business.

Yank 16:35, October 20, 2011 (UTC)

Why is the algorithm only half done? I want to know how much territory I am going to gain, and wether I'm going to be able to take over Ireland by the time 1695 rolls around.

You should take Ireland before Kunarian's return, if you wan not problems with Venice. Also, add Algeria, my vassal, to the algorithm. Sctoland became independent a couple of turns before... So.... it will afect the algorithm, or Scotland is again part of the KU? --Galaguerra1 01:49, October 21, 2011 (UTC)

Vietnam
Total: 71 (so far)
 * Location (other side of the world): 1
 * Attacker's advantage: 1
 * Vietnam, Sweden, Denmark, Doimaina, Estonia, France, Algeria, AGC, Hungary: 27
 * Motive (religious): 7
 * Population (10,000,000 to 100,000,000): 8
 * Military Expansion: 15
 * Expansion : 0
 * Chance: 2
 * UTC time: 16:57
 * Edit count: 4089
 * (4089/210)*pi=6117.1 2 969%
 * Participating in the war: 10
 * Said country does not rule said area: 0

Ireland
Total: 31
 * Location (at the war): 5
 * Ireland: 3
 * Motive (life or death): 10
 * Population (1,000,000 to 10,000,000): 7
 * Military Expansion: 0
 * Expansion : 0
 * Chance: 1
 * Participating in the war: 10
 * Said countryhas ruled said area for 151+ years: -5

Result
Vietmanese victory. Vietnam annexes (68/(68+31)*2)-1= 37.37% of Ireland

Discussion
Sweden wishes to keep two bits of Ireland: OTL Northern Ireland + Donegal and the counties of Cork, Limmerick and Kerry Scandinator\

I would like to purchase your territory in Ireland for a very hefty sum. I had allready annexed enough to pretty much take over all of Ireland. I will recognize your claim to Scotland in exchange for sole ownership of Ireland. I'll do (almost) whatever you want in exchange for the territory.

Yank 14:42, October 21, 2011 (UTC)

Why is it that Sweden is allowed it's own war with Ireland when they are allready listed at participating in my Irish War?

Yank 14:47, October 21, 2011 (UTC)

I have an idea to sweeten the pot. I will sell the former Ottoman/ colonies in North America seized by Vietnam following the controlling user's descent into inactivity. --Yank 19:29, October 21, 2011 (UTC)

They were already split.Florida went to Itsaygahi, Aden and Diu to Hanthawaddy, and Sri Lanka to Hungary.However, Hungary offers Vietnam support in trade for the Irish colony on Újfundlandi island (OTL Newfoundland).--Collie Kaltenbrunner 21:23, October 21, 2011 (UTC)

If you can help me get enough support to take all of Scotland. I will give you all of Ireland.Scandinator

I will give you support in the Swedo-Scottish War. And I will give you the former Ottoman colony on the Chesapeake, which was seized by Vietnam years ago. And I'll throw in the Virginia colony as a bonus.

Yank 00:18, October 22, 2011 (UTC)

Swedo-Scotish War
Sweden

Total: 63
 * Location (near the location of the war): 3
 * Attacker's advantage: 1
 * Sweden, Denmark, Doimaina, Estonia, Vietnam, AGC: 18
 * Motive (social): 6
 * Population (10,000,000 to 100,000,000): 8
 * Military Expansion: 10
 * Expansion : -1
 * Chance: 8
 * UTC time: 20:46
 * Edit count: 562
 * (562/48)*pi=3678.2 8 13%
 * Participating in the war: 10
 * Said country does not rule said area: 0

Scotland
Total: 31
 * Location (at the war): 5
 * Scotland: 3
 * Motive (life or death): 10
 * Population (100,000 to 1,000,000): 6
 * Military Expansion: 0
 * Expansion : 0
 * Chance: 2
 * Participating in the war: 10
 * Said countryhas ruled said area for 151+ years: -5

Result
Swedish victory. Sweden annexes (63/(63+31)*2)-1= 34.043% of Scotland. The Scottish government collapses.

Discussion
The Vietnamese will give the Swedes all the support they need in exchange for the territory taken by Sweden in Ireland.

Yank 00:27, October 22, 2011 (UTC)

The Commonwealth declares its support for Sweden it return for territory north to Hadrian's Wall.Zagoria 01:31, October 23, 2011 (UTC)

Buying//Selling Colonies
Currently, we are getting to a point in which the buying and selling of colonies may begin. However, we need to create some sort of in-game benefit to spending money on expansion. Obviously, if you just trade colonies, no big deal. however, lets say that a nation offers to buy a colony, or at least a portion of one. How do we simulate the transfer of money? Perhaps the nation that bought the colony will lose so much money they will only have half-turn for the next five years or somethng, or they are so busy handling the new lands they can't expand for another 5 years or something. Meanwhile, the nation that got the money should be able to get some bonus as well, like maybe being able to get double turns for a while or something. Thoughts? LurkerLordB 21:00, October 21, 2011 (UTC)

There is talk on buying and trading colonies, so this should be worked out. LurkerLordB 22:15, October 23, 2011 (UTC)

May be, If one country sell one colony, the time to found a new colony should be reduced, or the expansion rate must be increased for a little time. And, If one country buy a colony, the expansion rate must be reduced, or the founding-colonial time increased. --Galaguerra1 04:12, October 24, 2011 (UTC)

From thinking about it, perhaps just giving someone an extra turn for every X amount of pixels in the sold territory seems the easiest solution. They can then use that for whatever they want. LurkerLordB 00:19, October 25, 2011 (UTC)

Korea
Since PitaKang is out, who's controlling Korea?

RandomWriterGuy 23:23, October 21, 2011 (UTC)

Currently it is an NPC nation, so no one is (unless a new user joins). I think the reason the color is being kept is so we can see what was owned by their empire. LurkerLordB 01:04, October 22, 2011 (UTC)

Non-Agression Pact and Military Aid
China and Russia, I request military aid to help conquer Kashmir. I also promise to not invade both of your countries.

RandomWriterGuy 18:06, October 22, 2011 (UTC)

I'll send you some cossacksLxCaucassus 00:57, October 23, 2011 (UTC)

What's a cossack? LurkerLordB 01:02, October 23, 2011 (UTC)

one of the main reasons russi was able to take siberia. A highly militarized society of russo-ukrainians, at this point some loyal to the tsar and some able to be hired as mercinaries and were quasi independant. Interesting people, very VERY diverse becuase they moved a lot, from the banks of the dniper to siberia, they moved so russia could conquer siberia, settled and mixed with the local cultures. they were like the russian cavalry aswell.LxCaucassus 01:20, October 23, 2011 (UTC)

LukerLordB, I am kind or suprised you didn't know about cossacks. It made me laugh a little, but I feel bad for it. :(

I also forgot to mention this, but I was wondering if economic and trade realtions between Russia and China can be established with Persia.

RandomWriterGuy 05:46, October 23, 2011 (UTC)

Concern
I recently recieved this message about my inasion on Kashmir:

"To conquer Kashmir you must withdraw to the area you control and then reattack in a few years. Also if Russia joins your side, Sweden and Denmark and their vassals will withdraw support as Russia is somewhat of an enemy to the Swedish interests."

I understand this but who sent it?

RandomWriterGuy 05:55, October 23, 2011 (UTC)

Just look at the page history. It was Scandinator. Lordganon 05:58, October 23, 2011 (UTC)

Thanks LG< that's all I need.

RandomWriterGuy 06:02, October 23, 2011 (UTC)

Diplomacy For Annexation
I was wondering if we are allowed to use diplomacy to get countries to join another country. Is this possible or no?

RandomWriterGuy 05:56, October 23, 2011 (UTC)

Not generally. There are borderline cases where the other country had no choice. Most likely I would shoot for personal union/dynastic union (look it up on Wikipedia) or a confederation-style government. What exactly do you have in mind? Detectivekenny (Info; Talk) 07:05, October 23, 2011 (UTC)

Well I'm trying to create a Persian-Indian Empire (includes Persia and India, except for it's European colonies (and since the Mogul Empire is player controlled, how it will be annexed by Persia is controversial)). If I am allowed to get the Indian States (the Mogul Empire will be decided on later), can I change the name of my country from Persia to Persia-India?

--RandomWriterGuy 22:08, October 23, 2011 (UTC)

The Mughal Empire's player is gone, so it is no different than any other NPC nation right now. LurkerLordB 22:14, October 23, 2011 (UTC)

Sweden and Denmark Listen
Russia is curently helping me invade Kashmir, but Scandinator says that Denmark and Sweden will oppose this since Swedish interests in the region will be threatened. I want to point out we are in NO WAY of attacking Sweden's interests. My goal is to conquer all of India (and nothing else East (and (good thing that God of Pokemon Guy isn't here)). I do not mean to harm your interests, Sweden.

RandomWriterGuy 06:04, October 23, 2011 (UTC)

Please refrain from ALL CAPS. We are keeping this talk page clean thank you. Detectivekenny (Info; Talk) 06:06, October 23, 2011 (UTC)

Sweden and Russia have had at least 3 wars against each other in the past 100 years. There is some tension between the two nations. However the current king will allow Russian involvement in Kashmir. Also there is a heap of colonies in east India, do not attempt to take them or all of Europe will be against you. Scandinator

For the Detective Guy: I am very sorry, I Was not trying to be rude.

For Scandinator: I won't try to conquer them, but can I buy them?

--RandomWriterGuy 22:10, October 23, 2011 (UTC)

You can try... But I doubt many people will wish to part with those colonies...Scandinator

France
TO THE USER CONTROLLING FRANCE: Your increasingly insistant behavior is getting annoying. You can't get what you want by pestering the other players.

Yank 03:18, October 24, 2011 (UTC)

Calm down, he asked only two times, not enough to warrant being screamed at in all caps. It makes sense that they would offer to buy this colony, and you didn't respond the first time they asked, positive or negative, so no wonder they asked again. '''Attention Everyone: We need to work out how to sell colonies to other players, so that people actually can do this. I made a section higher on the page everyone ignored.''' LurkerLordB 03:45, October 24, 2011 (UTC)

Is this annoying you? Well, I am sorry. I just thought you didn't see my question the first time I post it, and I just want to remind it to you. I had no intention to bother you or any other player. Anyway, I apologize for my behavior annoying to you, but you should answer my petitions when I make it, and you must not get angry for jsut two times. --Galaguerra1 04:09, October 24, 2011 (UTC)

China

 * Close to the location of the War: 3
 * Attacker's Advantage: 1
 * China: 3
 * Military Expansion: 6
 * Population (100,000,000 to 1,000,000,000): 9
 * Motive: (Political) 6
 * Participation: 10
 * Chance:5
 * Editcount: 1600
 * 1x2x2x7=28
 * 1600/28= xpi = 17951.9580205131029


 * Owned area for 0 years= 0
 * Total= 43

Khosut Khanate

 * At the Location of the War: 5
 * Strength: 3
 * Expansion: 0
 * Military Expansion: 0
 * Population (10,000 to 100,000): 5
 * Motive (Life or Death): 10
 * Participation: 10
 * Chance: 3 (Random)
 * Owned area for 151+ years: -5
 * Total= 31

Result
Chinese Victory. China is entitled to (43/(43+31)*2)-1= 16.22% of the Khosut Khanate

Will post another algoryth in 1699 or 1700.

Discussion
I fixed the algorithm a bit. Detectivekenny (Info; Talk) 05:04, October 25, 2011 (UTC)

Where Is Me?
I'm playing as Persia, but my country is not colored in the map. Did you forget me?

RandomWriterGuy 21:55, October 24, 2011 (UTC)

First, If you have any doubt, post they all in ONE topic, we just clean the discussion. Is not a critic, just a clearing.

Anyhow, The mapmakers usually wait ten or fifteen turns before coloring a new player-country, because some players joined the game and abandoned it (or were baned) in a few turns, provoking great confusions with the map. -- Galaguerra1 00:32, October 25, 2011 (UTC)

By the way, I just conquered Kashmir. why is not on the map either?

--RandomWriterGuy 13:51, October 28, 2011 (UTC)

Disasters
I feel that there are not enough natural disasters mentioned in Principia Moderni. I propose that we follow historical accuracy with famines, floods, earthquakes, epidemics, etc. I could take on the job of finding and relaying them onto the map game as the disaster mod or something...Scandinator

Feel free to do them yourself. I just get lazy :P. Go off (including sub-lists). Then make a list of upcoming natural disasters based on the list and carry it out. Detectivekenny (Info; Talk) 03:59, October 27, 2011 (UTC)

Sure, I'll start with the Cascadia Earthquake and Tsunami. The next 300 years are gonna be awesome. XDScandinator

Persia-India
I have officially created a new union with the Indian States (aka: All countries in OTL Sri Lanka, Indian Subcontinent: Mughal Empire, Kashmir, Multan, Sindh, Gujrat, Malwa, Khandesh, Gondwana, Rajputs (Punjab), Rajputs(Rajahstan), Gajpatis, Reddis, Bahmani, Ahmadnagar (tell me if I have this wrong)). But I was wondering, is this allowed?

RandomWriterGuy 04:45, October 27, 2011 (UTC)

That breaks nearly all the rules. No offense, but quite honestly I want to tear my eyeballs out because of the implausibility. Please understand the historical implications of what you are doing, don't just act impulsively, and always carefully research similar occurrences in OTL. I don't want to discredit you because you are new and I understand some of these behaviors are tolerated on some of the other map games. I also appreciate the fact that you brought it up on the talk page, especially for something so major. But what you have in mind would take hundreds and hundreds of years, and could not be sustained for that long.

Persia is a pretty young state, not old and decaying, but it still has not reached its peak. You may be able to conquer some nearby states, and take Bombay which would be an asset, and this would take maybe 50 years. Meanwhile you could use your diplomatic power to communicate with some of the northern Indian states, namely the Muslim ones. Using this, you may be able to make them dependent on your resources, and have the benefits of the riches of Northern India, but this is not actual annexation. In a hundred years or so, you would have an excellent foothold on India. But of course you would have to sacrifice your economy among other things.

Just understand when you post that one of the things that makes this game the most successful of its type is the careful regulation of plausibility and enforcement of rules. You might have less freedom, but it ends up being more fun for everyone. Again I am glad you brought this up on this page and good luck with your Indian exploits! Detectivekenny (Info; Talk) 05:29, October 27, 2011 (UTC)

I suggest a slow bribery of the Muslim states and forceful conquering of the Hindu ones. It would take around 25 years min for the Muslim states to join you and around 50 years to conquer the Hindu states Scandinator

I am very sorry, but I did not find this in the rules. I will change my moves relating to forming a Persia-India to just unity with Northern Indian states. I am agreeeing for 25 years, I will, give a slow bribe to all the Northern Indian States as Scandinator stated, as well as the Mamuluk Caliphate and other Muslim NPC Countries. I'm also thinking of changing the name from Persia to the Tehran Caliphate.

P.S. Each bribery treaty with the nations I give to will last for 25 years. By the end of this time period, they will officially become part of the Tehran Caliphate.

RandomWriterGuy 23:00, October 27, 2011 (UTC)

Much better plan. However, there might not be enough of the Mamluk empire left to absorb into your empire after the Crusade...

(-unsigned)

That still doesn't work. First of all, bribery almost never works. People in general would choose power over money. Also, there is no way for you to get that much money, and even if you could, your country would collapse completely. In general at no time in history has a country ever bought another country. Maybe bribery could take place during conquest, i.e. to cause generals to defect, but it doesn't work in the way Scandinator proposed. It makes sense in theory but has just never occurred in history an likely never will.

If you plan to conquer India, it would take much longer than 25 years. The rugged terrain makes effective control nearly impossible by land. The British had a very powerful navy when they conquered India. Also, you can't just conquer random countries, you have to work your way slowly. From what it sounds like, your plan is the same as if a much poorer version of Britain decided to bribe all of Europe to be taken under the monarchy, including Russia, Italy, and everything, all at the same time.

I've provided the best alternative I can think of that would be plausible. Unless you can think of a better way, take Bombay, and create a viable sea trade route. If you really want to conquer India, you can by vassalizing the Mughals and expanding from there, which would take hundreds of years but is doable.

If you ask me, it is not worth conquering India. For such a weak state as Persia (Persia has only recently declared independence from the Ottoman Empire), India would just eat away at Persia's resources from the inside until it collapses. Don't be fooled by the notion that a country's power is defined by its borders. In real life, power is a combination of military stability, cultural dominace, and control of resources and other commodities.

But no matter what your plans are, you have to prepare yourself carefully. Just as a chess player cannot carry out a good game without planning ahead and preparing to make an attack, it is impossible in this game to become poweful without a careful strategy. Take time to consolidate your resources before making any conquests, and build up an army. It is simple enough. <small style="color:#004400">Detectivekenny (Info; Talk) 03:36, October 28, 2011 (UTC)

China

 * Close to the location of the War: 3
 * Attacker's Advantage: 1
 * China: 3
 * Military Expansion: 8
 * Population (100,000,000 to 1,000,000,000): 9
 * Motive: (Political) 6
 * Participation: 10
 * Chance: 9
 * Editcount: 1614
 * 1x2x2x7=28
 * 1614/28= xpi = 090376531925925


 * Owned area for 0 years= 0
 * Total= 49

Khosut Khanate

 * At the Location of the War: 5
 * Strength: 3
 * Expansion: 0
 * Military Expansion: 0
 * Population (10,000 to 100,000): 5
 * Motive (Life or Death): 10
 * Participation: 10
 * Chance: 2 (Random)
 * Owned area for 151+ years: -5
 * Total= 30

Result
Chinese Victory. China is entitled to (49/(49+3)*2)-1= 24.05% of the Khosut Khanate

China annexes Khosut Khanate with a cumulative gain over the 33.33% needed.

Discussion
Do I add the bonus algorythm points to this one? If so, how many do I get?

Possible Armenian-Persian War (cancelled)
This is a section for the war algorithm if Persia(or Tehran or whatever its called now) decides to have a war with Armenia

Armenia
At the Location of the War:5

High Ground:2

Russia/Lithuania/Kazakhstan/Armenia/Livonia/China: 18

Updating military:1

Population-1,000,000 to 10,000,000: 7

Stability Bonus Points: 40

Participating in War: 10

Motive: Life or Death:10

Ruled said area for 16-30 years: 5

Chance:TBD if the war begins (y)

Grand Total:100+y

Persia
Close to the Location of the War:3

Persia/Others(possibly): 3+

Attacker's Advantage:1

Military Update:1

Expansion:2

Motive:Political:5

Stability Bonus Points:15

Population:8

Participating in War: 10

Chance:TBD (x)

Grand Total:48+x

Result
Armenian victory, whatever the chance is

Discussion
Since the conflict is with Armenia, I changed it to that nation. For stability I just used Russia. LurkerLordB 00:22, October 28, 2011 (UTC)\

Well, If the conflict continues Russia will declare war on Persia because of Armenia being Russia's Puppet and Ally, invading them-invading Russia yada yada yada...LxCaucassus 00:35, October 28, 2011 (UTC)

But Russia will join on Armenia's side on the conflict. It is an excalation of the Armenia-Persian conflict, not a whole new one. You control Armenia, so it is practically the same thing. LurkerLordB 00:42, October 28, 2011 (UTC)

Not to mention China has an alliance with Russia and will back them up if need be. Russia has friends in Europe and Asia. You'd be declaring war on half the old world. CrimsonAssassin 01:09, October 28, 2011 (UTC)

Since you confirmed that China would join in if Russia was attacked, I added you as well. LurkerLordB 01:31, October 28, 2011 (UTC)

I am very sorry, I have canceled my invasion of Armenia. I wish you told me about Armenia before!

RandomWriterGuy 02:44, October 28, 2011 (UTC)

This raises a good point: why is Armenia a different color than Russia on the map? I can see how RandomWriterGuy was confused, since it looked as if he were just going against one small nation, not all of Russia. Armenia, as a puppet-state of Russia, should be that color as well. LurkerLordB 02:46, October 28, 2011 (UTC)

Because Armenia is a puppet state of Russia. if you look at the Key, you will see that the color for subordinate states hat was determined for Russia matches exactly that of Armenia.--Collie Kaltenbrunner 06:23, October 28, 2011 (UTC)

Persia

 * Next to the location of the War: 4
 * Attacker's Advantage: 1
 * Persia, Naples, Jerusalem: 9
 * Expansion:-2
 * Military Expansion:2
 * Stability:15
 * Population: 8
 * Motive: (Religious) 7
 * Participation: 10
 * Chance: 6
 * Editcount: 348
 * 2x5x8=80
 * 348/80xpi =13.665928


 * Owned area for 0 years= 0
 * Total=60

Shahrzur

 * At the Location of the War: 5
 * Strength: 3
 * Expansion: 0
 * Military Expansion: 0
 * Population: 4
 * Motive (Life or Death): 10
 * Participation: 10
 * Chance: 1 (Random)
 * Owned area for 16-20 years:5
 * Total= 38

Result
Persian Victory. Persia is entitled to (60/98*2)-1=22.44% of Shahrzur territory.

Discussion
I have declared war on Shahrzur with my Russian allies. Naples, I was wondering if I could get some help to.

RandomWriterGuy 03:00, October 28, 2011 (UTC)

I am planning on wrapping up the war next turn, so I will be able to help in 1702. You can start the war now, and just keep it going for several years, and then Naples will come to your aid then. LurkerLordB 03:03, October 28, 2011 (UTC)

Also, I advise to help you conquer Shahzur you bring some religious aspect, like Shi'a vs. Sunni or trying to unite Shi'a (I don't know which Shahrzur is). That will give you +2 on the war against them, making it easier to win. LurkerLordB 03:07, October 28, 2011 (UTC)

I don't know which state is Shahzur. Can you tell me where it is so I can determine what kind of state it is?

RandomWriterGuy 03:34, October 28, 2011 (UTC)

Sorry, I have ot deal with the Great Northern War Right now, my own war, I can, however send you monetary support.LxCaucassus 11:06, October 28, 2011 (UTC)

I found out Shahzur is Sunni Islam. I huess the cause for the war is Shi'a v.s. Sunni.

RandomWriterGuy 22:14, October 28, 2011 (UTC)

Is there a stability score for NPC nations? If so, how do you find it? LurkerLordB 00:54, October 29, 2011 (UTC)

Is there a stability score for NPC nations? LurkerLordB 15:40, October 29, 2011 (UTC)

Buy Armenia
LxCaucasus, I know you have been telling me about Armenia. So I guess we could start a discussion.

If I want to buy Armenia, how much will it cost? --RandomWriterGuy 14:09, October 28, 2011 (UTC)

Armenia is its own sovereign state with its own monarch, not a colony of Russia, buying the whole nation would be unrealistic. You could buy some of the territory, such as the parts in OTL Iran that would be Persian, but buying the whole thing would be unrealistic. Especially since the Industrial Revolution will give Russia so much money that they would probably have more money than all of Iran.

Furthermore, despite my attempts to start a conversation on this subject, no other moderators, or even any other users (save Galuguerra) have made any sort of comment or opinion on how to in-game handle the sale of territory. LurkerLordB 21:14, October 28, 2011 (UTC)

Fine, I am sorry. I'll buy the Iranian part of Armenia. How much is it?

RandomWriterGuy 22:12, October 28, 2011 (UTC)

Now, it is possible if you payed enough to Russia you might be able to make Armenia your vassal state, but it would still be semi-independent.

LurkerLordB 00:38, October 29, 2011 (UTC)

Money is such an abstract concept. Not only is the value ever-changing, but we have no standard currency, and no way to calculate buying power. But if LxCaucassus receives money it is fair that he decides what to do with it. Although I think it would be a better idea to give Lx something tangible, things or resources that only Persia has. Like idk, you coulg give Russian entrepreneurs like 300 sq km of pistachio farms? <small style="color:#004400">Detectivekenny (Info; Talk) 23:45, October 28, 2011 (UTC)

More Issues with the Map
I still have problems with the map used for 1700. I had absorbed the various Joseon colonies in East Asia years ago. I gave Joseon's slice of Japan and Kamchatka to Nippon, and I gave Joseon's colony in the Phillipines to New Lithuania. Could someone correct this blunder?

Yank 18:18, October 28, 2011 (UTC)

You have to declare war on Joseon. It was stated in Pita's "will" that he would maintain contact with his colonies. <small style="color:#004400">Detectivekenny (Info; Talk) 23:07, October 28, 2011 (UTC)

Iran's Westernization
After I read this message:

"If you want armenia, I can solve that diplomaticaly. You shouldn't go on gian expansion sprees rightnow, you should focus more on modernizing your nation and making it more stable on 5 years so your overall power can increase and its easier to capture people. If i declare war on a Non-Player state, I'm almost guaranteed a win right now. TRy to recover militarily right now, then in 10-15 turns when your stability is higher, go for a war, and kick the hell out of your opponents!"

I thought I westernize Iran and improve and expand its army for 15 turns so I hope I can be a state where I am powerful and nearly unstoppable. I will always update on the Shahzra War till its over.

RandomWriterGuy 22:21, October 28, 2011 (UTC)

Yeeeaaahhh avoid saying 'unstoppable'. It tends to let people know you're up to something. CrimsonAssassin 22:38, October 28, 2011 (UTC)

Good thinking, RWG. Try to simulate what goes on in real life, but make sure you are creative and having fun, and not just posting for power, because that is the easiest way to lose interest in the game. But nothing can make you "unstoppable." That's part of the fun of the game. <small style="color:#004400">Detectivekenny (Info; Talk) 23:34, October 28, 2011 (UTC)

Sorry for using the word "unstoppable". I only mean this for NPC countries.

RandomWriterGuy 23:40, October 28, 2011 (UTC)

Scotland
Since the current controller has be inactive can I retake Scotland and rebel aganist Sweeden? Alexanders 22:52, October 28, 2011 (UTC)

You might want to talk to Scandinator, who controls Sweden, about it. Or, you could have a revolt, but Sweden would probably crush the new nation in a war and retake it. Perhaps it would be better to choose a nation that no one has claimed yet. Just don't choose the Mamluks, if you don't want a bunch of people to be attacking you very soon... LurkerLordB 22:59, October 28, 2011 (UTC)

Also, Portugal is open, its user hasn't editted for a while. LurkerLordB 00:56, October 29, 2011 (UTC)

The more fun solution would be to act as the Scottish government-in-exile. You could take over Portugal and establish Scottish culture in hopes of one day reclaiming Scotland. <small style="color:#004400">Detectivekenny (Info; Talk) 03:43, October 29, 2011 (UTC)

This doesn't look so plausible.the most plausible option is simply take Portugal.or Spain, since its user was banned.--Collie Kaltenbrunner 05:35, October 29, 2011 (UTC)

Mamuluks
I have been checking recent images, all applying to the Mamuluks. Is that for Principa Moderni?

RandomWriterGuy 23:42, October 28, 2011 (UTC)

Yeah, France, Naples, Hungary, Sweden, and their vassals are all planning a huge Crusade against the Mamluks for religious purposes. LurkerLordB 00:34, October 29, 2011 (UTC)

Mamluk Crusade Planning
I decided we needed an official planning section for the Mamluk crusade. If we manage to overthrow the government, this is the current division of Mamluk territory:

Of course, we probably would be able to negoriate to give other people who join territory as well, or we could make a treaty/pay them off for their aid instead.

To everyone entering the war: I want this to be a long war. It is an enormous amount of territory to conquer, and it is a powerful empire. Unlike the Ottomans, who were cobbled together from numerous different ethnic groups that easily splintered away, the Mamluks are united by thier Arab descent. It will take a long time to overthrow such a nation, and longer still to subjugate the people. Furthermore, it has become sort of boring that all of the wars recently, even the 2 "Great Northern Wars" ended after two years. I am thinking that this should last like 10 years. It will be more fun that way. LurkerLordB 03:06, October 29, 2011 (UTC)

And worse; they are in civil disarray.it will be more difficult yet.--Collie Kaltenbrunner 05:38, October 29, 2011 (UTC)

Yeah, the Crusade may actually require a series of short wars to take all of the nation. LurkerLordB 13:29, October 29, 2011 (UTC)

I'm agree, the war should last ten years. Anyway, I thought about it and I want a little more territory, specificlly, a few lands down to Qatar and Bahrain. When do we start the crusade? After the Great Northern War? Now? Anyway, I want to iniciate it (considering that Naples and Sweden/Denmark will be in a sort of post-bellum state). Also, I would like to divide my conquest lands in two vassal states: Egypt, ruled by the Patriarch of Alexandria (as vassal to the King of France and the Pope) and Arabia, ruled by a Caliph of Mecca and Medina. Is this possible? --Galaguerra1 19:59, October 29, 2011 (UTC)

In part, this will not be possible.Alexandria will go to Greek control, and it's of Greek interest that the Patriarch stays on Egyptian lands. And, if i get that amount of territory on Egypt, and not too many people enter, i will make a vassal state called Egypt.but Arabia can be made.oh, and you already don't have a vassal in Algeria?--Collie Kaltenbrunner 06:44, October 30, 2011 (UTC)

I think that perhaps we should actually not choose any land right now, until it is confirmed who is going to enter. If no one else does, you can ask if Scandinator would let you take that territory. I am making an algorithm to determine if we will win now... LurkerLordB 23:13, October 29, 2011 (UTC)

Crusaders (led by France)

 * Near the location of the War: 3
 * Attacker's Advantage: 1
 * France/Algeria/Burgundy/Naples/Papal States/Jerusalem/Hungary/Greece/Sweden/Estonia/Netherlands/ Scotland: 36
 * Expansion: 0
 * Military Expansion: y (depends when the war begins)
 * Stability: 36
 * Motive (Religious): 7
 * Participation: 10
 * Chance: TBD (x)
 * Total=102+x+y

Mamluk Empire
I assumed tha *1.5 for civil disarray was to the final result. LurkerLordB 23:13, October 29, 2011 (UTC)
 * At the Location of the War: 5
 * Mamluk Empire/Yemen/Jysan/Fartak/Assyria: 15 (the crusade is against the "Rome" of Islam, all Muslim states nearby will try to help)
 * Expansion: -0
 * Military Expansion: 0
 * Stability: 0
 * Motive (Life or Death): 10
 * Participation: 10
 * Chance: 9
 * Total= 49*1.5=75

Jaeden CC (Burgundy) just confirmed me that he will be on our side (and he wants no territory gains). May be the user of Persia wants to participate. --Galaguerra1 01:40, October 30, 2011 (UTC)

If Persia joined it, it would be easy just to extend their territory that will border the Mamluks after they conquer Shahrzur just down some. LurkerLordB 17:22, October 30, 2011 (UTC)

You know what, I think I should join the war on the Crusaders' side. What do I have to conquer?

RandomWriterGuy 22:36, October 31, 2011 (UTC)

You could probably just extend your territory from Shahrzur down some ways. LurkerLordB 01:12, November 1, 2011 (UTC)

I am thinking if I can buy the western mountanious portion of the Arabian Peninsula. This is because so the "Land of the Two Mosques" won't be harmed since Persia is a Muslim country. Also, it may create trade in the Red Sea.

RandomWriterGuy 22:14, November 1, 2011 (UTC)

Great Northern War
This is the section for the confirmed Algorithm for the final conflict of the Great Northern Wars(hopefuly), the clash between two ambitious emperors: Peter I of Russia and Carl XI of Sweden. I want this war to last untill 1710 and be as true to OTL's Northern War as possible.

Tsardom of Russia

 * Next to the location of the War: 4
 * Attacker's Advantage: 1
 * Russia/Lithuania/Livonia/Kazakhstan/Armenia/China/AGC/Danish under Russian control/Greece/Hungary(1703-1704): 27 (30 if nations that briefly joined in are counted)
 * Expansion: -6
 * Military Expansion: 9
 * Stability: 42(debatable)
 * Motive (social): 6
 * Participation: 10
 * Chance: 3
 * UTC: 16:48
 * Edit Count: 892
 * 892/192*pi= 1459.5 3 1%
 * Total=96(99)

Empire of Sweden

 * At the Location of the War: 5
 * Sweden/Estonia/Netherlands/Scotland/Vietnam/France/Algeria: 21
 * Expansion: -1
 * Military Expansion: 9
 * Stability: 44(debatable)
 * Motive (Life or Death): 10
 * Participation: 10
 * Chance: 5
 * UTC: 21:53
 * Edit Count: 601
 * 892/192*pi= 6293.6 5 72%
 * Total= 103

Result
Swedish victory. Sweden can annex ((103/(103+96)*2)-1)*1.5=5.3% of Russia. Additional concessions may be made by treaties.

Discussion
Is it really life or death for Russia? I can see it for Sweden, since if they lost they would be broken up into a bunch of different nations, but Russia would probably just lose some territory, not their sovereignty. Therefore, I think Russia should be political. Also, does Russia get some sort of bonus for beginning to be industrialized? LurkerLordB 13:32, October 29, 2011 (UTC)

Isn't russia's stability 40 and sweden's stability 35? And Russia improving navy and training toops in a new way also counts, so russia' s military update should be higher(15 or 14) and Russia did not break the tallinn treaty because it was ending one war, and nothing said we couldn't attack -Lx from iPhone

I have the stability algorythm on Excel and I'm constantly updating it Russia currently has only 37 and sweden 34. This is due to the loss of a trade route and the Estonian attacks on Russia. Russia broke the treaty by:


 * 1) Invading Sweden (Sweden must defend herself)

Scandinator
 * 1) Section 8 which states that "Denmark is to join in Personal Union or form a supernational confederation(like the KU before it) with Sweden, and not be annexed into Sweden Proper." Danish independence was to be insured until their dealing with Russia were known. (Denmark attacked Sweden with no reason or a declaration of war. This was a small civil affair until russia intervened)

(have to edit on iPhone it doesn't let me scroll down when I edit): stability is updated every 5 years, it stays the same untill 1705. and how did russia loose 10 points, and I can take control of daniSh forces after I take control if them you can't just say they die I want them to die when they did in the real northern war

@LurkerLord. It is life or death for Russia. If the invasion is successful I will annex parts of Lithuania and all of Livonia, and if Russia resists I win by a significant margin I may be able to take all of Lithuania and possibily a small bit of Russia proper (St Petersburg if I feel mean). also the first Step of industrialization will not affect a nation much at all and the bonuses are calculated in the stability.

@Lx. Ok, I will concede to some Danish resistance. Also I counted every year and your military expansion is only 9.Scandinator

That is still not life or death. Annexing parts of a territory is political, for it to be life or death your goal would have to be to conquer all of Russia. LurkerLordB 17:19, October 30, 2011 (UTC)

It is only life or death if the sovereignty of the nation is at threat! Losing parts of territory but not sovereignty=political. LurkerLordB 17:55, October 30, 2011 (UTC)

Lithuania is threatened, and thats little and white Russia, Slavic orthodox that do not like domination by non-slavs, if youre in personal union you can use the life or death arguement for either one fo your PU nations, also livonia is threatendLxCaucassus 18:17, October 30, 2011 (UTC)

You cant go changing around the Stability numbers after every turn when its conveniant for you! If anyhting you upped the ante on swedish power so much that you gianed 10 bonus points for you and only 2 for me! its every 5 years! not every turn or whenever you like!LxCaucassus 21:00, October 30, 2011 (UTC)

Russia is still winning the war right nowLurkerLordB 21:49, October 30, 2011 (UTC)

You do not get it Lx. I update the table on the talk page every 5 years but the number is constantly changing. I use the current number in algorythm calcutions. Plus the original 35 and 40 was wrong as I grossly underestimated trade due to the fact I was doing it at midnight on an OTL map. I also do not go and change it to suit me!! In fact I put -150 stability on Sweden due to the combined Danish and Russian attacks and only -50 for Russia due to Swedish attacks!!!! Also the main reason for the lower Russian stability and bonus points is your extremely low population density. Scandinator

True, Russia's stability would probably raise up once industrialization increases urbanization. LurkerLordB 23:12, October 30, 2011 (UTC)

What does populations density have anything to do with this, most of my population(about 90% of it) lives in European Russia, siberia doesnt have that many people, but even then, you said that you only edited it for trade routes and Russia has more trade routes than 9, and sweden? I doubt it has 13(but I could be very wrong), I just want clarification in what counts as a trade route and what Sweden and Russia's are and how they count in bonus.LxCaucassus 23:46, October 30, 2011 (UTC)

Looks like a massive Swedish Victory. If I were Lx, I would be negociating with Sweden to try and not lose important parts of your nation. LurkerLordB 00:00, October 31, 2011 (UTC)

not now, I did the counting for the numbers that were there and Russia wins

IN the case that russia wins I want this to happen(or something of the sort)...please...(cited from the wikipedia article onthe great northern war): "At this point, in 1707, Peter offered to retrocede everything he had so far occupied (essentially Ingria) except Saint Petersburg and the line of the Neva, to avoid a full-scale war, but Charles XII refused. Instead he initiated a march from Saxony to invade Russia. Though his primary goal was Moscow, the strength of his forces was sapped by the cold weather (the winter of 1708/09 being one of the most severe in modern European history) and Peter's use of scorched earth tactics. When the main army turned south to recover in Ukraine, the second army with supplies and reinforcements was intercepted and routed in Lesnaya - so were the supplies and reinforcements of Swedish ally Ivan Mazepa in Baturyn. Charles was crushingly defeated by a larger Russian force under Peter in the Battle of Poltava and fled to the Ottoman Empire while the remains of his army surrendered at Perevolochna."LxCaucassus 01:08, October 31, 2011 (UTC)

You forgot to carry over. Sweden is actually on 101.Scandinator

I want is war to continue till 1708. Except the Swedish army occupies Lithuania in 1705 and tricks the Russians into attacking them in southern Lithuania, but the force in Southern Lithania is a decoy and the main Swedish army sweeps across Ingria and marches toward Moscow. The Russians chase but their supplies are cut and Sweden uses the Scorched earth tactics starving the Russian army and forcing them to surrender after a crushing Swedish victory in battle of Tuva. Scandinator

Greece and Hungary entered on Russia's side.(not militarly, but yet entered)--Collie Kaltenbrunner 07:24, October 31, 2011 (UTC)

Stop changing the stabilty every turn! If you want to change it put it on the graph so everybody can see wher you got the numbers 40 and 46 for sweden(just enough to give them the edge btw) I changed them back to what they were before. I stil didnt get the answer to Russian Trade routesLxCaucassus 10:51, October 31, 2011 (UTC)

I'm going to say this once: The two of you need to grow up a bit, and need to stop adjusting the numbers.

Kenny, if you could give these guys a set of numbers? I've read through their back-and-forth, and they need to have it decided for them because they are unable to do so.

Lordganon 11:42, October 31, 2011 (UTC)

Ok, Lx we'll leave it at that but if the war continues till 1705, i'll update and sub in the new numbers. Scandinator

I put the number back at what it was. Scan, I don't care who wins this, but don't touch the numbers again until we hear from Kenny. Lordganon 12:20, October 31, 2011 (UTC)

I just check the algorithm and Algeria is in the swedish side. --Galaguerra1 18:03, October 31, 2011 (UTC)

My take on this is a compromise. While I believe Scandinator has done his best at the stability, it is kind of sensitive when he is changing stability during the war. It is not fair that Scandinator should retract stability during a war without Lx's permission. But I agree that if the main player is Russia (this isn't the Swedish-Lithuanian War), then there cannot be life or death. <small style="color:#004400">Detectivekenny (Info; Talk) 23:18, October 31, 2011 (UTC)

But it can be moral as Sweden is using Estland to fight Russia(agianst Tallinn treaty) and Scan did miscalculate the Russian Trade routes. we have more than just the 9, at least 3 with china, 2 with perisia, 1 with hanthawaddy, one land Route with AGC, 1 with Hungary, 1 with greece, Northeast Passage(if you wish both Hanthawaddy and Vietnam), 1 with Orthagi via sea, one with Itsahagi by land via Novorossiya colony, one with Armenia. and some more...thats 13 or 14 right away... LxCaucassus 01:06, November 1, 2011 (UTC)

SInce they joined to try and support Danish rebels, I suppose it could be considered moral, as in fighting against Swedish oppression or whatever. I think the stability numbers in the algorithm should be for whatever year the war begins. LurkerLordB 01:11, November 1, 2011 (UTC)

We really need to figure out the end result of the war. The petty squabbling over the the numbers is giving me a headache. The war can be dragged out as long as you want, but I think we still need to know what happens at the end. The best either the Swedish or Russians can manage is either a stalemate or a measly terriory gain likely not worth the blood shed getting it. The Danes are doomed no matter what happens. What really gets me is the fact that this war happened when the Russian interfered in Sweden's business.

Yank 01:13, November 1, 2011 (UTC)

the thing is that even 3% of Russa is a lot of territory, Just look at the Map! Russia's friggin Hunge! 10% is basicaly more than Just Lithuania! its basicay everything west of Archangel at least, thats more than the territory of france! considering that 1/3 of Russia is in europe and that 1/3 is 2/3 of europe, if you think about it that way, thats alot of territory. and yes the danes will be doomed but if I doom them now then somebody might take them out of the algorithm or something, so untill its finalized they keep fighting hen they die the year we agree on a final winner.LxCaucassus 01:23, November 1, 2011 (UTC)

Wars happen because people get involved in other people's business all the time. LurkerLordB 01:35, November 1, 2011 (UTC)

I hope Lx likes his tiny scrap of Sweden. The numbers clearly show that he is probably going to get a percentage of Swedish territory in the single digits, and his Danish allies are still pretty much doomed.

Yank 02:23, November 1, 2011 (UTC)

I don't see anything wrong with the algorithm as it is now. Russia won't lose any part of Lithuania because it's not Lithuania's war. And Russia can make deals with Sweden, it doesn't necessarily have to be about territory. Let's just settle this, as the numbers are so huge it doesn't make a huge difference for small points. <small style="color:#004400">Detectivekenny (Info; Talk) 03:22, November 1, 2011 (UTC)

They could just sign a peace treaty of some sort due to the fact that it is almost a draw (and to prevent more Northern Wars from Occuring) LurkerLordB 03:35, November 1, 2011 (UTC)

Now, Sweden winning wouldn't cause the Industrial revolution to be delayed? ~Collie

Scan, I've told you twice now not to touch the numbers anymore and to only have Kenny do it, but both times you have failed to do so. I don't care who wins, nor do I care about the details. But cut it out. I have put them back at what they were before you messed with it. If something needs to be changed, he can do it. But don't do it yourself.

Kenny, methinks you need to add a rule preventing people from doing their own algorithms. The back and forth from these two is almost outlandish, lol.

Lordganon 10:03, November 1, 2011 (UTC)

I am meant to be doing the algorythms... Also no-one is bothering to fix and patch up the gaping holes in it.Scandinator 10:45, November 1, 2011 (UTC)

look, you cant remove one nation from my strength because they supported me for one year, I can just thensay vietnam is no longer helping o remove but no, the numbers stay the way theyt are and nobody bothered to fix russia's trade routes yet!LxCaucassus 10:57, November 1, 2011 (UTC)

Persia never supported you!!!! Hungary now has full neutrality and Vietnam is still sending supplies and supporting Sweden!!!! Face it, it is a win to Sweden and if you do not take my offer by 1706 in game or message then I'll take everything I can! Scandinator 21:02, November 1, 2011 (UTC)

Scan, you're really starting to try my patience.

Lx is protesting what he believes to be moves on your part to ensure that you "win." At the very least, your position leads you to be biased here. Even if it is not impacting your calculations, which I doubt, you still shouldn't do them for that reason. That, your attitude, and the senseless arguing is why I have told you to cut it out. I don't care one little bit what your "job" is here. Nor do I care who wins. What I do care is that peace is maintained and that the situation is fair.

That is why Kenny will be doing it. Because neither one of you have any blasted sense about it and I'll be forced to block both of you if it keeps up.

And, let me make one more thing very clear: Drop the attitude, Scan. And, btw, your offer to Lx? That was, at best, a demand, and was not reasonable in any way, shape, or form.

Lordganon 21:31, November 1, 2011 (UTC)

Persia said that they were not joining either side as it was two allies, and in fact urged their allies to make a truce. Hungary said that they were not in the war, only Greece was. Lx, you cannot control other player-nations to add them to your side. I'm a moderator by the way, in case LG was wondering why I was telling them what to do.LurkerLordB 21:49, November 1, 2011 (UTC)

@ Scan: from the Hungarian 1703 post : Hungary and Greece support Russia on its war against Sweden, as it is seen as a continuation of the Danish war, and one more thing: I didnt realise Russia had 18 trade routes, that Just blew my mind, I was thinking 14 mabe 15 at most, but 18...wow, thats alot.-LxCaucasus

Lx, from 1704 Hungary Posted this: "Under pressure from a Swedish diplomat in Hungary, Géza officially declares neutrality on the Northern War. However, Greece stays on Russia's side." LurkerLordB 22:01, November 1, 2011 (UTC)

I am well aware of who is who in this, Lurker.

And, I can say here, without question: Doesn't take a genius to see that Hungary supported Russia for a year, and then declared neutrality.

So yes, they are in some form a supporter.

Lordganon 22:08, November 1, 2011 (UTC)

@ LurkerLord: from the Hungarian 1703 post : Hungary and Greece support Russia on its war against Sweden, as it is seen as a continuation of the Danish war, and one more thing:

@ Scandinator I didnt realise Russia had 18 trade routes, that Just blew my mind, I was thinking 14 mabe 15 at most, but 18...wow, wasnt expecting that.

@LordGanonI think if there is any real porblem its with the stability and becasue its the first time its really used in a war, and there probably will be untill we actualy get a good hang of the stability realy, untill we update the table a phew times there will be some objections when it comes to big wars. You cant realy argue the other points because they are based on solid fact(except mabe motive, but others like strength and participation cant be argued) but, unlike the other factors, stability is reliant on people searching for information and is prone to human error. when it comes down to it, me and scan's argument bubbles down to how many trade routes each of us have, and those have alot of influence on stability points.LxCaucassus 22:08, November 1, 2011 (UTC)

Um.... Algeria is helping Sweden and then the algorythm's done!! I have decided not to annex my full amount but only Livonia, Lithuania part of OTL Belarus and a little part of Karelia and Kola. I also propose a joint governance of St Petersburg and the surronding area as it has strong Swedish and Russian ties. @ Lx, Russia has 18 trade route only because you asked so nicely and I decided to lower the trade criteria. Scandinator 22:25, November 1, 2011 (UTC)

I am between rock and a hard place because Sweden and Russia are my allies, yet they had gone tow ar against each other. I prpose a peace talk between both sides here. Call me when you are ready.

RandomWriterGuy 22:35, November 1, 2011 (UTC)

I am just stating I will have no more arguing. I can't always intervene on behalf of any situation. So I am leaving it up to Scan and Lx. If you guys do not reach an agreement within a day, both of you will lose territory to a Finnish uprising, no exception. <small style="color:#004400">Detectivekenny (Info; Talk) 22:42, November 1, 2011 (UTC)

I altered the Russian algorithm, to show how it differed if the debated nations were part of the war or not. LurkerLordB 22:54, November 1, 2011 (UTC)

Persia never joined the RussiansScandinator 23:00, November 1, 2011 (UTC)

Lx, what did I tell you guys? Don't touch it again.

Lurker, that was a sane response. Though it failed to get most of why they are fighting.

Kenny, you really need to do that blasted thing yourself, lol.

Lordganon 23:05, November 1, 2011 (UTC)

Well, I am still fairly confused by all of the math in the equation for stability, so I couldn't really intervene on that. I say the score should be whatever it was in the first year of the war, to end confusion. LurkerLordB 23:10, November 1, 2011 (UTC)

wai, now that i think about it, isnt the AGC the pesonal Union Between nglnd and the German confederation? so then both armies can be used?(this is for Zagoria to answer mostly), and Russia's colonies are all over 4500 sq. km, and the trade routes arent final yet therefore stability isnt final(even for 1700) therefore algorithm isnt final so i suggest we finish that up and finalize trade routes so i can see the actual number for stability so we can finish all this arguing!LxCaucassus 23:16, November 1, 2011 (UTC)

No the AGC is listed as one nation on External Territories. the stability numbers are the start of the war should be 63 Sweden; 58 Russia (looks big but Hunagary, Vietnam, China are all 70 +).Scandinator 23:30, November 1, 2011 (UTC) Also totally remove Persia from the war as they never joined. Scandinator 23:30, November 1, 2011 (UTC)

I'm just dying to hear what trade routes you put for sweden, especialy your colonies are basicaly isolated from any nations whatsoever(except tunisia and india wich were probably counted anyways) and you said that I downgraded it by mnaking all colonies count I see absolutely no reason why your numbers should go up but please tell me what the new definition of trade route is. every time that you cahnge the stability numbers the distance between russia and sweden seems to be growing.LxCaucassus 00:04, November 2, 2011 (UTC)

Scandinator is right, Persia never joined the war. Lx asked them to, but the next turn they stated that they were neutral and sought to get their allies to stop fighting. LurkerLordB 00:17, November 2, 2011 (UTC)

@LG thanks for keeping me up, but for a permanent solution Lx and Scandinator need to learn to get along. Doing the algorithm for them is not going to fix it. And just to put it out there, I have no problem moving the cradle of Industrialization to any of the many other qualified locations if there is not an agreement. <small style="color:#004400">Detectivekenny (Info; Talk) 00:45, November 2, 2011 (UTC)

One thing;Sweden winning wouldn't cause the whole industrial revolution to be delayed, or at least, heavily misplaced?--Collie Kaltenbrunner 06:51, November 2, 2011 (UTC)

Given the incredibly sorry state of this algorithm, and how obviously wrong it is even to myself, I can safely say that the current results are not accurate. The winner, maybe - though given who wrote it, I doubt it - but the current results, definitely not.

At this point, the result, by my guesswork, is going to be the uprising, because both parties can't agree on anything, and the only moves for peace have been a series of, let's face it, near-offensive demands by Scan.

Wouldn't worry about the industrialization if I were you, Collie.

Lordganon 07:04, November 2, 2011 (UTC)

Trade and Economic Relations
China and Russia, I was proposing an economic and trading pact to expand my economy and to modernize Persian technology Is this acceptable? --RandomWriterGuy 19:33, October 29, 2011 (UTC)

?
Where are people getting their stability numbers? I can't find it… lol. <small style="color:#004400">Detectivekenny (Info; Talk) 19:44, October 29, 2011 (UTC)

There is a table in stability. It shows all the stability points and numbers. If there are issues contact me on my talk page and I will explain them (but I have double and triple checked) Scandinator

China and Persia trade and economic relations
China, I want to establish an economic alliance together so we can be able to be strong nations together. --RandomWriterGuy 05:33, October 30, 2011 (UTC)

RWG, the diplomatic acts msut be made by the game page, and you can not say that you have one before consult the user. I don't want to offend you but...stop posting in the talkpage, really. --Galaguerra1 06:09, October 30, 2011 (UTC)

Clarification
Just to clarify: from this point on, the population and time ruled factors in the algorithm will be replaced with bonus points for player nations. For non-player nations, it will go as follows:

2.5*Number of digits of population*Time

Time is:


 * 1) Number of years ruled / 10.
 * 2) Plug into: x^1.25/1.25^x.

So take the current United States: 9 digits in population. Ruled for 235 years. Thus:23.5^1.25/1.25^23.5*2.5*9 = 6 points

Any problems with this system?

<small style="color:#004400">Detectivekenny (Info; Talk) 23:25, October 30, 2011 (UTC)

Yeah I tweaked it slightly just a second ago, and it is correct as above. <small style="color:#004400">Detectivekenny (Info; Talk) 01:16, October 31, 2011 (UTC)



Graphical representation. Red is 6 digit in population, green is 7 digits, blue is 8 digits, and yellow is 9 digits. The horizontal axis is years and the vertical is bonus points. <small style="color:#004400">Detectivekenny (Info; Talk) 01:36, October 31, 2011 (UTC)

Trade Routes
Since several people have asked for a trade route map or list, I will upload a list over the weekend. There are 119 trade routes spaning the globe currently on Principia Moderni so it will take some time. Due to Lx I have also lowered the criteria for trade routes therefore most nations have a doubling as small colonies are now included.Scandinator 21:16, November 1, 2011 (UTC)

how did I lower the chriteria, I just pointed out how you forgot to count some Russian trade routes, and if you counted trade from Russia to Hanthawaddy's colony I just said that there was no reason to not count the Russian colony in america, novorossiya and Itsahagi trade, and Novorossiya is not a small colonyLxCaucassus 22:20, November 1, 2011 (UTC)

I only counted colonies larger than 4000sqkm. Now? Most colonies are added in.Scandinator

novorossiya is larger, i just forgot to update the ext. territories pageLxCaucassus 23:08, November 1, 2011 (UTC)

Proposals to Update the Algorithm
OK, apparently there have been some arguments over the algorithm, to the extent that it has attracted

Proposals
Does anyone else think these changes should be made? I know that most of the confusion was due to the implementation of stability, and once people get used to it, the chaos will die down. LurkerLordB 21:25, November 1, 2011 (UTC)
 * 1) First of all, the stability scores for the nations should be the scores as of the very first year of conflict, in order to reduce confusion. Whatever it says on the table on the year that the war starts is the score to be used.
 * 2) If a nation joins a war, and then leaves the war, then the side that they were on will lose 2 of the points that they got for having that nation on that side, but will keep 1 point to represent the aid that they were provided. This is to show that the nation that left the war did help, but no longer helps. If a nation switches side, the first side gets 1 point and the new side gets all three.
 * 3) The Algorithm should be compiled together and put on the rules page, as it would be easier to find there and if all the stuff is added together instead of strewn all over the archives, it will be easier to find

For

 * 1) LurkerLordB
 * 2) CrimsonAssassin 00:50, November 2, 2011 (UTC)
 * 3) Zagoria 01:35, November 2, 2011 (UTC)
 * 4) Scandinator 05:33, November 2, 2011 (UTC)

Discussion
I actualy think that if one side recieves aid, it should be counted as aid, and, also, why should a nation be penalized if somebody switches sides, you are basicaly giving a bias to the side that the aiding naiton decided to aid second, aid is aid and you add the 3 points to both sides but you put the year that it was aided because support is always sent and support's benifits dont wear off with the snap of fingers and if you aid, no matter how long(because not every nation can send aid every year of the war), I think it should count, once aigin, you are penalising one player for the needs of another.LxCaucassus 22:16, November 1, 2011 (UTC)

Because if a nation withdraws support from the war, it will reduce the strength of the side that it leaves, as they are no longer recieving aid. For example, if war broke out between France and Burgundy, and Venice first helped France by attacking Burgundy, and then decided to stop attacking Burgundy midway through, Burgundy still is weakened (hence the 1 still remaining) but they now can concentrate all of their forces on the French Front, therefore meaning that they will be stronger in those battles (hence the -2). It is unrealistic to give a nation that briefly helped but withdrew its aid the same benefit to the side as a nation that fought the whole time, but it is unrealistic to count the aid as nothing once they withdraw, hence the compromise. If someone thinks only subtracting one point would be better, then we can change it to that LurkerLordB 22:39, November 1, 2011 (UTC)

The second two make sense but it doesn't make much of a difference. We really have no way of determining what kind of aid and how. Like if a country sends a ton of troops but retracts halfway through the war, is it more help than a supporter who just sends his love and some biscuits for the soldiers. So long as there is no way to determine the type and magnitude of aid, it doesn't really work.

And the first one I agree with: in fact it has been my policy for awhile. Although there is exception to people who want to participate in a war but aren't online at the time, they should be able to add themselves to the amount of belligerents. <small style="color:#004400">Detectivekenny (Info; Talk) 00:35, November 2, 2011 (UTC)

Well, currently they get +3 whether or not they send material aid or a full-on attack force. LurkerLordB 00:57, November 2, 2011 (UTC)

Do you have any ideas on how to make it more fair? <small style="color:#004400">Detectivekenny (Info; Talk) 01:09, November 2, 2011 (UTC)

Maybe +4 for the nations leading the war, +3 for nations that send military aid, +2 for nations that send supplies, and -1 on that score if a nation joins but later withdraws?LurkerLordB 01:18, November 2, 2011 (UTC)

Simple yet elegant xD. Might I have -1 for vassalized states or peoples. How about we mark countries in a war with a code like L for leader, M for military aid, S for supplies, V for vassalization or subordination and then W for withdrawal. So a list of belligerents read like China (L), Zhuang Warlords (MVW), Japan (M), Korea (MW), Hawaiian rebels (MV), Mali (SW). Man this algorithm is getting complicated but it is improving greatly. <small style="color:#004400">Detectivekenny (Info; Talk) 04:14, November 2, 2011 (UTC)