Talk:Principia Moderni II (Map Game)

Archives
Archive 1 | Archive 2 | Archive 3 | Archive 4 | Archive 5 | Archive 6 | Archive 7 | Archive 8 | Archive 9 | Archive 10 | Archive 11 | Archive 12 | Archive 13 |

Algorithm Format
This is to make things easy for everyone since I find myself doing a heap of algorythms and its a pain in the ass to flip back and forth with the rules.

Nation X
Total:
 * Location:
 * Tactical Advantage:
 * Strength:
 * Military Development:
 * Economy:
 * Infrastructure:
 * Expansion:
 * Motive:
 * Chance:
 * Edit Count:
 * UTC Time:
 * Nation Age:
 * Population:
 * Participation: +10
 * Recent Wars:
 * Recent Wars:

Map Issues
''' Please address any map issues here. They will be wiped at the start of each turn the map is updated. '''

The gains in the war against Russia need to be on the map--Yank 21:56, December 22, 2013 (UTC)

Labelled Map
































<p style="font-size:13px;">

<p style="font-size:13px;">

<p style="font-size:13px;">

<p style="font-size:13px;">

<p style="font-size:13px;">

<p style="font-size:13px;">

<p style="font-size:13px;">

<p style="font-size:13px;">New labelled maps :P Scandinator (talk) 16:43, May 19, 2013 (UTC)

<p style="font-size:13px;">I think it may be time to update the maps as a lot of territory changes have occurred in the last 50ish years.Andr3w777 (talk) 01:00, July 10, 2013 (UTC)

I have updated the Europe labelled map. <font color="#000000">VonGlusenburg (talk to Von!) 10:09, July 16, 2013 (UTC)

It has been updated again. However, some parts might not be fully accurate. Imp (Say Hi?!) 20:08, August 24, 2013 (UTC)

Religion Map
<p style="font-size:13px;"> <p style="font-size:13px;">I made this map, using the latest 1730 map, and the old Religion Map as a guide. I do not claim this to be official, but please add/edit/update it as you feel needed to do so. If the mods don't like this, please take it down, but I only want to help. Reximus55 (talk) 10:35, June 13, 2013 (UTC)

<p style="font-size:13px;">Since Callumthered had asked me what was the situation of Catholicism on Europe, i went to do a coloured map of this.it got big, so now this became a incomplete world map.dark blue represents Kappelists, blue represents breakaway churches, light blue represents Catholicism, light green represents Nestorianism, green represents Islam, and yellow-brownish represents orthodoxy.it is still incomplete.Obviously, this is political too, as some nations will have some state religion, but the population will follow other one.Anyway, i don't know the Arabian Federation's state religion, to start with.--Collie Kaltenbrunner (talk) 07:48, March 9, 2013 (UTC)

<p style="font-size:13px;">The Arabian federation doesn't have a state religion, its dominantly Islamic though. Many branches of Islam though, but I'd say Sunni or Ibadi Islam to be dominant. <font color="#000000">VonGlusenburg  (talk to Von!) 11:51, March 9, 2013 (UTC)

<p style="font-size:13px;">There would be a lot more ortododox wrong...-Lx (leave me a message) 19:30, March 9, 2013 (UTC)

<p style="font-size:13px;">What do you mean?--Collie Kaltenbrunner (talk) 08:36, March 10, 2013 (UTC)

<p style="font-size:13px;">Well, Russia is very wrong on that map. just look at the russia I made, and then you will see the real face of orthodoxy. you did your annexations horibly wrong. you made moscow a seperate state, and now Minsk is not longer in personal union. You should realy use my map, because at this point I think you just want an excuse to piss me off so you can purposefuly get me banned.-Lx (leave me a message) 23:07, March 10, 2013 (UTC)

<p style="font-size:13px;">The latter is not the case.in fact, i sometimes think that Scraw is being implausible just to have something to complain about, so he can get me to quit.We might be able to work this out, when it comes to Minsk.are you a hereditary monarchy?--Collie Kaltenbrunner (talk) 08:48, March 11, 2013 (UTC)

<p style="font-size:13px;">Russia has an old novgorodian style Elective Monarchy. The Tsar was a firm believer in Russian unification, and once he gianed the title of Tsar of Minsk through marriage, since he wanted at the least unified russian realm under one Ruler, and he did not want his efforts to be in vain when he died in case his son did not become the next Tsar(elective monarchy) so he had the two Crowns linked, although he kept the title of duke of minsk to his own family, the title of Tsar of Minsk and Tsar of Novgorod and Russia were linked. I find it is good logic, but If that's too complicated you can consider it like an act of union/annexatoin and ignore the part about a seperate Duma being built in Minsk.-Lx (leave me a message) 20:32, March 11, 2013 (UTC)

<p style="font-size:13px;">Yes, this sounds like a goland to coast should be harder and slower, but inwards expansion from coast to land should be easier. (This means through black areas.) ~ Scraw 21:46, September 10, 2013 (UTC)
 * 1) In the algorithm, the development scores should range based on how much total, not just 15 years. For example, if a weak nation has +15 military and a strong one has a +5 even though it has one of the most powerful militaries in the world, this is not fair. Each nation should have individual development scores, which can be assigned everytime a map is made. ~ Scraw
 * 2) Dare I suggest moving at two years per turn? That would allow the game to finish in in one year instead of two. Commandante Lemming (talk) 02:40, September 11, 2013 (UTC)

That all sounds good - I'm a little iffy on technical advances earlier for Asia as they would probably tip the balance in favor of Asia over Europe (which isn't neccessarily BAD, but it might be a bit unfair to players in Europe). Personally I was planning a PM3 strategy contingent on a mid-1400s start, but I think I can probably play in the same region with an even stronger chance of accomplishing my goal with an earlier start. My only question then would be whether a jump-start in technology would also enable a jump start in colonization. Just for the sake of gameplay, if we set colonization limits at 1500, some players may get boxed in and bored in the first 200 turns. I personally am not too worried about that (yeah I'm dropping hints) but I probably would be if my plan was to play a relatively small European nation in OTL France or Germany. Commandante Lemming (talk) 14:13, September 10, 2013 (UTC)

All I know is that I want to be Florence. Also, I remember Scan wanting to be China in PMII. CrimsonAssassin- "I have special eyes" 14:30, September 10, 2013 (UTC)

Well if we're calling nations I'm looking at my options in Siberia as the Golden Horde starts to collapse. I think it's an underexploited region that would make a nice follow up to my Selk'nam adventure, so I may discuss what nations can be carved out at the point of divergence. Commandante Lemming (talk) 14:43, September 10, 2013 (UTC)

For me, if we're going to start in 1350, probably i'll call Portugal again.--Collie Kaltenbrunner (talk) 15:12, September 10, 2013 (UTC)

I'd like to call Korea next game if it's okay. -Kogasa  2013 September 10, 18:00 (CET)

I'd like to call Britain/England.Trust Me, I'm The Doctor (talk) 16:06, September 10, 2013 (UTC)

I'd like to call Ethiopia once again. Vivaporius: "I don't need a slogan" 17:03, September 10, 2013 (UTC)

I'd like to call Scotland. Yank 17:44, September 10, 2013 (UTC)
 * I thought you'd wanted to be Japan next game? -Kogasa [[Image:Miko THPW2.png|50px]] [[Image:Flag of Europe.svg|23px|border]] 2013 September 10, 19:55 (CET)
 * I'd like to call the Kalmar Union. The one and only Guns, who is too lazy to go to source mod and type out his real sig. (talk) 18:16, September 10, 2013 (UTC)


 * If I'm going to be Japan they're going to Christianize ASAP. Even if it's a hybrid religion like Jiduhism. Yank 20:05, September 10, 2013 (UTC)
 * So, will you be choosing Japan or can I have it? The only reason why I didn't choose it was because I though you'd wanted it. -Kogasa [[Image:Miko THPW2.png|50px]] [[Image:Flag of Europe.svg|23px|border]] 2013 September 10, 22:10 (CET)
 * I'd like to stick with Europe for once. For now I'm going for Scotland. We'll see when PMII comes around. Yank 20:17, September 10, 2013 (UTC)
 * Fair enough. In that case I'll call Japan for PMIII. If you ever change your mind let me know. -Kogasa [[Image:Miko THPW2.png|50px]] [[Image:Flag of Europe.svg|23px|border]] 2013 September 10, 22:21 (CET)
 * I'll put in my reservation for the Mayans again (or Aztecs, depending on when the start date is). CourageousLife (talk) 20:26, September 10, 2013 (UTC)

If we're doing round robin - anyone have their heart set on Russia? I don't want it, but the presence, or lack thereof, of a strong Russia is going to be a big factor in my game, and if there is russian player I will want to talk to them before the game starts. Commandante Lemming (talk) 18:59, September 10, 2013 (UTC)

Well he hasn't posted yet but I know that Lx will be pissed if someone takes Russia. Unless you do something like the Russian Confed. from early on in this game (before your time I think) The one and only Guns, who is too lazy to go to source mod and type out his real sig. (talk) 21:41, September 10, 2013 (UTC)

I say that the start should be in 1400. Also, regardless of the start time, I wanted England, but that is unfortunately taken so I shall settle on China if still available. If not, (in order of preference) Vietnam, Korea, Ottomans, or Mughals.

Scraw 21:46, September 10, 2013 (UTC)

The Mughals came in 1517, while the Ottomans were pretty disorganized until 1420 ish. Korea is taken, I believe. But have fun with China. I NOW HAVE THE COOLEST SIG ON THE WIKI!

China it is then.

<span style="-webkit-border-radius: 1px 1px;-moz-border-radius: 1px / 1px;-webkit-box-shadow: 1px 1px 1px rgba(0,0,0,0.6);background-image:-webkit-repeating-radial-gradient(#FFFFFF 50%,#FFFFFF 50%);background:-moz-repeating-radial-gradient(#FFD700 50%,#000000 50%));"><span style="border:1px solid #000000;padding-bottom:1px;padding-top:1px;-webkit-border-radius: 1px 1px;-moz-border-radius: 1px / 1px;-webkit-box-shadow: 1px 1px 1px rgba(0,0,0,0.6);background-image:-webkit-repeating-radial-gradient(ellipse,#1C39BB 45%,#120A8F 50%);background:-moz-repeating-radial-gradient(ellipse,#CCCCFF 45%,#000000 50%));border-top-left-radius:500px 400px;border-bottom-left-radius:500px 400px">               <span style="background-image:-webkit-gradient(linear, right top, left top, from(#000000), to(#FFFFFF)); -webkit-border-radius: 36px 12px; -moz-border-radius: 36px / 12px; -webkit-box-shadow: 0 0 5px 5px #000000; border:2px double #E5E4E2 border-radius:5px; border-bottom-right-radius:100px 90px; border-top-right-radius:100px 90px; color:#FFFFFF"> <font color="#FF033E" face="Courier">"Fear the power   <font color="#FF033E" face="Courier" title="Bvlog"> of the Dark Side of the Force."  22:00, September 10, 2013 (UTC)


 * China's claimed by Scan. CrimsonAssassin- "I have special eyes" 22:01, September 10, 2013 (UTC)
 * Plz. Has he said it yet? If you really persist on this, then I'll just move on down to the Crown of Aragon.
 * Scraw 22:05, September 10, 2013 (UTC)
 * I claimed it a year ago :P Scandinator (talk) 09:53, September 11, 2013 (UTC)

Do it! Also, your sig has gone massive- YET AGAIN!

Dammit! Thought I fixed it...

~ S 22:08, September 10, 2013 (UTC)

Make it into a template

The one and only Guns, who is too lazy to go to source mod and type out his real sig. (talk) 22:19, September 10, 2013 (UTC)

That's how it already is...

<span style="-webkit-border-radius: 1px 1px;-moz-border-radius: 1px / 1px;-webkit-box-shadow: 1px 1px 1px rgba(0,0,0,0.6);background-image:-webkit-repeating-radial-gradient(#FFFFFF 50%,#FFFFFF 50%);background:-moz-repeating-radial-gradient(#FFD700 50%,#000000 50%));"><span style="border:1px solid #000000;padding-bottom:1px;padding-top:1px;-webkit-border-radius: 1px 1px;-moz-border-radius: 1px / 1px;-webkit-box-shadow: 1px 1px 1px rgba(0,0,0,0.6);background-image:-webkit-repeating-radial-gradient(ellipse,#1C39BB 45%,#120A8F 50%);background:-moz-repeating-radial-gradient(ellipse,#CCCCFF 45%,#000000 50%));border-top-left-radius:500px 400px;border-bottom-left-radius:500px 400px">               <span style="background-image:-webkit-gradient(linear, right top, left top, from(#000000), to(#FFFFFF)); -webkit-border-radius: 36px 12px; -moz-border-radius: 36px / 12px; -webkit-box-shadow: 0 0 5px 5px #000000; border:2px double #E5E4E2 border-radius:5px; border-bottom-right-radius:100px 90px; border-top-right-radius:100px 90px; color:#FFFFFF"> <font color="#FF033E" face="Courier">"Fear the power   <font color="#FF033E" face="Courier" title="Bvlog"> of the Dark Side of the Force."  22:26, September 10, 2013 (UTC)

Don't worry I'm not going to steal Russia, I was just going to see who was playing it becasue I intend on building an Asian Siberian power behind Russia - the idea being to seewhat happens in a timeline where Russia doesn't have unimpeded access to Siberia and the Pacific - but I don't want to get blown off the map by and angry Russian player either. If there's a strong Russian player then I'll likely back off and build an Asian nation in the OTL Russian Far East. If there isn't, I might just play as the Samoyedic peoples in the Urals and stop the Russian Empire from forming in the first place. But if Lx wants to keep Russia then I'll build something further East (Actually, if Lx wants to have some real fun and we shift back to 1350, I would encourage him to play as the Golden Horde, prevent it's demise, eliminate the nascent Russian Empire at it's origin, and build a Muslim power in East Europe - now THAT would shake things up.) Commandante Lemming (talk) 22:31, September 10, 2013 (UTC)

Matter of fact, I'll just take Aragon. Lemming, I suggest Manchuria or Korea.

<span style="-webkit-border-radius: 1px 1px;-moz-border-radius: 1px / 1px;-webkit-box-shadow: 1px 1px 1px rgba(0,0,0,0.6);background-image:-webkit-repeating-radial-gradient(#FFFFFF 50%,#FFFFFF 50%);background:-moz-repeating-radial-gradient(#FFD700 50%,#000000 50%));"><span style="border:1px solid #000000;padding-bottom:1px;padding-top:1px;-webkit-border-radius: 1px 1px;-moz-border-radius: 1px / 1px;-webkit-box-shadow: 1px 1px 1px rgba(0,0,0,0.6);background-image:-webkit-repeating-radial-gradient(ellipse,#1C39BB 45%,#120A8F 50%);background:-moz-repeating-radial-gradient(ellipse,#CCCCFF 45%,#000000 50%));border-top-left-radius:500px 400px;border-bottom-left-radius:500px 400px">               <span style="background-image:-webkit-gradient(linear, right top, left top, from(#000000), to(#FFFFFF)); -webkit-border-radius: 36px 12px; -moz-border-radius: 36px / 12px; -webkit-box-shadow: 0 0 5px 5px #000000; border:2px double #E5E4E2 border-radius:5px; border-bottom-right-radius:100px 90px; border-top-right-radius:100px 90px; color:#FFFFFF"> <font color="#FF033E" face="Courier">"Fear the power   <font color="#FF033E" face="Courier" title="Bvlog"> of the Dark Side of the Force."  22:33, September 10, 2013 (UTC)

@Scraw

Well, clearly not...

@Lemming

Don't worry, Lx won't flip. But really, take one of the Siberian peoples then, not one of the proper Rus.

Hey! Just had an idea.

Why not start PMIII now?

The one and only Guns, who is too lazy to go to source mod and type out his real sig. (talk) 22:35, September 10, 2013 (UTC)

I won't be taking an established nation. If I'm starting in 1350 in a baren wasteland I'm starting from scatch. I'm thinking maybe the Koryak peoples on Kamchatka could adopt Chinese and Japanese influeance and build a Buddhist Asian nation on the sea of Okhotsk - or Maybethe Evenks on the Amur River. That oughta be a nice suprise for the Russians when they arrive 300 years later :-) I'm playing the tribal game this time - it'll be even more fun if I do it from the get-go.

And I'd be all for starting it now but not for wrapping up PM2, I want to finish this sucker out.

Commandante Lemming (talk) 22:41, September 10, 2013 (UTC)

I agree.

<span style="-webkit-border-radius: 1px 1px;-moz-border-radius: 1px / 1px;-webkit-box-shadow: 1px 1px 1px rgba(0,0,0,0.6);background-image:-webkit-repeating-radial-gradient(#FFFFFF 50%,#FFFFFF 50%);background:-moz-repeating-radial-gradient(#FFD700 50%,#000000 50%));"><span style="border:1px solid #000000;padding-bottom:1px;padding-top:1px;-webkit-border-radius: 1px 1px;-moz-border-radius: 1px / 1px;-webkit-box-shadow: 1px 1px 1px rgba(0,0,0,0.6);background-image:-webkit-repeating-radial-gradient(ellipse,#1C39BB 45%,#120A8F 50%);background:-moz-repeating-radial-gradient(ellipse,#CCCCFF 45%,#000000 50%));border-top-left-radius:500px 400px;border-bottom-left-radius:500px 400px">               <span style="background-image:-webkit-gradient(linear, right top, left top, from(#000000), to(#FFFFFF)); -webkit-border-radius: 36px 12px; -moz-border-radius: 36px / 12px; -webkit-box-shadow: 0 0 5px 5px #000000; border:2px double #E5E4E2 border-radius:5px; border-bottom-right-radius:100px 90px; border-top-right-radius:100px 90px; color:#FFFFFF"> <font color="#FF033E" face="Courier">"Fear the power   <font color="#FF033E" face="Courier" title="Bvlog"> of the Dark Side of the Force."  22:43, September 10, 2013 (UTC)

Ik, that's what I was suggesting. Run 'em simultaneously. The one and only Guns, who is too lazy to go to source mod and type out his real sig. (talk) 22:44, September 10, 2013 (UTC)

That won't work as the players will immediately move to PMIII and let PMII die. That's what happened to all the other major map games the moment PMII began. Also, Scraw when I read your rule proposal, it almost entirely mirrors the current war between Ethiopia and the Sino-German Alliance. There have been many examples of a minor power defeating a major power throughout history. Greece vs. Persia, Japan vs. Russia, Switzerland vs. Holy Roman Empire, any number of barbarians vs. the Roman Empire. By assign individual development points, that in and of itself is unfair, as it doesn't permit a minor power to grow and become a major power. England was at one point a minor power, and could have been destroyed by Spain, but it became a major power after facing the odds and dethroning the world power of that time. Flag of thod logic.--[[User:Collie Kaltenbrunner (talk) 21:27, March 11, 2013 (UTC)

<p style="font-size:13px;">Just saying, but shouldn't Bijaur be hindu? Considering I have expanded my influence there and introduced anti-muslim laws and the Trimurts have been converting people like crazy? :L  Imp (Say Hi?!) 07:52, March 13, 2013 (UTC)

<p style="font-size:13px;">Update time? Imp (Say Hi?!) 13:38, March 24, 2013 (UTC) <p style="font-size:13px;"></li> <p style="font-size:13px;"></li> </li>



<p style="font-size:13px;"> Colors:

<p style="font-size:13px;">Catholic - Light Blue <p style="font-size:13px;">Reformed Churches - Blue <p style="font-size:13px;">Apostolic Church - Deep Purple <p style="font-size:13px;">Kappelists - Dark Blue <p style="font-size:13px;">Eastern Orthodox - Mustard

<p style="font-size:13px;">Ethiopian Orthodox - Yellow <p style="font-size:13px;">Islam - Green <p style="font-size:13px;">Nestorianism - Light Green <p style="font-size:13px;">Hinduism - Teal <p style="font-size:13px;">Buddhism - Pale Green

<p style="font-size:13px;">Taoism/Shintoism - Light Purple

<p style="font-size:13px;">Carthaginian Nestorianism - Light Red <p style="font-size:13px;">

<p style="font-size:13px;">So, after my last Religion Map was received pretty well, I have decided to make... another religion map! Along with this map, I will add a little bit of commentary, ever so boldly of myself following my latest ban! Anyhow, this is all to be taken in an ATL fashion, and not as a violation of NC/NC. As always, mods may feel free to remove this map or invalidate/change it.

<p style="font-size:13px;">So, lets go into a continent-by-continent ananlysis of the world map as shown by religion!

<p style="font-size:13px;">Europe - There is only one faith in Europe, and that is Christianity. But ever since the Great Schism in the late days of Rome, the Christian Church has been divided. This division grew even further with the arrival of Kappel, and the later reformation of German and Italian churches. Later even, Brython co-founded the Apolstolic Church, which is located out of Europe but centered in the Americas.

<p style="font-size:13px;">Religious Stability - Divided into 3 primary groups of Christians, 8/10

<p style="font-size:13px;">Religious Devotion - Weak faith is present in secular states like Italy, 6/10

<p style="font-size:13px;">Asia - Now, Asia is the largest continent, and also the most diverse religiously. Moving east from Europe, first Eastern Orthodoxy is prevalent, then Nestorianism in the Levant and in Persia/Baghdad. Next is Islam in Arabia and Central Asia, followed by Hinduism and Buddhism, and finally the unique religions of Taoist/Shintoist faith of Japan.

<p style="font-size:13px;">Religious Stability - Islam is falling, or may rise again?, 6/10

<p style="font-size:13px;">Religious Devotion - Strong faith in Eastern Asia, 8/10

<p style="font-size:13px;">Africa - By far the most prone to religious conflicts *Looks to mods for events* Africa houses a large variety of religions. South Africa, which had largely been Nestorian, is now shifting Hindu, and Mali still clings to Islam, although isolated by Christian nations. The unique Ethiopian Orthodox is common in the interior, and is most likely the most practiced African religion. Carthage's recent Nestorian conflicts are intriguing, and Madagascar still holds Islam dear, as well.

<p style="font-size:13px;">Religious Stability - Crazy colonization has lit a match!, 3/10

<p style="font-size:13px;">Religious Devotion - In order to survive, drastic measures may be needed, 9/10

<p style="font-size:13px;">Americas - I will not go into a ton of detail about religion in American colonies. Naturally, they mimic their motherlands. I will, however, express the distinctly American religion, which is Apostolicism. This religion, co-founded by the Selk'nam, has spread to encompass Kappelist beliefs, which have intrigued the average Mayan, and also now the Apache peoples.

<p style="font-size:13px;">Religious Stability - Devout Christians make the majority, 7/10

<p style="font-size:13px;">Religious Devotion - The Apostolic Faith in addition to motherland faiths, maintain religiosity, 8/10

<p style="font-size:13px;"> <p style="font-size:13px;">That's All Folks! 09:43, September 26, 2013 (UTC)

<p style="font-size:13px;">Mostly good although only the Apache, not the Mayans, are Apostolic (not for lack of trying on my part), I think at this point Tojiko in Africa may also be majority-Apostolic although that's Kogasa's call. He's been building more churches than temples there lately. Also the south American Japanese ex-colony Byakuren has conerted to Buddhism from Shintoism - that's what spurred their independence. Commandante Lemming (talk) 13:48, September 26, 2013 (UTC)

<p style="font-size:13px;">Actually, Byakuren converted from Taoism to Buddhism. As for Tojiko, they are a majority Apostolic (mainly Jīdūhist and Amaterasuist), with a decent amount of Shintoism. -Kogasa  2013 September 26, 17:58 (CET)

<p style="font-size:13px;">I fix what Commandante Said, The mayans are mostly germanic and Keppelists. and Carthage is due to being Isolated, in the sense of religion,(Due to lack of contact with the Levantine) Carthaginian  Nestorianism, Influenced Heavily by Catholicism. Sine dei gloriem (talk) 16:34, September 26, 2013 (UTC)

<p style="font-size:13px;">Good fix but.

<p style="font-size:13px;">Tojiko (Japanese Aftrica in OTL Namibia) needs to be Dark Purple (Apostolic).

<p style="font-size:13px;">Byakuren (Japanese South Chile), should be Light Green (Buddhist).

<p style="font-size:13px;">Should Maya be Kappelist dark blue or royal blue Germanic.

<p style="font-size:13px;">Also a number of nations have regional religious divisions so we can talk about whethr that is good to include (for instance my West is Taoist)

<p style="font-size:13px;">Commandante Lemming (talk) 17:14, September 26, 2013 (UTC)

Industrial Algorithm Modifiers and Industrial Era areas and rates.
I have a proposal to modify the algorithm to put into perspective the colonial wars of the 18th-20th century. An algorythm multiplier would be applied to all wars with the side with a higher stage gaining 10% extra for each stage higher they are. Nations with two stages use the higher when defending and the lower when attacking. Scandinator (talk) 04:59, April 28, 2013 (UTC)



Stage 1

 * The Air Furnace is developed
 * Agriculture begins to rapidly shift with fertilizers and rest years for the fields
 * Chemistry develops in leaps and bounds

Stage 2​

 * Steam Power is developed and water wheels are heavily utilized
 * Various chemicals are produced in large amounts
 * Health care and anatomic understanding improve, birth rates still high but death rates on a massive decline
 * Urbanisation begins on a significant scale

Stage 3

 * Paper mills develop with the tech to produce large reels of paper
 * Cloth factories begin using machines and steam power to increase productivity massively to keep up with population boom's clothing demand
 * Railways appear
 * Some revolutionary rumbles appear

Stage 4​

 * Civilian railways appear allowing easier access
 * Stronger cements are produced
 * Steel and Glass are avaliable
 * A few colonies and nations will have rebellions in this period

Stage 5

 * Ironclads and Artillery become widely used in combat
 * Revolutions by poorer citizens in cities become frequent

Stage 6​

 * Tanks and planes appear
 * Total War emerges with populations also targetted
 * Nationalism appears in larger multicultural nations

Stage 7

 * Atomic age begins a decade before the start of this age with certain nations able to make nuclear weapons
 * Wars between atomic powers CEASE, due to the threat and consequences of nuclear war
 * Colonies rebel for independence

Discussion
I'm extremely confused. Also, I think the industrialization chart should be corrected, as Scandinavia has been vanquished.

16:08, April 28, 2013 (UTC)
 * I don't see no need to remove them, as they have already been removed.--Collie Kaltenbrunner (talk) 17:07, April 28, 2013 (UTC)

I like this one better than it's predecessor, mainly beccause there are more divisions here, allowing for a more accurate representation of the country's standing. Albeit, there are a few things that could be amended. CourageousLife (talk) 16:22, April 28, 2013 (UTC)

Same here. Much better. And what is confusing Scraw? It is pretty simple to understand once the map is up showing industrialisation levels. :D  Imp (Say Hi?!) 16:27, April 28, 2013 (UTC)


 * Oh, it's for the map.


 * 17:16, April 28, 2013 (UTC)

It needs some corrections, as some characteristics are too late or too early for their times.Such as: We should move the appearing of railways to stage 4, and their spread to 5, to start with, After all, when we talk about railways, this implies steam locomotives, necessarily.And, steam locomotives in 1770?--Collie Kaltenbrunner (talk) 17:04, April 28, 2013 (UTC)


 * That isn't too far-fetched. A viable steam engine existed in 1782, it just took a while(about 20 years) before people to realise it could be used for rail transport. A two-cylinder steam engine was invented by a Russian in 1766...it had great potential, and could have perhaps accelerated the development of the steam locomotive by a phew decades(maybe only 10 years to say: put it on a fracking train) but The Empress ditched the designs in favor of a more "Brittish" system(i.e. hydraulicaly cooled that required close water supply...this lagged locomotive construction). So...RUssians could have built locomotives in the 1770s...but the empress wanted to stay close to brittain, and brittish-style tech, so that slowed many things...and because of that, the twocylinder stam engine was scrapped.-Lx (leave me a message) 23:42, April 28, 2013 (UTC)

Well, unlike the last game, the East is on better footing with the West, and thus will breed even more competition. I think this is completely fine if you ask me. Imp (Say Hi?!) 19:42, April 28, 2013 (UTC)

I've done the research in the industrial era. For whomever industrializes first, these technologies do not suddenly appear. It is gradual in within each stage. Scandinator (talk) 11:42, April 29, 2013 (UTC)

I would think that, like in PMII, crimson would be a fraction of the main natino around the nation's "heartland/capital" area, and the rest of the nation would get industry red. And colonies would industry get a colour under their founding nations, etc... However, I am worried about the ammount of colours...in any case, I do believe that orange and yellow(or at the least orange) should get planes at the same time as red and crimson...technology and trade would change to the point that...well...those nations could do thema t the same time...-Lx (leave me a message) 18:43, May 1, 2013 (UTC)

I feel like one of these (red, yellow, orange) should be removed. Also, shouldn't Europe (closer to Italy) be receiving industrialization faster than the Middle East?

21:21, May 20, 2013 (UTC)

Not that the map is bad, but I would say that the coast and Dehli should be joined up as they are prime industrial locations. Doesn't really change anything, but it looks nicer, lol. :D  Imp (Say Hi?!) 21:33, May 20, 2013 (UTC)

The Arabian Federation should really industrialize earlier than its vassal of Baghdad I think. Albeit just industrializing along the coastal regions like Oman and Qatar where the majority of my urban population lives. The Nejd won't see industrialization for many years later. <font color="#000000">VonGlusenburg (talk to Von!) 00:15, May 21, 2013 (UTC)

China would industrialize quicker than the yellow rate due to their extensive trading, especially with Orissa and Italia. CrimsonAssassin (talk) 17:20, May 21, 2013 (UTC)

I too feel that China should be in orange.

I also find it strange that both Georgia and Austria are in orange while Germany itself is in yellow. Not to mention that Germany was higher than Russia on the chart and closer to Italy than Russia.

21:25, May 22, 2013 (UTC)

Aren't any of these going to be addressed?

17:25, May 25, 2013 (UTC)

I'd so something about it since I'm a mod, but I'm not sure if I have clearance for this map. CrimsonAssassin- "You can't handle this egg roll" 18:20, May 27, 2013 (UTC)

You know, I'll edit it since, not only does it seem like the plausible thing to do, but worst-case scenario, they'll revert it and yell at me a little. CrimsonAssassin- "You can't handle this egg roll" 16:53, May 29, 2013 (UTC)

I think there should be less of orange China, as lots of those areas would be presently unsuitable for industrialization.

22:58, May 29, 2013 (UTC)

It's just a buffer between red and yellow.

CrimsonAssassin- "You can't handle this egg roll" 05:44, May 30, 2013 (UTC)

I like how Germany is on the same level with the Dimurat and Siberia.

23:06, May 30, 2013 (UTC)

As per my post on the page I'd like to propose that the point on Steel and Glass is changed to "Steel and Glass become mass producible". Also I now have both light green and yellow industrial stuffs in my nation so how does this affect my industrialisation? <smae Hurian Federation.png|30px|border|link=http://hurian-database.wikia.com/wiki/Hurian_Database_Wiki|The Hurian Database Wiki]] Vivaporius: "I don't need a slogan" 23:05, September 10, 2013 (UTC)

Actually I was thinking more along the lines of making it easier for colonies to conquer native nations, but your example works too.

<span style="-webkit-border-radius: 1px 1px;-moz-border-radius: 1px / 1px;-webkit-box-shadow: 1px 1px 1px rgba(0,0,0,0.6);background-image:-webkit-repeating-radial-gradient(#FFFFFF 50%,#FFFFFF 50%);background:-moz-repeating-radial-gradient(#FFD700 50%,#000000 50%));"><span style="border:1px solid #000000;padding-bottom:1px;padding-top:1px;-webkit-border-radius: 1px 1px;-moz-border-radius: 1px / 1px;-webkit-box-shadow: 1px 1px 1px rgba(0,0,0,0.6);background-image:-webkit-repeating-radial-gradient(ellipse,#1C39BB 45%,#120A8F 50%);background:-moz-repeating-radial-gradient(ellipse,#CCCCFF 45%,#000000 50%));border-top-left-radius:500px 400px;border-bottom-left-radius:500px 400px">               <span style="background-image:-webkit-gradient(linear, right top, left top, from(#000000), to(#FFFFFF)); -webkit-border-radius: 36px 12px; -moz-border-radius: 36px / 12px; -webkit-box-shadow: 0 0 5px 5px #000000; border:2px double #E5E4E2 border-radius:5px; border-bottom-right-radius:100px 90px; border-top-right-radius:100px 90px; color:#FFFFFF"> <font color="#FF033E" face="Courier">"Fear the power   <font color="#FF033E" face="Courier" title="Bvlog"> of the Dark Side of the Force."  23:37, September 10, 2013 (UTC)

Fine. I can wait another 200 days. Though I somehow doubt it will get that far... The one and only Guns, who is too lazy to go to source mod and type out his real sig. (talk) 23:49, September 10, 2013 (UTC)

Guns plz. PM always lasts.

~ S 23:51, September 10, 2013 (UTC)

Scraw, you have one example of that.

One data point a trend does not make. The one and only Guns, who is too lazy to go to source mod and type out his real sig. (talk) 23:58, September 10, 2013 (UTC)

I actualy posted before, stating my desire to, for the moment, be set as a russian nation, seeing as we do not know what the start date would be, therefore almost impossible to form strategy as a response to Leming's first querry on Russia. unfortunately, editconflict happened and I closed laptop as soon as I saw page reloading(most of the time meaning edit was submitted, only to find out now it did not go through. The Muslim GH option looks like it might be interesting, to change things up(i did despotic Muscovite russia, now i'm doing mercantile, democratic novgorodian russia)...but i will wait first so that I know what time period. For the time being put me down as a russian state(due to the fact that different time periods yield different balances of power in russia and in eastern europe/northwestern asia in general)-Lx (leave me a message) 00:56, September 11, 2013 (UTC)

Oh right, another thing, we probably shouldnt start PMIII before PMII finishes...running two (extremely) similar map games simultaneously, and expecting people to pay as much attention to one as the other is an absurd idea. you can at best hope for half copy-pastey and half actual edits, with the ones copy-pasting in PMIII actual editing in PMII and vice versa, and an eventual loss of intrest in one or the other, to the detriment of both. I want maximum success for both games, so I humbly suggest to wait out PMIII untill PMII finishes.

'''On a completely unrelated sidenote: I am posting this here because I know ceveral BFE contributors are also PMII contributors. you do not need to read this if you are not interested in Battle for Earth.'''The New BFE map game was delayed and never started due to summer and many people being gone...this should not be the case anymore...It would be best if people running the game would know who is still in, and perhaps new people that would like to join, please say so on the talk page of Battle for Earth Strikes Back. I want to start this up ASAP, and ask players to at least add a bit of history to the BFE: Prime Timeline, and do some personal alien nation history(or human nation history with alien artifacts left behind...) to add to the BFE Universe. -Lx (leave me a message) 01:06, September 11, 2013 (UTC)

Well Guns, if you're really itching for action, PM2 itself has a bunch of prime real estatem, especially in Central Asia, why not jump into the sandbox? I know the timeline has gotten pretty complicated and some weird moves have been made, but that happens with any game. I know I'd personally love to have a Persian or Dimurati player back in the game, that or take over one of the "ASB" colonies and see what you can do with it. You know you want to give in to the crazy. 200 turns isn't that long and the game could proably use a little new blood. Seriously though, we need more people who want to do serious alternate history in this game, it would enrich the timeline, and I think you could have some fun until we get PM3 going later. Commandante Lemming (talk) 02:40, September 11, 2013 (UTC)

If we're calling stuff can I call the Byzantines? :D Airlinesguy (talk) 12:54, September 11, 2013 (UTC)

Oh i call the Ottomans :D And if i cant have them then ill take Venice or the Papal States :) DS|Im Coocoo for Cocoa Puffs!! 16:22, September 11, 2013 (UTC)

The Ottomans were pretty disorganized at the time, assuming we're starting at 1350, though you're welcome to give it a shot. You never know what you could pull off. Though I'd advise against claiming the Italian states ;) CrimsonAssassin- "I have special eyes" 20:43, September 11, 2013 (UTC)

I also advise against Italy and the Ottomans. Italy will have two powerful nations with players in there already (me and Crim), so not the best move. Ottomans are randomly dead. I suggest a small state in Central Germany to get you started.

<span style="-webkit-border-radius: 1px 1px;-moz-border-radius: 1px / 1px;-webkit-box-shadow: 1px 1px 1px rgba(0,0,0,0.6);background-image:-webkit-repeating-radial-gradient(#FFFFFF 50%,#FFFFFF 50%);background:-moz-repeating-radial-gradient(#FFD700 50%,#000000 50%));"><span style="border:1px solid #000000;padding-bottom:1px;padding-top:1px;-webkit-border-radius: 1px 1px;-moz-border-radius: 1px / 1px;-webkit-box-shadow: 1px 1px 1px rgba(0,0,0,0.6);background-image:-webkit-repeating-radial-gradient(ellipse,#1C39BB 45%,#120A8F 50%);background:-moz-repeating-radial-gradient(ellipse,#CCCCFF 45%,#000000 50%));border-top-left-radius:500px 400px;border-bottom-left-radius:500px 400px">               <span style="background-image:-webkit-gradient(linear, right top, left top, from(#000000), to(#FFFFFF)); -webkit-border-radius: 36px 12px; -moz-border-radius: 36px / 12px; -webkit-box-shadow: 0 0 5px 5px #000000; border:2px double #E5E4E2 border-radius:5px; border-bottom-right-radius:100px 90px; border-top-right-radius:100px 90px; color:#FFFFFF"> <font color="#FF033E" face="Courier">"Fear the power   <font color="#FF033E" face="Courier" title="Bvlog"> of the Dark Side of the Force."  23:16, September 11, 2013 (UTC)


 * I thought you were going to be Aragon :( CrimsonAssassin- "I have special eyes" 23:56, September 11, 2013 (UTC)
 * I am. I have Naples and Athens! :P
 * Scraw 23:57, September 11, 2013 (UTC)
 * Naples was captured by Aragon in 1442 by Alfonso I. Even then, it was a dependency. Athens, on the other hand, was captured by Aragon in 1311. However, Florence captured the city in 1388. After some wars with Venice over the city, Florence finally came out on top and controlled the city until 1458. CrimsonAssassin- "I have special eyes" 00:46, September 12, 2013 (UTC)
 * Dang. I'll make it a point to speed that up XD.
 * Scraw 00:48, September 12, 2013 (UTC)
 * I'd advise against that ;) CrimsonAssassin- "I have special eyes" 00:52, September 12, 2013 (UTC)

In fact, you cannot play as the Ottomans if we start in 1350 because OH HEY THEY DIDN'T EXIST YET.

Othman I, the founder of the Ottoman Empire (ish, until 1420 it was disorganized and unimportant) was born in 1356 so ATL wouldn't be born at all; thus no Ottoman Empire would exist.

But I recommend we start in 1400 anyway because that was around the founding of the Kalmar Union.

The one and only Guns, who is too lazy to go to source mod and type out his real sig. (talk) 23:21, September 11, 2013 (UTC)

I think 1400 is a good year to start.

<span style="-webkit-border-radius: 1px 1px;-moz-border-radius: 1px / 1px;-webkit-box-shadow: 1px 1px 1px rgba(0,0,0,0.6);background-image:-webkit-repeating-radial-gradient(#FFFFFF 50%,#FFFFFF 50%);background:-moz-repeating-radial-gradient(#FFD700 50%,#000000 50%));"><span style="border:1px solid #000000;padding-bottom:1px;padding-top:1px;-webkit-border-radius: 1px 1px;-moz-border-radius: 1px / 1px;-webkit-box-shadow: 1px 1px 1px rgba(0,0,0,0.6);background-image:-webkit-repeating-radial-gradient(ellipse,#1C39BB 45%,#120A8F 50%);background:-moz-repeating-radial-gradient(ellipse,#CCCCFF 45%,#000000 50%));border-top-left-radius:500px 400px;border-bottom-left-radius:500px 400px">               <span style="background-image:-webkit-gradient(linear, right top, left top, from(#000000), to(#FFFFFF)); -webkit-border-radius: 36px 12px; -moz-border-radius: 36px / 12px; -webkit-box-shadow: 0 0 5px 5px #000000; border:2px double #E5E4E2 border-radius:5px; border-bottom-right-radius:100px 90px; border-top-right-radius:100px 90px; color:#FFFFFF"> <font color="#FF033E" face="Courier">"Fear the power   <font color="#FF033E" face="Courier" title="Bvlog"> of the Dark Side of the Force."  23:26, September 11, 2013 (UTC)

CORRECTION!!!! I WILL BE PERSIA!!!!!!! Either 1350 or 1400 ill still be a powerhouse :) DS|Im Coocoo for Cocoa Puffs!! 17:23, September 12, 2013 (UTC)

So as far as I can tell, Kogasa and Crim like 1400, Collie likes 1350, Scan has no opinion, and neither AP nor Lurk have posted in, wow, months now. Persia. Yeah, umm, no. That was 1500s. At this point, Persia was really weak. It was the Safavids who made Persia great again, in 1501. At this point you have a disorganized state recovering from the Ilkhanate. Still, it could be powerful. Have fun, Dean. The one and only Guns, who is too lazy to go to source mod and type out his real sig. (talk) 19:11, September 12, 2013 (UTC)


 * Really.Persia in 1350 will be divided among the Jalayrid, Chupanid, Muzaffarid, Hazaraspid, Baduspanid, Bavanid, Mihrabanid, Injuid and Kartid dynasties's domains, aside of the Gilite, Sarbadar and Shabankara kingdoms.don't forget Shirvan as well.It makes for a more interesting scenario, while in 1400 you'll have the Timurids in their peak.--Collie Kaltenbrunner (talk) 20:54, September 12, 2013 (UTC)
 * Care to explain yourself in why you were deleting my reply?--Collie Kaltenbrunner (talk) 07:01, September 13, 2013 (UTC)
 * Sorry, Collie. Not intentional. The one and only Guns, who is too lazy to go to source mod and type out his real sig. (talk) 13:33, September 14, 2013 (UTC)

If Airlines doesn't takes Byzantium i would like to have it, but I call dibs on France or Spain. Sine dei gloriem (talk) 01:12, September 13, 2013 (UTC)

Spain is not a country. Byzantium was never the name of the Eastern Roman Empire, which was as good as dead. Iberia already houses Portugal and Aragon, so unless you want to be sandwiched in by them, I suggest France.

<span style="-webkit-border-radius: 1px 1px;-moz-border-radius: 1px / 1px;-webkit-box-shadow: 1px 1px 1px rgba(0,0,0,0.6);background-image:-webkit-repeating-radial-gradient(#FFFFFF 50%,#FFFFFF 50%);background:-moz-repeating-radial-gradient(#FFD700 50%,#000000 50%));"><span style="border:1px solid #000000;padding-bottom:1px;padding-top:1px;-webkit-border-radius: 1px 1px;-moz-border-radius: 1px / 1px;-webkit-box-shadow: 1px 1px 1px rgba(0,0,0,0.6);background-image:-webkit-repeating-radial-gradient(ellipse,#1C39BB 45%,#120A8F 50%);background:-moz-repeating-radial-gradient(ellipse,#CCCCFF 45%,#000000 50%));border-top-left-radius:500px 400px;border-bottom-left-radius:500px 400px">               <span style="background-image:-webkit-gradient(linear, right top, left top, from(#000000), to(#FFFFFF)); -webkit-border-radius: 36px 12px; -moz-border-radius: 36px / 12px; -webkit-box-shadow: 0 0 5px 5px #000000; border:2px double #E5E4E2 border-radius:5px; border-bottom-right-radius:100px 90px; border-top-right-radius:100px 90px; color:#FFFFFF"> <font color="#FF033E" face="Courier">"Fear the power   <font color="#FF033E" face="Courier" title="Bvlog"> of the Dark Side of the Force."  01:16, September 13, 2013 (UTC)
 * And don't forget Navarra.--Collie Kaltenbrunner (talk) 07:01, September 13, 2013 (UTC)
 * OH Please start in 1400, oh please oh please :) Ill be a good Perisa XD Also, i can finally establish that Middle Eastern Empire i wanted to make in PM2 without the threat of Europe crusading me lol. And i promise NO CALIPHATE lol, im gonna be an Empire, pure and simple, and once i reahc my desired borders, which actually arent that insane, ill stop expanding and focus completley on staying on peaceful relations with everyone and get rich from trade, might establish a colony or two in East Afirca for trading bases, but otherwise stay totally focused on the homeland. DS|Im Coocoo for Cocoa Puffs!! 14:24, September 13, 2013 (UTC)
 * PS: Am i Muslim at this time?


 * So, I am interested (obviously) in joining PM3 when it comes out. I am just considering nations to be. I enjoy European history from 1400-1800 the most, with Western History from 2000 BC-Present being interesting, also. I was thinking of being part of the HRE (Saxony?) or the Teutonic Order. Any other suggestions? Thanks,  (PS. I am also thinking Burgundy, but want to hear your thoughts)


 * I would also like to claim the Romans, but seeing as how two people claimed that already, I doubt I would get it. If not,ll>Kunarian TALK 06:54, July 17, 2013 (UTC)

Based on precedence, I'd say no, as I've conquered both orange and red territories. I'm in orange, so realistically speaking, I only got red land but no red rights. So I'm pretty sure the answer is that you will not advance.

21:06, July 22, 2013 (UTC)

I just want to propose one change. I think orange should enter Stage 6 in 1900, and Stage 5 in 1865.

18:34, August 17, 2013 (UTC)

Guys i think France Should as of 1820 - 1830 be entering the Red stage, after all the Industrialization process as a player nation has grown eversince 1720 if not earlier, and france has enough resources from their relative states ( Such as the colonies or Vassals). Sine dei gloriem (talk) 03:55, September 8, 2013 (UTC)

Shouldn't france be entering red, or have some patches of land in Red ?. Sine dei gloriem (talk) 00:53, September 24, 2013 (UTC)

Th Selk'nam are shown here in my map color not with an updated industry score (doubt I've passed most European powers for industrialization). Am I still sky blue or should I move forward? Commandante Lemming (talk) 02:47, September 26, 2013 (UTC)

Special NPC bonus nations
Hey so these nations are special Non Player Countries because these nations used to be part of a powerful empire which ruled lots of the world, hence they are stronger than normal nations.

This bonus is worked out like the normal NPC bonus; where in every very year that a NPC nation is not at war or expanding, or having a disaster, it will build up one of the three development areas (military, infrastructure and economy). The number of total buildups will be divided into the three categories as evenly as possible, with preference going infrastructure>economy>military. With their final score will be divided by two then rounded to the nearest whole. However the special NPC bonus doesn't divide by two, so it is just the number of total buildups.

E.g. If a nation existed for 15 years, or spent 15 turns not doing anything, this would mean that the infrastructure, military and the economy were updated in five turns each. The NPC nation would receive fifteen points of bonus, five for each department (economy, infrastructure and military).

The nations with this special NPC bonus are as follows:

The Middle East Africa
 * The Republic of Turkistan
 * The Sultanate of Baghdad
 * The Sultanate of Kuwait
 * The Kingdom of Dimurat
 * Mangystau
 * Ha'il
 * Buraydah
 * Khafji
 * Saudi Arabia
 * Ar Rayn
 * The Arabian Federation
 * Oman
 * The Emirate of Shaybah
 * The Caliphate of Hejaz
 * Najran
 * The Emirate of San'a
 * Aden
 * Hadhramaut
 * Salalah
 * Socotra
 * The East African Federation
 * Sukuma
 * The Kingdom of Nyamwezi
 * Mbeya

Protectorate rules
Seeing how some nations are getting protectorates I think we should make the rules about them clear. As far as I'm concerned they aren't as good as vassals so they should be treated as NPCs in the algorithm, but the protecting nation should always help out their protectorate in any wars they are in and if you don't then the protectorate treaties will end as you failed to protect them.

Extending there treatment as NPCs you can't post turns for them either, and they can only give +1 to algorithm strength scores as (P) and they must be close to where the war is happening otherwise they don't get involved (e.g. Normandy's Mogadishu protectorate can't send aid to Normandy's wars in Europe).Protectorates get a -3 algorithm penalty in all wars due to their reliance on their protector.

They are shown in the colour of the protecting nation on the map so players know if other PNs are protecting them, and also you can only have a maximum of 5 protectorates. If you have 3 or more protectorates you also get a war algorithm penalty of -2 for having protectorates as your military will be stretched trying to protect these far off nations. It'll take a 4 year minimum to establish a protectorate too. You can also then peacefully turn your protectorate into a vassal or puppet after 15 years of that nation being your protectorate. You can do it sooner than 15 years if you like but an algorithm will be needed.

Thoughts on these new rules? <font color="#000000">VonGlusenburg (talk to Von!) 18:24, July 6, 2013 (UTC)

I think that this is good enough.--Collie Kaltenbrunner (talk) 06:51, July 7, 2013 (UTC)

Okay and also they should expand like NPCs since players can't post for them and because the protectorate is weak relying on another nation for protection.

I'll add this stuff to the rules page in a few days to give other people a chance to comment on these new rules. <font color="#000000">VonGlusenburg (talk to Von!) 21:30, July 7, 2013 (UTC)

PMIII Proposal
Hey all. PMII is in its last 200 turns and boy has it been a ride. I have a few ideas I wish to share for PMIII. Anyone else is free to add their own ideas so long as you sign after them.
 * 1) Earlier start time. We have had 1420 and 1450. I think its time to unwind to 1350 for some more interesting situations worldwide. Scandinator (talk)
 * 2) A slight rewrite of the algorithm to include national unity (or something similar). Scandinator (talk)
 * 3) Debuffs for all areas of the world until they fulfill a set of requirements. Scandinator (talk)
 * 4) Rethink industrialization concept. It was good on paper, but was rather sloppy in its execution. Some prior forethought into the matter to avoid the confusion and debate in the next game would be nice. Vivaporius (talk)
 * 5) Improve and refine colonization concept for PMIII. While I agree that it rather water-tight as of now, I think some further discussion on the matter as to how to improve it would be a significant development for the future game. Vivaporius (talk)
 * 6) Allow further technological advances. Of course the system now is good, but if nations in Asia become world powers, the progress of science is a whole load faster, especially if the government emphasis is on the subject. Otherwise we will be stuck with laptops in 2013, not building terraforming stations over Venus. ;) [[Image:1.png|23px]] Imp (Say Hi?!) 06:51, September 10, 2013 (UTC)
 * 7) Firm (but hopefully not restrictive) rules on expansion and colonization for tribal nations (Selk'nam, Koori, etc.) and non-OTL powers (Ethiopia, Maya, etc.). Address in advance whather or not European and Asian nations get special privileges to avoid recriminations and arguments over whether non-European powers are to be considered ASB. This seemingly has been a major problem in this game, with certain players demanding that African/American/Oceanian powers be allowed to rise. and some insisting that European powers should not be subject to off-continent attack, or that they should always behave as superiors when relating to non-Europeans. Commandante Lemming (talk) 17:40, September 10, 2013 (UTC)
 * 8) I would like for there to be at least one mod who does not play as a nation, who would be completely unbiased. They handle the algorithms where one or more mods are in the conflict, so there's no way that it could swing one way or another because of what user is playing. CourageousLife (talk) 20:29, September 10, 2013 (UTC)
 * 9) Expansion from I would like to call something Mongol, maybe the Golden Horde.
 * Monster Pumpkin (talk) 19:39, September 13, 2013 (UTC)


 * Lx may take Golden Horde but you could probably have some un with split-off in Siberia - that or unite a tribe like the Buryats or Yakuts in Siberia. I think I've setttled that I'm playing as the Nivkh people on the Amur River so OTL Russia could be crowded. (which I like) Commandante Lemming (talk) 20:16, September 13, 2013 (UTC)

Scandinator

 * 1) Earlier start time would mean a new scenario. 1350 means Europe is at its lowest point while the Middle East is collapsing. 1400 means the Middle East has collapsed while Europe is at its most fractured. Both present interesting options for gameplay and opening moves.
 * 2) National Unity is important as if there are multiple ethnic and cultural groups unintegrated into the nation then there will be dissent and rebellion within your nation at peace and at war. However this will be hard to implement and maintain.
 * 3) Debuffs. The regions and nations of the world were good and bad at various areas. Certain areas fielded excellent cavalry, others had immense navies while others had archers and infantry beyond compare. Each area was ahead in its own field but behind in others; until you manage to work around it then you are weaker in a certain way in the algorithm or in another way.
 * 4) I fully support a rework of the industrialisation chart and implementation. Stricter guidelines and harsher penalities for those that step out of plausibility are also required. Some of the steps on the chart were only achievable near the end and it was obivous that some people were doing things just for the table and hadn't done research into what was possible or not.
 * 5) A rework of the colonisation system is also required. We have tiny nations like Cyprus with large colonial empires. True there were cases of such in OTL but they were single territories and/or scattered islands (Belgium and Holland). Im unsure about how to go about this though...
 * 6) Technological Advancement beyond OTL is a good point and should be implemented although carefully monitored to avoid exploitation.
 * 7) Firm rules on continental expansion are required especially for tribal nations. Mods should be very strict with the original size of the nation. In addition, continental expansion rates should be of a proportional value to the main nation instead of the current one value fits all.
 * 8) The idea for a neutral mod is good but implausible. They would soon lose interest.
 * 9) Im not quite sure what Scraw means, but currently all black land is the same, it completely ignores terrain. I believe that expansion in deserts, mountains and other difficult terrain should be slower while coastal and river expansion should be faster and easier.
 * 10) An algorithm rework on that scale will be open for corruption and misuse. Population covers for that at the moment
 * 11) Nonononononono.

Kogasa

 * 1) To be honest I liked it better starting around the 1400s. I think the next game should start in 1400.
 * 2) That can possibly work.
 * 3) I personally like to think that any nation I play, unless I mention something different, goes on similar to OTL. That includes industrial.
 * 4) I agree. What Scan said above.
 * 5) I think colonisation is fine the way it is now. But that's just me.
 * 6) I fully agree with this one. Why be limited to technology OTL when we have industrialisation earlier than OTL?
 * 7) Again, what Scan said.
 * 8) It would be difficult. I disagree.
 * 9) Once again, what Scan said. Actually now thinking about it, my expansion on Kamchatka was limited due to terrain, and I couldn't expand the full 10000 sq km maximum (it was cut to 5000 sq km maximum). But I guess that's a different story.
 * 10) No. I agree with Scan above on this issue.
 * No.

CrimsonAssassin

 * 1) It's Principia Moderni (beginning of the modern) for a reason. 1400 is a good start date.
 * 2) This is going to be a pain to work in. I remember trying to integrate stability into algorithms in PMI not going very well.
 * 3) This could be interesting, but I don't think it should be a debuff. I think we should reward players for completing goals (like Italy unifying or Britain having a huge empire)
 * 4) This
 * 5) What would really help is a mapmaker for Europe and one for Asia.
 * 6) This
 * 7) What Scan said, but also we shouldn't give non-European powers special treatment.
 * 8) He/she would lose interest quickly
 * 9) What Scan said
 * 10) From what I've seen, most people who aren't in PM say that they haven't joined because they think it's too late. It's never too late, of course, but with a rule like this, new players would quickly be overwhelmed. Even with an NPC bonus, it'd be a pain.
 * No

Collie Kaltenbrunner

 * 1) Both 1350 and 1400 are good start dates.But i favour personally 1350.
 * 2) This is a good idea, but wouldn't it be difficult to implement?
 * 3) What is that?
 * 4) I agree with Scan again.
 * 5) I guess so.
 * 6) We should be careful with that.
 * 7) I agree with Scan.
 * No, it wouldn't work.for instance, in PMI, by the 1950's, i basically had lost all interest in the game when the expansion possibilities had ended, and the only thing keeping me from leaving was the fact that i still needed to make the maps, and even then, my posts became strictly copy-pasting.Okay, this might not be the best example, but you get the point.Why somebody would try to moderate a game that he has no involvement on?
 * 1) I agree with Scan again.Expansion through the Appalachians and the Sahara, for example, really should be more difficult.Also, inland Africa and Australia, up to a point.
 * 2) I will go with Scan's opinion.
 * 3) And the scale of posts would double, since we would have two years in one post.For some, nothing would change, as their posts are already copy-pasting, but some would be stuck with walls of text.And then we would have to rework the algorythm and the colonial system, just for starters.Your idea had good intentions, but it is simply impracticable.

:The Semi-Official Claims for PM3
In the following format claim your nation in PM3

Nation Name: Your signature

Europe
**Naples <span style="-webkit-border-radius: 1px 1px;-moz-border-radius: 1px / 1px;-webkit-box-shadow: 1px 1px 1px rgba(0,0,0,0.6);background-image:-webkit-repeating-radial-gradient(#FFFFFF 50%,#FFFFFF 50%);background:-moz-repeating-radial-gradient(#FFD700 50%,#000000 50%));"><span style="border:1px solid #000000;padding-bottom:1px;padding-top:1px;-webkit-border-radius: 1px 1px;-moz-border-radius: 1px / 1px;-webkit-box-shadow: 1px 1px 1px rgba(0,0,0,0.6);background-image:-webkit-repeating-radial-gradient(ellipse,#080808 45%,#000000 50%);background:-moz-repeating-radial-gradient(ellipse,#000000 45%,#202020 50%));border-top-left-radius:500px 400px;border-bottom-left-radius:500px 400px">               <span style="background-image:-webkit-gradient(linear, right top, left top, from(#ffffff), to(#ffffff)); -webkit-border-radius: 36px 12px; -moz-border-radius: 36px / 12px; -webkit-box-shadow: 0 0 5px 5px #ff0000; border:2px double #E5E4E2 border-radius:5px; border-bottom-right-radius:100px 90px; border-top-right-radius:100px 90px; color:#FFFFFF"> <font color=maroon face="Helvetica">"I can feel your anger.   <font color="#ff0000" face="Helvetica" title="Blog"> It gives you focus...makes you stronger." **Navarre <span style="-webkit-border-radius: 1px 1px;-moz-border-radius: 1px / 1px;-webkit-box-shadow: 1px 1px 1px rgba(0,0,0,0.6);background-image:-webkit-repeating-radial-gradient(#FFFFFF 50%,#FFFFFF 50%);background:-moz-repeating-radial-gradient(#FFD700 50%,#000000 50%));"><span style="border:1px solid #000000;padding-bottom:1px;padding-top:1px;-webkit-border-radius: 1px 1px;-moz-border-radius: 1px / 1px;-webkit-box-shadow: 1px 1px 1px rgba(0,0,0,0.6);background-image:-webkit-repeating-radial-gradient(ellipse,#080808 45%,#000000 50%);background:-moz-repeating-radial-gradient(ellipse,#000000 45%,#202020 50%));border-top-left-radius:500px 400px;border-bottom-left-radius:500px 400px">               <span style="background-image:-webkit-gradient(linear, right top, left top, from(#ffffff), to(#ffffff)); -webkit-border-radius: 36px 12px; -moz-border-radius: 36px / 12px; -webkit-box-shadow: 0 0 5px 5px #ff0000; border:2px double #E5E4E2 border-radius:5px; border-bottom-right-radius:100px 90px; border-top-right-radius:100px 90px; color:#FFFFFF"> <font color=maroon face="Helvetica">"I can feel your anger.   <font color="#ff0000" face="Helvetica" title="Blog"> It gives you focus...makes you stronger." Grand Duchy of Wallachia: Morgan Freeman (talk)
 * Roman Empire (Byzantines): Monster Pumpkin (talk) 00:33, October 14, 2013 (UTC)
 * England: I claimed England first! Trust Me, I'm The Doctor (talk) 17:28, September 18, 2013 (UTC)
 * Florence: CrimsonAssassin- "I have special eyes" 19:44, September 13, 2013 (UTC)
 * Kingdom of Bohemia:
 * Moravia --
 * Silesia --
 * Lusatia --
 * Brandenburg --   This is UglyTurtle, Signing off.
 * Luxembourg --
 * Wettin lands (Saxony-Meissen, Thuringia, Saxe-Wittenberg) - Fed (talk) 04:41, December 3, 2013 (UTC)
 * Russians(for now)-Lx (leave me a message) 19:59, September 13, 2013 (UTC)
 * Crown of Aragon ~ Scraw 21:28, September 13, 2013 (UTC)
 * Sicily <span style="-webkit-border-radius: 1px 1px;-moz-border-radius: 1px / 1px;-webkit-box-shadow: 1px 1px 1px rgba(0,0,0,0.6);background-image:-webkit-repeating-radial-gradient(#FFFFFF 50%,#FFFFFF 50%);background:-moz-repeating-radial-gradient(#FFD700 50%,#000000 50%));"><span style="border:1px solid #000000;padding-bottom:1px;padding-top:1px;-webkit-border-radius: 1px 1px;-moz-border-radius: 1px / 1px;-webkit-box-shadow: 1px 1px 1px rgba(0,0,0,0.6);background-image:-webkit-repeating-radial-gradient(ellipse,#080808 45%,#000000 50%);background:-moz-repeating-radial-gradient(ellipse,#000000 45%,#202020 50%));border-top-left-radius:500px 400px;border-bottom-left-radius:500px 400px">           [[Image:Regen Seal.png|15px|border|link=User:Scrawland Scribblescratch]]    <span style="background-image:-webkit-gradient(linear, right top, left top, from(#ffffff), to(#ffffff)); -webkit-border-radius: 36px 12px; -moz-border-radius: 36px / 12px; -webkit-box-shadow: 0 0 5px 5px #ff0000; border:2px double #E5E4E2 border-radius:5px; border-bottom-right-radius:100px 90px; border-top-right-radius:100px 90px; color:#FFFFFF"> <font color=maroon face="Helvetica">"I can feel your anger.   <font color="#ff0000" face="Helvetica" title="Blog"> It gives you focus...makes you stronger."
 * Sorry, but, since the game starts in 1400, Navarra and Naples are nowhere near being under your control.
 * Portugal: --Collie Kaltenbrunner (talk) 21:34, September 13, 2013 (UTC)
 * Castile : -#LivinLikeFeudal (talk) 20:32, October 18, 2013 (UTC)
 * Emirate of Granada(Vassal to Castile): The Unchallenged Conqueror #FP (Talk to Me) 21:23, December 26, 2013 (UTC)
 * If we start in 1400, the Kalmar Union. If in 1350, Denmark.
 * France:Sine dei gloriem (talk) 00:26, September 15, 2013 (UTC)
 * Teutonic Order: Yank 22:50, September 16, 2013 (UTC)
 * Republic of Genoa:Flag of Nazi Austria (No Belgium).svgCancom2.jpgian, Hail Marius (Play With Oct!)Cancom2.jpgFlag of Nazi Austria (No Belgium).svg 02:07, September 22, 2013 (UTC)
 * Hungary: (maybe) [[Image:1.png|23px]] Imp (Say Hi?!) 19:48, September 23, 2013 (UTC)
 * Croatia (PU): [[Image:1.png|23px]] Imp (Say Hi?!) 17:37, October 25, 2013 (UTC)
 * Lordship of Jever : Callumthered (talk) 22:34, October 1, 2013 (UTC) Scratch that. Instead, I wish to play as:
 * County of Oldenburg Callumthered (talk) 04:12, November 22, 2013 (UTC)
 * Papal State:
 * Venice: Kunarian TALK 12:10, November 29, 2013 (UTC)
 * Holland: nk
 * Austria - Mscoree (talk) 00:16, December 11, 2013 (UTC) (If I have a chance to play. May also play as Ordensstaat if Yank lets me.)
 * Bavaria (Electorate of Bavaria) - --Cookiedamage (talk) 22:30, December 15, 2013 (UTC)
 * Poland-Lithuania Mr YOLO (talk) 17:14, December 25, 2013 (UTC)
 * I originally had dibs,

Africa

 * Benin - Flag of the Hurian Federation.png Vivaporius: "I don't need a slogan" 20:26, September 13, 2013 (UTC)
 * Mamluk Sultanate of Egypt - LightningLynx89

Asia

 * Ashikaga Shogunate/Japan - Kogasa
 * China - Scandinator (talk)
 * Empire of Trebizond:
 * Nivkh People (Amur River area): Commandante Lemming (talk) 22:18, September 16, 2013 (UTC)
 * if I can't get back England( someone removed my claim) then I will take Nippon( Japan)Trust Me, I'm The Doctor (talk) (I already claimed Japan though. -Kogasa)
 * Vijarayana empire:  ShadowKnights1234
 * Korea: Daeseunglim (talk)
 * Sultanate of Bengal: Eiplec - ಠ_ಠ (talk)

Middle East

 * Perisa/Timurids: DS|The Rainbow Machete 19:38, September 13, 2013 (UTC)
 * Yemen: Willster22 (User talk:Willster22) 03:42, October 11, 2013 (UTC)

Oceania/Australia

 * Aborigines

North America

 * Mayans/Aztecs (depending on start date) - CourageousLife (talk) 02:37, September 15, 2013 (UTC)
 * Regardless of start date, the Aztec Triple Alliance wouldn't have formed yet, unless you want to start really small.
 * ​Would it be feasable for me to wait to enter the game until the Aztec Triple Alliance forms in 1428? CourageousLife (talk) 21:10, November 15, 2013 (UTC)
 * Probably, but you could start as Tenochtitlán and slowly form the triple alliance.
 * Yeah. I'll follow history and form the alliance. CourageousLife (talk) 00:31, December 23, 2013 (UTC)

PMIII Changes

 * 1) The start will be in 1400. I advise no-one to take the Golden Horde or the Empire of Timur the Lame. They will all be broken-up to smaller states as the Golden Horde is too disunified and the Timur Empire, too reliant on Timur himself for stability.
 * 2) In the light of national unity being ignored in PMII. It will be integrated with expansion.
 * 3) There will also be special algorithm modifiers to work for. Examples include the unifications of France, Iberia, Italy, UK, Germany, Scandinavia, Russia, India, etc. With each of those worth about 1-5 points while you hold it. And the control of key trade routes and points, like the Oresund, Gibraltar, Malacca, Aden, Venice, Bombay, Hangshou. etc. With each trade area worth an extra 1 or 2 points.
 * 4) The industrialization chart will be reworked and any nation that attempts to get the points ahead of time or without an appropriate reason will be heavily penalized.
 * 5) The colonial system will be reworked based on distance, security, and naval and economic strength.
 * 6) Technology will be allowed to advance past OTL but will be heavily monitored. The Industrial Era will start in 1700 like PMII but depending on which nation's get it sooner, then the process can be accelerated and we might need Mars and Moon maps.
 * 7) Tribal nations will start as that. One tribe, no larger than 4 px in areas with good land and about 100 in desert and badlands. Expansion from that will be at either 1% of current size or 1px, which ever is bigger. (Which will also be the rate of land expansion for all countries in their home continent.) You can convince other tribes to join you which would take several years. Thanks to this rule, nations like the Koori Union will be unable to form and expansion will be based on your current size and not the one size fits all policy that PMII has. I believe it effectively shows the challenges that tribes face in attempting to modernize and catch up from hunter-gatherer societies to a centralized or feudalized kingdom and nation.
 * 8) Terrain will be implemented on the map for colonial expansion.
 * 9) Start time will be changed back to 00:00 UTC to prevent confusion.

Discussion
All these points seem pretty good. Imp (Say Hi?!) 11:56, September 23, 2013 (UTC)

I still prefer 1350.We should do a votation among the mods for that, as there are still some mods (Yank) who haven't expressed if they prefer 1350 and 1400.Scan is fine with either of them, and Kogasa and Crim prefer 1400.for me, 1350 is a more interesting scenario, and prevents us from dealing with Dean as the Timurids, or something like that.The rest sound like good ideas.But i think that if we implement terrain on the actual map, mapmaking will be much more difficult.terrain modifiers are important, alright, but there must be another way of implementing those without complicating the mapmaking process.And i think that technology advance should not be too far from OTL, otherwise PMIII will eventually fall into the ASB category, and this means that the game is a failure, no matter how long it lasts.I remember Imperial Europe II.that's the best example of that.--Collie Kaltenbrunner (talk) 15:49, September 23, 2013 (UTC)

I would like too it too start in 1350 and if i'm allowed to say, for national unity you should give some sort of bonus, for a period longer that 15 years. that or add a score per the times a nation is bigger in size than the nation they are fighting. Sine dei gloriem (talk) 16:42, September 23, 2013 (UTC)


 * I still think it should be 1400. 1350 isn't really beginning of anything new. The game is meant to start right after the end of the black death, and I think 1350 will lose that. :P [[Image:1.png|23px]] Imp (Say Hi?!) 17:03, September 23, 2013 (UTC)


 * I concur with Imp, 1350 is a mess, I personally feel 1400 serves better.Trust Me, I'm The Doctor (talk) 17:21, September 23, 2013 (UTC)
 * Agreed.
 * <span style="-webkit-border-radius: 1px 1px;-moz-border-radius: 1px / 1px;-webkit-box-shadow: 1px 1px 1px rgba(0,0,0,0.6);background-image:-webkit-repeating-radial-gradient(#FFFFFF 50%,#FFFFFF 50%);background:-moz-repeating-radial-gradient(#FFD700 50%,#000000 50%));"><span style="border:1px solid #000000;padding-bottom:1px;padding-top:1px;-webkit-border-radius: 1px 1px;-moz-border-radius: 1px / 1px;-webkit-box-shadow: 1px 1px 1px rgba(0,0,0,0.6);background-image:-webkit-repeating-radial-gradient(ellipse,#1C39BB 45%,#120A8F 50%);background:-moz-repeating-radial-gradient(ellipse,#CCCCFF 45%,#000000 50%));border-top-left-radius:500px 400px;border-bottom-left-radius:500px 400px">           [[Image:Regen Flag.png|25px|link=User:Scrawland Scribblescratch]]    <span style="background-image:-webkit-gradient(linear, right top, left top, from(#000000), to(#FFFFFF)); -webkit-border-radius: 36px 12px; -moz-border-radius: 36px / 12px; -webkit-box-shadow: 0 0 5px 5px #000000; border:2px double #E5E4E2 border-radius:5px; border-bottom-right-radius:100px 90px; border-top-right-radius:100px 90px; color:#FFFFFF"> <font color="#FF033E" face="Courier">"Fear the power   <font color="#FF033E" face="Courier" title="Bvlog"> of the Dark Side of the Force."  21:08, September 24, 2013 (UTC)

I actually agree with firmer tribal rules, but I have to say this suggestion is a bit restrictive for those of us that play that game. I really don't think the goal should be to PREVENT something like the Koori Union from forming but rather to force it to take time and Normal steps toward civilization. For instance, if Hail had started building hte Koori in 1400 with the goal of making them a standalone civilization by 1700, I think that should be achievable. A lot of us play with the express goal of forcing a major flip in the progress of history - that shouldn't be impossible, it should just take a lot of time and patience. As an addendum, not all "tribes" are created equal. The group I plan on playing in PM3 is significantly more advanced than the Selk'nam when I started and could eaily be made more powerful with just a few tweaks to the Progress of neighboring China and Manchuria. If the goal is to force the game to flow along the OTL timeline, what's the point? Commandante Lemming (talk) 19:31, September 23, 2013 (UTC)

And is nobody going to comment on my other suggestions, or: if we implement terrain on the actual map, mapmaking will be much more difficult.terrain modifiers are important, alright, but there must be another way of implementing those without complicating the mapmaking process.And i think that technology advance should not be too far from OTL, otherwise PMIII will eventually fall into the ASB category, and this means that the game is a failure, no matter how long it lasts.I remember Imperial Europe II.that's the best example of that.--Collie Kaltenbrunner (talk) 20:19, September 26, 2013 (UTC)

I do think limits on tech are a good idea - some advancement ok but not sure how moon colonies would look - there are space-themed games for that. I don't do mapmaking so the use of terrain is up to y'all. Commandante Lemming (talk) 20:32, September 26, 2013 (UTC)

I'm against terrain, but we should have more rivers. Such as the Nile or the Mississippi.

<span style="-webkit-border-radius: 1px 1px;-moz-border-radius: 1px / 1px;-webkit-box-shadow: 1px 1px 1px rgba(0,0,0,0.6);background-image:-webkit-repeating-radial-gradient(#FFFFFF 50%,#FFFFFF 50%);background:-moz-repeating-radial-gradient(#FFD700 50%,#000000 50%));"><span style="border:1px solid #000000;padding-bottom:1px;padding-top:1px;-webkit-border-radius: 1px 1px;-moz-border-radius: 1px / 1px;-webkit-box-shadow: 1px 1px 1px rgba(0,0,0,0.6);background-image:-webkit-repeating-radial-gradient(ellipse,#080808 45%,#000000 50%);background:-moz-repeating-radial-gradient(ellipse,#CCCCFF 45%,#000000 50%));border-top-left-radius:500px 400px;border-bottom-left-radius:500px 400px">               <span style="background-image:-webkit-gradient(linear, right top, left top, from(#ffffff), to(#ffffff)); -webkit-border-radius: 36px 12px; -moz-border-radius: 36px / 12px; -webkit-box-shadow: 0 0 5px 5px #00ff00; border:2px double #E5E4E2 border-radius:5px; border-bottom-right-radius:100px 90px; border-top-right-radius:100px 90px; color:#FFFFFF"> <font color="#0000ff" face="Helvetica">"Fear leads to anger. <font color=navy face="Helvetica"> Anger leads to hate. Hate leads to    <font color="#000000" face="Helvetica" title="Blog"> suffering."  20:29, September 27, 2013 (UTC)
 * Again, the river exists, although actually showing them on the map would be very useful, As long as they are not used implausibly.--Collie Kaltenbrunner (talk) 09:47, September 28, 2013 (UTC)

I would like to suggest a relatively fundamental change to the forthcoming installment. The proposal is so that even though you may fail to post for a day or two, your nations' colonial growth and their economic/militaristic development will not simply stop.

This feature is, in and of itself, implausible. We must strive to make nations without players just as formidable as nations with players. I will also suggest more mod events. Also, we should get rid of infrastructure as a point on the algorithims, since it is rarely ever used. Thanks for listening, Sept. 28, 2013


 * No. Do you realize that if it was like that, inactivity would be non-existent (because if you can just not post, there is no way for inactivity to exist), and nobody would have any motivation to post regularly, just for starters?.--Collie Kaltenbrunner (talk) 09:45, September 28, 2013 (UTC)

I like these rules. I support them all. And I personally fancy the idea of Lunar, Venusian, and Martian maps for the third game. Would be nice to see a considerable realistic space race for the Inner Solar System for a change. Vivaporius: "I don't need a slogan" 04:16, November 22, 2013 (UTC)

Portugal
Total: 64 x 1.4 = 89.6 = 90
 * Location: 1
 * Tactical Advantage: 6
 * Strength: Portugal (L), Brasil (M), León (MV), Castille (MV), Aragon (MV), Granada (M), Barcelona (SV), Majorca (SV) = 18/8 = 2
 * Military Development: 10/3 = 3
 * Economy: 20/4 = 5
 * Infrastructure: 0
 * Expansion: 0
 * Motive: 3
 * Chance: 9
 * Edit Count: 5205
 * UTC Time: 21:00
 * 5205/2 x pi = 8175.99488
 * Nation Age: 0
 * Population: 27
 * Participation: +10
 * Recent Wars: 0

Post-A'Asabist nations
Total: 34
 * Location: 5
 * Tactical Advantage: 0
 * Strength: L = 8/18 = 0
 * Military Development: 6/2 = 3 = 3/10 = 0
 * Economy: 8/2 = 4 = 4/20 = 0
 * Infrastructure: 8/2 = 4
 * Expansion: 0
 * Motive: 10
 * Chance: 4
 * Nation Age: -5
 * Population: 6
 * Participation: +10
 * Recent Wars: 0

Result
90/124 -0.5 x 2 = 0.451612904

Portugal can get 45,1% of the post-A'Asabist states.

(45,1)*(1-1/(4)) = 33,82500

The war has to last two years in order to annex the state completely.

Rex / De Mor Tir
Hey all - saw the stuff about Rex. Just so you all know, I have a long standing deal with Rex that he can take over the Falkland Islands (De Mor Tir) as an independent nation if he gets blown off the map. If he doesn't get banned, I'm going to honor this deal with the condition that he stays my vassal and that he doesn't start any wars of expansion (he wouldn't have the military force to do so anyway). He's interested in playing this nation and interested in staying in the game, and seeing as he'd be essentially playing a nation on par with Hong Kong or Singapore in OTL, I think it's a good "training nation" for him regarding how to use  soft rather than hard power. I'll take responsibility for whatever he does, and part of the deal I offered him is that if things go South I will take him out myself.

Hopefully that's a significantly harsh deal to keep him in the game - I really do think he can be a positive contributor here.

Commandante Lemming (talk) 05:08, November 10, 2013 (UTC)

Just keep in mind that a lot of us are going to scrutinize on wether or not he proves that he can avoid his past mistakes. Yank 02:16, November 14, 2013 (UTC)

International Time Standardizing Conference
Ohai. Neu Berlin, inspired by Russia, has decided that the whole dangfangling world needs to standardize time. All heads of state or government are invited to meet in Neu Berlin and discuss how time should be organized globally. Neu Berlin proposes a +x -x system like Russia, but centered on another city. Neu Berlin proposes the cities of Venice, Novgorod, or Neu Berlin as the location of the zero hour.

22:15, November 12, 2013 (UTC)

The Selk'nam dissent, saying that none of the major powers should hold the zero hour - instead it is suggested that the zero hour be set at Jerusalem, a city acknowledged by all Christians as holy (and conveniently located between the Asian and European powers). Commandante Lemming (talk) 22:23, November 12, 2013 (UTC)

Neu Berlin, even though majority Christian, says this is offensive, since many nations, Neu Berlin included, have no state religion.

22:25, November 12, 2013 (UTC)

A Selk'nam delegate becomes incensed at this remark and declares that he wishes to "take the proposal from the honorable delegates from New Berlin, wad it into a tiny ball, and personally shove it up their blasphemous rear ends!" This delegate is immediately removed by his fellow Selk'nam negotiators, however the Selk'nam stand by the proposal that the zero hour should not be held by any major power's capital and should be located between major powers. Another proposal is made seeking to draw the line through the middle of the Atlantic as to give no-one primacy - with the main clock being located on the Portuguese Azorean islands. Commandante Lemming (talk) 22:32, November 12, 2013 (UTC)

Germany will not allow religion to interfer with matters of the state. Germany believes that the meridian should go through the city of Bristol.Trust Me, I'm The Doctor (talk) 00:48, November 13, 2013 (UTC)

<Guns pops out from alternate dimension>

<Slaps delegates like Lincoln>

Put it in the Ocean, fools!

<Pops back into OTL>

The Mighty Guns is too Glorious (or lazy) to go to source mode and type out his real sig  (Dammit, Guns!)  00:53, November 13, 2013 (UTC)

While the Mayans are fond of the idea of a zero-hour at Jerusalem, they agree that it should be seperate from religion, and shouldn't be any nation's capital. The Mayan delegates back the proposal of puting it in the Atlantic Ocean. CourageousLife (talk) 03:06, November 13, 2013 (UTC)

Neu Berlin would like to support the idea of a meridian in one of the two major oceans, but argues that this would make it complicated to tell time when at sea.

03:12, November 13, 2013 (UTC)

The Most Holy Emperor of Ethiopia, while intrigued by the idea of having the zero hour at Jerusalem, believes that it should be centered on Venice for the following reasons: Neu Berlin is not relevant enough to be granted that honor, Jerusalem is too closely associated with a single major religion, and finally, Venice is the dominate power of the globe and has thus earned that honor by right. We have made our position. Vivaporius: "I don't need a slogan" 03:36, November 13, 2013 (UTC)

The Saxon delegates believe that having the "Prime Meridian" in the middle of the Atlantic ocean is the best option. Contrary to what Neu Berlin says, this would not cause any problems. All that would be required is for one clock in every maritime city be synced with the time at that oceanic meridian. Ship's chronometers would then be synced to those clocks, therefore allowing them to determine their longtitude compared to the Atlantic Prime Meridian. Callumthered (talk) 03:43, November 13, 2013 (UTC)

China proposes that the meridian be defined by an important colonized island, such as Dongfang (Middle of the Pacific) or <whatever the hell Bermuda is right now> (Middle of the Atlantic)  CrimsonAssassin  - "I have special eyes"   03:45, November 13, 2013 (UTC)


 * The Portugese Azories have been proposed as well. CourageousLife (talk) 03:46, November 13, 2013 (UTC)

Shogun Rokkaku Takahito of Japan refuses to partake in the International Standardised Time, and will continue to have his nation continue its old practice of telling time. -Kogasa  2013 November 13, 05:53 (CET)

'''Japan has problems. '''

The Selk'nam point out that the Azores option would prevent any nation's mainland from holding the meridian (the only other landmass on the Prime Meridian would be Greenland). This would not be the case with Bermuda, in which case the Meridian would bisect Atlantia an run through New Berlin. The idea of a mid-Pacific meridian is questioned as there would be few nations close to the meridian given the ocean's size, and also the greater isolation of the Meridian island. Commandante Lemming (talk) 04:00, November 13, 2013 (UTC)

A delegate from the Attican Union is forcibly removed after reportedly telling a Japanese delegate to, "come off it, you stuck-up stubborn isolationist son of a she-guanaco!" :-P Commandante Lemming (talk) 04:04, November 13, 2013 (UTC)

The Saxon delegate agrees that the Azores is probably best, as it would allow an actual population to keeo the time. Callumthered (talk) 04:08, November 13, 2013 (UTC)

The Mayan delegates will support the Azores as the location of the zero-hour. CourageousLife (talk) 04:16, November 13, 2013 (UTC)

If such a comprimse is best, then so to do the delegates of His Imperial Majesty of Ethiopia agree with Azores as the location of the zero hour. Vivaporius: "I don't need a slogan" 05:39, November 13, 2013 (UTC)

The Hellenic Union's delegates agree to a meridian based in the Azores. Airlinesguy (talk) 07:24, November 13, 2013 (UTC)

The Italian Empire and all its associate territories declare that they will follow Venezia Mean Time. Scandinator (talk) 10:48, November 13, 2013 (UTC)

The Russian Delegation notices somehting, if you put the prime meridean anywhere, then you will always create an "International date line" exactly 180 degrees from the meridean...Russia suggests we set the In. Date line in such a way, as to make it more convenient and so nations do not need to change dates in the middle of their territory, in the middle of oceans for the Int date line is proposed.(Actualy, this is why GMT/UTC works so well, Since the date line ends up being between Russia and Alaska)-Lx (leave me a message) 13:56, November 13, 2013 (UTC)

Bavarian Germans agree that it is to be free from the mainland grasp of any world power, including Italia and Germany, and thus the Azores would fit better. Bavaria asks Japan to reconsider, as the timeline is in neutral areas and would v astly improve the speed of Japanese industry as well as the aid they recieve from European nations.Trust Me, I'm The Doctor (talk) 15:00, November 13, 2013 (UTC)

Selk'nam delegates note that the Azores would work well with the "date line concept" as the "date line would only run through the Russian Far East, and would pass between Austalis and the Maori Lands (it's only a one time zone offset from OTL, only country on a different side of the line is New Zealand). However, it is noted that the Azores Meridian could also be used as the dateline, caluculating "true midnight" rather than "true noon". Under the proposed "True Midnight" method, the date line would be at the Prime Meridian and time zones would be numbered from UTC +0 just East of the meridian to UTC +24 just West of the meridian (In OTL we separate the meridian and the dateline and number zones from UTC -12 to UTC +12). It is suggested that the "True Midnight" system would be a more efficient solution to the date line problem as it would merge the Prime Meridian and the dateline, and the dateline would then only run through the Azores and Greenland. Commandante Lemming (talk) 17:13, November 13, 2013 (UTC)

Empress Go-Shōtoku apologises for the Shogun's ignorance and will think about establishing a time zone for Japan soon. As for where to set the date line, absolute neutral areas work best. -Kogasa  2013 November 13, 21:31 (CET)

Russia proposes, ithat if we must move the prime meridian away from novgorod,  that we set the Prime Meridean at a neutral spot, the Bering Strait.-Lx (leave me a message) 21:06, November 13, 2013 (UTC)

The United Maharajya thinks it would be best to have the International Date Line run through the Azores. We are also interested in looking into the True Midnight method - but are currently leaning toward the true noon method. Imp (Say Hi?!) 21:19, November 13, 2013 (UTC)

Neu Berlin supports True Midnight through the Bering Strait.

22:08, November 13, 2013 (UTC)

Italia cites that the International Date Line will have sever consequences for the "Empire on which the sun never sets" with either option cutting between Atlantic trade or through the colony of Pacifico. Scandinator (talk) 00:38, November 14, 2013 (UTC)

Selk'nam delegates point out that the Bering Straight would be a very remote and inhospitable place to staff a universal clock and time service. The Asores on the other hand are remote but populated and have a good climate, which would make the "Time Islands" an attractive place to both live and visit.Commandante Lemming (talk) 03:32, November 14, 2013 (UTC)

Do colonies and vassals get a vote below, or just main nations? CourageousLife (talk) 03:38, November 14, 2013 (UTC)

@Lemming: Would cross through New Zealand, New Zealand is perfectly good as well.

'''@CL: Vassals, yes. Colonies, no.'''

03:44, November 14, 2013 (UTC)

Whichever location is chosen, that meridian becomes the Prime Meridian, or 0.

Azores - 28th Meridian West

Bering Straight - 169th Meridian West

CourageousLife (talk) 04:03, November 14, 2013 (UTC)

Well, it looks like we're going to have absolute midnight, so we won't have an IDL or anything.

04:14, November 14, 2013 (UTC)

True Midnight-

 * Bavaria
 * Neu Berlin
 * Russia and Asociates
 * Japan
 * Mayan Empire
 * Zapotec
 * Lakin
 * New Ceatl (Madura)
 * Selk'nam Haruwin
 * Yagich Rafael
 * Attican Union
 * Kanada
 * River Lakota
 * Saxony

True Noon-

 * Tojiko
 * Himekaidou
 * Kasodani
 * Greater Transcaucasia

Azores-

 * Bavaria
 * De Mor Tir
 * Italia
 * Siam
 * Malacca
 * Aymaras
 * Oaxaca
 * Selk'nam Haruwin
 * Yagich Rafael
 * Attican Union
 * Pure Science
 * Eternal Matter
 * Britannica
 * Carthage
 * Australis
 * Saxony
 * Hellenic Union
 * Cyrenaica
 * Athamos
 * Tamania
 * United Maharajya
 * Maharajyan Uttarshina

Bering Strait-

 * Neu Berlin
 * Tojiko
 * Himekaidou
 * Kasodani
 * Russia
 * Ukraine
 * Belorussia
 * Eesti
 * Baltica
 * Kazakhstan Federation
 * Japan
 * Mayan Empire
 * Zapotec
 * Lakin
 * New Ceatl (Madura)
 * Kanada
 * River Lakota
 * Greater Transcaucasia
 * China
 * Korea
 * Myanmar

1888
Once again, another round of voting.go to Olympic Games (Principia Moderni II Map Game).--Collie Kaltenbrunner (talk) 07:10, November 14, 2013 (UTC)

UER
Just an fyi, the UER is the bigger but kinder brother to the OTL USSR. And the breakup will be messier XD Scandinator (talk) 12:35, November 18, 2013 (UTC)

What. do we already have communists in 1890?--Collie Kaltenbrunner (talk) 14:33, November 18, 2013 (UTC)

Well, an equivalent, but yes. They're called Equalists. CrimsonAssassin - "I have special eyes"   14:43, November 18, 2013 (UTC)

Everything in this timeline has advanced further than OTL On a side note, Germany recently had a mild series of revolts, but the Eqaulists are not done, they ask for Eqaulist aid to overthrow the capitalistic and corrupt system.Trust Me, I'm The Doctor (talk) 18:44, November 18, 2013 (UTC)

Karl Marx (Founder of Communism) was in the mid-1800s, long before the 1890s. And Socialism existed even prior to that. So.

The Mighty Guns is too Glorious (or lazy) to go to source mode and type out his real sig  (Dammit, Guns!)  19:35, November 18, 2013 (UTC)
 * What Andr3w said below.there were no countries following communism in 1890 in OTL.--Collie Kaltenbrunner (talk) 20:22, November 18, 2013 (UTC)

I know this, I was referring to its popularity, which was not terribly noticed OTL until the Bolshevik revolutions.Trust Me, I'm The Doctor (talk) 19:55, November 18, 2013 (UTC)

Actually an earlier emergence of pseudo-communism could be fun. It wouldn't have been impossible (French revolution happened OTL and that was a similar radical strain) and the 1890s aren't that far ahead of the real life Russian revoluition - plus russia was not Europe's most advanced country at the time - so Italia being the venue makes it mor plausible. Plus we've already had Pure Science ideology take over several countries and that one is also based on Fascism and Communism (I should know since I invented it). Commandante Lemming (talk) 21:56, November 18, 2013 (UTC)

Is it possible that some of the republics of the UER would not like Equalism, and would then revolt from the UER?

22:06, November 18, 2013 (UTC)

Socialism was prevalent in many countries however.

The Mighty Guns is too Glorious (or lazy) to go to source mode and type out his real sig  (Dammit, Guns!)  22:07, November 18, 2013 (UTC)

But someone has to be Finland and the Baltic States and Transcaucasia, no?

22:16, November 18, 2013 (UTC)

Can someone post a list of the new Equalist nations? CourageousLife (talk) 22:21, November 18, 2013 (UTC)

Just everything green on the map since it's Italia right now Commandante Lemming (talk) 22:31, November 18, 2013 (UTC)

Nigeria & Mali
Total: 57 x 1.6 = 91
 * Location: +4
 * Tactical Advantage: +6
 * Strength: Nigeria (L), Mali (L) = 8/4 = +2
 * Military Development: 5/3 = +2
 * Economy: 5/3 = +2
 * Infrastructure: 0
 * Expansion: 0
 * Motive: +3 +3 = +6
 * Chance: +2
 * Edit Count: 3,900
 * UTC Time: 2*2*4*8=128
 * 3900/128*pi=95.72040116407031
 * Nation Age: +5
 * Population: +28 (55,000,000)
 * Participation: +10
 * Recent Wars: -10

Bonoman
Total: 39
 * Location: +5
 * Tactical Advantage: 0
 * Strength: Bonoman (L) = 4/8 = 0
 * Military Development: 3/5 = +1
 * Economy: 3/5 = +1
 * Infrastructure: 0
 * Expansion: 0
 * Motive: +10
 * Chance: 0
 * Nation Age: +5
 * Population: +7 (2,150,000)
 * Participation: +10
 * Recent Wars: 0

Result
Nigeria and Mali may claim 33.33% of Bonoman, toppling its government.
 * ((91/(39+91))*2)-1 = 0.4 = 40%
 * (40)*(1-1/(2*3)) = 33.3333333333333333 = 33.33%

Labelled Map/20th century plans
Just because this gets brought up every now and again - is there any way to do a new labelled map since our last one is like 200 years old? Is thre any way to crowdsource it to take work off mapmakers? I know my territories confuse people and a few others confuse me.

Also, since we're about to hit massive tech advancements and a lot of changes, should we have a discussion about who's planning what for the 20th Century. I know some of that is strategic and secret but I know some of us probably have plans that we don't mind putting out publicly because we know others will want to help - I know I have a few of those that I don't mind everyone knowing about becasue I think you will have fun with them. So is there anything I can help all of you with? (or fight you on to give you a straw man?). What are everyone's national priorities moving past 1900? I think we can probably have a better 20th Century if we have collaboration on events.

Commandante Lemming (talk) 17:29, November 21, 2013 (UTC)

Yes good god we need a new labelled map.

Also, no to that second part.

22:35, November 21, 2013 (UTC)

Yeah I figured not a lot of takers on that second one - I'm probably on of the few who doesn't mind having my plans out in the open because I'm not planning on conquering anything.

If anyone wants to know, my plan for the 20th Century is to become the OTL Macau and base my ecoomy on casinos and tourism - oh and I'll be antagonizing the enviro-movement with all the potential ecological problems I've been quietly seeding for the last 200 years...I would appreciate y'all's help on those.

I meant little stuff like that. But then again my goal in this game is to influence the timeline in entertaining and unexpected ways - I'm not aiming for great power status, I'm just aiming to drive global history in ways that seem odd. I'm not a power player so much as a mischief maker, and so-far i like my results :-)

Commandante Lemming (talk) 22:45, November 21, 2013 (UTC)

Science and technology for Germany. The goal is to become a sort of technocracy. Focus on qauntum physics versus relativity, invent stuff.Trust Me, I'm The Doctor (talk) 22:52, November 21, 2013 (UTC)

...I might contact you in a few years then - I'm eventually going to need help engineering a tunnel under the Strait of Magellan. Also I've got this great compound called Cocide that your chemical engineers would LOOOOOOOOVE. Commandante Lemming (talk) 23:06, November 21, 2013 (UTC)

I'll be building a bridge over the Bosporous, and that's as far as I know because I'm not that good at planning, lol. Airlinesguy (talk) 12:59, November 22, 2013 (UTC)

Andrew must make a Chunnel. I shall make nothing since no great feats of engineering were ever built in the Northern US. But I will create Hollywood and Las Vegas with other names.

23:19, November 22, 2013 (UTC)


 * Not if I bet it to you first in their OLT locations lol CourageousLife (talk) 15:44, November 23, 2013 (UTC)

Spread of Socialism Map
This is an early map showing Socialist and Eqaulist nations in verying shades of red.

obviously not completed, feel free to edit as needed.Trust Me, I'm The Doctor (talk) 16:48, November 22, 2013 (UTC)



You might want to change Selk'nam to a different color - I'm red on the main map but not Equalist. Also they're too small to see anyway but my two Praetorates are neither socialist nor equalist but the Pure Science ideology is kind of on that spectrum and they are allied to hte UER (Although the Apache Pure Science state is anti-equalist). Commandante Lemming (talk) 20:14, November 22, 2013 (UTC)

Actualy, Russia is I believe where socialism originated, and the Socialist Party controls the Duma with a 55% majority.-Lx (leave me a message) 20:26, November 22, 2013 (UTC)

Overly socialist world much?

23:16, November 22, 2013 (UTC)

Ethiopia (and perhaps Orissa) lean toward the far right in the sphere of fascism. To Scraw, the reason for so much red is that Ethiopia, Orissa, and Italia are included in the equalist and socialist spheres, and their territories are huge. henceforth all the red. They literally make up two-thirds of the spheres. Vivaporius: "I don't need a slogan" 00:13, November 23, 2013 (UTC)

I lumped fascism in with socialism as it is a kind, just on the far end of the spectrum.Trust Me, I'm The Doctor (talk) 02:51, November 23, 2013 (UTC)

Isn't China Equalist (or some other Communist substitute)? CourageousLife (talk) 15:42, November 23, 2013 (UTC)

There's a rebellion but there isn't an official Equalist government.Yank 20:05, November 23, 2013 (UTC)]

Yes, China is Equalist. CrimsonAssassin- "I have special eyes" 20:33, November 27, 2013 (UTC)

Leave of absence
I will be gone for at least this weekend, unable to post(probably). Scraw of Andrew, could one of you two please post Russia, Belorussia, Ukraina, Kazakhstan, Baltica and Eesti half working on military and half working on economy please?-Lx (leave me a message) 20:25, November 22, 2013 (UTC)

Same for me. Airlinesguy or Imp could you post that all of the republics quell the last rebellions and begin reworking the military?Scandinator (talk) 03:34, November 23, 2013 (UTC)

I am leaving this afternoon for holiday, could imp, Scraw or Callum post for me? Just copy paste, but remember to add a ATL version of Sherlock Holmes and Jules Verne.Trust Me, I'm The Doctor (talk) 13:08, November 25, 2013 (UTC)

I'm going out of town until Sunday. *Arnie voice* I'LL BE BACH! CourageousLife (talk) 16:12, November 27, 2013 (UTC)

1896 Prime Bishop Election
Members - Wales (Andrew?), De Mor Tir (Rex), Selk'nam Haruwin/Yagich Rafael/Attican Union (Lemming), Tojiko (Kogasa), Apache Empire (Grantzu), Lakin (Courageous).

'''Candidates: James Woldroff (Wales) Theologian Ptolmy (Apache). (Please add more if desired)'''

VOTES:

Andrew: James Woldroff

Rex:

Lemming: James Woldroff

Kogasa: Theologian Ptolmy

Grantzu: James Woldroff

Courageous: James Woldroff

Anti-Equalsim Conference
Okay so anybody that is intersted please put your countries name here:

What are your ideas to help stop the spread of Equalism?Grantzu (talk) 00:48, November 26, 2013 (UTC)

The Selk'nam are going to be very interested, as are Yagich Rafael - but the most interested are going to be the Attican Union who have recent experience with Pure Science dictatorship and see the neighboring Pure Science states drifting into the equalist orbit. That and the Praetorate of Pure science is massing a navy and nobody knows what for (including me as the author, by the way, so suggestions are welcome). Commandante Lemming (talk) 15:44, November 26, 2013 (UTC)

We should just support all anti-equalist rebels.

20:39, November 27, 2013 (UTC)

I'm fine as long as nobody tries to force equalism on my nations.--Collie Kaltenbrunner (talk) 07:11, November 28, 2013 (UTC)

I don't want that non-sense in my nation or dominions. I'll support any purge against the equalist deviants. Vivaporius: "I don't need a slogan" 07:34, November 28, 2013 (UTC)

German members of parliament recongnise the potential threat of Eqaulism and pledge support.Trust Me, I'm The Doctor (talk) 19:42, November 29, 2013 (UTC)

The Scandinavian delegates also agree that the "madness of so-called equalism is a threat to monarchists and republicans alike". Yank 19:53, November 29, 2013 (UTC)

The Faceist Union of Patagoshina also would like to assist in keeping the Equalist away. They want nothing to do with the Equalists who will ruin the way their nation runs. Imp (Say Hi?!) 20:07, November 29, 2013 (UTC)

Yeeesh. Somehow the support of the racist fascist analogues makes me feel less clean for my opposition of equalists. --Yank 20:16, November 29, 2013 (UTC)

Russian Civil War
I'm planning a Russian civil war as a way to set up a grand confrontation between the democratic nations and the equalist nations. It'd be World War II. Yank 21:02, November 27, 2013 (UTC)

-_- Russia...would this in any way shape or form prevent me from going nuclear in the 1940s-1950s...-Lx (leave me a message) 22:57, November 27, 2013 (UTC)

Yank, no. Civil wars should be entirely up to the player. And it would mean slaughter for the non equalists anyways.

23:00, November 27, 2013 (UTC)

Never mind. It was just an idea.Yank 00:14, November 28, 2013 (UTC)

Computer Problems
I'm having computer problems but they should be fixed soon. Posts take eons to upload and its overheating massively. The site takes an hour to load too. Scandinator (talk) 16:09, November 28, 2013 (UTC)

Formatting Issues and Indenting
You know the rdiculously complicated text formatting isn't necessary right? Not only is it unnecessary, but it damages the format of the map game. This is not a trashy map game where format can vary wildly in the same game. Plus there's the fact that unless your post is a diplomatic response to something it should not be indented below the post of the player you're responding to. And should have some variation of "Somecountryland Diplomacy:" in bold before it. Yank 16:49, November 29, 2013 (UTC)
 * Who are you talking to? What i have to do with complicated text formatting?--Collie Kaltenbrunner (talk) 20:24, November 29, 2013 (UTC)

Invention list
I don't want to step on anyone's toes, so I want everyone to list their nation's inventions to prevent confusion. Yank 04:10, November 1, 2013 (UTC)

Germany
 * Electric lighting
 * Automobile
 * Olympic Games
 * worlds fair
 * elevator.
 * typewriter
 * Saxonische ( German/English hybrid language)
 * Riverboat (not to be confused with Italian steamboat tech)
 * Grammaphone ( vinyl player) invented by Germany awhile back
 * military grade telegraph security code(cryptography including an enigma like encryption for telephones and telegraphs.
 * vacuum cleaner
 * traffic lights( at least in Europe)

Spain (Brasil included)
 * Hot-air balloon
 * 1769 car prototype
 * Phonautograph
 * Phonograph

Orissa/Ethiopia
 * Battleships (biggest in the world)
 * Uda Code (OTL Morse Code)
 * Sankala (mix of Hindi/Armahric)
 * Skyscraper (Akashchut)
 * Tesla-analogue (Ezana Iskinder)
 * Edison-analogue (Sanjay Rajnath)
 * Telephones
 * Tungsten Steel
 * Gyroscope (Dirthoscope)
 * Modern Fascism - originated from Pure Science movement ("Faceism")
 * Daguerreotype (precursor to photographs)
 * Azmera process (Bessemer process)
 * Eadweard Muybridge (Geressu Alemayyehu)
 * Coal-based power stations
 * Radar
 * Heliocopter (Helicopter)
 * Shell (its an oil company, so what lol)
 * ​I did radar, but you can do something like advanced radar or whatnot. I never added here cause someone archived it.
 * Who is this? Whoever it is, could not have because I invented it ages ago.
 * It'sa me, Mario. I used a chap named Hertz in 188-something.
 * Not possible with your technological advancement. It would have to be red or higher.
 * ​Trams
 * Battlecrusiers (Maha-Agni/Dreadnoughts)
 * Radium

Selk'nam Italia China Russia
 * Kelp-based agriculture
 * Fertilizer for use in oceans
 * Cocaine ("Cocide")
 * Submarines
 * Ironclads
 * Railways and all the assorted trainy stuff
 * Steam Engine
 * Equalism (Communism analogue)
 * Air Dragon (Pretty much a Zeppelin/Modern airship)
 * Modern contraceptives
 * Gunpowder
 * Modern photography (darkroom and accompanying cameras)
 * Modern Equalism (developed way before any Equalist revolutions
 * Armored car

Scandinavia Neu Berlin/Germanica France: Myanmmar: 
 * Gattling Gun (machine gun)
 * Twin-Piston Steam Engine
 * Percussion Cap
 * Rifling
 * paper cartriges
 * Multiple round magazine rifle
 * Mine Balls(connic bullets, more like OTL shape)
 * explosive artillery shells?(again, check this)
 * smokeless powder/cartriges(can somebody check who mentioned it first, me or scandinavia...I think I did in early 1800s)
 * Icebreakers(Koch-Icebreakers)
 * Bogatyr-class Warship(war-adapted chinese Treasure Ship)
 * Isaac Newton(forgot name)
 * lots more science guys
 * rebar
 * Russian Vodka (obviously)
 * Socialism (I think)
 * Individualism (Adam Smith)
 * X-Rays
 * Radiation(Discovered)
 * Theory of Relativity
 * Nucleus of the Atom and the Electron
 *  Which year were these done in? Because frankly your posts usually do not contain much background research and stuff on this. 
 *  If you lkookj at most scientific discoveries, it is more like scientists building on work of others, and I swear, if NOBODY had invented the Atom or done any reaserch on it that is implausible beond belief. Also, Einstein was a mere clerk when he came up with relativity, not much backround reaserch needed for that. 
 * Smokeless gunpowder
 * metal catrigdes
 * sewing machine
 * cotton gin
 * phonograph
 * assembly line
 * electromagnets
 * stronger cement
 * quadruplex telegraph
 * kinetoscope/video camera (image only)
 * radar
 * two way radio
 * el plane
 * refrigerator
 * refrigerated train car
 * Burgundian (French-German Hybrid spoken in Lorraine and Picardy)
 * Canarien (French-Greek Hybrid Spoken in the Islands)
 * Praetorate (Nouvelle Bourgogne was given the status of it in late 18th century and its different from the current Apache praetorate its a point in between a dominion and a colony)
 * Nation Endorsed Public School system (?? I haven't seen anyone claiming that so... Meh)
 * Scandinavian (AP era)
 * China was doing the last one centuries ago
 * Trust Me, I'm The Doctor ( talk ) 22:04, November 1, 2013 (UTC)
 * Myanmmar did it in the 18th century when we were rich and still is.
 * Industrialised silk making
 * Industrialised porcelain making
 * Modern iron mining methods
 * Stock Exchanges?
 * Bonds
 * TV stock shows (We're gonna ge that)

Discussion
YOU HAVE AN ENGLISH-GERMAN HYBRID!! Why did I not know. It would have begun to become implemented in my schools. Half of my nation already speaks some form of Italian. And I call dibs on the airplane and tanks! :P Imp (Say Hi?!) 19:44, November 1, 2013 (UTC)

I find it hilarious that Lx went straight for the machine gun without developing anything that makes a machine gun practical. All he wanted was a big fancy toy. With the massive amounts of fouling from black powder, his precious gatling guns would become essentially useless art pieces very quickly.Yank 19:59, November 1, 2013 (UTC)


 * Wha? I had cartrige guns and smokeless powder ever since some Rigan dude accidentaly invented it...and if you hadn't noticed, the Kalashnikov models ever since the 1830s featured smokeless powder cartriges.-Lx (leave me a message)Azarath Flag.png 02:08, November 3, 2013 (UTC)

Can one really claim the invention of the skyscraper?

20:55, November 1, 2013 (UTC)


 * Actually they can. [[Image:1.png|23px]] Imp (Say Hi?!) 12:37, November 3, 2013 (UTC)

Ethiopia is claiming penicillin, the typewriter, and the telephone. Plus, I'm going for some other very awesome inventions. Oh, and Ethiopia has just brought electricity to the masses. Vivaporius: "I don't need a slogan" 21:57, November 1, 2013 (UTC)


 * No long term "claiming". This was abolished in the last game. What you can do, however, is list whatever you've invented already.


 * 16:31, November 2, 2013 (UTC)

telephone hasnt happened yet, Germany already patented and invented both the typewriter and electric lighting(by the way on the lighting thing I streched it, I invented in abut 6 year before OTL, that is cutting it close) I can give you the modern typewriter, we created a version of it, not invented, i sohuld have said innovated on it.

Oh, oh! Trams! Who wants trams? I want to use them extensively, but I don't care who invents them. Callumthered (talk) 01:45, November 2, 2013 (UTC)


 * Trams, eh? I'm more busy trying crisscross Neu Berlin with a national highway system and railway. I want to take the history of British railways and transfer it to Neu Berlin.


 * 16:31, November 2, 2013 (UTC)


 * I will. I like the idea of trams. On that note - I shotgun the undergroud. Soory Scraw. :P [[Image:1.png|23px]] Imp (Say Hi?!) 17:27, November 2, 2013 (UTC)


 * Plz, I have New York for crying out loud. I'm starting a subway system in 76.
 * 18:14, November 2, 2013 (UTC)


 * The Brits came first, with that.


 * Yes, I know, the Underground was in 63, but considering that I'm that I'm not the master of the world, I waited a bit.
 * 20:19, November 2, 2013 (UTC)

Am I the only one who remembers how hard Lurk worked to prevent "claiming"? Also, you can't invent a person...ffs.

01:13, November 3, 2013 (UTC)

What are you on about. That is exactly what you did and what others do. We invent people post PoD. That was they Lurk said - you cannot have OTL people after a PoD. Imp (Say Hi?!) 01:37, November 3, 2013 (UTC)

Even so, they can't be listed on this section of the page. Also, just because you claim Edison, you don't get all 1000 of his inventions. plz

01:53, November 3, 2013 (UTC)

I never said I would. Instead I am making him more clever and making him more like Newton but with a gift for more practical and not theoretical stuff. Imp (Say Hi?!) 12:37, November 3, 2013 (UTC)

Can countries lower on the tier claim stuff even though we're not on the forefront of technology? CourageousLife (talk) 21:47, November 3, 2013 (UTC)

Add away folks. Just remeber not to archive this as it will be of paramount importance. Imp (Say Hi?!) 20:58, November 29, 2013 (UTC)

Voting
Please go to Talk:The World's Fair (Principia Moderni II Map Game) and Olympic Games (Principia Moderni II Map Game) in order to vote for the hosts of the events in question.

And, i'm thinking that for the Olympics, this business of voting in the page is not going well.After all, only five players came to the page last election.Somebody else thinks that it would be better to resume voting in the talk page and later transfer the results to the Olympic Games page?--Collie Kaltenbrunner (talk) 13:33, November 30, 2013 (UTC)

I suppose it can be done that way, it wouldn't be terribly difficult.Trust Me, I'm The Doctor (talk) 16:51, November 30, 2013 (UTC)

National Political Affiliation
Can everyone kindly place their nations name under one of the categories.This is to give me a better idea of the poltical climate of the world as we move into this 20th century.Trust Me, I'm The Doctor (talk) 18:13, November 30, 2013 (UTC)

Judging from these commentaries, it seems like people are getting 'anti-equalist' and 'not equalist' confused. CrimsonAssassin- "I have special eyes" 17:39, December 2, 2013 (UTC)

Non-Equalist

 * DIE EQUALISM DIE! ~ Neu Berlin, Kanada, Novomoskovsk, River Lakota, Ostkasodan, Kasodani, Greater Transcaucasia


 * Don't mess with us and we'll be fine - Portugal, León, Castille, Aragon, Majorca, Barcelona, Navarra, Granada, France, La Marche, Brasil.
 * Spain, France and its associated or component kingdoms hold the same ideological position of Germany as to it opposition to equalism, but don't wish to have hostile diplomatic relations with the Equalist nations unless they (the Equalists) choose to be hostile.
 * While Equalism leaves a bad taste in our mouths the Scandinavians will not directly go to war with the Equalists unless they are the aggressors. That being said we yearn for the day that the nations affected toss aside their ironically tyrannical Equalist governments in favor of more democratic forms of government.
 * Imperium Africana and the Fifteen Dominions have no desire or plans to join the Equalist movement. They move past our borders, and they die.
 * Hesitant about socialists, really don't like Equalists (read: Italia). Don't want any trouble - Mayan Empire and associates
 * Gang Federation
 * Selk'nam Haruwin (Liberal Democracy)
 * Yagich Rafael (Liberal Democracy - anti-Pure Science)
 * Attican Union (Liberal Democracy - anti-militarist - Radically anti-Pure Science)

Relativist

 * Germany and the Commonwealths of Poland-Slovakia, Afrika, Britannia, and Australis are all Releativist nations.

Socialist

 * Russian Governement run by a Socialist(45%)-Menshevik(less-militant Equalists)(12%) Coalition controling 57% of the seats in the Duma
 * The United Maharajya, Dakshin Maharajya, Rajputana, Khmer and Uttarshina are socialist but we really do not have much qualms with either side. Kinda like a NAM perhaps? Although I never really liked the idea of a NAM so won't happen. So where was I? Oh yes, Socialist and the people will continue to elect the socialist government until they screw up real bad.

Pure Scientist

 * Praetorate of Pure Science (Radical)
 * Praetorate of Eternal Matter (Pragmatist)

Equalist

 * UER and associated states :P
 * Dengyu Union (China and her associates)
 * Myanmar

United Maharajya

 * Location: 1 (my colony is next to them)
 * Tactical Advantage: 6
 * Strength: Orissa (L), Rajputana (L), Nepal (M), Afghan (M): 14/8 = 2
 * Military Development: 32/6 = 5
 * Economy: 28/6 = 5
 * Infrastructure: 0
 * Expansion: 0
 * Motive: 6 (3+3)
 * Chance: 7
 * Edit Count: 8655
 * UTC Time: 23:25 = 60
 * (8655/60)*pi = 453.1747402
 * Nation Age: 5
 * Population: 29
 * Participation: +10
 * Recent Wars: 0

Total: 76*1.5 (industrial bonus) = 114

Small African States
Total: 47
 * Location: 5
 * Tactical Advantage: 0
 * Strength: Luba (L), Wasangi (L): 8/14 = 0
 * Military Development: 6/32 = 0
 * Economy: 6/28 = 0
 * Infrastructure: 6
 * Motive: 10+10 = 20
 * Chance: 4
 * Nation Age: -5 + 0 = -5
 * Population: 7
 * Participation: 10
 * Recent Wars: 0

Result
United Maharajyan victory. Seems like the tanks were scary enough (because they are a sign of industrial powress) and so they could topple the governments.

((114/(114+47))*2) - 1 = 0.4161490

War lasted three years. The United Maharajya capture 35% and almost exclusively take the land toward the eastern state and the border toward uncivilised lands. This allows for the United Maharajya to be able to expand into the black areas.

Discussion
Again, your distance is 1 because the location is defined by the distance of the capital city of the nation from the front.Luba and Lunda also get six in infrastructure because they have 3 each.--Collie Kaltenbrunner (talk) 06:52, December 2, 2013 (UTC)

Imp, why did you declare war against two states that i thought that were Luba and Lunda if you just wanted to take land from Wasanga?--Collie Kaltenbrunner (talk) 06:58, December 2, 2013 (UTC)

I am not talking about that.If you just wanted to take land from one state, then why did you declare war on two?--Collie Kaltenbrunner (talk) 08:30, December 3, 2013 (UTC)

I wasn't invading Luanda. I said I was invading one of the states in the north while invading the one to the east. And its just because one of my fronts went better than the other. I did once again declare war in 1903 and I'll make my 1904 post stating what happens. Hopefully I'll be able to take both over. Imp (Say Hi?!) 21:14, December 3, 2013 (UTC)

Pure Science Terrorism
Just so everyone knows - I am not trying to attack anyone and my main nations are not involved in the terrorist activity I'm posting. I'm trying to collapse the Praetorate of Pure Science in a rather stupid blaze of glory. They're going to lose power very soon and their ex-leaders are going ot become a terrorist organization that randomly bombs people for the next decade or so - but that's it. Commandante Lemming (talk) 22:06, December 2, 2013 (UTC)

Just don't blow me up, eh? It'll be a declaration of war. :D

04:06, December 3, 2013 (UTC)

Germany sees the attack as a declaration of war, and will pursue retribution presently. Trust Me, I'm The Doctor (talk) 12:49, December 3, 2013 (UTC)

Portugal will do the same.--Collie Kaltenbrunner (talk) 14:11, December 3, 2013 (UTC)

Portugal is too weak to threaten anyone and Germany has to logical reason to attack a small, defenseless nation that threaten the kind people of Selk'nam. Ethiopia asks that all parties simply remain calm and assist the Selk'nam government in combating the terrorists rather than throw themselves aimlessly at the tiny kingdom like a bunch of savages. Put your d**ks away and calm down. Vivaporius: "I don't need a slogan" 14:47, December 3, 2013 (UTC)
 * I might be too weak to threaten anyone, but my opponent is much weaker.do you think they stand any chance?--Collie Kaltenbrunner (talk) 21:09, December 3, 2013 (UTC)

Don't worry Viva - nobody's attacking the Selk'nam. They're all jumping on the Praetorate of Pure Science which is a rogue state - I'm helping orchestrate the attack and the Selk'nam mainland will also be attacking. Commandante Lemming (talk) 14:50, December 3, 2013 (UTC)


 * Understood. Flag of the Hurian Federation.png Vivaporius: "I don't need a slogan" 22:18, December 3, 2013 (UTC)
 * No worries - I like talking out of both sides of my mouth. Most of my people are nice, but I keep the Pure Science people around so that I have an "evil twin" for occasional mischief. Commandante Lemming (talk) 22:23, December 3, 2013 (UTC)

And don't worry Scraw, you're not on the target list :-D....and there IS a list Commandante Lemming (talk) 14:51, December 3, 2013 (UTC)

And just so we all know who we are fighting here....Commandante Lemming (talk) 02:59, December 4, 2013 (UTC)



Germany vows to support Portugal in a mutual invasion if they so wish. Germany, in conjunction with the Attican Union will send the troops from The Commonwealth Britannia to attack the terrorists. The Welsh 1st Expeditionary Force will lead the attack.Trust Me, I'm The Doctor (talk) 03:28, December 4, 2013 (UTC)

Fall of the Praetorate
I've never done one of these before, so I'm going to need serious help. Commandante Lemming (talk) 14:35, December 4, 2013 (UTC)

Allied Forces
Total: 148 x 1.5 = 222
 * Location: 1+4+4+2+1 =12/5 = 2.4 = 2
 * Tactical Advantage: 5
 * Strength: Britannia (L), Saxony (S), Selk'nam (L), Attican Union (L), Yagich Rafael (L), Portugal (L), France (M), Brasil (M), León (SV), Castille (SV), Aragon (SV), Barcelona (SV), Majorca (SV), Navarra (SV), Granada (S) = 36/4 = 9
 * Military Development: 18+0+0+0+30 = 48/4 = 12
 * Economy: 0
 * Infrastructure: 15+15+15 = 45
 * Expansion: 0
 * Motive: 5+5+5+5+5 = 25
 * Chance: 7
 * Edit Count: 1624
 * UTC Time: 08:52
 * 1624/80 x pi = 63.7743308679
 * Nation Age: 0+5+0+0+0 = 5
 * Population: 28
 * Participation: +10
 * Recent Wars: 0

Praetorate of Pure Science
Total: 36 x 1.2 = 43
 * Location: 5
 * Tactical Advantage: 1
 * Strength: Praetorate of Pure Science (L) = 4 = 0
 * Military Development: 4 = 0
 * Economy: 0
 * Infrastructure: 6 = 0
 * Expansion: 0
 * Motive: 10
 * Chance: 6
 * Edit Count 355
 * UTC Time: 15:17
 * 355/35 x pi = 31.8647254
 * Nation Age: 0
 * Population: 4
 * Participation: +10
 * Recent Wars: 0

Result
222/265 -0.5 x 2 = 0.675471698

The coalition can topple the Pure Sciencist government in one year.

Discussion
I need the motives as to why the Attican Union, the Selk'nam and Yagich Rafael are declaring war.--Collie Kaltenbrunner (talk) 18:08, December 4, 2013 (UTC)

For this algorythm, i'll be considering the Allied Forces as the defending side, seeing as the Praetorate attacked first.--Collie Kaltenbrunner (talk) 18:12, December 4, 2013 (UTC)

The Attican Union is invading because an Attican ship was blown up in the Wales bombing and becasue they see the Praetorate as a looming terrorist threat next door - the Selk'nam and Yagich Rafael are invading because they have alliances with the Attican Union, because they see the Praetorate as a military and terrorist threat based on their rhetoric - and in the case of Yagich Rafael because the Praetorate has started a needless war with them in the past.

Also - how do we calculate military development. I put a lot of effort into building up my military for the last few centuries - although I've slacked a bit recently to focus on industrialization. So should the Selk'nam score really be zero?

Commandante Lemming (talk) 20:53, December 4, 2013 (UTC)

Yes.military development is counted only for the last 15 years before a war.I checked your posts.There is nothing about military except in two Praetorate posts.You are lucky that your coalition is defending instead of attacking, which puts your 15 points for each of your nations in infrastructure (industrialization counts as infrastructure) to good use.

And About the motives, once again this is a case where there is no appropriate score on the motives for that.I'll give you all a 5 for moral reasons, which is also the score i attributed to myself in the motives (because Portugal doesn't want resources.just revenge.There is no score for that.).--Collie Kaltenbrunner (talk) 21:07, December 4, 2013 (UTC)

OK - all sounds good and thanks for the tips - I usually try to avoid these algorithms at all costs anyway but nice to know how I stack up and why (and I'm only participating at all becasue I'm on both sides and becasue it's a purposeful suicide for the Praetorate). Commandante Lemming (talk) 22:23, December 4, 2013 (UTC)

Well, according to the results, we still would need two years for taking them down.in which level of industrialization the Praetorate is?--Collie Kaltenbrunner (talk) 08:17, December 5, 2013 (UTC)

I mean, it won't make that much of a difference in the results, but Saxony said from the begining that it was giving "materiel support" to the alliance. Callumthered (talk) 10:54, December 5, 2013 (UTC)

I was told that the Praetorate would be yellow on the map due to proximity to Africa - but I haven't written a lot other than "Industrialization deepens" since about the 1860s or so. You could put then as high as Stage 5 but I got a late start so they could be lower. Will focuss more on this element after the war and getting them all up to 5 and 6. Commandante Lemming (talk) 15:44, December 5, 2013 (UTC)

I think that they would be Stage 3 or 2.Is this good enough? we still can use the industrial bonus to heighten the Allied score.--Collie Kaltenbrunner (talk) 20:32, December 5, 2013 (UTC)

Good enough for me!

Commandante Lemming (talk) 21:38, December 5, 2013 (UTC)

Apostolic Prime Bishop Election 1906
Member States: Wales (Andrew), De Mor Tir (Rex), Tojiko (Kogasa), Apache Empire (Grantzu), Lakin (Courageous), Selk'nam, Attican Union, Yagich Rafael (Lemming)

Candidates:

1.Bishop Elmo Hgogin'Australias'ai'gro'bichin'yagich of Yagich Chongat Yagich (Yagich Rafael).

(please add more if desired)

VOTES:

Andrew: with no adequate replacement due to the terrorist attacks, Wales nominates Elmo Hgogin'Australias'ai'gro'bichin'yagich

Rex:

Kogasa: Bishop Elmo Hgogin'Australias'ai'gro'bichin'yagich

Grantzu:

Courageous: Bishop Elmo Hgogin'Australias'ai'gro'bichin'yagich

Lemming: Elmo Hgogin'Australias'ai'gro'bichin'yagich

Note from Lemming: I'm fine with winning this one - but not hellbent on it and would welcome competition.

Just to be clear
considering what happened last time I started editing irregularly, I want to specify that I might be editing irregularly because of my Exams that are starting two two weeks from now.-Lx (leave me a message) 23:16, December 5, 2013 (UTC)

I know I'm pretty junior around here but I have to say it's a little suspicious that random mod events blew up Lx's empire (again) right as he was going on leave - creating a bunch of newly independent areas right next to the territory of the mod who created the event...which of course Lx will not have time to revassalize before he comes back, and which Scandinavia will of couse be able to vassalize immediately. I realize that this game is subjective and mods rightly have a lot of control, but there should be some sort of firm rule against mods doing that. God-modding is bad enough but god-modding the destruction of other people's territory to expand one's own territory is a bit beyond the pale. I usually try to stay out of this sort of thing, but this is way too far of a leap. Can we at least get some sort of firm promise that these ex-Russian vassals won't become Scandanavian vassals before New Years or something? Commandante Lemming (talk) 20:33, December 6, 2013 (UTC)

Well I know nothing of this. But Germany is exerting influence on Baltica( we've wanted it for decades.Trust Me, I'm The Doctor (talk) 03:12, December 7, 2013 (UTC)

1912 Olympic Games Host election
as part of my proposal to maximize voter turnout, the elections for the host-city of the Olympic Games shall be initially held in the talk page, and after its finish, moved to the Olympic Games page.Let the elections begin.--Collie Kaltenbrunner (talk) 07:18, December 7, 2013 (UTC)

Nominations
* Korea nominates: Stockholm
 * Portugal nominates: Stockholm
 * León nominates: Stockholm
 * Castille nominates: Stockholm
 * Aragon nominates: Stockholm
 * Majorca nominates: Stockholm.
 * Barcelona nominates: Stockholm.
 * France nominates: Stockholm.
 * La Marche nominates: Stockholm.
 * Navarra nominates: Stockholm
 * Neu Berlin nominates Neu Berlin
 * Kanada supports Neu Berlin
 * Novonovgorod (Novomoskovsk) supports Neu Berlin
 * River Lakota supports Neu Berlin
 * Greater Transcaucasia supports Neu Berlin
 * Mayan Empire supports Neu Berlin
 * Germany nominates. Neu Berlin
 * Britannia nominates Stockholm
 * Australis nominates Neu Berlin
 * Afrika nominates Stockholm
 * HER nominates Neu Berlin
 * EER nominates Neu Berlin
 * BER nominates Neu Berlin
 * TER nominates Neu Berlin
 * Ethiopia nominates: Addis Ababa
 * Kenya nominates: Addis Ababa
 * Somalia nominates: Addis Ababa
 * Bugunda nominates: Addis Ababa
 * Tanganyika nominates: Addis Ababa
 * Darfur nominates: Addis Ababa
 * Chad nominates: Addis Ababa
 * Nigeria nominates: Addis Ababa
 * Mali nominates: Addis Ababa
 * New Borona nominates: Addis Ababa
 * Nunavut nominates: Addis Ababa
 * Baridi nominates: Addis Ababa
 * Tamaini nominates: Addis Ababa
 * Wadab nominates: Addis Ababa
 * Angola nominates: Addis Ababa
 * China nominates: Stockholm
 * Badakhstan nominates: Stockholm
 * Formosa nominates: Stockholm
 * Vietnam nominates: Stockholm
 * Laos nominates: Stockholm
 * Almaty nominates: Stockholm
 * Akmola nominates: Stockholm
 * Gang Federation nominates: Stockholm
 * All of those votes are invalid.None of those nations is registered in the Olympic Commitee.

Voting count

 * Addis Abeba: 15
 * Neu Berlin: 12
 * Stockholm: 12

Discussion
Does this mean I have to start preparing the facilities? Yank 17:55, December 7, 2013 (UTC)

I don't know, since you at the moment are tied in votes with Neu Berlin, and voting goes either until everybody has voted, or until 1912 starts if that is not the case.But you might like to prepare in case you win.--Collie Kaltenbrunner (talk) 19:46, December 7, 2013 (UTC)

Wow Viva. Just wow.

01:32, December 8, 2013 (UTC)

But he made a mistake.--Collie Kaltenbrunner (talk) 07:50, December 8, 2013 (UTC)

I didn't make a mistake, I've been registered since the beginning of the Olympics. And I don't see why "dominions" are in quotions Collie. Did you "miss" something?. Vivaporius: "I don't need a slogan" 09:21, December 8, 2013 (UTC)

You don't seem to have realized that your vassals aren't registered on the Olympic Commitee.Ethiopia is obviously registered, so they can vote.But not your vassals.That's why their votes are invalid.--Collie Kaltenbrunner (talk) 12:35, December 8, 2013 (UTC)

Then please register them so we can be done with this. Or is that a matter I must handle in-game? Vivaporius: "I don't need a slogan" 18:05, December 8, 2013 (UTC)
 * It's like that: you either add them to the page yourself or you request me to do it.i'll consider that a request and your votes were validated.--Collie Kaltenbrunner (talk) 21:53, December 8, 2013 (UTC)

Just add them to the page for the Games. Collie is a stickler about this for no good reason.

19:12, December 8, 2013 (UTC)

Because of our OTL example.Have you ever seen a nation that is not even a member of the IOC voting in the election of the host city?--Collie Kaltenbrunner (talk) 21:53, December 8, 2013 (UTC)

I think it is common sense that when we apply our main nation, we also intend to include our other nations.

22:11, December 8, 2013 (UTC)

Tanimbarkai and Co.
Total: 77
 * Location: Tanimbarkai (5), Commonwealth of Australis (3), Saxon Australis (3). (5+3+3)/3=3.6 = 4
 * Tactical Advantage: 1
 * Strength: Tanimbarkai (L), CA (L), SA (M). (4+4+3)=11/4 = 3
 * Military Development: Tanimbarkai (4), CA (22), Saxon Australis (2). (4+22+2)=28/3 = 9
 * Economy: Tanimbarkai (6), CA (0), SA (4). (6+0+4)=10/3 = 3
 * Infrastructure: Tanimbarkai (0), CA (0), SA (2). (0+0+2)=2 = 0
 * Expansion: 0
 * Motive: Tanimbarkai (3), CA (3), SA (3). (3+3+3)=9
 * Chance: 4
 * Edit Count: 1572
 * UTC Time: 08:47
 * 1572/224 x pi = 22.0472484
 * Nation Age: Tanimbarkai (5), CA (0), SA (0). (5+0+0)=5
 * Population: 28
 * Participation: +10
 * Recent Wars:

Sumba
Total: 37
 * Location: 5
 * Tactical Advantage:0
 * Strength: Sumba (L). 4 = 0
 * Military Development: 3 = 0
 * Economy: 3 = 0
 * Infrastructure: 3
 * Expansion: 0
 * Motive: 10
 * Chance: 7
 * Nation Age: -5
 * Population: 7
 * Participation: +10
 * Recent Wars: 0

Result
p=((77/(37+77))x2)-1=0.3508771929824561

(0.3508771929824561)*(1-1/(2x5))=0.315

So if the war lasts five years, Tanimbarkai will be able to gain 31.5% of Sumba. I think. Callumthered (talk) 04:49, December 8, 2013 (UTC)

Discussion
I've never done a coalition algorithm before. I tried my best, but there are still some gaps. Also, could an unbiased person please do the chance? Thanks, Callumthered (talk) 09:20, December 7, 2013 (UTC)

Well, your algorythm was mostly doing fine, until after Tanimbarkai's total, whereupon it became a mess of code not unlike Scraw's signature without a template.That's my only problem with it.the rest was fine.--Collie Kaltenbrunner (talk) 14:20, December 7, 2013 (UTC)

You know, you can always make this war last longer than 5 years.--Collie Kaltenbrunner (talk) 07:49, December 8, 2013 (UTC)

I do, and would, but alas, it only results in the addition of a measly 1.5%. Callumthered (talk) 22:04, December 8, 2013 (UTC)

National politcal affiliation
This is an attempt to re-create the list before, but I only want what affiliation you are, no slurs or threats to other philosophies. you are permitted in discussion to post what you will or explain your nation.

Democracy(Constitutional Monarchy or Republic)

 * Rokkaku Shogunate/Japan
 * Federal Republic of Tojiko
 * Republic of Himekaidou
 * Selk'nam
 * Yagich Rafael
 * Attican Union (will slowly drift Relativist)
 * Scandinavia
 * Neu Berlin and everyone
 * Mayan Empire and associates

Equalist (freely, democratically elected)

 * Most if not all of the Unitied Equalist Republics (emergency measures are still in place for some)

Equa-Socialism (a nation in between Socialist and Eqaulist, generally has an elected body)

 * After the 1910 elections, the Democratic Commonwealth of Germany and associated Commonwealths.

Pure Scientist
Preatorate of Eternal Matter

Discussion
Germany falls into the specially made Equa-Socialist catagory because Germany is a democratically elected constiutional monarchy, that currently has a super majority coalition in the Reichstag made up of the Equalist and Socialist Parties. Germany has long been socialist leaning, despite the decade or so of ant-eqaulist feelings that almost led to the nation's ruin. Germany is neutral in any conflict unless an ally (eqaulist or not) is harmed. Germany seeks to maintain positive relations with all nieghbours and was among the first to recognise the UER, despite anit-eqaulist sentiments at the time.Trust Me, I'm The Doctor (talk) 23:33, December 8, 2013 (UTC)

Imperium Africana
Total: 183
 * Location: +1
 * Tactical Advantage: +6
 * Strength: Ethiopia (L), Somalia (L), Kenya (L), Tanganyika (L), North Merina (L), South Merina (L), Mali (L), Nigeria (L), Bugunda (L), Nunvaut (M), Chad (L), Tumaini (M), Baridi (M), Angola (L), Eritrea (L), New Borona (M), Senegal (LV), Guinea (LV) = 66/73 = +1
 * Military Development: 16+16+16+16+16+16+16+16+16+16+16+16+16+16 = 224/141 = +2
 * Economy: 14+14+14+14+14+14+14+14+14+14+14+14+14+14 = 196/4 = +49
 * Infrastructure: 0
 * Expansion: 0
 * Motive: +3 +3 +3 +3 +3 +3 +3 +3 +3 +3 +3 +3 +3 = +42
 * Chance: +9
 * Edit Count: 4,035
 * UTC Time: 2*2*2*6=48
 * 4035/48*pi=264.0901324424094
 * Nation Age: +5 +5 +5 +5 +5 +5 +5 +5 +5 +5 +5 +0 +0 +0 = +55
 * Population: +8 (~90,000,000)  NO 9 digits Viva, The WORLD POPULATION WAS not even 2 billion. Africa had 100,000,000 at the time. You'd have 8 digits and thats generous already 
 * Participation: +10
 * Recent Wars: 0

Far East Republic
Total: 57 x 1.5 = 85.5
 * Location: +5
 * Tactical Advantage: +2
 * Strength: Far East Republic (L), China (L), Korea (L), Akmola (L), Khanate of Almaty (MV), Badakhstan (MV), Laos (MV), Formosa (MV), Gang Republic (L) Myanmar (M), UER (L), Bavaria (L), Britannia (L), Poland (LV), Slovakia (LV), Afrika (L), Russia (L), Neu Berlin (M), Kanada (L), Novomoskovsk (M), River Lakota (M), Ostkasodan (M) = 63/60 = +1
 * Military Development: 1+4+0+0+24+24+24+22+22+20+30 = 171/192 = +0
 * Economy: 0+4+0+0+0+0+0+0+0+0 = 4/168 = 0
 * Infrastructure: 1+0+0+0+0+0+2+0+0+2 = +5
 * Expansion: -9
 * Motive: +10+3+3+3+3+3+3+3+3+3+3+5+5 = +50
 * Chance: 0
 * Nation Age: -10-5+0+5-5+0+0+0+0+0+0+0+5 = -10
 * Population: +9 (c. 600,000,000)
 * Participation: +10
 * Recent Wars: -6

Result
Imperium Africana may claim 21.53% of Coalition lands.
 * ((184/(114+184))*2)-1 = 0.234893 = 23.49%
 * (23.49)*(1-1/(2*6)) = 21.5325% or 21.53%

Discussion
Now that you lost your colony in Siberia, I don't see any reason for you to invade that isn't hoarding territory, but I see that you've been awfully generous to your opponent. --Collie Kaltenbrunner (talk) 06:57, December 10, 2013 (UTC)

I take my chances where I can get them. As you have seen, I haven't been the aggressor for quite some time. Taking Chad was a strategic move since I needed my landed linked together. This, however, is to prevent Equalism from spread like a bad rash. However, your right. I have been awefully generous to my opponent. Time for a little total war. Vivaporius: "I don't need a slogan" 18:31, December 10, 2013 (UTC)

Russia is fighting, I'm merely defending Russia( my allies) land. Your being unecessarily aggressive like the United States, sticking your fingers in others pies. Germany has no quarrel with Ethiopia.Trust Me, I'm The Doctor (talk) 18:49, December 10, 2013 (UTC)

Then why are you sticking your fingers into the pie as well? Are you too not being equally as aggressive? I'm not attacking Russia, I'm attacking the Equalists, who, if my memory is correct, attacked Ethiopia, making it my pie as well. Vivaporius: "I don't need a slogan" 19:02, December 10, 2013 (UTC)

I know this has nothing to do with this, but, are you going to be able to host the 1912 Olympics? because you are leading the election with only 43 minutes to closing and you seem kinda tangled up in this war.Hey, maybe i should ask more people.Hey the rest of you guys involved, are you going to participate?--Collie Kaltenbrunner (talk) 20:16, December 10, 2013 (UTC)

Off course I'll host the Olympics. I just need to finish this conflict. Shouldn't be that long. Vivaporius: "I don't need a slogan" 20:25, December 10, 2013 (UTC)

Again, about the motive, the 5 is the closest i could come for the motive.The algorythm does not count ideological reasons, and i thought the best number for that was a 5.Because considering the reasons they give, None of the pre-existing motives apply.It can't be 3, because it isn't about resources, it isn't life or death, and none of the 5-7 zone strictly apply.You know considering how many wars we are going to have because of this, we should create a value for ideological motive if it is not under other value. --Collie Kaltenbrunner (talk) 20:30, December 10, 2013 (UTC)

If that is the case, the +5 should apply for ideological reasons. Ethiopia is fighting to prevent the spread of Equalism, as it is a danger to Monarchism. China and Germany aren't, their only fighting to stop Ethiopia from expanding, which isn't ideological but political. Henceforth, political motives should recieve +3 as they are never truly a reason to fight a war. Also, China doesn't possess a 75% industrial majority over Ethiopia, nor is it two levels ahead of Ethiopia and its allies, who are orange and yellow, while Germany is orange, and only China proper is red. Vivaporius: "I don't need a slogan" 20:39, December 10, 2013 (UTC)

That 1.5 is no industrial bonus.Is the bonus that the Far East Republic received due to its very recent government change.I thought you had added this bonus when you did this algorythm, if it was you who did it.--Collie Kaltenbrunner (talk) 20:55, December 10, 2013 (UTC)

Wasn't me. Also, German Afrika expanded each year for 15 years incuring a -15 point penalty, while the Gang Federation expanded once in 1903 and again in 1911. Vivaporius: "I don't need a slogan" 21:00, December 10, 2013 (UTC)
 * Hey that -30 in expansion is for what? i get those things that you talked about, but who else has expanded by 13 years?.Ah, and Afrika only began expánding in 1906.This is only 5 years.--Collie Kaltenbrunner (talk) 21:20, December 10, 2013 (UTC)
 * Your correct, my bad. Afrika expanded in 1906-7 and 1909-11. The Gang Federation expanded in 1903, 1905, 1909, and 1911. Flag of the Hurian Federation.png Vivaporius: "I don't need a slogan" 21:28, December 10, 2013 (UTC)

Ah.ah, and the generosity part was because the first draft of the algorythm was so filled with errors to favour the Far East Republic that, assuming that it was you who made the algorythm, i thought that you were so sure of your victory that you were purposely omitting your own values.But really, you could have gotten some stupidly high scores if the original algorythm was done right.--Collie Kaltenbrunner (talk) 21:17, December 10, 2013 (UTC)

The scores aren't stupid. I've expanded only five of my dominions for 15 years straight, henceforth their not leaders in the conflict. The motive accurate as were the mil/econ points as I never ceased expanding them. I fought only one war prior to this, which took place more than 15 years ago, and all of my nations are more than 100 years old. Ethiopia became the Imperium in 1792, and my dominions were merged with each other around the same time. So my points are accurate. So I omitted nothing, but its cute that you think so. Vivaporius: "I don't need a slogan" 21:23, December 10, 2013 (UTC)
 * I know.Got to hand this to you.Still, you haven't answered my other question.--Collie Kaltenbrunner (talk) 21:27, December 10, 2013 (UTC)


 * I saw no question in there, so I didn't answer it. Could you ask me specifically what it was you wanted to know so I could? Flag of the Hurian Federation.png Vivaporius: "I don't need a slogan" 21:32, December 10, 2013 (UTC)
 * The thing about the expansion, but nevermind, you already have answered.--Collie Kaltenbrunner (talk) 21:34, December 10, 2013 (UTC)

The "stupidly high" part was a figure of speech.I mean, something like 200 to 20, which you probably would have gotten if the original algorythm was correct.I was not insulting your scores or anything.--Collie Kaltenbrunner (talk) 21:27, December 10, 2013 (UTC)

Understood. Sorry. But the original was correct and was 212 to 27 (if I recall correctly). It was simply altered by Crimson and Andrew and while I slept, as they joined in the conflict as well during the night. I didn't read the part where the vowed to protect Russia. Vivaporius: "I don't need a slogan" 21:32, December 10, 2013 (UTC)

Another snafu for the Coalition. With Russia in the war, they automatically incur -3 points for fighting the Far East Republic. The same applies for the FER. Vivaporius: "I don't need a slogan" 21:39, December 10, 2013 (UTC)

I never touched the algo. Also I posted last year I'd protect Russia. If you assure me this is not for territorial gain then i will retract strategically. I'm only interested in Russia's protection.Trust Me, I'm The Doctor (talk) 22:13, December 10, 2013 (UTC)

I am only in this to make sure that this ASB does not happen. I would like if if none of my Kanadian lands are annexed, because I have no intent to take land.

22:20, December 10, 2013 (UTC)

In what way would me winning be ASB? That appears to be your defense for everything you do nowadays. Vivaporius: "I don't need a slogan" 22:22, December 10, 2013 (UTC)

How in hell's name do you expect to control Siberia? Your colony there is no longer there; your only way of approaching this land would be to sail past Japan and China. And then there's the question of controlling it.

22:28, December 10, 2013 (UTC)

AHHAHAHAHAHAA... Viva, you are one on the funniest people on this wiki.

Wait a sec...

He's joking, right? Please tell me he's kidding...

22:31, December 10, 2013 (UTC)

I would have to sail past Japan and China, but I have the bonus of being allied to Orissa (plenty of docks there), and being on the Indian Ocean. So I'm much closer to it than, say, Germany or Neu Berlin. And, oh wait, I control parts of Australia, so I have a base in the region. I am funny aren't I? By the way, Imp sold my colony without my permission. And if my colony was so important, then having three colonies next to Neu Berlin should have been counted as a good enough reason for me to invade that country. Vivaporius: "I don't need a slogan" 22:38, December 10, 2013 (UTC)

Guys, keep it civil. CrimsonAssassin- "I have special eyes" 22:44, December 10, 2013 (UTC)

Ye, you still have to get past big bad China, who is sitting on the doorstep of Siberia with equalist tanks ready. And I mentioned Australia, but that still doesn't take China into account. Yes your colony was important; it would have allowed for a land invasion. Also, I have a nice little colony just a few hundred kilometers away that can serve a handy little naval base. And yes, your colony was important because it would have given you the advantage of a land invasion. And just bordering someone isn't a reason to invade them.

Also, there's still the concern of anyone who's not a Eurasian nation controlling SIBERIA. Your colony? That was fine; it was small and functioned as a decent trade port. The whole of Siberia? No. Australia, the Americas, Africa, and Europe for that matter, should not have any influence whatsoever over Siberia. Europe just gets a free pass because Russia got there first, and because China has demonstrated no interest in it.

22:51, December 10, 2013 (UTC)

And you are? Vivaporius: "I don't need a slogan" 22:49, December 10, 2013 (UTC)

Scraw, sorry.

22:51, December 10, 2013 (UTC)

Right, so I corrected a few things. While it may seem that way, I'm not fighting for Equalism. I am fighting to prevent Ethiopia from exploiting Russia, which is a +7 bonus. Anyone else fighting behalf of Russia and not just because of Equalism is advised to inform me so I can add you to the algorithm. Please be honest. CrimsonAssassin- "I have special eyes" 22:52, December 10, 2013 (UTC)

The Greater Antillian Reich fights in the name of Russia.

22:55, December 10, 2013 (UTC)

I'm not exploiting Russia, I'm fighting the Equalists from exploiting, which your paranoia for the second time has prevented you from seeing. Equalism isn't a religion nor are the Russians apart of your ethnicity, so you get no +7 bonus. Stop pulling rules from your behind. Vivaporius: "I don't need a slogan" 22:57, December 10, 2013 (UTC)

Germany is not fighting for or against Eqaulism, we are only fighting because Russia is an ally and I honestly don't buy your invading to keep from spreading Eqaulism, don't get offended but your nation is way too big, to sprawling. Do you really need more land? It seems a bit far fetched. Now I may be wrong, I am merely stating what it looks like to an outside party. This looks like a war of conquest.Trust Me, I'm The Doctor (talk) 23:06, December 10, 2013 (UTC)

Viva, it's completely obvious that you're fighting to regain lost territory in Siberia. I have no idea where you're getting the idea that I'm being paranoid. Also, Russia is my ally and Chinese IS a minority in Russia, especially along the border. We've been allies for a very long time. We get the +7. CrimsonAssassin- "I have special eyes" 23:14, December 10, 2013 (UTC)

If I wanted my land back in Siberia, then I would have purchased it. But I'm not going to waste my time invading another country over a tiny barren piece of land. If I wanted to invade another country, I'd invade Neu Berlin. And by the way, since I'm looking to get my land back, and I still have a minority in Siberia, I get +7 too. Vivaporius: "I don't need a slogan" 23:29, December 10, 2013 (UTC)

Said people are in Japan.

23:33, December 10, 2013 (UTC)

Huh, your right. Oh well. Vivaporius: "I don't need a slogan" 23:38, December 10, 2013 (UTC)

Viva, I really do not want to do this - but I might have to intervene to back the other socialist nations around the world... Imp (Say Hi?!) 23:41, December 10, 2013 (UTC)

Its one thing to fight people who step  on you throughout the course of a game and insult your intelligence. Its another entirely to have someone who's stood by your side from the game's beginning turn against you. I just wanted to stop Equalism... -_- Vivaporius: "I don't need a slogan" 23:46, December 10, 2013 (UTC)

Yes, let's stop equalism by invading an equalist country that poses no threat to the rest of the world.

23:48, December 10, 2013 (UTC)

The country itself poses no threat. Its ideology does. However, the Far Eastern Republic is no longer my target. Vivaporius: "I don't need a slogan" 23:50, December 10, 2013 (UTC)

Check out the mod posts guys. Most of you fighting are meant to be on the same side. If not, then fascist revolutions might come aknocking... Imp (Say Hi?!) 23:51, December 10, 2013 (UTC)

Revolutions that will not succeed in any of those countries. It is not your job to dictate who helps who. That's godmodding.

23:57, December 10, 2013 (UTC)

@Imp in case I wasn't clear IM ONLY IN THIS WAR TO PROTECT RUSSIA! If RUSSIA joins the war on the side I'm fighting against, it is ludicrous. This war is not ideological. Not for Germany. If this keeps on I may be forced to pull out. This is ridiculous, I'm huts trying to do the right thing here.Trust Me, I'm The Doctor (talk) 00:01, December 11, 2013 (UTC)

Same goes for me.

00:03, December 11, 2013 (UTC)

This is talk is becoming uncivilized. Why not retcon it? I have much more accessible targets to fight. Like Neu Berlin. Vivaporius: "I don't need a slogan" 00:04, December 11, 2013 (UTC)

Yes, please come fight me because I proved you wrong. After all, who doesn't like good old metagaming?

Viva, I think anyone can realize that when their closest ally and friend is ready to go against them, something has gone wrong.

00:08, December 11, 2013 (UTC)

Lets just retcon this bullshit and allow the Russian Civil War to continue. Imp (Say Hi?!) 00:22, December 11, 2013 (UTC)

I'll support it if I can be assured that I'm not getting invaded by Viva anytime soon.

00:27, December 11, 2013 (UTC)

What wrong Scraw? What the need for assurances? Vivaporius: "I don't need a slogan" 00:28, December 11, 2013 (UTC)


 * I'd rather not fight a war. I have better things to do, like finish expansion in Quebec and other parts of Canada.


 * 00:32, December 11, 2013 (UTC)

I agree with imp here, let's just let the civil war take it's natural course. @imp, sorry if I appeared a little short, I just wasn't certain why viva attacked. No ill will is directed at you or the United Maharaja.Trust Me, I'm The Doctor (talk) 00:29, December 11, 2013 (UTC)

Ok. Thanks. Imma remove this section soon. Imp (Say Hi?!) 16:36, December 11, 2013 (UTC)

We don't need to retcon it. Let him suffer the consequences of such an ill-concieved war. This war has really made me realize how much the algorithm needs to be improved going in to PMIII. CrimsonAssassin- "I have special eyes" 17:25, December 11, 2013 (UTC)

Yank agreed to it, along with Scraw, Andrew and Viva. Imp (Say Hi?!) 17:27, December 11, 2013 (UTC)

And looking at the results, I still won even with you rediculous bonuses. You and Yank simply seem to disagree with the results since China losing to anyone, or one nation beating numerous others is considered implausible or ASB by your standards, history be darned. So me suffer the consequenses, I think not. Reap the benefits of a victory, very much. And I wasn't the one who made the algorithm or the rules associated with it, so stop with blaming me with the outcome. Don't like it, fix it. Vivaporius: "I don't need a slogan" 18:07, December 11, 2013 (UTC)

It's only because of your horde of vassals to back you up. The war is still being erased from history. Yank 20:55, December 11, 2013 (UTC)

I had a horde of vassals, you had a horde of allies. Britain had its "Young Lions" to back it up in every war it fought, and I had mine. Get over it. There is no rule saying I can't use them, and there is no historical event saying I can't use them. Just you, Scraw, and Crimson. And I requested the retcon. I simply made it clear that it either goes or I win. That was all. Vivaporius: "I don't need a slogan" 20:57, December 11, 2013 (UTC)

That sounds hypocritical. "Either it goes my way or it doesn't exist." We agreed to retcon it, and it will be retconned. Yank 21:06, December 11, 2013 (UTC)

Its not hypocritical. Its a fact. The algorithm said I won. Crim didn't want to get rid of it, so as a result, I won the war. However, I neevr said I didn't want it gone. You said "Either it goes my way or it doesn't exist,", not me. The algorithm simply backs what I said. What we fought over was how much land I won, not whether or not I won. Vivaporius: "I don't need a slogan" 21:14, December 11, 2013 (UTC)

Ethiopia (L), Somalia (L), Kenya (L), Tanganyika (L), North Merina (L), South Merina (L), Mali (L), Nigeria (L), Bugunda (L), Nunvaut (M), Chad (L), Tumaini (M), Baridi (M), Angola (L), Eritrea (L), New Borona (M), Senegal (LV), Guinea (LV)

I seriously doubt that Nunavut, Chad, Eritrea, and half of these other nations can be real leaders.

23:05, December 11, 2013 (UTC)

LOL. Nice try Scraw. But I can add any dominion I wish. Dominions are any self-governing colonies that can support themselves. Eritrea has a large population as do the others, as well as the means to support a conflict. If you have any doubts, tiny little New Zealand contributed 125,000 troops to the fighting in WWI, yet it had a population of 1.1 million. These dominions are much larger population-wise, and far more industrialized. Vivaporius: "I don't need a slogan" 00:58, December 12, 2013 (UTC)

Here's Imperium Africana's population if you need a reference. Total population: 461 million
 * Ethiopia: 253 million
 * Somalia: 15 million
 * Kenya: 32 million
 * Tanganyika: 25 million
 * North Merina: 7.5 million
 * South Merina: 8 million
 * Mali: 23 million
 * Nigeria: 42 milliion
 * Bugunda: 18 million
 * Nunvavut: 200,000
 * Darfur: 11 million
 * Chad: 9 million
 * Tumaini: 200,000
 * Baridi: 100,000
 * Angola: 8 million
 * Eritrea: 3.5 million
 * New Borona: 10 million
 * Senegal: 4 million
 * Guinea: 2.5 million

This is to do away with any attempts to complain about which dominions can do what. Vivaporius: "I don't need a slogan" 01:06, December 12, 2013 (UTC)

In order to be a leader, they have to be able to reach the front on their own. So landlocked countries can be an M, at most. And population isn't even an important factor; size and economy are.

01:07, December 12, 2013 (UTC)


 * Funny how you come up with new rules out of nowhere. If size and economy are a factor, then all of my dominions can join in the battle since as I stated before, dominions are self-suffient colonies of the empire. And the Thai were able to contribute to the fighting in WWI, yet their economy was weak. However, they recieved the honor of walking beneath the Arch d'Triumph with the Allies at the end of the war as an equal to the other armies. So your point is moot. You can't really come up with new rules on the spot because you don't like the idea of a swarm coming after you. Flag of the Hurian Federation.png Vivaporius: "I don't need a slogan" 01:24, December 12, 2013 (UTC)


 * How in hell Chad is supposed to be a leader? And where are these Merinas you speak of? Can Nunavut even raise an army? Can that army get to Siberia via Nunavut's navy (if it has one). not Ethiopia's navy? This is so implausible it's not even funny. We all have a shitton of nations but we don't make all of them leaders. Two of my nations are landlocked; so I can't put them as leaders unless they're invading a nation that borders them and is smaller than them in terms of land and military. One of my nations can barely raise an army that can lead an invasion on its own; it can only provide men and supplies via another of my nations. Besides, just admit that using all these nations is just cheating for extra development and motive points. If we keep four or five of your leaders, your score goes down significantly.
 * 01:34, December 12, 2013 (UTC)


 * Chad rose an army the same way it did in WWI and WWII. These Merinas I speak of are in Madagascar. Nunvavut sent volunteers as did the other Artic nations since they very well can't send a full army. Your still basing your argument on your beliefs and preferences, which I could do very well without. Britain had 15 dominions, and all of them fought in Britain's conflicts. That doesn't include the bucket load of protectorates and puppet states it had fighting as well. And let's not lie Scraw. You had all of your vassals as leaders not long ago when you were still in Europe. And Von had all of his vassals as leaders in the 1720 conflict. And Scan also had a huge number of leaders when he fought in a war, as did AP and Fed. Your argument is invalid. I've long been waiting to say that. Flag of the Hurian Federation.png Vivaporius: "I don't need a slogan" 01:47, December 12, 2013 (UTC)


 * And yet you forget that all of lands were under attack in those giant wars. Yep, every single one of them. Phillippines and Mysore by Imp. Mainland by Andrew, Callum, and Scan. Neu Berlin by Scan. Central America by Scan. South America by Scan and Imp. Yep, all of them.
 * On the real world side of the spectrum, all the British dominions had coastlines and sizeable populations, allowing for support. But we would not mark them as leaders unless they actually declared war on the enemy. Which most (Canada, New Zealand, Aussie, South Africa, etc) did in WWII because they actually could. For the other colonies, like Lesotho and whatnot, they relied on other dominions and nations that could be considered leaders to reach the front. Which means that they aren't L either.
 * Also, sending volunteers really doesn't count as L. Ask someone else if you're not sure. Really, it's common sense to know which nations can be a leader and not.
 * And let's face it, you're using 3 in 500 chances to back yourself up, as you always do.
 * 01:59, December 12, 2013 (UTC)


 * And yet you forget Von attacked me, not the other way around. AP was never attacked since he was too powerful. Fed's Caliphate was always on the offensive, and most of his lands were too deep to reach. That meant the Caliphate's vassals were never attacked at once. Also, if you remembered, Nunavut and the surrounding lands were never leaders, but that they were M. And you've just answered your own statement. The lands that Britain had as supporting leaders had coastlines. With the exception of a few large dominions, all of my lands have coastlines. Darfur and Chad are huge and can fight on the same level as the other dominions militarily and economically. They may require naval support, but they are quite capable of serving on the same level as their fellow dominons. They can buy their own ships to serve as transport. OTL Ethiopia is landlocked, yet it has a merchant marine anyway. And what's funny about those chances is that they work and they can be proven. You can't complain since those chances always appear to be in my favor, according to yourself that is. Flag of the Hurian Federation.png Vivaporius: "I don't need a slogan" 02:16, December 12, 2013 (UTC)

You're taking what I said the wrong way. This war is so implausible, it's borderline impossible. I was saying that we disregard the outcome and cross it out like any other severely ASB turn, replacing it with one that was more plausible. CrimsonAssassin- "I have special eyes" 01:17, December 12, 2013 (UTC)


 * I understand what your saying Crimson, but I'm still a bit concerned about the disregard of the community's disregard of transport of the time, replacing it with the general belief that Siberia is inaccessible to every other nation on the planet regardless of their abilities to reach the region. Italy, France, Poland and Czechoslovakia all contributed troops to the invasion of Siberia in 1919. The Czechs sent 50,000 men to fight in Vladvostok, and they were landlocked, yet clearly capable of reaching a city literally on the other side of the world for them. So its entirely possible. But you'd have to know that to say that. So your insistence that Ethiopia couldn't reach Siberia is as ridiculous as saying the Czechs and the Poles couldn't, even though, according to the facts, they did get to Siberia. Flag of the Hurian Federation.png Vivaporius: "I don't need a slogan" 01:24, December 12, 2013 (UTC)

Viva, cut it out.

Virtually all of those "historical facts" you're quoting aren't true.

Lordganon (talk) 11:31, December 12, 2013 (UTC)

Please Ganon, prove me wrong. Since you know so much, which historical facts are wrong? It'd be quite interesting to see this. I can back up what I say, I'd like to see you do the same. In fact, I'd be more than happy to show you my "facts" since I know very well you will not be able to do the same. Vivaporius: "I don't need a slogan" 18:03, December 12, 2013 (UTC)

I feel I should have posted this earlier, but no matter. According to John Bradley's The Czechoslovak Legion in Russia, 1914–1920, there were 50,000 Czechoslovak troops the participated in the Allied intervention in Russia. The same book states that 53,455 soldiers, 3,004 officers, 6,714 civilians, 1,716 wives, 717 children, 1,935 foreigners, 198 others returned to Czechoslovakia from Vladivostok using 21 boats purchased from the United States and Great Britain (12 American and 9 British). The Polish 5th Siberian Rifle Division is a military unit that the Poles used to fight in Siberia, and later went on to form the 30th Infantry Division of Poland. This according to Jonathan D. Smele's Civil War in Siberia. That division was made up of 17,000 Poles, not counting the other 15,000 that fought elsewhere in Southern Russia. So this in effect shows that my "facts" are facts. Done. Vivaporius: "I don't need a slogan" 07:45, December 13, 2013 (UTC)

The Czechs and Poles were prisoners in Russia that revolted get your facts straight. Simply put your numbers are inflated and you are being ASB. In addition your population is hugely inflated. You would not be able to support those number on Africa with 19 hundred tech. HELL Africa today is at about 1 billion only. With Chad and Darfur, they are huge but they are barren and low density, the tech and the population isnt there for them to fight a war on the other side of the world. Scandinator (talk) 14:50, December 13, 2013 (UTC)

I'm sure the same link I used said thoses were the numbers, unless you can prove otherwise. And your latter point is as valid as saying that Switzerland and Austria can't sent their troops to go fight in Iraq because their landlocked. Africa only has one billion people due to the vast famines, wars, diseases and emigration on the continent. Get your facts straight. Plus, since this is alternate history, Ethiopia was able to get around the history population issue by countering droughts, dealing with pestilence, and using medicines that prolonged the average life expectancy of a citizen. If droughts, disease, war, and famine were befalling you nation each and every decade, wouldn't your population take a while to grow? The fact that you have difficulty comprehending that disturbs me. I'm quite sure the world was shocked when the first city that reached one million people didn't collapse under a wave of human waste and pollution. People adapt and thrive.

Darfur has been controlled by Ethiopia for two centuries, more than enough time for an advanced nation to develop the other. It has the tech and the population, as the f***ing list above you states (it appears I forgot to add Darfur to the list). Chad had nine million people, so I don't know where their "population deficency" is. And your assuming that their population is dispersed across a broad region. If the majority of the land is barren, then would the population reside in packed areas like in OTL? In fact, to prove how moronic your statement it, Greece had a population of five million in 1914, yet it invaded the Ottoman Empire with a force of 200,000 men. Greece was poor and technologically backwards by world standards of the time, and most of the country was mountainous. Yet it was still powerful enough to launch a major invasion of another country five times its size, and its population resided in large urban areas since they had too.

You can't say anything since Crimson himself stated that China's ATL population is much larger since none of the major rebellions that ripped out chunks of its OTL population never happened. So he has 100 million more people thanks to the stability he's had. Your ardent need to adhere to real life and ignore any and all possible changes in alternate history, labelling them ASB, are both unfair and irritating. Your lack of knowledge on historical events or geological facts (such as stating that the Czechs couldn't be in Siberia or not knowing that Zaire had $24 trillion worth of mineral reserves) is also irritating. Every source I have read states that the Czechoslovak Legion was 50,000 men strong. I don't know if your blind or slow, but even Wikipedia states that's how big the legion was. So I don't know what numbers I was inflating. You base all of your arguments on OTL, then you tell everyone else that OTL doesn't matter. I don't know if your liars, hypocrites, or just dumb, but your inability to accept that you could or are in fact wrong is saddening. Vivaporius: "I don't need a slogan" 18:14, December 13, 2013 (UTC)

Yes but you do not have the right to have a population size AS LARGE AS THE ENTIRE BRITISH EMPIRE AT THE TIME. By your numbers being inflated I meant your population. In addition, Darfur and Chad have had years of prosperity, Greece was under Ottoman rule for 5 centuries; they had a powerful reason to attack the disorganised Turkey that was in total chaos with the loss of all of Mesopotamia, the Levant and Arabia. Chad today has a population of 12 million and your Chad is smaller. In addition I do not appreciate the name-calling.

Nominations
*North Merina nominates: Calcutta *Lanka: Calcutta
 * Portugal nominates: Lisboa
 * León nominates: Lisboa
 * Castille nominates: Lisboa
 * Aragon nominates: Lisboa
 * Brasil nominates Lisboa
 * Argentina nominates Lisboa
 * Majorca nominates: Lisboa.
 * Barcelona nominates: Lisboa.
 * France nominates: Lisboa.
 * La Marche nominates: Lisboa.
 * Navarra nominates: Lisboa
 * Ethiopia nominates: Calcutta
 * Kenya nominates: Calcutta
 * Somalia nominates: Calcutta
 * Kitara nominates: Calcutta
 * Tanganyika nominates: Calcutta
 * Darfur nominates: Calcutta
 * Chad nominates: Calcutta
 * Nigeria nominates: Calcutta
 * Mali nominates: Calcutta
 * New Borona nominates: Calcutta
 * Nunavut nominates: Calcutta
 * Baridi nominates: Calcutta
 * Tamaini nominates: Calcutta
 * Wadab nominates: Calcutta
 * Angola nominates: Calcutta
 * South Merina nominates: Calcutta
 * Senegal nominates: Calcutta
 * Guinea nominates: Calcutta
 * All those votes were temporarily invalidated.You need to vote for another city.it was estabilished previously that the same player can't host the Olympics twice in less than 12 years.Since you won 1912, you can't vote for yourself again.
 * Ah, I thought we were doing it again for another reason. Is it possible for me to vote for another city within my nation, or is that not allowed? ~Viva
 * No.you have to vote for some city in a country that belongs to another player.
 * Done. ~Viva
 * Four votes were reinvalidated, as the nation are not registered in the Olympic Committee.Sorry for not noticing earlier.
 * Germany and all associated commonwealths abstain
 * All seven Neu Berlin nation nominate Lisboa
 * (Neu Berlin, Ostkasodan, Kanada, River Lakota, Novnovgorod, Greater Transcaucasia)
 * I had to list them just for the record--Collie Kaltenbrunner (talk) 07:34, December 12, 2013 (UTC)'
 * ​HER nominates Lisboa
 * BER nominates Lisboa
 * TER nominates Lisboa
 * EER nominates Lisboa
 * The other 15 UER states nominate Lisboa
 * (Italia, Yugoslavia, Romania, Hungary, Belgium, Netherlands, Luxembourg, Antilia, Caribia, Equatore, Aymara, Pacifico, Australis, South East Asia and Tsingapore)
 * United Maharajya: Calcutta
 * Uttarshina: Calcutta
 * Dakshin Maharajya: Calcutta
 * Cebu: Calcutta
 * The two votes in question are invalid, as the nation are not registered in the Olympic Committee.Sorry for not noticing earlier.

Voting count

 * Lisboa: 36
 * Calcutta: 18

Far East Republic
Uhh this is probably a little stupid but where exactly is the Far East Republic? lol. PitaKang- My Life for Aiur! En Taro Tassadar 22:13, December 12, 2013 (UTC)

Siberia. Although, I think you're fine in Korea. You'll actually have something interesting to do with it. That is, rebelling against equalist (communist) rule.

23:07, December 12, 2013 (UTC)

the Far east Republic should become part of russia soon, so Korea would be a better choise, although i would not want to force Crimson to adopt a bunch of rebels...-Lx (leave me a message) 00:30, December 13, 2013 (UTC)

They don't have to do anything, Lx. I'm really getting sick of your deliberate ignorance of mod events. Plus the rebels aren't Bolsheviks anymore. They're radical equalists who aren't go into surrender in mass numbers like that. The reason why you got Baltica back in the fist place was that you spent more time on influencing them, but now you expect them to flock to you without work. This time I've got an 8 turn lead, but you just post as if they never left. Leave Pita alone. Yank 03:12, December 13, 2013 (UTC)

I think he's rightfully tired of you giving him bullshit mod events every month. You only have an eight turn lead because you continue to create such events that make his hard earned territories rebel for your own personal gain. And for the record, you've lost to Germany this time. Why don't you leave Lx alone?

03:16, December 13, 2013 (UTC)

That's fine. What I want is Eesti. And I've learned since 1858. I didn't just make the join. I'm not alone. Imp's got my back. It doesn't change the fact that Pita does not need to change his nation for you. You don't need to browbeat him into changing his nation.Yank 03:24, December 13, 2013 (UTC)

Imp has got your back because he takes great pleasure in destroying the nations of others and then building up differently to create a world map which agrees with his wishes. I don't really have any objection to him, but you've done it twice now. Also, we're not doing that. I care not for where Pita goes; you are the one trying to coerce him into the FER, which doesn't exist as of 1914.

03:27, December 13, 2013 (UTC)

He had already post before your buddy Lx decided to swallow him up. Did he agree to that? Because he didn't say that he wanted to be gobbled by Lx. I would have dropped it if he decided to continue to be Korea, its you Gus who want to browbeat him into doing your bidding. Yank 03:33, December 13, 2013 (UTC)

I really don't see how I'm trying to make him do anything. You on the other hand have gone out of your way to convince to him to be FER.

03:36, December 13, 2013 (UTC)

Also, he only posted this turn while he was Korea for the last two turns. So this is technically against the rules since he did it without notice.

03:39, December 13, 2013 (UTC)

We could say the rebellion against the Chinese was crushed. Boom! Problem solved. Yank 03:43, December 13, 2013 (UTC)

Which is metagaming.

03:44, December 13, 2013 (UTC)

I'm inclined to agree with Scraw here. He has some valid points. Pita did post as Korea, and didn't do anything to destroy the nation before he switched. Also, powers that support the FER were trying to convince Pita to play as it. Just give Lx a break and put aside personal agendas.

Your loving mediator,

CourageousLife (talk)

They were fighting against China with no foreign support. And it was a China without anything like the Great Leap Forward to destroy the regime's popularity. It should have been done when he transfered anyway. Russia can get Ukraine and Byelorussia back, and the Kazakhs never left. Yank 03:57, December 13, 2013 (UTC)


 * Actually, their fighting with clandestine Ethiopian military and logistical support. Flag of the Hurian Federation.png Vivaporius: "I don't need a slogan" 04:55, December 13, 2013 (UTC)

Plus there's the fact that Korea wasn't Pita's to take anyway. It was already controlled by China, and thus Crimson. I'm just returning it to it's rightful owner.Yank 04:49, December 13, 2013 (UTC)

Lovers' quarrel? Vivaporius: "I don't need a slogan"

It should be specified that unless a player is inactive no one may take his nations. Which, despite what Lx thinks, doesn't apply to those that have declared independence. Crim, while he posts infrequently, is not inactive. Therefore Korea wasn't available for Pita to take in the first place. Yank 04:55, December 13, 2013 (UTC)

Wait, so unless the user is inactive, nobody can take one of his colonies and rebel? I can smell the BS in this rule already. I would rather play as Korea but I was pressured by Yank to switch. So which should I play as? PitaKang- My Life for Aiur! En Taro Tassadar 09:52, December 13, 2013 (UTC)

Hey, I don't post infrequently. I post sporadically. Pita, if you really want to play as Korea, go ahead, but I really would prefer if it was kept close to China diplomatically (meaning keeping Equalism). If you have questions or concerns, meet me on chat or post on my talk page. CrimsonAssassin- "I have special eyes" 15:28, December 13, 2013 (UTC)

The reason why you got Baltica back was because you had spent the time necessary to get them back. Now you just assume that they are under your control. That is against the rules. The rules state that to vassalize an independent nation you must spend at least 4-5 turns doing so. Both me and Andy have followed the rules, you have not. Yank 20:11, December 13, 2013 (UTC)
 * Its not like now he just assumes this.He always has done this when he lost territory, but to a smaller degree.--Collie Kaltenbrunner (talk) 21:03, December 13, 2013 (UTC)

All that proves is that Lx has a chronic problem with following the damn rules. Yank 21:07, December 13, 2013 (UTC)
 * I remember his reaction to that mod event that split his nation for the second time back in 1850.He posted something to the effect that he got the lands back with no effort, and barely acknowledged the event's existence.And i also remember the first time that his nation got broken up and his reaction then as well.After the Caliphate's breakup, he and the other guy who played as Muscovy (what was his name?) started to complain because they didn't got all of Russia back to them instantly, as it had then split into many city-states.The other guy even left the game because of that.And don't even get me started on the 100 years (i think) of complaints about the map.--Collie Kaltenbrunner (talk) 21:03, December 13, 2013 (UTC)

Like a spoiled brat he has a history of complaining when he doesn't get his way. It would have been better if he had went the way of Muscovy's player. I remember then both complaining that a few of the post-Caliphate states shouldn't have existed because OTL says they shouldn't have any cities to use as capital. Only an idiot uses OTL to justify something ATL. Especially when things could have changed in TTL. We have finally told the spoiled brat "No" and he can't stand it. Yank 21:18, December 13, 2013 (UTC) Yank 22:34, December 13, 2013 (UTC)

Centuries of you being an asshole needs to stop too. Post remover.

22:39, December 13, 2013 (UTC)

I wouldn't need to be an asshole if we had stopped coddling Lx centuries ago. You're blindly supporting a player who's been flaunting the rules for much of the game. Yank 22:41, December 13, 2013 (UTC)

??WHen that happened I had to get that stuff back using hard work. You guys took advantage of my absence, and killed russia. I got moscow, and spent the next 100 years trying to restorw what I had before so I can expand into the black siberia. How did you spoil me when I NEVER, as you say, got my way. Even in PM1 you didnt like me. You guys never explain anything. All I want are some DAMNED EXPLANATIONS. THose are the things I never get, and whenever you are proven wrong, you just pretend like it never happened. I feel like leaving will just endulge your god complex yank, so I'll try and hold out for as long as I can. THis is the SECOND time you destroy russia implausibly without any explanations and by being extremely disconnected from reality. This is also the second (or perhaps third) time that you destroyed russia and took some of its land, benefiting form my absence. How is that being spoiled? You are more like the schoolyard bullies robbing me of my lumch money and then pretending that never happened.-Lx (leave me a message) 22:42, December 13, 2013 (UTC)

read Collie's posts before you bitch about how unfair I am.Yank 22:47, December 13, 2013 (UTC) Well, Yank, being the aforementioned player of Muscovy, I can happily assure everyone here that, in the word's of Vinny, "Everything that guy just said was BS."

Neither I nor Lx EVER said anything about the Calipahte's cities; we complained that they took over a nation around the size of the USA, with the third best military on earth, with almost every single citizen trained in some sort of martial arts, in one day; and for the record, Lurk agreed with us, and later stated that it was implausible.

Then we complained that despite the fact that all of our territories except Poland were ethnically Russian, apparently, the Caliphate collapsed them all into little itty nations and then refused our request to have some sense of plausibility. I believe I put Von's actions, at the time, as a declaration of "God and ASB", and dammit, you are doing the exact same thing right now. You're breaking up an empire that has no reason to collapse in a single day, with neither the player's consent nor any real grounding in plausibility.

And to think I once defended your modding against Scraw on chat.

I dearly repent that now. You have taken what has become a fairly ASB, and pushed it past the point of no return.

I thought that's what Von and Fed had done, last time, but I was fortunately wrong.

WIth you, I very much doubt it.

As I said when I left: Let this be a reminder of a time when men were real men, nations were real nations, and Principia Moderni was a plausible map game.

22:48, December 13, 2013 (UTC)

*insert slow applause here*

Yank, you really break more rules than Lx. Not just the game rules, but generally accepted how-not-be-a-total-dick rules as well.

22:56, December 13, 2013 (UTC)

Eastern European Conference
I decided, in the spirit of diplomacy, to form this conference where the parties of Germany, Scandinavia and Russia may air their grievences in regards to the questioned soveriengty of Esti and Baltica. Please, let us attempt to keep a civil tone in this discourse. Trust Me, I'm The Doctor (talk)

Germany feels, as Batlica rebelled away, and has been steadily influencing Baltica for approx. 6 years now, that Balitca is now a soveriegn Commonwealth of the Democratic Commonwealths of the German Empire. Trust Me, I'm The Doctor (talk) 21:35, December 13, 2013 (UTC)

THis is beond diplomacy. Yank is godmoding and had a grudge against me, and he has the attitude that he can do anything and get away with it and I cant do jack shit to stop him.-Lx (leave me a message) 22:25, December 13, 2013 (UTC)

Centuries of you acting like a brat need to end now.Yank 22:34, December 13, 2013 (UTC)

Well there goes diplomacy.... Germany pulls its delegates. Its obvious this is going no-where.Trust Me, I'm The Doctor (talk)

I can't believe this actualy has to be a sectiuon
Well, it seems that, despite all logic, we have to clarify a phew moderator rules that I was led to believe were plainly obvious, but now it seems that we have 2 options, one of which we need to add to the rules in the moderator section to clarify many things. I think the answer is obvious and that this section should not have existed in the first place, but obviously this is incorrect

Option One

 * Moderators can not destroy another player's empire for their own personal gain(sime enough, you can't make mod events that benefit you at the expense of another player)


 * Moderators can not destroy another player's empire for their own personal gain(sime enough, you can't make mod events that benefit you at the expense of another player)


 * Mod events must, as player posts do, adhere to the laws of plausibility


 * Moderators can not cause civil wars from monarch deaths past the early 19th century(this is about the time people almost universaly respected rule of law over largest-army diplomacy)


 * Moderators can not cause total destruction of an empire in one single event. THis type of thing nver happened overnight, and took many years, Empires do not fall for no reason overnight, there must be buildup


 * Moderators can not cause a complete declaration of independance, the most they can do is cause an armed revolt, which the player may chose to accept terms, or use military algorithm to retake, just like in the begining of PMII and end of PMI.


 * Moderators can not target one player for no particular reason time and time again.


 * If any of these rules are broken, and with no logical explination, players may submit an impeachment request if they were on this wiki for x ammount of days and have y ammnount of edits, and will become an impeachment hearing with one moderator's support.

>simple enough right? most of these were "unwritten rules or uderstandings" from what I gathered, but anyway, here is

Option two

 * Moderators are INfallible. Their word is law, and they are god. You don't like it? tough. Moderators have absolute power, and there is nothing you can do about it. We adore and uphod godmoding, and if you dont like that you should not join.

Can I get some input on this?-Lx (leave me a message) 22:32, December 13, 2013 (UTC)

Discussion
I like how Option 2 is phrased. But Option 1.

22:41, December 13, 2013 (UTC)

If I can mod in PM3, then option 2.

Otherwise, what Scraw said.

=)

22:50, December 13, 2013 (UTC)

Yeah. It's sad we have to write these things out. Option 1.

CourageousLife (talk) 22:54, December 13, 2013 (UTC)

Option 2. Yank 23:16, December 13, 2013 (UTC)

We adhere to these rules already for the most part. I never use my mod powers without reason and if I do, it's in the name of peace and sanity. Not in my name. CrimsonAssassin- "I have special eyes" 23:24, December 13, 2013 (UTC)


 * I see what you did there-Lx (leave me a message)Azarath Flag.png 23:30, December 13, 2013 (UTC)


 * Name of the Doctor reference. Good. Trust Me, I'm The Doctor (talk) 23:31, December 13, 2013 (UTC)


 * Also, you guys do realise that the proposals are open for discussion?-Lx (leave me a message)Azarath Flag.png 23:34, December 13, 2013 (UTC)


 * Stoppit Crim.


 * NO MORE xDD
 * 23:36, December 13, 2013 (UTC)


 * Crim plz. Great men (such as ourselves) are forged in fire. It is the privilege of the lesser man (such as yank and his comrades) to light the fire.
 * 23:40, December 13, 2013 (UTC)


 * <Guns looks for comrades>
 * Nothing here, scotty, beam me up!
 * 23:44, December 13, 2013 (UTC)


 * Anyway, since Yank disagrees, why don't you settle this the normal way, the sane way, the - if you will- MANLY way.


 * With insensate violence.


 * Fight! Fight! Fight!
 * 23:58, December 13, 2013 (UTC)


 * Option one is the most appealing and I agree with it. Option two is just so...sexy. I mean, who doesn't find power sexy? Flag of the Hurian Federation.png Vivaporius: "I don't need a slogan" 00:01, December 14, 2013 (UTC)


 * And Viva wins the award for Creepiest Answer! Congratulations! You want to make a speech?
 * 00:04, December 14, 2013 (UTC)


 * Yes. Um, I'd like to thank my mentor Dr. Lester, and my hero King Jeoffry. I'm...I'm just so happy about this award. I'm breaking up man. God bless America! T-T Flag of the Hurian Federation.png Vivaporius: "I don't need a slogan" 01:15, December 14, 2013 (UTC)

Wait is that a chuck reference? If so congratulationsTrust Me, I'm The Doctor (talk) 01:37, December 14, 2013 (UTC)

Well, this has pretty much degraded into multiple pop culture references. CrimsonAssassin- "I have special eyes" 01:48, December 14, 2013 (UTC)

I'm revamping the rules slightly for PMIII. Voting to impeach mods via a proper procedure will likely be included as well as a set criteron for said impeachment to be acknowledged. In addition I will be a lot more active next year and I'll keep a much closer eye on the game than I have this time round. Scandinator (talk) 04:18, December 14, 2013 (UTC)

Lx, Option 1, but The Great and Powerful Collie Kaltenbrunner doesn't trust your fifth and sixth points.

(Just thought i would jump into the pop culture reference bandwagon, but i am partially serious.The other points are fine, but the fifth and sixth need fixing; Some nations should be independent from certain others and no player is going to willingly give up their territory.If is only up to the player to determine the outcome, he is never going to lose territory unless it is some territory he never cared about.Of course there are going to be some certain players that would accept their possible losses, but most would react as i said.And plus, some certain players [*cough*DeanSims, Octavian Marius, Janisary*cough*] really deserve moderator targetting for their repeated implausibility.Of course, not everybody that is implausible sometimes should, but those three are the best examples of players who seemly just don't get the concept of plausibility, regardless of how many times we explain.This is the kind of player we shouldn't have.)--Collie Kaltenbrunner (talk) 09:47, December 14, 2013 (UTC)

More Far East Questions
Also, what would be the population of the Far East Republic be? And what are its relations to the states around it? PitaKang- My Life for Aiur! En Taro Tassadar 01:32, December 14, 2013 (UTC)

Also where exactly in Siberia is the FER? Is it the black part up north? PitaKang- My Life for Aiur! En Taro Tassadar 01:37, December 14, 2013 (UTC)

It's low. I think the FER's relations are respectful to it's neighbors, and it has been recognized by Germany. It's in what was a chunk of Russian Siberia. Whatever the FER is, it is definitely not a threat to Russia. Definitely prime underdog territory here! Yank 01:40, December 14, 2013 (UTC)

Alright then, can I get it added to the map? PitaKang- My Life for Aiur! En Taro Tassadar 01:42, December 14, 2013 (UTC)

I'm thinking that the Far East Republic/Greater Siberian Empire can be used as a convienient place for all those local Siberian tribes to be sent. Yank 02:03, December 14, 2013 (UTC)

Yank, how can you call me the one who's trying to make Pita do what I want? Anyways Pita, Russia is currently in the process of (not in control of) vassalizing the area. Also, Collie refuses to put it on the map. idk why. The population is one million or something, but it has a decent two or three pixel coastline. Not sure if it'd be frozen or not.

Also Yank, the FER has those Siberians already so plz.

02:30, December 14, 2013 (UTC)
 * I am not refusing to put it on the map.i didn't put in the map originally because i thought that it was going to be reabsorbed by Russia quickly, so there was no use for that.The Ethiopia debacle didn't help matters (was there any resolution to that?) and now i am waiting for you guys to decide whether Lx gets it back or not.--Collie Kaltenbrunner (talk) 17:03, December 14, 2013 (UTC)

Russia shouldn't be able to vassalize a nation already controled by a player. He did the first post on vassalizing them after Pita had already posted. The FER/GSE has the former Russian Pacific coast. I still don't know why there's any need to vassalize when they're clearly not a threat. Also, once again, Germany has given them diplomatic recognition. Yank 02:36, December 14, 2013 (UTC)

Also I'm just giving Pita some ideas. Nothing more than that. Yank 02:37, December 14, 2013 (UTC)

OK, let's get this straight. Also, that's bullshit:
 * 1) Pita was not legally the FER when Russia started vassalizing it.
 * 2) You then resolved this via cheating via mod event.
 * 3) Now you expect everyone to believe that it is not a threat to Russia. I would very much like to see what you would do if you had the bulk of your territory lost as well as one coastline.
 * 4) So? One recognition a nation does not make.

"Definitely prime underdog territory here!"

The sentence is screaming "HEY PITA YOU SHOULD TAKE THIS NATION JUST SO WE CAN PISS OFF LX AND THEN I WILL BREAK HIS NATION UP AGAIN AND WE CAN INVADE IT FROM BOTH SIDES!"

So please, do not try to pass this off as innocence.

02:42, December 14, 2013 (UTC)

The bulk of the Russian population is still in Russia. Is this going to be the next Eesti? I fail to see how a nation with a fraction of Russia's population is a threat to Russia. Yank 02:54, December 14, 2013 (UTC)

It's still lost territory you idiot. Everyone wants their lost territory back. What would you do if you lost everything north of Stockholm?

02:57, December 14, 2013 (UTC)

I recognized the FER after Pita posted, so I recognized a player nation, I also stipulated that they must remain friendly to Russia and or be a Russian fed member. On a side note, name calling is not professional. Please let's all be civil.Trust Me, I'm The Doctor (talk) 03:02, December 14, 2013 (UTC)

How is FER/GSE a threat? How is a nation primarily focused on internal issues a threat to your precious Russia? Yank 03:02, December 14, 2013 (UTC)

No one said it was a threat. What are you smoking? Everyone wants their lost territory back. ffs

03:03, December 14, 2013 (UTC)

They get the far more valuable (not to mention populous) territory of Ukraine, Byelorussia and Eesti back. There's no reason why they can't leave the FER/GSE alone. Yank 03:05, December 14, 2013 (UTC)

If Pita cannot play as the FER, is there another nation open to him?Trust Me, I'm The Doctor (talk)

http://fc08.deviantart.net/fs70/f/2013/224/5/c/facedesk_gif_by_katetls-d684dcx.gif

Yank, you're an idiot, you know that? I would very much like to see right now what you would do in the face of losing territory as important as this. In case you didn't notice it was Russia's ONLY access to the Pacific.

03:11, December 14, 2013 (UTC)

I could say the same for you, but I won't. I don't think it'd be too much to ask Pita for a trade agreement. And you resorting to personal attacks only convinces me I'm right even more. Andy's trying to be diplomatic, but you're ignoring him to spit insults at me. Yank 03:21, December 14, 2013 (UTC)

I would react very much like Lx.

And that's mostly because you're acting like quite the idiot atm.

04:09, December 14, 2013 (UTC)

If you would like to play as another nation Pita, you can join the UER as one or more of its consituant territories. I'm open to releasing the Aymaran and Ecuatorean or the South East Asian Republics to you. You'd just have to follow the UER framwork and declare when the UER declares for the next 40 turns or so. Scandinator (talk) 04:39, December 14, 2013 (UTC)

Lol didn't know my decision would create so much controversy... I assumed that since I only posted as one turn for Korea and it didn't really even have that much of an impact I could switch... I mean I'm honestly good in any nation you guys give me, I just don't know whats open... PitaKang- My Life for Aiur! En Taro Tassadar 12:54, December 14, 2013 (UTC)

Nominations

 * Portugal nominates: Copenhagen
 * León nominates: Copenhagen
 * Castille nominates: Copenhagen
 * Aragon nominates: Copenhagen
 * Brasil nominates Neu Berlin
 * Argentina nominates Neu Berlin
 * Majorca nominates: Copenhagen
 * Barcelona nominates: Copenhagen
 * France nominates: Copenhagen
 * La Marche nominates: Copenhagen
 * Navarra nominates: Copenhagen
 * HER nominates Copenhagen
 * TER nominates Copenhagen
 * BER nominates Copenhagen
 * EER nominates Copenhagen
 * Neu Berlin nominates Neu Berlin
 * Novomoskovsk supports Neu Berlin
 * Kanada supports Neu Berlin
 * River Lakota support Neu Berlin
 * Sioux support Neu Berlin
 * Neu Germanica supports Neu Berlin
 * DCGE(Germany) nominates Copenhagen
 * Albion nominates Copenhagen
 * Australis nominates Neu Berlin
 * Afrika nominates Neu Berlin
 * Selk'nam nominate Neu Berlin
 * Yagich Rafeal nominate Neu Berlin
 * Attican Union nominate Neu Berlin
 * Praetorate of Eternal Matter nominate Copenhagen
 * Mayan Empire nominates Neu Berlin

Voting count

 * Copenhagen: 16
 * Neu Berlin: 14

vacation
I'm going to be unavailable for the most part from December 16,2013 to January 3, 2014. I'm going to a region with little to no internet connectivity. Whilst I am gone, I turn over stewardship of Germany to Callum. If he is unavailable than I request Imp to post on my behalf. During this time I do not want Germany involved in any world conflict if avoidable. I will resume duties promptly on either the 3rd or the 4th. If I a have any service, I will try to post intermittently, otherwise Imp or Callum may post. Thank you all and have a happy holidays and a good new year.Trust Me, I'm The Doctor (talk) 03:13, December 15, 2013 (UTC)

See you next year! ;D

03:15, December 15, 2013 (UTC)

It is with regret that I say that I am going to Scotland on Tuesday, which means that from 1918, depending on the availability of internet at the houses of my Scottish relatives, I may not be able to post for roughly three weeks. I ask Imp to post for me as well as for Andrew. If it turns out there is internet there, then I will post for Andrew and me. I too ask for Germany not to be involved in any major war. Sorry for the inconvenience, thanks Imp in advance, and hopefully I'll be able to post anyway. Callumthered (talk) 12:13, December 15, 2013 (UTC)


 * You regret coming to Scotland? No neeps and tatties for you young lad. Although I am heading to Mumbai from Scotland so... [[Image:1.png|23px]] Imp (Say Hi?!) 08:55, December 19, 2013 (UTC)

Apostolic Election 1916
Candidates:

Votes

Kogasa: Bishop John Seltzer

Rex:

Lemming: John Seltzer

Grantzu:

Andrew: Bishop John Seltzer, Apostolic Bishop orginally from London, but assumed duties in Wales after the corrupt Elmo was ousted. He has spent plenty of effort in trying to repair the image of the church. He also single handedly brought the Church to Brittany and Scotland.

Courageous: John Seltzer

Far East Republic, Part 4
So, any definition whether Lx has taken them back, or not?--Collie Kaltenbrunner (talk) 21:03, December 17, 2013 (UTC)

Can we just give it to him in the name of peace and sanity?

22:33, December 17, 2013 (UTC)

Well my nation is intervening. We will try to take down the current government as well as the wilder Equalists and put in socialists. Imp (Say Hi?!) 00:18, December 18, 2013 (UTC)

Seriously? Am I the only one who doesn't want do anything there?

Also, you'll need an algo for that.

00:28, December 18, 2013 (UTC)

Algo is coming tommorrow. Yank 00:29, December 18, 2013 (UTC)\

ANyway...I saw Russia gets the as-of-yet-undefined "Largest and most advanced tank army" bonus in one of the mod events if memory serves right...and a "militarized populace" and should have the post-revolution/civil war *1.5 bonus...if not corrections would be apreciated...-Lx (leave me a message) 19:07, December 18, 2013 (UTC)

Tomorrow's almost over...algo?

23:35, December 18, 2013 (UTC)

"Holiday"
Hey guys, from Thursday I'll be going on holiday and might not get time to post. Therefore if someone like Collie could post for Andrew and Cal and perhaps Viva might be able to post for me if I cannot get on. I'll try to get on for a few minutes everyday, however. :D  Imp (Say Hi?!) 00:15, December 18, 2013 (UTC)

Sure I can do that. Looks like I've got to care for Germany too as part Andrew's request should Cal be unable to. Three massive empires. Dang it... -_- Vivaporius: "I don't need a slogan" 05:10, December 18, 2013 (UTC)

While we're at it, would anyone like to post for the Selk'nam for the next week or so? Commandante Lemming (talk) 16:50, December 18, 2013 (UTC)

And this is why people shouldn't celebrate Christmas. Vivaporius: "I don't need a slogan" 17:10, December 18, 2013 (UTC)

I celebrate Hanukkah - my fiance's family, however - celebrate Christmas. Therefore I will still be on vacation, your problem has not been solved! Happy ChrismaHannuKwanzaakah everyone! Commandante Lemming (talk) 17:13, December 18, 2013 (UTC)

I'm finbaly done exams...hurrah! just finished my last one now...howerver I will be leaving to florida...by car...on the evening of the 25th...and will be internetless in the ocean for a good 2-3 weeks after florida...so...esentialy, could Andrew or Scraw post for Russia and Asociates...like, half work on military, the other half on economy, and when time for nuke and space comes around, do nuke and space, since I like those kinds of things...for my nation or colaition of nations...-Lx (leave me a message) 19:05, December 18, 2013 (UTC)

Viva, I suppose we can split duties. You can take care of the Impire, and I shall attempt to manage Germany and Russia.

23:37, December 18, 2013 (UTC)


 * Not Germany. Andrew had asked me to do so, and so it would be passed on to Viva, if I cannot post. [[Image:1.png|23px]] Imp (Say Hi?!) 23:40, December 18, 2013 (UTC)
 * I'll happily help out with someone. Scandinator (talk) 09:41, December 19, 2013 (UTC)

Socialists
Total: 101
 * Location: 3
 * Tactical Advantage: +1 (unsure colonial size)
 * Strength: United Maharaya (L), Rajputana (L), Scandinavia (L): 12/4 = 3
 * Military Development: 16/0 = 16
 * Economy: 14/0 = 14
 * Infrastructure: 0
 * Expansion: 0
 * Motive: 5+5+5 = 15
 * Chance: 7
 * Edit Count: 9001
 * UTC Time: 23:31= 18
 * (9001/18)*pi = 1570.97086
 * Nation Age: 5
 * Population: +29
 * Participation: +10
 * Recent Wars: 0

Russia
Total: 13
 * Location: 5
 * Tactical Advantage: 0
 * Strength: Russia (L): 4/12 = 0
 * Military Development: 0
 * Economy: 0
 * Infrastructure: 0
 * Expansion: 0
 * Motive: 10
 * Chance: 0
 * Nation Age: -10
 * Population: 8
 * Participation: +10
 * Recent Wars: -10

Results
((101/(101+13))*2) - 1 = 0.7719298

Therefore in four years the Socialist Alliance wins in the Russian Front and bring the region to peace. The regions in Yellow are under Scandinavian control. The lands of the north can either be made into a vassal, puppet state or intergrated into the nation. The rest are Orissan control zones - apart from the Capital District which will be under joint control currently and will be the current focus of reconstruction. The rest of the nation is under 3 zones - with the central zone being most populated.

Discussion
Is there going to be any goddamn progress or are we going to retcon this war? Yank 20:05, December 19, 2013 (UTC)

Look, I said I was on holiday and so I will be lucky to get some editing done. -- Imp (Say Hi?!) 17:04, December 20, 2013 (UTC)

Did you need any support? Vivaporius: "I don't need a slogan" 16:27, December 21, 2013 (UTC)

I don't think so, lol. :D  Imp (Say Hi?!) 16:33, December 21, 2013 (UTC)

Autos
Felt like this needed to be a section. For some people, it's obvious who their auto companies are in OTL. Others are not so obvious. For the sake of all of our sanities, I'm gonna organize this now, before it really takes off. Please post your nation, your companies, and their OTL counterparts. CourageousLife (talk) 03:58, December 19, 2013 (UTC)

Mayan Empire

 * Ahaulel - Lexus
 * Autohil - Toyota
 * Future Scion

Japan

 * Daihatsu -
 * Isuzu Motors -
 * Mitsubishi Motors -

Neu Berlin

 * Mercedes Motor Company - Ford
 * Junker Automobile Corporation - Cadillac
 * Kaisermobil - Lincoln
 * Tiger - Jaguar
 * Volkswagen Corporation - as is
 * Rosenfeld - Chevrolet
 * Germanish Wagen Company - Lamborghini and Bugatti
 * Gelwag -- Jeep
 * General Motors - as is
 * Porsche Automobile Holding - Porsche
 * Something that will be Dodge
 * Something that will be Chrysler
 * Geronimo - Pontiac

Imperium Africana

 * n/a - Rolls-Royce
 * n/a - Ferrari
 * n/a - BMW
 * n/a - Honda
 * n/a - Caparo

UER

 * Benedetti - Lamborghini
 * Fugger - Fiat
 * Maria - Alfa Romeo
 * Veloce - Ferrari

Germany(the ones whom invented the auto)

 * BMW
 * Benz Motor Werke
 * Subaru Auto Teknik

Himekaidou

 * Nitori Motors -

Discussion
So....the Mayans are making Japanese builds and the Japs are making Japanese builds made by the subsidiaries of those companies...logic.

04:18, December 19, 2013 (UTC)

Yup. CourageousLife (talk) 04:22, December 19, 2013 (UTC)

Well dang Scrawland, way to take all of the American and German car companies. CourageousLife (talk) 04:34, December 19, 2013 (UTC)

Aside from Toyota and Lexus (as they've been taken by the Mayans) I plan to establish the OTL Japanese Auto Companies in TTL (or at least what I can), with the same names. -Kogasa  2013 December 19, 06:41 (CET)

Sorry about that, Kogosa. Naturally, I have to pull from somewhere, as there are no OTL Mayan car companies. Or anything Mayan, for that matter. I'll probably subdivide Toyota and Lexus into new companies later on. CourageousLife (talk) 04:53, December 19, 2013 (UTC)

I'm saying Ferrari and Lamborghini as to what they do. Benedetti for big and luxury cars, Fugger for the largest and mass-produced, Maria for small cars and Veloce for luxury sports cars. Scandinator (talk) 09:39, December 19, 2013 (UTC)

Here's what I'm going to say about this -

1) Don't be a car hog. Leave some for everyone else.

2) If you claim an OTL Brand, you need to have a car company to apply it to. No car company, no OTL claims.

3) If you violate these first two, people are going to (rightfully) steal your brands. Deal with it.

CourageousLife (talk) 21:49, December 19, 2013 (UTC)

I plan on selling stuff to Fiat if it's created.

21:53, December 19, 2013 (UTC)

Viva, can I point out that BMW stands for Bavarian AutoWorks? You really cannot not have an ATL version of that.

22:43, December 19, 2013 (UTC)

Yeah. Also, Andrew's been saying it for ages.

22:45, December 19, 2013 (UTC)

Nominations

 * France nominates Carthage
 * Barcelona nominates Bucharest
 * Majorca nominates Rome
 * Aragon nominates Buda (Hungary)
 * Brasil nominates Buda
 * Argentina nominates Buda
 * Portugal nominates Buda
 * Castille nominates Buda
 * León nominates Buda
 * Granada nominates Buda
 * Navarra nominates Buda
 * Mutapa nominates Bhubaneswar
 * La Marche nominates Carthage
 * United Maharajya nominates Bhubaneswar
 * Slashing Maharajya nominates Bhubaneswar
 * Uttarshina nominates Bhubaneswar
 * Mayan Empire nominates Neu Berlin
 * Neu Berlin/Kanada/Novnovgorod/River Lakota/Sioux support Neu Berlin

Voting count

 * Buda: 8
 * Neu Berlin: 6
 * Bhubaneswar: 4
 * Carthage: 2
 * Bucharest: 1
 * Rome: 1

Discussion
Now, what is going to happen if Neu Berlin is still at war by the time the Olympics come? --Collie Kaltenbrunner (talk) 07:31, December 21, 2013 (UTC)

One, two, three, four...Lowest voter turnout EVER.--Collie Kaltenbrunner (talk) 13:14, December 22, 2013 (UTC)

Imperium Africana
Total: 155
 * Location: +1
 * Tactical Advantage: +6
 * Strength: Ethiopia (L), Eritrea (L), Nigeria (L), Mali (L), Senegal (LW), Guinea (LW), North Merina (L), South Merina (L), Angola (L), Kenya (L), Somalia (L), Tanganyika (L), New Borona (M), Chad (M), Darfur (M), Nunavut (M), Baridi (M), Wadab (M), Nouvelle France (L), Scandinavia (L), United Maharajya (L) = 77/38 = +2
 * Military Development: +30+30+30+30+30+30+30+30+30+30+30+30+30 +30+16= 436/330 = +1
 * Economy: 0
 * Infrastructure: 0
 * Expansion: 0
 * Motive: +3 +3 +3 +3 +3 +3 +3 +3 +3 +3 +3 +3 +3 +3 +3 +3 = +45
 * Chance: +1
 * Edit Count: 4,275
 * UTC Time: 2*2*0*5=20
 * 4275/20*pi=671.5154297048625
 * Nation Age: +5+5+5+5+5+5+5+5+5+5+5+5+5+5+0 = +70
 * Population: +19 (756,000,000)
 * Participation: +10
 * Recent Wars: 0

Neu Berlin
Total: 104*1.1 = 114
 * Location: +5
 * Tactical Advantage: 0
 * Strength: Neu Berlin (L), Kanada (L), Novomoskovsk (M), River Lakota (M), Ostkasodan (L), Kasodani (MW), Greater Transcaucasia (M), Hispaniola (L), Puerto Rico (L), Sioux (M), Neu Germanica (M) = 38/79 = 0
 * Military Development: +30+30+30+30+30+30+30+30+30+30+30 = 330/436 = +0
 * Economy: 0
 * Infrastructure: 0
 * Expansion: 0
 * Motive: +10+10+10+10+10 = +50
 * Chance: +5
 * Edits: 7557
 * Time: 2*2*0*0 = 4
 * 7557/4 = 1889.25*pi = 5935.2539
 * Nation Age: +5+5+5+5+5 = +25
 * Population: +9 (101,000,000)
 * Participation: +10
 * Recent Wars: 0

Result
Hell if I know.

Discussion
Sorry, no 1.6 bonus for you. I too am of the orange industrial level.

04:21, December 20, 2013 (UTC)

Rules state a 75% supermajority of nations is needed to gain the 1.6 bonus if we're on the same level. As of the moment, I maintain the needed 75%. Vivaporius: "I don't need a slogan" 04:28, December 20, 2013 (UTC)

No no no. You're misunderstanding how this bonus works. You do not have the 1.6 bonus. This only applies if you are on different industrialization tiers. Since you are on the same tier, the bonus does not apply. Using the 1.6 bonus would imply that Scraw is 6 tiers below you, which is not the case. CourageousLife (talk) 04:41, December 20, 2013 (UTC)

Nation age is an average, not a sum. CourageousLife (talk) 04:42, December 20, 2013 (UTC)

Furthermore, all of your contries may not be counted as leaders. They are either vassals, pupppets, or in dynastic union. Vassals and Unions must be contiguous to your main nation. Any puppets have points deducted for this war. Vassals must be denoted, regardless whether they are a leader or not. CourageousLife (talk) 04:48, December 20, 2013 (UTC)

Dominions, are by definition, self-governing nations in union with the government of the mother country. So dominions can serve as true leaders (L/like Canada, Australia, and South Africa), while vassals can serve as vassals with leadership status (LV/like Newfoundland, Nepal, and Ceylon). Also, the nation age is applied to every leader on each side, not as an average. This can be seen in numerous coalition wars of the past. As for industry, rules state rather precisely that a 75% supermajority is required for any bonus. It was stated by Von that industrialization bonuses go as follows: you must either by two levels ahead of your opponent, or possess a 75% majority over your opponent if he is of the same level. This topic was brought up in the recent past, and this was the same explaination I used then. So I misunderstand nothing. Vivaporius: "I don't need a slogan" 09:05, December 20, 2013 (UTC)


 * "These differences are that location and nation age scores are done as an average of the coalition e.g. Nation A has a location score of 4 and Nation B has a location score of 2. Thus (4+2)/2 = 3, meaning the location score for the coalition of Nations A and B is 3." - Directly from the rules page.


 * As for the supermajority, it doesn't matter if Scraw has a supermajority or not. Your bonus depends on the average of his industry. You can't just discount the fact that his nations are industrialized as well.


 * CourageousLife (talk) 04:04, December 21, 2013 (UTC)

What the fuck is this? I go on holiday for two days and this happens. Imp (Say Hi?!) 17:05, December 20, 2013 (UTC)

Yank, Mscoree, and I planned on this, and I believe I spoke to you about the invasion in chat. Vivaporius: "I don't need a slogan" 17:22, December 20, 2013 (UTC)

I will be eagerly awaiting the day that Lx's greatest (and only) appeaser has been removed from the game. At this point I believe that pretty much everyone understands that any modifications to the algo would be like rearranging the deck chairs of the Titanic. Yank 21:10, December 20, 2013 (UTC)

Precisely. Vivaporius: "I don't need a slogan" 21:23, December 20, 2013 (UTC)

Yank, what business have you in this war besides getting at me personally? Metagaming much?

21:55, December 20, 2013 (UTC)

You know if we had just followed the rules the first time this happened we wouldn't be discussing this. Why? Because you wouldn't be playing. There's nothing that says that the bargain you got to get Neu Berlin should have happened. And if you really want a reason for me to fight you, then it's to support my allies in the UM and Africana. Yank 22:05, December 20, 2013 (UTC)

The rules specifically dictate that 33.33% or more allows the winner to do WHATEVER THEY WANT with the land, not ANNEX everything.

22:15, December 20, 2013 (UTC)

True. And what we want to do is annex Neu Berlin. However, since we're not monsters, you will be allowed to keep Sakartvelo, where you shall live out your days as an outcast on the world stage, and where you can do no harm. Vivaporius: "I don't need a slogan" 22:48, December 20, 2013 (UTC)

Well in that case, why didn't the Americans annex Afghanistan or Iraq after the wars there? They won, controlled em for a bit, but they never actually annexed them because that would have been MINDLESSLY stupid.

But, yeah, Scraw, shit occurred, and you lost.

22:52, December 20, 2013 (UTC)

America didn't annex Iraq or Afghanistan because there was no reason too. The goal wasn't to establish a 51st or 52nd state, but to establish a puppet government that would do the dirty work for use. Less expensive too. Plus, it really wouldn't look good on television or on the news. Just sayin'. Vivaporius: "I don't need a slogan" 23:14, December 20, 2013 (UTC)

And it is true that this war would look nice in the Newspapers...

Wait but how. They're in North America. You are on the wrong side of Africa. It is 1900. No Aeroplanes yet, at least not for transporting troops. SHips could take weeks. What is this? How you be invading? Especially given that they stretch  half way into the fricking continent...

23:19, December 20, 2013 (UTC)

The goal of the war in Iraq and Afghanistan wasn't to conquer anything. Furthermore the United States was not at war with either of those two states. If anything, they are currently working with those states, fighting insurgency groups opposed to the United States. Around this time in OTL the United States was able to ships troops across the world to Europe during World War I, so I believe it's feasible that we could do the same (in the other direction in Ethiopia's case). Mscoree (talk) 23:35, December 20, 2013 (UTC)

I guess... but I really think that Location should be differently handled. It barely has any impact on anything. It should have large impact at low industrial levels, then less at later levels.

23:38, December 20, 2013 (UTC)

I'm much closer to Neu Berlin that you think. Look at the map. Dakar to New York. One-way trip. Plus, I have those massive Canadian territories which are good for "training grounds". Vivaporius: "I don't need a slogan" 00:10, December 21, 2013 (UTC)

Fair enough, not here, but some location advantage needs to be factored in.

00:14, December 21, 2013 (UTC)

I will just point out that I never do economic expansion. Always military.

Also, even with your population numbers, your bonus is only +2 because 456000000/95000000 is only 4.8. This is the same if we use my correct population, which is more towards 101 million.

03:13, December 21, 2013 (UTC)

Aaand, factoring all that in it becomes 30%. Feel free to add any changes overnight. I shall see you all in the morning.

03:25, December 21, 2013 (UTC)

Actually, I noticed something a bit off. You only have two leaders, not eleven. And it appears that you've forgetten that Ethiopia has a far largest colonial empire than you. Vivaporius: "I don't need a slogan" 03:51, December 21, 2013 (UTC)


 * And why can't all of his nations be leaders? A good majority of yours are. You can control what nations are and aren't leaders in your coalition, but the other side also reserves this right. CourageousLife (talk) 04:24, December 21, 2013 (UTC)

I'm going to call this completely as I see it. This war was 1) unprecedented, because there was no logical reason to attack, no building tension, no obvious prejudice, except for that flaky excuse about minerals and 2) more personal than the agressor's party is willing to admit. The prejudice against Scraw is from real life encounters and has no business in the game. CourageousLife (talk) 04:21, December 21, 2013 (UTC)

Here's another thing you neglected - "Only two new colonies are allowed per 50 year period. The maximum number is seven at one time, two of which can be "large size." Large colonies are larger than OTL Peru (1,285,216 km2) <u style="font-style:inherit;font-weight:inherit;">OR  25,704 pixels. No exceptions."

Those colonies are larger than the amount allowed. You can avoid this by claiming they had dominion status. However, this would entail adding your non-colonial expansion. CourageousLife (talk) 04:41, December 21, 2013 (UTC)

Basically, what I'm saying is that this war is bull. There are so many things wrong with it, it's astounding. So, I'm going to continue to critique it until it is a structurally sound algorithm, like the algo mods should, if we had any non-biased individuals that were willing to help. CourageousLife (talk) 04:44, December 21, 2013 (UTC)

I'd just like to say that this reeks of massive issues I really don't want to see in PM3. Firstly this algorithm is wrong beyond all hells, whether it's misunderstanding or something I don't know but maybe mods should be in charge of making them. Also there are mods seeking to eliminate certain people from the game, metagaming quite a lot. To reduce this you should choose a smaller select pool of mods who have never or rarely acted in a bias manner. Democratic voting probably really won't help you decide this unless you gave everyone a pro and con vote and they had to use one on each candidate.

Just saying a few things because it'd be terrible to enter into PM3 with lots of metagaming, friction and lack of respect for rules and I really want PM3 to be good. Kunarian TALK 10:22, December 21, 2013 (UTC)

When in doubt, complain about the algorithm. Well there are three people who disagree with you. There's no metagaming or rule breaking, as for one, you haven't named any rules that were broken, just that we broke them. Second, Courage, you jumped to the defense of Scraw in the past several times, proving that you are by fact of past actions, biased toward Scraw in regards to protecting him. When AP, Rex, myself, Imp and Fed were attacked, you gave not such outpour of vigorous defense, but sat back and watched. Why should we take your word when your actions have proven that Scraw's survival is in your best interests? Also, in response to your previous statement on dominions, you've seem to have forgotten that Ethiopia only has dominions, a fact that has long been known. You can't say its breaking the rules or some other nonsense, as this has been a well known fact for the last 135 years of the game, more than enough time for you to grasp that Ethiopia doesn't have any colonies or vassals. As for Kun, you have not stated exactly what's wrong with the algorithm, only that its "wrong". Care to explain, or continue to use vague details to stir negative reaction? Vivaporius: "I don't need a slogan" 14:09, December 21, 2013 (UTC)


 * It's technically not my job to jump on all of the implausibility because I'm not a mod here. Give me a badge and it can happen. The reason I jump on these wars is because they directly affect me. If you've noticed, Scraw and I haven't always been on the same side, and I jumped on those algos against him, but I'm checking this algo because it directly affects me in Antillia. I'm not going to try and make him win if it's not plausible. But you can sure as hell bet that I'm not going to let him get pulverized by an algo that is unfair. As for the dominions, they very may well be dominion. I'm just saying that if they're expanding like colonies, that colonial expansion needs to be represented on the algo. Lastly, don't make this personal. Calling out my character is really unclassy. Any more attacks on me personally, I will consider harrassment. CourageousLife (talk) 14:53, December 21, 2013 (UTC)
 * Unclassy or not, it doesn't matter. I'm not taking it personally, but I'm stating facts of the past which are relevent to the matter at hand. I could have called you out on harassment for all the previous personal attacks against me, but I didn't because I knew how to ignore it. Don't hide behind some flimsy excuses to avoid criticism, its unhealthy. As for the algo, look at the past. Crimson and Scraw's algo against me and Imp was unfair, and it was very well known that they cheated. But no one stood up and said so. Scraw was your neighbor. Now I'm your neighbor. This is the new status quo. Flag of the Hurian Federation.png Vivaporius: "I don't need a slogan" 15:21, December 21, 2013 (UTC)


 * That's it, right there, what I'm talking about. You said you only stated the facts, but this post just proved otherwise. I rest my case. CourageousLife (talk) 15:28, December 21, 2013 (UTC)


 * Exactly fact didn't I state? Those are facts. Crim and Scraw did cheat. Scraw was (<- past tense) your neighbor. Are those not facts? Flag of the Hurian Federation.png Vivaporius: "I don't need a slogan" 16:27, December 21, 2013 (UTC)


 * If I was focusing on the information you stated, those are claims. However, I'm not focusing on that. In addition to the claims you made, whether true or false, you were stating things about me as well. These are childish tactics, attacking the user as opposed to the actions you don't agree with. I don't care if you make claims about cheating all day long. Like I have said, leave me out of it.  CourageousLife (talk) 16:53, December 21, 2013 (UTC)

This was my brainchild (sorry Scraw) and this is not how I intended for it to turn out at all. Are you kidding me guys? I was going to leave Scraw a rump state - most of East Antillia cannot be held past the 60s. If the world power will lose its republic on the continent - so will everyone else. I need to go check all this and see what the heck happened. Imp (Say Hi?!) 14:35, December 21, 2013 (UTC)

17:35, December 21, 2013 (UTC)
 * What happened was the Yank, Mscoree and I planned and launched an invasion of Scraw, which would have included Andrew if he hadn't gone on vacation (he planned to join us). However, since he wasn't here, we had to go on without him. Scraw isn't gone, and he's now a rump state in Caucausia. So your plan worked, just far ahead of scedule. I plan on holding East Antilla well into the future, I can assure you of that, and I already have contingency plans lined up in the event someone tries to take them away. Flag of the Hurian Federation.png Vivaporius: "I don't need a slogan" 15:21, December 21, 2013 (UTC)
 * Well gee, good luck keeping that contingency bullshit functional when mod events come.

Viva, none of us have colonies. None of your lands have red borders on the map; neither do mine, Yank's, or Ms's. 17:35, December 21, 2013 (UTC)

If he accepts my offer for help then mine will. Although then I will probably still only ask for Pacific coast lands.

~ Imp

Imp, according to the map, all your borders are gold and gray. The only red ones are not your; they are Portugal's.

Also Viva, if you could point out when and where Von said this nonsense about 75% majority, it would be greatly appreciated. However, I do not understand why the bonus is 1.6 and not something like 1.1 when it is clear that we are on the same industrial level, while Ms and Yank are yellow.

Here's a short sentence from the industrial section of this very talk page:

Nations with two stages use the higher when defending and the lower when attacking.

So really, you should be in yellow stage (your lower color is yellow) and I should be in orange (my higher color is orange).

17:49, December 21, 2013 (UTC)

My color is orange as the orange coloring is in Ethiopia. According to the rule, all of my dominions get one color lower than the motherland. And I don't see why you can't read the rules to the 75% requirement, but I'll indulge you. Von during the Ethiopian-Arabian War: "I'm not including the industrialization bonus because only 1 of the 10 nations in your coalition has it, whereas the other 9 nations are either the same industrial level or a lower level as our coalition nations. Thus they cancel each other out." You happy now? Also, that map is 200 years old. At the time, I didn't control any of those lands around Ethiopia, plus I purchased Scan's colony in Somalia, which was red. Ethiopia's industrial power has exceeded what the map says now, which I've been trying to tell the mods to update. Your still orange and so am I. And to explain how stupid that rule is, if the United States was going to invade another country, would it make sense for it to have its most advanced weapons produced in the shabbist factories? No. Vivaporius: "I don't need a slogan" 18:00, December 21, 2013 (UTC)

Even with what Von said, I do not see where this 1.6 comes from. If anything it ought to be 1.1 for the multiplier. You do not go up a level for conquering lands of higher color. I speak from experience. When I seized land from Imp, Von made it very clear that I could not be red. I agree with you in that it is quite nonsense, but rules are rules. Even so, Scandinavia is a leader and Scandinavia is majority green.

18:03, December 21, 2013 (UTC)

1.6 is the number used since I've reached Level Six on the industrialization scale. I was already orange to begin with, and that's the same level i am right now. However, since I still outnumber you ally wise, my industrialization bonus remains. As for Scandinavia, Yank is majority yellow since the green portion only makes up a fourth of his empire's industrialization. Vivaporius: "I don't need a slogan" 19:15, December 21, 2013 (UTC)

I too am of the orange level. All my leaders are completely orange, with the exception of Kanada.

19:26, December 21, 2013 (UTC)

I checked out the rules of both PMI and PMII, and there is not rule saying the defender is two levels higher than the attacker industrially. Only that you need a 75% supermajority to get any of the bonuses. I looked up and down for that rule, and it doesn't exist. Unless you can give me a link or a quote from the exist page, I can't help but feel that you've lied Scraw. No matter. With Orissa jumping it to help, your defeat is sealed. Vivaporius: "I don't need a slogan" 21:35, December 21, 2013 (UTC)

I have not seen this 75% nonsense, I have only heard it from you. If you could provide a direct link to Von's statement I would shed my doubts. Meanwhile, here is a link to lower/attacker higher/defender:

http://althistory.wikia.com/wiki/Talk:Principia_Moderni_II_(Map_Game)#Industrial_Algorithm_Modifiers_and_Industrial_Era_areas_and_rates.

First paragraph under the heading says that the attacker uses the lower stage and the defender uses the higher.

22:20, December 21, 2013 (UTC)

Of course you didn't hear about it. You don't read the rules. In the "Coalition Wars" section, paragraph four: "Furthermore if only 1 nation has a bonus (e.g. an industrialization bonus, height bonus, popular revolt bonus, etc.) then it cannot be applied to the entire coalition as all nations in the coalition may not be as industrialized as the other side. You need a Supermajority of 75% to gain these sort of bonuses, e.g. 8 nations of your 10 nation coalition have a popular revolt bonus, meaning the whole coalition gets the bonus." And regarding your point about two levels, that was a proposal, not a rule. And on the grounds of the same "technicality" you and Crim were so eager to exploit, since your outnumbered 7-to-1, this should be a automatic defeat for you. I'd love to see you use the same defense I tried to use when that happened. Vivaporius: "I don't need a slogan" 23:02, December 21, 2013 (UTC)

I asked Scan on Skype. He said that's how it works. Here's proof:



23:11, December 21, 2013 (UTC)

Well of course Scan said yes. Scan's the one who proposed the thing. Plus, Scan's proposal was never approved by the rest of the mods. What I think is funny however, is that you conveniently left out the fact that you don't have the 75% required by the rules. Your still outnumbered. You denied me my industrial bonus for your war on the same reasoning, so being fair and all, the same should apply to you. Vivaporius: "I don't need a slogan" 23:57, December 21, 2013 (UTC)

I don't need the 75%. You do. I am only one person; you are part of four.

00:05, December 22, 2013 (UTC)

Actually, I am the four. This is a coalition of Ethiopia, its dominions, and allies. 90% of it is me. As for you, its rather odd that your facing two world powers and its allies, and think that you can win. Logically speaking, you shouldn't be able too. Vivaporius: "I don't need a slogan" 03:27, December 22, 2013 (UTC)

I'm not beating you. You're beating me. By how much is the argument. And as it stands right now, it's not by much.

Now, if we could just a get a few non-participating mods in this, that would be great.

03:30, December 22, 2013 (UTC)

Actually, given that Imp is in the game, and he hasn't commited everything to the fight, the war isn't over yet. You will be sent to the Caucasus. Vivaporius: "I don't need a slogan" 03:36, December 22, 2013 (UTC)

What everyone seems to be forgetting is that Scan's proposal included the industrialization bonus as well as the stipulation about higher and lower scores. There is no other rule giving a bonus for industrialization. If you recongnize that you have an industrialization bonus, you are choosing to accept the other terms of the proposal as well. So, either you get a bonus using the higher-lower rule, or you choose to forefit the bonus completely. CourageousLife (talk) 04:18, December 22, 2013 (UTC)

Don't worry Viva, your old ally will once again come to the rescue and negate any technological advantage the Neu Berliners may have. Although I would ask for more Pacific lands. This is only the first stage however. I think it's time I showed the numbers of my nation in battle. ;)  Imp (Say Hi?!) 05:02, December 22, 2013 (UTC)

The lands are yours. And thank you. :D Vivaporius: "I don't need a slogan" 05:32, December 22, 2013 (UTC)

Claims
As the leader of the coalition, I've taken the liberty of dividing the lands as per the agreements following the war's end. Ethiopia takes most of Neu Berlin, including its Alaskan and Texan colonies. Scandinavia gets most of OTL Quebec and Ontario, as well as the Newfoundland and the OTL Atlantic Provinces of Canada. Nouvelle France gets Puerto Rico and Hispaniola, and basically any Neu Berlin territories that were in the Caribbean Ocean. Scraw shall keep Sakartvelo and expand in the Middle East, as none of us want to completely destroy him, including myself. I get no pleasure from destroying other player nations. :( Vivaporius: "I don't need a slogan" 02:33, December 21, 2013 (UTC)

Erm Viva, I know I didn't participate in the war yet but because it is going on til 1926 I was wondering if I could have sent some support. All I would like is the Pacific bit of the former state please? Thank you. :)  Imp (Say Hi?!) 17:13, December 21, 2013 (UTC)

I was planning on establishing the OTL United States with OTL borders (wanted to sell the Alaskan colony for Seattle), but sure, why not. Vivaporius: "I don't need a slogan" 17:46, December 21, 2013 (UTC)

I tried the same deal with Crim. He keeps saying no because Seattle's the capital.

17:53, December 21, 2013 (UTC)

I want control of the nation known as New Muscovy/New Novgorod. It's that state taking up much of central Quebec. Yank 01:56, December 22, 2013 (UTC)

I've given you control of that land, along with Newfoundland as originally requested. What you've been granted is twice the original size now. Vivaporius: "I don't need a slogan" 03:29, December 22, 2013 (UTC)

According to the map, you've only given him OTL Lower Canada, which is approximately the same size as Novnovgorod.

03:34, December 22, 2013 (UTC)

Anti-Neu Berlin Bargain Rule
I think that for PMIII we should expressly forbid anyone from pulling the "Neu Berlin Bargain" again. If the algorithm states that a nation is to be conquered then it is conquered. No more of this "keep half of my empire even though I was defeated" crap. Yank 22:08, December 20, 2013 (UTC)

Neu Berlin was not half of my empire, so please. Also, I think it should be up to the winner.

22:13, December 20, 2013 (UTC)

The way I see it, if someone is eliminated from the game, they should be able to start playing as someone else (assuming they don't metagame and what not), and in that case he happened to choose his former colony. Mscoree (talk) 22:17, December 20, 2013 (UTC)

The way I see it, Yank is just jealous of Russia because he couldn't expand Scandanavia to the same lengths plausibly, and is now taking it out on anyone who supported Lx in that particular argument.

22:25, December 20, 2013 (UTC)

Scraw, its over and done with. Your empire is ours now. That's coming from the winner. This isn't revenge. It's just business. You may keep Sakartvelo, far from us and incapable of harming our geo-political interests. Vivaporius: "I don't need a slogan" 22:47, December 20, 2013 (UTC)

lmao you just gave me a free pass. I'll be back.

03:10, December 21, 2013 (UTC)

Also, it's Sakartlevo, not Sakartvelo. On top of that, Sakartlevo is the Russian part. Mine is Greater Transcaucasia.

03:10, December 21, 2013 (UTC)

I personally want to give you zippo. As far as I'm concerned Viva's being all too generous. Yank 03:18, December 21, 2013 (UTC)

Well then I'd just pick another nation.

03:20, December 21, 2013 (UTC)

I am being generous, but as I stated before, I'm not into destroying another player's nation. It's a personal thing. Vivaporius: "I don't need a slogan" 03:47, December 21, 2013 (UTC)

Look, if we're talking about rules, I have a bone or two to pick. First off, motive. People have gotten away with giving out +5 for defending territory instead of +10 for life or death because the attacking country claims they have 'no intention of ending that country's soverignty', and when they 'just so happen' to get a 33%, they annex these countries anyway. My proposal is that unless the nation in question was given a +10 on the motive, they cannot be officially annexed, the reason being that they are, at some point in the war, fighting for the soverignty of their country.

What happened to this rule? This was not really enforced at all during this game-

Common Implausibilities Something needs to be done about prejudice. Many personal vendettas are carried out here without any precedent or plausible reason. Simply because you do not like that player or nation is not enough. We need something to protect against prejudice.
 * Expanding too fast. Massive expansion takes time to achieve, and nations that have expanded vast amounts in short periods of time (like the Mongols, Nazi Germans or Napoleonic French) have had their empires collapse, break apart and be defeated soon after doing so.

More to come...

CourageousLife (talk) 04:16, December 21, 2013 (UTC)

I agree with Yanks Idea, I mean, Scraw got a very powerfull region, and got control of regions to far for they to be controlled. I mean, He keeping neu berlin is plausible. it Happened with the portuguese in OTL napoleonic wars, but keeping as well Georgia was just too unlikely, even with the strong germanization. Sine dei gloriem &#34;Ex Initio Terrae&#34; (talk) 23:08, December 21, 2013 (UTC)

That's why I separated Georgia from Neu Berlin before reconnection.

23:18, December 21, 2013 (UTC)

This is all sounding like Yank wants to get rid of Scraw by any means necessary, for some reason.--Collie Kaltenbrunner (talk) 08:34, December 22, 2013 (UTC)

Which is why I keep trying to move Scraw to Georgia rather than completely destroy him. Vivaporius: "I don't need a slogan" 15:20, December 22, 2013 (UTC)

Yank needs to put on his big boy pants and deal with it. We all have people we don't like. But Yank is a mod. He is held to a higher standard, and should act accordingly. If he can't control himself, then he needs to be removed. CourageousLife (talk) 15:21, December 22, 2013 (UTC)

I'm okay with it happening this game. I just want to make a rule to prevent it for next game. Yank 15:56, December 22, 2013 (UTC)

And why is that?

17:38, December 22, 2013 (UTC)

3?
If I recall correctly, hadn't the planning for PMII started at this point in the original PM? I don't see any preparation for PMIII apart from a few posts more than two months old. 77topaz (talk) 08:48, December 21, 2013 (UTC)

Are you kidding me?

17:14, December 21, 2013 (UTC)

We already have lists of nations claims (although i have a feeling that many claimants won't even show up by the time PMIII begins), proposals for new rules and settings, the new map is being done, and i'm waiting for Scan to draft the rules.the preparations are being done, but not visibly.--Collie Kaltenbrunner (talk) 20:51, December 21, 2013 (UTC)

We should post messages on the claimants' talk pages mid-March (About a week before PMIII starts) to verify their claims. CrimsonAssassin- "I have special eyes" 22:40, December 21, 2013 (UTC)

More than a week. Give 'em a month.

23:14, December 21, 2013 (UTC)

A lot can change in a month. CrimsonAssassin- "I have special eyes" 20:34, December 22, 2013 (UTC)

Locking the Ethiopian War
I think it's about time that we lock the Ethiopian War algo. It was already established that the Allied Powers won, hence the claims section. Scraw should just take the exile in Transcaucasia. Yank 18:19, December 22, 2013 (UTC)

No. Not until it is reviewed by non participating mods.

18:20, December 22, 2013 (UTC)

Two mods just said you lost. Crimson was the one responsible for locking the 1835 war, which he participated in and you had no issue with him doing since you were on his side. So you have no place saying when and when it shouldn't be locked. Vivaporius: "I don't need a slogan" 21:13, December 22, 2013 (UTC)

Let's Pull the Plug
This game had a good run for the problems ot had, but let's pull the plug and start PMII. There was probably no way it could have lived up to PMI, anyway. Anyone in favor? Yank 18:53, December 22, 2013 (UTC)

Everyone can vote, player or not.

Aye

 * 18:54, December 22, 2013 (UTC)
 * (If I get a vote, then count this. If not, count it anyway.)
 * (It seems to be going to the dogs, and making Chat a warzone. Also, now you get three templates in a row)
 * This is UglyTurtle, Signing off. 19:43, December 22, 2013 (UTC) (Per reasons below)
 * --Yank 23:44, December 22, 2013 (UTC)
 * Kill it for killing the HRE, lols. "<font color="#AACC99">This is not your grave  but you are welcome in it. " 23:51, December 22, 2013 (UTC)
 * CourageousLife (talk) 00:02, December 23, 2013 (UTC) <Just kill it. Sad to say goodbye, but love to watch you leave :'(>
 * The Unchallenged Conqueror #FP (Talk to Me)
 * Sine dei gloriem &#34;Ex Initio Terrae&#34; (talk) 00:07, December 23, 2013 (UTC)
 * Mr YOLO (talk) 09:37, December 24, 2013 (UTC)

Nay

 * -Kogasa [[Image:Miko THPW2.png|50px]] [[Image:Flag of Europe.svg|23px|border]] 2013 December 22, 20:54 (CET)
 * Flag_of_HRE_(The_Kalmar_Union).svg.png Labarum.jpg CrimsonAssassin- "I have special eyes" 20:32, December 22, 2013 (UTC)
 * Scandinator (talk) 15:34, December 23, 2013 (UTC) (We dont have enough time to prepare)
 * [[Image:1.png|23px]] Imp (Say Hi?!) Here's a thought - we only count the votes of people actually playing PMII, not a bunch of people who gave up with the game.
 * Flag of the Hurian Federation.png Vivaporius: "I don't need a slogan" 06:14, December 26, 2013 (UTC) As much as I'd like to start the third game immediately, I'd much rather push through until the end rather than wuss-out like a punk. And I agree with Imp. As much as their votes are welcomed, its doesn't make sense that people who didn't spend a year developing a nation in this game get to vote on a matter that doesn't directly effect them.
 * Oct, i agree with viva, even tough I do not play in PMII and would love to start the next game

Discussion
Does this mean that the game ends immediately or at New Year's Eve? If that's the case then can we have whatever happen in that time with the understanding that PMIII is going to be different? --Yank 19:40, December 22, 2013 (UTC)

Immediately, so that we can prepare for PMIII.

19:42, December 22, 2013 (UTC)

Great, now i have to go and redo the whole map in one week.--Collie Kaltenbrunner (talk) 20:11, December 22, 2013 (UTC)

No. This game continues until March. Guys, this is the issue with making these claims too early. People get wrapped up in the next game and lose focus on this one. CrimsonAssassin- "I have special eyes" 20:38, December 22, 2013 (UTC)

Still, we failed.I can't even argue against the ASB tag of this game, like i did before.it isn't worth it to continue with this stigma.--Collie Kaltenbrunner (talk) 20:52, December 22, 2013 (UTC)

When does this vote end? If it goes through, can we stop the game? Mafia CBA doing his signature. Don't judge Him. This Sig is inspired by Guns.

It should end on Christmas, although I don't see the point. It'd just be dragging out the slow, painful death.

22:59, December 22, 2013 (UTC)

Just kill it now. Leave it rest in peace. As soon as we have a majority of players, end it.

Also, when it dies, can we go on break for the holidays? Leave time for people to get maps and lists and algos together, and we don't have to stress through the holidays. Start it sometime mid-January. CourageousLife (talk) 00:02, December 23, 2013 (UTC)

Apparently Imp is still in the Denial phase of grieving for this map game. Personally I'm in acceptance. Let's get this out of the way so we can build PMIII. --Yank 07:22, December 26, 2013 (UTC)

Suggestions for PM3 (whether or not the vote succeeds)
I have a few suggestions for PM3, when it comes around.


 * 1) We need more mods, and we need more assertive ones. Fed said he was returning for PM3, so make him one again, but also recruit others. Get at least 8 mods at all times. MP and Local have both expressed interest in the position, and both have shown themselves to be fair mods on other games.
 * 2) Fix the godamn algo! What is this? Your motives need a bigger punch, your location affects absolutely nothing- you guys seem to forget that it wasn't until the last 75 years that is was easy to send troops overseas- and define easy, BTW. It costs America a million dollars a year to send ONE soldier to Afghanistan and keep him there, on average. Gigantic ridiculous Vivempires that own territory in every continent- you guys deserved an ASB tag even before the fall of Germanica.
 * 3) Stop any 'Caliphial' type enterprises. I mean, something like the HRE is ok, it's good. Loose federations. But the Caliphate? This recent UM-IA joint enterprise thing? WTF? You guys share quite literally no culture in common, and that applied 100 years ago or whenever you two made this damn bond.
 * 4) Get off this idiotic "Oh it's PM it's awesome it can't die we can do whatever we want, if it's implausible the mods will stop it" attitude. You have three mods. Even on map games with 8 mods, like AvA, we still miss implausible posts. You guys need to calm down with this huge empire-building fanaticism. Viva, there's a reason that Africa never really formed long-lasting empires. Before the Europeans came there were 10,000 different tribes in Africa and none of them got along. Ethiopia, fine. Somalia, k. Eritrea, sure. Beyond that, you'd have so many rebellions it ain't even funny. You'd end up like Austro-Hungary, only worse.
 * 5) Understand that sometimes- not always, but sometimes- there is a reason that history went as history did. You guys have ignored that for a long time. The Caliphate? Sunnis and Shias, yes- that alone is a massive bloody civil war that should have ripped the Caliphate apart on day 3. Add to the fact that they also had regional disputes? Get out. The Caliphate might have formed, k, but it should have died after the Great Holy War.

Hell, this whole GAME should have died after the GCBC. Ever since 1600, you've been- to quote Ms- like feuding parents who are only staying together for the kid's sake.

Start the game on the 1st of the New Year, and make you resolution- to make a game that finishes, not wisely, but too well.

19:16, December 22, 2013 (UTC)

10/10 support fully.

I propose this for mods: 19:30, December 22, 2013 (UTC)
 * 1) Remove Yank. Yank, you're a good person, but you're a piss poor biased mod.
 * 2) Remove Imp. Imp, I like you too, but you're too damn biased.
 * 3) Nominate Local. Local is level headed and destroys both sides or not at all.
 * 4) Nominate MP. MP is also level headed, unbiased, and can spot implausibility at the roots.
 * 5) Nominate Guns. Guns may not be levelheaded or particularly unbiased, but he can spot implausbility. Guns should be the ASB finding mod.
 * I support all of these suggestions.But i never had any experience playing with MP and Local.--Collie Kaltenbrunner (talk) 20:07, December 22, 2013 (UTC)

I may have not played actively in PMII for a while now, but through playing for a bit and observing the game I have come to the conclusion that these are the things that PMIII needs to be a good game: 1) Forgiveness. Too many times have grudges been the main reason for fights both in game and out of game, with grudges lasting for long periods of time. Once we get rid of these grudges the game will be a more pleasent and plausible expeirence. 2)Clarity. There seems to be a lot of ambiguity in the rules, which causes confusion and fustration for everyone. In order to avoid this, the rules need to be clear in order to avoid confusion and tension and make the game run more smoothly. 3) Activity. There needs to be more active mods in order to enforce the rules effectively. It seems that a lack of activity means that users can get away with stuff they wouldn't normally get away with, sort of like a leniant subsitute teacher. The problem with leniancy is that once a door is creeked, most demand it to be fully open, resulting in chaos and confusion. 4) Plausibility. Another problem are people getting away with implausible super conglomerates rapidly expanding and staying stable for a long period of time, which causes much tension between players. Once we remove this we can have a more realistic and fair game. In closing, PMIII needs forgiveness between players, clarity in the rules, Active moderators, and plausible game play in order to be a fun and fair game for everyone. This is UglyTurtle, Signing off. 19:36, December 22, 2013 (UTC)

That's fine. I'm probably not the best candidate for mod anyway. I don't really think I asked for it. I just got it because I was mod in PMI. Yank 19:37, December 22, 2013 (UTC)

OK, I am basically the same as ugly in this. I have not played this, but I have noticed frequent explosive arguments on chat, and on this talk page. I have read some of them. This needs more mods. Either way, I am playing the next one, so... eh. Anyway. Thanks to Scraw for nominating me as a Mod. Thank you for the vote of confidence.

Actually, empires in Africa lasted for a long time, what held them back was the lack of technology and famine. If anything, the ethnic hatred is a recent occurence, and African empires lasted for many centuries at a time. The Ashanti Empire (1670-1896) were made up of several tribes, and none of them destroyed the empire, the British did. Same thing with the Ethiopian Empire (1137-1974), also made of hundreds of tribes and ethnic groups, yet they banded together, built an empire and staved off an Arab, Ottoman, Egyptian, British, and Italian invasion. all in the same century mind you. The Mali Empire (1260-1600) was made up of hundreds of tribes as well, and they didn't hate each other. They became one of the wealthiest nations on the planet, and what brought them down was the lack of a legit heir, leading to a civil war. What sealed their fate was gunpowder and a Moroccan invasion. The Hutus and Tutsis had no problem with one another until a bishop from Belgium arrived and stated to peach that one was greater than the other. The Igbo had no proble with the Yoruba-led Nigerian government. It was the fact that the oil from their lands was going to enrich the Yoruba instead of helping all Nigerians. In an effort to better their own lots in life using the oil that was from their lands, they tried to break away. So your statement that the African empires will break apart as a result of their tribes is a gross overstatement. African empires have always been made up of different ethnic groups, but unlike European empires, the African ones never oppressed one or the other, and rarely blamed the other for their problems, not until the 20th century when they need scapegoats to justify power grabs and government changes. So Africa has 10,000 different tribes, but no they don't all hate each other. That's recent. What destroyed them was the combination of colonialism, invasion, and slavery.

And your little jab with "Vivempires" is quite honestly retarded, like I'm the only player who had territory on every continent, or the only empire is history for that matter. First there was Collie, then Kogasa, then AP, the Scan, then Scraw, then Von, then Sine, and finally me. Grow up and stop using my actions to justify your complaints. If anything, your actions should justify mine. Vivaporius: "I don't need a slogan" 19:54, December 22, 2013 (UTC)


 * Bullshit. None of us controlled all that land at the same time. It was a lose-gain thing. None of us had land in Australia. Collie has had Brazil, and normal sized colonies in Africa, and puny outposts in India. Kogasa has controlled Japan and part of North America. However, I will give you points for him being in Africa and South America. He has no business there. AP is and was the same as you; it was only through the power of everyone that we ended that. Scan has no land in Africa, a normal sized territory in South America, and no land in Asia proper. Von stayed along the Indian Ocean; his only implausibility was New Oman. Sine was also ASB, but he did not have land east of Somalia. He was felled through war and mod events.And we didn't have massive behemoths as you do now. Nunavut is fucking massive, as is your Australia Dominion, which, for the record, is mostly desert.


 * 20:15, December 22, 2013 (UTC)


 * Scan rules Egypt by proxy, and has territories all across Malaysia and Indonesia, unless your blind that is. Nunavut is massive because few people live there (one million spread around) like in OTL, which is also massive, and before 1990, it was one territory in Canada. And Scan had territories in African until I did a rather pointless territory swap with him for Tasmania. AP wasn't brought down by everyone, you and a few other opprotunists struck after he left the game, and ripped his empire apart for yourselves. At your height, we all properly referred to you as ruling half the planet. You can't dispute the statements of ten other players. Flag of the Hurian Federation.png Vivaporius: "I don't need a slogan" 21:36, December 22, 2013 (UTC)
 * No, AP left because we invaded. He was planning to leave, which we didn't know, and he just decided to do it then and there. I did control half the globe. Even Britain did not ever do that. The Scanosphere and the Impire have always been the largest nations. Who are these nine other players? Do you have nine alter egos?
 * http://althistory.wikia.com/wiki/File%3APMII1815.png This is the height of my power, which lasted for one map. Most certainly not half the world, not even a quarter of it.
 * 21:41, December 22, 2013 (UTC)
 * I was not ASB, in fact i would say you conquering most of europe was far more ASB than me having a few bunch of colonies, having as vassal Carthage and and owning france, Most of territories were mostly peacefully obtained and or vassalized, and i never tried to expand my influence beyond certain territories. However You conquered territories that were much different in cultural aspects, and AP conquered a territory that was farther from him than me arguing that a travel from panama to peru was implausible. Sine dei gloriem &#34;Ex Initio Terrae&#34; (talk) 00:13, December 23, 2013 (UTC)

But you tried to put all of that together. Really, if you hadn't coast-to-coasted Africa, you would've been fine. The problem here is not what you did, it's how you handled it. Anyways, everytime we have this conversation you just pull the same bullshit out of your ass so let's just all agree that you have been ASB since the Caliphate.

20:00, December 22, 2013 (UTC)

There we go. This proves that you can't read or comprehend basic facts. Anyone with a second grade education would know its not BS (what makes it that anyway?), and simply accept it as fact, or better yet, do the research on their own first, and then then to say something about it. But you don't. You whine, complain, and insult, and pull ^^^this^^^ BS out in every conversation we have. You coast-to-coasted the planet, had territories on every continent, complained when the mods used the very same argument against against you as to why you couldn't control Scandinavia, and then complained we we did the same things to you (arguement, excuses, and all) that you did to us. We honestly can't take anything you say at face value, because when you say it, later down the line, you turn around and whine when we use your logic against you. Vivaporius: "I don't need a slogan" 20:07, December 22, 2013 (UTC)


 * Wrong, wrong, and wrong. I did not coast to coast the planet. I did even control all of Germany. At the height of my power, I was just North Germany, Scandinavia, Neu Berlin around the Great Lakes, Mysore, the Phillippines, and Aquitaine. Also, that statement about me and mods controlling Scandinavia is incoherent; I'm not sure what you're trrying to stay through that.


 * 20:15, December 22, 2013 (UTC)


 * And Korea, and parts of Africa. And the mod statement was not incoherent, it was the fact that you used the dumbest exuses (like how the Scandinavians were Germanic, and for that reason they shouldn't have to leave Germanica) to justify you attempts to stop the mods from dividing your empire. You used the same excuse to jutify your invasion of Britain. Flag of the Hurian Federation.png Vivaporius: "I don't need a slogan" 20:54, December 22, 2013 (UTC)

I feel that if i hadn't been such a doormat for the latter part of the game, things might have turned out differently.--Collie Kaltenbrunner ("I just don't know what went wrong") 20:02, December 22, 2013 (UTC)

I would be willing to mod in PM3 if you guys want. I didn't want to in PM2 given I didn't fully understand the game's many ATL workings. Secondly, I think that part or all of the causi belli/objective section should be copy and pasted from NotLAH (and the games that have since adapted it). It basically ensures that people cannot have wars for no reason, must have a clear reason, and a clear goal to achieve that isn't implausible. Feel free to work that in as you guys see fit. Mscoree (talk) 20:28, December 22, 2013 (UTC)

Seeming as I'm planning to be part of PMIII and have been watching the game progress (disappoint about Prussia and Protectorateness fading into the background ಠ_ಠ), I'd like to contribute to discussion.

Concerning mods, I think that we should limit mod powers to certain areas where they are best suited as so that mods who are slightly biased but good at spotting implausibility as someone above said only can deal with issues concerning implausibility. And only mods who are superbly unbiased and also have good historical understanding can create official mod events, etc. these ideas might be revising but they're just a starting point.

Concerning the algorithm, it needs to be reworked, and things that are logical for stacking should stack while things that aren't logical shouldn't and btw population and closeness to war should be more important because by and large the bigger guy wins and the guy who doesn't have to send people halfway across the world wins. Further cultural integration should be taken into account when conquering, this means that if you suddenly conquer a load of land then you are going to have issues waging further wars or managing your empire in general. Cultural differences can kill or immobilise empires.

I also think economics need to be brought up a little in importance and needs to be made so that the only thing people do is build up military every turn. Technology, society/culture/politics, economy, military should hold roughly equal importance, military should not be the be-all and end-all.

Just some ideas. Kunarian TALK 20:42, December 22, 2013 (UTC)

Would you guys be opposed to factoring number of troops in the war? Usually that's an important aspect of real world strategy. It doesn't work as easily in this case since the PM series has always used a single algorithm per war, as opposed to a per battle system where the number of soldiers is usually clearer. Mscoree (talk) 20:51, December 22, 2013 (UTC)
 * But we don't have any idea of how to do this.I, for example, don't have any idea of how many troops it would be plausible for Portugal to have in the 1500's.There is no way for me to find out.--Collie Kaltenbrunner (talk) 20:59, December 22, 2013 (UTC)

OK, I have to say this. Ms, I don't think you should mod on this. When you modded NotLAH, it was... bad. Very bad. And that was your own game. I don't want to cause offense, but the number of arguments you had with the other mods/players... I don't think PM needs that. But anyway. Just my opinion. Treat it how you want.

Compared to PM2, I'd say I had very few arguments relating to modding. Mscoree (talk) 21:09, December 22, 2013 (UTC)

Very few, yes, but very few in 120 turns, give or take, not 600, again, give or take. And, not that few, tbh Mafia CBA doing his signature. Don't judge Him. This Sig is inspired by Guns. 21:13, December 22, 2013 (UTC)


 * Do a system, like before 1500 turns are in 5 years, before 1850 turns are 2 years, and after 1850 turns are 1 year. CourageousLife (talk) 00:22, December 23, 2013 (UTC)

I think we should have a vote then in a separate section, on all existing and possible applicants, to see if they can mod in PM3. Mscoree (talk) 00:26, December 23, 2013 (UTC)

Mod Nominations For PMIII
All potential moderators must get a 2/3 majority to be elected in.

Vote ends at 1:00 UTC on Christmas.

Collie Kaltenbrunner (As head mod)

 * Aye
 * Scraw
 * Mscoree (talk)
 * Cour (pay attention to peoples map edits)
 * Sine dei gloriem &#34;Ex Initio Terrae&#34; (talk) 00:55, December 23, 2013 (UTC) (He has shown enough commitment in a certain amount of occasions although indeed he should have been more present sometimes, he did a good enough job to keep the game going.)
 * MP (Owns the series, in my opinion)
 * Flag_of_HRE_(The_Kalmar_Union).svg.png Labarum.jpg CrimsonAssassin- "I have special eyes"
 * --Yank 01:33, December 23, 2013 (UTC)
 * Eiplec - ಠ_ಠ (talk)
 * Flag of the Hurian Federation.png Vivaporius: "I don't need a slogan" 01:49, December 23, 2013 (UTC)
 * This is UglyTurtle, Signing off. 02:49, December 23, 2013 (UTC)
 * Airlinesguy (talk) 07:08, December 23, 2013 (UTC) cos why not?
 * Yay Kunarian TALK 09:21, December 23, 2013 (UTC)
 * Scandinator (talk) (no-one can dispute the amount of time and effort Collie has placed into this game)
 * Cookiedamage (talk) 18:54, December 23, 2013 (UTC)
 * Nay

CrimsonAssassin

 * Aye
 * Scraw
 * Mscoree (talk)
 * Shadow
 * Cour (Sturdy and reliable. Not uber-expansionist and agressive)
 * Sine dei gloriem &#34;Ex Initio Terrae&#34; (talk) 00:55, December 23, 2013 (UTC) (During the time i saw his modhood he prove to be fair and capable of acting for the best possible outcome within the game).
 * Local - Plausible, good mod in my experience
 * MP (Level headed, pretty fair)
 * NonEuclidean (talk) 01:08, December 23, 2013 (UTC)
 * --Yank 01:36, December 23, 2013 (UTC)
 * Eiplec - ಠ_ಠ (talk)
 * Flag of the Hurian Federation.png Vivaporius: "I don't need a slogan" 01:49, December 23, 2013 (UTC)
 * This is UglyTurtle, Signing off. 02:49, December 23, 2013 (UTC)
 * Airlinesguy (talk) 07:08, December 23, 2013 (UTC)
 * Collie Kaltenbrunner (talk) 07:20, December 23, 2013 (UTC)
 * Yay Kunarian TALK 09:21, December 23, 2013 (UTC)
 * Scandinator (talk) (More flavor to the game would be good)
 * Cookiedamage (talk) 18:54, December 23, 2013 (UTC)
 * [[Image:1.png|23px]] Imp (Say Hi?!) 11:39, December 25, 2013 (UTC)
 * Nay

Imperium Guy

 * Aye
 * Shadow
 * Flag_of_HRE_(The_Kalmar_Union).svg.png Labarum.jpg CrimsonAssassin- "I have special eyes"
 * Tr0llis (talk) 01:24, December 23, 2013 (UTC)
 * --Yank 01:30, December 23, 2013 (UTC)
 * Flag of the Hurian Federation.png Vivaporius: "I don't need a slogan" 01:49, December 23, 2013 (UTC)
 * Airlinesguy (talk) 07:08, December 23, 2013 (UTC)
 * Oct, is great in the TSPTF, helps me overcome biases. Might be a Jr. Mod for bias control
 * Nay
 * Scraw: Biased.
 * Cour (Looks out for his own interest, uber-expansionist)
 * Sine dei gloriem &#34;Ex Initio Terrae&#34; (talk) 00:55, December 23, 2013 (UTC) (What cour said, and expansionist, He conquered a region that in OTL is still unlikely to be conquered so easily.)
 * Collie Kaltenbrunner (talk) 07:20, December 23, 2013 (UTC) (Over expansionist and kinda biased [Anybody remembers that when the he made the 1858 events, he affected almost everybody {even himself} except Ethiopia?])
 * Too little confidence from the above, I like Imp and support him but if these people cannot support him at least almost unanimously, I cannot. Sorry. Kunarian TALK 09:21, December 23, 2013 (UTC)
 * Cookiedamage (talk) 18:54, December 23, 2013 (UTC) (Same as what everyone else has pointed out. Expansionist, which is a great trait for a player but not good of a trait for a mod.)

Callumthered

 * Aye
 * Scraw.
 * Sine dei gloriem &#34;Ex Initio Terrae&#34; (talk) 00:55, December 23, 2013 (UTC) (He is a good player and would be a perfect mod.)
 * Collie Kaltenbrunner (talk) 07:20, December 23, 2013 (UTC) (But he needs to be more active)
 * I don't think this guy has really ever caused anything but good RP. Kunarian TALK 09:21, December 23, 2013 (UTC)
 * Scandinator (talk)
 * Cookiedamage (talk) 18:54, December 23, 2013 (UTC)
 * Nay

Scandinator

 * Aye
 * Scraw.
 * Sine dei gloriem &#34;Ex Initio Terrae&#34; (talk) 00:55, December 23, 2013 (UTC) (Proved to be a fair mod, although i do have some objections to him, he is a good mod.)
 * Flag_of_HRE_(The_Kalmar_Union).svg.png Labarum.jpg CrimsonAssassin- "I have special eyes"
 * --Yank 01:35, December 23, 2013 (UTC)
 * This is UglyTurtle, Signing off. 02:49, December 23, 2013 (UTC)
 * Airlinesguy (talk) 07:08, December 23, 2013 (UTC)
 * Collie Kaltenbrunner (talk) 07:20, December 23, 2013 (UTC)
 * Yay Kunarian TALK 09:21, December 23, 2013 (UTC)
 * Cookiedamage (talk) 18:54, December 23, 2013 (UTC)
 * [[Image:1.png|23px]] Imp (Say Hi?!) 10:56, December 25, 2013 (UTC) No doubt
 * Nay

VonGlusenburg

 * Aye
 * Scraw.
 * Sine dei gloriem &#34;Ex Initio Terrae&#34; (talk) 00:55, December 23, 2013 (UTC) (Good mod and the head of the caliphate destruction.)
 * This is UglyTurtle, Signing off. 02:49, December 23, 2013 (UTC)
 * Airlinesguy (talk) 07:08, December 23, 2013 (UTC)
 * Collie Kaltenbrunner (talk) 07:20, December 23, 2013 (UTC) (If he is going to participate, that is)
 * Yay Kunarian TALK 09:21, December 23, 2013 (UTC)
 * Scandinator (talk) (level-headed and fair, we need more mods like Von)
 * Cookiedamage (talk) 18:54, December 23, 2013 (UTC) ( I do not recall any problems caused by Von.)
 * Nay
 * Tr0llis (talk) 01:24, December 23, 2013 (UTC)
 * [[Image:1.png|23px]] Imp (Say Hi?!) 11:47, December 25, 2013 (UTC) Reason the caliphate cuased the problems it did

Yankovic270

 * Aye
 * Shadow
 * Flag of the Hurian Federation.png Vivaporius: "I don't need a slogan" 01:49, December 23, 2013 (UTC)
 * Nay
 * Scraw: Biased.
 * Cour
 * Collie Kaltenbrunner (talk) 07:20, December 23, 2013 (UTC) (Has been severely lacking self-control lately, Not counting his repeated interventions in Russia, that might be biased)
 * Biased and too personally involved in his nations (which can be a positive but not in a mod) Kunarian TALK 09:21, December 23, 2013 (UTC)
 * Scandinator (talk) (Although Yank has been with us for millennia on PM, recent actions have shown bias which is unacceptable for a moderator)

Mscoree

 * Aye
 * Scraw.
 * Shadow
 * Sine dei gloriem &#34;Ex Initio Terrae&#34; (talk) 00:55, December 23, 2013 (UTC) (Although Indeed in precarious situations previously, he's probably alongside with crim the perfect nominees, proactive for the creation of related pages and info usefull to players, and an active member of the Althis community.)
 * MP (Level headed, pretty fair)
 * Cour (Good resume)
 * NonEuclidean (talk) 01:08, December 23, 2013 (UTC)
 * Tr0llis (talk) 01:24, December 23, 2013 (UTC)
 * Flag_of_HRE_(The_Kalmar_Union).svg.png Labarum.jpg CrimsonAssassin- "I have special eyes"
 * Eiplec - ಠ_ಠ (talk) (Doesn't show outright dispproval to the point of confrontation to those who oppose him, very creative, active member, helpful, and doesn't remove unfavorable votes)
 * Flag of the Hurian Federation.png Vivaporius: "I don't need a slogan" 01:49, December 23, 2013 (UTC)
 * Airlinesguy (talk) 07:08, December 23, 2013 (UTC)
 * Yay Kunarian TALK 09:21, December 23, 2013 (UTC)
 * Nay
 * Local, all the stuff that happens to Ms, banning and that, don't want it to affect the game/Also, he was a terrible mod on NotLAH. He did really biased events. I can find the stuff on the Talk Page for it, if you would like?
 * [[Image:1.png|23px]] Imp (Say Hi?!) 12:03, December 23, 2013 (UTC) I'm sorry but seriously?
 * Scandinator (talk) (Unknown quanity in my point of view, has not contributed significantly to the PM field yet)

Local

 * Aye
 * Scraw
 *  Sine dei gloriem &#34;Ex Initio Terrae&#34; (talk) 00:55, December 23, 2013 (UTC) (He has shown to be unable to accept somethings but he can be a good mod.)
 * Nay
 * Shadow
 * Mscoree (talk)
 * NonEuclidean (talk) 01:08, December 23, 2013 (UTC)
 * Tr0llis (talk) 01:24, December 23, 2013 (UTC)
 * --Yank 01:35, December 23, 2013 (UTC)
 * Due to a lack of general support. Nay. Kunarian TALK 09:21, December 23, 2013 (UTC)
 * Scandinator (talk) (Unknown quanity in my point of view, has not contributed significantly to the PM field yet)

Guns

 * Aye
 * Scraw
 * Cour (Good ASB filter)
 * Sine dei gloriem &#34;Ex Initio Terrae&#34; (talk) 00:55, December 23, 2013 (UTC) (Good mod, Good ASB filter indeed)
 * Scandinator (talk) (Somewhat of an unknown quanity in my point of view, but has contributed to PMII and is a fair and knowledgable person)
 * Nay
 * Shadow
 * NonEuclidean (talk) 01:08, December 23, 2013 (UTC)
 * Mscoree (talk)
 *  The Unchallenged Conqueror #FP (Talk to Me) 
 * [[Image:Flag of Russian Alaska (HR).svg |40px|link=User talk:Octivian Marius]] <font color=Purple face="Algerian">OCT MARIUS, HAIL HIM  [[Image: Flag of Italy (Federalist Italy).svg|40px|User talk:Octavian Marius]]
 * Due to a lack of general support. Nay. Kunarian TALK 09:21, December 23, 2013 (UTC)
 * [[Image:1.png|23px]] Imp (Say Hi?!) 10:51, December 25, 2013 (UTC) If you call me biased and not Guns, then I have no words.

MP

 * Aye
 * Scraw
 * Shadow
 * Cour (Sturdy)
 * Sine dei gloriem &#34;Ex Initio Terrae&#34; (talk) 00:55, December 23, 2013 (UTC) (Good mod, and a good player, he can coordinate other mods onto voting for other situations, i would say good to administrate the game)
 * Local, MP is a plausible Mod, has been a mod in several games
 * Mscoree (talk)
 * --Yank 01:34, December 23, 2013 (UTC)
 * Flag of the Hurian Federation.png Vivaporius: "I don't need a slogan" 01:49, December 23, 2013 (UTC)
 * This is UglyTurtle, Signing off. 02:49, December 23, 2013 (UTC)
 * Airlinesguy (talk) 07:08, December 23, 2013 (UTC)
 * Collie Kaltenbrunner (talk) 07:20, December 23, 2013 (UTC)
 * Yay. Kunarian TALK 09:21, December 23, 2013 (UTC)
 * Cookiedamage (talk) 18:54, December 23, 2013 (UTC)
 * Nay

Fed

 * Aye
 * Scraw
 * Shadow
 * Mscoree (talk)
 * Cour (Sturdy and positive)
 * MP (Level headed, pretty fair)
 * Sine dei gloriem &#34;Ex Initio Terrae&#34; (talk) (Has proven to be fair, and capable of holding its position as mod and has not shown any sort of bias or to take advantage of his position.)
 * --Yank 01:34, December 23, 2013 (UTC)
 * Flag of the Hurian Federation.png Vivaporius: "I don't need a slogan" 01:49, December 23, 2013 (UTC)
 * This is UglyTurtle, Signing off. 02:49, December 23, 2013 (UTC)
 * Airlinesguy (talk) 07:08, December 23, 2013 (UTC)
 * Collie Kaltenbrunner (talk) 07:20, December 23, 2013 (UTC) (Needs to be more active.He did next to nothing, or even nothing, as a mod in PMII, and in fact, he went inactive not too long after.)
 * Yay. Kunarian TALK 09:21, December 23, 2013 (UTC)
 * Scandinator (talk) (Needs to be more active and to add more flavor)
 * [[Image:1.png|23px]] Imp (Say Hi?!) (No doubt!)
 * Nay

Sine

 * Aye
 * Mscoree (talk)
 * Shadow
 * Cour (not a  bad choice, good for filtering)
 * MP (Level headed, pretty fair)
 * NonEuclidean (talk) 01:14, December 23, 2013 (UTC)
 * Flag_of_HRE_(The_Kalmar_Union).svg.png Labarum.jpg CrimsonAssassin- "I have special eyes"
 * Flag of the Hurian Federation.png Vivaporius: "I don't need a slogan" 01:49, December 23, 2013 (UTC)
 * The Unchallenged Conqueror #FP (Talk to Me)
 * Eiplec - ಠ_ಠ (talk)
 * This is UglyTurtle, Signing off. 02:49, December 23, 2013 (UTC)
 * I have enjoyed his RP and think he would be fine for this role. Kunarian TALK 09:21, December 23, 2013 (UTC)
 * Cookiedamage (talk) 18:54, December 23, 2013 (UTC) (He's a smart, competent player and would make a good mod.)
 * [[Image:1.png|23px]] Imp (Say Hi?!) 10:50, December 25, 2013 (UTC) He would make a good mod.
 * Nay
 * Scraw: Known for Byanztine/Franco/Carthagian wanks
 * Airlinesguy (talk) 07:08, December 23, 2013 (UTC) ^
 * Scandinator (talk) (Bent the rules to breaking to the point a mod intervention was needed to stop over-expansionism)

Cour

 * Aye
 * Sine dei gloriem &#34;Ex Initio Terrae&#34; (talk) 00:55, December 23, 2013 (UTC) (Good mod in other games i've seen, capable of modding here)
 * Shadow
 * NonEuclidean (talk) 01:08, December 23, 2013 (UTC)
 * Mscoree (talk)
 * Flag of the Hurian Federation.png Vivaporius: "I don't need a slogan" 01:49, December 23, 2013 (UTC)
 * Yay. Kunarian TALK 09:21, December 23, 2013 (UTC)
 * Scandinator (talk) (Good player and rather plausable)
 * Scraw
 * Nay

Feudal

 * Aye
 * Mscoree (talk)
 * Shadow
 * Tr0llis (talk) 01:24, December 23, 2013 (UTC)
 * Eiplec - ಠ_ಠ (talk)
 * Sine dei gloriem &#34;Ex Initio Terrae&#34; (talk) 02:13, December 23, 2013 (UTC) (Good mod, in other games, has proven to be trully realistic and for most of the time biased and open to certain events as far as proven plausible).
 * This is UglyTurtle, Signing off. 02:49, December 23, 2013 (UTC)
 * Yay. Kunarian TALK 09:21, December 23, 2013 (UTC)
 * Nay
 * [[Image:Flag of Russian Alaska (HR).svg |40px|link=User talk:Octivian Marius]] <font color=Purple face="Algerian">OCT MARIUS, HAIL HIM  [[Image: Flag of Italy (Federalist Italy).svg|40px|User talk:Octavian Marius]], He is cool and everything but can somtimes be overtly biased
 * Scandinator (talk) (Unknown quanity in my point of view, has not contributed significantly to the PM field yet)
 * Scraw ~ Not PM caliber, makes self biased mod events in other games
 * [[Image:1.png|23px]] Imp (Say Hi?!) 11:38, December 25, 2013 (UTC) Never seen you play PMII much I'm afraid.

Scraw: mapmaker ONLY

 * Aye
 * Cour (until other options present themselves)
 * --Yank 01:40, December 23, 2013 (UTC)
 * Shadow
 * Sine dei gloriem &#34;Ex Initio Terrae&#34; (talk) ( As far as i have seen He's a good map maker, I only hope you don't use Win7 mspaint.)
 * Airlinesguy (talk) 07:08, December 23, 2013 (UTC)
 * Yay. Kunarian TALK 09:21, December 23, 2013 (UTC)
 * Scandinator (talk) (Although I will be creating the initial map)
 * Cookiedamage (talk) 18:54, December 23, 2013 (UTC)
 * Nay
 * Flag of the Hurian Federation.png Vivaporius: "I don't need a slogan" 01:49, December 23, 2013 (UTC)
 * [[Image:1.png|23px]] Imp (Say Hi?!) 11:36, December 25, 2013 (UTC)

LxCaucassus

 * Aye
 * Plausible from my experience and seems at least level headed. Kunarian TALK 09:21, December 23, 2013 (UTC)
 * Scandinator (talk)
 * Cour
 * Nay
 * Collie Kaltenbrunner (talk) 07:20, December 23, 2013 (UTC)
 * [[Image:1.png|23px]] Imp (Say Hi?!) 11:37, December 25, 2013 (UTC)

Collie Kaltenbrunner (As mapmaker)

 * Aye
 * Collie Kaltenbrunner (talk) 07:20, December 23, 2013 (UTC)
 * Cookiedamage (talk) 18:54, December 23, 2013 (UTC) (Despite that sometimes we have to complain about any map mistakes made, Collie seems to be good at making and releasing maps on time.)
 * Nay
 * Scandinator (talk) (While Collie has been an amazing mapmaker for PM and PMII, there is also the fact that he is head mod and also numerous map issues that require edits and/or are forgetten for many years)
 * Scraw: Has served us since forever, but repeats the same mistakes until we clamor about them enough. But still a good mod.
 * [[Image:1.png|23px]] Imp (Say Hi?!) 11:34, December 25, 2013 (UTC)

EiplecOco (As Mapmaker)
(Examples of ability: 1, and 2)

Aye

Nay
 * Scandinator (talk) (Maps are based off regions. PM is a lot more precise)
 * [[Image:1.png|23px]] Imp (Say Hi?!) 11:46, December 25, 2013 (UTC)

Discussion
I added the current moderators and the one discussed above. Mscoree (talk) 00:37, December 23, 2013 (UTC)

Can you please take me out since I won't be joining the next one? -Kogasa  2013 December 23, 02:41 (CET)

Sure. Mscoree (talk) 00:42, December 23, 2013 (UTC)

Scraw might want to remove your second nomination. I think once you get elected you get to choose your particular specialty. Mscoree (talk) 01:44, December 23, 2013 (UTC)

What? I'm only applying for mapmaker and mapmaker only.

01:49, December 23, 2013 (UTC)

Could I have a reason as to why I can't just be mapmaker? Let's face it, Collie isn't that great at the job. - Scraw

Don't worry Sine, I have better programs that can count pixels and whatnot.

02:19, December 23, 2013 (UTC)

everyone ignorings me...ah well, at least I tried eh?-Lx (leave me a message) 05:03, December 23, 2013 (UTC)

You were a bit late and missed the initial craze, but I'm sure more people will be checking in. 24.147.78.107 14:00, December 23, 2013 (UTC)

I apologize for my somewhat biased actions late in the game. They were mostly in response to what I believed to be Lx being coddled by the game. With me and Lx set to be cooperating in the next game I don't see any issues arising.--Yank 15:30, December 23, 2013 (UTC)

Imma rant

Scraw: I helped to expand ur nation when it was fragile. I stopped ur expansion because your nation had expanded to the Pacific and more. Just because I am playing my part in the second world war you go all donkey skits.

Cour: I have never made a mod event against you. My expansion was based on economic interests and I would have set off quite a few mod posts in my own direction.

Collie: In the previous decade Ethiopia already had had mod events for it. And all the recent anti Ethiopia mod posts was me, not someone else. I have never once used a mod event to my favour. If you quote Russia then I'll let everyone know that I was only invaded the nation because I wanted to spread my ideology and unite all those who were against each other. Like India in otl.

Kun: Most mods have voted for me.

And I would like everyone to know these votes should be held in the new year as a lot of people are on holiday. These votings won't allow them to contribute. Call me bitter but it feels like a backstab. Imp (Say Hi?!) 15:53, December 23, 2013 (UTC)

I would just like make note of the fact that Guns' only opposition is the Ms gang (and Kun, who just goes nay when there are enough nays). This is clearly because of personal conflict with Guns, and not because of legitimate reasons. I would again like to point out that Guns is only nominated for the position of ASB filter.

On the opposite side of the spectrum, Ms. Ms' only opposition is Local (legitimate reason), Scan (legitimate reason), and Imp (no reason). Imp, let's not bring personal bias into this, eh?

Now we move on to Local. His objectors are, once more, mostly the Ms gang. This is because the little spat that Local and Ms had on chat yesterday. Yank was also present then; I assume he has the same reasons. And then we have Kun with his previously stated reasoning and Scan with his reasoning.

As for Imp, you cannot simply stop someone's expansion once they have reached a goal you want them to achieve. Perhaps I had further goals. That was an unecessary and, imo, an illegal intervention. Furthermore, stop calling every single war the Second World War. We have already had three, we do not need more. A world war is not 6v1 or 5v1. It's more like 1000vs999. On the topic of Cour, you invaded him for no goddamn reason. And that shit about Russia is bullshit. Russia was already socialist.

18:43, December 23, 2013 (UTC)

I voted no to Guns becasue I did not fully believe in his ability to maturely carry out the above role. If he convinces me otherwise I will change my vote. I voted no to Local since he 1. Has never even played a PM game 2. Whined for several hours on chat about the voting 3. Attempted to rig/alter/change the vote in his favor, or as he saw fit, despite having no authority to do so 4. Generally started, and has started in the past, numerous arguments over the issue, and he's not even in yet 5. Because I do not believe he is completely ready. It's nothing personal, that's just my opinion. Mscoree (talk) 19:42, December 23, 2013 (UTC)

I'm going to go ahead and create a probationary period in PMIII for PM2 mods that don't make the 2/3rd and for other's that do. At the end of the month long period the PM2 mods that have the 2/3rds will vote on who is best suited for the job. Scandinator (talk) 02:11, December 24, 2013 (UTC)

I dont get it, is it 2/3 aye vs Nay or 2/3 of all players?-Lx (leave me a message) 16:45, December 24, 2013 (UTC)

2/3 vote overall, like the TSPTF vote. And Scandinator, I would have thought PM2 was the previous mods' probationary period. Also that second vote idea sounds like vesting control of the vote in the hands of a few people, who are selected merely by their time with PM games, like an electoral college of about three people. Mscoree (talk) 16:49, December 24, 2013 (UTC)

That's not fair to the people like me that were about 3-6 hours late and missed the initial "craze", and just a question, why have the "nay" section if you count the votes as a portion of the total playerbase for PM3, is it not then a redundancy to have the "nay" section as their vote changes nothing?-Lx (leave me a message) 02:46, December 25, 2013 (UTC)

An explanation for Scraw, Air, and Scan. First I must say that both Scraw and Airlines are criticizing for something they have equally done, Scraw made Germanwank by conquering scandinavia, and a Caucasuswank by keeping georgia linked with neu berlin (which i found implausible but didn't gave much relevance as i'm not a mod and not going to boss one to change it) thirdly he and AP colonized india much early than any other nation in OTL, and no mod said anything at all. he controlled much of europe for atleast 50 years ranging from aquitaine (being the biggest and westernmost territory in europe) to poland in eastern europe. and had also colonies in most of the continents, and the only mod i had seen told him anything was collie and after the facts came to happen. Airlines did something similar, although not overexpanding in the territory-wise, if not capability wise, he conquered several territories in africa, and asia, as well as forge a well sized colony in south america with only the nation of cyprus, devastated by war and by the caliphate. And my expansion that was much slower than theirs and through most politcal ways in most of the cases. (Carthage due to dynastic union and the Vassalization of the Venaissin being that the only non-bellic example within the process of French reunification) furthermore,I believe that PMII france although indeed overexpanded, its in comparision to the OTL france not a Wank.

The only one of the three nays i received who has an actual reason to deny me the chance of modhood is Scan, that was mostly because i ignored the rules of the number of vassals one nation could have, and certainly, at that time i wasn't not even close to the Scrawish overexpansionism, I was merely trying to conquer Nea Lefkosa to unify my northern southamerican colonies. (and whatnot getting a vassal in greece lol) being this said, i believe that although i don't agree with scraw nor Air's postures they have their reasons to vote nay, and hereby i'm only explaining there plausible misconceptions. and btw, Crimson is winning by 17 votes on his favor, and seemingly there would be only 3 new mods. for what i've seen.

Sine dei gloriem &#34;Ex Initio Terrae&#34; (talk) 09:25, December 25, 2013 (UTC)

I am not calling every single war WWII, this one was because it actually has a lot of nations. And all I invaded him was for the Central American region and the west coast. This is 1920 so stop calling bias at every chance you get. I was not biased when I voted against Ms, he does not have the necessary game time in my opinion. My goal? All I did was stop your overexpansion which would stretched you and left a huge strain on your coffers, but no - I am Scraw and I will call bias on every mod event. And on that note, what happened to your planned revolution in the Caucasus in the 1870s? Still hasn't happened yet. And what are you on about with the 1000v999 thing for a world war? WWI WAS 9v4 and WWII was 5v2 (main nations) in OTL so stop making up stuff.

And telling me I am biased - your whole argument says otherwise - putting the arrow back at you, not me. But I guess it won't matter because of all your bullshit helped you and I didn't have the time on the wiki to call you out on it. And if I was overexpanding - then tell me where and how and don't just call bias because of losing your nation. You were capitalist and I was Equa-Socialist (large difference in ideologies), Russia and America nearly went to war various times - then why not the socialists/equalists against Capitalism? The way I play PMII does not affect my mod capabilies in any way, either. I support Ethiopia IC but as a MOD I am the one creating all the problems. I am getting a lot of slack for backing up another mod (like I did with Yank) and I thought that was what you were meant to do if you were a mod - stick up for each other. If not then I am sorry but that goes against almost everything I have seen happen. Imp (Say Hi?!) 11:43, December 25, 2013 (UTC)

This one is not World War II you idiot. In case you haven't noticed, I'm the only player on my side. That revolution did happen. It's an independent nation, I just still player control. And I am not overexpanding. Again, all my territories are contiguous with the exception of two islands and a completely separate naiton. You on the otherhand control land in everywhereville, from India to the Pacific to North South and Central Africa and back to South America and now North America for a swing up. Even I was not this spread out during my time as Germany.

As for your nonsense about the OTL World Wars, here is who really fought:

WWI: Britain, France, Italy, Russia (pulled out), Japan, and the United States (late comer) and these puny countries vs Germany, Austria Hungary, the Ottoman Empire, Bulgaria, and assorted little countries. So really, it was 5 vs 4 major powers at any given time n/including dominions and the such.

WWII: Britain, USSR, France (first half), United States (second half), China, and assorted little states vs Germany, Japan, Italy, and assorted little states. Really 4 vs 3 on a large scale.

Anyways, about this whole ideological conflict, in case you haven't noticed, we've got socialists (you), monarchists/capitalists (Yank), republicans (Ms). and faceists/monarchists (Viva) vs monarchist-capitalists (me). Bullshit much? Also, backing up a mod is not your job if you are backing him up to gang up on other players. Your job, and the job of all mods, is to maintain a shimmer of plausibility shielding the game and to spot and pick out nonsense ASB, not to back each other up in ganging up on player nations and then being unstoppable because you are mods. It would be good for us all if you were no longer a mod and thus incapable to maintain this holier-than-thou attitude without any repercussion. Good day and happy holidays.

22:27, December 25, 2013 (UTC)

OK, can we deal with this. It was Christmas. Most people were busy. Don't have discussions when people are away. jk. Mafia CBA doing his signature. Don't judge Him. This Sig is inspired by Guns.

Don't get me started on your attempts to enter India as Germany or how it expanded. Viva was socialist too actually, you should be reading people's posts more. I am not sure if Ms was actually republican. I have absolutely no clue what Yank was - I am not sure how many people do. We were not ganging up on one player. Lx got everything way to easily in 1858 because of the amount he annoyed us all. He himself set up a precarious situation and all we did was allow it to explode. That is not ganging up. How am I unstoppable by being a mod? When I was chosen for industrialisation - I sure as hell wasn't a mod. When we destroyed Brandenburg, I sure as hell wasn't a mod either. I do not maintain a holier than you attitude - I would actually throw that phrase out into the water and see how many actually support that view of yours. Ganging up? Its called having allies with the same interests as you - the same as what the US did against the Soviets and the US did support dictators and stiff who held common interests.

So what the hell do you want me to do? Cross out stuff without regard for what the player might feel? Imp (Say Hi?!) 12:12, December 26, 2013 (UTC)

Yes. That is exactly what I want you to do. To myself included. Of course, you're supposed to explain it as well, but in short, that's the reason.

17:05, December 26, 2013 (UTC)

To answer LX's question, we add up all the votes (aye and nay) and you need 2/3 aye out of that total. So if someone gets two ayes and one nay, that's 2/3.

Anyway, the deadline has passed, so voting is now closed. Mscoree (talk) 19:06, December 26, 2013 (UTC)

Ms, why does the vote end now? There has been a serious issue raised that I do not think you adequately dealt with:

Scraw "I would just like make note of the fact that Guns' only opposition is the Ms gang (and Kun, who just goes nay when there are enough nays). This is clearly because of personal conflict with Guns, and not because of legitimate reasons. I would again like to point out that Guns is only nominated for the position of ASB filter.

On the opposite side of the spectrum, Ms. Ms' only opposition is Local (legitimate reason), Scan (legitimate reason), and Imp (no reason). Imp, let's not bring personal bias into this, eh?

Now we move on to Local. His objectors are, once more, mostly the Ms gang. This is because the little spat that Local and Ms had on chat yesterday. Yank was also present then; I assume he has the same reasons. And then we have Kun with his previously stated reasoning and Scan with his reasoning."

Also, many people are on holiday. Why does the vote end now? I don't want to "start numerous arguments over the issue,". Which, by the way, is not true. Numerous. It means more than 1. At my count, I have started 1. Don't bullshit.

I am now going to proceed to dismantle your other arguments, because I have nothing better to do

1. Does not have any bearing on ability to Moderate. Modding is about plausiblity, and I think that someone without preconceptions from prior games would do better

2. That was after you voted against me. Disregarded as irrelevant. Others can bring it up, if they would like, not you.

3. See 2

4. Already dealt with in above paragraph

5. Based on what? Nothing? Right. Useful reason right there.

Thank you for reading.

PS. The 'deadline' seems completely arbitrary to me, but whatever.

Also, if you read the page, about 5 PMII members said they would be away for this period. How about we wait until they are back before ending this vote, especially considering they may want to input on the whole shutting down PMII thing as well as who mods the next game. But you know, do what you want, Ms Ahahahahhahaha! Guys, I think that Ms just called me immature. Sure, buddy. Because you can talk. This is on an iPad, so I vote nay for Ms and abstain for everyone else. -- 14:21, December 27, 2013 (UTC)

Results
Based on this vote congratulations to the following people:

Mscoree (talk) 19:13, December 26, 2013 (UTC)
 * Collie
 * Crim
 * Callumthered
 * Scandinator
 * VonGlusenburg
 * Mscoree
 * MP
 * Fed
 * Sine
 * Cour
 * Scraw (as Mapmaker)

Just one thing: who is Cour?--Collie Kaltenbrunner (talk) 19:17, December 26, 2013 (UTC)

Hi Collie ~ Cour ~ CourageousLife (talk) 19:33, December 26, 2013 (UTC)

Reboot
Me and Scraw have an idea. Instead of creating a new page for PMIII we should just reboot this one. --Yank 02:48, December 23, 2013 (UTC)

I think continuing on with PMIII is a sound idea. Why is there a need for a reboot of PMII? Doesn't seem neceserry or reasonable, imo. Cookiedamage (talk) 03:06, December 23, 2013 (UTC)

It great disgrace to PM famiry!

03:07, December 23, 2013 (UTC)

The current ideas are an entirely new game. We all are new nations, with new rules. To do a reboot we would have to delete literally hundreds of items. It seems really confusing and troublesome. Why not get a fresh start and just make a new page? Mscoree (talk) 03:23, December 23, 2013 (UTC)

PMIII. CourageousLife (talk) 03:50, December 23, 2013 (UTC)

No way.I don't like to retcon the existence of map games unless they have gone really, really wrong (Imperial Europe II and No Nukes come to mind immediately).And this was going kinda well up to the 20th century.It would be worse than the first overall, but i thought the problems would be not so bad as to shut down the game.And plus, we need these pages to continue existing to remind everybody of what went wrong with this game and why we should not repeat these mistakes.--Collie Kaltenbrunner (talk) 07:24, December 23, 2013 (UTC)

New page for a new game. Kunarian TALK 09:26, December 23, 2013 (UTC)

OK, forget this.

18:50, December 23, 2013 (UTC)

Turns
Normal turns:
 * 0: player diplomacy, non-player interaction, non-affecting flavour events
 * 0.5: non-player diplomacy (defensive treaties), continuing statements
 * 1: non-player diplomacy (offensive treaties), military provision, economic growth, political stabilising, technology development, declaration of war, expansion, vassalisation

Colonial Turns
Will need to be changed, a game with more motivation for varied turns will mean the power of colonisation should be increased quite a lot. This isn't unrealistic as we saw how spain and portugal took over south and central america like a plague. I've never been highly involved or interested in colonising so someone else should handle this.

Multiple Nations
In order of player control.

Dynastic or Personal Union
The closest you can get to playing two nations. I don't really see any reason for changing the rules here, they don't seem to have any noticable issues in my eyes.

Vassal States
Rules should be changed to:
 * Nations can be vassalised after roughly five turns of vassalisation, distance, comparitive size and cultural differences can make it longer.
 * Can be annexed into nation if touching borders and after 50 years of being a vassal.
 * Actions can be completely controlled by the player who is vassalising them.
 * Cannot declare war independently of player who is vassalising them.

Puppet States
Rules should be changed to:
 * Nations can be puppetted after roughly five turns of vassalisation, distance, comparitive size and cultural differences can make it longer.
 * Cannot be annexed into nation.
 * Actions can be controlled by player who is puppeting them.
 * Other players can attempt to puppet nations that are puppeted, if this is challenged by the current player who is puppeting before it completes then the nation enters civil war.
 * Can declare war independently of player who is puppeting them.

Independence

 * This should be made more general, nations didn't just declare independence after 1776.

Full Unity
I think that this is good as it stands.

Dominions, Protectorates and other dictionary definitions

 * Eliminate people playing with dictionary definitions. All nations are either player mains, those in dynastic or personal union, those vassalised by a player, those puppeted by a player and those that are grey nations that are not under the control of anyone.

Pre-Industrial
All nations can invest in developing technology, from 1400AD to 1650AD they will have a period of time in which to add to their starting technological development points. When 1650AD is reached, the scores are totalled and bonuses are added for things that will help the industrial revolution in a nation. Then nations are assigned to either crimson, red or orange development types if applicable, other nations will inherit development types.

Starting technological development points (at 1400 AD):
 * 100 - European Nations
 * 75 - Middle-Eastern Nations
 * 75 - Far-East Nations
 * 25 - American Nations
 * 0 - Oceana Nations
 * 50 - African Nations

Bonuses (added at 1650AD when industrial leaders are calculated):
 * 10 - general education system
 * 10 - religious freedom in terms of scientific development
 * 10 - pro-business legal system
 * 10 - an extensive colonial area
 * 10 - a resource that can be mass produced (cloths are preferred)
 * 10 - a large market for that resource
 * 10 - ability to transport that resource to that market
 * 10 - fuel source for factories
 * 10 - modern and stable government
 * 10 - no wars over heartland for 50 years
 * 10 - a large middle class

Colonies are counted as seperate nations and are placed two types below their home nation on the development list.

Assigned development types
 * Crimson Nation - one of these are assigned to the nation with the most technological development points
 * Red Nation - two of these are assigned to the next two nations with the most technological development points
 * Orange Nation - three of these are assigned to the next three nations with the most technological development points

Inherited development types
 * Orange Nation - assigned to all nations next to Crimson or Red nations
 * Yellow Nation - assigned to all nations next to Orange nations
 * Light Green Nation - assigned to all nations next to Yellow nations
 * Dark Green Nation - assigned to all nations next to Light Green nations
 * Dark Blue Nation - assigned to all nations next to Dark Green nations
 * Blue Nation - assigned to all nations next to Dark Blue nations
 * Sky Blue Nation - assigned to all nations next to Blue nations
 * Lavender Nation - assigned to all nations next to Sky Blue nations
 * Violet Nation - assigned to all other nations

Industrial Revolution
Same game as before but at 1650AD technological development points are reset according to nation development types. When 1920 is reached, the scores are totalled and bonuses are added for things that will help nuclear development in a nation. The process of Nuclear development doesn't change from the rules from PM2 except that the four nations that can develop them are specifically chosen with help from the points they accrue in the industrial revolution.

Starting technological development points (at 1650 AD):
 * 100 - Crimson Nation
 * 90 - Red Nation
 * 80 - Orange Nation
 * 70 - Yellow Nation
 * 60 - Light Green Nation
 * 50 - Dark Green Nation
 * 40 - Dark Blue Nation
 * 30 - Blue Nation
 * 20 - Sky Blue Nation
 * 15 - Lavender Nation
 * 10 - Violet Nation

Technological development points needed for various stages
 * 125 - Stage 1
 * 140 - Stage 2
 * 155 - Stage 3
 * 170 - Stage 4
 * 195 - Stage 5
 * 220 - Stage 6
 * 245 - Stage 7

Stages should remain similar to previous industrialisation stages.

Bonuses (added at 1920 when nuclear leaders are calculated):
 * 25 - access to radioactive substances
 * 25 - modern and stable government
 * 25 - no wars over heartland for 50 years
 * 25 - large, high population nation
 * 25 - Stage 7 nation

Nuclear technology
Related to technology level stat Bonuses (added at 1930 when space leaders are calculated):

Space technology
Related to technology level stat

War
Changes:
 * Changed location to reflect the real issues of distance in war
 * Changed tactical advantages to better reflect bonuses attackers, colonial forces and geography works in reality
 * Changed nations per side by removing it and replacing with a support and aid section
 * Changed the military, infrastructure and economy out for the new 4 stats
 * Changed motive to include limits on end-war demands
 * Changed population to show its importance

Location
Goes by capital and territory contingency with opposing war members:
 * 5 - Nation territory contingent with capital bordering territory of opposing war leader
 * 4 - Nation territory contingent with capital bordering territory of opposing war member
 * 3 - Nation territory not contingent with capital bordering territory of opposing war leader
 * 2 - Nation territory not contingent with capital bordering territory of opposing war member
 * 1 - Close cross-sea or aerial war
 * 0 - Far cross-sea or aerial war

Tactical Advantage

 * 1 - Attackers advantage
 * 3 - larger colonial empire (this benefit seems logical however I don't think it merits a 5 bonus, population should be a larger focus)
 * 3 - geographical advantage
 * Granted if:
 * Borders or homeland in general are particularly mountainous (not applicable if attacker and the opposing war leaders capital is across a sea)
 * Nation is defender and the opposing war leaders capital is across a sea

Nations per side
This is so backwards, as it gives an advantage to people who can spam countries, which is ridiculous and is exploited massively. However one nation on each side much be declared war leader, this is for the benefit of other sections of the rules.

Support and Aid

 * 3 - Nation with the highest amount of nations on its side
 * 3 - Nation receiving the highest amount of military aid on its side, cannot be combined with the bonus for highest amount of supply aid
 * 2 - Nation receiving the highest amount of supply aid on its side, cannot be combined with the bonus for highest amount of military aid

Military Development
Change to of +1 for each turn dedicated to military development in the past 15 years.

Economic Power
Total of economic power points for each side over the past 15 years must be made.
 * 5 - Side with a stronger economy by 5 points or more
 * 3 - Side with a stronger economy by 5 points or less

Political Stability
Based on war leaders stability or average of all nations during coalition wars.
 * 5 - 25+ stability
 * 3 - 20-24 stability
 * 1 - 15-19 stability
 * -1 - 10-14 stability
 * -3 - 5-9 stability
 * -5 - -4 and below stability

Technology Level
Based on technology level of the current nation. +50 if using nuclear weapons
 * 1.1xtotal - for being 1 industrialisation levels above
 * 1.2xtotal - for being 2 industrialisation levels above
 * 1.3xtotal - for being 3 industrialisation levels above
 * etc...

NPCs
Will have spent turns developing for the past 15 years in this order economy>political>military>technology.

Expansion
-2 for each non-colonial expansion in the past 15 years. Good way of discouraging players from super expansion

Motive
Choice of motive limits the end-war demands that can be made.
 * 3 - Economic: Fighting for resources - cannot demand more than 20% of opponents land, no vassalising or annexing, no altering of political connections, major alteration of economic connections
 * 5 - Defending: Fighting to defend territory you already own - cannot demand more than 10% of opponents land, no vassalising or annexing, minor altering of political connections, minor altering of economic connections
 * 5 - Social/Moral Friend: Fighting for social/moral reasons to help an ethnicity/race in the nation - cannot demand more than 20% of opponents land, no vassaling or annexing, minor altering of politcal connections, minor altering of economic connections
 * 7 - Social/Moral Kinsmen: Fighting for social/moral reasons to help a minority of your nation's main ethnicity/race in another nation - cannot demand more than 20% of opponents land, no vassaling or annexing, minor altering of politcal connections, minor altering of economic connections
 * 7 - Religious: Fighting for your nation's dominant religion, against a nation which is severely increasing discrimination, increasingly restricting access to or damaging holy sites, brutally opposing conversion attempts, or has recently changed its religion/denomination - cannot demand more than 20% of opponents land, no vassaling or annexing, minor altering of politcal connections, minor altering of economic connections
 * 10 - Life or Death: Opponents purpose is to destroy your nation - cannot demand more than 30% of opponents land, no vassaling annexing, full altering of political connections, full altering of economic connections

Additional motives that alter motive score:
 * -1 - Vassalisation: fighting with intent to vassalise opposing nations - can vassalise
 * -3 - Annexation: fighting with intent to annex opposing nations - can demand any amount of oppenents land, can annex if government toppled

Chance
Stays the same.

Nation age
Stays the same.

Population
Number of digits in population times by 2. Other rules stay the same.

Paticipation
Make into base score of 10 for each side in an algorithm.

Recent wars
keep the same.

Comments
It'd be good to hear what people think about these ideas. I'm still working on this section but I decided to publish to see what people think. Kunarian TALK 12:28, December 23, 2013 (UTC)

Some of these are good ideas but others will be too time consuming and hard to implement. I'm starting the drafts for the maps and the rules for PMIII but don't expect them before January finishes as they require a lot of work. Scandinator (talk) 15:39, December 23, 2013 (UTC)

The new rules make sense, though the nation side section would be rather difficult to work with, as the alliance with the most nations was often the winner in every war (WWI and WWII for example). Vivaporius: "I don't need a slogan" 16:46, December 23, 2013 (UTC)

I like these ideas, but a lot of them will need to be simplified while keeping the basic principles intact. Furthermore, we really need clear up motive.

18:49, December 23, 2013 (UTC)

What is a Colony ruled as? Vassal? Mafia CBA doing his signature. Don't judge Him. This Sig is inspired by Guns. 18:54, December 23, 2013 (UTC)

A colony is not a vassal. A colony is "a territory under the immediate political control of a state, distinct from the home territory of the sovereign," as defined by Wikipedia. A vassal state is "any state that is subordinate to another." That can be defined in the rules if I makes it clearer. Mscoree (talk) 19:36, December 23, 2013 (UTC)
 * I know what a Colony is, it had no ruling in the above section

Can you explain the sections below a little more. What exactly do these mean? CourageousLife (talk) 20:44, December 23, 2013 (UTC)
 * Changed motive to include limits on end-war demands
 * 10 - Life or Death: Opponents purpose is to destroy your nation - cannot demand more than 30% of opponents land, no vassaling annexing, full altering of political connections, full altering of economic connections
 * I'm only on for a second so I'll make a quick reply, I'm glad other people are interested in what I have to say.


 * On what you have there: 10 represents the points the motive gives you in an algorithm, the next section is the name and what has to be happening for you to be able to use this. Then the next bit means that whatever percentage you get if you win the war you can't take more than 30% of your opponents land (this includes forcing parts to break off into new nations), no vassaling means that you cannot vassalise them or any breakoff nation you create and annexing means you cannot fully annex them. Full altering of political connections means you can force them to break alliances with other nations and the like and can even force them to change government. Full altering of economic connections means that you can force them to break trade deals or trade routes or demand reparations and the like. The last two I described basically give you right to do some flavour stuff within plausibility. Kunarian TALK 22:10, December 23, 2013 (UTC)


 * I had previously addressed the issue of motive, and I just wanted to see if this matched up or not.


 * If the victor of the war plans to destroy the nation's soverignty, either by annexation or other means, then their motive must be +10, whether or not the original intent was destruction.
 * For example, the agressor nation gets +3 fighting for resources and the defender gets +5 for defending territory they already own. If the agressor gets enough points to possibly topple the defender's government, the defender's motive is automatically +10, because they are fighting for the existence of their nation.


 * Thanks, CourageousLife (talk) 23:35, December 23, 2013 (UTC)
 * There should be an anti-Caliphal rule, like saying that having more than 10 vassals or states not representing the main nation are counted as one nation or something. like the caliphate or the HRE. Sine dei gloriem &#34;Ex Initio Terrae&#34; (talk) 01:10, December 24, 2013 (UTC)

With the industrial and technology point system, its just too complex and annoying like the stability system. In addition there are issues that need to be recitified. In 1400 AD, the Arabs were at the most advanced technologically but constant warfare had the nations in the region collapsing. Europe was coming back from the plague and Asia was about to enter their period of stagnation. Scandinator (talk) 04:06, December 24, 2013 (UTC)


 * Well the British had more than 70 dominions, vassals, colonies, and protectorates in 1945, and each represented the British Empire in the regions they were located. The kicker is the fact that this was at the edge of British imperial authority at the time. Britain had way more territories in 1919, recognized as its pick point, when it reached the zenith of its territorial and imperial might. Once again, the rules cannot properly reflect these minute details, which would only serve to cause more trouble. When you consider the fact that France, Germany, the Mongols, Arabs, Romans, and Persians also had numerous vassal and dominion-like states across human history, you'll find yourself more likely fight historical facts than other players implausibilities. :/ Flag of the Hurian Federation.png Vivaporius: "I don't need a slogan" 01:48, December 24, 2013 (UTC)

About the annexation rule. In OTL nations were able to annex nations that were either uncivilized and/or one region large, assuming the invader completely occupied them. I'm not sure how this can be implemented, but I think it makes a lot of sense. Mscoree (talk) 14:28, December 24, 2013 (UTC)

Alright:

I don't have any opinion about the usual turns.in fact, i don't think that anybody even cares about this rule, since it doesn't affect anything and nobody remembers how this is supposed to work anymore.I might agree with the suggestion for colonial turns.

I agree with your suggestions about multiple nations.But i don't understand what you mean by independence.You are being too vague.

The ideas for industrialization levels are good, but how are they supposed to work? Are they going to become factors in the algorythm?

But, about war;

I agree with the locations thing, and the tactical advantage. But the nations per side thing works.the problem is when one player makes all his nations leaders in a war.We shouldn't allow this.

I don't understand your concept of support and aid.I also am not understanding your suggestions for military development, but if you are saying that only one point instead of two should be given to every year of military development, i disagree.The system already works well the way it is on that section.However, it is the option of the player whether he wants to develop his military or his economy more.About your suggestion for economy, i guess the 5 and3 there are bonuses, right?

About stability: and how we are going to calculate stability?

I guess that i agree with the technology level thing, since it is the same as it is now, but, i don't like this 50 bonus for the atomic bomb.if this is to be incorporated into the algorythm, it will encourage players with the bomb to go to war and use the bomb.and we don't want the Earth of PMIII to end up like the Earth of the original Map Game, do we?

Your idea for NPCs is not that good.If we are going to divide those five years into four categories, we get odd numbers, and if we get the same rule for this game as to how many points NPCs get, the numbers get even odder (say, a NPC would have 1.85 points in technology).the only way to fix that would be using the past 20 years.But then we would have to extend this to all the other nations.So, i think that either we try to avoid these odd numbers by expanding the development time to 20 years for everybody, or we take technology out of the factors.

Your idea of expansion is very good.

About the motive:

I don't agree with the economic part or the life or death part.After all, if a nation is small enough, a nation of a certain size can annex it by economic motive in one war, and this isn't possible with this.And, by the limits of the motives (30%), nobody can ever annex a nation in one war, regardless of motive or how much you got in the war score compared to them. (note that to annex a nation in one war, a country has to get 33,3%.) You could have 200 of war score and your opponent 20, but, you can't annex them, because of the limits even when you should annex the nation because of the motive chosen.So, unless you got something else to add, We should get rid of the limits for life or death and economic.I also don't understand how the 1 and 3 right below are supposed to be added to the algorythm.Ah, and i almost forgot: we need a motive score for ideologically-motivated wars because this is going to be a issue from the 18/19th century on.--Collie Kaltenbrunner (talk) 20:18, December 25, 2013 (UTC)

I agree with Nation age and chance, but we should clarify whether nation age is a average or a sum.There's been controversy about that recently, and the rules are vague about that.

--Collie Kaltenbrunner (talk) 10:57, December 25, 2013 (UTC)

PMIII Preparations
I have begun the map and the rules for PMIII. They can be found here and here. Constructive critism is welcome. Scandinator (talk) 18:52, December 23, 2013 (UTC)

We weren't supposed to make the page until 1 January 2014. Mscoree (talk) 19:32, December 23, 2013 (UTC)

I do not approve of this map.

22:21, December 23, 2013 (UTC)

There's a problem with your colonization system. I mean, some nations could be massive but still be really unstable and have a piss poor economy.

23:51, December 23, 2013 (UTC)

Couple problems with that. Britain was absolutely massive, and most of the people benefited from healthcare services and a stable government. Russia's current government is relatively stable, and most of the population is middle-class following the administration under Putin, yet it remains the largest nation on the planet. This in constrast with many small states, which are both poor and extremely unstable (Nepal, Bhutan, Honduras, any Central African state). The issue that in earlier periods, tiny states were easier to govern due to shorter communication routes. Plus, you didn't have to sustatin five million people at the same time in a tiny area. Larger states were left unproductive due to low densities and lack of interests in moving to undeveloped regions. Also, communication was a pain, and rebellions often took months to deal with if they happened on the other side of the empire. As communications became easier and faster, and populations grew, tiny countries could no loger support them without extensive importing, and larger empires could support themselves with faster transport, larger armies that could be paid for, and swift response to crisis on the ends of their territories. If you look back to the 1400s, Russia was broke and poor, while Rwanda was fantastically wealthy. In the former, there was a larger territory to cover and few available resources, while Rwanda had a smaller population, and few complex needs, allowing for a greater distribution of wealth. Today, Rwanda is poor because its tiny land has few useful resources, and Russia is rich and stable because its huge land has huge amounds of resources. Ages and circumstances change how stable and wealthy a nation is, and rules cannot properly reflect that. Vivaporius: "I don't need a slogan" 00:00, December 24, 2013 (UTC)

@Mscoree, the page is under construction, that requires a lot of work, hence the early start.

@Scraw, the reason why the map looks messy atm is because the top layer which is pure black fill is at 80% transperacy, the bottom layer is to have more accurate borders and will be removed for the game maps but will be present for edits only if I attain the role as map maker. However It would be great if the mapmaker used it too so we have more accurate maps.

@The colonial system has been altered at the cost of making it more work for the mods.

Scandinator (talk) 01:42, December 24, 2013 (UTC)

The earlier start is fine. I was just surprised since we  had originally planned to make the page on 1 January, and start two weeks or so after that. Also if possible make the map grey on a white background, instead of dark grey on blue. I think that looks better. Mscoree (talk) 03:52, December 24, 2013 (UTC)

I agree, I never liked gray on blue. Gray on white.

03:58, December 24, 2013 (UTC)

It's all black on white. I'm doing that to showcase the layers. Also I will be on holidays from the 3rd to the 16th. Hence the early start on the pages. Scandinator (talk) 11:26, December 24, 2013 (UTC)

Scan, we can't wait until february for the next part of the map to get ready, since the game has to start quickly.--Collie Kaltenbrunner (talk) 17:04, December 24, 2013 (UTC)

I'm attempting to draw out the HRE and related area for the map. Here is a WIP map for what I have so far. Will add more states later. Feel free to add this to the map. Mscoree (talk) 18:19, December 24, 2013 (UTC)

Sorry for interjecting, and I know I may be taking over-thinking this, but as a hopefully-future player of PMIII I must say, I don't think using OTL subdivision maps to recreate centuries-old maps is...accurate. The map of the world in 1450 compared to the world more than five hundred years ago are completely different, and the majority of nations would not have used borders close to our current ones. Consider, for example, that the Mamluk Egyptians would not have used the perfectly straight borders in Egypt today, nor would the Aztec and the Inca use such borders available on the map back then. I personally liked the base map from the beginning of PMII. Just my two cents. Hope the new game goes well :). ChrisL123 (talk) 20:09, December 24, 2013 (UTC)

The subdivisions on the map are rivers (which don't change too often) and OTL regions, which usually help to get us in the ballpark. Of course we'll have to manually draw some borders, but the subdivisions are a good guide. Mscoree (talk) 23:00, December 24, 2013 (UTC)

The claims will be respected correct? I mean the ones located here on this talk page? If not, I am still claiming the Timurids. Still, concerning the map, will the map look anything similair to the PM2 map, just layout wise, or no? That said, I applaud you Scan for your effort for this mapgame, just be ready to be DESTROYED!!! DS|The Rainbow Machete 22:13, December 25, 2013 (UTC)

Flag Map


I made this map to honor the end of the game. I apologize for the gross oversimplifications that may be present. I tried really hard to make sure everyone was represented, but some flags were simply not available. If your flag is not pictured here or your flag is wrong, post it and your country's name below, and I'll add it. CourageousLife (talk) 02:19, December 24, 2013 (UTC)

10/10. Shows who controls what much better than colors for some reason. Reminds of an earlier map I made for my timeline, seen right.

02:28, December 24, 2013 (UTC)

Tojiko, Byakuren, and Himekaidou have their own flags, and can be found on their respective pages linked. -Kogasa  2013 December 24, 04:34 (CET)


 * I'll get right on it. CourageousLife (talk) 04:03, December 24, 2013 (UTC)
 * It's now fixed for you. CourageousLife (talk) 04:19, December 24, 2013 (UTC)

How do u make a flag map. <font color=Purple face="Algerian">OCT MARIUS, HAIL HIM

Lots and lots of photoshop. If you don't have the money, (I have the cheap Elements version) Pixlr is a free online version. That would be a good start. CourageousLife (talk) 04:03, December 24, 2013 (UTC)

Looks nice, though Mali and the West African territories are dominions in the Imperium. Collie never darkened their nations even though I stated they had the same status as the rest of the empire. Also, the Sahara was formally annexed by Ethiopia, and acknowledged by one of the mods (no idea which one though). Very nice job though. Vivaporius: "I don't need a slogan" 05:46, December 24, 2013 (UTC)

Russia owns Belorussia, ukraina, and Baltics and FER because tank ultimatum-Lx (leave me a message) 02:47, December 25, 2013 (UTC)
 * Kneel before Lx Zod!--Collie Kaltenbrunner (talk) 09:33, December 25, 2013 (UTC)


 * Posted edited for accuracy. :P Flag of the Hurian Federation.png Vivaporius: "I don't need a slogan" 16:48, December 25, 2013 (UTC)

Andrew annexed the Baltics, which was confirmed by the mods several times. And the FER is owned by Pita, which was made very clear by the mods as well. The tanks were only to prevent foreign invasion into the lands you still held, but you never regained the lands that you lost. Vivaporius: "I don't need a slogan" 03:00, December 25, 2013 (UTC)


 * Correciton, I own Eesti, and I own belorussia, and Ukraina, and I ultimatum'd FER to join russia. The pita post's legality is questionable, and people just ignored that entire world section, since cohersion to join as said part of the world was used instead of the first choice, Pita was cohersed into posting as said dusputed territory. Form my POV, as soon as I ended the Russian civil war in 1914, which aparently some people said I did not have the power to do(affect events INSIDE my own nation), the entire situation revolving around the far east was not made clear by ANYONE. AT ALL. At best it was ignored and left to pester and  become a malignent tumor.-Lx (leave me a message)Azarath Flag.png 17:39, December 25, 2013 (UTC)


 * I actually have flags for Yagich Rafael, Attican Union, and Eternal Matter that I never got uploaded if you want them (granted two of those are just dots). Plus one for Pure Science.Commandante Lemming (talk) 19:47, December 27, 2013 (UTC)


 * Yagich Rafael:
 * Yagich_Rafael.png


 * Attican Union:
 * Attican_Union.png
 * Attican_Union.png


 * Praetorate of Pure Science (In Loving Memory):


 * PurScience.png


 * Praetorate of Eternal Matter:


 * Eternal_Matter.png


 * Commandante Lemming (talk) 19:47, December 27, 2013 (UTC)

Algorithms per Battle
I would like to make a case for the algorithm per battle system that many other games have utilized. Basically the idea is instead of making one algorithm before a war, nations make algorithms based on individual engagements. Usually one algorithm per war is the minimum for the system, while more are required for major battles and campaigns (E.g. A German invasion of Luxembourg would take only one algorithm). Some advantages of this system are that it leads to more strategic and tactical planning. I will illustrate this with an OTL example. Let's say it's 1939 and Germany makes an algorithm for WW2. All the Allies and future Allied powers state their intentions to fight back, and Germany loses the algorithm. For the next six years all the Allied powers simply write in their turn "We continue to fight Germany," simply because the war has to go on for a set amount. In the meantime Germany starts a bunch of arguments on the talk page because he/she feels cheated. (I mean, when playing the board game Risk it's more fulfilling to be defeated after an epic five hour game as opposed to a single battle, so of course they get mad.) In a per battle system, Germany actually has to move their soldiers around tactically, actually planning interesting ATL campaigns, and possibly changing the outcome of the war by winning a few battles here and there. I mean let's be real, usually (but not always) the outcome of a battle comes down to the quantity and quality of the soldiers on either side. So in a per battle system that would be factored in, which couldn't easily be done in a single algorithm system. Nations have to look at the big picture, making interesting and exciting turns in order to win the war. Please post what ever questions you have below and I'll be happy to answer them. Mscoree (talk) 17:04, December 24, 2013 (UTC)

I don't think so.If that algorythm suggestion passes, one will be hard enough to make already, without counting the usual controversy about the results.making many for the quantity of battles? We had wars that lasted 10 years because the players involved couldn't stop arguing about it.If we go with a battle system, a war, or even a battle, could drag itself out for unreal amounts of time.And plus, how the results would vary? to have any variation, we would have to work in: quantity of soldiers (and who will know how much are plausible in any nation for the late Middle ages?), terrain, skill of commanders, tactics, morale, losses,etc... Summing it up, it would just complicate the algorythm even further.--Collie Kaltenbrunner (talk) 09:39, December 25, 2013 (UTC)

The current algorithm that counts industry, economy, population, etc would factor in to determine quality. Quantity would be something that people would have to determine based on their population, and with help possibly from a moderator. Terrain, tactics, and some of the other things you mentioned have already been implemented into other games, and in some cases are even a simple number addition. Mscoree (talk) 13:55, December 25, 2013 (UTC)

Still, length.Considering the history of this game when it comes to inter-player discussions, it would be a miracle if the Second World War was solved in six turns.Especially with the sheer number of battles.--Collie Kaltenbrunner (talk) 20:33, December 25, 2013 (UTC)

Well I can say from experience that people argue a lot less on a per battle basis. Usually when people are defeated in battle they know why, and don't argue about it, but rather try to win the next one. When an entire world war can be decided with just one algorithm people feel confused and angry, almost cheated, as if they didn't even get a fair chance to fight back. Mscoree (talk) 16:30, December 27, 2013 (UTC)

One of the reasons why I never played PM2 was because of this. Games with algo per battle are so much fun. You actually have to think. Tr0llis (talk) 20:32, December 30, 2013 (UTC)

I agree with Tr0llis. User:Edboy452    (talk) 20:45, December 30, 2013 (UTC)

I'm a relative rookie but I generally would be against adding more math to the game. There are already a bunch of algo disputes, and frankly I think that the focus on algo-points diminishes the cultural and historical nature of the game. If people are basing their turns off math, they copy-paste and focus on achievements that get them points. If I wanted a game like that, I would stay offline and play "RISK". What makes this game fun for me is that we can actually write history and that the details matter, the focus on math cheapened it a bit for me and that's one reason that my game was so pacifist - yes I wanted to be nice but I wasn't interested in playing for algo-points, so I stayed out of wars entirely. If anything, we should be considering ways to make this game less ridiculously militaristic and more historically focussed as we are on an alt-history wiki not playing some text-only version of "Civilization" (nothing against that game). Frankly, I would boil wars down to simple algos and limit people to one offensive war every half-century. Making the game more battle-focussed is only going to lead to more unrealistic warmonegering that bogs down the game in military strategy. Commandante Lemming (talk) 21:02, December 30, 2013 (UTC)

I may have fought a lot of wars, but I agree with this, except for the penultimate sentence.

21:08, December 30, 2013 (UTC)

After having a talk with Scraw and some others in chat I have been convinced that algorithms per battle is better. NonEuclidean (talk) 21:17, December 30, 2013 (UTC)

Well if that how it goes - the good news for all of you is that you can look forward to another game where my nation is a peacful trading power. :-P I have to say if there's one part of this game I dislike, it's the algos.Commandante Lemming (talk) 21:22, December 30, 2013 (UTC)

I'm not sure what Commandante Lemming is talking about, or what he means by algorithm points, but to be honest, I believe that what he said is actually the opposite. I have seen people who just post "we continue with the war" every turn, simply because the algorithm makes them. If we had algorithms per battle you would have to actually think strategically and post about how you maneuver certain units, and play out the war overall. If we had algorithms per battle it would require mean we had to "actually write history and that the details matter". Again, I'm not sure what Commandante Lemming is talking about, but there is no math, points, or scores. The difference is just that instead of posting an algorithm for a whole war then sitting there as it occurs, you actually fight the war, and are in control. You decided how it is won. You actually write interesting history. Mscoree (talk) 21:23, December 30, 2013 (UTC)

I think Lemming is under the impression that players have to count up battles so how, and do mathematical formulas to determine if they win. I'm not sure how he got that impression, but that's the exact opposite of what ms proposed. NonEuclidean (talk) 21:25, December 30, 2013 (UTC)

No, I think what he's trying to say is that algo per battle takes too much time and work and more math than doing a single algo which actually allows users to change the algo as time passes, as opposed to having a new battle every turn and trying to figure out who the fuck can support who where and whose troops are where and who will win the war overall. And more algos means more arguing. Keep that in mind.

21:29, December 30, 2013 (UTC)

It doesn't necessarily lead to more arguing since more people will agree on a battle than a war. Also the idea of going back and changing a past algorithm as a war progresses sounds worse. That was one of the main sources of arguments. On every war there was a giant edit war since people kept changing and unchanging the algorithm. Mscoree (talk) 21:32, December 30, 2013 (UTC)

From experience the algo per battle system seems a lot more useful, that way people don't have to do just one algo and immediately win the war, rendering the losing player unable to even turn the tide if any ally wants to join him. Also, since PM does turn by the year instead of quarter or half year, we would only have to do this for major military engagements. User:Edboy452    (talk) 21:35, December 30, 2013 (UTC)

Usually only one is required, and only one is used in most wars, but when ever the winner starts to be contested (like if a new army was raised to try to stop the invaders again) then the losing side can make an algorithm to try to turn the tide. Mscoree (talk) 21:41, December 30, 2013 (UTC)

That's what we do in our current system joins. New person joins losing side, we fix algo. Simple.

21:43, December 30, 2013 (UTC)

The difference is that we don't want to go back and change already written things as new developments occur. That was the root of many arguments. Mscoree (talk) 21:46, December 30, 2013 (UTC)

That's why wars take more than one turn. In one turn one side can be winning, in the next the other side can be winning. If you had actually bothered to read this game, and actually see how we do things, you would see that we're already doing most of what you say we'll do without this nonsense. Also, the main problem is that it will take TOO DAMN LONG. Who the fuck has time to make an algorithm every day, and then argue about it for the rest of they day? The arguments on a mother algo would just pan out to the smaller ones. Stop trying to make everything NotLAH.

21:52, December 30, 2013 (UTC)

So I was in chat just now talking this over with Lemming and others and I was told to add my explaining to the talk page, so here you go. Here's the basic idea:

When two states declare war there is an algorithm just like before. That algorithm is usually titled "The Blank invasion of Blank". That determines the success of the initial invasion (so in WW1 the "German Invasion of France". Germany wins that one and continues war). As new developments arise (let's say Germany has now invaded France successfully, but the British arrive to help) the winning side is now contested, meaning the defenders believe they now can contest the invading force, so they make an algorithm using their new strength to try and turn the tide. If there is no help that arrives or any new changes, then only one algo is used and needed. That's usually what happens anyway. Multiple algos just means that when a state believes they can fight back, past the initial invasion, they are able to. Most wars need only one, but more can be used to turn the tide of a war/create interesting history, or for different fronts/campaigns. In WW2 there would probably be at least one for the Pacific War, European Theater, Invasion of USSR, etc. Most wars would continue to just have one. It's the larger wars where superpowers get involved where 2 or 3 are factored in. There is no adding up of points, or other methods of mathematics like that.

Now let's compare two typical turns using the two methods:

I mean there's no point of writing interesting history/tactics in your turn if you already won the war with a single algorithm.

Won't this lead to a ton of algorithms?

Algorithms will only be made as needed, not for every rock thrown. The more algorithms people want to make the merrier, and usually in past games when some one makes a lot it's because they could have just grouped them together anyway.

Won't people just argue more on each one?

One of the main reasons for arguments is because players didn't have a chance to fight back, and because changing algo was encouraged. If someone loses a war without even having a chance to fight back they feel cheated and argue about the legitimacy of the war and correctness of algorithm. Also since changing the algo to add new developments was encouraged it was impossible to have a solid algorithm, as it was prone to edit wars and arguments about that. People just added and undid everything over and over.

Algorithms per battle have already been adopted by many other successful games and series, including Night of the Living Alternate History and the Axis vs. Allies series.

So in conclusion, I think algorithms per battle is the better system. It allows for interesting and exciting turns full of history and strategic thinking, proper wars and a more realistic system, and hopefully helps to fix some of the problems from previous PM games. Thanks, Mscoree (talk) 22:27, December 30, 2013 (UTC)

That argument against arguments is bullshit. As I've said previously, if a new person joins the war we simply add them to the algorithm, which has the same effect as doing another algorithm. Also AvA has not adopted this nonsense.

02:56, December 31, 2013 (UTC)

Formal Apology
I hereby apologise for trying to change the rules in the Mod Elections. I understand that I acted badly, and my only defense is that I was only trying to make the elections based more on quality of the candidate, not he popularity with their friends. I realise this was the wrong thing to do, and I will not do anything like this again. I hope that I have convinced you of my sincerity, and hope that I can be forgiven for my actions. Once again, I apologise.

The Plug
Yank suggested pulling the plug on the game. The voting was not fair as those who are not playing the game voted. Therefore I have another vote with voting open to PMII players only:

Aye

 * Collie Kaltenbrunner (talk) 13:55, December 26, 2013 (UTC)
 * --Yank 17:00, December 26, 2013 (UTC)
 * 17:02, December 26, 2013 (UTC)
 * CourageousLife (talk) 19:21, December 26, 2013 (UTC)
 * Flag of the Hurian Federation.png Vivaporius: "I don't need a slogan" 20:16, December 26, 2013 (UTC)

Nay

 * [[Image:1.png|23px]] Imp (Say Hi?!)
 * Commandante Lemming (talk) 17:48, December 27, 2013 (UTC)
 * Scandinator (talk) 10:29, December 29, 2013 (UTC)

Discussion
Maybe you could just remove the non-PM2 people from the previous vote instead of having a new one. Mscoree (talk) 14:28, December 26, 2013 (UTC)

I don't see why they can't. It affects them either way.

17:02, December 26, 2013 (UTC)

They aren't the ones playing PMII though. :P  Imp (Say Hi?!) 17:10, December 26, 2013 (UTC)

So what?

17:12, December 26, 2013 (UTC)

Most of the people who are voting to pull the plug are people who want to play PM, but can't play PMII because basically nothing is open anymore. So they want to get PMII out of the way so that PMIII can take it's place. --Yank 17:23, December 26, 2013 (UTC)

I am voting to pull the plug because PMII is hijacking Chat. Also, I want to play PMIII. And PMII is dying Mafia CBA doing his signature. Don't judge Him. This Sig is inspired by Guns. 19:02, December 26, 2013 (UTC)

I am voting for it to end because the problems that this game always had have come to the point that they can't be fixed anymore.At least for me.Still, i'll continue playing if your side loses.--Collie Kaltenbrunner (talk) 19:10, December 26, 2013 (UTC)

Sorry Imp. But after reconsidering the issues with this game, its reached a point where the problems with the game are irreversible. People will always complain about the algos being illegals (with no valid evidence), whine about the actions in-game and argue over a point that was ill-defined by the mods, or even worse, come up with their own rules to validate their point on a matter. Better to let this game die rather than drag it out in longer. I'm not a wuss, I just slept on the issue and came to a conclusion is all. I battled it out for as long as I could, and now we've reached a point of no return. :( Vivaporius: "I don't need a slogan" 20:16, December 26, 2013 (UTC)

Nation's Claims
Hmm... where is the purported "nations claims" stuff for PMIII? It doesn't seem to be anywhere in the main-namespace yet. 77topaz (talk) 00:15, December 27, 2013 (UTC)

I couldn't find the list myself either. I saw your message and the rather admittedly rude response you got. If anyone has a link to the list, we'd love to get it please. Vivaporius: "I don't need a slogan" 00:17, December 27, 2013 (UTC)

The nation claims are on this very page. I don't believe they have been transferred to the PM3 page yet since it's under construction. Mscoree (talk) 00:25, December 27, 2013 (UTC)

Do you have a link to the section? I haven't been able to find it. 77topaz (talk) 00:32, December 27, 2013 (UTC)

http://althistory.wikia.com/wiki/Talk:Principia_Moderni_II_(Map_Game)#:The.C2.A0Semi-Official_Claims_for_PM3

00:36, December 27, 2013 (UTC)

This seems like a good time to warn people against claiming anything in Italy  *hint hint wink wink*  CrimsonAssassin- "I have special eyes" 00:39, December 27, 2013 (UTC)

Hmm... that claims list is several months old, there should probably be a new one on the PMIII page itself since users may have left/changed their mind/joined etc. in the meantime. As indicated, of course, it's unofficial (and incomplete, and quite messy). 77topaz (talk) 00:43, December 27, 2013 (UTC)

No.

00:44, December 27, 2013 (UTC)

I think what Scraw means is that the current list will be honored before a new updated list. There will have to be a new list, but anyone claiming a nation 'here' will still have priority for that nation 'there'. CourageousLife (talk) 00:50, December 27, 2013 (UTC)

Bingo.

00:53, December 27, 2013 (UTC)

Hmm... shouldn't there be an official map before we can truly make nations claims? The original PMII nations list had far more nations. (Also, there is only one free nation in the current list - which makes it seem that people have been adding nations to the list only as they claim them) 77topaz (talk) 01:13, December 27, 2013 (UTC)

Dude, you obviously want a nation. Which one is it? Just stop beating around the bush. CourageousLife (talk) 01:26, December 27, 2013 (UTC)

The map is not completed yet. That nation list is unofficial, and people have just been adding nations as they see fit/as they think of them. It is no where near a complete list, just a list of nations that we have interest in. Mscoree (talk) 01:31, December 27, 2013 (UTC)

Yes. And before Topaz can claim a nation, he needs to know which ones are avaliable and which aren't in a state of disarray before the start of the game like with PMII. Vivaporius: "I don't need a slogan" 05:11, December 27, 2013 (UTC)

I'll do a provisional map of 1400 with the usual base map soon.In fact, i'm already doing it.--Collie Kaltenbrunner (talk) 12:05, December 27, 2013 (UTC)

Collie I only focused on the area around Germany. Feel free to fix Italy as you see fit, and add what ever nations need to be colored. Mscoree (talk) 15:33, December 29, 2013 (UTC)

Provisional Map
Alright, the provisional map i told you is ready.However, there are some problems.At least, i might not have put in all of the states that existed at the time, but worse: this map can't handle more colours than the already-present on the 1450 PMII map.--Collie Kaltenbrunner (talk) 15:06, December 27, 2013 (UTC)



Looks like man. :/ Vivaporius: "I don't need a slogan" 15:40, December 27, 2013 (UTC)

Good to see the work I did wasn't used at all. :/ Mscoree (talk) 15:46, December 27, 2013 (UTC)

Oh, by the way, i switched my nation to Oyo. Better position and technology. And they have the same position of Benin (that big grey spot in Nigeria), but predate Benin by fourty years for a formation year that fell on, suprise-suprise, 1400 AD. :P  Vivaporius: "I don't need a slogan" 15:47, December 27, 2013 (UTC)

The area around OTL Germany isn't quite right. For example if the brown thing is supposed to be Austria, you've only colored half it's territory at this time. Most notably a large portion of their territory has been gifted to Venice here. Secondly what is that dark grey/black thing? What ever it is it encompasses parts of at least a dozen nations. Please view the map I made above for this region. It's not 100% accurate or complete, but it paints a better picture of this region than this current map does. Thanks, Mscoree (talk) 16:16, December 27, 2013 (UTC)
 * Look, my method for doing this map was taking the first map of PMII (File:PMIIFix2.png.Try to go to it to compare both versions.) and slapping 1400 borders on it.Because of this, except for the addition of one state or two, the area around Germany is just like it was on the original map.Ah, and that dark grey thing, let me explain what the dark grey colour means by region:


 * Western Europe
 * the nations in this color aren't fully integrated.(But i don't know if they should be coloured like this.they were already like this in the original map.)


 * Africa
 * in most of the cases, it represents an area made of city-states that share he same language.except for Kongo and Luba, which are in this color for not being fully integrated.


 * Eastern Europe
 * The only state that fits the description is the one near Albania.in 1450, there were many small states in the area, but i don't know how the situation was there in 1400.That part is a placeholder, in particular.


 * Central Asia
 * Hordes.all of them.


 * India
 * areas dominated by small states.


 * Southeast Asia
 * In the area around Myanmar, i would chalk it up to lack of integration.In the Khmer, it would be civil disarray, probably, south of Thailand, the area was dominated by small states, and in the Champa, the area was formed by city-states.


 * Indonesia
 * Area dominated by city states.Northern Borneo would be a different case.and the colour might not even apply there.


 * Americas
 * area dominated by city-states.

But again, this map isn't definitive, aside of being quite rushed, and i'm looking to try to find a way of making this map accept new colours.And i could try to adapt your map to this format, if you explained me what do those colours mean.

--Collie Kaltenbrunner (talk) 19:20, December 27, 2013 (UTC)

1. I voted no because it doesn't seem right to pull the plug before this thing runs it's course. Personally I would just give Collie final approval on crazy algos and be done with it. Besides - PM3 is going to bog down eventually too. We are too close to the end to give up - and at the end of the day this is a mpa game with self-defined rules, let's just have fun with the dang thing. What i would be fine with, however, is launching PM3 early and runnign the two concurrently for a little while since we're so close.

2. That, or this game is popular enough that there probably should be two versions of it running at all times anyway. Basically, I'm suggesting launching a new version every year  - so people who want in on an overly advanced PM3 next December can get on the ground floor of PM4 which will launch when PM3 has gotten to about 1765. Launching a new game every New Year would give you two games running at all times. One would always have room for newbies, while the other would be stable for more advanced players. Some people (me) would play both but some would focuss on one. Just a thought.

3. Also for PM3 I'm going to want to talk to Collie about my nation - I'm going to do the tribal gambit again but wanted to see about getting a head start at the point of divergance (in other words give me a national founding and a tiny bit of land to start with rather than just four pixels)

4. Can we please start calling it "PM3" instead of "PMIII" - easier to distinguish from "PMII" and we should start doing that now. :-P

Commandante Lemming (talk) 17:48, December 27, 2013 (UTC)

Also - I had been hoping to run for a mod position in PM3. I'm a committed player (except for this month whne I had to break for an grad school application) and have a history of playing peacefully and fairly. Having elections early while so many were on pre-announced vactions realy threw a wrench in. Commandante Lemming (talk) 18:07, December 27, 2013 (UTC)
 * I know, but nobody remembered to appoint you when we had the elections.If everybody is okay with it, we could hold an election for you.--Collie Kaltenbrunner (talk) 19:25, December 27, 2013 (UTC)


 * If you want to I'd like that. I'd love to be a mod but don't want to be obnoxious (at least not more than I already am). If people want to vote on me - I'll say up front that my approach would be to be unbiased, but post in the interest of chaos and "degree of difficulty". I try to read carefully and would consider unintended consequences of actions - especially environmental concerns like invasive species and the fact that cultures don't merge easily (nor do they always rebel). I think the role of a mod isn't so much to guide the timeline in a given direction as it is to create "speed bumps" that keep the game fresh for players. Commandante Lemming (talk) 19:33, December 27, 2013 (UTC)
 * I support the modness of you.
 * 19:37, December 27, 2013 (UTC)
 * Me too!--Collie Kaltenbrunner (BRUSH YOUR TEETH) 20:17, December 27, 2013 (UTC)

Hrr, my corner of the world looks very complicated. Anyone want to trade nations? If not I'll be looking into other nations. Also, I'd like to have the same color I had in this game if possible. Or a purple.

19:44, December 27, 2013 (UTC)


 * What do you mean?You claimed Aragon, didn't you?--Collie Kaltenbrunner (talk) 20:17, December 27, 2013 (UTC)
 * Yes, but I want to change it. I'm willing to swap nations with another player, or I'll just move. I originally wanted England, but that was taken, so I moved to Aragon, but Western Europe looks really crowded. Also, I want my blue color instead of pink. That is all.
 * 20:21, December 27, 2013 (UTC)
 * Okay.The pink was because in the original map (1450), Aragon was pink.In fact, in that map there are many colours assigned to playerless nations simply because they were there on the original.--Collie Kaltenbrunner (talk) 20:38, December 27, 2013 (UTC)

I'd also like to keep my current color for the next game. Vivaporius: "I don't need a slogan" 20:13, December 27, 2013 (UTC)

Alright, i think i found a way of introducing new colours.I'll try to revise this map soon.--Collie Kaltenbrunner (talk) 20:38, December 27, 2013 (UTC)

As Collie requested, here is a description of my map:

Okay I think that's it. Again not completed, but I hope that helped. Mscoree (talk) 20:42, December 27, 2013 (UTC)
 * Brown natin encompassing the kingdom of Denmark, Sweden, and Norway is the Union of Kalmar.
 * The Duchy of Schleswig, south of Denmark, is also shown in brown.
 * The nation in yellow south of Schleswig is the Duchy of Holstein. This should also probably be changed to brown.
 * The green nation east of Holstein is Mecklenburg.
 * East of Mecklenburhg is Pomerania.
 * South of Mecklenburg and Pomerania is Brandenburg.
 * East of Pomerania is Ordenstaat, the dominion of the Teutonic Order.
 * The yellow nation south of Brandenburg is Saxony.
 * The green nation south of Saxony is Thuringla-Meissen.
 * The brown nation southeast of the Saxony area in OTL Czech Republic is the Crown of Bohemia (which is incomplete).
 * The lighter brown nation bordering Bohemia is the Margravate of Moravia.
 * The dark blue/violet nation directly west of Bohemia is the nation of Palantine.
 * South of Palantine is the four partitions in Bavaria (showed as one color for simplicity); Bayern-Ingolstadt, Bayern-Landshut, Bayern-Munchen, and Bayern-Straubin.
 * To the west of Bavaria is Augsburg.
 * The green nation south of Bohemia, holding land in OTL Austria, Croatia, Switzerland, and Germany is the nation of Austria.
 * Austria proper is bordered by the yellow nation to the west of Gorizia.
 * In Switzerland south of the Austrian lands is the nation of Waldstatte.
 * West of Switzerland is the nation of Burgundy.
 * North of Burgundy is the nation of Lorraine.
 * The dark blue nation north of Lorraine is Luxembourg (not completed).
 * North of Luxembourg is Liege, bordered by Burgundian lands in the OTL Netherlands.
 * North of Liege is Brabant.
 * The green nation in the Netherlands is Hainaut-Holland.
 * The area northeast of Holland is Friesland.
 * The nation west of Brandenburg is Luneburg.
 * The red color in OTL Germany denotes small Holy Roman Empire states that I am unable to represent. WIthin this area (although not entirely completed) are the nations of Cologne, Hesse, Mainz, and Trier.
 * The blue nation is northern Italy is Milan (not completed).

I don't think i can translate this into the map.It's not that your instructions were bad, but try to copy this curve by curve into the usual map is almost impossible.Maybe we should use a separate map for the HRE.--Collie Kaltenbrunner (talk) 21:13, December 27, 2013 (UTC)

I am not opposed to the idea of having a separate map detailing the Holy Roman Empire. That would show a lot more detail I think. As for the world map, if we're using the blank map made by Scandinator then you can pretty much copy and paste my work into it. If we're using the PM2-style map then I understand that would be difficult. I can make a more simplified version using that map if you want. Mscoree (talk) 21:51, December 27, 2013 (UTC)
 * I think it would be better to use the usual map.If we were to use this new map and put colours for each nation regardless of player status, we would run out of colours soon.and it wouldn't serve to represent non-integrated states and hordes.And i would appreciate if you made a version of this map on PM2-style.--Collie Kaltenbrunner (talk) 07:04, December 28, 2013 (UTC)

I have some much neded corrections to Genoa in 1400 To find the source i am basing it off of and to correrc you mistakes look at this.
 * 1) Corsica would be under Genoess control.
 * 2) Part of the Crimea was under Genoess contol.
 * 3) Northern Sardnia is under Genoess control.
 * 4) Multiple medertrean city states are uder Genoness
 * 5) Some Greek isles are under Genoess control.

<font color=Purple face="Algerian">OCT MARIUS, HAIL HIM  00:11, December 28, 2013 (UTC)
 * Alright, i corrected that part, but Sardinia wasn't under Genoese control in 1400.even the map you show points out that Genoa only controlled it until 1325.And please, improve your spelling.--Collie Kaltenbrunner (talk) 13:44, December 28, 2013 (UTC)

Your horrendous spelling, grammar, punctuation, and capitalization deems all that to be false.

00:17, December 28, 2013 (UTC)

Now Scraw, there's no need for insults. What Oct states is indeed true. Genoa controlled all of those territories at the time of PMIII's start date. So unless you can prove otherwise, I'd very much like for you to leave Oct be. Jesus. Where were you raised? The projects? Vivaporius: "I don't need a slogan" 03:17, December 28, 2013 (UTC)

Jesus, it's a joke. I was raised in one of the more decent neighborhoods of New York, thank you very much, but at least I was raised with a sense of humor.

03:20, December 28, 2013 (UTC)

I have a sense of humor, but I didn't find your "joke" funny at all. I call 'em as I see 'em. Vivaporius: "I don't need a slogan" 04:11, December 28, 2013 (UTC)

Frankly Scraw that sounds more like LG's "hear and obey" bullshit than an actual joke.--Yank 21:19, December 28, 2013 (UTC)



I took Collie's map and edited the Holy Roman Empire area using the map I made earlier. Had to dumb down a lot of the borders and simplify a lot of stuff, but I think it's a slight improvement. Also made some other minor fixes. Let me know what you think. Mscoree (talk) 03:14, December 29, 2013 (UTC)

Well, it's good, but still will need revisions.the whole Berg-Cleves-Jülich area is missing, and considering that Callum claimed Oldenburg, we have to add it.Ah, and why is Milan apparently controlling Ferrara, for example?--Collie Kaltenbrunner (talk) 06:45, December 29, 2013 (UTC)

AHHHHH. I go away for three days for Christmas and the map is finished? I have Europe and most of Asia done to almost perfect accuracy... Scandinator (talk) 10:35, December 29, 2013 (UTC)


 * Alrighty, I've uploaded an accurate map for most of Western Europe, its one of my progress saves and I'm still fixing Asia and the Middle East. France and Germany need more work too but I got Bohemia and Italy's complexity down to show the detail that is getting put in. I'll edit the nations list tomorrow and finish off the map in a few days. I'm going to add clour after I finish the base map. Scandinator (talk) 15:48, December 29, 2013 (UTC)

<p style="margin-left:24px;">


 * No, it is not finished. and this is a provisional map that i made in order to show which nations were available right now.--Collie Kaltenbrunner (talk) 11:39, December 29, 2013 (UTC)

Hmm... the colours of Poland-Lithuania (?) and Japan seem rather similar. 77topaz (talk) 00:43, December 31, 2013 (UTC)

Also, the small island next to Adelaide, Australia is still coloured. 77topaz (talk) 05:58, December 31, 2013 (UTC)

Viva, quit being an ass. Lordganon (talk) 14:35, December 31, 2013 (UTC)

There is also a bit above Scandinavia that should be uncolored, but at this point I think we're not even using this map. Also to Lordganon, "?". Mscoree (talk) 15:46, December 31, 2013 (UTC)


 * Well, that map was never meant to be official anyway.--Collie Kaltenbrunner (talk) 19:22, December 31, 2013 (UTC)

Not one iota to do with you, Ms. Reading would help you a great deal. Lordganon (talk) 08:55, January 2, 2014 (UTC)

I never said it had anything to do with me. I'm just surprised to see you around, and I don't see how Viva is an "ass". Mscoree (talk) 11:30, January 2, 2014 (UTC)

Vacation
I'll be out of town for a couple days. May be on during my vacation. CourageousLife (talk) 18:04, December 27, 2013 (UTC)

Modness of the Lemming
Hey all - I broached this with Collie in the last thread but I was on vacation at the early mod election and planned to run for PM3 modship. Collie suggested having a special election so I thought I would throw it up in it's own section before it died (I figured this is a little obnoxious and self-promoting, but not as obnoxious as begging Collie repeatedly). So, if I'm way out of line here, please feel free to delete this vote and give me forty lashes with a wet noodle or consign me forever to a desolate rift in space-time.

Commandante Lemming as Mod

Yea Nay
 * Mscoree (talk) 14:10, December 28, 2013 (UTC)
 * Collie Kaltenbrunner (talk) 14:13, December 28, 2013 (UTC)
 * Airlinesguy (talk) 15:11, December 28, 2013 (UTC)
 * 17:34, December 28, 2013 (UTC)
 * Flag of the Hurian Federation.png Vivaporius: "I don't need a slogan" 17:40, December 28, 2013 (UTC)
 * "<font color="#AACC99">This is not your grave  but you are welcome in it. "
 * --Yank 21:21, December 28, 2013 (UTC)
 * Sine dei gloriem &#34;Ex Initio Terrae&#34; (talk) 01:11, December 29, 2013 (UTC)
 * 23:13, December 29, 2013 (UTC)
 * Cour (I was on vacation, but I'm still here...)

None

PASSED

Wow thanks! i expected at least on Nay vote lol. Commandante Lemming (talk) 18:13, December 30, 2013 (UTC)

Congratulations! Added to the moderator list. Mscoree (talk) 19:57, December 30, 2013 (UTC)

Stop for a sec
Am I the only one who has this really bad feeling that PMIII is going to have more problems than this game?

21:19, December 30, 2013 (UTC)

I'm not holding my breath, but I'd rather play through the game we're about to start that drag myself back to the one we just ended. Go boom or go bust. Vivaporius: "I don't need a slogan" 23:06, December 30, 2013 (UTC)

Of course it will have problems, but at least rebooting it back to 1400 will give us a nice long stretch where people have limited war-making capability, plenty of room to expand, and no colonization privileges. That, and I'm sure that PM3 rule-making will be informed by they events of PM2, and some players may take different approaches. Granted, there's a reason I'm not playing in Europe - y'all have fun slugging it out for continental dominance while I slowly build a sleeping giant behind you. Commandante Lemming (talk) 14:39, December 31, 2013 (UTC)

Also the collaborative nature of the game and the large number of playes makes it unpredictable and potentially hazardous...which is why we all keep coming back for more punishment. Commandante Lemming (talk) 14:41, December 31, 2013 (UTC)
 * Well, many of those who are claiming nations right now will have dropped out before 1500.(For example, in PMII, at 1450 we had about 37 players in the sign-ups list.only 28 players posted. in 1550, we had 42 in the list. from those 33, only 24 had been in the original list of sign-ups.However, in 1550, from those 42, only 16 posted something.Of course, that was a slow year, but even counting th other who posted somewhat regularly at that time, no more than 60% the sign-ups were actually playing, if i am right.What i'm trying to say, is that while there are going to be a lot of players posting in the start, but, as the game progresses, they will lose interest and be replaced, and the replacements will end up being replaced too.--Collie Kaltenbrunner (talk) 19:20, December 31, 2013 (UTC)


 * Yeah but even have 16 active players on the boeard is a pretty good turnout. And yeah there will be dropouts but hopefully we'll get some random new blood. I've even thought of trying to pull some of my offline history-nerd  friends into this thing, although I thnk I'm the only one obsessive enough to keep up lol. Commandante Lemming (talk) 20:12, December 31, 2013 (UTC)
 * I was not saying that that was necessarily a bad thing.I understood that you mentioned the large number of players as a bad thing, so i answered, saying that while the numbers would be high, they naturally would dwindle.--Collie Kaltenbrunner (talk) 07:29, January 1, 2014 (UTC)

It's not the issues that are important, it's how we deal with them that matters. If we can deal with anything that comes along properly, then I see no problems for PMIII. PMI had it's share of problems (ghosts and resurrected leaders for example), but it still finished properly. --Yank 18:31, December 31, 2013 (UTC)
 * Well, that was just one player.--Collie Kaltenbrunner (talk) 19:20, December 31, 2013 (UTC)

Yeah, someone will have to keep track of the people and discoveries and inventions and stuff. I might try my hand at it, since mapmaking is only every five turns and there's two of us on it.

18:34, December 31, 2013 (UTC)

2014
I'm kinda late for this but, anyway, Happy New Years!--Collie Kaltenbrunner (talk) 07:23, January 1, 2014 (UTC)

Is this game dead? If so when will the new one start I still hold my claim to England with the colour of red on the map. Also, what does one have to do to apply for modship? I've been on the scene for awhile now and feel I should be given a shot. As per that ridiculous war above. Thank God( or whom/whatever you believe in) Germany wasn't involved. Whilst it is sad to see this game die as it has. I hope it hasn't sullied the reputation of this great series. Mayhap's we can avoid the same mistakes next time around. --finally off vacation Trust Me, I'm The Doctor (talk) 13:02, January 3, 2014 (UTC)

Yeah it's reserved, see: http://althistory.wikia.com/wiki/Principia_Moderni_III_(Map_Game)

Although you're going to have company on the isles from Welsh, Scots, and Irish players. Europe is shaping up as an early bloodbath this go-round. Commandante Lemming (talk) 17:13, January 3, 2014 (UTC)

Talk to Collie about modship - they had a special election for me after I came back from vacation and found the game in ruins lol. Commandante Lemming (talk) 17:14, January 3, 2014 (UTC)

But thanks to Scan's delay of the start of the game, there is the chance that some of the early sign-ups won't show up when it starts.Ah, and Andr3w, if you are going to apply, there has been a discussion in the talk page about redoing Mscoree's election, and you can use this opportunity to put your candidature forward.of course, this does not mean replacing him.--Collie Kaltenbrunner (talk) 20:53, January 3, 2014 (UTC)

Imperium Africana
Total: 259*1.6 = 414
 * Location: +4
 * Tactical Advantage: +6
 * Strength: Ethiopia (L), Eritrea (L), Nigeria (L), Mali (L), North Merina (L), South Merina (L), Angola (L), Kenya (L), Somalia (L), Tanganyika (L), Amerika (L), Kanada (M) New Borona (M), Chad (M), Darfur (M), Nunavut (M), Baridi (M), Wadab (M), Senegal (S), Guinea (S) = 69/56 = +1
 * Military Development: +10 +10 +10 +10 +10 +10 +10 +10 +10 +10 +10 = 110/0 = +110
 * Economy: +10 +10 +10 +10 +10 +10 +10 +10 +10 +10 +10 = 110/140 = +1
 * Infrastructure: 0
 * Expansion: 0
 * Motive: +5 +5 +5 +5 +5 +5 +5 +5 +5 +5 +5 = +55
 * Chance: +8
 * Edit Count: 5,461
 * UTC Time: 1*4*1*3 = 12
 * 5461/12*pi = 1429.686456771249
 * Nation Age: +5 +5 +5 +5 +5 +5 +5 +5 +5 +5 -5 = +50
 * Population: +29 (915,000,000)
 * Participation: +10
 * Recent Wars: -14

Arab Federation
Total: 129
 * Location: +5
 * Tactical Advantage: 0
 * Strength: Arabian Federation (L), Saudi Arabia (L), Baghdad (L), Kuwait (L), Dimurat (L), Oman (L), Hejaz (L), Najran (M), San'a (M), Mangystau (M), Ha'il (M), Ar Rayn (M), Buraydah (M), Khafji (M), Aden (M), Turkistan (M), Salalah (S), Socotra (S) = 56/69 = +1
 * Military Development: 0 = 0/110 = +0
 * Economy: +20 +20 +20 +20 +20 +20 +20 = 140/110 = +1
 * Infrastructure: 0
 * Expansion: 0
 * Motive: +10 +10 +10 +10 +10 +10 +10 = +70
 * Chance: 0
 * Edits: 8,603
 * Time: 1*1*5*7 = 35
 * 8603/35 = 1889.25*pi = 772.203474252422
 * Nation Age: +5 +5 +5 +5 +5 +5 +5 = +35
 * Population: +7 (9,215,000)
 * Participation: +10
 * Recent Wars: 0

Result
Imperium Africana may 47.16% of the Arabian Federation, annexing it
 * ((414/(414+129)*2)-1 = 0.5248618784530387 = 52.4%
 * (52.4)*(1-1/(2*5)) = 47.16%

Discussion
I don't want your land, so I'll just take some of it. You don't really think you could do this under my nose did you? Vivaporius: "I don't need a slogan" 20:24, December 11, 2014 (UTC)

You know what?
Looking at the map got me thinking. If we revert some of the last 10 years of play, and set about a huge worldwide revolution - we could kickstart this game. Georgia was due for a bloody collapse, so was the Bharati colonial empire which was going to drift into more of a bunch of nations in a confederation (if that) with some rebelling and independence movements. Same with Ethiopia, parts of Eastern Europe, regions of France and the middle east was going to be the capital of them bloodbaths - like you do.

So who is in? Imp (Say Hi?!) 23:39, December 11, 2014 (UTC)

I do not like this plan. But perhaps you could develop it into a timeline.

00:40, December 12, 2014 (UTC)

I like it. Count me in. Saturn120 (Talk/Blog) 00:47, December 12, 2014 (UTC)

Ditto ^. I'll sign up as Normandy lol. Cookiedamage (talk) 01:06, December 12, 2014 (UTC

Lol. Maybe it could be, but I want wars and a space race to still occur. So if we erase my stupidity, we could give the game a chance to see how relations process between neu Berlin and Germany, what happens in the ethio-Japanese-Bharat civil war, how bloody is the break up of Georgia and how plurocontinentalism losses sway in parts of the world.

I want to see the language used in the behemoth of the nation of Ethiobharatjapan become the lingua franca of the world and how the assassination of royal family members leads to the civil war. I want to see if there is a Serbian war like there was in otl.

So much needs to be done. Imp (Say Hi?!) 01:21, December 12, 2014 (UTC)

How many ways can you say "Will end badly"?

01:51, December 12, 2014 (UTC)

Personally I'm not sure this is a good idea, given the state of affairs at the end of PM2, and now in PM3. If we do restart this, maybe we could have some sort of large global war to even the playing field a bit more and collapse some giant empires. Mscoree (talk) 02:02, December 12, 2014 (UTC)

Or or or we could let PM die and invent some NEW map games.

02:16, December 12, 2014 (UTC)

Honestly that was what I was hoping for. Everyone is excited for a reboot or PM4, yet they fail to realize that if we don't fix any of the problems inherently wrong with the system we'll just end up right in the same place. Ideally I would like to see the Principia Moderni series retired for a while, maybe a few months at least, so that people can actually get excited for a new game again, and some issues could be worked out. It would be nice to see in this time some new ideas form, and if we do make PM4 I'd like to see it some time in the future, when we have developed beyond this point, and have the capabilities to administer it better than previous games. Mscoree (talk) 03:54, December 12, 2014 (UTC)

Um, that huge civil war WILL free up nations! I will make a map of the changes I will be making. Imp (Say Hi?!) 09:39, December 12, 2014 (UTC)