Talk:Principia Moderni (Map Game)

Labeled Map


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

Why isn't somebody updating that map above? RandomWriterGuy 06:51, December 4, 2011 (UTC)

I tried to do it, but is impossible to add those letters.--Collie Kaltenbrunner 12:34, December 7, 2011 (UTC)

War Algorithm
An updated algorithm can be found on the rules page

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

Tactical Advantage

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

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

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

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

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

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

Strength

 * each country on a side of the war: L for leader (+4), M for military aid (+3), S for supplies (+2), V for vassalization or subordination (-1) and then W for withdrawal (-1). So a list of belligerents read like China (L), Zhuang Warlords (MVW), Japan (M), Korea (MW), Hawaiian rebels (MV), Mali (SW), creating a score of 13
 * country has developed military: 1 for each turn dedicated to military or military technology in the last 15 years
 * expansion: -1 for every turn used for expansion in the past 10 years

Motive

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

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

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

Other

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

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

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

Stage 1

 * Hungarian colonies
 * French colonies - New Songhai
 * Persian colonies
 * Hanthawaddy + colonies
 * Naples + colonies
 * Joseon
 * Itsaygahi + vassal and colonies
 * Turan
 * Finnish home territories + colonies
 * Rest of China + colonies
 * Vietnam + colonies, vassals - Ireland and East Africa
 * Newfoundland
 * Nippon
 * UAA

Stage 2

 * Poland
 * Persia
 * Hungary, Greece, Egypt
 * France + vassals & puppets minus Burgundy + New Songhai
 * Northern China and areas around Fuzhou and Amoy
 * Toeh Ngoa Nyoing
 * Rest of Sweden + colonies, vassals & puppets

Stage 3

 * All of Russian territory + colonies, vassals & puppets - Poland
 * Scandinavian Sweden + Baltic Alliance

Stage 4

 * None

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

2.5*Number of digits of population*Time

Time is:


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

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

Any problems with this system?

Detectivekenny (Info; Talk) 23:25, October 30, 2011 (UTC)

Yeah I tweaked it slightly just a second ago, and it is correct as above. Detectivekenny (Info; Talk) 01:16, October 31, 2011 (UTC)



Graphical representation. Red is 6 digit in population, green is 7 digits, blue is 8 digits, and yellow is 9 digits. The horizontal axis is years and the vertical is bonus points. Detectivekenny (Info; Talk) 01:36, October 31, 2011 (UTC) {C}{C When you archive the page again,please don't remove this section. i need to remind how the stability curve is done.--Collie Kaltenbrunner 20:15, November 25, 2011 (UTC)

Stability for Player States
Okay, time for the new system. This should be a lot more simple and a lot fairer.

System on Stability
The new system will distinguish government stability score (GSS) from common stability score (CSS). The sum is overall stability score (OSS).

Government stability score is basically the stability curve. The formula is 10*d^1.25/1.2^d where d is the number of decades the government has been in power, rounded to the nearest year. It is rounded to the nearest 0.1.

Common stability score starts at zero, and measures the stability of the common people. This number starts at zero. Economic improvements, propaganda, and religious revivals are +0.5 per year. Expansion and war are -1 per year. Make the most out of your expansion, and choose wisely guys.

When OSS reaches 0, you get a mod rebellion, so you can always change governments before then to keep this from happening.

System on War Algorithms
The new equation for gains from war algorithms is (p)*(1-1/(2x)), where x is the number of the years the war goes on and p is the amount of territory determined by the algorithm ((y/z+y)*2)-1 where y is the winner's score and z is the losers). So if your war lasts one year, you only get 50% of the territory, but if you let the war last five years, you get 90% of the territory. But you still lose -1 CSS for each turn you take during the war. However, it should be noted that the person who chooses how long the war is going to last is the winner. The winner may not hold the war if their OSS goes to zero. A country fighting on multiple fronts will lose twice as many OSS each turn.

If your OSS reaches zero during a war, you will have a rebellion during the war but it will not affect your overall score.

System on Rebellions
For mod rebellions or rebellions for new players who want to join, a specific area will be selected. For new players, it has to be a specific ethnic, regional, or national area, but for mod rebellions it will depend on the situation (i.e. for homogenous countries). The algorithm will continue normally, except the territory "owned" by the rebellion will equal half the disputed territory. If the war is a tie, the rebellious country may choose territory from 1/2 of the disputed area.

Why this works:
 * The stability scores are much lower and much less variable.
 * It actually takes into account usage of resources.
 * It prevents people from accumulating huge stability scores and wielding them against blank player nations who only have the stability curve.
 * It discourages too many changes of government because countries are most vulnerable as soon as they change government.
 * Rebellions have a good chance but they won't necessarily take over the entire country or completely be annihilated.
 * It's possible to keep your stability score artificially just above zero, but if you get invaded, you're screwed.

Problem with Stability Curve
I have identified a problem with the stability curves (both the NPC one and the one that factors into the full-on player stability): both make many real-world events impossible to replicate in-game unless every player agreed beforehand. For example, Napoleon only had held on to his government for a few years before he went around conquering places, yet he still managed to conquer many many nations in a very short time. Under the current stability system if the algorithm was used for every conflict, his war could not be replicated, he would have lost every war he fought. Same goes for Hitler's expansion in World War 2. LurkerLordB (Talk) 02:16, February 8, Here's an idea, if someone decides to pull a Napoleon, is let them cash in points that they accumulate during the game. These points can only be lost by spending them on a 'free takeover of a country of reasonable size (Sweden can't take over Russia, Korea can't take over China, ect.), keep a large empire together, or save their economy if everyone else's is in the crapper, to get these things, we should have done something big (.a quarter of a token per small sized nation we take over, 1 for every medium sized, and 5 for large empires taken over) like take a nation over or kept our nation together since a certain date (3 points for the people who joined when the map game was made a year ago). This is like an 'implausibility token' of sorts, though we should not hand them out like candy. CrimsonAssassin 02:37, February 10, 2012 (UTC)

Iukcasin
Can I join please? I saw this map game and I thought it looked like fun. If I can join I would like to be Indonesia? Iukcasin 18:32, February 9, 2012 (UTC)

Yes, but there is no Indonesia.the closer to Indonesia (in what is the bigger nation of the area) in this game right now is Pahang, but it is being invaded by Naples and other nations.In the other hand, there are at least three states on the islands of Java and Bali that you can control if you must conrol a state on the Indonesian area.And remember: Be plausible.--Collie Kaltenbrunner 19:23, February 9, 2012 (UTC)

Can I be Rhineland, and if so how would you suggest going about reforming Germany?Iukcasin 18:11, February 11, 2012 (UTC)

You can be Rhineland, although I fear that it may be a bit difficult to play as a small and landlocked nation. Reforming Germany would be dificult, especially with the Swedish influencing Hanover into working for them. You might be able to have dynastic union with Westphalia and then be able to expand from there, or attack Westphalia, but either way its a lot of war. LurkerLordB (Talk) 18:48, February 11, 2012 (UTC)

Saamwill
I think we should keep an eye on Saamwill. He has shown an increasing disregard for the rules, and his irrational descisions are violating the simplest rule of all. The unwritten rule of plausibility. I think he may become the next banning if he doesn't start following the rules better.

Yank 22:41, February 9, 2012 (UTC)

Well tell him then! That's the simplest way... VonGlusenburg (talk to Von!) 23:17, February 9, 2012 (UTC)

He also frequently edits past turns. Now, I can accept people editting a couple hours late, but almost a day after it's passed? And sometimes even after several days have passed? That is a problem. LurkerLordB (Talk) 23:46, February 9, 2012 (UTC)

Sometime implies that I have done it more than once... I only edited days several days ago once, but, now I know, I'll just have to miss a turn. Moreover, if something isn't plausible, you just them... I do admitt however to posting almost a day late. My schedule only allows me a lot of the time to be able to check every 2 days. Saamwiil 05:31, February 11, 2012 (UTC)

Bulgaria

 * Location: 5
 * Attacker's Advantage: 1
 * Bulgaria(L)/Dobruja(M)/Moldavia(M)/Wallachia(M)/Persia(M)/Naples(S)/Jerusalem(MV)/Ricasolia(S)/Russia(M)/Lithuania(M)/Hungary (S): 30
 * Expansion: -0
 * Puppet States:-0
 * Military Expansion: 0
 * Stability: (14 if we use generator, if not TBD)
 * Motive (Life or Death):10
 * Participation: 10
 * Chance: 9
 * Total= 65(79)

Turan

 * Location: 4
 * Turan(L)/Mesopotamia(MV)/Ottomans(MV): 8
 * Expansion: -1
 * Military Expansion: 0
 * Puppets:0
 * Stability: 31
 * Motive(Political):5
 * Participation: 10
 * Chance:5
 * 1*9=9
 * Editcount:321
 * 321/9*pi=112.05
 * Total= 62

Result
Assuming the random chance is used for Stability: Bulgarian victory. Bulgaria is entitled to ((79/(79+62))*2)-1=12% of Turan. *1.5 for vassals=at most Bulgaria can get 18% of Turan. Now, using the RNG, the war will last 6 years, letting Turan get 16.5% of Turan's territory. NOTE: For the purposes of territory-taking, only the inner half of Bulgaria is counted as Bulgarian, the eastern half is counted as Turan for the sake of taking territory. Bulgaria can't take more Turkish territory other than the parts of former Bulgaria, if the 16.5 would take more than that.

Discussion
I need to know how to handle rebellion stability. Because Bulgaria hasn't lasted a year yet, so giving it a stability score of 0 seems like it would be unfair. Furthermore, Detectivekenny said that he was making the area owned by the revolting nation equal to half the area they want in order to make it so they can't totally crush the nation they are fighting against. So having it be just 0 from the curve seems to be totally unlike what he was talking about. For the only other algorithmed revolt in game, he used a random number generator for the result, so should it be used? We need to determine what to do, but from Kenny's posts on this subject it is apparent that he had no want for us to just give them a 0 in stability making it very hard for them to win any war. I'm leaning towards a random number, maybe 10-20 or something? LurkerLordB (Talk) 23:40, February 9, 2012 (UTC)

I think Turan's location should be changed to 4. I think we should use a random number generator like Random.org to decide Bulgaria's stability. You should set the minimum at 10, and the maximum at 30, and generate a random number that way.Flagmania 19:52, February 10, 2012 (UTC)

You're right about the location, I'd transferred it over from another algorithm. Currently the random chance seems the best idea due to the precedent, but I'd like more imput. Anyways, I already generated the number if we use that method, to get 14. LurkerLordB (Talk) 22:15, February 10, 2012 (UTC)

Prussia is Turan's ally. And, Mesopotamia and the Ottoman empire are helping. Saamwiil 05:56, February 11, 2012 (UTC)

Prussia hasn't mentioned a single thing on the game page about helping Turan in the war. If no one else has any ideas, I'll do the random generator as the official one. LurkerLordB (Talk) 14:35, February 11, 2012 (UTC)

Just to clarify: the revolters are not the Turkish puppet governments that Turan set up, its the Bulgarian people themselves, so it is just one revolt. Furthermore, your set-up with a Macedonia makes no sense, the Macedonians lived further to the west, so splitting it in the first place was pointless. Your entire claiming of Bulgaria in one turn was implausible and we should have stopped it then, but I decided to be nice and give you a chance to not lose everything. LurkerLordB (Talk) 17:49, February 11, 2012 (UTC)

Saam, I'm go to say this once: The moderators of this game have made a ruling about your ridiculous attempts to go around the rules of this game. Quit complaining. Lordganon 18:03, February 11, 2012 (UTC) There are not 2 revolts, there is one revolt of Bulgarian People vs. the GTA. So either we use Turan as a representation of the GTA, or we don't have any representation of the GTA so I treat it as an NPC revolt and make it automatically successful. Your entire taking of Bulgaria was messed up, you had two nations which years before had been at war, including a nation founded after revolting from Turan, give up their sovereignty to a sworn enemy. It's highly implausible and we should have stopped it then. LurkerLordB (Talk) 13:48, February 12, 2012 (UTC)
 * 1) I know where Macedonia is, I had to give it a name that's distinguish it from a more Turkish Rumelia.
 * 2) I didn't claim all of Bulgaria in one turn. There was an armstice, and 2-3 years later, they formed under 1 government.
 * 3) If the people are revolting against the local governments then the algorythim shouldn't be against Turan, it should be against the local governments.
 * 4) I'm not complaining people, I'm just stating some incompatabilities in the revolts. BIG DIFFERENCE. I was going to go along and just accept the losses before I noticed them. -Unsigned post by Saamwiil

Fair, enough. But, shouldn't the other 4 states also be giving help, (according to the GTA constitution, if attacked every member nation must go to war.) Therefore, the following states shoul be included as helping Turan: Rumelia, Macedonia, ICR & Turkish Coast. Sorry for the inconvinience, but I keep noticing things... Saamwiil 15:21, February 12, 2012 (UTC)

Rumelia and Macedonia I didn't include because the vast majority of their population and the majority of their armed forces will have joined up with revolt, so those states will have collapsed into civil disarray practically. ICR I didn't inlcude because (unless I missed it) Deansims himself didn't post that he was helping and its a player nation. What's the Turkish coast? LurkerLordB (Talk) 15:44, February 12, 2012 (UTC)

Well, for member nations its kinda automatic. Kinda like if someone attacked the USA, all states would go to war. And the Turkish coast was another state carved out of Rumelia to protect the Turkish majority near the coast.Saamwiil 16:42, February 12, 2012 (UTC)

Yeah, carving out new vassals out of your territory in the middle of a war is kind of cheap. It would be like if Naples was in a war and I decided to split 3 small Italian nations away from Naples to help in the war. Since the ICR is a player nation, you can't control Deansims' nation. One misconception I think you might be laboring under is that there is a significant Turkish population in Bulgaria. In OTL, only 10% of the population of Bulgaria is Turkish, and that is with 200 additional years of Ottoman rule that this alternate Bulgaria didn't have. LurkerLordB (Talk) 17:36, February 12, 2012 (UTC)

The thing about no new vassals made to help you in the war was already done, when in an earlier war Russia tried to get an NPC nation to become their vassal in a very close war, so it's already a precedent and if someone else pulled a vassal out of no where in the middle of the war I'd strike it down just the same. LurkerLordB (Talk) 17:44, February 12, 2012 (UTC)

Honestly, I didn't think of the benifits at the beggining of the war, besides forming a safe place for Turkish citizens. And, Turan has a much stronger assimilatory stance than the Ottoman Empire, almost cruel in fact. But there also has been a lot of migration to both Greenland and Bulgaria. And, even before the 2nd war, Turan had conquered the coast. All these thing attribute to a Turkish majority around the coast.Saamwiil 18:08, February 12, 2012 (UTC)

Swedish colonies
Hey Collie, sorry to boher you but the recent expansion with Thorlaand and Asgard in meant to be a 2 to 3 pixel wide line trying to reach the other colony. Also Wonderlaand is expanding over across to the other side of the map. Thanks! Scandinator (talk) 23:55, February 10, 2012 (UTC)

I didn't knew that first one, but it wouldn't be a bit difficult to communicate with the westernmost parts, given that the capital of your colony is probably on Galapagos?at least before the technology is good enough, something that happened on the western most parts (hypothethical example: Hanthawaddy declares war on Sweden and invades Wonderlaand from Bi Hloa) would take months to arrive on the capital.--Collie Kaltenbrunner 05:44, February 11, 2012 (UTC)

True, which is why the capital is to be moved after I gain Fiji.Scandinator (talk) 13:26, February 11, 2012 (UTC)

Also I noticed that you forgot Svalbard. Sweden annexed it in 1802.Scandinator (talk) 07:07, February 12, 2012 (UTC)

Full
Can somebody please move the already finished threads except for the important enough to be kept here?the page already hit 172,000 bytes.--Collie Kaltenbrunner 15:11, February 11, 2012 (UTC)

I have done so. LurkerLordB (Talk) 15:18, February 11, 2012 (UTC)

Thanks.--Collie Kaltenbrunner 16:38, February 11, 2012 (UTC)

In-game currency
I've been reeding some post, and I think it would be a good idea to have an in-game currency, such as a Common World Currency (CWCs). This system should be used because it would make transaction between x number of countries a lot easier. E.g. China would buy Kazakhstan for 50CWCs. Due to the complexity, however, I propose that everyone gain the same amount every year, and the amount may be boosted with economic activity. Say we all get 1WCW a year. To make it more realistic however, moderators may judge how much the nation already has.

I believe this is a good idea, we should look into it. Saamwiil 16:50, February 12, 2012 (UTC)

This seems very complicated to account for, as it would require us to keep track of our nation's economies from year to year. If we were an electronic video game, then that would be a great solution, but stability is already controversial and complicated as it is.

Maybe the size of the territory should factor in? Like for ever X number of pixels in the nation, that nation which sells it away would gain that number of stability points and the nation that gets it loses that much stability points?LurkerLordB (Talk) 17:40, February 12, 2012 (UTC)

Nag, that would waver stability too much. Saamwiil 18:15, February 12, 2012 (UTC)

Losing/gaining a large amount of money would make your nation much less/much more stable. The only problem I see is that it makes all land equal in value, which is not. LurkerLordB (Talk) 18:32, February 12, 2012 (UTC)

I think that making a simple system for money wouldn't be to complex. Just start it ina year in the future. (5 years from now). Each player'd get 1 CWC a turn, and an extra .5 for economic activity. I think it'd be simple enough.Saamwiil 18:50, February 12, 2012 (UTC)