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 |

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:

Maps
Maps will be updated every 5 years.

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

China's New Harbin colony (in Mexico) is expanding instead of New Manchuria (The one in northern Washington/British Columbia). CrimsonAssassin- "I have special eyes" 21:09, August 20, 2013 (UTC)
 * No.You are clearly not seeing that i am expanding New Manchuria.--Collie Kaltenbrunner (talk) 21:48, August 20, 2013 (UTC)
 * It barely expanded and, where it did expand, it expanded inland rather than north. CrimsonAssassin- "I have special eyes" 03:41, August 21, 2013 (UTC)

The location of Kochiya should be at the tip of South West Alaska. -Kogasa  2013 August 20, 23:16 (CET)
 * Well, you never specified, and for me, the location on my map is the tip of southwest Alaska.and that location is less prone for you to have your expansion blocked.--Collie Kaltenbrunner (talk) 15:45, August 21, 2013 (UTC)


 * Ah, it's sort of hard to explain. I put up a map showing the area of where I wanted the colony to begin. -Kogasa [[Image:Miko THPW2.png|50px]] [[Image:Flag of Europe.svg|23px|border]] 2013 August 21, 18:19 (CET)

The Faroe Islands are still coloured Scandinavian, even though they should still be Saxon. Tanimbarkai's gain of 11% of Sumba also need to be shown. Thank you for the speedy depiction of the Saxo-Portuguese land deal though ;) Callumthered (talk) 21:48, August 20, 2013 (UTC)

I purchased the Faroe Islands over twenty years ago from Bavaria? Hailstormer (talk) 16:35, August 21, 2013 (UTC)


 * Firstly, they didn't have the right to sell them, as they were Saxon. Secondly, can you please direct me to the year/post in which it happened? I'll gladly trade them, but Saxony deserves something from the deal. We won the islands back when the original Scandinavia collapsed. Callumthered (talk) 21:20, August 21, 2013 (UTC)
 * And Andrew says he didn't sell them to you. Callumthered (talk) 09:42, August 22, 2013 (UTC)

Zululand and the muiscas are not enclaves or exclaves the territories have been expanding in the regions for nearly half a century at 10.000 sq km, prior to the regions being populated, and i can understand the Muisca, as it is plausible that nouvelle bourgogne gained more land to them, but the zulu expansion should have been achieved and shown in the map, and it is reasonable. and it is tiring to be saying this after 50 turns you know... Sine dei gloriem (talk) 02:47, August 21, 2013 (UTC)

Please Collie, could you add Ethiopia's colony over OTL Iqaluit? Its been there for a good twelve years now, and though I am thankful that you expanded by other two colonies, I'd really appreciate it if you could add Tumaini. Vivaporius: "I don't need a slogan" 04:57, August 21, 2013 (UTC)

Thanks for updating my colonies - and luckily I'm prohibited by the rules from founding any news ones for another decade or so (I'll warn you of those in advance lol!). One last housekeeping note is that my nation and colonnies are still different colors. My bad requesting it in the first place. I don't care which color they become as long as they match. Thanks - and I'll stay out of your hair for the next decade :-P Commandante Lemming (talk) 14:51, August 21, 2013 (UTC)
 * Well, this is unexplainable.They were right in 1795.This must be the consequence of having to download Von's map last time.--Collie Kaltenbrunner (talk) 15:44, August 21, 2013 (UTC)

Well Collie, same mistakes as usual for me. 17:29, August 21, 2013 (UTC)


 * Didn't i fix them? and as for the Cree, which is the most obvious mistake, you were talking about dividing them after conquering, and i have no idea how you planned to make that division.--Collie Kaltenbrunner (talk) 19:55, August 21, 2013 (UTC)

Hi, Collie. Well, a few things. All Dutch lands should be colored as Welsh. Furthermore, the Selk'nam should be colored back to orange. And, finally, West Munster isn't showing, so I would appreciate if the map could show them, please. A latest map of the dutch lands can be found here. Thank you,

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)

Religion Map


<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;">Kappelists - Dark Blue

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

<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;">Animism/Indigenous - Yellow <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 good logic.--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) </li>

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? 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)

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 East Indies and Australia
 * 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
 * New Oman
 * Bengkulu
 * Jambi
 * Lampung

Nation pages & PM2 awards?
Hey I was cleaning up the PM2 category just now and noticed a lot of the pages (especially for nations) are lacking content. Some pages have lots of content and are fantastic. I'd like to see all of the pages to the same standard and hence I'm thinking we do a PM2 awards to motive people into doing it.

'''Regardless of these awards, all players should update their nation pages so that nation history is easier for other people to learn about. It also helps in building the PM2 world too.'''

But these PM2 awards are just a for fun idea I had, we think up some categories for the awards (e.g. best nation page, greatest war, funniest post, largest nation, etc.) and then we all vote for which player, nation, etc. deserves the award. This game does have many months of content and I think we should highlight this more, and give credit where credit is due.

I was thinking maybe double colonial expansion rates for a year or a small algorithm bonus could be the prizes, which would be given out via mod event once the awards are given out.

What'd you guys think to the awards? Also please do update your nation pages!

--<font color="#000000">VonGlusenburg (talk to Von!) 12:07, June 24, 2013 (UTC)

I'll be doing a full re-write and re-structure of the Venice page in my holidays. I think the algorithm bonus would be good. Maybe out of 5 for a nation's organization, with NPCs assigned the first decimal digit of the chance score divided by 2 as theirs. Scandinator (talk) 12:28, June 24, 2013 (UTC)

I was thinking just like +3 economic development or something like that, nothing major. <font color="#000000">VonGlusenburg (talk to Von!) 20:12, June 24, 2013 (UTC)

I agree. I've fully updated my page and have been fairly detailed.Andr3w777 (talk) 02:43, June 25, 2013 (UTC)

I support double colonial expansion.

03:12, June 25, 2013 (UTC)

If we do double colonial expansion it will only be for a short while. <font color="#000000">VonGlusenburg (talk to Von!) 12:09, June 26, 2013 (UTC)

Alleged PMII ASB - ness
i have seen for a few times already Collie's post about Daxus labelling PMII as asb, taking this idea, what do you find ASB In the game, or that you find odd, that you think would never in any way have happened in OTL after the POD in 1450, i would like to know what you say guys. Sine dei gloriem (talk) 22:47, June 27, 2013 (UTC)

Well Tyrol, a majorly German state, being a French vassal, especially when in OTL they had a much stronger relationship to Bavaria and Austria. I'm still somewhat bitter I couldn't get Tyrol:(Andr3w777 (talk) 02:51, June 28, 2013 (UTC)

What I find a bit ASB was the Koori Union, allowing a massive colony in Australia. Also implausible was the Caliphate, and the exile states in Antillia/Atlantia.

03:10, June 28, 2013 (UTC)

i agree with the koori union, and the caliphate and must to point out the fall of spain, and the ottomans, i mean, both were the strongest nations of europe and the islamic world at their times and the english and french balkanization and later welsh supremacy on britain. Sine dei gloriem (talk) 06:40, June 28, 2013 (UTC)

<span style="color: rgb(58, 58, 58); font-family: Helvetica, Arial, sans-serif; font-size: 13px; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: normal; letter-spacing: normal; line-height: 21px; orphans: auto; text-align: start; text-indent: 0px; text-transform: none; white-space: normal; widows: auto; word-spacing: 0px; -webkit-text-stroke-width: 0px; display: inline !important; float: none;">There's also a line between that which is implausible and that which is impossble. There are a lot of OTL events that sound crazy in hindsight but every now and then you get black swan events. That and I have some sympathy for the Koori - if you make it possible to play tribes, chuckleheads like me will give it a shot, and we kinda have to write our own rules in terms of how to develop ourselves quickly without getting bounced. I know I crafted the Selk'nam strategy only AFTER reading all of the Koori, Apache, and Lakota history - and I still worry about getting dinged on the realism. Part of the problem is I think we don't have a lot of REAL history regarding tribes attempting to aggressively Eurpoeanize before the colonists reach them (which is the key "what if" of our entire game). By the way - I'm happy to accept any input on the conduct of the Selk'nam, as I am well aware of the fact that they have a lot of ASB potential...of course I'm still going to play hard and excecute my plans, but I'm always open to input seeing as past tribal players have been controversial. Commandante Lemming (talk) 21:29, June 28, 2013 (UTC)

<span style="color: rgb(58, 58, 58); font-family: Helvetica, Arial, sans-serif; font-size: 13px; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: normal; letter-spacing: normal; line-height: 21px; orphans: auto; text-align: start; text-indent: 0px; text-transform: none; white-space: normal; widows: auto; word-spacing: 0px; -webkit-text-stroke-width: 0px; display: inline !important; float: none;">Look. We found a cross-roads in time. Many had travelled down the most used path, yet some 25 of us were brave enough... to venture on the path less travelled on. The fun is in the journey, and the end is a bonus. So enjoy my fellow companions, for time is not done with us. Imp (Say Hi?!) 21:34, June 28, 2013 (UTC)

<span style="color: rgb(58, 58, 58); font-family: Helvetica, Arial, sans-serif; font-size: 13px; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: normal; letter-spacing: normal; line-height: 21px; orphans: auto; text-align: start; text-indent: 0px; text-transform: none; white-space: normal; widows: auto; word-spacing: 0px; -webkit-text-stroke-width: 0px; display: inline !important; float: none;">If you are really strict with it, almost every map game is implausible. So don't worry about it, but some of the more implausible events include: the collaspe of England & the rise of Wales as the dominant nation in the British isles, the Mayan empire still existing, everything to do with the Koori, the Ethiopian colonial empire, the Indian colonial empire, the Cypriot colonial empire, the Caliphate (especially invading Russia), Italy's unification, the Balkans being a series of Italian vassals and other small states having colonial empires (japan, saxony, etc.) <font color="#000000">VonGlusenburg (talk to Von!) 11:26, June 29, 2013 (UTC)

<span style="color: rgb(58, 58, 58); font-family: Helvetica, Arial, sans-serif; font-size: 13px; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: normal; letter-spacing: normal; line-height: 21px; orphans: auto; text-align: start; text-indent: 0px; text-transform: none; white-space: normal; widows: auto; word-spacing: 0px; -webkit-text-stroke-width: 0px; display: inline !important; float: none;">Those are basically due to the lack of idiot emperors. When there are less idiots, there are more empires. History showed us that with Rome, the Mongols - even Oman. Plus, if this universe looked at ours, then they would say the stopping of Hitler was implausible, and a small chain of islands becoming the largest colonial power in history lunacy. Its just you viewpoint - and events which youthink will never happen, happen. Koori and Wales are the only two I would say are the worst ones. The Capilate could have happened if there were less idiots in OTL. Here they were - therefore it happened. India has had some good emperors if you know what i mean, lol), and has backed Ethiopia expanding. Ethiopia is like Russia - a developed country gets the chance to expand into the uncivilised lands around it. So critics like Dax should notice these points before commenting. :D  Imp (Say Hi?!) 12:46, June 29, 2013 (UTC)

I think Dax, like many others, just criticize because other map games that have come, and done events like PMII have been called ASB, even though the reason of how things came to be are like the ones here, so he is following the ASB standards of this wiki. and Like Von, i find odd cyprus, The maya empire and Englands collapse, though i find italy and germany's unification just a event caused by the Caliphate threat. Sine dei gloriem (talk) 23:20, June 29, 2013 (UTC)

Allies
Well, I just want to establish a comprehensive list of who's allied with who. I think this would serve all the players well when it comes to player vs player wars. I'll start off by listing my allies.

23:24, June 30, 2013 (UTC)

Germanica and Associated Dominions

 * Russia
 * Great Brython
 * China
 * Mayans
 * China

Enemies

 * Iceland
 * Orissa

Cyprus

 * Brandeburg
 * Venice
 * Levantine Kingdom
 * Mayan Kingdom
 * Bavaria
 * maybe some others? I don't remember :P

Wales

 * Greater Germanic Union
 * Brandenburg
 * Saxony
 * Bavaria
 * Italy
 * Portugal
 * Spain
 * Maya
 * Selk'nam

Mononobe Shogunate

 * Italy
 * Myanmar
 * Orissa

Great Haruwin of th Selk'nam

 * Mononobe Shogunate
 * Wales
 * Magedeburg (which is now German Union, right?)
 * Friendly contact with Orissa, Netherlands, Portugal via their Atlantian colonies. We've also had indirect interaction with the Pope.

The Empire of Bavaria(German Union)
States that have pending Alliance requests from in game
 * German Union members(Saxony, Rhineland)
 * Brandenburg
 * Italia
 * France(trade deal)
 * Russian Federation
 * Arabian Federation
 * Cyprus
 * Levantine Kingdom
 * Maya Empire
 * Wales
 * China

United Maharajya

 * Ethiopian Empire
 * Italia
 * China
 * France
 * Japan
 * Cyprus

The Mayan Empire

 * Brandenburg
 * Cyprus
 * Wales
 * Bavaria
 * France
 * Anyone else I forgot...

Russian Realm

 * Italia
 * China
 * Germanic Reich
 * Bavaria

Kingdom of Italia

 * Bavaria
 * Saxony
 * Orissa
 * Nippon
 * China
 * Russia
 * Arabian Federation
 * Ethiopia

United Monarchy of Saxony, Hesse, and Magdeburg (German Union)

 * German Union (Bavaria, Brandenburg, Prussia, Switzerland, Anhalt)
 * Italia
 * Wales

Posting for Wales/Rex?
Hey all  - Rex asked me to post for Wales while he's away. Happy to do so but I'm not a mod so I wanted to double check that I didn't need special dispensation for that.Commandante Lemming (talk) 15:09, July 1, 2013 (UTC)

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)

Prussia
Okay I'm back but unlike last time (and the time before) I actually have time now to do things. So I was wondering if I could take over Prussia, the user is inactive and it's grey on the map, I'd enjoy creating a rich history as the nation (maybe being a go between for Russia and Germany or something just as interesting) and I'd love to have something to do over the holidays that appeals to my more mechanical rules based side than creative writing I'm doing on other wikias. Kunarian TALK 20:05, July 6, 2013 (UTC)

I was going to invade it as soon as I was done with Napoleon...so, er...you choice. Also Germany and Russia are long standing allies and share the same monarch for now.

20:17, July 6, 2013 (UTC)


 * Interesting... Well I hope to survive that brief encounter! Kunarian TALK 20:20, July 6, 2013 (UTC)

Congress of Avalon


Much like the OTL Congress of Vienna, I would like to propose to all leaders of all nations effected by Strellok to attend the Congress of Avalon. There are a few great perks of attendance:
 * See beautiful Avalon!
 * Decide the fate of Europe!
 * Create a new Map!
 * Prevent future Strellokian Generals!
 * Celebrate the end of the Strellokian Wars!
 * Work to prevent the rise of an Eastern Empire!

My propsosed agenda involves: New Map, New Alliances, and New Goals.

Invitees
and signing in for the conference.
 * Brandenburg -
 * Bavaria - Andr3w777 (talk) 05:04, July 11, 2013 (UTC)
 * Saxony - Callumthered (talk) 11:30, July 11, 2013 (UTC)
 * Prussia -  Kunarian TALK 06:37, July 11, 2013 (UTC)
 * Netherlands - Quashi (talk) 02:02, July 11, 2013 (UTC)
 * Switzerland - This is UglyTurtle, Signing off. 01:18, July 11, 2013 (UTC)
 * France -  Sine dei gloriem (talk) 16:00, July 11, 2013 (UTC)
 * Wales - Prince Evan II Pugh, Heir to the Kingdom of Wales and the Welsh, Albanic, and Brythonic Empires. Reximus55 (talk)
 * Italy - (sit in for Scan cause he's on holiday) [[Image:1.png|23px]] Imp (Say Hi?!) 11:45, July 11, 2013 (UTC)
 * Russia - -Lx (leave me a message)
 * Rhinish Confederation -
 * Berg - NPC
 * Limburg - NPC
 * Bar/Metz - NPC
 * Munster - NPC
 * Stassburg - NPC
 * Sundgau - NPC
 * Cologne - NPC
 * Westpahlia - NPC
 * Mainz - NPC
 * Palatinate - NPC
 * Lorraine (France) - Sine dei gloriem (talk) 16:00, July 11, 2013 (UTC)
 * Luxembourg (Brandenburg) -
 * Cleves (Netherlands) - Quashi (talk) 02:02, July 11, 2013 (UTC)
 * Papal Provence - (France) (Its been french for about 20 years now) Sine dei gloriem (talk) 16:00, July 11, 2013 (UTC)

New Map
My new Map consists of the following changes:
 * Unification of Welsh Lands
 * Unification of French Lands
 * Unification of Dutch Lands
 * Unification of Brandenburger Lands
 * Unification of Saxon Lands
 * Unification of Bavarian Lands
 * To the Netherlands - Cleves
 * To Switzerland - Sundgau and Strassburg
 * To Wales - Bar/Metz, Mainz
 * To Saxony - Westphalia, Berg
 * To Brandenburg - Munster, Cologne
 * To France - Papal Provence
 * To Italy - Papal Provence

The Rhinish Confederation
The Rhinish Confederation is to be broken up. The idea was a great one, masterminded by Saxony, and they have as such received a large portion of the former Confederation. It is evident from our experiences, however, that the Confederation, when unified, can pose a threat to all of north-central continental Europe. If we allow the Confederation to continue in existence, we risk allowing another threat, another Strellok, to rise up.

Furthermore, the Confederation increases problems caused by vassals, and causes a notable tension between the King-Duke of Saxony and whichever nation moves to vassalize the region in the Confederation. (ie, Luxembourg, Lorraine, Cleves.) This undermining of regional authorities causes the instability in which a Strellok-type general can emerge.

Each nation of the Alliance will, therefore, gain lands in the former Confederation. The idea is to give lands geographically near to the original holdings of each nation.

The Luxembourgish Question - Part 2
Luxembourg is a valuable asset to any nation, It posses a notable land area. It has a sea border with the Brythonic Channel. It has a mixed French and German population, with decent Alban influence near the sea ports.

During the Wars, the primary liberating forces fo Luxembourg were Wales and Brandenburg. The combined navies of these two nations liberated its coasts, and then 100,000 Welsh troops moved to liberate the countryside, from 1757 to the Wars' end. Furthermore, ethnic-French peasants rose up against the Rhinish armies in support of the Welsh invading forces and French forces south of the Luxembourgish border.

Therefore, a 3-way division of the lands would be most beneficial. The Brandenburgers will retain the primarily German Luxembourgish portions of the nation. This will be connected to their mainland, through Cologne. The central farmland, French region shall be ceded to the French. And the coast, already under a Welsh governor, shall remain Welsh following the Wars, since this region was liberated by the Welsh.

Venaissin
Considering the recent decline in the influence of the Papacy, the region controlled by the Pontifical Majesty shall be reduced by a considerable amount.

This is for His own good, especially with semi-hostile Italian interests really closeby. The only terms of this agreement is that the Pope doesn't become a Vassal, Protectorate, or Puppet-State of any nation in Europe, and that, if attacked by a hostile power, all nations will retaliate and defend the Holy City of Avignon.

Discussion
Germany wholeheartedly opposes to the Welsh control of Central Germany (Bar, etc) and also the lack of a hardwon coast from Burgund nearly 200 years ago. In fact, all of Luxembourg is essentially German. Also, the region was not "liberated by the Welsh" who are simply seeking to steal land on the continent. Also I will not unite my lands just because you say so. I have several distinct ethnic groups within it. Also, if Wales get the Luxembourgish coast, which is THE MOST IMPORTANT PART of it, Aquitane demands the southern French regions which it intervened in in 1756/7/8. Again, I am very much opposed to most of the Welsh gains in this war. The current Welsh occupation of the Luxembourgish coast is an occupation of German territory, not Rhinish, nor French. This potentially calls for war. You have reduced Luxembourg to a rump state that is smaller than it originally was in 1450, and Germany will not tolerate this. Germany win also not protect Avignon in any case as Germany is not Catholic and has not been for well over 100 years. 00:53, July 11, 2013 (UTC)

to be correct 155 years/turns ago and Your claims in Southern france have no reason as your intervention was to france itself, not Occitania or Papal provence which is vassal to france administrated from carthage, and i agree with you, although not due to Luxembourg being german ( they are Franco-germanic peoples rather than german or french) and even so the point of luxembourg would be that in the case that luxembourg was to be partially given to france it should mean that either the netherlands cede some of flanders to keep luxembourg's coast ,and per se i say status quo antebellum for the allies that fought strellok, and a division of the rhenish land between Germany,France,Switzerland,Bavaria, the netherlands  and Saxony as they were the affect, italia, wales and other involved nations shouldn't gain anything because they were not directly affected by the war. Sine dei gloriem (talk) 02:38, July 11, 2013 (UTC)

My idea behind giving the land in Central Germany to Wales was not to give the land to Wales proper, but the Palatinate, a nation which is in Dynastic/Personal Co-Union with Brython. Also, pegging Wales in with Italia and other nations (ie Russia), isn't fair. Strellok declared war on Wales. King Arthur II himself led a naval battle that eliminated Strellok's navy. He also led a landing in Normandy and an attack on Luxembourg with an army numbering 100,000 when Germany was engaged defending its capitals. We put him on the defensive in the north. Reximus55 (talk) 04:44, July 11, 2013 (UTC)


 * Palatinate is already with Bavaria, and has been so for very long.


 * 16:11, July 11, 2013 (UTC)

Switzerland agrees to the new map This is UglyTurtle, Signing off. 04:56, July 11, 2013 (UTC)

Where are Bavarian gains, we helped turn the tide of war yet we haven't been given anything??? Bavaria will not defend Avignon, there is no reason as a Germanic Church member we should aid the Papacy. I am opposed to Wales gaining land, and from a Bavarian perspective as a founding member of the Germanic Union, a Welsh occuping force can be seen as an invasion, in which Bavaria and Germany will respond in kind. Andr3w777 (talk) 05:07, July 11, 2013 (UTC)

That is a good point, yet I fail to see where you can gain any lands... maybe Strassburg can go to Bavaria in place of Switzerland, or maybe France will willingly relinquish Tyrolia since they are now distantly connected and you can gain Tyrolia. You border Mainz-Palatinate (Welsh Union), Switzerland, Tyrolia (French Vassal), Strassburg, and Westphalia. I think we can all agree that Saxony was hit the hardest, and therefore they deserve Westphalia. An alternative may involve you trading Slovakia for Austria?

On a seperate note, what occupying force on behalf of Wales do you see? The only Welsh force I know of is the one in Luxembourg, and that one is to liberate the region. If you are referring to the military governor, it is commonplace for a General to assign a Governor of the regained territory during the war to prevent war crimes, and to enforce pre-war law. Reximus55 (talk) 05:54, July 11, 2013 (UTC)

Well first of Palatinate is Bavarian, I vasslaized almost a decade ago and annexed to my main nation, it was a part of a deal i made awhile back. you have technically taken it from me through your union thing. i was under the impression that you were refusing to relinquish hold of liberated areas back to Germany, which is what I objected, I have long wanted Tyrol and Straussburg. I can relinquish my claim on Palatinate if I gain those two.Andr3w777 (talk) 06:36, July 11, 2013 (UTC)

Sorry about the Palatinate! It has never been on a map that I have seen, so I deeply apologize. I would like to maintan my possesion of the Palatinate, however (if possible). I think it would be more than reasonable for you to gain Tyrol (up to France, not me). As for Strassburg, I think a 50-50 split with the Swiss would be fair. If the Palatinate is truly off limits, I will edit my posts to say Mainz. Reximus55 (talk) 08:24, July 11, 2013 (UTC)

The King-Duke applauds Wales' initiative in beginning a Concert of Europe. Saxony agrees with most of the proposals, but has three objections and one request. Firstly, We wish to gain Cologne (or some other part connecting Saxony with the Netherlands), as we wish to share a border with the Netherlands and not to be entirely hemmed-in by Brandenburg. Sacondly, we wish to be able to allow Anhalt to retain independence (if we want to), as is our right as overlord. Thirdly, Prussia should remain independent. It has contributed to the anti-Strellokian alliance as much as it can, considering its size, general backwardness, and distance from the war. If it is not, then the rulers should be compensated with either the proposed "Palatine" nation, or Anhalt, if the civil war stops. Callumthered (talk) 11:30, July 11, 2013 (UTC)
 * We thank Saxony for pointing out the effort that Prussia has put into the war and we reinforce the point on our independence. Kunarian TALK 11:54, July 11, 2013 (UTC)
 * Germany (Br.) offers to give that thin piece of land between extended Saxony and the Netherlands.
 * 16:11, July 11, 2013 (UTC)

Also, could the Confederation's loyalist Government-In-Exile take up permanent residence in Rhinish Guinea and establish a Boer-style country there? They could be a member of the GU. Callumthered (talk) 11:39, July 11, 2013 (UTC)

'''I have already decided on how this event will end and how the Rhinish confederation will be divided. Wales you get nothing. This discussion is rather unneccessary. I had already put how the Rhine Confederation will be divided between the German Union nations on the Greater Germanic Union page a week ago.''' The other talks about Avingion and stuff however are okay, but the Rhine question has already got an answer a week ago and even longer ago when I was thinking through these events to do with Strellok. <font color="#000000">VonGlusenburg (talk to Von!) 17:35, July 11, 2013 (UTC)

I do not think that the partition is fair, at least for me. Cleves is located inside Netherlands, and long ago was vassal... Then came the mod events that formed the confederation, taking my 2 vassals: Cleves and Munster, and at the end of this war I have not received practically nothing, since I am one of those affected. I think at least the top of Munster should return to my control. Quashi (talk) 20:21, July 11, 2013 (UTC)


 * I (Saxony) will happily give you the top of Munster. Callumthered (talk) 20:29, July 11, 2013 (UTC)
 * Yeah that does make sense, sure parts of North and western Munster will go to the Dutch then. <font color="#000000">VonGlusenburg (talk to Von!) 21:18, July 11, 2013 (UTC)
 * Let it be known. War is coming. :D
 * 21:22, July 11, 2013 (UTC)
 * Let you be warned that any war, will be bad for both sides Sine dei gloriem (talk) 01:40, July 12, 2013 (UTC)
 * War...with...me??? I was happy to accept your initial terms, Brandenburg, before I was handed Munster. Callumthered (talk) 05:05, July 12, 2013 (UTC)
 * I would say its more likely that the war would be with me as i get picardy which he wants to keep a coast to luxembourg Sine dei gloriem (talk) 15:25, July 12, 2013 (UTC)
 * Why would I war with you, Callum? I was talking about France.
 * 21:09, July 12, 2013 (UTC)
 * A war with France? I hope you dont attack  Netherlands... Quashi (talk) 22:13, July 12, 2013 (UTC)
 * No, I wouldn't do that. You're an important trading partner.
 * 22:20, July 12, 2013 (UTC)

Discussion
I, Lithuania, would like to have an alliance with Germany against Prussia. I would like a share of Prussian territory. including the capital of Konigsburg if possible. OOC: I hope to slap. Lithuanian name on Konigsburg.Yank 00:29, July 11, 2013 (UTC)

Accepted, this time. Last time I was in a huge war. Sorry.

00:53, July 11, 2013 (UTC)


 * I as Prussia ask for a guarantee of my independence in the form of alliances from Lithuania and Brandenburg. I am shocked to hear of this as we have been allied with Brandenburg and the rest of Germany for a few years now and have sent some of what few soldiers we have to try and assist Germany, including Brandenburg. This is not an alliance against Brandenburg Kunarian TALK 06:41, July 11, 2013 (UTC)
 * Metagaming. You would not know about these secret arrangements.
 * I don't think this would be metagaming. The supposedly secret arrangements were made in a general discussion at the Avalon Congress. Just saying... Reximus55 (talk) 03:11, July 13, 2013 (UTC)

Alongside our request for an alliance simply to guarantee our independence, we would ask for an alliance against Lithuania to reclaim the lost Prussian lands, anyone who would join with us may take any amount of territory beyond the area (basically all the teal land) shown in the map as we would simply like our homeland rejoined once more. Kunarian TALK 07:05, July 11, 2013 (UTC)

Alliance maybe?? Sine dei gloriem (talk) 15:29, July 12, 2013 (UTC)

Discussion
May I as Prussia, express the insult we feel for not having been invited to the conference despite being a relatively minor power we are a member of the alliance. Kunarian TALK 23:45, July 10, 2013 (UTC)


 * You were not part of the Wars. Its not that we want to exclude you, it is just that you are not part of the ongoing Wars in the capacity that the other nations have been. I have decided to invite you anyway. Reximus55 (talk) 00:18, July 11, 2013 (UTC)
 * I understand that our contributions are mainly economic and not military however we feel that this could affect us greatly and so we would like our albeit small voice to be heard, so thank you. Kunarian TALK 06:38, July 11, 2013 (UTC)


 * If Brandenburg enters into an alliance with a foreign power against a fellow member of the GU, Saxony (and Bavaria) will have to consider whether Brandenburg is truly committed to the "stability of central Europe" or whether it is merely committed to its own personal gain. We  sincerely  hope that Saxony will not have to do any such considering, as Brandenburg is a long-standing friend and ally, with morals &c. Callumthered (talk) 11:30, July 11, 2013 (UTC)
 * We thank Saxony for the reinforcement of the idea of unity behind the GGU. Kunarian TALK 11:52, July 11, 2013 (UTC)
 * Since when was Prussia a GU member? This never happened.
 * 16:11, July 11, 2013 (UTC)
 * We joined in 1755. Saxony and Bavaria have understood this, we joined on the terms agreed: That I would convert to the Germanic Church and that I would be open to arrangements towards a protectorate in the future. Kunarian TALK 16:29, July 11, 2013 (UTC)
 * Yeah, I was of the mind that he had been accepted in 1755, hence the objection to an alliance against him. Callumthered (talk) 20:33, July 11, 2013 (UTC)

If you must reduce Venaissin (which is the proper name), then at least allow the Pope control over the holy city of Avignon. It houses the only proper papal residence other than the one the Italians forced the papacy to evacuate in Rome.Yank 00:23, July 11, 2013 (UTC)


 * Feel free to edit that. Also, please sign in? Reximus55 (talk) 00:18, July 11, 2013 (UTC)
 * It's Provence. You can check the labelled map as well as the nations list.
 * 01:33, July 11, 2013 (UTC)

Pretty sure that was just used in order to Not have to type the more complicated name of Venaissin. That was the name it had when the Papacy was there in the 1300's and its the name now. Also the labelled map has been wrong before. I'm also sure "Beja" had another name that was forgotten. Yank 01:23, July 12, 2013 (UTC)
 * Nubia?--Collie Kaltenbrunner (talk) 07:21, July 13, 2013 (UTC)

Prussia
Total: 39*1.5 (revolutionary government)= 58.5 = 59
 * Location: +4
 * Tactical Advantage: +1
 * Strength: Prussia (L) = +4
 * Military Development: 8/0 = +8
 * Economy: 4/0 = +4
 * Infrastructure: +0
 * Expansion: +0
 * Motive: +7
 * Chance: +0
 * Edit Count: 900
 * UTC Time: 06:56 = 6*5*6 = 180
 * 900/180 * Pi = 15.70796327
 * Nation Age: -5
 * Population: +6
 * Participation: +10
 * Recent Wars: +0

Lithuania
Total: 39=39
 * Location: +4
 * Tactical Advantage: +0
 * Strength: Lithuania (L) = +4
 * Military Development: 0 = +0
 * Economy: 0 = +0
 * Infrastructure: +0
 * Expansion: +0
 * Motive: +5
 * Chance: +5
 * Edit Count: 10,786
 * UTC Time: 06:56 = 6*5*6 = 180
 * 10,786/180 * Pi = 188.2512131
 * Nation Age: +5
 * Population: +6
 * Participation: +10
 * Recent Wars: +0

Result
Mod help pls.

Discussion
Feel free to comment. Kunarian TALK 08:55, July 12, 2013 (UTC)

The edits thing is different. I'll do the proper one for both of you. Imp (Say Hi?!) 12:23, July 12, 2013 (UTC)
 * Can I have a mod help please. It's a little late and btw I'm back! :D Kunarian TALK 20:17, July 14, 2013 (UTC)
 * You get 20%Yank 14:33, July 15, 2013 (UTC)
 * Right well I only want the area that I claimed which is less than 20% I believe. Kunarian TALK 15:08, July 15, 2013 (UTC)
 * I'd take the 20% while you still have the 1.5 x bonus. Reximus55 (talk);;
 * Give me a minute I'll throw up a map of what's going on with that 20% then. Kunarian TALK 16:03, July 15, 2013 (UTC)
 * Lithuania is 437 pixels large so 20% is 87 pixels. And Yank is a mod Kun, so he is perfectly fine to do this algorithm. And it is +5 nation age for Lithuania as its government ain't changed. <font color="#000000">VonGlusenburg (talk to Von!) 19:45, July 15, 2013 (UTC)
 * PM2PruLitTerritoryChange1760.png Here we go then. And are you sure you're right about Lithuania being 437 pixels in size, that'd make it smaller than Prussia. :P Kunarian TALK 19:50, July 15, 2013 (UTC)
 * Woops, Prussia is 437 pixels and Lithuania is 1397 pixels. I got the nations mixed up. Your map there helped me spot my mistake and the 1700 named map confirmed my error. I'm using the 1760 map btw for these pixels sizes. <font color="#000000">VonGlusenburg (talk to Von!) 20:13, July 15, 2013 (UTC)

I doubt that the current Prussian government could be classified as a revolutionary government. At best it would be -10 for Prussia with the last government change being entrance into the Germanic Union. 05:45, July 16, 2013 (UTC)
 * No, Government change refers to a change in the whole government not of policy therefore the overthrow of the previous government was the time of the last government change. And the current Prussian government overthrew the previous government and established a type of republic, quite revolutionary for the time most certainly, close to Napoleon (who is used as an example of revolutionary government in the rules). Kunarian TALK 06:41, July 16, 2013 (UTC)
 * Eh, that's taking the definition very far. I'd say it shouldn't count as the definition also includes Hitler. The fact with Hitler and Napoleon is that they replaced their respective governments with something almost as bad. 20:44, July 17, 2013 (UTC)
 * Then tell me at least three points that define a revolutionary government. Kunarian TALK 21:21, July 17, 2013 (UTC)
 * 1: People discontent with old (oppressive in most cases) government.
 * 2: New government is formed after series of uprisings and notions of civil war.
 * 3: New government begins to devolve and seek to set the record straight.
 * That is how your revolutionary government is formed. Most often, it is followed by this:
 * 4: New government falls into old government style and goes on a string of wars (with 1.5 bonus).
 * Your government goes more like this:
 * 1: People decide that they're bored with their old fashioned crusty government.
 * 2: New government declared with relative lack of bloodshed.
 * 3: New government remains stable.
 * 15:46, July 24, 2013 (UTC)

Absence
I won't be here for 1761, so be nice, and also I've put generally what will happen for my 1761 turn bold in below my 1760 turn. Be back soon! Kunarian TALK 15:02, July 12, 2013 (UTC)

perhaps lol <font color="#000000">VonGlusenburg (talk to Von!) 23:24, July 12, 2013 (UTC)

Arabian Federation
Total: 70*1.1 = 77
 * Location: +2
 * Tactical Advantage: +6
 * Strength: Arabian Federation (L), Arabian Caliphate (M), Kuwait (MV), Baghdad (MV), Maldives (MV), Comchellak (MV), Levantine Kingdom (M), Tanimbarkai (P): 19/4 = +5
 * Military Development: 26/3 = +9
 * Economy: 4/3 = +1
 * Infrastructure: 0
 * Expansion: 0
 * Motive: +3
 * Chance: +2
 * Edit Count: 4,305
 * UTC Time: 10:38 - 24
 * (4305/24)*pi= 563.523182238
 * Nation Age: +5
 * Population: +27
 * Participation: +10
 * Recent Wars: 0

Bima
Total: 41
 * Location: +5
 * Tactical Advantage: 0
 * Strength: Larantuka (L): 4/19 = 0
 * Military Development: 3/26 = 0
 * Economy: 3/4 = 0
 * Infrastructure: +3
 * Expansion: 0
 * Motive: +10
 * Chance: +3
 * Nation Age: +5
 * Population: +5
 * Participation: +10
 * Recent Wars: 0

Result
((77/(41+77))*2)-1 = 0.30508474576 - 30.51%

(30.51)*(1-1/(2*3)) = 25.425%

25.43% of Bima's 265 pixels is 67 pixels. These 67 pixels of territory will be annexed by the Federation into the Kupang colony.

Discussions
I finish this algorithm when I wake up tommorow, I am le tired now. Feel free to add ur nations to this algorithm if u are being nice and sending me military aid :) <font color="#000000">VonGlusenburg (talk to Von!) 23:24, July 12, 2013 (UTC)

Okay it is finished, victory is mine. I'll be following it up with a second invasion soon. <font color="#000000">VonGlusenburg (talk to Von!) 11:13, July 13, 2013 (UTC)

Woops forgot my industrialization bonus! <font color="#000000">VonGlusenburg (talk to Von!) 16:29, July 13, 2013 (UTC)

Russia's Eventual War with the Kazakh Khanate...
Russia will have this war...eventualy, once I buff up my military and economy stats...-Lx (leave me a message) 16:42, July 13, 2013 (UTC)

Algorithm Industry Bonus
I saw that Von mentioned some Industrialization bonus for the Algorithm, and I have not seen, or at the very least don't Remember any Industry bonus discussed, can sombody please clarify on what it is, if it exists, and, well, put in up on the rules page because there is no mention on what exactly the Industry bonus is, it just mentions it in the Coalition section.-Lx (leave me a message) 22:06, July 14, 2013 (UTC)

Well, according to Von, you only get the bonus if your fighting against one very primitive nation. Har. If your fighting against several unindustrialized nations, you still don't get the bonus even if you can outproduce them. ChaCha! Vivaporius: "I don't need a slogan" 22:28, July 14, 2013 (UTC)

You get it if your more industrialized then the other nation - e.g. they are stage 1 industrailized and you are stage 2. If you are in a coalition then the majority of the leader nations in the coalition need to be more industrialized than the other side. <font color="#000000">VonGlusenburg (talk to Von!) 19:41, July 15, 2013 (UTC)

yes, ok, I think I understand that part about coalitions, but that still does not answer my main question(sorry if I was not more clear): What form does the bonus take? I still dont understand what is added or how the bonus is calculated.-Lx (leave me a message) 20:24, July 15, 2013 (UTC)

10% for each stage higher. So 1 stage higher its 1.1 and two stages higher its 1.2, etc. <font color="#000000">VonGlusenburg (talk to Von!) 20:35, July 15, 2013 (UTC)

Thanks-Lx (leave me a message) 22:44, July 15, 2013 (UTC)

Von, wasn't Orissa more industrialized than you and Scraw, yet you said that it didn't matter? I can't buy that. Vivaporius: "I don't need a slogan" 17:10, July 23, 2013 (UTC)

Because Imp had two levels--red and orange. Both Von and I have orange territories and they were involved in the war, so they cancelled each other out.

15:42, July 24, 2013 (UTC)

You really never pay any attention do you Viva? As I have repeatedly told you, if you are in a coalition then the majority of the leader nations in the coalition need to be more industrialized than the other side. 1 nation out of 9 being more industrialized isn't a majority. Get this through your thick skull already before I ban you. <font color="#000000">VonGlusenburg (talk to Von!) 14:05, July 25, 2013 (UTC)

Von, please. I'm not disturbing the game. I'm not harassing other players. And I'm not disobeying any rules. Right now, the only reason you want to ban me is because I disagree with you. If you try to ban me, it'll just make you look bad. Fair warning. Now in my calmest tone. There has rarely been any case in recorded history where an industrialized nation has been defeated by multiple unindustrialized nations. Britian beat all of India by itself since it could outproduce the Indians. The United States outproduced all of Europe, and as I made clear before, produced half of the world's military supplies and equipment. One nation. One nation out of 54, counting Britian, Germany, Russia, France, and Japan. All industrialized. I rest my case. Vivaporius: "I don't need a slogan" 15:07, July 25, 2013 (UTC)

@Scraw. You forget that I was also orange, and that neither you, me nor Von had industrialized. As the rules pointed out, the colors only show who industrializes first and in what order. So they couldn't cancelled each other out since no one but Imp had industrialized. It's like saying the President-elect can start declaring war simply because he's about to become the president, even though the old President is still in charge. Just because his going to be the President doesn't make him the President. Not until he's sworn in at least. Same applies to pre-industrial nations in the game. Just because their going to industrialize doesn't mean they've industrialized. Vivaporius: "I don't need a slogan" 15:23, July 25, 2013 (UTC)

Ahahaha, this is where you are wrong. You see, since you were on the attacking side, you guys got your lower industrialized levels, which was yellow for you and orange for Imp. Same story for me and Von. So in full theory, none of us had industrialized, as Orissan industrialization was still vastly in its infancy.

18:56, July 28, 2013 (UTC)

Proposed Tribal Vassalization Rules
I wanted to kick start a discussion as a result of the Chono-Huarpe dispute in the Map section regarding the vassalization of Tribes in the black area. I think this may have some potential as a strategy to help close up the black areas quicker (and for those of us playing somewhat isolated nations ourselves) but there should probably be some rules on how to do this rather than just haphazardly inventing new states on the map. This goes to another point, which is that just becasue a tribal "nation" was real (an area of common culture), central GOVERNMENT did not exist among these groups and they first had to be united into a STATE (which we would show as gray areas). It's entirely possible for a colonial power to set up a local puppet chief and centralize his authority, so here's a proposal for how I think it could work.

''1. In order to vassalize a tribe, you must first  use your influence to centralize their government. This takes five years at the cost of half a turn per year, the tribe MUST border either your nation or your colonies (They could also be on the borders of a vassal, but the new state will be a vassal of the vassal not the main nation). If the tribe is placed on the borders of another nation, that other nation has the right to immediately begin influencing the tribe at no cost to them.''

2. At the end of five years, the new state will be placed on the map in a PRE-SPECIFIED location in gray and will be exactly 5,000 sq km in size.

''3. It will take another five years to fully vassalize this new nation, other players are free to interact with this new nation, and it is NOT controlled by the player that created it. (It also becomes a playable nation on the off chance that a new player signs up in the five year gap.)''

''4. Once vassalized, this new nation is classified not as a full vassal but as a "Tribal Vassal." Tribal vassals may expand at a constant rate of 2,000 sq km per year - to a MAXIMUM SIZE of 20,000 sq km.''

5. Tribal vassals may never be merged with colonies, vassals, or your main nation for the duration of the game - and they must become fully independent upon decolonization.

This is a start - but I think it may help us fill in the black areas and populate the map for later in the game. I think it also provides significant barriers against the idea of "vassal dumping" (inventing a large nation right next to another player in order to halt their expansion).

Thoughts?

Commandante Lemming (talk) 16:27, July 15, 2013 (UTC)

I think the tribes should be able to annexed into a colony or nation, I mean this was done very often with the USA, Brazil and Australia to name a few. We also need to make sure that the tribe actually exists and is in the location specified. Maybe we do a new labeled map with the black areas divided into the tribal regions? Or perhaps we allow nations to expand at a greater rate if they are invading a "non existant on the map" tribal nation by penalizing them with a war penalty of -1 in the algorithm? <font color="#000000">VonGlusenburg (talk to Von!) 19:54, July 15, 2013 (UTC)

That might work, although I think It would be really hard to make a labelled boundary map with a set list of tribes. For instance, in my part of South American, the "Chono culture" was pretty widespread and there could easily be multiple Chono states. On the other hand, the Selk'nam culture could be lumped in with the wider "Fuegian" distinction along with the Alacaluf, Yaghan, and Huash cultures (despite cultural differences)...OR it could have been subdivided into smaller independent units such as the Ona (who shared Selk'nam culture and language but were not really united with the other groups that shared Selk'nam culture - I ended up using the whole Selk'nam culture but it's debatable).

Personally I like the idea of leaving the black area undefined and letting players place tribal nations becasue it enhances the creativity and randomness of the game (which is why we are all playing a Wiki-based game rather than any number of pre-packaged geopolitical strategy games that we could buy). I wouldn't have been able to invent the Great Haruwin without the randomness, becasue the area likely would have been lumped into a "Mapuche" or "Chono" region.

As for the absorbtion thing I suggested it as a way of ensuring this isn't used as a backhanded way to expand colonies faster than they should expand. I was thinking that if you set up a puppet regime it's hard to fully absorb it, like the princely states in India, or the fact that Lesotho is still an enclave in South Africa becasue the British made it a protectorate rather than absorbing it. That and I think it would make things really interesting later.

Just my two cents though.

Commandante Lemming (talk) 20:15, July 15, 2013 (UTC)

They are still expanding faster than they should but its not their colonies but their puppets. Which is worse because puppets are more useful in the war algorithm than colonies. Plus like you say the debates on where these tribes live is difficult. No I think we should keep it how it is, with mods deciding when a tribe rises up to become a nation. So if players want to mention the tribes they have conquered, they can mention these tribes in their posts. <font color="#000000">VonGlusenburg (talk to Von!) 09:55, July 16, 2013 (UTC)

Could I, say, go to a large-scale war to unite the Chono, although I am not the Chono, thereby making them my vassal? Reximus55 (talk)

Well no because you are not the Chono and they lack a nation state too. You could do your expansion as normal and mention in your posts how your expansion is part of your mission to unite the Chono. But why would the British care that a native populace is now united? They just want their resources and to profit from them. <font color="#000000">VonGlusenburg (talk to Von!) 17:04, July 16, 2013 (UTC)

Well it would be convoluted but not unprecedented to try to prop up a local regime rather than outright colonoization. There aren't a lot of examples of this in Latin American because in real life that was early colonization by the Spanish and they just ran roughshod. However, we're in the 1700s her and talking about Enlightenment-age Welshmen. The British empire in particular, and especially in this historical period, did a LOT of propping up locals and moaking them pseudo-protectorates, both to soothe their own consciences and to keep and established authority with local credibility in place. They did this to great effect in India and later in Southern Africa. It would not be entirely out of character for PMII Wales to attempt something like that in a version of history where South America is still largely unsettled frontier (wheras in the real world I was one of the earliest places colonized) Commandante Lemming (talk) 17:13, July 16, 2013 (UTC)

Arabian Federation
Total: 74*1.1 = 81
 * Location: +2
 * Tactical Advantage: +6
 * Strength: Arabian Federation (L), Arabian Caliphate (M), Kuwait (MV), Baghdad (MV), Maldives (MV), Comchellak (MV), Levantine Kingdom (M), Tanimbarkai (MV): 20/4 = +5
 * Military Development: 20/2 = +10
 * Economy: 4/2 = +2
 * Infrastructure: 0
 * Expansion: 0
 * Motive: +3
 * Chance: +7
 * Edit Count: 4,329
 * UTC Time: 10:12 - 2
 * (4329/2)*pi= 6799.9772987
 * Nation Age: +5
 * Population: +27
 * Participation: +10
 * Recent Wars: -3

Bima
Total: 41
 * Location: +5
 * Tactical Advantage: 0
 * Strength: Larantuka (L): 4/20 = 0
 * Military Development: 2/26 = 0
 * Economy: 2/4 = 0
 * Infrastructure: +2
 * Expansion: 0
 * Motive: +10
 * Chance: +7
 * Nation Age: +5
 * Population: +5
 * Participation: +10
 * Recent Wars: -3

Result
((81/(41+81))*2)-1 = 0.32786885245 - 32.79%

(32.79)*(1-1/(2*1)) = 16.395%

Won 25.43% in the first war and 25.43 + 16.395 = 41.825 so the Federation topples Bima's government after 1 year of war and annexes them into the Kupang colony.

Nation Time
The rules say that colonies can start proclaiming independence as of 1776.we are in 1766 already, so, on advance, how is it going to be?--Collie Kaltenbrunner (talk) 19:40, July 18, 2013 (UTC)

I was thinking of having Scraw's USA-Canada colony declaring indepedence as a sort of psuedo-USA type nation. But I've decided to wait a bit with that. Same situation with the Italian USA colonies too. If one of the players want to do it of their own accord, that'd be great too. If any more large wars happen then I'll use the higher taxes on colonies thanks to the wars as reason for the rebellion. <font color="#000000">VonGlusenburg (talk to Von!) 19:20, July 19, 2013 (UTC)

You know, I dont see that much of logic about 1776. Other than the "oooh its america". I think that we could have colonies split now, since rebellions have occured before 1776, just not succesfully(mostly slaves). I believe that since it is past 1750, it is reasonable for colonies to succeed in becoming independant...since we already established that just because it happened one date in OTL, does not mean it cant happen earlier in ATL in terms of technology, I dont see why we can't have succesful colonial revolitions before OTL's first succesful colonial revolution.-Lx (leave me a message) 19:32, July 19, 2013 (UTC)
 * I don't think that the date matters too much. i was more asking about who is going to be first.--Collie Kaltenbrunner (talk) 20:28, July 19, 2013 (UTC)

I don't think it matters, although it interests me that this would be more of a parallel history if it happened in 1776 as opposed to any other time. Who are the prime candidates for independence? CourageousLife (talk) 19:40, July 19, 2013 (UTC)

Like I say its probably the next nation with a big colony to be dragged into a big war which mean they have to tax their colonists more heavily. This new Bavarian revolution could start one for example. <font color="#000000">VonGlusenburg (talk to Von!) 20:01, July 19, 2013 (UTC)
 * Wouldn't that recent Strellok war be one of thoe big wars that you are talking about?--Collie Kaltenbrunner (talk) 20:29, July 19, 2013 (UTC)
 * It could be yeah, but I mean from now so people have warning of it possibly happening. But my main concern is having these nations just becoming NPCs so I want someone to play as them, maybe if they simulate the war of indepedence in their own posts perhaps? <font color="#000000">VonGlusenburg (talk to Von!) 17:11, July 20, 2013 (UTC)
 * I thought that people could at least play as three of their former colonies at one time, as per the compromise that Lurker made a while back? -Kogasa [[Image:Miko THPW2.png|50px]] [[Image:Flag of Europe.svg|23px|border]] 2013 July 20, 19:43 (CET)
 * I am going to place the first declaration of independence way back in 1745 with the war of Bruneian independence. Now, this isn't exactly the same, but it works very similar to a colonial independence. The one thing I would suggest/advise it this: Independent nations cannot be vassalized by any other nation. This happened with Brunei (which was ok at the time, due to strong history), but in most cases it would be like France vassalizing the USA. Doesnt make much sense, does it? Similarly, I think that after 2 wars with the nation that declared independence, the Mother Nation must relinquish control over their nation. (ie, War of 1812). Also, no Commonwealths until the first World War that we have in the 1900s. Reximus55 (talk) 18:57, July 20, 2013 (UTC)

I was pretty much planning some sort of Dominion system around this time, but Strellok kind of put that on hold. However, this was after I had some sort of unsuccessful rebellion, forcing the government to grant more autonomy. Someone has to be Britain, eh? I'm still searching for a better name, as I don't want to us "dominion" all over again. Also, we need not necessarily have World Wars in the same sense as OTL. After all, we have pretty much already have had two or three wars that have engulfed most of the world.

21:35, July 20, 2013 (UTC)

I'm going to have my portion of the Americas declaring independence soon... Scandinator (talk) 15:58, July 23, 2013 (UTC)

Leave of Absence
I'm going on vacation for the next 2 weeks and don't know when I'll be able to post again. I give scraw permission to post for Russia. Just alternate military and economic dev and expand Kannada and novorossiya 4500 sq km each -Lx

Got it.

23:03, July 21, 2013 (UTC)

Selk'nam/Wales Royal Marriage
I posted this on the main page but I wanted to throw it in here so it doesn't fall off the radar - and I want to write on it this year. I'm not going to be a huge fly in the ointment, but I do think that at this point it would frankly be ASB to disallow this marriage based on the values of this timeline. Also, seeing as we're in a less racist timeline to begin with AND we're deep into the Enlightenment, a racial enlightenment at the royal level would be a perfectly natural outgrowth (that and this sort of thing is something I've been very carefully bulding for my whole game).

Wales and the Selk'nam have a deep bond. For one thing, the Selk'nam culture is deeply influenced by the Welsh culture. I'm note sure about language, but I know at least the leaders of the Selk'nam can speak Welsh. (Note to Commandante - Can you post about more Welsh cultural immersion, BTW?) We are huge trading partners, and are really close allies. Also, at least for Praxedes, I am under the opinion that she is not fully Selk'nam, but already part Welsh. Cornelius' great-granddaughter means that there are 8 great-grandparents of Praxedes. As part of the mixing of royal families, which happens regularly in Christian nations, I'd bet 4/8 of her great-grandparents were white, with 3/8 of them being Welsh. This would hardly impact the blood-line, as the child (which is the main concern of most political unions) would be 1/4 Selk'nam at most, while still being predominantly white. Reximus55 (talk) 05:27, July 22, 2013 (UTC)
 * Original protest: " If you disallow this marriage you are throwing out the last century worth of history in this timeline. Consider the following: We exist in a world where India is an industrial power. The Mayan Empire still exists. The Japanese AND Chinese, along with the Indians, are colonial powers. The Atlantic slave trade does not exist. The Spanish colonial empire (which developed a lot of ideas about Native Americans) never existed becasue the Portuguese conquered Spain. The Selk'nam's agressive Westernization has seen them widely embraced by Europe as a Christian nation on par with the rest of Christendom (that being the key to this marriage), and have even been allowed to build monestaries on European soil.  On top of that, Magedeburg has already had a ruler who was half Australian Aboriginal, and the Welsh king lives in a palace built by a Selk'nam architect who was considered the greatest European artisan of his generation.  Thanks to our "butterfly effect", this timeline is SIGNIFICANTLY less racist than OTL (which is not unrealistic based on events). Numerous events have frankly prohibited racism from developing to half the extent it has in the real world, and we CANNOT hold this timeline to OTL cultural moorings that were never allowed to develop in this world. Hence, TO DISALLOW THIS MARRIAGE WOULD BE ASB and in total conflict with history."
 * Commandante Lemming (talk) 03:30, July 22, 2013 (UTC)



I've prepared a pedigree for Praxedes - posted below. Great Chief connections are highlighted in red (She is a direct descendent of David and Cornelius, as well as a great niece of Pius. She has three non-Selk'nam great-grandparents (two Welsh, one Japanese). Her great-grandfather was the Deputy Viceroy of De Mor Tir, whose daughter married the Selk'nam ambassador. So, she is 5/8 Selk'nam, 2/8 Welsh, 1/8 Japanese. Also most Christian Selk'nam aristocracy are proficient in Welsh and Wales has been our primary Europen cultural influence (we are not Welsh immersed, as our goal is to be an independent Christian nation, but the influence is most definitely there, and I have some plans on that front). It is also worth noting that the Selk'nam have also had a cultural effect on Wales - there are a lot of Selk'nam citizens of De Mor Tir as a result of the aborted Selk'nam settlement there - and most Welsh acrchitecture has Selk'nam influences thanks to Rafael.

Commandante Lemming (talk) 15:10, July 22, 2013 (UTC)

Bavaria & Co.

 * Location: +4


 * Tactical Advantage: +6


 * Strength:
 * Bavaria=16 [Bavaria (L), Salzburg (MV), Bavarian Java (MV), Bavarian Indonesia (MV), Bavarian Australis (MV), Bavarian Cyrenaica (MV), Bavarian Carthage (MV) ]
 * Orissa=17 [Maharajya (MW), Rajputana (MW), Assam (MVW), Kuch (MVW), Nepal (MVW), Khmer (MW), Cebu (MW), Mataram (MW), Brunei (MW), Sindustan (MV)]
 * Saxony=26 [Saxony (L), Munster (MV), Bar (MV), Metz (MV), Sandgau (MV), Strassburg (MV), Palatine (MV), Mainz (MV), Westphalia (MV), Cologne (MV),  Limburg  (MV), Anhalt (MV)]
 * Arabia=12 [Dimurat (LW), Baghdad (LVW), Levant (L), Qoyunlu (LV)]
 * Netherlands=25 [Netherlands (L), Oldeburg (MV), Liege (MV), West Munster (MV), Cleves (MV), Iceland (MV), Dutch Persia (MV), Warqama (MV), Kongo (MP), Acech-Pasai (MP), Mali (M)]
 * France=30 [France (L), Musica (MV), New Judea (MV), Zululand (MV), Lorraine (MV), La Marche (MV), Papal States (MV), Switzerland (MV), Occitania (MV), Cathage (MV), Numidia (MV), Leptic Magna (MV), Picardie (MV), Lorraine (MV)]
 * Venice=25  [Italia (L), Greece (L), Hungary (SV), Yugoslavia (L), Malacca (L), Siam (L), Aymara (SV), Nya Gyptios (SV), Romania (SV), Padang (SV), Montenegro (SV)]
 * Prussia=3 [Prussian Protectorate (LW)]
 * Lithuania=3 [Lithuanian Protectorate (LW)]
 * Ethiopia=12 [Adal (M), Darfur (M), Kitara (M), Yorubaland (M)]
 * Total=171
 * 169/91 ~ 2


 * Military Development: 230/202 ~ +1


 * Economy: 114/104 ~ +1


 * Infrastructure: 0


 * Expansion: 0


 * Motive: +70


 * Chance: +9
 * Edit Count: 1,407
 * UTC Time: 11:14 - 4
 * (1411/4)*pi= 1108.19680855


 * Nation Age: +1


 * Population:  +11 (9+2) (106.8/86=1.2)


 * Participation: +10


 * Recent Wars: -16

Total: 99

Germanic Reich, etc.

 * Location: +5


 * Tactical Advantage: +0
 * G. Reich (63): Brandenburg (L), East Brandenburg (L), Poland (L), Austria (L), Luxembourg (L), Aquitane (L), Courland (L), West Prussia (L),  Georgia (LV), Armenia (LV), Denmark (M), Sweden (M), Norway (M), Mysore (MV), Lanka (MV), Travancore (MV), Carnatic (MV), Hyderabad (MV), Neu Prussen (MV), Chimu (MV), Oaxaca (MV), Angouleme (MV), Gibraltar (MV), Nya Syriac (MV)
 * Mayan Empire (8): Mayan Empire (L), Zapotec (MV), Greater Kaliforno (MV)
 * Russia (20): Russia (L), Kuban (MV), Suur Suomi (MV), Norwein (MV), Minsk (MV), Tatar State (MV), Caucasia (MV), Riga (MV), Astrakhan (MV)
 * Basic strength total: 91/171 = 0


 * Military Development: 202/250 = 0


 * Economy: 104/134 = 0


 * Infrastructure: 0


 * Expansion: -1


 * Motive: +93


 * Chance: +0
 * Edit Count: 6,670
 * UTC Time: 16:59 - 270
 * (6,670/270)*pi= 77.608974072


 * Nation Age: +5


 * Population: +8


 * Participation: +10


 * Recent Wars: -26

Total: 94

Result of the Great war of German Succession
Narrow Bavarian coalition victory:

((99/(94+99))*2)-1 = 0.02590673575

2.59*(1-1/(2*10)) = 2.46% of the Brandenburg Coalition's leaders nations.

2.46% of the Brandenburg's coalition's 302,275 pixels is 7,435 pixels.

Discussion
Can a mod redo Bavaria's part, i am not good with algosAndr3w777 (talk) 18:05, July 25, 2013 (UTC) What about Prussia? :O Kunarian TALK 12:34, July 25, 2013 (UTC)

Sorry lol your on the board.Andr3w777 (talk) 12:41, July 25, 2013 (UTC)

Erm the Federation and Caliphate won't be leaders in this war, but the Dimurats, Qoyunlu, Levant and Baghdad will be. Also I recommend using the table system that we used in the Great Arab-Ethiopian war of the 1720s as you have done a lot of this coalition algorithm wrong (e.g. motive, the bonuses, etc.).

Also the Dimurats want Germany's Persian colony, The Levant wants the Adana territories, and Baghdad & Qoyunlu will split up Georgia, Armenia and co. between themselves. <font color="#000000">VonGlusenburg (talk to Von!) 13:52, July 25, 2013 (UTC)

Add the Selk'nam in on the Bavarian/Welsh side of this thing. Commandante Lemming (talk) 14:38, July 25, 2013 (UTC)

Wow That was f***ing fast! Sine dei gloriem (talk) 15:31, July 25, 2013 (UTC)

All Land Requests shall be presented in a seperate post AFTER the war.Andr3w777 (talk) 15:41, July 25, 2013 (UTC)

Von could you when you get a chance fix this, i can never do an algo right.

~ whoever

You completely screwed up what Von said and I see no record of the Netherlands, Italia, or Orissa joining this war.

16:02, July 25, 2013 (UTC)

As a note I did not set this algo, idk how to realy set one up, as for Orissa has committed as well as the Netherlands shall they back out they will be removed.

Also, Carthage, Lorraine,Occitania, La Marche, Tyrol and the Vennaisin Should be leaders, (Vennaisin not so much) as they are either important french territories or border the german territories directly. Sine dei gloriem (talk) 16:31, July 25, 2013 (UTC)


 * Netherlands is in. Quashi (talk) 18:34, July 25, 2013 (UTC)


 * Wow, I really did not expect you of all nations. 18:41, July 25, 2013 (UTC)

I can deal with being accused of these BS letters, but not conspiring with "John Chongat" (whom I have never heard of) nor the "Annists" (who I have not heard of either).

16:26, July 25, 2013 (UTC)

No one said the letters are real, the Chongat one was produced under diress by very scared people. You think it's real? I don't and I invented the freaking thing :-) Commandante Lemming (talk) 16:51, July 25, 2013 (UTC)

May I just point out that your 'a million leaders' is completely wrong. You have Brandenburg and then all of your vassal states: Austria, Poland, etc. Else the Lithuanian protectorate is suddenly becoming an independent state and a leader. Kunarian TALK 16:47, July 25, 2013 (UTC)


 * Also I swear colonies are not considered vassals.  Kunarian TALK 16:48, July 25, 2013 (UTC)
 * They are not all vassals. Poland and Austria are in dynastic union, as are Luxembourg and Aquitane, and the rest are all in union. I used this same format in PMI. Also none of my colonies are listed as vassals.
 * 16:56, July 25, 2013 (UTC)
 * A leader is a player nation or an NPC being attacked. Under that idea we can declare every single subordinate nation a leader. Poland and Austria and Luxembour and Aquitane are subordinate to Brandenburg, so they are treated as vassals. Otherwise you don't get to control them.  Kunarian TALK 17:04, July 25, 2013 (UTC)
 * I don't know where you're pulling this from. I did this all perfectly well back when Von and I and the others beat Imp and Viva.
 * 17:06, July 25, 2013 (UTC)
 * I must have misunderstood the rules, so correcting my mistake Lithuania is now a leader.  Kunarian TALK 17:09, July 25, 2013 (UTC)
 * No, now you are misunderstanding. You have made Lithuania a protectorate. Protectorate. Nowhere at all near what I have spent two centuries creating.
 * 17:16, July 25, 2013 (UTC)
 * No, you are misunderstanding, Prussia and Lithuania are protectorates, due to them having a lord protector as the head of government rather than a King, not because of any subordination.  Kunarian TALK 17:18, July 25, 2013 (UTC)
 * This happened OTL, look at the English protectorate, it had a lord protector as it's head, Oliver Cromwell. Interesting man.  Kunarian TALK 17:20, July 25, 2013 (UTC)
 * And pray tell, who exactly are they protectorates of? The Lord Protector? Sounds reasonable enough.
 * 17:30, July 25, 2013 (UTC)
 * How can you not have heard of the Annists? They are the Anhaltese equivalent of the Jacobites. They have been around since the great Anhaltese civil War and were particularly prominent from 1586-1616. They again rose to prominence during the Strellokian War, when they joined forces with Strellock. Jeez. Callumthered (talk) 01:12, July 26, 2013 (UTC)
 * I normally skim posts, I probably skipped that over.
 * 01:18, July 26, 2013 (UTC)
 * Completely understandable. Callumthered (talk) 06:35, July 26, 2013 (UTC)

I have editted a few important things. I also completely reject the idea that your government voted to secede to GGU after it had been removed. Therefore, you can't just "elevate" your vassals to states right before a war - the same turn in fact. I have editted:
 * Expansion, rules say, " Expansion: -1 for every turn used for non-colonial expansion in the past 15 years" France, Saxony, and Bavaria did not use up a turn in doing so.
 * Nation Age - Von has said it on Andr3w's talk page. As long as the form of government doesn't change, the nation age doesn't change. This includes revolutionary gov'ts.
 * Thanks, <span style="border:3px solid blue; "> <font color="#FF0000" face="Sans-Serif" title="Reximus">Reximus   <font color="#FF0000" face="Sans-Serif" title="Talk">Maximus  19:16, July 25, 2013 (UTC)

I didn't elevate them. Since I was "kicked out" (or seceded, whatever, something happened and I was out of the Union), I restored everything that I had before I joined the Union in 1750. France, Saxony, Bavaria, and the Netherlands all expanded the year we defeated Strellok. I actually lost land. 19:21, July 25, 2013 (UTC)
 * Actually no, Cleves became Netherlands vassal before the war, with a Mond event. And after the defeat of Strellok, I did not win territory, Saxony won my territory but in our subsequent negotiations after the war they gave me part of Munster (that time before was in my power) So not really got expansion penalty. --Quashi (talk) 20:03, July 25, 2013 (UTC)

I am only sending military aid. :P Imp (Say Hi?!) 23:22, July 25, 2013 (UTC)

Okay I'll do another set of tables like we did in the last war.... there goes my friday night of Game of Thrones :( <font color="#000000">VonGlusenburg (talk to Von!) 16:09, July 26, 2013 (UTC)

Read the books! That's what I'm doing because I can't stand the suspense...then again...I'll just get more hooked on the suspense...anyway, I decided to start from book one...I must say it gives you much more lore and get to know the characters better...don't start from midway into three, you'll just get confused because they merged/deleted certain characters and scenes and changed things for effect/simplicity. Anyway, back to the point: Do you guys ever give me any breaks? its the second time i go pn vacation without my laptop and the second time im dragged into a war unpreparred because of it...arrgh! I never gave scraw permission to declare war for me or kill my country...mainly because I don't feel ready but anyway, it was the plausible thing to do seeing as Germany was attacked by Barvaria, putting the ally I support on the defensive, not to mention the Duma would have declared the letters fakes and the fact that kaiser=tsar, so fine. And also, Minsk and suur-Suomi are not vassals but in PU, entitling them to +3, Estonia/Eesti is part of Suur Suomi, and most importantly: didn't we agree during the first caliphate war around 1490 that: one player, one leader? Oh, and could you guys not tear Russia appart, or take territory, seeing as I am not able to really manage what happens(Lx from his iPhone thankful for bloody 3G connection)


 * Andrew has promised me that he will not allow anyone to take land from you, as I dragged you into the war. 20:17, July 27, 2013 (UTC)
 * That's not how the Rules work. All leaders usually lose land. ~ imp
 * I agree, if you're a leader you run the risk of losing land, so Russia and Wales would have to fall into a support role or face the chance of land loss. And Andrew cannot make a guarantee for everyone. Especially when there are multiple leaders on both sides. Kunarian TALK 12:35, July 28, 2013 (UTC)

Hey guys. I am much in the same boat as Lx, since I am going on a vacation for a week now, and then the term begins right after that. As such, I won't be able to post. If I can get a term wherein I won't have any of my land annexed, then I would join the war. (Since I won't be able to control what goes in either way, I think this will be fair enough.) I really feel like I ought to support Brandenburg, since they were unjustly attacked (even if they were conspirators). Therefore, I have opted to send aid but, as I said, if none of my land will be annexed if we lose (ie, Germany makes that promise, and says it was his bad at the end of the war, and his allies were left out of the loop, let them be and the Bavarian side accepts this offer) I will declare war. If not, I can sadly only offer military aid. Apologies: I am sorry to Andr3w777 for further convincing him to join this conflict and Scraw for telling him I will declare war, when I may not be able to assist him (due to the above). If Germany does win, all I can ask for is the Dutch colonies Argentium and Chile (also if the Dutch want an early out) and/or Nuovo Milano and Adal (and if the Ethiopians want an early out.) Thanks for listening, and as I'll be gone, Quashi has agreed to post for me, but Scraw can add that any of my nations declare war if he can promise I won't lost land. <span style="border:3px solid blue; "> <font color="#FF0000" face="Sans-Serif" title="Reximus">Reximus   <font color="#FF0000" face="Sans-Serif" title="Talk">Maximus  09:55, July 27, 2013 (UTC)


 * I would like to request that Wales get the same guarantee as Russia, as this whole war has been a whole shipload of random crap.
 * 20:17, July 27, 2013 (UTC)
 * You can't give guarantees, the only guarantee is to not be a war leader. Kunarian TALK 12:39, July 28, 2013 (UTC)
 * As a clarification, as I am only one of several leaders. I express my wish Russia and Maya be limited in harm. I gave Scraw the assurance of him retaining Neu Berlin, as that would become his fall-back nation, in exchange if I were to lose, I would retain my Australis colony. I made that commitment and as far as Neu Berlin is concerned, I will stick with it. Russia, Maya, I request be unharmed but cannot make guarantee for such. This war has become a boatload of crap.Trust Me, I'm The Doctor (talk) 15:24, July 28, 2013 (UTC)
 * I am back at a computer for about 1 hour...then i will have radio silence for a week. I would just like to say that I would apreciate that people would not just declare a free for all in Russia...especialy because of size. 1% of russia may be bigger than many nations...I would ask that if territory is taken it be taken from my buffer states(say 20% war loss, territory is from 20% buffers' territory, not from russia propper). I ask no territory be taken because 1. i was dragged into this war and 2. I want to at least be able to bargain for the land lost and not have it be a free-for-all for russia's juicy parts(since, as mentioned before, I will be away from any internets for 1 week. Anyway...since this war has devolved into just a confusing ball of crap, why not just have a pure stalemate with status quo ante bellum, and then use this as a excuse to tax the hell out of colonists than use that as an excuse to have them scream "INDEPENDANCE!"...I'm mainly saying this bcause what, htis war has dragged on for years now? and no clear winner/algorithm non-completed? everyone already took a  -4 hit for war years, lets just leave it at that, shall we? becasue I dont know how much longer it will take for the war algorithm, and I realy dont want to work for many years to wear this off!-Lx (leave me a message) 16:38, July 28, 2013 (UTC)
 * Honestly I am starting to agree with Lx. This war has decended into a mire, muddy and difficult, neither side has gained the upper hand, all of our nations are in the crapper. But IDK anymore, It was messed up from the start.Trust Me, I'm The Doctor (talk) 17:30, July 28, 2013 (UTC)
 * We haven't done the algorithm table. Do it, Scraw's side is the one delaying and to be honest that's rather unfair. Kunarian TALK 17:33, July 28, 2013 (UTC)
 * Well our table is almost done, we just need to get Sine to place France.Trust Me, I'm The Doctor (talk) 17:41, July 28, 2013 (UTC)
 * I will accept status quo ante bellum with anyone as this whole war has been a waste of everyone's time and vastly unnecessary. 18:33, July 28, 2013 (UTC)
 * But you're losing, the algorithm will show this once you do it and stop trying to scare people into leaving by claiming victory, why would anyone go status quo ante bellum? Kunarian TALK 18:54, July 28, 2013 (UTC)
 * No, I am not losing, and even if I do lose, it will probably not be by much. Seriously, can you stop being a god damn dick? That's honestly what you've been this whole war, trying to create random BS to boost your coalition's score and lower mine. Hell, even Andrew is facing the prospect that he might lose. May I remind you that I didn't start this war? 19:02, July 28, 2013 (UTC)
 * Hey there's no need for that language, I haven't said anything like that to you, and also I have hardly done anything but encourage people to fill in their places in the table and point out that you are specifically trying to force people to leave our side. And Andrew seems to just be thinking negatively, I don't know what you've said to him but considering how much you are playing the algorithm by creating all these 'leaders' and how many people you've told you're going to win I feel that you are taking this a tad too seriously. Kunarian TALK 19:30, July 28, 2013 (UTC)
 * I apologize; I take it back. I was just pissed off at everything and this whole war for nearly destroying everything I built up from the beginning of the game. I just feel like my time was wasted, ya know? Apologies for my harsh language. 21:04, July 28, 2013 (UTC)
 * Understood. Kunarian TALK 21:17, July 28, 2013 (UTC)

Yeah one side does has the upper hand, but we don't know what because people haven't added their nation's information into the table. It would be over now potentially if people just added their details in! <font color="#000000">VonGlusenburg (talk to Von!) 18:11, July 28, 2013 (UTC)
 * Scraw's side is the big problem, it's practically empty. And wouldn't all those newly created states have 0 development in military, economy and infrastructure? Kunarian TALK 18:15, July 28, 2013 (UTC)
 * But the thing is, didnt we agree that one player can only have one leader in the algorithm because of the caliphate nations trying to put all their ministates as leaders and overwhelm the christians in the first holy war? I thought we agreed that only your "main" nation can be a leader(both sides did this, Greece and yugoslavia should be italy, lithuanian protectorate is prussia and brandenburg realy put a lot of leaders taht are realy just him).-Lx (leave me a message) 18:33, July 28, 2013 (UTC)
 * I thoroughly agree with Lx here. Kunarian TALK 18:54, July 28, 2013 (UTC)
 * Actually we changed all that last time we changed the coalition algorithm, so uh, that would be...1700? idk. 19:02, July 28, 2013 (UTC)
 * But it makes no sense, the rule is open to complete abuse, it would mean that the one who divides themselves into the most states wins because they can claim they are all leaders in a 'coalition' war. One person per leader makes sense. Kunarian TALK 19:32, July 28, 2013 (UTC)
 * That's what we do now, otherwise a group of San Marino style player nations could overwhelm a single Russia seized Player nation because they have more players on their side. Instead we just try to stop players dividing up their nations into lots of small ones. <font color="#000000">VonGlusenburg (talk to Von!) 10:47, July 29, 2013 (UTC)

I added my Nations Scores (France,Occitania,Lorraine and Picardy) in the table, I added occitania lorraine and picardy because they are the equivalents of france of german luxembourg and aquitaine, Picardy just wants to avenge its subjugation century and a half ago. --Sine dei gloriem (talk) 22:04, July 28, 2013 (UTC)

So are we going to end this war, or what? CourageousLife (talk) 23:26, August 1, 2013 (UTC)

I just did the chance scores now, so unless any other nations join I think this war is over. But Bavaria, Netherlands, & Saxony both could add their vassals as leaders like Scraw did, which would bring it to a draw or a slim Bavarian coalition victory. <font color="#000000">VonGlusenburg (talk to Von!) 18:04, August 2, 2013 (UTC)

Bavarian Carthage, Bavarian Indonesia, Bavarian Australis. West Munster, Cleves, Liege. Anhalt, Saxon Norway, excetera (will add more when I get confirmation from Saxony.Trust Me, I'm The Doctor (talk) 18:16, August 2, 2013 (UTC)

Very dangerous move. I have vassals too.

20:00, August 2, 2013 (UTC)

Well as the algo is locked and my tiny pittance of vassals not there, you needn't worry, it isn't like it would do much.Trust Me, I'm The Doctor (talk)

Von's proposed peace treaty
Okay seems people are tired of war, so I purpose a peace treaty with a few territorial exchanges which would have likely happened. These are just ideas for what I think would have happened in a real war. Places like Saxon Norway or Mayan Eastern Panama are near impossible to defend, as would Austria and Aquitaine as they are surrounded. Brandenburg's gains in Canada & Czechslovakia are then to make up for their loses in the other places. <font color="#000000">VonGlusenburg (talk to Von!) 20:08, July 31, 2013 (UTC)
 * Saxony loose Saxon Norway to Brandenburg Norway
 * Brandenburg/Luxembourg loses Aquitaine to France
 * France loses their Canadian colony to Brandenburg's colony
 * Mayans lose that thin strip of Panama to France's colony
 * Austria is divided between Italy and Bavaria
 * Bavaria looses northern Czechoslovakia to Brandenburg and Poland

I'd like to contest the cession of Panama, considering almost all of my available military is located in a much closer proximity, as well as the fact that France had other areas to protect. CourageousLife (talk) 21:04, July 31, 2013 (UTC)

I will accept the peace, however as a point of order I'd like to clarify, Czechoslovakia is connected to Bohemia, I will allow the Czechs to go to Brandenburg but not Bohemia as my Royal family if from there. On the map Collie has them as the same, but they are not, I have attempted to correct this in the past but it was ignored. I will accept the treaty on the grounds that Bohemia remain in the Empire.(Von or another mod will be the ONLY people replying to this post.)Trust Me, I'm The Doctor (talk) 23:23, July 31, 2013 (UTC)

If Scraw agrees with it i'll relinquish my territories in Labrador if i gain aquitaine, and Like i said to Scraw, eversince the maya betrayal of 1615 the French colony of Nouvelle bourgogne and Brazilea have been under its own military regime, an entire army made up of the french creole population, hence my recovery of the colony is highly likely. Sine dei gloriem (talk) 02:13, August 1, 2013 (UTC)


 * I was refering to my land in Panama. What was yours stays yours, what was mine stays mine. Status quo ante bellum in the region. CourageousLife (talk) 02:19, August 1, 2013 (UTC)

I'd like to avoid exchange with Bavaria in the Austrian region. Austria is very important to me. However I am willing to give the Tyrol area owned by me to Italy. I cannot give all of Aquitane; I'd like to keep the coastal area.

02:51, August 1, 2013 (UTC)

I am not going to give Slovakia away for free.

~ Andrew

I don't want Slovakia from you.

03:11, August 1, 2013 (UTC)

I suppose Saxon Norway (which is, as Von says, practically undefensible) is a fair price to pay. I kept it for just such a bargaining situation. As it is my only real port (not in a colony) its loss will not doubt cause some unrest in the population, which will add plausibility to the post-war scene. Callumthered (talk) 09:44, August 1, 2013 (UTC)

These are just suggestions, I'm going for the areas which are difficult for a nation to defend like Saxon Norway which would swap hands. So Scraw I think keeping the coastal area in Aquitane is silly, as its difficult to defend and Aquitane is all but destroyed if you give the rest of it away. <font color="#000000">VonGlusenburg (talk to Von!) 13:22, August 1, 2013 (UTC)

Sine and I reached a decision. Angouleme for part of Baie d'Eric.

17:17, August 1, 2013 (UTC)

Algorithm mod check
Okay as far as I am aware, this algorithm is now complete. Do not edit it, and if you have any issues with it please post below. Mods if you can check over things to check the validity of this algorithm then please post your evaluation of it here. No one else may edit it now. <font color="#000000">VonGlusenburg (talk to Von!) 19:38, August 2, 2013 (UTC)

4+6+1+1+70+9+1+11+10-16 is not 102. It is 97.

19:42, August 2, 2013 (UTC)

You missed out a +2, but that still leaves us as 99 not 102. Seems I've miss-added that part. <font color="#000000">VonGlusenburg (talk to Von!) 19:46, August 2, 2013 (UTC)

You forgot Bavarian and the Netherlands vassals.Trust Me, I'm The Doctor (talk) 19:55, August 2, 2013 (UTC)


 * Which ones exactly? <font color="#000000">VonGlusenburg (talk to Von!) 19:57, August 2, 2013 (UTC)
 * Well Scraw threatened to add his, id rather the war just end.~ Andrew

So is this 9-year war over? Imp (Say Hi?!) 20:41, August 2, 2013 (UTC)


 * I'll just wait for the other mods to confirm it but otherwise yeah. I've fixed the addition problem and nothing else seems to remain as a problem. <font color="#000000">VonGlusenburg  (talk to Von!) 16:25, August 3, 2013 (UTC)

You neglected to account for the infastructure score for the defending side. CourageousLife (talk) 17:06, August 3, 2013 (UTC)


 * They inputted no infrastructure scores into the tables so they must have been updating their military or economy instead (or at war or idle). Remember the military, economic, infrastructure, idle and war leader years add up to 15 as you can only do 1 of these actions per year. So while they didn't update their infrastructure they did update their militaries. <font color="#000000">VonGlusenburg (talk to Von!) 12:55, August 4, 2013 (UTC)
 * In the case that all of the numbers add up to 15, Saxony has 25 years accounted for, and Courland has only 10 years. CourageousLife (talk) 19:47, August 4, 2013 (UTC)

It seems right.--Collie Kaltenbrunner (talk) 21:07, August 3, 2013 (UTC)

It looks right to me as well. -Kogasa  2013 August 04, 02:07 (CET)

Okay well I guess its finally over then. <font color="#000000">VonGlusenburg (talk to Von!) 12:55, August 4, 2013 (UTC)

Lands won by the Bavarian coalition
Okay seeing the victory of the Bavarian coalition, this section is about how the 7,435 pixels won from the Brandenburg coalition will be divided between us victors. Here is the list of land which will change hands, including pixel sizes:
 * Aquitane (to France) - 1,125 px
 * Parts of Eastern Armenia & Georgia (to Qoyunlu) - 1,960 pxTerritory_lost_by_Georgia.png
 * Greenland (to Netherlands) - 530 px
 * Luxembourg (to Netherlands) - 321 px
 * Eastern East Brandenburg (to Netherlands) - 38 px
 * Osnabrück (to Saxony) - 270 px
 * Hamburg (to Bavaria) - 458 px
 * Austria (to Bavaria) - 1,053 px
 * Austria (to Italy) - 369 px
 * Gibraltar (to Italia) - 18 px
 * Nya Syriac (to Italia) - 351 px
 * Neu Mecklenburg (West Africa colony) swapped for Saxon Norway
 * Total claimed: 6,493 out of 7,435 px (942 remain unclaimed)

Please say which lands you are claiming and I'll update this list with the claim and pixel sizes & such. Also if you want to do some land swaps then please also mention below and we could work something out about this (try to keep them to a roughly equal trade e.g. Saxon Norway for an equally sized amount of East Brandenburg rather than Saxon Norway for Neu Berlin). The preferance of which player gains what land, will be taken for the claims first posted on the land request list below from earlier in this war discussion. <font color="#000000">VonGlusenburg (talk to Von!) 13:55, August 4, 2013 (UTC)

The Hamburg region is going to be split by Bavaria and Saxony.Trust Me, I'm The Doctor (talk) 13:59, August 4, 2013 (UTC)
 * I'll need you to make a map or give specific details if I am to make an accurate map / pixel count of the exact area you are talking about. <font color="#000000">VonGlusenburg (talk to Von!) 14:07, August 4, 2013 (UTC) Changes-in-europe-GWGS.png
 * Okay I made this map with the division of Eastern East Brandenburg, which also includes the other changes in Europe. This division okay with you? <font color="#000000">VonGlusenburg (talk to Von!) 14:41, August 4, 2013 (UTC)
 * Saxony would appreciate a connection to the sea, as it would render Saxon Norway redundant and allowing me to trade it.Callumthered (talk) 18:31, August 4, 2013 (UTC) Never mind Callumthered (talk) 07:37, August 5, 2013 (UTC)

Can I keep Schleswig-Holstein for, say, my Bohemian territory? Also I'm willing to give up Neu Mecklenburg (West Africa colony) for Saxon Norway.

18:35, August 4, 2013 (UTC)


 * That is exactly what I was planning on asking for, thanks. Callumthered (talk) 01:34, August 5, 2013 (UTC)


 * Okay so swapping Saxon Norway for Brandenburg's Neu Mecklenburg colony in OTL Ivory coast.
 * Also Scraw if you want to keep Schleswig-Holstein then you'll need to convince Andr3w as he is the one gaining the region as his new vassal of Hamburg. Be warned though, he seemed quite adament on keeping it. <font color="#000000">VonGlusenburg (talk to Von!) 16:32, August 5, 2013 (UTC)
 * Yes, it's because he's from there OTL. However I need a larger connection to Denmark.
 * 19:17, August 5, 2013 (UTC)

Netherlands claims just like i said before: Luxemburg, Gibraltar, and if is possible Geenland colony Quashi (talk) 04:49, August 5, 2013 (UTC)


 * I believe that Italia has a better claim to African Gibraltar. We also only claim up to the OTL Austrian border so not as much on the map. We also claim Nya Syriac. We would gladly support the Dutch claim on Luxembourg in return for Gibraltar. Scandinator (talk) 13:50, August 5, 2013 (UTC)


 * Okay so Luxembourg becomes a Dutch vassal. As for Italian Austria, I have updated the map now. Also is Nya Syriac OTL Bahamas? As for the Gibraltar issue, Gibraltar is Italian Dark Green on the map, do you mean the German territory in OTL ? Also who is getting it? Italia or Netherlands? <font color="#000000">VonGlusenburg (talk to Von!) 16:32, August 5, 2013 (UTC)
 * A little less would be perfect,vand yes Nya Syriac is the Bahamas. And Tangier's is the Gibraltar territory at stake here. Scandinator (talk) 00:45, August 6, 2013 (UTC)
 * Could you edit the map then to show how much of Austria you want then please? It'd be much quicker than my guessing :p <font color="#000000">VonGlusenburg (talk to Von!) 09:48, August 6, 2013 (UTC)
 * Ok, Italy can have tanger, in that case can i have Greenland colony? Also, when you change the map, you erased west Munster, and indonesia limits, please fix them =) Quashi (talk) 04:25, August 6, 2013 (UTC)
 * If you want Greenland then sure, also you mean on the main map the Munster & Indonesia borders got changed? If so, then I'll fix them, which year map has the right borders on it? <font color="#000000">VonGlusenburg (talk to Von!) 09:48, August 6, 2013 (UTC)

I would very much like to get the Philippines back, as my vessels did fight in the war. With the pixels left over, I should be able to get all of my old Maynila holdings back. Vivaporius: "I don't need a slogan" 22:52, August 5, 2013 (UTC)


 * You only sent military aid, other nations which led the war were more at risk so they get the pixels not you because they risked more and contributed more. <font color="#000000">VonGlusenburg (talk to Von!) 09:48, August 6, 2013 (UTC)
 * Forget it then. Keep your ill-gotten gains of villainous villainy. Flag of the Hurian Federation.png Vivaporius: "I don't need a slogan" 18:33, August 6, 2013 (UTC)

Okay still got 1,543 pixels left unclaimed. If any of the other coalition leaders want any more land then please speak now, because I want to wrap up this war soon. If no one else claims I'll have a bit more of Georgia. But seeing how the swap of Saxon Norway for Neu Meckleburg wasn't completely equal pixel swap, I suppose that could be some of the remaining pixels taken up. <font color="#000000">VonGlusenburg (talk to Von!) 10:00, August 6, 2013 (UTC)


 * Neu Mecklenburg is larger than Saxon Norway. Feel free to take from Georgia; you won it, fair and unsquare.


 * 16:09, August 6, 2013 (UTC)
 * Exactly, hence the exchange counting as some of the victory pixels. Callumthered (talk) 06:45, August 7, 2013 (UTC)

Okay then, the peace treaty is completed and the war is offically ended With these territorial exchanges decided upon. <font color="#000000">VonGlusenburg (talk to Von!) 11:11, August 7, 2013 (UTC)

Hey Von can i get a part of German Hispaniola with the 900 remaining pixels if no one else objects, i wanted to say this before but i couldn't yesterday and most of this day my brother was in the PC working on his thesis so. please? Sine dei gloriem (talk) 02:34, August 8, 2013 (UTC)

Can you take them from Chimu? Please?

02:37, August 8, 2013 (UTC)

The thing is that since the dutch revolted from me i've been trying to regain a antillian territory, But sure why not. Sine dei gloriem (talk) 16:36, August 8, 2013 (UTC)

Land Requests
Pixel count must be properly calculated in order for land to be nessessarily divided up after the war


 * Also the Dimurats want Germany's Persian colony,   Qoyunlu wants Georgia, Armenia and co. ~Von 13:52, July 25, 2013 (UTC)
 * Land ceded.
 * I Would like Aquitaine, angouleme, Parts of German Canada a small territories in The antilles and some of German South america. If we win i would like to get those regions, and Lorraine should be a leader in the war. Sine dei gloriem (talk) 15:35, July 25, 2013 (UTC)
 * Bavaria will claim most of Austria as well as some of Poland, Nova Scotia and German luxembourg region Trust Me, I'm The Doctor (talk)
 * Prussia will claim it's rightful land of Danzig, Poland which shall be divided and the Germanic parts shall join with Prussia while the rest shall become a new protectorate and his Latvian territory which shall become our vassal, nothing else. Considering Russia has joined we would also like to claim their Baltic states.
 * Wales has claims on Korea and Hispaniola/the Bahamas. ~Rex


 * Switched sides.
 * If the Selk'nam get anything out of this, we merely wish to liberate the Inuit of Southern Greenland, who will become a vassal. Commandante Lemming (talk) 16:17, July 25, 2013 (UTC)


 * Self retcon.
 * Ethiopia wants the Hispaniola, Phillipines, Newfoundland and Labrador. ~Viva
 * Gains depends on our winning percentage, but then depending on that Netherlands has certain claims: First Luxembourg and Gibraltar, and second (if is possible) part of Denmark, the small African colony of Saint John, and the colony of Greenland. --Quashi (talk) 19:02, July 25, 2013 (UTC)
 * I already called Greenland
 * Can I have the souther half of Gibraltar, as it interferes with my Morocco colony? ~Rex
 * China has claims on the Philipines (told this to Rex earlier) CrimsonAssassin- "You can't handle this egg roll" 20:28, July 25, 2013 (UTC)
 * I lay claim to Mysore and all of Brandenburg's German territories on the Indian sub-continent. I also lay claim to the Philippines due to the fact that it was originally my colony (along with Ethiopia). Although I would be willing to forfeit it if the Chinese and Ethiopians can sensibly share out the islands. I also lay claim to its North American colonies (apart from the Maritime colonies/Vinland). So, yeah. ~Imp


 * I can tolerate most of that, but you want what? Neu Berlin? That is ASB to the max. Besides, Andrew said he would reserve Neu Berlin-Vinland for me to play as if my government is completely defeated.
 * How? I am industrially more powerful, and my plans for the colony are really cool, like German boers and stuff... ~Imp
 * You have to sail around South America or Africa to reach it. I know you'll say I have to round Africa to reach my Indian and Pacific territories, but those can be managed via each other and the distance from Aquitane to Mysore is shorter than that of Orissa to Neu Berlin.
 * With significantly better ships at my disposal compared to yours, as well as a bigger fleet, more crewmen and a significantly bigger base.
 * Withdrew from war.
 * Italia lays claim to the Southern half of Gibraltar, the Chimu, Nya Syriac, Hispaniola as much of Central America as possible and the German Middle Eastern lands. Scandinator (talk).

Anatolian Revolution Question
Hey, i was wondering if since Anatolia was annexed after the Fail War if I could lead a revolution agasint the Italians, thanks.

DS|Fear the Mutated Dean Sims Bomb, Fear It 16:40, July 26, 2013 (UTC)

No you are already Korea. <font color="#000000">VonGlusenburg (talk to Von!) 16:43, July 26, 2013 (UTC)

i havnt posted as Korea in a very long time. DS|Fear the Mutated Dean Sims Bomb, Fear It 16:55, July 26, 2013 (UTC)

Okay everyone can I have some input to Dean's actions in having Korea be annexed by China. It doesn't seem right with me. <font color="#000000">VonGlusenburg (talk to Von!) 17:16, July 26, 2013 (UTC)
 * China would have to want to do it and an algorithm would have to happen, you can't just surrender your nation away. You can't have your nation be annexed just because you want it to. Kunarian TALK 19:40, July 26, 2013 (UTC)
 * The same as above.I consider this metagaming.--Collie Kaltenbrunner (talk) 20:30, July 26, 2013 (UTC)
 * Actually, if Crim agrees to the outcome, we dont need an algorithm, its in the rules. DS|Fear the Mutated Dean Sims Bomb, Fear It 20:31, July 26, 2013 (UTC)
 * Dean is right about that part.
 * 20:33, July 26, 2013 (UTC)

I don't see why not.

18:33, July 26, 2013 (UTC)

China would be okay with it, but the war was kind of unnecessary lol CrimsonAssassin- "You can't handle this egg roll" 15:05, July 27, 2013 (UTC)

I can understand Dean destroying his nation, that can be allowed. However what I don't agree with is Dean conducting revolts which should be reversed for a player to decide when to do with his own nation or via mod event. Dean has seemingly done either, so he lacks the authority to so. <font color="#000000">VonGlusenburg (talk to Von!) 18:34, July 29, 2013 (UTC)

Joining possibilities
Hello! I was wondering of I could join, technically way after the game has started, but still almost 270 years before the end of the game as either the Plains or River Lakota? Thank you! EiplecOco (talk) 03:03, July 29, 2013 (UTC)

Yes you can Quashi (talk) 23:16, July 29, 2013 (UTC)

Of course you can join, it isn't too late I joined PM I in 1900 and still hada blast!Trust Me, I'm The Doctor (talk) 23:21, July 29, 2013 (UTC)

Freaking Crazy War
So, as some of you might know (or not, let's see who was paying attention), I was not here when the war started, and Scraw was supposed to post for me durring the time I was gone. However, he did not post for me, except to make my nation enter the war on Brandenburg's side. I would like to propose one of two options for my nation so that I can get back on track.

Option 1: Retcon my nation out of the war, since it wasn't my decision in the first place.

Option 2: Allow me to create an event within my nation to take it out of the war and restore it to status quo ante bellum.

Again, this wansn't my fault, and I want a chance to rectify the situation. Thank you.

CourageousLife (talk) 19:00, July 29, 2013 (UTC)

I'd like to take this opportunity to apologize to Courageous and hope he is allowed to pull out.

19:11, July 29, 2013 (UTC)

The Levantine Kingdom and Empire of Qoyunlu have no qural with the Mayans and will accept a peace treaty (we want some war reperations though).

However other nations may have qurals with the Mayans and not agree to this peace. So you have to convince them like you have sort of convinced me. <font color="#000000">VonGlusenburg (talk to Von!) 19:28, July 29, 2013 (UTC)

I'm not looking for game talk right now, I need to know what can be done to solve this outside of the game, since the factors affecting this issue are outside of the game also. CourageousLife (talk) 19:31, July 29, 2013 (UTC)

As Prussia we could care less, let the peace happen, we've got bigger fish to fry. OOC I understand and Prussia will support you pulling out with very minor reparations. Kunarian TALK 21:56, July 29, 2013 (UTC)

I will support the Maya pulling out of the war. It limits the current complications. No reparations are necessary.Trust Me, I'm The Doctor (talk) 22:31, July 29, 2013 (UTC)

I'm not sure what exactly was posted about my nation, but I'm almost positive I haven't fought any of your nations directly, so I don't see the purpose of me paying you reparations. However, as long as it allows me status quo ante bellum, I'll accept it for now. CourageousLife (talk) 22:38, July 29, 2013 (UTC)


 * 'Tis why I said no repartations. You did not join, or fight of your own accord, ergo Bavaria accepts your exit free and clear.Trust Me, I'm The Doctor (talk) 23:22, July 29, 2013 (UTC)
 * Netherlands accept too (also, can we go back to the old 1 vs 1 war? this world wars are stupid) Quashi (talk) 23:47, July 29, 2013 (UTC)
 * You should pay the reparation of France, you invaded my nation's colony of Nouvelle bourgogne, i push you back but still. otherwise, i have no objection to your withdrawal. Sine dei gloriem (talk) 00:04, July 30, 2013 (UTC)
 * No, I invaded Nouvelle Bourgogne. Also, I miss 1v1 wars and the such. The world is far too interconnected.
 * 00:08, July 30, 2013 (UTC)

Pull out now and most of the Bavarian backed side will leave you be, besides the only important ones are the ones with land near you, and they've already agreed to leave you be. Kunarian TALK 23:30, July 29, 2013 (UTC)

(highlighting this so people take notice:) '''Also I'd like to point out that I've realised that whoever loses the war, who was involved in heavy fighting (this means Bavaria, Saxony, Brandenburg, Prussia, etc.), will have to deal with the fury of their own people afterwards. And it's even worse if a status quo is signed as then all nations involved in heavy fighting will face popular revolt and chaos. This is clearly a war that will shape the Europe and world to come, no matter who wins or loses. The following points only apply to these deep in the fighting nations. The losers will face anger from the common folk, and their perceived weakness will lead to colonial revolts and declarations of independence, it is likely that their nation will be truly torn apart from within rather than from without (or at least a lot of blood will be spilled to keep the current order). The winners will face support and happiness from it's common folk, and their perceived strength will help bind their empire together for years to come, helping them last like the OTL great Britain into the modern era, they shall enter a golden age once the shattered windows are remade and the men return to the fields. Both sides will face a swell of nationalisms. As peoples on the losing sides look to other peoples for blame and their hatred and fury brings the fires of nation state and independent pride into their hearts, their nationalisms will be more localised and not across the entirety of their nations. Those on the victors side will speak of the 'great deeds' of their nation and will speak with pride of their nation the strong, the powerful and the unconquered, their pride and joy will bring the fire of a greater nationalism into their hearts, their nationalisms will be more across the entirety of their nations rather than local. So much hinges on this war, so so much. If one side wins then the face of Europe will change and the rise of new empires will occur, if no sides win then Europe may fall into chaos and those far from the fighting will become the leaders of the world. This is a speech and a point, I think it is great to be involved in this turning point in time and I feel that for years to come people will look back on this vital point that changed the course of history. Kunarian TALK''' 23:42, July 29, 2013 (UTC)

This is why I'd like a status quo. It'll open the floodgates for change and let us try new things. Hell, we could advance the Revolution of 1848 to 1798 if we wanted. We should not fear change. It can be negative and positive. We should embrace change. Change is inevitable.

00:12, July 30, 2013 (UTC)

I officially declare Status Quo Antebellum with the nation of Brandenburg. There will be some that argue, but ultimately I am doing what I believe is best, this war started out bad, on both sides, and has only snowballed from there. Bavaria officially withdraws all troops pending Brandenburg doing the same. If there are nations that object, you may continue to fight, but I will not support you. Enough damage has been done, enough German blood has been spilled. All Germans are brothers. We will attempt to live in peace, and will only attack if provoked. Good Day.Trust Me, I'm The Doctor (talk) 00:43, July 30, 2013 (UTC)
 * May I say you have only delayed the inevitable now, I know not what Scraw said to you but it is sad you would fall like this. I hope you remember to deal with the aftermath of this properly rather than pretend everything is roses and daisies. You may say German, but your Bavarians say Bavarian and they probably aren't very happy at all losing so many comrades, brothers, fathers and sons and for their government to declare them worthless, not even worth a small concession of land. You cannot buy back people's blood, I should hope you will create chaos in your nation with grace rather than wear blinkers and descend into the ASB of metagaming and pretend everything is fine. At least now my Prussians will know who to blame for the loss of their kin. Kunarian TALK 00:59, July 30, 2013 (UTC)
 * This is stupid. It is a damned if I do you damned if i don't. If I win, it is so narrow it won't matter. Same if he wins. NOTHING CHANGES. I attacked under the premise of him harming me or Saxony, which I found out through other sources, wasn't going to happen for now, it would evetually, but not now. Bavaria is Germany, Saxony, Brandenburg and Prussia is Germany. We are all German. We speak German, have the same past and religion. Of course things will not be rosey. But what you fail to realise is most of my nation didn't want to attack, again I was gouded into an attack, and was misinformed by Brandenburg's true intentions to Bavaria. That being said. I don't trust him. I am only withdrawing because in the end it changes little in Europe. Trust Me, I'm The Doctor (talk) 01:10, July 30, 2013 (UTC)
 * This is not stupid. And metagaming is not the way to solve it. And we are not all German, Prussia soon will be throwing off the shackles you metagamingly seem so keen to attach to Bavaria. And Prussians do not speak German, especially considering the differences from OTL and we do not have the same past at all. And let me repeat though, it doesn't matter what you do with Scraw metagaming wise, you need to deal with the fact that you IC roused Bavarian nationalism to an all time high, broke a massively important alliance and fought a bloody war with Brandenburg and in the end declared a status quo. People are not going to be happy, at all. Do you think Bavarians who enjoyed relative stability would want to support a government that took it away and killed their brothers, fathers and sons in a war they ended for nothing? If anything I'd say you'd face a rebellion via the armed forces, and not one you could throw off either. But hey, don't worry because it is your nation and I doubt you will be stopped from being ASB. I think more alarmingly than anything it reveals that you are willing to end a war and betray allies IC because of metagaming. It ruins the game really. Kunarian TALK 01:24, July 30, 2013 (UTC)
 * IC: Brandenburg accepts the peace with Bavaria on all fronts and withdraws troops from Bohemia and northern Bohemia. These forces are redirected to fight in Austria and Prussia.
 * OOC: I agree with Andrew, I only wish that we could all establish a peace in our time.
 * 01:16, July 30, 2013 (UTC)
 * IC:that's funny, because as soon as peace is declared between you and Bavaria I'm gone too so those troops can go elsewhere. If one leader can get off scot free, so can I. Rules are being broken by others so shall I.
 * OOC: well that's nice metagaming, personally I've almost had enough of it. ruins the game. Kunarian TALK 01:24, July 30, 2013 (UTC)
 * The rules are that all leaders in a conflict must agree to a withdrawal from a leader on the opposing side. OTL Example: Treaty of Brest-Litovsk. Scandinator (talk) 01:32, July 30, 2013 (UTC)
 * Well Guess what. I dont want it, he doesnt want it and majority of my allies dont want it. inculding Saxony. I was missinformed and cajoled into this war. I wont be apart of it anymoreTrust Me, I'm The Doctor (talk) 01:39, July 30, 2013 (UTC)
 * As a point of order I will not accept peace unless all my allies are assured the same.
 * ~ x
 * Since when does Prussia not speak German?
 * 18:44, July 30, 2013 (UTC)
 * Yeah, I was wondering about that too. Callumthered (talk) 20:58, July 31, 2013 (UTC)

Right then, seeming as Bavaria is pulling out I ask for Status Quo Ante Bellum too. There's no point continuing this madness. Kunarian TALK 01:57, July 30, 2013 (UTC)


 * @Scan: France, The Netherlands, Saxony, Bavaria, Prussia, have all agreed to it. I do not think it fair for me to still fight if Italia still wants to. I declared war, Scraw and I both agreed to antebellum, most of my allies agree. So as far as I can see ,it should still be allowed. Just because Italia or The Levant don't want to stop, shouldn't hinder the rest of us, if you want that land, form a seperate war. But I am done with this war. It has stressed me out, and has damaged Europe.Trust Me, I'm The Doctor (talk) 02:10, July 30, 2013 (UTC)
 * Brandenburg and co. accept the Prussian request. Troops are removed from Prussia and sent to fight France, the Netherlands, and Italia.
 * 18:44, July 30, 2013 (UTC)
 * As far as i am aware all nations have pulled out, albeit grudgingly. I should have handled things differently, but what is done is done. ~Andrew

No that is just metagaming I shall not allow it. No real in-game reasons remain for this war to end. Its just you guys agreeing to it in the meta. <font color="#000000">VonGlusenburg (talk to Von!) 20:52, July 30, 2013 (UTC)


 * So all we have to do is agree to a cease fire in game? CourageousLife (talk) 22:14, July 30, 2013 (UTC)

Okay, it has come to my attention that a ceasefire is not possible. I apologize to all my allies. I honestly wasn't thinking clearly. Any fault I take. I was a fool.Trust Me, I'm The Doctor (talk) 21:24, July 30, 2013 (UTC)

OK, if anyone wants to make peace in exchange for some small areas of land or money, be aware that these things are negotiable. I have already made peace with two of Von's nations, so if there are any other takers, drop a line on my talk page, cause some fronts of the war are really going nowhere.

22:25, July 30, 2013 (UTC)

Technology
Is it possible for the Mayan Empore to send the River Lakota a water wheel in a trade, or at least possible to have the technology level 1 happen earlier for the River Lakota, considering their agricultural focus will put them ahead of the plains riding and not settle Plains Lakota? EiplecOco (talk) 15:16, July 31, 2013 (UTC)

No, we all have to follow the schedule set out in the industrialization tables, otherwise people might start getting cars in 1860 or something ridiciulous. No exceptions to the industrialization rules. <font color="#000000">VonGlusenburg (talk to Von!) 19:37, July 31, 2013 (UTC)

Alrighty, I understand and thank you for responding! EiplecOco (talk) 19:49, July 31, 2013 (UTC)

Posting troubles
So, I am going on holiday from Saturday to Wednesday. I do not know if I would be able to post. Mods, please be kind as I would probably only get back on Thursday. Imp (Say Hi?!) 22:40, August 2, 2013 (UTC)

Imp, my family just got the internet again, so I'll look after India while your gone. :) Vivaporius: "I don't need a slogan" 20:01, August 3, 2013 (UTC)


 * Thank you. If I can post, I'll tell you. :) [[Image:1.png|23px]] Imp (Say Hi?!) 23:47, August 3, 2013 (UTC)

Revolutions
When can we start revolutions without "metagaming or risking a ban". Thanks. DS|Fear the Mutated Dean Sims Bomb, Fear It 01:08, August 3, 2013 (UTC)

You can't, the only people who can start revolts are the mods or a player can within their own nation. Otherwise you need the permission of the player who owns the nation you are trying to start a revolt in. <font color="#000000">VonGlusenburg (talk to Von!) 16:14, August 5, 2013 (UTC)

Sop colonies cant revolt without player aproval, so theyl never revolt? DS|Im Coocoo for Cocoa Puffs!! 20:38, August 8, 2013 (UTC)

I didn't say that, either a mod does it or the player who rules the land. And they do revolt if you care to look at PM1, usually because if they aren't reasonable with their revolts then the mods will come in and punish. <font color="#000000">VonGlusenburg (talk to Von!) 21:43, August 8, 2013 (UTC)

Got Bored


I got bored so I made a cultural map of the game based off your 1780. Same colors = same culture. You're welcome. Petrarch: Father of SWAG! (talk) 01:04, August 5, 2013 (UTC)

P.S. I fucked up and forgot to recolor the Cyprus lands in the West to the rest of greek culture (purpple)/

There are a few other mistakes, mainly in Australia, and Salzburg, is German so it should also be darker blue, it is still left lighter shade, same with Bavarian Australis.Trust Me, I'm The Doctor (talk) 01:08, August 5, 2013 (UTC)

Italia and Greece are much closer culturally ATL. The Southern Slavs (Yugoslavia) is separate from the Northern and Eastern Slavic groups. Romania and Hungaria have their own groups. Papua has had their replaced by Italian and Japanese (their former culture involved cannibalism) same with the Pacific Islands. Scandinator (talk) 06:55, August 5, 2013 (UTC)

The northern Swahili state is thoroughly Ethiopian after several decades of cultural intergration. The northern Phillipine islands are Ethiopian as well (as Scraw has not wiped out all of the Ethiopians that inhabited the islands for half a century), while those in the south are Indian and Hindu. However, I must say this is a very nice map. Vivaporius: "I don't need a slogan" 12:59, August 5, 2013 (UTC)

The Qoyunlu Turks are a different culture to the Arabians, and the Arabians have different cultures within themselves (e.g. Omani, Yemeni, Bedouin) and Baghdad is almost a unified culture too. But still a good idea for a map :) <font color="#000000">VonGlusenburg (talk to Von!) 15:47, August 5, 2013 (UTC)

The Tatar State is Nor Slavic, it is Tatar, if you look at the religion map, its the muslim state that is in Russia's colour on the regular map. the Tatar State is tatar, not slavic. Also, I guess we could put the northern part of the FDC(Federated Duchy of the Caucasus) as Circaucasian and the south as Transcaucasian...and Baku a mix of both. -Lx (leave me a message) 06:34, August 6, 2013 (UTC)

I wasn't exactly around for much of AP's Scandinavia, but I have a good feeling that he developed them with a culture unique to Scandinavia. Again, just a guess, but I think it'd have its own culture after for long as he played as them. Also, Germany hasn't exactly done a ton to integrate them into their mainstream culture. I'd also argue that Germany has about 2 cultures - Northern and Southern. Even in OTL Germany, this exists (Bavaria/Austria and Prussia). <span style="border:3px solid blue; "> <font color="#FF0000" face="Sans-Serif" title="Reximus">Reximus   <font color="#FF0000" face="Sans-Serif" title="Talk">Maximus  06:44, August 6, 2013 (UTC)

Well if we're going to get really technical there's a Selk'nam cultural dot on the South end of East Falkland island as a result of my agreement to sell the place to Wales. That and I technically have two cultures, Taoist Selknam with Japanese influence in Miyako Yagich (OTL Puerto Williams) and the far West of Tierra del Fuego, and Catholic Welsh influenced Selk'nam everywhere else. Granted that's splitting hairs and they really are all Selk'nam - although it's important if and when we update the religion map. Commandante Lemming (talk) 13:22, August 6, 2013 (UTC)

Great Brython
<span id="cke_bm_72S" style="display:none;">  Total: 72
 * Location: (4 [Wales] + 3 [Ethiopia])/3 = +4
 * Tactical Advantage: +6
 * Strength: Great Brython (L), Hobyo-Somalia (MV), Morocco (MV), Welsh Royal Coast (MV), New South Wales (MV), Ethiopia (L), Adal (MV), Kitara (MV), Darfur (MV), Yorubaland (MV), Majeerteen Sultanate (LV), Ajuuraan Sultanate (MV), United Mahajayra (M), Sindhustan (MV), Rajputana (MV), Mataram (MV), Assam (MV), Kuch (MV), Nepal (MV), Khmer (MV), Cebu (MV),  Brunei (MV), Germanica (M), Mysore (MV), Georgia (MV) Armenia (MV), Orientalia (MV), = 61/54 = +1
 * Military Development: (16 [Brython] +12 [Ethiopia]  = 28)/22 = +1
 * Economy: (14 [Brython] +12 [Ethiopia]= 26)/16 = +2
 * Motive: (3 [Brython] + 7 [Ethiopia] ) = +10
 * Chance: +6
 * Edit Count: 1,227
 * UTC Time: 09:39 - 243
 * (1,227/243)*pi = 15.8631036459
 * Nation Age: +5
 * Population: +29 (25 [Brython] + 55 [Ethiopia] = 80)
 * Participation: +10
 * Recent Wars: -2

Netherlands
Total: 37
 * Location: (5 [Netherlands] + 4 [Warsangali])/2 = +5
 * Tactical Advantage: +2
 * Strength: Netherlands (L), Oldeburg (MV), Liege (MV), Indonesia (MV), Kongo (MV), Cleves (MV), West Munster (MV), Luxembourg (MV), Mali (M), Gabu (MV), Mossi (MV) Wolof (MV), Warsangali (LV), Arabian Federation (M), Qoyunlu Empire (MV), Kuwait (MV), Baghdad (MV), Maldives (MV), Comchellak (MV), Levantine Kingdom (M), Dimurat (M), Mangystau (M), Tanimbarkai (MV) = 54/61 = 0
 * Military Development: (6+16)/42= 0
 * Economy: (4+12)/38= 0
 * Infrastructure: 0
 * Motive: (10 [Netherlands] +3 [Warsangali])= +13
 * Chance: +8
 * Edit Count: 194
 * UTC Time: 15:47 - 1*5*4*7 = 140
 * (194/140)*pi = 1.3857
 * Nation Age: (5+5)/2 = +5
 * Population: +7 (7+1 million = 8 million)
 * Participation: +10
 * Recent Wars: -13

Results
Great Brython and Ethiopiacan claim up to 32.11% of the Netherlands.
 * ((72/(37+72))*2)-1 = 0.3211
 * (32.11)*(1-1/(2*3)) = 26.75%

The victors win 26.75% of the Netherland's and Warsangali's XXX pixels.

Discussion of the Welsh-Dutch War
Quashi, I'd be happy to conclude an early peace with you if you care to negotiate with me. ~Rex 08:39, August 6, 2013 (UTC)

I added in the chance scores and the Dutch's missed out economic development score. <font color="#000000">VonGlusenburg (talk to Von!) 10:05, August 6, 2013 (UTC)

Ooh, count on military aid from me, if I can get Luxembourg and Oldeburg! 16:55, August 6, 2013 (UTC)

Throw Ethiopia into the battle. I want a piece of the Netherlands. Vivaporius: "I don't need a slogan" 17:16, August 6, 2013 (UTC)

I assume you'd like Indonesia. Care to split it if we get enough

17:18, August 6, 2013 (UTC)

Before we all get antsy, I want to make it known that all members of the War of Germanic Succession must be barred unless they can prove that they help more than hurt. I don't want that -10 per member penalty. So, Germany, sorry, you are out (I think that you may still make gains.) As for Indonesia, that can be split. The main goals of the Attackers are: Chile, Argentium, Congo, Indonesia THEN mainland Europe. ~Rex 17:45, August 6, 2013 (UTC)

I want the Kongo back mainly, but Indonesia is also a fine catch as well. As for Ethiopia's involvement in the previous conflict, we weren't truly involved in the conflict. According to Von, I only provided military aid, of that, only the vassals contributed. Vivaporius: "I don't need a slogan" 18:31, August 6, 2013 (UTC)

Please, refrain from to many people joining. In reality, only the Welsh and Netherlands, with maybe military support (or maybe only supplies) from Brandenburg is possible after the war that just happened. As for Ethiopia, I think (if they are to join), they can gain Kongo and/or (maybe) Indonesia. If the Arab Fed wants to join for Dutch Persia, that is also cool. But please note: All South American and European lands will go to Wales. The King of Wales is claiming to be the rightful King of the Netherlands. ~Rex 20:21, August 6, 2013 (UTC)

Understood. The territories surrounding Yorubaland (light red lands), who do they belong too? Vivaporius: "I don't need a slogan" 20:36, August 6, 2013 (UTC)
 * Normandy.--Collie Kaltenbrunner (talk) 20:47, August 6, 2013 (UTC)
 * Ah, okay. Flag of Kania.png Vivaporius: "I don't need a slogan" 22:42, August 6, 2013 (UTC)

I'm just giving military aid.

22:45, August 6, 2013 (UTC) I can not say I'm surprised, because even though you meant you wanted peace and a treaty of 150 years I imagined something like this, but did not expect it right after this war. Missing fix many things in the altgo, you miss my vassals, and also will Normandy be leading and belive Iceland. I think that Mali can also enter the war. I'll wait to see if anyone else assists me with this stab. --Quashi (talk) 04:47, August 7, 2013 (UTC)

Just completed the algorithm for Normandy. It's probably all messed up or whatever, but if anyone wants to polish it that would be great. Cookiedamage (talk) 05:41, August 7, 2013 (UTC)

Reversed the Norman algo, since he agreed to drop the war. ~Rex 06:37, August 7, 2013 (UTC)

I added Mali & Warsangali as leaders, and the Muslim bloc nations who are sending military aid to help the Dutch.

I removed Norway, Sweden & Denmark as they're NPCs now since they revolted away so no one controls them.

Also note that the Dutch chance score will be done once Quashi responds in game to the war, the time of that edit will be the one used for the chance score. <font color="#000000">VonGlusenburg (talk to Von!) 12:17, August 7, 2013 (UTC)

I've added Ethiopia and Germany into the algorithim, as well as given them the industrial bonus as they possess larger industrial bases (and the manpower to fuel them) than the Netherlands and Arabia combined. Vivaporius: "I don't need a slogan" 13:44, August 7, 2013 (UTC)

Arabia isn't fighting in this war, only sending aid if you bothered to actually read for once. You don't get the industrialization bonus because you are not more industrialized (we are all either yellow or green nations so we have the same amount of industrialization) and you've added those nations almost completely wrong. Also where did Scraw actually say he was fighting in this war? I'll fix this tomorrow. <font color="#000000">VonGlusenburg (talk to Von!) 16:11, August 7, 2013 (UTC)

There are more nations on the opposing side, with larger populations and factories. I'm very incline to believe that a nation with 30 million people is quite capable of outproducing an equally industrialized nation of one million people. If you bothered to read, then you would have seen this: "Ooh, count on military aid from me, if I can get Luxembourg and Oldeburg!" If you read anytihng in your life, you'd know that if you send military aid, that counts as providing supplies, for which you are added to the algorithim for. Its in the rules - S for supplies (+2). Your providing supplies, thus your in the war. Any politician, soldiers, or two-year old could tell you that. As for the other bit in the rules section: "Military aid is defined as sending some troops to join another nation's forces, not declaring full-on war on an enemy nation someone else is fighting. This would result in a coalition algorithm," its too ambigious, and doesn't explain if that counts in the algorithim or if it is actually part of a coalition. Vivaporius: "I don't need a slogan" 17:27, August 7, 2013 (UTC)


 * Actually, that has to be changed. I am sorry Viva, but only nations that are truely attacking the opposition are counted for other factors such as military development. (M) means that you are sending military aid, and your nation will not lose any land. [[Image:1.png|23px]] Imp (Say Hi?!) 22:46, August 7, 2013 (UTC)
 * "Ooh, count on military aid from me, if I can get Luxembourg and Oldeburg!" - ergo he sends military aid not a leader like you had him in as. <font color="#000000">VonGlusenburg (talk to Von!) 20:55, August 8, 2013 (UTC)

<span id="cke_bm_43S" style="display:none;">  Why is Mali written as a leader? I've only been offering military aid. Shawnguerra (talk) 23:24, August 7, 2013 (UTC)

Well, we just need Scand/Collie's ok on this, and it'll take effect. Thanks, ~Rex

I know I'm not either of those two, but I'm a mod, so I'm not out of my jurisdiction when I say that the algorithm has now been finalized and is official. Its consequences may now be put into effect in the game. CrimsonAssassin- "I have special eyes" 01:21, August 8, 2013 (UTC)

Sorry about not remembering you. I just assumed that most of the time, Von or Collie look over algorithims. ~Rex

'''Ok, Quashi. CrimsonAssasain approved/canonized the algorithim. That algorithim, which you are so intent upon changing, was right the way it was. You cannot change it. It was finalized! So, I will return the algorithim to the way it should be. Please do not change it again, or I will have you reported for Vandalism. ~Rex'''

'''The altgo is wrong, you put numbers are not accurate, plus a bonus that is not determined, and thus can not close the altgo. Also you should not have trouble if you are so sure of wining, since it began in 1785, and 2 days after you insist on close. Crim does not have all the data, although a mod, I want to correct the altgo with complete data.'''

Yeah, sorry, didn't see the bonus. The industrialization bonus has to go. I'm not as good with these algorithms as Von and Collie are. I'm more of a 'keep order' mod. CrimsonAssassin- "I have special eyes" 15:08, August 8, 2013 (UTC)

But its three industrialized nations against one small colonial empire and a funky vassal state. Vivaporius: "I don't need a slogan" 19:09, August 8, 2013 (UTC)

New algorithm, see if needs any change in your side Quashi (talk) 20:01, August 8, 2013 (UTC)

Yes there are things wrong still. <font color="#000000">VonGlusenburg (talk to Von!) 20:55, August 8, 2013 (UTC)

Yes there are. For one, my Dominions are not marked as such. Someone put them down to MV. I ask you, if you had OTL Britain with Canada and Australia, would you put Canada and Australia as MV? I doubt it.

21:54, August 8, 2013 (UTC)

<p style="margin-top:1em;margin-bottom:1em;"> Nuovo Milano was given to Ethiopia in 1720 by Italia. I thought you were talking about another state, the one below it (the area Mogadishu is located is another one of Ethiopia's vassals by the way). Vivaporius:  "I don't need a slogan"  23:35, August 7, 2013 (UTC)

I would like Dutch Persia, as I have had a long time standing in the region and only lost that footing thanks to Arabia in that last war. I am willing to sacrifice it for Aceh and/or Padang. I also demand Luxembourg, as it was only just taken from me.

00:45, August 8, 2013 (UTC)

You simply sent military aid... I was advised by multiple people to not give you anything. Furthermore, isn't it kind of obvious that the mods do not want you to have Luxembourg? Luxembourg, for even another reason, will be an island in Europe which you cannot access, by boat or by land without traveling through another nation. ~Rex

WTF After all that discussion with Viva? If I don't get anything, you may remove all my territories from the algorithm. I don't care what the mods think about Luxembourg, I've had it since the beginning of the game and I want that shit back one way or another.

02:16, August 8, 2013 (UTC)

But I thought Scraw was in the war the whole time? How do you think we won? And countless nations controlled enclaves throughout history. Look at any map from the 1500-1800s, Germany of all places really, and you'll see what I mean. Vivaporius:  "I don't need a slogan"  04:54, August 8, 2013 (UTC)

We have come to an agreement. And Quashi has been (illegally) screwing with our Algorithim. ~Rex

Erm hello? I am in this algorithim, so I would like the things promised to me. Such as the colonies of the Dutch in Amazonia. Plus, I would like the Kongo, Viva - please? Scraw getting Dutch Persia - fine with me if my wishes are respected. :L  Imp (Say Hi?!) 12:45, August 8, 2013 (UTC)

I'd be happy to part with Kongo, as for Dutch Persia, I suppose I can give up another holding. And on Warsangali,  Nuovo Milano was given to me by Scan 60+ years ago. Exchanging one vassal I control for another vassal I used to control defeats the purpose of me trying to get it. Vivaporius:  "I don't need a slogan"  14:05, August 8, 2013 (UTC)

The altgorim is wrong, you will win, but at least be legal Quashi (talk) 14:24, August 8, 2013 (UTC)

Kosaga checked and passed the algorithm yesterday while we were all in chat. It's legit. Vivaporius:  "I don't need a slogan"  17:04, August 8, 2013 (UTC)

Not really, I actually had some disagreements. Plus, I also said that there might be other mods that might add. Anyway I don't have much experience on algorithms as I really haven't used them. -Kogasa   2013 August 08, 19:54 (CET)

I see you're completely ingoring the fact the algorithm is wrong and pixel counts and just doing this. <font color="#000000">VonGlusenburg  (talk to Von!) 21:08, August 8, 2013 (UTC)

Well, I wasn't around for that part Kosaga. In any case, I cede any gains to Rex then. Vivaporius:  "I don't need a slogan"  23:11, August 8, 2013 (UTC)

New Borders
Ok, so the whole part under this part was all wrong. I apologize, because when I left last night, everything was mod-approved. Anyways, all the old images/borders are reset (for now) and all discussion to be moved to discussion. ~Rex

So, we need a mod to count the pixels of the Dutch Empire, and then post all of their holdings' sizes here. Please note that the Dutch Empire is shown in 2 colors (Darker and Lighter). In my latest post, I am assuming I can take at least the coast from Amsterdam to the Hague, Oldenberg, Cleves, West Munster, and Liege. <span style="border:3px solid blue; "> <font color="#FF0000" face="Sans-Serif" title="Reximus">Reximus   <font color="#FF0000" face="Sans-Serif" title="Talk">Maximus  11:10, August 10, 2013 (UTC)

Whoever.
should either A: stop making mod events or B: get his damn facts straight. I tolerated the ASB weather and the BS revolts in India, but stripping me of my motherland is really pushing it. Scandinavia became Germanicized and Germany became Scandinavified. I'm the Germanic Reich for a reason.

22:50, August 6, 2013 (UTC)

I currently agree, the mod events leading up to a French style revolution, can't reall happen, all our nations have democratized at least marginally, and in Bavaria's case, the monarchy is now little more than a figure head, a national symbol. Despite the fact that Scraw was my enemy, Denmark and the other regions have been in his hands for centuries, they are German.Trust Me, I'm The Doctor (talk) 22:53, August 6, 2013 (UTC)

I do belive that it was Scan, not Yank, who created that mod event. Check the history at 17:52 CourageousLife (talk) 23:46, August 6, 2013 (UTC)

Regardless, the mod in question, I request kindly reviews their position, Europe needs to rebuild, not be torn apart again.Trust Me, I'm The Doctor (talk) 23:50, August 6, 2013 (UTC)

Apologies. Regardless, these events are unhelpful for both Scan and Yank, as they are within the target ranges.

23:57, August 6, 2013 (UTC)

I don't mind these events, my issue is when they occur so frequently and when they fail to affect the countries of mods who created them. CourageousLife (talk) 01:18, August 7, 2013 (UTC)

That and mod events tend to be Eurocentric. It's not exactly like I want to be hit with a freak disster but I'm a little surprised that I haven't had to deal with a single mod event since the beginning of the game Commandante Lemming (talk) 01:21, August 7, 2013 (UTC)

Well, you can't exactly say that. Remember when the bulk of the mod events targetted the Maya, and the other batch that targetted the Caliphate? Its just Europe's turn now. Vivaporius: "I don't need a slogan" 04:26, August 7, 2013 (UTC)


 * I know there was one that created a revolt, and that was a result of Mayan overexpansion. The only other ones I recall were some natural disasters that I was assured were not specifically targeting the Mayans. The ones about the Caliphate, I feel that was more of the mods breaking up a monopoly, plus the Caliphate players had a plan previously to break it up anyway. This is . . . different. CourageousLife (talk) 04:32, August 7, 2013 (UTC)


 * I wasn't around for those, but you're right. Just a bit odd since I've been playing for 100 years. But no complaints. Commandante Lemming (talk) 14:43, August 7, 2013 (UTC)

To me it makes sense, the Scandivians ruled themselves for centuries before you came along Scraw. They are under foreign rule, and German is still not as popular as their native languages would be. Your mere 200 years means nothing. If it did, then colonial empires would never break up which they know they did in OTL. <font color="#000000">VonGlusenburg (talk to Von!) 10:55, August 7, 2013 (UTC)


 * Same applies for Italy in the Balkans and in Turkey.


 * 18:58, August 7, 2013 (UTC)
 * Well duhhhh. They'll be rebelling as well in the future. But Italia didn't just loose a major war unlike Brandenburg so they have the chance to rebel away. <font color="#000000">VonGlusenburg (talk to Von!) 21:06, August 8, 2013 (UTC)

Also in regards to these mod events... The weather is not ASB, take a look at the effects of the OTL Laki eruption... It cooled the European climates for many years and ignited the French revolution. In addition may of the recent mod events have targetted yours truly and I myself have thrown in several at myself in the past (2 plagues, 2 earthquakes and three revolts). Its unfair to accuse me of unfair targetting since I've done more damage to my own nation than to others and since I've had three revolts in the last several turns. Scandinator (talk) 15:25, August 7, 2013 (UTC) I honestly have no problem with the weather, but stealing Scandinavia from me is pretty much dropping me to the crap level. Not to mention that Scandinavia isn't even very inudstrialized; most of it is light green and yellow, and on top of that they are out numbered. Also the fact that Scandinavia actually just gained territory by fighting in this latest war.
 * I thought Yank did most of the mod events. CourageousLife (talk) 15:34, August 7, 2013 (UTC)

18:47, August 7, 2013 (UTC)

Also Germany and Scandinavia are far more interconnected than Italy and Turkey, since Germany and Scandinavia had the same religion even before the war and are part of the same ethnic group. Italy has owned Turkey and Greece for less time than I have had Scandinavia. Not to mention that Italic (formerly Catholic) Italy has no relation to the Orthodox majority Slavic countries (Hungary, Romania, Yugoslavia, Greece) or the Muslim territories in Turkey, which also have an Orthodox population. If Scan can deem those revolts in his territories unsuccessful, I would like to reserve the right to do the same within my borders. Scan runs vassals, subordinate states in the Balkans, I have a nation, with Scandinavia on an equal level of territory on the mainland.

18:58, August 7, 2013 (UTC)

I don't even know why we need a French Revolution; we already had Strellok.

19:08, August 7, 2013 (UTC)


 * I have to agree. We cannot have a reverse French Revolution, doesn't make sense. Sure, later on when you want 1848, but not now. [[Image:1.png|23px]] Imp (Say Hi?!) 21:10, August 7, 2013 (UTC)

True. In fact, Pan-Germanism is a strong factor in Germany maintaining control over the region. Germanic identity would play a strong role in Scraw being able to keep Scandinavia. Britain and India were two seperate cultures, yet Indians still admired the British for the culture and beliefs, and saw their industrial might as a something to strive for at home. Germany is much closer to Scandinavia and with a very similar culture and background. Scandinavians may not entirely like being ruled by the Germans, but they certainly wouldn't hate them for it. And 200 years means a lot. Many former colonies stil suck up to their old rulers (Mali and France), and idolize them for old times. Germany also has the manpower to dominate Scandinavia by force if Scraw needs to, but it won't come to the point where he needs to use force. Vivaporius: "I don't need a slogan" 19:22, August 7, 2013 (UTC)


 * Yet there is still a huge amount of resentment in India about the Brits ruling over them. [[Image:1.png|23px]] Imp (Say Hi?!) 16:06, August 8, 2013 (UTC)
 * Oh absolutely. Though I do remember reading about numerous Indian politicians showing respect for the British for their history and prosperity. I'm not sure which ones, but I'm sure you'd be able to name them all (not that many from my memory). Flag of the Hurian Federation.png Vivaporius: "I don't need a slogan" 19:04, August 8, 2013 (UTC)
 * And Pan Germanism matters to the Norwegians, Danes and Swedes because? Last time I checked they weren't German. And yes on the whole they will resent the fact that they are ruled by Germans rather than themselves after hundreds of years of self-rule. And 200 years matters little, for example Ireland rebelled away from England, the various lands which the Russian empire & USSR used to rule over rebelled away, and all of the other colonies in Africa and the Americas rebelled away too. The American revolution is probably the best example of this, British colonists rebelled away from their home country even though they had the same religion, ethnicity, etc.
 * They will all rebel away eventually, but losing a big war is a good chance for oppressed nations to rebel away from their masters. Not to mention, being friendly with your previous ruler happens usually when you had a peaceful independence or a really long time to get over a war of independence. <font color="#000000">VonGlusenburg (talk to Von!) 21:06, August 8, 2013 (UTC)
 * It's not Germanism. It's Germanicism. As in the Gothic and Germanic tribes from the last days of Rome. Denmark, Norway, and Sweden have only been solid sovereign nations from the 1100s to the 1600s. Denmark, Norway, and Sweden were winners in this war; they gained land. And I'm not oppressing anyone...
 * 03:09, August 9, 2013 (UTC)
 * Maybe you should check up on your history Von. America rebelled because the British taxed them to death. Americans were angered by the fact that they were being taxed by a nation that didn't allow them a say in their own lands, and they rebelled under the tax burden. And they may have been British by blood, but their culture was entirely different. No concept of lord, nobility, or king had been cultivated in America the same as in Britain. Loyalty to a monarch 2,000 miles away wasn't a priority for Americans. And ethnicity is a very, very broad term. Most Americans were and still are Germans, not Britons. Americans largely came from countries Britain oppressed, namely Ireland, Scotland, and Germany.
 * The Russians controlled lands that had no relation to them. Russians aren't related to Turks, Tartars, or Uzbeks if my memory is correct. The Russians were autocratic and oppressive. Ireland rebelled because their land was invaded and taken from them, and the British treat them like s***.
 * Germany is very close to Scandinavia, and could easily outbreed the native populations over that 200 year period as Germans move north for work. Given the fact that the Germans maintain a huge colonial empire, it would come as no surprise that German families would be moving north for land and to export lumber for the ships needed to maintain the Germany navy to maintain in turn that huge empire of theirs. Flag of the Hurian Federation.png Vivaporius: "I don't need a slogan" 04:02, August 9, 2013 (UTC)

To be honest I have to agree that it'll not make complete sense for them to rebel based on feeling oppressed. And while everyone talks about rebellions being because people feel oppressed and threatened, has no one though of rebellions and independence movements where people feel it's simply more advantageous to not be part of a state?

The Nordic Countries that are rebelling away now is completely plausible because of that EXCEPT for denmark. I don't think Germans in Denmark would feel far away enough to truly want to break away, at least at the moment and especially considering the wars they've fought side by side with Brandenburg I doubt they would. Now Norway and Sweden that's different, they gained from the last war, but they see the nation that they look to (Brandenburg) losing land and a war, the sea between them and the German mainland naturally makes them feel different, like an island nation away from Brandenburg. Norway and Sweden's first thoughts as they see Brandenburg losing so much is, what happens next time? they'll be a target, they'll have to supply more troops, Brandenburg can no longer offer protection.

For Norway and Sweden it is advantageous and logical to become independent (this idea being reinforced as soon as the Indian invasion occurs) whereas Denmark not so much. Kunarian TALK 13:23, August 9, 2013 (UTC)

Exactly. And let's not forget that Denmark is also very German (not Germanic). One of its larger cities actually voted to return to Germany in the 1970s I believe, but was outvoted by the rest of the neighboring counties forcing it to stay with Denmark. And for centuries, Denmark has always shared its culture, land, and people with the Germans, meaning that Denmark at the very least would find it nearly impossible to break away from Germany. As for Sweden and Norway, while Kun is correct in his statements, you must remember that over the last 200 years, the Swedish and Norwegian populations may have been displaced by the German immigrants looking for work. Both nations had tiny populations (Norway had about 750,000 while Sweden had two million). Rebelling from Germany would be a logistical nightmare, and should they succeed, they'd have to deal with the ethnic Germans seperated from their homeland and the potential bloodbath civil war after it. Vivaporius: "I don't need a slogan" 15:23, August 9, 2013 (UTC)
 * To be honest it'd have to be about wanting to assure safety from wars and hoping that separating from Brandenburg would help them. Also German or not, their culture will not be the same as Brandenburg, a peoples economic environment as well as history decides that and not forgetting the distance caused by the sea. Also on logistics and dealing with people who don't want the split, the same thing happened in America, more than half the population at the beginning of the conflict was pro-British and they fought with the British, and it took help from Spain, France and a few other powers to help them get away, so I completely agree. However here we have Brandenburg being devastated by wars and facing another (military help to seceede, indirect but still help) and should anyone adopt the nations (like the Icelandic Imperium seems to plan to) then they MUST deal with those against the split. I'd say the best solution would be compromise. Be realistic in terms of Denmark, they stay with Brandenburg but in the case of Sweden and Norway allow them to have a go at breaking free, we've already established that it's not impossible HOWEVER allow Brandenburg a period of say 50 years around for them to reclaim the lost nations and reassert control via the loyalty of the anti-split Germans there. Kunarian TALK 18:05, August 9, 2013 (UTC)
 * Exactly. Also, I am  REALLY  pissed that I am losing  ALL  of my territory. This is real bullshit. At least space the events out for hell's sake! Also Denmark, Norway, and Sweden suddenly want to become VASSALS of a weak and industrialized country, whereas they were previously part of one of the world's premier powers? I am doubtful.
 * 18:33, August 9, 2013 (UTC)
 * Yes concerning the Icelandic Imperiums attmepts, one of the mods should do a random dice roll with a -2 modifier for difficulty. 1-4 being flat out refusal, 5-6 being agreement to form an alliance (but no vassalisation or joining together) and 7 being agreement to begin forming a federation (where the icelandic imperium is not the boss but rather where there are three EQUAL states). I think this is a reasonable way to do this. Kunarian TALK 18:59, August 9, 2013 (UTC)
 * I had equal states...
 * 19:04, August 9, 2013 (UTC)
 * Which is part of the reason why they surely would not want to submit to anyone (still assuming that they are breaking away for more valid reasons than for Scandinavian culture which of course exists in a different and not as potent form in this timeline), they've tasted freedom, they wouldn't want it taken away again. Kunarian TALK 19:18, August 9, 2013 (UTC)
 * Once again, exactly my point. I fail to see how union with Iceland is any different than being in union with Germany. Furthermore, I fail to see how Iceland is not foreign rule.  ARE ANY OF THESE GOING TO BE ADDRESSED OR ARE THE MODS GOING TO CONTINUE BEING POLITICIANS AND IGNORE US?  For Pete's sake, at least respond to us!
 * 17:54, August 11, 2013 (UTC)

Posting for Bavaria
I will be offline for a week or more starting Thursday, the family is moving and I am temporarily losing internet connectivity. I have authorised Callum to post for me until I announce my return, note Bavaria is a neutral country in any foriegn wars.Trust Me, I'm The Doctor (talk) 05:56, August 7, 2013 (UTC)


 * Really? :( [[Image:1.png|23px]] Imp (Say Hi?!) 21:38, August 7, 2013 (UTC)

Proposed Change to Industrial Bonus
I would like to propose a change to the bonus in that population determines whether or not you get the bonus, instead of how many nations actually should get it by weight of numbers (having more industrialized nations on your side that it). My reasons for this are simple. During World War II, Germany was one of the most industrialized nations on Earth. However, it couldn't defeat the Soviet Union despite that since Germany's population was too small beat the vast industrial base and population of the Soviet Union. Even though the Soviets had fewer advanced factories or training, they simply had more factories to work with, and more people to man them all. Eventually, Germany was crushed by a tide of Soviet tanks that were being churnned out in the tens of thousands. The USSR's 200 million people and backwards industrial base, beat Germany's 80 million people and smaller yet more advanced industrial base. Henceforth, I believe that the industrial bonus should be tided in with the population size of the nation using it. Just a suggestion. Vivaporius: "I don't need a slogan" 13:50, August 7, 2013 (UTC)

There were many reasons for that. Foremost was the fact that by 1940, the USSR was one of the world's leading industrial powers. Spread out and poor but still an industrial power compared to most of the world. Furthermore was the fact that Germany had huge supply lines to fight in the USSR while the factories in the Ural mountains continued churning out tanks and aircraft and their supply lines shrank. Scandinator (talk) 15:31, August 7, 2013 (UTC)

Even before the supply lines broke, and before the invasion of the Soviet Union, the Germans were still having manpower issues. They couldn't produce nearly enough tanks or aircraft to fight the Russians, even though they were technially more advanced and still had strong supply lines. In the end, it couldn't afford the manpower losses that the Soviets could. Heck, if the United States invaded Britain today, Britain's supply lines would service the entire nation. But the US would still will even though it was fighting across the Atlantic. Why? It can afford to build more guns, more ships, and more tanks at the end of the day, and can afford to lose more men, while Britain cannot. Germany had poor logistics yes, but the Soviet Union had to service the same amount of territory with fewer supplies and facilities (Germany still had more rails and ships than the Soviets, and its territory was more densely-populated). My point remains that the Soviet were still industrializing by the time of the war, they simply marshalled their manpower to advance it for the conflict. Its repeated numerous times in every history book about the war I've read. I should really learn how to minimize these walls of text. Vivaporius: "I don't need a slogan" 15:49, August 7, 2013 (UTC)

You're completely right also personally I think that there should be an increase to the population bonus as like it or not, it's largely the biggest nation wins the war throughout recent history. Kunarian TALK 15:45, August 8, 2013 (UTC)

I concur. It's not entirely plausible either. I mean, how much of your population can you really have in the military and working in factories at any given time?

15:57, August 8, 2013 (UTC)

But then you cannot have a nation greater than you in population but say two levels below you in industry take you over. That has also never happened. The reason the Indians were under the Brits so long was becasue they were technologically superior (logistics and otherwise). :L  Imp (Say Hi?!) 16:01, August 8, 2013 (UTC)

Yup. Industrialized nations can easily conquer vast portions of unindustrialized land (which is why I'm confused as to why Ethiopia can't expand any faster into the black lands). And to anwser your question Scraw, the Soviet Union had 12.5 million soldiers in its standing army throughout World War II, and at the time of its dissalution in 1991, it had about three to five million troops. So that was about six percent of its population in 1945 and five percent by 1991. As for factories, the Soviet Union had 80% of its population in factories in 1980. So to finish, you can have a lot of people in factories and in the military. You don't need millions of people on a farm really, and most modern first world countries get by comfortable with only 2-3% of their population working the fields. Vivaporius: "I don't need a slogan" 19:02, August 8, 2013 (UTC)

You understand that 1900s industrialization is different to 1700s industrialization right? Also the USSR is a communist government with a centrally planned economy. The examples you are using are quite irrelevant to our current situation of 1700s economics and technology, with the largely democractic and/or monarchies which most nations players have are. The industrialization bonus is to make it easier for industrialized nations to colonize non-industrialized nations as without this bonus, nations would have no points to show that they have more advanced technology. Your example of example of WW2 nations was fought between nations with a largely similar level of technology so the industrialization bonus wouldn't come into play, but things like recent wars and allies would, meaning the USSR would win.

Numbers isn't everything, if you have significantly better technology that more advanced nation will win - e.g. Britain vs Zulu or the Darleks invading Earth. <font color="#000000">VonGlusenburg (talk to Von!) 22:01, August 8, 2013 (UTC)


 * United Earth still defeated the Romulans, even though they had superior technology. :P [[Image:1.png|23px]] Imp (Say Hi?!) 22:22, August 8, 2013 (UTC)

I suppose I'll use another example then. During the American Civil War, the North had three times the people than the South, four times the railroads, nine times the factories, and twice as many soldiers. This was in an era that was before the advent of electricity and the era of true mass production, so there is little to take away from it. Heck, even railways existed in the early-1800s, meaning that the economics, though not as rail-reliant as the 1860s, are still somewhat comparable. So the point still stands regardless, that numbers and industry still remain important as more bodies means more production, and more production means more guns, uniforms, and munitions. And on the Zulu, they were fighting a power that had a colony nearby, providing troops and ammuntion to fight a nation that was a pre-industrial power with a population of 500,000-1,000,000 people. The Boers were more numerous than them. Plus, the Zulu were fighting in a small area, and only fielded 14,000 to 20,000 men in the entire war, with the largest battles having no more than 4,000-5,000 warriors. The British fielded 1,000 troops at Isandlwana alone. Vivaporius: "I don't need a slogan" 23:29, August 8, 2013 (UTC)

United Maharajya
Total: 60
 * Location: 5
 * Tactical Advantage: 5
 * Strength: United Maharajya (L), Rajputana (L), Dahod (MV), Nepal (MV), Bhutan (MV), Mataram (M), Brunei (M), Naya Bihar (M), Sulwasi (MV) = 25/23 = 1
 * Military Development: ((18+18)/2)/9 = 2
 * Economy: ((12+12)/2)/8 = 2
 * Expansion: 0
 * Motive: 7 + 7
 * Chance: 9
 * Edit Count:7150
 * UTC Time: 22:19
 * 7150/180 x pi = 124.791042
 * Nation Age: +5
 * Population: +11
 * Participation: 10
 * Recent Wars: -4 (Orissa and Rajputana M in German War, Dutch War)

Germanica and Dominions
Total: 48
 * Location: +5
 * Tactical Advantage: 0
 * Strength: Mysore (L), Orientalia (L), Germanica (L), Georgia (M), Neu Berlin (M), Neu Prussen (M), Chimu (M) = +23/25 = 0
 * Military Development: (10+8+8=26/3~9) = 0
 * Economy: 9 = 0
 * Infrastructure: 0
 * Expansion: 0
 * Motive: 10 + 10 + 5
 * Chance: 6
 * Edit Count:6639
 * UTC Time: 17:33
 * 6639/63 x pi = 331.064026
 * Nation Age: +5
 * Population: +8
 * Participation: 10
 * Recent Wars: -2 (Mysore and Orientalia sending M in German War), -8 (Germanica L in German War), -1 (Germanica M in First Dutch War) = -11

Result
((60/(60+48))*2) - 1 = 0.111111111. In 6 years, the United Maharajya can take 10.3% of German Coalition territory.

That is 1142 pixels. I'm going to see how much of Mysore I can get.

Discussion
Scandinavia has joined the Icelandic Imperium so this war is no longer accurate, unless you plan on invading me aswell. Hailstormer ( talk ) 17:51, August 9, 2013 (UTC)

What war? I see no war here. Vivaporius: "I don't need a slogan" 17:56, August 9, 2013 (UTC)

Scraw, I attacked the Philippines as well. That counts as main German territories. Imp (Say Hi?!) 23:22, August 9, 2013 (UTC)

Yes, that's the Dominion of Orientalia. L up there.

00:24, August 10, 2013 (UTC)


 * You have a colony in the South (of India). Now that does count as main German territory. [[Image:1.png|23px]] Imp (Say Hi?!) 14:59, August 10, 2013 (UTC)


 * No, that's of Mysore. As in, colony of Mysore.
 * 17:15, August 10, 2013 (UTC)


 * That is BS. You have never mentioned that colony was given to Mysore. You invaded it from Germany. [[Image:1.png|23px]] Imp (Say Hi?!) 17:58, August 10, 2013 (UTC)
 * No, I invaded it with Brandenburg and Mysore as leaders. The only reason it had red border in the first place was because Travancore stood between Mysore and the area, which should have been corrected when Travancore was vassalized into Mysore.
 * 18:12, August 11, 2013 (UTC)

Alright, i tried to add more numbers to this.I couldn't find any chance for Germany, so unless that they acknowledge war, they will probably get a 1 as chance.There might also be some nations lacking from Imp's side.--Collie Kaltenbrunner (talk) 16:00, August 10, 2013 (UTC)


 * I'll gt round to it. Right now I gotta go destory zombies from South Africa. :D [[Image:1.png|23px]] Imp (Say Hi?!) 17:18, August 10, 2013 (UTC)

Oh, I forgot to acknowledge the war? Done.

17:15, August 10, 2013 (UTC)
 * No, i meant that you need to post on the game to do that, which you haven't done yet.--Collie Kaltenbrunner (talk) 17:21, August 10, 2013 (UTC)


 * I did. It's in my latest post.
 * 17:34, August 10, 2013 (UTC)

You add up motive btw. +10 for each german leader for example. Motive is not an average like nation age! <font color="#000000">VonGlusenburg (talk to Von!) 20:48, August 12, 2013 (UTC)

Ah, thanks.

21:13, August 12, 2013 (UTC)

C'mon. Population is not a +2. Imp (Say Hi?!) 15:54, August 14, 2013 (UTC)

Btw, what is that small nation next to Prussia? Becuase my forces would have invaded it too. :P  Imp (Say Hi?!) 15:58, August 14, 2013 (UTC)

Everyone has neglected to notice that I united all my mainland territories under Brandenburg and changed the name a while ago. Very much thanks to Collie's crooked mapmaking.

22:25, August 14, 2013 (UTC)


 * That is West Prussia. :P [[Image:1.png|23px]] Imp (Say Hi?!) 15:54, August 15, 2013 (UTC)

Allow me to tally my population for you: Your population is roughly 200 million on the Indian subcontinent. 200/80 is a bit more than 2. Ergo, +2.
 * Mysore: 30 - 40 million
 * Orientalia: 20(ish) million (likely around 2.2 - 2.3 Million)
 * Germanica: 8 million (Brandenburg and West Prussia) + 12 million (Poland)
 * Total: 52 - 62 million

22:32, August 14, 2013 (UTC)


 * We've dicussed this before. The United Maharajya would be 330-350 Million, with Rajputana around 50 Million people. The Philippines have 87 Million now, and that too becuase their population increase by like 5 fold since the Americans. Seeing as to how the Philippines are under German control, they would have fewer people - much fewer people. Y U changing my total, I like the number ;) [[Image:1.png|23px]] Imp (Say Hi?!) 23:08, August 14, 2013 (UTC)


 * The Phillippines would have at least 1.5 the population thanks to excess colonization from Ethiopia, old failed colonization from me, industrialization from me and you, as well as the benefits of unity. Also, India was only about 200 million people in 1800 OTL. Given your industrialization and unity, that would give you the 200 million without Mysore roughly 10 - 20 years early. 200 million.
 * 23:15, August 14, 2013 (UTC)


 * Sure, 1.5 times. According to wikipedia, its population in 1799 was 1.5 Million. This can be seconded by another website. So, 1.5x would give us roughly 2.2 - 2.3 Million people. German population at 8 Million? Seems a bit high, I would say more like 7 - bit 8 would still be beliveable (just). Poland's the one I am having problems with. Its population in 1921 was 25,000,000 - and that Poland was much larger than your Poland. Half of the seems way too high. More like 8 Million seems more accurate - at I said 8 becuase it is closer to Germany and more industrialised than OTL (or is it?). That puts your population at around 8 + 7/8 + 2 + 35 (midway) = 52-3 Million People. [[Image:1.png|23px]] Imp (Say Hi?!) 15:32, August 15, 2013 (UTC)
 * You fail to remember that the population of Poland was booming in the days before the Caliphate.
 * 17:54, August 15, 2013 (UTC)


 * On the other hand, I have control of the most fertile lands in India. Add to that there is a lot of industrialisation and we are pretty close to 1800s. That should mean that I have a good 240-260 Million at least in the UM with 30-40 Million in Rajputana (35 to make it simpler). So that would give me a total from anywhere 275 to 295 Million. And I have decided the war finishes this year anyway. Plus, Germania? I'm guessing that is your name for Brandenburg, becuase you still have West Prussia independent, as it says on on the German war. I invaded West Prussia when my aries landed in N Germany. They got defeated and captured, that is another story. [[Image:1.png|23px]] Imp (Say Hi?!) 16:02, August 15, 2013 (UTC)


 * Dude, pay the damn hell attention. I annexed East Brandenburg and West Prussia into Brandenburg RIGHT AFTER THE GERMAN WAR. Why? Because, they were so damn small and there was no point of keeping them speerate.
 * 17:54, August 15, 2013 (UTC)


 * Sorry. I'll remove their scores. :P [[Image:1.png|23px]] Imp (Say Hi?!) 20:22, August 15, 2013 (UTC)

Hey, wait a sec. I get the x 1.1 too becuase the majority of nations are more industrialised than their counter parts. :o Imp (Say Hi?!) 15:49, August 15, 2013 (UTC)

Reminder: Nations with two stages use the higher when defending and lower when attacking. My highest is orange, your lowest is yellow (?).

20:32, August 15, 2013 (UTC)

Germanica does not get -10 for recent war. If we go back 15 years from the start of this war (1788), we get 1774. -8 to be exact.

22:44, August 15, 2013 (UTC)

This war is as good as closed. :)  Imp (Say Hi?!) 21:24, August 16, 2013 (UTC)

7818 is not possible. Mysore itself is barely 5000 pixels. Clearly you forget that I released all my colonies in 1787.

23:54, August 16, 2013 (UTC)

Ethiopia
Total: 69
 * Location: +4
 * Tactical Advantage: +6
 * Strength: Ethiopia (L), Adal (MV), Darfur (MV), Kitara (MV), Yorubaland (MV), Kenya (M), Majeerteen Sultanate (MV), Ajuuraan Sultanate (MV) = 19/12 = +2
 * Military Development: 12/4 = +3
 * Economy: 12/4 = +3
 * Infrastructure: 0
 * Expansion: -3
 * Motive: +5
 * Chance: +8
 * Edit Count: 2,856
 * UTC Time: 18:56 - 240
 * (2856/240)*pi=37.384952577721
 * Nation Age: +5
 * Population: +28 (60,000,000)
 * Participation: +10
 * Recent Wars: -2

Normandy
Total: 33
 * Location: +5
 * Tactical Advantage: +1
 * Strength: Normandy (L), Oyo (MV), Benin (MV), Beja (MV), Mogadishu (MV) = 12/19 = +1
 * Military Development: 4/12 = 0
 * Economy: 4/12 = 0
 * Infrastructure: 0
 * Expansion: -6
 * Motive: +10
 * Chance: +1
 * Edit Count: 363
 * UTC Time: 21:43 - 24
 * (363/24)*pi=47.51658883125
 * Nation Age: +5
 * Population: +7 (3,750,000)
 * Participation: +10
 * Recent Wars: -1

Result
((69/(33+69))*2)-1 = 0.3529411764705882 = 35.29%

Ethiopia can claim up to 35.29% of Normandy, toppling its government. Conquest will last for three years in-game, but war is effectively won OOC.

Discussion
Can you explain me how invading Korea makes sense for Ethiopia? Not trying to say that this is implausible or anything, but sure this is unexpected.--Collie Kaltenbrunner (talk) 20:22, August 9, 2013 (UTC)

Black Man's Burden. Korea is a pre-industrial nation with little to no real power. Ethiopia, like any respectable colonial power, is simply spread the joys of civilization and industry to a poor nation. Seriously, it's the massive raw materials Korea has. Plus, its a bangin' geopolitical location between two major powers with lots of money. Controlling Korea comes with a lots of perks. Plus Ethiopia is way behind in the colonial game. Vivaporius: "I don't need a slogan" 20:29, August 9, 2013 (UTC)

Exactly why I wanted Korea in the first place. But noooooo Dean has to screw everyone. However, you fail to realize that Korea is currently part of China.

22:27, August 9, 2013 (UTC)

For ****'s sake Dean! Vivaporius: "I don't need a slogan" 23:13, August 9, 2013 (UTC)

Changed. By the way, I checked each and every post of Normandy from 1773 (15 years from the last year) to 1788. Move it up to 1774 for 1789, and you get the same result. Vivaporius: "I don't need a slogan" 23:59, August 9, 2013 (UTC)

Your motive cant be 5, alse he dont have recent wars, oe expansion, also his motive is 10, and you miss more things Quashi (talk) 00:20, August 10, 2013 (UTC)

It takes 15 years for the effects of a penalty to pass, hence the reason I stated going back to 1773-4 for the information needed to fight the Netherlands. The Netherlands fought a war against Wales in 1782-3. My motive is 5 as the Yoruba are fighting for lands that belong to members of the same ethnic group, and they are trying to bring the Yoruba under a single banner. Also, I'm fighting Benin, not Normandy, so Normandy doesn't get +10. Finally, Normandy expanded Benin and Mogadishu each and every year save the two they were fighting against Wales in. So no, I didn't miss anything. Vivaporius: "I don't need a slogan" 00:57, August 10, 2013 (UTC)

So you can claim all of Normandy because you declared war on my vassal? And you seem to be vassalizing my territories quite quickly despite it having to take a few turns to vassalize.Cookiedamage (talk) 01:22, August 11, 2013 (UTC)

Allow me to fix that then. And I'll lengthen the period as well. Vivaporius: "I don't need a slogan" 01:44, August 11, 2013 (UTC)

Wait, you're conquering Normandy? WTF. I have no problem with you colonizing the rest of the world, but Europe isn't exactly the place where one builds a colony/vassal. Unless they're already there...

01:47, August 11, 2013 (UTC)

Why not? Why can European nations conquer non-European ones but not the other way around? Isn't exactly fair. Also, Kosaga saw no issue with it and considered it fair for Ethiopia to take the land as it is the victor. Heck, and we're not the only ones who think that. Besides I did it since Cookie didn't really think defeating the vassal and taking his whole nation was right, so I did this. On the vassal note, don't let OTL history dictate what can and cannot happen. Europe isn't a place where vassals can be built because it hasn't happened for a very long time. Today that has changed. New history time. Also, Europe is the place to build vassals, as any history book about European history and warfare from 1000-1890 will show you. And I didn't exactly wake up and decide, "Hey, I guess I'll invade Europe today!" I thought long and hard on the matter before making my decision to go after Normandy or its vassals. Vivaporius: "I don't need a slogan" 01:53, August 11, 2013 (UTC)

I didn't mean it exactly like that, like I said, anyone can go anywhere, but I don't see foreign powers making large (yes, this is kinda large) vassals in Europe (or Asia, mostly China and Japan) as plausible. You kinda joined that gang, but eh, whatever. It's kinda too close to home for me.

02:17, August 11, 2013 (UTC)

Well I need only go after the weak like the Europeans did to succeed as they did. It's totally plausible as I had the ships and the men to pull it off. Europe isn't invincible now is it? Since its not, any nation with the will and power to get there can do pretty much anything, as the Europeans did throughout history. And having the Welsh maintain a large vassal next to Ethiopia is too close to home for me as well. Welcome to my club. Vivaporius: "I don't need a slogan" 02:39, August 11, 2013 (UTC)

You miss his motive, and also his military and econmy devep is wrong Quashi (talk) 23:16, August 11, 2013 (UTC)

Updated the algorithm. Thank you for point that out Quashi. But I still win. The war with Germany and Wales ate up the majority of his mil/econ points, meaning that he lost 11 points. Plus, in only one turn does he rebuild his points, but only once. Vivaporius: "I don't need a slogan" 01:56, August 12, 2013 (UTC)

Great Brython

 * Location: +5
 * Tactical Advantage: +6
 * Strength: Great Brython (L), Unionist Netherlands (M), Hobyo-Somalia (MV), Morocco (MV), Welsh Royal Coast (MV), New South Wales (MV), Oldeburg (MV), Liege (MV), Cleves (MV), West Munster (MV), Luxembourg (MV) = 26/12 = 3
 * Military Development: 12/4 = 3
 * Economy: 12/4 = 3
 * Motive: +10
 * Chance: +2
 * Edit Count: 1954
 * UTC Time: 18:41 = 32
 * (1954/32)*pi= 191.82784375
 * Nation Age: +5
 * Population: +28 (25 million)
 * Participation: +10
 * Recent Wars: -4
 * 71

Netherlands/Scandinavian Imperium

 * Location: +5
 * Tactical Advantage: 0
 * Strength: Netherlands (L), Indonesia (MV), Kongo (MV), Warqama (MV) = 10/26 = 0
 * Military Development: 4/12= 0
 * Economy: 4/12= 0
 * Infrastructure: 0
 * Motive: +10
 * Chance: +9
 * Edit Count: 296
 * UTC Time: 21:53 = 30
 * (296/30)*pi= 30.996133
 * Nation Age: +5
 * Population: +7 (2 million)
 * Participation: +10
 * Recent Wars: -11
 * 35

Results
After 3 years, Great Brython can claim up to 28.30% of the Netherlands.
 * ((71/(35+71))*2)-1 = 0.3396
 * (0.3396)*(1-1/(2*3)) = 0.2830 = 28.30%

Discussion on the Dutch War
Launching another war again I see. What's this, the Dutch Civil War? Implementing stories and implausible events in other countries? Oh and your locking other countries from entering the war? Cookiedamage (talk) 11:37, August 10, 2013 (UTC)

Wrong again, and also you are creating rebels and taking all my vassals? wtf man? Quashi (talk) 22:19, August 10, 2013 (UTC)

After the last war, I won either around 10% or 20% of your lands. I have taken a few of your vassals (since they are tiny in comparision to your colonies, and some of your coast. This is under both 20% and, I think, 10%. By taking your coast, I get your population centers, so your population has fallen. What is implausible? I have just called my Amsterdam to the Hague holdings "Unionist Netherlands" since they want a union with Brython. 14:05, August 11, 2013 (UTC).

Great Brython should have a massive penalty (same goes for Netherlands) as they fought in the last war.

18:07, August 11, 2013 (UTC)

Both nations do, Scraw. Brython has a -4 (-1 for aid in the German War, and -3 for the Dutch War) and the Dutch have a -11 (-8 for the German War, and -3 for the Dutch War). 10:24, August 12, 2013 (UTC)

Good algorithm, everything seems in order. <font color="#000000">VonGlusenburg (talk to Von!) 10:35, August 13, 2013 (UTC)

I have updated the algorithim to show the changes. Hailstormer (talk) 13:50, August 13, 2013 (UTC)

Quashi, add me as Military aider, i couldn't gather all of my information of the score. so please?.Sine dei gloriem (talk) 16:31, August 13, 2013 (UTC)

There is no such thing as ML, geniuses.

17:26, August 13, 2013 (UTC)

Motive is only allowed to leaders. So only a few of your nations may have that motive bonus. Vivaporius: "I don't need a slogan" 17:48, August 13, 2013 (UTC)

Discussion continued at: Uncovering a Conspiracy -- Urgent. ~Rex.

I also messed around a little bit to make this more accurate should Scandinavia be ruled ok to be part of the war. I messed with Tactical Advantage (to show Wales as the Defender), Nation Age (to represent the New Imperium and Germanic Rebellions), Motive (To Show Life or Death for Brython and Defend Land for Netherlands). I also then added the industrial algorithim. It turns out the Dutch didn't do quite as well as they thought... ~Rex.

Just realized that there is no such thing as a Defender's Bonus under the Tactical Advantage. Algo reflected to show that change. ~Rex.

I really don't see much wrong with this algo. I think it is done. :D  Imp (Say Hi?!) 21:28, August 16, 2013 (UTC)

I agree with Imp. Though there might be more things the other mods might say. -Kogasa  2013 August 17, 01:20 (CET)

Nothing wrong with this, except not having his vassals fight, but seeing how you have more vassals in the end that will lead to no real change in results. Meaning with the war could just drag in more nations to it but the result will remain the same most likely. There is also the Hail issue, but since he has tried to join too late, he isn't allowed to fight I believe. Combine this 28.30% with the 8% or whatever with the victory of the last war, you get 36.3% meaning the Dutch are overthrown. <font color="#000000">VonGlusenburg (talk to Von!) 09:46, August 17, 2013 (UTC)

Ethiopian Sea Routes


Okay, due to a long lasting issue regarding Ethiopia supposedly be "implausible" and incapable of maintaining its colonies overseas, I've made a map showing Ethiopia proper along with its colonies and vassals, and the sea routes connecting them together. Now, I shall explain, hopefully shortly, how Ethiopia as well as any other major power and hold anything anywhere in the world.

The first issue, is the most important and most annoying problem I hear, and I'm someone else has too. It is "how can you maintain your far-flung territory?" Well I'll tell you. The same why 90% of the world's colonial empires did. Sending ships and materiale to the colony. Duh. But how do I get there? I build ships, put stuff on them, and send them on their way. Double duh. The ocean currents carry them to their destination with minimal resistance, and in the case of Ethiopia, the fleet moves from Ethiopia, to Kenya, around the Cape to Nigeria, and up the rest of the way to Europe. If you look closely at the map, you'll see that the currents would actually work against Europeans vessels, as it flows against them. However, they work with African and East Asian vessels, as they flow with them.

Next part. Why can't Ethiopia or any other non-European nation have a colony wherever they want? France had colonies in Vietnam and India. So why can't it work the other way around? Italy had to get to Ethiopia by sailing all the way around Africa, just to get to Ethiopia, before the building of the Suez Canal. Besides, Ethiopia is an industrialized nation, as are many Asian nations nearby. I've been told that the game isn't Eurocentric, but it appears that that isn't the case. If this game is suppose to be alternate history, why can't any other empires, strong industrialized empires, build coloneis the same way Europe did? Is it because it never happened, and any attempts to do so are considered anamolies? Sounds like sticking to the status quo to me. Vivaporius: "I don't need a slogan" 00:00, August 11, 2013 (UTC)

I completely agree that Ethiopia has the rights to colonise, but I do just want to say something. Whilst the Europeans otl did colonise pretty much everywhere they considered "inferior", there are some notable exceptions: Japan, Tonga, Ethiopia (until Mussolini) and China. China was used much like a colony through unequal treaties and granting of extraterritoriality, but it still kept its sovereignity. Now what exactly am I trying to say by this? Well, the Europeans colonised places with governmental and social systems which they considered so unlike their own that they were "inferior". However, in the aforementioned places, the system of government and the general social system was close enough to the European that they were accepted as independent (or at least, not overtly colonised). So, putting this concept into the game, it makes sense for Ethiopia to colonise places which are culturally dissimilar and therefore "inferior". However, Europe, which is (unless I'm mistaken) farily similar to Ethiopia in terms of industrialisation and power, would, I think, be Ethiopia's Japan, China and Tonga.

I hope that that makes sense. It is just my opinion and again, I agree that it only makes sense if Ethiopia does colonise in TTL. Callumthered (talk) 10:43, August 11, 2013 (UTC)

Same with me. My colonies in South America are pretty easy to reach using the sea currents. All I have to do is let shipsset of from Brunei and Mataram and from there they would take the Equatorial Counter to get to the South American colonies. Much easier than the Europeans. Imp (Say Hi?!) 13:53, August 11, 2013 (UTC)

Exactly! We only say its implausible because none of the non-European nations ever had the chance to prove that it could be, and indeed is, plausible. Vivaporius: "I don't need a slogan" 17:10, August 11, 2013 (UTC)

Former Colonies
For those that don't know, there was an early discussion about posing a limit to playing former colonies. The discussion (seen here) originally led it to being able to control only one colony at a time. Later, Lurker had decided to raise it to three (seen here).

After another short discussion, Von decided to up the number to five. So, the most former colonies you can play as is five at a time now. -Kogasa  2013 August 11, 18:33 (CET)

Just to explain there is a limit because when you all start having your vassals, colonies and stuff declaring independence, things can get very confusing for other players, mods and map-making. We already have a lot of confusion and the game is hard enough, without players each running 7 or 8 separate nations. Look at the situation with my nations breaking up at the moment. Rather confusing no? <font color="#000000">VonGlusenburg (talk to Von!) 16:54, August 11, 2013 (UTC)

My note of leave
Okay if you haven't heard about it yet, or read into why my recent posts have had all these civil wars going on in them; it is because I am leaving soon. I start my exchange year to Hong Kong in 2 weeks so I really doubt I'll be able to keep playing this game so I am breaking up my nations now.

Now I'm not going away completely, just I shall not be able to play regularly and I also probably won't want to be playing this game rather than enjoying my year in Asia. So I'll still be here from time to time to moderate and I will be keeping a small Arabian Federation rump state too. Its just its not fair to everyone if my large empire goes inactive, so I'm breaking it up and giving some of it to other players where it makes sense. Plus it gives us some more powerful NPCs in case new players want to join the game or as is the case at the moment / coming future, players lose control of their current nations and have to go pick a new one.

I do however reserve the right to be able to re-unify Arabia under the Federation if I do come back to full time playing. This means my nation can bring other Arabian nations back into the Federation, but only if they are NPCs. If they are vassals or something of another player, then obviously I'll negotiate with the player using the normal means.

Furthermore, I will be giving a special bonus to my former nations in the form of a special NPC bonus. Details of which, I will be posting in the coming days. Don't worry its not massive, I just want to reflect that these nations which used to hold a high up position in the geopolitical order of things, so they will be slightly stronger than your average NPC.

Anyway I hope you guys can bare to see a lot less of me lol. <font color="#000000">VonGlusenburg (talk to Von!) 16:54, August 11, 2013 (UTC)

OK Von, have a great vacation. It'd be really neat to go to Hong Kong, so I a bit envious. Thanks for your willingness to split up your empire to help the common good. By the time you come back, the era of empire will be closing, anyways. I agree you should have a large NPC bonus - if people aren't happy with the NPCs you free, they shouldn't have to take it out on Arabia proper. Have Fun, <span style="border:3px solid blue; "> <font color="#FF0000" face="Sans-Serif" title="Reximus">Reximus   <font color="#FF0000" face="Sans-Serif" title="Talk">Maximus  10:21, August 12, 2013 (UTC) Well I don't think that's fair to all the poor chaps who take a short break and come back to see their nation in shambles. :(

16:41, August 12, 2013 (UTC)

Well if they don't tell us they're not coming back then its not our problem. Not to mention that they could do this if they wanted. And my empire is in shambles now. I've given up huge areas to other nations e.g. I lost all my colonies and vassals. <font color="#000000">VonGlusenburg (talk to Von!) 18:16, August 12, 2013 (UTC)

Uncovering a Conspiracy -- Urgent
<p style="margin-top:1em;margin-bottom:1em;">I am sorry, but none of this is valid. The war ended in 1791, so if you were to edit any of this, it would take a whole new war. It is currently 1793. I see that you posted in 1791 that you declared war, but this occured AFTER the new turn and AFTER I posted that the war ended, so you are too slow. These results do NOT stand. Furthermore, they aren't even right. But that is besides the point. The war ended, and you were too slow to edit yourself into this war.

This algorthim was closed after 2 events: 1) The War ended in-Game. This happened in 1791 BEFORE the Scandinavians joined the war. 2) The Algorithim was approved by a Mod. This happened on August 13.

Therefore, the algorithim was closed. We need to get this issue solved ASAP. People are playing as my nation, which is not right.

According to history... As you can see, Quashi erased my post. Just up and got rid of it, without mod approval of his algorithim. And, you can also see, On 6:55 August 13 when we should be playing 1792, Hailstormer went back and added a move in a turn in which he did not post, thereby changing the game.
 * 15:18, August 13, 2013‎  Quashi  (Talk | contribs) ‎ . . (387,355 bytes) (-5,175)‎ . .  (→‎1792) (undo)
 * 06:55, August 13, 2013‎  Hailstormer  (Talk | contribs) ‎ . . (380,343 bytes) (+2,597)‎ . .  (→‎1791) (undo)
 * 05:42, August 13, 2013‎  Reximus55  (Talk | contribs) ‎ . . (377,330 bytes) (+5,006)‎ . .  (→‎1792) (undo)
 * 14:01, August 12, 2013‎  Collie Kaltenbrunner  (Talk | contribs) ‎ . . (354,298 bytes) (+1,495)‎ . .  (→‎1791) (undo)

Also, in the list above, I included my post which I used to end the war. Any announcements of "Hey, I am joining" had to come before that time period anyways. From the point where I posted that in 1792, the war is over. Any changes to the algo after that were not legitimate. Furthermore, since Quashi just decided to erase my post, I had no way to conduct outside diplomacy and ensure that my nation would stay afloat. (I am sure I could've brought my huge stack of alliances to the table.)

Also, be sure to note that Hailstormer editted the past post, not say 15 minutes late (which is understandable), but a whole 16 hours late! This wasn't just a mistake - it was an intentional ploy at changing events by editting past turns.

I also did a bit of rooting around Hailstormer's talk page, and the pages of those he has came into contact with in the past day. I hope you find this as interesting as I do, cause it really tells the story of what went on, in what time frame.


 * Von i have declared war on Great Brython and updated the algorithim, please can you have a look when you are free to make sure it is correct. Thanks in advance. Hailstormer (talk) 14:01, August 13, 2013 (UTC)

Now, Hailstormer declared war in 1791, supposedly. (Note: This was after the turn ended). How is it that he could've been on at the start of a new turn (14:01) on August 13, but completely ignore deadlines for the start of the 1792 turn.

Proposed Outcome
Thanks for your time, but for now, I will be posting under the assumption that the mods are reasonable, kindly human beings (which has been true so far), and be posting as Great Brython and the Netherlands.
 * 1) My turn to 1792 should be returned to the game text.
 * 2) Hailstormer's post in 1791 should be removed.
 * 3) All edits to the algo AFTER Von Glusenberg announced it was "in order" should be reverted.
 * 4) Results of the previous, rightful, algo should be in place. (This means Scandinavia is not in the conflict, and the Netherlands are now Welsh 100%)
 * 5) Hailstormer should be banned from PMII for about 3 months. He proved implausibility with the Koori Trading Company, and he now proved unwillingness to follow rules.
 * 6) Quashi should be allowed to take over Scandinavian Imperium following Hail's ban from the game.

Thank you,  09:36, August 14, 2013 (UTC)

Discussion
I did a bit more rooting about (sorry for all this invasion of privacy, but doesn't everyone know anything online is available to anyone?). So, here is another thing I have discovered, this time from Quashi's talk page.


 * After talking to Von, reading up on algos, and spending a fair amount of time with a calculator, i have decided to join the ongoing war on your side, so that we can topple Great Brython and secure the future of our two states. Please message me as soon as possible, so we can confirm this plan of action. Hailstormer (talk) 12:11, August 13, 2013 (UTC)


 * I have declared total war on Wales with all of my states launching full invasions to aid you. I hope that this shall be rememebered fondly by us both. Hailstormer (talk) 14:02, August 13, 2013 (UTC)

Now, this further proves the point I was trying to make. Hail went on after the turn had closed, and then did a bunch of relatively contemptable acts to change the game. The time which Hail posted on Quashi's page is the start of 1793, for a point of reference. 10:23, August 14, 2013 (UTC)

Now, I know I already said that the algo isn't even ok. Here I will show proof that even after Iceland's "heroic" entry, I would've won. With the Industrialization bonuses, heres is a more accurate depiction of results.


 * 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)

So, Wales is defending against the Scandinavian Imperium. The highest color of Great Brython is Yellow. The lowest color of the Imperium is Blue. As per the rule, Wales is 4 stages higher than the Imperium. I have messed with the algo a bit, to show a more realistic outcome.

(PS. Can a mod check how many times Scandinavia posted? I highly doubt it was all 30 turns.) ~Rex.

In regards to the algorithm bonus. You are Yellow. But you are only on Stage 2. The colours show when you reach each stage. However this rule has not been used to date...

I dont want to prematurely say anything on the issue of the algorithm and the main page but this is a clear cut case of metagaming on Hail's side and a gross misuse of editing powers on Quashi's side. Scandinator (talk) 11:21, August 14, 2013 (UTC)

I get how you don't want to say anything just yet, but can I continue posting as if Scandinavia never got involved in the war which, for my puroposes, I am under the opinion that they did not get involved in the war? This way I can be prepared should the ruling be in my favor (which I think it will be!). Can you also go ahead and add back my post of  1792 (the one Quashi removed). Thanks, ~Rex.

Told you rex, your over expansionism is the reason they are going to try to take you down. even if you aren't defeated it will be a certain reason to end your nation, by the netherlands or other nations. Sine dei gloriem (talk)

Rex when I said the algorithm was in order, it had the Dutch winning by 26% not you winning. Look at the page when I said this.

Also there is no industrialization bonus. When 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. You are Green coloured and so is the Netherlands, Norway and Sweden. Denmark is yellow. Iceland is blue. Therefore GB is not more industrialized than the Dutch-Scandinavian collation as the majority of their coalition is the same level as you, and 1 nation is a stage higher, but 1 nation is a stage lower. Ergo no bonus.

After all these changes and stuff, I think it's quite obvious that I no longer find the algorithm to be in good order. <font color="#000000">VonGlusenburg (talk to Von!) 15:11, August 14, 2013 (UTC)

I am not exactly following that algorythm, so i can't say nothing about it.but i agree with the first two points.--Collie Kaltenbrunner (talk) 15:55, August 14, 2013 (UTC)

I agree with the first points but the others are only attempts by Rex to weaken The netherlands, and Rex, like i said, your over expansionism is not going to bring much good things to you in game. Sine dei gloriem (talk)

I must agree with Rex on this matter in that it clearly shows that Hail was metagaming, and effectively cheated to take over Great Brython. Sorry Hail and Quashi, but it appears that Rex is right on many of those points. Also, I agree with Sine's point Rex. Your over expansion will be your downfall if you continue on your current course. Vivaporius: "I don't need a slogan" 21:11, August 14, 2013 (UTC)

I see, Von, about your approval of Quashi's algo that gave him the +26%, but I'd like to argue a few points. Thanks, and please pay more attention (for now) about the Scandinavians illegally joining the war rather than the algo. The algo can be fixed at a later date, but for now I want to verify that my nation wasn't wiped by the Scandinavians. 22:18, August 14, 2013 (UTC)
 * 1) For Tactical Advantage, Brython should have a +6, with the Netherlands having a +2.
 * 2) Indonesia and Kongo never declared war. They should be dropped to (MV).
 * 3) Unionist Netherlands should just be (M) since they are in Personal Union, not vassalhood.
 * 4) Mil. dev and Econ. dev should just be representative of the Dutch, since Indonesia and Kongo never declared war.
 * 5) The Dutch motive should be +10, not +30, since the Indonesian and Kongolese vassals never declared war.
 * 6) Brython should have a +28 for population, since 25 is 10 * greater than 2. Meanwhile, the Dutch population should be adjusted for the loss of Indonesia/Kongo.

I agree as well, but I think three months is too long of a ban. How's five days sound? -Kogasa  2013 August 15, 00:23 (CET)

I have to agree with Rex. Hail clearly metagamed in this conflict. Kongo and Indonesia never declared war, and Scandinavia + Iceland together has a population of roughly 15 million. (Mostly Denmark and Sweden.)

22:40, August 14, 2013 (UTC)

Based on what I stated, and what Scraw went ahead and said, I editted the algorithim back to where (I think) it should be. These results show 26.22% gains in 3 years in favor of Brython. Add the 8% that was (at the very minimum) verified after the last war, and Brython has 34.22% gains in the past 30 years, allowing for complete annexation. ~Rex.

Agreed. CrimsonAssassin- "I have special eyes" 04:41, August 15, 2013 (UTC)

Now after spending a fair amount of time reading through Rex's claims, and everyone's views on them, i believe it would be unfair if neither me or Quashi got the chance to present our side. I admit i posted late, which was solely down to unfortunate circumstances. Do not mistake this for an excuse. It is just an explanation. However, i had no idea how long it had been since the new turn had started. This brings me onto my next point, the idea that there was some grand conspiracy at work, which is laughable. It was just a combination of bad timing, and what can only be described as a very active imagination. In terms of Quashi's choice to remove Rex's post, i have this to say. By posting what he did, Rex clearly violated the rule on accepting the results of an algorithm. As at this point, Von had confirmed the algorithm with Quashi making gains of 26% from Great Brython. Now, as we have seen with Rex, we are all quite defensive of our nations. So i think it would be fair, that when Quashi saw Rex disregarding the rules in such a blatant way, that he reacted the way he did. Hailstormer (talk) 10:09, August 15, 2013 (UTC)


 * I agree w. Hail. While I can't speak for Quashi's random edit change, I can speak for Hail. Apparenly the algorithm (which was apparently confirmed by Von) was violated by rex, so that's that. As for Hail's delay in declaring war, I don't see how that's such a big deal, since only according to Rex was it a delay of over 16 hrs. Another thing to mention is I've seen many people edit turns way past the time when that turn ends, eg. editing 1700 when 1701 already began, thus advancing nations' economies/militaries/ambitions when the turn has already ended. I don't have hardcore photographic proof of this happening but I'm sure it happens frequently. Cookiedamage (talk) 10:17, August 15, 2013 (UTC)


 * Well a lot of people (self included) put up their posts in the hour after thee turn ends, which I beleive is legal (there's something in the rules about not being able to edit any turn other than the most recent previous.) If Im in error on this let me know. Granted a rule clarification is needed. I've never done a 16 hour late post but I know a lot of people who miss the cutoff post one hour late. That's not a comment on the Brythonic-Dutuch-Scandanavian fracase just a not on that particular angle. Commandante Lemming (talk) 16:04, August 15, 2013 (UTC)

"For Tactical Advantage, Brython should have a +6, with the Netherlands having a +2." Yep okay I missed that part. But the Indonesian and Kongolese vassals should be in this war. If Quashi wants to have those nations in the war then he is perfectly able to do so, as they are his nations and his home nation does face destruction too. There is no rule saying in-game actions need to perfectly reflect what goes on the talk page, and we have many other wars where nations haven't declared war in game but are still on the algorithm. This is usually due to things changing with the result so people can't reflect things that well. <font color="#000000">VonGlusenburg (talk to Von!) 11:45, August 15, 2013 (UTC)


 * If that is the claim, then all of my vassals ought to be added to the war effort, which would greatly skew the results in my favor. Its the whole 1 leader per one player in a non-coalition war agreement, I thought.

Still do not understand why Rex will allow Colonial Empire bonus and I dont when mine is even bigger. Besides, if he is attacking, how can he put 10 of motive? Your Unionist Netherlands, are created by you, and therefore will always go with (MV) It seems unfair that Hail can not be in the algorithm. Also, if I remember who wins the war will decide how many years lasts. At the beginning of the algorithm were 5, but after seeing that it was not necessary was changed to 3. Also do not understand all that Rex complains when he did this the last war. Even after creating an algorithm that was wrong and put as leaders to countries who never said they were at war, and neither wanted to be, adding information on other people's posts, and even changing the algorithm when Von had said the result. I think Rex for his failures and his conduct should receive the ban, you are creating many conflicts and many say it to you.. When I delete your post already were marked with a line over, and things that You put, completely contradicted the result, and at that point there is nothing more to say. That posting after the turns end is nothing strange I do not think is anyone here who has not done so. Other than that I agree with Von in what he says. With all this I think Rex should stop their arguments and accept the algorithm. Quashi (talk) 17:15, August 15, 2013 (UTC)

Any clue how long this is going to take to resolve from the mods?

I'm not in on this, but all of these wars and wars of reprisal - and more importantly the repeated algorithm disputes, are preventing the rest of us from playing a game that's supposed to be about writing history. Just felt I had to offer that on behalf of everyone who's not involved in this mess as it's preventing the game from moving forward. I know that's not constructive but it had to be said.

Commandante Lemming (talk) 19:40, August 15, 2013 (UTC)

A few of my thoughts, about Hail and Quashi's posts. Towards Hail, I am sorry for whatever bad, unfortunate events (meant sincerely), but I have often foregone posting when I am an hours late, or more. This actually just happened to be today, when my computer had to be reset, and it ended up taking an extra hour and a half. Stuff happens, but you cannot alter the present game with last minute posts. To Quashi, it may seem unfair that he cannot be in the algo, but he posted late. The Unionist Netherlands were the result of my 8% (or more, still technically in dispute) gains from the First Brytho-Dutch War. As such, they are in Personal Union, and they get a (M). As for Indonesia/Kongo, if it can be assumed that a vassal declares war, well then, toss in all of my vassals as well. It just doesn't make sense, so lets assume they cannot be in this war. 23:11, August 15, 2013 (UTC)

Ok, so I am gonna be gone for this upcoming weekend. As a result, I will not be able to carry on this conversation. I think we can all agree on a few things: We can look to who has stated what. We pretty much have Hail and Quashi vs everbody on this talk page, with Von focusing on the algo. more than on the metagaming aspect (nothing wrong with this).
 * 1) Scandinavian Imperium never declared war.
 * 2) All his posts he made on time should be replaced by a message of his choice.
 * 3) All his posts that he made late should be erased.
 * 4) The Dutch didn't get 33%.
 * 5) He should stop posting like he won, when he didn't.
 * 6) The First Brytho-Dutch War algo (up on the Talk Page or here) is accurate.
 * 7) Amounts to 26.75% annexation.
 * 8) Wales takes Unionist Netherlands, West Munster, Luxembourg, Liege, and Cleves.
 * 9) The Second Brytho-Dutch War algo (up on Talk Page or here) is accurate as well.
 * 10) Amounts to 28.30% annexation.
 * 11) 26.75+28.30=55.05>33.33
 * 12) 100% Annexation is Possible

I will be back in 10 hrs, but after that, I will be gone, so please be reasonable. :D 12:28, August 16, 2013 (UTC)

Byzantine
Can I change my nation again? I want to be the Byzantine Empire. Yank 14:24, August 15, 2013 (UTC)

Get rid of Lithuania first.--Collie Kaltenbrunner (talk) 15:35, August 15, 2013 (UTC)

*cough* Prussia *cough*  Imp (Say Hi?!) 15:42, August 15, 2013 (UTC)

Airlinesguy has the Hellenic League aka Greece, Crete, Cyprus, West Anatolia, Thrace and Cyrencia. Scandinator (talk) 16:34, August 15, 2013 (UTC)

If you, uh, fight a fixed war with me wherein Lithuania falls to Germanica, I think that's an easy way to get rid of Lithuania. 17:49, August 15, 2013 (UTC)

Do it. Thanks to Prussia playing as Lithuania is terrible. Yank 20:03, August 15, 2013 (UTC)

I feel your pain. Also, just post in the game that Lithuania invades Germanica and fails miserably, allowing Germanica to capture the whole nation. Something along those lines should seal its fate.

20:06, August 15, 2013 (UTC)

That sounds like a very good plan. I guarantee it. Vivaporius: "I don't need a slogan" 18:22, August 16, 2013 (UTC)

FeudalPlague stole the Byzantines after I stated my intention to switch in advance. I'm still taking the Byzantines, because I see nothing that says "can I take the Byzantines" from him.Yank 01:44, August 19, 2013 (UTC)

Im very sure that whoever had their sig down first gets the nation.. regardless.. i was told the byzantines were open i took the byzantines.. then someone comes and say "but i called them" as far as i know you cant call nations. and even if you do you cant remove somebody else sig from the nation their playing as.. i beat him to it fair and square. &#35;LivinLikeFeudal (talk) 02:10, August 19, 2013 (UTC)

You're still officially the Navaho. And everyone knows that you can't take another nation while you are still playing one. I got rid of Lithuania before I transferred nations. You haven't done anything of the sort with the Navaho, therefore you are still playing them. Yank 02:12, August 19, 2013 (UTC)

I was told to change nations by 2 seperate people. so i changed. Ive been over this with Kogasa as well. &#35;LivinLikeFeudal (talk) 02:14, August 19, 2013 (UTC)

Choose another then. But I'm not budging. Yank 02:18, August 19, 2013 (UTC)

I was there first are you kidding me? your seriously about to act like a 10 year old? &#35;LivinLikeFeudal (talk) 02:19, August 19, 2013 (UTC)

Neither of you can do it. Cyprus entered a union with the Byzantines a while ago.

02:21, August 19, 2013 (UTC)

Airline's recent posts show no such thing. I'm also sure that Cyprus itself is too small to keep the Byzantines under control, so I'm going to keep posting.Yank 02:26, August 19, 2013 (UTC)

Neu Berlin
Total: 66 * 1.2 (industrial bonus) = 79
 * Location: +4
 * Tactical Advantage: +1
 * Strength: Neu Berlin (L), Vinland (M) = 7/4 = 1.75 ~ +2
 * Military Development: +12/1 = +12
 * Economy: 0/1 = 0
 * Infrastructure: +0
 * Expansion: -1
 * Motive: +3
 * Chance: +4
 * Edit Count: 6687
 * UTC Time: 1957 = 1*9*5*7 = 315
 * 315/6687*pi = 0.1479
 * Nation Age: +5
 * Population: +27
 * Participation: +10
 * Recent Wars: -1

Cree Confederacy
Total: 33
 * Location: +5
 * Tactical Advantage: 0
 * Strength: Cree Nation (L): 4/7 = 0
 * Military Development: 1/12 = 0
 * Economy: 1/0 = +1
 * Infrastructure: +1
 * Expansion: 0
 * Motive: +10
 * Chance: +7
 * Nation Age: -5
 * Population: +4
 * Participation: +10
 * Recent Wars: 0

Result
((79/(33+79))*2)-1 = 0.41071428571

41.07*(1-1/(2*3)) = 34.225%

The Cree Confederacy is defeated by Neu Berlin after three years of war, allowing the whole nation to be annexed by Neu Berlin.

Discussion
Should have made my move sooner. >.< Vivaporius: "I don't need a slogan" 21:54, August 16, 2013 (UTC)

Lol sorry. I saw the chance and took it.

23:29, August 16, 2013 (UTC)

God dammit, the NPC bonus preference goes infrastructure>economy>military and since the Cree Confederacy has been around since 1791 and this war started in 1795 that gives us 5 years of Cree development. Meaning 2 years of infrastructure & economy and 1 military. These are then divided by 2 as they aren't special NPCs. I have fixed the algorithm to show the NPC bonus correctly. Also if you are destroying the Cree Confederacy then they get a life or death motive obviously.

Also you done the industrialization bonus wrong. Neu Berlin is yellow, therefore it is stage 2. Cree are unindustrialised so they are stage 0. Therefore you are 2 stages higher meaning it is a multiplier of 1.2 not 1.8; and 1.8 is impossible since there are only 7 stages of industrialization. Don't cheat so blatantly in the future or I'll lose my temper. God knows what your results algorithm is meant to be, because that is not like how it's meant to be done and you know that.

Anyway its fixed now and not like it makes a lot of difference to the outcome. <font color="#000000">VonGlusenburg (talk to Von!) 09:14, August 17, 2013 (UTC)

Portugal
Total: 92 * 1.1 = 101.2 ~ 101
 * Location: 2
 * Tactical Advantage: +5
 * Strength: Portugal (L +4): 4/4 = +1
 * Military Development: +18
 * Economy: +12
 * Infrastructure: +0
 * Expansion: 0
 * Motive: +5
 * Chance: +7
 * Edit Count: 4764
 * UTC Time: 21:00= 2x1x0x0 = 2
 * 4764/2 x pi = 7483.2737
 * Nation Age: +5
 * Population: +27
 * Participation: +10
 * Recent Wars: 0

"Free Brazil"
Total: 25 * 1.5 = 37.5 ~ 38
 * Location: +5
 * Tactical Advantage: +1
 * Strength: Free Brazil (L): 4/4 = +1
 * Military Development: 0
 * Economy: 0
 * Infrastructure: +1
 * Expansion: 0
 * Motive: +10
 * Chance: +3
 * Nation Age: -10
 * Population: +4
 * Participation: +10
 * Recent Wars: 0

Result
((101/(38+101))*2)-1 = 0.45323741007

(45.32)*(1-1/(2*2)) = 33.99%

After 2 years of war, Portugal defeats Free Brazil and annexes the small rogue state of raiders

Discussion
Free Brazil has been around for 1 year so it gets 1 NPC bonus point for infrastructure and nothing else. Also Portugal gets an industrialization bonus of 1.1 since Free Brazil isn't industrialized. I fixed the rest and did the results too. <font color="#000000">VonGlusenburg (talk to Von!) 09:26, August 17, 2013 (UTC)

I was going to ask you this.Since that industrialization table or the rules don't mention nothing about it, how am i supposed to know how the industrialization bonuses work?--Collie Kaltenbrunner (talk) 13:05, August 17, 2013 (UTC)

They do, read the first paragraph of the [http://althistory.wikia.com/wiki/Talk:Principia_Moderni_II_(Map_Game)#Industrial_Algorithm_Modifiers_and_Industrial_Era_areas_and_rates. Industrial Algorithm Modifiers and Industrial Era areas and rates section]. Says 10%, which is 1.1 in the algorithm because of maths. <font color="#000000">VonGlusenburg (talk to Von!) 09:52, August 19, 2013 (UTC)

Kingdom of Tanimbarkai
Total: 41
 * Location: +4
 * Tactical Advantage: +1
 * Strength: Tanimbarkai (L), Saxony (M), Bavaria (S) = 9/4 = +2
 * Military Development: 10/3 = +3
 * Economy: 10/3 +3
 * Infrastructure: 0
 * Expansion: -1
 * Motive: +5
 * Chance: +3
 * Edit Count: 2,047
 * UTC Time: 05:40 = 20
 * 20/2047*pi=0.0306946033570103
 * Nation Age: -5 (because it became a Saxon vassal)
 * Population: +17
 * Participation: +10
 * Recent Wars: -1

Sumba
Total: 26
 * Location: +5
 * Tactical Advantage: 0
 * Strength: Sumba (L) = 4/9 = 0
 * Military Development: 3/10 = 0
 * Economy: 3/10 = 0
 * Infrastructure: 0
 * Expansion: 0
 * Motive: +10
 * Chance: +1
 * Nation Age: -5
 * Population: +5
 * Participation: +10
 * Recent Wars: 0

Result
((41/(26+41))*2)-1 = 0.22388 = 22.29%

Tanimbarkai may claim up to 23.52% of Sumba.

If the war lasts 1 year, they may claim 11.19% of Sumba.

Discussion
I am not sure how to do the Chance scores, or the Military, Economy or Infrastructure scores for Sumba. And I don't know the population of either nation. This is the first algorithm I think I've ever done myself, hehe. Callumthered (talk) 11:00, August 17, 2013 (UTC)

I'll look over the algorithm for you. Vivaporius: "I don't need a slogan" 14:57, August 17, 2013 (UTC)

Thank you, and huzzah for the result! Callumthered (talk) 21:30, August 17, 2013 (UTC)

Fixed the algo, because it was calculated wrong in the results section.

Invitees

 * Germanica:
 * UKA: DS|Im Coocoo for Cocoa Puffs!! 15:45, August 17, 2013 (UTC)
 * Lakota: Eiplec - ಠ_ಠ (talk) 04:46, August 18, 2013 (UTC)
 * Ethiopia: Flag of the Hurian Federation.png Vivaporius: "I don't need a slogan" 16:22, August 17, 2013 (UTC)
 * Mayans (and Apache): CourageousLife (talk) 17:56, August 17, 2013 (UTC)
 * Italia:
 * Mononobe Shogunate:
 * China:
 * Russia:-Lx (leave me a message) 17:02, August 18, 2013 (UTC)
 * Scandanavian Imperium:

Discussion
Germanica and its associated Dominions are not interested in any treaties. Also, don't draw  borders willy nilly and try to use rivers. Germanica will not sign this territory and does not expect to be bound by these terms. Germanica advises everyone else on the continent to do the same.

17:15, August 17, 2013 (UTC)

We ask that you join the conference, you gain so much by joining than by being on your own DS|Im Coocoo for Cocoa Puffs!! 17:21, August 17, 2013 (UTC)

Governor-General Satomi Ryūnosuke of Kasodani and Shogun Mononobe Kiyohito agrees with Germanica. Satomi Ryūnosuke also mentions that Kasodani will stop expanding by 1800. -Kogasa  2013 August 17, 19:26 (CET)

The Mayan Empire agrees with Germanica and Japan. However, if the map were to be ratified, the Mayans believe that the majority of the land should go to the three native nations - the Mayans, the Apache, and the Lakota. CourageousLife (talk) 18:00, August 17, 2013 (UTC)

Despite sharing common beliefs with the Mayans on this matter, Neu Berlin argues that the expansion abilities of the Lakota is limited due to their technological inferiority.
 * ​The Mayans concede to Neu Berlin. This fact is true.

18:03, August 17, 2013 (UTC)

Actually the Lakota have been given modern tech by Antillia. DS|Im Coocoo for Cocoa Puffs!! 18:18, August 17, 2013 (UTC)

You're not allowed to do that. They have to follow the industrialization chart. Pay attention.

18:20, August 17, 2013 (UTC)

How is that not allowed? Show me the rule. Wen i was Lakota you were all for giving me the tech if i became your vassal. DS|Im Coocoo for Cocoa Puffs!! 18:22, August 17, 2013 (UTC)

It's not allowed. Apache is my vassal, but they can't industrialize until 1840. CourageousLife (talk) 18:28, August 17, 2013 (UTC)

That was before I knew.

18:29, August 17, 2013 (UTC)

You do know that Germanica wouldn't get the pacific coast the map shows, It is more likely I (France) or China would gain it through colonialism,before any german set foot in the territory. Sine dei gloriem (talk) 20:47, August 17, 2013 (UTC)


 * Wanna bet?


 * 23:12, August 18, 2013 (UTC)

The Most Holy Emperor of Imperium Africana agrees with Germanica and Japan in that the treaty limits the growth of Imperial realms on the continent. However, while we are more than happy to back the claims of Antillia, we cannot allow a treaty to stifle the growth of our colonies. We are, though, only interested in the northern regions of the continent. Vivaporius: "I don't need a slogan" 22:38, August 17, 2013 (UTC)

I know I am not invited (and don't wanna be), but I am here to tell you that I sold the Dutch land to Russia (now DeanSims) when I won it.

Why is this called the Montreal Conference anyway? The Russians not the French colonized OTL Quebec so it won't exist or have a different name...

Anyway I recommend using the Mississippi, Missouri, Ohio, Colorado and Arkansas rivers as your borders. Here is a map to help you guys out build a border based on these rivers. <font color="#000000">VonGlusenburg (talk to Von!) 09:50, August 19, 2013 (UTC)

Aquitaine
Total: 42+chance
 * Location: 1
 * Tactical Advantage: 1
 * Strength: Aquitaine (LV +3), Angoulême (MV +2),Occitania (MV +2) Haute Bourgogne (MV +2),Basse Bourgogne (MV +2) Muisca (MV +2), New Judea (MV +2) =15/4 = 4...
 * Military Development: +26/18 = 1
 * Economy: 0
 * Infrastructure: 0
 * Expansion: 0
 * Motive: +3
 * Chance:
 * Edit Count:
 * UTC Time:
 * Nation Age: +5, +5, +5, 0, 0
 * Population: +7??
 * Participation: 10
 * Recent Wars: -1
 * Recent Wars: -1

Total incase of Coalition war:??

Persia
Total: 59+chance
 * Location: +5
 * Tactical Advantage: 0
 * Strength: Persia (L +4)
 * Military Development: 2+16/26 = 0
 * Economy: 2
 * Infrastructure: 3
 * Expansion: -1
 * Motive: 10
 * Chance:
 * Edit Count:
 * UTC Time:
 * Nation Age: 5
 * Population: 9
 * Participation: 10
 * Recent Wars: -2
 * Recent Wars: -2

Discussion
This war is suicide.

02:01, August 18, 2013 (UTC)

Amen to that. Vivaporius: "I don't need a slogan" 13:56, August 18, 2013 (UTC)

Added the other leaders i was planning to add, although i'm not sure if i should add france. Sine dei gloriem (talk) 22:56, August 18, 2013 (UTC)

How can i make a coalition war, i've never done it. Sine dei gloriem (talk) 00:08, August 19, 2013 (UTC)

First, you can't have all that quantity of leaders, as the only thing you did was claim that they were aiding you.this counts as M, not a L.And you can't have a coalition algorythm with your opponent fighting alone.--Collie Kaltenbrunner (talk) 08:42, August 19, 2013 (UTC)

Not sure what we should do if Persa wins, I mean Warman is there player but he seems rather clueless about the game and this war. Plus I can't plausibly see Persia taking the fight to Europe to annex parts of Aquitane... <font color="#000000">VonGlusenburg (talk to Von!) 10:48, August 19, 2013 (UTC)

Well, you know what we do in cases like this.or used to do.Status quo ante bellum.--Collie Kaltenbrunner (talk) 17:29, August 19, 2013 (UTC)

I thought persias didn't have a player, lol otherwise i would have probably not tried to invade persia, i didn't knew either that you couldn't have a Coalition Algorythm against an opponent fighting alone. but ok. Sine dei gloriem (talk) 23:37, August 19, 2013 (UTC)

Okay so this war ends Status quo ante bellum with both sides not gaining or losing anything after 3 years of war. <font color="#000000">VonGlusenburg (talk to Von!) 14:54, August 20, 2013 (UTC)

Mataram
Total: 95
 * Location: 5
 * Tactical Advantage: 6
 * Strength: Mataram (L), Brunei (M): 10/4 = 3
 * Military Development: 28/1 = 28
 * Economy: 2/2 = 0
 * Infrastructure: 0
 * Expansion: 0
 * Motive: 7
 * Chance: 4
 * Edit Count: 7301
 * UTC Time: 21:07 = 14
 * (7300/14)*pi = 1638.340568
 * Nation Age: 5
 * Population: 28
 * Participation: 10
 * Recent Wars: -1

Jambi
Total: 24
 * Location: 5
 * Tactical Advantage: 0
 * Strength: Jambi (L): 4/10 = 0
 * Military Development: 1/28 = 0
 * Economy: 2/2 = 1
 * Infrastructure: 2
 * Expansion: 0
 * Motive: 10
 * Chance: 0
 * Nation Age: -10
 * Population: 7
 * Participation: 10
 * Recent Wars: 0

Result
Jambi is outgunned. ((95/(95+24))*2) - 1 = 0.59663865. If the war lasts 2 years, the Matarami can claim 44.8%, thereby toppling the Jambese government.

Discussion
Heads up, it is a Welsh protectorate so this war will no doubt become yet another large world war between players. Go on Imp and Rex, go drum up support for your respective sides.... <font color="#000000">VonGlusenburg (talk to Von!) 09:35, August 19, 2013 (UTC)

Little implausible to establish protectorates over the states so quickly. Please, no more world wars. I don't think he will be a fan of them either. Hopefully, he'll break the protectorate. Imp (Say Hi?!) 14:06, August 19, 2013 (UTC)

I ain't signing that. You can keep that to yourselves. Vivaporius: "I don't need a slogan" 15:04, August 19, 2013 (UTC)

As am I. However, I would like to protest the rapid vassalization of Jambi by Wales and argue that Imp has rightfully won the land in this war, and that Wales is not and should not be involved.

19:45, August 19, 2013 (UTC)

I agree. Wales must cease its rapid expansion at once. Vivaporius: "I don't need a slogan" 00:18, August 20, 2013 (UTC)

Mataram
Total: 85
 * Location: 5
 * Tactical Advantage: 6
 * Strength: Mataram (L), Brunei (M): 10/4 = 3
 * Military Development: 24/1 = 24
 * Economy: 2/2 = 0
 * Infrastructure: 0
 * Expansion: 0
 * Motive: 7
 * Chance: 0
 * Edit Count: 7307
 * UTC Time: 22:11 = 4
 * (7307/4)*pi = 5738.904379
 * Nation Age: 5
 * Population: 28
 * Participation: 10
 * Recent Wars: -3

Benkulu
Total: 34
 * Location: 5
 * Tactical Advantage: 0
 * Strength: Jambi (L): 4/10 = 0
 * Military Development: 2/28 = 0
 * Economy: 2/2 = 1
 * Infrastructure: 2
 * Expansion: 0
 * Motive: 10
 * Chance: 4
 * Nation Age: -5
 * Population: 7
 * Participation: 10
 * Recent Wars: 0

Result
((85/(85+34))*2) - 1 = 0.42857142. The Matarami can claim 43% of Benkulu. If the war lasts 3 years, Mataram can claim 35.8% of Benkulu, toppling their government. Obviously, they have learned from Jambi. Still outgunned.

Discussion
Well Collie, I would appreciate if you could update the Map for 1800 like so with Mataram, that would be absolutely spiffing. Thank you. :D  Imp (Say Hi?!) 17:04, August 20, 2013 (UTC)

Borona
Total: 40
 * Location: +4
 * Tactical Advantage: +6
 * Strength: Borona (L), Kenya (M), Eritrea (M) = 10/4 = +3
 * Military Development: 16/5 = +3
 * Economy: 14/5 = +3
 * Infrastructure: 0
 * Expansion: -2
 * Motive: +3
 * Chance: +1
 * Edit Count: 3,007
 * UTC Time: 14:42 = 32
 * 32/3,007*pi=0.0106418357166611
 * Nation Age: +5
 * Population: +7 (10,000,000)
 * Participation: +10
 * Recent Wars: -3

New Oman
Total: 27
 * Location: +5
 * Tactical Advantage: 0
 * Strength: New Oman (L) = 4/10 = +0
 * Military Development: 5/16 = 0
 * Economy: 5/14 = 0
 * Infrastructure: +5
 * Expansion: 0
 * Motive: +5
 * Chance: 0
 * Nation Age: -5
 * Population: +7 (5,000,000)
 * Participation: +10
 * Recent Wars: 0

Result
((41/(27+41)*2)-1  = 0.2058823529411765 (20.58%)

Borona can claim 20.58% of New Oman.

Disscussion
You can't have both military and economy at 15. Everything has to add up right. You only get even numbers for development, and you only get 15 years total. So for example, 7 years military and 8 years economy gives you +14 military and +16 economy. It all has to add up to 30.

20:27, August 21, 2013 (UTC)

But I developed the military and economy at the same time for 15 years. I'm confused, but I'll go with what you say then. Vivaporius: "I don't need a slogan" 21:15, August 21, 2013 (UTC)

Indeed. However, you will have to put in the algorithm the double of the number of years spent on both. Therefore 8 years becomes 16 and 7 years becomes 14. :P  Imp (Say Hi?!) 21:19, August 21, 2013 (UTC)

Even if you do both, you have to pick one for each year. I agree, it's stupid, but that's how the rules are.

21:26, August 21, 2013 (UTC)

That's straight up wierd. Oh well, not like it makes a difference in the algorithm. :) Vivaporius: "I don't need a slogan" 00:11, August 22, 2013 (UTC)

you neglected to put New Oman's population there.--Collie Kaltenbrunner (talk) 07:34, August 22, 2013 (UTC)

No, I'm pretty sure I added " +7 (5,000,000)" for New Oman. While your here though, is there any chance you could added those chances to the map for Burma, who has gone uncolored for decades? Vivaporius: "I don't need a slogan" 14:41, August 22, 2013 (UTC)

Mataram and Brunei
Total: 92
 * Location: 5+5/2 = 5
 * Tactical Advantage: 6
 * Strength: Mataram (L), Brunei (L): 10/4 = 3
 * Military Development: 18+28/2 = 23/1 = 23
 * Economy: 2+2/2 = 2/3 = 0
 * Infrastructure: 0
 * Expansion: 0
 * Motive: 7 + 7
 * Chance: 3
 * Edit Count: 7311
 * UTC Time: 21:41 = 8
 * (7310/8)*pi = 2870.630287
 * Nation Age: 5 + 0/2 = 3
 * Population: 28
 * Participation: 10
 * Recent Wars: -6+0/2 = -3

Lampung
Total: 31
 * Location: 5
 * Tactical Advantage: 0
 * Strength: Jambi (L): 4/10 = 0
 * Military Development: 3/28 = 0
 * Economy: 3/2 = 1
 * Infrastructure: 3
 * Expansion: 0
 * Motive: 10
 * Chance: 0
 * Nation Age: -5
 * Population: 7
 * Participation: 10
 * Recent Wars: 0

Result
The Dakshin Alliance smashes through. The Matarami knew they were tiring so enlisted their close partner Brunei's full forces. Lampung could not stand the assult and fell.

((92/(92+31))*2) - 1 = 0.49593495. In 2 years, the Alliance can claim 37.5% and topple Lampung's government.