Talk:Principia Moderni III (Map Game)

=Resources=

Archives

 * Archive 1
 * Archive 2
 * Archive 3
 * Archive 4

Algorithm Template
Because the current algorithm looks like s***, I've taken it upon myself to do the players a favor and create an algo template that is more becoming of a map game of PMIII's caliber. Enjoy. Vivaporius: "I don't need a slogan" 18:40, February 3, 2014 (UTC)

Nation One (Attacker)
Total: 0
 * Location: 0
 * Tactical Advantage: 0
 * Nations: 0 = 0
 * Military Development: 0
 * Economic Development: 0
 * Expansion: 0
 * Infrastructure: 0
 * Motive: 0
 * Chance: 0
 * Edit count: 0
 * UTC: 0 (0) =
 * Total: 0/0*pi (3.14159265359) =
 * Nation Age: 0
 * Population: 0
 * Participation: +10
 * Number of Troops: 0/0
 * Recent Wars: 0
 * Vassals and Puppets: 0

Nation Two (Defender)
Total: 0
 * Location: 0
 * Tactical Advantage: 0
 * Nations: 0 = 0
 * Military Development: 0
 * Economic Development: 0
 * Expansion: 0
 * Infrastructure: 0
 * Motive: 0
 * Chance: 0
 * Edit count: 0
 * UTC: 0 (0) =
 * Total: 0/0*pi (3.14159265359) =
 * Nation Age: 0
 * Population: 0
 * Participation: +10
 * Number of Troops: 0/0
 * Recent Wars: 0
 * Vassals and Puppets: 0

Result

 * ((Winner/(Loser+Winner))*2)-1 = 0
 * (0)*(1-1/(2*0)) = 0

Map Issues
''' The issues of the previous map shall be cleared after each map to save up space, unless a discussion is still going on. '''

I have gone ahead and spent a ton of time fixing a plethora of Map Issues. To see all of these issues, please compare past maps, but I will also try to list a few of the changes here (of course, I do not remember them all) Thanks for your time, 22:29, April 18, 2014 (UTC)
 * Alexandrian Expansion
 * Oldenburg Colonies
 * Madagasikaran Events
 * Ethiopia
 * Ukrainian States (Fed's proposal)
 * Chinese Expansion/Integration
 * Japanese Expansion
 * Merger of some German states
 * Recoloring Mughal Empire
 * Creation of NPC off Tiwi Island
 * Irish Integration
 * and more...!

Germany is still very far off. Here is what it should look like (ignore surrounding area). Tr0llis (talk) 23:09, April 18, 2014 (UTC)

This is kind of minor, but can Ethiopia be changed to the one from Ms' map? It uses natural boundaries and looks a bit better I think. Tr0llis (talk) 23:21, April 18, 2014 (UTC)

THANK YOU very much for adding Oldenburg's island colonies, I really appreciate it!Callumthered (talk) 23:58, April 18, 2014 (UTC)

Mecklenburg, Ruppin, and Magdeburg should all be Hamburgs color.

It doesn't really matter, but can the borders be taken out of inside the Japanese Fusahito land? They aren't separate states anymore. Thanks, Ozymandias2 (talk) 16:23, April 20, 2014 (UTC)

And there goes another map where this isn't fixed. If the mapmaker could actually check this section that would be great. Tr0llis (talk) 22:40, April 20, 2014 (UTC)

Just as Ukraine was fixed, it needs fixing again. The eastern Ukraine is now a vassal of the Tartary, and should be coloured in the Horde colour. Fed (talk) 01:24, April 21, 2014 (UTC)

The Alyeskan Khaganate consists of Kodiak Island and the Queen Charlotte Islands, but doesn't exist on the map. Could it be added?Krasnoyarsk (talk) 13:29, April 21, 2014 (UTC)

Pskov bought some land off of Novgorod, Pskov's nea borders are on the Pskov Page's map, or exhibit 1, if you want map changes, its the lighter blue within Pskov's borders, also shown here as exhibit 2-Lx (leave me a message) 18:59, April 21, 2014 (UTC)

Georgia and Assyria need prior expansion added to the map. I've included maps for reference. Georgia gained one-sixth of Azerbaijan in a war from 1465-1468, while Assyria expanded 46px into north-central Mesopotamia for 2 turns in 1461 and 1462. Both of the maps are appropriately sized, so you should just be able to drop them straight into the 1480 map. Thanks! TankOfMidgets (talk) 21:44, April 21, 2014 (UTC)

China has annexed Inner Mongolia. The border with the Haixi Jurchens was removed for no reason (the vassal in Manchuria). Taibei (the northernmost area in Taiwan is meant to be apart of Tainan. Sukhotthai is now Ayutthayan. The island of Shikoku is Chinese territory too along with Osaka and another slice of Honshu. There are a couple islands not coloured in too in the Khmer Empire. Scandinator (talk) 08:37, April 22, 2014 (UTC)

THe West Ukrainian people should be Muscovian vassals due to pskov "convincing" Muscovy to influence them in exchange for being lenient with debt payments...although that issue never got sorted out...or ignored...and now somebody else is muscovy...not particularily happy about hat but the other ukraine should be moscow...or not depending on wether or not you decided to change your minds...-Lx (leave me a message) 17:39, April 22, 2014 (UTC)

Ok, so my expansions over the last 10 years have been a little complicated, so I'll post a map of it here. Basically, by 1485, Padang and Sri Vijaya will have been annexed to Ayutthaya proper, as will have part of the Majapahit, after I warred upon them. Aceh stays the same. China gifted Sukhotai to us, so that's a vassal of ours, but also of China's. That's kinda weird. In this map: Ayutthaya proper is in Dark Yellow. Ayutthaya's vassals are in Light Yellow. China is in Light Blue. Sukhothai is in Green.



22:18, April 24, 2014 (UTC)

Ok, so this map change happened in 1465 - like 15 years ago.



Could you please take a note of the changes? Except from Karaman, I wasn't allowed Karaman. :(  Imp (Say Hi?!) 23:10, April 24, 2014 (UTC)

Changes for 1485 Map (stuff between 1480-1485)
I know there is stuff above...but it seems to be older and ignored stuff (sadly). *Alexandria's gains from the Somali Trade Conflict 1482 (picture to the right). 20:05, April 25, 2014 (UTC)

The Toki state is now a vassal of the Fusahito Theocracy Ozymandias2 (talk) 22:07, April 25, 2014 (UTC)

Labelled


These great and wonderful maps have been made and labelled by Scandinator. Please be sure to thank him for his intense dedication and deep-level research that he put into these maps.

Religious Map
If you want to update the map, please list the changes you've made in the Notes section, along with your signature; this enables me to update the color key and change log accordingly, preventing confusion for readers. TankOfMidgets (talk) 19:58, March 24, 2014 (UTC)

The map is now up to date for 1475. TankOfMidgets (talk) 19:48, April 21, 2014 (UTC)

Color Key

All regions are shown according to their plurality religion.

Catholicism is yellow; the Western Church nations are shown in gold, and Catholic states whose churches function independently of the Roman Church are shown in pale yellow. Eastern Orthodoxy is orange; Oriental Orthodox sub-branches are burnt orange. *Reformism is red. Sunni Islam is lime green, Shia Islam is forest green; Ibadiyya Islam is dark green, Assafi Islam is bright green, and Paganistic Islam is mint green. The Mastorava is teal blue, Hinduism is sky blue, and Buddhism is dark blue; the Bon religion is pale blue, and Mongolian Buddhism is grey-blue. Confucianism is purple, while Shintoism is violet. Other "pagan" religions are pink; the Mesoamerican pantheon is light pink, the South American pantheon is hot pink, the North American pantheon is fuchsia, and the African pantheons are all dark pink. Other religions will be added as needed.

Notes Issues and Discussion
 * Added coloration for the Mastorava, Assafi, and Paganist-Islam sects.
 * Switched pale yellow from Sedevacantist to independent-Catholic.
 * Venice is still "Catholic" for the time being, but it will be shown as independent-Catholic when the Venetian player announces that his church takes orders from him instead of Rome.
 * Ayutthaya and its vassals are now Buddhist.
 * Tartary and its vassals are now Mastoravic.

Mod Event Grievances
Just so that it doesn't clutter the page, please post your mod event questions, comments and grievances here. This -should- be archived every five years.

1485


=General Discussion=

Safavid Empire (Attacker)
Total: 75
 * Location: Close to location (+4)= +4
 * Tactical Advantage: High Ground (+2), Siege weapons (+5)= +7
 * Nations: = Safavid Empire (L+5) Mughal Empire (M+3) Southern Chatagai Khandate (M+3)= +11
 * Military Development: Safavids (+6), Mughals (+4), SCK (+4)= 0
 * Economic Development: Safavids (+8), Mughals (+2), SCK (+4)= +14
 * Expansion: -1
 * Motive: Safavid (Attacking to enforce Political Hegemony +7) Mughals (Aiding an Ally +3) = 10
 * Modifiers: Non Democratic Government Supported by People (+4) Troop Morale High (+5)= +9
 * Chance: 6
 * Edit count: 1065
 * UTC: 20:17 (21*17) = 357
 * Total: 1065/357*pi (3.14159265359) = 9.36722689075
 * Nation Age: -5
 * Population: +7
 * Participation: +10
 * Recent Wars: Safavids (-1), Mughals (-1), SCK (-1)= -3
 * Vassals and Puppets: 0

Mansurryia Caliphate (Defender)
Total: 105
 * Location: +5
 * Tactical Advantage: (City walls +4)= +4
 * Nations: Mansurryia Caliphate (L+5), Yemen (M+3), Assyria (+3), Armenia (+3), Ottoman Empire (+3)= +17
 * Military Development: Mansuriyya Caliphate (+8), Yemen (+0), Armenia (+6), Assyria (+6), Ottoman Empire (+8)= +28/14=2
 * Economic Development: Mansuriyya Caliphate (+2) Yemen (+0), Armenia (+6), Assyria (+6), Ottoman Empire (+8)= +22
 * Expansion: -1
 * Motive: Defending Core/ Heartland from possibly fatal attack (+9), Aiding Social/Moral/Ideological/Religious Kinsmen who are being oppressed (+7) Defending territory not owned by nation more than 20 years (+4), Economy (Assyria+Armenia) (+6), Aiding an ally (+3)= +29
 * Modifiers: Non-Democratic government supported by people (+4)= +4
 * Chance: 6
 * Edit count: 9899
 * UTC: 20:17 (21*17)= 357
 * Total: 9899/357*pi (3.14159265359) =87.0668347
 * Nation Age: -5
 * Population: +7
 * Participation: +10
 * Recent Wars: Ottomans (-1)
 * Vassals and Puppets: 0

Result
Discussion Fix it if I did something wrong. PitaKang- My Life for Aiur! En Taro Tassadar 22:44, April 7, 2014 (UTC)

you did, you were only alive 5 turns, yet you somehow pgraded 7 different things, you can only upgrade once a turn.

Added Yemen, and a few others may join in. TBD. PitaKang- My Life for Aiur! En Taro Tassadar 00:30, April 8, 2014 (UTC)

How can it be a possibly fatal attack, it's not even near a possibly fatal attack. Sky Green 24 19:25, April 8, 2014 (UTC)

At this point Pita gets 18%.--Yank 23:28, April 8, 2014 (UTC)

And I remind you again, it shouldn't be defending core from possibly fatal attack, it shouldn't have ever been. Also, the Mughal Empire sent siege weaponry in 1466 so that would be a +5 aye? Sky Green 24 16:23, April 9, 2014 (UTC)

The Ottomans are sending military aid to the Mansuriyya. ChrisL123 (talk) 20:05, April 9, 2014 (UTC)

@Sky: When the Safavids invaded Mesopotamia in 1508, they sacked Baghdad and took it over for themselves. I think that qualifies as a fatal attack. Also added +5 for siege weaponry. PitaKang- My Life for Aiur! En Taro Tassadar 20:52, April 9, 2014 (UTC)

Mansuriyya and Co. takes 22.47% of Persian territory. PitaKang- My Life for Aiur! En Taro Tassadar 20:56, April 9, 2014 (UTC)

Vassalization reminders
Reminder

When it comes to major religions like Christianity or Islam, the main way to vassalize those states if your the opposite or different religion is more leaning towards war unless there are certain conditions. This applies to everyone so in all honesty do not vassalize those areas. Im looking at you Hungary

I made a new section at the bottom of this page for the mod event. Now, I would like to know how focusing on trading in the vassal would lead to muslim resentment. The high amounts of trading does bring christianity and helps it expand very quickly - but I do not see how trading can be something which the opposng religion tries to target as it would lead to many of them going hungry and stuff. Imp (Say Hi?!) 13:08, April 8, 2014 (UTC)

Padang (Attacker, ish)

 * Location: 20 (Ayutthaya: 20, Padang: 20, Kedah (LV))
 * Tactical Adv: 5 (siege equipment)
 * Nations: Padang (LV), Kedah (LV), Ayutthaya (L): 11/5 => 2
 * Mil Dev: 10 =>10
 * Padang: 1 turn: 2
 * Kedah: 1 turn:2
 * Ayutthaya: 3 turns: 6
 * Econ: 25/0 => 25
 * Padang: 1 turn: 2
 * Kedah: 1 turn: 2
 * Ayutthaya: 3 turns: 6
 * Larger Trade Empire: 5
 * Much larger economy: 10
 * Expansion: 0
 * Motive: 5
 * Padang: 7 (Political Hegemony)
 * Kedah: 3 (Aiding an ally)
 * Ayutthaya: 3 (Aiding an ally)
 * Modifiers: 9
 * High Morale: +5
 * Non-Dem Support: +4
 * Chance: 6
 * Edits: 7424
 * UTC time: 10:44 = 440
 * (7424/440)*3.141596 = 53.0672925091
 * Nation Age: +5
 * All Nations are Mature
 * Population: 29
 * Combined Population: 9 digits (8 mil from Ayutthaya, 1 mil each from the other two)
 * Over 10x Opponent Population: 20
 * Recent Wars: 0
 * Participation: 10
 * Number of Troops: 70,000/10,000 => 7
 * Result: 134

Sri Vijaya

 * Location: 25
 * Tactical Adv: 0
 * Nations: Sri Vijaya (L): 5 => 0
 * Mil Dev: 0
 * Econ: 0
 * Expansion: 0
 * Motive: 9 (defending from potentially fatal attack)
 * Modfiers: -5 (Low Morale)
 * Infra: 14
 * Chance:  7 (see above)
 * Nation Age: -15 (REALLY, REALLY, REALLY OLD!)
 * Population: 6
 * Recent Wars: 0
 * Participation: 10
 * Troops: 10,000/70,000 => 0
 * Result: 56

Result
(134/(134+56))*2-1 = 41.05%

(41.05)*(1-1/(2*3)) = 34.08%

The Allies can take 34.08% of SV, 20% to go to Padang, and the rest to be made a vassal of Ayutthaya.

Koryak-Tlingit War
Koryak Confederacy

Tlingit
 * Location: far from the location of the war: 2
 * Tactical Advantage: Siege Equipment: 5
 * Nations Per Side on the War: 4 (Koryaks)
 * Military Development: +1 (8/6)
 * Economic: +14 (7 yrs)
 * Expansion: -2
 * Motive: Total: +11 +7 (hegemony) +4 (non Dem supported)
 * Chance: Chance:7
 * Edit count=85
 * 1*1*1*2=2
 * 85/2*pi=
 * NPC Bonus: N/A
 * Special NPC Bonus nations :N/A
 * Nation Age: 0
 * Population:+2:
 * Participation: +10
 * Number of Troops: 15,000 / 7000 =2.14 = +2
 * Total: 67


 * Location: +5
 * Tactical Advantage: High ground/Ambush 2
 * Nations per side: Haida :+5 (L) +5/1 = 5
 * Military Development: 4/2 = +0
 * Economy: +12 (6 yrs)
 * Infrastructure: 6/2 = 3
 * Expansion: -0 (no expansion)
 * Motive: Defending heartland from non fatal attack +5
 * Chance: +6
 * Edit count=
 * 1*1*1*2=2
 * 85/2*pi=
 * Nation Age: +0
 * Population: 0
 * Participation: +10
 * Recent Wars: -0
 * Troops strength: 7000/15,000 = 0
 * Total: 48
 * ===Result ===
 * ((67/(48+67))x2)-1
 * =(0.165217)x(1-1/(2 x 2))
 * Koryaks can take 12.39% if war lasts 2 years.
 * Baranof and Chichagof islands is approx. 12%.
 *              Discussion
 * If I messed up on this, please tell me and feel free to fix it, because I'v enever done this before.
 * If I messed up on this, please tell me and feel free to fix it, because I'v enever done this before.

WTF?
Could it be explained to me why the Italian portion has christians and the Hungarian portion doesn't? Could it also be pointed out to me where Aragon took land from Banu Sulaym? Because right now this seems to be crossing a limit. Imp (Say Hi?!) 12:58, April 8, 2014 (UTC)

It was done, you vassalizing them in the first place was barely doable, they were a disorganized state and are Muslim. Also Italy controls much less than you do hence has less muslims. The area you control as well is larger and has more than likely more muslims than the Italian/Former aragonian area had. This also isnt just you so calm down. Most people are agreeing that your random vassalization of vastly differently cultured, or different religions is highly implausible and outright ridiculous Stay in your locale Imp

Just to say, it is quite ridiculous that the Hungarian area has trouble while the Italian area doesn't. Although Hungary could easily just decimate the population and kill all the Muslims, which is exactly what Castile and to some extent Venice have done in Morocco. Kunarian TALK 19:17, April 8, 2014 (UTC)

Thank you Kun. And I could say the same for Castile. Just because you were there for 30 years doesn't fix it either. And because it is on the coast and not all that big, I could do exactly what Kun said - yet I was being nice to them and focusing on trading. They want to rebel and screw their economy up - fine with me, I can kill em all and reopen trading by transporting peseants or Serbians (whichever one is the cheapest option). And it is not implausible - Hungary is transforming, and is extending its reaches - plus I am pretty sure if Banu Sulym isn't my locale - then what the hell is Castille doing in Alexandria? Banu is directly south of me - and a good trading region for my goods. Not so random now, eh? :P  Imp (Say Hi?!) 22:24, April 8, 2014 (UTC)


 * And don't give me that naval superiority bullshit. You may have a good navy - but so do other powers. [[Image:1.png|23px]] Imp (Say Hi?!) 22:25, April 8, 2014 (UTC)


 * Yes it is random... It is not directly south, its a good ways south. Whereas in my case Morocco is literally in my backyard. You can Swim across the straights of Gibraltar and get into morocco. As it stands as for my involvement in alexandria im not vassalizing the area and all i did was send aid to them. Outside of Cyprus which was given to me following a minor war im next to non existant in that area. So no as much as i would love to move on the holy land with my massive navy and army i cant cause its not really doable. Same difference with Hungary which according to multiple people is not in the best situation to have an african vassal especially the Berbers who you havent been fighting for nigh on 200 years like all the spanish kingdoms have. The Castilians gained their different religious vassal through war previously and as of right now neither of those areas are led by muslims any more and in the case of Morocco they are still being chrisitianized into the minority. -Feud


 * I don't need to fight anyone - the Berbers and Arabs do not get along. All I need to do is support one side over the other in whatever situation which is going on. My situation is perfectly fine - you see Sicily has Hungary friendly ports, and the numerous local ports of Banu Sulaym help my ships stay in the region and solve any problems occuring. As long as my conversion is peaceful and through trading - most of the local citizens will not have a problem until it is too late. [[Image:1.png|23px]] Imp (Say Hi?!) 18:01, April 10, 2014 (UTC)

Thing is imp that there's a Christian invader of their lands. At this moment they wouldn't give a shit about Arabs. And you own the mostly desertic are which even harder to keep and the region with a bigger Muslim presence. And to be honest the only reason Granada is christian is due to their uprisings. And morocco like feud has said is far from being fully christian Sine dei gloriem &#34;Ex Initio Terrae&#34; (talk) 18:20, April 10, 2014 (UTC)

Screw this, I'm going to war. Imp (Say Hi?!) 18:22, April 10, 2014 (UTC)

Duplicate and minor map changes
When the current map has been slightly altered - reupload it onto the old map, rather than making a new map. Where this reupload button is found is shown in the following picture. Imp (Say Hi?!) 13:25, April 8, 2014 (UTC)

Result
No one going to do this? Spartian300 (talk) 15:08, April 9, 2014 (UTC)

Discussion
Bad idea...

I dont think you should follow through with this. Im not a mod but if you give me the numbers I will plug them in for you. Also you should have used the cod for the algo. Also Sine you should sign your name.What is this????Is this a signature??? (talk) 18:56, April 9, 2014 (UTC)

I agree Spar, you have seen how the mods are treating Soconusco at the moment, there is a reason I didnt take military action, even if I won i'd be crippled by the mods once again. They are organized and have bonuses to their state now, wait later, and I will attack with you, and we can split it, you can have Soconusco and i'll take Atlocuapo. SwankyJ (talk) 23:33, April 9, 2014 (UTC)

Okay Spartian300 (talk) 09:40, April 11, 2014 (UTC)

Attacker (Kingdom of Georgia)
Total: 40
 * Location: 4
 * Tactical Advantage: 2 + 5 = 7 (High Ground, Siege Equipment)
 * Nations: Georgia (L), Rani (MV), Amier-Kavkasia (MV) = 7/5 = 1.4 ~= 1
 * Military: 8/3 = 2.667 ~= 3
 * Economy: (6 + 5)/3 = 11/3 = 3.667 ~= 4 (larger economy; multiple currencies, gold reserves, trade vs. isolated Azeris)
 * Infrastructure: 0 (attacking)
 * Expansion: 0 (no recent expansion)
 * Motive: 2 (economic, non-dem government supported by people, low troop morale b/c chance = 0)
 * Chance: 0
 * Edit count=220
 * UTC: 17:54; 1*7*5*4=140
 * 220/140*pi=0.5 0 0
 * Nation Age: 0 (maturing nation - 1413)
 * Population: 9 (1,663,000 = 7 digits; superiority +2)
 * Participation: 10
 * Recent Wars: 0
 * Troop Strength: 20000/22500 = 0.889 ~= 1

Defender (Sultanate of Azerbaijan)

 * Location: 5
 * Tactical Advantage: 1 (plains)
 * Nations: Azerbaijan (L) = 5/7 = 0.714 ~= 1
 * Military: 3/8 = 0.375 ~= 0
 * Economy: (3 - 2)/6 =1/6 = 0.166 = 0 (smaller economy)
 * Infrastructure: 3
 * Expansion: 0 (no recent expansion)
 * Motive: 0 (defending heartland from non-fatal attack; troop morale low)
 * Chance: 0
 * Edit count=220
 * UTC: 17:54; 1*7*5*4=140
 * 220/140*pi=0.5 0 0
 * Nation Age: 0 (maturing nation - 1415)
 * Population: 7 (1,129,000 = 7 digits)
 * Participation: 10
 * Recent Wars: 0
 * Troop Strength: 22,500/20,000 = 1.125 ~= 1
 * Total: 27

Results
(2*(40/(40+27)))-1 = (2*(40/67))-1 = (2*0.597)-1 = 1.194 - 1 = 0.194 = 19.40%

(19.40%) * (1 - 1/(2 * 3)) = 19.40% * (1 - (1/6)) = 19.40% * (5/6) = 16.16%

Georgia should win the war, and can take up to 19.40% of Azerbaijan. Assuming the war lasts 3 years, Georgia will gain 16.16% of Azerbaijan's territory.

Discussion
I think I've done the algorithm correctly, but I could use a mod to check it over and make sure that I'm following the new format properly. TankOfMidgets (talk) 20:33, April 9, 2014 (UTC)

Georgia proposes the following cession of lands by Azerbaijan to the Principality of Rani in exchange for peace. (I've run the numbers; the dark-orange area would be the land I take, which is 16.16% of Azerbaijan's territory.) TankOfMidgets (talk) 20:44, April 11, 2014 (UTC)

Safavid-Mansuriyya Peace Treaty
Some concessions I want from the Persians:


 * No tariffs or restrictions on Caliphate exports into Persia for the next 25 years. No guarentee on Caliphate tariffs.
 * A small strip of land on Persia’s southern coast.
 * Withdrawal of Persia from Mesopotamia.
 * No expansion into Mesopotamia.

PitaKang- My Life for Aiur! En Taro Tassadar 21:50, April 9, 2014 (UTC)

Persia accepts this offer for peace Toby (talk) 21:52, April 9, 2014 (UTC)

Thanks. The Caliphate wishes for only the best of relations between our nations in the futuer. PitaKang- My Life for Aiur! En Taro Tassadar 21:54, April 9, 2014 (UTC)

Moderator Actions
Not trying to point fingers. But if you see something implausible point it out at that time. You cannot simply wait 20 years (days) later while the player continues to do turns off that, and then come out and say it is implausible because it screws up a whole chain reaction of turns. SwankyJ (talk) 23:31, April 9, 2014 (UTC)

P.S. Mods, unless you're a Mapmaker, don't post over the map. I have given MP permission as my parents currently have me on lock down for getting a C in english. I will be making maps soon, hopefully. My responsibilities go to Kun and MP  for now. SwankyJ (talk) 23:31, April 9, 2014 (UTC)

As it stands im trying the best i can, i can only catch so much, if some other moderators would be a bit more proactive this could be avoided much easier

I agree SwankyJ (talk) 01:50, April 10, 2014 (UTC)

Resigning
I am resigning as mapmaker, and considering to resign from this game altogether, as all people do is ignore what I say, and my new ideas. Yet I have had to continue to argue with so many. It is nothing but stress. SwankyJ (talk) 16:16, April 10, 2014 (UTC)

Personal Responsibility
Okay, guys, I've noticed a giant trend for a while and I think it's time that I spoke up. A lot of players constantly complain about various mod events or arguments about plausibility. They give mods (who are here to keep the game plausible) crap and throw tantrums like bratty children. I think it's time we grow up just a little, don't you?

Guys, if mods are telling you something's wrong, 9 times out of 10, they know what they're talking about. Try listening to them and think critically about your nation and its actions rather than argue about everything they say. If you ACTUALLY think a mod is wrong, ask the others. We WANT to help you or we wouldn't have joined the force. Keep the game plausible. Listen to constructive criticism and your nation will be the best it can be. Don't make the game a chore.

Bananananananana BAT-CRIM 16:38, April 10, 2014 (UTC)

Hungary
Result: 75
 * Location: 3
 * Tactical Advantage: 5 (Got my Seige equipment ready)
 * Strength: Hungary (L), Poland (MS), Croatia (MS): 15/3 = 5
 * Military: 20/10: +2
 * Economy: +10 +15 (Much larger economy, Larger Trading Empire): 25/10 = +3
 * Infrastructure: 0
 * Expansion: 0
 * Motive: +6 +4 +5: +15
 * Chance: 8
 * Edit count: 10,127
 * UTC Time: 01:05 = 5
 * (10,127/5) * pi = 6362.98176
 * Nation Age: -5
 * Population: 27
 * Participation: 10
 * Number of troops: 60,000/25,000 = 2 (means nothing in the end really)

Banu Sulaym
Result: 42 x1.5 Popular revolt Bonus = 63
 * Location: 5
 * Tactical Advantage: 2
 * Strength: Banu rebels (L): 5/1 = 5
 * Military: 10/20 = 0
 * Economy: 8/25=0 (smaller economy)
 * Infrastructure: 10
 * Expansion: 0 (Govt change so I don't think it counts)
 * Motive: +5 (Premptive strike)
 * Chance: 1
 * Nation Age: -10
 * Population: 6 (no more than 500k)
 * Participation: 10
 * Number of troops: 25,000 (note not all of these are regulars its a popular revolt so their numbers can still swell to larger numbers than normal)

Result
((75/(75+63))*2) - 1 = 0.0869565

Hungarian victory. Hungary wins/retains: 8.6%, depending on how long the war lasts.

Discussion
Multiple things were wrong that have been corrected, Chance and troops needs to be done for either side but for the most part its done. Also you forgot a popular revolt bonus.

10%? That is impossible - even for a popular rebellion. Imp (Say Hi?!) 00:22, April 11, 2014 (UTC)


 * 5% is better. :P [[Image:1.png|23px]] Imp (Say Hi?!) 01:26, April 11, 2014 (UTC)

To me, the most plausible result is probably like OTL Vietnam War, Soviet-Afghan War, or the American Revolutionary War. The insurgents/natives will continue fighting for their independence in a war of attrition, something that the Hungarians will eventually find impossible to fully defeat.

In most cases of this kind of warfare, the war will grind on until it eventually becomes an economic drain on the Hungarians. At some point, the Hungarian people will get fed up with a war in which no progress is being made and would be forced to withdraw.

I am just thinking of it from their perspective, and do not deny that Imp gets 8% in the algo. I am just pondering plausibility and wondering how this would end up - I doubt "nationalistic" forces would let a bit undera tenth of their land remain under Hungarian rule. 03:46, April 12, 2014 (UTC)

Oyo (Attacker)
Total: 62
 * Location: +3
 * Tactical Advantage: +6
 * Nations: Oyo (L) = +5
 * Military Development: 20/6 = +3
 * Economic Development: 20/6 = +3
 * Economic Bonus = +5 (?)
 * Expansion: -1 (?)
 * Infrastructure: 0
 * Motive: +3 +7 +5
 * Chance: +4
 * Edit count: 4,916
 * UTC: 0*5*4*5 = 100
 * Total: 4916/100*pi = 154.4406948504844
 * Nation Age: 0
 * Population: +7 (9,415,548)
 * Participation: +10
 * Number of Troops: 225,000/100,000 = +2.25 = +2
 * Recent Wars: 0
 * Vassals and Puppets: 0

Mali (Defender)
Total: 48
 * Location: +5
 * Tactical Advantage: +1
 * Nations: Mali (L) = +5
 * Military Development: 6/20 = 0
 * Economic Development: 6/20 = 0
 * Expansion: 0
 * Infrastructure: +4
 * Motive: +9 +4
 * Chance: 0
 * Nation Age: 0
 * Population: +10 (20,000,000)
 * Participation: +10
 * Number of Troops: 100,000/225,000 = +0.4 = 0
 * Recent Wars: 0
 * Vassals and Puppets: 0

Result

 * ((62/(48+62))*2)-1 = 0.1272727272727273
 * (12.7)*(1-1/(2*9)) = 11.9944444444444444

The war with Mali will last nine years, after which Oyo may claim 11.9% of Mali's territory.

Discussion
Wrong algo is wrong... A few things: I fixed a few of these issues, notably the ones in italics.
 * How can you field an army twice as large as the Malian Army in an invading war when the Malians have a population twice as large as you?
 * Their motive would be 10 (defending from war that will overthrow culture, etc) with non-democratic support of 4.
 * Furthermore, care to explain your motive? Is it aiding kinsmen or hegemony, in which case you never had any hegemony to enforce.
 * You messed up on economic/infrastructure/military development.
 * Assuming you posted all of the past 10 turns, you would have total of 20 points to spend in total, or about 10 in each category.
 * For Mali's development, they should have 4 infrastructure points, 6 econ and 6 mil points.
 * Do you really have a large economy? They have 2x as many people as you, which alone should give them a substantially larger economy. Of course, various development has taken place in your nation, but we cannot assume that Mali has also been stagnant. European trade with Mali would have helped it as much (if not a bit less) as it would help you.

04:08, April 12, 2014 (UTC)

Rex, I don't have time for your nonsense, yet again. Seriously, don't you have anything better to do than follow me around and bug me about my actions? And stop editing my algo. Vivaporius: "I don't need a slogan" 06:04, April 12, 2014 (UTC)

I want fair algorithims. And a state taking over a state of 2x as many people and a presumably equivalent economy is just implausible. You made a number of mistakes, and if you must be rude to me about it, I shall bring it up to the moderator staff, who I was helping out. 06:55, April 12, 2014 (UTC)

Im inclined to agree with the changes, and i think troops would be relatively equal in this situation since mali has 20,000,000 and France has that same number and is plausibly fieldng 100,000 troops tops. Regardless results i believe need to be redone, and considering they are over double your population.. that will definitely pose issues later no offence. As it stands, more unlikely things have happened but that kind of society never lasts too long anyways

Not Milanese, for a second I thought Oyo was fighting Milan! Imp (Say Hi?!) 23:54, April 12, 2014 (UTC)

I must disagree for these reasons. Even during the civil war, Mali wasn't able to field more than 100,000 men because of its vast size, lack of readily available resources, and the fact that it didn't fight wars often as it was protected by the desert on one side, and the jungles on the other. Attrition isn't factor as the Mali people have nowhere to go and only one way out: the desert. Vivaporius: "I don't need a slogan" 00:00, April 13, 2014 (UTC)
 * The Malians never fielded more than 100,000 men OTL, and their in the middle of a civil war, also OTL.
 * I stated that my reason for invading is to enforce regional hegemony, not to conquer the country. So they don't get +10.
 * Read the above.
 * I posted on every turn, and I'm aware of the rules. They get don't get infrastructure since their an NPC.
 * Oyo is smaller, but it trades with Europe and the surrounding region, while Mali's double pop is dying from famine and a civil war. Bigger nations don't mean bigger economies. China had four times the American population yet their nominal GDP is half that of the United States.

We established over chat that Mali is not in a civil war (for those who do not chat as often as others). Furthermore, we discussed the differences time and industrialization have made in warfare, refuting most of Viva's claims. And yes, NPC get infrastructure. You are mistaken. 00:13, April 13, 2014 (UTC)

We could sit here and debate into eternity, but at the end of the day, arguing will never work. I could throw sources at you all evening, but it'll never sink. I stated that I was going to be a better person, and I'm sticking to that. So congratulations Rex, you won. I mean, what was I thinking? It's not like I was ever going to win or do anything of worth in this game. Vivaporius: "I don't need a slogan" 00:46, April 13, 2014 (UTC)

Last time I checked, I am not Mali and I am not being invaded by you, Viva. Therefore, how could I have won? And its not like I have any reason to take interest in Mali but I merely want a legitimate game. I do not appreciate you calling me out because I care about making sure algorithims are proper. Please refrain from rude comments like the one you just made, or just do not direct them at me passive-aggressively. Thanks, 05:45, April 13, 2014 (UTC)

Oh my. I didn't know that saying you won was an insult. Seems like someone has a soft skin. Well when you make it a habit of basically following me around in games, on talk pages, and in chat, plus PMing about it and using terms such as "Vivempires" that you know very well would anger me deeply, and bother the mess out of me because you don't like something, don't expect anything else. That's typically the price paid for bothering someone like that. Vivaporius: "I don't need a slogan" 14:53, April 13, 2014 (UTC)

The term vivempire is pretty well acknowledged to be a "slang" term in the Principia Moderni community. Anyone who looks at this map will understand just what we are talking about when we say Vivempire. 22:32, April 13, 2014 (UTC)

And anyone who looks at that map will see my empire is far from being the largest nation on the map. Imp practically has a lands on every single continent, Collie controls half of South America, Crimson basically rules a third of Asia, and Scan rules a mega-empire which in pieces can win wars on their own. And this says nothing of Scraw controlling half of North America and Cal/Andrew ruling most of Western Europe. But no. I control a chunk of Africa, something I was repeatedly too to focus on since "Viva has land to expand on in Africa, why does he need colonies," was the most common response. And as such, the implausible empire name isn't named after Imp, Scan, Crim, Scraw, Cal, or Andre, but after me. Yeah, because that clearly makes sense. Vivaporius: "I don't need a slogan" 01:35, April 14, 2014 (UTC)


 * Impire, Scanpire, Crimpire, Scrawpire, Callumpire, Andrewpire. Callumthered (talk) 09:05, April 15, 2014 (UTC)

Because most of those empires are plausible minus the impish empire which is ASB due to conquering south america (or most of it) after what should'be been rebellion era. You on the other side wanted haldnof Africa and still be able to colonize the other half of the world... Sine dei gloriem &#34;Ex Initio Terrae&#34; (talk) 17:50, April 18, 2014 (UTC)

So far as I know (and I could easily be wrong), Mali was fighting a guerilla war in the north and against the Songhai in the east at the time, so I doubt they would be able to field a very large army (100,000 men?) against another attack from the south. Krasnoyarsk (talk) 19:41, April 14, 2014 (UTC)

Cuzco(Attacker)
Total: 70
 * Location: 4
 * Tactical Advantage: 0
 * Nations: Cuzco (L) Wanka (MV) = 6
 * Military Development: 12
 * Economic Development: 18+5+3+1=27
 * Expansion: -1
 * Infrastructure: N/A
 * Motive: 3+7=10 (Modifers) 10+4+5=19
 * Chance: 7
 * Edit count: 275
 * UTC: 21:19 = 18
 * Total: 275/18*pi (3.14159265359) = 47.972
 * Nation Age: 0
 * Population: 0
 * Participation: +10
 * Number of Troops: 2,500/1000= 3
 * Recent Wars:-1
 * Vassals and Puppets: -1

Aymara (Defender)
Total: 43
 * Location: 4
 * Tactical Advantage: 0
 * Nations:Aymara (L) = 5
 * Military Development: 4
 * Economic Development: 5-2=3
 * Expansion: 0
 * Infrastructure: 5
 * Motive: 7+4+4=15 (modifers included)
 * Chance: 2
 * Edit count: 0
 * UTC: 0 (0) =
 * Total: 0/0*pi (3.14159265359) =
 * Nation Age: 0
 * Population: +2
 * Participation: +10
 * Number of Troops: 1000/2,500=0.1
 * Recent Wars:-1
 * Vassals and Puppets: 0

Result
Cuzco will take 21% of Aymara's land. The Northern Aymara government collapses after the two wars with Cuzco.
 * ((70/(43+70))*2)-1 = 0.23
 * (0.23)*(1-1/(2*6)) = 21%

Discussion
If I understand things properly here, this applies only to the Norhtern most areas of the Aymaras, the part the centrilized. Not the enitre thing.What is this????Is this a signature??? (talk) 21:18, April 11, 2014 (UTC)

So the first time i didnt round for the number of troops thing, b.ut because i rounded in the decimal place for the maximum precent, it made no diffrence in the end. Today is the day of Reckoning sir, You screwed up... '' You screwed up... '' 00:50, April 12, 2014 (UTC)

France

 * Location: close the location of the war +3
 * Tactical Advantage: Siege equipment +5
 * Nation Per Side: France (L), Burgundy (MV), Sardinia (MV)= 7/5 = 1
 * Military development: +20/7 = 2.85 =+3
 * Economic: +20/7 = 2.85 = +3
 * Motive: Attacking to enforce political Hegemony +11 (Non demo,supported by people)
 * Chance:7
 * Edit count 2408
 * 2408/18: 133,77
 * 133,77*pi :420,2752
 * Nation age:+5
 * Population:+28
 * Participation: +10
 * Number of troops: 200.000/ 50.000 = 4
 * Total: 80

Tunisia

 * Location: +5
 * Tactical Advantage: +3 Fortifications?
 * Nation Per Side: Tunisia (L) = 5/13 = 0
 * Military development: +7/20 = 0
 * Economic: +7/20 = 0
 * Infrastructure +6
 * Motive: Defending Heartland from attack that will not cripple/ destroy nation +5
 * Chance:5
 * Nation age:+0
 * Population :+6
 * Participation: +10
 * Number of troops: 50.000/200.000 = 0
 * Total:40

Discussion

 * Anything to say? Sine dei gloriem &#34;Ex Initio Terrae&#34; (talk)
 * France annexes the entirety of tunis (doubling the score of your enemy = 33%) Sine dei gloriem &#34;Ex Initio Terrae&#34; (talk)
 * How you can annex the whole thing when their motive is not "to defend nation from fatal attack"? g greg e   (talk)  01:18, April 15, 2014 (UTC)
 * ((80(80+40)*2)-1= 33% i'll do the rest later...

Algo changes from non mods
Thanks, Sine, I appreciate it. But, anyway, in your algo you need to change your econ/mil development scores. I know that you used the example algo made by Feud, but that is actually wrong. The rules are quite specific about a turn --
 * This is for you rex... Lol Sine dei gloriem &#34;Ex Initio Terrae&#34; (talk)

"Each nation has one turn during which it may do one of the following actions. With that in mind, you can only do mil or econ, and not both. So, you'd have a 10 in mil dev and a 10 in econ dev.
 * Work on the nation's military
 * Work on the nation's economy
 * Work on the nation's infrastructure
 * Expand the nation
 * Start or remain in a conflict."

Other than that, I do not see any problems. 06:15, April 13, 2014 (UTC)

Welp, I have further scrutinized the algo and have noticed another couple minor flaws. Again, minor.

The first is that Sine forgot that we are doing 10 year - not 15 year - periods. So, Tunisia should have 4 infra, 6 (for 3 years) econ, and 6 (again, for 3 years) mil. This is pretty much a wash, but still should be corrected.

The second issue is that Sine forgot to add the economic bonuses. He has a much larger economy (+10) and is a larger colonial/trade power (+5).

Thanks, 06:28, April 13, 2014 (UTC)

As i stressed to you before hand the rules need to be changed and i reaffirmed with Sine that 20 years is essentially the upper limit allowing for 20 and 20 in two categories or 14 14 and 12 for any variation of the categories. This needs to be fixed but as the man that wrote the algo... i am correct. The other area regarding 10 years needs to be changed. Also if your not a mod DO NOT edit the algos of a war that does not concern you. Its annoying and uneeded. Leave it up to Mods to handle and bring it up to them to fix.

Centrlized Aymara State southern border
So a long, long time ago, a mod told me that the Ayamras in the north had centrilzed around lake titicaca. The southern border of this was never expalined or mentioned. Any mod (the one who did it is unknown to me) want to help me out here. Other wise Im going to wing it for the Land Aqired section. "Today is the day of Reckoning sir, You screwed up... '' You screwed up..." '' 19:39, April 14, 2014 (UTC)

Around lake titcaca is what youll take, further south is still disorganized

Reclaimation of Egypt (1473 - 1475)
Alexandria (Attacker)

Total: 91
 * Location: +4
 * Tactical Advantage: +5 +1
 * Nations: Alexandria (L), Aiguptia (MV), Rumania (M), Venice (S), Albion (S), Milan (S), Cyprus (M), Erie (M), Caucasian Confederation (S), Roman Empire (M) = +5 +1 +3 +2+2 + 2 + 3 +3+2+3
 * Military Development: 1 turn +2,
 * Military Bonus: 1/1 = Even
 * Economic Development: 3 turns +6
 * Economic Bonus = +2 (Alexandria) +5 (Larger Economy) +5 (Larger Trade)
 * Expansion: -3 (Alexandria) -2 (Aiguptia)
 * Infrastructure: 2 turns N/A
 * Motive: +5, +4 (modifer)
 * Chance: 6
 * Edit count: 2519
 * UTC: 1:25 1x2x5= 10
 * Total: 2519/10*pi = 790.966
 * Nation Age: -5
 * Population: 17 (4,000,000 this is a post plague conservative estimate, so could be higher ie 4.8)
 * Participation: +10
 * Number of Troops: 25,000/35,000 .7 ~ 1 SUBJECT TO CHANGE
 * Recent Wars: 0
 * Vassals and Puppets: 0

Sultanate of Egypt (Defender)

Total: 38
 * Location: +5
 * Tactical Advantage: +2
 * Nations: Egypt (L) = +5
 * Military Development: 1 turn = 2/1 = 1
 * Military Bonus: 1/1 = EVEN
 * Economic Development: 1 turn = 2/1 = 1
 * Expansion: N/A
 * Infrastructure: 1 turns of buildup = 2
 * Motive: +9
 * Chance: 6
 * Nation Age: -10 (1470 est)
 * Population: +6 (500,000 this is a max estimate, not including the plague)
 * Participation: +10
 * Number of Troops: 35,000/25,000 = 1.4 ~ 1 SUBJECT TO CHANGE
 * Recent Wars: 0
 * Vassals and Puppets: 0

Result

 * ((91/(38+91)*2)-1 = 0.41085271317
 * (41.1)*(1-1/(2*3)) = 34.25
 * The war lasts for three years, ending just before the 1476 turn, and Alexandria is able to topple the Sultanate of Egypt.

Discussion
Firstly you do not have that level of population, and neither is theirs so low. They 100% outnumber you population wise, it's just a question of by how much. Especially as the population is not solely grouped around the north but along the Nile, unlike modern day.

Troops cannot come from an outside force in the algo so that 5000 extra is yours or Rumania must get directly involved. And considering that the population of Egypt is around 4,500,000 at this time and you probably control a quarter to just above a third of that, here's some numbers to give you an idea of what you and egypt should be able to basically raise: However considering that Egypt is a a sultanate and this war would be considered a religious one it would likely be much higher, just like the way you've raised forces. Although that's a point for the mods. Kunarian TALK 06:02, April 15, 2014 (UTC)
 * You: 1,000,000-2,000,000 = 10,000-20,000
 * Egypt: 2,500,000-3,500,000 = 25,000-35,000


 * Could you please show me some evidence that they have a larger population at all? I find it hard to believe that you believe a egypt, lacking the largest population centers of egypt (throughout most of egypts history and clearly at this time - Alexandria and Cairo). As for your claim that the population is not solely grouped around the north I agree; however, it is no where near the portion that you claim is not in the Nile Delta Region. If you could further elaborate on where you get the idea that the remained of egypt outnumbers me I would be glad to listen and learn. I look forward to you and I finding out more of the extremly limited information on Egypt's population pre 1500 AD.   g greg e  (talk)  15:28, April 15, 2014 (UTC)
 * First of all you don't have Cairo. Second of all you don't have all the Nile Delta, third of all, a massive amount of the population is spread along the Nile itself. Add on top of that the fact that they have all the coastal populations outside of the Delta and you very easily have them with a lot more. I'll draw a picture.


 * okay. Firsts first, the coloured areas are all about a similar population density, give or take. The bit in green is where Cairo roughly lays, obviously not all of it is Cairo but Cairo is in that area. That area has a higher population density than the northern coast, both historically and in the modern day. The bit in Purple and bright yellow is the populous Nile Delta area. You have the yellow bit and they have the Purple bit, you have about 3/5ths of it, they have 2/5ths and their area is historically and in modern day, more densely populated. Now add onto that the blue bit, that's the Nile and the other fertile areas it creates, all with a similar population density to the Delta. It's spread out yes, but it's still a population and historically it wasn't dwarfed by the north like it is today as all of the Nile was a great trading river. Add onto that the various coastal populations along the med and the red sea and you get a population which is easily one and half to two times bigger than yours. Kunarian TALK 18:04, April 15, 2014 (UTC)


 * Ah I can see and understand the confusion here now. The map says one thing, which is what you posted. But both my pages I've been creating, posts, and such since 1464 (almost a decade of game time now), have had Cairo as part of Aiguptia. I am going based of what has been said in turns and not a map - which no offense to the mapmakers is error prone. So now this confusion resides are part of a cartographic error. My 1464 post was as follows:
 * The Kingdom of Aiguptia is declared by the organized Chrisitians in the Nile Delta region, the border claimed by this kingdom are just east of OTL Port Faud, along the delta Region down to the Great Bitter Lakes to surrounding Cairo then northwest to the border of Alexandria. Aiguptia selects  Ibrahim Girguis as its king. Troops are stationed in the Aiguptia region to prevent any revolts.
 * I discussed these borders with Fed before declaring them, and presumed the map would reflect them. I have also played with these as my borders and including the cities that are reflected based on the post.
 * In addition, could you upload a map with the rivers and lakes on it? This one of the Nile, a difficult river to chart on these maps, is a great start. Without the rivers it is also very difficult to find certain cities on the map. It would make not only my own country easier to map and to catch errors (eg this situation), but also for the age of colonialism, which mandetes that we follow rivers to colonize. I appriciate your diligence nonetheless. g greg e   (talk)  18:23, April 15, 2014 (UTC)
 * Ah, okay. I've seen a few map errors before, I understand. I don't know how easy I can map rivers, I don't have much spare time but if I do then maybe. Kunarian TALK 19:27, April 15, 2014 (UTC)

Also add in supplies from Venice to Alexandria's side. Kunarian TALK 08:29, April 15, 2014 (UTC)

Albion will support Alexandria in reclaiming Egypt. (England, Scotland, Brittany, Wales.) It is up to bfox if he wishes to allow the Eire Kingdoms.ALLONS-Y!!,Basically, RUN!! 12:00, April 15, 2014 (UTC)


 * Does Albion's support get split amoung each of those Kingdoms in the algo? Im not sure how that works, if someone could let me know that would be great g greg e   (talk)  15:30, April 15, 2014 (UTC)

You forgot to add Milan. Tr0llis (talk) 18:19, April 15, 2014 (UTC)


 * Thank you   g greg e  (talk)  18:29, April 15, 2014 (UTC)

Albions support is split among tthe independent kingdoms so it would be England (which owns scotland i believe) and eire which is a seperate kingdom. Also you may add Cyprus as mil support


 * Thank you once again and for the clarification g greg e   (talk)  18:29, April 15, 2014 (UTC)
 * I thought there was a penalty for having more than two personal or dynastic union nations in an algo? And a penalty for having more than two vassals? Kunarian TALK 07:43, April 16, 2014 (UTC)
 * There is only one nation being subjugated into assisting the war. Two if you count Cyprus as a subjugated nation. The rules state a minus -1 penalty for each vassal after the third one in each L's group. g greg e   (talk)  21:54, April 16, 2014 (UTC)
 * That rule applies only for the main leading nation or in case of coalition all leaders. If Alexandria is only using Aiguptia than shes fine. If Albion is only using 2 of its PU's and 2 of its Vassals then she is also fine. My Cyprus sending mil support isnt his vassal so he cant get penalized for somebody elses vassal it would count towards me. If i had Granada, Morocco, and Cyprus all send aid then it would start to detract. 

China
Is Scan still playing as China? Because he hasn't posted for quite a while. Ozymandias2 (talk) 18:56, April 16, 2014 (UTC)

I don't believe he is...

He said I was the frontrunner for the role of China, but I have since taken another nation, so I'm out of that running.

20:08, April 16, 2014 (UTC)

Perhaps we should hold it escrow?

20:09, April 16, 2014 (UTC)

Yeah, that could be best- fully mod-controlled?Ozymandias2 (talk) 20:50, April 16, 2014 (UTC)

Maybe collapse part of it. The part nearest Ayutthaya.

22:19, April 16, 2014 (UTC)

Just treat it as an NPC for now. Tr0llis (talk) 22:54, April 16, 2014 (UTC)

G'day. I've returned from my mid-semester exams. I'm still on the fence about staying active as a player in the game but I shall be playing again for a week to see if I can get back into the groove of things. Scandinator (talk) 02:03, April 18, 2014 (UTC)

Im Back Baby
Ill be taking over China or Egypt, not sure. Oh and Im back in the modding bussiness too  -Nova 00:09, April 17, 2014 (UTC)

Pretty sure we need a Vote from what i remember discussing.. We didnt even make scraw a mod since we never voted.

I believe Geg is trying to take Egypt as Alexandria, but you can try. History Does Not Repeat Itself, Yet It Does Rhyme

Ive taken China  -Nova 00:24, April 17, 2014 (UTC)

Uhh... China is not just up for grabs. We haven't even established that Scan is gone yet.

Also, you're in the middle of a giant f*cking plague. Have fun lol.

01:10, April 17, 2014 (UTC)'

Scan said he would be back in a few weeks. He had exams i beleive. So as long as Nova gives it back to scan when he gets back no problem.

Hesse (Attacker)
Total: 35
 * Location: 2
 * Hesse: 4
 * Hamburg: 3
 * Mecklenburg: 2
 * Venice: 2
 * Epirus: 2
 * Candia: 2
 * Kaffa: 2
 * Tactical Advantage: 1
 * Open field
 * Nations: Hesse (L), Hamburg (L), Mecklenburg (L), Oldenburg (S), Venice (L), Epirus (L), Candia (LV), Kaffa (LV) = 36/24= 2
 * Military Development: 90/84 = 1
 * Hesse: 20
 * Hamburg: 14
 * Mecklenburg: 14
 * Venice: 10
 * Epirus: 14
 * Candia: 2
 * Kaffa: 16
 * Economic Development: 124/?=1 +3 (cities) +5 (larger economy) +5 (larger trade)
 * Hesse: 20
 * Hamburg: 14
 * Mecklenburg: 14
 * Venice: 20
 * Epirus: 20
 * Candia: 20
 * Kaffa: 16
 * Expansion: -2 (Several Annexations)
 * Motive: 6
 * Hesse: 13 (Recently held territory, Hegemony)
 * Hamburg: 3 (aiding ally)
 * Mecklenburg: 3 (aiding ally)
 * Venice: 3 (aiding ally
 * Epirus: 3
 * Candia: 3
 * Kaffa: 3
 * Chance:
 * Nation Age: -5
 * Hesse: -5
 * Hamburg: -5
 * Mecklenburg: -5
 * Venice: -15
 * Epirus: 0
 * Candia: 0
 * Kaffa: 0
 * Population: 9
 * Recent Wars: -4
 * Participation: +10
 * Number of Troops: 50,000 (20,000 from Hesse, given that a large portion of their military has defected and that they're mid plague)/?= 1

Anti-Hessian Forces (Defender)
Total: 99 * 1.5 (Popular revolt) = 148.5
 * Location: +4
 * Münster: 4
 * Berg: 5
 * Saxony: 3
 * Thuringia: 4
 * Koln: 5
 * Westphalen: 5
 * Tactical Advantage: +2
 * Nations: Munster (L), Berg (L), Saxony (L), Thuringia (L), Koln (L), Westphalen (L) = 24/5 = 5
 * Military Development: 80, 0
 * Münster: 20
 * Berg: 10
 * Saxony: 20
 * Thuringia: 18
 * Koln: 6
 * Westphalen: 6
 * Economic Development: 84, 0
 * Münster: 20
 * Berg: 10
 * Saxony: 14
 * Thuringia: 20
 * Koln: 10
 * Westphalen: 10
 * Expansion: N/A
 * Infrastructure: 80
 * Münster: 20
 * Berg: 10
 * Saxony: 10
 * Thuringia: 12
 * Koln: 24
 * Westphalen: 24
 * Motive: 7
 * Münster: 9
 * Berg: 9
 * Saxony: 3
 * Thuringia: 3
 * Koln: 9
 * Westphalen: 9
 * Chance:
 * Nation Age: -7
 * Münster: -10
 * Berg: -10
 * Saxony: -5
 * Thuringia: -5
 * Koln: -10
 * Population: +7
 * Participation: +10
 * Number of Troops: 30,000/50,000 = 0
 * Recent Wars: -4
 * Vassals and Puppets: 0

Discussion
I thought Infra was averaged? Imp (Say Hi?!) 14:42, April 17, 2014 (UTC)

I don't believe so. I'm also having Feud review this algorithm just to be sure. Tr0llis (talk) 17:48, April 17, 2014 (UTC)

To Guy: scores are doubled. Tr0llis (talk) 19:00, April 17, 2014 (UTC)

that doesn't change anything.

Crim already looked over this and said it was fine. Blocky858 (talk) 19:31, April 17, 2014 (UTC)
 * What? This algo is all wrong, the rebelling nations' scores were explicitly given, since when were those doubled? Our nation age scores are wrong, our development scores are wrong, our troop numbers are wrong.


 * Nation scores are doubles, meaning that if you have a score of ten, you get twenty points. For example, Munster: 10, 10, 10, means 20, 20, 20, just like how Hesse and their allies' scores are also doubled. I know Hesse is -5 for a fact since I asked Blocky and he told me the date in which he had his last government change (when he was elevated to a grand duchy); in the 1460's I believe. If you could provide me the dates for the other nations or any other information I will be happy to change any mistakes. Please just don't edit everything at once. Thanks, Tr0llis (talk) 20:05, April 17, 2014 (UTC)


 * I meant the one IATG put up was reviewd by Crim and said it was fine. Crim was in fact going to make almost the exact same edit he told me. Blocky858 (talk) 20:24, April 17, 2014 (UTC)


 * I can't believe I've only really noticed this, add Venetian support, add in Epirote support along with Kaffan and Candian support. There are no minuses due to what Feud said in the Egyptian war. We will be fully in the war although we will only be able to supply 10,000 troops from across all four of the states because of the plague. You will have assist us in feeding them also due to trade issues from the plague causing food trade to be much lower than usual. Kunarian TALK 20:34, April 17, 2014 (UTC)


 * Also please refer to the 3 royal marriages I have with Hesse for a good reason to join this war. Also I'm not even sending a proper force, more of an expedition, so please do not tell me that this is somehow damaging beyond a reasonable cost to the treasury or the -2 for my future recent wars. Kunarian TALK 22:24, April 17, 2014 (UTC)


 * Dont forget the 1.25 Popular revolt bonus...


 * Can I just say this algorithm isn't even finished. :P Kunarian TALK 08:16, April 18, 2014 (UTC)

Quick Trip
I'm going on a trip over the weekend, so I'll be gone for a few days. If anyone wants to copy-paste my turns while I'm gone, that'd be really helpful.

Thanks!

Cour *talk* 03:40, April 17, 2014 (UTC)

Moscow
Hi, I noticed that the nation of Muscovy has been inactive for a very long time. Would I be allowed to sign up as them? Thanks, Fritzmet (talk) 13:39, April 18, 2014 (UTC)

Scraw is, I believe, on a short wiki-break. He'll be back.

15:36, April 19, 2014 (UTC)

Leave of Absence
I am to be gone over the next seven days beginning this Sunday (Easter Sunday, 4/20). I MAY (big may) have the ability to only go on chat, but that is iffy. In the meantime, I believe I got Andrew to copy-post for me over that period of time. If Andrew is not willing/able to, I'll put the post here. Just copy-post and adapt to the events that happen (if needed). History Does Not Repeat Itself, Yet It Does Rhyme

Eire: Eire, having built up trade and infrastructure across the nation for years is in the process of becoming a modern European nation. Clans still remain. However, much of the new growth of the nation is in the new trade ports on the coast, settled by the Norse, or the towns at the hubs of the new roads. Indeed, many of the small towns from 50 years ago are unrecognizable compared to today. Eire seeks to show its power, and we invite monarchs from across Europe to tour the new nation. The military of Eire continues to be modernized. After years of friendship with Albion, a strange new dialect begins to emerge in coastal trade settlements. As the language divide in Albion has ended, and English becomes the tounge of all, traders from England and Eire begin to swap words in the trade settlements on the Irish Sea. The dialect, however, has not seen wide use outside of those settlements. We find that keeping the Southern Europeans away from our ports, who often carry diseases helps us prevent the spread of the strange new plague. Our vessels continue to explore and trade with our northern neighbors, however, such as Scandinavia and some of the German states that are not affected. We allow Roman Catholic churches to spring up again, after the reunification of the churches, and many reactionary Eire-folk take advantage of it, having practiced their services in secret. Tales of Celtic myths continue to become popular amongst the nobles, and old aspects of pre-Norman Hiberno-Roman culture begin to be rediscovered.

Minor Wikibreak
I'm sorry for the unexpected wikibreak; I am on a trip, and I am avoiding the wiki during the period. I'll be back on Monday; in the meantime, if someone were to write a quick post stating the Plague is getting better and that econ and military are improved (alternating), that would be spiffing. Thanks in advance! Fed (talk) 04:31, April 19, 2014 (UTC)

Aztec Empire - Requests
Not sure if this is allowed. But id like for Atotonilco (the 20 px of the northern and north eastern land of the Aztecs) to be gifted to Zapotec, as well as Cihuatlan (the coastal region of 15px on the most southern coastline) to also be gifted to the Zapotec. The regions of Texcoco and Tlacopan will be merged in to one into Tenochtitlan. And will be 25-35px. Zacatollan will remain under the Aztec Empire. I am resigning as the Aztecs. I do not care if these things go through with or not. But just an update for whomever takes my spot as the Aztecs, just so you do not have to read all my turns. SwankyJ (talk) 21:24, April 20, 2014 (UTC)

Aztec Empire Information
Player who plays as Aztecs, this for you, so you don't need to read all my turns. SwankyJ (talk) 21:24, April 20, 2014 (UTC)

1. I joined in 1429. I did 18 Infrastructure turns. 10 economic turns, and got +2 economic in events. And I did 20 military turns.

2. The regions owned by the Aztecs:

Atlocuapo (lost in 1474), Soconusco (lost in 1472), Atotonilco (20px of the NorthEast), Zacatollan (20px  of the NorthWest), Texcoco, Tlacopan, and Tenochtitlan (35px of the Central Eastern area), Cihuatlan (15px of the south-southwestern coastline)

3. Emperor Itzual I (died 1432 I believe), Emperor Montezuma II (died 1474), Emperor Cuachtemoc (as of 1475, he is 50 yrs old)

As of 1475, Cuachtemoc had four children: Tezcacoatl (male, 20 yrs old), Quatzecoatl (male, 16 yrs old), Xochitl (female, 14 yrs old), Toltecatl (male, 13 yrs old). Wife: Icnoyotl 45 yrs old.

Total Population of Aztec Empire: ~4.5 million. Total Population of Tenochtitlan(city): ~350,000. Total Population of Xilopolco (capital of Atotonilco and Zacatollan) : ~200,000. Total Population of Cihuatlan: ~500,000 Total Population of Texcoco: ~550,000 Total Population of Tlacopan: ~600,000 Total Population of Atotonilco: ~500,000 Total Population of Zacatollan: ~500,000 Total Population of Tenochtitlan(region): ~900,000 Total Population of Other (small outlying tribes, islands, military, traders, allies): ~400,000

4. You have canals, acqueducts, wells, schools, hospitals, extravagant roads, throughout the empire. Kind of got a quarantine thing going on. Your are allies with the Mayans, and have very good relations with the Zapotec. Your people are not fond of sacrificial paganism anymore, and look to worshipping the one almighty god: Quatzelta. This could be used to a gateway to christianity if you deem that as a smart decision. You have a low technologically advanced navy numbering in 400 ships as of 1475. You have a military of 75,000 as of 1475, and a population nearing 5 million. Which is very plausible for the land you own.

5. The Aztecs have trade routes with the people of Moundville in the north, although they are not very exquisite. You have iron weaponry and armor. You have big money making in mining gold, silver, obsidian, and iron. You have a large amount of fishing ships.

Please leave this up for the player who takes the Aztecs. SwankyJ (talk) 21:23, April 20, 2014 (UTC)

See, dammit? I said, didn't I? It'll be another Hail, I said. Give them at least 6 months to prove themselves. But no, you all voted for him, made him a mod- learn your lesson. Stop making Flash Players mods.

21:05, April 21, 2014 (UTC)

I wasn't made a mod. I was attacked with events, making my turns a prison, it's a joke. SwankyJ (talk) 21:14, April 21, 2014 (UTC)

You were the Aztecs. Despite the fact that historically 100% of your neighbors hated you and periodcally tried to overthrow you, you somehow conquered a giant area way, way larger than the Aztecs could have plausibly done.

Hail did something similar.

My bad, mapmaker. I still said that you would flash off.

21:19, April 21, 2014 (UTC)

Treaty Of OTL Sudan Land
I'm not sure how comfortable Venice feels with this expansiveness nor do I think it is possible. I know I'm not a primary participant in this treaty but you won't be able to hold the Muslim populations in Egypt, Judea et al. They threw off the yolk of an army of crusaders way more powerful than you and will almost certainly not be converting any time soon. Kunarian TALK 22:04, April 21, 2014 (UTC)
 * 1) We split the city 50/50
 * 2) Ethiopia gets White Nile and Blue Nile
 * 3) Alaxandria gets the regular Nile
 * 4) We both name our parts of the city different names
 * 5) We are allowed free access into each others land.
 * 6) Treaty_map_3.0.png

I didnt make this, not is it plausible to agree to anything in such a treaty...this could be a partition of lands that Alexandria and Ethiopia could agree to but neither nation controls anything like this at the moment. g greg e  (talk)  01:21, April 22, 2014 (UTC)

G Greg if you want to fix the map do so and I will see if I like the way you make the map and how we divide things up ok. If you want to add something to the treaty by all means do so and I will talk to you about it on the chat.- Scarlet

Two things: The first is that you should make a treaty page for things like this. The second is that I am opposed to any settlement of the East African coast south of Puntland. This includes Mogadishu, so please keep that in mind. Respectfully, 06:18, April 24, 2014 (UTC)

Prussia (Attacker)
Total: 36
 * Location: 3
 * Tactical Advantage: 1
 * Nations: Prussia (L), Ossel-Wiek(MV), Courland (MV) = 6, 0
 * Military Development: 80/38 = 2
 * Prussia: 40
 * Ossel_Wiek: 20
 * Courland: 20
 * Economic Development: 40, 0+5 (Larger economy) = 5
 * Prussia: 0
 * Ossel-Wiek: 20
 * Courland: 20
 * Expansion: 0
 * Motive: 7
 * Chance:
 * Nation Age:
 * Population: 8
 * Recent Wars: 0
 * Participation: +10
 * Number of Troops: 30,000, 0

Hesse (Defender)
Total: 110 + Bavarian score
 * Location: 5
 * Tactical Advantage: 1
 * Nations: Hesse (L), Hamburg (L), Mecklenburg (L), Trier (L), Bavaria (L) Munchen (MV) Straubing (MV) Ingolstadt (MV) Burgau (MV) Burggrafschaft (MV) Wurzburg (MV) Nurnburg (MV) Bamberg (MV) Zweibrücken (LV), Julich (LV) = 26/6 + Bavaria & vassals
 * Military Development: 38, 0
 * Hesse: 12
 * Hamburg: 12
 * Mecklenburg: 14
 * Bavaria: 12
 * Trier: 0
 * Zweibrücken : 0
 * Julich : 0
 * Economic Development: 50/40+5 (Larger empire) = 6
 * Hesse: 12
 * Hamburg: 12
 * Mecklenburg: 14
 * Bavaria: 12
 * Trier: 4
 * Zweibrücken : 4
 * Julich : 4
 * Infrastructure: 78
 * Hesse: 8
 * Hamburg: 8
 * Mecklenburg: 8
 * Bavaria: 8
 * Trier: 18
 * Zweibrücken : 18
 * Julich : 18
 * Expansion: 0
 * Motive: 6
 * Hesse: 9
 * Hamburg: 3 (aiding ally)
 * Mecklenburg: 3 (aiding ally)
 * Bavaria: 3 (aiding ally)
 * Trier: 3
 * Zweibrücken : 3
 * Julich : 3
 * Chance:
 * Nation Age: -5
 * Hesse: -5
 * Hamburg: -5
 * Mecklenburg: -5
 * Bavaria: 0
 * Trier: -15
 * Zweibrücken : 0
 * Julich : 0
 * Population: 8
 * Recent Wars: -4
 * Participation: +10
 * Number of Troops: 35,000, 1

Venice and allies

 * Location: 3 (11/4=~2.7=3)
 * Venice - 4
 * Epirus - 3
 * Candia - 2
 * Kaffa - 2
 * Tactical Advantage: 6
 * Open Field - 1 (it's all the Po valley)
 * Siege Equipment - 5
 * Nations per side: 16
 * Venice (L), Epirus (L), Candia (LV), Kaffa (LV)
 * Military Development: (58/?=~?=?)
 * Venice - 20
 * Epirus - 8
 * Candia - 10
 * Kaffa - 20
 * Economic Development: (72/?=~?=?+3(trade cities)+10(larger eco, larger trade)=?)
 * Venice - 18 (also Venice)
 * Epirus - 20
 * Candia - 20
 * Kaffa - 14 (also Kaffa)
 * Expansion: 0
 * Venice - 0
 * Epirus - 0
 * Candia - 0
 * Kaffa - 0
 * Motive: 10 (16/4=4+6(dem-sup)=10)
 * Venice - 7 (hegemony)
 * Epirus - 3 (aiding ally)
 * Candia - 3 (aiding ally)
 * Kaffa - 3 (aiding ally)
 * Chance: ?
 * Nation Age: -3 (-15+5=-10/4=-2.5=-3)
 * Venice - -15
 * Epirus - 5
 * Candia - 0
 * Kaffa - 0
 * Population: 7 (seven digits)
 * Recent Wars: -8
 * Venice - -2
 * Epirus - -2
 * Candia - -2
 * Kaffa - -2
 * Participation: 10
 * Number of troops: ? (52,500/?=?)
 * Venice - 26,000
 * Epirus - 14,000
 * Candia - 7000
 * Kaffa - 5500

Total: 41? (need to have Milanese input)

Milan

 * Location: 4
 * Milan - 5
 * Padua - 5
 * Trier - 3
 * Zweibrücken - 3
 * Julich - 3
 * Swabia - 4
 * Augsburg - 4
 * Tactical Advantage: 1
 * Open field - 1 (Venetian territory is on the edges of the Po Valley)
 * Nations per side: 8
 * Milan (L), Padua (LV), Trier (L), Zweibrücken (LV), Julich (LV), Swabia (L), Augsburg (L)
 * Military Development: 14
 * Milan: 0
 * Padua: 0
 * Trier: 0
 * Zweibrücken : 0
 * Julich : 0
 * Swabia: 7?
 * Augsburg: 7 ?
 * Economic Development: 26
 * Milan - 0
 * Padua - 0
 * Trier: 4?
 * Zweibrücken : 4?
 * Julich : 4?
 * Swabia: 7?
 * Augsburg: 7 ?
 * Infrastructure: 106
 * Milan - 20?
 * Padua - 20?
 * Trier - 18?
 * Zweibrücken - 18?
 * Julich - 18?
 * Swabia - 6?
 * Augsburg: 6?
 * Expansion: 0
 * Motive: 27+4 = 31/7 = 4
 * Milan - 9 (fatal attack)
 * Padua - 3
 * Trier: 3
 * Zweibrücken : 3
 * Julich : 3
 * Swabia: 3
 * Augsburg: 3
 * Chance: ?
 * Nation Age: -1
 * Milan: 5
 * Padua: 0
 * Trier: -15
 * Zweibrücken : 0
 * Julich : 0
 * Swabia: 0
 * Augsburg: 5
 * Population: 7
 * Recent Wars: -6
 * Milan: 0
 * Padua: 0
 * Trier: -2
 * Zweibrücken : -2
 * Julich : -2
 * Swabia: 0
 * Augsburg: 0
 * Participation: 10
 * Number of troops: ? (?/52,500=?)
 * Milan - 0
 * Padua - 0

Total: 37? (need to have Milanese input)

Discussion
NEED SOME MAJOR MOD INPUT ON CHECKING THE VALIDITY OF SOME OF THE MILANESE AND ALLIES SCORES DUE TO ISSUES WITH WORDING OF TURNS. Kunarian TALK 16:24, April 22, 2014 (UTC)

Good golly. Disputing the language of someone's turn is probably the most petty way to dispute an algo. My scores for one are canon considering they were acceptable in the last algorithm. NonEuclidean ツ (Talk)

Trier shouldnt be in this war Northern europe is their theatre and they cant supply a long distance defence like that. Their distance is a bit of a march. Same with Swabia most of the states you have involved are a bit too small to be able to fund this kind of war. Also Milans motive is not a fatal attack, hes not collapsing your or outright conquering you its defending some territory thats it. Those states that mad a trade off, Infra for no attacking means marching down south into italy to deal with that is a problem. So yeah no Trier or its vassals, any state not in the locale with a large infr cant make an appearance down in Milan. the distance is a bit too great considering you have to march through mountains and crap. Also after realizing how Infrastructure is kind of rigged yesterday in dealing with Prussia this has been changed to reflect only the main defender and in the case of certain bordering nations (only if they are going to be taken too) It makes alot more sense for the infra of the home defending nation to be considered and not every nations unless every nation in the coalition is being invaded. So yeah 108 on Infra isnt happening

Kunarian put the 9 motive himself. As for Trier and Swabia, they're my personal allies, and I've been improving relations since long before the war. Trier isn't even in Northern Germany, just the Rhine area. I'm only calling those two allies, nothing more. As for changes to the algorithm, any changes would probably need to take place after the war. It's not fair to change the algorithm to change the results. I'm probably not taking anything anyway, I just want peace. Tr0llis (talk) 20:05, April 22, 2014 (UTC)

You would need the offensive algo anyways so this is just a rebuffed invasion.

I see it is time. Imp (Say Hi?!) 11:44, April 23, 2014 (UTC)

Ayutthaya (Attacker)
Total: 203
 * Location: 20
 * Tactical Advantage: 5 (siege equipment)
 * Nations: Ayutthaya (L), Aceh (LV), Sri Vijaya (LV) = 13
 * Military Development:  46/0 => 46
 * Ayutthaya: 10 years (20)
 * Aceh: 6 years (12)
 * Sri Vijaya: 7 years (14)
 * Economic Development: 46 + 10 (larger econ) = > 56
 * Ayutthaya: 20
 * Aceh: 12
 * Sri Vijaya: 14
 * Expansion: 0 (last war was >15 years ago.
 * Infrastructure: N/A
 * Motive: 5 (preemptive strike)
 * Modifiers: 9 (support, high morale)
 * Chance: 9
 * Edit count: 7541
 * UTC: 10:24 =
 * Total: 7541/7*(3.14159265359) = 3384.39288582
 * Nation Age: -2
 * Aceh: Mature
 * Ayutthaya: Mature
 * Sri Vijaya: Ancient
 * Population: 8 + 20 => 28
 * Participation: +10
 * Number of Troops: 60,000/15,000 => 4
 * Recent Wars: 0

Majapahit (Defender)
Total: 68
 * Location: 25
 * Tactical Advantage: +2 (invading from Coast, partially)
 * Nations: Majapahit (L) = 5
 * Military Development:
 * Economic Development: - 2 (smaller econ)
 * Expansion: 0
 * Infrastructure: 6
 * Motive: 9 (defending possibly fatal attack)
 * Modifiers: -1 (low Morale, support)
 * Chance: 2 (see above)
 * Edit count: 0
 * UTC: 0 (0) =
 * Total: 0/0*pi (3.14159265359) =
 * Nation Age: + 5 (mature)
 * Population: 7
 * Participation: +10
 * Number of Troops: 60000/15000 = 0
 * Recent Wars: 0
 * Vassals and Puppets: 0

Result

 * ((203/(62+203))*2)-1 = 53.2%
 * (53.2%)*(1-1/(2*2)) = 39.9%

Discussion
It's not really plausible to take the whole Majapahit, even though they're in the mother of all declines, so instead this will annex the Western part to me while making the rest a vassal.

22:30, April 23, 2014 (UTC)

Question: Shouldn't location be averaged? Kind of seems weird like this. Sky Green 24 19:29, April 24, 2014 (UTC)

All 3 nations on the attacker side border the defender. It is averaged, but since they're all at 20 I saw no reason to list every single one.

21:18, April 24, 2014 (UTC)

Actually, the defender should get 20, since I'm not invading all of it, but what ever.

21:19, April 24, 2014 (UTC)

Somali Trade Dispute (1482 - ???)
Alexandria Merchants (Attacker)

Total: 67
 * Location: +3
 * Tactical Advantage: +1
 * Nations: Alexandria (L), Aiguptia (MV), Hungary (M)= +5 +1 +3 = 9
 * Military Development: 6 turns=12
 * Military Bonus: 12/6 = +2
 * Economic Development: 3 turns = +6
 * Economic Bonus = +2 (Alexandria) +10 (Much Larger Economy) +5 (Larger Trade)
 * Expansion: -4 (Alexandria)
 * Infrastructure: 4 turns N/A
 * Motive: +3 (economic)
 * Chance: 7
 * Edit count: 2519
 * UTC: 5:26 = 60
 * Total: 2595/60*pi = 135.873882268
 * Nation Age: -5
 * Population: +7 (4,100,000) +10 (eight times population)
 * Participation: +10
 * Number of Troops: 11,000/10,000 1.1 ~ 1
 * Recent Wars: -2 (L in Reclamation of Egypt)
 * Vassals and Puppets: 0

Somali Nation (Defender)

Total: 55
 * Location: +4
 * Tactical Advantage: +2
 * Nations: Somalia (L) = +5
 * Military Development: 6 turn = 12/2 = 6
 * Military Bonus: 6/12 = Less
 * Economic Development: 7 turns = 14/2 = +7 -2 (smaller Economy)
 * Expansion: N/A
 * Infrastructure: 7 turns of buildup = +14
 * Motive: +5
 * Chance: 135.873882268
 * Nation Age: -0
 * Population: +6 (500,000)
 * Participation: +10
 * Number of Troops: 10,000/11,000 = .8999 ~1 SUBJECT TO CHANGE
 * Recent Wars: 0
 * Vassals and Puppets: 0

Result

 * ((67/(55+67)*2)-1 = 0.0984
 * (9.8)*(1-1/(2*1)) = 4.9%
 * The war lasts for 1 years, ending just during the 1482 turn, and Alexandria takes 56px (max) from Somalia (Somalia is  1140pxs) (without Somalia nation being from the 40s it would be 83px)

Discussion
I can only see a few fixes. Firstly, does Alexandria proper have 4.1 million inhabitants? Modern day Alexandria has 4.8 million, so I find this highly doubtful. I also do not think Somalia gets a -5 on nations age, since their form of government has not changed since the fall of the Mashriq. Additionally, Somalia's location should be a 5, since they are defending their homeland. I also think that their motive would be higher. 07:44, April 24, 2014 (UTC)


 * In response to population it includes Aiguptuia as well as they are a vassal and in the war. As for the age of Somalia I could not find anything so i used the year 1458 which is Alexandria's independence and establishment from the Mashriq collapse as well. As for motive my goal is not to take huge swathes of land but rather enclaves to ensure trade safety and long term prosperity, thus the reasoning for thier motive being defending a non-fatal attack. Thank you for looking it over. g greg e  (talk)  15:18, April 24, 2014 (UTC)
 * Most of the Egyptian states became independent in the 1440's I think, with the exception of al-Swahili, formed in 1435. Tr0llis (talk) 21:38, April 24, 2014 (UTC)
 * Evidence? Ill give it the benifit of the doubt for now as im not planning on taking 80pxs anyway as that is implausible g greg e   (talk)  00:58, April 25, 2014 (UTC)



As a side note, in a trade dispute the victory typically doesn't take any land, just a ton of money and maybe future revenue. For plausibility I'd think you couldn't take any land, but you'd have a reason to come back and attack for lands at a later date. Tr0llis (talk) 14:38, April 24, 2014 (UTC)


 * I agree to the fact of not taking large pieces of land. Provided I am victorious I plan on taking a few small enclaves (10px-15px each) along the coast. I completly agree that anything more than that would need to change my motive as well as thiers. If these enclaves are threatend it may be a reason for further armed conflict. Thanks for your dilligence.   g greg e  (talk)  15:18, April 24, 2014 (UTC)

Hungary will be sending 3,000 soldiers to fight for Alexandria too. -- Imp (Say Hi?!) 21:57, April 24, 2014 (UTC)

Colonization List
Major:


 * Spain (Early 1490s)


 * Portugal (Late 1490s)


 * Albion (1500s)


 * France (1500s)


 * Scandinavia (1510's)

Minor:


 * Netherlands (1520-30)


 * Italy (1520s)


 * Prussia (1540-1550)


 * Oldenburg (1540s)


 * Hamburg (1540s)

Discussion
Pskov is a likely candidate for early colonization. It is a trade power, and thus has an interest in finding a cheap route to get the spices, silks, and whatnot from china and India WITHOUT having to deal with the Mongolo-tatars), thus giving way for exploreres to try and seek out new lands, and relative small size and lack of expansion possibilities push for colonization as a good method of moving excess population to develop resources, that will then be sold, lessening reliance on foreign powers for goods to transform, allowing Pskov to save money.-Lx (leave me a message) 01:21, April 25, 2014 (UTC)

Why am I listed for the 40s? I have expanded the navy constantly, I have explored just as much, if not more, than many of these others. I'm a heavy trade-based nation, so the prospect of new trade routes alone should allow me to push forward after the major nations. Not to mention I have the wealth to back it up.

I realize Georgia isn't on the list, but can I get an official estimate for when I'll be allowed to colonize, even if it's not as a major/minor power? I recognize that I don't have a major naval tradition, and that "American" colonization would likely be infeasible given my location. That said, I would like to get in on the age of colonization, even if it's only as a bit player outside the Americas, and would appreciate knowing when/if I can start moving into the few markets I can reach through the Philadelphi Canal and my port of the Persian Gulf. Thanks a bunch! TankOfMidgets (talk) 05:09, April 25, 2014 (UTC)

May I point something out?

OTL, almost no nations not directly connected to the Atlantic colonized, and the few that did, colonized much, much later.

Just saying. Pskov, the Romans, Hungarry etc actually should have no chance of colonization for a long time.

BTW, I"m in South-East Asia, I'm a fairly big power, when can I colonize Australia? 1550? Bit later? Bit earlier?

21:47, April 25, 2014 (UTC)

Well that was largely due to the fact that the nations on the Atlantic were more stable and had larger navies, while those away from it had smaller navies which were geared toward fighting neighboring enemies. Many OTL actions led to the colonization of the Americas, not the oversimplified list we've been given. I mean, Scandinavia had a tiny navy and an even tinier colonial empire in OTL, yet it's listed as one of the major colonizers. The Netherlands on the other hand, though tiny, had a massive fleet and economy, and historically maintained a massive colonial empire, yet is listed as a minor colonial power. I feel the entire system is screwed to pieces, though I'm honestly not surprised by the development. From the comments, it seems that people don't seem to be concerned about factoring history, economy, neccessity, or prior development, and just go on opinion. I mean, if Italy could build a colonial empire, why not Hungary, which has a large coast, navy, and economy? People should stop using their opinion and feelings to justify who can do what and when (such as I thnk/feel that X cannot do Y, and therefore cannot into America). I mean, Japan industrialized in less than 30 years, the fastest of any Western nation ever, yet it lacked the experience, will, or unity to make it happen when it did. Vivaporius: "I don't need a slogan" 22:00, April 25, 2014 (UTC)

As it Stands Australia is uncolonizable until 1700 thats not changing sorry. As for what viva said ive taken that into account and switched a few around Particularly Scandinavia and Netherlands since it does in fact make a bit more sense considering location etc etc. As for the minor colonizers, Italy has a bit better position and is essentially all coastal it would make sense their navy is well enough to go colonize something. Hungary had another country build all its ships that does not make a good colonizer if someone else builds all your ships. -Feud

Pskov is a trade power with a storng(albeit merchant) navy, and a growing military navy, now undergoing overhaul, previously based in Novgorod, now based in Nizhnigorodsk-Na-Narve, a city founded for the sole purpose of being pskov's chief shipyard and the base port of the Pskovain Navy. Pskov, as a trade power, has an interst to try and find a sea route to the orient without going around africa...and unfortunately they don't know that there is a bit of a continent in the way. Pskov has the motivation, it has a small size, and growing population, with no possibilities to grow, surrounded in all sides by other larger staes, and as soon as all those untapped resources that are the Americas, Pskov would have trade intersts in exploiting them for cash, and colonies seem a perfect place to send excess population. Colonies could provide raw good, and, due to mercantilism(a zero-sum economic ideology), the prevailing economic policy of the time when it comes to international trade, pskov getting raw resources to transform from territory it controls certainly does it good. Motivations to send explorers: yes Motivations for colonization: yes; Resources to colonize: more than enough; conclusion: Pskov is a viable colonial power.-Lx (leave me a message) 01:26, April 26, 2014 (UTC)

When looking at the colonisation rules it has a section which states the number of turns naval development has been stated. I have more than 50. The conservative date I received using the colonisation algo was 1506. And as for my ships, Venice helped to provide the initial technology and support when building the shipyards. After that Hungary built its own ships with only occasional help from Venice, therefore making that comment unfounded. Imp (Say Hi?!) 01:33, April 26, 2014 (UTC)

Same. I have more 65+ years of straight naval development (though don't expect me to jump into the colonization game for a bit for OOC reasons). In regards to Hungary, Venice was one of the greatest naval powers in history, and was only defeated by sheer luck (and the Ottomans). If anything, getting ships from Venice is akin to getting life advice from God himself (for those of us who believe of course). So even if Hungary got its ships from Venice, who it uses them is more imporant. Remember, for a good period of time, Japan, one of the greatest naval powers in recent history, got most of its warships from Britain and France, and yet it stomp major tail for nearly half a century with them. By your logic, Japan wouldn't be allowed to have its empire on account of it, not knowing how to use the ships, but on account of it purchasing its ships from overseas (lol, the irony). Vivaporius: "I don't need a slogan" 02:02, April 26, 2014 (UTC)

To Lx and Imp. Feud had an internal conflict with himself over adding Austria, and now they're gone, so I doubt Hungary or Pskov would be added when Austria is in a better position, and has a larger fleet (larger fleet than Hungary and larger war fleet than Pskov). They have also been expanding naval stuff since the beginning of the game, but I believe only the last few years are taken into account anyway, And lastly I'm pretty sure we don't even use the colonization algorithm. Tr0llis (talk) 12:50, April 26, 2014 (UTC)

Seriously? Larger fleet than Hungary? I really think not. Not only did they not have a vassal or such on the coast at the start of the game - the laying down of Austria's navy commenced my later than Hungary's. Run the numbers and Austria would still probably not equal me - my date would be earlier. Imp (Say Hi?!) 16:25, April 26, 2014 (UTC)

Pskov is a TINY nation with a SINGLE port. Furthermore, you have no method to reach America- the Oresund is controlled exclusively by Scandanavia.

Impo, same for you, only with Castille and Gibraltar rather than Scandanavia and the Oresund.

Feud, dammit, I'm right fricking next to Australia. It's not even a fortnight's journey.

16:46, April 26, 2014 (UTC)

Imp at the start of the game Austria had ports (not vassals but personal ones) on the sea, and a small, OTL private navy. You on the other hand have never touched the sea personally, and continue not to, therefore you're not even eligible, and all your naval development is basically null thus far. Tr0llis (talk) 17:01, April 26, 2014 (UTC)

Tells me how much you were paying attention to my turns. 1465 Hungary gets direct sea coast - as shown on the Map Complaints map. Early 1400 Venice agrees to assist Hungary with the construction of ships - giving me a large advantage. And Guns, so what? I pay my dues and get to go through. Imp (Say Hi?!) 17:08, April 26, 2014 (UTC)

Gwalior
I feel I should bring this to mod attention... Now, there are a couple of problems with this.
 * Kingdom of Gwalior: The small Kingdom at the center of the Indian Subcontinent looked anxiously towards it neighbors, fearing that the Gwalior Defense Forces would certainly fail to halt an attack. The army had already brought developments into the artillery and an envoy had been sent to the Oirats to purchase approximately 5000 Muskets. The new law that had been passed by Raja Vikram stated that all soldiers had to be equipped with an iron body armour and a sword. War Elephants had too been introduced to the GDF who were instructed with training the elephants for war. Meanwhile, Gwalior exported large amount of iron ore to its neighbours who were desperately in need for it and imported wheat, corn, spices etc as well as weaponry. TheKingdom of Gwalior expanded 500 px South into the Deccan, overrunning Nagpur, Gondia, Wardha and Bandara [OTL districts of Maharashtra, India] with ease but suffering a major defeat when the army attempted to invade the Kingdom of Chandrapur [OTL Chandrapur district of Maharashtra]. The newly conquered territory was quickly part of the Kingdom of Gwalior [Did not annex] and reinforcements were sent to the area once the King confirmed the success of the expedition. Population of Gwalior rises to 125,000 while the Gwaliori Army has a total of 15,000 troops [15,000 equally divided amongst GDF and GOF]

Firstly, India no longer has any disorganized states, and he cannot expand into those states sans algorithm, and I do not see one.

Secondly, there is no possibly way he can have an army of over 10% of his population in a pre-industrial nation. 2-3% would be the absolute upper limit even for the the most advanced nations at this time period. I think around 1500 troops would be more likely.

21:38, April 25, 2014 (UTC)

What is the current state of India that he would not be able to do this? If they are stable states, you are right, he needs an algorithm. The army is also too high. I'm not sure there has ever been an army that made up 10% of a country's population. What year is this, so it can be fixed? Cour *talk* 14:27, April 26, 2014 (UTC)

That was 1483.

I believe during WWII, Germany did have an army of over 10% of their population. But that was a heavily industrialized, modern nation fighting a total war for, basically, existence.

There are no longer any disorganized states in India. He needs an algorithm.

14:35, April 26, 2014 (UTC)

Right. I'll notify him. Cour *talk* 16:48, April 26, 2014 (UTC)

Except Feud beat me to the punch. Thanks Feud! Cour *talk* 16:50, April 26, 2014 (UTC)

Germany had a large army during WW2 as Guns said, but to get there by the end they had to enlist children and old men, most of whom were meth addicts or extremely fatigued. Tr0llis (talk) 17:03, April 26, 2014 (UTC)

... Meth addicts... 17:07, April 26, 2014 (UTC)

Labelled Map- SE Asia
I got bored, so I made a labelled map for SE Asia in 1485.



Here it is. Tell me if I got anything wrong, and what that thing in Australia is. 23:34, April 25, 2014 (UTC)

It looks good. The thing in Australia is the Marrikuwuyanga Empire. Callumthered (talk) 23:28, April 25, 2014 (UTC)

Ahh, thanks.

23:34, April 25, 2014 (UTC)

I've added it.

It's kinda fun being almost alone in a region.

23:37, April 25, 2014 (UTC)

It really is... 06:11, April 26, 2014 (UTC)

I (Oman) control Banda Island if you want to add that. - FP - YNWA 11:32, April 26, 2014 (UTC)

Sorry, FP, they're too small to appear here.

Though I am curious as to exactly how that happened...

Also, for some reason, even though I have uploaded a new version showing Dai Viet, the Marrikuwuyanga, and Sukhothai, the map isn;t showing them...

15:11, April 26, 2014 (UTC)

Wiki tends to do that some times. It shows up on the image at least when you click on it fully. Tr0llis (talk) 17:02, April 26, 2014 (UTC)