Talk:Principia Moderni II (Map Game)

Archives
Archive 1

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 flp back and forth with the rules.

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

Maps
Maps will be updated every 50 years.

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


 * Bavaria's vassal, Wurttemberg annexed Baden to create the state of Baden-Wurttemberg.Andr3w777 (talk) 18:33, September 20, 2012 (UTC)
 * That was done. Scandinator (talk) 05:42, September 21, 2012 (UTC)
 * That was done. Scandinator (talk) 05:42, September 21, 2012 (UTC)

Siam
Total:
 * Location: 4
 * Tactical Advantage: 1
 * Strength: Siam (L), Sukhothai (MV): 6
 * Military Development:
 * Expansion:
 * Motive: 7
 * Chance:
 * Edit Count:
 * UTC Time:
 * Nation Age: 5
 * Population: 9
 * Participation: 10
 * Recent Wars: 0
 * Recent Wars: 0

Khmer/Cambodia
Total:
 * Location: 5
 * Tactical Advantage: 0
 * Strength: Khmer (L): 4
 * Military Development: 0
 * Expansion: 0
 * Motive: 10
 * Chance:
 * Edit Count:
 * UTC Time:
 * Nation Age: -5
 * Population: 7
 * Participation: 10
 * Recent Wars: 0
 * Recent Wars: 0

Result
Cbb chance Scandinator (talk)

Austria
Total: 68
 * Location: 5
 * Tactical Advantage: 0
 * Strength: Austria (L), Venice (M), Byzantine Empire (MV), Bavaria-Munchen(S), Bavaria-Straubing (SV), Bavaria-Landshut (SV), England (M), Brandenburg (SV), Aragon (M), Milan (M): 23
 * Military Development: 8
 * Expansion: 0
 * Motive: 10
 * Chance: 5
 * Edit Count: 2103
 * UTC Time: 3:51
 * 2103/15*pi= 440.45129
 * Nation Age: 5
 * Population: 9
 * Participation: 10
 * Recent Wars: -2
 * Participating in another war: -5

Albert VI's Rebels
Total: 49*1.5=73.5
 * Location: 4
 * Tactical Advantage: 1
 * Strength: Albert VI's Rebels (L), Bohemian Rebels (M), Istrian Rebels (M), Croatian Rebels (M), Hungary (M), Luxembourg(S), Palatinate (S): 20
 * Military Development: 8
 * Expansion: 0
 * Motive: 10
 * Chance: 1
 * Edit Count: 2103
 * UTC Time: 3:51
 * 2103/15*pi= 440.45129
 * Nation Age: -10
 * Population: 6
 * Participation: 10
 * Recent Wars: 0

Result
The rebels can annex at most (73.5/(73.5+68)*2)-1=3.8% of Austria's remaining territory. Upper Austria (Tirol) remains independant, Aquelia forms.

Discussion
When did Luxembourg support Albert? I have to interest to support the hated Albert and fight against Austria. I refuse to fight Austria in a form. If Luxembourg will help, I shall not in any form and I will even declare independence from Luxembourg and throw off vassalization. Does Luxembourg even have a player? Syngraféas Enallaktikí̱ Istoría, Dic mihi lingua Anglorum. 04:12, September 9, 2012 (UTC)

I side with Austria ... Bavaria These are not the droids you are looking for. 04:19, September 9, 2012 (UTC)

Bavaria cant send military supplies since then it would be fighting three wars at a time and lose the reunification war. Brandenburg is a vassal of Luxembourg which wants the HRE throne and will do anthing to claim it. If you declare independence then you will be fighting another war. Scandinator (talk) 04:25, September 9, 2012 (UTC)

Very well, I will still try to send some basic help to my emperor. Also I thought I was only fighting one war, the war of unification?These are not the droids you are looking for. 04:38, September 9, 2012 (UTC)

England will support Austria, but the anglo-irish lordships won't be capable to send help for obvious reasons. --Galaguerra1 (talk) 04:27, September 9, 2012 (UTC)

Well, I certainly shan't fight Austria. **** off, Luxembourg.

Syngraféas Enallaktikí̱ Istoría, Dic mihi lingua Anglorum. 04:31, September 9, 2012 (UTC)

I thought Byzantium was Conquered? Saamwiil (talk) 04:36, September 9, 2012 (UTC)

Also, why isn't Burgundy there if Luxembourg is? How can the rebels have military development? Isn't their population limited to their armed forces? They aren't a nation, they're just rebels.

Syngraféas Enallaktikí̱ Istoría, Dic mihi lingua Anglorum. 04:41, September 9, 2012 (UTC)

The rebels were trained by Hungary, Venice resuced the Greek remanents of Byzantium. Burgundy and Luxembourg have nothing in common. They have seized part of Austria already and that area is their population base. If you wish not to supply or fight Austria's enemy with your 1 point then declare independence and have a proxy war with Luxembourg. Scandinator (talk) 04:44, September 9, 2012 (UTC)

Well, and I am smarter than that. I just got out of a war. I shall wait, meanwhile engaging in a diplomatic war with Luxembourg. And I thought Burgundy is also a Luxmebourgish vassal.

Syngraféas Enallaktikí̱ Istoría, Dic mihi lingua Anglorum. 04:48, September 9, 2012 (UTC)

Sorry MP old chap, but apparently Bavaria is not allowed to directly help you. Gott in Hemmel!!!! Das ist Sehr sclecht!!These are not the droids you are looking for. 04:51, September 9, 2012 (UTC)

But remnants isn't a whole state. You might get some military build up, but they wouldn't be a major factor in the war. Byzantine's army wasn't even that large at its demise. Saamwiil (talk) 04:56, September 9, 2012 (UTC)

Wait! Milan is also helping Austria, I just haven't post yet. Bauglir Stormageddon, Dark Lord of All (talk) 05:05, September 9, 2012 (UTC)

It's been three years since venice took over the Greek parts of Byzantium. Somethings got done and they have an official army which Venice transported to Austria. Scandinator (talk) 06:39, September 9, 2012 (UTC)

Where did DeanSims say Venice could annex the Greek parts of the Byzantine Empire? He was able to annex it all, unless he gave the rest of Venice they can't take it. LurkerLordB (Talk) 20:43, September 9, 2012 (UTC)

He said that the Ottomans annexted the Byzantine Empire, which presumably means all of it. LurkerLordB (Talk) 20:52, September 9, 2012 (UTC)

OTL The Ottomans took Athens in 1458 and the rest of Greece in 1460. The Greeks also declared independence as the short-lived Despotate of Morea in this time period. Venice with it's holdings on the Peninsula ATL stepped in and offer the Greeks protection from the Ottomans. Also the Ottomans could not take Constantinople and Greece in a year. To dismantle the seige equipment and march south straight away would kill morale. Scandinator (talk) 12:11, September 10, 2012 (UTC)

According to Florence's player, they are now supporting Austria. Monster Pumpkin (talk) 01:30, September 11, 2012 (UTC)

Algorithm
Another suggestion I might make is to give people a slight bonus, perhaps plus 3 or 4 for having a nation page. PitaKang- (But here's my number | So call me maybe) 01:15, September 11, 2012 (UTC)

>.> This is a joke, right? If yes, I fail to see where the funny is.

Syngraféas Enallaktikí̱ Istoría, Dic mihi lingua Anglorum. 02:03, September 11, 2012 (UTC)

Nope. I'm being totally serious here. PitaKang- (But here's my number | So call me maybe) 10:12, September 11, 2012 (UTC)

I actually agree with Pita. This forces the "conquerers and tyrants" of map games to put effort into this one. Scandinator (talk) 12:27, September 11, 2012 (UTC)

I agree and disagree. Yes I want people to put a lot of effort in, but I think making someone loose a war isn't the fairest way. Hmmm, I'm not too sure on this. VonGlusenburg (talk to Von!) 12:41, September 11, 2012 (UTC)

What about player vs. NPC wars? That could mess the algorithms up. CrimsonAssassin (talk) 14:38, September 11, 2012 (UTC)

I think I'm with Von. It's a good idea to reward people for working hard, but that might be a little too much of a reward. Maybe instead a nation page automatically counts for one year of military and economic buildup . CourageousLife (talk) 20:24, September 11, 2012 (UTC)

Perhaps we should just have revolts in the nations of people who refuse to make any nation pages after 10 days of playing the game. LurkerLordB (Talk) 21:51, September 11, 2012 (UTC)

Holy....

Hang on, I'm making one now. The Royal Guns (talk) 21:58, September 11, 2012 (UTC)

Far too hard to punish people for not making pages. I agree with the revolt proposal of LLB. --Galaguerra1 (talk) 22:08, September 11, 2012 (UTC)

The revolt is still a punishment albeit a much less serious one. Perhaps a famine or economic disaster instead too? VonGlusenburg (talk to Von!) 10:16, September 12, 2012 (UTC)

I think if the first ten years after joining pass and not page is created the player should have a revolt, if he has a vassal or colony, then it should gain independence, being annexed by other state or become savage (black) territory. After that, if a page is still not created, every six or seven years, periodical disaster would happen, such as famines, minor revolts, economical crisis, &c...

If a page for colonies is not created, then revolts, and, after much time, independence, despopulation or foreign annexation. --Galaguerra1 (talk) 00:24, September 13, 2012 (UTC)

Making a section for your vassals and colonies on your country's page is okay? i mean, it is difficult to create a page if you don't know how the cities are going to be called. that's why i never created pages for my colonies when i played as Hungary on the original game. i didn't had any idea of how they would name a colony.since i live in a former Portuguese colony, naming them will be easier, but what if i create a colony in a place that Portugal never colonized.How am i going to have a idea of how they would name it?--Collie Kaltenbrunner (talk) 21:14, September 13, 2012 (UTC)

Then you make your best guess. I tend to go with the native language of the colonizer to describe the area. Florida was a spanish word 'Flowery Land'. The english tended to name places after people, such as Virginia, a reference to Queen Elizabeth I, the 'Virgin Queen'. Heck, all of america was named for Amerigo Vespucci (I think that's how you spell his name). Many people named the place after the people who lived there. Quebec was an Algonquin word 'Kebec', for 'where the river shortens'. There's all kinds of ways to name a place, and as long as it's plausible, it'll be fine. CourageousLife (talk) 21:29, September 13, 2012 (UTC)

Well, the Portuguese also did it (native language) sometimes.that's why we have cities with names like Itaquaquecetuba, Pindamonhagaba, Araraquara, Guarapari, Paranaguá, Itamaracá, etc... --Collie Kaltenbrunner (talk) 22:29, September 13, 2012 (UTC)

The name doesn't have to be related with the OTL name. The spaniards (I'm form a former spanish colony) used to call towns in native names (for example, 'Tucumán, Neuquén', in mapudungun), after saints ('San Luis, San Juan' that mean 'Saint Louis, Saint John'), after an already existing place in Spain that they associated with this enw palce ('La Rioja' is an argentinan province, naemd after an already existing spanish one, other example will be New York named after York, in England), after an explorer (America after Americo Vespucci) or even after the territory itself for a particualr characteristic. The river in which the cities of Buenos Aires ('Fair Winds') and Montevideo (I don't know the ethymology and it has no meaning in spanish) were palced was names Río de la Plata ('Silver River'), as the spanish thought they could find silver on it.

The portugueses basicly did the same, don't worry for have some cities in different colonies with the same name, and other minor details.--186.60.17.13 17:00, September 14, 2012 (UTC)

Venice
Total: 69
 * Location: 5
 * Tactical Advantage: 0
 * Strength: Venice (L), Byzanite Empire (MV), Bavaria (S), Bavaria-Straubing (SV), Bavaria-Landshut (SV), Croatian Rebels (M), Papal States (S), Aragon (MV), Brandenburg (M), Epirus (S), Sweden (MV), Norway (MV), Denmark (M): 29
 * Military Development: 10
 * Expansion: 0
 * Motive: 10
 * Chance: 5
 * Edit Count: 1260
 * UTC Time: 21:29
 * 1260/36*pi= 109.9557428
 * Nation Age: -5
 * Population: 7
 * Participation: 10
 * Recent Wars: -2

Hungary
Total: 42
 * Location: 4
 * Tactical Advantage: 1
 * Strength: Hungary (L): 4
 * Military Development: 8
 * Expansion: 0
 * Motive: 3
 * Chance: 5
 * Edit Count: 1260
 * UTC Time: 21:29
 * 1260/36*pi= 109.9557428
 * Nation Age: 0
 * Population: 9
 * Participation: 10
 * Recent Wars: -2

Result
Crushing Venetian victory. Venice can at most annex (69/(69+42)*2)-1=24.3243% of Hungarian territory.

Reminds me of the Hungarian World War from Imperial Europe I. :( PitaKang- (But here's my number | So call me maybe) 21:54, September 11, 2012 (UTC)

Scaring people into submisison
I was wondering, since the only real reson why the Russian states are fragmented is becayuse a long time ago brothers warred to become the Grande Prince of Kiev, and then settle with their cities but with sovreignty, with culture, faith and basicaly the same dynasties, would it be possible if we annex one due to war we could scare the rest into being annexed with our military power(in an either you join us and have our military protect you or we do the same thing we did to the other guy type of way). Would that be allowed as long as its plausible? or would we have to stick with them being vassals or have a war with Each of them to get their territory-Lx (leave me a message) 21:57, September 11, 2012 (UTC)

lol. Well, I'm getting Tver, Rostov, and Yaroslavl. But, yeah, I suppose that is true.

How about the Samoyeds and etc? ]

The Royal Guns (talk) 22:28, September 11, 2012 (UTC)

They're tribes, its just normal expansion for them...no war required...after all ,there is no central governement and they are nomads. you don't need war to expand into black areas...at least not in the original PM you didnt.-Lx (leave me a message) 22:34, September 11, 2012 (UTC)

It makes sense to be able to annex a vassal that has been vassalized for a while. It would be a transition from independence to annexation, first you scare them or bribe them into vassalization, then you increase your influence over a decade or too, until you have total control over them and they can't resist being annexed.

However, I have been considering making individual city-states (like in the HRE) able to be annexed without an algorithm. LurkerLordB (Talk) 22:49, September 11, 2012 (UTC)

Also on the subject of vassals, I want to establish that using a RNG to determine if it is realistic to vassalize a nation or not is unrealistic. Unless you have totally surrounded the nation and have an incredible advantage, you should spend multiple turns (4-5 at least) using diplomacy to threaten, bribe, or persuade that vassal to join your main nation. I'm just going to get rid of any limit on the number of vassals a nation can have, as in OTL they didn't have any limits, but I will say that the combined area/population of the vassal states gained through methods other than algorithmic war should not be more than half of the area of the main nation LurkerLordB (Talk) 02:12, September 12, 2012 (UTC)

The Russian States of Tver, Yaroslavl and Rostov are surrounded by either muscovy or muscovy/novgorod

NO. I called them. Muscovy doesn't have a lot of options for expansion.

The Royal Guns (talk) 22:34, September 12, 2012 (UTC)

May be you should make a aprtition, struggle for the domain of those states or just create a joint federation with both your countries. --Galaguerra1 (talk) 00:27, September 13, 2012 (UTC)

I think its totally ridiculous, but I did create one that I am working on. Anywho, Moscow is going to collapse soon with all its wars and whatnot. You really should cut down on the expansion a bit. Work on the inside for a while. Then when you think you're ready, go after everyone.

Syngraféas Enallaktikí̱ Istoría, Dic mihi lingua Anglorum. 00:20, September 14, 2012 (UTC)

Protestant Reformation
I am currently consulting with LordGanon as to plausible places for it to begin, so please don't try and start one before I can bring back some more info. I think nothing major should occur until 1510 at the earliest. LurkerLordB (Talk) 00:06, September 14, 2012 (UTC)

Tibet
So, can it get a colour on the 1460 map?

Also, what happened to the labelled maps? I need to know what the names of the states around me are... 77topaz (talk) 06:59, September 14, 2012 (UTC)

About vassalizing and unifying
Ok, I'm getting tired. I have seen to far historical and political mistakes by many players, such as: I wanna to say that, I think we should stop this vassalization thing, specially on the HRE. --Galaguerra1 (talk) 17:37, September 14, 2012 (UTC)
 * Vassalizing. Many have said that you have to brib or threaten a country to make it a vassal. That's fine, but many people takes it just as it is written. To vassalize a state, you must have do something more than just saying "I'm start to brib this one so I get to make him my vassal in a few turns". You have to do stuff, sending ambassadors, offering royal marriages, giving the government or the people gifts, send ultimatums, instigate rebellions, &c...
 * Dynastical union. Who was the one who wrote that a dynastical union is a union of two states with the same dynasty? History is full with states of the same dynasty that had different governments (such as Spain and Austria after Charles I's abdication). What's the political meaning of having the same dynasty? Two states in that condition usually are allied with each other, but their government are totaly independent from the other one's.
 * Personal union. I say again, you don't just ask another country to join you in a union. For that to happen, you must be allies, arrange a royal marriage between the heirs, making a rebellion to put some state's ruler as ruler of the other one. A country is not going to just accept your leader as their own, replacing the other, after a few turns of diplomatical relations, not even well described in most cases.

Instigating rebellions is a way to vassalize that I forgot to mention. It is assumed that ambassadors would be sent bringing the bribes (AKA gifts to the government or people) or sending the threats/ultimatums. Royal marriages would fall under Dynastic union (which I don't really understand your complaints about?) True, for the personal union you need to either marry the existing monarch or topple them. LurkerLordB (Talk) 02:02, September 16, 2012 (UTC)

My main complains are that people is acting like the countries will become vassals just because they ask them to. I think mods should check more carefuly in plausibility about the personal unions, and specially the player-non player diplomatical relationships, because people could abuse of the non-player states sorrounding them and control them as puppets even if they are not. --Galaguerra1 (talk) 18:59, September 16, 2012 (UTC)

Muscovy

 * Location: 4
 * Tactical Advantage: 1
 * Strength: Muscovy (L), Novogorod (S) (I could be wrong here): 6
 * Military Development: 8
 * Expansion: -3
 * Motive: 3
 * Chance: 8
 * Edit Count: 1933
 * UTC Time: 2144
 * Nation Age: Old Nation (+5)
 * Population: 16
 * 6 digits in population
 * 5-10 times larger +10
 * Participation: 10
 * Recent Wars: -3
 * Total: 63
 * Total: 63

Rostov

 * Location: 4
 * Tactical Advantage: 0
 * Strength: Rosotv (L): 4
 * Military Development: 0
 * Expansion: 0
 * Motive: 10
 * Chance: 3
 * Edit Count: 1933
 * UTC Time: 2144
 * Nation Age: Ancient Nation (-5)
 * Population: 6
 * 5 digits in population
 * Participation: 10
 * Recent Wars: 0
 * Total: 32
 * Total: 32

Result
(((63/(32+63))*2)-1) = 32.63%, which is the maximum that can be taken. The war, as of Sept 14th, has lasted 3 years. The Royal Guns (talk) 21:57, September 14, 2012 (UTC)

So, I get roughly 30% of their territory.

Discussion
So, How badly did I screw up? The Royal Guns (talk) 21:57, September 14, 2012 (UTC)

Actually, population also takes the number of digist in account. this means that Rostov would have roughly 5, or 6 of population. yours also must be taken into account.judging by your territory, i would say that you have 6 or 7 of population.Rostov's population also must be 5, as you are invading them, and the places where the battles take place are too close to the city of Rostov to be a 4.--Collie Kaltenbrunner (talk) 10:12, September 15, 2012 (UTC)

Map Issues 1460

 * Bavaria is united completely, and Wurttemberg is it's vassalAndr3w777 (talk) 01:01, September 15, 2012 (UTC)
 * Austria only conceded Tyrolian independence, not Slovenia's. Also, I thought the rebel Bohemian territory would go back to Bohemia. Furthermore, the situation in the Black sea was resolved, Scan. There is no need to purchase anything, you already have it. Monster Pumpkin (talk) 03:06, September 15, 2012 (UTC)
 * What about my island in the Aegean Sea? --Galaguerra1 (talk) 03:15, September 15, 2012 (UTC)
 * Tyrol demanded it's and Aquelia's independence in return for ending the war. The rebel Bohemian terriotory was actually Austria's but wished to rejoin Bohemia. I'll fix the Black Sea. England will get their island. Scandinator (talk) 07:01, September 15, 2012 (UTC)


 * The Moscow people got all the territory. It was a coalition war(note the same war name).-Lx (leave me a message) 14:25, September 15, 2012 (UTC)

If those Rebels are going to revolt again, then I don't want them. They can go to Bohemia.

As for Aquelia, I made it clear that their independence was not acceptable. I counteracted that request by giving Albert V a high position in government.

Monster Pumpkin (talk) 15:15, September 15, 2012 (UTC)

@Lx, 50/50 then right?

@Pumpkin, will fix. Scandinator (talk) 16:05, September 15, 2012 (UTC)

I think there's an issue with the map - when I asked Khandesh and Berar to be vassalised, Berar accepted and Khandesh declined. However it shows Khandesh instead of Berar in my colour. Am I missing something, or is it a mistake? Our Brave Old World (talk) 20:45, September 15, 2012 (UTC)

Thanks OBOW! It's fixed. Scandinator (talk) 00:01, September 16, 2012 (UTC)

We Muscovians got all the territory because we won our war but you didn't... Because it was framed as two different wars... The Royal Guns (talk) 19:06, September 17, 2012 (UTC)

Where's Dimurat? They are the most stable of the post-Timurid states, and they are absent from the map. They control OTL Afghanistan and parts of Pakistan. The rest is still just chaos. Also the Manchurians purchased the wedge of Chinese territory directly south of Manchuria.

Yank 21:41, September 18, 2012 (UTC)

Naval Expansion
So, I've expanded the navy of Chichen Itza for the past 9 years. Considering that it had almost no sailing technology before 1450 and the rapid rate of upgrades, what would my sailing capabilites be? How far could I plausibly hope to sail? CourageousLife (talk) 13:54, September 15, 2012 (UTC)

I'd say rowing boats are your max level of naval tech at the moment. If determined enough you could reach nearby islands but to find them there will be numerous failed expeditions and ones that have to return. Scandinator (talk) 15:58, September 15, 2012 (UTC)

I developed sails a couple years back, was that ASB? Nothing as big as Eurasian sails, but still sails. CourageousLife (talk) 16:47, September 15, 2012 (UTC)

Sails are fine. It doesn't take a genius to figure it out. I'd check prevailing wind patterns in the Gulf to see where the sail boats end up. And the boats would hold only a few people at a time. So you would be unviable for and major colonization or trade for a while, exploring is fine though and I might and an event about a failed expedition... Scandinator (talk) 23:54, September 15, 2012 (UTC)

Thanks, that helps a lot! CourageousLife (talk) 23:57, September 15, 2012 (UTC)

Bahmani Invasion of Koli
Can a mod do this for me? Thanks.

Bahmani
Total: 49
 * Location: 4
 * Tactical Advantage: +1 (attacker's advantage)
 * Strength: Bahmani Sultanate (L), Berar (MV), Gondwana (MV): 8
 * Military Development: +3
 * Expansion: -4
 * Motive: 3
 * Chance: 2
 * Edit count: 44
 * Time: 2*1*5=10
 * 4.4*pi = 13.823
 * Nation Age: +5
 * Population: 17
 * 7 digits in population
 * 5-10 times the size of Koli +10
 * Participation: 10
 * Recent Wars: -0

Koli
Total: 31
 * Location: 5
 * Tactical Advantage: +2 (attacked from sea)
 * Strength: Koli: 4
 * Motive: 10
 * Chance: 3?
 * Nation Age: +0
 * Population: 7
 * 7 digits in popultion
 * Participation: 10
 * Recent Wars: 0

Result
Bahmani Victory. The Sultanate of Bahmani can take at most ((49/(49+31))*2)-1=22.5% of Koli and determine how long the war lasts.

Discussion
Did we decide to use the thousandths place of the chance result for NPCs? LurkerLordB (Talk) 17:27, September 16, 2012 (UTC)

Aragon

 * Location: 4


 * Tactical Advantage: +1


 * Strength: Aragon (L), Navarre (M), Brandenburg (S), Luxemborug (SV), Pomerania (SV), Austria (S), Tyrol (SV): 21


 * Military Development: 4


 * Expansion: 0


 * Motive: 3


 * Chance: 6
 * Edit count: 6774
 * Time: 1709
 * 6783/63*pi = 337.796........


 * Nation Age: +5


 * Population: 9


 * Participation: 10


 * Recent Wars: -3

Total: 55

Bearn

 * Location: 5
 * Tactical Advantage: 2


 * Strength: Bearn (L), France(M), Valois (M): 10


 * Motive: 10


 * Chance: 6


 * Nation Age: +5


 * Population: 6


 * Participation: 10

Total: 54
 * Recent Wars:

Discussion
Mountains? What mountains? And why have all the Ms been downgraded to Ms? We are giving military aid and you cannot change that. Syngraféas Enallaktikí̱ Istoría, Dic mihi lingua Anglorum. 20:55, September 16, 2012 (UTC)

Pyrenees... And just how are the Tyrolians gonna reach Bearn? Scandinator (talk) 02:02, September 17, 2012 (UTC)

Oh, right. And through Austria of course. Austrian help means Tyrolian help. Syngraféas Enallaktikí̱ Istoría, Dic mihi lingua Anglorum. 02:05, September 17, 2012 (UTC)

Salzburg could help too, as it is a vassal of Austria. But I wonder why I was brought into this war...

Monster Pumpkin (talk) 02:19, September 17, 2012 (UTC)

I thought you saw the algorithm on the HRE Unification talk page.

Syngraféas Enallaktikí̱ Istoría, Dic mihi lingua Anglorum. 02:25, September 17, 2012 (UTC)

I did, Just ask before you attack again please.

Monster Pumpkin (talk) 02:29, September 17, 2012 (UTC)

Okay. Syngraféas Enallaktikí̱ Istoría, Dic mihi lingua Anglorum. 02:43, September 17, 2012 (UTC)

Sending military help AKA troops to a far away war is implausable with current technology and high risk as well. Scandinator (talk) 06:59, September 17, 2012 (UTC)

Wait, Beárn wasn't a French vassal? so the countries involved part should be 9, not 10 for them.--Collie Kaltenbrunner (talk) 17:28, September 17, 2012 (UTC)

So what is the result? And since I am waging a war of liberation, can another alogorithms be added? --RandomWriterGuy (talk) 04:43, September 20, 2012 (UTC)

Everyone hold up a second. A: This war is over. B: earn is still a French vassal. So what are you liberating? Bearn? From YOURSELF? You're liberating your rebels? WTF? Syngraféas Enallaktikí̱ Istoría, Dic mihi lingua Anglorum. 00:27, September 21, 2012 (UTC)

Labelled maps
What happened to the labelled maps? I need to know what the names of the states around me are... 77topaz (talk) 08:25, September 16, 2012 (UTC)

I'll post up the ones from 1450. But I'll only update them every 50 years. Scandinator (talk) 09:23, September 16, 2012 (UTC)

Just look at the original named map, no new countries have appeared for anything so its just the same. In fact now we just lost countries. If your unsure what happened, just do a CTRL-F search on the game page for the countries you think is there so you can check the posts to see if it says it was annexed anywhere VonGlusenburg (talk to Von!) 13:44, September 16, 2012 (UTC).

Link? 77topaz (talk) 09:54, September 17, 2012 (UTC)

...Its at the top of the talk page...Scandinator (talk) 11:36, September 17, 2012 (UTC)

Holy Roman Empire (led by Tyrolia)
Total: 58?
 * Location: 4
 * Tactical Advantage: 1
 * Strength: Austria (M), Tyrolia (L), Salzburg (MVW) Switzerland? (M), Florence (S), Piombino (SV), Bavaria (M), Wurttemburg (MV), Baden? (MV), Milan (M), Genoa (MV), England (M), Calais (MV) = 31 so far.
 * Military Development: Salzburg and Austria were building up its miltary a few turns ago, and Milan and Switzerland are doing that now, so +6 for Austria/Salzburg, +6 for Switzerland, and +4 for Milan.
 * Expansion: -7?
 * Motive: +5
 * Chance: Can a mod help here?
 * Edit Count:
 * UTC Time:
 * Nation Age: +5
 * Population:
 * Participation: +10
 * Recent Wars: -3?
 * Recent Wars: -3?

Savoy
Total: 28
 * Location: 5
 * Tactical Advantage: ?
 * Strength: Savory (L), Monaco (M), the other two (M) = 13
 * Military Development:
 * Expansion: 0
 * Motive:
 * Chance:
 * Edit Count:
 * UTC Time:
 * Nation Age:
 * Population:
 * Participation: 10
 * Recent Wars:
 * Recent Wars:

Discussion
Sorry so much of this is incomplete, but this is the first time I have done an algorithim like this. Monster Pumpkin (talk) 22:53, September 17, 2012 (UTC)

The IP was me, and I didn't see Tyrolia as the leader. Is Salzburg the vassal of Tyrolia? LurkerLordB (Talk) 22:59, September 17, 2012 (UTC)

Salzburg is a vassal of Austria.

What does leader mean. Because I thought it meant that you needed a good general or something. Is that it?

Monster Pumpkin (talk) 23:00, September 17, 2012 (UTC)

Leader is the state that actually is doing most of the fighting. For example, in the Iraq war, the US would be the leader. The leader of the war should be a state that either borders the nation they are at war at, borders the Mediterranean and has a good navy, or has permission to cross through nations in the way. If multiple nations are doing the fighting, we can have a coalition algorithm, however, they really all should be able to get large amounts of troops Savoy. LurkerLordB (Talk) 23:10, September 17, 2012 (UTC)

Well, I don't know who would be doing the most fighting. Maybe Switzerland, but I don't know or not.

I think we would need a coalition algorithim, as I doubt my nations are the only ones that will fight savory.

So I guess the algorithim is tied for now?

Monster Pumpkin (talk) 23:15, September 17, 2012 (UTC)

Muscovy
Total: 37
 * Location: 4
 * Tactical Advantage: 1
 * Strength: Muscovy (L), Novogorod (S): 6
 * Military Development: 8
 * Expansion: -3
 * Motive: 4
 * Chance: 7
 * Edit Count: 1*9*5*9=360
 * UTC Time: 1853
 * 1853/360*pi=16.170
 * Nation Age: Old (+5)
 * Population: 16
 * Participation: 10
 * Recent Wars: -18

Yaroslavl
Total: 23
 * Location: 5
 * Tactical Advantage: 1
 * Strength: Yaroslavl (L): 4
 * Military Development: 0
 * Expansion: 0
 * Motive: 3
 * Chance: 0
 * Nation Age: Ancient (-5)
 * Population: 5
 * Participation: 10
 * Recent Wars: 0

Result
Muscovite Victory, Muscovy can annex ((37/(23+37))*2)-1=23.3% of Yaroslavl territory at most, depending on how long the war lasts. Muscovy's player can decide how long the war lasts

Discussion
Muscovy can take 35.135% of Yaroslavlan territory, which is enough to overthrow the government and annex the whole country... right? The Royal Guns (talk) 19:02, September 18, 2012 (UTC)

Please include the math for the chance and results, so it can be checked. You've had six years of war going on in the past 15 years, so that is -3 for each year of war. Though I only count 2 times of expansion, when you beat the Golden Horde and when you beat Rostov (expanding in a war only counts the very last turn where you finalize control over your expansion, so expanding because you win a war only counts -1) LurkerLordB (Talk) 21:24, September 18, 2012 (UTC)

I am thinking about attacking the Ottomans, but I am unsure of how much military power I have, combined with Lezhe and Serbia. Bfoxius (talk) 13:31, September 19, 2012 (UTC)


 * P so that's 23.33%, right? You had put it as 7.24%, but you had done it with the wrong scores (Yaroslavl had 23, not 32).

The Royal Guns (talk) 19:09, September 19, 2012 (UTC)

Novgorod
Total: 54
 * Location: 4
 * Tactical Advantage: 3(swamp and cold + attacker)
 * Novgorod(L)/Moscuvy(S)/Pskov(S): 8
 * Military Development: 2*10=20
 * Expansion: -0
 * Motive: 3(want more territory)
 * Chance: 7
 * Edit Count: 2878
 * UTC Time: 21:25- 2*2*5=20
 * 2878/20 * pi =452.0751828515712470
 * Nation Age: -5(Ancient nation)
 * Population: 7
 * Participation: 10
 * Recent Wars: -3(golden horde war)

Kazan Khanate
Total:26
 * Location: 5
 * Tactical Advantage: 0
 * Kazan(L): 4
 * Military Development: 0
 * Expansion: 0
 * Motive: 5(defending form attackers)
 * Chance: 5
 * Edit Count: 2878
 * UTC Time: 21:25- 2*2*5=20
 * 2878/20 * pi =452.075182851 5 712470
 * Nation Age: -10(stabilized in the last 5-10 years)
 * Population: 7
 * Participation: 10
 * Recent Wars: 0

Result
Clear Novgorodian Victory. Novgorod can take at most (54/54+26)*2-1= 0.35 = 35% of kazan territory, enough to topple the governement and take over the nation, and do with it what it pleases.

Discussion
Please feel free to point out any errors. This is still basicaly a draft of the war algorithm...but novgorod is winning by many points...many points indeed. please feel free to point out any errors I may have made or anything I may have left out(I'm not sure if I can still add military dev points before the Horde war...but that would only give me 2 extra points). -Lx (leave me a message) 21:58, September 19, 2012 (UTC)

Pretty sure you can't...

Umm, looks good, only...

The Royal Guns (talk) 22:37, September 19, 2012 (UTC)

Scotland
Total: 64
 * Location: 4
 * Tactical Advantage: 1
 * Scotland(L), France (M): 7
 * Military Development: 2*15=30
 * Expansion: -0
 * Motive: 3(want more territory)
 * Chance: 1
 * Edit Count: 5710
 * UTC Time: 2*2*2*1=8
 * 5710/8*pi =2242.311
 * Nation Age: +5
 * Population: 6+2=8
 * Participation: 10
 * Recent Wars: -1 (brief revolts in the early 1450s in one year will count)

Irish States
Total:34*1.5=51
 * Location: 5
 * Tactical Advantage: 2 (attacked from Sea)
 * Ireland(L), Papal States (SW): 5
 * Military Development: 0
 * Expansion: 0
 * Motive: 10
 * Chance: 1
 * Nation Age: -5
 * Population: 6
 * Participation: 10
 * Recent Wars: 0

Result
Scottish Victory, Scotland can annex (64/(64+51)*2)-1=11.3*1.5=16.95% of Irish territory at most. The war will last 4 years allowing them to annex (16.95)*(1-1/(2*4))=14.83% of free Irish territory

Discussion
The population may be subject to change if England has taken more of Ireland since the last map. LurkerLordB (Talk) 22:39, September 19, 2012 (UTC)

I added the Papal States, since apparently they are siding with heretics over fellow Catholics? LurkerLordB (Talk) 22:20, September 20, 2012 (UTC)

England has not yet declared war on Scotland, since I'm specting you to retreat and give me the conquered territories by 1568. The Papal States do not support Ireland, thus. --Galaguerra1 (talk) 00:15, September 21, 2012 (UTC)

Yeeeaah.... I believe the chances of the Scots forking over their Irish territory to the English is absolutely zero.

Yank 00:20, September 21, 2012 (UTC)

The Papal States stated that they sent aid to the Irish states, not on the condition that England helped. They cancelled that though, so they will be counted as withdrawing.

Scotland would be happy to agree to give up the territories by 1568, considering that is more than a hundred years away, but I imagine you meant 1458, in which case the Scottish are not going to give anything to Britain (though a negotiation to divide the island between the Scots and English, such as the Scottish getting Ulster and the English getting the rest, would be feasible). LurkerLordB (Talk) 00:25, September 21, 2012 (UTC)


 * Just wanna make it clear that it wasn't "siding with the heretics", it was ensuring the continuity of the Laudabiliter, so the English can retain their sovereignty over Ireland. And yes, we withdrew support.
 * Plus, if I helped the Scottish, I'd be hypocritical in going against the Laudabiliter, so. ChrisL123 (talk) 00:30, September 21, 2012 (UTC)
 * I'm not surrendering at this. If you don't cancel this by 1468, I'll declare war. Neither England nor the Papal States have anything to fear from Scotland. Ireland is mine, and I think the Pope should side with me on this. --Galaguerra1 (talk) 03:26, September 21, 2012 (UTC)
 * Well, we'll see what the Pope does, and we'll see what happens if he sides with England or remains neutral. LurkerLordB (Talk) 21:15, September 21, 2012 (UTC)

Different Algorithm Ideas for Fragmented states
I have begun to consider the unrealistic nature of our current rules for the algorithm. Currently, we have it so that nations in civil disarray or city-states have a 1*5 bonus on algorithms, making them incredibly hard to beat. This is not realistic in both senses.

For nations in civil disarray: Historically, nations in civil war have proven easy pickings for invading powers. Now, Kenny's logic when designing the algorithm was that since the populace is more armed, they would be defeated easier. I have a new proposal: they have no change to their final total. Because they are not unified the 1.5 modifier on land they lose is still in place. They still cannot take territory in wars. However, in the current results algorithm, instead of being (p)*(1-1/(2x)), they will have it be (p)*(1-1/(x)). This will require wars there to last twice as long to gain the same amount of territory. Due to their civil war, they will be heavily armed. The conflict will make their conquest easier, but they will take longer to subdue because they are used to civil conflict. Thoughts?

Now, for city-states: City states will be weaker due to their divisions preventing them from uniting a single offense. However, they are individually stable. They are individually going to be just as difficult to defeat as a nation their size. They are still functional states. Therefore, I have come up with the following idea: City states still get the *1.5 for the amount of territory they lose, get no bonus in their final score, but if they do win, they can take territory as long as the nation they take it from has territory to take close enough for the city states to rule without it being considered a colony. Thoughts?

Note: this would only apply to wars begun after we reach a conclusion here. LurkerLordB (Talk) 23:13, September 19, 2012 (UTC)

This seems fairer than the current system we have, and more realistic. I agree with this proposal. --Galaguerra1 (talk) 03:25, September 20, 2012 (UTC)

Unless anyone has any objections, all wars starting in 1468 or later will use this system. LurkerLordB (Talk) 01:21, September 22, 2012 (UTC)

Aq Qoyunlu
Total: 63
 * Location: +3
 * Tactical Advantage: +1
 * Strength: +18 (9 turns)
 * Military Development: Aq Qoyunlu (L +4), Assyria, (MV +2), Ramadan (MV +2), Dulkadir (MV +2), Circassia (SV +1), Desert State (SV +1), Zayannids (M +3), Crimea (S +2), Granada (M +3) Mamluks (M +3) = 23
 * Expansion: -5
 * Motive: Social Friens (+5)
 * Chance: 4
 * Edit Count: 726
 * UTC Time:5*4*0 =1
 * 726/1*3.14 = 2279.64
 * Nation Age: 0
 * Population:7
 * Participation: 10
 * Recent Wars: -4

Hafisds
Total: 36
 * Location: +5
 * Tactical Advantage: 0
 * Strength: Hafsids (L +4)
 * Military Development: 0
 * Expansion:0
 * Motive: +5 Defending
 * Chance: 4 (random.org, I don't know how to do the other one.)
 * Edit Count:
 * UTC Time:
 * Nation Age:5
 * Population:6
 * Participation: 10
 * Recent Wars:-3
 * Recent Wars:-3

Results of War
((63/(36+63))*2)-1 = 27.27 War is lasting 5 years. (27.27)*(1-1/(2(5))) = 24.53% of their terriotry can be annexed. However, I'm only annexing 3% of their territory bordering Cape Alfons, with the rest I'm deciding to make ammends with Hafsids, and to show it, a buffer between them and the Hafsids, and an alliance.

Discussion
Why this 25 on the recent wars part?be aware that this part for recent wars is to be on negative points.--Collie Kaltenbrunner (talk) 17:28, September 20, 2012 (UTC)

P.s. - who is leading this war, why it is on religious motive, and when it started?--Collie Kaltenbrunner (talk) 17:28, September 20, 2012 (UTC)

I am leading the war, and it started, in my command 1865, I don't know how long th Mamluks were already doing war with them. Saamwiil (talk) 22:19, September 20, 2012 (UTC)

How to they have 25 on recent wars? Not only is this supposed to be a negative number, but I don't see how they can have such a high number. Are they at war with five different nations at once? Have they been at war for eight and one-third years against someone? LurkerLordB (Talk) 22:27, September 20, 2012 (UTC)

I'm so sorry, I put it in the wrong spot, that was the temporary total score. Saamwiil (talk) 22:29, September 20, 2012 (UTC)

I am assuming my alliance with the Marinids was cut after the revolts. Saamwiil (talk) 10:57, September 21, 2012 (UTC)

Yes, after all, a different dynasty altogether has risen to power.--Collie Kaltenbrunner (talk) 16:08, September 21, 2012 (UTC)

Territory Issues & Map Issues
Sorry, maybe I'm messing up here, but Gondwana seems to be a Vijanagar territory even though I was sure I'd gotten there first and had been consolidating since. Maybe I'm messing up but can somebody help me here? OBOW - any questions? (talk) 17:43, September 20, 2012 (UTC)

Hold on, I'll clarify. I sent an offer of friendship in 1453, which received no response, and an offer of absorption in 1456. This also received no response. I made another offer in 1461 with no response. In 1462 Vijayanagar took over the country. I would call this rather unfair as for a number of years I had been attempting to take the country but had thought that absorbing it would probably require a mod's permission due to being quite a major action. In 1463, I missed Vijayanagar's turn and assumed that I was probably unlikely to get a response and began taking over the country. I began a year after Vijayanagar but in view of my repeated attempts (had they been responded to I probably would have taken over earlier) I would say I was equally entitled. Any opinions? OBOW - any questions? (talk) 22:08, September 20, 2012 (UTC)

The map still refuses to acknowledge that I purchased the wedge of Chinese territory south of my nation. The included map show showcase what I mean. The border of the territory is a rough one I just slapped together on Paint. Also the recent mod event states that the Golden Horde's territory in the east was evenly divided between the Sibirians and the Kazakh-Mongols.

Yank 18:28, September 20, 2012 (UTC)

Also, the Desert State needs to be added to the map. Saamwiil (talk) 22:25, September 20, 2012 (UTC)

Firstly map issues will be posted at the top of the page from now on. @OBOW Gondwana is Hindu and thus ignore attempts by non-Hindu states to vassalize or annex or ally. @Yank will be fixed. @Saam the Desert State is implausable, nomads don't care about your nation and the land is worthless to you. That region of the world was only colonized and conquered after world war one.Scandinator (talk) 05:42, September 21, 2012 (UTC)

Ok, thanks. Is Gujarat a vassal of mine? OBOW - any questions? (talk) 17:53, September 21, 2012 (UTC)

Leaving the game
I just wanted to leave a note saying I'm leaving this game; probably the wiki as well. I have schoolwork and an alternate history novel of my own to contend with, and in any case I live in the countryside and it takes me about an hour to upload my turn every night. Since I discovered I hadn't occupied Gondwana I think my Grand Plan for Islam went down the drain anyway (no insult to Vijayanagar's player; I wish him well). I'll probably be back in about four years. That's possibly premature but if it's true please be there when I come back - OBOW - any questions? (talk) 00:03, September 22, 2012 (UTC)]]

By four years, do you mean in-game or real life? If you mean in-game, we'll definately be there barring some apocalypse, but if you mean in real life, I doubt so. LurkerLordB (Talk) 00:54, September 22, 2012 (UTC)

I think he means real life years, which is quite a shame, he was a good player. Plus it messes up the caliphate's plans to expand into India. Sad to see you go OBOW, VonGlusenburg (talk to Von!) 01:15, September 22, 2012 (UTC).

Epirus
Total: 78
 * Location: +4
 * Tactical Advantage: +1
 * Military Development: +16 (8 turns)
 * Strength: Epirus: (L+4), Albania (MV+2), Serbia (M+3), Papal States (M+3), France (M+3), Bavaria (M+3), Brandenburg (S+2): +20
 * Expansion: 0
 * Motive: +5?
 * Chance: +8
 * Edit Count: 274
 * UTC Time: 3:33 (3*3*3 = 27)
 * (274/27)*pi = 31.88134
 * Nation Age: +0
 * Population: 6
 * Participation: 10
 * Recent Wars:

Ottoman Empire
Total: 29
 * Location: +5
 * Tactical Advantage: 0
 * Strength: Ottoman Empire (L+4)
 * Military Development: +6 (3 turns)
 * Expansion: 0
 * Motive: +5
 * Chance: +1
 * (274/27)*pi = 31.88134
 * Nation Age: -5?
 * Population: 9
 * Participation: 10
 * Recent Wars: (-3) [Byzantine] + (-3) [Karman] + (-1) [HRE aid] = -7

Results of War
Second try at an algorithm. Should probably let a mod confirm the result. ChrisL123 (talk) 03:39, September 22, 2012 (UTC)

Vassal Turns
Okay, noob question: Since sometimes my schedule doesn't coordinate with PMII's, I just saw the mod event with Alodia agreeing to my vassalation around 8 years ago. I don't really understand how do vassal turns work; can somebody explain it to me? Fed (talk) 04:17, September 22, 2012 (UTC)