Talk:Lobositz's Lamentable Loss (Map Game)

Algorithm
This algorithm is very important in this game, because we will be having a war. Here is the algorithm:

Location

 * At the war: 5: At the War means that the battle is in your nation.
 * Next to the war: 4: Next to the war means that the battle is on or near your border.
 * Close to the war: 3: Close to the war means that the battle is inside your neighboring country. (This only applies is the country is Poland sized or really close to you in the case of a Russia size nation.)
 * Far from the war: 1: Far from the war means that the war is nowhere near your country or its capital cirty.
 * Halfway around the world: -1 (By negative, I mean it loses one, due to wasting massive supplies, poor main comands, and wariness from troops from the mainland.) Halfway around the world means that your are not on the same continent. However, if you border an ocean (the Atlantic, perhaps), then you can send troops to the other side of that ocean. No loss, no gain.

Strength

 * Every ally/nation participating in the battle with defenders or attackers: 3
 * Side with greater population: 6
 * Side with greater industry: 6
 * Control of the Seas: 3+ attackers, or 5+ defenders. (The nation with a superior navy in that area, that has control of the seas of the areas, has a major advantage, due to blockading ports, or cutting off the enemy's supplies.
 * Tired Military: If defending nation is fighting another war already somewhere else: -2
 * If attacking force is fighting another war somewhere else: -2
 * Size of Army: (Nation with a larger army) If attacker has a larger army: 3+
 * If attacking army is smaller -3
 * Vice versa for defenders.

Tactical Advantage

 * Attacker’s advantage: 1
 * Defender’s advantage: 2
 * Home is desert: Defenders +3, attackers -3
 * Island: 4
 * General:
 * (Depending on who is leading the army, if he is detailed and the general is historically sucessful.)
 * Attacker: 1+ Defender: 1+
 * Note: In this game island and defender advantage points are COMBINED

Random

 * Done using random.org from one to ten

Motive

 * Provoked: 8
 * Life or death (country’s sovereign existence is threatened): 7
 * Social/moral: 6
 * Religious: 4-7 (if government is based on a religion, 7, if not, 4)
 * Political: 5
 * Economical: 3
 * To Gain Land: 2
 * To Look Nice in the Eyes of Big Nations: -2

The possibility of perhaps making an exception to Rule 7
I know, I know, the rules say only one nation, but if I played as a ridiculously small nation (like, say, the Principality of Waldeck), could I perhaps play as another small nation somewhere else (like in Italy)?

Regards, Callumthered (talk) 10:21, August 2, 2012 (UTC)

Sorry to break it to you, but no. --RandomWriterGuy (talk) 16:21, August 2, 2012 (UTC)

That's fine. On another note, should the British, Dutch and French East India Companies be playable nations? They did exercise much self-government. Callumthered (talk) 22:11, August 2, 2012 (UTC)

Sure. Mind getting their respective flags? --RandomWriterGuy (talk) 00:19, August 3, 2012 (UTC)

Actually, scratch the Dutch. They did not have any major influence in India. However, there's the Dutch East Indies Co. And they controlled most of the archipelago at the time.

BTW, I added new nations to Europe. mind getting their respective flags? --RandomWriterGuy (talk) 08:46, August 3, 2012 (UTC)

I''ll try my best! ''

(...I did say the Dutch East India Company...) Callumthered (talk) 09:43, August 3, 2012 (UTC)

Mod Event-Controlled Nationa
I have been wondering something that pretty much was also a flaw in a Principia Moderni. NOT all states have expanded or did any major achievements. My thought is that can we allow some nations to be either controlled by mod events for the sale of plausibility? --RandomWriterGuy (talk) 08:48, August 3, 2012 (UTC)

China and Flags
Again, whoever made that Althistory.com map did absolutely no research whatsoever into the history of China, the Uyghurs, or Tibet during this time period. I will correct the inaccurate map once more. LurkerLordB (Talk) 15:47, August 4, 2012 (UTC)

Also, once again, the Qing flag was not invented until 1862, and even then it was in triangle shape. The Japanese Rising Sun flag was not invented until 8 years after the Qing flag. LurkerLordB (Talk) 15:50, August 4, 2012 (UTC)

Also, I think it would be a good idea to do what we did in the last game and uncolor NPC nations with no colonies that have colors and give all player nations colors to help tell the difference. LurkerLordB (Talk) 16:03, August 4, 2012 (UTC)

Also, Vietnam did not have a flag until the same year as the Qing, and the Thai flag was just the blank red one until 1790. LurkerLordB (Talk) 16:15, August 4, 2012 (UTC)

Can I join the game?
I would like to join the game as the Dutch East Indies, is it fine if I play? I just joined Althist wiki and in the months before I joined I read map games, so I wont be implausible. I Am Walrus (talk) 00:47, August 5, 2012 (UTC)I Am Walrus

No restrictions into joining. Go ahead. --RandomWriterGuy (talk) 01:55, August 5, 2012 (UTC)

ASB Tag?!
Why is this game tagged ASB?! And how can we fix it? --RandomWriterGuy (talk) 01:28, August 5, 2012 (UTC)

While I'm not too sure (you should ask LG, since he was the one to categorise it) I do believe it's because of the whole "Frederick dies causing the Brits to entirely collapse" thingy, to which I'd suggest just killing off Frederick (erase all the "Four Years' War" thingy, leaving how long would the war last and its outcome open). Fed (talk) 04:20, August 5, 2012 (UTC)

OK. Look. The inspiration came from this Fed. If you showed this to LG, would he reconsider? RandomWriterGuy (talk) 04:25, August 5, 2012 (UTC)

Well, RWG, it'd be far better if you made it different from the TL, since derivative works in this wiki are against the rules (and LG is rather keen on deleting said derivative works). Fed (talk) 04:30, August 5, 2012 (UTC)

So what do you suggest? --RandomWriterGuy (talk) 05:16, August 5, 2012 (UTC)

Change it a bit so that only Frederick dies, and leave who wins and what time does it take open. That would be enough of a difference I believe. Fed (talk) 05:18, August 5, 2012 (UTC)

Anything else? --RandomWriterGuy (talk) 05:54, August 5, 2012 (UTC)

I got somewhat of a good idea. Maybe if he dies in Lobositz. Similar outcome? --RandomWriterGuy (talk) 18:33, August 5, 2012 (UTC)

...

RWG, you asked me before you made this about how plausible that timeline was. The answer was "not in the least" then. It has not changed.

The whole thing - though everything associated with the Brits is the worst - is why it is tagged ASB.

Lordganon (talk) 05:42, August 5, 2012 (UTC)

Is there any plausible way for the French to win the Seven Years War? LurkerLordB (Talk) 15:21, August 5, 2012 (UTC)

Well, sure, but it would be a lot earlier than a lamentable loss at leuthen.

RWG, why are you surprised? You put up a nexus page, got a firm 'implausible'....

The Royal Guns (talk) 15:27, August 5, 2012 (UTC)

It's a map game. Really, all map games are implausible. Let's just let it be and try to enjoy it. ChrisL123 (talk) 02:12, August 6, 2012 (UTC)

Lurk, the answer is more or less no. Best they can hope for is to gain a few towns in Europe, bankrupting themselves in the process, while holding their ground in North America.

Lordganon (talk) 08:45, August 6, 2012 (UTC)

When does the game start?
Sorry, im new here, I'm not sure if I just didn't see it or something, but when do we start?I Am Walrus (talk) 04:12, August 5, 2012 (UTC)I Am Walrus

Once things are prepared. RandomWriterGuy (talk) 04:26, August 5, 2012 (UTC)

Can I pick another country?
I don't know whether to pick Brazil, a Portuguese colony, or Sweden, which I play as in another game, or even Denmark-Norway? (to make amends for what happened in that game) Stewdio333 (talk) 08:46, August 5, 2012 (UTC)

Troop Numbers
I saw that in the last game you guys had a lot of argument about troop numbers. The troop numbers were waaaaayyyyy too high. The only countries that could have that many troops would be Japan, maybe Korea, and China. (China once had armies of up to one million before all this happened). PitaKang- (But here's my number | So call me maybe) 16:01, August 6, 2012 (UTC)

I doubt Korea and Japan can muster an army this big. I think that until empires are large enough and/or population is high should this be possible. But for now China has the advantage. --RandomWriterGuy (talk) 21:25, August 6, 2012 (UTC)

Trust me- they could. PitaKang- (But here's my number | So call me maybe) 01:22, August 7, 2012 (UTC)

during the tokogawa shogunate japan couldnt but prior they could the japanese under hidoyeshi mustered an invasion of korea 50,000 strong and lorea i have no idea but i think 20000 or 30000 would the largest armies any nation save china, the idian states, the persian empire could muster until the french revolutionary wars were the idea of conscription was invented. nkbeeching

I think that there should be a list of the player-controlled nations and their potential troops numbers. Just a thought. Callumthered (talk) 02:07, August 7, 2012 (UTC)

Err-- Forced conscription was probably the most common form of "recruitment" in the East... PitaKang- (But here's my number | So call me maybe) 13:06, August 7, 2012 (UTC)

Also, the Japanese invading army was about 200,000, not 20,000. China was actually less than Japan or Korea, at 90,000 ish. Korea was in the hundreds of thousands as well because of all those militas. PitaKang- (But here's my number | So call me maybe) 13:16, August 7, 2012 (UTC)

Generally, China kept their various armies in the tens of thousands, and they were stationed all across the border. In the case of total war, they could muster up millions of troops. LurkerLordB (Talk) 13:33, August 7, 2012 (UTC)


 * Yeah, I meant in the Japanese invasion of Korea. Flag_of_South_Korea.png PitaKang- (But here's my number | So call me maybe) 14:19, August 7, 2012 (UTC)

Yep. Still, I feel that this is still going to be pretty ASB in terms of troops numbers. But hey, as long as it is... believable... I feel it should be allowed.

The Royal Guns (talk) 13:48, August 7, 2012 (UTC)

Out of self-interest, the African states in West Africa were able to muster 80,000 to 250,000 men for combat. The Benin Empire had nearly 90-125,000 men for combat, and the Ashanti themselves were able to maintain an army of 80,000 men at any given time, and upwards of 250,000 during a full-scale war. Once again, mearly interjecting... --"Truth fears no questions..." 14:12, August 7, 2012 (UTC)

I've already found approximate troop numbers from New France by merely finding those who fought in the (around 20,000). Perhaps instead of just stating numbers, we should get a reference before we claim troop numbers. ChrisL123 (talk) 15:37, August 7, 2012 (UTC)

shall we make a caps for the troops numbers maybe until the french revolutionary war were we can up it for japan, korea, and the western nations 50,000 for colonies 20,000 except the carribean islands which maybe 8000 at most, for china 100,000 and the rest of the world 30,000 sound goods? i know these numbers arent all historically corect but to make it fair and atleast slightly balanced. Nkbeeching

Plenty of tiny African nations would be incapable of mustering more than some of the larger colonies, which themselves would be able to gather armies of different sizes. Furthermore, if the fighting is going on in a nation (invaded, civil war), they could constript troops amounting to much higher numbers. A better idea would be to tie it into the situation, and into the percentage of the population. Like say 0.2% of the population for the maximum amount of troops possible to be mustered, unless you are being invaded or in civil war, then you can muster up to 5% of your population. LurkerLordB (Talk) 18:33, August 7, 2012 (UTC)

I have to agree with Lurker; the number of troops wasn't fixed at all and really should depend per nation (for example, the Ottoman Empire's strength at the start of the XVIII Century was slightly above 50,000, but during the Ottoman-Russian War the Otts and their allies mustered over 400,000 troops according to Wikipedia). There should be a population percentage limit but leave it at that. Fed (talk) 22:01, August 7, 2012 (UTC)

It would be until the Napoleonic Wars when nations, specifically in Europe, started using much larger armies. Small nations in the Napoleonic Wars could muster armies as big as armies of major European Nations in the Seven Years war. That should be an estimate of troop numbers. Ianian58 (talk) 14:39, August 8, 2012 (UTC)

Lets go with the SOA5 idea proposed toward the end of the game. 4% tops during peace or minor war (mods rule on the difference). 6% in major war (again, mods rule on the difference). 8% tops if your country is about to die with enemy troops being shoved down your throat (I don't think there will be much need for mods to rule on this).

The Royal Guns (talk) 09:55, August 9, 2012 (UTC)

Those numbers are too high in general. LurkerLordB (Talk) 11:17, August 9, 2012 (UTC)

The percentage system could work in some instances, but the german countries (Hesse-Kassel, Waldeck and more) which hired out mercenaries had very large armies for their small populations. Callumthered (talk) 01:06, August 10, 2012 (UTC)

I looked as this discussion, and I definitely believe this is a problem we would have to solve. I believe countries with high populations are capable of mustering the largest armies. Small countries cannot. They can only do this in times of civil wars, separatist rebellions, or mercenary-hiring. --RandomWriterGuy (talk) 05:38, August 10, 2012 (UTC)

Hesse-Kassel was in a state of almost constant hiring-out of mercenaries otl. Waldeck (somehow) managed to have two whole Regiments hired out to the Netherlands for like, thirty years. Whilst the size is not large compared to other countries, it was, somehow, do-able for some of the small German states. Anyway, unless a country's economy relies on a large military (like the hiring-out countries), then I think they should be pretty small. Especially considering the world only just got out of a war, and will be in debt. Callumthered (talk) 23:24, August 10, 2012 (UTC)

3-Day Dissapearence
I will be gone for three days starting tomorrow. And I know the start of the game will be delayed. I assure you it will be Saturday. What time? When I tell you so. RandomWriterGuy (talk) 05:43, August 7, 2012 (UTC)

ASBness?
I think this game is a tad bit ASB/implausible.Mostly because Britain still has possessions in North America. I think that the Ohio River Valley should go to France, at the least. That was amajor goal for both sides in North America.

Syngraféas Enallaktikí̱ Istoría, Dic mihi lingua Anglorum. 05:49, August 13, 2012 (UTC)