Talk:Principia Moderni II/Archive 6

Brandenburg
Total: 78
 * Location: 2
 * Tactical Advantage: 5 (larger colonial empire), 1 (attacker)
 * Strength: Brandenburg (L), Scandinavia (M), Luxembourg (S), Saxony (M), Magdeburg (S) = 14/4 = 3.5 ~ 4
 * Military Development: 26
 * Economy: 0
 * Infrastructure: 0
 * Expansion: 0
 * Motive: 3
 * Chance: 6
 * Edit Count: 8751
 * UTC Time: 16:35
 * 1*6*3*5 = 90
 * 8751/90 x pi = 305.4675...
 * Nation Age: +5
 * Population: 16
 * Participation: 10
 * Recent Wars: - 1

Erokees
Total: 46/51
 * Location: 5
 * Tactical Advantage: none
 * Strength: Erokees (L +4) = 0
 * Military Development: 5/2 = 2.5 = 3
 * Economy: 5/2 = 2.5 = 3
 * Infrastructure: 5/2 = 2.5 = 3
 * Expansion: 0
 * Motive: 5/10
 * Chance: 7
 * Nation Age: 5
 * Population: 5
 * Participation: 10
 * Recent Wars:

Result
((78/(78+38))*2) - 1 = 34.48%

Discussion
Infrastructure doesn't count for your score unless you are the defender.--Collie Kaltenbrunner (talk) 22:40, December 28, 2012 (UTC)

Are you sure? Fegelein! Fegelein! Fegelein! 22:49, December 28, 2012 (UTC)

Yes.it's even on the rules.--Collie Kaltenbrunner (talk) 07:07, December 29, 2012 (UTC)

And plus, your capital is pretty much in the other side of the world, the chance for NPC's isn't random (is the number right after your number), and your score can only be 3 on motive, because you aren't defending your ownteritory, and fighting to help an ethnicity on their nation is pretty much implausible, since it is an native nation, after all.their motive is 10, as you already had shown pretensions of annexing them before, and all the other motives that give 7 do not apply.and, your ages are pretty much the same, as the formation of the Haudenosaunee and the last government change of Brandenburg happened on the same timeframe.--Collie Kaltenbrunner (talk) 07:28, December 29, 2012 (UTC)

OK. I'll fix the math in the morning; I'm going to sleep now. Fegelein! Fegelein! Fegelein! 07:17, December 29, 2012 (UTC)

OK I'm doing this all over again. Fegelein! Fegelein! Fegelein! 23:18, December 29, 2012 (UTC)

Again, you did the economy wrong, the Haudenosaunee appeared in 1458, so it was more than 100 years ago.And there ain't no way their motive can't be 10, counting the precendents.--Collie Kaltenbrunner (talk) 06:44, December 30, 2012 (UTC)

No, it's five. I'm trying to get as much as possible, not all of it. And these advantages are becoming really implausible. How on earth can native tribes fight back armed Europeans? Fegelein! Fegelein! Fegelein! 07:26, December 30, 2012 (UTC)

Well, in OTL, the Haudenosaunee themselves survived until the 18th century.--Collie Kaltenbrunner (talk) 09:39, December 30, 2012 (UTC)

Notification
I might be a bit inactive the next week or so (I already was a bit) because of the holidays. 77topaz (talk) 03:03, December 30, 2012 (UTC)

I also might be absent from today until tuesday, or it is thursday? i always confuse these the day before wednesday.but don't worry, the map will be ready before 1570 ends, and i already told AP to take my place on posting in case that i can't access the internet there.--Collie Kaltenbrunner (talk) 17:53, December 30, 2012 (UTC)

The day before wednesday is tuesday. Also I can do the map if you want. You'll probably want to update your colonies yourself mind you, so take the current updated map for 1565 and upload it for 1570 with your colonial expansion on it and I'll do the rest. VonGlusenburg (talk to Von!) 18:46, December 30, 2012 (UTC)

I'm back.it is still 1569, so i guess that i can make the map in time.--Collie Kaltenbrunner (talk) 09:24, January 2, 2013 (UTC)

Mahdiate
Total: 64*1.5 = 96
 * Location: +4
 * Tactical Advantage: (larger colonial empire, attacker) +6
 * Strength: Wallachia (M), Rumelia (L), Anatolia (L), Candar (M), Karaman (M), Cilesia (M), Trbizond (M), Al-Slaveit (M), Crimea (M), Georgia (M), Circassia (M), West Qoyunlu (M), East Qoyunlu (M), Iraq (M) Persia (M), Afghanistan (M), Balochistan (M), Koli (M), Gujurat (M), Deccan (M), Mangyastau (M), Dimurats (M), Bukhara (M), Xwarezm (M), Turkistan (M), Aqmola (M), Oman (M), Shaybah (M), Nejd (M), Hadramut (M), Yemen (M), Ehthiopia (M), Nubia (M), Hijaz (M), Egypt (M), Palesine (M), Syria (M), Tripolitania (M), Tunisia (M), Algeria (M): 122/22 -- 5.545 ~ +6
 * Military Development: +4
 * Economy: +4
 * Infrastructure: 0
 * Expansion: 0
 * Motive: +3
 * Chance: +8
 * Edit Count: 5,961
 * UTC Time: 21:32 - 2*1*3*2 = 12
 * 5,961/12*pi= 1560.58615067
 * Nation Age: -10
 * Population: 9 +20 = +29
 * Participation: +10
 * Recent Wars: 0

Byzantium
Total: 32
 * Location: +5
 * Tactical Advantage: 0
 * Strength: Byzantium (L), Venice (M), Scandinavia (S), Papal States (M), Austria (M), Tyrolia (MV), Salzburg (MV), Cyprus = 22 -- 0
 * Military Development: 0
 * Economy: 0
 * Infrastructure: 0
 * Expansion: 0
 * Motive: +10
 * Chance: 0
 * Edit Count: 34
 * UTC Time: 21:32 - 2*1*3*2 = 12
 * 34/12*pi= 8.90117918517
 * Nation Age: 0
 * Population: +7
 * Participation: +10
 * Recent Wars: 0

Results
((96/(32+96))*2)-1 = 0.5

(50)*(1-1/(2*2)=37.5

The Caliphate wins 37.5% following a 2 year war meaning that they can annex the Byzantine empire.

Discussions
I think you need a leader, else the military development scores and the economy scores can't be done.i assume the leader would be likely Rumelia, ain't it?--Collie Kaltenbrunner (talk) 17:39, December 30, 2012 (UTC)

I'd say Rumelia would be the leader. Fed (talk) 17:51, December 30, 2012 (UTC)

Yeah Rumelia makes the most sense.

Also wouldn't relgion be the reason? The Mahdi wants to spread Islam rather than gaining economic resources.

Also thank you very much for making the algorithm I was dreading doing it. --VonGlusenburg (talk to Von!) 18:42, December 30, 2012 (UTC)

The HRE states are missing. I'll add them. And can all the Caliphate states always give M or S in a war? Sounds kind of ridiculous... Fegelein! Fegelein! Fegelein! 18:55, December 30, 2012 (UTC)

That is a bit ridiculous, considering that most of the turns by the Caliphate in 1566 are "builds up its economy/military", with no word of being involved in the war, yet their names are still in the algorithm. ChrisL123 (talk) 19:21, December 30, 2012 (UTC)

What he said. Fegelein! Fegelein! Fegelein! 19:34, December 30, 2012 (UTC)

The Byzantium side has a larger colonial empire(Scandinavia, Venice, etc). Not to mention the penalties for recent wars on the side of the Caliphate. Isn't there penalties for having 3+ wars at once(Byzantium, Morocco, Adal, etc).AP (talk) 19:46, December 30, 2012 (UTC)

No you misunderstand the algorithm, its colonial empire of the countries which are fighting in the war only. So only the colonial empires of Byzantium and Caliphate are considered.

And the wars being waged at the same time are being done by different provinces of the caliphate so that stuff don't apply. Its the same as penalizing Venice for a war fought by Brandenburg just because they both in the HRE. VonGlusenburg (talk to Von!) 22:22, December 30, 2012 (UTC)

We're talking about the leaders here. And you guys don't have a colonial empire, just an empire. Fegelein! Fegelein! Fegelein! 22:25, December 30, 2012 (UTC)
 * No you fool, we have colonies in Africa, 4 colonies to be exact. Socotora, Chomellak and two in South Africa. VonGlusenburg (talk to Von!) 14:11, December 31, 2012 (UTC)

How are Ethiopia and Nubia going help you in this war with crossing masses of land and water? Fegelein! Fegelein! Fegelein! 22:26, December 30, 2012 (UTC)
 * The same can be said for Scandinivia, Austria, etc. VonGlusenburg (talk to Von!) 14:11, December 31, 2012 (UTC)

Cyprus supports Byzantium BTW. Airlinesguy (talk) 01:08, December 31, 2012 (UTC)
 * Military aid I take it? VonGlusenburg (talk to Von!) 14:11, December 31, 2012 (UTC)
 * Yep. Airlinesguy (talk) 00:16, January 1, 2013 (UTC)

On the other algorithms, the coalition's colonial empire was considered. The penalties make no sense because there should be a hefty penalty for fighting a 3 front war. Wouldn't that be a bit difficult for anyone? And that example made no sense because the Caliphate is a single entity with provinces while the HRE is a loose federation of sovereign states.AP (talk) 01:17, December 31, 2012 (UTC)
 * Byzantium are not fighting in a coalition. And my example makes perfect sense if that is how we've been treating the caliphate for the past 100 years. Please read the rules and check past examples properly before applying them to this case. VonGlusenburg (talk to Von!) 14:11, December 31, 2012 (UTC)

The Caliphate gets 20% of Byzantium. Yank 14:24, December 31, 2012 (UTC)

Mahdiate
Total: 63*1.5 =95
 * Location: 4
 * Tactical Advantage: 6 (attacking, larger colonial)
 * Strength: Wallachia (M), Rumelia (M), Anatolia (M), Candar (M), Karaman (M), Cilesia (M), Trbizond (M), Al-Slaveit (L), Crimea (L), Georgia (M), Circassia (M), West Qoyunlu (L), East Qoyunlu (M), Iraq (M) Persia (M), Afghanistan (M), Balochistan (M), Koli (M), Gujurat (M), Deccan (M), Mangyastau (M), Dimurats (M), Bukhara (M), Xwarezm (M), Turkistan (M), Aqmola (M), Oman (M), Shaybah (M), Nejd (M), Hadramut (M), Yemen (M), Ehthiopia (M), Nubia (M), Hijaz (M), Egypt (M), Palesine (M), Syria (M), Tripolitania (M), Tunisia (M), Algeria (M), Byzantium (M) 126/15 --- 3.93 -> 4
 * Military Development: 73/8 -- 9.125 -> 9
 * Economy: 2/2 --0
 * Infrastructure: 0
 * Expansion: 0
 * Motive: 3
 * Chance: 8
 * Edit Count: 1447
 * UTC Time: 11:34 --> 374
 * 1447/374*2.1415926535 = 8.285
 * Nation Age: -10
 * Population: 9 + 20 = 29
 * Participation: 10
 * Recent Wars: 0

Muscovy
Total: 41
 * Location: 5
 * Tactical Advantage: 0
 * Strength: Muscovy (L), Novogrod (L), Poland (L), Scandinavia (M), Lithuania (M), Psokov (MV), Rostov (MV), Ruhenia (MV), Ryazyan(MV), Ukraine (MV), Moldova (MV), Sibir (MV), Baltica (M) 35 -- 0
 * Military Development: 8 -- 0
 * Economy: 2 -- 0
 * Infrastructure: 0
 * Expansion: -1
 * Motive: 10
 * Chance: 3
 * Edit Count: 2780
 * UTC Time:11:40 440
 * 2780/440*3.14 = 19.839
 * Nation Age: 5
 * Population: 8
 * Participation: 10
 * Recent Wars: 0

Results
((95/(35+95))*2)-1 = 46.15

(46.15)*(1-1/(2(3))) = 38.45

The will last 3 years, and Russia is to be annexed. It will be explained how it will be divided. Saamwiil, the Humble 22:54, January 1, 2013 (UTC)

Discussion
Should we do the war algorithms for the invasions of Adal and Morocco first? VonGlusenburg (talk to Von!) 15:46, December 31, 2012 (UTC)

You can. My hand will be full with European algorithms. Saamwiil, the Humble 21:52, January 1, 2013 (UTC)

You need to add the other russian states to the allies list. They're being invaded so they'll be fighting too. VonGlusenburg (talk to Von!) 22:58, January 1, 2013 (UTC)

WOAH! I leave for a couple of days, and when I come back I'm being ANNEXED? The Royal Guns (talk) 20:56, January 2, 2013 (UTC)

A) Since Poland and Novgorod are also leaders, you must count their population- AND ANYWAY ours is 8 digits.

As a result, you also have to count their military development and Economic development, and Infrastructural development.

Next, our motive is 10, because you have more than sufficeint power to annex us- as you just proved.

Baltica will be aiding us, as they are part of Russia and a player nation- add another M, if not L.

And shouldn't half of Europe be supporting us? The Royal Guns (talk) 21:01, January 2, 2013 (UTC)

You guy's haven't posted for a while so I doubt your development scores will be anything to shout about. Secondly, Europe isn't supporting you because they've got their own wars to deal with. Regardless, you'll be independent again in 1575 (a mere 6 years away) so stop moaning; plus then you'll have most of Russia/eastern europe flattened so it'll be easy for you to conquer them.

Basically keep quiet for a while & you'll have you territory back and more soon enough giving you a chance to unite Russia under your exclusive control as you'll have the prime position to take over all of Russia yourself once all the new Russian states gain independence from the Caliphate in 6 years. Remember this is our empire we're breaking up in 1575 so make it quite hard or easy for you to pick up the pieces. VonGlusenburg (talk to Von!) 21:55, January 2, 2013 (UTC)

Russia is annexed into the caliphate in 1570 as the war started in 1567.

(German) Kappelist League
Total: 25
 * Location: +4
 * Tactical Advantage: (attacker) +1
 * Strength: Mecklenburg (L, mentioned thrice ), Hesse-Wolfenbuttel (L, mentioned twice ), Munster (L, mentioned twice ), Brunswick (M), Lauenburg (M), Paderborn (M), Nassau (M), Strassburg (M), Breman (M), Altmark (M): 33 --> 0
 * Military Development: 2 (Meck 3/2), 2 (Hesse 3/2), 2 (Munster 3/2) = 6 -- 0
 * Economy: 2 (Meck 4/2), 3 (Hesse 5/2), 3 (Munster 5/2) = 8/2 = +4
 * Infrastructure: 3 (Meck 5/2), 3 (Hesse 5/2), 3 (Munster 5/2) 9 -- 0
 * Expansion: 0 (Meck), 0 (Hesse), 0 (Munster)
 * Motive: +7
 * Chance: +3 (using German chance)
 * Nation Age: -10
 * Population: +6
 * Participation: +10
 * Recent Wars: 0

(German) Catholic League
Total: 52
 * Location: +4
 * Tactical Advantage: +5 (larger colonial empires)
 * Strength: Brandenburg (L), Burgundy (L), Saxony (L), Luxembourg (M), Calais (M), Magdeburg (MV), Aragon (M), France (M), Austria (M), Tyrolia (MV), Salzburg (MV), Mecklenburg (SW), Anhalt (MVW): 35/33 = 1.06 = +1
 * Military Development: 26 (Brandenburg), 6 (Burgundy), 14 (Saxony) = 46/6 = 7.666 = +8
 * Economy: +2 (Brandenburg), +0 (Burgundy), +0 (Saxony) = 2 – 0
 * Infrastructure: +12 (Brandenburg), +0 (Burgundy), +0 (Saxony) = 12/9 = 1.333 = +1
 * Expansion: -1 (Brandenburg War in New World), -5 (Burgundy onto Munster) = -6
 * Motive: +7
 * Chance: (Using Imperial government numbers) = +8
 * Edit Count: 8813
 * UTC Time: 1439
 * 1*4*3*9 = 108
 * (8831/108)*pi = 256.883...
 * Nation Age: [+5 (Brandenburg), +5 (Burgundy), +5 (Burgundy), ]/3 = +5
 * Population: +10
 * Participation: +10
 * Recent Wars: -1

Results
Crushing (German) Catholic League victory, ((52/(52+25))*2)-1 = 35.06%.

If the war lasts 4 years, (35.06)*(1-1/(2(4))) = 30.67% can be taken.

(Italian) Catholic League
Total: 59
 * Location: +4
 * Tactical Advantage: (attacker) +1
 * Strength: Venice (L), Papal States (L): 8/6 = 1.333 = +1
 * Military Development: 10 (Venice), 28 (Papal States): 38/12 = 3.166 = +3
 * Economy: 4 (Venice), 10 (Papal States) = +14
 * Infrastructure: -- 1 (Venice), 0 (Pope): +1
 * Expansion: +0
 * Motive: +7
 * Chance: +7
 * Edits: 5654
 * UTC: 3:15
 * 3*1*5 = 9
 * (5654/15)*pi = 1184.17099089
 * Nation Age: [+5 (Venice), +5 (Papal States)] = +5
 * Population: +8
 * Participation: +10
 * Recent Wars: -2 (Venice-Papal war in Naples)

(Italian) Kappelist League
Total: 21
 * Location: +4
 * Tactical Advantage:
 * Strength: Milan (L), Genoa (MV): 6 --> 0
 * Military Development: 12 -- 0
 * Economy: 0
 * Infrastructure: +1
 * Expansion: 0
 * Motive: +7
 * Chance: +3
 * Edits: 796
 * UTC: 3:15
 * 3*1*5
 * (796/15)*pi= 166.71385015
 * Nation Age: -10
 * Population: +6
 * Participation: +10
 * Recent Wars: 0

Result
Crushing (Italian) Catholic League victory. ((59/(59+21))*2)-1 = 47.5%.

If the war ends next year, (47.5)*(1-1/(2(4)))= 41.56% can be taken. ChrisL123 (talk) 03:19, January 2, 2013 (UTC)

Territorial changes
The war is over! Vive le catholiques! Anyway, I guess we might as well sort out the territorial changes with the Catholic League victory:


 * The German Catholic League will most likely have dominion over the Kappelist states
 * Brandenburg - Mecklenburg
 * Saxony - Altmark
 * Burgundy - Munster
 * Venice - Montferrat and Milan as vassal republics
 * Papal States - Corsica and Genoa

Unless Brandenburg and Saxony want to expand further into the Kappelist league (Hesse to Saxony and Lauenburg to Brandenburg?) But yeah, congrats again! ChrisL123 (talk) 03:05, January 4, 2013 (UTC)

Yes, both states would like this. We have destroyed the threat to God's will! Fegelein! Fegelein! Fegelein! 06:00, January 4, 2013 (UTC)

Bavaria
Total: (19*1.5) = 28.5 = 29
 * Location: +5
 * Tactical Advantage:
 * Strength: Bavaria (L): 4 --> 0
 * Military Development: +12 -- 0
 * Economy: 0
 * Infrastructure: +4
 * Expansion: 0
 * Motive: +5
 * Chance: +5
 * Edits: 2053
 * Time: 09:14
 * 9*1*4= 36
 * (2053/36)*pi= 179.158047717
 * Nation Age: -10
 * Population: +10
 * Participation: +10
 * Recent Wars: 0

Imperials
Total: 38
 * Location: +4
 * Tactical Advantage: +5 (larger empire: Austria (including vassals and the such)), +1 (attacker)
 * Strength: Saxony (L), Austria (L), Tyrolia (M), Salzburg (MV), Magdeburg (M), Altmark (MV), Switzerland (M), Croatia (MV) = 23/4 = 2.75 = +3
 * Military Development: 16 (Saxony) = 16/12 = 1.33 = 1
 * Economy: 0 (Saxony), 0 (Austria) = 0
 * Infrastructure: 0 (Saxony), 0 (Austria) = 0
 * Expansion: 0
 * Motive: +5
 * Chance: +1
 * Edits: 8882
 * Time: 1457 (1*4*5*7 = 140)
 * 8882/140*pi = 199.311...
 * Nation Age: +5 (Saxony), +0 (Austria) = +5
 * Population: +5
 * Participation: +10
 * Recent Wars: -1

Results
Imperial victory. If the leaders want land from Bavaria, they get ((38/(38+29))*2)-1 = 13.43%, and the length of the war will need to be determined.

Discussion
Bavaria's government did not change, many reichstag members, as well as the royal family, were secretly Kappelist. (thank you for setting up the algorithm scraw, i'm not good at it.)

i should have a plus for infrastructure as I built it up too, it wasn't just the militaryAndr3w777 (talk) 01:01, January 1, 2013 (UTC)

can somebody please add my infrastructure years and figure our chance??Andr3w777 (talk) 20:40, January 1, 2013 (UTC)

my motive should be +10 not +7, i am fihting for my life.

No, you were fighting to leave the HRE, and they're fighting to stop you. Not sure what that would mean in terms of motive scores, though. ChrisL123 (talk) 22:29, January 1, 2013 (UTC)

The reason is immaterial it is still a fight for my life, as per rules it should be a 10 I've not broken law in succession, it is in the treaty and our constitution if they refuse, I've not done anythingAndr3w777 (talk) 22:43, January 1, 2013 (UTC)

Similar to what I said above, leaving the HRE and becoming part of the Kappelist league would be a change in a government but it'd be a popular revolt so you have to multiply your final score by 1.5. Therefore it'd be life or death because your new non-HRE government is fighting to stay out of the HRE and retain its current kappelist independent government. VonGlusenburg (talk to Von!) 22:56, January 1, 2013 (UTC)

The Imperial's motive isn't to destroy their nation though. Their purpose is to stop the Bavarian government from leaving the HRE. Likewise, Bavaria's motive is an independence war. I believe the right motive is Defending (fighting to defend territory you already own, +5).

i suppose for the ske of arguement it can be anywhere between a 5 and a 7. Since it is merely a protectionist war, this succession to be clear, has been planned, and does not directly involve Kappelianism as of yet.Andr3w777 (talk) 01:45, January 2, 2013 (UTC)

Can someone count the Bavarian pixels? Fegelein! Fegelein! Fegelein! 02:34, January 2, 2013 (UTC)

As I am losing, how much will this make Bavaria suffer, am i still indepednent or forced back into the HRE?Andr3w777 (talk) 05:18, January 2, 2013 (UTC)

You're in limbo currently. Fegelein! Fegelein! Fegelein! 05:20, January 2, 2013 (UTC)

Back at last
I am back at last, after being gone much longer than expected. Sorry for the prolonged absence. What happened involving Scotland while I was gone? LurkerLordB (Talk) 22:14, January 1, 2013 (UTC)

Not much in Scotland but England has broken up. Elsewhere the Mahdi expansion wars has started as has the HRE break-up wars. VonGlusenburg (talk to Von!)

Northumbria
Total: 28
 * Location: +4
 * Tactical Advantage: Attacker, +1
 * Strength: Northumbria (L): 4
 * Military Development: +4
 * Economy: +0
 * Infrastructure: +0
 * Expansion: +0
 * Motive: Resources? +3
 * Chance: +4
 * Edits: 365
 * UTC time: 12:00
 * 1*2 = 2
 * (365/2)*pi = 573.3406
 * Nation Age: -10
 * Population: +8
 * Participation: +10
 * Recent Wars: 0

Mercia

 * Location: +4
 * Tactical Advantage: 0
 * Strength: Mercia (L): 4
 * Military: 1
 * Economy: 1
 * Infrastructure: 1
 * Expansion: 0
 * Motive: +10
 * Chance: +0
 * Nation Age: -10
 * Population: +6
 * Recent Wars: -2
 * Total: 15

Result
Northumbrian Victory (tentatively).

((27/(27+10))*2)-1 = 0.45945 = 46%.

Discussion
I tried to see who gets high ground, but there is nowhere where the heights of Tamworth (capital of Mercia) and York can be compared.--Collie Kaltenbrunner (talk) 09:46, January 2, 2013 (UTC)

The Caliphate
Let me make something perfectly clear. I don't think the Caliphate's recent actions qualify as jumping the shark. Thatt happened a long time ago. To refrence the Nostalgia Critic the Caliphate jumped the shark then went back to shoot it in the balls, raping it, eating it's flessh, consuming it's soul mounting it's head on the wall and then doing the same to twelve more sharks just to be sure. When the hell are we going to decide that enough is enough? When the entire European continent is worshipping Allah? I would get off their backs if they just stopped doing implausible things. At this point they've become serious competition with the Mongol Empire at it's prime for the largest land empire. It just pisses me off how bloated the dammned Caliphate is getting. It was to big ecades ago, and it's definitely too big now. There need to be consequences.Yank 03:48, January 2, 2013 (UTC)

What he said. All the way.

Fegelein! Fegelein! Fegelein! 03:50, January 2, 2013 (UTC)

Alright, I have enough with this nonesense. I've been posting the same thing aagain and again since the damned Great Holy War and you're still calling us the progenitor of all implausibility. We have been planning this for ages, and it'll be "enough" when the Mahdi falls down and the Muslim armies die or flee to their area in chaos.

You would get off our backs when we were 2 square kilometre enclaves in Crusader land because for some reason you have a huge bias against everything Muslim.

Nothing at all close to "competing with the Mongol Empire", since, as you could see if you opened a map of the time, we're barely larger than the damned Umayyads but you still call us a source of implausibility even though you have a HRE that can actually unite, and (this is especially ironic), a group of what at the time was a bunch of barbaric tribes worse than the Mongols at their worst colonising America. Fed (talk) 04:20, January 2, 2013 (UTC)

First of all, the HRE had everything planned since the NINETEEN SIXTIES of Principia Moderni. Also you guys expanded at the same rate you are now before this "Mahdi" came.

Hell, I had no problems whatsoever with the original Caliphate. The you guys gallioned into the Balkans, Persia, India, and Central Asia.

You're way larger than the original Umayyad Empire. Look how far you people moved into India and Central Asia.

The HRE could have united OTL. Problem was, there were several problems that happened OTL along the way that didn't happen ATL. Also, who else is going to colonize Europe? Venice had capabilities. That said, they used them in this game. Brandenburg? That's the might of Spain kicking in. Nothing else to say, because we're the ONLY ONES colonizes in the Americas. (Oh, Burgundy? That's your OTL France in South America.)

Fegelein! Fegelein! Fegelein! 04:29, January 2, 2013 (UTC)

The Caliphate cannot last more than a decade without a major collapse. You all gave me an estimate of 35 more years about 35 turns ago, so they need to start collapsing now. LurkerLordB (Talk) 04:30, January 2, 2013 (UTC)

What Yank said basically sums up what's wrong with the Caliphate(graphic, but effective). Fed, look at the next map and you'll see the implausibility of the Caliphate's actions(IE CONQUERING RUSSIA, Adal, Morocco, half the damn Indian subcontinent, almost all of Central Asia. You guys are so implausible that you guys are going to border the German states and Scandinavia! If this was real history, you guys would have lost-- hands down. BUT since their isn't any penalty for having a 4-FRONT war and the fact that an algorithm decides the fate of a nation, you guys get away with it. All your planning is a thinly-veiled way of getting away with straight-up implausibility.AP (talk) 04:36, January 2, 2013 (UTC)

The only people to historically conquer Russia were the Mongols. You are not in any way, shape, or form, the Mongols, nor do you resemble them and their sheer power. End of story. Fegelein! Fegelein! Fegelein! 04:42, January 2, 2013 (UTC)

Oh, and not to mention that they like to divide areas into smaller and smaller provinces in order to get more military strength on algorithms. For example, Dulkadir, Trebizond, Karaman, and Candar could all be amalgamated into the Anatolia province but they keep them separate to get that extra +3. The list goes on and on...AP (talk) 04:43, January 2, 2013 (UTC)

Russia, the Indian provinces, and the Anatolian ones will all revolt the next turn. Remember, if the result of the algorithm is implausible, it can be blocked- what should have happened with Russia. The Caliphate is going to collapse into a bloody mess for the next ten years because they are overextended like crazy. LurkerLordB (Talk) 04:52, January 2, 2013 (UTC)

For heaven's sake. 'Do you even read what I write? or do you pass it off as "oh those crazy Moslems are being evil and writing implausibilities again"?!'

The DME has also have everything planned since the start of PM2. Hell, I proposed the Mahdi to happen before 1500.

The wars in the Balkans are OTTOMAN, India is partly an inheritance of sorts of somebody who left the game and partly due to helping our ally. If you notice, Bengal won more land than us, but sure, because they can be influenced by Europe they are perfectly fine.

The Umayyad Emirate also controlled Central Asia, and it doesn't matter since Yankovic, complaining as hard as he possibly can, told us we were starting to beat the bloody MONGOL EMPIRE. Which is not at all the case. But sure, as you said, either we aren't the Mongols or we are, and since Yankovic says we are the Mongols, then I guess we can take over bloody Russia. And plenty of countries have BEAT Russia in their own land. Do "Poland", "Sweden" and "Crimea" ring any bells?

I don't mind Europe colonising America. I mind the Incas converting to Christianity and the Manchu tribes randomly becoming an empire more organised than China and colonising America. That is as implausible as the Caliphate, but since it either a) didn't affect European players or b) helped them, OF COURSE nobody complained. Since we're complaining about the Balkans and India, I feel I can complain about this too.

The HRE could have united in OTL? sure, with a 1170 AD POD and no Reformation.

I gave you an estimate of 35 more years 35 turns ago. I gave Von an estimate of 1500 in 1470. I'm lousy at math.

We are expanding tenfold because, y'know, we're in a short phase of mad expansion that follows collapse. In OTL we've lost? Really? because as far as I can see,.

Dulakdir, Karaman and Candar are not part of the Anatolia province because in-game they have their own dynasty and out of game it leaves Dean with less provinces than the rest of us. Trebizond's separtae because 1 it's Von's and 2 it's mostly Greek.

And I get Russia and India, but the Anatolian provinces revolting make no fucking sense at all. But sure, that point of view comes from somebody who plays a Muslim nation, so it surely costs a tenth of yours.

Fed (talk) 05:00, January 2, 2013 (UTC)

First of all, I am neither George W. Bush or another racist white person. I have no bias against you guys just because you're Muslim.

That said, Bengal is in India. For Pete's sake man, the damn Caliphate is based out of Turkey and Arabia. India? Funny. Over 50%? Hysterical.

The Umayyad Caliphate DID NOT  PLACE ITS NORTHERN BORDER IN KAZAKHSTAN . They hardly made it past Uzbekistan.

Also, you guys are larger than the Umayyads. The lack of Spain is made up by Turkey, the Balkan, Transcaucasia, and oh, what's that? Oh yes, ' KAZAKHSTAN. '

Also, your revolution is not like the ones listed. (And checking all those links was very annoying. Try to avoid that in the future.) The Mahdi was the existing Caliph. Do not name Alexander the Great. That psychopath did inherit his throne, yes, but he got stopped in India and Central Asia. And Africa. (No Ethiopia, see.)

Also, I think just because it's Von's is no excuse for it to stay apart.

Anatolian revolts? I have to agree on this one. A little farfetched. Less farfetched than the sheer size of the Caliphate, though.

Fegelein! Fegelein! Fegelein! 05:14, January 2, 2013 (UTC)

I meant Balkan, not Anatolian, for the revolting provinces, sorry.

The Caliphate's expansion, other than Russia, is not super-implausible more tham standard map game fare. However, they've had their expansion, and now its time for their collapse. Yes, you gave me an estimate of 35 years 35 years ago. Now those years are up, and it is time for the Caliphate to implode. The higher the pedastal, the harder the fall... LurkerLordB (Talk) 05:24, January 2, 2013 (UTC)

You seem to be George Bush, since you all seem to be perfectly free to be as implausible as you damn well wish but we can't do anything.

That said, the Caliphate is based out of Turkey and Arabia. Alexander's Empire was based out of Pella. Trajan's Empire was based out of Rome. Charles V's Empire was based out of Vienna. Persia? Egypt? America? Funny. Over 50&? Hysterical.


 * sighs*. AGAIN. We ARE larger than the Umayyads, but YANKOVIC. TOLD. US. WE. WERE. OF. THE. SIZE. OF. THE. MONGOLS*

I'm not avoiding something I use to prove my point, thank you very much. Alexander the Great got stopped where he stopped having knowledge of the world. Was his army not scared, tired, and going into lands they didn't know, they would've gone farther. The Mahdi's army is not scared, is not tired, and knows Europe.

No, but dynasties and being of a different culture are.

Less farfetched than the Soviet Union. Or the British Empire. Or the modern United States. Or Napoleon's Empire. Or Charles V's Empire. Or Charlemagne's Empire. Or Belisarius' Empire. Need I go on?

The Balkans also make no sense. LIKE A THIRD OF THE ARMY IS PLACED THERE. Another proof that people don't pay attention at what the Muslim provinces post.

AGAIN. I gave you a standard of 35 years 35 years ago. It went wrong because I am lousy at math. My previous estimates? 1489, 1492, 1500, 1511. Does that mean that the Mahdi should've rosen in any of that dates? Because I'll be glad to edit him in. Fed (talk) 05:27, January 2, 2013 (UTC)

I'm not Yank. That alone derails your entire argument. The Soviet Union rose from the Russian Empire. Less territories, in fact. US today? What about it? Napoleon's Empire? Puppet states, not direct annexation. Besilarius? Wait, who? Fegelein! Fegelein! Fegelein! 05:32, January 2, 2013 (UTC)

You're on Yank's argument. Just because you're not him doesn't derail his argument. You agree with his argument, and we apparently being larger than the Mongol Empire even when somebody that is not blind and can see a map can show you its not the case.

Fine then the Russian Empire. the US today is a HUGE state that arose out of lucky accidents and events in which it did the right choices at the right time. Napoleon's Empire still hugely spread. You know you can search on Wikipedia for stuff? Belisarius was a general who almost restored the Byzantine Empire to the Roman Empire's extension. Is he implausible too? Fed (talk) 05:37, January 2, 2013 (UTC)

All of those examples grew either far less rapidly and as much as the Caliphate has, and several of them have had far more advanced technology as well. Your previous estimates have shown that you've delayed the collapse for about 80 years. It's time for the Caliphate to go.

And stop making baseless racism accusations against anyone who questions you. LurkerLordB (Talk) 05:38, January 2, 2013 (UTC)

I said you're not the same size as the Mongol Empire. What's wrong with you?

And what Lurk said is exactly the rest of my argument. Fegelein! Fegelein! Fegelein! 05:40, January 2, 2013 (UTC)

Excuse me? What's wrong with me? and the "fuck them" in Andrew's chat? Don't talk like that to me again.

And YANK said I was. I was replying to Yank. I have repeatedly stated that we are larger than the damned Umayyads and that the Mongol post was adressed at Yankovic.

I'm not making baseless racism accusations, I'm stating that since in the game we are "evil moslems" you don't read my comment.

Far less rapidly? Is Alexander's Empire, or Napoleon's, or Hitler's or Belisarius', all of which lasted twenty years, risen more slowly than the Caliphate? Did a two year conquest of the Aztec and the Inca, itself only thirty years away from the discovery of America, last more than an 80-year process? the math doesn't make up to me.

And I've delayed the collapse 80 years? No, all those estimates show I don't know how long would the Caliphate take. Because really, otherwise it would've been a 5-year thing with no sense. We told you something and know you're clinging on to it even though I've told you again and again that was not an estimate and was wrong since our math was off.

Fed (talk) 05:45, January 2, 2013 (UTC)

Fuck them also being let them get screwed; aka Russia. You're getting a little confused here...

And who said you were "evil Moslems" other than yourself?

Also, we are not counting the present Mahdiate, as it is simply a direct extension of the Caliphate formed however-long-ago it was.

Fegelein! Fegelein! Fegelein! 05:49, January 2, 2013 (UTC)

Well, since context is not the easiest thing to get out of a text, fine.

Nobody I grant, but you are still not reading my post. I assume it's because I'm arguing for the Mahdinate. If that's not the correct thing, fine.

And I am also counting it. The Caliphate has lasted about 80 years, so it's taken a lot more to reach its current form than any of the empires have.

I'm going to sleep now, but could you all please take a look at my argument and read the whole point? Because I've been repeating some things since in-game decades ago and that's what's been annoying me to no edge. Fed (talk) 05:53, January 2, 2013 (UTC)

Like all of those 20-year empires, the Caliphate will fall. Furthermore, you cannot equate a Spanish conquest of a native nation with those of the Caliphate. You fail to realize the severity of your implausibility. Think about it. Russia is enough to convict you; then you add in Adal, Morocco, Ethiopia, Byzantium, Central Asia, India, the Syriac plot to invade Cyprus, the Algerian plot to "invade Europe,ETC and you get the grand prize for most implausible map game move. My point being that the Caliphate is way overdue for collapse.AP (talk) 05:55, January 2, 2013 (UTC)

I am going to say this ONCE.

Cut the arguing.

And, for the record? SS is correct.

Lordganon (talk) 05:55, January 2, 2013 (UTC)

Anyone using gratuitous profanity in this argument like what was posted in that chat will get suspended, it has no place here, and that's the final warning.

When will your math be right? It was wrong 80 days ago, it was wrong 70 days ago, it was wrong 60 days ago, it was wrong 35 days ago, why should I believe that it is right now? Can you give me a definite date, very soon by which it will suffer a violent collapse, either by the players or by moderator events? Otherwise, I'm destroy in in the next several turns. LurkerLordB (Talk) 06:04, January 2, 2013 (UTC)

*Sigh*

Why do you think we bothered to make the Caliphate page so detailed? You people have had access to the Caliphate/Mahdi plans since the beginning of the game and the long discussions about the plans. Doing all of this now and claiming ignorance is your own fault, especially when you've been commenting on our planning page about our plans. You've known all along that the (who started to rule in 1566) was going to rule as the prophesied redeemer of Islam who will rule for seven, nine or nineteen years. His army thinks that he was sent by God to conquer the world and that in 1575 or so the world will end so they are going to fight like there is no tomorrow thinking that they are fighting for God's own general.

It ends in 1575, as should the world should have ended sometime between 1573 and 1575. When it reaches 1576 the feelings that the Mahdi is a fraud will reach boiling point and he will be discovered to be so. The Muslim armies in disarray will collapse and all of the conquered people's will form their own independent nations and Islam will collapse as the bulk of all Muslim's will have their faith spat out as the Mahdi stuff turns out to be lies. So yeah 1576 will mean no more Caliphate. VonGlusenburg (talk to Von!) 13:16, January 2, 2013 (UTC)

I have one question, and one question only.

When Russia comes back in 1575, can we get the *1.5 bonus now? Since we're leading a revolution? Please? The Royal Guns (talk) 21:08, January 2, 2013 (UTC)

Yeah when the player states which gain independence from the Caliphate from 1575 onwards, then those nations will be new nations but it'd be a popular revolution. There will be a lot of new states and much territory in civil disarray though so you won't get back all of your former territory back straight away. No large empires will gain independence from the Caliphate as the various ethic & cultural groups will not give up the chance to be their own independent nation without a fight. VonGlusenburg (talk to Von!) 21:32, January 2, 2013 (UTC)

Why did your Mahdi plans take so long to occur? I had been operating under the assumption that your plans would happen earlier, and I had given you multiple warnings months ago that the Caliphate was nearing collapse. Why did you fail to carry out your plans soon enough?

But anyways, I'll give you 6 more years, but by 1576 they need to be seriously breaking up (in a damaging war way, not a way that lets a bunch of powers form from the ruins), or I might snap and destroy the Middle East via asteroids or something.

LurkerLordB (Talk) 23:55, January 2, 2013 (UTC)

Seriously? Europes players are just pissed because thet dont want to get there rearends beaten into the dirt. They didnt seem to mind doing it to the Caliphate earlier in the game? And ss abd other guys swearing? I thought you guys said only "immature" people do that. Double standard guys. Europe can beat up on caliphate, but the caliphate cant get strong without you guys female-dogging about it. Were better than all of this crap, come on guys, dont argue so mych about A GAME! Thank you, and goodnight! ™            (DeanSims: Talk) 00:35, January 3, 2013 (UTC)

Next person to ignore my last post gets a day's vacation. I said to cut it out, and I meant it. Lordganon (talk) 03:48, January 3, 2013 (UTC)

For the Record its not just Bias against muslim if not bias against Implausibility, because theres no way that ottomans or persian can take over india ethiopia and russia without their empire falling apart, and even more theres no way ethiopia would aid muslims in any war infact that would just cause them an attempt to seccede, and i dont like the idea of Caliphal duchies being counted in war, its like me dividing burgundy in 15 small nations and attacking france,and winning, its implausible and per se biased Sine dei gloriem (talk) 03:51, January 3, 2013 (UTC)

I believe Lord Ganon said Enough? Let it be. Okay?Andr3w777 (talk) 03:56, January 3, 2013 (UTC)

I'm planning for the Persian/Turkish states to be broken up into dozens of small little successor states, so there is no worry of an empire from ashes there. Von basically explained our argument. However, as a general form of internet-respect, can we all agree to read each other's post before arguing. It cuts a lot of unnecessary arguing from whichever side. (This applies to more that our current scenario with the Caliphate.) Also, to correct the terminology used, the Caliphate is no more. The Mahdiate, which is now in place, is to fall at given time.

What?
So, i have been away for the last three days, and i don't have much idea of what happened since 1566 (i would be easier without the main and talk page being so chaotic lately.it wasn't like this when i left.).can somebody explain to me, as i might need to put it in the map?--Collie Kaltenbrunner (talk) 10:49, January 2, 2013 (UTC)

You do your stuff then I'll add all of the war stuff and what not to the map. It'll be easier that way. VonGlusenburg (talk to Von!) 13:20, January 2, 2013 (UTC)

Okay.--Collie Kaltenbrunner (talk) 14:02, January 2, 2013 (UTC)

Bad Interwebs
I have a deplorable internet connection, if I've not posted in the next few days, it is because I can't. I have asked the reapair people to come out. Terribly sorry for the inconveince. If Bavaria is lost, do not mess with it whilst I am gone please.Andr3w777 (talk) 15:17, January 2, 2013 (UTC)

Duely noted. VonGlusenburg (talk to Von!) 22:45, January 2, 2013 (UTC)

Mahdiate
Total: 72*1.5 = 108
 * Location: +4
 * Tactical Advantage: +6 (attacking, larger colonial)
 * Strength: Yemen (L), Ehthiopia (L), Nubia (M), Hijaz (M), Egypt (M), Palesine (M), Syria (M), Karaman (M), Cilesia (M), Trebizond (M), West Qoyunlu (L), East Qoyunlu (M), Iraq (M) Persia (M), Afghanistan (M), Balochistan (M), Koli (M), Gujurat (M), Deccan (M), Dimurats (M), Oman (M), Shaybah (M), Nejd (M), Hadramut (M): 74/4 --- 18.5 -> +19
 * Military Development: (4+10)/2 -> +7
 * Economy: 2 -- 0
 * Infrastructure: 0
 * Expansion: -1
 * Motive: +3
 * Chance: +7
 * Edit Count: 5,350
 * UTC Time: 19:11 --> 9
 * 5,350/7*pi = 2401.07438524
 * Nation Age: -10
 * Population: 9 + 20 = +29
 * Participation: +10
 * Recent Wars: -2

Adal
Total: 29
 * Location: +5
 * Tactical Advantage: 0
 * Strength: Adal (L):4 -- 0
 * Military Development: 2 -- 0
 * Economy: 2 -- 0
 * Infrastructure: +3
 * Expansion: 0
 * Motive: +10
 * Chance: +4
 * Nation Age: -5
 * Population: +6
 * Participation: +10
 * Recent Wars: -4 (Ethiopia)

Results
((108/(29+108)) -0,5 x 2 = 0.576642336 x 1,5 = 0,864963504

(86,4)*(1-1/(3)) = 57.6

Following the 3 year war, Adal is annexed into the Caliphate.

Discussion
Sorry I should have done this sooner. <font color="#000000">VonGlusenburg (talk to Von!) 22:45, January 2, 2013 (UTC)

There is something wrong with the algorythm.Adal is in civil disarray.as such, the amount of territory that you can take is multiplied by 1,5 and in the part of how much you actually get on the war, you drop the "2 x years" part.And Adal's nation age score shouuld be -5 because there had been 12 years since the last government change.It still doesn't change the fact that Adal is annexed.--Collie Kaltenbrunner (talk) 07:25, January 3, 2013 (UTC)

And shouldn't be Ethiopia's Adalese war be counted as a recent war?--Collie Kaltenbrunner (talk) 07:35, January 3, 2013 (UTC)

Again minus 1 or 2 points, still doesn't change the fact Adal is annexed. Besides it'll be independent again within a decade.

But I didn't know about the special results rules for civil disarray nations, I thought it was just normal rules or expansion into them. I will remember for the future. <font color="#000000">VonGlusenburg (talk to Von!) 23:09, January 3, 2013 (UTC)

Well, colonial expansion is possible on those kinds of nations.--Collie Kaltenbrunner (talk) 07:13, January 4, 2013 (UTC)

Mahdiate
Total: 65*1.5 = 97.5 - 98
 * Location: +4
 * Tactical Advantage: +6 (attacking, larger colonial)
 * Strength: Nubia (L), Ethiopia (M), Yemen (M), Hijaz (M), Egypt (M), Palesine (M), Syria (M), Karaman (M), Cilesia (M), Trebizond (M), West Qoyunlu (L), East Qoyunlu (M), Iraq (M) Persia (M), Afghanistan (M), Balochistan (M), Xwarezm (M), Turkistan (M), Aqmola (M), Koli (M), Gujurat (M), Deccan (M), Dimurats (M), Oman (M), Shaybah (M), Nejd (M), Hadramut (M), : 82/4 --- 20.5 -> +21
 * Military Development: 4/2 -> +2
 * Economy: 2 -- 0
 * Infrastructure: 0
 * Expansion: -6
 * Motive: +3
 * Chance: +7
 * Edit Count: 5,350
 * UTC Time: 19:11 --> 9
 * 5,350/7*pi = 2401.07438524
 * Nation Age: -10
 * Population: 9 + 20 = +29
 * Participation: +10
 * Recent Wars: -1

Funj
Total: 43
 * Location: +5
 * Tactical Advantage: 0
 * Strength: Adal (L):4 -- 0
 * Military Development: 2 -- 0
 * Economy: 2 -- 0
 * Infrastructure: +3
 * Expansion: 0
 * Motive: +10
 * Chance: +4
 * Nation Age: +5
 * Population: +6
 * Participation: +10
 * Recent Wars: 0

Results
((98/(43+98))*2)-1 = 0.39007092198

(39.01)*(1-1/(2*4)) = 34.13375

Following the 4 year war, Funj is annexed into the Caliphate.

Discussion
Sorry I should have done this sooner. <font color="#000000">VonGlusenburg (talk to Von!) 22:45, January 2, 2013 (UTC)

Mahdiate
Total: 73*1.5 = 109.5 - 110
 * Location: +4
 * Tactical Advantage: +6 (attacking, larger colonial)
 * Strength: Algeria (L), Tunisia (M), Yemen (M), Hijaz (M), Egypt (M), Palesine (M), Syria (M), Karaman (M), Cilesia (M), Trebizond (M), West Qoyunlu (L), East Qoyunlu (M), Iraq (M) Persia (M), Afghanistan (M), Balochistan (M), Xwarezm (M), Turkistan (M), Aqmola (M), Koli (M), Gujurat (M), Deccan (M), Dimurats (M), Oman (M), Shaybah (M), Nejd (M), Hadramut (M), Anatolia (M), Rumelia (M): 88/4 --- +22
 * Military Development: 2 -> 0
 * Economy: 4 -> 4/2 -- +2
 * Infrastructure: 0
 * Expansion: 0
 * Motive: +3
 * Chance: +7
 * Edit Count: 5,350
 * UTC Time: 19:11 --> 9
 * 5,350/7*pi = 2401.07438524
 * Nation Age: -10
 * Population: 9 + 20 = +29
 * Participation: +10
 * Recent Wars: 0

Morocco
Total: 45
 * Location: +5
 * Tactical Advantage: (high ground) +2
 * Strength: Morocco (L):4 -- 0
 * Military Development: 2 -- 0
 * Economy: 2 -- 0
 * Infrastructure: +3
 * Expansion: 0
 * Motive: +10
 * Chance: +4
 * Nation Age: +5
 * Population: +6
 * Participation: +10
 * Recent Wars: 0

Results
((110/(45+110))*2)-1 = 0.41935483871

(41.93)*(1-1/(2*3)) = 34.9416666667

Following the 3 year war, Morocco is annexed into the Caliphate.

Discussion
Sorry I should have done this with the rest of the wars Fed started, I missed it out. My apologises. <font color="#000000">VonGlusenburg (talk to Von!) 00:50, January 4, 2013 (UTC)

Why in every Caliph/Mahdi-ate war that you're fighting lately, West Qonyulu is a leader?--Collie Kaltenbrunner (talk) 11:34, January 4, 2013 (UTC)

And why are some of these wars never included in the "Recent Wars" section of the algorithm? You literally have 5 wars visible on the talk page, and yet they weren't included (and points weren't deducted) on the First and Second Mahdi's Wars. ChrisL123 (talk) 06:49, January 5, 2013 (UTC)

Yeah West Qoyunlu shouldn't be a leader, especially considering West Qoyunlu's military & economic development scores aren't included in that algorithm. As for the recent wars, they all started at the same time and involving different provinces. <font color="#000000">VonGlusenburg (talk to Von!) 18:58, January 5, 2013 (UTC)

So we can write off West Qonyulu's "leading" as a mistake.--Collie Kaltenbrunner (talk) 20:47, January 5, 2013 (UTC)

Russia, Post-Caliphate
Just saying, I realize that Russia will not be fully intact after the fall of the Caliphate, but because I have the Russian Royal Families collectively staging an insurrection in 1575, gathering allies and what not till then, it will mostly be the Central Asian parts that break away- the parts annexed in the past 25 years- and not so much the parts that we conquered 125 years ago... right? Or the Polish and Novgorodian colonies (which is where part of their Royal families fled to)? So when we get completely freed in 1576, we'll have to reinvade only those parts, right?

The Royal Guns (talk) 20:37, January 3, 2013 (UTC)

I don't think the Polish and the Lithuanians will join this federation after this. they had no business being there in the first place, as they were your (Muscovy) enemies.The same goes for the Moldavians and that part of Livonia.--Collie Kaltenbrunner (talk) 21:16, January 3, 2013 (UTC)

Yeah you conquered them, they're not going to agree to you taking them over again willingly just like they won't agree to a new caliphate taking them over. Same goes for the rest of the territory conquered by the caliphate, no conquered territory will willingly let themselves be reconquered. Hence the Russian Federation and Caliphate will no longer exist. Heck maybe not even the HRE if the Mahdi wins enough wars. <font color="#000000">VonGlusenburg (talk to Von!) 23:06, January 3, 2013 (UTC)


 * How this part is going to be? i mean, will those nations be formed by a mod event or something?--Collie Kaltenbrunner (talk) 07:21, January 4, 2013 (UTC)
 * Mod events, independence movements, players spliting up into multiple nations, etc. I don't want the caliphate being replaced by a few other large empires. Some large empires will emerge from it but not all of it will be. <font color="#000000">VonGlusenburg (talk to Von!) 18:54, January 5, 2013 (UTC)


 * No. Lithuania and area are mostly of RUssian descent, and the Poles have been in our little Federation for nigh on 100 years. Also, the Royal Families all survived and fled to Scandanacia, as well as their respective colonies (well, not Muscovy, they'd have fled to someone else's colonies) where no one can reach them. Meanwhile, I have agents working in Muscovy and Poland to o'erthrow our oppressors, starting in 1575; we'll be revolutionary, but will be forced to make concessions to the people helping us- including, ironically, the Red Hand, who will demand a more democratic government. That said, apart from a few changes to the structure of govenrment, Since the curent governing apparatus has survived, the Russian Federation can and will continue once the Caliphate falls. The Royal Guns (talk) 00:22, January 5, 2013 (UTC)


 * Oh so then explain why Lithuania and Poland & the like wanted independence from Russia all through OTL then? They will not be joining you willingly. If your conquer them then fair enough but they ain't joining you willingly. Its like everyone agreeing to rejoin the Caliphate or British empire because they were part of them for a long period in their past. <font color="#000000">VonGlusenburg (talk to Von!) 18:54, January 5, 2013 (UTC)

Russia
Alright, How can this happen, I am cut off from the internets in Cuba for thee days and the bloody caliphate has conquered one of the most fortified and well-armed fortresses in the world? The center of the european arms trade, Europe's most intimidating navy, and more firearms per military man than any other nation on earth. I made sureof that. All occupied within three years without my concent and without an algorithm? how can this not be against the rules I am still wondering. The only people to conquer russia were the mongols, and even they did not conquer the Novgorodians, they were too cold and too marshey. What happened to Russia is an implausigasm. I suggest have a mod event have the russian winter kill the invaders...you know, for the sake of historical plausibility, people invade russia=death by freeze...unless of course, you are the mongols, but they are the exception to every rule. -Lx (leave me a message) 07:46, January 4, 2013 (UTC)
 * The most well-armed fortresses are in the Caliphate, the center of the european arms trade is hugly debatable, europe's most intimidating navy is either venice or portugal and the most firearms again is a superflous "fact" which you have no way of proving. Secondly, you lost the algorithm which was done & we don't your consent to say so because we beat you fair & square. And again just because not many people have conquered Russia doesn't mean that it isn't unconquerable. All that stuff is quite devoid from reality in this game and part of your near constant russian circle jerking. <font color="#000000">VonGlusenburg (talk to Von!) 18:46, January 5, 2013 (UTC)

I also think that it is implausible, but apparently, they are going collapse by 1576.Until then, you can try to do what the Muscovian player is doing.--Collie Kaltenbrunner (talk) 11:30, January 4, 2013 (UTC)

We are collapsing like Collie said, so don't worry. Like Collie said, do what the Muscovian player is doing and you'll resurface fine enough.

And Russia's invulnerability is overstated; sure, only the Mongols conquered it, but Sweden, Poland and the Ottomans have all defeated them. It's like saying only Spain has conquered Colombia, and the mountains are very hard to cross, but it doesn't mean it's impregnable. Fed (talk) 16:02, January 4, 2013 (UTC)

This reminds me that it's 1571.apparently, it was that year in OTL that Moscow was burnt by the Crimean Hetmanate.--Collie Kaltenbrunner (talk) 16:05, January 4, 2013 (UTC)

Cool, yes, we've been defeated. Thank you for the *1.5 bonus we'll get, BTW. And I've arranged it such that, with the help of the Red Hand, the Federation shall survive (and what doesn't, we can conquer). What did you think the Red Hand was? Except a plausible method of engaging upon our survival in EXACTLY this case? Come 1575, Russia's back. Come 1576... the Caliphate is gone. So, basically, prognosis; the HRE has ripped itself apart; So has Italy; the Caliphate will collapse; the Federation will easily recover; because of a revolutionary bonus; to beocme the effective superpower of the world; with the ability to conquer most of the Black sea and Eastern Europe; as well as Central Asia; and to form a nation that will last as a superpower to the modern day; overall prognosis; THANK YOU, CALIPHATE!The Royal Guns (talk) 00:32, January 5, 2013 (UTC)

Tell you what, in fact; I'll even make clear our plans, exactly.

The Russians have allied with the Red Hand, so we have loads of splinter cells scattered throughout Russia; and, also, the druzhina trains every single male soldier we have who's fit for the job. What's more most are loyal to the Federation.

Muscovy and Novgorod will break away from the caliphate reltivey intact, and as the government apparatus has fled off to Scandanavia and the colonies, when it returns, the Federation will still exist.

Lithuania will be with the Federation, because most of it's population is Russian. Poland has been in the Federation for 100 years. That said, some portions of the populace will be for secession. There will be a Civil war, which the Federationists will win.

Central Asia will try to break away. The Nogai will partially succeed, as will the Sibir. This mostly affects Muscovy. No matter. We'll take them back in a single year.

Moldavia will break away, so we'll take them back when we do the Caliphially controlled sections of Eastern Europe.

Thus does the Federation come back together, with governmental changes, becoming slightly- SLIGHTLY- more democratic; or republican. also, land restructuring will occur.

This, of course, is just about the federation, and not the war with the Caliphate remainders (those tiny splinter states)

The Royal Guns (talk) 00:56, January 5, 2013 (UTC)


 * This part of Lithuania's poulation being mostly Russian doesn't make sense.Okay, Poland-Lithuania was divided so arbitrarily that the southern part of your Lithuanian province is all Russian, and will stay, but the north will not be part of it.--Collie Kaltenbrunner (talk) 06:28, January 5, 2013 (UTC)


 * A lot of that plan makes no sense. <font color="#000000">VonGlusenburg (talk to Von!) 18:46, January 5, 2013 (UTC)
 * What Von says. Also, most of Eastern Europe will NOT be available to you. Remember that HRE states will also have the 1.5 bonus, as will all the other states you reconquer, so the end result would be the same as it would be without the bonus. [[Image:IMPERIAL NY-SPQR 1.png|25px]][[Image:Regen Flag.png|30px|border]] Fegelein! Fegelein! Fegelein! 18:54, January 5, 2013 (UTC)
 * ^This. I seem to keep having to tell people the same thing. When an empire collaspes, people aren't going to agree to just become part of another one straight away. You'll have to reconquer them, plus all of these new states will get that *1.5 bonus because they are also all new popular revolt states. <font color="#000000">VonGlusenburg (talk to Von!) 19:01, January 5, 2013 (UTC)
 * The only areas that I see willingly rejoining the Russian Federation are those that are ethnically Russian, ergo the areas thatmade up the former Kievan Rus'; anything to the east is Uralic, Turkic and Mongol, anything to the west is Polish and Lithuanian and Romanian. Fed (talk) 20:01, January 5, 2013 (UTC)
 * Well, considering the blatant anarchy we are setting up in the russian states you conquered(i.e. routinely assasinating any governors or officials you send), many states will look back at the order that was the Russian federation and will be very grateful for liberating them and therfore will be more than willing to join the Russian federation, and whatt was that about you saying that that easern part of belarus novgorod controls not being russian? As of what I can see, that is part that P-L took from Kievan Rus' 2 centuries before the founding of the RF. Also, I am just going to ignore the fact that someone posted that all russian states now have only 2 million population, i.e. not many more people died in Stalin's purges than those that dies in 1573 according to a caliphate post.-Lx (leave me a message) 03:54, January 6, 2013 (UTC)
 * Those assassinations were removed since its not your nation and people to control.
 * In your same train of thought, Mali and Niger would love to rejoin the French Empire because they would look back at the order that was French West Africa.
 * And I don't believe that the population of Russia is 20 million when it was six million in OTL at the time. I get you had a population boom, but that much more is just implausible. Fed (talk) 03:56, January 6, 2013 (UTC)
 * Poland alone has maybe 7-10 million. Theres Kazan and Sibir areas, with at least 2 million, and the population of russia was 6 million at the time after famine killed about 1/2-2/3 of the populaion. No such famine happened, the opposite did in fact. You are also fogetting the fact that Mali and Niger were colonies, governed directly by france with the ruling elite being prodominantly ethnicly french or european, and with great cultural differences with france, wheras members of the RF were almost entirely autonomous(well, more like laws that are made by organ w apply to organs y, x, and z, laws made by organ y applies to organ x and z, and organ x's laws apply to organ z and organ x can determine if organ z exists at all or what they can decide,and organ z can only decide things either witht eh permission of organ x or on its own if so indicated). Also, Cultural similarities between Poland-Luthuania and the other Russian states are way more prominant(2 slavic cultures, 2 cultures of the same group) that between France and Niger(cultures of two completely different families, european and african)-Lx (leave me a message) 04:18, January 6, 2013 (UTC)
 * Fine, that was a lousy comparison. How about Norway rejoining Sweden in the 1940s because they recall the stability and order of Sweden-Norway after the Nazi conquering? Makes no sense; and Norway's laws affected Sweden's, they had nearly the same culture, et cetera. About the population, that of Poland was of 6.5 million, Kazan and Sibir are both mostly Muslim, so they don't apply to the warfare. Sure, what Saam wrote was not that plausible, but you're way amping up the population; you'd have 15 mil at most, counting Muslim areas. Fed (talk) 04:31, January 6, 2013 (UTC)
 * Lithuania is baltic, not slavic.which is another reason for them to break away, as well as your provinc on Livonia.--Collie Kaltenbrunner (talk) 07:06, January 6, 2013 (UTC)
 * In my mind, the poulation was around 8-10 million or so. Sorry for my misunderstanding. However, whatever the case is, both Russia and the Caspian cost are going to be very depopulated by the end of the Mahdiate. Saamwiil, the Humble 09:35, January 6, 2013 (UTC)


 * They have been part of Russia for 100 years, during which time they were effectively assimilated.
 * We're not attacking the HRE. We're attacking Caliphial Europe and Moldavia.
 * Even if you send 100,000 soldiers to Russia and Instruct them to kill every single non- Muslim they find, you will still not succeed in killing more than a half million. Especially since, every single adult able male in Russia is armed and knows how to fight- A), through the druzhina, or B), through the Red Hand- and most probably BOTH.
 * Population is like 20 million- less than the Caliphate, of course.
 * The government is in EXILE, yes, but saying that we cannot send over spies from Scandanavia is INCREDIBLY implausible. NO-ONE in Russia wants to be part of the Caliphate- half of them don't want to be part of Russia, either, but until then, they'll fight along us, if not with us. You CANNOT stop us from staging a revolution. Just because you control the land doesn't mean you control the people. It doesn't mean you control their ideas.
 * The Royal Guns (talk) 00:31, January 7, 2013 (UTC)
 * And How in OTL Lithuanians, Estonians, and the like were part of the Russian Empire for over 100 years and they weren't assimilated? Or how the Greeks were part of the Ottoman Empire for over 350 years without being assimilated?--Collie Kaltenbrunner (talk) 13:03, January 7, 2013 (UTC)
 * Guns, Calm down, please, You dont have to go all caps, you could have just gone italics, bold italics or underline bold italics. IN any case, end of 1574(december or November), muslims kicked out of Novgood by the Durizhina and some of the stached weaponry at the cost of the Grand Prince Nicolas I, who dies in the Saint sophia cathedral after retaking the city form a gunshot wound. Luckily, the Muslims werent complete idiots and rebuilt most of the city as it was. He is replaced by Vecheslav Romanov as the Head of nthe Army and Grand Prince Presumptive. in 1575 all the fun begins. I persume, that before the caliphate can send any troops, their Mahdi sees jesus, fueling rage in Russia and in the caliphal troops, splintering them. With them stretched thin, Vecheslav assumes control of all former novgorodian lands(first in procalamation, then affirmed by sending heralds to call upon the druzhinas and armies and using them to assert his power in the cities and regions.), sound like a good plan? or is it too quick? Anyways, having the caliphate screw with the borders gives russia an excuse to either return to pre-mahdi borders or redraw them completeely and more comfortably.-Lx (leave me a message) 03:37, January 7, 2013 (UTC)
 * Nah, the Mahdi has to be mobbed first, which is going to happen mid '75 also with the assassination of his son who tries to assume power, thenceforth securing the independance of Hijaz. '76: Muscovy, Pol al-Jakub, Novogrod, Lithuania, Morocco, Gibraltar, Algeria, Tunisia and Al-Slaveit declare independance. '77:West Qoyunlu, East Qoyunlu, the rest of Russian states, Central-Asian states, Persia, Iraq, Balochistan and Afghanistan. There might be more for each year, but since I do not control those territories, I don't want to mess with their plans. Saamwiil, the Humble 11:40, January 7, 2013 (UTC)
 * The Mahdi doesn't have a son. The Mahdi will be killed in battle in '75 as he lays seige to Berlin. Then the Mahdi's own army will fall into disarray allowing it to be pushed back easily into Pol al-Jakub. The general claiming to be Jesus who captured Prague will try seize power but will be asked to prove his divinity & then once he's been seen to be a fraud he will be killed too. With the loss of the head of state and the main religion of the Mahdiate (Mahdi Islam) being proven to be fake, the people across the Caliphate will start rebelling and trying to seize power as a power vacuum ensues and the people start looking out only for themselves. A new rump Caliphate will be declared but it will be tiny and largely ignored by others who have had their faith in Islam destroyed by the fraud Mahdi. I will provide you guys with a base map for the collapsing Mahdiate as the starting point for this civil war/Mahdiate collapse. <font color="#000000">VonGlusenburg (talk to Von!) 14:16, January 7, 2013 (UTC)
 * So, Lx has explained what will ahppen to Novgorod- now I'l explain what happens to Muscovy.
 * Since, as I said, the governing apparatus is stable, Muscovy and Novgorod are still in a Union. Poland, meanwhile, has slowly been growing apart. So, similar to what happens in Novgorod, with the Help of the Druzhina and the Red Hand, Muscovy insurrects starting in 1574, by 1576 has declared complete independence. The armies are massively concentrated in the Muscovy- Tver- Ivansgrad- Ryazan area, so all of those rejoin the Federation- but in Central Asia, Muscovian Sibir and Southern Nogai fracture and break away. These will be dealt with.
 * In Europe, Moldavia breaks away.
 * Meanwhile, I thought that in Poland, there is a Civil War, between the Secessionists and the Federationists. While they fight together in the insurrection, they then turn on each other. The Federationists succeed, as even though they are outnumbered, they have support of the Royal family, and a few hundred thousand Russian troops, together which is enough to end the Civil War on the Federationist side.
 * The Civil War in Poland will coincide with the Russian attacks on Moldavia and Caliphial Europe (around the Black Sea.)
 * After this, we'll regain our territories in Central Asia, starting with the Sibir, moving on to the Nogai, and mopping up Mangystau and the like.
 * See? Perfectly plausible. Only around a half million people die in Russia due to attacks from the Red Rose, around another Quarter million in the initial war. The Royal Guns (talk) 19:35, January 7, 2013 (UTC)
 * Actualy, according to whorever controls the red rose, the population in Russia is now only about 500 000-700 000 by my calculations(if you exclude the muslim areas). So that means that this implausible genocide took the lives of pretty much about 20 million people! Lets just ignore it.(here is where I go those calculations from: the entire population of the RF is approx. 20 million. Lets Leave 250 000 people die in the initial attack. Still approx 20 million. being very  very  generous about 5-10% of the population is muslim, being oh so generous I give the muslims 2 million people in total. Half of those are female, therefore for the mostpart will never participate in war or killing. 1 million males. half of them are probably underage and will not be part of the rogues because of their age in the first place. only about 500 000 able-bodied men that could fight and kill. Lets assume that only 50% of those(and that is a very very very very very very very generous figure) are willing to leave their families and farms, possibly leaving their children and wives to starve, or have neither. We are left with 250 000 people willing to become part of that red rose. Lets, for the sake of arguement, assume that absolutely ALL of them join the Red rose(witch in and of it self is an extremely rediculous notion). Assuming 0 casualties(once again, a notion just as  rediculous), and the governement doing absolutely nothing to stop it even if it means loosing pesants and therefore crops and food, lets leave 150 000 troops in poland, and 100 000 to pillage the rest of russia. that means that the Polish population is now 325 000 inhabitants including them, the rest slaughtered by the red rose. Does anyone see how rediculous this is right now? the other 100 000 can go and kill and burn and pillage without anyone dying, and become the majority, meaning that the population of ther rest of russia now the 2 million muslims, + about 500 000 non-muslims. Remeber, these numbers are assuming every man that is willing joins the red rose, the governement does absolutely zilch to try and stop it, and the red rose has 0 casualties. This is an implausigasm on a grandiose scale, considering they beat what hitler did with smoothbrogh muskets and the caliphal governement might have paid attention if a quarter of all men suddenly started going on a murderous rampage and tried to stop it. so anyway, because of the aforementioned reasons, i will ignore the rogues altogether and consider them a group of 10 000 crazies at their peak that now only number less than 1000 and killed about 50 000 people. -Lx (leave me a message) 20:08, January 7, 2013 (UTC)
 * Actualy, according to whorever controls the red rose, the population in Russia is now only about 500 000-700 000 by my calculations(if you exclude the muslim areas). So that means that this implausible genocide took the lives of pretty much about 20 million people! Lets just ignore it.(here is where I go those calculations from: the entire population of the RF is approx. 20 million. Lets Leave 250 000 people die in the initial attack. Still approx 20 million. being very  very  generous about 5-10% of the population is muslim, being oh so generous I give the muslims 2 million people in total. Half of those are female, therefore for the mostpart will never participate in war or killing. 1 million males. half of them are probably underage and will not be part of the rogues because of their age in the first place. only about 500 000 able-bodied men that could fight and kill. Lets assume that only 50% of those(and that is a very very very very very very very generous figure) are willing to leave their families and farms, possibly leaving their children and wives to starve, or have neither. We are left with 250 000 people willing to become part of that red rose. Lets, for the sake of arguement, assume that absolutely ALL of them join the Red rose(witch in and of it self is an extremely rediculous notion). Assuming 0 casualties(once again, a notion just as  rediculous), and the governement doing absolutely nothing to stop it even if it means loosing pesants and therefore crops and food, lets leave 150 000 troops in poland, and 100 000 to pillage the rest of russia. that means that the Polish population is now 325 000 inhabitants including them, the rest slaughtered by the red rose. Does anyone see how rediculous this is right now? the other 100 000 can go and kill and burn and pillage without anyone dying, and become the majority, meaning that the population of ther rest of russia now the 2 million muslims, + about 500 000 non-muslims. Remeber, these numbers are assuming every man that is willing joins the red rose, the governement does absolutely zilch to try and stop it, and the red rose has 0 casualties. This is an implausigasm on a grandiose scale, considering they beat what hitler did with smoothbrogh muskets and the caliphal governement might have paid attention if a quarter of all men suddenly started going on a murderous rampage and tried to stop it. so anyway, because of the aforementioned reasons, i will ignore the rogues altogether and consider them a group of 10 000 crazies at their peak that now only number less than 1000 and killed about 50 000 people. -Lx (leave me a message) 20:08, January 7, 2013 (UTC)

Mahdiate
Total: 47*1.5 = 70.5 = 71
 * Location: 4
 * Tactical Advantage: 1 (attackers)
 * Strength: Wallachia (M), Rumelia (M), Anatolia (M), Candar (M), Karaman (L), Cilesia (L), Trbizond (M), Al-Slaveit (M), Crimea (M), Georgia (M), Circassia (M), West Qoyunlu (L), East Qoyunlu (M), Iraq (M) Persia (M), Afghanistan (M), Balochistan (M), Koli (M), Gujurat (M), Deccan (M), Mangyastau (M), Dimurats (M), Bukhara (M), Xwarezm (M), Turkistan (M), Aqmola (M), Oman (M), Shaybah (M), Nejd (M), Hadramut (M), Yemen (M), Ehthiopia (M), Nubia (M), Hijaz (M), Egypt (M), Palesine (M), Syria (M), Tripolitania (M), Tunisia (M), Algeria (M), Byzantium (M) 11 Russian states (M), Cyprus (M) 162/63 -- 2.5 = +3
 * Military Development: 30/14 -- +2
 * Economy: 56/6 -- 9
 * Infrastructure: 0
 * Expansion: 0
 * Motive: +3
 * Chance: +4
 * Edit Count: 1492
 * UTC Time: 18x47 = 846
 * 1492/846*3.14159= 5.540
 * Nation Age: -10
 * Population: 9+20
 * Participation: 10
 * Recent Wars: -8

Venice
Total: +45
 * Location: 5
 * Tactical Advantage: 5 (larger colonial empire)
 * Strength: Venice (L), Croatia (MV), Siena (MV), Savoy (MV), Naples (MV), Milan (MV), d'Asti (MV), Papal States (M), Provence (MV), Corsica (MV), Burgundy (M), Calais (MV), Brandenburg (M), Luxembourg (M), Austria (M), Salzburg (MV), Tyrolia (MV), Scandinavia (M), Portugal (M), Wettin Lands (M*5): +63 -- 0
 * Military Development: 14-- 0
 * Economy: 6 -- 0
 * Infrastructure: 0
 * Expansion: -2
 * Motive: +10
 * Chance: +7
 * Edit Count: 3258
 * UTC Time: 18*50= 900
 * 3258/900*3.14159= 11.3725
 * Nation Age: 5
 * Population: 7
 * Participation: 10
 * Recent Wars: -2

Results
((71/(45+71))*2)-1 = 22.41%

(22.41)*(1-1/(2(2))) = 16.80%

The Mahdiate annexes Venetian Mediterrenean. The strait of Gibraltar made into a province, as in Napliyye, and Crete. Colonies declare independance from Venice and the ones in the New World become 'Federated States of the New Worl'. (FSNW) These states have no connection with Caliphate at all and are a very loose confederation, attracting many Christians fleeing from the Caliphate.

Discussion
ChrisL123 (talk) 19:11, January 6, 2013 (UTC)
 * 1) You forgot about the numerous wars the Caliphate has fought in the last 15 years. I count five.
 * 2) You forget Venice's several vassals, including Croatia, Modena, Siena, Savoy, and possibly Gibraltar.
 * 3) States in the New World created this early have almost no chance of surviving without their parent country's assistance. They heavily rely on trade, weaponry, etc. If these colonies were forced to declare independence (without considering the consequences), they'd likely die away.
 * also in the rules it says that colonies can't get independence until 1776 (though i think that should be until 1750 as for the Tupac amaru attempt of independence for peru) i think the venetians colonies would be like Brazil in the napoleonic wars, and what Chris said and Scandinavia, Me, France and the other thousand pro venetian nations Sine dei gloriem (talk) 19:27, January 6, 2013 (UTC)
 * Maybe.Brazil itself was quite underdeveloped before the Braganças installed their court here.and plus, this is going to be brief.there's been just 50 years or so since the estabilish of theose colonies, so there is going to be no sense of nationalism as a separate country there.they still will consider themselves as Venetians.So, they won't stay independent, and probably will be absorbed back into Venice as soon as it regains independence.--Collie Kaltenbrunner (talk) 20:05, January 6, 2013 (UTC)
 * I also think that it shoudl be 1750, although the Tupac Amaru rebellion was around 1780.--Collie Kaltenbrunner (talk) 20:36, January 6, 2013 (UTC)

I tried to correct it, but i don't understand the divison of the military development scores by 14 and the economy by six for no seeming reason.If there are two leaders, shoudln't they be divided by the same number?--Collie Kaltenbrunner (talk) 19:26, January 6, 2013 (UTC)

Because the numbers being divided are Venice's scores. Is that what you're talking about? Also, I fixed a bit. The Pope will aid. ChrisL123 (talk) 19:35, January 6, 2013 (UTC)

Ah.i didn't know this part.--Collie Kaltenbrunner (talk) 20:05, January 6, 2013 (UTC)

I see... Karaman and Cilesia were not leaders in any other war. Also, Venice has been involved in some wars if I am not correct. Anyhow, if we can't annex Venice we will take the straits and mainland Venice. Saamwiil, the Humble 20:19, January 6, 2013 (UTC)
 * All of Venice except for some islands are mainland.And plus: the -8 score on recent wars is because Karaman and Cilicia both sent military aid in 8 wars on the last 15 years, the Serbian and Transylvanian wars included as they were declared before the war with Venice.--Collie Kaltenbrunner (talk) 20:28, January 6, 2013 (UTC)

You left out me(Scandinavia), the Papal States, Portugal, the Naples vassal, etc. Also It's ridiculous for colonies to be independent at 1574. They are all underdeveloped.AP (talk) 20:23, January 6, 2013 (UTC)
 * Hey, the Napolitan vassal is there on the algorythm.the Papal states too.--Collie Kaltenbrunner (talk) 20:32, January 6, 2013 (UTC)

Yes, well we need the following up there on the Venetian side: Fegelein! Fegelein! Fegelein! 20:38, January 6, 2013 (UTC)
 * Brandenburg (M)
 * Austria (M)
 * 2 Austrian vassals (MVs)
 * Milan (MV)
 * former Milanese vassal, now Venetian (MV)
 * Scandinavia
 * Portugal
 * Luxembourg
 * Wettin Lands (5 Ms)

You don't control Austria.--Collie Kaltenbrunner (talk) 20:40, January 6, 2013 (UTC)

I do. When MP left, he said Austria was controlled by whoever played the Emperor. I play the Emperor. Ergo. Fegelein! Fegelein! Fegelein! 20:42, January 6, 2013 (UTC)

Can Venice just give up Crete and Gibraltar, I don't feel like doing more algorithms and this seems reasonable to me. Saamwiil, the Humble 21:23, January 6, 2013 (UTC)

i don't think so. Scan is out and i don't think AP would give up such a strategical area, as Scan wouldn't either Sine dei gloriem (talk) 21:26, January 6, 2013 (UTC)

16.80% I believe that is enoguh to take both of them, and the small Greek exlaves. Saamwiil, the Humble 22:42, January 6, 2013 (UTC)

All of Venice's empire totals 7808 pixels and 16.8% of that is 1,312 pixels. So we can take all of Venice's Greek territories, Gibraltar & Sicily and annex them into the Mahdiate. <font color="#000000">VonGlusenburg (talk to Von!) 23:28, January 6, 2013 (UTC)

All of that is fine except the colonial independence. Not only is it ridiculous, but also implausible. No colony in Antillia or anywhere right now can sustain itself. The colonies are extremely dependent on the mother country right now and would not survive. Plus, it is against the rules for colonies to be independent before 1775. AP (talk) 01:34, January 7, 2013 (UTC)

Yeah this war will not directly effect Venice's colonies in the Americas, the Mahdiate cannot reach them. However there will be a strain on their resources so they probably won't expand as much now. Which considering Scan isn't here atm means he won't be posting for their colonial expansion anyway so it all works out in the end :) <font color="#000000">VonGlusenburg (talk to Von!) 02:02, January 7, 2013 (UTC)

So, it is possible to annex: Malta, Ventian Greece, Ventian Aegan Islands, Gibraltar and Sicily? Saamwiil, the Humble 02:06, January 7, 2013 (UTC)
 * Yep. I'm uploading a current caliphate map to show our expansion so far. It'll include the territories we have gained from Venice and all the provinces that we have created from it. <font color="#000000">VonGlusenburg (talk to Von!) 02:15, January 7, 2013 (UTC)

I'm posting for Scan so what would be a possible expansion rate(if it can be slowed down like that)? I think Sicily might be pushing it, but that's fine I guess. AP (talk) 02:10, January 7, 2013 (UTC)
 * Talking about half rate, Scan told you to expand each colony by 20 px.This isn't possible, as none of those colonies is more than 100 years old.the expansion rhyth at this rate would be 40 px to be divided.--Collie Kaltenbrunner (talk) 06:53, January 7, 2013 (UTC)

Say half rate until 1577? <font color="#000000">VonGlusenburg (talk to Von!) 02:15, January 7, 2013 (UTC)

Mahdiate
Total:
 * Location: +4
 * Tactical Advantage: +6 (attacking, larger colonial)
 * Strength: Rumelia (L), Tunisia (M), Yemen (M), Tripolitania (M), Hijaz (M), Egypt (M), Palesine (M), Syria (M), Georgia (M), Karaman (M), Cilesia (M), Trebizond (M), West Qoyunlu (M), East Qoyunlu (M), Iraq (M) Persia (M), Crimea (M), Mangystau (M), Xwarezm (M), Turkistan (M), Aqmola (M), Koli (M), Gujurat (M), Deccan (M), Dimurats (M), Oman (M), Shaybah (M), Nejd (M), Hadramut (M), Anatolia (M), Wallachia (M), Candar (M), Rumelia (M): 100/4 --- +25
 * Military Development: 4 -> 8/2 -- +4
 * Economy: 2 -> 4/2 -- +2
 * Infrastructure: 0
 * Expansion: -1
 * Motive: +3
 * Chance: +7
 * Edit Count: 4,459
 * UTC Time:
 * Nation Age: -10
 * Population: 9 + 20 = +29
 * Participation: +10
 * Recent Wars: ...
 * Recent Wars: ...

Serbia
Total:
 * Location: +5
 * Tactical Advantage: 0
 * Strength: Serbia (L):4 -- 0
 * Military Development: 2 -- 0
 * Economy: 2 -- 0
 * Infrastructure: +3
 * Expansion: 0
 * Motive: +10
 * Chance: ...
 * Nation Age: ...
 * Population: +6
 * Participation: +10
 * Recent Wars: 0

Results
Pending

Discussion
Will complete tomorrow. Gah so much to do atm! <font color="#000000">VonGlusenburg (talk to Von!) 02:35, January 6, 2013 (UTC)

Mahdiate
Total:
 * Location: +4
 * Tactical Advantage: +6 (attacking, larger colonial)
 * Strength: Wallachia (L), Tunisia (M), Yemen (M), Tripolitania (M), Hijaz (M), Egypt (M), Palesine (M), Syria (M), Georgia (M), Karaman (M), Cilesia (M), Trebizond (M), West Qoyunlu (M), East Qoyunlu (M), Iraq (M) Persia (M), Crimea (M), Mangystau (M), Xwarezm (M), Turkistan (M), Aqmola (M), Koli (M), Gujurat (M), Deccan (M), Dimurats (M), Oman (M), Shaybah (M), Nejd (M), Hadramut (M), Anatolia (M), Rumelia (M), Candar (M), Rumelia (M): 100/4 --- +25
 * Military Development: 2 -> 0
 * Economy: 4 -> 4/2 -- +2
 * Infrastructure: 0
 * Expansion: 0
 * Motive: +3
 * Chance: +7
 * Edit Count: 4,459
 * UTC Time:
 * Nation Age: -10
 * Population: 9 + 20 = +29
 * Participation: +10
 * Recent Wars:
 * Recent Wars:

Transylvania
Total:
 * Location: +5
 * Tactical Advantage: 0
 * Strength: Transylvania (L): 4 -- 0
 * Military Development: 2 -- 0
 * Economy: 2 -- 0
 * Infrastructure: +3
 * Expansion: 0
 * Motive: +10
 * Chance: ...
 * Nation Age: ...
 * Population: +6
 * Participation: +10
 * Recent Wars: 0

Results
Pending

Discussion
Will finish tomorrow, well later today (it is past midnight here now). This algorithm ain't finished so don't take it seriously. <font color="#000000">VonGlusenburg (talk to Von!) 02:35, January 6, 2013 (UTC)

Do I have to do the algorithms for these two wars? I mean they're both against NPCs and they'll be independent again in a couple of years. Likely chances are the Mahdiate will beat them and annex them but so much coursework to do atm I just don't have the time. If anyone else wants to do them though, I'll be very grateful. <font color="#000000">VonGlusenburg (talk to Von!) 23:46, January 6, 2013 (UTC)

Well, they are NPC's that won't get any outside help, so annexing them is an pretty much foregone conclusion, but the algorythm is still needed.--Collie Kaltenbrunner (talk) 12:58, January 7, 2013 (UTC)

But they'll be reformed in next to no time and its pretty obvious that they will be conquered. If it wasn't for the Mahdiate stuff reaching its conclusion atm, then I wouldn't be posting at all and on a break until my exams are over. <font color="#000000">VonGlusenburg (talk to Von!) 13:58, January 7, 2013 (UTC)

Well, by the temporay conclusions of this, you won. (76 vs. 34 ) --Collie Kaltenbrunner (talk) 14:55, January 7, 2013 (UTC)

Mahdiate
Total: 69
 * Location: +4
 * Tactical Advantage: +6 (attackers & large colonial empire)
 * Strength: Pol Al-Jakub (L), Litmysh (L), Wallachia (M), Rumelia (M), Anatolia (M), Candar (M), Karaman (M), Cilesia (M), Trbizond (M), Al-Slaveit (M), Crimea (M), Georgia (M), Circassia (M), West Qoyunlu (M), East Qoyunlu (M), Iraq (M) Persia (M), Afghanistan (M), Balochistan (M), Koli (M), Gujurat (M), Deccan (M), Mangyastau (M), Dimurats (M), Bukhara (M), Xwarezm (M), Turkistan (M), Aqmola (M), Oman (M), Shaybah (M), Nejd (M), Hadramut (M), Yemen (M), Ethiopia (M), Nubia (M), Hijaz (M), Egypt (M), Palesine (M), Syria (M), Sicily (M), Tripolitania (M), Tunisia (M), Algeria (M), Morocco (M), Al Yunaan (M) Ada'tu tareeqi (M), Moscow (M), Novogorod (M), Al talch (M), Kazan (M), Nogai (M), Al-Sibir (M), Cyprus (M): +4
 * Military Development: 30/4 -- +8
 * Economy: 50/5 -- +10
 * Infrastructure: 0
 * Expansion: 0
 * Motive: +7
 * Chance: +9
 * Edit Count: 6,090
 * UTC Time: 02:27: 2*2*7 = 28
 * 6,090/28*pi= 683.296402156
 * Nation Age: -10
 * Population: 9+20 = +29
 * Participation: +10
 * Recent Wars: -8

Brandenburg & Bohemia
Total: +52
 * Location: 5
 * Tactical Advantage: 0
 * Strength: Brandenburg (L), Bohemia (L), Luxembourg (M), Austria (M), Salzburg (MV), Tyrolia (MV), Scandinavia (M), UKBT (M), Aragon (M), Saami (MV), Venice (M), Modena (MV), Naples (MV), Siena (MV), Ferrara (MV) : +40 -- 0
 * Military Development: (10 + 3) 13-- 0
 * Economy: (3+2) 5-- 0
 * Infrastructure: (0+3): +3
 * Expansion: -2
 * Motive: +10
 * Chance: +2
 * Edit Count: 9117
 * UTC Time: 02:27: 2*2*7 = 28
 * 9117/28*pi= 1022.92500796
 * Nation Age: +5 (+5 Brandenburg, +0 Bohemia)
 * Population: 7
 * Participation: 10
 * Recent Wars: -8

Results
9.52% available.

7.14% if you fight for two years.

Counting pixels, you can take VERY SMALL parts of the Bohemian panhandle OR VERY SMALL parts of Courland, the Brandenburgish territory in the Baltics. Rough estimate.

Discussion
Okay the Mahdi is invading Bohemia and Brandenburg at the same time so I'm including them both in a single algorithm to save time. Note Jesus will take Prague over in this war and kill the Kappelist dictator resulting in Bohemia falling into civil dissarray but still how far into Brandenburg we get & how does the Bohemia war effect this? I'll leave it to the rest of you to finish this off. I did the chance scores though, everything else could do with updating though probably. <font color="#000000">VonGlusenburg (talk to Von!) 14:35, January 7, 2013 (UTC)

What will happen to Bohemia after 1576?--Collie Kaltenbrunner (talk) 14:56, January 7, 2013 (UTC)

Well I'll split it up into Bohemia & Slovakia but perhaps Bohemia is more liberal Kappelist then it currently is. Either way both of the new states not joining the HRE again willingly. <font color="#000000">VonGlusenburg (talk to Von!) 15:06, January 7, 2013 (UTC)

Anyway, only Bohemia was part of the HRE.--Collie Kaltenbrunner (talk) 16:01, January 7, 2013 (UTC)

OK, here's how it works. You invade any part of the HRE, the whole things gets involved. End of story. Fegelein! Fegelein! Fegelein! 23:31, January 7, 2013 (UTC)

And I participated in 10 wars and you 8? This doesn't sound right. Fegelein! Fegelein! Fegelein! 23:57, January 7, 2013 (UTC)

Do Pol-al-Jakub and Litmysh (Pol-al-Jakub, I assume, is Poland. Islamic for Poland is Lehistan) really have colonial empires? Fegelein! Fegelein! Fegelein! 23:57, January 7, 2013 (UTC)
 * Well, Poland has an small colony on the coast of Africa, but yours is bigger.--Collie Kaltenbrunner (talk) 06:44, January 8, 2013 (UTC)

And why is your motive 7? Shouldn't it be 3 or something? No one is opressing the Muslims. Fegelein! Fegelein! Fegelein! 23:57, January 7, 2013 (UTC)

Also you did the Caliphate's stregnth wrong. I fixed it. Fegelein! Fegelein! Fegelein! 01:23, January 8, 2013 (UTC)

You neglected to put in: Aragon, my special autonomous region of the Saami(would be MV), Venice, Modena(MV), Naples(MV), Siena(MV), Ferrara(MV), etc.AP (talk) 04:20, January 8, 2013 (UTC)

Done. Fegelein! Fegelein! Fegelein! 04:24, January 8, 2013 (UTC)
 * Actually, Modena shoudn't be here, because Venice annexed Modena on the middle of the war with Naples, around 1560.--Collie Kaltenbrunner (talk) 06:40, January 8, 2013 (UTC)

And Bohemia's age is 0, as their last government change was less than 100 years ago.--Collie Kaltenbrunner (talk) 08:56, January 8, 2013 (UTC)

Red Rose
Ok, this thing about the 'Red Rose' in Russia is now exceedingly implausible- as shown here:

Basically, my arguments I posted there. Unless it is actually possible for someone to kill 9 million people in 5 years- I rather doubt it- can the 1574 post about this be stricken?
 * Many rogues originating from the Muslim parts of former Russia and refugees from begin the 'final push'. This is high sense of alertness, the killings increase, unlike in Pol al-Jakub. The rogue bands go around burning crops in Novgrod, Al-thalch and Muscovy literally burning towns down to the root, burning forest, making the winter exeptionally cruel, killing of even the rogues, but even more Russians who are unprepared to go a winter without food or heat. or by those pushed out by the Russian gov't in exile, a house. Russia's female population outnumbers the male by 3:1, causing many rogues to also stop killing, but in this case be slave-capturers, where the women are sent to the Qoyunlus, where their life is spared from 'Russia's Hardest Winter'.
 * WHOA. 3:1? Look, Russia will have had a roughly even birthrate here, ok? 1:1. This mean that around 12 million people (In ALL of Russia) are male, and 12 million are female. At this point, the 'Red Rose' comes in and starts slaughtering people. For this to get to a three to one ration, you need to kill 9 million people in 5 years! Hitler barely beat that! And he had concentration camps, machine guns, gas cahmbers... come to think of it, since he started around 1935, Hitler DIDN'T beat that! If he killed 11 million (6 million Jews and 5 million others) people in 10 years, we then work out that he killed 5.5 million in the first five years. Are you honestly suggesting you could do 3.5 million better 350 years earlier? IMPLAUSOGASM.

The Royal Guns (talk) 19:53, January 7, 2013 (UTC)

there's also my mathematical impossiblility I posted in the Russia section, so now that there is a Red Rose section, I am just going to repost it:

Actualy, according to whorever controls the red rose, the population in Russia is now only about 500 000-700 000 by my calculations(if you exclude the muslim areas). So that means that this implausible genocide took the lives of pretty much about 20 million people! Lets just ignore it.(here is where I go those calculations from: the entire population of the RF is approx. 20 million. Lets Leave 250 000 people die in the initial attack. Still approx 20 million. being very very  generous about 5-10% of the population is muslim, being oh so generous I give the muslims 2 million people in total. Half of those are female, therefore for the mostpart will never participate in war or killing. 1 million males. half of them are probably underage and will not be part of the rogues because of their age in the first place. only about 500 000 able-bodied men that could fight and kill. Lets assume that only 50% of those(and that is a very very very very very very very generous figure) are willing to leave their families and farms, possibly leaving their children and wives to starve, or have neither. We are left with 250 000 people willing to become part of that red rose. Lets, for the sake of arguement, assume that absolutely ALL of them join the Red rose(witch in and of it self is an extremely rediculous notion). Assuming 0 casualties(once again, a notion just as rediculous), and the governement doing absolutely nothing to stop it even if it means loosing pesants and therefore crops and food, lets leave 150 000 troops in poland, and 100 000 to pillage the rest of russia. that means that the Polish population is now 325 000 inhabitants including them, the rest slaughtered by the red rose. Does anyone see how rediculous this is right now? the other 100 000 can go and kill and burn and pillage without anyone dying, and become the majority, meaning that the population of ther rest of russia now the 2 million muslims, + about 500 000 non-muslims. Remeber, these numbers are assuming every man that is willing joins the red rose, the governement does absolutely zilch to try and stop it, and the red rose has 0 casualties. This is an implausigasm on a grandiose scale, considering they beat what hitler did with smoothbrogh muskets and the caliphal governement might have paid attention if a quarter of all men suddenly started going on a murderous rampage and tried to stop it. so anyway, because of the aforementioned reasons, i will ignore the rogues altogether and consider them a group of 10 000 crazies at their peak that now only number less than 1000 and killed about 50 000 people. -Lx (leave me a message)20:08, January 7, 2013 (UTC)

While I believe the population of Russia should be lower, that of Islam higher and that the Red Rose would actually wreck a lot of havoc, Lx is right. Fed (talk) 03:23, January 8, 2013 (UTC)

Your calculations are off from mine. Let me start of by saying I believe that, by my calculations, Russia's initial population is aboutr 15M at most. The population of Russia should be about 5 million with everywhere besides Poland, muslims are a very small minority. 500k are in the red rose, roughly half of them have lost their home, their family et cetera in the earthquake, hence probably borderline psychopathic, roughly, a fourth wants to make money.

It seems to me that you way over-estimate the power of the resistance, as you said, not everybody is willing to leave their family and their home, even if the government is opressive, we have many historical examples of that. It seems that you want your troops to have 0 casualties, the casualties the Rogue attacks face is clear, by post you make. Not seeming to acount for any male casualties you dare say the ratio for men to women is still 1:1, which clearly is not the case if males are the prefered killing for millions of people. This is not including all the people who died becuase they froze off in the winter.

The government of the Mahdiate has not formally helped the rebels, but I am wuite assured that some years back, I posted on something saying to the effect that the Mahdi condoned these attacks because he needed to upkeep his troop. Saamwiil, the Humble 10:43, January 8, 2013 (UTC)

You may disagree on the numbers, but used percentages, all steming from the initial 20 million. you can exchange that for 15 mil or whatever you like, but the fact remains that the muslims are 10% at most and 5% are males, 2.5% are able-bodied, and 1.25% are willing to leave. 1.25% of the population massacring the rest is so extremely implausible. I am in no way arguing that the men:women ratio will remain 1:1 by the end of occupation(although I do not think that it is plausible for the rogues to have more than 10 000- 100 000 in numbers), but it will be close. I am just arguing that it is implausible for the rogues to cause as much damage as you have posted them to be, and caliphal posts are basicaly saying that there are unlimited rogues and limited russian resistance.-Lx (leave me a message) 14:15, January 8, 2013 (UTC)

You are right, I do agree that the number of massacres is overstated (although a LOT of people have died at the hands of a fraction of the population - see World War 2, the An Lushan Rebellion, et cetera), but there'd be more Muslims in the Federation since, y'know, Kazan and the Urals are highly Islamic. I do believe Saam's demographics are closer to correct, but the killings are a bit out of hand. Fed (talk) 16:09, January 8, 2013 (UTC)

The population of the RF, total, is some 20-22 million actually.

Look, at this period in time, the area of Poland had around 10 million people, while Russia proper had almost the same. However, unlike OTL, we had a population boom, and our population is 1 to 2 million higher than OTL. Thus, let's say 21 million.

Now, in the Central Asian portions, they will be some 75% Muslim- but of the total of Russia, most of which is concentrated in the Moscow-Warsaw-Novgorod area, it is perhaps, at most 15%. So, around 12% of the nation is Muslim- around 6% is male- around 4% is able-bodied- of which 1% will be running around slaughtering people.

That said, it is certainly possible for them to kill up to- say- half a million Russians. They have now been slaughtered by the druzhinas and Red Hand militants. Overall, Russia lost around 3/4 of a million people.

Please rectify. The Royal Guns (talk) 20:38, January 8, 2013 (UTC)

There were six million in Russia in 1599, just before the Time of Troubles. Not nearly ten.

Central Asia would be 85-90% of Muslim descent, since, pre-Tsardom, it was always that way and there's not nearly enough Russianization at the time for it to happen. Fed (talk) 21:18, January 8, 2013 (UTC)

There were people outside Russia coming into Russia to attack (mostly Mangyastau, West Qoyunlu and East Qoyunlu). Moreover, most of the killing happened in Poland, making the rogues who settled down for the last day the percent I stated in game. I'm planning to make Poland a 3-way states with local lords holding seets in the senate. From strongest to weakest, they are: Orthodox, Muslim, Kappelist. As the Muslims understand, id they wish to survive, they cannot be hostile, so they settle for a lot less than their power. Saamwiil, the Humble 23:04, January 8, 2013 (UTC)

Yes, there were. But also, there are several other things in that time period that-

Regardless, the population boom can make up for that. So, fine, say 10 million total. Whatever.

YOU DO NOT CONTROL POLAND ANYMORE. I already stated how it broke apart- and it did so. Now Russia shall re enter and take em back. The Royal Guns (talk) 20:39, January 9, 2013 (UTC)

And, the popualtion of Russia at 1600 was 15 million, without Poland, so I have no idea if you just made that up or what.

www.tacitus.nu/historical-atlas/population/russia.htm

The Royal Guns (talk) 21:00, January 9, 2013 (UTC)

My good sir, that alone states that Russia proper had about 13 million people around this time. Your "baby boom" probably brought it up by what, half a million? Because not all of those 13 million people can make babies. And it's not an even match of males and females. Plus the genocides probably brought you back down to somewhere between 12.5 and 13.2 million. Fegelein! Fegelein! Fegelein! 21:15, January 9, 2013 (UTC)

Learning From The Caliphate
While I still go by the fact that we let the Caliphate (and the HRE) get away with too much, especially with their latest wars. I understand that they will only last another year, but this brings me to my other point. The shockingly implausible things posted by the Caliphate's players, including the ridiculously deadly Red Rose, indicate that we need to be more serious when faced with relentless implausibility. I cannot believe that Von would willingly create this ridiculously large Evil Empire when he was above such behavior in the last game. We need to prevent another Shark-jumping nation of that magnitude from arising. I don't care that their destruction is eminent, it shouldn't have gotten to that point in the first place! And now that the Caliphate has run it's course we need to keep history from repeating itself in the future. Yank 03:12, January 8, 2013 (UTC)

Let's remember that this is alternate history, Yank. You view only as 'the Caliphate going to fall apart so ugh, I guess I can wait a turn', but it is so much more to that. It provides something more flavourfull than just a series of wars and colonisations between European Nations (maybe East Asian too). You could view as a muslim crusade, the whole point of it was to fall apart, not just a last second thought. That is the whole point for all these conquest, they were by no mean supposed to last in long number of years. Anyhow, since you're probably not going to read any post that comes from the Caliphate, I need no more explanation. Saamwiil, the Humble 10:49, January 8, 2013 (UTC)


 * ^this exactly. It was not meant to be anything long-lasted (and there are things on this map game that are equally implausible, on a smaller scale), and was meant so that it was not OTL history cutting out Castille and adding in Naples instead. Fed (talk) 16:09, January 8, 2013 (UTC)

Agreed. Though I think that after the Caliphate falls, the players should go back to playing the original nation(or whatever forms after the collapse) that they signed up for. Otherwise, they'll control 10+ provinces and it'll be the same as nothing--each one controlling a mini Caliphate.AP (talk) 17:09, January 8, 2013 (UTC)


 * Well, that's not really possible - the Mamluks are all but extinguished, as I'd believe is the Qoyunlu clan - but we'll collapse into a bunch of small states that will band together into smaller kingdoms (my plan is a very West-friendly Kingdom of the Levant that holds Syria, Yemen and Palestine, as well as hopefully Iraq, and a Maghrebi vassal - so invest heavily! :P). It'll take a while for control to emerge again, but eventually a Caliphate of this level won't rise again, don't worry. Fed (talk) 17:40, January 8, 2013 (UTC)

I was against it last game because that the type of nation I was playing, now I am not playing a liberal nation, I'm playing an extreme theocracy who agree with stuff like killing non-believers and mass expansion. Anyway the Mahdi will probably go down as the greatest general in history and his legacy will change the course of history. Anyway I'm writing the final Mahdi post as I speak and with it destroying the Mahdiate/Caliphate. Now two of the largest alliances in the world (Caliphate & Russia) have been destroyed and remaining one (HRE) has been weakened severely. Hopefully now the game will won't end up as a cold war between large player nation alliances again for a while. <font color="#000000">VonGlusenburg (talk to Von!) 17:29, January 8, 2013 (UTC)

Poland
Total: 48 * 1.5 = 72
 * Location: +5
 * Tactical Advantage:
 * Strength: Poland (L): +4 -- 0
 * Military Development: 0
 * Economy: 0
 * Infrastructure: 0
 * Expansion: 0
 * Motive: +10
 * Chance: +2
 * Nation Age: -10
 * Population: 8 (population fo 10 million- it was 11 before the invasion, OTL) + 20 (over 10X as large) = 26
 * Participation: +10
 * Recent Wars: -0

Brandenburg
Total: +60
 * Location: 4
 * Tactical Advantage: 6
 * Strength: Brandenburg (L), Austria (L), Salzburg (MV), Tyrolia (MV) = 15/4= 3.75 = 4
 * Military Development: 12
 * Economy: 4
 * Infrastructure: 0
 * Expansion: -0
 * Motive: +3
 * Chance: +6 (Edits = 9153, Time = 2226)
 * Nation Age: +5
 * Population: 6 = 16
 * Participation: 0
 * Recent Wars: -2

Results
((70/(70+41))*2)-1 = 26.12%

The war will last two or more years (depending on the total results, I think I did something wrong), so 17.55% can be take n.

(((72/(72+60))*2)-1 = 9.09% of Brandenburg can be taken.

When an NPC wins, how long does the war last? Or do we just assume it took over all 9.09% of Brandenburg?

9.09*(1-1/(2(2)) = 6.81%

Discussion
Is it possible to just fix the Mahdi's Third War and put all the Caliphate states with a "W" for withdrawal and take away the 1.5 bonus? Because this is just me pushing all the way into the Caliphate now that they're collapsing.

No, because Poland declared independance. Saamwiil, the Humble01:24, January 9, 2013 (UTC) Poland gets a +8 for population not six. And I doubt your population is 5 to 10 times that of Poland's. They get the population bonus, not you.AP (talk)

Poland has an 8 digit population. The Royal Guns (talk) 20:34, January 9, 2013 (UTC)

So, the rest of Russia has only 5 million people? This doesn't sound right to me. Fegelein! Fegelein! Fegelein! 21:15, January 9, 2013 (UTC)

As I am currently taking custody of Poland until its on its feet, I must say that Poland right now max has 5 mil.

Poland is an independent state known as the United Polish State. I'm showing it as in civil disarray on my 1576 map as the UPS is still unifying itself, but its nation borders are on the map. Plus its not NPC, Saamwiil controls the UPS. <font color="#000000">VonGlusenburg (talk to Von!) 01:05, January 10, 2013 (UTC)

Actually, since 9% of Brandenburg was taken shouldnt their government be overthrown because they lost 25% of their territory in the war with the Caliphate? That amounts to 34%. --AP

Yes it does, usually we do it for joining the scores of the same nations warring with one another together; but these unrelated wars could potentially be joined together. So yes they should be punished in some-way. Perhaps Poland gets its 9% of territory and then the Kappelist states Brandenburg annexed them rebel away? You could kill off your royal family and install a new dynasty if you'd like Scraw. Perhaps dynastic union with your close friend Saxony or Scandinavia?

I'm still questing for the HRE to be completely destroyed (the alliance that is), and this would be a good point to pick up from. <font color="#000000">VonGlusenburg (talk to Von!) 16:36, January 10, 2013 (UTC)

No, Actually, Poland has a population of at least 10 million. It was agreed that just half a million people were killed in the 'Red Rose' attacks... not 5 million.

And the rest of Russia has 15 million people, actually. The Royal Guns (talk) 20:16, January 10, 2013 (UTC)

I don't see how this war and the Caliphate's War can be combined, as the Caliphate collapsed--end of story. Poland is an entirely seperate nation, formed from the remains of a nation long gone. The 6% is 6%.

Fegelein! Fegelein! Fegelein! 19:38, January 12, 2013 (UTC)

Dimurats
I do not feel that at this point in time the Dimurats would be able to conquer their former empire and the Dimurat homeland. To recover their former empire in one year from the downfall of the Caliphate is really pushing it. I could see former Dimurat territories being the Dimurats, even though it would mess up my little city states plan for Persia. But even then, people have had a taste of what it feels like to be away from any central authority and would not be willing to go down like that. I could see a smaller Dimurat Kingdom say in Afghanistan, though it would still mess with my plans. Saamwiil, the Humble 12:03, January 9, 2013 (UTC)

Russia (Part 2)
Ok, guys, seriously. Just three things to say here. Please take these into account. The Royal Guns (talk) 21:06, January 9, 2013 (UTC)
 * 1) When France, Poland, or all such nations were annexed during WWII- for around the same length of time as us- they didn't shatter. Now, I can understand the Central Asian nations, I can understand Poland- but Muscovy and Novgorod should be effectively the same size as before the Federation, when all of Russia- Russian Russia, which was Russian for over 750 years- was with us.
 * 2) According to this source, Proper;y Russian Russia had a population fo 13-15 million.
 * 3) The Federation and all alliances will have survived, because the government apparatus had fled to Scandanavia.

1. That was in 1940, when nationalism actually existed. This time it's loyalty to the king, not ethnicity. That makes a nation's collapse far easy.

2. That source doesn't make any sense. The population, for some reason, doesn't fall during the Time of Troubles, even when a third of the population died IOTL. It is about six million people, according to Wikipedia.

Fed (talk) 21:39, January 9, 2013 (UTC)

It doesn't matter what the gov't did in exile, they weren't in Russia at the time. People/dukes have felt their freedom and aren't just going to give it up. No one is going to emerge as super power in atleast 50 years. Saamwiil, the Humble 22:02, January 9, 2013 (UTC)

The problem with that is that Novgorod was an actual republic. It had a Duma, witch was the solution they made to running a large nation with a direct democracy logistics problems. With new dukes, they will probably start cracking down on that. Pesants will not like that as much. and Russian population was relegated to 6 million after famine. no famine started this game. novgorodians loved their veche, and only gave it up OTL because of the muscovian conquest. Although it is debatable who actualy controled it, the people or the nobles behind the curtians, the people felt that they had a say in what their governement did. To keep that, the Novgorodians made a representative Duma, much like a primitive parliment, to keep the sense of the Veche, but at a larger scale. even if the Veche, debatably, did not have any power, the people still felt that it did and that they were teh ones deciding what happened when That is why so many people would be glad to rejoin Novgorod, after seeing what totalitarianism was like. -Lx (leave me a message) 01:44, January 10, 2013 (UTC)

No, it was six million according to Wikipedia, and 2 mil died. No famine, it's six-seven million instead.

And yes, the Novgorod part is right (at least in ethnic Russian areas), my complaint was mostly going at Muscovy. Nationalism did exist in republics or provinces with high citizen tradition back then (also see Venice, Florence and Ancient Rome). Fed (talk) 01:51, January 10, 2013 (UTC)

Right, and the mod event in 77' has Minsk Breaking away. I had intended, and have meant this clear multiple times, to have minsk as part of the Novgorod Repiblic, and went so far as to put it on the Novgorodian coat of arms. Check the Novgorod Page, that I realy need to update... I am perty sure that it was ethnicaly Russian(remember, during appenage Russia, Lithuania decided to invade old Kievan Rus' and take a bunch of its territory, still with native Russians(cultures have not diverged very much, belarus and Russia today have a customs union), Minsk should be still Russian, although I may be wrong about demographics of the time, I am pretty sure with the information i now posess that it is, and am willing to change my position with new evidence. -Lx (leave me a message) 02:11, January 10, 2013 (UTC)
 * Minsk is more or less Russian, Why do you think that Minsk broke away from Lithuania?--Collie Kaltenbrunner (talk) 06:58, January 10, 2013 (UTC)

Again, just because you used to rule that land doesn't mean that those people are going to roll over & let you do it again. Just like you never listen to a thing I say, they aren't going to listen to a thing Novogorod say. Some other power-hungry government has taken over Minsk and another one has taken over Kiev, and another .... etc. Novogorod & Moscow are not the only two royal families who have ambitions to rule over Russia. <font color="#000000">VonGlusenburg (talk to Von!) 03:03, January 10, 2013 (UTC)

Look, as long as Minsk has a veche, I am fine, mainlky because of power to the people reasons.outlined in my comments, and nationalism that existed in republics of the time.-Lx (leave me a message) 12:03, January 10, 2013 (UTC)

No your not getting it unless you have a war and invade it. End of story. <font color="#000000">VonGlusenburg (talk to Von!) 15:37, January 10, 2013 (UTC)

Nationalism has existed since states have existed. Greece was nationalistic, as was Rome (well, the Latin parts anyway). All of them considered themselves as one race, while all others are barabarians.

And due to the lack of a famine, the population would not have dropped by 4 million, as Lx said. And due to the population boom, the population would have risen to 13-14 million.

Wait, ok, let me get this straight. According to you, in 5 years... people who for their entire lives thought of themselves as Russian will now suddenly decide that they're wrong, and stop? Poland, ok, Central Asia, ok, but guys- this is implausible. You really hate us that bad? Then mod an effing asteroid storm. But don't use bad logic to rip us apart.

The Royal Guns (talk) 20:21, January 10, 2013 (UTC)


 * If Greece was nationalistic, then why were they divided into innumerous city-states? (i assume you are talking about Ancient Greece) --Collie Kaltenbrunner (talk) 21:32, January 10, 2013 (UTC)

Both of the nations had a strong citizen tradition, something which disappeared during the Germanic invasions. No nationalism after Rome and before the French Revolution, with counted exceptions.

No, no, you have it wrong. The population dropped to four million from a pre-famine six. The population would've risen to 7-8 million.

And people who for their entire lives thought of themselves as vassals of a Federation now suddenly decide they're wrong, yes, because the Federation ended. We've told you this again and again and you haven't paid a grain of attention. Fed (talk) 21:27, January 10, 2013 (UTC)

Just because people are in the same ethnic group doesn't mean they want to be ruled by someone else. If hundred years ago, your region as independent and then your country men invaded you and forced you into a federation. If you had the chance to be independent then you would right? Everyone would rather rule themselves then be ruled by someone else. And no, got every "Russian" thought themselves as Russian and want to be in a federation. I mean its like in England now, most people in the North of England would rather rule themselves then be ruled by the Southerners, or people in an American state would rather come up with their own state laws then be forced to accept federal laws. And again, the population is at maximum 10 million, but considering its all split up now, the largest states will only have a million or so people.

Answer me this Guns, after the Roman empire collapse after barbarian invasions; why didn't all of Italy unite straight after being invaded if they were all Italian citizens? Its a similar situation and its happening again now, but you are going against the plausibility of history. All the ideas of nationalism you keep citing are from completely different periods of history and you're only choosing to recognise the bits which suit your plans now.

Seriously this debate with you keeps going around in circles, we tell you why its happening but you insist on asking why & why. You realize going against mod decisions and algorithms is a bannable offensive right? And my patience is wearing very thin. <font color="#000000">VonGlusenburg (talk to Von!) 15:41, January 11, 2013 (UTC)

Alright, the fact that Sibir is larger than Novgorod says it all. The whole point is to piss on everything me and Guns tried to accomlish, a unified Russian state, a plausible early modern republic, and other things, wasnt it? Those divisions made no sense. Sibir is at least 2 times the size it was at its largest extend, while novgorod, on your map, is less than 1/3 of its. I spent the last two years going around with my armies telling the people I am theirno king. armies ammassed from all of Novgorod. what you are doing is just making excuses to devide all territory to your leisure, without concerning yourself with the fact that Novgorod was a republuic since the 12th century. for the mostpart, the territory that was in Novgorod at 1450 has been part of that republic for at least 300 years, 400 years afterwads. They had a citizen tradition, and would get it back if the had the chance. Most of that territory, however, was not ruled by independant states, but by nomadic tribes. The Novgorodian State survived the Mongols, fine, some sibir can go since they were conquered recently, but giving them all of our(Novgorod's at least) ural territory? I'm sorry. The Romans(or at least the Italians) did not come together, because, for one rason, there was no governement to re-establsh it. The Governement of Russia fled to form a governement in exile and came back to liberate the rest of Russia. that is why we could rebound like they did not.Novgorod had high citizen tradition, hell, it had a representative duma, the first of its kind in the post-renesence world as a evolution of its veche direct democracy. the people felt like they had a say in what their governement was doing(wether they did or not differs from historian to historian), and would like to keep that if they wanted, that is the reason that. Hell, there was not a single Novgorodian who lived and were born of grew up in a time where they could not kick their Grand Prince out of office or in a time where tehy did not pick their grand prince, and impose restrictions upon him in the form of a ryad(a form of primitive Novgorodian constitution). When their picked grand prince calls men to arms, they will come.. -Lx (leave me a message) 18:31, January 11, 2013 (UTC)

The fact that Sibir is larger than Novgorod is because a governor became powerful here, so don't state it's because we hate you. If we are "pissing on you" it's because you're trying to get two-thirds of the Caliphate when everyone else is weakened, which is implausible. Since Russia was also under the Caliphate, Russia now collapsed. The Urals weren't at all ruled by Novgorod before the 1400s and 1500s. and the and other kingdoms controlled wide swathes of what you're stating is yours since the friggin' Kievian Rus'. And. Fed (talk) 22:15, January 11, 2013 (UTC)

Just to build on Fed's excellent rebuttal to your continued nonsense: its is a lot easier for Sibir to expand because no other major powers exist. Dean now controls it and he'll probably keep on expanding it into the black regions to the east of it which no one controls. So of course Sibir is going to be bigger as it is the biggest fish in that pond. <font color="#000000">VonGlusenburg (talk to Von!) 23:41, January 11, 2013 (UTC)

1. How was the Khan of Sibir simply "more powerful". How? because you just wanted to extend a favor to an ex-caliphate member? if the colapse happened to russia, then it would have also happened to sibir(as a part of Russia), what justifications do you have for having him just be more powerful 2. No other major powers? how about Novgorod that has reintroduced its miltiary and raised it! you put arbitrary divisions in the territory for no other reason but to impede my efforts and accelerate deansims'. What "major powers" exist into impede Novgorod's efforts to expand into collapsed anarchc territory and bring peace that happened bewteen 1575-1577? None, you ignored my posts and arbitrarily created states on your map without even referencing them in any way other than "states apear in europe and asia", something that could have been interpreted as from 4 new states appearing in post-caliphate and 20 states. Very ambiguous, and ambiguity that should not be there when it comes to territory I sent troops into prior to re-assert dominance. You have no justification for the differences between the Russian States of moscow and novgorod and Sibir's situations, as moscow and Novgorod have an unwritten agreement to stay out of each other's ways and try to get their old territory back. They should be just as powerful if not more so than Sibir, because the same "collapse" you state as a lack of power for Russia happened to both places 3. The Byzantines were in no way shape or forma Governement in exile. The Roman empire was devided by Imperial Decree into the east, centered in Constantinople, and the West, centered in Rome, in 285 CE because the Emperor realized that it was too big to be governed by one entity at the time, but they maintained tight relations. When we talk of the "fall of Rome" in 476, we speak of the fall of the Western Roman Empire, not realizing that the Eastern Roman empire continued to thrive and flourish untill ultimately 1453 during the fall of constantinople. Not a good comparison. The least I am asking for is my pre-1500 territory. .-Lx (leave me a message) 03:07, January 12, 2013 (UTC)

I advise you read everything someone posts rather than just bits of it which suit you. That's a good tip for this game and life in general. Also split up your paragraphs so they're readable.

Firstly Sibir has expanded into non-controlled black territory so it has room to expand and has done. Secondly, the states around Sibir are much weaker so it can dominate easier. Obviously the collapse did happen to Sibir as it is now not part of the now non-existent Russian Federation. I did however forget to add exist in that area to my sentence: "No other major powers". Hence Sibir is a big fish in a small pond because no other major powers exist around Sibir (i.e. they all NPCs). I will however reduce Sibir by giving territory away to other states this turn however.

And yes we ignored your posts because that territory wasn't your to post for. When you say Novogorod expands, we take that as Novogorod the new city state expands. Not Novogorod half of Russia expands.

As for the states appear in Russia and Asia, in case you've forgotten (which you've done on purpose I presume to make your point seem more sentionalist): ''Another state forms in Smolensk. Farther south, three states form: Volhynia, centered on the city of Volodymyr, and Halych and Lviv, centered on the homonymous cities. Meanwhile, the fomer Russian vassal on the Baltic splits itself into the Principalities of Tallinn and Riga.both of them ally with Königsberg-Prussia. Many more new states establish themselves in Europe, Africa and Asia this year, as the Caliphate's former land is now almost completely divided up between new nation powers.'' We mention several of the new states and provided you with a map of the new states. Now a map is a lot more useful then us naming a load of new states which you don't know where they are. So its hardly ambiguous if there is a map showing you all of these states now is it?

I also must repeat your claim back yourself, you have no justification for the differences between the Russian States of moscow and novgorod and Sibir's situations. You claim an unwritten agreement is your claim? Can we see this claim? Oh wait no its unwritten. Just to let you know, Sibir has an unwritten agreement too, so that it can be like how it is on the map with all the other states around it being independent and separate of it too. to stay out of each other's ways and try to get their old territory back. See? That's not worth the paper its not written on either.

Novogorod & Moscow border one another, the rest are small NPC nations. You two are the two biggest fish in that pond. But who's to say the big fish will always get along? Combine Novogorod & Moscow into a single federation state. Then you would be more powerful then Sibir. But you guys claim to be equal partners in a federation. Therefore each partner would be smaller & weaker than Sibir (only minorly though). So I don't know what you are complaining about, because you probably are stronger than Sibir.

So for what feels like the hundredth time, no you cannot have any more territory without conquering that territory by war. <font color="#000000">VonGlusenburg (talk to Von!) 04:18, January 12, 2013 (UTC)

the map was posted after the whole new states thing, so it was ambiguous, so I thought I had the former territories, witch angered me becasue I posted one thing, then there was a map saying "Oh BTW, Sibir is way larger than you guys and there are sooo many different little mircostates to ensure you dont become as big as you did for another 100 years!" Deansims already controls the Ottomans, how can he control two states...unless I missed something with him revoking his rights to the Ottomans. And by unwritten agreement, I meant the relations between me and guns...

I have justified why Novgorod should be at least as big as it was pre-1500 because of citizen participation in the governement, and the fact that Novgorod has mostly been itself from the 12th century, minus some colonization. also, I can concede Perm becoming a state, even if it was a tributary of Novgorod or Moscow for its existance, but even then it should not be very large. Novgorod has a governement that people consiedered the legitimate governement taking back control of the nation, while in Sibir, a nation that was controled prior by Novgorod and then a disintegrating caliphate, men would have foght for power. those were my justifications condensed

Although I do not think that there would be enough cities of sufficient influence to create that many states in Novgorod(as it ruled most of its north just mainly by claim and the nroth was manily unpopulated), and Russia as were created in the 16th century(not enogh cities of sufficient population to create a good governement I believe but I am in no mood to negociate further, as I realise it will ge me nowhere. You have all the power. all I can do is to ask you take what i say under consideration, and tell me who I have to kill to get my territory back, deal?.-Lx (leave me a message) 04:54, January 12, 2013 (UTC)


 * Really.you don't have cities of enough influence on your territory.the only ones that i think that could try to declare independence are Polotsk (originally, my plan was for the splinter Slavic state from Lithuania to be centered in Polotsk, but then i found out that it was in your territory, so i centered it in Minsk, that was most likely not in your territory.), Tver and Pskov.--Collie Kaltenbrunner (talk) 07:12, January 12, 2013 (UTC)

Well those new Russian states are hardly strong now are they? Why don't you invade them if you want to expand? I mean they'll be invading each other anyway, so soon enough there won't be as many russian states as you think there are. <font color="#000000">VonGlusenburg (talk to Von!) 19:15, January 12, 2013 (UTC)

Cyprus
Total: 49 * 1.5 = 73.5
 * Location: 4
 * Tactical Advantage: 1 + 5 = 6
 * Strength: Cyprus (L), Burgundy (M), Calais (MV), Munster (MV) = 11
 * Military Development: 2
 * Economy: 0
 * Infrastructure: 0
 * Expansion: 0
 * Motive: +3
 * Chance:5
 * Edit Count: 314
 * UTC Time: 00:13 = 3
 * 314/3=104.66667*3.14=328.6533333
 * Nation Age: +5
 * Population: +6 (population was 180,000)
 * Participation: +10
 * Recent Wars: -3 (Caliphate taking Cyprus; Cyprus liberating itself, Great Mediterranean War)

Crete (Civil Dissarray)
Total: 29* 1,5= 43.5
 * Location: +5
 * Tactical Advantage: +0
 * Strength: Crete (L) = +4
 * Military Development: 0
 * Economy: 0
 * Infrastructure: 0
 * Expansion: 0
 * Motive: +10
 * Chance: 5
 * Edit Count: 314
 * UTC Time: 00:13
 * 314/3=104.66666667*3.14=328.65333333
 * Nation Age: -10 (It wasn't a nation until recently)
 * Population: +5
 * Participation: 10
 * Recent Wars: 0

Results
((49/(29+49))*2)-1=0.15*1.5=0.256410

so

(0.256410)*(1-1/(2*6)) = 0.20625 = 20.6% of Cretan land.

Discussion
Have I done anything wrong? Airlinesguy (talk) 02:07, January 10, 2013 (UTC)

If you want I'll do a mod event and you can enter dynastic union with Crete seeing how you've conquered quite a bit of it. <font color="#000000">VonGlusenburg (talk to Von!) 03:05, January 10, 2013 (UTC)

That would be nice, lol. Airlinesguy (talk) 04:44, January 11, 2013 (UTC)

Franco-Breton-Norman War (1574)
Could I have an algorithm? Stewdio333 (talk) 07:46, January 10, 2013 (UTC)

France
Total: 41
 * Location: 4
 * Tactical Advantage: 6 (attacker's advantage, larger colonial empire)
 * Strength: France (L +4),Burgundy (M),Calais (MV) Munster (MV) :11/8 = 1
 * Military Development: 6
 * Economy: 0
 * Infrastructure: 0
 * Expansion: 0
 * Motive: 3 (Economy)
 * Chance: 3
 * Edit Count: 540
 * UTC Time: 10:15 = 1x0x1x5 = 5
 * 540/5 pi = 25.1327412
 * Nation Age: 0
 * Population: 7+2
 * Participation: 10
 * Recent Wars: -1

Breton-Norman coalition
Total: 42
 * Location: 5
 * Tactical Advantage: 0
 * Strength: Brittany (L +4), Normandy (L+4) : 8 = 0
 * Military Development: 3
 * Economy: 3
 * Infrastructure: 3
 * Expansion: 0
 * Motive: 10
 * Chance: 2
 * Edit Count:
 * UTC Time:
 * Nation Age: 0
 * Population: 6
 * Participation: 10
 * Recent Wars: 0
 * Recent Wars: 0

Result
42/84 - 0.5 x 2 = 0.01204819

Brittany and Normandy gain 1,20% of French territory.

Discussion
Added my alliance with the french Sine dei gloriem (talk) 22:22, January 10, 2013 (UTC)

This war will likely end as status quo ante bellum, because it has already lasted 4 years, so the actual territory gained by the Normans and Bretons will be negligible.--Collie Kaltenbrunner (talk) 07:29, January 11, 2013 (UTC)

Muscovy
Total: 19*1.5 = 28.5
 * Location: +4
 * Tactical Advantage: +1
 * Strength: Muscovy (L), Novgorod (M), Rostov (MV),Burgundy (M),Calais (MV),Munster (MV): 16/4= +4
 * Military Development: 0
 * Economy: 0
 * Infrastructure: 0
 * Expansion: -3
 * Motive: +3
 * Chance: +3
 * Edit Count: 2849
 * UTC Time: 20:31 - 2*3*1 = 6
 * 2849/6*pi=1491.73291168
 * Nation age: -10
 * Population: (7+2) +9
 * Participation: 10
 * Recent Wars: -2

Ryazan
Total: 22*1.5= 33
 * Location: +5
 * Tactical Advantage: 0
 * Strength: Ryazan (L): 4: 0
 * Military Development: +1
 * Economy: +1
 * Infrastructure: +1
 * Expansion: -2
 * Motive: +10
 * Chance: +2
 * see moscow
 * Nation Age: -10
 * Population: +6
 * Participation: +10
 * Recent Wars: -2

Result
33/61.5 -0.5 x 2 = 0,073170731707317073170731707317073

Victory for Ryazan.Ryazan can take 7,3% of muscowite territory.

Discussion
There is no way of Muscowy alone having over 10,000,000 people.And you had been annexed, with your government having just been reformed, so your age would be -10.And most probably, Rytazan also deserves this x1.5 bonus.--Collie Kaltenbrunner (talk) 21:14, January 10, 2013 (UTC)

Ryazan's development scores where done wrong too. Musocow's motive, chance, expansion & tactical advantage were all done wrong too. I've fixed them now. Basically almost the entire algorithm was done wrong, and in your favour too. If I see anymore stuff like this I'll have you banned for cheating. <font color="#000000">VonGlusenburg (talk to Von!) 21:57, January 10, 2013 (UTC)

im going to add burgundy and my vassals, we were allieds before the caliphate invasion Sine dei gloriem (talk) 22:14, January 10, 2013 (UTC)

No because you can't reach Moscow as they have no sea port. <font color="#000000">VonGlusenburg (talk to Von!) 22:46, January 10, 2013 (UTC)

but i can reach novgorod Sine dei gloriem (talk) 01:42, January 11, 2013 (UTC)

To reach Russia in general, you need to pass through the Kattegat straits, which are owned by Scandinavia and they don't like you at all. But since we like Russia, we'll allow you to pass.AP (talk) 03:49, January 11, 2013 (UTC)

Caspian War For Freedom
The Caspian Coalition
 * Location: 4
 * Tactical Advantage: 1 (attackers)
 * Strength: Ghoek (M), Ghodu (L), Gose (M), Qchar, Qopanj (M), Gash (M), Gaft (M), Ghasht (M), Wadstan (L), Zhuzhdan (M), Selastan (M), Kuwait (L) Raqad (S), Raghdal (S), Adaraqa (S), Adaragazh (S), Adara'sels (S), Dararaba (S), Afik (S), Fadu (S), Al-Afse (S), Dostan(S) 50/4 -- 13
 * Military Development: 0
 * Economy:0
 * Infrastructure:0
 * Expansion: 0
 * Motive: 10
 * Chance:

Total: 35
 * Edit Count:
 * UTC Time:
 * Nation Age: -10
 * Population: 7
 * Participation: 10
 * Recent Wars: 0
 * Recent Wars: 0

Reformed Persian State
 * Location: 5
 * Tactical Advantage: 0
 * Strength: Persia (L) 4---0
 * Military Development: 0
 * Economy: 0
 * Infrastructure: 0
 * Expansion: 0
 * Motive: 5
 * Chance:

Total: 17
 * Edit Count:
 * UTC Time:
 * Nation Age: -10
 * Population: 7
 * Participation: 10
 * Recent Wars: 0
 * Recent Wars: 0

Results
(34.61)*(1-1/(2(14))) = War will last 14 years, and at that point Persia will be proken back up into the little constituent states it was before before the Shah tried endangering the state's independance.

((35/(17+35))*2)-1 = 34.61%

Discussion
How the hell is Persia a threat to the Cilicians? Cilicia is located in southeastern Turkey. The most the Persians want is to reunite As much of OTL Iran as possible. As such they are nowhere near close enough to threaten Cilicia. Yank 01:35, January 11, 2013 (UTC)

Sorry, had a mental break, meant to put Caspian. And, no, most Persians don't want that right now. They prefer independence. Saamwiil, the Humble 01:39, January 11, 2013 (UTC)

As far as I'm concerned you're repeating one of the Caliphate's biggest midtakes. No one player should be able to control a legion of puppets. Besides, there is literally nothing in the Persian mod events that says that they are forcing people into the fold. I wouldn't have as much of a problem with it if it wasn't under that sanctimonious name. Unlike the Caliphate they don't force countries to join against their will. All I wanted to do was provide a good, strong nation for someone to control. Why would you choose to be Kuwait when there's what should be a much stronger nation in Persia. Makes me feel vaguely insulted.--Yank 03:27, January 11, 2013 (UTC)

Vaguely insulted? What? So you feel offended because you did something that directly interfered with Saam's plans and he decided to continue with his plans? And btw, can you stop with 'Caliphals are the most implausible thing I have read *giantsquidofangervendetta*' in every talk page post? Fed (talk) 12:05, January 11, 2013 (UTC)

"giantsquidofangervendetta"?--Collie Kaltenbrunner (talk) 14:54, January 11, 2013 (UTC)

"giant squid of anger vendetta". Its the biggest, meanest giant squid in the world with a vendetta against large Caliphates. <font color="#000000">VonGlusenburg (talk to Von!) 21:07, January 11, 2013 (UTC) ^that precisely. Fed (talk) 22:03, January 11, 2013 (UTC)

How the hell is it plausible to control a dozen countries at once? Not only thAt, but a dozen countries whose sizes aren't really established. Tibet gets the vassals it has due to its size. Saying "you're just hating" doesn't cancel out what I think are valid points.Yank 21:24, January 11, 2013 (UTC)

I agree that Saam has a lot of nations. However, the "that's mildly insulting" part and the fact that you always connect every single discussion of how implausible the Caliphate was gets on my nerves. That's what I'm complaining about, not about you stating Saam has too many countries. Fed (talk) 22:10, January 11, 2013 (UTC)

Fine. I'll stop talking about the Caliphate. That's old news anyway. It's still against the rules to control a legion of unvassalized nations. Which is what Saammy is doing. This needs to be corrected. Saammy knows that without his impossible legions backing him up he only gets roughly 12%. He's only padding his numbers to keep his precious plans rolling.Yank 22:20, January 11, 2013 (UTC)

Excuse my French, but, stop being a butt, Yank. Really. Anyways, the nations I control are states which broke apart from the provinces in the Caliphate I controlled, therefore perfectly okay with accordance to the rules. Also, they are not technically different nations, they all are nominallly under the head of Qoyedi Saamwiil, the Humble 23:37, January 11, 2013 (UTC)

It its allowed but splitting up your nation into so many separate parts to algorithm boost isn't really allowed. You not remember Lurk telling us not to do the same with the Caliphate? I think the extent to which you've divided your nation up is too extreme, not to mention no one has no idea which one is which. <font color="#000000">VonGlusenburg (talk to Von!) 23:46, January 11, 2013 (UTC)

I didn't do it to algorith boost. If you don't remember, I posted long ago how the Qoyunlus would split up. And also if people haven't noticed, only half of Caspia is even involved in this war... Saamwiil, the Humble 23:49, January 11, 2013 (UTC)

That doesn't mean that it's any more excusable. Yank 00:02, January 12, 2013 (UTC)

Yes. Yes it does. This was not meant to be used for algorithms until you decided to screw things up and put a Persian state into the mix. Saamwiil, the Humble 00:19, January 12, 2013 (UTC)

No it doesn't. The fact that is only half is more worrying. That is an algorithm boost to extreme levels. I remember you saying Qoyunlus would split up but I thought of it as for something you'd unify as a single nation not a federation of algorithm boosting states. Or for you just to use as a means of government (e.g. counties of a single nation). You can carry out your plans but doing in it in this rule-breaking manner is unacceptable. <font color="#000000">VonGlusenburg (talk to Von!) 00:30, January 12, 2013 (UTC)

Whether or not you "meant" for it to enhance your algorithm or not, it's still Cheating with a capital "C". Unapologetic rule-breaking like this makes the game less fun for the rest of us. --Yank 03:24, January 12, 2013 (UTC)

Ethiopia
Total: 20 x 1.5 = 30
 * Location: +4
 * Tactical Advantage: +1 (+2 High Ground)
 * Strength: Ethiopia (L+4)
 * Military Development: 0
 * Economy: 0
 * Infrastructure: 0
 * Expansion: 0
 * Motive: +7
 * Chance: 3
 * Edit Count:1514
 * UTC Time:17:01
 * 1514/7*pi = 679.1371428571429
 * Nation Age: -10 (D'mt)
 * Population: +6
 * Participation: 10
 * Recent Wars: -7

Adal
Total: 28 x 1.5 = 42
 * Location: +5
 * Tactical Advantage: 0
 * Strength: Adal (L+4)
 * Military Development: 0
 * Economy: 0
 * Infrastructure: 0
 * Expansion: 0
 * Motive: +10
 * Chance: 7
 * Nation Age: -10
 * Population: +5
 * Participation: 10
 * Recent Wars: -3

Result
42/72 - 0.5 x 2 = 0.166666666

Adal wins 16,6% of Ethiopian territory.

Discussion
If you are going to use this independence bonus, then the nation age must be-10. Adal also doesn't have an colonial empire.--Collie Kaltenbrunner (talk) 16:03, January 11, 2013 (UTC)

Look, just give up Adal while there's still time, and until you're better prepared.Do you really want to lose almost 17% of your territory?--Collie Kaltenbrunner (talk) 16:36, January 11, 2013 (UTC)

Well I didn't know that. And no, I don't want to lose any territory. I don't want to lose any of it at all. Vivaporius says: "I don't need a slogan!" 18:42, January 11, 2013 (UTC)

You can't just cancel a war just because you lost it! Not to mention that you swapped nations from Swahili to Ethiopia which isn't allowed to. No you've lost the war against Adal who sort of has a player (me & the rest of the caliphate) but I've not reformed its government yet. I'll do that now with this victory being the test which allows a general to take over Adal as its Sultan. <font color="#000000">VonGlusenburg (talk to Von!) 21:06, January 11, 2013 (UTC)

I didn't say I was cancelling it. Nowhere do you find that in my sentence. And I asked three seperate mods if I could switch back, but no one said anything. Sounds like you really want to dominate the world, again. Also, I'm pretty sure the mods also stated that most of the Caliphate was now independent, as did one right before I did the algorithim. Vivaporius says: "I don't need a slogan!" 21:42, January 11, 2013 (UTC)

So you're losing territory to Adal, yes.

The fact that nobody said anything =/= you can do it.

Sounds like you really want to dominate the world? Nice way of playing victim without Von saying anything of the sort.

...And what do you mean with "most of the Caliphate was now independent"?

Anyways, Von's point still stands, you can't change back to Ethiopia now that it's independent again. Fed (talk) 22:39, January 11, 2013 (UTC)

Take a nice good long lok at both the map and the mod's own event:"Caliphate's former land is now almost completely divided up between new nation powers."

The Caliphate broke up. Period.

And from what many of the other players saw, I was the victim of Caliphate expansion. The Caliphate didn't have to get involved in my war with the Adalese, but it did. And what happened after that? Von took over my nation. And I must have misread Von's post. It sounded whiney to me (not to be offensive, but it did sound a bit whiney), so I must have taken as such. I'm sorry Von.

Anyway, there are no rules against me switching nations. I just read them to make sure. If I am wrong, one of the three mods will tell me since I just asked them. Time to play the waiting game. Vivaporius says: "I don't need a slogan!" 23:04, January 11, 2013 (UTC)

...Yes the Caliphate broke up. Your point being..?

The Caliphate didn't have to get in war with Adal in the same way Great Britain didn't have to get in war with Germany in World Wars I and II; you attacked an ally of the Caliphate, we defended said ally, you were defeated and annexed in the war. Von gave you a chance to stay as a Province, you decided to play as the Swahili, which is okay; as Von (a mod) just told you, changing without your nation being defeated is against the rules. Fed (talk) 23:13, January 11, 2013 (UTC)

I was not aware that I could stay as a province. I was under the impression that once my nation was conquered, I had to pick another nation. Wasn't paying attention. And I've lost my point with the Caliphate, old news now. Moving on. The matter has been remedied, etc, etc, let's play the game now. Vivaporius says: "I don't need a slogan!" 19:12, January 12, 2013 (UTC)

Venice
Total: 63
 * Location: +4
 * Tactical Advantage: +6 (1 - attacker's advantage/5 - larger colonial empire)
 * Strength: Venice (L+4)
 * Military Development: 12
 * Economy: 12
 * Infrastructure: 0
 * Expansion: 0
 * Motive: +3
 * Chance: 4
 * Edit Count:1680
 * UTC Time:11:20
 * 1608/2 x pi = 2525,84049348619...
 * Nation Age: +5
 * Population: +7
 * Participation: 10
 * Recent Wars: -4

Hayreddin/Malta
Total: 26
 * Location: +5
 * Tactical Advantage: 0
 * Strength: Hayreddin/Malta (L+4)
 * Military Development: 2
 * Economy: 0
 * Infrastructure: 0
 * Expansion: 0
 * Motive: +10
 * Chance: 0
 * Nation Age: -10
 * Population: +5
 * Participation: 10
 * Recent Wars: 0

Result
63/89 - 0.5 x 2 = 0,41573033707865168539325842696629

Venice can conquer 41,5% of Maltese territory.

(41,5)*(1-1/(2x)) - according to this, the war must last 3 years for Venice to topple the Hayreddin "government"

Discussion
i think that Hayreddin/Malta shouldn't receive no no 1.5 bonus as "If your nation has recently had a popular revolt soon after a new weak government was formed (like Adolf Hitler or Napoleon Bonaparte) your score is multiplied by 1.5 for all wars in the next 10 years. However, you cannot have multiple popular revolts of this nature in a row without government changes in between." Hayreddin wasn't formed by a popular revolt, so it doesn't count.--Collie Kaltenbrunner (talk) 16:03, January 11, 2013 (UTC)

Yeah it was formed by invasion. But it has been updating its military all turns since its existance. Don't worry I don't mind Hayreddin being destroyed, Sultan Barbaros is a dick lol. <font color="#000000">VonGlusenburg (talk to Von!) 16:06, January 11, 2013 (UTC)

Thhis isn't saying a lot since the country only existed for two turns before the war, and one was spent conquering Malta.--Collie Kaltenbrunner (talk) 16:09, January 11, 2013 (UTC)

Yeah they invaded Malta and established it. Its only been going for a short while. I never planned this being a long term nation. I in fact encourage its destruction and annexation. <font color="#000000">VonGlusenburg (talk to Von!) 16:24, January 11, 2013 (UTC)

Not that I care about the result, but wouldn't it be a bit much for a country who's navy went to smitherenes now captures pne of the most powerful navies in the mediterranean. Saamwiil, the Humble 23:51, January 11, 2013 (UTC)

I'd say they'd have about equal strength navies, a slight edge to Venice. I was just saying that stuff because Scan has an annoying habit of thinking his navy is as strong as the British navy in early 1900s. <font color="#000000">VonGlusenburg (talk to Von!) 00:18, January 12, 2013 (UTC)

Koch
Total: 24 x 1.5 = 36
 * Location: 4
 * Tactical Advantage: 1 (attacking)
 * Strength: Romania (M), Gabesh (M), Much (M), Kodort (M), Gavalta (M), Karambig(M), Mavad (M), Karambig (M), Mivik(M), Koch (L), Cyprus (M), Crete (M) 36/6 = 6
 * Military Development: 0
 * Economy: 0
 * Infrastructure: 0
 * Expansion: 0
 * Motive: 3
 * Chance:
 * Edit Count:
 * UTC Time:
 * Nation Age: -10
 * Population: 8+2 = 10
 * Participation: 10
 * Recent Wars: 0
 * Recent Wars: 0

Ottomans
Total: 21 x 1.5 = 31.5
 * Location:5
 * Tactical Advantage: 0
 * Strength: Ottomans (L), Crimea (MV) 6--0
 * Military Development: 4
 * Economy: 0
 * Infrastructure: 0
 * Expansion: 0
 * Motive: 5
 * Chance:
 * Edit Count:
 * UTC Time:
 * Nation Age: -10
 * Population: 7
 * Participation: 10
 * Recent Wars: 0
 * Recent Wars: 0

Results
Airlinesguy (Cyprus) gets whatever I would have gotten for percentage terms)

Discussion
Where this Koch is located? the name sounds Hindu.--Collie Kaltenbrunner (talk) 22:23, January 11, 2013 (UTC)

It's the state near the bordering the Black Sea. Saamwiil, the Humble 22:30, January 11, 2013 (UTC)

Cyprus and Crete support Koch. And we encourage others to join in too. :D Airlinesguy (talk) 23:57, January 11, 2013 (UTC)

The Ottomans have been peaceful, why are we being attacked? (DeanSims: Talk) 08:28, January 12, 2013 (UTC)

If Saamwiil has really left the game like he says he's resigned then this war will be removed and forgotten about. <font color="#000000">VonGlusenburg (talk to Von!) 20:21, January 12, 2013 (UTC)

Official Resignation/Reform/Russia, Part III
So, when I am being hyperambitious, people complain, when I am being hypoambitious people complain. This game long ago stopped being fun for me and became more of a hassle and a headache to have to, with continuous repetition, many times of arguments that I had already answered, play this game. So I'm leaving Caspia exactly as is, finishing the current wars that its member states are in. Knowing Yank, he will try to re-create Persia as soon as I leave so it won't matter in the long run this 14 year war. Anyways, to the original topic: I resign. Saamwiil, the Humble 04:04, January 12, 2013 (UTC)

No the complaint is about the way your doing it. Anyone can have a game plan but if you don't follow the rules, then its a bad plan. Combine your nations so you don't have as many and there is no problem. <font color="#000000">VonGlusenburg (talk to Von!) 04:21, January 12, 2013 (UTC)

I think the point of the matter is that we need to reform. Now. This game is becoming much different from the original PM and is instead turning into a more mainstream map game which, as you all know, ends in miserable failure-- this resignation might be the first of many. We need more active mods, first of all. Then, those mods need to get together and decide the fate of the former Caliphate's land-- in an unbiased manner. I say that because I(and I'm sure several more people) are against these "post-caliphate retirement packages." Even though they are not allowed to be allied to each other, they violate the one-country-per-player rule. Moving on, our mods need to be regulated at times. This is so that the two mods we have right now don't go over the edge and for them to have a second opinion to their events(IE the intense desire to fragment Russia, destroy Venice, annihilate Ethiopia/Hindustan). We need more mods people, we need to specialize them too... Like colonial mods, mods watching over certain regions of the world, etc you name it. If anything we at least need the former because some nations(Naples, Savoy, Burgundy) have gone extremely overboard with colonization. Just look at the mod signups: Gala is gone, Pita's gone, Lurk is AWOL, Crim dissappeared, Scan was gone a long time. In closing, '''we need to change. '''Otherwise, we face death(for the map game). This resignation, as i've said before, could very well be the first of many. In the words of Suquamish chief Seattle: "Your time of decay may be distant, but it will surely come."AP (talk) 05:17, January 12, 2013 (UTC)

I agree with AP, us mods need to get our act together. We need one mod-in-chief who will be here everyday, and then either regional mods or mods in charge of certain aspects of the game (colonies, wars, etc). We also need new mod elections as currently only 4 out of the 8 mods post regularly, if you do not have time to post each turn, how do you manage the game? Mods should also have skype or someother audio communications to discuss major issues like the post-caliphate world.

Now to the entire post-Caliphate issue. These retirement packages should not be happening, your hyperpower collapsed so instead of continuing to control all events in the USSR you must all settle with Bulgaria or Hungary and then expand outwards slowly again. @Von you get the large nation in the south of Arabia. @Dean, the Ottoman Empire and Crimea are all you should be able to hold. @Fed, Levant or Egypt. No controlling half the remaining post-Caliphate states. @Yank, if you wish for a strong nation to form out of the caliphate discuss it with the players around you, communication is the key to success. I asked Kogasa to have a Sengoku period and volia! It was done. To be a successful mod you must communicate and discuss ideas with players not shovel your idea down their throat. Finally @Saam, I understand why you are quitting but I ask you give us all another chance.

People this map game is as decentralized as the HRE in the 15th century. Either we let it collapse or we unite under Prussia and become the map game superpower we are meant to be. Scandinator (talk) 14:24, January 12, 2013 (UTC)

Thank you. I have repeated time and time again that the divisions within russia are implausible, and colie has agreed that there are not enough major cities in for that many states to emerge where they are. See Russia Part II section for more details on my complaints in general.It realy seemed as though Von's purpose is too completely destroy russia and help sibir. Hopefuly my issues will be adressed, but I have no power. can I also suggest putting in replacement mods for those who are inactive(at least untill they come back)? -Lx (leave me a message) 18:02, January 12, 2013 (UTC)
 * I said that in regards to you.The cities which are likely to declare independence are the cities which used to be part of Kievan Rus' principalities.as such, thos would be, Pskov, Novogrod, Murom, Nizhny Novgorod, Ryazan, Moscow, Vladimir, Suzdal, Tver, Smolensk, Kiev, Pereyaslavl, Polotsk, Volodymyr, Halych, Yaroslavl and Chernigov.I said that most of there aren't in your territory.most are either on Muscowy, or outside of both Novogorod and Muscowy.--Collie Kaltenbrunner (talk) 19:16, January 12, 2013 (UTC)
 * Yes, and yet there are 8+ states formed in Novgorod's territory alone. Witch is basicaly my entire complaint.-Lx (leave me a message) 20:43, January 12, 2013 (UTC)

So for some reason we can only control a slmall country but the original Russian Federation, even though it was conquered and as balkanised as the Caliphate, can just sweep in, annex tens of nationalities and seize everything from Greece to Taymyria in a single day? That's as implausible as you thing the Caliphate is. Russia will balkanise as well but for some reason they are obsessed with always being the hyperpower of the day.

The Levant and Egypt are the same nation as well, as is Yemen. You might mean the Levant or the Maghreb. Fed (talk) 18:27, January 12, 2013 (UTC)


 * Stop putting up strawmen, What tens of Nationalities, I can see maximum two that I can get, Russians, and a minority of Tatars that happen to live around kazan only. I can Understand Kazan seperating, but the rest is just rediculous.-Lx (leave me a message) 20:42, January 12, 2013 (UTC)

All nations have been split up under the post-caliphate stuff. That will include Sibir. I will however move back and Dean will just get to control one of his nations. I'll ask him which one out of Albania, Ottoman empire, Crimea, Greek Confederation, Serbia, Albania, Montenegro or the Sibir Khanate he'd like to take over. But honestly all I see is people who lost something complaining that you've not been given it back after losing it to the Caliphate. I see people complaining that they aren't the superpower. I also see people joining conversations without looking into what has happened and then messing stuff up. This in the final map of the caliphate break up this is how after 4 years of chaos the old caliphate now looks. So buck up. <font color="#000000">VonGlusenburg (talk to Von!) 20:02, January 12, 2013 (UTC)

I'm Scrawland Scribblescratch, and I approve of that map. But all I ask is that the Caliphate players be reduced to at least 5 nations, max and--I'm being generous here--that one of those nations be the nation they signed up for. Also, I had plans to completely shatter the HRE during the time period I like call The "What Just Happened?" Time Period, given the Kappelists in one place and the Caliphate destroying Russia for eternity and also rampaging around the world--but it just didn't happen how I expected it. I was expecting the Caliphate to end in Russia and Italy and Iberia, and the HRE to be stuck in the war with Kappelism so long that the land gained would be inconsequential, and then everyone would be disillusioned and leave, at which time the Caliphate would have collapsed, allowing a new time period that resembled the animal world: only the strongest will survive. As a matter of fact, this did not happen. In reality, the exact opposite happened, and all these little mini-Caliphates are springing up and the Russians insist that their federation survives--which is now becoming the cancer of this game and HRE remaining intact. Point is, the whole "Mahdiate" ruined this game. Fegelein! Fegelein! Fegelein! 20:19, January 12, 2013 (UTC)

Personally I don't want more than 1 nation. I'm happy with just having Shaybah's new empire. I've given up the rest of my states which I was really just posting for so we had some interesting NPC nations (e.g. Republic of Comchellak & others). But two of my nations were purely meant to be transitional states (Sultanate of Hayreddin & my current nation Shaybah) and Ganjanan was just to establish a nice peaceful nation.

Anyway yeah the Caliphate alliance and the RUssian federation alliance have both been destroyed so I don't want to see more stuff from them. Unless a new one is formed. But I certainly won't be part of either one. <font color="#000000">VonGlusenburg (talk to Von!) 20:33, January 12, 2013 (UTC)
 * Taking about what LX said below, could you please try to make an labeled map so we know hich are the names of those new countries?--Collie Kaltenbrunner (talk) 21:09, January 12, 2013 (UTC)
 * Some of those states have been named but then some of them haven't. To be honnest I think maybe having them join up in dynastic union or being invaded might be a good idea to get rid of the smaller ones, because as it I'm confused myself. <font color="#000000">VonGlusenburg (talk to Von!) 02:38, January 13, 2013 (UTC)

<p style="margin-top:1em;margin-bottom:1em;">Before you start calling us the cancer of this game, just try to name the states that popped up in ex-Novgorodian territory and what cities would be their capitals. I think just that bit of reserch would prove my point. Not enough cities of influence to balkanize russia sa much as you did. You keep insisting that russia has a population of 8 million, yet you devide the old lands into mroe than 20 seperate states. Most of novgorod's population would be concentrated in the west and Kazan as an outlier. All I am seeing is Von going "I am GOD and I'll just do what I want and nobody can stop me so suck it!!!!" You are just creating new states just for the fun of it and to levy some sort of percieved punishment on me for daring to question you.-Lx (leave me a message) 20:40, January 12, 2013 (UTC)

<p style="margin-top:1em;margin-bottom:1em;">i agree partially with lx, but then it come's to my mind, dukes want control, russia is not a balkanized russia if not a germanized russia, shattered ,yet keeping alot of the same culture dividided in several smaller nation Sine dei gloriem (talk) 21:09, January 12, 2013 (UTC)

Alright, so I agree, the Mahdinate ended up ruining this part of the game. You still don't have to call us 'cancer'.

two nationalities?!?! Lx, just off thetop of my head, I can list these nationalities in the Federation: Hardly two, innit?
 * 1) Russians
 * 2) Belarussians
 * 3) Ukrainians
 * 4) Poles
 * 5) Rusyn
 * 6) Germans
 * 7) Romanians
 * 8) Latvians
 * 9) Lithuanians
 * 10) Estonians
 * 11) Izhorians
 * 12) Votes
 * 13) Karelians
 * 14) Enets
 * 15) Nenets
 * 16) Komi
 * 17) Mari
 * 18) Udmurts
 * 19) Tatars
 * 20) Bashkirs

And, again, Egypt and Yemen have been absorbed by the Levant. Fed (talk) 22:04, January 12, 2013 (UTC)

But how am I trying to take them all over. most of those nationalities are hardly large enough in population to be noticed at this point in time, and Estonians, latvians, lithuanians all have their own nations, 90% of karelia is owned by scandinavia. At this point I think there is a misunderstanding. I believe that you think that I am justifying keeping absolutely all of russia in one piece, while in reality, I am talking about keeping novgorod mostly intact. Bashkirs were mostly in Moscow's territory. Most of those cultures are nomadic at this point in time and therefore would have a much harder time getting a state and they wouldnt have the numbers to do so.-Lx (leave me a message) 23:15, January 12, 2013 (UTC)

I'd say keeping the western two thirds of the territory you had in 1450 would be alright, but still you're acting like if there was only Russian people in the Federation. Guns said he'd be exactly in the same spot and conquer "Caliphal Europe" (which means freking Thrace) and "Central Asia" (which wouldn't happen).

I'd say that the OTL Ural republics oblasts and krais (from, say, the Volga in the west to the Yenisey/the Siberian border/whatever in the east, with capital in Kazan), being a puppet of Novgorod and Muscovy and becoming a mostly Uralic and Turkic kingdom and another part of the RF like Poland was pre-Caliph would be enough, since Permians and other Uralics have settled down and will establish their own state, as they established one before (Great Perm and the Golden Horde). The rest I agree, is mostly nomadic and will be easier to subdue Fed (talk) 23:51, January 12, 2013 (UTC)-

There needs to be a more moderate approach to it. Like I said before, we need more mods to check to actions of our current ones. Yeah, they were defeated in a war(semi-implausibly but that's old business), but that doesn't mean that they should shatter into a billion micro states. Did Germany reshatter into the dozens of old HRE states at the end of WWI? When Napoleon was defeated, did France reshatter into its feudal kingdoms? The answer to all of the above is no. I am not saying that they should be perfectly intact, I'm saying that they should not be as fragmented. All of the small Russian principalities(Pskov, Yaroslavl, Tver,Ryazan etc) should actually want to rejoin the Federation, not be independent(as all of them except Pskov are landlocked and would not survive too long). I think that all the aformentioned Russian states should join up with Novgorod/Muscovy, while the others(Poland,Lithuania, Nogai, basically everyone non-Russian that they conquered) become independent. Moreover, all those cities that broke away from them sounds kinda unreasonable. When I say this, I am not attacking but (from an unbiased perspective) it really does seem like the mods are out to destroy Russia. Anyone reading the events would just think "why the hell are all the events directed at one nation?" We need to be more moderateAP (talk) 02:44, January 13, 2013 (UTC)

Those two examples you give are under much more different circumstances and for different nations. Why not the example of when Russia got defeated in WWI? All the new break-away states, the small transitional states that you had during the civil war. Its just when you have railroads its much easier to get around and unify a nation then it was in the 1500s. Another example could be the collapse of the Mughal empire.

When nations fall into civil disarray it takes them a while to re-unify and while reunifying many small new states may pop up. Most of these new states are short lived and quickly get conquered by the larger more powerful ones. Remember this is the 1500s so it takes much longer to do. E.g. when the barbarian tribes invaded the Roman empire, many small nations emerged but eventually the stronger ones grew and grew until we have our feudal European states. So Russia reforming now won't take as long it the Franks to unify France but it won't be as quick as Russia reforming after WWI.

I also notice that people seem to be forgetting that other nations rebel because they disagree with the government. Perhaps they don't want to be part of the federation but instead an empire or a feudal kingdom? Other noble families in Russia will want the power that Novogorod & Moscow used to yeild over Russia for themselves.

Anyway if you thought I planned for Russia to stay balkanized or ever you're wrong, this next decade would be those russian states invading & joining up with one another. Just like the Franks, they'll slowly all become one. Think of this as the. <font color="#000000">VonGlusenburg (talk to Von!) 03:16, January 13, 2013 (UTC)

Bur even in the time of troubles russia remainde one state, nearly a failed state at one point, but still one. Even with rival factions, cities like sibir, Kazan and astrakhan did not break away, even when they could have, whereas now its more like a hundred microstates that I have to wage war on one by one. Russia in WWI signed a peace accord with Germany, and was fighting a civil war, basicaly while largely remaining one nation. Russa was never occupied as Germany or France were in WWI(although those are bad examples aswell as the victorious invaders did not annex the territoy but set up a new governement there to maintain stablility).-Lx (leave me a message) 03:35, January 13, 2013 (UTC)

I will be willing to stay in as a mod with no nation so I can be completely neutral. Anyhow, how I see the Russian scenario:

Yes, it is true that there are more states that could probably appear in Russia,considering its population. However, it is not implausible. However, there have been numerous cases where empires have both broken and stayed whole in times of crisis and no argument will reach a conclusion if we just keep naming counter examples to each other, hence making this whole conversation go round in circles.

I also believe there should not be any post-caliphate package deal, as they are not in any dynastic Union with the main PC, vassal, or in union with main PC. Hence, the Sibir Khanate should be given up, and so should all the Balkan countries, unless Dean makes a union with them. Now, can we broker an actual deal about this instead of going in circles. Saamwiil, the Humble 03:43, January 13, 2013 (UTC)

What I mean is tht there are no real cities to become the capital of most of the states that are formed out of old Novgorod, thus making the staes themselves implausible. I would like the names of those states created and their capitals, if you can somehow manage a plausible scenario to what city those states would center around, I will shut up mostly because I am just tired of arguing. I can Name 2 cities that can plausibly form out of Old Novgorod excluding sibir and Novgorod: Kazan, and to a much lesser extend, the state of Great Perm might form.-Lx (leave me a message) 04:43, January 13, 2013 (UTC)

What about a larger Great Perm centred in Kazan than, as I wrote before, became a vassal of Muscovy and Novgorod and a third state of the RF, with most of the Novgorodan territory and a lot of the Muscovian one remaining the same? Fed (talk) 04:46, January 13, 2013 (UTC)

That could work. I just didnt understand the first time you said it. Thanks for clearing it up. -Lx (leave me a message) 05:01, January 13, 2013 (UTC)

People
What is the current global population? Fegelein! Fegelein! Fegelein! 20:53, January 12, 2013 (UTC)

Most probably about 550 million people, according to some estimates.--Collie Kaltenbrunner (talk) 21:13, January 12, 2013 (UTC)

Future of Expatriate Kingdoms
Considering the Caliphate has fallen apart, most people are in disarray, things look bleak, more is being done within the lands than outside, is it safe to say that these (unlikely and probably implausible) expatriate kingdoms from the Caliphate should collapse within the next few turns? Assuming that the Caliphate did fund and trade with them (else they should have collapsed decades ago), without their help they're probably just looked upon as rogue states without a larger governing state and lack of resources, and they would likely die out. Should a mod event try to establish this? ChrisL123 (talk) 23:12, January 12, 2013 (UTC)

Since Egypt's first colony was over fifty years ago, I was planning to take control of them by annexing them into the Levant, but if you deem that implausible it's okay. Fed (talk) 23:14, January 12, 2013 (UTC)

They are nations founded by fellow Chistian refugees, not North Korea. New Georgia would survive at least. Because of the ridiculously plentiful supply of fish from the Grand Banks. I'm guessing that a refugee nation would be founded in a way to encourage self-sufficiency. The Caliphate gave only as much funding to ship them out in the first place. It's like thinking of a Jewish state in Madagascar as being a rogue state because it was established by Nazis following their Madagascar plan. --Yank 02:43, January 13, 2013 (UTC)

Which states you on about exactly Chris? Name them or point them out on the map if you can please. Based on what you said though, lemme say that one state I made, Comchellak is just a break away colony, small population and a trading state. It'd survive but its a bit of a push-over. <font color="#000000">VonGlusenburg (talk to Von!) 02:48, January 13, 2013 (UTC)

I'm talking about New Georgia (the state west of Vinland in Newfoundland), Nea Gyptios (the grey nation in central Florida) and New Syria (the grey state in the Bahamas). They are absolutely harmless, and have done nothing except maybe slightly obstruct Venice's colonial growth in Florida. It's why Venice posted that absurd post sealing the strait of Gibraltar to them. --Yank 02:54, January 13, 2013 (UTC)

I meant Chris more so, I like the idea of those American states. I mean they probably won't grow much now considering the people don't need to leave the caliphate now for fear of persecution. They'll probably just end up being a vassal of someone eventually. <font color="#000000">VonGlusenburg (talk to Von!) 03:19, January 13, 2013 (UTC)

I was referring to the North American ones in general. And I don't know, Yank, considering the warring Natives, diseases, etc., all of which they would have to face without international help. There were some separatist groups in OTL, the Pilgrims in particular, sure, but guess who they were funded by? You're talking about (probably) poverty-stricken Christian refugees who never before left the Caliphate, who established themselves in the New World in the 16th century with no real investment. Really, I doubt this should have been deemed plausible in the first place, but if you want one kingdom to survive (perhaps the one in Florida), I suppose that's okay. ChrisL123 (talk) 03:44, January 13, 2013 (UTC)

They could be an early form of the Federated States of America, they are all Expatriate Kingdoms that are in a bad position, they would want some nation to rely on (each other). However, there should be mod indian attacks, which have been relitavely absent. Saamwiil, the Humble 03:52, January 13, 2013 (UTC)

Labelled Maps?
What the hell happened to the labelled maps. We need not one, but two labelled maps and yet nothing's being done. In about 20 days we're going to need on for 1600, and yet I can see neither hide nor hair of 1500's map let alone 1550's. What's happening on that front to slow it down so much? --Yank 02:37, January 13, 2013 (UTC)

I've almost finished the 1550 one. I was away for two weeks. If people updated the Territories page it would be easier... The 1600 one should not take as long though. Scandinator (talk) 05:11, January 13, 2013 (UTC)