Talk:Principia Moderni III (Map Game)

=Resources=

Archives

 * Archive 1
 * Archive 2
 * Archive 3
 * Archive 4
 * Archive 5
 * Archive 6
 * Archive 7

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

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

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

Result

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

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



Anyhow, my expansion was included on one of the 1665 maps, but somehow wasn't included on one of the more recent maps for the same year. Well, here is the map for my nation (the mighty Kiatagmiut Band!) for 1670 and its upcoming maps. Thanks, 06:38, October 27, 2014 (UTC)

Just a reminder for Croatia's (and Pskov's) recent expansion's Sky Green 24 (Party,quotes) 18:48, October 27, 2014 (UTC)



Here are le Inca in le 1670(I think).

HELLO MR MAP MAKER!

ITS ME VON AGAIN AND I WOULD LIKE MY CHEROKEE NATION TO HAVE A COLOUR PLEASE. SOMETHING BOLD AND HARD TO NOT GET MIXXED UP WITH OTHERS, I WILL ONLY REALLY HAVE 3 NEIGHBOURS (ROME, HAMBURG AND FRANCE) SO DEFO NOT LIKE ANY OF THEIR COLOURS. PERHAPS CANDY BRIGHT DUTCH ORANGE COLOUR. LIKE THIS DUTCH FOOTIE FAN COLOUR. VonGlusenburg (talk to Von!) 04:41, October 29, 2014 (UTC)

PLEASE RE-ADD MANGUT NIVKHGU'S COLOR TO THE MAP AND NOTE MY EXPANSION INTO KAMCHATKA AND THE ALEUTIANS. Commandante Lemming (talk) 13:43, October 30, 2014 (UTC)


 * WHY ARE WE TYPING IN CAPS!?!? Saturn (Talk/Blog) 20:16, November 2, 2014 (UTC)

Please add the Nehilaw expansion shown here. Otherwise someone else will expand into it and everythign will go to hell. Shikata ga nai! 11:34, October 30, 2014 (UTC)



Labelled


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

Cultural


Now, I will attempt to list the myriad of cultures that are represented on the map. To do so, I will go by continent.

It is finished! 01:34, August 1, 2014 (UTC)

Religious Map
Alright, added another religion map. Map is based off of the 1655 Map. Same rules apply: List all changes below in the Notes section.

18:46, October 17, 2014 (UTC)

Color Key

All regions are shown according to their plurality religion.

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

Notes
 * Added Charismatic Christianity and Mogul Khanate is now Charismatic king Trevor 1 of wales (talk) 12:38, October 3, 2014 (UTC)

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

=General Discussion=

Nations of China
This is the list of nations of China starting from the NW to the SE. The highest point of that states is what is considered (if you're confused, I'll be posting a map soon, so don't fret):
 * 1) Uighur
 * Jin
 * 1) China
 * 2) Xi'an
 * 3) Disorganised States/ The Small Kingdoms
 * 4) Sichuan
 * Wu
 * Chu
 * Min
 * 1) Yunnan
 * Yue

Here's the map.

Iroquois

 * Location: 18
 * Tactical Advantage: 6
 * Nations: Iroquois (L), Susquetana (LV), Erie (LV)=11/3=4
 * Military Development: 60=60/26=2
 * Economic Development: 60-3= 57/41=1
 * Expansion: 0
 * Infrastructure: 0
 * Motive: 3+3+3 = 3
 * Chance:
 * Nation Age: 0
 * Population: +6
 * Participation: +10
 * Number of Troops:
 * Recent Wars: 0
 * Broken Treaties: -5 (NAP)
 * Result: 35

Scandinavian

 * Location: 25
 * Location Bonus: 5
 * Nations: Scandinavia (L), Nehilaw (M), Chisasibi (L), Nemaska (L)= 18/4=5
 * Military Development: 26/60=0
 * Economic Development: 27+10+5 +5 (Strategic Locations)=46/57=0
 * Tactical Advantage: 1
 * Expansion: -1
 * Infrastructure: 2
 * Motive: 10+3/3=4
 * Chance:
 * Nation Age: +5
 * Population: +6 +2 (Less than five times larger)
 * Participation: +10
 * Number of Troops: 7000 + Scandinavian troops
 * Recent Wars: -8
 * Concurrent Wars: - 15
 * Result: 40

Discussion
Scandinavian victory

You need to add concurrent wars since technically the Austrian war didn't end yet. Mscoree (talk) 02:17, September 15, 2014 (UTC)

You need to add concurrent wars, recent wars, and subtract the number of years you were at war from development. Also from what Feud told me for my own war, only one L per colonial algo. NonEuclidean ツ (Talk) 02:20, September 15, 2014 (UTC)

From what I see in the Brandengburg war, Ms, the war should last 4 years, meaning it'd end in 1625. So unless you want to be a jerk just so Crim could lose another war, I think the concurrent wars shouldn't be added. Sky Green 24 (Party,quotes) 12:28, September 15, 2014 (UTC)

Just btw, Nemaska and Chisasibi are technically in PU, given that they are ruled by the same governing body and are represented in this body. Chemu byt tomu ne minovat' 22:35, September 15, 2014 (UTC)

It looks like everything is about right. Bfoxius, I'm kinda partial to a renewal of the NAP. If you have any terms or grievances, just post on my talk page. This war's lasted for about as long as a war should last. Crim de la Crème 17:25, September 17, 2014 (UTC)

Can someone confirm the treaty breaking penalty? According to Crim it was added by Feud and Sine a month ago, but when I looked on the rules I saw it was actually added by Crim a week or so ago. It definitely has not been there for long, as in the past Feud actually removed the penalty after Sine added it to his algorithm. In the past both Sine and Feud said it wasn't a rule, so unless it is a new rule and they say otherwise, I assume it;s not a rule. Mscoree (talk) 19:29, September 17, 2014 (UTC)

In response to your edit summary, I didn't undo all the changes, all I did was edit the discussion section. Mscoree (talk) 20:39, September 17, 2014 (UTC)

The Christians Front
Total: 164
 * Location: 18
 * Location Bonus: 4
 * Tactical Advantage: 6
 * Nations: L(Rome),L(Croatia),L(Dacia)  = 3
 * Military Development: 60+10(No previous lost wars)+10(Naval dominance, judging by the fact that it's three nations with a navy versus one that's fighting on two fronts)+5(More total troops)+5(Fully mobilized)=90/-2=90
 * Economic Development: 60+(Larger economy)5+5(Larger trade/Colonial empire)=70/7=10
 * Expansion: 0
 * Infrastructure: 0
 * Motive: 7+3+3=4
 * Motive Modifiers: -3
 * Chance: 5
 * Edit count: 7047 (MP)
 * UTC: 4:27 = 56
 * Total: 0/0*pi (3.14159265359) =
 * Nation Age: 0
 * Population: 8+2
 * Participation: +10
 * Number of Troops: 35,000+35,000+100,000/45,000=4
 * Number of Ships: 80+30+350/60=8
 * Recent Wars: -2
 * Vassals and Puppets: 0

The Egypt
Total: 45
 * Location: 25
 * Location Bonus:+7
 * Tactical Advantage: 2
 * Nations: L(Aegypt) = 0
 * Military Development: 9-3-10=-4/2=-2/93=0
 * Economic Development: 9-2=7/70=0
 * Expansion: 0
 * Infrastructure: 6
 * Motive: 9
 * Motive Modifiers: -3-6
 * Chance: 3
 * Edit count: 15154
 * UTC: 4:27 = 56
 * Total: 0/0*pi (3.14159265359) =
 * Nation Age: 0
 * Population: 7
 * Participation: +10
 * Number of Troops: 0
 * Recent Wars:
 * Vassals and Puppets: 0
 * Multiple wars: -10

Result

 * 56.937799041%
 * (^)*(1-1/(2*2)) = 42.703349281%

The Muslim Front
Total: 186+troops+chance
 * Location: 19
 * Location Bonus: 5
 * Tactical Advantage: 6
 * Nations: L(Mansurriya),L(Damascus),L(Urdustan).L(Yemen)=4
 * Military Development: 110(Same as the upper front)=110
 * Economic Development: 90/7=13
 * Expansion: 0
 * Infrastructure: 0
 * Motive: 4
 * Motive Modifiers: -3
 * Chance: 0
 * Edit count: 0
 * UTC: 0 =
 * Total: 0/0*pi (3.14159265359) =
 * Nation Age: 0
 * Population: 8/9+10
 * Participation: +10
 * Number of Troops: 0/0
 * Recent Wars: 0
 * Vassals and Puppets: 0

The Egypt
Total: 47+chance
 * Location: 25
 * Location Bonus:+5
 * Tactical Advantage: 2
 * Nations: 0 = 0
 * Military Development: 0
 * Economic Development: 0
 * Expansion: 0
 * Infrastructure: 0
 * Motive: 9
 * Motive Modifiers: -3-6
 * Chance: 0
 * Edit count: 0
 * UTC: 0 =
 * Total: 0/0*pi (3.14159265359) =
 * Nation Age: 0
 * Population: 7
 * Participation: +10
 * Number of Troops: 0/0
 * Recent Wars: 0
 * Vassals and Puppets: 0
 * conncurent war:-10

Result

 * 59.65665235%
 * (0)*(1-1/(2*2)) = 44.74248927%

Discussion
Someone is very lazy

That someone is me, I assume. Also I added in Yemen since Rimp stated that he'll also join in on the war, however he can be removed if he wants to be removed. Another thing, are these two separate wars or two fronts? Cause I think we agreed on a war on two fronts. Sky Green 24 (Party,quotes) 13:14, September 16, 2014 (UTC)

Someone fix the 'Result' for the Muslim Front. Also, these are two different wars. The Muslims invaded to protect the Muslims of Aegypt. The Christians invaded so the Muslims do not take all of Aegypt. In simple words, both are trying to take parts of Aegypt without attacking each other and Yemen is invading Aegypt RexImperio (talk) 17:21, September 16, 2014 (UTC)

I think either way it is safe to say Egypt collapsed after one year with both invasions gaining over 25% in that time. Stephanus rex (talk) 22:43, September 16, 2014 (UTC)

But those two sides are not in a coalition or alliance with each other. The 25% thing would have worked if both sides were part of a greater coalition RexImperio (talk) 02:54, September 17, 2014 (UTC)

Pskov (Attacker)
Total: 140
 * Location: +10
 * Tactical Advantage: +1
 * Nations per side: Pskov(L), Narva(LV) = 9/5=2
 * Military: = 48
 * Score: 20+10
 * Naval Dominance; 10
 * More total troops: 5
 * Moderately Sized Army : 3
 * Calculation: 30+10+3+5/(negative) = 48/1 = 48
 * Economy: 16
 * Score: 20+10
 * Much Larger Economy: 10
 * Economic golden Age: 3
 * Larger Colonial Empire: 5
 * Calculation: 30+10+3+5/3 = 48/3 = 16
 * Locations Bonus: 0
 * Motive: 15
 * Pskov: 3(econ)
 * Narva: 3(aid)
 * modifiers:
 * +6(democratic)
 * +6 High Morale
 * Calculation: 3+6+6 = 15
 * Expansion: +0
 * Nation Age: +0
 * Pskov: +5
 * Narva; -5
 * Calculation; -5/2 = -2.5
 * Participation: +10
 * Number of Troops: 3000/500 = 6
 * Chance: 6
 * Number of Posts: 3215
 * UTC time: 1:28 ; 2*8 = 16
 * Calculation: 3215/16)*pi = 631.2 6 37
 * Population: +26
 * base:+6
 * Modifier: +20
 * Recent Wars: +0

Maputo (Defender)
Total: 56
 * Location: +25
 * Tactical Advantage: +0
 * Nations per side: Maputo (L)= 5, 0
 * Military: 0
 * NPC bonus: 5
 * Not Initialy Mobilized: -10
 * Small military: -2
 * Much Smaller Armed Forces: -5
 * Economy: 0
 * NPC bonus : 5
 * Smaller Economy; -2
 * Total; 3
 * Less than opponent = total 0
 * Infrastructure: 5
 * Motive: 4
 * Life or Death: 9
 * Low Morale: -5
 * Expansion: 0
 * Participation: +10
 * Chance: 7
 * Number of Posts: 3215
 * UTC time: 1:28 ; 2*8 = 16
 * Calculation: 3215/16)*pi = 631.263 7
 * Population: +5
 * Recent Wars: +0
 * Nation Age: 0
 * Troops = 500, 0

Result
((140/(140+56))-0.5)*2)*(0.75)*100%= 33% after 2 years of very light fighting, Maputo Dies

Dividing by 2 for negitive is nonsensical, seeing as if they had 1 you would get +48.  I am on the edge...  The EdgeofNight   20:24, September 16, 2014 (UTC)

IN the Rules it says devide by 2, so I devide by 2...-Lx (leave me a message) 21:04, September 16, 2014 (UTC)

It is nonsensical there too. It took me 2 wars to conquer Chiribaya when if I got the full amount of points for my developement rather than dividing it, it would have taken 1.  I am on the edge...  The EdgeofNight   21:24, September 16, 2014 (UTC)

I agree with that, if they got 1 or 0 I would get double the ammount of points...but one other thing...if I get that extra 24 points,  THen I conquer their entire governement in 2 years instead of just that small chunk!-Lx (leave me a message) 21:40, September 16, 2014 (UTC)

Largest Cities?
So I brought this up on chat, but they where all preoccupied.... with other things. Out of curiosity I wan to know everyones largest city so that we can know which one it is globablly. From what I was able to get, Shanghi has 200k.  I am on the edge...  The EdgeofNight   20:24, September 16, 2014 (UTC)

My largest city is Prague at 100,000+ people by 1600, making it the largest city in the Holy Roman Empire and probably central Europe. The next largest city in the Holy Roman Empire is Vienna at 50,000. Then you have Augsburg at 45,000, Cologne, Nuremburg, Hamburg, Mageburg, and Breslau at 40,000, Strasbourg at 25,000, Lübeck at 23,000, Regensburg at 20,000, Ulm at 21,000, Frankfurt am Main at 20,000, and Munich at 20,000. These numbers again are approximations around the year 1600. Mscoree (talk) 20:33, September 16, 2014 (UTC)

I did a quick check and as far as I can tell Paris is about 420,000 people, which I assume is the largest city in France. Mscoree (talk) 20:37, September 16, 2014 (UTC)

Constantinople is the largest city in the Roman Empire, with probably a little less than 300,000. After that is probably Athens, Thessalonica, and Smyrna for the top four cities.

"This is not your grave  but you are welcome in it. " 20:44, September 16, 2014 (UTC)

Actualy, Constantinople would be one of the only cities in the world with over 1 million population...just like rome in the ancient empire...-Lx (leave me a message) 20:53, September 16, 2014 (UTC)

Except for the many years of decline during the Latin Empire and the continued chaos of the late Empire. In OTL, when Constantinople fell, it had only 50,000, if I recall correctly, so it had to recover, and is at 300,000 for now.

Not what it was, nor what it will hopefully be.

"This is not your grave  but you are welcome in it. " 20:55, September 16, 2014 (UTC)

actually in OTL constantinople had about 700 000 people in 1650. With Rebirth and growth a figure of 1 million is not taht implausible...-Lx (leave me a message) 21:01, September 16, 2014 (UTC)

This is interesting, I would've thought Constantinople would've been closer, if not exceeding, 1 million citizens by this time ATL. I am that guy (talk) 22:25, September 16, 2014 (UTC)

Dacia's largest is probably Constanta, but it might be Varna. Stephanus rex (talk) 22:40, September 16, 2014 (UTC)

Anyway, people are seriously underestimating the sizes of cities here, my largest City is Pskov, followed by Nizhegorodsk-na-Narve, followed by Ostrov, then goes Luki, and last but not least, Novoprussiysk. Pskov is also the largest city in Russia surpassing moscow and novgorod at 300 000 people...and before people start yelling in OTL moscow had a population of 200 000 in 1600-1650ish[citation] And since moscow *cough* is in steep decline *cough* is currently not an expemplar of success, and Pskov is, in fact, the only russian state with access to the Baltic, it would make sense for People to move from Moscow---to Pskov, instead of what happened in OTL, people moved from everywhere, to Moscow. So yes, my population for Pskov is Plausible. 300 000 to 350 000 it shall remain untill the next century.-Lx (leave me a message)

Doing some Wikipedia research I was able to find that London had a population of about 200k in 1600 OTL. Beijing had about 700k OTL. Paris had pretty much the same as what MS said, and Constanitinople had about 400k at this point. <font color="#191970"> I am on the edge...  The EdgeofNight   10:48, September 17, 2014 (UTC)

Kunene has a 100k pop, so not that large I guess in the scale of large cities. And yeah, Peking was the largest city until London took it over in the 19th century. Saamwiil, the Humble 22:20, September 17, 2014 (UTC)

Prussia (Attacker)
Total: +96
 * Location: +20
 * Tactical Advantage: +6
 * Nations per side: Prussia (L), Neu Franken (M), Zollern Insels (M) =11/3 = 4
 * Military: 60+10+10+5+5+3=93/20 = 5
 * Economy: 60+10+3+5=78/20 = 4
 * Locations Bonus:
 * Motive: +8
 * Prussia: 7+4
 * Neu Franken: 6
 * Zollern Insels: 6
 * Modifiers: +5
 * Expansion: +0
 * Nation Age: 5
 * Participation: +10
 * Number of Troops:
 * Chance:
 * Population: +8 +20
 * Recent Wars:
 * Troops:

Seminole (Defender)
Total: +41
 * Location: +25
 * Tactical Advantage: +1
 * Nations per side: Seminole (L) = 5
 * Military: 20, 0
 * Economy: 20, 0
 * Locations Bonus: 0
 * Infrastructure:
 * Motive: 9-5-10
 * Expansion: 0
 * Participation: +10
 * Chance:
 * Population: +6
 * Recent Wars:
 * Nation Age: 0
 * Troops

Result
((96/(41+96))*2)-1=0.401459854

0.401459854*(1-1/(6)) = 34%

Principia Moderni III Base Map
So I am planning on doing a TL, and for quite some time I have also been interested in using the PM map for a few projects of my own but after many hours spent searching on the internet I was unable to find the map. I believe this is becuase one of the mods made the map and it is part of the intelectual property or ownership. If this is the case I am requesting permission to use the map, or if the map is public then I would be greatly appreciated if someone would attach a copy of the base map. Thank-you.

Aternix!? 11:52, September 17, 2014 (UTC)

You know you could just save the current map and use Paint to turn all the continents black if you plan onto carve your own nations. Or use the Maps Page to save the first PMIII Map. It isn't difficult RexImperio (talk) 14:30, September 17, 2014 (UTC)

Here is the official original PM3 map. It is the most accurate map made to date for the series, and is from Scandinator. I believe that IP doesn't apply to Wikia-original images, since I think it operates on a CC-BY-SA Creative Commons license. What this means can be found here! What is your TL going to be about, Aternix? 00:49, September 18, 2014 (UTC)

Hey, sorry for the slow reply. I have finished changing the map to completely black, if anybody would like a copy just give me a message. (There may be a few spots left here and there, but I think I got all of them.) My TL will be about the Norse captain Bjarni Herjolfsson, who was blown off course when he was on his way to see his Grandparents. OTL, he was begged by his crew to stop and look at hills in the distance and he refused. My TL is where he landed some 15 years before Leif Eriksson, and was able to return and build a sucessful colony.

<p class="firstHeading" id="firstHeading" lang="en" style="border-bottom-width:1px;border-bottom-style:solid;border-bottom-color:rgb(170,170,170);margin-top:0px;margin-bottom:0.25em;font-size:1.8em;color:black;overflow:hidden;line-height:1.3;font-family:'LinuxLibertine',Georgia,Times,serif;background:none;">

Great Lakes territory
Hey just wondering who has control of the area of the southern Great Lakes region? I believe their colony or territory, whatever clashes with the territory of the Ottawa. My current nation. CaptainCain (talk) 01:06, September 18, 2014 (UTC)

I believe there Scandivadian and British colonies in your area, correct me if I'm wrong, but those are the colonies in your area. Saturn (Talk/Blog) 12:34, October 1, 2014 (UTC)

Absences
I have been very busy with school and work and my relationships. I will try to post, but due to my hectic schedule, therefor I am canceling any major wars I may have had planned. I regret being unavailable and I am so sorry for any misunderstandings. I will keep my nation curated with the help of sky. However I warn that there may be days, weeks even, when I am not on. I appreciate the understanding and hope my schedule opens back up to allow me to play as I have in the past.FOR THE GLORY OF THE PARTY! 21:28, September 18, 2014 (UTC)

Rome (Attacker)
Total: 138
 * Location: 20
 * Location Bonus: 6
 * Tactical Advantage: 7
 * Nations: Rome (L), = 1
 * Military Development: 20+10+10+5-2=43
 * Economic Development: 20+10+5=12
 * Expansion: 0
 * Infrastructure: 0
 * Motive: 7
 * Motive Modifiers: +4+5
 * Chance: 8
 * Edit count: 0
 * UTC: 0 =
 * Total: 7066/(1*9*5*pi) = 49.9817256839
 * Nation Age: 0
 * Population: 10+20
 * Participation: +10
 * Number of Troops: 7500/2500=3
 * Recent Wars: -3
 * Vassals and Puppets: 0
 * -15

Yamasee (Defender)
Total: 56
 * Location: 25
 * Location Bonus:
 * Tactical Advantage: 1
 * Nations: 1
 * Military Development: 6-3-10=-7
 * Economic Development 5/2=3
 * Expansion: 0
 * Infrastructure: 7/2=4
 * Motive: 10
 * Motive Modifiers: -5+4
 * Chance: 1
 * Edit count: 0
 * UTC: 0 =
 * Total: 0/0*pi (3.14159265359) =
 * Nation Age: 0
 * Population: 5
 * Participation: +10
 * Number of Troops: 0/0
 * Recent Wars: 0
 * Vassals and Puppets: 0

Result
Win in 3 years.
 * ((Winner/(Loser+Winner))*2)-1 = 0
 * (0)*(1-1/(2*0)) = 0

Rome (Attacker)
Total: 138
 * Location: 20
 * Location Bonus: 6
 * Tactical Advantage: 7
 * Nations: Rome (L), = 1
 * Military Development: 20+10+10+5-2=43
 * Economic Development: 20+10+5=12
 * Expansion: 0
 * Infrastructure: 0
 * Motive: 7
 * Motive Modifiers: +4+5
 * Chance: 8
 * Edit count: 0
 * UTC: 0 =
 * Total: 7066/(1*9*5*pi) = 49.9817256839
 * Nation Age: 0
 * Population: 10+20
 * Participation: +10
 * Number of Troops: 7500/2500=3
 * Recent Wars: -3
 * Vassals and Puppets: 0
 * -15

The other nation next to Yamasee (Defender)
Total: 56
 * Location: 25
 * Location Bonus:
 * Tactical Advantage: 1
 * Nations: 1
 * Military Development: 6-3-10=-7
 * Economic Development 5/2=3
 * Expansion: 0
 * Infrastructure: 7/2=4
 * Motive: 10
 * Motive Modifiers: -5+4
 * Chance: 1
 * Edit count: 0
 * UTC: 0 =
 * Total: 0/0*pi (3.14159265359) =
 * Nation Age: 0
 * Population: 5
 * Participation: +10
 * Number of Troops: 0/0
 * Recent Wars: 0
 * Vassals and Puppets: 0

Result
Win in 3 years.
 * ((Winner/(Loser+Winner))*2)-1 = 0
 * (0)*(1-1/(2*0)) = 0

Discussion
Mp gave permission <font color="#50E0F0">Sky <font color="#50FF60">Green <font color="A00000">24 (Party,quotes) 19:56, September 19, 2014 (UTC)

Blank Map
Here is a copy of the blank map of PMIII if anybody wants one. :) Aternix!?  02:50, September 21, 2014 (UTC)

Croatia (Attacker)
Total: 144
 * Location: 15
 * Location Bonus: 0
 * Tactical Advantage: 6
 * Nations: Croatia (L), Western Hungary (MV), Britannia (S) = 2
 * Military Development: 20+10+10+5+3=48
 * Economic Development: 20+10+5 = 12
 * Expansion: 0
 * Infrastructure: 0
 * Motive: 7
 * Motive Modifiers: +4+5
 * Chance: 6
 * Edit count: 2,364
 * UTC: 12:40 =
 * Total: 0/0*pi (3.14159265359) = 94.0605713673
 * Nation Age:
 * Population: 7+20
 * Participation: +10
 * Number of Troops: 30,000/7,000=4
 * Recent Wars: -2
 * Vassals and Puppets: 0

Benin (Defender)
Total: 55
 * Location: 25
 * Location Bonus:
 * Tactical Advantage: 2
 * Nations: Benin (L) = 0
 * Military Development: 6-2-10/2 = 0
 * Economic Development: 7-2/2 = 0
 * Expansion: 0
 * Infrastructure: 7/2=4
 * Motive: 9
 * Motive Modifiers: +4-5
 * Chance: 0
 * Edit count: 0
 * UTC: 12:40 =
 * Total: 0/0*pi (3.14159265359) = 94.0605713673
 * Nation Age: 0
 * Population: 6
 * Participation: +10
 * Number of Troops: 0/0
 * Recent Wars: 0
 * Vassals and Puppets: 0

Result
Conquered in 2 years.
 * ((144/(55+144))*2)-1 =
 * (x)*(1-1/(2*0)) =

Austria (Attacker)
Total: +98
 * Location: +20
 * Tactical Advantage: +6
 * Nations per side: Austria (L), Westenland (M), Neu Bruchhausen (M) =11/3 = 4
 * Military: 60+10+10+5+5+3=93/20 = 5
 * Economy: 60+10+3+5=78/20 = 4
 * Locations Bonus: 2
 * Motive: +8
 * Austria: 7+4
 * Westenland : 6
 * Neu Bruchhausen: 6
 * Modifiers: +5
 * Expansion: +0
 * Nation Age: 5
 * Participation: +10
 * Number of Troops:
 * Chance:
 * Population: +8 +20
 * Recent Wars:
 * Troops:

Wolof (Defender)
Total: +41
 * Location: +25
 * Tactical Advantage: +1
 * Nations per side: Wolof (L) = 5
 * Military: 20, 0
 * Economy: 20, 0
 * Locations Bonus: 0
 * Infrastructure:
 * Motive: 9-5-10
 * Expansion: 0
 * Participation: +10
 * Chance:
 * Population: +6
 * Recent Wars:
 * Nation Age: 0
 * Troops

Discussion
Wolof's mil and eco shouldn't be 20/20, but 6 and 7 and his infra should be 7. Although they also divide by two. And with that said, you probably conquer it in one turn. Sky out <font color="#50E0F0">Sky <font color="#50FF60">Green <font color="A00000">24 (Party,quotes) 15:28, September 22, 2014 (UTC)

No their scores are still 6 7 and 7 no division. their division was already done before hand

Wu (Attacker)
Total: 116
 * Location: +25 +20 +15 +5= 65/4=16.25 = 16
 * Location Bonus: +21
 * Tactical Advantage: 2
 * Nations: Wu(L), Shanghai(LV), Philippines(LV), Spain(L) = +14/4 = 3.5 = +4
 * Military Development: +20 (Wu), +10(Shanghai) +20(Philippines), +20(Spain) = +103/4 = +26
 * Military mods: +10(Hasnt lost any of previous 3 wars),+10(Naval dominance),+5(More Total Troops),+5(Nation fully mobilized),+3(Moderately sized armed forces)
 * Economic Development: +20, +10, +20, +20 = +88/4 = +22
 * Economic mods: +10(Much larger economy), +5(Larger colonial empire), +3(Economic golden age)
 * Expansion: -5
 * Infrastructure: 0
 * Motive: +9, +3, +3, +3 = +26/4= 6.5 = +7
 * Motive Modifiers: +4, +4
 * Chance: 0
 * Edit count:
 * UTC:  =
 * Total:
 * Nation Age:
 * Population: +8 +2 = +10
 * Participation: +10
 * Number of Troops: 220,000/75,000 = +3
 * Recent Wars:

Chinese rebels (Defender)
Total: 67
 * Location: 25
 * Location Bonus:+0
 * Tactical Advantage: 2
 * Nations: Chinese Rebels (L) = +5
 * Military Development: 4 = 0
 * Economic Development: 4  = 0
 * Expansion: 0
 * Infrastructure: +10 = +10
 * Motive: 9
 * Motive Modifiers: +9 +4
 * Chance: 0
 * Edit count: 0
 * UTC: 12:40 =
 * Total: 0/0*pi (3.14159265359) = 94.0605713673
 * Nation Age: =-5
 * Population: 7
 * Participation: +10
 * Number of Troops: 75,000/220,000
 * Recent Wars: 0
 * Vassals and Puppets: 0

Result

 * 116 to 67... i believe weve won resoundingly this case is closed

Discussion
Josh asked me to do the algo for him we won resoundingly i see no issues here.

It would be nice to see a little more documentations (reasoning) for the numbers used. Otherwise, no issues. Saamwiil, the Humble 03:10, September 23, 2014 (UTC)

Question about picking nations
Do i have to pick a nation or can i create one. User:Likercat (talk) 11:20, September 24, 2014 (UTC)

You should probably just pick one. Mscoree (talk) 12:03, September 24, 2014 (UTC)

But i have seen people making other nations, like Rex made Livonia and Kiagamunt Band. User:Likercat (talk) 09:04, September 26, 2014 (UTC)

Rex, as far as I know, didn't make Livonia and the other is a tribe that exists in the region. <font color="#191970"> I am on the edge...  The EdgeofNight ╚╩o.o╩╝    11:22, September 26, 2014 (UTC)

Indeed. That region was called Livonia in OTL, and had several nations of that name throughout its history. I remade it through moderator event and then he played as it. His newest nation appears to be a tribe. If you can find evidence of a tribe in an area you can play as them, but you cannot just make up some fantasy nation. Mscoree (talk) 12:19, September 26, 2014 (UTC)

From what I've seen, if you want a tribal nation, you just have to prove that it exists and if it isn't in colonial territory (Ex. Powhattan - Rome). You also need to provide a map, which also must be a plausible size. Saturn (Talk/Blog) 11:58, September 26, 2014 (UTC)

brb
Will be inactive for a few weeks so don't kill off Yemen. Swank, I want you to assist Yemen in killing those blacks btw RexImperio (talk) 20:23, September 24, 2014 (UTC)

Derogatory statements such as "killing those blacks," even in context of a Map Game are not allowed. Please refrain from doing so in the future. Consider this your first and only warning. PitaKang- My Life for Aiur! En Taro Tassadar 23:51, September 26, 2014 (UTC)

League of Gichigamee (Attacker)
Total: 134
 * Location: +20
 * Tactical Advantage: 2
 * Nations: Nehilaw (L), Nemaska (LV), Chisasibi(LV), Ashinaabeg(L), Bodewamik (L) =  +4 -3 (Leading vassals) = +1
 * Military Development: Nehilaw (L) +16, Nemaska (LV) +20, Chisasibi(LV) +20, Ashinaabeg(L) +4, Bodewamik (L) +4 =  64/5 = 13 = +13
 * Military mods: +10 (Hasn’t lost any of previous 3 wars), +10(Naval dominance),+5 (More Total Troops),+5 (Nation fully mobilized),-2 (Small army)
 * Economic Development: Nehilaw (L) +14, Nemaska (LV) +20, Chisasibi(LV) +20, Ashinaabeg(L) +4, Bodewamik (L) +4 = 62/5 = +12
 * Economic mods: +5 (Larger economy), +5(Larger trade)
 * Expansion: -5
 * Infrastructure: 0
 * Motive: +5, +5, +5, +5, +5 = +25/5= +5
 * Motive Modifiers: +4, +6
 * Chance: 7
 * Edit count:555
 * UTC: 8:21
 * Total:555/16*pi (3.14159265359) =  108.9739
 * Nation Age: 0
 * Population: +7 +2 = +10
 * Participation: +10
 * Number of Troops: 20,000/7000 = +3
 * Recent Wars:

Twightee (Defender)
Total: 61
 * Location: 25
 * Location Bonus:+0
 * Tactical Advantage: 2
 * Nations: Twightee (L) = +5
 * Military Development: 4 = 0
 * Economic Development: 4  = 0
 * Expansion: 0
 * Infrastructure: +10 = +10
 * Motive: +5
 * Motive Modifiers: -5
 * Chance: 3
 * Edit count: 555
 * UTC: 8:21
 * Total:555/16*pi (3.14159265359) =  108.9739
 * Nation Age: =0
 * Population: +6
 * Participation: +10
 * Number of Troops: +0
 * Recent Wars: 0
 * Vassals and Puppets: 0

Result
((134/(61+134))*2)-1 = 0.3745897435 (0.37435897435)*(1-1/(2 x 1) = 0.18717948717. The war will last one year, enabling the League to take 18%.

Raigama (and Allies)

 * Location: 20 (Next to Location of War)
 * Tactical Advantage: 5 (Using Siege Equipment)
 * Nations Per Side on the War: Raigama (L), Kotte (LV), Netherlands (S), Delhi (S), Urdustan (L), Orissa (LV), Vijaynagar (LV) = 23/7 = 3
 * Military Development = 60 + 25 = 75/17 = 4
 * ​20 (Raigama)
 * 20 (Kotte)
 * 20 (Urdustan)
 * 10 (Naval Dominance)
 * 10 (Has not lost three previous wars)
 * 5 (More total troops than the enemy)
 * Economic = 60 + 10 = 70/4 = 18
 * ​20 (Raigama)
 * 20 (Kotte)
 * 20 (Urdustan)
 * 5 (Larger Economy)
 * 5 (Larger Trade)
 * Expansion: 0
 * Motive: 15 + 18 + 9 = 42/7 = 6
 * Raigama = 15
 * ​3 (Economic (Gains Land) = Raigama
 * 5 (Taking terrority of similar culture) = Raigama
 * 7 (To enforce political hegemony) = Raigama
 * ​Others = '18
 * 3 (Aid Ally) = Others (x6)
 * ​Modifiers = 9
 * 4 (Non-Democratic Nation)
 * 5 (High Troop Morale)
 * Chance: 6
 * Edit count = 216
 * UTC Time = 3:18 AM = 3*1*8 = 24
 * Math: 216/24 * pi = 28.26
 * Nation Age: 5 (Mature Nation)
 * Population: 28
 * 8 (8-Digit Population of Leaders)
 * 20 (More than 10 times greater)
 * Participation: 10
 * Number of Troops: 216,200/7,500 = 29
 * ​Raigama = 13,500
 * Kotte = 2,700
 * Urdustan and Vassals = 200,000
 * Theaters of War: 0
 * Total: 129

Jaffna

 * Location: 25 (At the location)
 * Tactical Advantage: 1 (No High Ground/Ambush)
 * Nations per side: Jaffna (L) = 5/1 = 5
 * Military Development: 12 + 5 = 17,0
 * ​12 (Jaffna)
 * 10 (Has not lost three previous wars)
 * -2 (Nation has small armed forces)
 * ​-3 (Smaller armed forces)
 * ​Economy: 6 - 2 = 4,0
 * ​6 (Jaffna)
 * -2 (Smaller Economy)
 * Infrastructure: 3
 * Expansion: 0
 * Motive: 5 + 0 = 5/1 = 5
 * 5 (Defending heartland from non-crippling attack)
 * Chance: 0
 * Edit count = 216
 * UTC Time = 3:18 AM = 3*1*8 = 24
 * Math: 216/24 * pi = 28.260
 * Nation Age: 5 (Mature Nation)
 * Population: 6 (6-Digit Population)
 * Participation: 10
 * Number of Troops: 0
 * Jaffna = 7,500
 * Theaters of War: 0
 * Total: 60

Results
((129/(60+120))*2)-1 = 43.3

43.3*(1-1/(2*3)) = 36.083%

This means Raigama and its Allies will be able to topple the Jaffnan government in 3 years.

Discussion
(Help me correct this algo, or tell me if you think it is fine)

Spain (Attacker)
Total: 129
 * Location: +20 +20 +15 +15 +15 +15 = +17
 * Location Bonus: +21
 * Tactical Advantage: 2
 * Nations: Spain(L), Italy(L), Morocco (L), Lombardy(L) Savoy (LV) Genoa (LV) = +4
 * Military Development: +20 (Spain), +20(Morocco) +20(Italy), +20(Lombardy) +20 (Savoy) +20 (Genoa) = +153/7 = +22
 * Military mods: +10(Hasnt lost any of previous 3 wars),+10(Naval dominance),+5(More Total Troops),+5(Nation fully mobilized),+3(Moderately sized armed forces)
 * Economic Development: +20, +20, +20, +20 +20 +20 = +138/7 = +20
 * Economic mods: +10(Much larger economy), +5(Larger colonial empire), +3(Economic golden age)
 * Expansion: n/a
 * Infrastructure: n/a
 * Motive: +7 (hegemony) +3 +3 +3 +3 +3 = 38/6 = +6
 * Motive Modifiers: +4, +4, +4, +4
 * Chance: 0
 * Edit count:
 * UTC:  =
 * Total:
 * Nation Age: +0
 * Population: +8 +20 = +28
 * Participation: +10
 * Number of Troops: 70,000/55,000 = +1
 * Recent Wars: -2 (Spain vs Wu Rebels)

Algiers (Defender)
Total: 59
 * Location: 25
 * Location Bonus:+0
 * Tactical Advantage: 2
 * Nations: Algiers (L) = +5
 * Military Development: 7 = 0
 * Economic Development: 7  = 0
 * Expansion: 0
 * Infrastructure: +4 = +4
 * Motive: 9 +4 =+13
 * Motive Modifiers: +4
 * Chance: 0
 * Edit count: 0
 * UTC: 12:40 =
 * Total: 0/0*pi (3.14159265359) = 94.0605713673
 * Nation Age: = -5
 * Population: 7
 * Participation: +10
 * Number of Troops: 55,000/70,000 = +0
 * Recent Wars: 0
 * Vassals and Puppets: 0

Result

 * 129 to 59

Discussion
Do i even need too???

id like to return to the game as the netherlands
if this is permited i am finally in a position were i can With Blood and Iron (talk) 15:18, October 1, 2014 (UTC)

seeing as trollis hasnt posted in several turns id like to assume control of the netherlands next turn. With Blood and Iron (talk) 16:08, October 1, 2014 (UTC)

I was actually just away the last week. Our previous deal with you playing as my colony is still on though right? Tr0llis (talk) 19:02, October 1, 2014 (UTC)

Mesopotamia-Damascus (Attacker)

 * Location: 15
 * Location Bonus: 4
 * Tactical Advantage: 5
 * Nations: Damascus(L),Mansurriya Sultanate(L) = 2
 * Military Development: 40+5(more total troops)+5(fully mobilized)+10(naval dominance)=60/25= 4
 * Economic Development: 40+10(much larger economy)+5(larger trade)=55/14=4
 * Expansion: 0
 * Infrastructure: 0
 * Motive: 3 (Gaining Land)+3 aiding ally=14/2=7
 * Modifer: 2*4 (Mostly non-demo states)  = 8, 2*2 (War not supported) = -4 = +4

Total: 72
 * Chance: 0
 * Edit count: 0
 * UTC: 0 =
 * Total: 0/0*pi (3.14159265359) =
 * Nation Age: +5
 * Population: 8 + 20 = 28
 * Participation: +10
 * Number of Troops: 150,000/40,000 =+4
 * Number of ships: 39/26 = 2
 * Alliance Breaking: -10
 * Recent Wars: -4
 * Vassals and Puppets: 0

Yemen (Defender)
Total: 50
 * Location: 25
 * Location Bonus: +3 (Red Sea Opening .-. OMG Sky)
 * Tactical Advantage: 2
 * Nations: Yemen (L) = 5/10 = 0.5 ~ +1
 * Military Development: 16 - 5 (Lesser Troops)  + 3 (Moderately Sized) = 15/60 = 0
 * Economic Development: 16-2=14=0
 * Expansion: 0
 * Infrastructure: + 4
 * Motive: +9
 * Modifier: +4 (Non-demo) -5 (2 front war) = -1
 * Chance: 0
 * Edit count: 0
 * UTC: 0 =
 * Total: 0/0*pi (3.14159265359) =
 * Nation Age: +5
 * Population: +7
 * Participation: +10
 * Number of Troops: 40,000/150,000 = 0
 * Number of Ships = 26/39 = 0.6 ~ +1
 * Recent Wars: -2
 * Concurrent war (Dacian Invasion):-15
 * Vassals and Puppets: 0

Result

 * ((72/(72+65))*2)-1= 5.10%
 * (0.0510)*(1-1/(2*4)) = 4.446% after 4 years of continuous fighting

Discussion
It became annoying that there wasn't an algo, so I made one. Oh and the result should be obvious. <font color="#50E0F0">Sky <font color="#50FF60">Green <font color="A00000">24 (Party,quotes) 16:30, October 14, 2014 (UTC)

I disagree. Damascan and Mansurriyya don't have naval dominance. In fact they barely had a navy whereas Yemens navy was much more stronger than those two. Another thing is Yemens military is roughly 40,000 soldiers not 15000. Moving on, UIN doesn't get 'Won all last three wars' since they lost to the Turkish Sultanate. RexImperio (talk) 16:28, October 15, 2014 (UTC)

However with fighting to wars I doubt it'd have naval dominance. Also you can't give one side coalition bonus and the other non-coalition. Also, due to technicalities, the thing that created the alliance the UIN can be considered a treaty so they get -5 instead of -10. Also Rimp I suggest you tread lightly since you recently asked a moderator to make an event in order to cut off suri from its allies. <font color="#50E0F0">Sky <font color="#50FF60">Green <font color="A00000">24 (Party,quotes) 17:16, October 15, 2014 (UTC)

I didn't ask the mods to make an event to cut off Suri from its allies. I just said it made no sense that the Persians were not rebelling against the Arabs. How was I supposed to know UIN would attack me the very next day? .-. RexImperio (talk) 17:30, October 15, 2014 (UTC)

It's a two front war for Yemen so according to war rules

2 Front War = -5

Definitely not -15 RexImperio (talk) 18:26, October 15, 2014 (UTC)

Also, please explain the -11 you keep adding to Yemens motive RexImperio (talk) 18:33, October 15, 2014 (UTC)

Btw, an alliance existed between Yemen and Danascus. We were also UIN members and Sulimen III I believe married the Yemeni Princess and gave birth to the current Sulimen IV of Damascus. So not only will the war be very unpopular in Damascus and Mansurriyya, they are also breaking an alliance RexImperio (talk) 18:37, October 15, 2014 (UTC)

Finally, Damascus get 15 for location because their capitals that is Damascus and Baghdad definitely are not next to location of war. I think that term should only exist for states having capitals near your border. RexImperio (talk) 18:42, October 15, 2014 (UTC)

Finally, it could also be said that it is a two front war for Mansurriyya since Mansurriyyan land in Africa (Nobody cared to add it to map but it is there) will also be attacked by Yemeni Iritriyā but I won't argue on this for now.

Oh and before you try to find a loophole

Every decade a new Sultan is chosen amongst the members of the United Islamic Nations to act as the Head of the alliance and to represent the alliance at international forums.

This is from the UIN Page. There is also no mention of Yemens removal of some sort or anything prior to war so it does count as breaking an alliance RexImperio (talk) 19:00, October 15, 2014 (UTC)

Small nitpicking, but Damascus needs its location bonuses. Should amount to just another point, but still needs to happen.

"<font color="#AACC99">This is not your grave  but you are welcome in it. " 19:40, October 15, 2014 (UTC)

So... Yemen did not die. Dacia rightfully claimed ALL of Yemeni Africa, and Swank I signed my treaty first so its mine. Stephanus rex (talk) 00:59, October 16, 2014 (UTC)

The point I was trying to prove as that Yemen does not die and people should not be allowed to edit the map if they have not made the algorithm RexImperio (talk) 03:19, October 16, 2014 (UTC)

Dacia (Attacker)
Total: 75
 * Location: 15+15+15+15 = 15
 * Location Bonus:
 * Tactical Advantage: 7
 * Nations: Dacia (L), East Hungary (L), Halych (LV), Kiev (LV) = 16/11=1
 * Military Development: +20 (Dacia) +20(E. Hungary) +20(Halych) +20(Kiev)+33(Mods) =113/43=3
 * Military mods: +10(Hasnt lost any of previous 3 wars),+10(Naval dominance),+5(More Total Troops),+5(Nation fully mobilized),+3(Moderately sized armed forces)
 * Economic Development: +20 +20 +20 +20 +18= 98/56=3
 * Economic mods: +10(Much larger economy), +5(Larger trade empire), +3(Economic golden age)
 * Expansion: n/a
 * Infrastructure: n/a
 * Motive: 37/4=9
 * Dacia:7+4
 * E. Hungary:3+4
 * Halych:3+4
 * Kiev:3+4
 * Motive Modifiers: +5 morale
 * Chance: 0
 * Edit count:
 * UTC: =
 * Total:
 * Nation Age: +0
 * Population: +8 +10 = +18
 * Participation: +10
 * Number of Troops: 70,000/15,000 = +5
 * Number of Ships: 120/30=4
 * Recent Wars:

Yemeni Africa (Defender)
Total: 48
 * Location: 25+25+20=23
 * Location Bonus:+0
 * Tactical Advantage: 2
 * Nations: Yemen (L), Iritrea (LV), Al Somal (LV)= 11/16=0
 * Military Development: = 16+16+16-5=43
 * Military Mods: -5(Much Smaller Armed forces)
 * Economic Development: = 6+16+16-2=36
 * Economic Mods: -2(Smaller Economy)
 * Expansion: n/a
 * Infrastructure: 22
 * Motive:22/3=7
 * Yemen:5+4
 * Iritrea:5+4
 * Al-Somal:5+4
 * Motive Modifiers:-5
 * Chance: 0
 * Edit count: 0
 * UTC: =
 * Total:
 * Nation Age: = -5
 * Population: 6
 * Participation: +10
 * Number of Troops: 15,000/70,000 = +0
 * Number of Ships: 30/120=0
 * Recent Wars: -15 concurrent war,-2 recent war
 * Vassals and Puppets: 0

Result
48 vs 75 ((75/123)*2)-1=0.2195 (21.95%)*(1-(1/(2*2))=16.46%

Discussion
16.46% of All Yemeni Lands Fall in 2 Years

282+110+3090+25+3=African 3510

16619+155+24+5=Arabian 16803

Total: 20313

20313*0.1646 = 3344 pixels

And as both African states are Vassals and therefore are 1 Pixel Won = 2 Pixels Taken both can be taken. Along with trade rights, etc.

Sincerely, and with some measure of regret: Stephanus rex (talk) 01:28, October 2, 2014 (UTC)

Let's ignore the fact that I absolutely dislike Dacia attacking Yemen, I do have to ask, how is Dacia getting golden economic age? Sure it's got stuff going for it, but I'm not sure if it's really 'golden'. Also your tactical advantage should be 6 not 7 since most of your army is probably arriving by sea. And I'm not even sure if your economy is 'much larger' with the UIN and stuff Yemen isn't really an economical wreck. That's it for now. <font color="#50E0F0">Sky <font color="#50FF60">Green <font color="A00000">24 (Party,quotes) 13:24, October 2, 2014 (UTC)

Ok Sky, I will give you the Golden Age and Tactical, as I used Feud's as a base, and added 5 for siege. Also Yemen is being attacked by several of the UIN states, and has less than 1/5th my population; and much of their's is nomadic herders, and seeing as a large portion of Yemen is Arabian Desert I would say Dacia has a much larger economy.

Yemen iirc has Iritriyan gold desposits and trades with european nations (like Croatia) and being in multiple wars doesn't drain the economy instantly. So I still think it should be just larger economy. <font color="#50E0F0">Sky <font color="#50FF60">Green <font color="A00000">24 (Party,quotes) 13:14, October 3, 2014 (UTC)

How are you transporting all those troops and supplis for the war? The cannal should only allow small ships? Saamwiil, the Humble 08:20, October 5, 2014 (UTC)

Tibet
Total: 48
 * Location: 20 (Looking at Lhasa on a map, it looks this distance from their targets of Ladakh and Kangra)
 * Location BONUS: N/A
 * Tactical Advantage: 2
 * Nations: Tibet (L), Nepal (MCV) , Chutiya (MCV) , Shan States (MVC) = 3.5 = 4
 * Military Development: (Scar needs to input this)
 * Military Modifiers: -2?
 * Nation is fully mobilized for war: +5?
 * Much Smaller Armed Forces: -5
 * Nation has a small armed forces: -2?
 * Economic Development: (Scar needs to input this)
 * Economic Modifiers: -2
 * Smaller Economy: -2
 * Expansion: n/a
 * Infrastructure: n/a
 * Motive: 3 - 3 =0
 * Tibet: Economic: +3
 * Nepal: Aiding Ally: +3
 * Chutiya: Aiding Ally: +3
 * Shan States: Aiding Ally: +3
 * Motive Modifiers: -3 (Until chance is done)
 * Mostly Non-Democratic Nations: -3
 * High or Low Morale: +/- 6
 * Chance: 0
 * Edit count: 2,206
 * UTC: 1*7*1*1 = 7
 * Total: 2,206 / 7 = 315.1428571429 * pi = 990.05 0 4848313
 * Nation Age: 5
 * Population: +7 (1.8 million was the agreed upon amount?)
 * Participation: +10
 * Number of Troops: 20,000 (5,000 more than Edge's count)
 * Recent Wars: 0

Indian League
Total: 149
 * Location: 23 (Average between Kangra, Ladakh, and Multan)
 * Location BONUS:
 * Tactical Advantage: 1
 * Nations: Kangra (L), Ladakh (L), Multan (L), Sindh (MC), Dhundara (MC), Urdustan (MC), Lanka (SC) = 4.85 = 5
 * Military Development: 100 + 8 = 108
 * Kangra: 14
 * Ladakh: 14
 * Multan: 14
 * Sindh: 14
 * Dhundara: 14
 * Urdustan: 10
 * Lanka: 20
 * ​Military Modifiers: 8
 * More Total Troops Than Enemy: +5
 * Nation is Fully Mobilized For War: +5
 * Moderately Sized Armed Forces: +3
 * Economic Development: 100 + 15 = 115
 * Kangra: 14
 * Ladakh: 14
 * Multan: 14
 * Sindh: 14
 * Dhundara: 14
 * Urdustan: 10
 * Lanka: 20
 * ​Economic Modifiers: 15
 * Much Larger Economy: +10
 * Larger Trade: +5
 * Expansion: n/a
 * Infrastructure: 18 
 * Kangra: 6
 * Ladakh: 6
 * Multan: 6
 * Motive: 4.7 = 5 + 3 = 8
 * Kangra: Defending Core/Heartland from possibly fatal attack: +9
 * Ladakh: 'Defending Core/Heartland from possibly fatal attack: +9
 * Multan: 'Aiding Ally: +3
 * Sindh: 'Aiding Ally: +3
 * Dhundara: 'Aiding Ally: +3
 * Urdustan: 'Aiding Ally: +3
 * Lanka: 'Aiding Ally: +3
 * Motive Modifiers: +3
 * Mostly Non-Democratic Nations: -3
 * High Morale: +6
 * Chance: 5
 * Edit count: 2,206
 * UTC: 1*7*1*1 = 7
 * Total: 2,206 / 7 = 315.1428571429 * pi = 990.0 5 04848313
 * Nation Age: 4 (Dangit Dhundara)
 * Population: 8 + 20 = 28
 * ​More than ten times pop: +20
 * Participation: +10
 * Number of Troops: 940,000 / 20,000 = 47
 * Urdustan: 250,000
 * Ladakh: 45,000
 * Kangra: 45,000
 * Multan: 250,000
 * Sindh: 200,000
 * Dhundara: 150,000
 * Recent Wars: 0

Disscussion
I know that Scar is stupid enough to attack India, but who is stupid enough to actually let him do it? <font color="#50E0F0">Sky <font color="#50FF60">Green <font color="A00000">24 (Party,quotes) 12:18, October 3, 2014 (UTC)

Sky, I wanted to attack 2 very small nations not the whole league. How else am I going to get land if nobody wants to PU with me.

Well, because you attacked one, now all of them are after you. I believe it's a part of the Indian League treaty. Saturn (Talk/Blog) 12:33, October 3, 2014 (UTC)

I told him it was a bad idea, because even if I didn't join, the Hindu nations would, but he kept propagating that he had over five million in population, and a 250,000 man military force when several others explicitly told him this is false. He wanted to stop the war, but as you know, you cannot start a war and cancel it when you think you won't win...However, in the effort of fairness, he was allowed to retcon it. At the time, only Fed and I were on, and we both decided our decisions were biased, so Crim was summoned. That is when my internet died. When I had returned, Scar said "I have a 40 to 60 % chance of winning I think", and then he left, so I'm assuming that Crim did not agree to his retcon, and Scar does not understand the gravity of what he has started. &#34;SO SAYETH THE EAGLE&#34; - Fascist Eagle ಠ_ಠ (talk) 12:40, October 3, 2014 (UTC)

I do hope someone finishes this algo so tibet finally falls. <font color="#50E0F0">Sky <font color="#50FF60">Green <font color="A00000">24 (Party,quotes) 13:07, October 3, 2014 (UTC)

Would I be considered a biased/unfair mod if I finished it? &#34;SO SAYETH THE EAGLE&#34; - Fascist Eagle ಠ_ಠ (talk) 03:38, October 4, 2014 (UTC)

If Urdustan is joining, Lanka is going to support the war effort. Hue hue hue. Don't mess with India. NicDonalds, Beginning Editor Talk  04:07, October 4, 2014 (UTC)

As an allied country of one Indian country and considering Lanka is joining, Ayutthaya is also going to support the war effort and I will also be able to open a front on the Shan states area owned by Tibet. Aternix!? 07:50, October 4, 2014 (UTC)

Eip I think it'd be fair, most people do their own algos however I do suggest a counter-attack <font color="#50E0F0">Sky <font color="#50FF60">Green <font color="A00000">24 (Party,quotes) 08:31, October 4, 2014 (UTC)

I filled out some parts of this. <font color="#191970"> I am on the edge...  The EdgeofNight ╚╩o.o╩╝ 

Prussia
Well, today was weird.

I heard something about scarlet outlaw wanting Poland and I freaked out. We all know of scars reputation in map games, and it's not so bright. But since we all know that MS is posting for Ed, I relaxed. This lead me to the attention of another nation, such as Prussia, which is seemingly open for the taking. Now, with all due respect, we don't want another scar touching this nation do we? This is why I ask to take Prussia under my wing to protect it from people like scar. A couple other mods have agreed, and MP Reme is ok under his wing, so I'm here just to get an approval from the other mods. - Saturn (Talk/Blog) 22:39, October 4, 2014 (UTC)

It looks like Prussia is taken. Mscoree (talk) 22:41, October 4, 2014 (UTC)

By whom? Saturn (Talk/Blog) 22:46, October 4, 2014 (UTC)

Nehilaw and Friends
Total: 154
 * Location: 20
 * Tactical Advantage: 5
 * Nations: L(Nehilaw), L(Bodewamik),L(Aashinaabeg), L (Twightee), LV (Nemaska), LV (Chisasibi), LV (Gojijiwininag), LV (North Ojibwe), LV (Piankeshaw)  = 33 -3 (Leading vassals)30/9 = 3
 * Military Development: 78 +10 (No previous lost wars) +10 +5 (More total troops)+5 (Fully mobilized)= 108/2= +54
 * Economic Development: 78 +5 (Larger economy) +5(Larger trade/Colonial empire)= 84/2 = 42
 * Expansion: 0
 * Infrastructure: 0
 * Motive: 7+3+3+3+3+3+3+3+3= 31/9 = 3
 * Motive Modifiers:
 * Chance: 5
 * Total: 583/18*pi (3.14159265359) = 101.75269
 * Nation Age: 0
 * Population: 8 + 2 = 10
 * Participation: +10
 * Number of Troops: 15,000+5000+5000/4000=4
 * Number of Ships:2/0=2
 * Recent Wars: -5
 * Vassals and Puppets:

Illinikew Remnants
Total: 52
 * Location: 25
 * Location Bonus: 0
 * Tactical Advantage: 2
 * Nations: L(lllinikew) = 5
 * Military Development: 4-2=2/108=0
 * Economic Development: 4 -2= 2/84=0
 * Expansion: 0
 * Infrastructure: 4
 * Motive: 9
 * Motive Modifiers: -6, -2 (Low morale, gov. not supported)
 * Chance: 2
 * Nation Age: 0
 * Population: 6
 * Participation: +10
 * Number of Troops: 4000/15000=0
 * Recent Wars: 0
 * Vassals and Puppets: 0
 * Multiple wars: 0

Result
((154/(52+154))*2)-1 = 0.49514563106 x 1.5 (Civil disarray rules) = 0.74271844659 (0.74271844659 )*(1-1/(2x1)) = 37.02  In one year, a government can be reestablished, but this time will be multiplied by 2 according to rules, meaning a two-year war.

Discussion
Feel free to edit. Shikata ga nai! 23:40, October 4, 2014 (UTC)

Imperium of Heaven (Aggressor)

 * Location: Next to the location of the war (+20) = +20
 * Tactical advantage: Open fields (+1), siege equipment (+5) = +6
 * Nations: Imperium of Heaven (L+5) = +5/1 = +5
 * Military development: Development (+14), more troops (+5), moderately sized armed forces (+3) = +22
 * Economic development: 0
 * Motive: Enforcing political hegemony (+7), non-democratic government supported by people (+4), morale high (+5) = +16
 * Chance: (9980/(1*2*6))*pi = 2612.75789024 = +7
 * Nation age: Young nation (-5) = -5
 * Population: 3,750,000 (+7) = +7
 * Recent wars: +0 = +0
 * Participation: +10 = +10
 * Number of troops: 32,000/10,000 = +3.2 = +3
 * Treaty breaking: +0 = +0
 * Popular revolt bonus: Total*1.5
 * Total: +81*1.5 = 122

Mongol Khanate (Defender)

 * Location: At the location of the war (+25) = +25
 * Tactical advantage: +0 = +0
 * Nations: Mongol Khanate (L+5) = +5/1 = +5
 * Military development: Development (+0), small armed forces (-2), much smaller armed forces (-5), nation was not initially mobilized (-10) = -17
 * Economic development: Development (+2), smaller economy (-2) = +0
 * Infrastructure: Development (+0) = +0
 * Expansion: +0 = +0
 * Motive: Defending from fatal attack (+9), non-democratic nation supported by people (+4) = +13
 * Chance: (74/(1*2*6))*pi = 19.3731546971 = +3
 * Nation age: Mature nation (+5) = +5
 * Population: 3,250,000 (+7) = +7
 * Recent wars: +0 = +0
 * Participation: +10 = +10
 * Number of troops: 10,000/32,000 = 0.3125 = +0
 * Treaty breaking: +0 = +0
 * Total: +51

Result
Total and decisive Imperial victory. Mongolia is overrun as the capital falls within two years. Mongolia is incorporated into the Imperium of Heaven.

Mods are the only ones allowed to grant the 1.5 modifier, so I don't think you have the right to use it. Moreover you can only have one motive in the algo (either choose hegemony or culture). Also development scores are divided now (larger divided by smaller side) and NPC/inactive nations expand by the infra>eco>mil prefrence, meaning Mongolia'd have 7 infra, 7 eco and 6 mil scores. Also the result should be calculated and the amount of years lasting should be there too. I have no more complaints, for now. <font color="#50E0F0">Sky <font color="#50FF60">Green <font color="A00000">24 (Party,quotes) 09:59, October 5, 2014 (UTC)

Oh and I highly doubt that you have a much larger economy. Larger perhaps, much larger no. <font color="#50E0F0">Sky <font color="#50FF60">Green <font color="A00000">24 (Party,quotes) 11:50, October 5, 2014 (UTC)

...Mongolia is a player nation. PitaKang- My Life for Aiur! En Taro Tassadar 12:53, October 5, 2014 (UTC)

Can confirm that Mongolia is a player nation, and that Pita does have the 1.5 modifier. The rest, I don't know.

Carry on.

"<font color="#AACC99">This is not your grave  but you are welcome in it. " 17:01, October 5, 2014 (UTC)

Tibet
Total: 54
 * Location: 25
 * Location BONUS: N/A
 * Tactical Advantage: 1
 * Nations: Tibet (L), Nepal (MCV) , Chutiya (MCV) , Shan States (MVC) = 3.5 = 4
 * Military Development: 74 - 2 = 72/Alot = 0
 * Military Modifiers: -2?
 * Nation is fully mobilized for war: +5
 * Much Smaller Armed Forces: -5
 * Nation has a small armed forces: -2
 * Economic Development: 74 - 2 = 72/alot = 0
 * Economic Modifiers: -2
 * Smaller Economy: -2
 * Expansion: n/a
 * Infrastructure: 6 (I assume)
 * Motive: 4.5 = 5 - 9 = -4
 * Tibet: Defending Core/Heartland from Possibly Fatal Attack: +9
 * Nepal: Aiding Ally: +3
 * Chutiya: Aiding Ally: +3
 * Shan States: Aiding Ally: +3
 * Motive Modifiers: -9 
 * Mostly Non-Democratic Nations: -3
 * Low Morale: - 6
 * Chance: 0
 * Edit count: 2,206
 * UTC: 1*7*1*1 = 7
 * Total: 2,206 / 7 = 315.1428571429 * pi = 990.05 0 4848313
 * Nation Age: 5
 * Population: +7 (1.8 million was the agreed upon amount?)
 * Participation: +10
 * Number of Troops: 20,000
 * Recent Wars: 0

Indian League
Total: 153
 * Location: 21 (Average between Kangra, Ladakh, Jaunpur, and Multan)
 * Location BONUS: N/A
 * Tactical Advantage: 1
 * Nations: Kangra (L), Ladakh (L), Multan (L), Jaunpur (L), Sindh (MC), Dhundara (MC), Urdustan (MC), Lanka (SC) = 4.92 = 5
 * Military Development: 116 + 8 = 124/72 = 1.7 = 2
 * Kangra: 14
 * Ladakh: 14
 * Multan: 14
 * Sindh: 14
 * Jaunpur: 14
 * Dhundara: 14
 * Urdustan: 12
 * Lanka: 20
 * ​Military Modifiers: 8
 * More Total Troops Than Enemy: +5
 * Nation is Fully Mobilized For War: +5
 * Moderately Sized Armed Forces: +3
 * Economic Development: 116 + 15 = 131/72 = 1.8 = 2
 * Kangra: 14
 * Ladakh: 14
 * Multan: 14
 * Sindh: 14
 * Dhundara: 14
 * Jaunpur: 14
 * Urdustan: 12
 * Lanka: 20
 * ​Economic Modifiers: 15
 * Much Larger Economy: +10
 * Larger Trade: +5
 * Expansion: n/a
 * Infrastructure: N/A
 * Motive: 3.5 = 4 + 3 = 7
 * Kangra: Economic + 3
 * Ladakh: Economic: +3
 * Multan: 'Aiding Ally: +3
 * Sindh: 'Aiding Ally: +3
 * Dhundara: 'Aiding Ally: +3
 * Urdustan: Enforcing Political Hegemony: +7
 * Lanka: 'Aiding Ally: +3
 * Motive Modifiers: +3
 * Mostly Non-Democratic Nations: -3
 * High Morale: +6
 * Chance: 5
 * Edit count: 2,206
 * UTC: 1*7*1*1 = 7
 * Total: 2,206 / 7 = 315.1428571429 * pi = 990.0 5 04848313
 * Nation Age: 4 (Dangit Dhundara)
 * Population: 8 + 20 = 28
 * ​More than ten times pop: +20
 * Participation: +10
 * Number of Troops: 1,310,000 / 20,000 = 65
 * Urdustan: 350,000
 * Ladakh: 55,000
 * Kangra: 55,000
 * Multan: 300,000
 * Sindh: 300,000
 * Dhundara: 250,000
 * Recent Wars: 0

Discussion
I dont think I was added as an aiding ally. Aternix!? 23:27, October 5, 2014 (UTC)

He didnt add you in the war cause he didnt want you involved in the war. You would need a seperate Algo and would need to fight Urdustan and Spain for the Shan State.

How come Lanka got involved? And I also never read about Spain fighting in the war. Aternix!? 23:59, October 5, 2014 (UTC)

Spain and Urdustan have an agreement regarding the Shan State.

Imperium of Heaven (Aggressor)

 * Location: 20
 * Tactical advantage: No defenses, open fields (+1), siege equipment (+5) = +6
 * Nations: Imperium of Heaven (L) = +5/1 = +5
 * Military development: Development (+14), more troops (+5), moderately sized armed forces (+5), fully mobilized (+5) = 29/7=4
 * Economic development: 0
 * Motive: Attacking to enforce political hegemony (+7), non-democratic government supported by people (+4), morale high (+5) = +16
 * Chance: (9,986/(2*1*3))*pi = 5228.65737312 = +7
 * Nation age: Young nation (-5) = -5
 * Population: 8,000,000 (+7), five times larger population (+10) = +17
 * Recent wars: Leadership (-2) = -2
 * Participation: +10
 * Number of troops: 25,000/3,000 = 8.333 = +8
 * Treaty breaking: +0
 * Revolt bonus: *1.5
 * Total: 59*1.5=89

Uyghur Khaganate (Defender)

 * Location: At the location of the war (+25) = +25
 * Tactical advantage: +1
 * Nations: Uyghur Khanate (L+5) = +5/1 = +5
 * Military development: 14, small armed forces (-2), much smaller armed forces (-5) = 7, 0
 * Economic development: 14
 * Infrastructure development: 6
 * Motive: Defending heartland from possibly fatal attack (+9) = +9
 * Chance: +3
 * Nation age: Mature nation (+5) = +5
 * Population: 1,500,000 (+7) = +7
 * Recent wars: +0
 * Participation: +10
 * Number of troops: 3,000/25,000 = 0.12 = +0
 * Treaty breaking: +0
 * Total: +85

Dacia (Attacker)
Total: 72
 * Location: 20+20= 20
 * Location Bonus:
 * Tactical Advantage: 6
 * Nations: Dacia (L), East Hungary (L)=10/10=0
 * Military Development: +20 (Dacia) +20(E. Hungary) +23(Mods) = 63/15=4
 * Military mods: +10(Hasnt lost any of previous 3 wars),+5(More Total Troops),+5(Nation fully mobilized),+3(Moderately sized armed forces)
 * Economic Development: +20 +20 +15= 55/14=4
 * Economic mods: +10(Much larger economy), +5(Larger trade empire)
 * Expansion: n/a
 * Infrastructure: n/a
 * Motive: 18/2=9
 * Dacia:7+4
 * E. Hungary:3+4
 * Motive Modifiers:
 * Chance: 0
 * Edit count:
 * UTC: =
 * Total:
 * Nation Age: +0
 * Population: +8 +10 = +18
 * Participation: +10
 * Number of Troops: 70,000/15,000 = +5
 * Recent Wars:-4

Kiev (Defender)
Total: 41x1.5=61.5
 * Location: 25 = 25
 * Location Bonus:+0
 * Tactical Advantage: 2
 * Nations: Kiev (L)5/10=0
 * Military Development: = 20-5=15=0
 * Military Mods: -5(Much Smaller Armed forces)
 * Economic Development: = 16-2=14=0
 * Economic Mods: -2(Smaller Economy)
 * Expansion: n/a
 * Infrastructure: 7
 * Motive:9
 * Kiev:5+4
 * Motive Modifiers:
 * Chance: 0
 * Edit count: 0
 * UTC: =
 * Total:
 * Nation Age: = -10
 * Population: 6
 * Participation: +10
 * Number of Troops: 15,000/70,000 = +0
 * Recent Wars: -2
 * Vassals and Puppets: 0

Result
72 > 61.5 A large battle in Kiev ends in the crushing defeat of a Kievan army. The leaders of the revolt are captured and impaled to serve as an example to the world. Kiev is stripped of its southern regions for compensation, as that territory has a large Romanian population. Stephanus rex (talk) 02:24, October 7, 2014 (UTC)

Discussion
Both of your northern vassals are revolting, not just Kiev. Mscoree (talk) 10:27, October 7, 2014 (UTC)

I know. Stephanus rex (talk) 22:21, October 7, 2014 (UTC)

So you need to add them both. Mscoree (talk) 22:36, October 7, 2014 (UTC)

And if this army is only in Kiev? Stephanus rex (talk) 22:54, October 7, 2014 (UTC)

Yeah uhh if there are 2 nations per side then both get 1 point and I think Kiev's motive would be 9 not 5. I think that's it <font color="#50E0F0">Sky <font color="#50FF60">Green <font color="A00000">24 (Party,quotes) 08:08, October 8, 2014 (UTC)

There's two states who raised troops, regardless of where the troops are located. Mscoree (talk) 10:25, October 8, 2014 (UTC)

So 2 vassals ending their vassalage, and then my invasion of ONE of those states means I am fighting both? Because if its one rebelion then it should be one state. Stephanus rex (talk) 22:11, October 8, 2014 (UTC)

I considered putting this in the original comment but decided not to. I was assuming you wanted to keep both through this algorithm. If you are only invading one that is fine, just know that you can only take one. Mscoree (talk) 22:25, October 8, 2014 (UTC)

I only have to take one, see my Diplomacy in 1648. Stephanus rex (talk) 23:22, October 8, 2014 (UTC)

In that case it's fine. Mscoree (talk) 23:28, October 8, 2014 (UTC)

Japan (Attacker)
​*+15 close from the location of the war Result: 93
 * +3 Minor Power
 * ​+5 Supported attack
 * Military Development: +6
 * ​Has Naval dominance: +10
 * More total troops than enemy: +5
 * Economic Development: +4
 * Larger Economy: +5 (Added Before Division)
 * Expansion: -3 (Japanese Unification War)
 * Larger Economy: +5 (added before divsion)
 * Geographic modifiers
 * N/A
 * Motive
 * Attacking to enforce political hegemony: +7
 * Modifiers
 * Non-democratic Government supported by people: + 4
 * Troop Morale high +5
 * Population
 * 22,000,000/1,500,000 = 20
 * Number of Troops: +2
 * 6,000/3,000 = 2
 * Recent Wars: -2 (Second Japanese Unification War)
 * Chance: 7
 * 755 = x
 * 04:01 = 4 = y
 * 755 (x) / 4 (y) = 188.75 x π = 592.675

Aniu (Defender)
Result: 51
 * ​+25 At the location of the war
 * ​+1 No Power
 * ​+3 Ambush/Non conventional warfare
 * Military Develpoment: 7.0 / 2 = 3.5 NPC Bonus
 * Smaller armed forces: -3
 * Economic Bounus: 7.0 / 2 = 3.5 (NPC Bonus)
 * Smaller Economy: -2 (added before divison)
 * Infrastructure: 7.0 / 2 = 3.5 (NPC Bonus)
 * Geographic Modifiers
 * N/A
 * Expansion: 0
 * Motive
 * Defending from attack that will wipe out nation and culture: + 10 (pre-nuclear era)
 * Modifiers
 * Non-democratic Government supported by people: + 4
 * Population
 * 1,500,000/22,000,000 = 0
 * Number of Troops: +0.5
 * 3,000/6,000 = 0.5
 * Recent Wars: 0

Result
((93+5) / 91 + (51-2)) = 50.05

Japan topples the Ainu In 2 years, and turns the nation into a vassal.

Discussion
Did the algo all by myself using feuds new algo. This is my first algo so don't murder me if I get something wrong. Saturn (Talk/Blog) 04:30, October 7, 2014 (UTC)

Pskov (Attacker)
Total: 55
 * Location: +20
 * Tactical Advantage: +6
 * Attacker: +1
 * Siege Engines: +5
 * Nations per side: Pskov(L), Narva(LV) = 9/2=5
 * Military: = 1
 * Score: 36+4
 * Less Total Troops: -3
 * Moderately Sized Army : 3
 * Naval Dominance: 10
 * Calculation: 40+10+3-3/(negative) = 50/43=1
 * Economy: 1
 * Score: 36+0
 * Larger Economy: 5
 * Economic Golden Age: 3
 * Calculation: 36+3+5/38 = 44/43 = 1
 * Locations Bonus: 0
 * Motive: 10
 * Pskov: 7(hegemony)
 * Narva: 3(aid)
 * +5(democratic)
 * +5 High Morale
 * Avg = 20/2 = 10
 * Expansion: +0
 * Nation Age: -5
 * Pskov: -5
 * Narva; -5
 * Participation: +10
 * Number of Troops: 30 000, 0
 * Chance: 0
 * Number of Posts: 51
 * UTC time: 20:45 = 2*4*5=40
 * Calculation: 40% of 51 = 20.4
 * 20.4*pi = 64.0884901
 * Population: +7
 * base:+7
 * Modifier: +0
 * Recent Wars: +0

Prussia (Defender)
Total: 63
 * Location: +22
 * Tactical Advantage: +1
 * Nations per side: Prussia(L), Livonia(L), Courland(LV), Osel-Wiek(LV)= 18/4=5
 * Military: 32+3=45,0
 * Economy: 38+5=43,0
 * Infrastructure:
 * Motive: 5
 * Prussia: 9
 * Livonia: 5
 * Estland: 5
 * Courland: 3
 * Osel-Wiek: 3
 * Low morale(low motive, lower dev scores): -6
 * Non-democratic coalition: -3
 * 25/5=5
 * Expansion: 0
 * Participation: +10
 * Chance: 8
 * Edits: 3332
 * Time: 10:23 = 1*2*3 = 6
 * Calculation:6% of 3332=199.92
 * 199.92*pi = 628.067203
 * Population: +9
 * Number: +7
 * Modifier: +2
 * Recent Wars: +0
 * Nation Age: 0
 * Troops = 30,000/30 000, 3

Result
Pskov Wins, is of Obvious,

Pskov can take at most  ((67/106)-0.5)*2*100% = 20% of Prussia

After 3 years of warfare this ammounts to 18.00% Map

Discussion
Prussia has development scores, I know that for a fact, I'm also sure they would have a larger economy. I am that guy (talk) 02:48, October 8, 2014 (UTC)

Not really... During the shitstorms that engulfed Scandinavia, Livonia and Prussia Pskov gained fame and favour in the west, pretty much he has relations with France, Scandinavia, The Dutch (if i recall correctly that being old) Spain and Britannia (not sure of this one either) Prussia has only with austria, you and poland). He's probably larger due to being relatively more estable. Sine dei gloriem &#34;Ex Initio Terrae&#34; (talk) 03:48, October 8, 2014 (UTC)

I do too believe Prussia should have scores, a larger army and probably Polish aid depending on that treaty they signed. Also Pskov might have grown, but Prussia has larger overseas territory. Let's not forget that. So naval dominance might be far-fetched. <font color="#50E0F0">Sky <font color="#50FF60">Green <font color="A00000">24 (Party,quotes) 08:11, October 8, 2014 (UTC)

Also Pskov has fairly recently acquired more possessions, the whole golden age might be a bit totally wrong. I understand Lx overestimating Pskov, but Sine is confusing me. <font color="#50E0F0">Sky <font color="#50FF60">Green <font color="A00000">24 (Party,quotes) 08:13, October 8, 2014 (UTC)

Well I wasn't expecting this. Since I have been posting I should have scores right? Harvenard2 (talk) 10:23, October 8, 2014 (UTC)

Prussia posted every turn "We dedicate this turn to economy". Which means that they get all Economy, and No Military. That's just jhow it works-Lx (leave me a message) 11:26, October 8, 2014 (UTC)

A quick search determined that to be false. He has alternated for the most part. Mscoree (talk) 11:45, October 8, 2014 (UTC)

Also Prussia should get the +5 Larger colonial empire bonus. And Pskov can't get high morale since Prussia's side has higher dev scores in economy. <font color="#50E0F0">Sky <font color="#50FF60">Green <font color="A00000">24 (Party,quotes) 12:08, October 8, 2014 (UTC)

Im not going to waste my time counting pixels in colonies. If you noticed, that +5 is given to the largest colonial/trade empire. take that into consideration, and the propper recipiant is clear. Also, Ms, I took your advice and rechecked the military and econ counts for prussia, this time in more detail(instead of seeing copy-paste past few turns and asssuming copy paste for all), and I fixed the scores, thanks for pointing that out. High morale only requires a higher score in one category. Its the low morale that requires lower in both, and triggers for any of the requirements, while high morale only requires one category but also high motive (>5) and high chance (>4)-Lx (leave me a message) 13:13, October 8, 2014 (UTC)

When I get home I will count the pixels for you, and I will check for other stuff. I noticed a few things in the algorithm that need to be fixed, on both sides. Mscoree (talk) 14:46, October 8, 2014 (UTC)

Okay I added some fixes: Mscoree (talk) 19:20, October 8, 2014 (UTC)
 * Prussia has a larger colonial empire, approximately 2000 pixels versus Pskov's 500.
 * Nations per side is divided by number of nations.
 * Added Prussia's expansion, five and five.
 * Added Prussia's motives.
 * I have never seen the motives divided before modifiers, and I ask for confirmation on this. I am almost positive modifiers go in first, as that's how it has always been done, but Feud has forgotten about rules before.
 * Prussia's nation age is zero since Prussia last changed its government in 1594, and its vassals last changed its government after the Livonian War. Pskov remains a -5 because of the war in Narva.

The attack as it stands is nonfatal, giving prussia a +5 in motive. Alright, Prussia's age is zero, fine, sure, hmmm...didnt think the livonia war was that long ago, whatever, the +5 is for bigger trade/colonial empire, so eve if the colonies are nominally bigger, Pskov survived and thrived on its trade empire, which is bigger than livonia and its colonies by far, so we should get the point...PRussia only expanded stuff 9 turns before the war, and I believe it was 5 for economy and 4 for military. Pskov had no alliance with Prussia to begin with. Fighting on the same side of a war does not constitute being an ally...for the ammount of troops you need to ask whoever owns Prussia, so for not I think that's good. Unless Prussia wants to leave Livonia to tis fate, I believe nondemocratic coalitions get -3, and Prussia is not going to die completely from this attack. I used the time and editcount when Harv edited here as his "akgnowledgement of war" for chance.-Lx (leave me a message) 20:15, October 8, 2014 (UTC)

We previously decided in practice that the colonial empire bonus is calculated by number of pixels. I don't believe we'd make an exception for you, and as it stands pixels is the easiest, most neutral way of gauging size of colonial empire. They get the 9 simply because they are defending, and it is quite obvious that it is (attempted to be) fatal. You wrote just above this section that you planned to destroy them. That's as fatal as it gets. Just because at this moment the attack is no longer as severe does not change the intention; the motive remains the same. From what I could tell it appeared you had an alliance. I read a few past turns in which it was written that an alliance was accepted, right before your coordinated war efforts. They don't get nondemocratic coalition because this isn't a coalition. It's a single player nation. Mscoree (talk) 23:33, October 8, 2014 (UTC)

I put I'm killing prussia because that;s what the algo previously stated...defenders dont get an automatic +9 unless the attack would either 1. Kill their nation or 2. Kill their nation without it. That's what potentially fatal is. This attack is obviously not. This wont kill their nation. Also, if they arent a coalition, remove all the Leaders excluding Prussia, or I guess Livonia because that's where I would be taking territory from. Coalition Rules apply to any war with multiple leaders I believe. Nations do not "get the 9 simply because they are defending". that makes no sense...So anyway its like 20% or something. Pskov, as a trade republic, based on trade, with economies driven by trade and banking, such as myself, have a larger trade power than him and his colonies combined. Objectively. I have a larger "empire" from which to draw funds and the like through my trade networks, which include many of the colonies of Borealia.-Lx (leave me a message) 00:01, October 9, 2014 (UTC)

You specifically wrote in your turn that "Pskov must be the only True Nation that dominates the east Baltic", meaning you either plan to annex him or at least annex Livonia (or one of the states). That means if Prussia is not a 9, then Livonia is, so it's the same result and not worth arguing about in the slightest. Furthermore if it's not a 9, then you'd be happy annexing zero states if you win? Coalitions are about player nations. In no other war has any 1v1 warranted a coalition. States can draw from their vassal states, just like their internal vassals, and they are viewed as the sphere of their respective leaders. As I said above, colonial empire is measured by pixel count. I don't care if one pixel is more valuable over the other. The rules say "larger", and the mods have in the past interpreted that as pixel count. In fact that was used to your very advantage in the war with Livonia. Don't tell me you expect me to change the rule, a rule you previously fought for (or at least Non did to me), now that it is working against you. Mscoree (talk) 00:07, October 9, 2014 (UTC)

I dont think dominating a region is the same as owning the entire region. I'm talking about trade/colonial not colonial period. larger colonies do not mean larger trade and I dont remember at all stating that as a reason for me to get points. IN the Livonia war I also had a larger trade empire, regardless of pixels. And who edited the algo, none of what is changed makes any sense at all. My annexation priorities are as follows: Narva expansion+Bahamas, Tallin, and finally Riga. whoever edited the algo, learn how to count please.-Lx (leave me a message) 14:28, October 9, 2014 (UTC)

If each nation's block is not a coalition, then each nation should get their modifyers added to the averagezzation process or whatnot. Truth is, the Vassals in the war are treated exactly like coalitoin powers, their development scores added, their motive taken into account, their war exhaustion counted. all these things that also apply to every coalition. I faught against this, it is true, I faught against vassals being used in this manner, but the general concensus was against me, and so vassals can and are beign used as coalition members. . They are treated exactly like coalition states in the algorithm...except, if you are to be believed...in motive. '''That. Makes. No. Sense.''' Consistency in use is not strong here. Lets get this done. I reiterate my annexation priorities 1. Narva Expansion+Bahamas 2. Republic of Reval(may be reduced in Size) and 3. Republic of Narva(may be reduced in size). either way, fine, ill stop arguing about trade empire because taht will go on forever, my gains are still about the same ammount. So there. Priorities, treaty map in results section. Making of Treaty of Taalin should be priority-Lx (leave me a message) 22:54, October 9, 2014 (UTC)

Firstly, there is consistency, if you follow how it has always been done. Instead of following the already determined rules and practices you are trying to make some, which even if they are generally better, should not and can not be implemented like that. Even if it makes no sense, that is how it is done; this isn't a coalition. If you want to change the rules afterword, then do so afterword. Also I'm not sure how, but you somehow managed to remove a good twenty points from the algorithm, removing stuff that Feud was asked about, such as the averaging. I'd appreciate it if you'd stop deleting things, but rather discussed them. Mscoree (talk) 00:51, October 10, 2014 (UTC)

I "somehow removed 20 points" because whoever did the math previously (*cough* probably harv *cough) screwed up the addition. I redid the summations and it became normal. If you added whatever was on both sides, it didnt equal the total ammounts. THe math was faulty. Anyway, to my main points: Vassals in this case act like coalition members, are counted in Military dev like Coalition members, in Location like Coalition members, in Economic like Coalition members, in Infrastructure like coalition members, in Population like coalition members, in troops like coalition members. and in motive too, they count as coalition members...averaged like everything...if it looks like crap, if it smells like crap, and tastes like crap, it's crap, not granny's cake or cookies. The Modifiers count aswell. That is what I meant by consistency. And its fine to tell somebody to discuss first, but if all people other than me do is edit without discussing, I just want reciprocity. Oh, and on the modifiers, a perfect reason why they are counted after. Say a single nation is fighitng a coalition of 2. That one nation gets a motive of 5, and is democratic, so 5+5/1 = 10. Good so far? great, here's where it gets interesting. A nation and its coalition friend both also get 5 in motive, and are both democratic, earning them 5+5+6. 16/2 = 8 ... so wait. what? a single nation gets more motive for the same exact things? that makes no sense. THis problem is compounded with more coalitoin members. you might say that makes no sense, and that's because it doesn't. They are seperate. The reason why there is a different section with motive, and modifiers, and why there is a difference between coalition and single nation modifiers, is because they were intended to be seperate. if not, then each nation would get a modifier, because it applies to each naiton, each democratic and nondemocratic, but alas, the modifiers do not apply to each nation, they apply to a side, hence the need for a difference between coalition and single nation modifiers. I hope this is sufficient evidence and logic determining the seperate nature of counting modifiers and base motives(base motives being averaged and modifiers being added later, as they apply to the side as a whole and not just single nations), and the fact that Coalitions act like Coalitions and therefore are Coalitions. I agree with the "discuss first and then edit". Let's start that now(I'm looking at you Harv).-Lx (leave me a message) 02:14, October 10, 2014 (UTC)

Because of the recent edit war between the two parties in the war, this algorithm can only be changed by moderators. Fed (talk) 03:48, October 10, 2014 (UTC)

You say you are fixing the math, but in reality you delete a ton of stuff. Stuff that several moderators told me to add, including Feud. I asked me and he confirmed all the stuff, like motive and averaging and what not. At this point it isn't really an edit war, just Lx constantly undoing the edits the mods put up. Lx just say in the discussion what is wrong. I added it up again myself and it appears to be correctly added up. Also this isn't a coalition, no matter what you say. In fact you specifically wrote in your turn this is a 1v1. Coalitions go by player nations. Look at pretty much any past war. You're frankly just ignoring the verdicts of the mods when they don't suit you, and then you're like "let's let the mods decided." Harvenard2 (talk) 21:48, October 10, 2014 (UTC)

Hamburg
Total: 181
 * Location: 20
 * Tactical Advantage: 5
 * Nations per side: Hamburg (L), Mecklenburg (L), Holstein (L), Stade (LV), Münster (LV), Austria (L), Bohemia (L), Luxembourg (L), Silesia (LV), Lusatia (LV) = 42/10 = 4
 * Military Dev.: 190 + 10 + 5 + 5 = 210/5 = 42
 * Hamburg: 10
 * Mecklenburg: 20
 * Holstein: 20
 * Stade: 20
 * Münster: 20
 * Austria: 20
 * Bohemia: 20
 * Luxembourg: 20
 * Silesia: 20
 * Lusatia: 20
 * Economic dev.: 190 + 10 + 5 = 205/8 = 25.6 = ~26
 * Hamburg: 10
 * Mecklenburg: 20
 * Holstein: 20
 * Stade: 20
 * Münster: 20
 * Austria: 20
 * Bohemia: 20
 * Luxembourg: 20
 * Silesia: 20
 * Lusatia: 20
 * Motive: 7
 * Hamburg: 7 + 4
 * Mecklenburg: 3 + 4
 * Holstein: 3 + 4
 * Stade: 3
 * Münster: 3
 * Austria: 5 + 4
 * Bohemia: 3 + 4
 * Luxembourg: 3 + 4
 * Lusatia: 3
 * Silesia: 3
 * Chance:
 * Nation age: 5
 * Population: 8 + 10
 * Troops: 300,000/75,000 = 4
 * Ships: 500/10

Hesse/Westphalia
Total: 42
 * Location: 25
 * Tactical advantage: 1
 * Nations: Hesse (L), Trier (LV), Cologne (LV), Mainz (LV), Palatinate (LV) = 17-4 = 13/5 = 2
 * Military dev: 20 - 5 - 10 = 5 = 0
 * Hesse: 4
 * Trier: 4
 * Cologne: 4
 * Mainz: 4
 * Palantinate: 4
 * Economic dev: 10 - 2 = 8 = 0
 * Hesse: 2
 * Trier: 2
 * Cologne: 2
 * Mainz: 2
 * Palatinate: 2
 * Infrastructure: 1
 * Motive: 7
 * Hesse: 9 + 4
 * Trier: 5
 * Cologne: 5
 * Mainz: 5
 * Palatinate: 5
 * Chance:
 * Nation age:0
 * Population: 7
 * Troops: 75,000/300,000
 * Ships: 10/500

Discussion
NOTE: Hamburg declared war on Westphalia in 1649, and that is when Austria also joined. There is no way a war of this size can only last a year(and nothing in anyone's post in 1649 even mentioned a war end), and trying to make it last a year only to get out of having to deal with a multiple war penalty in the Spanish war is utterly foolish. Cookiedamage (talk) 01:20, October 11, 2014 (UTC)

If the war is too last only one year then Hesse survives. ((181/(181+42)*2)-1 = 0,62331838565022421524663677130045 = 62.33 (62.33)*(1-1/(2*1)) =31.165, if the war lasts two years however (62.33)*(1-1/(2*2)) = 46.7475, This means the war has to last 2 years or else Westphalia will survive. Sine dei gloriem &#34;Ex Initio Terrae&#34; (talk) 01:32, October 11, 2014 (UTC)

^^^, also, since Westphalia was given a +9 in the motives, it is clear that the war was either meant to or definitely going to totally conquer Westphalia. So please don't say "oh well, we weren't aiming to kill westphalia anyways, so thats a 1 year war for us." Cookiedamage (talk) 01:38, October 11, 2014 (UTC)
 * That's my bad, I must've screwed up the numbers when I put them in the equation. I am that guy (talk) 02:02, October 11, 2014 (UTC)

1. This war does not change the result of your war at all. I don't understand why you even care.

2. It says "Defending Core/heartland from possibly fatal attack + 9". 31% is pretty darn close to fatal.

3. You don't have permission to just change the result of the algorithm/edit the year.

Please leave this alone, the war already ended. If it makes you happy I'll remain in the war, but again I have no idea what it has to do with you. I was just trying to prematurely leave the war, not that it takes away concurrent wars or anything like that. Mscoree (talk) 01:44, October 11, 2014 (UTC)

Hispania (Attacker)
Total: 99
 * Location: +20 (Spain) +20 (Italy) +20 (Lombardy) +20 (Modena) +20 (Ravenna) +20 (Savoy) +20 (Genoa) +20 (Croatia) +15 (Morocco)+20 (Hungary) +20 (Bavaria) = +20
 * Tactical Advantage: +6
 * Attacker: +1
 * Siege Engines: +5
 * Nations per side: Spain(L), Italy(L), Lombardy(L), Morocco (L), Modena (LV), Ravenna (LV), Genoa (LV), Savoy (LV), Croatia (L), Hungary (L) Bavaria (L) Greater Saxony (L) Franken (LV) Tawatinsuyu (M) = +4
 * Military: = +20 (Spain) +20 (Italy) +20 (Lombardy) +20 (Modena) +20 (Ravenna) +20 (Savoy) +20 (Genoa) +18 (Croatia) +20 (Hungary), +20 (Morocco) +19 (Bavaria) +19 (Greater Saxony) +19 (Franken) = 293/100=3
 * Moderately Sized Army : 3
 * Naval Dominance: 10
 * More total troops +10
 * Has not lost any of the last 3 wars: +10
 * Mobilized: +5
 * Economy: +20 (Spain) +20 (Italy) +20 (Lombardy) +20 (Modena) +20 (Ravenna) +20 (Savoy) +20 (Genoa) +18 (Croatia) +20 (Hungary) +20 (Morocco) +19 (Bavaria) +19 (Greater Saxony) +19 (Franken) : 270/100 =3
 * Much Larger economy: +10
 * Larger trade/colonial empire: +5
 * Locations Bonus: +21
 * Motive: +4
 * Spain: +7 (Hegemony)
 * Italy: +3
 * Ravenna: +3
 * Modena: +3
 * Savoy: +3
 * Genoa: +3
 * Morocco: +3
 * Croatia: +5 (Similar culture)
 * Hungary: +3
 * Bavaria: +3, +3 = +6
 * Greater Saxony: +3
 * Franken: +3
 * Expansion: +0
 * Nation Age: -3
 * Spain: -5 (this is for the whole empire)
 * Croatia: -5
 * Hungary: -5
 * Bavaria +0
 * Greater Saxony: +0
 * Franken: -5
 * Participation: +10
 * Number of Troops: 420,000= +3
 * Spain: 40,000 +10,000 from New Spain
 * Italy: 50,000
 * Lombardy: 25,000
 * Modena: 10,000
 * Ravenna: 6000
 * Genoa: 12,000
 * Savoy: 10,000
 * Morocco: 15,000
 * Croatia: 60,000
 * Hungary: 40,000
 * Bavaria: 75,000
 * Greater Saxony: 35,000
 * Franken: 30,000
 * Inca:2k
 * Total: 420,000
 * Chance: TBD
 * Population: +18
 * base:+8
 * Modifier: +10
 * Recent Wars: -2
 * Broken Alliance: 0
 * Concurrent War: 0
 * Concurrent War: 0

Austria (Defender)
Total: 41
 * Location: +25
 * Tactical Advantage: +2
 * Nations per side: Austria (L), Bohemia (L), Luxembourg (L), Silesia (LV), Salzburg (LV) +5
 * Military: 100
 * Economy: 100
 * Infrastructure: 0
 * Motive: +8
 * Austria: 9+4
 * Bohemia: 5+4
 * Luxembourg: 5+4
 * Silesia: 5
 * Salzburg: 5
 * Expansion: n/a
 * Participation: +10
 * Chance: TBD
 * Population: +8
 * Number:
 * Modifier:
 * Recent Wars: -2 (westphalia)
 * Nation Age: 0
 * Multiple War Penalty: -15
 * Troops =  150,000/418,000 = 0

Result
(99/99+41)*2)-1 = 41%

(41.42)*(1-1/(2*3)) = 35% of Austria if 3 years of war are waged. And since its 1653, the war is over.

Discussion
There could be more joiners as well as more than one front, MS please add what your going to add but do not touch my side of the algo at all for any reason. I will look over some of the stuff you put to make sure its all legit and will get neutral second opinions from someone (probably eip since hes in india)

Hungary should be L since it's in a PU not a vassal. Oh and hungary might have a taking back recently held land since austria proper took part of hungary. <font color="#50E0F0">Sky <font color="#50FF60">Green <font color="A00000">24 (Party,quotes) 18:24, October 9, 2014 (UTC) P.s. Croatia doesnt get recent war penalty since it happened more than 15 years ago

We shouldnt have concurrent war and alliance broken negative mods -Feud

Anatolian Expedition, part one
Roman Empire Total: 214
 * Location: 20
 * Location Bonus: +11
 * Tactical Advantage: 6
 * Nations: Roman Empire (L), Egypt (LV) 8/5= 2
 * Military Development: 40+5(mobilized)+10(not lost previous wars)+10(naval dominance)+5(more total troops) = 70/1=70
 * Economic Development: 40+10+5 = 55/2=27.5~28
 * Expansion: 0
 * Infrastructure: 0
 * Motive: 7
 * Motive Modifiers: +4(Non. dem)+5 high morale
 * Chance: 0
 * Edit count: 0
 * UTC: 0 =
 * Total: 0/0*pi (3.14159265359) =
 * Nation Age: 10
 * Population: 10+20=30
 * Participation: +10
 * Number of Troops: 300,000=10
 * Recent Wars: 0
 * Vassals and Puppets: 0

Ankara Total: 57
 * Location: 25
 * Location Bonus:
 * Tactical Advantage: 2
 * NPS: L
 * Military Development: 6/2=3-5=-2/70=0
 * Economic Development: 7/2=4-2=2/55=0
 * Expansion: 0
 * Infrastructure: 7/2=4
 * Motive: 10
 * Motive Modifiers: -5+4=-1
 * Chance: 0
 * Edit count: 0
 * UTC: 0 =
 * Total: 0/0*pi (3.14159265359) =
 * Nation Age: 0
 * Population: 7
 * Participation: +10
 * Number of Troops: 30,000
 * Recent Wars: 0
 * Vassals and Puppets: 0

Result (214/(214+57))*2-1=57.933579334

Win in 2 years (43.4501845%)

Hello All
Yes, it is I AP. After my year and a half long hiatus, I have decided to (possibly) return to the wiki. I noticed that many of the people I used to know are gone and that there are A LOT of new people. Anyone want to help me get situated/possibly return to modding the game/start a new map game (since this wiki has become rather PM-centric)? Anyone from the old days care to discuss this with me? If ya'll are interested at all, I go to Stanford now and I might be too busy sometimes but I'll try to be on here when I can! It's nice to be back and hope to hear from old friends (and new ones) back over on my talk page!!

AP (talk) 01:47, October 10, 2014 (UTC)

Welcome back. I don't know you but still hello. PMIII still open has nations, mostly in china and Borealia (North America). If you need help with any of the nations or anything, feel free to talk to the mods or me. :-) Saturn (Talk/Blog) 02:02, October 10, 2014 (UTC)

Greetings AP, its quite odd to see you back, and if i might say, if you plan to start a new map game, you should start a new version of Viva La Revolution, it was probably one of the most successfull games to have existed, considering your version of the game lasted around 80 turns, something non of the sequels nor the games that took similar positions achieved (most survived or died within the first 30 turns), and Welcome back to the wiki. Sine dei gloriem &#34;Ex Initio Terrae&#34; (talk) 03:11, October 10, 2014 (UTC)

First War of Wu Unification of China (1648-1650)
Wu (Attacker) Total: 66
 * Location: +15
 * Military Development: +16
 * Economic Development: +4
 * Economy Bonus: +5
 * Expansion: -4
 * Infrastructure: 0
 * Motive: +14
 * Chance: 0
 * Edit count: 654
 * UTC: 8:30
 * Total: 6
 * Nation Age: +0
 * Population: +2
 * Number of Troops: 220,000/75,000

Min (Defender)
Total: 42
 * Location: 15
 * Military Development: +1
 * Economic Development: +8
 * Expansion: 0
 * Infrastructure: +2
 * Motive: +9
 * Chance: 0
 * Edit count: 654
 * UTC: 8:30
 * Total: 0/0*pi (3.14159265359) = 5
 * Nation Age: +0
 * Population: +0
 * Number of Troops: 75,000/220,000

Result

 * ((Winner/(Loser+Winner))*2)-1 = .22
 * (.22)*(1-1/(2*2)) = .18
 * 18 precento in 2 years

Discussion
My business is done here. JoshTheRoman (talk) 13:08, October 11, 2014 (UTC)

Japan
Total: 240.8
 * Location: +25 (Japanese Taiwan) +10 (Japan) +10 (Ainu)
 * Location Bonus: +21 (Spain)
 * Tactical Advantage: +5 (Siege Equipment)
 * Nations: +5 Japan (L) +5 Shanghai (L) +3 Japanese Taiwan (LV) +3 (Ainu) (LV) = +16
 * Military Development: +17 (Japan) +20 (Shanghai) +7 (Japanese Taiwan) +7 (Ainu) = +51
 * Economic Development: +11 (Japan) +20 (Shanghai) +7 (Japanese Taiwan) +7 (Ainu) = +45
 * Expansion: +0
 * Motive: +7 (Japan) +3 (Shanghai) +5 (Japanese Taiwan) +3 (Ainu) = +4.5
 * Motive Modifiers: 4+5 (Japan) 3+5 (Shanghai) 4+5 (Japanese Taiwan) 4+5 (Ainu) = +9
 * Chance: +9
 * Edit count: 758 = x
 * UTC: 6:30 = y
 * Total: 758/0*pi (3.14159265359) = 4.49079245283
 * Nation Age: +0 (Japan), +0 (Japanese Taiwan) +0 (Ainu) = +0
 * Population: 24,000,000/18,000,000 = 1.3
 * Participation: Japan, Shanghai, Japanese Taiwan, Ainu = +40
 * Number of Troops: 110,000/170,000 = +0
 * Recent Wars: -4
 * Vassals and Puppets: -2

Min & Yue (Defenders)
Total: 94.3
 * Location: +15 (Min) +15 (Yue) = 30
 * Location Bonus: N/A
 * Tactical Advantage: +2 (High ground)
 * Nations: +5 (Min) (L) +5 (Yue) (L) = 10
 * Military Development: 10 (Min/NPC) 0 (Yue) = +10
 * Economic Development: 20/2 = 10 (Min/NPC) 0 (Yue/NPC) = +10
 * Expansion: 0
 * Infrastructure: 10 (Min) 10 (Yue) = +20
 * Motive: 5 (Min) 3 (Yue) = +4
 * Motive Modifiers: -15+4 (Min) -15+4 (Yue) = -11
 * Chance: 4.49079245283 = +0
 * Nation Age: +0 (Min), +0 (Yue) = +0
 * Population: 170,000/105,000 = 1.6
 * Participation: +10 (Min) +10 (Yue) = +20
 * Number of Troops: 120,000 (Yue) 50,000 (Min) 170,000/105,000 = +1.7
 * Recent Wars: -4 (Ongoing Wu war) (Vietnam-Yue War)

Alternate version
((240.8/(240.8+94.3)*2)-1 = 0.43718293046 (43.71)*(1-1/(2(3)) = 36.42%

Japan and Shanghai win 36% of the Yue and Min in 2 years, using 94.3.3 as their score instead of 101.3 Shikata ga nai! 12:37, October 11, 2014 (UTC)


 * I added another year to the war, if you don't mind kras. Saturn (Talk/Blog) 12:53, October 11, 2014 (UTC)

Disscussion
Vietnam joins the war and opens up the southern front.- Scarlet Outlaw


 * Vietnam isn't a part if this war, if you want to take advantage of this situation, I recommend making your own algorithm scar. Saturn (Talk/Blog) 12:53, October 11, 2014 (UTC)

Kras, if you don't mind, your version is more correct, so I am making it the official result of the war - but, with another year of fighting. Saturn (Talk/Blog) 12:53, October 11, 2014 (UTC)

Please remove spain, i only agreed to fight min not Yue

Since I saw you owned Taiwan, I called off the Hainan invasion. It's now only Taiwan. Saturn (Talk/Blog) 00:08, October 12, 2014 (UTC)


 * Please hop onto chat Feud - we need to disscuss some things about this algo. Saturn (Talk/Blog) 20:19, October 11, 2014 (UTC)

France (Attacker)
Total: 73.5
 * Location: +15
 * Tactical Advantage: +6
 * Nations per side: France (L), Rhineland (L) ,Burgundy(L),Artois (MV),Sardinia (MV),Africa (MV) 18/18=1
 * Military: 60+10+5+5/ 80/29 = 3
 * Economy: 60+10+5/75/36 =2
 * Locations Bonus:
 * +3 (Fiji)
 * +1 (Mogadishu)
 * Motive: +6
 * France +7+4 (hegemony)
 * Rhineland +3
 * Burgundy +3
 * Expansion: +0
 * Nation Age: 5
 * Participation: +10
 * Number of Troops: 350.000/100.000= 3.5
 * Chance:
 * Population: +8+10
 * Recent Wars: 0

Prussia
Total: 39
 * Location: +25
 * Tactical Advantage: +1
 * Nations per side: Prussia(L), Livonia(L), Courland(LV), Osel-Wiek(LV)= 18/18=1
 * Military: 32-3=29/80
 * Economy: 38-2=36/75
 * Infrastructure:10
 * Motive: 5
 * Prussia: 13
 * Livonia: 3
 * Estland: 3
 * Courland: 3
 * Osel-Wiek: 3
 * Expansion: 0
 * Participation: +10
 * Chance:
 * Population: +7
 * Recent Wars: +0
 * Nation Age: 5
 * Troops = 100.000/300.000 - 0
 * Fronts -10
 * Concurrent wars: -15

Total: (73.5/(112.5)*2)-1) = 0.3066666666667 = 30.7

(30.7)*(1-1/(2x5)) = 27.5% - In five years france can get 13% of the Prussian territory

Discussion
Don't forget to add Pskov, Poland, and Moscow to my side, as per our four way defensive pact. Harvenard2 (talk) 13:24, October 11, 2014 (UTC)

When i declared war on Prussia he was still officially at war with pskov hence he still gets the front penalty Sine dei gloriem &#34;Ex Initio Terrae&#34; (talk) 19:53, October 13, 2014 (UTC)

Republicans (Attacker)
Total: 63
 * Location: +20
 * Tactical Advantage: +1
 * Nations per side: Republicans (L), Britannia (L) = 10/2 = 5
 * Military: 40+10+5+5+10 (Development+Naval Dominance+Larger Trade Empire+More troops+Previous Wars)=70, 0
 * Economy: 40, 0
 * Locations Bonus: +3
 * Motive: +8
 * Republicans: 9+5
 * Britannia: 3+4
 * Expansion: +0
 * Nation Age: 2
 * Republicans: 0
 * Britannia: +5 (1539)
 * Participation: +10
 * Number of Troops: 155,000/90,000 = 2
 * Republicans: 115,000
 * Britannia: 40,000
 * Chance: 5
 * Edits: 1,241
 * Time: 01:41 = 4
 * 4% of 1,241=49.64
 * 49.64*pi = 155.948659
 * Population: +8
 * Recent Wars: 0

Monarchists (Defenders)
Total: 67
 * Location: +25
 * Tactical Advantage: +1
 * Nations per side: Monarchists (L), Luxembourg (L), Hamburg (L) = 5
 * Military: 60+10+5+3=78, 1
 * Economy: 60/40. 2
 * Infrastructure: 0
 * Motive: 10
 * Monarchists: 9+4
 * Hamburg: 3+4
 * Expansion: 0
 * Participation: +10
 * Chance: 5
 * Edits: 4,190
 * Time: 15:28 = 80
 * 80% of 4,190=3352
 * 3352*pi = 10530.6186
 * Population: +8
 * Recent Wars: -2
 * Nation Age: 2
 * Troops =90,000

Discussion
can somebody please join make the algo. With Blood and Iron (talk) 11:15, October 11, 2014 (UTC)

Doing it now. Mscoree (talk) 13:18, October 11, 2014 (UTC)

Basic algorithm is up but a lot needs to be added. Mscoree (talk) 13:18, October 11, 2014 (UTC)

Shouldn't the Republicans have location +25 (which averaged would be 23 since Britannia gets 20?), I mean, they are all in the same nation, I doubt that Netherlands is divided in half territorially atm. Of course Britannia gives the London location bonus +1, and obviously a larger economy, naval dominance and more total troops bonus. <font color="#50E0F0">Sky <font color="#50FF60">Green <font color="A00000">24 (Party,quotes) 14:21, October 11, 2014 (UTC)

Actually if you read the turns, the Netherlands is almost exactly divided in half (modern day Netherlands versus Belgium essentially), and Nk's half is specifically invading the other half. In the same way if Belgium invaded the Netherlands it would be a 20 and 25 respectively. The other bonuses will be added. Mscoree (talk) 14:25, October 11, 2014 (UTC)

the only issues i have with this algo are the nation age bonus and troop numbers. the total number of forces under dutch control is currently 115,000 troops plus whatever britannia sends the total isnt 115,000, its the total of pro-johannist forces only. With Blood and Iron (talk) 21:25, October 11, 2014 (UTC)

Fixed. Just waiting on adding Tr0llis' ally pick. Mscoree (talk) 21:33, October 11, 2014 (UTC)

Finished. Mscoree (talk) 03:33, October 13, 2014 (UTC)

If you're gonna give Hamburg +4 for non. dem you should give it to Britannia too. That increases nk's score by 5. Also I'm pretty sure Britannia gives the Johannist's larger trade/colonial empire, larger economy and naval dominance. I think larger troops should be added too. <font color="#50E0F0">Sky <font color="#50FF60">Green <font color="A00000">24 (Party,quotes) 16:09, October 14, 2014 (UTC)

i have to agree with Sky on this. may another mod or a few others look over this algo. With Blood and Iron (talk) 16:14, October 14, 2014 (UTC)

I didn't add larger empire since the colonies are supposed to be uninvolved. Mscoree (talk) 19:03, October 14, 2014 (UTC)

only dutch colonies and the dutch navy are uninvolved foriegn navies and empires are included ms those are the rules. With Blood and Iron (talk) 21:00, October 14, 2014 (UTC)

I added the bonuses for Britannia. Mscoree (talk) 21:52, October 14, 2014 (UTC)

antwerp plus 2 london plus 1, larger economy (britannia) plus 5,more total number of troops then enemy plus 5, naval dominance plus 10, and larger colonial empire (britannia) plus 5 those are the modifiers i dont think are there please can all the mods confirm the algo. if it is wrong ill admit defeat and leave the netherlands completely no questions asked however id like confirmed by all mods on here. With Blood and Iron (talk) 22:16, October 14, 2014 (UTC)

All those modifiers are already there, I even added labels. Fed and MP have also verified the algorithm. Mscoree (talk) 22:18, October 14, 2014 (UTC)

the only other concern i have is that luxemburg should not be the algo, all colonies, vassals, and dutch navy are left out of the war. so regardless it would be 40/40 military development for both sides with whatever bonuses need to be added to either side. With Blood and Iron (talk) 22:51, October 14, 2014 (UTC)

All the bonuses are already added. Luxembourg is only there since it's a possession of the Monarchists. Even if it wasn't there though, he'd still win, has shown from before I added it. Mscoree (talk) 22:54, October 14, 2014 (UTC)

its a succession war. the 2 different claimants simply one is backed by legislation. and with luxemburg it would not be 60 but 40 same as the other with the score being 70, to 58. luxembourg could support either side since their are 2 claims to the throne. hence johann vs hendrik like i said the algo needs to be looked over with a fine comb. With Blood and Iron (talk) 23:01, October 14, 2014 (UTC)

no colonies or vassals of the netherlands should be involved in this civil war. With Blood and Iron (talk) 23:02, October 14, 2014 (UTC)

either way either side could claim luxembourg as both havehapsburg blood im sorry but the algo needs to be fixed. i do request that all mods except ms look at the algo and determine the results. i think the score should be 70 for johannists, and 58 for pro-hendrik forces.With Blood and Iron (talk) 23:09, October 14, 2014 (UTC)

Hamburg has a -2 for leading the Hessian War. Stephanus rex (talk) 23:11, October 14, 2014 (UTC)

the little moment you see... Someone gave four points to the Monarchist side, their chance is 1 and the Republican Side chance is 4, also why is the motive of the republicans 8 when it should be 11, the Dutch loyalists should have 1 point for the nations per side, it should overall look like this Dutch Civil war algo it would be a either a 1 point victory or a tie (for which case i'd say Split them Dutchland lel) - Sine dei gloriem &#34;Ex Initio Terrae&#34; (talk) 19:01, October 15, 2014 (UTC)

Johannist Forces (Attacker)
Total: 68
 * Location: +20
 * Tactical Advantage: +1
 * Nations per side: Republicans (L), Britannia (L) = 10/2 = 5
 * Military: 40+10+5+10 (Development+Naval Dominance+/Total Troops/Previous Wars)=65, 1
 * Economy: 40+10+5 (Much Larger Economy/Larger Trade Empires)= 55, 1
 * Locations Bonus: +3
 * Motive: +10
 * Republicans: 9+5
 * Britannia: 3+4
 * Expansion: +0
 * Nation Age: 2
 * Republicans: 0
 * Britannia: +5 (1539)
 * Participation: +10
 * Number of Troops: 155,000/90,000 = 2
 * Republicans: 115,000
 * Britannia: 40,000
 * Chance: 5
 * Edits: 1,241
 * Time: 01:41 = 4
 * 4% of 1,241=49.64
 * 49.64*pi = 155.948659
 * Population: +8
 * Recent Wars: 0

Hendrik Loyalists (Defenders)
Total: 59
 * Location: +20
 * Tactical Advantage: +1
 * Nations per side: Monarchists (L), Hamburg (L) = 10/2= 5
 * Military: 40+5+3=48, 0
 * Economy: 40-3/55. 0
 * Infrastructure: 0
 * Motive: 10
 * Monarchists: 9+4
 * Hamburg: 3+4
 * Expansion: 0
 * Participation: +10
 * Chance: 5
 * Edits: 4,190
 * Time: 15:28 = 80
 * 80% of 4,190=3352
 * 3352*pi = 10530.6186
 * Population: +8
 * Recent Wars: -2
 * Nation Age: 2
 * Troops =90,000

Hendrik is defending, so his location alone is 25 (Nk specifically wrote in his turn that he is deliberately invading). You deleted Luxembourg even though it is in a component of Hendrik's nation. Mscoree (talk) 00:11, October 15, 2014 (UTC)

luxembourg would be disputed ms. the rules were clear. no vassals, no pus, no colonies for either dutch side. its only johannists vs pro-hendrik, with hamburg aiding hendrik, and with britannia aiding johannists. i knew the algo had issues but yeah i am invading northern netherlands i concede that point. With Blood and Iron (talk) 00:16, October 15, 2014 (UTC)

Luxembourg isn't a vassal. It was Hendrik's actual nation before this war. Also what is that extra location bonus, other than Antwerp and London? Mscoree (talk) 00:18, October 15, 2014 (UTC)

i dont know about the other land bonus. but either way luxembourg is not part of the algo. it was clearly stated north luxembourg vs south luxembourg plus 1 ally no aditional nations that was the agreement me andtrollis had. luxembourg is not included in the algo. With Blood and Iron (talk) 00:20, October 15, 2014 (UTC)

I see no reason why it wouldn't, it's in personal union with him. Weren't you the one who criticized him for seemingly losing Luxembourg? He got it back and now you're criticizing him for having it. Mscoree (talk) 00:25, October 15, 2014 (UTC)

it was a clear cut set of rules i set up with trollis. With Blood and Iron (talk) 00:31, October 15, 2014 (UTC)

It seems like you are making up the rules as you go now, since above you don't mention personal unions at all. Plus I see no reason for Hendrik to not use his personal army, which he earned, trying to satisfy your own very criticisms. Mscoree (talk) 00:33, October 15, 2014 (UTC)

personal armies is a yes. another nation involved is no. i said he can get mercs or other troops in chat several times. but foriegn nation full involvement was to be limited to one nation each side. With Blood and Iron (talk) 00:40, October 15, 2014 (UTC)

well in the end ill leave it in the hands of the mods to decide. im tired of fighting over useless things XD With Blood and Iron (talk) 00:41, October 15, 2014 (UTC)

Vietnam

 * Location: +20
 * Tactical Advantage: 6
 * Nations: Vietnam (L), Cambodia (MVW), Laos (MVW)=1
 * Military Development: +6+10+5/11=2
 * Economic Development: +8-2/12=1
 * Expansion: +0
 * Motive: Economic (Gains land, resources, etc): + 3, and Non-democratic Government supported by people: + 4 = 12
 * Motive Modifiers:
 * Nation Age: +0
 * Population: 7
 * Participation: +10
 * Number of Troops: 120,000/150,000=
 * Recent Wars: 0
 * Vassals and Puppets:
 * Total: 59

Yue

 * Location: +25 (Yue)
 * Location Bonus: N/A
 * Tactical Advantage: +2 (High ground)
 * Nations:(Yue) (L) = 1
 * Military Development: 6+5/2=6
 * Economic Development: 7+5/2=6
 * Expansion: 0
 * Infrastructure:7/2=4
 * Motive: Defending Core/heartland from possibly fatal attack + 9
 * Motive Modifiers: (Yue) = +4
 * Nation Age:(Yue) = +0
 * Population: 8 +2
 * Participation: +10 (Yue) = +10
 * Number of Troops: 150,000/120,000= 0
 * Recent Wars: 0
 * Multiple wars:-15
 * Total: 63

Result
((63/(122)*2)-1 =3.278688524%

3.278688524%*0.75=2.459016393%

Discussion
I know the math is wrong can I get some help, thanks - Scarlet Outlaw

Fixed at Scar's request. Yue repels Vietnam and is able to take 8.955223947% de iure, although de facto only 4% since it was a defensive war for Yue. <font color="#50E0F0">Sky <font color="#50FF60">Green <font color="A00000">24 (Party,quotes) 14:12, October 11, 2014 (UTC)

Scar deleted my comment, but as I said, Dai Viet does not have Laos or Cambodia as vassals. Dai Viet has a single vassal, the Riau Islands. Mscoree (talk) 14:16, October 11, 2014 (UTC)

This is wrong due to Yue has less troops and supplies to fight me since they were first attacked by Japan. All scors should be reduced to a lowere number of troops and supplies sinc ehtey are running thin due to the loss to Japan. Also I should own my vassals because they were given to me by feud. If thet revolt a civil war wil happen latter then. - Scarlet Outlaw

Scar stop changing or deleting my comments. You just did it again. Mscoree (talk) 14:23, October 11, 2014 (UTC)

Feud didn't "give you" anything, nor would he be in any position to, The states were vassalized by Harvenard2 several weeks ago, but revolted years ago, and as per the last moderator events are officially independent. Mscoree (talk) 14:26, October 11, 2014 (UTC)

Fixed (added multiple wars), Vietnam loses ~2.45% (Yue can take this since it's below 4%) - Sky

Unless he is actively invading Cambodia and Laos too then its not a concurrent war. They have essentially been independent this whole time, it's not really a revolt. Mscoree (talk) 14:33, October 11, 2014 (UTC)

I leave for two days and i get invaded haha. Toby2: THEY CALL ME Mr. Awesome!!!

Second War of Wu Unification (1652 - 1654)
Wu (Attacker) Total: 54
 * Location: +20
 * Nations Per Side: Wu (L)=5/5=1
 * Military Development: 6 turns=12 MODIFIERS: More Troops and Moderatly armed forces=+8=12+8=20/3~+6
 * Economic Development: 14t turns=28 MODIFIERS: Larger Eco and Larger Trade=+10= +38/5~+7
 * Expansion: -2
 * Infrastructure: 0
 * Motive: +10
 * Chance: 4
 * Edit count: <span style="color:rgb(45,45,45);text-align:right;">517
 * UTC: 14:00
 * Total: 405.84500
 * Nation Age: +0
 * Population: +9
 * Number of Troops: 220,000/75,000~+3
 * Recent Wars:-4

Min (Defender)
Total: 53
 * Location: 25
 * Nations: Min (L)-5/5=1
 * Military Development: +6-3=3,0
 * Economic Development: 7-2 (Modifiers)=5,0
 * Expansion: 0
 * Infrastructure: +7
 * Motive: +9
 * Nation Age: +0
 * Population: +6
 * Chance:+5
 * Number of Troops: 75,000/220,000=0

Result
Status quo antebullum

Discussion
+15 location for the defender, Horribly done military/economic development, wrongly done motive, wrontly done population, stupidly high number of troops...

Yeah, this algo's not gonna fly. PitaKang- (Talk to me | Kill count: 4)

Pretty obvious that my 2nd algo in my history of map games is not going to be perfect, I don't see how 220,000 is "stupidly high" according to Chinese population. Fix it if you want, even though I've been looking for someone to actually help me all day.

JoshTheRoman (talk) 20:32, October 11, 2014 (UTC)

User:Edgeofnight/Sandbox In there I did a better done version. Not Sure what needed to be fixed with motive tho. <font color="#191970"> I am on the edge...  The EdgeofNight ╚╩o.o╩╝ 

Imperium of Heaven (Aggressor)

 * Location: Imperium next to the location of the war (+20), Mongolia next to the location of the war (+20) = 20
 * Tactical advantage: Open field (+1), siege equipment (+5) = +6
 * Nations: Imperium of Heaven (L), Mongolia (MV) = +6/2 = +3
 * Military: Development (+12), more troops (+5), fully mobilized (+5), moderately sized armed forces (+3) = +27/7 = +3.57 = +4
 * Economy: Development (+14) = +14/14 = +1
 * Motive: Imperium attacking to enforce political hegemony (+7), Mongolia taking territory of similar culture but not part of nation (+5), non-democratic governments supported by people (+4), Imperium troop morale high (+5) = +21/2 = +11
 * Chance: (10,000/(1*9*1*1))*pi = 3490.65850399 = +8
 * Nation age: Imperium (-5), Mongolia (-10) = -8
 * Population: 8,100,000 (+7), <five times population (+2) = +9
 * Recent wars: Imperium (-2), Mongolia (-2) = -4
 * Participation: +10
 * Number of troops: 77,000/28,000 = +2.75 = +3
 * Total: +63

Jin Dynasty (Defender)

 * Location: At the location of the war (+25) = +25
 * Tactical advantage: Open fields (+1) = +1
 * Nations: Jin (L+5) = +5
 * Military: Development (+14), small armed forces (-2), much smaller armed forces (-5) = +7/37 = +0
 * Economy: Development (+14) = +14/14 = +1
 * Infrastructure: Development (+6) = +6
 * Motive: Defending heartland from possibly fatal attack (+9), non-democratic nation supported by people (+4) = +13
 * Chance: +5
 * Nation age: Young nation (-5),
 * Population: 3,055,000 (+7) = +7
 * Participation: +10
 * Number of troops: 28,000/77,000 = +0
 * Total: +59

Discussion
Doesn't Mongolia directly border Jin? <font color="#50E0F0">Sky <font color="#50FF60">Green <font color="A00000">24 (Party,quotes) 22:47, October 11, 2014 (UTC)

Btw I've noticed that you gave Jin a +5 for non-demo when it should be +4. <font color="#50E0F0">Sky <font color="#50FF60">Green <font color="A00000">24 (Party,quotes) 22:50, October 11, 2014 (UTC)

Prussian Westminster War of Bavarian Colonies (1653 -) RETCONNED, MP'S AUTHORITY
'''Feud please look over the combined version (see below). '''

Prussia (Aggressor)

 * Location: Next to the location of the war (+20) = +20
 * Tactical advantage: Open fields (+1), siege equipment (+5) = +6
 * Nations: Prussia (L), Livonia (L), Danzig (L), Estland (LV), Courland (LV) = 21/5=5
 * Military: 100+ has not lost past three wars (+10), moderately sized armed forces (+3) = 113/20=6
 * Economy: 100+5=105/20=5
 * Motive: 7


 * Prussia: 7+4
 * Livonia: 7+4
 * Danzig: 5
 * Estland: 3
 * Courland: 3
 * Chance:
 * Nation age: 5
 * Population: 7
 * Recent wars: -2
 * Participation: +10
 * Number of troops: 150,000/20,000 = 8
 * Total: +77

Bavaria (Defender)

 * Location: At the location of the war (+25) = +25
 * Tactical advantage: Open fields (+1) = +1
 * Nations: Bavaria (L+5) = +5/1 = +5
 * Military: +20, 0
 * Economy: +20, 0
 * Infrastructure: 0
 * Motive: Defending homeland from possibly fatal attack (+9)
 * Chance:
 * Nation age: 0
 * Population: 7
 * Recent wars: -2
 * Participation: +10
 * Number of troops: +0
 * Concurrent Wars: -15
 * Total: +40

Prussia (Aggressor)

 * Location: Close to the location of the war (+20) = +15
 * Tactical advantage: Open fields (+1), = +1
 * Nations: Prussia (L+5), Livonia (L+5), Danzig (L+3), Estland (LV+3), Courland (LV+3) = 19/5=+4
 * Military: +40 -3 -3 = +34/113 = +0
 * Economy: +40 -2 = +38/105 = +0
 * Motive: 7


 * Prussia: 7+4
 * Livonia: 7+4
 * Danzig: 5
 * Estland: 3
 * Courland: 3
 * Chance:
 * Nation age: 5
 * Population: 7
 * Recent wars: -4
 * Participation: +10
 * Concurrent Wars: -15 (Rome & France)
 * Number of troops: 75,000/75,000 = 1
 * Total: +31

Bavaria (Defender)

 * Location:  +25
 * Tactical advantage:
 * Nations: Bavaria (L+5) Swabia (L+5) Greater Saxony (L+3) Bremen Port (L+3) Lübeck (L+3) Franken (LV +3)  = +22/6 = +4
 * Military: +119, +10 +3 = 132/34 =+4
 * Economy: +119, +5 = 124/38 = +3
 * Infrastructure: +19
 * Motive: +6


 * Bavaria: +9
 * Swabia: +5 +3 = +8
 * Greater Saxony: +5 +3 = +8
 * Bremen Port: +3
 * Lübeck: +5 +3 = +8
 * Franken: +5 +3 = +8
 * Chance:
 * Nation age: 0
 * Population: +8
 * Recent wars: -2
 * Participation: +10
 * Number of troops: +0
 * Total: +77

Results
(77/(77+31))*2)-1 = 43%, Bavaria defeats Prussia, and I'm obviously not interested in any land, and as a defender I can't take any, lets just leave this war alone lol.

Prussia (Aggressor)

 * Location: Next to the location of the war (+20) = +20
 * Tactical advantage: Open fields (+1), siege equipment (+5) = +6
 * Nations: Prussia (L), Livonia (L), Danzig (L), Estland (LV), Courland (LV) = 21/5=5
 * Military: 100+ has not lost past three wars (+10), moderately sized armed forces (+3) = 113,0
 * Economy: 100+5=105,0
 * Motive: 7


 * Prussia: 7+4
 * Livonia: 7+4
 * Danzig: 5
 * Estland: 3
 * Courland: 3
 * Chance:
 * Nation age: 5
 * Population: 7
 * Recent wars: -2
 * Participation: +10
 * Number of troops: 150,000/20,000 = 8
 * Concurrent Wars: -15
 * Total: +51

Bavaria (Defender)

 * Location: At the location of the war (+25) = +25
 * Tactical advantage: Open fields (+1) = +1
 * Nations: Bavaria (L+5) Swabia (L+5) Greater Saxony (LV) Bremen Port (LV) Lübeck (LV) Franken (LV)  = +21/6 = 4
 * Nations Penalty: -4
 * Military: +120+10 +3=133/113=1
 * Economy: +120 +5=125/105=1
 * Infrastructure: 0
 * Motive: 4


 * Bavaria: +5 (Remember this is a war for colonies)
 * Swabia: +5 +3 = +8
 * Greater Saxony: 3
 * Bremen Port: +3
 * Lübeck: 3
 * Franken: 3
 * Chance:
 * Nation age: 0
 * Population: 7
 * Recent wars: -2
 * Participation: +10
 * Number of troops: +0
 * Concurrent Wars: -15
 * Total: +32

Dear Cookie, I don't know what happened, but somehow my turns got deleted or weren't posted. I tried to readd them today. Regardless though, I made this algorithm in 1652. All I am trying to do is add the dates at the top. Why does it say retconned? Admins can't retcon wars, the players have to agree. I'm banned on chat so I can't even talk to you, and this message will probably be deleted. Harvenard2 (talk) 22:47, October 13, 2014 (UTC)

Officially retconned -Feud

Roman Invasion of Prussian Florida (1652 - ...)
Roman Empire Total: 81
 * Location: 20
 * Location Bonus: +11
 * Tactical Advantage: 6
 * Nations: Roman Empire (L), Egypt (LV) =0
 * Military Development: 40+5(mobilized)+10(not lost previous wars)+10(naval dominance)+5(more total troops) = 70/29=2
 * Economic Development: 40+10+5 = 55/36=2
 * Expansion: 0
 * Infrastructure: 0
 * Motive: 7+3+4+5/2=10
 * Motive Modifiers: +4(Non. dem)+5 high morale
 * Chance: 0
 * Edit count: 0
 * UTC: 0 =
 * Total: 0/0*pi (3.14159265359) =
 * Nation Age: 10
 * Population: 10+2
 * Participation: +10
 * Number of Troops: 50,000/25,000=2
 * Recent Wars: -4
 * Vassals and Puppets: 0

Prussia Total: 46
 * Location: +25
 * Tactical Advantage: +1
 * Nations per side: Prussia(L), Livonia(L), Courland(LV), Osel-Wiek(LV)= 16/8=2
 * Military: 32-3=29/80
 * Economy: 38-2=36/55
 * Infrastructure:7
 * Motive: 4
 * Prussia:5+4
 * Livonia: 3
 * Estland: 3
 * Courland: 3
 * Osel-Wiek: 3
 * Expansion: 0
 * Participation: +10
 * Chance:
 * Population: +7
 * Recent Wars: +0
 * Nation Age: 5
 * Troops = 25,000/50,000
 * Multiple wars -15

Discussion
No idea how any of this works. "<font color="#AACC99">This is not your grave  but you are welcome in it. " 22:34, October 12, 2014 (UTC)

Fixed.<font color="#50E0F0">Sky <font color="#50FF60">Green <font color="A00000">24 (Party,quotes) 19:15, October 13, 2014 (UTC)

Sultanate of Punjab
Total: 117
 * Location: +25
 * Location Bonus: 0
 * Tactical Advantage: +8
 * Siege Artillery: 5
 * No Defenses: 1
 * Ambush: 2
 * Nations: Punjab [L], Urdustan [MS], Jaunpur [MS], Sindh [MS] = 20/5 = +4
 * Military Development: 55/12 = 4.5 ~ +5
 * Punjab: +20
 * Mil Modifiers: +35
 * More troops than enemy: 5
 * Naval dominance: 10
 * Moderately sized forces: 5
 * Nation mobilized: 5
 * Has not lost previous three wars: 10
 * Economic Development: 35/12 = 2.9 ~ +3
 * Punjab: 20
 * Econ Modifiers: +15
 * Much larger economy: 10
 * Larger trade: 5
 * Expansion: 0
 * Motive: +5
 * Taking land of similar culture but not part of nation: 5
 * Modifier: +9
 * Most non demo: 4
 * High morale: 5
 * Chance: +5
 * Edit count: 523
 * UTC: 08:40 (0*8*4*0)
 * Total: 51.352
 * Nation Age: +5
 * Mature: 5
 * Population: 8 + 20 = 28
 * Population Modifier: +20
 * More than 10 times larger than opponents: 10
 * Participation: +10
 * Number of Troops: 435000/45000 = 9.6 ~ +10
 * Recent Wars: 0
 * Vassals and Puppets: 0

Ladakh
Total: 50
 * Location: +25
 * Location Bonus: 0
 * Tactical Advantage: +2
 * High Ground: +2
 * Nations: Ladakh [L] = 5/15 = 0.3 ~ 0
 * Military Development: 12/55 = 0.2 ~ 0
 * Ladakh: +14
 * Mil Modifiers: -2
 * Much smaller armed forces: -5
 * Moderately sized forces: +3
 * Nation was not initially mobilized: -10
 * Has not lost previous three wars: +10
 * Economic Development: 12/35 = 0.4 ~ 0
 * Ladakh: +14
 * Econ Modifiers: -2
 * Smaller economy: -2
 * Infrastructure: +6
 * Expansion: 0
 * Motive: +5
 * Defending heartland from non fatal attack: +5
 * Modifiers: -5
 * Low morale: -5
 * Chance: +2
 * Edit count: 523
 * UTC: 08:40 (0*8*4*0)
 * Total: 51.352
 * Nation Age: 0
 * Normal: 0
 * Population: +7
 * Participation: +10
 * Number of Troops: 45000/435000 = 0
 * Recent Wars: 0
 * Vassals and Puppets: 0

Result
((117/(117+50)*2)-1 = 0.4011 or 40.11%

(0.40.11)*(1-1/(2x3)) = 33.425%

Wars lasts for three years and Punjab conquers Ladakh. The people are treated with honour, no land is taken from the natives and no one is persecuted. They now only accept the Sultans of Punjab as their Sultans and pay taxes and other stuff

Discussion
Yes yes, the Indian League has more or less come to an end RexImperio (talk) 03:12, October 13, 2014 (UTC)

Can confirm. League is nothing more than paper at this point. &#34;SO SAYETH THE EAGLE&#34; - Fascist Eagle ಠ_ಠ (talk) 03:23, October 13, 2014 (UTC)

Attacker: Suri Empire
Total: 52
 * Location: +20
 * Location Bonus: +1
 * Tactical Advantage: +1
 * Nations: Suri Empire [L], Delhi [MV], Chagatai [MV], Marwar [MV], Afghanistan [MV]  = 9/5 = 1.8 ~ +2
 * Military Development: 38/30 = 1.2 ~ +1
 * Military Modifer: 20 + 10 [Has not lost previous 3 wars], +3 [Moderately Sized Forces], +5 [More Total Troops] = 38
 * Economic Development: 15/18 = 0.8 ~ +1
 * Economic Bonus: 10 + 5 [Larger Economy] = +15
 * Expansion: 0
 * Motive: +3 [Gain Lands]
 * Modifer: +4 [Non-demo]
 * Chance: +4
 * ​Edit Count: 32
 * UTC: 0*5*2*7
 * Total: 1.436
 * Nation Age: +5
 * Population: +8 + 2 [Population Modifier] = +10
 * Recent Wars: 0
 * Military Strengh (Troops): 90,000/50,000 = 1.8 ~ +2
 * Puppets and Vassals:

Defender: Punjab Sultanate
Total: 51
 * Location: 25+
 * Location Bonus: 0
 * Tactical Advantage: +1
 * Nations: Punjab Sultanate [L] = 5/9 = 0.5 ~ +1
 * Military Development: 30/38 = 0.7 ~ +1
 * Military Modifer: 20 + 10 [Has not lost previous three wars], +3 [Moderately Sized Forces], -3 [Small Armed Forces] = +30
 * Economic Development: 18/15 = 1.2 ~ +1
 * Economic Bonus: 20 - 2 [Smaller Economy] = +18
 * Infrastructure: 0
 * Expansion: 0
 * Motive: +9 [Defending Against Fatal Attack]
 * Modifer: +4 [Non-Demo] -15 [Multiple Concurrent Wars], +5 [High Morale] = -6
 * Chance: +7
 * ​Edit Count: 573
 * UTC: 0*5*2*7
 * Total: 25.719514
 * Nation Age: +5
 * Population: +8
 * Recent Wars: -2
 * Military Strengh (Troops): 50,000/90,000 = 0,5 ~ +1
 * Puppets and Vassals:

Result:
((52/(52+51)*2)-1 = 0.009708 or 0.9% of Punjab Land

(0.009)*(1-1/(2 x 1)) = 0.004 or roughly 0.4% of Punjab Land

Discussion:
This is not finished Rimp. SwankyJ &#34;The Italian Stallion&#34; (talk) 10:52, October 16, 2014 (UTC)

We need to add Urdustan. SwankyJ &#34;The Italian Stallion&#34; (talk) 10:52, October 16, 2014 (UTC)

The turn is editted, I'm in. &#34;SO SAYETH THE EAGLE&#34; - Fascist Eagle ಠ_ಠ (talk) 12:05, October 16, 2014 (UTC)

Eip, if you were going to help Suri in the end, may I ask why you created all the confusion by saying that Suri would get invaded and stuff. Tbh, it would have been much easier RexImperio (talk) 13:37, October 16, 2014 (UTC)

Attacker: Suri Empire
Total: 76
 * Location: +20 + 10 = 30/2 = 15
 * Location Bonus: +1
 * Tactical Advantage: +1, +5 (Siege Equipment) = 6
 * Nations: Suri Empire [L], Delhi [MV], Chagatai [MV], Marwar [MV], Afghanistan [MV], Urdustani [L], Deccan [MCV], Sindh [MSCV], Jaunpur [MSCV]  = 27/8 = 3.375 ~ +3
 * Military Development: 53/48 =~ 1
 * Military Modifer: 40 + 10 [Has not lost previous 3 wars], +3 [Moderately Sized Forces] = 53
 * Economic Development: 50/32 = 1.56 ~ 2
 * Economic Bonus: 40 + 5 [Much Larger economy], +5 [ Larger trade] = 50
 * Expansion: 0
 * Motive: +7 [Asserting Hegemony] + 3 [Aiding ally] = 10/2 = 5 + 4 = 9
 * Modifer: +4 [Non-demo]
 * Chance: +4
 * ​Edit Count: 32
 * UTC: 0*5*2*7
 * Total: 1.436
 * Nation Age: +5
 * Population: +9, +20 [More than ten tims the pop] = 29.
 * Recent Wars: -2
 * Military Strengh (Troops): 750,000/250,000 = 3
 * Puppets and Vassals:

Defender: Punjab Sultanate
​Total: 59
 * Location: 25+
 * Location Bonus: 0
 * Tactical Advantage: +1
 * Nations: Punjab Sultanate [L], Ladakh [LV] = 8/9 = 0.8 ~ +1
 * Military Development: 48/53 = 0
 * Military Modifer: 20 + 20 + 10 [Has not lost previous three wars], +3 [Moderately Sized Forces], -5 [Much smaller armed forces] = 48
 * Economic Development: 32/50 = 0
 * Economic Bonus: 20 + 14, -2 [Smaller economy[= +32
 * Infrastructure: +6
 * Expansion: 0
 * Motive: +9 [Defending Against Fatal Attack]
 * Modifer: +4 [Non-Demo] = 4
 * Chance: +7
 * ​Edit Count: 573
 * UTC: 0*5*2*7
 * Total: 25.719514
 * Nation Age: +5
 * Population: +8
 * Recent Wars: -2
 * Military Strengh (Troops): 250,000,000/750,000 = 0
 * Puppets and Vassals:

Result:
I win. I get 4% of Suri land according to defensive algo rules The war lasts for a single year that is 1657 in which Suri forces are crushed.

Discussion
Urdustan needs to be added to this algo. It is not finished. SwankyJ &#34;The Italian Stallion&#34; (talk) 07:49, October 16, 2014 (UTC)

Well that depends on Eip. The turn he announces his decision to join, he shall be added RexImperio (talk) 08:08, October 16, 2014 (UTC)

He announced it in chat, he will edit his turn accordingly. Don't worry I took a screenshot incase you try to slither your way out of this one. SwankyJ &#34;The Italian Stallion&#34; (talk) 10:53, October 16, 2014 (UTC)

1657 is the date that Urdustan announced that it, and its vassals, joined in the war. Let's get this show on the road. &#34;SO SAYETH THE EAGLE&#34; - Fascist Eagle ಠ_ಠ (talk) 12:06, October 16, 2014 (UTC)

Does a Suri victory negate the counter-attacks? &#34;SO SAYETH THE EAGLE&#34; - Fascist Eagle ಠ_ಠ (talk) 13:28, October 16, 2014 (UTC)

Eip, if you were going to help Suri in the end, may I ask why you created all the confusion by saying that Suri would get invaded and stuff. Tbh, it would have been much easier RexImperio (talk) 13:38, October 16, 2014 (UTC)

Attacker: Punjab Sultanate
<p style="font-size:14px;">​Total: 87
 * Location: 20+
 * Location Bonus: 0
 * Tactical Advantage: +6
 * Nations: Punjab Sultanate [L], Ladakh [MSCV] = 18/8 = 2.25 ~ +2
 * Military Development: 53/28 = 1.8 ~ +2
 * Military Modifer: 20 + 20 + 10 [Has not lost previous three wars], +3 [Moderately Sized Forces], +5 [More Troops Than Enemy] = +53
 * Economic Development: 26/15 = 2.8 ~ +3
 * Economic Bonus: 20 + 14 +2 [Equally Matched Economy] = +18
 * Expansion: 0
 * Motive: +7 [Establishing Political Hegemony]
 * Modifer: +4 [Non-Demo], +5 [High Morale] = +9
 * Chance: +7
 * ​Edit Count: 573
 * UTC: 0*5*2*7
 * Total: 25.719514
 * Nation Age: +5
 * Population: +8 + 10 [Between 5 -7 Greater Population] = +18
 * Recent Wars: -2
 * Military Strengh (Troops): 300,000/35,000 = 8.5 ~ +9
 * Puppets and Vassals:

Defender: Suri Empire
<p style="font-size:14px;">Total: 50
 * Location: +25
 * Location Bonus: +1
 * Tactical Advantage: +1
 * Nations: Delhi [LV], Marwar [LV] = 8/18 = 0.4 ~ 0
 * Military Development: 28/53 = 0.5 ~ +1
 * Military Modifer: 20 + 10 [Has not lost previous 3 wars], +3 [Small Sized Forces], -5 [Less Troops Than Enemy] = 28
 * Economic Development: 9/26 = 0.3 ~ 0
 * Economic Bonus: 10 + 2 [Equally Matched Economy], -3 [Receding Economy] = +9
 * Infrastructure: +4
 * Expansion: 0
 * Motive: +5 [Defending Land Not Part of Homeland]
 * Modifer: +4 [Non-demo]
 * Chance: +4
 * ​Edit Count: 32
 * UTC: 0*5*2*7
 * Total: 1.436
 * Nation Age: +5
 * Population: +8
 * Recent Wars: 0
 * Military Strengh (Troops): 35,000/300,000 = 0.1 ~ 0
 * Puppets and Vassals: -4

Result:
((87/(87+50)*2)-1 = 27.00%

(0.2700)*(1-1/(2 x 2)) = 20% in 2 years

Discussion:
The first algo was not finished. You cannot counter attack until 1660 anyway. SwankyJ &#34;The Italian Stallion&#34; (talk) 07:48, October 16, 2014 (UTC)

Ofcourse I can counterattack. That is like saying 'France could not counterattack Germany in Africa because they had to defend themselves from Germany in Europe. The states of Delhi and Marwar are cut off from the Suri Empire and I have the troops and supplies to attack Suri in Delhi and Marwar. Moreover, because Suri suffered complete and utter destruction in its offense into Punjab, I am very much sure I can now attack the Suri mainland as well RexImperio (talk) 08:12, October 16, 2014 (UTC)

You cannot do this regardless, as the algo is not finished. Urdustan has yet to be added. I will have a mod block you from editting anymore of these algos. SwankyJ &#34;The Italian Stallion&#34; (talk) 10:55, October 16, 2014 (UTC)

This algo is subject to change...And Urdustani type of change. And I made sure that I specified my defense of both Suri proper, and Marwar and Delhi. &#34;SO SAYETH THE EAGLE&#34; - Fascist Eagle ಠ_ಠ (talk) 12:18, October 16, 2014 (UTC)

Eip, if you were going to help Suri in the end, may I ask why you created all the confusion by saying that Suri would get invaded and stuff. Tbh, it would have been much easier. :) RexImperio (talk) 13:37, October 16, 2014 (UTC)

Vietnam

 * Location: +20
 * Tactical Advantage: 1
 * Nations: Vietnam (L)=0
 * Military Development: +6+5=0
 * Economic Development: +8-2=0
 * Expansion: +0
 * Motive: Taking territory of simillar culture 5, and Non-democratic Government supported by people: + 4=9
 * Nation Age: -5
 * Population: 7
 * Participation: +10
 * Number of Troops: 90,000/150,000=0
 * Recent Wars: -4
 * Vassals and Puppets:
 * Total: 38

Laos and Cambodia

 * Location: 25
 * Tactical Advantage: 2
 * Nations: Cambodia (L), Laos (L)=2
 * Military Development: 12+5+5/11=2
 * Economic Development: 14+5/6=3
 * Expansion: +0
 * Infrastructure: 10
 * Motive:  Defending nation from fatal attack 9,pre-emptive strike +5, non. dem +4=9
 * Nation Age: +0
 * Population: 7
 * Participation: +10
 * Number of Troops: 1500,000/90,000=2
 * Recent Wars: 0
 * Vassals and Puppets:
 * Total: 70

Results
<p style="font-size:14px;">((70/(70+38)*2)-1 =29.629629629629...%

<p style="font-size:14px;">x*0.5=14.814814814...%

Discussion
Not only is the algo done wrong the result is somewhat wrong as well (if we consider your algo is correct which it isn't) RexImperio (talk) 15:47, October 15, 2014 (UTC)

I fixed it as good as I could, it's an obvious loss for Vietnam, perhaps a counter-attack could be made by Laos and Cambodia but that should be decided by a mod. <font color="#50E0F0">Sky <font color="#50FF60">Green <font color="A00000">24 (Party,quotes) 14:31, October 15, 2014 (UTC)

Is chat working? RexImperio (talk) 15:47, October 15, 2014 (UTC)

Nope. <font color="#50E0F0">Sky <font color="#50FF60">Green <font color="A00000">24 (Party,quotes) 16:28, October 15, 2014 (UTC)

Both nations just want to be left alone and independent, plus their alliance is purely defensive. For that reason I say no counter attack. Mscoree (talk) 17:21, October 15, 2014 (UTC)

I feel like something is wrong. - Scarlet Outlaw

CONCLUSION OF VOTING
Note: 72 hours have passed. Voting is over and any vote past this point will not be considered. In regards to removing all mod status, power, and privilege of Mscoree, 4 votes have been cast supporting it versus 0 votes cast against it, with 2 abstaining votes which do not affect the outcome. This qualifies as a supermajority, as all members in the voting body have voted yes, and that certainly translates to 100%. Cookiedamage (talk) 22:37, October 18, 2014 (UTC)

Impeachment
Long Form:

<p style="margin-bottom:0in">I call for the impeachment of mod Mscoree, and if voted successfully, his removal of all mod status, privilege, and power given to him.

<p style="margin-bottom:0in">There are three recent  instances of actions committed by Ms which validate this impeachment.

<p style="margin-bottom:0in">     The first instance, which was a total breach of the rules, occurred on October 11, when the current PMIII turn was then 1652. Happening at this time were both the Spanish-Austrian War and the Westphalian-Hamburger War, of which Ms was both involved with. Ms did the following: He went back to the 1649 turn (the turn itself was approximately two days finished) and added in a message stating Austria decides not to deploy troops to Westphalia, and thus, is not a part of the war. He did this as to avoid the concurrent war penalty in both the Westphalian and Spanish Wars. The way he did this, editing a turn that had been over for around 48 hours, is against the rules. For the reason he did it, it was cheating.

<p style="margin-bottom:0in">     The second instance occurred during turn 1656, when a mod event revolting Austria from Bavarian and Croatian rule garnered attention. Among the mods on chat that night, primarily MP, stated that the event was unfamiliar and did not recall any authorization of the event. Ms later came online, and attempted to clarify the situation. According to him, a “bunch of people” were involved and apparently Sine had asked him to write the event, since the former was busy at the time. Already, it was a suspicious situation: Ms, who just lost all of Austria to war, now writes a mod event revolting Austria from Bavaro-Croatian rule, thus restoring it to Independence.

<p style="margin-bottom:0in">     The third instance occurred that same night, when Sine joined chat. After being asked about the event, Sine admitted he knew such an event was discussed, but he fully denied any involvement with it, and furthermore, denied ever asking Ms to write such an event. Therefore, Ms lied, and wrote the event himself.

<p style="margin-bottom:0in">     As a final point, I now will bring in my own opinions and emotions into my argument. To be concise, Ms brings nothing positive to the wiki, and within the past few months, has been counterproductive in a large number of ways. Many people, PMIII mods included, can testify this.

<p style="margin-bottom:0in">     In brief, Ms has cheated, lied, and broken the rules, and those things enough should immediately warrant a full, permanent revocation of his mod title and all powers and privileges that accompany mod status. This impeachment itself is the result of the continuous conniving, arguing, and disruption we are subject to by Ms.

<p style="margin-bottom:0in">Sincerely,

<p style="margin-bottom:0in"> Cookiedamage (talk) 22:33, October 15, 2014 (UTC)

Short Form: 

<p style="margin-bottom:0in">Primary causes of this Impeachment:


 * <p style="margin-bottom:0in">Ms wrote a 1656 mod event causing Austria to revolt from Bavarian rule.
 * <p style="margin-bottom:0in">Ms lied about the aforementioned 1656 mod event and claimed that Sine told him to write it, which Sine later denied.
 * <p style="margin-bottom:0in">Ms cheated in PMIII by editing a 1649 turn, when that turn ended approximately two days ago, by removing himself from the Westphalian-Hamburger War so he would not get a concurrent wars penalty in the Spanish-Austrian War.

Mod Approval

 * Crim de la Crème 20:44, October 17, 2014 (UTC)
 * Crim de la Crème 20:44, October 17, 2014 (UTC)

Mod Voting
~I think it should be obvious that non-mod players and Ms himself cannot vote in this impeachment.

~I propose that voting occurs over a 72 hour period, ending at 10:33 UTC (two 1/2 hours before turn end) October 18th.

~If a neutral mod thinks of a more reasonable time, or the approving mod thinks of a more reasonable time, write it here.

~I'm a neutral mod, as I shall be abstaining. I believe that, considering the gravity of impeachment, that the voting last a week, or until 50% of mods have voted, whichever is longer. Saamwiil, the Humble 01:22, October 18, 2014 (UTC)

~I've spoken with Feud and he is against a week long vote, and concerning myself, I don't see the point in extending the vote any longer than 72 hours. Cookiedamage (talk) 21:45, October 18, 2014 (UTC)

Feud isn't a neutral mod in this matter, and you're the one that started the impeachment process. As a neutral mod, my recommendations for changes s large is at least a week, preferably till at least half of all mods have voted. Saamwiil, the Humble 01:57, October 19, 2014 (UTC)

For Impeachment

 * Fed (talk) 00:20, October 16, 2014 (UTC)
 * Crim de la Crème 01:58, October 16, 2014 (UTC)
 * Sine dei gloriem &#34;Ex Initio Terrae&#34; (talk) 18:03, October 16, 2014 (UTC)
 * Sine dei gloriem &#34;Ex Initio Terrae&#34; (talk) 18:03, October 16, 2014 (UTC)

Abstain

 * Saamwiil, the Humble 01:22, October 18, 2014 (UTC)
 * FOR THE GLORY OF THE PARTY! 22:01, October 18, 2014 (UTC)

Non-Mod Strawpoll
~All non-mods may vote so long as they play in the game.

~The level of weight that shall be attached to each voter is dependent upon the reputation of the individual voter, naturally. As such, indicate when you started playing the PM series.

~Voting shall last as long as the Mod votes.

For Impeachment

 * (Mar. 29, 2013 - PM2/1655)
 * SwankyJ &#34;The Italian Stallion&#34; (talk) (Feb. 14, 2014 - PM3/1405)
 * <font color="#50E0F0">Sky <font color="#50FF60">Green <font color="A00000">24 (Party,quotes) 12:56, October 16, 2014 (UTC) (PMIII/1406)
 * <font color="#50E0F0">Sky <font color="#50FF60">Green <font color="A00000">24 (Party,quotes) 12:56, October 16, 2014 (UTC) (PMIII/1406)

Against Impeachment

 * RexImperio (talk) (Started playing In 1470s or so, PMIII)
 * Guy (started playing February 2014, 1400 PMIII

Abstain

 * -Lx (leave me a message)Azarath Flag.png 01:56, October 16, 2014 (UTC) (started Playing in PM1 ; year 1492)
 * Flippedlion.png NicDonalds, Beginning Editor  Talk Lionsymbol.png  (July 31, 2014:PMIII/1580)

Discussion
~Both mods and non-mod players may discuss here.

A few things: Thanks, Mscoree (talk) 22:41, October 15, 2014 (UTC)
 * I didn't try to remove myself from the war in Hesse. I made a diplomacy post on a past turn, something that is allowed, but regardless of its outcome, it didn't remove me from the war, nor did it remove concurrent wars penalty. The penalty is still there, and nothing in that diplomacy actually pertained to that, or would have changed the algorithm. The diplomacy was a bit of roleplaying, for lack of a better word, in which I recalled my soldiers.
 * Posting that event was unfair, I agree with you. It wasn't even supposed to be posted. It was made as a proposal.
 * When I said Sine gave me permission/asked me to make something for him, I was talking about the Prussian event. I'm pretty sure we are mixing some stuff up here.
 * I wasn't trying to revolt Austria for myself, I already have a new nation,. and that was simply a general revolt.

Ms in fact didn't withdraw from the Hessian war, the first time he and I were on chat after Spains declaration of war, he told me he was going to make a diplomacy post where he remains in the Hessian war, but is recommitting troops to fight in the Spanish war. If you noticed, he never took out or attempted to take his nations or scores out of that algo. I am that guy (talk) 22:58, October 15, 2014 (UTC)



Ms certainly did withdraw from the Westphalian War, and he added in a dip post under yours in 1649... two-ish days after 1649 ended. That. Is. Against. The. Rules. Cookiedamage (talk) 23:03, October 15, 2014 (UTC)

It's a little hastily written, but I assure you I didn't make it so that I was never in the war. What I meant was we pull back soldiers en route and for them the war officially ends. Probably should have just put it in the current turn, but I assure you, what was done was already done, and this basically said we don't continue the war. Not to mention the war itself was pretty much over at this point. Secondly, editing past turns to add diplomacy is allowed. Most importantly, not a single algorithm changed because of this. Mscoree (talk) 23:16, October 15, 2014 (UTC)

'''"Editing past turns to add diplomacy is allowed." '''Um, nope. No. Um. Don't think it is sorry. And yeah, I'm not buying your excuse about shifting troops or whatever. You broke the rules and tried getting yourself out of a concurrent wars penalty. Stop lying and own up to it. Cookiedamage (talk) 23:28, October 15, 2014 (UTC)

The rules page is a bit lacking in this regard, as it doesn't even specifically say no editing past turns under any circumstance, but as precedence has shown this entire game, diplomacy is allowed to be added in past turns. That is why many people, myself included have placed diplomacy, royal marriages, and requests like that into past turns this entire game. Also if I was doing this as a way to get out of a concurrent wars penalty, wouldn't there be an edit on the talk page of me removing the penalty? Mscoree (talk) 23:34, October 15, 2014 (UTC)

(Darn edit conflicts) Just saying, I looked through the history and I couldn't fine anywhere of Cookie's accusations of cheating actually panning out on the talk page. Pretty sure that diplomacy was in an in-game thing, like how Cookie "abolishes serfdom" every year for a century. Fritzmet (talk) 23:37, October 15, 2014 (UTC)



Here's a pic for you fritz:

Cookiedamage (talk) 23:49, October 15, 2014 (UTC)

Nice attempt to lie, why don't you pan up and show what page that actually is? Either that or you didn't read what I said, when I said "talk page". Where on the talk page did ms delete concurrent wars? Fritzmet (talk) 23:53, October 15, 2014 (UTC)



My arguement is that Ms' cheating was intended to remove the concurrent wars. I never said he went through with it, and you know why? He was caught, by myself and MP. And seriously, you think I'm lying? Are you five years old? Like, here's a nice big screencap for you:

Also, if no one caught Ms sneaking that dip post in 1649, he literally would've gotten rid of the concurrent wars penalty.

Cookiedamage (talk) 00:00, October 16, 2014 (UTC)
 * Cookie, that's called speculation. I am that guy (talk) 00:03, October 16, 2014 (UTC)


 * Speculation? It's actually called an "argument". And what Ms did??? Cheating. Cookiedamage (talk) 00:04, October 16, 2014 (UTC)

Facepalm* He "cheated" by posting diplomacy on a previous turn, to "rig the algorithm". And by rig, I mean not impact in any way, positive or negative. To prove it somehow did impact the algorithm you then post a screenshot of a completely different page. Again either that's a intentional attempt to fabricate evidence, or you didn't read what I said and decided to present false evidence as a means to confuse. How is he attempting to remove the concurrent wars, when around the same time he deliberately wrote he was not? I believe that was even before you guys saw. Prove he edited the algorithm and removed it. Fritzmet (talk) 00:10, October 16, 2014 (UTC)

As a neutral figure in this argument, Ms asked Sine and me if he could write a proposal event on the mod page. That event became the Austria-Croatia event that was crossed out. Just to clarify.

"<font color="#AACC99">This is not your grave  but you are welcome in it. " 00:26, October 16, 2014 (UTC)

What MP said. It was a proposal, and it being posted in the first place was an error. I apologize for this error, and I ask if we could not use this as an excuse to go over the top. Mscoree (talk) 00:40, October 16, 2014 (UTC)

ALRIGHT GENTS.

I have been sent in as a neutral mediator by Crim.

Actually, he ordered me to, and I quote, "quell this shitstorm". Same difference.

Firstly, I think Cookie has made it clear that he is NOT lying. Let's not escalate by ad hominem, cause if you do, the banhammers will begin to come out- just saying.

At this point, we're not going to get anywhere by arguing over this. Thus, I recommend that the mods all vote, and everyone abide by the result.

As I said, since the alternative is a couple of people taking 3 day vacations from chat or the wiki, this is the best result.

Cheers,  02:37, October 16, 2014 (UTC)

If I'm not mistaken, when Fritz brought up lying, it was one of two choices. Cookie had posted a picture of the wrong page, not he page he was asking for, and Fritz basically said "Either you're lying and pretending that's the page I asked for, or you didn't read what I said/are mistaken [What probably actually happened]". So far no such screenshot has been produced of the talk page, the page he was asking about, but I think it is also clear that Cookie isn't trying to pull a fast one here.

Regardless, as Guns said, arguing isn't going to help. Let's just get on with it. Mscoree (talk) 03:01, October 16, 2014 (UTC)

What on earth are you even trying to assert? That I am lying. First of all, one of my primary arguments was that Ms retroactively edited the 1649 post as to eliminate himself from the Westphalian war and thus eliminate a concurrent wars penalty. That's. All. I. Said. I never said Ms actually went through with it and edited the talk page, but he sure would've if I didn't catch it and tell MP. So really, the thing we have here is Fritz desperately trying to make everyone believe I lied or faked evidence or some BS. Cookiedamage (talk) 03:08, October 16, 2014 (UTC)

After I've read this through I got to say just this one thing. Saying that Ms didn't try to rig the algo because he only changed the diplomacy and wasn't able to remove his multiple wars penalty from the algo is like saying you can't blame someone for attempted murder because he was caught with a loaded gun aiming at a person but wasn't able to shoot, because he got caught. <font color="#50E0F0">Sky <font color="#50FF60">Green <font color="A00000">24 (Party,quotes) 13:02, October 16, 2014 (UTC)

Shouldn't this be a week long? I believe that is standard for impeachments. Tr0llis (talk) 19:50, October 17, 2014 (UTC)

You believe false. There is no standard for impeachments, as I've checked previous PMIII impeachments of the past, and no timeframe was put into place. Furthermore, here is a section from the PMIII rules page, and the only section concerning mod impeachments:

'''"Moderators may be impeached. The impeachment procedure can be initiated by any player but must be approved by at least two other mods. Only moderators (minus the one being impeached) can vote on whether the impeached mod will or will not be removed." '''

Nothing is spoken of any timeframe, and I've thought it suitable for an impeachment to last 72 hours, and also note nothing is said of any minimum majority, so that's a note to make sure not to argue that an impeachment needs a supermajority in order to pass. All it needs is a simple majority by deadline.

Cookiedamage (talk) 20:49, October 17, 2014 (UTC)

Doesn't really matter, but if past impeachments are any indication, it's usually around a week (the last one was even longer than that), and requires a supermajority, given that previous majorities were rejected. Mscoree (talk) 20:54, October 17, 2014 (UTC)

Nothing in the rules mention anything of a required supermajority. I'm not going to accept some informal, uncodified rule about a supermajority. If it's required, then it can say so on the rules page. Cookiedamage (talk) 22:17, October 17, 2014 (UTC)

For things like impeachment, a supermajority is best. Given that it does not say how the voting shall be carried out, then going with a supermajority is best, especially if there is already a precedent for using supermajorities. What the supermajority should be of, I'm not sure; most of the mods have not voted. Saamwiil, the Humble 01:16, October 18, 2014 (UTC)

That's not what a supermajority is. A supermajority requires all members within the voting body to achieve above a 50%. If impeachments required all mods (there are twelve of them) to vote, then that would be called an absolute majority.

For example, take a school-based vote on whatever. Say there's a classroom with 10 people inside and they're voting on a motion to be able to use phones in class. A Simple majority would require over 5 people to vote either yes or no to pass or table the act. A Supermajority would require say, 7 people or over (over 70% majority) to vote yes or no to pass or table the act. An Absolute majority would require everyone in the school, say 100 people, to vote and score a majority. Cookiedamage (talk)

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Double_majority This is what I was thinking of. Saamwiil, the Humble 02:10, October 19, 2014 (UTC)

Pskov
Total: 51
 * Location: +20
 * Tactical Advantage: +6
 * Nations per side: Pskov(L), Narv(L) ; 10/2 = 5
 * Military: 48/40=1
 * Score: 30
 * Moderate Army: +3
 * Full mobilization: +5
 * Dominant Navy: +10
 * Economy: 38, 0
 * Score: 30
 * Larger Economy: +5
 * Golden Age: +3
 * Infrastructure: N/A
 * Motive: 25/2 = 12.5 = 13
 * Pskov: 5+5+5
 * Narva: 5+5
 * Expansion: 0
 * Participation: +10
 * Chance: 7
 * Edits : 3348
 * Time : 00:44 = 4*4 = 16
 * Calculation: 3348/16 * pi = 657.3782
 * Population: +7
 * Recent Wars: +0
 * Nation Age: -5
 * Troops = 30 000, 1
 * War Exhaustion: -4
 * Treaty breaking: -10

Prussia
Total: 15
 * Location: +21
 * Tactical Advantage: +1
 * Nations per side: Prussia(L), Livonia(L), Danzig (L), Courland(LV), Osel-Wiek(LV)= 21/5=5
 * Military: 40, 0
 * Prussia Score : 8
 * Livonia Score : 8
 * Courland Score : 8
 * Osel Wiek Score : 8
 * Danzig: 8
 * Moderate Army: 3
 * Lost More than 2 Recent wars: -3
 * Economy: 57/38=2
 * Prussia Score : 12
 * Livonia Score : 12
 * Courland Score : 12
 * Osel Wiek Score : 12
 * Danzig: 12
 * Smaller Economy: -3
 * Infrastructure:0
 * Motive: 28/4 = 7
 * Prussia: 5+4
 * Livonia: 9+4
 * Courland: 3
 * Osel-Wiek: 3
 * Expansion: 0
 * Participation: +10
 * Chance:4
 * Edits: 58
 * Time: 19:10 = 9
 * Calculation: (58/9)*pi = 4
 * Population: +7+2 = +9
 * Recent Wars: +0
 * Nation Age: 3
 * Troops = 30 000, 1
 * War Exhaustion: -28 (Prussia, Livonia, OW, and CL all participated in 3 wars, Danzig in 2, so its -4 for Danzig, -6 for each other nation, for the 3 wars they were L)
 * Concurrent wars: -15

Result
((52/(52+14))-0.5)*2 * 100% = 57.5757...% 57.57*0.75 = 43% Government kill in 2 yrs

2 yr war kill

Discussion
I got an OK from Fed and MP...triple and quadruple checked this... - Lx

Don't forget the broken alliance/treaty thing, since you just signed a treaty the other day. Mscoree (talk) 02:11, October 16, 2014 (UTC)

Thanks. Added. Just shoes no matter how many times you check you probably still forgot something-Lx (leave me a message) 02:36, October 16, 2014 (UTC)

Just asking, where's Prussia's chance score, sorry if I am missing a rule or something. NicDonalds, Beginning Editor Talk  19:47, October 16, 2014 (UTC)


 * It was in limbo, can't add it untill Harv  acknowledges the war, as the chance numbers are based on his edit stats at the time of aknowledging. He just edited the algo, so that counts...and therefore I added that now. for leaders each war is -2. Prussia & co. fought 3 wars, Pskov v1, France, and Rome within the past 10 years... Danzig only participated in 2. That's -4. so -2*4*3 = -24 ; -28-4 = -28.-Lx (leave me a message)Azarath Flag.png 20:15, October 16, 2014 (UTC)


 * Thanks! Sorry, I forgot it was a player nation. Flippedlion.png NicDonalds, Beginning Editor  Talk Lionsymbol.png 21:00, October 16, 2014 (UTC)

Anatolian Expedition, part two
Roman Empire Total: 198
 * Location: 20
 * Location Bonus: +11
 * Tactical Advantage: 6
 * Nations: Roman Empire (L), Egypt (LV) 8/5= 2
 * Military Development: 40+5(mobilized)+10(not lost previous wars)+10(naval dominance)+5(more total troops) = 70/1=70
 * Economic Development: 40+10+5 = 55/2=27.5~28
 * Expansion: 0
 * Infrastructure: 0
 * Motive: 7
 * Motive Modifiers: +4(Non. dem)+5 high morale
 * Chance: 0
 * Edit count: 0
 * UTC: 0 =
 * Total: 0/0*pi (3.14159265359) =
 * Nation Age: 10
 * Population: 10+20=30
 * Participation: +10
 * Number of Troops: 60,000=2
 * Recent Wars: -8
 * Vassals and Puppets: 0

Northern Anatolian State Total: 57
 * Location: 25
 * Location Bonus:
 * Tactical Advantage: 2
 * NPS: L
 * Military Development: 6/2=3-5=-2/70=0
 * Economic Development: 7/2=4-2=2/55=0
 * Expansion: 0
 * Infrastructure: 7/2=4
 * Motive: 10
 * Motive Modifiers: -5+4=-1
 * Chance: 0
 * Edit count: 0
 * UTC: 0 =
 * Total: 0/0*pi (3.14159265359) =
 * Nation Age: 0
 * Population: 7
 * Participation: +10
 * Number of Troops: 30,000
 * Recent Wars: 0
 * Vassals and Puppets: 0

Result (198/(198+57))*2-1= .55294118
 * (p)*(1-1/(2x))
 * (.55etc)(1-1/(4))

Win in 2 years (41.470589%)

Discussion
Ok so can you explain why you divide the Eco/Mil/Infra?

I don't even understand why you are dividing the Infra at all

And why you divide the Eco and Mil prior to adding/dividing the modifiers. Moreover, 7 Turn Eco means 14 on the algo. 6 Turn Mil means 12 on the algo. What are you doing MP .-. RexImperio (talk) 03:22, October 16, 2014 (UTC)

Namely because Sky did the algo, but to answer your question about dividing the eco/mil/infra, I believe it is because NPCs have their scores cut in half.

The rest I don't recall from the rules, and will find out some other time, because I am about to go to sleep.

"<font color="#AACC99">This is not your grave  but you are welcome in it. " 03:47, October 16, 2014 (UTC)

Predictions
After chatting mildly about PM3 in 2015, I saw a comical suggestion (here) and began to wonder to myself what PM3 will look like. I wanted to make a global map, but that ended up just being a bit too hard taking into account too many difficult factors (China, Borealia, Feud's colonies, Interior of Africa, etc.) As such, I remained where I felt familiar: Europe. Here is my map, followed by my claims:

Questions? Comments? Your maps? Please, add to the discussion.
 * Bavaria will unite most of Germany, but Westphalia and Oldenburg will both remain. Hamburg, on the other hand, will be divided between Oldenburg, Scandinavia, and Bavaria with no Austria to protect it.
 * The Bohemian lands will remain independent and will end up taking control over former-Hungary, which will end up lost by various revolts from Dacia and Croatia.
 * Russia will cease to exist as it currently does and will end up split between the Tatars, Pskovites, and Poles.
 * As for Poland, I think that its only a matter of time before someone with some skill picks them up and sticks with them, bringing them to a greater status than currently seen.
 * Dacia will lose parts of Ukraine, due to complete different culture and heritage. Tatary will be able to hold onto its parts of Ukraine, however.
 * Rome will end up taking all of Anatolia, all of the eastern Mediterranean, and eventually Caucasia would be split between Rome and Tatary.
 * Algeria will end up independent in the long-term. Same with Northern Italy (probably my most controversial pick).

Thanks, 06:50, October 16, 2014 (UTC) "Hamburg, on the other hand, will be divided ... with no Austria to protect it." Reminds me of how he's weathered several coalitions without any Austrian support at all. Mscoree (talk) 10:25, October 16, 2014 (UTC)
 * Rome shall not have the Mediterranean coast... I will make sure of it. SwankyJ &#34;The Italian Stallion&#34; (talk) 06:53, October 16, 2014 (UTC)

Hamburg didn't need Austria, IATG needed you, Ms. After Operation: Kaiserfallen you seem to have threatened Andy to let IATG continue playing as Hamburg or you'll give him mod-evented revolts in Scotland I believe. Atleast that's what my source (Andy) says. <font color="#50E0F0">Sky <font color="#50FF60">Green <font color="A00000">24 (Party,quotes) 12:50, October 16, 2014 (UTC)

That never happened. His war occured after the Second Franco-Austrian War, while I was taking a break. I remember completely missing that whole thing. Mscoree (talk) 14:47, October 16, 2014 (UTC)

IM making Pskov and Prussia into a confederation of Republics, Pskov, The URE (United Repuiblics of Eesti; Narva+Tallinn), Latvia, Lithuania Minor(OTL Lithuania), Prussia and Danzig, the name: Union of Koingsberg, after the treaty that dismantled Prussia and ended the Continuation war. Probably wont keep them all...create too many sham democracies and they might just figure out who's really in charge...-Lx (leave me a message) 16:45, October 16, 2014 (UTC)

You gave part of Rhineland to the Dutch, which wouldn't have got any more land in europe outside luxembourg, what you gave should have gone to bavaria as the dominant (likely to become) power in the region. Also Hamburg didn't needed Ms and I'd be quite surprised for ms to have threatened andy if he did (and andy was foolish if he did followed Ms' command hence my doubt) in anyway, Hamburg's survival did laid in the Austria's existence not because of any aid, but rather the threat that it could mean, I mean, if you take austria out of the picture it is possible for cookie to through everything he's got at you and more than likely take alot more than 10 or 5% perhaps even 33% with Scandinavia and What may remain of Westphalia. However an Austrian Empire capable of crushing or weakening anyone within the HRE, hence the mere existance of such threat puts at risk any full campaign in the region. Hamburg is going to have some tough stuff going up their legs now lel. Sine dei gloriem &#34;Ex Initio Terrae&#34; (talk) 17:25, October 16, 2014 (UTC)

You guys forgot that Lanka will invade through Africa, and take all of Europe. NicDonalds, Beginning Editor Talk  19:40, October 16, 2014 (UTC)

Japan
Total:151*1.5 = 226.5
 * Location: +15
 * Location Bonus: N/A
 * Tactical Advantage: +5
 * Nations: Japan (L) Taiwan (LV) Ainu (LV) = +4
 * Military Development: 24, 18, 14 = +16
 * Military Bonus: +10, +10, +5, +5 = +30
 * Economic Development: 16, 12, 8 = +36
 * Ecomomic Bonus: +5
 * Expansion: +0
 * Motive: 7, 3, 3 = 13/3 = +4
 * Motive Modifiers: +4
 * Chance: +9
 * Edit count: 819
 * UTC: 12:30
 * Total: 819 / 1230 * π = 2.09184096202
 * Nation Age: -10
 * Population: 24,500,000/9,000,000 = +5
 * Participation: Japan, Taiwan, Ainu = +30
 * Number of Troops: 125,000/100,000 = +2
 * Recent Wars: -2
 * Vassals and Puppets: -2

Vietnam (Defenders)
Total: 45
 * Location: +25
 * Location Bonus: N/A
 * Tactical Advantage: +1
 * Nations: Vietnam (L) = +5
 * Military Development: 40/56 = +0
 * Military Bonus: -3, -3 = -6/2 = -3
 * Economic Development: +0
 * Ecomomic Bonus: -2
 * Expansion: +0
 * Infrastructure:
 * Motive: +9
 * Motive Modifiers: +4
 * Chance:
 * Edit count: 1,158
 * UTC: 12:30
 * Total: 1158 / 1230 * π = 2.95769454704
 * Nation Age: -5
 * Population: 9,000,000/24,500,000 = +0
 * Participation: Vietnam +10
 * Number of Troops: 100,000/125,000 = 0
 * Recent Wars: -4

Result
((226/(45+226))*2) - 1 = 0.66789667896

Scar falls in 2 years, Japan succeeds even without Cambodian support. Vietnam is now divided into two Japanese vassals.

Disscussion
Made the algo. Scar, fix your dev scores if nessicary, but I don't think it would do anything, just saying. Saturn (Talk/Blog) 22:21, October 16, 2014 (UTC)

Actually, war lasts for a single year and Viet are defeated. (0.66789)*(1-1/(2*1)) = 33.339

RexImperio (talk) 04:52, October 17, 2014 (UTC)

Also Scar, I think you made some mistakes. Just because Scars Mil score was lesser than yours does not mean he gets zero because

40/56 = 0.7 ~ +1 Same goes for his troops

I don't know but you made some mistakes in the algo but the result is the same which is victory in a single year RexImperio (talk) 05:04, October 17, 2014 (UTC)

Announcement
Hey y'all!

For those of you who don't know me, I'm AP and I've been a contributor here for about 2 years but I recently took a long hiatus from the wiki. That aside, I'd like to announce a new map game on the site--Triple Entente vs. Central Powers! It's a reboot of the first map game I've ever played and it was definitely the most plausible of all honestly. We have player signups and mod applications open right now, so head on over and I hope to see you all!AP (talk) 22:41, October 17, 2014 (UTC)

Toby, preemptively hush.

00:00, October 18, 2014 (UTC)

Republicans (Attacker)
Total: 63
 * Location: +20
 * Tactical Advantage: +1
 * Nations per side: Republicans (L), Hispania (L), Italy = 15/2 = 5
 * Military: 60+10+5+5+10 (Development+Naval Dominance+Larger Trade Empire+More troops+Previous Wars)=90, 0
 * Economy: 60+10+5 (Larger trade/Colonial Empire + Larger economy)=75
 * Locations Bonus: +3
 * Motive: +8
 * Republicans: 9+5
 * Hispania: 3+4
 * Italy: 3+4
 * Expansion: +0
 * Nation Age: 2
 * Republicans: 0
 * Britannia: +5 (1539)
 * Participation: +10
 * Number of Troops: 140,000/90,000 = 2
 * Republicans: 100,000
 * Britannia: 40,000
 * Chance: 5
 * Edits: 1,241
 * Time: 01:41 = 4
 * 4% of 1,241=49.64
 * 49.64*pi = 155.948659
 * Population: +8
 * Recent Wars: 0

Monarchists (Defenders)
Total: 67
 * Location: +25
 * Tactical Advantage: +1
 * Nations per side: Monarchists (L), Luxembourg (L), Hamburg (L) = 5
 * Military: 60+10+5+3=78, 1
 * Economy: 60, 0
 * Infrastructure: 0
 * Motive: 10
 * Monarchists: 9+4
 * Hamburg: 3+4
 * Expansion: 0
 * Participation: +10
 * Chance: 5
 * Edits: 4,190
 * Time: 15:28 = 80
 * 80% of 4,190=3352
 * 3352*pi = 10530.6186
 * Population: +8
 * Recent Wars:
 * Nation Age: 2
 * Troops =90,000

Discussion
need some one to due the algo, i have britannia,sardinia, and artios aiding me in this assault.plus using siege weapons xD With Blood and Iron (talk) 00:44, October 18, 2014 (UTC)

Added the initial values and stuff. <font color="#50E0F0">Sky <font color="#50FF60">Green <font color="A00000">24 (Party,quotes) 17:47, October 19, 2014 (UTC)

Anatolian Expedition, part three
Roman Empire Total: 194
 * Location: 20
 * Location Bonus: +11
 * Tactical Advantage: 6
 * Nations: Roman Empire (L), Egypt (LV) 8/5= 2
 * Military Development: 40+5(mobilized)+10(not lost previous wars)+10(naval dominance)+5(more total troops) = 70/1=70
 * Economic Development: 40+10+5 = 55/2=27.5~28
 * Expansion: 0
 * Infrastructure: 0
 * Motive: 7
 * Motive Modifiers: +4(Non. dem)+5 high morale
 * Chance: 0
 * Edit count: 0
 * UTC: 0 =
 * Total: 0/0*pi (3.14159265359) =
 * Nation Age: 10
 * Population: 10+20=30
 * Participation: +10
 * Number of Troops: 60,000=2
 * Recent Wars: -12
 * Vassals and Puppets: 0

Northern Anatolian State Total: 57
 * Location: 25
 * Location Bonus:
 * Tactical Advantage: 2
 * NPS: L
 * Military Development: 6/2=3-5=-2/70=0
 * Economic Development: 7/2=4-2=2/55=0
 * Expansion: 0
 * Infrastructure: 7/2=4
 * Motive: 10
 * Motive Modifiers: -5+4=-1
 * Chance: 0
 * Edit count: 0
 * UTC: 0 =
 * Total: 0/0*pi (3.14159265359) =
 * Nation Age: 0
 * Population: 7
 * Participation: +10
 * Number of Troops: 30,000
 * Recent Wars: 0
 * Vassals and Puppets: 0

Result (194/(194+57))*2-1= .54581673 Win in 2 years (40.936255%)
 * (p)*(1-1/(2x))
 * (.55etc)(1-1/(4))

Attacker: Manchu Empire
Total:  93
 * Location: +20
 * Location Bonus: 0
 * Tactical Advantage: +6
 * Nations: Manchu Empire [L] = 5/5 = +1
 * Military Development: 29/7 = 4.1 ~ +4
 * Military Modifer: 16 + 5 [Fully Mobilized], +3 [Moderately Sized Forces], +5 [More Total Troops] = 29
 * Economic Development: 31/9 = 3.4 ~ +3
 * Economic Bonus: 16 + 10 [Much Larger Economy] +5 (Larger Trade) = 31
 * Expansion: 0
 * Motive: +7 [Political Hegemony]
 * Modifer: +4 [Non-demo] +5 [High Morale] -5 [Guerrilla War] = +4
 * Chance: +7
 * ​Edit Count:  618
 * UTC: 2*3*3*1 [23:31]
 * Total: 107.8753
 * Nation Age:  0
 * Population: +8 + 20 [Population Modifier] = +28
 * Recent Wars: 0
 * Military Strengh (Troops): 250,000/20,000 = 12.5 ~ +13
 * Puppets and Vassals:

Defender: Eastern Mongol Empire
Total:  53
 * Location: 25+
 * Location Bonus: 0
 * Tactical Advantage: +1
 * Nations: Eastern Mongol Empire [L] = 5/5 = +1
 * Military Development: 7/29 = 0.2 ~ 0
 * Military Modifer: 12 - 5 [Much Smaller Forces] = 7
 * Economic Development: 9/31 = 0.2 ~ 0
 * Economic Bonus: 14 - 2 [Smaller Economy]  -3 [Receding Economy] = 9
 * Infrastructure: +7/2 = 3.5 ~ +4
 * Expansion: 0
 * Motive: +9 [Defending Against Fatal Attack]
 * Modifer: +4 [Non-Demo], -5 [Low Morale] +1 [Guerrilla War] = 0
 * Chance: +5
 * ​Edit Count:  618
 * UTC: 2*3*3*1 [23:31]
 * Total: 107.8753
 * Nation Age: 0
 * Population: +7
 * Recent Wars: 0
 * Military Strengh (Troops): 20,000/250,000 = 0.2 ~ 0
 * Puppets and Vassals:

Result:
((93/(93+53)*2)-1 = 0.2739 or roughly 27.39%

(0.2739)*(1-1/(2 x 2)) = 0.2054 or roughly 20.54%

Within two years, the Manchu conquer 20.54% of Mongol Land, cutting off the Eastern Mongol Empire from the Imperium of Heaven, and establishing a border between the Manchu Empire and the Mongol Khaganate which previously had been inaccessible. Moreover, the city of Hailar falls into the hands of the Manchu although, much of Eastern Mongol Empire remains to be captured.

So apparently according to disorganised state rules, I get *1.5 in the end but war lasts for twice as much so the Mongol state will fall in 4 years RexImperio (talk) 12:16, October 18, 2014 (UTC)

Discussion:
There are three Northern states. From (Left - Right) 1) Uighur Khaganate 2) Mongol Khaganate 3) Jin Empire

Just to avoid confusion RexImperio (talk) 06:50, October 18, 2014 (UTC)

Ok now I am confused. If I am not wrong, the topmost northern states (Excluding Tartary) in Asia should be (From Left to Right)

1) Oirat/Liao Empire [Occupied By Mongol Khaganate]

2) Mongol Khaganate

3) Eastern Mongol Empire [Not sure what it is called. I am talking about the grey state South of Tartaric land, North East or East of Manchu, North of Imperium of Heaven and West of Mongol Khaganate]

RexImperio (talk) 10:38, October 18, 2014 (UTC)

If you mean the dark grey one (ie disorganized), you get a multiplier of 1.5 on the amount of territory you can take, but the war lasts twice as long. I still don't know what it's called, though. Shikata ga nai! 12:00, October 18, 2014 (UTC)

sigh

You don't even border Mongolia. Furthermore, I find it highly suspect for a nation of only 2,000,000-2,500,000 having a military over 10% of its population. PitaKang- (Talk to me | Kill count: 6)

My population is 5 million, definitely not 2.5 million and I have hired numerous mercenaries. Moreover, I am talking about that grey state East of Mongolia and idk what it's name is so I just called it Eastern Mongolian state RexImperio (talk) 03:50, October 19, 2014 (UTC)

le sigh

Manchuria's population in 1910 was 12 million. There is absolutely no way your population is above 2-3 million right now.

Your post is also absolutely invalid, because I never invaded the area you are invading right now. And an army of 300,000 is still stupidly large for a nation of 5 million. Even during the Three Nations Era Cao Cao was only able to raise armies of 50,000-200,000. You are most certainly not Cao Cao. Reduce your troop numbers now. And edit your post. PitaKang- (Talk to me | Kill count: 6)

Mod Rules
The recent impeachment proceedings with MS, one of several, has gotten me to thinking. "There must be a better way". In short, our mod electing and impeachment process must be streamlined. I have a few proposals.
 * 1) I feel that from the start of PM IV forward, that mods need to be better vetted by a group of peers, that means to monitor and review the applicants past decisions in effort to determine eligibility.
 * 2) we must place mods in separate regions so we can avoid the mod "super bloc" that is present currently in PM III.
 * 3) impeachment proceedings need to be handled in a clear manner. We need clear rules on impeachment as well as what should be considered impeachable offenses.
 * 4) mod election processes are hectic at best, and a disaster at worst. We need to develop a better way to elect people, preferably by instituting stricter qualifications.
 * 5) we need to delegate tasks. As it stands we have one or two mods that do the lions share of mod events whilst several other do nothing at all.

Thank you for consideration. FOR THE GLORY OF THE PARTY! 22:11, October 18, 2014 (UTC)

By Super bloc, are you talking about Westminister comprising of Hispania [Feudalplague], France [Sine de Gloriem] and Britannia [Andr3w777] ? RexImperio (talk) 06:58, October 19, 2014 (UTC)

Feud and I have been talking about a fair number of these things for PMIV. The fact that almost all of the mods for this game are in Europe is kind of startling to be frank. Crim de la Crème 16:16, October 21, 2014 (UTC)

I'm back, Von wants in again
Hey I'm back now for somewhat good. I want to take control of the southern Chinese state around OTL Guangzhou. What is this state called so I can research its past history?

Also I'll be doing some mod events too. Help speed up the colonialisation of the american/borealian south by having the Mvskoke Etvlwv (Creek) nation rise up and become very powerful. I might even play as them and run them into the dirt first, before I go to China.

What else should I know/ be informed of about PM3? <font color="#000000">VonGlusenburg (talk to Von!) 15:00, October 19, 2014 (UTC)

Hello, I am Saturn120, and here are all of the big things in PMIII.

A bunch if centralized tribes, Byzantines Revived, Tatars colntrol Eurasia, India seems more unified, and Japan is unified. And just an FYI, that nation is the Yue, and Toby2 plays as it. Saturn (Talk/Blog) 15:09, October 19, 2014 (UTC)

You probably don't want to join the shitstorm that is China right now. PitaKang- (Talk to me | Kill count: 6)

I believe not the Toby plays as Yue anymore. The two genreals killed his new king. I would suggest playing as Great Zimbabwe. I've been dying to have an African brother. Saamwiil, the Humble 02:42, October 20, 2014 (UTC)

Right I'll join as the Cree then! <font color="#000000">VonGlusenburg (talk to Von!) 02:00, October 29, 2014 (UTC)

Nehilaw et al. (Attacker)
Total: 122
 * Location: Avg. +18
 * Tactical Advantage: +5
 * Nations: Nehilaw (L), North Ojibwe (LV), Chisasibi(LV), Gojijiwininag (LV), Nipissing (LV), Piankeshaw (LV) =  +4 -3 (Leading vassals) = +1
 * Military Development: Nehilaw (L) +20, North Ojibwe (LV) +20, Chisasibi(LV) +20, Gojijiwininag(L) +20, Piankeshaw (LV) +20, Nipissing (LV)+8 =  108/6 = +18
 * Military mods: +10 (Hasn’t lost any of previous 3 wars), +10 (Naval dominance),+5 (More Total Troops),+5 (Nation fully mobilized)
 * Economic Development: Nehilaw (L) +20, North Ojibwe (LV) +20, Chisasibi(LV) +20, Gojijiwininag (LV) +20, Piankeshaw (LV) +20, Nipissing (LV)+8 =  108/6 = +18
 * Economic mods: +5 (Larger economy), +5 (Larger trade)
 * Expansion: 0
 * Infrastructure: 0
 * Motive: +5 +5, +5, +5, +5,+5 = +30/6= +5
 * Motive Modifiers: +4
 * Chance: x/y*pi = 216.8642 = +4
 * Nation Age: 0
 * Population: +6 +2 = +8
 * Participation: +10
 * Number of Troops: 10,000/5000 = +2
 * Number of Ships= 2/0 = +2
 * Recent Wars: -8

Anashinabe (Defender)

 * Location: 25
 * Location Bonus:+0
 * Tactical Advantage: 2
 * Nations: Aashinabeg (L) = +5
 * Military Development: 7 = 0
 * Military Modifiers = -10, -2
 * Economic Development: 7  = 0
 * Expansion: 0
 * Infrastructure: +7 = +7
 * Motive: +5
 * Motive Modifiers: +4
 * Chance: x/y*pi = 216.8642 = +2
 * Nation Age:= 0
 * Population: +6
 * Participation: +10
 * Number of Troops: + 5000/10000= 0
 * Recent Wars: -2
 * Vassals and Puppets: 0
 * Total: 53

Result
((122/(53+122))*2)-1= 0.39428571428

(0.39428571428 )*(1-1/(2x4)=0.34499999999

Toppled in 4 years.

Discussion
Feel free to fix any issues you see. Shikata ga nai! 15:15, October 19, 2014 (UTC)

Attacker: Mansurriyya and Damascus
Total: 101
 * Location: +20
 * Location Bonus: +5
 * Tactical Advantage: +6
 * Nations: Mansurriyya Sultanate [L], Damascus Sultanate [L] =10/5=2
 * Military Development: 60/3 = 20
 * Military Modifer: 40 + (fully mobilized), +10 (Naval Dominance), +5 (More total troops) = 63
 * Economic Development: 58/6 = 9.6 ~ +10
 * Economic Bonus: 40 + 10 (Much larger economy) +5 (Larger trade) +3 (Golden Economic Age)= 58
 * Expansion: 0
 * Motive: +7 (Political Hegemony) +3 (Aiding ally)=23/2=12
 * Modifier: +4*2 (Non. demo) +5 (High morale)  = +13
 * Chance: 0
 * ​Edit Count: 0
 * UTC: 0
 * Total: 0
 * Nation Age:  +5
 * Population: +8 + 10[Population Modifier] = +18
 * Recent wars: 0
 * Military strength: 225,000/75,000 = 3

Defender: Persians
Total:  29 *1.5 = 44
 * Location: 25+
 * Location Bonus: 0
 * Tactical Advantage: +1
 * Nations: Persian Rebels [L] = 5/10 =
 * Military Development: 3/60 = 0
 * Military Modifer: 8 - 5 [Much Smaller Forces]  = 3
 * Economic Development: 6/58 = 0
 * Economic Bonus: 8 - 2 [Smaller Economy]  = 6
 * Infrastructure: +7
 * Expansion: 0
 * Motive: +9 [Defending Against Fatal Attack]
 * Modifer:+4 [Non-Demo], -5[Low Morale]  = -1
 * Chance: 
 * ​Edit Count: 
 * UTC: 
 * Total:
 * Nation Age:  -10
 * Population: +7
 * Recent Wars: 0
 * Military Strengh (Troops): 75,000/220,000 = 0.3 ~ 0
 * Puppets and Vassals:

Result
(101/(101+44))*2-1=0.39310344826

0.39310344826*(1-1/(2*4))=0.34396551722

Discussion
<p style="font-size:14.44444465637207px;">This is based off of Feud's and Josh's Wu Revolt algo and also my first PMIII algo. Please make changes as needed. This is UglyTurtle, Signing off. 02:52, October 20, 2014 (UTC)

<p style="font-size:14.44444465637207px;">Fixed a few details, I can work on the rest as I am provided new information. "<font color="#AACC99">This is not your grave  but you are welcome in it. " 03:09, October 20, 2014 (UTC)

Mansurriyya and Damascan certainly do not get 'Have won all last 3 wars because their last three wars were 

1. Turkish War [Lost]

2. Aegypt War [Won]

3. Yemen War [Won]

RexImperio (talk) 03:38, October 20, 2014 (UTC)

Moreover, are not the Mil and Eco scores of Persia supposed to be doubled? Finally, UT added military Modifer and Eco Modifer score seperately when one has to add them to the main mil/Eco scores and then divide by that of the opponent RexImperio (talk) 03:41, October 20, 2014 (UTC)

I has made a new algorithm. RexImperio (talk) 13:41, October 20, 2014 (UTC)

Fixed it. <font color="#50E0F0">Sky <font color="#50FF60">Green <font color="A00000">24 (Party,quotes) 16:43, October 20, 2014 (UTC)

Rather irrelevant, they win if they score above the revolt.

"<font color="#AACC99">This is not your grave  but you are welcome in it. " 18:39, October 20, 2014 (UTC)

Lanka (and Allies)

 * Location: 10 (Far from Location of War)
 * Tactical Advantage: 5 (Using Siege Equipment)
 * Nations Per Side on the War: Lanka (L), Kotte (LV), Jaffna (LV), Urdustan (L) = 16/4 = 4
 * Military Development = 100 + 28 = 108/5 = 26
 * ​40 (Lanka)
 * 20 (Kotte)
 * 20 (Jaffna)
 * 20 (Urdustan)
 * 10 (Naval Dominance)
 * 10 (Has not lost three previous wars)
 * 5 (More total troops than the enemy)
 * 3 (Moderately sized armed forces)
 * Economic = 100 + 15 = 115/4 = 29
 * ​20 (Lanka)
 * 40 (Kotte)
 * 20 (Jaffna)
 * 20 (Urdustan)
 * 10 (Much Larger Economy)
 * 5 (Larger Trade)
 * Expansion: 0
 * Motive: 10 + 3 + 3 + 3 = 19 + 4 + 5 = 28/4 = 7
 * ​3 (Economic (Gains Land) = Lanka
 * 3 (Aid Ally) = Others
 * 7 (To enforce political hegemony) = Lanka
 * 4 (Non-Democratic Nation)
 * 5 (Troop Morale High)
 * Chance: 6
 * Edit count = 367
 * UTC Time = 0:10 = 0*1*0 = 1
 * Math: 367/1 * pi = 1152.9645
 * Nation Age: -5 (Young Nation)
 * Population: 28
 * 8 (6-Digit Population)
 * 20 (More than 10 times the population)
 * Participation: 10
 * Number of Troops: 75,000/3000 = 25
 * Whole Lankan Empire = 20,000
 * Whole Urdustan Empire = 55,000
 * Theaters of War: 0
 * Total: 147

Nikobara

 * Location: 25 (At the location)
 * Tactical Advantage: 2 (High Ground)
 * Nations per side: Nikobara (L) = 5/1 = 5
 * Military Development: 5,0
 * 12 (Nikobara)
 * -2 (Nation has small armed forces)
 * ​-5 (Much Smaller armed forces)
 * ​Economy: 6 - 2 = 4,0
 * ​6 (Nikobara)
 * -2 (Smaller Economy)
 * Infrastructure: 3
 * Expansion: 0
 * Motive: 9 = 9 = 9/1 = 9
 * 9 (Defending heartland from possiblely fatal attack)
 * Chance: 4
 * Edit count = 367
 * UTC Time = 0:10 = 0*1*0 = 1
 * Math: 367/1 * pi = 1152.9645
 * Nation Age: 5 (Mature Nation)
 * Population: 5
 * 5 (5 Digit Population)
 * Participation: 10
 * Number of Troops: 3,000/66,000 = 0
 * Nikobara = 3,000
 * Theaters of War: 0
 * Total: 68

Results
((147/(68+147))*2)-1 = 36.7%

(0.367)*(1-1/(2*5)) = 33.03%

Lanka takes 33.03% of Nikobaran territory.

​Discussion
Please do not touch the algo, if you are not a mod or Saamwill. The reason |onte is not included (so don't add it), is because the nation is in West Africa, and even if they wanted to assist this ASB nation, they would have little to no effect (This opinion is backed by MP and Feud). The reason I didn't finish is because I see a debate and arguments happening in this discussion. Plus, I don't know if Japan is participating or not. Thanks. Prepare for the shitstorm... NicDonalds, Beginning Editor Talk  19:53, October 20, 2014 (UTC)

Luckily no shitstorm. Cheers. NicDonalds, Beginning Editor Talk  00:58, October 21, 2014 (UTC)

Can you please not edit the algo, Saam, I told you explicitly not to. I'd rather have a neutral mod make the edits, and explain why he/she made them. Thanks. NicDonalds, Beginning Editor Talk  02:26, October 21, 2014 (UTC)

I added the things necessary. The population of the island, I know, is at least 30,000, from modern statistics and what not, I'm thinking 40,000, but I will be kind at 30k. I looked it up some time ago. Nikobara hasn't lost any of the last three wars, because it hasn't had any wars (that I know of?), so I took that bonus of from Nikobara. Considering they're have been overtures by both Ayutthaya and Lanka, I'm sure they were not unprepared. Nikobara is a mature nation,  roughly around 100 years old I belive. They get the high ground because you are attacking from the sea. In the terms that they get a lot of money for getting things I need in Asia, and they are prepared for this war, and they have a somewhat militant culture, I had originally thought 4,000 soldiers, however I put it down to 3,000. But in no way or form would they only have 1,000. You can ask me to not edit it all you like, but that changes nothing. I make neutral algos. You can see that I also took off bonuses that didn't make sense from Nikobara (such as the not losing any of the last 3 wars). I will therefore, as a mod, edit accordingly. I haven't done a thorough search, so there still might be problems, but this algo is more correct. There were some things that looked questionable (such as siege equipment), but I have given the benefit of the doubt. You're welcome for my edits. Saamwiil, the Humble 19:56, October 21, 2014 (UTC)

If a nation didn't have any wars yet it can't get the three wars bounus. <font color="#50E0F0">Sky <font color="#50FF60">Green <font color="A00000">24 (Party,quotes) 20:18, October 21, 2014 (UTC)

That's what I removed from Nikobara's side. It didn't make sense. Saamwiil, the Humble 22:02, October 21, 2014 (UTC)

I'd rather have a non-biased mod edit this algo. It totally makes sense that Saam is non-biased and neutral, as he is the one who created this  ASB  nation. It aggravates me that it even exists. Anyways, you say that their population is at least 30,000 based on modern statistics. If a group of africans traveled to Asia on a boat, I don't think their population would reach what it currently is today, espicially since they migrated there from a totally different area. Even if they existed on that island for 100 years, I am pretty sure they would not reach modern statistics. By saying that you are saying that Lanka should have modern statistics or even higher, as humans settled in Ceylon long before these africans came to the island. Saam just wants this nation to exist forever. He is not neutral. I have spoken with some mods and they agreed that he holds something against me because I didn't accepted his ASB offer to get his culture and language. I guess I shouldn't be arguing, because nothing is going to happen, and I am going to be accused of having a mindset of a victim. Seriously, I believe that this nation shouldn't even exist. I am ready for you to prove all my points wrong. Thanks for not listening to my requests! - Nic

Bumped military development for Lanka up by twenty as navy has been mention in the last twenty years. - Nic

Bumped up economic development for Kotte as their turns have been dedicated to economy in the last twenty years. Although they have also been focusing on infrastructure and westernization, when I asked a mod, " In PMIII algo's when it says turns dedicated to economy, does it mean mentioned or devoted?" they replied " well, devoted to, in a sense. If a player's post mentions both economy and military, then only one is used for that turn". - Nic

Nic, I actually do suggest getting out of the victims' mentality. I have no different to you than I have done to any other nation. Do you think I ate Cookie, Josh, Guns etc. ? Even if I did get angry over you rejecting my offer (which was an offer, I have no reason to be angry?), I'm the type of person that looses my problems with people. When everyone was attacking Rex, for example. I defended and asked him to present his case. That is, right after he had high-jacked an idea of mine, and acted like it was his (which he did again I hear). My personality doesn't really allow for grudges/bias. When asked to right papers on my thoughts, I often argue the exact opposite of what I think. I know it might be frustrating to not be able to manipulate an algo, or to get an occasional revolt/recession, but please drop the victims' mentality. You're not the only nation with problems. Saamwiil, the Humble 23:43, October 21, 2014 (UTC)

Damascan Invasion of Diyabakir (1662-1664)
Damascan Sultanate Total: 186
 * Location: 20
 * Location Bonus: +11
 * Tactical Advantage: 6
 * Nations: Damasacan Sultanate (L) 5/5= 1
 * Military Development: 40+5(mobilized)+10(not lost previous wars)+10(naval dominance)+5(more total troops) = 70/1=70
 * Economic Development: 40+10+5 = 55/5=11
 * Expansion: 0
 * Infrastructure: 0
 * Motive: 7
 * Motive Modifiers: +4(Non. dem)+5 high morale
 * Chance: 0
 * Edit count: 0
 * UTC: 0 =
 * Total: 0/0*pi (3.14159265359) =
 * Nation Age: 10
 * Population: 10+20=30
 * Participation: +10
 * Number of Troops: 60,000=2
 * Recent Wars: -2
 * Vassals and Puppets: 0

Diyabakir Total: 60
 * Location: 25
 * Location Bonus:
 * Tactical Advantage: 2
 * NPS: L
 * Military Development: 6-5=1=0
 * Economic Development: 7-2=5=0
 * Expansion: 0
 * Infrastructure: 7
 * Motive: 10
 * Motive Modifiers: -5+4=-1
 * Chance: 0
 * Edit count: 0
 * UTC: 0 =
 * Total: 0/0*pi (3.14159265359) =
 * Nation Age: 0
 * Population: 7
 * Participation: +10
 * Number of Troops: 30,000
 * Recent Wars: 0
 * Vassals and Puppets: 0

Result (186/(186+60))*2-1=0.51219512194

Win in 2 years (0.38414634145 or 38.41%)

Discussion

Thank you for whom ever made this an algo. -SwankyJ &#34;The Italian Stallion&#34; (talk) 13:16, October 22, 2014 (UTC)

Definitely Sky. He is the one who divides the Eco/Mil/Infra scores of all NPC states by 2 without any reason since their is no mention of this in the rules. Oh well, Danascan still wins the war RexImperio (talk) 14:29, October 22, 2014 (UTC)

Actually I made it, based on the template that Sky had made beforehand. And for the record, NPCs can have their scores divided, if I recall correctly.

"<font color="#AACC99">This is not your grave  but you are welcome in it. " 15:00, October 22, 2014 (UTC)

Yeah uhh, that divide by two was a rule before, but it was removed a week or so ago by the mods. Sorry bout that, but it doesn't actually change the result in the algo. <font color="#50E0F0">Sky <font color="#50FF60">Green <font color="A00000">24 (Party,quotes) 16:40, October 22, 2014 (UTC)

How does Damscus have 40 in both eco and military for it's base scores?

Croatia (Attacker)
Total: 127
 * Location: 20
 * Location Bonus: 0
 * Tactical Advantage: 6
 * Nations: L(Croatia),LV(Carantania),LV(White Croatia),=11/5=2
 * Military Development: 38+10(No lost wars)+10(Naval dominance)+5(More total troops)+5(full mobilization)=63/1=63
 * Economic Development: 38+5(Larger eco)+5(larger trade/colonial empire)/13=4
 * Expansion: 0
 * Infrastructure: 0
 * Motive: 7+4+4+4+3+3+5=10
 * Chance: 9
 * Edit count: 2577
 * UTC: 02:42 = 16
 * Total: 2577/16*pi (3.14159265359) =505.9927668
 * Nation Age: -2 (Average)
 * Population: 8+2
 * Participation: +10
 * Number of Troops: 175,000/160,000=1
 * Recent Wars: -6
 * Vassals and Puppets: 0

Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth (Defender)
Total: 49
 * Location: 25
 * Location Bonus:
 * Tactical Advantage: 2
 * Nations: L,  = 0
 * Military Development: 14-3(Smaller armed forces)-10(Not initially mobilized)=1, 0
 * Economic Development: 16-3(Receding economy since it lost accest to a coast and danzig as a port it could use)=13, 0
 * Expansion: 0
 * Infrastructure: 5
 * Motive: 8
 * 9+4-5
 * Chance: 2
 * Edit count: 2577
 * UTC: 02:42 = 16
 * Total: 2577/16*pi (3.14159265359) =505.9927668
 * Nation Age: 5
 * Population: 7
 * Participation: +10
 * Number of Troops: 160,000/175,000=0
 * Recent Wars: 0
 * Vassals and Puppets: 0
 * Multiple wars: -15

Result

 * ((127/127+49))*2)-1 = 0.443181818...
 * (x)*(1-1/(2*3)) = 0.3693181818...
 * (x)*(1-1/(2*2.02)) = 0.3334833483348...
 * Although it will technically last 3 years, the war ends in March of 1666.

Discussion
Edge is posting this for me because I won't be online at that time.<font color="#50E0F0">Sky <font color="#50FF60">Green <font color="A00000">24 (Party,quotes) 20:32, October 23, 2014 (UTC)

Fixed some stuff, war now lasts 3 years instead of two. <font color="#50E0F0">Sky <font color="#50FF60">Green <font color="A00000">24 (Party,quotes) 15:02, October 25, 2014 (UTC)

Bohemia

 * Location: 20
 * Location Bonus: 0
 * Tactical Advantage: 6
 * Nations: L, LV, LV,  =11/5=2
 * Military Development:30+5(Nation is fully mobilized for war)-3(Smaller armed forces)=32, 0
 * Economic Development: 30-2 (Smaller economy)=28, 0
 * Expansion: 0
 * Infrastructure: 0
 * Motive: Taking territory of similar culture but not part of nation + 5, +3 Aiding ally +3 aiding ally, +4 Support = 5
 * Chance: 0
 * Edit count: 0
 * UTC: 0 =
 * Total: 0/0*pi (3.14159265359) =
 * Nation Age: -5
 * Population: 7
 * Participation: +10
 * Number of Troops: 135,000/140,000=0
 * Recent Wars: -6
 * Vassals and Puppets: 0
 * Total: 39

Poland

 * Location: 25
 * Location Bonus:
 * Tactical Advantage: 2
 * Nations: L, LV = 8/2=4
 * Military Development: 40+5=45/32=1
 * Economic Development: 40-3+5=42/28=2
 * Expansion: 0
 * Infrastructure: 0
 * Motive: 9
 * Nation Age: 5
 * Population: 7+2
 * Participation: +10
 * Number of Troops: 140,000/135,000=1
 * Recent Wars: 0
 * Vassals and Puppets: 0
 * Multiple wars: -15
 * Total: 43

Result

 * (43/(43+39)*2-1=0.048780487…
 * 3.6585% in 2 years

Discussion
I think you should bring down 140,000 soldiers for Poland because I doubt Poland with a population under 10 mil would be able to wield an army of 310,000 men that is 170,000 against Croatia and 140,000 against Bohemia RexImperio (talk) 04:05, October 24, 2014 (UTC)

Poland is fighting for its existence, I think it's a reasonable amount for someone although most soldiers would be levies and such. Also Poland has around 8-9 million people while Bohemia and co. don't have over 5-6 million. I also removed the not mobilized penalty since it clearly states in Scar's post that he attacked as a reaction to my attack so the news must had gotten to Bohemia first, i.e. Poland was already mobilizing.So yeah, Poland kinda holds out against Bohemia, but Bohemia can take 2% of Poland although that could safely be considered white peace. <font color="#50E0F0">Sky <font color="#50FF60">Green <font color="A00000">24 (Party,quotes) 13:40, October 24, 2014 (UTC)

Bohemia also just fought in a three year war, so there's that. I am that guy (talk) 20:33, October 24, 2014 (UTC)

Also, since this algo is labeled "front", instead of another war, I believe Poland gets front penalty, not concurrent war penalty.I am that guy (talk) 20:37, October 24, 2014 (UTC)

That's wrongly labeled since scar made the algo (I think). But I personally never agreed to fight on the same side with Bohemia since Croatia and Bohemia don't have any diplomatic relations. <font color="#50E0F0">Sky <font color="#50FF60">Green <font color="A00000">24 (Party,quotes) 22:07, October 24, 2014 (UTC) Oh I overlooked your first message. Thanks for the info IATG. Bohemia now loses the war. And Poland can tak about 3.5% since it's under the 4% limit for defensive wars. <font color="#50E0F0">Sky <font color="#50FF60">Green <font color="A00000">24 (Party,quotes) 06:34, October 25, 2014 (UTC)

Hold on I should have at least 150,000 troops. Poland should have at most 100 k since most of the troops are fighting Croastia. - Scarlet Outlaw

Nikvh Princesses Available
In case anyone missed this in the actual text - Mangut Nivkhgu is looking for royal husbands for two princesses - good low-risk diplomatic opportunity for anyone in Asia. Commandante Lemming (talk) 13:18, October 24, 2014 (UTC)

I await the day when my tamed reindeer herdsmen and your guanaco performers  pastry chefs can finally make contact to start our diplomatic, and marriage, relations. :D Discover me, already! :P 22:24, October 24, 2014 (UTC)

HAHA! Working on it!Commandante Lemming (talk) 00:06, October 26, 2014 (UTC)

1700 predictions?
Hey guys,

So I was curious today, and I thought it would be interesting to ask you guys what your future predictions of the PMIII timeline would be.

What do you think the map will look like by 1700? In general terms, who will war on who, who will take what territories, etc.?

Thanks! Cookiedamage (talk) 00:39, October 27, 2014 (UTC)

My thoughts are that the German nations will have more civil wars and break appart even more, as I don't see Bohemia or Bavaria maintaining large amounts of land for too long. (No offence haha). Yeah, I hope that the two Russias become active, that would have brought a bit more of a change to Alaska and I think that the lower Russia (whatever it's called) will still be able to colonise the Americas. I also think that Rome will become alot stronger once all of Anatolia has been united, but they still face the threat from the UIN. That's just my thoughts so yeah... Aternix !?  05:39, October 27, 2014 (UTC)


 * Alaska is actually for Japan, so expect Japanese colonization of the Americas. Saturn (Talk/Blog) 12:40, October 27, 2014 (UTC)


 * Alaska is big enough for multiple habitants. And it's going to be fun - and by fun I mean I'm bringing the pastry! :-) Commandante Lemming (talk) 13:28, October 27, 2014 (UTC)

Imperium fails to unite China, Japan colon... Helps Alaska (I'm talking to you rex, lol). Expect a war of Indian unification sometime soon, New Spain Becomes even larger, and actually gets in a war. Saturn (Talk/Blog) 12:40, October 27, 2014 (UTC)

The HRE shall fall. <font color="#50E0F0">Sky <font color="#50FF60">Green <font color="A00000">24 (Party,quotes) 13:14, October 27, 2014 (UTC)

I would like to see New Spain lose some of their colonize to revolts. I also think that the remaining nations in the HRE will try and attack me and Cookie. Lastly Tartar and Japan will fight for Alaska, I want Tartar to take the rest of russian and unify the lands. - Scarlet Outlaw

The Holy Roman Empire might unify Germany, if not all of Europe. Mscoree (talk) 14:44, October 27, 2014 (UTC)



.IrishPatriot (talk) 15:19, October 27, 2014 (UTC)

Republicans (Attacker)
Total: 142
 * Location: +17
 * Tactical Advantage: +2
 * Nations per side: Cochin (LV), Hispania (L), Shan State (LV) Dawei (LV) Khambhat (LV) Madras (LV) Philippines (L) = +4
 * Military: 140+10+5+5+10 (Development+Naval Dominance+Larger Trade Empire+More troops+Previous Wars)= +170/5 = +34
 * Economy: 140+10+5 (Larger trade/Colonial Empire + Larger economy)= +155/6 = +26
 * Locations Bonus: +21
 * Motive: +30/6 = +5
 * Hispania: +7+4
 * Philippines: 3+4
 * Shan: +3
 * Dawei: +3
 * Khambhat: +3
 * Madras: +3
 * Expansion: +0
 * Nation Age: -5 (all averaged together)
 * Participation: +10
 * Number of Troops: 12,500/80,000 = 0
 * Spain: 1000
 * Philippines: 2500
 * Cochin: 1000
 * Dawei: 2000
 * Khambhat: 1000
 * Madras: 5000
 * Chance: TBD
 * Edits:
 * Time:
 * Population: +8 +20
 * Recent Wars: 0

Burmese noble (Defenders)
Total: 59
 * Location: +25
 * Tactical Advantage: +2
 * Nations per side: +5
 * Military: 10 -5 = +5/170 = 0
 * Economy: 8 - 2 = +6/155 = 0
 * Infrastructure: +8
 * Motive: +7
 * +7 (oppressed kinsman)
 * Expansion: 0
 * Participation: +10
 * Chance:
 * Population: +6
 * Recent Wars:
 * Nation Age: -10
 * Troops =80,000/ 12,500 = +6

Discussion
alright since this revolt is over ive officially burned them out and im done here

Imperium of Heaven

 * Location: Close to the location of the war (+20) = +20
 * Tactical Advantage: Open fields (+1), siege equipment (+5) = +6
 * Nations per side: Imperium (L+5) = +5/1 = +5
 * Military: Development (+38), not lost past three wars (+10), moderately sized military (+3), more troops (+5), fully mobilized (+5) = +57/1 = +61
 * Economy: Development (+0), larger economy (+10) = +12/10 = +1.2
 * Motive: Enforcing political hegemony (+7), non-democratic government supported by people (+4), morale high (+5) = +16
 * Participation: +10
 * Chance: (10,071/(1*6*4*4))*pi = 247.179528237 = +9 (yay)
 * Population: 4,138,000 (+7), larger population (+2) = +9
 * Recent wars: One (-2) = -2
 * Participation: +10
 * Number of troops: 88,300/13,900 = +6
 * Total: +146.2

Mongolia

 * Location: At the location of the war (+25) = +25
 * Tactical advantage: Open fields (+1) =+1
 * Nations per side: Mongolia (L+5) = +5/1 = +5
 * Military: Development (+8), small armed forces (-2), much smaller armed forces (-5) = +1/57 = +0
 * Economy: Development (+10), smaller economy (-2) = +8/10 = +0
 * Infrastructure: +4
 * Motive: They gon die (+9), non-democratic government supported by people (+4), troop morale low (-5) = +8
 * Chance: +5
 * Population: 3,591,000 (+7) = +7
 * Participation: +10
 * Number of troops: +13,900/88,300 = 0
 * Total: +65

Result
Decisive Imperial victory. 33.6% of Mongolia is taken in four years, resulting in a toppled government.

Royal Marriages: Bavaria
Hi guys. I have some unmarried royals that might be suitable for a match:

Children of King Leopold II of Bavaria: Children of Margrave Albert I of Brandenburg Children of Duke Franz-Ballard I of Pomerania
 * Anna-Sophia (born 1657) (aged 13, as of 1670)
 * Franz-Dominic (born 1659) (aged 11, as of 1670)
 * Karl (born 1661) (aged 9, as of 1670)
 * Katharina (born 1662) (aged 8, as of 1670)
 * Margaret (born 1663) (aged 7, as of 1670)
 * Albert (born 1660) (aged 10, as of 1670)
 * Johann (born 1668) (aged 2, as of 1670)
 * Klara (born 1669) (aged 1, as of 1670)
 * Mary (born 1668) (aged 2, as of 1670) (heavy preference on matrineal match)
 * Yvette-Katharine (born 1669) (aged 1, as of 1670)

Take a look and put stuff into the discussion box or whatevs. I'll put an offers section as well. Thanks! Cookiedamage (talk) 02:21, October 29, 2014 (UTC)

Offers
Hamburg offers


 * William Von Hamburg, son of Otto II, Duke of Hamburg, Aged 15 -> Anna Sophia of Bavaria


 * Henry Von Hamburg, son of Otto II, Duke of Hamburg, Aged 4 -> Mary of Pomerania Approved


 * Maria Von Hamburg, daughter of Otto III, Duke of Stade, Aged 10 -> Albert of Brandenburg Approved

I am that guy (talk)

Approved two. Thanks for offering! Cookiedamage (talk) 22:15, October 31, 2014 (UTC)

Confortentur Victricis
_______________________________________________________________________________________

Though this may sound annoying, could someone help me work on the Confortentur Victricis game I gave created? It is only a rough start and needs working on, and since I know that this is a very popular page, I thought at least one of you guys can lend me a hand by creating maps, timelines, and information.

72.171.192.120 14:08, October 30, 2014 (UTC)2.171.192.120 aka A Wikia Contributor

_______________________________________________________________________________________

I can give you a hand creating information, although I recommend making an official account. That way it will be easier to identify you and will allow us to talk on chat if needed. Mscoree (talk) 14:11, October 30, 2014 (UTC)

Mscoree is entirely right, anon. Joining Wikia is so easy a caveman could do it, and it really opens up a bunch of otherwise-blocked features. I'd highly suggest it. Chat is pretty much requisite for any successful map game, and your contributions will earn you greater recognition within the community.

Other than that, welcome to the community! I am pleased to meet you, and hope your Map Game succeeds! 23:05, October 30, 2014 (UTC)

What do we do with an honorary mod?
So yeah I'm back but I'm an honorary mod, so I'm wondering where exactly I stand in regards to my mod authority. I want to focus on the roles of mod events, neutrality Bringer, Air Breather and ASB hunter like EiplecOco and Feudal. So basically am I reinstated or not? No chance of me being a map maker anymore but my ability to look at a situation and be very neutral and unbiased is good I think.

But yeah other mods how do I stand with this all? I don't think we have precedent, but if an old/honorary mod did show up again in the past (like in pm2 I think it happened once or twice) then they got a flood of welcome backs, and it was like they never left, but then they left again. So far it ain't happened when the mod stays back for good. <font color="#000000">VonGlusenburg (talk to Von!) 00:57, October 31, 2014 (UTC)

Well, welcome back! I think that part of the difference is that the community shifted. The people who play PM3 are quite distinct from the people who play PM2 (whereas PM1'ers were very similar to PM2'ers). Thats not to say that there isn't overlap, just that you are a new face to a number of this game's users.

Furthermore, the whole idea of Honorary Mod really got messed up, in my opinion, when all mods of PM2 were granted Honorary status in this game. We had Mod elections to start the game off, so if you weren't elected then, then I would think that you would not be in the "official" mod status.

That being said, it seems that the mods are getting busier and busier and unable to make as many events as in the past (not complaining here, tbh), so you may be able to work on that. Additionally, the loss/impeachment of Ms has sort of brought about a space for a qualified fellow like you. Your position in the Americas is also a boon, as Europe is too saturated with players.

Best, 05:14, October 31, 2014 (UTC)

I'm in the same boat - I got modship at the beginning of PM3 and then ended up having to drop out for a long while. Honestly I probably couldn't handle being a full-time mod right now anyway but if honorary modship gives me any rights, I would probably throw a few bombs into the mod events every now and again. I wouldn't mind being a "universal chaos mod" whose job is to throw weird curveballs. Commandante Lemming (talk) 17:29, October 31, 2014 (UTC)

To become an actual moderator from the honorary moderator position you need to be voted in (again). Honorary modship is more for people who resigned or are inactive to the point where they are no longer a valid moderator. Mscoree (talk) 22:18, October 31, 2014 (UTC)

Can an actual PM3 mod comment on this? <font color="#000000">VonGlusenburg (talk to Von!) 06:14, November 1, 2014 (UTC)

Well, i don't know.the one mod that came back after being inactive was Pita, who came back intermittently in PMII, and never really established himself.he also never acted as a mod after he as declared inactive, so there is no precedent.--Collie Kaltenbrunner (talk) 14:19, November 1, 2014 (UTC)

From what I've seen, what I said is what we've been doing for previous honorary moderators who have considered joining as active moderators. Not to mention that all moderators are voted in, and the honorary moderators have not been yet. Mscoree (talk) 14:28, November 1, 2014 (UTC)

Bavaria (Attacker)

 * Location:  +10
 * Tactical advantage: +5
 * Nations: Bavaria (L+5), Brandenburg (LV +3), Pomerania (LV +3) = 16/4 = +4
 * Military: +60+10+10+5+5+3 = +93/1 = +93
 * Economy: +60+10 = +70/4 = +18
 * Infrastructure: +20
 * Motive: +3
 * Bavaria: +3
 * Brandenburg: +3
 * Pomerania: +3
 * Chance:
 * Nation age: 0
 * Population: +7 +10
 * Recent wars: 0
 * Participation: +10
 * Number of troops: 12,000/12,000 = +1
 * Total: +181

Acolapissa

 * Location:  +25
 * Tactical advantage: +3
 * Nations: Acolapissa (L+5) = 5/1 = +5
 * Military: +6 -5 =+1/93 = 0
 * Economy: +6 -2 = +4/70= 0
 * Infrastructure: +7
 * Motive: +9
 * Chance:
 * Nation age: 0
 * Population: +4
 * Recent wars: 0
 * Participation: +10
 * Number of troops: 0
 * Total: +63

Result

 * ((181/(181+63))*2)-1 = 48%
 * (48)*(1-1/(2*2)) = 36%

Discussion
Two year war and Acolapissa is kill. Feel free to post suggestions to the algo.

Where's Acolapissa?

Post_Mississippia_Collapse_labeled.png

Number 34 on that map. Cookiedamage (talk) 13:47, November 1, 2014 (UTC)

Colonies
Why were all my colonies removed from the map? Mscoree (talk) 18:47, November 2, 2014 (UTC)

They were collapsed due to the lack of a centralized government and strong support of another nation ( I think one of the African ones is going to be a tribal state) Sine dei gloriem &#34;Ex Initio Terrae&#34; (talk) 19:08, November 2, 2014 (UTC)

But I do have a centralized government, and all my colonies are being supported by the Netherlands and Hamburg. Do you meant to tell me that neither the Netherlands or Hamburg is capable of having colonies, or has a decentralized government? Mscoree (talk) 19:11, November 2, 2014 (UTC)

EH dont look ah me i didnt made The event lel Sine dei gloriem &#34;Ex Initio Terrae&#34; (talk)

There was no event! Someone just edited the map one day and removed them all. Can you please fix this map error? Mscoree (talk) 19:16, November 2, 2014 (UTC)

Overthrowing Hated Leader
I noticed that recently there was an event to break Westphalia into several states in protest of being ruled by a foreigner. Since Luxembourg is running rampant under a hated ruler, I believe it's only fair that we break them up to, for plausibility's sake. As such, I propose the following event:



In Luxembourg, after a long period of occupation by the Austrian and Westphalian forces, and the recent enthroning of the previous Archduke of Austria and his family in Frankfurt leads to a series of uprisings throughout the nation claiming for the liberation of their nation. One of the uprisings is heavily crushed by a group of Luxembourgian military corps near the city of Luxembourg, leading to an all out rebellion that spreads rapidly in Luxembourg. The enraged people of the nation enters the lightly defended city and slaughters the loyalist forces in its path to the palace where they find the Duke and slay him while capturing his family and take them into rebel-held territory. Soon landlords reestablish the borders of most of the counties prior to Luxembourg's existence. They leave the Holy Roman Empire citing its “failure to protect its states and inefficient defense against foreign threats” and establish the Luxembourgian confederation, and request for Dutch, French, and Spanish support to defend their nation. Luxembourgian royalist forces manage to hold Luxembourg City (Any act of war by any nation towards any member of the confederation will be an act of war against all members,Vassalage is also impossible in a period of less than 50 years) (Score undoubled: Military: 10, Economy: 8, Infrastructure: 8 for all the nations).

Hopefully that shuts down the implausible mess that is Luxembourg being ruled by a Habsburg. Hopefully that helps, Harvenard2 (talk) 18:59, November 2, 2014 (UTC)

If i recall correctly tr0llis is Luxembourg, idk if Luxembourg is a mess, the culture is pretty much similar throughout the nation and it would be ruled by a Nassau member of the family not a Habsburg one. No reason for a revolt or uprising at all so not happening Sine dei gloriem &#34;Ex Initio Terrae&#34; (talk)

False Luxembourg is currently owned by Ms, and it is ruled by a Habsburg. Harvenard2 (talk) 19:13, November 2, 2014 (UTC)

Afaik as I know the treaty made with the Netherlands was that it was personally owned by the king of the dutch but it was Austrian, with Austria gone it would become of the king. Especially with the fact that the Austrian Habsburg monarch dead. Sine dei gloriem &#34;Ex Initio Terrae&#34; (talk)

Perhpas the worst place for a revolt to occur is 1670s Luxembourg. If you could have picked any nation that wouldn't revolt against a foreign ruler, it would be Luxembourg. Luxembourg has little to no cohesive ethnic or national identity, no tradition of native rule that has recently been broken to be replaced with foereign rule, isn't experiencing especial oppression or high taxation, and really has no reason to revolt. Luxembourg was and presumably is very much a buffer state and administrative division within a larger Austrian (and now Dutch) empire, rather than a seperate nation. Luxembourg has no reason to revolt. Secondly, this is before the era of nationalism. Popular revolts for liberation didn't really occur at this point, not without significant support from disaffected nobles, who receive all their privileges from the king and haven't suffered significantly recently. In short, a revolt in Luxembourg is a ridiculously implausible bad idea. Shikata ga nai! 23:13, November 2, 2014 (UTC)

I guess Kras missed my statement on chat, but for the record Luxembourg is owned by myself, not the Dutch. Mscoree (talk) 23:28, November 2, 2014 (UTC)

Hesse conquered them all, a half dozen player and NPC states and didn't have a single revolt. There was oppression and high taxation (given the squashing of resistance and the many expensive wars) and he got nothing. Then Hamburg liberates a single province smaller in size than Rhode Island and all hell breaks loose. You mean to tell me someone can aggressively conquer several nations and increase their size by 500%, but if a state retakes a small area that was theirs for years it collapses? Harvenard2 (talk) 23:37, November 2, 2014 (UTC)

Now we see the real motivation behind this. It's an overdone attempt to prove a point entirely separate from this event. Hence the fact that Harv, rather than actually referring to my arguments as to why a revolt would never occur in Luxembourg, focused on prior events that occurred in ''different countries. ''Again, Luxembourg has no separate national identity from the HRE and Germany. Luxembourg's noble class - the only group that can plausibly lead a revolt at this point - has no reason to be angered, especially to the poin tof immediately resorting to violent revolution. Nobles don't revolt unless their privileges are seriously under threat by revolting, they risk losing these same privileges. None of the ingredients for a revolt exist here; it's an attempt to prove a point that discards logic and plausibility. Shikata ga nai! 23:50, November 2, 2014 (UTC)