User talk:Scandinator



Principia Moderni Treaty
From Emperor Pimpisara II of Hanthawaddy and its posessions to King of Sweden:

The current engagement our countries are in is coming to a halt and Hanthawaddy wishes to engage in a fair treaty. Hanthawaddy has captured most of Norway and Iceland, and it does not appear as if Sweden could regain those territories by fighting, so we wish that the territories be returned to Sweden through peace. The territories shown in red, Hanthawaddy wishes to keep. This includes Iceland and Finnmark as far as the Reisa River. Hanthawaddy will ensure that the traditional way of life of the areas are kept, and Sweden will have a say in how they are managed. Hanthawaddy will renounce claim over the area shown in green on the following conditions:


 * 1) Sweden allows Mons to settle islands off the west Norwegian coast, although the immigration is not to exceed 1,000 per year.
 * 2) Sweden favours Mon products in Swedish ports, allowing Hanthawaddy to account for 30% of the spice trade, and giving Mons living in Sweden privileges equal to those of locals.
 * 3) Sweden promises not to incite further violence in the territories of Toeh Ngoa Nyoing, and as a sign that the promise will be kept, Sweden presents three of its finest whales to Hanthawaddy each year via the port of Purongcham. Detectivekenny (Info; Talk)  19:09, July 31, 2011 (UTC)

American Empire
Greetings,

I was looking at your Imperialist America thing and would like to ask if I could be your other implausibility detector/grammar nazi as I am very OCD and great at both.

Sincerely,

PrinceofPrussia

Sure as long as you take a country and quickly!!

All the players are dividing up the big nonplayer nations and devouring them. But China is still open.

Yeah, I'll take China.

Imperialist America (Map Game)
I think I should be moderator on te map game due to me being its creator and that I should ave the same powers as you, which I acknowledge the fact that you became a mod. I have seen your work on other map games and I like what I see, please get back to me as soon as possible. DeanSims 22:44, August 9, 2011 (UTC)

PS: I also acknowledge the fact that Riley Conner is a mod, se is well knwon in other map games as well. thanks, DeanSims 22:44, August 9, 2011 (UTC)

Imperialist America
Prussia should join, it would be great, please make it official on the game page though. Heres the map of the world after Russia's conquest: DeanSims 15:20, August 10, 2011 (UTC)



A deal is offered to Prussia that if it joins the Southern Powers all of American Africa will become part of Prussia as well as previously agreed upon territories shown in the post-war world map as well as $30 million dollars DeanSims 17:42, August 13, 2011 (UTC) The United States is in need of dire assistance by its allies, if help is given, the below map will become official:



I cannnot hold them off forever, I will need help. DeanSims 00:25, August 13, 2011 (UTC)

Imperialist America Han China possibly a new nation
Mabe something could happen where the old Qing governement is pushed firther inland but never disapears like Taiwan(Republic of China) and what we currently call China(People's Republic of China or PRC)-2 chinas could exist-Qing China and Han China if the allies win, and Han china could be open to another player? I will propose a map later today. Qing China could stay its player but with a government-in-exile and mabe Han China could become a new nation? thoughts(respond on my talk page with the same headline please)

Who is this???

sorry i forgot to signLxCaucassus 22:03, August 16, 2011 (UTC)

Imperilist America
Hey, I was not here and I left Bobulgee in charge of the USA, and yet he did nothing, and you cant use your mod powers to win the war, I didnt do that, I am creating a second map game that currently is before the war, my country couldnt have been taken that quickly, its not right. DeanSims 19:00, August 22, 2011 (UTC)

I didn't use my mod powers to win at all. I merely blocked implausability from Russia, China and Austria. China at one point stated they were marching from the Urals to Oslo in one year!!!! I admit Bobulgee didn't take care of your country properly but your side was against Japan, Russia, France, Britain, Prussia and the Muslim Caliphate. We just hit one country at a time on all sides. Austria first, then China and finally the US. Scandinator 21:38, August 22, 2011 (UTC)

MOD
Did you create the moderator quotes stating that the USA was suffering riots? Because it was only me and my allies who experienced them, if not, ur mod status is restored.

DeanSims 21:55, August 22, 2011 (UTC)

Oh what the hell, ur a mod again

Mod
You are still a mod, I was being stupid, sorry, your previous powers have been returned.

DeanSims 14:10, August 23, 2011 (UTC)

SC II
Do you play StarCraft II? “as I pretty much live on strategy games.” PitaKang- (Talk | Contribs) 00:51, August 24, 2011 (UTC)

Yes, in fact I do. I find it a very good game but unfortunatly I can't play online due to a crappy conection... Scandinator 06:16, August 24, 2011 (UTC)

Axis vs Allies Revised

 * United Kingdom: The British declare war on the Soviet Union and Poland, and 200,000 thousand troops are sent to help Finland while the British Navy begins attacking ALL Soviet ships and much of its coastline cities. The UK response to the Soiets is that yes you were on the defensive, but how many other nations were on the defensive that you conquered, it is time to teach you communist scum what you deserve. Britain withfraws all penalties from Germany due to the Treaty of Versailes and other treaies thereafter, Germany is given the green light to fully mobilize its entire armed forces and navy to attack Poland asnd the USSR, of which all of European Poland and Russia will be ceded to it, the Baltic States, and Finland. The British Army invades the Soviet Union through Persia, and the army, numbering 200,000 men, begins to destroy the Soviet countryside and cities, hoping that Germany will launch an attack soon though Poland, draining more Soviet-Polish troops to another front.
 * You and I are now allies, I hope you will allow me to use your naval and air bases so I can attack Russia.
 * DeanSims 16:18, August 25, 2011 (UTC)

The Chronicles of the War
Hi, sorry to say this but this wiki is strictly for timeline that take place in the past up to the present. Future history is off limit. Marcpasquin 22:09, August 25, 2011 (UTC)

Ok, Sorry didn't know that.

AvA allience
Sure, Thailand shall accept the allience. 9 もりや すわこ 14:20, September 2, 2011 (UTC)

As long as I'm agianst Nazi germany im realy interested...LxCaucassus 16:36, September 3, 2011 (UTC)

From Poland
From Corvin Szabolcs, aka Lech II, King of Poland to the King of Sweden

The engagement between Venice and Hungary is ending, but other is about to begin.I see that you are trying to take over Poland, and i have a offer to make to you.Before the war, you were an ally of Hungary.However, a Civil war (or war of succession, since the objective is simply overthrow him and replace him with me or the crown prince) looks like its about to happen in Hungary.The king is against the already-signed peace treaty between Venice and Hungary and this war proved itself as a disaster, and any more year of fighting would exhaust the remainder of the Hungarian army, and it would end in defeat, since he is terrible with tactics and a somewhat incompetent ruler.Since Hungary will declare war on you anyway, Poland proposes a alliance in trade for your help in overthrow the king of Hungary.Your army can use the Polish cities as a base.However, you won't be allowed any territorial gains on Hungary, but you can make Prussia (a only nominal part of our territory, since it is rebelling against the Polish crown)a vassal state, or part of your territory.--Collie Kaltenbrunner 11:24, September 10, 2011 (UTC)


 * Yes, but the alliance only will be resumed after Béla (the current king of Hungary) is overthrown, and the new king (not defined yet. but will be either Szabolcs or the crown prince András) is crowned, because he (Béla) will be at war with you.i suggest that you move your troops (secretly) in the end of 1653 and start to attack in 1654.--Collie Kaltenbrunner 12:13, September 10, 2011 (UTC)

Shanghai
Even if that were the case it wouldn't help. Between the massive population of the city and the flames, nothing is going to exist within probably 50 miles of the destroyed city. A slightly off airburst would take out the entire city anyways, too. Lordganon 15:13, September 14, 2011 (UTC)

Nope. Fires, Debris, and Radiation, with refugees worse than anywhere on earth. No survivors.

There is a strike recorded near Ningbo. Have a look at the China page. Not sure what it is, but I assume a naval base.

Not only would Hangzhou get a ton of radiation, but near as I can tell, it would get overwhelmed by refugees, given its proximity to strikes, and get raided by the Dragons, or those fleeing them. Unlikely that there's any real number of survivors.

Have a look at the China map on that article. It'd be your best bet to find anywhere you could manage something.

Lordganon 22:24, September 14, 2011 (UTC)

The area is regularly ravaged by the Dragons, various refugees and warlords, covered in radiation, and suffering from the impacts of three separate strikes. You're still talking about the area around Shanghai, where a nation, or even any large number of survivors, is just impossible.

Look at the map on http://althistory.wikia.com/wiki/China_(1983%3A_Doomsday) and think about it.

Lordganon 07:00, September 15, 2011 (UTC)

Radiation does not only go in one direction - sure, it is concentrated in one, but it goes everywhere. You're also completely ignoring strikes that will land radiation right smack on that area.

You have completely failed to get my point about the refugees, fires, warlords, starvation, and above all, the Dragons. All four factors mean that millions die.

Again, have a look at the map on the China page. Have a good, hard look at that area. It is too close to those strike zones, and is right in the path of radiation from the strikes on the Southern Coast. Within a year, combined with the other factors, you are looking at more than 95% dead, probably closer to 99%. Hangzhou would be almost entirely depopulated, far worse than the rest of the region. There is no chance of a state existing there.

With major cities, especially ones the size of Shanghai, you need to remember that a massive death zone surrounds them. The blast will level most of the city, and the fires will take care of the rest within hours. Those who survive flee, causing others to flee as they find them. It is a cycle that lasts for weeks, until enough die off to live. The figures from that are never pretty.

Lordganon 09:35, September 15, 2011 (UTC)

About the only area left on the map that another Chinese state could possibly work in is somewhere along the border between Guangxi and Guizhou. The radiation from the strikes on the capitals of those two provinces, as well as the city of Hanoi in Vietnam, would miss almost entirely.

Lordganon 09:44, September 15, 2011 (UTC)

You are still failing to get the point. The radiation is largely irrelevant.

The radiation would be unaffected by that storm, btw. Have a look at the maps. It did not get anywhere near the area in question until the 28th or so, when it was largely burned out, and when it did, the radiation had already set in or had yet to arrive in force.

It is too close to Shanghai, and the other blasts. All there is to it. I have now even gone out of my way to supply you with a location that works 100%.

Lordganon 10:28, September 15, 2011 (UTC)

"New China" doesn't really make much sense. They are still in China, after all. Guangxi is a Autonomous Region for the Zhuang people, it would probably be best to play that card for the name, identity, etc. of the state.

"Most" is definitely out, too. As would any control over parts of Hunan. Some influence outside of their area of control, as virtually all the Chinese states have, would work as going into parts - not most - of the three provinces, but the core territory would need to be along that border.

Lordganon 13:47, September 15, 2011 (UTC)

Probably, it would remain Guangxi. The state would still have a large Chinese population, have to think of them too.

A probable capital, btw, would be Hechi.

Lordganon 00:32, September 16, 2011 (UTC)

(AvAr) It is Time:
It is time to form the Eastern Superpowers. Japan will be given an invitation aswell. It is time to strengthen Asia. Imperium Guy 11:36, September 21, 2011 (UTC)

Don't worry, you can take it, however you should speak for the betterment of the whole of the Eastern Superpowers (Hindustan, China and Japan). Vetoing decisions will be seen to when there is a need, right now that will be fine. Ta!! :D Imperium Guy 08:01, September 23, 2011 (UTC)

Yay!! I have written that constuction begin on a China-Japan bridge, would that be a problem as it has a big amount of Hindustani help and it stops at a Japanese island off the coast of Korea where it would meet up with its Japanese counterpart?? Ta!! :D Imperium Guy 09:38, September 23, 2011 (UTC)

Flag of the Eastern Superpowers? :D Imperium Guy 17:01, September 23, 2011 (UTC)

Varients 2 and 3, lolrl. Choose your pick. :D Imperium Guy 17:52, September 23, 2011 (UTC)

Afganistan still is British with Hindustani troops defending it, Scan. However, well done for putting the Soviets in their place. I will also begin an offensive into Soviet-Persia. :D Imperium Guy 19:01, September 24, 2011 (UTC)

Hey. I said that the USCA and the DRS are joined with more territory. Hope you don't mind because there is nothing to lose. Ta!! :D Imperium Guy 13:42, September 26, 2011 (UTC)

Principia Moderni (Possible Swedish Expansion Offer)
Dear Sweden. We have been watching the rapid Russian expansion and are incredibily concerned. We send an offer to join arms in the period between 1673 to 1682 where we will reveal ourselves. We are a current ally of yours as well. Sweden has the chance to gain huge advantages in land. We are also approaching the nations of Vietnam, Joeson, China (to hit Russia in the east) and Venice and Naples (to help you block Hungary, France and Anglo-Germany if they get involved). You have a vast territory open for possible expansion if you take this deal. Respond on this talk page if you are interested.

I'm interested. However, what happens in the Russian colonies? Scandinator

AvAr
Fancy joining the EASA program? It consists of Eastern Powers, UASR, Venezuala, Yugoslavia and Argentina? What do you think because venezuala is already in? :D Imperium Guy 09:43, October 3, 2011 (UTC)

Hey, the ruling in the ICJ was in Hindustani favor!! Therefore, Russian territories will have to be be returned and visa versa. There, war over!! :D Imperium Guy 18:22, October 3, 2011 (UTC)

Get 20 men or astronauts ready for the maiden launch of makind into space as well as to go to the moon and possibly Mars!! Also, need any help destroying a few communists?? :D Imperium Guy 20:50, October 9, 2011 (UTC)

Hey you want in on the USSR? they are currently invading me but can be turned back if assistance is given. Kunarian 19:22, October 10, 2011 (UTC)

You need to post. I need to find out if the bride is complete yet or not!! :D Imperium Guy 13:08, October 17, 2011 (UTC)

Mamluks
About the Mamluks, i already claimed Egypt first.here is Naples, France and Greece's proposal.Greece would like to get more territory on the French part, but the parts surrounded by French territory are mine.However, i have few interests on Cyrenaica aside of Benghazi.--Collie Kaltenbrunner 07:57, October 24, 2011 (UTC)

This don't work.Greece wants at least that part surrounded by France.Greece wants Egypt specially because it was present there before the Muslims took over.(even though it was 1000 years ago).Greece taking and retaining Arabia would be next to impossible on geographic and cultural terms. and, about Sinai, Red Sea, and Gulf of Persia, you need to talk about this with France.-Collie Kaltenbrunner 08:47, October 24, 2011 (UTC)



Now, there it goes.a new proposal.the Cyrenaican area is optional.Greece would like it, but i'm in doubt if i give it to you, or Greece gets it.--Collie Kaltenbrunner 14:28, October 26, 2011 (UTC)

Sorry.is because i woasn't sure if France conquered all of Algeria.was just 26%.oh, and half of Algeria is Burgundian because France made this deal with Burgundy.Sorry if i made other errors, because i wasn't sure in where is the Hadrian's wall.the Scottish coast isn't so detailed.--Collie Kaltenbrunner 08:07, October 28, 2011 (UTC)

Stability of Non-Player Nations
How do you find the stability of non-player nations? Do they use the stability score? LurkerLordB 22:13, October 29, 2011 (UTC)

I do not think so. That would make my calculations horribilty complicated.Scandinator

Principa Moderni- Scotland
Can I take Scotland and assume semi independence status? Alexanders 00:47, October 30, 2011 (UTC)

Trade routes
How a trade route is defined, and Hungary has trade routes with which countries?--Collie Kaltenbrunner 14:17, October 30, 2011 (UTC)

Ya, I'm confused, what are the trade routes you "missed" that gained Sweden a 10 point boost in stability? and you are only supposed to count stability every 5 years! not every Turn! So I am resetting the Stability things to their prior positions of 40 and 35 becasue for some reason Sweden ended up with more trade routes than Russia which I find very bizzareLxCaucassus 17:49, October 30, 2011 (UTC)

Hungary has 8 trade routes. There are land routes between Hungary and the following, Venice, AGC, Russia (via Lithuania), Russia (via Caucasians), Venice (Crusader States). Sea routes arrive at Naples, Tunisia and Libya.

Also the stabilty bonus for algorythms are calculated on an Excel spreadsheet EVERY year. I upload the full set of data every 5 as it takes a while. However I will input the current data into the algorythms.Scandinator

yes and they only take effect every 5 years when they are updated, so it doesnt change every year! you seem to change it whenever it is conveniant. Change it in 1705, then 1710 and so on, keep calculating it but it only takes effect on the 5th year, not whenever! and please define Russia's Trade routes pleaseLxCaucassus 21:07, October 30, 2011 (UTC)

Sorry if the last post is bit naggy and if it offended you a bit I didnt mean it but this is what I mean by trade routes: Russia has more than 9 trade routes and i find it strange that sweden has more(no offense), but on my own I could find these for Russia: Russia-Sweden(most probably very closed), Silk road, Russia-china trade, Russia-manchuria, Russia-Turik states, Russia-Kazakhstan, Russia-AGC/rest of europe, Crimea-Rest of europe ,Northeast passage, Oceania-Russia(via pacific), Russia-India(via pacific ocean), Africa-Russia, Canada/Novorossiya-Russia/Lithuania, North America-Africa, Novorossiya-Itsahagi/orthagi, India-Africa,Kazakhstan-India/Persia and so on…that’s more than 9 routes, 15 at least.If I tried I could think of some more.LxCaucassus 21:19, October 30, 2011 (UTC)

Nice Destroyer of worlds title BTW(im not being sarcastic, truely)LxCaucassus 22:21, October 30, 2011 (UTC)

Russia has 9 trade routes. there are 3 land routes with China, two with Hungary, two with Persia, one with each of the AGC and Hanthawaddians. Trade only occurs between player nations as NPN's are in isolation. Sweden has more due to the strategic economic positions of Scotland, Libya and the Netherlands. The Dutch were essentially the Venice of Northern Europe and with Libya opens many routes across Continental Europe and the Med. Sweden proper has only 5 trade routes with 3 from the Scots and Netherlands each and 4 from Libya.Scandinator

You are still forgetting about sea trade, you cant get to scotland without using a boat, you are only counting land routes you shouldnt count Scotland at all(except one with AGC), and who forgot about trade with Itsahagi? even if they are not in play they are still "Player nations" and if you are not counting sea trade LxCaucassus 11:08, October 31, 2011 (UTC)

you forgot about the Northeast passage, and by you logic of by country you should only have one trade route with each nation so your logic on that is bogus. I have 2 trade routes with Hanthawaddy(the colony and the northeast passage). I also trade alot with Itsahagi via Orthagi and the orthagians are basicaly dependant on trade with Russia for their economy, thats 3 routes right there that you "missed"LxCaucassus 13:30, October 31, 2011 (UTC)

Can you draw a map? Detectivekenny (Info; Talk) 03:25, November 1, 2011 (UTC)

Truce
I can not believe I'm stuck between LxCaucasus and you. because I can not make my mid about this, I suggest you and LxCaucasus declare a truce. Just keep what you have and try not to attack Russia again. please, I am stuck between the two of you and I just want to get out of it. --RandomWriterGuy 04:32, October 31, 2011 (UTC)

Great Northern War PM
In this case, Hungary will revert to neutral, but Greece still will be supporting Russia.--Collie Kaltenbrunner 08:37, October 31, 2011 (UTC)

Trade Route Map
No seriously can you create a map of list of all trade routes? If possible differentiate between major and minor trade routes (major includes mainly bordering countries), and also include relationships through colonies. Detectivekenny (Info; Talk) 00:50, November 2, 2011 (UTC)

Okay. Take your time. Detectivekenny (Info; Talk) 04:41, November 2, 2011 (UTC)

Why did you take Australia? :D It didn't receive independence yet anyways :D Doctor261 06:05, November 2, 2011 (UTC)

Finally something original ;D Good luck, mate Doctor261 07:28, November 2, 2011 (UTC)

I don't know.ColorCounter stopped working in my computer, and now the only way that i can count the pixels is manually.and for Russia, this is madness.--Collie Kaltenbrunner 08:37, November 2, 2011 (UTC)

Sure. Just propose it to me on your diplomacy turn ;) Doctor261 08:55, November 2, 2011 (UTC)

Thanks for lightening my up ;) Doctor261 21:10, November 2, 2011 (UTC)

Make me that table. I really want to see how my stability goes ;D And it's very interesting to count all these things. Doctor261 05:57, November 3, 2011 (UTC)

Glad to hear that ^.^ Doctor261 10:07, November 3, 2011 (UTC)

Finland
Hate to do this, but that's not my problem. Whoever is right I don't know (and honestly at this point I don't care), but the fact is you guys are slowing down the entire game. If I see progress in the peace effort, meaning no more argument, then you get your territory. If not, Finland. Simple. Detectivekenny (Info; Talk) 05:25, November 4, 2011 (UTC)

AvA (r)
Things are heating up and China needs your help. Fancy rejoining the game? It needs new players after several quit.82.11.86.136 18:00, November 5, 2011 (UTC)

Persia and Sweden
I want to tell something about the Northern War. I know you have been vital to me and promised to help me invade India, but there was a reason I had to side with Russia. I did not want Russia to invade me if I side with you, which is the reason I had to side with Russia.

Now, I want to ask for amnesty from Sweden for Persia. In exchange, I prmoise never to take sides if Sweden and Russia are in war again.

Can we also economically cooperate?

RandomWriterGuy 23:55, November 6, 2011 (UTC)

How about supporting you in the crusades? France has already started it and I could help you. --RandomWriterGuy 15:13, November 7, 2011 (UTC)

Here's little quote from AvA:Revised:

"Soviet Union denies Baltikan offer to conquer China, since most of the chinese leaders are communists. Soviet Union secretely shows China the plan, offered by Baltika." Doctor261 12:06, November 10, 2011 (UTC)

Allies vs Axis Revised
"*Soviet representative arrives to your Chinese office.*"

"Dear ruler of China. I have brung you bad news. Baltika and some other countries are onto you, but I am here to defend your rights. Here is the plan *shows the plan*. It was offered by Baltika to split Japan and China into several parts. They offered this to me, but this just seems stupid. And since we have very similar ideologies, I will do everything to defend chinese and your rights.

And a little sidenote. Please keep this meeting as a secret. We don't want anyone to know about it, do we?"

"*Soviet representative awaits for Chinese leader's decision*"

Stability
One problem I have with the system is that most countries shouldn't have an "effective tax system." That means bureaucracy, with specifically appointed government workers sent to every village, field, and town, to collect a uniform value of taxes. This also implies strict punishment on tax enforcement among other things, and should be money and not crops. Just to avoid excessive controversy, I'm going to limit "effective" taxation to after industrialization stage 3 and only for highly centralized states. If I draw the line anywhere else then it would be too controversial. What do you think?

How is the map going? Detectivekenny (Info; Talk) 01:25, November 11, 2011 (UTC)

More problems I have:

1) War won in less than 5 years/Wars lasting five years: we don't really have any way of determining how long a war will last. Now that I think of it, winning wars should have 0 points, and lost wars should have 500*percent lost.  The reason you are fighting a war is to achieve a certain ends, and it has nothing to do with stability.  However, you might gain trade routes or other valuable commodities.

2) In general, people's stabilities are just getting bigger and bigger with no end in sight. We need to set a cap, or if you're up to it a curve, like maybe the logarithmic curve.

3) We should also differentiate not posting versus a non-improvement turn. The policy since the beginning of the game has been that not posting implies "minor economic improvement."  Thus, not posting can stay at -20, but expansion, military, etc. is usually very costly and should be at -50 per turn.  Posts that include large amounts of colonial expansion but nothing else will also be -20. Detectivekenny (Info; Talk)  19:21, November 11, 2011 (UTC)

Principia Moderni Swedish Civil War
Hey, I was wondering, what if we did a civil war between the Nobles and the Swedish King Karl XI? Mabe have the Danish military as a whole and some Swedish units pledge allegiance to Karl and then the others keep their allegiance to the Nobles? Russia will back Karl as, even if Russian Tsar Peter Has a grudge with Karl due to the previous war and Finland, Peter Despises the Nobles more. how about it, starting the Swedish civil war?-Lx (leave me a message) 22:54, November 12, 2011 (UTC)

RE
But they would have lots of stuff that they would need to buy from Naples to set up their new nation. They might go into debt for it, but they need to support themselves. But in any case, it would be easy just to say it was blocked, as they can't get through the Danish straights.

How does Sweden control all the Baltic? Anglo-Germany and Russia and Finland all possess Baltic Ports. Together, they could probably at least hold a trade route within the Baltic, even if Sweden could stop up the Danish straights.

The picture is from the video game folklore, and it is really cool. LurkerLordB 16:42, November 13, 2011 (UTC)

Response
It is very obvious that you are not being neutral with regards to anything on that blasted game that your nation is involved in. You may not think so, but it is obviously the case.

Simply put, your actions and behavior have violated the wikia rules on several occasions. I have warned you, repeatedly, to quit. You have not done so. The extent I have been lenient with you is unprecedented, simply because of your age, and that you think you are doing your "job." As stated before, one more step over the line and you will get a vacation - such behavior will no longer be tolerated. Kenny has had to tell you such things, too.

You are harassing and bullying the users of that game, and I am tired of it. Of that there is absolutely no question.

Those who consider themselves free of "bias" are almost never actually so. This is a proven fact.

If ending trouble on this site means losing a "valued contributor" then so be it.

Lordganon 00:29, November 14, 2011 (UTC)

I read what you said to LG too Scandinator. Although I do not regret what I stated (the accusations of bias themselves) I do apoligize if I phrased something in a manner far more harsh than it should have been (as I fear may have been the case). LurkerLordB 01:13, November 14, 2011 (UTC)

All I'm going to say is if we're going to start a huge Wikia-wide controversy, let's at least clear everything up with stability. While Scandinator was probably not completely objective with his stability and algorithms, it is also true that he likely tailored his own country specifically to meet the needs of the algorithm. It is probable that his own actions for his country represent his ideas of stability. So in a sense it is not bias, but appears as so. I'm going to review the stability algorithm once this is over.

@Scandinator, you're not innocent… You probably should not have invaded Finland, and there may be eventual consequences. But overall this thing is a huge headache… so let's not start a controversy. @LG I can handle the conflict as it is on the game, feel free to interject, but we can deal with "harassing and bullying" once this chaos is over with. Detectivekenny (Info; Talk) 04:23, November 14, 2011 (UTC)

Where are the 1715 stability scores? i want to know how many of stability my nation has.--Collie Kaltenbrunner 06:58, November 14, 2011 (UTC)

Busy Weekends
Hey Samuel, could you take care of Spain on the UTC Friday and Saturday turns. I have too much to do over the weekends... Thanks!!

ManofSteele 02:45, November 18, 2011 (UTC)

Fix Stability
You might have missed this, but I did not add that thing saying that we would just be using the stability curve until the algorithm was fixed on a whim Detectivekenny, under the Finnish, war, stated " The stability curve is 100% objective, so for now we're going to use it, until we can get an objective stability system." That means until you can get the stability thing to be objective, we will use the curve. Since it wasn't objective when he posted that (or else he wouldn't have done so) and since it hasn't been modified in any way since then, it is therefore still not objective. I think some ideas to make it more objective might be to remove the soil quality thing, since that doesn't seem like there is any direct scale to say "this place has good soil, this doesn't" and also maybe define the size thing as well. LurkerLordB 00:51, November 19, 2011 (UTC)

Incas
I don't think you noticed, but I posted that I wanted a small bit of the Incan Empire as well. Since China's main purpose is to get Argentina, I took a part of OTL Chile that was in the south. Also, I thought it a bit unfair for China not to have a pathway to the Atlantic, so I decided to give them a small amount of Swedish Territory in the south and give Sweden a tiny amount of chinese in the north.LurkerLordB 14:50, November 22, 2011 (UTC)

I haven't made the map yet, but my strategy is to take over the entire empire. The plan is to take the area around Cuzco. Since the area is hard to invade, we'll just have to starve the city. At any rate, I was hoping to have borders with some of the black areas, but I am not entirely unhappy with the map Lurker proposed. CrimsonAssassin 00:41, November 23, 2011 (UTC)

Personally, I think it would look the best to just give China all of of the Argentine part except the French area, and give Naples the Part right above the "L" bend, and then give Sweden the northern part around Cuzco, but I figured that Sweden wanted a pathway from the Pacific to atlantic LurkerLordB 02:59, November 23, 2011 (UTC)

Mamluks
Fine, we'll keep the original division and the land to the yemeni. --Galaguerra1 16:33, November 22, 2011 (UTC)

Welcome back!
I am glad to see that you are back in the game. Both China and Japan faced going grey due to no use the turn after next and Baltika shortly afterwards. At least China won't bite the dust. :-)82.2.77.221 08:59, November 25, 2011 (UTC) AKA Billy.

Just pop in sometimes. Go for it. Could I also post for the CoA when I pop in?? :D Imperium Guy 09:23, November 25, 2011 (UTC)

The colour of the CoA should be yellow, China's colour. Not orange, it looks kinda horrible!! :D Imperium Guy 09:29, November 25, 2011 (UTC)

You are to destroy every area which was formally Hindustan's and who have rebelled. They should be back in the Coalition colour. We have a HUGE army. We should use it to crush and mush all the rebels. :D Imperium Guy 09:32, November 25, 2011 (UTC)

Finally, a WORLD power!! :D Imperium Guy 09:45, November 25, 2011 (UTC)

Flanders
May we can conquest Flanders together. Yo may have the northern part and I the french-speaking part... Show me your plan to divide it and I'll tell you if I'm agree. --Galaguerra1 23:18, November 26, 2011 (UTC)

Jaeden has already given me the control of Burgundy, as vassal. So, I already own that land. I'm agree with your proposal. Let's invade and retake Flanders! --Galaguerra1 03:09, November 27, 2011 (UTC)

West Africa
It would be unrealistic for the borders to have remained the same for so long and then to suddenly change all at once. It would be more realistic for them to have changed during the course of the game. What is concerning me, however, is your constant use of the phrase "leave it to me" in this situation. Every time this is brought up, you say the same thing again and again. This seems to show that you don't want anyone else's imput on what you do (other than Kenny's mandatory imput). Scandinator, it seems unfair for you to just take over what was my idea and not allow any of my ideas or Lx's ideas in. However, just recently you did begin to talk about it on the talk page after I made my remarks there, which I appreciate, but it did seem before as if you wanted to just take over the whole idea, having us all leave it to you, and then just do what you pleased. LurkerLordB 03:40, November 27, 2011 (UTC)

Map
Sorry about your pxels on New Sweden, i added them, but it was on the wrong place. when you merged Thoorland and New Scandinavia, you named it New Scandinavia, and i confused New Sweden and New Scandinavia. i'm sure that those 293 px intended for New Sweden went to new Scandinavia instead.i need to transfer them?--Collie Kaltenbrunner 16:28, November 28, 2011 (UTC)

Good on you. The world WILL be yellow!! :D Imperium Guy 09:08, December 2, 2011 (UTC)

New Stability System
I would prefer you to wait to take it over. I appreciate how dedicated you are to the game, but I would prefer if there was a little time where I can see exactly what works and doesn't work in the system. Last time I wasn't exactly on the boat with you and that caused problems. So no. Detectivekenny (Info; Talk) 01:12, December 5, 2011 (UTC)

Egypt's deal
Egypt will join the TC as a SAR type region (like Thailand did), but on 1 condition- Baltonordia get a similar deal in Eastern Europe and Scandinavia. What they decide to do with it is there business, but Egypt wants them offered it, just in case they also wish to join as a SAR.The River Nile-2 15:07, December 6, 2011 (UTC)

Note.
I'm joining the alliance, I'm after Libya, Crete and Chad next turn!The River Nile-2 15:05, December 12, 2011 (UTC)

Oman-Persian War
I recenlty (and forgot to tell you this so I thought I type it in for you) declared war on Oman. May you kindly please do an alogythm for me? RandomWriterGuy 04:32, December 9, 2011 (UTC)

Second Swedish Civil War/ War of Swedish Sucession
I would definitely not want to be in your place right now. It's just shameful that our fellow users have plans to divide Sweden amongst themselves while you are still playing. And while I will not get directly involved in your civil war, let me assure you that you have a near-infinite amount of Vietnamese volunteers to help you defeat the warring factions. Would you be able to accept a Swedish Republic? It would be free of undue Vietnamese influence, which is more than I can say about the rest of the players involved.

Yank 21:34, December 9, 2011 (UTC)

What if the Republicans re-established an independant Scotland in exchange for renouncing their claims to Sweden's government.

Yank 00:25, December 10, 2011 (UTC) Oh wow I thought you quit or something. What can I do to prevent the other nations from carving Sweden up? CrimsonAssassin 01:01, December 10, 2011 (UTC)

AvAr
Mwahhhaa!!!! :D Imperium Guy 10:28, December 14, 2011 (UTC)

Scotland
You cannot retake Scotland! That was the agreement, that Scotland would remain totally independent. Remember, you can't do anything now without Galaguerra's approval, as he now controls your government, and his king, who is also king of Sweden, pledged to allow Scotland to remain independent. Furthermore, the Scots are not going to rejoice to be dominated again, they just fought a war for independence. This would be like The American Congress voting to rejoin Britain, totally ASB. That's why I am striking your post down, because it is totally implausible.

This is just like when you abused your moderator powers to attempt to get Prussia to break away from another player nation right after you lost it by a treaty, or when you defied a moderator action to attempt to gain Finland back after being punished by losing it. You need to accept the fact that Sweden will sometimes lose territory, and you need to respect the agreements we reach on the talk page. It's no fun playing the game with someone who just ignores all of our agreements whenever they cause his nation to lose territory. If Sweden just keeps conquering land after land and never loses, it will end up like what you did on Imperial Europe 2. LurkerLordB 22:28, December 18, 2011 (UTC)

Axis vs Allies Revised
What is the name of the new timeline?He's Laptop Zombie, he's right here next to you! Send mails to him through his mailbox, and being an admin, here is what he did at this wiki. 04:18, December 19, 2011 (UTC)

Africa
This is a good way to disencourage colonialism.However, when exactly Guinea was estabilished?--Collie Kaltenbrunner 12:10, December 20, 2011 (UTC)

I still don't really like that you've declared yourself master of Africa. I think it would be better for every turn any moderator who wants to just has events occur in Africa & other unclaimed territories and then we can just see what happens, instead of you saying "OK, here's what's going to happen, leave it all to me". LurkerLordB 14:56, December 20, 2011 (UTC)

Axis vs Allies Revised
The new page is created at Axis vs Allies Revised.

3rd Shahzrur War
I have recentyl declared the 3rd Shahzrur War. Can I asks you to make a alogythm for it? RandomWriterGuy 03:44, December 28, 2011 (UTC)

American Empire (Map Game)
I want to invite you to join my map game

DeanSims 22:41, December 28, 2011 (UTC)

Taiwan-Guangxi Relations
What communist nation is this in particular, one thats already made or one that your planning to make? If its based out of Jiangxi or Fujian, especially Fujian, I would have to say that maybe you should look for another area for your nation as canon. Canon dictates that this was pretty much a disaster area and was under some pretty uncivilized regimes. If its a state based further inland in southern China or another SouthEast Asian state I'm interested in your proposal and working with you but Taiwan would definitely be hostile, maybe not physically but this "expedition" would likely get a staredown from the Taiwanese. They claim all of China sans Tibet already, but southern China is definitely their backyard even outside their official borders.

Nevertheless I'd be interested to hear your ideas and please contact me. I will be posting this on both your talkpage and mine but I'd prefer if we talked in this one. Arstar 04:37, January 5, 2012 (UTC)

Sure, lets discuss it on my page.

LG recommended the location to me. I have started work on my Guangxi article. It is near Yunan and claims five of the Chinese provinces; Gunagxi, Guangdong, Hunan, Guizhou and Sichuan. Its communist but moving away from that, when the supreme leader dies the state will become a technocracy. I have loose control over half of Guangxi and Guizhou and part of Hunan.Scandinator

For the record, Scan, Kenny has no say in Macau's affairs. Lordganon 07:35, January 5, 2012 (UTC)

It's Arstar's article. If he's not around, talk to me about it. Lordganon 08:12, January 5, 2012 (UTC)

Thanks LG for offering to help. To Scan, I would size it down quite a bit. Don't build nations by provinces but rather by the towns you are going to have rule the rest. If you could make a map that would be great. Meanwhile I think that all of the Chinese nation editors (including you) should get together to discuss the future of the region since progress on it has been slow moving after 1983DD's recession around January '11. All I'm going to say is that In terms of my two nations in the area "Imperial China" and Taiwanese China" I think that Taiwanese China might get all land-claimy but the Imperialist China might form an uneasy alliance with Guangxi so long as they are anti-Soviet. Arstar 20:45, January 6, 2012 (UTC)

Considering I created the nation, and Yank and Arstar built a basic frame article, then Kenny wrote 90% of the content, I think its unfair to say he has no say in the article considering both I and Yank support Kenny.Oerwinde 00:49, January 8, 2012 (UTC)

I agree with LG. Just because he wrote a lot of it, he still defied the conditions that I gave him in terms of editing it. Arstar 01:16, January 8, 2012 (UTC)

Re:Doomsday Tibet and Yunan relations with Guangxi
Well, I believe that they would not be hostile to them, as they do conduct trade with Nanchung and the Dragon State, so having a fellow communist government next to them wouldn't hurt. They'd probably try and convince them to join their "War with the USSR", though.--Vladivostok 09:18, January 5, 2012 (UTC)

Well, I thought I was done with 1983: Doomsday… I have only a narrow band that Arstarpool allowed me to edit within Macau, so you would have to ask him, if he is even active…  But as self-proclaimed Chief of South Chinese exploration, I will take an educated guess. Macau is willing to create relations with the nation, as Macau can provide valuable outlets for trade in return for raw materials and food. The politics would be very interesting, though, given the diverse parties. I leave you to be creative, just don't stray too far off the article. Detectivekenny (Info; Talk) 00:31, January 9, 2012 (UTC)

Why are you so possessive of the moderator events?
Scandinator, I am recently becoming upset with your behavior once again, but I don't want to start anymore fights, so I want to resolve this peacefully for once. First off, you are not in charge of the moderator events in Principia Moderni, you have no more authority over them than any other moderator. Yet you appear to be very possessive over the moderator events that occur in the game. First, you have now twice changed my posts, without even giving any reason for or even mentioning it beneath it, which should be a common courtesy''. ''Furthermore, you now have recently begun adding them hours in advance to make sure you get to add them first. I'm tired of you doing the vast majority off the moderator events and controlling all of them, and now you control stability and industrialization and the algorithm as well, you just control too much, it seems like you are in charge off everything. That's why you get into so many disputes with other players, it's because anything anyone does is somehow connected to you Can't you please let some other moderators do some things? And at least leave a comment when you change other moderator's posts so it doesn't look like you're doing it for no reason? LurkerLordB 22:03, January 13, 2012 (UTC)

Also, the reason Prussia would be seperate would be for cultural reasons. Mazovia was never part of Anglo-Germany, they would have recieved no English culture like the rest of Germany, and any cultural changes that occured Anglo-Germany wide would be lost. Furthermore, the northern part was ruled by Japan for more than a century. Massive Japanese cultural diffusion would have occured, including that entire region being heavily Schmittist. Many other aspects of Japanese culture would have been absorbed as well. Furthermore,  after Japan lost control, Sweden took over, so they then may have absorbed a small amount of Swedish culture from that brief period (not enough to give them any loyalty to Sweden after so many years though). Finally, Anglo-Germany did take over, but by then Prussia would culturally be no closer to the rest of Germany than the Czechs and Swiss would be, perhaps even less so due to the extremely foreign nature of Japanese culture. Neither the Czechs nor the Swiss would be able to control parts of Germany that are not dominated by their culture, especially if the German parts of their nations outnumbered the Czech/Swiss parts. Your current situation has Prussia controlling an area which outnumbers it, yet possesses a culture with vast religious, cultural, and perhaps even language differences (as Prussian may now be a combo of Japanese and German). They would be unable to control that territory, and it would break away and join either Brandenburg or Saxony.

Plus, Brandenburg was Zagoria's nation. If he did come back post break-up, it seems that it would at least be nice to give the nation he controls a seaport so that he isn't totally surrounded and landlocked. Furthermore, having a superlong, skinny Prussia like that just looks ugly in shape. Why would they have that tiny length to the Atlantic Ocean? I can see how you, not considering cultural differences, would have them take over north Brandenburg, but why that narrow strip to the Atlantic? It just seems strange, and it would make more sense for the unique Prussian culture to break away to form their own nation of just them, just like the unique Czech and Swiss cultures did when they broke away. Imagine the Swiss controlling all of Austria and Bavaria. It just doesn't work. LurkerLordB 05:00, January 14, 2012 (UTC)

States of America 4 Algorithm Request
Please make an algorithm for the CSS/American Union War against Michigan and post it on the talk page of the game if you have any time. Thanks,

DeanSims 16:01, January 14, 2012 (UTC)

Stability List
I know you said you had trouble with the table formatting (with the visual mode edtting of tables half-broken and the source mode really complicated, I can see why) so you said you weren't going to post the stabilities of the nations, however, this makes it hard to estimate whether or not it is feasible to enter a war, or whether or not your nation is about to collapse into revolts. You don't have to do a table, you can just make something like: Example: Or, you could put them on some other site, but it's invonvenient to be inable to make our own algorithms. I'll even make a table if you want me too and give me the numbers. LurkerLordB 22:34, January 17, 2012 (UTC)
 * Nation-CSS-Algorithm Points
 * Naples-7-25

Naples' current government started after the the 2nd Neapolitan civil war, in 1751. I'll try and get some of the other ones as soon as I can... LurkerLordB 22:52, January 17, 2012 (UTC) These are the only ones I can definitely choose the start date for right now, I'll post an announcement for people to update it as soon as they can. LurkerLordB 23:08, January 17, 2012 (UTC)
 * Naples-1751 (Carlo overthrown)
 * Turan-1715 (Ottomans defeated and replaced)
 * Sweden-1747 (union with France)
 * France-1747 (union with Sweden)
 * China- 1732 (government reform & new nobility&provinces after a rebellion)
 * Nippon- 1750 (independent from Vietnam)

Say, what's the Neapolitan current stability (for the algorithm)? I need to see whether or not it would be feasible to attack Malaysia now, or if I should wait until later. LurkerLordB 01:12, January 21, 2012 (UTC)

We really need a list, like 3 wars are currently stalled because no one knows the stability. LurkerLordB (Talk) 03:08, January 25, 2012 (UTC)

wait, does the new stability for player-states even include population as a factor at all??????-Lx (leave me a message) 03:30, January 25, 2012 (UTC)

Say, what would my stability be in 1801, assuming that every year until then I build up my military and industrialize more due to having to increase production for the buildup and have no more expansion? And can I count on Sweden and its vassals, puppets, and union states to be ready for war by then to honor their agreement with Naples. LurkerLordB (Talk) 23:38, January 31, 2012 (UTC)

About Finland and Kola
The new Emperor of France and King of Sweden, August I Harold, asks the Chancellors of Sweden and its colonies for a confirmation of their loyalty. He also questions how will a war with Kola benefit the Parliament and the Crown? He also says that, if the war is fought and Finland is conquest, it must remain as a independent state under the Emperor (who will be Grand Prince), as Sweden. --Galaguerra1 22:48, January 18, 2012 (UTC)

Ok, I thought so and I diceded I will support you in your campaign to conquest Kola and Finland, but you msut support the campaign of Burgundy to conquest Lombardy and let me conquest Wales for myself. --Galaguerra1 19:39, January 20, 2012 (UTC)

Say, how long is Sweden going to remain under the rule of the French King? For it will take some planning as to who gets what new territory gained. LurkerLordB 22:20, January 20, 2012 (UTC)

I'm thinking about Saarland, or even Hannover. Anyway, I'm ot planning to kep Sweden under my control for ever. Just until Scan considers it necessary. --Galaguerra1 03:00, January 21, 2012 (UTC)

If Sweden&France will promise to help Naples in the war against Malaysia and not get any territory, Naples will help them in this war with no plans to get territory (or, you can give me something in this war and I'll give you something in mine, but I prefer the first offer). Anyways, we should not help Poland in their war, and then wait right afterwards for Russia to beat them, then when Russia has the lowest stability due to the war draining their CSS and their expansion penalty, we attack them at their weakest & take them out. Helping Poland is a lost cause. LurkerLordB (Talk) 02:58, January 23, 2012 (UTC)

Naples, my 2 vassals, and Israel will all join in the war to help Sweden, that give you +9. My main goal is to take out the Malays. Getting more of the Dravidan-speaking parts of Swedish India would be good too, but getting help with Malaysia is more important. LurkerLordB (Talk) 03:46, January 23, 2012 (UTC)

Adopting
You do not need to ask anyone before adopting a page in DD. Go for it.

Most powerful'd be a stretch, imo.

Take into account everything on the ANZC page, and remember that Australia is a member-state of an organization even more unified than the otl EU.

Lordganon 01:35, January 21, 2012 (UTC)

Map
Because when you posted the new map, i had already modified the older map.I will see if i can adopt the new map for 1790.--Collie Kaltenbrunner 11:10, January 21, 2012 (UTC)

I know. but the map of 1785 was so changed that adding the changes of would revert a lot of progress on the map. i copied and pasted some things of the map, because i didn't want to do it all over again, and there were a lot of errors on the European borders (on the old one).Oh, and i will use the new, as i have already updated it. but this ain't a guarantee that the to-be-used version (new map with the progress that was added to the old) is totally fixed. i will look for more errors later.--Collie Kaltenbrunner 12:55, January 21, 2012 (UTC)

Puppet States on Principia Moderni
Hey, can I get a reason why you think the current system is superior to any of my alternatives? Because the current systesm is really unfair, a user with 1 vassal state is penalized as much as a user with 2+3 puppets. Every other factor into war, good or bad (expansion, military buildup, amount of allies, etc.) all depends on how much of the factor there is or has been. The vassal/puppet state negative is the only thing which has absoutely no change based on amount. Plus it is open to abuse. I don't really care what alternative there is, but why is there such a big support for not changing the system? I don't get it. LurkerLordB (Talk) 01:24, January 29, 2012 (UTC) I don't see why 2 would be so dificult to implement, just for the war (not for the purposes of nation collapse or whatever) subtract the number of vassals/puppets from the total score they get from stability. Or, even better, just not put it with stability at all and have a seperate line in the algorithm for "number of vassals (-1 for each vassal)" which the number would be put (it would have the same effect, and probably be easier to keep track of). Would that change be enough? LurkerLordB (Talk) 02:03, January 29, 2012 (UTC)
 * 1) Good Point, I hadn't really liked this one after thinking about it.
 * 2) Each puppet adds +2 on military, this subtracts -1 for each puppet. So basically what this does is halve the benefit you get from the puppets.  So I don't see why it would be equating to instantly losing, unless you got so many you had less than 1 stability, and since that would be like 20 puppets, that's the problem I'm trying to fix.
 * 3) The point would be to make people make less puppet nations, so if they wanted territory from the black portion they would have to not have as many puppet states.
 * 4) I agree it is probably unrealistic, it was just a prior way to manage large numbers of puppets so I thought I'd include it.
 * 5) THe one I'm trying to delete.

Behavior
Scan, I've warned you time and time again to be more civil, and to quit making demands. And, you've now passed the extreme tolerance I've been practicing with you.

I have blocked you for a day, as a result. I suggest that you take it to heart, and remember your mistake. You have been allowed the privilege of being able to still edit this talk page. Do not abuse it.

Lordganon 15:47, January 29, 2012 (UTC)

Message at Principia Moderni.
Check this out. RandomWriterGuy 22:34, January 31, 2012 (UTC)

I wanted to remind you that I severed relationships to Sweden for its actions against Russia, which is making it now a complete threat to the Russian people. Relationships will be restored if Sweden apoligizes for its actions. You already gained revenge when you lost the first war to Russia by winning the second one. There should be no point in waging a third war!

Also, Vietnam broke relations with me when it heard about my actions. RandomWriterGuy 06:00, February 1, 2012 (UTC)

Principia Moderni Talk Page
Did you intend to delete a bunch of stuff from the page? And It doesn't appear to be an archive attempt, as only new stuff was taken away and old stuff was kept. And you deleted the table that you asked for. I didn't want to undo your edit because you'd added some new stuff. LurkerLordB (Talk) 03:32, February 1, 2012 (UTC)

Australia
Oh, sorry. I did not know that. Sure, you can take it. Enclavehunter 15:11, February 1, 2012 (UTC)

Yes, I noticed he had let you - but quite frankly, despite your declared intentions, you never adopted the page - he did - so you had nothing to stand on.

Anyhoo....

Yes, I'm aware how large they are - cities in the Americas are the same way. Though the only one of the three that would have much of anything left is Sydney. The other two really aren't that big.

Something in the 400kt range is probably good for all three cities - but don't mention any specific sizes like that. Heck, from what I can remember, the Soviets really didn't have many, if any, that size.

A blast that size would probably eliminate an area about 7-10km on all sides, nearly outright.

There are a few factors you're missing, mind.

First, strikes like that set fires. Tons of them. Much of the remaining city would be burned out. Have a look at maps from Hiroshima and Nagasaki for more on this. This will be made worse by a lack of power, and water, to fight them. Even bringing in outside help will only do so much - they are really going to have to burn themselves out, mostly.

Each strike actually causes EMP damage, though localized. Most of the power, and other wired things, in areas directly adjoining the blast zones are going to be damaged, if not down.

Fallout lasts for weeks, not only one day. And the blasts themselves will screw around with the winds a little, too. Add to that that most fallout is actually deposited by higher altitude winds - at most, you'll be able to find out the surface ones. Plus, there will be large areas on the surface that are radiated through the blast, too.

Far as I can tell, in Perth and Sydney, the wind will blow the majority to sea. Melbourne, it will largely go to the sea too, though areas inland and to its northeast will be effected. Either way, bet on the vast majority of fallout going whichever way the winds normally blow.

Add the impact of people fleeing, too.

Towns like you're talking about just aren't possible, all things told. In addition to the 7-10km, add about the same for the fires and general chaos, though this will vary greatly depending on the territory. Most of the urban areas will burn, even if beyond this, though that is not 100%. And, downwind, you'd have irradiated land that would extend this even further.

For instance, of the two satellite cities you quote, only one would be at real risk of burning, etc. From what I can see, Sutherland is separated from the rest of the urban area, except for a bridge - it would escape the fires, by and large. However Blacktown, while further away, is connected through an urban environment, and thus far more vulnerable to all of these factors.

Lordganon 15:56, February 3, 2012 (UTC)

You've got to remember, though, Scan, that we're talking about 1983, not the present. Roads like that are a fairly new convention.

Doubtful that they would stop the fires, if they'd been built, which as I said, I doubt. Slow down, yes - but not stop, by any means.

Spared the radiation, maybe. But the winds will do nothing to the fires, all things told.

Scan, you're talking about three massive hits to the infrastructure. The entire water system in these areas is going to be more or less gone. You see, fire equipment needs water pressure in the pipes to function. This pressure is going to be largely non-existent in the days after DD, especially closer to the blast zones.

Add to that, the thing that would suffer most from EMP damage is actually the power lines. They will get shorted out far further than any other damage occurs. For instance, during Soviet atmospheric testing in Siberia, EMP damage to electronics only happened inside a certain radius. Yet, power lines got shorted out by current from the blast passing through them in Central Asia.

Now, I'm not saying it'd be remotely that bad, here. But there's going to be damage from that, though by no means even at all, for pretty well the 30-50km radius you describe.

Basically, the few surviving areas of Perth - it's actually small enough so this won't be much of anything - will avoid the fallout, but get the fires. Yes, people will survive. But almost no buildings will remain very habitable.

My estimates for Sydney would have an absolute blast radius - i.e. pretty well nothing left - of about 10km from where the bomb hit. This would remain entirely impassible today. Depending on terrain and surviving infrastructure, the fires will go anywhere from 5-20km beyond that. My guess, the flames will get stopped before Blacktown, but not by much. The evacuation zones around there would more than likely include that particular one.

About the closest I can see them letting people stay are the towns of St. Marys, Prestons, and Sutherland (along with the little towns around them)

And, remember that the ANZC article even talks about these areas being more or less abandoned, with new cities being built to both replace them and house the survivors/evacuees.

Lordganon 03:14, February 4, 2012 (UTC)

Sorry for taking so long to respond, was a massive amount of edits to go through, comment on, etc. and was busy last night and yesterday afternoon, lol.

You can find the simulator we use around here at this location.] Fair warning: There are limits on what it can do, and what it shows, which are in sections below the simulator itself, that you need to read first. Last thing I want is another argument with someone over that stuff.

At most, they would have an hour to get to a shelter before the blast - and given all things, probably more like 10-30 mins. You'd be lucky to get a thousand in there, quite frankly, before it hit. And after it hit.... well, there's one aspect of those things most people miss: if there's a direct hit, they are pretty useless. Not only that, but they have to survive until help arrives, and be able to get out - both of which are far harder than you'd think. Add to that that it appears to be right under the region where I'd expect ground zero to be - they're gone.

Looking at a map of that road, in the west it will definitely mark some sort of boundary in some spots - it's about as far as I figure the fires would get, and not even that far in some spots. There's places that it look like it would cross over, too - wooded areas on either side, etc. that would catch from embers, which would be a worry all over, quite frankly. Same goes for any spot it can go over or under (bridges, etc.) In the east, the blast radius itself would go over the road, and the fires spread beyond.

Sydney, and most of its suburbs, would be destroyed. The southernmost, and westernmost of them would have a chance. But the rest, pretty well gone. The government would have evacuated the remaining ones for a couple of weeks, too, minimum. I also expect that this blast would be larger than the other two, as well, given that the city is so much larger.

Melbourne, definitely gone.

Well, the simulator's blast site in Perth - nothing to do with the city, the sites are pretty arbitrary in it, so remember that too - is northeast of where it would have probably went off. Likely, it would have been aimed for the harbor regions, causing waves that make its effects worse. As noted, it's northern areas and suburbs are pretty well gone. To the south.... well, the suburbs are going to get burned out, by and large. Really, 95% in this context... you may as well say 100%, because the answer's basically the same. By my guess, in the region you're not going to see any settlements closer than Rockingham.

Lordganon 02:25, February 6, 2012 (UTC)

Well, that'd be assuming that they really got any warning. I can tell you right now that they didn't. And that such things never work as they are planned. 15m down would still be a risk from the ground burst, quite honestly, given the location.

You're missing, however, one of the things I said: that would be more or less ground zero for the blast. The entrances would be blocked off, likely fused shut. Whatever's above, severely irradiated. Even if the entrance is, by some miracle, still unblocked, they'd never be able to leave without dying - and even if they could not die nearly instantly, they'd never get out of the radiated zone. Nor would anyone be able, even in suits, to get to them. Radiation would get them even if they stayed put, too.

It's the biggest problem with such shelters, really. While good in theory.... ones in hit cities like that, if under where ground zero is likely to be, will just kill anyone inside. All that will happen is it takes longer. Those ones are only any real use for actual fallout, not the blasts themselves. It's kinda like that "duck and cover" bit - useless in a blast, good for some of the aftereffects.

There's still enough population to have the states. Moreover, canon has said for a long time that they all still exist.

Lordganon 09:37, February 6, 2012 (UTC)

More so, I'd say the subway station(s) would be fused shut in some form like that, and blocked off with debris besides. Of course, getting into the last little bits of the stations would be lethal, but that's ignoring that aspect.

That area of Sydney is going to be irradiated, even too much for access with suits, for a few decades still. Their story will be a long time coming, I'm afraid.

Lordganon 15:20, February 6, 2012 (UTC)

You can't control other players' nations!
Toeh Ngoa Nyoing and Iceland are both nations controlled by Hanthawaddy, thus they are player nations. Stating that they agree to join with your nation is controlling another player nation to an unnacceptable extent. You can take territory from them through war, but you cannot take them apart by controlling them. LurkerLordB (Talk) 22:29, February 3, 2012 (UTC)

Principia Moderni/Invasion of Brandenberg
Hey there, this is Prussia. I was going to declare war on Brandenburg in hopes of expanding my nation as well as attempting to remove the threat that the current King of Brandenburg currently holds on Central Europe. Since we have a military alliance, I was hoping I could have your support in this war. I will be declaring war in 1806, please let me know your intentions.

Hey, I'm not sure if I should go to your or someone else, but can I get an algorithim check for the Prussian-Brandenburgian war, I'm not sure if we are supposed to do ourselves or if a mod is supposed to do it. I wanted to see how much territory I could take? JonAllenMichael

Me
I'm Laptop Zombie. I've just opened a map game. Here it is.

Map
I would like to ask you where you got the map for Guanxi for? I know you probably cropped it, so that's why I am asking you where did you get the base map from (with the whole of China)? :D Imperium Guy 18:56, February 14, 2012 (UTC)

Thanks for that. :D Imperium Guy 10:45, February 15, 2012 (UTC)

South America
Where do you plan to expand with Fjordland? is because i plan to expand more with Uruguay after it becomes independent.At least, i plan to control most of Northern Argentina (Fjordlaaand owns most of the south, along with the Chinese colony), specially San Miguel de Tucumán (unless, obviously, that the Tucumán area is under control of Fjordlaand, which, according to my estimative, may not be.)--Collie Kaltenbrunner 16:28, February 15, 2012 (UTC)

Well, since right now i'm going to sleep, and i won't be able to correct the map until tomorrow, you can do it.ah, and about France, i wasn't sure if the country in union was France or Russia.--Collie Kaltenbrunner 21:19, February 15, 2012 (UTC)

Algorithim
Hey, I'm not sure if I should go to your or someone else, but can I get an algorithim check for the Prussian-Brandenburgian war, I'm not sure if we are supposed to do ourselves or if a mod is supposed to do it. I wanted to see how much territory I could take? I've been waiting for a response for 2 days now, any way you could help me out? JonAllenMichael 16:24, February 16, 2012 (UTC)

Guangxi
I don't really see why it should happen now. The articles do not contradict each other in any way. It has always been standard practice to just add in the required information to other relevant articles after a new one has been graduated. Which I will do. Vladivostok 08:29, February 19, 2012 (UTC)

Scan, I have to say that them getting to the sea, as a goal is probably fine. But, as for it actually happening.... no way that would be feasible. That's just too much of an expansion. Lordganon 23:31, March 18, 2012 (UTC)

Stability Table
I know that you are really busy, but you promised a completed stability table a week ago and it is barely 1/8 finished. I can respect that you have too much else going on to make it, but we really need this table, and if you are too busy to do it, then you really should either symplify the system or pass it on to someone else, or something, as we need that table LurkerLordB (Talk) 20:39, February 19, 2012 (UTC)

Thank you very much!! :) LurkerLordB (Talk) 21:00, February 19, 2012 (UTC)

Can you at least fill out Naples' for the current war? LurkerLordB (Talk) 00:48, February 23, 2012 (UTC)

Saamwiil's Replies
Turan bought claims to Greenland. Moreover, if I attacked Russia, I should be getting the advantage. Russia attacked me, very simple.All I did was incite revolts. Saamwiil 23:40, February 19, 2012 (UTC)

You obviously don't remember, but, i did.Saamwiil 22:14, February 20, 2012 (UTC)

Italy in DD
Well, Sicily does need some work done to it, which I'd let happen, as would Venice. There's also several destroyed cities that one would be nice to have an article on, and the Northern Alpine Areas too.

And, I figure that sometime in the next year most of the IPA-granted Zone will get turned into its own Republic of some sort. I'll let you know when that is, I'd have no problems with working it with you.

Lordganon 07:14, February 24, 2012 (UTC)

Well, as it happens, all three of those fall under my jurisdiction, lol. I'm always willing to listen to ideas, and maybe after I approve them, some contributions. Lordganon 09:12, February 24, 2012 (UTC)

Your hypocritical actions towards RWG
You attacked RWG for expanding without the algorithm and for having strange religious combinations in his nation. However, Sweden is by far the worst offender of these two cases in the whole game. Sweden has expanded and vassalized nations without the algorithm numerous times, many without even a few years of build up prior to the vassalization: In addition, for almost all of these nations, there was no civil disarray, and there was precious little in-game build up. RWG only expanded through vassalizing portions (not even the entirety) of nations which had been plunged into civil war for years. He devoted turns and turns in the game to sending aid to these nations. He then devoted turns and turns after he gained them to incorporating them further into his nation (while Sweden just gained the territory then never said anything else). His expansion was much more reasonable than your own. Furthermore, Sweden rules over a hodgepodge of religious minorities as well In conclusion, you have done much, much more annexation and vassalization without the algorithm than RandomWriterGuy has. Sweden has been gobbling up territory this entire game without having one algorithm except for when dealing with player nations. Your religious differences are almost as intense as his as well. You possess no right to start numerous moderator revolts against him, for such actions are nothing short of hypocritical. I hope you can see how RWG has done nothing that you haven't done a hundredfold. Note that I am not stating that I am totally innocent of having strange religious occurences and strange vassalizations, just that you have the greatest extent of such things so it makes no sense for you to attack RWG for it. LurkerLordB (Talk) 21:59, February 28, 2012 (UTC)
 * The taking of the Japanese European colony.
 * The taking of Oldenburg
 * The taking of Denmark
 * The conquest of Mazovia
 * The vassalization of Estonia
 * The vassalization and eventual annexation of England
 * The vassalization and annexation of part of the territory of Hanover
 * The vassalization of Scotland
 * The failed attempt to take Livonia
 * The failed attempt to take Prussia back from the Germans
 * The failed attempt to get Kurdistan to join Arabia
 * The failed attempt to regain vassalization of Scotland
 * The in-progress attempt to take over Flemland
 * The in-progress attempt to take over Toeh Ngoa-Nyoing
 * The in-progress attempt to take over Iceland
 * They converted from Catholicism to Eastern Orthodox for no apparent reason
 * They reconverted back to Catholicism
 * They have a large Saami Pagan population
 * They possess a large Schmittist population (which is not Christian!)

Also, can we please have the stability chart actually completed? And independent colonies like Ricasolia need to be added to the chart as well, they are not puppet states. LurkerLordB (Talk) 23:58, February 28, 2012 (UTC)

The only places where he expanded without the algorithm were in East Yemen and north Brunei. He tried to expand without the algorithm in India, but we made him use the algorithm. He hasn't actually done anything in the UAA areas yet. They are far away, so that is why Collie has them the lighter color on the map, they are puppet states so he'll get -2 on algorithms for them.

Christianity and Islam are converting religions. They believe that their path is the only existing path to heaven and that their goal must be to convert as many people as they can. That is why they convert and destroy so many older belief systems and religions. Buddhists (at least historically) sent missionaries for converts, but Buddhism would merge with the old beliefs and not just replace them. With the exception of the Hare Krishnas, most Hindus do not really convertLurkerLordB (Talk) 12:23, February 29, 2012 (UTC)

Really, Persia hasn't gained that much territory without the algorythm. North Brunei only is about the size of Wales, and East Yemen, being mostly desert, probably has the same number of people living in it. The UAA is a thing of the past, Adal is really the only former state in which he has a chance of stabilizing (through siding with the Christian faction there). LurkerLordB (Talk) 23:03, February 29, 2012 (UTC)

Lurk is right about everything. I mean LOOK AT THAT LIST: I didn't even vasslaize that much nations! Also, anyone attacking Persia (unless they're pretty close) will still have a hard time trying to invade me. I mean, I'M NOT TRYING TO INVADE! Vassalization is a peaceful process. I haven't declared war (but onyl joined wars) on anyone, and YOU SAID THAT I HAVE A LOW STABILITY SCORE.

My country has religious fredom. YOU CANNOT SAY THAT I DON'T.

Also, any nation can be vassalized regardless of distance, though the bigger the distance, the longer the vassalization process takes.

If this is some sort of vendetta aginst me, you're going to confess! If I feel bullied from trying to play this game, then SHAME ON YOU. RandomWriterGuy 23:18, February 29, 2012 (UTC)

"You may have vassal states subordinate to your nation, but contiguous to your nation. They are ruled by your first nation's government, but are allowed to keep their own interests. You may have up to two vassal states, and they are in the category of colonies. Size rules do not apply, nor do limits on the number of total colonies, except within plausibility." From the rules page, this means that vassalizing Brunei and Yemen or the UAA is illegal for Persia. Scandinator ( talk ) 05:13, March 1, 2012 (UTC)

Yemen and Brunei are currently being counted as puppet states, hence their color on the map. Anyways, it would be a lot easier to demonstrate why Persia's stability was so low if we had a table... (Hint hint) LurkerLordB (Talk) 12:06, March 1, 2012 (UTC)
 * Vendettas require numerous incidents over time, this is nothing like what Kunarian did to Yank or something like that. You do have a low stability score, on account of your government being really old and you having expanded quite a bit. LurkerLordB (Talk) 23:31, February 29, 2012 (UTC)

I wasn't even trying to expand by war! I was trying to expand peacefully! WHy does that have a toll in my stability?! You didn;t have to face this, and yet you have so many vassals! RandomWriterGuy 01:34, March 2, 2012 (UTC)

The real reason your stability is low is that it has been 150+ years since you last had a government change. Having a government change would allow your stability to start increasing again, and erase expansion prior to the government change. Scandinator doesn't have to face that because his government changes have erased some of the expansion toll. All of yours since you first started playing have been compounded together. LurkerLordB (Talk) 01:37, March 2, 2012 (UTC)

Any expansion from the main nation and affiliated states (vassals, puppets, clients) count as -1 stability. Only colonial expansion does not count. Scandinator (talk) 04:31, March 2, 2012 (UTC)

Stability Table
Scandinator, can we please get the stability table all filled out? You promised you were just double checking it a week ago, but it still isn't up. Can you either put it up or admit that it is too much work for you so we can try and make a simpler system? LurkerLordB (Talk) 21:48, March 17, 2012 (UTC)

Naundesa
You may not take the Toeh Ngoa Nyoing region without my permission. But I will make a deal with you. You can take over the region including Iceland, and the many many modern factories and cities in the area. However, you must make accomodations in New Hanthawaddy (on the Colombian-Venezuelan border) for the country of Naundesa to literally "move house" to the area. I need the ABC islands, and the territory as far east as OTL Carabobo province. But seriously, I never said you could take the country without my pemission. Detectivekenny (Info; Talk) 23:00, March 18, 2012 (UTC)

Hmmm…OK, I'll take the Colombian colony and the Ecuadorian colony. Thanks. Detectivekenny (Info; Talk) 00:54, March 30, 2012 (UTC)

Australia
Hi, Scan, I just wanted to offer a few words of encouragement. It took guts to challenge the established story line on Australia and the resulting ANZC of 1983DD. I did a check on PM Hawkes and September 26th. It is certain that he was indeed in Perth on the 27th (OTL) watching the pre-breakfast coverage of the race of the America's Cup (the sudden death race having been made necessary on the 23rd local time). It is logical to assume that he had been there on holiday, but he is on record as being in Perth that morning. Would he have flown there just to watch the scheduled race on television? He probably flew in the week before, being on vacation like the rest of parliament. This information is crucial and will mean a bit of rewriting, to say the least.

Since Parliament was not sitting, and state assemblymen were not in session then even if the PM had flown on holiday on Monday (OTL), he would have arrived sometime mid-day after the bombs fell in TTL. Assuming he was in route, things would be a lot different even then. In the chaos (assuming for a moment that most of Parliament did not go home on holiday) getting things in order would be a monumental task for the Hawke government -- almost as chaotic as what Bush was facing at the same time. As I write this, I am sure you are working on your defense of your challenge. I will leave you to it, then, and wish you well. SouthWriter 21:23, March 30, 2012 (UTC)

Hi again, Scan. I answered your response to the above over at my talk page (it's a lot simpler for me to keep up). However, I think I will use this space to once again offer you encouragement. I see that Ganon is accusing you of having a bad attitude for just disagreeing with him. He reads your emphasis of words like "major" and "feasibility" as violating some rule about "tone and attitude." I don't see it that way, but I too have been accused of such, and worse. It may be that we cannot notice attitude problems when we have them, but one would think that goes both ways, huh?

At risk that Ganon is reading this, I will say this anyway. He is as capable of making "bad assumptions" as any of us. His degree in history gives him an edge, of course, but his assumptions are just as fallible as any of ours. You will have to back your statements when making claims or they will be batted down as foolishness. With Ganon, his authority stands on its own, but if you want to challenge what has been accepted, you need to have a strong case going in. "Likely" does not get very far in this genre. Sure, the battle cry coming from Ganon has been "when in doubt, nuke it" and its corollary, "if in doubt, they're dead,' but when it messes with canon material, you cannot kill off folk that easily. I found out a few months ago that one of my favorite characters was most probably not safe on Doomsday. I could have "saved" him, but only one of his possible locations was safe. If I had saved him, he would not have been in a place that would have lead to where he was placed, so he's gone.

That being said, it can be stated with some surety that governors would be living in their mansions and those mansions are near the center of the capital cities. Would they be home or at the capital buildings? They might surely escape more easily than the general public. The same goes for the PM and the GG, they would get warnings and get out of town if they could. However, they may not have had more than about 30 minutes warning. What can be stated, though, is that the government would be scattered. This is going to mean some major changes in the story as Brian has built it up at the main "Commonwealth of Australia and New Zealand" page. If the bulk of the leadership can be saved, then I'd say save them. The story, though, will have to get them back to the capital. The storming of the Soviet Embassy there will be a continent away for many of the politicians when this happens. This far along, the less you change, the better. This is what has been established as QSS and QAA. Without really good, even ironclad, evidence, it is better not to change what is written. And the reasons for changing assumptions should be just about as good.

What has been written in this case was probably written on bad assumptions. No thought to spring break was made, for sure, and the coincidence of the America's cup was not dealt with at all. These are big problems, and need to be dealt with. But a total remaking of Australia is probably out of the question. --SouthWriter 03:18, March 31, 2012 (UTC)


 * I think the issue you raised is very interesting and I look forward to seeing what you find. We should always keep an open mind about adjusting or changing canon when it can be shown it is based on inaccurate information or flawed assumptions. That said, I have a suggestion if you have not already pursued it. Go to the library and look at copies of newspapers from September 24-27, 1983 for Perth, Sydney, Melbourne, and Canberra. Likely they would be on microfilm. This should help to plot or narrow down movements of people. I have done the same thing using newspaper archives online and at the Library of Congress in DC near where I live. It can be tedious research but very helpful in working on a article or supporting your thoughts. Good luck.--Fxgentleman 15:32, April 1, 2012 (UTC)

First, I apologise for indenting your comment without your permission, Fx. It makes it easier for me to follow the change in speakers in the string. Microfilm is a pain for most of us, for sure. Microfiche, where available is quite preferred. You are blessed to have access to the Library of Congress, and I, for one, l appreciate your due diligence in research. This is what it's going to take, though, to combat the notion that QSS is sacred. This is especially true since we have established the concept of "canon." In religious circles that is the ultimate in sacred material, and it seems that it is in the DD time line as well. "Heretics" are never welcome when the "gods" have spoken. I speak only partly in jest, but with the consensus of editors, this is the way that the collaborative effort of 1983DD works.

Right after I began editing I conceded that the accepted material seemed "wrong" in places, but I decided that I could work around almost anything in the interest of a good story. I have since tried hard to see things from new editors' points of reference giving preference, as I think about it, to those editors that live in the area being discussed. I even assumed wrongly, in the beginning, that 1983DD was mostly the work of Australians and South Americans. It just made sense to me. I know of two Brits who have contributed heavily to their home region, and Canadians that have dealt well with their nation. There are several South Americans as well, but you are the first Australian to offer your thoughts. I am sure that your knowledge will be quite valuable as we keep this time line alive.

Anyway, to my point, I concur with Fx. We cannot depend on "deals" to fix the time line. If you think Hawke was killed, you have to have him in the path of the bomb or its resulting fire storm by verifiable data. We know where he was on the morning after in OTL, so a schedule of his events on Monday the 26th is crucial. And then, you need to know what early warning he would have that missiles were coming toward Perth. Your research, so far, looks better than what the defender of canon has provided. If you have not contacted Brian yet, he is the caretaker of the ANZC and also a member of the "Brass." Another member of the Brass that worked on it is Ben. Both are open to suggestions and change when necessary. --SouthWriter 03:50, April 2, 2012 (UTC)

Hi, Scan. I'm following closely, but don't want to 'butt in' on the main talk page. Your discussion about advance warning has had me wondering what kind of warning would Hawke have had anyway. Reagan had NORAD, but nothing like that exists for Australia. Here is a discussion in 2003 about whether Australia needed one. They figured even then that a nuclear attack (from China, not the USSR) was unlikely.

The only warning Australians would have had was general news reports coming in from the northern hemisphere. Unless there are tracking stations in the Philippines (likely taken out by attacks on that country, but check) warned them, the tracking station at Nurrungar in South Australia and the Pine Gap facility in Northern Territory are both too far south to take note of an incoming ICBM in to make a difference. If the cities were hit in separate waves, then there would be a general evacuation after the first strike. However, the articles as written state the times assuming a near similtaneous strike.

The Dongara stations northwest of Perth are only about 400 kilometers away. They would surely catch the incoming missile in their scans, but from how far out? Would there be satellite information available in 1983? These stations were available for the Soviet Space Station, but were they able to see over the horizon? And if so, by how much? These questions are necessary to determine how much of a warning officials had. We included the targets because they were on a cold-war era map of possible strikes, so it is possible that just international calls from the US and Britain may have been all that are needed. The picture might not be as bad as you are portraying it, but this information -- one way or the other -- might help. SouthWriter 21:42, April 5, 2012 (UTC)

Here is Brian's email address. He said you can contact him there (altered to keep spammers away):

brianwdaugherty AT gmail DOT com

He is willing to work with you, assuming that Hawke escapes. SouthWriter 03:18, April 7, 2012 (UTC)