Talk:Principia Moderni II (Map Game)

Archives
Archive 1 | Archive 2 | Archive 3 | Archive 4 | Archive 5 | Archive 6 | Archive 7 | Archive 8 | Archive 9 | Archive 10 | Archive 11 | Archive 12 |

Algorithm Format
This is to make things easy for everyone since I find myself doing a heap of algorythms and its a pain in the ass to flip back and forth with the rules.

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

Maps
Maps will be updated every 5 years.

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

Collie, in the first place, my colonies on south america are not expanding, the Muiscas have more land as they expanded into the territory prior to the colonization and Basotho was vassalized, and Zululand territory is bigger, as it took the territories you modded to block Zululand expansion (or that other mods did i don't know) and North african expansion.I find unfair that none of this expansions have been shown and Wales were shown with less problems while they conquered mainly desertic territory. Sine dei gloriem (talk) 01:24, August 27, 2013 (UTC)
 * Your colonies are being expanded.look closer.--Collie Kaltenbrunner (talk) 21:00, August 30, 2013 (UTC)

Hold on, why did New Manchuria lose territory? In fact, it seems like all of my gains from 1805 were disregarded. What happened? CrimsonAssassin- "I have special eyes" 23:58, August 30, 2013 (UTC)
 * No, New Manchuria gained territory.--Collie Kaltenbrunner (talk) 06:58, August 31, 2013 (UTC)


 * New Manchuria and Baitudu lost the territory they had gained in 1805, though. CrimsonAssassin- "I have special eyes" 15:38, August 31, 2013 (UTC)


 * Indeed. The small "arm" New Manchuria had going northward seems to have vanished. The French could not have expanded out anyway. [[Image:1.png|23px]] Imp (Say Hi?!) 15:40, August 31, 2013 (UTC)
 * This can be explained by the fact that i did not use his correction when making the 1810 map.--Collie Kaltenbrunner (talk) 19:46, August 31, 2013 (UTC)
 * Could it be fixed? My gains from 1805 from New Manchuria are now in French territory and I don't want to gyp them out of territory. I'm very scared of messing the map up for other people ;_;. CrimsonAssassin- "I have special eyes" 21:50, August 31, 2013 (UTC)

Labelled Map
































<p style="font-size:13px;">

<p style="font-size:13px;">

<p style="font-size:13px;">

<p style="font-size:13px;">

<p style="font-size:13px;">

<p style="font-size:13px;">

<p style="font-size:13px;">

<p style="font-size:13px;">New labelled maps :P Scandinator (talk) 16:43, May 19, 2013 (UTC)

<p style="font-size:13px;">I think it may be time to update the maps as a lot of territory changes have occurred in the last 50ish years.Andr3w777 (talk) 01:00, July 10, 2013 (UTC)

I have updated the Europe labelled map. <font color="#000000">VonGlusenburg (talk to Von!) 10:09, July 16, 2013 (UTC)

It has been updated again. However, some parts might not be fully accurate. Imp (Say Hi?!) 20:08, August 24, 2013 (UTC)

Religion Map


<p style="font-size:13px;"> Colors:

<p style="font-size:13px;">Catholic - Light Blue

<p style="font-size:13px;">Reformed Churches - Blue

<p style="font-size:13px;">Kappelists - Dark Blue

<p style="font-size:13px;">Eastern Orthodox - Mustard

<p style="font-size:13px;">Islam - Green

<p style="font-size:13px;">Nestorianism - Light Green

<p style="font-size:13px;">Hinduism - Teal

<p style="font-size:13px;">Buddhism - Pale Green

<p style="font-size:13px;">Animism/Indigenous - Yellow <p style="font-size:13px;">I made this map, using the latest 1730 map, and the old Religion Map as a guide. I do not claim this to be official, but please add/edit/update it as you feel needed to do so. If the mods don't like this, please take it down, but I only want to help. Reximus55 (talk) 10:35, June 13, 2013 (UTC)

<p style="font-size:13px;">Since Callumthered had asked me what was the situation of Catholicism on Europe, i went to do a coloured map of this.it got big, so now this became a incomplete world map.dark blue represents Kappelists, blue represents breakaway churches, light blue represents Catholicism, light green represents Nestorianism, green represents Islam, and yellow-brownish represents orthodoxy.it is still incomplete.Obviously, this is political too, as some nations will have some state religion, but the population will follow other one.Anyway, i don't know the Arabian Federation's state religion, to start with.--Collie Kaltenbrunner (talk) 07:48, March 9, 2013 (UTC)

<p style="font-size:13px;">The Arabian federation doesn't have a state religion, its dominantly Islamic though. Many branches of Islam though, but I'd say Sunni or Ibadi Islam to be dominant. <font color="#000000">VonGlusenburg  (talk to Von!) 11:51, March 9, 2013 (UTC)

<p style="font-size:13px;">There would be a lot more ortododox wrong...-Lx (leave me a message) 19:30, March 9, 2013 (UTC)

<p style="font-size:13px;">What do you mean?--Collie Kaltenbrunner (talk) 08:36, March 10, 2013 (UTC)

<p style="font-size:13px;">Well, Russia is very wrong on that map. just look at the russia I made, and then you will see the real face of orthodoxy. you did your annexations horibly wrong. you made moscow a seperate state, and now Minsk is not longer in personal union. You should realy use my map, because at this point I think you just want an excuse to piss me off so you can purposefuly get me banned.-Lx (leave me a message) 23:07, March 10, 2013 (UTC)

<p style="font-size:13px;">The latter is not the case.in fact, i sometimes think that Scraw is being implausible just to have something to complain about, so he can get me to quit.We might be able to work this out, when it comes to Minsk.are you a hereditary monarchy?--Collie Kaltenbrunner (talk) 08:48, March 11, 2013 (UTC)

<p style="font-size:13px;">Russia has an old novgorodian style Elective Monarchy. The Tsar was a firm believer in Russian unification, and once he gianed the title of Tsar of Minsk through marriage, since he wanted at the least unified russian realm under one Ruler, and he did not want his efforts to be in vain when he died in case his son did not become the next Tsar(elective monarchy) so he had the two Crowns linked, although he kept the title of duke of minsk to his own family, the title of Tsar of Minsk and Tsar of Novgorod and Russia were linked. I find it is good logic, but If that's too complicated you can consider it like an act of union/annexatoin and ignore the part about a seperate Duma being built in Minsk.-Lx (leave me a message) 20:32, March 11, 2013 (UTC)

<p style="font-size:13px;">Yes, this sounds like a good logic.--Collie Kaltenbrunner (talk) 21:27, March 11, 2013 (UTC)

<p style="font-size:13px;">Just saying, but shouldn't Bijaur be hindu? Considering I have expanded my influence there and introduced anti-muslim laws and the Trimurts have been converting people like crazy? :L  Imp (Say Hi?!) 07:52, March 13, 2013 (UTC)

<p style="font-size:13px;">Update time? Imp (Say Hi?!) 13:38, March 24, 2013 (UTC) </li>

Industrial Algorithm Modifiers and Industrial Era areas and rates.
I have a proposal to modify the algorithm to put into perspective the colonial wars of the 18th-20th century. An algorythm multiplier would be applied to all wars with the side with a higher stage gaining 10% extra for each stage higher they are. Nations with two stages use the higher when defending and the lower when attacking. Scandinator (talk) 04:59, April 28, 2013 (UTC)



Stage 1

 * The Air Furnace is developed
 * Agriculture begins to rapidly shift with fertilizers and rest years for the fields
 * Chemistry develops in leaps and bounds

Stage 2​

 * Steam Power is developed and water wheels are heavily utilized
 * Various chemicals are produced in large amounts
 * Health care and anatomic understanding improve, birth rates still high but death rates on a massive decline
 * Urbanisation begins on a significant scale

Stage 3

 * Paper mills develop with the tech to produce large reels of paper
 * Cloth factories begin using machines and steam power to increase productivity massively to keep up with population boom's clothing demand
 * Railways appear
 * Some revolutionary rumbles appear

Stage 4​

 * Civilian railways appear allowing easier access
 * Stronger cements are produced
 * Steel and Glass are avaliable
 * A few colonies and nations will have rebellions in this period

Stage 5

 * Ironclads and Artillery become widely used in combat
 * Revolutions by poorer citizens in cities become frequent

Stage 6​

 * Tanks and planes appear
 * Total War emerges with populations also targetted
 * Nationalism appears in larger multicultural nations

Stage 7

 * Atomic age begins a decade before the start of this age with certain nations able to make nuclear weapons
 * Wars between atomic powers CEASE, due to the threat and consequences of nuclear war
 * Colonies rebel for independence

Discussion
I'm extremely confused. Also, I think the industrialization chart should be corrected, as Scandinavia has been vanquished.

16:08, April 28, 2013 (UTC)
 * I don't see no need to remove them, as they have already been removed.--Collie Kaltenbrunner (talk) 17:07, April 28, 2013 (UTC)

I like this one better than it's predecessor, mainly beccause there are more divisions here, allowing for a more accurate representation of the country's standing. Albeit, there are a few things that could be amended. CourageousLife (talk) 16:22, April 28, 2013 (UTC)

Same here. Much better. And what is confusing Scraw? It is pretty simple to understand once the map is up showing industrialisation levels. :D  Imp (Say Hi?!) 16:27, April 28, 2013 (UTC)


 * Oh, it's for the map.


 * 17:16, April 28, 2013 (UTC)

It needs some corrections, as some characteristics are too late or too early for their times.Such as: We should move the appearing of railways to stage 4, and their spread to 5, to start with, After all, when we talk about railways, this implies steam locomotives, necessarily.And, steam locomotives in 1770?--Collie Kaltenbrunner (talk) 17:04, April 28, 2013 (UTC)


 * That isn't too far-fetched. A viable steam engine existed in 1782, it just took a while(about 20 years) before people to realise it could be used for rail transport. A two-cylinder steam engine was invented by a Russian in 1766...it had great potential, and could have perhaps accelerated the development of the steam locomotive by a phew decades(maybe only 10 years to say: put it on a fracking train) but The Empress ditched the designs in favor of a more "Brittish" system(i.e. hydraulicaly cooled that required close water supply...this lagged locomotive construction). So...RUssians could have built locomotives in the 1770s...but the empress wanted to stay close to brittain, and brittish-style tech, so that slowed many things...and because of that, the twocylinder stam engine was scrapped.-Lx (leave me a message) 23:42, April 28, 2013 (UTC)

Well, unlike the last game, the East is on better footing with the West, and thus will breed even more competition. I think this is completely fine if you ask me. Imp (Say Hi?!) 19:42, April 28, 2013 (UTC)

I've done the research in the industrial era. For whomever industrializes first, these technologies do not suddenly appear. It is gradual in within each stage. Scandinator (talk) 11:42, April 29, 2013 (UTC)

I would think that, like in PMII, crimson would be a fraction of the main natino around the nation's "heartland/capital" area, and the rest of the nation would get industry red. And colonies would industry get a colour under their founding nations, etc... However, I am worried about the ammount of colours...in any case, I do believe that orange and yellow(or at the least orange) should get planes at the same time as red and crimson...technology and trade would change to the point that...well...those nations could do thema t the same time...-Lx (leave me a message) 18:43, May 1, 2013 (UTC)

I feel like one of these (red, yellow, orange) should be removed. Also, shouldn't Europe (closer to Italy) be receiving industrialization faster than the Middle East?

21:21, May 20, 2013 (UTC)

Not that the map is bad, but I would say that the coast and Dehli should be joined up as they are prime industrial locations. Doesn't really change anything, but it looks nicer, lol. :D  Imp (Say Hi?!) 21:33, May 20, 2013 (UTC)

The Arabian Federation should really industrialize earlier than its vassal of Baghdad I think. Albeit just industrializing along the coastal regions like Oman and Qatar where the majority of my urban population lives. The Nejd won't see industrialization for many years later. <font color="#000000">VonGlusenburg (talk to Von!) 00:15, May 21, 2013 (UTC)

China would industrialize quicker than the yellow rate due to their extensive trading, especially with Orissa and Italia. CrimsonAssassin (talk) 17:20, May 21, 2013 (UTC)

I too feel that China should be in orange.

I also find it strange that both Georgia and Austria are in orange while Germany itself is in yellow. Not to mention that Germany was higher than Russia on the chart and closer to Italy than Russia.

21:25, May 22, 2013 (UTC)

Aren't any of these going to be addressed?

17:25, May 25, 2013 (UTC)

I'd so something about it since I'm a mod, but I'm not sure if I have clearance for this map. CrimsonAssassin- "You can't handle this egg roll" 18:20, May 27, 2013 (UTC)

You know, I'll edit it since, not only does it seem like the plausible thing to do, but worst-case scenario, they'll revert it and yell at me a little. CrimsonAssassin- "You can't handle this egg roll" 16:53, May 29, 2013 (UTC)

I think there should be less of orange China, as lots of those areas would be presently unsuitable for industrialization.

22:58, May 29, 2013 (UTC)

It's just a buffer between red and yellow.

CrimsonAssassin- "You can't handle this egg roll" 05:44, May 30, 2013 (UTC)

I like how Germany is on the same level with the Dimurat and Siberia.

23:06, May 30, 2013 (UTC)

As per my post on the page I'd like to propose that the point on Steel and Glass is changed to "Steel and Glass become mass producible". Also I now have both light green and yellow industrial stuffs in my nation so how does this affect my industrialisation? Kunarian TALK 06:54, July 17, 2013 (UTC)

Based on precedence, I'd say no, as I've conquered both orange and red territories. I'm in orange, so realistically speaking, I only got red land but no red rights. So I'm pretty sure the answer is that you will not advance.

21:06, July 22, 2013 (UTC)

I just want to propose one change. I think orange should enter Stage 6 in 1900, and Stage 5 in 1865.

18:34, August 17, 2013 (UTC)

Special NPC bonus nations
Hey so these nations are special Non Player Countries because these nations used to be part of a powerful empire which ruled lots of the world, hence they are stronger than normal nations.

This bonus is worked out like the normal NPC bonus; where in every very year that a NPC nation is not at war or expanding, or having a disaster, it will build up one of the three development areas (military, infrastructure and economy). The number of total buildups will be divided into the three categories as evenly as possible, with preference going infrastructure>economy>military. With their final score will be divided by two then rounded to the nearest whole. However the special NPC bonus doesn't divide by two, so it is just the number of total buildups.

E.g. If a nation existed for 15 years, or spent 15 turns not doing anything, this would mean that the infrastructure, military and the economy were updated in five turns each. The NPC nation would receive fifteen points of bonus, five for each department (economy, infrastructure and military).

The nations with this special NPC bonus are as follows:

The Middle East Africa East Indies and Australia
 * The Republic of Turkistan
 * The Sultanate of Baghdad
 * The Sultanate of Kuwait
 * The Kingdom of Dimurat
 * Mangystau
 * Ha'il
 * Buraydah
 * Khafji
 * Saudi Arabia
 * Ar Rayn
 * The Arabian Federation
 * Oman
 * The Emirate of Shaybah
 * The Caliphate of Hejaz
 * Najran
 * The Emirate of San'a
 * Aden
 * Hadhramaut
 * Salalah
 * Socotra
 * The East African Federation
 * Sukuma
 * The Kingdom of Nyamwezi
 * Mbeya
 * New Oman
 * Bengkulu
 * Jambi
 * Lampung

Protectorate rules
Seeing how some nations are getting protectorates I think we should make the rules about them clear. As far as I'm concerned they aren't as good as vassals so they should be treated as NPCs in the algorithm, but the protecting nation should always help out their protectorate in any wars they are in and if you don't then the protectorate treaties will end as you failed to protect them.

Extending there treatment as NPCs you can't post turns for them either, and they can only give +1 to algorithm strength scores as (P) and they must be close to where the war is happening otherwise they don't get involved (e.g. Normandy's Mogadishu protectorate can't send aid to Normandy's wars in Europe).Protectorates get a -3 algorithm penalty in all wars due to their reliance on their protector.

They are shown in the colour of the protecting nation on the map so players know if other PNs are protecting them, and also you can only have a maximum of 5 protectorates. If you have 3 or more protectorates you also get a war algorithm penalty of -2 for having protectorates as your military will be stretched trying to protect these far off nations. It'll take a 4 year minimum to establish a protectorate too. You can also then peacefully turn your protectorate into a vassal or puppet after 15 years of that nation being your protectorate. You can do it sooner than 15 years if you like but an algorithm will be needed.

Thoughts on these new rules? <font color="#000000">VonGlusenburg (talk to Von!) 18:24, July 6, 2013 (UTC)

I think that this is good enough.--Collie Kaltenbrunner (talk) 06:51, July 7, 2013 (UTC)

Okay and also they should expand like NPCs since players can't post for them and because the protectorate is weak relying on another nation for protection.

I'll add this stuff to the rules page in a few days to give other people a chance to comment on these new rules. <font color="#000000">VonGlusenburg (talk to Von!) 21:30, July 7, 2013 (UTC)

Proposed Change to Industrial Bonus
I would like to propose a change to the bonus in that population determines whether or not you get the bonus, instead of how many nations actually should get it by weight of numbers (having more industrialized nations on your side that it). My reasons for this are simple. During World War II, Germany was one of the most industrialized nations on Earth. However, it couldn't defeat the Soviet Union despite that since Germany's population was too small beat the vast industrial base and population of the Soviet Union. Even though the Soviets had fewer advanced factories or training, they simply had more factories to work with, and more people to man them all. Eventually, Germany was crushed by a tide of Soviet tanks that were being churnned out in the tens of thousands. The USSR's 200 million people and backwards industrial base, beat Germany's 80 million people and smaller yet more advanced industrial base. Henceforth, I believe that the industrial bonus should be tided in with the population size of the nation using it. Just a suggestion. Vivaporius: "I don't need a slogan" 13:50, August 7, 2013 (UTC)

There were many reasons for that. Foremost was the fact that by 1940, the USSR was one of the world's leading industrial powers. Spread out and poor but still an industrial power compared to most of the world. Furthermore was the fact that Germany had huge supply lines to fight in the USSR while the factories in the Ural mountains continued churning out tanks and aircraft and their supply lines shrank. Scandinator (talk) 15:31, August 7, 2013 (UTC)

Even before the supply lines broke, and before the invasion of the Soviet Union, the Germans were still having manpower issues. They couldn't produce nearly enough tanks or aircraft to fight the Russians, even though they were technially more advanced and still had strong supply lines. In the end, it couldn't afford the manpower losses that the Soviets could. Heck, if the United States invaded Britain today, Britain's supply lines would service the entire nation. But the US would still will even though it was fighting across the Atlantic. Why? It can afford to build more guns, more ships, and more tanks at the end of the day, and can afford to lose more men, while Britain cannot. Germany had poor logistics yes, but the Soviet Union had to service the same amount of territory with fewer supplies and facilities (Germany still had more rails and ships than the Soviets, and its territory was more densely-populated). My point remains that the Soviet were still industrializing by the time of the war, they simply marshalled their manpower to advance it for the conflict. Its repeated numerous times in every history book about the war I've read. I should really learn how to minimize these walls of text. Vivaporius: "I don't need a slogan" 15:49, August 7, 2013 (UTC)

You're completely right also personally I think that there should be an increase to the population bonus as like it or not, it's largely the biggest nation wins the war throughout recent history. Kunarian TALK 15:45, August 8, 2013 (UTC)

I concur. It's not entirely plausible either. I mean, how much of your population can you really have in the military and working in factories at any given time?

15:57, August 8, 2013 (UTC)

But then you cannot have a nation greater than you in population but say two levels below you in industry take you over. That has also never happened. The reason the Indians were under the Brits so long was becasue they were technologically superior (logistics and otherwise). :L  Imp (Say Hi?!) 16:01, August 8, 2013 (UTC)

Yup. Industrialized nations can easily conquer vast portions of unindustrialized land (which is why I'm confused as to why Ethiopia can't expand any faster into the black lands). And to anwser your question Scraw, the Soviet Union had 12.5 million soldiers in its standing army throughout World War II, and at the time of its dissalution in 1991, it had about three to five million troops. So that was about six percent of its population in 1945 and five percent by 1991. As for factories, the Soviet Union had 80% of its population in factories in 1980. So to finish, you can have a lot of people in factories and in the military. You don't need millions of people on a farm really, and most modern first world countries get by comfortable with only 2-3% of their population working the fields. Vivaporius: "I don't need a slogan" 19:02, August 8, 2013 (UTC)

You understand that 1900s industrialization is different to 1700s industrialization right? Also the USSR is a communist government with a centrally planned economy. The examples you are using are quite irrelevant to our current situation of 1700s economics and technology, with the largely democractic and/or monarchies which most nations players have are. The industrialization bonus is to make it easier for industrialized nations to colonize non-industrialized nations as without this bonus, nations would have no points to show that they have more advanced technology. Your example of example of WW2 nations was fought between nations with a largely similar level of technology so the industrialization bonus wouldn't come into play, but things like recent wars and allies would, meaning the USSR would win.

Numbers isn't everything, if you have significantly better technology that more advanced nation will win - e.g. Britain vs Zulu or the Darleks invading Earth. <font color="#000000">VonGlusenburg (talk to Von!) 22:01, August 8, 2013 (UTC)


 * United Earth still defeated the Romulans, even though they had superior technology. :P [[Image:1.png|23px]] Imp (Say Hi?!) 22:22, August 8, 2013 (UTC)

I suppose I'll use another example then. During the American Civil War, the North had three times the people than the South, four times the railroads, nine times the factories, and twice as many soldiers. This was in an era that was before the advent of electricity and the era of true mass production, so there is little to take away from it. Heck, even railways existed in the early-1800s, meaning that the economics, though not as rail-reliant as the 1860s, are still somewhat comparable. So the point still stands regardless, that numbers and industry still remain important as more bodies means more production, and more production means more guns, uniforms, and munitions. And on the Zulu, they were fighting a power that had a colony nearby, providing troops and ammuntion to fight a nation that was a pre-industrial power with a population of 500,000-1,000,000 people. The Boers were more numerous than them. Plus, the Zulu were fighting in a small area, and only fielded 14,000 to 20,000 men in the entire war, with the largest battles having no more than 4,000-5,000 warriors. The British fielded 1,000 troops at Isandlwana alone. Vivaporius: "I don't need a slogan" 23:29, August 8, 2013 (UTC)

Well this is awkward....
Hey all, is there some way the mods can respond on behalf of Brython to my royal sucession crisis while Rex is blocked. I've boxed myself into a situation that needs a Brythonic response and putting my nation on hold for two weeks is not a great option. I don't know what Rex's plan was as he mentioned "further negotiation", but I can tell you that this succession crisis has been in the works for "decades", it was planned at the time of the royal wedding, and the entire existence of Brython's Prince Atticus was my idea in the first place (his entire purpose in existing is to unify the dynaties while separating the lines of succession). Commandante Lemming (talk) 15:41, August 22, 2013 (UTC)

Note of Leave
Hi everyone! While PMII has been super fun, I'll have to say I've gotten a bit unentertained by it. I'll be taking an indefinite, prob. permanent break, starting today, and I'd appreciate it if my country, Mali, and her vassals of Gabu, Mossi, and Wolof were handed off to a new player. Other than that, all the mods on this game have been great as well as all the players! Thanks for providing a super fun map/game experience.

Shawnguerra (talk) 18:59, August 22, 2013 (UTC)

Shame to see you go :( <font color="#000000">VonGlusenburg (talk to Von!) 19:34, August 22, 2013 (UTC)

The stealing of Persia
Okay so Yank has seemingly stolen Persia from Warman555. Warman555 has posted as Persia as well, and there is also the algorithm on the talk page which shows that Persia is a player nation, and also Warman has posted on the discussion boards about advice for Persia too.

This behaviour is completely unacceptable as a mod. I can't find anything on their talk pages agreeing to the swap over, so I'm assuming the worse case scenario. If its been agreed to and I just didn't find the agreement then fair dos, and apologises for this post.

Otherwise what should we do about this incident? <font color="#000000">VonGlusenburg (talk to Von!) 19:34, August 22, 2013 (UTC)

Wasn't he going to be the Byzantines?--Collie Kaltenbrunner (talk) 19:51, August 22, 2013 (UTC)

He's seemingly done the right thing there and left them to Cyprus, but he's doing it again now basically. This is twice in a like week. It is a terrible standard for a mod to be setting. <font color="#000000">VonGlusenburg (talk to Von!) 19:55, August 22, 2013 (UTC)

I agree. I motion for a vote of no confidence against Yank. (Hope someone catches the reference in there.)

19:58, August 22, 2013 (UTC)

Don't quote Phantom Menace, damn it! CrimsonAssassin- "I have special eyes" 21:03, August 22, 2013 (UTC)

Folks, lets calm down. Imp (Say Hi?!) 21:26, August 22, 2013 (UTC)

I thought that warman was only listed as Persia because that section of the signup sheet wasn`t updated. It still listed 77Topaz as Tibet, after all. And I don`t remember him posting until AFTER I chose Persia. Yank 21:35, August 22, 2013 (UTC)

I`m trying to become a more permanent part of this map game again, and yet every single nation I pick is taken. There seems to be quite a few novice map game users who post for a little while and them forget that his game exists. I`m net trying to abuse my status, but it is frustrating to have lost a nation to someone who can`t play the game properly.Yank 21:45, August 22, 2013 (UTC)

I agree Warman555 is quite the novice but you can't just go and take another player's nation. Why not go for Baghdad next door? They're quite powerful. <font color="#000000">VonGlusenburg (talk to Von!) 10:18, August 23, 2013 (UTC)

Fine. I'll be Bagdad. Here's hoping It'll stick in tume for the next map. Yank 21:48, August 23, 2013 (UTC)

Removing Posts
Someone has removed my posts from 1805 and 1806. I'm currently trying to find the perpetrator, but there's a bunch of history to go through.

<span style="-webkit-border-radius: 1px 1px;-moz-border-radius: 1px / 1px;-webkit-box-shadow: 1px 1px 1px rgba(0,0,0,0.6);background-image:-webkit-repeating-radial-gradient(#FFFFFF 50%,#FFFFFF 50%);background:-moz-repeating-radial-gradient(#FFD700 50%,#000000 50%));"><span style="border:1px solid #000000;padding-bottom:1px;padding-top:1px;-webkit-border-radius: 1px 1px;-moz-border-radius: 1px / 1px;-webkit-box-shadow: 1px 1px 1px rgba(0,0,0,0.6);background-image:-webkit-repeating-radial-gradient(ellipse,#1C39BB 45%,#120A8F 50%);background:-moz-repeating-radial-gradient(ellipse,#CCCCFF 45%,#000000 50%));border-top-left-radius:500px 400px;border-bottom-left-radius:500px 400px">               <span style="background-image:-webkit-gradient(linear, right top, left top, from(#000000), to(#FFFFFF)); -webkit-border-radius: 36px 12px; -moz-border-radius: 36px / 12px; -webkit-box-shadow: 0 0 5px 5px #000000; border:2px double #E5E4E2 border-radius:5px; border-bottom-right-radius:100px 90px; border-top-right-radius:100px 90px; color:#FFFFFF"> <font color="#FF033E" face="Courier">"Fear the power   <font color="#FF033E" face="Courier" title="Bvlog"> of the Dark Side of the Force."  17:20, August 28, 2013 (UTC)

While we're discussing this, can someone from the mod staff give a brief note on how to handle edit conflicts. I got busted for accidentally deleting a post by Von and I'm re-arranging my process to try and ensure it doesn't happen again but I doubt I'm the only one who has done this. To review, my own process to avoid edit conflicts (now) is to copy my entire text before publishing. In the event of and edit conflict, I will exit the editor entirely, refresh the main PMII page, re-open the editor and paste my entry at the bottom. Is this a fool proof way of doing it? I don't think I'm the one who took out the posts in question but if I did I know I've been actively tweaking my process to avoid this. Commandante Lemming (talk) 14:33, August 29, 2013 (UTC)
 * Usually i copy my post and in case of edit conflict, i copy my post and add it to the present version.--Collie Kaltenbrunner (talk) 16:21, August 29, 2013 (UTC)


 * I always copy my post in case there is an edit conflict. If there is, I just post in the place/year I was going to be posting in. :) [[Image:1.png|23px]] Imp (Say Hi?!) 19:20, August 29, 2013 (UTC)
 * The proper thing to do is copy your whole post before you hit publish. Paste if necessary. If you conducted diplomacy, things can get a little messy. Never copy an entire year.
 * <span style="-webkit-border-radius: 1px 1px;-moz-border-radius: 1px / 1px;-webkit-box-shadow: 1px 1px 1px rgba(0,0,0,0.6);background-image:-webkit-repeating-radial-gradient(#FFFFFF 50%,#FFFFFF 50%);background:-moz-repeating-radial-gradient(#FFD700 50%,#000000 50%));"><span style="border:1px solid #000000;padding-bottom:1px;padding-top:1px;-webkit-border-radius: 1px 1px;-moz-border-radius: 1px / 1px;-webkit-box-shadow: 1px 1px 1px rgba(0,0,0,0.6);background-image:-webkit-repeating-radial-gradient(ellipse,#1C39BB 45%,#120A8F 50%);background:-moz-repeating-radial-gradient(ellipse,#CCCCFF 45%,#000000 50%));border-top-left-radius:500px 400px;border-bottom-left-radius:500px 400px">           [[Image:Regen Flag.png|25px|link=User:Scrawland Scribblescratch]]    <span style="background-image:-webkit-gradient(linear, right top, left top, from(#000000), to(#FFFFFF)); -webkit-border-radius: 36px 12px; -moz-border-radius: 36px / 12px; -webkit-box-shadow: 0 0 5px 5px #000000; border:2px double #E5E4E2 border-radius:5px; border-bottom-right-radius:100px 90px; border-top-right-radius:100px 90px; color:#FFFFFF"> <font color="#FF033E" face="Courier">"Fear the power   <font color="#FF033E" face="Courier" title="Bvlog"> of the Dark Side of the Force."  16:48, August 30, 2013 (UTC)

Malta
I was wondering if I could play as the nation of Malta. I didn't see it in the nations list, but I noticed no one had conquered the islands in recent years. Is it alright if I sign up as them? Mscoree (talk) 17:41, August 30, 2013 (UTC)

It's not even on the map. As far as I know, either Cyprus or Italy owns it.

<span style="-webkit-border-radius: 1px 1px;-moz-border-radius: 1px / 1px;-webkit-box-shadow: 1px 1px 1px rgba(0,0,0,0.6);background-image:-webkit-repeating-radial-gradient(#FFFFFF 50%,#FFFFFF 50%);background:-moz-repeating-radial-gradient(#FFD700 50%,#000000 50%));"><span style="border:1px solid #000000;padding-bottom:1px;padding-top:1px;-webkit-border-radius: 1px 1px;-moz-border-radius: 1px / 1px;-webkit-box-shadow: 1px 1px 1px rgba(0,0,0,0.6);background-image:-webkit-repeating-radial-gradient(ellipse,#1C39BB 45%,#120A8F 50%);background:-moz-repeating-radial-gradient(ellipse,#CCCCFF 45%,#000000 50%));border-top-left-radius:500px 400px;border-bottom-left-radius:500px 400px">               <span style="background-image:-webkit-gradient(linear, right top, left top, from(#000000), to(#FFFFFF)); -webkit-border-radius: 36px 12px; -moz-border-radius: 36px / 12px; -webkit-box-shadow: 0 0 5px 5px #000000; border:2px double #E5E4E2 border-radius:5px; border-bottom-right-radius:100px 90px; border-top-right-radius:100px 90px; color:#FFFFFF"> <font color="#FF033E" face="Courier">"Fear the power   <font color="#FF033E" face="Courier" title="Bvlog"> of the Dark Side of the Force."  18:13, August 30, 2013 (UTC)

Before I made my post I searched through some of the archives. I noticed that Italy had attacked the islands but withdrew, and I noticed that Napoleon never invaded the islands, therefore the Sovereign Military Order of Malta would still be in power. Mscoree (talk) 18:58, August 30, 2013 (UTC)
 * No, in this timeline, Malta was only briefly independent, as a pirate-controlled state, but it was quickly annexed by Venice and is under Venetian control to this day.--Collie Kaltenbrunner (talk) 21:05, August 30, 2013 (UTC)
 * Yes, I believe this was sometime in the early 1500s. Also, we never had Napoleon, just two counterparts.
 * <span style="-webkit-border-radius: 1px 1px;-moz-border-radius: 1px / 1px;-webkit-box-shadow: 1px 1px 1px rgba(0,0,0,0.6);background-image:-webkit-repeating-radial-gradient(#FFFFFF 50%,#FFFFFF 50%);background:-moz-repeating-radial-gradient(#FFD700 50%,#000000 50%));"><span style="border:1px solid #000000;padding-bottom:1px;padding-top:1px;-webkit-border-radius: 1px 1px;-moz-border-radius: 1px / 1px;-webkit-box-shadow: 1px 1px 1px rgba(0,0,0,0.6);background-image:-webkit-repeating-radial-gradient(ellipse,#1C39BB 45%,#120A8F 50%);background:-moz-repeating-radial-gradient(ellipse,#CCCCFF 45%,#000000 50%));border-top-left-radius:500px 400px;border-bottom-left-radius:500px 400px">           [[Image:Regen Flag.png|25px|link=User:Scrawland Scribblescratch]]    <span style="background-image:-webkit-gradient(linear, right top, left top, from(#000000), to(#FFFFFF)); -webkit-border-radius: 36px 12px; -moz-border-radius: 36px / 12px; -webkit-box-shadow: 0 0 5px 5px #000000; border:2px double #E5E4E2 border-radius:5px; border-bottom-right-radius:100px 90px; border-top-right-radius:100px 90px; color:#FFFFFF"> <font color="#FF033E" face="Courier">"Fear the power   <font color="#FF033E" face="Courier" title="Bvlog"> of the Dark Side of the Force."  21:13, August 30, 2013 (UTC)
 * 1576, in fact.Right after the Caliphate fell.--Collie Kaltenbrunner (talk) 22:30, August 30, 2013 (UTC)

Nevermind then. Thanks. Mscoree (talk) 21:44, August 30, 2013 (UTC)

Imperium Africana
Total: 80
 * Location: +3 (Ethiopia 2, Germanica 3, Neu Berlin 3, Neu Prussen 4)
 * Tactical Advantage: +6
 * Strength: Ethiopia (L), Kenya (M), Eritrea (M), Borona (M), Adal (MV), Warsangali (MV), Normandy (MV), Oyo (MV), Benin (MV), Yorubaland (MV), Beja (MV), Darfur (MV), Kitara (MV), Majeerteen Sultanate (MV), Ajuuraan Sultanate (MV), Germanica (L), Neu Berlin (L), Neu Prussen (L), Georgia (L), Chimu (M), Mysore (M), Orientalia (M), United Maharajya (L), Rajputana (L), Dahod (MV), Nepal (MV), Bhutan (MV), Mataram (M), Brunei (M), Naya Bihar (M), Sulwasi (MV) = 85/32 = +3
 * Military Development: 16/16 = +1
 * Economy: 14/14 = +1
 * Infrastructure: 0
 * Expansion: -5
 * Motive: +3 + 7 + 7 + 3 = +20
 * Chance: +7
 * Edit Count: 3,050
 * UTC Time: 09:42 = 72
 * 72/3050*pi=0.0741621872322885
 * Nation Age: +5
 * Population: +29 (355,587,000)
 * Participation: +10
 * Recent Wars: 0

Great Brython
Total: 39
 * Location: +5
 * Tactical Advantage: 0
 * Strength: Great Brython (L), Hobyo-Somalia (MV), Morocco (MV), Welsh Royal Coast (MV), New South Wales (MV), Oldeburg (MV), Liege (MV), Cleves (MV), West Munster (MV), Luxembourg (MV), Netherlands (L), Indonesia (MV), Kongo (MV), Warqama (MV) = 32/85 = 0
 * Military Development: 16/16 = +1
 * Economy: 14/14 = +1
 * Infrastructure: 0
 * Expansion: 0
 * Chance: 4
 * Motive: +10
 * Nation Age: 0
 * Population: +8 (35,000,000)
 * Participation: +10
 * Recent Wars: 0

Results
((80/(35+80)*2)-1 = 0.344537815 = 34,45%

34z45*(1-1/(2*15)) = 33.3016667

The Ethio-Aryan-German alliance destroys Great Brython. They can topple the Brythonic government if the war lasts for fifteen years.

Discussion
LoL. Anyway since I'm not really around, some else really needs to keep Viva in check or else... <font color="#000000">VonGlusenburg (talk to Von!) 16:09, August 31, 2013 (UTC)


 * Don't worry. I've already nominated myself for the job. XD [[Image:1.png|23px]] Imp (Say Hi?!) 16:12, August 31, 2013 (UTC)

I think we should treat Great Brhyton's chances as a NPC, as Reximus won't answer until 1814, at least, and we can't have wars with inconclusive results for four years, after all, when this happens, the war drags out for 10 years or so.Or it would be more plausible to make this war drag on?--Collie Kaltenbrunner (talk) 19:49, August 31, 2013 (UTC)

I don't understand why that's necessary. He has development for the last fifteen years, save for the few days that he has been blocked so far.

<span style="-webkit-border-radius: 1px 1px;-moz-border-radius: 1px / 1px;-webkit-box-shadow: 1px 1px 1px rgba(0,0,0,0.6);background-image:-webkit-repeating-radial-gradient(#FFFFFF 50%,#FFFFFF 50%);background:-moz-repeating-radial-gradient(#FFD700 50%,#000000 50%));"><span style="border:1px solid #000000;padding-bottom:1px;padding-top:1px;-webkit-border-radius: 1px 1px;-moz-border-radius: 1px / 1px;-webkit-box-shadow: 1px 1px 1px rgba(0,0,0,0.6);background-image:-webkit-repeating-radial-gradient(ellipse,#1C39BB 45%,#120A8F 50%);background:-moz-repeating-radial-gradient(ellipse,#CCCCFF 45%,#000000 50%));border-top-left-radius:500px 400px;border-bottom-left-radius:500px 400px">               <span style="background-image:-webkit-gradient(linear, right top, left top, from(#000000), to(#FFFFFF)); -webkit-border-radius: 36px 12px; -moz-border-radius: 36px / 12px; -webkit-box-shadow: 0 0 5px 5px #000000; border:2px double #E5E4E2 border-radius:5px; border-bottom-right-radius:100px 90px; border-top-right-radius:100px 90px; color:#FFFFFF"> <font color="#FF033E" face="Courier">"Fear the power   <font color="#FF033E" face="Courier" title="Bvlog"> of the Dark Side of the Force."  20:53, August 31, 2013 (UTC)

What a surprise to see you two here. I just got back here to change the algo when I read the blog. I suspect Rex won't be around for a while. Vivaporius: "I don't need a slogan" 21:06, August 31, 2013 (UTC)

Collie has a point. While he does have development for the last fifteen years, though, we could still expand his military/economy/all that good stuff as if he became an NPC on whatever day he was banned, which was the 24th or 25th. CrimsonAssassin- "I have special eyes" 22:05, August 31, 2013 (UTC)

Can I assume it's too late for other countries to join? Callumthered (talk) 23:27, August 31, 2013 (UTC)


 * Sorry man, Viva was quick with the Algo. XD [[Image:1.png|23px]] Imp (Say Hi?!) 23:49, August 31, 2013 (UTC)
 * Dang. Well, I'll just have to hope that Brandenburg will trade Oldenburg for Khmer Koch or something (God damn Rex nd his banning! Oldenburg could have been mine years ago!). Callumthered (talk) 23:54, August 31, 2013 (UTC)

Added my proposal to the chances.After all, they need one, and i am not surprised that you conveniently forgot the chance.I also adjusted the length of the war with the chance.--Collie Kaltenbrunner (talk) 07:24, September 1, 2013 (UTC)

Claims
Since Rex is gone for a while, and we've clearly won a smashing victory, I think it proper to begin claim the lands of this vanquished foe. Vivaporius: "I don't need a slogan" 23:20, August 31, 2013 (UTC) Okay, I've ceded Welsh South America to Imp along with Kongo, and Wales is Scraw's. If there are no more claims to be made, then I shall call the wonderful little meeting to a close. We are adjured. Vivaporius: "I don't need a slogan" 23:43, August 31, 2013 (UTC)
 * Ethiopia - Great Britain (England and Scotland), Brittany, Welsh Greenland, Ireland, Welsh Australia, Warqama (just taking that back) and Hobyo Somalia. Germany can have Wales. All of Wales Southeast Asian territories.
 * Germanica - Greenland, Ireland, Wales, Welsh Carribean, all of Welsh North Africa, Welsh Carribean, former Dutch European land.
 * Orissa - New Zealand, All of Welsh South America, and Kongo. Claiming for Mataram is the Welsh colony/puppet on Sumendang.

Sure. Imp (Say Hi?!) 23:45, August 31, 2013 (UTC)

I would like to take this opportunity to point out an implausibility (which is not limited to this war). In the 1700s and 1800s otl, when a nation was defeated, it was very unusual for the entire home nation to be taken. Let's take France as an example. After they lost the Seven Year's War, they lost little to no territory in Europe, but lost basically all their colonies. After the Napoleonic Wars, France merely lost all the land it had gained throughout the wars. The nation-state of France remained intact. Again, after its defeat in the Franco-Prussian War, the Prussians/Germans did not annex all of France: just Alasce Lorraine. Even after the Nazis were defeated, Germany was not (permanently) occupied by the Allies, and at least West Germany was allowed to be independent. My point is, regardless of the Agorithm, it is implausible by this stage for an entire home nation to be annexed. Colonies, sure, it's only natural. Parts of the main nation, sure. But the entire country and all its colonies? I'm really not so sure. (Note how I don't say that it's implausible for Ethiopia to gain land in Europe, or for it to gain colonies.) Callumthered (talk) 23:52, August 31, 2013 (UTC)

I agree. I say that Ireland or Scotland should receive independent. Also, Wales has a larger population than Normandy--easier to rebel. I wanted England, mainly because they're Germanic, like me.

<span style="-webkit-border-radius: 1px 1px;-moz-border-radius: 1px / 1px;-webkit-box-shadow: 1px 1px 1px rgba(0,0,0,0.6);background-image:-webkit-repeating-radial-gradient(#FFFFFF 50%,#FFFFFF 50%);background:-moz-repeating-radial-gradient(#FFD700 50%,#000000 50%));"><span style="border:1px solid #000000;padding-bottom:1px;padding-top:1px;-webkit-border-radius: 1px 1px;-moz-border-radius: 1px / 1px;-webkit-box-shadow: 1px 1px 1px rgba(0,0,0,0.6);background-image:-webkit-repeating-radial-gradient(ellipse,#1C39BB 45%,#120A8F 50%);background:-moz-repeating-radial-gradient(ellipse,#CCCCFF 45%,#000000 50%));border-top-left-radius:500px 400px;border-bottom-left-radius:500px 400px">               <span style="background-image:-webkit-gradient(linear, right top, left top, from(#000000), to(#FFFFFF)); -webkit-border-radius: 36px 12px; -moz-border-radius: 36px / 12px; -webkit-box-shadow: 0 0 5px 5px #000000; border:2px double #E5E4E2 border-radius:5px; border-bottom-right-radius:100px 90px; border-top-right-radius:100px 90px; color:#FFFFFF"> <font color="#FF033E" face="Courier">"Fear the power   <font color="#FF033E" face="Courier" title="Bvlog"> of the Dark Side of the Force."  23:59, August 31, 2013 (UTC)

I'm just going to invade them later. I'd rather fight for them then let them slip away. Vivaporius: "I don't need a slogan" 00:02, September 1, 2013 (UTC)

But Viva, what exactly do you gain from Ireland or Scotland? Having an outpost in Europe, I can understand. But...these aren't the most useful places on Earth. Regardless, they aren't the actual home territory of Wales. Really, if part of Wales was to remain as a rump state, it would be otl Wales. Brandenburg could still get the "Germanic" English, and Ethiopia can still get their Northern paradises, whilst the Welsh retain their national homeland. It's a win for the coalition, a (sort of) win for the Welsh people, and a win for plausibility. Callumthered (talk) 00:20, September 1, 2013 (UTC)

I'm with Callum.

<span style="-webkit-border-radius: 1px 1px;-moz-border-radius: 1px / 1px;-webkit-box-shadow: 1px 1px 1px rgba(0,0,0,0.6);background-image:-webkit-repeating-radial-gradient(#FFFFFF 50%,#FFFFFF 50%);background:-moz-repeating-radial-gradient(#FFD700 50%,#000000 50%));"><span style="border:1px solid #000000;padding-bottom:1px;padding-top:1px;-webkit-border-radius: 1px 1px;-moz-border-radius: 1px / 1px;-webkit-box-shadow: 1px 1px 1px rgba(0,0,0,0.6);background-image:-webkit-repeating-radial-gradient(ellipse,#1C39BB 45%,#120A8F 50%);background:-moz-repeating-radial-gradient(ellipse,#CCCCFF 45%,#000000 50%));border-top-left-radius:500px 400px;border-bottom-left-radius:500px 400px">               <span style="background-image:-webkit-gradient(linear, right top, left top, from(#000000), to(#FFFFFF)); -webkit-border-radius: 36px 12px; -moz-border-radius: 36px / 12px; -webkit-box-shadow: 0 0 5px 5px #000000; border:2px double #E5E4E2 border-radius:5px; border-bottom-right-radius:100px 90px; border-top-right-radius:100px 90px; color:#FFFFFF"> <font color="#FF033E" face="Courier">"Fear the power   <font color="#FF033E" face="Courier" title="Bvlog"> of the Dark Side of the Force."  00:26, September 1, 2013 (UTC)

I don't gain anything from either. I just want them, just like I wanted the other territories. The Scots and the Irsh can talk about being free and whatever, and them being a part of Wales proper doesn't matter at all (since they've been thoroughly defeated), it simply won't stop me from steam-rolling them now or later. And you seem to forget that Rome, Germany and Britain managed to take over huge swathes of territory relatively quickly. Rome fell after numerous invasions over a one thousand year period; Germany after a coalition of nations defeated them (Wales being the case here), and Britain after its overstretched empire could no longer be controlled. I will cede Wales to Scraw, but I fought for and won Great Britain and Ireland, and I expect to get my winnings over the next five years. Vivaporius: "I don't need a slogan" 01:10, September 1, 2013 (UTC)

Oh, and on the topic of gains, you could probably ask the same question of Denmark, wanting a worthless piece of land known as Greenland, or Britain and its rabit desire to keep the equally worthless Falklands (taking them in the early 1800s by the way). What of the numerous nations who fought over the Pacific Islands, which possessed no useful resources at all? This took took place before the age of coal, which means their usefulness as recoaling stations was non-existant. I gain potatos and redheads from Ireland and lots shipbuilding in Scotland. There. Vivaporius: "I don't need a slogan" 01:14, September 1, 2013 (UTC)

Strange how the examples you gave (Rome, Germany and Britain (which was, in itself, a strange choice)) are not in the time period we are talking about and in Rome's case was over a thousand years before the time we are currently talking about. Here is a fact: in the 18th and 19th and (to some extent) 20th centuries, when "civilised" nations went to war, they did not take the entirety of the main country. Even Nazi Germany created puppet governments giving the locals some semblance of retaining power (not that the Nazis were civilised).

The examples of Greenland and the Falklands have nothing to do with our discussion. They were practically uninhabited outposts and were not the main, homeland territory  of any nation. Your "example" of Britain "falling" after it overstretched its empire is, well, laughable. Sure the overseas empire crumbled, but  the main nation survived  which is my point. And just quietly, with regards to the Pacific Islands, did you not consider Guano? Or (because by the time they were fighting over them, this was an issue) coaling bases?

Let's assume, however, that you do (implausibly) annex all of Britain. There is going to be massive resentment. Brtain had a decent (and patriotic and nationalistic) population by this point and there would be constant minor rebellions, uprisings and strikes. Think Ireland otl but multiplied to early-industrial British size. Your population in Ethiopia is going to get slightly sick of the endless bloody repressions and reprisals your military will have to engage in to keep the locals in check. And your population will see that, despite their European race, the Welsh are a civilised people with industry, not some uncivilised primitives like those in your other colonies. Annexing Britain would be more trouble than it is worth.

Let me stress again that taking Welsh colonies makes sense and is the most plausible thing to do. However "steamrolling" over the main nation of Wales is implausible and will do you more harm than good. Take Cornwall, take part of Scotland or Ireland. But annexing the Welsh heartlands/all of the British Isles is implausible and will in the long run be harmful for you.

And you'd get more redheads from Scotland than Ireland. Callumthered (talk) 03:26, September 1, 2013 (UTC)

I forget where my redhards are. Anyway, let's begin the long and difficult road of explanations. On your first point, since time period matters, let us discuss Caucausia. The Russians were notorious for booting the native population off of their lands, and wiping out resistance wherever it was. They annexed the entirety of the nation that resided there (the Caucausian Emirate), and did so with many other nations that were in Central Asia and Siberia as well. As for the Brits, they were notorious for taking over huge empires such as the Ashanti Empire and the Zulu Kingdom, as well as taking huge swath (albeit not all of) India. Look at the OTL Scramble for Africa, which the game is now entering. Huge pieces of land (such as Somalia, East Africa and Nigeria) were all home to huge empires which put up decent fights before being conquered.

As for my "laughable" statement on Britain being overstretched, look up your info (as I did when Scraw attempted to justify his oversized military in AvA2). Britain was overstretched. In fact, during nearly all conflicts Britain was engaged in, it had to juggle which colonies to defend and which to let go of until it could return to liberate them. Overall, Britain had a massive military force, its just that it was poorly placed and disproportionately so. Most of its soldiers came from India, and most of the equipment from the home isles. It took huge amounts of money to get these into the right places, and even so, it could only do so with a few areas (Egypt, India and Britain). Need I remind you of the Suez Crisis? Right after that, it was shown that Britain could no longer sustain its empire, and with that, it collapsed. Over a 10-20 year period (ten years if you really think about it), the entirety of the once mighty British Empire was reduced to a few scragglely islands and a funky near Argentina.

Now back to the point. As was the case in OTL Ethiopia during the Italian invasion, patriotism and nationalism don't protect you from a determined foe. All of Ethiopia was conquered by Italy, and though it only ever controlled a third of the country totally at any given time, that was only because the nation was so huge. However, whenever the patriotic Ethiopians turned up to fight, they got stomped. Patriotism gets you numbers (lots of willing recruits), not victories (no well-trained or equipped recruits). Only thing it does is annoy your enemy, and as has been the case in ever attempt to rebel, it either 1) Gets them to drop the colony let a rock and move on to better targets (OTL Britain dumped America for India), or 2) Gear up and raze every city, house and dog in the neighborhood (look at Norway, it had the longest uprising under Nazi Germany; two weeks). Look at France in Algeria. It only left when the people wanted their money spent elsewhere instead of the costly won. Look at Iraq, the United States didn't live because it lost. It left because the won cost to stinkin' much. A government that hits heavily and brutally wins a won such as that (OTL Boer Wars which literally broke the fighting will of the Afrikaners). OTL Kenya didn't break away because it won a war of independence, it did so because the fight against the Mau Mau was making the British look bad.

Now, as for war fatigue. This is the Age of Imperialism. War fatigue is a myth right now. The people want a war because it proves they are the best, they feel its their job to uplift the other nation, and they want the biggest empire on the block. Bloody reprisals are considered worth the investment, and the people aren't impartial when it comes to concentration camps (OTL South Africa for example). Next, you need to remember that Ethiopia is an African nation. Different culture and society. As has been the case throughout their history, war isn't considered much of a drain there. Society puts emphizes on never givingup (which is why they fought so hard ever when they were losing). Perfect example. Ethiopia was chasing the Italians out of the nation in 1895 and had no intentions on stopping. The only reason they did stopped was because they were going through a famine and couldn't maintain the momenteum as they needed food for the men and horses. The Ashanti, it took the razing of nearly all their cities to stop them from fighting. The Zulu didn't stop fighting until it became appearent it was totally pointless fighting the more numerous British.

Now you keep saying "implausible" "implausible", but you never say why. I'm ahead of Wales on the industrialization chart, and I had many many many more people to fund any war effort or die fighting for the "glorious empire". Was it implausible for the British to take over India with their tiny yet advanced armies? It took many decades, but the people didn't buckle under the cost or loss of life. Ethiopia is larger and more powerful than Wales, so I don't see how it would be implausible to conquer the entire nation. Its one more industrialized nation fighting a smaller and less industrialized nation. Me taking over an island with a population one sixth that of Ethiopia's is implausible? Nevermind the fact that Ethiopia has many millions of loyal citizens, hundreds of thousands of soldiers, hundreds of warships, and a culture that isn't afraid of a little decimation, but Britain having a highly patriotic population is going to prevent me from taking over? I'll reiterate: war weariness was not a major issue at the time. Cost was. Cost pushed the Soviets out of Afghanistan, America out of Iraq and Britain out of nearly all of its colonies.

I'm sorry about the text wall (its a thing), but you've stated as the sole basis of your argument, that patriotism (which historically has never won any wars), war weariness (which only truly took hold of nations after World War II), and implausibility (for which you have not explained why), will force the massive colonial empire that has only been engaged in two major wars over the last one hundred years, is incapable of conquering the tiny island nation with a population of 15 million? The Indians were equally patriotic, still didn't defeat the Brits. They were very numerous, with a population of 225 million. Still didn't beat the Brits. They were partially industrialized and even had a blue water navy. Still didn't beat the Brits. Recap. Britain: 15 million people, a military of 200,000 (at its post-Napoleonic height), and a navy of a thousand ships. India: 225 million people, several millions of professional warriors and soldiers, and a navy of several thousands of ships. Hmm. See a problem with that assessment? Once again I'm very sorry for the text wall. Vivaporius: "I don't need a slogan" 04:25, September 1, 2013 (UTC)

Also, please don't think I'm being disagreeable. I'm just trying to take what I've earned in the war. The colonies are nice, but I fought for, won and now want the British Isles (I mean seriously, that's literally the only reason I fought this stupid war). I have Normany right next to it, and Yoruabaland, Oyo and Benin not to far away either. I don't see how keeping to population in line is going to be difficult. Vivaporius: "I don't need a slogan" 04:37, September 1, 2013 (UTC)

Guys, guys, guys, tl;dr overload! Both of you are semi right, but we're going to act like this never happened. Court adjourned.

<span style="-webkit-border-radius: 1px 1px;-moz-border-radius: 1px / 1px;-webkit-box-shadow: 1px 1px 1px rgba(0,0,0,0.6);background-image:-webkit-repeating-radial-gradient(#FFFFFF 50%,#FFFFFF 50%);background:-moz-repeating-radial-gradient(#FFD700 50%,#000000 50%));"><span style="border:1px solid #000000;padding-bottom:1px;padding-top:1px;-webkit-border-radius: 1px 1px;-moz-border-radius: 1px / 1px;-webkit-box-shadow: 1px 1px 1px rgba(0,0,0,0.6);background-image:-webkit-repeating-radial-gradient(ellipse,#1C39BB 45%,#120A8F 50%);background:-moz-repeating-radial-gradient(ellipse,#CCCCFF 45%,#000000 50%));border-top-left-radius:500px 400px;border-bottom-left-radius:500px 400px">               <span style="background-image:-webkit-gradient(linear, right top, left top, from(#000000), to(#FFFFFF)); -webkit-border-radius: 36px 12px; -moz-border-radius: 36px / 12px; -webkit-box-shadow: 0 0 5px 5px #000000; border:2px double #E5E4E2 border-radius:5px; border-bottom-right-radius:100px 90px; border-top-right-radius:100px 90px; color:#FFFFFF"> <font color="#FF033E" face="Courier">"Fear the power   <font color="#FF033E" face="Courier" title="Bvlog"> of the Dark Side of the Force."  05:02, September 1, 2013 (UTC)

No, Viva, I am basing my argument on the fact  that when civilised countries went to war with each other at this time, they  did not  take the entire main nation. Seeing as Ethiopia and Wales are/were on basically the same scale of "civilisation" they would simply not do it. Sure, you have the manpower to take them. But it was not the done thing. And if you are the civilised nation you aseem to be, you would accept that. But it's not just you; I think Wales' annexation of the Netherlands was wrong too.

And I said that your claim that  Britain  (as in the nation on the British isles) "fell" was laughable. Britain is, last time I checked, still a sovereign nation. The same one which (as I myself said) lost its empire. Almost like, say, Wales losing its empire but remaining a rump state.

Your point about India is a good one. however you fail to recognise that the British did, at least at first, keep the indigenous government structures through their use of the princes. And you also do not take into account the sheer length of time and the number of wars required to subjugate India. It took the Brits years of weaseling in with the local princes, then a war or two or five with a prince who wouldn't accept their rule. And also, India had stuff worth fighting for. Britain is nice, but nowhere near as valuable as India.

I do not think you are being disagreeable, and I hope you do not think I am. As you know, my nation has nothing to gain from you gaining or not gaining Britain. However I am pointing out what I see as a problem which has started to occur with more regularity in this game and which I think takes away from its plausibility. (I'm done now Scraw) Callumthered (talk) 06:09, September 1, 2013 (UTC)

Understood. Though I am well read on the subject of the "princely states" permitted by the British to rule over portions of India (such as Hyderabad). I see Britain as a strategic holding, so that's why I'm interested in holding it. As far as that is concerned, I believe you have a valid point on the rest of the matter. I guess we're done here then. Vivaporius: "I don't need a slogan" 07:55, September 1, 2013 (UTC)

Map Contest Crossover
That's right, the Map Contest this week is based on Principia Moderni II! Anyone who is interested can go to the Map Contest page to participate. CourageousLife (talk) 20:27, August 31, 2013 (UTC)

Time to see what people's motives are in the game and if they plan on touching my shit *reads* CrimsonAssassin- "I have special eyes" 22:03, August 31, 2013 (UTC)

XD I made you and Russia my long time allies and then Cold War enemy.

<span style="-webkit-border-radius: 1px 1px;-moz-border-radius: 1px / 1px;-webkit-box-shadow: 1px 1px 1px rgba(0,0,0,0.6);background-image:-webkit-repeating-radial-gradient(#FFFFFF 50%,#FFFFFF 50%);background:-moz-repeating-radial-gradient(#FFD700 50%,#000000 50%));"><span style="border:1px solid #000000;padding-bottom:1px;padding-top:1px;-webkit-border-radius: 1px 1px;-moz-border-radius: 1px / 1px;-webkit-box-shadow: 1px 1px 1px rgba(0,0,0,0.6);background-image:-webkit-repeating-radial-gradient(ellipse,#1C39BB 45%,#120A8F 50%);background:-moz-repeating-radial-gradient(ellipse,#CCCCFF 45%,#000000 50%));border-top-left-radius:500px 400px;border-bottom-left-radius:500px 400px">               <span style="background-image:-webkit-gradient(linear, right top, left top, from(#000000), to(#FFFFFF)); -webkit-border-radius: 36px 12px; -moz-border-radius: 36px / 12px; -webkit-box-shadow: 0 0 5px 5px #000000; border:2px double #E5E4E2 border-radius:5px; border-bottom-right-radius:100px 90px; border-top-right-radius:100px 90px; color:#FFFFFF"> <font color="#FF033E" face="Courier">"Fear the power   <font color="#FF033E" face="Courier" title="Bvlog"> of the Dark Side of the Force."  22:35, August 31, 2013 (UTC)


 * And did you tell him what you did to me? *glares* CourageousLife (talk) 22:48, August 31, 2013 (UTC)
 * XD sorry. I tried to place one counternation on each continent, and you were the only major nation on the Antillian continent. Look at the map, you didn't even lose any land.
 * <span style="-webkit-border-radius: 1px 1px;-moz-border-radius: 1px / 1px;-webkit-box-shadow: 1px 1px 1px rgba(0,0,0,0.6);background-image:-webkit-repeating-radial-gradient(#FFFFFF 50%,#FFFFFF 50%);background:-moz-repeating-radial-gradient(#FFD700 50%,#000000 50%));"><span style="border:1px solid #000000;padding-bottom:1px;padding-top:1px;-webkit-border-radius: 1px 1px;-moz-border-radius: 1px / 1px;-webkit-box-shadow: 1px 1px 1px rgba(0,0,0,0.6);background-image:-webkit-repeating-radial-gradient(ellipse,#1C39BB 45%,#120A8F 50%);background:-moz-repeating-radial-gradient(ellipse,#CCCCFF 45%,#000000 50%));border-top-left-radius:500px 400px;border-bottom-left-radius:500px 400px">           [[Image:Regen Flag.png|25px|link=User:Scrawland Scribblescratch]]    <span style="background-image:-webkit-gradient(linear, right top, left top, from(#000000), to(#FFFFFF)); -webkit-border-radius: 36px 12px; -moz-border-radius: 36px / 12px; -webkit-box-shadow: 0 0 5px 5px #000000; border:2px double #E5E4E2 border-radius:5px; border-bottom-right-radius:100px 90px; border-top-right-radius:100px 90px; color:#FFFFFF"> <font color="#FF033E" face="Courier">"Fear the power   <font color="#FF033E" face="Courier" title="Bvlog"> of the Dark Side of the Force."  23:07, August 31, 2013 (UTC)
 * :P I know CourageousLife (talk) 00:28, September 1, 2013 (UTC)