Talk:Principia Moderni II (Map Game)

Archives
Archive 1

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 flp back and forth with the rules.

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

Maps
Maps will be updated every 50 years.

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



Siam
Total:
 * Location: 4
 * Tactical Advantage: 1
 * Strength: Siam (L), Sukhothai (MV): 6
 * Military Development:
 * Expansion:
 * Motive: 7
 * Chance:
 * Edit Count:
 * UTC Time:
 * Nation Age: 5
 * Population: 9
 * Participation: 10
 * Recent Wars: 0
 * Recent Wars: 0

Khmer/Cambodia
Total:
 * Location: 5
 * Tactical Advantage: 0
 * Strength: Khmer (L): 4
 * Military Development: 0
 * Expansion: 0
 * Motive: 10
 * Chance:
 * Edit Count:
 * UTC Time:
 * Nation Age: -5
 * Population: 7
 * Participation: 10
 * Recent Wars: 0
 * Recent Wars: 0

Result
Cbb chance Scandinator (talk)

Austria
Total: 68
 * Location: 5
 * Tactical Advantage: 0
 * Strength: Austria (L), Venice (M), Byzantine Empire (MV), Bavaria-Munchen(S), Bavaria-Straubing (SV), Bavaria-Landshut (SV), England (M), Brandenburg (SV), Aragon (M), Milan (M): 23
 * Military Development: 8
 * Expansion: 0
 * Motive: 10
 * Chance: 5
 * Edit Count: 2103
 * UTC Time: 3:51
 * 2103/15*pi= 440.45129
 * Nation Age: 5
 * Population: 9
 * Participation: 10
 * Recent Wars: -2
 * Participating in another war: -5

Albert VI's Rebels
Total: 49*1.5=73.5
 * Location: 4
 * Tactical Advantage: 1
 * Strength: Albert VI's Rebels (L), Bohemian Rebels (M), Istrian Rebels (M), Croatian Rebels (M), Hungary (M), Luxembourg(S), Palatinate (S): 20
 * Military Development: 8
 * Expansion: 0
 * Motive: 10
 * Chance: 1
 * Edit Count: 2103
 * UTC Time: 3:51
 * 2103/15*pi= 440.45129
 * Nation Age: -10
 * Population: 6
 * Participation: 10
 * Recent Wars: 0

Result
The rebels can annex at most (73.5/(73.5+68)*2)-1=3.8% of Austria's remaining territory. Upper Austria (Tirol) remains independant, Aquelia forms.

Discussion
When did Luxembourg support Albert? I have to interest to support the hated Albert and fight against Austria. I refuse to fight Austria in a form. If Luxembourg will help, I shall not in any form and I will even declare independence from Luxembourg and throw off vassalization. Does Luxembourg even have a player? Syngraféas Enallaktikí̱ Istoría, Dic mihi lingua Anglorum. 04:12, September 9, 2012 (UTC)

I side with Austria ... Bavaria These are not the droids you are looking for. 04:19, September 9, 2012 (UTC)

Bavaria cant send military supplies since then it would be fighting three wars at a time and lose the reunification war. Brandenburg is a vassal of Luxembourg which wants the HRE throne and will do anthing to claim it. If you declare independence then you will be fighting another war. Scandinator (talk) 04:25, September 9, 2012 (UTC)

Very well, I will still try to send some basic help to my emperor. Also I thought I was only fighting one war, the war of unification?These are not the droids you are looking for. 04:38, September 9, 2012 (UTC)

England will support Austria, but the anglo-irish lordships won't be capable to send help for obvious reasons. --Galaguerra1 (talk) 04:27, September 9, 2012 (UTC)

Well, I certainly shan't fight Austria. **** off, Luxembourg.

Syngraféas Enallaktikí̱ Istoría, Dic mihi lingua Anglorum. 04:31, September 9, 2012 (UTC)

I thought Byzantium was Conquered? Saamwiil (talk) 04:36, September 9, 2012 (UTC)

Also, why isn't Burgundy there if Luxembourg is? How can the rebels have military development? Isn't their population limited to their armed forces? They aren't a nation, they're just rebels.

Syngraféas Enallaktikí̱ Istoría, Dic mihi lingua Anglorum. 04:41, September 9, 2012 (UTC)

The rebels were trained by Hungary, Venice resuced the Greek remanents of Byzantium. Burgundy and Luxembourg have nothing in common. They have seized part of Austria already and that area is their population base. If you wish not to supply or fight Austria's enemy with your 1 point then declare independence and have a proxy war with Luxembourg. Scandinator (talk) 04:44, September 9, 2012 (UTC)

Well, and I am smarter than that. I just got out of a war. I shall wait, meanwhile engaging in a diplomatic war with Luxembourg. And I thought Burgundy is also a Luxmebourgish vassal.

Syngraféas Enallaktikí̱ Istoría, Dic mihi lingua Anglorum. 04:48, September 9, 2012 (UTC)

Sorry MP old chap, but apparently Bavaria is not allowed to directly help you. Gott in Hemmel!!!! Das ist Sehr sclecht!!These are not the droids you are looking for. 04:51, September 9, 2012 (UTC)

But remnants isn't a whole state. You might get some military build up, but they wouldn't be a major factor in the war. Byzantine's army wasn't even that large at its demise. Saamwiil (talk) 04:56, September 9, 2012 (UTC)

Wait! Milan is also helping Austria, I just haven't post yet. Bauglir Stormageddon, Dark Lord of All (talk) 05:05, September 9, 2012 (UTC)

It's been three years since venice took over the Greek parts of Byzantium. Somethings got done and they have an official army which Venice transported to Austria. Scandinator (talk) 06:39, September 9, 2012 (UTC)

Where did DeanSims say Venice could annex the Greek parts of the Byzantine Empire? He was able to annex it all, unless he gave the rest of Venice they can't take it. LurkerLordB (Talk) 20:43, September 9, 2012 (UTC)

He said that the Ottomans annexted the Byzantine Empire, which presumably means all of it. LurkerLordB (Talk) 20:52, September 9, 2012 (UTC)

OTL The Ottomans took Athens in 1458 and the rest of Greece in 1460. The Greeks also declared independence as the short-lived Despotate of Morea in this time period. Venice with it's holdings on the Peninsula ATL stepped in and offer the Greeks protection from the Ottomans. Also the Ottomans could not take Constantinople and Greece in a year. To dismantle the seige equipment and march south straight away would kill morale. Scandinator (talk) 12:11, September 10, 2012 (UTC)

According to Florence's player, they are now supporting Austria. Monster Pumpkin (talk) 01:30, September 11, 2012 (UTC)

Algorithm
Another suggestion I might make is to give people a slight bonus, perhaps plus 3 or 4 for having a nation page. PitaKang- (But here's my number | So call me maybe) 01:15, September 11, 2012 (UTC)

>.> This is a joke, right? If yes, I fail to see where the funny is.

Syngraféas Enallaktikí̱ Istoría, Dic mihi lingua Anglorum. 02:03, September 11, 2012 (UTC)

Nope. I'm being totally serious here. PitaKang- (But here's my number | So call me maybe) 10:12, September 11, 2012 (UTC)

I actually agree with Pita. This forces the "conquerers and tyrants" of map games to put effort into this one. Scandinator (talk) 12:27, September 11, 2012 (UTC)

I agree and disagree. Yes I want people to put a lot of effort in, but I think making someone loose a war isn't the fairest way. Hmmm, I'm not too sure on this. VonGlusenburg (talk to Von!) 12:41, September 11, 2012 (UTC)

What about player vs. NPC wars? That could mess the algorithms up. CrimsonAssassin (talk) 14:38, September 11, 2012 (UTC)

I think I'm with Von. It's a good idea to reward people for working hard, but that might be a little too much of a reward. Maybe instead a nation page automatically counts for one year of military and economic buildup . CourageousLife (talk) 20:24, September 11, 2012 (UTC)

Perhaps we should just have revolts in the nations of people who refuse to make any nation pages after 10 days of playing the game. LurkerLordB (Talk) 21:51, September 11, 2012 (UTC)

Holy....

Hang on, I'm making one now. The Royal Guns (talk) 21:58, September 11, 2012 (UTC)

Far too hard to punish people for not making pages. I agree with the revolt proposal of LLB. --Galaguerra1 (talk) 22:08, September 11, 2012 (UTC)

The revolt is still a punishment albeit a much less serious one. Perhaps a famine or economic disaster instead too? VonGlusenburg (talk to Von!) 10:16, September 12, 2012 (UTC)

I think if the first ten years after joining pass and not page is created the player should have a revolt, if he has a vassal or colony, then it should gain independence, being annexed by other state or become savage (black) territory. After that, if a page is still not created, every six or seven years, periodical disaster would happen, such as famines, minor revolts, economical crisis, &c...

If a page for colonies is not created, then revolts, and, after much time, independence, despopulation or foreign annexation. --Galaguerra1 (talk) 00:24, September 13, 2012 (UTC)

Making a section for your vassals and colonies on your country's page is okay? i mean, it is difficult to create a page if you don't know how the cities are going to be called. that's why i never created pages for my colonies when i played as Hungary on the original game. i didn't had any idea of how they would name a colony.since i live in a former Portuguese colony, naming them will be easier, but what if i create a colony in a place that Portugal never colonized.How am i going to have a idea of how they would name it?--Collie Kaltenbrunner (talk) 21:14, September 13, 2012 (UTC)

Then you make your best guess. I tend to go with the native language of the colonizer to describe the area. Florida was a spanish word 'Flowery Land'. The english tended to name places after people, such as Virginia, a reference to Queen Elizabeth I, the 'Virgin Queen'. Heck, all of america was named for Amerigo Vespucci (I think that's how you spell his name). Many people named the place after the people who lived there. Quebec was an Algonquin word 'Kebec', for 'where the river shortens'. There's all kinds of ways to name a place, and as long as it's plausible, it'll be fine. CourageousLife (talk) 21:29, September 13, 2012 (UTC)

Well, the Portuguese also did it (native language) sometimes.that's why we have cities with names like Itaquaquecetuba, Pindamonhagaba, Araraquara, Guarapari, Paranaguá, Itamaracá, etc... --Collie Kaltenbrunner (talk) 22:29, September 13, 2012 (UTC)

The name doesn't have to be related with the OTL name. The spaniards (I'm form a former spanish colony) used to call towns in native names (for example, 'Tucumán, Neuquén', in mapudungun), after saints ('San Luis, San Juan' that mean 'Saint Louis, Saint John'), after an already existing place in Spain that they associated with this enw palce ('La Rioja' is an argentinan province, naemd after an already existing spanish one, other example will be New York named after York, in England), after an explorer (America after Americo Vespucci) or even after the territory itself for a particualr characteristic. The river in which the cities of Buenos Aires ('Fair Winds') and Montevideo (I don't know the ethymology and it has no meaning in spanish) were palced was names Río de la Plata ('Silver River'), as the spanish thought they could find silver on it.

The portugueses basicly did the same, don't worry for have some cities in different colonies with the same name, and other minor details.--186.60.17.13 17:00, September 14, 2012 (UTC)

Venice
Total: 69
 * Location: 5
 * Tactical Advantage: 0
 * Strength: Venice (L), Byzanite Empire (MV), Bavaria (S), Bavaria-Straubing (SV), Bavaria-Landshut (SV), Croatian Rebels (M), Papal States (S), Aragon (MV), Brandenburg (M), Epirus (S), Sweden (MV), Norway (MV), Denmark (M): 29
 * Military Development: 10
 * Expansion: 0
 * Motive: 10
 * Chance: 5
 * Edit Count: 1260
 * UTC Time: 21:29
 * 1260/36*pi= 109.9557428
 * Nation Age: -5
 * Population: 7
 * Participation: 10
 * Recent Wars: -2

Hungary
Total: 42
 * Location: 4
 * Tactical Advantage: 1
 * Strength: Hungary (L): 4
 * Military Development: 8
 * Expansion: 0
 * Motive: 3
 * Chance: 5
 * Edit Count: 1260
 * UTC Time: 21:29
 * 1260/36*pi= 109.9557428
 * Nation Age: 0
 * Population: 9
 * Participation: 10
 * Recent Wars: -2

Result
Crushing Venetian victory. Venice can at most annex (69/(69+42)*2)-1=24.3243% of Hungarian territory.

Reminds me of the Hungarian World War from Imperial Europe I. :( PitaKang- (But here's my number | So call me maybe) 21:54, September 11, 2012 (UTC)

Scaring people into submisison
I was wondering, since the only real reson why the Russian states are fragmented is becayuse a long time ago brothers warred to become the Grande Prince of Kiev, and then settle with their cities but with sovreignty, with culture, faith and basicaly the same dynasties, would it be possible if we annex one due to war we could scare the rest into being annexed with our military power(in an either you join us and have our military protect you or we do the same thing we did to the other guy type of way). Would that be allowed as long as its plausible? or would we have to stick with them being vassals or have a war with Each of them to get their territory-Lx (leave me a message) 21:57, September 11, 2012 (UTC)

lol. Well, I'm getting Tver, Rostov, and Yaroslavl. But, yeah, I suppose that is true.

How about the Samoyeds and etc? ]

The Royal Guns (talk) 22:28, September 11, 2012 (UTC)

They're tribes, its just normal expansion for them...no war required...after all ,there is no central governement and they are nomads. you don't need war to expand into black areas...at least not in the original PM you didnt.-Lx (leave me a message) 22:34, September 11, 2012 (UTC)

It makes sense to be able to annex a vassal that has been vassalized for a while. It would be a transition from independence to annexation, first you scare them or bribe them into vassalization, then you increase your influence over a decade or too, until you have total control over them and they can't resist being annexed.

However, I have been considering making individual city-states (like in the HRE) able to be annexed without an algorithm. LurkerLordB (Talk) 22:49, September 11, 2012 (UTC)

Also on the subject of vassals, I want to establish that using a RNG to determine if it is realistic to vassalize a nation or not is unrealistic. Unless you have totally surrounded the nation and have an incredible advantage, you should spend multiple turns (4-5 at least) using diplomacy to threaten, bribe, or persuade that vassal to join your main nation. I'm just going to get rid of any limit on the number of vassals a nation can have, as in OTL they didn't have any limits, but I will say that the combined area/population of the vassal states gained through methods other than algorithmic war should not be more than half of the area of the main nation LurkerLordB (Talk) 02:12, September 12, 2012 (UTC)

The Russian States of Tver, Yaroslavl and Rostov are surrounded by either muscovy or muscovy/novgorod

NO. I called them. Muscovy doesn't have a lot of options for expansion.

The Royal Guns (talk) 22:34, September 12, 2012 (UTC)

May be you should make a aprtition, struggle for the domain of those states or just create a joint federation with both your countries. --Galaguerra1 (talk) 00:27, September 13, 2012 (UTC)

I think its totally ridiculous, but I did create one that I am working on. Anywho, Moscow is going to collapse soon with all its wars and whatnot. You really should cut down on the expansion a bit. Work on the inside for a while. Then when you think you're ready, go after everyone.

Syngraféas Enallaktikí̱ Istoría, Dic mihi lingua Anglorum. 00:20, September 14, 2012 (UTC)

Protestant Reformation
I am currently consulting with LordGanon as to plausible places for it to begin, so please don't try and start one before I can bring back some more info. I think nothing major should occur until 1510 at the earliest. LurkerLordB (Talk) 00:06, September 14, 2012 (UTC)

Tibet
So, can it get a colour on the 1460 map?

Also, what happened to the labelled maps? I need to know what the names of the states around me are... 77topaz (talk) 06:59, September 14, 2012 (UTC)

About vassalizing and unifying
Ok, I'm getting tired. I have seen to far historical and political mistakes by many players, such as: I wanna to say that, I think we should stop this vassalization thing, specially on the HRE. --Galaguerra1 (talk) 17:37, September 14, 2012 (UTC)
 * Vassalizing. Many have said that you have to brib or threaten a country to make it a vassal. That's fine, but many people takes it just as it is written. To vassalize a state, you must have do something more than just saying "I'm start to brib this one so I get to make him my vassal in a few turns". You have to do stuff, sending ambassadors, offering royal marriages, giving the government or the people gifts, send ultimatums, instigate rebellions, &c...
 * Dynastical union. Who was the one who wrote that a dynastical union is a union of two states with the same dynasty? History is full with states of the same dynasty that had different governments (such as Spain and Austria after Charles I's abdication). What's the political meaning of having the same dynasty? Two states in that condition usually are allied with each other, but their government are totaly independent from the other one's.
 * Personal union. I say again, you don't just ask another country to join you in a union. For that to happen, you must be allies, arrange a royal marriage between the heirs, making a rebellion to put some state's ruler as ruler of the other one. A country is not going to just accept your leader as their own, replacing the other, after a few turns of diplomatical relations, not even well described in most cases.

Instigating rebellions is a way to vassalize that I forgot to mention. It is assumed that ambassadors would be sent bringing the bribes (AKA gifts to the government or people) or sending the threats/ultimatums. Royal marriages would fall under Dynastic union (which I don't really understand your complaints about?) True, for the personal union you need to either marry the existing monarch or topple them. LurkerLordB (Talk) 02:02, September 16, 2012 (UTC)

My main complains are that people is acting like the countries will become vassals just because they ask them to. I think mods should check more carefuly in plausibility about the personal unions, and specially the player-non player diplomatical relationships, because people could abuse of the non-player states sorrounding them and control them as puppets even if they are not. --Galaguerra1 (talk) 18:59, September 16, 2012 (UTC)

Muscovy

 * Location: 4
 * Tactical Advantage: 1
 * Strength: Muscovy (L), Novogorod (S) (I could be wrong here): 6
 * Military Development: 8
 * Expansion: -3
 * Motive: 3
 * Chance: 8
 * Edit Count: 1933
 * UTC Time: 2144
 * Nation Age: Old Nation (+5)
 * Population: 16
 * 6 digits in population
 * 5-10 times larger +10
 * Participation: 10
 * Recent Wars: -3
 * Total: 63
 * Total: 63

Rostov

 * Location: 4
 * Tactical Advantage: 0
 * Strength: Rosotv (L): 4
 * Military Development: 0
 * Expansion: 0
 * Motive: 10
 * Chance: 3
 * Edit Count: 1933
 * UTC Time: 2144
 * Nation Age: Ancient Nation (-5)
 * Population: 6
 * 5 digits in population
 * Participation: 10
 * Recent Wars: 0
 * Total: 32
 * Total: 32

Result
(((63/(32+63))*2)-1) = 32.63%, which is the maximum that can be taken. The war, as of Sept 14th, has lasted 3 years. The Royal Guns (talk) 21:57, September 14, 2012 (UTC)

So, I get roughly 30% of their territory.

Discussion
So, How badly did I screw up? The Royal Guns (talk) 21:57, September 14, 2012 (UTC)

Actually, population also takes the number of digist in account. this means that Rostov would have roughly 5, or 6 of population. yours also must be taken into account.judging by your territory, i would say that you have 6 or 7 of population.Rostov's population also must be 5, as you are invading them, and the places where the battles take place are too close to the city of Rostov to be a 4.--Collie Kaltenbrunner (talk) 10:12, September 15, 2012 (UTC)

Map Issues 1460

 * Bavaria is united completely, and Wurttemberg is it's vassalAndr3w777 (talk) 01:01, September 15, 2012 (UTC)
 * Austria only conceded Tyrolian independence, not Slovenia's. Also, I thought the rebel Bohemian territory would go back to Bohemia. Furthermore, the situation in the Black sea was resolved, Scan. There is no need to purchase anything, you already have it. Monster Pumpkin (talk) 03:06, September 15, 2012 (UTC)
 * What about my island in the Aegean Sea? --Galaguerra1 (talk) 03:15, September 15, 2012 (UTC)
 * Tyrol demanded it's and Aquelia's independence in return for ending the war. The rebel Bohemian terriotory was actually Austria's but wished to rejoin Bohemia. I'll fix the Black Sea. England will get their island. Scandinator (talk) 07:01, September 15, 2012 (UTC)


 * The Moscow people got all the territory. It was a coalition war(note the same war name).-Lx (leave me a message) 14:25, September 15, 2012 (UTC)

If those Rebels are going to revolt again, then I don't want them. They can go to Bohemia.

As for Aquelia, I made it clear that their independence was not acceptable. I counteracted that request by giving Albert V a high position in government.

Monster Pumpkin (talk) 15:15, September 15, 2012 (UTC)

@Lx, 50/50 then right?

@Pumpkin, will fix. Scandinator (talk) 16:05, September 15, 2012 (UTC)

I think there's an issue with the map - when I asked Khandesh and Berar to be vassalised, Berar accepted and Khandesh declined. However it shows Khandesh instead of Berar in my colour. Am I missing something, or is it a mistake? Our Brave Old World (talk) 20:45, September 15, 2012 (UTC)

Thanks OBOW! It's fixed. Scandinator (talk) 00:01, September 16, 2012 (UTC)

We Muscovians got all the territory because we won our war but you didn't... Because it was framed as two different wars... The Royal Guns (talk) 19:06, September 17, 2012 (UTC)

Where's Dimurat? They are the most stable of the post-Timurid states, and they are absent from the map. They control OTL Afghanistan and parts of Pakistan. The rest is still just chaos. Also the Manchurians purchased the wedge of Chinese territory directly south of Manchuria.

Yank 21:41, September 18, 2012 (UTC)

Naval Expansion
So, I've expanded the navy of Chichen Itza for the past 9 years. Considering that it had almost no sailing technology before 1450 and the rapid rate of upgrades, what would my sailing capabilites be? How far could I plausibly hope to sail? CourageousLife (talk) 13:54, September 15, 2012 (UTC)

I'd say rowing boats are your max level of naval tech at the moment. If determined enough you could reach nearby islands but to find them there will be numerous failed expeditions and ones that have to return. Scandinator (talk) 15:58, September 15, 2012 (UTC)

I developed sails a couple years back, was that ASB? Nothing as big as Eurasian sails, but still sails. CourageousLife (talk) 16:47, September 15, 2012 (UTC)

Sails are fine. It doesn't take a genius to figure it out. I'd check prevailing wind patterns in the Gulf to see where the sail boats end up. And the boats would hold only a few people at a time. So you would be unviable for and major colonization or trade for a while, exploring is fine though and I might and an event about a failed expedition... Scandinator (talk) 23:54, September 15, 2012 (UTC)

Thanks, that helps a lot! CourageousLife (talk) 23:57, September 15, 2012 (UTC)

Bahmani Invasion of Koli
Can a mod do this for me? Thanks.

Bahmani
Total: 49
 * Location: 4
 * Tactical Advantage: +1 (attacker's advantage)
 * Strength: Bahmani Sultanate (L), Berar (MV), Gondwana (MV): 8
 * Military Development: +3
 * Expansion: -4
 * Motive: 3
 * Chance: 2
 * Edit count: 44
 * Time: 2*1*5=10
 * 4.4*pi = 13.823
 * Nation Age: +5
 * Population: 17
 * 7 digits in population
 * 5-10 times the size of Koli +10
 * Participation: 10
 * Recent Wars: -0

Koli
Total: 31
 * Location: 5
 * Tactical Advantage: +2 (attacked from sea)
 * Strength: Koli: 4
 * Motive: 10
 * Chance: 3?
 * Nation Age: +0
 * Population: 7
 * 7 digits in popultion
 * Participation: 10
 * Recent Wars: 0

Result
Bahmani Victory. The Sultanate of Bahmani can take at most ((49/(49+31))*2)-1=22.5% of Koli and determine how long the war lasts.

Discussion
Did we decide to use the thousandths place of the chance result for NPCs? LurkerLordB (Talk) 17:27, September 16, 2012 (UTC)

Aragon

 * Location: 4


 * Tactical Advantage: +1


 * Strength: Aragon (L), Navarre (M), Brandenburg (S), Luxemborug (SV), Pomerania (SV), Austria (S), Tyrol (SV): 21


 * Military Development: 4


 * Expansion: 0


 * Motive: 3


 * Chance: 6
 * Edit count: 6774
 * Time: 1709
 * 6783/63*pi = 337.796........


 * Nation Age: +5


 * Population: 9


 * Participation: 10


 * Recent Wars: -3

Total: 55

Bearn

 * Location: 5
 * Tactical Advantage: 2


 * Strength: Bearn (L), France(M), Valois (M): 10


 * Motive: 10


 * Chance: 6


 * Nation Age: +5


 * Population: 6


 * Participation: 10

Total: 54
 * Recent Wars:

Discussion
Mountains? What mountains? And why have all the Ms been downgraded to Ms? We are giving military aid and you cannot change that. Syngraféas Enallaktikí̱ Istoría, Dic mihi lingua Anglorum. 20:55, September 16, 2012 (UTC)

Pyrenees... And just how are the Tyrolians gonna reach Bearn? Scandinator (talk) 02:02, September 17, 2012 (UTC)

Oh, right. And through Austria of course. Austrian help means Tyrolian help. Syngraféas Enallaktikí̱ Istoría, Dic mihi lingua Anglorum. 02:05, September 17, 2012 (UTC)

Salzburg could help too, as it is a vassal of Austria. But I wonder why I was brought into this war...

Monster Pumpkin (talk) 02:19, September 17, 2012 (UTC)

I thought you saw the algorithm on the HRE Unification talk page.

Syngraféas Enallaktikí̱ Istoría, Dic mihi lingua Anglorum. 02:25, September 17, 2012 (UTC)

I did, Just ask before you attack again please.

Monster Pumpkin (talk) 02:29, September 17, 2012 (UTC)

Okay. Syngraféas Enallaktikí̱ Istoría, Dic mihi lingua Anglorum. 02:43, September 17, 2012 (UTC)

Sending military help AKA troops to a far away war is implausable with current technology and high risk as well. Scandinator (talk) 06:59, September 17, 2012 (UTC)

Wait, Beárn wasn't a French vassal? so the countries involved part should be 9, not 10 for them.--Collie Kaltenbrunner (talk) 17:28, September 17, 2012 (UTC)

So what is the result? And since I am waging a war of liberation, can another alogorithms be added? --RandomWriterGuy (talk) 04:43, September 20, 2012 (UTC)

Everyone hold up a second. A: This war is over. B: earn is still a French vassal. So what are you liberating? Bearn? From YOURSELF? You're liberating your rebels? WTF? Syngraféas Enallaktikí̱ Istoría, Dic mihi lingua Anglorum. 00:27, September 21, 2012 (UTC)

Labelled maps
What happened to the labelled maps? I need to know what the names of the states around me are... 77topaz (talk) 08:25, September 16, 2012 (UTC)

I'll post up the ones from 1450. But I'll only update them every 50 years. Scandinator (talk) 09:23, September 16, 2012 (UTC)

Just look at the original named map, no new countries have appeared for anything so its just the same. In fact now we just lost countries. If your unsure what happened, just do a CTRL-F search on the game page for the countries you think is there so you can check the posts to see if it says it was annexed anywhere VonGlusenburg (talk to Von!) 13:44, September 16, 2012 (UTC).

Link? 77topaz (talk) 09:54, September 17, 2012 (UTC)

...Its at the top of the talk page...Scandinator (talk) 11:36, September 17, 2012 (UTC)

Holy Roman Empire (led by Tyrolia)
Total: 58?
 * Location: 4
 * Tactical Advantage: 1
 * Strength: Austria (M), Tyrolia (L), Salzburg (MVW) Switzerland? (M), Florence (S), Piombino (SV), Bavaria (M), Wurttemburg (MV), Baden? (MV), Milan (M), Genoa (MV), England (M), Calais (MV) = 31 so far.
 * Military Development: Salzburg and Austria were building up its miltary a few turns ago, and Milan and Switzerland are doing that now, so +6 for Austria/Salzburg, +6 for Switzerland, and +4 for Milan.
 * Expansion: -7?
 * Motive: +5
 * Chance: Can a mod help here?
 * Edit Count:
 * UTC Time:
 * Nation Age: +5
 * Population:
 * Participation: +10
 * Recent Wars: -3?
 * Recent Wars: -3?

Savoy
Total: 28
 * Location: 5
 * Tactical Advantage: ?
 * Strength: Savory (L), Monaco (M), the other two (M) = 13
 * Military Development:
 * Expansion: 0
 * Motive:
 * Chance:
 * Edit Count:
 * UTC Time:
 * Nation Age:
 * Population:
 * Participation: 10
 * Recent Wars:
 * Recent Wars:

Discussion
Sorry so much of this is incomplete, but this is the first time I have done an algorithim like this. Monster Pumpkin (talk) 22:53, September 17, 2012 (UTC)

The IP was me, and I didn't see Tyrolia as the leader. Is Salzburg the vassal of Tyrolia? LurkerLordB (Talk) 22:59, September 17, 2012 (UTC)

Salzburg is a vassal of Austria.

What does leader mean. Because I thought it meant that you needed a good general or something. Is that it?

Monster Pumpkin (talk) 23:00, September 17, 2012 (UTC)

Leader is the state that actually is doing most of the fighting. For example, in the Iraq war, the US would be the leader. The leader of the war should be a state that either borders the nation they are at war at, borders the Mediterranean and has a good navy, or has permission to cross through nations in the way. If multiple nations are doing the fighting, we can have a coalition algorithm, however, they really all should be able to get large amounts of troops Savoy. LurkerLordB (Talk) 23:10, September 17, 2012 (UTC)

Well, I don't know who would be doing the most fighting. Maybe Switzerland, but I don't know or not.

I think we would need a coalition algorithim, as I doubt my nations are the only ones that will fight savory.

So I guess the algorithim is tied for now?

Monster Pumpkin (talk) 23:15, September 17, 2012 (UTC)

Muscovy
Total: 37
 * Location: 4
 * Tactical Advantage: 1
 * Strength: Muscovy (L), Novogorod (S): 6
 * Military Development: 8
 * Expansion: -3
 * Motive: 4
 * Chance: 7
 * Edit Count: 1*9*5*9=360
 * UTC Time: 1853
 * 1853/360*pi=16.170
 * Nation Age: Old (+5)
 * Population: 16
 * Participation: 10
 * Recent Wars: -18

Yaroslavl
Total: 23
 * Location: 5
 * Tactical Advantage: 1
 * Strength: Yaroslavl (L): 4
 * Military Development: 0
 * Expansion: 0
 * Motive: 3
 * Chance: 0
 * Nation Age: Ancient (-5)
 * Population: 5
 * Participation: 10
 * Recent Wars: 0

Result
Muscovite Victory, Muscovy can annex ((37/(23+37))*2)-1=23.3% of Yaroslavl territory at most, depending on how long the war lasts. Muscovy's player can decide how long the war lasts

Discussion
Muscovy can take 35.135% of Yaroslavlan territory, which is enough to overthrow the government and annex the whole country... right? The Royal Guns (talk) 19:02, September 18, 2012 (UTC)

Please include the math for the chance and results, so it can be checked. You've had six years of war going on in the past 15 years, so that is -3 for each year of war. Though I only count 2 times of expansion, when you beat the Golden Horde and when you beat Rostov (expanding in a war only counts the very last turn where you finalize control over your expansion, so expanding because you win a war only counts -1) LurkerLordB (Talk) 21:24, September 18, 2012 (UTC)

I am thinking about attacking the Ottomans, but I am unsure of how much military power I have, combined with Lezhe and Serbia. Bfoxius (talk) 13:31, September 19, 2012 (UTC)


 * P so that's 23.33%, right? You had put it as 7.24%, but you had done it with the wrong scores (Yaroslavl had 23, not 32).

The Royal Guns (talk) 19:09, September 19, 2012 (UTC)

Novgorod
Total: 54
 * Location: 4
 * Tactical Advantage: 3(swamp and cold + attacker)
 * Novgorod(L)/Moscuvy(S)/Pskov(S): 8
 * Military Development: 2*10=20
 * Expansion: -0
 * Motive: 3(want more territory)
 * Chance: 7
 * Edit Count: 2878
 * UTC Time: 21:25- 2*2*5=20
 * 2878/20 * pi =452.0751828515712470
 * Nation Age: -5(Ancient nation)
 * Population: 7
 * Participation: 10
 * Recent Wars: -3(golden horde war)

Kazan Khanate
Total:26
 * Location: 5
 * Tactical Advantage: 0
 * Kazan(L): 4
 * Military Development: 0
 * Expansion: 0
 * Motive: 5(defending form attackers)
 * Chance: 5
 * Edit Count: 2878
 * UTC Time: 21:25- 2*2*5=20
 * 2878/20 * pi =452.075182851 5 712470
 * Nation Age: -10(stabilized in the last 5-10 years)
 * Population: 7
 * Participation: 10
 * Recent Wars: 0

Result
Clear Novgorodian Victory. Novgorod can take at most (54/54+26)*2-1= 0.35 = 35% of kazan territory, enough to topple the governement and take over the nation, and do with it what it pleases.

Discussion
Please feel free to point out any errors. This is still basicaly a draft of the war algorithm...but novgorod is winning by many points...many points indeed. please feel free to point out any errors I may have made or anything I may have left out(I'm not sure if I can still add military dev points before the Horde war...but that would only give me 2 extra points). -Lx (leave me a message) 21:58, September 19, 2012 (UTC)

Pretty sure you can't...

Umm, looks good, only...

The Royal Guns (talk) 22:37, September 19, 2012 (UTC)

Scotland
Total: 64
 * Location: 4
 * Tactical Advantage: 1
 * Scotland(L), France (M): 7
 * Military Development: 2*15=30
 * Expansion: -0
 * Motive: 3(want more territory)
 * Chance: 1
 * Edit Count: 5710
 * UTC Time: 2*2*2*1=8
 * 5710/8*pi =2242.311
 * Nation Age: +5
 * Population: 6+2=8
 * Participation: 10
 * Recent Wars: -1 (brief revolts in the early 1450s in one year will count)

Irish States
Total:34*1.5=51
 * Location: 5
 * Tactical Advantage: 2 (attacked from Sea)
 * Ireland(L), Papal States (SW): 5
 * Military Development: 0
 * Expansion: 0
 * Motive: 10
 * Chance: 1
 * Nation Age: -5
 * Population: 6
 * Participation: 10
 * Recent Wars: 0

Result
Scottish Victory, Scotland can annex (64/(64+51)*2)-1=11.3*1.5=16.95% of Irish territory at most. The war will last 4 years allowing them to annex (16.95)*(1-1/(2*4))=14.83% of free Irish territory

Discussion
The population may be subject to change if England has taken more of Ireland since the last map. LurkerLordB (Talk) 22:39, September 19, 2012 (UTC)

I added the Papal States, since apparently they are siding with heretics over fellow Catholics? LurkerLordB (Talk) 22:20, September 20, 2012 (UTC)

England has not yet declared war on Scotland, since I'm specting you to retreat and give me the conquered territories by 1568. The Papal States do not support Ireland, thus. --Galaguerra1 (talk) 00:15, September 21, 2012 (UTC)

Yeeeaah.... I believe the chances of the Scots forking over their Irish territory to the English is absolutely zero.

Yank 00:20, September 21, 2012 (UTC)

The Papal States stated that they sent aid to the Irish states, not on the condition that England helped. They cancelled that though, so they will be counted as withdrawing.

Scotland would be happy to agree to give up the territories by 1568, considering that is more than a hundred years away, but I imagine you meant 1458, in which case the Scottish are not going to give anything to Britain (though a negotiation to divide the island between the Scots and English, such as the Scottish getting Ulster and the English getting the rest, would be feasible). LurkerLordB (Talk) 00:25, September 21, 2012 (UTC)


 * Just wanna make it clear that it wasn't "siding with the heretics", it was ensuring the continuity of the Laudabiliter, so the English can retain their sovereignty over Ireland. And yes, we withdrew support.
 * Plus, if I helped the Scottish, I'd be hypocritical in going against the Laudabiliter, so. ChrisL123 (talk) 00:30, September 21, 2012 (UTC)
 * I'm not surrendering at this. If you don't cancel this by 1468, I'll declare war. Neither England nor the Papal States have anything to fear from Scotland. Ireland is mine, and I think the Pope should side with me on this. --Galaguerra1 (talk) 03:26, September 21, 2012 (UTC)
 * Well, we'll see what the Pope does, and we'll see what happens if he sides with England or remains neutral. LurkerLordB (Talk) 21:15, September 21, 2012 (UTC)

Different Algorithm Ideas for Fragmented states
I have begun to consider the unrealistic nature of our current rules for the algorithm. Currently, we have it so that nations in civil disarray or city-states have a 1*5 bonus on algorithms, making them incredibly hard to beat. This is not realistic in both senses.

For nations in civil disarray: Historically, nations in civil war have proven easy pickings for invading powers. Now, Kenny's logic when designing the algorithm was that since the populace is more armed, they would be defeated easier. I have a new proposal: they have no change to their final total. Because they are not unified the 1.5 modifier on land they lose is still in place. They still cannot take territory in wars. However, in the current results algorithm, instead of being (p)*(1-1/(2x)), they will have it be (p)*(1-1/(x)). This will require wars there to last twice as long to gain the same amount of territory. Due to their civil war, they will be heavily armed. The conflict will make their conquest easier, but they will take longer to subdue because they are used to civil conflict. Thoughts?

Now, for city-states: City states will be weaker due to their divisions preventing them from uniting a single offense. However, they are individually stable. They are individually going to be just as difficult to defeat as a nation their size. They are still functional states. Therefore, I have come up with the following idea: City states still get the *1.5 for the amount of territory they lose, get no bonus in their final score, but if they do win, they can take territory as long as the nation they take it from has territory to take close enough for the city states to rule without it being considered a colony. Thoughts?

Note: this would only apply to wars begun after we reach a conclusion here. LurkerLordB (Talk) 23:13, September 19, 2012 (UTC)

This seems fairer than the current system we have, and more realistic. I agree with this proposal. --Galaguerra1 (talk) 03:25, September 20, 2012 (UTC)

Unless anyone has any objections, all wars starting in 1468 or later will use this system. LurkerLordB (Talk) 01:21, September 22, 2012 (UTC)

Aq Qoyunlu
Total: 63
 * Location: +3
 * Tactical Advantage: +1
 * Strength: +18 (9 turns)
 * Military Development: Aq Qoyunlu (L +4), Assyria, (MV +2), Ramadan (MV +2), Dulkadir (MV +2), Circassia (SV +1), Desert State (SV +1), Zayannids (M +3), Crimea (S +2), Granada (M +3) Mamluks (M +3) = 23
 * Expansion: -5
 * Motive: Social Friens (+5)
 * Chance: 4
 * Edit Count: 726
 * UTC Time:5*4*0 =1
 * 726/1*3.14 = 2279.64
 * Nation Age: 0
 * Population:7
 * Participation: 10
 * Recent Wars: -4

Hafisds
Total: 36
 * Location: +5
 * Tactical Advantage: 0
 * Strength: Hafsids (L +4)
 * Military Development: 0
 * Expansion:0
 * Motive: +5 Defending
 * Chance: 4 (random.org, I don't know how to do the other one.)
 * Edit Count:
 * UTC Time:
 * Nation Age:5
 * Population:6
 * Participation: 10
 * Recent Wars:-3
 * Recent Wars:-3

Results of War
((63/(36+63))*2)-1 = 27.27 War is lasting 5 years. (27.27)*(1-1/(2(5))) = 24.53% of their terriotry can be annexed. However, I'm only annexing 3% of their territory bordering Cape Alfons, with the rest I'm deciding to make ammends with Hafsids, and to show it, a buffer between them and the Hafsids, and an alliance.

Discussion
Why this 25 on the recent wars part?be aware that this part for recent wars is to be on negative points.--Collie Kaltenbrunner (talk) 17:28, September 20, 2012 (UTC)

P.s. - who is leading this war, why it is on religious motive, and when it started?--Collie Kaltenbrunner (talk) 17:28, September 20, 2012 (UTC)

I am leading the war, and it started, in my command 1865, I don't know how long th Mamluks were already doing war with them. Saamwiil (talk) 22:19, September 20, 2012 (UTC)

How to they have 25 on recent wars? Not only is this supposed to be a negative number, but I don't see how they can have such a high number. Are they at war with five different nations at once? Have they been at war for eight and one-third years against someone? LurkerLordB (Talk) 22:27, September 20, 2012 (UTC)

I'm so sorry, I put it in the wrong spot, that was the temporary total score. Saamwiil (talk) 22:29, September 20, 2012 (UTC)

I am assuming my alliance with the Marinids was cut after the revolts. Saamwiil (talk) 10:57, September 21, 2012 (UTC)

Yes, after all, a different dynasty altogether has risen to power.--Collie Kaltenbrunner (talk) 16:08, September 21, 2012 (UTC)

Territory Issues & Map Issues
Sorry, maybe I'm messing up here, but Gondwana seems to be a Vijanagar territory even though I was sure I'd gotten there first and had been consolidating since. Maybe I'm messing up but can somebody help me here? OBOW - any questions? (talk) 17:43, September 20, 2012 (UTC)

Hold on, I'll clarify. I sent an offer of friendship in 1453, which received no response, and an offer of absorption in 1456. This also received no response. I made another offer in 1461 with no response. In 1462 Vijayanagar took over the country. I would call this rather unfair as for a number of years I had been attempting to take the country but had thought that absorbing it would probably require a mod's permission due to being quite a major action. In 1463, I missed Vijayanagar's turn and assumed that I was probably unlikely to get a response and began taking over the country. I began a year after Vijayanagar but in view of my repeated attempts (had they been responded to I probably would have taken over earlier) I would say I was equally entitled. Any opinions? OBOW - any questions? (talk) 22:08, September 20, 2012 (UTC)

The map still refuses to acknowledge that I purchased the wedge of Chinese territory south of my nation. The included map show showcase what I mean. The border of the territory is a rough one I just slapped together on Paint. Also the recent mod event states that the Golden Horde's territory in the east was evenly divided between the Sibirians and the Kazakh-Mongols.

Yank 18:28, September 20, 2012 (UTC)

Also, the Desert State needs to be added to the map. Saamwiil (talk) 22:25, September 20, 2012 (UTC)

Firstly map issues will be posted at the top of the page from now on. @OBOW Gondwana is Hindu and thus ignore attempts by non-Hindu states to vassalize or annex or ally. @Yank will be fixed. @Saam the Desert State is implausable, nomads don't care about your nation and the land is worthless to you. That region of the world was only colonized and conquered after world war one.Scandinator (talk) 05:42, September 21, 2012 (UTC)

Ok, thanks. Is Gujarat a vassal of mine? OBOW - any questions? (talk) 17:53, September 21, 2012 (UTC)

Leaving the game
I just wanted to leave a note saying I'm leaving this game; probably the wiki as well. I have schoolwork and an alternate history novel of my own to contend with, and in any case I live in the countryside and it takes me about an hour to upload my turn every night. Since I discovered I hadn't occupied Gondwana I think my Grand Plan for Islam went down the drain anyway (no insult to Vijayanagar's player; I wish him well). I'll probably be back in about four years. That's possibly premature but if it's true please be there when I come back - OBOW - any questions? (talk) 00:03, September 22, 2012 (UTC)]]

By four years, do you mean in-game or real life? If you mean in-game, we'll definately be there barring some apocalypse, but if you mean in real life, I doubt so. LurkerLordB (Talk) 00:54, September 22, 2012 (UTC)

I think he means real life years, which is quite a shame, he was a good player. Plus it messes up the caliphate's plans to expand into India. Sad to see you go OBOW, VonGlusenburg (talk to Von!) 01:15, September 22, 2012 (UTC).

Sad to see you go, but u did open new doors for Hindu Vijaynagar! :'D Imp (Say Hi?!) 19:37, September 22, 2012 (UTC)

Epirus
Total: 92
 * Location: +4
 * Tactical Advantage: +1
 * Military Development: +16 (8 turns)
 * Strength: Epirus: (L+4), Albania (MV+2), Serbia (M+3), Papal States (M+3), France (M+3), Bavaria (M+3), Brandenburg (S+2), Venice (M+3), Byzantine (MV+2), England (M+3), Croatia (MV+2), Switzerland (M+3), Milan (S+2), Novgorod (S+2), Mantua (MV+2), Modena (MV+2), Siena (MV+2): +43
 * Expansion: -3
 * Motive: +7 (social/more kinsmen)
 * Chance: +8
 * Edit Count: 274
 * UTC Time: 3:33 (3*3*3 = 27)
 * (274/27)*pi = 31.88134
 * Nation Age: 0 (1411-1429)
 * Population: 6
 * Participation: 10
 * Recent Wars: 0

Ottoman Empire
Total: 69
 * Location: +5
 * Tactical Advantage: +2 (high ground, Epirus has to cross mountains to get to the rest of the Ottomans, any other attacks will be from the sea)
 * Strength: Ottoman Empire (L+4), Alayie (MV), Wallachia (MV), Oman (MV): 10
 * Military Development: +6 (3 turns)
 * Expansion: -2
 * Motive: +10
 * Chance: 3
 * 2*2*3*7=28
 * 4052 edits
 * 4052/28*pi=454.63
 * Nation Age: 5
 * Population:27
 * 7 digits in population
 * +20 (more than 10 times the size of Epirus)
 * Participation: 10
 * Recent Wars: (-3) [Byzantine] + (-3) [Karman] + (-1) [HRE aid] = -7

Result
Epirus and coalition victory; ((92/(92+69))*2)-1 = 14.28%. According to (14.28)*(1-1/(2(3))), Epirus can gain 11.90% if the war continues for a third year of fighting, and 12.50% for a fourth. ChrisL123 (talk) 23:31, September 23, 2012 (UTC)

Discussion
Second try at an algorithm. Should probably let a mod confirm the result. ChrisL123 (talk) 03:39, September 22, 2012 (UTC)

The population points for the Ottomans are 8, not 9.even on the 19th century, the Ottoman Empire never had a population over 100,000,000.I also don't think that Alaiyan military help would be exactly significant, as they are a city-state.--Collie Kaltenbrunner (talk) 08:02, September 22, 2012 (UTC)

For player wars, we use the chance algorithm for when the other player responds. If DeanSims hasn't responded yet, you should probably remind him about it via his talk page so we can do the chance. LurkerLordB (Talk) 12:01, September 22, 2012 (UTC)


 * Technically, the war wasn't intended to be to destroy the nation, it was to take territory, so would it really count as "purpose is to destroy nation"? Also, the total of Epirus was wrong, so I fixed it. ChrisL123 (talk) 16:22, September 22, 2012 (UTC)

I'm guessing that the main recipient of the territory gained is the Byzantine Empire. Am I right?

Yank 19:27, September 22, 2012 (UTC)

Main recipient? Why is that? This is Epirus' war, so they'd get the most, plus they promised the Papal States a bit of land. But Venice did join on the condition of getting land for Byzantine, so I'd assume they'd get a chunk, but not the most. ChrisL123 (talk) 19:37, September 22, 2012 (UTC)

Hey, if you are warring with the Ottomans, then the Russian states would probably want some land, even if it is only control of the city of COnstainople, Novgorod would send some troops on what little navy they had if it meant we could have constantinople(mainly for the union of the Med and black seas)-Lx (leave me a message) 20:22, September 22, 2012 (UTC)


 * I doubt that's plausible, Novgorod would have to get through multiple countries then through the Black Sea to get to Constantinople. If they were to use their navy, they'd have to go all the way around Europe. Not really that feasible. ChrisL123 (talk) 20:28, September 22, 2012 (UTC)
 * All I realy need to do is get through poland/lithuania, and we have an alliance...so that's not realy a problem.-Lx (leave me a message) 22:50, September 22, 2012 (UTC)


 * Your still ignoring the fact this war doesn't affect Russia that much. If your going to start with all that, then we'll just have all of the Muslim nations help too. To be honnest some of the other Muslim states should be sending aid anyway... VonGlusenburg (talk to Von!) 23:47, September 22, 2012 (UTC)
 * Actualy, one of teh biggest setbacks that Russia has ever faced concerning trade with the mediterranian were the ottomans, who were not very eager to let non-muslim nations cross through constantinople, so getting rid of the Ottomans helps Novgorod a whole deal lot, especialy since it is a nation of traders, and have some monopoly over fur trade at least in Russia and Scandinavia. Expanding that to the Med would be an invaluable resource. So yes, it does affect russia a whole lot who controls the Bosforous(Istanbul Strait), located within Constantinople and the connection between the black sea and the Agean would Concern Russia and Novgorod a whole lot, because of the Ottomans no longer control it, it opens up the possibility of much easier trade with mediterranian Nations.-Lx (leave me a message) 00:32, September 23, 2012 (UTC)
 * Its not plausable for the Russians to hold Constinople even if Lithuania lets you. It is just too far to maintain and hold. Not only that but there are several nations with stronger claims, especially the Byzantine remanents. Scandinator (talk) 09:39, September 23, 2012 (UTC)
 * Russia can't possibly gain any territory from this war. LurkerLordB (Talk) 12:25, September 23, 2012 (UTC)


 * You all do know that sending all of this military aid to every little conflict is going to hurt you in future algorithms? Anyways, if DeanSims doesn't respond in 24 hourse, I'll treat his chance like an NPC's. LurkerLordB (Talk) 19:02, September 23, 2012 (UTC)


 * Good, DeanSims arrived. I also changed the motive, because it didn't satisfy the requirements for religious motivation because the Ottomans have somewhat-free religion (freer than all of Europe, in any case) and didn't really change the situation in the last couple decades. They seized control of Constantinople, but there was no sign of them damaging the Orthodox church structure, if anything they might have strengthened it. I assume the position is like OTL. LurkerLordB (Talk) 22:26, September 23, 2012 (UTC)

It wasn't really a religious war as much as for ethnicity, and it definitely isn't for resources. If we can't come to a consensus between 3 and 7, I propose a 5. ChrisL123 (talk) 22:36, September 23, 2012 (UTC)

No, 5 would make no sense. 7 is right, I had assumed everyone was caught up in the Crusade idea and assumed this was a religious war. LurkerLordB (Talk) 22:44, September 23, 2012 (UTC)

Fixed Epirus establishment date and Ottoman population. It reached 8 digits after conquering Greece, Serbia, Epirus, Karaman and several other nations OTL reaching 11 million by 1520.Scandinator (talk) 11:07, September 24, 2012 (UTC)

For the Epirus establishment date, the last change of government would be the unification under Carlo I Tocco and the explusion of the Albanians, in the early fifteenth century. LurkerLordB (Talk) 20:22, September 24, 2012 (UTC)

I think we should end this war now, and give the Papal States their 15 px and expand the Byzantines, epirus, Albania and Serbia realistically. Bforix hasn't posted in 6 turns. Scandinator (talk) 16:02, September 27, 2012 (UTC)

I agree as well. I think the war has basically already ended in game anyway :P VonGlusenburg (talk to Von!) 12:36, September 29, 2012 (UTC)

Vassal Turns
Okay, noob question: Since sometimes my schedule doesn't coordinate with PMII's, I just saw the mod event with Alodia agreeing to my vassalation around 8 years ago. I don't really understand how do vassal turns work; can somebody explain it to me? Fed (talk) 04:17, September 22, 2012 (UTC)

Basically you can take another turn as your vassal, along with your main nation.

Monster Pumpkin (talk) 16:58, September 22, 2012 (UTC)

Ottoman Empire
Is Dean still playing this game? By my count if he isn't back by 1470 he should be considered inactive.

Yank 01:29, September 23, 2012 (UTC)

Well we can't just have the Ottoman Empire at this point in time! Its still in its growth stage so having it fall to the Crusaders like this/falling into civil disarray doesn't make much historical plausible sense.

Besides we know Dean isn't always able to access the Internet all the time, he doesn't get much computer time at his Dad's house if I remember rightfully. If he does another one of his I'm never coming back escapades then fair enough to declare him inactive. VonGlusenburg (talk to Von!) 17:24, September 23, 2012 (UTC)

WOAH, guys. The ottomans falling ALREADY? They're at their height right now. half of the med relies on them for trade. this cannot be plausible. This is like every country in Europe declaring war on America.

The Royal Guns (talk) 18:52, September 23, 2012 (UTC)

I sent DeanSims a message, which really should have been done a long time ago. LurkerLordB (Talk) 18:53, September 23, 2012 (UTC)

His post seems a bit...liberal. Would the Islamics want peace with the Christians? CourageousLife (talk) 22:53, September 23, 2012 (UTC)

Considering that they are losing the war, I am pretty sure they would want peace. OTL the Ottomans were fairly lenient with Christians in the Balkans. LurkerLordB (Talk) 23:08, September 23, 2012 (UTC)

Okay. It's not that he wanted peace, but the fact that he wanted to work together for univeral peace and such. Just thought I'd say something. Thanks. CourageousLife (talk) 23:10, September 23, 2012 (UTC)

Holy Roman Empire (led by Austria)

 * Location: +3
 * Tactical Advantage: +1
 * Strength: Austria (L, +4) Tyrolia (M, +3) Salzburg (SV, +1), Calais (MV), Brandenburg (S), Luxembourg (SV), Pomerania (SV), Aragon (S), Navarre (SV), Bavaria (S?), Venice (S), Byzantine (MV), Croatia (MV), Florence (M), Piombino (MV), Modena (MV), Ferrara (MV)= +34
 * Military Development: +2
 * Expansion: -1
 * Motive: +3
 * Chance:7
 * Edit Count: 3,283
 * UTC Time: 2:30
 * 3,283/6*pi= 1718.9'7'47
 * Nation Age: +5
 * Population: 7+2=9
 * Participation: +10
 * Recent Wars: -3 (Civil War), -1 (Brandenburg war) = -4
 * Total = 69

Crimean Khanate
Total: 69
 * Location: +5
 * Tactical Advantage: +2 (attacked from the sea and from coastal HRE colonies)
 * Strength: Crimean Khanate (L, +4), Aq Qoyunlu (M +3), Ramazan (M +3), Dulkadir (M +3), Circassia (M +3), Assyria (S +2), Oman (M +3), Shaybah (M +3), Zayyaninds (M +3), Granada (M +3) Yemen (S +2) +31
 * Military Development: +0
 * Expansion: +0
 * Motive: +10
 * Chance:4
 * Edit Count: 3,283
 * UTC Time: 2:30
 * 3,283/6*pi= 1718.9747
 * Nation Age: +0
 * Population: 7
 * Participation: +10
 * Recent Wars: -0

Result
Tie.

Discussion
I am sure that I am winning becuase of the unknown population variable, but can someone help me with that. First real try at this...

Monster Pumpkin (talk) 01:44, September 23, 2012 (UTC)

No. you probably got a 8, and they got a 6, probably. still, is not enough to win the war, or even go for a draw.--Collie Kaltenbrunner (talk) 21:13, September 23, 2012 (UTC)

You also get a 3 for location, since Austrian forces need to travel all the way around the Adriatic through Greece, through the straits owned by a country the HRE is partially at war at, and then through the black Sea.

I do find it odd though that the Muslim world is jumping to help Crimea but not the Ottomans, as the Ottomans control much more territory and are more important in general.

Also, again, there are specific requirements for what makes a war religious, none of which this war satisfies. LurkerLordB (Talk) 22:32, September 23, 2012 (UTC)

The ottomans are allied with the Holy Roman Empire and novrogod, they should be included in the algorithm. (Talk)

Dean, you do know that your allies have betrayed you big-time, with both the HRE and Novgorod attacking the Ottomans right now? You also need to have your name in your signature. LurkerLordB (Talk) 23:10, September 23, 2012 (UTC)

Is there a way to change your signature without having to do it every time manually? Saamwiil (talk) 23:36, September 23, 2012 (UTC)

Go to your preferences (reachable by putting your mouse over your name in the top right corner, in the drop-down menu). LurkerLordB (Talk) 23:39, September 23, 2012 (UTC)

Pardon me, people, but shouldn't chance be 3283/6, and not 3283/2.30 if I'm not mistaken? Syngraféas Enallaktikí̱ Istoría, Dic mihi lingua Anglorum. 00:32, September 24, 2012 (UTC)

Hold it. Shouldn't it be a four, as Austria does border them. Also, Bavaria and Calais are aiding me, and Venice should be helping me soon. Also, I am fighting this war to convert the mongols. I even did that to the ones in the territory already there. How is this not religious?

Monster Pumpkin (talk) 01:12, September 24, 2012 (UTC)

Because Christians are not coming under increasing amount of diffuculty. Say if I say all Christians were to be executed, then it would count.

No. That would be protecting a minority. I am trying to promote a religion. Protecting one would be +8, according to the rules.

Monster Pumpkin (talk) 01:25, September 24, 2012 (UTC)

Location goes by the location of the main nation, not colonies.

The rules clearly state what is required for a religiously motivated war. LurkerLordB (Talk) 01:31, September 24, 2012 (UTC)

I was under the impression that the Austrian Crimea was a full part of Austria.

Btw MP, if you told me about this war beforehand, I wouldn't have entered my non-agression period and you would win and have tons of Ms and MVs, and not Ss and SVs. Syngraféas Enallaktikí̱ Istoría, Dic mihi lingua Anglorum. 01:34, September 24, 2012 (UTC)

Also, why is Crimea's chance 9, when is should be in the hundreth's place?

Scraw, you can always end your non-agression...

Monster Pumpkin (talk) 01:42, September 24, 2012 (UTC)

No no, I have to stay true to my word. I can't just do that to tweak an algorithm. What you should really do is ask Andrew if you can add Bavaria and B. Ingolstadt and the such to algorithm. Syngraféas Enallaktikí̱ Istoría, Dic mihi lingua Anglorum. 01:45, September 24, 2012 (UTC)

The chance for the NPC is the thousandth place, the hundredth place is for the PC's chance.

That territory is too far away to count as anything but a colony. LurkerLordB (Talk) 01:53, September 24, 2012 (UTC)

Bavaria's troops are literally travelling all over Europe fighting wars, this is going to wreck their economy and wreck any algorithms they have ay time soon. LurkerLordB (Talk) 02:03, September 24, 2012 (UTC)

That is why they are sending supplies, not soldiers.

Monster Pumpkin (talk) 02:14, September 24, 2012 (UTC)

Fixed the algorithm. Especially chance. Scandinator (talk) 10:39, September 24, 2012 (UTC)

I've added my nations too, as since I am now a vassal of Aq Qoyunlu then my nations would also be made to send aid to help Crimea. VonGlusenburg (talk to Von!) 13:25, September 24, 2012 (UTC)

I am sending only supplies. I have entered a 5 year non agression pact with Europe. Also I have had to support practically ever European war. We are remaining uninvolved in any wars for the forceable future. If we attempt to aid any more, our economy will shatter. I cannot allow that. Sorry MP but I have to protect my people first.Andr3w777 (talk) 19:12, September 24, 2012 (UTC)

Now that everyone has put in their support and such, can the amount of territory annexed be calculated?

Monster Pumpkin (talk) 00:10, September 25, 2012 (UTC)

Well, it's a tie. So, therefore the Crimean Khanate can't take any of the Austrian territory, and the Austrians can't take any of theirs. Also this very long dragged out war is over considering the Crimeans have been wiped out by the Mongol armies. Austria, Russia, the Caliphate, or whoever will have a better shot at picking up the pieces of the area after the Khanate's fall. LurkerLordB (Talk) 01:06, September 28, 2012 (UTC)

Muscovy
Total: 55
 * Location: 4
 * Tactical Advantage: 1
 * Strength: Muscovy (L), Novgorod (S), Rostov (MV), Yaroslavl (MV): 10
 * Military Development: 6
 * Expansion: -2
 * Motive: 4
 * Chance:
 * Edit Count: 2017
 * UTC Time: 1907
 * 7
 * Nation Age: +5
 * Population: 16
 * Participation: 10
 * Recent Wars: -6 (last year of War on Rostov, and two years of war on Yaroslavl)

Tver
Total: 17
 * Location: 5
 * Tactical Advantage: 0
 * Strength: Tver (L): 4
 * Military Development: 0
 * Expansion: 0
 * Motive: 5
 * Chance:
 * Edit Count:
 * UTC Time:
 * 2
 * Nation Age: -5
 * Population: 5
 * Participation: 10
 * Recent Wars: 0

Result
Muscovy may annex ~45.85% of Tver territory, annexing the nation. The warm will last 3 years allowing Muscovy to annex 35.714% and still annex the whole thing.

The Royal Guns (talk) 18:22, September 25, 2012 (UTC)

Discussion
Novgorod would have given military aid for tver(the only one we actualy border), but I can see that you are doing very well without it...-Lx (leave me a message) 21:24, September 25, 2012 (UTC)

1 more point can hardly hurt. But I've already done the calculations and finished the whole war so...\

The Royal Guns (talk) 21:29, September 25, 2012 (UTC)

Colonization
I have noticed several players are colonizing already. This is quite a bit too early and if you look at expansion rates of colonies though the years, there were no large colonies in Africa until the 19th century. Therefore I propose expansion limits of 50sqkm or 1px a turn on all uncolonized continental areas (Africa, Americas and Australia) not connected to your main nation until further notice. This will affect all African colonies but not the islands and will simulate the method of colonizing that was used on Africa until industrialism began. These expansion rate limits will be lowered on sections of each of the "unexplored" continents by mod events to further simulate how colonialism worked. Furthermore, Central Arabia will be involved too as there was no formal control over the area until after WWI. Scandinator (talk) 01:24, September 25, 2012 (UTC)

Not only that but OTL Sierra Leone? Thats too far to be a sustainable colony, even for Portugal. The current limit for European nations is Songhay. Scandinator (talk) 04:45, September 25, 2012 (UTC)

It is a outpost, not a colony.In 1483 there were already outposts on OTL Ghana.Without counting that i don't think my continental outposts go more than 4 pixels inland.Although you are right about the part of settling.--Collie Kaltenbrunner (talk) 16:57, September 25, 2012 (UTC)

If I'm Majapahit though, since Australia's so close to me, should tht still count as a colony?Flagmania (talk) 12:36, September 28, 2012 (UTC)

Majapahit can expand normally into Australia. However I am considering hitting large portions of the world with expansion penalities to better simulate hard to control, low density, low wealth regions. LLB would you agree with this? Scandinator (talk) 01:40, September 29, 2012 (UTC)

Expansion of Tibet
Has the map taken into account Tibet's two expansions (800 km2 on the west border in 1463; 1000 km2 on the north border in 1469)? 77topaz (talk) 05:26, September 25, 2012 (UTC)

Yes. You must remember 50sqkm is one pixel on the map... Scandinator (talk) 07:01, September 25, 2012 (UTC)

Inca Empire
The Inca Empire rises!

i dont speack english, but i will try and i hope have fun here with all of you. Any help or tip you can giveme is very welcome! Zetsura (talk) 21:55, September 25, 2012 (UTC)

PD: if a can get a color will be green =) ty

Pink or brown? Greens are all out. Scandinator (talk) 10:32, September 26, 2012 (UTC)

Is yelow available? Zetsura (talk) 14:01, September 26, 2012 (UTC)

The Inca's can have Oman's old colour, Oman isn't going to be independent for a while now and I don't mind swapping my colour. VonGlusenburg (talk to Von!) 14:23, September 26, 2012 (UTC)

Yellow is ok =) --- In other matters, I would like to make an expansion to the south, where there are the southern andean states cities, but these do not have a great organization, I have to declare a war or can i add those regions? Zetsura (talk) 04:49, September 27, 2012 (UTC)

The Incan Emperors OTL were thought of as Gods, if you spend about 10 turns on each area persuading the city-states and chiefs to join you most of the area will be yours by 1492. Scandinator (talk) 10:18, September 27, 2012 (UTC)

What means OTL? Zetsura (talk) 13:57, September 27, 2012 (UTC)

O ur T ime L ineScandinator (talk) 16:00, September 27, 2012 (UTC)

Hanseatic League as a military force
The Hanseatic League did have its own navy to protect its traders, but seeing as how novgorod basicaly controls the league now, I would suppose we could use the Hanseatic fleet to our advantage if we went to war with say...any baltic nation hat has coastline that Novgorod might need. Although i can only see the League's navy helping out in the baltic because of logistical issues of getting ships to the med from the Baltic...not to mention Pirates! So can the HL be used as a military aid force?-Lx (leave me a message) 22:25, September 25, 2012 (UTC)

Lol, Lx. You're really not covering up those plans well.

Pirates?

You'll give it away!

The Royal Guns (talk) 00:13, September 27, 2012 (UTC)

Vassals and puppets
Is there are difference between them? 77topaz (talk) 20:21, September 26, 2012 (UTC)

In this game, not really. LurkerLordB (Talk) 01:09, September 27, 2012 (UTC)

Vassals allow extra turns, puppets do not. If you are interested in vassalizing another nation, Nepal would be the best choice. Scandinator (talk) 10:16, September 27, 2012 (UTC)

Actually, I was thinking of doing that. How many turns would it require to vassalise Nepal? 77topaz (talk) 09:39, September 29, 2012 (UTC)

You could probably do it in a turn, however there is no way across the Himalayas so you will have to vassalize Kashmir first... (Sorry I just remembered) they would take a few turns or you could just expand into them (kashmir) with 2000sqkm a year thus establishing a proper foothold on the subcontinent. It should only take >10 years. Scandinator (talk) 16:14, September 29, 2012 (UTC)

Let me get this straight: I could spend 4 turns vassalising Kashmir and then I'd be able to vassalise Nepal in one turn? And this would give me two vassals, Kashmir and Nepal? 77topaz (talk) 07:30, September 30, 2012 (UTC)

Taiwan/Philippines
Would what I'm doing right now (settling people) count as expansion? I would think so, but please let me know. PitaKang- (But here's my number | So call me maybe) 22:06, September 27, 2012 (UTC)

Expansion has a negative (I think) because it costs loads of resources and takes time to get them back (around 15 years), same for Recent Wars. What you're doing, I imagine, is expansion, but not it the algorithmic sense (could be wrong)

The Royal Guns (talk) 22:14, September 27, 2012 (UTC)

Are you using the colonial expansion numbers (or numbers lower) since the Phillipines would be a colony? Colonial expansion doesn't count, expanding any other way (including vassalization) does. LurkerLordB (Talk) 22:43, September 27, 2012 (UTC)

I'm just sending settlers with a couple dozen-one hundred soldiers to exterminate the locals. PitaKang- (But here's my number | So call me maybe) 22:52, September 27, 2012 (UTC)

Well I've been treating it as expansion on the map. You now have Taiwan and are expanding normally onto the Philippines. Should it be colonial rates? Scandinator (talk) 00:03, September 28, 2012 (UTC)

I suppose that the Phillipines would be marginally close enough to Korea to count as main country expansion, but then it would count as negative expansion for the algorithm, so... LurkerLordB (Talk) 00:55, September 28, 2012 (UTC)

I've been thinking of it as colonial expansion. PitaKang- (But here's my number | So call me maybe) 01:05, September 28, 2012 (UTC)

So I'll have to reduce the area then... Scandinator (talk) 04:30, September 28, 2012 (UTC)

Go ahead. PitaKang- (But here's my number | So call me maybe) 16:21, September 28, 2012 (UTC)

The Caliphate (Led by Qoyunlu)
Total: 64 * 1.5 =96
 * Location: +4
 * Tactical Advantage:+1
 * Strength: Qoyunlu (L +4), Circassia (VM +2), Wallachia (MV +2), Ottoman Empire (M +3), Dulkadir (MV +2), Ramazan (MV +2), Oman (M +3), Shaybah (MV +2), Hafsids (MV +2), Zayyanids (M +2), Egypt (M +3) Granada (SV +2) = 29
 * Military Development: +30
 * Expansion: 0
 * Motive: +3(Trying to get resources)
 * Chance:
 * Edit Count: 853
 * UTC Time: 11:20 1*1 = 1
 * 853/1*3.14 = 2678.42 (Aww man)
 * Nation Age: -10
 * Population: 7 +2 = 9
 * Participation: 10
 * Recent Wars: (-1 Crimea), (-8 Hafsids), (-1 Crusade-Ottoman) -10

Georgia
Total: 27
 * Location: +5
 * Tactical Advantage: 1
 * Strength: Georgia (L +4), Trezibond (MV +2): 6
 * Military Development: +5 (at most, a lot of them were double turns)
 * Expansion: -15
 * Motive: +10 (Defending)
 * Chance: 3
 * Edit Count: 12
 * UTC Time: 11:52 1*5 =5
 * 12/5*3.14 7.536
 * Nation Age: -5 (over 300 years)
 * Population: 7
 * Participation: 10
 * Recent Wars: 0

Results
((118.5/(27+118.5)*2)-1= 56.09% (62.88)*(1-1/(2(2))) = 42.06% The Caliphate annexes Georgia after 2 years, with a two pixel circumference. Georgia is forced to accept Islam as its national religion and joins the Caliphate.

Discussion
Scan, the countries you vassalised in this war aren't vassals. Aq Qoyunlu is bound by treaty not to have vassals, only the Caliphate may have vassals, which it only has Alodia... Saamwiil, the Humble 04:33, September 28, 2012 (UTC)

They may not be vassals but they are subordinate nations. also you do not get the 1.5 multiplier for fragmented states. That is meant for places like the Zapotec's and Ireland where there are many small city-states. But yea, even with all that taken out, Georgia is screwed. Scandinator (talk) 01:37, September 29, 2012 (UTC)

NPC nations that have been forced into obedience count as vassals, no matter what you call them.

However, would this new Mahdi or whatever be the leader through the religious popular revolt? Because then you get the *1.5 bonus. (the *1.5 bonus for fragmentation is over now) LurkerLordB (Talk) 02:23, September 29, 2012 (UTC)

OK, also, the 5 for defending can only be used if you are the defending player. Also, I need to count of expansion, and the Circassian expansion does count. LurkerLordB (Talk) 18:23, September 29, 2012 (UTC)

The expansion was over 15 years ago, so I don't think so. Saamwiil, the Humble 04:28, September 30, 2012 (UTC)

Help??
Hi everybody, I'd like to play this game, but I don't know how. I'm a big fan of this wiki and would like to eventually create my own althistory. Could someone please teach me how to play? Thanks. Airlinesguy (talk) 11:44, September 29, 2012 (UTC)

I think I know how to play now. Please tell me if I do anything wrong. Airlinesguy (talk) 12:57, September 29, 2012 (UTC)

Shall do. Just refer to the rules and try do what others are doing. VonGlusenburg (talk to Von!) 13:00, September 29, 2012 (UTC)

Thanks! Airlinesguy (talk) 13:15, September 29, 2012 (UTC)

Korea

 * Location: 4
 * Tactical advantage: 1
 * Strength: Korean (L): 4
 * Expansion: -15 (Taiwan...)
 * Military: +28
 * Motive: 5
 * Population: 7 (not sure who's is larger)
 * Participation: 10
 * Chance: 3
 * 01:24
 * 1*2*4= 8
 * 6200/8= 775
 * 775*pi= 2434.73430653
 * Old nation: +5
 * Recent wars: 0
 * Current total: 52

Manchuria

 * Location: 5
 * Tactical advantage: 0
 * High ground: 2
 * Strength: Manchuria (L), China (M): 7
 * Military Expansion: 0
 * Expansion: -15
 * Motive: 10
 * Population: 7
 * Participation: 10
 * Chance: 4
 * 01:24
 * 1*2*4=8
 * 9541/8=1192.625
 * 1192.625*pi= 3746.741938487526877
 * Average nation: 0
 * Recent wars: -3
 * Current total: 27

Result
Crushing Korean victory currently. Korea may annex up to 31.64% ((52/(52+27)*2)-1) of Manchurian land. Any other nations joining in and chance may make a difference. I also presume that China will come to Manchuria's defense?

But Korea is China's vassal...

Does that matter? Vassals can shake free, you know. Also, the -15 for Taiwan shouldn't be there, as Taiwan was colonial expansion. PitaKang- (But here's my number | So call me maybe) 00:46, September 30, 2012 (UTC)

Discussion
Et tu Pita? I really hate you right now you traitorous dirtbag. What did I do to provoke such an assault? You still have Taiwan and the Philipines to expand into. Why do you feel the need to be such an assole and steal my territory?

Yank 16:35, September 29, 2012 (UTC)

Says the one that did the same thing last game :P. Pita at least does it in front of you, not while you are on wikibreak... Scandinator (talk) 16:58, September 29, 2012 (UTC)

It was a simple land grab. I wasn't actively trying to destroy him, like how he is now. And I would have hoped we left all past grudges at the door. But Pita can't let it go aparantly. It was nothing personal, just business. And I admit I regret doing so.

Yank 17:02, September 29, 2012 (UTC)

People are allowed to invade other players nations you know. Its not like you guys had alliances or anything. This makes much more sense for Korea to do rather than colonizing the Philippines anyway. Its a game, don't take it so personally. VonGlusenburg (talk to Von!) 17:19, September 29, 2012 (UTC)

It's just that it came completely out of nowhere. I had thought that I had good relations with Korea. I even turned my other cheek, which I must admit wasn't such a good idea, when Pita did his totally-not-suspicious-in-hindsight "border incident". I thought that I had defused that situation at the time. Now Pita gets to feel the fury of a million-man army coming down on him.

Yank 17:29, September 29, 2012 (UTC)

A million man army would be like 30% of your population, not realistic at all. LurkerLordB (Talk) 18:18, September 29, 2012 (UTC)

I'm talking about China's army, not mine. And since China's population was in the 100 Million range I'm guessing that a mere one million soldiers is underestimating them by a lot..

Yank 22:39, September 29, 2012 (UTC)

Dude, it was nothing personal. I honestly didn't even remember your land grab, and I don't really care about it. Also, I thought it had been cleared up that Taiwan and Philippines had been colonial expansion, not actual expansion. PitaKang- (But here's my number | So call me maybe) 00:44, September 30, 2012 (UTC)

Besides, dude, I've been planning this since the beginning of PMII. It's not like I just came up with this on the blue. I was at first going to simply expand there, but after I saw you got the nation, I built up my miltary for about 15 years until I was ready. You expanding every turn also helped. Another point is that what I tell my soldiers on "reclaiming the land of our forefathers" is totally true. Gogoryeo used to own half of Manchuria, until Silla made a dirty alliance with the Tang to take over Korea. PitaKang- (But here's my number | So call me maybe) 00:55, September 30, 2012 (UTC)

China wouldn't make a million man army just to take what they consider a primitive backwards people. Their pride just doesn't let them. Also, do you know how difficult it is to supply a million man army through the Manchurian and Korean mountains? A million man army is unrealistic. Perhaps 100,000 to 250,000 max. PitaKang- (But here's my number | So call me maybe) 01:00, September 30, 2012 (UTC)

I'm treating Taiwan as normal and the Philippines as colonial. Otherwise you have nothing on the Philippines and barely half of Taiwan. Scandinator (talk) 03:47, September 30, 2012 (UTC)

Alright then, I suppose. I guess I get 81% of Manchuria? PitaKang- (But here's my number | So call me maybe) 11:28, September 30, 2012 (UTC)

Colonization Order
Tada! Here is a list of nations and the year they can start colonizing away from this main continent. Australia and Oceanic islands are not open to colonies yet.


 * European nations (including Moscovy and Novgorod) can establish colonies in the Americas from the first date, then can start colonizing in the rest of Africa and Asia 30 years later
 * Middle Eastern nations + Ethiopia & India can establish colonies across the rest of Africa and Asia from the first date, then they can start colonizing the Americas 40 years later.
 * Asian nations can colonize the West Coast of America, New Guinea and the East Coast of Africa from their first date, the rest of the world is opened 40 years later.
 * Tribal nations can colonize other continents after naval tech reaches a suitable level.
 * No coastline? Bad luck. DEAL WITH IT!

Europe

 * Austria 1535 (tiny navy, terrible position)
 * Bavaria
 * Brandenburg 1512 (mid navy, bad position)
 * Burgundy 1509 (mid navy, ok position)
 * Castille 1503 (large navy, good position)
 * Denmark 1504 (large navy, ok position)
 * England 1502 (large navy, good position)
 * Florence 1510 (mid navy, bad position)
 * Georgia (about to get owned)
 * Milan 1520 (vassal navy, bad position)
 * Moscovy
 * Novgorod 1525 (mid navy, terrible position)
 * Ottomans 1550 (mid navy, worst ever possible position ever)
 * Papal States 1525 (small navy, bad position)
 * Poland 1515 (mid navy, bad position)
 * Portugal 1499 (large navy, prime position)
 * Saxony
 * Scotland 1506 (small navy, good position)
 * Switzerland
 * Venice 1507 (large navy, bad position)

Middle East

 * Ag Qoyunlu 1522 (mid navy, ok position)
 * Ethiopia 1536 (small navy, good postion)
 * Mamluks 1511 (mid navy, good position)
 * Oman 1515 (mid navy, good position)
 * Vijayanagar 1532 (mid navy, ok position)

Asia

 * China 1527 (mid navy, ok position, retarded naval growth thanks to emperor's land focus)
 * Japan 1502 (large navy, prime position in Asia)
 * Korea 1514 (mid navy, ok postion)
 * Majapahit 1518 (large navy, ok position)
 * Manchuria 1533 (small navy, good position but new nation)
 * Siam 1528 (mid navy, bad position)

Discussion

 * And América? aztec, chiche itza, inca? we have navy too Zetsura (talk) 17:31, September 29, 2012 (UTC)
 * YTour navies are rowboats, sailboats with very small sail, and rowboats. No colonial power there.[[Image:IMPERIAL NY-SPQR 1.png|25px]][[Image:Regen Flag.png|30px|border]] Hasta la vista, baby. (I'll be back.) 18:08, September 29, 2012 (UTC)
 * im not sure about aztec and mayas, but the incas have ships, and they go to polynesia, acording the spanish cronist in 1460 aprox, the inca Tupac Yupanqui make a trip with 10,000 man to polynesia, and the Kon tiki voyague make in 1960 (in not sure the year) is an expample the this is totally real.Zetsura (talk) 20:51, September 29, 2012 (UTC)
 * And what about the Zulu?--Collie Kaltenbrunner (talk) 17:56, September 29, 2012 (UTC)
 * Austria can colonize sooner than the Papal States, despite the fact that the States have been improving military on both sides of the peninsula, have been establishing territories through with the encouragement of the navy, while Austria has a tiny sliver of coastal land and would have to go around an entire peninsula to get to the Americas? Other than that, perhaps we should make a sort of algorithm so we have a bit more reliability, not just mod assumptions. ChrisL123 (talk) 18:00, September 29, 2012 (UTC)
 * Anybody have noticed how all complaints until now have started with the letter A?--Collie Kaltenbrunner (talk) 18:01, September 29, 2012 (UTC)
 * Austria, America, Aragon. XD [[Image:IMPERIAL NY-SPQR 1.png|25px]][[Image:Regen Flag.png|30px|border]] Hasta la vista, baby. (I'll be back.) 18:08, September 29, 2012 (UTC)
 * And Aragon? Isn't Aragon in a good position to colonize Africa as well as in an insanely perfect place to colonize America? [[Image:IMPERIAL NY-SPQR 1.png|25px]][[Image:Regen Flag.png|30px|border]] Hasta la vista, baby. (I'll be back.) 18:08, September 29, 2012 (UTC)
 * Aragon would be in a good position, but Portugal is still the best by far. LurkerLordB (Talk) 18:16, September 29, 2012 (UTC)
 * Yes, yes, but where is Aragon on the list? [[Image:IMPERIAL NY-SPQR 1.png|25px]][[Image:Regen Flag.png|30px|border]] Hasta la vista, baby. (I'll be back.) 18:42, September 29, 2012 (UTC)
 * I think that it would be somewhere around 1505 and 1510.--Collie Kaltenbrunner (talk) 19:54, September 29, 2012 (UTC)
 * Anyways, I changed the Papal States and Austrians around, because the Austrian position is worse than the Ottomans really, and the Papal states would have a bietter military. On the subject of having an algorithm, that seems a bit hard to make, one of the major factors is location, and that is hard to create any algorithm for. This is making me think that the position of having the first sailor to arrive in the Americas from Europe should be Portugal. Not only are they currently the ones with the earliest possible date, but Collie has had the Portugese to quite a bit of exploring already, more than many other nations with early dates. LurkerLordB (Talk) 18:16, September 29, 2012 (UTC)
 * I could try to make an algorithm, with all the key factors needed. Just note that tallying the results would probably be like golf, where a lower score means they get to start earlier. Sounds confusing, but hopefully I'll make it work. Stay tuned! ChrisL123 (talk) 19:06, September 29, 2012 (UTC)
 * Ah, but then again, most of the time, i'm just repeating here what the Portuguese explorers actually did during this period of time, and when it come to explorers, Colombo presented his exploration project to Portugal twice.--Collie Kaltenbrunner (talk) 19:48, September 29, 2012 (UTC)
 * well he did but i think you should make that colombus is represented by an rng with all the nations in western europe, the one with the highest score and the best points in the system in here can get being the first in reaching americas, after all i think it should be like in OTL, just a random lucky guy and a random lucky nation like spain Sine dei gloriem (talk) 19:54, September 29, 2012 (UTC)
 * No. Few European nations are powerful enough to get Columbus to come to them. Moreso there was nothing lucky or random about it in OTL. [[Image:IMPERIAL NY-SPQR 1.png|25px]][[Image:Regen Flag.png|30px|border]] Hasta la vista, baby. (I'll be back.) 19:57, September 29, 2012 (UTC)
 * i say lucky because as far as every european the world was flat and as it seems to happen in otl colombus was rejected a few times, because no one would pay for something they didn't thought possible such as this travel, and he was lucky enough to have convinced the kings of spain of doing it as far as i know Sine dei gloriem (talk) 20:00, September 29, 2012 (UTC)
 * Actually, the first time that Colombo presented his project to Portugal, João II refused it after consulting experts, who told him that the travel distance that Colombo had planned was too low.in the second time, in 1488, he refused because a way to India (arond Africa) had already been discovered.Then, even the Castillian experts also told their monarch, when Colombo presented his proposal there, that the distance planned was too low.However, to keep Colombo from taking his ideas elsewhere, and perhaps to keep their options open, the Catholic Monarchs gave him an annual allowance of 12,000 maravedis and in 1489 furnished him with a letter ordering all cities and towns under their domain to provide him food and lodging at no cost.--Collie Kaltenbrunner (talk) 20:07, September 29, 2012 (UTC)
 * I thought China had a large navy. CrimsonAssassin (talk) 21:42, September 29, 2012 (UTC)
 * HAD is the crucial word. Thanks to your emperor's idea that naval exploration is a waste of time after Zheng He's voyage, the Chinese navy has suffered to the point where Japanese pirates could shut down most Chinese shipping.Scandinator (talk) 00:59, September 30, 2012 (UTC)
 * What about the Zulu. We have a coastline and have developed are Navy from the beginning. Enclavehunter (talk) 21:59, September 29, 2012 (UTC)
 * Developing a navy from scratch=shitty tiny naval with no capacity even after 20 years. Your best chance is to reverse engineer a modern ship. Scandinator (talk) 00:57, September 30, 2012 (UTC)
 * If Muscovy gets a coastline, it can colonize, right? (hint, hint) The Royal Guns (talk) 22:42, September 29, 2012 (UTC)
 * look, you wont have to worry about not having colonies as long as the the Commonwealth of Great, Little, and White Russia(Commonwealth/Confederation of All the Russias)[hint-hint invasion of poland]-Lx (leave me a message) 23:28, September 29, 2012 (UTC)
 * Yes you can but I would recommend via Poland, You would have to beat and take over all of Poland and Lithuania... Go through the Crimea if you can. (hinthint, nudgenudge) Scandinator (talk) 00:57, September 30, 2012 (UTC)
 * Well Novgorod has control over most of the baltic via the hanseatic league, and has de-facto control over the Hanseatic Navy, and the navy will be built up continuously as long as there are people that sign up, we will build more ships...although we do need to broker an alliance with Danemark or Sweden to pass through the baltic with warships, but we have no problem passing through the baltic with explorers or traders, all we need to do is install Hanseatic trade posts along the Kattegat strait, and we have de facto free passage, so long as the league has interest, and resources of a new continent are a strong motivator and I believe that the hasea will help a novgorodian expidition leave the baltic.-Lx (leave me a message) 23:16, September 29, 2012 (UTC)
 * You and what league? Burgundy has no wish to be in a trade league considering they have the largest port on the Atlantic, Friesland is Burgundian now, Denmark trades through Stockholm, Brandenburg through Venice, Poland through Venice. All you have is Prussia trading through you. Even Scotland and England with their Novgorodian trade posts still send most of their goods to Antwerp. Scandinator (talk) 00:57, September 30, 2012 (UTC)
 * Stockholm is a member of the Hansa, the hansa has an actual navy that patrols the baltic sea, Burgundy has trade agreements with novgorod and is still part of the league, and In northern germany, it is not venice who holds influence(eh-hem how can you control trade that far away eh?) in northern germany, but the New Hansa controled by Novgorod and the Imperial Trade Guild of the HRE(I think that is what it is called), that was formed because of the apparent demise of the Hansa...an oportunity novgorod took to take control of it. I think it was Lurker that said that it was impossible for venice's influence to reach that far north if novgorod was keeping the league alive, not to mention i spent the last 10 years at least trying to undo the dammage you did aswell as reorgonize the Hansa-Lx (leave me a message) 01:20, September 30, 2012 (UTC)
 * Since I now have Manchuria, do we get the "good position" perk? Thanks. Flag_of_South_Korea.png PitaKang- (But here's my number | So call me maybe) 12:22, September 30, 2012 (UTC)

Colonization Order Algorithm (Proposal)
As promised, I have written up an algorithm proposal that lists several key factors needed in order to successfully colonize. While it is mostly for American colonization, I have included some for south Asian nations. The algorithm works by tallying numbers that can be found through common sense, geographical details and player's turns. Unlike most algorithms, I'd assume players would want a lower score, because the algorithm determines the year by tallying up the results and adding 1500 to the total. I have included an example for Portugal and the Papal States.

Location
Add all that apply (e.g., Southern Europe and Central Mediterranean)
 * In Southern Europe (i.e., below the ): -3
 * In Eastern Asia: -2
 * In the western Mediterranean: -1
 * In Northern Europe (i.e., above the ): 0
 * In the center of the Mediterranean: +1
 * In Southern Asia: +2
 * In the eastern Mediterranean: +3
 * In Northern Africa: +4
 * In Western Asia: +5
 * Touching the Atlantic: *1.5
 * Touching the Pacific: *1.5

Travel

 * Traveling to Eastern Africa: +5
 * Traveling across the Indian Ocean: +8
 * Traveling across the Atlantic: +10
 * Traveling across the Pacific: +12
 * Traveling to Southern Africa: +15

Availability
Add all that apply
 * Ships must travel through a straight (e.g Gibraltar, Bosphorus): +5
 * Nations rely on a vassal for navy (e.g. Milan): +6
 * Ships must travel around a peninsula to colonize: +7
 * e.g., Novgorod around Scandinavia, Venice around Italy, Brandenburg around Denmark
 * Amount of coastland:
 * Miniscule coast (e.g. Austria) : +10
 * Little coast (e.g. Poland): +7
 * Nation's border halfly consists of a coast (e.g., Portugal, Papal States): +3
 * Majority coastal (e.g. England): -1

Naval establishment

 * Navy was created __ years ago:
 * 1-10: +40
 * 10-20: +30
 * 20-50: +15
 * 50-100: +5
 * 100-400: -3
 * More than 400 years: -4
 * Naval expansion: (-0.5*x), where x is the number of turns of naval expansion
 * New to colonialism: +8
 * Have a territory in the same continent: +1
 * Vassals/territories: (-0.5(x)), where x represents the number of vassals/territories
 * Islands colonized: (-0.25(x)), where x represents the number of islands (on the map?)

Navy size

 * Tiny navy: +15
 * Small navy: +10
 * Medium navy: +5
 * Large navy: -3

Motive
Add all that apply:
 * For exploration: +2
 * Religious reasons: +3
 * For profit: +3
 * For land: +4

Other
Add all that apply
 * Won a war using the navy: -1
 * Lost a war using the navy: +2
 * In economic ruin: +8
 * Lack of funding due to wars: +5
 * Economically stable: -2

Examples
Note that these examples are for colonizing the Americas, as shown by +10.


 * Portugal: 1500-(3*1.5)+10+3-3+(-0.5*8)-1+(-0.25(9))-3+3-2 = 1496.25 or 1496
 * Aragon: 1498 to 1507
 * England: 1500+(0*1.5)+10-1-4+(-0.5*11)+1+(-0.25*3)-3+3-1+2-2= 1498.75 or 1499.
 * Venice:  1500-3+1+10+5+7+3-3+(-0.5*10)+1+(-0.5*3)-3+3-1-2 = 1511.5 or 1512
 * Papal States: 1500-3+1+10+5+3+(-0.5*10)+(-0.5*3 territories)+1+10+3-1+5 = 1523.5 or 1524
 * Refer to this for a better detailed analysis.

Must say, it works out pretty well. But it's always opened to other factors. ChrisL123 (talk) 00:07, September 30, 2012 (UTC)

Discussion
This needs some tweaking, We have Middle Eastern and Asian nations that need their own little algorithm for travel. Those numbers also have to separate for even the Europeans. Suggestion: BTW this is for reaching, NOT establishing colonies, you can establish a colony in an area after 40% of the number for the region in years has passed. e.g. For Europe: 4 years after reaching America, 10 years after crossing the Pacific. Rough numbers still. Scandinator (talk) 01:11, September 30, 2012 (UTC)


 * You're right, I never considered the other continents for that. Very nice. ChrisL123 (talk) 01:54, September 30, 2012 (UTC)

For Aragon, using this, I get -3.5 plus whatever the motive is, so earliest would be 1499.5 and latest would be 1501.5 for the Americas. Fascinating. Hasta la vista, baby. (I'll be back.) 01:20, September 30, 2012 (UTC)


 * Not quite, by my calculations it's 1500-3*1.5+3+10+6 (unless you want to the ships to go through Gibraltar) +3-4+(-0.5*9)+5-1-2 = 1511 for the Americas, plus the motive. Might be confusing, but if we get to accepting the algorithm, I could make a page for each nation for us to know the justification of the numbers. ChrisL123 (talk) 01:54, September 30, 2012 (UTC)
 * Why do touching the Altantic and Pacific have *1.5 modifiers, if the lowest score is the best? Also, the straights and peninsulas should compound. For example, Moldova would have to go through the Bosporous, and through Gibraltar.
 * Also, I should really hope no one would get early than Portugal for Europe, with Norway and Castille's players being pretty much gone (I'm going to actually remove them from the list soon), there really isn't any serious competition. LurkerLordB (Talk) 02:46, September 30, 2012 (UTC)


 * This is what I calculate for Aragon:


 * Location: (-3)+(-1)*1.5 = -4.5
 * Travel: Across the Atlantic: +10
 * Availability: Amount of coastland: +3 (Aragon's entire southern coast is longer in pixels than the border with France and Bearn, but the puny northern coast which borders Navarre (Navarre is NOT a vassal, it is a STATE of the Crown of Aragon, just like Aragon and formerly Naples and the such, which borders the Atlantic.)
 * Naval establishment: -3 (Navy was established in the late 12th Century, although comparable to the current Chichen Itzan navy then.)
 * Naval expansion: (-0.5*9) = -4.5
 * Islands colonized: (-0.25(3))= -1 (The islands off the coast.)
 * Navy size: Medium? +5 (Navy was pretty big, conquering half of the Mediterranean coastline countries, but I'll go with 5)
 * Motive: Depends. In most cases it would be 2 or the second three.
 * Other: Economically stable, -2; have a territory in the same continent; +1
 * The "won a war with the navy" one only counts in-game. ChrisL123 (talk)
 * Total: (Motive is 2, Navy size is 5) = 1506 (Motive is 2, Navy size is large) = 1498 (Motive is three, navy size is medium) = 1507 (Motive is 3, Navy size is large) = 1499

So at best, 1498, and at worst, 1507. Not bad. Hasta la vista, baby. (I'll be back.) 03:26, September 30, 2012 (UTC)


 * Whoops, I did say military expansion, it should say naval expansion. And I counted 9 turns of naval expansion by Aragon, so (-0.5*9). I also fixed your calculations. Not bad indeed. ChrisL123 (talk) 03:54, September 30, 2012 (UTC)

Those *1.5 are multiplying numbers that are negative, so it would increase their value negatively, which would benefit them. (e.g., southern Europe [-3] touching the Atlantic [*1.5] means [-2*1.5] = -4.5) As for Portugal, they should still be the winner. I've done Venice and Aragon, two big players that I could think of, and they're over, though England will still have to be calculated. ChrisL123 (talk) 02:52, September 30, 2012 (UTC)

Note that I was referring to Portugal, assuming they don't get devestated by some war. LurkerLordB (Talk) 02:59, September 30, 2012 (UTC)

England would have...

England = 1500 + (0 x 1.5) + 10 - 1 - 4 - (1.5 x 11) - (0.25 x 3) - 3 + 3 - 1 + 2 - 2 =

1500 - 0 + 13 + 17 - 1 - 1 = 1528 I consider this algorithm brilliant, thoguh some things may be should be changed (something to make me reach America first, if possible ^^) in somethings, but I think is fair enough. --Galaguerra1 (talk) 03:59, September 30, 2012 (UTC)
 * 1) I expand my navy almost everyturn, I suppose it would be around 11 to 13 in the last 15 years... I calculate 11.
 * 2) I count Ireland, Man and the Dodecanesian Islands as colonized, that's 3.
 * 3) I expand for profit, to find a way to India.
 * 4) All my wars I have won with the navy, thoguh also every one that I've lost.
 * 5) I consider myself as economically stable.
 * 6) I round 16.5 (1.5 x 11) to 17.
 * 7) I round 0.75 (0.25 x 3) to 1.

You did a few things wrong. I'll show you:
 * In Northern Europe: 0
 * Touching the Atlantic: *1.5
 * Crossing Atlantic: +10
 * Majority coastal: -1
 * Naval origin: -4 (More than 400 years)
 * Naval expansion: (-0.5*11) = -5.5
 * Have a territory in the same continent: +1
 * Islands colonized: (-0.25(3)) = -0.75
 * Large navy: -3
 * For profit: +3
 * Won a war using the navy: -1
 * Lost a war using the navy: +2 (I think the English-Scottish incident counts as a loss?)
 * Economically stable: -2


 * Total: 1500+(0*1.5)+10-1-4+(-0.5*11)+1+(-0.25*3)-3+3-1+2-2= 1498.75 or 1499.