Talk:Axis vs Allies (Map Game)

Where is the map?
I usually don't enter the realm of the map games but I was skimming the recent edits and I came to this article and I could not help but notice...there is no map! How can you have a map game without a map?!?!?!? Mitro 21:17, February 15, 2011 (UTC)

yeah I will add one PitaKang 22:36, February 15, 2011 (UTC)

Pita I found a good map. just have to change the colors and such.



I can fix the colours. I just need everyone to say whether they're going to be allied or axis. Detectivekenny (Info; Talk) 02:10, February 16, 2011 (UTC)

I did this quickly and it likely has inaccuracies, possibly in German and English empires. Detectivekenny (Info; Talk) 05:16, February 16, 2011 (UTC)

Are we using it or not? It took a lot of work. Detectivekenny (Info; Talk) 22:58, February 17, 2011 (UTC)

New users?
Do you still accept new users in the game?Collie Kaltenbrunner 20:46, February 18, 2011 (UTC)

Yes. In fact, you are welcome to. PitaKang 20:48, February 18, 2011 (UTC)


 * There are still vacant countries?Collie Kaltenbrunner 21:14, February 18, 2011 (UTC)
 * Yes. Great Britian is still vacant, as well as France, Norway, Demark, Spain, Portugal, maybe a newly independent India, An independent Australia, almost all South American nations, and more! PitaKang 21:22, February 18, 2011 (UTC)
 * I would take Britian or France. Roguejedi 21:23, February 18, 2011 (UTC)
 * anyone have pros and cons for Brazil?Collie Kaltenbrunner 21:57, February 18, 2011 (UTC)
 * I would like to be the Congress for India (for now) and eventually Independent India,Batmanary 03:56, February 24, 2011 (UTC)
 * Can I join as Australia? God Bless the United States of America 14:24, February 24, 2011 (UTC)
 * Sure! Like I said, It's never too late to join. Remember to declare independence, though. PitaKang- (Talk|Contribs) 16:19, February 24, 2011 (UTC)
 * Can I replace Baconton as Britain? He doesn't seem to be responding much Batmanary 00:50, February 26, 2011 (UTC)
 * Sure! PitaKang- (Talk|Contribs) 23:11, March 2, 2011 (UTC)
 * Can I replace Baconton as Britain? He doesn't seem to be responding much Batmanary 00:50, February 26, 2011 (UTC)
 * Sure! PitaKang- (Talk|Contribs) 23:11, March 2, 2011 (UTC)

WW2
I think WW2 should be nuke-free. Say I if you are with me. PitaKang- (Talk|Contribs) 23:11, March 2, 2011 (UTC)

I agree. Maybe have a nuclear war to end the map game...Batmanary 23:34, March 2, 2011 (UTC)

The WW2 restriction, yes. The nuclear war, no. Fedelede 23:36, March 2, 2011 (UTC)

Hey, who will control Soviet Union? It seems the whole of Europe is in the Italian Alliance...Batmanary 01:43, March 4, 2011 (UTC)

Well, our OTL World War II was a nuclear war (It only takes one nuke for it to be a nuclear war, kids!) I would love to restrict nukes until after the war. However, we should step out of our comfort zone (but keep it plausible!) I think that superpowers like the US should get nukes first. A few turns later, nations that have been working since 1940 on the Manhattan Project like West Cuba can join the nuclear family (and I'm giving Cuba leeway since they've got spies working on the project in America. CrimsonAssassin 21:32, March 6, 2011 (UTC)

Sorry, but West Cuba isn’t going to join that particular club anytime soon. It just doesn’t have enough resources, and I’m sure everyone else agrees. How would the top scientists in the Manhattan Project be Cuban spies? That’s just implausible. Oh, Cuba may join in maybe 20-30 years, but not in 5 or 6. PitaKang- (Talk | Contribs) 23:01, March 6, 2011 (UTC)

Hey, it's possible for a Cuban Spy to be a chief scientist. In fact, that's the best place I could put them. Yes, Cuba has little resources. They can't produce the nukes, but if their spies worked on the atom bomb, they're already lightyears ahead of several other countries by just KNOWING how to build an atom bomb. Without America's help, it would take a long time for a cuban nuclear program. However, with America's (up until now unwilling) help, Cuba could have nukes by 1950.

However, the topic of this section is whether WWII should be a nuclear war. I say yes, with limitations.

CrimsonAssassin 15:37, March 7, 2011 (UTC)

Map
Hey, somebody is noting that the last map was posted in the 1940 section and we are almost in 1945?Collie Kaltenbrunner 21:02, March 5, 2011 (UTC)

Codes and stuff I've seen
Although I haven't been playing this, looking through recent stuff I have seen some things that I feel I need to say about.

1. The Italians land in Gibraltar. This is near impossible by themselves. Gibraltar is a Fortress, designed to hold out for months, if not years. Not to mention that any naval invasion would have to get past the coastal defense guns, and withering fire trying to climb the slopes. Even then, as I've said before, the fortress is designed to last months in a seige, and as long as Spain isn't in the war, they are going to sit there and wait for the british navy to show up and destroy your landing force.

2. Codes. I see that there were lots of arguments about who knows what. As everyone knows, Germany has the Enigma code. No one could break this until the Brits managed to get a working copy of Enigma, and then build their own computer to decipher it. Even then, they had to act like they had another reason for acting on information from Enigma, lest the Nazi's realize their codes had been broken. The Italians have Enigma, so ditto for them. British codes got broken by the Germans, but the Germans were crippled by the fact that there was no central command like in the UK. In Japan, only the diplomaic code was broken first. The military codes came after the Japanese had bombed Pearl Harbor. And everyone knows about the US codes. These are probably hard to break, since you need to get someone who can translate the Navajo, then figure out what they are saying. as for Russia, I don't really know, but I bet you could find someone who does.

Just my piece, thankyou for your time

Azecreth 21:46, March 5, 2011 (UTC)

Ah, Azecreth you know your codes and that is one of many things that impresses me. BlackSkyEmpire 21:52, March 5, 2011 (UTC)BlackSkyEmpire

Thank you. I also do parties and Bar Mitzvahs. Azecreth 22:11, March 5, 2011 (UTC)

Hey Azecreth, want to be our official neutral implauisibility inspector?Batmanary 00:21, March 6, 2011 (UTC)

Sure. That's fine with me. Just don't expect me to be forgiving. Azecreth 01:48, March 6, 2011 (UTC)

After some thought, I've decided on a better role. Basically, if there's a big argument over implausibility, just call me, and I will give my judgement. is that cool with you guys? Azecreth 17:28, March 8, 2011 (UTC)

Yeah, I've already given you Mod powers. PitaKang- (Talk | Contribs) 17:33, March 8, 2011 (UTC)

Can I join
Can I be South Africa

Can I join
Can I be South Africa.

Yes, and please sign your post with 4 tildes (PitaKang- (Talk | Contribs) 00:18, March 7, 2011 (UTC)). PitaKang- (Talk | Contribs) 00:18, March 7, 2011 (UTC)

Thanks Jer1818 00:20, March 7, 2011 (UTC)

Nation profile
I want to know which should be the pattern to the pages for the nations that you've talked about.Collie Kaltenbrunner 10:21, March 8, 2011 (UTC)

Axis and Allies
Put your nation in those categories

Allies
United States

India

Britain (and the rest of the Commonwealth/Imperial Federation.)

Korea

Britain vs Turkey discussion
Please sign your posts!!!


 * Buuut the Kurds already have a state in parts of Turkey and Iraq. I highly doubt they would like to be restricted to only Iraq, as the majority live in what was formerly Turkish territory. There's no point in having two Kurdish nations either, and one already exists that includes both regions. It makes no sense whatsoever to found a new state.- Matt 22:45, March 10, 2011 (UTC)
 * I agree with you totally, but of course I can't because I'm supposed to be on Britain's side in the war :) PitaKang- (Talk | Contribs) 22:48, March 10, 2011 (UTC)
 * PitaKang has seen the light, Batmanary. The question is, will you? BTW Peter which came first; Koryo or Choseon? Matt 22:52, March 10, 2011 (UTC)
 * Haha, seen the light. Also, Koryo came way, way first. It was founded in 918, while Choseon was founded in 1392. Go hereand herefor more info on them. PitaKang- (Talk | Contribs) 22:56, March 10, 2011 (UTC)
 * Thanks man. I have a big history exam tomorrow so I'm just studying up on the most inaccurate history site here on the web. Matt 23:04, March 10, 2011 (UTC)\
 * Haha, true. Hey, there was some guy on the Alexander's Empire article that didn't know this was alternate history so he corrected all the "inaccuracies" in it before he left. Then I reverted it. Hahah. :) PitaKang- (Talk | Contribs) 23:07, March 10, 2011 (UTC)
 * Lol! One might think that the whole "alternate" thingy in "alternate history" might have some meaning, but I suppose not. Matt 23:18, March 10, 2011 (UTC)
 * Yeah. Anyways, back to the discussion. So, we need to get more people to decide what's plausible about this situation. PitaKang- (Talk | Contribs) 01:45, March 11, 2011 (UTC)
 * Yeah, Yeah sure buit they are a British Dominion, which is actually advantageous for a small landlocked state, to have a powerful country ensure proper trade into the region and promising stability. Batmanary
 * True, but Turkey has already really sort of done that. PitaKang- (Talk | Contribs) 03:10, March 11, 2011 (UTC)
 * But at this point, Britain leads to total stability, plus I am planning on giving actual independence to all my colonies, and then having them in the Commonwealth of Nations. Not all the countries in it recognize the Queen as head of state. India, or Brunei for instance.
 * It makes absolutely no sense to create two different nations claiming the exact same area with the exact same goals. I think seniority would prevail in this case, so the one founded first would most likely be recognized by the majority of people.Matt 19:58, March 11, 2011 (UTC)
 * True, as that Turkey is also a stable nation, with a leader known for his greatness. However, Great Britain is much the same, but also, I think they would identify themself with Turkey more, as that first, Turkey is closer, and second, there are lots of Kurds living in Turkey. PitaKang- (Talk | Contribs) 21:33, March 11, 2011 (UTC)

Siam's War of Aggression
Hey, Batmanary here. I wanted to talk about the whole implausibility of the Siam-India War and hopefully you guys can help mediate the situation. Detectivekenny constantly tries to take Tenasserim from India, and charges me with threatening Siam. I countered that he could expand anywhere east or south of Siam, but he says that he cannot expand there. Here are the rough estimates of India's population in the 40s and Siam's today.

400 000 000 ( India's population in the 40s) and 66 000 000 (Thai population as of 2010). I said my army size is 2 million, which is plausible for India at this time, but he says that his armed forces are also 2 million strong, which is totally impossible, since Siam's population today doesn't even come close to India's in the 40s. Please share your thoughts and comments as to who will win this argument. If the majority of you agree with Detectivekenny, I will gladly back out and give Tenasserim. Batmanary

Okay here's my argument: 1) Economics: Siam has a lot more to gain from Tenasserim, including more access to the ocean, versus India where it is a drop in the bucket.

2) Location: Tenasserim is a day's walk from the capital, Bangkok, versus over a thousand miles from Delhi.

3) Geopolitics: Siam is a relatively compact nation, with ability to control nearby areas, versus gigantic India, which would have difficulty in moving large numbers of troops to extremeties

4) Manpower: Siam's army does have two million, plus added Japanese and Malays. I checked, and the population of Siam was pretty close to 20 million at the time.  That's one in 10 people in the army, very close to the ratio in North Korea, or Japan in OTL WWII.

5) Religion: Simply put, Thais are like 99% Theravada Buddhist, while India has no religious unity, split between antipathic Hindus, Muslims, Buddhosts. Under a single relgion, the army has a common enemy and has much higher morale.

6) Nationalism: India has many seperatist movements due to cultural diversity. India was never unified until the British.  Thus, nationalism would make a unified movement difficult.  Thailand does not have any seperatist movements excep some southerners, who could be categorized as Malays.

7) Tehnology: Check old posts, and you will see that Thailand has borrowed from Japan almost all of their technology, as well as developped its own significantly. Japan defeated Britain in WWII, and Indian tehnology might be sligthly inferior to British technology.  India has not developed its technology much, so we can assume Siamese technology is pretty close to Indian technology.

8) Government: India is ruled by a prime minister who is disliked by many Hindus, who make up around 90% of the population. On the other hand, Siam has a single figurehead who represents most Thais.

9) Geography: Thailand has good control of the Karen mountains just east of Tenasserim, making high ground invasion easy.

10) Support: Most Southeast Asians welcomed the Japanese as liberators from European rule, even though much later they decided the Japanese were worse. The inhabitants of Tenasserim would definitely show support for Asian liberators rather than a European-created nation.  Unless India could mass-distribute hundreds of millions of (present-day US) dollars in propaganda to everywhere in the country within five years or so.

11) Existence: This is a slight red herring, I admit, but did anyone find the idea of India completely unified with no riots a bit fishy? Not to mention being coupled with a Buddhist nation (Burma) with its own culture.

12) Sovereignty: One point for India.

Disputes? Detectivekenny (Info; Talk) 05:19, March 11, 2011 (UTC)

Pan-Asian Trade Union
These are the members of the Pan-Asian Union, at the moment: The Pan-Asian Union is a cultural and economic union that would guarantee the economic stability and interests of Asia in the world. It would have relief programs for the impoverished, and would develop welfare between all states. All Pan-Asian Union members would have free trade between each other as well, and the Bombay Stock Exchange, as well as Tokyo SE and Hong Kong's would serve as the centre of many Asian enterprises.
 * India
 * Korea
 * Australia
 * Malaysia
 * Phillipines
 * British Mandate of Hong Kong
 * Portuguese Mandate of Macau
 * Siam (proposed)
 * Japan (proposed)
 * China (proposed)
 * Saudi Arabia(proposed)
 * Turkey (proposed)
 * SAR (proposed)

United Nations
NPC. Countries with no player who are in the UN or are being assessed for it '''Belgium is part of Germany at this time. Batmanary 18:12, March 12, 2011 (UTC)'''
 * Britain and its Dominions
 * France
 * Turkey
 * Sweden
 * India
 * USA
 * Germany
 * Italy (only allowed in if they stop the war with France)
 * Saudi Arabia
 * DSAR (proposed)
 * Korea
 * Brazil (proposed)
 * Switzerland
 * Spain
 * Kurdistan
 * Portugal
 * Japan (proposed)
 * Netherlands

How the UN would function
This is how I think the UN should function:

A permanent council that proposes proposals and the like, which would consist of: These countries would vote on proposals. Depending on what type it is. Declaring war on another country, would require 100% of the votes. Other motions, such as currency, mediating wars already in motion, or discussing economics or whatever else would be decided by a majority vote. - cheers,Batmanary 18:17, March 12, 2011 (UTC)
 * Britain
 * US
 * Germany
 * India
 * Turkey
 * Brazil

Perfect! And we'd make a UN proposals/voting page for it, so we can do stuff and basically be a government in this map game! This would be the first map game (created by me, of course :) to have stuff llike that. I'm so excited about that! And I'm going to make an actuall TL off of this, so this'll help too. PitaKang- (Talk | Contribs) 18:20, March 12, 2011 (UTC)

I suggest to wait until the game ends, until making a TL about everything, as each page would be that much better.Batmanary 18:31, March 12, 2011 (UTC)

That was my plan. However, we should do this NOW. PitaKang- (Talk | Contribs) 18:37, March 12, 2011 (UTC)

The image has been reverted to its original picture - the UN building - and removed from here. Bat, upload it as something else. Lordganon 20:06, March 12, 2011 (UTC)

Problem: Germany annexed Austria and Sudentland, I posted it around 1939 or close to that year. 174.60.86.95 00:49, March 13, 2011 (UTC)BlackSkyEmpire