User talk:Ownerzmcown



I am Sorry
I am sorry for all the things I said to you. Please forgive me. --Catherine 23:01, June 1, 2010 (UTC)

Europe 1430
Europe 1430 has been reverted to 1522, before all the implausiblity happened, and ProfessorMcG awarded me control. Please read the archives and look at the current maps, and jump in to play! Thanks! --Catherine 23:01, June 1, 2010 (UTC)

Second crusade
please go Destroyanator 18:06, June 12, 2010 (UTC)

1983: Doomsday
Hey, I read on Yanks talk page that you wanted to sign up for 1983: Doomsday. Basically, you don't need to sign up. You just write whatever you want, as long as its possible. Arstarpool 02:53, June 22, 2010 (UTC)

Okay, to put maps is pretty difficult, but it's quick to do. Go to another nation page, and click source code on your edit bar. You will see that there is a thing that says something like this:

"Name=

"Map=(the name of the file goes here)"

Coa=

Leader=

...things like that. Your going to copy and paste that whole thing onto your thing, and then fill it in. If you find it difficult, I could do it for you.

Here are some of the last places nations can be made:

Southern U.S. Coast (keep it small)

New England (make like a very small nation there.)

Spain

East Europe

The Balkans

Kalingrad (also called East Prussia)

Africa

Chinese coast

Texas Coast

The Middle East

Thats about it... Arstarpool 17:44, June 22, 2010 (UTC)

Britain (keep it small)

Arstarpool 17:44, June 22, 2010 (UTC)

It can be started anytime after 1983. I think, though, that a newer nation would be cooler, but it's your choice. And yea, we have room in South East Germany.Arstarpool 18:24, June 22, 2010 (UTC)

Are you going to go ahead with a new nation? Arstarpool 01:24, June 23, 2010 (UTC)

I decided not to, I think I'm just gonna go with the Map Games for now, if you want you can take over the country I've already created, its called the Second Polish Republic Ownerzmcown 1:53, June 23, 2010 (UTC)

You'll have to wait until Sunday, cuz I'm going on vacation. Arstarpool 13:56, June 24, 2010 (UTC)

It's looking great. Arstarpool 02:04, July 1, 2010 (UTC)

Rise of America
You do know that we started and there is no particular order right? Eastward Expansion 18:06, June 22, 2010 (UTC)

Yes, I put up the post about the Aztecs, their my country! Ownerzmcown 18:08, June 22, 2010 (UTC)

Cold War
Hi there, can I please be Portugal in the Cold War map game?

Thanks in advance,

Heraklion

Its not my map game, its made by Arstarpool.

Macedonia
Could I work on the Macedonia page with you? BoredMatt 01:53, June 26, 2010 (UTC)

Yeah, I need a map for it, not a map of OTL Macedonia, but of a region called Greater Macedonia. Ownerzmcown, 2:00, June 26, 2010 (UTC)

It's looking pretty good, although I haven't been able to find any information on the "King". Arstarpool 03:40, June 28, 2010 (UTC)

I haven;t made a page for the king, but he's a real person, look up Alexander, Crowned Prince of Yugoslavia. Ownerzmcown 03:42, June 28, 2010 (UTC)

Neither. It can be written in by you that it's a member, an observer, has sent an application, or is banned. Arstarpool 02:51, July 2, 2010 (UTC)

Congratulations! You made a much more interesting article than I could have ever made. I had an unoffical agreement with Vladivostok that I created the Serbia and Macedonia articles, while he wrote the Slovenia, Croatia and Bosnia articles. I thank you for taking Macedonia off my plate.

Yankovic270 16:20, July 2, 2010 (UTC)

Userpage?
Why doesn't your user page show sup on your signature? Try doing these ~ (that little symbol right there) four times. So that it looks something like this: ~ ~ ~ ~ (without the space between them.) Arstarpool 20:16, June 29, 2010 (UTC)

Roman Empire
Hi, I see you're the Byzantine Empire in the map game, but you're not annexing anything, or invading, I originally think that you were going to be a new Empire and if you reached Phoenicia I was going to ally to you for just not invading me, but your rule is being taken by Belgica. VENEZUELA 22:13, July 10, 2010 (UTC)

Central World
Hi might you create articles for Central World and give me your opinion, I'm trying to turn it into a community project! Please Answer Me. VENEZUELA 23:28, July 15, 2010 (UTC)

Ok I'll do it the next week! VENEZUELA 00:11, July 16, 2010 (UTC) Feel free to add what you want! VENEZUELA 22:20, July 16, 2010 (UTC)

Rise of Roses
Well, the Pacific Federation (one of the most powerful nations) still needs to be made. If you make it, add it to the Rise of Roses Talk Page and the list on the actual Rise of Roses Page. You may want to do some research into this TL with the Timeline ad PODS page. One thing though, the PF (Pacific Federation) is a union of states led by Australia.Eastward Expansion 02:05, July 17, 2010 (UTC)

No Napoleon's Elba
Oh yes of course you can adopt it! I use an online program called [http://www.pixlr.com/ Pixlr. Best of luck, and I hope you turn it into a prosperous timeline.]

Eastward Expansion 22:33, July 18, 2010 (UTC)

Would you please tell me what categories I added? I am sorry if I did not respect your wishes.

Eastward Expansion 17:24, August 16, 2010 (UTC)

It says it on 1841-1881 (No Napoleon's Elba) you made an edit and I assume that was the added category. Ownerzmcown 17:34, August 16, 2010 (UTC)

IRC
This is sort of an IM thing that Smallpox and Vegas found, I checked it out and it's pretty cool.

Go to http://webchat.freenode.net/

write your nickname

type "wikia_ah" (remove quotation marks) in the channel box

enter, and party.

BoredMatt 14:22, July 20, 2010 (UTC)

PS me and EE found the layout a bit confusing, you type in the text bar at the bottom of the screen.

1430
Check the talk page about the invasion. BoredMatt 22:17, July 30, 2010 (UTC)

Owner, most of these people that you are "recruiting" don't even play the game that often, and i've written like five paragraphs on how it is not only plausable, but very, very easy to carry out my invasion.BoredMatt 14:00, July 31, 2010 (UTC)

Haha I like your user page :D BoredMatt 15:50, August 8, 2010 (UTC)

A Message
Hey if you haven't already vote at the bottom of the main talk page of the site. Please give your opinion if you want to. Also you have my permission to restart the Cold War map game. Arstarpool 02:25, August 12, 2010 (UTC)

Hi
Hey, I was just wondering if you could read my primary AltHist, French Trafalgar, British Waterloo, and give me some feedback, comments or ideas, if you don't mind. I've kinda hit a writers block, so maybe some new ideas will help me!

Thanks, Tbguy1992 05:15, August 14, 2010 (UTC)

Try either an United States invasion of Mexico or something else in Asia, honestly thats all I got. Ownerzmcown 05:19, August 14, 2010 (UTC)


 * The template you speak of, found here was created for me via special request from Realismadder, who graciously accepted. I know, its awesome.


 * what did you think of the TL other wise, though? Tbguy1992 02:50, August 21, 2010 (UTC)

Negotiations
Owner, I'm terribly sorry for any offense I caused you at the negotiations;but they were just that-negotiations. I'm going to be honest-I was a complete wanker to you all because I took the fact you didn't ask me about Macedonia's relationship with Greece far too grieviously. Now you probably won't believe me, but I'm legitimately trying to make this up to you and even become friends. Do you have to believe me? No. Will you? Probably not, for which I don't blame you. All I'm trying to do is make this right and culminate a friendship; a nuked-city and a naming-discrepency are nothing to sweat about, and I'm sure you have more. Also, since Macedonia is a monarchy and the young adults (as in 17-30, not what American-fiction deems "young adult") are becoming more-and-more infatuated with neo-conservaticy, the old Kingdom of Greece and Greece's long history as the heir to the Athenian and Byzantine/East Roman Empires as well as the Kingdom of Greece, the people would probably become more and more pro-Macedonian each day. Who knows, perhaps Macedonia can tutor Greece on how to become a proper, democratic/constitutional monarchy. Mr.Xeight 21:36, August 25, 2010 (UTC)

Xeight, I have to thank you for your professionality and for being mature in this matter, although the idea of negotiation has by now broken down, but perhaps the idea of Macedonia and Greece having a freindship in the post-DD world have appeared to be impossible, Macedonia has made contact with a country, Turkey, that has horrible relations with Greece, and now the two countries are great partners and I'm afraid that Macedonia and Greece must stay enemies. Ownerzmcown 23:41, August 25, 2010 (UTC)

I apologize, friend, but if you don't mind, I'd like to at least keep trying until we work something out.

The bad relations all stem from me being a complete prick to you over a simple misunderstanding, am I correct? Well if you'd accept my apology, we can't not change the past-I did it with Greece years ago (originally Greece was part of a state that unified with Turkey after I decided to go with the idealistic "Doomsday changes everything, let's set aside our differences and survive), and really nothing is written in stone so to speak. Though I'm a true "Son of Hellas" if you will, post-Doomsday the name-dispute in my opinion doesn't really matter anymore, and Greece isn't a victim in this-merely one faction in an old dispute. Since Greece's control over the North is widely shattered, I'm willing to completely forsake any claims to it, minus the Thracian Reclamation Territory. If I may propose something, perhaps even the Balkan-states work together to repopulate the territory? Now it might be crazy, and thus if we all work together then the territory would be fairly new. If Greece goes it alone, it's going to take decades for a farily-stable population to result. If say Rhodope, Greece, and Macedonia all work together (I'd even be willing to include Turkey), then it'll be easier to stablize. Also, perhaps we need to see beyond what divides and see what unifies us: Orthodox Christianity. Constantinople is a holy city for Orthodox-Christians everywhere, no matter of what Patriarchate. If the powers got together and work together to reclaim the territory, then well, it would take significantly less time. What are thoughts? Would you be willing to rewrite the past and save Constantinople from being forgotten in time with me? Mr.Xeight 23:54, August 25, 2010 (UTC)

Look, if you can get the following, then I'll give consideration to the concept:


 * The go ahead from Lordganon (Rhodope) and Caeruleus (Turkey) for the idea


 * Create a list of ideas for the name of such a union thats good by me


 * Finally, agree that if we decide to create such a union that the center will be a rebuilt Constantinople (The old name makes more historical sense to me) although a privisional center will probably have to be selected

Ownerzmcown 00:27, August 26, 2010 (UTC)

Graduating Macedonia
Can I help you get Macedonia graduated? I've seen the arguments and I just want to help. If it means scaling down a bit I will be willing to do it but I want it to be graduated. Arstarpool 22:37, August 28, 2010 (UTC)

Yes! Please and thank you! Ownerzmcown 02:43, August 29, 2010 (UTC)

Yugoslavia
Well, I think that any alliance between Serbia & Montenegro with Macedonia would automatically exclude Croatia, Bosnia or Slovenia. That being said, trade wouldn't of course be off the table. Generally, I think the relationship would be peaceful and productive, although since Slovenia and Croatia are planning on joining the ADC, while Greece is in a dispute with Macedonia, that would perhaps lead to relations being cordial, friendly perhaps, but definately not an alliance.--Vladivostok 21:30, September 1, 2010 (UTC)

A pact between Serbia & Montenegro sounds good to me, but what would we call it and would there be other members? Ownerzmcown 21:56, September 1, 2010 (UTC)
 * Well, it doesn't necessarily have to have a name, just a firm international relationship. But, on the other hand, I realize that relations between Macedonia and Serbia are not my strong suit. That would have to be looked into, to see if there is lasting anymosity in the region.--Vladivostok 22:06, September 1, 2010 (UTC)

The Wikipedia page on the subject says that they have good relations, although because Kosovo would likely never become a problem in this timeline, then they would remain good friends. Ownerzmcown 02:53, September 2, 2010 (UTC)
 * Ok, and they could have a strong relationship then. But I saw on Oer's talk page that your initial idea was to have them create an organization, or group. People have been always trying to lump these nations together, but it really isn't doable, unless it is forced. Perhaps a yearly summit, or council in which they discuss regional politics, I could see that.--Vladivostok 06:40, September 2, 2010 (UTC)

Almost There
Just a little more until Macedonia is finally canon! All Mitro wants is for you to change the map.

So what's next? Europe is pretty filled up...there's still room for city-states and such in North America, though. The page mentions at least a dozen city-states that haven't been written about yet, and  looks promising with a couple city-states mentioned too. South-east California has room with lush farmlands. Central Florida is pretty empty too. Missisisippi, Alabama, Georgia, and Louisiana are surprisingly empty as well. Arstarpool 04:03, September 2, 2010 (UTC)

Macedonia and Turkey
These two pages are always getting objetced. With your permission I would like to temporarily take the reins of Macedonia and get it graduated. I may have to give up a (small) part of the Greek lands and a large chunk of Serbia if you want it to get graduated because these are the two places everyone keeps on getting into arguments about. Get back to me soon. Arstarpool 19:20, September 5, 2010 (UTC)

I'm sorry Arstar, but as much as I would like to have my article graduated, I find it necessary to keep being the caretaker of the Macedonia article. Ownerzmcown 21:45, September 5, 2010 (UTC)

myhistory
Thanks for your interest in my page. if you have any ideas for it, you can allways make suggestions on my talk page. If you dont mind me asking, but where do you live? (Hellenicemperor 20:39, October 17, 2010 (UTC))

No offense, but I do have a problem, and I really don't have any ideas. Ownerzmcown 20:55, October 17, 2010 (UTC)

Explorers 1452
Our concessions for England are getting hilarious... if England agrees to any of our proposals, even if the side that England accedes to join wins, will get completely out of money. Fedelede 02:59, October 20, 2010 (UTC)

I agree, honestly, I just said the thing about the frigate to force the subject, maybe we are going a bit going to war all of a sudden, what do you think? Ownerzmcown 03:02, October 20, 2010 (UTC)

I'm not sure. If I were a general of the age, I would be almost sure that a war between France and Florence was soon to start. It is a bit of a forced start, yes, but it is not sudden. Although this will be an extremely good war. Fedelede 03:06, October 20, 2010 (UTC)

Are you pulling Muscovy into this? Fedelede 03:07, October 20, 2010 (UTC)

Well, it is Poland-Lithuanias main ally, I'm just advising, also, I agree, but maybe we should just leave this war to France and Florence. Ownerzmcown 03:08, October 20, 2010 (UTC)

It's true. But I only started offering alliances to the West and Poland-Lithuania because you had the Pope ready to excommulgate me if I invaded you, Venice in my heels, and were offering an alliance to England: It would have only been a fair match if I had parted from the Pope and had founded my own branch of Christianism, so that I could ally with the Mamluks and Ottomans. Even if Florence is mighty, compare it to the French Behemoth! Fedelede 03:12, October 20, 2010 (UTC)

This is also true, so what do you think we should do? Ownerzmcown 03:13, October 20, 2010 (UTC)

The war with Florence is over, Ownerzmcown. At least as far as the Papacy is concerned. Florence has been so badly mauled by England, Ireland, and the Papal States that it has been begging for its life.

The Florentines have offered to pay you thousands of florins per year and give you Corsica if you make a ceasefire with them. Personally, I (and the Map Game pope) recommend this. As noted on the negotiation page, they will pay you so much wealth per year it will drive them to bankruptcy. You will also get Corsica, a traditional French territory OTL. Once you have bled the Florentines dry in a few years, you can start the war again sometime (Since it's a ceasefire, not necessarily a white peace) and achieve more profitable and strategic results.--Emperor of Trebizond 21:01, October 21, 2010 (UTC)

Macedonia
Arstar has moved that since you've not worked on it in a while, Macedonia should be opened for adoption by others.

Though you should know - though, I'd be willing to add the details I mentioned to the thing to make it up to specs, if you'd like. Would shut all that up, lol.

Lordganon 07:11, November 19, 2010 (UTC)

Yeah, Owner, what's your game plan for Macedonia? If its just going to sit there there's a lot of willing people, like LG who would be willing to get it graduated or else its gonna end up being a proposal forever :P Arstar 16:18, November 19, 2010 (UTC)

I've simply had to take a break because of school, and now that its died down a bit I'll begin making the changes very soon. Ownerzmcown 20:02, November 20, 2010 (UTC)

Pokemon
Hey, when you say that you play Pokemon on your userpage do you play the newest games? Arstar 10:52, November 21, 2010 (UTC)

The latest game I have is SoulSilver, but when Pokemon Black and White come out I'm probably gonna get one of those. Ownerzmcown 14:32, November 21, 2010 (UTC)

Oh cool, I returned to playing HG and I was wondering do you play online? If you do my Friend Code is 1076 7355 3291. Arstar 21:40, November 21, 2010 (UTC)

Serbia
Nice to finally see Macedonia done, lol.

At any rate - Serbia! How about we turn that one into a joint project? I've got some things in mind for it in relation to Transylvania and the Bulgaria articles, and I'm sure you've got a few things in mind in relation to Macedonia.

And, of course, having to bring it into line with Macedonia, lol.

Lordganon 20:59, November 22, 2010 (UTC)

Sounds fine with me! Ownerzmcown 21:45, November 22, 2010 (UTC)

I'm curious - what do you think the eventual result would be for Serbia in the future? They are surrounded by hostile and semi-hostile nations, after all - and many would love a crack at it.

I've also begun a history, etc. for Serbia. Thoughts on a date for when the Serbs first deal with Macedonia? (i.e. the dates for the first skirmish after landing, the encounter with the general in Macedonia, and the date that the northward advance halts) Or can I just make them up to fit the story and the Macedonia history?

Lordganon 08:41, December 1, 2010 (UTC)

Well considering Macedonia has already bean canonized, I'd say that we work with the Macedonia article. Also, Serbia's only real ally is Greece, Greece would try, and likely fail, to get help from the ADC if war broke out. The most likely thing to happen would be one of the other smaller former Yugoslav nations will begin a war with Serbia, Greece will try to help, Macedonia would absolutely join in that case, or vice versa. Then when Macedonia gets involved, Turkey gets involved and the most likely result would be Bosnia, Croatia, Slovenia, Macedonia, and Turkey vs. Greece and Serbia. The end result will most likely be a victory for the "Coalition" and most likely Serbia and Greece would end up giving sizable amounts of land. Ownerzmcown 22:25, December 1, 2010 (UTC)


 * Croatia and Slovenia are applicants of the ADC. I highly doubt that they would get involved. Bosnia, on the other hand, is already an ally of Turkey, so no problems there. Where does it actually state that Serbia and Greece are close? I always assumed that Serbia and the ADC wouldn't have strong relations.--Vladivostok 23:11, December 1, 2010 (UTC)

Although I'm not entirely sure who first told me, it might have been Xeight, which he might have just said to be "afraid" of Greece. I guess it would then just be Bosnia, Macedonia, and Turkey vs. Serbia, which would likely mean Bosnia regaining the entire nation, Macedonia getting more of southern Serbia, and Turkey might end up with political influence in Serbia or possibly some Serbian coast. Ownerzmcown 23:40, December 1, 2010 (UTC)

Speaking for Greece, I can honestly say that they don't like the Serbians much either. Actions like they will have done in Bosnia/Croatia are a little hard to forget. No love is lost between the two, nor would they ally.

I'll cook up dates, then - Macedonia doesn't actually have any for parts of its early history. It'll work out.

I was more so thinking that we could have all of the neighboring nations form some sort of loose alliance if/when the nationalists in Serbia (warmongers, may I add) come back to power. Divy up the whole thing, lol. Most would probably go to Macedonia, if that helps - call it the kingdom of Macedonia and Serbia after that, lol. Croatia/Bosnia would get back their territory, and I can honestly say that some areas inhabited by other minorities would get "eaten" by other eastern and northern "neighbors" of Serbia. Montenegro could go either independent or in the kingdom, mind. Turkey or Greece could get involved, but I kinda doubt that any nation would invoke an alliance for a dogpile like that, lol.

Lordganon 00:01, December 2, 2010 (UTC)

So we're actually going for this? Fine by me. Either Macedonia would take all of Serbia, or maybe just large parts of it. I can't really think of any other nations besides former Yugoslavia getting involved or dividing up Serbia. Ownerzmcown 00:43, December 2, 2010 (UTC)

I wouldn't say actually going for it. More like a half-idea for some point down the road.

As for the other half of that, Transylvania has claims in Serbia.. and there are areas with majority Hungarian and Bulgarian populations.... ;)

Lordganon 00:46, December 2, 2010 (UTC)

Actually, what I imagine is that Macedonia would gain parts of Macedonia, give independence to Montenegro, possibly leave a small part of Serbia independent, although under a pro-Macedonian regime, and giving the Hungarians and possibly the Bulgarians their own nations. If this course of action is taken, then I believe that the creation of a "Yugo-Sphere" of some kind would be possible, some kind of Macedonia dominated alliance or organization that would likely be military and economic. Also, what do you think would be the size of the three branches of the Serbian armed forces, it under conscription, so I'd imagine large. Ownerzmcown 00:54, December 2, 2010 (UTC)

Something for the future, really. Though I meant that Partium/Rhodope would join in if Transylvania did ;)

As for the size of each branch, I would base that somewhat off of the Macedonian numbers. In my mind, they'd be about equal, except the navy. That'd be the size of the Macedonia Adriatic Fleet, plus another thousand or so at most for Danube river boats.

Lordganon 02:14, December 2, 2010 (UTC)

You'd have to give a good reason for either to intervene in what would likely just be a former Yugoslavia conflict. As for the river boats, they won't help much because the Danube River doesn't extend into Macedonia. Ownerzmcown 03:21, December 2, 2010 (UTC)

As I said, both of those would actively go along with a Transylvanian attack.

The river boats would be to keep the river secure, not anything to do with Macedonia.

Lordganon 04:09, December 2, 2010 (UTC)

Where would the Serbian originally get their weapons, and would the Serbian industry be able to produce its own weapons. Ownerzmcown 22:59, December 3, 2010 (UTC)

Serbia definitely has the industry needed to make its own weapons. Most of those industries are not in Belgrade, but in central Serbia. By the looks of things, in fact, only 2 or so of the major companies that would be involved with that production (ammo included) are headquartered there - the rest are in the center.

As for where they got the weapons originally, that's pretty simple: a definite majority of Yugoslav military bases (planes, etc.) are in Serbian areas, a majority of the troops were either Serbian or Montenegrin, and a large majority of the officers were Serbs.

Yugoslavia was basically dominated by Serbs, realistically. As things stood, while under Tito things were fairly multi-ethnic, by 1983 the Serbs and their allies had control.

Lordganon 03:41, December 4, 2010 (UTC)

Err.. what I meant was that they would have kept control of the bases and factories - no need to search for old weapons or resume manufacturing. The bases would have stayed under their control, leaving whatever was not used in the wars under their control. The factories, while suffering from a slight shortage of materials, etc. would have held the same manufacturing abilities, outside of Belgrade, that it had started the wars with. This includes all the arms factories, pretty much. Like I said, central Serbia - which is the Nis/Krusevac regions of Serbia, plus a bit further north.

Lordganon 22:06, December 4, 2010 (UTC)

So when will Serbia's next general election be? Because a little after that I believe would be the best time for Macedonia and Serbia to go to war. Ownerzmcown 16:23, December 5, 2010 (UTC)

I set up the Serbian election cycle to mesh well with the Macedonian Civil War. It's every 5 years, starting in 1989. So: 1989 > 1994 > 1999 > 2004 > 2009 > 2014 Meaning the next one would be in 2014, barring some sort of major voting failure in the Assembly, which wouldn't happen legally at this point - the governing Socialists are propped up by the various minority parties, who have issues with the nationalists and would not vote with them as a result.

Dont forget though, you'd need a few allies besides Turkey to pull off a major victory. All you need to do is look at the population numbers to see that, lol.

Lordganon 16:44, December 5, 2010 (UTC)

So clearly the legal and electoral way appears to be out of the idea, so the most likely thing would be a Nationalist revolution, or something along the lines.

And the sides at this point I'm thinking would be Macedonia, Bosnia, Croatia, Slovenia, Turkey, Transylvania, Rhodope, and Turkey, vs. Serbia. This "coalition" I believe would clearly outnumber the Serbian army. Ownerzmcown 19:59, December 5, 2010 (UTC)


 * I'd just like to say once more that Croatia wouldn't enter a war against Serbia, and Slovenia would definitely not want to enter another war. Croatia led a defensive war in OTL and TTL and would only be in this coalition if it were directly attacked. Bosnia is fair game though, and is already in an alliance with Turkey and would then probably have good relations with Macedonia.--Vladivostok 21:17, December 5, 2010 (UTC)

Agreed, Vlad.

True that those all combined would outnumber them.

Really, a war is somewhere off in the future. All things considered, a nationalist revolution would be unlikely - something that brings down the government and gets a new election, however, would not be impossible. I myself would prefer to wait a while. We'll revisit it sometime in the spring, I think.

Lordganon 02:13, December 6, 2010 (UTC)

Fair enough.

Ownerzmcown 20:23, December 6, 2010 (UTC)

I think that we may be just about done lol

Anything you can think of that needs adding still?

Lordganon 05:25, December 8, 2010 (UTC)

Although I'm still working on the military part, I think all of the other important parts have been taken care of.

Ownerzmcown 20:17, December 9, 2010 (UTC)

I'll ask for objections then.

Lordganon 21:19, December 9, 2010 (UTC)

Do we ever increase the population number on these articles, its not like the size of the country's population stays the same forever? Ownerzmcown 01:15, December 11, 2010 (UTC)

You are correct, we do change the populations periodically. But, it is something that should be done every couple years real-time, at most, like real census-taking.

Lordganon 02:18, December 11, 2010 (UTC)

I'd think that in this world, there would be a census like every 2 years or so.

Ownerzmcown 19:42, December 11, 2010 (UTC)

It really would depend on the country, and how fast it grows.

At any rate, Serbia has now been graduated! =)

Lordganon 07:28, December 13, 2010 (UTC)

Albania
Thought I'd let you know that we can ignore that Albania article completely - it was made obsolete.

More room for us to make articles, lol.

Lordganon 07:55, November 27, 2010 (UTC)

Hey LG, I was thinking that now Albania is obsolete, do you think I could make a page for the Republic of Albania that the Macedonia page talks about? Ownerzmcown 22:09, December 13, 2010 (UTC)

Power to you. I've been working on a couple ideas for the south of Albania myself, lol. Just remember to keep it in the north/center of the country. Lordganon 22:14, December 13, 2010 (UTC)

Common Defense Organization
Owner, if you remember, we discussed creating a common defense organization between Turkey, Macedonia, and other allied countries. I finally came around to remembering that conversation recently, but do you still want to do it? We can co-write the article. And, if you're still interested, what do you think it should be called and who would you want included? Caeruleus 01:09, December 13, 2010 (UTC)

Yes, I absolutely believe this would be a great project for us to create, it would likely consist of Macedonia, Turkey, and Macedonia and Turkey's other regional allies. I can think of only the Eastern Mediterranean Security Organization at the moment. Ownerzmcown 01:48, December 13, 2010 (UTC)


 * Cool. I was thinking of including Bosnia, New Erzurum, and Greater Patnos. I talked to Fxgentleman previously and he agreed that Lebanon, and possible some Syrian survivor states, would probably join. As for the name, I only came up with Meditterranean Defense League/Organization (MDL or MDO), though the name really doesn't matter to me. You can pick the name if you want. Caeruleus 01:52, December 13, 2010 (UTC)

What about Israel? Ownerzmcown 02:00, December 13, 2010 (UTC)


 * According to Fxgentleman, they probably wouldn't join because Israel, Jordan, and the GSU would form their own defense organization focused on opposing Iran. However, cooperation between the two organizations is possible since they share some common goals. Caeruleus 02:20, December 13, 2010 (UTC)

I originally thought Croatia and Slovenia, but their joining the ADC and that would definetely interfere, so I think we should first come up with a definite list of possible members. Also some kind of reason, like the ADC and Sicilian aggresion. Ownerzmcown 02:30, December 13, 2010 (UTC)


 * They haven't officially joined the ADC yet, so this organization could offer a tantalizing second option for them.


 * But as a preliminary list, here are the nations I could see joining:


 * Turkey
 * Macedonia
 * Bosnia
 * New Erzurum
 * Greater Patnos
 * Azerbaijan
 * Lebanon
 * Croatia (maybe)
 * Slovenia (maybe)


 * Also, I could see some states around the Black Sea, such as Crimea or the Don Republic, joining as a way to oppose Siberian expansion. Caeruleus 02:36, December 13, 2010 (UTC)

I think the Mediterranean Defense League would be the best name, but possible we would might need to change the name if those members join. I think it should be founded in order to defend from other states such as Siberia, Serbia, and possibly Iran. If we made this the idea, then the possibility of more states joining increases. Ownerzmcown 03:00, December 13, 2010 (UTC)


 * Opposing Siberia, and too a more limited extent Greece and Serbia, would definitely be the main goals of the organization. However, opposing Iran would be a difficult position since Turkey and Iran have an informal agreement due to their aligning interests and the GSU and Israel don't really care much about Siberia, Greece, or Serbia. But opposing Siberian expansion should be enough to get several former Soviet survivor states to join.


 * And here's the link to the page: Mediterranean Defense League
 * Caeruleus 04:28, December 13, 2010 (UTC)

I created the page and added a few basic things. Check the MDL talk page for specifics. We can carry this conversation there now. Caeruleus 04:53, December 13, 2010 (UTC)

I've had another idea for post-Warsaw Pact states for a while now so I hope you don't think I'm stealing your idea, but it'll include many to most of the former Warsaw Pact/Soviet states. I wouldn't have a problem with them being on good terms/allied with the MDL however. Arstar 05:22, December 13, 2010 (UTC)


 *  Azerbaijan will not be joining, and Vlad has said that he wants his Slovenia/Croatia articles to join the ADC. And as a reminder, you will need his permission to deal with Bosnia in such a regard as well. Lordganon 07:26, December 13, 2010 (UTC)
 * Why wouldn't Azerbaijan join? And Vlad ok'd Bosnia joining weeks ago. Caeruleus 12:36, December 13, 2010 (UTC)
 * Because as its caretaker, that is my wish. Verbatim. Lordganon 12:48, December 13, 2010 (UTC)

Hey Owner, I was rereading through our articles and realized that we haven't really done much with this one yet. Do you want to add something to it or have the MDL actually do something? We don't necessarily have to but its quiet start is less I imagined it to be. Caeruleus 05:40, May 28, 2011 (UTC)

Sicily War
Hmm.. Well, maybe, lol.

What's the view held by Macedonia on Sicily? Note that no direct intervention either way would occur, but there's a few things I could have happening otherwise depending on there views.

Lordganon 03:09, December 22, 2010 (UTC)

Macedonia views Sicily as an enemy to the world and kind of imperialistic militiants, it says something like that on the Macedonia page. Ownerzmcown 03:12, December 22, 2010 (UTC)

Heh. What I thought I remembered, more or less.

How would them taking up an "armed neutrality" stance following the invasion of the Ionians sound? It would limit Sicilian movements even further, helping the ADC/IPA.

Lordganon 03:29, December 22, 2010 (UTC)

Sounds very agreeable. Ownerzmcown 03:30, December 22, 2010 (UTC)

Nuclear Devastation
The Nuclear Devastation (Map Game) is starting now PitaKang 05:14, January 16, 2011 (UTC)

Doomsday
Well, there is several areas something could be done, even if a lot of it would be city-states. What part of the world would you like to work in? lol Lordganon 07:51, January 31, 2011 (UTC)

North America, Asia, or Africa. Ownerzmcown 21:40, January 31, 2011 (UTC)

Also, you sure don't want my help with the military section for Greece? Ownerzmcown 21:47, January 31, 2011 (UTC)

Yes, I'm sure. Should start on it sometime in the next few days.

NA, Africa, and Asia, eh? Hmmm..... Note that most of these would be small countries for you to do as you wish in, following their collapse.


 * Africa:
 * The two Congos, outside of the capital city-state and Katanga, are empty.
 * Liberia, outside of the Port of Monrovia, has only got state names in place (Democratic Republic of Lofa and Republic of Nimba both have articles, though are undeveloped stubs with virtually no content - there is also the Democratic Republic of Liberia and the Revolutionary Republic of Liberia that were planned at some point, having existed between 1985 and 1991 or so).
 * Kenya, which canon says is somewhat stable.
 * The mainland portion of Tanzania, which canon says went to hell.
 * Uganda, which collapsed, outside of Buganda.
 * Malawi
 * Zimbabwe, which collapsed.
 * Zambia
 * Fate of Lesotho and Swaziland, outside of their survival, has never really been determined.
 * Rwanda
 * Burundi
 * Angola, collapsed, has several half-started articles, in addition to space for more.
 * Central African Republic
 * Gabon
 * São Tomé and Príncipe
 * Algeria has several Greek-aligned states, like Kabylie - Chaoui, and Souk Ahras - and other states, Tamanrasset, Tamahaq, and M'zab - info about these would start on the Algeria article.
 * A breakaway version of the Sahrawi Arab Democratic Republic, the Independent Republic Sahrawi Arab, which controls around half of Western Sahara as well as nearby parts of Algeria and Mauritania.
 * There's room for small things left in South Africa.
 * Several west African nations - Benin, Burkina Faso, Gambia, Guinea, and Niger, for starters - could be created, so long as canon follows what is written in the West African Union, and its members, articles.
 * There is areas of southern Libya that may hold a city-state or two... little, but maybe.
 * Note that probably half of the current articles in Africa are stubs and could use expansion.
 * Asia:
 * There is a large amount of work in India that can be done. Almost none of the breakaway states have their own articles.
 * China has some room left.
 * Afghanistan, so long as the state is small, has some room for work.
 * Central Asia, and other nearby areas, has some room for small nations.

As for North America..... Any specific region? There's a ton of room for city-states in some areas, lol.

Lordganon 23:09, January 31, 2011 (UTC)

In the US, I was thinking South or Southwest.

I think I don't want in on Asia or Africa much now that I think about it. Ownerzmcown 23:12, January 31, 2011 (UTC)

Yeah, that's a touch daunting, lol.

South/Southwest...... Well, for starters, is open for adoption. Kinda a lawless frontier thing in Arizona. Note that all of these are city-states - there is no room for more than that in NA, in that region anyways.

Past that, from various articles.....


 * Georgetown, as seen in other articles, in South Carolina.
 * Silver City, a haven for outlaws and the like, in New Mexico.
 * Pine Bluff and Hope in Arkansas.
 * Apalachicola, in Florida.
 * Greenville or Kannapolis in North Carolina (there's also a ton of tiny communities, if you look at the North Carolina article)
 * Darien or Toccoa in Georgia.

And some ideas from my own lists....


 * Something in the area of Stone County, Arkansas.
 * St. Joseph or Hannibal, Missouri.
 * Guymon or Bartlesville, Oklahoma.
 * Vicksburg, Mississippi.

Texas and Louisiana are full, unless you can sucker Brian into letting you edit one of his Texas ones, lol.

Hope this helps.

Lordganon 23:43, January 31, 2011 (UTC)

I notice the southern coast doesn't appear to have been hit. Ownerzmcown 00:06, February 1, 2011 (UTC)

A lot of it wasn't directly hit, but for the most part it's been established that a fair amount was effected by refugees and radiation. Truth be told, most of the intact coastline on the Gulf is already part of organized states. Apalachicola is pretty well the only one the definitely exists on the coast there.

Off hand, I can only think of one more that would survive: Gulf Shores, Alabama. Texas and Lousiana are done, Missisipi and Alabama, as things stand, hand theirs largely destroyed, and Florida is pretty well either destroyed or in North Florida (out of Gainesville)

Lordganon 07:16, February 1, 2011 (UTC)

On second though I think I'll just stick with what I've got right now. Ownerzmcown 21:40, February 1, 2011 (UTC)

Why does everyone say that when I give them a list like that? lol Meh. Lordganon 00:07, February 2, 2011 (UTC)

Qu'il Tous
Heh. I'd be willing to do that, though I can definitely say that you'd be the one primarily responsible for it. I do like your basic idea, mind.

We do work quite well together, after all, lol.

Lordganon 05:42, January 27, 2011 (UTC)

Thank you very much! Ownerzmcown 14:05, January 27, 2011 (UTC)

All righty. Finished the war itself, in NA. Lemme know what you think.

So, how is all of this going to work, with boundaries in NA? I've got the Americans having captured more or less all of it, with minimal French support.

Lordganon 12:46, February 1, 2011 (UTC)

I would say the Americans would probably keep all of it, with France being more concerned probably with African and Asian colonies than in North America. Ownerzmcown 21:59, February 1, 2011 (UTC)

Glad to hear it. Lordganon 00:07, February 2, 2011 (UTC)

I also need a good map for Africa and North America. Ownerzmcown 01:46, February 2, 2011 (UTC)

North America I can do, readily enough. Africa, you'll need to tell me what areas would be french, in your mind.

Are you meaning a war map, mind? And what are the overall intentions towards Spanish America?

Lordganon 04:02, February 2, 2011 (UTC)

Just after the war, the article says, all of Britain's African colonies were given to France, so basically just work with that. But I'm not sure on South America, either Iberia would inherit them, or France would annex them after the Peninsula campaign. Ownerzmcown 21:31, February 2, 2011 (UTC)

Heh. Won't get the French much, then, unless the Brits manage to seize the Cape from the Dutch and the French get that. Until the mid-1800s no one really held much of Africa.

Considering all things Owner, otl the rebellions were already starting before the British naval losses atl happened. By the time the French secure control of the oceans to any great degree atl, things will have already begun to boil over in Spanish America. The rebellions would probably end up worse as well, because of perceived French domination and puppetry in Iberia. Past 1812, any fighting would largely be in vain, though I could see both still trying to keep much of it in Spanish hands.

Brazil would likely become independent as well, likely within days of them hearing of the surrender/capture of the Portuguese King.

Lordganon 03:53, February 3, 2011 (UTC)

I actually came up withe idea of Brazil and the rest of South America rebellion, receiving help from Mexico, and trying unsuccessfully to be defeated by France, Iberia, and the United States. Another idea I came up with would be like having a Britain and France on North and South America, in North America, it would be the US with France, and Mexico with Britain. And in South America it would be Argentina with France and Brazil with Britain. Ownerzmcown 04:07, February 3, 2011 (UTC)

Well, I honestly doubt the US would be able to help much. Nor that they would want to. Having different "client" type states is a good idea, mind - though I dont think the USA would really be one, more likely some sort of ally. But I really doubt that the French and Spanish could reconquer the area, especially when holding down all of Europe like that. Lordganon 05:31, February 3, 2011 (UTC)

A thought: I'd like for the HBC to keep their territories, for the most part. That would be a British-supported nation, easily enough. Some sort of concession as in otl with the otl borders too, but with the BC coast going to the USA. Thoughts? Lordganon 09:40, February 3, 2011 (UTC)

I'm sorry, but I don't know what HBC and BC mean exactly. Ownerzmcown 11:45, February 3, 2011 (UTC)

HBC = Hudson's Bay Company

BC = British Columbia

Lordganon 11:55, February 3, 2011 (UTC)

Sounds good, we can let the Americans get Lower and Upper Canada, and the Hudson Bay Company can keep the rest of its land. Also another idea I had was that Spain's colonies rebel, helped by Mexico and Brazil, already independent, and fight France and Iberian troops. Ownerzmcown 21:27, February 3, 2011 (UTC)

Works for me.

We can have Mexico gaining independence in 1812, with the rebellion in 1810 that started their war of independence succeeding because of Spain being more liberalized due to the situation with Napoleon there. The landowners support the rebellion, and it succeeds. Brazil becomes independent when Portugal surrenders. Mexican monarchy, Brazilian republic.

Lordganon 23:16, February 3, 2011 (UTC)

Sounds good I'll get started on it tonight. Ownerzmcown 00:37, February 4, 2011 (UTC)

Actually, come to think of it, unless you want the Portuguese royal family held hostage by Napoleon, it is likely that both would end up with monarchies. A Bourbon one of some sort in Mexico in the end, mind. Lordganon 02:22, February 4, 2011 (UTC)

Was about to do a map of North America, but remembered something - Florida we can assume went the US - that was basically a given, really - and the islands would stay with Iberia - but what about the boundaries of Mexico? Will they lose territory to the USA like otl? Way I figure it, that war was more or less unavoidable, as was its result. Lordganon 11:21, February 6, 2011 (UTC)

Florida would defintely be given to America at the end of the war, and Mexico would just have the territory it would have pre-Mexican Cession. They will go to war with the US, but that'll come later, probably 1840's like in OTL. Ownerzmcown 13:08, February 6, 2011 (UTC)

I made this map of North America, for modern times, a couple weeks back. Forgot about it, lol. I've got a file of state names and capitals for the US, Alaska, and Rupertsland as well.



Your work on the American-Mexican War reminded me, lol. I figured here, with more Northern reps overall, a version of the Treaty with more of Mexico in it - the one otl was appealing to the south, given the anti-slavery, etc. of Mexicans to get it passed - would have gone through instead. Alaska, call it more populated and controlled given Russian defeats in Europe, kinda similar in some regards to King's timeline.

Lordganon 11:09, March 19, 2011 (UTC)

I like the idea, and it gives me an idea for another war, I was thinking the Oregon War, US vs. Britain, US wins, and gets all of British Oregon. Thoughts? Ownerzmcown 12:08, March 19, 2011 (UTC)

Actually, I wrote the US as getting the rights for most of that area in the treaties following the earlier wars. The claims, though disputed, had been in place before then. As it stands, the US has about 2/3rds of the entire "Oregon Country." Lordganon 12:34, March 19, 2011 (UTC)

Good that sounds better, and Russia having Alaska is okay (No Palin, LOL), but I;m not sure what the name of that state abbreviated as SU is.

~Owner

It's more so that it's independant of Russia. Don't know how yet, but..... suppose it would depend on what path Russia takes.

SU = Superior. Neither of the two areas would be states on their own, and thus under other areas - but together, however, the situation changes to work out in their favor ;)

Lordganon 13:24, March 19, 2011 (UTC)

What about them getting independence amid the Russian Revolution or Civil War, whether or not they'd be communist is kinda a tough decision. And goof idea on Superior, and I'm presuming that NI is Niagara, right? Ownerzmcown 13:36, March 19, 2011 (UTC)

I like that idea, actually. Though, it makes more sense to have them as the bastion of the Whites from the Civil War, with the rest going communist, than the other way around. Whites controlled the fleets otl, figure that would be the same atl. And yes, NI is Niagara, lol. Lordganon 13:46, March 19, 2011 (UTC)

So is this just the map of NA after the Mexican-American War, or NA today? Ownerzmcown 14:09, March 19, 2011 (UTC)

Today. Lordganon 21:54, March 19, 2011 (UTC)

Another thought: To be a little more original, have about a different name for the treaty ending the War between Mexico and the USA? It was signed in a town just outside of Mexico City otl that is now inside the city - but how about a different town, instead of Villa Guadalupe? Would be lots of choices. Lordganon 11:50, March 20, 2011 (UTC)

History is full of insignifigant details, I don't see the point in just changing the name of a treaty. Ownerzmcown 13:24, March 20, 2011 (UTC)

Axis vs Allies (Map Game)
Hey Ownerzmcown, I'm wondering if you want to join in the Axis vs Allies (Map Game), a map game created by me. It's based on the Second World War, in 1933 when Hitler has just taken power. Thanks! PitaKang 00:42, February 7, 2011 (UTC)

Axis vs Allies (Map Game)
The Map Game is starting now. Have a great map game! PitaKang 23:09, February 8, 2011 (UTC)

Activity
Hey Ownerzmcown, I'm wondering if you're still interested in the Axis vs Allies (Map Game). If you are not, I'll remove you from the player list. Please respond ASAP. Thanks! PitaKang 23:16, February 13, 2011 (UTC)

Whoops, never mind. I didn't see your posts. Sorry! PitaKang 23:17, February 13, 2011 (UTC)

Ideas
Hey. I've seen some of your work on this site, and it looks good. I was wondering if you could give any advice for my Vicuña of the East timeline. As you can see, I have a good outline of events before the point where I can start making my own events rather than basing them on history. But I'm not sure what order to create the articles to avoid contradicting myself or wasting time. I'm used to this type of writing, having done it on Conworlds Wiki, but I am trying to create an extremely detailed timeline and am not sure of how to go about it. Thanks! Detectivekenny (Info; Talk) 07:30, February 14, 2011 (UTC)

Crisis
Message from USA to USSR, Canada, UK, China, Sweden, Turkey, Siam:

Currently, the US is at the center of a conflict with Mexico, Italy, Finland, and Germany. We need your help in defending from them, to preserve freedom and to make the world a better place. If you are with me, say so on my talk page. Remember, we need you!. PitaKang- (Talk|Contribs) 22:36, February 23, 2011 (UTC)

Byzantine Glory
Just wanted to leave you a note here before I forgot. I noticed that it looks like you're going to have the Aztecs survive into the modern era.

There's a major problem, however, with that. Note that I think it's possible to work around it, but it has to be dealt with.

Simply put, the Aztecs were a small warrior kingdom, who through force, managed to make all of their neighbors into their vassals. These vassals combined outnumbered them a great deal, as the Spanish showed otl when they used these people to aid them in taking the Aztec capital. Maps that show them controlling most of Central Mexico really aren't right, as that territory is newly conquered, or vassals, not long-held Aztec territory. Really, this had only happened under a couple good kings right before the Spanish came, and for most of its history the Aztecs had controlled only a tiny amount of territory outside their capital.

Basically, however, the Aztecs were like the Mongols, if any comparison is possibly valid, in that they conquered and vassalized lots of territory, very fast, and that a single bad leader would take them out, like what happened with the Mongols. A failed Spanish invasion would likely have similar effects on the Aztecs as time had on the Mongols.

Lordganon 11:58, March 26, 2011 (UTC)

Well then maybe I should add that they brought their vassals under direct control with their new Byzantine weapons. Ownerzmcown 13:33, March 26, 2011 (UTC)

Not quite that simple, I'm afraid, unless its a process that takes a very long time. There's just too many of them. Lordganon 13:45, March 26, 2011 (UTC)

But remember that the Spanish diseases would have affected them too, causing them to either hate the Spanish like the Aztecs, or just simply to have been wiped out. Ownerzmcown 13:56, March 26, 2011 (UTC)

Not saying that they wouldn't help get rid of the Spanish, but that they wouldn't just submit peacefully to the Aztecs afterwards. Lordganon 14:01, March 26, 2011 (UTC)

What if I just add the natives were too affected by the plague to help either side, and the Aztecs just spent the next decade or so subjagating the vassals into their empire. Ownerzmcown 15:42, March 26, 2011 (UTC)

Heh. Yeah, that sounds good, so long as you use the word "violently" and similar words to describe how it would go down - would not be pretty, given the nature of the tribal religions and what would have to be done for them to manage the takeovers. Lordganon 15:46, March 26, 2011 (UTC)

Revisting The Idea
Hey LG, I was just thinking about how we said we were gonna revisit the Macedonia vs. Serbia war idea in the spring, well the idea came back to me, and I was just wondering what your thoughts were now? Ownerzmcown 21:21, March 26, 2011 (UTC)

Just leave the notes on my talk page, I'll find'em faster, lol.

Spring to me is more like May, lol. Comes from being so far north, I'm afraid.

I figure, in light of the recent events in NA, we'll just hold off until later, and aim to have it start with a coup or something on some Serb holiday later in the year.

Lordganon 08:04, March 27, 2011 (UTC)

Sounds good. Ownerzmcown 11:04, March 27, 2011 (UTC)

Like I said, hold off until later. Your Glory timelines are making good progress, and I've got a few things that people messed up I have to fix, and maps to make for people, etc. May is more so spring to me, true, but I'm thinking the fall is best, lol - all the May comment was about was that to me spring only hit in May ;)

Aim for November 10th, the day that the last medieval Serbian state ceased to exist in 1540, for the war. The coup that we discussed, which would lead off to the war eventually, on maybe..... June 28th, the anniversary of the Battle of Kosovo in 1389? Dates like that are best because of it being the Nationalists overthrowing the government, and they would feel them incredibly important - something about "Serbia rising again" for the 28th, and the other one just being a good date in general. Few cooked up events done by Serbia, with responses from their neighbors, eventually leading to the war, in between.

We'll discuss what to do with Serbia later on, lol.

Lordganon 18:44, May 1, 2011 (UTC)

Constable?
I've been doing some thinking, Owner, and came to a decision. How would you like to be invited to join the admin team as a Constable? Means you'd get some rollback powers to help fight vandals. Lordganon 10:15, March 28, 2011 (UTC)

I would be truly honored, thank you. Ownerzmcown 20:01, March 28, 2011 (UTC)

You have been nominated. Head on over the to "request for user rights" page and accept it, as well as saying why you would like to hold the position. Lordganon 09:22, March 29, 2011 (UTC)

Ahh, good. You accepted it. Don't forget that you do need to explain a little about why you'd like the position, as well. Lordganon 12:35, March 30, 2011 (UTC)

Congratulations
Congratulations, you are now a Constable in the TSPTF. This allows you to showcase the TSPTF membership badge on your user page. Furthermore it gives you the rollback power on this wiki. In the History page of an article you will notice a new option called "rollback". This is an anti-vandalism tool. It allows you to quickly undo edits in case someone has made more than one edit to a page. By clicking rollback it will immediately revert the article to a time before the offending editor edited the page. This is your most important duty. By agreeing to be a constable, you are promising to do your best to patrol for vandals and trolls.

When you get the chance, please go to the TSPTF page, and sign up for some responsibilities. In reality, none of us have the time to devote to all of the duties that are expected of an administrator of the wiki. You are expected, however, to sign up for at least three responsibilities listed in that section. These are duties that you are agreeing to carry out to the best of your ability every time you are on this wiki. I'm hoping that by doing this the members of the TSPTF can efficiently share the work load of the wiki and gives us time for the real reason we are here. Since you are only a constable and do not have the power to delete or block, do not feel obligated to sign up for any duties you do not have the powers to do. Please inform myself or others in a position to do so if you see a problem that involves a needs for either of those things.

Again, congratulations on being elected to the TSPTF and good luck.

Lordganon 16:36, April 14, 2011 (UTC)

Thanks man, this is great! Ownerzmcown 00:20, April 15, 2011 (UTC)

Don't forget to sign up for responsibilities on the TSPTF page when you have the chance, Owner. Lordganon 16:41, April 16, 2011 (UTC)

Qu'il Tous
Well, the American Civil War, considering all the extra "free" states the USA has, more than likely wouldn't happen. At most, I would say a rebellion in South Carolina, but probably not even that. Avoid the whole thing entirely, in my opinion.

Besides that, the only other real wars fought in that time-frame otl were the first couple wars of German Unification, the Danish-Prussian War and the Austro-Prussian War were fought in the 1860s. Some sort of war in that area of the world - note, I've no idea what the current plan there is - would be good, over some of the same issues.

Lordganon 17:44, April 18, 2011 (UTC)

Heh. Noticed those undos that you did - you have powers now, you could have just rolled it all back, lol.

Well, Prussia is much weaker atl than it is otl in the 1860s, so they would more than likely lose such a war, and badly. Doubt they'd fight Denmark, either. It's a touch more likely that it would be Prussia and Austria against the Rhine nation, with a chance at Danish support.

Note, that the Hungarian revolts in the Austrian Empire otl, which were put down by the Russians otl, are very likely to happen here, and succeed. As an fyi on the whole matter.

Lordganon 07:25, April 20, 2011 (UTC)

Well, as a whole the Confederation, even by this time, wouldn't really be unified enough to fight off much of anyone. Prussia and Austria would likely make inroads, true enough, but once the French saw that the two powers were beating the Rhiners, they would - diplomatically, mind - force them to leave the entire matter as a draw. Don't know how you have planned Denmark-Norway in all this, but I'd have them back the whole matter against the Rhiners in some non-military fashion. In the aftermath of the war, angry at the debts taken on for nothing, and the increased taxes, the Hungarians, already angered by the same factors as in otl, revolt against the Austrians. Without Russian intervention like otl, it succeeds.

When you reply to this, please start a new "Qu'il Tous" section on my page, lol. Getting a touch hard to find it ;)

Lordganon 16:10, April 20, 2011 (UTC)

I wouldn't so much use the word "negotiate" as "demand" with the two sides retaining small conquests, maybe. But overall, I'm in agreement. Lordganon 08:31, April 21, 2011 (UTC)

Off hand, I'd say we need to get some stuff down on nation articles, lol. But, war-wise, there was a few wars in South America at the time, so maybe a war there. A war either in Russia, or involving Russia and the turks, sounds likely too. Lordganon 01:24, April 22, 2011 (UTC)

Well, I'll take the NA nations I've made the start for, and I figure you do the others you've started. Past that, we can just split them as we come across them. Lordganon 02:22, April 22, 2011 (UTC)

Go for it, though I would make it Madagascar, since the Boer situation, given everything, would be drastically changed. Heck, make that how the French get India and Aussie~ Lordganon 05:15, April 26, 2011 (UTC)

States of America 2
I would like to make a treaty between the FUS and the FSA and the CRA.

Bill Potter

Sounds like a good idea and I'm pretty sure just for WW2, right? Ownerzmcown 20:54, May 1, 2011 (UTC)

Macedonia-Serbia War
Well, that really depends on who fights the war. Serbia and Macedonia, obviously, but you know that Rhodope, Partium, and Transylvania will be in on it as well. Is there anyone else?

I know what area Rhodope will get, and know what areas Transylvania claims. The area Partium wants should be pretty obvious too.

Personally, I still think that having Macedonia become Macedonia-Serbia, or some such thing, is a good idea.

What were your thoughts on territory? Seem to recall you had an idea of what you wanted for Macedonia.

I'd also go with the name being the "4th Balkan War," myself. (WWI is quite often referred to, at least academically, as the 3rd Balkan War). I suppose maybe the "Third Balkan War" would work too, though I won't like it, lol. At the very least, calling it the "Macedonia-Serbia War" isn't really an option.

Lordganon 04:09, May 5, 2011 (UTC)

Well, I wouldn't call it either of those names, to be honest. Yugoslavia is just not possible, given the communist activities, and failure of that Kingdom, which make it something Alexander would not want to be associated with, and neither would his government.

The "United Kingdom of Serbia and Macedonia" does sound better, but given the boundaries we'd be talking about, would be really going into the arms of the Radical Serbs that had just been defeated. Macedonia is more of a multi-ethnic nation, and I feel that a name like this would just cause problems. At the same time, however, you have to keep the Serbs happy. Bit of a quandary, really. Myself, I would just stick with the current name, at least for now. If you want to change it, then "Macedonia" would have to be in front, without question.

Montenegro would be a must to be included in the Kingdom, as well - with the deaths of the old Montenegrin Royal Family in Paris, Alexander is, if not the heir, a very strong claimant to it.

Like I said before, there is no need to involve the Turks. At most, they'd be helping defend Bosnian territory. With our coalition against Serbia, they don't stand a chance anyways.

Bosnia - and maybe Croatia - would definitely get involved, though I only see them securing the part between them being realistic. Splitting it between them, of course. The part of Bosnia to their east the the Serbs took is a touch unrealistic, being much easier to defend.

Areas claimed/will be taken are:


 * Rhodope: Dimitrovgrad Municipality, and parts of Babušnica Municipality.
 * Transylvania: My map on that page is a touch off, I admit. But, it amounts to parts of South Banat, Central Banat, Bor, Braničevo, and Zaječar Districts.
 * Partium: Parts of South Bačka District, small parts of the Central Banat District, almost all of North Banat and West Bačka Districts, and all of the North Bačka District.
 * Bosnia and Croatia: Banja Luka and Doboj Regions split roughly in half between the two, all of Brčko district and parts of the other regions of the otl Republika Srpska going to Bosnia.
 * Macedonia: takes the rest, which is most of everything.

I'll work on a map roughly showing this later.

Also, a thought on my part. If you didn't already guess, the long-term future of those small states in Southern Albania is Greek annexation. Given that Serbia is the only real sort-of "potential ally" (not that it will/would ever happen atl, let me assure you) the Greeks has in the Balkans, I've got a proposal: In exchange for them not opposing Greek annexation of these areas, how would Greek blessing for a Macedonian conquest of Serbia sound?

Lordganon 10:22, May 6, 2011 (UTC)

Good, good. Hoped you'd like that deal, lol. Makes my planning easier.

I will try to come up with a better name for you. There's got to be something.

Yeah, I know about the Croatia thing. Given the Serb politicians that we are talking about, I think we can safely say that they would go after the Croats a touch, lol. At the very least, I see no reason why the Croats would let the Serbs conquer Bosnia. But, we can very well just have it be Bosnia and not Croatia, if you'd prefer. Would mean more territory for Macedonia in the end, lol.

Lordganon 12:45, May 6, 2011 (UTC)

Not a final map by any means - extremely rough - but this is kinda the thought:



Lordganon 14:14, May 6, 2011 (UTC)

Well, the UK is often called "Britain" because its name is actually the "United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland," and Britain is the island that most of the UK consists of as well. Not really the case here.

Yugoslavia is a name made up in the twenties, no reason why we can't do the same. Or, if my memory serves, there are other names for a country with the same idea that Pan-Slavs came up with in the same era, which will work nicely. Will get back to you on that.

Bosnia and Macedonia together, I'd think, would be their targets, though more so Macedonia. Even with some Turkish support - the Bosnia garrison, and supplies - they'll be roughly evenly matched. The Vidinites, who currently receive some sponsorship from Serbia, will see it vastly increase, and begin launching attacks, which when combined with their own claims and the Serbian nationalist claims on both of them - look at a map of "Greater Serbia" for more - will lead to the others becoming involved as well.

Lordganon 22:50, May 7, 2011 (UTC)

Well, you're forgetting that in many regards, Serbia is the equal or the better of Macedonia. A total blockade, even with some Turkish support - which I really would rather not deal with at all if we can help it - is really not likely, and a no-fly zone is probably not possible either.

Some sort of military threat by Serbia would be met by an equal response by Macedonia and Bosnia, with some sort of letter of Turkish support, with as much as they can spare. Remember, Turkey has it's own problems elsewhere and can't really commit much to help like that.

Following the exchange of threats, Serbia invades Macedonia and Bosnia, without a declaration of war. After losing some border areas, Macedonian forces, backed by Albanian forces, manage to stop the Serbs in their tracks. In Bosnia, the Turkish Garrison, Bosnian soldiers, and most likely some Croatian forces - I really doubt they'd just sit by and let a potentially hostile neighbor conquer another peaceful one, though they won;t do offensive operations or the like - fight a losing war, but eventually manage to stop them near the capital (kind of a siege, similar to otl but with a line of supply from Croatia and point west).

Feeling cocky, they get the Vidinites to launch their attack in Rhodope, with the aim of furthering their claims on Rhodope-controlled territory. Pretty obvious who does it, and it gets the other three in on it. About this time, the Greek offer goes through, allowing Macedonian troops to be moved from that border to the front. This allows them to counter-attack, along with Serbian forces having to pull out to fight the Partiumites, Rhodopians, and Transylvanians that are invading. In Bosnia a counterattack, after all of this, goes through and starts to push them back.

Macedonians, with their Albanian allies, are very successful, with their armor taking most of Serbia, including parts of Bosnian claims, which the Bosnians are not able to reclaim completely, though they do retake part of it and their original territory. The BSA nations (Rhodope, Partium, and Transylvania - don't worry about what it stands for, you'll find out in the next few weeks, lol) more or less stop at their claimed areas, though Rhodope, being the furthest south, does encounter the Macedonian spearheads at roughly its edge. Greece, per the agreement, gets the tiny Albanian states.

Air war is mostly a draw, until when the BSA nations intervene, adding their small forces to the fight. Naval war would eventually go to Macedonia and its allied forces, but not by much.

Something along those lines as an outline, with the details to be fleshed out later on. Thoughts?

Lordganon 09:30, May 9, 2011 (UTC)

Figured you'd like it. Won't be the first war I'm written all or part of on here, lol.

No doubt, that'd be a definite goal for them. Naval war will be entirely up to you for this one, lol.

Yeah, that map is kinda what I had in mind.

Well, it only really will involve nations under my watch, but it's an alliance that I've dropped a few hints around with regards to negotiations that will lead to its formation. Won't be involved in this, though some of its members will be. Stands for "Black Sea Accords." Of course, you're welcome to contribute when the proposal is made =)

Lordganon 10:45, May 9, 2011 (UTC)

I'd just like to point out that if that map is accurate, and Macedonia just absorbes Serbia, Macedonia will have about 7 million Serbs and about 2 million Macedonians. Not really a sustainable occupation I think. I don't really see any reason Serbia would attack Bosnia other than its alliance with Macedonia. And Serbia has a cassus belli for war, the Macedonian occupation of Serbian territory in the south, so why wouldn't they use it? Attacking without a declaration of war makes them a pariah state, when if they have justification they would be seen in the right by much of the international community. This would likely keep Croatia, Rhodope, and Transylvania out of the war and keep it between Serbia, Bosnia, Macedonia, and Turkey. Looking at it this way Serbia would be morons to act in this way.Oerwinde 18:10, May 9, 2011 (UTC)

These are the same nutjobs that started the 1980s wars atl, and the 1990s wars otl, coming back to power (well, their political descendants, but still) They've every right to attack Bosnia, and more, in their opinion.

The view of Macedonia is that the territory is rightfully theirs, as is the rest of Serbia. Won't be easy for them, but it'll work out. Both have equal justification for the area.

Rest plays out as planned above. Serbia, until the terrorist attacks in Smolyan and the Macedonian deal with Greece, will actually have an advantage. Not morons, just very risky.

Lordganon 21:59, May 9, 2011 (UTC)

I still don't see why they wouldn't use a valid cassus belli to get international opinion either on their side or at least split. A war to liberate occupied land would be much more acceptable than an unprovoked attack. They have to be competent enough to realize that.

And whats the justification for the Macedonian claim? Just imperialistic goals? I'm behind on the discussion so all I see is Owner wanting to create a new Macedonian empire.Oerwinde 08:21, May 10, 2011 (UTC)

The discussion has taken place pretty much since before Serbia was done, in several different locations.

The King of Macedonia hasn't dropped his claims to the Serbian areas of the former Yugoslavia, as per his status as the Crown Prince of Serbia, as well as being King in Macedonia. They've also had military issues over similar issues on several occasions - both claim the territory of the other. Macedonia isn't recognized in many fashions by the international community, and Serbia barely is - which won't last beyond a couple months of the new regime, I assure you.

By and by, the international community will ignore this war. Neither of the main parties are in the LoN, being barred atm, and none of their neighbors that are actually members will complain, each having a reason to see Serbia weakened. And the regime that will come to power in Serbia first will make Milosevic and his cronies otl look nice in most regards.

Lordganon 09:43, May 10, 2011 (UTC)

Heh. Left a message about that a while ago on the last war section we were using, lol. But, June 28th for the coup, and maybe November 10th for the start of the fighting? Both are dates significant to this type of Serbian nationalist, and I figure that's the kind of thing that they would do. Lordganon 11:37, May 10, 2011 (UTC)

Yeah, just gimme a couple days. It'll take several maps to get the general idea, have to hunt them and mark them, along with some historical research. Lordganon 06:02, May 12, 2011 (UTC)

Just a thought, Greece's support of Serbia is mostly to keep Macedonia in check, and due to Macedonia occupying part of both Greece's and Serbia's territory. Macedonia could use this opportunity to improve relations with Greece as well as their international standing. Rather than the Albanian territory, if Macedonia agreed to a timeline for the handover of much of the occupied greek territory, minus the heavily Macedonian settled area, which maybe could be like a jointly administered area? And in return Greece allows Macedonia's entry to the LoN, compensates Macedonia for any infrastructure improvements within the returned territory, and recognizes Alexander's claim to Serbia. Recognition by Greece and their allowing Macedonia's entry to the LoN would soften a lot of international opinion towards Macedonia and by and large would make them much more successful on the world stage.Oerwinde 08:23, May 12, 2011 (UTC)

We've discussed that in the past a touch, and agreed to let it rest for a bit. Currently, the idea of both having some control over much of the area (similar to the setup I put up in Thrace) with the heavily settled areas not included is on the table, though I forget where we talked about it. The Albanian deal is a start in maybe going in that direction. Lordganon 08:37, May 12, 2011 (UTC)

All right, invasion routes. There's several maps on wikipedia, I'll be giving you the links to them. Hunted through wars in the region, and figure I've got a bit of an idea where strongholds, etc. would be, or ridges, or the like. Note that between google maps and wikpedia you should be able to find out where the strongholds, etc. are.

Maps:

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/1/16/Kumanovo1912_marcossouza.jpg

From the First Balkan War. It's very rough, but it shows some features and avenues of attack, with locations that can be wiki'd.

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/9/97/Serbia-WW1-3.jpg

From the First World War. Shows some topography, and the main avenues of the C. Powers attacks. Not the best in the world, but it does give a clue as to things.

http://maps.grida.no/library/files/the-former-yugoslav-republic-of-macedonia-fyrom-topographic-map.jpg http://maps.grida.no/library/files/albania_topographic_map.jpg http://maps.grida.no/go/graphic/yugoslavia_topographic_map

Topographic maps of the region, for Serbia/Kosovo/Montenegro, Albania, and Macedonia. Advances, as a generally rule of thumb, aim to go along river valleys, and other lower parts of the maps, while avoiding the higher areas, at least at first, both because they are better-defended, easier to defend, and harder to advance in terrain-wise.

Other Notes, for strong-points/fortresses, and possible fates in the war here:

- Aleksinac, Ljubic very good defense position for retreating Serbs - Plocnik, Brus, Kraljevo, Kuci(esp) defense positions on Seb lines after counterattack or shortly thereafter - Kratovo and Kumanovo seems a good defense position for Macedonian lines after initial attack - Kosovo Polje, site of the Battle of Kosovo, was chosen for it being a very good defense position for defending. Serb lines after counterattack - Veliko Gradiste, Golubac strongpoint v.s. Trans~ - Sabac, Smederevo good spot for last strongholds, but Novi Sad likely the final spot of resistance - Pirot partially invested by Rhodope, esp. fort, than Macedonians come on other side and between them it is crushed

Will keep looking a touch. If you've a question about any of this, please lemme know. I know that those topographic maps can be a touch hard to read sometimes, lol.

Lordganon 12:55, May 13, 2011 (UTC)

Owner, do me a favor and tell me when you schedule this war to start. Trabizond and I were planning for the Sultanate-Trabzon War to occur sometime later this year, but that can happen whenever. That way there can be one war at a time and more Turkish resources available for each. So far this war is looking good. I'm looking forward to seeing it when its more complete. Caeruleus 22:46, June 3, 2011 (UTC)

For the record, what he said doesn't matter, as Turkey is not going to be involved in this. Lordganon 07:18, June 4, 2011 (UTC)

If you involve the MDL or Bosnia, Turkey will automatically be involved on some level. I don't expect large Turkish involvement though, assuming MDL or Bosnia are involved as your discussion mentioned. It will be primarily a Macedonian operation. Trust me LG, I'm not trying to impose here nor am I trying to change or hijack your war. I'm simply asking for some notification that's all. Caeruleus 15:07, June 4, 2011 (UTC)

No, they won't be. Simply put, you're not getting involved in this, at all, no ifs, ands, or buts. You have no control over Bosnia, so no, we don't have to deal with you at all. The MDL has not been mentioned, and will not be involved. Please actually read the discussion, instead of just glancing at it, and you'd see that. Apologies that this is on your page Owner, but he's not the type to read it anywhere else. Lordganon 21:20, June 4, 2011 (UTC)

I'm afraid I must agree with LG on this one Caeruleus, Macedonia would want to prove that it can fight a war mostly on its own, or at least without making it look like Macedonia can only fight a war with Turkey's help. Politically, I believe it makes sense. Ownerzmcown 22:12, June 4, 2011 (UTC)

Ok. That's fine. Though I think you're both missing my point about Bosnia. Turkey and Bosnia allies and Bosnia would probably need Turkish assistance to do anything significant. So while Macedonia would not be receiving any assistance, Bosnia probably would be. Btw, I hope you're involving Vlad in this discussion since Bosnia is his article. Caeruleus 06:25, June 5, 2011 (UTC)

We already have the permissions needed from Vlad. That's long been the case. Bosnia does not need any help from you, as the Croatians will be funneling supplies to them, also working within our permissions, as will others. Your Turkish Garrison will be ignored, for the most part, in all of this, especially during the fighting the Bosnians will be doing. Far as I'm concerned, there is no need to tell you anything, and I won't be doing so. Lordganon 06:46, June 5, 2011 (UTC)

That's why I didn't ask you. But that's largely what I needed to know anyway. I look forward to seeing it when completed. It's looking good so far. Caeruleus 14:26, June 5, 2011 (UTC)

Re: Making a Graph
Hello there. I have no idea how to make a parliament seating map. The one I made is only a rough and simple one I made. As for the sandbox, you just create the page. Your sandbox pagename would be User:Ownerzmcown/Sandbox. --NuclearVacuum (Talk) 18:08, May 8, 2011 (UTC)

1490, Dawn of a New World
Hi I'm Batmanary, and I would like to invite you to the Map Game, Dawn of A New World.

It is not a Colonization game, if oyou were wondering, but more than that, and it is player-turn, not player-country!

Serbia and Macedonia Kingdom Name
Benn hunting for these, as promised. Erred slightly in what I told you about it before - there is a severe lack of names that those patriots used, though I feel that they are out there and just in Serbian, so I can't locate them, lol.

So, been looking through Roman and Byzantine names, trying my best to avoid the Byzantine ones, given the Greek connections atl to that time. So, that in mind, here they are:


 * Illyria: An Ancient Kingdom, and after that a Roman Province. Covers 1/3-1/2 of the potential kingdom, but the name is more so used to refer to areas now in Croatia, which the old kingdom and province largely consisted of.
 * Dardani: Another Ancient Kingdom, and a Roman/Byzantine provincial structure. Varied in size, but covered at its largest Kosovo, reaching outside its borders on all sides. Usually used more otl to refer to Kosovo, however.
 * Praevalitana: An ancient Roman Province. Occupied what is now northern Albania, most of Montenegro, parts of Serbia, and a touch of Kosovo and Macedonia. Generally associated with Albania, however.
 * Dacia: Roman Diocese, from when those were the provincial structure of Rome, half of the former Moesia Diocese. Occupied what is now large portions of Serbia, Western Bulgaria, and Montenegro. Name, however, is much more often associated with the old Roman Province of the same name, which lies in Romania.
 * Moesia: Roman Diocese, from when those were the provincial structure of Rome, later split into the Macedonia and Dacia Dioceses. Stretched from the Danube to Crete, encompassing what is today much of Serbia, Macedonia, Greece, Albania, Western Bulgaria, Montenegro, and parts of Bosnia. No real problems with it other than age.
 * Illyricum: Praetorian prefecture of the Byzantine Empire. Encompassed a territory from Austria and Slovenia in the west, Hungary and Romania in the north, western Bulgaria and Macedonia in the east, and the Med. in the south. Dacia and Moesia were both part of this prefecture, as its sub-units, once again called dioceses. However, same problems to some degree as Illyria, but with the Byzantine aspects included.

Overall, the best names, territory-wise, are Illyricum, Moesia, and Dacia, in that order. However, they all come with problems, to some degree. Up to you if you want one of them or not. All are on wikipedia for your viewing pleasure.

Lordganon 11:25, May 12, 2011 (UTC)

You'd be surprised. Illyria is still used, to a certain degree, and Dardania is very much so a name used for Kosovo in a few corners currently - it's even used in a few of their more nationalist political party names. I've no doubt that all but Dacia - as I said, more used to refer to what is now Romania - have been used in some corners at one time or another. At any rate, four more names, slightly more modern - though I like Moesia myself, lol.


 * Velbazhd: Was one of the Serbian states that emerged for a short time after the Serbian Empire collapsed in 1371. Occupied what is now parts of Serbia and Macedonia, as well as southwest Bulgaria. Ottoman vassal for almost all its existence, gone in 1395.
 * Rascia: Name of the First Serbian Principality. Contained parts of what is today Montenegro, Bosnia, Croatia, Macedonia, Albania, and largely Serbia. Really not that suitable, however, given that it was in essence the start of the Serbian Empire, which doesn't fly well given the set-up atl.
 * Brankovic: Another 1371 Serbian state. Contained parts of what is now Bosnia, Kosovo, Serbia, Montenegro, and Macedonia, including the cities of Pristina and Skopje. While it did last until 1412, it was also named directly for its ruler, Vuk Branković.
 * Prilep: Another 1371 Serbian state. Contained parts of what is today Albania, Macedonia, and Greece, and was centered at Prilep in South-Central Macedonia. Lasted until 1395, but really not the best name for the state, territory-wise.

Lordganon 12:27, May 13, 2011 (UTC)

Remember that you're trying to create a pretty ethnic neutral state. That's kinda the idea for the really old names - they were in place before the Serbs, etc. arrived from the east, so there won't be any attachment to any one ethnic group over another. As a touch of an fyi, lol. Lordganon 09:47, May 21, 2011 (UTC)

TSPTF
Would you be at all interested in a promotion to a Lieutenant position? Lordganon 15:44, June 3, 2011 (UTC)

Perfectly all right, Owner. I'll probably ask again in a few months, but let me know whenever you feel that you are ready - you'll get the nomination from me in a flash. Lordganon 15:51, June 3, 2011 (UTC)

War Strategies
Well, that's a good plan in general. However, while it would work as you describe in areas further north, the Balkans are a touch too wide for a pincer movement of that size to be realistic.

Have the pincers lead off from the towns of Lipjan and Kamenica, in otl Kosovo, but atl are on, by my best guess, the Serb side of the border, though barely. Obviously, they aim for Skopje, with the intent of it being captured and surrounded. They do advance a bit all over, but definitely going further here.

At this, they have success to start, but they are eventually halted at the village of Studeničani, on the outskirts of the city, narrowly avoiding it being surrounded. They then slowly force them back when reinforcements arrive (here the Greek deal comes in), to otl Macedonia borders. From there, the dogpile allows them further a little later on.

Another attack, from around Podgorica in Montenegro, is also launched, with the initial aim of taking Shkoder, which they manage, and then they advance from there, hoping to help the Skopje campaign. The reinforcements, however, throw them back to Shkoder, besieging them in that city. Sometime between this point and the breakout into Serb territory north of Skopje, they take the city, and advance at the same time beyond it.

In Bosnia, again, two pincers. One, near the Croat city of Mostar but not going over the line, goes north, and another, coming from north of the Bosnian city of Zenica, heads south. Their goal, obviously, to surround Sarajevo. To a certain extent they manage this, but a small link remains open to Croatia at Prozor-Rama, where supplies and Croat volunteers come in. Past that, an attack gets launched on Sarajevo from the northeast, getting into its suburbs, but is beaten off when the Macedonian offensive, after the get to the otl Macedonia border, launches, and the Bosnians can counterattack from there. Won't be the entire Serb area of Bosnia that they capture, but should be a fair chunk of it.

About the only other things is that the Serbs, who atm are reigning in the Vidinites, supply and fund them after the coup. They conduct a bombing in Smolyan, after the otl Macedonian border is reached (more or less), with obvious evidence implicating them, and from there, the Serbs, leading to a Rhodope declaration of war. Note that about 1/2 of the Rhodope Army is stationed in military camps, usually closer to Vidin than not, and much of the rest is in Smolyan.

Transylvania is on record as saying they will fight with the Rhodopians in such an event. And where they go, the Partians must follow. After that point, the Serbs collapse as they try to defend themselves on all fronts.

Lordganon 22:17, June 4, 2011 (UTC)

!!

South Slavia sounds like a very good start to a name, lol. A bit awkward, maybe, but it actually doesn't sound too bad, lol. Hints at heritage, the former Yugoslavia, and a new Kingdom, so long as the right wording is used to not be just "Yugoslavia."

Hmmm.....

"Kingdom of South Slavia" - Јужна Славија (Južna SlaviJa) in Macedonian, Јужна Славија (Južna Slavija) in Serbian, and a rough equivalent in Albanian is Sllavët e jugut (means Southern Slavs, but close enough)

Must be two words, not one, however. Otherwise, it's just "Yugoslavia" all over again.

Heh.

Lordganon 23:00, June 4, 2011 (UTC)

Coup
You are correct, good sir - I'd forgotten the exact date. We had indeed placed the 28th as when it would happen. Can be inserted into the article very readily - I'll get to it sometime in the next 24 hours, unless you want to put it in the article and then add the newsbit for it to the main page and the news archives. Lordganon 03:10, July 6, 2011 (UTC)

Don't know how I screwed this up - no idea where I got that date from - but the Battle of Kosovo as actually on the 15th, not the 28th. No matter, I suppose - easy fix. Lordganon 21:57, July 6, 2011 (UTC)

It is done. Let the dice roll. Lordganon 22:27, July 6, 2011 (UTC)

For the record, I had the general making the coup take the entire National Assembly under his control. No one's getting out from there. Maybe some of the Provincial assembly members, but none of the federal ones. Lordganon

Suggestion
Hi Ownerzmcown! I can suggest that you add Carlos Ibañez del Campo instead Bartolomé Blanche in the list of commanders of the Fifth Global War (I think is a more probable candidate). Just if you want. jeje Regards! --Katholico 20:54, July 7, 2011 (UTC)

Qu'il Tous
Any thoughts on Europe post 1864? Or where you want the Rhine to go? Created articles for Austria, Hungary, and Prussia today, what to know if they can retake some land or not, lol.

And, thoughts on Africa and Asia outside of areas already written about?

Lordganon 03:16, July 19, 2011 (UTC)

All right, and thoughts on borders? Or if land will be regained by Prussia and Austria?

And, Africa and Asia?

Lordganon 01:46, July 20, 2011 (UTC)

Ætas ab Brian
Yeah, that name always gets me too, lol.

The author and creator is C II R, who signs posts as TEAKAY. One of the oldest timelines here, and probably the oldest one that is still updated, lol.

Lordganon 00:01, August 8, 2011 (UTC)

Axis vs Allies
Hi, Owner. As you may know, the original AvA is sadly defunct. The end had dissolved into a quagmire of space race, sports, inventions. In short, it was a hell of a mess. However, I have created a new AvA, the Axis vs Allies Revised. I am not going to allow what happened to the original map game happen here. As of such, I invite you to be part of my map game. I will also allow you to be a mod, since I have played many games with you.. Once again, I invite you to the new, improved, and revised version of Axis vs Allies. Sincerely, PitaKang- (Talk | Contribs)

Serbian War
November 10th is the day we were discussing for the fireworks starting.

That said, feel free to add events for the leadup. Need more of them, and as it stands right now I'm going to be busy with something else a touch longer.

Lordganon 00:15, August 29, 2011 (UTC)

Heh
Nice to see you, for sure.

To answer the question, Schonhausen is definitely in Prussia. I assume you're asking because of Bismarck? ;)

Lordganon 23:34, October 2, 2011 (UTC)

Heh. Thought so.

I've been working on that to some degree. Mostly in North America, mind, as we have a "modern" map for it, but nowhere else.

Well, first we need to establish borders, what countries exist, etc. I recall having said something before about that too, lol.

I can draw up a few modern maps for Europe, if you'd like. But, we need to first flesh out more of a history.

Lordganon 00:39, October 3, 2011 (UTC)

Well, I really don't consider another Mexican-American war plausible. More likely is a Mexican attempt to regain Central America, and an American intervention to save them. But another general war, no.

Suppose that answers the question - war in Germany it is.

On another note, I finished the lists of Prime Ministers and Governors of Rupertsland last night. Thinking I may do British PMs next, or have the various kingdoms I've set up get their monarchs more formalized.

More to think about, lol.

Lordganon 00:53, October 8, 2011 (UTC)

Way I figure it, The Rhinelanders are gonna get knocked down a peg. They're just a recipe for civil war if I ever saw it. All it would take is a dispute between the members over the guy in charge. Have a Civil War there while the French are distracted, and Prussia goes in and takes territory. Maybe another Asian War, and the Hanover region/Saxony seized, maybe. Have the civil war between the Bavarians and Hessians, maybe?

I figure a Central American war would be a Mexican attempt to gain back control, kind of a redemption after the loss in the Mexican-American War. Fighting through Guatemala, and American moves cause the war to end - maybe in exchange for the canal. And any canal, I'd prefer through Nicaragua - makes more sense, really.

Lordganon 03:33, October 8, 2011 (UTC)

Don't know why you'd think that. To me, it is definitely preferable that Prussia wins in some form. Simply put, the French and French-aligned states aren't going to win every time.

Overall, I'd like to see the Confederation eventually split into like 3 or 4 smaller states. Prussia'd eat off a bit of territory, and a bit would likely join the Swiss, but overall, a breakup into a few smaller parts. Bavaria, Hessen, and a couple-three more. I figure the next war is a good point to take care of it. Given the dates already established, probably in the 1870s - there's a few rulers of larger states that died then.

Figure I'll take care of the Central American War. I've been formulating a bit of a regional history, anyways.

Lordganon 14:31, October 8, 2011 (UTC)

Well, otl it got the way it did because, for a large part, they ran out of easy room on the mainland. Not quite the same way, here, with the land from both Mexico and Canada. Really, I can see something akin to the Spanish-American War happening - they do still control their islands in the Caribbean, right? - and them expanding influence in that area. Maybe an expansion of Liberia, to include more territory, too?

Another thing is, Latin America overall is more powerful/stable here. I can see them intervening in Central America a few times, propping up there a little maybe, mind.

Lordganon 06:53, October 9, 2011 (UTC)

Serbia and Macedonia
If I recall correctly, either Macedonia is building a Serbian vessel in its yards, or Serbia is building a Macedonian vessel in its yards. If my memory is not faulty as to the overall act, which side is building for whom?

Depending on who is building it, I'm planning on having it seized. That is, if my memory is right overall.

Any thoughts overall, too, as to events inside of Serbia, and overall relations, before I forget to ask?

Lordganon 07:29, October 23, 2011 (UTC)