Talk:Principia Moderni III (Map Game)

=Resources=

Archives

 * Archive 1
 * Archive 2
 * Archive 3
 * Archive 4
 * Archive 5
 * Archive 6
 * Archive 7
 * Archive 8

Industrial algo update
Due to us beginning to drive into the industrial age, the algo needs to be updated accordingly, With this having happened in PMII with decent success (and one of our redeeming qualities that someone always updates the maps usually) we will be replicating this here (support was shown by multiple mods a few of which were PMII veterans.) This will be represented on a map much like the Game map, but with the colors replaced to represent differing industrial levels and when they started. A Chart to represent will go below this post and just above that a map (currently in progress) will be posted to represented our first industrializers. In extenuating circumstances the chart can be superceded to show a change in industrial development quicker than represented on the chart but this will only be for Meiji, or rapid German industrialization efforts.

In the algo a n algorythm multiplier would be applied to all wars with the side with a higher stage gaining 10% extra for each stage higher they are. an example would be in a war between Britain and France, the British are 3 stages ahead of the French in terms of industrial development (for whatever circumstance caused this) the British would multiple their ending score by 1.3.

If anyone is wondering, currently industrialization will be mostly in europe with a select few nations outside of the continent it would be currently taking place (nations with a realistic reason to adopt it as such such as asian nations with a extremely anti-colonial attitude, or something along the lines of Japan.) Industrialization in the Americas (when stuff goes independent) will depend on how the territory is when it gains independence and will more than likely have to be handled on a case by case basis like the outside of Europe industrializers.

Stage 1

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

Stage 2​

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

Stage 3

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

Stage 4​

 * Experimental Railways begin to crop up
 * Stronger cements are produced
 * Steel and Glass are avaliable
 * A few colonies and nations will have rebellions in this period

Stage 5

 * Ironclads and Artillery become widely used in combat
 * Revolutions by poorer citizens in cities become frequent
 * Wide use of civilian and military purpose use railways

Stage 6​

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

Stage 7

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

Discussion
As Said Above, Industrialization aside from a few cases (and a case by case evaluation of tier jumps such as a US/German rapid industrialization, or a Japan Meiji or an Asian anti colonial reasoning) will be mostly within Europe and the Americas initially. As a relatively new person to the industrial tier buisiness i will be consulting PMII vets on how it was implemented but for right now due to ease the only two current industrializing states are France and Spain (and the other particulars will be worked out before another one joins the mix). Please bear with us while i gather the needed information to implement this properly.

The intended purpose of this is to prevent an unindustrialized state such as a disorganized tribe being able to deal a true and terrible blow to the Great industrial powers since this rarely happened, (and when it did it was usually due to vast numerical superiority, and even then it only happened once or twice). This is also to simulate a war and the vast advantages provided by industry in this case.

In the case of colonies, that can/will be handled by the mother nation. Plausibly most nations did not let directly owned colonies to industrialize (which is in fact represented by the fact that most colonies will be represented by the mother nations industrial colors). Colonies, under certain circumstances will be allowed to industrialize independently, and due to the access to technology and depending on their terms of industrialization (if they fought a 15 year war of independence like most of Spain OTL colonies) then industrialization will be a rather tough thing to propose to a new nation that would be essentially bankrupt right off the bat. Colonies that Gain Self rule or co-opting rule of any kind will also be able to industrialize in most cases due to the relatively open nature in which its being done. However a problem with this is how will you as a Colonial power manage your self ruling colonies industrial policy without inciting revolt.

This Era must be played carefully while the pertinent information is being discussed please be patient, but for now play on, enioy the game, and plan your moves Carefully

Map Issues
''' The issues of the previous map shall be cleared after each map to save up space, unless a discussion is still going on. '''

The map currently does not show the United Cherokee-Shawana Kingdom correctly. It also does not show my vassal state of Koasati either. The map here shows what it should actually look like. However now the Shawana are expanding into that civil disarray territory to its northwest, so add in that expansion too. Thanking you. VonGlusenburg (talk to Von!) 02:33, December 15, 2014 (UTC)

In the 1720 map, my Haejagang colony had expanded in total 2100 sq km from 1715-1719, yet on the new map it hasn't changed. Can this be fixed please? -Seiga  2014 December 18, 21:40 (CET)
 * In the 1725 map, the expansion from 1720-1724 (2500 sq km total) is missing as well as the previous expansion from 1715-1719. -Seiga [[Image:Miko THPW2.png|30px]] [[Image:Flag of Europe.svg|25px|border]] 2014
 * December 23, 07:37 (CET)

It seems I am being ignored here, but can someone color my nation and colonies? At this point other people, some of them including the map makers, are seizing my lands



. Mscoree (talk) 21:18, December 18, 2014 (UTC)

The Nehilaw have finally filled in that enclave for the 1725 map. Please add this. Shikata ga nai! 18:12, December 19, 2014 (UTC)

After confirming with MP, this is what my nation should look like. Feel free to color my half differently if you want, preferably my old color, not Spanish brown. Also note the part of Newfoundland that was mine, that someone colonized over. And while we're on the subject, probably a century or more of colonizing is missing in Dutch South America, and a decade or two in Newfoundland. Mscoree (talk) 02:14, December 21, 2014 (UTC)


 * Since Feud informed about this, I'm probably gonna have to say that I wouldn't have colonized Newfoundland had I known it was being colonized by the Dutch, I'm after all, not an idiot. However you forgot to add Dutch Benin, between Spanish Oyo and Croatian Dahomey, that should be yours too. S k y G r e e n 2 4 ( P , Q ) 17:21, December 21, 2014 (UTC)


 * Ah, that too. Thanks, Mscoree (talk) 17:27, December 21, 2014 (UTC)

MY CHEROKEE NATION ISSUE IS YET TO BE RESOLVED AFTER I BROUGHT IT UP A WEEK AGO. PLEASE FIX THE MAP ASAP! PLUS ALSO ADD THE CHEROKEE-SHAWANA's 10,000 sq km expansion into that civil disarray region to my nation's northwest. Thank you. <font color="#000000">VonGlusenburg (talk to Von!) 20:35, December 22, 2014 (UTC)

Ahhh you still haven't fixed my nation! It should look like this now in 1730. The Cherokee annexed the Cree and the Koasati. The Shawana expanded 30,000 sqkm (600px) to the north west. This new map shows how it should be. PLEASE FIX IT NOW!!! The map I have provided opposite shows exactly how it should look on the new 1730 world map with the annexing and the expansion. <font color="#000000">VonGlusenburg (talk to Von!) 02:19, December 28, 2014 (UTC)

Labelled


These great and wonderful maps have been made and labelled by Scandinator. Please be sure to thank him for his intense dedication and deep-level research that he put into these maps.

Cultural


Now, I will attempt to list the myriad of cultures that are represented on the map. To do so, I will go by continent.

It is finished! 01:34, August 1, 2014 (UTC)

Religious Map
Alright, added another religion map. Map is based off of the 1655 Map. Same rules apply: List all changes below in the Notes section.

18:46, October 17, 2014 (UTC)

<u style="font-style:inherit;font-weight:inherit;">Color Key

All regions are shown according to their plurality religion.

Catholicism is yellow; the Western Church nations are shown in dark gold, and Catholic states whose churches function independently of the Roman Church are shown in pale yellow. Ludwigism is shown in bright gold. Eastern Orthodoxy is orange; Oriental Orthodox sub-branches are burnt orange. *Reformism is red. Sunni Islam is lime green, Shia Islam is forest green; Ibadiyya Islam is dark green, Assafi Islam is bright green, and Paganistic Islam is mint green. The Mastorava is teal blue, Hinduism is sky blue, and Buddhism is dark blue; the Bon religion is pale blue, and Mongolian Buddhism is grey-blue. Confucianism is purple, while Shintoism is violet. Other "pagan" religions are pink; the Mesoamerican pantheon is light pink, the South American pantheon is hot pink, the North American pantheon is fuchsia, and the African pantheons are all dark pink. Other religions will be added as needed.

Notes
 * Added Charismatic Christianity and Mogul Khanate is now Charismatic king Trevor 1 of wales (talk) 12:38, October 3, 2014 (UTC)

Mod Event Grievances
Just so that it doesn't clutter the page, please post your mod event questions, comments and grievances here. This -should- be archived every five years.

'''A Council is brought up by the remaining Chinese warlording states, which seeing the advance and centralization of Manchu’s to the north and wishing to showcase a powerful united china to the outside threats, particularly Spain and Japan. The Warlord all unanimously declare that any further attempt by the advancing Manchu empire to take more parts of china will be met with massive force. Si-Chuan, Wu, Yue, Various high level elements of Yunnan, and Jin all show heavy support for this. Shandong and Hebei (the Two nations that formed out of the small Kingdoms decades ago) also show relative support to preventing further Manchu expansion.'''

This interesting, considereing the fact that Spain signed an alliance with the Yunnan last year, and also the fact when when Rimp asked to trade with the Si-Chuan, Feud responded and said no, but when Sky did it; the Si-Chuan said yes. Also, if all of China was against Feud was against China, they would stop trading with him; leading to an economic recession for Spain in Asia. Because of Feuds position as head mod, and has a huge interest in China, I am curious of how all of this to be, and for the "No modding in your area of interest" rule to be focused on, if it hasn't been already. Saturn120 (Talk/Blog) 16:43, December 14, 2014 (UTC)

Just so you know, Feud isn't actually head moderator. He is just a regular moderator. Tr0llis (talk) 17:20, December 14, 2014 (UTC)

I never said no to the trade before the event, i crossed out him attempting to trade with a state that literally just joined a coalition to keep him from spreading further. As for the no modding in your area of interest. that area is much further along in any attempt of me potentially influencing especially since im still on the coast and could probably barely get a message to them. As for Rimp advancing in china, this is not OTL. the OTL ming at the time of Manchu conquests had multiple revolts various other natural disasters and were essentially just ripe for conquest and exploitation in one fell swoop. Currently china is a collection of warlords who either want to be emperor of keep their independence leading to a general status quo. Anyone who upsets the status quo here is a target including me. If i go galavanting about and conquesting parts of coastal china they would all team up on me. Just because i have a few enclaves in China and a dream to take a bit more territory doesnt mean im constantly doing mod events in my favor.

The only reason your even bringing this up is the fact that its targeting Rimp.. who has been aggressively expansionist against Chinese warlord states of which there is a standard agreement to ally against anyone gaining hegemony. If it was me doing the same thing, you would say the coalition is justified and wouldnt make a single complaint about it. In fact if i ever attempt to mass conquest china you guys would call for an event exactly like this against me. The event has nothing to do with my chinese interests period since such a coalition can just as easily be turned against me to force me off Mainland China. This grouping is quite easily the start of a confederation type thing that more or less can target anyone who is a threat. Imperium, Japan, Manchu, and Spain. It does more harm to me then it does good

Now if they were truly against me, they would've outright declared war. But they merely declared that they were opposed to further expansion. Moreover, why is the Imperium included? He only controls the Mongol Empire. Why not Wu Empire? Is it because Wu is your little pet in China?

Regardless, this coalition is only against me to prevent me from further expanding. Certainly, I see no way how I can't revert this Anti - Manchu sentiment later on. Obviously, this sentiment will fall apart in the future. I am not saying they'll allow me to occupy China. However, I see no reason why I can't slowly and gradually allign with various Chinese states. RexImperio (talk) 05:15, December 16, 2014 (UTC)

=General Discussion=

What do we do with an honorary mod?
So yeah I'm back but I'm an honorary mod, so I'm wondering where exactly I stand in regards to my mod authority. I want to focus on the roles of mod events, neutrality Bringer, Air Breather and ASB hunter like EiplecOco and Feudal. So basically am I reinstated or not? No chance of me being a map maker anymore but my ability to look at a situation and be very neutral and unbiased is good I think.

But yeah other mods how do I stand with this all? I don't think we have precedent, but if an old/honorary mod did show up again in the past (like in pm2 I think it happened once or twice) then they got a flood of welcome backs, and it was like they never left, but then they left again. So far it ain't happened when the mod stays back for good. <font color="#000000">VonGlusenburg (talk to Von!) 00:57, October 31, 2014 (UTC)

Well, welcome back! I think that part of the difference is that the community shifted. The people who play PM3 are quite distinct from the people who play PM2 (whereas PM1'ers were very similar to PM2'ers). Thats not to say that there isn't overlap, just that you are a new face to a number of this game's users.

Furthermore, the whole idea of Honorary Mod really got messed up, in my opinion, when all mods of PM2 were granted Honorary status in this game. We had Mod elections to start the game off, so if you weren't elected then, then I would think that you would not be in the "official" mod status.

That being said, it seems that the mods are getting busier and busier and unable to make as many events as in the past (not complaining here, tbh), so you may be able to work on that. Additionally, the loss/impeachment of Ms has sort of brought about a space for a qualified fellow like you. Your position in the Americas is also a boon, as Europe is too saturated with players.

Best, 05:14, October 31, 2014 (UTC)

I'm in the same boat - I got modship at the beginning of PM3 and then ended up having to drop out for a long while. Honestly I probably couldn't handle being a full-time mod right now anyway but if honorary modship gives me any rights, I would probably throw a few bombs into the mod events every now and again. I wouldn't mind being a "universal chaos mod" whose job is to throw weird curveballs. Commandante Lemming (talk) 17:29, October 31, 2014 (UTC)

To become an actual moderator from the honorary moderator position you need to be voted in (again). Honorary modship is more for people who resigned or are inactive to the point where they are no longer a valid moderator. Mscoree (talk) 22:18, October 31, 2014 (UTC)

Can an actual PM3 mod comment on this? <font color="#000000">VonGlusenburg (talk to Von!) 06:14, November 1, 2014 (UTC)

Well, i don't know.the one mod that came back after being inactive was Pita, who came back intermittently in PMII, and never really established himself.he also never acted as a mod after he as declared inactive, so there is no precedent.--Collie Kaltenbrunner (talk) 14:19, November 1, 2014 (UTC)

From what I've seen, what I said is what we've been doing for previous honorary moderators who have considered joining as active moderators. Not to mention that all moderators are voted in, and the honorary moderators have not been yet. Mscoree (talk) 14:28, November 1, 2014 (UTC)

Well then can I come back as a mod? I'm back to full time now. Plus seeing all my experience at the job makes it an easy choice. <font color="#000000">VonGlusenburg (talk to Von!) 18:55, November 3, 2014 (UTC)

The Precedent was set, Nova tried to return once and we had a vote on whether to bring him back in or not. The Vote said no. So the mods would need to vote Von back in (which i assume hed win convincingly)

Im a she bub -Nova

Bavaria (Attacker)

 * Location:  +10
 * Tactical advantage: +5
 * Nations: Bavaria (L+5), Brandenburg (LV +3), Pomerania (LV +3) = 16/4 = +4
 * Military: +60+10+10+5+5+3 = +93/1 = +93
 * Economy: +60+10 = +70/4 = +18
 * Infrastructure: +20
 * Motive: +3
 * Bavaria: +3
 * Brandenburg: +3
 * Pomerania: +3
 * Chance:
 * Nation age: 0
 * Population: +7 +10
 * Recent wars: 0
 * Participation: +10
 * Number of troops: 12,000/12,000 = +1
 * Total: +181

Acolapissa

 * Location:  +25
 * Tactical advantage: +3
 * Nations: Acolapissa (L+5) = 5/1 = +5
 * Military: +6 -5 =+1/93 = 0
 * Economy: +6 -2 = +4/70= 0
 * Infrastructure: +7
 * Motive: +9
 * Chance:
 * Nation age: 0
 * Population: +4
 * Recent wars: 0
 * Participation: +10
 * Number of troops: 0
 * Total: +63

Result

 * ((181/(181+63))*2)-1 = 48%
 * (48)*(1-1/(2*2)) = 36%

Discussion
Two year war and Acolapissa is kill. Feel free to post suggestions to the algo.

Where's Acolapissa?

Post_Mississippia_Collapse_labeled.png

Number 34 on that map. Cookiedamage (talk) 13:47, November 1, 2014 (UTC)

Colonies
Why were all my colonies removed from the map? Mscoree (talk) 18:47, November 2, 2014 (UTC)

They were collapsed due to the lack of a centralized government and strong support of another nation ( I think one of the African ones is going to be a tribal state) Sine dei gloriem &#34;Ex Initio Terrae&#34; (talk) 19:08, November 2, 2014 (UTC)

But I do have a centralized government, and all my colonies are being supported by the Netherlands and Hamburg. Do you meant to tell me that neither the Netherlands or Hamburg is capable of having colonies, or has a decentralized government? Mscoree (talk) 19:11, November 2, 2014 (UTC)

EH dont look ah me i didnt made The event lel Sine dei gloriem &#34;Ex Initio Terrae&#34; (talk)

There was no event! Someone just edited the map one day and removed them all. Can you please fix this map error? Mscoree (talk) 19:16, November 2, 2014 (UTC)

Overthrowing Hated Leader
I noticed that recently there was an event to break Westphalia into several states in protest of being ruled by a foreigner. Since Luxembourg is running rampant under a hated ruler, I believe it's only fair that we break them up to, for plausibility's sake. As such, I propose the following event:



In Luxembourg, after a long period of occupation by the Austrian and Westphalian forces, and the recent enthroning of the previous Archduke of Austria and his family in Frankfurt leads to a series of uprisings throughout the nation claiming for the liberation of their nation. One of the uprisings is heavily crushed by a group of Luxembourgian military corps near the city of Luxembourg, leading to an all out rebellion that spreads rapidly in Luxembourg. The enraged people of the nation enters the lightly defended city and slaughters the loyalist forces in its path to the palace where they find the Duke and slay him while capturing his family and take them into rebel-held territory. Soon landlords reestablish the borders of most of the counties prior to Luxembourg's existence. They leave the Holy Roman Empire citing its “failure to protect its states and inefficient defense against foreign threats” and establish the Luxembourgian confederation, and request for Dutch, French, and Spanish support to defend their nation. Luxembourgian royalist forces manage to hold Luxembourg City (Any act of war by any nation towards any member of the confederation will be an act of war against all members,Vassalage is also impossible in a period of less than 50 years) (Score undoubled: Military: 10, Economy: 8, Infrastructure: 8 for all the nations).

Hopefully that shuts down the implausible mess that is Luxembourg being ruled by a Habsburg. Hopefully that helps, Harvenard2 (talk) 18:59, November 2, 2014 (UTC)

If i recall correctly tr0llis is Luxembourg, idk if Luxembourg is a mess, the culture is pretty much similar throughout the nation and it would be ruled by a Nassau member of the family not a Habsburg one. No reason for a revolt or uprising at all so not happening Sine dei gloriem &#34;Ex Initio Terrae&#34; (talk)

False Luxembourg is currently owned by Ms, and it is ruled by a Habsburg. Harvenard2 (talk) 19:13, November 2, 2014 (UTC)

Afaik as I know the treaty made with the Netherlands was that it was personally owned by the king of the dutch but it was Austrian, with Austria gone it would become of the king. Especially with the fact that the Austrian Habsburg monarch dead. Sine dei gloriem &#34;Ex Initio Terrae&#34; (talk)

Perhpas the worst place for a revolt to occur is 1670s Luxembourg. If you could have picked any nation that wouldn't revolt against a foreign ruler, it would be Luxembourg. Luxembourg has little to no cohesive ethnic or national identity, no tradition of native rule that has recently been broken to be replaced with foereign rule, isn't experiencing especial oppression or high taxation, and really has no reason to revolt. Luxembourg was and presumably is very much a buffer state and administrative division within a larger Austrian (and now Dutch) empire, rather than a seperate nation. Luxembourg has no reason to revolt. Secondly, this is before the era of nationalism. Popular revolts for liberation didn't really occur at this point, not without significant support from disaffected nobles, who receive all their privileges from the king and haven't suffered significantly recently. In short, a revolt in Luxembourg is a ridiculously implausible bad idea. Shikata ga nai! 23:13, November 2, 2014 (UTC)

I guess Kras missed my statement on chat, but for the record Luxembourg is owned by myself, not the Dutch. Mscoree (talk) 23:28, November 2, 2014 (UTC)

Hesse conquered them all, a half dozen player and NPC states and didn't have a single revolt. There was oppression and high taxation (given the squashing of resistance and the many expensive wars) and he got nothing. Then Hamburg liberates a single province smaller in size than Rhode Island and all hell breaks loose. You mean to tell me someone can aggressively conquer several nations and increase their size by 500%, but if a state retakes a small area that was theirs for years it collapses? Harvenard2 (talk) 23:37, November 2, 2014 (UTC)

Now we see the real motivation behind this. It's an overdone attempt to prove a point entirely separate from this event. Hence the fact that Harv, rather than actually referring to my arguments as to why a revolt would never occur in Luxembourg, focused on prior events that occurred in ''different countries. ''Again, Luxembourg has no separate national identity from the HRE and Germany. Luxembourg's noble class - the only group that can plausibly lead a revolt at this point - has no reason to be angered, especially to the poin tof immediately resorting to violent revolution. Nobles don't revolt unless their privileges are seriously under threat by revolting, they risk losing these same privileges. None of the ingredients for a revolt exist here; it's an attempt to prove a point that discards logic and plausibility. Shikata ga nai! 23:50, November 2, 2014 (UTC)

That was just a comparison. Harvenard2 (talk)

Oh mai gawd. I get it now. Harv isn't going against Ms, he's going for IATG. This has nothing to do with Luxembourg per se, he only wants to undermine the plausibility of westphalia revolting against Hamburg. It took me a while to figure it out. <font color="#50E0F0">Sky <font color="#50FF60">Green <font color="A00000">24 (Party,quotes) 13:43, November 3, 2014 (UTC)

Not really, the only thing I'm advocating for is this event. I was comparing it to Hamburg, how if he can have his province revolted away, then so should this. Hamburg's province revolting was socially accepted; the norm. If you think I am trying to advocate for it being returned to Hamburg then that's probably a reflection of how you actually think. Harvenard2 (talk) 14:00, November 3, 2014 (UTC)

Haha I just noticed this revolt took away land from multiple nations that they had fairly won in war and gave them to other players. This would be one of the reasons why I pretty much left. Somehow extremely bias things happen and no one cares. (If anyone would like to revolt all of Italy except Rome and make a random confederacy in which I am granted Lombardy again, that would be great.) Tr0llis (talk) 14:23, November 11, 2014 (UTC)

France

 * Location: next to the location of the war: +20
 * Tactical Advantage: Siege Equipment: 5
 * Nations Per Side on the War: +15  France (L), Rhineland (L) Africa(L) 15/3 = 5
 * Military Development: 60/1 = 60
 * Economic: 61 +1, /4 = 15.5


 * Much larger econ +10
 * Not lost previous last three wars +10
 * Larger Colonial Empire +5
 * Has Naval Dominance: +10
 * Nation Fully Mobilized +5
 * Mogadishu +1
 * Expansion: 0
 * Motive: 7


 * France:Economic Gains +3 + 4
 * Rhineland: +3 +4
 * Africa: +3 +4
 * Chance: 84.49575 =9
 * Nation Age: Mature nation = +5
 * Population:Total: +28 (More than 10 times larger)
 * Participation: +10
 * Number of Troops: 120000 / 6000 = 20
 * Theaters of War: 0
 * Total: 184.5

Natchez

 * Location:  +25
 * Tactical advantage: +3
 * Nations: Natchez (L+5) = 5/1 = +5
 * Military: +6 -5 =+1/93 = 0
 * Economy: +6 -2 = +4/70= 0
 * Infrastructure: +7
 * Motive: +9
 * Chance: 84.49575 = 5
 * Nation age: 0
 * Population: +4
 * Recent wars: 0
 * Participation: +10
 * Number of troops: 0
 * Total: +68

Result

 * ((184.5/(252.5)*2)-1 = 0.461386 = 46.14%
 * (46.14)*(1-1/(2x2)) = 34.605 = 34.6 which means france can topple natchez in 2 years

Discussion

 * v French Cahokie begins Sine dei gloriem &#34;Ex Initio Terrae&#34; (talk)

France

 * Location: next to the location of the war: +20
 * Tactical Advantage: Siege Equipment: 5


 * Nations Per Side on the War: +15  France (L), Basse Bourgogne (L) Sardinia(LV) Artois (LV) 16/4 = 4
 * Military Development: 93/1 = 93


 * Not lost previous last three wars +10
 * Nation Fully Mobilized +5
 * Economic: 104 /4 = 26
 * Much larger econ +10
 * Larger Colonial Empire +5
 * Has Naval Dominance: +10
 * Mogadishu +1
 * Expansion: 0
 * Motive: 7
 * France:Economic Gains +3 + 4
 * Basse bourgogne: +3 +4
 * Sardinia: +3 +4
 * Artois: +3 +4
 * Chance: 84.49575 =
 * Nation Age: Mature nation = +5
 * Population:Total: +28 (More than 10 times larger)
 * Participation: +10
 * Number of Troops: 150000 / 6000 = 20
 * Recent Wars: -4
 * Total: 194

Chahta

 * Location:  +25
 * Tactical advantage: +3
 * Nations: Chahta (L+5) = 5/1 = +5
 * Military: +6 -5 =+1/ = 0
 * Economy: +6 -2 = +4/= 0
 * Infrastructure: +7
 * Motive: +9
 * Chance: 
 * Nation age: 0
 * Population: +4
 * Recent wars: 0
 * Participation: +10
 * Number of troops: 0
 * Total: +63

Result

 * ((194/(257)*2)-1 = 0.5097 = 51%
 * (51)*(1-1/(2x2)) = 38.25 = 38.25 which means france can topple chahta in 2 years

France

 * Location: next to the location of the war: +20
 * Tactical Advantage: Siege Equipment: 5


 * Nations Per Side on the War: +15  France (L), Basse Bourgogne (L) Sardinia(LV) Artois (LV) 16/4 = 4
 * Military Development: 85/1 =85


 * Not lost previous last three wars +10
 * Nation Fully Mobilized +5
 * Economic: 109 /4 = 27
 * Much larger econ +10
 * Larger Colonial Empire +5
 * Has Naval Dominance: +10
 * Mogadishu +1
 * Fiji +3
 * Expansion: 0
 * Motive: 7
 * France:Economic Gains +3 + 4
 * Basse bourgogne: +3 +4
 * Sardinia: +3 +4
 * Artois: +3 +4
 * Chance: 
 * Nation Age: Mature nation = +5
 * Population:Total: +28 (More than 10 times larger)
 * Participation: +10
 * Number of Troops: 200000 / 6000 = 33
 * Recent Wars: -20
 * Total: 204

Chickasha

 * Location:  +25
 * Tactical advantage: +3
 * Nations: Chahta (L+5) = 5/1 = +5
 * Military: +6 -5 =+1/ = 0
 * Economy: +6 -2 = +4/= 0
 * Infrastructure: +7
 * Motive: +9
 * Chance: 
 * Nation age: 0
 * Population: +4
 * Recent wars: 0
 * Participation: +10
 * Number of troops: 0
 * Total: +63

Result

 * ((204/(267)*2)-1 = 0.5280 = 53%
 * (53)*(1-1/(2x2)) = 39.75 = 40% which means france can topple Chickasha in 2 years

Scandinavia

 * Location: next to the location of the war: +20
 * Tactical Advantage: Siege Equipment: 5
 * Nations Per Side on the War:  Scandinavia, Iceland = 5/2= 3
 * Military Development: 40+10+10+5+5+3= 73/1= 73
 * Economic: 40+10+5= 55/4 = 14
 * Locations Bonus: 3+1+1
 * Expansion: 0
 * Motive: 7+5+5-5= 12
 * Nation Age: Mature nation = +5
 * Population: 28
 * Participation: +10
 * Number of Troops: 30,000/3,000= 10
 * Theaters of War: 0
 * Total: 157

Susquehanna

 * Location:  +25
 * Tactical advantage: +3
 * Nations: Susquehanna(L+5) = 5/1 = +5
 * Military: +6 -5 =+1/73 = 0
 * Economy: +6 -2 = +4/55= 0
 * Infrastructure: +1
 * Motive: +9-5+1= 5
 * Chance:
 * Nation age: 0
 * Population: +4
 * Recent wars: 0
 * Participation: +10
 * Number of troops: 0
 * Total: +53

Result

 * ((157/(210)*2)-1 = 0.4952 = 49.52%
 * (49.52)*(1-1/(2x2)) = 37.14 = 34.6 which means Scandinavia can topple the Susquehanna in 2 years

Discussion
Iceland has some  cool  moves. <font color="#50E0F0">Sky <font color="#50FF60">Green <font color="A00000">24 (Party,quotes) 20:05, November 6, 2014 (UTC)

Japan and Wu (Attacker)
Total: 142
 * Location: 20
 * Location Bonus: 6
 * Tactical Advantage: 6
 * Nations: L,L = 2
 * Military Development: 40+10(has not lost previous 3 wars)+10(naval dominance)+5(more total troops)+10 (fully mobilized)=75/1=75
 * Economic Development: 40+5(larger eco)+5(larger trade)=50/12=4
 * Expansion: 0
 * Infrastructure: 0
 * Motive: 7+3+4+4/2=9
 * Chance: 0
 * Edit count: 0
 * UTC: 0 =
 * Total: 0/0*pi (3.14159265359) =
 * Nation Age: 0
 * Population: 8+2
 * Participation: +10
 * Number of Troops: 0/0
 * Recent Wars: 0
 * Vassals and Puppets: 0

Min (Defender)
Total: 52
 * Location: 25
 * Location Bonus:
 * Tactical Advantage: 2
 * Nations: L = 0
 * Military Development: 12-3 (smaller armed forces)-10 (not initially mobilized)=-1 = 0
 * Economic Development: 14-2(smaller eco)=0
 * Expansion: 0
 * Infrastructure: 7
 * Motive: 9+4-5=8
 * Chance: 0
 * Edit count: 0
 * UTC: 0 =
 * Total: 0/0*pi (3.14159265359) =
 * Nation Age: 0
 * Population: 8
 * Participation: +10
 * Number of Troops: 0/0
 * Recent Wars: 0
 * Vassals and Puppets: 0

Result

 * ((142/(142+52))*2)-1 = 0.46391752
 * (x)*(1-1/(2*2)) = 0.34793814

Hey
Is there any decent nations I can take, by decent I mean ones that arent a colonization target and can at least expand a little bit. -Ashlee 22:41, November 9, 2014 (UTC)

The best option you have is to pick some nation in China. Why?

- Europe is full - America gonna get colonized. No hope of surviving without becoming someone's bitc... I mean protectorate - Australia going to get colonized - Africa is useless as usual (Except when Viva plays as Africa) and so, I won't suggest it - So yeah.. You got China

RexImperio (talk) 15:52, November 10, 2014 (UTC)

I think Africa isn't really useless if you play it right. But America is soon to be completely carved up, so if u are planning for the long term don't play an american nation. I'm only american nation because I wanna jump ship eventually. I'm trying to speed up american colonization and facilitate expansion.

Chinese states, Indonessian states, Cacasus states, Laos, Cambodia and African nations are basically what you have to choose from if you want your nation to last a while. I'd say go Cambodia, Zimbabwae, Tibet or Wolof. <font color="#000000">VonGlusenburg (talk to Von!) 00:14, November 11, 2014 (UTC)

I personally think it would be too late to play as Zimbabwe, since other European nations won't let you expand properly. I really wouldn't suggest Cambodia. Tibet has already been broken into three states [Kham, idk, and idk] and is quite weak with Eiplec trying to vassalize it. I am not aware what Wolof is.. Indonesian states is another bad option because a certain European nation plans to establish hegemony in the area. I believe Swank will be invading Caucasus states soon, so not a good option.

Tbh I'd suggest China. China has been fractured, and at the moment there is no major power in China. There are 5 players in China at the moment So basically, there is no major power in China. Pita wants to unite China and form his own nationalist empire. Me and Josh plan to do the same although Josh is allied with Spain and I am allied with Japan, and Yank doesn't do much. [Preceding comment added by (I'd assume) Pita]
 * Yankovic [Ming Empire]
 * PitaKang [Imperium of Heaven + Mongol Khaganate]
 * RexImperio [Machu Empire + Hailar Khaganate]
 * JoshTheRoman [Wu Empire + Min Empire]
 * Toby [Yunan][Inactive]

The Netherlands
Total: 202+chance
 * Location: (15+20+20+20)/4 = 19
 * Location Bonus: 2
 * Tactical Advantage: 5+2 = 7
 * Nations: Netherlands (L), East India Company (LV), Jehore (LV), Brunei (LV) = 14/4 = 4
 * Military Development: 80+10+10+5+5+3 = 113
 * Economic Development: 80+10+5+3 = 98/12 = 8
 * Expansion: 0
 * Infrastructure: N/A
 * Motive: 3+4+5 = 12
 * Chance:
 * Edit count: 0
 * UTC: 0 =
 * Total: 0/0*pi (3.14159265359) =
 * Nation Age: 5
 * Population: 7,000,000 = 9+10 = 19
 * Participation: 10
 * Number of Troops: 25,000/7,500 = 3
 * Recent Wars: 0
 * Vassals and Puppets: 0

Pagaruyung
Total: 61+chance
 * Location: 25
 * Tactical Advantage: 3
 * Nations: Pagaruyung (L) = 5
 * Military Development: 12-2-5-10 = -5 = 0
 * Economic Development: 14-2 = 12 = 0
 * Expansion: 0
 * Infrastructure: 7
 * Motive: 5-5 = 0
 * Chance:
 * Edit count: 0
 * UTC: 0 =
 * Total: 0/0*pi (3.14159265359) =
 * Nation Age: 5
 * Population: 900,000 = 6
 * Participation: 10
 * Number of Troops: 7,500/25,000 = 0
 * Recent Wars: 0
 * Vassals and Puppets: 0

Results
The Dutch East Indies coalition can topple the native state after two years of combat.
 * ((202/(202+61))*2)-1 = 0.5361
 * ( 0.5361)*(1-1/(2*2)) = 0.4021

Discussion
Made this at the request of Nk. 23:58, November 12, 2014 (UTC)

Sky for Mod
Recently, PM3 has been in short supply of competent or active mods, and that is a problem, as it impeds the active process of playing the game and making it move smoothly. As a result, I propose that we add another mod to the ranks, namely SkyGreen.

Sky is a competent and relatively plausible player, who understands the way algos work and some of the other more complex rules present in game. In addition, he has a calm demeanor and usually interacts with other players in a tolerant and understanding fashion. For those reasons, I nominate him as a moderator for PM3.

"<font color="#AACC99">This is not your grave  but you are welcome in it. " 17:04, November 14, 2014 (UTC)

For

 * FOR THE GLORY OF THE PARTY! 17:31, November 14, 2014 (UTC)
 * 21:50, November 14, 2014 (UTC)Crim de la Crème
 * Sine dei gloriem &#34;Ex Initio Terrae&#34; (talk) 22:54, November 14, 2014 (UTC) (Cause, Why not?)
 * &#34;SO SAYETH THE EAGLE&#34; - Fascist Eagle ಠ_ಠ (talk) 20:20, November 15, 2014 (UTC)
 * &#34;SO SAYETH THE EAGLE&#34; - Fascist Eagle ಠ_ಠ (talk) 20:20, November 15, 2014 (UTC)

For

 * Saturn (Talk/Blog) 18:21, November 14, 2014 (UTC)
 * -Seiga [[Image:Miko THPW2.png|30px]] [[Image:Flag of Europe.svg|25px|border]] 2014 November 14, 21:13 (CET)
 * SwankyJ &#34;The Italian Stallion&#34; (talk) 19:57, November 14, 2014 (UTC)
 * CNC1 Nod Emblem.png Aternix !? Atheism.png 21:09, November 14, 2014 (UTC) I think Sky would make a good and active mod. ;)
 * Shikata ga nai! 21:57, November 14, 2014 (UTC)
 * Blocky858 (talk) 17:04, November 15, 2014 (UTC)
 * <font color="#000000">VonGlusenburg (talk to Von!) 20:44, November 15, 2014 (UTC)
 * RexImperio (talk) 05:31, November 16, 2014 (UTC)
 * <font color="#000000">VonGlusenburg (talk to Von!) 20:44, November 15, 2014 (UTC)
 * RexImperio (talk) 05:31, November 16, 2014 (UTC)

Discussion
I uhh, accept this nomination. I mean I talked about it to MP, and I'm pretty much the only one who can be active 7 days a week since I'm not in college. <font color="#50E0F0">Sky <font color="#50FF60">Green <font color="A00000">24 (Party,quotes) 17:08, November 14, 2014 (UTC)

Btw shouldn't sine's vote be in mod votes? <font color="#50E0F0">Sky <font color="#50FF60">Green <font color="A00000">24 (Party,quotes) 23:24, November 14, 2014 (UTC)

It should i was distracted and put it in here lol Sine dei gloriem &#34;Ex Initio Terrae&#34; (talk) 04:09, November 15, 2014 (UTC)

What duties will you perform now new mod? Getting the 1685 map would be a good start in my opinion. <font color="#000000">VonGlusenburg (talk to Von!) 20:45, November 15, 2014 (UTC)

A lot of mapping, I'm really good at that. I'll also make a lot of events (I made a few of the recent ones too). I'll help keep the game alive then the college boys are busy, oh, and I'm hillarious. Expect entertaining and useful events (without Batman). <font color="#50E0F0">Sky <font color="#50FF60">Green <font color="A00000">24 (Party,quotes) 21:20, November 15, 2014 (UTC)

Retirement
It is with heavy heart that i tender my resignation from PM III. I simply do not have the time between jobs and school. I will remain on the wiki and will be happy to stay on in an advisory capacity. But unfortunately i must stop playing the game. I how to rejoin later but i am unsure. I ask that Britannia be treated with respect and should i return, remain a possibility. Thank you all for the wonderful time. FOR THE GLORY OF THE PARTY! 17:35, November 14, 2014 (UTC)

You will be missed Andy. Very missed. SwankyJ &#34;The Italian Stallion&#34; (talk) 20:00, November 14, 2014 (UTC)

Let it be written that there was great wailing thoughout the world on this day. Commandante Lemming (talk) 21:34, November 14, 2014 (UTC)

Today we lose a good player, a fair moderator, and an even better person. It was great fun with you Andy, I hope things get better. <font color="#50E0F0">Sky <font color="#50FF60">Green <font color="A00000">24 (Party,quotes) 21:57, November 14, 2014 (UTC)

Shame to see you leave man. I hope you come back again! <font color="#000000">VonGlusenburg (talk to Von!) 20:49, November 15, 2014 (UTC)

Great Powers (Attacker)
Total: 84
 * Location: 20
 * Location Bonus: 3+1+2+1=7
 * Tactical Advantage: 7
 * Nations: Damascus (L), Tartary (L), Roman Empire (L), Egypt (LV) = 0
 * Military Development: 20+20+20+20+10 (No lost wars)+10(Naval dominance)+5 (More total troops)+5(fully mobilized)=110/45= 2
 * Economic Development: 20+20+20+20+5 (Larger eco.)+5 (Larger trade)=90/68=1
 * Expansion: 0
 * Infrastructure: 0
 * Motive: 7+5+5+3 / 4 = 6
 * Motive Modifiers: -3+6
 * Chance: 0
 * Edit count: 0
 * UTC: 0 =
 * Total: 0/0*pi (3.14159265359) =
 * Nation Age: 0
 * Population: 8+20
 * Participation: +10
 * Number of Troops: (150,000+65,000+200,000+200,000)= 615,000/180,000 = 3
 * Recent Wars: 0
 * Vassals and Puppets: 0

Caucasus Confederation (Defender)
Total: 53
 * Location: 25+20=23
 * Location Bonus: 0
 * Tactical Advantage: 2
 * Nations: Georgia (L), Armenia (L), West Azerbaijan (LV), Assyria Major (LV), Assyria Minor (LV) =19/18 = 3
 * Military Development: 12+12+12+12+12-10 (Not mobilized)-5(Much Smaller armed forces) = 45
 * Economic Development: 14+14+14+14+14-2(Smaller eco) = 68 = 0
 * Expansion: 0
 * Infrastructure: 7
 * Motive: 9+3+3+3+3 / 5 = 3
 * Motive Modifiers: -3-6
 * Chance: 0
 * Edit count: 0
 * UTC: 0 =
 * Total: 0/0*pi (3.14159265359) =
 * Nation Age:
 * Population: 7
 * Participation: +10
 * Number of Troops: 180,000/615,000 = 0
 * Recent Wars: 0
 * Vassals and Puppets: 0

Result
(84/(84+53))*2-1=0.22627737226

(x)*(1-1/(2*2))=0.16970802919

Discussion
Work in progress, please do not edit. "<font color="#AACC99">This is not your grave  but you are welcome in it. " 02:26, November 15, 2014 (UTC)

Need help? <font color="#50E0F0">Sky <font color="#50FF60">Green <font color="A00000">24 (Party,quotes) 08:09, November 15, 2014 (UTC)

Fixed. <font color="#50E0F0">Sky <font color="#50FF60">Green <font color="A00000">24 (Party,quotes) 20:18, November 15, 2014 (UTC)

A-J(Attacker)
Total: 63+troops
 * Location: 20+20+20+15/4=19
 * Location Bonus: 2
 * Tactical Advantage: 6
 * Nations: Ayutthaya (L), Japan (L), North Vietnam (LV), South Vietnam (LV) = 16/10 = 2
 * Military Development: 20+20+20+18+10 (No lost wars)+10(Naval dominance)+5 (More total troops)+5(fully mobilized)=108/11=10
 * Economic Development: 20+20+20+18+5 (Larger eco.)+5 (Larger trade)=88/26=3
 * Expansion: 0
 * Infrastructure: 0
 * Motive: 7+3+3+3 / 4 = 5
 * Motive Modifiers: -3+6
 * Chance: 0
 * Edit count: 0
 * UTC: 0 =
 * Total: 0/0*pi (3.14159265359) =
 * Nation Age: 0
 * Population: 8+2
 * Participation: +10
 * Number of Troops: 0/0
 * Recent Wars: -4
 * Vassals and Puppets: 0

Cambodia (Defender)
Total: 51
 * Location: 25+20=23
 * Location Bonus:
 * Tactical Advantage: 2
 * Nations: Cambodia (L), Laos (L) = 0
 * Military Development: 12+12-10 (Not mobilized)-3(Smaller armed forces) = 0
 * Economic Development: 14+14-2(Smaller eco) = 0
 * Expansion: 0
 * Infrastructure: 7
 * Motive: 9+3 /2 = 2
 * Motive Modifiers: -3-6
 * Chance: 0
 * Edit count: 0
 * UTC: 0 =
 * Total: 0/0*pi (3.14159265359) =
 * Nation Age:
 * Population: 7
 * Participation: +10
 * Number of Troops: 0/0
 * Recent Wars: 0
 * Vassals and Puppets: 0

Result

 * ((63/(51+63))*2)-1 = 0.10526315788
 * (0.10)*(1-1/(2*3)) = 8.7% or roughly 8.7% of the total land owned by Laos and Cambodia is conquered in two years

For the one who made the previous algo, this is how you do the result algo (Results From 1st Algo)*(1-1/(2*Number of Year War Lasts)) RexImperio (talk) 05:38, November 16, 2014 (UTC)

Fixed the war to the correct amount of years. Saturn (Talk/Blog) 05:48, November 16, 2014 (UTC)

Discussion
Japan is well... Winning. Kind of. Made at the request of Sat. <font color="#50E0F0">Sky <font color="#50FF60">Green <font color="A00000">24 (Party,quotes) 22:26, November 14, 2014 (UTC)

Thanks for the algo, can I please know how much land I am able to take? Aternix !?  09:16, November 15, 2014 (UTC)

Results were done wrong, therefore I shall be fixing them. RexImperio (talk) 05:33, November 16, 2014 (UTC)

Thanks for fixing it. Aternix !?  21:25, November 16, 2014 (UTC)

Great Powers (Attacker)
Total: 171
 * Location: 20
 * Location Bonus: 3+1+2+1=7
 * Tactical Advantage: 7
 * Nations: Damascus (L), Tartary (L), Roman Empire (L) = 3
 * Military Development: 20+20+20+10 (No lost wars)+10(Naval dominance)+5 (More total troops)+5(fully mobilized)=90/1= 90
 * Economic Development: 20+20+20+5 (Larger eco.)+5 (Larger trade)=70/12=6
 * Expansion: 0
 * Infrastructure: 0
 * Motive: 7+3+3/ 3 = 5
 * Motive Modifiers: -3+6
 * Chance: 0
 * Edit count: 0
 * UTC: 0 =
 * Total: 0/0*pi (3.14159265359) =
 * Nation Age: 0
 * Population: 8+20
 * Participation: +10
 * Number of Troops: 200,000/150,000 = 1
 * Recent Wars: -6
 * Vassals and Puppets: 0

Caucasus Confederation (Defender)
Total:51
 * Location: 25
 * Location Bonus: 0
 * Tactical Advantage: 2
 * Nations: Caucasus Confederation (L) = 0
 * Military Development: 12-10 (Not mobilized)-3(Smaller armed forces) = -1
 * Economic Development: 14-2(Smaller eco) = 12 = 0
 * Expansion: 0
 * Infrastructure: 7
 * Motive: 9
 * Motive Modifiers: -3-6
 * Chance: 0
 * Edit count: 0
 * UTC: 0 =
 * Total: 0/0*pi (3.14159265359) =
 * Nation Age:
 * Population: 7
 * Participation: +10
 * Number of Troops: 150,000 = 0
 * Recent Wars: -2
 * Vassals and Puppets: 0

Result
(171/(51+171))*2-1=0.54054054054054054054054...

0.27027027... in 1 year. With the previous war (which was changed to 1 year but someone (mp) forgot to change the algo) it's over 1/3. Caucasia falls and will be split.

Discussion
Still in progress. "<font color="#AACC99">This is not your grave  but you are welcome in it. " 19:01, November 16, 2014 (UTC)

Mp wanted me to fix it, so I did. I expect a port there for Croatia for my troubles. <font color="#1C4081">Sky <font color="#00FF21">Green <font color="531F72">24 (<font color="A00000">P, Q ) 13:43, November 17, 2014 (UTC)

Well since Georgia was invaded just a while ago, I doubt its forces would not be mobilized. In fact, I have noticed that every single war that takes place nowadays has got 'Not mobilized' on the NPC's side.

This is plain wrong.. Cause if the NPC is going to have Not Mobilized then the Aggressor should also have motive as 'Lands etc' since if there is a valid casus belli, then both sides would have prepared forces. However, if the motive was being greedy, then certainly; the nation defending itself would be unaware of any incoming invasion. RexImperio (talk) 06:32, November 18, 2014 (UTC)

You are completely correct. The motive is, in its essence, greed. I just forgot to change the motive since I did a lot of changing around other stuff and when I calculated the need score for the anti-caucasus side I just summed everything up. So yes, the nation would be unaware of the invasion for that reason. <font color="#1C4081">Sky <font color="#00FF21">Green <font color="531F72">24 (<font color="A00000">P, Q ) 14:39, November 18, 2014 (UTC)

Japan
Total: 55
 * Location: +20 (Manchurian Enclave), +20 (Manchurian Enclave), +20, +15 = +19
 * Location Bonus: +2
 * Tactical Advantage: +2
 * Nations: Japan, Manchuria, Taiwan, Ainu = +5,+5,+3,+3 = +4
 * Military Development: +20,+20,+10,+10 (Naval War) = +67/118 = +0
 * Bonus: +10 -3
 * Economic Development: +20,+20,+20,+20 = +78 /115 = +0
 * Bonus: -2
 * Expansion: -3
 * Motive: +3,+3,+3,+3 = +5
 * Motive Modifiers: +4,+4
 * Chance: +8
 * Edit count: 1,019
 * UTC: 1:03 = 3
 * Total: 1019/103*pi (3.14159265359) = 31.0804166409
 * Nation Age: +0,+5,+0,+0 = 1
 * Population: +9
 * Participation: +10
 * Number of Troops: 67/84 = +0
 * Recent Wars: -2,0,0,0 = -2
 * Vassals and Puppets: (Not needed)

Hispania (Defender)
Total: 65 (Spain) 55 (Japan)
 * Location: +25 +20 +20 +15 +5 = +17
 * Location Bonus: +20
 * Tactical Advantage: +2
 * Nations: Spain(L) Philippines (L) Shanghai (LV) Qingdao (LV) Greater Cochin (LV) = +3
 * Military Development: +100 +10 +5 +3 =+118/67 = +2
 * Economic Development: +100 +10 +5 = +115/78 = +1
 * Expansion: 0
 * Infrastructure: N/A
 * Motive: +5 (not heartland but over 20 years) +3 +3 +3 +3 = +5
 * Motive Modifiers: +4 (Spain) +4 (Philippines)
 * Chance: +8
 * Edit count: 6277
 * UTC: 2:50 =
 * Total: 6277/250*pi (3.14159265359) = 78.83912
 * Nation Age: -5
 * Population: +9 +2 = +11
 * Participation: +10
 * Number of Troops: 84/67 = +1
 * Recent Wars: 0
 * Vassals and Puppets: (not needed)

Result

 * ((65/(55+65))*2)-1 = 0.08333333333
 * (0.08333333333)*(1-1/(2*3))/2 = 0.034 = 3.4%

Discussion
Japan loses the war, Japan loses 5% - someone needs to to a pixel count, btw. I don't know how to do that XD. Saturn (Talk/Blog) 16:15, November 18, 2014 (UTC)

Yeah.. Manchu aren't going to get involved in this war. You're going to mess up my 'Won all last 3 wars' thing U_U.. Btw 84 and 67 troops? RexImperio (talk) 06:10, November 19, 2014 (UTC)

Japan has a grand total of 14,194 pixels, according to the latest map. 00:45, November 20, 2014 (UTC)

Sat don't tell me you just gave up 482 px to Feud :/

Anyways... The Manchu are not handing over any land. Sat can give up lands from his vassals RexImperio (talk) 10:41, November 20, 2014 (UTC)

Nicobar?
Hey,

just a quick question about Nicobar... After the Lankan Invasion of Nicobar (being the indpendent country), the land I noticed in the algorithm (now archived) should be owned by him. However, I have also noticed that the island (OTL Car Nicobar) is not coloured as a Lankan controlled land. This leaves me with the impression that he no longer or never did own it, and after requesting numerous times for the colour to be added and it not being added, I feel like it is still an independent country.

Is this correct? Thank-you. Aternix !?  10:18, November 19, 2014 (UTC)

By the way, that was also my 1,000th edit. :D

Well, most likely the Map makers forgot to add it RexImperio (talk) 13:40, November 19, 2014 (UTC)

Great Nicobar, in all actuality, should be my color, as I had trading posts and colonists there over a century before anyone did anything else with it. I am that guy (talk)

Well haha.. That complicates things even more. xD Aternix  !?  05:34, November 20, 2014 (UTC)

Didn't Sri Lanka guy invade it sometime during late 1500s?

Yeah that's what I'm talking about. But it was in the early 1600's. Aternix  !?  00:32, November 22, 2014 (UTC)

Bajanate Coalition (Attacker)
Total: 177
 * Location: 20
 * Location Bonus: 0
 * Tactical Advantage: 6
 * Nations: Red Croatia (L),White Croatia (L), Poland (L),Carantania (LV) = 4
 * Military Development: 80+10(Naval)+10(no lost wars)+5(mobilized)+5(m0AR troops)=110/1=110
 * Economic Development: 80+5(Larger trade)+10(Much larger)=95/12=8
 * Expansion: 0
 * Infrastructure: 0
 * Motive: 7+5+5+3 / 4 = 6
 * Motive Modifiers: +6-3
 * Chance: 0
 * Edit count: 0
 * UTC: 0 =
 * Total: 0/0*pi (3.14159265359) =
 * Nation Age: 0
 * Population: 8+2
 * Participation: +10
 * Number of Troops: 300,000/120,000=3
 * Recent Wars: 0
 * Vassals and Puppets: 0

Kliment Bohemia (Defender)
Total: 51
 * Location: 25
 * Location Bonus:
 * Tactical Advantage: 2
 * Nations: Bohemia (L) = 0
 * Military Development: 12-3-10
 * Economic Development: 14-2=12
 * Expansion: 0
 * Infrastructure: 7
 * Motive: 9 = 0
 * Motive Modifiers: -6-3
 * Chance: 0
 * Edit count: 0
 * UTC: 0 =
 * Total: 0/0*pi (3.14159265359) =
 * Nation Age: 0
 * Population: 7
 * Participation: +10
 * Number of Troops: 120,000/0=0
 * Recent Wars: 0
 * Vassals and Puppets: 0

Result

 * ((177/(51+177))*2)-1 = 0.55263157894
 * (X)*(1-1/(2*2)) = 0.4144736842

Discussion
Bohemia falls in two years, idiocracy is overthrown. <font color="#1C4081">Sky <font color="#00FF21">Green <font color="531F72">24 (<font color="A00000">P, Q ) 15:18, November 20, 2014 (UTC)

Wu
Total: 73
 * Location: +20,+20,+20 /3 = +20
 * Location Bonus: N/A
 * Tactical Advantage: +6
 * Nations: Wu, Min, Yantai = 5,3,5/10 = 1
 * Military Development: 20,20,20 = 80/17 = 5
 * Bonus:+10+5+5
 * Economic Development: 20,20,20+10 = 70/22 = 3
 * Bonus: +5,+5 = +10
 * Expansion: +0
 * Motive: 7,5,5 = 9
 * Motive Modifiers: +4+5 (High Morale).
 * Chance: +5
 * Edit count: 1,291
 * UTC: = 4:48
 * Total: 1,291 / 448 * π = 9.05311632988
 * Nation Age: 5,5,0 = +3
 * Population: 8+2
 * Participation: +10
 * Number of Troops: 55,000 (Wu) 15,000 (Min) 7,500 (Yantai) = 77,500/50,000 = +1
 * Recent Wars: +0
 * Vassals and Puppets: (not needed).

X and Y (Defender)
Total: 64
 * Location: +25,25 = 50/2 = +25
 * Location Bonus: +0
 * Tactical Advantage: +1
 * Nations: 5,5 = 10 = 0
 * Military Development: 6*2*2 -7= 17/60 = 0
 * Bonus: -10+3 = -7
 * Economic Development: 6,6*2 -2 = 22/60 = 0
 * Bonus: -2
 * Expansion: -0
 * Infrastructure: 7,7 = +14
 * Motive: 9,3 = -3/2 = -2
 * Motive Modifiers: -10-5
 * Chance: +3
 * Edit count: 1,291
 * UTC: = 4:48
 * Total: 1,291 / 448 * π = 9.05311632988
 * Nation Age: +5,+5 = 10/2 = +5
 * Population: 17,000,000 = 8
 * Participation: +10
 * Number of Troops: 25,000 (X) 25,000 (Y) = 50,000/77,500 = +0
 * Recent Wars: +0
 * Vassals and Puppets: (not needed)

Result
(73/(73+64))*2-1=0.06569343064

(0.06)*(1-1/(2*1))= 0.03 so Wu win 3% of X + Y land after a single year at war.

Discussion
...

Its a tie what do we do? Saturn (Talk/Blog) 21:56, November 21, 2014 (UTC)

Perhaps when we take down you know who, we can aid Josh in defeating the Small Kingdoms. RexImperio (talk) 05:06, November 22, 2014 (UTC)

Voldemort joined PMIII? <font color="#1C4081">Sky <font color="#00FF21">Green <font color="531F72">24 (<font color="A00000">P, Q ) 10:35, November 22, 2014 (UTC)

.... RexImperio (talk) 11:15, November 22, 2014 (UTC)

Hmm... Don't you think the Mil and Eco scores for the X and Y Kingdoms would double? 6 + 6 = 12*2 = 24 like we do with all the algos... Unless you divide their 24 by 2 for no apparent reason for there is no mention of such a thing in the rules and addition of such a rule at this point would be blatant bias. RexImperio (talk) 11:20, November 22, 2014 (UTC)

Moreover, it is impossible for X and Y to have 12 score for Mil and Eco and 14 for Infra. It should have been 14 for Infra, 28 for Eco and 24 for Mil keeping in mind the development scores granted to NPCs and that Mil/Eco scores are doubled. RexImperio (talk) 11:58, November 22, 2014 (UTC)

Fixed the results. Wu has lost the war. Saturn (Talk/Blog) 13:48, November 22, 2014 (UTC)

I'm not sure who made this algo, but I beg you not to make one ever again. Now, X and Y lose and due to their disorganized status the max amount is multiplied by 1.5. So yeah, choose how long you want it to last. <font color="#1C4081">Sky <font color="#00FF21">Green <font color="531F72">24 (<font color="A00000">P, Q ) 14:28, November 22, 2014 (UTC)

Well this was easy. JoshTheRoman (talk) 17:47, November 22, 2014 (UTC)

Josh you just won 9% of their land, not 33.3% RexImperio (talk) 17:54, November 22, 2014 (UTC)

Holidays
<p style="border-bottom-width:0px;border-left-width:0px;font-style:inherit;font-weight:inherit;margin-top:0.4em;margin-right:0px;margin-bottom:0.5em;margin-left:0px;padding-top:0px;padding-right:0px;padding-bottom:0px;padding-left:0px;vertical-align:baseline;">Hello everyone,

<p style="border-bottom-width:0px;border-left-width:0px;font-style:inherit;font-weight:inherit;margin-top:1em;margin-right:0px;margin-bottom:1em;margin-left:0px;padding-top:0px;padding-right:0px;padding-bottom:0px;padding-left:0px;vertical-align:baseline;">So I graduated high school yesterday, and am going on an overseas holiday for a month to celebrate. I will try my very best to continue posting as per normal, but there is a chance I will not be able to. My current (1693) turn is fairly generic, and can be copy-pasted if someone would be kind enough to do so. Thanks, Callumthered (talk) 23:12, November 21, 2014 (UTC)

<p style="border-bottom-width:0px;border-left-width:0px;font-style:inherit;font-weight:inherit;margin-top:1em;margin-right:0px;margin-bottom:1em;margin-left:0px;padding-top:0px;padding-right:0px;padding-bottom:0px;padding-left:0px;vertical-align:baseline;">I envy you :(. I have to wait till June to get out and then high school is no more.

<p style="border-bottom-width:0px;border-left-width:0px;font-style:inherit;font-weight:inherit;margin-top:1em;margin-right:0px;margin-bottom:1em;margin-left:0px;padding-top:0px;padding-right:0px;padding-bottom:0px;padding-left:0px;vertical-align:baseline;">Congrats tho. If you want, I could copy + paste for you, and I promise I won't let my pro-Bavarian politics slip into your posts XD. Cookiedamage (talk) 00:49, November 22, 2014 (UTC)

<p style="border-bottom-width:0px;border-left-width:0px;font-style:inherit;font-weight:inherit;margin-top:1em;margin-right:0px;margin-bottom:1em;margin-left:0px;padding-top:0px;padding-right:0px;padding-bottom:0px;padding-left:0px;vertical-align:baseline;">I promise I won't mod event oldenburg into balkanizing... yet. Just kidding, have fun tho and see ya back in 1723/1724. <font color="#1C4081">Sky <font color="#00FF21">Green <font color="531F72">24 (<font color="A00000">P, Q ) 10:37, November 22, 2014 (UTC)

<p style="border-bottom-width:0px;border-left-width:0px;font-style:inherit;font-weight:inherit;margin-top:1em;margin-right:0px;margin-bottom:1em;margin-left:0px;padding-top:0px;padding-right:0px;padding-bottom:0px;padding-left:0px;vertical-align:baseline;">Congratulations, Callum! Have fun! Where are you going, and, more generally, where do Aussies go for vacation? (Haha, its summer for you.) 01:07, November 23, 2014 (UTC)

Rome (Attacker)
Total: 154
 * Location: 20
 * Location Bonus: 6
 * Tactical Advantage: 7
 * Nations: Rome (L), = 1
 * Military Development: 20+10+10+5-2=43
 * Economic Development: 20+10+5=12
 * Expansion: 0
 * Infrastructure: 0
 * Motive: 7
 * Motive Modifiers: +4+5
 * Chance: 8
 * Edit count: 0
 * UTC: 0 =
 * Total: 7066/(1*9*5*pi) = 49.9817256839
 * Nation Age: 0
 * Population: 10+20
 * Participation: +10
 * Number of Troops: 7500/2500=3
 * Recent Wars: -2
 * Vassals and Puppets: 0

Tuscacora, or something like that (Defender)
Total: 56
 * Location: 25
 * Location Bonus:
 * Tactical Advantage: 1
 * Nations: 1
 * Military Development: 6-3-10=-7
 * Economic Development 5/2=3
 * Expansion: 0
 * Infrastructure: 7/2=4
 * Motive: 10
 * Motive Modifiers: -5+4
 * Chance: 1
 * Edit count: 0
 * UTC: 0 =
 * Total: 0/0*pi (3.14159265359) =
 * Nation Age: 0
 * Population: 5
 * Participation: +10
 * Number of Troops: 0/0
 * Recent Wars: 0
 * Vassals and Puppets: 0

Result
Revolt is killed in one turn. (1693)
 * ((154/(154+56))*2)-1 = 46%
 * (49)*(1-1/(2*2)) = 24%

More will undoubtably follow. "<font color="#AACC99">This is not your grave  but you are welcome in it. " 21:26, November 22, 2014 (UTC)

Which number is it in the Native tribes 24, 25, 26 and or 30? Sine dei gloriem &#34;Ex Initio Terrae&#34; (talk) 00:30, November 23, 2014 (UTC)

None, this is actually me making up for a map error in previous ages. There are no map changes as a result of this algo.

"<font color="#AACC99">This is not your grave  but you are welcome in it. " 00:37, November 23, 2014 (UTC)

Thimogna then? :v

Attacker: Greater Japan - Manchuria
Total:  95
 * Location: +18
 * Location Bonus: +2
 * Tactical Advantage: +6
 * Nations: Manchu Empire [L], Hailar Khaganate [L], Empire of Japan [L], Formosa [LV], Yantai [LV] Ainu [LV] = 24/5 = 4.9 ~ 5
 * Military Development:  138/10 = +38
 * Military Modifer: 120 + 5 [Fully Mobilized], +3 [Moderately Sized Forces], +5 [More Total Troops], +10 [Naval Dominance] = 138
 * Economic Development: 127/18 = 7.0 ~ +7
 * Economic Bonus: 120 + 5 [Larger Economy], +5 [Larger Colonial Empire], -3 [Receding Econony] = 107
 * Expansion:  0
 * Motive: +7 [Hegemony]
 * Modifer: -3 [Non-demo Nations], +6 [High Morale] = +3
 * Chance: +9
 * ​Edit Count:  782 + 2429 = 3211
 * UTC: 1*6*4*0 [16:40]
 * Total: 252.191
 * Nation Age:  0 [Normal?]
 * Population: +8 + 2 [Population Modifier] = +10
 * Recent Wars:  -10
 * Military Strengh (Troops): 275,000/150,000 = 1.8 ~ +2
 * Puppets and Vassals:

Defender: Ming Empire
Total:  43
 * Location: 25+
 * Location Bonus: +1
 * Tactical Advantage: +1
 * Nations: Ming [L] = 5/24 = 0.2 ~ 0
 * Military Development: 10/138 = 0.01 ~ 0
 * Military Modifer: 20 - 3 [Smaller Forces], +3 [Moderately Sized Forces], -10 [Not Initially Prepared] = 10
 * Economic Development:  18/127 = 0.01 ~ 0
 * Economic Bonus: 20 - 2 [Smaller Economy] = 18
 * Infrastructure: 0
 * Expansion: 0
 * Motive: +9 [Defending Against Fatal Attack]
 * Modifer: +4 [Non-Demo], -5 [Low Morale] = -1
 * Chance: +5
 * ​Edit Count:  13,245
 * UTC: 1*6*4*0 [16:40]
 * Total: 1040.259
 * Nation Age: -5 [Ancient Nation]
 * Population: +8
 * Recent Wars: 0
 * Military Strengh (Troops): 150,000/275,000 = 0.2 ~ 0
 * Puppets and Vassals:

Result:
((95/(95+43)*2)-1 = 0.3768 or 37.68

(0.3768)*(1-1/(2 x 5)) = 0.339 or 33.9%. So the Ming are toppled after 5 years of warfare •-•

And on 1538, the Ming Empire had revealed it's aggressive nature and invaded the Manchu Empire. Thereafter, the Manchu were treated badly and so on..

And today.. Today the Manchu shall reclaim their lost honour. Today the Ming will be taught a lesson that the Manchu never forget and the Manchu never forgive. RexImperio (talk) 11:52, November 23, 2014 (UTC)

Oh and two other nations that also aided the Ming in 1538 shall also be punished... soon RexImperio (talk) 11:52, November 23, 2014 (UTC)

Discussion
So you big excuse is a war I wasn't even responsible for? Go f*ck yourself Rimp. Yank 21:15, November 27, 2014 (UTC)

It might be a good idea to pay a minimum amount of attention to the game. Enough that you notice when, say, someone declares war on you. Shikata ga nai! 21:39, November 27, 2014 (UTC)

He did not notice, Sat told him about the invasion on his Talk Page. Nevertheless, Ming would've been invaded whether Manchu were invaded in 1538 or not, because the presence of Ming blocks Manchu expansion.

Moreover, judging by your attitude; I personally believe I did a good job is conquering the Ming. Nevertheless your feelings regarding Ming are irrelevant to me for if you really cared about the Ming then certainly, you would have atleast added more than 'Ming expand Eco and Mil' to your turn, and even that is the lowest contribution you could do. RexImperio (talk) 04:06, November 28, 2014 (UTC)

I'm sorry about my attitude. It was uncalled for. --Yank 00:33, December 1, 2014 (UTC)

Rome and Cherokee(Attackers)
Total: 151
 * Location: 20
 * Location Bonus: 6
 * Tactical Advantage: 7
 * Nations: Rome (L), Cherokee (L) = 5
 * Military Development: 20+10+10+5-2=43
 * Economic Development: 20+10+5=12
 * Expansion: 0
 * Infrastructure: 0
 * Motive: 7
 * Motive Modifiers: +4+5
 * Chance: 8
 * Edit count: 0
 * UTC: 0 =
 * Total: 7066/(1*9*5*pi) = 49.9817256839
 * Nation Age: 0
 * Population: 10+20
 * Participation: +10
 * Number of Troops: 7500/2500=3
 * Recent Wars: -4
 * Vassals and Puppets: 0

Mvskoke Etvlwv / Creek nation
Total: 56
 * Location: 25
 * Location Bonus:
 * Tactical Advantage: 1
 * Nations: 1
 * Military Development: 6-3-10=-7
 * Economic Development 5/2=3
 * Expansion: 0
 * Infrastructure: 7/2=4
 * Motive: 10
 * Motive Modifiers: -5+4
 * Chance: 1
 * Edit count: 0
 * UTC: 0 =
 * Total: 0/0*pi (3.14159265359) =
 * Nation Age: 0
 * Population: 5
 * Participation: +10
 * Number of Troops: 0/0
 * Recent Wars: 0
 * Vassals and Puppets: 0

Result
Victory in two turns.
 * ((151/(151+56))*2)-1 = 45%
 * (45)*(1-1/(2*2)) = 33.75%

Disscussion
Hey so I've not done any of these new PM3 algorithms and not done an algorithm in PM2 for more than a year. Hence I'm asking for help as I'm rusty and can't really remember much about making these correctly. PLEASE HELP ME DO THIS ALGORITHM RIGHT. THank you for your help --<font color="#000000">VonGlusenburg (talk to Von!) 19:08, November 23, 2014 (UTC)

Finished as far as I know, ask me if there are any questions. "<font color="#AACC99">This is not your grave  but you are welcome in it. " 19:18, November 23, 2014 (UTC)

This looks good, I'm too lazy to look over it in depth. So yeah, rejoice peasants, the algo is acceptable. <font color="#1C4081">Sky <font color="#00FF21">Green <font color="531F72">24 (<font color="A00000">P, Q ) 17:09, November 24, 2014 (UTC)

Ok. Well then if that is the case the Creek are conquered! The Cherokee and the Romans will split up their nation in half equally. So the map would look like the map on the right. I have also added the Shawana to my colour to signify my dynastic union with them, which come 1700 will be a full personal union because the current Shawana King will have been killed and my Cherokee Prince and his Shawana Princess will become the new King and Queen of the Shawana. Then a few years later my current Cherokee king dies and then both the Cherokee and Shawana will have the same monarch. They will then unite the two nations together to form the United Cherokee Shawana Kingdom. Otherwise I will expand further into the former Cahokian territories which are in civil dissarray next to the Shawana nation. <font color="#000000">VonGlusenburg (talk to Von!) 20:28, November 24, 2014 (UTC)

Britannia Events
According to several users there is some sort of plan to collapse the nation of Britannia through moderator events. Worse yet, I have been told there is a plan for certain foreign nations to "establish hegemony" in the British Isles. If this is actually the case, I ask that the moderators please consider. Britannia has a player now and I don't think it's really fair to do this. I don't really care about bad moderator events, but (assuming what these handful of people tell me is true) I ask that attention be paid to make sure they aren't bias or excessive. Thanks, Tr0llis (talk) 23:46, November 28, 2014 (UTC)

As a mod, I have to admit it is unfair to Tr0ll to force his nation to suffer a series of events that allow the other 2 powers (Hispania and France) to attempt to do what they plan. However I do suggest that Tr0ll is forced to solve this problem by marrying off the recently widowed Queen Amelia. <font color="#1C4081">Sky <font color="#00FF21">Green <font color="531F72">24 (<font color="A00000">P, Q ) 23:49, November 28, 2014 (UTC)

This is why i said we needed to wars over britannia, one to oust tr0llis and one to do the civil war. Also france won't get involved, I'm interested mostly cause of calais (lel) but my concern currently is Cahokia. Furthermore Dat Britanny must fall Sine dei gloriem &#34;Ex Initio Terrae&#34; (talk) 01:29, November 29, 2014 (UTC)

That comment essentially proves my point.

In summary: Congrats, Tr0llis (talk) 01:41, November 29, 2014 (UTC)
 * Bias moderators who wish to make events "to oust tr0llis", ie kick out a new player simply because it's Tr0llis.
 * Bias moderators who are motivated by land acquisitions and personal gains.

To be Honest, No mod wanted you in that place anyway, maybe only Sky, So yes you are not welcomed in britannia and IDIOT, i said that i wasn't going to do anything any time soon, and that i wasn't in favour of bringing britannia into such civil war without a previous war on britannia (Which happened to be yours). Don't care if you are or not playing as it, I still want calais and will take it when the time comes. Don't make it any earlier. Sine dei gloriem &#34;Ex Initio Terrae&#34; (talk)

"No mod wanted you in that place anyway" etc, at this point you have confessed to being openly bias and are targeting me because of who I am. I'm not sure if I should be mad about that, or disappointed that no one is going to care. Tr0llis (talk) 01:56, November 29, 2014 (UTC)

If the mods want you out, then they want you out. it doesn't mean they'll be biased in doing so. Furthermore, I don't see any indication they do, just that in order to create negative mod events about Brittannia they would have to first get you out, which is true. It also doesn't, however, mean that they're being biased and targeting you with mod events. I'm pretty sure the Britannia events predated your becoming Britannia. I don't necessarily agree with them, I just don't think they're a manifestation of bias, only of a general desire to cause some chaos in a nation, which is a mod's job. Let's not incite a discussion about a possible civil war and its plausibility into yet another shitstorm about bias and conspiracy. There have been enough of those already. Shikata ga nai! 02:33, November 29, 2014 (UTC)

Part of the reason I thought the moderators were being bias was because of what some of the mods told me was about to come. The 1701 event comes to mind, which because of this thread most likely, Sine has not posted. Tr0llis (talk) 02:39, November 29, 2014 (UTC)

To answer the issue here, this was a decision taken by several mods when we saw how many people wanted Britannia. We decided that this had the potential for some interesting stuff to happen in the game. In truth, PMIII (and the PM franchise) is just another alternative history. A story. It's our job as moderators to keep the story interesting and intense for everyone. We decided that, in the interest of giving these people a shot at Britain (all of whom have a fair chance at winning), we'd spark a civil war that would basically spell how the 18th century would play out. Tr0llis, it would be highly appreciated if you would play the game, try to have some fun, and not be the little boy who cried bias. Thank you. Crim de la Crème 02:40, November 29, 2014 (UTC)

Except that is all an indirect way of saying what Sine said. There is no attempt at story telling, there is no even sides, or chances. This is about removing someone you don't like through moderator events. How is someone supposed to "play the game" when they sign up and right away their nation is destroyed, and all the worlds superpowers want to invade you? Again, I am mostly going off what some of the moderators have told me, I don't know the full story, but Sky for one told me to post this here, and told me that there was bias and bad events to come. I honestly don't really care, but I was told to make this, and now you're just trying to defend an opening bias (as some people have even told me) and unfair series of events. Need I remind you how you whined for days about ms causing a revolt in a small area of your nation, one which he could understandably have interest in? Now imagine if the world's superpowers did the same thing because they want hegemony in the UK. You guys are doing the same thing that ms did times ten in terms of bias events. You shouldn't even be making events about a rival like that, let alone one that some of you openly want to conquer in part. And why Britannia? They sit here and hardly expand, while Spain conquers half the world and gets no events? This is a very unequal distribution of events, and one clearly motivated by bias/personal want. Tr0llis (talk) 03:11, November 29, 2014 (UTC)

I know I'm not really involved in this, but I read what Crim said and cringed, because it honestly sounds like trolling. It literally sounds like an EA spokesperson explaining why they had to put a feature in a game, hell the part about storytelling sounded familiar, because they did. Storytelling, are you kidding me? Please explain how randomly breaking up the UK into individual nations is a right of your creative freedoms, while the Scandinavian union, one which in OTL was almost never united, cannot ever be dissolved? Please explain how when there was a revolt in Scandinavian Germany, based OTL and well written (storytelling if you will) it was disputed and disputed by your yourself. That's heavy hypocritical. If what you're saying actually is true, I'm sure you won't mind if in a century we do this exact same thing to Scandinavia? After all it's not about breaking up a rival, it's about storytelling. Norway and Denmark secede from Scandinavia after an assassination, because storytelling. Explain how it's "fair" to collapse a brand new player and then have said new player compete against the strongest nations in the game. Let me guess, it's a coincidence that certain nations want to annex part of said new player. But don't worry this is "fair", they will have an equal chance to defend themselves...by algorithm...against the worlds superpowers. Yes, Tr0llis, "play the game" and stop being a little bitch. Clearly this is fair, just accept the loss of your nation, geez. After all you don't want to be the boy who cried out against moderator abuse while he still had a chance, woops I mean, the boy who cried bias. Harvenard2 (talk)

Here's what I think on this whole issue: On one hand, employing mod events to intentionally break up a nation, whether or not you want that nation's lands, is bad. However, on the other hand, these mod events add flavor and interest to PM3, and throwing challenges at a superpower does make the game more interesting.

From what I recall, Britain was to be warred upon by several of the great powers in order to install one of their own nobles/royals (French, Spanish, Dutch, German, whatever) on the throne. In my opinion, that's a perfectly legit way of doing things. Waging war, backed up by an algo, to achieve a goal. Now, adding mod events to destabilize a nation, such as delivering algo penalties, revolt risk, etc., is mighty unethical to me. With that said, I don't see anything necessarily bad about the Queen Amelia event, as no penalties are noted. It's just a standard event. The British King is dead, but really, Britain is still just as strong as it was in 1699 and as fit as ever to partake in a war. As it stands, Troll, no one is booting you out of Britain.

Now, do people want you out of Britain? Yes. To be honest, you have quite a reputation on this wiki, and one that is held up by constant arguments on chat and generally argumentive behaviour.

To close out what I'm trying to say: The 1700 British mod event may have whatever ulterior motives, but the fact remains that it does not technically harm Britain nor give Britain any algo penalties. If France and Spain warred on Britain today, Britain would have the same chance at winning as they did in 1699. I enjoy the mod event and I think it adds a nice narrative to the game. Just like Crim said, alternate history is about making a story, so please don't squander that opportunity.

This mod event isn't kicking you out of Britain, Trollis. A war will kick you out, one which has a great chance of occurring.

Cookiedamage (talk) 03:37, November 29, 2014 (UTC)

The 1700 event wasn't really the problem, it's the 1701 events and beyond (which weren't posted, but were described to me) which seemed to be a lot worse. Note they weren't posted, so my complaint here is a lot more diminished, and instead stands as a call to attention in regards to future events. I agree with you a lot here, that it isn't really fair to weaken a nation through moderator events who you plan to invade soon. You're right that I am not kicked out (yet), but what I was saying was that the next events in the series (which again were not posted after I made this discussion) and the fact that people were going to take advantage of them, made it quite clear that being kicked out was imminent. I'm not trying to squander the opportunity to make alternate history, or whatever the case is, but at the same time storytelling needs to be plausible and fair. I would like to bring up an important point here; Scandinavia was allowed to self write their own civil war in their turns, so I believe I should be allowed to the same, perhaps as a sort of compromise. It isn't fair that Scandinavia can avoid being collapsed by promising to "have an arc" (basically do storytelling), but I have to be forcefully collapsed. For one I know a bit more about the situation it seems, and can write a history similar to Crim. If what you say is true, and you are both just looking out for the storytelling, surely you'll agree to me taking up the responsibility to write more myself? If that was the case for one it would be a lot more developed and expansive. So with that said, I ask that if anything, I should be allowed to write in a roleplaying type civil war, not be collapsed half heartedly by my rivals. Tr0llis (talk) 03:56, November 29, 2014 (UTC)

After reading this wall of text I have the following to say: <font color="#1C4081">Sky <font color="#00FF21">Green <font color="531F72">24 (<font color="A00000">P, Q ) 13:08, November 29, 2014 (UTC)
 * 1) Nobody specifically wanted Tr0ll as Britannia, but only Andrew opposed it. Moreover, both Feud and I agreed to see how he plays.
 * 2) However, Tr0llis didn't play. Although these events have some implausibility because they ignore some facts (such as the names of the members of the royal dynasty) Tr0llis has posted for the first time on Wednesday/Thursday.
 * So, although Tr0ll has a point that he is being targetted and that those events are flawed, he didn't actually react to any mod events. Mod events exist to force a player to react to them in order to avoid damage to their nation or to benefit from them.
 * 1) As far as I see it, Tr0ll still has the chance to raise Britannia from the ashes.

If I'm not mistaken I've posted about five times, missing a few in between. Regardless, as I said above, my main problem was not the events already, but the shape of the events to come. The moderators have obviously decided to give me a chance, and for that I am very grateful. The events that are already there, I will react to them to the best of my ability. As long as the moderators are aware that I am playing as Britannia, and if anything allow me to pen my own civil war in my turns. Tr0llis (talk) 14:31, November 29, 2014 (UTC)

I have a simple question.. Why does this all start happening the moment Tr0llis joins in as Britannia? There were rarely any mod events that negatively affected Britannia prior to this, and not only is this bias but is also blatant meta gaming.

'I'm pretty sure the Britannia events predated your becoming Britannia. I don't necessarily agree with them, I just don't think they're a manifestation of bias, only of a general desire to cause some chaos in a nation, which is a mod's job.'

No, these events did not take place prior to Tr0llis joining in as Britannia. Moreover, if it is a mods job to cause chaos in nations, then why was not Britannia affected by such problems prior to Tr0llis joining? In fact, the only thing Andrew would get every century or so, would be a plague and the plague used to become irrelevant an year later.

'We decided that, in the interest of giving these people a shot at Britain (all of whom have a fair chance at winning), we'd spark a civil war that would basically spell how the 18th century would play out. '

I'm afraid it would be plain unfair to target a nation because others want to play as it. If we were to go by this, should not Sweden cede from your already implausible Scandivanian Union since Eric wants to play as Sweden? Perhaps, next a couple of Mscronies could gather and declare they want to play as Spain. Then would Spain get implausibly targeted?

From what I recall, Britain was to be warred upon by several of the great powers in order to install one of their own nobles/royals (French, Spanish, Dutch, German, whatever) on the throne.

But was there any such thing before Andrew went inactive and Tr0llis joined in? No, there was not. Like I said, there is clear meta gaming for Britannia is being targeted right after Tr0llis takes over. I mean it would make sense to attack if Tr0llis replaced the British Royal Family with another or perhaps, left Westminister, but Britannia is still the same Britannia and the only change is that of the player

Just like Crim said, alternate history is about making a story, so please don't squander that opportunity.

You know, if someone were to make a Timeline regarding all the stuff that happened in PMIII, the Timeline would get more ASB Tags than Eric's Wreck It Ralph Timeline.

'This mod event isn't kicking you out of Britain, Trollis. A war will kick you out, one which has a great chance of occurring. '

And why shall there be a war? Was Britannia being invaded prior to Tr0llis taking over? No. Then why now? Will you think of an implausible reason to kick out Tr0llis from Westminister? Will you meta game to attack Tr0llis?

Now then, let Trollis play in peace. Oh and Harv, you may be next. RexImperio (talk) 14:53, November 29, 2014 (UTC)

@Rimp: Also, another thing, dear RexImperio. I might be wrong, but I doubt it. Are you doing all of this because you have some personal quarrel with some of the mods (like Feud)? Because defending someone just to go against someone else isn't really something that benefits your reputation. <font color="#1C4081">Sky <font color="#00FF21">Green <font color="531F72">24 (<font color="A00000">P, Q ) 15:33, November 29, 2014 (UTC)
 * 1) They did predate Tr0ll joining, as they are in fact connected to Andr3w777 retiring, rather than him joining. There were already ideas on the mod page prior to Tr0ll signing up. However the events were actually written down after he joined. Nonetheless, they were planned prior to that.
 * 2) I'm really not sure who else planned to take Britannia, this isn't for me to discuss.
 * 3) Because nobody wanted to mess with Andrew, because, although he was inactive, he always counted on me informing him about Britannia. On the other hand, we have Tr0llis, who didn't prove himself as a successful player, atleast not as successful as Andy... yet.
 * 4) Doubtful.
 * 5) Multiple answers:
 * 6) Because there can be a war.
 * 7) No. (look at 3.)
 * 8) Because they can.
 * 9) Doubtful, Westminster is worthless now anyways.
 * 10) Doubtful, because everyone has different goals.

Am I really that bad of a player? I was conquered by my neighbor/friend as Lombardy, I played successfully as the Netherlands for like a century before giving it back to Nk. Where did I go wrong? (Except I know the answer; it's not about my in-game actions, it's about who I am personally.) Tr0llis (talk) 15:48, November 29, 2014 (UTC)

Sorry Tr0llis, but all I meant was that Andrew was a better player than you. I mean, the Netherlands didn't develop as fast as they did under Nk. You got involved in the Baltic region, while Nk would have probably continued focusing on his overseas territories etc. <font color="#1C4081">Sky <font color="#00FF21">Green <font color="531F72">24 (<font color="A00000">P, Q ) 16:22, November 29, 2014 (UTC)

How did I get involved in the Baltic Region at all? I had a single war with Scandinavia which was over his colonies, although it ended in white peace. No territory was gained in the Baltics, meanwhile Spain outright invaded and toppled Livonia and France now owns part of it. I was pretty much the major power who was least involved in the Baltics. As for developing, when I was the Netherlands I was one of the most invested in technology and science. When I was the Netherlands half of the game's inventions were by me, and I was the top in research, along with people like Pskov and Austria. So far Nk doesn't appear to be doing that. As for expanding, under me the Netherlands gained like five colonies, a whole protectorate, numerous vassals and allies in Asia, something NK was unable to do. All while expanding the South America colony just as much as Nk did (the map hasn't been updated there in like a century, mind you). I successfully defended the Netherlands when people like Sine trollishly threatened to invade me (basically what they're doing now to Britannia), among a sea of people hated me. Don't for a moment say I didn't do anything, that's completely false. Maybe I didn't conquer half of Europe, but that's obviously not what NK wanted, he just wanted someone to keep the Netherlands together until he could return. I'm sorry if that makes me a horrible player, but I was just trying to do what was right. Tr0llis (talk) 16:33, November 29, 2014 (UTC)

If all what you said is true, then I was wrong and excuse myself. You're then a good player who is underestimated because of his reputation and personal relations towards other users, which is rather unfair. <font color="#1C4081">Sky <font color="#00FF21">Green <font color="531F72">24 (<font color="A00000">P, Q ) 16:37, November 29, 2014 (UTC)

Aaaaaand the shitstorm is here. TBH, I think the best solution to this would be to have a mod with a non-European nation who could kinda manage events in Europe, free from accusations of bias. It would prevent this sort of thing recurring. Shikata ga nai! 17:32, November 29, 2014 (UTC)

There wasn't really a shitstorm, in fact this matter was pretty much settled. Now that you've commented and opened up a can of worms on moderators however I see this matter will not simmer down soon. Tr0llis (talk) 17:35, November 29, 2014 (UTC)

Yeah I got to agree, if you think Britania isn't doing good and you have plans for it; then carry out those plans in-game! Have a war of succession or something. Not start using mod events to get your own way if Trollis doesn't want these things to happen like you want them to happen. You can't just force him out if he hasn't been playing very good (something which is very subjective anyway). Also I agree with Krasnoyarsk above about reducing the bias, doing something like mod events to remove kings is very naughty if the mod has a conflict of interest..... <font color="#000000">VonGlusenburg (talk to Von!) 17:51, November 29, 2014 (UTC)

I agree with Von, and I think I will be having some sort of succession war anyway. I have an updated family tree on my page, and hopefully there isn't any interference or made up people now that it's publicly displayed who is in my royal family. Thanks, Tr0llis (talk) 17:56, November 29, 2014 (UTC)

For the record all I own in the Baltic, is the city of Danzig, which is quite easy unless I was blockaded  by Scandinavia, it would be harder for me to have a city state in Vietnam or India than Danzig. Also I haven't read the events in 1701 :v Sine dei gloriem &#34;Ex Initio Terrae&#34; (talk) 18:22, November 29, 2014 (UTC)

This really shouldn't be an issue. Yes, this is about storytelling. Harv, the same thing has happened to Scandinavia in the 1600s. The exact same thing, actually. Maybe if you weren't busy trying to make it difficult for actual progress to be made in anything ever, you'd have noticed the massive civil war I had that lasted over a decade. We wouldn't have done this if Tr0llis was the only one interested. But several others were interested. So, instead of turning players down that deserved the position, we decided to make it interesting. The starting conditions will be fair for all British nations. These events have been tailored by almost every active mod we have and several other trusted players to prevent bias, though we figured you would wail like a toddler when you didn't get exactly what you wanted, Tr0llis. Crim de la Crème 19:14, November 29, 2014 (UTC) I opened up a can of worms? Really? The hypocrisy. As I said above, there's not really any bias here. After all Britannia technically doesn't receive any penalties from the events, and there's no proposal for a civil war to kick Trollis out of Brittannia, only a civil war after he's been kicked out by a perfectly legitimate in-game war. This whole thing has been blown hugely out of proportion by the constant accusations of bias. That said, I feel that playing the "bias" card would be more difficult in the future if this type of mod events were done by a mod who wasn't immediately involved in European politics. Shikata ga nai! 19:27, November 29, 2014 (UTC)

I meant opened a can of worms by stating your opinion on moderator ethnics in a thread which at the time was kind of wrapping up. Truth be told I only said that because I really hate it when people (mostly Sat) are like "lel oh look another shitstorm". Anyway, as I said many times above, the problem was the future events which weren't posted yet. "Britannia technically doesn't receive any penalties from the events" because they weren't posted. Moderators told me about them, and because of this thread they are no longer being used. Also your thing about the order of actions is completely wrong, given that the 1701 event, again it was not posted (but would have only like a hour later), specifically made states of my nation secede. This isn't after a war with me, it's to cause one. How come when there was going to be negative events for Crim, he got a pass because he elected to write them himself, but I can't do the same? I didn't even get a chance, next thing you know, negative moderator events occur, while some users (ie the mods) are apparently able to opt out of bad events by offering to add them to their turns. Crim keeps saying the events aren't bias because "all the moderators had input on them", which prompted me to look into the matter. At this point and time half the moderators actually agree with me, and the other half (the half that is bias against me/my rivals) still upholds that they are fair and were written by both sides. Furthermore I asked some of these moderators and they confirmed that they were not written by all the mods, some have specifically told me that they had no part in them. So which is? Even if it was true that everyone pitched in on them, at this point half recant that statement, and it is clearly not non-partisan. Tr0llis (talk) 19:43, November 29, 2014 (UTC)

Even though Tr0ll does have a point, I kind of want to play as ÉIRE REBORN and truth be told, the "first come first serve" system when signing up is kind of unfair (see, Lx Russia debate before the map game). Between that and the fact that this map game is supposed to tell an interesting story, I think Britannia should be broken up, to a certain extent. —Bfoxius (talk)

What did Britannia do to be broken up? You want it to be broken up so that you can have part of it. The Russian thing doesn't really apply here since Lx signed for "something in Russia" and the only conflict came when someone signed up as Moscow and everyone assumed Lx had met Moscow. From what I can tell though Lx has had a fine time as Pskov. As for Ireland why can't you ply as Ireland within Britannia? Furthermore I don't even know if Ireland was going to be something that became independent, after all the mods were under the impression that you wanted Britannia as a whole. Tr0llis (talk) 20:38, November 29, 2014 (UTC)

Westphalia
I was told by Sky to make this discussion here, to get a certain matter sorted out for good. I believe that over the past forty years there have been unfair and illogical moderator events targeting Westphalia, and because of the discrepancies in the events no one has been really sure what is going on in this region.

I signed up as Westphalia in 1661, after Austria had been destroyed. During this time Sine briefly instigated me on chat by hinting toward a future event to "take care of that [Westphalia]" and this was followed by an event in 1662, which collapsed my brand new nation right off the bat. Beyond that it also did or led to a lot of things that don't make sense, and has caused a great amount of confusion.


 * Every time I try to ask people about this they bring up something along the lines of "why would they join under a Habsburg/they hate the Habsburgs/they will never be ruled by a Habsburg". This is misleading however because I never once mentioned the word "Habsburg" in any of my posts. People tend to assume that my nation was ruled by a Catholic Habsburg, even though neither of those things were ever specified. The idea that they would never be ruled by a Habsburg brings me to the second point.
 * Even if I was specifically Habsburg, many of these states would be perfectly fine with that. Let's remember that all these states were de jure ruled by a Habsburg for centuries, but more importantly, the majority were actually pro-Austrian/Habsburg, anti-Hessian, or even previously ruled by Austria.
 * Let's summarize the states that revolted away because they hate Habsburgs/Austria:
 * Territories that Austria has ruled literally since the first few decades of the game. Small states that have been a part of Austria for over two centuries in some cases. I see no reason why these states would suddenly hate Austria/Habsburgs.
 * Strong allies of the Habsburgs who were heavily against Hesse. States like Trier, who is actually famous for his Austrian allegiance, and was a strong enemy of Hesse. For some reason, even though these states are pro-Austrian/Habsburg, and heavily against Hesse, they rebel in favor of Hesse.
 * NPC states which rebelled/fought against Hesse multiple times. States like Munster who had a series of wars to avoid Hesse, yet for some reason rebel in favor of them.
 * All these states were recently conquered by Hesse from Austria/Austria's allies/NPC's, and had recently been liberated by Austria. Why are they rebelling in favor of Hesse when they were just returned to their rightful owners, or at the very least removed from their enemy? This is like if France was liberated by the Allies in WW2 and then revolted to join Nazi Germany.
 * Hesse revolting against the above mentioned states I could understand, but for some reason all of the people against Hesse are joining them.
 * Despite the fact that at the same time Bavaria had doubled its size, conquering a dozen nations, and coming out with only really one revolt, and the fact that Spain also just conquered a giant area, the moderators decided to revolt almost all of Westphalia away on turn one. I can understand the argument that Feud and Cookie said, where the new states wouldn't revolt right away because they were just devastated, but how come that argument doesn't apply to me? Westphalia was just devastated by war, and for the first time in centuries, with maybe an exception being part of Hesse Proper, the region is actually not being occupied.
 * Worse of all this event declares that part of Hamburg Proper, part of Hamburg for pretty much most of the last 200 years, revolts as well. Hamburg just won another algorithm to liberate part of Hamburg Proper and for some reason it revolts to join their own enemies. That's like if there was a revolt in Pskov that caused Croatia to lose part of Poland. When Sine was asked about this he said the losses from Hamburg were "collateral damage".
 * These parts of Hesse were conquered fair and square through algorithms, yet they are taken away one turn in. The moderators made events to take away land from Hamburg proper and from me that was fairly conquered for the sole purpose of creating a nation for someone to play as. What if Blocky really wanted to be the Basque, so during a moment of Spanish weakness the moderators declared Spain erupts into new nation confetti, and the Basque part of France too for some reason, just to make that new nation for Blocky in the Basque region? I'm sure a lot of people would like their nations back, the people you conquered, but are we just going to start releasing Lombardy or Italy? Why do you make an exception here?
 * People complain that a Catholic ruler/nation shouldn't be able to rule over a Ludwigist state. First of all that is again assuming my leader is Catholic, despite the fact that I made no mention of that (there are Habsburgs of many different religions). Secondly, Ludwigism isn't even a majority religion everywhere in Westphalia. Some of the states in Westphalia are even ruled by archbishops and are heavily Catholic. In some areas they are Dutch Reformist. Where did I get that from? The fact that when Tr0llis was the Netherlands he wrote for dozens of turns straight that Dutch Reformists move into Westphalia, and the fact that Blocky himself wrote on the page for Ludwigism that some of his former states are now Catholic, and Westphalia as a whole has even converted away from Ludwigism. Now let's consider the fact that Austria, and the Habsburgs, was the most tolerant nation of Dutch Reformist other than the Netherlands, and repeatedly had royal marriages with Dutch Reformists. Even if my ruler was Catholic and a Habsburg, that would meant they are being ruled by the most ideal of Catholics, as the Habsburgs were repeatedly supporters of Dutch Reformists.
 * Again, consider the fact that before I re-conquered these states, they had a series of wars against Hesse, and that Austria and Hamburg were their main supporters. Why are they revolting against the people who repeatedly looked out for their interests, in favor of the people they had numerous wars with?
 * The fact that most of Westphalia revolts and for some reason leaves Frankfurt and Nassau as a sort of enclave inside it. If your actual intention was to overthrow the Habsburgs, who you claim these people hate (even though they largely don't), then you would have said there was a civil war in which the Habsburgs are overthrown, or would have forced me to have a civil war in my posts. In no logical universe does it make sense for every state of the union except the capital to secede and then leave the capital just sitting there. If they are angry because of one single guy in the capital, they'd obviously just deal with that one guy.
 * Despite that fact that Westphalia is in personal union with/being supported by both the Netherlands and Hamburg, who are both responsible for continuing support for Westphalia's colonies, the moderators decided to uncolor certain colonies. When I asked Sine about this he said that he "didn't make the event". I replied "There was no event! Someone just edited the map one day and removed them all. Can you please fix this map error?" Despite the fact that they were supposed to still be colored, someone decided to just leave them uncolored so that people could take them. To the best of Sine's knowledge, the person who started all this, they were never taken away, and it's not like the Netherlands and Hamburg are unable to together hold up the colonies, so that should be fixed.
 * The moderators make all the rebelling states count as independent states, despite being in a confederacy like Switzerland, solely so that I cannot combat them in any form.
 * Every time I bring this up people delete it off the talk page. No one replies to my posts or answers any of my questions, they just occasionally cross them out.
 * I am beginning to believe that the moderators don't care in the slightest, and would rather the truth behind this event be ignored. I can never have a serious conversation about this without being insulted, or presented with made up facts.

In conclusion, I don't believe it is fair to collapse a nation one turn in, in a bias and illogical manner, so that revolting states secede in a gerrymandering pattern, against people they historically were a part of or in favor of, to join their most hated enemy. I don't think it's fair to get revenge on someone through moderator events, and/or give away free pieces of a nation, and neighboring nations for some reason, to a different player you favor more. I don't think it's fair to suddenly unite states which were previously owned by Habsburgs, Catholics, pro-Austrians, allies, etc against someone who is presumably those things, even though such conclusions aren't even grounded in evidence, and in either accord would not account for such a massive ideological shift. Thanks, Mscoree (talk) 23:28, November 29, 2014 (UTC)

I agree with the points of mods giving land to blocky being rather ridiculous, and one i wasn't in favor off. but the else is staying and most of the colonies would have had collapse due to hardly being the top priority. I mean for hamburg they american one would. but Africa would've died anyway. Else is staying, the revolt was essentially every duke trying to seize power and fucking up. only become the westphalian confed in order to avoid outside threats from invading. Sine dei gloriem &#34;Ex Initio Terrae&#34; (talk) 00:09, November 30, 2014 (UTC)

Sine you apparently wrote the event, how are can you say you dislike part of it? I literally saw you paste it on the moderator page, I literally saw you state parts in chat as you wrote it. There are direct quotes in my paragraph above that you said on the matter. Why would the colony collapse if the Netherlands are for one supporting them, the Netherlands are right next to them. In fact Hamburg even used my colonies as trade posts/stations on occasion. It's not like they just stop going to my colonies and everyone there loses the ability to eat food and dies. Furthermore the main areas that were uncolored were in the Americas, and you just said the Americas would probably survive. Not to mention they were uncolored (by Crim?, not sure) and then immediately other people began to prepare for taking them. You even said at the time on this very talk page that you had no preference on the matter, you didn't even know who did it. They were just never fixed, but they should have. No one fixed it because my messages were ignored/deleted. Why did these states revolt in such a manner? They already had that power, they were in the Holy Roman Empire for one, and secondly I never annexed any of them. Some of them were even Habsburgs, and you mean to tell me the Habsburgs revolt from the Habsburgs because they hate the Habsburgs? They didn't make a confederation to stop foreign invasion, they did it to stop me, from taking it back, and for some reason they are all counted separately even though other confederations are not. Mscoree (talk) 00:36, November 30, 2014 (UTC)

I am afraid Ms, but little can be done to ever convince a moderator. You'd have to deal with it before Westphalia is forced to further fracture and fall into disarray. RexImperio (talk) 07:07, November 30, 2014 (UTC)

I mean you just saw it yourself


 * 1) Sine admits that the event was unfair to you
 * 2) Sine admits he made this event regardless of how implausible it was
 * 3) Sine is willing to disclose it on the Talk Page that he made an unfair implausible event, knowing that it was unfair and implausible and 'nothing can be done' now

Oh well. Not that anything can be done considering most of the moderators are in this giant alliance that stretches throughout the world and they'd definitely put their own interests ahead of those of others. RexImperio (talk) 07:44, November 30, 2014 (UTC)


 * 1) Andr3w777 (Westminister)
 * 2) Collie Kaltenbrunner (Alive Due To Westminister Generosity)
 * 3) CourageousLife (Closely Tied To Spain and Now Annexed By Spain)
 * 4) CrimsonAssassin (Closely Tied With Westminister)
 * 5) EiplecOco (Closely Tied With Spain)
 * 6) Feudalplague (Westminister)
 * 7) Monster Pumpkin (Possibly The Only One Not Completely Inside The Spanish Sphere)
 * 8) Saamwiil (Closely Tied With Spain)
 * 9) Sine dei gloriem (Westminister)
 * 10) SkyGreen24 (Closely Tied With Spain)

RexImperio (talk) 08:18, November 30, 2014 (UTC)

Mscoree, I'm not going to get into this, but I have to say something about the colonies. If I recall correctly, the Austrians already got events that caused them to halt colonization, which is probably also one of the reasons why they're disorganized. But then again, I think Feud was the one who handled your overseas territories, so maybe that's something you should talk about with him.

As for you RexImperio, your little let's-kill-spain and down-with-the-mods attitude is getting extremely annoying. If you're going to plot against us, atleast do it behind our backs like everyone else.

So yeah, we're not just here because we're plotting against non-mods. Also, me, Saam and Eip hadn't even been mods for too long. <font color="#1C4081">Sky <font color="#00FF21">Green <font color="531F72">24 (<font color="A00000">P, Q ) 08:42, November 30, 2014 (UTC)
 * 1) Andr3w777 (Major power + Successful player)
 * 2) Collie Kaltenbrunner (Feud's generosity + Nation with great potential)
 * 3) CourageousLife (He got annexed, but IIRC Feud's rule was, if you were there before me you can stay or something)
 * 4) CrimsonAssassin (Successful player who had to deal with A LOT of enemies such as Russia, Prussia, Netherlands and Austria)
 * 5) EiplecOco (Extremely populous nation + Excellent player)
 * 6) Feudalplague (Major power + Scraw's inactivity + Successful player)
 * 7) Monster Pumpkin (Chris' inactivity + Crusades against Ottomans)
 * 8) Saamwiil (One of the few who plays tribal nations correctly)
 * 9) Sine dei gloriem (Major power + Successful player)
 * 10) SkyGreen24 (Making use of the Anti-Ms coalition(s) + Heavily informed about Croatia and adjacent regions + Experienced player)


 * What inactivity? Scraw will return.


 * 00:43, December 1, 2014 (UTC)

Well, first of all; I am not against Spain or the Mods but I am against destroying the nations of other players for no reason and I am against the Moderator alliance that extends throughout the world

Moreover, your 'successful player' thing makes no sense. It's the same thing. The Mods have grouped together in a giant alliance. It's a unipolar world. You either ally with them or they kill you.

Otl, France/Britain/Spain never formed a large alliance because their individual interests would clash. But it appears there's no such thing in PMIII.

Who else remembers when France/Spain/Britain pre made a map of the divisions of Americas and never had any colonial war against one another? Atleast I don't RexImperio (talk) 09:46, November 30, 2014 (UTC)

I'll have you know I completely halted the expansion of my colonies for over half a century. The only thing I am asking is that they are at least shown on the map (preferably before some of the moderator nations, coincidentally, take them all). In regards to what Sky and Rimp are saying, it seems to me like the measure of whether or not someone is a successful player is based on their loyalty/ability to be in this alliance. For example at first glance Sky said that Tr0llis was an unsuccessful player, but then when Tr0llis listed all his accomplishments it made Sky think twice. Is this alliance you speak of coincidentally all "successful players", or has it played some part in shaping their success? Regardless, let's stick to the matter at hand; Westphalia. Mscoree (talk) 13:29, November 30, 2014 (UTC)

My dear godness. Ms, you were told by two mods that you couldn't be Westphalia, you pulled off a bullshity reason to be so i pulled another equally bullshity reason to kick you off, and then you pulled another one, Instead of continuing this idiocy and honestly getting in the crosshairs for a ban (that is if this evolves into a further shitstorm) deal with stuff rather than discussing every fucking little detail. furthermore i said the only part i found to be unacceptable was when some mod was giving blocky land back after the confed was made (which by the record wasn't me), that is the only part i dislike, the rest was in essence everyone regaining their power through a civil war minus frankfurt. The event wasn't unfair, i never said it was unfair nor disclose anything of such (i said it was unfair to give land back to blocky after the confed was made which i did not) and that the only colony that i could agree would've survived was Newfoundland's colony under hamburg, else is to my eyes and that of other mods fair. Instead of bending my words do something of worth and fight to regain your power, instead of bitching around every time a mod does something. Sine dei gloriem &#34;Ex Initio Terrae&#34; (talk) 02:15, December 1, 2014 (UTC)

How is signing up as a new nation bullshit? Isn't that how literally everyone acquired their nation? Also why would the other colonies leave, when they border Netherlands and Hamburg. Also if you think the Newfoundland one is legit then why is that one specifically uncolored? Mscoree (talk) 02:18, December 1, 2014 (UTC)

1. you didn't signed up as a new nation, you used a loophole to make a new nation. 2. everyone agreed then that keeping the colonies was ridiculous even i did, but at the moment i didn't made any event, it was later on that i found about that but didn't gave much concern (Meh) Sine dei gloriem &#34;Ex Initio Terrae&#34; (talk) 02:25, December 1, 2014 (UTC)

The giving of land was actually approved by more than one mod and was done so after I had been influencing the said lands for years prior.And, can we please stop talking about this? Multiple mods have said "No, you can't be Westphalia." and you moan and groan and cry and complain. Just stop. You aren't Westphalia, deal with it. Blocky858 (talk) 15:37, December 1, 2014 (UTC)

Ending PM3
http://strawpoll.me/3095856 that is all. Blocky858 (talk) 14:46, November 30, 2014 (UTC)

4 people wanting the game to end isn't a consensus when there are 20+ people who play the game. Also it's not your decision to end The game. If you no longer wish to play than by all means don't post but the vast lack of what the mods do in attempting to keep order and keep the game running in a lot of cases goes totally unappreciated and you guys seems to rail against the more more in particular cause you don't get what you want rather than it being a real true issue of targeting and bias. But seriously if you are unhappy with the game then by all means don't post, but if you would refrain from posting slander here on the onion page we would all much appreciate it. THE GAME IS NOT OVER COTINUE POSTING

You can always go and start your own game. If this is how you feel then go and do it. Don't make it out as you are the only opinion and speak for the mods. What you did is a bannable offense by impersonating a mod and vandalising the page. Mods please ban them. <font color="#000000">VonGlusenburg (talk to Von!) 17:16, November 30, 2014 (UTC)

Who impersonated a moderator? Mscoree (talk) 18:22, November 30, 2014 (UTC)

^^^ Where's any impersonation, and Von, "them"???? And yeah, I mean, PM3, imo, is in a bad state, but I'm staying till the end, whether it be today or when we reach turn 2015. However, shutting down the game will do more harm than good, and if you don't feel like you want to keep playing, then you may resign, but flat out ending the game is not a good option. Cookiedamage (talk) 18:25, November 30, 2014 (UTC)

Wait, Von, I see what bothers you now. After looking at the gigantic mega-thread on the tsptf page, I am definitely understanding why you think bans are in order.

Putting up a strawpoll isn't a crime, but changing the game banner is just plain disruptive. Yes it's vandalism, but constantly chanting the forced end of pm3 and backing it up with vandalism is honestly stupid. It's obvious you all don't care about what actually happens to the game, and really this whole "end pm3" BS is to just cause another clusterfuck, and tbh, bans, perhaps not permanent, should definitely be in order.

Cookiedamage (talk) 18:52, November 30, 2014 (UTC)

P.S. are you getting Blocky mixed up with someone else? You're talking to him as if he needs to be banned himself, when he wasn't involved with whatever Harv or Ms were doing, other than posting a strawpoll here. -Cookie

Jesus Christ, what the hell happened the past few days...

If you want to kill PM3, just dont play it. It's so simple. Saturn (Talk/Blog) 01:34, December 1, 2014 (UTC)

I want bans exactly because they are just trolls. Just don't play it if you don't like PM3. Saying not to play the game and acting like you speak for everyone's opinon and trying to destroy PM3 shows hatecrime. I can't be dealing with haters. Go to jelly-academy and business school. Learn about not being jelly, not hating, not trolling and how to compete with people in a proper manner. If you don't an online game, rather than ruin the experience for people who do enjoy it; please just  go and start another game. If its better then people will come and play it as the free market demands your new supper good game since the current games are so bad. Go make a modded version of the game to improve the apparent problems you have with it, release your new modded version and offer it out to people. If the user base likes it and thinks its an improvement, then good you out-competed the original game. But you can't go and force the original developers to destroy their game and start anew.

A strawpoll is not a crime. but vandalising the game page, chanting to end PM3, impersonating the mods (saying the game is over) and generally trolling everyone because 4 people aren't getting their own way in a GAME is just sad beyond belief. Hence ban them. They are more trouble than they are worth. That mega-thread on the tsptf page just shows how lenient the mods and admins are being with these trolls. Why bother to give them the time of day trying to have a decent convosation with them then they are neither use nor ornament? <font color="#000000">VonGlusenburg (talk to Von!) 04:23, December 1, 2014 (UTC)

Well Harv already gets a month for the banner thing etc etc so Yeah the main troll is in fact Fact

Von, I wasn't even apart of the group that did any of that... literally all I did was to put a strawpoll here. Cookie has it right. Also, Feud, I never said I wanted to end the game, literally all I did was put the strawpoll here. Blocky858 (talk) 15:30, December 1, 2014 (UTC)

My Return
Finals will be done in a week and I may finally rejoin the game. My concern is, it seems you lot have decided to ruin my Britannia.... I am irate. I will likely decide to attempt to reclaim my nation if possible. I didn't want to leave initiLly and all this talk of civil war and in fighting makes restless. FOR THE GLORY OF THE PARTY! 06:59, December 6, 2014 (UTC)

I am sure the mods will find a way to return Britannia to normal from the near civil war it was going to be plunged into. The mods might as well restore Britannia relations with Westminister since as recently as 1706? Or 1705, Britannia was not included in the Westminister Meeting. So don't worry.

Now that you're back, Britannia will certainly return to the right path.

Regardless, welcome back. RexImperio (talk) 07:16, December 6, 2014 (UTC)

WestminIster... lol. <font color="#1C4081">Sky <font color="#00FF21">Green <font color="531F72">24 (<font color="A00000">P, Q ) 11:18, December 6, 2014 (UTC)

Tr0llis seems to have adequately defended Britannia in the arguments regarding collapse. I think one of the main reasons for collapsing Britannia was Tr0llis being there, so you returning should end these talks theoretically. Mscoree (talk) 13:04, December 6, 2014 (UTC)

Ending PM3 Early
Now, some players have expressed the wish to end pm3. So andy, mp and I thought decided we'd allow a vote to take place to see what people think.

Feel free to vote. There's no set time when the voting ends, but I'm guessing if most players vote we'll count the votes and decide on how to go on.

<font color="#1C4081">Sky <font color="#00FF21">Green <font color="531F72">24 (<font color="A00000">P, Q ) 19:57, December 6, 2014 (UTC)

Should PM3 end?
 * Aye
 * ​RexImperio (talk) 16:19, December 7, 2014 (UTC) (I say Aye not because I want reboot, rather because I want to show it up to those who said one thing on chat and did another during this voting)
 * Nay
 * <font color="#1C4081">Sky <font color="#00FF21">Green <font color="531F72">24 (<font color="A00000">P, Q ) 19:58, December 6, 2014 (UTC)
 * -Seiga [[Image:Miko THPW2.png|30px]] [[Image:Flag of Europe.svg|25px|border]] 2014 December 06, 21:58 (CET)
 * Cookiedamage (talk) 19:59, December 6, 2014 (UTC)
 * Tr0llis (talk) 20:05, December 6, 2014 (UTC)
 * FOR THE GLORY OF THE PARTY! 20:17, December 6, 2014 (UTC)
 * I am that guy (talk)
 * Yank 00:07, December 7, 2014 (UTC)
 * <font color="#000000">VonGlusenburg (talk to Von!) 02:18, December 7, 2014 (UTC)
 * -Lx (leave me a message)Azarath Flag.png 03:12, December 7, 2014 (UTC)
 * Collie Kaltenbrunner (talk) 07:57, December 7, 2014 (UTC) (why end now if we don't even have a PMIV planned?)
 * Cour *talk* 16:02, December 7, 2014 (UTC) (Now, we can't have this, can we?)
 * Shikata ga nai! 23:43, December 7, 2014 (UTC)
 * Abstain

Discussion
I propose we set some sort of voting deadline. Cookiedamage (talk) 19:59, December 6, 2014 (UTC)

How about one week OR 21 vote in total? <font color="#1C4081">Sky <font color="#00FF21">Green <font color="531F72">24 (<font color="A00000">P, Q ) 20:00, December 6, 2014 (UTC)

I like that. Why 21 though, is that the # of editors? Cookiedamage (talk) 20:02, December 6, 2014 (UTC)

The number is 23. However minus EoGuy, and let's assume one person just won't vote, I'm guessing 21 is a fine fine number. <font color="#1C4081">Sky <font color="#00FF21">Green <font color="531F72">24 (<font color="A00000">P, Q ) 20:05, December 6, 2014 (UTC)

Interestingly enough, despite originally more people voting aye, as soon as people began voting nay the original people voting aye appear to have removed their votes. Mscoree (talk) 00:14, December 7, 2014 (UTC)

As it has been continuely said, you can end PM3 for yourself by no longer playing. If some people want to keep playing then it will continue, if everyone leaves then its over. You can't force people to stop playing if they don't want to stop. Stop trying to control people gosh, <font color="#000000">VonGlusenburg (talk to Von!) 02:18, December 7, 2014 (UTC).

^This. One of the reasons why I let this "vote" take place was to show that a majority of people don't want it to end, no matter what 4-6 people on chat say. And for those who'll start open this discussion again in a few days I'll say just one thing. If you don't like PM3, either do something to improve it or leave the game. It's that simple. <font color="#1C4081">Sky <font color="#00FF21">Green <font color="531F72">24 (<font color="A00000">P, Q ) 09:12, December 7, 2014 (UTC)

I could name 10 people who supported the reboot on chat. Now it is unfortunate that they are too frightened to post here. What is even more unfortunate is how some people even removed their names while others have totally refused that they wanted reboot. RexImperio (talk) 16:15, December 7, 2014 (UTC)

Then name them. I remember you, toby, ms (not 100% sure), tr0llis and that's bout it. Yank was away all the time, MP and Andr3w didn't care much, I was against it, Seiga was against it too. Sat I think might have been for, not sure tho. <font color="#1C4081">Sky <font color="#00FF21">Green <font color="531F72">24 (<font color="A00000">P, Q ) 21:33, December 7, 2014 (UTC)


 * 1) Trollis
 * 2) Mscoree (Not completely sure)
 * 3) Nkbeeching
 * Me
 * 1) Toby
 * 2) Saturn
 * 3) Liker
 * 4) Harv
 * 5) Sean
 * 6) Bfox (At times)
 * 7) Blocky (At times)

And I kinda forgot the rest. I personally believe the entire Principia Moderni series would collapse if PM3 would restart now. I was personally in favour of major changes, not reboot and the reason I voted 'Aye' was because unlike the rest; I did not fear raising my voice. The others apparently didn't care to vote, and Toby and Sat first added their votes, then removed them. RexImperio (talk) 07:54, December 8, 2014 (UTC)

The reason I said PM3 could end was mainly because I thought that if PM3 ends and then the entire Principia Moderni series goes on a pause for a while, maybe some other map games could get a chance to shine. I didn't really feel like voting, but if you guys insist I should vote I'll add my vote. Tech (talk)

Why am I associated with the rebooting crowd? Mscoree (talk) 11:47, December 9, 2014 (UTC)

"Not completely sure" RexImperio (talk) 20:02, December 9, 2014 (UTC)

Do you not understand that by not contributing to PM3 anymore you are voting against the product through market mechanisms of free choice? Stop playing, create a new product and use that as a vote. Consumer markets don't vote to decide if a video game should be ended and changed, instead they just swap to using a competitor's game. Christ imagine if they did a vote to decide whether they should reboot Call of Duty? No they just swapped to a competitor's game like Battlefield or something. This is also a game and you have no barriers to making another game, thus the democratic thing to do is to make another one and offer a new competing choice to the Alt-history wiki market of map games. The above list is a type of market forecast showing a new game would have 11 possible players likely to buy into the new game so its a good indicator of demand. The demand is there for a new product, so instead of ruining a game which has demand for its service to continue, go offer a new game to those who are dissatisfied with the current game offered on the market! God I thought you yanks loved Regan's market bullshit. <font color="#000000">VonGlusenburg (talk to Von!) 17:09, December 11, 2014 (UTC)

Open for Royal Marriages: Bavaria
Hi guys, so I have some Bavarians open for marriage. All children listed are of the House Wittelsbach. Cookiedamage (talk) 23:02, December 6, 2014 (UTC)

Bavaria Proper:

King of Bavaria: Franz-Dominic I
 * Albert, heir apparent (born 1694)
 * Klaudia-Franzina, second-in-line (born 1701)(preference on matrilineal marriage)
 * Friedrich-Rudolf, third-in-line (born 1704)

Pomerania:

Duchess of Pomerania: Mary I
 * Margaret, second-in-line (born 1687)
 * Franz-Heinrich, heir apparent (born 1691)

Offers

 * Portugal is interested in having Klaudia-Franzina eventually marry the heir-apparent of the Kingdom of Portugal, Afonso Manrique de Lara (born in 1703).--Collie Kaltenbrunner (talk) 08:01, December 7, 2014 (UTC)
 * Croatia is interested in having Margaret marry Aleksandar Izan of the Nelipić family (b. 1687). <font color="#1C4081">Sky <font color="#00FF21">Green <font color="531F72">24 (<font color="A00000">P, Q ) 09:15, December 7, 2014 (UTC)
 * Accepted Cookiedamage (talk) 17:23, December 13, 2014 (UTC)
 * The Manchu are interested in having Mary I marry the 90 year old Governor of Hailar Khaganate, Prince Aisen Gioro Dorgon :D RexImperio (talk) 07:58, December 8, 2014 (UTC)

I'm Back (Kind of....Sort of)
Hey all. I know I kind of dropped off the map for a while, so I'll fill you in.

I was having problems posting every day because my schedule got really busy. The final nail in the coffin was that the screen on my computer fizzled out. I chose to relinquish the control of my nation to Feud and take a break for a while.

Now I'm back. Before you ask, no, I don't plan on taking back my nation. I don't feel that I have enough time or energy at the end of the day to maintain it. Besides, I gave it to Feud. I will, however, drop by every couple of days to see how everything's going, help with any mod stuff that needs doing, and can hopefully be completely unbiased seeing as how I don't have a nation to play as.

Last note, I have been hanging around alternatehistory.com lately and making some maps. If you're interested, go check me out here.

Cour *talk* 05:28, December 7, 2014 (UTC)

Hi, welcome back!

The link seems to be broken or s/t, as when I click on it, it says "<span style="color:rgb(0,0,0);font-family:verdana,geneva,lucida,'lucidagrande',arial,helvetica,sans-serif;font-size:13px;line-height:normal;">Sorry - no matches. Please try some different terms. 

Do I have to create an account on the site to view it?Cookiedamage (talk) 23:54, December7, 2014 (UTC)

Looks like it broke for me too. Most of the stuff is posted on my user page anyway. Cour *talk* 16:13, December 13, 2014 (UTC)

Attacker: Great Manchu Empire
Total:  119
 * Location: +18
 * Location Bonus: +2
 * Tactical Advantage: +6
 * Nations: Great Manchu Empire [L], Shangjingkou [LV] = 8/2 = +4
 * Military Development:  48/2 = +24
 * Military Modifer: 40 + 5 [Fully Mobilized], +3 [Moderately Sized Forces], +5 [More Total Troops] = 48
 * Economic Development: 58/9 = 6.4 ~ +6
 * Economic Bonus: 40 + 10[Much Larger Economy], +5 [Larger Colonial Empire], +3 [Golden Economic Age] = 58
 * Expansion:  0
 * Motive: +7 [Hegemony]
 * Modifer: +5 [Non-demo Nations], +6 [High Morale] = +11
 * Chance: +8
 * ​Edit Count:  830
 * UTC: 1*8*4*6 [08:46]
 * Total: 13.580
 * Nation Age:  0 [Normal?]
 * Population: +8 + 20 [Population Modifier] = +28
 * Recent Wars:  -2
 * Military Strengh (Troops): 175,000/35,000 = +5
 * Puppets and Vassals:

Defender: Kingdom of Xi'an
Total:  51
 * Location: 25+
 * Location Bonus: +1
 * Tactical Advantage: +1
 * Nations: Xi'an [L] = 5/1 = +5
 * Military Development:  2/48 = 0.08 ~ 0
 * Military Modifer: 12 - 3 [Smaller Forces], +3 [Moderately Sized Forces], -10 [Not Initially Prepared] = 2
 * Economic Development:  9/58 = 0.1 ~ 0
 * Economic Bonus: 14 - 2 [Smaller Economy], -3 [Receding Economy] = 9
 * Infrastructure: 0
 * Expansion: 0
 * Motive: +9 [Defending Against Fatal Attack]
 * Modifer: +4 [Non-Demo], -5 [Low Morale] = -1
 * Chance: 0
 * ​Edit Count:  830
 * UTC: 1*8*4*6 [08:46]
 * Total: 13.580
 * Nation Age: +5 [Mature]
 * Population: +7
 * Recent Wars: 0
 * Military Strengh (Troops): 35,000/175,000 = 0.2 ~ 0
 * Puppets and Vassals:

Result:
((119/(119+51)*2)-1 = 0.4 or 40.0%

(0.4)*(1-1/(2 x 3)) = 0.333 or 33.3%. So Xi'an is conquered in 3 years.

Discussion:
Hmm? RexImperio (talk) 08:57, December 8, 2014 (UTC)

I just noticed something. We've been doing NPS wrong. Also Shangjingkou should be giving you 3, not 5 as it is LV (L gives you 5, but V takes away 2)

<font color="#1C4081">Sky <font color="#00FF21">Green <font color="531F72">24 (<font color="A00000">P, Q ) 09:54, December 8, 2014 (UTC)

Personally, I didn't really understand what you said with the exception of the Shangjingkou LV part. Now I personally believe that by adding 1 score to Xi'an and reducing 1 from me, would have no affect upon the result that is victory in 3 years. However, I have taken notice of what you said and will make sure that such a mistake does not take place again. RexImperio (talk) 13:32, December 8, 2014 (UTC)

Wait so are you suggesting Xi'an gets +46 in Nations since 46/1 = 46? And I get +56 in Nations since 112/2 = 56? RexImperio (talk) 13:34, December 8, 2014 (UTC)

No, I'm talking about NPS. Instead of you having your NPS score be 8/4, it's going to be 8/2 since you have 2 nations on your side, while Xi'an's will be 5/1, since Xi'an has one nation on its side. <font color="#1C4081">Sky <font color="#00FF21">Green <font color="531F72">24 (<font color="A00000">P, Q ) 14:03, December 8, 2014 (UTC)

Ah, ok. I'll alter the algo and go check whether this has an impact upon the results. Thanks RexImperio (talk) 14:58, December 8, 2014 (UTC)

Urdustan and Co

 * Location: +13
 * Urdustan: 15
 * Spain: +5
 * Italy: +5
 * Greater Cochin: +15
 * Madras: +20
 * Khambhat: +20
 * Location Bonuses: +20
 * Tactical Advantage: 6
 * Siege Equipment: +5
 * Nation Per Side: +3
 * Empire of Urdustan (L), Spain (L), Madras (LV),  Khambhat(LV), Italy(L), Philippines(L), Greater Cochin(LV), Sultanate of Deccan (MSCV), Sultanate of Sindh (MSCV), Plutocratic State of Jaunpur (SCV)
 * ​Military Development: 168/2 = +84


 * ​Urdustan: 5
 * Deccan: 5
 * Sindh: 5
 * Jaunpur: 5
 * Spain: +20
 * Italy: +20
 * Khambhat: +20
 * Madras:+20
 * Philippines:+20
 * Greater Cochin: +20


 * ​Bonuses: +28


 * ​Not Lost Any of the Previous Three Wars, Naval Dominance, More Total Troops, Moderately Sized Armed Forces
 * ​Economic Development: 155/ +31


 * ​Urdustan: 5
 * Deccan: 5
 * Sindh: 5
 * Jaunpur: 5
 * Spain: 20
 * Italy: 20
 * Khambhat: 20
 * Madras: 20
 * Greater Cochin: 20
 * Philippines: 20


 * ​Bonuses: 15


 * ​Much Larger Economy, Larger Trade
 * ​Infrastructure: 0
 * Motive: +2


 * Taking Territory of Similar Culture but not Part of Nation: +5, Mostly Non-Democratic Nations -3, High Morale
 * Chance:
 * Nation Age: +5
 * ​Urdustan: 5
 * Deccan: 5
 * Sindh: 0
 * Jaunpur: 5
 * Spain (all nations): +5
 * ​Population: 30


 * ​More than ten times +20
 * ​Participation: 10
 * Number of Troops: 350,000/100,000

​Total: 204
 * ​85,000 (Spain and its empire)
 * 265,000 (Urdustani empire)

Dhundara

 * Location: +25
 * Tactical advantage: +2
 * NPS: Dhundara: +5
 * Military Dev: +7 = +0
 * -5 Much smaller armed forces
 * Econ Dev: +7 = +0
 * Smaller econ: -2
 * Infra: +4
 * Motive: +9 fatal attack
 * Chance: 0
 * Nation age: +0
 * Population +7
 * Participation: +10
 * Number of troops: 100,000/350,000 = +0
 * Total: 62

Discussion
War is open and shut pretty much thank you and goodnight.

Croatian-Roman Coalition (Attacker)
Total: 93
 * Location: +20
 * Tactical advantage: +6
 * Location bonus: +7
 * Nations: Croatia (L), Carantania (LV), Czechia (L), Poland (L), Rome (L) =23/5=5
 * Military: 100+10(No previous lost wars)+5(more total troops)+5(fully mobilized)=120/13=9
 * Economy: 100+10(Much larger eco)+5(Larger trade)=105/27=4
 * Infrastructure: 0
 * Motive: +6(Mostly democratic-supporting nations)+6(Morale)+21(Motives)/5=7
 * Croatia: +7 (Hegemony)
 * Poland: +3
 * Czechia: +3
 * Carantania:+3
 * Rome +5 (similar culture, not part of nation)
 * Chance:
 * Nation age: 4*0+5/5=1
 * Population: +8 +10=18
 * Recent wars: 0
 * Participation: +10
 * Number of troops: 550,000/100,000 = +6

Dacia
Total: +53
 * Location: +25
 * Tactical advantage: +1
 * Nations: Dacia (L), Halych (MV), Eastern Hungary (LV), Kiev (MV) = 9/4 = 1
 * Military: 28-10(no mobilization)-5(much smaller forces)=0
 * Economy: 32-2 (smaller economy)-3(Receding economy)=0
 * Infrastructure: +7
 * Motive: +14-3-6/2=-3
 * Dacia: +5 (Not part of heartland, but held for more than 20 years)-10 (Multiple wars)
 * Hungary: +9
 * Chance:
 * Nation age: 5
 * Population: +7
 * Recent wars: 0
 * Participation: +10
 * Number of troops: 100,000 = 0

Result
(93/(93+53))*2-1=27.387260272%

x*(1-1/(2*3))=22.931050226...%

Discussion
This is the WIP of a war, it shall not be considered official until all sides that are expected to join, do so. <font color="#FF0000">S <font color="#04690C">k <font color="#FF0000">y <font color="#04690C">G <font color="#FF0000">r <font color="#04690C">e <font color="#FF0000">e <font color="#04690C">n <font color="#FF0000">2 <font color="#04690C">4 <font color="#FF0000">( <font color="#04690C">P <font color="#FF0000">, <font color="#04690C">Q <font color="#FF0000">) 21:32, December 20, 2014 (UTC)

Done, now I have made Halych and Kiev M because they have never really shown true loyalty to Dacia (hence the Kiev revolt and also the Kievan rise of nationalism that also indirectly affected Halych). <font color="#FF0000">S <font color="#04690C">k <font color="#FF0000">y <font color="#04690C">G <font color="#FF0000">r <font color="#04690C">e <font color="#FF0000">e <font color="#04690C">n <font color="#FF0000">2 <font color="#04690C">4 <font color="#FF0000">( <font color="#04690C">P <font color="#FF0000">, <font color="#04690C">Q <font color="#FF0000">) 10:01, December 21, 2014 (UTC)

Hamburg (Attacker)
Total: 75
 * Location: +15
 * Tactical advantage: +6
 * Location bonus:
 * Nations: Hamburg (L), Mecklenburg (L), Holstein (L), Stade (LV)=18/4=5
 * Military: 80+10(No previous lost wars)+5(more total troops)+5(fully mobilized)=100/13=8
 * Economy: 80+10(Much larger eco)+5(Larger trade)=95/27=4
 * Infrastructure: 0
 * Motive: +5(Morale)+4(Non. demo)+16=25/4=7
 * Hamburg: +7 (Hegemony)
 * Mecklenburg: +3
 * Holstein: +3
 * Stade:+3
 * Chance:
 * Nation age: 5
 * Population: +7+2=9
 * Recent wars: 0
 * Participation: +10
 * Number of troops: 175,000/100,000 = +2

Dacia
Total: +55
 * Location: 15+25+25/3=22
 * Tactical advantage: +2
 * Nations: Dacia (L), Dacian Somalia (LV), Dacian Iritriya (LV),= 11/3 = 4
 * Military: 28-10(no mobilization)-5(much smaller forces)=0
 * Economy: 32-2 (smaller economy)-3(Receding due to the canal being Roman-owned so it affected the Dacian East Africa) =0
 * Infrastructure: +7
 * Motive: +2+4-5/3=0
 * Dacia: +5 (Not part of heartland, but held for more than 20 years)-15
 * Dacian Somalia: +9
 * Dacian Iritriya: +3
 * Chance:
 * Nation age: 5
 * Population: +7
 * Recent wars: -2
 * Participation: +10
 * Number of troops: 100,000 = 0

Result
(75/(75+55))*2-1=15.384615384

x*(1-1/(2*2))=11.538461538%

Discussion
Done for IATG. <font color="#FF0000">S <font color="#04690C">k <font color="#FF0000">y <font color="#04690C">G <font color="#FF0000">r <font color="#04690C">e <font color="#FF0000">e <font color="#04690C">n <font color="#FF0000">2 <font color="#04690C">4 <font color="#FF0000">( <font color="#04690C">P <font color="#FF0000">, <font color="#04690C">Q <font color="#FF0000">) 20:45, December 21, 2014 (UTC)

Introduction
Greetings fellow PMIII players, I am here to adress an issue that seems to have been ignored for too long. It seems that LxCaucassus has disobeyed the rules of PMIII and was accused of doing that by Fritzmet, Harvenard2, Tr0llis and Mscoree. Due to believing that justice must be served. I have investigated the matter thoroughly, taking into account all arguments, and this is what I have concluded.

Facts

 * Lesser Northern War:
 * Pskov Score: 36/21
 * Prussia Score: 73
 * Expected result: ((73/(73+36))*2-1)*(1-(1/(2*4))=29.7018348% of Pskov and Narva goes to Prussia
 * Actual result: Prussian loss, extremely possible Narvan annexation into Pskov
 * Treaty of Tallin
 * Franco-Prussian War: (1651-1655)
 * No effect. This event stays the same.
 * Roman invasion of Prussian Florida
 * No effect. This event stays the same
 * The continuation war (1656-1658) (Bolded: Best possible situation for Pskov, otherwise: Best possible situation of Prussia)
 * Pskov score: 51/45
 * Prussia Score:25/37
 * Expected result: 28.508772%/0.08130082% of Prussian land goes to Pskov
 * Actual result: Full annexation of Prussia.
 * Moscovite-Pskovian War (1656-1658) and Polish-Pskovian Colonial War (1656-1658)
 * Expected result(s):
 * Pskovian division of territory between Poland and Muscovy, different outcomes of Croatian war for White Croatia

Final conclusion
To be decided

Argumentative Discussion
Note: Writing things that don't contribute to the discussion such as comments like "Is this really necessary?" or "It doesn't matter, he deserved it" etc. will be removed.

Yours truly, <font color="#FF0000">S <font color="#04690C">k <font color="#FF0000">y <font color="#04690C">G <font color="#FF0000">r <font color="#04690C">e <font color="#FF0000">e <font color="#04690C">n <font color="#FF0000">2 <font color="#04690C">4 <font color="#FF0000">( <font color="#04690C">P <font color="#FF0000">, <font color="#04690C">Q <font color="#FF0000">) 20:15, December 22, 2014 (UTC)

Might I suggest a resurgent form of Livonian nationalism? 21:00, December 22, 2014 (UTC)

ok, im confused now...say what?-Lx (leave me a message) 22:31, December 22, 2014 (UTC)

Long story short, you're temporarily banned from PM3 for cheating. @Sky Thank you for finally dealing with this issue. It's good to see some moderators are still active and willing to help solve disputes. @Rex Considering Livonia was one of the few things actually conquered fairly in this region, probably not. Plus, we're trying to solve problems, not make more. Tr0llis (talk) 22:48, December 22, 2014 (UTC)


 * When did I cheat? this is litearlly the first I hear of any of these accusations. I have a very hard time believing that a war that was locked down and then edited and reviewed countless times during the course of a few days could have a different result than the, what, 4 or 8% that was won from Pskov?(at least that's from the Lesser Northern War).  I was also very confused about the Polish-Pskovian colonial war...never heard of that happening...ever..so I looked in the archives and as it turns out, a Muscovite-Pskov and Polsih-Pskov war  is something that Fritz added a month after I the Continuation war/Prussia debacle. so ya...I am kind of confused as to what any of this is actually about other than some revisionist history.-Lx (leave me a message)Azarath Flag.png 22:53, December 22, 2014 (UTC)

If you check the history he declared war the same turn as you invaded Prussia actually. Mscoree (talk) 22:57, December 22, 2014 (UTC)

(So many edit conflicts.) The cheating part would be disregarding algorithms, to the point where you got an opposite result. The mods, Sky for one, has checked these algorithms and confirmed that yours were in error. This wouldn't be the first time this has happened, see Hamburg for example. The archive was edited because somehow the algorithms ended up in the wrong place. Check the history though, they are now in concurrent order, and match up with my declaration of war. Fritzmet (talk) 22:59, December 22, 2014 (UTC)

Just coming to note, Danzig (the city itself that is) is a French City State :v, in other news, If the Muscovite-Pskov algo wasn't posted (idk) the Part of Pskov's annexation shouldn't be thought until proven they could've taken them down with the 33.333% needed :v Sine dei gloriem &#34;Ex Initio Terrae&#34; (talk) 23:01, December 22, 2014 (UTC)

No one disputes the annexations of France and Rome, that part is legitimate. The part in question is after that, and from what I can tell they annexed Pskov fair and square. Hopefully now the issue is resolved and we can all move on. Mscoree (talk) 23:18, December 22, 2014 (UTC)

afaik and remember the war was never actually carried through with.... This was what me and sine both discovered when going through this the other day. This means that Pskov wasnt not destroyed/annexed. Thats just my peice and tbh Lx is over here telling me much the same thing. Regardless of that lx just gave me proof through the editing history that it was posted in the Archive..... Which tbh i never seen before and im unsure as to how to handle this.

Arhive 8 for PMIII

the issue of Pskov and Prussia was dealt with on the 16th of october thats nearly a full month between the two edits.... Tell me again how thats fair. I dont want this to sound like it was planned or something but thats a bit crazy for that kind of timing and to hide it in an archive (from what it looks like) The stuff for pskov was finished within a full month of this thing being posted (from what i see) and just seems like fishing to bring down someone the scorned the Cronies. Unless im shown evidence to the contrary that shows the war was carried out correctly and not just posted into an archive i dont see this going any further.

P.S. nobody but mods decide a ban, Trollis if you post those kinds of things as a definite when we havent even made a real judgement or decision yet then you definitely need to check your privaledge.

That was Sky who said a ban. Sky is a moderator.

Secondly, look up what "check your privilege" means, because you are using that phrase counter to what it actually means. Mscoree (talk) 00:56, December 23, 2014 (UTC)

It was posted the same day that Lx declared war. For some reason it had to be moved on the archive, but if you check the history from back then you'll see I declared war on the same day as Lx. This isn't about "someone the scorned the Cronies" (whatever that is), it's about fixing something in the game that is incorrect. Even if you make the argument that my war didn't count, still doesn't change the fact that Lx's algorithm was never updated, meaning he still won unfairly even when I'm out of the equation. At this point several other mods have checked the situation and have verified this. As much as I appreciate your input Feud, I believe at this point the matter is pretty much settled. Fritzmet (talk) 01:00, December 23, 2014 (UTC)

Declaring war requires you actually post the algo as well.. You can declare war, but if you dont post the algo until a month later alot could have changed. Regardless im still waiting for Sky to fill me in and for multiple mods to be around to make this and official decision. As far as im seeing it just looks like you were irrisponsible and didnt post your algo within a reasonable time of your war declaration

As I said, the algo was posted the same day, but I think for whatever reason Harv tried to remove it, perhaps thinking he could reason with Lx. That wasn't the case though, and it was restored. He didn't really have the authority to remove another player's algorithm anyway. It was moved back, and the archive was edited because it was somehow not in chronological order. I think Sky handled this pretty well, no need to open this back up really. Fritzmet (talk) 01:15, December 23, 2014 (UTC)

It was never closed.... these kinds of things require a decent amount mod consensus to carry out, im having Eip Read it over as we speak. You being so quick to clear this down is rather annoying, especially for a game you hardly post in anymore. Im not against this being rectified, but im against this being unanimously handled by a single mod without ANYONE else giving it a thorough look over. So please be patient and stop saying its case closed when this is not currently closed

Sorry, I was told that the case was closed. If you are still reviewing it, that is fine too. The reason I had not been playing as much is because until now no one even cared to listen to me about this kind of stuff. Fritzmet (talk) 01:29, December 23, 2014 (UTC)

Well the main issue here is that, no matter what, the Lesser Northern War was never properly written out, and Harv had to sign a treaty even though there were no official results on the mod page. Yes, there were arguments, but nobody actually put down any real score. Either way I believe Lx deserves a punishment for taking amounts of land without a properly written algo. As for the issues about posting algos and declaring wars at the same time, from what I see the Treaty of Tallin was supposed to have a mutual defense term, which did call for Muscovite and Polish aid.

Also, another thing. One thing is confusing, the Continuation war was initially from 1657 to 1659, but then got moved back by a year.

I now checked the talk page edit history, and the wars were added later. This does put those who did that as victims of the one-week-banhammer, but still doesn't remove Lx's penalty.

Now, first, I'd like to apologize to Lx for not checking it better, but that does not remove the penalty for the lesser northern war. However, I believe that those who posted the two algos should also receive penalty, ranging from a 3 to 7 day ban.

<font color="#FF0000">S <font color="#04690C">k <font color="#FF0000">y <font color="#04690C">G <font color="#FF0000">r <font color="#04690C">e <font color="#FF0000">e <font color="#04690C">n <font color="#FF0000">2 <font color="#04690C">4 <font color="#FF0000">( <font color="#04690C">P <font color="#FF0000">, <font color="#04690C">Q <font color="#FF0000">) 14:14, December 23, 2014 (UTC)

I excuse myself for yet another mix up, all is explained in the first subsection. <font color="#FF0000">S <font color="#04690C">k <font color="#FF0000">y <font color="#04690C">G <font color="#FF0000">r <font color="#04690C">e <font color="#FF0000">e <font color="#04690C">n <font color="#FF0000">2 <font color="#04690C">4 <font color="#FF0000">( <font color="#04690C">P <font color="#FF0000">, <font color="#04690C">Q <font color="#FF0000">) 16:02, December 23, 2014 (UTC)

But the important part is:

I created a different perception because of statements that confused me because I wasn't fully aware of the context. Now the issue is the following: The continuation war wasn't quite correct, I looked over it again and it was oh so sloppy.

Oh, and Fritz should get banned for inserting algos in archives and changing algo results in the archives and we need to instate a rule that says that inactive nations also build up dev scores by the infra>eco>mil principle because I just remembered some stuff because of this and yeah.

Also, I'd like to say I'm sorry for the initial mix up, but I hope you all know that I had the best intentions.

<font color="#FF0000">S <font color="#04690C">k <font color="#FF0000">y <font color="#04690C">G <font color="#FF0000">r <font color="#04690C">e <font color="#FF0000">e <font color="#04690C">n <font color="#FF0000">2 <font color="#04690C">4 <font color="#FF0000">( <font color="#04690C">P <font color="#FF0000">, <font color="#04690C">Q <font color="#FF0000">) 16:11, December 23, 2014 (UTC)

I thought they were posted the same day, when I edited the archives I was trying to fix the order. If they weren't posted on time after all I guess that's another thing, but still doesn't change the fact that we declared war the same day and were never added, and the fact that we contractually obligated to declare war. Even if you don't count those other wars, the algo by Lx was still very wrong. Fritzmet (talk) 17:08, December 23, 2014 (UTC)

Look, I only posted the Continuation war Algo after asking many people to check, double check, and triple check its correctness before I posted it (I believe MP and Feud were amongst them but honestly, I dont quite remember 100%, maybe they were for other wars, dont take my word for it, ask them). I had that algo checked and verrified, so I had no reason to believe there to be any errors. Even Ms went in and fixed a few things that were initially missed(like the treaty breaker), the algo was also reviewed when posted. So in any case I had nor do I still have any reason to suspect that it was done incorrectly. therefore no cheating had occured. If any errors happened they were not only mine, they were collective, and I dont believe I should be punished for malicious activity if I did not act maliciously-Lx (leave me a message) 18:05, December 23, 2014 (UTC)

I never edited the Lesser Northern War algo though. In fact I specifically left it wrong when I reported it to Sky. Banning me just allows Lx to invade Moscow now, no wonder Feud approved when he said he wanted to invade me himself. This doesn't address any of the actual problems, including the fact that Prussia should not be annexed. I don't understand how me fixing my own algo later, by moving it to the right place, means I should be banned. Ask ms himself, he helped me make my algo the same day that Pskov declared war, I don't know what happened. He even made a google document and what not. Fritzmet (talk) 16:37, December 24, 2014 (UTC)

I literally checked the edit history, so please don't lie. As for Pskov attacking Russia, that's none of my bussiness. And Ms can feel free to show me that google doc. <font color="#FF0000">S <font color="#04690C">k <font color="#FF0000">y <font color="#04690C">G <font color="#FF0000">r <font color="#04690C">e <font color="#FF0000">e <font color="#04690C">n <font color="#FF0000">2 <font color="#04690C">4 <font color="#FF0000">( <font color="#04690C">P <font color="#FF0000">, <font color="#04690C">Q <font color="#FF0000">) 16:56, December 24, 2014 (UTC)

Final verdict
Written by: Sky
 * 1) Fritz gets a 3 day ban for editing the Lesser Northern War algorithm after it got archived
 * 2) Lx receives a warning and his posts and algorithms will from now on be inspected in order to prevent further damage.
 * 3) The rule that NPC nations develop scores by the infra>eco>mil priority order will now also affect inactive nations.

Supported by: Feud.

That'd be all, the discussion is now over. <font color="#FF0000">S <font color="#04690C">k <font color="#FF0000">y <font color="#04690C">G <font color="#FF0000">r <font color="#04690C">e <font color="#FF0000">e <font color="#04690C">n <font color="#FF0000">2 <font color="#04690C">4 <font color="#FF0000">( <font color="#04690C">P <font color="#FF0000">, <font color="#04690C">Q <font color="#FF0000">) 14:25, December 24, 2014 (UTC)

Mods are also players?
Can there be a PM game someday where the mods are not invested in the game at all? Just as a casual observer, it seems pretty clear there's some bias that goes into ever one of these games. Just a thought. Nathan1123 (talk) 03:00, December 28, 2014 (UTC)

Make me a mod again, and I'm happy to oblige to this. I am always very neutral and try to be unbiased as possible in past games, though I understand due to my control of some of the most powerful nations in past games (Nippon, Caliphate and Arabian Federation) this can be hard for some of my haters to apprieate. I don't plan on having a powerful nation at all in this game. In fact I'm trying to facilitate other nation's to expand and help everyone. So if you want a candidate, I offer myself and I hope my record is a good show of my honesty for the current mods. <font color="#000000">VonGlusenburg (talk to Von!) 03:11, December 28, 2014 (UTC)

A less bias paragraph might be a start. Mscoree (talk) 05:55, December 28, 2014 (UTC)