Talk: Principia Moderni II/Archive 7

Moderators

AP has raised a valid point.  Gala and Pita have left the map game. Crim and Lurker post extremely irregularly. Only Collie, Yank, Von and myself post every turn. Mods are disappearing left right and center and without proper control this game will fall apart. I propose the election of at least one new mod, the removal of Pita and Gala from the mod list and the election of a new mod-in chief. Also Collie, I can start making maps again for the 1585 turn and onwards, no holidays for at least another 6 months :( Scandinator (talk) 05:28, January 13, 2013 (UTC)

I dont know how far this will get(with the whole russia fiasco and all), but i propose my candidacy. Well, in any case, you can't get anywhere if you dont try-Lx ^{(leave me a message)} 05:37, January 13, 2013 (UTC)

I don't want it to sound like i brought that point up just to run for mod, but I too would like to announce my candidacy. And, I would like to see either Collie or Scan as moderator-in-chief.AP (talk) 05:41, January 13, 2013 (UTC)

I propose myself as moderator, as I have given up my country and therefore would be probably the least biased if two mods went head to head (or players).  Saamwiil, the Humble 15:09, January 13, 2013 (UTC)

I'd like to propose myself a moderator too. Despite the Caliphate fiasco I promise to be unbiased (and educate the country and steal its money :P) Fed (talk) 17:55, January 13, 2013 (UTC)

This is a good idea, my interest has simply waned to the point in which I can't act as head mod.  I'm glad to have been able to get this very successful game started, but I know that I can't devote enough time to this wiki to act as head moderator anymore.  Sorry for the trouble, I'll still post as much as I can remember to. LurkerLordB (Talk) 03:30, January 14, 2013 (UTC)

It's alright, DK reached the same point last game and resigned as well. I hope you can remain a regular participant in this game. Also on a side note, COLONIZE! Scandinator (talk) 03:45, January 15, 2013 (UTC)

I've just been wrapped up in ten metric tons of horseshit IRL, combined with lack of motivation. Same thing happened around this point last game. I'll become a regular poster again sooner or later. CrimsonAssassin (talk) 21:48, January 17, 2013 (UTC)

Mod Elections

For a Mod to be elected, he must have 5 votes (may vote any number of times). Only one vote for Moderator in Chief. You may also vote against. If you decide to do so, bold your name. Elections for new mods never closes. If one of the candidates for moderator in chief has a 4 vote lead by end of day, he gets the title.

Mod-In-Chief

Collie

1. Saamwiil, the Humble 17:14, January 13, 2013 (UTC)
2. AP (talk) 18:57, January 13, 2013 (UTC)
3. VonGlusenburg ^{(talk to Von!)} 22:58, January 14, 2013 (UTC)
4. Scandinator (talk) 00:41, January 16, 2013 (UTC)
5. CrimsonAssassin (talk) 01:29, January 18, 2013 (UTC)

Scan

1. Fed (talk) 17:55, January 13, 2013 (UTC)
2. -Kogasa 2013年1月14日 03:05:36 (JST)
3. CourageousLife (talk) 20:20, January 13, 2013 (UTC)
4. --Yank 22:52, January 14, 2013 (UTC)

VonGlusenburg

1.  Fegelein! Fegelein! Fegelein! 18:37, January 13, 2013 (UTC)

Mods (FINAL)

Saamwiil

1. Saamwiil, the Humble 17:14, January 13, 2013 (UTC)
2. Fed (talk) 17:55, January 13, 2013 (UTC)
3. AP (talk)
4. Airlinesguy (talk) 00:02, January 14, 2013 (UTC)
5. (DeanSims: Talk) 21:48, January 14, 2013 (UTC)
6. Fegelein! Fegelein! Fegelein! 00:32, January 15, 2013 (UTC) (voted after closed)

AP (mod now)

1. Saamwiil, the Humble 17:14, January 13, 2013 (UTC) (+)
2. --Collie Kaltenbrunner (talk) 17:44, January 13, 2013 (UTC) (+)
3. Fed (talk) 17:55, January 13, 2013 (UTC)(+)
4. -Kogasa 2013年1月14日 03:05:36 (JST) (+)
5. AP (talk) (+)
6.   Fegelein! Fegelein! Fegelein! (-)
7. CourageousLife (talk) 20:20, January 13, 2013 (UTC)
8. -Lx ^{(leave me a message)}
9. ^{The Royal Guns (talk) 20:01, January 14, 2013 (UTC)}

Fed (mod now)

1. Saamwiil, the Humble 20:11, January 13, 2013 (UTC)
2. -Kogasa 2013年1月14日 03:05:36 (JST)
3. Collie Kaltenbrunner (talk) 18:26, January 13, 2013 (UTC)
4. Fegelein! Fegelein! Fegelein! 18:37, January 13, 2013 (UTC)
5. CourageousLife (talk) 20:20, January 13, 2013 (UTC)
6. VonGlusenburg ^{(talk to Von!)} 00:23, January 15, 2013 (UTC)

LxCaucassus

1. -Lx ^{(leave me a message)}
2. Fegelein! Fegelein! Fegelein! 21:16, January 13, 2013 (UTC)
3. CourageousLife (talk) 00:13, January 14, 2013 (UTC)
4. Scandinator (talk) 01:04, January 14, 2013 (UTC)

Discussion

Are we allowed to vote for ourselves? ~AP

Saam, you can't vote thrice. Fegelein! Fegelein! Fegelein! 19:10, January 13, 2013 (UTC)

Read the instructions. And yes, one can vote for himself.  Saamwiil, the Humble 19:14, January 13, 2013 (UTC)

You voted THRICE. The rules say TWICE. Take off one of your votes. Fegelein! Fegelein! Fegelein! 19:20, January 13, 2013 (UTC)

I meant any number of times, but if you want to be a stickler on language, fine, I'll take one off. Also, unless anyone votes against him, AP is a mod.  Saamwiil, the Humble 19:24, January 13, 2013 (UTC)

If you think about it, that makes no sense. If I wanted to be "biased" I would have to be a mod first. I have never been biased in any game, others see it as bias because they don't like it simply put. But it's ok, I get it; I would have done the same(for different reasons) had you run.AP (talk) 19:36, January 13, 2013 (UTC)

I get your point, and I assume you understand mine. Fegelein! Fegelein! Fegelein! 19:42, January 13, 2013 (UTC) 

I've taken it upon myself to change it to what I originally meant.  Saamwiil, the Humble 20:10, January 13, 2013 (UTC)

Wait, you wrote the rules for this? Now I understand what you mean. Fegelein! Fegelein! Fegelein! 20:13, January 13, 2013 (UTC)

Yeah. I did. I meant any number of time because I thought the modship wouldn't be limited to incoming member because of space limitability but because of their quality, so if people vote for you.  Saamwiil, the Humble 20:32, January 13, 2013 (UTC)

Somebody forgot to put my name onto the list, so I did it-Lx ^{(leave me a message)} 21:13, January 13, 2013 (UTC)

Is the voting over? Exactly how many mods are to be admitted?AP (talk) 22:56, January 13, 2013 (UTC)

Not limited. Saamwiil, the Humble 23:17, January 13, 2013 (UTC)

Voting should have a definate end time. It is the responsibility of the mod-in-chief to identify players that would do well as a mod and ask them to take up the role. Not vote spamming up to 5. Otherwise unworthy or unproven players my take the role of mod. In my opinion Lx, AP, Fed and Kogasa are the best candidates for a new position. Scandinator (talk) 06:05, January 14, 2013 (UTC)

I understand this voting is going to end when 24 hours since the adding of this section end.--Collie Kaltenbrunner (talk) 06:34, January 14, 2013 (UTC)

Okay, one day has already passed, but what that 4-vote lead that you was talking about means? this means that we have to make another election to elect the mod-in chief (Scan has 4 votes, while i have 2.i understand that for a 4-vote lead to happen, he would have to have 6 votes, and i 2 , for example.) or Scan already won?--Collie Kaltenbrunner (talk) 21:40, January 14, 2013 (UTC)

So as I see, Fed, AP and I are mods, the moderator-in-chef will arise, yes when there is a 4 point lead. Currently, it is 5 to 3. A moderator in chief isn't as urgent as new moderators, hence takes longer. People can switch around their vote for the better good if it takes too long.  Saamwiil, the Humble 00:13, January 15, 2013 (UTC)

Voter bribery? I don't approve of these sort of actions. VonGlusenburg ^{(talk to Von!)} 00:20, January 15, 2013 (UTC)

Saamwill, the requirements of modship include that you have not expanded implausably in the last fifteen turns. If I recall, the Caliphate was in the middle of invading frigid Russia at the time and annexing nations left right and center. Scandinator (talk) 00:30, January 15, 2013 (UTC)

Where on earth did you just pull those "rules of modship" out of? VonGlusenburg ^{(talk to Von!)} 01:42, January 15, 2013 (UTC)

Taken from the Principia Moderni II Rules Moderator Requirements section:

• Not having expanded implausibly for fifteen turns, as determined by other moderators.
• Played for at least thirty moves.
• Must use a user account for most of their edits.
• Must be active at least six days a week on average.

So he pulled it from the rules page.-Lx ^{(leave me a message)} 02:12, January 15, 2013 (UTC)

Ah okay, its just that I never noticed that before. Thanks Lx. VonGlusenburg ^{(talk to Von!)} 15:42, January 15, 2013 (UTC)

As determined by other mods. That is a very wide spectrum of possibilities, and probably needs to be further defined in the future. There's probably deffering opinions about what was plausible. And in that scenarion, Fed wouldn't be a mod eaither, so I don't believe that is applicable. I suggest for future entrances into modship, we take that off, as if you are voting for them to become mod, they're probably a plausible sorts.  Saamwiil, the Humble 03:50, January 15, 2013 (UTC)

Saam, I put my vote in before you "closed" the voting. Check the history. You can't just eliminate my vote because you're desperate to be a mod. And I thought elections for new mods "never closes" because that's what you wrote at the top. Fegelein! Fegelein! Fegelein! 04:15, January 15, 2013 (UTC)

Actually, you were 32 minutes late as of day close. And I was taking it that there was a consensus that it should only be a day. As you may see above I didn't argue against it when Collie suggested it, so I'm not taylor making this situation.  Saamwiil, the Humble 12:23, January 15, 2013 (UTC)

>.> Just do me a favor and check the history. I can always prove it to you via screenshots. Fegelein! Fegelein! Fegelein! 21:48, January 15, 2013 (UTC)

Can I also ask why people are voting for a head mod who was banned unanimously in the previous game and still continues to do these same offences in this game! E.g. in Venice's latest post he is controlling Switzerland so that the south of the nation wants to join his Venetian league. Not to mention he seems perfectly willing to allow Dean to take over Greece as the Ottoman empire, providing Venice gets a part; even though an Ottoman-Venetian alliance is highly implausible considering the past 100 years of war! Not to mention that Scan is not as active as Collie. VonGlusenburg ^{(talk to Von!)} 15:42, January 15, 2013 (UTC)

I nominateth you for head mod. You are level headed and capable of making good end-of-the-line decisions. Fegelein! Fegelein! Fegelein! 21:48, January 15, 2013 (UTC)

Von, you are digging up things from a year ago. Last year I had a lot of pressure on me from home and school for the college admission tests not to mention my family life was also highly unstable since my parents argued over every little thing. I had several nervous breakdowns, a lengthy bout of depression ending in attempted suicide and permanently injured my right hand. So happy now that you know the reasons for my irrational behaviour on PMI?

Anyways the post I made on Switzerland is in line with the rules: 

For non-player nations (who are not controlled by a user), you may do the following. However, these must be dealt with carefully and plausibly:

• Sign treaties, agreements and alliances.
• Encourage the government of that country to make certain choices.
• Create ideas among the common people.

Venice is encourging the various cantons of Switzerland to move closer to Venice and is turning the Kappelist population back to Catholics. And how is an alliance with the Ottomans improbable? Foreign policy of the Republic is dictated by the Doge, if he wants an alliance he will get it. Of course there will be public opposition which may flare up... But at the current state of affairs, Venice has lost all its Greek forts used for trade with the Levant and Asia and needs to regain Greece and its isles, otherwise the Venetian economy will die like OTL. So it is either Venice invades Greece alone or with a local land power backing them. And honestly, I don't really care who becomes the new mod-in-chief so longs as we get one soon. Scandinator (talk) 00:39, January 16, 2013 (UTC)

If elections for new mods never closes, can we put up some moer candidates? Because I have some people in mind...

Fegelein! Fegelein! Fegelein! 04:18, January 16, 2013 (UTC)

Well I think we only need to replace the mods we are losing/lost. VonGlusenburg ^{(talk to Von!)} 03:42, January 17, 2013 (UTC)

In that case, only three of these four mods should be accepted. Fegelein! Fegelein! Fegelein! 05:33, January 17, 2013 (UTC)

Well we lost Galaguerra1 and PitaKang, who have been replaced by AP and Fed. Even though Fed and Saam got the same number of votes. But if that is what the new mod-in-chief wants then so be it. VonGlusenburg ^{(talk to Von!)} 00:43, January 18, 2013 (UTC)

Ammendments

Something I propose to you to make the game better: Nations that are close enough to each other in culture and geographival means or in dynastic unions be considered one. Hence, the Caspian states just appear as Caspia, and Scandinavia just appears as Scandinavia, and if Russia ever emerges they are just counted as Russia.

Also, arguing makes games not so fun, especially when you have to do it continuously. I suggest in discussion on a certain topic, you put 2 sections for it, 'argument for' and 'argument against', or whichever names are appropriate for the scenario. Then let the mod(s) decide which case is correct. This saves a lot of time and unnesessary arguing, considering a lot of us just argue the same point over and over and over... again.

Thirdly, the idea of 'Player Consulation'. This is where a mod starts a discussion about a mod event in which he plans to do, say, 2 turns in advance. This would keep gameplay flowing and not be such a shock to players when their nation just gets invaded by mod events, and people will be alot less frustrated. (Algeria, Russia, Caspia, etc.) Let me know what you think.  Saamwiil, the Humble 15:19, January 13, 2013 (UTC)

so, wait, the fisrt thing does it mean that if moscow and Novgorod, and other russian states aided each other in a war, it would just be counted as one russia(aka4 points)? if so then I disagree.-Lx ^{(leave me a message)} 16:00, January 13, 2013 (UTC)

I would propose ammending coalition alogrithms, so that it is harder to take over multiple nations. in other words, The caliphate treated the Russian States as one nation. They got 33%, and decided that it was OK to take over 4+ nations. I suggest using the old system from PMI that used to be used to determine the ammount of territory you need to take over a nation as a function of how many nations are invading.(the one that was originaly used to decide that 33%= win by one natoin.). It should have been formulated by DK during the invasion of the mughal empire. Basicaly, to take over a 2 states with a coalition, it will be harder than to take over one state with a coalition(33% for one, 50% for 2, I think 66% for 3 etc...)-Lx ^{(leave me a message)} 16:04, January 13, 2013 (UTC)

I'm saying if Moscow and Novgorod were in a Federation, because of their geographic, cultural, linguistic etc. similarities, they'd be treated as one (Russian Federation). However, if they are not one, then they would still count as different contries. Hence, Scandinavia is one while if Burgudy helped France, they'd be seperate. But Caspia would be one.  Saamwiil, the Humble 17:08, January 13, 2013 (UTC)

Then you'd just have no one forming federations but large alliances instead. Not to mention alliances of smaller nations would gain an unfair advantage against larger nations. As for the coalition algorithm changes, 33% is fair considering nations in that coalition contribute to that coalition total. Plus it too creates an unfair advantage to alliances of small nations, e.g. if Novogorod tries to invade two small city states who are allied, then why should Novogorod need more of a point total to do the exact same thing which is easier to do with two separate algorithms? VonGlusenburg ^{(talk to Von!)} 23:10, January 14, 2013 (UTC)

1.5?

Can I get a list of states with the 1.5 bonus right now? Fegelein! Fegelein! Fegelein! 22:12, January 13, 2013 (UTC)

All states with this bonus haven't 5 years of existence.as such, all states created from 1577 on by popular revolt have this bonus.--Collie Kaltenbrunner (talk) 06:57, January 14, 2013 (UTC)

Moroccan War (1580 - 1585?)

Granada and co

• Location: 4
• Tactical Advantage: 5 (larger colonial empire), 1 (attacker)
• Strength: Granada (L), Scandinavia (M), Luxembourg (S), Aragon (M), Brandenburg (M), Burgundy (M), Calais (MV), Austria (S), Salzburg (SV), Grissons (SV) = 24/4 = 6
• Military Development: 26
• Economy: 0
• Infrastructure: 0
• Expansion: 0
• Motive: 3
• Chance: 6
  • Edit Count: 433
  • UTC Time: 1737
  • 1*7*3*7 = 147
  • 433/147 x pi = 9.253...
• Nation Age: -10
• Population: 6
• Participation: 10
• Recent Wars:

Total: 56 x 1.5 = 84

Morocco

• Location: 4 (Rabat is all the way over there)
• Tactical Advantage: 2 (high ground, they are being invaded by the coast and Fez is almost 600 m high)
• Strength: Morocco (L +4) = 0
• Military Development: 5/2 = 3
• Economy: 5/2 = 3
• Infrastructure: 5/2 = =3
• Expansion: 0
• Motive: 5
• Chance: 3
• Nation Age: -10
• Population: 6
• Participation: 10
• Recent Wars:

Total: 29 x 1.5 = 43.5

Result

84/127.5 - 0.5 x 2 = 0,31764705882352941176470588235294

Granada can take 31,4% of Moroccan territory.

Discussion

You have to have a -10 nation age to use this bonus.--Collie Kaltenbrunner (talk) 06:29, January 14, 2013 (UTC)

Andean war ?

Burgundy

• Location: 1
• Tactical Advantage: 5 (larger colonial empire), 1 (attacker)
• Strength: Burgundy (M), Calais (MV),Friesburg (MV),Munster(MV), = 13/4 = 3
• Military Development: 24(you cant upgrade military, economy and infrastructure all in one turn. It's one a turn)
• Economy:0
• Infrastructure: 0
• Expansion: 0
• Motive: 3
• Chance: 2
  • Edit Count: 1951
  • UTC Time: 0119
  • 1*1*2*2 = 4
  • 1951/4 x pi = 1532,266625
• Nation Age: +5 (I think)
• Population: 9
• Participation: 10
• Recent Wars:-4

Total:59

Inca

• Location: 5
• Tactical Advantage: none
• Strength: inca (L +4) = 0
• Military Development: 2 = 0
• Economy: 2 = 0
• Infrastructure: 2
• Expansion: 0
• Motive: 7
• Chance: 6
• Nation Age: +5
• Population: 7
• Participation: 10
• Recent Wars:

Total: 32

Result

((59/(59+32)*2) - 1 = 296703

how much does it last

Discussion

did i do something wrong

This is metagaming and will not happen. You saw all the planning of the Incan invasion and decided to jump in before anyone else could now did you?AP (talk) 01:31, January 14, 2013 (UTC)

You also tried this with the Aztecs, and the answer is the same--not happening.AP (talk) 01:36, January 14, 2013 (UTC)

were you invading the inca's ? i didn't knew, and i've been already planning it from before, but i had to prepare for the conflict, and the Aztecs had a reason, they were isolated, the inca's are at my hand because of that i control Panama so its going to Happen if you want or not Sine dei gloriem (talk) 22:32, January 14, 2013 (UTC)

"Scandinavia builds up its military and economy. Infrastructure is built up, connecting provincial capitals with the rest of the country. Nya Danmark expands by 2100 sq km. Expeditions from Africa and Asia return, with news of Japan, the civil disarray in India, and the return of a Christian nation in East Africa."

i thought we could, oh well Sine dei gloriem (talk) 22:40, January 14, 2013 (UTC)

can someone fix this please i want to know how much land do i take Sine dei gloriem (talk) 20:25, January 20, 2013 (UTC)

i think this is collie please,fix the mistakes, and tell me how much can i take

This war was retconned.

why, because it wasn't convenient for you Sine dei gloriem (talk) 23:26, January 20, 2013 (UTC)

Another Resignation

I'm sorry I was gone for a few days, or else I'd have done this sooner. Never mind the shark, this game has jumped the whale, hopped the Kraken, and is currently cartwheeling over a smallish landmass the size of Canada. The formation of the Caliphate (Hence forth referred to as the 'shark), the existence of said Caliphate for 100 years despite various cultural and religious differences within it (Hence forth referred to as the 'whale'), the annexation of- well, of most to Eurasia (Hence forth referred to as the 'Kraken'), these could all have been recovered from. In fact, I'd argue that the shark and whale added some more excitement to the post Great Holy War (Hence forth referred to as 'Yes, it was plausible- ever heard of the crusades?')(just kidding, actually it will be referred to as 'GHW'), just as the Dual Khanate was falling and we were all failing to do anything about that. The Kraken was, I feel, majorly implausible, but again, could have been recovered from.

The subsequent breakup- especially the events around Russia (hence forth referred to as the 'not-so-smallish-landmass' ) the thing that really screwed this game up, for me anyway. I have a feeling that if more mods had been around, the argument wouldn't have resolved itself as it did, with a declaration of God and Alien Space Bats from Von. But I don't want to restart this argument- I don't care any more- and I bear no animosity to those who sided against me.

All metaphors over now. 

Russia is hardly a cancer to this game. The true cancer was the breakup of the Mahdiate; not really anyone's fault. To those who disagree with me; kindly shut up.

I'll post the last message in 1581, stating that the Grand Duke of Muscovy now dies, heirless, so the Muscovian government asks for annexation by Novgorod. 

I'll be back for PMIII, when it rolls around, sooner or... well, it might be later, though I rather doubt it. Still, the appointment of new mods might get you through this. 

In conclusion, ladies, gentlemen, assorted mods, please, do not be too rough on the newly humbled state of Russia. It is a reminder of that long ago (read; a month) time when men were men, war was war, and Principia Moderni II was a plausible map game.

The Royal Guns (talk) 20:22, January 14, 2013 (UTC)

Luso-Castillian War (1582)

Portugal

• Location: 5
• Tactical Advantage: 5 (larger colonial empire), 1 (attacker)
• Strength: Portugal (L+4), Scandinavia (S) = 6/4 = 1.5
• Military Development: 12
• Economy: 10
• Infrastructure: 0
• Expansion: 0
• Motive: 3
• Chance: 8
  • Edit Count: 3613
  • UTC Time: 21:06
  • 2*1*0*6 = 12
  • 3613/12 x pi = 945,8811881183269142137942119824
• Nation Age: +5 (1385)
• Population: 7
• Participation: 10
• Recent Wars:-1

Total: 66,5

Castille

• Location: 5
• Tactical Advantage: 2 (high ground)
• Strength: Castille (L +4) = 4 = 0
• Military Development: 0/3
• Economy: 0/3
• Infrastructure: 0/3
• Expansion: 0
• Motive: 5
• Chance: 1
• Nation Age: -5 (1230)
• Population: 7+2 = 9
• Participation: 10
• Recent Wars: 0

Total: 27 or 36

Result

It will depend if Castille can receive NPC bonus.

In case their score is 36:

66,5/102,5 - 0,5 x 2 = 0,2975609756097560975609756097561

Portugal can take 29,7% of Castillian territory.

In case their score is 27:

66,5/93,5 - 0,5 x 2 = 0,42245989304812834224598930481283

Portugal can take 42,2% of Castillian territory.

Discussion

The 0/3 on the military/economy and infrastructure sections for castille is because i'm not sure if the NPC bonus count, as Castille technically, still has a player.--Collie Kaltenbrunner (talk) 21:13, January 14, 2013 (UTC)

Add me on for supplies.AP (talk) 07:23, January 15, 2013 (UTC)

Castile should've broken up by now because it had no player for X years. I don't understand how the mods overlook these things. Fegelein! Fegelein! Fegelein! 21:37, January 15, 2013 (UTC)

Technically/Nominally, they have a player, but he doesn't post since so much time, that he should have been condsidered inactive a long time ago.Which is where the problem with the bonus arises.--Collie Kaltenbrunner (talk) 21:54, January 15, 2013 (UTC)

Well just because a player leaves doesn't mean there nation should always be broken up. I mean the England break-up seemed a bit daft to me for one. But anyway, yes they should have lost their player colour & change to NPC status a while ago. VonGlusenburg ^{(talk to Von!)} 03:30, January 17, 2013 (UTC)

Really. the only nations which should have broken up from them were Wales and Cornwall. A beter option would be the nation entering into a civil war just like the one in France and then reestabilizing again.--Collie Kaltenbrunner (talk) 07:00, January 17, 2013 (UTC)

Okay, it is 1586.i asked the mods about what to do, and most told me that i should treat them as a player nation (Scan - NPC/ Von and AP - player/Fed and Yank - didn't answer).As such, Castille shall be treated as a player nation.as such, their score is 27.--Collie Kaltenbrunner (talk) 21:00, January 18, 2013 (UTC)

The Mayan empire

I think we need to do something about the Mayan empire. I think it has expanded too rapidly and should be hit with another disease outbreak in which it looses its empire's furthest territories. (e.g. its Calfornian colonies, northern mexico, costa rica, etc.). What do the other mods think? VonGlusenburg ^{(talk to Von!)} 23:59, January 14, 2013 (UTC)

I'm going to make a few Indian Revolts. They are most certainly angry, and they seem almost absent. But I think the Mayans should weaken anyways because of disease.  Saamwiil, the Humble 00:14, January 15, 2013 (UTC)

I really don't think "weak because of the plague" is true because, remember, it's been three generations since the Maya were exposed to smallpox. Fed (talk)

What about measles, pox, plauge, etc. Or an assassination and civil war? Anyways what is more concerning is the fact that Dean is allowed to control SIX independent nations. I believe the mods should convene about that. ~Scan

Measles, pox and plague were all introduced with smallpox. I could see civil war working but we really have to stop using "king dies heirless" as a collapse idea because it really isn't that much of a thing. A civil war, yes, but eventually a pretender will rise out most likely. Fed (talk) 01:38, January 15, 2013 (UTC)

Who said the king dies heirless? It could be the siblings of the heir struggling for power... Scandinator (talk) 03:23, January 15, 2013 (UTC)

Well, what I meant is that every collapse reason until now is "succession struggles" which almost always doesn't result in national collapse. It's okay now and then but not every single collapse. Fed (talk) 03:29, January 15, 2013 (UTC)  

How about a new wave of disease causes the other peoples the Mayans rule over to revolt and break away. Remember that the player for the Mayans is still playing, we just need to reel in his implausible expansion. Remember when the Europeans came to the Americas, native states like the Maya are meant to weaken not strengthen! VonGlusenburg ^{(talk to Von!)} 18:44, January 15, 2013 (UTC)

• In my defense, I did cease all expansion when I got hit with the plague the first round. In OTL, the Mayans and the Incas were both conquered by the Spanish. In this timeline, no one was interested, and instead gave me technology. True, I have probably been expanding a little implausibly. Let me tell you why though. A while back, the mapmakers wouldn't post my expansion for turns on end. So I just added it myself. No one would answer my questions as to a limit for expansion, so I just did my best  to make it as plausible as possible. If you guys have a problem with my plausibility, just tell me. I'm dissapointed that I had to find this myself instead of someone coming and confronting me first. I will stop expanding so much, but only if it's added to the map like it should be. Otherwise, I have to do it myself, or it will never get done. CourageousLife (talk) 19:58, January 15, 2013 (UTC)

Talking about the map, next time when you edit the map, please stop adding a color to the Miskitos.they haven't got a player.--Collie Kaltenbrunner (talk) 22:15, January 15, 2013 (UTC)

Hopefully, I won't have to edit the map next time. In case I do, I'll be sure to remember that. CourageousLife (talk) 23:57, January 15, 2013 (UTC)

Well then we'll just have some territory lost you have more plausible borders then. Which is basically what we are doing now. VonGlusenburg ^{(talk to Von!)} 03:26, January 17, 2013 (UTC)

I have tried really hard to stay in the lines in reguards to plausibility. In this case, it was an honest miscalculation that wouldn't have happened if it was represented correctly on the map. I will gladly submit to a period of limited to no expansion to make up for the error, which is the solution that I'm asking. But I need to know, what would my borders look like in the case that you did sieze some of my territory, and how long would it take to reaquire it after it was taken from me? CourageousLife (talk) 04:14, January 17, 2013 (UTC)

The Mayan empire after this proposed mod event

Okay here is a map of how it'd look afterward. A famine or plague or something causes a lot of the northern territories to be abandoned. Then some revolt happens, Mayans sell some colonies to help fund the war and they win the war. Only 3 states revolt away in the south with some civil disarray which you can reconquer too. Sell at least 1 colony but you don't have to sell them all, just the 1. The break away states can only be retaken via war and you can expand as normal to retake the abandoned land following a 3 year wait to make sure the land is safe again. VonGlusenburg ^{(talk to Von!)} 04:56, January 17, 2013 (UTC)

The abandoned territory in the north or in the south? CourageousLife (talk) 05:01, January 17, 2013 (UTC)

The North, it has gone back to being black. Compare this map with the 1580 map and tell me what you think. VonGlusenburg ^{(talk to Von!)} 05:04, January 17, 2013 (UTC)

It's reasonable. The black land in the north, I think I'm just going to sell. CourageousLife (talk) 05:12, January 17, 2013 (UTC)

On second thought, I'll just let it go back to black. CourageousLife (talk) 13:49, January 17, 2013 (UTC)

Dean's six nations

The rules of the game clearly state that one is only allow to have one independent nation and can control others via, puppet regimes, unions or vassalizations. Dean has none of these for Greece, Albania, Montenegro, Sibir or Serbia. I propose a moderator vote to either set a precedent and allow everyone multiple nations or abide by the rules and leave Dean with the Ottoman Empire and the Crimean Khanate.

More than one nation allowed

• If that nation is a successor state of your nation (like break-away colonies or break away states) then I say okay. VonGlusenburg ^{(talk to Von!)} 01:49, January 15, 2013 (UTC)

Only one independent nation per player until colonies revolt

• Scandinator (talk) 01:00, January 15, 2013 (UTC)
• Fed (talk) 01:38, January 15, 2013 (UTC)
• AP (talk) 05:59, January 15, 2013 (UTC) I like this. This is democracy, see how much better we're doing already?(the vote, not what we're voting on)

NPC But player controlled flavour

• Only if you used to control it. Saamwiil, the Humble 04:51, January 15, 2013 (UTC)

Discussion

Another mods-only vote, eh? Fegelein! Fegelein! Fegelein! 01:17, January 15, 2013 (UTC)

lol facepalm... Sine dei gloriem (talk) 01:20, January 15, 2013 (UTC)

Well I think he should be allowed to chose which nation he wants to control for starters. Anyway he used to control that territory when it was in the Caliphate so falls under the same jurisdiction as a successor state / controlling break away colonies. VonGlusenburg ^{(talk to Von!)} 01:41, January 15, 2013 (UTC)

Have you noticed how differently controlled each nation is, im doing it right, its not like I was making them all become one big alliance then sure, but how is adding more detailed posts bad for the game, I see no crime in it. (DeanSims: Talk) 02:38, January 15, 2013 (UTC)

Von, key word being used to. The Caliphate's in disarray, everything's broken apart, and these Balkan states who have for centuries Christian are now free from the Muslim regime. I highly doubt they would accept being under the control of Anatolia willingly. ChrisL123 (talk) 02:40, January 15, 2013 (UTC)

Just saying there is a clause in the basic rules that goes as follows: "Each player will "call" a nation, one nation per player. Until decolonization" Scandinator (talk) 03:32, January 15, 2013 (UTC)

Since I like compromise: Dean may post as them, as he used to control them, but they are treated as NPCs because that's what they truly are, and therefore are hit by mod event as NPCs. This would hence imply that he does not control the foreign relations of each country, but may add internnal flavour and have them work on their military et cetera.  Saamwiil, the Humble 03:54, January 15, 2013 (UTC)

Chris he is treating them as separate countries, i.e. the Greeks and Ottomans haven't agreed to join up or anything. They are different nations and he is treating them like that. They are not under Ottoman control, simply just Dean's rule.

Scan, he used to control those territories, they've now broke away as separate nations. Everyone did this in PM1. You are allowed to control break away nations. The fact that he is demanding more nations which the Caliphate used to control is sign of compromise already. So unless people are trying to control break-away nations & colonies (like Dean is trying to do now) then they can't control multiple nations. Futhermore in the rules it says the following: "Bordering nations may gain independence at any time. Colonies may gain independence beginning in 1776. Players may add a quarter turn per year and keep alliance with the first nation, or add a half turn and break alliances. Players may also decide to relinquish control over the independent state and come back to it later, although standard expansion rules apply. After thirty years, the number of turns doubles for an independent nation." Is that not what has happened? Is that not what me, Fed & Saam all did and that was allowed?

And Saam that is already what is sort of happening. But he does have control of their external affairs. VonGlusenburg ^{(talk to Von!)} 15:26, January 15, 2013 (UTC)

No, the breakaway colonies are different to the issue at hand. Anywyas the conflict has been resolved. Dean is to get 1.5 bonus on his algorithm for the next 15 years in the Balkans as the Ottoman Empire. Scandinator (talk) 15:38, January 15, 2013 (UTC)

Since when has a democratic process more important than your back-handed deals? Plus read what I actually put! Bordering nations may gain independence at any time. You completely ignored my argument in hope that you can now get Venice some territory back in Greece. VonGlusenburg ^{(talk to Von!)} 15:46, January 15, 2013 (UTC)

I agree with Von. Reaching a compromise is one thing, giving Dean a shady advantage and dealing to split territory with that advantage is just plain unfair. I say if it's one or the other Dean keeps his countries and that's it, not the fifteen'year rule, which is borderline corruption. Fed (talk) 18:19, January 15, 2013 (UTC)

Exactly, and you guys want to make this corrupt guy the head mod. Considering what he has done in the past and present, I don't think he is fit to hold this position. Its like giving a senator who has sent to prison the presidency. It just isn't meant to happen.

Proposed division of the Balkans - yet more proof Scan is only looking out for himself & not the integrity of the game

Let me say it again, the bordering country rule allows this sort of thing. Me, Fed, Saam and others have done this already in the game with no problems. Heck no one battered an eyelid at us doing it, but now seeing that other people could loose a bit of territory/the chance to get some territory, they now decide to pipe up. Scan has now even drawn up a map dividing the Balkans between himself and Dean. It is yet another instance of Scan abusing his position to better his own nation, something which he was banned for in the past. Not to mention an alliance between the Venetians and Ottomans is borderline implausible considering they've been hated enemies for the past 100 years or so. VonGlusenburg ^{(talk to Von!)} 18:39, January 15, 2013 (UTC)

Sorry, I thought the deal was ok cuz a mod offered it. If you wish I can just use the Ottoman Empire to avoid any more issues.,Besides, ecentualy it was going to be used to advance the Ottomans past a plausible point because, well, thats what ive done in the past when having more than one nation, look at Hot Cold War, I did that and united germany and england. (DeanSims: Talk) 19:28, January 15, 2013 (UTC)™

Well since we have Dean deciding to just use the Ottoman Empire instead of insisting on controlling the area he used to then there will be no need for the 1.5 bonus which I was going to use as a compromise. the bording country rule does not allow it to this extent. You say it is ok to control bordering nations with military, economy and war one second and refuse to allow even planting discussion of joining an international league -.- I'm confused Von. And honestly, I don't care who gets mod-in-chief so long as they do their job. Enough with the shame politics... Scandinator (talk) 00:54, January 16, 2013 (UTC)

Also your precedent with the Caliphate was due to the fact that one ruler controlled all those nations (even so if I was there then the conquest of Russia would have never happened). If you are talking about after Caliphate, then the only reason nothing was done is thanks to mod inactivity. Scandinator (talk) 08:01, January 16, 2013 (UTC)

No its not okay for a player to control over NPCs which border them. The rules state thusly: "It is possible to create multiple nations. However some rules must be observed. ... (Section 3: Independence): Bordering nations may gain independence at any time." As in you can have part of your territory break away as an independent state bordering your current which you control. And it was done a few times after the Caliphate but there were active mods e.g. me. You seem to forget you were active too, even having a war with one of my successor states & not complaining about it then. The Caliphate and Russia also did it when we were creating new provinces/states too. The only complaint from Lurk being not to over-do it. But true they shared the same head of state, but they acted autonomously from one another but with the same intentions. However I did do it with Shaybah and also it was done a few times in PM1 too.

Also what do you mean about: "refuse to allow even planting discussion of joining an international league." To what league and what nations do you refer? VonGlusenburg ^{(talk to Von!)} 03:22, January 17, 2013 (UTC)

Announcement

In in attempt to centralize the leadership of the game, several people have mentioned the creation of a mod page. That is exactly what I have done. Please visit it as soon as I have created it(mods only though!)AP (talk) 06:19, January 15, 2013 (UTC)

HRE

I have developed a new plan for ending the HRE. Election are "ongoing" right now, even though we have no votes in. My plan is that the HRE becomes split due to the radical differences between the "candidates" for Emperor and the proximity of votes in number. Eventually everyone support one candidate leave the Emperor, and this pattern continues with the remaining states until nothing is left. Thoughts? Fegelein! Fegelein! Fegelein! 04:15, January 16, 2013 (UTC)

There is a great divide already, Burgundy, Italy and Bavaria are likely to break away very soon leaving a remanent HRE. Scandinator (talk) 06:42, January 16, 2013 (UTC)

Can you just be a bit more patient? I was going throw the HRE out the windows long ago, but everyone interfered. If you all cooperate this time, we can make everything click into place and be independent nations. Fegelein! Fegelein! Fegelein! 22:42, January 16, 2013 (UTC)

So this would be to divide the HRE even more after that?--Collie Kaltenbrunner (talk) 06:54, January 16, 2013 (UTC)

Just like the Caliphate I think the HRE should be given an ultimatum now. Either split it up before 1600 or the mods will do it for you in 1600. Something which we have tried partially already (e.g. the Kappelist league break away) but you guys seem to unwilling to break it up. VonGlusenburg ^{(talk to Von!)} 03:24, January 17, 2013 (UTC)

...You do realize that I just said I'm going to break it up, right? Or did you just read the first sentence?

Anyways, I have tried several times to force the HRE to implode. However, several other things interfered with this. I have not postponed this at all. I ask that everyone fall in with the plans so that everyone can be happy when this is all over. Fegelein! Fegelein! Fegelein! 03:32, January 17, 2013 (UTC)

Well then show us these plans. VonGlusenburg ^{(talk to Von!)} 03:47, January 17, 2013 (UTC)

He did state above his plans, slightly vaguely, but stated yes. However, if the HRE doesn't fall apart by 1600, the mods will need to force it apart.  Saamwiil, the Humble 03:58, January 17, 2013 (UTC)

Siad plan being forced infighting, no successor to the Emperor, no central government, states decide that there is no more HRE, the end. Much easier than anything else anyone has or had planned. Fegelein! Fegelein! Fegelein! 04:52, January 17, 2013 (UTC)

...And Scan has chosen to ignore this....

Fegelein! Fegelein! Fegelein! 18:20, January 21, 2013 (UTC)

And AP. Can someone just show these ignorant ignorers this? If more people interfere, the HRE will never collapse, and we need the HRE to collapse. Fegelein! Fegelein! Fegelein! 15:39, January 22, 2013 (UTC)

I retconned the independence of North Bavaria which is implausible. Other than that, the rest should just fall into place. I'm just making sure that Scraw doesn't run the show completely to benefit himself.AP (talk) 03:59, January 23, 2013 (UTC)

Mods?

It has come to my attention that the recent elections for new mods were thrown together by Saamwiil, and that he made up several rules, including you can vote more than once and anyone can run. Clearly this goes against the existing rules. As such, I am inclined to believe that Fedelede and AP are unfortunately not really mods, and neither is Saam himself. I also believe that he closed voting after I put my vote of rejection against him, and he insists that I voted after closing. Anyone can check the history and see that I voted against him before he "closed" voting. As such, I am sure that we to vote all over again, and ensure that all our candidates meet the criteria given.

FURTHERMORE, I do not appreciate the whole vendetta Saam set against my colony I established, Neu Berlin. I would like to know in which timeline and alternate universe the Indians are found capable of driving back numbers of armed Europeans, as well as the fleets from the motherland that are stationed there year round. I have already been inducing native attacks upon myself for quite a while now, and these recent announcements that I cannot expand my colony by my God-given rights (excuse the reference, it's just a term) of 2100sqkm.

Thank you for bothering to read this.

Fegelein! Fegelein! Fegelein! 05:27, January 17, 2013 (UTC)

Oh, and one last thing. In all honesty, do these unorganized tribes really count as nations at all? Should they even be on the map? And if yes, how plausible is it really for the fourth-most modernized nation on the entire planet to defeated by awestruck natives? Fegelein! Fegelein! Fegelein! 05:30, January 17, 2013 (UTC)

No offense Saam, but are you a mod? You're name isn't on the list, and I've been confused about your status as a mod for a while now. And I see Scraw's part of the argument. It seems that his colony is the only one that is being attacked by natives, no one else's. CourageousLife (talk) 13:54, January 17, 2013 (UTC) 

I thought that the election was to replace the mods who left, which were two, so in this case, Saam wouldn't be a mod, as he got third place in votes among the four which competed.--Collie Kaltenbrunner (talk) 16:51, January 17, 2013 (UTC)

So he's not a mod? CourageousLife (talk) 17:25, January 17, 2013 (UTC)

No.i think that he was the last to hit those five points, so he isn't a mod unless it is decided that we can have a ninth mod, but the mod-in-chief election is still tied between me and Scan.--Collie Kaltenbrunner (talk) 21:08, January 17, 2013 (UTC)

Caspia

Yank's Cetera Argument

I've still got my doubts about Caspia. It still seems like it grew way too fast. If he had started with Kuwait and slowly worked on expanding his territory I wouldn't have a problem with it. But he had to be greedy and take it all in one fell swoop. They way he uses the constituent countries to pad is numbers in the mod is against the rules, but he doesn't care. This in my opinion disqualifies him from assuming the position of Mod in the first place. And didn't he effectively storm off in a huff when he didn't get his way? Yank 05:45, January 17, 2013 (UTC)

Saam's become what Scan used to be. I think he needs to take a break from the map game and return when he can play nice with others. He can't cheat in the algorithm and he shouldn't bully his fellow users. He needs to leave before his actions kill this game and tarnish the legendary predecessor's reputation. Not that I'm saying he can't be rehabilitated. Scan has become a productive member of the map game. I'm just saying he needs time to cool off, as how Scan did. He needs to sit out the rest of this game and return when PMIII comes. --Yank 06:03, January 17, 2013 (UTC)

I'm not the only one who thinks Saam went too far. Both Von and Fed agree that his behavior with Caspia. I'm not the only one with a "giantsquidofangervendetta" or whatever he calls it. His implausible posts picking on Scraw do absolutely nothing other than implausibly try to keep a colony from doing the natural thing and expand. The Natuve Americans were powerless to stop the Europeans, so it's ridiculous to think otherwise. Yhe fact remains that his atat paddjnv is considered cheating by pretty much everyone. He doesn't have the right to bend the rules for his own benefit. Not to mention the fact that he's quit the game. Until he changes his ways like Scan did he does not belong here. Principia Moderni didn't get the reputation it did by allowing the players to throw out the rules at will.--Yank 18:53, January 17, 2013 (UTC)

Saamwiil's Cetera Argument

This is just an example of how blind to the scenario you are and using your modship to your advantage to pursue your giantsquidofangervandetta.

1. Kuwait is only one of the three states leading against the Persain War, and has no leadership of the the three.
2. I had long before posted how the divisions of Caspia would go down, and would have liked to be a peacefull, and make the Persian states into tiny trading states, Von may attest this, and maybe if you have the energy, you may take another look at the DME talk page, but of course you shouldn't, mods shouldn't do research before doing their argument, should they?
3. I no longer control Caspia, so this truly is a mute point.
4. Caspia is basically the territories I had started off with in the game, and it is a weak remnant state of what they used to be (the Qoyunlus). It doesn't havea national army, there is a minimal tax on the local emirs which is often ignored, and the emirs may declare war with each other, it spends most of its money on arts and technology. This is one of the biggest threats the Middle East has had, isn't it?
5. Yank seems to care more about honour than actual gamplay, and will use his modship to persue the giantsquidofangervandetta. He has continuosly shown for his main intrest to be destroying nations ex and in Caliphate, unless he controlls it as a mod (Persia, Dimurats). I actually think he is perfect as a mod. He's biased, impluasible and can't control his anger, that's all what a mod needs to be the best one possible.

I'm not sure if you really want Yank as a mod.  Saamwiil, the Humble 13:05, January 17, 2013 (UTC)

'Scussion

I'm with Yank. Saam, first of all, everything you said could have been said by Yank to be used against you. Essentially--every thing you've said is wrong. Modship is about what you said it is--and you are neither a mod, nor do you fit any of your criteria. Fegelein! Fegelein! Fegelein! 21:54, January 17, 2013 (UTC)

Haha. No it couldn't. I have no nation, I cannot be biased. If I were to pursue my giantsquidofangervandetta I would be making Korea revolt right now (which I believe should happen since Korea almost conquered Manchuria t one point, then it jus became vassalise), but since I am not biased like Yank, I don't, I leave it to other mods who may be less sentimental about the subject. Anyhow, I think the moderators agree that your German colony was too big.  Saamwiil, the Humble 22:03, January 17, 2013 (UTC)

First of all, a Korean conquest would have been plausible at all times. The algorithm.

Second of all, you're not a mod.

Third of all, the only who still thinks my colony is too big is you--Collie and AP officially disagree with you, as evidenced by this page, the game page, and the mod page. I've followed all the rules. You have not. Yank has. You are not a mod. END OF STORY. 

Fegelein! Fegelein! Fegelein! 22:09, January 17, 2013 (UTC)

Trololol. You really like the word 'End Of Story' do you not. Actually AP originally mentioned the German Colony being to big, it wasn't even my original idea, do research. The Koreans were vassalised not conquered, look throughout the talk page and its archives and you will  never find a place where Manchuria conquered Korea, actually it was the other way around...

~ Saam

Yes, in fact I do. Yes, he did start it, but then he said you're going overboard with it.

It doesn't matter what happened to Korea, it's still plausible. ALGORITHM.

Fegelein! Fegelein! Fegelein! 22:22, January 17, 2013 (UTC)

Because he thought I was making the Indians kick you out on New England, which is not correct, they just tried to, the only place they have kicked you out of is Canada. And yes, you are correct, the algorithm is chief. But won't you please give me a link to where his algorithm for conquering Korea is? I've looked through all the archives, but maybe I'm blind. Prove me wrong, and I'll shut up about Korea.  Saamwiil, the Humble 22:26, January 17, 2013 (UTC)

No, Korea tried to invade Manchuria, but that backfired and Manchuria won. Or was that Taiwan? I think Korea was a mod event by Von, or something. Inactivity, I think.

Fegelein! Fegelein! Fegelein! 22:32, January 17, 2013 (UTC)

Korea almost conquered Manchuria. Look at the algorithm. I even remember the joke about Korea starting a second war against Manchuria to mess with Yank.  Saamwiil, the Humble 22:37, January 17, 2013 (UTC) The Manchurians first took advantage of the chaos in Korea to take back the territory the Koreans took. They then took the opportunity to back a vassal state in former Korean territory. At that point the organized nation of Korea didn't exist. I would have removed it if someone had a legitimate problem with it, but nobody did. Three people in this game definitely have problems with what you did. You can't use that as an example, because I didn't ignore the complaints because there were none. That's exactly what you are doing here. You're ignoring the fact that you are wrong and justifying your wrongdoing. Yank 22:54, January 17, 2013 (UTC)

Haha, okay. Yank. You're right. You're conquering of Korea was plausible, the setting up of Persia was plausible and I shouldn't be picking on you or SS.  Saamwiil, the Humble 23:04, January 17, 2013 (UTC)

I don't like having to bring you down, but it's the duty of the mods to keep the game plausible. I think Persia is much more plausible because of historical connotations. The Persians were one of the oldest regional superpowers, and any aspiring leader would be wise to want to become the next Persia. You could play as Persia if you so desired, so long as you keep it plausible. Yank 23:59, January 17, 2013 (UTC)

For the record I didn't have anything to do with the korea thing, I just stopped Yank taking over Korea as Manchuria as fast. And my issue with Saam was not his nation or the idea behind it, just how he was treating it as a league of really small nations to algorithm boost. I would be quite happy if he still played as them just as long as he wasn't using so many nations in an attempt to algorithm boost. He could carry out his plans with a lot less states and the fact he didn't is my cause for concern. Anyway yeah. VonGlusenburg ^{(talk to Von!)} 00:35, January 18, 2013 (UTC)

But it wasn't for an algorithm boost! I said long before on the DME talk page how I planned Caspia to be. Anyhow, right now, Persia has no place in Persia. If they are conquered, it will break up at the death of the first Sultan or earlier. People just experience decentralistation and don't want to give it up. Same as in Russia.  Saamwiil, the Humble 00:41, January 18, 2013 (UTC)

Yes you explained but not you'd have them all as seperate nations but still in the alliance, unlike Russia. I was thinking they were just going to be just how you were displaying them on the map. You can do that but you can't in the algorithm. Something which you knew after Lurk told us about after we were thinking about something similiar with the caliphate. You should know better, especially if you're trying to be a mod (which you're not currently) so yeah. VonGlusenburg ^{(talk to Von!)} 00:48, January 18, 2013 (UTC)

They are not all in an alliance... They routinely declare war on each other, they will protect against foreign threat to keep their freedom though. I never planned to use all of them, the only oned in the war were regional emirates. Saamwiil, the Humble 00:56, January 18, 2013 (UTC)  Saamwiil, the Humble 00:56, January 18, 2013 (UTC)

You quit. That means that you don't get to tell us how the world works in Principia Moderni. If we allow people like you to poke holes in the rules Principia Moderni will be degraded to become a common map game, making the original look worse by association. You were caught breaking the rules and resigned in a quite selfish move. Caspia doesn't work under the rules. You are frankly quite hypocritical. You are the corrupt cop of this map game. For the good of the map game you need to finish what you started and stay gone. --Yank 04:16, January 18, 2013 (UTC)

All right, I've now had enough of this.

Saam, you aren't playing the game, or listed as a mod, or anything of the sort. And that is plainly obvious. Thus, you have no role in it. As has been stated before, you quit. As such, you have no power, or anything of the sort. Others have made this clear to you - now I am, too. End of discussion.

Lordganon (talk) 11:08, January 18, 2013 (UTC)

Apparently he doesn't get it. He's still modding. Fegelein! Fegelein! Fegelein! 21:06, January 19, 2013 (UTC)

Ottoman-Albanian War

Would someone please do an algorithm for the Ottoman-Albania War? (DeanSims: Talk) 14:24, January 17, 2013 (UTC)

New World and future territory for France.

Since I'm going directly east from La Rochelle, it looks like I'll be landing in OTL Nova Scotia. How will I be able to confirm that I establish a base there? Stewdio333 (talk) 04:44, January 18, 2013 (UTC)

Scandinavia already claims that area.--Collie Kaltenbrunner (talk) 19:53, January 18, 2013 (UTC)

Northeastern North America is essentially taken. Colonizing their will most likely end in colonial war. I'd suggest South America or Central America. Argentina seems like a viable spot.

Actually, Chile, because Argentina north of Patagonia is already being disputed between Portugal, Scandinavia and Burgundy.--Collie Kaltenbrunner (talk) 06:32, January 19, 2013 (UTC)

Invasion of the Incan Empire

Scandinavia(and friends, maybe)

• Location:  1
• Tactical: 6
• Strength: Scandinavia(L)+ Saami(MV) +Portugal(S)+Leon(S)+Castille(S) = 12/4= 3
• Military Dev: 30
• Economic Dev: 0
• Infrastructure: 0
• Motive: 3
• Chance: 8
  • Edit count: 1,834
  • Time: 08:37
  • 1834/168*pi= 33.78204761904762
• Nation Age: +5
• Population: 8+10
• Participation: 10
• Recent wars: -3

Total: 81

Incan Empire

• Location: 3(Cuzco is very far inland and the invasion is on the coast)
• Tactical: 2(High ground)
• Strength: Incan Empire(L)--0
• Military Dev: 3
• Economy: 3
• Infrastructure: 3
• Motive: 10
• Chance: 2
• Nation Age: 0
• Population: 7
• Participation: 10
• Recent Wars: 0

Total: 40

Don't touch the algorithm please, it's already checked out.

Result

(81/(121)*2)-1= 0.3388429752066116%

After 5 years, 30.6% is taken. The Sapa Inca is deposed and replaced by a pro-Scandinavian one, turning the rest of the Empire into a vassal.(as Collie and I agreed upon)AP (talk) 02:22, January 20, 2013 (UTC)

Discussion

It's 30% which means you can only take 30% because you need 33% to take over or do whatever. Why is it that Collie always takes to correcting my native algorithms to the point that I lose, whereas he didn't even bother with this one? Fegelein! Fegelein! Fegelein! 02:25, January 20, 2013 (UTC)

Because this time he was right, and last time you tried to do it, you ignored a lot of things that were supposed to be on thge algorythm?--Collie Kaltenbrunner (talk) 07:11, January 20, 2013 (UTC)

Don't you need at least 33% of taken territory to do something like that..? ChrisL123 (talk) 02:24, January 20, 2013 (UTC)

Also, every single time I do an algorithm, Collie insists that the military, economy, and infrastructure is 3, because 5/2 is 2.5 and 2.5 rounds to 3. Fegelein! Fegelein! Fegelein! 02:26, January 20, 2013 (UTC)

When the NPC bonus was proposed, they said that the 2.5 was supposed to be rounded by 3.--Collie Kaltenbrunner (talk) 07:11, January 20, 2013 (UTC)

He edited it already actually. And you can do that, provided you win by enough(30% or higher margins)AP (talk) 02:29, January 20, 2013 (UTC)

Go read the rules page and then come back to us. Read the algorithm part inside-out. You'll the mistakes he "overlooked." Fegelein! Fegelein! Fegelein! 02:31, January 20, 2013 (UTC)

You round up the individual scores like Collie is doing. That is correct what he is doing. You round up to the nearest whole number with the exception of the territory won percentage which isn't (unless its under 1% then it is rounded to 1%). VonGlusenburg ^{(talk to Von!)} 05:07, January 20, 2013 (UTC)

Turco-Albanian War (1583-?)

Ottoman Empire

• Location: 3
• Tactical Advantage: 1 (Attacker's advantage)
• Strength: Ottoman Empire (L), Crimean Khanate (MV) = 6 = 0
• Military Development: 12/7 = 2
• Economy: 1 = 0
• Infrastructure: 0
• Expansion: 0
• Motive: 3
• Chance: 3
  • Edit Count:  4600
  • UTC Time: 03:18
  • 3*1*8 = 24
  • 4600/24 x pi = 602,138591825
• Nation Age: -5 (1575)
• Population: 27 (>10 times)
• Participation: 10
• Recent Wars: 0

Total: 44

Albania & Venice

• Location: 5
• Tactical Advantage: 2 (high ground)
• Strength: Albania (L +4), Venice (L +4), Piedmont (MV +2), Sardinia (MV +2), Croatia (MV +2), Naples (MV +2), Siena (MV +2) = 18/4= 4.5
• Military Development: 1+6 = 7/12 = 0
• Economy: 1+20 = 21/1 = 21
• Infrastructure: 1
• Expansion: 0
• Motive: 10
• Chance: 8
• Nation Age: -5 (1577)
• Population: 6
• Participation: 10
• Recent Wars: -4

Total: 60.5

Result

Large Coalition victory. (63/107)*2-1=19% of the Ottoman empire can be taken, The Ottomans lose all islands and Continental Europe to the HRE

Discussion

Not too sure about this, most likely has a bunch of errors. Fed (talk) 19:49, January 19, 2013 (UTC)

I corrected it.one thing about an NPC bonus.it is not always three.in case of Albania, they had only 6 years of existence before this war.as such, they did each of the kinds of development twice.so, their score is 1 when you divide per 2.the three only arises in nations who did each of the developments 5 times.Although i'm not sure if this 27 is really true.--Collie Kaltenbrunner (talk) 07:29, January 20, 2013 (UTC)

Saamwill

We need to ban Saam from the game. Even with the Caspia nonsense out of the way he still is trying to manipulate the game. The fact that he's very apparently nursing some grudge against Sraw, and he's posting mod events without being either a mod or a player. He needs to learn a lesson on the importance of rules.--Yank 23:02, January 19, 2013 (UTC)

I don't think a ban is necessary. He doesn't have a nation and apparently he's not a mod. It was my idea for the Indian attacks, but he took it a few steps overboard so I'm not too sure if it's some sort of vendetta against Scraw or if he was just motivated by the mod page discussions but took it too far. He (Saam) really has nothing to lose here if you think about it. You know, unless he decides to play again.AP (talk) 23:52, January 19, 2013 (UTC)

Small West African States

I'd like to know what all the small West African states are named, especially the ones along the coast. Airlinesguy (talk) 23:44, January 19, 2013 (UTC)

Along the coast from Morocco to Zululand, the NPC West African states are: Morocco, Fulani, Wolof, Gabu, Bonoman, Oyo, Ife, Benin, Kongo, Zululand.

Enjoy, and use this info well. Scandinator (talk) 03:09, January 20, 2013 (UTC)

Thanks Scan! Airlinesguy (talk) 00:27, January 21, 2013 (UTC)

War of Veliko-Permian Submission

Novgorod

• Location: 4
• Tactical Advantage: 6(attacker+colonies)
• Novgorod(4L)/Muscovy(3M)/Scandinavia(S2)/others=9+/4 =  2
• Military Development: 20/1=20
• Economy:  2/1= 2
• Infrastructure: N/A
• Expansion: 0
• Motive: 5(reuniting nation counts as this?not sure on motive)
• Chance: 9
  • Edit Count: 3418
  • UTC Time: 1:40 = 1*4=4
  • (3418/4)*pi= 2684.490922492478
• Nation Age: 0
• Population: 9(7+2)
• Participation: 10
• Recent Wars: 0(or -3)

Total: 67*1.5 = 101(100.5)

Great Perm

• Location: 4(assuming capital kazan)
• Tactical Advantage:
• Strength:1 = 0
• Military Development:1 = 0
• Economy:1 = 0
• Infrastructure:1 = 0
• Expansion:1 = 0
• Motive:10
• Chance: 4
  • Edit Count: 3418
  • UTC Time: 1:40
  • (3418/4)*pi= 2684.490922492478
• Nation Age:0
• Population:7
• Participation: 10
• Recent Wars:0

Total: 36

Result

Novgorod wins a crushing victory. Novgorod can take at most (((99/99+36)-0.5)*2)) *100% =46.6666666666666666666666666666666...% of Great Perm, the war will last 3 years, allowing Novgorod to acquire 46.666...*(1-1/4) = 35% of Veliko-Permian territory, allowing Novgorod to annex it.

Discussion

I think the 1.5 multiplier expired... Add me on for supplies.

I thought it was for 15 years...caliphate got blown up in 1575(or at least the novgorodian insurrection), so I am guessing I have untill 1590-Lx ^{(leave me a message)} 02:42, January 20, 2013 (UTC)

No it is 10 years. Clearly says so in the rules. Also you can't invade Perm as you don't border it or have a way to reach it. You'll have to invade one of the states you actually border. Plus it isn't called Perm, Perm is in the Khanate of Sibir; I think its the largest city in Sibir so its the capital too. VonGlusenburg ^{(talk to Von!)} 05:16, January 20, 2013 (UTC)

So what is the state he borders called, then?--Collie Kaltenbrunner (talk) 07:36, January 20, 2013 (UTC)

either way, the revolt lasted untill 77 realy, in 75 the governement was put in place in novgorod but not in full control, 77 full control. And the modern city of perm was founded in 1723 by Peter the Great and was named after Great Perm and its capital that was sometimes called Permia and is now called Cherdyn, a town that got overshadowed by Perm and now has only 6000 inhabitants.-Lx ^{(leave me a message)} 21:59, January 20, 2013 (UTC)

Novogorod borders 5 NPCs, Estonia, Lativa, Belorussia, Smolensk and Arkhangelsk? Not sure if the Arkhangelsk one is defintely called Arkhangelsk but that is the largest city in that region which I can use as an identifyer. Seeing how he is trying to invade Sibir then I guess that nation we're called Arkhangelsk which borders the Arctic Ocean would be the most likely candidate for him to try invade.

Otherwise this algorithm has a lot of problems and needs fixing. This war is not complete. VonGlusenburg ^{(talk to Von!)} 00:41, January 21, 2013 (UTC)

That version of the NPCs would be great and all, if it were not for one small factoid...Archangelsk is in Novgorodian territory. Or at least is should be. That and a phew more reasons, such as that city being one of the centres of Novgorodian nationalism by virtue of being the Novgorodian White Sea Fleet, and where the RFNWSFS North Star, or Ice Bogatyr. The navy woyld have returned to its usual spots after the Great Insurection, and Archangelsk was a very big Novgorodian Naval center, and one of Novgorod's biggest Ports and shipyards. Archangels was one of the centers of Novgorodian Nationalism. Either way, I can Invade through Moscow. I own it now, or did you not get the memo? -Lx

Whatever I don't care about all of that crap. I was just trying to come up with a name for that nation which you border in the far north which is alon the Arctic Ocean.

Plus Moscow doesn't border Sibir either. Look at the map. VonGlusenburg ^{(talk to Von!)} 20:09, January 21, 2013 (UTC)

Im not invading sibir, I;m invading Great Perm, and the city of Perm was not in existance at this time. the old city of Cherdyn was sometimes called Permia or velikoperms, and Perm was named after the state of Great Perm, not vice versa-Lx ^{(leave me a message)} 02:09, January 22, 2013 (UTC)

Which one on the map is that one? VonGlusenburg ^{(talk to Von!)} 13:47, January 23, 2013 (UTC)

Great Perm, worst case scenario Kazan, Although I do believe that there should plausibly be only one other state that apears in the novgorodian east.(Great PErm) outside Sibir.-Lx ^{(leave me a message)} 15:04, January 23, 2013 (UTC) 

I'll join some more up in a mod event soon. But I don't want you just taking over all of Russia implausibly fast like you are trying to currently. Expansion will be slower if your doing colonies on top of eastward expansion. VonGlusenburg ^{(talk to Von!)} 01:35, January 31, 2013 (UTC)

Ethiopian-Comchellak War

Ethiopia

• Location: +3
• Tactical Advantage: +3
• Strength: Ethiopia (L +4)
• Military Development: +2
• Economy: +0
• Infrastructure: +0
• Expansion: -2
• Motive: +3
• Chance: 4
  • Edit Count: 1537
  • UTC Time: 19:15
  • 1*9*1*5
  • 1537/458*pi=107.2484444444444
• Nation Age: -5
• Population: +7
• Participation: 10
• Recent Wars: -1

Total: 28

Republic of Comchellak

• Location: +4
• Tactical Advantage: 0
• Strength: Comchellak (L +4)
• Military Development: 2
• Economy: 2
• Infrastructure: 2
• Expansion: 0
• Motive: 10
• Chance: 8
• Nation Age: -5
• Population: +5
• Participation: 10
• Recent Wars: 0

Total: 42

Result

(24/(47)*2)-1= 0.01428...

Depending on how long the war lasts, Malagasy gets less than 13% of Ethiopia.

Discussion

The population and several other things were wrong. I fixed them.AP (talk) 02:00, January 20, 2013 (UTC)

Seriously what is up with you editing every algorithm? You have no jurisdiction, you are not a mod so stop going around and changing algorithms that don't directly affect you. (BTW I'm talking to Scraw).AP (talk) 03:29, January 20, 2013 (UTC)

...Anyone can edit an algorithm...or so I've been told... Fegelein! Fegelein! Fegelein! 03:38, January 20, 2013 (UTC)

Anyone can edit an algorithm, though they should probably mention why they are editing it if it isn't their own algorithm.

Furthermore Malagasy is not the nation in question here; it is part of the Caliphate successor state of Comchellak. Something which I show on the map but people keep un-doing when they upload new maps. Stop changing it, Comchellakis an independent nation and has expanded more than that into Madagascar itself too. VonGlusenburg ^{(talk to Von!)} 05:10, January 20, 2013 (UTC)

Wait, I thought I was invading the old Ethiopian colony (hence the population size), that became independent in the north. Plus, Ethiopia became indepedent from the Caliphate less than 15 years ago, and thus I still get the independence bonus just like Madagascar which became independent at the same time as Ethiopia at the Caliphate's fall. Plus, I made several military and economic expansions after independence. And why does Madagascar get the Military/Economy/Infastructure bonus if its an NPC? Vivaporius says: "I don't need a slogan!" 19:00, January 20, 2013 (UTC)

The bonus only lasts for ten years. And NPC or not, I don't think they sit around doing nothing. That's why we give them buildup scores. Fegelein! Fegelein! Fegelein! 19:10, January 20, 2013 (UTC)

When the Caliphate took over Ethiopia it added Ethiopia's Madagascar colony to the Caliphate's Comchellak colony. The Ethiopians were removed from Madagascar mostly via killing, and new Arab colonists took all of the Ethiopian's stuff for themselves. Once the Caliphate fell the Caliphate's Comchellak colony gained independence as the Republic of Comchellak. Its population is almost entirely Arab and if not Arab then African slaves. Its sort of like OTL Zanzibar and Oman. Otherwise what Scraw says about the rules is correct. VonGlusenburg ^{(talk to Von!)} 00:29, January 21, 2013 (UTC)

Wait, wait, wait. So based on speculation, you've given the colony build-up points? And if the bonus only lasts for ten years, why does the colony have it if they and Ethiopia became independent at the same time? Also, the Caliphate broke up in 1579. Ethiopia invaded the colony in 1588. Plus, there was no mention of the Ethiopian massacre, which if true, would allow Ethiopia to use the religious bonus as the remain Ethiopian people were in danger of being wiped out by a Muslim power. Also, shouldn't their chance be the same? Vivaporius says: "I don't need a slogan!" 02:36, January 21, 2013 (UTC)

Countries don't just sit there and do nothing if they don't have a player, which is why the NPC bonus is in place. The Caliphate broke up in 1576.AP (talk) 02:49, January 21, 2013 (UTC)

Okay. But on the issue of the points, why did you remove Ethiopia's when I made several economic expansions after the fall of the Caliphate? Plus I upgraded the navy at least twice. And some of my questions still havn't  been answered. Vivaporius says: "I don't need a slogan!" 02:58, January 21, 2013 (UTC)

I went back 15 years from the declaration of war(as per the rules) and found your military expansions, but no economic ones. The main reason you've lost two wars with Adal and the war with Comchellak is because you post for three turns, then leave for a while. When you come back, you declare war on someone. Stick around for 15 solid years and then attack an NPC.AP (talk) 04:40, January 21, 2013 (UTC)

Makes sense, but in my defense, me leaving was out of my hands, and my declaring war on somebody came as a direct result of my attempts to protect Ethiopia or its possessions. But I totally understand your point. Well now, this was interesting. :/ Vivaporius says: "I don't need a slogan!" 04:46, January 21, 2013 (UTC)

It happened in 1566-67. The majority of the small Ethiopian colonist population were killed. Many more Arab settlers came during the Caliphate rule and the Caliphate break-up. Ethiopians are about 35% of the population of Comchellak if that.

Anyway seeing how Comchellak wouldn't go and take the fight to Ethiopia, I think they'd kill more Ethiopians in Comchellak or force them into slavery. Thus removing Ethiopia's claim to protect the Ethiopian people in Madagascar for ever. I also think we should send Ethiopia into civil war as people are tired of the current Ethiopian Negus' evil imperialist ambitions and poor military prowess. VonGlusenburg ^{(talk to Von!)} 20:19, January 21, 2013 (UTC)

80 years down!

Well folks, I'm back! I see the Indian continent has not really been updated, and I picked a state which it might be hard to understand where it is. Here is a map to show where it is. Would that be fine with everyone?  Imp ^{(Say Hi?!)} 13:13, January 20, 2013 (UTC)

Actually, i think that this East Bengal (which is in the west, actually), should be called Orissa.they weren't even part of Bengal until the Caliphate war.--Collie Kaltenbrunner (talk) 15:05, January 20, 2013 (UTC)

Oops, I keep mucking up east and west!! :L I see your point, thanks Collie. BTW, is the Bengal player still playing?  Imp ^{(Say Hi?!)} 15:17, January 20, 2013 (UTC)

He pretty much went inactive some time ago.--Collie Kaltenbrunner (talk) 18:14, January 20, 2013 (UTC)

Bengal is reduced to just what you call West Bengal on that map. East Bengal is a seperate state who wants nothing to do with their previous Bengali rulers. But yeah call what you call East Bengal on that map Orissa like Collie says. Otherwise Rajaputana is the only other player nation in India.  VonGlusenburg ^{(talk to Von!)} 00:23, January 21, 2013 (UTC)

War of Southern Rebellion

Mayans

• Location: +4
• Tactical Advantage: +1 (attacker's advantage) +5 (Larger Colonial Empire)
• Strength: Mayan Empire (L +4), Brandenburg (M +3), Scandinavia (M +3)
• Military Development: +2
• Economy: +1
• Infrastructure: +2
• Expansion: -10
• Motive: +5
• Chance: +6
  • Edit Count: 2,143
  • UTC Time: 18:39
  • (2143/216)*pi=31.168671558532
• Nation Age: +5
• Population: +20
• Participation: +10
• Recent Wars: 0

Total: 60

Rebels

• Location: +5
• Tactical Advantage: 0
• Strength: Rebels (L +4)
• Military Development: +1
• Economy: +1
• Infrastructure: 0
• Expansion: 0
• Motive: +10
• Chance: +5
  • Edit Count: 2,143
  • UTC Time: 18:39
  • (2143/216)*pi=31.168671558532
• Nation Age: -10
• Population: 0
• Participation: +10
• Recent Wars: 0

Total: 26

Result

((58/(26+58))*2)-1= 0.3953488372

39.53*(1-1/(2*4))= 34.58875

The Mayans win the war and 34.58% of the rebel territory.

Discussion

First algorithm, how did I do? CourageousLife (talk) 18:56, January 20, 2013 (UTC)

What are those rebels fighting for?--Collie Kaltenbrunner (talk) 20:24, January 20, 2013 (UTC)

Independence from the Imperialist Mayans. VonGlusenburg ^{(talk to Von!)} 00:30, January 21, 2013 (UTC)

I have done some military and infastructure development, but the Rebels haven't done any, so anything divided by 0 is 0, right? CourageousLife (talk) 00:41, January 21, 2013 (UTC)

Every nation even if they haven't done anything, gets a minimum of 1 development score to stop the whole divided by zero problem. VonGlusenburg ^{(talk to Von!)} 00:57, January 21, 2013 (UTC)

What i don't understand there, is that this rebellion is in the south, and most of the south (Yucatan and similars, i assume) is made up of ethnic Mayans.if it was on the north, okay.--Collie Kaltenbrunner (talk) 17:50, January 21, 2013 (UTC)

It's only small regions in southern Panama, so they're not technically ethnic Mayans. 75.182.92.38 19:57, January 21, 2013 (UTC)

This is the south as in Panama, Costa Rica, Nicagagrua and parts of Honduras. Not the ethnic Mayan bits. VonGlusenburg ^{(talk to Von!)} 20:00, January 21, 2013 (UTC)

I wouldn't say as far north as Honduras, maybe southern Nicaragua at most. CourageousLife (talk) 20:07, January 21, 2013 (UTC)

Well that then, still it looks like you should win so it doesn't matter too much :P VonGlusenburg ^{(talk to Von!)} 20:20, January 21, 2013 (UTC)

While you're here, how do I do the second part of the algorithm, (p)*(1-1/2x))? I need a little help. CourageousLife (talk) 20:23, January 21, 2013 (UTC)

It explains it in the rules quite simply. I've done it for you this time though. This war started in 1584 right? Well its been going on for 4 years currently so X=4. And the P refers to the first part of the algorithm you did, so P=26.15. Giving us 26.15*(1-1/(2*4)) which equals 22.88%. So it looks like you haven't won by enough to completely defeat the rebels. Unless you can boost your algorithm score or have another war. VonGlusenburg ^{(talk to Von!)} 20:32, January 21, 2013 (UTC)

Great, thanks! CourageousLife (talk) 21:08, January 21, 2013 (UTC)

This is really close... CourageousLife (talk) 21:39, January 21, 2013 (UTC)

Ottoman-Candar War

Ottoman Empire

• Location: 5 (BORDERING Candar)
• Tactical Advantage: 3 (high ground and tactical advanage)
• Strength: 
• Military Development:
• Economy:
• Infrastructure:
• Expansion:
• Motive:
• Chance:
  • Edit Count:
  • UTC Time:
• Nation Age:
• Population:
• Participation: 10
• Recent Wars:

Total:

Candar

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

Total:

Discussion

Are you refering to the Caliphate province of Candar? If so, then it is already part of your new Ottoman empire. You got Anatolia, Candar, Karaman, Cilicia, Trebizond and parts of Rumelia & Al Yunaan provinces from the caliphate break up as the Ottoman empire. VonGlusenburg ^{(talk to Von!)} 16:22, January 22, 2013 (UTC)

Now that's new: Declaring war on an inexistent country.--Collie Kaltenbrunner (talk) 16:49, January 23, 2013 (UTC)

DeanSims

We need to keep an eye on Dean. His posts are getting ludicrous. Like anyone would listen to a Caliph so soon after the insane Mahdi was deposed.--Yank 20:15, January 23, 2013 (UTC)

chill dude, im being fine. (DeanSims: Talk) 17:14, January 24, 2013 (UTC)

German - Erokee War (1591)

Germany

• Location: 2
• Tactical Advantage: 5 (larger colonial empire), 1 (attacker)
• Strength: Brandenburg (L), Austria (S), Luxembourg (S), Vinland (MV) = 10/4 = 2.5 = 3
• Military Development: 30
• Economy:
• Infrastructure: 0
• Expansion: 0
• Motive: 3
• Chance: 8
  • Edit Count: 9412
  • UTC Time: 16:29
  • 1*6*2*9 = 108
  • 8751/90 x pi = 273.783...
• Nation Age: -10
• Population: 16
• Participation: 10
• Recent Wars:

68 * 1.5 = 102

Erokees

• Location: 5
• Tactical Advantage: none
• Strength: Erokees (L +4) = 0
• Military Development: 5/2 = 2.5
• Economy: 5/2 = 2.5
• Infrastructure: 5/2 = 2.5
• Expansion: 0
• Motive: 5
• Chance: 3
• Nation Age: 5
• Population: 5
• Participation: 10
• Recent Wars:

Total: 40.5

Result (102/(102+40.5)*2)-1 = 43.15%

43.15 * (1/(1-(3*2))) = 35.95%

Gone.

Discussion

First, you only can receive this bonus in case of a popular revolt after an weak government is formed.you also managed to make mistakes on your own chance (8, not 6), and, you can't have 30 on military development and 8 on economy, as you can't do both at the same time, which is what this would imply.--Collie Kaltenbrunner (talk) 22:09, January 23, 2013 (UTC)

I did have a popular revolt. Read 1590. And why can't I build up my economy and military at the same time? Fegelein! Fegelein! Fegelein! 22:26, January 23, 2013 (UTC)

It was decided before.Actually, it's not so much as "you can't", but more "only one of them will be counted on the algorythm".--Collie Kaltenbrunner (talk) 07:05, January 24, 2013 (UTC)

Oh, OK.

Fegelein! Fegelein! Fegelein! 17:54, January 24, 2013 (UTC)

German - Myami War (1591)

Germany

• Location: 2
• Tactical Advantage: 5 (larger colonial empire), 1 (attacker)
• Strength: Brandenburg (L), Austria (S), Vinland (MV) = 8/4 = 2
• Military Development: 30
• Economy: 0
• Infrastructure: 0
• Expansion: 0
• Motive: 3
• Chance: 8
  • Edit Count: 9412
  • UTC Time: 16:29
  • 1*6*2*9 = 108
  • 8751/90 x pi = 273.783...
• Nation Age: -10
• Population: 16
• Participation: 10
• Recent Wars: -1

Total: 67 * 1.5 = 100.5 = 101

Miami

• Location: 5
• Tactical Advantage: none
• Strength: Miami (L +4) = 0
• Military Development: 5/2 = 2.5
• Economy: 5/2 = 2.5
• Infrastructure: 5/2 = 2.5
• Expansion: 0
• Motive: 5
• Chance: 3
• Nation Age: 0
• Population: 5
• Participation: 10
• Recent Wars:

Total: 37

Result

((101/(101+37))*2) - 1 = 44.73%

44.73 * (1-(1/(2*2))) = 34.77%

Discussion

Their name is actually Miami, their nation age is 0, and also, the same things i have already said in regards to the Iroquois algorythm.--Collie Kaltenbrunner (talk) 22:12, January 23, 2013 (UTC)

OK then.  Fegelein! Fegelein! Fegelein! 22:28, January 23, 2013 (UTC)

You don't have a border with them.AP (talk) 00:55, January 24, 2013 (UTC)

I do. Neu Berlin expanded around you and the small are borders them. Fegelein! Fegelein! Fegelein! 01:08, January 24, 2013 (UTC)

Remember our discussion.

Several things were fixed like chance, motive, etc.AP (talk) 02:27, January 24, 2013 (UTC)

Please do not touch the algorithm. It has been checked. ;) (Quote on quote.) Fegelein! Fegelein! Fegelein! 02:29, January 24, 2013 (UTC)

It needs to be touched because there are actual things wrong with it. 48*1.5 is 72 not 101. The revisions for the Miami are right because their development scores are 3 not 2.5(like i mistakenly did with the Inca). Their motive is 10 because they are obviously facing life or death.AP (talk) 02:43, January 24, 2013 (UTC)

Also, military support for Granada(their war from the 1580s) is where the other -1 comes from.

~ AP

This thing is basically the same as the Erokee War, it just has to have another -1, and the Miami get +0 for nation age. Collie's been through this. And Granada War doesn't count; popular revolt.  Fegelein! Fegelein! Fegelein! 02:57, January 24, 2013 (UTC)

Your population is not 16 digits long so that's wrong. You did the chance wrong because your edit count is 9412 not 8751-- and 1*6*2*9 is 108 not 90. Multiply that by pi and the hundredths digit is 4 not 8. Of course the Granada war counts. Popular revolt or not, you fought in that war and the economic repercussions are Their motive is in fact 10 because you are setting out to destroy them. Overturn these points and you're algorithm is good to go.AP (talk) 03:17, January 24, 2013 (UTC)

Dude, what do you think the algorithm says? Right there, it says 9412 and 108. And my population has 6 digits, plus the bonus. And the I didn't see Von reusing old war during his Mahdi algorithms, so why should I? Here's something from a calculator.

(9412/108)*(press the pi button on the calculator) = 273.783...

Obviously you put in 3.14, which is the number one mistake people make in algorithms.

Fegelein! Fegelein! Fegelein! 03:33, January 24, 2013 (UTC)

What you mean reusing old war during his Mahdi algorithms? If this crap about the recent wars, remember that we treated the provinces as seperate states so the Indian states starting a war wouldn't effect a war with the Russian states, etc. VonGlusenburg ^{(talk to Von!)} 14:48, January 26, 2013 (UTC)

Cypriot - Beninese War

Cyprus

• Location: 2 
• Tactical Advantage: 1 + 5 = 6
• Strength: Cyprus (L), Crete (MV) = 6 = 1.5
• Military Development: +28
• Economy: = 0
• Infrastructure: 0
• Expansion: 0
• Motive: +3
• Chance: 9
  • Edit Count: 387
  • UTC Time: 1:14=1*1*4=4
  • 387*4=1548/3.14=492.993630573
• Nation Age: -5
• Population: +6
• Participation: 10
• Recent Wars: -1

Total: 59.5

Benin

• Location: 5
• Tactical Advantage: 0
• Strength: Benin (L) = 4 = 0
• Military Development: 3
• Economy: 3
• Infrastructure: +3
• Expansion: 0
• Motive: +10
• Chance: 3
  • Edit Count: 387
  • UTC Time: 1:14=1*1*4=4
  • 387*4=1548/3.14=492.993630573
• Nation Age: -5
• Population: +6
• Participation: 100
• Recent Wars: 0

Total: 38

Results

((59.5/(38+59.5))*2)-1=((59.5/97.5)*2)-1=(0.61025641025*2)-1=1.2205182051-1=0.2205182051

so if the war goes for 6 years:

(0.2205182051)*(1-1/(2*6))=(0.2205182051)*(1-1/12)=0.2205182051*0.916666666 =0.20213675213= 

Cyprus, specifically the colony of Nea Lemesos, gains 20.2% of Beninese territory. 

Discussion

Did I do everything correct? And will someone please lend me some military aid to push me over the magical 33.33%? Airlinesguy (talk) 03:42, January 24, 2013 (UTC)

I'm still fixing this. :P Airlinesguy (talk) 04:01, January 24, 2013 (UTC)

Algorythm corrected.--Collie Kaltenbrunner (talk) 07:16, January 24, 2013 (UTC)

Removal of AP as a mod.

He's just being plain annoying and abusing his power. And threatening everyone for challenging him.

Fegelein! Fegelein! Fegelein! 03:34, January 24, 2013 (UTC)

Also, AP, if you cross this out or remove it, there is no point as someone can still see it/find it.

Fegelein! Fegelein! Fegelein! 03:36, January 24, 2013 (UTC)

I am against implausibility and if you're implausible, then you get stricken out. I'm sorry you feel threatened at all. I don't target anyone. I don't "abuse my powers," I've stricken 3 or 4 things out at most. I seem annoying to you only because I won't let you have your way or get away with flawed algorithms. And who's "everyone?" You mean my explicit warning to people reading the mod talk page, which you've done multiple times? So stop putting words in my mouth and let's all get back to playing a simple game. I think most people fail to realize this. The purpose of games are to entertain and have fun but some people take it a bit too far. In real life, the HRE was a decentrallized sorry excuse for an empire, Brandenburg was an unimportant crap in North Germany, Sweden was a loser that got its tail handed to it by Russia several times, Scandinavian unifications were utter failures, Italy was fractured, and the Muslim states were the laughingstock of the world. See? A bit of reality check is needed for all of us to realize that we're playing a game and that disputes over imaginary lands are irrelevant and overrated. So to Scraw and the rest of you, please realize that what you are doing is fruitless. You are not getting paid; You are not getting any medals or recognition for your actions in this game; You are not helping a real nation; you are not the glorious leader of anything; you are some person sitting behind a computer that gets the occasional "Hell yeah" feeling from winning an imaginary war for an imaginary nation in an imaginary world created by people just like you. Thank you all.AP (talk) 04:23, January 24, 2013 (UTC)

Briskly cutting to the point--you are the one being implausible.

And the second point is, you are the one who states that this is just a game and that we should enjoy it, but who can enjoy when you are in the way?

Regardless, you are abusing your powers. You are quick to the point and simply strike out anything that does not collapse into your will.

Fegelein! Fegelein! Fegelein! 04:34, January 24, 2013 (UTC)

I didn't say you were implausible, I was speaking in general. I strike out what's implausible. Most of what I strike out has nothing to do with me. AP (talk) 04:38, January 24, 2013 (UTC)

SS, I understand that something bad happening to your nation might be frustrating, or not being able to colonise America in 10 years as it did in real life can be angiefying. However,  we have certain rules in this game which stop us from being more realistic and being able to have things like canons in the 16th century. I know these rules are dumb, but you have to follow them. Stop complaining about mods being removed, AP is perfectly fine. If he was removed, by order of sucession, I would become a mod. Now think, I'm way more focues than AP on making this world implausible by making players not be able to conquer America in ten years.

You make blunt arguments that have no point, please list examples of what you mean, and say what you believe that should be different.  Saamwiil, the Humble 13:37, January 26, 2013 (UTC)

Conquest of the Rebellious East(four wars in one algorithm, just ctrl-c, ctrl-v)

Novgorod

• Location: +4
• Tactical Advantage: (attacker+colonies) +6
• Strength: Novgorod(L), Muscovy(M)), Maya(S), Scandinavia(S): 11/4 = 2.75~3
• Military Development: 20/3 = 6.6...~7
• Economy:  4/3=1
• Infrastructure: N/A
• Expansion: -1
• Motive: +3
• Chance: +5
  • Edit Count: 3446
  • UTC Time: 15:45 = 100
  • 34.46*pi= 108.2592828427
• Nation Age: -5
• Population: (7+20) +27
• Participation: +10
• Recent Wars: -3

Total: 57*1.5=85.5~86

Eastern States

• Location: +5
• Tactical Advantage: +0
• Strength: Eastern State (L) = 0
• Military Development: 9 - +0
• Economy: 0
• Infrastructure: +3
• Expansion: -2(0)
• Motive: +10
• Chance: +7
  • Edit Count: 3446
  • UTC Time: 15:45 = 100
  • 34.46*pi= 108.2592828427
• Nation Age: -5
• Population: +6
• Participation: +10
• Recent Wars: 0

Total: 34(36)

Result

Crushing novgorodian victory *4. Novgorod can take (((86/122)-0.5)*2)*100%=41% Novgorod gets to pick 4 neighboring NPCs and just annex them. because 49*0.83=34% and thats for a 4 year war.

Discussion

Wrong NPC bonus (those states must have been 12 years old or so, so they updated each of their areas 4 times, roughly), there is no reuniting nation motive on the rules, and as such, your motive is 3, both your nation's ages are -5 (more than 5 but less than 20), although for once you did the population kinda right, as those states are relatively sparsely habitated, expansion count on years in which you expanded your territory, which counts as such with the annexation of Moscow and your annexation of the Barents state.Ah, and conquer all of them, you need to get 33%.30% isn't enough.--Collie Kaltenbrunner (talk) 17:11, January 26, 2013 (UTC)

moscow came into personal union...not annexed. I decided to do that in the end.-Lx ^{(leave me a message)} 17:38, January 26, 2013 (UTC)

Still kind of counts as expansion.--Collie Kaltenbrunner (talk) 17:57, January 26, 2013 (UTC)

No you've done the NPC bonus wrong and among things. You haven't won this war. Lemme just go through it and sort out a few things. VonGlusenburg ^{(talk to Von!)} 23:03, January 27, 2013 (UTC)

Okay now that it has been correctly, it turns out you loose Lx. Stop missing out the NPC bonus and I'm not at all sure what you where thinking about with the chance scores. VonGlusenburg ^{(talk to Von!)} 23:19, January 27, 2013 (UTC)

How do you expect anarchic states with no capital and therefore no central government to update anything. Name the states is a simple exercise you should do to verify plausibility, this game's chiefest rule. It's time for me to pull a caliphate. Devide the algorithm into 3. Add a 1.5 multiplayer. Next year, Romanov is to be expelled. You want to break the chief rule of this game, a rule that applies to moderators and players alike? Fine. It's time for me to openly jump through a loophole in an attempt to finally close it.This seems to be the only way to raise awareness. You seem to only listen when I make bold moves like this There is no negative for fighting multiple fronts. So make me fighting 4 rebel states, on four seperate algorithms. There is no reason for them to be unified. I am using your logic, fighting fire with fire, and don't you dare be a hypocrite. I believe a moderator said this was possible last time I said we should make it harder to win vs multiple nations.-Lx

They are not in anarchy, they are soverign states, ruled by dukes, princes or whatever from their capitals. They do update things because they aren't going to sit around not doing anything. This is the NPC bonus to stop people expanding too much and the NPC's becoming push overs.

If you want to divide each state up and invade each one with a seperate algorithm then fine by me. But you don't get a 1.5 multiplier because its been more than 10 years since Novogorod's popular revolt from the Caliphate. I'm not sure what else you are moaning about though. You did the algorithm wrong, I corrected it.

Plus there is a negative for fighting multiple fronts, you get a higher recent wars penalty (e.g. you are fighting 3 wars in one war rather than 3 enemies in a single war so you get a penalty of -3 rather than -1 for each year of the war. However it is a small penalty in conparison so perhaps we do need to make this penalty a bit higher. Why not start a new topic and outline what you would change and the rest of us can join in the discussion for a higher multiple war front penalty? VonGlusenburg ^{(talk to Von!)} 20:34, January 28, 2013 (UTC)

Im moaning because those states should not exist in the first place. They have no plausible capitals, and have no names. Please, I want some names. I dont want to go and fight State 1, state 2 and state 3 all the time. The algorithm requries capitals(for the distance), witch these staes do not. Romanov would be expelled from the city, ousted, becuase of his lack of success in the war, and a new, more charismatic general will assume power. I saw nothing of NPC bonus in rules, but I looked up past talks and found it. It just seems that goin berzerk is teh only way to get any attention. it seems that the only way to adress real issues I have without being ignored is to pound and yell as hard as I can. And also, stop cheating and amping up the NPCs' chance, its the 10th digit ffrom the players chance, not 9. -Lx ^{(leave me a message)} 22:19, January 28, 2013 (UTC)

Where does it say that about the NPC chance digit? As I knew, 3 was the magic number so the 3rd digit is used. VonGlusenburg ^{(talk to Von!)} 21:05, January 29, 2013 (UTC)

I always used the 10th digit, thats why I put ten digits, and that section did not decide to use the third or any digit for that matter, it was basicaly, how about we use 7 or 8, no thats too far, how aboyt 3, no thats half evil...end. I always used the 10th decimal digit. always. and its nice and round, so thats good. nothing difinitive, but we all seemed to agree that it should be a digit from playerchance. And I can only find one instnace of expansion, annexation of velikopermia, and perhaps you could count the PU with moscow...and I dont know why the east has expansion negatives...-Lx ^{(leave me a message)} 03:02, January 30, 2013 (UTC)

Well in most other algorithms, in fact the majority of ones done with this rule, use the 3rd digit. There are way more using the 3rd than 10th. Also stop changing it and cheating. You are fighting 4 nations so they get 4 development scores added together & 4 nations in the strengh calculation. Other expansion includes all of Novogorod's expansion since 1578 which includes general expansion into black, the war against Velikopermia and the vassalization of Moscow. So in fact it should be -3 minimum for Novogorod's expansion penalty. Also you don't get the 1.5 multiplyer as you haven't had a popular revolt in the past 10 years. VonGlusenburg ^{(talk to Von!)} 01:46, January 31, 2013 (UTC)

What expansion into black, whenr, the only black that I would border is that small strip of black above sibir, so no black to expand into. also, I think you just forgot about your previous statements, in this same discussion: If you want to divide each state up and invade each one with a seperate algorithm then fine by me[...]you are fighting 3 wars in one war rather than 3 enemies in a single war so you get a penalty of -3 rather than -1 for each year of the war. Im changing chance to 10th digit because I did not see anything difinitive in that seciton, and all of my wars used 10. the last post from that section you sent me was literaly : We use the number generated for the player nation's chance. So if the player nation's number is 7.89567, the player nation gets a nine on chance and the NPC would get another number in that decimal sequence. - unsigned. 

Von is correct with the algorythm, the four nations get a coalition algorythm since they are all fighting Novgorod. Chance is the third digit end of story and the reason the rules page is not updated is because Lurker never got around to it. Also Lx is right on a few other things, Von I'm creating the labelled map for 1600 and I need the names for every single state in the Caliphate areas. If you cannot find a name or a power base, then the state does not exist and should be amalgamated with its neighbouring states. Scandinator (talk) 02:51, January 31, 2013 (UTC)

I didnt see anyone combine all nations the caliphate was fightning into one giant coalition. And I am fighting states that should not exist anyway. war over is. I created a popular revolt. people were angry at the tsar for his lack of success.. Im changing chance to 10th digit because I did not see anything difinitive in that seciton, and all of my wars used 10. the last post from that section you sent me was literaly : We use the number generated for the player nation's chance. So if the player nation's number is 7.89567, the player nation gets a nine on chance and the NPC would get another number in that decimal sequence. - unsigned.  In any case, I'll get all my teritory back in 1600 when von fails  in his task, and if that happens, this war has no point in existing, as the states do not exist, if that happens, I can count it as military dev instead of war, or just war on less states.-Lx ^{(leave me a message)} 16:00, January 31, 2013 (UTC)

No I shalln't fail, they have names. Anyway, 2 mods have told you to use the 3rd digit so use it. And I haven't forgotten what I said, but you haven't done 3 algorithms, you've done one. VonGlusenburg ^{(talk to Von!)} 18:39, January 31, 2013 (UTC)

I don't think that changing your government in the middle of a war counts for the algorythm of this same war.and plus, the part about NPC chance has been added.--Collie Kaltenbrunner (talk) 20:34, January 31, 2013 (UTC)

Levantine - Ternate War

The Levant

• Location: 2 
• Tactical Advantage: 1 + 5 = 6
• Strength: Levant (L), Venice (M), Siena (MV), Piedmont (MV), Naples (MV), Sardinia (MV), Croatia (MV), Albania (MV), Cyprus (M), Crete (MV)  = 26 = 6.5
• Military Development: +12
• Economy: = 0
• Infrastructure: 0
• Expansion: 0
• Motive: +3
• Chance: 9
  • Edit Count: 5507
  • UTC Time: 2304 =2*3*4 = 24
  • 5507*24=132168/3.141592=42070.3897896
• Nation Age: 0
• Population: +17?
• Participation: 10
• Recent Wars: 0

Total: 65.5

Ternate

• Location: 5
• Tactical Advantage: 0
• Strength: Ternate (L) = 4 = 0
• Military Development: 3
• Economy: 3
• Infrastructure: +3
• Expansion: 0
• Motive: +10
• Chance: 7
• Nation Age: -5 (1257)
• Population: +6
• Participation: 10
• Recent Wars: 0

Total: 42

Results

((65.5/(42+65.5))*2)-1 = 0.21860465116

so if the war goes for 6 years:

( 0.21860465116)*(1-1/(2*6))= 0.20038759689

the Levant gains 20.03% of Ternatean territory.

Discussion

Cyprus and Crete give military support to the Levantine Kingdom. Airlinesguy (talk) 23:29, January 25, 2013 (UTC)

Yay :D Fed (talk) 17:43, January 26, 2013 (UTC)

Ottoman-Georgian War

Ottoman Caliphate

• Location: +4 (near the war)
• Tactical Advantage: +1 (attackers advanatage)
• Strength: Ottomans = 4
• Military Development: 10/2 = 5
• Economy: 0
• Infrastructure: 0 
• Expansion: 
• Motive: 3
• Chance: 7
  • Edit Count: 4842
  • UTC time: 21:59 ~ 2*1*5*9 = 90
  • 4842/90*pi = 169.01768
• Nation Age: -5
• Population: 6
• Participation: 10
• Recent Wars: -3(?)

Total:32

Georgia

• Location: 5
• Tactical Advantage: +2 (high ground)
• Strength: Georgia = 4
• Military Development: 0
• Economy: 2
• Infrastructure: 2
• Expansion: 
• Motive: 10
• Chance: 6
• Nation Age: -5
• Population: 6
• Participation: 10
• Recent Wars: 0

Total: 42

Results

42/74 - 0.5 x 2 = 0.135135136

Georgia takes 13,5% of Ottoman territory.

Discussion

Alright, so this needs a few corrections, but I'm too lazy to do them right now; the Ottomans would actually be close to the war, not at it, and in what way are Constantinople and Bursa higher up than Tbilisi? Fed (talk) 17:25, January 27, 2013 (UTC)

Actually, Constantinople has been taken by the Venetians.--Collie Kaltenbrunner (talk) 19:23, January 27, 2013 (UTC)

While I find that implausible, fine then, in what way is Bursa higher up than Tbilisi? Fed (talk) 23:08, January 29, 2013 (UTC) 

None.And, the totals were corrected.--Collie Kaltenbrunner (talk) 07:36, January 31, 2013 (UTC)

German Conquest Wars (1591)

Germans

• Location: 4
• Tactical Advantage: 5 (larger colonial empire), 1 (attacker)
• Strength: Germany (L), Bavaria (L), Saxony (L), Magdeburg (MV), Anhalt (MV): 16/4 = 4
• Military Development: 30
• Economy:
• Infrastructure: 0
• Expansion: 0
• Motive: 3
• Chance: 6 (I did the math, too lazy to write it out.)
• Nation Age: -10
• Population: 6+2 = 8
• Participation: 10
• Recent Wars: -1
• Total: 60

Bohemians

• Location: 5

• Tactical: 0

• Strength: Bohemia(L)--0

• Military: 3

• Economy: 3

• Infrastructure: 3

• Motive: 10

• Nation Age: 0

• Population: 5

• Participation: 10

• Recent Wars: -0
• Chance: 3

• Total(tentative): 42

Result

((60/(60+42))*2)-1 = 17.64%

17.64 * (1/(1-(2*4)) = 15.44%

Discussion

Population of Bohemia and the chance for both sides need to be done. I can't since I need to go for the day.AP (talk) 23:54, January 26, 2013 (UTC)

Done. Can someone tell us how many pixels we can take? Fegelein! Fegelein! Fegelein! 07:09, January 27, 2013 (UTC)

Bohemia's chance is missing...AP (talk) 07:12, January 27, 2013 (UTC)

...

"Chance: 3"

...

Fegelein! Fegelein! Fegelein! 07:13, January 27, 2013 (UTC)

Bohemia is 1450 pixels large on the map for 1595. VonGlusenburg ^{(talk to Von!)} 00:01, January 28, 2013 (UTC)

Thanks. Fegelein! Fegelein! Fegelein! 00:03, January 28, 2013 (UTC)

When will we be able to partition the land, we've been fighting for years...Andr3w777 (talk) 19:34, January 29, 2013 (UTC)

War's over.

               ♒"Fear the power of the Dark Side of the Force."  23:33, January 29, 2013 (UTC)

Ethiopia and Colonialism

Hey, just a matter I thought I'd address now since people have stated it was an issue. Some said that Ethiopia didn't have ocean-going ships, however, I spent the second half of the last century developing naval technologies to expand overseas, even going so far as to commission an expedition to Austraila. Even though it was far too soon for that, Ethiopia established trading posts from East Africa to Java, allowing it to trade overseas. Now, I spent a long time working on the navy before I even sent those ships off to Southeast Asia, and I do have the technology needed to travel across the Indian Ocean. These can be easily extended to Madagascar or even Europe.

Now why Japan has colonies on the American West Coast is beyond me, but I don't understand why Japan which made no technological advancements in the naval area that I could find, was allowed to cross the world's largest ocean and establish a colony on another continent (not being petty, just making a point), while Ethiopia spent 40-50 years on naval development, and not only wasn't allowed to establish a worthy colony, but is still considered landlocked by many of the comments here. Anyway, I hope this clears up the "Ethiopia is pushing it by having a Malagasy colony" issue, and I can go about competing overseas now. That is all. Vivaporius says: "I don't need a slogan!" 00:47, January 27, 2013 (UTC)

What they say is true. It is even more so because the Caliphate tore you to shreds and took everything  you had including the navy. Japan is and probably will always be more advanced than you in tech of all fields. AP (talk) 01:18, January 27, 2013 (UTC)

Unless a certain European nation *wink wink* decides to throw a couple of freebies my way *wink wink*. Also, this was before the Caliphate invaded. I had a colony in Madagascar decades before the invasion, and had developed the navy decades before the colony. That is the problem. I did all of the work and research, I had the ships and technology, and yet everyone said I had no navy, no colony, and that I was doomed to be landlocked forever. What was the point of all the research if historically poor and weak nations like Cyprus get to build colonies and I don't? Seriously, what is the whole bias against African nations becoming great powers in their own right?

Player works and work to make something out of them, and nobody cares, and they go further to say that their still weak. Heck, Mali was the richest nation on the face of the planet for decades, and Ethiopia was called one of the four superpowers of Earth at the turn of the first millennia. What's the point of doing all the work if you don't get any of the benefits you worked for? I don't what it to seem that I'm complaining. I just feel that I'm building an empire that no one considers an actual empire. I want colonies and global recognition, but no matter what I do to get it, I believe players only see "African" first and automatically think  "weak and Impoverished nation".Vivaporius says: "I don't need a slogan!" 01:30, January 27, 2013 (UTC)

Yes and when the Caliphate invaded you lost everything. You must rebuild from scratch. I agree with the notion that not everyone should be able to colonize, the colonization list just gave everyone a year and they started colonizing. The main flaw in the game is that people don't realize the economics behind colonization, which is why Germany, Scandinavia, Cyprus, or even Russia did not colonize. BUT we can't change any of that so we just move on. Also, it is difficult for people to play the game as if they were actually living in the 1590s. Our 2013 perspective is difficult to disregard. It is very difficult for African nations to become powerful, but it is slightly possible. With the Arab nations and even Europe(I don't know about the other Euros but I'm seizing Mombasa soon) interested in Africa, you're essentially surrounded. Stop expanding(it's ALOT of negative points on an algorithm) and consolidate yourself and repeat that for several cycles. That's my suggestion.AP (talk) 01:41, January 27, 2013 (UTC)

For Christ's sake, I survive long enough to see the Caliphate fall apart and lose everything in the process. I'm holed up in my fort in East Africa, and I'm not going anywhere. Here's too one hundred years of fruitless growth and exploration. Back too the game I suppose. I'll use that advice by the way. Vivaporius says: "I don't need a slogan!" 01:50, January 27, 2013 (UTC)

Your navy will allow you to reach South Africa and Malaya. No further just yet. The main reason Japan has a stronger fleet may be because they are an ISLAND nation... Scandinator (talk) 04:14, January 27, 2013 (UTC)

Britian was an island nation and its navy was pathetic compared to the mainland powers of the Netherlands (largest navy is the world by 1650), Spain (most powerful warships in the world), and Portugal (largest seafaring vessels in the world until the Titanic). So that can't be the main excuse. Vivaporius says: "I don't need a slogan!" 20:22, January 27, 2013 (UTC)

a) You didn't survive to see the fall of the Caliphate, you were conquered and miserably destroyed, your ships were turned over to the Caliphate's Indian Sea Fleet if not completely destroyes, you army was non-existing besides the imperial guards which made sure you stayed faithfull to Islam. There is no way to have a colony after facing that in the last 40 years.

b) I do agree it would be implausible for Cyprus to have a colony, however, there have been smaller European nations to have colonies in the New World.

c) Historically, Britain has had one of the if not the strongest navy in the world until the Yanks overtook them.  Saamwiil, the Humble 20:47, January 27, 2013 (UTC)

A) I did survive to see the Caphilate crumble like a rock as the Caliphate of Ethiopia. Your contridicting yourself, as everyone said Ethiopia did survive inside of the Caliphate, and got on me for leaving it as I thought it was destroyed. So you are wrong on this point.

B) You are correct, but I was pointing out the issue that had to do with the fact that tiny Cyprus (with a population of less than 100,000), was allowed to conquer entire African kingdoms more powerful than it in real life, while Ethiopia (with a population of about six million), was not allowed to establish any colonies before the fall despite my work to get it to do so. However, this matter was corrected with the recent explainations.

C) Before the destruction of the Spanish Armada, the British Navy was crap. Pure, undistilled, horsecrap. I relied on pirates to do its fighting, and had to call on merchant vessels to bolster its tiny fleet. When Elizabeth I took over, Britain was a poor excuse of a European monarchy, and considered very much a backwater by mainland Europe. After the defeat of Spain, then it became a major power, and that event has been seen as the identifying point in global history when Britain became a world power. Vivaporius says: "I don't need a slogan!" 22:56, January 27, 2013 (UTC)

Cypriot-Burgundian War (1594-?)

Cyprus

Location: 5

Tactical: 1

Strength: Cyprus(L)+Crete(MV)--0

Military: 20

Economy: 0

Infrastructure: 0

Motive: 3

Chance: +8

• Edit Count: 398
• UTC: (00:06)= 6
• 398/6*pi= 208.2866666666667

Nation Age: 0

Population: 6

Participation: 10

Recent Wars: -4

Total: 49

Burgundy

Location: 4

Tactical: 5

Strength: Burgundy(L)+France(M) ---7/6 = 1

Military: 22

Economy: 0

Infrastructure: 1

Motive: 5

Chance: 6

Nation Age: +5

Population: 7+2

Participation: 10

Recent wars: 0

Total: 68

Result

68(117)*2-1 = 16.2%

Territory taken depends on how long Burgundy wishes to fight Cyprus. Just to clear this up, Cyprus is the aggressor because they invaded Burgundy's colonies.

Cyprus pulls out of Burgundy's colonies immediately, no land is gained or lost. Airlinesguy (talk) 23:55, January 27, 2013 (UTC)

You don't understand. You don't just invade someone and then pull out because you are going to lose. In the end, it is Burgundy's player who will decide if the war continues or if they accept your surrender.AP (talk) 02:07, January 28, 2013 (UTC)

no,AP i don't more wars but thanks for the algorythm Sine dei gloriem (talk) 03:36, January 28, 2013 (UTC)

Africa

I would like the names of the West African nations. I will colonize slowly.

Also, I have a big question: why on earth would you have one rate for all your colonies? They have different ages, shouldn't they expand differently?

Fegelein! Fegelein! Fegelein! 07:13, January 27, 2013 (UTC)

Along the coast from Morocco to Zululand, the NPC West African states are: Morocco, Fulani, Wolof, Gabu, Bonoman, Oyo, Ife, Benin, Kongo, Zululand.

Enjoy, and use this info well. Scandinator (talk) 16:05, January 27, 2013 (UTC)

There's one expansion rate for the colonies because 1) you're splitting your resources amongst them and 2) right now then people could start colonising 12000 square kilometres in total, which is ridiculous. 17:25, January 27, 2013 (UTC)

Ethiopian Invasion of Travancore

Ethiopia

• Location: +3
• Tactical Advantage: +3
• Strength: Ethiopia (L +4)--4/4--1
• Military Development: +12/3=4
• Economy: +12/3=4
• Infrastructure: 0
• Expansion: -2
• Motive: +3
• Chance: 8
  • Edit Count: 1633
  • UTC Time: 20:25
  • 2*0*2*5=20
  • 1633/20*pi=256.381
• Nation Age: 0
• Population: +7
• Participation: +10
• Recent Wars: -1

Total: 40

Travancore

• Location: +5
• Tactical Advantage: 0 (Both capitals on the coast)
• Strength: Travancore (L +4)
• Military Development: 3
• Economy: 3
• Infrastructure: 3
• Expansion: 0
• Motive: 10
• Chance: 8
• Nation Age: +0 (Established around 1500)
• Population: +7
• Participation: +10
• Recent Wars: 0

Total: 49

Result

(49/(89)*2)-1= 0.101123595505618

Travancore easily repels the Ethiopian invasion. They do not take land since it is implausible.

NOTE: This might be retconned.

Discussion

The NPC bonuses are 3 not 2. We've been throught this before. Also, this might be getting retconned due to the sheer implausibility of you invading an Indian kingdom when you could just expand in Africa.AP (talk) 06:14, January 28, 2013 (UTC)

Is this an actual war or a legit joke?

               ♒"Fear the power of the Dark Side of the Force."  06:18, January 28, 2013 (UTC)

Did you do all this complicated code just for this picture?--Collie Kaltenbrunner (talk) 06:45, January 28, 2013 (UTC)

Yep. :) It's my new signature.                ♒"Fear the power of the Dark Side of the Force."  07:20, January 28, 2013 (UTC)

Yeah. Also infrastructure is given only to the defender.AP (talk) 06:20, January 28, 2013 (UTC)

I'm confused now. Allow me to walk you through my issue with this matter.

1. First I'm told Ethiopia should develop its navy before it can establish any colonies. So I did that. But I was told Ethiopia should focus on Africa and not the world (a little biased given the colonization fever), so I did that. I invaded Adal, wasn't aware then I was responsible for the algorithms. I saw them corrected, and not once was there any bonus given.

1. Second, I'm told that the NPC nations get bonuses, when I saw that nowhere in the rules. So I skip conquering, and after fifty plus years of work on the navy, I set up a colony...in Madagascar. Then people say I'm pushing it with the colony that I established in Africa, even though I had a strong navy for decades. Then I'm told that I can get to Malaysia and South Africa, but somehow India right between the two is untouchable.

1. Third time, the NPCs get yet another bonus. First there is the independence bonus that supposedly lasts for 15 years, yet another mods states that its ten years. Once again, didn't see it in the rules, but I bite the bullet, and move on to do the algorithm. Then I redevelop my navy for seven additional years, then move back into expansion. Then yet again, NPC nations get yet another bonus.

Now I am bitter, angry, close to spraying the place, and can't understand why the mods keep ignoring my nation's progress, and never remain consistent with their statements. I mean, is this an Africa thing or what? Why is it that I can pour years of work into a nation, and get bumped up from "Minor Power" to "Third World Nation", while everyone else steams ahead of me? This is a constant theme. I work hard on a nation. Use "actual historical proof" from the era to back up my claims. Scraw slides his way over, runs his mouth, ignores me and even other user who refute his claims, and causes arguments. Then I roll over and give up on the nation due to inability to move up the food chain due to the mods' inability to remain consistent with what they say.

• You tell me to develop my nation first. I do.
• You tell me to focus on Africa. I do.
• You tell me I'm being implausible having a colony in Africa. So I cope, and try to focus on Ethiopia's growing navy.
• Then you tell me I can move abroad. So I do.
• Now, I'm told that not only can I not move abroad, but I should focus on the area I was focusing on to begin with.

I'm too stinkin' through with this nonsense. What do you want from me? Vivaporius says: "I don't need a slogan!" 02:30, January 29, 2013 (UTC)

Expand in Africa. That's all i can tell you. Your naval reach is for colonization not conquest. Also, you need to have more realistic numbers when it comes to military. The problem here is that you don't wait long enough to properly build yourself up for wars, making the NPC nations(Adal, Adal again, and now Travancore) easily defeat you.AP (talk) 03:31, January 29, 2013 (UTC)

I developed my country for thirty years, but it was never shown on the actual algortihims shown for my first war. Then I did again the second time (and last I heard the navy was part of the military), but it was yet again not shown on the algorithim. And then with Travancore, the numbers were on the fly, I did know they were too high. But you just raised the development numbers from two to three even though you, Scraw, and another mod said it was two, even though that number was never used when I fought against Adal, where Fed's sudden support for them won the day. Vivaporius says: "I don't need a slogan!" 03:45, January 29, 2013 (UTC)

I was misinformed at first and led to believeit was 2. It is 3. And the reason it was not present against Adal was because we did not implement the system yet.

               ♒"Fear the power of the Dark Side of the Force."  03:48, January 29, 2013 (UTC)

I have a simple question. Rather than retcon the outcome, could we not just switch names from "Travancore" to "Swahili City-States"? Vivaporius says: "I don't need a slogan!" 07:22, January 29, 2013 (UTC)

There's no point since you'd still lose.AP (talk) 03:00, January 30, 2013 (UTC)

And the Swahili would be able to take land from you.                ♒"Fear the power of the Dark Side of the Force."  03:08, January 30, 2013 (UTC)

Not to mention its not right for you to declare war and then pretend it never happened just because its outcome doesn't suit your purposes. You have to live with the consquences. VonGlusenburg ^{(talk to Von!)} 01:32, January 31, 2013 (UTC)

Did I say I couldn't live with the consequences? Because I'm sure all I asked was if I could switch the nation I attacked. I don't need you telling me to deal with things I already dealt with days ago. Vivaporius says: "I don't need a slogan!" 19:21, January 31, 2013 (UTC)

Third Venetian War of Conquest

Venice

• Location: 4
• Tactical Advantage: 6 (attackers advantage, larger colonial empire)
• Strength: Venice (L +4), Piedmont (MV +2), Naples (MV +2), Sardinia (MV +2), Croatia (MV +2), Albania (M +3), Romans (M +3), Crimea (MV +2), Cyprus (M +3), Crete (MV+2) = 25/4 = 6
• Military Development: 8/3 = 3
• Economy: 20/3 = 7
• Infrastructure: N/A
• Expansion: -1
• Motive: 3
• Chance: 7
  • Edit Count: 1672
  • UTC Time: 22:28
  • 1672/64*pi = 82.07410
• Nation Age: +5
• Population: 8+20 =28 (population of Italy at the time was 12.4 million, subtracting 3 million for Papal territories and adding Slovenia and Dlmatia brings the Venetian total to just over 10 million and over 10 times larger than the Greek population of about 900 thousand)
• Participation: 10
• Recent Wars: -5 

Total: 73

Greece

• Location: 5
• Tactical Advantage: 0
• Strength: Greece (L +4) = 0
• Military Development: 3 = 0
• Economy: 3 = 0
• Infrastructure: 3
• Expansion: 0
• Motive: 5 (Venice does not want to destroy Greece)
• Chance: 4
  • Edit Count: 1672
  • UTC Time: 22:28
  • 1672/64*pi = 82.07410
• Nation Age: 0
• Population: 6
• Participation: 10
• Recent Wars: 0

Total: 33

Result

Venetian Victory. Venice can annex 73/(73+33)*2-1 = <36% of Greece. The war will last for 5 years at the moment allowing Venice 33.0% of Greek territory and collapsing the Greek government.

Discussion

Actually, according to my accounts, you can complete this war in 9 years and still topple their government.--Collie Kaltenbrunner (talk) 19:57, February 1, 2013 (UTC)

Cyprus and Crete request to join on the side of the Venetians. Airlinesguy (talk) 22:40, February 1, 2013 (UTC)

• The Romans and Crimeans are aiding the Venetians

(DeanSims: Talk) 00:56, February 2, 2013 (UTC)

And now with all the help, this war can last 5 years.--Collie Kaltenbrunner (talk) 13:45, February 2, 2013 (UTC)

Funny Weather We're Having

The Mayans just got hit with another natural disaster. It was the earthquake a couple of years ago, and now a hurricane. What's up? By Mayan Littoral, did you mean the Gulf of Mexico (or Mayan Sea, as I call it)? Am I doing something wrong? CourageousLife (talk) 21:43, February 1, 2013 (UTC)

the Gulf of Mexico.i didn't know how to call it, but you aren't doing nothing wrong, this hurricane happened just because it happened in OTL.I would add the Huaynaputina eruption too, but i don't know how to exactly describe it, and plus, a particularly harsh winter already was had as recently 1592.The earthquake event also was done for the same reason.I noticed that in the 1574-1594 period, there were three earthquakes on the San Salvador area.--Collie Kaltenbrunner (talk) 22:26, February 1, 2013 (UTC)

It just seems that too much is specifically targeting the Maya. I replaced it with an OTL hurricane on the coast of Texas.--Yank 22:40, February 1, 2013 (UTC)

It's okay, just making sure that it wasn't aimed towards me. If it happened in OTL, then that's okay. Thanks for the explanation. CourageousLife (talk) 22:43, February 1, 2013 (UTC)