Ad blocker interference detected!
Wikia is a free-to-use site that makes money from advertising. We have a modified experience for viewers using ad blockers
Wikia is not accessible if you’ve made further modifications. Remove the custom ad blocker rule(s) and the page will load as expected.
This is the Mod page where all joint mod decisions on how to run outside powers will be made
What do you guys think that the US should do about Pennsylvania for making a trade agreement with Virginia?
- I think that it should be reprimanded somehow for being disloyal and acting on its own accord CourageousLife 21:13, April 20, 2012 (UTC)
- I know that I'm not a mod, but I would like to defend my choice here. One, If the U.S. government had two states seceed and not penalize them, I doubt that they would worry about Pennsylvania right now. And two, the game would rapidy become boring if the player couldn't do what it wanted. Monster Pumpkin 21:17, April 20, 2012 (UTC)
- I'm with MP here. Syngraféas Enallaktikí̱ Istoría, Dic mihi lingua Anglorum. 22:24, April 20, 2012 (UTC)
- Oh kind of forgot about that little fact there. MP I am glad that you decided to speak up - thank you for bringing this to my attention. Now, would it be fair to say that the Union goes after the seceeding states and doesn't worry about Pennsylvania right now? Scrawland, you and I seem like the only two mods on this page so it's up to us. I'm for the Union going after the seceeding states. You? CourageousLife 03:37, April 21, 2012 (UTC)
- Absolutely. First of all, we ought to send people to fight at Fort Sumter and ask the Frenchies and Brits to side with us and not the Texans or Virginians. Syngraféas Enallaktikí̱ Istoría, Dic mihi lingua Anglorum. 03:39, April 21, 2012 (UTC)
- I'm texas, but hey, what the heck? My only thing is, how can we plausibly get the French and British to side with the Union and not the seceeding states?
- Should we being the CSA into gameplay in the near future? After all, if Hannibal Hamlin is fighting in the Civil War, he needs an enemy or there won't be a war. So what do you think? CSA, or just abunch of seceded southern states? SPQR 02:38, April 23, 2012 (UTC)
- What? No. It is acutally a little late for that, since we have California as S (secessionist), Oregon as S, including Washington Territory, the Republic of New England, the Northern Federal Republic, and the Central American Union. Syngraféas Enallaktikí̱ Istoría, Dic mihi lingua Anglorum. 03:30, April 23, 2012 (UTC)
- Scraw, you and me have to hash this mexico thing out to see what it's going to do since Dean went on a powertrip and decided to leave CourageousLife 20:45, May 8, 2012 (UTC)
- So, how do you guys want to start wwi? I think it should start differently than in OTL, earlier and with different alliances. I was thinking the main cause for it should be something happening between Great Britain and France. CourageousLife 13:50, May 12, 2012 (UTC)
- Napoleon III is coming to power in France so I think we can just start WWI when he creates the Second French Empire and attacks Prussia. Mod will control nations outside of North America. Syngraféas Enallaktikí̱ Istoría, Dic mihi lingua Anglorum. 21:52, May 12, 2012 (UTC)
- I'm hesitant to allow people to claim outside nations because someone might decide to invade N. America and kill the game. Maybe for WWII we can let people claim outside nations but for now let's go with your idea. Here's what i'm thinking:
- Great Britain
- German States
- German States
- I'm thinking that more imperialistic states like NY and MA will side with the french and more conservative states like TX and FSA will side with Prussia. Not to mention any uncontrolled mexican states will be mod run. There's also proximity to think about. Lots of states border french territory in the north.
- Any nation that Britain did not attack (CA, PacRep, NFR, GrCO, so on) will join the Allies, while other nations (Louisiana, GrPlainRep, NY, MA, PA, VA, Carolina, CSA, RNE, Quebec) will definitely join France. Also, Italy united in 1861, and it'll be with France. Syngraféas Enallaktikí̱ Istoría, Dic mihi lingua Anglorum. 22:36, May 12, 2012 (UTC)
- I'm not a mod or anything, but I'n Greater Colorado, and yes, we probably would join with Prussia, because of a large German community and German President :) GRSGov 22:41, May 12, 2012 (UTC)
- Not a Mod either, but wouldn't the German States be united. Also, I believe they would be on the Allies Side.TacoCopper
- Sorry everybody, my sources are getting me muddled. Ill look into germany and italy. As for your nations, you will have to decide for yourselves. CourageousLife 22:46, May 12, 2012 (UTC)
- I think we should have two maps. North American map, and Europe map with non-playable countries(for now)GRSGov 22:51, May 12, 2012 (UTC)
- Here are some things on repeating weapons:Colt Firearms and Winchester 1873 Rifle gets invented in the Republic of New England, Browning (Gun company) gets established in Greater Colorado (me) which means I get M1 Garands, BARs, etc. first.Gras Rifle, French bolt action got created in 1855. GRSGov 23:25, May 12, 2012 (UTC)
- You might invent them, but once they're invented, everyone can produce them (to avoid conflict). There will be no monopolies in this game when it comes to inventions. CourageousLife 00:35, May 13, 2012 (UTC)
- What I meant were specific models of weapons. It wouldn't make for a nation that is at war with France, fighting with French weapons with no history of trade.
- Should the percentage of population in the military be larger in smaller countries? Also, what is maximum percentage of population in military when mobilised?GRSGov 00:47, May 13, 2012 (UTC)
- It's all comparative, so it doesn't matter - a smaller country with a smaller population will have a smaller army. And the max percentage, stated on the algorithm, is 4%, at the absolute maximum. CourageousLife 00:50, May 13, 2012 (UTC)
- I'd rather have a WWI in the 1900s to be perfectly honest, but a war with France still sounds great. CrimsonAssassin 01:38, May 13, 2012 (UTC)
- I totally respect that. Still, I feel like if we wait 60+ turns until 1900, the game will defunct long before that. CourageousLife 01:42, May 13, 2012 (UTC)
- NORTH GERMAN CONFEDERATION CREATED IN 1867!!!!!GRSGov 03:54, May 13, 2012 (UTC)
- Chin up! If you keep the game plausible and interesting, it could reach 2012 (or 2013... whenever we end this). CrimsonAssassin 03:56, May 13, 2012 (UTC)
- I believe it ends in 2013, unless we have set an earlier ending date. TacoCopper
- I think we should end it when we catch up to present day. That is unless, someone reunites the Union before then.......MWAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA...*cough*.....ha. Syngraféas Enallaktikí̱ Istoría, Dic mihi lingua Anglorum. 00:59, May 17, 2012 (UTC)
- Haha. Anyways, I think we could continue the game even after the US is united, but it kinda ruins the point of the game. TacoCopper
- I just noticed, since Austria and Prussia are on the same side, after the war a super German-Hungarian empire could form. This would clearly influence a lot of what could happen later in the game. What do you guys think? Monster Pumpkin 23:21, May 17, 2012 (UTC)
- 60 years seems too long, but I kinda feel that it's way too early, unless it was caused by the British- American war. Of course, I guess there isn't really a limit to the # of WWs we have... Vir prudens non contraventum mingit 18:22, May 18, 2012 (UTC)
- What do you guys think of uniting the German states? CourageousLife 00:36, May 22, 2012 (UTC)
- I think that France and Spain should try to conquer the Mexican nations CourageousLife 01:19, May 27, 2012 (UTC)
- I would be in favor of that, but only if I got to annex most of the land there. Just Kidding. If Prussia and Austria win the war, which they probably will, then the German states can be unified. Monster Pumpkin 01:34, May 27, 2012 (UTC)
- Would Prussia, Austria, and the German States create a monster German Empire? GRSGov 01:37, May 27, 2012 (UTC)
- If they win the war, they might have good enough relations to achieve such a thing. Monster Pumpkin 01:40, May 27, 2012 (UTC)
- Just had a little discussion with Guns. Currently, the max amount of soldiers you are allowed to have is 4%. However, there has been a new rule proposed to let it be raised over that. Thoughts? CourageousLife 18:40, May 31, 2012 (UTC)
- I'm not a mod, but In cases of war, drafts have often risen up to even 10% (in the most extreme cases only, of course), so this rule makes sense, just saying... Vir prudens non contraventum mingit 19:00, May 31, 2012 (UTC)
- I think we should just make it like this:
1-4%, economy is fine. 5-6% Economy is slightly hurt by the large need to take care of these men. 7-8% Economy is very hurt, the nation is going into heavy debt. 9-10% Economy wrecked, nation is bankrupt.
- But that is just my opinion. TacoCopper
Maybe we could do something like this-
1-4% (-50 on the stability algorithm) (just for having an army)
But the states with small populations would be getting screwed over- they need a large percentage of their population, or they're push overs. Also, no nation can not have an army. I feel those need to be kinda toned down (-200 for a 5-6% army?). I'm not a mod, again, but this is a little TOO extreme. Vir prudens non contraventum mingit 18:31, June 1, 2012 (UTC)
So tone it down for smaller nations and raise it for larger nations is what you're suggesting?
My idea: 5% max for a large nation (ex: NY, PA, TX, FSA) during the peace. To 10% 12% max during wartime. 13% max for small and weak nations (NFR, Durango, Veracruz) during peace and 16% max during wartime. ~ Scraw
Why should small nations get an advantage? Because there small? That is life, small nations get screwed, big nations benefit from these nations getting screwed. Medium nations ally with Big Nations to gain land and not get screwed or stay neutral. It isn't fair, but thats how the system works. If we give small nations this advantage, big nations have every right to do the same. TacoCopper
No, the difference is technology. Even with a small army, New York could invade and conquer a 20% active Colorado. With a 20% army, the NFR could even hope to bring down the FSA. The reason is that the small number of manpower is made up for with technology and knowledge, etc. Syngraféas Enallaktikí̱ Istoría, Dic mihi lingua Anglorum. 01:05, June 2, 2012 (UTC)
Ah yes, once again, Scrawland comes to the rescue with his logic! TacoCopper
Who would win?
Who do you guys think will win the war. My money is on Prussia and all of its allies. Monster Pumpkin 00:43, June 2, 2012 (UTC)
Prussia. Post war conditions:
- German states (and possibly austria) form Germany
- Some part of france is separated into a new country (possibly as a buffer state)
- Portugal gains some land in Spain
- Northern Italy is broken off into independent states, and sicily, sardinia, and corsica are all independent
- Britain gains control of French colonies
Anything else? CourageousLife 01:21, June 2, 2012 (UTC)
This is my version here.
- Prussia, the other German states, and Austria, minus Hungary, form a greater germany, somehow.
- France loses Alsace-Lorraine as OTL. Maybe a buffer state in Burgundy?
- Portugal is in this war? If so, probably Galicia to the north, if anything.
- I doubt that Italy would be broken up, as it is easier to control one large country than multiple small ones.
- No argument about Britain.
Monster Pumpkin 01:27, June 2, 2012 (UTC)