The Democratic BAR: Your vote counts

[unmerged(29041)]

ooc:
Fodoron,
It might be interesting if Aragon, OE, Hungary and Genoa's random leaders were edited and suddenly a relative or even possibly a senator themselves was found leading a foreign army against us. Talk about a juicy scandal!

Unfortunately, random leaders cannot be seen except in your own armies. Historic leaders can be seen by hovering the pointer, but adding historic leaders completely messes the game even with default statistics due to their rank precedence in sieges.

 

[ProfCC]

Hey gang, staying out of character still to keep discussing our energy on the real questions before (I'll vote in another post, in character).

About Egypt, I'll express some ignorance since in all my games, I have NEVER dealt with North Africa. ARen't those Muslim provinces? As such, isn't it simply beyond a CAtholic nation to keep them? I mean, I honestly haven't really looked, but if they are Christian and we can hold them, then sure looking at Egypt would be cool. Plus, for me personally, it would be a part of the game that I haven't played. Though I've played for a while, there is still much about the game that is new for me (last game, I finally went to colonize India; lots of fun, new nations and stuff). So, I would FULLY agree for us to stay "historical" and work to control the way to India "our way." Would set up a fun, somewhat historical and nice competition with Portugal for the trade. But I am fearful of dealing with 10-20%RR in the Muslim lands and getting us over-extended. So if someone can teach me about this, I'll gladly chip in with the "old man's" thoughts on "Senator Giustinian's" proposal.

aegandolfi, would you please teach me about the "poor province" concept? I was serious when I asked that earlier. Remember, I don't care much for the math stuff--to me it is simple and manifest--more land, more money (albeit small), more people for the army, land bridge to far away provinces---what am I supposedly missing? I mean, how can you suggest allowing Austria, even if our ally, to take land near us in our sphere of influence. I know you know the game well, so I really am curious about your thoughts. In this marvelous game, we don't all agree (Fodoron and I have different thoughts about forts, for instance---Fodoron, you'll be happy to know that I left my last 4 provinces in my current England game fort free) , but I am always interested in other ideas and strategies.

Fodoron, I don't hear anyone suggesting a different thought yet--stay at peace for 20-30 years, lower our BB some, finish unifying Italy, remove the OE, avoid northern wars, move on India through Egypt (to be fair, aegandolfi also suggesting going around Africa). Now we all need to be good gamers to realise this is not a 25 year thought, but probably 60-100 years to do all of that. Do you propose that we just "keep all this in mind" as we vote on stuff? Do you think we should have a vote to declare some clear long term thoughts? I mean, its kind of important--just look at the recent votes you asked about. If we are trying to stay out of northern wars, then we don't need to declare on Palatinate (nor if we are trying to stay at peace for 25 years or so). But, I suppose if we think unifying Italy is critical then going again on Genoa might be wise (I certainly can't see that--there is no way we'll take Crete unless we can catch them in ANOTHER war where they will have unloaded their army--that's how I got it in my game as Venice--they had just move 75% of their massive army away and I jumped them).

I guess before I vote, I would like some of my questions answered (sorry to hold up the progress and I guess you could go on without me anyway). If we are only going to "keep our long term goals in mind" but not make it official policy, then fine--I'll post as Cornaro appropriately and speak my piece about our issues. But, if we are going to vote and set some clear directives down, then I think that vote would supercede the current votes (if we VOTE to get rid of the OE BEFORE unifying Italy or going for India, then I'm NOT going to vote to go to war with Genoa--see what I mean?).

Not trying to make it confusing; trying to make it clear for us all. Thanks guys. Love this thread.

 

[Ciçatrix]

Hey gang, staying out of character still to keep discussing our energy on the real questions before (I'll vote in another post, in character).

About Egypt, I'll express some ignorance since in all my games, I have NEVER dealt with North Africa. ARen't those Muslim provinces?

They are.

aegandolfi, would you please teach me about the "poor province" concept? I was serious when I asked that earlier. Remember, I don't care much for the math stuff--to me it is simple and manifest--more land, more money (albeit small), more people for the army, land bridge to far away provinces---what am I supposedly missing? I mean, how can you suggest allowing Austria, even if our ally, to take land near us in our sphere of influence.

The thing is, technology cost is influenced by amount of provinces, the more provinces the more it costs, if we annex albania, it will bring our average province income down, while increasing technology costs, this all adds up to slower technology and stability research.

 

[unmerged(29041)]

You, my dear senators are playing the tune at which we dance, yet, as the conductor, I am responsible for giving you the cues and making sure that nothing relevant escapes your attention.

I will make sure that the relevant questions and events are brought to your consideration to advance the goals that we decide. For example if we decide that Italy is a top priority, but european OE is not, situations in Italy will make me stop the game, while the same thing in Bulgaria will certainly be reported but probably will not stop the game until the next scheduled stop.

Palatinate is in Northern Europe, but Aragon, his ally, has 4 Italian provinces. We would be making war in Italy. But peace is also an option. Do not jump to war just because I show you the CB. think about it and consider how much it is worth it. Obviously, certain things that we want will not be obtained peacefully.

Luther is around the corner. It is a widespread rumor all over Europe that reformation attempts are being made. Once he comes we will be able to hold muslim lands with acceptable risks by giving up on protestants. Conversions should be continued with good monarchs to eventually get rid of Orthodox.

As King of Minors says, rich provinces push you up and poor provinces push you down. The general rule is by all means keep out of poor provinces of wrong religion, wrong culture. Albania is just marginally better than that. Kerch is a 20 times better acquisition. After some time we could even keep Albania as a vassal outside of our alliance. But everybody has his/her preferences, and we don't have to do things just because they are economically sound. We are here to have fun, whatever it means in terms of gameplay.

But in the end we need some focus or we will fall to shortsightedness. Think in terms of 50 years or think in terms of whole game. Soon I will put you against an election in which we will decide our focus. We will choose a few things at which we want to do well. That should simply help us continue. Once we get into exploration/colonization we will have to define the areas and colony criteria. It will be fun and we all will learn more about the game.

In the meantime vote what is best for the country now. we will worry about the focus later. A war more or less is not going to change much except our BB. I also think that a war against Genoa is probably not the best option, as Sam Clemens has made clear in his vote. But some senators have a crush on Genoa, and, Why not?

 

[unmerged(34338)]

Election 36
Dear friends: Papal States, Albania, Savoy
Friends: Hungary, Burgundy, Russia, Theodoros, Switzerland
Adversaries: OE, Aragon, Portugal
Enemies: Genoa, Egypt
War (only with CB, not against adversaries (or (dear) friends of course...) 
Diplomacy: Yes, yes 

Election 37
I+ L- C+

Election 38
No

I'll just give my opinions on our future;

I agree with those who favour the capturing of Alexandria en Nile. Especially after reading Norrefeldt's remark that the proper Venetian way is east.

I don't agree with capturing OE-territory. Unless the taxvalues or goods are really different in AGCEEP their provinces are dirt-poor. And mostly wrong religion-wrong culture. The only province that I would consider is Smyrna, but that leads to problems. If the OE attacks us now, we can easily stop their Asian armies and gain a positive warscore in Europe. If we own Smyrna, we can't prevent them from taking it and our warscore will be lower.
And if I'm correct a landbridge to Kerch won't make a big difference. I thought you got no penalty for having no land-connection in 1.08 when you're fully naval (correct me if I'm wrong... I still play 1.07)

There are still some Italian provinces we don't own. As far as I know they're all pretty wealthy and I think we should get them. Eventually. And except for Rome of course.
I don't think attacking Aragon is wise at this point, but if I'm correct they own Siena and knowing them they might attack the Papal States. If we get the Papal States in our alliance before Aragon declares war (if they do), we could get their provinces at 1BB/province.
It's not sure, but I think we should be ready for it.

Savoy can wait IMO. If we can get them in our alliance, do so and diplo-vassalize. If we can't, wait.

I do like the idea of attacking Genoa. Their CoT is the richest price we can get! The only reasons I can think of to stay at peace are 1. No CB (we have one) 2. Truce (should be over by now) 3. Lots of Genoese armies on Corsica (Didn't they use all their armies there to protect Genoa and Kerch in the last war? Please tell me they did. Please ).

And I like the gold of Tyrol, but it may give us too much trouble with Austria. So I'm still undecided on that one.

PS: Fodoron; my experience with RM's is that you have to have relations > -150 to get them accepted (and if relations are around zero they also tend to decline). What's our relation with Hungary? And as mentioned I play 1.07, so this may not be correct in 1.08

 

[Samuel Clemens]

OOC: Except that we wouldn't be able to take the CoT. I guarantee if we took Corsica and knocked them down to one province, that'd make them a huge target to everyone else. Especially the way the game likes to have other countries dogpile on countries that've been hit hard by war.

 

[unmerged(34338)]

OOC: Except that we wouldn't be able to take the CoT. I guarantee if we took Corsica and knocked them down to one province, that'd make them a huge target to everyone else. Especially the way the game likes to have other countries dogpile on countries that've been hit hard by war.

Good point. But we can force-vassalize them and then annex them. I think we're strong enough economically to annex after ten years.
And I know we could diplo-vassalize instead of force-vassalize, but that just doesn't feel right.

I'm not sure many countries would attack Genoa. I have the feeling BB points play a big role as well and Genoa has none. But probably Savoy or Aragon would move in for the kill, so we wouldn't get the CoT as you pointed out.

 

[ProfCC]

I'll believe you, but I just don't see it. I know I haven't played that many games, but I have never worried about poor provinces vs. rich provinces (except in picking which provinces to attack for warscore).

To me, the Balkan provinces become defense oriented for Venice as we move forward in the game. I think of it this way--when you play as France, you literally have tons of provinces that are "safe" from attack becuase they are interior. Certainly an army can get into those places, but in my mind, they were safe. Compare that to Venice--there is no place safe and our entire nation can be cut in half quickly. Thus, when I played Venice I quickly moved (by early 1500s) to control the second level of provinces (Croatia, Serbia, Steirmark, etc...). Along the way, I (like we have) got the Aegean Sea provinces first and then worked construct a land bridge. I wasn't worried about any penalty, but only to connect my land; I just don't like have isolated provinces (heck, I don't colonize unless I can grab land around it, except in the Dutch East Indies and there I try to grab all the islands). Later, I too took out Genoa and Kerch and I wanted the land bridge, so I took all that land over time (1600s into 1700s).

In the end, I was the richest nation (not the biggest), I could handle all comers, no one moved in the EAstern MEd/Black Sea without my permission, and I beat everyone in the techs. So, I certainly did not see any ill effects of some "poor provinces" issue. MAybe I'm blind or dumb; perhaps I could have ruled the world faster had I left the "poor provinces" to some other nation. Who knows? I guess I just don't see the point in allowing any potential enemy to own land in my back yard.

I can tell that I'll be outvoted on this one, but that's okay. That's why we are playing a Democratic AAR. I'll shut up now and get to watch how it all transpires. I'm sure we'll still end up victorious; I mean it us humans against merely the AI.

 

[ProfCC]

Can you freakin believe it? I spend half an hour getting a good response and the stupid internet goes down/away. Grrrr This is obviously shorter (probably good for you). :rofl:

And exactly why are we considering war when we've spent the past years saying that we need peace to repair our reputation and trade? Did we not see the Doge's comments that Corsica is held by over 30,000? Are we prepared to send our entire army to Iberia in an effort to get them to loosen their hold on their Italian provinces? Have we forgotten that our real enemy in on our doorstep? Poor provinces or not, we must remove the OE in our land!

Election 36
1. Albania, Savoy
2. France, Austria, Theodsus, Bavaria, Bohemia, Castille, Aragon
3. Genoa, OE, Papal States, Burgundy, Hungary
4. NONE
5. PEACE
6.A. YEs B. Yes You should have been doing this already. You did not need our permission. Your carefully worded statement of what each level was clearly implies that you would have to spend money to make it so for level 2 and 3

Election 37
O -
O -
O- (The plus to siege value is huge and this is now one of my first moves in the slider department for my nations. Makes all my wars go much faster, thus better for me!)

Plus, kind of hard to vote for innovative vs narrowminded when we don't know if we are going to colonize or not.

Election 38
Yes

On a private note, I am retiring this year. I took over for my father Carlo in 1454 and now, 1509, 55 years is long enough in my service to the nation. Plus, at 75, I can barely remember my children's names, let alone yours. As you all know, my son Giovanni has been much more interested in art than politics, plus he too is ill (some form of breathing illness; no remedy has worked).

My grandson Loganni is young at 28, born in 1481, but he is smart and has done well in school. He loves horses though more than the sea. Many of you will remember him as he has stood by my side in our deliberations over the past 5 years. He is ready and will serve the nation well. Be at peace my friends.

 

[Usually_Insane]

Election 36.

1. Dear Friends: Papal States, Albania, Austria, Savoy, Theodoros
2. Friends: France, Spain, Hungary, Portugal, Burgundy
3. Adversaries: OE
4. Enemies: Genoa
5. Warmonger clause: War
6.
A) Allowed, but I suggest to concentrating on the two or three which had the most votes
B) Allowed, with the same clause as above

Election 37.
C+ C+ C+

Election 38.
1) You have my full support to annex Albania

I hope this helps

 

[SnapperAEG]

Election 36

1. Albania, Papal States, Knights, Austria, Savoy
2. France, Spain, Portugal, England
3. Aragon, Genoa
4. Ottomans, Egypt
5. Peace
6. A. Yes, B. Yes

Election 37

C+ O+ O+

Election 38

Annex

Cheers,

EG

 

[Norrefeldt]

Carlec, if you play SP you won't really notice the difference in tech speed if you have many poor provinces or not. There's simply no one to compare with, and a player will lead the tech race soon enough if he plays a good nation. In MP however, one can really notice the difference and many players are cautious about what provinces they aqcuire, and even more so with the latest beta where vassals are such a good investment.
For us here, Albania should be mostly about playing style. (I don't vote to maximize our nation anyhow, that's why I suggested the Egyptian route, since I think it would be fun.)

 

[Norrefeldt]

Pascal Barbarigo​

Hearing that Eduardo Cornaro will not attend our meetings anymore makes me sad, but it's been a joy to hear his eloquent arguments for all those years. I hope your grandson has the same gift of spellbinding the audience with his words.

Election 36.
DF: Albania, Savoy 
F: Austria, Portugal, Hungary, Theodoro, Papal States
A: Egypt, Aragon, Genoa
E: Ottomans
W/P: Peace

6. A

In my old age I don't bear the hatred for Genoa any longer, they are well past their prime. If we should find ourselves in war we should only make them our vassals. Trying to cut them up will invite many contenders for their rich Ligurian city.

Election 37. L- O- M-

With going fully naval we wont need land connections to be able to fully tax our provinces.

Election 38. No, keep as vassals.

May I suggest that our Doge or some servant of his collect a list with possible future strategies so we can rank them in order of importance? I have heard of "Dominating all Italian land", "Free all Greeks from Ottoman slavery", "Drive away the Ottomans from the Balkan" and "Get Alexandria" as things we should strive for, but we need to make priorities.

 

[ProfCC]

Carlec, if you play SP you won't really notice the difference in tech speed if you have many poor provinces or not. There's simply no one to compare with, and a player will lead the tech race soon enough if he plays a good nation. In MP however, one can really notice the difference and many players are cautious about what provinces they aqcuire, and even more so with the latest beta where vassals are such a good investment.

Ah--that is what I was wondering about--the eternal question of SP vs. MP. Being a wuss (and a person with a too busy schedule to be fair to others), I've never played MP and I completely accept your thoughts there. And, playing on a Mac (no complaint, makes me very happy), I don't have the latest beta patches to even know. I HAVE always feared having too many vassals, fearing I can't protect them all, but in my last game as England, I had tons released and only a few were ever targeted (truly, the ones NOT in my alliance).

Again, I'll drop it or at least accept being outvoted. No problems, no worries---its a democracy anyway so you don't always get your way anyway. LOL

Game on!

 

[unmerged(29041)]

Since there are no more votes, I will close elections 36, 37 and 38.

Election 36 International relations

1. DF: Albania (6/7), Savoy (5/7), and Papal States (4/7)
2. F: Austria (6/7), Spain (4/7), Portugal (4/7), Hungary (4/7) and Theodoros (4/7)
3. A: Ottomans (6/7), Aragon (5/7), Egypt (4/7)
4. E: Genoa (4/7)

5. War (4/7)

6. Funds for DF: Yes (7/7)
Funds for F: (6/7)

Election 37 Domestic Policies 1509-1529

1509: Increase in Centralization (C+) 5 votes
1519: Decrease in Land (L-) 3 votes and higher precedence
1529: Decrease in Mercantilism (M-) 3 votes

I remind that to prevent bias, if a senator enters 3 votes for the same change, he is entering one vote for the same change in all three decades. So although there were four votes for a reduction in Offensiveness, only two senators voted for it, so it lost to the ones that had the support from 3 senators.

Election 38 Albanian annexion

Anexion was decided (4/7)

Comments on the election

I see that the senators of this Consiglio enjoy posing difficult tests on their Doge. I will explain.

The Senators of this Consiglio have approved that Venice should go to war, yet the only country that has been pointed as the enemy of Venice is Genoa. Yet Genoa is one of the few countries in the world from whom we probably cannot win anything by war. As I pointed out, our fleet scouts report the presence in Corsica of an army of 32,000 men. Our experience at Kerch against an army half that size proves that Corsica is better left alone. The conquest of Liguria is feasible, but once it is done, what could we possibly request from the Genoese? I refuse to believe that the senators of this Republic, all wealthy beyond measure, would embark in such enterprise only to empty the meager pockets of the Genoese.

Nevertheless I would carry out my orders, however foolish, if it weren't for a small detail. One of the senators, our dear Giancarlo Giustinian, has made clear that he does support war, but not against Genoa, while strangely enough declaring Genoa an enemy of Venice.

As you all know, If war is chosen, any country listed as enemy against whom we hold a casus belli becomes a de facto target, and a declaration of war is almost assured unless the military conditions indicate it would be suicidal to do so.

So Genoa is our only enemy, and war has been approved by four votes over seven, yet war against Genoa only has the support of three senators.

Looks like an impossible dilemma that will require the use of your Doge's discretionary powers to solve. The solution in the next report.

 

[unmerged(29041)]

And this year's war goes to...

Aragon! (big applause, but some look disappointed).

Dear Senators,

As you all know, in this past elections the members of the Blue Party were able to secure a majority of the positions in the Signoria. The consequence was that we decided to go to war.

I know, I know, we are quite an agressive nation and are starting to have a bad reputation, but more on that later. The nature of our political system pretty much guaranties that the Blue Party rules our nation half of the time, so we go to war too often.

But the problem this time was that the Signoria did not decide a clear target to officiate as victim. Genoa was a likely candidate, but the Genoese, aware of our intentions, have garrisoned all their army in Corsica and have made war with them a fool's business.

And so it became up to your Doge to satisfy your lower instincts by choosing a country against which a productive war could be conducted. Alternatively, I could have chosen peace, but I too am aware of the new wind that blows in our country, and I have decided to abandon the ranks of the Golden Party, where history wanted to place me, and join the Blue Party.

Next, we considered our enemies. Expelling the infidel Turks from Europe is a Holy Cause, yet we don't see much help coming from the rest of Christianity, and our reputation and stability would suffer greatly, more than it is worth it. A similar case present the Mameluks of Egypt, except that Alexandria is a very tempting target.

But no, it has to be Aragon. Those damned Spaniards ocuppy the sacred land of our ancestors. It is time for them to go home, either voluntarily or by force. As you will remember, Aragon is an adversary, and therefore, as it is clearly stated, it can be the target of an opportunistic agression if she holds something that we desire.

But every opportunistic agression has to be opportune. Is it opportune to wage war against Aragon? Discret investigations by our spies reveled that Sardinia, Malta, Sicily and Messina were all undefended. What a huge mistake by usually wise and sharp Fernando. A clear sign of his decrepitude. The strong army in Siena is not considered an insurmountable problem.

We have declared war to Palatinate. His allies, Aragon and Spain have honored their alliance. We obviously have declined to invite Albania to the fight. Our ally is perpetually ravaged by rebels that are too weak to conquer the capital.

I have given Capitano Generale Fodoroni full control of our armed forces and some directions about the political interest of this Doge. The islands of Sardinia and Malta have to be secured at all cost. All our economy is directed to our war effort, and agreed policies will have to wait.

Leonardo Loredano, LXXV Dux Venetiarum. Mar. 1509.

 

[Norrefeldt]

The young hotheads have taken over our dear city, and use our resources to wage wars to the right and left! What can we do!?

 

[Ciçatrix]

The young hotheads have taken over our dear city, and use our resources to wage wars to the right and left! What can we do!?

Hope for a victory, ofcourse. Hopefully at reasonable costs.

 

[SnapperAEG]

Hope for a victory, ofcourse. Hopefully at reasonable costs.

Fellow Senators,

We of course, expect victory, but the real question is at what cost, and to what end. We can not take the blow to our reputation that seizing all of Aragon's Italian lands would cause. We might bring all our enemies down on us.

I am perplexed by our Noble Doge's choice of Sardinia and Malta as our targets. Will they not be expensive to taken, given the low ability of armies to live off the land there? Are not Siena, Sicily and Messina all richer, and connected to us by land, making defense easier.

Anyway, we must trust the judgement of our Captain-General, but I hope we will not over reach.

Yours,

Eduardo Gandolfi

 

[Norrefeldt]

Fellow senators, honorable Doge,

I would be satisfied with just one or two provinces taken in this offensive war on a friendly Catholic nation. Eduardo Gandolfi mentioned our bad reputation and lack of friends, and I concur. If Aragon and it's allies could be forced to pay a tribute as well, that would be good of course.

Pascal Barbarigo