Machiavelli II: The Rebirth

[ForzaA]

Originally posted by TheArchduke
You know of course that if Nationalism died out the colony will automatically become your culture. This important changed was done somewhere during Tsunami (after hours of hassling Johan.)..

but eighty years of unimpeded growth(+30 for nationalism to die out) give the colony(+ former natives) a good chance to pass the 5000 threshold.. that was my concern

 

[ForzaA]

Originally posted by Slargos
HolisticGod:

You may want to check out http://www.slargos.se and click on the leader generator forum... any ideas are welcome...

The project is delayed for now, but I expect to have a working program up sometime this autumn...

and not only the Leader Generator, but also the "historical events removal mod" (more or less suspended since Ryoken's accident)

 

[Peter Ebbesen]

Holistic God, a few comments on your points:

1) A total ban on conquering Cantonese, Han, Manchurian, Korean and Japanese provinces? Have pity, at least allow Russia to make the Amur river the boundary, should she so desire. (Currently 3 Manchu provinces north of the Amur, and the Chinese often colonise a few as well)

2) No conversion in India.... I'm not sure where I stand on this one - it is almost guaranteed to ensure that nobody will even try their hands at some Indian conquest - which may be your intention, of course And the OE should be allowed to go to India, should it so desire, in which case it should certainly be allowed to convert.

3) An interesting idea on colonial wars, but your rules seem to me to be too many to be practical, and not easy to remember in case of hostilities. In other words, it is too cumbersome for practical use.

I want a codex of rules that is easily remembered - less chance of mistakes that way, and much, much, less trouble when trying to explain to a substitute a full page's worth of information concerning colonial wars.

4) I much prefer keeping the 3 province rule for full provinces for the duration of the game.

5) On the other hand, raising the number of colonies possible taken might work.

6) Ditto. Spain must choose A

7) OE: High income, homogenous population, high manpower, good leaders the first half of the game - make them muslim techgroup in 1615.

8) Much easier to say than do. The few times I committed stupid moves in Machiavelli I for the sake of roleplaying, I felt like a terrible sucker.

9) Random leaders. No. We do not have a tested setup with reasonable statistical distributions based on dp-settings, countrysize, and luck, that people have agreed to.

Finish such a tool, have it available for inspection and discussion, and it might be used in a later game - introducing it four days before game start is a no-go.

 

[Smirfy]

1/ I will play in no game were naval power is forbidden to blockade countries or is neutered in any way. You want to defend colonies GET A NAVY!

2/ I will also not play in any game were all the countries are the same. Last game the OE proved it could adequately keep up in the tech race on top of it's other strengths this is too much especially considering it's man power. We are playing a RP game here so this *should* not be a problem.


If either of these prove to be Unacceptable to the GM let me know ASAP.

Who is the GM BTW because I was certainly not asked to forward any name.

 

[BiB]

Originally posted by Barnius
Just to point out how again Portugal is handicapped by the “no colonies eastern of India before 1600” rule: only one conquistador will be there, and the rest of them will uselessly wander around without helping colonization.

Nothing that a few MORE good admirals couldn’t fix though

Yeah, Brazil is useless to colonise And all those provinces u can conquer are such a waste

 

[BiB]

Originally posted by Barnius
And what does in your own unclear way mean "No colonisation beyond TP's is allowed in India and provinces east of India until 1600 so that there is a more even footing available when the Dutch come onto the scene." exactly mean?

If you go far enough east you will eventually come to Europe...
Is western coast of North America off limits?
Another possible problem: I suppose Portugal can finish already started colonisations, like in Tindore. I don't particulatly want to keep an army there just in case natives decide to rise...

I would assume that it is obvious that Spain and Portugal stay in their designated ToT zone

And that stopoverharbours to explore India aren't counted as colonisation.

 

[BiB]

Originally posted by ForzaA
noooooo!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!



actually.. to give Holland a fair chance, you should just hand over all of your colonies when Holland forms

OTOH: Did Holland really have language problems (as in the people speaking portuguese, not dutch) in the "colonies" they conquered for long? IIRC most portuguese were simply kicked out and replaced with Dutch merchants/soldiers etc. ... not very likely if you can build up a colony with natives in 1520....

No, there were just natives with some Dutch merchants who replaced Portuguese ones.

 

[BiB]

Originally posted by Smirfy
1/ I will play in no game were naval power is forbidden to blockade countries or is neutered in any way. You want to defend colonies GET A NAVY!

2/ I will also not play in any game were all the countries are the same. Last game the OE proved it could adequately keep up in the tech race on top of it's other strengths this is too much especially considering it's man power. We are playing a RP game here so this *should* not be a problem.


If either of these prove to be Unacceptable to the GM let me know ASAP.

Who is the GM BTW because I was certainly not asked to forward any name.

Wyvern, because he's the only one who stepped up

 

[TheArchduke]

Originally posted by BiB
Wyvern, because he's the only one who stepped up

Or because he was the only one who didn´t stepped back.

 

[BiB]

Originally posted by TheArchduke
Or because he was the only one who didn´t stepped back.

No, saying it like that (even if true ) wouldn't do honour to his efforts

 

[ForzaA]

Originally posted by BiB
No, there were just natives with some Dutch merchants who replaced Portuguese ones.

in that case I'd say Portugal isn't allowed to expand its colonies in the Indies, unless the culture gets changed to Dutch after nationalism (IF these colonies get conquered, that is) even if they managed to grow beyond 5000 (a growth rate of 1% will have a colony of 2000 people to 5000 in 80 years)

 

[unmerged(15967)]

Originally posted by ForzaA
in that case I'd say Portugal isn't allowed to expand its colonies in the Indies, unless the culture gets changed to Dutch after nationalism (IF these colonies get conquered, that is) even if they managed to grow beyond 5000 (a growth rate of 1% will have a colony of 2000 people to 5000 in 80 years)

This discussion is not really my concern, but I'm disgusted by this greediness. The no colonization east of India rule is already grossly unfair to Portugal and the Netherlands have done very well in every single MP game I have ever heard of, you don't need anywhere near that much extra help.
On the matter of colony culture, I don't see anyone complaining that their histroical colonies in India would have wrong culture and non-christian religion, so you should be able to survive 2 or 3 iberian cultured provinces that will be much easier to convert, should you actually manage to get them.

Barnius may be the Propaganda Machine, but that is no sufficent reason to ignore all his everything he says IMO.

 

[ForzaA]

Originally posted by Freiherr vStein
This discussion is not really my concern, but I'm disgusted by this greediness. The no colonization east of India rule is already grossly unfair to Portugal and the Netherlands have done very well in every single MP game I have ever heard of, you don't need anywhere near that much extra help.
On the matter of colony culture, I don't see anyone complaining that their histroical colonies in India would have wrong culture and non-christian religion, so you should be able to survive 2 or 3 iberian cultured provinces that will be much easier to convert, should you actually manage to get them.

Barnius may be the Propaganda Machine, but that is no sufficent reason to ignore all his everything he says IMO.

I'm not saying it should be like this or that.. I'm just saying IF x is true, then we might consider y too..
OTOH.. despite "doing good" Holland didn't have that many colonies in Machi1, and as it looks now, it will be even less in Machi2.. oh well.. guess I'll have to just sail up the Thames, Seine and Tejo.. and just conquer a few nations

 

[unmerged(15967)]

Originally posted by ForzaA
I'm not saying it should be like this or that.. I'm just saying IF x is true, then we might consider y too..
OTOH.. despite "doing good" Holland didn't have that many colonies in Machi1, and as it looks now, it will be even less in Machi2.. oh well.. guess I'll have to just sail up the Thames, Seine and Tejo.. and just conquer a few nations

In Mach1 the other nations had 28 years more to place colonies before Holland could even theoretically have formed, Holland formed 40 years later than in most MP games (and 20 years later than is likely in this game), Holland started out as Catholic and avoided building up colonial cities that would have to be converted later and there was no[/no] east of india rule at all.

Oh, and Holistic God is good, but probably no BiB.

Considering all these facts your statetement is absolutely ludicrous.

 

[Wyvern]

Originally posted by ForzaA
in that case I'd say Portugal isn't allowed to expand its colonies in the Indies, unless the culture gets changed to Dutch after nationalism (IF these colonies get conquered, that is) even if they managed to grow beyond 5000 (a growth rate of 1% will have a colony of 2000 people to 5000 in 80 years)

If we stick with Peter's 1520 1.1.0 release and he doesn't change anything then Portugal has one unfinished colony in Asia if I remember correctly. By the time 1600 comes around Holland should be well on the scene. Really ForzaA Holland is going to have great opportunities and Portugal will only have the chance to put TP's down so stop worrying about culture .

 

[Wyvern]

Originally posted by Smirfy
1/ I will play in no game were naval power is forbidden to blockade countries or is neutered in any way. You want to defend colonies GET A NAVY!

2/ I will also not play in any game were all the countries are the same. Last game the OE proved it could adequately keep up in the tech race on top of it's other strengths this is too much especially considering it's man power. We are playing a RP game here so this *should* not be a problem.

It doesn't sound like you'll have a problem then Smirfy as there aren't any such rules in the game unless you consider the galley rule as weakening navies? We're trying to strengthen the colonial scene and the influence of navies. Also what could have made you think all the countries might be the same? By the end of the weekend the first post of this thread will have all the rules updated in it so everyone will be able to see what we play with, though it's pretty complete even now.

I'll be GM'ing and am trying to weave a path through all the rules discussions to pick those that have the backing of the majority of players (and aren't too complicated - I hate complicated rules! ) and not going with anything new that doesn't have a decent groundswell of support. So whilst it has more of my imprint that is inevitable as I'm the chairman who has to sift through everything and make the final choice, this is a team effort though to come up with the rule set .

 

[Wyvern]

Ok three areas that have been debated over the last 24 hours -

Barring Chinese (ie han and cantonese) culture. Consensus says that we go with this. The Portuguese event given province obviously has to be an exception to the rule. I'm not keen on banning other cultures though, for a start I don't like to place too many restrictions on play and the main reason for the chinese ban was to stop the CoT snatching. Japan has her CoT in her captial which I think is good enough to keep it safe.

Banning the converting of India - don't really like this one and also don't think it's necessary. If someone really wants to pump thousands of ducats (and it would take thousands upon thousands) to convert India then so be it. I remember Peter trying in DoN's and he managed about 2 provinces from 30 odd attempts. I think such a rule is therefore unnecessary.

Colonial wars - I'm leaning towards just having a straight clear cut colonial or full war demarkation for simplicities sake unless anyone can persuade otherwise over the next 24 hours .

BB and capturing colonies - zero BB don't agree with. BB drops fast enough as it is on Normal difficulty level so 1 BB per colony seems right, a colony being a province with less than 5000 pop and only being applicable to player nations - it's conflict with players we're trying to promote not AI bashing.

Were there any other outstanding issues?

 

[Twoflower]

My apologies for interfering again, feel free to ignore me if I'm just annoying you
Your 3 province rule makes a lot of sense; since it discourages permanent global wars, it definitely improves the game.
However what about allowing certain exceptions?
One thing that would clearly be disappointing about your rule is that the Ottomans are unable to take Hungary in one war and that the christian powers (especially Austria) would not be able to take back lots of territories in one war - as both happened historically. Clearly a war against the Ottomans was not the same thing as two christian European states fighting each other. Possible exceptions to the rule that would solve this (if you agree that this is a problem):

• the rule only applies to countries within the same religious group (whether orthodox is part of the big christian group or an own one would need to be discussed) OR
• the rule explicitly does not apply for the Ottoman Empire OR
• the rule does not apply between the Ottomans on the one side and Austria and Hungary on the other

The first possibility is the easiest (and maybe most logical and realistic), but probably goes to far and would create several new problems. The second is more specific, yet might be regarded as unfair - and not entirely realistic. E.g. wars between the Ottomans and Venice were usually quite limited, with just one territory being fought over and ceded. Also it might provoke ridiculous gangbanging against the OE. Therefore I think the third alternative is best. It would deal with only the two special cases where you would want the rule not to apply.

Also I think it could make some sense to allow exceptions to these rules when certain events have happened. The players of Machiavelli have been complaining about historical events having hardly any attention in MP games and are usually not even commented by the other players - when in fact these should be quite seminal things. One that I can think of (and other exceptions might make sense, too, like perhaps for thee Napoleonic Wars, provided France can pose some threat):

• The Spanish Succession event will, if a war results from the event - as it should - unlock the limit for provinces taken from Spain in this war (and only then). Unlike other events for "historical wars", like the Great Nordic War or the League of Cambrai, the Spanish Succession is not that dependent on the diplomatic situation in the game. While e.g. the Great Nordic War will be totally inappropriate in MP games more often than not, because the diplomatic setup or the balance of power differs completely from the historical situation, it can with some certainty be assumed that the childless death of Carlos II happened relatively regardless of anything else, and that a conflict about his succession would have happened almost no matter what - because no matter the situation, both France and Austria getting Spain would have almost certainly destroyed the BoP. Wouldn't it be nice if this major event would not, like it is done now, just make people click it away, going with the choice that gives them positive stab, and finally have some impact? I'm inclined to think that especially in a game like yours where limited wars are the norm one major conflict could greatly spice things up and be quite a special event. It is not even bad that people will know that the event happens - IRL the childless death of Carlos had been expected and impatiently anticipated for a long time by all diplomats of Europe who were quite busy negotiating and securing alliances years before it happened. As a safeguard, the GM's should be able to decide that the event does not make sense in the game's respective situation and the exception is not applied

 

[unmerged(15967)]

On Twoflowers point, but maybe a bit simpler:

1. The province limit does not apply if all taken provinces are cores.
2. Austria gets cores on the territories it got historically in the Spanish succession for the case Spain chooses Bourbons (edited in before the session, but only to be used in that case). IMO those cores would be justified even without the first rule.

 

[Twoflower]

Originally posted by Freiherr vStein
On Twoflowers point, but maybe a bit simpler:

1. The province limit does not apply if all taken provinces are cores.
2. Austria gets cores on the territories it got historically in the Spanish succession for the case Spain chooses Bourbons (edited in before the session, but only to be used in that case). IMO those cores would be justified even without the first rule.

This is IMO certainly a better rule, I just didn't dare to suggest it because IIRC many of you people despise the core system. Allowing unlimited conquest of cores would solve all problematic situations, like Austria and the Ottomans in Hungary, Russia and Sweden in their border area, the Spanish Succession, the Partition of Poland etc. The question is however how to do peace deals that involve core provinces and non-cores - what about letting cores only count as 0,5 provinces, so it would e.g. be possible for one alliance to take 4 cores and one non-core in a war - and while you're at that, let colonies count as 0,25 provinces.