Originally posted by BiB
Peter also had by far the most military VPs in Mach 1. Coincidence? I think not
How exactly is military score calculated?
-
We have updated our Community Code of Conduct. Please read through the new rules for the forum that are an integral part of Paradox Interactive’s User Agreement.
How exactly is military score calculated?
Only a few players in Mach qualify into that group, but the majority of us are just average players with still a lot to learn. And this learning part is also one thing that's VERY attractive to me. For example, before Mach 2 I had some kind of a "feeling" that development of a colonial empire and infrastructure of the country (forts, manufactories, ...) should be financed out of inflation up to 20-25%. But here I see Professors' Russia doing it even with 35%!
Numerology is not math. It is a joke.
(And sometimes a con artist's scheme to defraud the gullible)
Finally I managed to do all the answers – time for a post regarding income data for 1756
Now, don’t judge too fast! Portugal had 3 deflations – that’s the main “source” of the increase of income.
Also, one more thing, which is corrected in the data for 1705 and 1731: when a particular technology reaches it’s maximum, corresponding manufactories don’t add to the research income any more. That is the case for Holland with infrastructure from 1699 and with trade from 1718, for Ottoman Empire with trade from 1720 and with infrastructure from 1742, for Portugal with trade from 1731 and for Denmark with trade from 1741.
Now, don’t judge too fast! Portugal had 3 deflations – that’s the main “source” of the increase of income.
Also, one more thing, which is corrected in the data for 1705 and 1731: when a particular technology reaches it’s maximum, corresponding manufactories don’t add to the research income any more. That is the case for Holland with infrastructure from 1699 and with trade from 1718, for Ottoman Empire with trade from 1720 and with infrastructure from 1742, for Portugal with trade from 1731 and for Denmark with trade from 1741.
Well, I would be doing rather better if I had received some deflationary events. Believe me, I would prefer having lower inflation as well, but it is now 207 years (out of 237 played) since the RNG last granted me deflation.
The high inflation is a necessary evil given the strategy of early colonisation, conquest, and conversion, given the absence of outside funding in the early game, and when there is never, ever, any excuse for not racking up an additional 10-15% to pay for manufactories once your income hits 150d-200d/mth or so.Most other nations are going hard for infra10/trade10 and will reach them within the next two decades (if they do not already have them). I think Russia will stop at 8/8. The reason? Infra9 costs 56,000d investment, which is a bit expensive for a nation with a monthly income of 310 (of which only 22d trade
)
Or, to put it another way, your TRUE strength is finally revealed, now that it is not obscured by high inflation.
Holland with maxed economic techs in 1718 and the Ottomans (!?) from 1742, when the anticipated date for tech 9 is 1750. Jesus wept.
Now, now, you can't have it both ways
Inflation adjusted figures are YOUR method... although it would implicate that my TRUE strength is hidden Well, let's leave Holland for a moment. But whom to blame for Ottomans? Russia for example
Of course I can have it both waysOriginally posted by Barnius
Now, now, you can't have it both ways
Inflation adjusted figures are the best method of showing the exact strength of a nation. The reader should just remember that for any nation with a decent but not extraordinarily high inflation, a single deflation event or two will significantly improve the nation's situation. But significant enough for a 47% income growth?
Now, let us just for fun take a closer look at the Portuguese situation.... In your case, those 3 deflation events [how I envy you!], meant an increase of (1.3/1.15 - 1) = 13% to your inflation adjusted income. Given that your actual increase in inflation adjusted income was 47%, the neutral observer must conclude that your claim that this merely represented the deflation is obviously false. In fact, your actual inflation adjusted income growth is nearly FOUR TIMES the contribution from the deflation events, or, to put it another way, you have - ignoring the benefits of deflation - increased your income by NEARLY ONE THIRD over the last 25 years. :
But have no fear. Only the observant reader will notice this. The rest of the dummies may believe that it is the deflation that is really to blame :rofl:
Originally posted by Peter Ebbesen
Of course I can have it both ways
Inflation adjusted figures are the best method of showing the exact strength of a nation. The reader should just remember that for any nation with a decent but not extraordinarily high inflation, a single deflation event or two will significantly improve the nation's situation. But significant enough for a 47% income growth?
Now, let us just for fun take a closer look at the Portuguese situation.... In your case, those 3 deflation events [how I envy you!], meant an increase of (1.3/1.15 - 1) = 13% to your inflation adjusted income. Given that your actual increase in inflation adjusted income was 47%, the neutral observer must conclude that your claim that this merely represented the deflation is obviously false. In fact, your actual inflation adjusted income growth is nearly FOUR TIMES the contribution from the deflation events, or, to put it another way, you have - ignoring the benefits of deflation - increased your income by NEARLY ONE THIRD over the last 25 years. :
But have no fear. Only the observant reader will notice this. The rest of the dummies may believe that it is the deflation that is really to blame :rofl:
:wacko: I hope people just skip your long posts!I thought you will in fact raise another important fact that shows that inflation adjusted figures are not the only that matter. Because they are applicable under the assumption that the income is spend in tha country itself. While we all know signifficant ammounts of money are sent as a help to other countries.
Like for example from PTC to Austria. And Austria agreed to compensate PTC for money invested in one of her weapon manufactories. A sum of 1000 d was agreed.
Nevertheless, we realise our friend Austria is in some strange kind of economic trouble. Could it be because she gave her treasury to France to govern it?
Well, as soon as she takes her own treasury in her own hands, PTC will again be willing to invest in Austria
And naturally, under the condition that all past PTC investments there were succesful...which brings us again to the question of that one manufactory Since Austria lacks cash for 1000 d payment (not to consider interests during 21 years - that's how long she is behind the scheddule!), PTC is good enough to suggest another way. That particular manufactory can be shipped from Austria to one of Portuguese colonies. Natives will be more than happy with this a bit obsolete technology. We are even ready to consider some monetary compensation for Austria.
Now, isn't this a solution acceptable to everyone?
That is a very good point, Barnius!
Might I take this opportunity to notify all the leading economic nations of the world that the best way to have your income valued as LESS, and thus appear LESS THREATENING, is to give it to a low-to medium income country with high inflation, as that will devalue the money the most.
...Russia being the obvious candidate
And here are the military data from the beginning of the last session.
It would be good if army and navy support limits were included, but that's not possible to find out without loading every country and running it to the next month.
Morale and maintenance figures are for the assumed 100% maintenance.
It would be good if army and navy support limits were included, but that's not possible to find out without loading every country and running it to the next month.
Morale and maintenance figures are for the assumed 100% maintenance.
Originally posted by Barnius
And here are the military data from the beginning of the last session.
It would be good if army and navy support limits were included, but that's not possible to find out without loading every country and running it to the next month.
Morale and maintenance figures are for the assumed 100% maintenance.
???? Is England the only country using cannons???
Originally posted by Attila the Hun
???? Is England the only country using cannons???
22 years ago it appeared so
but very soon more than 200 Portuguese cannons were besieging one of the wealthiest European provinces.
Last edited:
OMG, I have so much to catch up in the AAR thread! My last entry was for more than a century ago
I could do it...
In fact, I've already come up with a few ideas...1. I have some experience in MPs...Originally posted by Attila the Hun
Besides, having been around since the beggining of Mach II and having read things about Mach I it would be hard to find a player who 1. has a decent experience in MPs 2. has absolutely no idea about the love's and hate's prevailing between certain players (I was really astonished to find out that there are old rivalries still prevailing having a rather huge effect on the game :-( ) and has a good understanding how RP should be conducted and 4. has some fair knowledge about that particular period in history. Thus, all in all, we might as well return to the random assignements (missions) given by the game-engine, perhaps assigning highr VPs to each mission.
2. I have no idea whatsoever about the "love's and hate's" you speak of.
3. I did a little role-playing back in DoN2... some of the other players there might even remember the new meaning of "Venice" that the Popes propagated for.
4. I'm not completely ignorant of that time... especially the reign of Catherine the Great and her advisor Potemkin the anglophile (who liked his nieces
).So, all I need to make specific missions for everyone is to learn what the current alliances are and to be shown maps of every continent (with Europe in greater detail).
That is, if the M2 players would be comfortable with me meddling in their otherwise internal affairs, "Homerus-style", and giving them all something big and special (and potentially rewarding) to do.
Which all is just as possible in the DU concept and I can come up with some new critiques too (like people gambling with a country because they know they will get a new one soon anyway for example). But the bottom line is that, like this sort of game, there it also mostly depends on the players. If those are good and up for it, teh game will be good. IF not, well ...
And I'd say it is hardly more realistic to live for 400 years and rule another nation every few decades than what we have usually
I have to agree with the Gary. Its the players and the competition along with the 'restrained' atmosphere to refrain from some of the worst powergaming inclinations, that make Machiavelli fun for me.
Warfare in Russia is seldom static enough for cannon to be of any use whatsoever. The 90 cannon in the list (and while we are at it, Barnius, those figures are NOT thousands of cannon, they are tensOriginally posted by Attila the Hun
???? Is England the only country using cannons???
), were custom built at the end of the 1706-1734 session for use in sieging one particular Mughal province, Samarkand. They were put to work and proved excellent at the task in the beginning of this session. I think I retired them after the war.
Last edited:
Gary,
As I'm sure Duke can verify, he DOWed long before I was ready... And his reasons for it and mine differed-I said, to the public, that the greatest part of Spanish European policy revolved around restoration of the Netherlands, which, if you'll recall, were technically stolen by France or in rebellion.
If I'd powergamed, or believed the general consensus that this was just a powergame, pure and simple, things would've been much different. No inflation pre-event, for instance, no crusade against the Turks in North Africa. No independent Dutch. Three province gain in the first war with France. No Alba in the Balkans. No Imperial Army in Bohemia after Austria DOWed Poland during the winter and lost. Columbia up first for colonization. No Mayans. Whole different set of DP and event choices.
That said, my alliance comment is a jibe at Slargos, not you... You began asking me in the 1540's (add that to the list of power-gaming things I would've done) and for France, it made complete sense.
But I agree, generally, that Mach II is merely restrained... It isn't an RP game except insofar as RP reasons are invented to justify purely game-related activities and that leads to fun AARs and diplomacy. What really sets it apart is the competition and a few of the funny ideas people come up with, that make things more interesting...
Putting a lackluster economist in Spain, for instance, though I hope we can do away with that sort of thing next game and put me in, say, France, Sweden, Austria or the OE...
As I'm sure Duke can verify, he DOWed long before I was ready... And his reasons for it and mine differed-I said, to the public, that the greatest part of Spanish European policy revolved around restoration of the Netherlands, which, if you'll recall, were technically stolen by France or in rebellion.
If I'd powergamed, or believed the general consensus that this was just a powergame, pure and simple, things would've been much different. No inflation pre-event, for instance, no crusade against the Turks in North Africa. No independent Dutch. Three province gain in the first war with France. No Alba in the Balkans. No Imperial Army in Bohemia after Austria DOWed Poland during the winter and lost. Columbia up first for colonization. No Mayans. Whole different set of DP and event choices.
That said, my alliance comment is a jibe at Slargos, not you... You began asking me in the 1540's (add that to the list of power-gaming things I would've done) and for France, it made complete sense.
But I agree, generally, that Mach II is merely restrained... It isn't an RP game except insofar as RP reasons are invented to justify purely game-related activities and that leads to fun AARs and diplomacy. What really sets it apart is the competition and a few of the funny ideas people come up with, that make things more interesting...
Putting a lackluster economist in Spain, for instance, though I hope we can do away with that sort of thing next game and put me in, say, France, Sweden, Austria or the OE...
Originally posted by Attila the Hun
Well - in case You have missed it Forzaa - there was a small affair in NA between France and England that prevented Me (England) to save Hannover last session.
thats not the point i was trying to prove.. it was more about doing things that are sensible RP wise.. but would have been better avoided...