-
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.
Tonioz said:
With Spain owning all of Italy you are throwing bricks in a glass house!
England's second explorer from the family Cabot discovered a lot of sea zones but hardly no land provinces. A COT opened in London increasing income somewhat but still a lagging way beyond.
Bah, you can say that and hope people believe it, but you know you lied to me, and apparently lied to everyone else while I was dumped from the game at the crucial moment. Your reasoning is invalid, since there wasn't even the hint of an attack upon Hungary at the moment; you simply wanted the income and didn't have the courage to ask me in advance about the idea.admiral drake said:
Now here is the part that should make you, I hope, a little unhappy with yourself. I don't mind the result per se; but what pisses me off is the fact that I went to all the trouble of going over this in detail with you today, for over an hour, prior to the game, then going to the further trouble of looking up what I needed for the treaties which I posted on line. All of that trouble because I don't just play the game, but because I like the whole role aspect of it. And all of that was wasted effort. Which makes me very unlikely to want to do it again. By which I would hope you and others have lost something.
Funniest thing about it is that, had you said something about the concept, we could have negotiated it in advance and all would be fine. As it is, I have no intention of trusting you ever. Not this game, not any game, not ever. Nor, I suspect, will anyone else who knows what you did. Some won't care, but you lost something in the process. Respect doesn't come on a silver platter.
As for the game, it, too, loses something for me. First it is Brandenburg crying in its beer about how poor it is, and playing lawyer with the rules. Then it is Poland breaking treaties it negotiated in supposedly good faith and then using lame lies to try and justify it. I don't mind losing at war; I'm a poor militarist and I'll learn. But I dislike lies and I dislike "players." If this game represents "chill" MP, I'll take the much nicer game I was playing before.
For anyone playing along, by the way, the whole reason for the "Treaty of Eger" is that Poland came to me claiming to want Hungary to exist for a while as a "buffer" against the Ottomans. Well, we see the truth of that nonsense.
juv95hrn said:
far from owning whole Italy. And what`s wrong, there are plenty of games with Spain at _whole_ Italy.
DSYoungEsq said:
whatever the general deal would have resulted in defending it from ottos till you inherit it wich would have happend eitherway , you should have talked instead of ignoring me after it to , youre attack was rather weak and i'm stil offering you wp but you can forget any provs from northern hungary now , i wasn't going to backstab you over the provs themself and offert to let you take them by fake war als refused , you dowing with ottos was a mistake to , i knew ottos wanted south so simple gave it and kicked you out of the northern part with some shockleaders
i do agree that i should have sayd so but i don't have to take orders from a autrian either i didn't backstab the deal i just did anything to ensure the provs survival and benefit from it a bit at same time as i also knew ottos didn't wan't to wait much longer and would have warred hungary even if you didn't ask him , you however did attack me thus i imidiatly gave ottos south making sure you got 0instead of 2/3 of hungarian provs in balkan
After having missed last session, i came back to the game as sweden... and for a nightmare evening :wacko:
My ally (denmark) suddenly dowed me as i had very few army and a bad monarch... obviously he quickly overran me, but not satisfied enough he demanded 3 provinces
.
I hope i won't be the only one remembering such a behavior
Anyway, i didn't even try to protest as it is supposed to be a "chill" game but really VD you are not the best type of neighbour in a game :mad.
Denmark can be sure that i'll do my best to remind him of being such a traitor.
After this loss of provinces, sweden is crewed for some time as it only earns 19d per month and has a lower mp than ever...
Else, convertion to protestant and alliancy with russia, as these danish cowards allied with BB and Poland (just in case sweden could have a chance to recover )
My ally (denmark) suddenly dowed me as i had very few army and a bad monarch... obviously he quickly overran me, but not satisfied enough he demanded 3 provinces
.I hope i won't be the only one remembering such a behavior
Anyway, i didn't even try to protest as it is supposed to be a "chill"
game but really VD you are not the best type of neighbour in a game :mad.Denmark can be sure that i'll do my best to remind him of being such a traitor.
After this loss of provinces, sweden is crewed for some time as it only earns 19d per month and has a lower mp than ever...
Else, convertion to protestant and alliancy with russia, as these danish cowards allied with BB and Poland (just in case sweden could have a chance to recover
)
Adam Breit said:Good session, btw Barnius, Quitting ?
Thinking about is, because of no permanent players, which is the most important feature I seek in games. Also we were playing too fast. For me it is not Chill when I have no time to send merchants and explore optimally(=with at least 98% of maximal immaginable efficiency
) and than lose the explorer. I really see no reason for this rush, we played for perhaps 3 hours and covered 28 years, which is almost double the "normal" speed in the games I played so far (20 years per session).
Tonioz said:
For all practicall purposses, Spain DOES own the whole Italy, but if you want to be such a nitpicker, than let's say Spain for now owns only 95% of Italy (the number I am 100% positive I can prove to be correct by applying the appropriate weighting for income, manpower, strategic importance and if needed some other influencing factors
).This is wrong from BoP perspective.
What is VERY wrong from the game point of view is Spain apparently somehow getting Mantua as national province
. How did that happen??!! Did Spain ask Genoa to allow this? Or did perhaps Genoa offered that to Venice, her archenemy, so that Venice can easier conclude the deal with Spain giving Spain the whole Italy?National provinces can not be traded that easy IMO. The only one so far was France RENOUNCING her claims on Calais. This was UNILATERAL decission which King of France had every right to make.
The second one concerns France and Flandres. Again, France will renounce some claims on the current Flandres land, and again everything is OK.
Renouncing claims is easy, GETTING them is much, much more complicated, because other interested parties can have something to say in it. But by all means, getting claims has to be agreed by the country currently owning the disputed province. I don't think Genoa agreed Spain to claim province of Mantua.
At least this alliance will lose one member as soon as cheech is back.patoche34 said:Else, convertion to protestant and alliancy with russia, as these danish cowards allied with BB and Poland (just in case sweden could have a chance to recover
I'd be very if you should leave. I agree we played a bit to fast for my taste yesterday, and I think othersBarnius said:Thinking about is, because of no permanent players, which is the most important feature I seek in games. Also we were playing too fast. For me it is not Chill when I have no time to send merchants and explore optimally(=with at least 98% of maximal immaginable efficiency
complained as well. Regarding permanent players, I think we have bee rather lucky so far, haven't we?
Can someone clarify what has happened with Mantua, Spain and Genoa? What has Genoa to do with Mantua in the first place? I agree with Barnius that it's one thing to renounce cores (can perhaps be accepted), and a totally different matter to get cores! I'll wait for a clarification before I comment more on this though.
Norrefeldt said:
Oh, I will not leave over this and I appologise for even mentioning it, but I was really upset when my only explorer died because of the game speed (I assure you I am rather good in exploration when I can dedicate the appropriate care to it, and as it is, my explorer did almost nothing
).As for permanent players, missing at least one player every session is FAR from beeing lucky in my book
. Perhaps I could oversee one missing every 5 sessions . For example, Portugal missed some crucial years of exploration, as well as Brandenburg could have dome a lot in Germany and perhaps in this Polish adventure...
Tonioz said:
Can't but agree with Spain, England really is developping her ecconomy completelly unchecked by any competition. Perhaps Spain can do something about it?
Barnius said:
I'm quite sure this is why VD dowed me yesterday as well...
No BB player, he could annex northern germany and be sure he would'n be dowed on his southern border
Im not sure if brand is worth continuing at this stage. 2/3 sessions AI is pretty bad really. Perhaps better to let them be split up as there is nowhere left for them to expand. I would be willing to sub though or take over if someone leaves.
I can confirm that Spain has somehow acquired a core in Mantua since the 1503 save. Adam Breit, can you explain why? If there is a way to get new cores, can you explain for the rest of us how we should do it? Is there something in-game that can be done, or just nagging? If there is a way I think it should be made official.
If there is a way to get new cores, can you explain for the rest of us how we should do it? Is there something in-game that can be done, or just nagging? If there is a way I think it should be made official.
Norrefeldt said:I can confirm that Spain has somehow acquired a core in Mantua since the 1503 save. Adam Breit, can you explain why?
Everyone can see on the Spanish maps that they claim Mantua now, while this was not the case in (early) 1503.
Spain will just have to spend some stab if she wants Genoa
A massive core switching has been done. Spain has lost 5 cores and gained 10.
I must sincerely say I am very disappointed on our GM, since he doesn't follow his own rules. Oh, I notice that the paragraph on editing is removed from the first post... Ad hoc-GMing indeed. It's a rather big step we have taken from the original rules. But how stupid of me, the GM was invloved in the dealings so of course the rules could be fixed! How convenient.
I don't think I'm "chilled" enough to play this game....
Or should I adapt? Starting to sell out my Hungarian cores here? 100d a piece?
I must sincerely say I am very disappointed on our GM, since he doesn't follow his own rules. Oh, I notice that the paragraph on editing is removed from the first post... Ad hoc-GMing indeed.
It's a rather big step we have taken from the original rules. But how stupid of me, the GM was invloved in the dealings so of course the rules could be fixed! How convenient.I don't think I'm "chilled" enough to play this game....
Or should I adapt? Starting to sell out my Hungarian cores here? 100d a piece?
Last edited:
I am sure there is an explanation. Anyway, so far nothing has happened...
Spain got cores on:
- former Aragon provinces of Valencia, Aragon, Catalonia, Gerona (and the second core on Navara - already had it); perhaps it was from event? If not, perhaps it is "natural" Spain to have them? If not, than she should have waited some time to inherit Aragon...
- cores on Mantua, Istria, Dalmatia and Ragusa; all former Venetian provinces, all former Venetian cores, but NOT part of Venice when traded.
Spain gave to Venice in exchange for above mentioned provinces cores on Messina, Sicily, Sardinia and Malta.
After thinking a bit about it, is there really something so wrong with it, especially since we all have CBs on each other through capitals?
If we allow territory selling, than surelly we should also allow sell of some papers giving mere RIGHTFUL CLAIMS on some land...
Venice and Spain simply exchanged RIGHTS to be called monarchs of 4 provinces, no? The fact that Venice also got the mentioned provinces from Spain, while Spain still isn't recognised as a rightful owner by the current owners (Genoa, Bosnia, ...) is either calculated in the deal, or doge of Venice was again cunning and succeeded in tricking Spain .
Spain got cores on:
- former Aragon provinces of Valencia, Aragon, Catalonia, Gerona (and the second core on Navara - already had it); perhaps it was from event? If not, perhaps it is "natural" Spain to have them? If not, than she should have waited some time to inherit Aragon...
- cores on Mantua, Istria, Dalmatia and Ragusa; all former Venetian provinces, all former Venetian cores, but NOT part of Venice when traded.
Spain gave to Venice in exchange for above mentioned provinces cores on Messina, Sicily, Sardinia and Malta.
After thinking a bit about it, is there really something so wrong with it, especially since we all have CBs on each other through capitals?
If we allow territory selling, than surelly we should also allow sell of some papers giving mere RIGHTFUL CLAIMS on some land...
Venice and Spain simply exchanged RIGHTS to be called monarchs of 4 provinces, no? The fact that Venice also got the mentioned provinces from Spain, while Spain still isn't recognised as a rightful owner by the current owners (Genoa, Bosnia, ...) is either calculated in the deal, or doge of Venice was again cunning and succeeded in tricking Spain
.
Last edited:
Norrefeldt said:
I must say I find this to be at odds with the maptrading rules. This is a FAR more significant edit than editing 10 seazones or somesuch. [and very close to, if not more changing the balance than making BUR HOL]