Chill 1; Easy And Simple. (Normal and Relaxed players only, RP encouraged)

[ForzaA]

IMNSHO- for core editing ALL parties influenced (others having the core, owning the prov. Arguably people bordering the prov, having the culture etc.) should agree.
And since the AI can't agree to it, it should not be possible to gain cores on AI provinces this way. [if you want it, take it then claim the core]

 

[juv95hrn]

As for game speed I apologize if people felt we went too fast at times. Observe that I alos har demands to increase speed. As usual I tried to go Normal/AN when all nations were at peace and Normal/BN when human players were at war. As host there are many wills to consider and I try to listen to the majority when people want different things.

As to breaking deals and playing with AI nations:
I hope that people that are dissapointed because they were backstabbed, treaties were broken etc, etc remains in the game and try to get back at the perpetrators instead of quitting out of disappointment. Bactstabbing and breaking treaties is allowed but should result in that the victim plans revenge and trusts the performing nation less during the rest of the campaign.

Let me give you an example. In a campaign where I played Holland I offered, or blackmailed Portugal into selling her few remaining provinces in Indonesia to me. Instead of planning her departure I saw Holland using the 5.000d to fortify her provinces and I realized I had been double crossed. When the deadline for handing over the provinces came a refusal to do it ensued. In this game Portugal did not only lose her Indonesian provinces but most of her colonies in the rest of the world as well since I ruthlessly pursued them for the rest of the campaign. Don't get mad, get even!

Core edits and rule changes:
I'm strongly against any rule changes that aren't pre-announced nor discussed beforehand. If I interpret the Spanish core changes they are clearly against the rules I was under the impression we were playing with and I would say bordering on the line of cheating, no matter their importance in the game. Breaking the rules when this bears little importance is as bad as when the importance is big. Let's discuss this calmly and investigate what have happened and then resolve the situation.

All in all we have a nice campaign going. Maybe a few AI:ed nations need some DP-slider edits of their choice etc, but I really don't feel that this campaign have had any real incidents worth getting really upset or quitting over, which I think was the reason it got the title it got. Take a deep breath and lets go on as mature and reasonable adults as before.

 

[Norrefeldt]

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 .

If we are going to allow this, at least Venice ought to have the provinces they sell cores for, or sell the rights to the owner of the provinces. I don't think it's natural that Spain got cores on my provinces, to enable a BB cheap attack. Would Austria like me to give my cores on their provinces to a very strong and possible hostile France just in time for their attack? Doubt it.
If this is done and allowed by our current rules (until the GM has some other ideas he wants to fit into the rules) then I consider it a very hostile act by Venice against the Ottoman Empire and I will not rest until avenged.

And on another matter, I think Forzaa can become just any nation he wants to now. We cannot allow for a lot of editing in one area while maintaining a very harsh line in others.

EDIT: When swapping/selling/giving away cores it should be announced beforehand. It affects the other players. I would have played differently last session if I had knew it.

 

[Adam B.]

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?

What rules have I not been following ?

Cores on Aragon are normal, and the cores on Venitians terretories were discussed with venice and are allowed by the rules !

If you all do not like the normal cores on aragon, I will delete them, but the Venitian deal was completely within the rules !

And I removed the paragraph because ppl used it to complain about the smallest edits, ...

You can always agrue against edits that are boosting, like aragon, but not on ppl to ppl edits, wich are completely within the rules ... :s

EDIT: From the rules:

"-CBShields Can be demanded/negotiated."

 

[Norrefeldt]

But the rules has changed since we started. And please inform others when cores are edited.
I still consider Forzaa eligable for anything he likes to, since all the editing in this game is rather silly and it couldn't really make it worse.

And an information to all: trading cores on provinces that is owned by the Ottoman Empire or it's vassals is concidered very hostile.

 

[Adam B.]

But the rules has changed since we started. And please inform others when cores are edited.
I still consider Forzaa eligable for anything he likes to, since all the editing in this game is rather silly and it couldn't really make it worse.

The rule about vassals has changed, yes, because of good discussion by you

And sorry that I didn't trow it into the group, my mistake.


BTW: Lets go a bit slower next time, tough I did have enough time for my merchants ...

 

[Adam B.]

As for game speed I apologize if people felt we went too fast at times. Observe that I alos har demands to increase speed. As usual I tried to go Normal/AN when all nations were at peace and Normal/BN when human players were at war. As host there are many wills to consider and I try to listen to the majority when people want different things.

Indeed, lets go a bit slower next time, if some don't like it, we should change it.

As to breaking deals and playing with AI nations:
I hope that people that are dissapointed because they were backstabbed, treaties were broken etc, etc remains in the game and try to get back at the perpetrators instead of quitting out of disappointment. Bactstabbing and breaking treaties is allowed but should result in that the victim plans revenge and trusts the performing nation less during the rest of the campaign.

Aye, Look at my country ?, Do I have a future ?

Let me give you an example. In a campaign where I played Holland I offered, or blackmailed Portugal into selling her few remaining provinces in Indonesia to me. Instead of planning her departure I saw Holland using the 5.000d to fortify her provinces and I realized I had been double crossed. When the deadline for handing over the provinces came a refusal to do it ensued. In this game Portugal did not only lose her Indonesian provinces but most of her colonies in the rest of the world as well since I ruthlessly pursued them for the rest of the campaign. Don't get mad, get even!.

Argh !

Core edits and rule changes:
I'm strongly against any rule changes that aren't pre-announced nor discussed beforehand. If I interpret the Spanish core changes they are clearly against the rules I was under the impression we were playing with and I would say bordering on the line of cheating, no matter their importance in the game. Breaking the rules when this bears little importance is as bad as when the importance is big. Let's discuss this calmly and investigate what have happened and then resolve the situation.!.

No rules were changed, I just edited:

1: Cores From Venice to Spain and vice versa. (As allowed within the rules, if many disagree OBJECTIVELY, we should get rid of this rule)

2: Aragonese Cores to Spain. (Not stated in rules, and I will remove them if too many players disagree )

All in all we have a nice campaign going. Maybe a few AI:ed nations need some DP-slider edits of their choice etc, but I really don't feel that this campaign have had any real incidents worth getting really upset or quitting over, which I think was the reason it got the title it got. Take a deep breath and lets go on as mature and reasonable adults as before

I love the spirit and feeling of this campaign, I have not boosted any nation really with any edits, don't think I would.

If you dislike any edits, lets talk it trough, and I organize a poll on the Adamo afterwards.

 

[unmerged(10146)]

Lets go a bit slower next time, tough I did have enough time for my merchants ...

Well, I was doing rather good in sending merchants in 1510es, but in the period about 1522-152X I was supposed to do my best with 4-5 years living explorer. Unfortunately, in the same time France found herself at war against 3 (THREE) countries, all well known warmongers on our borders, all at some times demanding one province each .
Sending merchants was the second that was abandoned. Than came stupid losses in the wars because I tried to explore. Only after my explorer died (because of the stupid habit to run to the first port regardless of my orders to wait reinforcement!!!!) war went better. Than I also continued vassal tribute payments to Flandres, a yearly routine abandoned when wars started.

Yes, France was paying half of her taxes to Flandres, as if she was her vassal, for 20 years (effectively). My calculation show I had to pay about 1860 d and I paid 1905 d, so this is done. Together with Kleves and France renouncing the claims on the remaining Flandrian provinces, this was the payment for Flandres finally leaving southern France (Orleans, Champagne, Bourgogne, Franche Comte).

 

[ForzaA]

EDIT: From the rules:

"-CBShields Can be demanded/negotiated."

Indeed, HOWEVER, in discussions with me (regarding me being edited to HOL, then FLA..) where I and Barnius had agreed to move FRA's core on Calais to BUR/FLA/HOL you DID NOT edit it, because Juv opposed it.

I find it perfectly reasonable for Juv to oppose it, HOWEVER, I think that, since Genoa CAN'T oppose it (being AI and all that) there shouldn't have been edits to cores that directly affect her.

 

[unmerged(10146)]

I already posted my view: we are talking here about some historical claims. If selling actual territory is allowed, than surely claims should be allowed too.
Should third parties be included? Well, they are not included when territory is sold, regardless of the possible fact that some province can be claimed by a third party.

The problem I see is our 3-province rule. It is tied to claimed provinces in a way (IIRC) that claimed provinces don’t count, so they are rather important. Besides that, they influence nationalism (or lack of it). Perhaps also war score?

 

[Adam B.]

Indeed, HOWEVER, in discussions with me (regarding me being edited to HOL, then FLA..) where I and Barnius had agreed to move FRA's core on Calais to BUR/FLA/HOL you DID NOT edit it, because Juv opposed it.

I find it perfectly reasonable for Juv to oppose it, HOWEVER, I think that, since Genoa CAN'T oppose it (being AI and all that) there shouldn't have been edits to cores that directly affect her.

Nonono, I didn't do that one because you wanted one, just like that, not getting it from France ...

 

[juv95hrn]

Im not enrirely sure what happened in Italy regarding cores but I think its fine if a human nation deals with cores but we shouldn't mess with the AI's territories.

Ie. if Venice ceded cores to Spain from her own territories I think it should be allowed. On the other hand if the AI for some reason were bereft of their CB shields and these moved to Spain I vote for removing theses changes for the reason of following the rules.

Also I suggest all edits to be posted so to avoid misunderstandings of this sort in the future.

Regarding Calais I resist cores from other nations except England for ingame purposes. I like the RP of defending Calais although it's probably not the most beneficial province to own. Anyway let's not mix ingame/subjective discussions with out of game, rules discusssions where everyone should try to remain objective.

 

[juv95hrn]

Indeed, HOWEVER, in discussions with me (regarding me being edited to HOL, then FLA..) where I and Barnius had agreed to move FRA's core on Calais to BUR/FLA/HOL you DID NOT edit it, because Juv opposed it.

I find it perfectly reasonable for Juv to oppose it, HOWEVER, I think that, since Genoa CAN'T oppose it (being AI and all that) there shouldn't have been edits to cores that directly affect her.

As I interpreted the rules only me, owning Calais, could give away a core on it. I would be happy to agree to the change if the rules had allowed it but since I'm in a position to oppose it I will do so for game purposes. I will alos be happy to do so if it's for the better good of the campaign. But as it stands now I think most players, and nations, are quite happy with England in Calais.

 

[unmerged(10146)]

Im not enrirely sure what happened in Italy regarding cores but I think its fine if a human nation deals with cores but we shouldn't mess with the AI's territories.

Ie. if Venice ceded cores to Spain from her own territories I think it should be allowed. On the other hand if the AI for some reason were bereft of their CB shields and these moved to Spain I vote for removing theses changes for the reason of following the rules.

No, Juv, it's third option: Venice sold HER cores on territory she didn't own at the moment. AI countries themself owning that territory weren't edited at all.
Still, as said already, if we allow selling of actual territory, than why not also claims on it (some old documents)?
Only, 3-province rule perhaps should be rewritten, or just do as Norre did as OE: declare such act to be extremelly hostile and will be sanctioned.

 

[DSYoungEsq]

One quick note here.

Doesn't an alliance containing Poland, BB and Denmark violate the rules?

What penalties will apply?

 

[admiral drake]

One quick note here.

Doesn't an alliance containing Poland, BB and Denmark violate the rules?

What penalties will apply?

brand was ai all session so no violation , brand is also not in alliance right now so again no violation to good for informing me so i'm forced to break alliance with brand to re-ally brand


edit : nice try dsy but you can't give me a penalty for not breaking the rule tho to be honost i didn't realise there was a 2playeralliance rule so tnx for pointing that out for me

 

[unmerged(5161)]

Regarding Calais I resist cores from other nations except England for ingame purposes. I like the RP of defending Calais although it's probably not the most beneficial province to own. Anyway let's not mix ingame/subjective discussions with out of game, rules discusssions where everyone should try to remain objective.

I hate to interject here (well, not a whole lot), but I have been considering linking a "Merchant Adventurer Company" event in my EoS mod with owning Calais. Do you guys think that would be a cool solution? I am in the process of rebuilding the event, monarch, and leader files in a huge version update due in a week or so. The Merchant Adventurers initially got cut from my events because I saw it as a bogus booster event with little historical significance (Merchant Adventurers were not very powerful in real life). However, in my new version I will be having the event trigger ONLY if you still have Calais in 1543 (which is the historical date for the company) and the event will give you a few small boosts, but also a chance to activate a dormant explorer; Willoughby and Chancellor (two names, same explorer) because they sailed at same time for very short trips but under the Merchant Adventurers watch.

So come to my dungeon if you want to comment on this idea (link in my signature) and maybe give me an alternative way to increasing the desire to hold on to Calais for England.

You may now return to your business of arguing about who is the most chilled player in this chilled game of chilled people.

EDIT: Just for clarification, I forgot to mention that Merchant Adventurers were based in Calais, hence the justification for the trigger is historical actually. You may now once again return to fighting in the Chilled thread.

 

[Tonioz]

Well, I was doing rather good in sending merchants in 1510es, but in the period about 1522-152X I was supposed to do my best with 4-5 years living explorer. Unfortunately, in the same time France found herself at war against 3 (THREE) countries, all well known warmongers on our borders, all at some times demanding one province each .
Sending merchants was the second that was abandoned. Than came stupid losses in the wars because I tried to explore. Only after my explorer died (because of the stupid habit to run to the first port regardless of my orders to wait reinforcement!!!!) war went better. Than I also continued vassal tribute payments to Flandres, a yearly routine abandoned when wars started.

Barnius, since 1490 i settled colonies, pointed many explorers, conqs, sent merchants, was in war with american and explored all them. I did all that on above normal speed, and didn`t complain, though many of my explorers died sailing around Africa. Once i`ve told regarding speed, when i was in war versus Incas, and i hardly could send them peace offers doing other tasks at the same time. Though i`m used to play at AN at russian lan games before - either war or colonization.

In fact, Juv always tended to AN speed in peaceful time despite of whines of colonization and trade countries - i remember that was in Reign of Empires Well, it would be good if England can make colonization since 1550 on such speed

 

[Tonioz]

some notes:

1. i wonder why you guys are mixing cores and owning. It is two separate things in EU2. I remembed rules told about ceding/selling cores and there were nothing that it should be done with own province only. Venice didn`t cede province, it ceded core only, and that is normal. Besides it looks quite silly for me, that we are seriously discussing rights of AI. Perhaps if there was separate state Mantua, we would seriously discuss if Mantua would agree on transferring of cores of Venice ? Taking this logic, why we forgot about Bosnia and Istria core ? Or the discussion is up for PR purposes only because of our direct interest to this region ?
It is interesting to know that Venice can`t take out own cores and manage own rights. What rights do Genoa and Bosnia have to veto Venice`s deals, that doesn`t effect on Genoa or Bosnia states at all ? It is stupid subject of discussion imho. In fact Venice offered whole this deal with vassals/cores vs island and i agreed on it, nothing more.

2. Barnuis, i would welcome if you prove your point of view, that 95% of Italy is owned by Spain by "applying the appropriate weighting for income, manpower, strategic importance and if needed some other influencing factors". It is interesting to see the basis of your calculations if Spain doesn`t own Piedmonte, Liguria, Corsika, Sardinia, Sicily, Messina, Venice, Istria and Dalmatia. As far as i understand this pack of provinces give 5% of Italy. Poor Venice.

3. I don`t understand point of view of OE "Venice ought to have the provinces they sell cores for, or sell the rights to the owner of the provinces. I don't think it's natural that Spain got cores on my provinces". Spain got the core for Ragusa, when it was the domain of OE. But about what kind of provinces is Norre talking ? Or perhaps we should care about future ownings of OE and discuss with Sultan beforehand what he is going to own ?
Also i don`t see any way of prioirity of owner on the transferred cores. All are free in their relations and their deals. I don`t need cores on Istria, Dalmatia or Ragusa at all, but i strongly dislike the way it was talked by OE, France etc.

 

[unmerged(10146)]

Barnius, since 1490 i settled colonies, pointed many explorers, conqs, sent merchants, was in war with american and explored all them. I did all that on above normal speed, and didn`t complain, though many of my explorers died sailing around Africa. ...

The key word here is many . It was French first explorer