STGOD! OOC Thread.

Hadrianvs · Post by **Hadrianvs** » Wed Dec 16, 2009 3:43 pm

General Havoc wrote:I don't really have the time to delve into it now, but my recollection was that the Turks' last stand was not in Constantinople, but in central Turkey, and it took place in the 1700s. I needed at least two centuries thereafter or else it would not make sense for my Empire to be established in the way that it is, with the Turks having had sufficient time to gain Senatorial status, wide-franchise, and eventually a consulship.

Umm, isn't that exactly what I just said? The Turk's last stand is in Anatolia during the 1740s.

Hadrianvs · Post by **Hadrianvs** » Wed Dec 16, 2009 3:56 pm

Here are the relevant parts for your convenience.

"Great Turkish War ... is finalized with the capture of Constantinople in the early 18th century, during Peter the Great's reign, and leaves the Ottomans with most of Anatolia, the upper part of Mesopotamia, some of the Levant, and a bit of the Caucasus."

"The Ottomans are finished off during Empress Elizabeth I of Russia's reign, when she decides to free the Georgians and Armenians from the Turkish yoke. ... The Last Turkish War..."

Elizabeth I was Peter the Great's daughter, and she ruled from 1741 to 1762.

Steve · Post by **Steve** » Wed Dec 16, 2009 3:58 pm

I believe Constantinople was to be regained in 1688, mirroring the 2nd Siege of Vienna, with Jan Sobieski leading a Polish army to the aid of the Roman legions besieging Constantinople and crushing the Turkish army between the two, while Russia advanced in the Caucauses and Hungary grabbed the Balkans.

By this point Greece and western Anatolia would already be Roman again, and in the 18th Century the Turks were finished off between Rome and Russia, but not very late in said century. Much of the Ottoman Empire would have already been lost by 1688 when Rome reclaims the Sublime Porte, leaving only a broken, fractured Turkish kingdom in central and eastern Anatolia for Rome and Russia to carve up in the following decades.

I'm pretty sure that was the timeline we set in the chat. It gives time for the Romans to finish the assimilation of the Turks and to have Greece as a long-settled, prosperous part of the reborn Empire.

Hadrianvs · Post by **Hadrianvs** » Wed Dec 16, 2009 4:07 pm

I could have sworn we agreed on the ending blow being later in Peter the Great's reign rather than earlier. And I am definitely sure that the last of the Turks were finished off by Peter's daughter (plus Romans and Persians). Havoc said that in 1750 the Ottomans needed to be dead and buried. I had been pushing for later because I wanted Catherine II to be the vanquisher of the Ottomans, but seeing that Havoc's limit coincided with Elizabeth's reign, I decided that Catherine could squash some Mongol Khanate in Central Asia instead. I did research and everything too. In our timeline the Khanate of Bokara due to ahistorical luck and help from exiled Ottomans, is the big boy of Central Asia... until the Russians show up and show them who's bigger.

Steve · Post by **Steve** » Wed Dec 16, 2009 4:41 pm

Yeah, we had that in the chats, with 1710 being the end of a Great Turkish War instead of the historic 1699. Russian intervention could've been the clinching moment. But I don't know when Hav wants the city retaken. I wanted it to be at a time where it could realistically happen thanks to the arrival of a Polish army under Jan Sobieski so we could have a nice parallel to real history. Because I'm quirky that way.

Slacker · Post by **Slacker** » Wed Dec 16, 2009 4:54 pm

Well, Sobieski wouldn't be king here, but I do enjoy symbolism and as his birth is right around where I have Polish history going off the rails I figured I'd keep him.

frigidmagi · Post by **frigidmagi** » Wed Dec 16, 2009 5:00 pm

Right on a slightly more important note, I need volunteers to write OOBs for Iran, Japan and the Chinese states. I'm writing Spain right now.

Iran and the Chinese states will write up with 15 points.

Spain and Japan get 20pts.

You cannot write up one of your neighbors. So AcNut and Hadri for example can't do Iran. Hotfoot or Steve could. At the same token no one in Asia can write up Japan.

Slacker · Post by **Slacker** » Wed Dec 16, 2009 5:20 pm

Up to writing the fortifications part of my OOB. I have no idea how many significant fortifications would be appropriate for the Commonwealth and don't want to go overboard. Obviously most of them would be facing Russia, with a few along the German and Hungarian borders, token forts in the rest of the country and overseas.

Suggestions?

Hadrianvs · Post by **Hadrianvs** » Wed Dec 16, 2009 5:37 pm

Kiev is going to make Festung Berlin look like a nice open promenade? Unless you don't want me to level it if I siege it, in which case you really do want it to be a nice open promenade, like Paris.

Cynical Cat · Post by **Cynical Cat** » Wed Dec 16, 2009 6:39 pm

History edited.

General Havoc · Post by **General Havoc** » Wed Dec 16, 2009 6:43 pm

I think I did mis-read. I thought you were indicating that Constantinople fell in the early 1800s, not the 1700s. The former would be WAY too late, as I needed to acquire Constantinople itself by 1700 and have the Turks beaten by 1740 or so if not earlier, so as to allow for them to have enough time for a couple of failed revolts, followed by gradual (and partial) romanization, culminating in the early 1800s with Napoleon's provincial franchise, and of course eventually with a Turcian Consul.

frigidmagi · Post by **frigidmagi** » Wed Dec 16, 2009 6:44 pm

Spain is up! They don't like Havoc.

Slacker · Post by **Slacker** » Wed Dec 16, 2009 6:47 pm

Hadrianvs wrote:Kiev is going to make Festung Berlin look like a nice open promenade? Unless you don't want me to level it if I siege it, in which case you really do want it to be a nice open promenade, like Paris.

Well, I'd imagine Kiev and Riga are both fortified to hell and gone, whereas Minsk is relatively open simply because I haven't had it long enough to fortify it. You're in the same boat there with Odessa.

Charon · Post by **Charon** » Wed Dec 16, 2009 6:58 pm

frigidmagi wrote:Spain is up! They don't like Havoc.

Havoc's good at making friends.

Hadrianvs · Post by **Hadrianvs** » Wed Dec 16, 2009 7:02 pm

Slacker wrote:Well, I'd imagine Kiev and Riga are both fortified to hell and gone, whereas Minsk is relatively open simply because I haven't had it long enough to fortify it. You're in the same boat there with Odessa.

You may want to refer to the maps I sent you. You conquered Minsk and Riga in the same war, and both of them were far enough from the previous border that they wouldn't have been particularly fortified by the Russians either. The same in the opposite direction is true of Odessa and Brest. On the other hand, I gather it's been 10-20 years since the end of the last war, which is quite a bit of time to fortify.

Incidentally, did you pick Standing Military 5 because of Big Scary Russia? I should have posted my OOB earlier, I was going to go for Mil 3, but seeing as I'm surrounded by Mil 5 powers I might have to upgrade.

Slacker · Post by **Slacker** » Wed Dec 16, 2009 7:06 pm

Hadrianvs wrote: Incidentally, did you pick Standing Military 5 because of Big Scary Russia? I should have posted my OOB earlier, I was going to go for Mil 3, but seeing as I'm surrounded by Mil 5 powers I might have to upgrade.

I absolutely did-that and the fact I haven't been able to nail down a firm position on Vasan-German relations from our friends in Hannover.

I had originally had SML4 to be honest, and if you want to keep things on a lower intensity wouldn't object to stepping down my forces.

Cynical Cat · Post by **Cynical Cat** » Wed Dec 16, 2009 7:18 pm

Hadrianvs wrote: I should have posted my OOB earlier, I was going to go for Mil 3, but seeing as I'm surrounded by Mil 5 powers I might have to upgrade.

Please old bean, you're a mid twentieth century colonial power. Those Mil 5 nations are Poles and a bunch of dirty Indians. Where's your sense of racial superiority? They're inferior people. Your armies will sweep them away with a wave of the Tsar's arm.

Hadrianvs · Post by **Hadrianvs** » Wed Dec 16, 2009 7:30 pm

Slacker wrote:I had originally had SML4 to be honest, and if you want to keep things on a lower intensity wouldn't object to stepping down my forces.

Hah, game barely starting and we're already talking detente. I don't know, SML4 has its own appeal, but I'm definitely not going for SML5. Russian military tradition can be summarized in three words, "We have reserves.

EDIT - Okay, I made up my mind, on the grounds of reserves like only the Xiang Chinese and Mughals can match it's SML 3. Though annoyingly, both the Xiang Chinese and Mughals are my neighbors.

rhoenix · Post by **rhoenix** » Thu Dec 17, 2009 1:33 am

Ok, rules clarification, inspired from a debate in the chat:

Though the rules for aircraft include the "airdrop" option, is it possible to airload men and gear (e.g. paratroopers) right from the beginning of the game, or would it require researching the right materials?

Hadrianvs · Post by **Hadrianvs** » Thu Dec 17, 2009 6:26 am

So it turns out you can squeeze a hell of a lot of army out of a 1600 points when you realize that your navy has no raison d'etre whatsoever. I'm looking at 1020 point army supported by a 560 point air force. My 20 point navy will be spent in forts, and I was thinking of dumping my entire naval reserve into the Submarine Swarm From Hell.

I might reconsider though. I can reduce my army to 825 points and air force to 420. That's enough to liberate 355 points for a standing navy, which means that two months after initiating mobilization I'll have 1555 naval points of combat ready warships. Except that even if I concentrate the whole thing in one front (I have three) I could reasonably expect to be outnumbered by enemy naval contingents. So, what does a navy do for me again?

I ask honestly and earnestly, because I wanted armoured battlewagons with very large guns. Unfortunately for me, the strategic situation keeps making the case that, for Russia, naval supremacy matters about as much as the day's weather in Tierra del Fuego. So yeah, would be nice to hear a good reason why a real navy is worth considering.

Screwball · Post by **Screwball** » Thu Dec 17, 2009 7:07 am

I ask honestly and earnestly, because I wanted armoured battlewagons with very large guns. Unfortunately for me, the strategic situation keeps making the case that, for Russia, naval supremacy matters about as much as the day's weather in Tierra del Fuego. So yeah, would be nice to hear a good reason why a real navy is worth considering.

I really don't know. I'm considering dropping my BBs and conceding the seas to anybody who wants them (in this case, the Taipings) and spending the points on more army and airforce, on the assumption that I can create a large enough sub-swarm to make amphibious landings unfeasible.

That, or ally with Japan and use their navy instead.

Hotfoot · Post by **Hotfoot** » Thu Dec 17, 2009 7:32 am

Screwball wrote:
I ask honestly and earnestly, because I wanted armoured battlewagons with very large guns. Unfortunately for me, the strategic situation keeps making the case that, for Russia, naval supremacy matters about as much as the day's weather in Tierra del Fuego. So yeah, would be nice to hear a good reason why a real navy is worth considering.
I really don't know. I'm considering dropping my BBs and conceding the seas to anybody who wants them (in this case, the Taipings) and spending the points on more army and airforce, on the assumption that I can create a large enough sub-swarm to make amphibious landings unfeasible.

That, or ally with Japan and use their navy instead.

Japan's player left.

No Monocora.

General Havoc · Post by **General Havoc** » Thu Dec 17, 2009 11:51 am

Every player finds themselves in a different strategic situation. Russia's focus has not traditionally been their navy. I on the other hand find that there's a hell of a lot of reasons why I want a potent (if not overwhelming) navy.

Screwball · Post by **Screwball** » Thu Dec 17, 2009 1:41 pm

Japan's player left.

No Monocora.

So, an alliance with an NPC Japan.

Anyway, Hadri, I'd take a look at what you can get out of a 355 point navy, and if its worth the points diversion. I've decided having active-duty BBs and cruisers isn't. They'd be nice, but I'm clearly poorly placed to be a naval power, and I'm never going to beat even an NPC IJN so I'm not even going to try. I could easily compete with Frigid, but I've decided that the points spent competing with his navy would be worth more as army and airforce.

Hotfoot · Post by **Hotfoot** » Thu Dec 17, 2009 2:05 pm

Allying with an NPC nation should just not be allowed, period.

LibriumArcana.Games

STGOD! OOC Thread.

#51

#52

#53

#54

#55

#56

#57

#58

#59

#60

#61

#62

#63

#64

#65

#66

#67

#68

#69

#70

#71

#72

#73

#74

#75