Apologies for the wait. The nation template is enormous, although luckily I have designed it so that it is very easy to actually fill out.

I've been looking at this for a while now and I'd actually like to try this RP if it's still possible :)

The Nation I was thinking about taking is one which has had a turbulent past, a nation which has played a vital role in the history of Central Europe with a fine martial tradition and has made great scientific advances. Its eagle a sign of strength to its people.

can you guess what country? [+]

I hope you didn't think of Germany because I of course meant Poland! :P

Anyway, you think that would be possible? :)

Sure! Commonwealth or Soviet Satellite?

docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/17SE2wn..
Here is the current spreadsheet for the nations. Just so you know I haven't been sitting on my ass for a week :-).
I still have Economy and Military left, but I am really proud of my policy support and position calculator. Thoughts?

<Snipped quote by Zoldyck>

Sure! Commonwealth or Soviet Satellite?

Neither, the Interbellum Republic was what I was going to use as a template... Though with Lithuania and Latvia included.
.
.
.
It will become clear when I have the CS done :P

<Snipped quote by Gaebrael>

Neither, the Interbellum Republic was what I was going to use as a template... Though with Lithuania and Latvia included.
.
.
.
It will become clear when I have the CS done :P

Alright. I just need to know for filling in sheets. Also, what did you think of the template so far?

<Snipped quote by Zoldyck>

Alright. I just need to know for filling in sheets. Also, what did you think of the template so far?

Aah, well in that case just fill in a parlementary republic :P

And to be honest... It's kind of an intimidating template. I'm not quite sure as to how it works, though I believe that there's a lot of influence drawn from a certain series of Grand Strategy Games, but I might be mistaken :P

<Snipped quote by Gaebrael>

Aah, well in that case just fill in a parlementary republic :P

And to be honest... It's kind of an intimidating template. I'm not quite sure as to how it works, though I believe that there's a lot of influence drawn from a certain series of Grand Strategy Games, but I might be mistaken :P

I tried to add some guides in the actual sheet about why certain numbers are certain ways. It should hopefully be more intuitive once things get punched in. And if you are thinking of EUIV, you are indeed correct!

EDIT: Also, no problem with the gov thing. The way it works is that I fill out the red section after you reserve something, then you fill out the grey section.

Also, not sure I mentioned it in the OP, I need Co-GMs! If anybody is interested, let me know!

@Gaebrael

I am quite impressed by the spreadsheet as it is most encompassing, keep up the stellar work.

@Gaebrael

British Empire [+]

This is British territory, assuming the French took India, Burma, and Canada.

If i'm accepted we could discuss subsequent wars/history. You might have retaken some territories etc...

@Winston Smith

That sounds good to me.

@Gaebrael

I am quite impressed by the spreadsheet as it is most encompassing, keep up the stellar work.

Thank you! :-) That means a lot.

<Snipped quote by ZB1996>

If i'm accepted we could discuss subsequent wars/history. You might have retaken some territories etc...

I apoligize for not getting to you sooner, but yes, you are indeed accepted! I praise the initiative!

Things I need feedback and ideas for:
What should the battle mechanics be? I like the idea of each type of ship/tank/infantry/air force playing a different role, but I really want to flesh out the military mechanics. Thoughts? Ideas?

Things I need feedback and ideas for:
What should the battle mechanics be? I like the idea of each type of ship/tank/infantry/air force playing a different role, but I really want to flesh out the military mechanics. Thoughts? Ideas?

An Idea I've used before to go beyond numbers when countries get involve in conflict is for the GM to provide them with a situation in which their troops encounter one another and they both prepare and present their interpretations/reactions of/to the situation and the GM can either choose one over the other ( if one faction decides they have Rambo who bites through Maus Tanks and needs 'nerfing') or attempts to blend both proposed interpretations into one 'official' conclusion with favour/victory leaning towards, whoever had the initial starting advantages of course, but also the person who showed the most realistic, detailed,tactically and strategically-savvy,convincing version of the scenario they were given.

@Gaebrael

So is the timeline 1925 or 1940?

@Gaebrael

So is the timeline 1925 or 1940?

1940, I will explain a bit more about the lore soon.

<Snipped quote by Gaebrael>

An Idea I've used before to go beyond numbers when countries get involve in conflict is for the GM to provide them with a situation in which their troops encounter one another and they both prepare and present their interpretations/reactions of/to the situation and the GM can either choose one over the other ( if one faction decides they have Rambo who bites through Maus Tanks and needs 'nerfing') or attempts to blend both proposed interpretations into one 'official' conclusion with favour/victory leaning towards, whoever had the initial starting advantages of course, but also the person who showed the most realistic, detailed,tactically and strategically-savvy,convincing version of the scenario they were given.

Whilst the written component sounds all well and good, my problem is that I want it to matter what you choose you spend your credits on. Do you invest in better Pocket Battleships because you need to halt the advanced fleet of enemy heavy cruisers? Or are you a small navy that needs to manufacture and acquire through whatever means necessary more torpedoboats? Whilst writing out the battles works on the micro level of whose strategies win, it is also utterly arbitrary and doesn't really work on the macro level that well. It is hard to judge between certain macro strategies, as well.

So I was hoping for more number-centric mechanics. Literally accompaniments are wonderful, but without numbers, there can never be a clear victor. Casualty counts are also impossible with this method, as are reliable budgeting schemes for armies and navies and such. A few POV paragraphs, however brilliantly they describe a strategy, are still going to feel forced when you mention exactly how many P-53s and F-52s were lost in the Battle of Edinburgh versus the Battle of Glasgow. Do you kinda get my point?
ALSO: EDIT: You are a Superpower, being that you still control a double digit percentage of the world.

If the game's still open, I'd love to join. I'm thinking of playing the Ottomans, ruled by Abdul Hamid II who resisted being overthrown in 1909 and who refused to enter WWI. Thus, the Ottaman Empire was not dissolved by the Treaty of Versailles and remains a player in the Middle East and Eastern Europe. (This would probably change the holdings of @ZB1996 in the Middle East however.)

If the game's still open, I'd love to join. I'm thinking of playing the Ottomans, ruled by Abdul Hamid II who resisted being overthrown in 1909 and who refused to enter WWI. Thus, the Ottaman Empire was not dissolved by the Treaty of Versailles and remains a player in the Middle East and Eastern Europe. (This would probably change the holdings of @ZB1996 in the Middle East however.)

There would be a small problem with that... namely that Byzantium is a thing in this alternate universe and the only way for that to happen is for the Ottomans to be... euhm, non-existant.

That being said, I dont know if said player is still in this, so who knows, you might be lucky.

If the game's still open, I'd love to join. I'm thinking of playing the Ottomans, ruled by Abdul Hamid II who resisted being overthrown in 1909 and who refused to enter WWI. Thus, the Ottaman Empire was not dissolved by the Treaty of Versailles and remains a player in the Middle East and Eastern Europe. (This would probably change the holdings of @ZB1996 in the Middle East however.)

<Snipped quote by chevalier>

There would be a small problem with that... namely that Byzantium is a thing in this alternate universe and the only way for that to happen is for the Ottomans to be... euhm, non-existant.

That being said, I dont know if said player is still in this, so who knows, you might be lucky.

That may be a small problem, but certainly a workable one. It may be important to remember that for a time, both nations existed simultaneously. Byzantium could opt for a "mini" Byzantium, focusing more and Greco-Roman holdings and ceding most of Anatolia, save Constantinople and bits ad pieces of the western coast, to the Ottomans, who in turn would have decided to focus more on Arab holdings. Byzantium could also be a colonial power, which would give similar land opportunities. Crimean colonies in particular come to mind.

Also, I might note, not a single person has given me an article on their nation, and a few have yet to give me rulers, so if I could get a more exact mini NS from everybody who is still interested, that would be great.