Reserved.
Dannaroo Member
- Last Seen: 8 yrs ago
- Joined: 10 yrs ago
- Posts: 20 (0.01 / day)
- VMs: 0
-
Username history
- Dannaroo 10 yrs ago
Status
User has no status, yet
Bio
User has no bio, yet
Most Recent Posts
I get what you guys are saying I just think there needs to be more limitations on the war orders. While Outcast is great, he is not omnipotent. In certain instances he cannot know whether a player is doing something for RP reasons or just doing it to game the system. In the Mexican example, as Mexico is allied with FFGB they theoretically have a justifiable reason to declare war on China now that UR is at war with them.
Pepperm1nts said
Orders are far too precious to be used on just one thing, Dannaroo.
What I'm saying is it gives an unfair advantage. What's to stop, say, Mexico from declaring war on China right now and using the three extra war orders to build some ships, increase number of regulars and conduct army drills to increase army level. Then using his 4 normal orders as usual. Mexico has no intention of actually attacking China in any way. China is zero threat to Mexico (it is about to be blockaded/invaded by European powers). So what is to stop someone from doing that to gain an unfair advantage?
So Boerd said
Outcast has to keep it close to the vest because there is no interest. If there was interest, then default would simply be when you income was less than debt maintenance
Yes that is problematic.
solamelike said
I think if you reach -100,000 you default and your country goes into chaos. That's what I thought was going to happen anyway...
A limit would be good. But having an arbitrary value as a limit doesn't make sense. It should be determined using a percentage of your economy or something.
The Nexerus said
How is a nation with war orders able to expand their navy faster than one without? You can buy tens of thousands of pounds worth of ships in a single turn. The reason people don't is because it costs ten of thousands of pounds.
I think its been established previously that debt is pretty meaningless in this game. In my opinion debt should have a negative effect on income (ie interest repayments)
The Nexerus said
There's no net difference between one normal order for five ships + one war order for five ships vs. one normal order for ten ships.
Looking at previous updates there seems to be a certain build capacity that your shipyards are limited by. This could potentially be circumvented by multiple ship-building orders in one turn.
@pasta I can't blame you for doing it. I would do it too if I were you.
Dedonus said
So you're just using this "war" to take advantage of three more orders. That's not meta-gaming at all..
This.
I think it's probably more than three extra though if you count war updates inbetween the main updates. To me, it's unfair that one nation is able to expand their navy faster than another just because the first nation is at war. In my opinion war orders should be used for troop/fleet movements only.
Republica Argentina
His Excellency President Bartolome Mitre addresses supporters at a rally in central Buenos Aires:
"The consolidation of the Argentine nation continues at a rapid pace, I thank all of our people in this great Republic for putting their differences aside in the interest of solidarity for the Argentine state. Serving the people of Argentina for the past 5 years as their President has been my greatest honour. In that time I have managed to unite the warring political factions of our Confederation into one Republic with one national identity. I made a priority of this government the expansion of our population base to stimulate our economy and promote growth. I am proud to say that I championed our policy for free and compulsory education for all school-aged children, for investing in our nation's future is a wise and prudent decision. The state of the economy has been at the forefront of my mind. I have begun what is to be known as an Agricultural Revolution for Argentina which will result in bountiful harvests that we can then use to ensure our people, even the poorest among us, our well fed before we can sell any remaining surplus to regional and overseas markets.
Trade is of such vital importance to our economy that we must be extremely vigilant in rooting out any barriers that might impede our ability to trade. Without income from trade our economy- and thus our society- would collapse. It is for this reason that I come before you again to address the problem we are having with the Republic of Paraguay. President Lopez is a thorn in the side of Argentine progress. His refusal to allow free and unhindered passage of trade goods along the Paraguay and Parana Rivers can no longer be tolerated by the Republic of Argentina.
Our efforts to resolve this dispute diplomatically with the Paraguayan government have failed. We have taken the matter to the Council of South American States for their mediation. The Council has agreed with our proposal that military intervention is necessary to resolve this dispute and bring an end to President Lopez's tyrannical reign.
The Paraguayan people live in constant fear of their brutal, sadistic leader. Lopez rules with an iron fist and any dissenters to his right to rule are put down with summary execution or indefinite imprisonment. The Argentine Republic can no longer stand idly by while this bloodthirsty dictator massacres his own people in his lust for power. He must be stopped.
I, Bartolome Mitre, President of the Argentine Republic, do declare that a state of war now exists between the Argentine Republic and the Republic of Paraguay. I have ordered the mobilisation of the armed forces to commence immediately and an invasion of Paraguayan territory will begin forthwith. We will not rest until free and fair trade is brought to the region and President Lopez is made to pay for his crimes. We will bring justice for the people of Paraguay and only when they are given the right to an accountable and representative government will this conflict be resolved."
Article I. The Signatories of this treaty agree to a non-aggression pact of five years.
Article II. The United Republic of Great Britain and Ireland recognizes the South American Council's stance of disavowing any further colonies into South America beyond what is already there. The United Republic of Great Britain and Ireland will make no movement into South America beyond our interests in European colonies.
Article III. The signatories agree to only provide the bare minimum required by other existing treaties should the signatories find themselves in a war against the allied nations of another signatory.
Article IV. Upon reaching the four year mark of this treaty, the signatories are to inform each other of whether they wish to renew, nullify, or edit the treaty in anyway.
Article V. The United Republic agrees that should any signatory wish to withdraw from the South American Council, it will offer to defend the withdrawee from any repercussions from other members of the South American Council.
Article VI. The signatories open their ports to one another. In all ports, the nationals of both nations have the right to lease Ground and Purchase the Buildings Thereon, and May Erect Dwellings and Warehouses. All purchases on foreign soil are to be non-military in nature. The signatories abolish tariffs and trade taxes between their nations.
[X] Emmanuel Garcia, Minister for Foreign Affairs of the Argentine Republic
[X] Manuel María Mallarino, Foreign Minister of the Granadine Confederation
[X] Benjamin Disraeli, Interim British Prime Minister.
The three South American nations have discussed it extensively and I can assure you we are all neutral in the Caribbean War.
© 2007-2024