Yeah, sorry. Some words I have just heard, never read, and vise-versa.

 

Like I've never heard peninsula.

It seems like a bad idea.

Blowing a nation into dust for the soul purpose of preventing it going to war is just a rather pointless affair. If neither side doesn't gain anything out of it then what is the point.

Furthermore banning military actitivies seems to kill the game whenever it is suggested.

What I'm sugguesting is just that no one can be completely beaten out of the game, only reduced to a small nation that cannot attack or backup others for... say, two - three decades?

Well, we could go for an EU style victory system...Winning means you get 3 cities and maybe a bit of technology, rather than destroying an empire entirely.

As long as people were not gonna go and do a Napoleon(We must fight to win regardless of the costs) it would be good.

Add as poll?

...sais the second smallest nation in the Hegemony.

He could be the third smallest nation if you'd like, Mather?

Oh no she didn't :-o

^ I see what you did there!

 

Also I think my Martian colony's larger than Madagaskar.

 

The mars base is about 1.5 times the size....However Madagascar has three cities...The Mars base has none...I know which one I would choose.

Well, I said smallest, not poorest.

Yes, but remember the mars map is ~ the same size as the Earth map, but mars is only 1/3 the size of Earth.

Well, we could go for an EU style victory system...Winning means you get 3 cities and maybe a bit of technology, rather than destroying an empire entirely.

As long as people were not gonna go and do a Napoleon(We must fight to win regardless of the costs) it would be good.

 

Speaking of EU, Dusty, I got it to work at my Grandpa's house, but I didn't have time to play. Whats a good starting nation?

France, England, or Castille.

 

England is probably the best starter nation since its removed from all the nasty conquerer blob countries. Just use your navy to keep the isles safe and you're good.

When Britain was traded with Grim, the infrastructure of Britain was averaged with his. When the islands were destroyed, he lost part of his infrastructure. Thus, he lost a fraction of his IAG since IAG is tied in with infrastructure.

 

I hope that clears up some confusion.

No, that's not the case. His infrastructure remains the same if you give/trade him land. The averaging rule only applies to annexation. Then, when it was blown up, an infrastructure loss might be reasonable, but infrastructure is only tied into IAG at the end of the decade when it's calculated. Plus, he hadn't moved any people there yet, anyway, since you have recently evacuated the entire island.

If that's how it works, I create a vassal state out of, say, Tunisia, trash the cities til it has an infrastructure of 0 (but the cities still exist), fill it with bombs, and then give it to ICU. Next, I blow it up. So his infrastructure is now averaged, and then it takes a hit because I blew it up. And apparently his IAG goes down too.

Doom, there were people living in Japan, even when you controlled it. Im sure at least one person would have seen them, and reported it. It's incredibly unlikely that it would go unnoticed for 30 years.

Trol, that's not how Hegemony works, apparently. Otherwise, most of us would have had internal rebellions by now.

 

Also, to be fair, if Doom did indeed PM Archi about placing bombs in Japan a month or so ago (whenever she occupied it), she can legitimately blow Japan up.

Well I agree that Doom can destroy Japan, I don't agree it should be such a massive loss. Japan wasn't all of Mather's territory, and your only destroying 5/7 cities, I think it means Mather would of had like 5 cities remaining, which is like 40% of his cities, and even then, his empire has been part of mine for a year so that means it has been spread out, and as I have a lot of cities remaining, then it is a minimal loss

Japan is concentrated. That should mean its cities are worth more, and since we actually know their value (One trillion IAG for all of them), then it should be simple to calculate from there. 600 Billion IAG loss?

Japan itself was worth a few trillion originally, the few asian countries he had were worth 200b total, probably. So, blowing up 5/7 will knock out at least 1 trillion.

 

Otherwise losing, for example, one zimbabwean city is worth the same as losing one extremely wealthy French or Italian city.

May I put in a suggestion? If we were to want to drum up membership to the tavern we could use hegemed (using the slightly more accurate map of the eastern hemisphere) as a recruitment thread in the off-topic board (or possibly forum games) simply because it would support one heckuva lot of players and the mechanics are markedly simple (simple enough to create some sort of equation for usage). Hell if we needed more countries we could just carve up some of africa or northwestern asia. We could even release a map of the western hemisphere if we had to.

Grim,

 

We have petitioned the admins about that in the past, and it has not yielded any results. I believe that they want to keep the boards from having any kind of influence over each other.

I don't think they like us. They already took away our postcount rights.

 

@Sere - That's why I want to mod the next modern day hegemony. This one was too gamey, it didn't feel like I was really leading a country.

Brilliant deduction, Sherlock.

 

Now find out where my keys are. Wouldn't we all appreciate that? :lol: