If I must then I must... I vote against controlling other people's countries.

Oooooh, I also vote in favor of that.

 

Does that basically mean that he sticks with the "GDP" system in the sense of how large his budget is?

That means he doesn't say:

My people build 2 bagillion tanks and they're free.

 

If I must then I must... I vote against controlling other people's countries.

 

Ok..?

 

Vote for Arch having to use money:

2/0

 

Vote for not controlling other people's countries

2/0 (I vote yes, obviously)

Oh, is that all? I can do that fairly easily. Oddly enough not paying people doesn't remove the need for raw materials.

As long as the second thing doesn't cancel the first thing, then I vote for that as well.

I think it does...Retech...

Of course not.

 

We don't have to control your country to actually use currency. It just means that the willingness of your people to work for you for free is that up to your GDP surplus, which according to Doom is 3 billion.

Wonderful....So I don't have to use the system I just have to use the system.

Common sense fail...

I think it does...Retech...

Nah, it actually is another vote against Arch, really. To stop him from proxy controlling Absyssinia.

 

Besides, voting that you have to use currency isn't 'controlling' your country. Controlling it would be if I said: 'Your people revolt, overthrow King Archi, and re-instate the coif'.

No more than voting against anything is.

Meh, well if you want to try to screw up my country then go for it. I will make perfectly sure to increase my GDP by some ridiculous amount and then carry on anyway, screwing the game up but descrewing my country.

I'm really confused now. Anyways, basically my common sense is that you can do anything you want with your country, as long as it is balanced with other countries. That's why I couldn't expand by GDP at 5%, and that's why you might have to keep limits on spending.

 

Weren't you just yelling at me earlier about how expanding my GDP at 5% was going to screw the game up?

Meh, well if you want to try to screw up my country then go for it. I will make perfectly sure to increase my GDP by some ridiculous amount and then carry on anyway, screwing the game up but descrewing my country.

Yeah, because dropping all currency and forcing people to work for free wouldn't screw up the game...

Meh, well if you want to try to screw up my country then go for it. I will make perfectly sure to increase my GDP by some ridiculous amount and then carry on anyway, screwing the game up but descrewing my country.

Yeah, because dropping all currency and forcing people to work for free wouldn't screw up the game...

 

China and India would have a big advantage right there!

 

Paul: I build a million tanks!

Not really...since I still have the limits of raw materials...

Retech the whole thing is confusing because you are trying to steal my technology because you want it, distorting the game rules to allow it, so I am distorting the game rules some more to stop you, which is confusing the hell out of everyone.

Hopefully it won't carry on and won't crash and burn like the last hegemony.

Not really...since I still have the limits of raw materials...

Which you get for free from a trade agreement you made with yourself.

Not really...since I still have the limits of raw materials...

Retech the whole thing is confusing because you are trying to steal my technology because you want it, distorting the game rules to allow it, so I am distorting the game rules some more to stop you, which is confusing the hell out of everyone.

Hopefully it won't carry on and won't crash and burn like the last hegemony.

 

I'll try to respond in bullets.

 

1. Abbysnia can't supply more than 5 P-Jets worth of supplies each year? What?

2. I don't even think P-Jets are possible, but instead of arguing for an equally unfair technology, I am simply making it impossible for it to be argued against. Either P-Jets are banned all together (I want that) or I have P-Jets, which would negate their advantage, which is also fine with me.

3. What game rules?

4. You're expanding your GDP at billions of percents. Wouldn't that just cause your economy to go into a major recession?

Not really...since I still have the limits of raw materials...

Which you get for free from a trade agreement you made with yourself.

Actually I get them in exchange foe 400 tonnes of Gold...so its not really free as such...

Not really...since I still have the limits of raw materials...

Which you get for free from a trade agreement you made with yourself.

Actually I get them in exchange foe 400 tonnes of Gold...so its not really free as such...

so 50b+ materials a year in exchange for a one time payment of 13b?

According to my figures, that's 12.8 billion.

 

400 tonnes of gold at about 32 million each tonne?

Sigh...you people never heard of a loan agreement?

 

Can I just enter a co-prosperity sphere...like Retech did in Asia... ? I have been trading for a few days now...

Ok, I give Angola some guns, the conquer the rest of africa in under 6 months, then I give them 12 billion in gold, in exchange for infinite resources.

Well since you've just begun, then you need to wait for 5 days until it joins your little group.

 

I basically formed the USSR of the Pacific, except they preserve their cultures and ideals and stuff. Oh, and they didn't become Communist. That's a big one.

Yup...me playing an extreme right wing nation, clamoring at nationalism and all that obvouisly makes Switzerland Communist... Anyway its been...2 days or something... So thats 3 days left.

 

Doom, its not infinate resources...oddly enough I doubt Abbysinia...or indeed any country...would let another country exploit it for much longer than was neccessary. Just helps get me though this phase of the game until things settle down...if they ever do...if not then another harebrained scheme will doubtlessly rear itself to keep my nation on a par with everyone elses.

That's not true Archi. I don't believe you had announced that you were annexing, taking over, controlling directly, installing a new government, or whatever in Abbysnia. Shouldn't the count start today? I'm pretty sure most people were under the impression that you were manipulating them as a puppet state, and nothing more.

 

The USSR example was basically about "taking over a country" without actually taking them over.

If we are talking about installing a new government then I did that quite a while ago...Back before chemical weapons were banned...again...UN forced independance on them, they got accustomed to it but we stayed on friendly terms, I gave them weapons and gold and they started annexing Africa...It also seems like a fairly logical progression to me...

 

I fail to see the relevance of the USSR in this discussion....