Tip.It Hegemony

[a_bert]

[hide=map][/hide]

[Icuownage]

Well as all military has been destroyed, I use my army of 1,250,000 to conquer Laos and Cambodia, who's budgets for their military are below 100 million, while mine was around 100 billion.

 

So they will probably both lose by next year, and I'm just going to say I lose around 125,000 under trained soldiers, and 50,000 trained soldiers, and the 875,000 undertrained soldiers gain combat experience and become trained soldiers.

 

Everyone okay with that?

[a_bert]

winning wars in a year is lame mate

[The_Mather1]

Maybe we should add a sort of combat system?

[Icuownage]

They have no military, or a very small one, if others agree with you then I'll change it to two years.

[The_Mather1]

[spoiler='Budget #3]Population:

4 988 000,00

 

Avg. Income:

$37 094,00

 

Tax:

28 %

 

Tax income:

$51 806 964 160,00

 

Other incomes:

$25 970 320 676 452,00

 

Income:

$26 022 127 640 612,00

 

Expensabillity factor:

0,01

 

Expendables:

$260 221 276 406,12

 

 

 

Denmark and Sweden has joined Norway, their entire budgets are used to make their standards equal to Norways (meaning I won't have to average out taxes and income, only add people). They will not be included in the budget before next year.

 

Greenland shows signs of a willingness to follow Denmark next year, Iceland and Finland seems willing to join in two.

[Iconic]

Declaration of war on North & South Korea

 

Early this month South Korea stopped broadcasting signals and ceased training, the world; assuming that it was widespread powercuts ignored it but it has now been revealed that the Japanese government, fearing the oppresive North Korean government decided to invade Korea killing very little civilans of both countrys.

 

Translated News Article

 

Good day and welcome to JPN, breaking news: the Japanse government has invaded Korea, the short lightning war managed to claim 2,000 Korean lives.

it is reported that South Korea having agreed to the Serephurus agreement had no military at all however citizens managed to take out atleast 200 soldiers but they were eventually made to return to their abode's.

North Korea however was a much bigger challenge and the small, weak but anonymous army of Secret State Police (경찰은 비밀) managed to kill off 1,800 soldiers by use of well placed snipers, the soldiers died were replaced but not forgotten.

JPN will not be broadcasting in North and South Korea, an independant news station known as NSKNN which provides a personal view of worldwide events.

 

The government is stationing all 300,000 soldiers and 100,000 reserves.

2,261,287,392,000 is put into raising an army of 2,000,000 men in the ratio of.

Land, Air, Sea

1:1:1

Respectfully. Also its a recurring number so the person at the end gets a nice cottage with roses around and a wife.

 

I will keep rioters and other people who pose a threat going for five years then they'll settle down.

 

Mather, I dislike systems and Roccodog you don't play.

[a_bert]

no thanks mather

 

also btw if you look closely you'll see finland doesn't have much of a say in the matter!

[Icuownage]

If Edel just won his war like that, then I'm winning my war like that O_o.

 

Cambodia and Laos both fall under Vietnam control due to them not having a military.

[The_Mather1]

I'm not saying we need any complicated system, we could just use simple points.

 

Like say the US has 500,000 and Mexico has 250,000, the US wins and has [500,000-(500,000-250,000)/2=125,000] casualties.

[a_bert]

Edel's cheating

 

you can't instaannex

 

bugger off

[Iconic]

Edel's cheating

 

you can't instaannex

 

bugger off

 

I didn't, I conquered as Icuownage did.

I suffered deaths from civilians.

 

IRL it would take about a month to secure a country with no military.

[Wisp]

Yeah, how's Iraq going? The Army was out after the first year or so. Clearly it only takes a month to do anything in a country.

Ok, here's the logic to using GDP vs. GDP/capita.

Section one: Logic

1) If 1 million babies are suddenly born, they all aren't going to get 30,000 dollar a year jobs.

2) More population means the wealth is more spread out, meaning lower gdp/capita. This is why smaller countries with lowish populations are often the richest. EX: Norway, Lux, Qatar.

3) A family suddenly having 5 babies (or even one, or two) means that they can't work as much, and that lowers their gdp/capita.

Section two: Gameplay:

1) Later on in the game, people can just use any number of researches to speed up population growth, so having a growth rate of 10% isn't unheard of. Increasing GDP by 10% (+the gdp increase rate) in one year wrecks the game.

2) It actually gives the game a more strategic element. You can choose to keep your population under check, and have a lower pool of manpower, and possibly industrial capability, or you can have a more wealthy society that's happier.

 

 

Mather mentioned that we only counted those able to work into population. No, we didn't. We counted everyone.

Edel, stop abusing the rules. Those were only in place to make it so people didn't gank eachother.

[The_Mather1]

At 2% it shouldn't wreck wealth anyways, and I still have years til I get a large population... no, wait... I would have had years til a large population had it not been for Denmark and Sweden which are currently working their asses of to get their wealth to Norways level.

 

Lets say growth rates over 2.5% causes avg. Income to be lowered 1% for each percent it is over.

[Retech]

Okay, think about this carefully.

 

 

 

You're taxing people...then giving money to those same people, and your GDP rises. Huh?

[Icuownage]

Okay I'll say my two wars will take 5 years.

[The_Mather1]

No, I'm taxing people, using the cash to grow various enterprices which are forced to raise salaries according to their increased income.

[Seraphi]

And this is why a modless system does not work.

 

He did X, so I'm doing X as well.

[Wisp]

And also Edel, in Heg v1/2, budget was 4% ish of your budget, not 20.

[The_Mather1]

My system's going by 1%.

[Iconic]

Lets come up with a new system if GDP is problematic.

[The_Mather1]

It's not problematic, it's just that some (you) have to learn how to use it properly.

[jasignhagj]

Well Mather, it's not directly related, if you think about it. The new population will be a buncha babies, and if we have a large growth rate, a huge part of the population will be babies.

 

Babies don't really do much, unless poop contributes to the economy.

 

Siggyed, and I take America if it hasnt been claimed, or Canada

[jasignhagj]

Budget In hegemony 1 was 7.5%

 

GDP per capita is crap, because dusty just had all women spit out triplets every 9 months and got a 12% growth rate or something.

 

And if you want to talk about Insta-Annex, look at mather's 'oh the whole of Scandinavia decides to join me' bull.

 

ll post a legit first post soon.

[Iconic]

My GDP is fine, Mather.

This 4%, 2% and all of this doesn't do anything, if everyone just used the simpler system (of not doing a percentage twice) everyone would have a more realistic amount of money.