| Map Prelude; Before we get to the actual map | |
|---|---|
| Tweet Topic Started: Jul 13 2009, 10:47 PM (1,642 Views) | |
| Germany | Jul 26 2009, 07:44 PM Post #51 |
|
Greater German Reich
|
I find this unfair imo. America can start with its territories plus more, which all have vaster potential than the British empire; Russia can start with its whole territory, which essentially allows it to be self-sufficient unlike nobody else if pursued properly; Australia pwns and gets some of the richest regions of the world in the 1930's; Japan can somehow magically control China's richest regions and vast territories of Russia it should not be able to actually properly control; and Britain is OOC forced, without even considering the player and asking him, to cede its most important territories, including its rubber, phosphate and oil sources? So practically you take the only freaking major power in the world and steal most of its strategic resources away from it, including effectively its entire freaking oil and phosphate supplies and most of its rubber (all of which are bloody crucial raw materials) completely ignoring the inherent weaknesses of its territory, which as of this time period is thinly spread forces, that more than enough compensate for the size of the Empire and actually does make sense, unlike other states around here? This is nerfing and punishment for no reason other than misunderstood circumstances, as well as bloody unfair to the British player. Even if he controls the whole freaking British Empire with the power levels of 1900 he still doesn't require nerfing. As the ruling stands, Britain has just been reduced to a third-rate power, up to par with countries like Italy and Denmark that just "happen" to have overseas territory of little value compared to actual empires (amusingly Australia, Canada, Japan, Russia, America, and even Germany for fuck's sake.) Oh, wait. Isn't that everyone else? This is bias against players due to their nation of choice, imo, and absolutely cannot be allowed to continue under any circumstances. And before you dispute that, I ask thee: how does the following sound to you?
Edited by Germany, Jul 26 2009, 07:48 PM.
|
![]() |
|
| Australia | Jul 26 2009, 08:18 PM Post #52 |
|
Our main problem was that Britain has a lot of territory all over the world. If he would like to consolidate his territory to a more centralized location, for example the whole south of Africa, which he already had for the most part. If he wants to take up a claim then let him we aren't being unfair, we are trying to start everyone in the same place. I know that historically that was inaccurate, fine, I get it. We aren't playing history here. Britain, I personally apologize for the bluntness. I understand that you're really into history, but its just a little unfair to start with so much territory. It was however your claims to further expand your lands that caused the alarms to go off. Germany I hate to burst your bubble but, as it stands there will be no serious resource management. The economic system is a little light, and will be based mostly on your nation's economic model, as well as authority, and social regulations. There is of course more, but it isn't final yet. Oh and Germany I love Britain. I was going to be Britain, but I didn't get on quick enough. This is not bias in any way. Basically when we collectively looked at the newest map we said "WOW Britain has a f**kton of territory" Oh and Germany if you have a problem just be civilized about it, we aren't trying to be unfair or exploit power, cause I'm not even an admin, and we don't have a vendetta against Britain. |
![]() |
|
| Germany | Jul 26 2009, 08:27 PM Post #53 |
|
Greater German Reich
|
It shouldn't be your problem. It is the territory's OWN problem. Therebfore, the fact he has much territory is balanced by how SPREAD it is. As of real-world 1930's hsi forces are VERY thinly spread to control it, ergo he has no unfair advantage over anybody else. As of major resource management, nobody said there HAD to be. It is called REALISM. Realism is this: "I have a ship. It will bring gold from Cape Town to London. The ship needs fuel. I have no fuel, so I cannot trade my colonial gold. Why do I not have oil? Because Australia posted I lose my Middle East colonies." The newest map is the real-world British Empire as of 1935 minus Canada and Australia, the latter including New Zealand. It's the real world status quo. Russia has about the same area, in square kilometers, minus the one he chose to give Japan. Does this cover your arguments? |
![]() |
|
| Great Britain | Jul 26 2009, 08:59 PM Post #54 |
|
I accept your apology Australia, and I thank you Germany for your quick defence of me. Both are fully appreciated. However, I believe it is now my turn to speak. Firstly and foremostly, Let me state how completely i disagree with the ethos you are advocating. I shall attempt to explain how completely wrong you are, so I apologize in advance if i sound brusque or overly critical. I assure you, I hold no grudge against you for what you are proposing, I merely wish to have my 2 cents, and hopefully convince you why this is an idiotic move.
Britain does indeed have territory all over the world. I fail to see how this is a problem- indeed, its a bonus, allowing me as a Player to interact with basically everyone, and therefore you will all have plenty to roleplay with me. I have no problem should anybody wish to seize these territories after gameplay has commenced, and am happy to roleplay a War with the Ungrateful Ozzie Bastards for control of Singapore and suchlike. However, I dont think its reasonable for Australia to be apportioned a larger empire from the start out of some poorly understood notion of equalizing everything to fairness. Again, I dont blame you for wanting to do this, and nor am I trying to antagonize you. On the matter of Centralization, I fail to understand why this beneficial to the whole board. the British Empire consolidating would in theory appear to make us a stronger collective entity, but in reality would strip it, as Germany has pointed out, down to a third-rate power, weaker even than Japan or the Dominions. I happen to feel having a farflung Empire is an excellent handicap to the overall power of the British Empire- Unlike damn near everybody else, the British Empire is incapable of focusing its vast and somewhat godmodish Navy against any one power- at all times it must safeguard countless fronts across the entirety of the Globe. If anything, posessing control of so many tiny islands everywhere is a vital way of counterbalancing the British Empire's might- whilst America and Japan are free to centralize and direct enormous resources in focused abundance against their targets, any attempt by the Empire to try and somehow consolidate is doomed to fail. Indeed, it was precisely due to this desire to consolidate- the Imperial Federation- that the Dominions began to break away and form their own identities historically! The rapid degeneration into full independence and subsequent partition of India and Pakistan and Bangladesh in 1948 were also the result of cumulative efforts by the Empire to try and consolidate the Indian Domain. Aside from apportioning some of the territory to Australia, I fail to see what benefit denying me of the rest has. While it is true that many of the islands contain important strategic resources, it would be entirely metagame of me to simply handwave ownership of these islands away because the intended game system is 'light on resources'. Furthermore, since this territory as you say does not confer any great strategic advantage to the British Empire within the rules of the game system, I fail to see why denying it is so important! In addition, having them left idle benefits noone and narrows roleplay opportunities- Agreed, I dont see many people getting into a fight over who has claims to say, Ascension Island or Bechunaland, but again this reinforces why the disapportioning of them from the British Empire is so absurd- aside from the Islands in the Southeast Asian region, which I again state I am happy to roleplay conflict over with Australia- I fail to see who benefits or suffers from owning, not owning or being denied ownership of these OOCly-'useless' territories!
If you think thats alot, bare in mind this Empire is significantly reduced- I have in no way claimed all my protectorates, or pretended to in anyway claim/influence the now Independent Dominions. Thats not even counting the Latin American countries we pretty much owned through corporate and economic influence, or the Chinese Warlords who owed us for all those rifles, or the Mediterrenean Isles who grudgingly relied on our trade, or, or, or. The British Empire is unquestionably the most powerful body in the 1930s in OTL. But At the same time, its power came from its resources and finance, and was incredibly fragile. WW2 demonstrated with eloquent magnificence how easily said Empire could be shattered by a determined force who could focus all its power on a single front, whereas the British Empire had to fight in over a dozen Theatres. Again, I repeat, territory does not equal power. Since strategic resources are aimed to be 'light', the benefits of owning these territories are just as dubious. I admit it may seem at first glance like I have an unfair advantage over everybody else, but, equally, everybody else has an unfair advantage over me. All the rest of you can direct your entire mights to what are to us peripheral theatres and utterly own us there. Ironically, Britain's Empire doesn't even really need your pressure- it is and was already fracturing internally. Having these territories are a huge liability to us, and cost us vastly more to maintain, patrol and occupy than not owning them would. I think it would be immeasurably more interesting and characterful to be the 'Sick Man of Earth', a global version of the Ottoman Empire- an incredibly fragile Empire that is dying by inches, being circled by younger, more powerful Empires eager for a slice of the pie. If, as you claim, you truly love Britain, you'll understand how this is an epic challenge. If you want to swap roles, I am happy to take on the much easier position of the young, vibrant, Fascist Australia, whose long-term political goals are obvious and easy to achieve. Simply maintaining the British Empire, on the other hand, is a far more challenging goal. There is no hope of Expansion, barely even any vainglorious dreams of Re-Conquest or Unification. The main goal of the British Empire at this time is largely stability- It is incapable of launching any imagined Vast Offensive without years of preperation and considerable help from foreign powers. Each intercession it makes weakens its ability to make intercessions elsewhere. I am aware you are not familiar with my roleplay abilities, and it is true I am very dedicated and interested in History and Historical Accuracy- it makes me wince everytime i go to a forum and there's another Finnish Caliphate or a Welsh Empire spanning Africa, or worse, a country with a frankly ridiculous name like Christmas Day or Nightly Whispers or AK-47 Land. I give you my word as an English Gentleman that I will do my level best to play as I have outlined above- There will be no absurd or glorious British Armadas sailing forth from the Marshall Islands to conquer South America. There will be no huge British Expeditionary Forces landing in Murmansk to shatter the Menshevik Grip. There will barely even be effective Blockades of Imperial Japan- whose Empire is now four-five times the size of what it was in 1936, and is beginning undoubtably to feel the same strain my Empire is- and America can pretty much do as it pleases in the Western Hemisphere, or, should it so desire, the Eastern One- the Charles Doctrine is basically unenforceable, for, for all of Leo Amery's hatred of Cordell Hull and Roosevelt, even at this early stage the US is becoming more and more an IV to Britain's fragile economy. So, in conclusion, I leave you with some questions: 1. How is it unfair when a.) the resources are disputed in worth b.) the territory is farflung and worthless to most anyone c.) it is in fact, a vast burden on Britain simply to keep all this stuff? 2. What does starting everybody "in the same place" achieve? Surely having a globe-spanning Empire everybody dislikes and wants a piece of is a great way of unifying everything? If lack of Players is a problem, i can easily recruit more, but I understand that close quality is of concern. In that case, isnt quality of roleplay diminished by such an arbitary and absurd move? 3. I would disagree that we are not playing History. An Alternate History, yes, one with vaguer than usual anchors to our own time. But unless you are planning on building Steam Mecha and claiming the Moon anytime soon, we are still somewhat grounded in the 'flavour' and context of the early 20th century. I think thats everything. I am happy of course to clarify any and all points of my position, and I look forward to your response. ![]() |
![]() |
|
| Australia | Jul 26 2009, 09:23 PM Post #55 |
|
At this point Britain I personally don't care what happens. I would just like to complete Borneo if at all possible under the Australian flag. I think that's a reasonable request. Whats important is that we discuss the goings on. I already apologized for the bluntness of my post and I humbly accept the apology presented by Illustrious Britain. Its a forum not a boxing match, I should have stated the problem we for-saw with a little more tact and diplomacy. However these events have already transpired and therefore I believe we should move forward learning from this experience. |
![]() |
|
| Canada | Jul 26 2009, 09:55 PM Post #56 |
|
Okay, too much to quote, so I'll address my points in general. I've intentionally left the Middle East blank, exclusively because Egypt guy isn't here yet. Flat-out, I'm not going to waste my time screwing with all of it when the guy who's supposed to occupy it isn't even here yet. I did give Britain Suez, Palestine, and, because the Sinai would be useless with both ends controlled by the British Empire, I went ahead and gave that to Britain, too. So, we'll deal with that particular game once all the players show up. End of story. Germany - Romania as a puppet, with 1914 borders? The former: no problem. The latter: this is 1936. That's the border we're sticking with. I may have edited in Austria-Hungary, but that area wasn't in any contention with another nation. This one is. As I understand it, Russia wants Bessarabia/Moldova. If that has changed, let me know, and all of Romania is yours. Otherwise, the border stands. Canada being a Commonwealth nation. I intend to RP a particularly nasty split with Britain. I just haven't gotten around to changing my flag yet (or updating that damned factbook...). Everything else: I get the sensation that we're going to have some awfully nasty wars in the future. Edited by Canada, Jul 26 2009, 09:57 PM.
|
![]() |
|
| Germany | Jul 26 2009, 10:13 PM Post #57 |
|
Greater German Reich
|
Canada, you don't get it. Let me explain in simple language, because it seems nobody here can understand anything complex: *Russia and Germany [the players] both want Romania, but not all of it. *Russia wants Bessarabia. Germany wants the rest. *Russia gets Bessarabia. Germany gets the rest. *Germany annexes Transylvania and makes the remaining a client state. *Considering that the remaining Romanian territory is, for the most part, the same as the pre-World War I Kingdom of Romania in terms of territory, the German-controlled independent Romanian state is sandwiched between Bessarabia (Russia), Transylvania (Germany) and Bulgaria. *The map I posted reflects these exact territorial changes. In practice, the only difference from the map you posed is that I actually divided by territory in two: Germany on one hand, and [the remnants of] Romania on the other. This by no means influences Bessarabia, for which I do not give a wooden nickel about. To put it more simply: We are saying the exact same thing. You have merely misunderstood my intentions on how to divide my end of Romania from the rest of the territory I control. I do not want to annex all of Romania, I annex Transylvania alone whereas I make the rest a client state that has a border between e and it like Manchuria and Russian Far East are both gold like Japan but are separated by a border. It by no means involves any other player, Russia or otherwise, but me, myself and I alone. I hope this clears things out. I hope I do have the liberty of selecting the extent of the territory I annex and the extent of the territory I control via other means, right? Because nobody sticks by 1936 borders, so it would be unfair if I was forced to stick by that while everyone else didn't. Fyi I made my exact border changes in the map I posted. Just copy-paste the German territory over your map and all's done; no complex stuff for you, and no space for misunderstandings either. Now, regarding the British territory issue, I feel we have made no steps forward despite a very hard night having just passed... Alas. Fro what I understand Vextra wants to play the British Empire in its 1936 borders and address its challenges, not something smaller in order to be able and reclaim lost lands. Egypt aside, for which I personally do not give a jack about in the first place (not the player; no offence meant) I think that it's flatly asshole-ish to remove the vast majority of Britain's oil and phosphate supplies out of it. This includes the Iraq mandate, the Transjordan part of the Palestine update (yes, Palestine included present day Jordan back then, which you seemingly ignore) as well as the British colonies (emphasis given for Dan) of Kuwait, Bahrain, Katar, Oman, Yemen, and the other Arab Peninsula areas Britain controls on my sample map. Now, before anyone goes about anything, the territories Britain lacks in the Middle East are all actual British Empire territories as of 1919, or exactly before the year we can start editing our histories at. Translation: Britain can decree if it gave them up or not, just like Britain should theoretically be able to decide whether it gave independence to Egypt in 1922 or not. In any case, independence given, the country still hosted British troops until 1937 and from 1940-ish until 1956, just like the "independent" (ie. client state) Transjordan and Iraq did comparably. And if you don't believe me, I hope you can trust things like Google and encyclopedias more. Sorry if I sound bad but I had a rough night. No offence meant to anybody. Just give me the damn border details I want, it's not like I will annex the moon or anything...
|
![]() |
|
| Australia | Jul 26 2009, 10:35 PM Post #58 |
|
As I have said, we should be moving ahead with civility, instead of vulgarity. The British land issue is Britain's issue to address, with those members who brought up the issue. The issue should not be a concern of anyone else, save maybe Canada who has to continue to change the map. |
![]() |
|
| Canada | Jul 26 2009, 11:11 PM Post #59 |
|
Okay, I've had enough of this. This is the last time I will say it: I am not going to touch the Middle East/North Africa/that whole general area until whom-the-fuck-ever is RPing it comes in here and says "okay, this is what I want from Great Britain." Why, you ask? Because I'm not going to waste my time filling in everything for Britain, only to have someone else come along and say "oh, I want that!" And also, from what I've seen transpire here already, I'm actually quite concerned, nay, expecting another territory fight. I think it would at least be somewhat less of an issue if Britain and Egypt would figure it out between the two of them before I start changing the color of pixels in a damned photo. There will be no more discussion on this matter until Egypt shows up. And when he does, really, it's between the two of them how they carve up the Middle East. Because you're absolutely right: it belongs to Britain. And because it belongs to Britain, really, the decision as to what Egypt gets is ultimately up to him. Not you or Russia or even me. So enough with the Mongolian clusterfuck. Let's move on. And I do mean it this time. Romania. I'm not playing this game anymore. You said Romania was what you wanted. I gave you that. I left Russia with Bessarabia/Moldova, and I thought we were finished. Now all of a sudden you want Romania to be a puppet, with Transylvania as a part of Germany. News to me. And before you go on about it being two days ago, I wasn't here last night. I don't know how else to say it. My patience is exhausted. You've been dicking me around from page one, saying one thing, letting me act on it, then going back and saying "oh no, not that, this is what I meant by that." As if I was supposed to figure that out by sheer fucking coincidence. So you know what, here's how we're going to solve this issue: neither of you gets Romania. You want it that bad, invade it, annex it, and wait for Russia to declare war. Because I'm finished. Moreover, my inclination to help you as best I can has been pretty well soured. You say you've had a rough night. I sympathize. Been there plenty of times myself, and I know as good as anyone else, it sucks. But that doesn't mean I appreciate you barking orders at me. Maybe it's because I've been trying real, real hard to cater to everyone's wishes here. Maybe it's because I'm starting to feel as if my generosity, flexibility, and desire to please all is being taken advantage of. Maybe it's because I'm an aerospace engineer (used to working in a team, being civil, cooperative, willing to compromise and negotiate), and I don't deal very well with people shouting orders at me. Or maybe it's because I'm a maniacal jackass. Whatever the case may be, never order me to do something again, much less tell me how to do my job. There are very few things I take personally in life, because I'm a man who prides himself on his ability to not give a shit about most things. This one, though. Yeah, that pissed me off. Don't do it. All of you. Can we move past this? They're pixels on a map for shit's sake! And I plenty well know, anything you don't have now, you're going to try and take by force in the RP. So really, fighting with each other now is an exercise in futility. Save it for the RP so that it'll actually be interesting, and not irritating. Please? Edited by Canada, Jul 26 2009, 11:40 PM.
|
![]() |
|
| Germany | Jul 27 2009, 03:26 AM Post #60 |
|
Greater German Reich
|
Oh for fuck's sake already. I will ask it to the point here and now: if Japan, Britain and Russia can have territories on the map that have a border between them and it, why can I not do the same? Besides, I have traditionally posted a map of my state with Transylvania included in it since day 1. Before we get confused, Greater Romania has five regions: Bessarabia, Moldavia, Wallachia, Dobruja, and Transylvania. Ruussia got Bessarabia/Moldova. I got Transylvania. What's left is the Dobruja-Wallachia-Moldavia historical proper. I am not asking for more land, I am simply asking for a different appearance of the map. No effective changes at all, just how the map looks like to better-reflect the political situation. As of the "puppet state", Manchukuo is a puppet state, Russian Far East is a puppet state, Philippines is a puppet state and yet nobody ever complains about that. I made the following three modifications of your map to explain: http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v258/cccp2004/map-1.jpg Map 1: Present state as you posted it. While every other major player but USA has overland borders between some of their territories, I do not. http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v258/cccp2004/map-2.jpg Map 2: A map with my desired changes. It's an overland border in my territories, like with Russia and the Baltics or Jaapan with Manchukuo. That, and a tiny bit expansion in Italy, circled in green. http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v258/cccp2004/map-3.jpg Map 3: This is map 2 overlaid over map 1 to show you I am not bullshitting you and that they ARE identical save for the green circles. Is it too much? I don't know. If it is, just leave me the stupid grey chunk I am. Frankly, it seems it is way too much to as for a white pixel line between two parts of my state. But do not go on about me "taking shit by force" as though I am your average "LAND EQUALS POWARRRR!" retard. If you want to remove me Romania fine, I do not give a shit. But I want Transylvania, as I had it before the Romania discussion in the first place. Regarding Transylvania being news to you, I quote: Spoiler: click to toggle Just trying to not lose my land here, man. Transylvania is very important to my role-play plans. If you still want to grey out Romania, at least grey out the remaining and not Transylvania included, since it's virtually unrelated to this discussion, and should be that way. And no, I never ordered you around. I merely made some requests that couldn't, apparently, be understood properly, in part because I didn't word them as I should have and in part because, apparently, I should have made them myself on a map copy to make it easier to describe. Sorry if I caused you issues with that. The only problem is misunderstanding in each other's tone (you think I order you around while I do not) as well as incapability of generally understanding we say the same thing, more or less. You say I want something different, I say I don't; I only want a border inside the grey territory you gave me, like everyone else has. Cosmetics, in other words. If the white border is that much of a problem. just leave the map as it was when you last posted it, I am not going to mind that either. With this, I shut up and return to my little corner. You big boys can play with your wooden sticks and big empires while I am content with Transylvania alone. Just do not order me around, saying I must invade this and annex that and shit, which unfortunately I've heard quite often around here (not from you at least.) But seriously, it really bothers me we bitch at each other for a freaking cosmetic difference. Come to think of it, screw it and leave the map as it stands now. Or maybe do whatever you want with it, since you apparently have limitless powers concerning it. But all I wanted is a cosmetic change, nothing that gives me role-play bonuses and advantages. With that being said I won't post at this thread any lon ger unless it immediately and directly concerns me. Edited by Germany, Jul 27 2009, 04:27 AM.
|
![]() |
|
| 1 user reading this topic (1 Guest and 0 Anonymous) | |
![]() Our users say it best: "Zetaboards is the best forum service I have ever used." |
|
| Go to Next Page | |
| « Previous Topic · Cartography · Next Topic » |



This is bias against players due to their nation of choice, imo, and absolutely cannot be allowed to continue under any circumstances. And before you dispute that, I ask thee: how does the following sound to you?




Because nobody sticks by 1936 borders, so it would be unfair if I was forced to stick by that while everyone else didn't.



3:43 AM Jul 11
