Citizen X wrote:[...]
The change of ownership seems ok.
The allowance of colonial decisions I have problems with. That would allow Sweden more than the Ottomans in the first place, a country that had colonies and protectorates from the beginning. Also to declare protectorate and thus claim a colony for your own it doesn't need more than 45% cp. So either everybody gets full allowance of all these decisions or we keep it the way it is now, where countries have certain pros and cons and distinctive character, so to speak. As a third opportunity a country lead by players could get means for more sophisticated colonial policies and be given the entire decision complex Prosecute/Pacify/Retaliate, plus Colony. That should be put to vote as this is a major thing that touches the interests of everybody. I will go easy with all three opportunities. While the Ottomans can take tremendous advantage out of #1, for reasons of balance and flavour I would prefer #2 or #3. But I would like to have an active decision by the community on that matter.
I would say you split the script so that you can get the change of ownership independently of the discussion.
[...]
I will split the script then, if this needs further discussion.
Though I have to say (and have said) that these options are what Belgium got via event around 1876, in a tad larger numbers. You might as well ask why Belgium got these, which in our reality doesnt even have colonies, let alone shown the intention for such over the past ingame decade (if not longer).
I think the reason the Ottomans dont have further colonial options is that for them, the regions they own as 'colonies' are considered core regions, but are regarded engine wise as colonies. Maybe that the military decisions pacify etc. can be played there, or as you put it, "where countries have certain pros and cons and distinctive character" the Ottomans should concentrate on keeping what they have, instead of acquiring more ...
