This week a joint offensive by the banner of Manchuria and the Imperial 'Beyang' Field Army dealt stunning blows to the Russian occupiers of Manchuria.
-
De_Spinoza
- Lieutenant
- Posts: 110
- Joined: Sun Jan 08, 2012 8:54 pm
- Location: Vienna, Austria
Deutsche Allgemeine Zeitung, Early September 1874
FRENCH RAMPAGE CONTINUES
The destruction of Germany civilian property continued with the loss of the Thyssen Stahl factory in Mainz, and a coal pit, depot and ammunition shop in Koln. When will the German Army stop these immoral French scum from destroying the livelihoods of so many German civilians? Why isn't the world expressing outrage over this uncivilized action or demanding the French stop? Protests have sprung up in many German cities demanding retribution. "An Eye For An Eye!" read many of the placards. This paper now supports retaliation by German troops. We Germans cannot stand by and do nothing. A Factory For A Factory, A City For A City!
In a statement released by the Chancellor's office, "No French property has been willfully and intentionally harmed by German soldiers. We do not understand this reckless course of action the French army has undertaken. They are turning this war into one nasty fight to the death. The French have now cast away the chivarly of warfare and I fear it will never return," signed Chancellor Otto von Bismarck.
JAPAN ROARS
In a recent announcement by the Japanese governement Germany was warned against destructive military actions in France. This paper wonders if they have lost all their faculties? Do they not remember it was France who started this war and it was France who started destroying civilian property? Why haven't the Japanese warned the French against their wanton destruction, which coincidentally harms Germany's ability to conduct free commerce with Japan. It must be that Japan is two-faced when it speaks in public and has no care whatsoever for the truth or improving relations with Germany.
The destruction of Germany civilian property continued with the loss of the Thyssen Stahl factory in Mainz, and a coal pit, depot and ammunition shop in Koln. When will the German Army stop these immoral French scum from destroying the livelihoods of so many German civilians? Why isn't the world expressing outrage over this uncivilized action or demanding the French stop? Protests have sprung up in many German cities demanding retribution. "An Eye For An Eye!" read many of the placards. This paper now supports retaliation by German troops. We Germans cannot stand by and do nothing. A Factory For A Factory, A City For A City!
In a statement released by the Chancellor's office, "No French property has been willfully and intentionally harmed by German soldiers. We do not understand this reckless course of action the French army has undertaken. They are turning this war into one nasty fight to the death. The French have now cast away the chivarly of warfare and I fear it will never return," signed Chancellor Otto von Bismarck.
JAPAN ROARS
In a recent announcement by the Japanese governement Germany was warned against destructive military actions in France. This paper wonders if they have lost all their faculties? Do they not remember it was France who started this war and it was France who started destroying civilian property? Why haven't the Japanese warned the French against their wanton destruction, which coincidentally harms Germany's ability to conduct free commerce with Japan. It must be that Japan is two-faced when it speaks in public and has no care whatsoever for the truth or improving relations with Germany.
-
lukasberger
- AGEod Veteran
- Posts: 782
- Joined: Thu Dec 07, 2006 5:59 pm
bjfagan wrote:
JAPAN ROARS
In a recent announcement by the Japanese governement Germany was warned against destructive military actions in France. This paper wonders if they have lost all their faculties? Do they not remember it was France who started this war and it was France who started destroying civilian property? Why haven't the Japanese warned the French against their wanton destruction, which coincidentally harms Germany's ability to conduct free commerce with Japan. It must be that Japan is two-faced when it speaks in public and has no care whatsoever for the truth or improving relations with Germany.
The Egypt Gouvermant said "the Germany are the first to begin destroy factory in Egypt, the real beginner of civils attack is the Prussia, not France, not Egypt, but really the Prussia!"
Additionally, American observers couldn't help but notice a string of Austrian "peacekeepers" in front of the main axis of the French advance.
OOC - Was that seriously an effort to exploit an already known bug for a second time by placing Austrian units in every German city on the border with French held territory?
OOC - Was that seriously an effort to exploit an already known bug for a second time by placing Austrian units in every German city on the border with French held territory?
coolbean wrote:Additionally, American observers couldn't help but notice a string of Austrian "peacekeepers" in front of the main axis of the French advance.
OOC - Was that seriously an effort to exploit an already known bug for a second time by placing Austrian units in every German city on the border with French held territory?
No more gamey than the American ownership of French factories and mines in Lille to prevent falling into enemy hands.
They are U.S. owned coal mines because they are U.S. owned coal mines. They just now happen to have German troops march by them.
But at least you admit that you were indeed trying to once again use a known exploit, one that turned back France's offensive last time it was used [and caused a bit of drama I might add], and perhaps this time as well.
I thought we settled on a rule for this exploit the last time but if not we should vote and decide on something for going forward, or else people will always block armies using neutral units.
But at least you admit that you were indeed trying to once again use a known exploit, one that turned back France's offensive last time it was used [and caused a bit of drama I might add], and perhaps this time as well.
I thought we settled on a rule for this exploit the last time but if not we should vote and decide on something for going forward, or else people will always block armies using neutral units.
I think it should not be considered gamey, unless it is blatantly done with mischief. For example if it's (a) something like a supply cart only or (b) the "peacekeeper" is protected by imposed engine diPeace. It all depends on the peace agreements Austria-Hungary declared. If they failed in their neutrality we can always vote for a 5% Prestige penalty. I strongly believe that it should be the attacker that should have the duty to dislodge whoever is in a region (neutral or enemy), this is my expressed opinion on the matter in the past. Of course, there MAY be some strange cases so we need to discuss this case by case.
---
Tokyo, Japan, September 1874
MILITARY PLANS
The Emperor has asked the Home Lord to protect Japan from any future aggression and at the same time create plans for operations in case the stability in the Far East precipitates. Japan does not have many natural enemies other than local rivals, nonetheless it is imperative as a modern nation to use strategic Western thinking as far as military planning goes. The first plan that has been drawn is called "Toyotomi Hideyoshi", in honor of the medieval Japanese General before the first Shogunate had been established. He was known as the first real unifier of Japan, although his successes were short-lived.
---
In game terms: Military Plans have been researched, together with Logistics and Intelligence some time ago. Japan's R&D is finally bearing fruits.
---
Tokyo, Japan, September 1874
MILITARY PLANS
The Emperor has asked the Home Lord to protect Japan from any future aggression and at the same time create plans for operations in case the stability in the Far East precipitates. Japan does not have many natural enemies other than local rivals, nonetheless it is imperative as a modern nation to use strategic Western thinking as far as military planning goes. The first plan that has been drawn is called "Toyotomi Hideyoshi", in honor of the medieval Japanese General before the first Shogunate had been established. He was known as the first real unifier of Japan, although his successes were short-lived.
---
In game terms: Military Plans have been researched, together with Logistics and Intelligence some time ago. Japan's R&D is finally bearing fruits.
Care to unify Germany as Austria? Recreate the Holy Roman Empire of the 20th Century:
Großdeutschland Mod
Are you tough enough to impersonate the Shogun and defy the Westerners? Prove it:
Shogun Defiance Mod (completed AAR)
Großdeutschland Mod
Are you tough enough to impersonate the Shogun and defy the Westerners? Prove it:
Shogun Defiance Mod (completed AAR)
Kensai wrote:I think it should not be considered gamey, unless it is blatantly done with mischief. For example if it's (a) something like a supply cart only or (b) the "peacekeeper" is protected by imposed engine diPeace. It all depends on the peace agreements Austria-Hungary declared. If they failed in their neutrality we can always vote for a 5% Prestige penalty. I strongly believe that it should be the attacker that should have the duty to dislodge whoever is in a region (neutral or enemy), this is my expressed opinion on the matter in the past. Of course, there MAY be some strange cases so we need to discuss this case by case.
I couldn't disagree more, of course, but I suppose this is what you get when you play these types of games. People will exploit every flaw in the game design possible, it is only natural. I would ask that we recognize flaws in the design and try to forbid abusing them going forward, but perhaps that is too much to hope for.
If Austria making peace with Germany and then moving to protect German cities from their former ally, then saying that the former friend must declare war on Austria in order to move them makes sense to you, then surely the USA putting a unit in every Chinese city in order to protect them from the Russians must also make sense.
I wouldn't be making such a big deal about this if I didn't believe it was completely game breaking and game altering, not to mention completely unfair to anyone who is the victim of it.
-
Soulstrider
- Major
- Posts: 222
- Joined: Fri Sep 14, 2012 11:22 pm
- Location: Northern Lusitania
We still need to find out why the USA owns every single economic structure in Lille. That seems gamey too, since those should have been returned to France after Belgium was kicked out.
The issue of neutrals in a combat zone was never really resolved nor was a rule created. I did not believe it would be "gamey" to send them in behind the front lines. They were showing up when the French fell back towards Paris. If we create a rule, I will definitely follow it.
As for France DoW on a former ally, well I think we have already seen many quick flip-flops from players in this game that would not be considered plausible in our game world. Also, France and Austria both explicitly stated they were not allies and were not working together. So, Coolbean do you have information to the contrary? Were the human players acting in concert but not with their avatar nations? This would seem gamey too... and explain why Howdy would attack for no logical reason other than to throw away his country and quit, because he did not like a certain other human player.
The issue of neutrals in a combat zone was never really resolved nor was a rule created. I did not believe it would be "gamey" to send them in behind the front lines. They were showing up when the French fell back towards Paris. If we create a rule, I will definitely follow it.
As for France DoW on a former ally, well I think we have already seen many quick flip-flops from players in this game that would not be considered plausible in our game world. Also, France and Austria both explicitly stated they were not allies and were not working together. So, Coolbean do you have information to the contrary? Were the human players acting in concert but not with their avatar nations? This would seem gamey too... and explain why Howdy would attack for no logical reason other than to throw away his country and quit, because he did not like a certain other human player.
Please quote me where I said that we weren't working together or not allied. The only thing I ever explicitly stated was that France offered nothing to Austria to join a war against Germany and did not even broach the subject. I know that Howdy isn't here anymore to defend himself, but I'd appreciate it if you didn't put words in my mouth.
coolbean wrote:
If Austria making peace with Germany and then moving to protect German cities from their former ally, then saying that the former friend must declare war on Austria in order to move them makes sense to you, then surely the USA putting a unit in every Chinese city in order to protect them from the Russians must also make sense.
I love it!
And I do remember when Prussian troops (neutral vs. attacking country/US?) were sitting in Shanghai and were asked to move.....and they were moved.
I missed CaptHowdy bowing out....that's too bad.
-
lukasberger
- AGEod Veteran
- Posts: 782
- Joined: Thu Dec 07, 2006 5:59 pm
I was only here for the tail end of the previous neutrals in war zone discussion. I do recall that no decision was conclusively reached.
My justification of Austria's stance is this:
Germany is our second closest friend according to the dip ratings. Surprising but true, after the peace deal we shot up to +40 with Germany, relations with France are still at -30 or so, as they were even during the war that France and Austria fought against Germany. Germany is also one of our closest economic partners, the Austrian troops are there to prevent French damage to the German industries, as has already occurred, which would indirectly damage Austria's economy.
And no, France and Austria weren't allied in the war, there was no in game or out of game treaty of alliance. It seems like the two governments simply decided to work together. Vezina did say that he considered Austria his allies, but the previous Austrian government left no documentation of an alliance at all. As mentioned in game relations between the two nations are/were terrible.
There was also a major issue in which France was supposed to guarantee that the Italians not attack Austria during the war. However Italy dow'ed and attacked anyway. That more than anything else decided me on the issue of whether to work with Germany or France.
If the consensus is that its too gamey I'm willing to move the troops out, I just remember there being no conclusive decision reached when this came up before.
My justification of Austria's stance is this:
Germany is our second closest friend according to the dip ratings. Surprising but true, after the peace deal we shot up to +40 with Germany, relations with France are still at -30 or so, as they were even during the war that France and Austria fought against Germany. Germany is also one of our closest economic partners, the Austrian troops are there to prevent French damage to the German industries, as has already occurred, which would indirectly damage Austria's economy.
And no, France and Austria weren't allied in the war, there was no in game or out of game treaty of alliance. It seems like the two governments simply decided to work together. Vezina did say that he considered Austria his allies, but the previous Austrian government left no documentation of an alliance at all. As mentioned in game relations between the two nations are/were terrible.
There was also a major issue in which France was supposed to guarantee that the Italians not attack Austria during the war. However Italy dow'ed and attacked anyway. That more than anything else decided me on the issue of whether to work with Germany or France.
If the consensus is that its too gamey I'm willing to move the troops out, I just remember there being no conclusive decision reached when this came up before.
Dip ratings mean jack crap when it comes to making player strategies. I don't know how many times this has to be stated. Even the Russians agree that governments can have further vision than a simple abstracted number (that is basically there so that the AI acts accordingly) when it comes to cooperation. They used the same argument when asking for their structure back from you. Do you also disagree with their argument? And of course the "last administration" didn't leave documentation of an alliance. He pretty much quit the game without notice - what documentation are you expecting exactly? Thank you for punishing me for a player leaving without waiting for a replacement.
I never made any guarantee like that ever - not even to Howdy. I don't know where you got that from that it was guaranteed, but it was hearsay at best. You should also note that your "best economic partner" has beaten you in two separate wars and taken land in both instead of just being satisfied with a victory. Sounds like a good friend to me. Honestly, considering the way you've played so far, I should have blocked you from taking Austria until the war was over like Kensai said. I'm too nice of a guy to disrupt the game like that, though.
I never made any guarantee like that ever - not even to Howdy. I don't know where you got that from that it was guaranteed, but it was hearsay at best. You should also note that your "best economic partner" has beaten you in two separate wars and taken land in both instead of just being satisfied with a victory. Sounds like a good friend to me. Honestly, considering the way you've played so far, I should have blocked you from taking Austria until the war was over like Kensai said. I'm too nice of a guy to disrupt the game like that, though.
-
lukasberger
- AGEod Veteran
- Posts: 782
- Joined: Thu Dec 07, 2006 5:59 pm
I've always viewed the dip ratings as important. Be that as it may, as I've pointed out to you via Pm, where are there any concrete evidences of Austrian and French friendship?
Dip relations suck in game, no in game alliances, no out of game alliance, one of France's client nations is attacking the nation you supposedly view as your ally while your supposed ally is fighting the same nation you are and you don't stop them.
As to where I got the info coolbean assured me there was an agreement that Italy wouldn't attack Austria, which France backed, when he turned the game over to me from his playing of Austria. That's literally the only piece of info I got from any prior Austrian government.
As you should know from our relations when I played the OE, I'm no enemy of you or of France, nor a mindless lackey of Germany.
We always had excellent relations both in game and out of game, even when there was pressure on me to turn against you.
The reality (in my view) of the situation re: Austria and France is different. I'm adapting my view to fit that circumstance.
I'm trying to play in the best interests of Austria, as you're trying to play in the best interests of France.
Do you really not see how this stance makes sense for Austria? If you can't put yourself in the place of an Austrian player and see that, then I just don't know what else to say
I'm truly sorry to upset you so much
Dip relations suck in game, no in game alliances, no out of game alliance, one of France's client nations is attacking the nation you supposedly view as your ally while your supposed ally is fighting the same nation you are and you don't stop them.
As to where I got the info coolbean assured me there was an agreement that Italy wouldn't attack Austria, which France backed, when he turned the game over to me from his playing of Austria. That's literally the only piece of info I got from any prior Austrian government.
As you should know from our relations when I played the OE, I'm no enemy of you or of France, nor a mindless lackey of Germany.
We always had excellent relations both in game and out of game, even when there was pressure on me to turn against you.
The reality (in my view) of the situation re: Austria and France is different. I'm adapting my view to fit that circumstance.
I'm trying to play in the best interests of Austria, as you're trying to play in the best interests of France.
Do you really not see how this stance makes sense for Austria? If you can't put yourself in the place of an Austrian player and see that, then I just don't know what else to say
I'm truly sorry to upset you so much
coolbean,
as I said, perhaps we cannot make a rule out of this as each case should be considered uniquely. But as I see it, it is the aggressor that tries to change the status quo so it is the aggressor who will have to dislodge anyone who does not want to leave (willingly or by force). Obviously there should be some cases where it is so game breaking (as you say) that we should take action: parking a supply cart or doing it in the year (24 turns) of imposed diPeace for example is gamey. But now Austria-Hungary is a sovereign nation, it may change flags although it should really fall down in the eyes of every nation. If I were lukas I would stay strictly neutral, but perhaps A-H got promises from Germany in case of final victory.
Anyway, try not to cheat and abuse your opponent(s) in every opportunity. No computer game is flawless in its rules and engine decisions. Play along, we've been doing this for almost 2 years now. Do not ruin it. Thanks.
as I said, perhaps we cannot make a rule out of this as each case should be considered uniquely. But as I see it, it is the aggressor that tries to change the status quo so it is the aggressor who will have to dislodge anyone who does not want to leave (willingly or by force). Obviously there should be some cases where it is so game breaking (as you say) that we should take action: parking a supply cart or doing it in the year (24 turns) of imposed diPeace for example is gamey. But now Austria-Hungary is a sovereign nation, it may change flags although it should really fall down in the eyes of every nation. If I were lukas I would stay strictly neutral, but perhaps A-H got promises from Germany in case of final victory.
Anyway, try not to cheat and abuse your opponent(s) in every opportunity. No computer game is flawless in its rules and engine decisions. Play along, we've been doing this for almost 2 years now. Do not ruin it. Thanks.
Care to unify Germany as Austria? Recreate the Holy Roman Empire of the 20th Century:
Großdeutschland Mod
Are you tough enough to impersonate the Shogun and defy the Westerners? Prove it:
Shogun Defiance Mod (completed AAR)
Großdeutschland Mod
Are you tough enough to impersonate the Shogun and defy the Westerners? Prove it:
Shogun Defiance Mod (completed AAR)
-
lukasberger
- AGEod Veteran
- Posts: 782
- Joined: Thu Dec 07, 2006 5:59 pm
Kensai wrote:But now Austria-Hungary is a sovereign nation, it may change flags although it should really fall down in the eyes of every nation. If I were lukas I would stay strictly neutral, but perhaps A-H got promises from Germany in case of final victory.
Look, I've been trying to tell everyone, there were no flags to change. If Austria and France had had an alliance I would not be doing what I am now, I would have honored it. There was no alliance, according to any info anyone has given me. No treaty, no economic agreement even, nothing. Just howdy wanting to hurt Germany and recklessly throwing Austria into a war that would gain it nothing but brought it enormous harm.
In fact there are/were more tangible reasons for poor relations between France and Austria than between Germany and Austria.
And now I'm the bad guy for rectifying his foolish foreign policy based on nothing (as far as I can tell) more tangible than a personal dislike of the German player? That's too bad
I can see how peace makes sense for Austria. There is no logic in the world that would validate becoming close friends with two countries that have annexed parts of your country twice in a decade in the span of a few months; not only that, but then immediately defending them against a country that just risked everything in concert with yours. How many provinces has France taken from Austria over the years despite beating them in a war? Friends don't take your stuff, dude. "Friends" do.
Who cares what the abstraction says? The OE and France have negative relations right now with no treaties, but you say they were no enemy of France. How is that suddenly different in Austria's case? Do you not see the disconnect there?
Who cares what the abstraction says? The OE and France have negative relations right now with no treaties, but you say they were no enemy of France. How is that suddenly different in Austria's case? Do you not see the disconnect there?
-
lukasberger
- AGEod Veteran
- Posts: 782
- Joined: Thu Dec 07, 2006 5:59 pm
Vezina wrote:I can see how peace makes sense for Austria. There is no logic in the world that would validate becoming close friends with two countries that have annexed parts of your country twice in a decade in the span of a few months; not only that, but then immediately defending them against a country that just risked everything in concert with yours. How many provinces has France taken from Austria over the years despite beating them in a war? Friends don't take your stuff, dude. "Friends" do.
Who cares what the abstraction says? The OE and France have negative relations right now with no treaties, but you say they were no enemy of France. How is that suddenly different in Austria's case? Do you not see the disconnect there?
The OE-French relations were positive for a long time not sure why they aren't now.
It's not just an abstraction though, there were also no tangible, written commitments between the two nations.
I would agree there's a disconnect, if not for the situation with Italy. To me that makes France and Austria, at least to some extent, enemies. As I mentioned to you before, given the information I have it appears to me that how things went down with Italy would justify a dow against France. That I didn't due so was due to consideration of the cooperation between the two nations.
If no guarantees were given by you in the matter, then that's different. But you had ample opportunity to explain the situation to me in that light and didn't do so.
At any rate, is it so silly to assume that the destructive policy of the previous Austrian government (pro French) caused its downfall and replacement by a pro German government?
I think that's what would have actually happened if all this had happened irl. Viewed in that light, the situation is in no way anomalous. That's how I viewed the situation after I took over and assessed matters.
-
Ojodeaguila
- Lieutenant
- Posts: 136
- Joined: Wed Sep 14, 2011 8:03 pm
Vezina wrote:I can see how peace makes sense for Austria. There is no logic in the world that would validate becoming close friends with two countries that have annexed parts of your country twice in a decade in the span of a few months; not only that, but then immediately defending them against a country that just risked everything in concert with yours. How many provinces has France taken from Austria over the years despite beating them in a war? Friends don't take your stuff, dude. "Friends" do.
Who cares what the abstraction says? The OE and France have negative relations right now with no treaties, but you say they were no enemy of France. How is that suddenly different in Austria's case? Do you not see the disconnect there?
The Austrian government decided the best for A-H and did not break any treaty, if this dislike France is a French problem please stop collapsing the world communications.
PD: The last Austrian player probably leave because he do not see any collaboration from France and his allies, Vezina you lose your opportunity to get A-H as allied of France, continue the game like the new A-H player do, look forward.
lukas, you are not the bad guy obviously, as long as you play seriously every action of yours is respected. However, just for the roleplaying, since there was a change of (human) player on top, at least let some turns pass before changing sides, otherwise it looks really crazy from the outside. That's all. 
Care to unify Germany as Austria? Recreate the Holy Roman Empire of the 20th Century:
Großdeutschland Mod
Are you tough enough to impersonate the Shogun and defy the Westerners? Prove it:
Shogun Defiance Mod (completed AAR)
Großdeutschland Mod
Are you tough enough to impersonate the Shogun and defy the Westerners? Prove it:
Shogun Defiance Mod (completed AAR)
-
lukasberger
- AGEod Veteran
- Posts: 782
- Joined: Thu Dec 07, 2006 5:59 pm
Kensai wrote:lukas, you are not the bad guy obviously, as long as you play seriously every action of yours is respected. However, just for the roleplaying, since there was a change of (human) player on top, at least let some turns pass before changing sides, otherwise it looks really crazy from the outside. That's all.
Look, I understand.
Vezina will tell you that I pm'ed him for days while trying to make up my mind as to the best course, peace or continuing the war.
The decision couldn't have been taken more seriously. I in no way came into the situation with a preconceived notion. I spent days trying to figure out what I thought would be the best course of action for Austria.
As I've repeated too, an in or out of game treaty would have made all the difference to me. I would have honoured it.
Since there was none though, and given the Italian situation, it was clear that France was not entirely committed to Austria. Surely if they were, there would have been a DA between the two nations?
I think France was trying to walk a tightrope between appeasing Italy and Austria. It would have worked, if howdy had stayed, since howdy was willing to sacrifice Austria to hurt Germany. He left and France fell off the tightrope.
It's too bad, I honestly feel for Vezina, I know how frustrated I'd be in his place.
But I don't think my handling of the situation deserves censure, given all the facts as outlined in my last few posts.
Kensai wrote:Anyway, try not to cheat and abuse your opponent(s) in every opportunity. No computer game is flawless in its rules and engine decisions. Play along, we've been doing this for almost 2 years now. Do not ruin it. Thanks.
Wait... you mean do not cheat and ruin the game by stationing troops in countries to prevent the take over of cities in wartime?!?!? I couldn't agree more!!
Kensai, all I'm trying to say is that I'm terrified by this mechanism in the game. Philtib, if you are reading this, please advise as to whether or not this tactic is intentional and WAD. This tactic has been used three times, and perhaps affected the outcome of the wars in which is was used every time (bear in mind one of those times it was even "beneficial" to my avatar nation when Austrian troops couldn't take Italian cities due to neutral Spanish troops).
Bjfagan and lukas, I don't think I accused you of breaking any rules, if I did sorry. I got confused because I swore we voted on something the last time this happened but perhaps I was mistaken. But you can't deny that this is in a way underhanded and in the very least controversial, that's why in the future I want to make it illegal - going forward. I mean come on, what's the point of a victory in a game like this if it clings in the back of everyone's mind that the abuse of this tactic was perhaps a part of it?
Bjfagan, rest assured there is nothing underhanded about the USA owning the coal mines in Lille. The province was taken from Belgium when they invaded, and the US got control of the structures when they pushed the Belgians out. As you know, there were no scripts or anything giving control of the structures to the USA. In the past, it has been policy to wait until wars are over before returning structures. I think you even ran into this problem this go around when Russia got control of German structures that Austria had previously controlled, but Kensai said something to the affect of it's been policy in the past to wait until the end of hostilities before a final return-of-everything script.
Lukas, don't worry too much about your policy as Austria toward other nations. It is a bit of a shock to other players who have been playing along, but it is new to you as you step in with a fresh look. This isn't the first and won't be the last time, I wouldn't worry about it too much. I only pointed out the violent flip flop in policy in order to prove a point to Kensai's point: that if you want to go on a case by case basis, I would argue this case is weird. That's why I would say this tactic should be illegal and the punishment should be on a case by case basis (i.e, was it intentional or by accident, is the defendant in the process of trying to forge a CB, etc...). I'm sorry if I gave bad info regarding Austria-Italy. It was quite hectic in the 24 hours I controlled Austria, as you can imagine. I only wanted to manage the economy post-war and not deal with negotiations. Anyway, stuff happens. Also, I wouldn't just assume Italy is so close to France. Italy is "allied" and "close" to both France and Germany, but I suspect listens to neither, which is pretty much what I would do if I was Italy
. Also, I wouldn't get too caught up with the relations screen. As Vezina says, pretty much the impression that has been used in the past is that it is irrelevant in relation to what you personally want to do with your country. At the end of the day, do what you want to do so you stay in the game and don't want to leave, do what you suspect is realistic, historical, or rational.lukasberger wrote:Since there was none though, and given the Italian situation, it was clear that France was not entirely committed to Austria. Surely if they were, there would have been a DA between the two nations?
This is the last thing I will say because I am tired of this.
There are two reasons for the in-game DA:
A)Threat of free CB's if you or your friends are attacked;
B)United combat fronts in shared provinces.
A is irrelevant because Austria and France were already at war with everyone that we needed to be at war with. B is unnecessary because the geographical distances between Austria and France make it unlikely that the two's forces would ever meet before Germany would be defeated or vice versa. Therefore, there is no need for the in-game DA. When I tell someone I consider them my ally, I mean exactly that. No inane, abstract, voodoo-doll computer code is necessary for me to act as I deem appropriate. I am sorry that you can not understand that.
I have nothing further to say.
Return to “PBEM and multiplayer matchups (all games)”
Who is online
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 4 guests