White Space vs. Non Civilized Nations

[Carthaginian]

In what way is trying to acquire a de facto satellite state not doing something?
Going around putting down flags sounds far less interesting then trying to get the maximum amount of money from Brazil in return for minimum amount of assistance against a Texas-backed Argentina for example.
It would also be fun with a NPC region were the unscrupulous arms dealers can have a field day!

You think that acquiring NPC lackeys is fun.
Others do not wish to have dogs that might turn around and bite the hand that feeds them.
We'd rather have empires- and the way that Mike has it set up seems best... you can have small NPC puppies that fall you around, but nothing like the major players you seem to want to get behind them.

Pretty much yes, but as most colonies in Africa were the effect of political rather then economical ambitions it is not like that matter much.

Everything is economic, even if it is political.
People are a resource as well, you know.

[Korpen]

You think that acquiring NPC lackeys is fun.
Others do not wish to have dogs that might turn around and bite the hand that feeds them.
We'd rather have empires- and the way that Mike has it set up seems best... you can have small NPC puppies that fall you around, but nothing like the major players you seem to want to get behind them.

I can respect that, but is the world not big enough that there could be space for both? Why the need to force everyone down the same path?

Everything is economic, even if it is political.
People are a resource as well, you know.

Sure, but the pont was that the driving force behind European colonialism in Africa during the 1880s and 1890s was internal political concerns rather then any economic plan.

[miketr]

Because the objective is to give people something to do? 

In what way is trying to acquire a de facto satellite state not doing something?
Going around putting down flags sounds far less interesting then trying to get the maximum amount of money from Brazil in return for minimum amount of assistance against a Texas-backed Argentina for example.
It would also be fun with a NPC region were the unscrupulous arms dealers can have a field day! :)

Because the ABC nations are too powerful too puppet without major campaign?  Having several weaker nations gives greater scope for people to do stuff.

If we are going to be realistic most of Africa other than the southern Cape is WORTHLESS fever swamp & jungles. 

Pretty much yes, but as most colonies in Africa were the effect of political rather then economical ambitions it is not like that matter much.
[/quote]

Again its to give people room to expand into.  South America, India and East Asia are economic.  Someone could try to take the cape and or North Africa.  Any organized state will resist such efforts diplomatic or military but it is very possible to achieve, and thats what we want.  Stories of how said take overs occur.

Weaker states again give more scope for player action.

Michael

[Korpen]

Because the ABC nations are too powerful too puppet without major campaign?  Having several weaker nations gives greater scope for people to do stuff.

Only if one define "do stuff" as direct control and intervention and seek territory in ones own name.
A South America with functioning states would be more like the cold war with states supporting, and getting support from  local entities, but not seeking direct control.
Yes, they would be to strong to conquer or puppet without a cost-prohibited level of military force, but I think that is a pro, not a con.

Again its to give people room to expand into.  South America, India and East Asia are economic.  Someone could try to take the cape and or North Africa.  Any organized state will resist such efforts diplomatic or military but it is very possible to achieve, and thats what we want.  Stories of how said take overs occur.

Fair enough that some wants to play that sort of game were their own territorial expansion is the raison d'être to play, but with the entire world at our disposal, is there not space for those players who have no interest in that sort of things?

[Ithekro]

Game of the times I suppose.

There is the control model (being the overlord to a peoples, yet they run things locally for you):  British India.
There is the influence model (Most of the Western Hemisphere in the 1800s according to the Monroe Doctrine...even if it was not entirely the case)  Basically your say has weight to it in local affairs and you can deny outside influences, even if you don't actually run anything in the locel governments at all.  Gunboat diplomacy is used often in this model.
There is the Cold War-ish/economic model (playing one side against another for profit)
There is the exclusive trade model (Trade ports in China/spheres of influence)
There is the colonial model (take land, move your own people there, remove or enslave the natives)

All of these I believe were used in the 1800s.

[Desertfox]

Fair enough that some wants to play that sort of game were their own territorial expansion is the raison d'être to play, but with the entire world at our disposal, is there not space for those players who have no interest in that sort of things?

I guess you could promote setting up stronger local governments. At least I intend to do something similar in a certain part of the world.

[ctwaterman]

All the points are Valid.....

We want room for both the people who want to support the local government possibly in return for exclusive trading rights or a trade port.  As well as te people who want to land their marines backed up by a couple of large Warships in the port and tell the local dictator this is how its going to be...????

Roleplaying and storytelling opportunities for all sides of the Isle.
And when one style of play clashes with the other... my that appears to be opportunity for one of those nasty little colonial brush fire wars where a few ships and a few thousand troops plus a whole bunch of pissed off natives will determine the fate of a some colonial territory.

[TexanCowboy]

Foxy, all of your plans that I know of either involve Plan Alamo II, invading California, or using Indians as proxies for both of those plans. :P

In response to Korpen; nations like mine in North America (which WILL be agressively expanding in South America) will be unbalanced if we go with your plan. Your idea can be accomplished pitting Buenos Aries vs. Peru, for example...

[Tanthalas]

Fair enough that some wants to play that sort of game were their own territorial expansion is the raison d'être to play, but with the entire world at our disposal, is there not space for those players who have no interest in that sort of things?

I guess you could promote setting up stronger local governments. At least I intend to do something similar in a certain part of the world.

LOL DF we all know you intend to set up "strong" puppet goverments so you have allies when you inevitably bite off more than you can chew in the wars you will inevitably start.

@ TC why ofcourse Mexico intends to attack Texas and Deseret, after all they have won so may of the previous wars in North America...

[Korpen]

In response to Korpen; nations like mine in North America (which WILL be agressively expanding in South America) will be unbalanced if we go with your plan.

Unbalanced? Against what?

Expanding in south America would be harder, but far from impossible (and with potentially greater reward).

[Carthaginian]

In response to Korpen; nations like mine in North America (which WILL be agressively expanding in South America) will be unbalanced if we go with your plan.

Unbalanced? Against what?
Expanding in south America would be harder, but far from impossible (and with potentially greater reward).

It should not be 'harder but not impossible'- it should be no harder than expanding into any other place. If South America is mostly 'difficult to invade minor powers,' then every continent on the map should be. There should be no 'easy' territory and 'hard' territory... the overall difficulty should- at least here in N-verse- be just the same whether the natives in OTL had firearms or whether they considered blankets, bowls and pointy sticks cutting edge tech.

[Korpen]

It should not be 'harder but not impossible'- it should be no harder than expanding into any other place. If South America is mostly 'difficult to invade minor powers,' then every continent on the map should be. There should be no 'easy' territory and 'hard' territory... the overall difficulty should- at least here in N-verse- be just the same whether the natives in OTL had firearms or whether they considered blankets, bowls and pointy sticks cutting edge tech.

Why?
With an entire world, why should every place be identical? We got space for variation and should be able to carter to all taste to some degree; why not use that to make a more interesting game?

[Carthaginian]

It should not be 'harder but not impossible'- it should be no harder than expanding into any other place. If South America is mostly 'difficult to invade minor powers,' then every continent on the map should be. There should be no 'easy' territory and 'hard' territory... the overall difficulty should- at least here in N-verse- be just the same whether the natives in OTL had firearms or whether they considered blankets, bowls and pointy sticks cutting edge tech.

Why?
With an entire world, why should every place be identical? We got space for variation and should be able to carter to all taste to some degree; why not use that to make a more interesting game?

Then, Korpen, put those difficult nations where you intend to expand- not where others intend to.
I like the map as the Mods have made it now, and that is how I vote it should stay.

[Korpen]

Then, Korpen, put those difficult nations where you intend to expand- not where others intend to.

Antartica? Novaja Zemlja?
I suggested SA for the simple reason that it would require almost no world-building, unlike asia or Africa or Australia were one would need to make everything up and it is a high risk of things just getting silly.

[Carthaginian]

Then, Korpen, put those difficult nations where you intend to expand- not where others intend to.

Antartica? Novaja Zemlja?
I suggested SA for the simple reason that it would require almost no world-building, unlike asia or Africa or Australia were one would need to make everything up and it is a high risk of things just getting silly.

LOL... like 'nothing in the southern hemisphere having any major national or colonial structure' kind of silly?
Sorry, Korpen- we are too far into 'Fictionland' for your argument for placement to work. Trying to inject fact into the sim now is about as productive as trying to inject antibiotics into a man in cardiac arrest! You have got to let your desire for anything factual go... we're just too far into a totally fictional world for anything factual to fit in nicely.

Besides, Australia would be a perfect place to create a powerful NPC like what you are looking for.