Colonial discussion

[snip]

Ok, so here is a thought on how we could rework the colonial rules. If enough parts are not immediately shot down in flames, I will work with Kirk to hash details.

Justification: I feel the colonial element is very important to the sim as it provides the reasoning behind our navies beyond coastal defense and looking cool  8). This is something we need to get right so it's a meaningful addition to the game from an economic and conflict generation perspective. Because of this, the Colony system is a place we can afford some additional complexity. The current system has failed at that, as it is too equal and too open. There needs to be constraints and inequities.

0) Note this will probably require a complete revamp of our current colonies. We can burn that bridge should we come to it.

1) Adopt the Colonies must begin at a "Port" proposal. I think this is a good idea as it allows for concentrating available colonies thereby providing the potential for conflict. What exactly a "port" would be is a detail for Kirk and me to discuss. My first stab would be a major river mouth, but Im open to suggestions.

2) Scale colonial IC cost based on distance from a port. An approximator of logistical difficulties and how said difficulties impact the construction of "civilized" infrastructure. This is also meant to be a conflict driver as it will incentivize multiple colonies rather than a singular large one.

3) Modify colonial IC cost based on terrain type. My idea would be to classify terrain into a couple big buckets that would provide a modifier to the cost of colonial IC. This is meant to make the buildup of colonies unequal, and therefore worth fighting over.

4) Provide a modifier to colonial income based on resources. Like the terrain type, this would be a couple of buckets that provinces would sit in. Ment to adjust colonial income and make some areas better than others or help offset other penalties. Also meant to help introduce inequality and thereby the potential for conflict. This would not track specific resources.

Thoughts?

[The Rock Doctor]

1)  I think most have, in some fashion, if one also counts nice bays and natural harbours.

2-4)  That all sounds complicated.  There are hundreds, if not thousands, of provinces on the map to classify in this fashion.

[Desertfox]

Looking at the economy rules, I do not see a "limit" to ICs.
Actually, looking at them, I don't see why I can't stack 100 IC in one colonial province and get $150 from it....well except the mod-generated Typhoon I'd send my way.
I remember there was one, I guess it got removed.

Kirk am I reading the following rule incorrectly then?

Colonial Upkeep
No colonial province may have more than two (2) IC present at any given time. If at any time a province is lacking an IC and/or any Land Points, the player has one turn to begin construction of a new IC or deploy a Land point or the province reverts to unowned territory. This new IC must be completed within four turns or the province reverts to unowned. A nation may also assign at least one Land Point to a province that nation once controlled via IC to maintain control of it for an indefinite period.

5.If we want to limit colonial expansion rates in the future, we could do a simple 2 step rule
A. First landings can only claim coastal provinces and must be at least 5 provinces away from that players other holdings.
B. From a landing spot colonies can expand a "distance" of 2 provinces in all directions.  Example : A first landing in Delaware on T1, could expand T2, to cover all 4 adjacent provinces and the 5 provinces adjacent to them.

1) Adopt the Colonies must begin at a "Port" proposal. I think this is a good idea as it allows for concentrating available colonies thereby providing the potential for conflict. What exactly a "port" would be is a detail for Kirk and me to discuss. My first stab would be a major river mouth, but Im open to suggestions.

I like this idea. Perhaps expand to you can only add one province per turn, per colony after initial settlement?

For the ports, what if losing the "port" means losing access to that colony's IC production? Would mean more reason to defend the colonies and have ports. Maybe have the first IC built in a colony be considered the "port"?

3) Modify colonial IC cost based on terrain type. My idea would be to classify terrain into a couple big buckets that would provide a modifier to the cost of colonial IC. This is meant to make the buildup of colonies unequal, and therefore worth fighting over.

4) Provide a modifier to colonial income based on resources. Like the terrain type, this would be a couple of buckets that provinces would sit in. Ment to adjust colonial income and make some areas better than others or help offset other penalties. Also meant to help introduce inequality and thereby the potential for conflict. This would not track specific resources.

2-4)  That all sounds complicated.  There are hundreds, if not thousands, of provinces on the map to classify in this fashion.

We don't need to classify all the provinces, just the ones that have colonies. Why not put the onus on the players to do the classification and limit it? Split provinces into "high" and "low", all provinces starting as "low". Once per turn, each player gets to pick one province to upgrade to "high". Provided they make a reasonable case, that province is now upgraded and provides some sort of bonus.

[Kaiser Kirk]

)nce per turn, each player gets to pick one province to upgrade to "high". Provided they make a reasonable case, that province is now upgraded and provides some sort of bonus.

My basic objection to this sort of approach is threefold. 
First, all players, regardless of the number of territories they hold and therefore are having to garrison, gets 1 per turn.  It does not matter if you have 5 provinces in the Kalahari, or 100 across the Western USA.  Logically, the chance of locating resource areas of value should be greater if you  are looking in more places.   
This also brings this to Two, which is again, all provinces are treated as having equal potential, so none are more important to colonize than any other.
Then there is Three- we already have a way to improve a province by build IC to utilize the resources, which then gives a bonus.

[Jefgte]

1) Adopt the Colonies must begin at a "Port" proposal. I think this is a good idea as it allows for concentrating available colonies thereby providing the potential for conflict. What exactly a "port" would be is a detail for Kirk and me to discuss. My first stab would be a major river mouth, but I'm open to suggestions.

In 1911H1 report, Byzance builds an harbor at Diego Suarez with a 125m drydock.

[Kaiser Kirk]

First responding to Rocky on my #6,  Homelands...um...err...good question...could be that's already accounted for in our starting IC? Real answer, hadn't really thought about that, would be a big pain to backfit, so it would have to be handwaved into starting IC.

1) Adopt the Colonies must begin at a "Port" proposal. ...

2) Scale colonial IC cost based on distance from a port....

3) Modify colonial IC cost based on terrain type....

4) Provide a modifier to colonial income based on resources...This would not track specific resources.

Thoughts?

1. I think 'anchorage' is the the best term.  We can hand wave in "tramp steamers" and "freeports" at such places easily.  Rate of cargo transfer is far more workable from such areas.  Working from webpages and a 1890s USN port document, one can find ports, natural harbors, anchorages, etc. So I did do a map of africa a while ago, it could be expanded to the world with effort. That would probably be a early Feb product.

So, if useful, possible.

2. I think that would become problematic to track.
Currently, we have colonial regions, made up of provinces. As far as I can tell, we build the IC in the Colonial Region, not a particular Province.
So tracking where an IC is built, and then making sure the various players are counting right, could be a paperwork burden.

3. The  idea of terrain is similar to my Idea 6, and so I have some ideas on it.
The names can be figured out later, but simply coloring the unclaimed provinces into 3-4 codes would show what they were.
We'd have to have a clean colony basemap.
The turnsheet could have an indent showing the different subtypes in a colony.
You would still track semi-regionally.

There is the same per-province tracking problem with IC as #2, but could be dealt with simply with defining what type of province within the colony is being built on.
New France         # province   # IC    New IC $
          Good                  2                        4
          ok                     6                        1                     +$5
          poor                 12                       0
          barren                4                       0

Using real world geography and settlement, it should be fairly simple to figure out and symbolize the nice places to settle. However the bookeeping works, the map should be doable.

4. Generic Resources :
There could be provinces with a Resource Point (type undefined).  That would give more more income when developed. Those could be a simple DOT on the province.
There could be an underlying assumption that if you have a 5 barren Provinces, and 1 has a resource point, any IC built in the Barren area will be on the resource point first. That gets rid of tracking by province. Likewise if there's a extremely fertile province, and so an 'Arable/Good' with a Dot, we presume that's the one you're going to develop first...

Edit Perhaps 2 types of resources - one IC or one BP, with either give more production or allow cheaper building?  Just musing there.

This would be a bit more bookkeeping, and a bit harder to set up. A simple Dot should be trackable, and we simply put the Resource Count on the Budget spreadsheets as they are conquered, so a one time effort.

[Desertfox]

)nce per turn, each player gets to pick one province to upgrade to "high". Provided they make a reasonable case, that province is now upgraded and provides some sort of bonus.

My basic objection to this sort of approach is threefold. 
First, all players, regardless of the number of territories they hold and therefore are having to garrison, gets 1 per turn.  It does not matter if you have 5 provinces in the Kalahari, or 100 across the Western USA.  Logically, the chance of locating resource areas of value should be greater if you  are looking in more places.   
This also brings this to Two, which is again, all provinces are treated as having equal potential, so none are more important to colonize than any other.
Then there is Three- we already have a way to improve a province by build IC to utilize the resources, which then gives a bonus.

What I was trying to do is 1) Instead of trying to figure out the whole map and hundreds of provinces lets do it bit by bit. 2) Instead of having the mods do all the work, have the players contribute by identifying provinces that are better/should provide some additional benefit.

An alternative would be to have the mods pick a handful of provinces a turn that provide some benefit, half of those could be on unclaimed provinces.

[Desertfox]

On a different topic (Concessions), I was thinking, why not limit concessions to a port (ie Hong Kong) instead of a whole province and allow other ways of obtaining them, specifically bribery (hard cash, ships, tech, etc...) and/or diplomacy (at the mods discretion)? I don't see anyone taking advantage of that rule as it is currently constructed, maybe allowing different options would make things more interesting.

[Kaiser Kirk]

An alternative would be to have the mods pick a handful of provinces a turn that provide some benefit, half of those could be on unclaimed provinces.

Ah,
Well it seems that Snips #4 idea fits that concept. Unless I'm confused again...or still...can't tell which..

[Desertfox]

Yes its a version of Snips #3 and #4, all I'm trying to say is, instead of trying to do the whole map at once, do the province modifiers bit by bit, one province per player, per turn (plus say 5 unclaimed provinces per turn) would reduce the workload on the mods and keep it fair for everyone.

Another thing I would suggest, whether its based on terrain or resources or something else, keep the modifier simple say a baseline province ($1 per IC) and a good province ($2 per IC) or at most baseline ($1), good ($1.5), and poor ($0.5). Keep it simple and abstract but add some flavor and inequality in the provinces.

[Jefgte]

...On a different topic (Concessions), I was thinking, why not limit concessions to a port (ie Hong Kong) instead of a whole province and allow other ways of obtaining them...

It is already done in 1911H1, Byzantium had plans to build a port in Australia (Shark Bay) with the agreement of the Australian government.
The hard conquest of Madagascar postponed this project.

[Desertfox]

...On a different topic (Concessions), I was thinking, why not limit concessions to a port (ie Hong Kong) instead of a whole province and allow other ways of obtaining them...

It is already done in 1911H1, Byzantium had plans to build a port in Australia (Shark Bay) with the agreement of the Australian government.
The hard conquest of Madagascar postponed this project.

Well currently Australia is white and not a true NPC, I'm saying more for the NPCs like China, Aztecs, Incas, etc. Instead of taking a chunk (province) from an NPC, just restrict it to a port and make it easier. Like for example say Byzantium wanted to establish a base in Goa (Lakshmanti?), a few older warships and some tech transfer in the right hands could make it happen.

[Kaiser Kirk]

Concessions -
I can't say I recall much of that from the world-building phase, so I don't know what Snip intended.

So the first question needs to be what is the desired vision for the Concession rule. Snip will have to answer that.
Then we can ask if that is being met.

[snip]

Regarding the questions/thoughts about my plan: The alterations that would occur under the 3rd and 4th options would be predetermined beforehand. There would be no player picking of where to apply bonus (or penalties, but who would do that willingly?)

Concessions - These were intended to be items like the ports granted to European powers under the Unequal Treaties with Imperial China. A concentration of trade interaction by force. They were also intended to be a solvable puzzle in comparison to all-out war. Something that, from a GM standpoint, I could check a box off and have it completed. It was also supposed to be an alternative to direct colonization, but I think the ready availability of white space on the map hosed that. Its something that can be looked at alongside revamping the colonial rules as a whole.

[The Rock Doctor]

Something I've seen in other games in other fora is the introduction of soft-power "influence points".  A nation gets so many a turn, they are used to sway NPCs into one's orbit to some degree.  We would likely not have a lot, but perhaps could add to the base amount through a form of economic investment akin to BP or IC.

If such a system is in place, we could use them on grey NPCs (not blank white spaces) to seek out concessions in those NPCs.  It might be a sliding scale - spend one increment of soft power to get basic trade relations with an NPC and this produces a flat income bonus based on the "Tier" of the NPC.  Spend more, maybe you get a territorial concession that lets you put a single high-yield IC in the territory.  Spend even more, maybe you bring them into your orbit as a puppet/raj kind of situation.

Alternately, one could spend soft power trying to reduce another PC's influence in a NPC.

Needs work, but I know.