Territory Count

[Kaiser Kirk]

Thinking further on the enclave concept,

Perhaps the best way of presenting them is +3 average IC, +2BP over the standard province.

Why?
Well, currently the proposal is that
So, if you have a Port Symbol in a 'Rich' province with 2 IC, currently it generates 2 x 3 (rich territory)  = 6
But if we say Enclave ICs are average..then it's 5 x1.5 (average territory)= 7.5 ....not much of a gain for +3 IC.

BUT if we make the Enclave +3
Then it's the 2x3 = 6  for the province
+ 3x1.5 = 4.5 for the Enclave +3...
total = 10.5   Suddenly a very desirable little chunk of territory.

IC cost
Should the + IC cost the Homeland rate? 
Or the territorial rate?


Thoughts on the above?

[Kaiser Kirk]

I envisage the conquest in the early 1930s.
These 2 nations only have one harbor (base). They can't just have a small Navy.

That gives us some time to prepare.
I will likely have time to assist or mod battles by that point.
I expect their navies both exceed the Mayan in size when the math is done.

[Jefgte]

I suggest not re-working 1928.5
I hope to have the enclave rule finalized in time for 1929.0

At that point, you can allocate part of the investment to the extra IC into the Byzantine Enclaves,
and then decide where you want the rest of the investment.

=> I carried out a redistribution of IC, certain groups of colonies had too many, others not enough.

I maintain the redistribution:
49 colonies => 98 IC (rules are rules)

- investment in homeland IC => $25

=> $5 placed in reserve for Enclaves.

[The Rock Doctor]

Thinking further on the enclave concept,

Perhaps the best way of presenting them is +3 average IC, +2BP over the standard province.

Why?
Well, currently the proposal is that
So, if you have a Port Symbol in a 'Rich' province with 2 IC, currently it generates 2 x 3 (rich territory)  = 6
But if we say Enclave ICs are average..then it's 5 x1.5 (average territory)= 7.5 ....not much of a gain for +3 IC.

BUT if we make the Enclave +3
Then it's the 2x3 = 6  for the province
+ 3x1.5 = 4.5 for the Enclave +3...
total = 10.5   Suddenly a very desirable little chunk of territory.

IC cost
Should the + IC cost the Homeland rate? 
Or the territorial rate?


Thoughts on the above?

Do we have a port that is also rich?  I'm pretty sure I don't.

The converse is a place that is resource-poor becomes a lot more interesting with 3 additional average IC.

I assume the IC would cost the territorial rate, regardless of what income it produces.

[Kaiser Kirk]

Do we have a port that is also rich?  I'm pretty sure I don't.

The converse is a place that is resource-poor becomes a lot more interesting with 3 additional average IC.

I assume the IC would cost the territorial rate, regardless of what income it produces.

I thought we made Panama a rich port...

On the one hand, most rich symbols were put where resources were on an old atlas map,
and that tended to be mountains in the interior...not always.

So, we have many with both "Port Symbol" and "Rich".
You have one in Niger...and I really thought Panama had a port symbol now. Hmm. Has the rich symbol...no port.

The Aztec have them at San Diego, Baja, and South New Zealand, Japan at Java,
Parthia...has 7.. ironically not where I was musing about having Enclaves.

cost

I am fine with the Enclave IC costing the same as other territorial Coastal Port IC..10.
If there is a player appetite for 25 like the homelands, I wanted to give folks a chance to speak up.

The other option

Earlier in this, I mentioned the idea of letting all Port Symbols "host" 3 IC.
I discarded the idea immediately, as Parthia has more than it's share of Port Symbols, so it would be
very advantageous to me.

However, it's certainly within the Spirit of making those symbols,
Jefgte seemed keen on the idea, so I thought I'd throw it out there.
Norse at Newfoundland and in Quebec,