1
Other Games / Re: [Forum Game] World in Revolution 1861, Sign-up Thread
« on: June 17, 2012, 08:28:51 AM »
'Twas good while it lasted.
Show Posts
This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.
Pages: [1] 2
2
Other Games / Re: [Forum Game] World in Revolution 1861, Sign-up Thread
« on: June 16, 2012, 04:43:17 PM »
You should get a Co-GM to help things along.
3
Other Games / Re: [Forum Game] World in Revolution 1861, Sign-up Thread
« on: May 13, 2012, 05:34:07 AM »
They are in.
4
Other Games / Re: [Forum Game] World in Revolution 1861, Sign-up Thread
« on: April 24, 2012, 10:27:43 PM »
Russia tried to do a dramatic change, and the Tsar was Assassinated.
Austria tried to do a Constitution, then the Nobles rose up against the Emperor.
While my WiR is different than OTL, all of it is within plausibility. 200,000 Soldiers shipped to the United States, however, is not.
Austria tried to do a Constitution, then the Nobles rose up against the Emperor.
While my WiR is different than OTL, all of it is within plausibility. 200,000 Soldiers shipped to the United States, however, is not.
5
Other Games / Re: [Forum Game] World in Revolution 1861, Sign-up Thread
« on: April 24, 2012, 10:14:44 PM »
The Qing should be an isolationist country, shunning foreigners.
The United States would have a near revolt on its hands if, in 1861, randomly invited 200,000 Japanese soldiers to march through the West. The Japanese Government would be in turmoil too, as they were still hyper-sensitive of outsiders at this time.
The United States would have a near revolt on its hands if, in 1861, randomly invited 200,000 Japanese soldiers to march through the West. The Japanese Government would be in turmoil too, as they were still hyper-sensitive of outsiders at this time.
6
Other Games / Re: [Forum Game] World in Revolution 1861, Sign-up Thread
« on: April 23, 2012, 06:11:31 PM »
Japanese soldiers in the United States?
Does the USA player have a death wish?
Does the USA player have a death wish?
7
Other Games / Re: [Forum Game] World in Revolution 1861, Official Game
« on: April 17, 2012, 02:46:27 AM »
[Confederate States]
To: The Nations of the World
Re: Confederate Independence
To the nations of the world, we as you today to consider, even more a moment, the prospects of recognizing the Confederate States of America as an independent nation. We have supplied your mills with Cotton for the past few decades, and have been a faithful buyer of your goods. We have started this war to achieve independence from what we consider foreign rule. Look at Hungry, Look at the Balkans. At one time, they were both ruled by the Ottoman Turks, a Foreign power, but now Hungry has been restored to European rule and some of the Balkans look ripe to achieve independence once again. Support that same, home rule, idea here in the Confederate States. All we ask to to have the right to have our own say in our own Government
To: The Nations of the World
Re: Confederate Independence
To the nations of the world, we as you today to consider, even more a moment, the prospects of recognizing the Confederate States of America as an independent nation. We have supplied your mills with Cotton for the past few decades, and have been a faithful buyer of your goods. We have started this war to achieve independence from what we consider foreign rule. Look at Hungry, Look at the Balkans. At one time, they were both ruled by the Ottoman Turks, a Foreign power, but now Hungry has been restored to European rule and some of the Balkans look ripe to achieve independence once again. Support that same, home rule, idea here in the Confederate States. All we ask to to have the right to have our own say in our own Government
8
Other Games / Re: [Forum Game] World in Revolution 1861, Official Game
« on: April 14, 2012, 10:39:55 PM »That is completely false. It wasn't until 1863 that the war was publicly stated as being about slavery.
The southern states seceded because Lincoln was elected president. This was only a problem because Lincoln was "ANTI-SLAVERY".
There were many reasons that led up to the war and secession, but to say that slavery was not one of them until 1863 is completely wrong.
I have a Ph.D in United States History. You have no need to lecture me.
In context of the game, Lincoln would not admit, in public affairs, that he wanted slavery to end. He would not be comitted to this until the middle of 1862, when the emancipation proclamation was drafted. Publically, the war was not about slavery, and instead to preserve the Union. If it had gotten out, at all, that Lincoln wanted to free the slaves, the border states would have seceded, something Lincoln could not have at all costs. Only after a show of force of arms at Sharpsburgh did he proclaim it, knowing the border states could not leave after that victory.
9
Other Games / Re: [Forum Game] World in Revolution 1861, Official Game
« on: April 14, 2012, 10:20:37 PM »
OOC: It wasn't until 1863 that the war was about slavery. Calling it about slavery this early would have caused the border states to secede.
10
Other Games / Re: [Forum Game] World in Revolution 1861, Official Game
« on: April 13, 2012, 01:00:25 PM »
The Confederate States of America is distraught that we have arrived here at this present time. We do not wish for hostilities between the United States of America, but we will not stand for President Lincoln to occupy and fortify Fort Sumter in South Carolina. This Fort rightfully belongs to the Confederate State of South Carolina, and by extension, the Confederate Government.
All we ask is to be left alone.
11
Other Games / Re: [Forum Game] World in Revolution 1861, Sign-up Thread
« on: April 13, 2012, 01:22:48 AM »
I have word from a one jacobl, who will be playing as the Kingdom of Spain. He will be registering shortly. I also have Muskeato who would like to be Mexico.
12
Other Games / Re: [Forum Game] World in Revolution 1861, Sign-up Thread
« on: April 13, 2012, 01:14:02 AM »
I too, am excited for this game. Speaking from my perspective, Spain and Italy are not all that important at this time period. They could very easily be filled in at a later date. I, for one, am interested in getting some diplomacy started.
13
Other Games / Re: [Forum Game] World in Revolution 1861, Sign-up Thread
« on: April 12, 2012, 04:46:41 AM »
Considering the main WiR thread has around 273 pages, that is a very possible goal.
14
Other Games / Re: [Forum Game] World in Revolution 1861, Sign-up Thread
« on: April 12, 2012, 03:38:13 AM »
Looking back upon the debates about Trade Balance and whatnot, If you want my advice, coming from my GM standpoint, the system I have now... really doesn't work that well. However, I feel that the system I am about to implement into World in Revolution over in the other forum, is just a tad to complicated to just thrust into this game.
However, what I am thinking of is that trade in this game can be expressed by two ways, Nation Trading and Colonial Trading. This would settle the differences between the colonies gaining/giving wealth and from trading with other nations. Colonial Trading would represent the balance of trade that the homeland has (British Isles v India) versus the colony. If you have a really bad colony, (Yes, I am talking about you Algeria) then you'd have to suffer for that. However, if you get a good colony it raises the amount of money you get.
Anywho. That's what my rambling has to offer. If you trade with another nation, you'd have to deal with Imports and Exports. I think it would be up to the GM to say who's is negative and positive. Case in point, the Confederacy exporting Cotton and Importing Manufactured Goods. Cotton is worth less as a raw material, so the trade balance is negative.
Ah. That's my two cents.
EDIT: The Confederacy should not have control of Virginia, North Carolina, Tennessee, and Arkansas. These states seceded after Ft. Sumter was attacked. This was a mistake in the other WiR, as a history professor, I'd much appreciate it if this was fixed inthis one.
However, what I am thinking of is that trade in this game can be expressed by two ways, Nation Trading and Colonial Trading. This would settle the differences between the colonies gaining/giving wealth and from trading with other nations. Colonial Trading would represent the balance of trade that the homeland has (British Isles v India) versus the colony. If you have a really bad colony, (Yes, I am talking about you Algeria) then you'd have to suffer for that. However, if you get a good colony it raises the amount of money you get.
Anywho. That's what my rambling has to offer. If you trade with another nation, you'd have to deal with Imports and Exports. I think it would be up to the GM to say who's is negative and positive. Case in point, the Confederacy exporting Cotton and Importing Manufactured Goods. Cotton is worth less as a raw material, so the trade balance is negative.
Ah. That's my two cents.
EDIT: The Confederacy should not have control of Virginia, North Carolina, Tennessee, and Arkansas. These states seceded after Ft. Sumter was attacked. This was a mistake in the other WiR, as a history professor, I'd much appreciate it if this was fixed inthis one.
15
Other Games / Re: [Forum Game] World in Revolution 1861, Sign-up Thread
« on: April 12, 2012, 03:18:22 AM »
Over in the other WiR, I'd just allow the loser to pick a new nation. It has happened a few times already. The Qing got booted out, and that player became Morocco. Ireland got booted out and is now Chile.
I'd hope that's how it is here as well.
Ah well.
I'd hope that's how it is here as well.
Ah well.
Pages: [1] 2