1870 : Alternative Divergence [AH][OOC][REBOOT]

[Tracian Empire]

Well, if you're taking control over Persia than the Roman-Persian relations might change rather drastically.

I want them to stay the same. To do otherwise would mess up your history, especially if the alliance never happened. Considering the changes already made, I don't want to upset the status quo too much. Plus, it'd be cool to have a Roman-Persian alliance.

Not exactly. I can easily have the alliance be a cold one, and its existence doesn't matter all that much after the middle ages end.

[Seinlo]

I want them to stay the same. To do otherwise would mess up your history, especially if the alliance never happened. Considering the changes already made, I don't want to upset the status quo too much. Plus, it'd be cool to have a Roman-Persian alliance.

Not exactly. I can easily have the alliance be a cold one, and its existence doesn't matter all that much after the middle ages end.

I really want there to be an alliance, though, Trace. You were all for the alliance when Ikky was going to be Persia, but now you don't want it to exist. I would like it to exist. Alliances make me happy.

[Tracian Empire]

Not exactly. I can easily have the alliance be a cold one, and its existence doesn't matter all that much after the middle ages end.

I really want there to be an alliance, though, Trace. You were all for the alliance when Ikky was going to be Persia, but now you don't want it to exist. I would like it to exist. Alliances make me happy.

Because I've roleplayed with Ik many times before and I do trust her to have an alliance.

[Seinlo]

I really want there to be an alliance, though, Trace. You were all for the alliance when Ikky was going to be Persia, but now you don't want it to exist. I would like it to exist. Alliances make me happy.

Because I've roleplayed with Ik many times before and I do trust her to have an alliance.

I was hoping to have a close relationship with Rome because it would benefit us both. Removing that alliance just takes away one of your advantages, and lowers your ability to wage war. With our alliance, any enemies of yours would likely be Persia's enemies (if they attacked you, or you called on us and we answered, that is; I am unsure how close the alliance you would have had with Ikky was, but, yeah), and that could aid in wars against states that wished to end Roman dominance. If you don't want an alliance, however, because you question my skills as a roleplayer, that is fine, but I would like it if you removed such thoughts from your reasoning as I am a perfectly capable roleplayer, despite still learning about nation roleplays (I have a pretty good grasp, but it isn't on the level I want it to be right now). Maybe I will pursue the 'warming' of this alliance ICly, but if you do not want that, then I will not do that, either.

[Seinlo]

I'm trying to make Zanzibar small on this map, as it would conform to the historical colonies that Oman held, but it's not doing very well because there are a few big spots on the way down to the southern border, and that means it's not as uniform, and that that perfect little strip that I see on this map of Oman's colonies. That bothers me. I realize that the colony looks larger on this map I'm editing, and smaller on the one I'm using for reference, but these big blocks don't want me to fix this. :c Stupid Victoria 2 map, and you're reasonably badly sized spots.

[Tracian Empire]

Because I've roleplayed with Ik many times before and I do trust her to have an alliance.

I was hoping to have a close relationship with Rome because it would benefit us both. Removing that alliance just takes away one of your advantages, and lowers your ability to wage war. With our alliance, any enemies of yours would likely be Persia's enemies, and that could aid in wars against states that wished to end Roman dominance. If you don't want an alliance, however, because you question my skills as a roleplayer, that is fine, but I would like it if you removed such bias from your reasoning as I am a perfectly capable roleplayer, despite still learning about nation roleplays (I have a pretty good grasp, but it isn't on the level I want it to be right now).

No, the issue isn't your ability, it's trust. I've been back-stabbed before, and since I never roleplayed with you before, I still would't trust you enough for an alliance like the one that Rome was supposed to end with Persia. Losing the alliance with Persia, while regrettable, wouldn't be that much of a hit considering my other alliances.

[Seinlo]

I was hoping to have a close relationship with Rome because it would benefit us both. Removing that alliance just takes away one of your advantages, and lowers your ability to wage war. With our alliance, any enemies of yours would likely be Persia's enemies, and that could aid in wars against states that wished to end Roman dominance. If you don't want an alliance, however, because you question my skills as a roleplayer, that is fine, but I would like it if you removed such bias from your reasoning as I am a perfectly capable roleplayer, despite still learning about nation roleplays (I have a pretty good grasp, but it isn't on the level I want it to be right now).

No, the issue isn't your ability, it's trust. I've been back-stabbed before, and since I never roleplayed with you before, I still would't trust you enough for an alliance like the one that Rome was supposed to end with Persia. Losing the alliance with Persia, while regrettable, wouldn't be that much of a hit considering my other alliances.

It isn't my ability, and it was trust? I definitely understand that. In another RP, my character was denied at first because the Co-OP who took charge of my app had gone through bad times with roleplayers that possessed powerful characters and abused them. The kind of roleplay they have is a multiversal character-based roleplay, so I knew that it would be easy for roleplayers that looked like they would do well to get past the cracks, and due to the RPs age (and research of my own on the RP), I knew they had probably weeded out the ones that caused problems. The quality there is usually higher than other melting pot RPs I looked into (the Wikia could use more detail, though), even though it may get a "bit" weird sometimes. As you know, I sometimes jump to conclusions, am easily overexcited, and also easily overreact, but I didn't do much except question their belief in my skill, telling them that I didn't like the insinuation of a problem with skill (with how it was phrased, it could have been either, but I'm much more sensitive than many people due to certain things going on with my brain, and thus thought they were talking about my skill), but, like I said, it wasn't my skill they were worried about, it was trust. They explained this, and knowing that trust is paramount to not only healthy relationships, but also to making an RP successful, I directly addressed their concerns once I realized what their concerns were.

I didn't address their loss of faith with sweet words, but instead by explaining to them my roleplay etiquette, and how I did things most of the time, as well as how seriously I took roleplay etiquette. Some people aren't bad roleplayers. They can have quality posts, but may get ejected from an RP because of their lack of knowledge or refusal to follow roleplay etiquette. Roleplaying etiquette on the Internet is a form of netiquette with extended "laws", and I try to adhere to it strictly. I am even planning to make a thread outlining RP etiquette (it will do other things, too). It applies to everything from godmodding, to metagaming, to abusing a character's power, to back-stabbing without planning it in the OOC, doing OOC things for IC reasons (this applies to most things, but there are a very small amount of exceptions), and much more. So, I'll do that here, too.

My etiquette on forums is very strict. I usually require myself to ask before I do something to another character that can in any way have a potentially permanent or detrimental effect on another typist's characters, and also for the use of powers such as telepathy, though NRPs have their own form of etiquette. I realize that may not be very reasonable on NS, especially in a battle, but I still follow it as much as possible, asking before I use my powers in certain ways, and communicating as often as I can with my RP partners. I can't stab a nation in the back in this game if we have a long-standing relationship, not unless there are extenuating circumstances, which often include a lot of planning, talk through PMs (TGs in this case), and everything else that goes along with changing something so drastically. I hope that you understand this, Trace. My style in roleplaying nations means that I try to avoid war, especially with player nations, though this Persia I am making may be a little imperialistic, so it's more than likely that a war with Rome will never occur to me, especially when this alliance is so valuable. I don't find any advantage in back-stabbing Rome, certainly not when you have other alliances.

I would love for this alliance to take place, so I am asking you to reconsider not having it continue into 1870, so that we may both enjoy an alliance. I can communicate with you through TGs, and you can bring up and explain any problems easily, if there are any you have. Please reconsider, Trace, and ask yourself why I would ruin an alliance and threaten Rome when Rome is Persia's closest, and potentially only ally.

[Tracian Empire]

No, the issue isn't your ability, it's trust. I've been back-stabbed before, and since I never roleplayed with you before, I still would't trust you enough for an alliance like the one that Rome was supposed to end with Persia. Losing the alliance with Persia, while regrettable, wouldn't be that much of a hit considering my other alliances.

It isn't my ability, and it was trust? I definitely understand that. In another RP, my character was denied at first because the Co-OP who took charge of my app had gone through bad times with roleplayers that possessed powerful characters and abused them. The kind of roleplay they have is a multiversal character-based roleplay, so I knew that it would be easy for roleplayers that looked like they would do well to get past the cracks, and due to the RPs age (and research of my own on the RP), I knew they had probably weeded out the ones that caused problems. The quality there is usually higher than other melting pot RPs I looked into (the Wikia could use more detail, though), even though it may get a "bit" weird sometimes. As you know, I sometimes jump to conclusions, am easily overexcited, and also easily overreact, but I didn't do much except question their belief in my skill, telling them that I didn't like the insinuation of a problem with skill (with how it was phrased, it could have been either, but I'm much more sensitive than many people due to certain things going on with my brain, and thus thought they were talking about my skill), but, like I said, it wasn't my skill they were worried about, it was trust. They explained this, and knowing that trust is paramount to not only healthy relationships, but also to making an RP successful, I directly addressed their concerns once I realized what their concerns were.

I didn't address their loss of faith with sweet words, but instead by explaining to them my roleplay etiquette, and how I did things most of the time, as well as how seriously I took roleplay etiquette. Some people aren't bad roleplayers. They can have quality posts, but may get ejected from an RP because of their lack of knowledge or refusal to follow roleplay etiquette. Roleplaying etiquette on the Internet is a form of netiquette with extended "laws", and I try to adhere to it strictly. I am even planning to make a thread outlining RP etiquette (it will do other things, too). It applies to everything from godmodding, to metagaming, to abusing a character's power, to back-stabbing without planning it in the OOC, doing OOC things for IC reasons (this applies to most things, but there are a very small amount of exceptions), and much more. So, I'll do that here, too.

My etiquette on forums is very strict. I usually require myself to ask before I do something to another character that can in any way have a potentially permanent or detrimental effect on another typist's characters, and also for the use of powers such as telepathy, though NRPs have their own form of etiquette. I realize that may not be very reasonable on NS, especially in a battle, but I still follow it as much as possible, asking before I use my powers in certain ways, and communicating as often as I can with my RP partners. I can't stab a nation in the back in this game if we have a long-standing relationship, not unless there are extenuating circumstances, which often include a lot of planning, talk through PMs (TGs in this case), and everything else that goes along with changing something so drastically. I hope that you understand this, Trace. My style in roleplaying nations means that I try to avoid war, especially with player nations, though this Persia I am making may be a little imperialistic, so it's more than likely that a war with Rome will never occur to me, especially when this alliance is so valuable. I don't find any advantage in back-stabbing Rome, certainly not when you have other alliances.

I would love for this alliance to take place, so I am asking you to reconsider not having it continue into 1870, so that we may both enjoy an alliance. I can communicate with you through TGs, and you can bring up and explain any problems easily, if there are any you have. Please reconsider, Trace, and ask yourself why I would ruin an alliance and threaten Rome when Rome is Persia's closest, and potentially only ally.

The entire thing with the alliance between Rome and Persia started way back in the old threads. The initial thing with Islam began with Rome and the Neo-Akkadian Empire having kept the Muslims out initially. But the guy that created the Akkadians never really posted anything in the IC, so not much happened. I eventually annexed him, and I was planning to also annex Persia, before Ik joined and took it. At the time, Persia was in a pretty bad condition. There was a Korean supported Pirate Kingdom taking their shores, and it was surrounded by me, Russia, and China or India, I can't remember exactly. So, that's when the idea appeared, for Persia to take over the role that Akkadia had, and for this entire Eternal Peace thing. And if Ik will be taking Persia again, then I don't have any problem continuing it, and it will have happened historically no matter of who apps for Persia. Even if, up to this point, I have friendly relations with most of my neighbors.

Except for the Huns. Barbarians.

I'm not going to openly break this Eternal Peace or anything even if you app for it. But you should understand that since me and Ik never discussed it, it's not a military alliance. More like an old armistice. Because the Roman-Persian rivalry is still there, and what is going to happen depends on both nations. Persia as an example, might not be all that happy about the Romans owning Mesopotamia, and the Romans aren't going to give their port(s) to the Persian Gulf that easily.

Since I do trust Ik at least a little, I could have easily tried to go for friendlier relations and that alliance. But if you take it, I don't know. You're far too unpredictable, and I don't know how I would personally handle such an alliance. That's why it depends.

But my personal opinion is that just as you said. You're still learning about nation roleplays. Persia is a nation that historically, in this timeline, should be on the same level or nearly on the same level as Rome, making it a great power. I don't think that you can handle it.

[Seinlo]

It isn't my ability, and it was trust? I definitely understand that. In another RP, my character was denied at first because the Co-OP who took charge of my app had gone through bad times with roleplayers that possessed powerful characters and abused them. The kind of roleplay they have is a multiversal character-based roleplay, so I knew that it would be easy for roleplayers that looked like they would do well to get past the cracks, and due to the RPs age (and research of my own on the RP), I knew they had probably weeded out the ones that caused problems. The quality there is usually higher than other melting pot RPs I looked into (the Wikia could use more detail, though), even though it may get a "bit" weird sometimes. As you know, I sometimes jump to conclusions, am easily overexcited, and also easily overreact, but I didn't do much except question their belief in my skill, telling them that I didn't like the insinuation of a problem with skill (with how it was phrased, it could have been either, but I'm much more sensitive than many people due to certain things going on with my brain, and thus thought they were talking about my skill), but, like I said, it wasn't my skill they were worried about, it was trust. They explained this, and knowing that trust is paramount to not only healthy relationships, but also to making an RP successful, I directly addressed their concerns once I realized what their concerns were.

I didn't address their loss of faith with sweet words, but instead by explaining to them my roleplay etiquette, and how I did things most of the time, as well as how seriously I took roleplay etiquette. Some people aren't bad roleplayers. They can have quality posts, but may get ejected from an RP because of their lack of knowledge or refusal to follow roleplay etiquette. Roleplaying etiquette on the Internet is a form of netiquette with extended "laws", and I try to adhere to it strictly. I am even planning to make a thread outlining RP etiquette (it will do other things, too). It applies to everything from godmodding, to metagaming, to abusing a character's power, to back-stabbing without planning it in the OOC, doing OOC things for IC reasons (this applies to most things, but there are a very small amount of exceptions), and much more. So, I'll do that here, too.

My etiquette on forums is very strict. I usually require myself to ask before I do something to another character that can in any way have a potentially permanent or detrimental effect on another typist's characters, and also for the use of powers such as telepathy, though NRPs have their own form of etiquette. I realize that may not be very reasonable on NS, especially in a battle, but I still follow it as much as possible, asking before I use my powers in certain ways, and communicating as often as I can with my RP partners. I can't stab a nation in the back in this game if we have a long-standing relationship, not unless there are extenuating circumstances, which often include a lot of planning, talk through PMs (TGs in this case), and everything else that goes along with changing something so drastically. I hope that you understand this, Trace. My style in roleplaying nations means that I try to avoid war, especially with player nations, though this Persia I am making may be a little imperialistic, so it's more than likely that a war with Rome will never occur to me, especially when this alliance is so valuable. I don't find any advantage in back-stabbing Rome, certainly not when you have other alliances.

I would love for this alliance to take place, so I am asking you to reconsider not having it continue into 1870, so that we may both enjoy an alliance. I can communicate with you through TGs, and you can bring up and explain any problems easily, if there are any you have. Please reconsider, Trace, and ask yourself why I would ruin an alliance and threaten Rome when Rome is Persia's closest, and potentially only ally.

The entire thing with the alliance between Rome and Persia started way back in the old threads. The initial thing with Islam began with Rome and the Neo-Akkadian Empire having kept the Muslims out initially. But the guy that created the Akkadians never really posted anything in the IC, so not much happened. I eventually annexed him, and I was planning to also annex Persia, before Ik joined and took it. At the time, Persia was in a pretty bad condition. There was a Korean supported Pirate Kingdom taking their shores, and it was surrounded by me, Russia, and China or India, I can't remember exactly. So, that's when the idea appeared, for Persia to take over the role that Akkadia had, and for this entire Eternal Peace thing. And if Ik will be taking Persia again, then I don't have any problem continuing it, and it will have happened historically no matter of who apps for Persia. Even if, up to this point, I have friendly relations with most of my neighbors.

Except for the Huns. Barbarians.

I'm not going to openly break this Eternal Peace or anything even if you app for it. But you should understand that since me and Ik never discussed it, it's not a military alliance. More like an old armistice. Because the Roman-Persian rivalry is still there, and what is going to happen depends on both nations. Persia as an example, might not be all that happy about the Romans owning Mesopotamia, and the Romans aren't going to give their port(s) to the Persian Gulf that easily.

Since I do trust Ik at least a little, I could have easily tried to go for friendlier relations and that alliance. But if you take it, I don't know. You're far too unpredictable, and I don't know how I would personally handle such an alliance. That's why it depends.

But my personal opinion is that just as you said. You're still learning about nation roleplays. Persia is a nation that historically, in this timeline, should be on the same level or nearly on the same level as Rome, making it a great power. I don't think that you can handle it.

Both Ik and Novacom have told me that I can RP Persia. I have enough knowledge in NRPs to play a great power. Please don't try to block me from getting Persia, okay?

[Novacom]

The entire thing with the alliance between Rome and Persia started way back in the old threads. The initial thing with Islam began with Rome and the Neo-Akkadian Empire having kept the Muslims out initially. But the guy that created the Akkadians never really posted anything in the IC, so not much happened. I eventually annexed him, and I was planning to also annex Persia, before Ik joined and took it. At the time, Persia was in a pretty bad condition. There was a Korean supported Pirate Kingdom taking their shores, and it was surrounded by me, Russia, and China or India, I can't remember exactly. So, that's when the idea appeared, for Persia to take over the role that Akkadia had, and for this entire Eternal Peace thing. And if Ik will be taking Persia again, then I don't have any problem continuing it, and it will have happened historically no matter of who apps for Persia. Even if, up to this point, I have friendly relations with most of my neighbors.

Except for the Huns. Barbarians.

I'm not going to openly break this Eternal Peace or anything even if you app for it. But you should understand that since me and Ik never discussed it, it's not a military alliance. More like an old armistice. Because the Roman-Persian rivalry is still there, and what is going to happen depends on both nations. Persia as an example, might not be all that happy about the Romans owning Mesopotamia, and the Romans aren't going to give their port(s) to the Persian Gulf that easily.

Since I do trust Ik at least a little, I could have easily tried to go for friendlier relations and that alliance. But if you take it, I don't know. You're far too unpredictable, and I don't know how I would personally handle such an alliance. That's why it depends.

But my personal opinion is that just as you said. You're still learning about nation roleplays. Persia is a nation that historically, in this timeline, should be on the same level or nearly on the same level as Rome, making it a great power. I don't think that you can handle it.

Both Ik and Novacom have told me that I can RP Persia. I have enough knowledge in NRPs to play a great power. Please don't try to block me from getting Persia, okay?

I have emphatically not told you you can RP as Persia, if that's what you thought after your tantrum last night then let this disabuse you of that notion.

[Tracian Empire]

The entire thing with the alliance between Rome and Persia started way back in the old threads. The initial thing with Islam began with Rome and the Neo-Akkadian Empire having kept the Muslims out initially. But the guy that created the Akkadians never really posted anything in the IC, so not much happened. I eventually annexed him, and I was planning to also annex Persia, before Ik joined and took it. At the time, Persia was in a pretty bad condition. There was a Korean supported Pirate Kingdom taking their shores, and it was surrounded by me, Russia, and China or India, I can't remember exactly. So, that's when the idea appeared, for Persia to take over the role that Akkadia had, and for this entire Eternal Peace thing. And if Ik will be taking Persia again, then I don't have any problem continuing it, and it will have happened historically no matter of who apps for Persia. Even if, up to this point, I have friendly relations with most of my neighbors.

Except for the Huns. Barbarians.

I'm not going to openly break this Eternal Peace or anything even if you app for it. But you should understand that since me and Ik never discussed it, it's not a military alliance. More like an old armistice. Because the Roman-Persian rivalry is still there, and what is going to happen depends on both nations. Persia as an example, might not be all that happy about the Romans owning Mesopotamia, and the Romans aren't going to give their port(s) to the Persian Gulf that easily.

Since I do trust Ik at least a little, I could have easily tried to go for friendlier relations and that alliance. But if you take it, I don't know. You're far too unpredictable, and I don't know how I would personally handle such an alliance. That's why it depends.

But my personal opinion is that just as you said. You're still learning about nation roleplays. Persia is a nation that historically, in this timeline, should be on the same level or nearly on the same level as Rome, making it a great power. I don't think that you can handle it.

Both Ik and Novacom have told me that I can RP Persia. I have enough knowledge in NRPs to play a great power. Please don't try to block me from getting Persia, okay?

I have all the right to my own personal opinion, I'm not trying to block anything, but I believe that your Omani app and all that came with it says enough.

[Seinlo]

If I can't do anything in this RP, and can't have any fun then there's no point in staying, I suppose. I would have liked the chance to have fun, but that doesn't seem to be possible because of certain events that occurred and changes that were implemented. Good bye, I guess :/

[The V O I D]

Dafuq I miss?

[Soviet Chernarus]

Reservation

Nation Name: Kingdom of Portugal
Territory: Portugal, Madeira, Azores, coast of Angola, coast of Mozambique, Lesser Sunda Islands, Northern Morocco, Ceuta, Luanda area, southern coast of Oman (I will make a map later)
#AltDiv (do not delete this, it's for keeping track of the apps)
*Note: Reservations will last for 48 hours

[Rygondria]

Full Nation Name : Konungsrkid Sutherland (The Kingdom of the Southlands in English
Majority/Official Culture : Southlander
Territorial Core : Netherlands,Northern Belgium, Mozambique
Territorial Claim : Belgium
Capital City : Brimarborg
Population : 12,000,000

Government Type : Monarchy
Government Ideology/Policies : Imperialism
Government Focus :[/[b] The Kingdom is focused on improving Southlander prestige across and establshing trade and colonies in Asia and Africa.
[b]Head of State : King Leo Helgisson
Head of Government : King Leo Helgisson
Government Description : The King wields absolute authority through strength not divine right, at any time the king proves himself to be weak he is liable to be replaced by a more stronger king, but that tradition is mainly not used anymore in favor of divine right be theoritically any man can accuse the king of weakness and challenge him to a duel for control of the Crown.

Majority/State Religion : Catholicism
Religious Description : The church is a well protected part of soutlandic culture and its churches are built in a mixture of Norwegian stave and a more modern design.

Economic Ideologies : Capitalism
Major Production : Steel, tulips, Coal, and fish
Economic Description : The Southlandic economy depends heavily on trade and industry, with trade being their specialty, it is said that they have on of the largest trade fleets in the world and are one of the largest manufacturers of steel in the world

Army Strength : A very well disciplined force tends to be very well equipped.
Army Weakness : Generalship based on nobility rather than merit so leaders tend to be a mixed bag of either being terrible to genius or somewhere in between.
Naval Strength : Has one of the best navies in the world with well trained sailors and admirals. Ships tend to be of high quality
Naval Weakness : Naval tactics are outdated and tend to lack behind those of similar naval strengths.
Further Military Description : The entire Southlandic army has about 45 thousand men and can be increased to about 80,000 if reserves are called up. The navy hast 25,000 sailors and can be increased to about 35,000 in the even of war.

National Goals : To Established a colonial empire, To Keep the Burundians and Germans from conquering the land.
National Issues : Modernization of Naval tactics, changing of Hereditary laws, The status of the Fleming minority.
National Figures of Interest :
King King Leo "Bronze Beard" Helgisson
Arruns Lucretius Octavianus (Known in the royal court simply as "The Eunch")
Crown Prince Leif Olavsson
National Ambition/Aspirations : The southlandic people desire to bring back the glory that was the Viking age to their kingdom, which includes victory over their Foes, Sutherlandic ships on every horizon, and colonies that can establish the legacy of the vikings across the world.

History : WIP

Comparison Points – Political :
Comparison Points – Cultural/Religious :
Comparison Points – Economy :
Comparison Points – Military :
Total Comparison Points used (10 Points MAX) : /10

[Tracian Empire]

Dafuq I miss?

A lot.

[Tracian Empire]

Reservation

Nation Name: Kingdom of Portugal
Territory: Portugal, Madeira, Azores, coast of Angola, coast of Mozambique, Lesser Sunda Islands, Northern Morocco, Ceuta, Luanda area, southern coast of Oman (I will make a map later)
#AltDiv (do not delete this, it's for keeping track of the apps)
*Note: Reservations will last for 48 hours

Mozambique is taken, but the rest is free, I think

[Rygondria]

Dafuq I miss?

A lot.

Ohhh yes alot, mostly arguments though.

[Tracian Empire]

A lot.

Ohhh yes alot, mostly arguments though.

Unfortunately.

But such is life.

[Soviet Chernarus]

Reservation

Nation Name: Kingdom of Portugal
Territory: Portugal, Madeira, Azores, coast of Angola, coast of Mozambique, Lesser Sunda Islands, Northern Morocco, Ceuta, Luanda area, southern coast of Oman (I will make a map later)
#AltDiv (do not delete this, it's for keeping track of the apps)
*Note: Reservations will last for 48 hours

Mozambique is taken, but the rest is free, I think

Is the Gold Coast/Ghana taken?

[Rygondria]

Ohhh yes alot, mostly arguments though.

Unfortunately.

But such is life.

Indeed
In a lighter note i found a photo for our enuch friend
http://www.aeroartinc.com/media/catalog ... 2/6252.jpg

[Tracian Empire]

Mozambique is taken, but the rest is free, I think

Is the Gold Coast/Ghana taken?

Yep, native state.

[Tracian Empire]

Unfortunately.

But such is life.

Indeed
In a lighter note i found a photo for our enuch friend
http://www.aeroartinc.com/media/catalog ... 2/6252.jpg

Looks good

[Rygondria]

Do romans still use togas in this timeline?

[Tracian Empire]

Do romans still use togas in this timeline?

Quite possible, though Western fashion has also been adopted.