GGG vs 7years war vs 18 century.

Which one you like more? And why?

18th century was one of the first scenarios I played and holds a nostalgic place in my heart.

GGG is fun but it is too predictable imo.

7 years (in Europe) is a clusterfuck of spam or (in asia/america) a lot of allyfagging.

18th century>GGG>7 Year War imo

Geschrieben von KYBL, 30.12.2013 at 13:35

18th century>GGG>7 Year War imo

Geschrieben von Tundy, 30.12.2013 at 00:35

Which one you like more? And why?

Both, Unleashed. You are amazing in every way.

My opinion is biased.

Anything tik toks <

I don't know about others but GGG is historically inaccurate.

Geschrieben von Roncho, 01.01.2014 at 15:09

I don't know about others but GGG is historically inaccurate.

GGG is alternative history

I didn't know that, thanks

Best excuse for inaccurate maps lol

Geschrieben von Solair, 02.01.2014 at 16:54

Best excuse for inaccurate maps lol

Exactly what I said when looking over GGG's description. No surprise that Tunder would take the easy way out though.

Geschrieben von Utah, 02.01.2014 at 23:23

Geschrieben von Solair, 02.01.2014 at 16:54

Best excuse for inaccurate maps lol

Exactly what I said when looking over GGG's description. No surprise that Tunder would take the easy way out though.

Well historically speaking he would not be able to have colonial Africa and a colonial America at the same time, also Japan should not have Korea and Manchuria but he gave Japan it anyway for balance purposes.

Basically you can't make a full world balanced colonial historical scenario.

Geschrieben von Meester, 03.01.2014 at 07:24

Geschrieben von Utah, 02.01.2014 at 23:23

Geschrieben von Solair, 02.01.2014 at 16:54

Best excuse for inaccurate maps lol

Exactly what I said when looking over GGG's description. No surprise that Tunder would take the easy way out though.

Well historically speaking he would not be able to have colonial Africa and a colonial America at the same time, also Japan should not have Korea and Manchuria but he gave Japan it anyway for balance purposes.
Basically you can't make a full world balanced colonial historical scenario.

Any thing is possible

Geschrieben von Meester, 03.01.2014 at 07:24

Geschrieben von Utah, 02.01.2014 at 23:23

Geschrieben von Solair, 02.01.2014 at 16:54

Best excuse for inaccurate maps lol

Exactly what I said when looking over GGG's description. No surprise that Tunder would take the easy way out though.

Well historically speaking he would not be able to have colonial Africa and a colonial America at the same time, also Japan should not have Korea and Manchuria but he gave Japan it anyway for balance purposes.

Basically you can't make a full world balanced colonial historical scenario.

He is still using it as an excuse to not do research on the era. Labeling it as "alternative history" means he should do actual research on his divergent point in history and see its effects on the world. Instead he just uses it as a tool to change the world however he feels like doing so without even thinking about the historical aspect of it. It is less alternative history and more fantasy.