Game 8

Jason wrote:Sorry, I think Richard must have sent me an incorrect version of the newspaper...in mine, the pirates have run away, towards Japan, from the warfleets of the Manchu empire...

I guess somebody decided the Wako pirates would be more fun/easier than one of the European ones. I'm thinking they're reconsidering now!

I'm sure they'll find the West Indies more to their liking now

The pirates have been scared off into Japanese waters and we would be happy to keep them there indefinitely but they will find the Manchu battle fleet ready and waiting if they should return.

Gunpowder & shot cost money you know! And Warships do not normally carry profitable loot!! A Pirate does not have to be scared to run away. Some would just call it good business practice.

As long as they continue to practice their good business elsewhere

Jason wrote:As long as they continue to practice their good business elsewhere

That seems unlikely. Unless they decide to try to go legitimate... Which would be interesting.

If G7 is any guide the possible options for "western" pirates wanting to go legit would seem to be:

1) Privateering
2) Start Own trade company/bank and arrange accidents for trade rivals
3) Go into politics

Do you think the WAKO have same opportunities?

Stuart Bailey wrote:If G7 is any guide the possible options for "western" pirates wanting to go legit would seem to be:

1) Privateering
2) Start Own trade company/bank and arrange accidents for trade rivals
3) Go into politics

Do you think the WAKO have same opportunities?

Given the insular nature of both the chinese and the japanese in period, I think that the Wako pirates (I assume it's them) have a relatively greater opportunity than the western pirates of going 'legit', though legit here is probably just focusing on smuggling rather than actual piracy, since trade is restricted in both major countries in the region. Those restrictions make it an area ripe for smugglers to make a killing without doing anything quite so offensive as actual piracy.

The Japanese historically hated dealing with the Europeans, so I can imagine a case could be made for the Wako pirates taking over the external trade concession provided they vacated japan and never came back (the japanese didn't want any foreign ideas to 'pollute' the purity of their people, so if you've left the country for any reason they don't want you back.) I think it would be a challenge to negotiate that, though. You'd probably have better luck getting trading rights in China by either legitimate lobbying or just bribing the local officials, and then setting up smuggling operations into Japan. Japan has a coastline and a ton of islands that is just perfect for smuggling, and japan had little naval resources historically to answer that problem. (my university degree was in japanese studies and I lived there for about 3 years, first as an exchange student and later for work).

It wouldn't be the same kind of quick fun that out-and-out piracy would bring, but I think there would be plenty of opportunity to build an interesting position if you wanted to take the position in that direction.

And, at this date, nobody has really started the opium trade, so that would be another option.

That's an interesting idea of taking the position forward Deacon

I agree, but I'd guess whoever is playing the Wako pirates isn't going to take it. Frankly if you wanted to take a more peaceful approach, why not just play Korea which isn't currently being run? You could do all the same things as above, plus you'd have an actual state as a base with recruits and the like.

Some people like the challenge perhaps, but if I wanted to try a smuggling position in the East, I'd pick up Korea and start from there.

You'd have much bigger problems getting trade contacts in Japan for smuggling, but those could be overcome with time and effort.

I suspect it was someone who simply assumed that in the Far East players hadn't been putting efforts into developing navies.

It will be interesting to see what they will do next...

Probably drop

Being a pirate is about picking on the weak and helpless, attacking battle fleets not so much.

The trick is to pick on the weak and helpless while avoiding the battle fleet, we do intend to make this difficult of course.

Or convince patriotic Chinese Sailors that the Manchu are a bunch of barbarian horse nomads who should be sent back to the steppe where they belong.

Another issue is what is the Japanese doing about all this, very quiet so far.
The pirates have taken a number of japanese vessels so they should have an interest in wiping them out. Unable or unwilling, that is the question.

Historically the Japanese were really weak on navy, though from the newspaper he's invested in enough to try to conquer Hokkaido properly.

My understanding is that the Ieyasu the founder of the Tokugawa Shogante divided up the daimyo lords into fudai daimyo (Inner Lords) who were Tokugawa Loyalists and the Tozama (outer Lords).

The Tozama being daimyo who had fought against the Tokugawa at Sekigahara or stayed neatral or were otherwise suspect.

For historic reasons many of these Tozama Lords such as the Shimazu from Satsuma came from the wertern Islands of Kyushu & Shikoku or Choshu & Skikoku (Western most provinces of Honshu) which have a greater maritime tradition than the Tokugawa heartlands. This tendancy was then reinfoced by the Shoghate doing land swaps which moved loyalists closer to Kyoto and moved daimyo it did not fully trust further away.

This means that Japans seafareing areas are not areas where the Shoganate is that strong and Kyushu etc is full of daimyo and other Samurai who in G8 the Shoghan needs to watch/keep busy in case they get ideas about having a go at an Imperial Restoration 150 years before their great great grandsons actually do the deed.

One historic solution is send them and their boats off to invade Korea but another way of keeping the peace at home is turning a blind eye to Kyushu based smuggling /illegal trade and even turning a blind eye to a bit of piracy. Its a bit like the government in London saving itself a lot of grief by not sending the "revenue" into the Highlands, the West Country, Ireland and the American colonies to break up illegal stiles and cider presses. llowing a handallowing v

True, but my sense of the game is that it isn't modeled at that level of detail.

I think you have to have honour problems or something before you have to deal with real insurrection issues typically, and most nation states have more centralized control to support playability than they did historically. Witness the centralized economy.

Deacon wrote:
True, but my sense of the game is that it isn't modeled at that level of detail.

I think you have to have honour problems or something before you have to deal with real insurrection issues typically, and most nation states have more centralized control to support playability than they did historically. Witness the centralized economy.

I agree with what Deacon posted with a couple of exceptions:

1) When you have players who so carefully research their position that they want to deal with historic problems the GM is not even throwing at them...........The RKL is a good example of this type of player.

2) When you have a "dodgy" player running a major position who wants to hurt his trade rivals by the use of pirates which he can deny all knowledge off.......such players are normally North Africans or Dutch but Japan would make a good position for the type of player who enjoys being "Mild Mannered Shogan and master of courtly Poety by day.........Wako by Night." Putting up a smoke screen of reported attacks on own shipping used to be a popular tactic.

3) When a position is divided amongst several players some of whom are rebels, potential rebels or pirates and if the central government stamps on them hard that Govt player could then have lots of problems. A good example of this is the British Empire in G7 where we seem to have active - a) Central Government B) Jacobite rebels.....fond of piracy C) HWIC ex pirates turned Merchants D) Blackbeard - not a ex pirate E) Sons of Liberty.

Stuart Bailey wrote:

Deacon wrote:
True, but my sense of the game is that it isn't modeled at that level of detail.

I think you have to have honour problems or something before you have to deal with real insurrection issues typically, and most nation states have more centralized control to support playability than they did historically. Witness the centralized economy.

I agree with what Deacon posted with a couple of exceptions:

1) When you have players who so carefully research their position that they want to deal with historic problems the GM is not even throwing at them...........The RKL is a good example of this type of player.

2) When you have a "dodgy" player running a major position who wants to hurt his trade rivals by the use of pirates which he can deny all knowledge off.......such players are normally North Africans or Dutch but Japan would make a good position for the type of player who enjoys being "Mild Mannered Shogan and master of courtly Poety by day.........Wako by Night." Putting up a smoke screen of reported attacks on own shipping used to be a popular tactic.

3) When a position is divided amongst several players some of whom are rebels, potential rebels or pirates and if the central government stamps on them hard that Govt player could then have lots of problems. A good example of this is the British Empire in G7 where we seem to have active - a) Central Government B) Jacobite rebels.....fond of piracy C) HWIC ex pirates turned Merchants D) Blackbeard - not a ex pirate E) Sons of Liberty.

Well, I can personally attest that I believe that my play style of roleplaying with my ministers just caused me problems, so I stopped doing it. So my personal experience is that going into more detail isn't always a good idea. Maybe the extra level of detail grants you more benefits to offset the extra problems, but all I saw in that particular case was the downside. It was frustrating because I was having fun doing the roleplay, but I'd rather have ministers who follow direct orders, so....

It is certainly possible that the Japanese are secretly backing the pirates, but it would be out of character for the Japanese, and I'd expect his ministers would absolutely hate it. Soiling your noble samurai self with piracy? Certainly subterfuge was accepted in some instances, but I'd think backing pirates would just be out of bounds for a Shogun. Much less so a western power where the idea is just a step forward from letters of marque and all that. (not that you were necessarily suggesting that the Wako are backed by the Japanese, just that that development would certainly surprise me based on my knowledge of the culture.)

I've been thinking a bit about this and it does seem odd to me that all the pirates seized in Chinese waters were fishing boats. Whilst barbarians are, quite wisely, not allowed to trade with Manchuria (they would all commit suicide at the thought of having to leave such a paradise to return to their own unworthy lands...clearly...so we're just doing them a favour), there are a fair number of Manchurian merchants ploughing the seas, as well as Korean and other Chinese provinces.

On the plus side, if the pirates come back, at least the smell of rotting fish will give them away

Warning, may contain nuts

Hmmm...looks like G8 has another outbreak of pirates...

Give it a good scrub, put some cream on & it should clear up in a few days.

very good

And more slave raid by the Don Cossacks!

G8 may not have the 'big war' of G7 but it does seem to have a lot more disorder in it