gradenko_2000 posted:

Darkrenown posted that it's the per-day RP production of the conquered state * 365 days * 25% per military reform

If the state you just conquered produces 2 RP per day and you have 3 of the 4 military reforms, then that works out to 547.5 RP

Unfortunately I don't think there's really a way to peek into the RP production of any given state, so at best you have to just eyeball taking populated areas instead of tracts of desert.

gradenko_2000 posted:

Darkrenown posted that it's the per-day RP production of the conquered state * 365 days * 25% per military reform

If the state you just conquered produces 2 RP per day and you have 3 of the 4 military reforms, then that works out to 547.5 RP

Unfortunately I don't think there's really a way to peek into the RP production of any given state, so at best you have to just eyeball taking populated areas instead of tracts of desert.

Westminster System posted:

Westminster System posted:

Europe!

Africa!

Why am I not sleeping?









In further news, the USA is now the Commonwealth of Delaware, many slightly drunk giggles were had.

ThatBasqueGuy posted:

Looking good! I'd up the darkness on the Kingdom of Alexandria, it kinda blends in with the uncolonized territory, making it annoying to tell exactly what it owns.

Mister Bates posted:

This is looking really awesome, except for one thing, and that's having every nation on the planet named 'Republic of Blank' or 'Kingdom of Blank' or 'Empire of Blank'. It's fine for a few of them, but it looks like almost every single country uses that naming system, and it just looks kind of funky. Are you going to give countries unique names depending on government type?

Kersch posted:

Actually, I was thinking about this and it doesn't seem quite right. Even if another unciv was generating 10 RP per day, which would be huge, that would come out to 3650 RP for you if you had all 4 military reforms. I'm sure I've gotten far more than that for a conquest before without having all 4 of the conquest RP reforms, and I definitely wasn't conquering an unciv that produced that many research points per day.

uPen posted:

Yeah for reference Korea (which is one of the best nations to conquer for RP) produces 1.7 RP in 1836 which would give around 620 RP according to that formula. Even if Korea doubled its RP gain in the ~5-10 years it takes for Japan to get around to conquering them that formula is still off by an order of magnitude at a minimum. It would also mean that conquering an unciv state that had 0 or nearly 0 clergy would give no RP which I've never seen happen.

The Narrator posted:

Is there an "Observe" console command in EU3 similar to that in CK2? Where I could start a game, switch to observation mode or whatever and just see how it plays out?

Westminster System posted:

Europe!

Africa!

Why am I not sleeping?

DrProsek posted:

Yeah I think a HoD patch dropped the time for rebels to take over to like 2 months or something. It's annoying if you don't know about the change, but I kinda like it because now you actually see the AI fall to rebels more often. I often saw in games of V2 prior to the change every nation either was a rock of stability never falling to rebels, or being such a broken shattered mess that they get overthrown once a year. The change means a nation that isn't broken beyond repair can still have rebellions and can even still stay a GP after them.

I kinda hope that V2 gets another expansion, or (better) when V3 is made, Paradox makes a DLC themed around the Russian Civil War, and overhauling rebels for it. Large rebellions can form their own rebel nations and fight using regular nation AI instead of the simplistic "rush the capital" rebel AI, as the rebellion drags on soldiers start defecting to various sides, add in other nice stuff like maybe Anarcho-Liberal flags or maybe another government type, etc. It could lead to fun situations where the player's nation enters a giant civil war with multiple sides, the player goes with say the Communist rebels, they end up the smallest rebel faction due to defections, but by sitting out on the fighting and keeping their head down, the player is able to wait for the Fascist and Monarchist factions to grind eachother to dust before swooping in, and uniting the nation. I think this would be more V3 material, but I just think half the fun of Victoria 2 is fighting your own people .

Vivian Darkbloom posted:

The Russian Civil War seems way out of Vicky's league, to be honest. I think V2 could be overhauled (with another x-pack) to simulate the WWI land combat situation. But the rest of the war -- the history of revolt and repression in Tsarist Russia, the influence of new radical ideas, the social strains and contradictions of Russian politics, the confused fighting all throughout the former Russian empire, the international situation that led to the Allied interference in the war, and on & on -- would be very difficult to do in a decent way within the usual Paradox framework. I could maybe see a Clausewitz game just about Russia in 1917 doing a good job capturing the key dynamics, but it's hard to imagine that game getting made.

Westminster System posted:

Vivian Darkbloom posted:

The Russian Civil War seems way out of Vicky's league, to be honest. I think V2 could be overhauled (with another x-pack) to simulate the WWI land combat situation. But the rest of the war -- the history of revolt and repression in Tsarist Russia, the influence of new radical ideas, the social strains and contradictions of Russian politics, the confused fighting all throughout the former Russian empire, the international situation that led to the Allied interference in the war, and on & on -- would be very difficult to do in a decent way within the usual Paradox framework. I could maybe see a Clausewitz game just about Russia in 1917 doing a good job capturing the key dynamics, but it's hard to imagine that game getting made.

Westminster System posted:

Update time!

Vodos posted:

Are the EU4 pre-orders going well? Better than CK2? Was CK2 actually strong on pre-orders or did the game's main success come after release?

gradenko_2000 posted:

At least from what I remember of this thread, everyone was still cautious about pre-ordering CK2, wary of falling to the Paradox trend of games being lovely on release. It was after people discovered the demo and then the actual release that the game blew up because hey, it wasn't just playable, it was also really really good.

I feel like EU4 pre-orders are much stronger as a result of CK2 being so good on release.

Doctor Schnabel posted:

Yes that's great. Having more scenarios (or options in general) is always great. Same goes for that guy who was modding Cascadia a few pages back

DrProsek posted:

Eh, it's true that the game couldn't model every little detail of the RCW, but the idea isn't to perfectly replicate the RCW in Victoria 2, but to have civil wars that look more like the RCW did than the current system for rebellions be possible..... ...the point of the expansion wouldn't strictly speaking be to add a RCW simulator to the game, but to make it possible that revolts that are more like the RCW possible, while adding gameplay mechanics for other nations.

DrProsek posted:

Eh, it's true that the game couldn't model every little detail of the RCW, but the idea isn't to perfectly replicate the RCW in Victoria 2, but to have civil wars that look more like the RCW did than the current system for rebellions be possible. Like for example, having rebel nations using regular nation army AI all fighting eachother and the nation they're rebeling against instead of all rebels just blindly marching towards the capital with fascist and communist rebels working side by side, even helping eachother in battle. Sure, even in a game where Russia follows down the path it did historically and it ends up fighting a giant civil war it still won't end up modeling everything of the RCW, but just like how the AHD expansion didn't add slave revolts, reflect how utterly hosed a Confederate government would have been had the CSA actually gained independence just by the nature of the south's society and the government created by the CSA constitution, European intervention is kinda modeled but the decision that gets them to intervene relies on the CSA being in a position to stop exporting cotton to Europe, which wasn't the CSA's choice by 1862, and in turn the game doesn't really model the blockade that made the King Cotton decision moot, etc, the point of the expansion wouldn't strictly speaking be to add a RCW simulator to the game, but to make it possible that revolts that are more like the RCW possible, while adding gameplay mechanics for other nations.

Drone posted:

Fintilgin's classic Kingdom of Jerusalem mega-LP deserves a look.

Is Danimo's Texas LP lost to the sands of time?

DrProsek posted:

I like what you have going, but I can't help but feel Great Britain could use some breaking up. If I could make a suggestion: An independent Wales + Cornwall, call it the Celtic Union or something, give it a decision if it gets enough prestige to start trying to unite all Celtic peoples. I just think Great Britain with Southern Ireland instead of Northern Ireland could use more alt-history .

Little Abigail posted:

Reverse Ireland amuses me for some reason. I'm a bit confused at Gaza in South Africa though.

Also, Germany is looking scary big, especially with France weakened. It would be a fun country to play as, I'm thinking.

Pakled posted:

Is that an independent country controlling the Strait of Gibraltar? That's rad as hell.

Regarding the names, though, I don't like seeing a whole bunch of "Kingdom Ofs" in places like this picture you posted, it makes it a bit difficult to navigate lists like that. I think you should try to avoid having the title of a country come before its actual name as much as possible, unless there's some entity you'd like to have popularly referred to as "The Republic" or "The Kingdom." In real life, it makes sense for a map to have the USA labeled as "The United States of America" because it's widely referred to by that title, but world maps don't typically have "Republic of India" or "Kingdom of Denmark" on them.

I do like the idea of the world being polarized between republics and absolute monarchies, but I don't think it'd be too difficult to come up with more names that would easily identify a country as a monarchy or republic without resorting to the naming scheme "x of y" too much. You could give monarchies the "normal" names and make republics have more romantic or revolutionary sounding names, or republics could have the "normal" names while monarchies have more feudal-sounding names.

At the very least, it'd be nice to, in some cases, make it so the name of the country comes first and then the title. "Nile Republic" instead of "Republic of the Nile" sounds like a perfectly fine name to me, for instance.

To expand on the conflict being so polarizing, something big should happen when a great power becomes a constitutional monarchy. I don't have any particular idea for that, but since this scenario is built around a conflict between extremes, something interesting should probably happen when someone tries to compromise.

quadrophrenic posted:

Sorry, I feel a little out of the loop, but what's the story here? Is this that Srbja althistory mod I've been meaning to try out, or what?

It looks like an interesting world, I wanna know the backstory.

Westminster System posted:

At the moment, the Papal States controls the strait at the (greatly weakened) Spanish Crown's invitation. Gibraltar's British pop's were converted, mostly, to Italian, and theres some other italian pops there too. The Jews also keep their little enclave, as the Pope isn't in much of a position to argue. Obviously, I would probably change the name from The Papal States (leaving it as one of the options). The idea being they arn't too happy about the whole Rome being controlled by the Greeks.

Westminster System posted:

Well, I don't know how UBERAWESUM Britain will be without 99% of India and a few smatterings in the Carribean/Africa. I'll take the advice on board though and if GBR looks like it could use some shaking up, I'll work in some reasoning for a split.

Perhaps an Irish-Scottish alliance? Perhaps a Wales with half of England.. (oh god don't tempt me)


It amused me too, which is why it stayed in from the EU3 output. As for Gaza - that's from NNM, and has its basis in HISTORY™. NNM fills up Africa in an interesting way, and 90% of European one province colonies are now Hansa Colonies, but I'll be considering if theres more I can do to make it interesting.

Germany, once it has an army, will probably be GP#1. The main thing I'd like to present the German player with is 1) Russia doesn't like you 2) France and Lotharingia are meant to be allied and don't like you and of course, 3) There should be a lot of domestic dissent, possibly, if I knew how, resulting in a German Civil war and the outcome of that. Revolutionary Germany 100 years late? Could be a thing.


At the moment, the Papal States controls the strait at the (greatly weakened) Spanish Crown's invitation. Gibraltar's British pop's were converted, mostly, to Italian, and theres some other italian pops there too. The Jews also keep their little enclave, as the Pope isn't in much of a position to argue. Obviously, I would probably change the name from The Papal States (leaving it as one of the options). The idea being they arn't too happy about the whole Rome being controlled by the Greeks.

Indeed. I'll look into it once its done - Perhaps remove Kingdom of and make a fancy name for democracy if its a kingdom, and the reverse if that occurs as you suggest. Sounds like a good compromise idea. That way you know if good old absolutist Russia has flipped into hippy land. Another idea would be to fall back on, in the case of some places, Native Names - like Konigreich Deustchland, thoughts? In terms of say, "The Nile Republic" this name formatting is typically for the non-democratic republic type governments, so that's why you're not seeing them so much.

At the moment, theres only 3 Democracies in Europe, Poland, because Krakow, and will probably be changed, Ireland - because that legitimately makes sense in the vein of Irish independence, and the Hansa. Democracy is a term people tend to associate, in Europe, with violent rebellion or breakaway colonies. In terms of HMS Governments, there's 3? Off the top of my head - the UK, whose government changes came with turmoil in the colonies, Norway, because Norway and I believe New Normandy, which I feel is a nice little kingdom to have in NA. Obviously, switching from one extreme to another should create a stir, though we go into territory I'm not all that knowledgeable yet (events/decisions etc).


ZearothK's excellent Srbja mod is another, and just one of many inspirations.

This scenario is based off of "what happens when you play EU3 and mess with a few things" and then mixing in my own variations on things in the world. I'd like to do "spotlights" on countries in the future to give a better view on the world, but that'll come when I'm actually done with the map and pops.

Kersch posted:

I was trying the Serbia & Friends mod in multiplayer with someone and we both kept getting v2game.exe appcrash errors at the same time. Has anyone else had this problem? We never had any crashes with vanilla, only a couple of desyncs at worst.

edit: Ran it singleplayer for a while and got the same appcrash

Westminster System posted:

The short version: Norway should be reformed, Britain/Ireland/Germany should be protestant, as should Poland/Baltics.

Russia is Orthodox with the Byzantines, which Wallachia/Siebenburgen/Serbia should be too. Italians/Spain/France catholic, Lotharingia Protestant. Alexandria is orthodox and the Hansa are protestant. Hungary should probably be catholic german minority with a protestant/orthodox mix of Hungarians (60/40). Minorities will remain catholic. Croatia will be catholic.

UPDATE TIME. This is preliminary, I want feedback.

The Narrator posted:

Australia's well set up. I've always wanted, but unfortunately never really seen, a divided Australia. I think it would make a nice area for a few small squabbling states. Especially when they're so ethnically diverse! Australia could be a real sticking point in this timeline between the West, Mid-East and Far Eastern states. I assume Aoteroa is a Maori state?

China should probably be trimmed down, yep. The idea you've got at the moment sounds pretty good - the two competing monarchies could be good for breaking up the big yellow blob. Maybe give either the Republic or the alt-Monarchy some backup to reflect support from the West? I'm not sure how equal China is meant to be with Europe in this scenario, so a European-sponsored competitor state in China could make for a good dynamic. Alternatively, you could spin off some substates or such from China to set up some potential civil-war fuckery. Maybe introduce some colonial trading posts in Indochina or the East Indies?

Independent India looks like it'd be really fun to play if you could add some choices for India to align with a certain colonial power? Or you could just give events focused around India to cause conflict between the powers themselves.

Chief Savage Man posted:

I think you'd be better off removing 'of Arabia' and just calling it 'The Caliphate'. The demonym for Australia could be 'Caliphal'. Also I think China should be treated like it was historically but within the divides you've introduced. The resident monarchy could be under fire from foriegn-supported liberal democrats and conservative/reactionary monarchists, likely to align with their European co-ideologues.

Westminster System posted:

Any idea's for the name of a partially Manchu/Japanese minority Filipino Majority Philipines?