|
Koramei posted:Provinces are in history\provinces but you change terrain in map\terrain.txt Cool, I'm gonna make cilicia a farmland and add cotton to Egypt. Maybe even make whatever the places that aren't called Khartoum farmlands too. My nile empire Will out develop those Antolian assholes
|
#
?
Jul 12, 2015 19:52
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 12, 2024 21:37 |
|
|
Fuligin posted:I don't mind burgundian inheritance because it fires rarely enough that it's an actual interesting twist when it does. The Dutch revolts, similarly, I havent noticed occurring at all since CS dropped. If all these myriad historical surprises could arise through basic game mechanics that would be beautifully elegant, but I don't think the utility of DHEs as ways of keeping the game interesting during the flow of endless player expansion should be discounted. It's what makes the Reformation mechanics great, and why I think a similar macro-mechanic for national revolutions in the late game would be a great addition. It's not that the concept of DHEs is bad, it's that the kind people keep mentioning here isn't interesting. The Burgundian Inheritance currently just hands the emperor a bunch of really rich provinces with 0 autonomy that they have no difficulty holding on to. The Netherlands almost never become part of Spain at any point and they rarely become independent., so it's doing a very poor job of simulating a historical event and can just fire and kill a major power at random. The Ottomans have a bunch of missions to tear up the Mamluks anyway, and they manage to do it with reasonable consistency, so a DHE to annex them immediately just speeds up the process at the cost of weird railroading and deleting a major power.
|
|
#
?
Jul 12, 2015 20:08
|
|
|
Yashichi posted:It's not that the concept of DHEs is bad, it's that the kind people keep mentioning here isn't interesting. The Burgundian Inheritance currently just hands the emperor a bunch of really rich provinces with 0 autonomy that they have no difficulty holding on to. The Netherlands almost never become part of Spain at any point and they rarely become independent., so it's doing a very poor job of simulating a historical event and can just fire and kill a major power at random. The Ottomans have a bunch of missions to tear up the Mamluks anyway, and they manage to do it with reasonable consistency, so a DHE to annex them immediately just speeds up the process at the cost of weird railroading and deleting a major power. played around with a Mameluke start last night and dear god they have like 4x the starting troops as I do. They don't need help.
|
|
#
?
Jul 12, 2015 20:10
|
|
|
looking around more and it looks like colonial trade goods don't come from the colonial_region.txt as that's only for random new world, but comes from tradegoods.txt, where they have reigions defined where the tradegood event will trigger. that's a much bigger pain in the rear end to mod. And I still can't find where the tradegoods for actual non colonial provinces are defined.
|
|
#
?
Jul 12, 2015 20:37
|
|
|
Yashichi posted:It's not that the concept of DHEs is bad, it's that the kind people keep mentioning here isn't interesting. The Burgundian Inheritance currently just hands the emperor a bunch of really rich provinces with 0 autonomy that they have no difficulty holding on to. The Netherlands almost never become part of Spain at any point and they rarely become independent., so it's doing a very poor job of simulating a historical event and can just fire and kill a major power at random. The Ottomans have a bunch of missions to tear up the Mamluks anyway, and they manage to do it with reasonable consistency, so a DHE to annex them immediately just speeds up the process at the cost of weird railroading and deleting a major power. The bigger problem with the Netherlands events is that it's a quick fix for the fact that once you've conquered + cored (+ converted where necessary) some territory and separatism has gone away it never revolts ever again without events interfering or gigantic amounts of WE. This is obviously dumb and bad from a historical perspective; as an earlier post mentioned, local autonomy is a really interesting game concept for making large (and especially multiethnic / multifaith) states appropriately difficult to manage efficiently and potentially unruly, but nothing is done with it. There should be some degree of balancing going on all the time between local autonomy and RR and reaching 0% should be a big deal that rarely happens in large states outside of the capital, but I really don't know how to make this happen without just throwing events at poo poo. Here's my "I thought about this for 5 minutes and it might be interesting" suggestion: make local autonomy reduce RR in and of itself, and give all provinces a baseline +RR to compensate for it, then remove / change the RR effect from clicking the more / less autonomy button. In this way, as you suck more and more out of each province (which conceptually represents minor increases in efficiency of government, new local taxes and laws, etc.) they will gradually get more pissed off at you until there's either a revolt or you give in and give them back some local control. Of course this doesn't hit larger states any worse than small ones other than causing a lot of micromanaging so it's obviously not a good idea without some serious work but I thought the concept was interesting and somewhat reminiscent of EU3's Centralisation / Decentralisation slider. RabidWeasel fucked around with this message at 20:45 on Jul 12, 2015 |
|
#
?
Jul 12, 2015 20:39
|
|
|
I accidentally ran a vanilla observer game last night (meant to test a mod but forgot and didn't notice it wasn't on) which ended up with the Ottomans well-off (they even controlled Rome!) and Russia having nice borders.   Maybe that game was just lucky or something?  It's kind of tempting to just run vanilla observer games every night for like a week, take shots of the map at the end and then overlay all the results and see what the most common elements are.
|
|
#
?
Jul 12, 2015 20:46
|
|
|
Uggghhh. I need so much help is there a map anywhere of regions so I don't have to boot eu
|
|
#
?
Jul 12, 2015 20:55
|
|
|
Poil posted:So my Ternate game ended up with the Aspiration for Liberty and I turned into a republic. A constitutional republic. Which requires 26 seats. That's +52% cost of increasing stability. It took me a while to figure out where the button was to assign seats but in retrospect it's almost obvious it would be up in the corner where you assign a new capital or trade collection center. Gold provinces are anything but crappy. You just need to manage your inflation better.
|
|
#
?
Jul 12, 2015 21:05
|
|
|
PrinceRandom posted:Uggghhh. I need so much help is there a map anywhere of regions so I don't have to boot eu
|
|
#
?
Jul 12, 2015 21:20
|
|
|
Is it me or is Hesse becoming the emperor with strange frequency?
|
|
#
?
Jul 12, 2015 21:27
|
|
|
Jsor posted:Is it me or is Hesse becoming the emperor with strange frequency? Saxony and the Palatinate for me. The first 1.13 patch had Bohemia as emperor constantly but that seems to have died down some with further hotfixes though they still do it occasionally. Until the AI gets changed to prioritise allying electors the current system is always going to favour the Elector monarchies.
|
|
#
?
Jul 12, 2015 21:35
|
|
|
Jsor posted:Is it me or is Hesse becoming the emperor with strange frequency? Yeah seems fairly common. It's usually Austria, Bohemia, or Hesse in my games.
|
|
#
?
Jul 12, 2015 21:35
|
|
|
I'm Holland. Navarra just asked me for military access, they don't have any enemies or allies near me. 
|
|
#
?
Jul 12, 2015 21:47
|
|
|
I reunited the Pentarchy as Russia and was disappointed to find out that not much happened, since it's such a big deal in CK2. Oh well.
|
|
#
?
Jul 12, 2015 21:55
|
|
|
Anybody tried for the Tunis achievements recently? I see Castile regularly get curbstomped and broken, I was thinking of going for Sons of Carthage or maybe Re-Reconquista as Granada.
|
|
#
?
Jul 12, 2015 21:58
|
|
|
I am probably the strongest advocate for historical outcomes here. I find it way more fun to play a minor power if the majors are doing their historical thing.Yashichi posted:It's not that the concept of DHEs is bad, it's that the kind people keep mentioning here isn't interesting. The Burgundian Inheritance currently just hands the emperor a bunch of really rich provinces with 0 autonomy that they have no difficulty holding on to. The Netherlands almost never become part of Spain at any point and they rarely become independent., so it's doing a very poor job of simulating a historical event and can just fire and kill a major power at random. The Ottomans have a bunch of missions to tear up the Mamluks anyway, and they manage to do it with reasonable consistency, so a DHE to annex them immediately just speeds up the process at the cost of weird railroading and deleting a major power. The 0 autonomy thing definitely is a problem, but you need DHEs to ever create these sorts of situations. It might be better if there was a more detailed dynastic system to model the collapse of Burgundy, but Johan had stated multiple times that we won't see that kind of interaction in EU4, because that's a CK thing. I'd say the Burgundian Inheritance could use some work, but it's still a vital piece of the game. As for the Ottomans, they really do need the speed up. They played a dominant role in European politics, and they won't be able to play that role if they have to slowly grind down the Mamluks. Their weakness is then made more severe by the old issue if the AI committing 100% of their strength to every war they fight.
|
|
#
?
Jul 12, 2015 21:58
|
|
Yes, it's like a lava lamp.
|
Ofaloaf posted:I accidentally ran a vanilla observer game last night (meant to test a mod but forgot and didn't notice it wasn't on) which ended up with the Ottomans well-off (they even controlled Rome!) and Russia having nice borders. French Iceland is the weirdest thing about that map
|
|
#
?
Jul 12, 2015 22:01
|
|
|
ZombieLenin posted:Gold provinces are anything but crappy. You just need to manage your inflation better.
|
|
#
?
Jul 12, 2015 22:11
|
|
|
Poil posted:No, gold provinces for colonial nations are terrible and continuously throw treasure fleets at you that increases your inflation (even if the gold income is low enough that you wouldn't have any inflation if the mines were in your nation). Getting economic ideas is not always viable and certainly isn't fun to be forced to take. Master of the mint is unreliable at best, too much rng and I don't want to spend several treasure fleets worth of cash to dismiss advisors and maybe get one. Certainly not since even if the correct advisor shows up he might just be a crappy level 1 or an overly expensive level 3. There is also the papal inflation reduction, if you're catholic.
|
|
#
?
Jul 12, 2015 22:30
|
|
|
Tsyni posted:There is also the papal inflation reduction, if you're catholic. That's interest
|
|
#
?
Jul 12, 2015 22:36
|
|
|
PittTheElder posted:I am probably the strongest advocate for historical outcomes here. I find it way more fun to play a minor power if the majors are doing their historical thing. The actual Burgundian Inheritance was more like a succession war between France and Austria than the weird partition that we have now, and since that system already exists in the game the event is redundant and weird. If we have to have it then it would be more interesting to have a rare event that can break up European Christian countries in general among their royal marriage partners; it's not as though Burgundy is the only country this could have happened to, nor was it a sure thing in 1444 that the Inheritance would even happen the way it did. Maybe let Austria get their mission to PU Burgundy much earlier. Similarly, the Ottoman missions put them in a great place to achieve their historical borders without hand-holding. They don't have problems conquering the Mamluks in a timely fashion and they regularly swallow the Balkans unless they end up at war with several other majors, which is how that should play out anyway. The Iberian wedding is also stupid and should probably be replaced with something better, since Aragon typically rivals Castile and shouldn't be content to fuse with them. The mission system is pretty good at getting major powers to go where they should, and more general events like "The [X country] Inheritance" or "Failed State Annexed" would add those kind of historical shakeups without forcing the same poo poo to happen every game.
|
|
#
?
Jul 12, 2015 22:43
|
|
|
PrinceRandom posted:That's interest It's inflation and interest. And it lasts 20 years, which is fairly decent for 50 papal influence.
|
|
#
?
Jul 12, 2015 22:56
|
|
|
Tsyni posted:There is also the papal inflation reduction, if you're catholic. 
|
|
#
?
Jul 12, 2015 23:08
|
|
|
 Good job, guys! Go get that OPM!
|
|
#
?
Jul 12, 2015 23:12
|
|
|
Jsor posted:
|
|
#
?
Jul 12, 2015 23:16
|
|
|
They were taking max 5% attrition so a lot of troops were dying. Only Austria was smart enough to move their army off that thing.
|
|
#
?
Jul 12, 2015 23:18
|
|
|
Yashichi posted:The actual Burgundian Inheritance was more like a succession war between France and Austria than the weird partition that we have now, and since that system already exists in the game the event is redundant and weird. If we have to have it then it would be more interesting to have a rare event that can break up European Christian countries in general among their royal marriage partners; it's not as though Burgundy is the only country this could have happened to, nor was it a sure thing in 1444 that the Inheritance would even happen the way it did. Maybe let Austria get their mission to PU Burgundy much earlier. That said, it's not like the Burgundian Inheritance is destined to always be a French/Austrian split, it can go to other emperors too, or the French entirely, or even be split with some other European power. Not actually sure if there is a decision/event for this, but maybe if Burgundy had the possibility of creating a full independent kingdom with the backing of the HRE? This would then prevent any further non-generic inheritance, preserving Burgundy as a foil to the French until the French kill it manually.
|
|
#
?
Jul 12, 2015 23:25
|
|
|
Yashichi posted:The actual Burgundian Inheritance was more like a succession war between France and Austria than the weird partition that we have now, and since that system already exists in the game the event is redundant and weird. If we have to have it then it would be more interesting to have a rare event that can break up European Christian countries in general among their royal marriage partners; it's not as though Burgundy is the only country this could have happened to, nor was it a sure thing in 1444 that the Inheritance would even happen the way it did. Maybe let Austria get their mission to PU Burgundy much earlier. There's no system in-game that can partition things like that though, because peace treaties are one-sided (you can either give or take, not both). A succession war under the current rules would end up with either France or the Emperor getting everything, not a split.
|
|
#
?
Jul 12, 2015 23:31
|
|
|
A Buttery Pastry posted:Burgundy wasn't just another country though, it was an overgrown French fief which expanded into HRE lands. I'm not sure what other countries could realistically be split due to being in different "jurisdictions". Not kingdoms at least, though adding similar events for other dukes might make sense. Having HRE duchies possibly just split up without being absorbed by another country wouldn't be too bad either. That's what Charles the Bold tried to do, and it would be nice to have a decision for it. But only the French parts of Burgundy were partitioned due to being fiefs, the Habsburgs got the rest through marriage (and had to fight France for it) so it's weird that the emperor always gets the rest, especially since Austria usually rivals Burgundy.
|
|
#
?
Jul 12, 2015 23:39
|
|
|
Apoffys posted:There's no system in-game that can partition things like that though, because peace treaties are one-sided (you can either give or take, not both). A succession war under the current rules would end up with either France or the Emperor getting everything, not a split. Those were two separate possibilities. We could replace the BI with a succession war, or devise an event chain that does something like the BI but isn't limited to that tag at a particular time.
|
|
#
?
Jul 12, 2015 23:41
|
|
|
I have a regency council (Interregnum) as Byzantium. And my heir died. It's been this way for quite some time now. I'm going to get an heir, right...? e: Great. It's a loving von Hapsburg. Node fucked around with this message at 00:00 on Jul 13, 2015 |
|
#
?
Jul 12, 2015 23:50
|
|
|
Yay! Ethiopia play through ruined by me not paying attention and war decing the Malmuks during a truce. Yay -3 stability, internal conflicts, and having 167 AE with the Ottomans. Time to start over and not be stupid... Again.
|
|
#
?
Jul 13, 2015 00:07
|
|
|
Changing all these tradegood regions is making me want to make some random events like POP for vicky 2 that can change non colonial goods.
|
|
#
?
Jul 13, 2015 00:09
|
|
|
A Buttery Pastry posted:I don't think I recall Muscovy ever not being weak. They seem to have a lot of trouble building up a stable power base from which to expand, and then just get beaten up occasionally by their neighbors. I wonder actually, is the current religious/cultural setup historically justified? Because having some Orthodox Russians in the northern parts of the Golden Horde territory might help Muscovy hang on to it if it manages to grab it, plus weaken the Golden Horde. Alternatively, those territories should have a decision associated with them which allows Muscovy/Russia to turn them Russian and Orthodox, sorta like it has for St. Petersburg. loving forever ago during my Byzantine/Restored Empire play through I stopped paying attention to Muscovy for a long time. So I was totally caught by surprise when the war dec from Russia and the endless stream of infantry came. This was end game and didn't really ruin anything other than my personal goal of restoring the entire empire.
|
|
#
?
Jul 13, 2015 00:11
|
|
|
Node posted:I have a regency council (Interregnum) as Byzantium. And my heir died. 
|
|
#
?
Jul 13, 2015 00:11
|
|
|
ZombieLenin posted:Yay! Ethiopia play through ruined by me not paying attention and war decing the Malmuks during a truce. Yay -3 stability, internal conflicts, and having 167 AE with the Ottomans. There should be and "are you sure?" popup for that.
|
|
#
?
Jul 13, 2015 00:14
|
|
|
Also, one thing I really want is a flag warning that you have a stationary navy taking attrition. I've lost 10s of thousands of gold worth of fleets that have died because I left them somewhere out of supply range.
|
|
#
?
Jul 13, 2015 00:15
|
|
|
Do any of the UI mods fix the issue where you can't see things because the list goes off the screen with no scroll? I have no idea what the ship composition is there, aside from there's 60 ships. Also, what's the deal with the blockade text there? 
|
|
#
?
Jul 13, 2015 00:38
|
|
|
Got all the colony trade goods equalized and I'm gonna try a mix of dei gratia and EVE
|
|
#
?
Jul 13, 2015 00:41
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 12, 2024 21:37 |
|
|
It is really relaxing to go into observe mode, put into the console "bearhaslanded" and just watch Jan Mayen go to work. It is also pretty funny to see them declare on someone they clearly cannot reach, for example, my Jan Mayen landed in Baluchistan. They took all of the Timurids, half of India and most of Egypt. So naturally for their next point of expansion they declared on Poland, who they have absolutely no path to and no hope of fighting. In a failed observation earlier, they spawned in the Aztec region, expanded a bit, then declared on the Kalmar Union. In 1451.
|
|
#
?
Jul 13, 2015 00:44
|
|