|
Hashim posted:And with that, yet another sultan dies prematurely That's a good Byzblob. Also: why is Italy a snake?
|
#
¿
Feb 19, 2017 20:09
|
|
Because the chapter was cut short, and we’re coming up on another hundred years, here’s a world map:
|
|
| # ¿ May 3, 2024 16:29 |
|
|
Hitlers Gay Secret posted:If I recall, you can't take any territories when a Crusade/Jihad/Holy War is called on you. In CK2 you can never take land in a defensive war, only in offensive ones.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 28, 2017 19:01
|
|
|
Flavius Belisarius posted:Which LP was that again? Grey Hunter's Ghana LP
|
|
#
¿
Apr 11, 2017 23:18
|
|
|
B C B B A
|
|
#
¿
Apr 28, 2017 07:56
|
|
|
Slaan posted:Things never end up well for native Americans I guess Read ByzLP, it has the Haida and Ayiti as Great Powers throughout the entire LP.
|
|
#
¿
May 3, 2017 14:57
|
|
|
 New Taifas for now.
|
|
#
¿
May 5, 2017 18:29
|
|
|
I propose that we disinherit our current heir as soon as we are at 0 prestige. The single most important thing in the game is keeping up in mil tech, so far we've had a 0 and a 1 mil ruler, another 1 mil ruler will ensure we fall behind even further.
|
|
#
¿
May 16, 2017 11:10
|
|
|
Lord Cyrahzax posted:I agree with the sentiment here, but we must go further: Most of this isn't something that can really be done easily. Building barracks can of course be done, but is at odds with keeping a solid cash reserve. Expanding the army is useless if we're behind in mil tech (especially if it's a tactics tech, like we currently are), all we're going to do is feed more men into the meat grinder and accumulate more war exhaustion. Recruiting better officers is luck of the draw and costs mil points and as such is directly at odds with investing more into tech. And it didn't seem like our wise sultan wasn't already investing all our mil points into tech and generals, so in the end this proposal would not actually do that much towards making us competitive with France again. Instead we need to increase the amount of mil points we get monthly, so I ask the taifas to reconsider their votes and vote in favor of disinheriting our 1 mil heir.
|
|
#
¿
May 16, 2017 14:48
|
|
|
 Switching to the Ulama
|
|
#
¿
May 19, 2017 10:31
|
|
|
What are our accepted cultures right now?
|
|
#
¿
May 20, 2017 16:08
|
|
|
Hashim posted:Only Andalusian, our primary culture. OK, thanks! I'll propose the Conversion Preparation Act Which will instruct our sultan to add the two cultures with the most development in our states to the list of accepted cultures (this should be Portuguese and Castilian) This will not only increase our income from this region and reduce the revolt risk there, but it will also prepare the area for conversion at a later date. VVVVV in that case, I retract my proposal sheep-dodger fucked around with this message at 17:56 on May 20, 2017 |
|
#
¿
May 20, 2017 17:44
|
|
|
Hashim posted:On that last part, I'm going to be treating Accepted Cultures as actual accepted cultures, like the Ottoman millets. That means no religious conversion or culture conversion to cultures that have been accepted. Do we have +Tolerance of heathens coming up in our NIs somewhere like vanilla granada? Because otherwise we'll definitely have to pick up either Religious or Humanism at some point.
|
|
#
¿
May 20, 2017 18:01
|
|
|
Just some comments on the gameplay effects of each proposal:Soup du Jour posted:
paragon1 posted:
Luhood posted:Hmm, you're right. This has to end somewhere, and fast! Hashim: don't know if you want to give it away, but do we have a +tolerance to heathens idea coming up in our national ideas similar to vanilla Granada?
|
|
#
¿
May 24, 2017 23:15
|
|
|
Frionnel posted:Accepting cultures makes no difference on the difficulty of converting, by the way. Maybe the rule of no conversions at all unless the Ulema is dominant will be a bit too punishing in the long term, until we can at least adopt humanism. yes it does, since we're not in the same culture groups as the Iberians. Non-accepted cultures in a different group have a -2% reduction in conversion speed. Not that this really matters, since Hashim has said that he's not going to convert accepted cultures at all. Also: I'm declaring for the Loyalists 
|
|
#
¿
May 31, 2017 21:15
|
|
|
Loyalists
|
|
#
¿
Jun 8, 2017 19:15
|
|
|
Ulama
|
|
#
¿
Jul 11, 2017 00:05
|
|
|
Ralepozozaxe posted:Aw man, when did they add that. Though really, I probably wouldn't build much there anyways unless i could boost gold production. it's been in for quite a while. And you definitely want to build manufactories there if you can afford it, for that sweet, sweet trade income
|
|
#
¿
Jul 20, 2017 00:15
|
|
|
A The Sultan
|
|
#
¿
Jul 31, 2017 08:39
|
|
|
I'll join the Taifas
|
|
#
¿
Aug 8, 2017 23:00
|
|
|
I will propose the Homeland Security Act - develop level 24 mil tech asap - Build max level Fortresses in Navarra, Wasqah and Jabal Tariq - build level 2 fortresses in Evora, Qunka and Liyun and scrap the other smaller fortresses on the peninsula The large fortresses will make sure we have strong fortifications at every entrance to the Iberian peninsula and in the best possible defensive terrain, securing the peninsula for ourselves as long as the navy holds our coasts. (Forts in mountain provinces are an amazing defence) The smaller fortresses will control the countryside and make sure that in the case of rebellion, order is quickly restored. (the Zone of Control exerted by forts massively increases the speed at which devastation is reduced, thus helping to keep our provinces productive) I will also suggest to my colleagues among the traders and in the ulema that taking an administrative idea group while we are not even halfway through filling out Humanism and also need at least another 450 admin points to reduce our inflation might not be the best option, as progress would be incredibly slow, Maritime might be more useful, as it allows us to grow our navy further to directly compete with both Morocco and the Gaelic Empire. In case any of my colleagues are considering what to propose in their legislation, it might also be prudent to dishinherit our current heir, as he is not up to the task of leading a modern state. sheep-dodger fucked around with this message at 00:33 on Aug 10, 2017 |
|
#
¿
Aug 9, 2017 23:56
|
|
|
Dance Officer posted:It's actually not a tough decision at all. We need morale, force limit and unit cost reductions. But morale most of all. What I suggest we do is to take defensive ideas I would generally agree, but we are behind on mil tech and still have two ideas of Offensive left to finish:   we also have a 4/1/1 coming up as the next sultan, unless a faction decides they want to use an instruction to get him disinherited. I would generally advise people not to vote for another administrative idea group though, even if getting innovative sounds nice on paper. For those of you who are not as familiar with the game, here's why: Humanism, administrative and innovative are all idea groups whose ideas you buy by paying for them with administrative power points. What does admin power do?
If we pick up another administrative idea group, every time we have to chose between either advancing the new group, advancing Humanism (and there's some life-saving poo poo coming up for us there, we want to get the heretic tolerance at the end of the idea group as soon as possible), advancing our technology or conquering more stuff. (not to mention that we still need to reduce the 13 inflation we're sitting on) A second admin idea group will therefore not actually do much for us, as there are much better places to spend our admin points, and instead only block that idea group slot for the next decades without giving us any return on our investment. Instead we should pick up a diplomatic or military idea group (where I would probably prefer diplo, since we're ahead of time on tech there and military is still behind). If you guys want to increase our trade income, vote for trade, if you want to increase our naval power then vote for maritime, which will also help income through more light ships, if you want better armies, go for defensive. All of these will yield far better returns on investment and be more immediately helpful to us than going for another admin group
|
|
#
¿
Aug 10, 2017 09:18
|
|
|
RabidWeasel posted:He had 30 loving useless transport vessels in there so I'm going with this. The Celts probably also have more naval focused ideas.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 14, 2017 12:49
|
|
|
 Let's have peace and prosperity
|
|
#
¿
Oct 15, 2017 22:15
|
|
|
mcclay posted:
Agreed Though a lot of Iberia is already over 10 development, so you might want to put in a provision to improve provinces with 17 or 18 development to 20 sheep-dodger fucked around with this message at 09:08 on Oct 17, 2017 |
|
#
¿
Oct 17, 2017 09:03
|
|
|
RabidWeasel posted:Though obviously getting tons of autonomy in all your provinces ruined everything and you're probably never supposed to actually chose that event option. I mean -5 diprep isn't great, but way better than 15 autonomy in every single province
|
|
#
¿
Nov 6, 2017 21:37
|
|
|
Chatrapati posted:What sort of republic do revolutionaries usually cause? It's a little odd that they wouldn't always cause a revolutionary republic. Constitutional Republics. The thing with revolutionary republics is that it's usually confined to the target of the revolution, of which there can only be one.
|
|
#
¿
Nov 18, 2017 12:11
|
|
|
|
|
#
¿
Nov 23, 2017 02:58
|
|
|
Super Jay Mann posted:So if you could pinpoint one field battle where losing was backbreaking enough to start this downward spiral into international implosion which battle would it be? it wasn't any field battle, it was when Hashim kept clicking the "gain 15% autonomy" option in the time of troubles event to RP the continued focus on the war against France. So I blame the Taifas 
|
|
#
¿
Dec 20, 2017 14:12
|
|
|
Mr.Morgenstern posted:
Taifas! 
|
|
#
¿
Dec 21, 2017 12:10
|
|
|
Hashim posted:Yeah, I added a few decisions for the countries surrounding Serbia to become Revolutionary states if they invaded and defeated in a war. It had happened to Vakhtanis/Armenia, Hungary, and Bavaria, whilst Serbia became the Baltic Union after conquering Greece and Constantinople, before Morocco invaded them and forced them to release Greece. Serbia basically became the big baddie this day, after the Almoravids crushed Tirruni in the early years. 
|
|
#
¿
Jan 4, 2018 00:27
|
|
|
Hashim posted:Tirruni will have ambitions of his own for Iberia, and he's got an event chain to decide exactly how he wants to deal with it, but a resurgent al-Andalus will be quite powerful, so it's obviously something he wants to avoid. Not great news for the Majlis, but still, we'll burn that bridge when we come to it.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 19, 2018 03:17
|
|
|
Does Liege have its own national identity like in OTL, or do you think the fact that they didn't have their own empire means they could be subsumed into a German national identity?
|
|
#
¿
Jun 15, 2018 11:42
|
|
|
Dance Officer posted:They're probably Flemish or Dutch. Yeah, but the distinction in our time between German and Dutch is one that was built on the different polities that populations lived in, pre 19th century north German dialects are very close to Dutch and are only standardized into German after unification, so a Netherlands that doesn't have their foundational experience of fighting off the Spanish and building their own empire might well be folded into a German nation if that comes to pass.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 15, 2018 15:04
|
|
|
Hashim posted:I've taken a couple days off conversion work, but since I apparently like making maps, here's what the culture map is looking like at the start of vicky: If I could make some suggestions regarding the cultures in Germany and the Netherlands: A lot of those differences in OTL between Flemish, Dutch and North German are due to the different polities that those populations ended up in and their religions. The difference between Flemish and Dutch would for example be due to the Flemish being Catholic and the Dutch being Calvinists and before the homogenization of German as a language, the difference between Dutch and Northwest German would be a difference in religion (Lutheran vs Calvinists) and the separate history of the Dutch Empire. Those lines and polities are very different in this timeline though. Liege is lacking the imperial history of the Netherlands that sets them apart from the rest of the Germanic sphere, and they are Catholics surrounded by Protestants, so I'd fold the Flemish into Dutch, since according to the last religious map, the Flemish and the Dutch are both majority Catholic. The Northwest of OTL Germany is also Catholic in that screenshot, so I'd extend Dutch further east, and tie North German pops to Protestantism and Dutch pops to Catholicism. Wallonia is Protestant this time around, so I'd fold Wallonian and Picard into one culture, since Belgium doesn't exist to have them emerge as a separate identity. I'd also give Liege the Austria treatment, where they are not required to form Germany, but can join up or form it themselves (though a Hanover led Germany would want to keep them out, to avoid tilting the religious balance further in favour of Catholics, while a Bavaria led Germany would want to get them in for the opposite reason). So the tl;dr is that I'd line up cultures more along religious lines, since a lot of these identities are not yet firmly established at game start and were tied to religious identities for a long time.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 23, 2018 10:40
|
|
|
Do remember that our next ruling party will have to navigate the Springtime of Nations, so a vote for Imperialists is a vote for more liberalism. Plus, most of our income is still from agriculture, so while it may not be the best option for industry, it'll still not crater the nation. Plus: the Springtime rebellions might take one or both of our targets out of the Moroccan sphere, so I'd rather have a party in power that strikes while the iron is hot, especially Qattalun seems ripe for some revolts. Also: switching ruling party will probably change our Vizier (at least that how those events work in regular NNM), so we'd be rid of the guy that halves our infamy reduction.
|
|
#
¿
Jul 5, 2018 20:50
|
|
|
Yessod posted:Moderates please. Burn off the infamy, build up the industry, then we can jump in. For those of you voting Moderates for the infamy cooldown, consider that we currently have a grand vizier that halves our BB reduction, and if the Moderates stay in power, so will the Grand Vizier.
|
|
#
¿
Jul 6, 2018 09:17
|
|
|
Pakled posted:We can only hope that the Russian AI is too dumb to work out how to send troops en masse to Western Europe. Figuring out how to move troops all the way across Eurasia is the one thing V2 AI is good at.
|
|
#
¿
Jul 9, 2018 11:55
|
|
|
If you want colonies, you have to vote Imperialists in this election. Due to the time it takes to research and build the ports we need to claim African colonies it is imperative we do so in the 56-66 term. If we elect Imperialists next term there will simply not be any time to first research the port level techs and then upgrade the ports, which takes literally years. So unless you vote Imperialists now it's very unlikely we'll be able to grab a significant chunk of Africa.
|
|
#
¿
Jul 11, 2018 22:54
|
|
|
Mirdini posted:L-F is only really disastrous later in the game when you have a really large industrial base, as-is it might hurt us a bit but the benefit of getting commerce + naval techs should outweigh that. Yeah, this. L-F isn't great by any means, but consider that the price for not having it is not being set up for grabbing African colonies, which are great sources for resources (especially rubber, which will be the #1 resource come the 1910s) and markets for products. People are overstating how much laissez faire is going to hurt us.
|
|
#
¿
Jul 12, 2018 10:30
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ May 3, 2024 16:29 |
|
|
Another reason to vote Imperialist: We're still lacking the economy tech that gives us an invention with a full 50% farming efficiency bonus.
|
|
#
¿
Jul 12, 2018 19:58
|
|