Home Trending Latest threads New posts Developer diaries

AGC-EEP Portugal and West Africa

Jump to latest Follow Reply
  • We have updated our Community Code of Conduct. Please read through the new rules for the forum that are an integral part of Paradox Interactive’s User Agreement.
Garbon said:
If that was the case, anyone who colonizes the province should get the boost...which I don't actually believe as that suggests a whole new way of dealing with colonization.
Click to expand...

How do you figure that? I don't follow your logic since the events would only apply to the nation that historically colonized that particular province. They shouldn't be generic to all nations.

The virtue here, as I see it, is that nothing happens unless there is already an existing colony present. Plus I really do like the dispersal event as it preserves the karmic balance.

Other example might be the French colonies around the Rio de la Plate, but this sort of thing will be easiest for the Portugese and Spanish since they were the first colonizers.
 
I don't see why only Portugal, let's say, should be qualified for a special population boost in a specific province...unless there was some policy only carried out by that nation that led to that specific increase. Otherwise, the notion of population addition is already covered by adding colonists, so I don't see why Portugal should get specific boons.
 
Submission #385 not included, I agree with Fodoron and Garbon.

About submission #386, I have some modifications for proposed POR_260049:
Code: 
event = {
	id = [COLOR=Yellow]338085[/COLOR]
	random = no
	trigger = {
		[COLOR=Red]owned = { province = 795 data = -1 } #Leone
		control = { province = 795 data = -1 } #Leone
		provincereligion = { province = 795 data = catholic } #Leone[/COLOR]
		[COLOR=Yellow]event = 260048 #POR: Settlement of El Mina[/COLOR]
	}
	random = no
	[COLOR=Yellow]province = 795 #Leone[/COLOR]
	name = "EVENTNAME[COLOR=Yellow]338085[/COLOR]" #Muslim gold traders have begun to avoid El Mina
	desc = "EVENTHIST[COLOR=Yellow]338085[/COLOR]"
	#-#

	date = { day = 1 month = january year = 1550 }
	offset = 180
	[COLOR=Yellow]deathdate = { year = 1820 }[/COLOR]

	action_a = {
		name = "ACTIONNAME[COLOR=Yellow]338085[/COLOR]A" #Damn!
		command = { type = mine which = 795 value = -17 } #Leone
	}
}
EVENTHIST: Muslim gold traders have begun to seek more profitable markets than the Portuguese fort at El Mina.

Correction in desc too and added final dot.

POR_260048 should fire before, otherwise production of gold will become negative and description doesn't mean anything...
IMHO, controlling the province and having it catholic doesn't change the fact that Muslim traders will go elsewhere. And Portugal could have changed its State religion and converted the province too. Am I wrong?

EDIT: province specific event now. Leone could be owned by another country when 338085 fires => removal of "Portuguese" in desc.
 
Last edited:
Leone and Fernando Po

Yodamaster,
Your corrections are fine. As for the Fernando Po events, have y'all been following the discussion on Fodoron's why the AI is so bad a colonization thread? I've merely jumped the gun a little, but the fundamental point is that colonization is too damn expensive and this will only be aggravated by the increase in provinces in the HC map.
The emerging consensus on the other thread is for generic population increase events, but I'm not at all sure I agree. At any rate there no chance at the time of the events for any other nation to colonize Fernando Po, so why not make it Portugese specific?
 
Yodamaster,
It's subsequently occured to me that the event really should be generic; it doesn't matter who owns the province when the gold traffic drops off. It should still require 260048 as its trigger, but it shouldn't be a Portugese specific event.
 
Garbon said:
I don't see why only Portugal, let's say, should be qualified for a special population boost in a specific province...unless there was some policy only carried out by that nation that led to that specific increase. Otherwise, the notion of population addition is already covered by adding colonists, so I don't see why Portugal should get specific boons.
Click to expand...
I often hear this argument at the AGCEEP, so I always wished to ask: how do you think then why this fort and as well as half of Asia and large parts of Africa were colonized and conquered by Portugal, not any other European nation of the 15th-16th centuries? :) In fact there are much reasons why some nations could gain a colossal profits from their colonization and maritime trade and expansion and why others failed absolutely in this perspective, not seeing on the colossal affords and resources they wasted (such as Denmark, Sweden or Courland for example).

The only question if you really wish to represent the proper historical Portuguese colonization with its big navy, explorers, quite rich and large estate of the merchants, its monarchy’s policy oriented on the maritime expansion, or to leave it to be unimportant “equal” state of Europe, in no way different form others and without any “special boosts”.
 
Natives in Fernado Po

Fodoron has found a reference in Wiki to a Bantu tribe that lived in on of the islands of the Fernando Po group.

But my sources say that São Tomé, the biggest island of the group, was uninhabited as I posted in the bugfix thread. Perhaps São Tomé proper, which is the most distant from Africa, was uninhabited, but some natives lived on the smaller islands closer to the mainland? Anyways, my sources are:

C.R. Boxer: The Portugese Seaborne Empire:
Uninhabited when first discovered by the Portugese around 1470, they were colonized by a mixture of white settlers sent from Portugal (including levies of Jewish children deported in the 1490s) and by a force of Negro slaves secured from a wide variety of tribes on the mainland, many of whom subsequently gained their freedom.
Click to expand...

The oft-cited Malyn Newitt:
Like Madeira and the Azores, these Guinea Islands were volcanic in origin and uninhabited, like the Cape Verde Islands, they were situated within easy sailing distance (160-80 miles) of the African coast.
After the initial colonizing expeditions very few Portugese went to São Thomé and the population that grew up there was from the start almost entirely of African origin.
Click to expand...
 
Garbon said:
Totally off-topic, but can I just say that I've always hated this thread. It is such a bizarely narrow focus, that was covered by two regional threads at the time it was created. Overlaping piece of junk.
Click to expand...
We can always ask a moderator to merge this thread into the AGCEEP Africa thread.
 
Garbon said:
On the most recent topic, I really couldn't care less. The natives there are so few and very peaceful. One of the least important issues to discuss in my opinion.
Click to expand...
If some of us like to argue about minutia over hundreds of posts you shouldn't belittle us. :p
 
sturmvogel said:
Fodoron has found a reference in Wiki to a Bantu tribe that lived in on of the islands of the Fernando Po group.

But my sources say that São Tomé, the biggest island of the group, was uninhabited as I posted in the bugfix thread. Perhaps São Tomé proper, which is the most distant from Africa, was uninhabited, but some natives lived on the smaller islands closer to the mainland? Anyways, my sources are:

C.R. Boxer: The Portugese Seaborne Empire:

The oft-cited Malyn Newitt:
Click to expand...
Acording to this book The Bubis on Fernando Po. Language analysis and archeology agree with Bubi oral tradition in placing them in the island (Fernando Po for the Portuguese, Bioko for the Guineans and Otcho for the Bubis) before the arrival of the Portuguese, in a two wave migration separated by centuries.

Collen Truelsen (translator of the Spanish book "Los Bubis de Fernando Poo") said:
"Modern thought on Bantu origin and expansion places the cradle of the Bantu languages in Nigeria’s Benue Valley. According to Jan Vansima, in Paths in the Rainforest* (University of Wisconsin Press, 1990): “In that general area, the Bantu family split into two branches: eastern and western Bantu, a split dated by glottochronology to c. 3000 BC. Western Bantu evolved east of the Cross River in western Cameroon, both on the then-forested Bamileke Plateau and on the lowlands near the ocean.” Author John Reader, in his book Africa: A Biography of the Continent (Alfred A. Knopf, 1998), also puts Bantu dispersion from their cradle-land at around 5000 years ago. The Bubis still are believed to have been among the first Bantu to migrate, and probably first arrived on Bioko sometime between 2000 and 3000 BC. Vansima notes: “Among the early splits, some were caused by the isolation of small groups moving out of reach. That seems to be the case for the Bioko and the Myene-Tsogo group, who moved by sea. ... Archaeological evidence attests to the early phases of settlement on Bioko. The earliest sites lie on the northern coast. They reveal a Neolithic occupation without ceramics, which has not been dated. From the seventh century AD on, pottery appears.”* A second wave of migration from the African coast to Bioko Island accounts for much-later settlements. Vansima writes: “Most traditions tell of a Great Migration comprising four waves of immigrants. ... (Evidence) suggests that the immigrants conquered the earlier Bubi settlers. Nevertheless, the archaeological and linguistic evidence makes it clear that, conquerors or not, the immigrants adopted the language and the material culture of the aboriginal population.* ... The archaeological evidence in hand suggests that the Great Migration ended in the fourteenth century.”
Click to expand...

I guess the Bubis got their 15 minutes of AGCEEP fame and will now go back to be tame natives waiting to be assimilated.
 
post now in iberian peninsula thread ;)
 
Last edited:
My first post is about this because it's something that really disturbs me... I don't know if this is the right thread, but here it goes.

Portugal went for Tangiers/Ceuta for 3 reasons:

- Nobles wanted more fame, more money and more lands.
- It was a CoT... All portuguese historian books refer it, it's commonly accepted... and produced a lot of grain...
- Clergy wanted to expand faith

Reasons for failure:

- The trade routes changed
- Portugal couldn't produce grain in it because of constant attacks

This is really common sense in Portugal, so I only refer Portuguese wikipedia, but if you need more sources I'll look for it:
http://pt.wikipedia.org/wiki/Conquista_de_ceuta

What I think it should be done to Tangiers:

Something like Calais to England... Increased base tax in Tangiers, and then lowering when morocco loses it...
 
Tangiers wasn't actually occupied by the Portuguese until 1471, IIRC, when it was abandoned by the Moroccans and doesn't seem to have been the bonanza anticipated by them. It may have been the main port for its hinterland, but it certainly wasn't a nexus for trade for the rest of the region or anywhere else so it certainly wasn't a CoT in game terms.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top Bottom
Back