+ Reply to Thread
Page 3 of 4 FirstFirst 1 2 3 4 LastLast
Results 41 to 60 of 72

Thread: 2.4.6 download/feedback thread.

  1. #41
    Sanctioned OT Hall Monitor Thistletooth's Avatar
    Hearts of Iron 2: ArmageddonCrusader Kings IIDarkest HourDeus VultEU3 Complete
    Hearts of Iron IIIVictoria 2

    Join Date
    Dec 2003
    Posts
    5,329
    Quote Originally Posted by Jaol View Post
    That's really odd, I didn't see any mass-starvation in this version. Could it be that something went wrong with the extraction and you still have 2.4.5 files?
    Fresh 2.4.6 install on a vanilla 1.2.

  2. #42
    Major danomite's Avatar
    Arsenal of DemocracyCrusader Kings IIEuropa Universalis: ChroniclesDivine WindFor the Motherland
    Hearts of Iron IIIHOI3: Their Finest HourMagickaRome GoldSemper Fi
    Victoria 2Victoria II: A House DividedVictoria II: Heart of Darkness

    Join Date
    Mar 2005
    Location
    Montreal
    Posts
    773
    Blog Entries
    1
    my 2.4.6 test game as china seems to have fixed the mass starvation, but I only tested a few years into it. (it used to start almost right away in 2.4.5)
    Great Game 2: 900 Year Conversion Game : Indonesian Confederation
    Part 1: EU3 - Part 2: Victoria - Part 3: HoI2 Arma with ColdWar Extension

    Great Game 3: Tyranny's Bloody Banner : Mayan/USA/NCR (New Californian Republic)
    Now in AOD: CWE with DH map!

  3. #43
    Quote Originally Posted by Thistletooth View Post
    Given the above conditions, is it possible for any nation that gets the Age of Liberalism AFTER 1855 to ever get rid of Liberal Agitation without switching to Universal Weighted? The flag "liberal_revolution_fired" is only set by Springtime of Nations, which doesn't fire after 1854, and can only fire if the Age of Liberalism fires before 1855, which requires literacy be at 30%. This could be keeping late literates from ever getting rid of Agitation without expanding their franchise. If they keep collapsing before Reactionaries and Communists, the cycle isn't ever going to break.
    Good catch.
    For every subtle and complicated question, there is a simple and straightforward answer, which is wrong.

    Creator of PDM:PoD for Heart of Darkness: http://forum.paradoxplaza.com/forum/...ownload-thread
    Aaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaand Creator of '1792' for March of the Eagles: http://forum.paradoxplaza.com/forum/...69074-1792-mod

  4. #44
    Quote Originally Posted by Thistletooth View Post
    Fresh 2.4.6 install on a vanilla 1.2.
    That's frankly bizarre. Can you replicate on a new game?
    For every subtle and complicated question, there is a simple and straightforward answer, which is wrong.

    Creator of PDM:PoD for Heart of Darkness: http://forum.paradoxplaza.com/forum/...ownload-thread
    Aaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaand Creator of '1792' for March of the Eagles: http://forum.paradoxplaza.com/forum/...69074-1792-mod

  5. #45
    A couple more minor observations:
    • Perhaps Reactionary rebels should be slightly less likely when there's a reactionary gov't in power. It seemed like there were a lot of reactionary rebels in reactionary regimes.
    • Are we 100% sure that angry rioters would have revolted as some other rebel type had they not been angry rioters (especially in uncivs)? There seem to be a lot of them in uncivs. But maybe I just wasn't paying attention to what rebels were there before. In general, having uncivs rocked with rebels seems good, except that the rebels end up sweeping through the whole nation. Perhaps we should make a new type "local nobles" that only need to hold a single province for a year to be successful; that way there would be frequent revolts without them always ending up in national movements. Their demands could be to add a province modifier "local privileges" that would have some bad effects representing that the local elites are in charge and the central gov't isn't getting much tax revenue.

  6. #46
    Field Marshal Rylock's Avatar
    Crusader Kings IIDarkest HourEU3 CompleteDivine WindHearts of Iron III
    Heir to the ThroneVictoria 2

    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Location
    Edmonton, Canada
    Posts
    8,217
    Quote Originally Posted by Jaol View Post
    [*]Perhaps Reactionary rebels should be slightly less likely when there's a reactionary gov't in power. It seemed like there were a lot of reactionary rebels in reactionary regimes.
    You shouldn't see reactionary rebels if there's an Absolute Monarchy or Daimyo government. They can still appear in a Presidential Dictatorship, however, though there's a smaller chance. We could go back to disallowing them in a PD completely, though the rebels are set up to install an Absolute Monarchy in that case so I figured there should at least be a chance for that to occur.

    Are we 100% sure that angry rioters would have revolted as some other rebel type had they not been angry rioters (especially in uncivs)? There seem to be a lot of them in uncivs. But maybe I just wasn't paying attention to what rebels were there before. In general, having uncivs rocked with rebels seems good, except that the rebels end up sweeping through the whole nation. Perhaps we should make a new type "local nobles" that only need to hold a single province for a year to be successful; that way there would be frequent revolts without them always ending up in national movements. Their demands could be to add a province modifier "local privileges" that would have some bad effects representing that the local elites are in charge and the central gov't isn't getting much tax revenue.
    The reason you get a lot of Angry Rioters in uncivs is because they aren't eligible to have many other rebel types-- they can't have Jacobins or Communists or such until they're civilized, so any rebel activity is going to settle down to either Angry Rioters (if they're an Absolute Monarchy) or Reactionary (if they're not).

    But, yes, if they didn't default to the Angry Rioters they would appear elsewhere. The rebel_types script doesn't determine whether a pop becomes a rebel, only which rebel group it decides to join and how long before it actually rises.

    The problem with making the Angry Rioters only needing to hold a single province is that the "demands enforced" trigger means the entire rebellion ends. So that would mean you could get Angry Rioters rising across your entire nation, but as soon as they take one province then the entire rebellion would simply up and disappear. Would that work? I don't know. Currently they disappear as soon as the capital is held for 60 days.

    One thing we could try is adjusting what the Angry Rioters do when they take a province. It's possible to add effects onto any province that they capture-- currently they remove any provincial modifiers that uncivs get (like trading posts or foreign smugglers and such). We could add a provincial effect like "war torn" that lasts for a year and makes the province crappy. And we could also reduce the militancy in that province as a single-shot effect.

    Why? I've noticed that if militancy drops (ie. the "support" behind the rebels) the rebels can outright disappear even if they're in mid-rebellion, before they even achieve their goals. So if we remove the "militancy -8" from the demands_enforced section and apply it to the siege_won effects instead... it might be very possible for Angry Rioters to only ever affect the province they were spawned in. I might have to try that out.

  7. #47
    Quote Originally Posted by Rylock View Post
    You shouldn't see reactionary rebels if there's an Absolute Monarchy or Daimyo government. They can still appear in a Presidential Dictatorship, however, though there's a smaller chance. We could go back to disallowing them in a PD completely, though the rebels are set up to install an Absolute Monarchy in that case so I figured there should at least be a chance for that to occur.
    I've mainly been seeing democracies with Reactionary parties in power, and then reactionary revolts. It's not bad--I could see that reactionaries might be unhappy that winning the election didn't get them enough support to change the regime, but it seems to be fairly common.

    Quote Originally Posted by Rylock View Post
    The reason you get a lot of Angry Rioters in uncivs is because they aren't eligible to have many other rebel types-- they can't have Jacobins or Communists or such until they're civilized, so any rebel activity is going to settle down to either Angry Rioters (if they're an Absolute Monarchy) or Reactionary (if they're not).

    But, yes, if they didn't default to the Angry Rioters they would appear elsewhere. The rebel_types script doesn't determine whether a pop becomes a rebel, only which rebel group it decides to join and how long before it actually rises.

    The problem with making the Angry Rioters only needing to hold a single province is that the "demands enforced" trigger means the entire rebellion ends. So that would mean you could get Angry Rioters rising across your entire nation, but as soon as they take one province then the entire rebellion would simply up and disappear. Would that work? I don't know. Currently they disappear as soon as the capital is held for 60 days.

    One thing we could try is adjusting what the Angry Rioters do when they take a province. It's possible to add effects onto any province that they capture-- currently they remove any provincial modifiers that uncivs get (like trading posts or foreign smugglers and such). We could add a provincial effect like "war torn" that lasts for a year and makes the province crappy. And we could also reduce the militancy in that province as a single-shot effect.

    Why? I've noticed that if militancy drops (ie. the "support" behind the rebels) the rebels can outright disappear even if they're in mid-rebellion, before they even achieve their goals. So if we remove the "militancy -8" from the demands_enforced section and apply it to the siege_won effects instead... it might be very possible for Angry Rioters to only ever affect the province they were spawned in. I might have to try that out.
    Oh, I wasn't suggesting changing the angry rioters. I was suggesting adding a new unciv-only rebel type to siphon some of the rebel activity away from Angry Rioters, and making this new rebel type likely to disband quickly. I like your suggestion better, though, if it works.

  8. #48
    what happened to angry peasants? They were supposed to be an unciv-only reb type...
    For every subtle and complicated question, there is a simple and straightforward answer, which is wrong.

    Creator of PDM:PoD for Heart of Darkness: http://forum.paradoxplaza.com/forum/...ownload-thread
    Aaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaand Creator of '1792' for March of the Eagles: http://forum.paradoxplaza.com/forum/...69074-1792-mod

  9. #49
    They were expanded to serve as an "if nothing else" type for civs. You wont see them in civs if any other type is valid, but they exist to prevent any illogical types from appearing (reactionaries in absolute monarchy, etc.)
    B.B.B.B.B.B.B.B.B.Mod for CK II

    Every winter my Uncle Bilbert used to go out and buy clothes for his entire hobbit family. I remember the first year I came along with him shopping. His tongue was swollen up so he was unable to speak but my uncle Bilbert was not concerned. He simply took me and my cousins to town and proudly presented his young relatives to the shopkeeper. The wise old clothesmaker just smiled and started taking measurements. After so many years of business he didn't hesitate to in fur my uncle's hobbits.

  10. #50
    Field Marshal Rylock's Avatar
    Crusader Kings IIDarkest HourEU3 CompleteDivine WindHearts of Iron III
    Heir to the ThroneVictoria 2

    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Location
    Edmonton, Canada
    Posts
    8,217
    Quote Originally Posted by Naselus View Post
    what happened to angry peasants? They were supposed to be an unciv-only reb type...
    That was part of the changes I made to the rebel_types file.

    One of the issues I noted in the "nationalist rebels" thread was the need for a fall-through -- a rebel type that rebels could default to if nothing else was applicable. The Angry Peasants served this purpose in an unciv, but in any civilized country you could end up with some very unpredictable results as the rebels chose the "least negative" rebel value... possibly resulting in them picking rebel types that weren't even valid.

    Changing the Angry Peasants into Angry Rioters was just one thing I was trying out in the Revolutions work (and really only involved changing the name to remove the "peasant" connotation, and removing the "zeroing out" conditions for civilized countries and non-monarchies). It does its job as the funnel for rebel activity (meaning that "zeroing out" a rebel type earlier does what it's supposed to), but that doesn't preclude restoring Angry Peasants to their original purpose and creating a different funnel rebel type that does something else.

  11. #51
    Field Marshal Rylock's Avatar
    Crusader Kings IIDarkest HourEU3 CompleteDivine WindHearts of Iron III
    Heir to the ThroneVictoria 2

    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Location
    Edmonton, Canada
    Posts
    8,217
    Quote Originally Posted by Jaol View Post
    I've mainly been seeing democracies with Reactionary parties in power, and then reactionary revolts. It's not bad--I could see that reactionaries might be unhappy that winning the election didn't get them enough support to change the regime, but it seems to be fairly common.
    Reactionary rebels don't currently care about the ideology of the ruling party -- only the government type they're dealing with. So Reactionary rebels would be responding to the fact that the nation is a democracy.

    Mind you, if we're going with the changes I made to the Clean Up file a democracy with a reactionary party in power would likely soon become a Presidential Dictatorship anyhow.

    Oh, I wasn't suggesting changing the angry rioters. I was suggesting adding a new unciv-only rebel type to siphon some of the rebel activity away from Angry Rioters, and making this new rebel type likely to disband quickly. I like your suggestion better, though, if it works.
    There was a suggestion in the Nationalist Rebel thread to make a funnel rebel type that didn't rise ("protesters") and which only zeroed itself out when national militancy reached a certain level... which would then flood an actual rebel group with new recruits. I haven't actually tried this out.

  12. #52
    Ran another hands-free game in the background this morning. Here are some very crude observations:
    • The ACW seems a little early. I've run three games now, and never seen it later than 59.
    • The USA never seems to add wargoals in its wars with Mexico. So instead of a single large Mexican-American War, you have 5-6 little wars, as the US slowly eats Mexico one state at a time. I suspect this is due to having not enough Jingoism to add additional wargoals. Perhaps I should either adjust the Jingosim drop on adding the acquire_core cb, or make a new Manifesty Destiny cb, that doesn't lower jingoism.
    • Things are more peaceful than I'm used to. Apart from the usual Morocco and Boliva dogpiles, there haven't been many crazy conquests. Denmark even hung onto S-H in 2 games! Generally a good thing, I think.
    • Russia maintained GP status in all 3 games now!!!

  13. #53
    Field Marshal Rylock's Avatar
    Crusader Kings IIDarkest HourEU3 CompleteDivine WindHearts of Iron III
    Heir to the ThroneVictoria 2

    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Location
    Edmonton, Canada
    Posts
    8,217
    Quote Originally Posted by Jaol View Post
    [*]The USA never seems to add wargoals in its wars with Mexico. So instead of a single large Mexican-American War, you have 5-6 little wars, as the US slowly eats Mexico one state at a time. I suspect this is due to having not enough Jingoism to add additional wargoals. Perhaps I should either adjust the Jingosim drop on adding the acquire_core cb, or make a new Manifesty Destiny cb, that doesn't lower jingoism.
    My understanding is that the current PDM version treats both jingoism and pro_military sentiment as "jingoism" when it comes to determining whether new war goals can be added. So the fact that adding CB's moves attitudes from jingoism to pro_military wouldn't actually affect this.

    If this needed to be addressed, my suggestion would be to have the Manifest Destiny event for the USA (I believe it fires one when the tech is researched) simply add jingoism sentiment for its population.

  14. #54
    Quote Originally Posted by Rylock View Post
    My understanding is that the current PDM version treats both jingoism and pro_military sentiment as "jingoism" when it comes to determining whether new war goals can be added. So the fact that adding CB's moves attitudes from jingoism to pro_military wouldn't actually affect this.
    Is this the case? I had thought it was hard-coded. The defines only mention jingoism (WARGOAL_JINGOISM_REQUIREMENT = 0.07)

    Also, I forgot:
    • The USCA somehow appeared in Nicaragua. I think it was due to rebels. Rylock, you might want to check if the USCA is on the banned list of nationalist rebels; I'll check to make sure it's banned in the free peoples wargoals.
    • Also, I just looked at an 1860 savegame, shortly after the outbreak of the ACW. The CSA has 0 brigades and is covered in massive reactionary stacks. I think something should be done about this--a massive revolt directly after the CSA declares independence can cripple it, and isn't really historically plausible at all, unless the rebels are Yankee patriots, or some sort of slave uprising. EDIT: The USA is also covered in reactionary rebels, so this was probably due to the rising militancy before the ACW broke out. Still seems very wrong.
    Last edited by Jaol; 22-02-2011 at 21:00.

  15. #55
    Field Marshal Rylock's Avatar
    Crusader Kings IIDarkest HourEU3 CompleteDivine WindHearts of Iron III
    Heir to the ThroneVictoria 2

    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Location
    Edmonton, Canada
    Posts
    8,217
    Quote Originally Posted by Jaol View Post
    Is this the case? I had thought it was hard-coded. The defines only mention jingoism (WARGOAL_JINGOISM_REQUIREMENT = 0.07)
    Unless I'm mistaken (Naselus can correct me if I'm wrong) there's a setting that checks "is jingoism" for every military policy. That's what determines the jingoism requirement for adding wargoals. Normally only Jingoism is set to "yes", but now so is Pro-Military.

    [*]The USCA somehow appeared in Nicaragua. I think it was due to rebels. Rylock, you might want to check if the USCA is on the banned list of nationalist rebels; I'll check to make sure it's banned in the free peoples wargoals.
    This should be taken care of in my most recent update of the rebel_types file (which I don't think is in 2.4.6). I've zeroed-out primary cultures from becoming nationalists, which wasn't happening before-- so that should theoretically prevent the USCA rebel thing.

    [*]Also, I just looked at an 1860 savegame, shortly after the outbreak of the ACW. The CSA has 0 brigades and is covered in massive reactionary stacks. I think something should be done about this--a massive revolt directly after the CSA declares independence can cripple it, and isn't really historically plausible at all, unless the rebels are Yankee patriots, or some sort of slave uprising. EDIT: The USA is also covered in reactionary rebels, so this was probably due to the rising militancy before the ACW broke out. Still seems very wrong.
    Someone else reported reactionaries in the USA. Why the USA would have that much militancy is a mystery-- but I suspect that, once they get that much militancy, them having very low "political reform want" will cause them to become reactionary rebels in favor of angry rioters.

    Come to think of it, that might need to change. Perhaps instead of looking for the absence of political reform want the code should be looking for a desire for reforms that are less than what the country currently has.

  16. #56
    Quote Originally Posted by Rylock View Post
    Unless I'm mistaken (Naselus can correct me if I'm wrong) there's a setting that checks "is jingoism" for every military policy. That's what determines the jingoism requirement for adding wargoals. Normally only Jingoism is set to "yes", but now so is Pro-Military.
    Ok, then it must be that the US has very low jingoism and pro-military.

    Quote Originally Posted by Rylock View Post
    Come to think of it, that might need to change. Perhaps instead of looking for the absence of political reform want the code should be looking for a desire for reforms that are less than what the country currently has.
    That sounds really good. If it works, you could even use it to further differentiate rebels depending on which reform they wanted/wanted to get rid of. For example, Reactionaries might be much stronger and more likely to rise over voting/trade unions than over other issues.

  17. #57
    Field Marshal Rylock's Avatar
    Crusader Kings IIDarkest HourEU3 CompleteDivine WindHearts of Iron III
    Heir to the ThroneVictoria 2

    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Location
    Edmonton, Canada
    Posts
    8,217
    Quote Originally Posted by Jaol View Post
    That sounds really good. If it works, you could even use it to further differentiate rebels depending on which reform they wanted/wanted to get rid of. For example, Reactionaries might be much stronger and more likely to rise over voting/trade unions than over other issues.
    Assuming that there's a hook into specific reform desire that I can use, there's no reason that wouldn't be the case. Currently all the rebel types only look at general political reform want (or social reform want, in the case of communists) or its lack.

    Naselus, if you'd like me to take a swing at this, and possibly restore the angry rioters back into angry peasants for uncivs (with perhaps adding a different default rebel group for the civs), I can certainly give it a shot.

  18. #58
    Hamburg is the new Switzerland--it made GP status 2 times in my hands-free games. Does it have some great prestige-boosting decisions?

  19. #59
    It has a small prestige increasing event but I think it just tends to get lucky because it researches well and it's big enough to be a GP. I used to see it occasionally crack the top 8 in vanilla.
    B.B.B.B.B.B.B.B.B.Mod for CK II

    Every winter my Uncle Bilbert used to go out and buy clothes for his entire hobbit family. I remember the first year I came along with him shopping. His tongue was swollen up so he was unable to speak but my uncle Bilbert was not concerned. He simply took me and my cousins to town and proudly presented his young relatives to the shopkeeper. The wise old clothesmaker just smiled and started taking measurements. After so many years of business he didn't hesitate to in fur my uncle's hobbits.

  20. #60
    Quote Originally Posted by Rylock View Post
    Assuming that there's a hook into specific reform desire that I can use, there's no reason that wouldn't be the case. Currently all the rebel types only look at general political reform want (or social reform want, in the case of communists) or its lack.

    Naselus, if you'd like me to take a swing at this, and possibly restore the angry rioters back into angry peasants for uncivs (with perhaps adding a different default rebel group for the civs), I can certainly give it a shot.
    POPs never want to regress reforms currently - it's just invalid for them to do so.

    I'm going to drop the MIL gain and reduction values for ideology in the next release (tomorrow afternoonish) to try and get a grip on the mass-rebellion thing; I *think* it's because highly liberal or reactionary POPs who disagree with the government gain MIL at a massive rate currently. Doing this, and tweaking the mil balance point slightly for goods (maybe increasing the value placed on everydays slightly) should do the trick; that and removing the time barriers on Springtime of Nations should deal with most of the militancy issues we're currently seeing. Sigh, this is why I hate mucking with the ideologies... any changes take an hour to do since you have to mess with all the files, and then you find half the world going mental as a result...
    For every subtle and complicated question, there is a simple and straightforward answer, which is wrong.

    Creator of PDM:PoD for Heart of Darkness: http://forum.paradoxplaza.com/forum/...ownload-thread
    Aaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaand Creator of '1792' for March of the Eagles: http://forum.paradoxplaza.com/forum/...69074-1792-mod

+ Reply to Thread
Page 3 of 4 FirstFirst 1 2 3 4 LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts