Silk I'd appreciate it if you kept me appraised of any MP game for this mod, best bet is MSN as I don't check forums anymore really. Thanks
Silk I'd appreciate it if you kept me appraised of any MP game for this mod, best bet is MSN as I don't check forums anymore really. Thanks
Steam ID: 'catchin_wreck'
MOROCCO in 'Cabal is for Winners'
ENGLAND in 'Est Modus in Rebus'
AUSTRIA in 'Ultima Ratio'
These were the old effects associated to colleges:
+25% spy defence
I am starting to repeat myself, but the spy defence increase, which piled up with spy agencies, cathedrals, free subjects, stability and tax base, etc. was absolutely unneeded. To avoid replicating bonuses and stress their strategical impact, only one building now provides local spy defence — gendarmeries. The opportunity cost of building colleges was a manifest deterrent — the sole increase to spies and magistrates is an incredibly long term investment, twenty years for the first usable spy and forty years for the first usable magistrate (considering the one spent). Since colleges generally become available at the start of the 17th century, in vanilla, their contribution is negligible in games that end by the 18th century.
Colleges new bonus is:
There are three considerations to make:
To put colleges gain into perspective, here are other variable and incremental aspects which increase magistrates:
- the one official spent to build a college is recouped in about eight years
- officials spent to reach the college (courthouses, gendarmeries, temples) actually feature tangible effects
- every eight years a college will produce an official
It's not necessary to stress the need for magistrates, it is obvious. Though it's useful to remark that the bigger one's country is, the more magistrates will be needed to keep up with others. The most radical requirement to erecting colleges is that they reside on accepted culture, tolerated religion and land connected provinces. For typically large colonial empires this aspect invites an intriguing choice — should colleges support infrastructural expansion overseas, or should military buildings take colleges place. Should England embark on a college building spree, they would neglect naval arsenals (which can't be built overseas). Should Spain do likewise they would weaken their military position without conscription centres. A country like Russia has an immense potential, given the number of available provinces — the challenge though is converting Tartar provinces while westernising, or adopting "Humanist Tolerance". Town halls and gendarmeries lose their relevance in low tax base Siberian provinces.
- centralisation step: +0.2
- stability level: +0.2
- college: +0.12
- country in sphere: +0.08
Colleges complement seminaries, since the two requirements to expand buildings are ducats and magistrates. Colleges are also needed for the "Restrict Press Liberties" decision, and the "Rise of Narrative Fiction" cultural decision.
Last edited by silktrader; 16-06-2012 at 00:45.
Sabotage Supply Routes
This new spy mission aims at reducing opponents mobility. For little more than five years any army moving to and from the affected province will do so at half speed. The extent of the delay actually depends on which regiments are being moved (artillery being the slowest), leaders, how big a province is and what terrain it features.
We shall consider the province of Urumqi: the ancient location of the Dzungarian gate, an historically important pass along the "silk road" which connected the Far East to Central Asia. These are the number of days which add to armies journeys (infantry regiments):
A few sparse comments:
… to Dzungaria: +29 days
… to Hovd: +23 days
… to Altai: +40 days
As with every espionage action, there are two costs to "sabotage supply routes":
- Armies delays affect one's ability to retreat and gain terrain advantages before the opponent. Delays also affect reinforcements, if the first of the month is skipped during retreat. Fast movement is obviously key to relieve sieges (foes or rebels).
- Some geographical spots are naturally more trafficked than others: the Bosphorus straits, Crimea, Rome, Suez, Lapponia, the Altaic passes, etc. It goes without saying but they are prime candidates for sabotages.
- The more provinces an army has to cross, the more effective sabotaged supply routes are.
- Naval powers, who adopt amphibious operations, can benefit from slowing down enemies. While the naval player is able to land frequently, in any coastal province, his land foe might have increased difficulties reaching far off provinces.
The spy mission can't be performed in provinces which feature "roads", it's a timid attempt to increase their logistic relevance.
- There's the monetary expenditure, which amounts to 13 ducats * tax base in excess of five * 1.20 — therefore hardly dissuading.
- Every time a sabotage is successful, the spy used has 35% chances of returning unharmed and be of service again. There is but a prestige loss (1) should the spy miserably fail — difficulty is low. The cost in terms of spies used is therefore variable, and it's the one determining whether one should prefer such a mission to alternatives (since the ducat expenditure is modest).
Cardinals are generally employed by few dominant countries: Spain, England, Portugal and Italian states. This new espionage action allows players to significantly decrease others papal influence.
Clergy men can only be framed in provinces which host temples. Naturally a country can't be framed unless it has one cardinal present in the Curia. The mission can't be repeated ad libitum — there's a limit of one framed cardinal, per country, every five years. This measure was put in place to avoid a player using a full stack of five spies before others can react. Papal influence is meant to be gained far more slowly in the mod.
The spy action is moderately expensive (the base cost is 42 ducats) and has a difficulty of four. Should it fail, it would lower the player's prestige by three points.
Since players are expected to fight for control of the Curia (Papal Controller, Societas Jesu and Military Orders, Papal Bulls and Indulgences, etc.), the mission may come in handy at times. One can defend against it by either selecting which provinces should host temples, or by building gendarmeries and lowering revolt risk in temple provinces.
Incite Troop Desertion
The old spy mission was only slightly changed, it used to cause:
+5 maximum attrition
+5 attrition weight
The old mission lasted only two months, its base cost was twenty five ducats.
The new effects aren't unlike the previous:
+5 maximum attrition
+8 attrition weight
"Attrition weight" basically represents the effect x number of additional regiments would have on armies stationed in the province. If 25 fully manned regiments reside in a given province, where supply limits stretch to 30, then the "Troop Desertions" modifier will cause attrition (25+8). The attrition rate (at present) depends on how many thousands men over limits there are (1,000 equal to 1% attrition rate). Increasing maximum attrition therefore only yields results in provinces where limits are already surpassed.
The new modifier lasts eighteen months, which is far, far, more than the vanilla one. The expense of one spy wouldn't be justified for but two months of marginal attrition increases. Since the mod actually decreases the efficiency of assaults, also reducing fielded regiments, sieges become key and assaults occasional: attrition therefore becomes more relevant.
The new spy mission costs 18 ducats (base), which is accessible to most. It's cost in terms of spies consumed has been reduced: there are 35% chances that the agent will return to the pool. Failure determines a minor one prestige loss. Difficulty has been slight increased (to three), compared to vanilla — the idea's simple: stronger effects, less frequent to avoid wasting spies.
The AI has been instructed to never perform the action in high supply limit provinces, where there are few regiments or where the AI is stationing.
You can't incite desertions in provinces which feature the march.
Spy Ring Infiltration
The vanilla spy mission used to decrease the target's spy efficiency by 25%. The latter is subtracted to local and global spy defence determining the spy success chances. The obvious problem though is the modifier's duration — it lasts six months. It therefore simply delays an enemy's attempts to spy. The mission would require more spies than can be generated to guarantee a solid defense.
In the mod the modifier lasts for about five years. The longer duration allows the infiltrator to take advantage of the situation during wars, which notoriously last more than a couple of years in multiplayer scenarios. Infiltration though decreases efficiency by 18% which doesn't bar out the enemy's espionage efforts.
As with other spy missions the intention was that of increasing effects along with difficulty, so to redeem the spy cost. There are 35% chances of the agent returning on success.
While in vanilla you had to carry out the mission in the capital, one can target either the capital or the embassy, in the mod. Allowing for either possibility stresses the need to build up the province (gendarmeries, garrisons) hosting the embassy (likely to change several times during the campaign). It is otherwise easy to focus spy defences in the capital, keeping safe of many espionage attempts and increasing spy costs.
In short, the mission now looks like:
capital province or embassy province
target isn't already infiltrated
Effects (five years):
-18% spy efficiency
There were only minor alterations to the vanilla spy mission. The cost in ducats was lowered by ten ducats (it's now half that of supporting pretenders, nationalists, etc.). Difficulty was raised by one but the "Foreign Support" modifier the mission assigns now lasts five years, rather than one year.
As with other low difficulty missions, the agent has 35% chances of returning unharmed. There are minor chances of a revolt being created, as many regiments as the province's tax base could spawn, or very rarely two times the province's tax base.
The vanilla modifier implied (one year):
+3 revolt risk
The "Foreign Support Revolt" modifier in the mod causes (five years):
+ 65 provincial stability costs
+ 5 revolt risk
The increase to stability costs is obviously only relevant when the target is trying to achieve a more stable level — it effectively doubles most provinces base stability costs (with temples). Inflation, higher stability levels, infamy affect these base costs. High stability costs wouldn't make sense with a duration of one year (the opponent would simply delay investment for a year). While the mission doesn't necessarily provoke revolts (unlike the "Fund Pretenders", "Fund Nationalists", etc.) it's now a cheap option to cause stability and revolt problems over several provinces for a short duration of time.
The mission, in short:
the province isn't already affected by "Foreign Support for Rebels"
+5 revolt risk for five years
+65 stability costs for five years
30% chances of a normal revolt
10% chances of a double revolt
This military national idea ranks among the least frequent in multiplayer games — it simply isn't a match for "Military Drill", "National Conscripts" or even a mediocre alternative like "Engineer Corps". The national idea's effects are plain, they increase prestige by a factor of 100%, after each battle. Perhaps less known is the fact that the "prestige_from_land" modifier also halves prestige's decrease when losing. There are several problems in vanilla:
In "Omnium Contra Omnes" there are fewer sources of prestige, many are exclusive and to be contented by players ("Defender of the Faith", "Papal Controller", "Emperor"). Missions' effects were reviewed, prestige isn't the inevitable reward anymore. More importantly, prestige is used to gain and maintain spheres of influence. It's now a necessary requirement to consolidate acquisitions and other decisions. Prestige's effects will be discussed in other sections, but it's relevant to add that legitimacy partially depends on it.
- prestige is far too abundant and accessible — which decreases "Glorious Arms" relevance as there are cheaper alternatives
- prestige gain is always capped at five per battle — given that battles in multiplayer are inevitably large and frequently lead to +/-5, the advantages bestowed by "Glorious Arms" are only visible when losing battles
"Glorious Arms" still provides +100% prestige on winning battles and a lesser prestige decrease on losing. Like all other ideas, besides the one modifier, it also has indirect effects that can be leveraged:
The last item is rather plain — when switching governments players normally lose three stability points, having "Glorious Arms" decreases that loss by two. Switching the idea out (three stability points) would still represent a net stability loss, despite the discount (two stability points) — but it becomes a more interesting option later on.
- the Celebrate Eminent General decision
- the Military Preeminence triggered modifier
- the Last Jousting Tournament
- lower stability costs when proclaiming empires
Missions and event factors were reviewed to account for "Glorious Arms" benefits. An example is the new mission that invites players to attack bigger, more prestigious adversaries, while granting a temporary morale bonus among other things. "Glorious Arms" countries are five times more likely to receive the mission, which remains though occasional. A second example is the new event which reward players for capturing a large enemy capital (war exhaustion decrease) — it's enabled by "Glorious Arms".
Last edited by silktrader; 20-06-2012 at 22:24.
Celebrate Eminent General and Admiral
This decision was introduced to strengthen "Glorious Arms" and "Glorious Navy" compared to their alternative national ideas. The intention was that of complementing these with "Battlefield Commissions", "Sea Hawks" and "Excellent Shipwrights".
The decision's requirements are:
have "Glorious Arms" or "Glorious Navy"
haven't celebrated a general or admiral in the last twenty years
have a general or admiral whose shock, fire or maneuvre reaches up to three
capital is free of enemy troops
the country is either at peace or winning a war (over 25 warscore)
one month of income is spent
The celebrations are meant to be infrequent, but can be timed to gain prestige at the desired time. The twenty years delay was chosen as it represents the average life span of military leaders.
Last edited by silktrader; 20-06-2012 at 19:16.
Army and Navy Preeminence
Along with the smoother transition to imperial forms of government, "Glorious Arms" and "Glorious Navy" also allow one to gain prestige depending on the size of one's forces. The two modifiers, "Army Preeminence" and "Navy Preeminence" (suggestions as to alternative names are welcome!), bestow the player with +1% prestige, which is a modest but useful addition to prestige gained during battles.
To gain this benefit it is necessary to:
Rivals are determined automatically, depending on a country's size, armed forces, income and obviously geographical location. The list of perceived rivals is always visible in the diplomatic panel. Examples, at the earliest scenario: France and England, Savoy and Switzerland, the Hansa and Venice or Nepal and Tibet. The situation, rival wise, is obviously likely to change in multiplayer games: eventually it is likely that up to four players may become rivals — only one would benefit from the triggered modifier(s).
- feature the "Glorious Arms" or "Glorious Navy" national ideas
- field a larger navy or army than any rival
The size of armies and navies was chosen as a trigger because it complements ideas such as "Grand Army" and "Grand Navy", much like general or admiral celebrations work in unison with "Sea Hawks" or "Battlefield Commissions".
Please note that it's entirely possible to feature but transports to surpass an enemy's navy: the drawback's obvious, such a navy wouldn't perform too well in a war. The earliest version of the triggered modifier discouraged transport based navies, but I feel they make naval limits even more relevant. Sliders (naval, quantity) are relevant when choosing whether to aim for "Navy Preeminence" or the other. Since "Empires" lower prestige decay by 3%, either "Army Preeminence" or its naval equivalent would cause prestige to slowly gravitate around 33% (all other things being equal). Lastly, it is possible to gain both triggered modifiers, in the presence of both "Glorious Arms" and "Glorious Navy".
Last edited by silktrader; 20-06-2012 at 19:22.
Wow, lots of new description at the moment. Thanks
The Last Jousting Tournament
The vanilla decision was slightly changed, it used to look like:
before land tech 11
army tradition higher than 15
cultural tradition higher than 5
-3 months of income
+4 army tradition for ten years
+2 cultural tradition for ten years
+0.1 morale for ten years
You could enact the decision only once, but every Western country could, before land tech eleven. While the military tradition increase (about 35) was an enticing opportunity, and even though the magistrate cost wasn't really a concern at the start of a campaign when funds are low, the decision wasn't determining since every Western player enacted it, after "Expand the Bureaucracy". When a decision is so accessible as to be a given for all, its strategic implications lose importance.
In "Omnium Contra Omnes" changes are minimal:
"Glorious Arms" national idea
western or eastern group
more than or 35 prestige
more than or 50% cavalry
+3 army tradition for eight years
+2 cultural tradition for eight years
+0.8 land morale
The "Last Jousting Tournament" can be held only once, by one country and before the 16th century. The big difference, compared to vanilla, lays with the morale increase. As is well known morale is the determining factor in early wars, especially in multiplayer campaigns. I should remark that "Military Drill" isn't available as a first national idea anymore, as it's been moved to land tech seven. During eight years, a single country having chosen "Glorious Arms", may have +0.8 morale over others. The army and cultural tradition gains are short lasted, as in vanilla, but moderately useful.
Please note that it's not sufficient to rush "Glorious Arms" to enact the decision, since there also is a prestige requirement ("Glorious Arms" should help). I've toyed with the idea of requiring either 28 army tradition or cultural tradition (8 points above initial values for countries which start at peace or war) — but it seemed to limit the time scope of the decision, which is already quite exclusive.
When the tournament is held every "aristocratic", multi province, country who already features neutral relations will be invited — that's a minor +50 relations boost. I meant to use this device to actually signal and warn other players of the possible danger (by event); I am unsure whether that's appropriate.
I've just found this mod and although I don't play MP, but I love it.
I just wanted to thank all of you your efforts.
Are the religion bonuses still the same as in normal eu3? The fact that colonists were tied to religion always bothered me. It would make more sense if it would be tied to tech group or something else.
Originally Posted by birdike12I am glad you appreciate the mod or the descriptions, but, frankly, I don't think gratitude is due! You must have noticed I am a chatty person, so I'd be happy to engage in a discussion concerning the mod's numbers and inner workings.Originally Posted by lukew
Neither missionary chances, nor missionaries gained per year, are the same in the mod. Conversion chances were described here. I can quickly tell you that there's one decision per religion group which increases missionaries, effects are variable. Missionaries are otherwise exclusively gained through "narrowmindedness" and "Divine Supremacy".Originally Posted by Brasem
The alternative to converting is tolerating, which has been reviewed to be viable.
Slider wise, in the mod, you either gain colonists through free trade or narrow-mindedness. Westernising countries or innovative ones aren't necessarily limited anymore. The same logic is applied to vanilla's spies — you either gain spies with mercantilism or with plutocracy. "Colonial Ventures" remains determinant factor when establishing colonies.Originally Posted by Brasem
The idea, in the mod, was to reduce the relevance of colonists with regards to the development of the colony, so that another variable would acquire importance — colonial growth. Costs, colonist numbers and colonists chances invite players to simply tag a province with an agent and let it grow with other incentives. "Land of Opportunity" is meant to be key, as it drastically speeds up colonisation (lowering costs).
I have never seen a player willingly choose "Naval Glory" as a national idea. Given how naval battles are resolved, few occur during the game, as they usually determine the complete loss of one party. While in previous game iterations pirates provided prestige when defeated, they don't do so anymore (but marginal amounts). A few tweaks were implemented to augment the frequency of naval battles, many hard-coded dynamics can't be changed though — the beta helped in this regard.
The prestige from winning naval battles when one has claimed "Naval Glory" was significantly increased, it's now four times as high as in vanilla. It is up to the player to determine whether a sufficient number of battles can be fought over time, to back up the idea. The modifier, it's helpful to remember, also zeroes the prestige loss on losing naval battles.
Given the sporadic nature of battles, and the high prestige decay (5% each year), a second, steady, source of prestige was introduced: "Naval Preeminence". Provided the player has a larger navy than any of his rivals, he will gain +1 prestige yearly. Naval competition among players is generally lower than on land, the +1 prestige is likely to remain in the hands of the one player who can boast the higher force limits.
A second advantage bestowed by "Naval Glory" is to diminish the stability hit when proclaiming an empire: players lose one point, rather than three. An idea switch costs three stability points, to put the saving in perspective.
Besides "Naval Preeminence", "Naval Glory" also allows the celebration of admirals — which grants a +23 prestige when a country boasts an admiral whose skills surpass three in any field. Celebrations are held every two decades, at best.
Missions and event factors were reviewed to take into consideration "Naval Glory". The famed "Britannia Rules the Waves" decision depends on the national idea, it increases leader's maneuvre rating by one.
Ultimately, the idea's attractiveness will depend on whether changes to naval combat incite more battles and therefore more prestige on the table. It is hard to numerically appraise the impact of the tweaks, which will be described in other sections.
The East India Trade Company
The "East India Trade Company" becomes available when one owns a province in the "East Asia Trade Port" region. In most games these provinces are merrily distributed to most European powers. There isn't a reason not to acquire the modifier, as it benefits even those who don't trade (trade efficiency increases tolls income, under taxes). There are two problems with the decision and its effects:
the combined effects of "Shrewd Commerce Practice" and "National Trade Policy", which is an insurmountable obstacle to non Western traders
any and every Western country can acquire the modifier, so that it loses its strategic importance
I've made the same point in other paragraphs — when such a modifier is available to all, without discriminations, it simply inflates everybody's income. In this case, like the "Formalise Scales" vanilla decision, the "East India Company" is easily enacted: players can purchase provinces and rebel control without even requiring a navy.
The old decision is summarised by:
Christian religion group
capital is in Europe
have two land connected ports
naval tech past 20
owns a province in the East Asian Port region
+4 trade tech investment (monthly)
+10% placement chances
+10% compete chances
+5% trade worth
The reviewed decision features:
capital is in Europe
have three land connected ports
naval tech past 20
owns a province in the East Asian Port region
+8 trade tech investment (monthly)
+10% compete chances
The most significant change though is — there can now be only three countries benefiting from the "East India Trade Company" at any one time.
Players will thus contend the required provinces and prevent rivals from reaching them. Whenever a nation loses the modifier it will free a spot for another nation to take it. Whenever the EITC was lost originally, in the unmodded game, one wouldn't be able to claim it back, as the country flag persisted — that's now a possibility, which I hope encourages the modifier switching hands during a campaign, as some gain and lose the upper hand.
Historically, the United Kingdom, Portugal and Spain were the ones sponsoring East India Trade Companies. If a multiplayer campaign unfurled as history did, France, Austria, Venice and all the others would be left out. The Netherlands have their own peculiar East India Trade Company — its requirements prescind from the number of already existing companies.
The purpose of overseas companies was to ship goods from the East, for redistribution or consumption in the West — religion seems besides the scope, whereas geography appears to determinant. Thus we parted with the "Christian" requirement. In practical terms, it's now possible for the Ottoman Empire (or Russia) to march through Persia and set up their own India Trade Company. Once again, the idea is to stimulate competition — if the Ottoman player seizes the modifier, there will be one less spot for others.
Placement chances are largely irrelevant, as they easily surpass 100% with trade efficiency and other modifiers. They are used to determine whether a free spot will be occupied, but are generally subsequent to competing out merchants. The increase to trade worth and trade efficiency was deemed too general to fit the specific nature of trade companies. The same reasoning was employed while redesigning the Sund and Bosphorus tolls.
An ulterior important change is the one concerning chinaware, tea and spices prices. Demand will decrease for each European province belonging to a country that has the "East India Trade Company". When demand decreases, so do prices. Eastern players will want to prevent Europeans from acquiring the trade company, or making so that the smallest among Europeans get a hold of it. Likewise, those successful few Europeans who manage to seize valuable land in Asia will want to prevent others from acquiring the "East India Trade Company", else they will witness their own tariff income decreasing. The rational is that, as exotic goods are more readily available in Europe, their prices decrease, as offer meets demand.
To avoid embarrassing situations, an ulterior device was introduced. Switching one's capital to Asia (where exotic supply came from) or the New World (where exotic demand wasn't comparable to that of Europe) will trigger the loss of the modifier. A temporary capital move by Ming or Hindustan to Sardinia, Malta or the likes, for instance, would be therefore ineffective. A permanent move would otherwise be detrimental to income.
Lastly, given the now exclusive nature of the modifiers, the AI was instructed to seek an Eastern province when circumstances are ripe for the decision enactment. The AI will attempt to target weak Asian owners at first, avoiding (theoretically tougher) players when possible. New missions introducing the want for a rival to lose the East India modifier were included.
Last edited by silktrader; 25-06-2012 at 16:41.