+ Reply to Thread
Page 2 of 3 FirstFirst 1 2 3 LastLast
Results 21 to 40 of 46

Thread: On how missions should have been implemented.

  1. #21
    French Moddection wraitii's Avatar
    Crusader Kings IIEU3 CompleteDivine WindHeir to the Throne500k club

    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    France
    Posts
    838
    Note sure we need to keep mission cancelation if it represents what the people need... You can't cancel their needs.
    InExtenso - Distance is your enemy.
    DW is too slow? Get the Faster Graphics Pack.
    Hate the wavy fog? Go back to the old one.
    Don't hate me because I'm French. Hate me because I can mod anything in this game

  2. #22
    Lt. General ANO1453's Avatar
    Crusader Kings IIEuropa Universalis: Chronicles500k clubEuropa Universalis IV: Pre-order

    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Location
    by Jove, who cares?
    Posts
    1,430
    Quote Originally Posted by Marquis d Blois View Post
    I don't think the completion of a mission should cancel the others by default, however, there has to be a way to get rid of silly ones.

    So I say we should be able to cancel them, and the result would not be prestige loss. Instead, a slider move away from the group issuing the mission - with all its adverse effects (i.e. stab hit and revolt). Similarly, completing would give moves towards the group - with positive effects (probably).

    This way we could go all the way towards the group (I mean reach +-5 slider position) while cancelling can only take to +-3 (upon reaching it, they don't give any more missions, and any are auto-cancelled but without any effects).

    And then the groups themselves:
    • Clergy: Narrowminded
    • Nobility: Aristocracy, Serfdom (Land)
    • Citizenry: Plutocracy, Free subjects
    • Peasantry: Free subjects
    Nobility is not associated with serfdom after the middle of the game's timeframe, and even promoted by enterpreneurs (which we would see as Citinzenry?), in the American plantantions. And that doesn't solve the problem, which is to get sometimes stupid and senseles misions. I was thinking in three slots:
    one which was either Plutocratic or Aristocratic missions
    one which has either Clergy (narrowmindeness) or Philosopher (innovative)
    one which has either serfs or citizens (depending on the free subjects slider)
    - and, if we are feeling generous, a "God wants us to" slot, which has general missions, with core giving things.
    And giving stab hits, revolts and slider moves is a bit too much, IMO. Sliders take a long time to move in big empires, and if we are going to get backward just because we want to cancel some senseless missions that might still appear it just gets worse.

    @ mudcrabmerchant Yes, the power, could go to sectors other than the nobility, but I wasn't talking about power - I was talking about military/diplomatic competences which we will see as an "aristocratic" (not nobility) role for the timeframe.
    Last edited by ANO1453; 21-08-2011 at 00:21.
    CoT today, gone tomorrow
    A saying. Or so they say
    ---------
    EU3 AAR: Two lions and a yellow background (MPM)

  3. #23
    Quote Originally Posted by wraitii View Post
    Note sure we need to keep mission cancelation if it represents what the people need... You can't cancel their needs.
    Just if they want something stupid, you still have to be able to tell them to 'want something else'. And if the slider would thus move to -3, they would no longer have the voice (representation, power, influence) to give a mission at all.
    Quote Originally Posted by ANO1453 View Post
    Nobility is not associated with serfdom after the middle of the game's timeframe, and even promoted by enterpreneurs (which we would see as Citinzenry?), in the American plantantions. And that doesn't solve the problem, which is to get sometimes stupid and senseles misions. I was thinking in three slots:
    one which was either Plutocratic or Aristocratic missions
    one which has either Clergy (narrowmindeness) or Philosopher (innovative)
    one which has either serfs or citizens (depending on the free subjects slider)
    - and, if we are feeling generous, a "God wants us to" slot, which has general missions, with core giving things.
    And giving stab hits, revolts and slider moves is a bit too much, IMO. Sliders take a long time to move in big empires, and if we are going to get backward just because we want to cancel some senseless missions that might still appear it just gets worse.
    Yes, Aristocracy was related to Serfdom only in Feudal Monarchies. And we change to other government forms in the 17th century.

    I think we want almost the same, as our categories quite translate to each other. So I'd like to clear up on it a bit:
    • Nobility: tied to the Aristocracy slider, slightly Land and Offensive (?) oriented. Gives many expansive missions (and cores).
    • Burjoise: tied to the Plutocracy slider, slightly Naval oriented. Being rich traders, they rather give Build and Establish Trade missions.
    • Citizenry: tied to the Free subjects slider, possibly related to Innovative. Gives Build missions (and hopefully others, I just couldn't come up with it right now.) They mean the not-so-wealthy city dwellers (artisans and small-scale traders).
    • Clergy: obviously Narrowminded, with Convert and Attack Heathen/Heretic missions.
    • Court: possibly Centralisation related, but I'm not sure. Anyway, they are responsible for the Establish RM, Vassalise, Annex, Vote for us, etc. missions. And hopefully more conquest missions (and free cores without conquest).
    • Workers: complete anachronism. But for the sake of example, they prefer Free subjects and Quantity in return for manufactory building.
    Sorry I excluded the 'God wills...' version, but it could be the standard for the Clergy.

    For slider moves, I agree that they would be too fast relative to the method available right now, but I would (personally) love the possibility of a radical overchange of policies... at the cost of county-wide revolts and general turmoil, much like the French Revolution.
    Also, I'd like to point out that there are quite a few national and religious decisions that give slider moves, and I personally have made 2-3 moves in a direction within a year thanks to them. (Note: this doesn't include basic slider moves based off government form).

  4. #24
    Lt. General ANO1453's Avatar
    Crusader Kings IIEuropa Universalis: Chronicles500k clubEuropa Universalis IV: Pre-order

    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Location
    by Jove, who cares?
    Posts
    1,430
    Quote Originally Posted by Marquis d Blois View Post
    I think we want almost the same, as our categories quite translate to each other. So I'd like to clear up on it a bit:
    • Nobility: tied to the Aristocracy slider, slightly Land and Offensive (?) oriented. Gives many expansive missions (and cores).
    • Burjoise: tied to the Plutocracy slider, slightly Naval oriented. Being rich traders, they rather give Build and Establish Trade missions.
    • Citizenry: tied to the Free subjects slider, possibly related to Innovative. Gives Build missions (and hopefully others, I just couldn't come up with it right now.) They mean the not-so-wealthy city dwellers (artisans and small-scale traders).
    • Clergy: obviously Narrowminded, with Convert and Attack Heathen/Heretic missions.
    • Court: possibly Centralisation related, but I'm not sure. Anyway, they are responsible for the Establish RM, Vassalise, Annex, Vote for us, etc. missions. And hopefully more conquest missions (and free cores without conquest).
    • Workers: complete anachronism. But for the sake of example, they prefer Free subjects and Quantity in return for manufactory building.
    Sorry I excluded the 'God wills...' version, but it could be the standard for the Clergy.
    I'm not sure how the Court gets in centralisation, because it is a council with the representation of the three classes. In fact, in the centralised states of Despotic/Absolute Monarchy, the Court is irrelevant for anything other than taxes or recognising the heir to the throne.
    I don't see much difference between Bourgeoisie and Citizenry, or Citizenry and Workers. But your suggestion is very similar to mine. We basically divide the population in classes, and have those classes wish something only when they are still relevant. So, in late game, in the French Revolution for example, we don't get the Clergy asking to purge the infidel.

    (Note: this doesn't include basic slider moves based off government form).
    Yeah, I'm on middle game, and I get one every 20 years. It only gets worse.
    CoT today, gone tomorrow
    A saying. Or so they say
    ---------
    EU3 AAR: Two lions and a yellow background (MPM)

  5. #25
    General kolmy's Avatar
    Crusader Kings IIEuropa Universalis 3Europa Universalis: Chronicles500k clubEuropa Universalis IV: Pre-order
    EUIV: Call to arms event

    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Location
    Portugal
    Posts
    2,180
    Quote Originally Posted by wraitii View Post
    I think I'll get that a lot... Could someone sum up how MMtG intends to deal with this?
    The two diaries about factions explain how their mission system works.
    Owner of a Cork Cookie For Great Lusitan Flagish Skills:

  6. #26
    French Moddection wraitii's Avatar
    Crusader Kings IIEU3 CompleteDivine WindHeir to the Throne500k club

    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    France
    Posts
    838
    I see... It's not exactly the same, though there are factions. Of course I'd implement them differently, I think Magna Mundi is way more hardcore than EU ought to be. It's midway between the "fun" CK, and the more serious vicky and HOI.
    InExtenso - Distance is your enemy.
    DW is too slow? Get the Faster Graphics Pack.
    Hate the wavy fog? Go back to the old one.
    Don't hate me because I'm French. Hate me because I can mod anything in this game

  7. #27
    Ruler of the Queen's Navee George LeS's Avatar
    Europa Universalis 3Divine WindHeir to the ThroneEuropa Universalis III: In NomineEU3 Napoleon's Ambition

    Join Date
    Feb 2004
    Location
    Richmond, VA
    Posts
    4,613
    One trouble with all this is that it tends to read modern perceptions or misperceptions back onto the past. For instance:

    Quote Originally Posted by Marquis d Blois View Post
    ...
    Yes, Aristocracy was related to Serfdom only in Feudal Monarchies. And we change to other government forms in the 17th century.

    ...
    This isn't true; or is only in W Europe. In E Europe, the opposite happened; serfdom ROSE with more modern states (late 16th C onwards).

    Again, the notion of clergy as "narrowminded" is true enough in certain contexts, but not others. A lot depends on how you've got your state religion organized. There is a big difference between the erastian, the local, and the international, churches. (In W Europe, in the game, those adjectives translate to "Protestant", "Reformed", and "Catholic", respectively. But I'm not knowledgeable enough to translate further overseas, except tentatively classing Confucian as erastian.)

    It's not that these are bad ideas, but sublety is needed; care not to read English history onto Poland.

    On a complete tangent, there could be, as I've often said, external effects. I've long argued for war missions; you could have them for alliances as well. "Go here, don't go there." A thought: could you have negative missions? That is, "missions" in which the effect is something undesireable? Thus, colonizing a province in C America will get you in big trouble if you're Catholic, and not Spain? I can see the AI would have a problem here, but it might help limit players, especially if we could get more than one active mission. It could allow AI nations to stake claims to certain areas, and penalize the player for violating it. (In real terms, violating their sphere, although the game uses that word more narrowly.) It could involve colonization, rate of building colonies, trade, possibly even # of units in a given area.

    Just a notion.
    'Believe me, my young friend, there is nothing--absolutely nothing--half so much worth doing as simply messing about in boats.' -- the Water Rat

    GRIN Mod--Historical leaders mods: http://forum.paradoxplaza.com/forum/...46994-GRIN-Mod

    Rex Maris--SRI-based naval and exploration mod. http://forum.paradoxplaza.com/forum/...4#post11451354

  8. #28
    Lt. General ANO1453's Avatar
    Crusader Kings IIEuropa Universalis: Chronicles500k clubEuropa Universalis IV: Pre-order

    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Location
    by Jove, who cares?
    Posts
    1,430
    Quote Originally Posted by George LeS View Post
    One trouble with all this is that it tends to read modern perceptions or misperceptions back onto the past. For instance:



    This isn't true; or is only in W Europe. In E Europe, the opposite happened; serfdom ROSE with more modern states (late 16th C onwards).

    Again, the notion of clergy as "narrowminded" is true enough in certain contexts, but not others. A lot depends on how you've got your state religion organized. There is a big difference between the erastian, the local, and the international, churches. (In W Europe, in the game, those adjectives translate to "Protestant", "Reformed", and "Catholic", respectively. But I'm not knowledgeable enough to translate further overseas, except tentatively classing Confucian as erastian.)

    It's not that these are bad ideas, but sublety is needed; care not to read English history onto Poland.

    On a complete tangent, there could be, as I've often said, external effects. I've long argued for war missions; you could have them for alliances as well. "Go here, don't go there." A thought: could you have negative missions? That is, "missions" in which the effect is something undesireable? Thus, colonizing a province in C America will get you in big trouble if you're Catholic, and not Spain? I can see the AI would have a problem here, but it might help limit players, especially if we could get more than one active mission. It could allow AI nations to stake claims to certain areas, and penalize the player for violating it. (In real terms, violating their sphere, although the game uses that word more narrowly.) It could involve colonization, rate of building colonies, trade, possibly even # of units in a given area.

    Just a notion.
    You made some good observations. I feel, however, that those negative missions could be a bit 'deterministic', if you will.
    CoT today, gone tomorrow
    A saying. Or so they say
    ---------
    EU3 AAR: Two lions and a yellow background (MPM)

  9. #29
    Negative missions are certainly a weird idea, but quite acceptable. Especially if they give a positive mission as the 'key' to remove them.
    A simple deadline will do, but that won't be too interesting.

    Also, these would be a great use for geographical regions (they are awesome, but hardly ever used).
    Possibly the 'Keep X out of region Y' which means X cannot gain a core in Y region, and gives a nice CB for provinces owned by X in Y region, as well as releasing states into reg. Y. On failure, X gains cores on all their currently owned provinces in Y and possibly a few (or just a CB) against the player.
    I understand this would suck as Tuscany gets Keep France/HRE Austria out of Italy so there should be some restriction (for example, neither monthly income, max manpower nor forcelimit of X should not exceed the double of the player; this happening would auto-cancel the mission without any negative effects).

    Example of such a complex mission:
    Thou shalt not own anything in the Caribbean before you acquire at least 2 colonies in Brazil (allow: no Caribbean holdings, no Brazilian holdings, at peace with all primitives, has QftNW)

  10. #30
    I agree with all the OPs points. Especially the point about not giving cores on foreign lands. Most of the countries i play don't have core giving missions. One time though I decided to have a go at playing Burgundy, and was shocked at the amount of free ores i got from missions. To me it almost seemed like cheating and i gave the game up.

    I would like to see the whole core system overhauled. And hopefullyget rid of missions and events that give them out to sme nations but not to others. It should be a fifty years wait.

  11. #31
    Quote Originally Posted by Dogia View Post
    I agree with all the OPs points. Especially the point about not giving cores on foreign lands. Most of the countries i play don't have core giving missions. One time though I decided to have a go at playing Burgundy, and was shocked at the amount of free ores i got from missions. To me it almost seemed like cheating and i gave the game up.
    Have you tried playing England?
    Mission no. 1 (50% of the time): Conquer Ireland!
    Mission no. 2 (the other half): Subdue Scotland!
    Mission no. 3 (rarer as first): Reclaim Normandy! (Gives some prestige for successfully retaking your cores)
    99% mission if you complete/cancel one while at war with France: control Paris! This gives cores on all Gallia (yes, 2/3 of 1399 Burgundy and half of France) if you complete a siege of Paris!

    Overly good missions, eh?

  12. #32
    Lt. General ANO1453's Avatar
    Crusader Kings IIEuropa Universalis: Chronicles500k clubEuropa Universalis IV: Pre-order

    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Location
    by Jove, who cares?
    Posts
    1,430
    Quote Originally Posted by Marquis d Blois View Post
    Example of such a complex mission:
    Thou shalt not own anything in the Caribbean before you acquire at least 2 colonies in Brazil (allow: no Caribbean holdings, no Brazilian holdings, at peace with all primitives, has QftNW)
    Me, playing as Portugal, would support that. As long as I kept Brazil Castille wouldn't touch the Caribbean (but then again, if I had Brazil, my next target would be the Caribbean anyway).

    The HRE could use some core missions for OPM, but not too much.
    CoT today, gone tomorrow
    A saying. Or so they say
    ---------
    EU3 AAR: Two lions and a yellow background (MPM)

  13. #33
    Another weird idea would be to have mission 'pairs' 'groups' or 'strings'.
    Pairs and groups would be two (or more) countries getting missions that mutually exclude each other (e.g. if one is completed, none other in the group can be completed). Of course, the completion of one would fail the others immediately.

    This would be to spark competition between minors (perhaps towards forming a union tag), like giving Thüringia, Hesse, Saxony, Meissen and Brunswick the mission to take and hold (own) Anhalt for 10 years. Conquest CB for all. On grabbing Anhalt, core. Upon completion, 'free' (actually hard-earned) core on any owned Saxon region provinces, and an event 728.

    This idea is based off of me often witnessing France start with the Aquitanie mission while England got the Reclaim Normandy. This is not such a mathematical impossibility, but still reflects the basic idea behind them.



    Mission strings: a bunch of successive missions that build upon each other through necessity, not only chance.
    Like:
    -Establish trade in Italy (own 1 merchant in Liguria or Venice)
    -Widen trade in Italy (own at least 1 in both)
    -Expand trade in Italy (own 3-3 or 7 altogether)
    -Rely on trade in Italy (5-5)
    -Monopolize on trade in Italy (6-6) (available after Monopolies are discovered)
    Each should give a minor Prestige boost and a dozen ducats.

  14. #34
    Lt. General ANO1453's Avatar
    Crusader Kings IIEuropa Universalis: Chronicles500k clubEuropa Universalis IV: Pre-order

    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Location
    by Jove, who cares?
    Posts
    1,430
    Quote Originally Posted by Marquis d Blois View Post
    Another weird idea would be to have mission 'pairs' 'groups' or 'strings'.
    Pairs and groups would be two (or more) countries getting missions that mutually exclude each other (e.g. if one is completed, none other in the group can be completed). Of course, the completion of one would fail the others immediately.

    This would be to spark competition between minors (perhaps towards forming a union tag), like giving Thüringia, Hesse, Saxony, Meissen and Brunswick the mission to take and hold (own) Anhalt for 10 years. Conquest CB for all. On grabbing Anhalt, core. Upon completion, 'free' (actually hard-earned) core on any owned Saxon region provinces, and an event 728.

    This idea is based off of me often witnessing France start with the Aquitanie mission while England got the Reclaim Normandy. This is not such a mathematical impossibility, but still reflects the basic idea behind them.



    Mission strings: a bunch of successive missions that build upon each other through necessity, not only chance.
    Like:
    -Establish trade in Italy (own 1 merchant in Liguria or Venice)
    -Widen trade in Italy (own at least 1 in both)
    -Expand trade in Italy (own 3-3 or 7 altogether)
    -Rely on trade in Italy (5-5)
    -Monopolize on trade in Italy (6-6) (available after Monopolies are discovered)
    Each should give a minor Prestige boost and a dozen ducats.
    We could add mission strings right now, no? And they seem reasonable, giving a player not just a task to fulfill, but a whole orientation to his country. If he wanted, obviously. Otherwise he could just cancel and get another string more suitable to his aspirations.

    The competitive missions seem very good to me as well, adding an extra incentive, but I don't know if we could mod those in.
    CoT today, gone tomorrow
    A saying. Or so they say
    ---------
    EU3 AAR: Two lions and a yellow background (MPM)

  15. #35
    Quote Originally Posted by ANO1453 View Post
    The competitive missions seem very good to me as well, adding an extra incentive, but I don't know if we could mod those in.
    There is one thing that there could be an event firing on game start and handing out these missions, and there is the other that unless we want to interrupt already given missions we couldn't gather the countries required to open a mission slot.

    I think we should go back and have a 'God wills' slot for exactly this reason. It would be unique that upon completion (or failure) you don't necessarily get a new mission instantly.

    Competitive mission crusade:
    The first Catholic state to kill 10K men of the current crusade target loses 3-5 Infamy, gains 10 Army Tradition, 20 Prestige, and a hug from the Pope.

  16. #36
    French Moddection wraitii's Avatar
    Crusader Kings IIEU3 CompleteDivine WindHeir to the Throne500k club

    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    France
    Posts
    838
    I quite like Georges Les idea of negative missions... But i wouldn't use them for historical determinism, unless there is an explicit and logical reason to do so. Have a mission "Do not colonize the caribbean but Brazil first" makes no sense if there is no drawback to going in the Caribbean, and it feels more like the game is messing with you.

    But if we use missions representing the wills and needs of classes, we certainly could have stuffs like "do not go at war in the next X years" and so on.

    As for the number of missions: I think we should be able to get between 1-4 at once per "class" of mission. If we have Nobles, Clergy, Commoners, Burghers, perhaps Colonists or whatever, each class would be able to have 1-4 missions at once, that could ( not necessarily ) be exclusive.
    I also think rewards for missions should not be too high. But there should be slight drawbacks not to complete them under certain circumstances (I stress this point: sometimes, missions just can't be completed, or they make no sense anymore, and penalty then is a bit dumb).

    As for the other points, we need a overhaul of the "core and claims" part of the game. A military overhaul could also certainly be ordered, as is exploration and ROTW. But that's another topic.
    InExtenso - Distance is your enemy.
    DW is too slow? Get the Faster Graphics Pack.
    Hate the wavy fog? Go back to the old one.
    Don't hate me because I'm French. Hate me because I can mod anything in this game

  17. #37
    Colonel magitsu's Avatar
    Cities in MotionCrusader Kings IIEuropa Universalis: ChroniclesEU3 CompleteFor the Motherland
    Hearts of Iron IIIHOI3: Their Finest HourHeir to the ThroneVictoria: RevolutionsSemper Fi
    SengokuVictoria 2Victoria II: A House DividedVictoria II: Heart of DarknessMount & Blade: Warband
    Mount & Blade: With Fire and SwordCK2: Holy Knight500k clubEuropa Universalis IVEUIV: Wealth of Nations

    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Location
    Finland
    Posts
    845
    Quote Originally Posted by Marquis d Blois View Post
    Overly good missions, eh?
    Italian ambition is miniaturized Occupy Paris.
    I wonder which countries can get it. At least AUS, FRA, CAS, POR.
    For Portugal it made no sense historically (gamewise it's a major bait and small challenge). I missed my exploration deadline by a decade when I decided to take Pisa/Siena & Sicily/Malta with free cores.
    Almost +70% to MP for Portugal, 2 universities and yummu basetax provinces.

    England/Burgundy has incredible starting missions, Castille has one excellent, but France has some roadblocks. You have to cancel a few of them or accept the slow route of diploannexing.

    How about that one event which gives you free cores in just about every neighbour you have?

    Choosing from many missions sounds like a neat idea.
    Last edited by magitsu; 22-08-2011 at 11:56.

  18. #38
    Lt. General ANO1453's Avatar
    Crusader Kings IIEuropa Universalis: Chronicles500k clubEuropa Universalis IV: Pre-order

    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Location
    by Jove, who cares?
    Posts
    1,430
    Quote Originally Posted by magitsu View Post
    Italian ambition is miniaturized Occupy Paris.
    I wonder which countries can get it. At least AUS, FRA, CAS, POR.
    For Portugal it made no sense historically (gamewise it's a major bait and small challenge).
    Yes, in my Portugal game (which I intend to keep somewhat historical), I took Malta (which is Iberian culture) just so that I wouldn't get spammed by that event.

    England/Burgundy has incredible starting missions, Castille has one excellent, but France has some roadblocks. You have to cancel a few of them or accept the slow route of diploannexing.
    I find almost unfair that Portugal gets conquering missions in North Africa but no cores
    CoT today, gone tomorrow
    A saying. Or so they say
    ---------
    EU3 AAR: Two lions and a yellow background (MPM)

  19. #39
    Ruler of the Queen's Navee George LeS's Avatar
    Europa Universalis 3Divine WindHeir to the ThroneEuropa Universalis III: In NomineEU3 Napoleon's Ambition

    Join Date
    Feb 2004
    Location
    Richmond, VA
    Posts
    4,613
    Quote Originally Posted by wraitii View Post
    I quite like Georges Les idea of negative missions... But i wouldn't use them for historical determinism, unless there is an explicit and logical reason to do so. Have a mission "Do not colonize the caribbean but Brazil first" makes no sense if there is no drawback to going in the Caribbean, and it feels more like the game is messing with you.

    But if we use missions representing the wills and needs of classes, we certainly could have stuffs like "do not go at war in the next X years" and so on.

    As for the number of missions: I think we should be able to get between 1-4 at once per "class" of mission. If we have Nobles, Clergy, Commoners, Burghers, perhaps Colonists or whatever, each class would be able to have 1-4 missions at once, that could ( not necessarily ) be exclusive.
    I also think rewards for missions should not be too high. But there should be slight drawbacks not to complete them under certain circumstances (I stress this point: sometimes, missions just can't be completed, or they make no sense anymore, and penalty then is a bit dumb).

    As for the other points, we need a overhaul of the "core and claims" part of the game. A military overhaul could also certainly be ordered, as is exploration and ROTW. But that's another topic.
    What I was thinking of in "negative missions", was external, not internal, relations. That is, colonizing Jamaica would put you in trouble with other countries. Obviously, it's not your internal balance which would be primary here. At least, not on the proposed, class-based, model on the virtues of which I am unconvinced. To my mind, it'd be more realistic for the period (but harder to implement) for internal problems to have a local tilt. It's not the merchants who want you to colonize the W Indies, vs the other classes who don't. Much more likely, it was the merchants of Brest who were all for it, while those of Calais and Marseilles who were PO'd about it. Happened all the time. (Big flap in the late 17th C, where I was born: the commercial monopoly on the sale of bread, held by New York, over surrounding counties.)
    'Believe me, my young friend, there is nothing--absolutely nothing--half so much worth doing as simply messing about in boats.' -- the Water Rat

    GRIN Mod--Historical leaders mods: http://forum.paradoxplaza.com/forum/...46994-GRIN-Mod

    Rex Maris--SRI-based naval and exploration mod. http://forum.paradoxplaza.com/forum/...4#post11451354

  20. #40
    Aye- contrary to popular opinion, the Church (at least in Europe) was the big 'pusher' of science for a very long time. To say that it was 'narrow minded' is, by and large inaccurate- though undoubtedly there are many point where it was.

    Anyways, this is very similar to what MMtG is doing. Multiple factions? Check. Each can give one different missions that can be accepted or ignored? Check. Factions that are powerful and friendly to the gov help? Check. Factions that are powerful and hate the gov can lead revolutions? Check. Granted, it is likely some won't enjoy MMtG due to its hardcore nature, but it's not a bad testing ground for ideas to put in EUIV (just like EU3 was a good testing ground for MMtG).

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