(MOD) 399 a.d.

[AKronblad]

1. The foederati request has some errors. If you choose to let them have the province you declare war and get 5 prestige. But you will have peace at the same time and loose 5 prestige. Is it necessary to first have war and then peace? And why do you get 5 prestige just to loose them? The text says you let them have the province, get military units and 5 prestige. The help text when you hover the button says:

"Relation between and Roma changed by 40.
Declare War on Roma.
White Peace with .Gain 5.00 prestige.
Lose 5.00 prestige."

There is something wrong with the way EU3 presents the effects, like above. Everything down to and including "Gain 5 prestige" refers to the Germanic, "Lose 5 prestige" refers to Roma. War and the White Peace is only way I could come up with that creates the truce without which it wouldn't really make much sense to accept (because without it, the Germanic would get the province and very likely DoW afterwards). Through giving up a province, Roma has now bought itself some time (5 years) to deal with other matters. A good setup, in my own highly subjective view...

[Micro]

There is something wrong with the way EU3 presents the effects, like above. Everything down to and including "Gain 5 prestige" refers to the Germanic, "Lose 5 prestige" refers to Roma. War and the White Peace is only way I could come up with that creates the truce without which it wouldn't really make much sense to accept (because without it, the Germanic would get the province and very likely DoW afterwards). Through giving up a province, Roma has now bought itself some time (5 years) to deal with other matters. A good setup, in my own highly subjective view...

Thats ok then.

But Roma still gets and then loose 5 prestige... the text in the foederati request says Roma will get 5 prestige... not zero which will be the result.

[AKronblad]

Thats ok then.

But Roma still gets and then loose 5 prestige... the text in the foederati request says Roma will get 5 prestige... not zero which will be the result.

Where do you get that from? If Roma accepts then Germanic Tribe gains 5 prestige, and Roma loses 5 prestige.

[Micro]

On another note, I have been thinking about the drop in prestige. If all barbarians go to war with Roma at the same time they will most likely conquer a lot of provinces. This results in a lot of Roma cores in other nations and therefore this high drop in prestige (uncontested claims). Roma will most likely not reqonquer all those provinces again so I though that Roma cores conquered by those barbarian nations could be removed faster than the standard 25 or 50 years... 50 years is a long time to have -100 prestige.

With only a few uncontested cores, the drop is only 1-2% but when all the barbarians conquer most of Iberia and Gaul the drop will be 9-10% each year. Usupers and migration remove the cores so its the provinces lost in war that is the problem.

2-3 Roma cores in other nations could be removed each 5 years by an event... and the event should only fire if Roma has more than maybe 3 cores in other nations.

This event should be done or the barbarians should be weaker when they attack. 10-20 Years is too fast for Roma to decline.

[Micro]

Where do you get that from? If Roma accepts then Germanic Tribe gains 5 prestige, and Roma loses 5 prestige.

Look at the screenshot I attached in my post. It says Gain 5.00 prestige. The next line says Lose 5.00 prestige. And Roma did not get any prestige. It was on -100 and -100 after the event.

[AKronblad]

Look at the screenshot I attached in my post. It says Gain 5.00 prestige. The next line says Lose 5.00 prestige. And Roma did not get any prestige. It was on -100 and -100 after the event.

That's what I am saying above: "There is something wrong with the way EU3 presents the effects, like above. Everything down to and including "Gain 5 prestige" refers to the Germanic, "Lose 5 prestige" refers to Roma." So Roma loses 5 prestige if accepting the foederati. And in your case prestige was already -100 and can't go lower than that. OK?

[AKronblad]

On another note, I have been thinking about the drop in prestige. If all barbarians go to war with Roma at the same time they will most likely conquer a lot of provinces. This results in a lot of Roma cores in other nations and therefore this high drop in prestige (uncontested claims). Roma will most likely not reqonquer all those provinces again so I though that Roma cores conquered by those barbarian nations could be removed faster than the standard 25 or 50 years... 50 years is a long time to have -100 prestige.

With only a few uncontested cores, the drop is only 1-2% but when all the barbarians conquer most of Iberia and Gaul the drop will be 9-10% each year. Usupers and migration remove the cores so its the provinces lost in war that is the problem.

2-3 Roma cores in other nations could be removed each 5 years by an event... and the event should only fire if Roma has more than maybe 3 cores in other nations.

This event should be done or the barbarians should be weaker when they attack. 10-20 Years is too fast for Roma to decline.

Agree that quite a few cores should be lost. Will look at that.

[Micro]

That's what I am saying above: "There is something wrong with the way EU3 presents the effects, like above. Everything down to and including "Gain 5 prestige" refers to the Germanic, "Lose 5 prestige" refers to Roma." So Roma loses 5 prestige if accepting the foederati. And in your case prestige was already -100 and can't go lower than that. OK?

Ohh... that explains it.
Stupid buggy text!

[AKronblad]

Ohh... that explains it.
Stupid buggy text!

Glad we sorted it out!

[Micro]

For the fun of it, here is a screen shot of Europe 419.

Screen shot 2012-01-30 at 14.37.14.jpg

Angles and Saxons had a party in Italy. And Angles even had some in Africa.
Visigoths in Iberia.
Frisians in Bretagne, but that might be ok.

[AKronblad]

"EDIT3: 7. The foederati decision should only be avalable to barbarian nations that border Roma."

It is. It is only allowed if you have Roma as neighbour (neighbour = WRE). Please check Vandals for details. So should be ok.

[AKronblad]

Agree that quite a few cores should be lost. Will look at that.

I have added a decision in which WRE give up its cores on non-owned provinces. If a Reconquest decision is introduced, they will get cores back.

give_up_cores = {
		potential = {
			tag = WRE
		}
		allow = {
			any_core = { not = { owned_by = THIS } }
		}
		effect = {
			any_core =  {
				limit = { not = { owned_by = THIS } }
				remove_core = THIS
			}
		}
		ai_will_do = {
			factor = 1
		}
}

[Micro]

I have added a decision in which WRE give up its cores on non-owned provinces. If a Reconquest decision is introduced, they will get cores back.

give_up_cores = {
		potential = {
			tag = WRE
		}
		allow = {
			any_core = { not = { owned_by = THIS } }
		}
		effect = {
			any_core =  {
				limit = { not = { owned_by = THIS } }
				remove_core = THIS
			}
		}
		ai_will_do = {
			factor = 1
		}
}

Cool!

With a reconqeust decision that gives 2-3 cores and a mission to reconquer those provinces and of course a reconqeust casus belli this would give Roma a goal in the game except just to survive. Many of those built in missions does not make sense some times.

This decision should be available as long as Roma does not own all it's old provinces.

[AKronblad]

Cool!

With a reconqeust decision that gives 2-3 cores and a mission to reconquer those provinces and of course a reconqeust casus belli this would give Roma a goal in the game except just to survive. Many of those built in missions does not make sense some times.

This decision should be available as long as Roma does not own all it's old provinces.

Agree, this would be a grand "Reconquer the Empire" decision that will be made available for WRE, ERE, and BZN (for provinces not owned by any of these three). Will probably do it in the form of a combination of a few permanent cores and many temporary cores so that prestige does not suffer too much. But at the same time, the decision should not be made too impulsively, so there must be some cost or risk attached to it. (Challenging part is as always how AI should decide whether to make decision or not....)

[Micro]

I almost forgot... the nations to choose from at the bookmark should be changed. I would suggest Roma, Constantinoble, Huns, Franks and Visigoths.

[XVG]

I almost forgot... the nations to choose from at the bookmark should be changed. I would suggest Roma, Constantinoble, Huns, Franks and Visigoths.

Maybe also some Asian ones? Gupta, Persia or Zhongguo?

[Micro]

Sugestions for changes of some events:

1. The random barbarian AI declare war event should have a mean time to happen of 60 months (months = 60). Also add Franks (tag = FRK).
2. The size penalty event modifier event should have a duration of no longer than 5 years (duration = 1825).

With these changes the size penalty will be changed more often and the barbarian nations will not declare war so often. This will help Roma to withstand the pressure from the barbarians. Remember, Roma still gets usurpers and foederati requests and when the barbarians declare war their alliance partners will help them. So Roma will still lose land!

I suggest these changes because I have never played a game where the Empire lasted for more than 10-15 years. After that Roma has usually been minimized to maximum 10 provinces...

[XVG]

Sugestions for changes of some events:

1. The random barbarian AI declare war event should have a mean time to happen of 60 months (months = 60). Also add Franks (tag = FRK).
2. The size penalty event modifier event should have a duration of no longer than 5 years (duration = 1825).

With these changes the size penalty will be changed more often and the barbarian nations will not declare war so often. This will help Roma to withstand the pressure from the barbarians. Remember, Roma still gets usurpers and foederati requests and when the barbarians declare war their alliance partners will help them. So Roma will still lose land!

I suggest these changes because I have never played a game where the Empire lasted for more than 10-15 years. After that Roma has usually been minimized to maximum 10 provinces...

I agree with you. As Western Rome was actually 'destroyed' only by Odoacer and his foederati. (The Barbarians could only weaken Roma but not totally destroy it. So how about making a Odoacer event?
Conditions could be:

Western Rome reduced to only Italy (not controlling some important places like Carthage, Londonium and some place in Iberia. )
Roma has accepted a foederati
A weak ruler/ regency / low stability / low legitimacy / high war exhaustion

Of course a player playing Rome would find this very annoying and game-breaking, but it was historical. Maybe this could be used to restrict a player playing Roma too aggressively/ getting into bad situations?
There should also be some randomness. Eg. the 'coup' not succeeding.

If Odoacer succeeds. Italy inherits Roma and Odoacer becomes a king.

Just my thoughts.

[AKronblad]

Sugestions for changes of some events:

1. The random barbarian AI declare war event should have a mean time to happen of 60 months (months = 60). Also add Franks (tag = FRK).
2. The size penalty event modifier event should have a duration of no longer than 5 years (duration = 1825).

With these changes the size penalty will be changed more often and the barbarian nations will not declare war so often. This will help Roma to withstand the pressure from the barbarians. Remember, Roma still gets usurpers and foederati requests and when the barbarians declare war their alliance partners will help them. So Roma will still lose land!

I suggest these changes because I have never played a game where the Empire lasted for more than 10-15 years. After that Roma has usually been minimized to maximum 10 provinces...

1. You mean the one at start date? OK, will consider to change to MttH = 60 months to give Roma some relief. But reason for not including FRK is that in history they became much more active later (450-470AD). Not that excluding them from this event will stop them from declaring wars, but nevertheless....
2. Fair enough. I can change to 1825 days in a later version to see the effect.

[AKronblad]

So how about making a Odoacer event?
Conditions could be:

Western Rome reduced to only Italy (not controlling some important places like Carthage, Londonium and some place in Iberia. )
Roma has accepted a foederati
A weak ruler/ regency / low stability / low legitimacy / high war exhaustion

Of course a player playing Rome would find this very annoying and game-breaking, but it was historical. Maybe this could be used to restrict a player playing Roma too aggressively/ getting into bad situations?
There should also be some randomness. Eg. the 'coup' not succeeding.

If Odoacer succeeds. Italy inherits Roma and Odoacer becomes a king.

Good idea! It could be an ai = yes event only. Or involve a human WRE player too, but give him/her two options: one ( = Odoacer) tempting or discouraging (that you'd really need to consider), and one alternative (with some other severe risk if you don't accept Odoacer). Of course, player could then continue with Italy....

I have made a Ricimer event (not yet published) a little like this, where player can get a great general (Ricimer) but risk (minor probability) getting ruler and/or heir killed, prestige lost, etc. Same same but different so could be used for Odoacer as well.