I'm no expert on the Second French Empire, but it wasn't an Absolute Monarchy in the same way as Tsarist Russia was, was it? I think Pruss Const. is probably appropriate.
Well, it's good to know everyone has suddenly changed their mind after the last argument over why it had to be Presidential Dictatorship.
If Naselus wants to change it, then so be it. I see no reason to.
Ok, I don't mean to be a hardass, but this thread is called Mandates & Korea, not "French government type". Anyway I think there was another thread concerning this.
As for Korea, I really don't care anymore. All that needs to happen is that Korea-Chinese relations should be bumped up to above 150 and Russia should stop trying to conquer it, and instead try to put them into their sphere instead (clashing with Japan).
Yes in an ideal world Korea would be a puppet of China, but Rylock hates them so much, and I can easily make the change myself, so whatever.
Insofar as France goes, I'll point out that you *did* bring it up on page 2. Probably why it was commented on. But there's no need to continue hijacking your intended discussion.
Anyhow, with regards to your last post: the changes to Lebanon were made two versions ago. Any changes otherwise made to the Orient are Naselus' to decide (that is who you were responding to, and he's without Internet for a bit, so you'll need to wait for a response). He also had ideas about Persian events, though I imagine some of what you suggested on that front might be do-able. Persia's relations with Russia were fixed in the last version.
I can indeed increase Korea's relations with Qing. Will add that into 3.07.
Rylock opposed to make Korea a Chinese puppet on account of puppet's duty to join the war to defend suzerain, which both might make some trouble and is not true in history. Chinese Empire had a great tributary system, but thoese tributes were not puppets as they still had independent diplomacy besides Tibet(was more similar to an actual satellite in Qing's indirect control). Even if we make Chinese tributary system in APD, events will be better, not puppet.
Last edited by ayafox; 04-07-2012 at 09:17.
And yes I agree a more focused "Korea Question" event is needed to flesh out the future of the Korean state (otherwise it stays stagnant the entire game or is absorbed by Russia, and I hate both outcomes equally.
It's not a Presidential Dictatorship. It's an Absolute Monarchy. Seeing as the primary difference between the two is the monarch part (which 'Emperor' qualifies as), that's why it's set as that. I might change the flag, though, since people keep whining about it. Seriously. God forbid Wikipedia show a different flag for Napoleonic France.I mentioned it in passing, but in truth his flag should be changed, the fleur-de-lis does not belong on a flag for a Presidential Dictatorship.
It's in the 3.0.4 changelog. Lebanon's been reduced to a single tag (as opposed to "Christian Lebanon" and "Muslim Lebanon"), and yes, the flags were changed.Well I have not been able to download the new version yet, but I checked the changelog and did not see any changes, did you just forget to place it in? What changes did you make exactly? Did you change the flags as well?
We can't direct the AI short of events simply adding influence/relations. Naselus says he has plans for Persia, so I'll leave it to him. As for oil, I've no idea. There's a whole list of provinces which gain oil in the Goods event list. Persia could be in there.Yes I just noticed, I just hope it will stop them from eating up Persia, and instead the Russians will sphere them instead. But the relationship between Persia/UK and Persia/Russia should be enhanced even more. Also does oil appear in Persia at the beginning of the 20th century?
Here is Napoleon III special flag, which should replace the old Bourbon Fleur-de-lis for the Absolute Monarchy:
Or frankly you could just continue to use the French Tricolour, as the flag above was technically the personal flag of Napoleon III, not necessarily representing the entire Second Empire.
Just about the French Flag, it's completely fine to put the tricolor flag as the flag of the absolute monarchy. The July Monarchy didn't dare to change it and I think it's pretty safe to assume even the most reactionary regime would not get rid of it.
I tried using the Napoleonic standard once before... it just looks really messy when rendered as a small flag. Honestly, I don't place much importance on which flag is showing. To me (and, I imagine, to Naselus), any monarchy flag will do. I like seeing the monarchy flag being different than the regular flag, personally, but I'm also tired of discussing it. Whatever I change it to, I'm sure someone else will show up before long deciding that it must change to something else.The only time I ever see France turn into an Absolute Monarchy is when the Napoleon III event fires, so the flag should just be his imperial standard, as Louis Phillipe I (The guy before Napoleon III, who is ruler of France in 1836) used the French tricolour.
Because that's how we roll, apparently.
About the Korea-Qing thing, you could try to represent the relationship without making them a puppet at the start.
For instance every few years there could be an event/decision that pops up for Korea saying something like "The Qing Empire demands Tribute from us" and Korea has a choice of either accepting; which increases relations between the two countries and takes a large amount of money from Korea and gives it to China, or rejecting, which lowers relations and maybe gives the Qing and CB against Korea (maybe a "Make Puppet" CB).
Then you could also have a system where if any GP takes Korea into it's sphere, Qing China has a chance to react, perhaps delivering an ultimatum to the GP; "Get out of Korea, or else!", if they refuse then the Qing get a CB to remove Korea from their sphere, etc.
Something like that would be acceptable, wouldn't it?
On another note, we need more events for the Russo-Japanese Wars, I had the japanese declaring war on them every 5 years, and even when the most eastern part of Russia was cut off (Dismantling, wooo!) there was still no territorial gains, and Ukraine beat them in a war, that is how weak they were.
The real Russo-Japanese Treaty:
The only time there seem to be arguments, in fact, are when someone decides that their version of historical accuracy must take precedence over every other consideration... or when they don't accept that final say over what gets priority rests with Naselus (or, failing his involvement or interest, with me).
But, no, pulling out "historical accuracy" as an argument is not the final word on anything.
But whatever. Clearly a vital issue of great concern that shakes the very foundation of historical plausibility.