+ Reply to Thread
Page 2 of 4 FirstFirst 1 2 3 4 LastLast
Results 21 to 40 of 69

Thread: Weak Egypt in 1836

  1. #21
    OK, how's this:

    We give Egypt all the reforms it should have, but also a modifier that nerfs it's Research output to next to nothing initially. This is removed when the crisis ends. If the crisis ends in victory, this should allow Egypt to civilize within about 5-10 years. If it results in Egypt losing, we rip out 6-8 reforms, and still remove the modifier. That puts Egypt back a several decades, and leaves it in more or less the state of the other uncivs.

    Hell, I'd even suggest we tag the RP nerf onto Ali's reforms modifier - give it a mobilization boost and some economic benefits, at the expense of stopping RP growth for ten years.
    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

  2. #22
    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
    8,341
    Quote Originally Posted by Naselus View Post
    OK, how's this:

    We give Egypt all the reforms it should have, but also a modifier that nerfs it's Research output to next to nothing initially. This is removed when the crisis ends. If the crisis ends in victory, this should allow Egypt to civilize within about 5-10 years. If it results in Egypt losing, we rip out 6-8 reforms, and still remove the modifier. That puts Egypt back a several decades, and leaves it in more or less the state of the other uncivs.

    Hell, I'd even suggest we tag the RP nerf onto Ali's reforms modifier - give it a mobilization boost and some economic benefits, at the expense of stopping RP growth for ten years.
    We don't need to apply a time limit to the reforms modifier-- it is automatically removed when the crisis ends, one way or the other.

    So, yes, we can apply a negative research % to the reform modifier if we like. It's normally applied in 1838 (or immediately if the crisis starts sooner), but we can apply it whenever.

    I can make the changes, if I know exactly what you'd like them to be. (I'm back from San Diego now.)

    EDIT: Okay, I added the reforms mentioned (bringing Egypt up to 75% civilized at the game start) and adjusted the Muhammad Ali's Reforms modifier to give -60% RP plus a boost to mobilization and land org/org regain (plus it builds a fabric factory, as otherwise that never happens if the country just starts with the reform... although I suppose we could just add the factory in the history file instead). If Egypt loses, then it loses 6 random reforms (3 economic and 3 military) and always loses the modifier as soon as the crisis ends.
    Last edited by Rylock; 17-07-2012 at 22:27.

  3. #23
    General Hibernian's Avatar
    Crusader Kings IIEuropa Universalis 3Divine WindFor the MotherlandHearts of Iron III
    HOI3: Their Finest HourHeir to the ThroneEuropa Universalis III: In NomineEU3 Napoleon's AmbitionNaval War: Arctic Circle
    Rome GoldSemper FiVictoria 2Victoria II: A House DividedMount & Blade: Warband

    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Location
    Dublin, Ireland
    Posts
    2,140
    Sounds good.

  4. #24
    Leave the fabric factory part out - I'll add it in the history files and give them some craftsmen.
    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. #25
    Great! I can't wait to see all of these changes implemented in 3.09.
    But I also suggested a Russio-Turkish alliance and switching OE 1836 ruling party to conservative. No need to be discussed?

  6. #26
    On Probation Straigthtsilver's Avatar
    Crusader Kings IIDarkest HourHearts of Iron IIIMarch of the EaglesVictoria 2
    Victoria II: A House DividedCK2: Holy Knight500k clubEuropa Universalis IV: Pre-orderEUIV: Call to arms event

    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Location
    Canada
    Posts
    745
    The problem with a Russo-Turkish alliance is that the game has the tendency to have alliances last an extremely long amount of time, and not take into account historical enmity between nations (hence Hapsburg Austria's love of allying with the Ottomans in-game, rather than just begrudgingly stonewalling the Russians as happened historically).

    The Ottoman Empire already is prone to being allied with half of Europe, and making its chief rival and main instigator for the Crimean War/Congress of Berlin event chain means that the chances of those events firing drops to nearly nil.

  7. #27
    Quote Originally Posted by Straigthtsilver View Post
    The problem with a Russo-Turkish alliance is that the game has the tendency to have alliances last an extremely long amount of time, and not take into account historical enmity between nations (hence Hapsburg Austria's love of allying with the Ottomans in-game, rather than just begrudgingly stonewalling the Russians as happened historically).

    The Ottoman Empire already is prone to being allied with half of Europe, and making its chief rival and main instigator for the Crimean War/Congress of Berlin event chain means that the chances of those events firing drops to nearly nil.
    What I want to emphasise is that Russo-Turkish alliance is a short-term alliance, which will reach it's end once Egypt is defeated in crisis. Actually Treaty of Hünkâr İskelesi was signed in the year when the first Egyptian-Ottoman War was over. For this reason, obviously the alliance was built up to defend OE from increasingly strong Egypt. At least it's one of the reasons. That's why Russia should have a high tendency to stand on the OE side when OC break out. In APD Oriental Crisis event, OE's alliances of great power are more likely to help OE in crisis. In the present version, most time OE will ally to UK instead with Russia. Then Russia will not interfere the crisis and even help Egypt against OE, which is so strange. By making a short-term Russo-Turkish alliance, Russia's decision will be closer to history. It will definitely not effect the game after crisis is over, for the reason that we have severed it forcebly through the final part of Oriental Crisis Events.
    Last edited by ayafox; 18-07-2012 at 16:55.

  8. #28
    That's deterministic. I don't like events which are basically just used to force the AI to do things which may not even be in it's interest at the time. The OC happens because it was more or less certain to happen - the same cannot be said of the GP's various stances to it, as by the time it rolls around Russia might have CBs on the OE, might be engaged in an arms race with it... It's too tactical a decision to go around forcing like that.
    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. #29
    Quote Originally Posted by Naselus View Post
    That's deterministic. I don't like events which are basically just used to force the AI to do things which may not even be in it's interest at the time. The OC happens because it was more or less certain to happen - the same cannot be said of the GP's various stances to it, as by the time it rolls around Russia might have CBs on the OE, might be engaged in an arms race with it... It's too tactical a decision to go around forcing like that.
    Just add some codes like this one.
    Code:
    #Treaty of Hünkâr İskelesi 
    
    alliance = {
    	first = RUS
    	second = TUR
    	start_date = 1833.7.8
    	end_date = 1841.7.13
    }
    And do nothing else. no enforcing, AI Russia can end this alliance at any time. I played a game of APD 3.07 recently with such modification. Then I found AI Russia was willing to keep this alliance for more than a decade. Looks like the alliance is in AI Russia's interest. So, this is why I suggested this idea, even AI agrees on the idea.
    Last edited by ayafox; 18-07-2012 at 19:00.

  10. #30
    Yes, I know how to add an alliance to the diplomacy file, thank you :P

    Having Russia and the OE allied early will likely result in Russia failing to attack the OE later on, tho. Given that Russia's overarching strategy toward the OE from 1650 onward was more or less' poke it with a stick til it falls over', and the AI isn't bright enough to know that, meddling in the area's initial politics is likely to end up hurting more than it helps.
    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

  11. #31
    Quote Originally Posted by Naselus View Post
    Yes, I know how to add an alliance to the diplomacy file, thank you :P

    Having Russia and the OE allied early will likely result in Russia failing to attack the OE later on, tho. Given that Russia's overarching strategy toward the OE from 1650 onward was more or less' poke it with a stick til it falls over', and the AI isn't bright enough to know that, meddling in the area's initial politics is likely to end up hurting more than it helps.
    You are partly right. Under the Treaty of Hünkâr İskelesi, Russia was more in favour of allying to OE rather than attacking it. But that's just what the history was like in 1830s, a short time when Russia gave up its' more aggressive policy to control OE. Russia will hold this policy for the reason that it's just what it want instead of AI problem. So why did Russia turn to aggressive policy later? It's not simply for Czar changed his mind, it's because of other great powers didn't like that. I believe this alliance policy would continue without other great powers' interfering.

    But in the game, AI GPs are not able to negotiate with Russia to require it to end the alliance like what they truly did in history. We can help them by adding a new event called London Straits Convention. This event will have a chance to fire from 1836, but the chance of it will be much lower until Oriental Crisis has ended. After Oriental Crisis, the event will fire inevitably. Once event fire, Russia will have to choose to whether leave the alliance or not. If Russia leave the alliance, OE will ally to Britain instead. If Russia refuse to do so, than Russia's relationship with other GPs will be affected. AI Russia will definitely choose the former one so that the game can go on normally.
    Last edited by ayafox; 19-07-2012 at 07:23.

  12. #32
    Quote Originally Posted by ayafox View Post
    You are partly right. Under the Treaty of Hünkâr İskelesi, Russia was more in favour of allying to OE rather than attacking it. But that's just what the history was like in 1830s, a short time when Russia gave up its' more aggressive policy to control OE. Russia will hold this policy for the reason that it's just what it want instead of AI problem. So why did Russia turn to aggressive policy later? It's not simply for Czar changed his mind, it's because of other great powers didn't like that. I believe this alliance policy would continue without other great powers' interfering.
    I seriously doubt that, given that expansionism was pretty much the only unchanging pillar of Russian diplomacy in the period, and they'd been fighting the Ottomans on and off for decades by this point anyway. From at very least Catherine the Great onward, taking territory from the Turk was a staple Russian policy - some might even argue the Treaty itself was simply a means to protect future Russian lands from outside aggression, akin to SOIing a future invasion target.

    Quote Originally Posted by ayafox View Post
    But in the game, AI GPs are not able to negotiate with Russia to require it to end the alliance like what they truly did in history. We can help them by adding a new event called London Straits Convention. This event will have a chance to fire from 1836, but the chance of it will be much lower until Oriental Crisis has ended. After Oriental Crisis, the event will fire inevitably. Once event fire, Russia will have to choose to whether leave the alliance or not. If Russia leave the alliance, OE will ally to Britain instead. If Russia refuse to do so, than Russia's relationship with other GPs will be affected. AI Russia will definitely choose the former one so that the game can go on normally.
    Just no. Drop it.
    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

  13. #33
    Quote Originally Posted by Naselus View Post
    I seriously doubt that, given that expansionism was pretty much the only unchanging pillar of Russian diplomacy in the period, and they'd been fighting the Ottomans on and off for decades by this point anyway. From at very least Catherine the Great onward, taking territory from the Turk was a staple Russian policy - some might even argue the Treaty itself was simply a means to protect future Russian lands from outside aggression, akin to SOIing a future invasion target.
    Well, if you think so. But Russia indeed firmly supported the OE for fear of fall of it, which lasted from 1833 to 1841 when the menace of Egypt was finally eliminated. Since you have rejected any possibility of making an alliance, I have no idea how to make this policy reflected in the game. I only want to see Russia will aid OE in Oriental Crisis more likely.

    Besides, I suggested a modification that was changing OE's ruling party from Reactionary Nizam-i Alem to Conservative Hükumet-i Hümayun. The modification should be in no doubt.
    Last edited by ayafox; 19-07-2012 at 17:54.

  14. #34
    Quote Originally Posted by ayafox View Post
    Besides, I suggested a modification that was changing OE's ruling party from Reactionary Nizam-i Alem to Conservative Hükumet-i Hümayun. The modification should be in no doubt.
    Yup, that one's fair enough - tho a note of caution. No change is ever 'not in doubt'. I fully reserve the right to ignore history for the sake of game balance, and if the OE needed to be reactionary for some reason, then it'd stay reactionary. We are NOT seeking to just recreate history here - some players like determinism, others really ,really don't, so we try to strike a balance between the two.
    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

  15. #35
    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
    8,341
    Well... I can think of one difference going from Reactionary to Conservative government: the TUR conservative government has Pluralism as its religious policy, as opposed to Moralism for reactionary. Isn't that going to have significant effects on promotion/demotion for the OE with all its religious minority pops?

  16. #36
    Quote Originally Posted by Rylock View Post
    Well... I can think of one difference going from Reactionary to Conservative government: the TUR conservative government has Pluralism as its religious policy, as opposed to Moralism for reactionary. Isn't that going to have significant effects on promotion/demotion for the OE with all its religious minority pops?

    Wait... religious policies actually affect something? Is this for real? I thought it was just for assimilation/conversaion

  17. #37
    Quote Originally Posted by moldeh View Post
    Wait... religious policies actually affect something? Is this for real? I thought it was just for assimilation/conversaion
    It effects all sorts of stuff, from demotion to issues. Of course, we can quite easily just change the Conservative government's religious policy to the one we want for balance anyway; I'm fairly certain ayafox is adamant about the change because of the party name and not a lot else (though IRL Mahmud II was actually quite progressive, so it's not really fair to saddle him with reactionary ideology).
    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

  18. #38
    Private Son of a Duck's Avatar
    Crusader Kings IIDarkest HourVictoria 2Victoria II: A House DividedCK2: Holy Knight
    500k clubEuropa Universalis IV: Pre-order

    Join Date
    Aug 2010
    Location
    My moms basement
    Posts
    18
    I agree, compared to the huge armies the Ottomans can raise, Egypt has a very hard time, especially when France and the UK often decide to declare war on Egypt as well

  19. #39
    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
    8,341
    Quote Originally Posted by Naselus View Post
    It effects all sorts of stuff, from demotion to issues. Of course, we can quite easily just change the Conservative government's religious policy to the one we want for balance anyway; I'm fairly certain ayafox is adamant about the change because of the party name and not a lot else (though IRL Mahmud II was actually quite progressive, so it's not really fair to saddle him with reactionary ideology).
    The party's only called that because that's what the Ottomania mod called it (I assume).

    Insofar as changing the conservatives-- should we just change the religious_policy to moralism? That means the difference between conservative and reactionary is then interventionism (vs. state capitalism) and pro_military (vs. jingoism). If we're fine with that, then cool. I'll include it in the next drop.

  20. #40
    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
    8,341
    Quote Originally Posted by Son of a Duck View Post
    I agree, compared to the huge armies the Ottomans can raise, Egypt has a very hard time, especially when France and the UK often decide to declare war on Egypt as well
    The problem isn't that Egypt has a hard time. It should have a hard time if and when other European powers come to the OE's defense. The problem is the Ottomans not having difficulty dealing with Egypt even without European help.

+ Reply to Thread
Page 2 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