Peter's Age of Explorations v1.1.1 Released

Peter Ebbesen · Jan 11, 2004

Peter's Age of Explorations v1.1.1a Released

Peter's Age of Explorations v1.1.1 Released
- Attack Of The Venetian And English Lobbies -
- AND -
- Modified Based On Quick Bitching -
- To 1.1.1a -

Peter's Age of Explorations Modded Scenario for 24 players in EU2 is a mod of the 1492 Age of Explorations scenario suitable for both single- and multi-player coupled with a 1520 variant based on Fate's 1520 scenario. The scenario can be used by anybody in multiplayer without having to transfer anything but the save file.

Note that the 1520 setup is probably the better MP setup.

Full release notes and installation instructions included in the the release.txt file in the download (as always)

Changes from v1.1.0

Release 1.1.1a Released January 18th, 2004
------------------------------------------------------------
The Quickbitch release. Minor changes only.

1492:

Russia
* Loses Ruthenian culture again due to bitching. Sic transit gloria mundi.

Scotland
* Scottish base manpower down to 14 from 18

Venice:
* Fleet set to 20/80/0

1520:

Russia
* Loses Ruthenian culture again due to bitching. Sic transit gloria mundi.

Scotland
* Scottish base manpower down to 14 from 18

Venice
* Fleet set to 20/80/0

Release 1.1.1 Released January 11th, 2004
------------------------------------------------------------
1492:

Global Population Changes
* Upgraded all starting populations of 20,000 to 20,500 for more accurate relative manpower depictions on startup (if they start at 20,000 they experience a bump to the next category after just one month of playing)

Austria
* Guaranteed independence to all German HRE members until 1821

Denmark
* Granted navalequipment manufactory in Jutland
* Starts with bigger bag of gold (1,000d)
* Shipyard in Copenhagen
* Slightly increased manpoer of Southern Norway, Sjælland, Jutland, and Skåne

England
* Base manpower increased from 43 to 66

Mughal Empire
* Increased taxvalues of Herat, Kabul, Quetta, Surkhandarya, Zahedan

Poland
* Loses Hinterpommern core (no more using that core on a capital as the excuse for annexing the entire northern HRE)

Scotland
* Base manpower of increased from 10 to 18

Songhai
* Gold provinces now much poorer (Bambuk (1490) and Buré (1494) are now base 10 rather than base 50)

Sibir
* now pagan with muslims rather than muslim with pagans (just like in 1520 1.1.0)

Russia
* Added Mongol and Ruthenian cultures for easier conversion (historically easy conversions, needed for lower stabcosts that were raised with 1.07 BB. Really ought to be added by event later on, but, oh well)

Venice
* Conscription Centre in Venice itself (representing Italian Condottieri... Ehhm. Well, something like that. They need a manpower and support limit boost, dammit)
* Population of Veneto set to 200,007 to artificially award it the highest manpower category (and to prevent it from suddenly gaining in manpower 110 years down the road)
* Base manpower of Veneto dropped to 6 from 7
- Total result of the three above changes is a fat 10.0 manpower from Veneto, that will ONLY increase by manpower boosting events (1.5 per +1), and a ~14,000 boost to the support limit
* Knowledge of Isfahan CoT granted, 4 merchants in place
* 40 extra galleys awarded
* Starts with bigger bag of gold (2,000d)

1520:

Global Population Changes
* Upgraded all starting populations of 20,000 to 20,500 for more accurate relative manpower depictions on startup (if they start at 20,000 they experience a bump to the next category after just one month of playing)

CoT Changes:
* Al Kharam CoT removed: Always very small, served only to give Portugal extra merchants
* Guantanamo (Santiago) CoT added: Splits Central American trade

Austria
* Loses Lombardia core (allocated to Spain in the split)
* Start with CBs on Bohemia
* Guaranteed independence to all German HRE members until 1821

Bohemia
* Two fortresses raised to small

England
* Base manpower increased from 43 to 66
* Initial fleet increased by 13 warships to 60

Denmark
* Granted navalequipment manufactory in Jutland
* Starts with bigger bag of gold (1,000d)
* Shipyard in Copenhagen
* Slightly increased manpoer of Southern Norway, Sjælland, Jutland, and Skåne

Mughal Empire
* Increased taxvalues of Herat, Kabul, Quetta, Surkhandarya, Zahedan

Ottomans
* Removed free weapons mnf in Anatolia

Poland
* Loses Hinterpommern core (no more using that core on a capital as the excuse for annexing the entire northern HRE)
* Infrastructure tech down to 2 from 3

Portugal
* Tech 10/14/4/3 (down from 11/15/5/3)
* Goa now 35K hindus rather than a 6K Catholic Iberian colony. All of mainland India is now considered Indian cities rather than small European colonies for consistency.
* Free naval equipment manufactory in Tago removed
* Al Kharam no longer core
* Mercantilism -2 to 8
* Portuguese 500 pop colonies reduced to 200 pop, fortresses in 200 pop provinces wiped. Tough luck if the natives wipe you out.

Russia
* Slightly adjusted several taxvalues in Russian cultured provinces
* Updated population figures from their 1492 roots
* Removed free weapons manufactory in Vladimir
* Tech 7/3/3/2 (down from 8/4/3/3)
* Added Mongol and Ruthenian cultures for easier conversion (historically easy conversions, needed for lower stabcosts that were raised with 1.07 BB. Really ought to be added by event later on, but, oh well)

Scotland
* Base manpower of increased from 10 to 18

Songhai
* Gold provinces now much poorer (Bambuk (1490) and Buré (1494) are now base 10 rather than base 50)

Spain
* Guantanamo (Santiago) now 1,000 pop with minimum fortress
* Spanish 500 pop colonies reduced to 200 pop

Venice
* Conscription Centre in Venice itself (representing Italian Condottieri... Ehhm. Well, something like that. They need a manpower and support limit boost, dammit)
* Population of Veneto set to 200,007 to artificially award it the highest manpower category (and to prevent it from suddenly gaining in manpower 110 years down the road)
* Base manpower of Veneto dropped to 6 from 7
- Total result of the three above changes is a fat 10.0 manpower from Veneto, that will ONLY increase by manpower boosting events (1.5 per +1), and a ~14,000 boost to the support limit
* Knowledge of Isfahan CoT granted, 4 merchants in place
* 40 extra galleys awarded
* Granted naval equipment manufactory in Crete
* Slight market penetration in all European CoTs
* Island fortresses reduced to small from medium
* Starts with bigger bag of gold (2,000d)
* Gets CB on Mantua

As always, feel free to comment and correct, but note that I am looking mainly for comments on the 1520 scenario as 1492 is mostly discontinued.

I apologise profusely to the Venetian lobby for still leaving Venice so dreadfully weak, but thank everybody for the valuable - and spirited - input on release 1.1.0 that made 1.1.1 possible.

However, when some changes implemented are denounced in no uncertain terms by the very people who suggested them in the first place (a thing conveniently forgotten at the time of denouncing), it is possible to make a quick fix to cut down on the bitching. Version 1.1.1a thus supercedes version 1.1.1.

Damocles · Jan 11, 2004

I don't think Scotland needed to have it's manpower doubled, or Austria should have lost it's CB on Milan. Historically, they did most of the fighting over it with the French, though, it did end up going to Spain. (It could just as easily have remained a direct Austrian possession).

I also am not sure about the Mughal tax values being added. They always end up stinking rich and hitting land tech 42 before most of Europe anyways if player controlled.

I also have a bit of a problem with Russia getting Ruthenian and Mongol off the bat. Only after 1700 is either of those cultures even barely arguable. Its now possible for Russia to end the game Russian, Ugric, Altai, Ruthenian and Mongol cutlre

. With only Russian and Altai, my Russia was able to dominate WoI militarily and economically from my stronghold of the East. I had 7 infra by 1600 and 15 weapon manus by 1650. I don't think Russia needs to be so dramatically boosted. Mongol and Ruthenian culture is a huge. At the very least, the Russians should not get Ruthenian. Otherwise, you might as well give them Lithuanian and Polish too! I don't think the argument about needing it to be easier to convert is very feasible either. Ruthenian is already completely orthodox, and Russia often has plenty of missionaries to spare on any conversions they want.

If you're going to give them those cultures, the least you could do is drop their techs. 3/3 was laughably high, considering they start 1/1 otherwise. 3/2 is kind of a weak concession.

Venice got a pretty...immense boost. It should have no trouble becoming Italy by 1600 now.

Denmark's manpower boost is great. Swedens everywhere will appreciate it.

It would've been nice for you to post a list of real potential changes so we could've had something tangible to debate, except for the fake (albeit amusing) one.

Also, why does Austria start with CBs on Bohemia? They get it by event soon enough anyways. It will only serve to degenerate relations until then.

unmerged(18425) · Jan 11, 2004

Overall very good changes and it seems to be what most people wanted, especially regarding Portugal & Venice. I may have missed a part of the discussion, but why is Englands & Scotlands manpower raised so much?
And why is their mp exactly the same in 1492 and 1520?

unmerged(18425) · Jan 11, 2004

Regarding Russias cultures, I can understand Mongol, because I believe Russia was without conflicts with mongols in the whole timespan, but why Ruthenian?

Futhermore, the position of Persia is quite weaker, with the Mughals richer and Russia having all those nice cultures.

How about giving OE muslim tech and sleeping the bej event?

Damocles · Jan 11, 2004

Historically, Scotland was rather sparsly populated, poor mountainous country. (Still is!) Giving it added MP is a step in the wrong direction. At best, its just extra MP for England come 1700. The reason Scotland lasted so long on England's northern border had nothing to do with manpower. For one thing, the Turks found Albania nearly impossible to conquer for a century. That sure as heck isn't possible to model either.

Damocles · Jan 11, 2004

FAL said:
Regarding Russias cultures, I can understand Mongol, because I believe Russia was without conflicts with mongols in the whole timespan, but why Ruthenian?

Futhermore, the position of Persia is quite weaker, with the Mughals richer and Russia having all those nice cultures.

How about giving OE muslim tech and sleeping the bej event?

I can see Russia having Mongol by 1650-1700.

I can't see Russia having Ruthenian until post 1820.

And yes, it would've been nice to see the Ottomans fixed :/. I am tired of having Super Turk in every game, with tech better then the Europeans.

Hive · Jan 11, 2004

Overall nice changes. I think you overdid when reducing the African gold though...

And just a small issue about the Austrian guarantees: they should only last till 1805, as the HRE was dissolved that year...

Peter Ebbesen · Jan 12, 2004

Damocles said:
I also have a bit of a problem with Russia getting Ruthenian and Mongol off the bat. Only after 1700 is either of those cultures even barely arguable. Its now possible for Russia to end the game Russian, Ugric, Altai, Ruthenian and Mongol cutlre
[/b]

How the fuck does Russia get ugric??? Not in any event I know of. Only if you start an ordinary GC as Novgorod - but that is a completely different scenario.

I am sorry you dislike the Ruthenian and Mongol ideas, but as they met next to no opposition in the experiences thread after somebody brought them up, and rather more support, I went with them. (And yes, I agree that mongol would be nicer tied to an event - however, no events). Ruthenian, on the other hand, makes excellent sense. Considering that the Ruthenian provinces are basically the Ukraine, Russia having Ruthenian culture makes as much sense as Poland.

It would've been nice for you to post a list of real potential changes so we could've had something tangible to debate, except for the fake (albeit amusing) one.

There was the 1.1.0 release thread for discussions as well as the MP experiences thread. That should be enough for everybody. Changes are made as I see fit, and I make final decisions based on the content of those threads and my own desires. I have no intention of running several rounds per release with "this is what I am currently considering" and follow up answers. Once per release is pain enough - otherwise it is too much like real work.

Also, why does Austria start with CBs on Bohemia? They get it by event soon enough anyways. It will only serve to degenerate relations until then.

As noted in the experiences thread, if Bohemia chooses "wrong" in 1526, Austria does not get cores on Bohemia anytime soon.

unmerged(18425) · Jan 12, 2004

Peter Ebbesen said:
I am sorry you dislike the Ruthenian and Mongol ideas, but as they met next to no opposition in the experiences thread after somebody brought them up, and rather more support, I went with them.<snip>

Everyone agreed that the OE were a problem with their ability to stay Orthodox, so why no changes there? I silently hoped for them

And again: why the English and Scottish mp boost? EDIT: answered already

Peter Ebbesen · Jan 12, 2004

FAL said:
Overall very good changes and it seems to be what most people wanted, especially regarding Portugal & Venice. I may have missed a part of the discussion, but why is Englands & Scotlands manpower raised so much?

There was a big hullaboloo some time ago concerning England's manpower being too low compared to France's as a consequence of the province setup (number of provinces chosen). Please note that the figures indicate base manpower. So even though the Scottish base is now 18, that makes for 4.50 actual manpower on scenario setup due to the low population (and 0.50 manpower for those without gaelic culture... such as England pre-1700)

And why is their mp exactly the same in 1492 and 1520?

Because they control the same provinces? Remember, we are talking base manpower here.

Anyhow, if it turns out to be too much in practise, we ARE talking about a 50% boost to English manpower, after all, it will be tuned down in the next release - but I want to see how it works out

unmerged(18425) · Jan 12, 2004

Peter Ebbesen said:
Anyhow, if it turns out to be too much in practise, we ARE talking about a 50% boost to English manpower, after all, it will be tuned down in the next release - but I want to see how it works out

I reread the discussion. However, I believe it was pointed out that England could not use the mp of Wales, Scotland & Ireland, which was a huge factor to their small armies.

50% IS huge, but I'm also curious. If you don't experiment, you'll never get a new experience

Peter Ebbesen · Jan 12, 2004

Damocles said:
If you're going to give them those cultures, the least you could do is drop their techs. 3/3 was laughably high, considering they start 1/1 otherwise. 3/2 is kind of a weak concession.

You know, the exact same thing could be said about Poland when it was united with Lithuania early and granted Ruthenian culture on top of the earlier significant boosts to Polish taxvalues and the change of goods in several provinces (less grain, more cloth) but, strangely enough, I did not hear a lot of complaints that Poland's techs were laughably high at 3/3 in 1.1.0.

But I dropped both Poland and Russia by 1 in infra (a cost of about 9,000d to regain at their starting sizes, will grow significantly if they expand - which is very likely for Russia), mainly because I saw both doing very well very early in Machiavelli 2 - when run by two VERY good players.

Read: I really don't give a damn about 1492/1520 tech comparisons, especially those based on relative differences, considering the significant differences in tech costs for 1->2, 2->3, and 3->4.

unmerged(10146) · Jan 12, 2004

Peter Ebbesen said:
There was a big hullaboloo some time ago concerning England's manpower being too low compared to France's as a consequence of the province setup (number of provinces chosen). Please note that the figures indicate base manpower. So even though the Scottish base is now 18, that makes for 4.50 actual manpower on scenario setup due to the low population (and 0.50 manpower for those without gaelic culture... such as England pre-1700)

Anyhow, if it turns out to be too much in practise, we ARE talking about a 50% boost to English manpower, after all, it will be tuned down in the next release - but I want to see how it works out

I don't think you will see it from the performance of Machiavelli III England

, since this particular player knows from the experience only naval superiority and money is important

.

Seriously, if you believe this particular change is too much, let's return it to the former values or something between.

devil · Jan 12, 2004

I like the changes

As Hive said, just one thing. Gurantees on the HRE should only last until 1805.

Fredrik82 · Jan 12, 2004

nice changes, especially the changes of Vencie, witch i will try out in next MP game

TheArchduke · Jan 12, 2004

devil said:
I like the changes As Hive said, just one thing. Gurantees on the HRE should only last until 1805.

Why? A game starting in 1520 doesn´t guarantee a decisive beating of Austria by France in 1805 and we haven´t even got an event for the disolution of the HRE. Not that this is too important, mind you.

Trin Tragula · Jan 12, 2004

Peter Ebbesen said:
I am sorry you dislike the Ruthenian and Mongol ideas, but as they met next to no opposition in the experiences thread after somebody brought them up, and rather more support, I went with them. (And yes, I agree that mongol would be nicer tied to an event - however, no events). Ruthenian, on the other hand, makes excellent sense. Considering that the Ruthenian provinces are basically the Ukraine, Russia having Ruthenian culture makes as much sense as Poland.

If it's just the ukraine neither should have it. That area was notorious for it's many revolts... There was a revolt atleast once every other year. Every tenth year or so they'd ignite to real big rebelions. This happened to both Poland and Russia.

Hive · Jan 12, 2004

TheArchduke said:
Why? A game starting in 1520 doesn´t guarantee a decisive beating of Austria by France in 1805 and we haven´t even got an event for the disolution of the HRE. Not that this is too important, mind you.

True. But if you wanna go down that road, the Pope can be annexed before the ToT event triggers... so should we not have that happening either?

Damocles · Jan 12, 2004

Peter Ebbesen said:
How the fuck does Russia get ugric??? Not in any event I know of. Only if you start an ordinary GC as Novgorod - but that is a completely different scenario.

I am sorry you dislike the Ruthenian and Mongol ideas, but as they met next to no opposition in the experiences thread after somebody brought them up, and rather more support, I went with them. (And yes, I agree that mongol would be nicer tied to an event - however, no events). Ruthenian, on the other hand, makes excellent sense. Considering that the Ruthenian provinces are basically the Ukraine, Russia having Ruthenian culture makes as much sense as Poland.

There was the 1.1.0 release thread for discussions as well as the MP experiences thread. That should be enough for everybody. Changes are made as I see fit, and I make final decisions based on the content of those threads and my own desires. I have no intention of running several rounds per release with "this is what I am currently considering" and follow up answers. Once per release is pain enough - otherwise it is too much like real work.

As noted in the experiences thread, if Bohemia chooses "wrong" in 1526, Austria does not get cores on Bohemia anytime soon.

Towards the very end, Russia has an event giving them Ugric.

For the vast majority of the time frame, Russia possessed hardly any Ruthenian provinces at all. Not until the late 18th century onwards with the final partitionings of Poland did they even gain them. So it only serves to skew the first 3 and a half centuries of the game.

And why should Austrian cores on Bohemia be granted no matter what? Thats what the event is for.

Damocles · Jan 12, 2004

Peter Ebbesen said:
You know, the exact same thing could be said about Poland when it was united with Lithuania early and granted Ruthenian culture on top of the earlier significant boosts to Polish taxvalues and the change of goods in several provinces (less grain, more cloth) but, strangely enough, I did not hear a lot of complaints that Poland's techs were laughably high at 3/3 in 1.1.0.

If anything, Poland's tech should've remained at 3/3 and Russia should've been dropped to around 1/2.

You seem to overlook the fact that Russia is a strong country with massive potential whereas Poland is in 95% of the games, everyone's bitch and is completely unable to defend themselves against North, East, South or West. Comparisons of the two are evil.

The only reason why Poland and Russia in Mach II were so equal was because my Poland got funded more then any other country in the history of MP gaming, which it used to build factories and establish the fourth strongest trading position in the game and you played a terrible economic game by racking up inflation and ignoring trade.

You seem to have made your modifications to this scenario based around your experiences in Mach II which is clearly the wrong way to go about it. For one thing, you weren't powergaming your Russia. You've just created a monster, Peter.

Peter's Age of Explorations v1.1.1 Released

the Conqueror

Field Marshal

Cyborg

Cyborg

Field Marshal

Field Marshal

Lex Superior

the Conqueror

Cyborg

the Conqueror

Cyborg

the Conqueror

Admiral

Blorg Fanatic

Field Marshal

Doing his own thing

Design Lead - Crusader Kings 3

Lex Superior

Field Marshal

Field Marshal