YodaMaster said:
Amended. I think it's King. Is Great Britain ok or should I replace it with England?
-
We have updated our Community Code of Conduct. Please read through the new rules for the forum that are an integral part of Paradox Interactive’s User Agreement.
Amended. I think it's King. Is Great Britain ok or should I replace it with England?
Toio said:the question on the hessians , is that they where mercenary for hanover who was king of England ( unless my history is askew)
My perception is that Hessians could be called mercenaries only if you apply the term very loosely. They were regular soldiers of HRE states who were sent to fight for an ally in exchange for financial aid. They personally didn't receive any mercenary payment and fought for the same wages as regular British soldiers (which were twice the wages in their homelands). They were branded as mercenaries by very skillful propaganda of the young USA and Landgrave Friedrich II was accused of selling his subjects into slavery and even a letter was forged in which he was complaining that not enough of his men were getting killed (because King George III was treaty bound to make an additional payment for each killed Hessian in order to train and equip his replacement).
Lord Grave said:
sounds like contract troops, which means mercenaries, if Hesse was not at war with the USA, and hessian troops where hired by the English and these hessian troops where led by a hessian, then thats a mercenary
same applies to all the italian wars., contract/paid foreign troops
Toio said:
There are similarities between mercenaries and German soldiers that were rented out as a part of Subsidien, but there are also differences. Mercenary companies were independent, while Hessians served their monarchs and followed their orders and were part of regular army of their countries. True, they all fought for personal reasons because they got double wages in British service, but throughout history there are examples of soldiers who fought for material rather than patriotic reasons. When a country can't provide a solid patriotic motivation for its soldiers, a good pay is always the next best solution. Would you say that modern peacekeepers are mercenaries because they receive very nice wages and certainly don't go on peacekeeping missions for patriotic reasons? I have nothing against "mercenary" being applied as a classification for a soldier who fights only for money, but in the context of the revolutionary USA propaganda against Hessians it also has an additional negative meaning which was probably supposed to provide a counter-example of a good American minuteman.
@Lord Grave: about Hessians return to Europe new provincespec event, this event could fire for any owner of province 333. The event implies a qulatiy boost But this increase could be unjustified, especially for a large empire, even if it is Hesse...
I agree with other commands because they are tied to the province (but why is province tax for a capital that could be anywhere and not the province itself?) but DP change should be granted only under condition to the owner of the province.
This provincespec event shouldn't be triggered. If province is not controlled, soldiers will not appear. Better add dates and a trigger for ENG_164241 and province controlled by the owner (or is it intended?). In order to avoid confusion, I suggest a different name for the event too:
#-#17,313 Hessians returned to their homelands after the war ended in 1783. Of the 12,526 who did not return, about 7,700 had died: some 1,200 were killed in action and 6,354 died from illness or accidents. Approximately 5,000 Hessians settled in North America, both in the United States and Canada, some because their commanders refused to take them back to Germany because they were criminals or physically unfit. Most of them married and settled amongst the population of the newly-formed United States. Many of them became farmers or craftsmen. The number of their direct descendants living in the U.S. and Canada today is still debated.
Better idea?
Waiting for agreement on DP change, command is commented out for now.
EDIT: name of action_c in HES_185004 is a bit long. I suggest:
ACTIONNAME185004C;Compensate the families of the soldiers and invest the rest into economy;;;;;;;;;;
I agree with other commands because they are tied to the province (but why is province tax for a capital that could be anywhere and not the province itself?) but DP change should be granted only under condition to the owner of the province.
This provincespec event shouldn't be triggered. If province is not controlled, soldiers will not appear. Better add dates and a trigger for ENG_164241 and province controlled by the owner (or is it intended?). In order to avoid confusion, I suggest a different name for the event too:
Code:
#(1776-1820) Hessians return to Europe
event = {
id = 338491
[COLOR=Yellow]trigger = {
event = 164241 #ENG: Hessians return to Europe
control = { province = 333 data = -1 } #Hessen
}[/COLOR]
random = no
province = 333 #Hessen
name = "EVENTNAME[COLOR=Yellow]338491[/COLOR]" #Hessians [COLOR=Yellow]back home[/COLOR]
desc = "EVENTNAME164241"
#-#
[COLOR=Yellow]date = { day = 1 month = january year = 1776 }
offset = 30
deathdate = { year = 1820 }[/COLOR]
action_a = {
name = "GREAT"
command = { type = INF which = 333 value = 10000 } #estimated number of survivors from Hesse-Kassel only
[COLOR=Yellow]#[/COLOR]command = { type = domestic which = QUALITY value = 2 } #those soldiers are now veterans
command = { type = provincetax which = [COLOR=Yellow]333[/COLOR] value = 1 } #they are back after years of being paid double wages
}
}Better idea?
Waiting for agreement on DP change, command is commented out for now.
EDIT: name of action_c in HES_185004 is a bit long. I suggest:
ACTIONNAME185004C;Compensate the families of the soldiers and invest the rest into economy;;;;;;;;;;
Last edited:
I made a mistake when planning the DP change by thinking in terms of Hesse only. I suggest three mutually exclusive events instead of this one, each for its own range of countrysize, and one giving +2 Quality, one giving +1 Quality, and one without a Quality change. Any suggestions about countrysize ranges? At what number of provinces does +2 become too much, and at what size does 10000 veterans become too few to affect the Quality DP?
Lord Grave said:
I wonder if it might just make more sense to ignore issues of quality altogether. While not an issue, this does seem to be a rather expanding set of events for a very small historical moment.
Yes, this is why I commented the command out and Quality losses should then maybe be removed in HES events at the start of the sequence.
If that's what the majority thinks then who am I to argue? I still think Hesse should feel the departure and return of veterans, though, and a single step in Quality slider can have a significant effect.
Lord Grave said:
It just doesn't seem to me that the benefit of doing such is really worth the energy expended or the number of events that need to be written to check the various conditions.
Garbon said:
If it's about my time and energy then it seems I've already made a decision
However, if it's about Yoda's time and energy while compiling the mod and the game performance then we should forget about the DP change.
I have all the time to compile anything that is valuable.
Just propose but be aware I rarely don't find errors nor side-effects in proposals.
Just propose but be aware I rarely don't find errors nor side-effects in proposals.
YodaMaster said:I have all the time to compile anything that is valuable.
Then I'm going to see to it as soon as I have some time, and then you can see if it has at least some value
YodaMaster said:Just propose but be aware I rarely don't find errors nor side-effects in proposals.
You are a next generation online debugging tool with semantic awareness and heuristic side-effect detection algorithms
The culture in Savannah (54) ought to be Creek. Savannah was mostly populated by Creek, not Cherokee. It also makes the Creek culture contiguous, as the culture extends to Roanoke province.
No capital event for the US?
EVENTNAME324008;The New Capital;;;;;;;;;;
EVENTDESC324008;In 1790 Congress designated 260 square kilometers of territory for the new seat of government of the USA. The site of the new capital was largely the result of a compromise between the Southern and Northern states. By 1800 the first Congress session was held, and president John Adams moved in to the White House.;;;;;;;;;;
ACTIONNAME324008A;Let us move to Washington, D.C.;;;;;;;;;;
ACTIONNAME324008B;Let us remain in the current capital;;;;;;;;;;
Code:
#Washington, D.C#
event = {
id = 324008
trigger = {
owned = { province = 69 data = -1 } #Powhatan
[COLOR="Blue"]control = { province = 69 data = -1 } #Powhatan[/COLOR]
OR = {
event = 4994 #Treaty of Paris
event = 4995 #Treaty of Paris
}
}
random = no
country = USA
name = "EVENTNAME324008"
desc = "EVENTHIST324008"
style = 5
#-#In 1790 Congress designated 260 square kilometers of territory for the new seat of government of the USA. The site of the new capital was largely the result of a compromise between the Southern and Northern states. By 1800 the first Congress session was held, and president John Adams moved in to the White House.
date = { day = 1 month = january year = 1800 }
offset = 500
deathdate = { year = 1820 }
action_a ={ #Let move the capital to Washington, D.C.#
name = "ACTIONNAME324008A"
command = { type = capital which = 69 } #Powhatan
command = { type = provincetax which = 69 value = 2 } #The site had significant commercial potential
command = { type = population which = 69 value = 1500 }
command = { type = stability value = 1 }
}
action_b ={ #Let Philadelphia stay Capital#
name = "ACTIONNAME324008B"
command = { type = stability value = 2 }
}
}EVENTNAME324008;The New Capital;;;;;;;;;;
EVENTDESC324008;In 1790 Congress designated 260 square kilometers of territory for the new seat of government of the USA. The site of the new capital was largely the result of a compromise between the Southern and Northern states. By 1800 the first Congress session was held, and president John Adams moved in to the White House.;;;;;;;;;;
ACTIONNAME324008A;Let us move to Washington, D.C.;;;;;;;;;;
ACTIONNAME324008B;Let us remain in the current capital;;;;;;;;;;
Last edited:
Just to nitpick event USA_324008:
shouldn't the "White House" be called the "Executive Mansion"? AFAIK this name was given only under Roosevelt presidency.
shouldn't the "White House" be called the "Executive Mansion"? AFAIK this name was given only under Roosevelt presidency.
Depends on one's point of view, I suppose. The view being whether things should have their historical name for the period or whether they should use generally understandable terms from today.
We could have "... and president John Adams moved into the Executive Mansion (nowadays White House)."
Btw, is "in to" in two words correct?
EDIT: into
Btw, is "in to" in two words correct?
EDIT: into
Last edited: