Adapting the EU III Horde Mechanics

[TheeBadJoke]

Seeing how the latest dev diary dropped some hints on new horde mechanics, I thought now would be a good idea to post my suggestion on how to adapt the EU III horde mechanics to EU IV. Please note these ideas have some gaps and are mostly intended to be an over arching set of ideas.

Hordes don't have Colonists, they have Looters. When they conquer a province they place a looter on it slowly colonizing the province. Once it is maxed they take the province with a core. All non-hordes lose core on the province due to it being razed to the ground. In a peace deal with hordes provinces cannot be taken or given unless they have a non-horde core and are being requested by a non-horde nation. In order for a horde nations provinces to be conquered the province must be occupied and colonized. However, hordes take provinces from other hordes in a normal peace deal and core the like normal.

Hordes declare war on non-horde neighbors by entering their land rather than casus belli, providing little warning for the defender. Non-hordes can use the Repel Hordes casus belli to declare war back.Due to the need to colonize provinces in order to take them War Exhaustion would tick up less quickly when at war as or with hordes.

Hordes have a system of Dominance that acts like legitimacy. If dominance gets low enough it will start to trigger the Tribal Revolt Disaster which spawns a few stacks of Independence Rebels for 1-4 new Horde nation(s). When they Westernize their nation name changes. i.e. Golden Horde to Golden Kingdom. Custom Nation's with the horde government type can toggle dynamic horde names in the Nation designer.

 

[firecage]

I would like this, since I loved playing hordes in EU3, but in EU4 they were a disappointment to play as.

 

[GiftGruen]

Golden kingdom sounds awful, if they had ever westernized successfully, they would've probably taken on the Muslim habit of calling their state after the ruling dynasty or the European one of calling it after a geographical entity like their capital or a former tribal settlement, or after their culture.

Also, I somewhat dislike your propositions, nations losing cores, and all in all it's more like the CK II horde mechanics. But by 1444, most hordes weren't the scourge from the East anymore. The only horde that made major territorial gian after 1444 were the Mughals afaik. And they could get their territory very easily with normal wars, if not for all the unrest and rebellion from the foreign cultures.

 

[radiatoren]

Seeing how the latest dev diary dropped some hints on new horde mechanics, I thought now would be a good idea to post my suggestion on how to adapt the EU III horde mechanics to EU IV. Please note these ideas have some gaps and are mostly intended to be an over arching set of ideas.

Hordes don't have Colonists, they have Looters. When they conquer a province they place a looter on it slowly colonizing the province. Once it is maxed they take the province with a core. All non-hordes lose core on the province due to it being razed to the ground. In a peace deal with hordes provinces cannot be taken or given unless they have a non-horde core and are being requested by a non-horde nation. In order for a horde nations provinces to be conquered the province must be occupied and colonized. However, hordes take provinces from other hordes in a normal peace deal and core the like normal.

Hordes declare war on non-horde neighbors by entering their land rather than casus belli, providing little warning for the defender. Non-hordes can use the Repel Hordes casus belli to declare war back.Due to the need to colonize provinces in order to take them War Exhaustion would tick up less quickly when at war as or with hordes.

Hordes have a system of Dominance that acts like legitimacy. If dominance gets low enough it will start to trigger the Tribal Revolt Disaster which spawns a few stacks of Independence Rebels for 1-4 new Horde nation(s). When they Westernize their nation name changes. i.e. Golden Horde to Golden Kingdom. Custom Nation's with the horde government type can toggle dynamic horde names in the Nation designer.

The "Looter mechanic" you propose can also be used to make the game as certain nations in other areas more immersive since it simulates the sedentary vs. nomadic conflict well. Me likes! The specifics of the mechanic as you explain it seems a bit OP for hordes since it basically makes it easy for hordes to grab land (though harder to core) and it makes it very difficult for non-hordes to avoid colonization ideas and difficult for them to push the hordes back if the horde succeeds in looting/coring. How about any previous horde-territory could be set to 1/1/1 for non-hordes conquering it and in that way simulate the difference in lifestyle? And hordes should probably get a bonus from war exhaustion to partially compensate, while stilll not encouraging it. That seems more in line with what war exhaustion is about.

Dominance instead of legitimacy gives some good room for improvements and it does seem like part of what Paradox will do.

 

[TheeBadJoke]

The "Looter mechanic" you propose can also be used to make the game as certain nations in other areas more immersive since it simulates the sedentary vs. nomadic conflict well. Me likes! The specifics of the mechanic as you explain it seems a bit OP for hordes since it basically makes it easy for hordes to grab land (though harder to core) and it makes it very difficult for non-hordes to avoid colonization ideas and difficult for them to push the hordes back if the horde succeeds in looting/coring. How about any previous horde-territory could be set to 1/1/1 for non-hordes conquering it and in that way simulate the difference in lifestyle? And hordes should probably get a bonus from war exhaustion to partially compensate, while stilll not encouraging it. That seems more in line with what war exhaustion is about.

Dominance instead of legitimacy gives some good room for improvements and it does seem like part of what Paradox will do.

That seems like a reasonable way to balance it out. I honestly forgot about development entirely, but it makes a good way to balance it out. I was actually considering saying non-hordes bordering hordes would get a free colonist, but that could be easily abused with a trapped OPM horde for a free colonist. I was rather thinking they could choose expansion ideas which would give them a free colonist, as well as push them in the historical direction of trying to take/form Russia.

 

[TheeBadJoke]

Golden kingdom sounds awful, if they had ever westernized successfully, they would've probably taken on the Muslim habit of calling their state after the ruling dynasty or the European one of calling it after a geographical entity like their capital or a former tribal settlement, or after their culture.

Also, I somewhat dislike your propositions, nations losing cores, and all in all it's more like the CK II horde mechanics. But by 1444, most hordes weren't the scourge from the East anymore. The only horde that made major territorial gian after 1444 were the Mughals afaik. And they could get their territory very easily with normal wars, if not for all the unrest and rebellion from the foreign cultures.

Those names are entirely possible, my main thought behind the dynamic name was how it doesn't make sense for a kingdom or republic to be calling itself a horde. As for the mechanics, they are also to show the slow progress of the hordes as they fall to more centralized kingdoms, while still giving the player unique mechanics and a chance at making a Genghis Kahn-like horde. I agree with you about the Mughals, maybe they could receive their own special government type like the English or Dutch where they could take provinces in war.