Regarding the Miclantecs, I think it would be interesting to implement conflict between different Incarnates. Potentially create different abilities that are given to people who have successfully claimed to be the incarnation of a particular deity, as well as making situations where two different Kings are claiming to be the same god lower moral authority, as well as potentially giving them Casus Belli to eliminate each other.
After the End - A post-apocalyptic America mod
- Thread starter Ofaloaf
- Start date
-
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.
I like that idea alot, kind of a progressive and dynamic antipope system. I find usually there are no more than 3 independent miclantec realms in existence at any given time given their sweet innate primogeniture, and not all of them are guaranteed to be lead by incarnates, but this is a great idea.
Vassals don't become incarnates, or at least they didn't when I played (which was back in 0.5).
So this might backfire on me spectacularly, but here it goes anyway:
Fans of the mod, if you had to say what was the weakest area of the mod is, what would it be?
If something comes up a bunch of times, maybe we might be able to mend it.
Fans of the mod, if you had to say what was the weakest area of the mod is, what would it be?
If something comes up a bunch of times, maybe we might be able to mend it.
Not enough incest.
...Seriously, the one mod without everyone marrying their mothers is the one with the actual hillbillies. Irony, thy name is Tenesi.
(Is that hillbilly country? My knowledge of American geography is basically Hearts of Iron.)
- 4
Not enough incest.
...Seriously, the one mod without everyone marrying their mothers is the one with the actual hillbillies. Irony, thy name is Tenesi.
(Is that hillbilly country? My knowledge of American geography is basically Hearts of Iron.)
close. Alabama and Mississippi bear the brunt of stereotypical southern incest jokes. though in Mississippis' defense, Alabama actually does have laws saying incest IS technically legal.
fun fact: rednecks and hillbillies aren't one in the same according to actual self-proclaimed rednecks and hillbillies. it's a long story.
there's no incestous marriage! there needs to be at least one culture group or religion allowing for "keeping it inside the family". basically a Messalian stand in as it were.
- 2
That would likely be offensive to actual people from those areas. There aren't really any Messalians left, but there are presumably people from Alabama or wherever who play this mod. If there's going to be something like that, it should probably be something to do with one of the original religions rather than being based off of an actual stereotype. Maybe some heresy or other.Not enough incest.
...Seriously, the one mod without everyone marrying their mothers is the one with the actual hillbillies. Irony, thy name is Tenesi.
(Is that hillbilly country? My knowledge of American geography is basically Hearts of Iron.)
- 2
I feel that a lot of the "more special" features were added on as the mod went further west (Like the Californian Emperor, the Oregon trailers, Haida Canada, etc.). I think the Eastern side of the country still needs some more dynamics and/or flavor.
One of my ideas is for the Charismatics. From what I understand, they are essentially Southern Baptists, Believe-and-you-shall-be-healed type folks. Maybe an option to cure someone of illness or deformities if you have enough piety.
On a different note, two questions for the geo-regions. Why is Arkansas part of Appalachia, and why is the Southern tip of Texas not in America?
- 3
While the devs have stated that they would like to avoid implementing Incest in order to avoid offensive material, if it was to be implemented, the most sensical way to do so would be as a heresy of Reformed Occultist, in my opinion. What I would have in mind would be a cult that believes congenital deformities are a sign of favor from their gods, and encourages incestuous marriages in order to bring about those deformities. A trait could be added that is given to people with negative congenital traits following the religion which gives an opinion boost with coreligionists, and the defines for divine blood could be changed to match normal marriage, meaning incest marriages would get opinion boosts like they do for Zoroastrians and Messalians in vanilla, but the rate at which inbreeding creates negative traits would no longer be reduced by the divine_blood flag.
- 4
I think the HL crash bug has finally been squashed, with the help of Captain Gars. A fix is up on Github, and we'll hopefully do a small bugfix release this weekend.
As far as the Incarnate discussion goes, I may revisit the Mictlantecs in the future to give them a religious head title which can only be held by an Incarnate. The title is destroyed if there is no Incarnate, an Incarnate can create it if it doesn't exist, and a newly ascended Incarnate can choose to gain a claim on it after a successful ceremony. One reason I haven't done this already is that there are some complicated succession issues to deal with.
@TruckFeet is correct that right now only independent Mictlantec rulers can become Incarnate, but I'll consider changing it. The change might lead to interesting conflicts with the more complicated system I described above.
As far as the Incarnate discussion goes, I may revisit the Mictlantecs in the future to give them a religious head title which can only be held by an Incarnate. The title is destroyed if there is no Incarnate, an Incarnate can create it if it doesn't exist, and a newly ascended Incarnate can choose to gain a claim on it after a successful ceremony. One reason I haven't done this already is that there are some complicated succession issues to deal with.
@TruckFeet is correct that right now only independent Mictlantec rulers can become Incarnate, but I'll consider changing it. The change might lead to interesting conflicts with the more complicated system I described above.
Yes, it was a bug caused by hard-coded antipope mechanics when any ruler has a claim on the religion head title. I'd prefer to have a more complicated system where candidates who lose the election can contest the election and gain a claim on the presidency (with a negative impact on moral authority and opinion penalties), but for now I just added a small event to silently strip claims on the presidency.
Last edited:
- 2
Maybe have it be inherited normally, but the "mortal" trait (or being below king-level and not being Incarnate) causes it to be destroyed or granted to another ruler? That way new rulers can keep it, but if they fail the ceremony they lose it.
Edit: Speaking of Mictlantecs: I've been working on another mod that includes sacrifices. Would it be okay for me to borrow the events for Mictlantec sacrifices for my mod (with attribution, of course)? If not, that's fine.
Last edited:
If succession is a problem, maybe give the religious head Papal Succession, and make the requirements for holding the elector title having the Incarnate trait. This would make it more difficult to continuously hold the title, but could be combined with claims if a parent held the title to cancel that out.
Sure, you can use those events wherever you like. I just made some changes to those events to fix the HL crash bug (caused by some problem in HL that led to having a dead prisoner in your jail), so be sure you get the lastest version.
- 1
Well, as I said upthread, I'd like to see the integration of vanilla's nerfs to seduction and diseases, and some more stuff to do with the interstate. I'm betting the distance settings are unchanged from vanilla, and while those might have made sense for the spread out steppes, things are much closer together for the eastern half of America.
- 2
- 1
I just committed a merge of those vanilla changes. If there are any other vanilla changes we missed, let us know.
- 4
This might just be my random luck, but every game I've played, the HCC have been very stable and big unless I specifically bring the hammer to them - the HCC is too stable and static. I realize it's supposed to be like the HRE in vanilla, but the HRE in vanilla typically not as exciting as other areas on the map. I always see the HCC having limited expansion to the north and and towards Florida, almost without fail. They have no real external threats - even the Redcoats typically run out of steam by the time they reach the Confederacy's borders, and they are too big for internal rebellions to succeed often. And because their de jure is so big, even if the Tuskegeans manage to become independent the HCC can chip away at them constantly with de jure wars.
I figure the HCC should collapse, if not all the time or even half the time, then at least sometimes. Though I'm not sure how this could be accomplished.
- 3
same thing with me. every game the HCC is wracked by by uprisings early in (when nobody can match it) but after 150+ years it is nearly untouchable unless you have an even stronger empire butting heads with it. in my last 200 year playthrough as ultimately a gothamite empire, by the time i started smashing the americanists, they had already been gutted by the HCC.
I've seen the HCC wipe out the Americanists in Virginia, and then eventually take New York City after the Redcoats who captured it earlier lost steam. This was was while I was on the other side of the map building Cascadia. I saw the HCC did have some set backs, like eventually losing New York to some independent faction (I think?) that formed the Duchy of Catskills, but not enough to ever cripple it. I don't really mind its stability really, but the only thing that really irks me is if they cause painful border gore across the Midwest (and then consequently relocate their capital to Dayton, Ohio).
It might be worth considering adding some mechanics to the HCC that punish raising crown authority and expansion. These could be useful both mechanically and for flavor. Flavorwise, there are probably a lot of people in the HCC that are opposed to strong government and/or are isolationist, and players can roleplay a certain viewpoint. Mechanically, things could slow HCC expansion or cause an implosion, which is both helpful for surrounding small nations and probably even as an HCC player, because it adds some challenge to what would normally be an easy steamroll across the map.
As for implementation, it depends on how complex you want it to be. It could be as simple as Decadence-style revolts when crown authority goes up or a certain number of provinces is reached, or as complicated as character traits for HCC members like "Isolationist/Interventionist" and "Big Government/Small Government". You could turn that into some sort of set of HCC political parties instead, as a trait, like "Federalist" (who would support strong central government). They would of course have different viewpoints and hate other parties.
Some way to work the Evangelicals in would be nice too.
Just some suggestions, because the HCC and the south in general do seem kind of bland =)
As for implementation, it depends on how complex you want it to be. It could be as simple as Decadence-style revolts when crown authority goes up or a certain number of provinces is reached, or as complicated as character traits for HCC members like "Isolationist/Interventionist" and "Big Government/Small Government". You could turn that into some sort of set of HCC political parties instead, as a trait, like "Federalist" (who would support strong central government). They would of course have different viewpoints and hate other parties.
Some way to work the Evangelicals in would be nice too.
Just some suggestions, because the HCC and the south in general do seem kind of bland =)
- 5
It seems a shame that President Franklin Ironwrit - who seems like one of the more interesting characters at the start - is an unplayable theocrat. Any possibility of this changing?