• 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.
idontlikeforms I can't agree with you on the need to change Fernando Po from slaves to sugar. While it is true that few slaves came from Fernando Po, that is where they were gathered and shipped from to the new world. This trade vastly outweighed the sugar trade, and Portugal should reap the benefits from owning a slave province there.
 
Yakman said:
idontlikeforms I can't agree with you on the need to change Fernando Po from slaves to sugar. While it is true that few slaves came from Fernando Po, that is where they were gathered and shipped from to the new world. This trade vastly outweighed the sugar trade, and Portugal should reap the benefits from owning a slave province there.

The sources I'm reading say jsut the opposite please post your source or quote a source. Slaves did gather there, that part is true but to work on sugar plantations. I assumed what you are saying is the real reason that the makers of EU2 made the province slaves and not sugar, but I can't find anything that says that so far.
 
from what I've read, the island was a transhipment point for slaves from across the bight of benin.
 
Yakman said:
from what I've read, the island was a transhipment point for slaves from across the bight of benin.
I've been looking up imformation on this island since I read your objection and this is what I've found. Fernando Po was used on a very tiny scale for sugar plantations and pretty much nothing else for prablably roughly half of the game.Occasionally Europeans tried to grab natives living there to sell as slaves too but were usually unsuccessful. It was used as a way station for the slave trade. But as near as I can tell this is for a much shorter period of time. Its most notable source of income as far as I can find was cocao, which I think is chocolate. Let me know if I'm wrong about that. Also as I said in the original post in the AGC-EEP Iberian here
http://forum.paradoxplaza.com/forum...5&page=16&pp=25
the city name for this province is Sao Tome. This was a neighboring island to Fernando Po and unlike Fernando Po it did play a significnat role in world history. Sao Tome along with Principe another neighboring island had large sugar plantations. And thus accrued a large profit for Portugal, who in the game happens to be the nation that usually colonizes this province. In fact the plantations which used slavery were in fact the blueprint for later slave plantations in the new world. It's a wonder the makers of EU2 named the province fernando Po and not Sao Tome. If the province is intended to represent Fernando Po and Sao Tome, which I think it does, then the commodity hands down should be sugar, since that by far was the most profitable export from this Island chain. But if it is not meant to represent Sao Tome or any other island but Fernando Po, then as perplexing as it may be why the makers of the game bothered to even include this province, the commodity by technicality of time should still be sugar. It seems odd to me that a significant contributer to wealth and rise of power of Portugal, being Sao Tome and Principe, should be left out of the game completely. And slaves as a commodity are worth less than sugar even after almsot all the provinces in the game are colonized. This descrepency of history along with many others I gave in the Portugal and Indian Ocean thread are the main reasons for why Portugal is much weaker in that game than they should be based on history.
 
Yakman said:
from what I've read, the island was a transhipment point for slaves from across the bight of benin.
As was mentioned in the goods thread with respect to Armenia, trade goods should represent domestic production, not traded goods, no matter how prodigious they were. If Fernando Po was really dominant in trade, then a CoT during some period would be an option.
 
Combining Sao Tome and Fernando Po sounds fine to me. In that case, sugar is more than acceptable.
 
Are you still considering advancing Nubia to Moslem tech-group? I don't think this is a good idea. It's not really historical.
 
I've noticed that all the Morrocan leaders who happen also to be the kings of Morrocco have ranks other than 0. Is this correct? If not they need to be corrected
 
I've made 2 events for Timbuktu. Here they are=
#University of Timbuktu#
event = {
id = 284020
trigger = {
owned = { province = 1495 data = -1 }
event = 284016
}
random = no
country = SON
name = "The university of Timbuktu"
desc = "After Askia Mohammed returned from his pilgrimage to Mecca, he revived Timbuktu as a great center of Islamic learning. The university of Timbuktu at it's peak had about 25,000 students and people from all over the muslim world went there to study."
style = 1
date = { day = 11 month = april year = 1499 }
offset = 90
deathdate = { month = august year = 1528 }
action_a ={
name = "Make the University of Timbuktu great."
command = { type = population which = 1495 value = 2000 }
command = { type = stability value = 1 }
command = { type = cash value = -200 }
command = { type = gainmanufactory which = 1495 value = luxury } }
action_b ={
name = "Focus on military."
command = { type = land value = 300 }
command = { type = domestic which = quality value = 1 }
command = { type = domestic which = offensive value = 1 }
}
}

#The sack of Timbuktu#
event = {
id = 284021
trigger = {
control = { province = 1495 data = MOR }
}
random = no
country = MOR
name = "Morocco sacks Timbuktu"
desc = "Morocco captured Timbuktu in 1591. The Moroccan army under the leadership of Pasha Mahmud ibn Zarqun had 4,000 soldiers armed with muskets, while Timbuktu’s soldiers had bows, arrows, and spears. After this the city began its decline. After its capture, city scholars were arrested because of a perceived political threat. Some were killed in struggles, while others were exiled to Morocco. The Moroccan army plundered the wealth of the city and burned the libraries. Huge libraries of books and manuscripts were dispersed. Timbuktu never again recovered its leading position."
style = 1
date = { day = 1 month = january year = 1500 }
deathdate = { day = 1 month = january year = 1820 }
action_a ={
name = "Sack timbuktu."
command = { type = cash value = 300 }
command = { type = trigger which = 284022 }
}
}
#The sack of Timbuktu for the owner of Timbuktu#
event = {
id = 284022
trigger = {
event = 284021
}
random = no
province = 1495
name = "Morocco sacks Timbuktu"
desc = "Morocco captured Timbuktu in 1591. The Moroccan army under the leadership of Pasha Mahmud ibn Zarqun had 4,000 soldiers armed with muskets, while Timbuktu’s soldiers had bows, arrows, and spears. After this the city began its decline. After its capture, city scholars were arrested because of a perceived political threat. Some were killed in struggles, while others were exiled to Morocco. The Moroccan army plundered the wealth of the city and burned the libraries. Huge libraries of books and manuscripts were dispersed. Timbuktu never again recovered its leading position."
style = 1
action_a ={
name = "The greatness of Timbuktu is no more."
command = { type = population which = 1495 value = -3000 }
command = { type = losemanufactory which = 1495 }
command = { type = removecot which = 1495 }
command = { type = stability value = -1 }
command = { type = provincetax which = 1495 value = -2 }
}
}

The sack of Timbuktu by Morocco destroyed it's market and university(fine arts acadamy), that was made in the event before this one. This is the only historical justification I can find for the destruction of the COT in Timbuktu. Historically of course it still existed and the university was re-established but neither the market nor the university had anywhere near it's former prosperity. Here are a couple of links discussing Timbuktu history=
http://www.mnsu.edu/emuseum/archaeology/sites/africa/timbuktu.html
http://edsitement.neh.gov/view_lesson_plan.asp?id=505
There is of course quite alot of information about Timbuktu on the internet besides these 2 sites and it isn't hard to find either.

Also I would like to point out that Songhay is ahistroically weak right now. Songhay is supposed to be top dog in west Africa for much of the game, but currently they stay small and Mali isn't dethrowned. I would say this is how it turns out at least 3 out of 4 times presently.

Garbon made the events for it and I would say he did a very good job except that they are not very concise. I don't think there are too many more justifiable events that can be made for Songhay. So perhaps the current events should be beefed up a bit for gameplay purposes.

1 other thing, Timbuktu absolutely MUST have it's "historical COT modifier" changed from 5 to -3. I am almost postive that city size and province tax value effects the robustness of a COT as well as the HCOTM. This being the case Timbuktu is the strongest COT in the game currently. And it needs to be able to die much easier on it's own if Morroco doesn't sack Timbuktu. Currently if it dissapears it is later the no. 1 candidate in west Africa by far for a new COT. This shouldn't be the case. Even with -3 HCOTM, timbuktu is still has a pretty strong chance of getting a new COT in west Africa on account of it's tax and population.
 
Last edited:
I been doing alot of studying for west Africa and I've found out that this is one area in the game where the EU2 crew got alot of things wrong, especially with Kongo. Well here are my proposals for setup changes.

Bambuk, Timbuktu, Gao, and Accra need their manpower increased to 6.

Bambuk, Timbuktu, Gao, Say, and Accra need their tax increased to 8.

Ivoria should have it's tax decreased to 3

Bambuk and Say need their pops increased to 15,000.

Accra needs it's pop increased to 18,000.

All these places were heavily populated, had large agricultural regions, and contributed large amounts of men to their respective nations armies.

Timbuktu needs it's tax lowered to 8. I have no idea why it has 14. As far as I know it's not a bigger contributor in these categories than the cities above mentioned. It should be about on par with them though. It currently has 10,000 pop. and I would reccommend leaving it like this because with the COT will make it grow faster and the event giving it a manu will help alot there too.

Accra should be switched from slaves to spice. Benin traded very large amounts of malugueta pepper for probably all the game time. Finding an exact location where it was grown has been elusive to me so far. But I did find 1 site that said it was gathered in Benin city(Accra in the game). Here it is=
http://www.greatestcities.com/Africa/Nigeria/Benin_City.html
The major port for trade of Benin was Gwato and it was very near the capital and this was where the pepper was sent to. Gwato falls within Accra as well. So I'm about 90% sure this is the province most deserving of being spice(pepper). Also currently Benin has 2 slave provinces but actually Benin closed itslelf off to the slave trade for much of the game time. So slaves shouldn't be prefered over spice.

In addition to this I've made 3 events for Benin. Here they are=
#Portuguese offer of christianity#
event = {
id = 127000
trigger = {
OR = { owned = { province = 798 data = POR }
owned = { province = 797 data = POR }
owned = { province = 796 data = POR }
owned = { province = 795 data = POR }
owned = { province = 816 data = POR }
owned = { province = 790 data = POR }
owned = { province = 789 data = POR }
owned = { province = 788 data = POR } }
exists = POR
}
random = no
country = BEN
name = "The portuguese embassy to the king of Benin"
desc = "In 1486 Joham Affom da Aviero made contact with the king of Benin. The king of Benin then sent an ambassador to the king of Portugal because he desired to learn about Portugal. He was entertained and shown many good things of the kingdom of Portugal. The king of Portugal then sent him back to Benin with some catholic priests, who were to rebuke the idolatries of the negroes, and a few merchants along with some gifts for the king Benin."
style = 2
date = { year = 1486 }
offset = 60
deathdate = { year = 1514 }
action_a = {
name = "Accept their gifts but do not enforce Christianity"
command = { type = relation which = POR value = 150 }
command = { type = trade value = 100 }
command = { type = cash value = 10 }
command = { type = domestic = innovative value = 1 }
}
action_b ={
name = "Convert to Christianity"
command = { type = relation which = POR value = 200 }
command = { type = trade value = 100 }
command = { type = cash value = 10 }
command = { type = missionaries value = 1 }
command = { type = religion which = catholic }
command = { type = sleepevent which = 127001 }
}
}
#2nd Portuguese offer of christianity#
event = {
id = 127001
trigger = {
OR = { owned = { province = 798 data = POR }
owned = { province = 797 data = POR }
owned = { province = 796 data = POR }
owned = { province = 795 data = POR }
owned = { province = 816 data = POR }
owned = { province = 790 data = POR }
owned = { province = 789 data = POR }
owned = { province = 788 data = POR } }
exists = POR
}
random = no
country = BEN
name = "The 2nd portuguese embassy to the king of Benin"
desc = "In 1514 the king of Portugal sent priests again to the king of Benin. When the priests arrived they brought gifts and desired to explain christianity to the king of Benin, but he replied that he was too busy with war to consider the mystery of Christianity. However his son and many nobles did convert and were even taught to read. The portuguese also began giving military aid to the king fo Benin."
style = 2
date = { day = 1 month = january year = 1515 }
offset = 60
deathdate = { year = 1660 }
action_a = {
name = "Accept their gifts but do not enforce Christianity"
command = { type = relation which = POR value = 150 }
command = { type = land value = 100 }
command = { type = cash value = 10 }
}
action_b ={
name = "Convert to Christianity"
command = { type = relation which = POR value = 200 }
command = { type = land value = 100 }
command = { type = cash value = 10 }
command = { type = missionaries value = 1 }
command = { type = religion which = catholic }
command = { type = provincereligion which = 792 value = catholic }
}
}
#Political reforms of Ewuare#
event = {
id = 127002
random = no
country = BEN
style = 1
date = { year = 1445 }
offset = 120
deathdate = { year = 1452 }
name = "Ewuare centralizes the power of the oba"
desc = "Oba Ewuare reduced the influence of the uzama, a body of hereditary chiefs who participated in the selection of the oba, by instituting primogeniture. He also created new categories of chiefs that he appointed himself."
action_a = {
name = "Make the reforms"
command = { type = ADM which = 2 value = 240 }
command = { type = stability value = 1 }
command = { type = domestic = aristocracy value = -3 }
command = { type = domestic = centralization value = 3 }
}
action_b ={
name = "Leave things as they are"
command = { type = vp value = -1 }
}
}

And yes I realize that I made 2 events where option B allows them to convert to Christianity. They had 2 very distinct opportunities to do this and they were very tolorant of catholic evangelism. That Benin gets a 10% chance over all instead of a 5% chance to convert to Christianity is in light of the sources I've read pretty realistic I think. I'll probably switch the triggers to 792(Accra) discovered unless Isaac or someone else can prove I've got the discovered trigger wrong as I've found that it does indeed work the way it is supposed to. Currently if Portugal places even 1 TP on the west African coast nearby the events will trigger at the historical time. Also I have not playtested these events yet so I may have to modify them slightly.

In addition to this I think I've come up with a solution for Songay's being too weak problem. Besides the big adjustments to their 2 beginning provinces, they should start off with land 10. Currently I think it's 3. Why the heck they would be geared towards naval in 1419 I have no idea. Some other West African countries get land 10 at the beginning. The poor unfortunate Songhay have to pay 7 ducats for each 1,000 infantry. No wonder they can't take their historic objectives!

Kongo is biggest example of lousy research I've have seen so far by the EU2 crew for EU2. They got almost everything wrong here. First of all the provinces Kongo starts with are wrong. Currently Kongo starts with Teke, Ngoyo, Mdongo, and Congo. But I could find no maps nor any information at all that says that Kongo ever reached beyond the Ougawe river. The river was it's furthest border. The Ougawe river for those of you who don't know is the river that cuts through the middle of Kongo in the game. Surprise! That river is not actually the Congo and it isn't in the game either. The Congo river in the game is that little slip of river just above Zaire. Why the heck the province of Congo doesn't even border the Congo river I have no idea.

The provinces that Kongo owned in the game at it's peak were: Congo, Mdongo, Mayumba, Cabinda, and Zaire. The capital was in Zaire and should be called "Sao Salvador do Congo." Most of the game time Kongo really didn't own more than Zaire of course. The empire of Kongo was centered more toward the east of the province of Zaire in the game.

here is the setup for Kongo=
# Kongo #

country = {
tag = KON
policy = {
aristocracy = 9
centralization = 0
innovative = 3
mercantilism = 5
offensive = 5
land = 7
quality = 1
serfdom = 9
}
colonialattempts = 0
colonialnation = no
major = no
colonists = 0
cancelledloans = 0
extendedloans = 0
treasury = 200
inflation = 0
merchants = 0
religion = { type = pagan }
culture = { type = kongolese }
diplomacy = {
}
knownprovinces = {
785 786 787 1505 1506 }
ownedprovinces = {
785 786 787 1505 1506 }
controlledprovinces = {
785 786 787 1505 1506 }
nationalprovinces = {
785 786 787 1505 1506 }
city = { fortress = { level = 1 }
population = 15000
location = 1506
}

city = { fortress = { level = 1 }
population = 15000
location = 1505
}
city = { fortress = { level = 1 }
population = 15000
location = 786
}
city = { fortress = { level = 1 }
population = 15000
location = 787
}
city = { fortress = { level = 1 }
population = 18000
location = 785
capital = yes
name = "Mbanza Kongo"
}
technology = {
stability = { level = 3 value = 42 }
infra = { level = 0 value = 0 }
trade = { level = 0 value = 0 }
land = { level = 0 value = 0 }
naval = { level = 0 value = 0 }
}
}


In addition to this the following provinces need some of their stats changed.

Kongo should be switched from chinagoods to slaves and have it's tax switched from 10 to 5.

Zaire needs to be switched from slaves to copper. Copper was one of the major commodities the Kongolese traded to Portugal and the province of Zaire had a large copper mine.

Zaire should have it's tax increased to 6.

Ndongo, Cabinda, and Mayumba need their tax increased to 5.

Zaire, Cabinda, Ndongo, and Mayumba need their manpower increased to 5.

Don't let the manpower increases scare you. Kongo was heavily populated and could field large armies. Besides I am going to make a series of Kongo events and one of them will hit their provinces manpower hard due to the unwanted increase in slave trafficing. it will also lower tax by 1 and lower pop a little too.

In addition to this Iwould like to point out that Kongo traded large amounts of Ivory as well. But none of it's begining provinces, real or the ones at present, have ivory as a commodity. I have been unable to locate the primary source of this. If anybody knows or can find out please let me know, as it seems fair to me that one of their starting provinces should be ivory. Perhaps Congo? And than maybe Rio Muni can be swicthed from ivory to slaves. As the coast below Benin to Kongo was a big slave producing region and no doubt more so than Ivory anyways.

The name "Mbanza Kongo" will have to be removed from the cityname of province csv. file.
 
Last edited:
idontlikeforms said:
1 other thing, Timbuktu absolutely MUST have it's "historical COT modifier" changed from 5 to -3. I am almost postive that city size and province tax value effects the robustness of a COT as well as the HCOTM. This being the case Timbuktu is the strongest COT in the game currently. And it needs to be able to die much easier on it's own if Morroco doesn't sack Timbuktu. Currently if it dissapears it is later the no. 1 candidate in west Africa by far for a new COT. This shouldn't be the case. Even with -3 HCOTM, timbuktu is still has a pretty strong chance of getting a new COT in west Africa on account of it's tax and population.

I agree completely with this.
 
Last edited:
Changing the COT modifier for Timbuktu makes sense. Raising the manpower is also not a big problem since Europeans are not likely to get manpower from here. Only the OE of the majors gets here easily. I haven't checked how much the original values were though. The events look fine, but introducing Christianity in Benin should be problematic for a player so it should be tested, if revoltrisks or stab hits is needed. I think we should be careful with increasing the tax value of Kongo provinces, since those areas shouldnt be much worth for a colonizer and was colonised very late when all the good spots are taken. There wasn't much of a race for inner West Africa and raising the values there make it an attractive spot for the OE. Going into Balkan doesn't make much sense economically as it is, and we should make sure we don't make it worse by adding other profitable areas. Even if Kongolese/West African provinces are converted and by that get European culture they shouldn't be anywhere as profitable as Carribean, Indonesian, European or Indian provinces.
 
Norrefeldt said:
Changing the COT modifier for Timbuktu makes sense. Raising the manpower is also not a big problem since Europeans are not likely to get manpower from here. Only the OE of the majors gets here easily. I haven't checked how much the original values were though. The events look fine, but introducing Christianity in Benin should be problematic for a player so it should be tested, if revoltrisks or stab hits is needed. I think we should be careful with increasing the tax value of Kongo provinces, since those areas shouldnt be much worth for a colonizer and was colonised very late when all the good spots are taken. There wasn't much of a race for inner West Africa and raising the values there make it an attractive spot for the OE. Going into Balkan doesn't make much sense economically as it is, and we should make sure we don't make it worse by adding other profitable areas. Even if Kongolese/West African provinces are converted and by that get European culture they shouldn't be anywhere as profitable as Carribean, Indonesian, European or Indian provinces.

The ottomans shouldn't be able to get to west Africa for some time. One of the points of the manpower increases is to make it even more dificult for europeans to take west African provinces from these countries. These places historically had large agricultural regions and they fielded pretty large armies too. With these manpower increases the West African countries will be able to field larger armies. This should prevent not help early ahistorical conquests there.

I don't see why introducing christianity into Benin should be a problem. The king of Benin didn't endorse it but the missionaries were allowed to convert people here without any intereference. And they did infact convert a good number, probably not enough to justify a province religion conversion though. If my events are added the AI will still only convert Benin to christianity 10% of the time. A christian Benin should still wind up being weaker than a fixed Songhay. So even if it helps them, I doubt a christian AI Benin is going to take over west africa often.

The tax increases to the Kongo overall should wind up being barely stronger than they are now, since the province of Congo is having it's province tax decreased by 5. Besides I just made an impact of slavery event that reduces them further. I'll post it probably tomorow. The Portuguese considered the Kongolese to be the most advanced and prospersous african nation they'd seen. Kongo had an estimated 3 milion pop in the 15th century. Tax values of 5 per province should rest well with the history of this region.

I think with the Kongo event set I'm working on Kongo won't be a walk in the park at all. They should have some difficulty becoming powerful etc.
 
idontlikeforms said:
The ottomans shouldn't be able to get to west Africa for some time. One of the points of the manpower increases is to make it even more dificult for europeans to take west African provinces from these countries. These places historically had large agricultural regions and they fielded pretty large armies too. With these manpower increases the West African countries will be able to field larger armies. This should prevent not help early ahistorical conquests there.
As long as you dont increase it a few hundred per cent manpower of these states are no that much of a problem around 1600 with a leader. I didn't really oppose the changes, just said their impact in OE should be tested.


idontlikeforms said:
The tax increases to the Kongo overall should wind up being barely stronger than they are now, since the province of Congo is having it's province tax decreased by 5. Besides I just made an impact of slavery event that reduces them further. I'll post it probably tomorow. The Portuguese considered the Kongolese to be the most advanced and prospersous african nation they'd seen. Kongo had an estimated 3 milion pop in the 15th century. Tax values of 5 per province should rest well with the history of this region.

I think with the Kongo event set I'm working on Kongo won't be a walk in the park at all. They should have some difficulty becoming powerful etc.
I don't care much for the impact of Kongo AI or player since they are very incompetent/isolated. But with the increase of slaves as commodity we have already raised the value of some of the provinces. We have to verify by tests that the area just doesn't become too valuable. There are a lot of European provinces that have tax values less than 8 and with less valuable commodities.
 
Norrefeldt said:
I don't care much for the impact of Kongo AI or player since they are very incompetent/isolated. But with the increase of slaves as commodity we have already raised the value of some of the provinces. We have to verify by tests that the area just doesn't become too valuable. There are a lot of European provinces that have tax values less than 8 and with less valuable commodities.

I've played quite a few games with the slaves commodity on 8 and I haven't noticed anything unusual or ahistorical yet. West African countries are ahistorically weak right now with the current setup. It would have to be a huge boost in economic value to cause gameplay problems. West Africa is somewhat isolated already. What specifically could be a problem that I should be looking for?

Besides in my opinion raising commodity value has far less of an impact than raising the tax value of provinces. Since the net tax value increase to west Africa is very little, 6 for west Africa and 6 for Kongo, I hardly think it could cause some horrible calamity. Especially if you consider that 5 of the 6 Kongo gets is going to be lost via event in the early 16th century. And Songhay gains 7 tax overall and it is way too weak right now and usually can't pull off what it's supposed to. So this should correct problems. Not make them.
 
Last edited:
idontlikeforms said:
Besides in my opinion raising commodity value has far less of an impact than raising the tax value of provinces. Since the net tax value increase to west Africa is very little, 6 for west Africa and 6 for Kongo, I hardly think it could cause some horrible calamity. Especially if you consider that 5 of the 6 Kongo gets is going to be lost via event in the early 16th century. And Songhay gains 7 tax overall and it is way too weak right now and usually can't pull off what it's supposed to. So this should correct problems. Not make them.
I don't understand what problems your are addressing by these changes. You say West Africa are historically weak right now, can you give some example why you think that? How large armies did these states field, since you say manpower should be raised? Are we really solving more problems than we might potentially create?

I see a few problems: Raising tax value increases the supply, making it easier for Europeans to conquer the provinces. The easier-to-get provinces becomes comparably richer. Manpower in West Africa is very tempting for OE, and they are tempted enough as it is. It will not help these states one little bit when they fight Europeans with 20 higher tech and leaders. It's easy enough to get some tens of thousands here, and you are making it easier, since supply is the problem. All of this creates a stronger incitament for a ahistorical race for West Africa and inner Congo.
 
Norrefeldt said:
I don't understand what problems your are addressing by these changes. You say West Africa are historically weak right now, can you give some example why you think that? How large armies did these states field, since you say manpower should be raised? Are we really solving more problems than we might potentially create?

I see a few problems: Raising tax value increases the supply, making it easier for Europeans to conquer the provinces. The easier-to-get provinces becomes comparably richer. Manpower in West Africa is very tempting for OE, and they are tempted enough as it is. It will not help these states one little bit when they fight Europeans with 20 higher tech and leaders. It's easy enough to get some tens of thousands here, and you are making it easier, since supply is the problem. All of this creates a stronger incitament for a ahistorical race for West Africa and inner Congo.

West Africa in the 15th and 16th centuries had large populations and these states could field large armies. The size of their their armies is what made europeans not think of conquering west African states.

Here it says Songhay could field an army of 30,000 infantry and 10,000 cavalry. http://216.239.57.104/search?q=cach...1.doc+songhay+field+warriors&hl=en&lr=lang_en
This website says the Songhay army was powerful and proffessional.http://www.lonelyplanet.com/destinations/africa/mali/printable.htm
This website says that Timbuktu reached a population of 100,000 under the Songhay. http://www.ijebu.org/songhay/
This website says Benin had a standing army of 20,000 and could field up to 100,000 if necessary. http://www.edo-nation.net/stewart1.htm
This website says the capital of Kongo had a population of 60,000 to 100,000 by the early 16th century. http://www.emayzine.com/lectures/africa and the spread of Islam.html
This website says that Kongo had a population of three million in the late 15th century. http://caxton.stockton.edu/hod/history Portugal only had around 1 million.

Besides all this there is plenty of historical information that shows that west Africa in general in the 15th and 16th centuries had heavy agricultural produce. This should be reflected in population and tax value. I deliberately reserved these 8 tax valued provinces for the places that I found had the largest populations and agricultural production.

The provinces in west Africa getting the tax increases are located the furthest inland. So no problems there with conquest by europeans early.

Ideally these provinces need to be able to field larger armies and this should be the real deterrent to early european conquests. If these states are given high land DP and high serfdom value etc. They will be able to regularly maintain very large armies. This is exactly what we want to mimic the true history of these regions.
 
Norrefeldt said:
I see a few problems: Raising tax value increases the supply, making it easier for Europeans to conquer the provinces. The easier-to-get provinces becomes comparably richer. Manpower in West Africa is very tempting for OE, and they are tempted enough as it is. It will not help these states one little bit when they fight Europeans with 20 higher tech and leaders. It's easy enough to get some tens of thousands here, and you are making it easier, since supply is the problem. All of this creates a stronger incitament for a ahistorical race for West Africa and inner Congo.

This comment got me to thinking. Timbuktu in 1550 would undoubtedly have been a tempting target to the Ottomans in real life. Why didn't they do what the Morroccans later did - invade across the Sahara to W Africa? I guess what I'm getting at is how ahistorical is an Ottoman conquest of West Africa, and why. I haven't a clue, but the answer affects my opinion about all of this. Norre is undoubtedly right about richer W Africa being more enticing for the Ottomans.
 
idontlikeforms said:
West Africa in the 15th and 16th centuries had large populations and these states could field large armies. The size of their their armies is what made europeans not think of conquering west African states.
But even after they were conquered the African provinces wasn't very profitable, compared to other colonial areas. This comparison needs to be done.

idontlikeforms said:
Here it says Songhay could field an army of 30,000 infantry and 10,000 cavalry. http://216.239.57.104/search?q=cach...1.doc+songhay+field+warriors&hl=en&lr=lang_en
This website says that Timbuktu reached a population of 100,000 under the Songhay. http://www.ijebu.org/songhay/ .
The second source says Songhai at it's peak could field an army of 35.000. I have no idea of how correct that might be or what this private website got the number from. But how far is that of the support limit we have got so far?

idontlikeforms said:
This website says Benin had a standing army of 20,000 and could field up to 100,000 if necessary. http://www.edo-nation.net/stewart1.htm
This website says the capital of Kongo had a population of 60,000 to 100,000 by the early 16th century. http://www.emayzine.com/lectures/africa and the spread of Islam.html
This website says that Kongo had a population of three million in the late 15th century. http://caxton.stockton.edu/hod/history Portugal only had around 1 million.
Three million for Kongo, that might mean 1 million for the area covered by EU2 map, if we are generous.

idontlikeforms said:
Besides all this there is plenty of historical information that shows that west Africa in general in the 15th and 16th centuries had heavy agricultural produce. This should be reflected in population and tax value. I deliberately reserved these 8 tax valued provinces for the places that I found had the largest populations and agricultural production.
How would this be compared to Europe. Generally I think you reasoning and sources only focus on one area, without comparison with other areas it's hard to argue anything.

The provinces in west Africa getting the tax increases are located the furthest inland. So no problems there with conquest by europeans early.

Ideally these provinces need to be able to field larger armies and this should be the real deterrent to early european conquests. If these states are given high land DP and high serfdom value etc. They will be able to regularly maintain very large armies. This is exactly what we want to mimic the true history of these regions.[/QUOTE]This works well as it is early in the game, so no need fixing. what makes people go into deep Africa is mostly that all other areas are taken.

Isaac Brock said:
This website says that Timbuktu reached a population of 100,000 under the Songhay. http://www.ijebu.org/songhay/ .
This source says Songhai at it's peak could field an army of 35.000. I have no idea of how correct that might be or what this private website got the number from. But how far is that of the support limit we have got so far?

Isaac Brock said:
Timbuktu in 1550 would undoubtedly have been a tempting target to the Ottomans in real life. Why didn't they do what the Morroccans later did - invade across the Sahara to W Africa? I guess what I'm getting at is how ahistorical is an Ottoman conquest of West Africa, and why.
It is a decent target as it is, but we have to look into the other Ottoman expansion directions to make sure we dont make W Africa so rich you have to be stupid NOT to head here. I haven't done the comparision, but it needs to be done.

Btw, your material above. Benin should only have an opportunity to turn Christian if it's pagan. The capital of Kongo should follw the AGCEEP naming convention, all city names in local language.
 
Norrefeldt said:
But even after they were conquered the African provinces wasn't very profitable, compared to other colonial areas. This comparison needs to be done.

This is irrelevant. The provinces in question were mostly conquered by europeans after the game ends. Its how valuable they were during the gametime that matters.

Norrefeldt said:
The second source says Songhai at it's peak could field an army of 35.000. I have no idea of how correct that might be or what this private website got the number from. But how far is that of the support limit we have got so far?

Well if it sounds so outrageous to you that it just can't be true then study the matter yourself instead of just trying to belittle common information on this subject. Songhay was an EMPIRE, not a minor tribe. Their army was proffessional. That means it was a permanent standing army of trained soldiers, not a mob of savages.

Norrefeldt said:
Three million for Kongo, that might mean 1 million for the area covered by EU2 map, if we are generous.

And? The populations I've reccomended for Kongo aren't unreasonable nor much larger than they currently.

Norrefeldt said:
How would this be compared to Europe. Generally I think you reasoning and sources only focus on one area, without comparison with other areas it's hard to argue anything.

Do I need to make specific comparisons? Maybe I should get a PHD in this area, make ground breaking research in it, publish a book making these comparisons, and get tenure at a world famous university. I mean really just study the subject yourself if my claims seem so farcical. Anyone who has a moderate amount of knowledge of the history of west Africa in the 15th and 16th centuries should have no problems with my claims. They are no where near far-fetched or exagerations. Its all pretty much common information Norrfeldt.

Norrefeldt said:
This works well as it is early in the game, so no need fixing. what makes people go into deep Africa is mostly that all other areas are taken.

What makes them go into Africa is that their economies are capable of handling stab. hits, they have explored west Africa, and they know that the BB penalties for conquering pagans is low. Otherwise they'll usually leave it alone.

Norrefeldt said:
It is a decent target as it is, but we have to look into the other Ottoman expansion directions to make sure we dont make W Africa so rich you have to be stupid NOT to head here. I haven't done the comparision, but it needs to be done.

This is such an irrelevant issue. Look if the Ottomans want to capture west Africa they must go through Morocco and the 2 salt provinces between Morocco will need to be colonized with probably at least level 2 forts. Were talking late 16th century here. The only other way there is around the coast of west Africa and that requires knowledge via an explorer. This should rarely happen earlier than late 16th century. And neither of these 2 routes are really viable without Ottoman ownership of Morocco. The Ottomans will take very heavy BB hits killing Songhay and Mali. And if they lose 1or 2 battles then bye bye conquest because reinforcing it will just take too much time and money. I mean seriously how big of a problem is this really. If you want to play the Ottomans and take west Africa go ahead. I think the majority of the time other targets are easier and more profitable to get, even with my west africa changes, which aren't nearly as big of changes as you are supposing.

The only west African country recieving a big help from them is Songhay. And Songhay is so much weaker than it should be that you ought to be thanking me for making proposals to help it not calling my suggestions into question with petty complaints that are not backed by research nor a decent understanding of the area in question.

Norrefeldt said:
Btw, your material above. Benin should only have an opportunity to turn Christian if it's pagan. The capital of Kongo should follw the AGCEEP naming convention, all city names in local language.

Once again this objection is irrelevant. Benin is pagan late 15th early 16th century not muslim. And even if it was muslim that would be no deterent because west Africans in general were impressed with christianity more than islam. They considered islam inferior and were VERY interested in the new religion of the technologically superior portuguese. After all when the portuguese arrived did they have much problems switching trade routes to them? No.

Alright I'll switch the capital of Kongo to it's pre-portuguese discovery name. But keep in mind that the name I gave it was it's name for the majority of the game time. The king and a good amount of nobles from Kongo for much of it's history were fluent in Portuguese. The titles of almost all of the kings in their king list are also Portuguese and yes they are historical not fictional, at least for the parts I've studied so far which go to about 1700.

Sometimes I wonder if I relog on with a different ID name would my proposals draw so much protest. Does the name idontlikeforms on a post immediatly instigate a subconscious doubt of the claims given? It's not like I'm not studyingthe things I'm suggesting. I don't want to make proposals that I don't know the history behind reasonably well. I spend far more time studying these subjects than scripting events or setup changes for them.