Home Trending Latest threads New posts Developer diaries

AGC-EEP Italian Unification

Jump to latest Follow Reply
  • 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.
Show only dev responses
Originally posted by C.N.
Looks good, but there is two things I would change:
1. Disallow a vassal of France to be made king of Italy by the Habsburg emperor.
2. Make the VP losses a little bit more severe (-20 - -50?) for not becoming Italy to reflect dissapointment at home that you chickened out. On the other hand, I wouldn't remove VP:s for being rejected. I'm also not fond of removing VP:s on the default choice (as in the Austria event).
Click to expand...
Implemented the first.
You support harsher VP punishments for not doing something that really did not happen (noone asked for the crown like this), but Habsburg shouldn't loose when they give away an important title? I would like to hear more opinions on this one. The option for Mantua not chosing to ask *is* rather boring, but I have no idea what should more be there.
 
Originally posted by mnorrefeldt

You support harsher VP punishments for not doing something that really did not happen (noone asked for the crown like this), but Habsburg shouldn't loose when they give away an important title?
Click to expand...


I wouldn't have a problem with punishing Habsburg if it was the B option. I have a problem with punishing the AI for being AI. As it is now the AI will take the more stupid alternative most of the time, but if we switch A and B, making the AI reject the Kingdom of Italy most of the time, the players will be unhappy. I see no clear way solve this problem.
And about harsher punishments for not going Italy, -1?!, come on, there are random events that gives more negative VP:s than that.
EDIT: If you compare to vanilla EU, Russian minors gets -200 VP and -3 stab for not becoming Russia, and in EEP they can't reject becoming Russia. I'm starting to consider that a stability loss would be required for chickening out becoming Italy, since that would show weakness to opportunist factions that want the throne for them self.
 
Last edited:
Originally posted by C.N.
I wouldn't have a problem with punishing Habsburg if it was the B option. I have a problem with punishing the AI for being AI. As it is now the AI will take the more stupid alternative most of the time, but if we switch A and B, making the AI reject the Kingdom of Italy most of the time, the players will be unhappy. I see no clear way solve this problem.
And about harsher punishments for not going Italy, -1?!, come on, there are random events that gives more negative VP:s than that.
Click to expand...
I think it can be a nice option in MP, since they are your ally, but you are perhaps right. -1 is more of a filler. Do you have another suggestion? ;)
 
Originally posted by mnorrefeldt
I think it can be a nice option in MP, since they are your ally, but you are perhaps right. -1 is more of a filler. Do you have another suggestion? ;)
Click to expand...

You posted while I edited my post above, check my added thought on stability:
"I'm starting to consider that a stability loss would be required for chickening out becoming Italy, since that would show weakness to opportunist factions that want the throne for them self."
 
New update!

Added:
*New (b) option for the states getting a 10 year CB when Italy emerges to seek their friendship, was suggested somewhere by Isaac Brock, and makes sense, especially in MP.
*If Austria grants the crown they lose their core on Lombardia, if they have one. They cannot both bless it's creation and still have the claim.
*Italy have to secede 4 Austrian cores if they get the crown from the Emperor, should they have them.

Monarchs:
It actually worked to have a state getting the coronation event, getting the new tag Italy and trigger events for that tag in the same event. This would make it easy to give ITA the old nations monarchs and leaders. Also they get the Milan leaders, historical base of the kingdom and always included when created.
It wouldn't be OK to give them all leaders of the Italian states they have conquered, since that is not the way it is done for any other nation.
If ITA get the old nation's monarchs we have a problem with Mantua (ends in 1748) and Milan, that have a City Counsil after 1535. What was your idea Isaac Brock, when you suggested that the Savoy monarchs should be used? Did you mean only if the creator is Milan (and Savoy of course!) or always?
 
New update!

Added:
*New (b) option for the states getting a 10 year CB when Italy emerges to seek their friendship, was suggested somewhere by Isaac Brock, and makes sense, especially in MP.
*If Austria grants the crown they lose their core on Lombardia, if they have one. They cannot both bless it's creation and still have the claim.
*Italy have to secede 4 Austrian cores if they get the crown from the Emperor, should they have them.

Monarchs:
It actually worked to have a state getting the coronation event, getting the new tag Italy and trigger events for that tag in the same event. This would make it easy to give ITA the old nations monarchs and leaders. Also they get the Milan leaders, historical base of the kingdom and always included when created.
It wouldn't be OK to give them all leaders of the Italian states they have conquered, since that is not the way it is done for any other nation.
If ITA get the old nation's monarchs we have a problem with Mantua (ends in 1748) and Milan, that have a City Counsil after 1535. What was your idea Isaac Brock, when you suggested that the Savoy monarchs should be used? Did you mean only if the creator is Milan (and Savoy of course!) or always?

Another thing, the badboy command is only available in the betas, with 1.07 'UNKNOWN STRING WANTED' is shown. If it just skippes the line it is OK; but otherwise there have to be two versions, puh! :)
 
Originally posted by mnorrefeldt


If ITA get the old nation's monarchs we have a problem with Mantua (ends in 1748) and Milan, that have a City Counsil after 1535. What was your idea Isaac Brock, when you suggested that the Savoy monarchs should be used? Did you mean only if the creator is Milan (and Savoy of course!) or always?
Click to expand...

I meant for anyone, although I hadn't thought it through.

As far as I know Savoy had a claim on the sucession to Milan in 1447, and I think they might have had one in 1535. They certainly had a very strong claim when the Spanish Hapsburgs became extinct in 1700. So for Milan it's possible to have fantasy schemes that put the House of Savoy on the throne.

As to Mantua, if you set aside the Salic Law then Savoy was the legitimate heir in 1626. This was the basis for their claim on Montferrat in that year (which did not have the Salic Law) and for their ultimate annexation of Montferrat in 1713. So again we could just use the House of Savoy.

But it was really just a thought. For the countries themselves it would make more sense to use the Hapsburgs after their monarchs run out.
 
As far as I know, the issue of continued relations with the nation that crowns the king hasn't been addressed. I think that the KoI should have a "truce" on top of everything else with the nations that crowned them in the non-forceful way of making Italy. Why? If a pope crowns you, and then you attack the pope, you are going to have MAJOR instability back home. Same with the Habsburgs. I think a 50 year truce would prevent ridiculous events like annexing the pope after using it to become king.
 
Originally posted by Phystarstk
As far as I know, the issue of continued relations with the nation that crowns the king hasn't been addressed. I think that the KoI should have a "truce" on top of everything else with the nations that crowned them in the non-forceful way of making Italy. Why? If a pope crowns you, and then you attack the pope, you are going to have MAJOR instability back home. Same with the Habsburgs. I think a 50 year truce would prevent ridiculous events like annexing the pope after using it to become king.
Click to expand...

Yes, and since you'll have to have good relations and be in the same alliance I think we have done all that we can. Keep in mind that we will very rarely see an AI state become Italy, so the problem mostly apply to players, and they are unstoppable anyhow! :D
I'll put in Savoy monarchs for Milan and Mantua becoming Italy.
 
Originally posted by mnorrefeldt
I'll put in Savoy monarchs for Milan and Mantua becoming Italy.
Click to expand...

This makes sence, unless we think about trying a kind of event sequence which gives additional choices (fictional but somehow realistic, or at least as realistic as having any leader-king still reigning after having been killed in battle), like for example (please forgive my illitteracy in scripts) :

event 1, whenever the ruling dinasty becomes estinct, i.e. when Sforzas (in case of Milan becoming Koi or Italy), Gonzagas (for Mantua), Medicis (should Florence become Koi or Italy I wouldn't grant Italy to Habsburg for free), and so on.

choice a: recognize Savoy claim (they had relations with anybody)
maybe secede Savoy to France if still there, worse relationship w/ France, worse w/ Habsburgs, some instability and/or RR te reflect general troubles.

choice b: get a Bourbon available branch (Naples for instance), better relations w/ France/Bourbon Spain, worse Habsburg, RM w/ France, some instabilty+RR

choice c: get a Habsburg branch (later Florence kings), RM + better rel w/ Austria, worse rel w/ France, some instability+RR.

Maybe we also want to give temporary CB to the not chosen side(s).

This would roughly create the possible condition for a "Italian" or "KOI" succession war.

Does the idea make sense?
 
Sounds like an excellent idea berhaven, if you don't look into it I might, but later, struggling to get the EEP release done so the merger is not hindered too much.
As I have planned with the monarchs, the Ambrosian republic and the republics of Florence are left out, alternative rulers are used, a kingdom cannot be ruled by a republic! I also intend to make it impossible to become KoI during the reigns of these republics. Opinions?
The sequence above is changed, the question to the HRE/Pope, the answer and the coronation were on the same day, since they were triggered like they were. I now put in an offset so that the coronation comes about three months later, also you have to be at peace to have it, otherwise it gets postponed. A last chance for evildoers... But there is no second check if you fulfill the criteria, so the only way to stop it is annexation!
Opinions?
 
Originally posted by mnorrefeldt
As I have planned with the monarchs, the Ambrosian republic and the republics of Florence are left out, alternative rulers are used, a kingdom cannot be ruled by a republic! I also intend to make it impossible to become KoI during the reigns of these republics. Opinions?
Click to expand...


Sounds perfectly fine, in theory, but keep in mind that not everyone is a history buff, and most people won't have an idea if their current ruler is king or medival president.
 
Originally posted by anti_strunt
Sounds perfectly fine, in theory, but keep in mind that not everyone is a history buff, and most people won't have an idea if their current ruler is king or medival president.
Click to expand...
I understand this and agree with you, but the republics are not there for long and we intend to make a much needed 'How do I form Italy/win HYW/form Holland/resurrect Byzantine Empire/form Persia as Qara Koyunlu/become Prussia/become Mughal Empire/how do I get cores as Russia and OE/how to suppress the Dutch revolts etc etc' -thread. This is much needed now since many events sequences are rather elaborate.
 
Originally posted by mnorrefeldt
As I have planned with the monarchs, the Ambrosian republic and the republics of Florence are left out, alternative rulers are used, a kingdom cannot be ruled by a republic! I also intend to make it impossible to become KoI during the reigns of these republics. Opinions?
Click to expand...

IMHO this is certainly correct, unless we want to get desperate in finding a rationale for a republic claiming the heirship of a crown, (but I guess it could only work, and only to a limited extent, for Venice in regards of Byzantyne legacy, which is not the case here) or we even more radically want to assume that the Republican phases are subject to something specific and not just exogenous variables.

Another intriguing link to be kept in mind could be a Medici claim on Milan after Sforza extinction. After all Giovanni dalle Bande Nere's Mother was a Sforza (Sforza-Riario to be exact, ruler of Rimini before being expelled by Borgia).

In any case, should we decide for a Savoyan heritage of Milan and/or Mantua, we should probably tune a bit the current events for the Regencies and Civil wars in Savoy, thus they reflect a quasi-vassalization of Savoy by France (what was definitely the case in RL) which doesn't necessarely has to be assumed for a KoI or a unified Italy, which should be assumed as having a somehow more independent foreign policy.
 
All is done and tested. I have found this flag made by Kaigon for Italy
italyeagle.gif


I think it might be better than the one suggested before, it feels more Italian since it has the colors of the modern Italian tricolor. The imperial eagle is still in, as it should be IMO. Opinions?
 
ugh I can't say I share your enthusiasm :eek:

By the way, the colours of the Italian tricolour were invented by Napoleon, there isn't anything especially Italian about green, other than the fact that it was Napoleon's favorite colour.

The first thing I thought of when I saw it was "what the... what's a czarist battle flag doing there?"

RUSSIAN Eagles are Gold, Holy Roman Eagles are black dude.

Also it's a rather odd device for Italian heraldry, looks almost Aryan, or Hindi. Italians either had their heraldic device proper upon a field, or quartered it with something else. They were even more neurotic about this than the French.
 
OK, OK, If you never ask you never get any answers, right? I just thoughht that the green color would be more useful if Italy also stands for the Cisalpine and Cispadane republics as well, created later in the game. I don't care that much though so the old one can be used instead. ;)
 
Originally posted by Mad King James


The first thing I thought of when I saw it was "what the... what's a czarist battle flag doing there?"
Click to expand...

That is the correct flag for the Kingdom of Italy (1805-1814) , which was of course a french vassal. ( i.e. Napoleon's standard in the center )


Not really a good flag to use for the whole unification proposal. :(
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top Bottom
Back