Home Trending Latest threads New posts Developer diaries

AGC-EEP: North America

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.
unmerged(17856)

unmerged(17856)

General
Jun 26, 2003
2.473
0
Visit site
The ultimate goal of this thread is to 1) settle the issue of the North American tribes & 2) come out with an improved North American Colonial Scenario.
The first issue has been settled. NA nations no longer have EU2 tags in the merger.

Regardless, most of us share common concerns about the current NA colonial situation and a common goal; we want to improve the quality of our NA colonizing gaming experience.

To successfully resolve the second issue and ultimately present a unified proposal for the AGC-EEP project, I feel we must begin by outlining our problems and concerns no matter how large or small with NA! We shall then attempt to resolve these concerns and try to keep everyone happy in doing so.

PARLIAMENTARY BODY & AFFILIATIONS (no longer called into session IE disolved)
 
Last edited:
Culture/Nation List & Concerns

Cultures/Nations:

EEP NA Nations/Cultures: (6 total)
Huron/Huron
Iroquois/Iroquois
Shawnee/Shawnee
Cherokee/Cherokee
Creek/Cherokee & Creek
Navajo/Navajo

EU2 1.07 NA Nations/Cultures: (8 total)
Dakota/Dakota
Huron/Huron
Iroquois/Iroquois
Shawnee/Shawnee
Lenape/Iroquois & Deleware
Cherokee/Cherokee
Creek/Cherokee & Creek
Navajo/Navajo

EEP-AGC NA Nations/Cultures: (0 total)

Concerns:

A) Weak AI colonizing performance
i.colonies in historicaly inaccurate provinces
ii.european nations fail to develoup along historical lines
B) Human colonizing performance
i.provincial natives at current settings are too easy for the human player & and will result in an easy continental 'gold mine'.
C) RE-Representing NA-nations
 
Last edited:
Not meaning to devaluate native American cultures or to claim that they was less diverse than European or Asian people, but I think for the purpose of EU2 the native American cultures should be more simplified. Currently there are 14 different cultures north of Mexico (Aleutian, Navajo, Creek, Cherokee, Mississippian, Dakota, Shawnee, Iruquois, Huron, Delaware, Cree, Abenaki, Naskapi, Inuit), which is, considering that most of these provinces are uninhabited, quite a waste of culture tags and not really accurate - Paradox seems to have taken just the names of some NA people they knew and made cultures of these. Commonly, native American cultures are divided into seven groups, based on similar culture, language, area of settlement etc:
Arctic
Northwest Coast
Plains
Plateau
Eastern Woodlands
Northern
Southwest

Such a setup would be both more accurate and save seven culture tags.
 
This is a very good idea. I would only hope that we could retain the cultures of the 'countries' we are going to keep. So, if we are going to keep Iroquois, for example, substitute Iroquis for Eastern Woodlands.
 
Uh, just tossing in my 2 cents here, but why not use the 5 civilized tribes as nations, sorta, and the rest just leave as hostile native populations.
 
I am for complete removal of all the NA tribes. Currently, their inclusion allows easy colonial empires to be built by whoever discovers them first. The NA tribes don't put up much of a fight and only allow city sized provinces for their conquerors. Plus, with the new conversion of pagans rule, not only does the province get to be your religion, it becomes your culture as well.

Some people fear that by removing the tribes colonization will be too easy or ahistorical. Colonization is already ahistorical. Ina game with no random maps, everyone knows where to send their explorers. The solution to early colonization lies in changing the explorers or in altering the ai files to prevent them colonizing before a certain date. In addition, if we remove the NA tribes we could increase numbers and the aggressiveness of the natives in each province to make things more difficult.

Plus, with leaving the tribes in, colonization is definitely too fast due to the insta empire tactic of annexing the pagan country and then converting the provinces.

To sum it up, what do we gain by leaving the tribes in?
(1) More realistic setup.
(2) Possibility of a human NA tribe.

What do we get by removing them?
(1) More realistic coloniation experience.
(2) No insta-empires.

As always, when confronted by the historical development/gameplay balance issue, I will almost always side with gameplay. So my vote is that we remove the NA natives, except maybe the Iroquois. They actually deserve a tag IMHO.
 
Daaamn, you guys are doing native cultures no justice...

When it comes to culture, in native tribes it wasn't religion but tribe. Culturally just call it 'Tribal' as no player will have tribal culture.

However the Iroquois were creating the beginnings of a empire, with language, customs, and religion imposed imperially, thusly THEY should have Iroquois culture, and be in the process of imposing it on everyone else.

Also beginning in 1500, natives should suffer increasingly devastating smallpox epidemics slashing population, army sizes, and standing manpower, keeping native populations from ever getting very high. These should be horrifically devastating and continue to massacre native populations even following European conquest, however if such an epidemic strikes an already-conquered Indian province, it should be even worse than normal and convert the province to european culture and religion.
 
Should european colonizers have some (random?) events to encourage the spread of smallpox? ("My native friends! Have these blankets to keep your children warm.")
 
We need to Parliamentarize this thread. I feel this will help keep some structure to this topic because that's the way anything solid will ever come out of this.

Therefore, it is necessary for those who post on this thread to state their 'party allegiance' so to speak.

Party affiliations should by no means be thought of or regarded as rigid. The primary purpose of the party affiliation is to facilitate an inevitable majority in the long run, as the time will come when AGC-EEP will be turning to us to provide answers to the kinds of questions/concerns we are posing on this thread.

I'll be posting party and party members' names and will update frequently. This way, we'll know where the majority stand on the NA issue at any given point in time.

It seems the biggest issue this thread faces currently is whether or not we should leave the NA tribes in the game. Personally, I am for reforming the NA tribes, not eliminating them. As a 'Reformist' I see a set of problems and I see many workable solutions to each and every one of them.

I have the list of tribal Nations and Cultures for the EEP for NA. What are the Nations and Cultures in NA for the AGC?
 
Last edited:
AGC didnt implement its proposals to remove the NA tribes.

good idea to move this issue to a new thread. put me into the tribal elimination party. may as well put all the others who said similar things in the Americas thread:
Originally posted by maxpublic
I eliminated the American nations a long time ago from my game, so I've quite a bit of experience on the effects. They're very consistent, and very historical....
Click to expand...
Originally posted by Jester
This seems to be a little extreme, but it probably does lend it self to more historical development....
Click to expand...
Originally posted by loseth
I just want to put in my vote for the no-NA-natives party....
Click to expand...
Originally posted by Mad King James
Personally I'm for making all but the Aztecs and Inca as natives really...
Click to expand...
just a suggestion to do this more efficiently...

EDIT: ok i misunderstood and deleted Twoflower's quote. i did have 3 dots at the end of each quote, that signifies it's an incomplete statement.
 
Last edited:
I feel wrongly quoted ;) At least you should have mentioned that this was not my complete statement. I said that if all other tribes are axed, there wouldn't be much more point in keeping the Iroquois and Cherokee since they would be unplayable anyway. That doesn't mean I advocate the removal of NA natives, in fact rather the opposite; enough tribes should be kept to have a playable, interesting setup there.
 
so then u still favour removing some? which ones?

is "reform" supposed to include removal of some NA nations or reform without removing any nations, which is what i think ribbon22 had previously advocated for. maybe they could be divided up.
 
I'm to the Pseudo-Abolitionist wing of the Reform Party ;)

IE I wouldn't mind if they went away forever, but I could be happy with only a few remaining (Iroquois and Cherokee)
 
I'm in favour of axing everyone but the Aztecs and Incas. Hardline pseudo-abolitionist?
 
Last edited:
i think psuedo-abolitionist ought to have their own party. to say "reform" distorts the whole categorisation. nobody is advocating no change. it's a matter of how many nations to keep. i too would consider myself pseudo-abolitionist if there is such a group.
 
Originally posted by Sun_Zi_36
AGC didnt implement its proposals to remove the NA tribes.
Click to expand...
Does that mean AGC essentially has the same NA tribal nations as does EU2 1.7?
Originally posted by Sun_Zi_36
may as well put all the others who said similar things in the Americas thread
Click to expand...
Parliamentary members will have to speak for themselves regarding this matter.
Originally posted by Sun_Zi_36
is "reform" supposed to include removal of some NA nations or reform without removing any nations, which is what i think ribbon22 had previously advocated for. maybe they could be divided up.
Click to expand...
Reform should not be divided, idealogically; if you believe the NA situation can be tweaked/re-vamped/scripted, so to speak, and that yes, some Indian nations should get the axe from the ORIGINAL EU2, then you are a REFORMIST. My view is that the EEP NA tribal nations setup should suffice in terms of the number of native nations. They are listed near the top of this thread. Though, of course, my view may change if I hear sufficient evidence and reason to change it.
Originally posted by Sun_Zi_36
i think psuedo-abolitionist ought to have their own party. to say "reform" distorts the whole categorisation. nobody is advocating no change. it's a matter of how many nations to keep. i too would consider myself pseudo-abolitionist if there is such a group.
Click to expand...
Then let the Psuedo-abolitionist party officially be born.
It is essential, however, to preserve the Reformist party for those who feel 2 or 3 native nations in all of NA is simply too little to successfully explore the historical significance of the region in a manner that enhances the gaming experience.
 
Originally posted by Mad King James
I'm to the Pseudo-Abolitionist wing of the Reform Party ;)

IE I wouldn't mind if they went away forever, but I could be happy with only a few remaining (Iroquois and Cherokee)
Click to expand...
Count me in this camp as well. My vote would be: Incas, Aztecs, Chimu, Iroquois, Cherokee, and MAYBE Maya. Those are actually nations by the standards of the game, unlike the others.

There should probably be some extra random events that decimate the populations of these countries through disease. I'd suggest having the trigger for these random events be having a NA capital, and having a whiteman value in a certain range (only knowing a few European nations). Once you meet the Europeans, the plagues start, but by the time you've met a bunch, your people have been exposed and only those who are resistant are still around. This would hopefully help model the historical decline of nations like the Cherokee.

Lord knows we could use the Lenape, Huron, Shawnee, Creek, Dakota, Navajo, and Zapotec tags in other places in the game, where they could actually ADD to the realism of the game rather than take away from it. The fact that this makes the Irriquois and Cherokee boring to play is just not an issue for me. For those who want a fantasy game where the NA indians are powerful, just play the regular GC or the current EEP/AGCs that have the whole set of NA nations.
 
Originally posted by Mad King James
Now we just need our own armbands and a secret police ;)
Click to expand...

And a password no? :)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top Bottom
Back