AGC & EEP: Russia

[unmerged(40707)]

Same remark as for the proposed event between Spain and Netherlands: what if Russia and Poland are allied or Poland vassal of Russia?

And what about very good relations as Third Angel wrote for the Spanish event?

 

[Toio]

Same remark as for the proposed event between Spain and Netherlands: what if Russia and Poland are allied or Poland vassal of Russia?

And what about very good relations as Third Angel wrote for the Spanish event?

i agree we can add a trigger on how relations are ( i asked if zero is ok) , but ...........a vassal is hard to swallow. IMO being a vassal is a servant of a superior nation, most times unwanted by the inferior state but needed to stay alive.

Allied situation should not be required, sometimes allies joined for necessity against a superior common enemy ie, FRA, ENG and HOL against SPA in the 17th century

 

[unmerged(40707)]

I don't see why Russia would DoW Poland if Poland is already vassal of Russia (and could be annexed this way). We never know... Maybe timespan of the event (1632-1638) could be extended then.

Ok, condition for an alliance can be useless.

We could have relations below 75 as condition (instead of 0 only).


EDIT: with (NOT ("vassal" AND "relations > 25") AND "relations <= 75"), even Poland as vassal with low relations could be targeted.

 

[Toio]

I don't see why Russia would DoW Poland if Poland is already vassal of Russia (and could be annexed this way). We never know... Maybe timespan of the event (1632-1638) could be extended then.

Ok, condition for an alliance can be useless.

We could have relations below 75 as condition (instead of 0 only).


EDIT: with (NOT ("vassal" AND "relations > 25") AND "relations <= 75"), even Poland as vassal with low relations could be targeted.

Ok, with the trigger of not to fire if POL is a vassal of RUS, since this is a RUS event

hmm on your EDIT...........an angry RUS demanding one of its core lands seems justified

 

[unmerged(40707)]

Yes, vassal was meant for Poland vassal of Russia.

 

[Third Angel]

Looks like no conclusion was reached. Could we then agree about that: the event should not fire if POL and RUS are allied or if POL is a vassal of RUS.

It could fire if RUS is a vassal of POL with low relations, say 50 or 0 (that could be discussed), or if RUS and POL (not vassals) have relations below 75 or 100, not sure about the value here either.

This could go for the SPA-HOL situation in the other thread, as it is basically the same event. This would look like this:

NOT = {
	alliance = { country = RUS country = POL }
	vassal = { country = RUS country = POL }
	AND = {
		relation = { country = POL data = 50 }
		OR = {
			vassal = { country = POL country = RUS }
			relation = { country = POL data = 100 }
		}
	}
}

There should also be a breakvassal command so that RUS breaks its vassalization to POL. Also, why is there no option B?

 

[Toio]

Looks like no conclusion was reached. Could we then agree about that: the event should not fire if POL and RUS are allied or if POL is a vassal of RUS.

i agree

It could fire if RUS is a vassal of POL with low relations, say 50 or 0 (that could be discussed), or if RUS and POL (not vassals) have relations below 75 or 100, not sure about the value here either.

yes to .........if RUS is a vassal of POL .....and
I agree on no criteria (relations) if RUS and POL and no alliance or vassal of each other

This could go for the SPA-HOL situation in the other thread, as it is basically the same event. This would look like this:
NOT = {
alliance = { country = RUS country = POL }
vassal = { country = RUS country = POL }
AND = {
relation = { country = POL data = 50 }
OR = {
vassal = { country = POL country = RUS }
relation = { country = POL data = 100 }
}
}

}
my change in red

There should also be a breakvassal command so that RUS breaks its vassalization to POL. Also, why is there no option B?

not required IMO as there is no need, the area is a core of RUS , what do you expect RUS to do

As for the HOL-SPA event, SPA only recognized the dutch republic in 1648 , thats 80 years of warfare. maybe the -400 relation is too much , but we can test on this.