AGCEEP: Burgundy

[unmerged(36449)]

So you say a German duke could better control Dutch merchants because he is not going to exploit them? Hmm, well I think that his greed for gold wouldn't be weaker than a Habsburg's so that's why... and also because a eu2 game without the Netherlands loses too much imo...

The consideration of a game without the Netherlands is to be blunt totally irrelevant. If the conditions are not such that it would be formed then it should not form, to do otherwise is to take liberties that one should not.

Would another dynasty exploit the populations of the area? Certainly, but not to the degree and depth that the Hapsburgs of Spain DID by virtue of them not having the same cash requirements because odds are they are not fighting constantly two or more powers for the better part of a century or so.

Conditions matter, the chain of causal effects that lead to a conclusion matter and they should be adhered to rather then whim and desire.

To do other then that undercuts the Mod's creditbility to a very great degree.

And one final point: Depending upon when the German prince took possession of the territory they would not be "Dutch". They continued to self identify as "German" for well into the 15th century possibly till the early 16th. Ever notice how "Dutch" and "Deutch" sound and look alike? It is because they are the same word but in different dialects of the same root language.

 

[Toio]

@Toio: "flag = Brussels" is to check if capital moved to... Brussels

For 137002, I'm not sure. IMHO, problem for Burgundy is elsewhere.

I know , what the flag is for, question mark was to mean, is it necessary. the event should fire even if BUR does not inherit brabant. If by 1477, BUR still exists then why not fire?

maybe change the flag trigger to countrysize trigger,


on 137002, I suggest removal of C option , due to the fact that the AI will choose C if they cannot afford A and will choose C due to the favourable stabilty bonus, a human will never choose C if he cannot afford A.

The option C if taken by Ai , with its loss of -3 quality leads to a very active Cleves taking many BUR lands prior to 1500, which eventually leads to no dutch revolts in the 16th century, hence no netherlands

So the event should have A and B only , with B comprising of some commands of C

 

[Toio]

The consideration of a game without the Netherlands is to be blunt totally irrelevant. If the conditions are not such that it would be formed then it should not form, to do otherwise is to take liberties that one should not.

agree to a point,
if previous events have options that force the AI to go down a path where conditions prevent the chance of netherlands ever forming, then this is wrong.

 

[unmerged(36449)]

agree to a point,
if previous events have options that force the AI to go down a path where conditions prevent the chance of netherlands ever forming, then this is wrong.

Part of the danger in going about the mod from a grand campaign aspect is trying to pigeon hole things. I have long advocated backing away from that policy and putting some effort into writing scenarios a al vanilla for key points of history.

The GC should be allowed to flow as it will so that the player can assess the impact of subtle changes in decisions on the world as we know it; which is a surprisingly powerful tool for learning and understanding the world that they live in NOW. And that is the kind of thing that sets a good game apart from a GREAT one; that it can inform and impact in a meaningful way the person playing its' perception.

Now of course events should be written to assume that the "A" choice has been picked since the odds favor it, but effort should also be put into logically following the chain of events triggered by the "B" & "C" choices at least as far as logic and probability will allow (as well as available information). This also has the benefit of making the game itself far more entertaining to the players and a heck of a lot more challenging since you know longer have a firm knowledge of what exactly is going to happen, it adds drama back into the game.

 

[sabular]

on 137002, I suggest removal of C option , due to the fact that the AI will choose C if they cannot afford A and will choose C due to the favourable stabilty bonus, a human will never choose C if he cannot afford A.

The option C if taken by Ai , with its loss of -3 quality leads to a very active Cleves taking many BUR lands prior to 1500, which eventually leads to no dutch revolts in the 16th century, hence no netherlands

It seems you are implying that the AI makes rational decisions on which option to pick in an event (ie: I cant afford option a so don't take it) but AFAIK it is just a constant chance (approx 5% for non a-options)

Anyway, the point remains that the AI will sometimes chose c while a human would never do that

 

[Toio]

Part of the danger in going about the mod from a grand campaign aspect is trying to pigeon hole things. I have long advocated backing away from that policy and putting some effort into writing scenarios a al vanilla for key points of history.

The GC should be allowed to flow as it will so that the player can assess the impact of subtle changes in decisions on the world as we know it; which is a surprisingly powerful tool for learning and understanding the world that they live in NOW. And that is the kind of thing that sets a good game apart from a GREAT one; that it can inform and impact in a meaningful way the person playing its' perception.

Now of course events should be written to assume that the "A" choice has been picked since the odds favor it, but effort should also be put into logically following the chain of events triggered by the "B" & "C" choices at least as far as logic and probability will allow (as well as available information). This also has the benefit of making the game itself far more entertaining to the players and a heck of a lot more challenging since you know longer have a firm knowledge of what exactly is going to happen, it adds drama back into the game.

lets look at a tough scenario then for europe

SPA not to merge with ARagon, but merges with POR.

results would be ???
-does SPO (spain and portugal union) inherit POR events?
-SPO must not have any italian based events as these belong to aragon.
-SPO cannot have a union with austria
are 3 I can think of

will then, as you forsee it , will a reunion down the road of SPA and aragon, releasing POR be a path you will see?

I think this is what you have in mind

if this is not the case , then playing without any events will be the only option for you.

 

[Toio]

It seems you are implying that the AI makes rational decisions on which option to pick in an event (ie: I cant afford option a so don't take it) but AFAIK it is just a constant chance (approx 5% for non a-options)

Anyway, the point remains that the AI will sometimes chose c while a human would never do that

I am implying , that the 5% chance (ai is thinking ) is an option which should be removed due to, as stated a human will never choose.
these choices in events where there is zero chance of a human with any brain taking these options need to be discarded or rewritten.

I will 100% of the time take option A even going into debt.

 

[unmerged(40707)]

@Toio and sabular: I checked the events and I see the point now.

For BUR_137311, maybe checking if at least one of the involved provinces (Geldre, Holland, Zeeland, Brabant, Artois or Flandern) is owned could be the solution.

For BUR_137002, could removing quality command be a solution for better balance?
Btw, there is a typo in ACTIONNAME137002A: Strengthen the army with mercenaries

 

[Bordic]

For BUR_137311, maybe checking if at least one of the involved provinces (Geldre, Holland, Zeeland, Brabant, Artois or Flandern) is owned could be the solution.

Yes the meaning of the flag was to check if Burgundy had at least one Dutch province. But I'd prefer the trigger check if BUR own Brabant or Flandern and eventually Artois, where conflicts were sharper inside and outside (Louis XI).

 

[Bordic]

The consideration of a game without the Netherlands is to be blunt totally irrelevant. If the conditions are not such that it would be formed then it should not form, to do otherwise is to take liberties that one should not.

Would another dynasty exploit the populations of the area? Certainly, but not to the degree and depth that the Hapsburgs of Spain DID by virtue of them not having the same cash requirements because odds are they are not fighting constantly two or more powers for the better part of a century or so.

Conditions matter, the chain of causal effects that lead to a conclusion matter and they should be adhered to rather then whim and desire.

To do other then that undercuts the Mod's creditbility to a very great degree.

And one final point: Depending upon when the German prince took possession of the territory they would not be "Dutch". They continued to self identify as "German" for well into the 15th century possibly till the early 16th. Ever notice how "Dutch" and "Deutch" sound and look alike? It is because they are the same word but in different dialects of the same root language.

Yes, I understand your point and I understand that the Netherlands were considered or considered themselves "German" at those times. Actually we can say the last but one German Pope was Adrian VI...

I have already posted a suggestion in agceep Holland thread (here, post 335) in case a BUR player decides to become KLE or MUN. As we are discussing to avoid Dutch revolts for those nations we would also assume that the Dutch people, even if loyal to the German Duke, would continue their historical path of merchants and colonizers. So instead of pasting and copying the whole HOL leaders-monarchs-events file in the KLE or MUN one, why not using the "country tag change command"? Capital and culture will remain in any case Muester-Cleves and German-Dutch. Or German culture could be removed in the second part of the game.
That also mean we should remove all events for KLE and MUN concerning the Dutch revolts (2 submitted and 2 bugfixes). Comments/ideas?

 

[Toio]

why the empty commands for these events


#(1427) The Dutch Wittelsbach possessions (Brabant renounced claims on Holland and Hainaut)
event = {
id = 137024 #triggered by HAU_182003 A
random = no
country = BUR
name = "EVENTNAME137024" #The Dutch Wittelsbach possessions
desc = "EVENTHIST182003"
#-#Jan IV of Brabant had almost always been ill and weakly, hence his premature death in April 1427 came as no surprise, and had been anticipated especially by his Burgundian cousin. While his brother Filips succeeded him in Brabant, Burgundy took full control of Hainault, Holland and Zeeland. Being in no position to openly oppose the move, and also lacking the claim his brother had due to his marriage with Jacqueline, heiress of Holland, Hainault and Zeeland, Filips had to accept the fact.

action_a = {
name = "OK"
command = { }
}
}
#(1427) The Dutch Wittelsbach possessions (Brabant defies Burgundy)
event = {
id = 137025 #triggered by HAU_182003 B
random = no
country = BUR
name = "EVENTNAME137024" #The Dutch Wittelsbach possessions
desc = "EVENTHIST182003"
#-#Jan IV of Brabant had almost always been ill and weakly, hence his premature death in April 1427 came as no surprise, and had been anticipated especially by his Burgundian cousin. While his brother Filips succeeded him in Brabant, Burgundy took full control of Hainault, Holland and Zeeland. Being in no position to openly oppose the move, and also lacking the claim his brother had due to his marriage with Jacqueline, heiress of Holland, Hainault and Zeeland, Filips had to accept the fact.

action_a = {
name = "ACTIONNAME137025A" #It's open war with them!
command = { }
}
}
#(1427) The Dutch Wittelsbach possessions (Luxemburg honoured the agreement)
event = {
id = 137026 #triggered by LUX_213001 A
random = no
country = BUR
name = "EVENTNAME137024" #The Dutch Wittelsbach possessions
desc = "EVENTHIST213001"
#-#Jan of Bavaria, husband of Elisabeth of Görlitz and as such pawnee of Luxemburg, died, probably of poison, on January 6th 1425. While his wife retained her pawn Luxemburg, the Duchy of Bavaria-Straubing was seized by Emperor Sigismund as a vacant Imperial fief and his part of the Dutch Wittelsbach inheritance passed to Burgundy, on the base of a treaty that had just been concluded, which is why the Duke of Burgundy was immediately suspected of having ordered the assassination of Jan.;;;;;;;;;;

action_a = {
name = "OK"
command = { }
}
}


my opinion
id = 137024
secedeprovince of zeeland to BUR


id = 137025
war against brabant


id = 137026
secedeprovince of holland to BUR

 

[Bordic]

why the empty commands for these events

my opinion
id = 137024
secedeprovince of zeeland to BUR


id = 137025
war against brabant


id = 137026
secedeprovince of holland to BUR

If you look at the corresponding HAU and LUX events, these commands are already there except for Zeeland, about which I don't know! Probably because Zeeland is the extra province in revolt.txt for Brabant (HAU).

 

[unmerged(37697)]

Hey, sorry chaps but I have a real issue with Burgundy's flag: namely, I think it looks bloody awful!

Not only that, but I haven't seen any source images of it anyway. I think the best thing to do would be to either give Burgundy her historical flag (the same as Spain; it's not like there aren't other nations with flags which look similar anyway...) or give them their CoA as a flag. This is available in Hive's AoI mod if you don't already have it.

I'd go with the first option myself. The best course of action would be to change it slightly (like with Trier, Genoa & England - essentially the same flag, but they all look slightly different) so as not to so easily confuse it with Spain, should she exist. But I certainly think an alternative to the current flag is required.

Burgundy Modern
Burgundy Cross
Burgundy Cross (Yellow Variant)

I think a change of flag is also needed for if Burgundy chooses to accept the House of Nassau.

 

[Toio]

@Toio and sabular: I checked the events and I see the point now.

For BUR_137311, maybe checking if at least one of the involved provinces (Geldre, Holland, Zeeland, Brabant, Artois or Flandern) is owned could be the solution.

For BUR_137002, could removing quality command be a solution for better balance?
Btw, there is a typo in ACTIONNAME137002A: Strengthen the army with mercenaries

the event should be as :

#(1471) Military Reform by Lambert Simnel
event = {
id = 137002
trigger = { countrysize = 4 }
random = no
country = BUR
name = "EVENTNAME137002" #The Ordonnance of 1471
desc = "EVENTHIST137002"
#-#During the reign of Philip the Good the quality of the armies provided by the feudal levy had declined, the men-at-arms were ill-equiped and poorly skilled, the armed valets that in other armies fought alongside their masters were all but absent and not all nobles were able or willing to heed the call to muster. Nor could the disciplined city militias of the low countries be relied upon as the city governments were often in oposition to the Dukes of Burgundy. In 1471 a decision was finally made to reform the army. At the core of the new army would be the best mercenaries available: English longbowmen, German pikemen, Italian crossbowmen and men-at-arms from throughout Christendom.

date = { day = 1 month = january year = 1471 }
offset = 120
deathdate = { day = 1 month = january year = 1472 }

action_a = {
name = "ACTIONNAME137002A" #Strengthen the army with mercenaries
command = { type = treasury value = -400 }
command = { type = domestic which = LAND value = 1 }
command = { type = domestic which = QUALITY value = 4 }
command = { type = domestic which = ARISTOCRACY value = -1 }
command = { type = CAV which = -2 value = 5000 }
command = { type = INF which = -2 value = 5000 }
command = { type = ART which = -2 value = 20 }
command = { type = land value = 250 }
}
action_b = {
name = "ACTIONNAME137002B" #Reform the feudal troops
command = { type = domestic which = CENTRALIZATION value = 1 }
command = { type = domestic which = ARISTOCRACY value = 2 }
command = { type = domestic which = SERFDOM value = 1 }
command = { type = stability value = 2 }
}
}

stability changed to +2 , why original instabilty of -2

deleted option C

 

[Toio]

Hey, sorry chaps but I have a real issue with Burgundy's flag: namely, I think it looks bloody awful!

Not only that, but I haven't seen any source images of it anyway. I think the best thing to do would be to either give Burgundy her historical flag (the same as Spain; it's not like there aren't other nations with flags which look similar anyway...) or give them their CoA as a flag. This is available in Hive's AoI mod if you don't already have it.

I'd go with the first option myself. The best course of action would be to change it slightly (like with Trier, Genoa & England - essentially the same flag, but they all look slightly different) so as not to so easily confuse it with Spain, should she exist. But I certainly think an alternative to the current flag is required.

Burgundy Modern
Burgundy Cross
Burgundy Cross (Yellow Variant)

I think a change of flag is also needed for if Burgundy chooses to accept the House of Nassau.

we already use the yellow variant in AGCEEP

 

[Toio]

why does Brabant not have a chance for independence once the netherlands is formed.
Netherlands should get all except brabant and artois (?)

they gained independence in 1568.

Game reasons?

 

[Toio]

this event should be changed

#(1559-1648) Brabant joins the Republic
event = {
id = 3813 #triggered by HAU_3812 A
random = no
country = HOL
name = "EVENTNAME3813" #Brabant joins the Republic
desc = "EVENTHIST3813"
#-#Your Excellency, seeing the success of the revolt in the core provinces of the Low Countries, other Dutch principalities are rushing to join the greater Dutch Republic. Today, our brothers in Brabant have decided to join us!

action_a = {
name = "ACTIONNAME3813A" #Marvellous!
command = { type = inherit which = HAU }
}
}


as it should have a trigger of:

NOT if brabant is spanish , in which case it would refer to the spanish netherlands and lead (or contination) to the 80 year dutch-spanish wars.

many books have Brabant's history of
1421 - 1430 = independent

1430 - 1477 = under burgundy

1477 - 1517 = under burgundy but a vassal of austria

1517 - 1568 = under spain

1568 - 1648 = under spain ( some books have it as independent ie vassal of spain), - treaty of munster

1648 - 1820 = under austria until the congress of Vienna

I suggest the above trigger of NOT to go to netherlands unless it is not spanish.
If spanish, brabant is to remain under spain and either another event which gives artois to spain as well or not

anyone object?????

 

[sabular]

this event should be changed

#(1559-1648) Brabant joins the Republic
event = {
id = 3813 #triggered by HAU_3812 A
random = no
country = HOL
name = "EVENTNAME3813" #Brabant joins the Republic
desc = "EVENTHIST3813"
#-#Your Excellency, seeing the success of the revolt in the core provinces of the Low Countries, other Dutch principalities are rushing to join the greater Dutch Republic. Today, our brothers in Brabant have decided to join us!

action_a = {
name = "ACTIONNAME3813A" #Marvellous!
command = { type = inherit which = HAU }
}
}


as it should have a trigger of:

NOT if brabant is spanish , in which case it would refer to the spanish netherlands and lead (or contination) to the 80 year dutch-spanish wars.

many books have Brabant's history of
1421 - 1430 = independent

1430 - 1477 = under burgundy

1477 - 1517 = under burgundy but a vassal of austria

1517 - 1568 = under spain

1568 - 1648 = under spain ( some books have it as independent ie vassal of spain), - treaty of munster

1648 - 1820 = under austria until the congress of Vienna

I suggest the above trigger of NOT to go to netherlands unless it is not spanish.
If spanish, brabant is to remain under spain and either another event which gives artois to spain as well or not

anyone object?????

You mean that the netherlands should not inherit brabant if it is a spanish vassal?

 

[Toio]

You mean that the netherlands should not inherit brabant if it is a spanish vassal?

i mean , that SPA inherit BUR in 1517, if they still hold brabant when netherlands forms, then brabant should remain with SPA

 

[Third Angel]

I don't understand your logic here. If Spain still holds province 378 when the Netherlands form, HAU_3812 will not fire as Brabant will not exist.