Ozzeh said:The GC starts 1419
Never played it
I thougt it started with the fall of Constantiple (1451 oe 53, dont remember), hehehe...
-
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.
Never played it
I thougt it started with the fall of Constantiple (1451 oe 53, dont remember), hehehe...
Vendere Sacerdo said:
I agree that if we use random leaders, it should be capped at 2-4 and 0-2 for siege.
My vote is no to random leaders. I hate them; eventually, everyone ends up with a boatload of them and they totally devaluate the concept of leader.
Instead, I'd just let every country that otherwise has no historical leaders prior to 1419 have at the start of the session a leader with stats of, say, 3/3/3, so that they aren't devoid of ability to fend off their neighbors.
Instead, I'd just let every country that otherwise has no historical leaders prior to 1419 have at the start of the session a leader with stats of, say, 3/3/3, so that they aren't devoid of ability to fend off their neighbors.
I don't much like random leaders either cept for those countries that have gaps in their leader file, ie early BB, late spain stuff like that. I always used to think with this game, why should OE and Spain for example decline as they did historically when the player might have made them an uber empire? Why be forced to decline with no leaders when a still vibrant and powerful empire would still be producing great generals? It might be tricky to apply random leaders to countries all at different times of play but we kinda need to make up for the games historical decline of these countries. eg my Poland has nothing from 1700 onwards and even before then the leader file is somewhat lacking...Jan Sobeiski saved Vienna from the turks right? Why then is he so crap?
Who organises subs? the GM or the player who needs one? Prob with me doing is that I dont have any of you on my ICQ list anymore
Who organises subs? the GM or the player who needs one? Prob with me doing is that I dont have any of you on my ICQ list anymore
Camisa 10 said:
Never played it
I thougt it started with the fall of Constantiple (1451 oe 53, dont remember), hehehe...
That would be 1453
And there is actually no campaign in Vanilla EU2 that starts at that date.
Damocles said:
Agree, just enough so the leaderless nations are not helpless. The last bunch random leaders that we had in the old game were not powerfull although there were a few. Perhaps if the GM could randomize then go through the list and adjust them accordingly.
Just took a look through the leader files. Castile gets one leader in 1423, Austria, and BB are leaderless for the first 180 years.
My vote is for random leaders the entire length of the game for the reasons Drake outlines. Venice has some good leaders in teh elary middle part of the game and then is completely empty.
In fact, I'd support a game made up of entirely random leaders and we just can the historical ones.
In fact, I'd support a game made up of entirely random leaders and we just can the historical ones.
Iam against random leaders for all the period. I think that theres a balance of power made by paradox with leaders and others caracteristics of the game that random leaders alter to much...
I accept random leaders only till the GC start (thats because by what you said Hive didnt looked for historical leaders except for some big countries).
I accept random leaders only till the GC start (thats because by what you said Hive didnt looked for historical leaders except for some big countries).
I agree that the historical leaders past 1492 are balanced, but only if the BOP in the game progresses the same as it did in history. Post 1700, if France, England, Austria, Russia, and soon to be, Prussia, are the top five powers in Europe, they will counter each other quite well in the game as they're meant to with their historical leaders. If, however, we have something like two of those powers, say England and Austria, and a few historically weaker ones like Spain, the OE, and Poland as the preeminent nations, that won't be the case. England and Austria will throw their neighbors around with Marlborough, PE, Wolfe, Karl, etc, because their neighbors just won't have anything to counter with.
In a game starting in the 1300s, or even 1419, such an unhistorical outcome is not very unlikely. We're already talking about "what if France is annexed by England". What if this happens, and then Brandenburg's annexed by Sweden, and Austria's castrated by the OE? Post 1700, Europe will get owned by Frenglend for the rest of the game.
The only way to plan for such changes is to add leaders to the game. I'm for random leaders, or a set amount of random leaders based on "Great Power" status, possibly dependent on whether the nation already has a lot of historical ubers or not.
In a game starting in the 1300s, or even 1419, such an unhistorical outcome is not very unlikely. We're already talking about "what if France is annexed by England". What if this happens, and then Brandenburg's annexed by Sweden, and Austria's castrated by the OE? Post 1700, Europe will get owned by Frenglend for the rest of the game.
The only way to plan for such changes is to add leaders to the game. I'm for random leaders, or a set amount of random leaders based on "Great Power" status, possibly dependent on whether the nation already has a lot of historical ubers or not.
Bumble Bee said:can I get a reply on my sub question please?
Get your own sub if you have one you trust, & if that doesn't happen then most games try to get the most competent sub they have in their combined ICQ list. If all of this fails your usually stuck with a random vneter, but I do not think that is an option with the AoI mod.
Vendere Sacerdo said:
Problem with a last minute vnet sub is that he wont probably have the AOI mod...
Camisa 10 said:
... Try posting in the forum LE for the sub. Maybe someone from the Monday AoI crew will be able to sub.
All,
Since none of you followed instructions, I did my best to extrapolate final votes from the various waffling and such. It came out like this:
Leaders before 1419
-Damo
-Arco
-Camisa
No leaders
-Drake
-CF
-DSY
Leaders throughout
-John
-Stonewall
-Dave
Examining the file, I'm going to go ahead and break the tie in favor of pre-1419, for the reasons Damo outlined. However, I'm going to extend that date to 1492, when the files really become balanced. It is not fair, for example, that the Timurid Kahnates, that produced quite a few significant military leaders in the 15th century, wind up with no counter to Muscowy's Generals after Muscowy is provided a counter, or any counters to the OE. I don't think the GC is much more complete than 1337-but more to the point, I think that one example is too glaring an unfairness to be left standing.
On the larger question, it is not unfair, or unbalancing, to give everyone random leaders for the period of the game that Hive created and for which he did not provide sufficient files. You would be hard pressed to make the argument that the Margrave of Brandenburg, the King of Castille and the Duke of Austria did not have one single decent general for one hundred to two hundred years. Moreover, that the various German states and the HRE failed to provide decent Generals over the same era. I think the point here was to develop the HYW and not enough attention (as Hive has actually said himself) was given to tracking down the myriad of arcane sources otherwise.
That also extends to changing some leader stats. Because we're so close to game time, I will not modify the HYW at all and I will not reduce any leaders. I am, however, going to make Timur a 3 siege and 5 shock. I will also be boosting Hive's Ottoman leaders, who, absurdly, are all 2 shock during its period of ascent.
Randoms will be capped at 4-4-4. There will be the possibility of two Generals and one Admiral per session, with one General assured. Throughout the game, random admirals will be generated, at 4-4-4 max until 1700 and 5-5-5 max thereafter. This is because in a land five locked game, admirals being as overpowered as they are, we gotta use them to make things competitive (try building a mid-late game navy with the Mughals, otherwise, or the Austrians).
Our semi-final rules will be posted in a few hours, as will the semi-final save.
Since none of you followed instructions, I did my best to extrapolate final votes from the various waffling and such. It came out like this:
Leaders before 1419
-Damo
-Arco
-Camisa
No leaders
-Drake
-CF
-DSY
Leaders throughout
-John
-Stonewall
-Dave
Examining the file, I'm going to go ahead and break the tie in favor of pre-1419, for the reasons Damo outlined. However, I'm going to extend that date to 1492, when the files really become balanced. It is not fair, for example, that the Timurid Kahnates, that produced quite a few significant military leaders in the 15th century, wind up with no counter to Muscowy's Generals after Muscowy is provided a counter, or any counters to the OE. I don't think the GC is much more complete than 1337-but more to the point, I think that one example is too glaring an unfairness to be left standing.
On the larger question, it is not unfair, or unbalancing, to give everyone random leaders for the period of the game that Hive created and for which he did not provide sufficient files. You would be hard pressed to make the argument that the Margrave of Brandenburg, the King of Castille and the Duke of Austria did not have one single decent general for one hundred to two hundred years. Moreover, that the various German states and the HRE failed to provide decent Generals over the same era. I think the point here was to develop the HYW and not enough attention (as Hive has actually said himself) was given to tracking down the myriad of arcane sources otherwise.
That also extends to changing some leader stats. Because we're so close to game time, I will not modify the HYW at all and I will not reduce any leaders. I am, however, going to make Timur a 3 siege and 5 shock. I will also be boosting Hive's Ottoman leaders, who, absurdly, are all 2 shock during its period of ascent.
Randoms will be capped at 4-4-4. There will be the possibility of two Generals and one Admiral per session, with one General assured. Throughout the game, random admirals will be generated, at 4-4-4 max until 1700 and 5-5-5 max thereafter. This is because in a land five locked game, admirals being as overpowered as they are, we gotta use them to make things competitive (try building a mid-late game navy with the Mughals, otherwise, or the Austrians).
Our semi-final rules will be posted in a few hours, as will the semi-final save.
myvote is either no or in randoms entire line incase of a tie sorry for being not clear
i vote for random leader especially after 1700 since it can adds spice during wars against all uber leaders of eng, fra, and bb
All,
Some preliminary rules:
1. Maptrading
-No maptrading with the AI. Period.
-No maptrading with humans until 1600
-Maps stolen from the AI before 1492 will be edited out
2. Domestic Policies
-Land slider locked at 5
-Event movements of the land slider will be removed after the session
3. Peace
-A player must accept a stabhitting peace offer at -3 after three or more years of war
-A player must accept a stabhitting peace off at -3 stab and -99 WS regardless of how long the war has been going
-Stabhits must be given individually, between two nations, not alliances
-Simultaneaty will be enforced; all other deals, back-stabs, outright lies, player annexations, gangings, counter-gangings, etc., are allowed and part of the game, to be dealt with diplomatically and not in tirades
4. The Hundred Years War
-If France is eliminated, French culture will be given to Castille, Austria and Venice at the GM's discretion
-France and England are prohibited from drawing permanent borders or making any peace agreement of ten years duration or more prior to 1453
-The GM reserves the right to immediately replace either or both players for failing to meet the above requirement
5. Leaders
-Random leaders will be generated until 1492; each generation will have at least one General and possibly two Generals and an Admiral
-Random Admirals will be generated throughout the game
-All stats are capped at 4-4-4
6. Conduct
-Out of character bitching, moaning, fit pitching, wife-swapping and pig fucking are prohibited in-game and in the main thread; serious concerns should be addressed in private to the GM
-A threat to quit after the game has started, for any reason, is quiting
-All in-game diplomacy, particularly of the angry kind, must be conducted in-character
-Diplomacy and game analysis, generally, belong in-character in the dispatches thread; not here
-This is a diplomacy and character heavy game; failure to particiapte actively and intelligently means a sack and replacement
-No exploits of any kind. That includes, but is not limited to, pirate spamming, lagging missionaries and colonists, human-human vassalizations (except by force), multiple DP clicking, farming the AI for cash, etc., etc. The GM's word on this in-game is final and may be discussed after the session.
-Again, no pig-fucking
Anything else?
Oh, and incidentally, I don't consider turbo-burning an exploit. I do, however, consider it the same as razing towns and villages, massacres that ought to have diplomatic consequences.
Some preliminary rules:
1. Maptrading
-No maptrading with the AI. Period.
-No maptrading with humans until 1600
-Maps stolen from the AI before 1492 will be edited out
2. Domestic Policies
-Land slider locked at 5
-Event movements of the land slider will be removed after the session
3. Peace
-A player must accept a stabhitting peace offer at -3 after three or more years of war
-A player must accept a stabhitting peace off at -3 stab and -99 WS regardless of how long the war has been going
-Stabhits must be given individually, between two nations, not alliances
-Simultaneaty will be enforced; all other deals, back-stabs, outright lies, player annexations, gangings, counter-gangings, etc., are allowed and part of the game, to be dealt with diplomatically and not in tirades
4. The Hundred Years War
-If France is eliminated, French culture will be given to Castille, Austria and Venice at the GM's discretion
-France and England are prohibited from drawing permanent borders or making any peace agreement of ten years duration or more prior to 1453
-The GM reserves the right to immediately replace either or both players for failing to meet the above requirement
5. Leaders
-Random leaders will be generated until 1492; each generation will have at least one General and possibly two Generals and an Admiral
-Random Admirals will be generated throughout the game
-All stats are capped at 4-4-4
6. Conduct
-Out of character bitching, moaning, fit pitching, wife-swapping and pig fucking are prohibited in-game and in the main thread; serious concerns should be addressed in private to the GM
-A threat to quit after the game has started, for any reason, is quiting
-All in-game diplomacy, particularly of the angry kind, must be conducted in-character
-Diplomacy and game analysis, generally, belong in-character in the dispatches thread; not here
-This is a diplomacy and character heavy game; failure to particiapte actively and intelligently means a sack and replacement
-No exploits of any kind. That includes, but is not limited to, pirate spamming, lagging missionaries and colonists, human-human vassalizations (except by force), multiple DP clicking, farming the AI for cash, etc., etc. The GM's word on this in-game is final and may be discussed after the session.
-Again, no pig-fucking
Anything else?
Oh, and incidentally, I don't consider turbo-burning an exploit. I do, however, consider it the same as razing towns and villages, massacres that ought to have diplomatic consequences.
Ok I will post in the forum for a sub player...just to make sure what is the session time? 7:30 EST Wednesday yes?
