What are the chances of getting you motivated enough to release a "random event" mod?
Beta of 5.1 - 17th May 2011 - Discussion Thread
- Thread starter Johan
- Start date
-
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.
- Status
Thank you, seems this beta fixes a few of the issues from the previous on. Great job!
I'd say you try to send it to the devs and let Johan & Co. have a look at them for the next beta. The more events, the better!
Good job with the beta patch. Hopefully we will get more random events in the next beta
But I really like to know how long time it takes for hordes to conquer non core provinces and how every techgroup is affeted by the changes:
- Increased the time it takes for horde to conquer non-core territory.
- Techgroup affects how quickly a province falls to horde building destruction.
But I really like to know how long time it takes for hordes to conquer non core provinces and how every techgroup is affeted by the changes:
- Increased the time it takes for horde to conquer non-core territory.
- Techgroup affects how quickly a province falls to horde building destruction.
I think what we really need is some indicator on screen about how long it will take for a given province to flip to a Horde. Like, maybe, another flag at the top of the screen, next to the truces running out and such. Just something that reminds you that you need to get that province back before $date OR make peace OR resign yourself to having to colonise it (again) at some point.
Yes, look in RandomeEvents.txt, for most of the new events; they're tacked on at the end.
RandomProvinceEvents.txt also has a couple of new ones, including a nice incentive to keep natives alive, if feasible.
I think it would be cool if being in the Eastern techgroup made it harder for hordes to conquer you, but I get the feeling that the truth is actually that it is a declining scale from Western all the way down the techgroup ladder.Good job with the beta patch. Hopefully we will get more random events in the next beta
But I really like to know how long time it takes for hordes to conquer non core provinces and how every techgroup is affeted by the changes:
- Increased the time it takes for horde to conquer non-core territory.
- Techgroup affects how quickly a province falls to horde building destruction.
I hope naval combat time is shortened in the final patch. Currently it is taking many many months for 30 carracks to fight and destroy 5 cogs.
Start a new thread for events and keep writing, I'm sure quality events sooner or later will make it into the game.
I've done two hands-off games today. One was just for 65 years, another for 100. Here are my thoughts:
1. Golder Horde is still too expansive.
2. Ottoman Empire can't sustain itself - on both games OE was quite successful at the beginning, only to be shattered a bit later by revolts, Austrians, etc.
3. The same is true for Poland: it tends to wage wars against everyone around, conquering parts of Bohemia, Hungary, etc. (but, for some unknown reason, never what it should conquer, i.e. Danzig and Warmia) and then it is overrun by Czech or Austrian or whatever western-tech armies and reduced to few provinces scattered around central Europe.
While point 1 is easy to change, I'm worried the other problems are AI-specific: AI is not very efficient at dealing with rebellions, and AI of eastern-tech countries doesn't seem to understand that its strength is, more often than not, only temporary and relative, that in short time its western neighbours WILL become more advanced and some of them WILL oppose their imperialist position, so antagonising everyone around is not the wisest strategy. Poland would do far better if it didn't try to conquer Bohemia or Hungary, but instead maintained good relations with Lithuania and helped this country to survive GH invasions, so that they can, for example, successfully wage war against the Teutonic Order together. Ottoman Empire would do much better if it prioritised its conquests, first establishing a firm base on Anatolia, then going for only as much land as it can manage.
1. Golder Horde is still too expansive.
2. Ottoman Empire can't sustain itself - on both games OE was quite successful at the beginning, only to be shattered a bit later by revolts, Austrians, etc.
3. The same is true for Poland: it tends to wage wars against everyone around, conquering parts of Bohemia, Hungary, etc. (but, for some unknown reason, never what it should conquer, i.e. Danzig and Warmia) and then it is overrun by Czech or Austrian or whatever western-tech armies and reduced to few provinces scattered around central Europe.
While point 1 is easy to change, I'm worried the other problems are AI-specific: AI is not very efficient at dealing with rebellions, and AI of eastern-tech countries doesn't seem to understand that its strength is, more often than not, only temporary and relative, that in short time its western neighbours WILL become more advanced and some of them WILL oppose their imperialist position, so antagonising everyone around is not the wisest strategy. Poland would do far better if it didn't try to conquer Bohemia or Hungary, but instead maintained good relations with Lithuania and helped this country to survive GH invasions, so that they can, for example, successfully wage war against the Teutonic Order together. Ottoman Empire would do much better if it prioritised its conquests, first establishing a firm base on Anatolia, then going for only as much land as it can manage.
Last edited:
Nope, not one bit.
With a fresh new game as Burgundy, one of my allies got me in a war with some Irish minors. This was after England had nuked my fleet in a previous war, so I had no ships.
I build 6 cogs to have a transport fleet. When they're in the Channel, just moments after joining, a fleet of 5 cogs and 1 carrack attacks them. Fine, I wait and see.
A while later, I decide to start building another cog and two galleys.
About 100 days later, those ships arrive and immediately join the battle THAT WAS STILL GOING ON!!! It was sort of my plan but I never expected it'd work...
I didn't have enough money but the battle went on for at least another 100 days. I could've built ANOTHER set of ships to add to the battle...
I'm sorry but it's just ridiculous. Being able to raise a land unit in the time it takes to siege a castle, yes, fine. Being able to build ships FROM SCRATCH in the time it takes to wage a sea battle, no, just no.
Pedant alert! Technically speaking it's bad style to use the bi-form both the Oxford English Dictionary and Fowler's Modern English Usage recommend the less ambiguous 'half-yearly' or 'two-yearly' as hugely preferable alternatives. Ramping up the pedantry, the OED lists 'bi-yearly' as only pertaining to twice a year. Curiously, bi-hourly only means once every two hours, and bi-weekly and bi-monthly can mean both twice a week/month and once every week/month. Let's make things simple and do away with the bi-prefix!
Wow that's five minutes of my life I'm never getting back.
Last edited:
First to everyone: you cannot judge the patch after 1-2 games. You need at least 5 games to get a good idea. EU has too much ''variance'' to think that 1 game = the result. Play 50-100 years times 5 and then if there's sometime wrong, you will be sure about it cause you will see it a couple of times.
1. GH is a large horde... so we just have to deal with it...
2. The AI can never get enough improvement in self management.
3. The polish missions about conquering Danzig and Warmia are broken... They only receive that mission when they are in war with TO. (Still a lot of broken missions out there...)
- Status