So give such posibility in PU, for example my minor have reconquest CB so I as master declere war so minor can take what is his.
Beta of 5.1 - 21st June 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
So give such posibility in PU, for example my minor have reconquest CB so I as master declere war so minor can take what is his.
ditto, also. But is that what others are getting too? I've only seen one other confirmation from Tului.
The reason I ask is that I've run two hands-off games as Cyprus and I'm seeing the starting CoTs being abnormally small, soon closing, followed by weird (but interesting CoTs) opening up throughout Europe. I've seen something similar once when I did a small but sloppy province mod; but this is a fresh install and appears to be the consistent checksum.
Anybody else have a different checksum? And/or is anyone else seeing CoT weirdness?
This is more or less the case since HttT. The values for CoT destroy/create are still from IN. With the tons of provincial and other decisions that boost trade income, the minimum split value for CoTs is woefully out of date. Personally, I double the minimum amount of trade needed to create CoTs.
This is true. However, it does not help thatWhile I agree Spain ought to form more often, that`s not exactly realistic, since Castille did not historically beat Aragon in a war and take their lands.
The real problem with North Africa is not that Castille is too strong and they were too weak (I don`t think anybody would dispute Castille`s army would likely beat Morrocco`s in a stand-up scrap), but that the game is incredibly poor at modelling the logistics that made most historical conquering of that sort difficult or impossible due primarily to how easy it is to support large armies outside your home turf (or at all, for that matter), and how big an area each province represents being dramatically disproportionate from Europe to anywhere else. Morocco is about 700,000 square kilometers to unified Spain`s 500,000 square kilometers, but Castille alone starts with something like twice as many provinces as Morocco (and three times as many as Algiers). Again, this is a problem that would be hard to solve in a patch or even an expansion, really.
1) Over half of Morocco's tax base is in 3 northern provinces representing northern towns, which means that if Portugal and Spain conquer their little northern enclaves Morocco's ability to raise an army is devastated
2) Castille attacks Granada immediately, rather than circa 1480 as would be historical, and Granada immediately allies with Morocco/Algeria because of (a) the hard-coded antagonism between Christians and Muslims... which works great for Catholics/Muslims 1480-1650, but isn't really appropriate yet, and (b) Castille and Portugal's missions kicking in (it would be better if missions for the Reconquista held off until the time period when Castille historically ended its alliance with Grenada and restarted reReconquista'ing.)
At the moment, there are two states of relations between religion groups: the state of cold war hatred which exists before 1650, and the state of strained relations which exists after 1650. It would be great if that were less hard-coded and more moddable, so that, for example, the cold war state could exist between Catholics and Muslims while Orthodox and Muslims, Christians and Pagans, and Muslims and Eastern religions were in the strained-relations-but-alliances-are-possible state that only happens after 1650 now, and so that the cold war state could be turned on and off between individual religions by event. But that's a big enough project for an expansion.
Perhaps I'm not being clear. This has been the case only since yesterday.
I'm not talking about the spamming of CoTs in mid-late game. Yes, that is something that could/should be corrected, perhaps by simply modifying the create/destroy values, as you suggest.
But the starting CoTs are generally stable in Europe, throughout the first 100 years or so. They start being worth many hundreds, with one or two generally topping a thousand, rising in value, as you say, before being scaled back, somewhat, as competitors come and stand along-side them. But I'm not sure I've ever seen more than one or two ever get destroyed (and that probably done by or influenced by players).
What I'm talking about is that all the starting CoTs seem to be worth tens or ones, not hundreds; they all vanish in about nine years; and they are all replaced at that time. Entertaining, yes; intentional, I doubt.
But I don't think I'm playing with a modded version. And I just repeated it with an ENG game, and a FRA game, so it's not island or Cyprus-specific. The only other odd thing I was doing was use historical leaders, but that only for the CYP games. So, it suggests to me a bug of some sort. I'm inclined to think something map or syntax related, based on my own (limited) modding experience. There are some interesting variations in the number and size and location of the replacements, but going into that doesn't seem useful.
But surely someone else is noticing this? Or could my checksum be off?
No, it's should be easier: small political units usually have small armies, so they have very small chances to defend. Big and united countries is much harder to beat.
I don't notice anything like that. There must be something wrong with your install.
My checksum is: FSCV
There is a bug in the form Byzantium decision: the last line of adding the cores to BYZ comments the } which should be on the next line to work i.e.
should be
(reporting it to bugforum as well, but now you can change it yourselves if you want to go Epirus on the world)
Code:
...
add_core = 1853 # Kozani }
...
Code:
...
add_core = 1853 # Kozani
}
...(reporting it to bugforum as well, but now you can change it yourselves if you want to go Epirus on the world
)
Japan should unify Japan when all four daimyo are conquered. This allows the conquest of Kyoto as last Japanese province. Give Japan claims (not cores) on all Japanese provinces to give them a goal to united the whole archipelago by sword.
It will keep the system as it works, but also the chance to annex them.
It will keep the system as it works, but also the chance to annex them.
\
To me, it sounds like one can't fix it for some programming reason and coming up with really bad excuses. What kind of design is that?
Neither the individual Dayiomos, nor Japan itself can be conquered. If you do a de facto world conquest you end up reducing Japan to 5 OPM's.
Thanks!
Really happy to see AI buidling behavior being improved.
Now how about improving AI inflation management?
It's very sad to see Russia being exterminated every single game and being replaced by Sweden and/or Poland-Lithuania.
I'm sure it'll get fixed and balanced out eventually.. The force is strong with Johan!
Really happy to see AI buidling behavior being improved.
Now how about improving AI inflation management?
This
It's very sad to see Russia being exterminated every single game and being replaced by Sweden and/or Poland-Lithuania.
I'm sure it'll get fixed and balanced out eventually.. The force is strong with Johan!
Well, I don't agree with that really. A nation shattered into smaller political units is of course much harder to conquer, however it is not impossible as it stands in the game currently.
I suppose we could have an unification event with the condition that each daimyo doesn't have over 5 - 8 provinces. It means that if a foreign country owns 10 - 20 provinces in Japan, the japanese factions are united under the emperor. I think it is not far from historical accuracy or plausibility.
Last edited:
However, thank you very much for these excellent updates. If you could just make it possible to annex Japanese provinces without unification, reduce naval combat times and program the AI to try and keep their inflation low except for dire circumstances (badly losing war or preparing for conquest and therefore minting).
If these issues can also be dealt with, I feel that this is going to be the best strategy game ever.
If these issues can also be dealt with, I feel that this is going to be the best strategy game ever.
Oh my god, that's the funniest thing I've read all week.
"Dear Hertz, my rental car won't start."
"That's the design."
"Dear sweepstakes offer, you advertise a prize but didn't include an address to send my entry to."
"That's the design."
"Dear chess game designers, every time I check the enemy king my game crashes."
"That's the design."
A bit out of proportion don't you think, it's more like "Dear chess game designers, the game doesn't seem to allow en passant pawn captures".
More like: "Dear chess game designers, one of the pawns can not be captured until it is promoted".
- Status