Common Sense Problems

[ThePatriotOfDreumel]

1. The "One night in Paris" achievement. I think it will be way too easy in the next patch. its litterally: beat France in a war and take Paris. IMO it should be Paris and surrounding provinces. Why this? because its exactly the same as "PU france in HYW and Integrate" or "Take the surrounding lands and conquer Paris.

2. Hordes. I think that Horde government types shouldn't be able to increase development. if they reform they should be able to with an discount to development cost to recover the years of development lost.

3. NI: Give Unique NI to: the Dutch minors(NI in a group like Germany), the French minors and Serbia

 

[Lemont Elwood]

Yes, but they still didn't get up to the level of the civilizations to their south and west.

Answer this: were the Hordes of the Enlightenment period nomadic?

 

[chrnno]

Answer this: were the Hordes of the Enlightenment period nomadic?

No.

 

[marcopt15]

I don´t think you´ll be able to take Paris in the HYW. The devs said that it costs extra to take provinces without claims and even more to take the capital. I´m guessing that taking such a high BT (or developed) capital province without a claim will be impossible, especially without a proper CB.

 

[War_lord]

Yes, but they still didn't get up to the level of the civilizations to their south and west.

Answer this: were the Hordes of the Enlightenment period nomadic?

You claimed they had no major population centers, I listed their major population centers. Now you're onto some twaddle about "levels of civilisation" they didn't reach, despite the fact that Mongol Dynasty's ruled in both China and Persia and Karakorum being a rich center of trade and culture. It's starting to look like you're less misinformed and more like you're invested in this rubbish idea of backwards unwashed hordes and refuse to let go of it because you like the stereotype.

 

[ThePatriotOfDreumel]

Something happening?

 

[elpibeuruguayo]

You claimed they had no major population centers, I listed their major population centers. Now you're onto some twaddle about "levels of civilisation" they didn't reach, despite the fact that Mongol Dynasty's ruled in both China and Persia and Karakorum being a rich center of trade and culture. It's starting to look like you're less misinformed and more like you're invested in this rubbish idea of backwards unwashed hordes and refuse to let go of it because you like the stereotype.

In mi opinion and knoledge the Hordes conquer a organised society and ruled it, you can be "barbarian" conquer China and still be a "barbarian", if doesnt matter if hordes rule China.

 

[theKing1988]

In mi opinion and knoledge the Hordes conquer a organised society and ruled it, you can be "barbarian" conquer China and still be a "barbarian", if doesnt matter if hordes rule China.

Lets go back to what the OP is actually proposing. He is proposing to ban hordes from increasing development. i.e. developing their province's production infrastructure, tax potential and manpower base. Is this an accurate portrayal of how hordes ruled when they took over cities and other more "civilized" areas? Nope, it most certainly is not.

 

[Lemont Elwood]

No.

Thank you, I didn't know that. That changes everything.

You claimed they had no major population centers, I listed their major population centers. Now you're onto some twaddle about "levels of civilisation" they didn't reach, despite the fact that Mongol Dynasty's ruled in both China and Persia and Karakorum being a rich center of trade and culture. It's starting to look like you're less misinformed and more like you're invested in this rubbish idea of backwards unwashed hordes and refuse to let go of it because you like the stereotype.

See the above. My arguments would have been appropriate for a nomadic society. If Enlightenment-era Hordes were sedentary people, then there is no reason for them not to have access to the Development feature.

Oh, and please, don't make assumptions about my thoughts or my character. We already have enough self-righteous gits on here.

 

[Delta21]

See the above. My arguments would have been appropriate for a nomadic society. If Enlightenment-era Hordes were sedentary people, then there is no reason for them not to have access to the Development feature.

Oh, and please, don't make assumptions about my thoughts or my character. We already have enough self-righteous gits on here.

The Golden Horde (and the Crimean Tatarate) actively tried to conquer eastern europe. The result of these attempts at conquest in my country's region (Moldova) was the building of trade roads to the east from major local trade centers. They also built turkish bathouses, mosques next to christian churches(they didn't destroy much, as it was unprofitable) and developed manufacturing centers for merchandise that was too costly to carry around, and easier to produce locally. I'm not sure how much more civilized my region had become as a result, but it certainly grew more prosperous due to mutual exchange of goods and developed infrastructure (I'm thinking production and trade in EU4 terms). I don't see a reason why a horde wouldn't be able to raise development. It's just that they did it on the border or in conquered regions, not in home regions (as large metropolitan areas akin to the western ones were uncommon). Of course this varied from horde to horde, but generally speaking they were countries like many others.
They didn't have trade guilds or craftsmen's guilds, but then neither did many of the eastern countries. In fact one of the first (and only one around) universities in orthodox eastern Europe was established in 1632 in Kiev(the province, not the city). Education of the general populace and elites is usually linked to a level of socio-economical thriving, yet economy in terms of production, base tax(agriculture),trade and military manpower has nothing to do with formal education. Hordes had different ways of making money and recruiting warriors. Extorting money(tributes) and trading were the major ways they got their cash.

A horde overhaul mechanic would be nice, but not something as stupid as implying that they weren't capable of developing their economic standing in the regions that they controlled.

 

[Lemont Elwood]

So we're all in agreement.

 

[Mattius]

Agree with the hordes. I also think certain terrain types should increase development costs (marsh, mountains)

 

[Delta21]

Agree with the hordes. I also think certain terrain types should increase development costs (marsh, mountains)

Doing this in deserts or arctic climate is far more expensive than doing it in better climates

Yep, the devs thought about it. They're doing it. Read the developer diaries