Crusader Kings 2 DD #14: The Road Ahead

[TheDungen]

AFAIK that inflation in Egypt is a proven thing, not something that allegedly happened.

Anyway, he was so rich, because he has controlled all the gold mines in West African region, what previously did not happen, or the gold fields known previously were not so rich...
In game terms, I think that a trade route which, if all its branches are fully controlled and if all trade cities and advancements of trade buildings are built-up, should provide extreme wealth... at least for certain period of time.

The value of Gold in WA was naturally much lower, but on the other hand, the horses were extremely valuable and expensive there, because they were really hard to get there across the desert (especially in Mansa Musa's time, when aridization of the region made trade much more risky, especially with goods such as horses). Despite that Mansa Musa was so rich that he could afford to buy large numbers of horses, what gave him great advantage on battlefield of West African savannah.. and thus he was able to expand further than any of his predecesors. That was only later beaten by the Songhai rulers, who used the Niger river as the main transport line thus making supply much more effective.

My guess is that his wealth was worth a lot less where he came from due to inflation than it was where he brought it. So there really is no reason to make him super rich, no more so than any other ruler sitting on valuable natural resources in an inaccessible location. Perhaps a gold road could be added, like the silk road.

 

[elvain]

My guess is that his wealth was worth a lot less where he came from due to inflation than it was where he brought it. So there really is no reason to make him super rich, no more so than any other ruler sitting on valuable natural resources in an inaccessible location. Perhaps a gold road could be added, like the silk road.

the difference is that due to system of rule in West Africa and the way how the gold trade was controlled, there was gold monopoly, controlled by a special merchant class, called Wangara, who were the only ones who had the access to gold fields. And all the gold they obtained was handed to local rulers, or went through them. So the Ghanas (rulers of Wagadu empire, called Ghana), and later Mansas of Mali had full controll of the gold, therefore could controll possible inflation. OTOH, for the people in the region salt had much higher value than gold and was even used as currency in times.
The merchants and rulers, however knew about the value of Gold outside their empire, they could (and did) use it to control the imports of salt and other valuables unavailable in the region, so they definitely were extra rich even despite the relative low value of gold in their own homeland. Not the richest of the rich, but still were nowhere near what they are now, dirt poor nobodies.

In game terms, the trade route would be very necessary condition to have at least a glimpse of what and how the region looked like and worked.

 

[TheDungen]

the difference is that due to system of rule in West Africa and the way how the gold trade was controlled, there was gold monopoly, controlled by a special merchant class, called Wangara, who were the only ones who had the access to gold fields. And all the gold they obtained was handed to local rulers, or went through them. So the Ghanas (rulers of Wagadu empire, called Ghana), and later Mansas of Mali had full controll of the gold, therefore could controll possible inflation. OTOH, for the people in the region salt had much higher value than gold and was even used as currency in times.
The merchants and rulers, however knew about the value of Gold outside their empire, they could (and did) use it to control the imports of salt and other valuables unavailable in the region, so they definitely were extra rich even despite the relative low value of gold in their own homeland. Not the richest of the rich, but still were nowhere near what they are now, dirt poor nobodies.

In game terms, the trade route would be very necessary condition to have at least a glimpse of what and how the region looked like and worked.

I'm not saying that the region could not use some more development, I think it should have, in fact I think all of west africa (sans a little bit right at the tip to prevent ships from sailing around it) should be in the game, as well as most of the east african coast.
But because their wealth were so hard to exchange for goods they needed it did not turn them into the superpower it would have if crossing the sahara was easy. And that is a problem in the game because crossing the sahara is easy in the game.

 

[elvain]

yup, that's right, they definitely should not become superpower with easy way to expand across the Sahara and keep the empire. IMHO there could be a set of mechanics (like desert areas not allowing controll of other government than specificaly desertish etc.), which could block it.. but I'm affraid I'm already derailing this thread too much into WestAfrica... so maybe we can continue there? (the last part actually is abot West African trade route).

 

[jkntimport]

If the map expands any father east I'd love to see Srivijaya and its religious wars with the Khmer and Chola

 

[Aardvark Bellay]

..... Instead, we’ll optimize the game and improve the AI (sorely needed, though I've done some work on it for the upcoming patch)

I just 'played' an observe game ( for the last two days or three..) where i cheated here and there,
but most of the time let it run and watch and played without fog of war.


I hope "improving the AI" includes pathfinding or whatever it is that makes armies :

- move into nowhere before changing course after a month or more (seriously there was nothing, neither target area nor enemy, no force to merge with,
no ally, no revolt , no alliance war nor had they been beaten in battle and were in shattered retreat or anything alike.
(especialy obvious inPersia/India region, but also happened elsewhere),

- breaking off their own sieges to beat 200 sizes armies close by so that they seem to never finish that bloody siege.
They also lose troops this way required for the siege they otherwise wouldn't lose.

- being indecisive and leaving and quitting and leaving and quitting a province and thus move like only techno and house dancers or people on speed move
..and that i've seen for more than a month without any enemy army around whatsoever by the way..

- (the often times mentioned) "run in circles", only that circles becomes the whole baltic sea or even the whole mediterranean.

- going in the direction of the area to siege (not only target, but also own areas occupied by enemy) or an army to beat (while also being bigger and having better moral), but one province before change direction, even though there is no enemy army/reinforcement around and for sure no big one to beat anywhere (the latter refers to going for areas to siege but breaking off for no discernable reason) and just decide to go somewhere else, as if they were strolling around the streets like a dog.

- seemingly trying to trick the enemy and flank it, otherwise i wouldn't know why these don't attack the enemy directly, only for the other big army directly attacking the enemy to lose a battle, as the reinforcement army 'securing the flanks'/'cutting the enemies army way' (which it doesn't) arrived too late.


Every time i saw armies act like this and thus prove my suspicions, I couldnt' decide if i should throw a hissy-fit or be depressed...and call you Creative Assembly from now on.
So decided i just do both....without calling you CA...yet.

I get the impression attempts to make the AI more cunning and intelligent also made it (realisticaly so) more indecisive, confused and.....and human indeed.
From that perspective...hmm....

Thank you for your attention.
Where's my Gin and Tonic...