WE isn't bad and Croatia also has a full MP pool. Failure to capitalize on a few successes and ability to minimize a few losses has kept this war on the border. There is nothing more to it than that.
The realm rejoices as Paradox Interactive announces the launch of Crusader Kings III, the latest entry in the publisher’s grand strategy role-playing game franchise. Advisors may now jockey for positions of influence and adversaries should save their schemes for another day, because on this day Crusader Kings III can be purchased on Steam, the Paradox Store, and other major online retailers.
So, Distant Overseas for everyone and their cat, and your land is poor and nobody wants it. You say: 'boo, poor land'; I say: 'security'As for our position, we're in Africa. Africa of the Tiny Tax and Endless Grain.
That is one benefit of poor land, it's true.your land is poor and nobody wants it.
..correction : nobody wants the poor land, as long as there is richer lands as easy to grab...That is one benefit of poor land, it's true.
Even easier!..correction : nobody wants the poor land, as long as there is richer lands as easy to grab...
That'll teach those imperialistic, non-african, somewhat-capitalistic trader-pigs!!Even easier!In addition to grain and low basetax, we also have lovely attrition-causing tropical diseases in Africa, which most of the rest of the world (with only Indonesia and parts of India excepted) lack.
to control the COT's? ..hmmm..there might be a reason to take some tiny bits of africa, after all...To trade obviously.
Yes, well, coffee is the tradegood of various Ethiopian provinces in later starts, but the way the game is made, for a 1399 start there is no way to get coffee there. Or anywhere in Africa at all, actually, as its a disallowed tradegood for the entire continent.Coffee on the other hand, should be Ethiopean..
You'll note that the malarial jungles and worthless deserts weren't annexed until very late, and then it was, by and large, to allow railroads to connect existing colonies. A railroad between South Africa and Egypt has obvious value by lowering transport costs for the exports of South Africa. Kenya and Rhodesia (now Zimbabwe) were both colonies of settlement: Good land free for taking by anyone willing to move; this is of course very badly modelled by EU3 with its state colonists. The names "Ivory Coast" and "Gold Coast" should in themselves be a bit of a hint; the Congo had rubber plantations and whatnot under Belgium - and again, you'll notice that the annexation was very late, well after the EU3 period. As for the Sahara, the French cared nothing for the desert as such but they found themselves with the classic problem of imperial states: Their coastal settlements in Algeria, Tunisia, and Morocco, which they did care about - let's note that grain and other agricultural products were a lot more important than EU3 tends to model them as; all these states had rapidly-growing and hungry populations - were exposed to raids by Bedouin tribes beyond the line of settlement. So they did as the Romans, Egyptians, Russians, and British had done before them: They moved forward in punitive expeditions and tried to establish a line of fortifications well beyond the settlements they were nominally protecting, to keep the tribes at a distance. Which is not to say that painting the middle of the Sahara in French blue was anything but boasting, but after all, who was going to complain?That'll teach those imperialistic, non-african, somewhat-capitalistic trader-pigs!!
...hmmm..why DID the europeans go there in the first place? (In real life..)
Damn that sure was a crushing defeat for the Chinese. Bavarian flag FTW.
And he had Dip 3 too so he couldn't convince anyone else to go in his placeI can just see the advisers to the emperor offering him a nice holiday in the warm deadly jungles....
Terrain modifier -4, and Bavaria has the all-important level 18 of landtech so they do twice as much damage even with all else equal. We should have retreated well before we did.I'ld like to point out that 80% of the troops in that battle were Punjabian and Mongolian troops which uh, aren't will suited for combat in Chinese hills and rice fields.
What does the origin of the unit have to do with their combat performance again?I'ld like to point out that 80% of the troops in that battle were Punjabian and Mongolian troops which uh, aren't will suited for combat in Chinese hills and rice fields.