EEP Byzantium

[joak]

I got it working, and it's so simple I feel guilty for bringing it up w/out a solution earlier. I just added a deathdate:

deathdate = { day = 1 month = january year = 1820 }

after the "date" line in the final event, reloaded a conveniently saved game, and it fired. Apparently, without a deathdate it tries to happen within the offset period; you need (non-intuitively) the end-of-game deathdate for it to happen "any time" after the start date.

BTW, you want the offset there, otherwise it fires immediately after the last accept the Turks event, and you'd get the combined revolt risks and stab hits. Breaking them up is good.

(Edit (one more comment): The thing could fire most games in the middle of Zoe's reign, so you'll get a nice 60 month revolt risk that could tie several of the noble revolts together. I'm not suggesting it be changed, actually I think it'd be fun )

 

[driftwood]

Very impressive, Joak.

Yes, the massive offsets (10-30 years) are in there to space events out, since there's no good way to schedule them from an unknown starting point. Come on, the game's not very hard, why not be forced to wait for your rewards a little bit longer?

The overlapping offsets shouldn't matter, since it just pads the amount of time it will happen once all the other conditions have been met (triggers and startdate).

If I ever figure out when the next deadline is, I promise to take a Saturday, round up all the updates, make sure they all load properly (though I won't guarantee they function properly), and get them in for the next release.

driftwood

 

[Idiotboy]

Originally posted by joak
I got it working, and it's so simple I feel guilty for bringing it up w/out a solution earlier. I just added a deathdate:

deathdate = { day = 1 month = january year = 1820 }

after the "date" line in the final event, reloaded a conveniently saved game, and it fired. Apparently, without a deathdate it tries to happen within the offset period; you need (non-intuitively) the end-of-game deathdate for it to happen "any time" after the start date.

BTW, you want the offset there, otherwise it fires immediately after the last accept the Turks event, and you'd get the combined revolt risks and stab hits. Breaking them up is good.

(Edit (one more comment): The thing could fire most games in the middle of Zoe's reign, so you'll get a nice 60 month revolt risk that could tie several of the noble revolts together. I'm not suggesting it be changed, actually I think it'd be fun )

It was as I figured then. Not to surprising really but good we got some confirmation on this. This should eliminate the troubles we have had on the events almost completely.

 

[driftwood]

Could it really fire in the middle of Zoe's reign? Aren't most of the offsets no worse than 20 or 30 years after 1575, meaning the very beginning at worst? I'll have to doublecheck. Too many pints o' Guinness at the moment. <drool>

Hehe, that would make a great historical monograph! "On the conflux of Turkish assimilation and anti-aristocratic reforms in the reign of Zoe II" Someone could earn a doctorate for that.

driftwood

 

[unmerged(5664)]

I'm slowly playing along as EEP Byzantium...

I was cruising through the event files and saw the "Byzantine Renaissance" event. I also saw it had a trigger of religion = orthodox.

Why? I'm trying a very alternate history, and will probably stay Catholic. What ws the justification for this trigger?

BarristerBoy

 

[driftwood]

The theme of the Renaissance is that it's a return to traditional levels of power and government (such as during the Macedonian dynasty). Since Orthodoxy was at the very core of the eastern Roman self-identity, there's no way you could put on a traditional mantle while following such a popularly unpopular decision as the Council of Florence.

However, there was a series of events that someone (Idiotboy?) proposed quite a while ago that would allow for a true union of the churches, negotiated between equals. It was a very long series that required decisions on each of the outstanding issues, maintaining high relations with the major Catholic states despite decisions that they're unhappy with, etc. But I don't think those were coded.

driftwood

 

[Idiotboy]

Originally posted by driftwood

However, there was a series of events that someone (Idiotboy?) proposed quite a while ago that would allow for a true union of the churches, negotiated between equals. It was a very long series that required decisions on each of the outstanding issues, maintaining high relations with the major Catholic states despite decisions that they're unhappy with, etc. But I don't think those were coded.

driftwood

I think I remember what you are talking about, but I don´t think it was my idea and it was a long time ago those ideas was up. If we want something like that I think we have to start from scratch.

Anyway I´m coding the events of the Spanish succession now. Should be complete soon.

 

[joak]

Originally posted by driftwood
Could it really fire in the middle of Zoe's reign? Aren't most of the offsets no worse than 20 or 30 years after 1575, meaning the very beginning at worst? I'll have to doublecheck. Too many pints o' Guinness at the moment. <drool>

By my math, you can get the last province event in 1605, and then get the acceptance eventin the next six years--it could happen right in the middle of the nobles revolts.

Also by my math, not sure you can have too much Guinness

Hehe, that would make a great historical monograph! "On the conflux of Turkish assimilation and anti-aristocratic reforms in the reign of Zoe II" Someone could earn a doctorate for that.

driftwood

"The magnates' opposition to Zoe's reign, although ostensibly triggered by her usurpation of the throne and assasination of her brother, were in fact primarily a reaction to the uncertain place now held by these traditional elites as more and more Turks entered the upper ranks of Byzantine society . . . "

 

[unmerged(5664)]

Originally posted by driftwood
The theme of the Renaissance is that it's a return to traditional levels of power and government (such as during the Macedonian dynasty). Since Orthodoxy was at the very core of the eastern Roman self-identity, there's no way you could put on a traditional mantle while following such a popularly unpopular decision as the Council of Florence.

However, there was a series of events that someone (Idiotboy?) proposed quite a while ago that would allow for a true union of the churches, negotiated between equals. It was a very long series that required decisions on each of the outstanding issues, maintaining high relations with the major Catholic states despite decisions that they're unhappy with, etc. But I don't think those were coded.

driftwood

hmmm...

I actually played through the Renaissance event last night. It seems rather unbalancing, with significant positive attributes. Adding the additional core provinces I can understand, but I don't understand why you would also get so many +ve relations. Surely neighboring powers would be concerned that Byzantium was re-asserting old territorial claims.

Re-setting the loan values, of course, makes perfect sense.

As well I'm not sure what the justification for all the +ve tax values were???

And as for the religion = orthodox, I don't really buy the explanation. During the Macedonian dynasty there was no explicit Catholic / Orthodox split! The churches were still unified during that period. It wasn't until 1054 that the great schism occurred, which co-incided more or less with the end of the Macedonian dynasty.

Besides, it is tough enough to play as a Catholic Byzantium (-30% income, 30 year revolt risk).

Barrister(Yes, I know my Byzantine history)Boy

 

[unmerged(7837)]

Yes, but by 1453, there was a large schizm between the Catholic and Orthodox churches. That's why there's such a large revolt risk, afterall. Church leaders were pissed off, ones that went along with the union weren't like too well...just all sorts of problems. In that atmosphere, it seems unlikely that the nation would really be able to move foward. It's not that being Catholic in itself would hinder the reforms...it's the problems that the Union caused that hinders the process.

 

[Idiotboy]

Originally posted by BarristerBoy


And as for the religion = orthodox, I don't really buy the explanation. During the Macedonian dynasty there was no explicit Catholic / Orthodox split! The churches were still unified during that period. It wasn't until 1054 that the great schism occurred, which co-incided more or less with the end of the Macedonian dynasty.

Well the great schism of 1054 was IMO just the culmination of what had been going on for a long time. The church might had been unified on paper but that was pretty much it.

 

[driftwood]

Since the Schism was a political rather than a theological divide, it's no use trying to apply logic.

It's true that Orthodox/other neighbors might regard Byzantium's resurgence warily, but I think it's more likely that they'd heave a sigh of relief that a friendly Orthodox power was regaining itself, as opposed to a successfully militant, Muslim one.

The core provinces and loan changes are simply restoring the official values (if that - the core provinces are still a fraction of what Paradox gives you). As for the tax/manpower increase, it's basically a small reward for overcoming the great odds against you in 1419. Most of the other events require either long wars, putting down domestic rebellions, or paying money to get the benefits.

I'll give one more whirl at the religion=orthodox thing. Regardless of the Macedonian dynasty's actual relations with the Papacy, the people of Constantinople, not to mention the less sophisticated ones of the Balkan/Anatolian countryside, believed that a return to tradition meant Orthodoxy (since Catholicism must, being on the other side of the schism, be heresy).

Besides, if you're playing the challenging Catholic version, you don't want these freebie events, right?

driftwood

 

[unmerged(7837)]

I was just thinking about my colonial event for Byzantium...I think it needs another event preceding it. Something to guide the player in the direction of Nile and Basrah. My reasoning is that my games don't always go in that direction...sometimes I never even bother with the Malmelucks or whatever, or Persia...so that event would be wasted. So I'm thinking two more events, something like Jenkin's Ear with England...script an insult from Persia or Malmelucks that gives you a CB if you make the right choice. This would send you go after one of those two provinces, or at least give you a small hint in the right direction. We could make it so that you give the other nation a chance to make the insult, then you have the choice to make a big deal out of it. If everything works out, there's a CB. Have the event say something like:

"We've been looking for an excuse to expand East anyway, so let's use this opportunity"

Or whatever. What do you think?

 

[Havard]

Why should the player be herded around to make sure he plays it the "right" way?

Besides, IMO the entire Eastern Colonialism event is serious[/i] unbalanced (even after the removal of the free manufactory )...

 

[Idiotboy]

Originally posted by Havard
Why should the player be herded around to make sure he plays it the "right" way?

Besides, IMO the entire Eastern Colonialism event is serious[/i] unbalanced (even after the removal of the free manufactory )...

Any ideas on how to change it then??

Anyway I have to agree with one thing though. Two explorers plus two conquistadors is a lot. But the rest is nothing that you shouldn´t already have anyway so really it gives you very little.

 

[unmerged(7837)]

How is it seriously unbalanced? It does some dp changes (and not necessarily ones that a player would want to make, anyway, like the move toward naval), gives two conquistadors and explorers (the only advantage is that they're in the right area instead of random), gives a boost to research (that is pretty nice, I admit), and gives you some settlers (at this point in the game, a Byz player is likely to have 6 settlers anyway). And it cost money that a player just coming out of Zoe isn't likely to have. IMO, my colonial event only really gives the player a hint as to what he can do with what he'd have already...it doesn't really give the player that much that wouldn't have been able to get on his own, anyway.

 

[Havard]

Originally posted by dunkel
How is it seriously unbalanced? It does some dp changes (and not necessarily ones that a player would want to make, anyway, like the move toward naval), gives two conquistadors and explorers (the only advantage is that they're in the right area instead of random), gives a boost to research (that is pretty nice, I admit), and gives you some settlers (at this point in the game, a Byz player is likely to have 6 settlers anyway). And it cost money that a player just coming out of Zoe isn't likely to have. IMO, my colonial event only really gives the player a hint as to what he can do with what he'd have already...it doesn't really give the player that much that wouldn't have been able to get on his own, anyway.

The event as such is balanced, since there are no "bad" options.

What I was referring to is that it basically give the Byz. player a large advantage whatever policy they follow.

I'd say e.g. free conquistadors/explorers are quite an advantage...

 

[Idiotboy]

Originally posted by Havard


The event as such is balanced, since there are no "bad" options.

What I was referring to is that it basically give the Byz. player a large advantage whatever policy they follow.

I'd say e.g. free conquistadors/explorers are quite an advantage...

I´m not quite sure I follow you but I´m thinking you have to have certain DP-settings for it to trigger.

 

[Havard]

Originally posted by Idiotboy
I´m not quite sure I follow you but I´m thinking you have to have certain DP-settings for it to trigger.

As far as I can see the trigger was ownership of either Basrah or Nile province.

 

[Idiotboy]

Originally posted by Havard


As far as I can see the trigger was ownership of either Basrah or Nile province.

Yes, yes but how should i be altered if you have to have certain policies??