England and its colonies...

[unmerged(1020)]

More events:

Thai aggression scares Malay Princes: I think it was in the 1820s (I'll check) that several Malay kngdoms got gobbled up by the Thais. As a result, the British came in to protect the Malays. Essentially it became part of the British empire, so it should either make the Malays vassals or old fashioned anexed territory.

Development of Singapore: With the game starting in 1820, Singapore will have been British for all of 10 months, and will have a small population. The continual trade boom, which should probably be evented after the building of Suez, made it the trade hub of much of the far east. This should add a CoT there, boost the population and change the culture to Chinese, to reflect the widespread immigration to the area.

Welsh Iron & Steel: When the Welsh iron and steel industry took off, it turned a formerly backwards area into one of the greatest producers of metal and coal. +1 Tax value would reflect this.

Adm. Fisher's reforms: Has someone mentioned this yet?

1860s Fort improements: Like the colonial defence event. Reflects a sharp increase in fortification both in the British isles and in the colonies in (IIRC) the 1860s.

Recruitment of Ghurkas: Just a suggestion, gives +1 quality, costs a bit of cash.

End of Imperial Preference: Two choices: End it: Free trade up a lot, maybe a tax drop here and there, enables a second event 'the fruits of free trade'. Keep it: Mercantilism up quite a bit.

The Fruits of Free trade: Activated by ending Imperial preference. Makes up for the earlier tax loss and then some, values rise at home and overseas.

US-Canada Free trade treaty: (1855 IIRC), Mercantilism down, tax values up, requires certain level of free trade to let it happen.

Standardised Time: I'm not sure whether this is in the era in question, but I believe it is. +1 centralisation would go well with it.

Oregon country: I think I noticed this earlier, but it wasn't quite right. There should be 3 options- It's all ours, Continue along the 48th or Give it to the Americans. This might need coordination with the American events. Basically, the situation was that in 1846 the deal whereby Oregon was to be jointly administered expired. America wanted it all (an election campaign slogan called for the whole area, going all the way up to the Yukon, cutting Canada off from the Pacific), and ar looked possible. However, eventually they settled for the extension of the 48th parallel as the border.

Perhaps what could be done is the US player could get 3 options (all to us, split it, all to them). The British player would then be asked if they want to settle for what they get, or contest it. If they contest, both sides get a CB on the other, and a relations hit. Then they'd trigger another event later, to allow them to settle on an equal split, or continue to press it. The more they claim, the more relations are hurt, and the more likely war becomes. Some fictionl events could be built off that push both sides to war.

Colonial purchases: Cyprus, British North Boreo, so on, so forth- the list is endless. Buying in costs, but players get territory.

 

[Styrbiorn]

Excellent work. May I ask you if you can create descriptions (ie ingame text) for them too? Then I can script them ASAP.

BTW, there is a Brazilian-British set of events concerning the rubber trade, where the British can buy smuggeld rubber seeds and plant them in their South East Asian conlonies (as happened historical). Maybe link those events with the creation of a CoT in Singapore? As a condition I mean, the British need to have started rubber plantages to gain a CoT?

 

[unmerged(1020)]

Rubber trade: That sounds a very good event. My only real concern is that it means a major shift in what the province makes, essentially changing its commodity. I'm guessing this can't be done trhough an event, or else it would feature quite prominently in the original game. However, making it a requirement for getting the Singapore CoT would be a good way to get around this.

Description- I advise you look over these for any inadvertant spelling errors.

Railway booms: Nothing captured the hearts of the public, or the money of investors, like the railways. Whenever there was spare money to invest, there was railway stock to buy. As a result, good economic times were matched by large expansions in the railway network.

New Railways brought rural communities into the national economy, as well as linking them to urban society. Urban centres became more prominent and powerful, taking produce from nationwide and selling their goods not only across the nation, but around the globe. In addition, there was good money to be made for a canny investor, and railway stocks formed the backbone for those with money to spare.

Railways also brought social change. Officials and businessmen could reach any part of the nation, tying the bureaucratic and econoic ties of the country closer. Journalists and political figures could travel to the scenes of trouble, rallying or reporting opposition to government policy. Even the poor could escape the urban hell for a day trip to the seaside. The railway was the foundation of modern society.

Isambard Kingdom Brunel: Arguably the most famous engineer of the 19th century, there was nothing this man did not turn his hand to. In 1830 he designed the Clifton Suspension Bridge, the first of its kind, showing his great originality and ability. He designed a number of ships, notably the Great Britain, the world's first large iron-hulled, screw propelled steam ship.

However Brunel's greatest achievement was the Great Western Railway, one of the four great British railways. Linking London and Bristol, be started as chief engineer at the age of only 27. With viaducts, bridges and the famous Box Tunnel (which worried scientists predicted would asphyxiate passengers), it was a wonder of the railway age.

While watching the troublesome trials of his latest ship, the Great Eastern, in 1858, Brunel collapsed with a seizure. He never recovered, and died soon after, but bequeathed to the nation some of the finest engineering ever seen.

More to come later. Have to eat.

 

[Johnny Canuck]

Admiralty & War Office Reforms

Here are two events with descriptions for the period:


Fisher's Naval Reforms

Date: 21 October 1904

Desc: On the 21st of October, 1904, the 99th anniversary of the Battle of Trafalgar, Admiral John 'Jacky' Fisher was appointed First Sea Lord of the Admiralty - in effect, the professional head of the Royal Navy. A great reformer, he promptly transformed the Royal Navy from a laid-back and antiquated Victorian fleet to a modern war machine. He scrapped hundreds of obsolete vessels, revamped the education of new officers, emphasized the latest technical innovations like the submarine and airplane, and reployed the Royal Navy to home waters to defend against the threat from the German Navy. Most prominently, he played a leading role in the design and construction of HMS Dreadnought, the first all big-gun battleship that revolutionized naval warfare and ushered in the area of the naval arms race. Fisher faced serious opposition, though, from traditionalists who disliked change, and a great rivalry emerged between him and Admiral Lord Charles Beresford, the leading reactionary, that nearly crippled the Royal Navy by 1909.

A: Support Fisher
+2500 Naval Investment
+10 Warships in the Highlands [Represents Formation of Home Fleet at Scapa Flow]
+1 Naval DP
-10 Relations with 4 Random Countries [Represents Withdrawal of Vessels from Foreign Stations]

B: Support Beresford
+1 Aristocracy
-500 Naval Investment


The War Office Reforms

Date: 1903 [offset = 500]

Desc: Prior to the 20th century, the British army was outdated, ineffective, and designed to only fight a colonial war. The Boer War revealed glaring problems of training, tactics, and supply. A committee was formed to reform the War Office in 1903, led by Lord Esher. It recommended in particular the formation of a General Staff along German lines to study the art of war and make strategic recommendations. Later, while Richard Haldane was Secretary of War, the War Office underwent further reforms. The net result was that the British was overhauled and made much better able to fight a European war.

A: Reform the War Office
+1500 Army Investment
+5000 Inf in Anglia
+3000 Cav in Anglia
+20 Art in Anglia

B: We Don't Need a Strong Army
+1 Aristocracy
-500 Army Investment

 

[unmerged(1020)]

The Great Stink: By the 1850s, London was the world's greatest city, the fast growing heart of a fast growing empire. As with all cities, this caused problems. Not the least of these was that there was at best an imformal sanitation network. While things were better than the days when waste was thrown onto the streets, cesspits were served by rivers that over time had been covered and turned into primitive sewers, such as the Fleet and Holborne. These fed straight into the Thames, the primary watersource for Londoners.

While debate raged over whether cholera was a waterborne disease or not, four outbreaks in the first half of the century killed thousands. In 1858, the hot summer made the smell literally unbearable. Some rich families fled the city, while parliament hung curtains soaked in chlorine over the windows to mask the smell. The time had come for action.

The answer was presented by Joeseph Bazalgette, Chief Engineer to the Metropolitan Commission for Sewers. His plan dictated for a mass program to sanitise the city. Eventually 13,000 miles of sewers linked up to filtering plants and holding tanks. Meanwhile the banks of the Thames were shored up, creating the embankments that became centres of social life.

Northcote-Trevelyan reforms: As patronage declined in the choice of crown servants, a meritocratic body of civil servants took their place. The proposals set out in the Northcote Trevelyan report took many decades to fully implement, but recommended selection by examination, promotion based on ability and a single, unified, standardised service of minesterial advisors and helpers. The Civil Service commission was set up in 1855 to oversee recruitment, and competitive examination was introduced in 1870. The report marked the begining of a true Civil Service, which would serve as a model for others worldwide right up to the present day.

 

[unmerged(1020)]

Malaya- this is a bit tricky to say whaen it all happened. The treaty I was thinking of stopped the Thais encroaching on malay kingdoms, But Britain never conquered the area. Instead it gradually wheedled into power in the area. The federated Malay states were founded in 1896, perhapos that could be a centrepiece to their joining.

Anyway- the Singapore event: As trade with the Far East intensified, the settlement at Singapore grew. From a few hundred souls when the lease was arranged, it rapidly became a global trading hub. Immigrants, mostly Chinese, flocked to the city to make their fortunes, bringing with them their cultures and traditions. Meanwhile, the rubber plantations of the port's hinterland and improved communictions via the Suez canal led to a period of sustained growth, both in wealth and population.

Sorry- once again no time to finish doing these events. I'll try and sort something tomorrow.

 

[Vulture]

You script them Styrbiorn? I am off for the day, but these look like EXCELLENT events

 

[Styrbiorn]

Originally posted by VultureGFF
You script them Styrbiorn? I am off for the day, but these look like EXCELLENT events

I'm on to it.

 

[unmerged(1020)]

Thanks for the complements.

Welsh Steel Industry (Note- this is based on some hazy memories of old geography lessons. I haven't found a better source online though, so it'll have to do): Southern Wales was blessed with plentiful iron ore and coal deposits, easily accessible through mines in the hillside. Aside from becoming the point of origin for much of the coal that fed late 19th century shipping, the area was the natural site for steel mills. Dozens of furnaces popped up, and the iron and steel industry employed thousands across the region.

Isn't progress wonderful?
+1 Tax value in Wales

 

[unmerged(1196)]

event = {
id = 19280
random = no
country = ENG
name = "Annexation of Oregon Country"
desc = "After the Treaty of 1818, the US and Britain agreed upon a joint-occupation of the land. With growing American immigration to the area, combined with a decline in the fur industry due to overhunting, the British were increasingly less reluctant to give up Oregon country. In the US, expansionists demanded full annexation of Oregon up to 54 degrees 40 minutes. Southerners championed annexation of a smaller area, up to 49 degrees, to minimize the advantage to the North. The US has demanded the land up to 49 degrees."
style = 5
action_a = {
name = "Give up the territories."
command = { type = relation which = USA value = 100 }
command = { type = stability value = 2 }
command = { type = secedeprovince which = USA value = 6 }
command = { type = secedeprovince which = USA value = 7 }
command = { type = secedeprovince which = USA value = 1473 }

}
action_b = {
name = "These territories shall always be British!"
command = { type = relation which = USA value = -200 }
command = { type = stability value = -2 }
command = { type = trigger which = 19091 }
}
}

event = {
id = 19281
random = no
country = ENG
name = "Annexation of Oregon Country"
desc = "After the Treaty of 1818, the US and Britain agreed upon a joint-occupation of the land. With growing American immigration to the area, combined with a decline in the fur industry due to overhunting, the British were increasingly less reluctant to give up Oregon country. In the US, expansionists demanded full annexation of Oregon up to 54 degrees 40 minutes. Southerners championed annexation of a smaller area, up to 49 degrees, to minimize the advantage to the North. The US has demanded the land up to 54 degrees 40 minutes."
style = 5
action_a = {
name = "Give up the territories."
command = { type = relation which = USA value = 100 }
command = { type = stability value = 2 }
command = { type = secedeprovince which = USA value = 6 }
command = { type = secedeprovince which = USA value = 7 }
command = { type = secedeprovince which = USA value = 1473 }
command = { type = secedeprovince which = USA value = 5 }
command = { type = secedeprovince which = USA value = 4 }
command = { type = secedeprovince which = USA value = 3 }
command = { type = secedeprovince which = USA value = 2 }

}
action_b = {
name = "These territories shall always be British!"
command = { type = relation which = USA value = -200 }
command = { type = stability value = -2 }
command = { type = trigger which = 19091 }
}
}

event = {
id = 19282
random = no
country = ENG
date = { day = 1 month = january year = 1840 }
offset = 0
name = "Immigration of Americans to Oregon country"
desc = "With a rapidly expanding American population, many took the 'Oregon trail' to the heavily disputed Oregon territories, rapidly becoming the majority."
style = 5
action_a = {
name = "Damn"
command = { type = provinceculture which = 6 value = cree }
command = { type = provinceculture which = 7 value = cree }
command = { type = provinceculture which = 1473 value = cree }
}
}
}

 

[unmerged(1020)]

End of Imperial Preferences: The early 19th century saw the free trade lobby ascendant. Following the ideals of economists like Adam Smith and David Ricardo, liberal thinkers sought to repeal the protectionist legislation and tariff barriers of the past two centuries.

In the 1840s these ideals finally took effect. Starting with the repeal of the corn laws, the protectionism of old was cut away. In 1849 the Navigation Acts, the backbone of the old mercantilist system, was removed. Preferential treatment for Canadian timber ended, as the market was opened up. By 1860 all tariffs and trade restrictions had been unilaterally dropped.

A: A Free market is good for us
+4 Free trade (perhaps more?)
+3 Merchants
-1 Tax in two Canadian provinces
Enables 'Fruits of Free Trade' event

B: We must look after our own interests
+2 Mercantilism

The Fruits of Free Trade (happens a couple of years later): Despite opening their markets to the world, the British retained their dominant economic position in the global market. World trade and commerce boomed in the 1850s, and the nation and empire could both reap the rewards. Almost regardless of the cost, British people and officials prefered to buy British goods, and automatic favouritism towards British products occurred. With cheaper food and raw materials, combined with increased sales, the country had found the best of both worlds

Another triumph for the free market.
+1 Tax in quite a few random provinces, mostly home ones, but some colonials. I'd estimate somewhere in the region of seven to ten, but that might make it a bit too good.

Reciprocity Treaty (1854, needs mercantilism to be pretty low, US to exist, Canada to be British): As the USA grew, the need for raw materials and foodstuffs grew with it. Canada was ideally placed to serve this demand. Providing food for the cities of the north east, as well as lumber for the growing farms and settlements of the west was highly profitable.

The Reciprocity treaty allowed ten years of free trade between the Canadian provinces and the USA, running from 1855. It coincided with high growth and widespread railway building, all of which meant a prosperous Canada.

A: Sign the Treaty
+1 Tax in a random Canadian province
+1 Free Trade
Trade Agreement with USA

B: The Americans cannot be trusted
+1 Mercantilism

 

[unmerged(1196)]

You really are overestimating the British drive for free trade. At the height of the UK's free trade fervor, there were still plenty of trade barriers, particularly on certain colonies, such as India.

 

[unmerged(1020)]

All freedom is relative, and trade here was freer than anywhere else I believe. At least enough to put it firmly down the free trade end of things. Not to mention the fact that the Navigation acts counted as +6 mercantilism in EU2 proper, and their repeal and subsequent tarif reductions should be worth a hefty amount.

 

[unmerged(1196)]

But "By 1860 all tariffs and trade restrictions had been unilaterally dropped." is certainly not true.

And by 1860, there was a number of places where trade was more free, particularly certain heavily agricultural states.

 

[unmerged(1020)]

http://www.theworldeconomy.org/96-98.pdf

3rd paragraph underneath Acceleration of Technical Growth heading. Third line. I was only quoting that. Edit: perhaps I should clarify that I'm only talking about British tariffs- of course the rest of the world still had them.

The Palmerston Fortifications: Britain always had its share of invasion scares, and the 1850s were no exception. Relations between Britain and France were far from certain, and military revolutions, such as the launching of La Gloire and the invention of rifled guns jeopardised the walls of wood that had protected the isles for centuries.

Lord Palmerston set up a commission to 'Consider the Defence of the United Kingdom', looking in particular into the new rifled guns available. Its findings were wholeheartedly approved by the Prime Minister, and the fortification of the major ports of the home isles began. Dubbed Palmerston's Folly, these forts were state of the art and skillfully built, but by the time of their completion France clearly had no plans to invade. Despite never firing a shot in anger, they were the last major fortifications in the British isles before the advent of trench warfare.

A: The French Menace must be stopped!
+2 Fortification in Wessex
+1 Fortification in Anglia
+1 Fortification in Kent
+1 Fortification in Cornwall
-1500 Gold

B: A waste of Public Money
-2 Stability

 

[unmerged(1020)]

Oh- BTW, I can't help thinking Oregon could be made more interesting. rather than just a relations drop if the two sides can't agree, how about some escalation? A sort of 'They dare to dictate terms to the greatest empire ever' response, which puts the tension up substantially and triggers some going to war events. Alternatively, offer each side the opportunity to sell their stake to the other for a tidy sum.

Anyway-

The Iron Duke's Funeral: When the Duke of Wellington died, it was the end of an era. On and off the battlefield he had proved a powerful figure, both as a brilliant general and as a controversial Prime Minister. As he grew older and more retired, respect for him grew, and by the time of his death he was a national hero. His state funeral, the first to take place under the dome of St Pauls Cathedral, attracted 13,000 inside and hundreds of thousands outside, lining the route. In a way it was another step in the death of the old order.

However Wellington's death marked something more practical. The country had not fought a European war or a major battle since 1815, and it showed. Wellington had been commander in chief of the army, but now he was replaced by men with practically no combat experience. Commands were filled by aristrocratic novices who had bought, rather than fought for, their commissions. The army would prove itself in a sorry state when war next came.

A Great Man has Passed
-1 Quality

Is there a way this event could be stopped if Britain has had a big war at all? Otherwise, it might be a good idea to leave it out altogether.

 

[unmerged(1196)]

3rd paragraph underneath Acceleration of Technical Growth heading. Third line. I was only quoting that.

It was wrong then. It may have been correct regarding tariffs, but certainly not 'all trade restrictions.'

Edit: perhaps I should clarify that I'm only talking about British tariffs- of course the rest of the world still had them.

Not really. Again, certain heavily agricultural states and many protectorate states of the Europen empires had low to no tariffs. Also, the Dutch didn't have many tariffs, IIRC.

 

[unmerged(1196)]

Oh- BTW, I can't help thinking Oregon could be made more interesting. rather than just a relations drop if the two sides can't agree, how about some escalation? A sort of 'They dare to dictate terms to the greatest empire ever' response, which puts the tension up substantially and triggers some going to war events.

The US gets a CB. As a rule, I don't like to force war in events.

Alternatively, offer each side the opportunity to sell their stake to the other for a tidy sum.

Too much effort for something that doesn't have any basis in history.

 

[unmerged(1020)]

Too much effort for something that doesn't have any basis in history.

Correct me if I'm wrong, but isn't that the point of this entire game, to do things that didn't happen in history?

 

[unmerged(1196)]

I don't know what you mean, exactly.

My event philosophy (and Paradox's IMO) is to present a plausible alternative histories that have bases in reality. You don't see a choice to support the Ottoman Sultan in the initial War of Roses event, for instance.

I don't see one side "selling" a claim to another as a historically plausible alternative. On one hand, the US wasn't about to abandon a large number of its citizens living in the Oregon territories, unless the Brits provided a real incentive, and the Brits didn't care enough about Oregon to do so. On the other hand, the US had absolutely no reason to buy Oregon. If the Brits refused, due to the population disparity in Oregon, the Americans could simply take it.

Besides, "purchasing" events are real pains. They usually take 3 events each. So your proposal would add 6 more events, and more bugs to track down.