Home Trending Latest threads New posts Developer diaries

Help for Greven: Resources.

Jump to latest Follow Reply
  • We have updated our Community Code of Conduct. Please read through the new rules for the forum that are an integral part of Paradox Interactive’s User Agreement.
Show only dev responses
Originally posted by Aetius


There is a major civil war during the era do you have any suggestions on how to handle it? :confused: I have made a list with parallel leaders for most powerful factions at the time but it seems a bit over the top. There is another, probably uniquely Japanese, problem, the shoguns often abdicated from official power to assume actual power. :rolleyes: So I need some sort of heuristic to get the lists to fit together, roughly correspond to reality and the way the other lists are put together.

Oh yeah here's another link if anyone is interested, seems completish at least with regards to official rule in Japan:
http://www.users.globalnet.co.uk/~plk/history.htm
Click to expand...

It will be hadled and the player will be able to chose sides...:)

/Greven
 
I don't mean to spoil your fun but If there are going to be so many new states how much memory will be required to handle all these AIs?:confused:

By the Way is Trier going to be included? I think that all the eclectorates secular or ecclesiastical should be in. Brunswick-Luneburg too(because of its army actually).
 
Gen. Suvorov,

can you please post periodically (on your website or here ?) what monarchs/leaders you already have, so there will be no duplicate effort among all of us, especially after Demetrios made his dump ;)

Crook

P.S. I e-mailed rulers/generals for Delhi sultanate, Russia, and some Russian leaders. I also have Savoy, Papal States, most of Milan, Mantua and Kashmir.
 
Very few Indian monarchs around...

There are very few American Indians who would fit as "monarchs" in the EU sense. Many of the most famous leaders had very little civil power and were really purely "military" leaders. A few of them found themselves turned over to the USA when the civil leadership decided them a liability. A magnificent leader like Sitting Bull, who excelled in military, civil, and religious spheres was extremely rare.

However, I would like Greven to see that list I compiled of tribe names, in case it might be of use to him. Will that be going into one of your packets, Suvarev?

PS: Every Indian of my acquaintance sneers at the term "Native American" :p.

PPS: The reason I'm so nitpicky about tribal names is that my fencing master is a Lakotah.
 
Originally posted by Crook
Gen. Suvorov,

can you please post periodically (on your website or here ?) what monarchs/leaders you already have, so there will be no duplicate effort among all of us, especially after Demetrios made his dump ;)

Click to expand...


I've already given him the rulers of all the German and some of the French/English states on Greven's list. The only ones of that have stymied me thus far have been Wales (as there were no native princes of note that I know of after Owen Glendower, and he died just before EU2 opens), the Roundheads (we already have the Cromwells), and, to a point, Aquataine (although I substituted the Counts of Armagnac there). I'm just about to get to work on the rest of the French states and continue on with the Russian/Steppe states afterwards.

But, in reality, it would proably be better if several lists were sent for each nation. That way, mistakes and errors can be caught if one list is defective. I know I've got a lot of informaiton, but I also know that I'm not perfect when copying massive amounts of information. :D
 
Last edited:
Hi, Here is the list of Bosnian kings in 1400-ies:

1404. - 1408. Stjepan Tvrtko II
1409. - 1418. Stjepan Ostoja
1419. - 1421. Stjepan Ostojic
1421. - 1443. Stjepan Tvrtko II
1444. - 1461. Stjepan Tomas (he is hardcore catholic and persuades bogumils, you probably want to add some unrest under his rule, also relations to hungary gets better while relations with turks gets worse)
1461. - 1463. Stjepan Tomasevic (he is so hated by the people that when turks invade country people dont want to defend it, add lots of unrest between 1461 and 1463

In 1463 Turks conquered Bosnia and killed last Bosnian king Stjepan Tomasevic. (province of Hum in the south was free until 1483 when it also was invaded by the turks).


When it comes to generals Bosnia could probably start with army commanded by herceg Hrvoje Vukcic Hrvatinic who was the bosnian duke that lead bosnian/turkish forces that beat hungarian/croatian forces in 1415 and assured bosnias independence against hungary.

Another general that you could use is herceg Stjepan Vukcic Kosaca ruler of province of Hum between 1435-1466. He conquered parts of zeta (todays montenegro).

There were few more known leaders but they were not as competent as those 2 I mentioned before. In case you want their names too just say and I'll post them.

Also after turks conquered bosnia in 1463 there were few bosnian kings in exile. In case that 1463 comes and turks havent conquered bosnia you might want to use them as rulers of Bosnia.

In 1471 Hungarian king Mathias Hunyadi Korvin appointed
Nikola Ilocki for king of Bosnia. Later he dies and in 1479 last queen of Bosnia Katarina Kosaca also dies in Rome. After that there were no more pretenders at the bosnian crown.

btw Greven, one question for you :) How is EU2 going to handle leaders of the countries that got historicaly annexed for example in 1463 but it is a year 1500 and they are still not annexed? Are they going to get random leaders or just weak leaders all the time?

For example Bosnia had lots of people that got into high positions under Ottoman occupation of Bosnia. For example Mehmet Pasa Sokolovic who was from Bosnia had a rank of high admiral of the fleet (1546) and later he became a grand vizier of Ottoman Empire under sultans Süleyman the Magnificent and Selim II. Some say that he was the real ruler of the Ottoman Empire during that time. Obviosly he was very competent man and the question is who is going to get him in case that year 1505 comes (year when he was born) and bosnia is still not annexed by Ottoman Empire. Are Turks going to get Sokolovic anyway or is Bosnia going to get him or he maybe he doesnt even rise to the power?

Also please change religion of Bosnia. Bosnias population was mix of catholics and bogomils. There were no orthodox christians. Because bogumils as catholic heretics cant be simulated in eu2 only right thing is to have catholic Bosnia.
 
Re: Very few Indian monarchs around...

Originally posted by Dogface
There are very few American Indians who would fit as "monarchs" in the EU sense. Many of the most famous leaders had very little civil power and were really purely "military" leaders. A few of them found themselves turned over to the USA when the civil leadership decided them a liability. A magnificent leader like Sitting Bull, who excelled in military, civil, and religious spheres was extremely rare.

However, I would like Greven to see that list I compiled of tribe names, in case it might be of use to him. Will that be going into one of your packets, Suvarev?

PS: Every Indian of my acquaintance sneers at the term "Native American" :p.

PPS: The reason I'm so nitpicky about tribal names is that my fencing master is a Lakotah.
Click to expand...

The only way to handle that accurately would be to make these leaders "generals" and then have some sort of generic group of rulers--"Elder Council." except for big exceptions; i.e. Sitting Bull, as you said. I know many of us don't like to see too many of these generic rulers, but there are so many shady historical nations in this game (shady in the sense of little information), that we're going to be seeing an awful lot more of these situations. What's your position on this issue Greven, if I could ask? Are you anticipating a lot more really general leaders, because historical facts are so hard to find or don't exist on some of this stuff?
 
Originally posted by Greven


It will be hadled and the player will be able to chose sides...:)

/Greven
Click to expand...

Civil wars, in Spain will be a lot in the time for 1419 to 1557
Castille
1427-1453)Followers of Juan de Luna(king's Prime Minister) vs the nobility non-follower of him.
1454-1468)Civil wars betwen Enrique IV vs the nobility guide first by his brother, and then by her sister Isabel la Católica.
1474-1480)Civil wars betwen the followers of Isabel la Católica & the followers of Juana la Beltraneja(queen of Portugal, Daughter of Enrique IV)
1520-1521)Civil war between Carlos I and Las Comunidades(the communities)

Aragon
There weren't any Civil War in tht years except of the War of Las Comunidades(the Communities)

Navarra
No Civil Wars

Granada
Constantly Civil War

Spain
1520-1521)Las Comunidades
1700-1713)War of Spanish Succesion, followers of Felipe V vs followers of Archiduke Carlos de Habsburgo
2nd/May/1808-1813)The peoples of Spain(followers of Fernando VII) versus the Napoleonic troops(José I Bonaparte)
 
Originally posted by Txini


Civil wars, in Spain will be a lot in the time for 1419 to 1557
Castille
1427-1453)Followers of Juan de Luna(king's Prime Minister) vs the nobility non-follower of him.
1454-1468)Civil wars betwen Enrique IV vs the nobility guide first by his brother, and then by her sister Isabel la Católica.
1474-1480)Civil wars betwen the followers of Isabel la Católica & the followers of Juana la Beltraneja(queen of Portugal, Daughter of Enrique IV)
Click to expand...

I thought the point of the civil war was because no one believed that Juana was truly the daughter of Enrique IV. He was called Impotente not only because he was politically impotent, but for other, more personal, reasons as well.

In the monarch list I just sent to Gen. Suvorov, I suggested that Enrique IV el Impotente was so poor a king (as shown by the continual civil unrest during his reign) that he should only get 2s and 3s in his stats.
 
Originally posted by Crook


It doesn't prevent us from giving a civil war event to that king, does it?
Click to expand...

Oh no, certainly not! It would make it even more interesting and challenging to play Castile then. Although if we go too overboard, the poor player will be grinding his or her teeth in frustration and counting down the time until 1474 and the accession of Isabel la Catolica! :D
 
Re: Re: Need any help on Turkic tribes?

Originally posted by Gen. Suvorov
Leaders/Generals are especially needed, thanks.
Click to expand...

OK, we will get to work asap. The countries in question:

Ak Koyunlu
Kara Koyunlu
Karaman
Candar*
Dulkadir
Tekke

Any others?


*Not independent in 1400, but independent 1402-1416.
 
Last edited:
Re: Re: Re: Need any help on Turkic tribes?

Originally posted by Emre Yigit


OK, we will get to work asap. The countries in question:

Ak Koyunlu
Kara Koyunlu
Karaman
Candar*
Dulkadir
Tekke

Any others?


*Not independent in 1400, but independent 1402-1416.
Click to expand...

I assume it had been conquered by Bayezit and then set free by Timur after the Battle of Ankara?

I assume that you won't need to list leaders who ruled before 1419, as that is when the game begins. Presumably, then, Candar won't make it?
 
Originally posted by Gen. Suvorov


Its possible, but you've got to give me some time. I have 29 files that I need to convert.

:) :(
Click to expand...

Only 29? Expect even more tonight.. :D
 
So does Greven also want us to send lists of the monarchs of countries that were already in EU1 as well? I assume that if the answer is yes, it is only for 1419 - 1492 and 1792 - 1820 only, right?

I see a lot more work ahead of me... :( :)
 
Concerns about the usefulness of Tekke in EU2

I was doing research on the monarchs of the Turkish Emirates today, and I came across some problems concerning Tekke. While the other potential Turkish states (Karaman, Dulkadir, and Candar - which would be better if renamed Kastamonu) were large, viable states, Tekke has so many potential problems that I think it wouldn't be a wise idea to have it in EU2

Reasons to have Tekke in EU2:

*It was independent in 1419
*Its capital is Antalya, which as a city and province already extant in EU would make adding Tekke in EU2 very easy.

Reasons Tekke may be a problem in EU2:

*Sure, it was independent in 1419, but it lost its independence in 1424, only five years after the start of the game. Tekke has the potential of becoming the "Granada" of EU2
*While it was independent, it was heavily under the influence of its massive Ottoman neighbor. The other three potential Turkish states were devoid of any Ottoman control in 1419.
*Using the Antalya province from EU for Tekke would grossly over-misrpresent Tekke's power, as it was confined to part of the southern coast of that province. The Ottomans controled the northern 2/3 of EU's Antalya province in 1419, while minor Turkish states filled out the rest. If the provincial boundries change in this area in EU2,however, then this objection could be dropped.
*There were four other minor Turkish states in western and southwestern Anatolia in 1419. All were as large or larger than Tekke, and all of them outlasted Tekke (by a year or two; Kutahya lasted to 1428). If we are to have an independent state in western and southwestern Anatolia, one of the other four (Aydin, Manisa, Mentese, or Kutahya) would seemingly be a better representative. Seeing as the Ottomans pretty much controled all these states anyway, and soon gobbled them up, giving this area to the Ottomans wouldn't be too far from the truth.

So, what is everyone else's opinion on this?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top Bottom
Back