HttT - Tribal Nations

[Dafool]

Has anyone else tried out a tribal nation yet? I've found it to be horribly unbalanced and difficult.

I started with Incas on normal, and within the 1st year I had the event that spawns roughly 8K pretenders come up twice, and I went through 3 heirs in 4 years. The other big problem is that without forts you lose 1 prestige every time a rebel takes a province. But, because as a 0 tech nation you have essentially no combat modifiers, it takes 10+ battles to kill a small sized rebel stack, even with a good general. With all that prestige gone, you can't gain any legitimacy. It starts to spiral quickly and I broke several times before I just gave up.

I know the New World nations were never simulated that well, but I still think it's a bad idea to nerf them them to the point of unplayability to make like 2 other tribal nations slightly more flavorful. I haven't actually tried out the Mamluks or GH yet, but I'm feeling a bit like all the tribal events are going to a backup folder until a new patch comes out.

 

[jdrou]

Well, countries aren't supposed to be 'balanced' in EU3 but I agree about the problem with forts. I usually give my self some level 1 forts when playing those countries; ideally they would have extra-weak forts that can only last a couple of months so at least you have some chance to prevent the loss of the province. No fort at all is too large a step down from a level 1 fort.

 

[Dafool]

Yeah, I know New World nations have never been a priority, but it's just disappointing to see them hurt even more. I'm probably going to make the new world nations unable to get the events, and I might tweak it a little. I still do hope PI tries to fix this with a patch at some point though.

 

[defoffuture]

What annoys me is that the event seems totally random. I was playing as Mali, and not 2 weeks after taking Ashanti, I was told that my King was "showing weakness by being too peaceful." I feel like this should happen somewhere around 10 years after your last peace treaty or something. Also, it's illogical how powerful the pretenders are. Pretender armies would regularly take out half of my 4x larger army (and there were, mind you, like 5 EVENT-SPAWNED stacks of 6+ guys here, that had to be ping-ponged to death). Aside from the fact that the representation of the Malinese Empire is downright insulting it's so unrealistic here, it's just bad gameplay.

 

[BritNavFan]

Well, in 1399 the Mali Empire was roughly where the West Roman Empire was in 450: it had seen better days, to say the least. But it's certainly ironic that they're being represented as the barbarians! It was also amusing when, in the Byzantine game I started, I heard the news that the Mamluk Horde had sacked the wealthy city of Mecca! Maybe they'll hit Cairo or Alexandria next

Incas have it worse than Mali, partly because you only have one other country to attack until the Europeans show up, and partly because every time you ping one of the rebel armies you it pongs into the Andes mountains, which actually matter now .

On the hopeful side, it seems that the North American tribes not only don't have to sack neighbouring cities but they also no longer get succession wars.

EDIT: I should add that I like the new "tribal" features a lot. They develop the Timurids, Golden Horde, Oirats, etc. nicely. The new tech levels for "reforming" your tribal government are also a major improvement. It's just that a lot of the "tribal" governments in Africa and the New World are more analogous to the "civilized" governments of ancient times, settled, agrarian societies with relatively big cities, than to barbarian hordes.

I hope to update my little Africa mod to HTTT on Friday. That'll be several more cultures and culture groups, forts and placable merchants at tech 0, gold as a tradeable good (that was why Timbuktu was so rich: it was a transhipment point for gold going north across the Sahara; there weren't a lot of things besides gold, slaves, warhorses, and, later, muskets, that were valuable enough to be worth carrying across the Sahara), non-annexable African pagans, rethinking of the African countries' government types, maybe one or two things more .

 

[unmerged(150720)]

Well, in 1399 the Mali Empire was roughly where the West Roman Empire was in 450: it had seen better days, to say the least. But it's certainly ironic that they're being represented as the barbarians! It was also amusing when, in the Byzantine game I started, I heard the news that the Mamluk Horde had sacked the wealthy city of Mecca! Maybe they'll hit Cairo or Alexandria next

Muslims sacking Mecca, haha. If it was real I think Egypt would have been bombed into a big crater by its fellow Muslim neighbours

 

[Arilou]

The simplest fix would probably be to make the (at least) Inca's or Aztecs into some other kind of government (Theocracy or Despotic Monarchy or even Empire?) and do the same with the some of the native african states.

 

[Trin Tragula]

Well a horde should be able to do so, but with the new horde events it becomes a bit dubious whether the mamluks actually deserve to be categorized as one, the same holds true for the timurids after timur actually. Should work very nicely for the khazaks, uzbeks, etc though.

 

[Doomdark]

Yeah, I know New World nations have never been a priority, but it's just disappointing to see them hurt even more. I'm probably going to make the new world nations unable to get the events, and I might tweak it a little. I still do hope PI tries to fix this with a patch at some point though.

It will be fixed in the first patch. The Incas, Aztecs and Chimus have the wrong type of tribal government atmo, triggering mongol horde type events.

 

[Dafool]

It will be fixed in the first patch. The Incas, Aztecs and Chimus have the wrong type of tribal government atmo, triggering mongol horde type events.

Excellent. I'm glad to know it's not WAD. Thanks for the answer. I look forward to the patch.

 

[Pickle_mole]

Im playing Etheopia, took my neighbor to the south east, have 3 stability, 100 percent legitimacy, and a 20 year old heir but when my king dies the claimants spawn 1.5 ish times the size of my army, storm my villages since they are fortless and my country collapses, and breaks apart, the "successor" (he inherits jack shit now) then has 20 legitimacy so he spawns 4k stacks of pretenders non stop till country collapses again, rinse and repeat until bullet penetrates skull

 

[Chaos128]

It will be fixed in the first patch. The Incas, Aztecs and Chimus have the wrong type of tribal government atmo, triggering mongol horde type events.

Thanks Doomdark, thats definitely good news!

 

[Timmetie]

It will be fixed in the first patch. The Incas, Aztecs and Chimus have the wrong type of tribal government atmo, triggering mongol horde type events.

Or, and this might be more difficult, have provinces with no forts hold out at least a day. When chasing rebels your armies are usually no more than a day behind and it would help a lot. Chalk it off to them having to actually conquer the province and make sure there is no enemy presence or something.

 

[Pickle_mole]

Is my issue an issue, or a game "enhancer"?

 

[Dafool]

You're experiencing essentially the same problem that I am (albeit half a world away). The lack of forts mixed with a small known area means that the "You need War" events will basically destroy you constantly. As Doomdark said, this wasn't the intention, so it's more likely a bug or at least something that will be changed.

 

[unmerged(1823)]

You're experiencing essentially the same problem that I am (albeit half a world away). The lack of forts mixed with a small known area means that the "You need War" events will basically destroy you constantly. As Doomdark said, this wasn't the intention, so it's more likely a bug or at least something that will be changed.

Well, the tribe events were kinda my design.. Was supposed to be for the big tribes in central asia.. like Golden Horde, Timurids etc.. To create a different and challenging gameplay.

 

[UmOceano]

It will be fixed in the first patch. The Incas, Aztecs and Chimus have the wrong type of tribal government atmo, triggering mongol horde type events.

Would you consider adding a couple more nations in the Americas? Too much unpopulated land, and a lot of tribes are not represented.

Though I'm not sure if such a thing would be easy to do, or even possible for a patch.

 

[Dafool]

Well, the tribe events were kinda my design.. Was supposed to be for the big tribes in central asia.. like Golden Horde, Timurids etc.. To create a different and challenging gameplay.

Hmm, so will there be a change to differentiate the New World/African tribes from Middle eastern/Asian tribes? I like the idea for the TE and GH, but it just feels out off place for some of the others. I'm guessing off what Doomdark said that it wasn't intended to affect the other tribal nations that way then.

 

[defoffuture]

Well, in 1399 the Mali Empire was roughly where the West Roman Empire was in 450: it had seen better days, to say the least. But it's certainly ironic that they're being represented as the barbarians! It was also amusing when, in the Byzantine game I started, I heard the news that the Mamluk Horde had sacked the wealthy city of Mecca! Maybe they'll hit Cairo or Alexandria next

Incas have it worse than Mali, partly because you only have one other country to attack until the Europeans show up, and partly because every time you ping one of the rebel armies you it pongs into the Andes mountains, which actually matter now .

On the hopeful side, it seems that the North American tribes not only don't have to sack neighbouring cities but they also no longer get succession wars.

EDIT: I should add that I like the new "tribal" features a lot. They develop the Timurids, Golden Horde, Oirats, etc. nicely. The new tech levels for "reforming" your tribal government are also a major improvement. It's just that a lot of the "tribal" governments in Africa and the New World are more analogous to the "civilized" governments of ancient times, settled, agrarian societies with relatively big cities, than to barbarian hordes.

I hope to update my little Africa mod to HTTT on Friday. That'll be several more cultures and culture groups, forts and placable merchants at tech 0, gold as a tradeable good (that was why Timbuktu was so rich: it was a transhipment point for gold going north across the Sahara; there weren't a lot of things besides gold, slaves, warhorses, and, later, muskets, that were valuable enough to be worth carrying across the Sahara), non-annexable African pagans, rethinking of the African countries' government types, maybe one or two things more .

I agree on all these points. Mali SHOULD suck, but not in the way they do in the game right now: they should be dealing more with minor states around them and any rebellions they should incur should come from a low stability, not "tribal in-fighting." Your description is perfect.

Digging into the code, I realized that the event only happens if you're above 10 provinces. I sold 2 provinces to Ashanti and then vassalized them, securing my African hegemony. In all honestly, this simulates the status of Mali more accurately, and I take back most of my criticism. However, my OLD criticism -- that West Africa is not as splintered and divided amongst nation-states as it should be -- still stands.

In other news, the Tribal Succession Wars system works EXCELLENTLY with the Mongol groups. It's crappy, but realistic that these would happen ALL THE TIME.

Also, where can I get my hands on your Africa mod?

PS: Glad Doomdark is on the case!!