I want my GUILLOTINE !

[unmerged(3773)]

and I want the heads of:
-the mayor
-the tax collector
-the legal counsel
when I take a province back from the hands of Rebel Scum (if the Rebel Scum hasn't done it)

 

[unmerged(3408)]

Why? The more developed the province the better. Less $$$ for you to spend.

 

[unmerged(3773)]

I made the suggestion to increase the penalty of having a revolt...

 

[unmerged(3408)]

Aahhh.

Then what you really want is a "slaughter the natives" or "ethnic clensing" button for your own provinces. Couldn't agree more.

There are some provinces which need to be punished from time to time

 

[Carolus Rex]

How about a little BB increase and a stab decrease if you use this window washing feature??

 

[unmerged(2540)]

Ahh, it would be fun. That province of yours won't rebel, won't get under 5k pop so you can "convince" the pop there to join your faith? Just hit the "MAKE EM ALL DEAD" button. Instant pop drop by 1000, -2 stab, and, hehhehehe...+8 revolt risk in all provinces! Mwa ha ha! Mwaa ha ha! Mwaaaa haaa haaaa!

 

[unmerged(3792)]

That button would be very useful in the province of Meath...

(nothing is quite as silly is a Protestant Ireland with a Catholic Meath)

 

[unmerged(4828)]

Interesting ideas!
I think a certain percentage chance for the unfortunate demise of the mayor/judge
etc during a revolt would increase realism.On the other hand I do believe some change had to be made to revolt percentages in places that has had an uprising squashed recently.
Maybe such provinces should not have more revolts in 1-2 years if armies remain
in the area.
Special exception if base chance is over 5% or something(people really hate you).
As for the genocide idea.....I like it!
A nation might declare war on a religious minority as we all know.
I do think that if this was incorporated in the game the penalties should be truly
frightening though.
T.

 

[maekh]

at least you should be able to eliminate that annoying tax-collector when don't need him anymore... i mean why should i have them increasing the chance revolts by 3 when i have a monthly income at 600 gold/month or the double??

 

[unmerged(4273)]

Originally posted by Carolus Rex
How about a little BB increase and a stab decrease if you use this window washing feature??

I'd be against any BB increase. Historically, pogroms would occur from time to time in the various nations of Europe (and under various guises... the Cossacks in western Russia/eastern Poland, the Spanish Inquisition are the two clearest examples), and while the other nations might look on with dis-taste, methinks that the only time relations were truly impacted was in situations where a foreign nation might share religion with the oppressed minority, or ethnicity, or something.

Thus, I'd say if you commit a pogrom in a province where another nation has a CB shield, that nation's relations to you should go down. Also in the situation where you commit a pogrom in a province of X religion, nations of X religion should be upset with you.

But a general BB increase? I'd prefer to stay away from something this a-historical.

Even in the 20th Century in relatively enlightened countries like the Western European nations and the U.S., we ignore the genocidal behaviors of others (Turkey vs. the Kurds) unless there is some particular ulterior motive to get involved. You may point out that European/U.S. was involved for apparently altruistic purposes in Kosovo, but I will again point out the genocides in Turkey, Iraq, Congo, Rwanda, etc. Whereas western powers did much in Kosovo, little was done in THESE situations.

So even in the 20th century, there are many many situations where a genocide of another people wasn't in-of-itself reason enough for a nation to be regarded in a bad light (which isn't to say that Turkey, Iraq, Congo, etc. are regarded in a bad light, but I'd say their modern 'BB' would be fairly low as regards their relations with European powers).

Whaddaya think?

 

[unmerged(3627)]

I'm amazed that people are wanting the ability to expel minorities *added* ... there are enough examples of countries wrecking themselves by using it, that if it comes with appropriate drawbacks nobody would ever want to use it anyway.

 

[unmerged(3773)]

This has gone far from my original idea:
when a revolt occured in a province, there was usually its lot of pillage, destruction, ect...
now in EU1, the consequence is just a battle againt Rebel Scum and possibly a siege with a small reduction of pop.
Sending (automatically) the mayor, governor, tax collector, legal consel to the guillotine is meant to represent the actual loss of infrastructure which should normally happen during a revolt.

About the pogrom option, well, why not....but the price should be heavy (stab loss, tech bonus for the neighbours, and so on)

 

[Carolus Rex]

Ok, so only stab hit, no BB hit, how about taxes??
They will of course decrease in the cleansed province, how about the others??
Shouldn't they increase due to fear of cleansing?

 

[Alexander Seil]

To Heliumgod: Just couldn't take it:
What do you call "enlightened"...US? The country where blacks were third-class citizens til 1960s? And don't talk about "altruistic" goals of NATO in Yugoslavia. US helped Kosovars because of their policy to help rebels in all those countries who do not want to join NATO. About "genocidal", from what i know, etnic cleansings never happened on large scale in Kosovo. Kosovars and NATO bombs killed more Serbs than Serbs killed Kosovars....alot more. Most of this "etnic cleansing" stuff was standart US propaganda, that has nothing to do with reality. About Turkey...i think it is member of NATO...and probably gets lots of military aid from US....so US SUPPORTS Turkish actions against Kurds (who actually asked for it...if you want to fight for independence, prepare for consequences).
Not related to EU II..but as said, i CAN'T take those lies....

 

[unmerged(4928)]

If a province you have conquered and annexed is such a major revolt risk, why did you take the province in the first place?

 

[unmerged(5222)]

What may also be interesting if we have a revolt or a pogrom or whatever, the refugees may then have the option to run to another neighbouring state which shares its ethnicity or faith.

Then maybe if say I've conquered Venice as Turkey, following supression of revolt, there is a slight, maybe 1% increase of population in Milan and Styria say until the fires go out (i.e. the fires in the game) together with the population in Venice going down. That would be more realistic.

Whether the increase in population due to this impacts stability or revolt risk in Milan and Styria is another matter, but probably unlikely as the population increase is about 1%

 

[unmerged(3792)]

Originally posted by attamaco
What may also be interesting if we have a revolt or a pogrom or whatever, the refugees may then have the option to run to another neighbouring state which shares its ethnicity or faith.

Then maybe if say I've conquered Venice as Turkey, following supression of revolt, there is a slight, maybe 1% increase of population in Milan and Styria say until the fires go out (i.e. the fires in the game) together with the population in Venice going down. That would be more realistic.

Whether the increase in population due to this impacts stability or revolt risk in Milan and Styria is another matter, but probably unlikely as the population increase is about 1%

A migration factor in the game would be very cool (Huguenots out of France, Jews from Granada to Salonica...)

 

[unmerged(5098)]

It should be pointed out that monarchs of this era did not limit their killing to their own people. It was a common tactic of this era to burn a city if they thought they might lose control of it to the enemy. Maybe after capturing a province there could be a "Burn City" option which would devestate the city, and would result in the destrucion of the local fortress as well as economic and population damage to the province as well- altough I'd suggest not giving victory stars for burned provinces you conquer.

Truly despicable monarchs could do this to their own people as well, as an option short of ethnic cleansing. I know Russia devestated their own land thus causing supply problems of Napoleon.

 

[unmerged(4273)]

Originally posted by Alexander Seil
To Heliumgod: Just couldn't take it:
What do you call "enlightened"...US? The country where blacks were third-class citizens til 1960s? And don't talk about "altruistic" goals of NATO in Yugoslavia. US helped Kosovars because of their policy to help rebels in all those countries who do not want to join NATO. About "genocidal", from what i know, etnic cleansings never happened on large scale in Kosovo. Kosovars and NATO bombs killed more Serbs than Serbs killed Kosovars....alot more. Most of this "etnic cleansing" stuff was standart US propaganda, that has nothing to do with reality. About Turkey...i think it is member of NATO...and probably gets lots of military aid from US....so US SUPPORTS Turkish actions against Kurds (who actually asked for it...if you want to fight for independence, prepare for consequences).
Not related to EU II..but as said, i CAN'T take those lies....

Alexander... please re-read what I read. The US _IS_ as I said "relatively enlightened" compared to many of the nations around. Relative being the key word. Even though the rights put forth in the American constitution are not always upheld or pursued (esp. when it comes to other nations), the very fact that these rights are *somewhat* protected definitely makes America "relatively enlightened" compared to say . . . Columbia, Congo, N. Korea, etc. Now if you mention that the U.S. is partially responsible for the situations in all three of the nations I have mentioned, I won't disagree. That wasn;t the original point.

Now if you would have read what I originally wrote, all I noted as regards the Turks vs. the Kurds was that NO GOV'T IS BOYCOTTING TURKEY (that I'm aware of) or otherwise denegrating them for their policies. In other words (and my point was) Turkey has not gained 'BB' (or the real-world equivalent of this overly-simplistic idea) over it's genocidal policies.

Also, note that I said 'apparently altruistic'. This is FAR different than 'altruistic'.

You should:

A. Re-read my message
B. Realize that your response to me had absolutely nothing to do with the point I was making, which was a FAR cry from being 'pro-American' or whatever. That wasn't even part of the discussion.

And if you have difficulty differentiating between 'apparently altruistic' vs. 'altruistic' and 'relatively enlightened' vs. 'enlightened', that is okay as we are not all experts of the English language, but at the very least you should take a little more care before deciding someone is spreading "US propaganda".

 

[Carolus Rex]

HEY IF YOU WANT TO BASH EACH OTHER DO IT AT THE OT FORUM, NOT HERE OK!!