-
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.
- Status
Calipah said:Rejoice in Allah's glories, I think we deleted that event
Nice, though those Ducats did allow me to conquer Wallichalia and Moravia before making peace with Hungary
Dairpo said:
I made a mistake. I thought I was making a geneic version, but wrote the event to trigger for whomever owned province 357. Which, when not CONTROLLED by Byzantium, would still be OWNED by Byzantium, so you got both sides of the event.
My mistake. I cannot think of a way to have it trigger for the controller, and so would have to be nation specific. There is one for Genoa, Caliphate and (until Calipah's edits) the Order. So, I could have this event for Hungary, but then why do only those nations get to sack Constantinople? Hmmmmm.
Thanks for the heads up.
Some miscellaneous eccentricities:
Norway has events turning Bergen to scandinavian, but Norway has its own 'norwegian' culture (represented in events by inuit), which is surely what Bergen should revert to.
The Inca got an event in the 1530s in which they chose 'there's nothing we can do against the Europeans' or something like that and turned Catholic. Genoa then got an event saying 'the Inca have refused to convert' and leading to a war between Genoa and the Inca. Looks like something's mixed up here.
The Caliphate got 'Jerusalem, City of Allah, God and Jahweh' (which file is this in?) when they didn't actually own Jerusalem.
Looks like I'll need to tidy up the events for the disappearance of Levantine culture as well, as some of them aren't firing properly.
I see Languedoc can become Occitania. But as Occitania can form by other means, the formation event probably needs "NOT = { exists = MES }" in the trigger.
I'm a bit confused by some of Swabia's early events. Is Styria meant to be a vassal of Swabia, or the other way round? One set of events makes Swabia a vassal of Styria, but another checks whether Styria is or is not a vassal of Swabia.
In the Swabia file, the event 'End of the Visconti in Milan' (444107) has a comment saying 'Triggered by Milan event 201201'. This is not the case as far as I can tell, so I don't know if 444107 will ever fire. Likewise the events 444108 and 444109 are supposed to be triggerable, but aren't.
Norway has events turning Bergen to scandinavian, but Norway has its own 'norwegian' culture (represented in events by inuit), which is surely what Bergen should revert to.
The Inca got an event in the 1530s in which they chose 'there's nothing we can do against the Europeans' or something like that and turned Catholic. Genoa then got an event saying 'the Inca have refused to convert' and leading to a war between Genoa and the Inca. Looks like something's mixed up here.
The Caliphate got 'Jerusalem, City of Allah, God and Jahweh' (which file is this in?) when they didn't actually own Jerusalem.
Looks like I'll need to tidy up the events for the disappearance of Levantine culture as well, as some of them aren't firing properly.
I see Languedoc can become Occitania. But as Occitania can form by other means, the formation event probably needs "NOT = { exists = MES }" in the trigger.
I'm a bit confused by some of Swabia's early events. Is Styria meant to be a vassal of Swabia, or the other way round? One set of events makes Swabia a vassal of Styria, but another checks whether Styria is or is not a vassal of Swabia.
In the Swabia file, the event 'End of the Visconti in Milan' (444107) has a comment saying 'Triggered by Milan event 201201'. This is not the case as far as I can tell, so I don't know if 444107 will ever fire. Likewise the events 444108 and 444109 are supposed to be triggerable, but aren't.
Last edited:
A Few Fixes
- I edited the descriptions for the Strategies of Cordoba and Mamelukes :
Cordoba controls most of Iberia, but the 15th century will be a difficult one. Your first goal will be resolving the conflict with the Christians, one way or another; after that, you must choose your priorities between gaining a foothold in France, taking over Morocco and expanding into Africa, or peaceful colonisation. The Mutazelite heresy will quicken your technology research and define your political and religious position in the Muslim World, so consider your options carefully. The Maya are usually natural allies for Cordoba in most cases, depending on their religious disposition, so it is imperative you attempt to discover - and convert - them first.
The Mameluke Empire is strong, but still dwarfed by the Abbasids and Cordoba. You should consider your strategy carefully. One path allows you to expand deep into the south of Africa, while the other carves you an empire from North Africa. Both paths may prove profitable but also challenging.
- In the Eire, Savoy, Britaney, and I believe Burgundy descriptions Cordoba is refered to as 'Granada'
- There are four referances to the Alhambra in the Cordoba file that need to be changed into Rusafa .
- The Omani text description says that the Omani Sultans conquered Bahrien, but since that isnt the case in the new setup, perhaps that sentence should be delted?
- I edited the descriptions for the Strategies of Cordoba and Mamelukes :
Cordoba controls most of Iberia, but the 15th century will be a difficult one. Your first goal will be resolving the conflict with the Christians, one way or another; after that, you must choose your priorities between gaining a foothold in France, taking over Morocco and expanding into Africa, or peaceful colonisation. The Mutazelite heresy will quicken your technology research and define your political and religious position in the Muslim World, so consider your options carefully. The Maya are usually natural allies for Cordoba in most cases, depending on their religious disposition, so it is imperative you attempt to discover - and convert - them first.
The Mameluke Empire is strong, but still dwarfed by the Abbasids and Cordoba. You should consider your strategy carefully. One path allows you to expand deep into the south of Africa, while the other carves you an empire from North Africa. Both paths may prove profitable but also challenging.
- In the Eire, Savoy, Britaney, and I believe Burgundy descriptions Cordoba is refered to as 'Granada'
- There are four referances to the Alhambra in the Cordoba file that need to be changed into Rusafa .
- The Omani text description says that the Omani Sultans conquered Bahrien, but since that isnt the case in the new setup, perhaps that sentence should be delted?
Last edited:
Added all these elements and I think I got all the Granada references.
As Oman's text states poor relations with the caliphate and good relations with the Il-Khanate, I have altered the .inc file to reflect this. Ought we to now remove the Omani inheritance event and the Oman sends troops events? They appear to be out of character.
As Oman's text states poor relations with the caliphate and good relations with the Il-Khanate, I have altered the .inc file to reflect this. Ought we to now remove the Omani inheritance event and the Oman sends troops events? They appear to be out of character.
MattyG said:
Hmmm yes....we should get rid of the Oman sends troops events, but the Omani inheritance should stay as the event's description refers to Arab states in the Middle east either being united with the Caliphate through peaceful - and warlike means. Seems to fit, dont you think?
PS : Alhambra , purge the name - and yes, thats because your prone to forget
By the way, I corrected a few text errors in the Order of the Crescent events - so now u can copy paste them with ease
Calipah said:Hmmm yes....we should get rid of the Oman sends troops events, but the Omani inheritance should stay as the event's description refers to Arab states in the Middle east either being united with the Caliphate through peaceful - and warlike means. Seems to fit, dont you think?
PS : Alhambra , purge the name - and yes, thats because your prone to forget
By the way, I corrected a few text errors in the Order of the Crescent events - so now u can copy paste them with ease
For the Omani inheritance, we could add a minimum relation as a trigger for a player (not ai).
I altered the .inc to include the relations changes. I won't touch the Caliphate file just yet, as we can include the changes to the newer file we are working on.
Matty
I'm not sure if this is a bug, but oh well.
In 1503 (or around that) i colonized Gambia, and there was no colonial event that triggered. The province to the east of it has already been colonized, if that matters. Even so, i think that i should get a core to start a possible conflict between me and the first claimer of the region.
Also, should genoa really have a core on crete? I know that they do in the story line, but this just causes them to conquer crete, and doesn't this screw up the Byzantine storyline?
In 1503 (or around that) i colonized Gambia, and there was no colonial event that triggered. The province to the east of it has already been colonized, if that matters. Even so, i think that i should get a core to start a possible conflict between me and the first claimer of the region.
Also, should genoa really have a core on crete? I know that they do in the story line, but this just causes them to conquer crete, and doesn't this screw up the Byzantine storyline?
Another possible genoa bug--
The events about Andrea Doriana's plan to capture alexandria is a good sequence, but they still activate if Mamelukes doesn't exist. Which means that the rest of the event cycle can't occur, and genoa doesn't get a CB against the controller of Alexandria.
The events about Andrea Doriana's plan to capture alexandria is a good sequence, but they still activate if Mamelukes doesn't exist. Which means that the rest of the event cycle can't occur, and genoa doesn't get a CB against the controller of Alexandria.
loki1232 said:
The non-Americas colonial file remains that as for Aberration, with all its flaws and bugs. And will remain so until we finish working on the design of Africa. It probably reuires you to have one or two other provinces and then you get cores on the lot. Yes, not really an ideal design.
The Genoan core on Crete probably shouldn't be there. They have all these interractions with Byzantium, but there is nothing that really links Genoa to Crete with a claim. I think its there mostly for the intrigue and the old Aberration style of giving away a lot of cores to make sure everyone was at each other's throats in MP.
If there was some specific Genoese connection to Crete (other than simple politics) then it is unclear to me. The Palaiologoi seem to have the 'backing' of the Genoese, but no hard marriage or prior ownership connection that might grant them a core. We probably ought to remove it.
loki1232 said:
Agreed.
For the next art of the sequence Alexandria needs to be not owned by Genoa and owned by Caliphate, mameluke or Egypt. They left Fatimids out of the list, so I have added them, but removed the Caliphate. Otherwise, I think it makes sense that while you can dump on Alexandria no matter who owns it, the trade thing is an Egyptian specific relationship. I can't see Byzantium or the Caliphate agreeing to it, for example, or being forced by Genoa to give in to it.
In my game egypt was owned by the Sharay, two different sharay countries actually.
Also, i kept tracker of the diploannexation not from events from the start of the game until 1515, and it seemed very high. Probably around 7 non-event diploannexations, which i thought was quite wierd and bad. Hungary DAed poland, and Bavaria DAed both friesland and gelre.
Also, i kept tracker of the diploannexation not from events from the start of the game until 1515, and it seemed very high. Probably around 7 non-event diploannexations, which i thought was quite wierd and bad. Hungary DAed poland, and Bavaria DAed both friesland and gelre.
A mameluk bug--The event sequence started when i capture Sinai and then offer to sell it to the Caliphate never gives me the 100 ducats i asked for.
loki1232 said:
Nothing much I can do about DiploAnnexation, my most hated and despised aspect of this great game. The ai does it with impunity. Yes, it's awful. Hopefully it will be cured in EU3.
So, if there were two Sharay's that means it was the civil war, still in progress. As long as the province of Alexandria was OWNED by the Sharay Kingdom, then this confirms what I thought, as they have the tag FAT, which was left off the event.
Sounds like we need to add more triggers: Not both FAT and EGY and maybe also minimum Genoa province knowledge of the Indies, as that is the presumption of the event.
Please can you let me know?
Matty
loki1232 said:
Yeah, they left that command out of the final Mameluke event of the sequence. Hilarious. It's now in there. Thanks.
MattyG said:
Yes, the Sharay Kingdom controlled everything from Tunisia to the Nile, while the Sharay sultanate controlled the rest of egypt and Sinai.
By this time i knew a little about the west indies. I had only gotten two explorers, so i sent one down to africa and the other across the atlantic. Perhaps the Genoan's should know the gauntanamo CoT? I did know it.
A small suggestion-the genoese conquistador Antonio Silvestri is around for too long IMO. With him i was able to discover the entire west coast of africa. I got him around 1570 and he died in 1588.
- Status