HolisticGod said:
-What's the consensus on leader swapping and selling? I'm inclined to support some mercenary options, provided they're limited and can't be a condition of a peace agreement.
while historically sound, I fear this opens up too much opportunity for exploit/unbalance.
-Purchasing explorers and conquistadors?
at a fairly high price, a good idea, also provided that you have the right mindset (ie. naval mostly)
-Expanding the forts in central France to prevent Charles V from winning an offensive war ahistorically easily? (as, for example, Duke and I did last game)
Not needed, this should be solvable with people's mindsets... fighting a limited war for Lombardia, not going for the whole of France
-Shipyard and in-place northern merchants, or increased tax base, for Denmark?
Shipyard, merchants OK, Basetax perhaps marginally (maybe 4 or 5 total)
-Boosting Venice with knowledge of Ganges, Isfahan and Shanghai?
I'd say Isfahan only.
-Putting Poland in Latin?
-Dividing Poland and Lithuania?
-Cutting Russia down a bit, particularly in trade and land tech?
Going back to the original Paradox setup for Poland (including latin->orthodox switch with the Union) might be a good idea, and with Russia reduced a bit, the risk of Russia overruning Lithuania ahistorically easy IMHO is no longer that much of a threat. Only problem may be that Poland cannot provide Austria-Hungary with sufficient support against the OE
-Reducing Spain's Carib colonies to Haiti and Cuba (with one city, probably in Hispanolia or Havana, and the rest at 2-3) to at least make competition there possible?
Competition, or rather the lack thereof in the Caribbean, is plagueing a lot of games, Afterall, despite the ToT France had a couple of colonies there, and when the Dutch came onto the colonial scene, there was room for them too, still.
does little in interaction with others, and IMHO unbalances the Asian situation
-Giving the OE Slavonic?
-Giving Austria Slavonic?
-Giving the OE Magyar?
I think these should depend on their actions. As it is, the Balkan is hardly worth fighting for in income and manpower, adding these cultures could do something to make the region more worthwile to fight over.
-Increasing base tax in India, to make it a profitable conquest as the south is now (historically) uncolonizable
Sounds good, though we will have to consider what it does in the India vs. SE Asia balance, ie. it might cause one or more of the Indians to go on an ahistorical conquest spree.
-Reducing the West African gold?
In favour
-Expanding a few German forts?
sounds good.
Slargos said:
Just tested this and confirmed that you can indeed.
If startdate is set later than current date, the guarantee is in effect until 5 years after teh startdate.
To me this sounds like a good solution then.. having Austria (in general they ARE the HRE all the time) guaranteeing the independence of all HRE states. If for some reason Austria manages to not get elected, then it should lose the benefits ofcourse. The HRE was remarkably unified when it came to defying outside threats.
HolisticGod said:
2. This is what I'd like to see. After 1750 it's realistic to see Europeans, especially the English, French and Dutch, taking control of East Asian trade. And should it spawn colonial wars, even better.
Perhaps there is some event around that time it can be coupled with? -1750- sounds a bit rigid (just like maptrading, which, IIRC was to be coupled with certain events too) For that matter, I would prefer ALL rigid dates concering rules instead be coupled to events.
As to the Dutch situation: coupled with the proposal about vasalships (overlord setting policies for the vasal in terms of colonisation etc. ) that is very close to the real situation, in which the Dutch were largely independent domestically and tradewise, but couldn't set their own foreign policies. Also, the Lowlands provided a LOT of the funding for Spanish AND Portuguese colonisation (mainly from trade and industry in Antwerp/Flanders)
