-
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.
This will only go off if Norway takes the big help WTC event choice.
Code:
event = {
id = NORXXXX
country = NOR
random = no
name = "Oil Rig Attack"
desc = "Over a period of several days, terrorists destroyed a good number of Norway's North Sea oil rigs."
style = 1
date = { day = 17 month = august year = 2005 }
offset = 50
deathdate = { day = 2 month = may year = 2006 }
action_a ={
name = "We're paying the price"
command = { type = provincetax which = 256 value = -9 }
command = { type = provincetax which = 255 value = -9 }
command = { type = stability value = -3 }
command = { type = trigger which = NORXXXX }
}
}
Last edited:
Hmm cant they have the choice to rebuild them soon as possible.
Costing a lot of money but doesnt lower the taxvalue so much.
And I think the taxvalue lowering is too little. Norways provinces should be rich IMHO and effected greatly.
Costing a lot of money but doesnt lower the taxvalue so much.
And I think the taxvalue lowering is too little. Norways provinces should be rich IMHO and effected greatly.
Code:
event = {
id = NORXXXX
trigger = {NORXXXX}
random = no
country = NOR
name = "Reconstruction of the Oil Rigs"
desc = "Soon after the terrorist attack on her oil rigs Norway had a convention to see weather to rebuild them or not."
style = 5
action_a ={
name = "Rebuild the Oil Rigs!"
command = { type = provincetax which = 256 value = 9 }
command = { type = provincetax which = 255 value = 9 }
command = { type = stability value = 2 }
command = { type = treasury value = -2000 }
}
action_b ={
name = "Do not rebuild them"
command = { type = revoltrisk value = 3 }
command = { type = stability value = -2 }
}
}
Last edited:
No I dont get it. Why should nothing happen when you dont rebuild them? Hmm good point that rebuild them makes them better and profit better.
cause in the previous event there is a big dip in provincetax lost and stability, though maybe an increase in revolt risk could be tagged on to the "do not rebuild choice."
there are 3 events, the oil rig one hurts Norway if they choose to give large support for the US in the war. I'm going to put a line in Norway's WTC event which if they don't pick nominal or minimum it will not cause the oil rig event to sleep. So it will hurt them badly for a while, but i need to redo the trigger on the event so it doesn't go right after the oil rig event.
Ahh now I get it. The secons event is triggered by the first one. Yes a higher revoltrisk and maybe lower stability is a good idea.
The Corsican Revolts:
Code:
event = {
id = FRAXXXX
random = no
country = FRA
name = "The Corsican Revolts"
desc = "In 2034 a group of corsican independence fighters started a great revolt that could reach France itself. They offered France to concentrate more on the building of infrastructure on the Island, than France itself"
style = 5
action_a ={
name = "Ignore them"
command = { type = province_revoltrisk wich = 398 value = 5 }
command = { type = stability value = -2 }
}
action_b ={
name = "Accept their Demands"
command = { type = provincetax wich = 398 value = 4 }
command = { type = provincetax wich = 420 value = -2 }
command = { type = provincetax wich = 385 value = -2 }
command = { type = stability value = 1 }
}
command = { type = treasury value = -800 }
}
Last edited:
Why would a Corsican revolt affect mainland Fance? Also, why would there be a tax increase and tax loss?
Code:
event = {
id = ????????
random = no
country = SWE
name = "Reformation of the swedish army"
desc = "After the Soviet threat was gone, there was no need of an army that was build just to protect Sweden aginst russian invasion. A reformation must come."
style = 5
date = { day = 1 year = 1991 }
deathdate = { day = 1 year = 1999 }
action_a = {
name = "Keep it and improve it, we can never trust the russians"
command = { type = inf which = 341 value = 5000 }
command = { type = fortress which = 341 value = 1 }
command = { type = relation which = RUS value = -100 }
command = { type = cash value = -500 }
}
action_b = {
name = "Reform the conscript army"
command = { type = cash value = -1000 }
command = { type = provincetax which = -1 value = 2 }
command = { type = provincetax which = -1 value = 2 }
command = { type = provincemanpower which = -1 value = -2 }
command = { type = provincemanpower which = -1 value = -2 }
command = { type = land value = 1000 }
command = { type = revoltrisk which = 32 value = 1 }
command = { type = trigger which = ????? The second reformation of the swedish force }
}
action_c = {
name = "Replace the conscript army with a highly trained peace force."
command = { type = domestic which = QUALITY value = 3 }
command = { type = domestic which = OFFSENSIVE value = 2 }
command = { type = treasury value = -1500 }
command = { type = losebuilding which = 254 value = Barrack }
command = { type = revoltrisk which = 32 value = 2 }
command = { type = land value = 1500 }
command = { type = provincemanpower which = -1 value = -4 }
command = { type = provincemanpower which = -1 value = -4 }
command = { type = sleepevent which = ????? The second reformation of the swedish force }
}
}
Last edited:
Did this actually happen and what choice was picked?
The first choice should also cost money. There should be a choice where the player doesn't have to lose money. Which choice would the Swedes support most/less? Stability loss/increase should be shown in choices. Or did the population not care? How come reforming concript army brings tax increases while replacing them doesn't? Wouldn't a peace force be defensive rather than offensive?
The first choice should also cost money. There should be a choice where the player doesn't have to lose money. Which choice would the Swedes support most/less? Stability loss/increase should be shown in choices. Or did the population not care? How come reforming concript army brings tax increases while replacing them doesn't? Wouldn't a peace force be defensive rather than offensive?
The actual reformation of the army started allready in the 70s with lesser and leser people recruted. But as the swedish land force during the cold war was an army only goal was to defend sweden against an land attack from Finland in Vasterbotten (341) it wasnt necesarry when Soviet fell apart. It also was very expensive so the reformations on the 90s was mostly to cut down the army. Then also during the 90s there was a upgrade of the army buying new equipment to the army, not guns to the footpeople, but tanks, the new aircraft JAS 39 Gripen, the worlds first stealth boat and so on.Originally posted by Phillip V
Did this actually happen and what choice was picked?
The first choice should also cost money. There should be a choice where the player doesn't have to lose money. Which choice would the Swedes support most/less? Stability loss/increase should be shown in choices. Or did the population not care? How come reforming concript army brings tax increases while replacing them doesn't? Wouldn't a peace force be defensive rather than offensive?
I may had added that the reformation went on the 90s and countined in the new mellenium and still not finished.
Yes your right.
Wich choice?
I dealt it with revoltrisk because it mostly effected the people living in small cities with a army based there.
Your maybe right. The reason I added that was the lower cost of the new force.
I was thinking that a peaceforce mostly not sieging fortress.
The last choice is a little bit fantasi because the idea with a peace force happend a little bit later (The second reformation of the swedish force).
Ok.
And Phillip: What Gathenhielm said
. The french people would be angry if the corsicans would get better infra, not them
oh, and some scripting help: look a file in the DB folder, called event_manual, there you'll find all the commands that can be used. (may be 1.05 only)