Muslims being crushed by catholic great powers

[jju_57]

Historic vs. not tried historically. In our games Castille indeed does turn NA in a catholic sandbox. That didn't happen historically, but the reason why is not clear cut. Was it because it was too hard and people refused? Or was it because Spain didn't really try and put the effort into it? In the game you try to convert and the chance range from around 5% up to 20%. But even at 5% that means on average it would take 20 years to convert the province. Tweenty years is a generation so this is plausible if we determine that the converting process means schools, government, trading, some torture and everyday life.

To say that Spain shouldn't be able to convert that fast may be missing the real question. The real issue historically was why6 didn't Spain try hardder to convert the provinces they captured? I admit I'm not fully informed about early spanish conquests and conversions in NA so I might be way off base here. But I still want to raise the question.

 

[unmerged(48470)]

May be, sometimes, Spain attack too early but was the developement of its own politics before to drag in European affairs from Charles V.
Spanish monarchs, if they steyed indipendent from Hapsburg, would point toward african cost.
Charles itself try to conquer Tunis.

 

[Agenor]

I raised the cost of Defender of the Faith to 50000 ducats, and in my game Castile doesn't have a single province in North Africa by 1460. Portugal is fighting in Morocco, though, and has four provinces there, presumably the result of missions.

 

[Valiant_Hogers]

I raised the cost of Defender of the Faith to 50000 ducats, and in my game Castile doesn't have a single province in North Africa by 1460. Portugal is fighting in Morocco, though, and has four provinces there, presumably the result of missions.

I believe they get "Conqeur Tangeirs" almost always.

 

[xcrissxcrossx]

The reason Catholics conquer North Africa is the same reason Bohemia takes Central Asia form the hordes and countless other problems. The AI needs to be changed so they are only interested in provinces in their own culture group. With some exclusions like if the adjacent provinces are wealthy, or if you are Russia taking Altaic lands, or Christians taking new world lands. Maybe add bonuses for conquering exclusively in your culture group to stop humans from unrealistic conquering.

If this is implemented, PI should also change the empire decision for if you unify two culture groups or more.

 

[il_loco]

To be fair if a country like France would have focused all of their military strenght towards defeating the Ottoman Empire they probably could have but they where unable to do so IRL but as Europa Universalis is all about writing new history this doesnt bother me one bit.

Any over seas operation requires really, I mean, really good logistics...

 

[jju_57]

The reason Catholics conquer North Africa is the same reason Bohemia takes Central Asia form the hordes and countless other problems. The AI needs to be changed so they are only interested in provinces in their own culture group. With some exclusions like if the adjacent provinces are wealthy, or if you are Russia taking Altaic lands, or Christians taking new world lands. Maybe add bonuses for conquering exclusively in your culture group to stop humans from unrealistic conquering.

If this is implemented, PI should also change the empire decision for if you unify two culture groups or more.

Why? I mean you the player can capture provinces outside of your culture group. Why can't the AI try for a WC?

It seems to me that most are being big hypocrites. It's OK for a human to go WC or create these super hugh blobs and grab lands that weren't historically theirs, but they complain if the AI does it.

Either make the game so no one can do it (and watch people complain about that) or allow the AI to do what a human player can do.

 

[A_Dane]

Don't think anyone is being hypocrites here, the main issue is that it happens in 90 % of the games i play. Sure, I want the AI to put up a challenge, but this does not happend by them conqueroring a bunch of completely worthless provinces in North Africa, it only helpes me, as I'll get ahead in tech. If the castillians goes on a conqueroring spree once in a while, it's all good, but as it is now, they don't colonize, and eventually fracture because france comes walzing in..

 

[jju_57]

The issue isn't that they fall behind in tech it's that the AI doesn't know how to fight when behind. Let's face it. How many have won battle after battle when behind in thech? pretty much all of us. And some win and do WC's in the 'poorer' tech groups. We bleed the AI armies and scorch earth to get their WE way up. As humans we grab many of those junk provinces and just deal with them. We even 'sell' them for zero money to our vassels so they build them up and then annex them latter if we get a mission that cores them. They AI doesn't do this or can't do it.

So the real issue is not the AI grabbing them but the limitations of the AI in building a big empire when they do. Helping the AI with money, inflation, infamy etc makes the game pretty hard at the start but necessary by mid-game.

 

[il_loco]

Why? I mean you the player can capture provinces outside of your culture group. Why can't the AI try for a WC?

It seems to me that most are being big hypocrites. It's OK for a human to go WC or create these super hugh blobs and grab lands that weren't historically theirs, but they complain if the AI does it.

Either make the game so no one can do it (and watch people complain about that) or allow the AI to do what a human player can do.

It is not hypocrisy I think. One tends to play an alternate world against historicity. All things being more or less the same with history, it is the player that would play out of it, if he intends to. If conquest of North Africa was an exception that was seen time to time, it wouldn't be that much of problem. After all history is contingent.

AI is not doing what human players do. Would AI Portugal be content with conquest of Tangiers which is gained after a war of conquest or take as much provinces possible with 4 infamy points each? Does it in any time decides to consolidate after new provinces taken or will it grab more any time the opportunity arises. It just adds province after province, AI does it without a basis.

Either they have to come up with better AI that would act with accordance to mid to long term goals or they have to make it harder to conquer irrelevant regions.

 

[grommile]

Either they have to come up with better AI that would act with accordance to mid to long term goals or they have to make it harder to conquer irrelevant regions.

I favour Paradox doing the former, and modders doing the latter.

 

[Fishman786]

Just performed a test run of my new personal mod. Its a combination of CanOmer's DAO Lite and my own personal fixes. These fixes include removing defender of the Faith, nerfing the Holy War CB greatly and only allowing the 'continue the reconquista' mission to occur after 1500. DAO Lite strengthens the Ottomans considerably in terms of new provinces and missions, but also gives Ceuta to Granada in 1399.

My test ran from 1399 to 1455, so not that long. I was the Maldives. Results below:

- Castille is kept out of the middle east and north Africa almost entirely.
- Castille still conquers much of Morrocco despite the posponing of 'Continue the Reconquista'. This is probably due to the existence of the Grenadine enclave at Ceuta, giving Castille a bridge into Africa.
- Castille takes a single isolated province in northern Turkey, probably from Candar.
- The Ottomans remain intact and expand into eastern Anatolia.
- Castille conquers much of Aragon.
- Portugese take some provinces from Tunisia.
- Worrying French conquests in northern Iberia, despite the impassable mountain walls that DAO adds.
- Worrying Byzantine reconquest of the Latin Greek states and Trabzon.

Other things:
- Golden Horde expansion limited due to modifications to province defection rates. However, Muscowvy has been vassalised and some provinces taken.
- Timurid collapse due to nasty modifiers I gave them if they have a tribal government after 1410.
- Massive Oriat expansion throughout central Asia.
- Indian kingdoms still expand into Persia, unfortunately.
- Massive Yemen!

 

[Kyrator]

- Worrying Byzantine reconquest of the Latin Greek states and Trabzon.

this is a good thing though and not that that hard to do with any nation

 

[Evie HJ]

Why? I mean you the player can capture provinces outside of your culture group. Why can't the AI try for a WC?

It seems to me that most are being big hypocrites. It's OK for a human to go WC or create these super hugh blobs and grab lands that weren't historically theirs, but they complain if the AI does it.

Either make the game so no one can do it (and watch people complain about that) or allow the AI to do what a human player can do.

The problem is that right now, the AI behave like a competitive non-roleplay players. Which the competitive (blobbers, etc) players probably don't mind overmuch, while the players who usually try to focus more on roleplay get excedingly annoyed at an AI that is far more aggressive and violent than any nation would have been in the era.

The whole building system is set in a way that does not encourage blobbing. Meanwhile, the AI is still set to try its best to expand as much as it can whenever it can. Bit of a contradiction there, really.

 

[Arizal]

I think the game should direct us in roleplay, because sometimes this is only the logical thing to do. Indeed, there were illogical things in the world and there are still many, but you can see some logic why Spain didn't conquered North Africa. Firstly, the North African country were probably either more powerful than in the game or weaker, at a stage while it was a waste of money to conquer them and to hold them. Because while EU3 represent countries as modern with fixed boudary States, that was not true. You cannot just conquer a province and wait 50 years to own it. MEIOU already changed this and I'm glad for this, but it still seems too easy to expand non-historically.

Secondly, Spain discovered America. Add this with reason 1.2 (this is a waste of money), and you have why they didn't bother to conquer North Africa. Indeed, America was much more richer and large than this part of the world. The same way, Bohemia didn't bother, even tried, to conquer all Siberia because there were nothing there, nothing that was easy to hold, at least. So, I'm in full support for a Strategic Artificial Intelligence. It would be an improvement that could allow us after that to change the diplomatic system.

 

[xcrissxcrossx]

Why? I mean you the player can capture provinces outside of your culture group. Why can't the AI try for a WC?

It seems to me that most are being big hypocrites. It's OK for a human to go WC or create these super hugh blobs and grab lands that weren't historically theirs, but they complain if the AI does it.

Either make the game so no one can do it (and watch people complain about that) or allow the AI to do what a human player can do.

I should have explained a little better. I think triggered modifiers should be added that give penalties for conquering outside of your cultural group, except for Russia etc. But the AI needs to be changed to understand this first.

 

[6354201]

Despite Paradox's worldview of Europe being supreme gods except for about 25 years in 1400 (i.e. their lower starting tech level), the fact of the matter is that there is no way the Muslim world should be as weak as it is. It's basically common knowledge that the Ottomans threatened to take Vienna and were viewed as Europe's greatest threat. They also created an empire that rivaled any European power until arguably the late 1600s. The North African states and the Barbary pirates were a constant plague until the late 1700s to early 1800s when European military technology finally outstripped North African powers enough to make them wholly ineffective. In EU, this happens circa 1500, and it's a minor miracle if North Africa isn't completely dominated by Castille by 1550.

And no, in real life Castille/Spain could not have effortlessly conquered North Africa like in EU -- the North African states were not primitive militarily and the logistics involved along with the harsh terrain would have simply been too much. Even once Europeans got technological superiority (in the 1800s) North Africa was not an easy place to control. Look at Spain in the early 20th century and the difficulty they had in the Rif war, and that was with French help and modern European arms!

 

[Stratagyfan101]

Just saying, there is no way in heck that the EU3 North African States could ever survive long enough for the US Barary Wars due to Castille/Spain's massive conquests. But, then again, how often have we seen Castille become a lesser partner of Aragon, or a Von Hapsburg magically form Spain via inheritance.

The point is the game mechanics do not compell the AI to stay within a historical path. I'm cool with that because this is one of the greatest games ever.

Also, Muslims seem way too weak, even with the lvl 6 start tech.

 

[6354201]

Just saying, there is no way in heck that the EU3 North African States could ever survive long enough for the US Barary Wars due to Castille/Spain's massive conquests. But, then again, how often have we seen Castille become a lesser partner of Aragon, or a Von Hapsburg magically form Spain via inheritance.

The point is the game mechanics do not compell the AI to stay within a historical path. I'm cool with that because this is one of the greatest games ever.

Also, Muslims seem way too weak, even with the lvl 6 start tech.

I don't mean to nitpick, but it's illustrative of Paradox's extreme and pernicious Eurocentrism which is relevant to the thread so I'll point it out. In DW, they decided that 6 was for some reason too much and reduced it 5 (for the Ottoman tech group as well). They also inexplicably reduced the tech speed of the Eastern/Ottoman/Muslim tech groups by 5% (apparently because those groups didn't unrealistically fall behind Western Europe fast enough in HTTT?).

 

[Stratagyfan101]

I don't mean to nitpick, but it's illustrative of Paradox's extreme and pernicious Eurocentrism which is relevant to the thread so I'll point it out. In DW, they decided that 6 was for some reason too much and reduced it 5 (for the Ottoman tech group as well). They also inexplicably reduced the tech speed of the Eastern/Ottoman/Muslim tech groups by 5% (apparently because those groups didn't unrealistically fall behind Western Europe fast enough in HTTT?).

That is interesting. I'm not going to go as far as to call it Eurocentrism, but the game is called Europa Universalis, and realistically Europe did basically take over the world.

I think a lot of issues come from lack of logistics and the lack of any real terrain effects outside of combat and manuevering.

Slighltly off topic (but relevent) is how Songhai, and Bornu become French or Portuguese if they survive, by 1600 or at the latest 1650, when if you look at the 1821 scenario, most of Africa is still free.

I still believe this issue lies in core mechanics of the game. I'm not gonna complain because their is no other game like this (that I know of).

The game has more of a CK feel to it in that once you unpause the game, all historical plausibility is out the window.

All hail the Caliphate of Ireland!