Jinnai said:
I didn't speak about ASIA.
Japan was the focus. India and Middle asia were more important than many european countries.
-
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.
I didn't speak about ASIA.
Japan was the focus. India and Middle asia were more important than many european countries.
OK, let me get this straight: It is fundamentally not a part of the AGCEEP to refuse to give attention to non-European nations at the expense of European ones.Jinnai said:
I don't get it.
Look, thousands of countries throughout the world have broken up the way Japan did at the beginning of the Tokugawa era, but we don't represent those wars by giving them tons of tags. When it comes down to it, the only reason we even know about the Tokugawa era is because of Japan's excellent record-keeping. Ultimately, it is NOT A SIGNIFICANT WORLD EVENT. It had almost no impact whatsoever on the rest of the world. AGC-EEP is a WORLD-CENTRIC game. Therefore, all tags should be used in whatever method benefits THE WORLD AS A WHOLE the most. Given that Japan's civil war had NO IMPACT ON THE REST OF THE WORLD, it should therefore use as few tags as possible. Given that Japan was never invaded during the EU2 timeframe, it should have as few provinces as possible. Given that Japan had NO DIPLOMACY WHATSOEVER for the majority of the EU2 timeframe, it had almost no impact on the surrounding region.
Japan is a NONFACTOR in EU2 as much as Xhosa, Navajo, or any other country that had no diplomatic, military, or environmental effect on the world as a whole. Giving Japan dozens of tags to make it more fun to play and historically accurate is just the same as throwing dozens of tags into Zulu to represent all of the different tribes that constantly fought over land there and to make Zulu more fun to play.
FRIENDS:
thi isn't the right thread.
as i said last week: should'nt better open a new thread?
thi isn't the right thread.
as i said last week: should'nt better open a new thread?
It's quite amusing to see a HC member defending his rabid nippophilia ( (c) Slargos) at the cost of, say, 10 European countries.
The argument being used: 'this mod is about the world, not about Europe only' is a bit silly if you know that giving tons of tags to Japan certainly doesn't help the world too, but only Japan.
Tell me, if I want to play a mod based on the world, why is so much attention given to one nation in that world? A nation that could as well be permanent terra incognita without hampering gameplay much for any other nation besides Korea?
Sure, we would lack some AARs about Japan, but I can live with that if I can see better AARs about Serbia, Croatia, Hungary, Austria, the Ottomans, Venice and so on in return.
The argument being used: 'this mod is about the world, not about Europe only' is a bit silly if you know that giving tons of tags to Japan certainly doesn't help the world too, but only Japan.
Tell me, if I want to play a mod based on the world, why is so much attention given to one nation in that world? A nation that could as well be permanent terra incognita without hampering gameplay much for any other nation besides Korea?
Sure, we would lack some AARs about Japan, but I can live with that if I can see better AARs about Serbia, Croatia, Hungary, Austria, the Ottomans, Venice and so on in return.
Pellucid said:
You must have missed the part where I wrote that different sizes are used for European and non-European provinces.
Jinnai said:
OK , I see where you are going with this.
heres another game
GAME TEST #: 7
SCENERIO: GC
MAP: MYMAP
TIMEFRAME: 1419 - 1450
DIFFICULTY LEVEL: Normal
AGGRESSION LEVEL: weakling
RANDOM EVENTS (Y/N)? Yes
FANTASY EVENTS (Y/N)? NO
INDEPENDANT WALES (Y/N)? (When appropriate) NO
HUMAN COUNTRY: Knights - to prevent the salonika business
ANY MODIFICATIONS TO STANDARD SCENERIO (Y/N)? Yes
IF SO, WHAT? Using my POR AI files.
WHAT, IF ANY, NON HISTORIC EVENT CHOICES DID THE AI (FOR THE REGION) TAKE?
None that I noticed , although once Morea aligned with BYZ in 1435, war with OE commenced immediately. settled as soon as salonika fell to the OE.
WHAT, IF YOU WERE A REGIONAL COUNTRY, NON HISTORIC EVENT CHOICES DID YOU TAKE?
DId not make any non historical event choices, but did play a very very passive game with the knights.
WHAT, IF ANY, UNUSUAL NON-EVENT CIRCUMSTANCES OCCURED?
Cyprus taking ramazan and a few years later declaring war on Karaman.
IF YOU WERE A REGIONAL COUNTRY, DID YOU DO ANY UNHISTORICAL (OUTSIDE OF EVENT CHOICES)?
No
WHAT OTHER NON-REGIONAL FACTORS MAY HAVE PLAYED A ROLE?
THe collapse of Austria again, the coronation event for Bohemia which led to a 10 province bohemia. this led to a war declared by HUN with BOH on OE.
Continous random plagues events for some balkan areas. could be good in the long run though.
BREIF DESCRIPTION:
Further recommendations
Lika and Bihac to be merged. Again a recommendation.
Fixes.
The sea lanes are in error, you can travel from Ionia sea to Aegean sea (near salonika without passing Naxos area, this is due to there being 2 aegean seas.
OE is continously at -3 stab , some events for OE need a + stab for them.
Victory point graph is very similar to the agceep.
Should I test with a different aggression level ?????????
niceta said:
Agree, this thread is about the slavic areas, maybe the hardest to get right. the other areas should be easier to agree on.
Lets test on this please.
Politically yes, but from the times of Karl of Luxembourg (the XIV century), Prague was the largest market of the region.almoravid said:
OT.Herr Doctor said:
You have agreed to the forum rules:
You will not hijack threads for your own purpose but, rather, will begin a new thread with the new subject.
Last edited:
How do you think why East Europeans almost never play Lithuania (the leading power of the region in the XV century, btw)?..Jinnai said:
(cept may be only Russians which turning it now to new Russian dukedom )
OT.Herr Doctor said:How do you think why East Europeans almost never play Lithuania (the leading power of the region in the XV century, btw)?..
You have agreed to the forum rules:
You will not hijack threads for your own purpose but, rather, will begin a new thread with the new subject.
Indeed, it seems that only Jinnai was speaking according to the main subject?Norrefeldt said:OT.
FAL said:
Dear, if you're going to continue in this OT track, at least be sure to have your facts straight. AFAIK, no HC member has displayed "rabid nippophilia". The only person who has "rabidly" pursued many tags for Japan is Jinnai and he is not a HC member.
The AGCEEP would have done a very bad job with the new map when it has to give its new provinces to countries that never owned them. The only somewhat meaningful way to beef up Austria with one more province would be to have a separate province for the part of Austria north of the Danube (the split between Upper and Lower Austria is not a north-south one along the Danube, but a west-east one along the Enns). What would be more desirable is to prevent a frequent destruction of Austria by a rebalancing of the Hussite sequence. Are the Hussite events you are using already reworked to account for the new Bohemian provinces? If yes, who gets them?Toio said:
The inclusion of Görz has been suggested before, in fact it was included on MKJ's map. I agree with Svantevid that instead having a Carinthia province would probably be a better idea.
And my proposal has been known for quite some time before this and was agreed to the basics even before this.
I also said i did not have a problem with the overall number of provinces (you seem to be putting words in my mouth here and then questioning other areas), if the following are true:
1. Historically the area can progress easily with little help from events. Certainly no more than in AGCEEP now and less is better.
2. There are no city-provinces or equivalent.
The former one it seems people are willing to atleast attempt to prove, but the latter, there is atleast one province that meets such criteria.
I also said i did not have a problem with the overall number of provinces (you seem to be putting words in my mouth here and then questioning other areas), if the following are true:
1. Historically the area can progress easily with little help from events. Certainly no more than in AGCEEP now and less is better.
2. There are no city-provinces or equivalent.
The former one it seems people are willing to atleast attempt to prove, but the latter, there is atleast one province that meets such criteria.
What province exactly are you referring to? As far as I can see, all provinces in the Balkans represent quite a bit more than just a city. The only province that comes rather close to the criteria is Macva if it is used mostly to represent the city of Belgrade - but then, the lack of a province to reasonably represent Belgrade has been a big annoyance in the old Balkans discussions, so it would be a good thing to be able to do this now. And besides, it would neither in size nor in its usage in events represent only the city, but always also the large territory of Macva surrounding it that shared Belgrade's history.Jinnai said: