• 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.
music_theory7 said:
It should be on that Extra WATK link.

I'm going to start playing WATK with AGCEEP until the new map comes out. Sounds like they won't even have Urbino with Caesera Borgia as a country in their new map anyway. :wacko: or Lucca for that manner.


Every region could be more detailed. Pplayers interested in the Aegean will want every island as an individual province. Ditto those interested in Italy and its history/politics. I'd like to have seen most major cities (especially the hansa cities) as indiviual provinces.

If we all got what we wanted, Africa would have had to be represented by about five provinces, Asia by about 10. Compared to the same area almost anywhere in the world, even the vanilla version of Italy is over-represented by provinces. It means you need to be creative with events and accept the scope of the game cannot detail the intricacies of many regional political and cultural milieus.

That said, I visited Lucca and it was a great great town. And it is a shame that its long struggle to be independent through astute politics cannot be given that level of attention and care. :cool:
 
I don't know if this was discussed before, but smaller, and therefore more numerous, provinces could change quite a lot in AGCEEP.

1) More provinces in a realm makes it more difficult to conquer an area. If a vanilla province is represented by 3 provinces in a new map, you would have to take 3 provinces in a war where you had to take only 1 with vanilla map. In other words, you would have to cause a greater defeat to the enemy and would suffer more BB if you don't have cores on all the provinces in question.

2) Inheritances will give more BB. MMG2 for EU3 did a nice job of Burgundian succession, but it gives Austria so much BB it spoils the historical feel of the country for the rest of the game. This happens exactly because EU3 has smaller and more numerous provinces.

3) Other Paradox games run at much slower pace than EU2, which might be one of the reasons why EU2 is more popular. I'm not sure if this is because of too many provinces or because of more random event engine with mtth. Probably both. Also, managing a major power with so many provinces can become quite difficult for inexperienced players, which is the main reason why I never played HoI2 or Vicky with a major power.

In conclusion, maybe the release of new map should be coordinated with release of the code changes?
 
MattyG said:
Every region could be more detailed. Pplayers interested in the Aegean will want every island as an individual province. Ditto those interested in Italy and its history/politics. I'd like to have seen most major cities (especially the hansa cities) as indiviual provinces.

If we all got what we wanted, Africa would have had to be represented by about five provinces, Asia by about 10. Compared to the same area almost anywhere in the world, even the vanilla version of Italy is over-represented by provinces. It means you need to be creative with events and accept the scope of the game cannot detail the intricacies of many regional political and cultural milieus.

That said, I visited Lucca and it was a great great town. And it is a shame that its long struggle to be independent through astute politics cannot be given that level of attention and care. :cool:

having spent 4 days in lucca myself in 2006, it by far a more interesting place than Pisa, which is only 15km away.

We can always use pisa province for lucca ..if a tag permits!

amusing historical signs on many lucca historical places read.(translated) ........better a death in the family than allowing a pisan to enter.
 
Toio said:
having spent 4 days in lucca myself in 2006, it by far a more interesting place than Pisa, which is only 15km away.

We can always use pisa province for lucca ..if a tag permits!

amusing historical signs on many lucca historical places read.(translated) ........better a death in the family than allowing a pisan to enter.


Hilarious.

Yes, and with the changes to the code, I understand that province names will be changeable, not just city names.

The city walls of Lucca are wonderful, and the interior of the old city are comparatively non-touristy.
 
Lord Grave said:
1) More provinces in a realm makes it more difficult to conquer an area. If a vanilla province is represented by 3 provinces in a new map, you would have to take 3 provinces in a war where you had to take only 1 with vanilla map. In other words, you would have to cause a greater defeat to the enemy and would suffer more BB if you don't have cores on all the provinces in question.

I was not party to any discussions, but as the lead designer of Interregnum, making it harder to conquer a region is perfect. But of course, at some point it would be rediculous. Everyone has their own limit. One province for France, ten, thirty, one hundred?
2) Inheritances will give more BB. MMG2 for EU3 did a nice job of Burgundian succession, but it gives Austria so much BB it spoils the historical feel of the country for the rest of the game. This happens exactly because EU3 has smaller and more numerous provinces.

This for me is of critical value. Better to increase the number of provinces to increase BB value for conquest, than to increase the base amount to, say, 3 per province. As it stands, too little BB is gained for being a warmonger.

For inheritance events, the event can simply compensate. As for the standard cost of a DiploAnnex ... that can now be modified by YodaMaster and his team.
 
MattyG said:
I was not party to any discussions, but as the lead designer of Interregnum, making it harder to conquer a region is perfect. But of course, at some point it would be rediculous. Everyone has their own limit. One province for France, ten, thirty, one hundred?

when i tested mymap ( balkan area) i commented that by increasing all leaders seige ( including default ones ) by 1 will help in the conquering issues.
 
MattyG said:
Yes, and with the changes to the code, I understand that province names will be changeable, not just city names.
Yes but names on the map(s) will have to be removed first in order to use this.

MattyG said:
For inheritance events, the event can simply compensate. As for the standard cost of a DiploAnnex ... that can now be modified by YodaMaster and his team.
Better make values moddable, it will be far easier to adjust to any map.
 
Last edited:
Toio said:
when i tested mymap ( balkan area) i commented that by increasing all leaders seige ( including default ones ) by 1 will help in the conquering issues.


My mistake. I was not referring to difficulty, but BB cost for conquering. By increasing the number of provinces, conquering a region now becomes more expensive in terms of BB (and troops and ducats too, more actual seiges ...)

But, yes, giving leaders better stats makes things easier ... for the enemy too! :cool:
 
Toio said:
when i tested mymap ( balkan area) i commented that by increasing all leaders seige ( including default ones ) by 1 will help in the conquering issues.
The thing is, it makes playing MyMap a bit ridiculous. Most Ottoman leaders have siege values of 3-4 which, combined with their shock and movement values of 4-5, makes them an unstoppable and almost undefeatable war machine. This destroys the fun - whenever you are playing the OE or it's enemies.
Therefore, I think one should be very careful when trying to balance the siege values especially. I hope (well, to be honest - I am sure that) the AGCEEP team will approach such issues with utmost care, once Garbon's map is out.
 
So it is now 2009 any word about the AGCEEP map?

Garbon are you still working on this? If so how is it going? I read in another thread that y'all were around 90% done with the Map and associated adjustments to AGCEEP; any truth to that?
 
Anyway, an agceep map shall be much better much than vanilla map( exception), if vanilla map is a mod map, it will be forgotten
Full expection~~