Rant on unreal westernization...

[TheDarkMaster]

This really wouldn't be a problem if Europe didn't start the game ahead of everyone else. This is neither historical nor balanced. Ideally you'd have Europe start behind the Chinese and Muslims in 1444, catch up by 1500, and start pulling ahead in 1650. It is only after around 1650-1700 that Westernization/modernization should even be possible, then a system that's balanced and reasonable for that situation that favors the historical outcome (only a handful of nations modernized during the game's time period, many more partially did so).

 

[Haccoude]

This really wouldn't be a problem if Europe didn't start the game ahead of everyone else. This is neither historical nor balanced. Ideally you'd have Europe start behind the Chinese and Muslims in 1444, catch up by 1500, and start pulling ahead in 1650. It is only after around 1650-1700 that Westernization/modernization should even be possible, then a system that's balanced and reasonable for that situation that favors the historical outcome (only a handful of nations modernized during the game's time period, many more partially did so).

Problem is that can't really be achieved with a static tech penalty. How are multiple tech groups to have parity (i.e. get the same techs at roughly the same time) for several tech levels, without having the same tech penalty?

 

[TheDarkMaster]

Problem is that can't really be achieved with a static tech penalty. How are multiple tech groups to have parity (i.e. get the same techs at roughly the same time) for several tech levels, without having the same tech penalty?

Obviously you can't have a static tech penalty. The absolute simplest way to do this is to have tech group penalties be capable of changing as the game progresses. Then come ~1650 the western tech group gains a lowered tech cost modifier. This is not my preferred solution, but it is the simplest one without changing the game too much.

 

[civfanatic]

The most critical element in declaring Pizarro's conquests luck is how he managed his expedition, by first exploring, spreading disease, and returning a few years later with the blessings of the King of Spain. It was Pizarro's trip that resulted in the spread of disease into Ecuador, and there where the Sapa Inca and his heir both came down with the sickness and proceeded to die, leading to a brutal civil war made even worse through the facilitation of disease that war causes. Pizarro arrives the day after Atahualpa finally beats Huascar in this exhaustive civil war. Quite frankly, the man has the devil's luck, he could never have known the consequences of his actions.

Part 2 of his devil's luck is the newly established sole Sapa Inca being incredibly weak politically and choosing to use Pizarro as an example of his magnanimity to his vassals. The Andes has a long and dare I say sacred tradition of wining and dining rulers in order to get what you want politically by bestowing lavish gifts of goods, women, gold, and festivities upon them. It's actually how Cuzco got off the ground under Pachacuti; he came upon many riches and proceeded to use them to bribe the local lords to provide manpower to modernize Cuzco.

Now, the thing about the Inca is that they increasingly came to not utilize this system as the empire went from strength to strength, giving the Sapa Inca more relative power over his unruly nobles by placing extended family and loyal followers in control of newly conquered lands taken through war or even declaring the lands the personal estates of the Sapa Inca. Manpower was king in the Andes, and the greater the Sapa Inca's potential armies grew(remember that all men are required to serve militarily for several years) the less he relied on wining and dining his nobles, outside of doing so for independent lords to vassalize them peacefully.

What Atahualpa hoped to do was to turn Pizarro into an example of the Sapa Inca's power, wealth, and prestige by vassalizing him through Andean customs. Make him a show of force to the more rebellious northern provinces of the Empire. That's why he threw a feast for him. Little did he know that he was screwing around with the man with the devil's luck...

Yes, and as a modern human being playing as the Inca, we should have the ability to prevent such circumstances from forming in the first place. We have the benefit of hindsight; we can start preparing for a European intrusion from 1444 itself, because we know that Europeans will arrive sooner or later. In the same way, a person playing as Portugal might make preparations (i.e. by saving up monarch points to get exploration ideas) for the colonization of Brazil right from the mid-15th century, when Portugal in real life didn't even know that Brazil existed. In reality, Portuguese and Spanish expeditions were very risky because geographic knowledge of the world across the Atlantic was nonexistent, but the modern human player knows where everything is and what what to do decades in advance.

 

[DreadLindwyrm]

Yes, and as a modern human being playing as the Inca, we should have the ability to prevent such circumstances from forming in the first place. We have the benefit of hindsight; we can start preparing for a European intrusion from 1444 itself, because we know that Europeans will arrive sooner or later. In the same way, a person playing as Portugal might make preparations (i.e. by saving up monarch points to get exploration ideas) for the colonization of Brazil right from the mid-15th century, when Portugal in real life didn't even know that Brazil existed. In reality, Portuguese and Spanish expeditions were very risky because geographic knowledge of the world across the Atlantic was nonexistent, but the modern human player knows where everything is and what what to do decades in advance.

Which is partially why the exploration changes were made - "explore the coast of X", "explore the waters of X", and why there is the "random new world" option, should one choose to use that.

The initial point of the exploration was to try to reach India by going west, so investing time and monarch points into exploration isn't that unreasonable on a "historical" view point.

 

[TheDarkMaster]

This really wouldn't be a problem if Europe didn't start the game ahead of everyone else. This is neither historical nor balanced. Ideally you'd have Europe start behind the Chinese and Muslims in 1444, catch up by 1500, and start pulling ahead in 1650. It is only after around 1650-1700 that Westernization/modernization should even be possible, then a system that's balanced and reasonable for that situation that favors the historical outcome (only a handful of nations modernized during the game's time period, many more partially did so).

Note, the exception to this are the primitive nations: new world and sub-Sahara. They need ways of modernizing/westernizing from day one, but shouldn't be limited to only Western tech group neighbors to do so, any Old World neighbor other than sub-Saharan would do.

Muslim and Chinese tech should be about even at game start, with Indian slightly slower than them (maybe the same as starting Western). Nomad is currently fine, since you change tech groups when you reform. Eastern starts on par with Western, but if Byzantium gets a resurgence they should be bumped up.

 

[Axe99]

Obviously you can't have a static tech penalty. The absolute simplest way to do this is to have tech group penalties be capable of changing as the game progresses. Then come ~1650 the western tech group gains a lowered tech cost modifier. This is not my preferred solution, but it is the simplest one without changing the game too much.

What would be perfect is if technological and the associated cultural and economic development naturally evolved through gameplay. Then you can create a situation where Europe in 1444 has the prerequisites for things to kick off in a Renaissance kind of way (but it hasn't kicked off yet) while things in China and India are happening at their own pace - they start ahead, but they don't have the prereqs for that renaissance spark that pushed Europe ahead. No idea how I'd do this off the top of my head, but I'm sure it'd be doable.

 

[WeissRaben]

What would be perfect is if technological and the associated cultural and economic development naturally evolved through gameplay. Then you can create a situation where Europe in 1444 has the prerequisites for things to kick off in a Renaissance kind of way (but it hasn't kicked off yet) while things in China and India are happening at their own pace - they start ahead, but they don't have the prereqs for that renaissance spark that pushed Europe ahead. No idea how I'd do this off the top of my head, but I'm sure it'd be doable.

The Renaissance had started already, in 1444. But yes, this kind of idea is what I'd like to see in game.

 

[Axe99]

The Renaissance had started already, in 1444. But yes, this kind of idea is what I'd like to see in game.

Sorry, my medieval history is really patchy, thanks for the info .

 

[moorsonthecoast]

What kicked off the Renaissance was a set of conditions irreplicable in the world. For one, you need a whole lost way of life rediscovered, and you need a continent which was beginning to furiously repopulate after a major population culling. These prereqs. don't exist anywhere else at that time that I am aware of, and it's a pretty unique situation even through time. The Byzantines never lost civilization, so they never had to regain it, and authority in the Far East --- but mostly China --- was precipitated on civilization not having ever been lost.

On top of that, the distinctiveness of the Renaissance is not its rediscovery of the ancient scientific works but entirely to do with the fact that it was the rediscovery of the ancient cultural works, the "classics." It was a period enamored not so much by the best of its prehistory but the way of life of its prehistory. That it has to do with technological development is a secondary measure of the Renaissance, if anything.

Anyway, so we need (with specific examples in parentheses):

• A new order (Christendom unites the "barbarian" Germanic tribes)
• Crushed by a few major disasters, transitions, over the course of centuries (Collapse of the Roman Empire, "The Dark Ages," and the Black Death)
• Which suddenly, speedily recovers (Booming fertility filling up an emptied continent)
• As it rediscovers its prehistory (Greco-Roman antiquity)
• And believes it has something to prove (And here is the title of the game)
• Fueled by the clash between that new order and its self-loathing reactionary spirit (Trent vs. The Reformation)

There's a reason why the Renaissance happened in Europe, and that's because there was a "rebirth" that could happen.

If a dynamic Renaissance is implemented into the game, Europa Universalis V will be less historical, not more.

 

[TheDarkMaster]

What kicked off the Renaissance was a set of conditions irreplicable in the world. For one, you need a whole lost way of life rediscovered, and you need a continent which was beginning to furiously repopulate after a major population culling. These prereqs. don't exist anywhere else at that time that I am aware of, and it's a pretty unique situation even through time. The Byzantines never lost civilization, so they never had to regain it, and authority in the Far East --- but mostly China --- was precipitated on civilization not having ever been lost.

On top of that, the distinctiveness of the Renaissance is not its rediscovery of the ancient scientific works but entirely to do with the fact that it was the rediscovery of the ancient cultural works, the "classics." It was a period enamored not so much by the best of its prehistory but the way of life of its prehistory. That it has to do with technological development is a secondary measure of the Renaissance, if anything.

Anyway, so we need (with specific examples in parentheses):

• A new order (Christendom unites the "barbarian" Germanic tribes)
• Crushed by a few major disasters, transitions, over the course of centuries (Collapse of the Roman Empire, "The Dark Ages," and the Black Death)
• Which suddenly, speedily recovers (Booming fertility filling up an emptied continent)
• As it rediscovers its prehistory (Greco-Roman antiquity)
• And believes it has something to prove (And here is the title of the game)
• Fueled by the clash between that new order and its self-loathing reactionary spirit (Trent vs. The Reformation)

There's a reason why the Renaissance happened in Europe, and that's because there was a "rebirth" that could happen.

If a dynamic Renaissance is implemented into the game, Europa Universalis V will be less historical, not more.

It wouldn't really be a dynamic renaissance, that's something that would almost certainly happen not long after the start of the game. It is the enlightenment which would be dynamic, a system that lets other parts of the world push up to higher levels of tech without it being predetermined that Europeans will be the ones to do so.

 

[randylek]

hey i have nothing to contribute but i noticed your name is also randy and i hardly see any randys around anymore

 

[moorsonthecoast]

It wouldn't really be a dynamic renaissance, that's something that would almost certainly happen not long after the start of the game. It is the enlightenment which would be dynamic, a system that lets other parts of the world push up to higher levels of tech without it being predetermined that Europeans will be the ones to do so.

Same difference, though, because the Enlightenment builds exactly on the events of the Renaissance, and the Renaissance is an odd fellow. If we start in historical 1444, we have already predetermined that neither can occur outside Europe. The only thing to be determined is if it will occur inside Europe and this sort of thing, I think, is done very well in the game, I'm thinking of the Reformation events.

 

[TheDarkMaster]

Same difference, though, because the Enlightenment builds exactly on the events of the Renaissance, and the Renaissance is an odd fellow. If we start in historical 1444, we have already predetermined that neither can occur outside Europe. The only thing to be determined is if it will occur inside Europe and this sort of thing, I think, is done very well in the game, I'm thinking of the Reformation events.

I'd argue that it would be much better from a gameplay perspective to have the enlightenment be capable of happening all over the world for various reasons. It would make the game much more dynamic and interesting.

 

[WeissRaben]

Same difference, though, because the Enlightenment builds exactly on the events of the Renaissance, and the Renaissance is an odd fellow. If we start in historical 1444, we have already predetermined that neither can occur outside Europe. The only thing to be determined is if it will occur inside Europe and this sort of thing, I think, is done very well in the game, I'm thinking of the Reformation events.

I disagree. Japan was on its way to become a quite modern society, from all points of view. Have an emperor who does not go President Madagascar over Christianity, and Japan is going to follow Europe, rather than Asia. At which point, the rest of the East will follow, by hook or by crook.

 

[Wizzington]

You're right, the tech system is deeply unrealistic. To make it more realistic we'll start by putting Europe on tech 2 and a 50% penalty until they 'Renaissanceize', which requires bordering Italy. Also China starts at tech 12. Sound good?

 

[Sarmatian]

You're right, the tech system is deeply unrealistic. To make it more realistic we'll start by putting Europe on tech 2 and a 50% penalty until they 'Renaissanceize', which requires bordering Italy. Also China starts at tech 12. Sound good?

China should start at tech 30, have invincible armies and could only be defeated by a single unit of cavalry.

Kidding and improbable suggestions aside, some kind of improvement to Westernization is long overdue.

And remember, I rated your post "helpful". That doesn't mean I agree with it, just that I read it.

 

[QDI]

You're right, the tech system is deeply unrealistic. To make it more realistic we'll start by putting Europe on tech 2 and a 50% penalty until they 'Renaissanceize', which requires bordering Italy. Also China starts at tech 12. Sound good?

I know you are being sarcastic but I have to say that a system to represent Renaissance spreading in Europe would be nuts!

 

[MatthieuG7]

You're right, the tech system is deeply unrealistic. To make it more realistic we'll start by putting Europe on tech 2 and a 50% penalty until they 'Renaissanceize', which requires bordering Italy. Also China starts at tech 12. Sound good?

I would like something like that.
But I know I'm an realistic masochist that prefers realism over gameplay, and that I'm a minority.

 

[WeissRaben]

You're right, the tech system is deeply unrealistic. To make it more realistic we'll start by putting Europe on tech 2 and a 50% penalty until they 'Renaissanceize', which requires bordering Italy. Also China starts at tech 12. Sound good?

Sounds good.