• 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.

unmerged(3106)

Sergeant
Apr 17, 2001
80
0
Visit site
Use cavalry with a few infantry say 1 or 2k if you want to incorporate natives into your city. The object is to break their morale, not kill them.

There seems to be a split of opinion as to whether to kill or suppress natives with high agression. I tend toward suppression. My reason is that suppression gets me a city with an extra 1000 to 20,000 citizens. Income is influenced by population and the extra thousands are valuable. While it is true that you will have a lower success rate if you let the natives live, it is worth it to lose two or three colonists, even four or five, to get a 6,000 bump in population.

One warning, this is an intuitive conclusion, I haven't run the actual economics and would be interested to hear from anyone who has.
 
Aug 18, 2001
242
0
Visit site
Well, to effectively supress the natives without killing them, try using leaders (not conquistadors) who have high firepower and low shock ratings: they'll break the native low morale in the fire phase - which kills few - and bypass the heavy-casualty shock phase.

That'll keep them in line until they're absorbed (and you will need few troops).

Note that, as a Portuguese player, my priority in the early game is always to get to India, pronto (this is extra important in multiplayer), and your few troops will be needed there, not to rot away in Africa. So, you'll better find unoccupied areas (historically, Fernando Pó isle, Table province and Mombassa) for ports and use them on your way to the indian riches.

Btw, if you're wondering how we did it in real life, here's our little secret: the 'prazo' technique.
(more rarely - like the Angolas - we made an alliance with the tribes and christianized them after saving the guys from an enemy tribe; but this was sporadic).

Basically, what we did was to set up an outpost on the coast and sent one guy inland for each tribe we knew. Sure enough, they always become kings of the blacks and then ruled them alone, swearing loyalty to our king and submitting 'hostile' tribes.

We provided them with white wives, so the local black tribes always had full-blood portuguese kings.

In fact, besides the 500-odd people in the main colony, the whole territories of Angola and Mozambique were ruled by about 20 white colonists right up the middle of the XIXth century :D

Regards,
Keoland
 

unmerged(469)

Rear Admiral
Nov 19, 2000
1.120
0
Visit site
Originally posted by Keoland
Basically, what we did was to set up an outpost on the coast and sent one guy inland for each tribe we knew. Sure enough, they always become kings of the blacks and then ruled them alone, swearing loyalty to our king and submitting 'hostile' tribes.

We provided them with white wives, so the local black tribes always had full-blood portuguese kings.
Just one guy by himself, or did you send along some arquebus equipped persuasion? What was the process by which he aquired the kingship? And how did the succession go? Where did the kids find husbands and wives to continue the dynasty?
 
Aug 18, 2001
242
0
Visit site
Re: History Lesson

Originally posted by Major Minion
That was quite interesting. Where did you read that?

It's thaught in our history classes. I'm a portuguese history major. This is part of our course - we have four full years of (mainly) national history, as well as christian theology and ancient writing.

Originally posted by Admiral Yi
Just one guy by himself, or did you send along some arquebus equipped persuasion? What was the process by which he aquired the kingship? And how did the succession go? Where did the kids find husbands and wives to continue the dynasty?

Just one guy. He took whatever he wanted with him. They did whatever they wanted (beats us HOW they became kings, they just did). His sucessors were his white - preferrably male - children. The crown provided all the 'prazo' holders with wives or husbands.

We picked them up from a near-inexaustible stock called the 'Orphans of the Crown'; poor girls or boys that had lost their parents and whose only family was the State. And for the girls, the only way to get married was to do what the Crown said [the King also gave those orphan girls a small dowry]. Indeed, that's how we had wives for most of our settlers in Brazil and India.

(We portuguese have an ancient national saying that goes: 'black to f**k, white to marry'. Sorry if I sounded too 'un-PC', but that's how we do it :D ).
 

Jos Theelen

C.U.T.
4 Badges
Apr 6, 2001
1.926
0
Visit site
  • Diplomacy
  • Europa Universalis III
  • 500k Club
  • Europa Universalis III: Collection
Originally posted by Major Minion
That's what I was afraid of. So, any ideas on how large occupational forces should be in colonies. I'm trying to turn one of my African coloniies into a city.

I have very good results with 1:1. 1 infantry on 1 native. With that amount of soldiers I could also colonize provinces like Chin (10000 agressive natives).
But what is also very important is the speed of colonising. When you wait long between new settlers, the chance on problems becomes bigger, I think.