Straitscode?

[Nikolai II]

Sorry if I offended you, I just think it's a bad idea. And I honestly thought you where joking.

Okies - and if I was joking I wouldn't have brought it up twice in the thread.

And joking the joke could have been ok - had you added the "I just think it's a bad idea" to your last post.

But seriously - how often do you see the knights wrecked w/o player intervention? And the distance involved is akin to Smyrna - Macedonia and like several of the jumps Smyrna - Ionia.

Drawbacks might be increased Knight activities in Anatolia, but that might mean less Knight invasions everywhere else. Also easier attacks from owner of Antalaya and his alliesupon Rhodes, but knights still have good soldiers and an evil mountain fortress and it might still take a while for the different turks to get their act together..

(But this is what I wanted - a second opinion )

 

[Hive]

Okies - and if I was joking I wouldn't have brought it up twice in the thread.

And joking the joke could have been ok - had you added the "I just think it's a bad idea" to your last post.

But seriously - how often do you see the knights wrecked w/o player intervention? And the distance involved is akin to Smyrna - Macedonia and like several of the jumps Smyrna - Ionia.

Drawbacks might be increased Knight activities in Anatolia, but that might mean less Knight invasions everywhere else. Also easier attacks from owner of Antalaya and his alliesupon Rhodes, but knights still have good soldiers and an evil mountain fortress and it might still take a while for the different turks to get their act together..

(But this is what I wanted - a second opinion )

Well I just think we'll compromise reality a bit too much if we give in to this. I mean, then wehre should we stop? Should we give Sweden land connection to Gotland? England to Ireland? Dalmatia to Corfu?

Besides, it will in such a case be way too easy to defeat the Knights. They aren't supposed to be an exact walkover, their navy and fierce knights kept the Ottomans away many times. If it really bothers you that much, just make an AI-only enheritance event to trigger the year they where historically conquered.

 

[unmerged(6159)]

on another note: any chance of seeing code to completelu block the passage of hostile navies if you control gibrareltar/tangiers or sjælland/skåne?

I really don't see this as being necessary. As it is you get an automatic intercept in the straits (Sund, Gibraltar, Marmara). So you need a fleet to prevent anyone from passing through.

The Danes could make it difficult for trade to pass through the Sund. But on several occasions England and/or Holland passed fleets through the Sund in despite of Denmark. I beleive that if Denmark wants to block access to the Baltic she should have a fleet in the Sund to stop it.

As to the Sjaelland straits I agree that they shouldn't be there unless they really are improving gameplay a lot.

And by the way the name 'strait' is totally incorrect for the way it's used in EU. "Straits" is defined by Websters as " a comparatively narrow passageway connecting two large bodies of water -- often used in plural but sing. in constr.". The point being that the straits connect the bodies of water and are relevant for fleets. For narrow bodies of water that can be crossed by armies it ought to be 'crossing' or 'ford' or even 'narrows'.

edit: I meant Sjaelland to Scania, NOT Sjaelland to Jylland. The second seems pretty sensible to me, the first not so much. However if it improvies Denmarkm it's a good thing.

 

[Sikker]

I really don't see this as being necessary. As it is you get an automatic intercept in the straits (Sund, Gibraltar, Marmara). So you need a fleet to prevent anyone from passing through.

The Danes could make it difficult for trade to pass through the Sund. But on several occasions England and/or Holland passed fleets through the Sund in despite of Denmark. I beleive that if Denmark wants to block access to the Baltic she should have a fleet in the Sund to stop it.

Actually this is true ... IF your fleet was large enough (or the political consequences too great) Denmark would let your fleet through ... but that was forced access. Since there is no such thing in the game, I guess it is better left as it is ... (especially because of the automatic intercept in straits).

As to the Sjaelland straits I agree that they shouldn't be there unless they really are improving gameplay a lot.

It help the Danish AI immensely as it is now suddenly capable of defeating rebellions everywhere ... just like the land powers can. Earlier Denmark would often loose it's German possesions through defections, and once in a while Jyland and Skåne too (the latter obviously being the one with relevance to the Sjæland strait).
Also Denmark is now much more able to send reinforcements to Skåne when the Swedes attacks.

 

[Norrefeldt]

Could be nice with some more crossable straits, but I strongly object to one of them, Tangiers-Gibraltar.
This would make Spain able to draw massive amounts of manpower from Africa and make it the focus of their attention. A determined Spanish player could create a Spain with a manpower much greater than France, and since this would be done early in the game there would be no-one to stop him really. In MP, one of the most important issues would be Spain's colonial possessions in Africa, at least for France. (With the latest patch, thw one with 'straitscode' in it, one could create a high quality, fully land oriented Spain and still get full income from Africa, if not from SA.) It would be next to unplayable. The possibility for a fantasy Granada or Almohads to get manpower from Spain does not outweight this.

 

[doktarr]

Could be nice with some more crossable straits, but I strongly object to one of them, Tangiers-Gibraltar.
This would make Spain able to draw massive amounts of manpower from Africa and make it the focus of their attention. A determined Spanish player could create a Spain with a manpower much greater than France,

Unless I've got my manpower calculations off, the wrong-culture, low manpower provinces of North Africa would provide next to no manpower benefit to Spain. Colonies, though, could give manpower, I suppose.

and since this would be done early in the game there would be no-one to stop him really. In MP, one of the most important issues would be Spain's colonial possessions in Africa, at least for France. (With the latest patch, thw one with 'straitscode' in it, one could create a high quality, fully land oriented Spain and still get full income from Africa, if not from SA.) It would be next to unplayable. The possibility for a fantasy Granada or Almohads to get manpower from Spain does not outweight this.

I suppose your concerns trump any advantages I've mentioned... consider the proposal withdrawn. I'll just edit the strait in if I'm playing a resurgent Granada in SP.

 

[doktarr]

Revised list of the proposed straits:

Kaffa/Kerch, Smyrna/Thrace, Shikoku/Kansai, Messina/Apullia - These all already exist, right?

Kyushu/Kansai - If Messina/Apulia can be coded, I imagine this can be to... and it almost certainly should be. There is a wide strait there, and a dominant navy should be able to block passage.

Veneto/Istria - As I said before: "There was talk of moving Venice to Mantua, since there should really be no land connection between Venice proper and Istria. This would be another wat to finesse that connection. But it would look a little ridiculous on the map." I still think it's a workable idea.

Hainan-Guangdong - can anyone comment on how realistic this is? It would help AI China, at any rate.

 

[|AXiN|]

Just a quick question with regard to the Gibraltar - Tangiers strait question : do straits count as land connections when there aren't land connections previously?

 

[Norrefeldt]

Just a quick question with regard to the Gibraltar - Tangiers strait question : do straits count as land connections when there aren't land connections previously?

Yes. You can draw manpower across it, and no tax reduction. That's why this strait would be a disaster, as argued above.

 

[doktarr]

Kyushu/Kansai - If Messina/Apulia can be coded, I imagine this can be to... and it almost certainly should be. There is a wide strait there, and a dominant navy should be able to block passage.

Veneto/Istria - As I said before: "There was talk of moving Venice to Mantua, since there should really be no land connection between Venice proper and Istria. This would be another wat to finesse that connection. But it would look a little ridiculous on the map." I still think it's a workable idea.

Hainan-Guangdong - can anyone comment on how realistic this is? It would help AI China, at any rate.

Should I post these three to their respective regional threads for discussion?

Some numbers (at their narrowest):

Kyushu/Kansai: 700 meters
Hainan/Guangdong: 25 km

By comparison:

Bosporus: 700 meters
Messina/Apulia: 3 km
Sjælland/Skåne: 5 km
Gibraltar: 13 km
English Channel: 34 km

So, I think Kyushu/Kansai is a no-brainer, Gibralter is nixed due to gameplay concerns, and the Qiongzhou strait is too wide to count. Veneto/Istria is more of a question of gameplay than reality.

 

[Norrefeldt]

I support the Venice/Istria and the Japanese one.

Anyone understands whats in straits.csv? Sea zones, pixel numbers?
Doktarr, how do you do that one-post link?

 

[doktarr]

I support the Venice/Istria and the Japanese one.

Cool; I only proposed the two that nobody has ever objected to...

Anyone understands whats in straits.csv? Sea zones, pixel numbers?

I always thought those were just the x and y positions of the strait icon (the three rocks). I thought the actual code for it was in the TBL files, where the adjacency lists are kept. Presumably the people that know how to edit in the PTI links across the Urals and across Mongolia would know how to do this?

Kaigon suggests using an editor to do this here.

Doktarr, how do you do that one-post link?

The above link was done by writing {url=http://forum.paradoxplaza.com/forum/showthread.php?t=126963}here{/url}, with square in stead of curly brackets of course.

 

[unmerged(10128)]

the Hainan/Guangdong strait could actually be good for gameplay, despite its width. but seems a bit strange to me to be able to march straight across..

I always thought those were just the x and y positions of the strait icon (the three rocks). I thought the actual code for it was in the TBL files, where the adjacency lists are kept. Presumably the people that know how to edit in the PTI links across the Urals and across Mongolia would know how to do this?

i believe editing straits is a different file from making province links.

 

[Khephren]

i believe editing straits is a different file from making province links.

I have a bad feeling that the straits making use of the new rules are hard coded. Besides hearing that in the General Forum once, I noticed that when Johan went back and forth between making Sjelland-Jylland a stait, the .tbl file and straits.csv remained unchanged.

 

[Norrefeldt]

Hej!
I EU2, är straits hårdkodade eller kan de moddas? Vilken fil är det i så fall?
/Martin

hårdkodade.

The straits are hard coded and cannot be modded. End of discussion.