Testing 1.41: Hungary & Ottomans 1419-1500

[Norrefeldt]

I have started a serie of testing the OE's ability to expand during the first 80 years, since I noticed while testing the new AI files that they didn't perform well. There may be many reasons, but a guess is that the flurry of wars we used to have (or still have when playing under "normal" aggressiveness?) was good for them. Still, since we want minors to survive better than before, we cannot revert to the old situation.
To start it off by some testing, I ran three hand-off games, default settings with normal aggressiveness, and took screenies 1500.

Game 1:

OE did well in the east, even took Cyrpus from Ramazan. It has high BB, around 30. Two minors remain in the middle of OE territory, but they have no chance. Hungary with 13 provinces has taken Macedonia from OE, and they are a big threat!
Game 2:

Worse than game 1, the east wasn't taken and Hungary expanded again to 16 provinces. Genoa owns a balck Sea province since they took it from Bulgaria after they revolted from Hungary. Hungary in a strong alliance just beat up OE for two provinces.
Game 3:

This is almost historical borders of OE but Hunagry will likely stop all advances further into the Balkans with her 19 provinces, more than OE has.

In all three games, Hungary is a bigger threat to OE than OE is to Hungary which is wrong. Hungary should be rather strong I know, but this is too much.

 

[Norrefeldt]

So how will I try to fix this. Mainly by looking into what we have done with Hungary. It seems they have a too easy ride, and AFAIK no one have summed up all changes to it. These are the DP:

						Arist	Cent	Inno	Merc	Off	Land	Qual	Serf
						9	1	5	6	6	8	[COLOR=YellowGreen]6	[/COLOR]9

#The National Diet of 1445	1445		-1							
#Hunyadi appointed Gubernator	1446		-1	2						-1
#Election of Mathias Corvinus	1458		-1	1						
#Formation of the Black Brigade	1462							1	2	
#Army reforms of Corvinus	1464			1				2		
#Adm and social reforms Corvinus1466		-2	[COLOR=YellowGreen]2	2[/COLOR]					-2
#Academia Istropolitana		1467				1					
#Death of Corvinus w HAB	1490		3	-2	-1					2
						
						7	5	7	6	6	11	8	8

Not much really strange here, even if I think their centralisation raise a bit too much (remember that scale is ment to be up to 1819!), and the quality at start is too high. Hungary shouldn't have close to the quality of the
Jannissaries, even after they learnt a lot from the Hussite wars. Even if the Renaissance brought a lot of changes, very few, is any European states should hav innovativeness 7 by 1500. I suggest lowering the ones in green by one, but quality at start with 2.

 

[joriandrake]

hungary always was a strong enemy for the ottomans, and if we really had some allies like we can have in the game, we could have easily beaten OE.
The game is balanced, and a player can always help OE or Hungary with money/alliance/DOW-ing its enemy

So how will I try to fix this. Mainly by looking into what we have done with Hungary. It seems they have a too easy ride, and AFAIK no one have summed up all changes to it. These are the DP:

						Arist	Cent	Inno	Merc	Off	Land	Qual	Serf
						9	1	5	6	6	8	[COLOR=YellowGreen]6	[/COLOR]9

#The National Diet of 1445	1445		-1							
#Hunyadi appointed Gubernator	1446		-1	2						-1
#Election of Mathias Corvinus	1458		-1	1						
#Formation of the Black Brigade	1462							1	2	
#Army reforms of Corvinus	1464			1				2		
#Adm and social reforms Corvinus1466		-2	[COLOR=YellowGreen]2	2[/COLOR]					-2
#Academia Istropolitana		1467				1					
#Death of Corvinus w HAB	1490		3	-2	-1					2
						
						7	5	7	6	6	11	8	8

Not much really strange here, even if I think their centralisation raise a bit too much (remember that scale is ment to be up to 1819!), and the quality at start is too high. Hungary shouldn't have close to the quality of the
Jannissaries, even after they learnt a lot from the Hussite wars. Even if the Renaissance brought a lot of changes, very few, is any European states should hav einno 7 by 1500. I suggest lowering...

Hungary HAD good quality!! Anyone used hungarian Huszár-s as the future cavalary, polish used a kind of huszár-s too. We became weaker later, but not in that era.
Don't break hungarian events and possibilities, we already don't have too many events and such, it IS balanced dammit! I would even give more events to the game, and more possibilities.

 

[Norrefeldt]

hungary always was a strong enemy for the ottomans, and if we really had some allies like we can have in the game, we could have easily beaten OE.
The game is balanced, and a player can always help OE or Hungary with money/alliance/DOW-ing its enemy

Sure, a player can do whatever... The meaing of a balanced game is to have it balanced when the player does not interfere. How can you say this is biased when Hungary in all three games expand well beyond historical borders?

 

[joriandrake]

Sure, a player can do whatever... The meaing of a balanced game is to have it balanced when the player does not interfere. How can you say this is biased when Hungary in all three games expand well beyond historical borders?

no simulated inner affairs (problems), also: Hunyadi does not try to get austria and Bohemia, as in history(mostly to get HRE crown and elector rank), thus: focus more on weaker nations like OE in that century


In real life, Hunyadi even made his 'capitol' Bécs (Vienna)
(he should try that in game, also get after vienna german culture<if more german cultures exist:the one of austria>)

 

[joriandrake]

If I also remember correctly, becouse of somewhat Hungary had in RL good relations to OE (I will check this), and we had all hands full to get into the HRE and gain crown/elector title


If this all will be simulated in the game, it will result in more historical results

 

[Norrefeldt]

Other changes I'll implement before doing another round of tests:

AI (OE):
Change base for OE to 7, since the readme for AI files says:

# low values keep wars mainly defensive, high values make you extremely aggressive
base = (0.0 - 100.0) #warmongers need this high

I'' remove BYZ from the AI file 1419, and add SER and remove GEN in the AI file 1451, Kerch will become OE's by event.

Events (HUN):
The civil war of 1440 actually give a net increase in stab, this is silly (yes, I know I wrote them myself ) The starting event of the sequence of Succession of Albrecht (1440), will now give -3 stab in A (was 0), and -4 in b (was -2). It's a civil war, and the texts I have read the last few days states it was close to disintegration as new good leaders put it together later that century.

Relations (OE):
Eastern wars can be very costly to OE, and they shouldn't ally with states far far away. Some relations needs lowering.

Start setup (HUN):
Remove 5000 cav.

 

[joriandrake]

for more understanding about Hunyadi and 'the austrian conquest', check wicky, in this it is accurate, also check some other sources.
And here the CoA-s owned by the Hungarian Kingdom in time of 'Corvinus':

Events (HUN):
The civil war of 1440 actually give a net increase in stab, this is silly (yes, I know I wrote them myself ) The starting event of the sequence of Succession of Albrecht (1440), will now give -3 stab in A (was 0), and -4 in b (was -2). It's a civil war, and the texts I have read the last few days states it was close to disintegration as new good leaders put it together later that century.

try it, maybe it works, but also don't allow OE to geet too strong, or Hungary too weak.

 

[Norrefeldt]

Hungary HAD good quality!! Anyone used hungarian Huszár-s as the future cavalary, polish used a kind of huszár-s too. We became weaker later, but not in that era.
Don't break hungarian events and possibilities, we already don't have too many events and such, it IS balanced dammit! I would even give more events to the game, and more possibilities.

Matthias I Corvinus created the real Hussar corps, it cannot influence the Quality setting 1419. Vanilla game don't have an event for it, now with this event the start quality should be lower.

 

[unmerged(29041)]

Other changes I'll implement before doing another round of tests:

AI (OE):
Change base for OE to 7, since the readme for AI files says:

Good idea. Perhaps 7 is not high enough for them. Also equally important would be to set the value to 0.0 for Hungary, as they should not expand.

If only this worked as described Having a very defensive country would make them hard to defeat, but they would not expand much. Perfect for Hungary.

 

[joriandrake]

here:
http://www.goo-bear.com/tree/english/anthem.cfm


check the 1st three part of our Hymn, in is also in it, and a bit more

strong influence and 'annexations'(not sure in translation, but I think its the best) in the era by Hungary:

as you see no arrows to OE(except some defending, what was easy couse we had good castles there), but quite many into west, now TRY to talk about no expansions!

If ever, than THIS is the right time for Hungary to become and stay a Great Power, and to get the HRE crown and the voting right of bohemia for Hungary.


PS: look at croatia and half of todays bosnia, they are part of Hungary.


It's nearly a swap-ed white blob

 

[doktarr]

Jorian,

Your posts are essentially a non-starter. People are trying to figure out how to make the OE and Hungary proceed historically. You saying "no, they were high quality, they were expansionistic", et cetera, et cetera, is not really helping, no matter how much you can justify it historically.

The point is, we want things to proceed historically. In the end, Hungary should end up being divvied up between Austria and the OE in the majority of games where a human player does not interfere. Personally, (and this is consistent with the mission statement of the AGCEEP) I would like to see this accomplished with a minimum of obtrusive events, in stead proceeding mostly through the natural operation of the game engine.

If you can set things up such that Hungary is historically agressive in the west, and still make the historical outcome play out the majority of the time, then that's fine. But simply arguing that we should make Hungary more agressive/powerful, when it is already exceeding its historical boundaries the majority of the time, is not a helpful argument in the context of the goals of this mod.

 

[joriandrake]

Jorian,

Your posts are essentially a non-starter. People are trying to figure out how to make the OE and Hungary proceed historically. You saying "no, they were high quality, they were expansionistic", et cetera, et cetera, is not really helping, no matter how much you can justify it historically.

The point is, we want things to proceed historically. In the end, Hungary should end up being divvied up between Austria and the OE in the majority of games where a human player does not interfere. Personally, (and this is consistent with the mission statement of the AGCEEP) I would like to see this accomplished with a minimum of obtrusive events, in stead proceeding mostly through the natural operation of the game engine.

If you can set things up such that Hungary is historically agressive in the west, and still make the historical outcome play out the majority of the time, then that's fine. But simply arguing that we should make Hungary more agressive/powerful, when it is already exceeding its historical boundaries the majority of the time, is not a helpful argument in the context of the goals of this mod.

If you look at the other thread: bohemia and hungary, i will exactly make that.
Norrefeldt and I agreed upon making more events and such.
And to the borders: this is a game, all other nations get sometimes too weird borders, why always steping on Hungary?
The problem is exactly that that Hungary in the Grand Camaign is too underpowered, and OE has extra power to archieve historical outcome, even if we know some of historical outcomes in the world had quite low possibility to happen.

The best thing is that I have some historian friends, so I can make historical events, and more. Also events what makes Hungary divide between Austria and OE (And Transylvania). But that will not happen all times, as it will depend on OE-s archievements, and if the austrians are coming to 'help us'.

 

[joriandrake]

http://psychcentral.com/psypsych/Imre_Thököly

I will also make events for Thököly Imre and his actions

 

[doktarr]

And to the borders: this is a game, all other nations get sometimes too weird borders, why always steping on Hungary?

I think this is more perception than reality. Hungary gets no more attention than any other large nation that is supposed to disappear and often doesn't. This is up there with the formation of the Mughal Empire, the conquest of the Aztecs/Incas, the Dutch and British expansion in the East Indes, the consolidation of the HRE into large states, and Russia's eastward expansion, on the list of "historical things that the AGCEEP has had trouble with".

The problem is exactly that that Hungary in the Grand Camaign is too underpowered, and OE has extra power to archieve historical outcome, even if we know some of historical outcomes in the world had quite low possibility to happen.

If you really believe that should motivate our choices, you are in the wrong mod. This is NOT the "what was the most likely outcome for the world starting in 1419" mod. It is the "historical" mod. There are lots and lots of examples of this; a commonly cited one is that we strongly encourage a Castille-Aragon union when a Castille-Portugal union may have been more likely in 1419.

The best thing is that I have some historian friends, so I can make historical events, and more.

That's great; I mean that. I would also encourage the creation of alt-history events for Hungary and the HRE, as long as these events don't trigger very often when the AI controls all nations. But as I said before, the AGCEEP would rather have history play out mostly through the natural operation of the game engine, with events playing a more supporting role.

Also events what makes Hungary divide between Austria and OE (And Transylvania). But that will not happen all times, as it will depend on OE-s archievements, and if the austrians are coming to 'help us'.

I agree; the final partition should be handled by event, much as it is currently. This is historically justified, for sure. The goal IMO is to set things up so that this event does trigger most of the time.

 

[joriandrake]

yes, I will make historical events, and yes, I will also make ahistorical ones, most of the will have 0-5 % chance for fire with AI. I will not make anything thats too arkward, but there WILL be some suprising ahistorical events if things change mutch in the Heart of Europe (the Karpaths).

1st I will look on what you did made events/added leaders/gained 'tradethingy' for a province, and if that is accurate, then I start to research for more.


for the purpose of getting info:
please write the stats what Napoleon, Mátyás, , a random english, a random spanish, a random prussian, and the last byzantine leader have
(so I hope to understand how you get the different stats, I will also check all the leaders, what they learned as children, and what they archieved in life)

 

[Norrefeldt]

for the purpose of getting info:
please write the stats what Napoleon, Mátyás, , a random english, a random spanish, a random prussian, and the last byzantine leader have
(so I hope to understand how you get the different stats, I will also check all the leaders, what they learned as children, and what they archieved in life)

AGCEEP leaders are based strictly on historical achievements. To understand how lifespan and stats is decided, this thread on Italian leaders is the best example there is.

 

[Josip]

as you see no arrows to OE(except some defending, what was easy couse we had good castles there), but quite many into west, now TRY to talk about no expansions!

Copy-paste from Wiki - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Matthias_Corvinus_of_Hungary
Until his death in 1490, Matthias Corvinus gained control of Moravia, Silesia, Lusatia (these in 1468/1469/1479-1490), and half of present-day Austria (1477/1483-1491); he even ruled from Vienna after 1485.

Now this is very interesting, after his death, this Empire of yours fell apart, so it wasn't really a strong Hungary but a strong leader that held it together...
Same things happened in Turko-Persian conflicts, when the Persians had a good monarch, they would gain an advantage and conquer Mesopotamia, when the Ottomans had a good monarch, the reverse would happened, so it wasn't really a natural flow, but more of an achivement of an individual...

 

[Toio]

@norrefelft

tested the base = 7.0 , with 6 games

result , 5 games had OE attack SER in the first year.

- bosnia remained an OE ally for longer

- HUN was pressed due to 3 wars, .v. Venice, Hussites and following Serbia against the OE.
all final results ended with croatia becoming OE as well as kosovo.

NOTE- did not amend any BYZ stuff in regards to the OE

From what I have read about the base in question ( the whole section that is ) is a multiplier , so 7.0 is multiplied by another number to give this warmonger rating :wacko:

 

[Toio]

Good idea. Perhaps 7 is not high enough for them. Also equally important would be to set the value to 0.0 for Hungary, as they should not expand.

If only this worked as described Having a very defensive country would make them hard to defeat, but they would not expand much. Perfect for Hungary.

I read that the base area is a multiplier, so with this in mind a 0.0 most probably will not work, maybe 0.1 is the lowest you can have?