The Hanseatic League

Incompetent · Aug 13, 2005

mikl said:
London is a backwater, not even a part of the great kingdom of Scotland.

It'll be less important than in vanilla, but historically London was not a capital for the sake of having a capital, like Madrid or Brasilia; rather, it was already England's most important city before becoming the established capital. It's ideally placed to control trade between the British Isles and the continent, so it wouldn't have been a backwater by any means, even without the British Empire. In fact, you could go as far as saying that the Hansa only deserve their COT in Flanders if they have good trade access to southern England. That could be the case if the powers in England decide to let the Hansa take all the profits from trade, but the only way for the Hansa to be safe is to control a port like London or Dover.

MattyG · Aug 13, 2005

Incompetent said:
It'll be less important than in vanilla, but historically London was not a capital for the sake of having a capital, like Madrid or Brasilia; rather, it was already England's most important city before becoming the established capital. It's ideally placed to control trade between the British Isles and the continent, so it wouldn't have been a backwater by any means, even without the British Empire. In fact, you could go as far as saying that the Hansa only deserve their COT in Flanders if they have good trade access to southern England. That could be the case if the powers in England decide to let the Hansa take all the profits from trade, but the only way for the Hansa to be safe is to control a port like London or Dover.

So, you're saying that if anyone owns Flandern and does not own Anglia, then Flandern should lose its CoT?

Incompetent · Aug 13, 2005

MattyG said:
So, you're saying that if anyone owns Flandern and does not own Anglia, then Flandern should lose its CoT?

No, but if England is controlled by powers which are openly hostile to the Hansa, that COT's days could be numbered. We already have the Flanders COT disappearing if Burgundy gets it. I think it's one which ought to be likely to disappear at some point before 1820, though not necessarily immediately, and this would fit in well with the Hansa's gradual loss of their hegemony over northern trade.

MattyG · Aug 13, 2005

Perhaps instead, if the Hansa gain Anglia, the CoT flips to Anglia as soon as Hansa has a war with Bavaria or Burgundy, or within 30 years at least.

unmerged(16159) · Aug 15, 2005

Incompetent said:
No, but if England is controlled by powers which are openly hostile to the Hansa, that COT's days could be numbered. We already have the Flanders COT disappearing if Burgundy gets it. I think it's one which ought to be likely to disappear at some point before 1820, though not necessarily immediately, and this would fit in well with the Hansa's gradual loss of their hegemony over northern trade.

You have a point here. The Flanders CoT loses it's value in 1435 when the Ulster CoT happens. Perhaps this is one of two moments for the Hansa's grip on Anglia. IF Eire builds the CoT, AND they don't own Anglia or Kent or Caux (therefore dominating the Channel), then they lose the Flanders CoT. There is already an event which builds a new (but doubtless not profitable...) CoT in Firenze at that time.

The again from 1530 - 1630 after the Pleskows come to power, and they don't control the channel (as above) the Flanders CoT is also abandoned.

unmerged(16159) · Aug 15, 2005

MattyG said:
This is it. This is the right balance. I think you have finally nailed the right amount of flavour and believability, and married it to a little randomness. This will be great. And, yes, the cost needs to be higher. 200 ducats for a province is a rip off for the seller. More like 50 - 60 times its base tax value, so that a province with a good tax value of, say 17 would cost 850 - 1020 ducat range.

Matty

OH, and quit complaining about Bavaria. It hasn't been re-written yet. Of course these things will be scaled down. Especially if you do it!

Hansa only start with 750 ducats. The sale price reflects bribes / state gifts, not purchase price. The asusmption with all of these 5 events is that the Hanseatic traders already 'control' the province in all but name, but merely are buying off royal claim (the shield). In this context I feel 300 is already high.

unmerged(16159) · Aug 15, 2005

Incompetent said:
It'll be less important than in vanilla, but historically London was not a capital for the sake of having a capital, like Madrid or Brasilia; rather, it was already England's most important city before becoming the established capital. It's ideally placed to control trade between the British Isles and the continent, so it wouldn't have been a backwater by any means, even without the British Empire. In fact, you could go as far as saying that the Hansa only deserve their COT in Flanders if they have good trade access to southern England. That could be the case if the powers in England decide to let the Hansa take all the profits from trade, but the only way for the Hansa to be safe is to control a port like London or Dover.

When did it become an established captial? If we are Aberrating from 1066, then we are saying that London is NOT a capital from that point onwards, and thus would 'lose' 353 years of growth due to being a capital. I am not sure about the complete english aberrated history, perhaps you could fill me in here.

Currently London has a population of 20,000. IF we accept that it is a middling rich province (not backwater...

) then we should perhaps lower the pop to around 15,000, or on par with Kent.

Whaddaya think?

unmerged(21937) · Aug 15, 2005

London has been quite important city even in Saxon times already, so if any fragmented realm was situated in the area including London, it most likely would have served as a capital of it.

Incompetent · Aug 15, 2005

mikl said:
When did it become an established captial? If we are Aberrating from 1066, then we are saying that London is NOT a capital from that point onwards, and thus would 'lose' 353 years of growth due to being a capital. I am not sure about the complete english aberrated history, perhaps you could fill me in here.

Currently London has a population of 20,000. IF we accept that it is a middling rich province (not backwater... ) then we should perhaps lower the pop to around 15,000, or on par with Kent.

Whaddaya think?

I think we shifted the collapse of England to the Peasants' Revolt in 1381, so there wouldn't have been much of a demographic change relative to real history. A Britain without 1066 would just be too wierd.

MattyG · Aug 15, 2005

mikl said:
Hansa only start with 750 ducats. The sale price reflects bribes / state gifts, not purchase price. The asusmption with all of these 5 events is that the Hanseatic traders already 'control' the province in all but name, but merely are buying off royal claim (the shield). In this context I feel 300 is already high.

ONLY 750 ducats. Did I just read that correctly? :rofl:

unmerged(16159) · Aug 15, 2005

MattyG said:
ONLY 750 ducats. Did I just read that correctly? :rofl:

Ummm, we I last started a game competitively, Hansa (and everyone else) started with 750 ducats. The *.inc file says 1000. BUt recently when I playtested, actually Hansa started with only 250. Is this random?

unmerged(16159) · Aug 15, 2005

Incompetent said:
I think we shifted the collapse of England to the Peasants' Revolt in 1381, so there wouldn't have been much of a demographic change relative to real history. A Britain without 1066 would just be too wierd.

Righto. Kent starts with 11,000, London currently 20,000. I resckon this is probably right. Any less and the neccesary population density for a wanky, chardonnay sipping, hanseatic elite wouldn't exist.

unmerged(26209) · Aug 15, 2005

Only 750 ducats? Denmark in Vanilla starts with 1800 ducats, ffs!

yourworstnightm · Aug 16, 2005

Hansa should have a lot of money, so giving them 2000 ducats or something would be right.

Incompetent · Aug 16, 2005

yourworstnightm said:
Hansa should have a lot of money, so giving them 2000 ducats or something would be right.

They can have some money at the start of the game, but it would take a typical power 10 years of 100% minting to amass that much. I thought starting money was just that, to get you started, rather than a great windfall which allows you to live the easy life for the first few decades. The Hansa's great wealth is modelled by their high number of COTs and starting trade efficiency, which allows them to make a lot more per month than most of their rivals.

Nikolai II · Aug 16, 2005

Otoh Denmark begins the vanilla GC with 800.. this is then reduced or increased by difficulty level, but when halved to 400 for VH it is just enough to last for one highly active year (or less). Point being that 2000 would not be a huge amount if there are events that are supposed to drain some.

But it should be put in relation to other "majors" starting cash, they should not have more than 200-250% of the second richest starter (and preferably not more than 500% of the poorest "major" in starting cash)

unmerged(16159) · Aug 16, 2005

Nikolai II said:
Otoh Denmark begins the vanilla GC with 800.. this is then reduced or increased by difficulty level, but when halved to 400 for VH it is just enough to last for one highly active year (or less). Point being that 2000 would not be a huge amount if there are events that are supposed to drain some.

But it should be put in relation to other "majors" starting cash, they should not have more than 200-250% of the second richest starter (and preferably not more than 500% of the poorest "major" in starting cash)

I think the Hansa reserves should be drained as a result of the bribes and dues it is paying. It's a tremendous gamble that these merchants are making, coughing up family money to buy a nation, but one they know will pay off in the end. 1000 ducats for any other nation would fund a war, but for Hansa it's funding capital investments.

And the default is purely the bribes on Anglia and Firenze only, which amount to 600 ducats, leaving them with only 150 (with game set on Hard). And keep in mind that they have just paid to retain the services of 40K mercenaries!

So if on VHard they have to take a loan to buy Firenze, well that's probably fitting.

unmerged(34993) · Feb 8, 2006

mikl, is it possible for me to rewrite HSA events for Sund crisis? I will include then in KAL file, so you should delete the existing ones in HSA file...

unmerged(16159) · Feb 8, 2006

Freiksenet1987 said:
mikl, is it possible for me to rewrite HSA events for Sund crisis? I will include then in KAL file, so you should delete the existing ones in HSA file...

many many people spent many many months sorting out the Sund events.

please post your suggestions, and we can debate it in the forum.

yes, Change is Good.

but let's talk about it first

unmerged(34993) · Feb 9, 2006

We need to have it a bit later. To be imposed in 34 or 35, so the NEW monarch will have to deal with it. You see, you will be able to choose pro-hansa monarch, pro-finnland monarch and neutral one. Pro-hansa can make sund crisis never spawn, really. He will just have serie of Hansa-dealing events.

Pro-finnish at the other hand can turn this in a total war, with his anti-Hansa thoughts.

Neutral monarch will have a pretty currents serie, with some revamps.

The Hanseatic League

Euroweenie in Exile

Attention is love.

Euroweenie in Exile

Attention is love.

Eldermann

Eldermann

Eldermann

Your Industrial Friend

Euroweenie in Exile

Attention is love.

Eldermann

Eldermann

Major

Field Marshal

Euroweenie in Exile

A bunny with a hat

Eldermann

First Lieutenant

Eldermann

First Lieutenant