-
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.
In other words, is there ANY nation you can play in the 1337 scenario, that doesn't require extensive editing of leaders, monarchs, events, cores, cultures, starting cash, tech group and DP setting from the start 
Aladar,
Hmm... It seems not. No matter what's played, and even if Timur is started from the earliest realistic date, someone is going to be stuck with a backward, barely playable Khanate for a session before his birth and four sessions following his death, with little to no human interaction. Probably not a good idea.
Issues that do need deciding:
1. English cores on historical lands
2. The peace rules (seemed to be strong support for modifying them as suggested, so there's a limit on what can be lost rather than taken)
Hmm... It seems not. No matter what's played, and even if Timur is started from the earliest realistic date, someone is going to be stuck with a backward, barely playable Khanate for a session before his birth and four sessions following his death, with little to no human interaction. Probably not a good idea.
Issues that do need deciding:
1. English cores on historical lands
2. The peace rules (seemed to be strong support for modifying them as suggested, so there's a limit on what can be lost rather than taken)
Nabu is complaining about the diff. level which means that BB goes down slow. Any comments on this?
What are the historic cores for England in France?
About the peacerules. Could you explain that again please.
So instead of OE winning a war against OE, which under the current rules will allow him to take 6 cores, he can only take 3. Is that all?
What are the historic cores for England in France?
About the peacerules. Could you explain that again please.
So instead of OE winning a war against OE, which under the current rules will allow him to take 6 cores, he can only take 3. Is that all?
I kinda agree on the diff level. The AI will go down anyway, and on very hard you can use BB wars to bring them down even faster Its just a pain in the ass to have to wait a century to get BB down.
Its just a pain in the ass to have to wait a century to get BB down.
Aladar said:
Aladar, the OE wouldn't take cores from itself, and I beleive the change being proposed isn't in how much 3 points is, but in that a country can only lose 3 points in a war, as opposed to a country gaining 3 points
This is copy paste of my post.
I am very sorry about not attending the sessions, also I'm sorry about not informing I'm not going to be able to come. Problem is I just started to go to the university, I moved to Zagreb now. I live in a student dorm and ATM I do not have internet access. I thought I could get by this by using my new laptop on the wireless hotspot on my university but I had a problem with wireless on it. Trouble configuring and using the internet. I also had a lot of work to do (to find and get all the necessary documents,) ... I again apoligize. I will quit all games I'm in until I get stable internet connection (it could be around 15. october).
Sorry again.
I am very sorry about not attending the sessions, also I'm sorry about not informing I'm not going to be able to come. Problem is I just started to go to the university, I moved to Zagreb now. I live in a student dorm and ATM I do not have internet access. I thought I could get by this by using my new laptop on the wireless hotspot on my university but I had a problem with wireless on it. Trouble configuring and using the internet. I also had a lot of work to do (to find and get all the necessary documents,) ... I again apoligize. I will quit all games I'm in until I get stable internet connection (it could be around 15. october).
Sorry again.
Dr Bob said:
Good explanation - I don't know if I can clear things up more but I can try...
Aladar, the issue is not worth (cost) of province in war points. Your rule is agreed upon. HG explained in detail what he wants and we all think he is right. Maybe you should reread those humongous posts, because he explained everything is such detail that nothing can remain misunderstood.
I'll try to explain in few words; instead of calculating how many provinces can be won we calculate how many provinces can be lost in any simultanious war.
Now, what does that mean? (I'm repeating HG now but I would like to help in clarifying) That means; (for instance) England and Spain are attacking France. Their peace is considered alliance peace and they can take 3 points in provinces. Austria and Venice saw France beeing attacked and they want part of their country so they DOW. Their peace is also alliance peace so they can take also 3 points in provinces. All in all, after gang, France will loose 6 points in provinces max.
But if we form rule that one country (France) can loose only 3 points in any related or silmutaneous war our ganged France will loose only 3 points although 2 alliances attacked her. Knowing that, Austria and Venice won't attack because they have little to gain and their alliance can still loose 3 points in provinces. Especially if England and Spain becomes mad because of their meddling and prepare revenge.
Ozzeh said:I kinda agree on the diff level. The AI will go down anyway, and on very hard you can use BB wars to bring them down even faster
I didn't quite understood this. You agree with me yes?
I propose normal, normal as HG already sugested.
Hmm it seems we no longer have a France. We should move someone I think (France seems quite essential).
Ozzeh said:
I already asked you to move to France. Of us here you are the only one who could survive vincinity of HG
.
Nabukodonosor said:I already asked you to move to France. Of us here you are the only one who could survive vincinity of HG
Now you're giving me too much credit
Ok, i'll adopt the rule that in a simultanious war, only 3 points can be lost. Instead of long post, why didn't you just write what Nabu did.
K'Shar might be interested in France.
K'Shar might be interested in France.
Aladar said:
that would be great!
have you talked with him or???if K'shar does not come Nordefeldt can be put in France - his post count tells me that he should know how to play this game
Post 1 has been updated with peacerules, Normal/Normal.
Do we make a strait between England/France & Castile/Marocco?
Do we make a strait between England/France & Castile/Marocco?
Aladar,
It's already there.
We can't change it without modifying the game file and that'd require a sep. moddir version of AoI and make subs all the more difficult.
I'm in favor of normal/normal too, as has been suggested.
I'll come up with a list of reasonable English cores in a bit.
It's already there.
We can't change it without modifying the game file and that'd require a sep. moddir version of AoI and make subs all the more difficult.
I'm in favor of normal/normal too, as has been suggested.
I'll come up with a list of reasonable English cores in a bit.
Aladar,
The coast plus Guyenne, Limousine and Maine should cover it.
And that's pretty light, considering England begins with cores over all of France.
The coast plus Guyenne, Limousine and Maine should cover it.
And that's pretty light, considering England begins with cores over all of France.
Nabukodonosor said:
Why would they not attack? If I were FRA I might give AUS and VEN 3 provinces directly when they attack (just to get rid of them) and then laugh at SPA who has perhaps been fighting for many years and now will get nothing.
Regarding the question to whom I would give the 3 provinces I can lose, that would depend on many circumstances, such as the probability I could take them back, whom I hate the most
and so on.I am afraid this kind of rule may work unsatisfactorily and may lead to some bitter arguments.
EDIT
I now see that sharp MR Ozzeh already pointed out this flaw. Remarkably it appears quite a few still prefer it. Well, it's your game.
Coming to think of it. If one of my neighbours were my hated enemy who had DOWed me and I were losing that war and another neighbour was a good friend I would invite my good friend to DOW me and give him those 3 provinces that he could give back later on. You may claim this is abusive/exploiting and I have nothing to say to my defence but "under normal circumstances I always abuse and exploit rules". That's why the rules need to be stringent and wise.
Last edited:
Daniel,
I agree. My first pick is no rule at all.
Unfortunately, that's not option. So we're left with this or the far less satisfactory alternative of a rule that encourages gangings, is far more complicated and difficult to sort out, and unfair at its base.
Between the two, this is the best we have.
I agree. My first pick is no rule at all.
Unfortunately, that's not option. So we're left with this or the far less satisfactory alternative of a rule that encourages gangings, is far more complicated and difficult to sort out, and unfair at its base.
Between the two, this is the best we have.