-
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.
Stefanos said:
The 5000 discount seems like too much to me as well. (I've thought about a 4000 discount, which would be 1/3 off, but I don't know about that, either.)
If it weren't necessary to include any goods, the cost of the factories by themselves would be 6000. I had the event written like this, but then playtesting indicated that without the goods included in the event there wouldn't be a possibility of craftsmen, due to a lack of clothing and furniture on the WM.
I hadn't thought about splitting off the goods into a separate event, and I'll ponder that. However, the cost of clothing, paper, and furniture is high enough in 1.03 that the goods needed to convert 5 POPs cost more than the factories themselves. Texas would require more than 1500 days starting in 1838 to come up with the 10,000 WM cost of all the necessary materials (or 1000 days to come up with the cost of what's included in the event), so having a full price event for the goods fire just a few months later won't solve the problem.
pimparel said:
This is something I've considered, but doing so doesn't give the player control over exactly which POPs get converted, and it would be like giving the Texas player 10,000 in free goods when the POPs got converted, unless there was an equivalent charge included in the event. And the main problem for Texas in 1838 is the cost.
Now, there is the issue that Texas should have lumber, wine, and liquor production by 1836, which were not included in the setup for 1.03. So perhaps Texas should get those for free or at least at a discount.
(On a side note, I notice that in the GC Mexico has only a liquor factory at start. I wonder if this is historically accurate?)
Last edited:
Theodotus1 said:
Even giving the factories for free, texas has the manpower? Cause with BRZ, Rio de Janeiro had a Liquor Factory, which I added in the .inc file. But later on we had a MAJOR surge towards industrialization. Them I made an event giving a steel and a random factory fot 75% of the price, but what did happen, was that I didn't have manpower to ran effieciently the 3 factories.
pimparel said:
This is a good point. Texas could easily convert five POPs to factory work, if the goods were available. Twice that would probably be possible, if everyone except slaves went to industry.
I wasn't thinking that Texas would be able to run them all at once. But having them exist would give Texas the option to produce the goods if it chose.
In any case, I've gotten to thinking that some of the production reflected in the event might not have reached a factory level by 1838. (My sources indicate "local makers," and it now occurs to me that may not mean production to be represented by a factory.) I'm going to do a bit more research right now, and see if I can find more information.
EDIT: I've concluded that wine and liquor production was at a home brew level, with production sufficient for Texas commercial demand but not export, and so might not be appropriate for the event. (On the other hand, wine and liquor should perhaps be included, if they are part of POP needs, since there was definitely sufficient production for the Texas market. My sources indicate early Texans drank an immense amount.) The same applies to cement. (I don't see a reason to include cement anymore.)
On the other hand, a lumber mill is appropriate. Here's a bit on lumber in early Texas:
"Lumbering and flour and grist milling were the first permanent industries established in Texas and remained the two leading industries throughout the early period of development. What was probably the first sawmill was built near San Augustine in 1825. One was built on Buffalo Bayou in 1831 and another on Adam's Bayou in 1836. A steam sawmill was constructed at Harrisburg in 1836. . . ."
Handbook of Texas Online.
Some of this lumber made its way to the Matamoros market, so it did enter international trade.
As for furniture, this was the case:
"Until the 1870s most Texans bought their house furniture from local cabinetmakers. Census records, newspaper advertisements, and surviving examples of furniture indicate that nearly 1,000 cabinetmakers made furniture in Texas between 1839, when the first, William P. Lang of Houston, was recorded, and 1880, when locally made furniture had been largely replaced by imported, factory-made furniture. During those years there was at least one cabinet shop in every county in Texas, and most towns had several. Furniture production was most heavily concentrated in the Piney Woods of East Texas, the Blackland Prairie south of the Red River in North Texas, the German settlements between the Brazos and Colorado rivers in Central Texas, the German settlements in the Hill Country, and the cities of Galveston and Austin. The majority of Texas cabinetmakers were Southerners, but a significant minority were German immigrants, whose work was not confined to the German settlements."
Handbook of Texas Online.
However, mechanized production of furniture in Texas began only in the 1850s.
It would seem to me now that lumber (and perhaps wine and liquor) should be in an 1836 event, while furniture is in an 1839 event (if the above would indicate a furniture factory is rated). (Beyond these, there was no other appreciable Texas industry until around 1850.) This would certainly solve the cost problem for 1839. As for 1836, I'm inclined to write an event that fires on 1/1/36, since the production capacity predated 1836.
As I continue to ponder this, I'd like to extend my thanks for the input -- it helps me refine my focus.
Taking into account what Pimparel pointed out, I've decided to incorporate only the lumber mill in 1836. Since that production capacity predates 1836, the event should probably fire on day 1 of the GC.
Question then is, should there be any charge for the factory, or should it be treated as part of the initial setup? And should goods for POP conversion be provided, and if so for how many POPs and at what, if any, cost? Hmmm
Last edited:
Here's the revamped event:
event = {
id = 272085
random = no
country = TEX
trigger = {
owned = { province = 1186 data = TEX }
}
name = "Early Texas industry"
desc = "Lumbering was the first industry established in Texas. A sawmill was built near San Augustine in 1825, and another was built on Buffalo Bayou in 1831. A third sawmill was built on Adam's Bayou in 1836, and a steam sawmill was constructed at Harrisburg that same year."
date = { day = 1 month = january year = 1836 }
action_a = {
name = "Industrialize!" #
command = { type = gain_building which = 1186 value = lumber_mill }
command = { type = resource which = regular_clothes value = 10 }
command = { type = resource which = furniture value = 10 }
command = { type = resource which = tobacco value = 10 }
command = { type = resource which = paper value = 10 }
}
}
I've not included any cost in this, because it represents capacity that could have been included in the inc file. (Using the event allows for the small history lesson in the description, and allows the player to pick the POP to convert, rather than forcing any particular setup on the player.) I'm not including an atwar check in the trigger for this same reason.
Any thoughts?
event = {
id = 272085
random = no
country = TEX
trigger = {
owned = { province = 1186 data = TEX }
}
name = "Early Texas industry"
desc = "Lumbering was the first industry established in Texas. A sawmill was built near San Augustine in 1825, and another was built on Buffalo Bayou in 1831. A third sawmill was built on Adam's Bayou in 1836, and a steam sawmill was constructed at Harrisburg that same year."
date = { day = 1 month = january year = 1836 }
action_a = {
name = "Industrialize!" #
command = { type = gain_building which = 1186 value = lumber_mill }
command = { type = resource which = regular_clothes value = 10 }
command = { type = resource which = furniture value = 10 }
command = { type = resource which = tobacco value = 10 }
command = { type = resource which = paper value = 10 }
}
}
I've not included any cost in this, because it represents capacity that could have been included in the inc file. (Using the event allows for the small history lesson in the description, and allows the player to pick the POP to convert, rather than forcing any particular setup on the player.) I'm not including an atwar check in the trigger for this same reason.
Any thoughts?
Last edited:
Theodotus1 said:
If it predate 1836, why not change the .inc file and add a lumber mill and edit the texas POP file. If you need help, I can edit both to you, I've done both modifications to BRZ.
So dropping the event, cost and resources.
Edit: Add this to texas.inc
Code:
factory = {
location = 1186
id = {
type = 5300
id = 14113
}
type = lumber_mill
}change this at texas_anglo.csv
Code:
1186;Texan;Protestant;farmers;;;;11
Code:
1186;Texan;Protestant;farmers;;;;4
1186;Texan;Protestant;craftsmen;;;;5
1186;Texan;Protestant;clerks;;;;2Done!!!
Last edited:
pimparel said:
Ok, seems reasonable. Let me take a look at the inc file.
EDIT: I think I see how it's done. I added this to the Texas .inc file:
factory = {
location = 1185
id = {
type = 5300
id = 272100
}
type = lumber_mill
}
and used a 272 ID number since Texas events are in the 272 sequence. How's this look?
Last edited:
pimparel said:
Actually, I'd been thinking of making the 2000 member POP in Austin (1186) into a craftsmen and leaving it at that, because Texas' lumber production was not large in 1836 and the 11,000 POP is useful for soldiers if necessary. However, your setup has definite appeal. Let me do a quick bit of research to see if Texas could reasonably have clerks as well as craftsmen at start. (I like to have historical justification as much as possible.)
Many, many thanks for your help on this.
EDIT: I decided to leave the 11,000 POP be and split the 2,000 POP in Austin into 1000 clerks and 1000 craftsmen. (Workers and management, basically, I guess.) The low numbers simulate that the industry is in its infancy.
Last edited:
I've now uploaded the modded Texas .inc file, Texas_anglo POP file, and a file with a couple of event fixes from recent playtesting to a folder on the first Yahoo file page called "Post-1.03 Tweaks."
It would be good if all these could get to the General at the earliest opportunity, so that there might be some chance they could get incorporated into the VIP .01 release. (There's a replacement in there for the previous "Early Texas Industry" event, which I can now see was fubar.)
It would be good if all these could get to the General at the earliest opportunity, so that there might be some chance they could get incorporated into the VIP .01 release. (There's a replacement in there for the previous "Early Texas Industry" event, which I can now see was fubar.)
Wow so much talks about Texas ! Such a small entity next to Québec !
Am I preaching in the desert
?
Ok, I wanted replies because I really spent so much time on this and I really, really would like it to make it into the next patch !
I'd ready to help because I noticed there was some irregularities in some other nerthern canadian provinces too.
Am I preaching in the desert
?Ok, I wanted replies because I really spent so much time on this and I really, really would like it to make it into the next patch !
I'd ready to help because I noticed there was some irregularities in some other nerthern canadian provinces too.
Niptium said:Wow so much talks about Texas ! Such a small entity next to Québec !
Am I preaching in the desert
Ok, I wanted replies because I really spent so much time on this and I really, really would like it to make it into the next patch !
I'd ready to help because I noticed there was some irregularities in some other nerthern canadian provinces too.
We're just getting started on all parts of Canada, including Quebec. Any inpute would be appreciated.
Theodotus1 said:We're just getting started on all parts of Canada, including Quebec. Any inpute would be appreciated.
No problems !
You may be aware that the Canadian population repartition is a major screw up in Victoria. So to sum it up, the population has to get some changes.
REGION OF QUÉBEC : POP : 619 000 hab.
Franco-Canadiens : 525 180 (84,84%)
Anglos-Canadiens : 93 820 (15,00%)
Inuits : 990 (0,16%)
----
Catholics : 525 180 (84,84%)
Protestants : 93 820(15,00%)
Pagan : 990 (0.16%)
By Provinces :
Montréal : 250 000 Habitants
Franco-Canadiens : 175 000 (70%)
Anglo-Canadiens : 75 000 (30%)
Québec : 100 000 Habitants
Franco-Canadiens : 100 000 (100%)
Sherbrooke : 99 000 Habitants
Franco-Canadiens : 81 180 (82%)
Anglo-Canadiens : 17 820 (18%)
Rivières-du-Loup : 50 000 Habitants
Franco-Canadiens : 50 000 (100%)
Weymount : 50 000 Habitants
Franco-Canadiens : 50 000 (100%)
Roberval : 15 000 Habitants
Franco-Canadiens : 15 000 (100%)
Kipawa : 50 000 Habitants
Franco-Canadiens : 49 000 (98%)
Anglo-Canadiens : 1000 (2%)
Moisie : 5000 Habitants
Franco-Canadiens : 4010 (80,2%)
Inuits : 990 (19,8%)
Anglos are protestants and Francos are catholics. The province of Amos should only be populated by Francos-Canadiens (50%) and Crees (50%).
Ontario's provinces (Timmins, Sudbury, Simcoe, Toronto, Sault Ste Marie) should only be populated by Anglo-Canadians and No Francos should be there. Finally there should be about 5% of Francos in the southern-most, London.
As far as New-Brunswich is concerned, there should be 40% of Franco-Canadiens in Bathurst and 20% in Fredericton. The rest should be composed of Anglos.
These changes are supported by two mods and most of the French community on this board.
What are you saying guys ?
Niptium said:
My thought after your first post was "we should make these changes." However, I was unsure of what to do to achieve it - .inc file adjustments I assume. So, pimparel, we'd appreciate your help again. Talk us through how to implement these changes, and we'll see it done.
About Mexico (as you guys might know, I'm somewhat partial to Mexico):
Yeah, one factory at start takes Mexico from being a potential powerhouse (assuming you can somehow avoid devastating wars with the USA and European Intervention) down to being a vast land ripe to become a colony of someone else.
Mexico probably shouldn't have the steel factory she had in the original game - such major industry really came to Mexico in the 1880's - but having both wine and liquor factories at the start of the GC would be very reasonable.
I'd also think that probably lumber, and perhaps fabric and cement factories would be reasonable for the start of the GC as well, but I'd want to research that.
Yeah, one factory at start takes Mexico from being a potential powerhouse (assuming you can somehow avoid devastating wars with the USA and European Intervention) down to being a vast land ripe to become a colony of someone else.
Mexico probably shouldn't have the steel factory she had in the original game - such major industry really came to Mexico in the 1880's - but having both wine and liquor factories at the start of the GC would be very reasonable.
I'd also think that probably lumber, and perhaps fabric and cement factories would be reasonable for the start of the GC as well, but I'd want to research that.
Here's another thing to think about (especially now that we are stepping up to making changes in the .inc files, now) the starting OOB for both Texas and Mexico.
They ought to be more like this:
Texas -
Army of Texas = 20 (would give Houston the historic 2000 men he had at San Jacinto)
Travis' Command = 2 (would put 200 in San Antonio - more than the historical 186)
Fannin's Command = 5 (there were about 400 men put to the sword at Goliad, but some of his force escaped)
Mexico -
Ejército del Norte = 6 (Cos' command of about 600)
Ejército del Sur = 12 (with a hussar brigade(?) Urrea's command of about 1200)
Ejército Mejico = 34 (with a hussar brigade(?), engineers(?) the main army under Santa Ana at San Luis Potosi - 3400)
Ejército Mejico = 50 (the other half of the army under Comonfort at Ciudad Mejico)
These numbers are much more in line with history and the game scale.
They ought to be more like this:
Texas -
Army of Texas = 20 (would give Houston the historic 2000 men he had at San Jacinto)
Travis' Command = 2 (would put 200 in San Antonio - more than the historical 186)
Fannin's Command = 5 (there were about 400 men put to the sword at Goliad, but some of his force escaped)
Mexico -
Ejército del Norte = 6 (Cos' command of about 600)
Ejército del Sur = 12 (with a hussar brigade(?) Urrea's command of about 1200)
Ejército Mejico = 34 (with a hussar brigade(?), engineers(?) the main army under Santa Ana at San Luis Potosi - 3400)
Ejército Mejico = 50 (the other half of the army under Comonfort at Ciudad Mejico)
These numbers are much more in line with history and the game scale.