I wouldn't be surprised if he's talking post-unification Germany. In many of my recent games Germany beats up on Denmark on a regular basis - it seems there might need to be some tweaking of the AI, to tone down that aggressiveness.
-
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.
Yeah I'm talking about Germany, I know Prussia has two event-driven wars with Denmark, but even if the Germans own all of schleswig-holstein they'll nonetheless continue attacking the Danish until they are annexed.
I think this would need to be an AI tweak (likely removing Denmark from Germany's AI file in the parts about who your enemies and targets, etc... are).
(P.S. Sorry for late reply... forgot about this).
I started a Game with Sweden hoping to form the Scandinavian Union, I followed the Script to form it as printed on the previous page but cannot join the Union because it says "Game Over" and It just quits, The Worst Thing is that you cannot even Save the Game before it Quits..Seems like a waste of time if you ask me.
Oh Yes, From 1836 to 1846, I researched 10 culture techs with Sweden, They didn't fire for ages and ages, And my Prestige was very low. With other nations like the big ones, they tend to fire more or less straight away, Especially Romanticism and Realism, Maybe not having a Navy decreased my Prestige too.
Oh Yes, From 1836 to 1846, I researched 10 culture techs with Sweden, They didn't fire for ages and ages, And my Prestige was very low. With other nations like the big ones, they tend to fire more or less straight away, Especially Romanticism and Realism, Maybe not having a Navy decreased my Prestige too.
Last edited:
If Denmark has greater prestige than Sweden, it becomes Scandinavia rather than Sweden.
The events probably need another set of triggers so that it happens that the human player always becomes SCA if the other conditions are met.
Two questions. When I play as Sweden and chose Scandinavist surge I never see any further events fire in the logs in any of the Slesvig wars, however I see the wars fire wjen playing other nations, is this wad?
And also, I once managed to satillite Russia as Sweden and it gave me St Petersburg and Russias Capital moved to Moscow, what is the reasoning behind this? Is this another part of taking back parts of the "empire"?
And also, I once managed to satillite Russia as Sweden and it gave me St Petersburg and Russias Capital moved to Moscow, what is the reasoning behind this? Is this another part of taking back parts of the "empire"?
How much can you get as sweden during the crimean war? I joined the war and thought I could get Finland in a peace deal or an event but right when things were going really well VIP decided that the crimean war was over and I was granted the wonderfull reward of Mariehamn. A province producing fish with 5000 inhabitants. 
I think the crimean war is done badly in VIP when a event stops the war just after 5 months. :wacko: Do anyone know the triggers for the "Paris peace"(I think it was paris) event? This sort of killed all fun I was having in my Sweden game. I know I will never be able to beat Russia in a regular war with the manpower I have.
I think the crimean war is done badly in VIP when a event stops the war just after 5 months. :wacko: Do anyone know the triggers for the "Paris peace"(I think it was paris) event? This sort of killed all fun I was having in my Sweden game.
I know I will never be able to beat Russia in a regular war with the manpower I have.
Here are the trigger conditions:
Found in: "...\scenarios\VIPscen\events\VIP_Russia.txt"
Code:
trigger = {
event = 2513 # Crimean War
flag = { name = flg_russia_crimeayes value = 1 }
owned = { province = 983 data = RUS } # Ismail
owned = { province = 985 data = RUS } # Cherson
owned = { province = 1041 data = RUS } # Erevan
desperation = { country = RUS data = 8 } #at least 16 Russian provinces occupied
NOT = {
desperation = { country = TUR data = 5 } #less than 5 Ottoman provinces under occupation
}
}
Is there any reason behind the fact that Scandinavia has 4 liberal parties but none with full citizenship? the only way to go in this direction is to go either socialist or communist. this seems ... weird given the fact scandinavia has cultures like finish, uralic and north german.
I just read through this thread and saw a lot of talk about the lack of swedish cores in finland. I can only agree with those who think sweden should have cores on finland. Finland belonged to Sweden 1249–1809 and a vast majority of the 19th century Finnish intellectuals were swedish speaking and of swedish descent. The reason Sweden never tried to take finland back was because of Oscar I's fear of Russia, not for the lack of revanchism in Sweden. The Novembertraktaten (november treaty) between Sweden/Norway and Britain and France in 1855 guaranteed Sweden's independance and was more or less a defensive alliance between the western powers and Sweden. Napoleon III himself was in Stockholm and met with Oscar I to discuss plans for war operations in the baltic sea in spring 1856. It was from these discussions, along with the possibility of Austrian agression, that Russia got cold feet and signed the treaty of Paris.
So in the end it was Russian cowardice, not lack of interest in Sweden that made sure Finland remained russian.
Swedish cores on finland please, and the Crimean war needs rework. Always ending the war with the treaty of paris doesn't seem very historical since, as I wrote before, this war could have spread and turned into something much bloodier. The historical path is basically a twist of fate, and it was a very unlikely chain of events that ended the war. I think there should be somewhat higher chance that the war continues anyway.
So in the end it was Russian cowardice, not lack of interest in Sweden that made sure Finland remained russian.
Swedish cores on finland please, and the Crimean war needs rework. Always ending the war with the treaty of paris doesn't seem very historical since, as I wrote before, this war could have spread and turned into something much bloodier. The historical path is basically a twist of fate, and it was a very unlikely chain of events that ended the war. I think there should be somewhat higher chance that the war continues anyway.
The Paris Treaty is the only historical outcome of the Crimean War, for it was what happened in history. Everything else is alternate history, and, as such, not on the priority agenda of the mod team for the next couple of VIP updates.
Thus, I shall only refer you folks to what OHGamer had said times and times over: if you have a plausible alternate history route and wish to implement it, then write out the event chains, add the approprite cores, do the changes you wish to see. After this, submit it to the VIP team on the CORE-VIP forums.
Don't even go there.
Change:
Always ending with the Treaty of Paris doesn't seem very balanced.
Happy?
It where Swedish cowardice, since France took Åland and asked Sweden to garrison it and if (we) Sweden had it would have been part of Sweden. As for Finland I am not that sure if Sweden would have had it back since Finnish nationalism had been a strong force since 1810 and more and more of the dominant people in Finland changed their name to more Finnish equivalent and started to speak Finnish.
Only if Sweden agree to be a part of the alliance that goes for Moscow.
If the player isn't interfering in the war, always ending with the Treaty of Paris seems fine by me. Otherwise it can compromise later events too frequently.
So anyone who think that a more or less sandbox game (yes, I went there, a game where you can get Nepal as nr1. Great Power is a sandbox) should be a sandbox has to automatically learn how to fiddle with this sandbox at event command level?
Yes, I know, one of VIPS points is to be historical, but even if you conquer all of Finland as Sweden, all you get in the Crimean War is measly Aland. And historical gets thrown out of the window the moment you choose to invade Finland.
While I agree that players who want something done should show initiative for it, but you are basically telling him to buzz of and write his own damned events if that is so important to him, and this is, frankly, snobbish.
(Or I have been at the EVE fora too long and interpret everything as smacktalk, in which case I apologize)
I don't think itt's not snobbish, but the thing is, given the size that VIP has gotten to, if people don't make more practical suggestions (such as posting the event in the thread, and saying what specific commands should be changed to what, etc.) it helps little.