In general I would agree, but otherwise I think you would have to introduce more variables (which wouldn't be a bad thing but is probably less likely from Paradox's end).
- 8
Wasteland, Eurocentrism, and a petition for an expansion focusing on Africa
- Thread starter mcmanusaur
- Start date
-
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.
I think what they really need to add is some kind of colonization difficulty rating for different provinces, sort of like in Victoria 2, so that it is always more profitable for Europeans to colonize somewhere else. Of course, that then leads to WC problems and other things. Maybe a different colonization system for Africa, like CNs for America and trade companies (which would become Asia only) where you instead just make small trade posts along the coast and trade with local kingdoms for slaves and things, with no real reason to expand inland?
Also, how would the inland nations interact with the rest of the world? If they are literally completely separate, they probably shouldn't really be bothered with, as they would just be their own thing. Was there any outside contact at the time, at least indirectly through coastal kingdoms?
Also, how would the inland nations interact with the rest of the world? If they are literally completely separate, they probably shouldn't really be bothered with, as they would just be their own thing. Was there any outside contact at the time, at least indirectly through coastal kingdoms?
- 20
- 1
- 1
.png){kind=avatar}
I guess one way would be to make wasteland choke points to protect the interior, subsaharan kingdoms but allowing them to potentially do so.
I think most of the Great Lakes region's interaction with the outside world would probably concern the Muslim influence via coastal East Africa, although there could easily be cultural and economic interaction in any direction, really.
- 9
- 1
Really, the only way I can image to keep Euros from expanding into Central Africa is to add a "Non-Home continent" malice (which considering the new region system could be possible), where it's like 10-50% attrition and a large moral loss, like -20%. I feel both could be justified by a lack of supplies, dangerous conditions, and just simply not wanting to fight a war so far from the homeland
- 17
- 2
- 1
That would create odd scenarios where spain gets crushed in north africa, the ottoderps being unable to expand in Africa and Asia etc
- 4
- 2
- 1
Well, when it comes to Spain in North Africa, they did win some wars, but they never really gained the upper hand
Anyways, I was just scrolling through a discussion where one person suggested the distance from the closest player/ allied controlled and owned fort would influence attrition and, under my suggestion, morale as well.
- 13
- 4
There are really any number of ways to approach this problem. I don't know what Paradox is planning with the new region system- it doesn't seem like the kind of change that would really make much difference in the back end. But I have a hard time seeing how they'd justify making that change this late in the game's lifecycle on front-end considerations alone, so perhaps Paradox will feel that it gives them more reason to introduce new mechanics. That said, the new region system is fairly abstracted, so I would be somewhat wary of tying too many mechanics to it.
- 2
- 1
The difference in wasteland between Africa and the Americas is definitely strange, and says something about Paradox's priorities.
I'd like to see an expansion that reduces the amount of wasteland, but also brings in a more sophisticated system for making places easy/hard to colonise. You can see the absurdity when places are easy to colonise by 1600 in EU4, but in Victoria 2 they need several mid-19th century innovations for anyone to even begin colonising them. I don't think absolute bans on colonising areas are the way to go, but some places need to be orders of magnitude slower and more costly to colonise than others, and their needs to be some dependence on the country doing the colonising (so that 'advanced' Europeans can't colonise their way into the heart of Africa at a faster pace than 'primitive' local states can fill up the land).
I'd like to see an expansion that reduces the amount of wasteland, but also brings in a more sophisticated system for making places easy/hard to colonise. You can see the absurdity when places are easy to colonise by 1600 in EU4, but in Victoria 2 they need several mid-19th century innovations for anyone to even begin colonising them. I don't think absolute bans on colonising areas are the way to go, but some places need to be orders of magnitude slower and more costly to colonise than others, and their needs to be some dependence on the country doing the colonising (so that 'advanced' Europeans can't colonise their way into the heart of Africa at a faster pace than 'primitive' local states can fill up the land).
- 18
The following maluses should be added to the game to make colonization more challenging.
Troops should take a supply bonus to attrition based on distance from the nearest fort, maximum attrition 10%. naturally, stepping into an unsettled province that is not connected to another settled province (stepping two provinces into the gray in other words) accrues a "distance to fort" penalty of 9999 and the full attrition penalty.
The fort in this case represents supply bases and established infrastructure to support armies abroad. Most of the time whenever a new colony was established nearly the first thing colonials would do is build a fort. And no, a mothballed fort does NOT count.
This would mean that colonists would need to start their work in an area that was gentle and wouldn't need much tending. That doesn't describe many of the coastal African territories. That tends to write off most of Africa except for the Cape region and a handful of islands. Which is exactly what we want. Now all we need to do is take away that ridiculous immunity the AI has to native revolts and convince Paradox to actually make the AI colonize right.
Tropical provinces should get both disease based events that can wipe out 90% of an established colony, and seasonal maluses to colonial growth up to a maximum of -50 per year based on the rainy season. This should be overcomable but only by a determined colonist who's sunk a lot of mana into being a colonistr. Casual colonizers need not apply.
These disease events should also have a potential to fire whenever a colony's natives revolt which should be extremely frequent, especially tropical inland provinces. However, increased diplo tech should increase the MTTH and increase the likelihood of Europeans finishing colonies.
Obviously nontropical regions of Africa such as the Cape should be much easier to settle. these areas were settled by Europe within this time frame. Just as obviously, the Islamic colonies in eastern Africa need to be represented properly as well.
Similar maluses should be applied to Arctic provinces to account for the short growing season and harsh winter. Do it right and you've prevented both overcolonized Africa and Iberian Siberia in one go. If they have to take the time to build a fort in every new area they colonize before they can safely extend their range the colonizers may even not reach Asia until they're supposed to rather than getting there super duper early compared to real history.
Troops should take a supply bonus to attrition based on distance from the nearest fort, maximum attrition 10%. naturally, stepping into an unsettled province that is not connected to another settled province (stepping two provinces into the gray in other words) accrues a "distance to fort" penalty of 9999 and the full attrition penalty.
The fort in this case represents supply bases and established infrastructure to support armies abroad. Most of the time whenever a new colony was established nearly the first thing colonials would do is build a fort. And no, a mothballed fort does NOT count.
This would mean that colonists would need to start their work in an area that was gentle and wouldn't need much tending. That doesn't describe many of the coastal African territories. That tends to write off most of Africa except for the Cape region and a handful of islands. Which is exactly what we want. Now all we need to do is take away that ridiculous immunity the AI has to native revolts and convince Paradox to actually make the AI colonize right.
Tropical provinces should get both disease based events that can wipe out 90% of an established colony, and seasonal maluses to colonial growth up to a maximum of -50 per year based on the rainy season. This should be overcomable but only by a determined colonist who's sunk a lot of mana into being a colonistr. Casual colonizers need not apply.
These disease events should also have a potential to fire whenever a colony's natives revolt which should be extremely frequent, especially tropical inland provinces. However, increased diplo tech should increase the MTTH and increase the likelihood of Europeans finishing colonies.
Obviously nontropical regions of Africa such as the Cape should be much easier to settle. these areas were settled by Europe within this time frame. Just as obviously, the Islamic colonies in eastern Africa need to be represented properly as well.
Similar maluses should be applied to Arctic provinces to account for the short growing season and harsh winter. Do it right and you've prevented both overcolonized Africa and Iberian Siberia in one go. If they have to take the time to build a fort in every new area they colonize before they can safely extend their range the colonizers may even not reach Asia until they're supposed to rather than getting there super duper early compared to real history.
Last edited:
- 33
- 4
- 2
IMO, better modeling of the Americas - both to be more realistic and to make early gameplay of American civs much more engaging - would have a much busier map, but with some sort of plague mechanic triggered by colonizers.
My thoughts on it are vague, but it could be something that hits provinces with increasingly painful penalties, even to the point of wiping out provinces and changing them to unsettled. This should probably lower but not wipe out development investments, since in some places colonists were able to basically just take over native farms and land left empty by dead locals.
- 7
- 1
Just reduce the number of colonizable provinces on the African coast. European powers usually don't bother conquering non-adjacent African lands.
This x1000. Whole Africa and Pacific end up colonized by late 1600s because the AI can spam colonies in provinces with maximum aggressiveness with no troops to protect them and yet never get a revolt.
- 32
- 2
NO. Ming relies on rushing across the Indian Ocean with its first colonist (and later pushing north through Oirat/east through Jianzhou/Yeren/Kurils/easternmost Asia after you get the second (who either one, while waiting for the latest colony in the chain to core, should be carving up next to Uzbek after carving through Oirat to cut off Muscovy/Russia if they made it) to survive Paradox's ridiculous tech system.
I'd love this.
- 6
- 1
You dont really mean survive paradoxs system. You mean be able to world conquer effectively. A human player would have no problem surviving as china for the entire game without westernising. What you want is to have the western tech so you can conquer all of asia. Apparently the idea that such a reasonable aim would require gamey tactics is shocking to you.
- 23
I just wanna add my support to the ai native revolt immunity part of silverbow's post.
So very very needed.
If that proves impossible, hit the a.i. with a steep growth malus that scales with the native presence.
So very very needed.
If that proves impossible, hit the a.i. with a steep growth malus that scales with the native presence.
- 13
- 1
I guess they should give these nation something like 'pagan homeland attrition' like in CK2. That way they won't be painted horrible yellow or green before the end of the game.
- 4
Africa could be included if the sahara and the kalahari as left as wasteland and south africa became a colonial region. And colonies were limited to colonial regions. All other colonialism (africa and the spice islands) get handled with some other mechanics, representing protectorates and tradeposts. Small islands outside of the spice islands or the colonial regions should probably be colonisable as well.
Colonialism attached to your capital should always work though (russia or if any of the african countries want to expand).
Colonialism attached to your capital should always work though (russia or if any of the african countries want to expand).
- 3
The game is already sometimes unstable on some 32 bits system as it is now. I had to tweak my memory settings so that it runs smoothly on my system after the lasts DLC. I am not sure there is still that much room for map expansions, unless the developers find a way to optimize.
- 2
.png){kind=avatar}
Perhaps you should play M&T? They are all about the better map and historical reality. Also, Africa can be pretty interesting.
- 3
- 2
- 2