Yeah... It would be quite interesting... Don't know if it should happen in every game though.Originally posted by Carolus Rex
You mean China invading Iberia and stuff??
Good man, at ease.(soon DiB will pop in spil all the fun)
-
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.
But China did have influence in Central Asia during the EU2 period. In fact, some of the Khans of the Kazakhs even swore feality to the Chinese Emperor, showing just how deep into Asia Chinese influence was felt.
As for the states there, it should take some time for the Chinese to wipe out all the minors in the area and get into modern Uzbekistan. If Paradox models the area correctly, the remnant Mongol state, the Oyrats/Kalmyks/Dzungirs, and the Jagatai Khanate will all block any moves by the Chinese to the north and west. Plus, even if they get rid of most of the PTI, it should still remain in the exceptionally high and mountainous terrain in the area (the Himalaya, the Pamirs, and the Tien Shan), leaving only a few strategic gaps through the PTI/mountains, points which a strong fort could hold up Chinese expansion indefinitely
IMHO in the new world (specifically North America) the provinces should be divided into smaller territories (especially along coastal areas). By doing this the amount of land influences by early trading posts and colonies is reduced but the overall land value should not change by much since you will still have the same goods and the same population. This will more accurately simulate how the new world was colonized. First a port was founded then slowly as people arrived they spread inward. In this manner small colonies could exists right next to each other. Is is currently incorrect to show that a small 1000man colony could control an area as large as the one represented by manhattan on the map. there are terrain obstabcles which caused 4 or 5 different colonies to develope in this one region alone. Manhattan, Perth Amboy, Newark, Cape May, Swedesboro, Fort Elfsborg (1st three dutch in north jersey and the isle of manhattan, later three swedish in south jersey). All were contemporary colonies, all under the same respective charters but they competed with each other for dominance over trade and shipping, ...
Another point of order i think would be to allow colonial lands to be semi-autonomous until they reach a set number like 1 or 2 thousand. In this manner small colonial states could war with each other without DoW and without CB's.
The swedes in New Sweden (delaware, eastern maryland, and southern new jersey) New Sweden ended up being a successful colony (1637-1681) that began to take some trade from the dutch in manhattan and conquered the dutch colony of new amstel and its Fort Casimir (renamed Trinity) in 1654, to this end the dutch sailed south in 1655 and took Fort Trinity (todays new castle delaware), Fort Christina (Wilimington, delaware) and Fort Elfsborg (salem, new jersey) from the swedes and doing so took the colony from swedish control, however the colony was allowed to exists as a semi-autonomous "swedish nation" until 1681 when the english established the penn colony
Another point of order i think would be to allow colonial lands to be semi-autonomous until they reach a set number like 1 or 2 thousand. In this manner small colonial states could war with each other without DoW and without CB's.
The swedes in New Sweden (delaware, eastern maryland, and southern new jersey) New Sweden ended up being a successful colony (1637-1681) that began to take some trade from the dutch in manhattan and conquered the dutch colony of new amstel and its Fort Casimir (renamed Trinity) in 1654, to this end the dutch sailed south in 1655 and took Fort Trinity (todays new castle delaware), Fort Christina (Wilimington, delaware) and Fort Elfsborg (salem, new jersey) from the swedes and doing so took the colony from swedish control, however the colony was allowed to exists as a semi-autonomous "swedish nation" until 1681 when the english established the penn colony
Last edited:
Very interesting, I do not know that we had colonies in NA after 1655 and the fall of Fort Kristina.
Someone alse has said that before-but the fact is that the Chinese did conquer Tibet and Vassalise Nepal, in just such inhospitable regions.
Those weren't the mountains I was talking about. The Plateau of Tibet may be inhospitable, but it is nowhere near as bad as the main line of the Himalaya, or the Pamir. Nepal mainly lies to the south of the main line of mountians as well. The PTI would only need to represent the lines of the highest peaks of these moutain chains, with gaps here and there to simulate historically well-used passes.
I like the idea of different level difficulty in exploring different provinces. I'd make the system more complex though, and allow any unit to try and explore any province. However, they'd only have a base chance (lets say, 5 or 10% per level). If they fail to explore, they "fall of the edge of the world". More hostile provinces can have a negative modifier attached to them, so lower level units, while capable of trying to explore them, will have a much lower chance of doing so (maybe a minimal 1% chance, regardless of how hostile the terain is, or how weak the unit's tech level is.
Alexandre
Sounds like what you're proposing is a 'tweak' to the attrition system, with a base attrition level to enter a province based on its level of inhospitability, perhaps very high in the case of Potential Terra Incognita. Combine this with certain Tech Levels that drastically or slightly lower the effect of Attrition on units, and don't we achieve your goals within the current EU attrition - movement -exploration system?
The only New Thing to add would be a Catastrophic Attrition Effect, where the land unit is destroyed attempting to enter or traverse a province. I don't think that exists in the game now - at least, I've had lots of exploring fleets sink on me, but never had a land exploration party disappear simply from movement.
About that TP thing. I remember in Pax Britanica you could actually place the first kind of influence in territories where others already had its influence set. Maybe in EU2 it could be the same, let's just say that there could be 2 diffrent tp in the same territory at the same time. 1 tp would prevent others to start a colony there but to put a tp, and if one territory has a tp then you'll need a tp there to send a colonist.
curango = cubango(river in angola)
palanas = cape palmas (liberia)
mtawa = mtwara(town/province in tanzania)
nampuia = nampula (town in mozambique)
zambela = zambezia(i guess a province name in tanzania)
(the river is the zambezi)
tocuvo = tocuyo
(there are more, i just dont have the time or correct atlas right now.
there ought to be a site where map fixes for eu2 are posted.
palanas = cape palmas (liberia)
mtawa = mtwara(town/province in tanzania)
nampuia = nampula (town in mozambique)
zambela = zambezia(i guess a province name in tanzania)
(the river is the zambezi)
tocuvo = tocuyo
(there are more, i just dont have the time or correct atlas right now.
there ought to be a site where map fixes for eu2 are posted.
he PTI is a PITA (pain in th a..)..
It is also wrong.
The Russians, for, example explored all of Siberia in the 17th and 18th Centuries, including Kamchatka and Sakhalin (Karafuto).
But Siberia is miles and miles of bloody christmas trees. Like most of the PTI it is inhospitable, even if possibly rich in natural resources. They have low population densities and cannot support large populations except by high technology requiring massive investments. They have less than pleasant climate and/or may be subject to strange and noisome diseases and/or very unpleasant insects and parasites. It was only from the late 19th Century that such areas became places of "unlimited possibilities" . and then only to totalitarian visionaries. No 16th or 18th Century ruler in his right mind would attempt to build settler colonies in the Canadian north. They would all die from scurvy the first winter.
Let there be more territories, but let them be very expensive and hard to settle and let them suffer from high attrition rates and negative population growth. While the probability for placing a trader in the Canadian/Siberian north should be high, that for placing a colonist should be very low - or nonexistent. This holds good even if the province is "playable", ie that it can be conquered, in EUII. In fact, these regions were never "conquered". In Siberia a couple of men with guns and liqour was sufficient to impose "taxes" on the natives. In game terms this means a "trader".
While it should be possible to explore them and place traders, it should not be possible to send armies through them. In game terms a force sent into such a province should attrite to 10 men during a winter, regardless of whether its leader is a conquistador or not
The tropics represent a different problem. Europeans conquered and colonized the the American tropics. They never settled in tropical Africa or the Orient. With all provinces playable any European player may attempt to conquer West Africa - and good luck to him. The only Europeans that did conquer/settle in Africa were the Portuguese in Cap Verde, Sao Tome, Angola (Loanda(Mocammedes) and Mocambique and the Dutch in the Cape. The rest of us were strictly traders on the coast until the 1870s. The most accurate simulation of historical 16th-18th European-African interaction would be to have new centres of trade crop uop on the coast of West Africa in pace with the European expansion in South America/the Caribbean. This would also soothe the sensibilities of those too PC to trade in slaves. (Don't send merchants to such centres, don't conquer provinces with slave economies).
With all provinces playable it should be possible for Europeans to conquer their eway into India and Indonesia. But it should be far harder to accolish than today. I have conquered China in five years ...
It is also wrong.
The Russians, for, example explored all of Siberia in the 17th and 18th Centuries, including Kamchatka and Sakhalin (Karafuto).
But Siberia is miles and miles of bloody christmas trees. Like most of the PTI it is inhospitable, even if possibly rich in natural resources. They have low population densities and cannot support large populations except by high technology requiring massive investments. They have less than pleasant climate and/or may be subject to strange and noisome diseases and/or very unpleasant insects and parasites. It was only from the late 19th Century that such areas became places of "unlimited possibilities" . and then only to totalitarian visionaries. No 16th or 18th Century ruler in his right mind would attempt to build settler colonies in the Canadian north. They would all die from scurvy the first winter.
Let there be more territories, but let them be very expensive and hard to settle and let them suffer from high attrition rates and negative population growth. While the probability for placing a trader in the Canadian/Siberian north should be high, that for placing a colonist should be very low - or nonexistent. This holds good even if the province is "playable", ie that it can be conquered, in EUII. In fact, these regions were never "conquered". In Siberia a couple of men with guns and liqour was sufficient to impose "taxes" on the natives. In game terms this means a "trader".
While it should be possible to explore them and place traders, it should not be possible to send armies through them. In game terms a force sent into such a province should attrite to 10 men during a winter, regardless of whether its leader is a conquistador or not
The tropics represent a different problem. Europeans conquered and colonized the the American tropics. They never settled in tropical Africa or the Orient. With all provinces playable any European player may attempt to conquer West Africa - and good luck to him. The only Europeans that did conquer/settle in Africa were the Portuguese in Cap Verde, Sao Tome, Angola (Loanda(Mocammedes) and Mocambique and the Dutch in the Cape. The rest of us were strictly traders on the coast until the 1870s. The most accurate simulation of historical 16th-18th European-African interaction would be to have new centres of trade crop uop on the coast of West Africa in pace with the European expansion in South America/the Caribbean. This would also soothe the sensibilities of those too PC to trade in slaves. (Don't send merchants to such centres, don't conquer provinces with slave economies).
With all provinces playable it should be possible for Europeans to conquer their eway into India and Indonesia. But it should be far harder to accolish than today. I have conquered China in five years ...
A small correction:
Sakhalin was explored by Japanese in 1800s and then Russians 15-20 years later, who tried to expel Japanese settlers from the island.
Most of Southern Siberia was colonised, and parts of the North were too (marginally though). However, Urals were colonised in 15-17 centuries, including some northern parts. I hope they goona add this part to the map.
Sakhalin was explored by Japanese in 1800s and then Russians 15-20 years later, who tried to expel Japanese settlers from the island.
Most of Southern Siberia was colonised, and parts of the North were too (marginally though). However, Urals were colonised in 15-17 centuries, including some northern parts. I hope they goona add this part to the map.
I agree, and already posted something looking your suggestion. IMO a tradepost should not forbid others to build tradeposts in this province. And we come to the question, when can you claim land?
I suggested using a certain boundary that one should reach (f.e. colony is large enough and a mayors mansion is build) before one can claim land. After the requirement is fulfilled, you have to settle this matter with the other nations having a tradepost or colony there (=Diplomay). Some actions could follow out of this:
-merging people in one colony,
-let others search for new lands, building a new colony there, or just ad the people to a nearby colony of the concerned nation.
-expell the others, giving a drop in relations + CB,
This will be concluded by offering money or giving up the right in ohter colonies (adding your colonists already there to the other nation). This will make it very easy for the "trading" partner to establish his colony there.
Heck, these areas should have been in the original map/game-I've never understood the arbitrary nature of the "Siberian corridor" at all!
i have a couple of questions concerning province.csv:
how do the climate and terrain factors for a province influence attrition (for land units) ?
how do the ice and storm factors influence attrition for naval units?
(the storm off cochin always rips my portugese fleets up just in sight of the promise land).
there are a bunch of unlabeled columns between port/sea adjancy and
how do the climate and terrain factors for a province influence attrition (for land units) ?
how do the ice and storm factors influence attrition for naval units?
(the storm off cochin always rips my portugese fleets up just in sight of the promise land).
there are a bunch of unlabeled columns between port/sea adjancy and
[Self-quote from an earlier thread]"...I (silently, 'til now) belong to the somewhat vocal group in the forum that wants the entire world available for discovery - no Terra Incognita. Hopefully, the designers will develop provinces for the entire world. If anyone's worried about historical accuracy in this issue, I'd suggest that certain provinces/areas never be 'explorable' (or 'uncoverable', if you will) by military leaders (even after that military tech advance arrives). Moreover, Explorers themselves should face enormous penalties when attempting to enter provinces/areas that weren't explored before 1820. Such penalties could be severe attrition (Donner Party-scale attrition ) of accompanying parties, or a high incidence of the Explorer's untimely demise (better than 50%) while in 'en route mode' to the province..."
Thanx for the near-echos, Hardu & Alex. One way or another, all the PTI has to go.
Thanx for the near-echos, Hardu & Alex. One way or another, all the PTI has to go.