Why i dont cant recruit generals, explorer, admiral, etc

[FREDREX]

i have a campaign whit france and i canot recruit generals and nothing, i have the idea quest for the new world and i canott recruit explorer and conquistador why??? because i am a feudal monarquy?, i have two posibilities one its a bug or 2 is the options what i changed, i put the leaders and caracter in historical and not in normal

 

[naggy]

i have a campaign whit france and i canot recruit generals and nothing, i have the idea quest for the new world and i canott recruit explorer and conquistador why??? because i am a feudal monarquy?, i have two posibilities one its a bug or 2 is the options what i changed, i put the leaders and caracter in historical and not in normal

That's why. Historical leaders mean you cannot recruit any leader types - you only get the historical leaders on specific pre-defined days.

 

[Fay]

This and the fact that you need 1 diplomat for each General/Admiral and 1 colonist for each Explorer/Conquistador.

 

[OutsiderSubtype]

Historical leaders means you only get the explorers and conquistadors France got historically. It's a pretty bad way to play the game, to be honest.

 

[dharper]

Historical Leaders: Your country will receive any generals, admirals, explorers or conquistadors that it did historically at that date, but is unable to hire any, making tradition (and buildings, national ideas and modifiers that give it) useless. I believe (but am not sure) that this also makes national ideas and modifiers that change leader stats (manuever, shock, fire) useless as well, since historical leaders have set stats. Note that this feature makes Quest for the New World useless, since you cannot hire explorers or conquistadors (this may make colonization of the New World more historical). Like advisors, some countries are blessed with leaders while others never receive any, but keep in mind that your country is likely to receive many leaders during times that were historically bloody - you should plan your wars in advance (or take advantage of new generals appearing) if you want to make sure of having leadership in your wars. Note that countries that did not exist historically will not receive any leaders at all, so if England becomes Great Britain in 1500 it will not receive any leaders - including explorers - until 1703, thus crippling itself.

 

[FREDREX]

Thanks i prefer the game historical, in what year france receive explorer?? and the options leaders for events how is?

 

[orwell]

Event is for modders only. Do not use it unless specifically directed to by a mod.

 

[unmerged(114111)]

I've never played with historical leaders before, but I assume the first explorer they get will be Jacques Cartier in 1532 (or earlier). By that time Spain and Portugal would already have a decent selection of explorers and conquistadors. As you can probably tell, France was relatively late in exploring and colonizing the New World, and even after they started, they were pretty slow. Mostly because they didn't really need to. The French people preferred living in France, and the only things about the New World that interested the French traders were the furs and fish.

 

[smellymummy]

The French people preferred living in France, and the only things about the New World that interested the French traders were the furs and fish.

fish?

 

[unmerged(114111)]

Sounds silly in the context of EU3, but ya, apparently most of French colonization was for the exporting of furs and fish. And it is true that the North Atlantic used to be great for fishing before the fish population was decimated.

 

[smellymummy]

well furs is a given, it's just i've never heard of fish being so valuable to the french. i know the english we're fishing a lot out in that area, but this the first time i see fish in relation to french new world interests. interesting

 

[unmerged(11600)]

Hmm, I'm usually not correcting dharper, but let me point out that QftNW is still a useful NI in IN due to the +50% colonial range.

-Pat

 

[unmerged(114111)]

The fish was valuable to everyone, including the French. That's why people bothered sending fishers to those distant shores at all. Without the fish, the Europeans may not have been interested enough in Canada to discover the more valuable stuff inland. In the grand scheme of things, though, the fish is not as important later on as the sugar colonies and fur trade. Think of fish as the gateway drug, and the fur and sugar as the addiction.

 

[Nyrael]

Thanks i prefer the game historical, in what year france receive explorer?? and the options leaders for events how is?

Yeah, when your King lives for 300 years, the game is so historical...

 

[unmerged(114111)]

Now there's an idea: starting and ending a game in the lifespan of one ruler. Or better yet, staying with one country in a game for one ruler, then when he/she dies, move to another country in the same game, etc. Who wants to try that?

 

[dharper]

Thanks i prefer the game historical, in what year france receive explorer??

You can see all leaders in your EU3/history/countries/fra - france.txt file.

France gets explorers from 1522-8, 1534-42, 1553-7, 1615-25 and 1766-93.

Hmm, I'm usually not correcting dharper, but let me point out that QftNW is still a useful NI in IN due to the +50% colonial range.

Good point.

 

[unmerged(115611)]

Am i the only one who it strikes as odd that you would colonize for just FISH? i mean if you live there you need fish to make sure you dont starve, but its not like you could bring the fish back to France without it getting a bit smelly?

 

[dharper]

Am i the only one who it strikes as odd that you would colonize for just FISH? i mean if you live there you need fish to make sure you dont starve, but its not like you could bring the fish back to France without it getting a bit smelly?

The island of Newfoundland was fought over for this very reason: both the English and French used it to dry the cod they had caught in the Atlantic before returning to Europe. As part of the treaty that ended the French and Indian War in 1763, the French retained the right to dry fish there (although they gave up quite a lot otherwise); there's still a part of the island known as the "French Shore". Most of the dried fish was sold to Spain and Italy, and later (at a lower profit) to the domestic market. Keep in mind that during that century France suffered several years of famine, and one of their chief exports was grain; if they had a steady source of cod from the New World, they could have exported even more, paid off Louis XIV's war debts, and still staved off famine and revolution.

Mind you, Newfoundland was not one of the bigger colonies in America, and was one of the last to gain autonomy from Britain largely because it lacked the population of other colonies that had more local industry.

There's an interesting discussion of this history at the Newfoundland Heritage website.

 

[Veldmaarschalk]

Am i the only one who it strikes as odd that you would colonize for just FISH? i mean if you live there you need fish to make sure you dont starve, but its not like you could bring the fish back to France without it getting a bit smelly?

They salted the fish, and that you you can transport it all across the Atlantic, without the fish going 'smelly'

 

[unmerged(175734)]

Is it possible to edit the save to allow for normal recruitment of leaders?