|
1) If Ertan had been successfully assassinated, who would have inherited? 2) If the heir belonged to a different dynasty (meaning a game over screen), would you have gone with it and said "well, sorry guys, turns out this was actually a 4-update megaLP"?
|
# ¿ Aug 10, 2011 00:42 |
|
|
# ¿ Apr 29, 2024 04:26 |
|
I suppose you now get to name a bunch of new vassals for the conquered lands? If so, will they be loyal or will your bad reputation just make the more knives at the Sultan's throat?
|
# ¿ Aug 10, 2011 16:02 |
|
dun dun DUNNNNNNN!! No, I don't have anything better to add.
|
# ¿ Aug 11, 2011 01:24 |
|
What scares me the most right now is that at any moment Byzantium might decide that they want the whole of Cyprus. They look healthy and the Mongols still have a while to go before they slap them. Also, Naples is doing a mighty fine job. How long until they claim the Iron Crown of Italy and/or get elected Emperors?
|
# ¿ Aug 11, 2011 22:01 |
|
Man, all this Mongol warfare talk just made me reinstall Medieval 2 TW + Stainless Steel.lonelywurm posted:Another key factor is that a mongol archer riding a mare was his own supply line - a combination of milk and blood could be all a warrior would eat for days at a time, bulked up by hastily hunted meat.
|
# ¿ Aug 12, 2011 13:38 |
|
AgentF posted:So, what, now you're drinking a frothy pink mixture? Fantastic. That actually looks delicious. Then again I love blood sausages of all kinds, and when I get a paper cut I also enjoy the taste of my own blood.
|
# ¿ Aug 12, 2011 15:23 |
|
Yes, the Nameless Brethren must abso-jävligt-lutely be modded into the EU3 starting scenario. A less anachronistic comparison could be to the Waldensians, which in fact survived to this day despite having had a loving Crusade called upon them in the late 12th century.
|
# ¿ Aug 15, 2011 08:03 |
|
"The common Ummah pray for rain, healthy children and a summer that never ends. It is no matter to them if the high emirs play their game of caliphates, so long as they are left in peace. They never are."
|
# ¿ Aug 15, 2011 09:08 |
|
Everybody's hoping for the next update to be "... and absolutely nothing happened for the next 20 years." Actually, if a Jihad is called could you send Golden Boy to his death there? If all your neighbours are Muslims it should be relatively safe to declare on an overseas Christian enemy, right?
|
# ¿ Aug 17, 2011 19:06 |
|
That Italy What's the status of the Holy Roman Emperor? Still Bohemian and ineffective? Also, does the Bubonic Plague modifier spread more easily within the same country, or is it indiscriminate and we can look forward to plague-stricken neighbours too?
|
# ¿ Aug 18, 2011 00:08 |
|
Such a rain of updates! Wiz is like a mum telling us "Why, kids, of course you can have the whole tub of ice cream"
|
# ¿ Aug 19, 2011 16:55 |
|
Here's a fairly straightforward idea: Egypt used to be a Crusader kingdom until you conquered it from the North, right? So let's have a Christian kingdom survive to the South in Sudan, as a replacement / forecast of what in the real timeline would be Catholic Ethiopia two centuries later. Also, did I read correctly in the map that you created Lübeck ex novo? Why not have independent, republican Gotland be the foremost Baltic trade power instead? (because small islands are a terrible position for a merchant power, ok, but Lübeck would not have been so hot without the Stecknitz Canal either, which in this reality might well never have been built) NihilCredo fucked around with this message at 00:07 on Aug 20, 2011 |
# ¿ Aug 20, 2011 00:05 |
|
Wouldn't "Batavian Order" sound better than "Dutch Order"?
|
# ¿ Aug 20, 2011 00:40 |
|
1) Did Timur die during his first military campaign? No 2) Did Zabulistan successfully resist the Ghaznavid invasion? No 3) Did the Mongol invasion of Japan succeed in reaching the island? No 4) Did the Australian megafauna survive human migration into the continent? Yes 5) Did Sundiata Keita die in exile? No
|
# ¿ Aug 20, 2011 14:20 |
|
The Saurus posted:Megafauna? What difference does that make in EU3! I suppose it could give Australia/NZ some extremely valuable and unique trade goods, though that would probably only have a noticeable effect around the Vicky era.
|
# ¿ Aug 20, 2011 15:55 |
|
Jeb Bush 2012 posted:I thought the Italian unification decision specifically excluded the Papacy? It does, but they can form the Kingdom of God instead over pretty much the same provinces. If farraday's recollection is correct, it seems the KoG, unlike the Papal State, can turn Muslim (and if so, that's something that should probably be fixed).
|
# ¿ Aug 25, 2011 15:05 |
|
The Najjar aren't usurpers - it was due to their own infertility that the Ildeguzid didn't have male heirs. When the eldest daughter was married to the son of the loyal steward, the sultan knew that this effectively meant adopting him as heir. Given that the Najjar's rise to royalty came from their generation-spanning role as stewards/viziers, I would recommend Bureaucracy as the second national idea, after Patron of the Arts. For the third one, Azerbaijan's long-standing enmity with both Christian and Mongol interlopers, and its history of relative friendship with Muslim neighbours, suggests Unam Sanctam (or whatever gives the Holy War CB under Wiz's modding).
|
# ¿ Aug 25, 2011 17:39 |
|
Wiz posted:I might just ignore them since it's not really going to affect the game much. It would be a different story if there was actual heretical rulers. Well, the Waldensians and the Cathars never got more than a few minor nobles to support them, and they still caused a good deal of trouble. Would it be terribly hard to just set the province religion as Cathar / Hussite / Reformed / whatever you have? Most of them indeed probably won't do anything, but in EU3 there's almost always a few countries that just crumble, and some of those group of heretics might be able to pull off a successful revolt, or at least tip the balance if their country is embroiled in a very close struggle.
|
# ¿ Aug 25, 2011 20:41 |
|
Wiz posted:Why am I staring at this? It's not a bug, I deliberately removed localization. Why did I remove localization? You figure it out! Does it make it easier to work with EU3 on one screen and Notepad on the other when you see the same tags on both sides? (Speaking of which, is there a "Introductory guide to converting your CK/EU3/V2 saves to EU3/V2/AoD" somewhere?)
|
# ¿ Aug 25, 2011 23:11 |
|
Murderion posted:Given this, shouldn't "achieve Celtic unity" be an objective for all of the Celtic states in 1400? I don't know how this stuff works in EUIII, since I don't own the game. I'll probably pick it up soon, though. Uniting the Celtic survivors is a fine goal for a human player, but an AI would most likely horribly gently caress up the management of a country split into four disconnected regions. Maybe if England had totally collapsed like France.
|
# ¿ Aug 28, 2011 16:33 |
|
Garenas posted:I really feel we'd be remiss not to include some classical/imperial Roman influence on the Italian coat of arms, considering Wiz did say that the king styled himself as the inheritor of the Roman Empire.
|
# ¿ Aug 30, 2011 08:13 |
|
Servant posted:The Roman Empire technically already exist in Italian propaganda: the puppet Latin Emperor that holds Constantinople. Unless we are to devalue the title of Emperor by postulating the existence of two Emperors ruling the Italian Empire (a Greek Junior-Emperor and a Sicilian Senior-Emperor), I think it's more likely that the Italian Empire is claiming not to resurrect the "Roman" empire but to supplant it (due to the whole "successor" claim). It was just the Byzantines and their neighbours who called themselves "Romans". As far as the West was concerned, there had been two separate empires for the last thousand years (and the separation predated the fall of the West). This includes the 300 years that precede CK during which the Holy Roman Empire never made any claim to the East. In short, if the Hauteville (shouldn't we call them Altavilla now?) want to lay claim to being the heirs of Rome, it would bring them into a clash with Bohemia, not with the pretenders and puppets fighting over Constantinople. NihilCredo fucked around with this message at 17:27 on Aug 30, 2011 |
# ¿ Aug 30, 2011 17:23 |
|
IIRC the Hautevilles calling themselves the new Roman Emperors was a touch of fluff written by Wiz, not an actual Crusader Kings effect.Servant posted:The main difference seems to me to involve Papal relationships; if you're the King of Italy, it's reasonable to agree to a mega-Vatican City concordat that leaves the Eternal City in the hands of the Church. If you're the Emperor of the Romans, however, ya gotta grab that bitch, yo. (Pointless style-talk: While it's true that Odoacer sent the eagles over to Constantinople in the 'landmark' year of 476, Charlemagne and the then-Byzantine Emperor peacefully acknowledged each other something like a decade after his coronation; the tension over the title of Imperator Romanorum, IIRC, was mostly fueled by the Pope and his desire to get back the Eastern schismatics. As for translatio imperii, it always was a piece of propaganda more than a honestly debated legal issue - much like the Donatio Constantini for the Papal State. It's about as relevant as the justifications medieval scholars came up with for why the world didn't end with the millennium. Anything that happens by force of arms gets afterwards sanctioned via the proper exegetical quibbles, not vice versa.) NihilCredo fucked around with this message at 19:01 on Aug 30, 2011 |
# ¿ Aug 30, 2011 18:58 |
|
Frionnel posted:I think this is lovely except that the black horse on blue is drat near invisible. Outlining him in white would solve the issue.
|
# ¿ Aug 31, 2011 20:33 |
|
It would be bloody satisfying to see Porta Pia breached before it was even loving built.
|
# ¿ Aug 31, 2011 23:33 |
|
DarkCrawler posted:
The CoA of Aragon, unlike the flag, should have vertical lines:
|
# ¿ Sep 1, 2011 20:20 |
|
^^^^^ It always feels a little disappointing to form GB from a country other than England, because the end-result doesn't look any different so it still feels as if the English are the ruling nation. Assuming Burgundy is still a French-language country, shouldn't its provinces use their French names? E.g. Fribourg, Berne, and Suisse.
|
# ¿ Sep 2, 2011 17:01 |
|
He does have Duchies, they're just not part of the hierarchy for monarchies I guess.
|
# ¿ Sep 3, 2011 03:50 |
|
Does your mod include some rebalancing of the modifiers, Wiz? Otherwise I would say that Quantity +4 is more of a nerf than anything.
|
# ¿ Sep 10, 2011 18:29 |
|
I'm surprised that Burgundy is richer than Italy, but I suppose that's because they have a CoT and Italy has none. Does Italy have cores on the Tuscan republics and/or anything else (missions?) to encourage them to eat them up if possible? You could balance that by making the Tuscans start allied/sphered/guaranteed with some major power.Wiz posted:Clicky Could I suggest reducing it to, say, 3% per tick, and/or adding a land_attrition bonus for Quantity (-0.01 or -0.02 per tick)?
|
# ¿ Sep 11, 2011 19:08 |
|
I'm with Wiz on this. The line between alternate history and wacky poo poo is thin and often blurry, but people from the British Isles, let alone mainland Europe sailing to go trade in Iceland is a pretty clear case of the latter. Just to be clear, Reyjkavik is at the same longitude as Lisbon and at the same latitude as Trondheim. It's really loving out of the way.
|
# ¿ Sep 12, 2011 21:35 |
|
Kavak posted:Would it be possible to tie base tax to population through event chains? Like, every 10000 people it goes up 1 point? Give each one a very short MTTH (I think 1 month is as low as you can go), introduce modifiers elsewhere to increase or decrease population growth (Maybe tying it to technology)? Yes, I think it is definitely doable, but I'm much less sure it's a good idea - this is a game where for years large cities ballooned up to 9999999 inhabitants. Dynamically fixing pop growth seems much harder a goal to me than 'just' dynamically fixing the base tax values. Anyway, a mockup event for the hell of it, if you want to test it: code:
NihilCredo fucked around with this message at 04:38 on Sep 13, 2011 |
# ¿ Sep 13, 2011 04:15 |
|
Wiz posted:Also, in case anyone wonders how cultural tradition works, it's like this: By default you get +1 culture trad/year in peacetime, -2/year in wartime, and bonuses from various things like being in the HRE, decisions you can take, etc. You can buy an advisor if your culture trad is above 10%, and all advisors have the same cost: All your culture trad.
|
# ¿ Sep 13, 2011 21:25 |
|
theblastizard posted:I've had one that was that+Bulgaria in personal union with me in an aborted WC game. In my last game the "M" of "Ming" was touching Karelia. Patter Song posted:In my HTTT Mughal game, I just saw Aragon, with a nearest base of West Africa, conquer most of the island of Sumatra and the southern half of the Malay Peninsula away from Brunei in the 1660s. Granted, that is roughly the time the Dutch started going hardcore into that region, but Aragon? Sailing all the way in from loving Gabon? Why would Aragon be less plausible than the Dutch as a conqueror of SE Asia, assuming they hadn't been reduced to an OPM or something?
|
# ¿ Sep 16, 2011 00:18 |
|
If I'm getting this correctly, the issue is that EU3 scripting doesn't let you either check or affect the actual regiments at all - it deals exclusively with the characteristics of countries and provinces (plus structures like HRE/Papacy/Shogunate). So, say you give a country extra attrition if they're at war with a country from a different continent - it would be horribly inaccurate because AFAIK there is no way to check that they actually sent troop overseas, as opposed to just waiting to white peace out. --- Brainstorming: another ham-fisted implementation, and probably only viable for the New World and subsaharan Africa, might be to reduce the supply limit values of the provinces, then give native American/Oceanian/central-south African countries a triggered modifier that gives them a corrispondent reduction in land_attrition.
|
# ¿ Sep 16, 2011 02:26 |
|
I love how this started up as a straight CK->EU3 conversion and now we're talking about getting Wiz to fix practically everything that can be fixed in EU3, including parts of the world that Azerbaijan will probably never seriously interact with until at least the Vicky start date.
|
# ¿ Sep 16, 2011 21:11 |
|
For reference, this is what Wiz planned for Oz:Wiz posted:4) The migration into Australia occured much earlier than in the real life timeline, and some of its megafauna survived long enough to evolve alongside humans. A species of grazer was domesticed, transforming some Australian aboriginal tribes from hunter-gatherers into pastoral societies. How about just setting Australian natives to max size/ferocity/aggressiveness? If someone still successfully establishes full cities there, so be it; if they manage to resist to some degree then you get to mod the Welsh-Kangaroonian Wars into Vicky 2.
|
# ¿ Sep 17, 2011 01:15 |
|
And if you're really set on it, once the mod package is released, turning a bunch of disconnected provinces into a Lost World-esque kingdom of diprotodon shepherds and kangaroo riders could be a fun introduction to modding.
|
# ¿ Sep 17, 2011 16:11 |
|
Quick question: your Pirate Hunters only serve to 'patrol' the whole world, and do not also prevent the Fund Privateers spy action from doing anything, right? ('cause that one seems to me the most historically plausible implementation of pirates in EU3.)
|
# ¿ Sep 17, 2011 16:26 |
|
|
# ¿ Apr 29, 2024 04:26 |
|
Does Azerbaijan start with any non-owned cores?
|
# ¿ Sep 17, 2011 23:39 |