Dawn of Kingdoms

Bordic · Dec 11, 2011

Third Angel said:
... and that also applies to the Music folder, though at some point I did consider adding some medieval music but I had to prioritize things.

I see that you have Crusader Kings. In this game we have 13 tracks:

CRUSADER_KINGS
BLACK_SHIELD_WHITE_CROSS
BROTHERHOOD_OF_CLUNY
CRAC_DES_CHEVALIERS
CROSS_OR_CROWN
DANCE_WITH_THE_REAPER
EASTERN_WIND
EL_CID
LA_SERENISIMA
MENU
SCORPION_IN_THE_SAND
VOICES_OF_WAR
WAR_WITHOUT_END

Although CK is Paradox product, I don't know if we could break any copyright rule in adding them in a mod for FTG. Otherwise they could be perfect...

ConjurerDragon · Dec 11, 2011

Third Angel said:
Having no HRE in 888 is on purpose, read above as we cross-posted. Do you happen to know if the hre command works even for un-owned provinces? In that case, we could implement a HRE with Otto I's coronation as emperor.

Should the event really add un-owned provinces? In this thread:
http://forum.paradoxplaza.com/forum...mp-Austria&p=12542057&viewfull=1#post12542057
I tried the opposite way - removing provinces from the HRE when the Ottomans conquered provinces. But why should provinces the emperor not controls become part of the empire?

...
Also, if you happen to have some time and to be somewhat knowledgeable about medieval Germany, or any other country, feel free to conribute.

No, I just wanted to take a look at the map you use - and as it´s so easy to install even mods with different maps with FtG even I could do that ( as opposed to former EU2 times where for each different map the whole game had to be installed in a seperate folder... )

I don´t think FtG´s game engine is really suited to games in that time. To be historically accurate each "state" would have to have "national cores" only on it´s capital and perhaps a handful provinces and the rest controlled by lots and lots of sometimes more or less independant vassals. And FtG can´t really do well with far fewer vassals even in the 1419 - timeframe. I´d rather use Crusader Kings to play in that time.

Instead of the +30 RR that were suggested in several posts why not use claimcores instead of national cores and redefine "nationalism" as "local resistance"?

Bordic · Dec 11, 2011

ConjurerDragon said:
Should the event really add un-owned provinces? In this thread:
http://forum.paradoxplaza.com/forum...mp-Austria&p=12542057&viewfull=1#post12542057
I tried the opposite way - removing provinces from the HRE when the Ottomans conquered provinces. But why should provinces the emperor not controls become part of the empire?

Indirectly, with vassal kingdoms if not inherited by GER.

In case we could renounce the Imperial eagle on GER capital city but the HRE can be drawn up accordingly. Of course military access and tributes to the HRE won't work.

ConjurerDragon · Dec 11, 2011

Bordic said:
...
We could test a MUS event discovering GER in 962 scenario and see what happens.
Of course religion_special defines should be in the folder.
And following in the countries.txt

Code:

MUS = { #Perpetual Pope elector = 1 history = { } }

Hopely it could work!

Another way to prevent someone wrong to be elected emperor early would be to start the game with an existing emperor. Make Leo VI of Byzanz emperor and noone will be elected emperor until he dies or Byzanz is annihilated ^^

Bordic · Dec 11, 2011

ConjurerDragon said:
Another way to prevent someone wrong to be elected emperor early would be to start the game with an existing emperor. Make Leo VI of Byzanz emperor and noone will be elected emperor until he dies or Byzanz is annihilated ^^

Well, that's a good idea.
In case PAP could be the ONLY elector by event in 962 and with +400 rel to GER it could elect GER as emperor. Default_emperor would be GER. BYZ would be emperor in the scenario data.

Bordic · Dec 11, 2011

I just wanted to point out that in order to use MUS events we need to add province no. 2018 as known in the "inc file" of any Catholic or European country. This file is in each scenario folder.

Than we need to create a specific inc file for MUS country:

Code:

#-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

country = {
	tag = MUS
	colonialattempts = 0
	colonialnation = no
	major = no
	colonists = 0
	cancelledloans = 0
	extendedloans = 0
	treasury = 10
	inflation = 0
	policy = {
		date = { year = 0 month = january day = 0 }
		aristocracy = 0
		centralization = 0
		innovative = 10
		mercantilism = 10
		offensive = 5
		land = 10
		quality = 5
		serfdom = 5
	}
	merchants = 0.0
	religion = { type = catholic }
	culture = { type = frankish }
	diplomacy = { }
	knownprovinces = { 2018 }
	ownedprovinces = { 2018 }
	controlledprovinces = { 2018 }
	nationalprovinces = { 2018 }
	city = {
		population = 2000
		location = 2018 
		name = "Fortuna"
		capital = yes
	}
	diplomats = 0
	technology = {
		stability = { level = 3 value = 0 }
		infra = { level = 0 value = 0 }
		trade = { level = 0 value = 0 }
		land = { level = 0 value = 0 }
		naval = { level = 0 value = 0 }
		group = exotic
	}
}

#-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

In this way all event for Perpetual Pope would work.

ConjurerDragon · Dec 11, 2011

Bordic said:
Well, that's a good idea.
...
In case PAP could be the ONLY elector by event in 962 and with +400 rel to GER it could elect GER as emperor. Default_emperor would be GER. BYZ would be emperor in the scenario data.

Then in file
888_GlobalData.inc
simply add emperor = BYZ
at the bottom like this:

Code:

	}

emperor = BYZ
#--------------------------------------------------

}

Bordic · Dec 11, 2011

I have found a possible bug here:

If ITA_228000 goes with action B Guido doesn't become king until 889. It is strange to see Berengario fighting with himself as Margrave of Friuli.

This should be changed:

Code:

historicalmonarch = {
	id = { type = 6 id = 064501 }
	name = "Guido di Spoleto"
	startdate = {
		day = 12
		month = february
		year = [COLOR="#FFFF00"]888 [/COLOR] [COLOR="#FF0000"]889[/COLOR] [COLOR="#FFFF00"]#889 IRL[/COLOR]
	}
	enddate = {
		day = 11
		month = december
		year = 894
	}
	DIP = 6
	ADM = 4
	MIL = 7
	dormant = yes
	remark = "Guido III, duke of Spoleto"
}

Bordic · Dec 11, 2011

ConjurerDragon said:
Then in file
888_GlobalData.inc
simply add emperor = BYZ
at the bottom like this:

Code:

} emperor = BYZ #-------------------------------------------------- }

Yes, the problem is that I have tried with MUS but the engine seems to need a visible HRE (not a MUS monarch) in order to elect a new one.

EDIT: And the default emperor isn't changeable by event. Without electors the engine uses all monarchs of the default emperor until we have at least one elector by event.

So we cannot have BYZ as emperor until 962 and GER after that year, that's what I think I have understood.

In conclusion, when not modified in a future FTG patch we can only draw up our HRE provinces by events in 888 scenario and start the 962 and 1031 scenarios with GER as Emperor and with the HRE in its historical boundaries.

ConjurerDragon · Dec 11, 2011

Bordic said:
Yes, the problem is that I have tried with MUS but the engine seems to need a visible HRE (not a MUS monarch) in order to elect a new one.

EDIT: And the default emperor isn't changeable by event. Without electors the engine uses all monarchs of the default emperor until we have at least one elector by event.

So we cannot have BYZ as emperor until 962 and GER after that year, that's what I think I have understood.

In conclusion, when not modified in a future FTG patch we can only draw up our HRE provinces by events in 888 scenario and start the 962 and 1031 scenarios with GER as Emperor and with the HRE in its historical boundaries.

For your MUS way: You did define MUS as being an elector with at least 1 vote? You did define the 1 hidden province of MUS as being part of the HRE?

Why would you want to change the default emperor when the wanted emperor should be GER?
In the 1419 scenario the default emperor is HAB but the first emperor is HUN so it´s no problem that the default emperor would be GER and the first emperor BYZ.

Bordic · Dec 11, 2011

ConjurerDragon said:
For your MUS way: You did define MUS as being an elector with at least 1 vote? You did define the 1 hidden province of MUS as being part of the HRE?

Why would you want to change the default emperor when the wanted emperor should be GER?
In the 1419 scenario the default emperor is HAB but the first emperor is HUN so it´s no problem that the default emperor would be GER and the first emperor BYZ.

That's what I did:

Code:

event = {
	id = 10054
	random = no
	country = GER
	name = "The Imperial Election"
	desc = "The Pope has elected us Emperor."

	date = { day = 1 month = february year = 962 }
	
	action = {
	name = "OK"
	command = { type = elector which = MUS value = 1 }
	command = { type = trigger which = 10055 } #MUS
	command = { type = trigger which = 10057 } #HRE Province specific
	}
}


event = {
	id = 10055
	random = no
	country = MUS
	name = "Renovatio Imperii Pope Elector on"
	desc = "."
	
	action = {
	name = "OK"
	command = { type = relation which = GER value = 400 }
	command = { type = relation which = BYZ value = -50 }
	}
}

event = {
	id = 10056
	random = no
	country = MUS
	name = "Renovatio Imperii Pope Elector off"
	desc = "."

	date = { day = 10 month = february year = 962 }
	
	action = {
	name = "OK"
	command = { type = elector which = MUS value = 0 }
	}
}

event = {
	id = 10057
	random = no
	province = 667 #Milan
	name = "The Allegiance to the Emperor"
	desc = "Our province should be part of the HRE"
	

	action_a = {
		name = "This province is imperial fief"
		command = { type = hre which = 667 value = yes }
	}
	action_b = {
		name = "We are masters of our land"
		trigger = {
			NOT = { 
				owned = { province = 667 data = GER } 
		}
		command = { type = trigger which = 10059 } #GER: event to give claim CB
	}
}

without having HRE provinces in the map.

The problem is that until 962 no emperor should be GER apart from a certain period with Arnulf of Carinthia. But if we use BYZ as default and with no elector, after 962 there should be a MUS event a couple of days before the death of each German Emperor. That event is useful to boost relations with GER and decrease relations with BYZ.

And it's not sure GER will always win, according to my tests.

EDIT: It seems that even adding 2018 as HRE province the result doesn't change.

Of course I have anticipated the startdate from 2 to 0 february in order to get these events working!

ConjurerDragon · Dec 11, 2011

Bordic said:
That's what I did:

Code:

event = { id = 10054 random = no country = GER name = "The Imperial Election" desc = "The Pope has elected us Emperor." date = { day = 1 month = february year = 962 } action = { name = "OK" command = { type = elector which = MUS value = 1 } command = { type = trigger which = 10055 } #MUS command = { type = trigger which = 10057 } #HRE Province specific } } event = { id = 10055 random = no country = MUS name = "Renovatio Imperii Pope Elector on" desc = "." action = { name = "OK" command = { type = relation which = GER value = 400 } command = { type = relation which = BYZ value = -50 } } } event = { id = 10056 random = no country = MUS name = "Renovatio Imperii Pope Elector off" desc = "." date = { day = 10 month = february year = 962 } action = { name = "OK" command = { type = elector which = MUS value = 0 } } } event = { id = 10057 random = no province = 667 #Milan name = "The Allegiance to the Emperor" desc = "Our province should be part of the HRE" action_a = { name = "This province is imperial fief" command = { type = hre which = 667 value = yes } } action_b = { name = "We are masters of our land" trigger = { NOT = { owned = { province = 667 data = GER } } command = { type = trigger which = 10059 } #GER: event to give claim CB } }

without having HRE provinces in the map.

The problem is that until 962 no emperor should be GER apart from a certain period with Arnulf of Carinthia. But if we use BYZ as default and with no elector, after 962 there should be a MUS event a couple of days before the death of each German Emperor. That event is useful to boost relations with GER and decrease relations with BYZ.

And it's not sure GER will always win, according to my tests.

EDIT: It seems that even adding 2018 as HRE province the result doesn't change.

Of course I have anticipated the startdate from 2 to 0 february in order to get these events working!

I just ran a quick testgame with emperor = BYZ in the file as described in my earlier post. As long as no elector and HRE province is defined BYZ simply stays emperor even after Leo VI dies.

Errors:
The text for "PORCELLAIN / GLASSWARE" is too long. It´s only shown as "RCELLAIN / GLASSWA" in my game.
The event for Neustria "The seizure of Sens" lacks a description it shows only "EVENTDESC384020"

Shouldn´t "York" be named "Jorvik" while being norse?

Edit: Perhaps add the capital of GER to the HRE in the event about the coronation of GER?

Bordic · Dec 11, 2011

ConjurerDragon said:
I just ran a quick testgame with emperor = BYZ in the file as described in my earlier post. As long as no elector and HRE province is defined BYZ simply stays emperor even after Leo VI dies.

Yes, but GER should in 962 by election. And I didn't manage with the posted events.

ConjurerDragon said:
Edit: Perhaps add the capital of GER to the HRE in the event about the coronation of GER?

Already did. I added the command in the first event. In 962 capital city is Milan. I have also used PAP instead of MUS and both of them and even with 2 votes each.
I have split BYZ monarch in order to get the GER one on 2 feb 962 and BYZ is still emperor. The BYZ monarch dies in 963 and the emperor is still BYZ...

ConjurerDragon · Dec 11, 2011

Bordic said:
Yes, but GER should in 962 by election. And I didn't manage with the posted events.

Already did. I added the command in the first event. In 962 capital city is Milan. I have also used PAP instead of MUS and both of them and even with 2 votes each.
I have split BYZ monarch in order to get the GER one on 2 feb 962 and BYZ is still emperor. The BYZ monarch dies in 963 and the emperor is still BYZ...

You do have the election advantage defined for GER?

Bordic · Dec 11, 2011

ConjurerDragon said:
You do have the election advantage defined for GER?

Yes there is something I surely forgot in order to have things working. I try to see what is missing reading through agceep files...

ConjurerDragon · Dec 11, 2011

Bordic said:
Yes there is something I surely forgot in order to have things working. I try to see what is missing reading through agceep files...

Rome itself could start as part of the HRE so that at least 1 province already is shown on the religious map as part of the HRE.

Bordic · Dec 11, 2011

ConjurerDragon said:
Rome itself could start as part of the HRE so that at least 1 province already is shown on the religious map as part of the HRE.

I think it's not needed for two reasons: we could always have HRE provinces by event before the 962 election; why should PAP pay yearly ducats to BYZ?

Third Angel · Dec 11, 2011

About the HRE

This going way too fast for me. If you two are going to keep this pace, I will have to ask permission to open one or two other working threads, or even ask for a dedicated subforum.

Unfortunately, the following might cool down things a bit. :ninja:

First of all, I do not think that GER should inherit its vassals. Otto I never tried to rule directly outside Saxony and Franconia. He was content to appoint his relatives in the other duchies, Bavaria, Swabia and Lotharingia, and to be recognized as an overlord in the sub-kingdoms, ITA where he allowed Berengar II for a time, BUR of course, but also FRA and NST where, in 962, both the king and the duke were very young men still largely under the influence of their mothers who happened to be Otto's sisters. All in all, what I am trying to say is that the Ottonian empire was much more of a personnal institution than a territorial one. POL and BOH are also very good examples of this as they tend to be considered by the chroniclers as inside or outside the empire depending on the state of their relations with the emperor.

I think the shift towards a bounded territory with formalized institutions, supposed to be modelled by the FTG system, took 400 years from 962 to 1356, although I do not yet know enough about the twelfth and thirteenth centuries to determine when decisive steps were taken. Take the election process for instance, I do not recall that either Otto II or Otto III were ever elected. Later on, the emperors were elected by the high nobles who attended the assembly, there was no fixed list. Certainly the 1356 decision was only formalizing a process that had already become usual but since when?

So to summarize: no precise defined borders, northern France should definately be part of it in 962, possibly Bohemia and Poland too, but not later on; and no formalized election process with designated electors. Someone posted above that the FTG engine is not suited to medieval simulations, overall I disagree but in some cases he was right, and I think the HRE is one of those.

EDIT: Not to mention the tribute part, now that I am reading the post above, yes it took me this long to write my post.

Bordic, I hope you do not take this badly, I really appreciate the work you have done on Italy and I look forward to see your modifications about the Provençal intervention. I will try to answer the other points that I have left un-answered from the posts above tomorrow.

ConjurerDragon, I certainly hope that you reconsider your decision.

ConjurerDragon · Dec 12, 2011

Bordic said:
I think it's not needed for two reasons: we could always have HRE provinces by event before the 962 election; why should PAP pay yearly ducats to BYZ?

I thougth only the electors of the HRE do give the Emperor the ducat tribute and the manpower bonus.
The HRE provinces are only giving the Emperor military access when the Emperor is at war.

Just tried another game with default emperor GER and starting emperor BYZ and after Leo VI died Konrad von Franken became emperor.

Therion · Dec 12, 2011

Third Angel said:
This going way too fast for me. If you two are going to keep this pace, I will have to ask permission to open one or two other working threads, or even ask for a dedicated subforum.

I would advise this as it's hard to keep track of all subjects in just one thread.

Dawn of Kingdoms

Magister Militum

Generalissimus

Magister Militum

Generalissimus

Magister Militum

Magister Militum

Generalissimus

Magister Militum

Magister Militum

Generalissimus

Magister Militum

Generalissimus

Magister Militum

Generalissimus

Magister Militum

Generalissimus

Magister Militum

Mad Medievalist

Generalissimus

Field Marshal