• 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.
The Caliphate should probably get an ai-file :D (currently they don't have any specific one so they use default.ai). That should hopefully make them more active.

The Land and Naval techs. The problems is because of two things. First everyone is in the orthodox group, but the major thing is that level two (and seemingly three, but maybe not to the same extent, seeing that the irish (who gets land 2 at the start in 526) kept up relatively well the latest time when I played 526). Why it costs so much to reach level two I haven't quite figured out.

Considering what it says in the land and naval.csv land level 2 should be reached in 1490 (if we where in latin) and naval level 2 in 1480 (if we where in latin):

land.csv
Code:
Level;Average Date for Next;vIF(%);vCF(%);vAF(%);vIS(%);vCS(%);vAS(%);vSize;Morale; nSprite;Era;Name;Effect
0;1425;0;0;0;50;300;440;1;1.5;0;0;Tribal Warfare (0);Allows for infantry, cavalry, and level 1 Fortresses
1;1450;1;0;0;50;300;450;1;1.60;0;0;Classical Warfare (1);
2;1490;1;0;0;70;300;460;1;1.75;0;0;Late Antique Warfare (2);Allows for level 2 Fortresses
3;1500;1;0;0;80;325;480;1;1.75;0;0;Late Antique Warfare (3);
4;1515;1;0;0;90;350;500;1;2;0;0;Late Antique Warfare (4);
5;1525;2;0;0;100;360;500;1;2;0;0;Early Medieval (5);Allows Assault
...

naval.csv
Code:
level;Cost;WarshipFire;WarshipShock;GalleyFire;GalleyShock;Attrition;Morale;Wind;Low Wind;Sprite;Era;Name;
0;1419;0;50;0;100;1;1.5;0;10;0;0;Antique Warfare (0);Allows Warships, Galleys and naval troop transportation
1;1480;30;80;0;120;1;1.5;0;10;0;0;Late Antique Warfare (1);
2;1490;30;80;0;120;1;1.5;0;9;0;0;Late Antique Warfare (2);
3;1500;50;80;0;120;1;1.5;0;8;0;0;Late Antique Warfare (3);
4;1520;60;100;0;150;1;1.5;0;8;0;0;Early Medieval (4);Allows Transport ships
5;1525;60;100;0;150;1;1.5;0;7;0;0;Early Medieval (5);
...

I don't know why level 2 get's so expensive, the fact we are in the orthodox group is not enough to explain it. I'm happy with the cost of 0 to 1, and the progress I get in 526 I like, haven't played 632 far enough to judge it there, but it seems ok. Anyone have any idea why level two gets so expensive that even though "Average Date for Next" (and "Cost" in naval.csv) in land.csv would indicate that one would reach it not to long after 1490 (1480 for naval) one gets a price one won't overcome much later?
 
Lofman said:
land.csv
Code:
Level;Average Date for Next;vIF(%);vCF(%);vAF(%);vIS(%);vCS(%);vAS(%);vSize;Morale; nSprite;Era;Name;Effect
0;1425;0;0;0;50;300;440;1;1.5;0;0;Tribal Warfare (0);Allows for infantry, cavalry, and level 1 Fortresses
1;1450;1;0;0;50;300;450;1;1.60;0;0;Classical Warfare (1);
2;1490;1;0;0;70;300;460;1;1.75;0;0;Late Antique Warfare (2);Allows for level 2 Fortresses
3;1500;1;0;0;80;325;480;1;1.75;0;0;Late Antique Warfare (3);
4;1515;1;0;0;90;350;500;1;2;0;0;Late Antique Warfare (4);
5;1525;2;0;0;100;360;500;1;2;0;0;Early Medieval (5);Allows Assault
...


I don't know why level 2 get's so expensive, the fact we are in the orthodox group is not enough to explain it. I'm happy with the cost of 0 to 1, and the progress I get in 526 I like, haven't played 632 far enough to judge it there, but it seems ok. Anyone have any idea why level two gets so expensive that even though "Average Date for Next" (and "Cost" in naval.csv) in land.csv would indicate that one would reach it not to long after 1490 (1480 for naval) one gets a price one won't overcome much later?


Got some it, a little bit. It's the starting year. If you raize it becomes easier to jump from 1 to 2. But the problem is that is more difficult to go from 0 to 1.
After that I don't know. Maybe it's something else.
 
Since there seems to have been considerable progress made in the ability to modify the map, I'm now wondering wether or not we want to change the map for this scenario. We should however be aware that the map files are large, so if we decide to have a custom map, we should make sure that it is finished when we include it, and let it be a separate download one only need to download once.

If we decide for a new map, this is what I would like to see (area by area). Note that we will probably not need to use the beta with the 400 or so extra provinces, since we can 'harvest' provinces from America and other areas that isn't included in this scenario:

Scandinavia
Not much here, change a few borders, add Östra Götaland and some provinces in Norway, possibly something in Denmark as well. Rename provinces where necessary.

British Isles
In addition to renaming provinces and changing borders (Rheged should for instance stretch up to Strathclyde IIRC), the following provinces should IMHO be divided: Anglia into East Anglia and Essex (new country). Wales into Gwynedd and a southern province, Dyfed or Glywising (new country) or something like that. Depending on how many provinces we feel Alba should have we could either move the Highlands province southwest to become Dalriada or simply create a new province for Dalriada. Alba would then become Pictland. We could also attempt to squeeze in Elmet if possible between current Yorkshire & Lancashire, but if we do that (a quick job with paint seems to indicate it would be possible without making that province too small) we would need to add some province for Mercia since we don't want Northumbria to have that many more provinces then Mercia i assume. Sussex could possibly be squeezed in as well.

Lowlands & Germany
A few border changes and renaming, and maybe a few new provinces wherever they seems to be needed.

France
I would prefer nothing more here then renaming provinces and border changes.

Iberia
Same as France. Maybe a few new provinces, but not too many

North Africa west of Cyrenaica
I would really like to divide it into several provinces. Vandalia is way too weak in 476. It doesn't need that much strengthening in 526 but since all their new provinces will be unfortified it shouldn't strengthen them to much. More provinces in the inland would probably make the Berbers slightly tougher to control which would be good.

Italy
Mostly renaming and changing borders here too but a few new provinces i would like to see would be a Lombardia divided into two provinces so we can have both Milan and Pavia on the map at the same time. Spoleto is also needed, and splitting Naples so we can let the Romans keep Naples instead of giving it all to Benevento. Possibly a third province in Sicily, but that might be unnessecary.

Pannonia & Balkans
I think this area may need some change, but how it should be done I don't have any ideas of yet.

Anatolia & Caucasus
Should also be improved, especially the Caucasus. With regards to Anatolia (as well as everything else that should belong to the Roman Empire almost all the time) we should not add that many provinces, the Roman Empire is powerful enough as it is.

Steppes north of Black Sea
Here we should atleast rename the provinces.

Syria & Mesopotamia
Syria might get away more or less as it is but Mesopotamia needs many more provinces. I would really like to be able to have Hira were it should be, which is about where the CoT icon in Iraq is.

Arabia
Some changes might be done but I don't know which ones except in the northern part to better represent Ghassan and Hirah. We might add some part of the interior so we can have Kindah, we already have their monarchs (in Hadramut).

Egypt, Nubia & Ethiopia
In Egypt, possibly not much more then renaming and border changes were needed. Ethiopia I don't know enough about, but for Nubia I was thinking two provinces for each one of the three kingdoms two provinces, one on each side of the Nile. The coast could be divided into two provinces, either unoccupied and populated by hostile natives, or belonging to the Blemmyes which would then be added as a nation.

Persia
More provinces in order to make Persia powerful enough to stand up to Rome (though we have to make sure Hephtalites are still a threat, and that the Caliphate won't have it too difficult to conquer Persia)

India
More provinces could be added. I don't know much about India though.

Tarim basin, Tibet & Neighbourhood
Tibet might be strengthened but other than that only Khotan needs to be added.

Southeast Asia
I assume it needs to be changed, but I don't know how.

China, Korea & Japan
China and Korea should both get more provinces. I don't know what might be needed for Japan though.

Mongolia
Needs to be added so that Juan-Juan and later Eastern Gokturks has a visible connection between all their provinces, and has a real border with China.

America, Australia and other areas not used by this scenario
This from where we can get the "new" provinces.
 
This will be a dauntint task to implement a new map and adapt everything. However, I trust that you will be up to it! :D
 
America, Australia and other areas not used by this scenario
This from where we can get the "new" provinces.
You ARE aware that in the latest beta modders got 400 new provinces to use? I doubt you would use all of them only for Asia/Europe/North Africa.
 
If a new map is to be done - and it's a vast undertaking just for one mod - why not part ways with the original? By dispensing with the New World / Africa / Australasia together with the new IDs made available by Johan, we could free up hundreds upon hundreds of provinces and redraw the map at a size and density similar to Victoria.
 
Phillip V: Luckily there aren't that many events that need to be edited. So it will mostly be the setup, revolt.txt and some other things, but atleast not a massive amount of events.

Rythin: Yes I'm aware of that and even wrote it, but as long as it is just a beta I would prefer not to use it.

Earl Uhtred: Nice idea, though I suspect that in some place we would get really huge provinces, and it would be more work, but it would really allow us to get all those small kingdoms on the Isles (well maybe not the smallest but the medium-sized ones), and I like that, but since most other areas doesn't contain that many small kingdoms (possibly Scandinavia, but it is not as there are many good sources about Scandinavian kingdoms in this period) but we could still increase the size as much as possible, but if we get provinces that covers the whole screen even when zoomed out as much as possible, then we should either see if they could be divided, or else if that is not possible reduce the (used) map slightly in size.
 
Fair point. If we have dinky provinces in England (though I was really thinking of Italy when I suggested it) we need 'em everywhere, and apart from research issues it will have God knows what effects on the engine what with trade, badboy, tech calculations and such.

If you do decide to do it, I'd be happy to research as much of western or northern Europe as you need, though I don't have what it takes to do the actual map.
 
I think we should not increase the size of the used part of the map too much, but a little bit would be okay. Here is a small suggestion for southern Britain (south of Northumbria) i quickly drew, a bit sketchy I know. As you can see some of these provinces would be too small if we didn't enlarge it, but we should just enlarge so that they become playable.
1r6i2r


Now for something related to the new map. How should we do it. We will need someone to do and make sure the map is available for download (hopefully together with the initial province.csv of the new map, this one should be based on the one we currently have to make it easier to implement the map), and it won't be me. If noone seeing this volunteers I think we should go to the graphics forum and attempt to find one, since I assume whoever will make the map will prefer to be able to do it as we decides what we want rather than get a very large request to do all at once :p. And it would make it easier for us to implement it, more on that later.

Now how should we proceed? I have two suggestions

I. Go with the map while working with the scenario as we do it, or
II. Release the current version of the scenario and focus on the map

I prefer II, since we can still add events and such to the scenario, however since I will probably not do much more then focus on the map, and I am the only one able to add anything without proposing it in the forum first, all new things will be in this thread for all to see.

And to the thing I said earlier about implementing, I think we should after we decide to do changes to provinces we should note down all the things we need to change, one example. If we decide to add the Kernow province on the map and it gets id 1 we should write something like this (we should have the changes by region)

...
BRITAIN
New provinces in region
1
Provinces removed from region
0

Provinces:
Kernow (1).
Add province Kernow (id 1) with (pop. x fort lvl. y) to:
476: pop. 1000 fort lvl. 0 Dyfnain (core for Dyfnain)
526: pop. 1500 fort lvl. 1 Wessex (core for Dyfnain)
632: pop. 1000 fort lvl. 1 Kernow[new country] (core for Dyfnain, Wessex, Kernow)
Change events:
id x (in Dyfnain.txt) should affect only Kernow, and no other provinces
id y (in Dyfnain.txt) should not release tax value but move capital to Kernow and cede Dyfnain (id i)
id z (in Wessex.txt) should give core on Kernow
...

I assume this would make it relatively quick to implement the map once it is finished. Some misses might be done, but will most likely be in the knownprovinces section. Is this a good idea?
 
Got a bit carried away.

Textures are terrain. The colour of the text indicates starting culture - red Saxon, blue Anglian, orange Jutish, pale yellow British, off-yellow North British, purple Pictish, green Gaelic.

The six southern provinces that start British but can turn Saxon by event are outlined red. The British and north British provinces in the midlands and north that can turn Anglian are outlined blue. None of this is as visible as I'd like after conversion, but you get the idea.

2d470b03.png


I'm aware redoing the whole map at this sort of level would be a huge undertaking. Stop me here if you feel it can't be done.
 
It's clear that this will involve a staggering number of tags. Within each group, 'definite' needs are above the hyphens, others below.

Wales
Gwynedd
Powys
Dyfed
Morgannwg
---
Brycheiniog
Seisyllwg
Glywysing
Ergyng
Gwent
Deheubarth
Ui Liathain (Irish)

Lowland Brits
Calchvynydd (Catuvellauni)
Pengwern
Caer Gliw (Gloucester)
Dyfnain
Loidis
---
Pryden (Chi-Rho tag for Arthurian choice B)

Saxons and Jutes
Wessex
Essex
Sussex
Kent
Hwicce
---
Wiht
Magonsaete
Surrey
Middlesex

Angles
Mercia
Middle Anglia
East Anglia
Lindsey
Deira
Bernicia
Northumbria

North Brits
Strathclyde
Loidis
Rheged
Gododdin

Far North
Alba (Southern Picts)
Moray (Northern Picts)
Dal Riada ('Scots')

The total of just definites is 28. With 'desirables' it is 40! And that doesn't include Ireland!

Is it worth it?
 
Looks good Earl Uhtred, will look at it more carefully before saying anything more. ;)

Here is a map suggestion for Sweden and Norway. If we want to keep Götaland and Svealand united some provinces probably should be dropped.
1rsuol


Old provinces (7), who only have borders and names changed:
Rogaland - formerly Bergenshus. Will belong to Rogaland
Vestfold - formerly Östlandet. Will belong to Vestfold
Västergötland. Will belong to Västergötland
Uppland (should also include Åland) - formerly Svealand. Will belong to Uppland
Småland. Will belong to Småland (or uncolonized with natives if want to have it that way instead)
Gotland. Will belong to Gotland
Hälsingland - formerly Gästrikland. Will remain uncolonized, could be given to a Hälsingland nation if we want to add one

New provinces (9):
Hordaland. Either uncolonized with natives or new nation Hordaland
Agder. Should belong to new nation Agder
Telemark. Should belong to new nation Telemark
Värmland. Either uncolonized with natives or new nation Värmland
Dal. Either uncolonized with natives or new nation Dal
Västmanland. Should belong to new nation Västmanland
Södermanland. Should belong to new nation Södermanland
Närke. Should belong to new nation Närke
Östergötland. Should belong to new nation Östergötland

Provinces I'm not sure of(2):
Öland. Maybe to small but if included it should belong to new nation Öland perhaps?
Hringarike. I'm not sure were it should be but IIRC it were somewhere in the EU II province Östlandet, we have some rulers of Hringarike in the monarch file for Vestfold, so they could be included as an independent country, though the Hringarike province on the map might be a little misplaced.

That would be at most 11 new provinces for Norway, Svealand and Götaland, though some might think it is too much, I don't since the new provinces would go to new countries (between 6 and 12 to be exact) or be uncolonized with natives, open for colonization.

I noted that I seems to have given Östergötland half of Tjust, it could be given back to Småland (it is the part of old Småland province near the coast where you can see the Småland border above the new red one). We could divide Småland into two provinces (though we shouldn't attempt to divide it into every småland though :D), Möre at the coast (including the smålands Möre, Handbörd, Aspeland, Sevede and Tjust) and Värend or Finnveden (or Tiohärad) in the inland (including the smålands of Finnveden, Värend and Njudung). This proposed Möre province could possibly be a part of the province of Öland (if we want that one). There are more borders that are not very accurate in the north and they should probably be slightly improved but only Småland has an error that can be fixed by using the old border (though since we don't know much of what would be a proper border for the period we want this map for we should not be too pedantic in most cases). If anyone wonders about the other parts of Småland given to the Götaland provinces, I say that IMO those smålands should stay in those provinces.
 
I agree most of the Scandinavian interior should be PTI, but how about a string of provinces up the Norwegian coast at least as far as Trondheim?

Strikes me a single province for Orkney / Shetland would be cool. Norse settlement was under way there there as the scenario ends.
 
I was bored, so I did this map showing 'city' names.

settnames.png


I used the final form of the name in all cases. That means a lot of the lowland settlements are named Anglo-Saxon style even though they spent up to half the scenario under British rule. I wish it was possible to change names by event, but there you go.

I have some pathetic newb questions related to events.

- Is it now possible to release nations by event a la Victoria / HoI2? I know in earlier versions you just had to trigger millions of revolts and hope for the best. Hope that was changed.

- Is it possible to associate an event with a province rather than a tag? I don't fancy having the same colonisation event repeated in every Anglo-Saxon event file on the offchance it's Surrey that takes Edinburgh instead of Northumbria.
 
Last edited:
Earl Uhtred, after looking more closely at your proposed map I have to say I would really like to see all those provinces in the game, we should however get someone that can do the map ASAP, that can see what can be done and what can't and tell us that so we doesn't decide that we are to have something unfeasible, any volunteers :)?

However I fear that in order to get all these provinces we would have to increase the used to part of map maybe too much, so we have to be aware that we might have to sacrifice a few provinces :(.

Regarding the tags, don't worry, I think we could have them all (if we can have all provinces). We do currently have lots of unused tags. Are you aware that you have Loidis both in the Lowland Brits and North Brits ;)?

BTW I think that Westerna in 476 should belong to Rheged instead of Elmet(Loidis).

I have some pathetic newb questions related to events.

- Is it now possible to release nations by event a la Victoria / HoI2? I know in earlier versions you just had to trigger millions of revolts and hope for the best. Hope that was changed.

- Is it possible to associate an event with a province rather than a tag? I don't fancy having the same colonisation event repeated in every Anglo-Saxon event file on the offchance it's Surrey that takes Edinburgh instead of Northumbria.

-Yes, that's what I'm doing with the Franks in 511 (and are going to do to them in 561).

-Yes to that as well. I have a few in the Caliphate event file as well as one in the Northumbrian one.

And I agree that we maybe should have some more province up the Norwegian coast.
 
Lofman said:
... we should however get someone that can do the map ASAP, that can see what can be done and what can't and tell us that so we doesn't decide that we are to have something unfeasible, any volunteers :)?

Ho ho, aye. Without that it's all worthless. Any takers?

However I fear that in order to get all these provinces we would have to increase the used to part of map maybe too much, so we have to be aware that we might have to sacrifice a few provinces :(.

Yeah, I can see a few that could be dispensed with if needs be.

Regarding the tags, don't worry, I think we could have them all (if we can have all provinces). We do currently have lots of unused tags. Are you aware that you have Loidis both in the Lowland Brits and North Brits ;)?

I wasn't. Good.

BTW I think that Westerna in 476 should belong to Rheged instead of Elmet(Loidis).

Not sure about that. It's an arm of the lowlands, really.