A list with what people might consider an exploit

[Chaingun]

Mulli could you please change that green to text to lighter green? I almost have to highlight it unless I have to make a concentrated effort to read it (or as I did, highlight it).

IMHO (as always in these matters), I don't find breaking a truce particulary exploitive, even when at -2 stab only. There are times and reasons for that. Usually the reason for breaking a truce is that the country breaking was not happy with peace terms for whatever cause. After a big war with loads of WE a country should rest anyhow, unless the former condition applies in which case the war can be regarded as a continuation anyhow.

IMHO it's worse if there's a X province rule per war and the victim is DOWed immediately after a war.

 

[ForzaA]

I think the protestantism one (#9) needs an "and then switch back to catholicism" to be clear, or alternatively; I *strongly* disagree with it.

 

[ForzaA]

Both religious items could perhaps be phrased: if you convert from Catholiscism to either Counter-reformed or Protestant you are not allowed to go back to Catholiscism before the edict of Tolerance. This is much easier to apply then what you propose. If possible a rule shall not among its requisites have what the player's intention was when he did what he did...

Well, this does block both England and Sweden's ability to take advantage of one of their events (well, unless you want them to wait 10+ years as catholics before going protestant)

It's a posibility, certainly, but it blocks a tactic that I wouldn't consider an exploit, certainly.

And if "min X years rules" are implemented anyway, you might aswell say that someone may not switch back to catholicism less than X years after they switched from it.

 

[ForzaA]

What events are this? Do they ususally switch to prot and then back to cath? I did not know that.

For England:

#The Act of Supremacy#
event = {

	id = 3009
	trigger = {
			religion = catholic
		}
	random = no
	country = ENG
	name = "EVENTNAME3009"
	desc = "EVENTHIST3009"
	style = 1

	date = { day = 1 month = january year = 1534 }
	offset = 30
	deathdate = { day = 1 month = january year = 1541 }

	action_a ={		#Take Command of the Church of England#
		name = "ACTIONNAME3009A"
		command = { type = religion which = protestant }
		command = { type = treasury value = 250 }
		command = { type = breakdynastic which = -1 }
		command = { type = relation which = -3 value = -150 }
		command = { type = breakdynastic which = -1 }
		command = { type = relation which = -3 value = -150 }
		command = { type = domestic which = CENTRALIZATION value = 1 }
		command = { type = stability value = -2 }
	}

	action_b ={	#Accept Rome's Supremacy, but ignore it on a personal level#
		name = "ACTIONNAME3009B"
		command = { type = relation which = PAP value = 100 }
		command = { type = relation which = SPA value = 100 }
		command = { type = stability value = 1 }
	}
}

For Sweden:

#The Parliament of Västerås#
event = {
	id = 3226
	trigger = { religion = catholic }
	random = no
	country = SWE
	name = "EVENTNAME3226"
	desc = "EVENTHIST3226"
	style = 2

	date = { day = 1 month = january year = 1530 }
	offset = 720
	deathdate = { day = 1 month = january year = 1533 }

	action_a ={ # Convert to the Evangelic Faith
		name = "ACTIONNAME3226A"
		command = { type = religion which = protestant }
		command = { type = treasury value = 250 }
		command = { type = stability value = -2 }
		command = { type = breakdynastic which = POL }
		command = { type = relation which = POL value = -100 }
		command = { type = breakdynastic which = HAB }
		command = { type = relation which = HAB value = -100 }
		command = { type = breakdynastic which = SPA }
		command = { type = relation which = SPA value = -100 }
		command = { type = breakdynastic which = POR }
		command = { type = relation which = POR value = -100 }
		command = { type = breakdynastic which = PAP }
		command = { type = relation which = PAP value = -100 }
		command = { type = revoltrisk which = 120 value = 3 }
		command = { type = provincetax which = -1 value = 1 }
		command = { type = provincetax which = -1 value = 1 }
	}
	action_b ={ # Remain true to Catholicism.
		name = "ACTIONNAME3226B"
		command = { type = stability value = 3 }
		command = { type = relation which = PAP value = 100 }
		command = { type = relation which = SPA value = 100 }
		command = { type = relation which = HAB value = 100 }
		command = { type = relation which = POR value = 100 }
		command = { type = relation which = POL value = 100 }
	}
}

I'm not saying it's the *usual* course of action, but it certainly isn't an invalid course of action, IMO (250 ducats and centralisation or basetax can certainly be worth it)

 

[ForzaA]

Aha, you suggest they go prot early on (around 1520 perhaps) and then shortly before the events you list they go back to cath. Thue being able to yet again going prot with the events and reap the benefits from them. Now I understand.

I must admit it never crossed my mind to do this. Does not conversion mean a heavy stab hit? And this in the period in any game were stab hit are as most difficult. You have already exapanded quite a lot thus increasing stab costs while not yet gotten trade and thus economy going. Therefore it takes very long time for stab to recover.

I would never consider doing this. Did Tonio (SWE) or Ozzeh (ENG) do this in Finding Neverland?

I did in BF3 (and the 250 came in *very* handy, as Sweden)

..and yes, a heavy stabhit, hence why I don't see it as an exploit (and honestly, we don't need rules to protect people from stupidity, or do we )

EDIT: you only get the benefits of the event at that point, not of the going protestant, but it may still be worth it (essentially, trading 6 stab for 250 ducats and some cent or basetax)

 

[ForzaA]

And why would this not be an exploit?

If you decide to go protestant before the even fires, you ought to stay protestant.

If you want the benefits of the event, you can damn well wait till it fires.

well, then obviously you should forbid (or atleast declare "gamey") increasing your INNOVATIVENESS as England to 6 (to get the merchant adventures and the muscowy trade company) and then dropping it again to get enough missionaries/colonists.

 

[ForzaA]

I don't, since that would cost an English player 20 years and two stab hits. Also, you are now more referring to general event abusage and not specifically to switching religions back and forth.

In general I find it gamey if players try to avoid nasty, but important, events, like the Spanish bankruptcy or the Ottomans going orthodox in the Bej events.

I am trying to find a proper wording for this type of exploit.

well, what's the difference between 20 years and 2 stabhits, and a -5 stabhit twice in ~10 years?

Mind you, you're ofcourse perfectly in your rights to *declare* it a gamey tactic, I'm simply curious what your reasoning is why you find it gamey.

 

[ForzaA]

I find it gamey to switch religions back and forth. It doesn't matter if you do this for the cash in general, for a temporal morale advantage or to reap the benefits of a particular event. It's a general gamey tactic I like to ban in my games. Others will probably disagree and want to make an exception for the Swedish event situation. That's fine. It is than an exception of the general : Do not switch to protestantism and then back to catholicism rule and has nothing special to do with event-abusing.

There's another type of exploit and that's trying to avoid nasty historical events, or reaping the rewards of an event, while trying to avoid nasty side-effects the event also gives.
If I mark the Swedish example as an exploit, I do this because of the religion switching, not because of the event-abusing (though it is an example of event-abusing as well). Thus, I am not going to automatically ban other event-abusings, because this is not the reason I ban the Swedish one.

I hope I am somewhat clear here

As for event-abusing in general, I am trying to figure out which ones I find an exploit and which not. So far, I have listed avoiding the Spanish bankruptcy events and the Ottomans going Orthodox in the Bejs as a gamey tactic.

Well, I believe I originally brought in the Swedish (and English events) as a reason why religion switching SHOULD be allowed in some cases atleast - as BESIDES these events, there's no reason AT ALL to switch back to catholicism if you plan to go protestant, so why forbid it?

Certainly, I can see the point in forbidding to go protestant if you plan to be catholic (as this nets you a reward of 25 ducats per province) -- but the conversion protestant -> catholic, and a later catholic -> protestant has no benefit in and of itself.

Ofcourse, noone who's thinking WOULD want to do it, except, PERHAPS for these events, so either you shouldn't (need to) forbid it*, or you should forbid it to prevent people from using it to gain the benefit of these events.
In which case I (would) ask you why you forbid it for those events, but not for the aforementioned merchant adventures and muscowy trade company and innovativeness shifting.

* Maybe in that case you should also forbid giving up provinces in peace?

 

[ForzaA]

I will answer: Switching from catholicism to protestantism to gain cash and then switch back to catholicism is disallowed in my games. I feel your pain if you then miss the benefit of that particular event, if you are Sweden, but that's just too bad. Other GM's will probably make an exception, that's up to them.
I am not forbidding Sweden to do it because of the event-abusing, but because of the rule against religious switching, so I don't need to talk about other events in this case.

Clear now?

(underlining mine)

...but that's not what is happening....

 

[ForzaA]

Perhaps I seriously miss something here.

What I am talking about is: Sweden is catholic, she switches to protestant shortly before the event to gain 25 ducats per province, then she switches back to catholicism to let the event make her again protestant and give 250 ducats extra.

Now, where are you talking about?

I am talking about a Sweden that wants to be protestant (as all her provinces are protestant)

for ~10 years (1520-1530 approx), this will mean low stab costs (relatively) and more census tax.
Then, to get an event she changes her religion to catholic (read: increases innovativeness by 1), and gets an event, which changes her to protestant,(read: gives 2 explorers, a boatload of merchants and money) she remains protestant after that and profits again from full tax income, and low stabcost(read: she reduces her innovativeness by 1 again to get more colonists and missionaries).

 

[ForzaA]

i have no clue what this means:


can someone please explain it to me? maybe with an example?
i do understand the words but the whole sentence doesnt make any sense for me... :wacko:

A war is fought, during which no money can be transferred between the countries.

The countries agree that A gets one province of B, and A pays 500 ducats for it.

Peace is concluded, in which A gets the province, A should then transfer the money (via gifts or loans), after the peace has been signed, to B, but there's NO way to enforce this.
(well, it is possible to transfer money the other way in a peace signing, but it's very difficult to make working, I'm not even sure if it works in MP, it's somewhat of a quirk/ not an intentional feature in any case)

 

[ForzaA]

So, it is precisely as I said: Sweden starts as catholic, switches to protestant, then switches to catholic again (to get the event). And that is not allowed. Event or no event.

If Sweden chooses to go protestant because of the rewards, then has to stay protestant and thus miss the event. Or she stays catholic and chooses the historical route to the event that allows her to become protestant.
Sweden can't do both. At least not in my games

Then I ask you *again* why is switching religion to get an event NOT allowed, and shifting your DP sliders is no problem.

And also, what about England taken historical event options (going protestant, going catholic again, going protestant again) ?

 

[ForzaA]

How does this work?

I'd assume I loan you an X amount of money, using that money, you offer me a loan of X.. we both get interest on the loans?
I'd think those interests are payed out of the treasury, and so would not mean a net increase of money?

you leave siege army and move/stay the rest.
Perhaps it starts to make a bug only after failed assault.

This doesn't work, so it's not an exploit.
However, there DOES seem to be a little known feature* here;
at high tech, you get MORE siege rolls per month, at LT 51, you get one every 19 days (after the first month) , at LT 57, this has increased to a siege roll every 7 days (again, after the first month). LT 60 is, again, every 7 days..
I'll see if I can find out a little more (for example, can this information be found directly, somewhere?)


*I knew you got more siege rolls at high tech, but I didn't know there was such a difference from LT 51 to LT 57

Will remove the siege bug again. Apparently you get a siege roll each 19 days at LT 51, each 7 days at LT 57 etc. So besieging at very high LT levels is profitable

HEY! no trying to run off with my finds!