• 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.
AAArgh! They broke the parser.... :( :p

EDIT: OK, not so bad

Have a couple of these..
Code:
		command = { stability value = 1 }
And a couple of these...
Code:
		command = { type = revolt [B]value[/B] = -1 }
 
Last edited:
Khephren said:
AAArgh! They broke the parser.... :( :p

EDIT: OK, not so bad

Have a couple of these..
Code:
		command = { stability value = 1 }
And a couple of these...
Code:
		command = { type = revolt [B]value[/B] = -1 }

Oh pity that...it looks as if its only the Raider events for AFG and BAL, he must have copied one from the other. :(

So, BAL 296662 and AFG 296674?
 
Okay so I've just begun extensive testing (for Shah Rukh's reign) to see how the Timurids fare. About the end of 1419, the Kara Koyunlu and the Timurids started to duke it out. They so would have handed it to the now weakened Kara's however, they started having revolts popping up all over their western territories. Now I removed, all the early revolt risk events so I was like whats all this? :confused: Well it turns out that those provinces being persian cultured and having shiite religion at start really cause issue for the Tims. So my suggestions are that, we don't have the Shiite religion really become prevelant until about the rise of the Safavids (so start most provinces off as Sunni) and perhaps we should give the Timurids, Persian culture till then end of Rukh's reign. I realize that this is not historical, but for gamebalancing I think it could be worth a shot. Thoughts?
 
OK, just ran a hands off with the above events and it turned out rather wierd due to the tag changing. The Tims turned into Khorasan and ate Transoxiana. The Babur's ambition event fired for the Tims ( the game still recognized Khorasan as the TIM tag ), so Khorasan became the Mughals. The 'Rise of Mughals' event also fired, because the game still recognized the Tims as being alive, even though they were now the Mughals. Then the event for Persia to inherit Khorasan fired, even though Khorasan was now the Mughals. Understand? :confused: There is probably really no way to combat these kind of tag changing side effects. I was thinking maybe a user only event that says "Reload Now". ? :confused: :p
 
Khephren said:
OK, just ran a hands off with the above events and it turned out rather wierd due to the tag changing. The Tims turned into Khorasan and ate Transoxiana. The Babur's ambition event fired for the Tims ( the game still recognized Khorasan as the TIM tag ), so Khorasan became the Mughals. The 'Rise of Mughals' event also fired, because the game still recognized the Tims as being alive, even though they were now the Mughals. Then the event for Persia to inherit Khorasan fired, even though Khorasan was now the Mughals. Understand? :confused: There is probably really no way to combat these kind of tag changing side effects. I was thinking maybe a user only event that says "Reload Now". ? :confused: :p

Hmmm...well we could also implement some flags, so that a Timurid Empire that turns Khorasan can't become the Mughals. We'd also need to beef up Transoxiana as thats the real issue.
 
I'm going to look into why more provinces weren't turned to Sunni from Shiite, but here we have straight form the AGC a bunch of provinces that were appropriately set as Sunni for the 1419 start. (Our Persia still has its conversion events, so eventually these provinces will become Shiite but they shouldn't start that way).

Code:
# 525: Elbruz (1)
province = { id = 525 manpower = 2 religion = sunni  }
# 527: Kerman (1)
province = { id = 527 manpower = 1 goods = 9  religion = sunni }
# 526: Meched (2)
province = { id = 526 manpower = 2  religion = sunni  }
# 528: Lut (1)
province = { id = 528 manpower = 1 religion = sunni }
# 533: Isfahan (10)
province = { id = 533 manpower = 12 religion = sunni }
# 534: Fars (5)
province = { id = 534 manpower = 5 religion = sunni }
# 535: Hormouz (5)
province = { id = 535 manpower = 7 religion = sunni }

eep just noticed that there was a problem in one of these codes that was keeping Kerman from being sunni
 
Last edited:
Yes it sounds like a "honestly, we're really not the Timurids anymore" flag would help.

Making some of the to-convert-later provinces Sunni makes a lot of sense. Lower impact than giving Shah Rukh persian culture (although I'm not totally opposed to that either). There's been talk of re-doing the Savafid revolts anyway.

On another subject, how about axing the 10% starting inflation? I'm not sure it's needed, and the existing badboy is probably a more realistic handicap.
 
doktarr said:
Yes it sounds like a "honestly, we're really not the Timurids anymore" flag would help.

Making some of the to-convert-later provinces Sunni makes a lot of sense. Lower impact than giving Shah Rukh persian culture (although I'm not totally opposed to that either). There's been talk of re-doing the Savafid revolts anyway.

On another subject, how about axing the 10% starting inflation? I'm not sure it's needed, and the existing badboy is probably a more realistic handicap.

Oh I'm doing that terrible tangling of threads bit again. Most recent stuff on this in Black Sheep Turks thread.
 
Okay...I'm doing it again...expect another revision of the whole fall of the Timurids piece sometime this weekend. :eek:o Need to rework this whole chain of events as I just figured out (after finding a wonderful genealogy of the whole Timurid family tree :cool: ) just why it was I was feeling there were incosistencies with monarchs and where and when breakaway Timurid states were showing up. So coming soon, new conceptual plan...which should allow for a more historical Timurid fall on a much more consistent basis. And best of yet, there will be so few tag swaps now that we shouldn't have this region causing CTDs at all really. (It doesn't really make sense for the player to get a choice to become Khorasan as why would one want to choose the dying branch of the dynasty who never gets a chance to become the Mughals? :confused: )
 
Garbon said:
Okay...I'm doing it again...expect another revision of the whole fall of the Timurids piece sometime this weekend. :eek:o Need to rework this whole chain of events as I just figured out (after finding a wonderful genealogy of the whole Timurid family tree :cool: ) just why it was I was feeling there were incosistencies with monarchs and where and when breakaway Timurid states were showing up. So coming soon, new conceptual plan...which should allow for a more historical Timurid fall on a much more consistent basis. And best of yet, there will be so few tag swaps now that we shouldn't have this region causing CTDs at all really. (It doesn't really make sense for the player to get a choice to become Khorasan as why would one want to choose the dying branch of the dynasty who never gets a chance to become the Mughals? :confused: )
Where did you find the geneology...i'm asking cuz if its a general resource database it could be of much help for the Japanese Shogunates.
 
It doesn't really make sense for the player to get a choice to become Khorasan as why would one want to choose the dying branch of the dynasty who never gets a chance to become the Mughals?
I agree. We don't have to give the player this choice. It's in the same legue as playing FRA at start.
 
The Timurids Revisited!

Okay as promised here's my new proposal for modeling the Timurids and their subsequent decline.

Only change to the 1419 setup, is that the Timurids gain fortifications in Kyrgisistan and Tadjikistan so as to discourage the Uzbeks and the Chagatai from taking them.

As its long been suggested, the during the reign of Shah Rukh, playing the Timurids should be relatively easy. Despite the large decentralized nature of the Empire, by 1419 Shah Rukh had established himself above all other claimants. Therefore events like "Dissent in the Timurid Empire"(296600) are getting the boot as they just aren't historical. (War exhaustion should cripple the Empire if it decided to war instead of focus on developing its infrastructure)

Its with the death of Shah Rukh that the Timurid event sequence changes drastically. Rukh's death triggered massive revolts across the Timurid Empire as the various Timurid factions felt they had a decent shot at toppling the newly appointed Ulugh Beg. Thus we shouldn't have a binding of rogue Timurid states to Ulugh Beg (like what the Ascendency of Ulugh Beg event currently does). Instead, at this ascendency, the Timurid Empire should start incurring revolt risk and become quite unstable. Then in the "Death of Ulugh Beg" event (called "The Split of the Timurid Empire" for those following along with Isengard's events), the Empire shouldn't split into two pieces (Khorasan and Transoxiana) but should instead split into three main statelets, with the option of a revolting Afghanistan.

Timurid situation (circa 1449)
timurids.jpg

provinces with dots indicate that they will be ceded via event to their respective color coded countries, that weren't historically owned but should be ceded if owned

So the new plan is that Ulugh Beg's death triggers a three-choice event with the choice A, creating these two new nations. Because I know people hate deterministic events (despite the fact that this breakup was pretty much inevitable set into motion prior to the games start), choices b and c allow the option of trying to fight a pretty much hopeless fight (essentially a bunch of revolt risk, revolts and other awfulness-so that although its terrible, choice a is the easiest course). The player no longer has the option of choosing a faction and instead is required to follow the line that links up with the Mughal Empire.

The other big change involves Transoxiana and the rise of the Mughals. Until the Uzbeks took Samarkand (towards the end of the 15th century), there really isn't a differentiaion between Transoxiana and the Timurid Empire. Thus it doesn't really make sense to allow Transoxiana to revolt free from it. So I'm consigning Transoxiana to 'revolt=no' as it is still useful in existing in sequences post the Timurid period. Now while it was fun to have the idea that Babur should attack the Timurid Empire and then eventually fight his way down to Afghanistan to form his Empire, it just doesn't really work with the EU2 engine. So instead, we will default back to the Timurid Empire->Mughal Empire sequence which should allow for a healthier Mughal Empire and virtually guarentees their existence unless the Timurids happen to get wiped out.

Now whats the deal with this new Fars revolter?

Fars

Okay here is my list of reasons to include this revolter:
-during all of Shah Rukh's period, this entire portion of Iran was ruled for the Timurids under various governors and so theoretically had the Empire been stable enough some rogue prince would have established himself in the region (in fact, Rukh only gained the region after taking it from its autonomous ruler, Khalil Sultan, in 1414).
-when the Timurids splintered in 1447/9, this region was not ruled by Khorasan or the Timurid Empire. Details are sketchy at best, but essentially this portion of modern day regained its independence
-this makes the work of the Kara Koyunlu easier, as instead of fighting the entire Timurid Empire and negotiating a peace, they simply have to eliminate this completely decentralized, revolt prone, Timurid rump state.
-this is the only region of the Timurid Empire that can't be given its independence during the reign of the Timurids despite the fact that there were princelings in the region. (Turkmenistan has Khorasan, Transoxiana can be released to simulate Ulugh Beg's governorship, Afghanistan and Baluchistan can also both be released) So for consistency sake, something should cover this region
-additionally there were attempts by Kara Koyunlu princes to establish a nation here subsequent to their destruction
-this revolter wouldn't be an issue wouldn't be an issue for Persia as it should have the line 'no=PER' considering that I don't currently know of any issues Persia had in keeping the region under firm control
(Those of you who have been around for a while should recognize this suggested Fars nation as a reincarnation of my idea of having "Shiraz" be independent.)

Questions, comments, concerns that need allaying? :cool:
 
Garbon said:
So the new plan is that Ulugh Beg's death triggers a three-choice event with the choice A, creating these two new nations. Because I know people hate deterministic events (despite the fact that this breakup was pretty much inevitable set into motion prior to the games start), choices b and c allow the option of trying to fight a pretty much hopeless fight (essentially a bunch of revolt risk, revolts and other awfulness-so that although its terrible, choice a is the easiest course). The player no longer has the option of choosing a faction and instead is required to follow the line that links up with the Mughal Empire.
Here i think the breakup should happen no matter what, but instead as before the player can chose which to side with. As you said, and I agree, this was inevitable because events that lead to this were set before the beginning of the game.
Garbon said:
The other big change involves Transoxiana and the rise of the Mughals. Until the Uzbeks took Samarkand (towards the end of the 15th century), there really isn't a differentiaion between Transoxiana and the Timurid Empire. Thus it doesn't really make sense to allow Transoxiana to revolt free from it. So I'm consigning Transoxiana to 'revolt=no' as it is still useful in existing in sequences post the Timurid period. Now while it was fun to have the idea that Babur should attack the Timurid Empire and then eventually fight his way down to Afghanistan to form his Empire, it just doesn't really work with the EU2 engine. So instead, we will default back to the Timurid Empire->Mughal Empire sequence which should allow for a healthier Mughal Empire and virtually guarentees their existence unless the Timurids happen to get wiped out.
Sounds good, as long as we have some backups for succession.

About Fars, i like it so long as, it also has events to go along with it and its a chosable nation upon the breakup. As i said, i think the breakup should happen, but the player should be able to chose who to play.
 
Jinnai said:
Here i think the breakup should happen no matter what, but instead as before the player can chose which to side with. As you said, and I agree, this was inevitable because events that lead to this were set before the beginning of the game.

About Fars, i like it so long as, it also has events to go along with it and its a chosable nation upon the breakup. As i said, i think the breakup should happen, but the player should be able to chose who to play.

Tag changing is always such an issue, I'd rather avoid it until I absolutely must (Formation of Mughal Empire). Additionally, scripting this to allow the player to choose which branch is more work then not giving a choice and I wonder if it'd actually be appreciated. Because like I said, who would choose to play the Timurid Empire and then end up picking a branch that doesn't have the option of becoming the Mughals? (Beyond the fact that I need to start being concerned whether the player should have the option of choosing the Timurid princes of Kandahar; as they are as equally valid a choice as Fars.) But perhaps I'm making the wrong assumption in this case. I suppose we could ask the people?
 
|AXiN| said:
And, I think, this Fars nation should have an event to become Persia if it doesn't exist by, say, the early 1500s.

I think like with the Mughals, we should have a hierarchy then.

Like:
-historical route of Persia forming (hopefully what I'm working on in addition to this Timurid stuff will do this)
-Ak Koyunlu
-Kara Koyunlu
-Fars

With each getting its chance should the one above it fail.
 
How 'bout flags/shields? Ironically, that Shiraz set would prolly be ideal for Fars. Maybe MKJ has a clue. I could always make a a vanilla set for Timurids...yellow circles on black flag :eek: :p
 
Khephren said:
How 'bout flags/shields? Ironically, that Shiraz set would prolly be ideal for Fars. Maybe MKJ has a clue. I could always make a a vanilla set for Timurids...yellow circles on black flag :eek: :p

I know, I found it odd that the set I had originally suggested for Shiraz is now the standard for the Timurid Empire. Yea I was thinking that if worse comes to worse we can always just use that original vanilla set as I'm totally drawing blanks trying to find anything usable. :D