Home Trending Latest threads New posts Developer diaries

Balance of Power

Jump to latest Follow Reply
  • 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.
I would love to play, and will be happiest with the earliest start. I really enjoyed playing from 1419 in the other game; whatever deficiencies it had, that wasn't one. :)

We aren't picking countries yet, right? I do have a preference for playing as England and proving that staying on the Continent is a Good Thing, or playing as Spain and proving that Portugal can't stay in the game. :rofl:
 
well worth a try problem is reducing taxvalue/mp outside europe won't reduce trade and i think if anything needs to be reduced its trade so change alot of chinaware/spice provs ect to grain , alot of carribean islands to fish ect

1520 sucks btw
 
Damoclit,

Land is locked at 5. I don't GM games without that anymore.

As far as trade income and such, I'm quite hesitant to introduce it without some long ranging tests and such, in particular following the burn out of the experimental TOW. What I would be open to trying, though, is moving ROTW COTs to Europe under some certain system that rewards holding the most provinces in a region. That, to me, seems like the best fix. Colonial resources were the foundation of trade in Europe after the 15th century-but they were traded in Europe, not in the backwoods of America.

The further upshot of this is that holding provinces in colonial regions will be the key, in order to funnel trade into one's own COTs. I also hope to see much wider use of embargoes, trade agreements and trade wars, as part and parcel of the diplomatic scene.

Much more important, to my mind (as fixing land 5 actually goes a long way toward evening out the positions of traditional naval powers and traditional land powers such as Austria), are the following:

1. Random admirals (I oppose all other random leaders, but I do think this is necessary in a locked land game)
2. Fixing naval support, particularly for Portugal

And of course, there are other issues that will have to be addressed, and may be broached, when the scenario is chosen.
 
admiral drake said:
well worth a try problem is reducing taxvalue/mp outside europe won't reduce trade and i think if anything needs to be reduced its trade so change alot of chinaware/spice provs ect to grain , alot of carribean islands to fish ect

1520 sucks btw
Click to expand...

Technically, all those rich carribean islands were absolutely WORTHLESS until the mid 18th century. Before that, they were so poor that noone wanted anything to do with them.

Beyond that,

It seems like alot could be fixed if CoTs wouldn't form overseas.

Or maybe...since there is a fixed amount of cots, we could simply double them up in Europe.
 
Last edited:
Damocles said:
Technically, all those rich carribean islands were absolutely WORTHLESS until the mid 18th century. Before that, they were so poor that noone wanted anything to do with them.

Beyond that,

It seems like alot could be fixed if CoTs wouldn't form overseas.

Or maybe...since there is a fixed amount of cots, we could simply double them up in Europe.
Click to expand...


good enough reason to make them fish actually i think bocaj made half of them fish in 1453scenario already.......
 
Damo,

That's the idea.

If you move any conquered COTs, and any newly spawned COTs, to Europe, you concentrate trade where it should-generally-belong. More to the point, though, you double or triple the number of high value targets in European wars and make it much more possible for countries like Austria, Brandenburg and Russia to become significant trading powers earlier.

The downside is pretty steep, though. You further reduce the case for colonial (and therefore naval) warfare and if Austria or BB or another prinicipally continental rack up a large percentage of the COTs they'd be worthless except for merchants.
 
HolisticGod said:
Damo,

That's the idea.

If you move any conquered COTs, and any newly spawned COTs, to Europe, you concentrate trade where it should-generally-belong. More to the point, though, you double or triple the number of high value targets in European wars and make it much more possible for countries like Austria, Brandenburg and Russia to become significant trading powers earlier.

The downside is pretty steep, though. You further reduce the case for colonial (and therefore naval) warfare and if Austria or BB or another prinicipally continental rack up a large percentage of the COTs they'd be worthless except for merchants.
Click to expand...

On the other hand, the great wars fought overseas in the 18th-17th centuries were about amassing vast tracts of colonial overseas territory. The Netherlands won a war with Portugal that would've seen the latter lose 20+ provinces in a EUII war. The French and Indian Wars (fought with the English) would've amounted to 50+.

If we do this, I'd be willing to play the Netherlands. Provided the Dutch were in play from the start. To show that I'd play a colonial nation, even in a harder colonial atmosphere.
 
There should be a couple Cots in Asian capitals, aside from that I like the idea.
 
Damocles said:
On the other hand, the great wars fought overseas in the 18th-17th centuries were about amassing vast tracts of colonial overseas territory. The Netherlands won a war with Portugal that would've seen the latter lose 20+ provinces in a EUII war. The French and Indian Wars (fought with the English) would've amounted to 50+.

If we do this, I'd be willing to play the Netherlands. Provided the Dutch were in play from the start. To show that I'd play a colonial nation, even in a harder colonial atmosphere.
Click to expand...

I agree with having colonial wars exchanging vast tracts of colonial territory. They were fought for that. But colonial trade was extremely relevant and worth to fight a lot (as they were).

I am not sure if moving COTs will be enough (I think that will happen will be have several worthless COTs and a few great ones), although is true that a lot of colonial trade wealth was traded in Europe not sure if it could work in practice. But anyway some ROTW COTs should remain (Malacca and the Chinese ones, the europeans made a lot of money in inter-asian trade after all)
 
If y'all are interested, I've already got a 1520 modified PE where the NEtherlands is independent from the start. They are vassalize to Spain and have 2 explorers (5 year duration) and no Spanish maps. We played them in the Friday Night Game a last campaign, but they ended up getting annexed after pursuing a policy of attack everybody. I see no reason why an early independent Holland can't work.
 
Stonewall said:
If y'all are interested, I've already got a 1520 modified PE where the NEtherlands is independent from the start. They are vassalize to Spain and have 2 explorers (5 year duration) and no Spanish maps. We played them in the Friday Night Game a last campaign, but they ended up getting annexed after pursuing a policy of attack everybody. I see no reason why an early independent Holland can't work.
Click to expand...
It'll work, it worked in Battlefront3.
Just that Holland kinda sucks to play the first 100 years in a 1520 start :)
 
Stonewall said:
If y'all are interested, I've already got a 1520 modified PE where the NEtherlands is independent from the start. They are vassalize to Spain and have 2 explorers (5 year duration) and no Spanish maps. We played them in the Friday Night Game a last campaign, but they ended up getting annexed after pursuing a policy of attack everybody. I see no reason why an early independent Holland can't work.
Click to expand...

vote isn't going 1520 currently most votes seems
1453
aoi
1492 in that order unles i'm missing some posts
 
moving cots to europe isn't the answer , some cots will be extreme rich others will be very poor , cots will spawn random , if you add cots to europe to avoid that yo will have cots with value 20-50

better solution is just either change goods value (mod unfortunatly)
or change alot of goods to grain , fish ect

-for example eastern half of carribean islands = fish
-southern part of Na = grain instead of cotton
-change alot of chinaware provs and spices provs in asia these 2 are worst goods for trade


or just ban trade unles :
you got a presence (5provs that trade in that cot)
+atleast half the provs going to that cot is coming from playercontrolled provs
(so people have to take over parts of india to trade in ganges , delhi or kutch= would result in huge stabcosts for that to ofset large tradeincome a bit)
 
Drake,

The vote actually stands:

3 for AOI
3 for 1453
2 for 1492
 
HolisticGod said:
Drake,

The vote actually stands:

3 for AOI
3 for 1453
2 for 1492
Click to expand...

so stil is 1453 and aoi in the lead followed by 1492 and if 1492 gets 3votes i change mine to aoi :)
 
All,

I vote 1492, but Drake has his set to switch to AOI, so it makes no difference.

It would appear 1337 is the scenario of choice, and I'm willing to give it a spin. It has proven enormously enjoyable in the Monday game, but all should be aware that it's more delicate than any other scenario except the GC and it has, in its one run so far, created two major superpowers. The Ottoman Empire is very weak in this setup (athough I am going to edit its early leaders to reflect its military prowess instead of the various biases reflected now), the HYW is just beginning and can fairly easily go to one side or another and Spain is quite a ways from being united. You all need to be aware of this, and if you're not willing to take the risk change your vote.

That said, 1337 is great fun, has vast potential and provides us an opportunity to have real Napoleonic Wars instead of a heedless world war, as we'll be running to 1913. That presents diplomatic options that are the key to this game. And it is elastic. Even in the Monday game, where England has destroyed France and swallowed all of it and the Netherlands, nothing's broken. Here, I suspect that it's far less likely that England wins a complete victory, particularly as the first war is strongly in France's favor, and far less likely to swallow all of France even if it does. To ensure the smoothest possible start, though, these are my conditions for a 1337:

1. I select the players for France and England. The rest will be chosen using the CQS lottery system, but here it's absolutely essential to get the right balance of skill and inclination. If France wins the first war and rapidly unites the country, the game is in serious trouble.
2. The French and English players will agree to fight the HYW in a concerted, historical manner. Worse than one player winning a dramatic victory in a single war is an early deal. I want to see a good four-six rounds before it's over. If you aren't willing to do this, you won't play France or England.
3. If England wins and France is eliminated, Venice, Austria and Aragon will gain French culture.
4. Edits will be done to strengthen the Ottomans (especially their leaders and starting size) and Austria, and possibly Venice economically. These edits are up for debate, but my word is final. Some things will be necessary.
5. Governors will be distributed across Europe (already done, actually, in Oz's base 1337 scenario). There's really no other way to start this early and expect any serious human-human warfare.

If everybody who voted for 1337 is still in favor, that's what we'll do unless Drew or Gero or another player pops in to vote before midnight tonight.

Whatever the case, we'll start the rules/edit discussion as soon as it's done.
 
Last edited:
I am willing to abide by the rules posted, and willing to abide by the requirements of an England to start. Competence would be a different issue.
 
Back in the day, there were a couple variants of campaigns that had people randomly choose countries every two sessions. And then they would be graded by their overall performance, regardless of which country they ended up in. And some players, would even end up with the same country multiple times in a row, allowing them to really craft its direction and foreign policy, like in RL. And each new roster would be decided immediately after the end of the session to give people a week to negotiate.

I think that'd be an amusing style of game, especially in one going until 1913.

If anything, there are so many wars, it prevents hyperteching. And I'm concerned that in a game beginning in 1337, everyone will be maxed out in tech by 1750 at the latest. I don't think people are really grasping just how amazingly long this is. 200 years before even a 1520 start date, and going 100 years after 1819.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top Bottom
Back