• 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.
Showing developer posts only. Show all posts in this thread.
I'm certainly hoping this isn't a "first come, first served" thing :)



..Anyway, my preferences/thoughts on countries:


Russia: Rather not play them since they're the only country I'm currently playing (in Chill 2)

Other than that, I don't see myself as a great trader, so it's probably not a very good idea to put me in a country that really depends on trade to be something.
 
hmm.. Poland...

should be able to do better than the historical counterpart (though.. with Tonio in Austria, risky)


Not a country I would've put as a preference, but I guess I can handle it :)
 
Fredrik82 said:
Of course you will handle it ;)
Although, it's only a suggested nation setup. I can put you elsewhere if you want to.


mainly just expressing "willingness to consider swapping"

no need to bail me out at this time.. And there shouldn't be a need lateron either (well, except if Bocaj screws Poland royally)
 
Bocaj said:
Holland at the start is fine as long as they don't have any maps or freebies.

Of course a benevolent naval sucker might give them some maps, you can never predict these things.


Holland WILL be needing extra (early) explorers if she's released from start.

for two reasons:

1) they were actually exploring/travelling to the new world already when they were still considered Spanish
2) they won't be getting Spanish maps if they are played from start (neither would they if the Austrians kept the territory, and then had to release them, though)
 
admiral drake said:
i can start sayng simular claims historicle lowlands and flandern was habsburg/spanish till revolt shouldn't i get them or atleast flemish including admirals/generals till the period spain historicle lost flandren ? :rolleyes:


If they fought/explored/contributed/.. for Spain/Austria, certainly.
 
Holland is fairly pointless if you give them NO early explorers and NO maps to start off with. (atleast Denmark/Sweden have each other to fight, Venice has Italy to unite.. squable with OE etc.)


Certainly, I do believe that Denmark/Sweden/Venice are deserving of some explorers too (DAN and SWE less so than VEN, though)


..hmm.. now THAT's positive, I start arguing that Holland should get some extra explorers, and you maneuvre the discussion so that I can try for some explorers for me too :D
 
Bocaj said:
Giving them explorers from 1540 would put France at a definite disadvantage from the start as they don't really get explorers that early even.

@ Tonio. I'd love to take a look at those.

40s, 50s... don't REALLY care about the exact time, but I do think Holland (and DAN, SWE, VEN ) needs some early explorers - the explorers they get in the late 16th century did NOT start exploring just west of Ireland, the Canaries etc.


...though the *key* problem is ofcourse not that some countries get their explorers late, but rather that the early colonisers can claim FAR more already than they could IRL.
 
Fredrik82 said:
Holland: One explorer in the 1530s so they can explore the way to the new world and possibly build a colony or two. Live period something about 7 years.
And one other in the 1550s that live longer.
sounds reasonable in terms of what they "knew" historically, I would say... I'll see if I can find some names for historicals.

Sweden-Denmark-Venice: All gets one explorer in the 1500s, starting after 1550s. And one more in the early 1600s.

Thoughts?

sounds good.. gives them a little freedom from other countries in that regard..
though you'd have to check what they get already (IIRC Denmark gets one sometime, dunno when exactly... but it would be rather odd to lose that "advantage" vs Sweden if they both get their early explore before that)
 
FAL said:
Bedford is a fantasy explorer specifically added by Peter Ebbesen to give England the possibility to explore too. He was called Lord cheesy in early releases IIRC :)


Bedford t'anti-Cheese, I believe


but yeah, added by PE to give ENG a chance.

Fredrik82 said:
Thanks, and when you're at it could you find some Dutch leaders (Generals/Admirals) during the timeperiod 1520-1570s aswell?

working on it... though ofcourse, particularly in the earlier period, there weren't many Dutch generals/admirals (they were at that time a fairly compliant part of the Habsburg territories, with no separate army/navy)

On the matter of explorers: haven't been able to trace the names of any early explorers, and using Mercator (that Flemish guy) would be very odd aswell - since he never actually explored AFAIK, just make a lot of very good maps.
 
Hendrik van Brederode; general 1559-15 feb 1568
some Dutch site says that he already was in the army as an officer from around 1559 (sadly, he's not so important as to attract much attention on English sites)

..looking at the leaders file, it looks like he's not *really* necessary (from 1559 onwards, the Dutch will have leaders)
they also have a general (3/3/2/1) until 1538.
also, a general (3/2/3/1) until 1543 (van Rossum) - who could well be increased to 1555 (in 1543, Gelre was defeated and van Rossum joined the Habsburgs, so he was still alive, and likely would have served "the Dutch" if they were around)

that would leave a leaderless gap of only 2 years.. nothing to get worried about.

I still need to fill the admiral gap, though ('20-'65)
 
Bocaj said:
I do have one question I want to throw out about the scenario.

Who would like to see each major naval nation with a shipyard? Portugal, Spain, OE, Venice all already have one, England gets one soon, but France, Denmark, and Sweden get shafted. The main difference would be that they could colonise easier and put up a good naval show. Good things imo.


sounds like a plan :)

you'll have to go look at historical placement (and strategic placement) before you do so, though (possibly in talking with the various countries)

Also, I believe that both SWE and FRA do have a (late) event that potentially gives a shipyard, so I'm not sure how that would fit in exactly.
 
Fredrik82 said:
Sweet,
they should have atleast one historical admiral during this time. :)

well, ofcourse, not being a country (and thus not having a fleet) does tend to decrease the number of admirals...and admirals that DID come from the Netherlands during that time could show up "anywhere" (Spain, Austria, baltics..)

-----
land/naval 5: interesting option, but I do believe some countries (Sweden, Brandenburg, Portugal, Holland, Denmark) would need some extra MP then.

Sweden/Brandenburg to compensate for the lack of extra MP from the land slider (this is less of an issue with the larger land nations)
the others to compensate for the fact that they can't have the fleet to defend them at the usual cheap price, so they need a little more troops. (if you don't have MP anyway, you might aswell go naval to atleast have cheap ships is a reasoning I have heard quite a few times)

I haven't played with it yet.
---------

@Tonio:

Willem van de Marck, lord of Lummen (Lumey for short) - your "Lume de la Mark" - was BORN in 1542 and died in 1578.. now, I'm not sure about you, but I wouldn't send a toddler as head of an expedition to the new world. (yes, I saw various references to him.. he was a "watergeus" (basically little more than privateer) from the late sixties to his death.
Nice idea, but hey, if we can get people to explore from their birth, I'm happy to provide you all with a list of nice admirals for the Netherlands ;)

Willem Blois van Treslong: same story basically, BORN in 1530 (d.1594) , hardly worthy of captaining a ship at the age of 0 ;) [basically the same story, did nothing of note before the Dutch rebellion started, then was a "watergeus"]

Van Gronsveld(t) : can't find anything of note about the lords of Gronsveld.. it's a nice Dutch name, certainly, but little of note ever happened to them.


Sure, I can dig up a few nice Dutch names to stick to some admirals, and that's not a problem, I was just trying to find some historically relevant people for that :p

from around 1558 onward, no problem flooding the game with historical leaders (generals/admirals) .. the real trouble is before that time :(
 
HolisticGod said:
and Poland because it stands no reasonable chance of having enough naval support to make use of it while facing a suddenly much, much stronger Sweden.

Where, if I may ask, does Sweden gain strength from this change?


EDIT: However, if we do this and even if we don't, I'm dead set against giving new explorers and conquistadors with no comparable boost to the land countries.

As I said, the explorers for NL I certainly don't consider a "boost", but rather a compensation for their lack of maps that they WOULD get if they were released at a later date (certainly, this is somewhat balanced by having extra time to build up - but there's only so much HOL can build up anyway, certainly not so much that it needs ~60 years for that that they wouldn't have otherwise)
 
Tonioz said:


this sheds a whole new light as to why the october/november revolution is called that....
Obviously, it wasn't because the Russians hadn't "caught up" a few missing days... rather that it was a revolution past the 31st of october...
 
Damocles said:
Why not 23:30?

If someone can't handle the extra half hour, maybe they should rearrange their schedules :/

I'm sure my teachers will appreciate me asking to delay the lectures by half an hour :rolleyes:

In other words, if there's a majority in favour of 23.30, I'll have to withdraw, 23.00 really is the latest I'll do.
 
Fredrik82 said:
If everyone is ok with a 18.00CET start, then i'm afraid i will have to ask PJL to drop out of the game if he still can't play that early :/


hold it.. going from 19.30 or thereabouts to 18.00 as a start time?

I should be able to make that most of the time, though, but let's just say I had grown a little lazy with all the nice 1900-2300 games :)