Home Trending Latest threads New posts Developer diaries

Chill 1; Easy And Simple. (Normal and Relaxed players only, RP encouraged)

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.
Show only dev responses
Well, than she should have dealh with those restless dukes herself. As it was, King of France saw no future for his country in endless wars against superior enemy, especially not without capable leaders. Instead, he decided to decentralise and demilitarise the country and rely on the diplomacy, so if any enemy wishes to take land from France, he would be seen as a particularly Bad Boy :) .

France succeeded in honouring her obligations towards England to a certain extent. Economy is in rather good state and science and education is florishing. Future will tell if the King made good decissions.
 
Barnius said:
Let's try it with as little editing as possible.
Click to expand...
Always! :D

I do stand by my view that Burgundy is better played by AI in 1419/1453 campaigns, but I'm happy to have Forzaa here and I think he should continue playing them and not be punished for doing well. Letting Burgundy evolve into a large Netherlands is an option, eventually Burgundy runs out of events and leaders and that might be dull. If Forzaa rather live with that and continue with Burgundy I'm sure it will be an interesting game too.

As long as Barnius thinks France is a playable nation and not want to switch I think he should be able to play on. It's a chill game and we shouldn't try to set things straight... :cool:
 
Ottomans, first session

The awfully gifted Sultan Mehmed II Fatih (8-8-9 monarch and 5/7/4/2 leader) had an easy time conquering minor Christian states (Trabzon, Athens, Albania, Serbia and Georgia), vassalising muslim neighbours and start converting the new peoples to the Faith.
Venice was told not to try to expand eastwards, which the Doge agreed upon. He also let the obnoxious vassal Bosnia off the venetian meat hook, and they thanked for the Sultans protection by canceling the vassalage. That will probably be attended to since the Sultan feels he still has some years in him.
 
Barnius said:
Let's try it with as little editing as possible. If Burgudy accepts to remain where she is, leaving the rest of French lands to Kingdom of France to consolidate it in time, France will leave the issue of Paris beeing surrounded by Burgundy. Perhaps Burgundy could only allow MA...

If not, if Burgundy still has territorial pretensions, than France hopes someone will intervene against vile Burgundy.
Click to expand...

I don't have plans to expand in France, certainly- but on the other hand, I will aid my allies (ie. if you want to gobble up Brittany that's your risk :rolleyes: - Burgundy will defend herself and her allies)

RE: HOL/BUR; depends on how, ofcourse :) [in terms of DP's, cultures, that sort of things]
 
Norrefeldt said:
Always! :D

I do stand by my view that Burgundy is better played by AI in 1419/1453 campaigns, but I'm happy to have Forzaa here and I think he should continue playing them and not be punished for doing well. Letting Burgundy evolve into a large Netherlands is an option, eventually Burgundy runs out of events and leaders and that might be dull. If Forzaa rather live with that and continue with Burgundy I'm sure it will be an interesting game too.

As long as Barnius thinks France is a playable nation and not want to switch I think he should be able to play on. It's a chill game and we shouldn't try to set things straight... :cool:
Click to expand...

EVENTS IN FRANCE

French position in 1453 was difficult. It was clear either England or Burgundy could easily crush France, England with her excellent leaders that were left from HYW and lived much longer than the last French general, or Burgundy with her manpower, money and average leaders. With England a deal was made and more or less honoured. The remaining money will be paid and with some interests for being late. With Burgundy, sadly, no diplomacy was possible, because the "regular" Duke could not be reached. I really hope the current Duke will continue ruling Burgundy, because the diplomacy with him could be conducted in an easier way. Anyway, before anything could have been done we were at war. Damn Brittany :D . French forces were defeated and from than it's pretty clear what is going on :) .

While Burgundy remains stubbornly as one of the last relicts of the Middle Ages feudal duchies, relying on pure number of soldiers, France is trying to evolve in a modern kingdom, relying on better technology (OOC: yes, I know until land 9 I am actually getting weaker, because of shock getting lower, but perhaps France will survive long enough to reach land 9...).

King of France already intended to start to centralise his country, but vile Burbonais made it impossible, after annexation of Poitou (OOC: no land connection with the only vassal who was in my alliance, and no more AI possible in alliance). However, things are looking well now, after Swiss left the alliance and Burbonais is defeated (OOC: editing some peace between Burbonais and Holstein would help additionally).
King of France wishes to consolidate his country in peace. We are opened for negotiations with our northern… well, and southern and western (what a MONSTER this Burgundy is :eek: ) neighbour. France also seeks help from other interested parties, should it be needed, and will not forget the possible favours.
 
ForzaA said:
RE: HOL/BUR; depends on how, ofcourse :) [in terms of DP's, cultures, that sort of things]
Click to expand...
It should come at a cost comparable with the gains, IMO.

EDIT: Perhaps I can clarify. I don't think we should just set up HOL regardless on what we have. A strong BUR becoming HOL should mean HOL is also stronger at start, though perhaps not with ideal DP's. If it want to get substantial DP shifts towards a naval trading power, giving up inland cultures and vassalising inland provinces might make sense. Another problem is that HOL normally get good maps from start, and you wont...
Just my 2 cents, it's up to the GM of course.
 
Last edited:
ForzaA said:
I don't have plans to expand in France, certainly- but on the other hand, I will aid my allies (ie. if you want to gobble up Brittany that's your risk :rolleyes: - Burgundy will defend herself and her allies)
Click to expand...

Naturally, naturally... Well, France secretly hopes some revolts will eventually appear in this obsolete Middle Ages Duchy...

ForzaA said:
RE: HOL/BUR; depends on how, ofcourse :) [in terms of DP's, cultures, that sort of things]
Click to expand...

We started with Burgundy and this already brought some unexpected deviations from the standard development :D . Burgundy influences things GREATLY in regular campaigns with her succession events. Here those were avoided and now we have to keep Burgundy. But how to keep it? The main point is she is incredible rich and strong, second only to Ottoman Empire. I think it would be bad to keep it as only a part-time solution till it is edited as Netherlands. As it would be unfair to now do massive editing of French lands to boost France, so would it be unfair, not only to France, but also to Germany, to just declare some huge Burgundy suddenly becomes Holland.

There is 1555 event that creates Netherlands, but Holland should exist before. Perhaps you can do it. I mean, perhaps we can edit it. Holland and the remaining Burgundy as her vassal. That would mean no revolts in Burgundy. You could than switch to Holland perhaps, and protect and incorporate Burgundy or parts of it. But I am not sure if you should keep Britany too :) .
Or you could remain Burgundy. She already has Dutch culture, on DP sliders you can work and I suppose limited editing would be possible. But what I would personally miss is Netherlands, with her nice admirals…

Anyhow, my MAIN point is there has to be a continuity: what Burgundy does now will affect 99% how she will look in the future, or how Netherlands will look in the future.
 
Norrefeldt said:
It should come at a cost comparable with the gains, IMO.

EDIT: Perhaps I can clarify. I don't think we should just set up HOL regardless on what we have. A strong BUR becoming HOL should mean HOL is also stronger at start, though perhaps not with ideal DP's. If it want to get substantial DP shifts towards a naval trading power, giving up inland cultures and vassalising inland provinces might make sense. Another problem is that HOL normally get good maps from start, and you wont...
Just my 2 cents, it's up to the GM of course.
Click to expand...


Exactly what I thought :) .
A continuity Burgundy > Netherlands is needed. That's what I had in mind when considering playing Burgundy > Netherlands.
 
European Economy in 1476 – Some Unexpected Changes from 1453


Here is the current status of the European economy:

post-23-1103023525.jpg


post-23-1103023594.jpg


  • The basic year was 1454, where all analyzed countries were AI; probably some were wartaxing or something
  • The best performance regarding increase of income showed Muscowy, Poland and Ottoman Empire; Muscowy and Poland acquired new COTs, while Ottoman is counted in already in the base year.
  • Close behind, with significant increase on income, are Austria (new manufactory), England and Burgundy. No doubt Denmark would be somewhere there too, if she was not at war with Mecklenburg occupied.
  • By far the worst are Portugal :eek: and France :eek:o ; Portugal because of lost trade (more than 70%) and France because of lost land (taxes and production) – vassal income is considerable smaller, as noble Danes noticed.
  • Curses! Although trying really hard, France still has the highest inflation! Why some were more lucky in deflation events as well? :(
  • A small consolation to King Louis XI is only French trade, which is currently the leading in Europe, followed by Ottoman one.
 
If I may be permitted an opinion, the better comparison would be to income in 1453, with an assumption that all parties initiated upgrade to tax collector in all provinces, yielding census taxes. Not certain how easy that would be to determine.

As I thought from looking at the stats page, Austria is relatively poor because a) no CoT, and b) His Highness had a hands-off order regarding German minors, which, frankly, I don't understand. I assume the idea is to hand Brandenburg to anyone who wishes to join, but my thought would be it would make more sense to just start with BB and not Denmark if a Germany is necessary. Otherwise, assume that Denmark will inherit the role of Germany as Sweeden with her fantasy leaders pushes Denmark out of Scandanavia. :D

But had Austria been allowed to annex the one-state minors, there would be a significant difference in the income page. :cool:


Of course, Austria's Duke has indicated a better Trade performance had best be in the offing, or someone's head will roll....... :eek:
 
You are right, but the problem with 1453 is it is only 7 months, so I would need to do some calculations. Also, wars always make mess in income, and all starting years are full of wars, so really no point in trying to make it perfect, it is only for a rough comparison.

After the next session we will have more reliable data to compare with :)
 
DSYoungEsq said:
If I may be permitted an opinion, the better comparison would be to income in 1453, with an assumption that all parties initiated upgrade to tax collector in all provinces, yielding census taxes. Not certain how easy that would be to determine.

As I thought from looking at the stats page, Austria is relatively poor because a) no CoT, and b) His Highness had a hands-off order regarding German minors, which, frankly, I don't understand. I assume the idea is to hand Brandenburg to anyone who wishes to join, but my thought would be it would make more sense to just start with BB and not Denmark if a Germany is necessary. Otherwise, assume that Denmark will inherit the role of Germany as Sweeden with her fantasy leaders pushes Denmark out of Scandanavia. :D

But had Austria been allowed to annex the one-state minors, there would be a significant difference in the income page. :cool:


Of course, Austria's Duke has indicated a better Trade performance had best be in the offing, or someone's head will roll....... :eek:
Click to expand...

Heh, I actually think you vassalizing them was the best option, now you get to peacefully annex them later = Troops and noBB :)
 
Adam Breit said:
Heh, I actually think you vassalizing them was the best option, now you get to peacefully annex them later = Troops and noBB :)
Click to expand...
Bah, if I start worrying about BB as Austria, I'm hamstrung. :p
 
But anyway- I think there's two (semi-)major issues that need a resolution:

1]
the weakness of France (Barnius was too smart for his own good ;) ) in comparison with Burgundy (well, basically in comparison with everyone, but eh :rolleyes: )
This also leads to a somewhat more unfortunate side effect for me- despite very lenient terms in that war (I don't even know who started it... ) I/my alliance am/is seen as a danger to balance [England in particular is concerned ;) ]

now, I see 3 ways out:
1) we leave it as is, and hope France somehow miraculously recovers (hopefully not requiring an orchestrated attack/gangbang on Burgundy)
2) Barnius moves to Brittany and we try to get him to become France as Brittany (meaning FRA would have to be annexed, and BRI owning Ile de France, before 1515) OR he could remain Brittany.
3) We do some bigtime editing (Annexing vasals, bit of province shuffling)

2] Burgundy-> Holland
several smaller issues here.
1) Dutch revolts would basically paralise Burgundy for some 80 years if they were to go "historical" or would see her lose a lot of land.
2) Burgundy has no scripted leaders(After 1486) or events(except Dutch revolts, see 1) ) whereas Holland does.
3) IF Burgundy is edited to become Holland, a carefull balancing act will have to take place so that it's not an über-Holland (ie. Trading/colonising "superpower" with a lot of MP aswell) nor a half-France (not being a real coloniser, but lacking the MP/taxes/leaders to become a continental player of importance)
 
ForzaA said:
But anyway- I think there's two (semi-)major issues that need a resolution:

1]
the weakness of France (Barnius was too smart for his own good ;) ) in comparison with Burgundy (well, basically in comparison with everyone, but eh :rolleyes: )
This also leads to a somewhat more unfortunate side effect for me- despite very lenient terms in that war (I don't even know who started it... ) I/my alliance am/is seen as a danger to balance [England in particular is concerned ;) ]

now, I see 3 ways out:
1) we leave it as is, and hope France somehow miraculously recovers (hopefully not requiring an orchestrated attack/gangbang on Burgundy)
2) Barnius moves to Brittany and we try to get him to become France as Brittany (meaning FRA would have to be annexed, and BRI owning Ile de France, before 1515) OR he could remain Brittany.
3) We do some bigtime editing (Annexing vasals, bit of province shuffling)

2] Burgundy-> Holland
several smaller issues here.
1) Dutch revolts would basically paralise Burgundy for some 80 years if they were to go "historical" or would see her lose a lot of land.
2) Burgundy has no scripted leaders(After 1486) or events(except Dutch revolts, see 1) ) whereas Holland does.
3) IF Burgundy is edited to become Holland, a carefull balancing act will have to take place so that it's not an über-Holland (ie. Trading/colonising "superpower" with a lot of MP aswell) nor a half-France (not being a real coloniser, but lacking the MP/taxes/leaders to become a continental player of importance)
Click to expand...

Myself is in favor of editing all french vassals back to France.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top Bottom
Back