Home Trending Latest threads New posts Developer diaries

Cores / Claims / CB Provinces

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.
unmerged(174613)

unmerged(174613)

Banned
1 Badges
Oct 21, 2009
441
0
  • For The Glory
FTG has finally given us a distinction between cores and claims.

Naturally, all events which deal with them must now be revised, and it decided which should be claims and which cores.

My personal opinion is that, as a rule of thumb, cores should be quite rare. For the most part, you start with your national cores, and then claims are given/taken through events. There are examples of cores changing, but very few IMO.

For example, the cores handed out to FRA in the Chambers of Reunion events can quite logically be made claims instead.

Likewise, there is no longer a reason for ENG to have cores on French provinces.

Feel free to post here regarding which cores you think should be 'downgraded' to claims, or CB provinces.

Finally, I think all colonial cores should be CB provinces.
 
What about Spanish and Portuguese traditional claims after Tordesillas event.

Shouldn't they be converted to cores after the Edict of Tolerance?

For France I suggest claims over Naples from 1494 to 1530.

However, which are the differences in gameplay between cores, claims and CB? :eek:o
 
James III said:
FTG has finally given us a distinction between cores and claims.

Naturally, all events which deal with them must now be revised, and it decided which should be claims and which cores.

My personal opinion is that, as a rule of thumb, cores should be quite rare. For the most part, you start with your national cores, and then claims are given/taken through events. There are examples of cores changing, but very few IMO.

For example, the cores handed out to FRA in the Chambers of Reunion events can quite logically be made claims instead.

Likewise, there is no longer a reason for ENG to have cores on French provinces.

Feel free to post here regarding which cores you think should be 'downgraded' to claims, or CB provinces.

Finally, I think all colonial cores should be CB provinces.
Click to expand...

I agree that the french cores in the Chambers of Reunion event should be changed from national cores to claimcores.

For a human player I would agree with your rule of thumb.

However for the AI it can be a challenge to overcome the lack of manpower and the nationalism for 30 years if it get´s only a claimcore and not a national core,
e.g. the Ottoman Empire if AI controlled, only with cores on turkish provinces and everything else only claimcores would make their historical early fast expansion very unlikely.

My own rule of thumb goes like:
========================

Casus Belli core: A nation receives a CB core for those provinces for that it should be able to start a war without the stability hit for having no CB, BUT THAT IT SHOULD NOT CONQUER because it historically never successfully conquered or besieged the province, or a colony on another continent. As the AI should concentrate on national cores first, claimcores second and CB cores last those CB cores should not hinder the wanted historical expansion of the AI countries but still sometimes lead to a histrorical conflict.
Effectively a CB core is the same as receiving a casus belli against a certain state - only that the casus belli is directed against a state which in the game might not rule a certain province. In that case a cb core works like a permanent (until removed) casus belli for a certain province.

e.g. Diu (the indian province of Gujarat) could become a CB core for the Ottoman Empire *if* the portuguese (or another non-muslim nation) conquer it, as historically the Ottomans made at least two attempts to dislodge the Portuguese from their outposts there - and failed both times after some battles - after Gujarat asked them for aid.

Claimcore: A state should receive a claimcore if they historically waged a war and controlled a province - but lost it again in less than 100 years, or if a state ruled for 100+ years a distinct part of a province but not all of it. Or if a state conquered a province but encountered heavy resistance. The lower manpower and the nationalism will make it difficult to retain the province for the AI but after 30 years of control it turns into a national core if not lost or removed again. e.g. this could be Serbia/Bosnia/Wallachia for HAB/Austria after the treaty of Pessarowitz
http://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Frieden_von_Passarowitz

National/full core: Those provinces that a state completely ruled for 100+ years. As the AI will have problems with too many claimcores we should still give before the conquest all cores as national cores that we want the AI country to conquer and to keep - e.g. the whole Balkans for the Ottomans.
 
Last edited:
ConjurerDragon said:
I agree that the french cores in the Chambers of Reunion event should be changed from national cores to claimcores.

For a human player I would agree with your rule of thumb.

However for the AI it can be a challenge to overcome the lack of manpower and the nationalism for 30 years if it get´s only a claimcore and not a national core,
e.g. the Ottoman Empire if AI controlled, only with cores on turkish provinces and everything else only claimcores would make their historical early fast expansion very unlikely.

My own rule of thumb goes like:
========================

Casus Belli core: A nation receives a CB core for those provinces for that it should be able to start a war without the stability hit for having no CB, BUT THAT IT SHOULD NOT CONQUER because it historically never successfully conquered or besieged the province, or a colony on another continent. As the AI should concentrate on national cores first, claimcores second and CB cores last those CB cores should not hinder the wanted historical expansion of the AI countries but still sometimes lead to a histrorical conflict.
Effectively a CB core is the same as receiving a casus belli against a certain state - only that the casus belli is directed against a state which in the game might not rule a certain province. In that case a cb core works like a permanent (until removed) casus belli for a certain province.

e.g. Diu (the indian province of Gujarat) could become a CB core for the Ottoman Empire *if* the portuguese (or another non-muslim nation) conquer it, as historically the Ottomans made at least two attempts to dislodge the Portuguese from their outposts there - and failed both times after some battles - after Gujarat asked them for aid.

Claimcore: A state should receive a claimcore if they historically waged a war and controlled a province - but lost it again in less than 100 years, or if a state ruled for 100+ years a distinct part of a province but not all of it. Or if a state conquered a province but encountered heavy resistance. The lower manpower and the nationalism will make it difficult to retain the province for the AI but after 30 years of control it turns into a national core if not lost or removed again. e.g. this could be Serbia/Bosnia/Wallachia for HAB/Austria after the treaty of Pessarowitz
http://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Frieden_von_Passarowitz

National/full core: Those provinces that a state completely ruled for 100+ years. As the AI will have problems with too many claimcores we should still give before the conquest all cores as national cores that we want the AI country to conquer and to keep - e.g. the whole Balkans for the Ottomans.
Click to expand...

my only change would be that events which give a CB core should also give a war command
 
I agree with ConjurerDragon's "rule of thumb"

I don't think war command should be given with CB as the rule says "it should be able to start a war without the stability hit for having no CB, BUT THAT IT SHOULD NOT CONQUER because it historically never successfully conquered or besieged the province, or a colony on another continent."

In the ending titles of a recent film I haver read a quote from Machiavelli:"Wars will begin where you will, but they do not end where you please."

In agceep we could have too many unwanted results with a war command.

About the chains of events I know better in the game, I would suggest having France with claim_cores in Milan and Naples and Spain with national_cores.

About Provence in Naples as we can see it now, there should be CB cores when attacking and claim_cores when inheriting Naples. Or they could be assigned nationa_cores? Since France will inherit Provence and get cores on Naples I would suggest then a downgrade for France, from national to claim.

About Aragon should they start with claim cores, changed in national cores after they take Naples?

Should then Spain still be the first claimant of Naples in case Aragon doesn't conquer Naples for the benefit of Provence?
Could they have national cores in an alternative history of Naples ruled by the French or simply claim or eventually cb cores?
 
Bordic said:
I agree with ConjurerDragon's "rule of thumb"

I don't think war command should be given with CB as the rule says "it should be able to start a war without the stability hit for having no CB, BUT THAT IT SHOULD NOT CONQUER because it historically never successfully conquered or besieged the province, or a colony on another continent."

In the ending titles of a recent film I haver read a quote from Machiavelli:"Wars will begin where you will, but they do not end where you please."

In agceep we could have too many unwanted results with a war command.

About the chains of events I know better in the game, I would suggest having France with claim_cores in Milan and Naples and Spain with national_cores.

About Provence in Naples as we can see it now, there should be CB cores when attacking and claim_cores when inheriting Naples. Or they could be assigned nationa_cores? Since France will inherit Provence and get cores on Naples I would suggest then a downgrade for France, from national to claim.

About Aragon should they start with claim cores, changed in national cores after they take Naples?

Should then Spain still be the first claimant of Naples in case Aragon doesn't conquer Naples for the benefit of Provence?
Could they have national cores in an alternative history of Naples ruled by the French or simply claim or eventually cb cores?
Click to expand...

i was mistaken , the war command should be inserted where there is a claim core as per - Claimcore: A state should receive a claimcore if they historically waged a war and controlled a province
 
Toio said:
i was mistaken , the war command should be inserted where there is a claim core as per - Claimcore: A state should receive a claimcore if they historically waged a war and controlled a province
Click to expand...

Having the claimcore on a province will lead the AI state itself to consider going to war for it - IF the conditions are right and it´s alliance is stronger than the alliance of the owner of the province. The claimcore will make sure that relations are constantly lowered between the nations having the core and that owning the province.

However we should not force a war by using the WAR command unless it´s about extremely important historical wars as we can´t be certain what alliances the AI nation and it´s enemy will have at the moment it gains the core. The situation will likely be far different from the historical setup to further a game plays on and therefore we should leave the declaration of war to the AI state (or the player if human controlled).
 
What does one use in the scenario files to have a country begin with claim cores? For national and casus belli cores
Code: 
nationalprovinces = { } 
casusbelliprovinces = { }
work, respectively, but after testing it seems that
Code: 
claimprovinces = { }
does not work in the same way. Could anyone clarify the proper syntax?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top Bottom
Back