Culling...

[Mad King James]

I've decided for realism's sake that Wales doesn't really deserve to be independent... This got me thinking of a lot of changes I think may be neccisary...

ENGLAND:
Wales should be English.

FRANCE:
The Foix-Navarra issue:
The County of Foix basically Bearn in 1419. In 1441 Aragon took Navarra after the death of Jeanne, by seizing the throne and preventing Jeanne's son from succeeding. Conflict ensued that turned into full-blown civil war in 1452. Foix eventually gained Navarra in 1481, but the civil war continued until Castille invaded Foix and seized Navarra in 1512.

Bourbonnais and Auvergne:
They were duchies of France. If we're going to break these off, why isn't Austria sliced to bits too? Or England and Scotland and Ireland for that matter? Ireland should be 8 kingdoms at this point, and yet in-game they're more united than France is. Should they be part of France? I'm thinking they should be, or we have to cut up England too. Opinions?
As well, Provence was not under the French crown, though Maine was, and should not be a vassal.

Provence was of the Anjou dynasty, and thusly it's cores should be far different than that of other French minors, who were variously of the Capet dynasty. Claims on Naples, Malta, Sicily, Sardinia, Savoy, and the Anjou territories in France.

Gascogne:
Gascogne should not actually be independent, and should rather be directly ruled by the English.

 

[unmerged(739)]

Shouldn't Béarn be French culture?

 

[unmerged(8451)]

Originally posted by Gen. Wolfe
Shouldn't Béarn be French culture?

No, Beorn is half man and half bear.

 

[Mad King James]

Originally posted by Gen. Wolfe
Shouldn't Béarn be French culture?

Not in 1419. Navarra AND Foix were considered 'French' because the Basque were considered subjects to the French crown.

The nobility of Foix were definitely Occitan French though.

 

[nelly644]

Originally posted by Mad King James
Bourbonnais and Auvergne:
They were duchies of France. If we're going to break these off, why isn't Austria sliced to bits too? Or England and Scotland and Ireland for that matter? Ireland should be 8 kingdoms at this point, and yet in-game they're more united than France is. Should they be part of France? I'm thinking they should be, or we have to cut up England too. Opinions?

I never actually saw the point in making them independant in the first place. They should definetely be part of France. This not only makes France stronger in the Hundred Years War, but also cuts down on their BB from annexing their vassals.

Originally posted by Mad King James
Gascogne:
Gascogne should not actually be independent, and should rather be directly ruled by the English.

Yes, certainly. Also I was thinking also of adding some events to England which secedes each French province when the French control it. The French never had to invade England to win the HYW IRL, so why have to do it in game?

 

[Languish]

Re: Re: Culling...

Originally posted by nelly644
I never actually saw the point in making them independant in the first place. They should definetely be part of France. This not only makes France stronger in the Hundred Years War, but also cuts down on their BB from annexing their vassals.

Yes, certainly. Also I was thinking also of adding some events to England which secedes each French province when the French control it. The French never had to invade England to win the HYW IRL, so why have to do it in game?

These are excellent points.

 

[Kevyinus]

Re: Re: Culling...

Originally posted by nelly644
Yes, certainly. Also I was thinking also of adding some events to England which secedes each French province when the French control it. The French never had to invade England to win the HYW IRL, so why have to do it in game?

But wouldnt that be the same for england, by 1429 they owned everything in france down to the river Loire, and Gascoign wasnt touched by France. England replaced all the french lords with english ones so rightly England should have similar events. I think the 2 french dutchys being merged into france would be enough to kick england out of france, they do it already in mine without invading england

 

[Kevyinus]

oh the reason those two French dutchys are in was because of the threat of civil war in France, they were all dutchys under the french crown, but had their own military forces etc, and were swayed in the past to the English like the Treaty of Bruges 1412. As Charles went mad they fought with each other, and threatened to take the French throne themselfs. if dutchys are to be removed, shouldnt burgandy?

 

[nelly644]

Re: Re: Re: Culling...

Originally posted by Kevyinus
But wouldnt that be the same for england, by 1429 they owned everything in france down to the river Loire, and Gascoign wasnt touched by France. England replaced all the french lords with english ones so rightly England should have similar events. I think the 2 french dutchys being merged into france would be enough to kick england out of france, they do it already in mine without invading england

I suppose England probably should get similar events, but as they were only really winning for the first 10 years or so, so they should only be until say Joan of Arc.

oh the reason those two French dutchys are in was because of the threat of civil war in France, they were all dutchys under the french crown, but had their own military forces etc, and were swayed in the past to the English like the Treaty of Bruges 1412. As Charles went mad they fought with each other, and threatened to take the French throne themselfs. if dutchys are to be removed, shouldnt burgandy?

The difference here is that the duchies were not really independant states. There were plenty of areas in other countries such as England, which are not independant in game. This is the point MKJ is trying to make.

 

[Twoflower]

So you suggest that the HRE is united as well?
France is already too strong as it is now, no need to even worsen that.

EDIT: But Orléans and Auvergne should really be removed and Bourbonnais moved to Auvergne's territories, since Orléanais, Limousin and Berry were held by the crown or the royal family.

 

[Caliga]

Agreed. Never understood why it wasn't in prior versions of the AGC. I believe Wales was finally conquered in the 13th century and even before then only small portions of the north and northwest had been actually consistently independent.

Originally posted by Mad King James
ENGLAND:
Wales should be English.

 

[Arilou]

IF you do it that way, make Calais an exception to the "conquer=own" rule, it was held for quite some time after all.

 

[unmerged(9119)]

I many times saw France losing the 100 YW!!! And every time I play that scenario with France I went crazy with the BB values. Maybe e´ngland should control the same provinces of the GC so france would not became so mutch powerfull. And that own/lose event for england should only trigger affer Jean d'Arc so they don't lose it so easilly. So the England Human Player should have some time to defende him self.

And wales should not be independente

 

[Chuckie123]

Ireland 8 kingdoms?

About Ireland being 8 kingdoms, how could that happen in the game? And what would the Kingdoms be called? My biggest concern would be that they wind up as parts of 8 other diffrent European countries.

 

[Kevyinus]

i dont think events losing land should be in really, culling Orléans and Auvergne like twoflower said will make france stronger and never has france had to invade england to win 100 yrs war.

 

[Peter Ebbesen]

Bah.

Removing Wales sounds Ok, and while chopping the French duchies may actually make sense (but what about Burgundy - special exemption?), it makes for an insanely powerful early-game AI France, but it might be acceptable.

But province-by-province forced seccession events. How deterministic do you want it to be?

I would much rather see an English loss of the HYW event, that seceded everything but the northern possessions around Calais to France en bloc.

 

[unmerged(739)]

In order to counter an early ultra-France you could lower tax and manpower values to represent the hold of the nobles over much of the land.

 

[nelly644]

Originally posted by Peter Ebbesen
I would much rather see an English loss of the HYW event, that seceded everything but the northern possessions around Calais to France en bloc.

I thought about this too, but the problem arises in what determines if England actually loses the war. Or do we want England to lose the war in 1453 every time?

 

[artemis667]

Originally posted by nelly644
I thought about this too, but the problem arises in what determines if England actually loses the war. Or do we want England to lose the war in 1453 every time?

Maybe make an event for this that will trigger once England no longer controls any provinces in France?
Something like
trigger = {
NOT = { control = { province = frenchprovince1 data = ENG } }
NOT = { control = { province = frenchprovince2 data = ENG } }
NOT = { control = { province = frenchprovince3 data = ENG } }
NOT = { control = { province = frenchprovince4 data = ENG } }
NOT = { control = { province = frenchprovince5 data = ENG } }
...
}

might do the trick if I got my logic right...

 

[chegitz guevara]

Cull Ayidin. It didn't last seven years into the game period.