Egypt and Nubia

[Incompetent]

I must admit, I haven't played Egypt or Nubia, and have only had a quick look at their events. But there are a few things that strike me as odd.

1. Egypt uses three tags:
MAM for the pre-Civil War Mameluks
FAT for the Fatimid dynasty
EGY for the Fatimids' opponents in the Civil War

Now what I don't get is, what happens to the Mameluks in the Civil War? Do they simply get squished by the factions? Where do these factions come from, if not from the Mameluks?

In any case, what kind of a name is 'Mameluks' or 'Fatimids' for a country? It's like calling 16th-century England 'Tudors'.

I'm not just concerned about cosmetics here: having three tags for what is essentially the same country makes for unnecessary work in the events, as it means lots of events have to be repeated.

What I'd suggest is this:
- from 1419 onwards, we have a country called Egypt or Misr, using the EGY tag
- if we keep the civil war, we can use the other tags for the factions. But once the country is reunited, it's EGY again (with suitable monarch/leader adjustments).


2. The Copts in Nubia are completely doomed with current events - they get hit not once but several times with events to convert them to Islam and/or join Egypt, and if they do there's no turning back. Now I don't mind if say 2 times out of 3, Nubia goes Muslim and gets conquered by Arabs in some order. But there should at least be a decent chance for survival, and for the revival of the Coptic faith if the Egyptian overlords are overthrown. We could go even further: what if the Nubians actually manage to beat up Egypt? (I do see this happen from time to time.) Maybe there should be the possibility of a Nubian takeover in Egypt, possibly even a Coptic one, with the Nubians teaming up with the Egyptian Copts. Nubia would still be a very difficult country to play, but this would at least make it an interesting option in SP.

 

[MattyG]

Incompetant,

Good clear thinking from you again.

Misr (or Egypt) must remain the same country whatever dynasty happens to take over. This also frees up core tags. The factions can be given u12 or whatever. Alternatively, they don't need tags, and are just represented by heavy revolt events with the EGYrev flag. Success in capturing the capital would force a change of monarch and and the normal "the government has fallen" action would also occur. With all the civil war type events planned for Europe, asia and Africa, we will otherwise quickly run out of tags.

As for Nubia, I had had a similar thought, but haven't had the time to start posting about it (my LIMITED time is given to New World and France). The near east needs a lot more variety, as we have expressed in other forums. The KoJ needs a better chance at survival, the Nubians too, and the Caliphate needs to be a little less beserk, conquering everything in only a few years.

I don't think Nubia should convert to Islam by event at all. If the ai or player pays the ducats and it work? OK. In fact, even if it goes islamic, the only event should be to force re-covert it under certain circumstances. For example, if Byzantium or Krete or Genoa captire Alexandria, this triggers a revolt in a non-independent Nubia and force re-conversion. Of course, an islamic country could still pay again to have it re-convert.

Nubia resurgent? Its a great concept to play with, but it sounds like a project for the distant future. Creating the proper event files for a Nubia that conquers Egypt would be valuable but it's unlikely to happen. Unless we want it to happen more often. They get a great leader atva time of internal political strife for Egypt, such as one of the dynastic change times. They have their shot at glory, and maybe burn out or fade away. Could be very very cool.

 

[unmerged(30761)]

In any case, what kind of a name is 'Mameluks' or 'Fatimids' for a country? It's like calling 16th-century England 'Tudors'.

Or like calling 21st century country "Saudi Arabia"

 

[Incompetent]

As for Nubia, I had had a similar thought, but haven't had the time to start posting about it (my LIMITED time is given to New World and France). The near east needs a lot more variety, as we have expressed in other forums. The KoJ needs a better chance at survival, the Nubians too, and the Caliphate needs to be a little less beserk, conquering everything in only a few years.

I don't think Nubia should convert to Islam by event at all. If the ai or player pays the ducats and it work? OK. In fact, even if it goes islamic, the only event should be to force re-covert it under certain circumstances. For example, if Byzantium or Krete or Genoa captire Alexandria, this triggers a revolt in a non-independent Nubia and force re-conversion. Of course, an islamic country could still pay again to have it re-convert.

Nubia resurgent? Its a great concept to play with, but it sounds like a project for the distant future. Creating the proper event files for a Nubia that conquers Egypt would be valuable but it's unlikely to happen. Unless we want it to happen more often. They get a great leader atva time of internal political strife for Egypt, such as one of the dynastic change times. They have their shot at glory, and maybe burn out or fade away. Could be very very cool.

Nubia doesn't need to have some monster event file like the ones you and I have been doing lately, just a few events allowing it to gain control of Egypt, with Arabic culture as a possibility (albeit a rather difficult one). Nubia would probably become Egypt, in fact, as 'King of Egypt' is far more prestigious than 'King of Nubia'.

I wouldn't go as far as saying Nubia can't ever convert to Islam by event, and one of its possible conversions is not prompted by the Mameluks but by Muslims in Batn al Hajar, so it's not always an issue of the Mameluks putting in the effort. But the repeated 'king is assassinated, now we must give in to the Mameluks' events to me seem like naked railroading of the story, and that's what I want to get rid of.

Having said that, I forgot a further point: Egypt is not pulling its weight as a major. While they get an easy ride in Nubia, that doesn't really matter because Nubia is horribly poor. We need to strengthen Egypt in other ways so that they can resist the encroachment of Baghdad and Cordoba, particularly after 1550 or so, as I find the Mameluks tend to start strong but then go downhill (partly thanks to the civil war).

From the few test games I've played, it seems my simple changes to the KoJ have had a dramatic effect. I'd put its life expectancy as a Levantine power at maybe 50 years now, whereas it was about 10 before; although the Caliphate nearly always wins eventually, CAL and JER are now almost evenly matched in 1419. But in any case, this is a discussion for another thread.

 

[unmerged(26209)]

Or like calling 21st century country "Saudi Arabia"

Isn't the official name still "Hejaz and Nejd"?


Anyway, I like the concept of the Nubians taking Egypt by force, but this should not go unoticed by the Caliphate if it happens.

 

[Incompetent]

Anyway, I like the concept of the Nubians taking Egypt by force, but this should not go unoticed by the Caliphate if it happens.

Well, Nubia may be Muslim itself by this point; historically, the Kingdom of Sennar converted to Islam long before the Arabs conquered it. But yes, a Coptic Egypt is going to have a very rough ride - more fun for SPers, you might say.

 

[unmerged(30761)]

Isn't the official name still "Hejaz and Nejd"?


Anyway, I like the concept of the Nubians taking Egypt by force, but this should not go unoticed by the Caliphate if it happens.

http://lcweb2.loc.gov/cgi-bin/query/r?frd/cstdyfield(DOCID+sa0004)

Formal Name: Kingdom of Saudi Arabia.

Short Form: Saudi Arabia.

Term for Nationals: Saudi(s) or Saudi Arabian(s); adjectival forms--Saudi or Saudi Arabian.

beside that point. anything that makes your life easier and everyone's experience more enjoyable is a bonus.

 

[unmerged(23409)]

Well, Nubia may be Muslim itself by this point; historically, the Kingdom of Sennar converted to Islam long before the Arabs conquered it. But yes, a Coptic Egypt is going to have a very rough ride - more fun for SPers, you might say.

The Kingdom of Sennar came about at the beginning of the 16th Century IIRC, but anyhoo, a Nubia with a chance to destroy the Mamleuks sounds fine.

 

[unmerged(31994)]

Or like calling 21st century country "Saudi Arabia"

They are entitled to that right, and it wasnt them who named it, but the people.Drop the stupid "OMG ITS A DICTATORSHIP" shit, because Im not in the mood for it at all.

I will be posting some events soon for the Caliphate, been a rough week, and it has some egyptian events too.

 

[unmerged(23409)]

They are entitled to that right, and it wasnt them who named it, but the people.Drop the stupid "OMG ITS A DICTATORSHIP" shit, because Im not in the mood for it at all.

I will be posting some events soon for the Caliphate, been a rough week, and it has some egyptian events too.

I think he was refering to it being named after the Royal Family, not some kind of evil tyrannic dictatorship rant.

 

[unmerged(31994)]

ahhhh sorry then, Im kinda in a bad mood, I feel like ripping somebody apart in RL.

 

[unmerged(26209)]

Naming countries after dynasties is indead stupid. Perhaps abe should have it as a policy not to? Except perhaps when naming civil war factions, but they should anyway become the countyr proper if thye win... I think.

 

[Incompetent]

Naming countries after dynasties is indead stupid. Perhaps abe should have it as a policy not to? Except perhaps when naming civil war factions, but they should anyway become the countyr proper if thye win... I think.

Yep. To avoid derailing this thread, I've created a new one on naming conventions.

 

[yourworstnightm]

If Egypt is meant to be a major, something has to be done, since during the civil war The kaliphate just diploannex one faction and conquer the other, I never see one of the egyptians win the civil war, which is sad, since it would have been interresting to see what that faction does when the war is over, so a rework of Egypt would be great.

I also like the idea that Nubia can become a coptic Egypt, make the game interresting when things like that happen once in a while.

 

[Incompetent]

If Egypt is meant to be a major, something has to be done, since during the civil war The kaliphate just diploannex one faction and conquer the other, I never see one of the egyptians win the civil war, which is sad, since it would have been interresting to see what that faction does when the war is over, so a rework of Egypt would be great.

I also like the idea that Nubia can become a coptic Egypt, make the game interresting when things like that happen once in a while.

One thing we could do is say that if the Caliphate has good relations with the surviving faction, they hand back any Egyptian lands they took in the war. After all, usually the surviving faction is the one which allies with the Caliphate and gets the Caliph to take care of the other side for them

 

[Kaigon]

I must admit, I haven't played Egypt or Nubia, and have only had a quick look at their events. But there are a few things that strike me as odd.

1. Egypt uses three tags:
MAM for the pre-Civil War Mameluks
FAT for the Fatimid dynasty
EGY for the Fatimids' opponents in the Civil War

Now what I don't get is, what happens to the Mameluks in the Civil War? Do they simply get squished by the factions? Where do these factions come from, if not from the Mameluks?

In any case, what kind of a name is 'Mameluks' or 'Fatimids' for a country? It's like calling 16th-century England 'Tudors'.

I'm not just concerned about cosmetics here: having three tags for what is essentially the same country makes for unnecessary work in the events, as it means lots of events have to be repeated.

What I'd suggest is this:
- from 1419 onwards, we have a country called Egypt or Misr, using the EGY tag
- if we keep the civil war, we can use the other tags for the factions. But once the country is reunited, it's EGY again (with suitable monarch/leader adjustments).

Ok, I was the one who created all this (eastern north africa) so I might just explained how I thought when I made this:
I used three tags back in the days since I wanted three different graphics sets, now this is fully possible by an event command but I believe it wasn't back then. Also, there was no lack of tags at all, rather quite a surplus, so using three tags was not a problem world-wise. Lastly, I found it easier to make a difference between them all by using three tags, I rather worked with monarchs and leaders from different tags rather than sleeping dynasties by events.

If you really need a tag, extract it from here (MAM, EGY, FAT) but I wouldn't recommend for the work included in it, unless you're planning a make over of the situation anyway.

About duplicate events, although it was a long time I worked on this file I only found a few (around 4) of them (that could be removed along with one of the tags).

Of the three names, Fatimids is the "worst", since it actually consists of several families/dynasties (unlike the Mameluks monarch tree). I still used it since I knew of nothing better and I wanted to tie them to central north africa in some way. You could consider it a place-holder for a better name.

 

[unmerged(26209)]

Ok, I was the one who created all this (eastern north africa) so I might just explained how I thought when I made this:
I used three tags back in the days since I wanted three different graphics sets, now this is fully possible by an event command but I believe it wasn't back then. Also, there was no lack of tags at all, rather quite a surplus, so using three tags was not a problem world-wise. Lastly, I found it easier to make a difference between them all by using three tags, I rather worked with monarchs and leaders from different tags rather than sleeping dynasties by events.

If you really need a tag, extract it from here (MAM, EGY, FAT) but I wouldn't recommend for the work included in it, unless you're planning a make over of the situation anyway.

About duplicate events, although it was a long time I worked on this file I only found a few (around 4) of them (that could be removed along with one of the tags).

Of the three names, Fatimids is the "worst", since it actually consists of several families/dynasties (unlike the Mameluks monarch tree). I still used it since I knew of nothing better and I wanted to tie them to central north africa in some way. You could consider it a place-holder for a better name.

How about Fatimid faction?

 

[Kaigon]

How about Fatimid faction?

As a country name? Even worse than just 'Fatimids' in my ears, or did I misunderstand your question?