Eu2Vic: Feedback and Comments

[Golden_Deliciou]

EDIT: And... too many countries are civilised. Now that we all seem to have agreed upon making latin tech countries civilised regardless of tech level, can we please modify "-If a country has not reached at least land and navy 35 (TBD), and trade and infra 5 (TDB) - it will be considered an uncivilized nation (i.e primitive = yes)." so that at least 49 is needed for naval (triple decker ships, supposed to be discovered in 1790 in EU2) and 51 (levee en masse, 1792) for civilised status? I'd bump up trade and infra to 7 as well.

Rather than just having the blanket rule that Latin tech group states are always civilised, I would suggest giving them a lower threshold to be civilised. Same for Orthodox, but less of a difference. I want to see uncivilised countries in Europe now and then.

Obviously what the different thresholds are depends on the normal situation at the end of EU2.

In addition, we need to do something about population levels. Might I suggest that the EU2 savegame result and the Victoria default levels be added and the result divided by two? Because otherwise I cannot see how we will be able to satisfy both players that start with, say, the 1419/1492 scenario, and those that start, say, with the 1773/1795.

The start date is recorded in the save, isn't it (at least indirectly; the name of the scenario is saved)? So you could have different multipliers for different start-dates. Otherwise, I would say this is a problem with EU2's population growth rates.

And, finally, I'd suggest converting EU2 fortress level 5s to Vic level 1s and EU2 6s to Vic 2s. Were we to convert EU2 level 4s to Vic 1s, if you play a late scenario, Vic Europe in particular is going to be crammed full of fortifications. If we are unable to take care of the population problem that means a very static game to begin with.

Yeah- but also note that the fortresses should only be in ONE province each. Not every single one.

 

[unmerged(31960)]

Rather than just having the blanket rule that Latin tech group states are always civilised, I would suggest giving them a lower threshold to be civilised. Same for Orthodox, but less of a difference. I want to see uncivilised countries in Europe now and then.

Ok, i don't agree with having lowered tech levels for latin or orthodos, if you read carefully, Uncivilized was the status given by the western power to the countries with another culture, religion or way to be, like the difference between chinese and english people, so they always considered all europe "civilized" so no point in doing that unless you create a new status meaning backward or something. I do agree with the latin type idea oh and orthodox countries should be added too.

The start date is recorded in the save, isn't it (at least indirectly; the name of the scenario is saved)? So you could have different multipliers for different start-dates. Otherwise, I would say this is a problem with EU2's population growth rates.

I like the idea, but i suggest an option in the program so the user can choose in case he changed the escenario's name. example: POP convertion: 1419-1492-1700-etc.

Yeah- but also note that the fortresses should only be in ONE province each. Not every single one.

i don't agree with this, take the chinese wall as an example, that wall goes through all the provinces of the converted state. So if a province has a fort, put it in all the provinces of the converted game

 

[Emre Yigit]

More comments:

On the subject of trade post and colonial city conversion, in particular with respect to Africa, what do you all say to:

1. Removing all tps during conversion?

2. Downgrading all colonial cities (populations less than 1000) to tps?

 

[Brownbeard]

More comments:

On the subject of trade post and colonial city conversion, in particular with respect to Africa, what do you all say to:

1. Removing all tps during conversion?

2. Downgrading all colonial cities (populations less than 1000) to tps?

you can't have a city with less than 1000 pops in 1.08

 

[unmerged(10564)]

When will the next version be released?

When it's ready!!! :rofl: :wacko:

 

[Golden_Deliciou]

Ok, i don't agree with having lowered tech levels for latin or orthodos, if you read carefully, Uncivilized was the status given by the western power to the countries with another culture, religion or way to be, like the difference between chinese and english people, so they always considered all europe "civilized" so no point in doing that unless you create a new status meaning backward or something. I do agree with the latin type idea oh and orthodox countries should be added too.

Civilised in Victoria is a matter of whether or not one is partaking of the industrial revolution or not, more or less. The non-Western countries more or less just stagnated from the late middle ages through to the end of the 19th century. Made no progress at all.

I like the idea, but i suggest an option in the program so the user can choose in case he changed the escenario's name. example: POP convertion: 1419-1492-1700-etc.

Yeah- that's fine.

i don't agree with this, take the chinese wall as an example, that wall goes through all the provinces of the converted state. So if a province has a fort, put it in all the provinces of the converted game

The Great Wall of China, to the extent it ever had any military value, certainly had none by 1836. If the player wants to turn isolated fortresses into a comprehensive fortress system he'll have to fill in the gaps himself. There's just no way to turn a fortified province in EU2 into a fortified line in Victoria. It would just end up being a blob of fortified provinces with no shape to it.

 

[Emre Yigit]

you can't have a city with less than 1000 pops in 1.08

Ummm, yes, so?

 

[Brownbeard]

then i fail to see the point of making a rule for something that does not exist. why delete all cities with pops under 1000 if there are no cities with pops under 1000?

 

[Golden_Deliciou]

then i fail to see the point of making a rule for something that does not exist. why delete all cities with pops under 1000 if there are no cities with pops under 1000?

Currently, colonies in EU2- regardless of population- are converted to claimed provinces in Victoria. His proposal is to make them trading posts instead.

 

[unmerged(10564)]

Colonies = trading posts
Trading posts = Claims

What about that?


1500 posts!

 

[Brownbeard]

not so sure. i see it as a possible ana very large prestige exploit.

perhaps if it used the same principle forts use. make one trade post or colony city into one claim, not claims to all vic provs in a eu2 prov

 

[Golden_Deliciou]

Colonies = trading posts
Trading posts = Claims

What about that?

Eh? That doesn't make sense.

 

[Golden_Deliciou]

not so sure. i see it as a possible ana very large prestige exploit.

perhaps if it used the same principle forts use. make one trade post or colony city into one claim, not claims to all vic provs in a eu2 prov

Hm- a thought. Perhaps this could be based on the population of the province.

<100 = trading post
100-1000 = one claim building
1000-2000 = two claim buildings
2000-3000 = three claim buildings, and so on.

 

[unmerged(31960)]

Hm- a thought. Perhaps this could be based on the population of the province.

<100 = trading post
100-1000 = one claim building
1000-2000 = two claim buildings
2000-3000 = three claim buildings, and so on.

Great idea, why not do the same with fortress, EU2 level 5 fortess gives 1 level 1 fortress in a province of the state and level 6 gives 2 level 1 forstres in the state.

 

[Golden_Deliciou]

Great idea, why not do the same with fortress, EU2 level 5 fortess gives 1 level 1 fortress in a province of the state and level 6 gives 2 level 1 forstres in the state.

It's an idea. Level 2 fortresses requires Strategic mobility and the invention "Field Fortifications", something which is unlikely to be around in 1836, so splitting the fortresses between two provinces would be better.

 

[Emre Yigit]

Feedback on latest .exe file

OK. I did a conversion of my latest 1795 game using the latest EU2Vic.exe, and here are my comments:

1. Populations are too low. (I won't belabour the point much further, only say that China squeaked past the 11m barrier.)

2. Ships appear too few. 11 nations had fleets, over half of which were composed of 1 ship. Other than me, the US had the largest fleet with 4 ships. However, looking at the conversion factors for my fleets, I think that we should let this one go.

3. The one-step increase in the civilisation requirement (trade level = 6 now) meant an increase in the number of uncivilised countries from 4 to 11. Most remain civilised. Please see my previous comments for suggestions on how to deal with this.

4. I would suggest that, before converting manufactories into industrial plants, we should check to see whether the tech stream is latin or not. Non-latin countries should have a penalty of perhaps 50%, because otherwise, we're going to get civilising events thick and fast even if the starting conditions for civilised countries are made more demanding.

 

[montyP]

OK. I did a conversion of my latest 1795 game using the latest EU2Vic.exe, and here are my comments:

1. Populations are too low. (I won't belabour the point much further, only say that China squeaked past the 11m barrier.)

2. Ships appear too few. 11 nations had fleets, over half of which were composed of 1 ship. Other than me, the US had the largest fleet with 4 ships. However, looking at the conversion factors for my fleets, I think that we should let this one go.

3. The one-step increase in the civilisation requirement (trade level = 6 now) meant an increase in the number of uncivilised countries from 4 to 11. Most remain civilised. Please see my previous comments for suggestions on how to deal with this.

4. I would suggest that, before converting manufactories into industrial plants, we should check to see whether the tech stream is latin or not. Non-latin countries should have a penalty of perhaps 50%, because otherwise, we're going to get civilising events thick and fast even if the starting conditions for civilised countries are made more demanding.

Looking closer at the 1795 scenario, one can see that it has a lot of flaws. For example, china has less population in it that it does in the 1492 scenario… The population over all is generally too low, comparing to many of the other scenarios. Another thing with the 1795 scenario is that all of England’s colonies are national territories… And the tech levels for all nations are pretty high! So I think we should test with other scenarios too.

With population we could do what has been suggested earlier on this forum, have a different multiplier for different scenarios.

How many ships did the countries have prior to conversion?

The idea with converting manufactories for non-latin countries looks very interesting. I will look into it.

 

[Nimic]

I converted a game where I started in 1419. Me as Prussia (Brandenburg first ofcourse) controlled a good part of Europe, I had a pop of 25 mill. China, controlling actually less than they do in GC, had a pop of ~420 mill.

That game got screwed up with England being uncivilized because they totaly shut down tech research in EU2, despite them having the British Isles and lots of NA

One other thing. In my EU2 game, I had a factory in every single province. When it converted to Vic, some states had like 5-6 factories, while some had 0.

 

[montyP]

It's an idea. Level 2 fortresses requires Strategic mobility and the invention "Field Fortifications", something which is unlikely to be around in 1836, so splitting the fortresses between two provinces would be better.

Idea adopted and implemented!

 

[Golden_Deliciou]

Looking closer at the 1795 scenario, one can see that it has a lot of flaws. For example, china has less population in it that it does in the 1492 scenario…

I don't think that's really a problem. China's population since antiquity has been growing and contracting in waves. In good times the population booms then after a couple of centuries there's some sort of cataclysm, millions die and the government changes. One could view China's current state as simply the biggest of these booms- which would mean we're due a cataclysm in the next century or so.

For this particular period, China was certainly booming around 1492, whereas in 1795 they'd just had the cataclysm which led to the replacement of the existing regime by the Manchu dynasty.

How many ships did the countries have prior to conversion?

I think it's quite clear that there are never enough ships in the conversion. The current ratio is 1:10. That means that Britain would have to have over 500 warships to get their starting Victoria GC fleet strength. How often have you seen Britain have 500 warships? I usualy find 100 is enough.

The idea with converting manufactories for non-latin countries looks very interesting. I will look into it.

One would have to take a look at how often non-latin countries built manufacturies. I suppose it would result from the having lots of money when they're still at a moderate tech level.