• 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.

MichaelM

For the Glory lead
10 Badges
Jun 30, 2004
4.046
491
crystalempiregames.com
  • Europa Universalis III Complete
  • Divine Wind
  • Europa Universalis IV
  • For The Glory
  • Heir to the Throne
  • Europa Universalis III Complete
  • Europa Universalis III Complete
  • Victoria 2
  • 500k Club
Today's preview comes once again from our British correspondent, mandead, who will show us more of what he's been working on. mandead?



Hola, and welcome to Thursday's For the Glory 1.3 Preview! This evening I'll talk about a few of the scenario and event changes that you'll see in the new patch, alongside a couple of new features.

First and perhaps most importantly are events. As the spiritual successor to EU2, we've always tried to maintain that game's wonderful mix of historical and flavour events. By this I mean those major - and several minor - events which aim to push certain countries in a particular direction, either historically or ahistorically depending on the player's choice. Flavour events are those which may only have a minimal effect on the course of your chosen country, but will hopefully give some of the larger events a little more context.

As for new and reworked events, what do we have? Well, several of the more famous event chains for the historical majors (England, France, Austria, etc.) have been polished and improved, and a number of smaller states have had their event files expanded. In addition, we've also gone through and fixed a number of events that apparently hadn't been working properly for years - if at all. It's funny what you learn by reading through a game's database...

New formable countries have been added, most existing ones have had their formation criteria improved and cores/claims have been standardized between scenarios and the events which hand them out. I've also done a lot of work on trying to improve various countries' known provinces between scenarios, but that's quite a lot of work as I'm sure you'll understand. It is also incredibly tedious.

As an example of a new major event that can have a universal impact on the flow of the game:

IxZTPd6.jpg


The Treaty of Westphalia is a global event that will fire for European states between 1640 and 1680 so long as they're at peace and Austria, Switzerland and the Netherlands all exist. The reason for adding this event is fairly simple; Michael added the hre = yes/no command a while back, so I thought why not actually use it?

In gameplay terms it's a very interesting event because it can seriously hamper the Empire's war efforts outside of Germany. So, playing as Austria or Spain and want to keep Charles V's realm together? Solution: crush the Dutch rebels before they can form the Netherlands. In the long term this will benefit the Habsburgs (assuming they can remain emperors) immeasurably because it gives them free reign to march across northern Europe and Italy, whereas if the Treaty of Westphalia event fires then the strategic balance is pushed in France's favour.

As I mentioned last time, consistency has very much been the driving force behind many of these changes, and as such the Empire's borders have been tweaked across all scenarios - meaning, for example, that Austria can no longer peacefully march its troops across the Dutch Republic in 1795.

Actually, speaking of the Dutch Republic, here's a little something for you:

Code:
adjacency = { from = 340 to = 334 type = sea through = 938 } #Flood Dykes around Zeeland - 1.3 addition
adjacency = { from = 340 to = 338 type = sea through = 938 } #Flood Dykes around Zeeland
adjacency = { from = 340 to = 339 type = sea through = 938 } #Flood Dykes around Zeeland
adjacency = { from = 340 to = 343 type = sea through = 938 } #Flood Dykes around Zeeland
adjacency = { from = 340 to = 378 type = sea through = 938 } #Flood Dykes around Zeeland
adjacency = { from = 340 to = 380 type = sea through = 938 } #Flood Dykes around Zeeland

Tired of seeing the French and Spanish overrunning the Dutch in every single game? This was a change we discussed pretty early in 1.3's development, the basic premise being that France + Holland = no more Holland. Historically of course this was never the case, and the relatively tiny Dutch Republic managed to fend off Louis XIV's invincible armies on many an occasion. With the vanilla map being 'unique' in its layout and choice of province sizes, I tried a few things to help improve balance in the Low Countries, and so by adding straits to all provinces adjacent to Zeeland (and there are a number of them) the Dutch may keep enemy troops from crossing into the Republic so long as a navy is present off the Dutch coast. This doesn't make them a complete fortress insofar as naval supremacy is required on the part of the defender, and armies may still invade Holland from the three neighbouring German provinces which have no river crossing.

There are a couple more examples of straits being added to try and aid historically defensible parts of the map, but I'll let you spot those next week.

Finally, here's an example of one of my favourite new random events, coupled with one of the game's new religions.

k7bR3W9.jpg


Tomorrow, Michael will talk you through some of the new map modes, interface enhancements and gameplay features.
 
Well, all these new events etc. most likely to AGCEEP only. But hey, who isn't playing AGCEEP these days? Only viable option for vanilla map.

So, Michael, no changes to scenario files format? No new values for .eug, .inc, etc? Well, it's not bad after all. Less converting, eh.
And, it's not really that topic but since I'm here - will you guys release templates for new shields? It would be...useful ;)
 
The scenario work only affects the standard/vanilla FTG.
Figures. I guess I'll have to wait for a new AGCEEP before I start playing 1.3 then. (Assuming the current AGCEEP will be incompatible with the new version of FTG, that is.)

Ah, I seem to remember you mentioning something about a brand new mod you were planning on making after 1.3. Looking forward to that, assuming your plans haven't changed since then.
 
I don't think AGCEEP will be 100% compatible, assuming that the AGCEEP team (Garbon?) hasn't been working on it in the background.

I haven't changed my plans. At the moment, Card. Contarini and myself are working on the map (using either WatK 4 or the 'work in progress' map Michael talked about as base). More people are welcome to join the project. With enough people, we could have something like EUII era AGCEEP going on (without their cartographic conservatism :)).
 
I don't think AGCEEP will be 100% compatible, assuming that the AGCEEP team (Garbon?) hasn't been working on it in the background.

I haven't changed my plans. At the moment, Card. Contarini and myself are working on the map (using either WatK 4 or the 'work in progress' map Michael talked about as base). More people are welcome to join the project. With enough people, we could have something like EUII era AGCEEP going on (without their cartographic conservatism :)).

If you ever make a forum thread I might try helping out if I can, though I don't exactly have a lot of experience with EU2 modding of any kind. Good luck though!

I like vanilla...
To me, vanilla is nigh unplayable even in FTG. v_v
 
Why do the Paradox games always say "Miaphysite" when they could just use the less-technical "Oriental Orthodox". I've never met a a self-identified "Miaphysite". I mean, you wouldn't call Catholics "Transubstantiationists" or Protestants "Sola Fideists". Just saying.

But I do like that it's there, and it that event is interesting.

On religion in the game, it's always irritated me that the US in EU II, and I believe FtW is reformed. Most Americans at during the time were not Calvinists, which is what I presume Reformed means in the context of the game.

What are the other new religions? I have always felt that Anglicanism ought to be added.
 
Last edited:
Why do the Paradox games always say "Miaphysite" when they could just use the less-technical "Oriental Orthodox". I've never met a a self-identified "Miaphysite". I mean, you wouldn't call Catholics "Transubstantiationists" or Protestants "Sola Fideists". Just saying.

Because of the French. It´s always the french ^^
As far as I understand it oriental and eastern just mean the same and so having two orthodox religions with one named oriental but both in the east (of Europe) could be confusing. And as the "byzantine" orthodox church is the larger and more important in the games timeframe a different and unique name was needed.

On religion in the game, it's always irritated me that the US in EU II, and I believe FtW is reformed. Most Americans at during the time were not Calvinists, which is what I presume Reformed means in the context of the game.

Religion in the game is limited in that there can be only 1 religion in any province and only 1 state religion. In the US nearly every christian faith was present (e.g. catholics in Maryland) as the colonies were a place of more religious freedom than England at the time.And depending on the tolereance sliders a protestant USA would constantly improve relations with protestant nations - like England which should remain hostile until after the games timeframe.

"reformed" does not refer only to those churches that were calvinist or followed Zwingli in Switzerland or later Knox in Scotland but all reformed churches.
 
Last edited:
Because of the French. It´s always the french ^^
As far as I understand it oriental and eastern just mean the same and so having two orthodox religions with one named oriental but both in the east (of Europe) could be confusing. And as the "byzantine" orthodox church is the larger and more important in the games timeframe a different and unique name was needed.

Yeah, the literal meaning of those two appellations is the same, as to the difference, it's an issue of Chalcedon or not. My only objection is that for cosmetic reasons, I'd prefer to not have a fancy theological term to call them. (I also don't like how CK II puts all Oriental Orthodox under the authority of the Coptic pope, but that's a different game) But I'm happy that the game at least recognizes the distinction; EU III, for example doesn't.



"reformed" does not refer only to those churches that were calvinist or followed Zwingli in Switzerland or later Knox in Scotland but all reformed churches.

Ah, ok. But by that as it might, neither the US on the whole nor all of the individual provinces were reformed. Some were, but certainly not all. At the time of independence, Quakers, non-Low Church Anglican, Wesleyans, and others that I would definitely not call Reformed made up substantial portions of the population. (It might be a tough decision to make, but I would make the US Protestant rather than Reformed for game purposes.
 
Got a question concerning events:

Is there one that allows you to assimilate/accept a culture or change a culture of a province you have owned and controlled for a long time?

I know there is such an event in EUIII and would like one in ftg/agceep/PV as well.

Regards,
Tyrgalon
 
AGCEEP has some province especific events that change cultures. General ones that trigger after x years of owning a province don't exist in FtG.
 
gaaaa!! ftg being updated!? MIAPHYSITES!! im so getting back into this gem :)
 
Why do the Paradox games always say "Miaphysite" when they could just use the less-technical "Oriental Orthodox". I've never met a a self-identified "Miaphysite". I mean, you wouldn't call Catholics "Transubstantiationists" or Protestants "Sola Fideists". Just saying.

But I do like that it's there, and it that event is interesting.

On religion in the game, it's always irritated me that the US in EU II, and I believe FtW is reformed. Most Americans at during the time were not Calvinists, which is what I presume Reformed means in the context of the game.

What are the other new religions? I have always felt that Anglicanism ought to be added.

other languages only have one word for east instead of the two english has (eastern and oriental, though of course oriental has more exotic connotation than merely "east") so having two eastern orthodox wont exactly work in for example the latvian language version of the game, and I last time I tried modding in oriental orthodox in EU3 when it first was released it either was too long or it wouldnt let use the space, i think the latter, so i used miaphysite myself too

as for america the puritans (most anyway) were pretty hardcore calvinists.. i think it would be better if they had the cost provinces along the middle and southern colonies as protestant reflecting anglicanism and the new england/northern colonies be calvinist reflecting the puritans