Further developing the Haudenosaunee

[unmerged(17763)]

The Iroquois, as they stand, have lots of potential for developing their role in the Aberrated world. They should make contact with Europeans (typically Eire) almost 150 years before this happened historically, so we have free reign to implement various fantasy events for them. Since the Hiawatha events occur in the 1570's, in nine games out of ten they won't exist by then. Apart from increasing the base tax in their provinces slightly, I propose implementing some event cycles that allow the Haudenosaunee to ally with neighbouring colonial powers, gain tech investments, convert and probably also advance into a semi-decent techgroup. Their patron would, as the "carrot", gain them as vassals, and get a CoT in the area (Manhattan?). Furthermore, since they tend to found colonies beyond their core territory, I suggest implementing events that enable trading these settled provinces for European weapons and tools (tech investments), which is actually fairly realistic as well.

I'll get to writing up the event projects if there's any interest in this (and if I get the green light on it), but there are a few technical issues first. Do I tediously create separate event chains for each of the likely colonising powers, or do I make these province-driven events, thus estabilishing one province (such as Manhattan) as the "gateway" to the Haudenosaunee trade, thus slightly unbalancing the whole thing?

Looking forward to hearing any comments.

 

[MattyG]

Obviously I am really pleased to have you on board as a contributor to Aberration II.

I would be very happy to see the Haudenosaunee revamped. Most of what was done was - in my mind - a bit of a holding pattern, but enough to give them more umph and character than the usual inornate minor.

While I like very much the notion that the Haudenosaunee will have the leadership to grasp the potential of the new cultures, these potential invaders, and to respond by learning quickly, rather than ignoring a growing storm, we need also to be very careful and make it all believable.

I am not sure if I have succeeded in this regard with the Maya and Dichali for all critics, but I took pains to make the progression of technology and 'modernisation' of the culture as believable as possible. In the face of what happened in the real history, it probably all seems a great stretch.

So, here we are looking at doing it all again, this time with the Haudenosaunee. And I for one support the notion, but we need to be careful. It needs to be that the Haudenosaunee don't progress quickly through the tech groups. The Maya are in a waaaay better position, being surrounded by other cultures all of them more 'advanced' than the Haudenosaunee or their less-organised neighbours. The Haudenosaunee will be starting 'from scratch' once they enounter the Europeans (most likely the Irish, as you say).

While it shouldn't need to be player run to flourish, we need to hjave restrictions that hem the player in to avoid abuse. I do not want to see Haudenosaunee troops invading Eire in 1560, and building tanks by 1750. Sorry, I was imagining Civ there for a second ... For example, as boring as it might be for the player, having access to explorers and conquistadors prior to European arrival is a recipe for abuse, with the Haudenosaunee discovering the Vinalnders and annexing them and making their way south etc etc.

That all said, if the task is difficult, very difficult, for the player, then the challenge will be that much more fun as well. And if the storyline is well constructed then the roleplaying of it will be more pleasureable.

So, let's see some initial ideas!!!

MattyG

 

[unmerged(17763)]

I've made and debugged a very basic, skeletal set of events for a warmup.In any case, what I have planned for the overall structure right now is as follows.

Early contact (15th and early 16th century):

Triggers for the various European events are mainly neighbouring OHI (surprise surprise) and owning at least one of Powhattan, Susquehanna, Catskill and Manhattan. Manhattan is there because the Haudenonsaunee don't start with it discovered, so one can be sure you don't have to go to war to claim the events in case they've expanded into all three of Powhattan, Susquehanna and Catskill. These triggers are for all the initial "trade" events. Later, around 1530 (I might move the date forward somewhat depending on what the speed of colonisation ends up being in Abe2) an event fires based on them, setting a flag for both countries involved (assuming the European country is one of the likely colonisers). This sets the scene for later diplomatic interactions between them, especially conversion of the Haudenosaunee. Several events (such as the conversion issue) also remain even if the patron country gets kicked out of the neighbouring land.

16th century:

The Intermarrying Issue
Around the 1550's, the patron country will get an event on the issue of intermarriage between the colonisers and the natives, asking whether it wants to encourage it or stamp down on it. The default option depends on the country in question - most will get encouraging as the default option, but, say, Cordoba doesn't. This has some short term effects, but its most important aspect is affecting...

The Haudenosaunee Conversion
This occurs in the 1580's. The patron country gets to send missionaries to the Haudenosaunee, and they get a choice to convert to its religion, advancing into the Chinese techgroup at the same time. However, there will be two different versions of the event, depending on the intermarrying question years earlier. If intermarrying has occurred, the eastern provinces of the Haudenasaunee convert to the new religion by themselves, if it hasn't, they stay pagan.

A CoT appears in Manhattan or Susquehanna if the patron country owns it around this time.

I'll post my ideas for later events in a while, but they involve giving them an excellent conquistador who, however, later seizes power leading to a pagan rebirth and civil war. Should the player quell the revolts, he may implement a constitution, giving the country direction in the modern world, and perhaps even advancing it into the muslim techgroup (they will be hopelessly behind everyone anyway, after all, so I don't think it would cause major balance problems).

Also, once I'm done with all this, I also propose removing the Haudenosaunee territories from colonial claims.

 

[unmerged(17763)]

All right, here's the initial event file. Sorry for the hassle you have to go through to download a 7kb file, but unzipped the file was 50kb and would murder this forum page. It also has a quick'n'dirty modification of the country file which gives them infra 1 so they can get to promoting tax collectors and actually have some cash.

http://www.uploading.com/?get=PN41J1RX

Done:
- Most of the initial trading events, although I should still expand them
- Smallpox
- Religious conversion and chinese techgroup advancement
- Intermarriage events and their relation to the conversion

To-do list:
- Pre-European contact events
- 17th and 18th century events
- More early trading events
- CoT reward for Europeans
- More "stick" events for both sides

Overall scenario modifications necessary when all this is done:
- Slightly increasing the intial tax values (at least to get rid of those terrible tax 2 provs)
- Removing Haudenosaunee territories from all nearby territorial claims
- Fortresses?

 

[MattyG]

All right, here's the initial event file. Sorry for the hassle you have to go through to download a 7kb file, but unzipped the file was 50kb and would murder this forum page. It also has a quick'n'dirty modification of the country file which gives them infra 1 so they can get to promoting tax collectors and actually have some cash.

http://www.uploading.com/?get=PN41J1RX

Done:
- Most of the initial trading events, although I should still expand them
- Smallpox
- Religious conversion and chinese techgroup advancement
- Intermarriage events and their relation to the conversion

To-do list:
- Pre-European contact events
- 17th and 18th century events
- More early trading events
- CoT reward for Europeans
- More "stick" events for both sides

Overall scenario modifications necessary when all this is done:
- Slightly increasing the intial tax values (at least to get rid of those terrible tax 2 provs)
- Removing Haudenosaunee territories from all nearby territorial claims
- Fortresses?

I understand the need for the tax collectors. It's the simple way to do it. But perhaps we could instead start them at Infra 0 and have an event that gives them a solid infra boost and some cash. The point would be in the description section, where would could explain that the European economic structures of the game system (costs for troops and everything else) does not translate well into the economy of woodland amerindians, however more unified they are than those surrounding tribes. And that - accordingly - we are deliberately increasing the Infra etc etc to compensate, event though it seems 'ahistoical'.

Alternatively, we could simply have an event that triggers on January 2 1419 that explains what we have already done. I think that it would help with the plausibility and the flavour of it all.

I don't agree with removing the territotial claims. Far more 'advanced' civilisations to the south were crushed and their lands claimed. The Europeans did not let any extant system prevent them from claiming lands. Even by the end of the Eu2 period the English conveniently described Australia as 'empty land' so as to claim it without negotiation from its millions of inhabitants.

I think that what you want to acheive is that, should a nation go for the vassal deal with them, THEY don't get to renege and simply claim the lands. In that case, we could have NOT = { event = releventevent } added to the trigger for the Ohio claim events. They simply wouldn't work for that country.

In response to your earlier question ... ah yes, how to sructure things so that you can write one series of events, not a series for each and every possible European nation that arrives in the area. If you have perused other files I have written for the region you will see the headache this can present. It all depends on crucial commands you want to have execute. If its a matter of a CoT, then you can avoid it, because the CoT command doesn't care about a country, just a province. But if any of the commands you want to be able to use require a tag, then you are sunk, because the game cannot identify and link things very easily. That's why the Kutch Company event structure I have written is so big and so far is only for Eire and only for Kutch. I suspect that, if you want to have your events come off exactly as you would prefer, you're going to need to have them tag specific. It's more work, but it produces better results.

If you have written a new smallpox event, were you aware that they already existed in the Smallpox file?

Thanks for your work on this. I'll look over the file in the next day or two and get back to you!

 

[unmerged(17763)]

I understand the need for the tax collectors. It's the simple way to do it. But perhaps we could instead start them at Infra 0 and have an event that gives them a solid infra boost and some cash. The point would be in the description section, where would could explain that the European economic structures of the game system (costs for troops and everything else) does not translate well into the economy of woodland amerindians, however more unified they are than those surrounding tribes. And that - accordingly - we are deliberately increasing the Infra etc etc to compensate, event though it seems 'ahistoical'.

Alternatively, we could simply have an event that triggers on January 2 1419 that explains what we have already done. I think that it would help with the plausibility and the flavour of it all.

Sounds like a good idea, so that a player who hasn't looked in the event file has some idea what's going on.

I don't agree with removing the territotial claims. Far more 'advanced' civilisations to the south were crushed and their lands claimed. The Europeans did not let any extant system prevent them from claiming lands. Even by the end of the Eu2 period the English conveniently described Australia as 'empty land' so as to claim it without negotiation from its millions of inhabitants.

I think that what you want to acheive is that, should a nation go for the vassal deal with them, THEY don't get to renege and simply claim the lands. In that case, we could have NOT = { event = releventevent } added to the trigger for the Ohio claim events. They simply wouldn't work for that country.

My main problem here is that overlapping cores would tarnish relations a lot, no matter what. What you say makes sense, your solution, however, basically forces scripting separate events for each of the five-six likely colonial powers. Way too much hassle. Perhaps we could remove the cores from the claim events, but provide them as soon as a nation goes to war against the Haudenosaunee? This would mean that it doesn't happen unless hostility proceeds. I find it common-sense that if Europeans engage in friendly trading relations and diplomacy with the locals, rather than ignore or conquer them, then they won't claim the locals are occupying their land unlawfully - until it pays off for them, of course!

In response to your earlier question ... ah yes, how to sructure things so that you can write one series of events, not a series for each and every possible European nation that arrives in the area. If you have perused other files I have written for the region you will see the headache this can present. It all depends on crucial commands you want to have execute. If its a matter of a CoT, then you can avoid it, because the CoT command doesn't care about a country, just a province. But if any of the commands you want to be able to use require a tag, then you are sunk, because the game cannot identify and link things very easily. That's why the Kutch Company event structure I have written is so big and so far is only for Eire and only for Kutch. I suspect that, if you want to have your events come off exactly as you would prefer, you're going to need to have them tag specific. It's more work, but it produces better results.

I've outright ripped off some of your solutions

The vassalisation events (which I'm working on as we speak) will, of course, be tag-specific. They will also require the country in question to control the entire coastal area (Chesapeake, Delaware, Manhattan) and at least one of the inland provs (Powhatan, Susquehanna, Catskill), as well as good relations, after the conversion (so it doesn't happen too early). After this event fires, the potential land-trade events will fire, and I expect these to involve the greatest amount of find-replace monkey-work.

I'll also have to set some deathdates or sleepevent commands for the "War with the ghost people" events so we don't end up with them firing at ridiculous times (like, say, the 18th century, fighting against the American revolter states).

If you have written a new smallpox event, were you aware that they already existed in the Smallpox file?

Yes, but they trigger too late and I wanted something more along the lines of the Maya Smallpox events.

Cheers,
Jekyll

 

[MattyG]

My main problem here is that overlapping cores would tarnish relations a lot, no matter what. What you say makes sense, your solution, however, basically forces scripting separate events for each of the five-six likely colonial powers. Way too much hassle. Perhaps we could remove the cores from the claim events, but provide them as soon as a nation goes to war against the Haudenosaunee? This would mean that it doesn't happen unless hostility proceeds. I find it common-sense that if Europeans engage in friendly trading relations and diplomacy with the locals, rather than ignore or conquer them, then they won't claim the locals are occupying their land unlawfully - until it pays off for them, of course!

No, the way we can do it is as follows:

Each of the vassalization events (one for each potential European state) has an event id.

Each country owns its own capital.

We tie these in the trigger like this:

event = cores event on Ohio
NOT = {
..........OR = {
..................AND = {
.............................event = Eire's version
.............................owned = { Eire's capital }
..................}
..................AND = {
.............................event = Brittany's version
.............................owned = { EBrittany's capital }
..................}

etc etc

So, the cores event for Ohio will trigger for anyone who owns the right provinces but Not if Eire made them a vassal and you are Eire, for example.

The vassalisation events (which I'm working on as we speak) will, of course, be tag-specific. They will also require the country in question to control the entire coastal area (Chesapeake, Delaware, Manhattan) and at least one of the inland provs (Powhatan, Susquehanna, Catskill), as well as good relations, after the conversion (so it doesn't happen too early). After this event fires, the potential land-trade events will fire, and I expect these to involve the greatest amount of find-replace monkey-work.

Sounds cool.

Yes, but they trigger too late and I wanted something more along the lines of the Maya Smallpox events.

OK, this is one great big ooops on my part, forgetting my own work. The events I spoke of are mostly if the provinces are overrun. I will go into the Smallpox file and delete the late-game-if-Haudenosaunee-not-defeated-version.

 

[unmerged(17763)]

No, the way we can do it is as follows:

Each of the vassalization events (one for each potential European state) has an event id.

Each country owns its own capital.

We tie these in the trigger like this:

event = cores event on Ohio
NOT = {
..........OR = {
..................AND = {
.............................event = Eire's version
.............................owned = { Eire's capital }
..................}
..................AND = {
.............................event = Brittany's version
.............................owned = { EBrittany's capital }
..................}

etc etc

So, the cores event for Ohio will trigger for anyone who owns the right provinces but Not if Eire made them a vassal and you are Eire, for example.

Brilliant, although it also needs an exists = EIR clause, since it would otherwise stop a country which had simply annexed Eire (kind of an oddball situation, but nevertheless plausible). This needs to be done primarily for South Lakes, as that region covers all of OHI territory. Also, the Manhattan claim covers Tuscarora, and this is something that has to be removed completely. The Haudenosaunee are supposed to keep Tuscarora for many of the events to fire, but they will typically fire for the nation that holds the Manhattan claim. This will tarnish relations and give the AI an incentive to go after them where it normally shouldn't, as well as to take that province despite the fact that it will just lose tax value because of it. In compensation, I propose moving Tuscarora to the South Lakes claim covered by the above clause.

 

[MattyG]

Yes, you are right.

We need to include the exists = Eire etc

Maybe the Tuscarora thing is not as bad as you suggest. I challenge here the idea that just because Eire is allied with the Haudenosaunee that Brittany (now claiming Tuscarora) would give a damn. Maybe they would, maybe they would not. A player Haudenosaunee would need to ensure they also have an alliance with Eire or that they maintain both good relations with Brittany and also a preparedness for war, which would have been a reality.

We can't cozen the Haudenosaunee too much with this vassal relationship. It didn't prevent wars and claims in Europe and would be less likely to do so in this theatre.

Also, remember that colonisation of provinces further inland is very much more difficult in Aberration II. We have raised the difficulty factors and can raise them further if it means getting closer to the real world spread of colonies inland.

 

[unmerged(17763)]

I don't think you get my point. A third power (Brittany in the example) has nothing to do with it. I'm talking about prior to the vassal relationship being estabilished, while the colonies are being built. Let's say Eire goes in and colonises the Manhattan area, getting a claim. They get the appropriate events and all, but despite having excellent relations with the Haudenosaunee and perhaps even an alliance, they waltz in all of a sudden and claim that they have a right to Tuscarora, giving them a CB on the natives and damaging relations. If Eire is controlled by the AI, they're likely to go after the Haudenosaunee even though it doesn't pay off for them, killing the highly profitable fur trade.

If, in your example, Eire is allied with the Haudenosaunee, Brittany can't claim Tuscarora because in all likelihood Eire already has, which realistically shouldn't happen as, in order for the vassalisation events to fire, they must have estabilished that they treat the Haudenosaunee as trading partners rather than a bunch of savages to be conquered.

I do intend to give an "option B" for Europeans who have dominated the area which states that they Haudenosaunee are, in fact, a bunch of savages to be conquered, and gives cores on much of their lands. This is so the whole thing isn't too deterministic and allows for the traditional "imperialist" option all along.

 

[MattyG]

OK, I'll move Tuscarora to South Lakes.

Matty

EDIT: Done. Man I can work fast.

 

[unmerged(17763)]

New material up at http://www.uploading.com/?get=3Z62MGJO !

Added:
- Vassalisation & CoT event chain
- Conquistador -> Civil War -> Choice of direction event chain
- Some leaders
- New monarchs

 

[MattyG]

Dr, Jekyll,

The new material you uploaded appears to contain none of the changes I urged from the initial material you posted. I send my suggestions to the email address you provided. I can't imagine you rejected all the changes without any discussion, so it most likely means you didn't receive it.

Have you checked your inbox at that address?

On a separate matter, there is a potential problem with the CoT events.

Most of the eastern seabord provinces have the potential to sprout a CoT in the early 1500s via the games built-in mechanisms. Most players know this. And Delaware is the prime candidate, (although that can be changed in the province.csv file). It won't look good or be appropriate if theres a CoT in Delaware and, say Chesapeake.

How would you like to deal with this issue?

Matty

 

[unmerged(17763)]

My apologies, the email didn't reach me at all, and that's the only address I use. In fact, I was surprised that you didn't send me anything, so I figured you'd forgotten. So no, I wasn't so rude as to completely ignore everything you said, I just didn't see it. Would you mind resending it or possibly using PM? Gmail has been rather unusually clunky in the past few days, so I'm not surprised this has happened. I definitely look forward to reading your ideas.

I thought I've added the triggers that there isn't a CoT anywhere nearby? If not, that was a mistake, since I definitely meant to.

 

[MattyG]

Hi,

Two things first.

1. I actually didn't send that email. I rechecked my sent file. Sorry. o

2. Instead of correcting the file as I did the other time ( though I didn't send it) I'll just make comments here.


A. Credit

I think I ought to be included in the credits.

B. Council Changes and Stats

The council random event changes were an neat little approach, but I'd actually like to see them go. I had intended them as a filler until a proper build was done. I often get a lot of country-speicifc random event ideas, but there is a lot of pressure on random events. Thousands already jostling for the odd occurance. It would be better if the councils could simply have more variety.

Alternatively, have just one random for council changes with four balanced options. The ai will mostly take action_a, of course, so make it something like -1 DIP, -1 MIL +2 ADM which is good for an AI country.

As for the various councils, we also need to bring their stats down a bit. I think they are a little too good. Instead of the standard being a 5, 6 and 7 the standard ought to be a 4, 5, and 6, with occasional variations up and down to represent better years, maybe. That one really good leader is fine, but the Civil War needs to be made even worse, I think.

c. Trade Events

Great new approach. But there need to be events that cancel each of those, triggered as soon as the Haudos are not neighbours, representing the end of the fur trade and reversing the provincetax increases.

D. Weapons

The Weapons of the Ghosts triggers off event 102, but you have that as 'Vacant'. The idea is that weapons become available if trade flourishes with the Europeans, so the event needs to trigger off one of the core trading events using OR = { event = 730xxx event = 730xxx etc }.

E. Intermarriage

I had rewritten the intermarriage events, and below is one example. I don't agree with the province tax increases, it's moreappropriate to show technological change (new ideas from new people) through infra increases. Infra eventually changes tax incomes too. Plus, provincetax increases will encourage invasion from players and ai, as the province is now base-wealthier, not just wealthier for the Haudos, as they are if the Haudo infra level goes up.

I also felt that the DP changes and monarch stat changes for the Europeans were too great. To some extent this is happening on the edge of a larger empire and shouldn't be quite so influential on the homeland culture and the leadership there.

event = {
id = 730112
random = no
country = OHI
trigger = {
event = 730106
event = 730206
NOT = {
war = { country = EIR country = OHI }
}
neighbour = EIR
}
name = "Intermarriage with the Irish"
desc = "Despite our different traditions and the resistence of some within our community, the union of Haudenosaunee women and the Irish traders, scouts and soldiers has continued now for a generation. The result is that we have grown in numbers and strength, it seems. We have learned a great deal from these new men among us, and their children have now grown to become leaders, people with skill and wisdom. There is now not so great a difference between our peoples."
date = { day = 1 month = january year = 1525 }
offset = 15000
deathdate = { day = 29 month = december year = 1819 }

action_a = {
name = "A change we embrace"
command = { type = population which = -2 value = 750 }
command = { type = population which = 84 value = 1000 }
command = { type = population which = 89 value = 500 }
command = { type = infra value = 5000 }
command = { type = revoltrisk which = 360 value = 1 } #social tensions
}
}

event = {
id = 730206
random = no
country = EIR
trigger = {
event = 730106
neighbour = OHI
OR = {
owned = { province = 69 data = -1 }
owned = { province = 88 data = -1 }
owned = { province = 85 data = -1 }
owned = { province = 87 data = -1 }
}
NOT = {
war = { country = EIR country = OHI }
}
}
name = "The Intermarriage Question"
desc = "Our settlers have estabilished friendly relations with the dominant local tribe of the Haudenosaunee. Some of our people have begun marrying the locals and creating mixed-race families. This is economically a good idea, but our international prestige may suffer from breeding with savages."
date = { day = 1 month = january year = 1540 }
offset = 350
deathdate = { day = 30 month = december year = 1577 }
action_a = {
name = "Encourage it"
command = { type = population which = 87 value = 100 }
command = { type = population which = 85 value = 100 }
command = { type = population which = 69 value = 80 }
command = { type = population which = 88 value = 80 }
command = { type = domestic which = innovative value = 1 }
command = { type = DIP which = -1 value = 60 }
command = { type = relation which = OHI value = 50 }
}
action_b = {
name = "Discourage it"
command = { type = relation which = OHI value = -50 }
command = { type = sleepevent which = 730112 }
}
}

F. Brittany

Brittany appears twice in many of the sequences. Not sure if this is intentional.

G. CoT event

This needs to get more complicated! I love the idea that there's this great prize for working with the fur trading Haudenosaunee. It's historically muchmore accurate. The problem is that currently the eent won't fore because - I almost guarentee you, there WILL be a CoT in one of those provinces. Unless we downgrade the base chance for those places to get one. Then it's more likely for the event to trigger. BUT, then we'd need back-up events incase the whole cycle fails (Haudos are destroyed, say) to have a CoT appear in that region 'normally' (or maybe we don't , hmmmm ).

Alernatively, we have events that cancel CoTs in that area if the Haudos exist.

I also think that the range of provinces required to NOT have a COT needs to be larger. There is once in the Caribbean. One might appear in the Georgia region. And Eire will likely get one in the maritime provinces, because they are there so early. Potentially, that would be four CoTs in the east-coast to caribbean region. Not inappropriate for the 1800s, but too many for the 1600s.

Maybe let's start by reducing the chance of a CoT in the New England region and then seeing how it all playests. Please, when you send me the final files for 6.02, could you remind me to do that change?

Overall, great work. Very excited.

 

[unmerged(17763)]

Heh, no problem. Sorry about the credits thing.

Anyway.

My reasoning behind the excellent council leaders and short civil war was, essentially, that the Haudos are far behind enough already. They'll have spent about a hundred years with what amounts to basically NO technological development at all, and despite all the boosts usually remain roughly two CRTs behind Europeans in land tech and about two levels behind in trade and infra. On the other hand, they are supposed to be a challenging minor, so I guess you're right about toning that stuff down a bit. However, the council should be better than average European monarchs, simply because aside from the civil war, it never had to deal with power struggles or anyone contesting tis authority. This is also why it's a lot weaker after it regains power.

The trade cancelling events are on my agenda.

Oops! Going to fix the weapons thing soon. I guess I screwed up while shifting the IDs around.

I like the new version of the intermarriage events and you're probably right. I figured they were probably too major, but decided to playtest them first, and indeed they increased the province tax values far too much.

Brittany is included twice in all events pertaining to the religious sequence in order to acommodate both a Protestant and a Catholic Brittany.

CoTs: Ah, I didn't realise that. The whole point was indeed to create a balance to the Mayan CoT in the Caribbean, but I guess adding a whole bunch of removecot commands will be a good temporary solution until I can figure out a more complicated sequence.

 

[MattyG]

Dr Jekyll,

As far as the CoT thing is concerned, I have altered the province.csv in the just-uploaded beta 6.01 so that a CoT is more likely to naturallu occur in Roanoke or the Nova Scotia area. The latter is important for Eire with its explorations there in the 1450s as well. Playtest with this new beta and see what happens with CoTs. It may be enough without other events.

Matty