Home Trending Latest threads New posts Developer diaries

Iberian crusade

Jump to latest Follow Reply
  • 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.
unmerged(49695)

unmerged(49695)

General
Oct 23, 2005
2.374
0
well as i already mentioned in the interregnum multiplayer thread, this has some major flaws: First of all, the conditions that make the event fire arent to be found anywhere and after so many playtests i couldnt really determine which ones they were.

Scnearios ive found: First took oporto, tago, estremadura, castille. Got crusade sucess first, followed by a second event of failed crusade (its become quite common for the event to fire twice).

2nd took oporto, tago, algarve, andalusia, which got me 2 crusade failed events.

3rd event i accepted the ai offer and got oporto tago algarve murcia and catalonia. got event failed twice.

4th run: vassalised al-andaluz and got:
welllllllov5.png


notes: all of al andaluz was occupied with the exception of catalonia. Britanny took granada and burgundy murcia.

Bavaria's potential is cut short thanks to this :\
 
i continued the game after i managed to get a combination of only a voctorious/failed event. Then i started getting those nasty events where u either grant independent to 3 or so nations or get badboy... meh. bavaria was ruined.
 
Colonel_General said:
i continued the game after i managed to get a combination of only a voctorious/failed event. Then i started getting those nasty events where u either grant independent to 3 or so nations or get badboy... meh. bavaria was ruined.
Click to expand...

yes I've found that it's not worth bothering with the crusade most of the time because the "failed" event seems to be very happy to trigger while the success one seems to want to hide. It's not made clear what you need to do for victory and even if you've clearly won, and gotten the event, it gives you the failed event almost always as well.
 
While I'm not too sure, it seems Al-Andalus has to be completely annexed in order for the Crusade_won conditions to be met. This is all but impossible to achieve since signing a peace that takes away enough provinces to even attempt an annexation will cause the Crusade_lost event to fire. Or, at least that's what I got from the event file.

In my opinion, an event should be included that annexes Al-Andalus if all its provinces are occuppied or if it becomes vassalized, or the crusade_lost events should be redone so they don't trigger nearly as much (maybe have the start date for the event be 1492).
 
Greetings,

Sorry to read that the coding for this event sequence is such a disaster.

The sequence has been restructured for Interregnum 2 already, as it happens.

However, I will take this week to go back over the sequence and restructure it, or at least check to see where the errors are.

As for needing to conquer all of Iberia, it depends on which option you choose. There are three possible levels to the crusade. Hopefully the action names give away the intensity, if not that can be changed.

The lowest level essentially requires only to ensure that the provinces which begin the game as catholic states remain that way (Navarra, Leon, Porto and Galicia).

Level 2 requires that you reconquer some of the other catholic provinces, including Tago and Castille.

Level three requres an almost-complete conquest. I think Granada can remain out of your contol, something like that. (Note: there is a special event for the Al-Andalus capital to shift from Toledo province if you control it, making this possible.)

This last version is surely a challenge, and rarely should the ai acheive it, if ever. It's definitely something for the player.

So, I'll work through the sequence and try to iron things out.

Thank you for having made these observations. The mod will never get better without them.
 
:p Hey, I did tell him to play Bavaria, thank me for providing further interest. I think this will cause a delay in the start of the MP game though, there are to many bugs that I myself have found, and others are finding. I'm investigating what I believe may be a very 'flawed' polish conquest event, which is having difficulty triggering. But yea, I'll get the fixed code for that soon.
 
now that i think of it, i really didnt notice what option ive chosen for the crusade :| ill try to replay it
 
Alright, I'm pretty sure I know what's wrong with the "Crusade has failed" events. The events fire if Bavaria is not at war with Al-Andalus, or if the victory events have not fired. The problem with this, as Colonel showed, is that they fire at the same time because both require there to be peace (the "Iberia for Christendom" events require certain provinces to be owned, not just occuppied).

Suffice to say, it's virtually impossible to achieve the "grand" crusade objectives (take 19!!! provinces), even when ostensibly you've won crushing victories, simply because you took even a 5-year break. Even the moderate crusade demands 11 provinces be conquered, and is a rather excessive demand.

So it all depends on where you want this mod to go as it develops. Is the "grand" crusade intentionally next to impossible to achieve? I don't think that's the intention. Even a slight modification of the "Crusade is Lost" triggers would improve things remarkably (stardate it much later, offset it so it won't fire in tandem with "Iberia for Christendom," which prevents it from firing), or, in combination add an event that annexes the whole of Al-Andalus to the victor country.

Or, if you want to be really ambitious, have Al-Andalus cede each province its losses in the crusade to the country that took it. ;)
 
TC Pilot said:
Alright, I'm pretty sure I know what's wrong with the "Crusade has failed" events. The events fire if Bavaria is not at war with Al-Andalus, or if the victory events have not fired. The problem with this, as Colonel showed, is that they fire at the same time because both require there to be peace (the "Iberia for Christendom" events require certain provinces to be owned, not just occuppied).
Click to expand...

Thanks for the tip.

Suffice to say, it's virtually impossible to achieve the "grand" crusade objectives (take 19!!! provinces), even when ostensibly you've won crushing victories, simply because you took even a 5-year break. Even the moderate crusade demands 11 provinces be conquered, and is a rather excessive demand.
Click to expand...

Then that's a problem with the offset. But if you've made peace with Al-Andalus, then surely you've made peace with Al-Andalus.

So it all depends on where you want this mod to go as it develops. Is the "grand" crusade intentionally next to impossible to achieve? I don't think that's the intention.
Click to expand...

Yes, it is the intent. The Pope has set the emperor up to fail, essentially, to discredit the Wittelsbachs and gain the ascendency. The full crusade should be very hard to acheive, even for a player. Why would it be otherwise? For a nation like Bavaria to travel so far to crush a power like Al-Andalus, that's huge.

But you can do it gradually. Start the small, when victory is attained, extend the crusade, and do it again when the middle version is acheived.


Even a slight modification of the "Crusade is Lost" triggers would improve things remarkably (stardate it much later, offset it so it won't fire in tandem with "Iberia for Christendom," which prevents it from firing), or, in combination add an event that annexes the whole of Al-Andalus to the victor country.
Click to expand...

Thanks.

Or, if you want to be really ambitious, have Al-Andalus cede each province its losses in the crusade to the country that took it. ;)
Click to expand...


Perhaps this is the way to go.

Standards peace deals don't quite work with this structure. But it would have to be both ways. Yeah. complicated.
 
it was rather easy to beat al andaluz. I had britany and burgundy helping aswell, all i did was transport 60k troops, and siege them to oblivion! the few battles we had, i made sure it was on plans so i could take advantage of the extra cav and my leaders. Easy tbh
 
panther-anthro said:
Col, just so you know, I can probably find out what is wrong, but I have to finish the event database today so.
Click to expand...


My project. Back off Mr Energetic. :(
 
I've also conquered the majority of Al Andalus with Brittany but the failure event failed. (I think I took 3 provinces in the end).

I think it would be quite annoying particularly for the player if provinces switched hands automatically unless there are multiple layers of events. I've never played as Bavaria so can't really comment in detail however once peace is agreed could an event fire instead where Bavaria can decide that this is the end of the war or that they want to press on which causes war to be declared in 5 years or possibly immediately.
 
MattyG said:
Then that's a problem with the offset. But if you've made peace with Al-Andalus, then surely you've made peace with Al-Andalus.
Click to expand...

Yeah, as far as I can tell, simply offsetting the Loss event will solve the problem colonel was having. Should only take a few minutes to correct, so no worries about a massive re-write of this splendidly deep event chain.
 
TC Pilot said:
Yeah, as far as I can tell, simply offsetting the Loss event will solve the problem colonel was having. Should only take a few minutes to correct, so no worries about a massive re-write of this splendidly deep event chain.
Click to expand...


<,..,< Sure it's splendid, and yet no one noticed a major error like this... Oh yes, matty people totally played interregnum, and this event was totally tested.. -NOT-. Excuse the sarcasm, but quite frankly, we need a lot more testing, and things like this prove it.
 
panther-anthro said:
<,..,< Sure it's splendid, and yet no one noticed a major error like this... Oh yes, matty people totally played interregnum, and this event was totally tested.. -NOT-. Excuse the sarcasm, but quite frankly, we need a lot more testing, and things like this prove it.
Click to expand...


Actually, people have played it. I've been playing it for almost two years now, from time to time, but never actually posted anything because I had no account and no time for it:D.

And I always managed to complete the crusade. I can't remember the Failed event ever to fire.
 
panther-anthro said:
<,..,< Sure it's splendid, and yet no one noticed a major error like this... Oh yes, matty people totally played interregnum, and this event was totally tested.. -NOT-. Excuse the sarcasm, but quite frankly, we need a lot more testing, and things like this prove it.
Click to expand...


There is no testing but playing.

The playing is the testing. You played, and found problems, and reported them. That's how it works.
 
MattyG said:
There is no testing but playing.

The playing is the testing. You played, and found problems, and reported them. That's how it works.
Click to expand...


Or by evidence of a lack of reports, doesn't work. I realize there is no 'testing', I Just think there are a lot of easy errors, that should've never have been in a release version, there are lots of events, that just seem to not trigger properly, because of odd conditions, and the like, these kind of things are the main problem as far as I'm concerned, not the minor errors, anyone can notice.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top Bottom
Back