IGC 2.3 Discussion

[Doomdark]

Ok, I might as well start up this thread right away. I need your feedback on 2.2, especially on these issues:

- Are you satisfied with the new Portuguese colonial efforts or should the AI be tuned back more towards trade posts?

- Are you happy with the historically accurate periods of unrest in Persia and Uzbekistan?

- Which nation would you most like to see instead of Granada: Kazakhs, Taungu (Burma), Koryo (Korea), or some other nation?

Any other complaints and suggestions for the next version?

 

[unmerged(2618)]

Do you ever take a rest?

 

[unmerged(2970)]

Originally posted by Doomdark
- Which nation would you most like to see instead of Granada: Kazakhs, Taungu (Burma), Koryo (Korea), or some other nation?

- Kazakhs.

 

[Doomdark]

Do you ever take a rest?

Yes, I do, but the people on this forum don't.

It is better to collect all the relevant info in one place so I can use it when the time comes to update the IGC again...

 

[BiB]

IF the Portuguese AI has the money it should get soem cities. It'll build quite a few TPs anyway next to now at least some colonies. U could wipe their entire colonial empire from the map in a single war before.

 

[unmerged(3021)]

I would like to see an option for a completely united Germany (every state that comprises modern day Germany and perhaps Prussia) as well as a United Italy (put it under Venetian control except for Rome).

 

[unmerged(3236)]

CoT:

The AI spends a lot of money in the CoT in Venice. Theu do it because it is quite cheap for them to trade there and it is rich. But there is so much competition there so the wont do much money. I think the CoT in Venice should be smaller so that the AI wont lose as much money as they do in there.


New country:

Koryo would be fun for me because it train Tae Kwon Do and the national sport in Koryo is Tae Kwon Do. I would have fun invading china with martial arts But it is not historical so at the end im against it.

Kazakhs isnt the most of their nation in TI?
or have i misstaken them for another nation.

I think the new nation should be in America.
I am not an expert in native americans there is a big tribe north and north west of the aztecs. (atleast in colonization)

 

[unmerged(2530)]

Thanks for your dedication !

Hey,

I just like to say Thank You for dedication to the cause.
For those of you that took the time to work this stuff out, take some time out and hoist a couple a couple at a local pub, etc.

Take Care
Nova538

 

[Vulture]

* I love the new Portugal behaviour, but that might be personal taste
* Hmmm, actually none of the nations mentioned; sorry... I would love a United Italy, United Germany and Independant Flandres option. But if I have to choose, I have to go for Kazaks

 

[unmerged(3021)]

I'd like to see an option for Palestine/Israel. I'd say make them Reformed (as it seems to be closest in the game to Judaism; great merchants, high morale in the army...) and give them the Venetian (trader) AI. Maybe throw in a COT in that area so that they can afford a lot of troops like in the modern day.

Just a suggestion, but I think it would be a lot of fun.

 

[Vulture]

I think the nations that Lars means are:
Maya's, Olmeks, Zapotecs... Maya's would be interesting yes

 

[Vulture]

Oh btw, why don't include an option 'Make Scotland have lvl 1 military tech, no fortresses and give England land tech 10,and lvl 5 forts so that England can finally kill Scotland'

England still can't handle Scotland most of my games

 

[unmerged(3021)]

Mayas were already gone, I think. They were the ancestors of the Aztecs, if I remember my Native American history.

 

[Vandelay]

Which nation would you most like to see instead of Granada: Kazakhs, Taungu (Burma), Koryo (Korea), or some other nation?

It's a muslim tag (graphics) so I'd go for a Muslim and/ or Near Eastern nation. I'm still slightly dismayed by the fact that there are no sub-saharan African nations so I suggest an abstraction of the Swahili states in East Africa - we could call it Zanj.It would be Sunni Muslim with pagan population. Say three towns (Mombasa, Zanzibar, and Kilwa) and some TP´s along the coast. They should start out with knowledge of Mamluks, Persians, Omanis, Aden and India´s westcoast. Trade through the CoT´s in Alexandria or Muscat.

Put Portuguese CB´s all over Zanj and the Portuguese might get control of parts of East Africa like they did for real.

/Vandelay

 

[unmerged(1302)]

We can use an IRO tag for them. After all, those boys don't do anything but give anyone an easy annexation chance instead of settling the area. I am obviously for Qazaqs . In my games they actually fight Sibir and Uzbeks and Russia. Korea would be nice but too ahistorical. Burma or Cambodia are Ok, but they wouldn't do anything or will eventually be annexed by China.

 

[unmerged(3021)]

OHI is the tag for the Iroquois.

 

[Shadowstrike]

It would be nice to see a Turkey that actually expands.... The one in my games just sits there.... And I think the swahili city states are a good idea. Give them good rlations with Oman, and they'll bar unhistorcial Turkish expansion in that region....

 

[BiB]

Seeing I never get to see Russia in Siberia anymore I don't particularly fancy adding the Kazaks On the other hand colonising in Asia still is too easy so I wouldn't mind a quite strong state in between the Dai Viet and Ayutthaya

About the unrest in Persia. That might very well be historically accurate but I'm xure they weren't the only country in turmoil in that 300 year span. Giving them lots of negative random events and countries who went thru turmoil too none, effectively sets Persia back compared to the rest.

 

[unmerged(1302)]

About the unrest in Persia. That might very well be historically accurate but I'm xure they weren't the only country in turmoil in that 300 year span. Giving them lots of negative random events and countries who went thru turmoil too none, effectively sets Persia back compared to the rest.

BiB,

This is easily correctable Besides, there is a difference between the unrest and a civil war. Persia wasn't really a united country, tribal problems were not completely solved all the way into 19 century. Persia was a WEAK country until Abbas I and then it declined again until Nadir Shah and his Afghans showed up. Then again it fell into a disarray.

Shah Ismail lost Iraq to Turks.
Abbas I got it back.
Tahmasp I lost Qandahar to Mughals and was extremely inefective against the Uzbeks.
After that, Turkey, Russia plundered as much as they wanted in 1700s and only death of Peter I stopped Russia from making a Caspian Sea a Russian Sea.

Playing Persia should be challenging as it was historically. It doesn't mean we shouldn't give the same events to other nations, if they had them. It just that we can't do everything at once .

I somewhat agree about Russian expansion, but if we only could reprogram the Russian AI .

Take note Paradox, fix those Hist events, event 50 isn't working!!

 

[unmerged(2833)]

Well, i am afraid to say it
but PL armies are still not placed correctly,
Army in Western Prussia suffer attrition (not as big as former Belgorod's army, but still...) initially