-
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.
Yeah, I got them. The changes will be included in 2.2b, which I will release ASAP. I just wish to get to the bottom of the crash problems some people have reported first.
I think that Granade should be replaced by Irvan. It should have Kars (Capital). It should be Persian Vassal with relations at +200
Other changes:
-Franche Comte was still French in 1492, it has been loosed in middle of 1493.
-Algiers should be Hafasid Vassal, since it was ruled by Tunisian Hafasids in 1492.
-Mameluks still had Adana and Sivas. They loose it only in 1515!
-Memel was Polish-Lithuanian.
-Fimark and Gotland should be Swedish (they loose those lands when they declare indepdence from Kalmar Union).
-I think ther should be "Free Aragon" historical option, since it was still Spanish Vassal.
Other changes:
-Franche Comte was still French in 1492, it has been loosed in middle of 1493.
-Algiers should be Hafasid Vassal, since it was ruled by Tunisian Hafasids in 1492.
-Mameluks still had Adana and Sivas. They loose it only in 1515!
-Memel was Polish-Lithuanian.
-Fimark and Gotland should be Swedish (they loose those lands when they declare indepdence from Kalmar Union).
-I think ther should be "Free Aragon" historical option, since it was still Spanish Vassal.
Franche-Comte had only been temporarily occupied by France, so giving the province to them would misrepresent the real state of affairs in that area.
I like the Mameluke idea, although Sivas would do better to be independent as Dulkadir, which was a Mameluke vassal at the time. I'd rather see Granada used for this purpose than for Erivan (which I don't think was truly independent in 1492)
Memel province is screwed up in EU. Yes, most of it was owned by P-L, but the actual city of Memel was Prussian. For the sake of Prussian longevity, it's probably better to assign it to Prussia instead of P-L.
I like the Free Aragon idea as an option. In fact I've modified the IGC so that Aragon starts off the game as an independent state, although tied to Spain (Castilla) in every conceivable way. I'd lobby for a Bugundian Netherlands option too, but that would only get BiB worked up again.
I took a closer look, and Demetrios is right: the province identified as Bessarabia is really TransDniester which wasn't Moldavian during this time period. There is no need for Moldavian/Wallachian CBs and it should remain part of Poland-Lithuania.
Originally posted by Doomdark
Alexandre,
Very good suggestions for Moldavia and Wallachia. Most of them will certainly make their way into IGC 2.3.
1) E-mail to doomdark@ludd.luth.se.
2) Go for accuracy whenever possible.
3) Provide as many as you like and let me weed out a few if I think there are too many.
4) Yes.
However, I don't have time to put your revised monarchs and leaders into the required game files. Therefore I must ask that you work with the .wal and .mol files and send them to me finished. I will assign valid IDs to them (use xxxx for the new leaders and monarchs).
I hadn't started playing with the monarch or leader files, but taking a look at them they don't look that complex (just time consuming). I'm going to try and incorporate some events, though, which may make it a slower process as I weed out errors.
I'm going to remove a few fake monarch names. Do you want me to recycle those IDs, or just let you know which one's I've removed? How do you want me to identify the same prince when he's re-elected in one principality, or between the two principalities?
When I get to the leaders file, does it matter to game play what percentage of the leaders end up as monarchs? I have a feeling that on a historical level it should be heavier for many of the minors, and certainly the two principalities, since great war leaders tended to be elected reigning prince, and being war leader was a very important part of being reigning prince.
I think most of Wallachian and Moldovan monarchs could be leaders, even if they did not fought impresive battles they, nevertheless, were in command of their armies.
I think for a period Moldova instead of certain monarchs could be ruled by "Greek Phanariots" that bribed Sublime Porte to be crowned as Princes.
I will better give a starting -200 relation between Wallachia and Turkey, but leave vassalage. Is it possible to implement some events that could trigger a break of vassalage later in the game?
It wasn't elective, who paid more to Sublime Porte could become Prince. Very good relations YES, but no vassalage between Moldova and Wallachia.
I totally agree with that. Except for Bessarabia which is wrongly named, as was marked by Demetrios.
Very good point!
Yes! Last night I played a game and for the first time I saw a Portuguese colony in Goa (previously there were only trade posts).
In a previous post I voted for Kazakhs. Kazakhs became a recognizable group, when clan leaders broke away from Abul Khayr, leader of the Uzbeks, to seek their own territory in the lands of Semirech'ye, between the Chu and Talas rivers in present-day southeastern Kazakhstan. The first Kazakh leader was Khan Kasym (r. 1511-23), who united the Kazak tribes into one people.
Alexandre,
Recycle the IDs, mark new ones with XXXX.
No need, really, but you can add a line like this:
remark = "Re-elected."
...or some such.
Just attempt to compare the leader's abilities with other leaders in the game. If you think he matches up, put him in, balance be damned.
Recycle the IDs, mark new ones with XXXX.
No need, really, but you can add a line like this:
remark = "Re-elected."
...or some such.
Just attempt to compare the leader's abilities with other leaders in the game. If you think he matches up, put him in, balance be damned.
While I respect everyone's opinions, what are the damned, bloody Kazhaks going to add to the game? Won't the Aragon and/or Mameluke vassal ideas tend to play more on the game?
In all truthfulness, they will be off in the middle of bloody nowhere, and you probably won't notice them until someone annexes them and shoots a bad boy up. It's the same way for all the different Russo-Area "tribes".
Regards,
Andrew
In all truthfulness, they will be off in the middle of bloody nowhere, and you probably won't notice them until someone annexes them and shoots a bad boy up. It's the same way for all the different Russo-Area "tribes".
Regards,
Andrew
While bloody Kazakhs are sitting in the middle of nowhere they force other nations in the region to do smth, Sibir, Astrakhan, Golden Horde and Uzbeks are involved quite heavily, as obviously Russia. And they are not an easy nut to crack. Aragon already has a TAG, so it's not problem. And while Mameluke's and Persia vassals are Ok, they will be annexed within the first 10 years, as the game has an internal flaw -- ever-improving relationship between the countries, and there is nothing you can do to stop that. BTW, Persia wasn't united at all throughout the game span, and we will need about 10 TAGS to represent all these semi-independent states. As for idea of Israel, it's Ok as a fantasy option, since they never existed before 1947, and since we at it, why would they deserve to have a very strong morale is beyond me.
Crook
Crook
Dealing with free muslim tags, if so could they not be put to use as ottoman revolters (armenia, trebizond) or used to bring the Dulkadir kingdom into the game (which was not a vassal of the ottomans until 1522)
Dulkadir - a Turkmen dynasty (1337-1522) that ruled in the Elbistan-Maras-Malatya region of eastern Anatolia. Its lands were the focus of rivalry between the Ottoman Empire and the Mamluks of Syria.
After 1450 Ottoman-Mamluk rivalry intensified, resulting in dynastic struggles and frequent changes in Dulkadir leadership. When Ali, the last Dulkadir prince, was overthrown by his grand vizier in 1522, the principality was incorporated into the Ottoman Empire, the Dulkadir family was accorded vassal status, and its members were appointed to high offices.
the regions of dulkadir, and all of anatolia revolted, known as the Jelali (also spelled CELÂLI) rebellions in Anatolia in the 16th and 17th centuries. The first revolt occurred (1519) near Tokat under the leadership of Celâl, a preacher of Shi'ah Islam. Major revolts later occurred in 1526-28, 1595-1610, 1654-55, and 1658-59.
The major uprisings involved the sekbans (irregular troops of musketeers) and sipahis (cavalrymen maintained by land grants). The rebellions were not attempts to overthrow the Ottoman government but were reactions to a social and economic crisis stemming from a number of factors: a depreciation of the currency, heavy taxation, a decline in the devsirme system (levy of Christian boys), admission of Muslims into the army, and an increase in the number and dominance of the Janissaries (elite troops) both in Istanbul and in the provinces.
With a decline of the sipahi cavalry the sekban troops, recruited from the Anatolian peasantry, formed the main provincial army. During wartime the sekbans served the provincial governors and drew regular pay. In peacetime, however, they were not paid, and they resorted to banditry, in which case they were called Jelalis. They were joined by sipahis, who had lost their land grants to court favourites, and by overtaxed peasants and Turkmen and Kurdish nomads.
In 1598 a sekban leader, Karayazici Abdülhalim ('Abd al-Halim), united the dissatisfied groups in Anatolia, forcing the towns to pay tribute and dominating the Sivas and Dulkadir provinces in central Anatolia. When Ottoman forces were sent against them, the Jelalis withdrew to Urfa in southeastern Anatolia, making it the centre of resistance. Karayazici rejected offers of governorships in Anatolia and died in 1602. His brother Deli Hasan then seized Kutahya, in western Anatolia, but later he and his followers were won over by grants of governorships.
The Jelali unrest, however, continued under the leadership of Janbuladoglu in Aleppo and Yusuf Pasa and Kalenderoglu in western Anatolia. They were finally suppressed by the grand vizier Kuyucu Murad Pasa, who by 1610 had eliminated a large number of Jelalis
During the rest of the 17th and the 18th century, Jelalis continued their periodic depredations in Anatolia, representing a provincial reaction against the increasing power of the Janissaries
*I think that these periods of unrest should be worked in as times of troubles with the possibility of succession in anatolia. I know that this has been brought up before but once the bugs with the ottomans are worked out they will be seriously powerful. In one of my games they annexed poland and kept russia from expanding west. Years of internel turmoil and bad money management should be initiated to reflect historical accuracy.
Territory Maps
Persia http://ccat.sas.upenn.edu/~rs143/timurid.jpg
Armenia http://www.britannica.com/eb/art?id=4788&type=I
Ottoman http://ccat.sas.upenn.edu/~rs143/ottosul.jpg
Here is a Circa 15th century map muslim world for further clarification
http://ccat.sas.upenn.edu/~rs143/map6.jpg
Dulkadir - a Turkmen dynasty (1337-1522) that ruled in the Elbistan-Maras-Malatya region of eastern Anatolia. Its lands were the focus of rivalry between the Ottoman Empire and the Mamluks of Syria.
After 1450 Ottoman-Mamluk rivalry intensified, resulting in dynastic struggles and frequent changes in Dulkadir leadership. When Ali, the last Dulkadir prince, was overthrown by his grand vizier in 1522, the principality was incorporated into the Ottoman Empire, the Dulkadir family was accorded vassal status, and its members were appointed to high offices.
the regions of dulkadir, and all of anatolia revolted, known as the Jelali (also spelled CELÂLI) rebellions in Anatolia in the 16th and 17th centuries. The first revolt occurred (1519) near Tokat under the leadership of Celâl, a preacher of Shi'ah Islam. Major revolts later occurred in 1526-28, 1595-1610, 1654-55, and 1658-59.
The major uprisings involved the sekbans (irregular troops of musketeers) and sipahis (cavalrymen maintained by land grants). The rebellions were not attempts to overthrow the Ottoman government but were reactions to a social and economic crisis stemming from a number of factors: a depreciation of the currency, heavy taxation, a decline in the devsirme system (levy of Christian boys), admission of Muslims into the army, and an increase in the number and dominance of the Janissaries (elite troops) both in Istanbul and in the provinces.
With a decline of the sipahi cavalry the sekban troops, recruited from the Anatolian peasantry, formed the main provincial army. During wartime the sekbans served the provincial governors and drew regular pay. In peacetime, however, they were not paid, and they resorted to banditry, in which case they were called Jelalis. They were joined by sipahis, who had lost their land grants to court favourites, and by overtaxed peasants and Turkmen and Kurdish nomads.
In 1598 a sekban leader, Karayazici Abdülhalim ('Abd al-Halim), united the dissatisfied groups in Anatolia, forcing the towns to pay tribute and dominating the Sivas and Dulkadir provinces in central Anatolia. When Ottoman forces were sent against them, the Jelalis withdrew to Urfa in southeastern Anatolia, making it the centre of resistance. Karayazici rejected offers of governorships in Anatolia and died in 1602. His brother Deli Hasan then seized Kutahya, in western Anatolia, but later he and his followers were won over by grants of governorships.
The Jelali unrest, however, continued under the leadership of Janbuladoglu in Aleppo and Yusuf Pasa and Kalenderoglu in western Anatolia. They were finally suppressed by the grand vizier Kuyucu Murad Pasa, who by 1610 had eliminated a large number of Jelalis
During the rest of the 17th and the 18th century, Jelalis continued their periodic depredations in Anatolia, representing a provincial reaction against the increasing power of the Janissaries
*I think that these periods of unrest should be worked in as times of troubles with the possibility of succession in anatolia. I know that this has been brought up before but once the bugs with the ottomans are worked out they will be seriously powerful. In one of my games they annexed poland and kept russia from expanding west. Years of internel turmoil and bad money management should be initiated to reflect historical accuracy.
Territory Maps
Persia http://ccat.sas.upenn.edu/~rs143/timurid.jpg
Armenia http://www.britannica.com/eb/art?id=4788&type=I
Ottoman http://ccat.sas.upenn.edu/~rs143/ottosul.jpg
Here is a Circa 15th century map muslim world for further clarification
http://ccat.sas.upenn.edu/~rs143/map6.jpg
I don't mind a Free Aragon idea, but I think it should be left in the "Historical Options" screen instead of being made a game requirement.
Also, it makes me feel pretty invincible now playing as France with a level 3 fort sitting in my capital from day 1! I realize this was done to help the AI. But some of us still like to play around with the majors and do things too. Perhaps this would be better as an option, so we can turn it off when we play a major?
Also, it makes me feel pretty invincible now playing as France with a level 3 fort sitting in my capital from day 1! I realize this was done to help the AI. But some of us still like to play around with the majors and do things too. Perhaps this would be better as an option, so we can turn it off when we play a major?
Religion in the Balkans
I must agree that the majority of, if not all, the Balkans would better be modeled as "Orthodox" rather than "Sunni" during this historical period. Likewise, Cappadocia (northern Anatolia--I forget which provinces this is in EU) had a very large Greek population up until the Greek/Turkey war of the 1920s. At least one of the Cappadocian provinces should have an "Orthodox" tag. Up until the 1800s, Turkish tolerance of the Orthodox peasantry was fairly high. When Orthodox Christianity became tied up in Greek and Slavic nationalism, then the crackdowns started. Ethnic cleansing of the region had to wait until after WWI, when Kamal Ataturk decided to have a Turkey for Turks alone--"Who remembers the Armenians?"
I must agree that the majority of, if not all, the Balkans would better be modeled as "Orthodox" rather than "Sunni" during this historical period. Likewise, Cappadocia (northern Anatolia--I forget which provinces this is in EU) had a very large Greek population up until the Greek/Turkey war of the 1920s. At least one of the Cappadocian provinces should have an "Orthodox" tag. Up until the 1800s, Turkish tolerance of the Orthodox peasantry was fairly high. When Orthodox Christianity became tied up in Greek and Slavic nationalism, then the crackdowns started. Ethnic cleansing of the region had to wait until after WWI, when Kamal Ataturk decided to have a Turkey for Turks alone--"Who remembers the Armenians?"
Greek National Territory
If the Greece option is still used (either as a rebellion or as a "fantasy" option that can be turned on at the start of the game), what provinces are marked as National provinces for them?
Pan-Helladist claims are actually fairly broad, encompassing all of what we would consider modern "Greece", all the islands of the eastern Meditteranean and around the Achaean and Anatolian peninsulae, the provinces of Thrace, Macedonia, and at the very least the western and northern coastal provinces of Anatolia.
Indeed, there are Greeks living today who still consider these lands their "natural national territory".
If the Greece option is still used (either as a rebellion or as a "fantasy" option that can be turned on at the start of the game), what provinces are marked as National provinces for them?
Pan-Helladist claims are actually fairly broad, encompassing all of what we would consider modern "Greece", all the islands of the eastern Meditteranean and around the Achaean and Anatolian peninsulae, the provinces of Thrace, Macedonia, and at the very least the western and northern coastal provinces of Anatolia.
Indeed, there are Greeks living today who still consider these lands their "natural national territory".
Historical events for Japan (and 1 for spain since it related directly with Japan)
Japan: Historical events
1536 [Revolt in Honshu]
An autonomous government was established in Kyoto by adherants to the Nichiren Sect.
1559 [Opening of Trade Ports] **Until this time, Japan should be closed to trade to all but China and Dia Vet.**
Otomo Sorin opens the port in Funai to ships from western nations.
1575 [Japan enters modern warfare; 1000 ducat investment in Land Technolgy]
3000 musketeers were deployed by Oda Nobunaga in his victory at the battle of Nagashiro. This marks the beggining of Japanese modern warfare.
1587 [Anti-Christian Edicts; -25 relations with all christian nations]
Toyotomi Hideyoshi issues and edict expelling all Christians from Japan. It is neither obeyed or enforced.
1596 [Persecution of Christian Missionaries; +1 Galleon -75 relation with Spain]
Toyotomi Hideoyoshi confiscates the Spanish Galleon San Felipe carying Catholic Missionaries.
1614 [Christianity banned nationwide; -50 all Christian nations]
The lack of power of the Anti-Christian Edicts led to more forceful measures against Christianity.
1615 [Reformation of Infrastructure; +500 Infrasturcture investment]
Shogunate issues several measures to reform Nippon. Castles are limited to one per domain, promulugates laws governing Military Houses, Imperial Court and Nobility.
1637 [Peasant Revolts; -1 stability]
Shimabara uprisings mounted by overtaxed peasants.
1651 [Revolt in Edo]
Massive swelling of Ronin creating bands of ruffians causing problems throughout the province.
1767 [Uprisings! Revolt risk increased +3]
Peasant and urban uprisings continue to increase with frequency.
Spain
1596 [Persecution of Christian Missionaries; Temp. Caucus Belli against Japan]
Toyotomi Hideoyoshi confiscates the Spanish Galleon San Felipe carying Catholic Missionaries.
Japan: Historical events
1536 [Revolt in Honshu]
An autonomous government was established in Kyoto by adherants to the Nichiren Sect.
1559 [Opening of Trade Ports] **Until this time, Japan should be closed to trade to all but China and Dia Vet.**
Otomo Sorin opens the port in Funai to ships from western nations.
1575 [Japan enters modern warfare; 1000 ducat investment in Land Technolgy]
3000 musketeers were deployed by Oda Nobunaga in his victory at the battle of Nagashiro. This marks the beggining of Japanese modern warfare.
1587 [Anti-Christian Edicts; -25 relations with all christian nations]
Toyotomi Hideyoshi issues and edict expelling all Christians from Japan. It is neither obeyed or enforced.
1596 [Persecution of Christian Missionaries; +1 Galleon -75 relation with Spain]
Toyotomi Hideoyoshi confiscates the Spanish Galleon San Felipe carying Catholic Missionaries.
1614 [Christianity banned nationwide; -50 all Christian nations]
The lack of power of the Anti-Christian Edicts led to more forceful measures against Christianity.
1615 [Reformation of Infrastructure; +500 Infrasturcture investment]
Shogunate issues several measures to reform Nippon. Castles are limited to one per domain, promulugates laws governing Military Houses, Imperial Court and Nobility.
1637 [Peasant Revolts; -1 stability]
Shimabara uprisings mounted by overtaxed peasants.
1651 [Revolt in Edo]
Massive swelling of Ronin creating bands of ruffians causing problems throughout the province.
1767 [Uprisings! Revolt risk increased +3]
Peasant and urban uprisings continue to increase with frequency.
Spain
1596 [Persecution of Christian Missionaries; Temp. Caucus Belli against Japan]
Toyotomi Hideoyoshi confiscates the Spanish Galleon San Felipe carying Catholic Missionaries.
What about a Java 'island' based nation. I am not up on the history of that area, but someone else who was posting alot in the scenario board a few weeks ago about the asain/pacific side of the EU world mentioned that Java was a small or less organized trading nation. There is nothing else in that area of the world.
just a thought,
ErrantOne
Re: Religion in the Balkans
I once remove the "national" tag from many of the provinces in the Balkans in order to simulate the nationalism in the Balkans. As a result, even though the Turks conquered most most of the states there, after a particularly nasty four or five decade war, the revolt percentages went WAY up. They had to spend much of their time putting down revolts and reconquering countries that had declared independence. It looked pretty much what I thought the Balkans should look like if the Turks got caught up in a too long and disaserous war.
So maybe we can remove the national province tag from the Morea, Hellas, Serbia, Kossovo, Bosnia, Modavia, Wallachia, and maybe even Bulgaria?
I once remove the "national" tag from many of the provinces in the Balkans in order to simulate the nationalism in the Balkans. As a result, even though the Turks conquered most most of the states there, after a particularly nasty four or five decade war, the revolt percentages went WAY up. They had to spend much of their time putting down revolts and reconquering countries that had declared independence. It looked pretty much what I thought the Balkans should look like if the Turks got caught up in a too long and disaserous war.
So maybe we can remove the national province tag from the Morea, Hellas, Serbia, Kossovo, Bosnia, Modavia, Wallachia, and maybe even Bulgaria?