impossible to make mugah's; no wonder ai can never do it either

[unmerged(15247)]

now this realy upsets me

i have met every condition and MORE; and this event just does not want to fire at all( passed the deathdate)

i even went into save and modified timuruds tag to "mugah" but game crashes then

seems pretty straight foward case , but looking within timuruds save there are 3(!?) tags within its title

"country = {
tag = TIM
ai = {
flags = { [immigration] = no [Random_MajorRef] = no [Random_MinorRef] = no } "
i played it all time, was never "ai"

#(1514-1520) Babur's Ambition
event = {
id = 296613
trigger = {
owned = { province = 1527 data = -1 } #Kabul
NOT = {
exists = MOG
exists = KUS
}
OR = {
event = 296770 #TIM: Uzbeks in Samarkand
event = 296771 #TIM: Uzbeks in Samarkand
}
}
random = no
country = TIM
name = "EVENTNAME3804" #Babur's Ambition
desc = "EVENTHIST3804"
#-#Zahir-ud-din Muhammad, better known as Babur, was a Timurid Prince with the blood of Genghis Khan and Tamerlane flowing through his veins, who became the founder of the mighty Mughal dynasty. His early years were spent in bitter struggle with the Uzbeks, who under their brilliant Khan Muhammad Shaybani had occupied the old Timurid capital of Samarkand. Weary of this useless quest, Babur eventually turned his ambitious gaze east towards India - a much more fruitful ambition, as it would turn out...

date = { day = 1 month = march year = 1514 }
offset = 1
deathdate = { day = 1 month = march year = 1520 }

action_a = {
name = "ACTIONNAME3804A" #Unleash the Tiger!
command = { type = flagname which = "" }
command = { type = country which = MOG }
command = { type = add_countryculture which = afghani }
command = { type = domestic which = QUALITY value = 3 }
command = { type = INF which = -2 value = 10000 }
command = { type = INF which = -1 value = 10000 }
command = { type = INF which = -1 value = 10000 }
command = { type = CAV which = -2 value = 20000 }
command = { type = ART which = -2 value = 10 }
command = { type = treasury value = 300 }
command = { type = relation which = DLH value = -400 }
command = { type = addcore which = 543 } #Delhi
command = { type = addcore which = 1523 } #Thar
command = { type = land value = 3000 }
#command = { type = AI which = Mughal.ai }
}
}

 

[Garbon]

Are you sure that all conditions were met? Which one of the Uzbeks in Samarkand events fired?

Secondly, the ai flags have nothing to do with your problem as eu2 just stored flags under the ai heading.

Thirdly, the ai, when it forms the Mughals, usually does so from Kabul (the historic path).

Lastly, you'd need to find/replace all instances of TIM (exact match) with MOG.

 

[unmerged(15247)]

i never got capital sacked or lost since i release vassals prior to bad events triggering and re-annex later.

 

[Garbon]

Well that's why it didn't fire. If you aren't "willing" to let the Uzbeks take Samarkand then you have no business becoming the Mughals. Babur only decided to take India after several failed attempts to take back Samarkand. None of the Mughal events really make sense if the Timurid were not dislodged from Transoxiana.

 

[unmerged(15247)]

ok then that "if" is way to circumstantial; i made my modifications anywayhere since i do not agree ; in its event files to be updated with new agceep release; same for taking off the "release vassals" in HRE wich make absoulute no sense to me just detrimental to game play;

 

[Garbon]

I mean if you could come up with a plausible way for the Timurids to own Samarkand and yet run to found and indian empire, I'd be all ears. However, I personally can't think of anyway that, that would actually make sense.

 

[unmerged(15247)]

Well that's why it didn't fire. If you aren't "willing" to let the Uzbeks take Samarkand then you have no business becoming the Mughals. Babur only decided to take India after several failed attempts to take back Samarkand. None of the Mughal events really make sense if the Timurid were not dislodged from Transoxiana.

why this makes no sense? since when the possibility of altering history has to be DENIED in agceep!?( i can only assume as of making up valid arguments so it "fits" the tech and the eu2 engine shortcomings?). in my game i diplo annexed uzbeks WAYYYYY before the timuruds even broke up ; so you are saying that babur could have not even been born right? well following this argument same should go napoleaon or many others no?

 

[unmerged(15247)]

I mean if you could come up with a plausible way for the Timurids to own Samarkand and yet run to found and indian empire, I'd be all ears. However, I personally can't think of anyway that, that would actually make sense.

the plausible way wuld be to follow general historical lines and ditch the "modifications" when would be detrimental to game play becouse fears of "loosing balance". a human will always ditch the above balance , so why just put sticks in his way just for the sake of it?

as a matter of fact agceep is way better in many respects; congratulations. but when it comes to persia and north india, it is a mess; way too many impossible "ifs" that ai simply can not meet (forget even the human problems i already mentioned). one positive aspect is for uzbeks to avoid all its bad events by pausing game the same day they occupy "khiva" province

i do not how tests go in your games but mugahs almost never forms in mines, no matter what nation i am; the best i have seen it is as afghanistan rebels by chance ONLY( there are not even rr events for its province around the time when mugah should form)

ak and kara are a mess too; for ai persia forms always as a few provinces quickly overun by mighty ottos; she never gets the eastern provinces for some reason. for a human is even worse; i must ditched over 10 games in that area becouse wiered events trigger WHEN they actually do; is more like this whole area has a base concept as "keep it a mess"; and no human can do anything about it really no matter what changes he can think of or come up with

 

[unmerged(15247)]

the solution would be to ditch the intermediar states that form upon timuruds break-up and use the tags somwhere else(there are always 3-4 such states that survive until 1820 nd they never existed in reality more then 20-30 years...),; the vanila aproach was better becouse provinces defecting or timuruds beeing slowlly but effcetivelly been conquered by surounding states. and when babur came always remaked in general lines, the mugah empire; what was wrong with it?

 

[Garbon]

the solution would be to ditch the intermediar states that form upon timuruds break-up and use the tags somwhere else(there are always 3-4 such states that survive until 1820 nd they never existed in reality more then 20-30 years...),; the vanila aproach was better becouse provinces defecting or timuruds beeing slowlly but effcetivelly been conquered by surounding states. and when babur came always remaked in general lines, the mugah empire; what was wrong with it?

Because it was totally ahistorical. Babur never ruled an Empire stretching from Samarkand to Delhi. He went to Delhi because the situation in Samarkand was hopeless.

Also, you're wrong about the breakaway states. Balkh and Ferghana should be independent for centuries. Khorsan was independent for 50+ years and there was no real reason that it couldn't have lasted longer (although Uzbeks and Persia are helped with conquest).

On things you said earlier, I actually see a strong Persia most of the time. A few versions ago, Persia used to do damage to the Ottomans until we curbed them in.

 

[Garbon]

the plausible way wuld be to follow general historical lines and ditch the "modifications" when would be detrimental to game play becouse fears of "loosing balance". a human will always ditch the above balance , so why just put sticks in his way just for the sake of it?

The event isn't written for balance...it's written because it wouldn't make sense under "general historical lines" for Babur ruling Samarkand to go to form the Mughals. Timur attacked Delhi and reduced it to being a vassal. There was no desire to rule from India. In fact, when Babur first took Delhi, most of his captains were ready to go home to Kabul as they had no desire to stay in the subcontinent.

as a matter of fact agceep is way better in many respects; congratulations. but when it comes to persia and north india, it is a mess; way too many impossible "ifs" that ai simply can not meet (forget even the human problems i already mentioned). one positive aspect is for uzbeks to avoid all its bad events by pausing game the same day they occupy "khiva" province

Actually I don't see that many problems with Persia anymore. Regarding the Mughals, I'm somewhat resigned that we will have to wait till the new map, as there simply aren't enough provinces on the current one to represent Kabul as a strong state, capable of overthrowing Delhi. Vis-a-vis the Uzbeks, you found an exploit. Not really sure how that means Central Asia is a mess...

i do not how tests go in your games but mugahs almost never forms in mines, no matter what nation i am; the best i have seen it is as afghanistan rebels by chance ONLY( there are not even rr events for its province around the time when mugah should form)

Like I said the Mughals form a real empire rarely, although a significant amount of times I see them as masters of Afghanistan and Punjab.

 

[Canenald]

Beregic, what Garbon is trying to say is that no one is preventing you from conquering India with Timurids. It's just that it won't be called Mughal Empire because Mughal Empire was formed when Babur lost Samarkand.

Garbon, maybe there could be an event where Timurids may choose to abandon Samarkand (secedeprovice to Uzbeks) in order to form Mughal Empire? As it was pointed out dozens of times, we have a funny situation where you are required to play badly in order to have a good outcome. Novice players who don't look into event files while playing will have no idea why they are unable to form Mughals with Timurds.

 

[unmerged(15247)]

The event isn't written for balance...it's written because it wouldn't make sense under "general historical lines" for Babur ruling Samarkand to go to form the Mughals. Timur attacked Delhi and reduced it to being a vassal. There was no desire to rule from India. In fact, when Babur first took Delhi, most of his captains were ready to go home to Kabul as they had no desire to stay in the subcontinent.



Actually I don't see that many problems with Persia anymore. Regarding the Mughals, I'm somewhat resigned that we will have to wait till the new map, as there simply aren't enough provinces on the current one to represent Kabul as a strong state, capable of overthrowing Delhi. Vis-a-vis the Uzbeks, you found an exploit. Not really sure how that means Central Asia is a mess...




Like I said the Mughals form a real empire rarely, although a significant amount of times I see them as masters of Afghanistan and Punjab.

sorry, it seems we play diffrent versions of agceep or something; there is no way the above comments come true in my games, roughfly 1/day. or maybe u have an "advanced" one unreleased? does anyone else have the above persia ever forming properlly???

 

[unmerged(15247)]

Beregic, what Garbon is trying to say is that no one is preventing you from conquering India with Timurids. It's just that it won't be called Mughal Empire because Mughal Empire was formed when Babur lost Samarkand.

Garbon, maybe there could be an event where Timurids may choose to abandon Samarkand (secedeprovice to Uzbeks) in order to form Mughal Empire? As it was pointed out dozens of times, we have a funny situation where you are required to play badly in order to have a good outcome. Novice players who don't look into event files while playing will have no idea why they are unable to form Mughals with Timurds.

ouch it is a given that many of the players are generaly novice in modding, like myself; however i doubt anyone here has ever actually played as many games as i had 1419-1820(i never play 1520's scenario or others, only gc) i realy doubt that

the problem with the event above is that no such reason is MENTIONED in the history event file; besides, the coding of the event , unless one is a modding "insider" ,reffers to the uzbek event (wich i know them by heart as well). basically could not see that NOT owning Samarkand was a problem.the event's script gives the understanding that mughas SHOULD TAKE Samarkand or own it . and there are more such examples; lets start with "ak" forming persia for example.... regrdless of any arguments there should be no reason timuruds not able form mugahs becouse such a detail LOL. as i mentioned above , if the owning or not owning of Samarkand is an issue then same should aplly for many more other cases (why should persia form at all if no rebels then!????? ?????)
but i am sure that this aspect will never be considered since it looks that you guys already took a final decision here

 

[Garbon]

Because owning Samarkand (/Transoxiana) is a fundamental stumbling block for the formation of the Mughal Empire. India was the secondary prize that Babur settled for when he couldn't hold onto what he really wanted. If he'd kept Samarkand it is likely that he would have followed Timur's model and thus the Mughal Empire would not be formed.

That said, Lord Grave, I guess it could be alright to give the players a choice. It is sort of odd to give up Samarkand but if one wants to be the Mughals...

The fundamental issue here is that it really isn't historical for the Timurids => Mughals but we need to have the option for the player. Since that's the goal, then yea, giving up Samarkand to gain India could make since to me. I'll re-script the sequence this weekend.

 

[Garbon]

sorry, it seems we play diffrent versions of agceep or something; there is no way the above comments come true in my games, roughfly 1/day. or maybe u have an "advanced" one unreleased? does anyone else have the above persia ever forming properlly???

I see the Safavids doing well quite a lot of the time...and I run a lot of hands off tests.

What aggressiveness to you have the AI set on?

 

[MichaelM]

Because owning Samarkand (/Transoxiana) is a fundamental stumbling block for the formation of the Mughal Empire. India was the secondary prize that Babur settled for when he couldn't hold onto what he really wanted. If he'd kept Samarkand it is likely that he would have followed Timur's model and thus the Mughal Empire would not be formed.

That said, Lord Grave, I guess it could be alright to give the players a choice. It is sort of odd to give up Samarkand but if one wants to be the Mughals...

The fundamental issue here is that it really isn't historical for the Timurids => Mughals but we need to have the option for the player. Since that's the goal, then yea, giving up Samarkand to gain India could make since to me. I'll re-script the sequence this weekend.

What if you do keep Samarkand? Is there a possibility to conquer, say, all of Central Asia? Would Babur really have stopped with Samarkand?

 

[Garbon]

What if you do keep Samarkand? Is there a possibility to conquer, say, all of Central Asia? Would Babur really have stopped with Samarkand?

You're welcome to conquer all of Central Asia. Just don't expect cores.

Most likely scenario is that Babur conquers a la Timur and then upon his death a weak son could see the empire go up in flames.

 

[MichaelM]

You're welcome to conquer all of Central Asia. Just don't expect cores.

Yes, but why? Is it not plausible?

Most likely scenario is that Babur conquers a la Timur and then upon his death a weak son could see the empire go up in flames.

Again, why? Did the conquest of India change the succession rules?

I'm asking these questions not necessarily because I think you're wrong, but because I really don't know much about the Timurids.

 

[unmerged(15247)]

I see the Safavids doing well quite a lot of the time...and I run a lot of hands off tests.

What aggressiveness to you have the AI set on?

my settings are always very hard and lowest ai agressivness, of course.
i never do hands off test becouse , i believe they can be missleading, tryed once , but i noticed that ai behaviour is wayyyyyyyyy to "standard" wich almost never happens when human around even if FAR away to influentiate certain regional outcomes.