Large Nation Events: Things I've heard

[panther-anthro]

So, their not really a problem for me, because I normally turn them off. but I'd like to point out that some players complain that they 'mess up their games'. So I suggest a very easy fix, default them to off, and not on. That's it, lots of people complained to me over MSN over them causing issues for them, because they 'forgot'

 

[MattyG]

They 'mess up your game'?

It's true, these events are not for the meek.

I will set them to default off for those who feel that conquering the world ought to be easy.

 

[panther-anthro]

Thanks Matty, beregic and a few others mentioned they pissed them off.

 

[MattyG]

Thanks Matty, beregic and a few others mentioned they pissed them off.

Yes, beregic doesn't like events that stop him from cruising to world domination.

Some people just don't like the idea that you can't hold together a massive empire of different cultures without any real internal opposition.

 

[panther-anthro]

Yes, beregic doesn't like events that stop him from cruising to world domination.

Some people just don't like the idea that you can't hold together a massive empire of different cultures without any real internal opposition.

Those people haven't read about all the issues Rome had before Augustus XD! *Also after, about 10 emperors it started to go to hell*

 

[unmerged(15247)]

Yes, beregic doesn't like events that stop him from cruising to world domination.

Some people just don't like the idea that you can't hold together a massive empire of different cultures without any real internal opposition.

i think we already debated that...ai can NOT offer ANY oposition as such this event is implemented. all it does is ANNOYANCE since one will just have to do the same things over again( what would be the fun in a repeating force vassal, annexation of same nation over and over again, etc ). becouse, in reality, that is what those events are...repeating the very same steps the human has done ALREADY by the time they happen...

It's true, these events are not for the meek.

i beg the difrence; funny that the explanation bellow, goes against the VERY thing you are trying to insinuate . you really picked the wrong player to insinuate such thing "meek" :rofl: (ESPECIALLY in sp).

in sp such event has NO VALUE whatshowever. simply becouse when the ONLY human player achives the maximum size( as the engine sees it) there would be NO real chalange into gaining those breakaway nations yet again( ai hardlly wars any big empire ). al the player has to do in such conditions, to avoid ai dow him, is to PAUSE and built troops = extrior ai will never dow beeing "afraid" to do so(that in the ONLY case that the human keeps low amount of troops).a huge empire can not posiblly run low on manpower when such things happen( i am not even counting the more then enough money a player would have, as a huge empire, for gaining instant mercenaries thus yet another way to deal fast with the rebels ...). that is another reason the event annoys me ; becouse it has no EFFECT on game play quality in sp... just EXTRA "click fest" for no PRACTICAL REASON.

regardless panther has a great idea; usually any extra eu2 added options , in any mod, are by default "OFF" ( as they offer to the player a choice, otherwise could be considered that the player is expected or dictated HOW to play and by what rules...).

and i do not appreciate yet again the insinuation of "easy". we both know that this is not the case here

besides the large nation event ONLY helps 2 diffrent possible scenarios only:
- "new players" becouse there are no big AI empires possible to happen...so they never have to face a big country( since the clonies count towards the size 10 condition for the trigger, and no ai has above 8 centralization).
- players that just like to sit and allow nations evolve by themselves with minimal interfearence.


as for second sentence, towards having internal difficulties, i totally agree with you. simplly put the event just does not meet such requierments in SP( practical gameplay value reasons). in MP would be a totally diffrent story indeed, and there would be gameplay advantages and strategy based on it for sure... franklly would be FUN to have this option ON in mp; to see everyone trying HARD to stay a medium empire :rofl: ( of course, unless the player is willing to take chances to get dowed by other humans when such event happens).

 

[MattyG]

Those people haven't read about all the issues Rome had before Augustus XD! *Also after, about 10 emperors it started to go to hell*

I studied classical history in university, and while it was a while ago and I was never much of a scholar, I remember that the Romans were perpetually supressing major uprisings in areas distant from Rome, both before and after the empire was formed.

The revolt system built into the game does not adequetly model regional revolts against a large empire with a distant capital.

 

[panther-anthro]

I studied classical history in university, and while it was a while ago and I was never much of a scholar, I remember that the Romans were perpetually supressing major uprisings in areas distant from Rome, both before and after the empire was formed.

The revolt system built into the game does not adequetly model regional revolts against a large empire with a distant capital.

Not 100% true, only after Trajan did it start to go to hell. The time period between the reign of augustus and the death of trajan, is really the roman golden age, and the height of it's size.

Regardless, the current engine is horrible at representing how weak multi-cultural empires are. Even france was horribly unstable, in reality because of it's large size.

 

[unmerged(86600)]

Not 100% true, only after Trajan did it start to go to hell. The time period between the reign of augustus and the death of trajan, is really the roman golden age, and the height of it's size.

Regardless, the current engine is horrible at representing how weak multi-cultural empires are. Even france was horribly unstable, in reality because of it's large size.

Actually, that's also a 50-50 issue. There are numerous examples of rebellions which took decades at times against Roman rule (Spanish tribes for instance). Not to mention the British Isles or Germania, as well as Syria, Egypt and North Africa. However, it was indeed a relatively stable time during the Five Good Emperors especially.

Regarding the multicultural empires, I feel the game could simulte this by lowering tax income a bit more when the empire owns a very very large number of provinces of various cultures and religion (yes, I know there's aready a penalty, but what the heck, can't hurt trying). If you want a good example of a large empire which crumbled partly because of its own excessive fiscal policies, then we have, yet again, our friends, the Romans. Trully gigantic empires managed to create a trully efficient taxation system pretty late in history, when communications allowed it. Compare that to tribute collecting by force in the 1400's.

 

[unmerged(15247)]

I studied classical history in university, and while it was a while ago and I was never much of a scholar, I remember that the Romans were perpetually supressing major uprisings in areas distant from Rome, both before and after the empire was formed.

The revolt system built into the game does not adequetly model regional revolts against a large empire with a distant capital.

reminding you that those revolts were generally used by the roman high class as a PRETEXT into going looting ( and therfore improving their familly prestige and "electoral" chances. also war DOES bring "progress" (read economical benefits) while peace does not in LONG term

history is my major, and if one thing that it universally teaches is that reading between the lines is what brings to light the real issues. dates , numbers and reasons are not the objective but rather its effects wich always repeat themselves no matter what the GIVEN "reason" might be.

 

[MattyG]

Whatever we may want to say, argue or debate about various periods of history, the purpose behind revolts and uprisings and the nature of various conflicts, the real motivation behind these events was this:

In EU2 you can do what no nation has ever been able to do, which is to conquer more than a quarter of the world. In fact, no nation has ever even conquered that much, but in EU2 you can take over the whole thing.

1. You can do the historically-impossible.

2. It can be done with most nations, even those which are poor and not in the bext tech-groupand

3. As long as you don't get bored, you can do it with most games you play.

This means that the game is not offering sufficient challenges to overcome. These events were an attempt to add challenge to expansion with the limited tools available to us.

 

[panther-anthro]

Coding more events to detect massive empires, formed by certain empires, adds replay value IMHO.