Home Trending Latest threads New posts Developer diaries

Plague only after 'the one'

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.
I seem to remember there were was also at least one plague that affected the Roman Empire (2nd Century?).

I think various plagues have always been a problem where there were enough people living in close proximity.

Also, trade is the main reason a plague becomes a plague rather than a localised epidemic - which explains why many of the early European plagues mainly affected the Mediterranean.
 
Originally posted by SJG
I seem to remember there were was also at least one plague that affected the Roman Empire (2nd Century?).

I think various plagues have always been a problem where there were enough people living in close proximity.

Also, trade is the main reason a plague becomes a plague rather than a localised epidemic - which explains why many of the early European plagues mainly affected the Mediterranean.
Click to expand...

To take them backwards.. trade of grain was a major reason of spreading the plague, since rats follow grain and you need rats to spread the plague.



Plagues haven't always been a problem for humans since it is a rodent disease and contact with social rodents in a plague-ridden rodent population is necessary. This is probably why it disappeared sometimes, apart from the bacteria being somewhat picky about it's living conditions.



There might have been plagues before Justinian's, like the 'Plague of the Philistees' in the bible, the 'Plague of Athens' 430B.C. or the roman epidemics of 166-180 and 251-268.

But these cases all have in common that the disease(s) in question have not been identified. It might have been the plague, or something else.

Rufus of Efesos in words saved for us by the greek doctor Oribasius brings us the earliest description of what probably is the plague. He hadn't seen it himself but describes what Dionysius the Hunchback had seen in the near east and nort africa, but also upon Posidonios and Dioskorides for north africa. This would be sometime around 200B.C.

This disease was claimed to break out from time to time in Syria, Egypt and other parts of north africa, but the descriptions are too vague to say more than that it could have been the plague.

Btw, 'various'? plagues, there is only one plague, there are lots of epidemical diseases, maybe you meant them?
 
Agreed on the trade of grain. That might be a way to employ it into the game engine. EUII has provinces specifically producing grain, and should the attached COT get the plague its reasonable to assume that said grain producing province would have it brought back from the peddlers selling it at port.

This at least establishes a link to the historical hypothisis that trade routes, and grain were mutual factors in its spread. A random event for plague wouldnt wash unless an area around you is effected.

Keeping with the EUII example, Baden is a wine producing province so based on my example wouldnt have a "grain trail" persay, so if its neibhor does and gets the plague I can understand that by chance it spreads to baden through travel between provinces.

In EUII the plague is a random event which is fine, but in CK we are talking about an absolute historical event that hit europe hard. It cant be ignored and some formal process for its occurance should happen, if it can be done in the game.

Odin
 
It went beyond grain trade I'll have to admit. Also there seems to have been a way for humans to carry the disease and spread it to new regions.

Since fleas are the transmitters for plague (unless it has gone to the lungs) and 'human' fleas haven't been proven to spread the disease I don't know how that would work. I hope to learn the theory behind when I get some spare time to study.

The strange thing about the 'black death' is that some areas, including major CoT Milano, would be almost completely spared. Not that it would save them in the end, Milano 'got it' really bad within a decade or two anyways, but it's an additional wierdness.


The grain theory works so that if a region that produces surplus grain gets the plague then all regions purchasing of that surplus (e.g. Baden) will get the plague from importing infested rodents.
 
Just wonder how many infected rats that actually moved? The plague kills the rats too as you might know so it's only when there's no rats left the fleas will bite humans (mostly anyway). So guess grain export didn't spread the plague due to rats but due to infected humans.
 
Originally posted by Doomfarer
Just wonder how many infected rats that actually moved? The plague kills the rats too as you might know so it's only when there's no rats left the fleas will bite humans (mostly anyway). So guess grain export didn't spread the plague due to rats but due to infected humans.
Click to expand...

The accepted explanation for how the plague came to Norway is through a ship carrying grain from England to Bergen in 1349. The ship also carried rats among the cargo, who were infected with the plague.

It would be plausible that rats followed cargo along the trade routes, thereby contributing to the spread of plague.
 
Originally posted by Doomfarer
Just wonder how many infected rats that actually moved? The plague kills the rats too as you might know so it's only when there's no rats left the fleas will bite humans (mostly anyway). So guess grain export didn't spread the plague due to rats but due to infected humans.
Click to expand...


As long as rats get infected one by one they can transport plague nicely as a collective, and in a grain shipment there would be several.

Then once the plague has arrived somewhere there are more rats, but when they are wiped out in the area humans will get infected and *whammo*.
 
Wonder if the plague will hit Europe in every game or if it's random? Does anyone know?

I for one hope it's random.
 
Originally posted by Doomfarer
Wonder if the plague will hit Europe in every game or if it's random? Does anyone know?

I for one hope it's random.
Click to expand...

I'd hate it if it was random. Which year it arrives in, sure, but just as much as the Mongol hordes should be a certainty, that much should the plague be a certainty.
 
If it's certain that it does hit Europe every game it should at least have a broad range from so-so to devastating effect and deadliness. I think it would be boring if in every game half of Europes population disappeares.

Sure, give me that plague but make the deadliness random.
 
Originally posted by Doomfarer
If it's certain that it does hit Europe every game it should at least have a broad range from so-so to devastating effect and deadliness. I think it would be boring if in every game half of Europes population disappeares.

Sure, give me that plague but make the deadliness random.
Click to expand...

I am on the fence wit this one, I can understand the devestation it can exact on a nation and hurt the game play, hell cripple it to a degree where it isnt fun at all.

But thats how it happened, the great plague was devestating, so I agree with you Doomfarer that the effects can be variable depending on where you are etc, but the plague should come and should be heavy for some, how that will play out or made fair might just have to be random.

I think perhaps if the game technology can handle it, that a COT gets infected first, and keeping with an EUII scenrio for trading if you have merchants in that COT then your going to get the plague, or if you have some diplomatic agreement with a nation that has the plague. I dunno, it should be a fixed event like the reformation, but the degree is certainly fair to debate. For me though I would rather it be as close to historically accurate as possible, but I can sense from your post that you feel it could be a real game breaker on a massive scale, and on that we agree. Dont know how to handle it I guess, should be one heck of a quandry for the development team.

Odin
 
Originally posted by Odin1970
For me though I would rather it be as close to historically accurate as possible, but I can sense from your post that you feel it could be a real game breaker on a massive scale, and on that we agree. Dont know how to handle it I guess, should be one heck of a quandry for the development team.

Odin
Click to expand...

As I tried to say, I'm ok with it being a killer in some games, but I'd prefer it if I could get lucky in other games and perhaps not getting it at all or just get a mild version of it.

I guess it will be like the Tordesillas event in EU2 that it will appear every time with the same effect but with some offset to make its appearance date random.
 
I think the Plague should perhaps NOT happen 1 time out of 10, and that there should be some time variance about when it actually does occur for the other 9, say between 1330 and 1360. I also think the subsequent main waves need to be simulated, and then local outbreaks after that.

Just been reading a book about mediaeval trade - it pointed out that there were 4 main waves of plague. I *think* the dates of the other three are 1361-2, 1369, and in the 1370s.

1347-52 being the 'biggie' - but the real damage population-wise was done by the later waves because those waves 'targeted' those groups with less resistance, specifically children.

In chronicles the later waves are often referred to as affecting children and nobles, the two groups with least resistance to plague because of less exposure.

Edit: for England I think the average guesstimate for the death toll is between a third and a half - but that it has a disproportionate affect on the countryside rather than the main cities.
 
The severity of the plague should also depend on culture and such. If it was the norm to run for the hills and just throw dead people in mass graves when dead rats started to appear you shold get a les severe effect than if you stay and mourn with the dead and so on.
 
Originally posted by Doomfarer
The severity of the plague should also depend on culture and such. If it was the norm to run for the hills and just throw dead people in mass graves when dead rats started to appear you shold get a les severe effect than if you stay and mourn with the dead and so on.
Click to expand...

Yep. I don't know if the cultural boundaries for those behaviors match the cultura divisions of the game though. No big deal.


And I say again, the plague must be there and it must kill all.:)p) It won't be a gamebreaker since everyone is scr*wed about equally.

Sure, you might loose half your army and income while prices rise, but the same goes for all your enemies.


Oh, and I have no problems with plague coming in sometime 1320-80 or having quite random effects. (as long as about 50% are dead within 30 years ;))
 
The randomness of the plague would be dictated by things that, as I understand it, are not included in the game such as physical trade routes and the amount of other contact between regions.

My two cents worth is that there should be plague events which become more likely as time passes. ie. everyone knows the plague is coming, it is just a matter of time.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top Bottom
Back