Home Trending Latest threads New posts Developer diaries

Problem with War Events

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.
U

unmerged(75851)

Major
May 8, 2007
697
0
In the game events will occur which bring you to war for historical events.


Now this is fine with me. But, if you have a peace treaty then it makes you accumulate BB and/or a huge lose of stability. Like say, you just beat the Huegonots and then it makes you go to war with them.


My question is, is there any way to make it so that going to war with a country will automatically eliminate peace treaties and such? Like say on January 15th an event occurs where you first have your peace treaty with H. automatically lifted and then you go to war the next day?
 
MnM said:
In the game events will occur which bring you to war for historical events.


Now this is fine with me. But, if you have a peace treaty then it makes you accumulate BB and/or a huge lose of stability. Like say, you just beat the Huegonots and then it makes you go to war with them.


My question is, is there any way to make it so that going to war with a country will automatically eliminate peace treaties and such? Like say on January 15th an event occurs where you first have your peace treaty with H. automatically lifted and then you go to war the next day?
Click to expand...
Not currently, no.
 
MnM said:
Also, how do you edit a saved-game file to change stuff like say, badboy or culture/etc. Haven't done it in a while and I've forgotten how.
Click to expand...
  1. Open the save file (it should have a .eug extension)
  2. Find the place where it says
    Code: 
    country = {
   tag = <your country's tag> # like POR or SPA or ENG or...
  3. Look down a bit. It should be pretty obvious once you see it.
 
Couldn't it just be solved by modifying each event which leads to war so that the very first thing it does is dissolve the peace treaty or military access, followed by a new event occuring a day later which allows the war to take place then?
 
MnM said:
Couldn't it just be solved by modifying each event which leads to war so that the very first thing it does is dissolve the peace treaty or military access, followed by a new event occuring a day later which allows the war to take place then?
Click to expand...
Again, not currently. (Actually, that's what I thought you were asking in the first place. But the answer is still "No".)
 
I don't know the technicals but couldn't war events simply start out as dissolving truces and then have a new event the day after which leads to an outbreak of war? I guess I mean, is it possible for a war event to be encoded which dissolves a truce?

If it is possible then it could be applied to certain war events, dissolving the truce on that day, followed by leading to a new event which takes place a day after, which leads to the event.

Sorry for the confusion but I'm just curious is all.
 
So there's no command that could change the truce to that day? (sorry if it's the "same questions", I just want to see if there are any other possible technical solutions)

And if it's not possible then would it be possible to have the game simply check to see if a truce does exist and if it does, to restore stability and reduce badboy for each truce which does get broken?
 
MnM said:
So there's no command that could change the truce to that day? (sorry if it's the "same questions", I just want to see if there are any other possible technical solutions)

And if it's not possible then would it be possible to have the game simply check to see if a truce does exist and if it does, to restore stability and reduce badboy for each truce which does get broken?
Click to expand...

badboy seems to be a major issue with you.!!!

lower BB faster by giving a state independence and making them be a vassal of you

what do you mean by the last paragraph.?? restore stab and lower BB for breaking an alliance?
 
MnM said:
And if it's not possible then would it be possible to have the game simply check to see if a truce does exist and if it does, to restore stability and reduce badboy for each truce which does get broken?
Click to expand...
It is not possible to check for truce.

Also, you gain 0 badboy for breaking a truce. The badboy you get for a DoW depends on relations and eventual CBs.
 
MnM said:
In the game events will occur which bring you to war for historical events.


Now this is fine with me. But, if you have a peace treaty then it makes you accumulate BB and/or a huge lose of stability. Like say, you just beat the Huegonots and then it makes you go to war with them.


My question is, is there any way to make it so that going to war with a country will automatically eliminate peace treaties and such? Like say on January 15th an event occurs where you first have your peace treaty with H. automatically lifted and then you go to war the next day?
Click to expand...

yes, this is an issue for me too that i would like see fixed.

an example that plays very ahistorical would be the eastern african minors: if they choose to refuse portugese demands then the second event option in many cases is "war with portugal" wich gives THEM 4bb and not to portugal...
in this cases bb does not represent "agressive" logic but instead it is modded to reflect other eu2 engine issues.


to fix that, would help a lot if the engine itself would be moded to SEE the cb FIRST when the cb AND the forced wars are triggered in SAME day, OR make those 2-steps-event always ( 1 event giving cb and the second, a month later, gving the forced war).
 
Toio said:
badboy seems to be a major issue with you.!!!

lower BB faster by giving a state independence and making them be a vassal of you

what do you mean by the last paragraph.?? restore stab and lower BB for breaking an alliance?
Click to expand...
he refers to the fact that when he is forced to have a war , he ALSO has to gain bb that he did not INTEND to gain in the first place .

for example:
the southern indian state again...in 1510, if refuses to cede provinces to portugal, the second option forces the player to dow portugal, and that makes no logical sense( if portugal demands things from me why would i GAIN the 4 bb = all ai around me sees ME as agressor and might dow me as well). the issue has to due with LOGIC intergrity.

so i am sure that portugal is not allowed to do this(dow every ai that does not like to "submit" to her demands) since it would make her gain a LOT of bb,and thus hampper her historic development. so why not, in those second event options that gives various nations "war with portugal" option, make those vents have a -4bad boy option as well?(or -3 to consider possible RANDOM rr via random events when the "historic" event might trigger)


so to show an exact example now:

#(1498-1560) Portugal demands submission
event = {
id = 333000
trigger = {
event = 18031 #POR: Submission of Kilwa
exists = POR
}
random = no
country = KIE
name = "EVENTNAME333000" #Portugal demands submission
desc = "EVENTHIST333000"
#-#A commander of the strong Portuguese navy demands our submission. Should we agree and become vassals of the Portuguese King, or defy the Crusaders and fight them?

date = { day = 1 month = january year = 1498 }
offset = 30
deathdate = { day = 1 month = january year = 1560 }

action_a = {
name = "ACTIONNAME333000A" #Agree to vassalship
command = { type = stability value = -2 }
command = { type = treasury value = -200 }
command = { type = sleepevent which = 18034 } #POR: Sultan refuses our demands
}
action_b = {
name = "ACTIONNAME333000B" #Defy the Portuguese
command = { type = war which = POR }
command = { type = stability value = -6 }
command = { type = sleepevent which = 18033 } #POR: Sultan agrees to our demands
}
}



to make the event FAIR to a kilwa PLAYER, it should read :




#(1498-1560) Portugal demands submission
event = {
id = 333000
trigger = {
event = 18031 #POR: Submission of Kilwa
exists = POR
}
random = no
country = KIE
name = "EVENTNAME333000" #Portugal demands submission
desc = "EVENTHIST333000"
#-#A commander of the strong Portuguese navy demands our submission. Should we agree and become vassals of the Portuguese King, or defy the Crusaders and fight them?

date = { day = 1 month = january year = 1498 }
offset = 30
deathdate = { day = 1 month = january year = 1560 }

action_a = {
name = "ACTIONNAME333000A" #Agree to vassalship
command = { type = stability value = -2 }
command = { type = treasury value = -200 }
command = { type = sleepevent which = 18034 } #POR: Sultan refuses our demands
}
action_b = {
name = "ACTIONNAME333000B" #Defy the Portuguese
command = { type = war which = POR }
Code: 
		command = { type = badboy value = -4 } #or -3 to count a possible random cb existing prior to this event triggering
command = { type = stability value = -6 }
command = { type = sleepevent which = 18033 } #POR: Sultan agrees to our demands
}
}
 
Last edited:
beregic said:
he refers to the fact that when he is forced to have a war , he ALSO has to gain bb that he did not INTEND to gain in the first place .

for example:
the southern indian state again...in 1510, if refuses to cede provinces to portugal, the second option forces the player to dow portugal, and that makes no logical sense( if portugal demands things from me why would i GAIN the 4 bb = all ai around me sees ME as agressor and might dow me as well). the issue has to due with LOGIC intergrity.

so i am sure that portugal is not allowed to do this(dow every ai that does not like to "submit" to her demands) since it would make her gain a LOT of bb,and thus hampper her historic development. so why not, in those second event options that gives various nations "war with portugal" option, make those vents have a -4bad boy option as well?(or -3 to consider possible RANDOM rr via random events when the "historic" event might trigger)


so to show an exact example now:

#(1498-1560) Portugal demands submission
event = {
id = 333000
trigger = {
event = 18031 #POR: Submission of Kilwa
exists = POR
}
random = no
country = KIE
name = "EVENTNAME333000" #Portugal demands submission
desc = "EVENTHIST333000"
#-#A commander of the strong Portuguese navy demands our submission. Should we agree and become vassals of the Portuguese King, or defy the Crusaders and fight them?

date = { day = 1 month = january year = 1498 }
offset = 30
deathdate = { day = 1 month = january year = 1560 }

action_a = {
name = "ACTIONNAME333000A" #Agree to vassalship
command = { type = stability value = -2 }
command = { type = treasury value = -200 }
command = { type = sleepevent which = 18034 } #POR: Sultan refuses our demands
}
action_b = {
name = "ACTIONNAME333000B" #Defy the Portuguese
command = { type = war which = POR }
command = { type = stability value = -6 }
command = { type = sleepevent which = 18033 } #POR: Sultan agrees to our demands
}
}



to make the event FAIR to a kilwa PLAYER, it should read :




#(1498-1560) Portugal demands submission
event = {
id = 333000
trigger = {
event = 18031 #POR: Submission of Kilwa
exists = POR
}
random = no
country = KIE
name = "EVENTNAME333000" #Portugal demands submission
desc = "EVENTHIST333000"
#-#A commander of the strong Portuguese navy demands our submission. Should we agree and become vassals of the Portuguese King, or defy the Crusaders and fight them?

date = { day = 1 month = january year = 1498 }
offset = 30
deathdate = { day = 1 month = january year = 1560 }

action_a = {
name = "ACTIONNAME333000A" #Agree to vassalship
command = { type = stability value = -2 }
command = { type = treasury value = -200 }
command = { type = sleepevent which = 18034 } #POR: Sultan refuses our demands
}
action_b = {
name = "ACTIONNAME333000B" #Defy the Portuguese
command = { type = war which = POR }
Code: 
		command = { type = badboy value = -4 } #or -3 to count a possible random cb existing prior to this event triggering
command = { type = stability value = -6 }
command = { type = sleepevent which = 18033 } #POR: Sultan agrees to our demands
}
}
Click to expand...

IMO the event is balanced, Kilwa gets the BB and POR has to waste resources from Lisbon to sail to east african and is not gauranteed to win the war.
If POR was to also get the BB, then every state in europe would DOW POR eventually due to their high BB
 
Toio said:
IMO the event is balanced, Kilwa gets the BB and POR has to waste resources from Lisbon to sail to east african and is not gauranteed to win the war.
If POR was to also get the BB, then every state in europe would DOW POR eventually due to their high BB
Click to expand...

please read above carefully,WHY i did already considered that this is NOT an option for portugal to dow, and therfore WHY the bb decrease shall be granted to "defenders".

for a human is NOT ablanced to get 4bb while portugesse AI gets NO losses ( in many cases they have ai events that simplly give them troops and extra ships much greater then if they would actually have BUILD them).

WHY should kilwa GET bb while fighting a defensive war!? there is definatelly something "corrupt" i do not understand in such REASONING.
-also ai has NO naval attrition( not getting what you mean by resources wasted while SAILING...)

besides, please actually do fight such a war...having ONE portugese warship winning more the 1 time, at times, against 100 galleys is propesterous ( when regarding the resources be SPENT to have such a war).
 
Last edited:
beregic said:
-also ai has NO naval attrition( not getting what you mean by resources wasted while SAILING...)

besides, please actually do fight such a war...having ONE portugese warship winning more the 1 time, at times, against 100 galleys is propesterous ( when regarding the resources be SPENT to have such a war).
Click to expand...


true , the ai has no naval attrition, but getting these "free troops and ships" still needs maintenance costs, which is one issue why we removed most of these for POR.
No war, yet they still got troops and had to pay maintenance and then had NO money to colonise

The AGCEEP policy is to not have the WAR command in use unless for some specific requirement, I do think this might be one of these specific events.
SO, I thought about this for the addition to option b
badboy -3
stab -4 .........morale will still be bad at -4 stab for combat though
 
Where do you see a defensive war in action_b?

You have the choice between becoming a vassal or defying the Portuguese.

Badboy -3 and stab -4 could be a solution but we aren't even sure war command will apply. in the end, the result could be a stab loss... and a bb loss without war.

Nevertheless, it is a fact many war/truce/military access related conditions and commands are missing
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top Bottom
Back