Put North Africa in the European continent

[TheDarkMaster]

With the new changes to Wasteland in Northern Africa, now would be an excellent time to move the whole of Northern Africa into the European continent for the purposes of calculating overseas penalties. It doesn't make sense for the two sides of the Mediterranean to be distant overseas, while Lisbon and Constantinople are not distant overseas.

I'd suggest cutting things off at the two new unsettled passages into West Africa. As for Egypt, have all of the Mamlukes starting territories in Europe, except for the provinces that boarder on the Red Sea. I suggest putting the Red sea provinces, and most of East Africa into the Asian continent, so that the overseas treatment there is more sensible as well.

Finally, I suggest that the East coast of the med be put in the European continent as well, ideally all provinces West of the Caspian Sea should be in the European continent, cut off by a line drawn between the sea and the new Northern wasteland in Arabia. To the West of this line is the European continent, and to the East is the Asian continent.

This will lead to overseas penalties being avoided in places where it simply does not make sense for them to be in place, and avoids situations where some large nations like the Ottomans in later start dates can end up with large parts of their nation becoming distant overseas by cutting them in half, removing their direct land connection. It also ties North Africa closer to Europe, when it historically has been quite strongly tied to it through things like the Roman Empire.

 

[Jorlem]

I'm not terribly happy with how overseas works right now... but this is not how to solve it. Would prefer some ideas on how overseas could be reworked in a sensible way (ie, not something fiddly and abusable like distance from capital).

Maybe allow what would appear to be partially overlapping continents, sort of linked to the something like the adjacency suggestion? So then you could have, from north to south, something like Europe, Mediterranean Europe, Mediterranean Africa, and Africa. Then have areas count as the same continent if they share part of the name. So a capitol in Europe wouldn't count Med-Europe as distant, but would count Med-Africa, while a capitol in Med-Africa wouldn't count Med-Europe or Africa as distant but would count Europe as distant.

 

[nOxr]

EDITEDIT: As for abusability... you may get the opportunity for weird stuff around border regions. If Wallachia moves their capital one province south, they can now rule North Africa with no penalties. But if they are going to be conquering so far out of their home region that capital change matters, they will gain so much land in the intervening region that they will probably want to move their capital to a more natural spot- in this case, somewhere like Constantinople or Italy, which are capital changes that make perfect sense. The cases where major gameplay effects are gained by cheesily moving your capital one province over should be rare.

Which region you belong to wouldn't have to be determined by the capital solely though. It could be that you would need to have the capital plus the majority of provinces in a new region in order to change. You would still be able to migrate but you would have to grow into the new region.

 

[mgoetze]

I'm not terribly happy with how overseas works right now... but this is not how to solve it. Would prefer some ideas on how overseas could be reworked in a sensible way (ie, not something fiddly and abusable like distance from capital).

I'd love to help you, if you could just explain to me what the (perceived) problem with distance from capital is.

(Here was my suggestion: http://forum.paradoxplaza.com/forum...nomy-for-quot-distant-overseas-quot-provinces )

 

[VampireBoot]

I'd love to help you, if you could just explain to me what the (perceived) problem with distance from capital is.

It lets players game the system by moving their capital to strategic locations. I'd prefer if the game mechanics didn't strongly encourage France to move its capital from Paris to Sinai.

 

[chrnno]

It lets players game the system by moving their capital to strategic locations. I'd prefer if the game mechanics didn't strongly encourage France to move its capital from Paris to Sinai.

Err... what? The disadvantages in that far, far outweight the advantages.

To move to another continent you need to have only your capital in your home continent which would be wasteful enough as France due to all their provinces but after moving you also hit the fact that the only way for the provinces in France itself not be considered overseas is if you have a land connection from Sinai and in that case then the only possible thing moving to Sinai would give you is a few provinces in Africa(the islands) when opposed to the English Isles, Ireland and several other islands in Europe.

 

[grommile]

It lets players game the system by moving their capital to strategic locations. I'd prefer if the game mechanics didn't strongly encourage France to move its capital from Paris to Sinai.

Ah yes. You're reminding me of my standard manoeuvre in the early-to-mid 16th century as Castile in EU3: smack the Ottomans about, grab Smyrna, and move my capital there so that I can get India to be land-connected to my capital without first carving a bloody swathe across France, Italy, and the Balkans.

 

[VampireBoot]

Err... what? The disadvantages in that far, far outweight the advantages.

To move to another continent you need to have only your capital in your home continent which would be wasteful enough as France due to all their provinces but after moving you also hit the fact that the only way for the provinces in France itself not be considered overseas is if you have a land connection from Sinai and in that case then the only possible thing moving to Sinai would give you is a few provinces in Africa(the islands) when opposed to the English Isles, Ireland and several other islands in Europe.

I'm talking about the hypothetical scenario where "continents" are entirely replaced by a "distance from capital" mechanic. In that case, you'd always want your capital to be as close to the center of your empire as possible, and a capital in the Eastern Mediterranean provides one of the best locations for a large land empire, to the point that most European countries would probably want to move somewhere in the vicinity.

 

[chrnno]

I'm talking about the hypothetical scenario where "continents" are entirely replaced by a "distance from capital" mechanic. In that case, you'd always want your capital to be as close to the center of your empire as possible, and a capital in the Eastern Mediterranean provides one of the best locations for a large land empire, to the point that most European countries would probably want to move somewhere in the vicinity.

Ops... Teach me to reply without looking at the line of replies. Sorry. :sad:

And yes you are entirely correct, unless there are actual consequences to moving capital away from homeland that would be inevitable.

 

[colinljx]

LA based on distance from capital will do better. Or LA based on province count: Capital 0%, capital neighbors 1%, neighbors' neighbors 2%, .... and 100% for the 100th neighbors and further. (sea zone count as one province of course)

 

[net.split]

A province can be flagged as "distant", which gives the same current penalties as "distant overseas."

Instead of using continents or range from capital, use range from nearest non-"distant" province.

Optionally, coring mechanics can be worked in here; either "distant" provinces can't be cored, or you only consider range from core provinces to determine whether a given province is "distant" or not. Using the first option, a cored province should never become "distant" even if you lose provinces forming your "range" bridge.

The "range" values used here would be shorter than anything that would normally come from your capital.

This does create the potential of bridging yourself around the world by taking single provinces here and there to form connections, but that's probably OK. Doing so has other disadvantages compared to taking land in tighter clusters, such as having a more spread-out presence in trade nodes vs dominating specific ones, and having an empire that's tougher to defend since you can't walk your troops everywhere.

 

[Pellucid]

I'm not terribly happy with how overseas works right now... but this is not how to solve it. Would prefer some ideas on how overseas could be reworked in a sensible way (ie, not something fiddly and abusable like distance from capital).

What you REALLY need is some distinction between "backwater province full of savages" and "populated metropolis full of citizens." I'll re-post an old idea I had in this subforum about that.

 

[Camarada78]

I'm not terribly happy with how overseas works right now... but this is not how to solve it. Would prefer some ideas on how overseas could be reworked in a sensible way (ie, not something fiddly and abusable like distance from capital).

How about replacing a distance from capital with "Distance from Administrative Center". And now we must build a costly governemnt building, that requires certain development, to be an administrative reference to our Empire. We could even build this in our subjects,

That is why Portugal made Vice-reigns, where he could make first Salvador, then Rio de Janeiro an administrative cluster for the south american empire. Spain did this in Lima (Peru) and as the Ottomans did with conquered Cairo from the Mamluks.

 

[tobias.mb]

Maybe instead of basing it on continents, it could be based on regions.
You get 0% min autonomy in your capital region; neighbouring regions get 10% autonomy, neighbours of those get 20% autonomy...
Maybe link it to culture also: Same culture group or accepted culture gives -10% min autonomy bonus while non-accepted culture gives +10% min autonomy malus.
Or introduce a system of "cultural distance", where french and iberian cultures are closer than iberian and moroccan. Then Spain could get a smaller wrong culture penalty from ruling france than from ruling north africa.

 

[grommile]

Maybe instead of basing it on continents, it could be based on regions.

Regions are terrible for this, since provinces can be in multiple regions and regions vary wildly in both size and total development.