MattyG said:
I think I can work around this. But this is just the Trigger, not the Command line, right. Otherwise we are stuffed.
-
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 think I can work around this. But this is just the Trigger, not the Command line, right. Otherwise we are stuffed.
MattyG said:
taa. I'll work on this over the weekend. Hope to have something up again on Monday.
All, including the demanding Moderators... 
The new hansa files are uploaded, here
Contents.
1. inc.zip, containing *.inc files, mostly as per the last issue. HSA, KLE, LAT, LUX, NRM, NOR, PIS and TOS.
2. minor.zip, containing minor event files for ALT, NOR, NRM, OLD, BRA, KOL and TOS.
- I have reapproriated the Koln ID range as follows:
202201-202205 Koln
202206-202210 Toscana
- The Altmark ID range from 200961 - 200965 is now divided as follows:
200961 Altmark
200962 - 200963 Brandenburg
200964 - 200965 Oldenburg
If we make a larger event file for Brandenburg, then we will obviously need more numbers.
- The Normandy event ID range already exists, but I have no idea if these have been stolen by another nation. The ID forum quotes the following: 200301 - 200310: Reserved for normandian events. I have only used 200301.
- Also according to the ID forum, Scotland has the following: "200311 - 200389: Reserved for scottish events" but the major_sco.txt file I found (in Aberation sucdirectory) had reserved IDs up to 200400. Since this is greedy I have taken 200396-200400: for Norway, but used only a single event for the moment.
3. major.zip, contains SCO, LAT and KAL files, slightly adjusted.
- There is a new event in the LAT file 201399 (part of the Formation of the Hansa series...), and I have slightly adjusted event 201303 so it doesn't fire if the Order already owns Novgorod. I hope this is ok.
- I have adjusted the Sound Due event in the Scottish file, event 200315, to reflect the revised event ID number in the HSA file. The choice "_a" in that event "Proclaim Neutrality" still has Scotland claim a core on Anglia, which seems a rather un-neutral thing to do. I leave that to you to decide.
- The KAL file has also been tweaked, particularly concerning the Sund events (201503, 201581 and 201582), and there is a new event 201580 (also part of the Formation of the Hansa series...).
4. hansa.zip contains the monarch, leader, inc, and event files for Hansa, now finished for Beta issue and playtesting. I have tested it online, but not playtested it. This weekend, promise.
The new hansa files are uploaded, here
Contents.
1. inc.zip, containing *.inc files, mostly as per the last issue. HSA, KLE, LAT, LUX, NRM, NOR, PIS and TOS.
2. minor.zip, containing minor event files for ALT, NOR, NRM, OLD, BRA, KOL and TOS.
- I have reapproriated the Koln ID range as follows:
202201-202205 Koln
202206-202210 Toscana
- The Altmark ID range from 200961 - 200965 is now divided as follows:
200961 Altmark
200962 - 200963 Brandenburg
200964 - 200965 Oldenburg
If we make a larger event file for Brandenburg, then we will obviously need more numbers.
- The Normandy event ID range already exists, but I have no idea if these have been stolen by another nation. The ID forum quotes the following: 200301 - 200310: Reserved for normandian events. I have only used 200301.
- Also according to the ID forum, Scotland has the following: "200311 - 200389: Reserved for scottish events" but the major_sco.txt file I found (in Aberation sucdirectory) had reserved IDs up to 200400. Since this is greedy I have taken 200396-200400: for Norway, but used only a single event for the moment.
3. major.zip, contains SCO, LAT and KAL files, slightly adjusted.
- There is a new event in the LAT file 201399 (part of the Formation of the Hansa series...), and I have slightly adjusted event 201303 so it doesn't fire if the Order already owns Novgorod. I hope this is ok.
- I have adjusted the Sound Due event in the Scottish file, event 200315, to reflect the revised event ID number in the HSA file. The choice "_a" in that event "Proclaim Neutrality" still has Scotland claim a core on Anglia, which seems a rather un-neutral thing to do. I leave that to you to decide.
- The KAL file has also been tweaked, particularly concerning the Sund events (201503, 201581 and 201582), and there is a new event 201580 (also part of the Formation of the Hansa series...).
4. hansa.zip contains the monarch, leader, inc, and event files for Hansa, now finished for Beta issue and playtesting. I have tested it online, but not playtested it. This weekend, promise.
Mike,
Great work and congratulations. There is a lot of good work here and I will incorporate it into the new build which I will post as soon as I have run everything and made certain that is works.
However, before I do that, you will need to discuss that Scottish event with Incompetant. I have received his new Scottish files and they may contradict. I leave it to your two gentlement to work out, and to provide me with the final event/change.
Matty
Great work and congratulations. There is a lot of good work here and I will incorporate it into the new build which I will post as soon as I have run everything and made certain that is works.
However, before I do that, you will need to discuss that Scottish event with Incompetant. I have received his new Scottish files and they may contradict. I leave it to your two gentlement to work out, and to provide me with the final event/change.
Matty
mikl said:
Yep, no problem.
mikl said:
The Scotland file has been completely replaced, so we'll have to fit any changes into the new setup. The only Hansa-related thing I've done so far for Scotland is over London - the city rebels against Scotland in the 16th century, and the Hansa can sponsor the rebels with a view to regaining the city. It's up to you what conditions you want to put on Hanseatic involvement, though; presumably if they've decided to focus on Germany by this point, they won't be interested.
I don't know if I want to put the expulsion of foreign merchants back in, or how bad it should be on the Hansa if it is included. I could write a Scottish event for the Sund crisis, but as Scotland is not a protagonist, I doubt it would get any cores at all for its involvement.
Incompetent said:
Do you have an outline of what you are planning for the Scots? Currently Hansa only have claims and events for Anglia. Normandy start with Anglia and Kent, but give up Anglia in the frst year, and then give up the rest to Brittany.
Don't mind either about the "expulsion" event, and agree that Scotland is probably not interested in the Sund, unless they have already taken out Norway and have designs on Scandinavia.
Currently, when I have a corruption event, it's in London, and I kind of paint the city as a bed of evil, sin and depravity. To that we add beer. You could have an event, "Expulsion of the criminal element..."
Having played a bit of the Hansa in beta4, I have a quite important point to make, the Hansa starts out on -3/-2 stab and then have 2 events raising the stab, I am not sure if this is WAD but that slight period of very low stab means that the Hansa loses all of its level 5 merchant spots in the intial rush.
Which means the Hansa gets no better trade than anyone else, maybe you should just give them high stab at the start instead of through the events, of course it could be that this is meant to happen and I am being crazy
Which means the Hansa gets no better trade than anyone else, maybe you should just give them high stab at the start instead of through the events, of course it could be that this is meant to happen and I am being crazy
Dr Bob said:Having played a bit of the Hansa in beta4, I have a quite important point to make, the Hansa starts out on -3/-2 stab and then have 2 events raising the stab, I am not sure if this is WAD but that slight period of very low stab means that the Hansa loses all of its level 5 merchant spots in the intial rush.
Which means the Hansa gets no better trade than anyone else, maybe you should just give them high stab at the start instead of through the events, of course it could be that this is meant to happen and I am being crazy
Well the -3 stab is meant to be, since it reflects the uncertainness involved in the creation of a state. But I didn't realise that it would affect their trading so severely. I am not sure what game mechanic can be used to fix this problem.
Perhaps to reflect their status, and leverage used to create their nation, they should be given a shit-load more positions in their three CoTs at the start of the game. They will lose a few merchants, but still dominate.
How do we do this?
mikl said:
Hmm, I'm not sure about the Hanseatic opening. So, after over a century of existence as a powerful trading alliance, we have the Hanseatic League suddenly deciding it wants to be an independent country, and rulers from London to Florence abandon their claims, in favour of merchant companies who only occupy a tiny portion of the cities in question (London!). I find it hard to believe that something of this scale would happen so uniformly and suddenly in so many places - sure, the Bavarians and Hessians might have signed a treaty, but what does that mean to Norway or Normandy? Further, the Hanseatic player has no real control over how this happens, nor does he have any choices to make, so why does this need to happen in game time? Wouldn't it be simpler to say that the Hansa developed into a sovereign entity over preceding decades, and put a description of it in the country's history blurb? At the least, talk in the events of the Hanseatic League 'coming into being' seem rather out-of-place.
Incompetent said:
Ummm, How can one envisage a Hanseatic nation developing at all! That's part of the Aberration.
It's a cascade of events. Winning a major battle against the Bavarians, economically controlling a series of provinces currently owned by poor, struggling nations, and then buying them off in return for a share of the profits, thus picking up Firenze. The old and sick king of Normandy can see this power develop and knows he can't defend Anglia well, so settles for the bribe, thus giving up Anglia.
Incompetent said:
While the default choice is that Kalmar and TO decline to give up Sjaelland and Ingermandland, in MP they might be convinced to do so. And in 2% (5%?) of cases if the AI is running Kalmar/Norway/TO, Hansa are given Sjaelland/Bergen/Ingermandland. It means no two gamestarts for the Hansa player are ever the same.
It's colour, and as far as I can see, it doesn't hurt anyone. Why do we have two Bavarians events devoted to beer?
Incompetent said:
Sure it would be simpler, but would it not also be less interesting? The creation of a nation has to happen sometime, it might as well happen in 1419-1420. Any later and the power of the hanseatic traders wanes and their leverage to create anything drops. Any earlier and perhaps they are not coordinated or rich enough. When the game starts Hansa have been nogotiationg this for years, so it's not a flash-in-the-pan thing. It just happens to culminate in 1421. In vanilla EU2 the game starts with Henry V weighing in aganst the French, when it would have been simpler to start the game before or after that war.
BTW London was big IRL in 1419, but in ABE it's just a province, wedged in between the mighty Scotland and Burgundy. A non capital backwater, with a large port, ideal for trading. But not a capital, and not a population centre.
mikl said:
Well from a purely gameplay perspective the easiest way is to give the Hansa +2 stab at the start of the game, because they get that from the events within the first 2 years anyway and just take away the stab bonus from those two events.
That negative stab really, really destroys the Hansa's merchants so it may be worth ignoring that creating a nation is unstable in favour of the Hansa actually having a merchant presence in their own CoTs.
I had some similar thoughts about the opening, and I am convinced it is more a matter of storyline.
The stability issue and loss of merchants is just typical EU2 kookiness. The Hansa WILL win back their trading strength in a year of two. And so a few clever merchants from other areas took advantage of troubled times to get a bigger share of trade. Well, that actually seems pretty believeable. In fact, if the Hansa traders did NOT lose some dominance as a result of these difficult times, THAT would be hard to believe.
mikl, in answer to your question, we could just edit the scenario file where the CoT data is stored, and have fewer merchants present at start, but I don't think it's necesary.
London does have a CoT, so I don't think we could pretend it is not a major centre. Let's instead assess its recent history.
"London has changed hands many times over the years and has not always been a possession of the Norman kings. Indeed, the Ladbrokes only regained possession of the Anglia province in 1394, following the London Sequester, in which the merchants and guildsmen led a revolt against the Yorkist kings whose taxes were strangling trade and production. London had for generations been a 'free town' with a charter that ensured the merchant houses and guilds had enjoyed royal perogatives, rather than a duke or count or other representative of the King of York. Jean Ladbroke, William's astute father, had intervened, joining with the Sequestrians on the context that York had (however inadvertantly) sunk several Norman ships in the harbour in an initial attempt to rout the Sequestrians. The Norman army defeated the Yorkists at Rolton's Bridge, and with the Scots threatening war from the north, Roger, king of York, brokered a peace with the Normans and Sequestrians. The city of London and its surrounding lands would remain a self-defended free city under the Norman yoke, but with 1 penny in ten of taxes going to York. Taxes in general were to be lowered drastically. In practice, the Merchnats and Guildsmen had strengthened their position, because the Lodbroke family owned considerable sums of money to London-based money-lenders. With taxation from London greatly reduced, the additional revenue did not swiftly reduce Jean's debts, who continued to spend lavishly on his palace at Rouen. His son, William, inherited a financial disaster. His response was to try to raise taxes and impose additional dues on the city by imposing the Navigation Tax, essentially patrolling the waters at the mouth of the Thames and charging all vessels for the service. It outraged the Londoners, common and powerful alike. The old Norman rulers had not been popular, and the new ones had proven just as detestable."
It is in this historical context that we find the Hanseatic League forming. London is about to revolt once more, with the city leadership constructing defences and canons to fight against the Normans should it come to that. The league steps in and essentially offers to 'buy' London. As part of the League, the league offers to forgive the entirety of Lodbrokes debt. With war threatening again on the continent over the division of France and his country close to bankrupt, Lodbroke had few choices.
The event would be re-written as follows:
Description taken from above.
action_a =
"Relieve the debt and give up London"
commands = {
type = cash value = 200
secedeprovince which = London value = Hansa
removecore which = London
stability value = -1
action_b =
"London is ours!"
type = inflation value = 4
type = revolt which = London
type = revolt which = London
type = revolt which = London
type = province_tax which = London value = -5 (representing lower taxes)
type = relation which = Hansa value = -100
If the Normans give London to the Hansa ...
action_a =
"Excellent"
type = inflation value = 1 #debt relief costs
type = cash value = -200
type = addcore which = London
If they don't give up London, the Hansa STILL get a core on London, the result of the merchant WANTING tobe part of the Hansa.
Similarly intriguing histories can be prepared for Firenze and the other provinces.
The stability issue and loss of merchants is just typical EU2 kookiness. The Hansa WILL win back their trading strength in a year of two. And so a few clever merchants from other areas took advantage of troubled times to get a bigger share of trade. Well, that actually seems pretty believeable. In fact, if the Hansa traders did NOT lose some dominance as a result of these difficult times, THAT would be hard to believe.
mikl, in answer to your question, we could just edit the scenario file where the CoT data is stored, and have fewer merchants present at start, but I don't think it's necesary.
London does have a CoT, so I don't think we could pretend it is not a major centre. Let's instead assess its recent history.
"London has changed hands many times over the years and has not always been a possession of the Norman kings. Indeed, the Ladbrokes only regained possession of the Anglia province in 1394, following the London Sequester, in which the merchants and guildsmen led a revolt against the Yorkist kings whose taxes were strangling trade and production. London had for generations been a 'free town' with a charter that ensured the merchant houses and guilds had enjoyed royal perogatives, rather than a duke or count or other representative of the King of York. Jean Ladbroke, William's astute father, had intervened, joining with the Sequestrians on the context that York had (however inadvertantly) sunk several Norman ships in the harbour in an initial attempt to rout the Sequestrians. The Norman army defeated the Yorkists at Rolton's Bridge, and with the Scots threatening war from the north, Roger, king of York, brokered a peace with the Normans and Sequestrians. The city of London and its surrounding lands would remain a self-defended free city under the Norman yoke, but with 1 penny in ten of taxes going to York. Taxes in general were to be lowered drastically. In practice, the Merchnats and Guildsmen had strengthened their position, because the Lodbroke family owned considerable sums of money to London-based money-lenders. With taxation from London greatly reduced, the additional revenue did not swiftly reduce Jean's debts, who continued to spend lavishly on his palace at Rouen. His son, William, inherited a financial disaster. His response was to try to raise taxes and impose additional dues on the city by imposing the Navigation Tax, essentially patrolling the waters at the mouth of the Thames and charging all vessels for the service. It outraged the Londoners, common and powerful alike. The old Norman rulers had not been popular, and the new ones had proven just as detestable."
It is in this historical context that we find the Hanseatic League forming. London is about to revolt once more, with the city leadership constructing defences and canons to fight against the Normans should it come to that. The league steps in and essentially offers to 'buy' London. As part of the League, the league offers to forgive the entirety of Lodbrokes debt. With war threatening again on the continent over the division of France and his country close to bankrupt, Lodbroke had few choices.
The event would be re-written as follows:
Description taken from above.
action_a =
"Relieve the debt and give up London"
commands = {
type = cash value = 200
secedeprovince which = London value = Hansa
removecore which = London
stability value = -1
action_b =
"London is ours!"
type = inflation value = 4
type = revolt which = London
type = revolt which = London
type = revolt which = London
type = province_tax which = London value = -5 (representing lower taxes)
type = relation which = Hansa value = -100
If the Normans give London to the Hansa ...
action_a =
"Excellent"
type = inflation value = 1 #debt relief costs
type = cash value = -200
type = addcore which = London
If they don't give up London, the Hansa STILL get a core on London, the result of the merchant WANTING tobe part of the Hansa.
Similarly intriguing histories can be prepared for Firenze and the other provinces.
MattyG said:
Those -5 should perhaps go somewhere?
Why not add a 10% province revolt risk instead or the tax reduction? That means London will be an evil hotbed until the Normans loose it to someone.. anyone even.
Good idea. The -5 goes to the merchants, families etc, to anyone other than the Norman Kings. As Taxation represents the king's take (not the total economy) it would be fine for it to disappear, as long as one wrote a corresponding event should it be captured etc etc.
But I like your idea better.
But I like your idea better.
MattyG said:
I agree, thank you.
MattyG said:
London is not a CoT. The London of IRL is not the London of Abe1 or Abe2.
Flanders is. And Mecklenberg, and Novgorod. London is a backwater, not even a part of the great kingdom of Scotland. I have reduced the population in the *.inc file to reflect this.
I like the history and the event though, and would be happy to apply this to Flanders, say.
It isn't? Really? Oh ....
The next stage for bringing more life to the hanseatic story is to have each of these province events connected, not distinct. So that there is a sense of momentum, and also a chance that the league remains small, a lesser power from the outset (variation is a good thing).
So, the first event would be the one for London. If London goes to the League, it triggers an event for the Scandanavian property. This costs more. But if it also joins the hansa, suddenly it starts to seem like a reality, inevitable even.
The Firenze event might fire either way, but have two versions. If two or more of the other provinces have gone to the League, then joining is option A, otherwise it will be option B.
Matty
The next stage for bringing more life to the hanseatic story is to have each of these province events connected, not distinct. So that there is a sense of momentum, and also a chance that the league remains small, a lesser power from the outset (variation is a good thing).
So, the first event would be the one for London. If London goes to the League, it triggers an event for the Scandanavian property. This costs more. But if it also joins the hansa, suddenly it starts to seem like a reality, inevitable even.
The Firenze event might fire either way, but have two versions. If two or more of the other provinces have gone to the League, then joining is option A, otherwise it will be option B.
Matty
MattyG said:
A fine and strong idea, and there is much here to work with.
However. This would make the accumulation of the league rather dependent upon that first event. Maybe that's the intention, maybe it isn't.
The theory here is that the big key event has already happened, as described in the opening event 200300, in which our heroes buy up a bunch of mercenaries and win a series of major battles, enforcing by might the right to determine their own future. That's a big deal.
From this point on there is an inevitability about the creation of the Hanseatic League from 7 core provinces (has to be otherwise we wouldn't have a game) and all they are then negotiating is getting 5 other provinces into the league.
Of these, two are likely.
Anglia is poor, and owned by a sick king who controls it by accident and can't afford to defend it. But it has an important port/river, and suits potential hanseatic expansion plans, and more importantly the population look favourably upon the hanseatic traders.
Tuscany is run by the Medicis a powerful family, who are having trouble establishing themselves as important merchants in the Med. They see entry into the League as a financial 'merger', rather than loss of sovereignty. Medici stands to be richer as Mayor, than as a Prince. There is a sense that their decision here is connected to Lodbrooke acquiesing over Anglia.
But the others are long shots. Pleskow knows that he can defeat Bavaria, but taking on the Order over Ingermandland is something else altogether. And ruling Kalmar is a stronger royal line, and Sjaelland is too expensive. And neither of these ruling houes are going to be influenced too much by the Anglia or Firenze seccesions.
Norway consider to agree to selling Bergenhus, but Scottish diplomats are assuring them that they need not feel threatened or pressured into losing it, despite the fact that Bergen's population is sympathetic to the League. Again, Scotland/Norway probably would not be swayed by the Anglia decision, and Tuscany is just too far away for them to think about.
And frankly, we don't want a League starting with 9 provinces. These events are largely for colour, and some degree of MP interaction. There is also a remote chance that the ai picks option 'b' a few times in SP, and the League end up with - say - Ingermandland, or Bergenhus to start with. What fun, eh!
So I would agree to the following changes...
Anglia goes first.
If Hansa get it, then the Medicis choose to join. If not then they still choose to join, but the price is higher.
The Ingermandland, Sjaelland and Bergenhus events are not affected. But if the Hansa player does manage to convince a stupid Kalmar/TO/Norway player to part with them, the price should be higher.
And now I'd like to spend just as long discussing those two idiotic bavarian beer events in the BAY file. Beer is no more important to the stability than bread or fish. +2000 Infra!? Pull the other one.
mikl said:
This is it. This is the right balance. I think you have finally nailed the right amount of flavour and believability, and married it to a little randomness. This will be great. And, yes, the cost needs to be higher. 200 ducats for a province is a rip off for the seller. More like 50 - 60 times its base tax value, so that a province with a good tax value of, say 17 would cost 850 - 1020 ducat range.
Matty
OH, and quit complaining about Bavaria. It hasn't been re-written yet. Of course these things will be scaled down. Especially if you do it!