Home Trending Latest threads New posts Developer diaries

US revolt

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.
unmerged(2833)

unmerged(2833)

Grandpa Maur
Apr 10, 2001
8.614
5
Visit site
It should be a poll but since i don't think they were many people who's observed this, it's ok with normal thread.

Question is:
Have anyone seen US actually revolt in the game, GC or IGC?
 
Ok, i will try to explain my idea more.
As i suppose, chance for revolting US are next to zero.
That's because of approx four things.

1.They can revolt only after 1750. That's good considering RL, but game-wise, NA gets colonized much earlier.

2.Easy way to prevent rebellions. Since AI almost always put state religion tolerance to max, and colonies always gets state religions, revolts in colonies almost never happens.
(New Spain happens in about half of my games, but this is because former Aztec (pagan) lands produce a huge rebel armies for often war-exhausted Spain)
which leads to last two issues

3.Low rebel number in NA provinces
Rebel army size depends on three things
a)land tax value-about 6 in required NA provnices, not much
b)city population size-not very large, so to say
c)some is hardcoded, for example Danzig always produce huge rebel armies (which is quite historica,btw)

4.NA land is often disputed between England and Netherlands, and fact that Dutch tend to found TP's, which hardly rebel ;). England mostly found colonies, but it doesn't help much.

So i was wondering for some time what can be done with it.

Another question
But since IGC implemented Vinland, i would also like to know how many of you actually turn this option on.
 
I always check it. I like to make things as difficult for Spain as possible since they have it so easy. Vinland never seems to intrude on my game, I always mantain good relations with them if Im trying to establish myself in the hemisphere.
 
If you manage your NA colonies well, isn't it quite historical for the US not to form? Correct me if I'm wrong, but as I recall there would have been no rebellion at all in the 1770's if Britain had given the colonies representation in the parliament. I might be wrong but I think there was a documentary on the History Channel on this topic.
The US would probably somehow have formed later on anyway though (maybe along the same lines as Canada and Australia?).
 
Well, you're probably right, but i'm not speaking about RL, only game.
I don't know if it's any good to change it, if most people play with Vinland, it would make any difference if US revolter will be changed.
So please answer my question:)
 
Ok Maur, I'll answer your question. I never turn on Vinland, I think it's silly. And I've never seen rebellion in NA.

I think they could add an "English unrest" option to the IGCconfig. That would be nice, but still wouldn't guarantee the US forming.

Generally, I think rebellions leading to new nations in real life are very random events, just think about how many ways things can go wrong for potential new states.
 
yeah, like how everything went wrong for the USA in real life, so it never formed;)
 
Last edited:
oh, and since nobody else said it yet, I suppose I'll have to:

"My Lord, my Lord, America is revolting!"

retort: "It certainly is!"
 
Originally posted by Urkhan
yeah, like how everything thing went wrong for the USA in real life, so it never formed;)
Click to expand...

Or, more realistically, consider that if France and Spain didn't at the time consider Britain to be their biggest enemy, they probably would have helped to kill the revolt - or at the very least stayed neutral - and it wouldn't have formed. Or at least, not in 1776. Then again, if the British had seen sense and given the colonists a voice in Parliament, we might have had the UN a century earlier and with teeth, and seen world peace by 1900. Things have a strong tendency not to happen the same way if you throw the dice again.
 
Originally posted by Heyesey
The chances of the USA forming from revolts are vanishingly small .. it requires 12 provinces simultaneously to be in rebel hands. (No I don't remember which ones offhand.) If it can't happen anyway before 1750, then all 12 have to go under inside 42 years. It may also require that they are actually *cities*, not just level 3/4/5 colonies.. anybody know about this?
Click to expand...
In GC 12 provinces had to be rebel-controlled, IGC changed it to only two (Massachussetts and Connecticut),but it didn't helped much.
I also made a mistake it's from 1700, not 1750.Which doesnt' help much too.

Of courese, other 10 provinces, if they are in rebel hand will join too.
I think only required ones have to be cities, but maybe even it isn't the case, I once saw New Spain with capital in Tentochtitlan, while Tampico remained Spain TP.

Beowulf, English unrest won't be any solution, because east coast probably will be disputed, or one of these two provinces will be TP, besides their capability to make rebel armies seems to be very small.

Point is:
Something has to be done with USA tag. We have to find a way for it to be more likely to appear, or entirely get rid of it, i'm quite sure there will be plenty of use for this tag.
 
Originally posted by Heyesey


Things have a strong tendency not to happen the same way if you throw the dice again.
Click to expand...

This is a point that EU is very good at IMO. I've seen the Netherlands not forming for so many different reasons now that I don't understand how it could ever form. In the last game it was because Kur-Pfalz (which is reformed) had taken two crucial Lowland provinces earlier in the game.
 
Originally posted by Maur13


Beowulf, English unrest won't be any solution, because east coast probably will be disputed, or one of these two provinces will be TP, besides their capability to make rebel armies seems to be very small.
Click to expand...

That's pretty much what I said. It might give a better chance though.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top Bottom
Back