Home Trending Latest threads New posts Developer diaries

where IGC wandered

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
I was reading some thread, some time ago, about Russia's performance and a though came to my mind. I remember one of my games, i was playing PL, as usualy, but this time i didn't crushed Russia, i wanted to deal with strong enemy late in the game.
To my dismay, i observed a strange situation (it was IGC 2.0, or something like that,shortly after adding Ryazan)
Every five years Russia dowe'd Horde (which was down to Volgograd and province east to it), conquered it's capital, then made peace for money :confused:
It took Russia over sixty years to conquer Horde, and only because i saved immediatly before fall of Volgograd and reloaded many times, finally Russian army moved to capture second province and annexed Horde.
Point is:
IGC was supposed to be more historically acurrate
and it is
So why outcome of GC was more accurate historically???
I think because there are many interdependent things in Eu, of which people forgot, this Volgograd's example shows it.
I am not saying i'm dumping IGC, but i was a bit sad when i realized this :(
well, i really don't know what's the point of it...
so maybe someone else will say something...
 
Most of the time the RUS just push through the little guys on their way to the Asian pipline to the pacific. The normal case I see these days (75% of the time) is 1560-1580ish they have annexed siber and are colonizing until the ToT. Then after retaking whatever they lost they continue in full force.

There are some huge variables to this as well. I have seen sibir allied with the uzbeks and persians and hold russia off for 20-40more years. or a more common case one of the russian allies get provinces that block russia from going east. Play 5-10games then talk of real problems in a particular area. Any one or two games can be oddball flukes, but those are what keep things interesting. ;p A recent example for me was seeing russia diplo-annex austria in the mid 1500s. those spanards are tricky. ;)

:cool:
ErrantOne
 
Any one or two games can be oddball flukes

Yup. That's true.
 
I though i already replied, but since i can't see my post...
Well, i was speaking of one example, but i am not generalizing it, i experienced Russian troubles with Khanates many times.
I know that randominess is big in EU, but there are some things, and some trends that didn't exist in GC.
well, how often do you see Incas annexed by Spain?
and btw, i switched almost instantly to IGC, so maybe i'm just talking about 'good,old times'
 
well, how often do you see Incas annexed by Spain?
Click to expand...
Yes one is very true. The spanish have a hard time getting enough troops over there unless they do a shiplanding. I have been watching the new world and tweaking colonization. The funny thing about the AI is it will DoW AZT and INC just to let troops explore their territory. So this gives each country a chance to build up alot more troops (tech 0 though).

I currently have a very odd H.O. game. 1600 - Austria is a one province minor, POL diplo annexed hungry and russia is blocked from the asian pipeline to the pacific by persia because persia annexed the GH and is now allied with russia. Venice has done well against the turks and owns all of the coast down to albania....and....the AI spanish have prevented the dutch from emerging. On a minor note, those warlike ethiopians have almost conquered the nubians.


:cool:
ErrantOne
 
Loln in my latest hands off I experienced exactly the opposite of what Austria is in your game. They control most of Poland, annexed about 60% of the German minors, Bohemia and Hungary. Beat up Venice and Turkey a lot. And kept France at bay :D This all was in IGC 2.2 I think (or 2.1)

Anyway, is it just me, or is Austria doing less good in the latest IGC?
 
The Incas always bothered me. They hang around often until the end of the game. They need to be significantly weakened some how so that a 1000 man conquistador can conquer the country without to much effort. As it is, in 1560 your going to use at least 9000 men or so to conquer the Incas under a conquistador. Pizzaro did it with 250 something.

Can you set up an event to have mass desertions when a European makes contact and keep them running (the desertion event) for the rest of the game to simulate the smallpox plague that swept the Americas?
 
Pizarro had hellish amount of luck
In EU geography is a problem, Incas are stretched long way north-south, and they are probably using cavalry-trick tactic (with infantry though:))
 
It's inderdeed the geography thing. Give them all forts and the Spanish will most likely do better :D They do crap now because they can't control all provinces. They keep losing them. even the crappest armies like the Incas can take unfortified provinces. Never seen them take a fortress though :D
 
lol, this is an inca thread now :)

There are a few problems. Attrition kills many of the spanish. and yes, those dastardly incas use the cav type trick and trap a single attacking group in a province for a long while. There is one province in inca lands with a supply of 0, yes zero, units. When I tried putting forts in 2 of the 3 choke points, but it simply stopped the less then 1k groups of spainish from moving that direction, then the incas just slowly grind them down.

The only successful way I have seen them taken early was when the spanish did an amphib landing with 20k of troops and eventually claimed a 2 province piece, then a few years later they attacked again and got a couple more provinces and finally finished them off the third time. Even this was not until about 1600. As I dimmly recall IRL the spanish did them in before a decade or two before 1550.

A country that can't advance in tech and has eve more limitations needs to be weakenend ?
Click to expand...
sad but true. something which does help a little with the aztecs is to make their inf cost 'a' and take their whole starting army away, but 1k troops. As long as the spanish dont DoW just to walk through on their way north or south, it goes well. The spanish can take them out with 1-2k of troops in the 1530-1560range depending on when they decide to attack.

The really odd thing is that the AI will DoW the inca when they have no troops or colonies nearby or even walked toward them. Those wars end up with 6billion inca troops and a white peace. :eek:

After spending way to much time tweaking this area, I have formed the opinion that paradox just focused on europe and did not spend much of anytime testing the other areas of the game. This problem is at least as bad in the GC, with very little we can do about it without some major AI cheat tweaks.


Anyway, is it just me, or is Austria doing less good in the latest IGC?
Click to expand...
This is the first time I have seen them do that bad. Part of the reason I think was the hungry was allied with POL. and bohemia got hooked up with some misc german alliance or something. I spent alot of time last week running many many games to work on colonist issues and for the most part HAB and FRA were fighting it out for the middle parts of europe with HAB usually doing slightly better then FRA, but mostly becuase FRA was fighting HAB and SPA either together or in seperate wars.

The game I mentioned previously was just a truely oddball case. The biggest surprise was that the Spanish put down the Neatherlands revolt. That I have never seen happen before. The revolts stop somewhere between 1590-1595 I think. I have seen one game where HOL did revolt and it was mid 1580s (I think). I love watching the AI fight the revolters. Its better then most screen savers. :)


:cool:
ErrantOne
 
Somehow I missed this thread

Like Errant, I have been running hands off games doing research. Russia normally has gotten to and annexed the Sibir by 1560 or so. The only game I have seen them blocked was when they were very aggressive early and had annexed Sibir by 1530. The Time of Troubles destroyed them. All the annexed countries came back, and Novogorod came into existence (very large, too). Meanwhile P-L, Austria, and Turkey had DoW'ed. Russia was left with Muscovy and scattered TP's.

The most interesting game, though was with the Mughal all but destroying Persia and the Uzbeks. It and Russia had a fierce war that looked like Mughal would block Russia from advancing east, but Russia managed to recover and settle giving up a couple of provinces to Mughal, but not blocking its advance through Siberia. With peace, the Mughal seemed to lose all interest in Siberia and did not threaten Russia anymore.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top Bottom
Back