[Modmodmod] RFC:Europe Extra Civs

[AbsintheRed]

I am thinking about RFCE here, but the only other such Unions would be "Leon-Aragon" (this mod only) and Austria-Hungary. I don't think France-Burgundy qualifies. Maybe a temporary Spain-Portugal one. Am I missing any?

This is from Morholt's original post:

Actually a union mechanic might not be a bad idea for this mod since there will eventually be 6 unions in it: Poland+Lithuania, Castille+Aragon, Denmark+Norway, England+Scotland, Austria+Hungary, Brandenburg(Germany)+Prussia.

 

[Science Rules]

This looks good. I would include a few other unions with lower probabilities of success:

Spain+Austria+Burgundy
Spain+France
Netherlands+England

 

[J. pride]

Following Unions for the Middle East:
Ottoman-Egypt (when put in)
Ottoman-Hafsid
Ottoman-Arab (if still alive)
Ottoman-Morocco (low chance but still possible)
Arab-Cordoba

 

[civ_king]

Following Unions for the Middle East:
Ottoman-Egypt (when put in)
Ottoman-Hafsid
Ottoman-Arab (if still alive)
Ottoman-Morocco (low chance but still possible)
Arab-Cordoba

Also Ottomans Crimea

 

[Morholt]

Another thing you should also take into account, that a partially union is not really possible with the stability mechanics we have here
If the "losing" civ losts half of it's territory, the stability will be so low that there is no point keeping the civs in. Will collapse in a few turns anyway.
Also, huge territory of the "winner" civs will be on the loser civs war map.
Would be really strange to see: Lithuania declared war on the union of Poland-Lithuania, or the remnants of Austria on the union of Hungary-Austria ,)

Currently the only "partial" union is Brandenburg-Prussia. What happens in the other unions is that the remnant, if any, is force-collapsed.

What should be with respawns?
I can imagine this both ways:
The respawn means the "loser" civs sruggle for freedom - like Hungary's several attempts in the 18-19th century
Or disabling respawns could be better for gameplay

I'm thinking of keeping respawns in, unions were after all broken at several times (Sweden, Hungary, Lithuania during the Deluge). There might be a mechanic to reenact the union if you manage to collapse or capitulate the reborn civ.

You are right that religion should be important too
But I think an union should only be possible between nations of the same religion
Religion was way too important in medieval Europe
Morholt, you can even give this a new screen (4th power calculation), faith points are perfect for it

I don't want to make unions be impossible between different religions, since Hungary might be Orthodox and Lithuania Pagan. There will be a penalty to the AI's willingness to go ahead with it instead.

Generally, I'd agree with the religion thing, but Poland-Lithuania might have to be an exception. I think that the Union of Krevo (1385) should be the date for union between these two, especially if you want a united front against the Teutonic Order.

Good idea, there should first be a moderate-probability union opportunity around 1385 and then a high-probability opportunity around 1569.

I am thinking about RFCE here, but the only other such Unions would be "Leon-Aragon" (this mod only) and Austria-Hungary. I don't think France-Burgundy qualifies. Maybe a temporary Spain-Portugal one. Am I missing any?

maybe an Ottoman Egypt one (when theyre included) a Denmark and Sweden union to represent the Kalmar Union. England and Scotland around 1700s. Muscovy and Novgorod? I'm not sure on the history of the formation of Russia so disregard that if its historically inaccurate.

This looks good. I would include a few other unions with lower probabilities of success:

Spain+Austria+Burgundy
Spain+France
Netherlands+England

Following Unions for the Middle East:
Ottoman-Egypt (when put in)
Ottoman-Hafsid
Ottoman-Arab (if still alive)
Ottoman-Morocco (low chance but still possible)
Arab-Cordoba

Also Ottomans Crimea

Apart from the list, I'm also implementing Treaty of Pereyaslav between Moscow and Kiev if they survive that long or respawn, as well as a lower-probability Treaty of Hadiach between Poland and Kiev.

Spain-Portugal and Ottoman-Hafsid will also go in.

Kalmar Union will not be in the next version since I'm redoing Scandinavia the version after that anyways. Then it will be something like: Sweden-Norway 1336 (Union under Magnus IV), Denmark-Sweden 1389 (Union under Margaret), Denmark-Norway 1483 (Under John of Denmark) and again 1536 (Formal incorporation of Norway into Denmark). I really don't want to bother with tripartite negotiations and the Kalmar Union wasn't entered into at the same time anyways (There was a formal treaty document but it was never properly ratified).

Spain-Austria will not happen mostly for gameplay reasons, but also the fact that the Spanish and Austrian Habsburgs came into conflict almost immediately. Spain-Burgundy might happen.

I don't like unions like Moscow-Novgorod or Ottomans-Egypt where one nation historically conquered the other. Unions are supposed to represent mostly peaceful agreements.

 

[AbsintheRed]

Agreed on everything, except the religions
Historically unions were very unlikely (or impossible) among most nations with different religions

There are quite a few union possibilities now, and not all of them have to happen in the same game.
I don't see it as a problem if there is zero chance for a few unions because of religious differences in a specific game

 

[Morholt]

The exception being Poland-Lithuania in 1385.

Let's say being of different religions gives a 50 %units penalty to AI willingness to talk about union. And let's say that Austria-Hungary has a 90% AI willingness, which is the highest of any union I have coded now.

The AI willingness for Austria-Hungary is then 40%, which means that a human player has a below 50% chance of enacting the union if he really wants to (and one of the religious score choices will be to convert to the other civ's religion). But for an AI-AI union to happen both civs have to be willing, so there the probability is 0.4*0.4 = 0.16 or 16%, which means it will happen less than 1 out of 6 games. I think that's reasonable.

 

[dragodon64]

The exception being Poland-Lithuania in 1385.

Let's say being of different religions gives a 50 %units penalty to AI willingness to talk about union. And let's say that Austria-Hungary has a 90% AI willingness, which is the highest of any union I have coded now.

The AI willingness for Austria-Hungary is then 40%, which means that a human player has a below 50% chance of enacting the union if he really wants to (and one of the religious score choices will be to convert to the other civ's religion). But for an AI-AI union to happen both civs have to be willing, so there the probability is 0.4*0.4 = 0.16 or 16%, which means it will happen less than 1 out of 6 games. I think that's reasonable.

But that's only for the 1 out of 6 games where Hungary is Orthodox. I see a Catholic Hungary at least 75% of the time.

If I'm correctly interpreting your mechanics, when Hungary is Catholic, there is a 0.9*0.9 = 81% chance of the union forming.
As you said, there is a 16% chance if Hungary is Orthodox.

Assuming a Catholic Hungary 75% of the time, the overall chance for an AI Austro-Hungarian union in a game is 0.75*0.81 + 0.25*0.16 = 64.75%, or roughly 2/3, which I think is pretty good.

Aside from Poland-Lithuania, I think a 50% religion penalty might be realistic without infringing on gameplay. The only other exception I can think of is Scandinavia ruled by mixed Catholic and Lutheran monarchies. I don't know too much in detail of the various Unions, though.

 

[Sian]

whole of Scandinavia was fairly early 'converts' to Lutherian Protestantism

 

[Morholt]

There's examples like James II of England who was a catholic king of anglican England, calvinist Scotland, and catholic Ireland.

 

[hoplitejoe]

He didn't exactly shout about it and if England had not just had Cromwell and his puritan strictness (he banned Christmas!) i doubt he would have been as accepted.

 

[Morholt]

Assuming a Catholic Hungary 75% of the time, the overall chance for an AI Austro-Hungarian union in a game is 0.75*0.81 + 0.25*0.16 = 64.75%, or roughly 2/3, which I think is pretty good.

It's actually less since there are several conditions that can forbid the union completely such as the initiating civ being dead, not having any cities in the union area, being at war with each other, one of the civs being a vassal to an outside civ. Now all of these make sense, it would be unfair and unrealistic to snatch the master's vassal away from under him and in most of the other cases it's simply not possible to perform any union.

But making different religion forbid unions completely seems arbitrary to me, especially since there are several cases of that occuring in history, though generally not very successful, which is reflected in the lower probability to happen. Apart from the English Commonwealth there was also the (failed) treaty of Hadiach between catholic Poland and orthodox Ukraine, the (failed) Polish attempt to create a union with Muscovy, the (failed) Swedish attempt of doing the same during the Time of Troubles, and the (very short lived) Swedish-Lithuanian union of Kedainiai.

 

[AbsintheRed]

Alright, you convinced me
A seriously lowered probability should be enough

 

[civ_king]

It's actually less since there are several conditions that can forbid the union completely such as the initiating civ being dead, not having any cities in the union area, being at war with each other, one of the civs being a vassal to an outside civ. Now all of these make sense, it would be unfair and unrealistic to snatch the master's vassal away from under him and in most of the other cases it's simply not possible to perform any union.

But making different religion forbid unions completely seems arbitrary to me, especially since there are several cases of that occuring in history, though generally not very successful, which is reflected in the lower probability to happen. Apart from the English Commonwealth there was also the (failed) treaty of Hadiach between catholic Poland and orthodox Ukraine, the (failed) Polish attempt to create a union with Muscovy, the (failed) Swedish attempt of doing the same during the Time of Troubles, and the (very short lived) Swedish-Lithuanian union of Kedainiai.

So what would be the final list of possible unions?

 

[dragodon64]

It's actually less since there are several conditions that can forbid the union completely such as the initiating civ being dead, not having any cities in the union area, being at war with each other, one of the civs being a vassal to an outside civ. Now all of these make sense, it would be unfair and unrealistic to snatch the master's vassal away from under him and in most of the other cases it's simply not possible to perform any union.

But making different religion forbid unions completely seems arbitrary to me, especially since there are several cases of that occuring in history, though generally not very successful, which is reflected in the lower probability to happen. Apart from the English Commonwealth there was also the (failed) treaty of Hadiach between catholic Poland and orthodox Ukraine, the (failed) Polish attempt to create a union with Muscovy, the (failed) Swedish attempt of doing the same during the Time of Troubles, and the (very short lived) Swedish-Lithuanian union of Kedainiai.

I see your point, although I never supported forbidding unions if the states have different religions. I think a malus for different religions would be nice (with exceptions like the PLC), but if that excessively reduces the frequency of unions in practice, I think it would be best to exclude it.

 

[Barratt_87]

I'm not too sure when this happened (if it even happened in the timeline of the mod) but what about the spanish netherlands?

And what do you think about the idea of a chance for war if the two civs disagree on a union?

 

[dragodon64]

The Netherlands defined itself as an independent nation by breaking away from Spanish rule. Their spawn date, 1581, is the date of the Dutch declaration of independence. If Spain wants the Netherlands after that date, they'll have to conquer it.

 

[Morholt]

So what would be the final list of possible unions?

Currently (all dates are approximate and semi-random):
Union of Krewo (Poland-Lithuania) 1386
Castille-Aragon 1478
Union of Mielnik (Poland-Lithuania) 1500
Austria-Hungary 1560
Union of Lublin (Poland-Lithuania) 1569
Iberian Union (Spain-Portugal) 1580
Ottoman-Barbary (Ottomans-Tunisia) 1580
Union of the Crowns (England-Scotland) 1600
Prussia-Brandenburg (Prussia-Germany, not total) 1618
Council of Pereyaslav (Muscovy-Kiev) 1660
Treaty of Hadiach (Poland-Kiev) 1660
Spanish Succession (France-Spain) 1700
Act of Union (England-Scotland) 1707

Keep in mind that only a small number of these will likely happen during any one game. I'll also put in the Spanish Netherlands around 1520 and French Burgundian Inheritance around 1480.

Two of the unions are special. Union of Krewo ignores religion penalty and the Spanish Succession triggers a world war if it is enacted.

 

[Sian]

assorted Scandinavian unions such as Denmark-Norway, Denmark-Sweden-Norway) and Sweden-Norway (with the dominant in front)

 

[Morholt]

Yeah not for this version though since I'm redoing Scandinavia for the next version.