Suggestions and Requests

[Ecthy]

Should Germany get conquerors for Russia once they invent Panzers?

 

[mccp77]

Should Germany get conquerors for Russia once they invent Panzers?

not a fair metaphor

 

[mccp77]

I disagree. It was unprecedented, for north Africa to attack west Africa, so to say, and it caused the collapse of the Songhai, yes, but this was a short-lived invasion conducted for economic interest; within 30 years or so, Morocco was out of the region, if I remember correctly (I may be very wrong, mind).

By the same argument, every single war should be artificially created. In some games, Morocco might decide to declare war on Mali - perhaps this can be made slightly likelier, but on the other hand, it might cripple the Moroccan AI - but in other games, it might not - perhaps it is busy conquering Spain - which is the charm of this mod.

I understand/agree now with the idea that Morocco shouldn't get conquerors, but maybe the first civ w gunpowder to _________ (I think to declare war on Mali) should get conquerors. The Moroccan invasion shouldn't be simulated, but some invasion should be simulated as the invasion of a small force w muskets essentially ended 1500 years of West African imperial history based on the export of gold, salt, and slaves across the Sahara by one large empire (Ghana, Mali, Songhai, etc.). That West African imperial coherence shouldn't be modeled through the 1950s from the 1000s.

Plus, Morocco conquering West Africa would massively destabilize Morocco which is historically accurate. Morocco invading Mali would probably collapse Mali AND Morocco which is exactly what happened in real history bc Morocco couldn't afford to occupy the urban centers of West Africa as it put huge financial strain on Fez.

Agree. If any civ should have conquerors for Mali it should be France

See above. Less concerned with the 19th century and more concerned with the end of the West African imperial system as it existed before the Moroccan invasion.

 

[Malchar]

Since there are conquerors for America, why not for west Africa as well?

 

[need my speed]

I understand/agree now with the idea that Morocco shouldn't get conquerors, but maybe the first civ w gunpowder to _________ (I think to declare war on Mali) should get conquerors.

But why would this not be comparable to the first European civilisation with Fascism declaring war on whichever nation it borders to the east, to give a random example? I don't think these things should be so forced.

Plus, Morocco conquering West Africa would massively destabilize Morocco which is historically accurate. Morocco invading Mali would probably collapse Mali AND Morocco which is exactly what happened in real history bc Morocco couldn't afford to occupy the urban centers of West Africa as it put huge financial strain on Fez.

But that is not an argument, I believe. Napoleon's adventures, the collapse of Holy Rome, the extensive influence of Islam and Arabia, the Cold War... There are so many events, with such massive an impact, but we don't force these to happen either. And that is a good thing! Because we want freedom, and a world that is recognisably based on ours, yet has its own distinct history. We don't want a world where every event that happened in our world happened there as well.

 

[mccp77]

But why would this not be comparable to the first European civilisation with Fascism declaring war on whichever nation it borders to the east, to give a random example? I don't think these things should be so forced.

But that is not an argument, I believe. Napoleon's adventures, the collapse of Holy Rome, the extensive influence of Islam and Arabia, the Cold War... There are so many events, with such massive an impact, but we don't force these to happen either. And that is a good thing! Because we want freedom, and a world that is recognisably based on ours, yet has its own distinct history. We don't want a world where every event that happened in our world happened there as well.

1. The fascism comparison is not apropos. The first fascist government in real history did not declare war on the nation directly to its East. Fascism doesn't cause massive European conflagrations (although I'm not defending its ethical, moral, or intellectual consistency.); the Northern European plain and the geopolitical insecurity that geography creates does. The map being realistic creates that on its own.

2. The difference between all of these comparisons you're making and this is that it's much more similar to Alexander's conquest of Persia, the Mongol's conquest of China, or the Spaniard's conquest of the New World than it is to them. For people living in West Africa this event, much like those, completely changed their conception of the way the world was organized. For tens of hundreds of years they had a certain conception of the world dominated by a single powerful imperial entity that derived its wealth from caravan trade routes, and then 4,000 Moroccans came across a desert with guns and turned their conception of the world upside down. From then on most West African empires oriented their trade towards their sea, and there would never be a single overwhelmingly powerful West African empire again. Africa would be unrecognizable had this not occurred. And frankly, in this game it often is unrecognizable bc Mali survives into the 1900s. That's why I agree that the event doesn't necessarily need to be Moroccan-specific. The Ottomans, Arabs, Mamluks, Spaniards, Portuguese, French, Italians, English, etc. all could have (in theory) sent a small excursion with guns to sack the trading cities of West Africa. But what's important is that it did happen and pretending like it didn't creates a totally unrecognizable West Africa.

3. And let me open up a third angle for debate here, which is more meta to the game. We have conqueror events all over the map to simulate small technologically advances forces overcoming larger less advanced ones. Why should we let the fact that the Moroccans collapsed into civil war 30 years later prevent us from putting in a generic conquerors event for West Africa? It's no different than when the Mongols found the New World in one of my games, conquered it, and then collapsed 5 turns later.

 

[need my speed]

It is late now, so I won't write a detailed argument, but, I am willing to admit that I might be biased by living in the Netherlands (though I did indeed question why this mod simulates Alexander's conquests, and I came to the conclusion that it is something the AI could never do on its own, while the Moroccan AI could probably manage to send an army to Mali). It would be interesting to hold a debate over the nature of conqueror events.

Regarding your first point, are you familiar with the book 'Guns, Germs, and Steel'? It might interest you. I do not believe this is very relevant, but this ties into the nature of conqueror events, and I don't feel like diving into that at 2:13 (besides, Leoreth's philosophy would be far more relevant).

 

[mccp77]

It is late now, so I won't write a detailed argument, but, I am willing to admit that I might be biased by living in the Netherlands (though I did indeed question why this mod simulates Alexander's conquests, and I came to the conclusion that it is something the AI could never do on its own, while the Moroccan AI could probably manage to send an army to Mali). It would be interesting to hold a debate over the nature of conqueror events.

Regarding your first point, are you familiar with the book 'Guns, Germs, and Steel'? It might interest you. I do not believe this is very relevant, but this ties into the nature of conqueror events, and I don't feel like diving into that at 2:13 (besides, Leoreth's philosophy would be far more relevant).

Personal Sharing and Book Recommendation
----------------------------------------------------------------

This made me really smile. I really love these forums specifically because of posts like yours -- thank you. This paragraph is a personal story (feel free to ignore). I grew up in the Southern part of the US and first read that book in high school when my father gave it to me. It had me convinced that I wanted to major in geography until I became an undergraduate a realized that formalized geography programs were essentially been purged from most (not all) American schools outside of the California system following WW2. (The Nazis ruined many academic fields including but not limited to eugenics and geopolitics.) Anyway, I've actually since had several professors as mentors both in undergrad and grad school who have told me something along the lines of "Dr. Diamond has a very high opinion of his own intelligence." Now, I have an amused love-hate relationship with his books. (I have still to actually meet the man in person, so in the final analysis it could go either way. I would like to like him.)

So with that in mind if you enjoy Guns, Germs, and Steel try "Geography and World Power" by James Fairgrieve. It's over 100 years old, so it's embedded with the racism inherent in that age. If you can read through that, it's a fascinating work on geopolitics. It traced the impact of geopolitics on the evolution of civilization from the ancient Egyptians to British and Americans and predicted the rise of Russia and America. Fairgrieve factored topography, location, climate, demographics, energy, politics, social organization, and transportation into his history-spanning analysis. Great read if you get the chance. (And it's so old there is probably a free pdf online.)

----------------------------------------------------------------
Mod Relevant
----------------------------------------------------------------

Now, back to the actual mod. I understand your point I believe. You're saying tropical areas that had diseases which prevented permanent large scale conquest by Europeans until the 1800s shouldn't have conquerors events at gunpowder (I think.) Fair enough. Then let's do 2 things. 1. Have Mali collapse on its own around 1550-1650 and 2. Give the Europeans conquest events in the industrial era like they get in India and Indonesia in the interior of Africa. (And I'd like to see Nigeria added to the British core area.)

In most games I play Mali becomes a vassal and survives into the 20th century, and in those where it doesn't survive the Europeans never conquer the interior of Africa by 1900-1950. Granted, I tend to start in 3000BC and 600AD, so I don't know as much about the 1700AD scenario, but that seems like a pretty big omission.

 

[Fresol]

Suggestion on modifying the Grand Canal great wonder:

Firstly, it shouldn't require a river to be built. The Grand Canal was built because there was NOT a river connecting Beijing and Hangzhou, the irony. Secondly, it should count as a source of fresh water, or better, it should provide the city with a "river", enabling a levee to be built in the future.

Complementarily, the default city of Beijing location should really be moved 1E. Beijing is way farther from any part of the Yellow River(>400km to the west or >300km to the southeast at the Yellow River estuary) than from the coast(~150km at Tianjin). In general, there is huge room for map improvement in the China region and I hope one day Leoreth has time to touch on this topic.

Edit: The Grand Canal probably should require flatland to be built. It's hard to imagine a canal built among hills.

 

[star15389]

One issue with Mali collapsing around 1600 like I agree is most historical is that it would mean no West African slave trade, just "raids" by European units. Though it does seem to be the case already that Mali has very few slaves to sell in comparison to the Congo, so maybe not such a problem? It should either be the case that Mali collapses and has its cities destroyed so France can settle them or France gets a conqueror event with some middle Industrial Era tech. They should probably get one for Algeria too with an early industrial tech

 

[Visard]

Statemen come too late eventhough they are generally the least usefull spealist, although the great one is really good.
So I would suggest that the palace allows one stateman slot, to present the court/ministers.
Also the specialist should give , since they present also diplomats/ambassadors who had possibility to gather espionage.

 

[J422]

Regarding statemen and their usefulness : I think it could be interesting to have a new yield like "political power". It could be used to hurry stuff with the right civics, build special "ministry" buildings in the capital, count toward stability or even be used in diplomacy.

It would help make a difference between differently advanced states and allow a more 'vertical' development instead of the primarily land-based one that we have now (even with stupid civic choices, an empire with good land is often more viable than a little advanced state).

It's probably quite complicated to implement and this is probably not the right time given everything that is being done with the new tech tree, but I got the idea, so I thought I'd share it anyway.

 

[Leoreth]

That was actually my long term goal with the statesman, but this idea is currently on hold.

 

[star15389]

Is that why Statesmen only yield 2 and settled G Statesmen only yield 4? Always thought those were inexplicably low

 

[Leoreth]

That's actually because commerce is generally stronger in its raw form, but I think something like 2 commerce 1 espionage would really be fairer.

 

[star15389]

Even 4 would be a mediocre return on 2 though. If the yield were the primary consideration you'd almost always be better off working a coast tile or something else food neutral instead of the specialist and using the you save from being able to whip more to build . You run specialists for the GPP and Great Statesmen aren't that useful until the late game.

 

[Imperator Knoedel]

In my modmod ( yes yes I sound like a broken record ) Statesmen provide 1 Commerce and 2 Espionage, and are also unlocked by the Palace and Universities.

Edit: Recently I have also played with the thought of making them provide happiness similar to settled Great Artists.

 

[star15389]

Having them provide happiness makes a lot of sense thematically but it seems like it wouldn't be that useful, ie if you need a statesman to avoid angry citizens why not just whip them away or assign some tiles to another city? Wouldn't even help stability much since having the pop to run a statesman would generate 1 to cancel out the bonus! And I like artists being the only ones that can do that, gives them something worthwhile to do. Maybe we could just accept statesmen having a lousy yield but make settled Great Statesman give a few and also a point or two of stability.

 

[1SDANi]

On that vein of thought, what if it removed 2 Unhappiness and gave 1 commerce?

Thematically, you'd need to employ more people to run propoganda, aid public relations, and pay people to hold powerless official positions to keep people not unhappy.

Gameplay-wise, it still keeps Artists as the ones to increase Happiness, but Statesmen would now give a more preferable alternative for military and authoritarian civs.

Obviously I'm not sure if that specific number of yields would be best, but I like the idea.

 

[Imperator Knoedel]

And I like artists being the only ones that can do that, gives them something worthwhile to do.

Culture should be made a useful yield for that purpose. The happiness from the Statesman would just be the cherry on top of the yields it already provides.