The Rise and Fall of the Mughal Empire

[Luddi VII]

iirc, that's a city pcx sheet problem.

Ram, do you have customized city gfx in for this scenario?

I modified the original city graphics sheet, so the cities were only medieval.

 

[Rambuchan]

@ TLC: That's a healthy lead dude! Congrats!

Some Qs:

- Are you on your usual difficulty level?

- What do you make of the VP victory limit at 60k?

When I've play tested for a space race victory, I found I had to hold off on the smashing of other civs. This was so I would not hit a VP victory which would interrupt my 'Trade Mastery' and 'Jewel In The Crown' building. Seemed a bit contrived. Warfare should go hand in hand with a Trade Mastery victory. Perhaps raise the VP victory point?

- Did you build any of the early wonders to auto-prod some extra military? If so what did you make of it? (Kerala Martial arts is my fave)

Also:

The AI cannot play the Europeans it seems. But the human is ideally set up to experience very much the same kind of power and progression as IRL. Actually this is something I am happy with, simply because you get more of a feeling of 'doing it your own way' as playing an Indian or Persian civ.

 

[The Last Conformist]

I'm playing on Monarch, which is my "standard" difficulty level for trying out scenarios.

I built the Rajput Valour (or whatever it's called) - the Safavids snatched the Kerala Martial Arts. Can't say it makes alot of difference - the Resistors aren't that powerful, and their numbers are quite limited.

Hard to say much about the VP limit yet. I can note that Vijayanagara has started to rake in VPs in a big way, but unless they stop trading border towns with the Bijapuris, they're gonna hit that elimination limit. (Evil machinations? Me? No idea what you're talking about! )

 

[silver 2039]

Why is there 8 city elimination in this scenario? Does'nt seem to make sense to me....

 

[Rambuchan]

[EDIT] @ Silver: The 8 City Elimination is of vital importance for historical realism because:

a) Many of the civs from the Indian culture group were gone within 100 years of the scen's start date (Bijapur, Vijayanagara, Ahmadnagar). The 8 city elimination allows for this sense of a power vaccum being created by the fall of a kingdom. It's how it happened IRL. I don't want to go into full details of how kingdoms fell, there is a whole load of historical info in the Pedia to tell you that.

b) It encourages diplomatic skullduggery. Indian (late) Medieval history is littered with jealousies, betrayals, and temporary alliances. If ever there was a land and time that took the motto: "The Enemy of my Enemy is my Friend" seriously, this is it. When dealing with the invading Mughals, and later the British, Indian kingdoms consistently failed to club together to defeat the threat. This rule encourages the player to team up against the big powers to bring them down.

c) Prestige was a massive factor in Medieval India. Anyone getting their butt kicked too severely would see his mercenaries, generals and regular army switching sides. Again, if you get your butt kicked too badly, you are out the game. Same as IRL.

(It was in the preview thread not this one)

 

[Rambuchan]

@ TLC: Yeah Rajput Resistance never did it for me either but I built it once and it was handy having them around as defenders.

VPs: Vijayanagara must've hit that VPL on the south tip. But true to history if they keep that war with Bijapur up and lose 8 cities, they will crumble.

 

[The Last Conformist]

As I was helping the Bijapuris against Vijayanagara (for "helping", read "establishing a base on their southern border"), the Portuguese attacked me for no particular reason. In retaliation, I placed a Mughal governor in Goa, ending all sovereign European presence on the subcontinent.

Meanwhile, Bengal launched a surprise attack with surprisingly strong forces on the Gangetic plain. However, the assault was repelled at Agra, and quickly turned into retreat as the Mughal diplomacy swung into action and signed up the Golcondans, Bijapuris, and Safavids (who have a presence in Tibet) for Bengali-bashing.

Vijayanagara is at seven cities lost now, but I do not intend to eliminate them at the moment - since they're gonna die anyway, I prefer them keeping Golconda, Bijapur, and Ceylon from expanding for as long as possible.

Edit: I should maybe mention that the whole Elimination thing has forced me to abandon my usually cavalier attitude to defense. I normally do not care much if AI sneak attacks or counterattacks costs me the odd city - I'll always retake it soon. Here, such temporal losses will kill you! The net result is I bury much more troops in garrison duty, which slows down conquering alot.

 

[Rambuchan]

Thanks for a very colourful report TLC.

It all sounds about right, especially the backstabbing and need for garrisons.

 

[The Last Conformist]

The Bengali war had all potential to become a truly epic struggle, but instead became a comparatively minor affair, with the peace being signed after Persia and the Mughals each seizing a city in the Himalayan foothills from Bengal. Fighting continues between the Bengalis and the Golcondans, however.

Meanwhile, Vijayanagara got itself killed in a rather amusing way; they managed to seize Talikor, whereupon Bijapur sued for peace, but soon enough the Talikoris revolted, sending the second-largest empire on the subcontinent into disintegration. A crisis of confidence, I suppose.

I've just switched to the Mansab System. With Vijayanagara, all reason to keep friendly with the Bijapuris evaporated, so they're the next target ...

Edit: So further complexify things, the Dutch just landed an army in Gujarat. It was wiped out on landing (that's what my improved garrisons to do the impertinent), but it raises the ante in the diplomatic game. I could really use them not signing in the Persians against me ...

Edit2: Well, that was a weird war. A mistake in my planning (involving the movement cost of Jungle being 3, not 2) allowed the Bijapuris to seize Goa, but the immediate counterattack caused Bijapur to disintegrate. I need to be real careful in the future - I've lost five cities this far. All were recaptured within a turn, so it feels a tad unfair they should count towards the elimination limit, but that's life.

Edit3: Soon after Bijapur's demise, Golconda was overcome by deathwish, and declared war on the Mughals. Under the combined Mughal and Bengali pressure they collapsed very quickly indeed ...

The Dutch eventually accepted a peace treaty, and I turned to recolonizing the space emptied by Vijayanagara, Golconda, and Bijapur. The only other civ with an apparent interest in filling the vacuum is the British, who plopped down a city in the neighbourhood of Calicut.

Then the Bengalis declared war on me. This should get interesting.

 

[silver 2039]

@Luddi and Rambuchan

Would you mind if I created a NES based off your scenario? I would give you credit of course.

 

[Luddi VII]

First, what stands NES for?

Second, just make it.

 

[The Last Conformist]

The Safavids built the Trade Mastery wonder, so I tried to make as short work as possible of the Bengalis. As an not entirely surprising consequence, a couple Bengali counterattacks got thru, and I hit eight lost cities. Oh well. Feels rather weird to lose because of a temporary setback in a war I was clearly going to win.

It may be noted that Burma rose a major power. They were the 2nd biggest AI after the Safavids in the later stages of the scen.

I think I'll try a European faction next time round.

 

[Aion]

I just downloaded this. Haven't tried it yet, but I'm really looking forward to playing it, because I'm a huge fan of Indian history. So I might really love this

 

[Rambuchan]

@ Silver: Luddi spoke my mind when he responded to your NES query. Just do it and kindly report back a little so we have some idea how the scen has 'gone on'.

@ Aion: I hope you enjoy! If you're interested in this area and period's history then I think you should be able to get a comprehensive outline of the military, arts, global economics, and much else from simply going through the links in the Pedia. I like to think the gameplay rocks too .

@ TLC: Another fine report there. Thanks! Here is some feedback on it, then one question.

1 > Sorry to hear you got outdone by the 8 City Elimination limit. Any idea what date this happened on? I'm hoping that the timeline had run by roughly 200 years by now right? In which case your 'Fall of the Mughal Empire' might well have been realistic. As you found, when a kingdoms falls, a vacuum arises to be filled. In all likelihood, the space created by your decline would have been filled by the Dutch, Bengalis and Safavids. Although the civs are a bit different, it isn't far from reality. Replace them respectively with the British, the Marathas (out of Bijapur & Ahmadnagar) and Afghan and/or Rajput kingdoms/empires and that's pretty much what happened .

So to reiterate, the Elimination Limit is there for Historical Realism and to challenge your diplomacy and defensive plans.

2 > Burma: Yes Burma has the space to open up to be a large power. This is NOT realistic. However I never found them to grow to be serious contenders. Large but not advanced or powerful. Play testing saw them rise large and then get chopped down with ease by however wanted to have a go (or got paid to do it ).

3 > Garrisons: I wasn't clear if you were referring to the City Improvement called 'The Garrison'. This should be available to only the European Trading Companies. Were you able to build this??? Because you should not be.

IMPORTANT TRADE MASTERY VICTORY ADVICE:

4 > Safavid's and 'Trade Mastery': Not having seen an screenies from you (hint hint) I would have to hazard a guess to give some advice here:

Note that you need Cotton & Opium luxuries to build it. Now if you had taken out the Rajputs & Ahmadnagar early on then you probably took control of the Opium in that region, denying the Safavids control. But you must be aware that there is an Opium source in the north (Afghanistan) which needs to be grabbed before the Safavids can - if you're playing as the Mughals that is. You could have easily stopped them building 'Trade Mastery' by:

a) Cutting off their control of this opium.
b) Setting up trade embargoes to prevent the Bengalis trading their sources of Opium.
c) Using your own Fakirs to cut the supply lines, even in peace time.
d) Denied them supplies of Gems and Silks, so they could not place (build) "The Jewel In The Crown".

There are many ways to stop a rival's attempts to gain trade mastery but it isn't easy of course!


Q: What kind of military combinations and strategies did you use to wage your wars?


PS. You should find that the Europeans play the most realistically of all the civs available.

 

[The Last Conformist]

My last save is from 1641 - the disintegration will have occured only a couple turns later. If fact, I could probably start from the save, sue for peace, and avoid it altogether. That would offend my sense of sportmanship, however.

Stupid of me not to think of the resource requirements for the Jewel in the Crown - it looks like denying the Safavids access to Silk and Gems would have been perfectly doable.

By "garrisons", I simply mean units defending my cities.

I mostly relied on Mughal Cavalry, and later Local and Artillery Cav, for my conquests. I also used Rocket Walas with considerable success. It took a while before I caught on to the fact they have lethal land bombardment - had I known this earlier, I'd used them even more. Took a well-defended Bengali city with no losses at all thanks to them. I also made heavy use of all-cavalry Armies to smash defenses. In fact, I'd be inclined to think that both Rocket Walas and Armies are overpowered.

Seems unlikely the Dutch would have done much to fill the vacuum left behind me - the British were the only European civ who tried and expand into the vacuum left by Vijayanagara.

It would be nice if Elimination would only count "your" cities, say those where you have the most culture or nationals, but alas, that's not to be.

 

[Rambuchan]

Well 1641-50 is a bit early for the collapse of the Mughal Empire, but then again, in reality it had a line of very prudent emperors running it, not someone called TLC

Anyway, I'm glad you're aware of the different resource requirements for both those final Trade Mastery victory wonders. It may come in handy next time round. I'm also glad that it came into play with another civ competing to win by this method. That was totally intended to give people the sweats . Plus the scramble for trade monopoly (of India's resources) was a massive dynamic in this period of history.

Military: Oh good . This is quite accurate to reality then. The Mughal Cavalry and their cannons were the ways they went about thrashing everyone.

Rocket Walas: You're right about them, they are a little over powered. But they're damn good fun right!? Besides, not sure what defenses you were up against but you will find they are far less effective against the Sikh Guard (Rifleman class) defenders. You'll either need loads of Rocket Walas or something else. [Hint: The Europeans have an improvement available to them which auto-produces cannons. And you know what they upgrade to ]

Fakirs: The abilities of these units are not to be under estimated. IMO you may have been able to destabilise the Safavid Trade Mastery enterprise with these alone.

Terrain: Sounds like you ran into a bit of trouble with the units' abilities on terrain. Again, this was totally intended and I hope it caused you (as it did generals of the time) to rethink your campaigns in distant mountain/jungle/forest infested areas of India.

Armies: Well IMO they are overpowered in everygame. But again, they're damn good fun!

European AI Behaviour: I'm still a bit disappointed by the AI's ability to play these civs well. There are SO MANY things working to help them take the continent (cash rich and war friendly govt, loads of improvements which auto-prod units, plenty of bonuses on commerce, virtually nil unit upkeep) but they seem to be too stupid alas. The activity you describe is quite rare in my testing experience, only a few times did I see a Euro civ break away. But like I say, all this taking of India by the Euros is far easier with a human guiding an East India Co.'s efforts.

[One idea may to have 'colonisers' which take only 1 population off the city rather than settlers, but this was simply too much, the growth was too rapid when playing them]

Elimination: I see your point. There isn't a way to tweek this to your liking afaik. Besides, I think it still adds to the fun and I came to terms with it. You can always raise it to 10 cities but then you can't drop the other guys so easily. I think this may be one rule which people alter themselves but I definitely concluded that 8 cities was the best after testing a number of options. Not having elimination at all is not a very realistic or accurate option however.

 

[The Last Conformist]

Re: Rocket Walas, the Bengalis thought that five Sikh Guards were adequate defense against my Rocket Wala stack. They thought wrong.

Re: armies, I'm quite happy about the way I did them in the Maya scen - they take only one unit, but have a +5 HP bonus. This makes them less powerful, and, even better, makes the AI use them competently. (It still doesn't build them competently, so I have them spawned.)

 

[El Justo]

Armies: Well IMO they are overpowered in everygame. But again, they're damn good fun!

hi Ram.

i thought i'd give you some feedback on this aspect of civ3.

while some say that the AI won't use them properly or more specifically, load the 'right' unit into them, i have seen the opposite in my TCW scenario; ie the AI doing the 'smart' thing and loading tanks into them.

i wonder what the exact criterion is for the AI when they're considering which units to load. my guess is that they rely heavily on the "AI Strategy" flags. i can not confirm this though.

however, to blindly say and believe that the AI will not load the 'right' unit into their army is clearly not accurate.

 

[Rambuchan]

Good to see you El J. Thanks for dropping in.

I've always been quite non-fussed by the issue of 'right' units in armies. I've always assumed that they are dependent on "AI strategy flags" (Edit Rules/Civilisations/Build Often check box etc) and also the check boxes for the units themselves (Load, pillage, offense etc). So I've always interpretted any stupid unit loading decisions simply as their 'character'. In this scen I found that to be the case. Vijayanagara loaded up armies with their Brahmins which was sensible considering the jungle movement bonus they got. I had to focus on killing that army quick for it presented a real danger.

I also left armies' stats in the Biq as they are normally because I wanted the Militaristic civs to be just that, and I wanted them to come through more boldly with bigger armies (which may or may not be considered overpowered).

I guess these issues about armies are a matter of taste? Or has there been some consensus reached that I don't know about?

 

[The Last Conformist]

I didn't see a single AI army in this scen.

The issue with loading them seems to be that it doesn't want to load units into it that will slow it down, but it fails to appreciate that units loaded into it will gain the movement bonus of armies. Thus, if it loads a 3-move cav unit into an army, it will have four moves, and further cavs will be rejected as too slow.