Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[Kashyyk]

Units with the True Sight or Mindless traits will autokill units with the Illusion trait. The code for picking which units fight will take this into account. If a mindless unit is attacking, the defender will attempt to use something other than an Illusion for example. When this comes into conflict with the Shock/Normal/Support traits, the illusion will be skipped in favor of a unit that actually has a chance.

[Criptfeind]

Sounds fair enough... I assume If the enemy only has illusiony units left, the attacker automatically sends in mindless or true sight units as well even if it's not their proper turn to attack?

[Kashyyk]

Sounds fair enough... I assume If the enemy only has illusiony units left, the attacker automatically sends in mindless or true sight units as well even if it's not their proper turn to attack?

Correct.

Units can be cycled in and out of combat as the available units for each side changes. For example, the code may decide to send Mindless units out first, but if they all get killed, the defender may then bring in all their illusions now they don't have to fear the mindless units.

[Criptfeind]

Also huh, I just noticed this:

Kashyyk, with regards to the new building upgrades do you need to (for example) build a Farm before replacing it with an Improved Farm or can you just build an Improved Farm straight away?

You need to build the prerequisite first.

The roi on improved farms seems pretty bad. 1000 bucks for 100 extra income. 0.1 is the same return as basic investment, but basic investment can be improved by percentage buildings and doesn't take a slot and don't need research. Hum... In the first game, improved farms gave 300, which was the same roi as basic farms.  I'm wondering if you're going to need improved basic industry buildings for better economic buildings later down the chain, right now there doesn't seem to be a good reason to build them, unless you have absolutely nothing else to spend money on.

[Nirur Torir]

I like how it says Lower Ostley  has been liberated. Despite the fact that it's more or less been taken over by some other group.

I shouted out "Liberation!" as I took it.

Can't say for sure yet, but it looks to me that event factions behave differently from PC factions. I took liberated it on the turn after they did. The county had no damaged units, and its defenders' upkeep matched the county's taxable income (rounded down to tens, it gives xx9).

[Criptfeind]

I like how it says Lower Ostley  has been liberated. Despite the fact that it's more or less been taken over by some other group.

I shouted out "Liberation!" as I took it.

Oh, well, fair enough then! All hail the great liberator.

On event troops... Gota be hard to tell until you take out the source of it. Maybe the Dark Lord's whole army was in that province...

For my event, they had event only troops in the area, no back up from mortal stuff or hint of where the original owners were. And their upkeep was slightly above the income of the province.

That said it'd be pretty weak sauce if the events actually made areas easier to take. So I expect that they'll almost certainly get free batches of troops when they take over a neutral area.

[Kashyyk]

Event factions do not follow all the same rules as players and neutrals have already been explained. The empire does however, play by the same rules you do. I'm intentionally going to play them badly so as to avoid accidentally winning as a gmpc.

[Nirur Torir]

I assumed tax dodgers would basically be fighting mid-level bureaucrats sending out progressively larger punitive teams, eventually forced to call for help from her in the chain, forcing their superiors to divert funds from weekly banquets into actually training troops.

[Kashyyk]

Something like that. The imperial tax is its own event and thus gets special rules.

[Iituem]

Also huh, I just noticed this:

Kashyyk, with regards to the new building upgrades do you need to (for example) build a Farm before replacing it with an Improved Farm or can you just build an Improved Farm straight away?

You need to build the prerequisite first.

The roi on improved farms seems pretty bad. 1000 bucks for 100 extra income. 0.1 is the same return as basic investment, but basic investment can be improved by percentage buildings and doesn't take a slot and don't need research. Hum... In the first game, improved farms gave 300, which was the same roi as basic farms.  I'm wondering if you're going to need improved basic industry buildings for better economic buildings later down the chain, right now there doesn't seem to be a good reason to build them, unless you have absolutely nothing else to spend money on.

That's a fair point.  Especially if Farms III, for example, were £1500 for £300, at that point you're actually worse off than basic.  The only way it would work is if the bonuses were cumulative.

[Iituem]

Spoiler: Trade Treaties (click to show/hide)

Trade Treaties

Two nations are eligible to form a Trade Treaty if they either:

a) Share a land border.
b) Connect a trade route with a caravan.
c) Both have an existing Trade Treaty with a third party.  But see the Caveat below.

The process for establishing a Trade Route is as follows.

1) Build a caravan.
2) Move said Caravan to the target province.
3) On the following turn, spend 1 full turn in that province setting up the route.
4) The turn after that, the trade route is established.

This means that a trade route takes a minimum of 3 turns to come into effect.  On turn 1 the caravan comes into existence and moves to its target province.  On turn 2, the caravan spends the full turn establishing the route.  At the start of turn 3, the route has been established.  A trade route remains in existence as long as both sides care to sustain it, and is dissolved if either the home or target province of the route is conquered.

If you have formed a trade route with a caravan, it is my understanding that you may establish a Trade Treaty on the same turn as you are establishing the route.  That is to say, if you agree to the treaty on Turn 2, it will take effect at the start of Turn 3.

If you agree to form a Trade Treaty one of the other two ways (i.e. sharing a land border or via a third party) it still takes 1 full turn to establish the Treaty.  Therefore, it takes effect the following turn after you agree to do so.  Trade Treaties (to my understanding) may be cancelled at any time by either party, with that cancellation taking effect the start of the following turn.

Primary Trade Treaty:  A trade treaty formed between two nations who either share a land border or are connected by a caravan route.

Secondary Trade Treaty:  A trade treaty formed between two nations who both have a Primary Trade Treaty with a third nation.

Caveat:  You can form a Secondary Trade Treaty with someone if both parties have a Primary Trade Treaty, but you cannot create a Tertiary Trade Treaty via Secondary Trade Partners.

e.g. Acheron and Borogravia both share borders with Castille (but not each other).  They can therefore set up a Secondary Trade Treaty.  Damascus shares a border with Borogravia, but not the others.  It could set up a Secondary Trade Treaty with Castille, but not Acheron (who is 2 links away).


Trade Treaty Effects

The effects of a Trade Treaty are as follows:

a)  Both Treaty Members receive a bonus to income equal to 10% of their partner's base income (before trade bonuses).
b)  Both Treaty Members gain access to their partner's controlled resources for the purposes of buildings (e.g. Marketplaces) and troop construction (e.g. Axemen).
c)  Both Treaty Members can send cash to each other.  This is instantaneous and happens on the turn the cash is sent.  Possibly?
d)  Both Treaty Members can send technology to each other.  This is instanteous and happens on the turn the cash is sent.  Possibly?

In addition:

a)  Cash may be sent between indirect trade partners (i.e. From the source to a Trade Partner, to a destination nation who is Trade Partner to the second nation but not the first), through any number of intermediate trade partners.  This takes 1 full turn and every nation in the chain has the option to steal the cash.
b)  Technology may be sent between indirect trade partners as with cash.  This takes 1 full turn and every nation in the chain has the option to steal the tech.

I decided to compile all the notes on trading that have come up in this thread.  This is my current understanding of it laid out in one place, so Kash can correct the bits that are wrong.

[Sheb]

e.g. Acheron and Borogravia both share borders with Castille (but not each other).  They can therefore set up a Secondary Trade Treaty.  Damascus shares a border with Borogravia, but not the others.  It could set up a Secondary Trade Treaty with Castille, but not Acheron (who is 2 links away).

I'm not sure about this one.

[Criptfeind]

From my understanding there's so such thing as secondary or primary trade treaties. They all work the same way, and you can propagate though them fully. IE: In a real example. Next turn Pork can trade with Storm because they are both trading with Tiruin. After that Pork will be able to trade with the northerners because they are trading with storm. If the northerners were trading with some fifth party, then Pork could, in the next turn, trade with them. Each time you make the link you become the primary trade partner in that relationship, the intermediary you went though might as well not exist.

Caveat: The actual trade route you're using at this point goes right though the intermediary territory. Making it trivially easy for them to blockade you. Assuming the trade network is a line instead of a circle. If you're like, a node in the trade network (like, say, brimstone, who's just a node hanging off the Revkin link) you're going to be vulnerable to being disrupted though your partner.

[Nirur Torir]

Or a spiderweb. Everyone should throw caravans at Tir, who is definitely not fixated on the idea of backstabbing.

[Criptfeind]

Indeed, some level of redundancy is good. you probably want your own personal lines to various points. If Tiruin attacked me in a few turns, I'd be screwed since I'm totally relying on her for my trade and would be immediately blockaded. Even if I won it'd take a lengthy rebuilding process to remake the vital trade routes. Equally, I couldn't attack her without a lengthy and expensive disruption. Tactically you'll want to spread to a few different entrances in the link to avoid any one specific conflict cutting you off... Not that that'll help if you become a pariah, which we learned in the last game getting totally cut off from trade is a very easy and passive aggressive way to cripple a nation before killing them.