Jump to content
Age of History Games

Sneaky

Prince
  • Content Count

    85
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    1

Reputation Activity

  1. Like
    Sneaky got a reaction from EmpirePlanner145 in Reform on how we recruit an Army   
    Actually, maybe just scrap the whole recruitment feature and turn it into mobilization. In a country tab, you can decide to mobilize, and then decide how much % of your population you want to mobilize. The bigger the percent you mobilize, the higher negatives from economy you get. Mobilizing would also cost 1 gold per pop you mobilize. Max would be 5% of your population (with soldiers counting towards the population). Also, when mobilized, you get a happiness boost depending on the percent you're mobilizing times 10, so if you mobilize 1%, that's -10% happiness and so on. Mobilization would work by mobilizing 20% of the full number each turn, so it'd take 5 turns to get all your pops mobilized.
    You'd still be able to hire mercenaries (basically the conscript feature) which work the way they do, but cost a lot more.
  2. Like
    Sneaky reacted to EmpirePlanner145 in Reform on how we recruit an Army   
    Instead of building a army using money, scrap that and have it being that it require that province's population to build a army.
    This will make so that your gold can not quickly build a army in one turn. 
    Example, you select provinces that will build a army for you based off of the population the province has.
    Population of 25000, would be able to recruit a army of 1500 but it would take 3 turns.
    Each turn makes 500 units
    There needs to be a new building so that you can train a army. The higher the level the building is the faster and more units you can build.
    The cost would increase the military upkeep.
    This would allow a nation prepared for war, have a higher chance of winning.
    Even if you are a small nation but have time to build up a army without costing gold would be ideal in terms for war.
    A Big Nation will always out produce units because of gold but take that away then this allows a small nation to take down a big nation or at least get them to agree to a peace deal in the small nation favor.
    Having these buildings in the game would allow strategic planning since now you know where you should plan your attack.
    You would want to take out their building so they cant counter attack or build a army close enough.
    With what we currently have a Nation with a high budget can build a army of 2500 in one turn, which is annoying because you probably was prepared for war but suddenly they out number you.
  3. Dislike
    Sneaky got a reaction from JustAnUser in Lthuana Greatest Derp!   
    silly lthuanan
    unted kngdom of great brtan and northern reland will beat all
  4. Like
    Sneaky got a reaction from Hydra in World War Two Nerds?   
    I'm interested in WW2, albeit I wouldn't call myself a nerd. 
    If you want to debate, then here are some opinions on WW2 of mine:
    Germany could have won WW2, but only without Hitler. Even then, if they still had to invade USSR, they'd only win in the very unlikely scenario that they'd get Western support. Erwin Rommel is one of the most overrated Generals of all time. Heinz Guderian is what most people make Erwin Rommel out to be. Erich von Manstein was one of the most brilliant strategists of WW2 and one of the main reasons Germany was so successful. US involvement in the war could only be delayed, but not prevented. Germany could never ever have invaded mainland Britain, even with the destruction of the RAF. Hitler was the reason for both the success of Germany and the failure of it. Germany produced some of the best tanks of the war, but they were exactly the kind of tanks Germany did not need. The Sherman is underrated. While most people say Germany would have been better without Italy, I disagree. While Italy had one of the worst armies of WW2, it still did its own fair share of helping Germany. The Italian Navy kept the Royal Navy busy so Germany could focus on the ground aspect. Many people misunderstand the involvement of Baltics within WW2. The Courland Pocket saw very fierce combat, and the Latvian Legionnaires were some of the last German units surrendered. Let that sink in - the Courland Pocket held out until the Soviets had already reached Berlin. While Soviets had already won by then, D-Day was still an important part of the Allied efforts to end WW2. The nuking of Japan was fully and completely justified. Germany couldn't have gotten nukes, even if the Norwegian resistance members hadn't blown up the heavy water stations and what not. The Soviet Union had better tactics for the use of large scale tank assaults - Deep Operations/Soviet Deep Battle. There was no such thing as a "blitzkrieg" tactic - it was simply generals using the tanks at their disposal to their best ability. Germany was technologically superior to the Allies, but its resources deprived them of putting them to any use. Please don't hate me for having an opinion.
  5. Like
    Sneaky got a reaction from MehmetCeran in Big list of additions I'd like for the scenario editor.   
    [NOTE: This is not at all a rant thread. If it comes off as so for whatever reason, it wasn't Implied. I genuinely love this game, but these are simply ways that it (specifically, the scenario editor) could be made significantly better. Also, I really hope this hasn't been done before. If it was, tell me]
    I have no idea if this already has been suggested, but this is a personal list which, if implemented, would allow us to make scenarios that are way more fun and interesting. With every suggestion, I'll also show an example on how it'd help. Anyways, let's begin.
    "Any Civilization" option for events and triggers. This would allow us to make random events way easier, such as bankruptcy or underpaid military, without needing to make a separate event for each civilization. It would also help with more scenario-specific events, such as every country with a treasury higher than 100000 would get an event about them becoming a great power.
    This is also needed for triggers too. It would allow us to make group events much easier. For instance, if I wanted to make a "great power" system in a scenario, I could make it so if you have an economy larger than 10 thousand, you get an event signaling you're a great power. You could then make events where every country who had the event for becoming a great power would now get extra economy and things like that. It'll just be better for everyone, really.
    Decision list in country tab. These decisions, once clicked, would fire an event or give you money or things like that'd. I don't really think this needs a more of an explanation for why it'd help making events.
    Permanent modifies. This would be an outcome from events. For instance, when playing as Prussia, you could get an event which would make your troops overall 10% stronger (meaning 100 of your troops could beat 105 enemy troops).
    These modifies would range from building cost (such as -20% building cost), army quality (the thing mentioned above), extra or less population/economy growth, basically anything that can be modified.
    Change the "Annex" outcome into a full annexation. At the moment occupy and annex do almost the same thing. What I'd like is that if you choose the annex outcome, you could select 2 countries and the 1st country would completely annex all of the 2nd country.
    Add a "in [X] turns, trigger another event". I don't think this needs much explanation, but an instance would be a decision where you can take out a loan, and in 50 turns you get an event where you need to repay it back just as an example.
    An option to specifically type in a number on outcomes such as add money and alike. This might already be a thing, and if it is, feel free to notify me, but otherwise, it's quite annoying to be stuck at granting +25821 money from an event because it's next to impossible to get it at +25000.
    Add an outcome that makes you switch to a new country. This is for events such as Civil Wars or alike or new countries being formed. I know civil wars do have a workaround, but it'd still be very nice to have this as an outcome. One instance where this is useful is for region-specific scenarios, such as medieval europe-only scenario. You could make an event about the mongols arriving, and then get an option as switching to and playing as them.
    Set variables in events. By this I mean, you can make it so an event sets a variable called "Threat" to one. Another country gets an event and they increase the variable "Threat" by another one. Say, threat became 10, you could add a trigger for "[Variable] >= 10" and then have an event fire for a country if threat became big enough, just as an example.
     
    If I think of any more, I'll add them. Feel free to suggest your own ideas and if I like them/they're otherwise popular, I'll add them here and credit you.
  6. Like
    Sneaky got a reaction from goktug14 in Lthuana Greatest Derp!   
    silly lthuanan
    unted kngdom of great brtan and northern reland will beat all
  7. Like
    Sneaky got a reaction from Armolitskiy in Big list of additions I'd like for the scenario editor.   
    [NOTE: This is not at all a rant thread. If it comes off as so for whatever reason, it wasn't Implied. I genuinely love this game, but these are simply ways that it (specifically, the scenario editor) could be made significantly better. Also, I really hope this hasn't been done before. If it was, tell me]
    I have no idea if this already has been suggested, but this is a personal list which, if implemented, would allow us to make scenarios that are way more fun and interesting. With every suggestion, I'll also show an example on how it'd help. Anyways, let's begin.
    "Any Civilization" option for events and triggers. This would allow us to make random events way easier, such as bankruptcy or underpaid military, without needing to make a separate event for each civilization. It would also help with more scenario-specific events, such as every country with a treasury higher than 100000 would get an event about them becoming a great power.
    This is also needed for triggers too. It would allow us to make group events much easier. For instance, if I wanted to make a "great power" system in a scenario, I could make it so if you have an economy larger than 10 thousand, you get an event signaling you're a great power. You could then make events where every country who had the event for becoming a great power would now get extra economy and things like that. It'll just be better for everyone, really.
    Decision list in country tab. These decisions, once clicked, would fire an event or give you money or things like that'd. I don't really think this needs a more of an explanation for why it'd help making events.
    Permanent modifies. This would be an outcome from events. For instance, when playing as Prussia, you could get an event which would make your troops overall 10% stronger (meaning 100 of your troops could beat 105 enemy troops).
    These modifies would range from building cost (such as -20% building cost), army quality (the thing mentioned above), extra or less population/economy growth, basically anything that can be modified.
    Change the "Annex" outcome into a full annexation. At the moment occupy and annex do almost the same thing. What I'd like is that if you choose the annex outcome, you could select 2 countries and the 1st country would completely annex all of the 2nd country.
    Add a "in [X] turns, trigger another event". I don't think this needs much explanation, but an instance would be a decision where you can take out a loan, and in 50 turns you get an event where you need to repay it back just as an example.
    An option to specifically type in a number on outcomes such as add money and alike. This might already be a thing, and if it is, feel free to notify me, but otherwise, it's quite annoying to be stuck at granting +25821 money from an event because it's next to impossible to get it at +25000.
    Add an outcome that makes you switch to a new country. This is for events such as Civil Wars or alike or new countries being formed. I know civil wars do have a workaround, but it'd still be very nice to have this as an outcome. One instance where this is useful is for region-specific scenarios, such as medieval europe-only scenario. You could make an event about the mongols arriving, and then get an option as switching to and playing as them.
    Set variables in events. By this I mean, you can make it so an event sets a variable called "Threat" to one. Another country gets an event and they increase the variable "Threat" by another one. Say, threat became 10, you could add a trigger for "[Variable] >= 10" and then have an event fire for a country if threat became big enough, just as an example.
     
    If I think of any more, I'll add them. Feel free to suggest your own ideas and if I like them/they're otherwise popular, I'll add them here and credit you.
  8. Like
    Sneaky got a reaction from JustAnUser in Big list of additions I'd like for the scenario editor.   
    [NOTE: This is not at all a rant thread. If it comes off as so for whatever reason, it wasn't Implied. I genuinely love this game, but these are simply ways that it (specifically, the scenario editor) could be made significantly better. Also, I really hope this hasn't been done before. If it was, tell me]
    I have no idea if this already has been suggested, but this is a personal list which, if implemented, would allow us to make scenarios that are way more fun and interesting. With every suggestion, I'll also show an example on how it'd help. Anyways, let's begin.
    "Any Civilization" option for events and triggers. This would allow us to make random events way easier, such as bankruptcy or underpaid military, without needing to make a separate event for each civilization. It would also help with more scenario-specific events, such as every country with a treasury higher than 100000 would get an event about them becoming a great power.
    This is also needed for triggers too. It would allow us to make group events much easier. For instance, if I wanted to make a "great power" system in a scenario, I could make it so if you have an economy larger than 10 thousand, you get an event signaling you're a great power. You could then make events where every country who had the event for becoming a great power would now get extra economy and things like that. It'll just be better for everyone, really.
    Decision list in country tab. These decisions, once clicked, would fire an event or give you money or things like that'd. I don't really think this needs a more of an explanation for why it'd help making events.
    Permanent modifies. This would be an outcome from events. For instance, when playing as Prussia, you could get an event which would make your troops overall 10% stronger (meaning 100 of your troops could beat 105 enemy troops).
    These modifies would range from building cost (such as -20% building cost), army quality (the thing mentioned above), extra or less population/economy growth, basically anything that can be modified.
    Change the "Annex" outcome into a full annexation. At the moment occupy and annex do almost the same thing. What I'd like is that if you choose the annex outcome, you could select 2 countries and the 1st country would completely annex all of the 2nd country.
    Add a "in [X] turns, trigger another event". I don't think this needs much explanation, but an instance would be a decision where you can take out a loan, and in 50 turns you get an event where you need to repay it back just as an example.
    An option to specifically type in a number on outcomes such as add money and alike. This might already be a thing, and if it is, feel free to notify me, but otherwise, it's quite annoying to be stuck at granting +25821 money from an event because it's next to impossible to get it at +25000.
    Add an outcome that makes you switch to a new country. This is for events such as Civil Wars or alike or new countries being formed. I know civil wars do have a workaround, but it'd still be very nice to have this as an outcome. One instance where this is useful is for region-specific scenarios, such as medieval europe-only scenario. You could make an event about the mongols arriving, and then get an option as switching to and playing as them.
    Set variables in events. By this I mean, you can make it so an event sets a variable called "Threat" to one. Another country gets an event and they increase the variable "Threat" by another one. Say, threat became 10, you could add a trigger for "[Variable] >= 10" and then have an event fire for a country if threat became big enough, just as an example.
     
    If I think of any more, I'll add them. Feel free to suggest your own ideas and if I like them/they're otherwise popular, I'll add them here and credit you.
  9. Like
    Sneaky reacted to Istria in Coat of Arms: 1836.   
    Finally!!!!! 
  10. Like
    Sneaky reacted to Glisterr in Coat of Arms: 1836.   
    Hurrah!!!!!
  11. Like
    Sneaky got a reaction from antoniokf5 in how to change the requirements in the formation of another civilization? (for example - Portugal - Iberia)   
    I might be wrong but I think it was map editor > earth (4269 provinces) > formable civilizations, then find the country you want to edit.
  12. Love
    Sneaky got a reaction from Syed Osama in World War Two Nerds?   
    I'm interested in WW2, albeit I wouldn't call myself a nerd. 
    If you want to debate, then here are some opinions on WW2 of mine:
    Germany could have won WW2, but only without Hitler. Even then, if they still had to invade USSR, they'd only win in the very unlikely scenario that they'd get Western support. Erwin Rommel is one of the most overrated Generals of all time. Heinz Guderian is what most people make Erwin Rommel out to be. Erich von Manstein was one of the most brilliant strategists of WW2 and one of the main reasons Germany was so successful. US involvement in the war could only be delayed, but not prevented. Germany could never ever have invaded mainland Britain, even with the destruction of the RAF. Hitler was the reason for both the success of Germany and the failure of it. Germany produced some of the best tanks of the war, but they were exactly the kind of tanks Germany did not need. The Sherman is underrated. While most people say Germany would have been better without Italy, I disagree. While Italy had one of the worst armies of WW2, it still did its own fair share of helping Germany. The Italian Navy kept the Royal Navy busy so Germany could focus on the ground aspect. Many people misunderstand the involvement of Baltics within WW2. The Courland Pocket saw very fierce combat, and the Latvian Legionnaires were some of the last German units surrendered. Let that sink in - the Courland Pocket held out until the Soviets had already reached Berlin. While Soviets had already won by then, D-Day was still an important part of the Allied efforts to end WW2. The nuking of Japan was fully and completely justified. Germany couldn't have gotten nukes, even if the Norwegian resistance members hadn't blown up the heavy water stations and what not. The Soviet Union had better tactics for the use of large scale tank assaults - Deep Operations/Soviet Deep Battle. There was no such thing as a "blitzkrieg" tactic - it was simply generals using the tanks at their disposal to their best ability. Germany was technologically superior to the Allies, but its resources deprived them of putting them to any use. Please don't hate me for having an opinion.
  13. Love
    Sneaky got a reaction from Hydra in Kaiserreich 0.1 (Based on the HoI4 mod)   
    Wilhelm II was actually incompetent.
    Change my mind.
  14. Like
    Sneaky got a reaction from adiloyuncu3 in World War Two Nerds?   
    I'm interested in WW2, albeit I wouldn't call myself a nerd. 
    If you want to debate, then here are some opinions on WW2 of mine:
    Germany could have won WW2, but only without Hitler. Even then, if they still had to invade USSR, they'd only win in the very unlikely scenario that they'd get Western support. Erwin Rommel is one of the most overrated Generals of all time. Heinz Guderian is what most people make Erwin Rommel out to be. Erich von Manstein was one of the most brilliant strategists of WW2 and one of the main reasons Germany was so successful. US involvement in the war could only be delayed, but not prevented. Germany could never ever have invaded mainland Britain, even with the destruction of the RAF. Hitler was the reason for both the success of Germany and the failure of it. Germany produced some of the best tanks of the war, but they were exactly the kind of tanks Germany did not need. The Sherman is underrated. While most people say Germany would have been better without Italy, I disagree. While Italy had one of the worst armies of WW2, it still did its own fair share of helping Germany. The Italian Navy kept the Royal Navy busy so Germany could focus on the ground aspect. Many people misunderstand the involvement of Baltics within WW2. The Courland Pocket saw very fierce combat, and the Latvian Legionnaires were some of the last German units surrendered. Let that sink in - the Courland Pocket held out until the Soviets had already reached Berlin. While Soviets had already won by then, D-Day was still an important part of the Allied efforts to end WW2. The nuking of Japan was fully and completely justified. Germany couldn't have gotten nukes, even if the Norwegian resistance members hadn't blown up the heavy water stations and what not. The Soviet Union had better tactics for the use of large scale tank assaults - Deep Operations/Soviet Deep Battle. There was no such thing as a "blitzkrieg" tactic - it was simply generals using the tanks at their disposal to their best ability. Germany was technologically superior to the Allies, but its resources deprived them of putting them to any use. Please don't hate me for having an opinion.
  15. Like
    Sneaky got a reaction from PApaSpitler in Road to Hell : A European War 4 : Napoleon Mission   
    hah, more like scared of what they'll think of an emperor losing to a count
  16. Like
    Sneaky got a reaction from ITurkishmapping in Collapse of Qing, Taiping Rebellion & New Ideologies!   
    It's true. Update 1.1 really is nearing its completion. All I need to do now is add a few missing civilizations and finish the coal/iron terrain maps and finish the collapse of Qing event completely. Otherwise, that's really the update done! So I hope I haven't had you guys waiting too long. As for today's "dev report", I've got 2 things: info about the new Qing events and something I've been working on for update 1.2, Manifest Destiny. Let's get started:
    Collapse of Qing. At around 1900, Qing gets an event called "Collapse of Qing". This starts an event chain where every turn there's a chance for events that happen to Qing. These events include things such as the people of a country (such as Mongolia) demanding independence, and if Qing refuses, they get a severe happiness loss. This should more accurately represent the collapse of Qing into warlords at the start of the 20th century.
    Taiping Rebellion! Once the Qing is centralized, they now have a chance for the "Taiping Rebellion" event to fire. Once it fires, a civil war breaks out between the Taiping and Qing. The Qing has a long-term advantage, meaning most of the time the Heavenly Kingdom will lose. While the event is underway, there's also a possibility for an event about the instability of the dynasty, giving a happiness debuff.
    New governments! because, surprise surprise, they're based off those of Victoria 2. At the moment I've renamed the current governments to:
    Conservatism - the standard ideology in the Victorian Era.  Has high acceptable taxation, low minimum goods and investments, as well as a small buff to taxation, production and a noticeable boost to defense, but in return it has +5% research cost. Good and versatile starting ideology; Reactionaryism - the more extreme brother of conservatism. Higher acceptable taxation, very low minimum goods and investments as well as a sizeable boost to taxation and production, but has a much higher +15% research cost. Good for growing economies; Liberalism - an ideology that gets much more popular later down the road. Has high acceptable investments, high minimum goods and investments, higher military upkeep and administration cost and little defense, but gets a -15% research cost. Good for stable and rich economies. Anarcho-Liberalism - the more extreme version of liberalism. Similarly to liberalism, it has an even higher minimum goods and investments and gets a debuff to taxation and production and a +25% to military upkeep, but gets a whopping -25% research cost. Good for very large economies. Socialism - an ideology that only shows up later on. Unlike its more extreme version, communism, socialism is very economic-based. It gets a very high acceptable taxation, but also a very high minimum goods and investments. However, it also gets a very sizeable increased in taxation and production. Good for growing economies that aren't under threat. Communism - unlike socialism, communism is very largely based on war. It gets extremely high acceptable taxation, extremely low minimum goods and investments, the same boost to taxation and production as socialism, and a very noticeable -15% military upkeep, but in return, it gets +20% research cost (slowest out of all the modern ideologies) and a +20% administration cost. Good for already-well developed countries that need to often go to war. Fascism - a weird mix of all the ideologies. It has a rather high acceptable taxation, mediocre minimum goods and investments, -10% research cost, -15% military upkeep and a -5% administration cost, but in return it gets a slight debuff to taxation and production. Good for countries that conquer a lot. Although, these ideologies will only be available in Update 1.2 Manifest Destiny. I want to get update 1.1 out as soon as possible since it's been in development for long enough! 
    Hope you enjoyed reading this dev report!
     
  17. Like
    Sneaky reacted to BrakeCoachStudios in Collapse of Qing, Taiping Rebellion & New Ideologies!   
    yea. Its a little different from US anarchism
  18. Like
    Sneaky reacted to Istria in Collapse of Qing, Taiping Rebellion & New Ideologies!   
    Great job, I am excited
  19. Like
  20. Like
    Sneaky got a reaction from Future mapper in Collapse of Qing, Taiping Rebellion & New Ideologies!   
    It's not anarchism in your typical sense. It's supposed to be liberalism with as complete little government interference as possible, but the government itself is still there. Not to mention, these are generally ideologies, not governments.
  21. Like
    Sneaky reacted to Glisterr in The Fall of Communism in Europe (1989)   
    Hello everybody!
    This is my Scenario, Europe in 1989.
    I have made events all the way up to 1993 currently, my plans are to have at least a Europe starting in 1989 with events that lead up to a decently accurate modern day scenario, so you can practically watch it in spectator mode like one of those History of Europe - every year videos with little to no interference.
    How I do this is make an event to create a large non - aggression pact, so the AI doesn't go crazy and make horrifying border gore.
    Future Updates:
    More Yugoslav Wars (Yugoslav Wars are actually not finished yet)
    Expansion of EU alliance events
    Russian annexation of Crimea events
    Collapse of the Soviet Union event chain
    Making it a bit easier to survive and not collapse as the USSR
    Syrian civil war
    Pictures:

    My main goal here is to make the most historically accurate events possible.  So if you find any errors, or have any suggestions, PLEASE tell me!
    In some ways, this can be considered a little less player friendly as not all but a few events may be forced upon you.
    Want to download it now? http://www.mediafire.com/file/cv14vn98pcixwb4/scenario.rar/file

  22. Like
    Sneaky reacted to followstark in Footage of 17 units stationed in a base   
    Invades France as U.S.A with 1 unit.
    Unit:

  23. Like
    Sneaky reacted to Łukasz Jakowski in Footage of 17 units stationed in a base   
    Footage of 17 units stationed in a base after being recruited (2018 colorised)

  24. Like
    Sneaky got a reaction from XGamer50 in Information about the new event chains & music!   
    Unlike other ones, I'll try and keep this a bit shorter. Also, another quick announcement: there's been a bit of a lack of updates due to personal reasons, but CoA: 1836 is not being abandoned at all, so don't worry. Anyways, let me give you a quick rundown of the new features I've added recently:
    UK and Germany now have an event chain to annex a Chinese few ports. Both UK and Germany get events that are all around the same. The event initially asks them if they wish to request a trading port (Hong Kong for the UK, Qingdao for Germany) from China. If China denies, UK or Germany then gets an event to threaten with war if China doesn't hand over the province. If China still doesn't, UK or Germany gets an event where they can choose to declare war or not, although if they back down this far into it, they'll suffer a happiness loss.
    US now gets an event about sending the Perry expedition. It'll initially cost them 50000 gold, but if all goes successful, they gain a rather noticeable (around 15%) economy boost. Every step of the event can be accepted or denied, for instance, Japan can turn away the Perry expedition ships. However, because of a rework for the triggers for the Meiji Restoration, if Japan decides to be friendly to these ships, not only are they much likely to trigger the Meiji Restoration event, they also get an option to improve relations with the US.
    Japan now gets 2 separate events that lead to rebellions during the Meiji Restoration. Every turn the Meiji event-chain is underway, Japan gets a chance for the Bushido War to start. Once defeated, they have a chance to get the Satsuma rebellion event. These events are rather weak, however, and Japan shouldn't have too much trouble dealing with them.
    While it doesn't seem like much, because I tried to make everything as player-friendly as possible, meaning they don't have any event forced unto them which they can't refuse. This is so any country can be played at, just not easily.
     
    I've also spent some time making up a sort of a music add-on, consisting of many Victorian-era like songs (and some which aren't), although the music is not at all mine. It'll be released alongside The Forgotten East update.
  25. Like
    Sneaky reacted to Glisterr in What's left for update 1.1 and information about further updates.   
    Great job!  You make everything so exciting xD
×
×
  • Create New...