AGC-EEP Golden Horde and its Successors.

[Jester]

This thread is to discuss the Golden Horde and its resulting splinter nations. This would include Kazan, Crimea, Astrakhan, Sibir, and UZbek Horde/Shaybani Empire.

Issues that I have seen so far:

Golden Horde only starts with Altai culture. The greater part of the area that they control is now "Tatar" culture. This doesn't seem right.
Golden Horde starts with some very strange cores also now.
It doesn't seem like much from the AGC setup for them was included.
Does anyone have any insight into these nations or this area?

Later,
Jester

[Calantyr]

The difference in cultures may be down to the ruling class being of Altai culture and an inability to effectivly control the majority of people in the province. Think of them as invaders who have usurped the local rulers and needs to use force to get their way in the face of local discontent. Just a guess, Im no expert on it.

Doesnt make playing them very viable... your empire's going to fall apart and the people in its heartlands hate you anway. A quick look through the envent file doesnt show ANY good events. Your a masochist!

[Garbon]

The cultures never got implemented correctly. I did all the country side stuff for these Central Asian nations (there should be something mention about the se in the central asia thread), but was never informed as to how the provinces cultures would be. So indeed, it needs to be changed.

What about the AGC setup for them?

Their current cores falls under a portion of the legacy of Crook and although perhaps a few can be shifted around, I definitely would not suggest that any cores should be added.

[Garbon]

Originally Posted by Calantyr

A quick look through the envent file doesnt show ANY good events. Your a masochist!

Yes, unfortunately with Crook's passing we lost that neat event that allowed the Golden Horde to eventually become Crimea.

[Jester]

Originally Posted by Garbon

The cultures never got implemented correctly. I did all the country side stuff for these Central Asian nations (there should be something mention about the se in the central asia thread), but was never informed as to how the provinces cultures would be. So indeed, it needs to be changed.

What about the AGC setup for them?

Their current cores falls under a portion of the legacy of Crook and although perhaps a few can be shifted around, I definitely would not suggest that any cores should be added.

I was not thinking of adding any cores, although I do think maybe taking away
465-Kerch and 514-Irgiz would be good. Irgiz is not a good core for them to have, because it ends up in the golden Hordes hands, but seperated from the rest of their lands, and then Russia has a hard time getting to it. 465-Kerch was not included as a core in the AGC, and since the Golden Horde never really controlled that whole pennisula or took the area away from Genoa/Georgia I don't see why the GH should get it. It would help things develop better in the area if they didn't.

The AGC Setup had them with a lot more cores, and they had Mongol, Altai, and one other culture also.
Since the culture setup did not get implemented correctly, could you let me know how it should have ended up?

Appreciate your help Garbon,

Jester

[Garbon]

Originally Posted by Jester

I was not thinking of adding any cores, although I do think maybe taking away
465-Kerch and 514-Irgiz would be good. Irgiz is not a good core for them to have, because it ends up in the golden Hordes hands, but seperated from the rest of their lands, and then Russia has a hard time getting to it. 465-Kerch was not included as a core in the AGC, and since the Golden Horde never really controlled that whole pennisula or took the area away from Genoa/Georgia I don't see why the GH should get it. It would help things develop better in the area if they didn't.

I agree with those ones. I think Irgiz might be an accidental hold over on my part from some experimental things but I'm not quite sure.

The culture setup that was never added but wasn't contested either was the following:

+Tartar for Uzbek and Golden Horde territories (includes Sibir)
+Altai(waiting on name-Ostjaks?) in Finno-Ugric areas north of Sibir

All nations would then start off with tartar with the Uzbeks and Kazakhs getting their respective cultures via event. Sort of a fusion of EEP culture ideas and one of MKJ's previous proposals.

[Jester]

And GH should start with Tartar culture right?

Late,
Jester

[Garbon]

Originally Posted by Jester

And GH should start with Tartar culture right?

Late,
Jester

Yeah, and it'd be its only culture.

[Jester]

Originally Posted by Garbon

Yeah, and it'd be its only culture.

Roger that, and how far is Tartar supposed to go north, and where does Altai pick up?
Does Uzbek or Sibir start with Tartar?

Late,
Jester

[Jester]

Originally Posted by Jester

Roger that, and how far is Tartar supposed to go north, and where does Altai pick up?
Does Uzbek or Sibir start with Tartar?

Late,
Jester

Forget those questions, I just booted up the AGCEEP and it answered all my questions.

LAte,
Jester

[Archaalen]

As i understood it, the use of Altai for the GH was to weaken them so they'd fall apart properly, like with the Mams in Egypt. Also, I don't think the GH currently gets Kerch (I'm not sure that they even get Azow...)

[anti_strunt]

Originally Posted by Archaalen

As i understood it, the use of Altai for the GH was to weaken them so they'd fall apart properly, like with the Mams in Egypt. Also, I don't think the GH currently gets Kerch (I'm not sure that they even get Azow...)

I think the GH will keep Azov. Giving the Genoese 2+ provinces in the black sea isn't really neccessary...

[Jester]

Originally Posted by Archaalen

As i understood it, the use of Altai for the GH was to weaken them so they'd fall apart properly, like with the Mams in Egypt. Also, I don't think the GH currently gets Kerch (I'm not sure that they even get Azow...)

Can anyone confirm that this is the way it was supposed to be, as discussed in the merger thread? It just seems really strange to me that GH wouldn't get the culture for the majority of it's empire. But then it may be historically justified, I don't know. It wasn't like that in either the AGC or the EEP.

Late,
Jester

[Garbon]

Originally Posted by Jester

Can anyone confirm that this is the way it was supposed to be, as discussed in the merger thread? It just seems really strange to me that GH wouldn't get the culture for the majority of it's empire. But then it may be historically justified, I don't know. It wasn't like that in either the AGC or the EEP.

Late,
Jester

I was the one who submitted the file with their culture being Altai and I didn't have that intention at all. I think that its left over from whatever scenariofile I used to base the AGCEEP's Golden Horde file on. Besides, Altai will no longer be representative of a culture that the Golden Horde should have according the prior listed plan.

[Archaalen]

anit-strunt, I was talking about CB shields, not owned territories. The GH owns Azow, but they have no CB on it. I know they don't own Kerch at present. I think we were both discussing different problems at the same time there...

[doktarr]

To change the subject slightly, how about de-fortifying much of this region? There was very little siegecraft going on in this area in this era. It probably makes sense to leave many provinces unfortified.

MKJ had the fairly radical idea of making many of the provinces in this region be trading posts. I think this is a bad idea, since they will get burned down, and could end up colonized by anyone. That said, low population colonies or trading posts do make sense for areas that had their local populations driven out and became thoroughly Russian in character. So, I think the layout should be a mix of 900 population colonies and unfortified cities, with only a few fortified cities, and a few low population colonies or TPs sprinkled in on the northern and eastern edges of the region.

Of course, the risk is that such a layout will cause dramatically ahistorical results, as agressors from the south or west could grab vast stretches of the steppe before Russia has a chance. If this ends up being the case, then this approach will have to be scrapped, or at least replaced with events that remove forts at the appropriate times (collapse of the GH, claims in the east, and so on).

[Archaalen]

I like the idea, but you're right about getting ahistorical results. Maybe some fortifications in the south, to keep out the wrong folks, that fall apart when the Russians move in?

[Zander]

Unfortified cities won't help at all, as they will certainly be fortified by the time the Russians arrive. All they would do is increase the chance of some mega-power forming in Central Asia before the Russians even reach the area.

...unless you make the colonies small enough that they won't reach 1000 population before the Russians come.

[Archaalen]

The GH wouldn't be able to afford fortifications for all that land, even in the best of times.

[Alkar]

Something that came to my mind, would it be possible to give Crimea an event that allows them to inherit the Golden Horde? This would solve the problem of having the GH hanging around with that crappy immortal monarch of theirs. Also the GH being inherited by the Crimea would make triggering the russian claims on the steppes easier. Since the trigger conditions for those require Russia to own the GH capital province, which would mean that Russia has to conquer the entire GH. The problem is that the GH has the tendency to acquire provinces in central Asia out of Russia's reach. Also Russia gets a lot of unnecessary bb-points due getting cores on the GH eastern provinces with the claims on the steppes event. A final advantage of the Crimea inheriting the GH would be that they would be strenghtened a lot and pose some real threat to Russia.