Europa Universalis V

Europa Universalis V

Omni-directional Rivers
16 条留言
Rambosfire 12 月 14 日 上午 4:30 
Uh, it does make sense as these rivers flow in a single direction. It's easier to travel downstream than upstream. Historically, upstream requires much more manpower and time, such as rowing, even in tandem with wind, and navigating banks where the current is weak, and waiting for favourable winds and currents.

Also sometimes boats were towed upstream with pack animals pulling from along the banks. Most interesting is something like the Bosphorus straight, where they had actually discovered the understeam counter-current heading upwards into the black sea, despite the surface current heading out. As a result they invented a special anchor, the 'weighed baskets' that would sink to the low counter current stream, create drag, and pull the ships/boats upstream.

In short, it is realistic that going upstream is much more difficult for these eras, thus gives 1/3 the control of going down in the game. Personally, I would find less immersion in using this mod.
Harbivore  [作者] 12 月 13 日 上午 6:28 
@Calliyop thanks but I stole the idea from Jackkade who might have heard it from somewhere else...
Harbivore  [作者] 12 月 13 日 上午 6:27 
@brotistlecker007 maybe but idc I wanted to make a simple test mod and so here it is

@Dohaerās! because it doesn't make sense for a river to be as strong as the basic roads, and cba to rebalance all the roads. If you don't like it make your own mod...
Calliyop 12 月 12 日 下午 12:48 
Harbivore!! My hero!! So freaking clever to share this idea and make it a mod! I'll see what it does with my Norwegian campaign, you explain so well how absurd it is to put a capital on a river's source... genius! Thank you Harbi'! 😊
Dohaerās! 12 月 12 日 下午 12:08 
Why do you make buffs? why didnt you average upstream and downstream to achieve same average control. Game already has problems with infinite money
brotistlecker007 12 月 12 日 下午 12:07 
@Chocolayte I think Vanilla does this in a Patch..!?
Harbivore  [作者] 12 月 12 日 上午 6:45 
@Chocolayte no
Chocolayte 12 月 12 日 上午 2:16 
Does this mod enable proximity on lake?
Harbivore  [作者] 12 月 11 日 下午 6:30 
@God Gamer so again the proximity boost should be the exact same number for going up or down river.
It should make sense however for the market access to be better downstream from what replanttrees said, but even then the market boats would have to then go back upstream to collect more goods. Surely people weren't making new boats and then sending them on one way trips down the rivers to be dismantled at their destination.
God Gamer 12 月 11 日 下午 1:50 
so would there be a way to have one direction act as a proximity boost and the other as a market access boost? that seems to be the most realistic depiction
Harbivore  [作者] 12 月 8 日 下午 7:21 
@brotistlecker007 Agreed, I think it makes sense for rivers to be on par with modern roads. I would have liked to have it be equal to paved roads with an extra building that would then give and extra -5 or to rebalance all the proximity stuff.
brotistlecker007 12 月 8 日 上午 8:55 
Works.
I think this is the optimal balancing solution to make gameplay less tedious.
Railways are still better, but it makes choosing a capital less of a headache.
Harbivore  [作者] 12 月 8 日 上午 4:09 
@replanttrees for trade yes this is entirely true but control from proximity isn't the same as market access. For market access it does make sense where trades can only to travel one way, but for projecting power you need to travel both ways.
Like in your body with nerves, your fingers tell your brain an object is hot and then your brain tells your hand to move. The brain or capital needs to know something is happening to then respond.
replanttrees 12 月 7 日 下午 11:59 
I do agree with you, though. If they are going to model up/downriver trade in terms of proxitimity, then it should also have a more pronounced effect on market access and advantage.
replanttrees 12 月 7 日 下午 11:59 
You have a point with the numbers not really working out. However, if you read historical documentation, you will find that trade really was mostly downriver. Before the invention of the steam engine, the only real way to navigate upriver was by rowing (for larger boats) or poling (for smaller boats, generally), which was slow and manpower intensive. Sails did not work because tacking was not usually feasible with broad cargo boats in narrow rivers. Therefore it does make sense for upriver to be less connected than downriver.

As an aside, it is precisely this fact that made downriver cities more wealthy and larger. The settlements upriver HAD to trade through the downriver settlements, who usually forced harsh tariffs and regulations on their boats. This allowed downriver settlements to extract resources from upriver settlements, thereby growing and eventually becoming capitals.
Felis 12 月 7 日 上午 11:05 
this mod cured my cancer and gave me an immaculate pregnancy