|
Revoking the Privlegia is awesome.
|
#
?
Mar 4, 2015 19:58
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 10, 2024 01:01 |
|
|
Eughhh I assumed the last patch came with the ability to always transfer occupation to the warleader, but apparently that's still not a thing? Annoying 
|
|
#
?
Mar 4, 2015 19:59
|
|
|
Another Person posted:Nice new map name feature Wiz. But I have one question, will there ever be random religions? Right now religion seems regional. It would be interesting if it were not. Also, I haven't checked, but are government types random right now? I have yet to see a horde outside of horde lands, and I haven't even checked if the hordes are even there. This would be neat. Also being able to form cultural countries out of the random ones would be cool.
|
|
#
?
Mar 4, 2015 20:08
|
|
|
Another Person posted:Nice new map name feature Wiz. But I have one question, will there ever be random religions? Right now religion seems regional. It would be interesting if it were not. Also, I haven't checked, but are government types random right now? I have yet to see a horde outside of horde lands, and I haven't even checked if the hordes are even there. Well, there has to be some kind of structure to the randomness. Right now it's easy enough to slot essentially random countries into the existing geo-political layout. You won't have DHE's causing Castile and Aragon to marry, but you will still likely have the country of Algarve colonizing the New World, etc. Completely randomizing religion would be tricky to do without it seeming arbitrary. And hordes probably shouldn't spawn outside of horde lands (and probably non-hordes should not spawn in horde lands) because hordes are adeptly suited to horde lands at game start.
|
|
#
?
Mar 4, 2015 20:11
|
|
|
Dibujante posted:Well, there has to be some kind of structure to the randomness. Right now it's easy enough to slot essentially random countries into the existing geo-political layout. You won't have DHE's causing Castile and Aragon to marry, but you will still likely have the country of Algarve colonizing the New World, etc. Yes, heaven forbid.
|
|
#
?
Mar 4, 2015 20:22
|
|
|
Dibujante posted:Well, there has to be some kind of structure to the randomness. Right now it's easy enough to slot essentially random countries into the existing geo-political layout. You won't have DHE's causing Castile and Aragon to marry, but you will still likely have the country of Algarve colonizing the New World, etc. Hordes in central and northern Africa would be quite cool imo. I would just like them to spawn in some more areas than horde land to add more variety really. I know for a fact that a horde along the North of Africa can be very powerful, as if it goes to war with the land the Mamluks usually have they can rake in money with their horde double looting. Alongside that, it would be easy for them to westernise when they are capable of taking Morocco's land, if they reform first. I don't even know if they spawn randomly at all yet, I haven't really looked. I'd just like more governments because they are cool. A generic version of a Shogunate/Daimyo relatonship, not specific to Japan, would be cool too. Mini empires spawning around the map in specific land zones, but the members all detest each other and will fight for the top. Make it so that land cannot be added to those empires however. To explain it off, just put some bullshitty description about the land being associated with being the central lands of the empire since the known beginning. The empire cannot, or their AI typically would not consider, expanding outwards except for if the emperor declares it so. Or put some cap on how large the individual members can expand outwards before the Emperor will become very aggressive towards one member and attack them with the other members to cut it down to size. Basically, make it so that you take opinion maluses the more inequal the individual powers of the empire become. That would create more natural feeling power blocks with a cool and greater sense of historicity. Also, if the AI wants to, they can declare on the empire to break it up and force independence, and for 50 years the emperor may have a CB to reunite. It should also be hard for members of the empire, including the emperor, to create outside alliances. Also, yeah, the arbitrariness of religion I feel is a moot point. It says random in the title, and random is arbitrary. It would just create some more interesting international relationships.
|
|
#
?
Mar 4, 2015 20:23
|
|
|
 We're starting a new multiplayer game using the nation designer this Saturday at 3pm est (or next Saturday the 14th if there isn't a patch/hotfix by this weekend). How it'll work is you go to the thread linked below and post whether you want to be inland, coastal, or an island (or either/any) and your steam name/a link to your steam account and the day before the game players will be randomly assigned regions of the type you choose in Asia that you can pick your provinces from. http://forums.somethingawful.com/showthread.php?threadid=3577057&pagenumber=96#lastpost The setup will look similar to this:  We'll be using 250 points to design the nations. There are no house rules to what you can do with the designer so everyone in this thread talking about what ideas are the best can see if they're right or not. I'd encourage anyone who wants to give multiplayer a try to sign up, but would say it probably isn't for players new to eu4 this time around. We're capping it at 30 players and we already have a core group of about ~20 players so if you want to join sign up quick.
|
|
#
?
Mar 4, 2015 20:50
|
|
|
Started a game as Inca. Turns out it wasn't nearly as hard as I thought it would be, except for that one pre-westernization war Portugal threw at me. I think from this position I'm in a good position to snag that achievement.
|
|
#
?
Mar 4, 2015 22:51
|
|
|
I wish that there was a way to change the base tax of provinces in the nation designer as a way of representing any changes that would've come from your alt-historical world. Because forming a New World nation with a Western Tech Group that has a capital with a base tax of 4 is not my favorite.
|
|
#
?
Mar 4, 2015 22:54
|
|
|
Finished Jihad. Decided to go the route of owning all of Africa and Asia. Never even needed to fight the Ottomans. Opened with Diplomatic, Innovative, Quantity. Easily the three strongest ideas in my mind. Diplomatic allows extra relations and the insane, no-cb war for only 1 stab bonus. Having more vassals early is essential because it gives you way more troops and allows you to expand much faster. Innovative because it makes those same vassals contribute more, gives a tonne of useful bonuses (such as reduced AE) and allows even more vassals. Quantity because as DDRJake once said "there is no problem in this game that can't be solved by having more men". Once your vassal strategy has taken care of the coring restriction manpower is the limiting factor in expansion. Quantity basically ends it as a problem. Other people's troops are better but you field twice as many. Dip technology can be easily ignored if you're not colonising. By the time I got the achievement (~1700) I was un-westernised, at tech 18 admin, tech 12 diplo and tech 25 mil. You never once feel the hit on dip. All Dip goes to peace deals and intergration
|
|
#
?
Mar 4, 2015 23:12
|
|
|
Dibujante posted:Well, there has to be some kind of structure to the randomness. Right now it's easy enough to slot essentially random countries into the existing geo-political layout. You won't have DHE's causing Castile and Aragon to marry, but you will still likely have the country of Algarve colonizing the New World, etc. I don't think you 'get' the concept of randomness.
|
|
#
?
Mar 4, 2015 23:16
|
|
|
Funky Valentine posted:I don't think you 'get' the concept of randomness. There's a completely random mode available as well, and that's already in the game.
|
|
#
?
Mar 4, 2015 23:23
|
|
|
The_Bends posted:Finished Jihad. Decided to go the route of owning all of Africa and Asia. Never even needed to fight the Ottomans. Pretty sure you mean Influence here and not Innovative 
|
|
#
?
Mar 4, 2015 23:25
|
|
|
Steamrolling Castille and Portugal while they're busing conquering Algiers oh yes. With the help of the Swiss, Milan and Venice  I've extended my coastline all the way to Galicia, sweet. I'm afraid of doing too much war fatigue, but Burgundy just attacked Lorraine  that's gotta be a good opportunity if Austria gets involved.Edit: I prefer this game to CK2 so far. Kurtofan fucked around with this message at 23:31 on Mar 4, 2015 |
|
#
?
Mar 4, 2015 23:26
|
|
|
 Spain, what are you doing over there.
|
|
#
?
Mar 4, 2015 23:59
|
|
|
Kurtofan posted:Edit: I prefer this game to CK2 so far. What made you prefer EU4? I kinda flip flop between them, burning out on one just to resume with the other.
|
|
#
?
Mar 5, 2015 00:05
|
|
|
Elendil004 posted:
sIberia, first time you've seen that?  Quick couple questions, I'm doing a Castile->Spain achievements run and fed enough of Portugal to Galicia that I can vassalize them in the next war. I could release Galicia and reconquer Portugal's cores from them, or I could integrate both of them. Is having a vassal colonizer a pain in the rear end, or how does that even work? Will they form their own colonial nations, and if I later integrate Portugal do those go free? I seem to recall they do.
|
|
#
?
Mar 5, 2015 00:05
|
|
|
THE BAR posted:What made you prefer EU4? I kinda flip flop between them, burning out on one just to resume with the other. I think I'm jumping the gun a bit here, haven't even started colonizing but I guess I prefer the focus on the country/empire rather than the dynasty thing CK2 got going.
|
|
#
?
Mar 5, 2015 00:09
|
|
|
Drone Incognito posted:I think from this position I'm in a good position to snag that achievement. See you SAY that... Start building your fleet now. Nothing but heavies and as many as you can reasonably afford, cuz your in a way worse position than I was in my run. What Euros do Brazil have allied?
|
|
#
?
Mar 5, 2015 00:13
|
|
|
Dibujante posted:There's a completely random mode available as well, and that's already in the game. Pellisworth posted:Pretty sure you mean Influence here and not Innovative
|
|
#
?
Mar 5, 2015 00:26
|
|
|
I believe I have found the AE cap. It is 1,000.
|
|
#
?
Mar 5, 2015 00:26
|
|
|
THE BAR posted:What made you prefer EU4? I kinda flip flop between them, burning out on one just to resume with the other. For what it's worth these are some of the points I like a lot better about EU4 over CK2: - Less core mechanics based purely on % Chance to happen Yearly and things like that. Forging claims on provinces for example. Stabbing people in CK2 could be a huge drag because it's something you need to do all the time. Converting Religion/Culture. Improving Relations. Vassal and Peasant revolts, and Disasters, all pretty clear % progress bars. And so on. - A bit less micromanagement and fiddlyness related to armies. I hate having to lower/raise levies all the time in CK2 to refill armies. I hate that there's what, 8 unit types in CK2, but you have so little control over your army makeup outside of retinues. Generals in EU4 are a lot more straight forward to work with than leaders in CK2. Automated unit transporting, although that is an AoW thing obviously. - Absolutely love the Sue for Peace mechanics of EU4 a million times better than the war mechanics of CK2. - No Gavelkind. Far less time spent in-fighting every time a ruler dies. - Admin points feel a little more direct and meaningful than Piety and Prestige do. - Technology steps often have meaningful 'jumps', like unlocking new unit types or idea groups or mechanics. In CK2 they're almost all just %Bonus to Whatevers, and there are a lot more categories of them. And you can only improve your capital directly. I could make plenty of arguments going the other direction as well, there's a bunch of things I don't like about EU4. But overall I like the gameplay mechanics of EU4 better at the moment.
|
|
#
?
Mar 5, 2015 00:35
|
|
|
Bort Bortles posted:I was starting to wonder if more changed with Innovative than I thought Innovative is such a confused idea group right now. Like, I sort of get the impression it's supposed to help me have better/more leaders and advisors but that's not terribly exciting and the only thing really unique you pick up is the -0.05 monthly WE which is sure nice but there are other ways to deal with WE. The -25% merc cost seems out of place and doesn't synergize with the rest of the group. -10% Inflation Reduction cost is just laughably bad, it's a pitifully small value of one of the least useful bonuses in the game, and again doesn't really fit thematically with the idea line. I'd move the -25% Advisor Cost capstone early in the tree, that's pretty useful and might make it an attractive early pick. Change the capstone instead to a MP cost reduction for recruiting leaders, and replace the -10% Inflation Reduction Cost with literally anything else. It is a black hole of awful. Edit: so maybe you'd have something like this for Innovative -25% Advisor cost (might need to reduce number value to balance) -5% Tech cost -1% Prestige Decay +1 Possible Advisor (anything vaguely useful to replace the Inflation Reduction Cost, maybe Legitimacy/RT since that isn't available anywhere else?) +0.5 Yearly Legitimacy / +0.2 Republican Tradition or something? -0.05 Monthly War Exhaustion +1 Leaders Without Upkeep Capstone: 25-33% or something reduced Mil/Dip cost for recruiting Generals/Admirals Pellisworth fucked around with this message at 00:45 on Mar 5, 2015 |
|
#
?
Mar 5, 2015 00:37
|
|
|
Pellisworth posted:Innovative is such a confused idea group right now. Like, I sort of get the impression it's supposed to help me have better/more leaders and advisors but that's not terribly exciting and the only thing really unique you pick up is the -0.05 monthly WE which is sure nice but there are other ways to deal with WE. I really wish they would've just kept the old less tradition decay and then swapped out the stupid inflation reduction cost for +1 advisor, then give aristocratic reduced leader cost/yearly legitimacy. Either way I like your suggested tree way better since the reduced cost for reducing inflation may be the worst idea not in espionage.
|
|
#
?
Mar 5, 2015 00:49
|
|
|
Might also be neat if Innovative capstone somehow modified the bonuses from your advisors, maybe by 50%. If you're going with the general theme of more/better/cheaper advisors and leaders, that would be really cool and allow for some flexibility. For example, the 10% Production Efficiency advisor would now grant +15% with the Innovative capstone, or +2% Missionary Strength from an Inquisitor would increase to 3%, +10% Manpower advisor to +15%, and so on.
|
|
#
?
Mar 5, 2015 00:59
|
|
|
I really hate how some idea groups are balanced with a mixture of good ideas and total dogshit ones. I'm fine with not every idea being excellent but some of them are so very offensively bad and not helpful (reduced inflation reduction cost being one of the absolute worst) that I can't deal with it.
|
|
#
?
Mar 5, 2015 01:11
|
|
|
RabidWeasel posted:I really hate how some idea groups are balanced with a mixture of good ideas and total dogshit ones. I'm fine with not every idea being excellent but some of them are so very offensively bad and not helpful (reduced inflation reduction cost being one of the absolute worst) that I can't deal with it. The problem with Innovative (and Aristocratic) right now is there aren't much in the way of good ideas left to balance out the dogshit ones
|
|
#
?
Mar 5, 2015 01:18
|
|
|
Is there an easy way to mass siege? It's getting a bit old moving, hitting "d"etach, moving to the next spot, hitting "d"etach, and so on... And then putting the armies back together at the end and making sure they line up as 8/4/8. Maybe I should have separate stacks that I use for mass sieging consisting solely of infantry and artillery (I guess?) Another question: I declared an Imperialism CB on Fox, a native tribe in the Americas. It said "Full Annexation" was an option, but I can't ask them to give me their capital province in a peace deal. Why is that? (I've transferred siege control to my colonial nation that I'm feeding -- could that be the problem? -- there also doesn't appear a way to un-transfer siege control). Not sure I want to finish out this Poland/Commonwealth game. It's becoming a bit tedious, and by the 1700s it's running pretty slowly on my 13" Retina MacBook Pro (2013). Not as bad as CK2, but it's getting there...
|
|
#
?
Mar 5, 2015 01:23
|
|
|
does anyone else like pairing up humanist and religious as idea groups?
|
|
#
?
Mar 5, 2015 02:00
|
|
|
Whorelord posted:does anyone else like pairing up humanist and religious as idea groups? I mean, you'd be super stable and have an easy time with unrest and conversion, but taking both seems kind of overkill. Edit: Religious is great if you're going to conquer a bunch of neighboring off-religion provinces, especially Muslim provinces which are difficult to convert. You get a CB as your very first idea, go nuts with that and just Increase Autonomy and convert all your conquered provinces. Humanist is particularly good if you have +Heretic/Heathen Tolerance bonuses, since if you can get +3 total to either you can essentially ignore converting them, they'll only be a couple RR different than your own religion and won't penalize your Religious Unity etc. In many cases you can get away without either. Pellisworth fucked around with this message at 02:19 on Mar 5, 2015 |
|
#
?
Mar 5, 2015 02:09
|
|
|
During ED release I heard there was some bug involving war-call-intos, has that been dealt with?
Baron Porkface fucked around with this message at 03:10 on Mar 5, 2015 |
|
#
?
Mar 5, 2015 02:50
|
|
|
alcaras posted:Is there an easy way to mass siege? It's getting a bit old moving, hitting "d"etach, moving to the next spot, hitting "d"etach, and so on... Get Arumba's keyboard shortcuts mod and make extensive use of them. You can select an army and press, like, b b b to create a new unit of 2 regiments (one b to open army composition screen, two further b's to move things to the right of said army comp screen), or if you have a decently round number can abuse split and click. Then you select all of your new armies, tell them to go to the same province, click b(? maybe v) to deselect one, and spread them out. Like this, but in EU4.
|
|
#
?
Mar 5, 2015 03:08
|
|
|
Other than no royal marriages, are there any drawbacks to playing as a Theocracy? edit: nevermind, moved it into its own post AAAAA! Real Muenster fucked around with this message at 03:31 on Mar 5, 2015 |
|
#
?
Mar 5, 2015 03:25
|
|
|
Bort Bortles posted:Other than no royal marriages, are there any drawbacks to playing as a Theocracy? Other than that and lack of a stronger monthly autonomy, NOPE.
|
|
#
?
Mar 5, 2015 03:26
|
|
|
No -unrest bonuses from legitimacy/RT I guess
|
|
#
?
Mar 5, 2015 03:28
|
|
|
Bort Bortles posted:Other than no royal marriages, are there any drawbacks to playing as a Theocracy? You don't know what your heir's stats will be, so it's kind of a crapshoot with rulers. On the other hand, there are zero stability costs for rulers dying (even in combat).
|
|
#
?
Mar 5, 2015 03:28
|
|
|
Tibet is the best theocracy - I think the first five Dalai Lamas all have predetermined stats.
|
|
#
?
Mar 5, 2015 03:31
|
|
|
Is yearly inflation reduction worth taking? Or once you hit midgame is the third tier production building enough to stave off owning a few gold provinces or having colonies sending you gold? I've never played a country that has had a lot of gold but my last game as Vanilla Mint Ice posted:Other than that and lack of a stronger monthly autonomy, NOPE. Allyn posted:No -unrest bonuses from legitimacy/RT I guess Pellisworth posted:You don't know what your heir's stats will be, so it's kind of a crapshoot with rulers. On the other hand, there are zero stability costs for rulers dying (even in combat).
|
|
#
?
Mar 5, 2015 03:32
|
|
|
alcaras posted:Another question: I declared an Imperialism CB on Fox, a native tribe in the Americas. It said "Full Annexation" was an option, but I can't ask them to give me their capital province in a peace deal. Why is that? (I've transferred siege control to my colonial nation that I'm feeding -- could that be the problem? -- there also doesn't appear a way to un-transfer siege control). Several problems: First, full Annexation is its own option, it isn't done through choosing all their provinces in the peace deal. Second, you can never take a capital province in a peace deal unless it is isolated (in which case you have to choose between taking the capital or any other provinces) or in a coalition war. Third, you can't take provinces for yourself if the province is occupied by another party; you can still return core if it's a core province of yours, but the conquer provinces tab only gives the province to the occupying party.
|
|
#
?
Mar 5, 2015 03:39
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 10, 2024 01:01 |
|
|
My GF is a wonderful woman and has enabled my bad life-choices by getting me the EUIV. Is the converter for CK2 working again? Or should I just get El Dorado and re-create my crap there? Also, is there some package somewhere where you can get the DLC heavily discounted? I look at all the stuff and uhhh, 75 bux for just the core DLC is a bit stiff. What's the order of necessary DLC anyhow? What's the Old Gods for this game?
|
|
#
?
Mar 5, 2015 03:47
|
|