|
Jackson Taus posted:Would there be benefit to doing a new learning LP for EU4? I feel like so much has changed since the original release, even without DLC. Definitely interested!
|
#
?
Jul 6, 2015 16:54
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 10, 2024 04:27 |
|
|
Wiz posted:Yes. Westphalia is not supposed to good for the Emperor. It makes sense to encourage the Emperor to get a religious victory, I was just curious if it were a bug or not.
|
|
#
?
Jul 6, 2015 16:56
|
|
|
Jackson Taus posted:Would there be benefit to doing a new learning LP for EU4? I feel like so much has changed since the original release, even without DLC. People ask constantly, if you're in the mood you definitely should.
|
|
#
?
Jul 6, 2015 17:12
|
|
Yes, it's like a lava lamp.
|
Trying to get byz off the ground and keep getting dow'd by the ottomans before I could possibly ally austria/poland. Anyone had any luck in the beta patch?
|
|
#
?
Jul 6, 2015 17:13
|
|
|
PittTheElder posted:People ask constantly, if you're in the mood you definitely should. I've never done an LP before, but I agree it needs to be done. Poil posted:I don't think anyone would say no to that. alcaras posted:Definitely interested! What do you think it should look like? I'm trying to get a sense of which countries would make good tutorial countries that let you look at most of the major mechanics. I'm thinking Ottomans is the best example (multiple easy wars scaling into a moderate-difficulty war against Mamluks, diplovassalize Crimea, vassal-feed Iraq or something, the diversity gets you a good look at religious conversion and accepted cultures, etc). Would probably need a Spanish interlude or something to go over colonizing. Would it make sense to play with DLC and highlight which things I do belong to which DLC, or would it be best to do without DLC?
|
|
#
?
Jul 6, 2015 17:20
|
|
|
Stevefin posted:Been playing some of the beta patch, and the changes to development are better, but maybe too easy now, However I don't think a multiplier of adding more monarch points would fix it. Maybe they could add a cooldown to development that lasts say 10 years? and decreases with high end tech in admin?
|
|
#
?
Jul 6, 2015 17:24
|
|
|
KoldPT posted:Trying to get byz off the ground and keep getting dow'd by the ottomans before I could possibly ally austria/poland. Anyone had any luck in the beta patch? You need 100% galleys that you can block the Bosporus with and hope the Ottoman army starts trapped in Asia Minor. Don't think any major powers will ally with you until you get big. Oh, and the Ottoman navy is larger than your forcelimit so keep building until you know you will win a naval battle.
|
|
#
?
Jul 6, 2015 17:24
|
|
|
Back To 99 posted:You need 100% galleys that you can block the Bosporus with and hope the Ottoman army starts trapped in Asia Minor. Don't think any major powers will ally with you until you get big. Oh, and the Ottoman navy is larger than your forcelimit so keep building until you know you will win a naval battle. Or a better way, sit your navy out in the waters and hope that the ottomans split theirs up. When half or so of their navy ends up on the same province as your navy declare war in hopefully instantly wipe out half of their navy, giving you the naval advantage. Still though, they're likely to get access from people to go around the black sea. So you really do still need good and powerful allies on the European side of the Bosporus.
|
|
#
?
Jul 6, 2015 17:28
|
|
|
Bort Bortles posted:I think a change would be awful. It would take decades of planning to upgrade a province enough to build a new building. It would take 100 years to go up 10 levels for the next building. I think beyond a certain point the cost could conceivably be made steeper but I have no good suggestion on where. Maybe after total development reaches certain thresholds (after reaching a total of 100 development the % increase after each upgrade goes to 4% instead of 2%?) but I really do not think it is necessary. In a world where having a city with 60 development is supposed to be an achievement (albeit an "Easy" one on par with forming Russia), the contemporary numbers are a bit nuts. Plus the whole "Italian OPMs have 75 development in the 1600s and therefore cost all your Admin to core" bit is really harsh. I agree that a threshold would be a good idea - maybe have it kick in at 50 or so? Nitrousoxide posted:Or a better way, sit your navy out in the waters and hope that the ottomans split theirs up. When half or so of their navy ends up on the same province as your navy declare war in hopefully instantly wipe out half of their navy, giving you the naval advantage. Getting a white peace gives you another 5 years to get stronger, and forcing any concessions out of them at all gets you an even longer truce timer. If you know they're coming for you, it might be better to hit first to get that white peace and buy a few extra years.
|
|
#
?
Jul 6, 2015 17:31
|
|
|
Jackson Taus posted:I've never done an LP before, but I agree it needs to be done. If anything you'd probably want to avoid 'long' games and instead do short runs as different nations. On the DLC front, surely you'd want to pack in as much DLC as possible? Otherwise it's not hugely different from a few versions back.
|
|
#
?
Jul 6, 2015 17:42
|
|
|
Knuc U Kinte posted:How do I stay emperor if I convert to protestantism? I believe that Erbkaisertum will also let you do this. It's the go-to reform for circumventing HRE restrictions and becoming a Dutch Republic Emperor, which you should absolutely do at some point. China should be represented better.
|
|
#
?
Jul 6, 2015 17:47
|
|
|
Bort Bortles posted:I think beyond a certain point the cost could conceivably be made steeper Someone else had the same idea.  Wiz posted:Extra cost for increasing at each level:
|
|
#
?
Jul 6, 2015 17:57
|
|
|
Something I'd like to see to slightly reduce the impact of coring costs is having the admin efficiency bonuses you get from Admin Tech spread out more throughout the game rather than just kind of given to you in huge chunks in the 1700s. The mid-game feels like much more of a slog than the late game and even early game, where at least nations aren't super developed yet. Just kind of feels like you go from paying hundreds and hundreds of admin any time you take a sizeable chunk of territory to suddenly being able to take 100% warscore worth of provinces and core them all for 300 admin in the span of 50 years (thanks partly to the Imperialism CB as well). I'd be totally fine with the overall bonus capping at 50% if you started getting it in 5-10% chunks in like the early 1600s.
|
|
#
?
Jul 6, 2015 18:22
|
|
|
VDay posted:Something I'd like to see to slightly reduce the impact of coring costs is having the admin efficiency bonuses you get from Admin Tech spread out more throughout the game rather than just kind of given to you in huge chunks in the 1700s. The mid-game feels like much more of a slog than the late game and even early game, where at least nations aren't super developed yet. Just kind of feels like you go from paying hundreds and hundreds of admin any time you take a sizeable chunk of territory to suddenly being able to take 100% warscore worth of provinces and core them all for 300 admin in the span of 50 years (thanks partly to the Imperialism CB as well). I'd be totally fine with the overall bonus capping at 50% if you started getting it in 5-10% chunks in like the early 1600s. In the 1.13 beta it goes in 20% chunks, starting a lot earlier, and maxing out at 60%.
|
|
#
?
Jul 6, 2015 18:32
|
|
|
Sindai posted:Someone else had the same idea. Wiz also indicated on the Pdox forums that there will be an update to the beta coming later this week - presumably with that change and a few bug fixes. Obliterati posted:If anything you'd probably want to avoid 'long' games and instead do short runs as different nations. On the DLC front, surely you'd want to pack in as much DLC as possible? Otherwise it's not hugely different from a few versions back. Yeah, I mean I don't foresee a learning LP running to 1821 (and I've only had a few games go that long anyhow), but I'd want some continuity between posts explaining concepts. Like it's one thing to do 2-3 mid-length runs (one for Ottomans doing the basics, one for Colonization/Exploration, one for non-Western perspectives?) and another to do a different run for each of half a dozen different concepts. I'd also want to avoid countries that are too one-off/special-event heavy - since most Poland strategy involves feeding and free-integrating Lithuania and dealing with a special government type nobody else has, I'm not sure it's the best starter, for instance. My DLC concern is that I don't want to do a learning/tutorial LP and have it feel inaccessible to people who didn't buy all the expansions - does it make sense to note where something I'm doing only works with DLC, or would it be better to say "if you had DLC X, you could do Y here"?
|
|
#
?
Jul 6, 2015 18:46
|
|
|
Has Common Sense had the post-launch wrinkles ironed out?
|
|
#
?
Jul 6, 2015 18:53
|
|
|
RentACop posted:Has Common Sense had the post-launch wrinkles ironed out? The beta patch seems solid.
|
|
#
?
Jul 6, 2015 18:54
|
|
|
Can anyone tell me why I wouldn't be able to core these or is this a bug?
|
|
#
?
Jul 6, 2015 18:59
|
|
|
Sindai posted:Someone else had the same idea. Just to be clear, I'm not talking about a super complex system, just a rough division of the world's provinces into development potential tiers. Something like dividing the world low/limited/middling/high/huge potential provinces, with the bottom tier covering most of Scandinavia/Siberia/Africa/the Americas. There's obviously a lot of variation in how developed these provinces ended up being, but I doubt it would be worth the effort to go very in depth with this. Still, a good change nonetheless.
|
|
#
?
Jul 6, 2015 18:59
|
|
|
Trujillo posted:Can anyone tell me why I wouldn't be able to core these or is this a bug?
|
|
#
?
Jul 6, 2015 19:00
|
|
|
A Buttery Pastry posted:I'd still like to see development costs have an additional modifier based on predefined potential, scaling according to how close you are to this potential. A place like Italy for example grew very little over the time period, only doubling in population without getting richer per capita (started out really strong though), which would imply it was already pretty well-developed in relation to its potential at the start of the game. Which fits with it being as rich as it is. England on the other hand grew to six times its original population, and on top of that it more than doubled its per capita income, meaning it should have quite a bit more potential relative to its starting strength. I guess technically England and Italy might have about the same potential in their provinces, England would just have further to go before it reaches it. Yeah I'd like to see development a little more like tech. When there's a sort of ideal optimal level of development based on your current technology level, going under it means the price to develop goes down, going over it means it goes up. Then again for a huge empire I really wish development was some how more automated. Maybe not even tied to MP at all, just a thing that happens in the background based on policies and investments with the ability for the player to directly invest here and there where needed.
|
|
#
?
Jul 6, 2015 19:03
|
|
|
Poil posted:You can't core provinces when you're at war with someone who also has cores on them, I think. No one else has cores.
|
|
#
?
Jul 6, 2015 19:04
|
|
|
Jackson Taus posted:My DLC concern is that I don't want to do a learning/tutorial LP and have it feel inaccessible to people who didn't buy all the expansions - does it make sense to note where something I'm doing only works with DLC, or would it be better to say "if you had DLC X, you could do Y here"? You might just disable your DLC (checkbox in launcher on starting game) for the purposes of doing a 'vanilla' run for at least the basic game, as that's probably what a lot of people will start with.
|
|
#
?
Jul 6, 2015 19:08
|
|
|
Nitrousoxide posted:In the 1.13 beta it goes in 20% chunks, starting a lot earlier, and maxing out at 60%. What was it in 1.12? I didn't realize they had already moved it up/earlier. Either way it just feels like a really sudden change in the game between those bonuses and the Imperialism CB, but maybe that's just how my timings/playstyle have worked out so far. Like in my Russia game where I was going for Master of India, there was a very clearcut shift where I went from slowly grabbing up 6-8 Indian provinces at a time to suddenly being able to swallow all of Guarajat and Bahmanis (who owned ~50% of Indian territory) in like 3 big gulps. I guess I'm mostly just not sure why the bonuses come in huge 20% chunks. It seems like it would make sense to dole them out like every other bonus in 5-10% chunks in order to match the increasing coring costs that come about as the game goes on and the AI develops its provinces. Jackson Taus posted:Like it's one thing to do 2-3 mid-length runs (one for Ottomans doing the basics, one for Colonization/Exploration, one for non-Western perspectives?) and another to do a different run for each of half a dozen different concepts. I'd also want to avoid countries that are too one-off/special-event heavy - since most Poland strategy involves feeding and free-integrating Lithuania and dealing with a special government type nobody else has, I'm not sure it's the best starter, for instance. Just going to throw this out there but I think Muscovy makes for a pretty good learning nation. You've got an easy war target in Novgorod to beat up, some vassals to demonstrate those mechanics, colonization (albeit only same-continent) and exploration once you diplo-annex Perm, and a good demonstration of religious/cultural stuff between your own Orthodox lands, Lithuania's orthodox lands, and the Sunni hordes to your south. RentACop posted:Has Common Sense had the post-launch wrinkles ironed out? Yeah the game's super fun right now. The main thing is that it's just really different from how it was pre-CS, so there's some general gameflow stuff that everyone's still getting used to as well as the new features.
|
|
#
?
Jul 6, 2015 19:10
|
|
|
Nitrousoxide posted:In the 1.13 beta it goes in 20% chunks, starting a lot earlier, and maxing out at 60%. It still doesn't start until the 1620s, I'd really like to see smaller bonuses (5-10%) coming as early as the 1500-1550 period. E: Wiz posted:Extra cost for increasing at each level: This seems a bit harsh, 2-2.5% as a baseline seems like it would still work. I guess it comes down to how common you want big 30+ development provinces to be, going over 30 is where it starts getting really expensive here. RabidWeasel fucked around with this message at 19:21 on Jul 6, 2015 |
|
#
?
Jul 6, 2015 19:14
|
|
|
I'd do Spain, England, Muscovy or Austria for a tutorial video. The first three get you multiple wars, colonization, heavy handed diplomacy, very clear goals and specific decisions. Spain and England get you some naval material and exploration on top of that, Spain also gets you special events and probably PUs. Austria shows off the real challenges with diplomacy, the HRE, and lets you really explore complex relationships in wars. I think Ottoman's are something to be avoided, even compared to others I didn't list. Not a whole lot of diplomacy work and there are really only two ways to play them, either go for a slow historical run which is fairly bland and doesn't show off the game or go full on exploiting the mechanics to expand like crazy which can be fun but shouldn't be done as part of a tutorial style video.
|
|
#
?
Jul 6, 2015 19:16
|
|
|
KoldPT posted:I'm gonna do a Byzantium run in honor of Varoufakis. Post a pic when you siege Frankfurt.
|
|
#
?
Jul 6, 2015 19:36
|
|
|
Bold Robot posted:It's really dumb that a protectorate starting/finishing Westernization doesn't get a popup by default. Is it this one? quote:development_of_amsterdam = { I don't see what's wrong with it, so i'll just disable it if anyone can confirm please. Party In My Diapee fucked around with this message at 19:55 on Jul 6, 2015 |
|
#
?
Jul 6, 2015 19:49
|
|
|
VDay posted:Just going to throw this out there but I think Muscovy makes for a pretty good learning nation. You've got an easy war target in Novgorod to beat up, some vassals to demonstrate those mechanics, colonization (albeit only same-continent) and exploration once you diplo-annex Perm, and a good demonstration of religious/cultural stuff between your own Orthodox lands, Lithuania's orthodox lands, and the Sunni hordes to your south. Hmm, that makes a lot of sense. nessin posted:I'd do Spain, England, Muscovy or Austria for a tutorial video. The first three get you multiple wars, colonization, heavy handed diplomacy, very clear goals and specific decisions. Spain and England get you some naval material and exploration on top of that, Spain also gets you special events and probably PUs. Austria shows off the real challenges with diplomacy, the HRE, and lets you really explore complex relationships in wars. My worry with Spain or England was that there are a lot of mechanics that are specific to those countries (Iberian Wedding, War of the Roses, Parliament, all the Moorish events) that I'd need to cover and be like "but this whole thing is country-specific so don't worry about it in your game". My one concern with playing a Russia game as a tutorial is that I've never played as Russia before. What's the general strategy - take the mission and hit Novgorod first? And then just get a bunch of allies so I can deal with Poland-Lithuania to take all those sweet sweet Orthodox/same-culture-group provinces off of them? Also I was thinking doing a screen-shot LP since those seem easier and more accessible as a reference (so if a new player has a question about X, he can just scroll to that post instead of re-watching a video). Jackson Taus fucked around with this message at 19:59 on Jul 6, 2015 |
|
#
?
Jul 6, 2015 19:53
|
|
|
Back To 99 posted:Is it this one? The province modifier has no specified duration. Which means it has no duration at all and will be cleared at the earliest tick. It needs a "duration = -1" to be permanent. Baronjutter posted:When does that event fire? I've never seen it in my dutch game and these swamps are expensive to develop. It's not an event it's a decision. It also costs 50 adm and the ai will spam it every month if it can. Sorced fucked around with this message at 20:05 on Jul 6, 2015 |
|
#
?
Jul 6, 2015 20:02
|
|
|
Back To 99 posted:Is it this one? When does that event fire? I've never seen it in my dutch game and these swamps are expensive to develop.
|
|
#
?
Jul 6, 2015 20:02
|
|
|
Thanks, just replace with this for anyone else who wants to fix it before the next patch: add_permanent_province_modifier = { name = "holland_polders" duration = -1 }
|
|
#
?
Jul 6, 2015 20:06
|
|
|
Jackson Taus posted:My one concern with playing a Russia game as a tutorial is that I've never played as Russia before. What's the general strategy - take the mission and hit Novgorod first? And then just get a bunch of allies so I can deal with Poland-Lithuania to take all those sweet sweet Orthodox/same-culture-group provinces off of them? The nice thing about Russia is that you can do whatever you want. Taking the mission and swallowing up Nogorod ASAP (like, day 1 DOW) is the easy first step, but from there you can pick which direction you want to expand in. Kazan/Golden Horde might be a bit too tough early on if one or the other gets some good alliances in, but the loser of their first initial war is usually easy pickings. Alternatively you can jump on Sweden when they declare their independence and grab some land from them real quick while they're busy with Denmark and its allies. Similarly, you can either take out LO/Riga/TO or ally with Austria or Hungary and wait for Poland to declare war on TO and then declare war on Lithuania for their Orthodox lands. If you just start a few games up and let them go like ~10 years you'll see the patterns that tend to always form and can probably make a pretty good roadmap for your LP based on them. Like Kazan or Golden Horde literally always fight and one or the other ends up allying with Crimea, Timurids, or Uzbek. Poland always allies then PU's Lithuania, then goes after TO. Sweden always tries to get an alliance with either Lithuania or TO or LO before declaring independence, etc. There are tons of opportunities for early land grabbing and expansion once you know what to look out for with Muscovy, which is nice for new players because they can afford to just sit and wait for stuff to happen around them.
|
|
#
?
Jul 6, 2015 20:17
|
|
|
RabidWeasel posted:It still doesn't start until the 1620s, I'd really like to see smaller bonuses (5-10%) coming as early as the 1500-1550 period. This is my thinking as well. Make it a sliding scale that starts at around tech level 10 for 10%, then 10% for every other tech level all the way to tech level 20; The last 150 years of the game should be a mess of war and mayhem, not just the last hundred. It starting at 1600 now is an improvement but its still too late both game play wise and historically.
|
|
#
?
Jul 6, 2015 20:19
|
|
|
Dammit, I got a CTD running the beta patch that corrupted my Ironman Theocratic Byzantium save. And Basileus didn't even trigger before it happened for some reason. 
|
|
#
?
Jul 6, 2015 20:47
|
|
|
Another Person posted:In my Jaunpur hell game, I ran an army which had all merc infantry. I never worried about manpower. Only time I ever had non-merc inf was when I integrated a vassal. The only downside was when infantry tech would advance. I wish Paradox would just add a "Upgrade mercs" button like with ships. Make it cost the same, just save me the time of rebuilding them. As the PLC in my last game I would click build all and then have that be my only army with "attach to this unit" checked. Turning my ~25 stack into a 50 stack to to swing around without having to worry about attrition was pretty convenient.
|
|
#
?
Jul 6, 2015 20:54
|
|
|
Goddammit. As soon as I loaded up that Revolutionary Byz save and grabbed a couple of provinces in Europe, I got completely dogpiled by literally the entire continent. Despite a heroic defense, I was completely overrun by forces three times my size, and the glorious revolution was drowned in blood. I had to make huge concessions and be brought back into the fold of the ancien regime. I can't help but feel there are some painful parallels to certain IRL current events.
|
|
#
?
Jul 6, 2015 21:18
|
|
|
Does the colonial nation AI seem really weak to anyone else? For example, every time my Colonial Mexico with a 30k stack does a terrible job fighting one of the Mexican minors and ends up only taking one province.
|
|
#
?
Jul 6, 2015 21:40
|
|
|
James The 1st posted:Does the colonial nation AI seem really weak to anyone else? For example, every time my Colonial Mexico with a 30k stack does a terrible job fighting one of the Mexican minors and ends up only taking one province. I don't know if it's the beta patch but I've seen a lot of my CN's and vassals just not deal with rebels or natives. I constantly see my poor CN's just not respond to natives and have their colonies destroyed. A couple of my marches sat there with 40k troops next to 11k rebels for like 5 years as they slowly sieged down their fort.
|
|
#
?
Jul 6, 2015 21:57
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 10, 2024 04:27 |
|
|
Baronjutter posted:I don't know if it's the beta patch but I've seen a lot of my CN's and vassals just not deal with rebels or natives. I constantly see my poor CN's just not respond to natives and have their colonies destroyed. A couple of my marches sat there with 40k troops next to 11k rebels for like 5 years as they slowly sieged down their fort.
|
|
#
?
Jul 6, 2015 22:08
|
|