|
 i hosed up
|
#
?
Aug 11, 2015 07:57
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 16, 2024 04:55 |
|
|
PittTheElder posted:I've just been eating the prestige hit. It's -20 prestige every 15 years or something? Meanwhile I gain +40 prestige for relieving some Asian middle power of all their provinces every 2-3 years. He still has a point, that mechanic doesn't scale at all, bonuses are pretty much province only things or otherwise useless while the bribes go up and up and up. About the best one might be the +colonist one but even that gets too hard to achieve if you conquer anything as England. That whole thing needs to be revamped, I know it's new and all but it should never have been rolled out like it is. It's about as stupid as some of the event choices in the game "lose 1 stab" or "gain 1 inflation" uh let's see 150+ admin for +1 stab or the 70 or whatever admin to reduce inflation by 2......
|
|
#
?
Aug 11, 2015 08:28
|
|
|
Tahirovic posted:He still has a point, that mechanic doesn't scale at all, bonuses are pretty much province only things or otherwise useless while the bribes go up and up and up. About the best one might be the +colonist one but even that gets too hard to achieve if you conquer anything as England. that event is stupid, but if you are paying 150+ admin for +1 stab there is something funny going on.
|
|
#
?
Aug 11, 2015 08:39
|
|
|
850k manpower. About to annex Afghanistan which is blocking the entire Indian subcontinent and about 80% of China. The mans, they might be overflowing. Only 600ish provinces, and once I got to India and only paid distant overseas for coring I was at war nonstop. What an intense achievement. Node fucked around with this message at 09:15 on Aug 11, 2015 |
|
#
?
Aug 11, 2015 08:44
|
|
|
Tahirovic posted:That whole thing needs to be revamped, I know it's new and all but it should never have been rolled out like it is.
|
|
#
?
Aug 11, 2015 08:57
|
|
|
I am not sure what a good way good way to fix it is, I feel like there needs to be something to scale rewards up or scale the bribes down based on number of seats, maybe balance bribes overall. When CS released I did a couple of England games and it quickly became obvious that the numbers of this system don't add up, since then I've avoided this type of government.
|
|
#
?
Aug 11, 2015 09:51
|
|
|
PleasingFungus posted:that event is stupid, but if you are paying 150+ admin for +1 stab there is something funny going on. Each seat in the parliament is +2% stab cost, so that quickly adds up, especially with low republican tradition. I remember having to pay Edit: Found a screenshot. It was actually 363 admin  
Chickpea Roar fucked around with this message at 11:38 on Aug 11, 2015 |
|
#
?
Aug 11, 2015 11:31
|
|
|
Goddamit, Commonwealth, build some forts. They've had this bizarre corridor to their capital since I started fighting them in the 1600s, at least. You'd think that finally losing their protected eastern territory would get them to build something but nope. I checked and there's a grain and wool province both with build slots free. I have no idea how the AI decides what to build where but it shouldn't be prioritising econ buildings in crap provinces, should it? Also holy gently caress the revolutionary bonuses, fielding almost 1 million men and last I checked I was paying less than 100 ducats/month for my entire army. -50% maintenance, don't mind if I do.
|
|
#
?
Aug 11, 2015 11:47
|
|
|
Node posted:850k manpower. About to annex Afghanistan which is blocking the entire Indian subcontinent and about 80% of China. The mans, they might be overflowing. Now see if you can get Silk Road before time is up.
|
|
#
?
Aug 11, 2015 13:48
|
|
|
Gitro posted:I was really confused by that too. I kept looking through the options thinking it must be there and it just wasn't. The best you can do is annex chunks of territory and client state them. Annexing and client stating is how Napoleon did it, basically.
|
|
#
?
Aug 11, 2015 15:47
|
|
|
I just repeatedly broke the combined might of Poland-Lithuania on the frozen walls of Russia, not because of Muscovy's infinite manpower pool, but because Novgorod is a haven of mercenary scum the world over that will always have money to pay. I took three valuable Russian provinces from them, as well as Danzig, which I turned into a vassal and will eventually give me my Westernization. Just when I was thinking of quitting that campaign thanks to the boring-rear end rebel cleanup every conquest, Lithuania thinks it can snipe Finland away from me...comrades, now I understand 
|
|
#
?
Aug 11, 2015 15:52
|
|
|
Jazerus posted:Annexing and client stating is how Napoleon did it, basically. Napoleon was the first to play EU4.
|
|
#
?
Aug 11, 2015 16:17
|
|
|
I could use some advice for taking on the Ottomans. I'm playing 1.13 as Oman, and the Ottomans beat me to Egypt and the Levant. I lost a couple of wars against them while expanding in other directions, but I've got to face them soon. Recently our mutual ally Tunis broke their alliance so I thought that might be an opportunity, but the Ottomans replaced them with the giant Ming. I have Spain as an ally but in my two wars with them they have yet to send any troops. One was against the Ottomans and I barely managed to white peace, the other was against Sind or Gujarat and I basically won Spain a handful of provinces. You're welcome, Spain. Anyways, here's the situation:  (Aside, how does uncovering terra incognita work? How am I getting the Hudson Bay before Madagascar? Is it basically required to get exploration if you want to do any colonization?) And the political map:  looks like Brittany has Madagascar. WTF. Here's the war screen. It would be tough to beat them alone (my manpower will go up to 100K and I have admin so can get a lot of mercenaries) but their allies make it impossible.  Here you can see Ming and Ottoman's strength:  My diplomatic situation. Just finished feeding Kaffa to Ethiopia, still haven't taken on Mutapa's inland provinces. I have Tunis and Spain as allies plus Bukhara is a mutual ally with the Ottomans. And the middle east fort situation  So, what do I do? Keep ignoring the Ottomans? I could keep expanding into Persia and eastward into India. I could start eating Mutapa. I could try fighting Portugal for South Africa (would I have a chance without landing any troops in Europe?) I could wait for the Ottomans to get involved in Europe but that's only happened once in the last 200 years (fairly recently... and they got trounced into giving up Serbia and Bosnia) and my manpower was depleted from an unexpectedly difficult war against some East African nation. Oh, and the Mamluks. If I could vassalize them that would help me take down the Ottomans in any war that I come out ahead in. Unfortuately they ended up as an OPM on Crete.  I have 5 of their cores in Upper Egypt/Nubia, though 2 will expire in 1720 (8 years). If I start giving them provinces do I have a reasonable chance of being able to vassalize or will I be giving up provinces for no reason? Alternative is to wait for someone to take them out then release. I suppose I may as well wait until 1720 either way. Last question, how much should I be spending on development points? I hadn't played since Art of War and I didn't even notice that you could improve development until like 1550. I've sprinkled some points here and there but it hasn't been a major part of my expenditures. SurgicalOntologist fucked around with this message at 16:33 on Aug 11, 2015 |
|
#
?
Aug 11, 2015 16:29
|
|
|
I want to congratulate the Indian AIs in your game for their fine borders, gently caress Spain though. Development is basically something you do when you have a great ruler and you start getting excess monarch points, which actually kind of makes sense if you think about it.
|
|
#
?
Aug 11, 2015 18:58
|
|
|
Holy poo poo Independent Canada? I've never seen the AI do that
|
|
#
?
Aug 11, 2015 19:15
|
|
|
TTBF posted:Now see if you can get Silk Road before time is up. I already got that one as the Ottomans. It would probably take too long fighting through all their forts through to Hudavenigar or however you spell it. 420 Gank Mid posted:Holy poo poo Independent Canada? I've never seen the AI do that The last game I played I saw the AI form Hindustan, Malaya, and an independent Canada. I was impressed.
|
|
#
?
Aug 11, 2015 19:16
|
|
|
420 Gank Mid posted:Holy poo poo Independent Canada? I've never seen the AI do that It happened on my game. They were dutch or something.
|
|
#
?
Aug 11, 2015 19:16
|
|
|
Yeah, if Canada is formed by not GB or France, and is AI controlled, then there is a decent enough chance of them gaining independence.
|
|
#
?
Aug 11, 2015 19:25
|
|
|
Canada usually always forms in my games, but I usually always push GB's poo poo in so that often has a lot to do with it. Also Peru became independent and its own colonial power, colonizing around Brazil (creating their own CN which later declared its independence), colonizing africa, and invading and holding some of Japan. Baronjutter fucked around with this message at 19:47 on Aug 11, 2015 |
|
#
?
Aug 11, 2015 19:45
|
|
|
Independent Dutch Canada, and Scottish Colombia. The entire North American east coast is Florida. Edit: got Hindustan too.
|
|
#
?
Aug 11, 2015 19:45
|
|
|
SurgicalOntologist posted:how does uncovering terra incognita work? How am I getting the Hudson Bay before Madagascar? Is it basically required to get exploration if you want to do any colonization?) What's being revealed is information other nations you know have discovered about 50 years ago (this number is affected by modifiers such as relations, culture group and other stuff). Europeans are the only AI nations to take exploration, I believe so all your map information is coming from Europe which gives you Hudson Bay before Madagascar since your Muslim neighbors aren't doing any exploration.
|
|
#
?
Aug 11, 2015 20:14
|
|
|
Zettace posted:What's being revealed is information other nations you know have discovered about 50 years ago (this number is affected by modifiers such as relations, culture group and other stuff). Europeans are the only AI nations to take exploration, I believe so all your map information is coming from Europe which gives you Hudson Bay before Madagascar since your Muslim neighbors aren't doing any exploration. This is also one of the reasons taking Exploration first or second as a non-European is often a great idea, if you have some income to spare. It's usually better to go island hop to get a border with the Europeans and Westernize rather than waiting for them to come to you, and since your neighbors won't be colonizing (except until very late like the Malay states) you have free reign to colonize all your home region.
|
|
#
?
Aug 11, 2015 20:38
|
|
|
 Thanks everyone for the advice. It looks like I'll have to try 1,001 provinces with the Ottomans, but I'm still pretty impressed by the amount of bodies Russia can throw against anyone. There was no way I could afford that 1,500 force limit.
|
|
#
?
Aug 11, 2015 21:04
|
|
|
420 Gank Mid posted:Holy poo poo Independent Canada? I've never seen the AI do that I actually see at least a few CNs break off every game, last game the USA formed from a Spanish colony on the entire east coast without my intervention at all.
|
|
#
?
Aug 11, 2015 22:11
|
|
|
If I'm France, how should I be going about trying to trigger the Burgundian Succession Crisis? Should I declare war on them and then keep it going while the warscore is maxed out to force the white peace and flip the lands to me for free? Or is that still going to take like 20 years of waiting and I'm better off just focusing somewhere else and hoping the event fires naturally?
|
|
#
?
Aug 11, 2015 23:15
|
|
|
VDay posted:If I'm France, how should I be going about trying to trigger the Burgundian Succession Crisis? Should I declare war on them and then keep it going while the warscore is maxed out to force the white peace and flip the lands to me for free? Or is that still going to take like 20 years of waiting and I'm better off just focusing somewhere else and hoping the event fires naturally? You've got a 70-90% chance it'll just fire if you do nothing. But if you like to boost your odds a bit you can go to war for some of their HRE land that's near enough to fabricate and core (Franche Compt is the most eligible for this) because it's not land you're going to get otherwise, and you increase the chances of the event since France being at war with Burgundy lowers the MTTH or the AI is just using the king in combat or sieging and he dies.
|
|
#
?
Aug 11, 2015 23:29
|
|
|
Had Transylvania as a vassal, diploannexed it, then about a year later it gets the Internal Conflicts disaster despite it not existing.
|
|
#
?
Aug 12, 2015 00:37
|
|
|
Vassals  took some land from Majapahit to release Sunda, released Sunda, clicked the button to force the Sikh religion on them, only after all their provinces were occupied did I notice that they somehow had no legitimacy? They also didn't take any of the good Hindu/Sikh decisions so they just immediately collapsed back into Majapahit. Great job guys!The only blemish in my Animist->Hindu->Sikh Ternate game though, ripped through all of Borneo and most of Malacca by 1510. So incredibly overpowered.
|
|
#
?
Aug 12, 2015 00:44
|
|
|
First Pope game since the new patch (rage quit my Ternate game because ~ming~). I like Milan a lot but the pope is an aggressive monster with the fabricate and AE modifiers, along with all the special events. Some fun stuff so far this game: -Djerid -Scotland beats the poo poo out of England -Crimea gets pretty big -Denmark actually beats Sweden -LO going on rampage -Castile put Aragon into the PU like normal, then it broke, then Aragon put Castile into a PU and it broke again. They've been going back and forth trying to kill each other the past 100 years. -Portugal only colonized the Caribbean and South Africa. I'm used to them going crazy in Brazil. 
|
|
#
?
Aug 12, 2015 02:05
|
|
|
Is it possible to define new regions? in my colonial trade good modding I'm trying to separate out south eastern America for tea and other subtropical stuff.
|
|
#
?
Aug 12, 2015 02:09
|
|
|
SurgicalOntologist posted:... Welp, got completely owned by the Ottomans. I found a moment when their allies wouldn't be called in, plus they were westernizing so I thought they were unstable. However, Ottoman's allies promptly ended their wars and came to join, the Ottomans immediately finished Westernizing, and my European allies with tons of troops never moved a muscle (I figured I could negotiate Military Access for them... apparently that just works for vassals?). I won a handful of giant battles but the Ottomans won the manpower countdown race. Next time, I'll take Explortation first, lock Europe out of the east if possible, and prioritize getting to the levant before the Ottomans do. Also I could have been more aggressive pushing into India.
|
|
#
?
Aug 12, 2015 02:30
|
|
|
I picked up CS a few days ago and I've concluded that forts on borders kinda suck in at least some important cases. This seems strange, so please tell me how I am wrong. Here's a situation:  I am Tunis. I am liable to wind up at war with the Mamluks because they're allied with Morocco and because I'm allied with the Ottomans. Because the Mamluks are big and because from experience I know that they like going after me first in wars (AI seems to like knocking out weaker nations in wars early), I know I have to go on the defensive and play the attrition game. As it stands, an AI doomstack usually sieges an uncaptured province before moving on, so long as there are no armies nearby they can beat up. So in the situation above, the AI will siege down about a dozen or so provinces before encountering a fort or (if played correctly) my army. In the current setup, unfortified provinces provide negligible warscore, so lets say all dozen provinces are maybe 5 warscore in total. At one tick per province movement and one tick per siege that's 24 ticks of attrition in desert territories and a year of sieging in exchange for 5 warscore. In about a year, the Ottomans can siege down a few forts, which is worth a bit more than 5 warscore. Wost case scenario, I'll have to force a defensive battle in the highlands of Kef against an enemy who's already lost 20K worth of manpower (24 ticks of about 3% of a 30K stack). When that battle is won (let's assume that it's a 1v1 war, if I have the Ottomans in on my side it favors border forts even more because I can just deny battle and warscore, and a border fort is easy warscore for the Mamluks, so I have to win at least one battle to not lose), I can carpet siege captured territory and force the Mamluks to eat attrition all over again. So let's consider the situation where I build a fort on or near by border somewhere, doesn't matter where. Keeping to the same strategy, they'll take about a dozen (exact number doesn't matter here) extra ticks of attrition before arriving near my core. However, that border province is now valuable: they arrive at my core with quite a bit more warscore than they would have otherwise. To regain that warscore, I'll have to march a large force down to my border and reclaim the fort, which by this point has had time to fortify. This is bad for two reasons: 1) the Mamluks might finish retreating by the time I get there and will have more men in the form of allies or more of their own stacks 2) they'll certainly have time to recoup while I'm sieging down my own territory. However, if I'm going to build a fort, there's no rule that states it must be on the border. So compare that border fort to one in Sfax or Gafsa. They've still lost about 18K manpower by the time they reach the Sfax/Gafsa fort, but now I have options: I can engage then and there, or I can retreat and allow the AI to siege down the fort before fighting. Assuming option 2 and a victory on the field, I need now only siege down a fort with about 100 men in it before recovering from the warscore loss, and still have the option to carpet siege the lost territory and force them to eat the attrition all over gain. In short, it seems to be a choice between accepting a loss in warscore that will either be harder to get back border fort) or easier to get back.
|
|
#
?
Aug 12, 2015 03:47
|
|
|
 Alans, they mercenaries of unmatched skill. Ofaloaf fucked around with this message at 04:13 on Aug 12, 2015 |
|
#
?
Aug 12, 2015 04:10
|
|
|
Basically if you can only build one fort you'd want it on Jufra. Blocks him from passing to your interior until he takes it. If you can build two then second on Gafsa is good. You don't want to let him take half your land in case you have enough money and manpower to build more regiments in case you're getting hosed. Plus you get more War Exhaustion the more provinces you lose. Remember that forts add mini forts to all surrounding provinces (meaning you have to take the main fort or keep an army on the mini fort to keep the province and move past it). The opposite case is you are Italy in which case you build forts on every province because gently caress you im rich
|
|
#
?
Aug 12, 2015 04:11
|
|
|
I'm having a lot of fun using the HRE as a big stick after turning them into Vassals. "choo choo"
|
|
#
?
Aug 12, 2015 05:02
|
|
|
Epinephrine posted:I am Tunis. I am liable to wind up at war with the Mamluks because they're allied with Morocco and because I'm allied with the Ottomans. Because the Mamluks are big and because from experience I know that they like going after me first in wars (AI seems to like knocking out weaker nations in wars early), I know I have to go on the defensive and play the attrition game. As it stands, an AI doomstack usually sieges an uncaptured province before moving on, so long as there are no armies nearby they can beat up. So in the situation above, the AI will siege down about a dozen or so provinces before encountering a fort or (if played correctly) my army. In the current setup, unfortified provinces provide negligible warscore, so lets say all dozen provinces are maybe 5 warscore in total. At one tick per province movement and one tick per siege that's 24 ticks of attrition in desert territories and a year of sieging in exchange for 5 warscore. In about a year, the Ottomans can siege down a few forts, which is worth a bit more than 5 warscore. Wost case scenario, I'll have to force a defensive battle in the highlands of Kef against an enemy who's already lost 20K worth of manpower (24 ticks of about 3% of a 30K stack). When that battle is won (let's assume that it's a 1v1 war, if I have the Ottomans in on my side it favors border forts even more because I can just deny battle and warscore, and a border fort is easy warscore for the Mamluks, so I have to win at least one battle to not lose), I can carpet siege captured territory and force the Mamluks to eat attrition all over again. On arrival land attrition has been removed, if that's what you mean by a tick on movement. I rarely stick forts on my border, since the AI is pretty happy to use their whole stack to siege an unforted province, it lets forts cover more territory and gives me more flexibility to engage. I'm also not super fond of mountain forts in territory I want to actually fight in. The attrition is nice, but if for whatever reason the enemy gets on them before you do you've just given them a perfect defensive position, attrition or no.
|
|
#
?
Aug 12, 2015 05:50
|
|
|
aeglus posted:Basically if you can only build one fort you'd want it on Jufra. Blocks him from passing to your interior until he takes it. If you can build two then second on Gafsa is good. You don't want to let him take half your land in case you have enough money and manpower to build more regiments in case you're getting hosed. Plus you get more War Exhaustion the more provinces you lose. You're missing Epinephrine's point; they're arguing that you do not want a fort on Jufra, because the enemy taking it costs you more in warscore + sieging it back than if you had no fort there at all. This is true if and only if you're planning on fighting wars well into your own territory & are willing to take the corresponding damage to your income and war exhaustion, but it might be a viable strategy? Maybe.
|
|
#
?
Aug 12, 2015 07:35
|
|
|
Normal? posted:I'm having a lot of fun using the HRE as a big stick after turning them into Vassals. 1558, huh. How'd you manage that?
|
|
#
?
Aug 12, 2015 07:36
|
|
|
He got a PU over Hungary, he kept Italy in and the Burgundian Inheritance fired, those things are half of what you need to get that far.
|
|
#
?
Aug 12, 2015 08:11
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 16, 2024 04:55 |
|
|
PleasingFungus posted:You're missing Epinephrine's point; they're arguing that you do not want a fort on Jufra, because the enemy taking it costs you more in warscore + sieging it back than if you had no fort there at all. This is true if and only if you're planning on fighting wars well into your own territory & are willing to take the corresponding damage to your income and war exhaustion, but it might be a viable strategy? Maybe. I think if your strategy is to let them TAKE your forts, then you are going to lose the war. He gets no benefit if he moves his fort from Jufra to Gafsa. The enemy just gets a bunch of free provinces to run cavalry around for a ton of free pillage money and you still are out on warscore because if you couldn't beat their army at Jufra you can't beat it at Gafsa. Meanwhile you now have less money and less territory to raise troops.
|
|
#
?
Aug 12, 2015 08:33
|
|