|
StashAugustine posted:Eighty Years War says hi edit: I feel my point has gotten blurred and it is a pointless argument and I am not ready to die on this hill so I'm going to try to stop posting about it. AAAAA! Real Muenster fucked around with this message at 23:00 on Sep 22, 2015 |
#
?
Sep 22, 2015 22:57
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 12, 2024 02:37 |
|
|
Expressing the full complexity of European alliance politics, while at the same time making it accessible and enjoyable to a player, is very, very hard. Games like Civilization, that try to do this (you negotiate each declaration of war with the interested parties and the AI tries to figure out how much it likes that declaration), end up essentially just not having alliances. EU4 is very far ahead of Civ in alliance logic, even though alliances are still essentially exploitable. Remember that the game is also real-time, meaning that the whole system can't be too cumbersome.Bort Bortles posted:The richest land in Europe revolting against Habsburg rule /=/ the Ottomans and Austrians fighting a foreverwar because the Ottomans declared war on Genoa for Scio in the game EU4. I am talking about fun gameplay, not historical precedent, which is something Wiz has had to make plenty of adjustments for in the past. Major wars were fought for less reason, however, every war was not a major war; there are no "border scuffles" in EU4 and needing to deal with five countries to peace out the war target for one province is getting old.
|
|
#
?
Sep 22, 2015 23:11
|
|
|
Dibujante posted:I do think that it makes sense for defensive calls to be as optional as offensive calls - Genoa calling in Austria might wreck the alliance, which Genoa may want to keep in place as a hedge against Venice. A lot of problems would be reduced by manual defensive calls combined with the removal or reduction of the "is defensive war" bonus. It would at least then be up to the player / AI whether or not it's worth calling in the allies or just giving up.
|
|
#
?
Sep 22, 2015 23:20
|
|
|
I too would like there to be more limited warfare/border skirmishes. Right now almost every war feels like Napoleon or even Civil War-era total war.
|
|
#
?
Sep 23, 2015 00:18
|
|
|
Interesting thought: Border Dispute CB that lets you take a border province, but ONLY that province, and no allies can be called on either side, maybe even with the draw back that if you lose the war, the enemy can take one of your provinces at no cost. Maybe a limiting mechanic where it's only valid against neighboring nations that are close to your own development so you can't just slowly beat down a neighbor with weak troops forever. Although the ability to check off allies to send a call to arms for on the War Declared screen would be sweet.
|
|
#
?
Sep 23, 2015 00:22
|
|
|
I hope this hasn't been asked recently before but I was wondering. What is the advantage of keeping small vassals around, in an area where they can't absorb enemy territory? As Bohemia I have several HRE vassals and I was wondering what reasons there would be not to just diploannex my vassals, one by one. I understand people liked to feed their vassals territory so as to absorb AE costs but I was wondering if there was anything else. On top of that, for my first military idea I was thinking either Offensive or Quantity. Are those two good picks and is there any other strong ones to consider for Bohemia?
|
|
#
?
Sep 23, 2015 03:57
|
|
|
Is there any way to force ships on a Protect Trade assignment to actually use the ports of vassals? It's pretty stupid to send a dozen ships to protect trade in Crimea and then see them immediately turn around and plot a course from the Black Sea all the way around up to the Baltic just because they don't want to repair at Moldova's coast. Roadie fucked around with this message at 04:17 on Sep 23, 2015 |
|
#
?
Sep 23, 2015 04:14
|
|
|
SkySteak posted:I hope this hasn't been asked recently before but I was wondering. What is the advantage of keeping small vassals around, in an area where they can't absorb enemy territory? As Bohemia I have several HRE vassals and I was wondering what reasons there would be not to just diploannex my vassals, one by one. quote:I understand people liked to feed their vassals territory so as to absorb AE costs but I was wondering if there was anything else. Feeding vassals helps handling AE only in very specific cases. Maybe you mean OE?
|
|
#
?
Sep 23, 2015 04:32
|
|
|
When I have Lithuania in a PU, at +140 opinion and 0% liberty desire, why does it sometimes just leave a 27-stack (backed by full manpower) just sitting there instead of doing literally anything to help in a war where my stuff right next to Lithuanian border is getting sieged?
|
|
#
?
Sep 23, 2015 07:12
|
|
|
Deltasquid posted:Is the "Failed administration" event from the admin ideas group supposed to fire when I'm at positive stability? According to the wiki, it should only fire if I'm at -2 stab. I've had it trigger thrice in like 20 years and it's getting a bit silly that this idea group just tanks my stability. In paradoxese, an equal sign is actually greater than or equal to. So the line "stability = -2" means that it will trigger if your stability is -2 or higher.
|
|
#
?
Sep 23, 2015 07:36
|
|
|
So having played this game for 1,100 hours, I've just now finally started a proper game as France (ignoring the BBB achievement earlier.) I'm going for Better Than Napoleon. Holy poo poo. Guys. You might not realize this, but France is pretty strong.
|
|
#
?
Sep 23, 2015 08:05
|
|
|
Fister Roboto posted:In paradoxese, an equal sign is actually greater than or equal to. So the line "stability = -2" means that it will trigger if your stability is -2 or higher. Well that clears it up, then! Thanks.
|
|
#
?
Sep 23, 2015 11:04
|
|
|
Bort Bortles posted:Nah it is may more realistic that they run themselves out of manpower and deeply into debt when I am trying to take a peripheral off-culture province from them and dont want more. Actually it is.
|
|
#
?
Sep 23, 2015 11:44
|
|
|
Node posted:So having played this game for 1,100 hours, I've just now finally started a proper game as France (ignoring the BBB achievement earlier.) I'm going for Better Than Napoleon. Who could have thought that 20% bonus manpower as a tradition would be viable?
|
|
#
?
Sep 23, 2015 12:40
|
|
|
Fister Roboto posted:In paradoxese, an equal sign is actually greater than or equal to. So the line "stability = -2" means that it will trigger if your stability is -2 or higher. Is there a reason for this? Assigning a different meaning to = always seems like a really, really strange tradition to buck.
|
|
#
?
Sep 23, 2015 12:59
|
|
|
Is it normal for the AI to constantly try and eat provinces? I would demand unlawful territory but my Imperial Authority is down the drain thanks to a ton of provinces being of the HRE (due to Austria being under a PU with Hungary) and I don't want to burn what IA I have. On the other hand I've lost 3-4 OPMs including an elector.
|
|
#
?
Sep 23, 2015 13:44
|
|
|
SkySteak posted:Is it normal for the AI to constantly try and eat provinces? I would demand unlawful territory but my Imperial Authority is down the drain thanks to a ton of provinces being of the HRE (due to Austria being under a PU with Hungary) and I don't want to burn what IA I have. On the other hand I've lost 3-4 OPMs including an elector. Yes. The HRE will always slowly disintegrate because of the strong states eating smaller ones. You need to pass the Landfriede (internal peace) reform asap to stop this. Easier said than done though. edit: Passing reforms is harder now than it used to be. A great deal of time will be spent on negative IA because of the religious split. To pass a reform, take land from non-members and add it to the empire right after your emperor dies (free +10 IA) in batches of 40 provinces. It gets a little cheaper if you won the Thirty years war, and winning by default counts too. The game considers all provinces from Iceland to Georgia and Urals to be "Europe", so you get eligibe land from beating Ottomans, Russia and Scandinavia, and everything in between. vuohi fucked around with this message at 14:00 on Sep 23, 2015 |
|
#
?
Sep 23, 2015 13:52
|
|
|
SkySteak posted:Is it normal for the AI to constantly try and eat provinces? I would demand unlawful territory but my Imperial Authority is down the drain thanks to a ton of provinces being of the HRE (due to Austria being under a PU with Hungary) and I don't want to burn what IA I have. On the other hand I've lost 3-4 OPMs including an elector. Also as emperor dont forget to use "Send Warning" diplomatic action and "Proclaim Guarantee". Warning a country makes it so you will be called to defend anyone they attack that you share a border with, but you must be more powerful than them. Countries are also way less likely to attack anyone who might be able to drag you into a war like this. This is very strong at stopping middling powers in the HRE like Saxony, Bavaria, Savoy, or whoever else has gotten up to 4+ provinces. Unlike warnings, proclaiming guarantees costs a diplo relations slot, since as Emperor you already have this basic arrangement for free with Free Cities and hopefully you are also allying electors, you can use this mostly for the rare instance where a vulnerable elector will not ally you (allied to Rival, hostile or outraged attitude, etc.) Also if you start out in the Southern part of the Empire you should really focus on keeping Italy in the family. You can do this by taking Roma, Romagna, and Urbino from Papal States, and all of Venice's provinces in Italy except their capitol. Coring, and adding all of those provinces to the empire before 1490. Doing this means you get to get a nice foothold in 2 of the best trade nodes, you get nice high development land, and you keep Milan, Savoy, Mantua, Ferrara, Siena, and Lucca all in the empire. Some of them can make for great backup free cities edit: actually I looked it up and you need to basically take all of the Pope's land 
420 Gank Mid fucked around with this message at 14:13 on Sep 23, 2015 |
|
#
?
Sep 23, 2015 14:07
|
|
|
Yeah the problem will be the penalties for killing the pope.
|
|
#
?
Sep 23, 2015 14:50
|
|
|
Tahirovic posted:Yeah the problem will be the penalties for killing the pope. Nah, you can get rid of those by just releasing him as a vassal as soon as you've added his lands to the empire. The event just needs all of those colored provinces to be in the Empire and owned by a tag that is a member.
|
|
#
?
Sep 23, 2015 14:52
|
|
|
420 Gank Mid posted:Also as emperor dont forget to use "Send Warning" diplomatic action and "Proclaim Guarantee". Thank you for the advice. This is my current situation in my game:   Austria under Hungary's PU is nuking any Imperial Authority (as their provinces are counted as outside the Empire) while also growing heresy risks pushing it down even further. I have been dodging Unlawful Province demands because I honestly feel I'd be nuking what IA have gotten and well, my manpower doesn't recover at a fast rate.
|
|
#
?
Sep 23, 2015 14:53
|
|
|
junidog posted:Is there a reason for this? Assigning a different meaning to = always seems like a really, really strange tradition to buck. Because it keeps the scripting language simple, I'd imagine, as well as maintaining backwards compatibility with older scripts (EU4 when released was essentially EU3+ with a whole lot of directly copied files). The script allows you perfectly well to express a true equal by doing code:
|
|
#
?
Sep 23, 2015 15:08
|
|
|
junidog posted:Is there a reason for this? Assigning a different meaning to = always seems like a really, really strange tradition to buck. Just legacy really. Newer games have >= and such.
|
|
#
?
Sep 23, 2015 15:13
|
|
|
Bort Bortles posted:Nah it is may more realistic that they run themselves out of manpower and deeply into debt when I am trying to take a peripheral off-culture province from them and dont want more. Honestly, whenever the AI declares war on me (usually to conquer a single mission province) I will send my entire army and manpower pool to their deaths defending that province. Then I'll run my country to the brink of bankruptcy funneling mercenaries into the breach because I refuse to lose a war to video game AI. If I gain the advantage I'll take my time patiently 100%ing the country and taking a ton of their stuff in the peace. Basically the AI behaves like stubborn and petty human players.
|
|
#
?
Sep 23, 2015 15:33
|
|
|
Since when are the extra missionaries from Jerusalem and Mecca gone? Or is it because I am Hindu? I really needed those extra missionaries, now I kinda hosed up an iron man game by loading myself with extra wrong-religion territory when it was supposed to help me get rid of it. Guess I will have to try and spawn a Hindu Najd vassal somehow.
|
|
#
?
Sep 23, 2015 15:33
|
|
|
Node posted:Holy poo poo. Guys. You might not realize this, but France is pretty strong.  I realized the power of compounding idea groups with national ideas first with France, which is to say, holy loving crap
|
|
#
?
Sep 23, 2015 15:34
|
|
|
SkySteak posted:Thank you for the advice. This is my current situation in my game: PU's are annulled on monarch death if the liege has negative prestige. Look for a good moment to declare war on Hungary and make a peace that lowers its prestige as much as possible. Also look at Hungary's rivals and enemies for potential alliances.
|
|
#
?
Sep 23, 2015 15:36
|
|
|
Somebody asked about how Sikhism appears, here it goes:
|
|
#
?
Sep 23, 2015 16:14
|
|
|
Deutsch Nozzle posted:Honestly, whenever the AI declares war on me (usually to conquer a single mission province) I will send my entire army and manpower pool to their deaths defending that province. Then I'll run my country to the brink of bankruptcy funneling mercenaries into the breach because I refuse to lose a war to video game AI. If I gain the advantage I'll take my time patiently 100%ing the country and taking a ton of their stuff in the peace. Maybe I should code the AI to be reasonable to players that act reasonable, and petty and stubborn to ones that don't.
|
|
#
?
Sep 23, 2015 16:16
|
|
|
Wiz posted:Just legacy really. Newer games have >= and such.
|
|
#
?
Sep 23, 2015 16:29
|
|
|
Wiz posted:Maybe I should code the AI to be reasonable to players that act reasonable, and petty and stubborn to ones that don't. Shouldn't take more than a day of programming and a night of testing I'm sure.
|
|
#
?
Sep 23, 2015 16:31
|
|
|
PittTheElder posted:In a sort of related vein, can the AI throwing everything they have into every war be addressed? I think that's by far the biggest 'flaw' in the game right now, if you can even call it that. It's in place for offensive wars, where your allies are generally less likely to help you unless you're fighting their rivals, but it could stand to be done for defensive wars too I think. Agreed. The real problem there is that it's too easy/cheap to ship huge armies overseas, I think - the same problem that led to native tribes being given unique "have a huge army" buildings, and that led to the colonial AIs being specifically constrained not to send troops out of the colonies. That doesn't seem to be a problem EU is likely to fix any time soon, though.
|
|
#
?
Sep 23, 2015 16:33
|
|
|
Deutsch Nozzle posted:Honestly, whenever the AI declares war on me (usually to conquer a single mission province) I will send my entire army and manpower pool to their deaths defending that province. Then I'll run my country to the brink of bankruptcy funneling mercenaries into the breach because I refuse to lose a war to video game AI. If I gain the advantage I'll take my time patiently 100%ing the country and taking a ton of their stuff in the peace. Hardly, I would never give up a single province unless I was being utterly over run with no hope of winning. The AI will at least admit defeat if you can run down their manpower and drag it out.
|
|
#
?
Sep 23, 2015 16:36
|
|
|
Wiz posted:Maybe I should code the AI to be reasonable to players that act reasonable, and petty and stubborn to ones that don't. mmmm you're right, maybe I should play this sandbox video game in a more 'reasonable' fashion.
|
|
#
?
Sep 23, 2015 18:03
|
|
|
Deutsch Nozzle posted:mmmm you're right, maybe I should play this sandbox video game in a more 'reasonable' fashion. No, the point isn't to make you play differently but rather that AI does not need to be a stubborn jerk if the player isn't, so maybe have it act accordingly.
|
|
#
?
Sep 23, 2015 18:11
|
|
|
Shayu posted:
Bort Bortles posted:Right, which is why I am dropping it. I'm not trying to decry the game or bitch and moan about it so I am not going to keep trying to prove a point that is now quite apparent I am doing a poor job of. Deutsch Nozzle posted:
edit: [based on my knowledge from reading a bunch of period-relevant books] A lot of times wars ended because the powers fighting ran out of money or the lack of a desire to pursue the war as far as it would have to go to end it decisively. I think wars in EU4 could be more expensive and the fact that mercenaries are limitless and only bound by two things (money available to recruit them and them being available (which is based on time because they regenerate)) hurts the game because I can just endlessly recruit mercs to make up pretty much any deficiency because I also essentially have endless money through loans. I would really like it if armies and mercs were more expensive, and mercs were limited in some way like they are in CKII. edit2: For gameplay reasons I think army maintenance is pretty okay but wars were really loving expensive and tended to wreck the economy of areas the war was fought in for years, which is now somewhat modeled by provinces having loot bars, which I think is awesome. AAAAA! Real Muenster fucked around with this message at 18:22 on Sep 23, 2015 |
|
#
?
Sep 23, 2015 18:12
|
|
|
PleasingFungus posted:Agreed. Ant it ties back into the fact that the AI doesn't take naval attrition, so they happily ship troops around the world. I guess they could just be set to get fleet basing rights or something though and it would change nothing. The AI just needs to be better at seeing that it has nothing to gain and abstaining from participating, same as the player does.
|
|
#
?
Sep 23, 2015 18:23
|
|
Yes, it's like a lava lamp.
|
SkySteak posted:Thank you for the advice. This is my current situation in my game: If an HRE member (and worse if its an elector) gets put under a PU as emperor you need to really focus to end it. There's a few ways to go about it, the most straight-forward to get a CB (or if you really cant just eat the penalties for no CB war) and beat the snot out of them. No matter how large a vassal or union is you can break it with 100% warscore and it will probably be the only thing you can afford in that war, it also may cost several hundred diplomatic points so be prepared. Another is to try to get the PU to end naturally. This happens when the monarch dies and the senior partner has negative prestige, or if the junior partner's opinion of the union leader is too low (any negative sum). Or if the junior partner has a liberty desire at 50% or higher you can ask them if they want you to support their independence. This is probably the least reliable way because AI liberty desire is not visible to the player other than their own vassals and even when they want your support, you still have to wait for the AI junior nation to declare war themselves. As far as manpower goes, get Quantity. Even if it's just for the first idea, because +50% nation manpower modifier is probably the most powerful out of any first pick for any military group. Deutsch Nozzle posted:Honestly, whenever the AI declares war on me (usually to conquer a single mission province) I will send my entire army and manpower pool to their deaths defending that province. Then I'll run my country to the brink of bankruptcy funneling mercenaries into the breach because I refuse to lose a war to video game AI. If I gain the advantage I'll take my time patiently 100%ing the country and taking a ton of their stuff in the peace. I like that the AI will bitterly defend their territory to the last man even if it's just some bumfuck province, just like the flavor text when you complete a core. What makes less sense and is less fun for me at least is when their allies will bleed to death with them. I've been doing a Sun God achievement run lately and I must be cursed because Castille got halfway through eating Aragon and then became the Jr. PU to Portugal, who is allied to France, who somehow this game actually has nearly no colonies but still sails all the way down to keep trying to land on my shores for at least 5 years. So now every war to take land in South America is against Portugal/Castille, who drag in France. I have sunk France's navy in every war, but since the wars drag on for nearly a decade each, they usually just replace them and keep trying to sneak troops over the entire duration of their war. Meanwhile I carpet siege every CN that they have in South America, and some in Mexico and Carib, win 80%+ of battles on the continent. Because I can't actually mount an invasion against a fully united Iberia and France on the continent, I can't really much but sit on a fully occupied South America for 10 years and hope maybe call for peace or rebels will break them. Even after 5 years when France arbitrarily decides to call it quits after losing its 3rd navy. Castille + Portugal have 150k+ troops combined and despite me being ahead on miltech every single province I have in south america is 1-2 manpower development each so I have ~90 force limits with full quantity. I am 3rd in total development, and 9th in Force Limits. Without actually being able to invade the continent the most I can ever hope for in a war is 15-25% warscore worth of peace after nearly a decade of complete occupation of land I can take maybe 10-20% of what's left at a time. I'm on track to finish the achievement even with this grinding pace but the wars just aren't fun like this where both sides are just staring each other down, I have occupied all the land I want and could hold it indefinitely, but for some reason I can't actually ever take it. What I would like to see is that land in colonial nations is scaled up so that it gives much more warscore when occupied because full occupying was giving me basically 0% warscore against Portugal. Maybe it could also cost more in the peace, but at least give you enough warscore to make a reasonable peace. Also non-colonial nations, or nations that have no interest in a particular colonial region should have a malus to joining colonial wars, or maybe there should just not be a mandatory defensive call to arms vs colonial nations, and colonizers like Castille or Portugal would have to lose prestige to call in allies against "rowdy natives" instead of proper European foes.
|
|
#
?
Sep 23, 2015 18:37
|
|
|
Dear France, natives are rowdy again pls ship armies to Brazil Hugs, Brotugal
|
|
#
?
Sep 23, 2015 18:45
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 12, 2024 02:37 |
|
|
420 Gank Mid posted:If an HRE member (and worse if its an elector) gets put under a PU as emperor you need to really focus to end it. There's a few ways to go about it, the most straight-forward to get a CB (or if you really cant just eat the penalties for no CB war) and beat the snot out of them. No matter how large a vassal or union is you can break it with 100% warscore and it will probably be the only thing you can afford in that war, it also may cost several hundred diplomatic points so be prepared. Peace deal Diplomatic point cost is now capped at 200 per action, so it won't be worse than that, but yeah, just do this. quote:I like that the AI will bitterly defend their territory to the last man even if it's just some bumfuck province, just like the flavor text when you complete a core. What makes less sense and is less fun for me at least is when their allies will bleed to death with them. This. This is what upsets me.
|
|
#
?
Sep 23, 2015 18:52
|
|