|
Pondering a game as something in India, perhaps as Bahmanis. (Visiting Hyderabad right now so inspired to play as a nation containing it). Any advice for starting apart from what's in the wiki? http://www.eu4wiki.com/Bahmanis I've never played outside of Europe.
|
#
?
Sep 29, 2015 06:15
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 10, 2024 06:18 |
|
|
alcaras posted:Pondering a game as something in India, perhaps as Bahmanis. (Visiting Hyderabad right now so inspired to play as a nation containing it). Succumb to Hindi zealots around 1520 and convert to Sikh after taking the Hindu missionary strength decisions for the ability to convert any province to Sikh in like 4 months. You can then take Humanism to stack with your Bahmanis tolerance to give you provinces that never rebel and become correct religion in no time flat. You also have the option of taking the Sikh modifiers, and then causing a Shia province you hopefully converted earlier to let you rebel back into a Super-Muslim country and try to do the unite islam decision. Larry Parrish fucked around with this message at 06:49 on Sep 29, 2015 |
|
#
?
Sep 29, 2015 06:47
|
|
|
alcaras posted:Pondering a game as something in India, perhaps as Bahmanis. (Visiting Hyderabad right now so inspired to play as a nation containing it). Take Humanism, go Sikh, roll face. I don't know what the wiki is on about re Vijay; Bahmanis is crazy strong, and routinely dominates India even in the hands of the AI.
|
|
#
?
Sep 29, 2015 06:54
|
|
Yes, it's like a lava lamp.
|
Yeah Bahmanis was actually more difficult to beat than Vij in my Orissa run, Vijangar imploded and I actually vassalized them as OPM and then fed them. Overall this Orissa achievement run was pretty fun, stacking coring cost reduction to core Africa for less than 10 adm per province never gets old. The feature where you can tell a CN to DoW someone is pretty drat awesome too, send your CN some gold and then tell them to DoW an other CN and they'll kick their rear end.
|
|
#
?
Sep 29, 2015 07:14
|
|
|
I was wondering why my conversions were taking so drat long, but I'd foolishly chalked it up to it being because of the -2.0% from shia/sunni/ibadi provinces. Why not check all of the modifiers just to be sure! Oh, another -2.0% from "missonary slider". Huh, weird, I've never heard of that event befor-  I had switched my state religion away 50 years ago without remembering to turn the missionary maintenance up from when I purposely spawned the zealots in the first place. 
|
|
#
?
Sep 29, 2015 08:12
|
|
|
Why does sending my ships sometimes reduce trade income?
|
|
#
?
Sep 29, 2015 09:33
|
|
|
Are there any special events for Bohemia that I should be aware of when starting a new game? Aiming for The Bohemians and Neither Holy, Nor German achievements.
|
|
#
?
Sep 29, 2015 09:55
|
|
|
As tabarestan/persia, humanism or religious?
|
|
#
?
Sep 29, 2015 10:55
|
|
|
double nine posted:As tabarestan/persia, humanism or religious? Shia is a minority religion, take Religious. Although I'd suggest Trade first, because Persia is a nice trade node to monopolize.
|
|
#
?
Sep 29, 2015 11:08
|
|
|
alcaras posted:Pondering a game as something in India, perhaps as Bahmanis. (Visiting Hyderabad right now so inspired to play as a nation containing it). Larry Parrish posted:Succumb to Hindi zealots around 1520 and convert to Sikh after taking the Hindu missionary strength decisions for the ability to convert any province to Sikh in like 4 months. You can then take Humanism to stack with your Bahmanis tolerance to give you provinces that never rebel and become correct religion in no time flat. You also have the option of taking the Sikh modifiers, and then causing a Shia province you hopefully converted earlier to let you rebel back into a Super-Muslim country and try to do the unite islam decision. Yup this is pretty much the pro-strat. Bahmanis gets some cool Muslim-specific events and permanent national bonuses: improve capital of Bidar and Bidriware production, local +35% tax +25% fort defense and +1 Prestige total then there is the event chain started by you inviting Gharbians (westerners) and their conflict with local Deccanis, this gets you +5% Fort Defense and you choose a side, Gharbians is +10% stability cost +5% land morale and Deccani is +10% stability cost -1 RR. So you rack up your modifiers and expand, Exploration is a great idea since you can easily afford the colonies, Westernize earlier, etc. Bahmanis is built for Humanism but Admin ideas are really great early on as well since India is quite expensive in both coring costs and attrition. Lots of jungle, tropical, and arid provinces so you'll often eat 3-4% base attrition on sieges, which cheaper mercs help a lot with. Convert to Hindu in the early 1500s, Sikhism will pop around then. You may want to convert some of your provinces to Shia if you plan on eventually going back to it, but keep a majority Hindu to easily switch. There is a Hindu religious decision for a permanent -6% tech cost that requires you own a Sunni province, so aim to grab one of those. Then convert to Hindu, take the decisions you want, go Sikh. You now have a boatload of MS and some other good bonuses, staying Sikh or flipping back to Shia are your strongest options. Tahirovic posted:Are there any special events for Bohemia that I should be aware of when starting a new game? Aiming for The Bohemians and Neither Holy, Nor German achievements. The main ones involve pushing you to flip Protestant. It would be a bit of work to stay Catholic, otherwise that's about it. Pellisworth fucked around with this message at 17:58 on Sep 29, 2015 |
|
#
?
Sep 29, 2015 17:56
|
|
|
Baron Porkface posted:Why does sending my ships sometimes reduce trade income? If you're sending them on a privateer mission, it's because pirates reduce everyone's trade power in a node. Even the power of the country sanctioning the privateers is reduced and added to the pirate's power in that node.
|
|
#
?
Sep 29, 2015 18:01
|
|
|
Deutsch Nozzle posted:If you're sending them on a privateer mission, it's because pirates reduce everyone's trade power in a node. Even the power of the country sanctioning the privateers is reduced and added to the pirate's power in that node. Sometimes my value is reduced when protecting a node.
|
|
#
?
Sep 29, 2015 23:38
|
|
|
Baron Porkface posted:Sometimes my value is reduced when protecting a node. The only thing I can imagine: If you don't have a merchant there, it will add its trade power evenly to all outgoing nodes. That might not reach your collection point. For example, you collect in Genoa, and cuurently there is 100 trade power worth of Europeans in Alexandria who forward trade to Genoa, and 50 (33%) to Constantinople, where the Ottomans collect more or less everything. There is no one collecting locally. If you add 100 trade power without a steering merchant, it gets distributed evenly over all outgoing nodes, without increasing the trade value. So now there is 150 to Genoa and 100 (40%) to Constantinople, so you lost 7% going to Genoa.
|
|
#
?
Sep 30, 2015 05:29
|
|
|
Baron Porkface posted:Why does sending my ships sometimes reduce trade income? The tooltips lie. They are nonsense. Ignore them and only pay attention to the actual effects on your trade income at the end of the month.
|
|
#
?
Sep 30, 2015 05:40
|
|
|
Yeah, the tooltips on the navy screen are not to be trusted. Trust the income number on your trade screen, with a few months averaging to allow for the fact that you're not operating in a vacuum.OperaMouse posted:If you add ... trade power without a steering merchant, it gets distributed evenly over all outgoing nodes I don't think this is actually correct. I think it gets shared out proportionally amongst the merchants that are steering. For instance, if a node has two exits, and only one merchant steering, 100% of the trade will go that one direction, regardless of how much power you might add.
|
|
#
?
Sep 30, 2015 05:54
|
|
|
So I tried out the Extended Timeline mod for EU4 to see if it is the successor to Steppe Wolfe. While it lacks the rampant Bulgarian Nationalism, it still has some of that unique approach to modern politics. Azerbaijan has just reformed its government, and will now be headed by powerful capitalists.  Relations between Japan and China have fallen to the point where Chinese goods are banned in Japanese markets.  Following the secularization of the Saudi nation, Israel extends an olive branch.  Even after several hundred years, the Austrians still hunger for their territories in the Low Countries.  Not shown: the US transferring its trade power to Canada.  I feel like this isn't even worth showing.
|
|
#
?
Sep 30, 2015 07:22
|
|
|
What is your standard policy re:autonomy when conquering new territory? I've come to the habit of increasing autonomy almost always and am wondering if that's a bad idea.
|
|
#
?
Sep 30, 2015 09:29
|
|
|
double nine posted:What is your standard policy re:autonomy when conquering new territory? I've come to the habit of increasing autonomy almost always and am wondering if that's a bad idea. It depends on a lot of things. If you don't have the troops to put down the rebellion because you're going to war someone else soon, raise it. If the provinces are poo poo, raise it, because lovely provinces aren't worth losing manpower fighting rebels for. If they're really rich provinces, don't raise it. If you have a good government and rank that reduces autonomy even while at war, it might be alright to raise it. If you have the idea from economics that gives you autonomy reduction, you might be alright to raise it. I can't think of a situation where you'd ever want to lower it, though. Maybe if you have national ideas and humanist/religious that give a very nice bonus to tolerance. Basically you want to look at the rebel situation and see if it has a good chance at getting to 100% before separatism lowers enough that the revolt risk is minuscule before it can get there.
|
|
#
?
Sep 30, 2015 09:42
|
|
|
Node posted:It depends on a lot of things. If you don't have the troops to put down the rebellion because you're going to war someone else soon, raise it. If the provinces are poo poo, raise it, because lovely provinces aren't worth losing manpower fighting rebels for. If they're really rich provinces, don't raise it. If you have a good government and rank that reduces autonomy even while at war, it might be alright to raise it. If you have the idea from economics that gives you autonomy reduction, you might be alright to raise it. I lower it when I'm trying to do Religious/nationalist rebel fuckery.
|
|
#
?
Sep 30, 2015 09:47
|
|
|
Same religion/accepted culture conquests may sometimes start off close to -10 unrest (or if you have enough missionary strength you can get the same religion part pretty quickly anyway). I would lower autonomy if it means the province doesn't jump to, say higher than 3 or 4, since the separatism part of the unrest will decay over time anyway. Might be worth lowering autonomy if you have just defeated a revolt too. A bit more risky since the post-revolt -20 to unrest will go away before the +10 from lowering autonomy. But unless the timing falls on a major war or something you can just defeat the rebels again anyway.
|
|
#
?
Sep 30, 2015 10:33
|
|
|
I pretty much always just raise autonomy on anything I capture. gently caress dealing with rebels if all it takes is a month before they put some lovely modifier like +10 years of separatism on a province.
|
|
#
?
Sep 30, 2015 16:48
|
|
|
Doesn't lowering autonomy increase tax revenue?
|
|
#
?
Sep 30, 2015 17:12
|
|
|
I'm losing a war, badly, and am fighting the urge to ragequit. How do I make myself less butthurt about losing wars?
|
|
#
?
Sep 30, 2015 17:49
|
|
|
Don't lose wars.
|
|
#
?
Sep 30, 2015 17:58
|
|
|
Gort posted:I pretty much always just raise autonomy on anything I capture. gently caress dealing with rebels if all it takes is a month before they put some lovely modifier like +10 years of separatism on a province. Yeah but if the revolt risk base is over like 15% then they're going to revolt anyway, so all you're doing is losing a significant chunk of change over a long period of time in order to delay the inevitable. Also separatism modifiers aren't applied if the province is within a fort's zone of control, so oftentimes it's better to resist the temptation to raise autonomy.
|
|
#
?
Sep 30, 2015 18:35
|
|
|
Baron Porkface posted:I'm losing a war, badly, and am fighting the urge to ragequit. Accept that when playing minors, sometimes you do. And don't try and fight them to the bitter end either. If you know you're going to lose, figure out what you consider to be an acceptable loss, and fight only until you can make the AI accept it. Prop Wash posted:Yeah but if the revolt risk base is over like 15% then they're going to revolt anyway, so all you're doing is losing a significant chunk of change over a long period of time in order to delay the inevitable. Also separatism modifiers aren't applied if the province is within a fort's zone of control, so oftentimes it's better to resist the temptation to raise autonomy. This. If they're going to revolt, they might as well revolt as soon as possible, so you can get that -20 Recent Uprising modifier, and go use your armies elsewhere. If I'm blobbing like crazy, I'll have one set of front line armies, and another of pacification forces that sit in captured territory just killing rebels.
|
|
#
?
Sep 30, 2015 18:46
|
|
|
double nine posted:What is your standard policy re:autonomy when conquering new territory? I've come to the habit of increasing autonomy almost always and am wondering if that's a bad idea. Assuming an accepted culture and 0 tolerance, you need to wait 10 years before the -20 RR reduction from a rebellion cancels out the RR from separatism + lowering autonomy. Assuming a non-accepted culture and -3 tolerance, though, you need to wait 20 years for it to cancel out. Humanism basically throws these calculations into the trash and lets you just conquer everything and lower autonomy everywhere and bring everyone under your velvet-coated iron fist without repercussions, of course. Otherwise, do the math. The more -RR or +tolerance you can throw at a province, the more easily you can lower autonomy. There are two inflection points: one is when your RR after a rebellion is <= 0, which is important to prevent an endless rebel spiral. The other is when your RR before a rebellion is <0, in which case you are playing with humanism ideas.
|
|
#
?
Sep 30, 2015 19:01
|
|
|
Are colonial nation rebellions a little wonky for you all? Twice this game I supported a CN's independence, went to war over it, and seemed to win the war (the parent nation had to give some stuff up)... but the CN is still a subject after the war. Here's it happening with Portugal. Also have some border gore. I love colonizing and fighting over the Americas. 
Vivian Darkbloom fucked around with this message at 22:48 on Sep 30, 2015 |
|
#
?
Sep 30, 2015 22:36
|
|
|
oh glorious Russ...eh, what?  Mighty Livonian order!
|
|
#
?
Sep 30, 2015 23:23
|
|
|
Vivian Darkbloom posted:Are colonial nation rebellions a little wonky for you all? Twice this game I supported a CN's independence, went to war over it, and seemed to win the war (the parent nation had to give some stuff up)... but the CN is still a subject after the war. Here's it happening with Portugal. Independence is a specific demand a revolting subject has to make in the peace deal, otherwise they remain in the same diplomatic configuration with their overlord as ante-bellum, even if the overlord makes other concessions to them. If you start a game as Sweden and go to war with Denmark for your independence and only peace out for the Danish provinces on your side of the Sound you will remain in a PU under Denmark.
|
|
#
?
Oct 1, 2015 01:11
|
|
|
Vivian Darkbloom posted:Are colonial nation rebellions a little wonky for you all? Twice this game I supported a CN's independence, went to war over it, and seemed to win the war (the parent nation had to give some stuff up)... but the CN is still a subject after the war. Here's it happening with Portugal. Yeah, its happening way too much. CNs declare independence, the overlord doesn't invade them, but the CNs just decide "Eh, this really wasn't worth the effort, guys." and take the generic war reparations while remaining a subject. Something isn't weighted heavily enough for independence CBs.
|
|
#
?
Oct 1, 2015 01:27
|
|
|
Node posted:Yeah, its happening way too much. CNs declare independence, the overlord doesn't invade them, but the CNs just decide "Eh, this really wasn't worth the effort, guys." and take the generic war reparations while remaining a subject. Something isn't weighted heavily enough for independence CBs. I think it costs 50% WS to demand independence (? I can't find where specific costs are defined in EU4) so a complete non-war will never net the independence-seeker more than 25% warscore. Probably any victory should lead to independence by default, and any defeat should re-establish dependence by default. This would prevent an exploit too.
|
|
#
?
Oct 1, 2015 02:20
|
|
|
I'm pretty sure independence is 22%
|
|
#
?
Oct 1, 2015 04:23
|
|
|
double nine posted:oh glorious Russ...eh, what? LO is probably allied to Poland or something. AI Russia seems really bad about getting into wars it can't win and collapsing in some hilarious fashion once Sweden/Novgorod/Poland/Lithuania decide to drill into them and start taking huge chunks out of their Eastern European land.
|
|
#
?
Oct 1, 2015 04:40
|
|
|
In my last game Golden Horde killed and ate Muscovy, Kazan, Novgorod, and the eastern parts of Lit before settling down and westernizing. Then they started eating into Siberia through Mega-Oirat. I was pretty impressed.
|
|
#
?
Oct 1, 2015 07:23
|
|
|
Vivian Darkbloom posted:Are colonial nation rebellions a little wonky for you all? Twice this game I supported a CN's independence, went to war over it, and seemed to win the war (the parent nation had to give some stuff up)... but the CN is still a subject after the war. Here's it happening with Portugal. Yeah, I see deals like this being offered to me all the time when I use the "Cleansing of Heresy" CB. Yes, I declared a holy war on you and occupied half your nation because I wanted 10% of your income and fifty bucks. I get the feeling that since the AI thinks they're reasonable enough deals to offer, they also think they're reasonable enough deals to accept.
|
|
#
?
Oct 1, 2015 08:26
|
|
|
YF-23 posted:Independence is a specific demand a revolting subject has to make in the peace deal, otherwise they remain in the same diplomatic configuration with their overlord as ante-bellum, even if the overlord makes other concessions to them. If you start a game as Sweden and go to war with Denmark for your independence and only peace out for the Danish provinces on your side of the Sound you will remain in a PU under Denmark. That's WAD? Weird, it doesn't make any intuitive sense to me.
|
|
#
?
Oct 1, 2015 08:31
|
|
|
Yashichi posted:I'm pretty sure independence is 22% I would say it's actually based on development. They could fix it with ticking warscore going high enough and it ticks while the CN's capital isn't occupied by their overlord.
|
|
#
?
Oct 1, 2015 09:48
|
|
|
Got a bad case of dumb war AI: Pictured: 61,000 of my allies troops just standing around while 5,000 dudes siege down their stuff. (Anhalt, Thuringen and Leipzig have all fallen already) Saxony declared the war on their neighbour, then not only did not invade said neighbour, they actually left Saxony itself for neighbouring Bohemia to allow themselves to get invaded by an army a fifth of their size. Meanwhile their allies are doing the same thing. Gort fucked around with this message at 09:52 on Oct 1, 2015 |
|
#
?
Oct 1, 2015 09:50
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 10, 2024 06:18 |
|
|
Dev diary about Estates is up.
|
|
#
?
Oct 1, 2015 11:30
|
|
