|
Does anyone know if refusing a Defender of the Faith call to arms counts the same as refusing an alliance call to arms, in terms of making everyone trust you less?
|
#
?
Nov 4, 2015 01:53
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 12, 2024 16:11 |
|
|
Strudel Man posted:More often than not? I always used to play with them off, and that certainly wasn't my observation. I haven't done it since release or so, but yeah.
|
|
#
?
Nov 4, 2015 02:13
|
|
Yes, it's like a lava lamp.
|
Strudel Man posted:Does anyone know if refusing a Defender of the Faith call to arms counts the same as refusing an alliance call to arms, in terms of making everyone trust you less? That is a good question. I don't think so, but I am not sure. You can immediately buy the title back, which is kind of silly. The game shouldn't let you immediately take the title again for another ten years or so, the Christian/Muslim faith would not take you seriously if you didn't, you know, defend the faith. I'm also pretty sure it doesn't go away upon a leader's death, despite the description. It shouldn't anyway, that's just irritating - especially if you were a republic.
|
|
#
?
Nov 4, 2015 02:22
|
|
|
There was another developer MP stream earlier today, they showed off the new development mapmode: That's a much better colour scheme than the base tax map, thank god.
|
|
#
?
Nov 4, 2015 04:29
|
|
|
Weird. I'm allied with Great Britain, and the last 3 times they called me to war, I accepted, and then didn't actually get added to the war. What's up with that?
|
|
#
?
Nov 4, 2015 07:51
|
|
|
Strudel Man posted:Weird. I'm allied with Great Britain, and the last 3 times they called me to war, I accepted, and then didn't actually get added to the war. What's up with that? Were you in another war? You can't be at war with the same country in two wars, or fighting on the same side in one and opposite sides in the other. If that happens after you get a CtA it doesn't let you join.
|
|
#
?
Nov 4, 2015 07:59
|
|
|
Allyn posted:Were you in another war? You can't be at war with the same country in two wars, or fighting on the same side in one and opposite sides in the other. If that happens after you get a CtA it doesn't let you join.
|
|
#
?
Nov 4, 2015 08:16
|
|
|
Koramei posted:That's a much better colour scheme than the base tax map, thank god. I've never used the base tax map, so I don't know how bad the colours are for that, but brown->orange->yellow->green seems a little weird.
|
|
#
?
Nov 4, 2015 09:49
|
|
|
Kalos posted:Rebels lasting longer and hitting harder makes them more likely to overthrow their conquerors, especially in the early game where manpower is precious. It's true, posting in this thread and explaining why we have hostile core-creation is most assuredly the same thing as a 'tear-stained middle finger'. You should find a way to display just how cruelly you are being oppressed by Paradox developers, perhaps by changing your avatar to a rebel flag?
|
|
#
?
Nov 4, 2015 10:34
|
|
|
Wiz posted:It's true, posting in this thread and explaining why we have hostile core-creation is most assuredly the same thing as a 'tear-stained middle finger'. You should find a way to display just how cruelly you are being oppressed by Paradox developers, perhaps by changing your avatar to a rebel flag? Scared?
|
|
#
?
Nov 4, 2015 10:40
|
|
|
I don't know where you touched him, but some of the ideas here in the thread were better than core creation cost, so please look at them. It just destroys any desire to play in North Africa for me and others.
|
|
#
?
Nov 4, 2015 10:40
|
|
|
Maybe you should play and just eat the increased core cost? I don't think his ideas are bad either, the rebel support suggestion could make gameplay more engaging, but people getting distressed about having to pay more ADM to core provinces is really silly. And I mean, you guys keep saying "but increased coring cost is not a deterrent! I just actively avoid the region because of it!" which proves in fact that it is a deterrent! Even if you do eventually get around to conquering the territory, that you do that when you can afford not to care does not really help the argument against increased coring cost. Increased core costs themselves are nowhere near as catastrophic as you make them out to be. They are a hindrance and will slow you down, but you act as though those "toxic cores" ruin everything forever, but they don't.
|
|
#
?
Nov 4, 2015 10:54
|
|
|
Huh. Apparently, if you remove all electors by forcing them to change religion when the HRE is officially Catholic (or Protestant, presumably), it forces it into hereditary rule. (And incidentally makes it immune to dismantling as well).
|
|
#
?
Nov 4, 2015 10:56
|
|
|
YF-23 posted:Maybe you should play and just eat the increased core cost? I don't think his ideas are bad either, the rebel support suggestion could make gameplay more engaging, but people getting distressed about having to pay more ADM to core provinces is really silly. And I mean, you guys keep saying "but increased coring cost is not a deterrent! I just actively avoid the region because of it!" which proves in fact that it is a deterrent! Even if you do eventually get around to conquering the territory, that you do that when you can afford not to care does not really help the argument against increased coring cost. It's a deterrent to humans, not ai usually. And it's not an interesting one. If you're playing a muslim tech country and paying extra admin to core stuff, you're pretty hosed. Please explain, as I asked before, why you think increased coring cost is a good mechanic. People being distressed over having to pay more of their very limited monarch points actually does make sense.
|
|
#
?
Nov 4, 2015 10:57
|
|
|
GreyPowerVan posted:I don't know where you touched him, but some of the ideas here in the thread were better than core creation cost, so please look at them. It just destroys any desire to play in North Africa for me and others. I don't love hostile core-creation as a mechanic, but I wasn't really convinced that any of the ideas presented would be an actual deterrent. I'll give it some thought though.
|
|
#
?
Nov 4, 2015 11:02
|
|
|
GreyPowerVan posted:It's a deterrent to humans, not ai usually. And it's not an interesting one. Because when I see I have to pay extra ADM to conquer provinces, instead of getting upset that my grand strategy plans have been foiled and I have to pay 200 and 300 ADM to core provinces, I smile thinking "well played". Because yeah, it is a bother and will slow me down, and I may have to go after someone else instead if I can. That, by the way, means that increased coring cost actually works, no matter how much you say it does not. I'm sure wiz can talk about AI taking it into account or not.
|
|
#
?
Nov 4, 2015 11:03
|
|
|
Wiz posted:I don't love hostile core-creation as a mechanic, but I wasn't really convinced that any of the ideas presented would be an actual deterrent. I'll give it some thought though. Could you elaborate on why you think that stronger/faster-acting/more tenacious rebels or earlygame-centric military bonuses are lacking compared to hostile core-creation? Ask any person who's played Muscovy what that +1 General Shock pip does to their desire to invade Lithuania so long as there are any other targets left.
|
|
#
?
Nov 4, 2015 11:09
|
|
|
If the bonus were an extra diplomatic relation slot, nations with Aristocracy would have an extra ally to call on for defence, right? That would probably work better. Also thematically appropriate.
|
|
#
?
Nov 4, 2015 11:18
|
|
|
YF-23 posted:Because when I see I have to pay extra ADM to conquer provinces, instead of getting upset that my grand strategy plans have been foiled and I have to pay 200 and 300 ADM to core provinces, I smile thinking "well played". Because yeah, it is a bother and will slow me down, and I may have to go after someone else instead if I can. The AI absolutely takes it into account, it's just not 'I will never touch high core cost land'.
|
|
#
?
Nov 4, 2015 11:19
|
|
|
420 Gank Mid posted:Could you elaborate on why you think that stronger/faster-acting/more tenacious rebels or earlygame-centric military bonuses are lacking compared to hostile core-creation? Extra rebels aren't a deterrence. There's too many ways to handle them and when was the last time you saw an experienced player lose to rebels, no matter how strong? Early game military bonuses aren't a deterrence because the player can just stack the odds in their favor anyway.
|
|
#
?
Nov 4, 2015 11:20
|
|
|
Personally I don't have much problem with increased coring costs. That said, I could see some degree of deterrent being achieved by simply having the lands automatically assigned to an estate with a nasty modifier upon being conquered (perhaps increased revolt risk and an even further raised cap for local autonomy) and then simply making it costly to revoke the lands from the estate. This also seems like a sensible representation of the ideas themselves as most of them have to do with a powerful local organization obstructing your ability to govern the province. Perhaps allowing the lands to be conquered but painful to hang on to and nigh useless if you don't want to pay the added cost might be a less offensive alternative to being "forced" to pay the extra admin.
|
|
#
?
Nov 4, 2015 11:30
|
|
|
At least make berbers not have the same penalty against same cultures. I don't really care about conquering northern africa as other nations, it's annoying but whatever. But playing as like Tunis or Morocco, it sucks that expanding nearby just makes your bad tech even worse.
|
|
#
?
Nov 4, 2015 11:33
|
|
|
Wiz posted:Extra rebels aren't a deterrence. There's too many ways to handle them and when was the last time you saw an experienced player lose to rebels, no matter how strong? If the player can just win all wars, why bother having war in the game? Just click on provinces to add to your empire if you have enough admin points! Making the wars harder definitely would change how often you want to attack them or if it's even worth it with other targets available. L
|
|
#
?
Nov 4, 2015 11:34
|
|
|
GreyPowerVan posted:If the player can just win all wars, why bother having war in the game? Just click on provinces to add to your empire if you have enough admin points! Making the wars harder definitely would change how often you want to attack them or if it's even worth it with other targets available. L There's no way military bonuses can make the Berber states that beefy unless you give them Prussia ideas times ten.
|
|
#
?
Nov 4, 2015 12:22
|
|
|
That discussion makes me feel kinda stupid cause Ive played around north Africa numerous times, took their lands several times, and I never noticed those outraging coring costs.
|
|
#
?
Nov 4, 2015 12:28
|
|
|
Elias_Maluco posted:That discussion makes me feel kinda stupid cause Ive played around north Africa numerous times, took their lands several times, and I never noticed those outraging coring costs. it's... 50% more I think.
|
|
#
?
Nov 4, 2015 12:34
|
|
|
I gladly paid 380 admin points to core canton because gently caress Yue I might be a tad too invested in roleplaying in this map painting game?
|
|
#
?
Nov 4, 2015 12:37
|
|
|
What I really want personally is a reason to spend my monarch points the way I want to, and not the way I need to because of some exploit that happened that I don't care about, or for the sake of historical accuracy. EUIV after all looses all historical accuracy once the game is unpaused, player or not. I like to play my EUIV games along the ways of here is history, now go gently caress it up!, and not here is history, now go follow the carefully lined tracks of your nation. The same for the exploits. I don't care what some guy on youtube did to beat the world in a month as Albania, let me play my game and not be punished for it. What I am trying to say it, back on the topic of Monarch points, Don't shoe horn every mechanic into it. Else people will just find the most efficient way to spend monarch points, leading to what we do have now, If your not in the HRE you still just conquer to make your nation better, If your in the HRE, you develop your nation so you can than conquer to make your nation better. Most of the times you can just ignore the develop stage cause it is not an efficient way of using monarch points. And than there is the forced shoe horning to make you, and the AI play out the nation they picked like they did back than. even though the game won't follow that course because of random events Stevefin fucked around with this message at 13:16 on Nov 4, 2015 |
|
#
?
Nov 4, 2015 13:03
|
|
|
Have you ever considered making attrition in deserts intense? Like 10%+ more attrition? But give countries that start in that type of terrain a national bonus that negates it. Maybe it can be negated by other nations later in game by tech, or a national idea.
|
|
#
?
Nov 4, 2015 13:19
|
|
|
How about every time you try to remove a Berber core, the game installs an instance of Paradox Toolbar™ in your browser of choice?
|
|
#
?
Nov 4, 2015 13:41
|
|
|
For the AI Iberians, it'd install one on Wiz's computer, so he'd make sure it works as indended.
|
|
#
?
Nov 4, 2015 13:42
|
|
|
YF-23 posted:Because when I see I have to pay extra ADM to conquer provinces, instead of getting upset that my grand strategy plans have been foiled and I have to pay 200 and 300 ADM to core provinces, I smile thinking "well played". Because yeah, it is a bother and will slow me down, and I may have to go after someone else instead if I can. So let's do some sort of use cases on what the Berber Traditions do, to see if they work: Portugal: I don't value Admin points much because I mostly need diplo points to start my trade/colonial empire. I can spare the admin to take the coastal Berber lands early on. And militarily they present no danger. Castile: I just feed them to Aragon and get them for free anyway Aragon: I need my admin to conquer Castile and form Spain and to core my new Italian holdings, I can't waste them on the toxic Berber cores, I get hosed Ottomans: I have a buffer state and my coring bonuses stack: Overseas, Admin, Tradition, I don't care about the penalty. Mamluks: I already have problems keeping the Ottos out, Tunisia is too close to be distant overseas, I get hosed Any Berber state: I have a hard enough start with the Iberians to the North and Mamluks (later most likely Ottos too) in the east. My expansion options early game are pretty much limited to other Berber states, I get hosed. Not sure who else is a valid contender for that area. So my take is that the current solution works badly and is a penalty for the wrong people and needs to be reworked/tweaked. People are being vocal about this now because the rest of the game has improved/evolved so much while this problem has had the same questionable solution since, I think, release. Didn't they remove it from Hungary and they are doing much better now? Meanwhile Wallachia still has the HCC and it does nothing for them.
|
|
#
?
Nov 4, 2015 14:49
|
|
|
Lichtenstein posted:How about every time you try to remove a Berber core, the game installs an instance of Paradox Toolbar™ in your browser of choice? Of my choice? Sorry to do this to you internet explorer, but its for the best. *Cores 40 berber provinces*
|
|
#
?
Nov 4, 2015 15:06
|
|
|
Kersch posted:Have you ever considered making attrition in deserts intense? Like 10%+ more attrition? But give countries that start in that type of terrain a national bonus that negates it. Maybe it can be negated by other nations later in game by tech, or a national idea. Maybe this, or alternately, give the Berbers a combat bonus in deserts/mountains. Like how the hordes get a bonus while fighting in the steppes. Alternatively, maybe there should be a penalty for fighting in a desert unless that's terrain your capital is in? It seems like if countries have attrition and supply problems while fighting in the most developed area in the world (Europe), they should have it a lot worse in deserts/hostile terrain.
|
|
#
?
Nov 4, 2015 15:38
|
|
|
Why can't I march into this TI? version: 1.13, have all DLC except El Dorado Is this a known bug? I'm going crazy. This might end up wrecking my otherwise- kinda promising Kongo game. edit: OMFG, I'm a moron. Literally the second after I posted this, the FoW lifted and I found out that it's wasteland. Huh. For some reason, I thought that the west coast of Africa was just provinces all the way down. NEVERMIND, i'm dum quadrophrenic fucked around with this message at 15:44 on Nov 4, 2015 |
|
#
?
Nov 4, 2015 15:41
|
|
|
Africa used to be an unbroken ring of provinces along the coast, this got changed because a) Iberia tended to focus entirely on Africa instead of the New World, b) Spain having ports in Madagascar in 1520 is ridiculous, and c) it gives everyone in eastern Asia a few centuries to prepare for European bullshit.
|
|
#
?
Nov 4, 2015 15:47
|
|
|
Wiz posted:Extra rebels aren't a deterrence. There's too many ways to handle them and when was the last time you saw an experienced player lose to rebels, no matter how strong? I've been curious about this, 'cause surely it would be possible to make rebels strong enough to be a threat if you guys wanted them to be right? Has there just been a lot of feedback that people don't find losing to rebels fun, so you guys are hesitant to change them? Or is there some other reason?
|
|
#
?
Nov 4, 2015 16:26
|
|
|
Koramei posted:I've been curious about this, 'cause surely it would be possible to make rebels strong enough to be a threat if you guys wanted them to be right? Has there just been a lot of feedback that people don't find losing to rebels fun, so you guys are hesitant to change them? Or is there some other reason? People absolutely despise strong rebels, yes. They also make mincemeat out of new players.
|
|
#
?
Nov 4, 2015 16:50
|
|
|
I've been playing since day 1 and rebels have crushed me a couple of times. In my current game it's only 1510 and dealing with rebels has already cost me one war and made me avoid 3-4 others. It takes most of my army to get revolt risk down as low as possible so that's several years after most wars where I don't have any soldiers available. Lithuania seems to be completely incapable of containing their rebels and it costs me a bundle of manpower every time. It almost lost me another war when Lithuania bugged out to hunt rebs and then lost because the rebel stack was half again their size. Humanism is my favorite idea solely because of the fewer years of separatism making such a huge difference in handling rebels.
|
|
#
?
Nov 4, 2015 17:28
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 12, 2024 16:11 |
|
|
I guess the real question about increased coring cost is: why do you need to deter the player from expanding into North Africa? It's got some decent provinces, but they're not that great. They're not very good for trade because they're mostly in the Safi or Tunis nodes, which are totally unconnected to New World trade.
|
|
#
?
Nov 4, 2015 17:39
|
|
