|
Rakthar posted:I would like to Formally Request that we let this CB expire, I never thought I would need to write this many words to try to say "Too much of a good thing can be bad, in some situations", but I would like to write no more words about it. We could do that or I could fabricate an Explain Yourself CB on another one of your posts. 
|
#
?
Nov 9, 2015 21:32
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 16, 2024 21:13 |
|
|
Ideas which reduce core costs are really bad. When I take them I can conquer so many provinces with the same admin power that the AI coalitions against me like crazy.
|
|
#
?
Nov 9, 2015 21:33
|
|
|
YF-23 posted:We could do that or I could fabricate an Explain Yourself CB on another one of your posts. Let's go with the claim expiration. I am preparing for another war against Pellisworth for his highly illegal and frankly immoral jokes.
|
|
#
?
Nov 9, 2015 21:34
|
|
|
Enjoy posted:Ideas which reduce core costs are really bad. When I take them I can conquer so many provinces with the same admin power that the AI coalitions against me like crazy. First time I ever played Ottomans. "Whoa holy poo poo I can core SO MUCH STUFF  "That was when I learned 210% Overextension is not really workable. Edit: Rakthar posted:Let's go with the claim expiration. I am preparing for another war against Pellisworth for his highly illegal and frankly immoral jokes. Umm who elected you Holy Roman Emperor . My jokes are perfectly legal (and terrible).
Pellisworth fucked around with this message at 21:44 on Nov 9, 2015 |
|
#
?
Nov 9, 2015 21:34
|
|
|
Enjoy posted:Ideas which reduce core costs are really bad. When I take them I can conquer so many provinces with the same admin power that the AI coalitions against me like crazy. lool
|
|
#
?
Nov 9, 2015 21:36
|
|
|
Enjoy posted:Ideas which reduce core costs are really bad. When I take them I can conquer so many provinces with the same admin power that the AI coalitions against me like crazy. The Actual Argument Being Used. If the attrition is so bad then you can disband troops! Then they don't cost you manpower or gold, it is extremely OP.
|
|
#
?
Nov 9, 2015 22:03
|
|
|
Two modding questions: A, are there any map mods that include more provinces outside of Europe? The only two categories are "Europe only, for now" and "supermod that nerfs gameplay for extra realism"; and B, are there any mods that add more patterns and/or symbols for the custom creator, specifically non-European symbols?
|
|
#
?
Nov 9, 2015 22:04
|
|
|
An heirless 36 year old Louis XIII Osmanoglu just landed on the throne of France, may yet pull a WC out of this run 
|
|
#
?
Nov 9, 2015 23:22
|
|
|
What's the reason for making the Ottomans catholic, anyway? I thought about trying it once to be able to pick up the protestant faith customization later on, but I assume that's not why people in here are doing it. More/better diplomatic options in Europe?
|
|
#
?
Nov 9, 2015 23:39
|
|
|
To become HRE
|
|
#
?
Nov 9, 2015 23:41
|
|
|
PAWGChamp posted:To become HRE
|
|
#
?
Nov 9, 2015 23:45
|
|
|
Strudel Man posted:What's the reason for making the Ottomans catholic, anyway? I thought about trying it once to be able to pick up the protestant faith customization later on, but I assume that's not why people in here are doing it. More/better diplomatic options in Europe? PAWGChamp posted:To become HRE And potential for PUs. Probably won't happen but if you manage to get a big European nation PU'd that's a huge amount less effort for you. But mostly to get in on the HRE, yeah. It's a nightmare to try and conquer. Edit: also having the Holy War CB from Religious ideas is loving awesome as a Christian Ottomans. You can plow through all of Asia and Africa no sweat. Pellisworth fucked around with this message at 23:50 on Nov 9, 2015 |
|
#
?
Nov 9, 2015 23:47
|
|
|
Any recommendations for a land power that's also a republic ?
|
|
#
?
Nov 9, 2015 23:54
|
|
|
StashAugustine posted:Any recommendations for a land power that's also a republic ? Maybe start as Hansa or Hamburg and form Prussia? or Switzerland?
|
|
#
?
Nov 9, 2015 23:59
|
|
|
I'm so incredibly addicted to this game. Just had a run as Creek where I didn't complete westernization until 1610, and stayed totemist which meant I couldn't get any christian allies. By 1660 I had not been able to fight the europeans at all, with a Portugese Mexico and Louisiana to the southwest and Thirteen Colonies all over the northeast. I thought it looked pretty bad but I seized an opportunity when Great Britain got its navy wiped by the Ottomans and managed to completely punch GB and Portugal in the dick. Ended up wiping both of them out from north america, and following up by conquering the British Isles and Lisbon. Feels good man.
|
|
#
?
Nov 10, 2015 00:08
|
|
|
StashAugustine posted:Any recommendations for a land power that's also a republic ? Novgorod.
|
|
#
?
Nov 10, 2015 00:20
|
|
|
quadrophrenic posted:I've been wondering lately if there are any exceptions to this. I gave up on my Kongo African Power game, but I was thinking that Naval might have been a viable choice in that game because leader shock/fire and heavy combat ability + the Kongolese high naval forcelimits (and the forcelimit modifier from Exploration) would enable large stacks of heavy ships to crush European forces before they get a chance to land. In the early and mid game you only really need 20 heavies to crush any naval power, even GB or Castile. As Kongo the more important thing would probably be affording them all, so a money idea group might be better.
|
|
#
?
Nov 10, 2015 00:21
|
|
|
Pellisworth posted:Maybe start as Hansa or Hamburg and form Prussia? Just straight up Hamburg is good, their ideas are great. No military bonuses but you'll have the MP to have fantastic tech and the cash for lots of mercs, and starting as an HRE OPM is the best for getting into lots of stupid loving wars. I'm holding off on playing as them for a while until 1.14 since they will be straight up independent at game start.
|
|
#
?
Nov 10, 2015 00:42
|
|
|
I asked a few days ago for suggestions on a good country to play to improve my skills. I ended up picking Muscovy for reasons, and hit the game kerfuffle I always do: some nearby big power gets really big and I feel like I can't do anything about it. At this point I figure I probably hosed up somewhere by not properly checking the enemy's power and now am stuck with some superstate gobbling all of Europe.   In this case, Poland-Lithuania (will be integrated by 1612, according to the tooltip) is a growing beast and I don't really have the option of expanding Westward. I can smack Sweden around a bit, and I do. I'm not really sure what to do about P-L, and I don't just mean that in that they're worrisome: I mean, I literally don't really understand game mechanics enough to be able to do something about them. Together they have a force limit of 96. I think the only thing other than me that presents a threat to them is the Ottoman Empire to the south. I'm currently allied to The Hansa and Livonian Order because of their utility against Sweden. I'm thinking Livonian is a liability at this point since they don't have a very big military, though I'd love to gobble them up. I took Admin ideas mostly to stack cheaper coring, Offensive for those combat bonuses, and Religious to help convert Nogai's provinces as I hoover them up. Next will be Exploration for Siberia. I guess the question I have here is, what would you folks be doing in this game at this stage? This is where I start to loathe playing because I feel like I'm fighting a losing war and already missed the big opportunities to check other big nation's powers. I am haunted by P-L to the west and expect fully to be crushed by them (Poland is already taking provs from the Horde!), and the mobs to the southeast are a bother to fight. I'm also having a hard time just getting allies to help me fight wars, since everyone is so far away. Someone mentioned that the game is more about intuition than intellect, and I think my problem is that I'm sort of blindfolded: I'm not sure I have enough understanding of how to use the tools at my disposal to do things, let alone to use them effectively. JerikTelorian fucked around with this message at 00:50 on Nov 10, 2015 |
|
#
?
Nov 10, 2015 00:47
|
|
|
Rakthar posted:Two things about Defensive that I came to enjoy less and less over time: OK let's get some math up in here. Your army tradition is modified at the start of each month. Without any modifiers, it is supposed to decrease by 5% each year. This process has a fixed point of zero; every month your army tradition will decrease, getting closer and closer to zero. Granted this will happen very slowly; a hasty calculation tells me that to go from 100 tradition to 1 with nothing else affecting this will take about 90 years. The way that other influences, such as the Defensive AT bonus, the forts maintained bonus, and incidental AT gains from battles, events, etc, change this is by changing where on the scale your fixed point is. Take the full bonus from forts for example: each year this bonus adds 1 to your AT, and the natural decay tries to remove 5%. At 20 AT, this natural growth and decay balance each other out, with any overcorrections getting smoothed out in time. Below 20 AT, it will slowly grow, and above 20 AT, it will slowly fall. Now add in a +1 yearly AT idea, such as Defensive’s to this. Your new fixed point becomes 40, because your bonuses try to add 2 while the natural decay tries to remove 5%. And in the same way, putting in Quality’s bonus will make your new fixed point 60. This is a value you can reasonably expect to not spend much time below, and significant time above. If you are gaining enough AT from less consistent sources (battles, for example) to hover at 38-42 AT with just the fort bonus like in your scenario, then doing the same behavior when you add in the Defensive bonus is going to make your AT hover around 60. If it doesn’t, it’s likely that your behavior changes in the mid-game, maybe by fighting less or funding insufficient forts. There are a couple of idea group events for Defensive that ding your AT, but those aren’t common and become less so as you get more ideas, plus they aren’t injurious enough to take you from whichever fixed point you’re near or above to no better than if you didn’t have Defensive at all. Maybe they would if you get a supremely unlucky streak, but if you consistently get a -10 AT event three five-year pulses in a row go buy some scratch-offs and put your built-up karma to good use. So to sum up, assuming you wouldn’t already be at 80+ to 100 AT without it, Defensive will within a couple of decades have your AT 20 points higher than it would be without Defensive. This means you get +.05 Morale, +2% morale recovery, +2% manpower recovery, and anywhere from 1.2 to 2 extra general pips expected depending on whether your new AT fixed point is 20 or 100. This makes Defensive’s +1 yearly AT bonus great. The attrition vs reinforcement part of your post has been well-covered so I'm not talking about that.
|
|
#
?
Nov 10, 2015 00:47
|
|
|
So I ended up picking Switzerland. How terrible an idea is Defensive->Influence->Plutocratic?
|
|
#
?
Nov 10, 2015 00:54
|
|
|
JerikTelorian posted:I asked a few days ago for suggestions on a good country to play to improve my skills. I ended up picking Muscovy for reasons, and hit the game kerfuffle I always do: some nearby big power gets really big and I feel like I can't do anything about it. At this point I figure I probably hosed up somewhere by not properly checking the enemy's power and now am stuck with some superstate gobbling all of Europe. The good news is that Poland will be less dangerous than Poland and Lithuania together. Check who the enemies of Poland are. Those are the nations that have rivaled Poland and will accept an offensive call to arms. If Ottomans or France or Austria are there you can probably take Poland. If you do it now (hard mode) you can release Lithuania in the peace deal. If you wait until Lithuania is inherited, the total force limit and manpower pools will shrink which should make it a bit easier.
|
|
#
?
Nov 10, 2015 00:55
|
|
|
Manpower is actually the key to winning any war. The bonus you get from quantity to manpower reinforcement, combined with the protestant 10%, and if you're a theocracy, another 10%, basically lets you fight wars forever.
|
|
#
?
Nov 10, 2015 01:00
|
|
|
thatdarnedbob posted:The way that other influences, such as the Defensive AT bonus, the forts maintained bonus, and incidental AT gains from battles, events, etc, change this is by changing where on the scale your fixed point is. Take the full bonus from forts for example: each year this bonus adds 1 to your AT, and the natural decay tries to remove 5%. At 20 AT, this natural growth and decay balance each other out, with any overcorrections getting smoothed out in time. Below 20 AT, it will slowly grow, and above 20 AT, it will slowly fall. Now add in a +1 yearly AT idea, such as Defensive’s to this. Your new fixed point becomes 40, because your bonuses try to add 2 while the natural decay tries to remove 5%. And in the same way, putting in Quality’s bonus will make your new fixed point 60. This is a value you can reasonably expect to not spend much time below, and significant time above. I regret everything I've written today and I'm glad the good times continue to roll. Can someone please explain to me the way AT gains work then? The best conclusion I could reach was that the reason I was 'capped' at around 40 AT is that I wasn't gaining enough even with constant fighting to offset the tradition decay. Every fight I would win would give me like .01 army tradition even if it was 80 regiments (mine) vs 120 regiments (Ottoman). What affects the amount of AT you gain when winning a battle? My experience was that at my 40 AT starting point I was not able to increase it past 40 AT even with constant fighting and sieging forts. Perhaps we can get someone else to provide data? If you are currently playing a EU4 game and are about to take defensive or an equivalent AT idea, please take note of your AT for a few years before you get the idea, and a few years after. This is assuming you are more or less conquering as normal and don't totally change your fort or development. By the way, I get the way the AT resting point works and how raising it or lowering it changes your AT floor. I'm asking how that relates to getting more through battles.
|
|
#
?
Nov 10, 2015 01:02
|
|
|
I've learned to fight any larger wars while checking everybody's manpower pool. Buying mercenary infantry is great, because they die like flies and don't drain your body pool.
|
|
#
?
Nov 10, 2015 01:04
|
|
|
StashAugustine posted:So I ended up picking Switzerland. How terrible an idea is Defensive->Influence->Plutocratic? Nope that sounds loving awesome. Morale rules, Plutocratic rules, those are all good picks. Depending on your point income and expenditures you might want to grab an Admin idea instead of doubling down on military ideas for your first three. As a republic you have a lot of control over your point income so that shouldn't be an issue but Administrative, Economic, Humanist, or Innovative all might be good picks too depending on where you want to go with Switzerland.
|
|
#
?
Nov 10, 2015 01:09
|
|
|
StashAugustine posted:So I ended up picking Switzerland. How terrible an idea is Defensive->Influence->Plutocratic? It's fine, but in Switzerland's case (esp. if you're going for Switzerlake) I would argue that you should take Humanist first, for the sole reason that Aggressive Expansion is going to be your single limiting factor. So you want Better Relations Over Time as fast as you can get it.
|
|
#
?
Nov 10, 2015 01:11
|
|
Yes, it's like a lava lamp.
|
Rakthar posted:Perhaps we can get someone else to provide data? If you are currently playing a EU4 game and are about to take defensive or an equivalent AT idea, please take note of your AT for a few years before you get the idea, and a few years after. This is assuming you are more or less conquering as normal and don't totally change your fort or development. By the way, I get the way the AT resting point works and how raising it or lowering it changes your AT floor. I'm asking how that relates to getting more through battles. Army Tradition is harder to come by in the last couple patches but there's still a very noticeable gain from Defensive, Quality, Aristocratic etc. in my experience. Like thatdarnedbob posted, a yearly +1 AT could be analyzed as adding a baseline of 20 AT, and in addition to the scaling bonuses each 20 AT gives 1 - 2 leader pips for recruited generals, with increasing returns at high AT. So going from 0 to 20 AT gives you on average 1.0 leader pips, going from 20 to 40 gives you another +1.2, etc. Let's say you're a European nation with no AT bonuses innately. You join the League Wars so have a long-term +0.5 yearly AT, plus you're maintaining fully upgraded forts for another +1.0 AT and took Defensive (+1.0 AT). All told that's +2.5 yearly AT and a base decay of -5%, so your Army Tradition "floor" should be 50. You might dip below that or go far above that depending on wars and events but your equilibrium point is 50 AT. In practice you'll be much higher than 50 since you're fighting wars, but that's the baseline your AT will decay towards.
|
|
#
?
Nov 10, 2015 01:16
|
|
|
Pellisworth posted:Army Tradition is harder to come by in the last couple patches but there's still a very noticeable gain from Defensive, Quality, Aristocratic etc. in my experience. On my Commonwealth run I took Quality as my second military idea. Should I have been able to exceed 40 AT at any point? This was in patch 1.13 official, not beta. I was not able to exceed 40 AT before I took Quality, and I did not regularly stay above 40 after I took Quality. Why did it make no difference if I was fighting more or less non stop?
|
|
#
?
Nov 10, 2015 01:20
|
|
|
Rakthar posted:On my Commonwealth run I took Quality as my second military idea. Should I have been able to exceed 40 AT at any point? This was in patch 1.13 official, not beta. If you had Quality and the full +1.0/year AT from fully maintained forts, you should've been mostly above 40 AT assuming you're fighting fairly regularly. Winning fights and sieges doesn't give all that much AT. I can't break 60 and mostly stay around 50 as an extremely aggressive Ottomans. Edit: Quality and fully maintained forts = 2.0 / year and 5% decay, equilibrium or "floor" is then 40 AT.
|
|
#
?
Nov 10, 2015 01:25
|
|
|
Pellisworth posted:If you had Quality and the full +1.0/year AT from fully maintained forts, you should've been mostly above 40 AT assuming you're fighting fairly regularly. Ok so fighting all the time you have an AT of 50. What are your bonuses to tradition - just the +2? Are you getting the full +1 as the Ottomans from the forts? As Commonwealth I ended up with +1 from Defensive, +1 from Quality, roughly .4 from Forts, and it would hover in the 50s. When I didn't have the +1 from Defensive it would hover in the mid 40s. When I didn't have the +1 from Quality it was in the high 20s. From all those things it struck me as a mechanic that you can't do anything with, just determine where the natural resting point is. So to me it felt like you get given 20-30 just from fighting, and if you work really hard you can get it to be about 40 when you are rolling a general, which to me felt worse than having bonus pips. How does raising your AT to 40 instead of 25 really help? Does it do anything? I'm genuinely asking here. It didn't seem to help much for me.
|
|
#
?
Nov 10, 2015 01:28
|
|
|
I have no evidence to support this, but I'm pretty sure AT gain is scaled by the proportion of your army is actively fighting too. So if you have a bunch of troops standing around in the colonies, or waiting around to kill rebels, AT would be a lot harder to come by than if you were throwing all your men into every battle.
|
|
#
?
Nov 10, 2015 01:28
|
|
|
StashAugustine posted:So I ended up picking Switzerland. How terrible an idea is Defensive->Influence->Plutocratic? Back when I used to play MP I picked a combination similar to that. It was pretty fun; my soldiers were very good. Being Switzerland, though, my force limit was always pretty low due to the crappy tax provinces in the area.
|
|
#
?
Nov 10, 2015 01:29
|
|
|
Rakthar posted:Ok so fighting all the time you have an AT of 50. What are your bonuses to tradition - just the +2? Are you getting the full +1 as the Ottomans from the forts? None at all, sorry if I was being unclear with my examples. I'm currently about 1550 with an aggressive Ottoman Empire gone Protestant, and my AT is 50-60 with no bonuses other than about +0.6 yearly AT from fully maintained forts. I almost lost the Janissaries because there was no loving way I was going to break much above 60 AT without ideas, thankfully my poo poo heir died. It's really a fairly simple calculation. Yearly AT / decay, so if you have fully maintained forts and either Defensive or Quality, 2.0 / 0.05 = 40 baseline. On average you should get about 20 AT out of 1.0/year AT bonuses, more if you have decay reductions like Prussian ideas or Aristocratic.
|
|
#
?
Nov 10, 2015 01:33
|
|
|
Pellisworth posted:It's really a fairly simple calculation. Yearly AT / decay, so if you have fully maintained forts and either Defensive or Quality, 2.0 / 0.05 = 40 baseline. On average you should get about 20 AT out of 1.0/year AT bonuses, more if you have decay reductions like Prussian ideas or Aristocratic. I thought so too but I just couldn't seem to do anything with it. Hell I have the same AT as you in the 1700s with +2.4  I personally am leaving it alone as a system I don't care about anymore.
|
|
#
?
Nov 10, 2015 01:36
|
|
|
There was also a point not too long ago where winning sieges would sometimes lose you AT. So make sure you're talking about relatively recent builds.
|
|
#
?
Nov 10, 2015 01:42
|
|
|
PittTheElder posted:It's fine, but in Switzerland's case (esp. if you're going for Switzerlake) I would argue that you should take Humanist first, for the sole reason that Aggressive Expansion is going to be your single limiting factor. So you want Better Relations Over Time as fast as you can get it. I don't think you'd ever want to pick a military idea first since the first few technologies that give military tactics and morale are so much more important.
|
|
#
?
Nov 10, 2015 01:42
|
|
|
Rakthar posted:I thought so too but I just couldn't seem to do anything with it. Hell I have the same AT as you in the 1700s with +2.4 Losing battles actually gains you a lot more AT than winning. If you're a large empire mostly winning your wars you gain very little AT from battles and sieges right now.' Edit: dividing your yearly AT gain by your decay (e.g. +2.5 AT and 5% base decay = 50 AT) should give you a rough baseline, and to me it feels like you can push another 10-20 above that with wars but it's hard to get really high AT values without large passive bonuses. Pellisworth fucked around with this message at 01:50 on Nov 10, 2015 |
|
#
?
Nov 10, 2015 01:48
|
|
|
Rakthar posted:How does raising your AT to 40 instead of 25 really help? Does it do anything? I'm genuinely asking here. It didn't seem to help much for me. There is a range/"window" of pips that your generals get (before applying bonus pips from stuff like offensive ideas). Higher AT moves that window so on average you will be rolling better generals. The thing is, that range is pretty wide, so while on the grand scheme of things more AT will net you better generals, it is pretty easy end up rolling a better general at 25% AT than at 40%, because at 25% the range is from "poo poo" to "decent" and at 40% from "poor" to "pretty good". The trick to AT is to stack up more and more bonii to it. A 20% resting point is just not any good on its own, but if you are stacking these up to get on the higher end of the scale (+3AT -1% decay nets you 75% resting point) you are talking business.
|
|
#
?
Nov 10, 2015 01:52
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 16, 2024 21:13 |
|
|
Rakthar posted:I thought so too but I just couldn't seem to do anything with it. Hell I have the same AT as you in the 1700s with +2.4 The big thing that affects AT gain from battles is the number of troops participating in the battle in relation to your entire army. In the early game this tends to be 100% and can net you absurd amounts of AT, especially if you chain a few early wars together while relying on allies to soak casualties. It quickly dwindles to a much lower number in the mid and late game as you start rocking 2 stacks, then 3, then 10. Eventually AT gain from battles becomes completely ignorable. That is why people are saying +AT from ideas is awesome, because it lets you keep getting good generals in the late game. Otherwise you'd be sitting at ~20 AT, crying over your 2/2/2/0 running into a 6/6/6/4 monster. AT gain from sieges is an arcane and mystical process that no one has any idea how works.
|
|
#
?
Nov 10, 2015 01:52
|
|
