|
Larry Parrish posted:But honestly I quit my games far before I get that huge because I find it extremely boring to beat up nations that are much smaller for hours. Even when they get into competitive alliance webs, since they never bunch up their armies you just play an increasingly annoying game of whack-a-mole. I've always wondered whether there would be some way to replicate the HRE Vassal Swarm stuff for lategame empires. I'm usually past the point of caring about individual battles and armies but I don't mind calling which wars get fought. A part of the lategame where you just say "siege these 3 forts" or "occupy this whole country" and go hit speed 5 and 2 years later your armies have gotten it done.
|
#
?
Nov 14, 2015 01:20
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 17, 2024 07:54 |
|
|
Average Bear posted:I still feel that estates will be an annoyance rather than interesting gameplay. The part of the game that makes our brains go "oooo good" is watching our borders expand. Civ has good tall, internal internal gameplay because cities expand with buildings and borders expand without war. You just can't trigger the fun sensor in our rat brains without a map painting mechanic in this game. Sounds like someone has never played CK2. It's certainly possible to implement an internal political system that doesn't rely on external war. Pellisworth posted:Couple of questions: You'll make 1000 no problem. Once Admin Effic. starts kicking in you'll be able to take huge swathes of land. No idea on the WC though, since I've never actually done it (because of how tedious it seems mostly).
|
|
#
?
Nov 14, 2015 01:28
|
|
Yes, it's like a lava lamp.
|
I've played CK2. It's just the internal politics get boring and predictable after a while, and expansion is what keeps a player hooked.
|
|
#
?
Nov 14, 2015 03:14
|
|
|
My current Bengal run is going OK despite terrible monarchs (including a long-lived 0 1 0), but this is currently bugging me. Is Bahmanis pronounced with a hard 's', or it is the plural of Bahmani? If the latter, shouldn't it really be called Bahmanids?
|
|
#
?
Nov 14, 2015 10:09
|
|
|
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ottoman_wintering_in_Toulon This is crazy
|
|
#
?
Nov 14, 2015 11:29
|
|
|
So I'm on the cusp of forming the HRE, and wondering about next steps- -Now that I'm sitting across multiple trade nodes, including almost 100% of Lubeck and the Dutch side of the English Channel, any suggestions on my merchant positioning? I took trade as a focus so I have 5 to move around. -Is the HRE typically the focus of a coalition once they form? I'm just wondering if I should cut my army down from four times the size of the next largest army in Europe to only 2.5 times or so... -anything else I should watch for?
|
|
#
?
Nov 14, 2015 12:16
|
|
|
Slime Bro Helpdesk posted:-Now that I'm sitting across multiple trade nodes, including almost 100% of Lubeck and the Dutch side of the English Channel, any suggestions on my merchant positioning? I took trade as a focus so I have 5 to move around. Move your main trade port to a nice harbor province in the English Channel and collect there (you don't need a merchant to collect at your main trade port). If you can dominate one of the end trade nodes (the ones that don't have any exits), you should always collect there. Then spread the rest of your dudes out to transfer trade there - nodes where you have more power are usually better to transfer in, unless a node where you have less power is massively bigger in volume traded.
|
|
#
?
Nov 14, 2015 13:40
|
|
|
Average Bear posted:I've played CK2. It's just the internal politics get boring and predictable after a while, and expansion is what keeps a player hooked. I dunno, I'm kind of bored with war. It's not avoidable entirely, but I'd love a game where I can grow in power and money without having to become a giant blob.
|
|
#
?
Nov 14, 2015 13:44
|
|
|
Colonial Air Force posted:I dunno, I'm kind of bored with war. It's not avoidable entirely, but I'd love a game where I can grow in power and money without having to become a giant blob. how about the sims3
|
|
#
?
Nov 14, 2015 16:27
|
|
|
Rakthar posted:I've always wondered whether there would be some way to replicate the HRE Vassal Swarm stuff for lategame empires. I'm usually past the point of caring about individual battles and armies but I don't mind calling which wars get fought. A part of the lategame where you just say "siege these 3 forts" or "occupy this whole country" and go hit speed 5 and 2 years later your armies have gotten it done. playing a game of eu4 where you'd gone so far past any challenge to have automated your armies would be intensely, intensely boring. the actual problem here is that there's no challenge in wars in late-game SP. I vaguely remember that coalitions were originally supposed to solve this, but they don't at all, of course; they just slow down how quickly you can reach the unstoppability point. possibly the problem is the timescale; 400 years is just far too long for almost all games of eu4 you'll want to play. A compressed eu4 that lasted only ~200 years (with the climax being the religious league wars, perhaps?) would only much more rarely suffer from this problem; it might kill WCs but I'm absolutely fine with that. Ofc that's not going to happen. encouragement to play from later starts would also be neat - effectively different scenarios, which would help the game feel fresh. My understanding is that johan really hates the later starts (due to the amount of work required to keep supporting them) and so doesn't want to add anything beyond the silly 1776 usa achievement, but that seems like a waste if true.
|
|
#
?
Nov 14, 2015 17:46
|
|
|
PleasingFungus posted:playing a game of eu4 where you'd gone so far past any challenge to have automated your armies would be intensely, intensely boring. Yeah, this is exactly my issue. Late game major power wars generally aren't challenging, just tedious. Nothing worse than trying to grind up Ming in the 1700s with their level 8 forts and 75% defensiveness.
|
|
#
?
Nov 14, 2015 17:52
|
|
|
Slime Bro Helpdesk posted:So I'm on the cusp of forming the HRE, and wondering about next steps- As a medium-term project, try to gather trade power in the Caribbean and North America to send back to the English Channel. Britain won't always fight to redirect the money hose from the Caribbean to them instead of the Iberians, so you'd probably make a lot of money doing so.
|
|
#
?
Nov 14, 2015 18:19
|
|
|
Everybody keeps complaining about and referring to late game Ming but has anybody actually fought late game Ming or are you just theorycrafting how hard or annoying they can be? They're a loving pushover unless they westernized. Having actually taken the game to 1821 a few times post forts patch and fighting lucky nations Ming each time, they're many times easier and less tedious to fight now then pre forts patch. You turn the speed up to 5, and move your huge stacks on each fort until they're down and move on to the next one, assault if it's a crappy inner fort or siege with a siege leader if it's big fort. There's no tedium involved unless you find playing the actual game tedious.
|
|
#
?
Nov 14, 2015 18:26
|
|
|
Vanilla Mint Ice posted:Everybody keeps complaining about and referring to late game Ming but has anybody actually fought late game Ming or are you just theorycrafting how hard or annoying they can be? They're a loving pushover unless they westernized. Having actually taken the game to 1821 a few times post forts patch and fighting lucky nations Ming each time, they're many times easier and less tedious to fight now then pre forts patch. You turn the speed up to 5, and move your huge stacks on each fort until they're down and move on to the next one, assault if it's a crappy inner fort or siege with a siege leader if it's big fort. There's no tedium involved unless you find playing the actual game tedious. I do not know - I was just playing a multiplayer game with a friend with myself Portugal, it was in around 1650 and Great Britain (AI) decided to call me into a war against Mega-Ming (They had a lot of the Vietnam type area as well). Their military tech was only a few levels behind me along with them having 140,000 men under arms and I did not really feel like fighting them for the benefit of my 'ally' so I declined the call to arms. A few years later I noticed Chinese troops successfully besieging London.
|
|
#
?
Nov 14, 2015 18:36
|
|
|
Vanilla Mint Ice posted:Everybody keeps complaining about and referring to late game Ming but has anybody actually fought late game Ming or are you just theorycrafting how hard or annoying they can be? They're a loving pushover unless they westernized. Having actually taken the game to 1821 a few times post forts patch and fighting lucky nations Ming each time, they're many times easier and less tedious to fight now then pre forts patch. You turn the speed up to 5, and move your huge stacks on each fort until they're down and move on to the next one, assault if it's a crappy inner fort or siege with a siege leader if it's big fort. There's no tedium involved unless you find playing the actual game tedious. The big thing is that compared to conquering basically any other stretch of territory, even if it is as big and developed as China, takes a lot less time. They're not difficult to beat, it just takes loving ages. Sure, I can do it at speed 5, but isn't solving the issue, just avoiding it.
|
|
#
?
Nov 14, 2015 18:50
|
|
|
Absolutely no way imo, mega France and mega Russia, especially Russia, takes much, much longer to fight. Fighting 1700s lucky mega Russia is incomparable to fighting Ming. I would understand if the poster boy for tedious late game war was Russia but I just don't understand why everyone mentions Ming of all nations.
|
|
#
?
Nov 14, 2015 18:53
|
|
|
Pellisworth posted:Would appreciate some advice. The Pr-Otto-stant Empire, ca. 1600: You're in really good position for a WC. First goal is to revoke the privelegia, so convert HRE members, etc. Once that's done, you can vassal-feed like crazy (you can do this now, too, if you're allied with them in the war). Go after the rest of Europe, especially Spain/Portugal/England, though you aren't in a huge rush - watch how many wars you need with each to annex them and try to wear it down - you don't need to do 100% wars here yet. If you can, give their territory to HRE members, since you'll inherit it for free when you form the HRE, and so you'll core it free and won't need to deal with OE. The PU with France might actually hurt you a little - you could otherwise snake your vassals over to Spain, and they'd core France for you. If you inherit/integrate France, adding their provinces and then releasing provinces/smaller nations will let France take up the slack in coring Europe. Try to cut off the colonizers' sea access. Are you at the point where you don't get coalitioned anymore yet? If so, you can just go crazy, if not, be careful. Grab all of Africa - it's cheap and easy, and you want to kick Portugal/Spain out of it. The Berbers will be cheap to core with all your discounts, so don't worry about them, even with the 50% extra cost. Until you have no one left to declare on due to truces, you should be at war with Africa 95% of the time. You can pretty much steamroll them. Work on India and Ming. Ming will take a lot of wars, and if you can take them on now, do it - prioritize their forts. After a war or two, they get really easy, but get them early if you can - they are a bitch with tons of high level forts. India will take a lot of time to wear down, so they're a priority, too. I'd cut off Russia's colonial access to keep them weak, but the colonies are pretty cheap to grab, so that's up to you. You have 200+ years, so that's over ten wars with them, so you're in no hurry. The New World is easy. It's easiest to grab it now, or to stop them from expanding further, but you can inherit the CNs when you finish them off. Unfortunately, the CNs will probably break free - you can do some things to prevent this, but overall, they're not that hard to grab late game anyhow. Basically, here's my goals in your situation for a WC: - Revoke the Privelegia ASAP - Conquer Africa - you can collect in Cape or somewhere and just clean up by re-directing trade that way. - Conquer somewhere in the world always - just be constantly running multiple wars, with one in Europe, as many as you'd like in Africa, and one or more in Asia. You may be able to lay back on the Europe war sometimes; they'll be a really easy fight once you revoke, and you should be able to find a way to get your vassals (that you'd inherit for free) to core most of the guys there. - Feed the Commonwealth to as many HRE vassals as you can - it looks like three share a border? Snake them so that they can all take lots of land, and then can reach Russia to do the same. - You might want to do the same with Sweden - vassal feed to your HRE members the increased coring cost provinces. You're in better position for a WC than I was, and I completed mine by 1740 or so. Don't take anything I've said as an absolute must - I could be misjudging your strength or your opponents might be stronger, though once you revoke, Europe is a joke. You'll want to have wars set up so you get to/close to 100% OE, core them, and can peace out with another war for 100% - coring time becomes a constraint. Personally, the fun of a WC is more in the planning, and then beating the time limit. I talk about my similar run here http://forums.somethingawful.com/showthread.php?threadid=3725024&userid=127090#post448905601 and here, if that helps: http://forums.somethingawful.com/showthread.php?threadid=3725024&userid=127090&perpage=40&pagenumber=1#post449142022 OneTwentySix fucked around with this message at 19:26 on Nov 14, 2015 |
|
#
?
Nov 14, 2015 19:21
|
|
|
Vanilla Mint Ice posted:Absolutely no way imo, mega France and mega Russia, especially Russia, takes much, much longer to fight. Fighting 1700s lucky mega Russia is incomparable to fighting Ming. I would understand if the poster boy for tedious late game war was Russia but I just don't understand why everyone mentions Ming of all nations. They are generally far away from most people's base of power so it can be a pain to get into position. The last time I fought Ming they were neck-in-neck with me for military tech (I was mega-russia with most of India conquered) and so I waited to declare war until I had just gotten the last infantry unit upgrade and they hadn't. I won handily, but I had to use hundreds of thousands of troops, and there were still some sketchy moments since you still need to be careful of attrition, and managing an army with 500,000+ troops can be finicky. Part of the reason it comes up so much is they are a bit of a road-block at the end of the game when you've dominated the European powers. The forts do take a crazy long time to siege so they can hamper your goals.
|
|
#
?
Nov 14, 2015 19:26
|
|
|
Vanilla Mint Ice posted:Absolutely no way imo, mega France and mega Russia, especially Russia, takes much, much longer to fight. Fighting 1700s lucky mega Russia is incomparable to fighting Ming. I would understand if the poster boy for tedious late game war was Russia but I just don't understand why everyone mentions Ming of all nations. If I'm playing towards the late game, Russia and France get murdered long before the 1700s. The reason Ming is used as an example boils down to the fact that they tend to be a stable ~1000 development nation with a bunch of fort defensiveness and a tendency to poo poo out forts everywhere that you only run into come the late game unless you are starting in Eastern Asia.
|
|
#
?
Nov 14, 2015 19:26
|
|
|
Vanilla Mint Ice posted:Everybody keeps complaining about and referring to late game Ming but has anybody actually fought late game Ming or are you just theorycrafting how hard or annoying they can be? They're a loving pushover unless they westernized. Having actually taken the game to 1821 a few times post forts patch and fighting lucky nations Ming each time, they're many times easier and less tedious to fight now then pre forts patch. You turn the speed up to 5, and move your huge stacks on each fort until they're down and move on to the next one, assault if it's a crappy inner fort or siege with a siege leader if it's big fort. There's no tedium involved unless you find playing the actual game tedious. Maybe I just got unlucky, but the last time I fought Ming post-1700 they were at tech parity without westernization and their +1 fire and heinous numbers of artillery allowed their stacks to stand up pretty well. The forts weren't as much of a problem as the multiple 70-stacks roaming around.
|
|
#
?
Nov 14, 2015 19:37
|
|
|
Dibujante posted:Maybe I just got unlucky, but the last time I fought Ming post-1700 they were at tech parity without westernization and their +1 fire and heinous numbers of artillery allowed their stacks to stand up pretty well. The forts weren't as much of a problem as the multiple
|
|
#
?
Nov 14, 2015 19:45
|
|
|
I think late game might feel less tedious if you had the option of handing your armies over to AI control. Early game you don't want that because every battle matters, but after 1600 or so you just want to smash dudes into each other and call it a day.
|
|
#
?
Nov 14, 2015 20:21
|
|
|
Vanilla Mint Ice posted:Absolutely no way imo, mega France and mega Russia, especially Russia, takes much, much longer to fight. Fighting 1700s lucky mega Russia is incomparable to fighting Ming. I would understand if the poster boy for tedious late game war was Russia but I just don't understand why everyone mentions Ming of all nations. For me it's all just in the Fort Defensiveness bonuses in their ideas, combined with taking Defensive, which means their forts take probably twice as long to siege down. France and Austria used to be the same way, but I believe their ideas got changed with CS. Fort Defensiveness in general I don't care for; because you can't stack Siege Ability to anywhere near the same extent, it just makes those select powers annoying to fight. Not really any harder.
|
|
#
?
Nov 14, 2015 20:23
|
|
|
Fister Roboto posted:I think late game might feel less tedious if you had the option of handing your armies over to AI control. Early game you don't want that because every battle matters, but after 1600 or so you just want to smash dudes into each other and call it a day. Yeah this is more or less how I feel about it. If I don't have to do the uninteresting stuff I'm more likely to stick with it. Ham Sandwiches fucked around with this message at 20:29 on Nov 14, 2015 |
|
#
?
Nov 14, 2015 20:27
|
|
|
Does it make sense to always call your allies to war, even if the interface says that they won't come? Does the AI have a prestige value that takes a hit when they refuse a call to war?
|
|
#
?
Nov 14, 2015 20:36
|
|
|
I think the alliance would get broken if you call them when they have the red X next to them in the declaration screen, wouldn't it?
|
|
#
?
Nov 14, 2015 20:46
|
|
|
You can strategically call someone to arms if you know that they're going to refuse to make them take the prestige hit and get the Dishonoured CB against them. If you're allied to Poland and want to break their PU or something then sure but it's not something that you should always be doing.
|
|
#
?
Nov 14, 2015 20:59
|
|
|
It's also useful to break your alliance with someone if you want to do so but don't want to take the relations hit for doing so, for whatever reason. Very occasionally useful.
|
|
#
?
Nov 14, 2015 21:01
|
|
|
Tendronai posted:You can strategically call someone to arms if you know that they're going to refuse to make them take the prestige hit and get the Dishonoured CB against them. If you're allied to Poland and want to break their PU or something then sure but it's not something that you should always be doing. Whoa. I never thought of that. That's some realpolitik right there.
|
|
#
?
Nov 14, 2015 21:11
|
|
|
If I completely annex someone with colonial nations, do the overlordship transfer to me or do they become independent? Or do they get merged into my own colonial nations (if they exist)? e: what about vassalizing and diploannexing them? Can vassals have subjects of their own? TheFluff fucked around with this message at 21:18 on Nov 14, 2015 |
|
#
?
Nov 14, 2015 21:13
|
|
|
TheFluff posted:If I completely annex someone with colonial nations, do the overlordship transfer to me or do they become independent? Or do they get merged into my own colonial nations (if they exist)? a) the overlordship transfers but they don't merge with your own nations. b) vassals can have vassals with infinite recursion. I did a Ming WC where I created Ultramongolia as a client state, which vassalized Uzbek, which in turn vassalized Kazakh, which in turn vassalized Khiva.
|
|
#
?
Nov 14, 2015 21:55
|
|
|
TheFluff posted:If I completely annex someone with colonial nations, do the overlordship transfer to me or do they become independent? Or do they get merged into my own colonial nations (if they exist)? full annexation -> you become overlord vassalization -> colonies become free diploannexation -> you become overlord You used to be able to make vassals vassalize more vassals but I think they changed that in a recent patch. But vassals can spawn new colonial nations if they colonize.
|
|
#
?
Nov 14, 2015 22:20
|
|
|
Sorced posted:But vassals can spawn new colonial nations if they colonize. Yeah, with the added bonus that if they get up to >10 provinces you can get several bonus merchants from a colonial region. As England for example, it might be a good idea to keep Scotland around for a long time as they take Exploration third and will set up a couple of colonial nations for you, there's no particular advantage in forming GB.
|
|
#
?
Nov 14, 2015 22:31
|
|
|
The fact that the CNs remain separate is nice because if you play your cards right you can end up with infinity merchants and micromanage global trade to your whims.
|
|
#
?
Nov 14, 2015 22:33
|
|
|
I think it's cool seeing minority cultures in the New World too. As it stands I can call my CNs "New Wales" and "New Scotland" but they're not Welsh or Scottish 
|
|
#
?
Nov 14, 2015 23:34
|
|
|
OneTwentySix posted:WC stuff Thanks for the tips I'll focus mostly on fixing up the HRE and conquering Europe/Africa, India and China as side projects. I managed to grab a line of Trade Company provinces in India so none of them will be Westernizing anytime soon, Ming is pretty broken up, so it's mostly punching bags.
|
|
#
?
Nov 15, 2015 01:35
|
|
|
Could someone explain or link me to a guide on how trade nodes and trade power work? I did the tutorial but I still don't get it. I'm not sure how I should be using my merchants either. I did all the tutorials but I find this game more daunting than Crusader Kings II. Does anyone have any recommendations on how I should play?
|
|
#
?
Nov 15, 2015 03:14
|
|
|
Can i pretty please change my CNs colors? I don't want to have yellow CNs still when I form GB.
|
|
#
?
Nov 15, 2015 03:20
|
|
|
GreyPowerVan posted:Can i pretty please change my CNs colors? I don't want to have yellow CNs still when I form GB. You have to edit the save file
|
|
#
?
Nov 15, 2015 03:24
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 17, 2024 07:54 |
|
|
snoremac posted:Could someone explain or link me to a guide on how trade nodes and trade power work? I did the tutorial but I still don't get it. I'm not sure how I should be using my merchants either. Here's a post I did not too long ago on the basics of trade http://forums.somethingawful.com/showthread.php?threadid=3725024&pagenumber=215&perpage=40#post452083628 The game is complex as gently caress and changes significantly between patches--for the better, but that makes it hard to recommend a comprehensive tutorial that isn't out of date. Much like in CK2, you're going to have a very different playing experience and need to familiarize yourself with different systems playing as a colonial nation vs. land power vs. HRE member, etc. Honestly the best advice I can give is to choose a couple of nations or mechanical focuses, ask about them in the thread and you'll get good advice. For example, do a colonial-focused run as Portugal. Castile/Spain is your forever buddy and so you can mostly ignore internal European politics and infighting and focus on learning the trade and colonial systems. Pick Exploration, Expansion, then Quantity etc.
|
|
#
?
Nov 15, 2015 03:29
|
|