|
Allyn posted:Entirely possible it got changed tbh, I've not played for a while (and I may have missed it changing before then anyway). It was that case at one point in time, anyway -1000 and not eligible is all it says.
|
#
?
Nov 18, 2015 19:10
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 16, 2024 12:49 |
|
|
PittTheElder posted:14 progress levels for fort levels >3. Pretty sure it only counts to 12 on level 1 forts. Not quite. The extra progress on higher level forts is for breaches. Every time you roll a natural 14, you get +1 towards the siege, up to the fort's level, in addition to the progress event that you roll. e: also when the number of defenders drops to the next lower tier, like say a level 2 fort drops below 1000, the fort loses a level as well. Fister Roboto fucked around with this message at 19:49 on Nov 18, 2015 |
|
#
?
Nov 18, 2015 19:19
|
|
|
Some serious end-boss times here. England integrated France (which is actually kinda good for me since it makes them less powerful on the continent) and Austria is in a PU under Russia). I've been allied to England for most of the game, but I think I'll have to turn on them soon. Their only real ally is Scandinavia who I'm also allied to and don't really want to fight. Then again, my force limit is 154 and I currently have the largest army in the world. I'm slowly eating up Castile with my two vassals Catalonia and Leon and I'm inching my way into Italy as well. Initially I was a member of the HRE but I ended up leaving it so I could switch to kingdom rank (and soon empire rank) because the lack of diplomats was killing me. There's not really anything else in the HRE region I really want other than Austrian provinces and well, I don't really feel like warring with Russia over them quite yet. Also, I don't think I've ever made as much money from production in any other game of EU4. Normally all my money comes from trade or taxes.
|
|
#
?
Nov 18, 2015 19:58
|
|
|
Zuhzuhzombie!! posted:-1000 and not eligible is all it says. Are you the correct religion? If it is before the League Wars end then you need to be Catholic. After the League Wars the HRE screen will tell you what the appropriate religion is, in the top middle/slightly right. It does not matter which side of the league wars you joined or fought in, although if your end goal is to become the Emperor it makes little sense to fight for the league that is not your religion. **edit** I assume you are not a vassal or a junior member in a personal union, but if you are you will be ineligible to become emperor. You mentioned you were Spain, so I doubt that is the case. You also must not have a Theocratic or Republic government, but as you are Spain, I again doubt that is the case. IncredibleIgloo fucked around with this message at 20:35 on Nov 18, 2015 |
|
#
?
Nov 18, 2015 20:31
|
|
|
Dibujante posted:You get a -1 stab hit if you declare war on a country you have a high opinion of. As far as I'm aware, that's it. That's the only one I know of as well. But sending an insult usually tanks that enough to dodge the stab hit. Or just ally them and them immediately break the alliance.
|
|
#
?
Nov 18, 2015 21:11
|
|
Yes, it's like a lava lamp.
|
The only other effect is that you can't ally a country when you have a negative opinion of them.
|
|
#
?
Nov 18, 2015 21:58
|
|
|
Scandinavia forms every game, you'd think it was a freak accident it didn't in real life
|
|
#
?
Nov 18, 2015 22:21
|
|
|
Wiz has stated on the paradox forums that Denmark is a lot stronger in 1.14, so hopefully that'll be less of an issue.
|
|
#
?
Nov 18, 2015 22:24
|
|
|
PittTheElder posted:Wiz has stated on the paradox forums that Denmark is a lot stronger in 1.14, so hopefully that'll be less of an issue. Despite the development system, the game still doesn't really model population growth. "Base tax" seems like it often represents how productive a region will become, with places like Kiev being tiny backwaters with populations in the low five digits until the Victorian era. Sweden and Norway were in a similar boat - a floor of 3 base tax / province is probably a large overestimate of how developed they were at the time. On top of that, there was a much greater disconnect between the wealth and population of a nation and the wealth and power of its corresponding state during this time period. Denmark could rely on the sound toll to directly finance its state, which was an ongoing concern. After all, the English Civil War started when Charles I tried to levy a tax instead of relying purely on tonnage and poundage duties to fund his government. Imagine a world where you have to have a bake sale each time you want to raise a regiment of infantry.
|
|
#
?
Nov 18, 2015 22:32
|
|
|
I wonder if they bring back population in some form, and tie it to development. It doesn't have to be actual numbers, because who really cares, but it could be something like each province has a population growth bar which fills up at a rate determined by various factors, and when it's full it adds a random point of development. Something to make it feel more dynamic.
|
|
#
?
Nov 18, 2015 23:10
|
|
|
I'd like for development to actually be worth doing before they start putting more abstraction on top of it.
|
|
#
?
Nov 18, 2015 23:45
|
|
|
Fister Roboto posted:I wonder if they bring back population in some form, and tie it to development. It doesn't have to be actual numbers, because who really cares, but it could be something like each province has a population growth bar which fills up at a rate determined by various factors, and when it's full it adds a random point of development. Something to make it feel more dynamic. I hope they're working on something like that, it would be very helpful for Groogy when he's coding the EU4 -> V3 converter 
|
|
#
?
Nov 19, 2015 00:02
|
|
|
Is Montezuma coded to die young? I've been trying to get an Aztec game running and he's died less than 4 years in every time. I've restarted 5 times, this is kind of annoying.
|
|
#
?
Nov 19, 2015 00:08
|
|
|
Zuhzuhzombie!! posted:I'd like for development to actually be worth doing before they start putting more abstraction on top of it. I think that development costs should be more variable. What should happen is that certain events should apply a blanket development cost reduction that goes away as you apply development points. So something like "importation of the potato to Europe" might give the player a -90% development cost that lasts for the next 300 spent points of development. That way the player could go through growth spurts as new crops, technologies, and practices take root. There would be ideal times for the population to surge ahead, and other times when it's expensive enough that they only do it because they need to. I also think the cost per point should scale more harshly. The player should get the maximum out of these events by spreading the development out, to counteract the piling on of -development cost bonuses that they are assigning to their high-value provinces. I would buy a crops mini-DLC. How can you model the period without modeling the spread of corn, maize, potatoes, sweet potatoes, squash and beans throughout the world? These all increased calorie intake immensely, especially in marginal land that was previously not farmable.
|
|
#
?
Nov 19, 2015 00:37
|
|
|
Chickpea Roar posted:I hope they're working on something like that, it would be very helpful for Groogy when he's coding the EU4 -> V3 converter Groogy shouldn't touch anything in EU4.
|
|
#
?
Nov 19, 2015 04:23
|
|
|
Dibujante posted:Despite the development system, the game still doesn't really model population growth. "Base tax" seems like it often represents how productive a region will become, with places like Kiev being tiny backwaters with populations in the low five digits until the Victorian era. Sweden and Norway were in a similar boat - a floor of 3 base tax / province is probably a large overestimate of how developed they were at the time. Almost no Scandinavian provs outside Denmark have that much BT. It certainly is not the floor. Anyhow, development cannot perfectly match history because nations' power did not scale linearly to their population. It's an abstraction of population and general wealth. Wiz fucked around with this message at 08:52 on Nov 19, 2015 |
|
#
?
Nov 19, 2015 08:48
|
|
|
Paradox, you uh, need to proofread poo poo: 
|
|
#
?
Nov 19, 2015 11:41
|
|
|
Haha yeah that tooltip that almost no one ever reads is wrong.
|
|
#
?
Nov 19, 2015 14:13
|
|
|
Wiz posted:Almost no Scandinavian provs outside Denmark have that much BT. It certainly is not the floor. I think one of the complaints is, that it is mostly used by western nations and only when you don't/can't blob as much or if you win ruler lotto. As the Ottomans I actually improved my three trade bonus provinces and some production ones because I simply had way to much admin points. But when you play something outside of the western group you wont ever have points to build up things. I feel like most of the time, development only helps me to make money and not much else, while there's only advisers to convert money into MP, thus making it kind of a weak option. But like many things in EU it might just come down to personal taste, I've never actually made a spreadsheet for it.
|
|
#
?
Nov 19, 2015 14:15
|
|
|
Is there any chance of keeping/merging events when forming a country? I think some of Sweden's events still make sense if they form Scandinavia
|
|
#
?
Nov 19, 2015 14:38
|
|
|
Wiz posted:Almost no Scandinavian provs outside Denmark have that much BT. It certainly is not the floor. Sorry, 3 dev/prov.
|
|
#
?
Nov 19, 2015 15:35
|
|
|
Didn't some of the Asian (Goa and Malacca are the big ones I can think of) ports that were used by Europeans have huge population/trade value explosions as well. Part of that is covered with the existing, static province modifiers but some more events to model these developments would be really cool and a nice buff for those regions. Imagine the Indian nations actually getting a boost/something nice from Portgual getting Goa, instead of just suffering from it due to Deus Vult.
|
|
#
?
Nov 19, 2015 15:39
|
|
|
Tahirovic posted:I think one of the complaints is, that it is mostly used by western nations and only when you don't/can't blob as much or if you win ruler lotto. As the Ottomans I actually improved my three trade bonus provinces and some production ones because I simply had way to much admin points. But when you play something outside of the western group you wont ever have points to build up things. Oh, increasing development is certainly one of the by far worst ways of spending monarch points relative to gain(with the exception of gold provinces), but it is there. It probably shouldn't be much stronger than it is though, because other ways of expanding your influence require more effort. It also scales horribly. When your nation is at 10 development, an increase of 1 development is a much bigger deal than it is at a 1000.
|
|
#
?
Nov 19, 2015 15:49
|
|
|
Cynic Jester posted:Oh, increasing development is certainly one of the by far worst ways of spending monarch points relative to gain(with the exception of gold provinces), but it is there. It probably shouldn't be much stronger than it is though, because other ways of expanding your influence require more effort. It also scales horribly. When your nation is at 10 development, an increase of 1 development is a much bigger deal than it is at a 1000. There's a reason why the optimal start strat for any small nation that isn't in immediate existential crisis (and many that are) is "dump all your dip points and maybe some admin into development", and then you basically ignore development once you start growing. Having slightly higher force limits and more income is very meaningful early on, even to the point where you're sacrificing tech.
|
|
#
?
Nov 19, 2015 16:45
|
|
|
Getting a 0/1/1 ruler as a poor muslim tech country might as well just quit the game for you.
|
|
#
?
Nov 19, 2015 16:47
|
|
|
I might argue that development is an optimal choice for non-western nations with good mana, because tech costs can be prohibitively expensive, sometimes it can be a good idea to wait for neighbor bonuses, and you need something to spend excess mana on when you hit the cap. In other words, sometimes waiting a couple years to buy Admin 8 or whatever for 800 power instead of 1200 can be the right choice, and sitting at the cap is always a bad idea, so it's kind of a win-win to improve your income/manpower while also reaping neighbor bonuses. In fact, now that I think about it, I've done the most development as small, non-western nations. eta: and it's especially a win-win-win when you're a regional power trying to gimp yourself in order to qualify for westernization. I've done a lot of development as various Western African powers because I needed to be behind in tech to westernize and whatever such-and-such idea was not terribly exciting to me at that moment. quadrophrenic fucked around with this message at 17:29 on Nov 19, 2015 |
|
#
?
Nov 19, 2015 17:25
|
|
|
I think the idea that development is useless is stupid. As someone who played around with the values before, it can earn you a surprising bit of cash and manpower if you're in a rut, especially if you're sitting on a bunch of high price trade goods and have the diplo power to spend (and lets be honest, diplo power didn't have that many uses to begin with anyway).
|
|
#
?
Nov 19, 2015 18:23
|
|
|
Development being useless is generally an opinion espoused by people who only understand the game in a shallow pure numbers way of thinking.
|
|
#
?
Nov 19, 2015 18:52
|
|
|
Nobody's saying it's useless, just not as useful (or interesting) as it could be. One thing I miss from pre-CS is all the unique buildings, and other buildings with interesting effects beyond just +50% tax or whatever.
|
|
#
?
Nov 19, 2015 18:56
|
|
|
I dunno if it needs to be more interesting. It has a purpose, and I think having sweeping development changes (like Dibujante's idea) occur over the course of a game would just throw off the balance and make people bemoan the coring costs even more. Especially since I doubt the AI would dump their points on it in a way that actually makes much sense (either historically or gameplay wise). that said I do think the development values of the provinces as they are needs changing, China should not be barely as rich as a unified HRE, that's just weird.
|
|
#
?
Nov 19, 2015 19:03
|
|
|
I play the game in a stable economy mindset, and development is fantastic for that. Dev is probably my favourite addition to EUIV. e; the pre-CS buildings were terrible. poo poo like "your army is cheaper if you build it here" was really unfun.
|
|
#
?
Nov 19, 2015 19:05
|
|
|
I just like seeing the little city graphics get bigger.
|
|
#
?
Nov 19, 2015 19:05
|
|
|
Funky Valentine posted:I just like seeing the little city graphics get bigger.
|
|
#
?
Nov 19, 2015 19:06
|
|
|
Development is pretty circumstantial. It's rarely the purely optimal strategy, but EU4 isn't a game about purely optimal strategies. It basically adds more depth to strategies other than map-painting, which is something the game needed. I'm just a Columbian Exchange geek and really want to see it make its way into the game  If ever there were a single unifying theme for the time period covered by EU4...e: basically, do you now eat or have you ever eaten potatoes? If this is the case, and you are not a person of primarily Mesoamerican or South American origin, then your ancestors had their lives profoundly changed by developments that occurred during this time period. It is more likely than not that you would not exist today if not for that development. Dibujante fucked around with this message at 19:11 on Nov 19, 2015 |
|
#
?
Nov 19, 2015 19:06
|
|
|
I think some things like that, along with the plagues in the Americas etc could really be modeled in some way. They had profound impacts on the world and it's kind of strange them being meaningless here. Especially with the new random new world it'd be kind of cool to have normally gamechanging effects like that not happen, and seeing how that changes things. e: also sometimes I do think they need to really go back and develop all the systems already in the game rather than piling on new ones. Whatever happened to triggered modifiers? I remember there was an article on a games website a few months ago (with the interview with Johan) revisiting EU4 after 2 years, and they were complaining about how cluttered the UI was, and I was kinda mad about it then. But thinking about it more they kind of have a point. To new players especially, when there are a thousand little things to manage, it gets extremely intimidating and it feels kind of needless. We have things like inflation, development, autonomy etc that could model so many things, but instead they all have just one job, and when there's a new system introduced in a new expansion they just add yet another thing, when it could easily be tied back into the old thing. Koramei fucked around with this message at 19:14 on Nov 19, 2015 |
|
#
?
Nov 19, 2015 19:09
|
|
|
Actually since Wiz is here. How will the nation ruining mechanics work? In the MP thread in PGS we were just discussing how it would work and how it might screw certain strategies or playstyles. Do you intend to make that system more like a large ruleset which you have to take all at once or not at all, or is it more of an a la carte menu where you can take individual rules and leave others? The second one sounds infinitely preferable, since there are strategies which can be made out of things that might be seen as 'nation ruining'.
|
|
#
?
Nov 19, 2015 19:11
|
|
|
Life is hard enough as a New World native in EU4 without smallpox ruining everything.
|
|
#
?
Nov 19, 2015 19:11
|
|
|
Stop that.
|
|
#
?
Nov 19, 2015 19:11
|
|
|
My biggest complaint about development is that it gets comparatively less attractive as an option as the game goes on due to development efficiency being worse than administrative efficiency, and some regions of the map being extremely inefficient to develop due to terrain. Also there's more ways of reducing coring and diplo annex cost than development cost. I'd like it if just for the sake of verisimilitude there were some points in the tech curve where developing provinces up to some baseline amount is relatively efficient.
|
|
#
?
Nov 19, 2015 19:18
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 16, 2024 12:49 |
|
|
PittTheElder posted:Stop that. Mana bonii.
|
|
#
?
Nov 19, 2015 19:24
|
|