|
EU's always had to balance historic accuracy vs. gameplay. Personally, I favor the gameplay a bit more but EU would lose it's appeal if was divorced from history. You're not painting a random map your colours, you're painting our Earth.
|
#
?
Aug 11, 2016 10:11
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 19, 2024 09:33 |
|
|
Mysticblade posted:EU's always had to balance historic accuracy vs. gameplay. Personally, I favor the gameplay a bit more but EU would lose it's appeal if was divorced from history. You're not painting a random map your colours, you're painting our Earth. Yeah this is a main reason stuff like stellaris never appealed to me. It's not as fun if it's made up whole cloth
|
|
#
?
Aug 11, 2016 10:37
|
|
|
New DD: Queensquote:We have one vision for this patch and expansion, and that is to breakthru and make the organisational aspects of your country more interesting. In the june diary about ruler personalities we avoided talking about the empty spot at the court screen, but here goes.
|
|
#
?
Aug 11, 2016 12:33
|
|
|
Are there any benefits to having a good queen other than just them heading up a regency and getting a relations boost, kind of like CK2's giving your character half the stats of their wife? Or will it just be the case that now while wishing for your 0/1/0 king to die, you'll also be taunted by a 6/6/6 queen as well as a 6/6/6 heir, neither of whom give you any benefit?
|
|
#
?
Aug 11, 2016 13:03
|
|
|
I think there's a way to abdicate now
|
|
#
?
Aug 11, 2016 13:04
|
|
|
quote:A Queen Regent will allow you do declare wars like normal during a regency. Oh hell yeah
|
|
#
?
Aug 11, 2016 13:17
|
|
|
Tahirovic posted:The main point of a game is to have fun, so here's something to think about, who is the sperg? The guy who wants fully historically accurate simulation of attrition while on a troop transport or the guy who just wants to play a game and paint the map (preferably in Nassau's color because it's prettiest). There is another way that may in fact be more fun than the current game and more historically themed.
|
|
#
?
Aug 11, 2016 13:22
|
|
|
I am sure there's better ways, but it could also end up worse. Say attrition gets that bad that you can't have big stacks at all. That would turn into micromanagement hell as soon as you're over like 20 force limit. Not to mention the tediousness of still having to hunt down the enemies micro stacks. Leaders would also be a lot more annoying to manage.
|
|
#
?
Aug 11, 2016 15:29
|
|
|
Tahirovic posted:I am sure there's better ways, but it could also end up worse.
|
|
#
?
Aug 11, 2016 15:41
|
|
|
No consort option for kings? Dealbreaker.
|
|
#
?
Aug 11, 2016 15:50
|
|
|
Poil posted:No consort option for kings? Dealbreaker. They say later in the thread countries ruled by queens have king-consorts. DD Link, conviently dev only responses
|
|
#
?
Aug 11, 2016 16:01
|
|
|
The root problem is the main and most fun part of the game is expansion by conquest. If diplomacy and peacetime play were interesting and rewarding, you could also make the game more historically accurate. Paradox has tried to slow down the rate of expansion but to me it seems like they're treating the symptom (map painting is the core of EU4 gameplay) rather than the root cause (everything else is not very fun or rewarding and just feeds back into map painting).
|
|
#
?
Aug 11, 2016 16:06
|
|
|
Pellisworth posted:The root problem is the main and most fun part of the game is expansion by conquest. If diplomacy and peacetime play were interesting and rewarding, you could also make the game more historically accurate. A heavily reworked development system letting you build tall is something I'm hoping for in EU5 or at the very least one that doesn't cost MP when they're all already being spent on more important stuff. Apart from a few edge cases the only time I ever invest in development is if I have an awesome ruler and am so far ahead in tech that I'm reaching the points cap.
|
|
#
?
Aug 11, 2016 17:13
|
|
|
Tendronai posted:They say later in the thread countries ruled by queens have king-consorts. 
|
|
#
?
Aug 11, 2016 17:16
|
|
|
is economic worth it just for +5 discipline and +10 arty combat policies? e: innovative has siege ability and 20 infantry combat too
|
|
#
?
Aug 12, 2016 00:28
|
|
|
StashAugustine posted:is economic worth it just for +5 discipline and +10 arty combat policies? probably not but I take it often as the bonuses in general are very good if for example you're in the middle of Europe and are more limited by AE than coring costs/time (where Admin would be better) or near a bunch of different religions (Religious) It is way better than Innovative imo and particularly useful for nations that are stuck at Duchy level (due to size or being in the HRE) for a long time since you're missing out on the autonomy reduction from higher-ranked governments Though I'm of the opinion that picking idea groups specifically for their policy unlocks is not a very good strategy, they're something to consider but mostly as a bonus to the actual idea line. Edit: also don't forget that Economic will cause the National Bank event, letting you take loans out at 24x monthly income which is really baller combined with the interest and inflation reduction. The only weak part of Econ is the -10% build cost which is kinda "eh" Edit2: more detailed/organized thoughts on ADM idea picks- Administrative is something you should mainly pick for the ADM point cost reductions from core cost and and technology. The mercenary stuff is alright, actually the best part there is the upfront cost reduction. Why? Because mercenary maintenance is ADDITIVE (2.5x base cost, so -25% yields 2.25x and does not stack with land maintenance I believe) and is an effective -10% overall maintenance. Nice, but not as good as it might seem at a glance. IIRC you can actually buy mercenaries for cheaper upfront than regular units with this and high Prestige? You want to use mercenaries at the front lines, they are not really good for long-term standing armies. They train at 25% normal speed, and they don't cost manpower. So you build them to reinforce your armies after your first battles using mostly manpower. It is always better to have a standing army with as much regular non-merc regiments as possible. Why? It's effectively additional manpower in your pool, and merc maintenance is always going to be higher. Remember they train really fast and you can recruit them in occupied enemy provinces, build them near the front lines. Invest your money savings in buildings and artillery and ships and stuff. If you're more limited by treaties and AE than you are by core cost/speed and OE, take Economic This is mostly the case in Europe, you have the surplus points to core at full price and buy some development so Economic is a fantastic choice. The better loans and reduced maintenance are great too. There's nothing bad in this group. If it's the opposite situation, you're more limited by core cost/speed and OE than you are by AE and treaties, take Administrative. This is usually the case in nations with neighbors of several different religions, which is the case in much of Asia and Africa. The Ottomans are a classic example of this since they can alternate wars between East and West and have much less of a problem with AE. Religious is also an excellent early pick in these situations, because obviously you're conquering into off-religion territory so the conversion bonuses are nice. And it unlocks a fantastic general-purpose CB that allows you to snake your way and break up large enemies. Innovative, Humanist, and Expansion (unless you're a hardcore colonizer) are best left until a later pick imo. You could make a case for Humanist replacing Religious if you have NIs with lots of Tolerance, but I think Religious is always going to be better for map painting. Innovative and Expansion have a lot of mediocre individual ideas.  I can post about the other idea sets too if people are interested in my take. Pellisworth fucked around with this message at 02:37 on Aug 12, 2016 |
|
#
?
Aug 12, 2016 01:16
|
|
|
The consort mechanic sounds really neat. I think they should replace the idea in Aristocratic, "Local Nobility", which is the higher core cost with something to represent the few monarchies that had strong consorts, like William and Mary or Ferdinand and Isabella .The benefit could be that you get to use the the highest monarch point value between the two, which could potentially make Aristocratic a more interesting idea group choice, as this would be more interesting to the player than core cost increase.
|
|
#
?
Aug 12, 2016 20:30
|
|
|
IncredibleIgloo posted:The consort mechanic sounds really neat. I think they should replace the idea in Aristocratic, "Local Nobility", which is the higher core cost with something to represent the few monarchies that had strong consorts, like William and Mary or Ferdinand and Isabella .The benefit could be that you get to use the the highest monarch point value between the two, which could potentially make Aristocratic a more interesting idea group choice, as this would be more interesting to the player than core cost increase. Great idea. That coring idea is poo poo.
|
|
#
?
Aug 12, 2016 20:32
|
|
|
IncredibleIgloo posted:The consort mechanic sounds really neat. I think they should replace the idea in Aristocratic, "Local Nobility", which is the higher core cost with something to represent the few monarchies that had strong consorts, like William and Mary or Ferdinand and Isabella .The benefit could be that you get to use the the highest monarch point value between the two, which could potentially make Aristocratic a more interesting idea group choice, as this would be more interesting to the player than core cost increase. That seems crazy strong. Average monarch points would go from 3 to 3.9 per category. For comparison, the bonus lucky nations get raises the average from 3 to 3.47. junidog fucked around with this message at 21:03 on Aug 12, 2016 |
|
#
?
Aug 12, 2016 21:01
|
|
|
junidog posted:That seems crazy strong. Average monarch points would go from 3 to 3.9 per category. For comparison, the bonus lucky nations get raises the average from 3 to 3.47. How does the math work if you just make it a +1 bonus if your consort's score in a category is better than your ruler's?
|
|
#
?
Aug 12, 2016 22:29
|
|
|
junidog posted:That seems crazy strong. Average monarch points would go from 3 to 3.9 per category. For comparison, the bonus lucky nations get raises the average from 3 to 3.47. Perhaps it could be limited to your ruling monarchs weakest score then. Or re-order the idea group to put this at the end or make it the capstone. On the other hand military ideas outside of Aristocratic tend to be better options, (well, not the naval ideas) so it still might not get chosen that often. Or, if the consort is rolled on the Regency table as opposed to ruler table it would skew the average to 3.48 . I am not sure what table they will use for the consorts. Edit: If we just increase the Ruler stat by 1 if the consort is higher, that leads to an average of 3.33 or so, based on consort being rolled on ruler table. IncredibleIgloo fucked around with this message at 23:12 on Aug 12, 2016 |
|
#
?
Aug 12, 2016 23:02
|
|
|
Nobody ever takes Aristocratic now. I wouldn't want it to be a dominating pick either but one really strong idea would be enough combined with the good but uncompelling ideas that the group already has to make it an actual choice.
|
|
#
?
Aug 13, 2016 00:27
|
|
|
Personally I think ideal balance is for all the idea groups to be dominating picks. As it stands now I have about 5 groups I pick between for the first 2 idea groups with very little variation because some of the choices are pretty much objectively better.
|
|
#
?
Aug 13, 2016 00:41
|
|
|
Back when EU4 was in pre-release I thought that you would get one Dip, one Mil, and one Adm pick for ideas and that would be it for the whole game. You'd have to do a lot of rebalancing but I think that could be a potential fix to the noted samey-ness of idea picks right now.
|
|
#
?
Aug 13, 2016 00:46
|
|
|
How would giving you fewer choices lead to less sameyness?
|
|
#
?
Aug 13, 2016 01:20
|
|
|
Wafflecopper posted:How would giving you fewer choices lead to less sameyness? Because every game you would need to choose different groups to suit your situation, as opposed to now where you get enough groups that every nation you play will have some overlap. I don't think it's a good solution, or even really a problem since for most of the game you basically do have only a couple idea groups, but that's the concept.
|
|
#
?
Aug 13, 2016 13:46
|
|
|
Pellisworth posted:You should be fine, just occupy a few provinces of theirs and wait for the ticking warscore. There are heavy unlocks at dip 15 and 19 so you shouldn't be behind there. Turns out I was worried over nothing. Once France jumped England again, I decided to declare my war as well, despite being in the middle of westernising. France quickly occupied most of England and killed most of their army which meant all the colonies shot up to 100% liberty desire and started allying each other. I occupied south africa and ile de bourbon and never saw a single enemy ship or soldier.
|
|
#
?
Aug 13, 2016 20:33
|
|
|
Is there a mapmode that shows truces? e also I messed up and gave my client state a too-long name 
StashAugustine fucked around with this message at 19:23 on Aug 14, 2016 |
|
#
?
Aug 14, 2016 19:20
|
|
|
Sadly there is no map mode that shows truces.
|
|
#
?
Aug 15, 2016 10:13
|
|
|
CK2 fan trying to get into this one and I'm a little confused by trade. I'm Portugal. There's no way to push trade from the Chesapeake/St Laurence to Sevilla or anyplace that's directly connected to Sevilla. Does this mean that I don't want to colonize those areas (at least until I'm done colonizing places that are 1 or 2 hops from Sevilla)? I feel like I'm missing something fundamental, since that doesn't seem right.
|
|
#
?
Aug 16, 2016 04:00
|
|
|
That's pretty much right. Go further south (Caribbean islands, anywhere on the Gulf of Mexico, and northern Brazil are all good ideas) and you'll make more money. Caribbean is the most important new world node for Iberian nations because as you will notice it's the only one which routes direct to Sevilla. You can also make good money by pushing into west Africa with an eventual view to routing Indian trade round the Cape.
|
|
#
?
Aug 16, 2016 04:35
|
|
|
What are trade routes supposed to be an abstraction of? Seems odd to railroad the player into colonizing a specific part of the world by preventing trade flows between specific subcontinents.
|
|
#
?
Aug 16, 2016 04:46
|
|
|
Vegetable posted:What are trade routes supposed to be an abstraction of? Seems odd to railroad the player into colonizing a specific part of the world by preventing trade flows between specific subcontinents. They do sort of reflect key trade routes, though the idea of trade as a one-way flow is a little weird of course. Trade nodes and trade routes are an improvement on the EU3 system of Centers of Trade, which could be dynamically created and destroyed, but didn't have any connection to each other -- controlling a valuable CoT by sending merchants there could be profitable but there was no real way to use your global fleet or colonies to improve your world trade standing. I wish trade were a little more dynamic in EU4, but I do think it's cool that there are ways to get more money by controlling the worldwide flow of goods instead of just getting rich in local markets.
|
|
#
?
Aug 16, 2016 05:33
|
|
|
The Little Kielbasa posted:CK2 fan trying to get into this one and I'm a little confused by trade. I'm Portugal. There's no way to push trade from the Chesapeake/St Laurence to Sevilla or anyplace that's directly connected to Sevilla. Does this mean that I don't want to colonize those areas (at least until I'm done colonizing places that are 1 or 2 hops from Sevilla)? I feel like I'm missing something fundamental, since that doesn't seem right. Basically, though you also could colonize them enough to dominate the trade there and then just stick a merchant collecting in St. Lawrence so that Scandinavia and England don't get the rewards for your hard work. That wouldn't take more than 10 provinces or so - just enough to get Thirteen Colonies and Canada colonial nations going. However the Caribbean is higher priority until it's fully colonized, and you'll want to be moving east, too, so that you have a monopoly on Asian trade...basically, North America is a pretty distant priority, but if you get time, not terribly hard to secure. Jazerus fucked around with this message at 05:41 on Aug 16, 2016 |
|
#
?
Aug 16, 2016 05:37
|
|
|
It's a little bit about that. The AI will colonize according to how trade flows, so it's presumably setup that way to encourage the AI to maybe do what happened historically. They still don't, but I assume that's the intent.
|
|
#
?
Aug 16, 2016 05:37
|
|
Yes, it's like a lava lamp.
|
StashAugustine posted:e also I messed up and gave my client state a too-long name You should be able to edit that from the subjects screen, I think?
|
|
#
?
Aug 16, 2016 06:30
|
|
|
Drakhoran posted:Sadly there is no map mode that shows truces. This would be really cool and useful. Doesn't have to be its own mapmode though, it could be integrated with diplomatic or something like that.
|
|
#
?
Aug 16, 2016 07:06
|
|
|
The Little Kielbasa posted:CK2 fan trying to get into this one and I'm a little confused by trade. I'm Portugal. There's no way to push trade from the Chesapeake/St Laurence to Sevilla or anyplace that's directly connected to Sevilla. Does this mean that I don't want to colonize those areas (at least until I'm done colonizing places that are 1 or 2 hops from Sevilla)? I feel like I'm missing something fundamental, since that doesn't seem right. Yup. Sevilla is an excellent home node, but there are a few areas you won't be able to funnel trade from because of the setup. Eastern North America is one, so colonizing Canada and Eastern America is low priority, another area is Anatolia and the Middle East, which you have no way of bringing home. As Portugal you want to focus on the Caribbean and south in the New World, then raking in huge amounts of cash from Africa and India. Frankly, overseas colonization is sort of a vanity project and takes a good century or more to be profitable. You can totally afford it as Portugal, just be aware it will be a long time before you're drowning in trade bucks. Early on, it's a bit of a race to grab the best spots. Colonial nations automatically grant you 50% of their trade power, and they'll colonize (slowly) by themselves. It's best to colonize five provinces in a region, prioritizing trade centers and estuaries for trade power bonuses, then give your newly formed baby colonial nation 2.0 or more ducats in subsidies for a few decades. The subsidies ensure they'll have enough money to colonize on their own, it's slow but once you're running a few colonial nations it's significant. Colonial nations will each give you +5% Trade Power and a bonus Merchant once they reach ten total provinces, so Trade ideas tends to be totally excessive as a colonial power. After you've hit five provinces in each of the easily contested colonial regions and grabbed the good parts of West and South Africa, go back and help build up to ten provinces in each colonial nation for those extra merchants. A hidden bonus of Exploration ideas is the large amounts of bonus Monarch Points and good likelihood of permanent modifiers from searching for the Seven Cities (assuming you have the DLC, El Dorado I think?). Send a small army (6-8k is what I usually use) with a Conquistador to search for the Seven Cities in the New World and you'll get a bunch of events, many of which reward you with monarch points. Start early, since maps of the New World will be revealed over time and you only get cool stuff from unexplored provinces. Get to South Africa ASAP and grab all that coastline before Castile/Spain or England. That will give you uncontested access to Asian colonization for quite a while. You can collect in another node in addition to your home trading port, but you do so at a penalty and you lose the bonus of +10% Trade Power for each Merchant steering towards home which is going to be a significant and important asset playing as Portugal and competing with Spain for trade power in Sevilla. Your best bet unless you're conquering Spain is to have all your merchants steering toward Sevilla and dominate there. Pellisworth fucked around with this message at 09:55 on Aug 16, 2016 |
|
#
?
Aug 16, 2016 09:53
|
|
|
Pellisworth posted:Get to South Africa ASAP and grab all that coastline before Castile/Spain or England. That will give you uncontested access to Asian colonization for quite a while.
|
|
#
?
Aug 16, 2016 09:58
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 19, 2024 09:33 |
|
|
awesmoe posted:Lines like this make me realize that I don't understand trade. What's the difference between me (as castille) steering trade through the cape trade node onward to sevilla vs portugal doing the same thing? Why should I care as long as the trade gets steered and not collected? In the grand scheme, it doesn't much matter, you're right. Castile and Portugal are both steering the same route back to Sevilla. Even if you were playing England, it doesn't matter since you only need to steer trade in Ivory Coast and don't care who is pushing trade through South Africa. The only real benefits are the extra Merchant from having a dominant Trade Company there and the ability to block off other colonial powers from Asia for a long while. Like I said, overseas colonization is largely a vanity project and early on it's a race to get the best provinces. Going for South Africa early lets you block other colonizers from the Indian Ocean and Southeast Asia for a century or more. If you're Castile you can totally just let Portugal pull home a bunch of tradebucks from Africa, India and Asia while you focus on New World colonization, since you share your home trade node. This is also pretty historical! Edit: overseas colonization to contrast with same-continent colonization which is a different thing. If you're Russia or an African/American/Asian nation you can do same-continent colonization which just directly gives you provinces and has a lot more immediate payoff than overseas colonization like Western Europeans are usually doing. You're also usually using a colony to westernize, all told Exploration as an idea group has a much more immediate payoff for non-Europeans. Pellisworth fucked around with this message at 10:17 on Aug 16, 2016 |
|
#
?
Aug 16, 2016 10:04
|
|