|
Jay Rust posted:Two questions: 1. Releasing nations is pretty chancy, yes. You can always guarantee the released nations but usually I would say this isn't worth it unless you vassalize the released nations and feed your rival to them with reconquest to avoid AE. Other stuff like privateering, embargoes, sending condottieri against them, and various types of espionage are very limited and situationally effective compared to just taking land out from under them. But if they are on the ropes you might have some joy with them. One other thing you can try next time you fight a war with them, if you can manage it, is wiping their armies, running them up to 100% score or as close as you can get it, and then just waiting for a couple years until your war exhaustion starts to mount. Then declare a white peace. Because you aren't gaining anything from them, they won't lose any of their through-the-roof war exhaustion, and will have to deal with poo poo tons of rebels and probably debt and instability and maybe a crisis while rebuilding their armies from scratch. Granted this is entirely contingent on having the ability and opportunity to crush them in a war to begin with, but if you really want a nation to be down in the dumps for a while, that's what to do. 2. Yeah. The bigger you get, the less eager nations are to do anything about their outrage towards you. They're less likely to join coalitions if the AE is marginal, and far less likely to actually declare a coalition war even if they do join. If you're playing something huge like Ming or Mughals where all your enemies are an order of magnitude smaller than you and not all the same culture/religion, you can run up an absurd amount of AE and as long as your armies are at full strength they'll be content to send you strongly worded letters while you devour half the old world.
|
#
?
Jun 11, 2017 03:37
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 22, 2024 15:32 |
|
|
Jay Rust posted:Two questions: 1. What skasion said. Taking an opponent's land gives them Revanchism, which is a huge boost to taxes, manpower recovery, unrest reduction, and army tradition. The purpose of this mechanic is to reduce the likelihood of a nation getting dogpiled all at once and completely collapsing after a significant defeat, but it can also have a comeback effect; your opponent may have lost some prime real estate but the Revanchism bonuses might put them in a position to eat their smaller neighbors. If you really want to crippple an opponent, then you can try to wipe out their manpower, drive them to 100% occupation, wait for a bunch of rebels to spawn (because occupied provinces have high unrest), and then in a peace deal take war reparations, ducats, and release whatever nations you feel like spending diplo on. This will result in the rival getting no Revanchism, and therefore no bonuses from the war's end, plus they'll be broke with low manpower and tons of rebels (hopefully Separatist rebels who will wind up successfully seceding). Since you're not taking much in the peace deal, your truce timer will be small and you'll be able to declare again not long after. In general it's best to take land, but if your AE is high then you can still effectively cripple an opponent with a successful war, and you still get something out of it (ducats, plus Humiliation for PP, and probably a weakened opponent) 2. Yes. As you grow, coalitions will eventually stop forming at all because you're simply too big and powerful.
|
|
#
?
Jun 11, 2017 05:55
|
|
|
Contingency Plan posted:This is the theme song of Third Rome: I too miss the halcyon days of YTMND.
|
|
#
?
Jun 11, 2017 09:03
|
|
Yes, it's like a lava lamp.
|
Returning cores is always good for busting up your rivals too.
|
|
#
?
Jun 11, 2017 09:11
|
|
|
Jay Rust posted:Two questions: 1. Release nations and guarantee or ally them to avoid them getting curbstomped right off the bat (the releaser nation gets a truce with them but everybody around doesn't..), occupy them until WE is very high so when you peace out they're facing rebellions everywhere, loot them, take their money. If they are weakened enough other rivals will also pounce on them. 2. Yes. Having a huge army deters people from joining coalitions and declaring war on you. Edit: Yeah everybody else beat me to it, that's what you get for not noticing a new page 
TorakFade fucked around with this message at 11:53 on Jun 11, 2017 |
|
#
?
Jun 11, 2017 11:49
|
|
|
Playing till 1500 to see if I win the colonialism lottery is not fun gameplay. Thanks.
|
|
#
?
Jun 11, 2017 14:11
|
|
|
uPen posted:Playing till 1500 to see if I win the colonialism lottery is not fun gameplay. Thanks.
|
|
#
?
Jun 11, 2017 15:25
|
|
|
Is it normal in eu4 nowadays for Indian and Asian holdings to have matching technology with Western powers? Currently continuing my England relearning game and I am stumped as to how I am supposed to crack some of these areas. All have sufficiently large alliances to make it probably impossible. I just tried to invade India and a 100k stack promptly showed up and wiped out my 50k stack no problem
|
|
#
?
Jun 11, 2017 15:25
|
|
|
So my Sudanese expedition run is almost done, think I did pretty well for myself. Sadly France is a huge roadblock to any further conquest in Europe, and I'm bored of stomping on Africans.  Anything else I should be doing before wrapping this up? As far as I can tell, there's no easy achievements in reach that I don't already have. Edit: what in the everloving gently caress, ivory in Greenland? Is that from walruses or something?  
TorakFade fucked around with this message at 18:09 on Jun 11, 2017 |
|
#
?
Jun 11, 2017 17:03
|
|
|
uPen posted:Playing till 1500 to see if I win the colonialism lottery is not fun gameplay. Thanks. why do you need to spawn colonialism for yourself?
|
|
#
?
Jun 11, 2017 17:26
|
|
|
uPen posted:Playing till 1500 to see if I win the colonialism lottery is not fun gameplay. Thanks. MrBling posted:why do you need to spawn colonialism for yourself? also if it's really that important why not save scum?
|
|
#
?
Jun 11, 2017 18:17
|
|
|
MrBling posted:why do you need to spawn colonialism for yourself? Because for some silly reason the rules for spawning it vs passively generating points for it after it's been spawned are completely different. So if you're not in Europe you either need to spawn it yourself or spend a few thousand mp on developing a province to get it. This wouldn't be a problem if it passively generated points for nations that qualify for spawning it. Pellisworth posted:also if it's really that important why not save scum? This is what you have to do which is also not fun.
|
|
#
?
Jun 11, 2017 18:49
|
|
|
I'd be more okay with save scumming if rebooting EU4 didn't take so long (yes I have an SSD)
|
|
#
?
Jun 11, 2017 18:51
|
|
|
Upgrade your RAM.
|
|
#
?
Jun 11, 2017 18:53
|
|
|
TorakFade posted:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ivory_trade#Walrus_ivory
|
|
#
?
Jun 11, 2017 18:55
|
|
|
uPen posted:Because for some silly reason the rules for spawning it vs passively generating points for it after it's been spawned are completely different. So if you're not in Europe you either need to spawn it yourself or spend a few thousand mp on developing a province to get it. This wouldn't be a problem if it passively generated points for nations that qualify for spawning it. Well you could also set up your own new world colonial nation to get it to spread to you. Still, spawning Colonialism outside of Europe is nice to help you get a leg up on tech and not fall behind when Europe gets Printing Press way before you.
|
|
#
?
Jun 11, 2017 18:57
|
|
|
Schizotek posted:Yes? Like it's come up a few times in the thread, but yeah walrus ivory was and is a thing. Narwhal tusks as wel.
|
|
#
?
Jun 11, 2017 18:58
|
|
|
Woolly mammoth mines
|
|
#
?
Jun 11, 2017 19:00
|
|
|
Mountaineer posted:Well you could also set up your own new world colonial nation to get it to spread to you. Having a new world colonial nation would take decades and would be fine if that was what was needed to spawn colonialism but it's not. The problem is the huge difference in effort required between spawning it (find america) vs passively getting it (spend years colonizing to get a colonial nation which does jack poo poo for you because the trade routes all go the wrong way.)
|
|
#
?
Jun 11, 2017 19:05
|
|
|
Phone posted:Alright, sounds good. Only issue you might run into with playing on a laptop is that you might not be able to play at the highest speed.
|
|
#
?
Jun 11, 2017 19:28
|
|
|
uPen posted:Having a new world colonial nation would take decades and would be fine if that was what was needed to spawn colonialism but it's not. The problem is the huge difference in effort required between spawning it (find america) vs passively getting it (spend years colonizing to get a colonial nation which does jack poo poo for you because the trade routes all go the wrong way.) Forming a colonial nation for the sole purpose of getting Colonialism growth is not worth it at all. If you're planning to colonize then go for it, but otherwise just develop your land or wait for it to spread if you're close enough to the spawn point. Also just finding America isn't enough to get it to spawn. It can only spawn in coastal state provinces that are either a capital, a trade port, or have 12 more more development. Having more eligible provinces will increase your chances of getting it.
|
|
#
?
Jun 11, 2017 20:03
|
|
|
uPen posted:Having a new world colonial nation would take decades and would be fine if that was what was needed to spawn colonialism but it's not. The problem is the huge difference in effort required between spawning it (find america) vs passively getting it (spend years colonizing to get a colonial nation which does jack poo poo for you because the trade routes all go the wrong way.) To be honest, simply finding America probably shouldn't be the requirement for spawning colonialism anyway. It should more realistically be "have a province in America" (core, colonial nation, or colony) Spawning colonialism is not that much of a big deal and you should not stress out about it
|
|
#
?
Jun 11, 2017 20:58
|
|
|
TorakFade posted:So my Sudanese expedition run is almost done, think I did pretty well for myself. Sadly France is a huge roadblock to any further conquest in Europe, and I'm bored of stomping on Africans.
|
|
#
?
Jun 11, 2017 21:27
|
|
|
AAAAA! Real Muenster posted:When you got started did you go ham against Castille? I am allied to Grenada and joined the war against Castille and we have won like thirty battles against them but they just keep coming back; now I'm out of manpower and taking loans, and now Portugal declared war on Grenada, so I just dont feel like I'll be able to succeed. Yes the first 50 years were dedicated to punching castile in the dick. I rivaled castile and allied Aragon, then annexed granada when they tried to defend tlemcen from my righteous fury so I had a foothold to park my whole army before declaring. I attacked asap before they could solidify good alliances and every war I grabbed 3-4 provinces (prioritizing Andalusia) and either gave Aragon 1-2 or called them in with favors, the first couple wars were pretty close and had to hide behind my forts for a while but eventually we managed to reduce them to almost nothing over about 3-4 wars and expanding south and east during truces. Once you cut them down by taking provinces, especially the gold one, they're much easier to kick around especially if they never get colonies going and don't get allies like france or Austria. Honestly I was very lucky that the iberian wedding didn't fire (might be due to the fact we were beating them down literally as soon as truces expired) and france was busy beating up england and didn't bother attacking Aragon or allying castile. TorakFade fucked around with this message at 22:09 on Jun 11, 2017 |
|
#
?
Jun 11, 2017 22:02
|
|
|
Assassination attempts seem like a thing this game should have but doesn't for some reason. I guess it would be annoying dealing with the AI constantly attempting to kill your rulers/heirs, so I don't know how it should be balanced, but it's one of those things that feels like it's missing from this game.
|
|
#
?
Jun 11, 2017 22:07
|
|
|
QuarkJets posted:Assassination attempts seem like a thing this game should have but doesn't for some reason. I guess it would be annoying dealing with the AI constantly attempting to kill your rulers/heirs, so I don't know how it should be balanced, but it's one of those things that feels like it's missing from this game. It's probably just a part of EU4 consciously trying to be less character focused, more nation focused than CK2 if I had to guess 
|
|
#
?
Jun 11, 2017 22:08
|
|
|
QuarkJets posted:Assassination attempts seem like a thing this game should have but doesn't for some reason. I guess it would be annoying dealing with the AI constantly attempting to kill your rulers/heirs, so I don't know how it should be balanced, but it's one of those things that feels like it's missing from this game. The some reason is that it would be tremendously unfun to deal with.
|
|
#
?
Jun 12, 2017 00:05
|
|
|
Oh look my rival killed my 6/5/6 ruler Oh look my rival killed my 5/5/6/heir and now I'm in a PU Oh look my rival killed my 2/3/3 ruler after breaking out of the PU and I'm in another PU
|
|
#
?
Jun 12, 2017 00:10
|
|
|
Also monarchs didn't really ever assassinate each other in the period anyway. I can't actually think of an example of a ruler dying at the hands of a foreign agent.
|
|
#
?
Jun 12, 2017 00:23
|
|
|
I have never once felt that EU4 needed assassinations.That is a hole that does not need to be filled.
|
|
#
?
Jun 12, 2017 01:27
|
|
|
 The Zerozeroan rebellion of 1764 is not very well known in popular history.
|
|
#
?
Jun 12, 2017 01:50
|
|
|
Ruler Assassination in EU4 would be even more annoying to deal with than Civ4's constant water supply poisoning.
|
|
#
?
Jun 12, 2017 02:05
|
|
|
Eej posted:Ruler Assassination in EU4 would be even more annoying to deal with than Civ4's constant water supply poisoning. It'd be loving infuriating to lose 5/5/5 or better rulers because of it. The game doesn't need it.
|
|
#
?
Jun 12, 2017 02:14
|
|
|
Eej posted:Ruler Assassination in EU4 would be even more annoying to deal with than Civ4's constant water supply poisoning. It's a pretty good and effective mechanic in CK2, I could see Paradox successfully implementing something similarly good and effective in EU4
|
|
#
?
Jun 12, 2017 02:35
|
|
|
PittTheElder posted:Also monarchs didn't really ever assassinate each other in the period anyway. I can't actually think of an example of a ruler dying at the hands of a foreign agent. The idea of assassinating a tyrannical ruler gained popularity around the time of the Renaissance, and there were also many religiously-motivated assassinations that occurred during the Reformation. Whether or not any of these assassinations were perpetrated by monarchs is questionable but not necessarily relevant if you think of playing EU4 as a nation rather than as a specific person.
|
|
#
?
Jun 12, 2017 02:52
|
|
|
QuarkJets posted:It's a pretty good and effective mechanic in CK2, I could see Paradox successfully implementing something similarly good and effective in EU4 What exactly would make Ruler assassination good and effective in EU4
|
|
#
?
Jun 12, 2017 03:42
|
|
|
I could assassinate my own ruler without paying 50 prestige.
|
|
#
?
Jun 12, 2017 03:48
|
|
|
Eej posted:What exactly would make Ruler assassination good and effective in EU4 I don't know, I'm not a game designer. But neither are any of you. Paradox has done it successfully before and CK2 isn't so different that it'd be impossible to create something good here. In the CK2 system it's something that's difficult to pull off, risky to even try, and often there's a price to pay even if you succeed because you need to bring in a bunch of collaborators. In EU4 terms that could mean having to find a country that trusts you a lot that is also well-trusted by the target, spending a ton of Favors with that country + a lot of Diplo points, and maybe suffering a ton of AE, Diplo Rep, and relations penalties if you fail or are caught.
|
|
#
?
Jun 12, 2017 03:57
|
|
|
QuarkJets posted:I don't know, I'm not a game designer. But neither are any of you. Paradox has done it successfully before and CK2 isn't so different that it'd be impossible to create something good here. and grappling hooks. Grappling hooks work great in other games. Could buy them with mil points?
|
|
#
?
Jun 12, 2017 04:05
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 22, 2024 15:32 |
|
|
re-skin the "force wall breach" button to "equip troops with grappling hooks for an assault", tia
|
|
#
?
Jun 12, 2017 04:12
|
|
