|
Pellisworth posted:Sounds like he's already triggered the disaster and tanked their Mandate except it doesn't really bother them. At that point you can beat them 3:1, it's tedious but very doable if you can field two combat widths of troops. That's pretty much what I did minus the tributaries as I haven't tried taking the mandate yet. I tried both as Manchu and Qing but as Manchu it's a race against time against Horde Unity (which costs more and more to maintain) and gold. As Qing, your troops don't quite melt theirs that well. In the first war, I got enough war score to get a few states so that was fine, second war I managed to get another state, but their mercs never end; and being that Ming has about 743 forts, you can't really chase them to stack wipe. Eventually they grind you down due to the endless numbers they can throw at you. The thing is, at mandate 0, during both truce periods they managed if not thrived. They lost about half their tributaries but they just waged wars where they lost tons of mercs but eventually won, and teched up without any issue. Any rebellions were squashed immediately. I could declare war for a state each time but again, as Manchu, you're fighting against time.
|
#
?
Apr 27, 2017 09:28
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 23, 2024 10:11 |
|
|
Am I a fool for just eating Castille as Aragon, and not wait for a potential PU?
|
|
#
?
Apr 27, 2017 09:40
|
|
|
THE BAR posted:Am I a fool for just eating Castille as Aragon, and not wait for a potential PU? depends on your goals/the bigger picture, but kind of, yeah? it's a (series of) tough war(s) that you don't really need to have, and the opportunity cost is...eating other stuff that you don't get for free e: hm I read this the other way around. I've never played aragon so I dono if the situation is majorly different. Anyway "a fool" is way too strong but that war isn't my go-to play as castile. awesmoe fucked around with this message at 09:52 on Apr 27, 2017 |
|
#
?
Apr 27, 2017 09:48
|
|
|
I am Kilwa, my colony in Australia has a problem. Rebels have held the two colonies at top end for many years. I cannot land troops there nor can they walk around. The colony does not appear to be doing anything about it. Any suggestions? I have no dlc.
|
|
#
?
Apr 27, 2017 10:08
|
|
|
awesmoe posted:depends on your goals/the bigger picture, but kind of, yeah? it's a (series of) tough war(s) that you don't really need to have, and the opportunity cost is...eating other stuff that you don't get for free I'm doing Consulate of the Sea, Trade Hegemon and Mare Nostrum. Think I'll do it over, as the extra PU will help my splendour as well.
|
|
#
?
Apr 27, 2017 10:47
|
|
|
I'm doing Straight Talk since the game is still kinda broken, it seems. I am debating taking Exploration as my first idea set. I like the idea because it would allow me to get some same culture + same religion development, which does not exist for Hormuz at the start (edit: except I guess Najd's land, but they are allied to the Mamluks, so I guess my point stands? heh). I dont like the idea because I was thinking of developing to seed the Renaissance because it will be decades till it gets here naturally, and by colonizing land I lose the OPM bonuses that I currently have. On top of that, colonizing is expensive and any land I colonize will be pretty expensive to make into a State because it will be so far away. I'm thinking my best bet would be to seed the Renaissance then go for Exploration, if I would want Exploration (I think I do).
|
|
#
?
Apr 27, 2017 11:32
|
|
|
BONGHITZ posted:I am Kilwa, my colony in Australia has a problem. Rebels have held the two colonies at top end for many years. I cannot land troops there nor can they walk around. The colony does not appear to be doing anything about it. Any suggestions? I have no dlc. Um, just in case you're new to the game. You can park your transports near a coastal province, click the button to select the troops onboard and right click on the desired province and they'll make a landing there. It takes a while though.
|
|
#
?
Apr 27, 2017 14:25
|
|
|
Ah, so Manchu was gimped a bit in 1.21 after all: - Manchu provinces now start with Feudalism again. - Allies that are Tributaries can now be called into wars. That's why I was behind in tech right from the start, and why Oirat wouldn't join in the glorious crusade vs Ming.
|
|
#
?
Apr 27, 2017 14:35
|
|
|
Poil posted:What do you mean by cannot land troops? Are there way too many rebels in both provinces or they intercept your landings all the time? In that case your only real option is to get more transports and soldiers. It's the second thing! I was trying to slam my boats onto the coast like I normally do. Thank you!
|
|
#
?
Apr 27, 2017 18:11
|
|
|
canepazzo posted:I tried both as Manchu and Qing but as Manchu it's a race against time against Horde Unity (which costs more and more to maintain) and gold. As Qing, your troops don't quite melt theirs that well. Horde Unity caps at -5 per year which is not hard at all to manage. I was a 1200 dev horde in 1610 when I finally formed Qing and never dipped below like 70 Unity. You just need to alternate wars between a couple nations, carpet siege to loot them, rinse repeat.
|
|
#
?
Apr 27, 2017 19:06
|
|
|
The main problem with Manchu as it gets larger (while being a horde) is that the drat tribes start to want more and more of your state dev, up to 50%. This makes your economy get more and more balls as you go on. As Pellisworth says the max unity reduction is nothing at all if you're conquering. There's also this weird way that the thing that the tribes, Manchu ideas, and the whole banners concept help most with, manpower, would be almost completely solved by any one of those individually. So you're running around near force limits, almost always near max manpower, and you can just barely pay for it all which feels like a sin.
|
|
#
?
Apr 27, 2017 21:56
|
|
|
Does anyone know if the "owns core province" trigger for decisions allows territorial cores, or do they have to be state cores?
|
|
#
?
Apr 27, 2017 22:37
|
|
|
RabidWeasel posted:Does anyone know if the "owns core province" trigger for decisions allows territorial cores, or do they have to be state cores? Territories are fine.
|
|
#
?
Apr 27, 2017 23:43
|
|
|
Being a large horde is miserable. Trying for the 200 grain provinces count is going to be agonizing. Your horde unity ticks down at an absurd rate, that you cannot keep up no matter what, even if you're always at war. And sometimes you simply cannot be at war due to lack of manpower and revolts. I have to set my focus to military and constantly strengthen government to over 75%, because once it hits 50% you start to trigger the civil war disaster, which activates if you ever conquer and have over 10% overextension.
|
|
#
?
Apr 28, 2017 00:43
|
|
|
As soon as you conquer something your horde unity shoots right back up though? Are you not razing provinces or something?
|
|
#
?
Apr 28, 2017 00:56
|
|
|
Was doing an observe of the latest patch. Ming will begin to harmonize a religion, get halfway through, switch religions, get halfway through, etc. Unless it's just always taking the harmonization penalty decisions, I think they're also not saving harmonization progress, which means this is a complete and total waste of Harmony.
|
|
#
?
Apr 28, 2017 01:06
|
|
|
Jabor posted:As soon as you conquer something your horde unity shoots right back up though? Of course I am. Horde unity is ticking down over 5 per year at this rate. It's absurd. There aren't enough people to go to war with.
|
|
#
?
Apr 28, 2017 01:30
|
|
|
In my Horde games I usually leave a few easy to attack countries alive for Power and Unity farming, QQ Circassia, Georgia, Shirvan and others in that area are good for it since coring them costs extra anyways, they rarely ally anyone of note, are individually weak, and the area is gonna be unstable until the other Hordes have been gobbled up, just war them, loot and raze provinces while taking all their money in the peace deal, and hand all their provinces back when you are done. The hordes themselves can also usually have this done to them, but the constant Seperatist rebels they spawn who wander over to you get annoying fast. I also dont expand too quickly at the start, mainly watching who is getting stomped, setting them as rivals and quickly getting in for 100 of each Monarch power for basically free while keeping my Hordity high and getting money from looting at 0% army maintenance while the third parties are fighting their actual armies, if they still have any at all. The hordes engage in war antics all the time and Crimea, Nogai, Kazan, and Uzbek will be getting clobberstomped by one or more far superior opponents very early and make prime victims.
|
|
#
?
Apr 28, 2017 02:23
|
|
|
Node posted:Of course I am. Horde unity is ticking down over 5 per year at this rate. It's absurd. There aren't enough people to go to war with. Huh? Unity decay is capped at 4.0/year based on development. There is no way you should be above 5/year Unity decay and it is incredibly easy to manage. Just declare and loot a neighbor, it's easy. edit: Here I am as an almost 1800 development horde in 1630, I haven't had Unity dip below 70. You are wildly exaggerating how easy it is to maintain Horde Unity.  Pellisworth fucked around with this message at 02:43 on Apr 28, 2017 |
|
#
?
Apr 28, 2017 02:40
|
|
|
Is that from an old patch or did Ming actually explode in your game?Yami Fenrir posted:Territories are fine. Excellent, I don't know how loving impossibly hard it is going to be but I at least want to try to culture shift as Yuan without wasting a gigantic amount of admin points.
|
|
#
?
Apr 28, 2017 07:40
|
|
|
RabidWeasel posted:Is that from an old patch or did Ming actually explode in your game? In that screenshot I've fought half a dozen wars with Ming prior, I first triggered the disaster about 1520 so I've been grinding them down with zero Mandate and the disaster penalties for a full century. They're easy to beat but extremely stable and wealthy. I had a long truce with Ming so in that screenshot I actually declared war on their tributary Dai Viet, all of SE Asia are still tributaries under Ming for some reason despite me halving their development, them having zero Mandate, and me wrecking them every truce timer for a century prior. It turns out you can't actually cancel tributary status in a peace deal with a tributary subject so it was sort of a waste. Tributaries are still pretty broken and dumb. Partially out of spite I fully occupied Ming, looted them for Horde Unity, and waited until a few rebellions spawned before signing a white peace with them at 20 WE. So, it's a Ming explosion but I forced it with a 20 WE white peace after a hundred years of breaking them down to the current size. Notice I took all of their coastal provinces, they don't have a navy (Yue is a vassal of mine). Amusingly, they are still rich enough to afford a ton of mercs and have reconquered much of their land a decade after that screenshot. Ming is comically wealthy and stable no matter what. edit: It would actually be a lot more fun if Ming broke easily into a few large successor states, they would each be strong by themselves and create more of a thunderdome. Right now you just blob until you can trigger the disaster, then tediously grind the ultra-stable and wealthy (but easily beatable) Ming down over many wars. Imo Ming is still way too stable, make them explode more easily and have the successor states be powerful to create an East Asian thunderdome. Pellisworth fucked around with this message at 08:07 on Apr 28, 2017 |
|
#
?
Apr 28, 2017 07:56
|
|
|
Pellisworth posted:Huh? Unity decay is capped at 4.0/year based on development. There is no way you should be above 5/year Unity decay and it is incredibly easy to manage. Just declare and loot a neighbor, it's easy. Yeah I guess I am. I just broke into India and have a lot more targets now. In the earlier part of the game, where you only have a few targets, its very easy to fall to zero horde unity and constantly be dealing with rebels. It's frustrating and boring. Despite the benefits of a horde like the CBs, I loving hate this government type. I'm not even sure I grasp how big 200 grain provinces really is. How many are in Western and Eastern Europe, and Russia? Not even 100?
|
|
#
?
Apr 28, 2017 08:21
|
|
|
I think they're trying to go for something more closely resembling the real world fall of the Ming, i.e. that it was almost directly supplanted by the Qing as they moved South. This is a lot less fun to deal with in terms of game mechanics though (how many wars does it even take to completely conquer China?)
|
|
#
?
Apr 28, 2017 08:23
|
|
|
RabidWeasel posted:I think they're trying to go for something more closely resembling the real world fall of the Ming, i.e. that it was almost directly supplanted by the Qing as they moved South. This is a lot less fun to deal with in terms of game mechanics though (how many wars does it even take to completely conquer China?) 10ish and that's if you're razing every province to fuel monarch points and cash for expansion  conquering Ming right now isn't that difficult it's just extremely tedious and you need to understand Mandate mechanics before you claim Emperor of China and I dunno how you do that without a previous attempt
|
|
#
?
Apr 28, 2017 08:36
|
|
|
RabidWeasel posted:I think they're trying to go for something more closely resembling the real world fall of the Ming, i.e. that it was almost directly supplanted by the Qing as they moved South. This is a lot less fun to deal with in terms of game mechanics though (how many wars does it even take to completely conquer China?) The real problem here is just that the game doesn't have a good way to effectively model the fact that the effective authority of the Ming government had totally collapsed by the time Dorgon took Beijing. He didn't settle for peace with the central government because there wasn't any central government left. Rather, he conquered the individual provinces rapidly because no one of them could defeat the Manchus and there was a total absence of any leadership to coordinate efforts to resist them. He did this not because his army was so huge and good (though it was pretty good) but because the various Ming armies, having a crisis of confidence about Ming leadership, chose to side with him. After 1644 the Ming rulers were exclusively pretenders who did not control any significant amount of Chinese territory or manpower. Individual Han generals leading Han armies effectively controlled most of southern China and while their loyalty to the Qing was not at all ironclad and several attempted to switch sides again and win territory for the Ming, the actual conflict here doesn't fit neatly into the artificial distinction EU4 forces between war between perfectly defined national armies who have different map colors and war between a nation and rebels who have an anarchy flag and smoke weed everyday. Which is weird because I seem to recall EU:R actually did civil strife and armies revolting pretty well, but I guess nobody at Paradox wants to try that these days.
|
|
#
?
Apr 28, 2017 12:59
|
|
|
What is the icon for the Tear Down This Wall achievement supposed to be? It doesn't seem to have anything to do with Berlin, fortresses or artillery.
|
|
#
?
Apr 28, 2017 14:55
|
|
|
A cannonball smashing into a brick wall.
|
|
#
?
Apr 28, 2017 14:57
|
|
|
Giving Timurids my semestral try and it's already unraveling. I don't get the Razing mechanism. So you ruin your own provinces for bonuses, but then get stuck with crappy, pissed-off provinces. If you return them, they are now too crappy to be razed again in the next war, forming a ring of crappy land around your nation and leaving less option t increase your horde unity. If you core them, they are now worth less income, manpower and such. Wouldn't it make more sense to raze stuff during the war and keep the choice bits for yourself?
|
|
#
?
Apr 28, 2017 22:33
|
|
|
Horde lands are vast and you often can't state them all anyway, especially with the now lower state limits. Razing high-autonomy, non-state land doesn't reduce its efficiency by much and you can use those monarch points to improve your core, stated territory. Find a good high-value province like a gold province and use the monarch points from razing to develop that, and it's a net gain.
|
|
#
?
Apr 29, 2017 00:01
|
|
|
The whole point of razing is that it makes provinces cheaper to core. Hordes can conquer much faster in the early game just by virtue of razing and you get a big pile of dip and mil points dropped in your lap at the same time for doing it. You might want to hold back on razing provinces in particularly high value states, gold provinces, etc. but generally razing is very strong.
|
|
#
?
Apr 29, 2017 00:10
|
|
|
I see. So I basically group provinces into 2 groups: 'real' territory to fully core and state and develop, and vast wastelands to raze dry and core to the bare minimum so as not to stay overextended? Ugh. Actually, I give up.Two dead khans within 15 years, regency (meaning heir killed and a 3/0/0 dope taking over) sending horde unit to the low 30s. Can't conquer and raze territory fast enough to recover unity, so lots of revolts. Manpower fully drained trying to raid neighbors for raze-worthy land. When I am at war, they hate me for not being a war. When I am at war, they hate me for the war exhaustion, and reinforcing my stuff means I'm always broke.
|
|
#
?
Apr 29, 2017 02:49
|
|
|
Sephyr posted:I see. So I basically group provinces into 2 groups: 'real' territory to fully core and state and develop, and vast wastelands to raze dry and core to the bare minimum so as not to stay overextended? The normal paradigm is to just raze once before creating a territory core, or before giving the province to a vassal. This gives you some monarch points in exchange for making the province worse, but if the province is going to sit at 75 to 100 percent autonomy anyway then it's a pretty good deal. And it also makes coring cheaper I think the time between razes is like 20 years or something, I don't think that you want to sit on overextension for that long just to raze again eventually.
|
|
#
?
Apr 29, 2017 04:40
|
|
|
Huh, just reminded me. You can return provinces for free as a horde, rather than coring them- "burn and return", the devs were shooting for it to be a bit viable back when Cossacks first came out but I don't think it ever really caught on since you'd rather just keep the land normally. But with the claim mandate CB, you can easily take 100% OE for just 50% warscore, so it'd be pretty viable to take another 50% warscore of provinces to just raze and give back every war. Anyone tried that?
|
|
#
?
Apr 29, 2017 04:47
|
|
|
Is there a more updated list of what DLC I should buy first if I don't feel like buying every single new expansion right off the bat? I own Res Publica, Conquest of Paradise and Wealth of Nations since I last played.
|
|
#
?
Apr 29, 2017 10:55
|
|
|
The must-haves IMO are Rights of Man, Common Sense, Art of War and probably The Cossacks.
|
|
#
?
Apr 29, 2017 11:16
|
|
|
I think Common Sense probably became the most important expansion when Institutions became a thing. Unless you only play in Europe, I guess Although war is so important that maybe Art of War is still the most important one
|
|
#
?
Apr 29, 2017 12:11
|
|
|
I see the sailor's maintenance change made it live too, stupid poo poo that. Guess I'll keep running 1.20.1 for a bit until they come up with something new.
|
|
#
?
Apr 29, 2017 12:16
|
|
|
Sephyr posted:I see. So I basically group provinces into 2 groups: 'real' territory to fully core and state and develop, and vast wastelands to raze dry and core to the bare minimum so as not to stay overextended? As a Horde you gotta find that right momentum of aggressiveness and caution that means you expand rapidly without gutting your economy through taking too many losses. Hordes are all about early fast expansion and then reforming in the mid game into a dominant, secure position (ie Timurids grabbing all the land they need then switching to Mughals).
|
|
#
?
Apr 29, 2017 12:19
|
|
|
For some reason I can't load saves, they don't show up in the load or save menu. Autosaves still work and the game does create files (which have size) under my documents but they just don't show up in game. 
|
|
#
?
Apr 29, 2017 19:09
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 23, 2024 10:11 |
|
|
Sephyr posted:I see. So I basically group provinces into 2 groups: 'real' territory to fully core and state and develop, and vast wastelands to raze dry and core to the bare minimum so as not to stay overextended? The trick to Timurids is to laser focus on forming the Mughals immediately because your country is too big and diverse to maintain as a horde for more than a few decades, and most of your country is awful for horde armies since horde cav gets penalties for fighting on non-flat terrain (also your starting Khan and heir are both loving awful and 60/50 years old which makes doing this a pain). I found it also helped to immediately debase currency to like 20 corruption because that gets you a ton of unrest reduction for some reason, which helps with your religious and cultural rebels If you're quick you can take all the provinces necessary to form Mughals in two wars, usually three when Indian neighbors dogpile whoever you're crushing and take provinces you need, but this will probably get you a big coalition
|
|
#
?
Apr 29, 2017 19:23
|
|
