|
I'm pretty sure MEIOU does have north american natives, but they are a separate download on the steam workshop for whatever reason.
|
#
¿
Aug 23, 2015 20:18
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ May 2, 2024 06:29 |
|
|
I remember trying to play MEIOU a DLC or two back and my computer could simply not handle it. It worked, but it went by so goddamn slow.
|
|
#
¿
Aug 23, 2015 21:01
|
|
|
Wiz posted:We'd had 'one battle decides the war' at one point in EU4 in large wars. It was absolutely terrible. Gameplay goes before historical accuracy. Would it be worth experimenting with raising the cap of battle effect on warscore, from 40 to something like 60, perhaps? Also, somewhat unrelated, if you tinker battle warscore, you should look into something like newer battles or time causing a decay of battle warscore from earlier battles. Because as it is one side that pulls a couple of strong wins early in a war could end up facing (for whatever reason) a complete military collapse and still have positive battle warscore that bears no relevance to the prosecution of the war anymore. Basically if Prussia is fighting Russia and kicks Russia's teeth in, but ends up attritioning to hell and back and Russia swings back and destroys the Prussian armies, the initial victories shouldn't have as much importance as they did when they happened. You could even add a modifier for that like "enemy warscore from battles"; I feel that there's themes to which that would fit well, such as for Quantity ideas where the idea is that you can make up for defeats by bouncing back with superior numbers.
|
|
#
¿
Sep 21, 2015 13:02
|
|
|
A Buttery Pastry posted:Maybe just have the warscore from battles be modified by the size of your armies relative to your force limit? Perhaps with a higher cap to make up for it. That might be good, but time still is really important. A big battle in a war should not have an equal influence right after it happens and five years down the road when its effect is no longer as relevant. I would say something like, a battle's warscore contribution should start decaying after a year for four years, resting at half of its initial warscore. If a battle is so big that it cripples the opponent's camp for the rest of the war then it does have a lasting influence on the war's prosecution thereafter, but then warscore would be reflected from that as the winner's side starts taking over fortifications and so on. If the winner of such a battle on the contrary fails to actually follow up with the prosecution of the war after that then the battle should stop being as important as it was immediately after it happened.
|
|
#
¿
Sep 21, 2015 15:31
|
|
|
As Sweden you should definitely at some point pick up Quality and the idea groups that with quality enable policies that give your troops combat ability. You can get something insane like a cumulative +50% infantry combat ability and +30% artillery combat ability that way.
|
|
#
¿
Sep 22, 2015 17:09
|
|
|
junidog posted:Is there a reason for this? Assigning a different meaning to = always seems like a really, really strange tradition to buck. Because it keeps the scripting language simple, I'd imagine, as well as maintaining backwards compatibility with older scripts (EU4 when released was essentially EU3+ with a whole lot of directly copied files). The script allows you perfectly well to express a true equal by doing code:
|
|
#
¿
Sep 23, 2015 15:08
|
|
|
prussian advisor posted:Ok. So, I've played EU4 a fair amount but largely stopped playing after getting burnt out on crazy El Dorado randomized worlds. I picked up Common Sense and tried to start a new game but, I've got to be honest, the new mechanics for development are so daunting and radically different than the old system that I just sort of stared at the screen for a couple minutes and gave up. Can anyone give me a basic rundown of how I should approach spending monarch points on development, when they're better spent on technology and other things, and how exactly to best navigate the new fewer-forts based land combat system? It feels like they completely changed the basic guts of the game and now I'm completely lost. You should spend points on development when you don't have anything better to spend it on, like coring, ideas, or technology that's not ahead of time. If you are finding your diplo power or military power hitting the 800s or so it sounds like a good time to develop a few of your provinces. It is basically supposed to be a sink for getting near the maximum point limit, like policies. Of course sometimes you want to develop a province anyway; for instance, you want to get your goldmines to 10 production. You can also push a culture to over the accepted threshold since that goes by development as well.
|
|
#
¿
Sep 26, 2015 13:29
|
|
|
Sharzak posted:are you asking why a fort doesn't restrict movement once its fallen? I think he's asking why occupied forts don't exert a zone of control for the occupier.
|
|
#
¿
Sep 27, 2015 17:24
|
|
|
Same religion/accepted culture conquests may sometimes start off close to -10 unrest (or if you have enough missionary strength you can get the same religion part pretty quickly anyway). I would lower autonomy if it means the province doesn't jump to, say higher than 3 or 4, since the separatism part of the unrest will decay over time anyway. Might be worth lowering autonomy if you have just defeated a revolt too. A bit more risky since the post-revolt -20 to unrest will go away before the +10 from lowering autonomy. But unless the timing falls on a major war or something you can just defeat the rebels again anyway.
|
|
#
¿
Sep 30, 2015 10:33
|
|
|
Vivian Darkbloom posted:Are colonial nation rebellions a little wonky for you all? Twice this game I supported a CN's independence, went to war over it, and seemed to win the war (the parent nation had to give some stuff up)... but the CN is still a subject after the war. Here's it happening with Portugal. Independence is a specific demand a revolting subject has to make in the peace deal, otherwise they remain in the same diplomatic configuration with their overlord as ante-bellum, even if the overlord makes other concessions to them. If you start a game as Sweden and go to war with Denmark for your independence and only peace out for the Danish provinces on your side of the Sound you will remain in a PU under Denmark.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 1, 2015 01:11
|
|
|
Average Bear posted:It looks exactly like merchant republic factions. And the bonuses look just as ignorable Estates look to be much more consequential to your country than factions ever did, even if you ignore that the bonii scale with loyalty/influence.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 1, 2015 14:34
|
|
|
Gort posted:Is there any point to development except as a dumping ground for monarch points when you max out? I tried a game as Bavaria, who are basically the best country I could think of to maximise development (all grass/farmlands, western tech, small, in the HRE so they're defended somewhat, national idea that gives a development discount) and it still feels like you get a tiny fraction of the return for your monarch points compared to what conquest gives you. I suppose it's not risky, but it's not at all rewarding either. Development is mostly a dumping ground for monarch points near the MP limit, but there's a lot of cases where it is more useful in general. Unlocking a building slot if you're near that, pushing a culture to over the accepted culture entry threshold, keeping it above the accepted culture exit threshold. If you're small and your provinces aren't worth poo poo-all it can help bring you to parity with other states in the neighbourhood. High-value goods are quite worth putting points into production development. Gold producing provinces should always be built up to production 10. Between universities, economic ideas, and the discount to development you get from tech you can make development dirty cheap too. DStecks posted:I will fight you Gladlii
|
|
#
¿
Oct 1, 2015 15:36
|
|
|
Obliterati posted:Hey, France and Spain need subs this week! My timezone is not entirely conductive for the game hours (UTC+2), plus I could well be doing stuff with friends on those days. I'm not saying it would be impossible for me to participate but I cannot guarantee anything so I can't really say I'll jump in either.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 1, 2015 16:40
|
|
|
double nine posted:That's ... extremely tempting. Here's the thing though: I cannot get a CB against mamluks. I cannot fabricate a claim and they are too far away to use the herecy CB. I also can't use the justify trade conflict. So it'd have to be a no-CB war. Now on the one hand I can afford a no-CB war (I have religious completed) and the Mamluk ally is Yemen so I'd take one of their provinces to get the coring distance, but I'm not sure how that will affect my alliance/trust with the Ottomans. If you can declare war on one of the Mamluks' allies instead of the Mamluks directly you can avoid starting a no-CB war. If there's no significant other allies with that ally then you can even set the Mamluks as a co-belligerent and dodge having to deal with taking land from a non-cobelligerent.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 2, 2015 12:00
|
|
|
If you want to delay the Ottomans you can always declare a war you don't give much of a gently caress about, like against Genoa in the Black Sea. It should keep the Ottoman AI busy with something for a few years while you deal with your own thing in Oman. It might mean taking the Mamluks on solo eventually, but that's probably better than giving the Ottomans the chance to occupy provinces you'll want for yourself.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 2, 2015 12:15
|
|
|
Sheep posted:I apparently haven't played a Russia game in ages - what are peoples' favorite opening idea sets? I've heard good things about religious but I'm not really seeing where it'll stay useful the entire game. Religious plays really well even without the missionary bonuses, and works well with Russia too. Stability cost reduction is great, prestige is always good, tolerance of the true faith will contribute towards keeping you stable. As Russia, Holy War is one of the best CBs in the game, and is perfect for eastwards expansion. Conversion bonii will make early muslim conquests actually convertable, and the culture conversion cost reduction compounds on the one Muscovy gets as part of its NIs to make culture conversion super cheap.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 2, 2015 13:13
|
|
|
Pellisworth posted:Exploration is a good first pick as Russia, then Religious second. You can haul rear end across Siberia and colonize into Asia and the western US, last time I played a Russia game I beat the Iberians to the Cape Exploration for Russia sounds horrible, unless you are playing as Novgorod or just basically playing with a completely unorthodox (doh hoh hoh) western expansion focus. The coloniser Russia idea group is pretty much meant to be Expansion; less ship stuff which as Russia you wouldn't need anyway, more trade stuff which you'll get mileage out of drawing that central Asian trade to the home node, a great CB for your giant Asian backyard (which if you picked religious you'll admittedly not need). The extra colonist there is just exactly what you need to get to the sea of Okhotsk comfortably before the west European colonisers get in the area. For a typical land-focused Muscovy->Russia game I would suggest expansion every time. Exploration, you'd have to go out of your way to make useful.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 2, 2015 19:51
|
|
|
Rakthar posted:Can you provide some details as to what exactly is better about Expansion over Exploration? I mean you go over the gist of what you're saying, but I don't provide see the details of what makes Expansion better? Assume you're playing Russia with no plans on jumping on the Americas. You are going to end up caring very little about your navy. You won't need conquistadors explorers or conquistadors, (even without your NI revealing provinces you border those get revealed on their own anyway after some time, it just might take a few months), you won't need the colonial range because you'll be colonising pretty much only land border provinces, you won't need extra tariffs because you won't be having Colonial nations, you won't be needing the extra naval forcelimits (you might end up needing a navy for the Ottomans or Sweden but then you're much better off going specifically for that, and if you aren't, a navy isn't strictly necessary in either case), and you won't be dealing with primitives so the finisher CB is useless too. If you want to keep the option to make American CNs open then yeah, sure, go for exploration. But if you want to be dealing with Asia instead (the central Asian states, Persia, India, China) Expansion's bonuses are way more relevant.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 2, 2015 22:40
|
|
|
AI naval invasions have always been wonky. It could be worth saving and reloading, it might get the AI to wake up.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 3, 2015 10:13
|
|
|
Bold Robot posted:Yeah, I'm not too jazzed about Admin but it seems like there isn't an obvious choice. Another military idea would be nice but I'm pretty starved for mil points due to a lovely ruler and heir. Influence would be nice to dump diplo points but I don't have a lot of vassals and AE hasn't been a big issue. The inflation reduction from Econ would be great, but the rest of the bonuses aren't very interesting. Economic is great. The inflation reduction will help with keeping the inflation from the treasure fleets low, the autonomy reduction is good, the land maintenance idea is great, and the development cost reduction is also really drat sweet. Then again, you're playing Spain so you're probably having no trouble getting money and anything that helps with that is pointless. I would say Innovative or Administrative as an admin group, trade, diplomatic, influence or maritime as a diplomatic group. -Trade would probably help the most with taking advantage of your colonial empire unless you're already getting enough merchants from your CNs and trade companies that you don't know what to do with them. But everything else in the idea group than the merchants is still good to have! Except maybe Caravan Power, but Steering, Trade Efficiency, and Trade Power will all help out. -Maritime is great for actually supporting your trade network and giving you leeway to also maintain a war fleet (and is also needed for the Thalassocracy decision). -Innovative is good all around. Prestige decay, technology cost, advisor pool, war exhaustion, leader pool, advisor costs. Probably the widest scope of bonii you can get. -Administrative, you pretty much just want for the coring cost (and the advisor pool). If you are planning to expand you might want it, doubly so if you have common sense. -Diplomatic or Influence if you don't care for any of the above. Influence if you plan on making vassals/client states, diplomatic if not.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 6, 2015 19:46
|
|
|
Pellisworth posted:I dunno why you say in one breath income-related ideas are pointless as Spain, then recommend Trade and Maritime. I think Trade and Maritime are good picks specifically for NON-colonizers, going colonial and particularly as Spain you have more bonus merchants and naval forcelimits than you know what to do with. Income-related ideas might not be great when you're already getting showered in it, but I feel like trade can make enough of a difference to still be worth it. More importantly than the economic ideas' income boosts, trade ideas also mean you're sucking trade income from everyone else. And eventually, even with huge amounts of money you can still find uses for them, like giving huge sums in subsidies to your rivals' enemies. If you're at that point, you're probably going to get more mileage out of trade ideas than economic ones. And maritime is about more than just the extra cash you'd get by expanding your trade fleet. Hell, the only trade fleet-specific idea in there is light ship combat ability. Everything else in there is just swell for any country that wants a big-time naval presence, without coming at the expense of the opportunity cost to your land forces that Naval ideas are. Node posted:No. No. Bad. Bad poster. Stop doing that. You're doing English wrong. I will never stop.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 6, 2015 20:20
|
|
|
If you haven't you should start following wiz on twitter. He posts cool stuff.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 6, 2015 20:38
|
|
|
Poil posted:Advisors come from random provinces inside your realm, right? Does this include provinces who don't follow the state religion, so you can end up with an inquisitor from a heathen/heretical province who helps forcibly convert his home town by the sword? Yes. It should not be that much of a surprise; collaborators have existed throughout history.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 7, 2015 23:57
|
|
|
Is the Crimson Empire a reference to something? It feels like it is but I'm not getting it.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 9, 2015 23:48
|
|
|
You'll be wanting to keep the princes Catholic, your own country doesn't matter much for that except in so far as you might be in a position where you could convert a Centre of Reformation.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 10, 2015 13:14
|
|
|
Rakthar posted:Reasons I don't like Expansion, feel free to give me the reasons you do like it: You can't do Expansion->Religious->Admin anyway since that's three ADM groups in a row. Exploration gives you an extra colonist, sure, but if you're not planning on colonising more than Siberia, both the early colonist and the second one are just overkill (plus, like I mentioned in an earlier post, 3 or 4 of the exploration bonii are just useless since they are about CNs or a fleet and we're talking Russia colonising Siberia here). I would say something like Religious->[mil group]->Expansion would work well for Russia, with Expansion pushed down to 4th if monarch stats are dicking you over in ADM points. By the 5th or 6th idea group you'll either be in the process of or have actually gained access to the Asian nodes, so pick trade then and start pulling all that sweet sweet asian trade home. With that set-up you can pretty comfortably colonise Siberia, and if that's all you want from colonising you're gold. The main weakness of this strategy is that you are missing out on administrative's core cost reduction, but by vassalising smaller states and balkanising larger ones, and releasing vassals and later on making Client States you can push the integration cost to DIP power instead.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 11, 2015 12:34
|
|
|
Wafflecopper posted:Thanks guys. One more trade question: What should I be doing with my light ships? When I set them to boost trade or whatever the option's called and get the list of where to send them, I mouseover each one and it looks like I get the most out of just sending them to my home node. Is there any more to it than what's indicated in the tooltip? It seems a bit simple. Might I make more sending them to a node I'm steering from if I don't have much strength there for example? You should be putting your trade ships in your home node if control over the trade in it is contested. Otherwise, they are much better off supporting your merchants that are pulling trade towards your home node instead. Example: You are playing Yemen and your home node is the Gulf of Aden. Aden pulls in trade from Persia and India, which pull trade from further in and so on. Trade flows from the Gulf of Aden west to Alexandria, north to Hormuz, and south to Zanzibar. Aden is a crossroad that can potentially be a very rich node, but to do that it has to bring trade in from India, and to keep trade from flowing out. Trade will flow out if countries like the Mamluks or Persia try to pull trade from Aden into their nodes, and other countries collecting in Aden will additionally be competing with you to collect whatever part of the trade pie is left over. If any significant part of the trade in your primary node is contested like that, say 40% or more, it is very much worth it to put your trade ships in there to both enlarge the trade pie that remains in the node as well as your share of it. But if your share of the node is overwhelming it's definitely much more worth it to try enlargening it but putting your trade fleets in India and pulling trade to Aden from there, unless you somehow have more overwhelming control over those than over Aden itself, but even then there's more trade to pull your way, by getting the trade from Belgan to west India so it can flow to Aden, from Malacca to Bengal, from China to Malacca and so on. It might still be worth it to put trade fleets in your home node even if you have an overwhelming share of it, if the rest of it is all being pulled out of the node instead of being collected there, but long-term your solution to other countries stealing trade value from your home node should be to fight them, sink their fleets, and take their important trade provinces than having a trade fleet permanently ear-marked to giving you extra power in your home node.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 11, 2015 14:41
|
|
|
The Cheshire Cat posted:Related to this, what's the difference between privateering/protecting trade? The way I'm reading it, it sounds like protecting trade just boosts your own power on that node, while privateering reduces the power of other nations on that node and gives it to you, for a bigger net effect (but is also countered by people pirate hunting, while trade protection can't be countered directly). Unless it's been changed recently, privateering doesn't give you any trade power, but it does give you a little bit of money from the trade power you're undercutting. It can also intercept gold fleets and steal portions of the gold they're bringing back home.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 12, 2015 00:19
|
|
|
Tahirovic posted:The best part is, there's even a policy for it. I guess it's some MP thing or so, where you activate it to spite someone after losing a war? It is a legit strategy to cut your losses short if you ever find yourself on the losing side of a war.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 12, 2015 08:36
|
|
|
1. Diplovassalising is pretty much always worth it when it's possible. It's very rare that you could make a cleaner integration by straight up war. 2. Take either an Admin or a Diplo idea group as your first pick; keeping up with mil tech in the early game is vastle more important than taking ideas. The only time you want a MIL group as your first thing is if you are willing to just let it sit partially filled for a while; which, granted, might fit your circumstances since you need manpower and Quantity has two of its strongest ideas right at the start. But a more standard pick would be something like Administrative or Influence ideas. Keep in mind that if you are planning on colonising you'll want to hold back on Exploration until your third or so idea group since you'll lack the colonial range to set up colonies until Diplo tech 7 or higher, most likely.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 12, 2015 11:43
|
|
|
Fat Turkey posted:1) Great, I was hoping to let my troops recover a bit but take advantage of the vassal option. It'll be interesting to try that route for a change, haven't really done it in other paradox games. As vyelkin said. Both technology and ideas cost you monarch points to unlock. If you're starting to fill out an idea group (base cost for each of the 7 ideas in a group is 400 points), it will mean that you will fall behind on the equivalent tech for a couple of decades. This can be fine with administrative or diplomatic technology (with a few circumstantial exceptions), but you almost never want to fall behind on military technology. Ideas themselves give you a boost to tech cost reduction - each idea you unlock in a group will by itself give you a 2% cost reduction to the appropriate technology, so, bonuses themselves aside, if you have two administrative idea groups filled you'll be getting a -28% admin tech cost. You'll additionally have fallen behind in the technology itself - if any country in your technology group is a technology ahead of you that gives you a 5% reduction to the cost of that tech for every tech level they have on you. So if you start filling out an admin group and by the time you're done, say, Bohemia has reached admin tech 7 ahead of everyone else, for admin tech 6 you'll be getting a 14% reduction from having filled an admin idea group, a 10% reduction because you're two techs behind on your tech group, and any other bonii you get to tech cost reduction from the ideas themselves (Innovative has a 5% tech cost reduction, administrative a 10% admin tech cost reduction). That makes catching up much easier. With mil tech, when you do pick a military idea group, you'll usually be filling out a 2-3 ideas between techs, but early game there's some really big bonuses in the techs which can give you a big advantage, so you want to be focusing on those and maybe even getting them ahead of time if you're about to fight a big war. I can only think of two cases where you want to prioritise administrative or diplomatic technology over filling out an idea group in those categories; with administrative, it's if you are about to unlock an administrative efficiency bonus technology soon before you get a lot of provinces to core in a peace. With diplomatic, if you have big vassals, colonial nations etc. you will want to be up to date on diplomatic technology because you're otherwise risking your subjects getting ahead of you, which gives them significant boosts to Liberty Desire. As a coloniser you're almost certain to be dealing with that late game so keep this in mind. Temples give a % of a province's base tax income. They will give you a return that's more worth their value but it will take a while for most provinces. Vyelkin is wrong in this because the tooltip when you build something is monthly, so at +0.10 the temple would make you 1.2 ducats a year, and so clean out its investment after something closer to 80 years in that case. That said I would probably still not build a temple in a province that a base tax as low as that, but you should have plenty of provinces that can give you more than that.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 12, 2015 14:37
|
|
|
It is an insanely cheap very high returns long-term investment. Sure, each province is a fourth as good, but then after a hundred years of near-free expansion you annex that vassal and whoah you autonomy-reduce yourself to titan strength.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 12, 2015 23:59
|
|
|
It's always great when the random set-up spawns you right next to a megatitan, or even just too close for comfort. I was playing in Arabia in a multiplayer game where the two strongest AI states in the game by far both started off in India, one expanding east into China and the other west into Persia. It took a coalition of all four players to effectively curb-stomp them and reduce them as a threat. And of course, the western one had +30% increased coring cost. 
|
|
#
¿
Oct 13, 2015 09:28
|
|
|
Pellisworth posted:The DLCs/patches have so radically altered the game that it's often jokingly referred to as "EU5." Funky Valentine posted:Realistically we're on EU6 now. While the game is radically different from release, it was also essentially EU3 Enhanced on release. I'd say we only really got to EU4 with Common Sense, and even still there's still EU3 baggage that most likely have room for improvement being carried in the game like the combat system.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 14, 2015 14:51
|
|
|
New EU4 Dev Diary, about the natives in uncolonised provinces and protectorates. Nothing major but next dev diary is going to be about "diplomatic feedback" so we'll get a look at what's being done there.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 15, 2015 10:04
|
|
|
Poil posted:Isn't that native policy the same as you get in an event? I'm pretty sure the event choices have less significant effects, and you cannot change the policy you've chosen afterwards.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 15, 2015 11:07
|
|
|
Bold Robot posted:Is there a release date yet? It usually goes something like 6 weeks from announcement? So probably somewhere in the first half of December.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 15, 2015 16:46
|
|
|
Carrier posted:Yo Wiz, is there any way in the game currently to convert to Norse without importing a CK2 file? Cause that sounds like a really cool run, to me. You can pick Norse on the nation designer so it's in the base game files. If you'd want to convert to it in a regular historical game you'd need to do save editing though.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 15, 2015 17:29
|
|
|
You can tell this is an official Paradox screenshot because only Paradox devs would use terrain mapmode.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 17, 2015 01:40
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ May 2, 2024 06:29 |
|
|
TorakFade posted:Great, thanks guys. So basically grab the mission, declare war on Novgorod within spring 1445 to avoid attrition in the first months while I chase around their armies to smash them, then carpet siege their poo poo. You don't need to hunt down their army. Unless something has gone very wrong, they will never be able to take you on in a straight fight, so just keep pushing them as they come at you. You'll be able to take all the land that actually matters (the western bits) from Novgorod in the first war. You should try to connect to Pskov and take the Novgorod province as a bare minimum. In fact, it might be a good idea to not go for 100% worth of provinces as long as you hurt them enough to make them vassalisable in the second war. But Novgorod will be pretty much finished after the first one. They can never really recover from a good smacking.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 17, 2015 19:13
|
|