|
I think England may have made some bad life choices fighting France+Aragon at the same time
|
#
¿
Sep 15, 2016 19:09
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ May 17, 2024 07:51 |
|
|
Finally got Luck o' the Irish. What's a good semi-relaxing run? My last few were an aborted Shahanshah run, a Basileus run, and Luck o' the Irish. I'm holding off on Ottomans until the changes in Rights of Man.
|
|
#
¿
Sep 16, 2016 23:59
|
|
|
CharlestheHammer posted:It's a long process but it eats diplo points only and who gives a gently caress about those. Also it is insanely easy to get to 190. So the ten year timer is your only obstacle. I've found that at least when you start with small nations, diplo power is a little more valuable now because you need to aggressively make sure your tech is within the range to avoid corruption until you're in a position to fix your economic base (you also can't do the thing you used to do where you just blindly burn through idea groups and then resume tech). I mostly just view diplo-annexing as a way to convert diplo into admin, and pick depending on which is tighter (I prefer to diplo-annex, but if I'm trying to rush Exploration Ideas or get to Diplo Tech 7 for colonial range I'll just annex). Admin is generally way more valuable, but there are times where it's preferable to burn it. Annexing also becomes more viable when you start getting admin ideas and such. DIplo-annexing also has other benefits because vassals generally contribute more forces than owning the land directly, especially since autonomy needs to tick down before you get the full force limit. Not to mention you pay manpower fighting the odd rebels depending on the exact distribution of separatists and whatnot. Does refusing to enact the last reichsreform while emperor still give you the broken ability to vassalize anyone without them taking up a diplomatic reputation slot or being able to revolt? Linear Zoetrope fucked around with this message at 02:41 on Sep 20, 2016 |
|
#
¿
Sep 20, 2016 02:34
|
|
|
Gort posted:Some hard and fast rules for babby's first use of mercenaries: Also: 5. Building mercs is best for emergency situations at war, regardless of cost, because they build much more quickly (but still should probably only be used for infantry).
|
|
#
¿
Sep 21, 2016 19:20
|
|
|
Deutsch Nozzle posted:is it still possible to get a byzantium game off the ground? i want to go for the basileus cheevo but previous strategies like over-the-limit galleys and/or a poland alliance dont seem to be working for me I don't see why not. I didn't do it that long ago, though I think it was last xpack. Still, I don't think Mare Nostrum changed anything enough to make it impossible. (And I've also seen a timelapse of somebody doing it on 1.16) Keep in mind that getting good starting alliances involves a lot of luck. You probably need to restart the game several times to get a good opening, but after that it's not too bad. You might lose a war or two to the Ottomans, but as long as it's not your FIRST war with them, you can usually bounce back. I'd caution against angering Hungary too early, though. I did it in desperation when I felt boxed in to get more land and really regretted it. Fighting two separate wars against the Ottomans and Hungary when you're a mid-tier power at best is not a fun time. Quantity Ideas early is probably a must, but you have to balance ideas with tech for tactics levels. I still have a personal goal of forming the Roman Empire with Byzantium, but I don't know if I can handle that many Byzantium runs, and you have to blob a bit before you can abuse PU mechanics (which are still luck based anyway), which I think you'd have to do to annex Europe fast enough as Byz. Linear Zoetrope fucked around with this message at 00:45 on Sep 22, 2016 |
|
#
¿
Sep 22, 2016 00:43
|
|
|
So I take it things like "X turns west" and Western Arms Trade are also disappearing?
|
|
#
¿
Sep 22, 2016 18:38
|
|
|
skasion posted:New dev diary up. Mostly just a list of miscellaneous fixes and fun stuff, like the Knights being able to slave raid quote:If you are enter battle while in an enemy province with a fort, you will be treated as the attacker in battle and incur that province's terrain penalties. That's a pretty massive change to forts.
|
|
#
¿
Sep 27, 2016 23:49
|
|
|
RabidWeasel posted:That fort change is going to make mountainous provinces absolutely incredible for defense, to the point that you will actually have an incentive to keep to natural borders and support them with forts. Yeah, I had a hell of a time doing Luck of the Irish because England has two forts in the south with overlapping zones of control and in a few wars my army just got stuck. There's also some outstanding issue where the ZOCs don't seem to be applied properly when you've paused. Like, I got a "a fort's zone of control prevents you from moving" message while paused, but as soon as I unpaused I was allowed to move my army just fine. (I'll admit it's possible my army didn't get stuck and it was this issue and I didn't notice, but I'm not sure).
|
|
#
¿
Sep 28, 2016 00:34
|
|
|
So how many achievements arise just because someone at the office made a lame pun?
|
|
#
¿
Oct 4, 2016 11:55
|
|
|
gently caress, decided to try Coptomans. Finally got rebels to spawn, they siege down two already Coptic provinces and decided to gently caress off to somewhere in Crimea.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 12, 2016 11:57
|
|
|
The Cheshire Cat posted:I was using Quantity but maybe that's not a good first choice - my aim is to try and take advantage of Muscovy/Russia's manpower bonus and winter attrition to just kind of outlast the AI but obviously that's not going very well for me. There are some subtleties to mercenaries, and a lot of it depends on your strength, manpower to force limit ratio, and income. Generally, early game or with a weaker nation, I go with zero mercenaries until either: 1. I'm in a really, really bad or important war and am need to go above my force limit quickly and take loans to win. (Note, sometimes losing a war is okay) 2. My manpower is running dry and my regiments are very undermanned. At this point it pays to consolidate regiments and hire mercs up to your force limit. Another thing with 2 is that mercenaries train very quickly and can be trained in enemy territory you've sieged down, so they are useful for reinforcing an understaffed army on the front lines. Later in the game, it can be worth it to go with all mercenaries for your infantry (merc cav and artillery is too expensive), because it makes constant war easier. Note that if you ever have to do number 2 above, do not immediately disband your mercs after the war ends, the AI will see you have a tiny army (and probably zero manpower) and attack you. Even if it means a couple more loans it's usually worth it to slowly replace the mercs with real troops as your manpower recovers. Though if you're losing something insane like 3 ducats a month even with maintenance lowered, you may be forced to disband a few. (Conversely, if you are above your force limit after a war, always consolidate or disband some troops, and prefer disbanding mercenaries unless you have The Peasant's War disaster building, in which case you may have to prefer disbanding real regiments to avoid it until your manpower recovers). Generally I don't pre-build mercenaries before a war, and most of the exceptions fall under 1 above. If I need to attack some nasty blob who's much stronger than me I might overbuild with mercs right before the war (though I usually opt to overbuild with real regiments instead), this is mostly for achievement runs though, not Muscovy. The AI will absolutely go insanely into debt in order to beat you, though. It can be pretty frustrating, especially if the enemy has obnoxious fort placement. E: There are some rare scenarios where you may build a merc cavalry/cannon or two (e.g. if you have zero manpower and just got stack wiped), but it should never be more than maybe one or two because they are expensive. Linear Zoetrope fucked around with this message at 10:53 on Oct 13, 2016 |
|
#
¿
Oct 13, 2016 10:47
|
|
|
Wafflecopper posted:Can someone explain to me how France were able to march from Bearn, waltz right through Pirineo straight past my level 6 fort, and into Zaragosa to stack wipe me? Because either forts are completely broken or I just don't understand them at all. Either way it's pretty frustrating and their weird and inconsistent mechanics are easily my least favourite thing about EU4 right now. I'm at tech 22 with 23 still at 130% ahead of time, next fort level is at tech 24 so no way it's obsolete. The AI is allowed to pathfind in a straight line to any province it has any path to. So you're right, you would've had to go to Navarra to Zaragoza, but since that path exists, the AI is allowed to ignore the fort in Pirnio and move straight there. After testing and watching some LPs, I'm fairly confident this is the case. I don't know if it's a bug or not. E: You can essentially think of the AI as having a whitelist of provinces. If a province can be reached at all, no matter how convoluted a player in that same situation's route would be, it's in that nation's whitelist, and the AI is allowed to take the shortest path through any provinces on its whitelist, regardless of forts. Linear Zoetrope fucked around with this message at 12:01 on Oct 16, 2016 |
|
#
¿
Oct 16, 2016 11:57
|
|
|
beer_war posted:Is this documented anywhere? Not saying you're wrong, just that's it rather surprising as a player. I don't think it is, but after observation I'm fairly confident that's the case. See the beginning of this video by Arumba, who uses the console to tag switch and shows that the rules are clearly different for players: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kN4dTMZ4a_s Looking through the comments, somebody made the same inference I did. E: One thing I don't know is if they can use transport fleets to add to their whitelist. If they park a navy with transports in a sea tile that borders both a fort and some province beyond a fort can they ignore the fort? No idea. Linear Zoetrope fucked around with this message at 12:10 on Oct 16, 2016 |
|
#
¿
Oct 16, 2016 12:03
|
|
|
I'm pretty sure it's a corner case bug of some sort. I just set up a test case with custom nations and the AI had to navigate around the ZOC. It doesn't seem to be a hard and fast thing the AI can just do all the time, however, it definitely does it sometimes. My guess is that it might have something to do with chasing shattered or retreating armies, since that's when it happened most of the times it's happened to me. E: And for all I know, we can do it to under certain circumstances but we just don't notice. Linear Zoetrope fucked around with this message at 12:42 on Oct 16, 2016 |
|
#
¿
Oct 16, 2016 12:35
|
|
|
It would be nice if there were a few more ways to get institutions, though I like that it makes paying attention to development something you actually do. Maybe something like "court foreign scholars" where you target a country you have positive opinion with that has embraced the institution, and pay a large number of ducats/mth (or even something like diplo/month). Maybe have other modifiers while doing it like +national unrest because you're spreading those dirty furriner ideas.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 16, 2016 23:07
|
|
|
Wait, can rulers get the immortal trait naturally, or is this some weird CK2 importer shenanigans (though I don't understand how that works with a Korean dynasty if so).
|
|
#
¿
Oct 16, 2016 23:57
|
|
|
Elman posted:It'd be nice to have more institution-related content in general, yeah. I don't like how the main way to deal with institutions is developing your provinces, but that's a DLC-only feature. Yeah, the game has a bit of a problem in that they design features from new DLCs with solutions offered by previous DLCs. I think it makes for a more interesting game, but undermines the DLC model a bit. The only real saving grave is that the old DLCs go on sale for really cheap every time a new one comes out.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 17, 2016 01:35
|
|
|
Mysticblade posted:https://forum.paradoxplaza.com/forum/index.php?threads/eu4-development-diary-18th-of-october-2016.975428/ It will be a balance update focusing on Denmark. They now begin in a PU under Sweden.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 18, 2016 09:38
|
|
|
The answer with the Ottomans is usually "take turns expanding in all directions", that way you spread out AE. I'd personally go for Europe, because the more you eat Europe the less problematic they become, but East is a valid option too.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 19, 2016 04:25
|
|
|
SSJ_naruto_2003 posted:how the hell is bukhara so big in that picture Weird stuff just happens sometimes. I had one game where Taberestan appeared to be going for a Shahanshah run and doing pretty well at it.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 19, 2016 11:58
|
|
|
God drat it, I get called into a defensive war against France/Ottomans as Castille with approximately a billion allies including Austria. We pretty much full siege France (the enemy war leader) and are at about 75 warscore. Bleed all of my manpower and take five loans fighting a bloody war. Austria gives me Bearn and pretty much does nothing else instead of doing the smart thing of dismantling France as much as possible. Or at least making them annul with the Ottomans.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 24, 2016 01:12
|
|
|
Lagnar posted:Sadly the Wallachia start is, at least in my experience, far more difficult then Moldavia. Get Independence from Poland and take enough provinces in the same war to border Silesia. (Again, got lucky this run and didnt join the HRE). How to start as Wallachia I wouldent even know. Get an alliance with Hungary and hope the Otto's dont declare on you I guess. What's that map mod? I like it.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 29, 2017 00:56
|
|
|
Redmark posted:How does anyone do a world conquest? Once you're in a good position it's like 100 wars' worth of busywork... I just end up looking at the save and closing the game in disgust. A high tolerance for tedium. Honestly, I have the same issue with like, Najdi Jihad. I still want to do a Byzantine -> Reform Rome game, but I know it'd take a bunch of aborted attempts and take forever.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 29, 2017 01:07
|
|
|
skasion posted:Roman Empire really isn't THAT bad once you get into a dominant position. Byz isn't super great for it though, I'd rather do France or Austria or even Castille/Aragon. It's nowhere near as tedious as WC anyway. Well, the point of the Byzantines was more that it's cute that the Byzantines reclaim their old empire. I watched a timelapse of it once and it looked pretty awful, tbh, but I love the idea so much.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 29, 2017 08:02
|
|
|
Yeah, I've gotten Basileus, but it took me a while. And it was well before Mare Nostrum so Rome wasn't really an option. It's more the idea of going through Basileus again that hurts me.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 29, 2017 12:36
|
|
|
In a hypothetical EU5, I'd like to see a refinement of Stellaris' sector mechanic and HOI4's battle plan and production mechanics, where the farther away things get from your core land (as in your most important/fundamental provinces, not land that has cores), the less direct control you have over everything. To the point where with colonial or distant overseas territories you're more giving vague war goals and handling logistics and trusting the AI to handle the war for you. This means that as a player the game doesn't completely devolve into a micromanagey stomp and means that as your empire gets bigger you switch to a more macro game where you're building up your infrastructure to actually get troops and supplies to where you want to conquer. It also makes wars more asymmetric mechanically, where as a colonial power you're more trying to just grab land while focusing on important political and military matters at home whereas as a native fighting the indirectly controlled troops Portugal is shuffling around IS your micromanagement heavy war at home. The throughput and logistics issues also mean natives get more of a fighting chance in the beginning that becomes more insurmountable as technology improves and the colonial powers get more established. It also provides some incentives to be friendly with at least SOME of the natives because they could provide significant local infrastructure bonuses before the colonial powers are fully established due to knowing the land/how to farm local crops/etc. Makes you extend the political game to colonial areas where regional powers were very much played against each other historically, whereas now it's mostly just sweeping them up with tiny stacks that may as well be stacks of doom. This could also provide incentives to play a small country who "builds tall" because you could focus on providing necessary infrastructure, logistics, and supply for larger nations, perhaps even being allowed to take direct control of some of their armies for them in overseas territories (sort of an abstraction of "we have a general on loan from Prussia"). Of course, I don't think you can make a world conquest interesting past a certain point without putting more effort into internal politics than I think is reasonable, but I think this way stops it from being QUITE so pause and micro heavy. It also serves as a soft-handicap to the player as an acknowledgement that the game simply can't beat a good player at the war game once they've reached a decent level of power (especially when expected to control hundreds of agents at once), and forcing the player to focus on how to tip the scales in providing support to two equally intelligent opponents (of course you can tweak how relatively smart the player and enemy AI is for difficulty balance). It may at least extend the window before that "I've won why am I even still playing this save" period hits. (To be honest, this system could work just as well for CK3 with some tweaking to give some more hand-off feudalism "why are my vassals idiots?" flavor, with character stats informing how smart or dumb the AI is. It kiiiinda already does this when you allow your vassals to declare outside wars, but not to this degree). Linear Zoetrope fucked around with this message at 15:13 on Jul 19, 2017 |
|
#
¿
Jul 19, 2017 13:25
|
|
|
H-how did I become a great power with Majapahit in 1493?
|
|
#
¿
Jul 21, 2017 01:27
|
|
|
Technowolf posted:
The AI just wants the "Spain is the Emperor" cheevo, okay?
|
|
#
¿
Aug 2, 2017 08:01
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ May 17, 2024 07:51 |
|
|
Surely we all get some sort of CB if it's not that.
|
|
#
¿
Nov 16, 2017 07:14
|
|