|
I was worried mega-Ming would be a problem what with a large Yarkand being their tributary, but it turns out Ming are more than happy to have me as a tributary 
|
#
¿
Aug 12, 2017 20:29
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ May 10, 2024 11:35 |
|
|
oddium posted:when i have 11 infantry and 13 cavalry as manchu, who has a ratio of 75%, raising banners should raise infantry right Depends on how many banners, the short answer is no because you already have fewer than 75% cavalry so it will raise cavalry up to your ratio first. AnoHito posted:Wait, what have they changed? The only thing I'd heard of is the bit where if they lose the mandate (never) then they get a bunch of penalties for a while. They also fixed the exploit where you could move your capital to an island and then you wouldn't get the Mandate penalties for having neighboring non-tributaries. Mandate is still broken and unfun to play in East Asia. One of the main problems with Ming is that they can throw infinite mercenaries at problems. They do get revolts, and low Mandate makes their armies pathetic, but that doesn't matter because they can drown rebellions in endless mercs. Imo they still need to 1) make tributary range smaller and tributaries more willing to leave when Ming is weakened and 2) add a penalty to merc forcelimits or cost at low Mandate so Ming can't magically solve all their revolt problems with mercs. Edit: I routinely see Ming running around with zero (or close) manpower and 100+ merc regiments. There should probably be some consequences for that. Pellisworth fucked around with this message at 17:24 on Aug 13, 2017 |
|
#
¿
Aug 13, 2017 17:20
|
|
|
oddium posted:got it coach. anyway it's 1480 and i formed qing. should i let ming keep the mandate for now and crush their tinfoil soldier or take it for myself and unchain them. what an iffy mechanic you probably shouldn't have formed qing, even. that removes your horde government, which disables the disaster loving Ming over don't take the Mandate now. you need to grind Ming down over many wars until they're small and fractured enough for you to make a positive Mandate score. if you become Emperor of China right away, your Mandate will tank super negative because you have a high-development non-tributary Ming neighboring you. they'll ruin your Mandate until you spend a century or more grinding them down. they're super stable but as long as you keep their Mandate low they're an easy (if tedious) opponent. basically, China/Mandate/tributary mechanics remain very bad and unfun, you will need to grind Ming down into a nub before you take the Mandate for yourself.
|
|
#
¿
Aug 13, 2017 23:34
|
|
|
Ok so update and some observations on my Oman -> Mughals run aiming for Third Way. It's been fun and not really that difficult, though it is a slow first 100-150 years since you're small, quite poor, your armies and manpower suck, and there aren't nearby good high-development provinces you can conquer to power yourself up. I didn't really get powerful enough to take on mid-size enemies until the 1630s after I conquered some of the juicy provinces in northern India and formed Mughals. Here's the current state of my game:  Ottomans are my bestest (100 trust) buds and have been for a very long time, Commonwealth are also allies but much lower trust, and they're rivals of the Ottomans. Sometime soon I'll have to break my alliance with the Ottos and start conquering them while switching to Commonwealth for my main defensive ally. Ming is a fat rear end in a top hat, they have a few Sunni provinces and Korchin somehow ended up Sunni so I'll have to fight them a fair bit. They also asked me to be their tributary (see screen) and I might just take them up on that for a few years to make it easier to beat up Yarkand and Malacca (Ming tributaries). Morocco exiled both Portugal and Castile to the New World, thankfully they didn't take Exploration so I won't have to worry about Sunni provinces in the New World. Unfortunately now I'll have to conquer much of the Iberian Peninsula. Edit: oh, and Kilwa are fairly strong and allied to the Ottomans so I've been postponing conquering Zanzibar. I only in the last 20 years or so got big enough to match their forcelimits. Pellisworth fucked around with this message at 04:50 on Aug 19, 2017 |
|
#
¿
Aug 19, 2017 04:45
|
|
|
Dr. Video Games 0031 posted:Well, if Ming blobs out and manages to conquer most of East Asia, they should be able to get tributaries elsewhere. Distance should simply be a much bigger factor than it currently is. Ming doesn't really blob at all, they're very static and boring. They make most of East Asia tributaries and just sit around. AAAAA! Real Muenster posted:That and Ming should not be auto-called in to defensive wars that were declared on a Tributary by a non-Tributary. And the AI should be more willing to stop being a tributary if they are rich/powerful enough. Well, there wouldn't be much advantage in being a Ming tributary without the defensive call to arms. I would like to be able to cancel tributary as a war demand. Currently you can only do that against Ming, and it works just like cancelling a regular vassal so the warscore/DIP cost is enormous.
|
|
#
¿
Aug 19, 2017 20:10
|
|
|
Tahirovic posted:Any news on Ming? Ming status: still dumb, they made some small changes last patch but it all works out the same. As one of the Manchu hordes it's not very difficult to beat Ming down and form Qing if you know how to game the nonsensical Ming/Mandate mechanics. Tedious, though. edit: specifically, as one of the Manchu hordes, you'll want to become a tributary so you can freely conquer other tributaries once you have over 300 development and can field a full combat width of troops (probably around 1500 give or take a couple decades), you can cancel your tributary status which will start a disaster ticking for Ming. meanwhile, keep up relations with them as best possible and hope they don't decide to declare war on you yet their Mandate will tick downward, a low Mandate + the disaster firing will allow you to cut through Ming armies like butter the trick is to NOT take the Mandate and become Emperor for yourself until you have a tributary network and have conquered most of Ming over the course of several wars. if you take the Mandate early your own Mandate score will crater because you have a large neighboring Ming. so you whittle them down until the mid-1600s, then you can finally become Emperor of China and form Qing basically taking the Mandate of Heaven for yourself is a trap until Ming has been almost completely eradicated. oh, and Ming is super ultra stable so they won't fracture, though you won't have any trouble beating their army of 100k mercenaries Pellisworth fucked around with this message at 18:50 on Aug 28, 2017 |
|
#
¿
Aug 28, 2017 18:43
|
|
|
yeah basically anywhere in Africa is a great starting position if you get decently lucky with ruler stats you can lock down a ton of trade bucks and you're also really hard to invade (plus the AI is still bad at sending their military overseas)
|
|
#
¿
Aug 29, 2017 04:14
|
|
|
YF-23 posted:Mercenaries in the EU4 time period were often closer to looters than soldiers, especially in peak EU4 (30 years' war) time period. this is really untrue, read some of HEY GAL's posts in the milhist thread, she studies 30YW mercs sure they provisioned themselves by looting and extorting from local villages but they were definitely professional soldiers and for many of them it was a family affair, your dad was a merc and you grew up in army camps then you became a merc too.
|
|
#
¿
Aug 29, 2017 19:09
|
|
|
Eldred posted:So I'm playing Castile as my first game, took over most of Iberia and lucked into a personal union over England (which sent my Aggressive Expansion through the goddamned roof since I had to fight Austria for it) by 1500. England is the only other colonizing power so far so I have no real competition on that front. Expansion isn't very good unless you're a colonizer, which you are. You can drop it later in the game (late 1600s or so) when the extra colonist becomes less valuable. Quantity or Defensive would probably be my top picks in your situation. Castile gets morale and discipline from their ideas and a strong Age bonus (Tercios) so your armies will still be pretty decent. However, you will want a large army to expand your colonial holdings, fight in Europe, and also keep England happy. Having a large army reduces their Liberty Desire. Exploration-Expansion-Quantity (or Defensive) is 100% what I would pick as Castile, Portugal, or England.
|
|
#
¿
Aug 29, 2017 20:17
|
|
|
One issue is historicity The larger issue is every DLC adds a few scaling modifiers/scores to keep track of because why not, let's just throw paint at the wall and see where it lands! Art! fix China mechanics please, then you can get back to selling me on new and exciting ways of video game bean-counting
|
|
#
¿
Aug 30, 2017 06:16
|
|
|
Technowolf posted:Has there been any word on when the new patch/DLC is gonna drop? Please be patient it takes a little time to balance the three new scaling modifiers. Paradox wants to make your bar-filling experience as fun and engaging as possible.
|
|
#
¿
Sep 14, 2017 15:41
|
|
|
Fister Roboto posted:Missions are in dire need of a revamp. Most of them are still just vestigial holdovers from EU3, and they range from incredibly powerful to hilariously useless. imo we need a new bar to fill that lets you purchase missions when you do certain things you get Mission Points and then you can choose from a longer list of possible missions, with more powerful missions costing more this would fit perfectly with the Paradox design model of each DLC/patch introducing at least two new types of points to manage, because we always need more UI elements and bars to watch fill up!
|
|
#
¿
Sep 19, 2017 22:12
|
|
|
Hryme posted:The merchant republic mechanics introduced in one of the DLCs is really outdated. And now after estates got introduced most other nations are much closer in trade efficiency because you can place burghers in trade centers. But I guess they can't really just remove the special internal politics of the merchant republics because they are a paid feature of a dlc. Yeah, I would prefer Paradox release a final DLC / EU4 Ultimate edition that fixes some of the more outdated and unbalanced mechanics and move on to EU5. It feels like they're running out of ideas and as much as I and others like to bitch about feature bloat there really isn't much in the upcoming DLC that appeals to me. Sure, army drill was a very important thing in the EU4 period but we already have Discipline, Morale, and Army Tradition, why do we need even more bars to watch fill up? We already have a lot of things that take up UI space yet are only relevant in edge cases. Sailors and Corruption are good examples. Paradox has done a great job making any nation a fun and viable game but their DLC model is really starting to show its limits. I have well over a thousand hours played in EU4 but have barely touched it in the last few months and I don't see the new patch/DLC renewing my interest, sadly.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 1, 2017 06:31
|
|
|
Rapner posted:I prefer to have a full force limit standing army during peace, and aggressively crunch the infantry together and replace with mercs as the war goes on. Yeah this is a good strategy. Also, mercs are way way more expensive than they used to be and even as the wealthy Ottomans, a full front line of mercs is a massive cost.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 2, 2017 13:42
|
|
|
imo there are two problems with Ming: 1) tributary range and defensive call to arms, plus 2) extreme stability of Ming even with their Mandate reduced to zero.oddium posted:the best ming fix was that countries get a severe penalty in trade nodes that ming dominates/owns the most centers of trade/ whatever if they don't pay the tribute 1) Increase range penalty for tributaries so Ming doesn't end up with tributaries all the way to the Urals, plus change it from a defensive call to arms to a trading mechanic like oddium mentions. Then you could have a more realistic and interesting interaction with Europeans wanting to open up access to Chinese trade. 2) Add a scaling penalty to available mercenaries with low Mandate in addition to the weakened combat strength of regiments. Right now, even if you tank Ming's Mandate so their armies are terrible, they can effortlessly swat down rebels by hiring 100+ merc regiments because they're fantastically wealthy. You will often see Ming with zero manpower for decades on end but that doesn't hurt them at all. Reducing available mercenaries by 50 or even 100% with low Mandate would help make low Mandate an actually meaningful penalty. Ming's ability to run an almost all-merc army means revolts don't do anything to them and low Mandate doesn't significantly affect their internal stability. Nerfing their merc forcelimits at low Mandate would also encourage other AI nations to attack them. The AI doesn't see the +50% fire and shock damage received modifier but does consider total army size when deciding to attack. With Ming hiring fewer mercs it would encourage AI nations to attack when Ming is weakened by a low Mandate, at present this never happens. Pellisworth fucked around with this message at 17:27 on Oct 3, 2017 |
|
#
¿
Oct 3, 2017 17:24
|
|
|
V for Vegas posted:I don't know why people complain so much about feature bloat - I love tinkering around with all the different sub-systems and if Paradox want to put more into the game I say more power to them - stuff that game so full of bars and buttons and mana trackers that you can't go a month without the game going 'ding' because some number container reach its new level so you can upgrade some widget. Partly it's that I've put thousands of (enjoyable) hours into both EU3 and EU4 and most of these additions are just small tweaks to the base gameplay. It's hard for me to get excited about a little window dressing when there are many base mechanics in need of a serious overhaul. The combat system is a good example-- it's very complex, needlessly so, and based on rolling actual physical dice because EU started as an adaptation of a board game. The other annoying issue is UI and micromanagement bloat. The state interface is already annoying to work with and it seems like they're adding a bunch of new stuff to states. Paradox's DLC model prevents them from making major paid DLC changes to the game since that would force players to buy the DLC when they're intended to be mostly optional. So we get a bunch of bars and buttons slapped on top when really the foundational mechanics could use an overhaul. Hence, lots of players wanting an EU5.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 4, 2017 06:15
|
|
|
I have a save from 1450 as Norse/Manchu starting in Panama with Siberian Frontiers. Ironman, eligible for Ideas Guy and a ton of other achievements. I can post it to dropbox or something if somebody wants it. You don't need to roll back any patches.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 19, 2017 23:29
|
|
|
EU4 was released more than four years ago, in summer of 2013. It's absolutely a good game but many of us who have been playing since launch are getting tired of the DLC model. It's time for EU5 or at least a summary expansion + sale which ties together all the previous DLCs.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 30, 2017 01:46
|
|
|
octopi octopus is Greek so it's technically octopodes but actual ocean scientists just say octopus/octopuses
|
|
#
¿
Nov 2, 2017 18:42
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ May 10, 2024 11:35 |
|
|
Fister Roboto posted:Speaking of Ming, I just managed to cause a mingsplosion. Imo stay Manchu until you start running out of good options to farm Horde Unity. You want most/all of your neighbors as tributaries eventually so you don't tank your Mandate when you become Qing.
|
|
#
¿
Nov 15, 2017 01:11
|
|
