|
If anyone is looking for a relatively relaxed mp megacampaign to join, mine is recruiting and is starting the EU4 phase after nearly 600 years of CK2: reposting the link, sundays at noon est/ 9am pst https://forum.paradoxplaza.com/forum/threads/where-our-bootheels-goed-sunday-0900-1300-pst.1399662/ Most of the viable slots in Western/Central europe are filled and I think we filled most of eastern Europe. So potential slots are probably Middle East and North Africa/Egypt and Further East in Russia. I'm in Northern Italy roleplaying a peasant's republic of matriarchal Dragonborn descended from Melkor's Ancalagon the Black. The sizes currently are because we instituted hard size limits in CK2 to prevent blobbing and 1984 style "cold wars" between blobs. Our EU4 phase will likely retain some degree of size limits through reduced administrative capacity or something to that effect.
|
#
¿
Jul 1, 2020 03:33
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ May 10, 2024 06:00 |
|
|
May I introduce the thread to our Lord and Savior Long Novgorod?
|
|
#
¿
Mar 28, 2023 22:56
|
|
|
In case anyone's curious this is from my weekly Multiplayer Megacampaign, which is why Kyiv is still alive as it's a player nation and have a vastly stronger army. We've largely agreed to an amicable split of the rest of the world though. Like the Treaty of Tordesillas but overland. In an ironic twist they got mildly upset that I joined the Holy Roman Empire though for protection. Not that they intended to ever attack me, but it took away the option essentially should've push come to shove. I've also long since bought the Siberian trading company from Rome who extorted me from an ungodly amount of money.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 29, 2023 03:02
|
|
|
Hellioning posted:I like how you say you 'joined' the HRE in order to gloss over the whole 'getting elected emperor' thing. IIRC the offer was that if I stayed Catholic and joined the hre I'd be made Emperor, with the expressed purpose that me joining was to help pass reforms.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 29, 2023 21:34
|
|
|
AnoHito posted:It mostly makes sense for Renaissance, where you’re basically creating your own big fancy city to Renaiss in. Could represent via abstraction, hiring of explorers, like the Queen of Spain selling her jewelry to fund the expedition? You're gathering interested peoples and relevant industries to the purpose of ship building, exploration, trade, and so on even if specifically no single person flies your flag and goes sailing.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 31, 2023 01:59
|
|
|
I'm surprised how much more balanced Anebar kinda seems to be? I've been playing it in MP (10 players) and most of our experience as fairly experienced players is "So I tried to attack some people and then Gawed showed up and stomped on my neck."
|
|
#
¿
Feb 8, 2024 16:55
|
|
|
Rynoto posted:Gawed is a paper tiger who, if they lose a big war or win a war that decimates their manpower will quickly implode. Eh, not my experience in the two casual MP rounds; sure they're weaker when that happens, but I still got roflstomped by a 100,000 man coalition (first Grombar run that was semi successful until it wasn't anymore!) that Gawed seemed to me like a pretty major component of.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 8, 2024 23:32
|
|
|
Idk, I feel like its fair to admit that the human has a much better grasp of the mechanics, the player is someone of focus, commitment, and sheer will. Something the AI knows very little about. So making the AI willing to take the player more seriously than other AI makes sense when the AI interacts with other AI mostly randomly with some sort of weight to its actions but the Player wants you specifically dead and will stop at nothing.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 10, 2024 16:13
|
|
|
Managed to turn around my so far disasterous Grombar run where Gawed beat my vassals out of me and put me 500 ducates into debt by turning onto Bjarnik and beating their gold out of them while slowly beating on the northerners/licking my wounds etc. Then me and my friends went and got revenge on Gawed and I beat out 1200 crowns out of them to pay off my loans and reclaimed some land and soon I'll beat them up again.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 12, 2024 23:24
|
|
|
I deffo would like to see EU5 even if its content sparse just so the team has a chance to rethink the core mechanics and replace Mana with Capacities similar to V3. It'd also be neat if warfare also got a huge rework in general to be less about doomstacking but maybe not abstracted away like in V3. cheetah7071 posted:It's not really ever worth spending diplo points on but that's more because the exchange rate is really bad than because mercantalism is weak Don't you just crank it up by giving merchants monopolies on goods in exchange for money?
|
|
#
¿
Feb 27, 2024 22:11
|
|
|
There's also the fact that a lot of EU4 is kinda imbalanced from a multiplayer skill perspective, there's a lot of systems if you don't do things the right way you're knee capping yourself really hard.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 27, 2024 22:21
|
|
|
Shroud posted:I think it would be neat if they would try something like the following: In my experience, especially in multiplayer, warfare is already heavily disincentivized. Its too easy to play tall, and too easy to beat up the AI, and never actually fight another player unless you have virtually no other choice because in a do or die circumstance between debasing, scorch earth and so on, you can drag out the war basically forever.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 27, 2024 22:34
|
|
|
Yeah it'd be cool if trade was dynamic and procedural. So it flows based on development/demand; like low development maybe tends to be where resources are extracted from over rivers/trade routes towards areas of high development and as development gets higher and "tech" gets more advanced it becomes more international as more overseas routes open up.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 27, 2024 23:23
|
|
|
Groke posted:As someone who played both EU1 and EU2 extensively, EU2 was by far the superior of those two. Falalalalalalan
|
|
#
¿
Feb 28, 2024 16:17
|
|
|
Do I care about trade that's down stream of my capital CoT, and if I do what can I do about it?
|
|
#
¿
Feb 28, 2024 21:58
|
|
|
How do I know actually when I have too many light ships doing trade? Do I have to calculate the maint costs vs the amount of trade I'm making? I assume the number if tells me isn't very accurate or doesn't tell me the whole picture?
|
|
#
¿
Feb 28, 2024 23:49
|
|
|
Could be like a Tribal/Pre-Classical migration sort of game?
|
|
#
¿
Mar 6, 2024 23:59
|
|
|
I do hope its EU5, it'd be nice to see them apply to EU lessons learned from CK3 and V3. I feel like "capacities" are much easier balance the AI with than knowing when to spend mana in an optimal way.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 7, 2024 03:33
|
|
|
Rynoto posted:If you want an actual cool (heh) hole then Krakdhûmvror is all about harnessing the power of ice and wizard-smith dwarves. Speaking of, in my grombar run currently I went and vassalized them, is there anything I can do to make them make me more money? Should I be doing anything?
|
|
#
¿
Mar 16, 2024 03:28
|
|
|
Some things I'm discovering about EU4 from Anbennar and why I'm hopeful for EU5 is that there's a lot of mechanics like Artificers in Anbennar where I'm like "What the gently caress is this" and I have to ask how to use and how easily you can miss whole mechanics, also applies to EU4 vanilla. But anyways, I've managed to reach the eastern Ocean by the Lake? Confederacy. Jesus they have so many troops. 
|
|
#
¿
Mar 19, 2024 16:49
|
|
|
Sadly my Grombar probably lost its chance to really be one of the world's great powers, I'm barely neck and neck with the Halflings. I hope to see more of the map to my east so I can keep chaining my merchants I guess? The thing I'm not sure about is trade.  I'm collecting in Bay of Chills, but I'm told that maybe it might be better to collect in Vorensbay because of Serpent's Head? The Gnomes dominate Serpent's Head and will dow me if I try to compete there.  I've got like a merchant in Ogre's Steppe as I don't see Zernuuk yet, I need to steal their maps. Currently I'm like in 7th place in income.  I'm almost out of things to spend my money on, I am vastly underutilizing my lands for manpower and force limit buildings though, but I also need to dev up a lot of my lands to do so. I've had my focus being on Admin for nearly the entire game. =/
|
|
#
¿
Mar 19, 2024 17:20
|
|
|
Private Speech posted:You got unlucky with Castanor (western roman empire/early HRE) forming and with how powerful Phoenix Empire (early Arab conquests) and Command (Imperial Japan, kindof) became, but you're doing pretty well IMO. Grombar is a bit like a weaker Russia, it's not that easy to play. And to clarify this is a multiplayer game so those are all players. Is there something I'm supposed to do as Grombar for my military at around this time? I notice against some of the AI nations in the Empire that my moral seems a little weaker. I went Revalian so I got the Infantry Combat bonus and the Moral Bonus. And yeah I basically only recently got to the East, and hadn't thought about building trade ships here yet, I'll get on it.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 19, 2024 17:36
|
|
|
Private Speech posted:Ah okay, that makes sense. The kobolds are also players and currently my allies helping me expand into the Lakefed.  Yeah I started drilling, I've often been at war or dealing with rebels often enough that I never had the time; currently I'm helping Small Country in a war against Verne because Verne decided to support one of Small Countries colonies in independence so I'm sitting in Small Country as peacekeepers (as I'm defender of the Revalian faith), building boats as maybe I can build a big enough navy to fight Verne's? I think they had only like 25 large ships. But yeah generally at this point its cleaning up Dalr and expanding east into the Lake.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 19, 2024 18:01
|
|
|
Somehow I'm managing to bankrupt my dwarves who have the Kromian end node.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 25, 2024 03:54
|
|
|
skasion posted:FWIW I enjoy Anbennar and I think the mission trees are fun by and large, but someone at Pdox does need to find a way to translate mission objectives into plainer English. Picking through layers of nested “one of the following must be true: all of the following must be true: no provinces in province group Grouped Provinces has: provinces” is no one’s idea of a good time. Honestly this has been a massive pain, where some of the Grombar missions that involve building X, Y and Z in various provinces are super unclear. Speaking of grombar, you can through the orc migration events, lose tolerance and end up oppressing regular orcs if you're half-orc, which is annoying for the face of the north mission, as it was like 60 years to work it back up to co-existence. It is kinda funny though, all of the half-orc ignoring/avoiding grandapa orc like the plague (he's says racist things about elves).
|
|
#
¿
Mar 25, 2024 17:02
|
|
|
Wafflecopper posted:There are tricks you can use to boost tolerance up faster. Using racial focus set to orc will make their tolerance events fire more often. If you beat a nation that is expelling or purging orcs you can make them stop for a big tolerance boost. Accepting orcish cultures will also boost it. Yeah its a mp game and we're like in the mid to late 1600s, so I don't think there's any easy tricks for that currently. I've been using the focus but sometimes the tolerance boosting decision has had large negatives pretty often so it took longer than it probably should have.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 25, 2024 22:49
|
|
|
Any talk of how militaries work yet? One thing I'd like to see is a move away from the manpower pool and regenerating in the field regiments model which makes wars kinda feels out of place and more attritional than they were in reality. I feel like how it should work is for a while anyways, armies should be more regional in nature, more culturally specific (i.e Swiss Mercs), and more tied to specific depots where you need to bring them back in order to reconstitute them; and maybe a little more complexity to attrition that isn't just a flat number that slowly drains your armies into nothingness because you parked it somewhere weird. It would also be nice if instead of moving from province to province there was something for sub province-wise for movement or an entirely different map. It's weird for there to be attrition the way its modeled in EU4 while also having an army occupying an entire province and presumably looting it. And some sort of supply line/wagon-baggage train system to make combat more interesting than rolling at each other with doomstacks.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 27, 2024 17:22
|
|
|
Box wine posted:I sure would enjoy reloading cause a merc company on a 30% chance walked into some mountains instead of marching straight into relieve another army. You wouldn't be able to reload for a MP game, so having something that's inbetween a Stability Hit and a Disaster would be cool. CommonShore posted:I like the manpower model because it's a view of the military at the levels of simulation that EU is working on: the depersonalized high-level state view in which lots of those functions get delegated and the player just deals with the end result - not how the troops get supplied, merely what condition they're in as a result of those mechanisms for the leader moving blocks around on the map. It's not a game that's primarily about military micro and I don't fire it up to scratch that itch, and really states didn't have the ability to manage their armies that way because of how communication worked. The problem though is that we DO have the ability to micro our armies, i.e doomstacks, and a lot of the interesting things about the Early Modern period, like what went on with Wallenstein and stuff like that, the importance of logistics and how armies are built up, trained and equipped is all lost and the resulting abstractions result in boring samey gameplay that comes down to stacking the most modifiers. I think the way you're asking for more modifiers ultimately is doubling down on the worst aspects of EU4's design, that the numbers don't make playing as France different from playing as Russia or playing as China; its all impersonal modifiers and stats and not differences in how the game actually plays as a result of your local decisions. I don't feel that the manpower pool as we have it is a good abstraction, I don't think Louis the 14th had a precise number of how many bodies he could throw to fill in the lochs of the Low Countries. I want a much more decentralized model that early game is more akin to begging local lords to contribute troops that slowly transitions to something more akin to Victoria 3/EU4 in having a professional army. That way we can model things like "This local lord was really big at carefully training his troops and are way better at fighting" and "this dude just sent a bunch of starving peasants" and the struggle over the course of the game is to try to create standards and to slowly take away that power from local lords and put that power in the hands of the state and its bureaucracy. Re: Geography I think it would be neat if Navigable rivers was more of a thing; both for supply and maneuver, and that crossing a major river is a major part of gameplay and is a de facto fort line. I do like the idea Victoria 3 brings to the table and it would be nice if we could somehow split that difference or square that circle to step away from Armies circling each other or to make it more interesting and aligned with historical reality. Napoleon's maneuvers in Germany aren't really all that possible in the current province based map. I'd like to see Roads/Rivers be more important to restricting movement. And yeah I think for the period in question in which Mercs were hugely important, they should be better modelled, and the consequences for failing to pay; but not quite an annoying potentially nation-ruining way if it happens. Something like they give/tick up devastation in the provinces they influence when they lack pay could be interesting, and maybe they're slower to react to the enemy, but you still have them fighting for you.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 27, 2024 20:25
|
|
|
CommonShore posted:unless eu5 has a way of stopping alt-f4, iron man is pointless. I think the purpose of Iron Man is to prevent casual save scumming, not necessasarily as the end all be all line of defence.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 28, 2024 03:53
|
|
|
I feel like Stability should be implicit and ultimately comes down to "vibes". Either your country feels stable, or it doesn't; based off of a confluence of factors. However with Victoria 3 proving the concept of capacities, you could probably have something like a "Unstable" to "Stable" meter which increases or decreased based off of how various different and myriad aspects of your country are. The larger your country the more "effort" it should be to nudge this well into the fully stable end of the scale. It should require vastly more effort to keep China stable than keeping the Low Countries stable. You should legitimately feel like "I dunno if I can do this thing because it might cause a rebellion that would be bad!"
|
|
#
¿
Mar 28, 2024 20:21
|
|
|
Can we also gently caress off with Ruler-Generals dying in like a fraction of the time despite never fighting a battle? What the gently caress is up with that.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 28, 2024 22:20
|
|
|
To me its kinda obvious that it should function similar to how calling up vassal levies works in CK3, at least for the early game while you're decentralized. Recruitment is largely decentralized and delegated to local nobles or your ministers; who tell you vague vibes of how many troops they think they can raise, I think the important thing is not having a concrete number the represents all draftable persons, but more like a malus or a modifier that indicates how much manpower remains to be effectively tapped from a region, but not as a concrete thing to be clear. You click the "raise troops" button and maybe something like it lets you choose how many to raise, and then they raise them (similar to how mercenaries work in EU but closer to like vassal levies from CK3), but as you start ticking down in your "Capacity" for manpower the amount of troops that can be subsequently raised becomes less, but I think never zero; but maybe more expensive or start accruing costs beyond gold (like population growth malus from drafting people needed to farm the land). EU4 kinda had this in that you could exploit dev but unless it was a PvP war in a In-It-To-Win-It total death ball war in a competitive mp game no one is clicking those buttons if it isn't life or death and even then. It would be better if raising troops at all implicitly abstracted this until technology kicks in to lessen the penalties. I tie this back of course to my earlier idea that manpower isn't something that's a pool that slowly drains to reinforce armies in the field; armies in the field should be (a) a little more durable so your 40,000 man army isn't attritted down to 6,000 just after fighting once and attrition. But once you do have regiments that basically cease to exist they should be sent back to their home depot to be reconstituted; and later in the game you can have something like how the British had for regiments in the field a reinforcement battalion training at home that could be sent to reinforce it. Armies should be very important; and should be more involved then just clicking a button once or a bunch of times in a row to build one and then the drill button if we're feeling generous. The selecting of individual regiments should feel impactful and their commanders a part of politics.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 28, 2024 22:50
|
|
|
I really should try Imperator at some point.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 29, 2024 17:18
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ May 10, 2024 06:00 |
|
|
It'd also kinda neat if somehow "provinces" weren't the set things they are, so England kinda ruling over parts of France and there being overlapping jurisdictions and authorities that gradually firms up as the game goes on and things become more set.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 7, 2024 15:02
|
|