|
quote:Shame. Spain has hardly been touched since the game came out And you focus on heretical pirates and cheap duchies. I do not buy any more DLC again. Long live for the universal monarchy. 
|
#
¿
Jan 16, 2018 12:07
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ May 11, 2024 13:30 |
|
|
Just do what I do and ignore everything without a fort on it?
|
|
#
¿
Jan 16, 2018 13:20
|
|
|
Ehhh. Breaking straits only requires you to hold one or two specific provinces, freshly recruited regiments you can pick off in the field, the rest is all poo poo I would consider peripheral to the actual prosecution of a war. If your desire is to grind a country into dust and break them for all eternity then that probably should be a considerable undertaking. My experience is that any war that drags on long enough to require carpet sieging- we're talking exclusively massive hellwars against pan-continental juggernauts and coalitions here- is already so long that carpet sieging doesn't make it appreciably longer. And those wars are very much not the norm, unless you're trying to conquer the world... or play multiplayer, I guess.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 16, 2018 13:59
|
|
|
To tell you the truth, I usually don't bother with either. If I've destroyed their armies in the field then the war is over and whatever they're panic building isn't going to be a threat anyway. 
|
|
#
¿
Jan 16, 2018 14:47
|
|
|
Koramei posted:The majority of these figures are from McEvedy and Jones' Atlas of World Population History, since it's simple for me to reference from it. However, I know it to be pretty unreliable, so if you have better figures available, please let me know and I'll update this. Likewise, if you have figures for a smaller area (like say, Bavaria, Occitania, Aragon etc), feel free to let me know and I'll add an entry; I'm unhappy with how broad this is for many of the regions, so I'd like to add some more granularity. Maybe check out the Maddison figures (under Historical Statistics), which has smaller divisions for some but not all of your regions.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 16, 2018 20:53
|
|
|
They didn't bring it back because people hated it.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 1, 2018 01:43
|
|
|
These missions England gets are loving nuts. Permanent claims on the whole of the British Isles? France? Every loving rock in the Med? The entirety of India? It's like a rocket train to world domination.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 22, 2018 02:45
|
|
|
Poil posted:Close enough, but the holy land is the other way isn't it? Someone took Jerusalem literally, I guess  https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Sc9Ww3rmT7I
|
|
#
¿
Mar 25, 2018 14:54
|
|
|
Man, the British Isles feel huge now with all these extra provinces in them. I especially like the changes in Scotland- it's a small thing, but separating Perthshire from Fife and the southern uplands from the central belt means the terrain setup makes so much more sense. e: a second province in the Hebrides before a third in the belt is madness tho KOGAHAZAN!! fucked around with this message at 14:16 on Mar 26, 2018 |
|
#
¿
Mar 26, 2018 14:07
|
|
|
On the one hand, hooray for more detail and nuance in governments! On the other, I am looking at yet another way to buy a dozen little puddly 5% or 10% bonuses to the same modifiers and my blood is starting to boil up out of my eyes. EU these days feels like this bowl of mushy indeterminate gruel to me, sixteen ways to do the same thing and they all taste the same.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 3, 2018 12:27
|
|
|
RabidWeasel posted:Doesn't stop it from being a bad mechanic which completely destroys what little balance the game has if it happens at the wrong time. Getting a potentially huge permanent ally just because the RNG said so isn't a great gameplay mechanic. I don't know if I see a good way around it. You can't dispose of the concept because it was hugely important to the strategic situation in Europe during this period. The Habsburgs were a major power, the major power at points, largely on the back of PUs, and succession crises were generating general wars all the way through to the Spanish Succession, if not the Austrian. You can't make it much more gameable because the fundamental processes- who manages to produce heirs, who dies when- to a large extent are random.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 25, 2018 12:08
|
|
|
Elman posted:
Yes it is, and I love it Now if the state limit wasn't so drat high this might actually have some teeth...
|
|
#
¿
Jul 24, 2018 12:42
|
|
This seems extremely harsh if you're trying to blob. Or, god forbid, WC.
|
So, every time a patch adds new provinces I like to make these maps of province density, to try and get a feel for how it's changed. 1.25:  1.26:  They've outdone themselves. Now for China. 
|
|
#
¿
Sep 6, 2018 17:04
|
|
|
Prop Wash posted:I’ve tried the Fast Universalis mod but tbh it didn’t seem to improve performance much in the endgame and it makes the game look really terrible. The sort of things Fast Universalis does is going to help you if you have a poor framerate but it's not going to make a blind bit of different to a poor tick rate. fuf posted:we played Imperator instead lol Oh hey what's the MP like for that now. Last I heard they'd changed the servers and were having massive desync problems. Didn't know if they'd fixed that before stopping development.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 11, 2021 12:16
|
|
|
Dorkopotamis posted:Courtly Ideas seems really good if just for being the only(?) idea group that allows you to directly increase monthly mana Well. Mana income increases and mana cost reductions are functionally equivalent. Though this is pretty strong by those standards. The -10% tech cost in Innovative is worth, I think, about 13.7 MP per year (60 MP per tech, 3 techs every 13 years on average)- the category specific reductions in Admin, Diplo and Merc are a third of that (4.5 MP/year). -10% idea cost for full Humanist is 6.6 MP/year (280 MP per idea group, one idea group every 42 years). Stability, core, dev cost etc. are harder to evaluate but are probably worth a lot. Free policy slots? That's 12 MP/year if you have a good policy to stick in them. Advisor cost reduction is a soft equivalent too, as it reduces the cost of turning gold into MP. And innovativeness gain has to be worth something even if it's not much. The more I look at the groups the more ideas seem to be about reducing MP expenditure in some way. e: The flipside of this though is there's like, diminishing returns on most things you can buy with MP? With the possible exception of cores. KOGAHAZAN!! fucked around with this message at 15:04 on Apr 19, 2023 |
|
#
¿
Apr 19, 2023 15:02
|
|
|
Lostconfused posted:Tried Gawed for a day but the starting economy is so awful and it feels pretty impossible to deal with Lorent at the start, as someone who has 0 idea about what they're doing. Well, Lorent is basically Gawed's only serious rival, so yeah you probably want to go in any other direction first. Gawed has a lot of easy gains, though- the Alenic micronations to the north and especially the Kobolds are going to be free real estate. I think the strat there is ally* Deranne and any other Lorentish minor that'll have you, integrate the Westmarches, go ham in the north/east and then go south. Your economy is weak, ish, but all economies are weak in the beginning of EU and Gawed actually starts out wealthier than anyone in its immediate region, so you're at no disadvantage. *If you're coming from HOI- and to a lesser extent, any other Paradox series- you may underestimate how central diplomacy is to EU. There are a lot of countries and you have a lot of ways to interact with them, and there's none of the event and focus-tree stuff that railroads diplo in HOI. Alright, Anbennar specifically has some of that, but it's still a lot more open than HOI. You really want to have as many allies as possible (note: there is a limit on how many diplomatic relations you can have at once) at all times, and preferably ones that are a) large and b) situated in your primary rival's flank (so: Deranne). KOGAHAZAN!! fucked around with this message at 02:19 on Apr 26, 2023 |
|
#
¿
Apr 26, 2023 02:12
|
|
|
What's even the point of playing Aelnar if you're not gonna go the evil Elsa route though
|
|
#
¿
Oct 5, 2023 20:25
|
|
|
CommonShore posted:I think something like 1353 would be a fun start date, with Europe and the Mediterranian really depopulated and needing (re-)development, Yuan China all hosed up and collapsing, the ERE (not "Byzantium" also) as a workable but not terribly powerful polity in the Balkans and Aegean, Muslim Iberia, a more unified Japan, the Timurids on the rise... Ah, a MEIOU and Taxes fan KOGAHAZAN!! fucked around with this message at 21:11 on Dec 16, 2023 |
|
#
¿
Dec 16, 2023 19:14
|
|
|
Captain Oblivious posted:Gonna laugh when it’s a new project and not EU5 New DD makes that vanishingly unlikely imo https://forum.paradoxplaza.com/forum/developer-diary/tinto-talks-2-march-6th-2024.1626415/ Global map, probably "set in the past", can't be a Crusader Kings or a Victoria... and Tinto is the Johan/EU team. Not that I'd say no to an "Imperator 2: The Revenge of Imperator: Global in scope for some loving reason". On another note, I am unspeakably horny for this loving map   I am slavering like a dog. I am fully gone. e: quote:Project Caesar will have a warfare system that involving moving units in locations on the map. Army micro haters BTFO KOGAHAZAN!! fucked around with this message at 16:02 on Mar 6, 2024 |
|
#
¿
Mar 6, 2024 15:59
|
|
|
 Trying to work out the date from these borders. Not clear if these are national borders or what sort of internal divisions are being broken out as vassals, but we have a balkanised Persia, a China that does not include Yunnan, and a strong hegemon in India that could be a Tughlaq Delhi. This would seem to point to somewhere between 1368 and 1370. 88m is also a plausible population for early Ming.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 13, 2024 15:34
|
|
|
Gnostic Byzantium run here we go.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 13, 2024 18:27
|
|
|
1337 would precede the Black Death, so maybe an opportunity to show off the new pop system in a big splashy way at the start of the game? But I think the Yuan had Tibet/bits of SE Asia then?
|
|
#
¿
Mar 13, 2024 20:22
|
|
|
Just don’t play Mithradhum, because someone thought an entire mission tree about condottieri would be fun. Actually, what are the cool holds? I’ve wanted to do a Verkal Dromak run since I first heard about it, but it sounds like an utter pain in the dick to form. I assume Er-Natvir has some funny railway nonsense to do- does Ovdal Lodhum do anything interesting with the Love Dwarfs thing? KOGAHAZAN!! fucked around with this message at 02:43 on Mar 16, 2024 |
|
#
¿
Mar 16, 2024 02:27
|
|
|
Demon_Corsair posted:Oh probably, I can’t imagine it being named anything else. But when it’s pretty obvious it’s eu5 aren’t you going to be generating similar amounts of hype to just announcing eu5 is in development? Johan did this same thing with Imp and people figured that one out nearly as fast. e: Now that I think about it, that one was a rename 
|
|
#
¿
Mar 22, 2024 23:24
|
|
|
Y'know, if there's literally anything whatsoever you can do to mitigate the effects of the Black Death then the opening play for basically every old-world start is going to be to go all-in on that, because if you manage to get through that better off than your neighbours then you're going to have a massive advantage in resources. And if there's any significant RNG in how hard you get hit "rolled a bad Black Death" is going to be a major cause of restarts.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 23, 2024 22:17
|
|
|
I'll be frank, I'd taken the notion that there'd be some sort of carrying capacity/logistic growth model for granted. Like, how else are you going to model pre-modern population growth? I don't see a sensible alternative. I don't think it changes the calculus here? A Buttery Pastry posted:A deterministic model like that frankly sounds like the ideal way to model population growth, since you can basically just assign values to the end goal rather than growth, which would be much less likely to cause unfun permanent slumps or absurd levels of population growth due to unforeseen snowball effects. Like, even if you somehow managed to do some poo poo that increases your expected population in 1450 compared to real life, that advantage just lets you pull ahead to a new higher population before returning you to regular population growth, instead of resulting in what could be a compounding 200 year advantage. (Depending on the end date.) The advantage I'm imagining is not a snowballing increase in long-term population, but a short-term economic and military advantage that you leverage into long-term gains through conquest. Pre-modern populations could and did spring back from trauma rapidly, but not so rapidly as to make a disparity strategically insignificant on EU timescales. And not every population sprang back at the same rate- England for instance didn't recover to 1340 levels of population until the 17th century, about two centuries later than France. A Buttery Pastry posted:More serious answer: Didn't the Black Death result in a curtailment of the power of the nobility, due to the lack of downtrodden subjects? The loss of subjects might be offset somewhat by faster social development, making it a bit less of a clear binary. Not that this entirely solves the issue, but it is a way to make the crisis somewhat of an opportunity too. It's been posited, though in the context of EU I think there is again a problem of timeframes here. It's like the old problem of buildings- you can put money into buildings which might pay for themselves in a century or you can put that money into armies and conquer something now. Do you want an economic advantage now or do you want whatever benefits a tighter labour market might give you in a hundred years?
|
|
#
¿
Mar 24, 2024 14:45
|
|
|
Johan posted:We mentioned taxes before, and while this is not the development diary where we go into details about the economic system, it is important to mention that the estates of a country have wealth that is increased by the amount of money that you have not taken from them in taxes. Rich estates will use their wealth on many things, primarily to invest into things that benefit them, but will often also build things that also benefit the country. This is the most interesting part to me. The M&T influence is very obvious here.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 27, 2024 16:52
|
|
|
Jay Rust posted:I just downloaded the latest version off here That looks like the right commit. Are you sure you're loading that version of the mod and not the steam version? e: So is this next patch going to be the Cannor refresh, then?
|
|
#
¿
May 7, 2024 00:58
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ May 11, 2024 13:30 |
|
|
PittTheElder posted:I really don't understand why they're sticking with CK style levies, and there seems to be a complete absence of military forces drawn from the estates, which should be super common at the beginning of the game. Service aristocracies were hella common. I think you might be reading too much into "CK-style" there. We haven't actually been given much information about how they function at all. The DD says they're raised from pops, which means the reference point is probably more properly Imperator. And every pop belongs to an estate, so it's levies from estates by proxy. Whether different types of pop will give different qualities of troop, or more or less troops for a given quantity of population, or whether they can refuse to serve if their estate is unhappy- these are all questions we don't actually have answers to yet. Unless Johan has addressed them in the replies already, which he probably has.
|
|
#
¿
May 8, 2024 17:37
|
|