|
Fister Roboto posted:Yes, that's the point I'm trying to make. Why is turning money into manpower fine in one way (mercs) but not in another (paying more state maintenance)? Mercs have their own cap, to prevent the players from converting all of their gold into manpower. And there's the additional cost of professionalism. So it doesn't seem like a great comparison unless you want the additional states to also contribute to national unrest or something, which would be thematic and interesting
|
#
?
Nov 19, 2017 22:07
|
|
|
|
| # ? Apr 25, 2024 12:06 |
|
|
MrBling posted:I started a new game as The Mamluks to check out all the changes and my my are they beefy now. Controlling Mecca and Medina gives you legitimacy now instead of prestige, which is also really helpful with the Mameluke government.
|
|
#
?
Nov 19, 2017 22:13
|
|
|
Beamed posted:
Looks like your sultan's an atheist. 
|
|
#
?
Nov 19, 2017 22:21
|
|
|
QuarkJets posted:Mercs have their own cap, to prevent the players from converting all of their gold into manpower. And there's the additional cost of professionalism. So it doesn't seem like a great comparison unless you want the additional states to also contribute to national unrest or something, which would be thematic and interesting
|
|
#
?
Nov 19, 2017 22:23
|
|
|
AAAAA! Real Muenster posted:Once ever in 1500 hours of play has the mercenary cap come into play for me as the player, and very incredibly obviously is not a factor for the AI (see: China having 300 Infantry regiments, 100% being Mercs, or, any late game AI in the middle of losing a war). I constantly run into the cap. I replace every regiment that I can with a merc, and I tend to play in regions that can take over the spice islands for ridiculous ducat income
|
|
#
?
Nov 19, 2017 22:26
|
|
|
I could be tripping here, but didn’t they announce at one point that some patch or other had made Korea/Ming less likely to go bugfuck insane on the Manchu minors right away thus preventing a strong Manchuria from ever forming? Cause if so they were full of poo poo
|
|
#
?
Nov 19, 2017 22:28
|
|
|
Poil posted:"Our leader openly patronizes the No Religion faith". Yeah, exactly - I guess Aq Qoyunlu's starting heir was designed to have no religion? For some reason? When I hover over, it says he's Orthodox, which is even weirder.
|
|
#
?
Nov 19, 2017 22:42
|
|
|
In my game so far I haven't been able to afford to do any drilling, but the AI definitely are. I'm sure its great and all but as soon as QQ got stackwiped in a war against the Mamlukes they merced up close to their forcelimit. Seems silly to drill away for decades and have it all undone in a single war, but maybe that's WAD? Also echoing the easily exploitable "declare at 1st of month to stackwipe drilling armies" which is a bit silly.
|
|
#
?
Nov 19, 2017 22:46
|
|
|
Beamed posted:
Hey, what map mods are you using?
|
|
#
?
Nov 19, 2017 22:48
|
|
|
Beamed posted:Yeah, exactly - I guess Aq Qoyunlu's starting heir was designed to have no religion? For some reason?
|
|
#
?
Nov 19, 2017 22:48
|
|
|
Mr. Fowl posted:Hey, what map mods are you using? Just Graphical Map Improvements for now. I really miss Thick Borders and Recolored Water but it seems abandoned, as are the awesome(!) colored UI mods from pre-Third Rome. 
|
|
#
?
Nov 19, 2017 23:21
|
|
|
Ming is still as stupid as ever, their fix did nothing. Transoxiana is a tributary in loving 1540. Is there still an exploit or something to disable them in Ironman mode?
|
|
#
?
Nov 19, 2017 23:24
|
|
|
Hey so I know some devs read the SA threads and thought I would leave some Cradle thoughtzzzz here. The DLC is really good, and revitalised my interest in an area I had played countless times by just hitting it with a sledgehammer and making like 25 new nations. The new government interactions are fun, and I find I always have stuff to be doing with them and always have plans to be doing further things. It is no longer a bipolar power region, as Qara and Timmy now put up more of a real fight. I am loving the new tags, the new government systems, and the new provinces/trade goods, as well as the rebalanced nations. However, the Muslim faith system rework, legalism/mysticism events maybe needing some tuning? The pulse on the events is incredibly fast, which means I can regularly and easily get a ton of manpower or just drop 2 corruption. The way in which the system only partially resets your progress towards one of the two poles isn't enough. If I am really gunning for it, I can have 100 legalism or mysticism again before 3 years are up, 2 years before I can even hit that button again. This means there is basically almost no incentive to not just reset that legalism/mysticism for the juicy bonuses, because you will get it back incredibly shortly anyway. The pulse timer might well be the same as the old Muslim event timer, but the old timer didn't have such a powerful potential to just spam corruption out. Basically there is no decision or trade off in hitting the buttons, and it takes very little to sustain max mysticism or legalism even if you are hitting them at every chance. Similarly, I also feel kinda spammed by events in this new patch, between those pulse events and the new province development modifier events, which also seem to happen incredibly frequently. While I don't mind being given nice hefty bonuses, dev cost reduction is kinda really easy for me to game, especially if I am running an almost constant -10% tech modifier with no corruption due to legalism. On the rebalanced nations however, the Ottos feel kinda... too weak? I know they are intended to be weaker, however, I ran about 8 observer games up to about 1550 after I noticed them get rolled twice and saw them get rolled a further 6 times in those observers. It seems Byz is easily getting allies and defeating the Ottos now, and Venice and Candar usually strike when the Ottos fight Byz too. I have seen all of the state of Rum flip to Candar, as well as the Ottos lose Greece to Byz and for some pissant like Genoa to take the Eastern Aegean coast. They maybe aren't the threat that they are supposed to be in that region, despite being so large. While they probably should not be an unstoppable wrecking ball, they have maybe been too lowly tuned. As such, I haven't actually seen the Ottos fight the Mamluks without me severely weakening the Mamluks first yet. They just can't muster the momentum any more. They sorta just stay a regional power, instead of becoming a continental threat.
|
|
#
?
Nov 19, 2017 23:31
|
|
|
I don't know why you're getting so many piety events, the only time I had enough piety to spare to click buttons was when I was throwing out constant holy wars as Persia, events didn't help much. In spite of all of the nice things Islam got I still feel like effectively having a large chunk of your ability to convert provinces removed (especially other Islamic faiths that you can't placate a bit with Dhimmi tolerance) is a huge problem.
|
|
#
?
Nov 19, 2017 23:52
|
|
|
In my current Mamluks game Byzantine got utterly stomped into the dirt as usual. But that's just my one game. I'm really glad the piety events are gone and that the new ones are, so far, less full of book burnings and xenophobic lynch mobs.
|
|
#
?
Nov 19, 2017 23:55
|
|
|
Tahirovic posted:Ming is still as stupid as ever, their fix did nothing. Transoxiana is a tributary in loving 1540. Disable the DLC, if you can live without Ages and the diplo manager.
|
|
#
?
Nov 20, 2017 00:18
|
|
|
Another Person posted:Hey so I know some devs read the SA threads and thought I would leave some Cradle thoughtzzzz here. I feel like I don't get events to move my piety one way or the other enough.
|
|
#
?
Nov 20, 2017 00:51
|
|
|
THE BAR posted:Disable the DLC, if you can live without Ages and the diplo manager. I cannot live with the diplo manager page.
|
|
#
?
Nov 20, 2017 01:11
|
|
|
Beamed posted:I feel like I don't get events to move my piety one way or the other enough. If you manage your rulers right (disinheriting for good ones, then stepping down when possible and your heir is about 20), you can easily sustain it. If you can get to 100 legalism the first time in a rulers lifetime, you will get there 3-4 more times due to events, and even more from warring if you keep on top of it (although why you would have so much corruption is a mystery). I have had 100 legalism for over a century as the Mughals, while also having some god rulers. Between the conversion prestige age bonus, infinite disinheriting, god rulers and legalism, I have basically had an absurdly easy run. It isn't just Mughals though, I did the same as Qara, Rassids, and Mamluks. If you just make it so that your rulers are young, you can easily keep that number high and never have any corruption, and have -10% tech cost. Getting additional legalism for declaring on different faith nations is just icing on the cake. Basically, keep your rulers young and spearhead directly into wrong faith lands, get that prestige for conversion bonus first in the Age of Reformation (it is so good, too good to pass up imho) while keeping an estate inquisitor on hire (and hell, promote them to at least +4 because they are so cheap). You can easily sustain so many absurd bonuses doing that. I guess on one hand it gives you a Muslim metagame of intentionally spreading the faith, but on the other hand it is incredibly, absurdly powerful. e; basically the op strategy for all muslim nations now is to take religious ideas, and then run as far away from other same branch islamic nations as fast as you can, and you can basically sustain insane modifiers and bonuses for about a century or two. it is a level of synchronicity you would expect out of some absurd combo normally. Another Person fucked around with this message at 01:21 on Nov 20, 2017 |
|
#
?
Nov 20, 2017 01:12
|
|
|
Another Person posted:If you manage your rulers right (disinheriting for good ones, then stepping down when possible and your heir is about 20), you can easily sustain it. If you can get to 100 legalism the first time in a rulers lifetime, you will get there 3-4 more times due to events, and even more from warring if you keep on top of it (although why you would have so much corruption is a mystery). I have had 100 legalism for over a century as the Mughals, while also having some god rulers. Between the conversion prestige age bonus, infinite disinheriting, god rulers and legalism, I have basically had an absurdly easy run. It isn't just Mughals though, I did the same as Qara, Rassids, and Mamluks. If you just make it so that your rulers are young, you can easily keep that number high and never have any corruption, and have -10% tech cost. Getting additional legalism for declaring on different faith nations is just icing on the cake. Sure, maxing out legalism is easy enough if you're declaring on wrong religion, but that's completely different from events letting you go back and forth - I've only gotten mysticism past 75 once, period, across something like 100 years of combined playthrough.
|
|
#
?
Nov 20, 2017 01:38
|
|
|
Beamed posted:Sure, maxing out legalism is easy enough if you're declaring on wrong religion, but that's completely different from events letting you go back and forth - I've only gotten mysticism past 75 once, period, across something like 100 years of combined playthrough. I was able to keep mysticism maxed as Rassids. They were my mystic run, because I needed the conversion strength. I don't know why you guys can't sustain it, I've been having a really easy time with it? Maybe I've just been absurdly lucky, but I think it is really easy to keep either of them incredibly high. Also, I am not only using the events, I am also intentionally using the button to reset progress back whenever possible.
|
|
#
?
Nov 20, 2017 01:43
|
|
|
Another Person posted:I was able to keep mysticism maxed as Rassids. They were my mystic run, because I needed the conversion strength. I don't know why you guys can't sustain it, I've been having a really easy time with it? Maybe I've just been absurdly lucky, but I think it is really easy to keep either of them incredibly high. Also, I am not only using the events, I am also intentionally using the button to reset progress back whenever possible. As the Rassids, were you declaring war to keep mysticism high? No one is disputing that war declarations are the best way to move the slider one way or the other, but yeah, it sounds like you've been really lucky with events so far.
|
|
#
?
Nov 20, 2017 01:46
|
|
|
Beamed posted:As the Rassids, were you declaring war to keep mysticism high? No one is disputing that war declarations are the best way to move the slider one way or the other, but yeah, it sounds like you've been really lucky with events so far. Nah. Rassids is basically surrounded by wrongfaith nations as a Shia mostly surrounded by Copts, Sunnis and Ibadis (which is why I needed the mysticism, before I could take religious ideas I had to rely on that for conversion strength). I conquered the Southern half of Arabia (Oman, Hormuz), and then shot right down the Zanzibar coast, while also smashing Ethiopia. If anything, I should have been maxxed on legalism from it. Like I say, I have felt like I have been totally spammed by so many events in my runs so far, which is why I am thinking it has been easy to maintain. Legalism is totally easier to maintain, for sure, but I have found it easy enough to do either. My point about the spearhead into other faiths is that the slider can basically be used as a metagame strategy for Muslims for absurdly powerful runs with a ton of synchronicity.
|
|
#
?
Nov 20, 2017 01:52
|
|
|
Well, hopefully this conversation will rub off the "tons of events firing" onto me as well then. 
|
|
#
?
Nov 20, 2017 01:55
|
|
|
Tahirovic posted:Ming is still as stupid as ever, their fix did nothing. Transoxiana is a tributary in loving 1540. Turn off Mandate of Heaven, and then cry about losing your diplo macro builder.
|
|
#
?
Nov 20, 2017 02:48
|
|
|
Fister Roboto posted:Turn off Mandate of Heaven, and then cry about losing your diplo macro builder. It's still worth it.
|
|
#
?
Nov 20, 2017 04:27
|
|
|
Do you need MoH for the drill troops option and to improve advisors? It's not showing for me. Also, is it me or are Timurids even more boned? Before you at least had rich provinces and could find allies, and manage your unrest with a bit of luck and more accepted cultures; now all your slots are filled with vassals that hate your guts. Every game has had the old ruler die in 2 years and my vassals pouncing on me. Are you supposed to lose them all and do a recovery game?
|
|
#
?
Nov 20, 2017 05:54
|
|
|
Sephyr posted:Do you need MoH for the drill troops option and to improve advisors? It's not showing for me. Timmies can be a little tricky but here's the rough outline of how to emerge easily the strongest power in central Asia: 1.) Take the lenient taxation policy, obv. 2.) Placate to get Transoxana below 50% LD - this prevents Ming from supporting their independence, yes that's a thing because Paradox. 3.) Declare on Ajam ASAP, so long as they don't ally a strong power. You get arelations bonus with each of your vassals for this that helps keep LD low while you improve relations with Transoxana and Fars. 4.) Ajam is probably going to be a hellwar so take what you can - focus on sustainable growth, you can come back later. 5.) By now your king has probably died and only 2 or so of your vassals are loyal. If not at least 2, then use development to bring it down. Otherwise, diplo annex the loyal ones. This brings your development high enough that the other vassals fall in line. This has been reliable for me. Diplo-annexing Fars is basically the key to staying strong enough vassals LD doesn't break the 50% mark. Stack diplo rep too if you can, though don't break your back doing it - consider it a "nice to have".
|
|
#
?
Nov 20, 2017 06:50
|
|
|
[quote="Another Person" post=""478551463"] the Ottos... too weak? . [/quote] Were it a previous version, I’d laugh and laugh... but I was testing it as ottos so I noticed some things. 1.byz gets allies easier and the level 3 fort in constan takes forever to fall. (Close to 4 years) now that maybe bad dice rolls, but that along with allies extremely delayed ottoman wars. 2. Jannassaries as a state wrong religion banner summon + stats change. Making tha jannassaries a state Christian summon that requires military points (10 per unit) only reduces damage taken vs the previous discipline army buff means the ottos are really weakened early game: they can only summon 11-13 infantry jannasries In the start every 5 years and would require more stated wrong land holdings to get more 3. Truces/no claims on eastern lands. Ottos start with eastern Karaman in truce and require to manually claim the Anatolian areas. This gives time for all of them to form a decent power block. That + increased land and dev in the Mid East means they can field larger armies so that 2-3 of them can match your size easily As A result, the ottomans actually end up in a somewhat inferior position. Jannassaries aren’t that strong and yet require mil points to summon (as opposed to corruption or stab cost for banners and sterltzy.) Truces west and east somewhat limit your expansion in the first 10 years and mamluks loom dangerously. Such is your state that often 3 or more Anatolian minors can literally wipe out all your manpower and render you weakened Just in time for the western truce timers or a hungry mamluks. I would even argue that ottos are no longer a big scary threat in MP as much as france or mamluks now
|
|
#
?
Nov 20, 2017 08:29
|
|
|
Dunno about the Byzantines' alliance situation but the Constantinople fort situation has not changed. It's still just a standard early-game fort plus capital fort. Should take a year or so on average to siege down. You must've gotten pretty unlucky.
|
|
#
?
Nov 20, 2017 09:02
|
|
|
Oh hey GLU. Yeah. If there was ever a time to run your dumb overpowered Byz fantasy world games, now is the time because the Ottos aren't just weakened. They are utterly neutered. I have since ran another 2 observer games on the side while doing other things, looking over when things start moving more than normal. My observations in the games I simulated: 1.) Manpower. With how quickly the Ottomans end up at war usually (anywhere from 1-4 years), they run out of manpower before they can get a real siege going, or they spend it on the siege if they don't move and get unlucky. This might be a result of them starting with only about 45% of their manpower in 1444. They have an incredibly high chance of spending the early game with little to no manpower, depending on how quickly they go to war and whether they end up in more wars alongside their first. Their tendency to be in a state of perpetual warfare is a real problem for them right now because their manpower just isn't enough in 1444 for the AI to consistently perform well. 2) Diplomatic setup. Even though 1-4 years is still pretty quick for a starting war, the diplomatic layout of the Balkans and Anatolia now allows nations to more easily find alliances. Byz can usually ally both Trebizond and Serbia, and sometimes even Albania. Fear the Skanderbeg. While this is no great enemy for them to overcome singularly, combined with their low starting manpower other nations seem pretty comfortable with declaring war upon the Ottos while they are getting their first one dealt with, something you didn't usually see before. Usually this is Candar or Venice, which leaves the Ottos hopelessly outnumbered and fighting a multi-front war. Either of these is particularly bad for the Ottomans, because their army has a tendency to shatter retreat right next to another nation they are at war with, leading to really dumb stackwipes. If they don't get stackwiped, due to being at war with 4-5 nations, they are easily blockaded from crossing the strait, either through a navy or a nasty rivercrossing penalty which the AI is reluctant to take. As such, given how much of a lone wolf the early Ottomans usually is, the diplomatic setup leaves them hopelessly outnumbered. Funnily enough, I have actually seen Constantinople conquered by Genoa 2 times before the Ottomans could even lay siege to it. This really stalls them, because they won't declare into the HRE usually. Similarly, without their cores, the Ottomans also don't have nearly as much early game momentum as they did before, and their only core that still exists is protected by the best general in 1444, and the wooden wall of the Venetian fleet, and they can usually manage to ally Hungary too. They tend to lose declaring for their core on Albania more than they do declaring for Byzantine lands. Regardless, their lack of cores means they actually have to worry about aggressive expansion in the early game, which slows down their ability to relentlessly expand into their standard area a fair bit. Usually while waiting for their AE to cool down, their targets will warm up to new, big threats to the Ottomans, like the Mamluks or Qara, especially as the numbers get whittled down. I would not say this is a bad thing, but it does slow them down and really hamper their ability to become what they usually did before. 3) Drilling. I feel like this might be the most decisive part of why the Ottomans are performing so poorly right now, because it has basically changed the nature of AI wars, especially for lone wolves like the Ottomans. The tendency I have noticed in my observer games is that the AI will be drilling if they can afford it when at peace. Armies now, rather sensibly, perform better at the start of a war than in the middle or the end. This isn't a problem if you are going to war at a sensible pace, and have a band of allies to have your back, but the Ottomans do not do these things. They go ham, and in the early game they seem to live in a state of perpetual warfare. This means that their 0 manpower armies, with depleted and undrilled infantry, are smashing into heavily drilled armies quickly enough and just taking hugely disadvantageous fights. Constant drilling also has the knock-on effect of enemy armies having much better generals than they did before. Hadim Sehabeddin, the Ottoman 2 star general in 1444 is not as impressive as he once was any more, because his 3/3/3/1 can be closely enough achieved by anyone, especially Qara and Aq. Even tiny little Bitlis has a 1/3/2/0 right now in this game I am looking at, and the 3 shock is what really counts in 1444, for a tiny nation with allies. Basically, there is always at least one incredibly good general on every side in a war, which means the Ottomans no longer hold the distinct advantage in that field (excluding Skanderbeg, at least). They have a stark tendency to become the early Sick Man of Europe because of this. e; Constantinople hasn't changed, but that one in my observer games isn't the main issue. Because Byz can usually get Trebizond as an ally, Trazbon is the real issue, since it comes with a a defense bonus to waste their limited manpower pool away. It is having to deal with multiple fortified capitals. Another Person fucked around with this message at 09:40 on Nov 20, 2017 |
|
#
?
Nov 20, 2017 09:27
|
|
|
Sephyr posted:Do you need MoH for the drill troops option and to improve advisors? It's not showing for me. Yeah they're part of the paid content which is basically: Army professionalism and drilling New government buttons (Iqta, Mamluk government, Feudal Theocracy, Ottoman pashas / janissaries) Islamic Schools and the "convert piety to manpower / corruption reduction" buttons
|
|
#
?
Nov 20, 2017 09:35
|
|
|
Why is paradox still nerfing ottomans when ming is more ridiculous than they ever were? Ottomans being a powerhouse into the 1600s made sense but they're dying now lol
|
|
#
?
Nov 20, 2017 09:43
|
|
|
Outside of core removals, I wouldn't really call most of what has happened to the Ottomans a nerf really. I would just say that everyone got buffed around them. Also the Ottomans are dumb as gently caress and tend not to ally anyone except Tunis, who is useless, or France/Bohemia sometimes who generally doesn't help them much. If the Ottomans get going (which, yes, is a bit rarer now), they still turn into a juggernaut hegemon. They just have a very real hurdle to that now. I think it needs to be reduced a bit, but they aren't pathetic. They just underperform right now. Also Ming is easy to beat, come on. They don't explode while you aren't looking any more really, but it is super easy to beat them and keep them beaten when you prepare for it and fight the war properly. The trick is to ravage their lands with absurd amounts of devastation through looting. This is the most important part of fighting Ming to kill them for good. You have to loot the everloving poo poo out of them. Once you do that, their armies take huge penalties due to their mandate ticking down. Their men don't fight incredibly well normally because they don't really take many military ideas until super late outside of Offensive ideas iirc, they just have a lot of manpower. Once they are taking +50% shock and fire, their armies just melt like hot butter. Then, once you win your first war your peace deal should carve as many forts out of them as you possibly can, to make that devastation last as long as possible. Just keep doing that, and each subsequent war will be much easier than the last. Ming starts off looking big and mighty, but they can't take a punch. Also if you are Russia, you can just build a bunch of really dumb forts in Siberia which stop them getting to your capital easily, let them walk in to siege them, and then just siege their land while they eat 5% attrition every month like a total idiot. e; also i don't remember if this works, but another idea is to release 1-2 vassals from Ming which share a border with Ming. This should give them -0.3 Mandate per vassal bordering them if you can make them big enough, due to them not being tributaries. You can incredibly easily offset their tributary mandate gain through maluses doing this and keep their armies trash for even longer. If that doesn't work, then release them as non-vassals, and then ally/guarantee them. If they have cores on Ming, and vice versa, they won't just diplomatically become a tributary, and if you are strong enough Ming won't just declare war on them to reconquest. Beating Ming is all about kicking the dog when he is down, and once you land that first kick you can easily keep landing more. Another Person fucked around with this message at 10:17 on Nov 20, 2017 |
|
#
?
Nov 20, 2017 10:03
|
|
|
Albania being guaranteed by Venice is pretty big, as well, I haven't seen the OE lose that war but it does tie them up for a bit as Albania is usually also guaranteed by or allied to Hungary. Except of course every time I try to do a Rum game the OE completely owns the entire Balkans in about 15 years.
|
|
#
?
Nov 20, 2017 10:27
|
|
|
Running a lucky nations game for the first time in a little bit. Is it normal that Castile and Portugal get eaten up by Morocco and Aragon? Portugal has been exiled to its small colony in Florida, and Spain has been exiled to Nova Scotia.
|
|
#
?
Nov 20, 2017 10:35
|
|
|
 Could someone please inform me why this counts as "no adjacent" despite 3 cored provinces right next to it?
|
|
#
?
Nov 20, 2017 11:16
|
|
|
It's not about how hard it is to beat Ming, it's about why the gently caress I would have to beat them to take Nogai lands in the first place. Why is Brunei a tributary in 1490? Why is there a 24 stack of Ming sieging Porto in 1612? Any time I want something from one of their tributaries I have to fight a hell war against a nation that spams mercs and after I win nobody takes advantage of it. The end result is that it's almost always not worth it for the couple of provinces you want to take. In my Mamluks game it was easier to conquer HRE lands than the spice islands. In most cases it's only worth conquering lands of Ming tributaries, if you're a tributary yourself. The AI is way to happy being a tributary, it doesn't want to or can't fight an independence war, even with the low mandate penalties and me having devastated China. I like Paradox and I like this game but the current state of Ming is one of the most horribly balanced things we've had in EU4 and it's been 7 months now. Their latest fix is laughable and shows that they don't even understand the problem. I am used to better and faster reactions from Paradox and I simply expect more from them, because I know they can deliver it. There's plenty of short term solution until they can come up with a long term solution: - Only neighbors can become tributaries - Link it to religion - Link it to region - Disable the diplomatic option so they have to fight wars to gain tributaries Disabling the DLC because the best, most attentive game developer out there can't fix Ming is pathetic.
|
|
#
?
Nov 20, 2017 11:17
|
|
|
SSJ_naruto_2003 posted:Why is paradox still nerfing ottomans when ming is more ridiculous than they ever were? Ottomans being a powerhouse into the 1600s made sense but they're dying now lol not many turks buying eu4 i guess
|
|
#
?
Nov 20, 2017 11:18
|
|
|
|
| # ? Apr 25, 2024 12:06 |
|
|
Poil posted:
I had the same thing happen to me in that region, I guess it's a bug.
|
|
#
?
Nov 20, 2017 12:03
|
|