|
I've been seeing some bizarre behavior by Castile in a Portugal game I started recently. They're keeping their troop count to only 8k for some reason and are regularly letting rebels walk all over them. Every so often they'll build more troops, but they always disband them less than a year later. They have a couple loans but are still making like 8 ducats a month, so it's not like they can't support more troops. I don't get it. Granada ended up defecting from them because of this, and they've made no effort to get it back. Also, why do I always notice these problems more often in Castile than anywhere else? Wafflecopper posted:What the gently caress kind of arcade games did they have in Scotland? This feels like a very petty thing to post. His English is fine. lovely sentences like that one are gonna happen even with the best authors if they go unedited (and I suspect no one ever edits these dev diaries) It actually struck me how well-spoken he was when I first saw him streaming the dev clashes (in his solo days). He's a closet weeb though who plays visual novels and stuff, so maybe a bunch of awfully written translations have affected his writing ability. 
|
#
?
Sep 25, 2018 15:01
|
|
|
|
| # ? Apr 27, 2024 22:42 |
|
|
Why is Paradox so hostile against low dev desert provinces?  (good change) Oh, I like religious ideas being able convert again. Even though losing the culture conversion bonus is a bit of a bummer. But it's still a big improvement.
|
|
#
?
Sep 25, 2018 15:02
|
|
|
You still keep the culture conversion bonus
|
|
#
?
Sep 25, 2018 15:17
|
|
|
Dr. Video Games 0031 posted:I've been seeing some bizarre behavior by Castile in a Portugal game I started recently. They're keeping their troop count to only 8k for some reason and are regularly letting rebels walk all over them. Every so often they'll build more troops, but they always disband them less than a year later. They have a couple loans but are still making like 8 ducats a month, so it's not like they can't support more troops. I don't get it. Granada ended up defecting from them because of this, and they've made no effort to get it back. Are they out of manpower? The disbanding is weird though. I don’t know of anything that can cause that other than balance sheet problems. Castile is big enough that it can have serious problems without its neighbors immediately devouring it, but its starting position is slightly precarious. For a player it’s easy to avoid the danger but if the AI messes up it can get well and truly stomped by some combination of Aragon/France/Morocco. They also get pretty nasty revolts after conquering Granada. Burgundy is kind of similar situation only instead of having events to magically make it way better eventually, it has events to wipe it from the face of the earth.
|
|
#
?
Sep 25, 2018 15:28
|
|
|
if switching versions is gonna be a hassle would i rather be at 1.19 or 1.24 for a while
|
|
#
?
Sep 25, 2018 15:30
|
|
|
Wafflecopper posted:What the gently caress kind of arcade games did they have in Scotland?  oddium posted:if switching versions is gonna be a hassle would i rather be at 1.19 or 1.24 for a while I think once you do the little dance to unlock the versions, switching will be like normal. That’s how I read it at least.
|
|
#
?
Sep 25, 2018 15:30
|
|
|
Dr. Video Games 0031 posted:This feels like a very petty thing to post. Yeah fair enough. I was trying to be funny but in retrospect it was pretty lovely. Sorry Jake!
|
|
#
?
Sep 25, 2018 15:36
|
|
|
Thinking of religious conversion, are there even many instances of large scale religious shift like the game allows? I can think of four:
I do think the change is good, but I wonder if it still shouldn't be more restrictive in general.
|
|
#
?
Sep 25, 2018 16:02
|
|
Yes, it's like a lava lamp.
|
skasion posted:Are they out of manpower? The disbanding is weird though. I don’t know of anything that can cause that other than balance sheet problems. No, they have plenty of manpower.
|
|
#
?
Sep 25, 2018 16:04
|
|
|
PittTheElder posted:Thinking of religious conversion, are there even many instances of large scale religious shift like the game allows? I can think of four:
|
|
#
?
Sep 25, 2018 16:12
|
|
|
Maybe at some point they'll make the conditions for printing press not entirely obtuse.
|
|
#
?
Sep 25, 2018 17:47
|
|
|
PittTheElder posted:Thinking of religious conversion, are there even many instances of large scale religious shift like the game allows? I can think of four: Conversion of Bengal and a lot of SEA is quite a big deal in terms of population.
|
|
#
?
Sep 25, 2018 18:53
|
|
|
Groogy posted:You still keep the culture conversion bonus  Can you culture convert territories?
|
|
#
?
Sep 25, 2018 19:21
|
|
|
Poil posted:That's great, thank you. They answered that, still no.
|
|
#
?
Sep 25, 2018 19:52
|
|
|
quote:- Vijayanagari mission 'Divert Trade from Bengal' will not only upgrade CoT's to level 2. I assume they mean "now" and not "not" because I just did this to get the Fine Financials achievement and it definitely upgraded all of the CoTs to level 3 after I upgraded them to level 2 myself. This is the first time I've ever discovered on my own and used an exploit to get an achievement before it gets immediately patched out. Get your 8 level 3 centers of trade while they're hot!
|
|
#
?
Sep 25, 2018 22:36
|
|
|
PittTheElder posted:Thinking of religious conversion, are there even many instances of large scale religious shift like the game allows? I can think of four: Muslims can large scale convert areas just through trade. They don't even need to own the provinces in question.
|
|
#
?
Sep 25, 2018 23:04
|
|
|
PittTheElder posted:Thinking of religious conversion, are there even many instances of large scale religious shift like the game allows? I can think of four: Yeah, the current system of plopping a missionary down for 36 months and BOOM! London worships Quetzalcoatl is bad. I don't really see how they can improve it without introducing some sort of finer grained religious model. Either something very clever or something like pops in EUVIII. Conquering a big swath of wrong religious provinces should really be something that haunts you and gives you problems for the rest of the game, not something where you hire a religious advisor and flip Egypt to Protestantism in ~20 years. 
|
|
#
?
Sep 26, 2018 00:49
|
|
|
Fintilgin posted:Conquering a big swath of wrong religious provinces should really be something that haunts you and gives you problems for the rest of the game, not something where you hire a religious advisor and flip Egypt to Protestantism in ~20 years. Actually isn't that even more unhistorical for this time period? There are a lot more examples of rule by religious minorities than there is of mass state sponsored conversion efforts. Indian sultanates, Ottoman conquest of the balkans, Russian conquest of muslim khanates are the ones I'm thinking of.
|
|
#
?
Sep 26, 2018 01:44
|
|
|
Yeah lets make the game more fun. You people have worse ideas than Paradox. And that "no conversion in territories" bit was already really horrible.
|
|
#
?
Sep 26, 2018 10:16
|
|
|
I think the assumption here would be that Paradox would find a way to make it interesting rather than "lol you cant convert anymore, get rekt". An example of this would be Ottoman Janissaries - gives them incentive to not convert everything they conquer. Find a way to do that for England in India, France in Africa, ect ect
|
|
#
?
Sep 26, 2018 13:00
|
|
|
Will religious revolts get reworked heavily? Because gently caress getting constant revolts in 1700 because you have swaths of territory you won in 1450 that you can't convert.
|
|
#
?
Sep 26, 2018 13:08
|
|
|
I really feel like territories should at the very least have less impact on religious unity. So there's a tradeoff between fully exploiting your territory and keeping them content with rule by another religion. But this would necessitate a much greater rework of all the mechanics that tie into religion. Simply changing that and nothing else wouldn't work. Like, do you want that to be the primary way the player tolerates other religions? Should you require Ottomans to keep christian Europe as territories? Is that more historically accurate or less? How would you allow players to later mitigate the effect of having more territories? Would you have to rebalance Humanism to accommodate the change? (and honest question, how would you even represent this as an Indian Sultanate, whose entire territories were always majority Hindu? Is this concept incompatible with them?) Basically, what I'm saying is that this is a sign that Paradox needs to fully reevaluate how the entire religious system works, and I think leaning heavily on the state/territory system is a good start.
|
|
#
?
Sep 26, 2018 13:34
|
|
|
I have no issue with conversion being ‘arcadey’, if by arcadey you still mean more mechanically deep than most other contemporaries. EUIV aint a simulator, and while interesting i dont think current conversion is fun, all for flipping it back over here. Weird poo poo i noticed recently: i set a fleet to patrol the med so it went around in a 4 sea tile circle constantly Something i think needs nerfing: trading in bonuses. I had all but two of them just before playing venice, which was absurd, especially the 0.12 RT from i think chinaware or tea. I was just a sea of weird modifiers. There should be a cap on the amount of trading in bonuses you can hold at once, i just had so much poo poo buffing me that i could ignore a ton of stuff wholesale. The value of them is fine, but having so many at once is a bit silly, could do with a reform there. My only suggestion of a new system would be like the new policies: once you trade enough in a good you can activate it as a bonus, with an upper limit of 3 for a duchy, 5 for a kingdom and 7 for an empire or something like that.
|
|
#
?
Sep 26, 2018 16:40
|
|
|
Will the new patch break iron man saves?
|
|
#
?
Sep 27, 2018 00:48
|
|
|
Creed Reunion Tour posted:Will the new patch break iron man saves?
|
|
#
?
Sep 27, 2018 02:07
|
|
|
i don't think 1.24 broke ironman saves, the new provinces were just uncolonizable wasteland
|
|
#
?
Sep 27, 2018 02:14
|
|
|
Dr. Video Games 0031 posted:I really feel like territories should at the very least have less impact on religious unity. So there's a tradeoff between fully exploiting your territory and keeping them content with rule by another religion. But this would necessitate a much greater rework of all the mechanics that tie into religion. Simply changing that and nothing else wouldn't work. Like, do you want that to be the primary way the player tolerates other religions? Should you require Ottomans to keep christian Europe as territories? Is that more historically accurate or less? How would you allow players to later mitigate the effect of having more territories? Would you have to rebalance Humanism to accommodate the change? (and honest question, how would you even represent this as an Indian Sultanate, whose entire territories were always majority Hindu? Is this concept incompatible with them?) Just fully incorporate Dei Gratia and give dharper some love. OR pops pops pops pops pops pops EVERYBODY
|
|
#
?
Sep 27, 2018 02:16
|
|
|
Playin' an england game and war of the roses proc'd, but I lost some battles real bad and the pretender had a much better stat spread than my actual king anyway, so I pulled the ol' "send the military off to bumfuck nowhere and deliberately succumb to the rebels" move I like the in-universe imagery of all the military officers and lesser nobles going "alright, so, gently caress this guy" and leading a mass desertion
|
|
#
?
Sep 27, 2018 02:36
|
|
|
MaxieSatan posted:Playin' an england game and war of the roses proc'd, but I lost some battles real bad and the pretender had a much better stat spread than my actual king anyway, so I pulled the ol' "send the military off to bumfuck nowhere and deliberately succumb to the rebels" move One time I did that, and the general leading the army happened to have the same last name as the pretender. It just fit so drat well that the army stayed away because the general wanted to place his brother on the throne.
|
|
#
?
Sep 27, 2018 02:44
|
|
|
Hey, what's the rule of thumb on collecting vs. steering trade? I've got a Portugal game going where I have 50-75% in most of the relevant colonial trade nodes (Caribbean, Ivory Coast, etc.), and about 70% in Seville thanks to a lucky PU over Castille. Should I keep steering everything upstream to Seville? Or should I be collecting farther upstream in all of the various nodes, and collecting the leftovers in Seville?
|
|
#
?
Sep 27, 2018 03:26
|
|
|
Arcturas posted:Hey, what's the rule of thumb on collecting vs. steering trade? I've got a Portugal game going where I have 50-75% in most of the relevant colonial trade nodes (Caribbean, Ivory Coast, etc.), and about 70% in Seville thanks to a lucky PU over Castille. Should I keep steering everything upstream to Seville? Or should I be collecting farther upstream in all of the various nodes, and collecting the leftovers in Seville? As I understand it, every "jump" from one trade node to the next increases the total value; on the other hand, collecting directly reduces the amount you get, unless it's your main trade hub. So if you have 100% control in the English Channel and 100% control in Bordeaux, it's better to steer from Bordeaux bc it'll be worth more in the Channel. Since you're running Portugal (so most major powers will be drawing trade in your direction anyway) and you have such a wide + deep network, you should focus steering. Collecting is more useful for areas where you can't effectively "pull" - for instance, if you're a European power that has a presence in Zanzibar, India, and Indonesia, but not in South Africa or the western coast, you'd want to collect from Zanzibar.
|
|
#
?
Sep 27, 2018 03:34
|
|
|
Arcturas posted:Hey, what's the rule of thumb on collecting vs. steering trade? I've got a Portugal game going where I have 50-75% in most of the relevant colonial trade nodes (Caribbean, Ivory Coast, etc.), and about 70% in Seville thanks to a lucky PU over Castille. Should I keep steering everything upstream to Seville? Or should I be collecting farther upstream in all of the various nodes, and collecting the leftovers in Seville? only collect when you don't have an effective route home and you'd otherwise lose out on a big chunk of trade iberians in particular will never really have a reason to collect with a merchant, everything naturally flows to your home node
|
|
#
?
Sep 27, 2018 03:44
|
|
|
MaxieSatan posted:As I understand it, every "jump" from one trade node to the next increases the total value; on the other hand, collecting directly reduces the amount you get, unless it's your main trade hub. So if you have 100% control in the English Channel and 100% control in Bordeaux, it's better to steer from Bordeaux bc it'll be worth more in the Channel. If you've got 100% control of Bordeaux, it's better to steer anywhere else because you're going to get 100% of the trade from Bordeaux no matter what.
|
|
#
?
Sep 27, 2018 03:50
|
|
|
Thanks all. I'll just keep steering trade out of the Caribbean and to Seville, then. And maybe building some light ships to get more power in those outlying nodes, rather than just relying on transferred power from colonial nations.
|
|
#
?
Sep 27, 2018 04:25
|
|
|
It really depends on how much power you have in your home node compared to all the other nations with power there. If you are totally dominating it, it will most certainly be best to steer trade to your home node. However if you are having trouble there and have like 60 percent or less it might make more sense to collect in a node like Carribean if you have most of the power there. One thing to note is that if you chose to collect in any other node except your home node, it might be good to use more or all mechants to collect in nodes where you have power, because only one merchant collecting and not transferring trade power will remove the bonus power that gives in your home node. The problem here is that it is hard to give excact numerical guidelines because it all depends on how strong the other trade powers are too in the nodes in question. F.ex, with a colonial Norway it is likely you will earn more money from collecting with all merchants unless you have taken over England and can dominate the english channel and north sea or you have been able to take out most of the competing trade power in Lubeck.
|
|
#
?
Sep 27, 2018 04:46
|
|
|
Huh, is the province of interest system the mechanism AI nations use for charter companies? I noticed this, checked with a friend, and it turns out that nations will mark out provinces in Asia in a somewhat scattershot fashion as provinces of interest. In this case, all their colonial nations had Expansion, so they claimed the province for their overlords. I got to thinking that it might also be the way nations would pick provinces for chartering.
|
|
#
?
Sep 27, 2018 13:19
|
|
|
Probably not. They tend to pick inland indian provinces for some reason. I've had multan claimed by Florida out of nowhere in like 1600 before.
|
|
#
?
Sep 27, 2018 13:34
|
|
|
That mass claim fabrication spam is because every colonial AI wants every gold province in the world.
|
|
#
?
Sep 27, 2018 16:52
|
|
|
That sounds pretty historically accurate.
|
|
#
?
Sep 27, 2018 17:02
|
|
|
|
| # ? Apr 27, 2024 22:42 |
|
|
I think I just had a bug: Got a notice that the ottomans sold a province to ragusa but it didn't flip. I checked province IDs just to be sure. 
|
|
#
?
Sep 27, 2018 21:47
|
|