Search Amazon.com:
Register a SA Forums Account here!
JOINING THE SA FORUMS WILL REMOVE THIS BIG AD, THE ANNOYING UNDERLINED ADS, AND STUPID INTERSTITIAL ADS!!!

You can: log in, read the tech support FAQ, or request your lost password. This dumb message (and those ads) will appear on every screen until you register! Get rid of this crap by registering your own SA Forums Account and joining roughly 150,000 Goons, for the one-time price of $9.95! We charge money because it costs us $3,400 per month for bandwidth bills alone, and since we don't believe in shoving popup ads to our registered users, we try to make the money back through forum registrations.
«712 »
  • Post
  • Reply
Larry Parrish
Jul 9, 2012



General reminder that the AoW nerfs to same-continent colonization were absolutely ridiculously brutal but like 1 patch later it got made into the current, reasonable system we have now. If you hate the MP changes maybe just wait a patch and it'll probably even out a bit.


Personally I feel like, at least from my brief Hesse game in the HRE, expanding is way too costly, but it's equally costly to expand internally. And raising your BT in your capital or something doesn't really give as much benefit as spending 150 ADM on coring a neighboring province would in general. So it comes out to development just being not worth buying most of the time.

Adbot
ADBOT LOVES YOU

VDay
Jul 2, 2003

I'm Pacman Jones!


Ghetto Prince posted:

Do forts add to military upkeep cost?

They have their own maintanence/upkeep cost. 1.0/month for a working fort, 0.5/month for a mothballed one by default.

alansmithee
Jan 25, 2007

A villain in your land, in his land a ruler


Grimey Drawer

BgRdMchne posted:

As to non western nations having too few MPs, why not make development cheaper, and then for the Americas, cut the development level in half a few years after contact with Western nations?

I'd almost go the other way, make non-Western tech groups have reduced coring costs on a sliding scale.

Giggle Goose
Oct 18, 2009


After having played up until 1500 with Milan, I feel like the changes aren't anything to get all upset about. I have managed to conquer and diplo-annex a number of neighbors, work my way partway up a few idea groups and still am sitting pretty in every tech tree. I honestly feel like AE is limiting my conquests more than anything else, which is really how it should be.

I really like the limited building mechanic and the fort stuff although I think that an occupied enemy fort next to an unoccupied enemy fort shouldn't automatically get liberated because it just doesn't make any sense.

The rebel thing seems like it has to be an oversight more than anything else. I would be surprised if they didn't implement some new ticking system or something for rebel occupations. As it stands it, just seems really unfair, especially in much larger empires.

Edit. To be fair though, I have had pretty decent rulers and my trade income allows me to go nuts on advisers.

Giggle Goose fucked around with this message at Jun 10, 2015 around 21:13

MG42
Nov 14, 2011

Delusion now


My England game is going exceptionally well. I'm integrating France right now and building colonies all over the Americas.
Couldn't help but take a look at continental Europe to see what was going on there.

What the gently caress Sweden.

alansmithee
Jan 25, 2007

A villain in your land, in his land a ruler


Grimey Drawer

Elman posted:

I haven't improved a single province since I haven't played western yet, but I'd prefer my expansion to be limited by AE, stronger AIs, my vassals' liberty desire or my own fuckups. Monarch points just aren't very fun cause they're one resource you can't really control, as opposed to a bunch of different factors you have to juggle around.

Yeah this is kinda how I feel. Obviously it's always been an issue where a bad ruler can if not crush you, at least slow you down horribly but now it's just not particularly fun at all.

I didn't check out all of the developer diaries, but was there a mention anywhere on diploannex/coring costs being jacked up so high? I guess I'd like to see the thinking behind it, did they think there was some huge problem with people being able to take over too much land? I'd thought the last expansion and subsequent patches had put the game in a fairly good place. Now it feels like unless you're extremely good, going wide or tall is kinda prohibitive.

Baronjutter
Dec 31, 2007

"Tiny Trains"


There needs to be massive ugly border penalties.

PittTheElder
Feb 13, 2012

Englands's greatest Prime Minister?


Elman posted:

I haven't improved a single province since I haven't played western yet, but I'd prefer my expansion to be limited by AE, stronger AIs, my vassals' liberty desire or my own fuckups. Monarch points just aren't very fun cause they're one resource you can't really control, as opposed to a bunch of different factors you have to juggle around.

But now we have an actual trade off between going tall and wide. Unless you are limited by something like monarch points, this won't happen.


To solve the lovely monarch problem, everybody should get to have a War of the Roses type event. You get to choose between some medium strength rulers, but you have to fight a huge civil war to do it, and all your neighbors get to intervene.

Pellisworth
Jun 20, 2005

Hi, I am listening to the new Weepies album and sipping on some ice tea... with a slice of lemon, of course! Tomorrow I plan on growing a pair of ovaries.


Ghetto Prince posted:

I like my England game, it's kind of easy to force the personal union over France, but literally all of Europe freaks out and coalitions against you.

Anyway, how should I be building forts? I just survived a bitch of a punitive war and I'm wondering if I should sink all my loot into building 2 border forts or into building up the economy.

Do forts add to military upkeep cost?

Also, to contribute to the previous fort chat, I think you basically have to keep a force of 10-15k mercenaries just to deal with fort sieges cause they can eat manpower.

As England, you'll want forts on the continent and in the Channel (your wooden wall ). Forts block movement through their zones of control and also flip occupied provinces, so they force your opponent to siege the fort to be able to march armies through or hold the controlled territory. Forts also require many more men to execute a siege and can give pretty brutal attrition. England will want forts on the continent so your provinces don't get occupied in one month, and they're probably better on low-development and hostile terrain provinces to contribute to attrition.

Guildencrantz
May 1, 2012

Somewhere, something incredible is waiting to be known.


Okay, Teutonic Order is actually fun now. I went somewhat balanced between development and conquest, staying medium-sized but taking enough provinces from Poland and Lithuania (thank God I managed to break up their union early) to eliminate them as threats, it seems to be working pretty well. Loose notes:

- TO + Defensive + Quantity is ridiculously awesome with the new fort changes. Whenever someone attacks me I just sit behind my network of forts twiddling my thumbs and laugh as enemy armies starve to death beneath my Great Wall. The drive to keep a defensible position also really supports pretty borders.
- Theocracies own pretty hard. That +25% tax income from devoutness is nuts, especially when you have a bunch of provinces with godawful goods and have to mostly just pump taxes. Also most rulers aren't poo poo. My only complaint is that devoutness is super easy to keep above 95.
- Development seems weak in the early game, but really picks up the midgame once you're able to stack discounts. The main thing is that you really have to be conservative about expanding and pick up strategic provinces rather than blob everywhere. (You can still blob everywhere, but you won't be creating obscene super-provinces)
- I stayed Catholic for RP reasons and picking up free stab boosts all the time is pretty sweet, but I probably should have gone Protestant because it looks like the opportunity to further fine-tune your nation for maximum efficiency is really fun.

Best expansion. My next run will definitely be a custom nation where I just stack devcost, defensiveness etc. and do the exact opposite of Old EU4, becoming the graveyard of empires.

Mr. Fowl
Mar 8, 2008

nononononono


I keep getting the notice "Too Few Seats in Parliament" as England. How many seats do I need to give out to make that go away?

Gort
Aug 18, 2003


Mr. Fowl posted:

I keep getting the notice "Too Few Seats in Parliament" as England. How many seats do I need to give out to make that go away?

I found I needed six or seven seats total with the starting England provinces, with more as I expanded.

Tahirovic
Feb 25, 2009


I finally managed to get an England game going, managed to enforce the PU over France, got half of europe into a coalition against me and then 7 loving months after enforcing that PU my King dies....

Jabarto
Apr 7, 2007

I could do with your...assistance.


PittTheElder posted:

But now we have an actual trade off between going tall and wide.

I don't know about that, spending 50+ monarch power for +0.8 base tax in a single province sounds like a horrible deal compared to coring even a fairly weak enemy province.

Allyn
Sep 4, 2007

I love Charlie from Busted!

Mr. Fowl posted:

I keep getting the notice "Too Few Seats in Parliament" as England. How many seats do I need to give out to make that go away?
Quick test on my end says you need one for every 3 of your total (non-overseas?) provinces, rounding down.

Party In My Diapee
Jan 24, 2014


Haven't played this in a long time. If you enforce the union with France as England and inherit, do you become England-France with accepted cultures etc. or more like some kind of super England?

Nitrousoxide
May 30, 2011

do not buy a oneplus phone




Mr. Fowl posted:

I keep getting the notice "Too Few Seats in Parliament" as England. How many seats do I need to give out to make that go away?

There's very little downside to keeping your seats to a minimum. I'd personally just hand out seats to the provinces you want to develop thanks to the development discount and let the game pick them when when you need more.

Zurai
Feb 13, 2012


Jabarto posted:

I don't know about that, spending 50+ monarch power for +0.8 base tax in a single province sounds like a horrible deal compared to coring even a fairly weak enemy province.

That's 0.8 tax per month, which is a great deal frankly.

Allyn
Sep 4, 2007

I love Charlie from Busted!

Back To 99 posted:

Haven't played this in a long time. If you enforce the union with France as England and inherit, do you become England-France with accepted cultures etc. or more like some kind of super England?

You stay as England. Any cultures which make up more than 20% of your base tax* will become accepted. French cultures will not automatically become accepted if they don't meet that threshhold. (Scottish will once you form Great Britain, however, as GB is the union tag for the British culture group.) Note you can lower that 20% threshhold using ideas (humanist), various policies (humanist-diplomatic, humanist-plutocratic), and a few other things.

*(This was true before Common Sense hit this week when base tax essentially changed to development; I assume it's based on 20% of development now but I don't know for sure.)

Nitrousoxide
May 30, 2011

do not buy a oneplus phone




Zurai posted:

That's 0.8 tax per month, which is a great deal frankly.

Pretty sure its .08 and some change per month. One admin development adds one yearly basetax which comes out to .0833333 repeating per month.

shallowj
Dec 18, 2006



the enemy fort markers that pop up during wartime make figuring out which 4 or 5 HRE minors are attacking me a lot easier. Really happy about that. Also playing as Teutonic Order. The building changes are a lot of fun. Nice to feel like I'm somewhat able to grow even when I'm not really able to take any provinces from anyone around me.

I also really like the mission changes. They're generally more worthwhile and interesting. I used to just stop doing them after awhile. Overall the game feels more difficult and meaningful, but I personally find blobbing really boring once you achieve regional dominance.

Jackson Taus
Oct 19, 2011


Mr. Fowl posted:

I keep getting the notice "Too Few Seats in Parliament" as England. How many seats do I need to give out to make that go away?

Gort posted:

I found I needed six or seven seats total with the starting England provinces, with more as I expanded.

The thing that drives me nuts about this is that the number of seats you need to avoid having the AI place seats automatically for you and the number of seats you need to make the warning go away are very far apart. According to the Dev Diary, you need 1 seat per 5 non-overseas provinces, but the alert shows up if you have fewer than 1 seat per 3. If you have 30 provinces that means you need 6 seats, but warning makes it look like you need 10. Given the costs of adding extra seats (makes winning debates pricier, higher stab/WE costs) this is really annoying.

Thunder Moose
Mar 7, 2015

S.J.C.

Starting a new game as England/UK and I have to say I really enjoy the new way of evolving nations. That being said - what governs your "government rank?"

Apparently with a high enough one I can turn the UK from a kingdom into an empire (does that mean I get an emperor? neat.) but it seems to go from 350-450 depending on the month and I need it to hit 1000.

Guildencrantz
May 1, 2012

Somewhere, something incredible is waiting to be known.


Zurai posted:

That's 0.8 tax per month, which is a great deal frankly.

Plus it's completely hassle-free. No fighting, no AE, no unrest, no waiting for autonomy to tick down, no worrying about accepted cultures or alliance cascades. Simply click and turn your MP directly into more cash and forcelimits. Obviously it's still not as good as eating an enemy province, but sometimes you're just boxed in.

James The 1st
Feb 23, 2013


For those that are saying things are too expensive, is it a problem of not having enough points available, or getting an awful ruler? I'm thinking the point randomness from ruler ability should be scraped, or the variance decreased, it doesn't really add much besides raging at the computer.

James The 1st fucked around with this message at Jun 10, 2015 around 21:53

iCe-CuBe.
Jun 9, 2011


Tercio posted:

Looks like the Johan symbiote found a new host body.

lol

Odobenidae
Mar 2, 2013

Your cum loving Russian shill


Forts are super cool, but the fort mapmode is useless and it should be made more clear that your free capital fort doesn't have a zone of control.

I think that being able to annex provinces you haven't sieged is really backwards considering how easy it is to siege provinces without a fort.

Empress Theonora
Feb 19, 2001

She was a sword glinting in the depths of night, a lance of light piercing the darkness. There would be no mistakes this time.



I wish that it was more intuitive which provinces are in which fort's zone of control, although at least it's easy enough to tell if a province is in a zone of control or not, which is the important bit. Now that I've diploannexed the Irish minors, grabbed Brittany, held onto Normandy, and eaten enough of Burgundy to connect Calais with the rest of my French possessions, I haven't fought many big land wars, anyway, since I've been concentrating on exploration, colonization, and developing England proper. I haven't even bothered making any moves against Scotland yet, since I've been peacefully allied with them for a few decades. I guess I should probably do something with that eventually, if only so I can get a cooler flag, but I'm fine just being Tall England With Colonies for now.

Meanwhile, I've been running with just six Parliament seats all this time and haven't had any adverse affects aside from constantly seeing the too few seats warning for the entire time I've been playing. It's more convenient than clicking on the little Parliament button in the corner, anyway.

I have to say I really like Common Sense so far (and all the other expansions I haven't done much with in aggregate-- Art of War's map changes are great, of course, but I'm also a big fan of El Dorodo's exploration stuff). The trick was just playing the same sort of England game I always do instead of trying something new-- getting used to the new systems was much easier in a start I'm otherwise familiar with.

I do have one question about El Dorodo's auto-explore system, though. In the majority of sea exploration missions, you don't have to worry about sea attrition unless your explorer gets killed somehow. This isn't the case with circumnavigating the globe, however, as I learned after I sent two explorers off to grisly deaths. What conditions (Diplo tech? Naval access with nations along the way? More colonies? A certain fleet composition?) should I meet before attempting circumnavigation again?

sloshmonger
Mar 21, 2013


I'm really liking this expansion. It gives even OPMs a chance at really impacting the world, like OPM Ancona wardecing 4 province Florence and annexing everything. Forts make warfare more interesting, and you need to plan how you will attack an area, or where you will hide your armies.

The increased coring costs and annexation costs come with an adjustment in mindset, true. But I thought vassal feeding was too gamey. Now you need to think whether you want to have a stronger vassal, more dip points, or take other considerations in peace. I think the costs may have gone a little too far in that regard, but I get the reason. Finally there are some trade offs where you have to chose a direction to go in rather than just "every".

Rincewind posted:

I do have one question about El Dorodo's auto-explore system, though. In the majority of sea exploration missions, you don't have to worry about sea attrition unless your explorer gets killed somehow. This isn't the case with circumnavigating the globe, however, as I learned after I sent two explorers off to grisly deaths. What conditions (Diplo tech? Naval access with nations along the way? More colonies? A certain fleet composition?) should I meet before attempting circumnavigation again?

Either naval access or more colonies/cores along the route. If you have colonies in South America, Hawaii or other mid-Pacific colony, and some access in Malaysia, India and Africa that should be sufficient.

Poil
Mar 17, 2007



How long has the Religious Zeal bullshit been an absolutely ridiculous -100% missionary strength when religious centers auto convert stuff? After the modifier finally ends and you convert it back to the true faith it just auto converts right back with another long time of bullshit claiming that it's hard to convert a recently converted province. loving HELL IT IS! I JUST CONVERTED IT AND IT FLIPPED RIGHT BACK WITH NO DIFFICULTY! Certainly no long immunity bullshit then.

The only thing to do was of course to declare war on the offending rear end in a top hat country, stomp them into the ground, take the offending province and create a large bonfire to solve the problem permanently. Still got the long wait, again!, but it does feel better now.

Empress Theonora
Feb 19, 2001

She was a sword glinting in the depths of night, a lance of light piercing the darkness. There would be no mistakes this time.



sloshmonger posted:

I'm really liking this expansion. It gives even OPMs a chance at really impacting the world, like OPM Ancona wardecing 4 province Florence and annexing everything. Forts make warfare more interesting, and you need to plan how you will attack an area, or where you will hide your armies.

The increased coring costs and annexation costs come with an adjustment in mindset, true. But I thought vassal feeding was too gamey. Now you need to think whether you want to have a stronger vassal, more dip points, or take other considerations in peace. I think the costs may have gone a little too far in that regard, but I get the reason. Finally there are some trade offs where you have to chose a direction to go in rather than just "every".


Either naval access or more colonies/cores along the route. If you have colonies in South America, Hawaii or other mid-Pacific colony, and some access in Malaysia, India and Africa that should be sufficient.

Okay, there's the problem, then-- I was attempting it when I'm only in Thirteen Colonies, Caribbean, and like Panama or something.

Alloran
Dec 30, 2014


Alright. Two disclaimers, I only have through Res Publica ('cause I'm poor) and I have very little idea what I'm doing.

So I'm considering a colonization game with Morocco. Is this dumb, or fun? ... or both?

Even without the xpac, I'm enjoying the new building and fort mechanics. Played ~100 years of Brandenberg, and I'm doing better than I have any time previously.

A second question. Where does money come from? How do I money? It seems every time I go to mess around with this game, I end up broke beyond belief. I tried to get a handle on the trade system, and I did a bit with Castille when they were an end node. But playing inland I'm at a complete loss.

Fluffy Tail
Jan 3, 2012

"I am the beginning and the end. The alpha and the omega. The first and the last."

Chaos Dunk


Alloran posted:

Alright. Two disclaimers, I only have through Res Publica ('cause I'm poor) and I have very little idea what I'm doing.

So I'm considering a colonization game with Morocco. Is this dumb, or fun? ... or both?


It's fun, but be prepared for Portugal and Castile to repeatedly declare war on you, since they get missions for your provinces and are generally assholes.

Nitrousoxide
May 30, 2011

do not buy a oneplus phone




So now that I've played around with the game some since the patch and expansion I think I've wrapped my mind around the new, more optimal, way to play the game.

Vassal feeding was important before, but it is even more so now. The hints come in from the fact that marches get their bonuses up to any size and the new vassal interaction mechanics. Actually annexing those vassals is much more expensive than it was before, but maintaining control over a larger vassal swarm has been made much easier. Several things factor in to this:

1: Taking lands in war is the most cost efficient way to get new development under your direct or indirect control. It's free to take them if you have a claim on them, or a vassal has a claim, or if you use certain CB's like holy war. However coring them takes 10 admin per development point although you can get that pretty low late game.

2: Controlling your vassals is much easier now than it used to be. Keeping them as marches means they are VERY unlikely to revolt and even if they have a hankering to take you on, you can placate them with some subject interaction.

3: You're able to improve your own lands without taking others. This means even though you're feeding your marches/vassals a lot of land, you improve your own right culture, right religion lands in optimal ways that allow your buildings to improve them massively. Since vassals look to their relative strength to you, you're able to keep spending those admin and diplo points to improve your lands and ensure you can afford the army to keep them cowed. You should be able keep your vassals placated as long as you build tall and only take a few important provinces here and there directly (like centers of trade or easy to develop lands).



The short of it is I think the optimal play style now is:
A relatively small country which focuses on getting valuable provinces like centers of trade and plains for easy development with a huge vassal swarm that you don't ever integrate (preferably kept as marches) which essentially give you a way to (indirectly) control large tracks of development for free.

Jabarto
Apr 7, 2007

I could do with your...assistance.


I'm not sure if this is a bug or not but when I try to form the kingdom of Italy, my national ideas don't get switched like it says. However, I was playing a custom nation, and it would make sense to me if the removed that for custom nations so you can't just skimp on ideas to save points and then get better ones for free by tag switching.

Baronjutter
Dec 31, 2007

"Tiny Trains"


Is there any way to cheat or save edit change your government? I really wanted a government that had the parliament and thought Poland's stupid elective monarchy would do it. I'm about to westernize as Cuzco and figured I'd celebrate with a proper government.

Koramei
Nov 11, 2011

I just pretend to be nice.


Lipstick Apathy

Yeah. Make sure your save isn't compressed, then go to C:\Users\you\Documents\Paradox Interactive\Europa Universalis IV\save games and find it, open with a text editor. Go down and find your country (easiest way is to ctrl+f for human=yes I think), and find stuff like this:



it lists your government type there, but that's from the start of the game rather than the point you saved at, so copy that and ctrl+f it and the next reference should be the one you change; go for constitutional_republic, constitutional_monarchy or english_monarchy, then save the file, voila.


e: oh yeah right, so does anyone know how to upgrade your marches' forts? It says on the upgrade button that you can "build or upgrade forts in your subjects' lands" but I don't actually see any way to do the latter.

Koramei fucked around with this message at Jun 11, 2015 around 00:45

MorphineMike
Nov 4, 2010


Playing as Austria, I made 100% sure everything in the Kingdom of Itatly and Northern Italy regions was in the HRE, and then I still got the event where they all left anyway. I'm really glad that there are so few gamebreaking bugs in this patch, but there are still so many small frustrating ones

Yashichi
Oct 22, 2010


I think the bug where the AI doesn't understand alliances is back


Adbot
ADBOT LOVES YOU

Stevefin
Sep 30, 2013



I am not sure if this has been discussed, but I have found if rebels take land within a active forts s[hear of influence. They will not get their end of siege demand increase/nationalism, until they take the active fort and re siege the now unprotected lands

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
  • Post
  • Reply
«712 »