|
honestly, on a personal level I have no idea if 3 galleys are better than 1 heavy, because outside of starts that really need early fleets, I tend to just ignore them until I can build 40 heavies and just loving mulch anyone stupid enough to get in the way of that
|
#
?
Aug 9, 2020 08:09
|
|
|
|
| # ? Apr 25, 2024 06:02 |
|
|
Red Bones posted:Are galleys worse than heavies in inland seas now that naval combat has been reworked? I remember before 1.30 galleys were better in inland seas, because of something to do with the combat line. Like, once they hit zero morale heavies would just sit in the line, taking up two combat width and taking hits without firing, and galleys were better in that context because they just have a width of one? And if you combine that with the 50%(?) combat bonuses galleys get in inland seas, galleys were preferable? It was something esoteric like that. Galleys now get +100% hull strength in inland seas, meaning that 3 galleys have at least double the hull strength of their equivalent heavy. This makes them mostly better than heavies in inland seas, with some important exceptions: - As mentioned above, galleys rotate out of the combat line more readily than heavies, as ship per ship they have lower HP. The difference at base tech is 20 (heavy) to 8 (galley), with the latter doubled to 16 in inland seas. Because ships lose morale whenever a friendly one is sunk and having zero morale increases damage taken by 10x, galleys are more susceptible to morale death spirals. - Your opponent having a wider combat width than you will mean that they can bring more heavies to bear. Combat width primarily comes from admiral maneuver pips (+10% per pip, with a base of 25) but also from ideas - Naval gives you 10%, and so does being Danish. Being adjacent to a coast gives another 10%. Every 10% normally means at least one additional heavy in the combat line, and between two and three galleys. What all of the above means is that in general galleys are better in inland seas than heavies, but if you're fighting a high maneuver admiral with heavies or the Danish around Sjaelland, you better bring lots of maneuver with your galleys or you'll probably lose.
|
|
#
?
Aug 9, 2020 10:10
|
|
|
I'm gonna be playing a multiplayer game with four new players soon. Can anyone suggest me five countries that: 1. Are fun to play 2. Don't have missions to kill each other 3. Are forgiving enough to handle new player screw-ups I was thinking maybe Ottomans, Muscovy, France, Castile and Portugal?
|
|
#
?
Aug 9, 2020 13:08
|
|
|
Castille has a mission to PU Portugal.
|
|
#
?
Aug 9, 2020 13:11
|
|
|
And France has a mission to PU Spain. If you plan on having 5 players in Europe playing large nations, you're not going to be able to avoid them having missions on eachother or competing missions.
|
|
#
?
Aug 9, 2020 13:28
|
|
|
Gort posted:I'm gonna be playing a multiplayer game with four new players soon. Can anyone suggest me five countries that: Suggest Portugal, Austria, Ottomans, Vijayanagar, and Ming. Very different gaming experiences.
|
|
#
?
Aug 9, 2020 14:16
|
|
|
Cynic Jester posted:And France has a mission to PU Spain. If you plan on having 5 players in Europe playing large nations, you're not going to be able to avoid them having missions on eachother or competing missions. They don't have to be in Europe
|
|
#
?
Aug 9, 2020 15:15
|
|
|
Anyone know why when I win a fleet battle I earn 0.4 Naval Tradition and the person I beat gets 8 (as in, eight point zero), but when I lose a fleet fight the winner gets 1 or 2 and I get zero point 6? I'm trying to get my Naval Tradition up because I am really close to getting Traditional Player, but no matter what I do my Tradition never goes up by more than a fraction.
|
|
#
?
Aug 9, 2020 15:40
|
|
|
I feel like an Africa game would be fun. Was looking at West Africa as Mali or someone, bringing the light of Islam to Brazil, but nobody seems to have any unique mission trees. Who is interesting to play as in Africa right now?
|
|
#
?
Aug 9, 2020 16:03
|
|
|
Beefeater1980 posted:I feel like an Africa game would be fun. Was looking at West Africa as Mali or someone, bringing the light of Islam to Brazil, but nobody seems to have any unique mission trees. Who is interesting to play as in Africa right now? Ethiopia to spread Coptic faith, Mamluks for great government, Kilwa to dominate your weaker tribal neighbors, Morocco has a very OP mission tree and can become Andalusia. Specifically for colonization Morocco -> Andalusia may be your best bet.
|
|
#
?
Aug 9, 2020 16:21
|
|
|
Everyone in Africa is surprisingly good at colonizing. You need to rush to get feudalism in some cases, but your location means if you go explo/expansion you’re all but guaranteed to beat Europe to the cape and dominate eastern trade. Plus all the gold, ivory, etc mean you can get rich quick and be running high skill advisors to dev institutions, your biggest drawback
|
|
#
?
Aug 9, 2020 17:02
|
|
|
AAAAA! Real Muenster posted:Anyone know why when I win a fleet battle I earn 0.4 Naval Tradition and the person I beat gets 8 (as in, eight point zero), but when I lose a fleet fight the winner gets 1 or 2 and I get zero point 6? I'm trying to get my Naval Tradition up because I am really close to getting Traditional Player, but no matter what I do my Tradition never goes up by more than a fraction. Naval tradition is proportionate to the amount of damage you do relative to the respective strengths of the nations involved. You are probably significantly stronger than the nation you're fighting.
|
|
#
?
Aug 9, 2020 17:05
|
|
|
There is no way to reform Ming as a Chinese "minor" right? I can't find anything at all. Meaning you're stuck with boring ideas and super generic missions that aren't even focused on getting the mandate or patching the place together. You can however play as, for example, Yan and conquer a lot of territory in Manchuria to culture switch and form Manchu and then Qing for some actual ideas and missions. Also lol at the denounce neo-confucianism event that either gives you heathen tolerance you don't need or literarily nothing (+legitimacy not translating into +meritocracy) but with the drawback of +1 unrest. Why yes, I would love to take that trap option. Poil fucked around with this message at 19:24 on Aug 9, 2020 |
|
#
?
Aug 9, 2020 19:21
|
|
|
Aethernet posted:Naval tradition is proportionate to the amount of damage you do relative to the respective strengths of the nations involved. You are probably significantly stronger than the nation you're fighting. I ended up getting Traditional Player by taking Maritime Ideas, building 500 Light Ships, and combining Aristocratic's Tradition decay with two policies, Thalassocracy, World Ports, and all those trade ships protecting trade to get it to go up to 90 passively. I didnt think I'd be able to do it passively! And now it hovers at 90%.
|
|
#
?
Aug 9, 2020 19:23
|
|
|
I haven't played a ~serious~ game of this in a while, and is it just me or has there been some serious power creep? England has always been my go to country for a relaxing game because I like sitting on my island and doing my own thing. It's like 1630, and I'm just rolling in cash and monarch points this game. Way more then I feel like I usually am at this point. Went hard on the Americas and ignored going for Africa/Asia. Got all of North America except the core of Mexico (gonna take it from Spain soon though) and 80% of the Caribbean. I can run 3 +3 advisors and I'm still getting 80 to 100 gold a month. I've plastered Britain, northern France, and Norway in manufactories. Regularly dunking on France enough to neuter them, but not enough they've stopped being a possible rival, has kept my power projection and thus bonus monarch points up. Plus another three monthly monarch points from estates, plus the advisors, and I've been like 100% ahead of time on all the techs for most of the game with plenty left over for busting forts, development, etc.
|
|
#
?
Aug 9, 2020 21:36
|
|
|
Guys I conquered all of North America and the Caribbean as well as parts of France and Norway, why am I rolling in ducats??
|
|
#
?
Aug 9, 2020 22:11
|
|
|
Sampatrick posted:Guys I conquered all of North America and the Caribbean as well as parts of France and Norway, why am I rolling in ducats?? No, that's what I always did, I just feel like I have a lot more then I remember having in older patches. But maybe nothing has changed and I'm just set up better in general. Noticed it more with monarch power.
|
|
#
?
Aug 9, 2020 22:32
|
|
|
England is OP. It's recommended for new players because of that. Once you've learned how to play aggressively you can basically act with impunity.
|
|
#
?
Aug 9, 2020 22:39
|
|
|
There has definitely been power creep of a sorts. With certain things it is easier to load up on bonuses than it was before. For example, during my This Is Persia run I managed to get 1 million manpower with just a tiny bit of effort, and I didnt even take Quantity.
|
|
#
?
Aug 10, 2020 00:35
|
|
|
Yeah there's been definite power creep, with England being the worst one. By being able to spend your monarch points on development, especially with the discounts you get, you can be more developed than China by Iike 1600. It's dumb. E: oh and disinherit is probably another big problem. It should really come with some actual downsides. PittTheElder fucked around with this message at 01:17 on Aug 10, 2020 |
|
#
?
Aug 10, 2020 01:08
|
|
Yes, it's like a lava lamp.
|
PittTheElder posted:Yeah there's been definite power creep, with England being the worst one. By being able to spend your monarch points on development, especially with the discounts you get, you can be more developed than China by Iike 1600. It's dumb. Of course, it feels like one of those internal politics deals they’re allergic to modeling.
|
|
#
?
Aug 10, 2020 01:40
|
|
|
True but you have to compare that to how utterly boring the game becomes when you're stuck with a lovely ruler for decades. You can't really do anything. You can't tech, you can't get ideas, you can't core, every stab hit is awful, you can't annex and just replacing the fragile mayfly generals is a drag.
|
|
#
?
Aug 10, 2020 12:02
|
|
|
My generals let out great big sighs of relief every time I declare war because it means they've earned a temporary reprieve from certain death in the training fields
|
|
#
?
Aug 10, 2020 12:14
|
|
|
Poil posted:True but you have to compare that to how utterly boring the game becomes when you're stuck with a lovely ruler for decades. You can't really do anything. You can't tech, you can't get ideas, you can't core, every stab hit is awful, you can't annex and just replacing the fragile mayfly generals is a drag.  I love all the tools that the game puts at my disposal to accomplish my goals, but its a little much sometimes in that you can really stack some modifiers. I dont even have Economic, the Economic+Quantity policy, AAAAA! Real Muenster fucked around with this message at 13:48 on Aug 10, 2020 |
|
#
?
Aug 10, 2020 12:29
|
|
|
 That's... a very impressive low number.
|
|
#
?
Aug 10, 2020 13:41
|
|
|
Poil posted:
edit: I cant criticize the QQ start too much, though, because that national idea set... 
AAAAA! Real Muenster fucked around with this message at 13:57 on Aug 10, 2020 |
|
#
?
Aug 10, 2020 13:53
|
|
|
Welp, that's land = won. The imperial invasion of Kyushu had to be postponed a year since our beloved emperor, the virtuous son of heaven, accidentally ordered the construction of light ships instead of galleys.
|
|
#
?
Aug 10, 2020 20:14
|
|
|
Lance of Llanwyln posted:Yeah, disinheriting is majorly OP and completely deleted one of the biggest downsides of being a monarchy. Prestige is ridiculously easy to come by(unless you’re tiny and/or have a ton of uncontested cores, but that’s only ever true in the beginning) and legitimacy is too(hell, once Absolutism comes online, using Strengthen Government is a good way to get those sweet, sweet bonuses) Plus, it’s generally not a big deal to have little of either. I got an event as Korea to replace my lovely starting heir with a much better heir but at the cost of stability and every estate being mad at me. If you added in 50 prestige lost it still would be an easy decision to make unless the difference is like 1 or 2 dip difference. You'd almost have to make it always give a low claim heir that nearly causes a Civil War for each heir after you disinherit for it to be balanced.
|
|
#
?
Aug 10, 2020 22:58
|
|
|
Disinheriting should just give you -75 legitimacy for your new heir and give everyone with a royal marriage with you a CB to install a heir of their own dynasty.
|
|
#
?
Aug 11, 2020 13:36
|
|
|
Deltasquid posted:Disinheriting should just give you -75 legitimacy for your new heir and give everyone with a royal marriage with you a CB to install a heir of their own dynasty. It would also be nice if you did not know how that a newborn was destined from birth to be the worst king in the history of your country.
|
|
#
?
Aug 11, 2020 14:02
|
|
|
AAAAA! Real Muenster posted:Lets not go too far. I think they could fix Disinheriting if they changed it so rulers had actual family trees. If you disinherit your oldest son but he has a younger brother its a minor legitimacy hit. If you pull a cousin of the disinherited in its a moderate legitimacy hit, and if you pull from a distant family branch its a major hit. And also, you would see succession crises coming instead of "oops, my 70 year old king had no living relatives but the one son. Couldn't have possibly predicted a problem." A rudimentary character system in EU sounds like it would be fun imo but people hate Rome so idk maybe it isn't meant to be. I haven't played it.
|
|
#
?
Aug 11, 2020 14:34
|
|
|
I understand the concept of wanting to keep dynasty stuff in CK in order for each historical Paradox game to have its own vibe, but it’s a bit hard to justify when you look at just how many key events during the EU timeframe were driven by dynastic politics. The rise of the Habsburgs, the wars of the Austrian and Spanish successions, all the horseshit in England around Catholic/Protestant heads of state... the Royal Marriage and PU system is demonstrably insufficient to represent such a pivotal feature of the period.
|
|
#
?
Aug 11, 2020 14:39
|
|
|
BBJoey posted:I understand the concept of wanting to keep dynasty stuff in CK in order for each historical Paradox game to have its own vibe, but it’s a bit hard to justify when you look at just how many key events during the EU timeframe were driven by dynastic politics. The rise of the Habsburgs, the wars of the Austrian and Spanish successions, all the horseshit in England around Catholic/Protestant heads of state... the Royal Marriage and PU system is demonstrably insufficient to represent such a pivotal feature of the period. The justification is that EU is a game about map painting and CK is a game about RPing a dynasty. They are different games for different people.
|
|
#
?
Aug 11, 2020 15:03
|
|
|
I think that they could get away with a dynastic tree with the depth of something you would see in a total war game, they dont have to go full ck with it.
|
|
#
?
Aug 11, 2020 15:11
|
|
|
New Dev Diary: https://forum.paradoxplaza.com/forum/threads/eu4-development-diary-11th-of-august-2020.1409992/ Firebatgyro posted:The justification is that EU is a game about map painting and CK is a game about RPing a dynasty. They are different games for different people. AnEdgelord posted:I think that they could get away with a dynastic tree with the depth of something you would see in a total war game, they dont have to go full ck with it.
|
|
#
?
Aug 11, 2020 15:21
|
|
|
AAAAA! Real Muenster posted:New Dev Diary: Also how immediately after regencies upon coming of age, a lot of times you'll spawn a sibling-aged heir that stays heir forever unless they die, which makes young rulers who live a long time somehow more likely to cause succession crises than anyone else. Also mostly for flavour I think it'd be cool to have rudimentary characters so you could have stuff like an advisor getting elected to lead the republic, or a general turning into head of a rebellion, and even maybe characters with backgrounds could contribute to a cool system representing stuff like janissary coups. But again, I haven't played Rome and it seems to have a lot of problems so a barebones Medieval Total War system might be best.
|
|
#
?
Aug 11, 2020 23:29
|
|
|
please leave all the bad ck2 mechanics in ck2 where i dont have to play them
|
|
#
?
Aug 12, 2020 00:04
|
|
|
The inheriting mechanic is fine as is. The game is an abstraction, nothing follows how it did historically and realistically it never can. Shoe horning mechanics that the game isn’t built to deal with into it isn’t going to help that
|
|
#
?
Aug 12, 2020 00:15
|
|
|
The game has like 5-10 different and mostly unrelated abstractions for people, several of which are so abstract as to be meaningless, and that is silly. But it’s also ingrained from earlier installments of the series so I hardly expect them to fix it in DLC. A unified character system would be a much better thing to work on for EU5.
|
|
#
?
Aug 12, 2020 00:44
|
|
|
|
| # ? Apr 25, 2024 06:02 |
|
|
they should just not put one into eu4 or 5 and leave it in the series people dont play because its a bad system
|
|
#
?
Aug 12, 2020 00:45
|
|