+ Reply to Thread
Page 17 of 38 FirstFirst ... 7 15 16 17 18 19 27 ... LastLast
Results 321 to 340 of 743

Thread: Christmas momod

  1. #321
    Second Lieutenant Tapochki's Avatar
    EU3 CompleteDivine WindHeir to the Throne

    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Location
    in the Medium
    Posts
    179
    That sounds like first demanding bribes from the church to not convert - and then using those very same bribes to bribe the people to go along with this conversion and be happy about it.

  2. #322
    Why yes, the beauty of this method is that you'll get that concessions event, giving two random provinces +1 to base tax.

  3. #323
    First Lieutenant Jirlow's Avatar
    EU3 Complete

    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    Stockholm, Sweden
    Posts
    293
    Just a question. I've recently downloaded this (undoubtedly promising) momod, and I am simply asking for any signs that tell me that it is successfully installed. Will there be anything in-game that tells me that I'm playing this mod and not the ordinary MMU 1.26? I can't see anything out of the ordinary, am I doing it wrong?

    Help would be appreciated!

    Cheers!

  4. #324
    Private
    Crusader Kings IIDiplomacyEuropa Universalis 3Sword of the Stars IIVictoria 2
    Victoria II: A House DividedVictoria II: Heart of DarknessEuropa Universalis IV: Pre-order

    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    Netherlands
    Posts
    21
    Just a question. I've recently downloaded this (undoubtedly promising) momod, and I am simply asking for any signs that tell me that it is successfully installed. Will there be anything in-game that tells me that I'm playing this mod and not the ordinary MMU 1.26? I can't see anything out of the ordinary, am I doing it wrong?
    In the starting screen where you can choose between single and multiplayer, you should see the mods name in the lower left corner (Mod: MMU 1.26 + CMM)
    If you still don't trust the game then, you could check one of the National Idea's descriptions - they differ noticably from the ordinary mmu 1.26.

  5. #325
    Playing as Naples. In order to get into the HRE I had saved 2500 up and moved my capital to Rome, which as far as I recall could join the empire in the vanilla mod, only to find out it is not possible. Any reason why? I feel like adding Rome to the HRE region, that is to say the region where it can be added to the HRE proper. Any balance reasons not to?

    And thank you for getting my jewsies back.

  6. #326
    Iirc, it has always been impossible to move your capital into HRE - no matter whether moving capital or taking the provincial decision in capital province.

  7. #327
    One could never move ones capital into the HRE, but the capital can join. I tested by moving my capital to Romagna, and it could join no problem...

  8. #328
    Afaik, the national decision would override the HRE block...I wrote a capital move for a Teutonic Order > Prussia that becomes available if you have Brandenburg cored and it worked just fine.

  9. #329
    Second Lieutenant Tapochki's Avatar
    EU3 CompleteDivine WindHeir to the Throne

    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Location
    in the Medium
    Posts
    179
    Last I checked, if a province is non-HRE but can be made HRE, you can move your capital in, then make the province HRE.

  10. #330
    Soft Taco TheLoneTaco's Avatar
    200k clubCrusader Kings IIDeus VultEU3 CompleteDivine Wind
    Heir to the ThroneVictoria: RevolutionsRome GoldMount & Blade: Warband500k club

    Join Date
    Nov 2002
    Location
    Oakland, California, United States
    Posts
    1,718
    I've just started playing this momod again, first as Morocco for a bit and now as Holland. Some notes:

    1. "Moral fibre" events were always annoying, but they are even more powerful in this momod because of how severe attrition is. In this momod, armies tend to be much smaller (or get much smaller because of attrition, yet the moral fibre event will still give the AI dozens of fresh troops. I have just removed them entirely.

    It is possible to make them not so terrible. First, then can be made more general - I don't understand (besides OUR OWN historical accuracy) why some nations get free troops but not others. Second, the events need to be less general - they fire when a nation is at war with ANYONE. An alternative event would fire (more rarely) when a nation is a major or great power at war with another major or great power. This would help the AI from dumping its armies into colonies. But I presume only major or great powers have this problem in the first place. Second, it would be more historically PLAUSIBLE. Only large nations should have the infrastructure to assemble armies from whole cloth (local garrisons, decent manpower, etc). Also, only wars with large nations should trigger these armies as they would actually pose a threat. Adding that the invading army must a rival is even better.

    2. The administration efficiency scores seems to be way too conservative. I had inefficient administration as a 6 province Algiers with a 5 star ADM leader in a very fast test game. As a 3 province Holland with 3 cores and a 7 star ADM leader I only had capable government. These AE modifiers are very powerful and often require AE ideas to deal with. However, being forced to take bureaucracy as EVERY nation's 4 ideas is not fun. I suggest adding 1 province to the ceiling of each AE level. So, good government will work with (say) up to 3 provinces (+1 from before?). Capable would still fire with +2 (+1 from new good's ceiling, +1 from new capable ceiling), competent would get +3, inefficient +4, etc. This would still penalize large nations. However, it would no longer penalize relatively small nations (like my Holland ) and would free these sorts of nations up to pursue more seemingly appropriate ideas like national trade policy.

    3. In my Holland game, a few provinces of Burgundy (but not of any other nation I noticed) seem to have incredibly low defensiveness. Literally every day the siege gets a die roll, as seen in the attached sceencap of it happening in Artois. artois_sieges.png

    I'm not sure why this is happening, but the end result is that these provinces only last a couple weeks under siege. Burgundy's government recently crashed after being taken over by rebels.
    Only ugly on the inside

  11. #331
    Quote Originally Posted by Tapochki View Post
    Last I checked, if a province is non-HRE but can be made HRE, you can move your capital in, then make the province HRE.
    Exactly what I tried to do, and I could do it with Romagna, but for some reason not with Rome. It could join before I made it my capital but not after... Maybe it is to ensure that the papal states do not join?

    As for the AE, I do not have this problem. How is your stability and war exhaustion? It seems to have a major influence, as does extreme policies. In my Naples game I've had good government all the way through, excepting the starting years under the aragonian union and a short dip to capable government during a war with Genoa, that went wrong (full blockade and they occupied Sicily, forcing me to releas Urbino)



    As you can see, no Bureaucracy, although there are balanced policies and bill of rights.

    As for the quick sieges, I have found it to be a result of bankruptcy, which I actually think is a good thing.

  12. #332
    First Lieutenant Jirlow's Avatar
    EU3 Complete

    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    Stockholm, Sweden
    Posts
    293
    Quote Originally Posted by Nimurrud View Post
    In the starting screen where you can choose between single and multiplayer, you should see the mods name in the lower left corner (Mod: MMU 1.26 + CMM)
    If you still don't trust the game then, you could check one of the National Idea's descriptions - they differ noticably from the ordinary mmu 1.26.
    Thanks man! Still doesn't work though, can it have something to do with me playing the Firenze Submod 1.26? I hope they are possible to combine, the Firenze mod is awesome. Would be a shame to get rid of it... Well, guess you can't have it all. :/

  13. #333
    As for AE, prestige and advisors also matter. Statesmen and Ulama gives a full point for every star, treasurers, aldermen, high judges, sherrifs and sufi fakirs each give 0.5 points.

  14. #334
    Soft Taco TheLoneTaco's Avatar
    200k clubCrusader Kings IIDeus VultEU3 CompleteDivine Wind
    Heir to the ThroneVictoria: RevolutionsRome GoldMount & Blade: Warband500k club

    Join Date
    Nov 2002
    Location
    Oakland, California, United States
    Posts
    1,718
    Quote Originally Posted by Discordia View Post
    As for AE, prestige and advisors also matter. Statesmen and Ulama gives a full point for every star, treasurers, aldermen, high judges, sherrifs and sufi fakirs each give 0.5 points.
    If extreme policies have an effect, I am in trouble, as I have full free subjects and full free market. That is the only thing I can figure

    Another issue I am running into is the insane stability costs. I just modded back in the -10% cost per negative level. Right now I am at -3 and need over 12,000 just to go to -2 (I make about 40/month, so 480/year). The larger AI nations have been at -3 for as long as I can remember.

    If the -10% doesn't work, I am going to mod even up to -25% (so at -3, -75%). I would think, like prestige, that stability should gravitate toward 0, not the negative maximum.
    Only ugly on the inside

  15. #335
    Soft Taco TheLoneTaco's Avatar
    200k clubCrusader Kings IIDeus VultEU3 CompleteDivine Wind
    Heir to the ThroneVictoria: RevolutionsRome GoldMount & Blade: Warband500k club

    Join Date
    Nov 2002
    Location
    Oakland, California, United States
    Posts
    1,718
    Ok, I modded it to -50% cost per level, and it still costs thousands and thousands just to get out of -3. I've been stuck at -3 for about 20 years. Even when I finally got to -2, briefly, England declared war and I got the "holy crap, we're in trouble" event for -1 stability.

    Am I missing something here? I was doing pretty well until I united the Netherlands and then everything turned to crap. It's not fun to deal with 20%+ revolt risk in every province, horrible admin efficiency, 35%+ inflation (so I can't afford a navy or merchants)...
    Only ugly on the inside

  16. #336
    Playing Castille, 5 years into the game and I am at 1.7 inflation already, I normally gain aroun 0.2/0.25 yearly from reliance on gold. Personally, I think that should happen later after they discover the Americas.
    Destroying blobs since 1995

  17. #337
    First Lieutenant Gogog's Avatar
    Hearts of Iron 2: ArmageddonCrusader Kings IIDarkest HourDeus VultEuropa Universalis: Chronicles
    Victoria 2Victoria II: A House DividedVictoria II: Heart of DarknessCK2: Holy Knight500k club
    Europa Universalis IV: Pre-order

    Join Date
    Oct 2004
    Location
    Auckland, Nz
    Posts
    201
    Lone Taco, the stability costs are way higher, I think it is designed so you have to rely more on events.

    Other than that you have picked the worst example. Having played them myself, Holland is basically set up to have the worst stability possible. It has the sliders of a modern republic with none of the development to back it up.

    If you're going to go liberal (free subjects, innovative) you really need all the assorted ideas (humanist tolerance, bill of rights, ecumenism ect.) otherwise you need to compromise (innovative with decentralisation).

    I think it is realistic, there is a reason why there are so few republics at the start and they tend to be small or fairly conservative (like venice).

    Also keep in mind that stability and AE seem to have been reworked so that small nations no longer get a free ride. On the other hand they are no longer so unrealistically punitive on large nations. Also ALOT of stuff in this mod effects AE for better and worse.

    Hopefully you don't give up on the mini-mod, it has done wonders for Magna Mundi.

    P.S. - SerialCereal - EU3 players have been ingrained to avoid inflation at all costs. If you read the effects however, they have been toned down in the mod. Bohemia has the same problem so a decision was added to turn the gold mine to lead and back again. I do think it might be worth rebalancing.
    Last edited by Gogog; 17-07-2012 at 01:49.

  18. #338
    Soft Taco TheLoneTaco's Avatar
    200k clubCrusader Kings IIDeus VultEU3 CompleteDivine Wind
    Heir to the ThroneVictoria: RevolutionsRome GoldMount & Blade: Warband500k club

    Join Date
    Nov 2002
    Location
    Oakland, California, United States
    Posts
    1,718
    Yeah, I understand the idea with stability. Overall I like the concept, but it needs to be tweaked. My last game with the momod, a few months ago, I noticed that every major nation was consistently in negative stability.

    Even if I did pick a bad nation, this still affects the AI very badly. I think my own mod of -50% per level is a good one. It helps to keep nations above -3, -2, without allowing them to get to +2, +3. The stab costs are still incredibly high - don't get me wrong - they are just not prohibitively expensive.

    It just doesn't make sense that a country would be at -3 stability (cusp of civil war?) for 20+ years in the total absence of war, famine, etc. I couldn't think of anything plausible that would be keeping my stab so low. Even switching away from feudal monarchy, which was the cause of my huge stab burden, SHOULD have made my life easier because it fit better with my nation. The end of feudalism should have been seen as a boom, not a bust.

    My big problem was not foreseeing the admin efficiency problems when I took my 5th idea. I really didn't need superior seamanship and should have picked up humanistic tolerance or something else to help with admin efficiency. I was planning on colonizing like crazy (I was one of first two to the new world) but ended up doing basically nothing instead. Whoops.

    As far as inflation, I agree that it is not as big of an issue in the momod. However, I think it should also be toned down a bit. Getting -0.01 per monarch ADM would be a good change. It's not so high that you can avoid inflation, but it will help keep it manageable.

    A big problem MM has always had is the poverty of even pretty powerful nations. I was already at 35% inflation by 1520 (1399 start). Merchants were already getting to be too expensive to risk, and you can forget building a navy.

    Then, when the typical +3 inflation or -1 stab event pops up...
    Only ugly on the inside

  19. #339
    First Lieutenant Gogog's Avatar
    Hearts of Iron 2: ArmageddonCrusader Kings IIDarkest HourDeus VultEuropa Universalis: Chronicles
    Victoria 2Victoria II: A House DividedVictoria II: Heart of DarknessCK2: Holy Knight500k club
    Europa Universalis IV: Pre-order

    Join Date
    Oct 2004
    Location
    Auckland, Nz
    Posts
    201
    Fair points, I usually go for state ideas and play very conservative when it comes to losing stability.

    It can sometimes take ten or twenty years at the start to raise a stability point. I find that once you start growing your country, economy and picking ideas it speeds up considerably.

    I like it on the whole. In the vanilla mod there are too many random stability losses even if stability was easier to get.

    Regarding the AI I will usually see an occasional country at -3 and they do tend to stay that way for a while. On the whole they seem to do okay.

    Maybe there should be an escalation of chaotic countries. If things are that bad trigger a civil war that leads to some restoration of order when there is a victor.

  20. #340
    Soft Taco TheLoneTaco's Avatar
    200k clubCrusader Kings IIDeus VultEU3 CompleteDivine Wind
    Heir to the ThroneVictoria: RevolutionsRome GoldMount & Blade: Warband500k club

    Join Date
    Nov 2002
    Location
    Oakland, California, United States
    Posts
    1,718
    Quote Originally Posted by Gogog View Post
    Maybe there should be an escalation of chaotic countries. If things are that bad trigger a civil war that leads to some restoration of order when there is a victor.
    This is how Burgundy went from -3 to +3 overnight in my game I agree that this is a cool idea. Almost every nation in real life has gone through a revolution or civil war. In EU3, civil wars are a HUGE no-no and players try very hard to eliminate them. But in real life, civil wars have sometimes made things work out for the best. Or, they are least have made nations radically shift course for better or worse.

    In my Holland game, it would make a lot of sense for the burghers to rise up and demand an end to aristocracy when things were going so badly. They probably would have taken over in a couple years, made a republic, and my stability would have shot up quickly. Instead, I am stuck with -3 stab admin monarchy for centuries until I get constitutional monarchy. Why shouldn't I get republican rebels?

    In other nations, different factors would cause different rebels to show up and quickly restore order. For example, in my game France may have split into a protestant north vs. catholic south civil war. The winner would then get "end over the war" and stability would return.

    However things happen, it would make much more sense (and be WAY more fun) if negative stability cause huge turmoil but was over relatively quickly before stability went pretty high (say, 10 years of -2 or -3 stab almost guarantees a revolution, which would typically last 3 years, sending stab up to +2 or +3).

    Getting 1 to 3 revolutions per 400 seems reasonable. It would also help avoid the problem I get every game of getting my sliders "perfect" within 200 years and then never touching them again
    Only ugly on the inside

+ Reply to Thread
Page 17 of 38 FirstFirst ... 7 15 16 17 18 19 27 ... LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts