So now when I fight my "All of Europe" coalition to take Frankfurt for 60% WS, I have to wait the next 11 years instead of 5?
Or will coalition-warscore finally be adjusted?
Or will coalition-warscore finally be adjusted?
Patch Notes 1.7
- Thread starter ForzaA
- Start date
-
We have updated our Community Code of Conduct. Please read through the new rules for the forum that are an integral part of Paradox Interactive’s User Agreement.
- Status
Uhhuh. And then we get "but if you want any internal politics go play CK2/V2". This doesn't make sense.
Why would anyone change culture? It's way too expensive, leads to rebellions over and over again and takes even longer now to be finished (as if it didn't need a freeking long time even now)?
That's all of building buff? I don't think this makes buildings useful now.
At last. But no change to the insane amount of AE for getting and restoring hugh PUs?
Huge.
This time for real?
I think they nerfed colonization too hard with one of the earlier patches, I never see Spain own most of south America by 1590 anymore, I think they made colony growth dependant on diplo tech level, that seems like a terrible idea to me (poor poor non europeans) even though I guess it makes sense in a way (it just doesn't work well for game balance)
The fact that trade winds were applying backwards might have had its part to play in that. Not that this patch seems to have fixed it.
This is fairly annoying. While I can somewhat understand the reverse case (although it simply punishes players who don't want to just keep expanding mindlessly), there are so many situations where I simply don't care to hold on to a province (like to expand along culture borders), but now probably can't sell to anybody. A prime example for this is the one inland province TO starts with. It is 3 base tax and unaccepted culture. If my plan is to expand into the HRE, the only thing the province is good for is gobbling up diplo points early on, or spawning rebels in my territory. Normally, I would just sell it to Poland (and make more money in the process than the province would make in 50 years), but now I can't, because they hardcoded to rival TO. It's their province, they desire it, why would they not take it without having to go to war over it?
You do realise that there are more nations to go to war against, apart from those you have a truce with right?
Also, this will make it all the more rewarding to fight Coalition wars to the bitter end, just to make sure those pesky neighbours of yours won't be jumping at your throat in merely five years.
# Military
- Removed manpower impact from productionsize, to be tied to increased by 5% from each military tech.
You do realise that there are more nations to go to war against, apart from those you have a truce with right?
Also, this will make it all the more rewarding to fight Coalition wars to the bitter end, just to make sure those pesky neighbours of yours won't be jumping at your throat in merely five years.
You tell me what the hell Scotland is gonna do at the start of the game after it wins its first war with England. Go beat up on the Irish minors? That's setup you do while England is losing the HYW, not after you beat up England. Go beat up the Kalmar Union just for Orkney? Not worth it.
Also no, it definitely won't make coalition wars worth fighting, and it definitely won't make them rewarding. Not while you can still only get the same amount of land from a coalition that you could from fighting just Hungary, for example.
Edit: Honestly I don't even see a point for the change. Why? What does the change do aside from slow conquest down against a target nation? Is it to give them time to rebuild their forces? It won't matter because if they lost to you in the important first war, they're going to lose to you literally every war after that, unless they pick up a very strong power ally, which is fairly unlikely.
Last edited:
I really like those changes!
AE change is not needed imho, just realized this in my recent games.
What about alliance abuse, though? I don't mean the CTA dishonored call cb, i mean just allying everything somewhat threatening in your vicinity just to reduce AE during 1 war where you annex the rest?
And what about stuff like allying France as an OPM and use them to conquer Burgundy in 2-3 without doing anything but siege the provinces you want in the peace deal?
AE change is not needed imho, just realized this in my recent games.
What about alliance abuse, though? I don't mean the CTA dishonored call cb, i mean just allying everything somewhat threatening in your vicinity just to reduce AE during 1 war where you annex the rest?
And what about stuff like allying France as an OPM and use them to conquer Burgundy in 2-3 without doing anything but siege the provinces you want in the peace deal?
So many interesting and game changing changes. I'm impressed and like what I see. The game mechanics are really coming nicely together now with this patch and 1.6.2 combined.
Will be very interesting and exciting to fire up my first game with this + DLC.
Especially the change to truces came as a great surpsise, and I really like the sound of it. Excellently thought out.
NB! I agree with the poster above me that alliance abuse can still be kind of problematic. Especially the HRE Emperor shouldn't support allies conquering
in the HRE based on fabricated and not real claims. Allying the Emperor should be more of a defensive security then offensive exploit.
I also doubt France would risk ending up in war with the Emperor to help his allied Cleves conquering Gelre.
Some stricter modifiers on when Great Powers will help you offensively could perhhaps be something to think about in future patches/new mechanics.
Will be very interesting and exciting to fire up my first game with this + DLC.
Especially the change to truces came as a great surpsise, and I really like the sound of it. Excellently thought out.
NB! I agree with the poster above me that alliance abuse can still be kind of problematic. Especially the HRE Emperor shouldn't support allies conquering
in the HRE based on fabricated and not real claims. Allying the Emperor should be more of a defensive security then offensive exploit.
I also doubt France would risk ending up in war with the Emperor to help his allied Cleves conquering Gelre.
Some stricter modifiers on when Great Powers will help you offensively could perhhaps be something to think about in future patches/new mechanics.
Last edited:
Oh, this patch looks fantastic! So many interesting changes and fixes, I'll spend some time with this for sure!
Why? Is this really necessary? It made sense, I think, to get IA (and losing it) for the religious flip
*sad violin*
People were probably exploiting it to rush reforms.
Doesn't seem they changed westernization, so looks like if you ever expand too much sucks for you, not only that since they buffed monarch points I can't see why anyone would ever want to Westernize, you get no units, you get no monarch points. You get slightly cheaper techs at the cost of the difference * 10 (plus all the negative events), and you can form trade companies. Otherwise worthless, also you can't vassalize anyone since they're you're at a higher tech level than them, even if you're behind them in tech.
How's Sikhism supposed to spread, now? In one game I found a Sikh Syria; that seems to be impossible now.
I can't honestly see the problem - it's not 1890 we're talking of. Westernization, as of now, could well be scrapped and substituted by something better representing modernization of an objectively backward system (which would be valid for the French economic system and the Chinese both).
Guess it's intended that the whole planet won't need to end up westernized.
The same way as before? The only thing they changed was that it won't spread to religious centres (Jerusalem, Mecca and Rome).How's Sikhism supposed to spread, now? In one game I found a Sikh Syria; that seems to be impossible now.
- Status