3 most powerful nations in the game (According to me)

[Chronicler]

Okay, which leads me to another question: WHYYYYYYY???? Honestly, Vassals are not that good, releasing opm vassals for the sake of it is kind of strange, since they are practically worthless in wars since they don't coordinate really good and get beaten up by every bigger enemy and push your ws down.....

You kidding me? My main armies take out the enemies, and then they do all the sieging for me in enormous stacks. I luv it (i'm lazy though)

Some vassals can even field 15k armies for me (Like Flanders)

EDIT: Also you get half their tax income and half their manpower...which is niceeeh.

EDIT2: In the end it's just to gain enough power to conquer northern golden horde, and my cores there after forming Russia...and then get even stronger.

And to annihilate my enemies, like France.

 

[The Blood Eagle]

But that brings up another point, you can do it with the Ottomans, but you can just as easily be as massive with any western power. Hence why I put ENG at #1. British Isles + France is just as much wham with half the provinces.

 

[Pewt]

That OE screenshot at 1450 made me nauseous. Too much micromanagement, perhaps I judge my favorite countries by how compact I can keep them a world leader.

Edit - and to all the haters, going over your infamy limit isn't the end of the world. Some crappy events that mostly revolve around rebels, and you barely have to pay attention to them anymore. If you can wage war on 15 countries at a time when you don't have a crusade or are past the limit I see no reason why a few years of being a scumbag is prohibitive.

It messes with the MTTH of lots of events, and at 1.25 times your infamy it's practically impossible to keep your stability up or maintain advisors. On top of that, lots of people just find rebel whack-a-mole tedious and frustrating, regardless of whether or not they're capable of it.

 

[The Blood Eagle]

Just auto-hunt, that's way too much whack-a-mole for me, too. I could never bring myself to play Timurids before that function was available.

Edit - a lot of it depends on whether or not you're a dedicated 5x speed player like me or one of those overly-meticulous types that reads the message log and all it entails.

 

[Stolen Rutters]

Single player, by 1500 a player can dominate with any mid-sized or larger Western-tech nation. So aside from initial size, the biggest differentiator I see is all about the free cores in rich land, and the strength and position to own them super fast (the two together allow for tons of infamy-free and overextention-free growth).

1. France, 2. England, then 3. Ottomans (Austria, Castille and Burgundy vie for 4th, all more nerfed by limits to expansion into resource-rich provinces compared to my three picks).

(p.s. Multiplayer, I have no clue how I would rerank... much as I would like to try it, real life nerfs my ability to set aside time to play that regularly.)

 

[Ryuujin95]

How would the Ottomans much up my game? They don't even see me or my western neighbour on the map lol, they can't get military access through Golden Horde for example.
And I would do the same to muck up his game.

Guarantees on electors. I'll be able to see you just fine if we're at war. Moving troops through the GH is not an issue regardless of whether I'm at war or peace, and who's to say I'm not above buying a route through Lithuania if I don't border the Horde.

Your saved game is gone, but from what I gathered from your post is that you conquered all the Russian minors using Muscowy's missions, vassalized 5 of the HRE electors, and conquered a couple more from Lithuania by 1420, without using Unam Sanctum. So that's 30+ infamy, minus whatever you burnt off. You now have massive force limits, but your provinces are too poor to support even a fraction of that limit, and your troops are still Oriental. It's a fine (if gamey) strategy playing solo, when you can be left alone to diplo vassalize small kingdoms to your heart's content, but you're fooling yourself if you think a human player will leave you alone long enough for it to work.

 

[Chronicler]

Guarantees on electors. I'll be able to see you just fine if we're at war. Moving troops through the GH is not an issue regardless of whether I'm at war or peace, and who's to say I'm not above buying a route through Lithuania if I don't border the Horde.

Your saved game is gone, but from what I gathered from your post is that you conquered all the Russian minors using Muscowy's missions, vassalized 5 of the HRE electors, and conquered a couple more from Lithuania by 1420, without using Unam Sanctum. So that's 30+ infamy, minus whatever you burnt off. You now have massive force limits, but your provinces are too poor to support even a fraction of that limit, and your troops are still Oriental. It's a fine (if gamey) strategy playing solo, when you can be left alone to diplo vassalize small kingdoms to your heart's content, but you're fooling yourself if you think a human player will leave you alone long enough for it to work.

I'm not sure they can declare war on me even with guarantee....it would also be problematic for them to do so since the electors usually are pulled into french/burgundian wars. And even if they did do that I'm not sure Ottomans could declare on me since they can't see Muscowy on the map? And even if they did they would have to pay a fortune in bribes and diplomats just to get their armies to the electors.


And how do you calculate that is 30 infamy? Infamy from vassals was almost none, think it took 2 war declarations since most were allied. That is 24 infamy. Then I had missions on that around me as Muscowy, and Lithuanias provinces defected to me.

And I supported 50 000 units by 1425 (for my invasion of the golden horde)....I wouldn't call that nothing. And that was my earliest and also an experimental game. I can upload it again for you if you want it.

And also, did thread was stated with SP in mind, but now we are also discussing Ottomans in mp, and I think it would work (see opening statement in this post)

EDIT: Also, my point was that infamy doesn't matter for an orthodox nation since there are so few for the electors to choose from. A catholic nation with 24 infamy would have -240 in support in the elections, and would not be able to compete and hence not be able to obtain the crown in the first 10 years.

In that savegame you saw, I was very unlucky, and Bohemias king didn't die until like 1416 or something. (Was an unlucky game in general)

EDIT2: My entire goal with this was a strong Russia (all Russian cores+Siberia). With a lot of magistrates to build up the economy. (Then supporting units wouldn't be a problem)

 

[stnikolauswagne]

EDIT: Also, my point was that infamy doesn't matter for an orthodox nation since there are so few for the electors to choose from. A catholic nation with 24 infamy would have -240 in support in the elections, and would not be able to compete and hence not be able to obtain the crown in the first 10 years.

Even if I declare war on 4 Electors (the majority) without and none of them are allied to each other or to the emperor, which is practically impossible, I will still have only 20 Infamy, 2 of which will probably have allready cooled down by the end of the war. I then have most likely 100 Legitmacy, 100 prestige and 18 Infamy, lets see:
(200 Relations + 250 Vassal + 30 Alliance + 50 Legitimacy + 30 (?) Prestige -180 Infamy - 50 Not in the HRE)=330 Points, i seldom see the AI getting their Electors above 300, let alone the majority of them, keep in mind that they need to have all the other 3 + at least one of your 4.....

 

[Chronicler]

Even if I declare war on 4 Electors (the majority) without and none of them are allied to each other or to the emperor, which is practically impossible, I will still have only 20 Infamy, 2 of which will probably have allready cooled down by the end of the war. I then have most likely 100 Legitmacy, 100 prestige and 18 Infamy, lets see:
(200 Relations + 250 Vassal + 30 Alliance + 50 Legitimacy + 30 (?) Prestige -180 Infamy - 50 Not in the HRE)=330 Points, i seldom see the AI getting their Electors above 300, let alone the majority of them, keep in mind that they need to have all the other 3 + at least one of your 4.....

You will have like 0-20 legitimacy after declaring wars on electors with no CB.....

And in my game yesterday Bohemia was at 400 points early game.

And if they aren't allied (4) electors, that would be 24 infamy.

2 per declaration, and 4 per vassalization. (And this elector-infamy won't be your only infamy as Castille I bet. You will probably invade Granada for example)

And if you want to do my strat, you would have to drop prestige (adding to SOI), to be able to be effective at offering vassalization later.

And last, there would be no alliance, because that isn't very smart to do early game with just those 4 electors (for a number of reasons)

EDIT: And lastly, let's not forget, that when in war with the emperor, Aragon will probably perceive you as weak and declare war. So might France/Portugal

 

[Simberto]

Why are you doing all of that theoretically? That just leads to "I do bla, but you do bla, and then he does blub", where noone will ever convince anyone. Just play it out, then you have actual Data. No more "my x would kill your y", than you can say "My x killed your y"

 

[lemonsquid]

Epirus is the most powerful, everyone knows this...

 

[Chronicler]

Why are you doing all of that theoretically? That just leads to "I do bla, but you do bla, and then he does blub", where noone will ever convince anyone. Just play it out, then you have actual Data. No more "my x would kill your y", than you can say "My x killed your y"

How do we play out a game with Castille and Muscowy were both is suppose to prove their superiority in obtaining the imperial crown (and not by conflicting with each other)?

 

[stnikolauswagne]

Edit: You are right Simberto, this whole discussion is stupid.

Let's do it this way: We both do a WC with the country of our choice, and as soon as we rule the whole world we submit the date, I give you 1740, not very good and I made many mistakes, but that still is realistic data.

 

[Chronicler]

I have to admit, I have never declared war without a CB, since there are so many ways to get a cb against them... You can for example just RM Saxony and the Palatinate and force a PU on them (I think they both start without heirs), guarntee everyone, put the countries next to them in your soi so they are not allowed to interact with them etc. And if I reaaaaaly wanted that Emperor position as early as possible I'd just relase a big vassal, pushes my infamy down..... And by your logic, if you have 24 Infamy (-240), 0 Legitmacy (-50), next to no Prestige you would get in the very real danger of being overruled even by byzantium or ethiopia, so your plan is not that save, is it?

Yeah right, even with all that I still beat Byzantium with miles when it came to the crown. (I don't think Ethiopia is eligible being tribal, and Byzan is usually killed very early by the Ottomans AI or someone else.

I never liked PUs, I find them problematic for a number of reasons. How would me guaranteeing the electors help? you mean sending warning (my favorite used to be ally and then declare war, when they break, I declare, but there isn't enough time for that if I want the imperial crown in the first 10 years of the game)

As Castille you have no big vassals to release, you have Galicia....1 province...and I think one more 1prov. And maybe Granada perhaps if you annex it first.

(And I did add some to my post above that you might have missed)

 

[Chronicler]

Edit: You are right Simberto, this whole discussion is stupid.

Let's do it this way: We both do a WC with the country of our choice, and as soon as we rule the whole world we submit the date, I give you 1740, not very good and I made many mistakes, but that still is realistic data.

I don't do WCs, lately I just try to gain as much power as possible at the start of game. (Practicing for mp) (And I would never annex the HRE or my vassals)

 

[Lord Curlyton]

I believe the original debate is whether Muscowy ----> Russia could stomp all over an OE when both are being run by humans. It then devolved into the various debates on HRE stuff and somehow changed to a "is Castille or Muscowy better for obtaining Imperial crown".
Proposed solution: start 2 SP games, in a thread where both the Castille and Muscowy player post screens and/or saves every 5 years until HRE crown obtained. Make sure each side uses same settings. Compare various statistics at end of time.
Now, as far as the original claim you made re:Muscowy being one of the top 3.....
Well, as has been said a lot, a human can become a world beater with nigh anybody, and everyone will have a favorite. Once you started making claims that you could curb stomp a human run OE with your Muscowy, well, I'd just say you need to have a MP match with the person to prove the point. Personally, my money would be on the OE human to do the curb stomping, assuming they really wanted to do so (which they would after the trash talk). Besides, you can't be the HRE if the OE player goes in and disbands the HRE, now can you (I'm presuming anyone who occupies the capitals of emperor + electors gets to do so if they want)?
EDIT: And for the record, my top 3 for ease of power esp in SP can be picked at random from France, England, Castille, Austria. Even the AI usually has trouble mucking them up, though of them, AI Castille seems most prone to failure.

 

[Ryuujin95]

And how do you calculate that is 30 infamy? Infamy from vassals was almost none, think it took 2 war declarations since most were allied. That is 24 infamy. Then I had missions on that around me as Muscowy, and Lithuanias provinces defected to me.

Conquest CB is 1 infamy per province, x6 provinces. 20 infamy for 5 vassals. A couple of no-CB wars puts you at 30, with the + indicating uncertainty at the the number of no-CB wars and whether Smolensk and Bryansk revolted or not.

And I supported 50 000 units by 1425 (for my invasion of the golden horde)....I wouldn't call that nothing. And that was my earliest and also an experimental game. I can upload it again for you if you want it.

It's not nothing, but I imagine it was infantry heavy to take advantage of the Serfdom slider and not break your budget. In comparison, the Ottoman empire from my screenshot was supporting 76 regiments in 1425.

And also, did thread was stated with SP in mind, but now we are also discussing Ottomans in mp, and I think it would work (see opening statement in this post)

You started this tangent yourself when you said:

I could beat you so hard you would cry as Muscowy if you were Ottomans.

In that savegame you saw, I was very unlucky, and Bohemias king didn't die until like 1416 or something. (Was an unlucky game in general)

And the game from my screenshot was my first as the Ottomans. I know without a doubt that I could conquer more efficiently than I did in that game. I've had games where the emperor survived 40+ years after I gained control of the electors. I don't see how waiting until 1416 for Vaclav to die was bad luck considering the real Vaclav died in 1419.

 

[Chronicler]

Conquest CB is 1 infamy per province, x6 provinces. 20 infamy for 5 vassals. A couple of no-CB wars puts you at 30, with the + indicating uncertainty at the the number of no-CB wars and whether Smolensk and Bryansk revolted or not.



It's not nothing, but I imagine it was infantry heavy to take advantage of the Serfdom slider and not break your budget. In comparison, the Ottoman empire from my screenshot was supporting 76 regiments in 1425.



You started this tangent yourself when you said:





And the game from my screenshot was my first as the Ottomans. I know without a doubt that I could conquer more efficiently than I did in that game. I've had games where the emperor survived 40+ years after I gained control of the electors. I don't see how waiting until 1416 for Vaclav to die was bad luck considering the real Vaclav died in 1419.

1. It still doesn't matter when it comes to infamy for an orthodox nation compared to catholic when electors are orthodox.

2. It was decently balanced. I could afford more, but I'm not a spender. And in an mp game I would probably do everything to trip you (And to answer someone above), if you tried disbanding the HRE I would defend it

3. Well, Vaclav usually dies within the first 10 years of the game, and I usually gain the electors within the first 3 years of the game or so. I've never seen Vaclav survive after 1420 I think.

EDIT: Also, you have to remember that this game was a bad one for me, if Vaclav had died within the first 10 years, and I hadn't made several mistakes, I would easily have been able to field 75k units (with my better economy)

 

[stnikolauswagne]

What exactly would you do to harm the Otomans? Getting in a war against them would mean that your War capacity would plummet and both novgorond and Poland/Lithuania could see you as a juicy target, that however does not change the fact that you can't reach them (because you would have to walk around the GH, which is a bloody long walk if you ask me, the ottoman player could just beat their way straight through the horde in the meantime and you couldn't do anything to stop him) and they could probably just beat you down over and over again, since, even if you become emperor you won't be able to field a force that can beat the higher-tech ottoman units for a long, long time.....
And now let's just stop this, because seriously, the best way to summarize this discussion is the following: "It's the kind of logic that just can't be argued with, not because it's right, but because the insane troll is so demented, so lost in his own insanity that any attempts to correct him will be met with more gibberish." Disclaimer: This quote has been brought to you by TVTropes.org, and is not meant to be taken seriously but rather as a nice little joke that should best end the conversation so that I can sleep peacefully

 

[Chronicler]

What exactly would you do to harm the Otomans? Getting in a war against them would mean that your War capacity would plummet and both novgorond and Poland/Lithuania could see you as a juicy target, that however does not change the fact that you can't reach them and they could probably just beat you down over and over again, since, even if you become emperor you won't be able to field a force that can beat the higher-tech ottoman units for a long, long time.....

How do you figure I can't reach them?

Also, Ottomans would be busy fighting wars if it wants to grow, I wouldn't be alone in said wars.

EDIT: Hey, it was you who stated Castille is better than Muscowy, I'm just disagreeing. The way you say it's better doesn't work though. Which I have proven. (And it can't do the same thing)