Buildings shouldn't cost MP
- Thread starter Hamor
- 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.
Yes it should. It makes sense.
(you do realize you are offering virtually no reason to support your point, right?)
(you do realize you are offering virtually no reason to support your point, right?)
I think the military buildings (definitely the fortifications) and the special buildings should still cost MP (it's not like you're going to have a military points shortage anyway), but aside from that I agree with you. Either you're small, in which case it's the cash cost, not the MP cost, that matters, or else you're big, in which case having your massive building program limited by an arbitrary abstracted "monarch point" barrier makes no sense. In either instance an MP cap makes very little sense. At the very least, an MP cost should only be associated with the higher-level building types, namely the ones that are obviously nationally-directed projects (like canals and nationwide roadbuilding), whereas with smaller, locally-organised ones (marketplaces, temples), then the only cost should be cash.
However, I still support it for military buildings, because fortifications in particular seem to be to be things that logically and obviously require the attention of the military arm of the State, hence a military points cost.
In addition, if you got rid of the MP cost for all building types, you would need to think of a new idea for Quantity, because that reduced MP cost for buildings would have pretty much no utility whatsoever.
However, I still support it for military buildings, because fortifications in particular seem to be to be things that logically and obviously require the attention of the military arm of the State, hence a military points cost.
In addition, if you got rid of the MP cost for all building types, you would need to think of a new idea for Quantity, because that reduced MP cost for buildings would have pretty much no utility whatsoever.
They need to cost MP. In half of my campaigns, I have too many points and am constantly hitting the cap. In the other half, I usually have blobed too much to justify building buildings. And before you say this is only a western phenomenon, I usually get it on every nation past 1650.
I think building MP costs do a good job of balancing tall versus wide empires. It's very hard to be tall AND wide. As it should be.
this especially since the neighbor bonus in tech isn't capped anymore for tech so you can afford to fall behind a bit in tech if you want to do a building spree
plus large empires can already hire more expensive advisers compared to smaller ones so I think its balanced
I, OTOH, think they should cost a bit more power, but also have larger effects. So that it is less about spamming tens of buildings around to get rid of excess MP and more about strategic choices between different uses of monarch points.
I don't think this is a thing for EU. In EU the more provinces you have, the better you are no matter what.
Either way I don't think I can say they are properly balanced MP vs Helpfulness right now. I only use them when I am getting close an an MP cap and need to dump and then I spam them.
That seems to be a common way of it also.
Maybe a compromise would be to let half of the buildings be MP free. For example tax buildings, docks, and forts are free of the MP cost.
.png){kind=avatar}
Building should be done away, apart from the top-ties and special ones, and replaced with some sort of developement plan system to invest MP over a period to improve tax base, manpower, trade power and so on... just three: a civic one, a trade one and a military one, with scaling costs based on the province's stats. It would reduce micromanagement and give a real reason to build up in peace.
Do not buy techs ahead of thier times and you'll never worry about MP cost for buildings.
They SHOULD cost MP, and as someone stated, they should cost more!
10 temples = 10 basetax for 100 ADM. Try coring a 10bt province for that cheap.
Some of you seem to think buildings are weak, I can tell you they are not... Buildings are powerful and worth every MP they cost. Dont forget that most buildings provide more than one benfit. Temples add cash, of course, as well as forcelimits. Workshops increase production income as well as trade income. etc....
They SHOULD cost MP, and as someone stated, they should cost more!
10 temples = 10 basetax for 100 ADM. Try coring a 10bt province for that cheap.
Some of you seem to think buildings are weak, I can tell you they are not... Buildings are powerful and worth every MP they cost. Dont forget that most buildings provide more than one benfit. Temples add cash, of course, as well as forcelimits. Workshops increase production income as well as trade income. etc....
Not that I disagree with your point, but you are using the best building in the game by far, as an example to illustrate it. If you made the same point with courthouses, docks, counting houses, and forts, you'd have a much tougher time making your argument seem as strong.
If you didn't have a MP cost for buildings there would be no limit too them. Income is not enough of a limitation, MP is necessary to prevent everyone spamming them everywhere. Already the stronger ones (military, Production and government lines) tend to get spammed everywhere by western powers, remove the MP cost and it becomes even easier to do so.
If you find buildings not worth it then you need to play the game on a higher difficulty.
Forts are very strong, particularly in multiplayer but also in SP where the AI wont avoid high level forts. I find Courthouses very useful, bare in mind that -1 unrest usually takes up an entire idea. Docks are fine and they lead to much stronger buildings. Counting houses are great for small empires.
If you find buildings not worth it then you need to play the game on a higher difficulty.
Forts are very strong, particularly in multiplayer but also in SP where the AI wont avoid high level forts. I find Courthouses very useful, bare in mind that -1 unrest usually takes up an entire idea. Docks are fine and they lead to much stronger buildings. Counting houses are great for small empires.
-1 unrest per province. If you want 40 provinces reduced by 1 unrest it's probably better to get the idea. Docks leading to better buildings is true, but tier 3 naval building costs 30 dip points for all buildings leading up to it. It grants 1 naval force limit. Two temples on coasotal provinces grant the same, but only cost 20 adm points. Treasury gives -0.01 inflation per year if you have 10 provinces. Reducing inflation by 2.00 costs 75 points. My napkin math tells me that straight up reducing inflation is 26 times more efficient.
I don't think it's unreasonable to be able to buy these buildings for 10 MP + ducats, which everyone seems to completely ignore in every scenario.
Last edited: