Is there a problem with the centralisation slider again? As Poland in new GC I am very low centralisation, so WE should not much a problem short term (should it?) but after only 2 years of war my core provs are at +5 RR, non-core +10.
-
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.
In addition to the +1 revolt risk, war taxes also raise your war exhaustion by 1 point every time you enact them.
That must be it - although I swear it still went up fast. I actually like this harsher war exhaustion but less frequent revolts a lot better anyway.
well every time you recruit troops, whether it be 1k or 100k, you'll get +1 WE in that province. (New in New patches).
War taxes are dangerous. If you stay out of action in a war you are part of then you WE wont raise much, but as soon as you take war taxes, then the WE seems to sky rocket.
Nope.
You get a (manpower raised/yearly manpower gain) bonus to WE when raising armies, not a flat +1 WE.
Thus draining your entire manpower pool when it is full in one huge spree of recruitment will net you +2 WE (as the manpower pool max size is twice the yearly manpower gain)
Having a large manpower pool is really, really nice.
Note: Recruited mercenaries does not increase WE.
Originally posted by Peter Ebbesen
Nope.
You get a (manpower raised/yearly manpower gain) bonus to WE when raising armies, not a flat +1 WE.
Thus draining your entire manpower pool when it is full in one huge spree of recruitment will net you +2 WE (as the manpower pool max size is twice the yearly manpower gain)
Having a large manpower pool is really, really nice.
Note: Recruited mercenaries does not increase WE.
But this is like eating your own foot. The trouble is that you get the money and the manpower but the faster the WE rises the greater the reduction on the troop raising capabilities of every province and the reduction in cash income after war taxes. Remember the -1 stab also raises RR and decreases income and hence troop raising ability.
I once did this as Oman only to realise after the third war tax and five years that I could only raise 2,000 in Muscat and 1,000 in the three other Omani cores. Nothing elsewhere. Even though I had 600 in the bank and 50 manpower. Then the impact on supportable troops bit as the tax income fell. I was forced to take loans to support my existing troops and eventually was bankrupted and the government fell.
I'm not proud of this - and it won't happen again - but let this be a cautionary tale to all those war tax junkies out there.
- Dec 14, 1999
- 18.409
- 38.945
Thats great news. The goal is to make wars end for economical reasons, not in total wins or losses.
Errrrr...........yes I guess so. Only it didn't seem so great at the time.
I think this really hurts oversized minors who have few cores. The majors with loads of cores can still fight effective wars. Which is what it should be of course.
Originally posted by Derek Pullem
Errrrr...........yes I guess so. Only it didn't seem so great at the time.
I think this really hurts oversized minors who have few cores. The majors with loads of cores can still fight effective wars. Which is what it should be of course.
LOL
But Derek has a point about the cores.
Its been mentioned a few times recently that their importance is on the rise again and whilst important lets not be overly reliant on them as they are already so very powerful.
This is great. It means that you the economic implications of sustained wars turned on you - which is very desirable
And the point of having a bigger manpower pool compared to a smaller is, of course, that you can recruit the same number of troops for a smaller increase in WE.