Conundrum, or I miss 1.07

[unmerged(29041)]

Are you playing with AGCEEP ? Because in the 1500s (end of the century), they got an event destroying all their fortresses. That's when I found myself at war with them : you only have to beat their troops (which aren't too numerous), and no sieges to do.

I have AGCEEP 1.32 (I think), and I heard that a lot of changes were made to Russia in 1.35, but 1.35 is an .exe file that does not work on macs. I don't know anything about that event and I also saw that you inherited the GH while I didn't. I would have liked very much to get them without fortresses. Last night I was mad when I stopped playing. It is very rarely that I get that mad, only when I play a minor and everything turns out wrong. But then I took it phylosophically and thought that perhaps the movie was "The day of Pagan's revenge" I just hope they don't make the second part. I did seriously underestimate those pagans based on previous experiences with the native americans.

Has anybody seen AI pagans with land tech of 12 and above? It sounds obscene.

 

[unmerged(25609)]

Those damm pagans defend themselves better than expected.

Ha! That's on my list of to-do GCs: the Kazakhs, or one of those Nogai / Sibir types. Try like hell to tech up to a decent level ... then resist the Russians when they show up. Beat back the Muscovites Hordes!

Oops .... kinda forgot who I'm playing right now ......

 

[Iasius]

Iasius,

You have even worse techs than I have. This makes my day

I also know now where I went wrong (too much minting of course, but why I did that ):
I immediately attacked Sweden, which gave me wrong religion provinces hat aren't that rich. I wanted to do this early to cripple Sweden, but they research and fight just about as well without their poor Finnish provinces.
Instead I had to mint a lot in those 11 years (Sweden would only give me 2 provinces until I had 100% warscore ) and later I had conversions to pay. I should've left Finland for the 16th century. The money I basicaly wasted here alone is enough for 2 or 3 manufactories.

I'm thinking about starting a Muscovy game soon to compare it with my Novgorod game (I rarely play longer than until 1700).

Oh and yeah I didn't invest in Land until 1690. I didn't see the point as I was already a couple CRT behind everyone else (even Persia was 2 CRT ahead in 1650 ... :wacko: ).
It was interesting to have to depend solely on my AI allies for defense. That was a first for me in the 17th century.

 

[Iasius]

So I did start a Muscovy game tonight.
Here are the stats with Novgorod included for comparison:

Novgorod, vanilla, sept. 5 beta, 10 years easy/normal then vh/normal

Year  Sta Income                           CTax Manu  No Prov     BB         Tech          IN   PE  TE  T%  StaC   MPp/support    
1450  0   13.8   3.4   0.9     0 =  18.7d  57    0   12+ 0+ 0 =  12  1.5/38   1- 1- 2- 2   2.8  24  36  X   215     24/ 35
1505  +2  29.2   9.0   1.4     0 =  39.6d  173   0   28+ 0+ 0 =  28 14.0/39   2- 2- 2- 3   9.4  29  32  X   548     74/110
1553  +3  42.7  15.9   1.7   6.7 =  67.5d  253   1   37+ 0+ 0 =  37 15.8/43   2- 2- 2- 4   9.6  41  31  X   492    128/188
1600  +2  63.1  32.7   2.5  14.4 = 112.7d  401   1   58+ 8+ 0 =  66 17.5/44   3- 2- 2- 5  34.9  49  32  X   638    196/292
1650  +2  94.5  49.6  58.9  20.3 = 223.4d  480   0   75+10+ 0 =  85 10.6/46   6- 3- 5- 5   9.8  54  56  X   478    211/369
1700  +2 181.8  79.0 186.9  73.2 = 521.4d  595  25  102+10+ 0 = 112  1.9/48  10- 4- 8- 5  21.4  52 107  X  1384    211/434

Muscovy, vanilla, sept. 5 beta, vh/normal

Year  Sta Income                           CTax Manu  No Prov     BB         Tech         IN   PE  TE  T%  StaC   MPp/support    
1450  +2  17.0   2.9   0.6   5.6 =  26.1d   97   0   13+ 1+ 0 =  14 12.4/37   1- 1- 2- 2  0.2  18  30  X   153     61/ 78
1500  +2  30.2  12.6   8.1   5.6 =  56.6d  144   4   25+ 0+ 0 =  25 13.1/42   2- 2- 3- 3  4.8  44  47  X   661     58/117
1550  +2  46.8  21.6  24.5   8.9 = 101.7d  236   4   31+ 0+ 0 =  31 12.1/45   3- 2- 4- 5  6.5  55  52  X   889     92/164
1600  -1  74.7  32.6  74.5  19.7 = 201.3d  300   4   57+14+ 0 =  71 17.9/44  11- 3- 7- 5 13.7  41  66  X   724    116/226
1650  +3 157.9  65.0 175.5  74.8 = 473.7d  545   4  100+ 7+ 0 = 107 21.9/46  16-11- 8- 6  0.9  54  85  X   874    124/294
1700  +3 337.8 152.4 534.1 105.2 =1130.1d  909  42  171+ 8+ 0 = 179 32.1/53  18-12- 8- 7 19.3  60 127  X  2661    154/461

1450: The 12 BB mostly come from forceannexing Novgorod and taking Tambow, Ufa and Samara in an offensive war against the Golden Horde (which went with 'Buy the Non-Mongols off', less defections ).

1500: Forcevassalized Lithuania in 1456 and diploannexed in 1495 after researching trade 3. Released them again as their 4 minimum provinces were all catholic. Minted 4000 ducats in the 60s to build 4 refineries. Castile chose not to become Spain! Political map (that's Hungary in Kleves and Gelre)

1550: Two short wars against Teutonic Order/Sweden for Tver, Pskov, Polotsk and against Golden Horde for Bogutjar and Astrakhan. I've got governors everywhere, trade 5 should be done in 1552. I'm close to 100 years more advanced in tech compared to my Novgorod game. Political Map Austria has 43/45 BB ...

1600: Several quick offensive wars against Golden Horde and Sibir once I reached landtech 9 in 1603 (77 years earlier than with Novgorod ) and a couple of defensive wars against Ottomans, Austria, Sweden, and Poland which basically resulted in either white peaces or me giving a few ducats away. I may not be that far behind militarily, but I don't care for their provinces right now and any vassalization efforts would cost waaay too much.
I have a trade agreement with Portugal and France. My manpower is a lot lower this time as I'm at land 2 instead of 10. Political map

1650: I get 7.4 colonists per year so colonizing Siberia continues at quite a pace. I annexed the Aztecs and took Bujak, Moldovia, Wallachia, Serbia, Bulgaria, Macedonia, and Hellas from Austria in several defensive wars with me being one CRT behind. I DoW the Ottomans, they had to give me Daghestan and Armenia. I also finally remembered to vassalize Ryazan. o I think I'll start minting for some refineries. Two months per stab point and I don't have a single FAA. Political map

1700: There isn't an orthodox province left that doesn't belong to Russia. Yay!
I annexed several pagans in West Africa and North America, took Sochi and Morea from Genoa; Corfu, Crete, Ionia, and Cyprus from France; Georgia, Trabzon, Dobrudja and Rumelia from Ottomans and I annexed Ryazan and Ethiopia. I build 36 refineries (3 had burned down before, I didn't notice really so I'm not sure how to correct the stats above), 4 FAAs were built by Ethiopia and two I got per event.
There are 14 countries left in Europe and Austria has vassalized tiny Palatinat and is in an alliance ...
Zimbabwe, Dakota, Navaho, Huron, Iroquois, Lenape, and Incas are the remaining pagans.
Slider settings:
aristocracy = 9
centralization = 10
innovative = 0
mercantilism = 2
offensive = 8
land = 0
quality = 10
serfdom = 10
Political map of North America
Political map of Africa
Political map of Europe
Political map of Siberia


What I find interesting is that for the first 180 years my income with Muscovy was 150% compared to Novgorod, while in the 100 years since then Muscovy's income was about twice that of Novgorod.
I guess the high inflation I had with Novgorod meant that I was unable to keep up with the growth levels I managed with Muscovy.

The difference was especially stark militarily, while I was protected by my alliance with Austria in my Novgorod game I have been fighting wars every couple of years against both France and Austria successfully in the Muscovy game.
Especially trade income is very different despite the similar levels of trade tech in 1700, Novgorod was embargoed by everyone in Europe and had to rely on trade in Asia, while Muscovy had a TA with Portugal and France and I was able to wage wars against Denmark and OE to open their CoTs again.

In the end I think Novgorod went wrong very early. I focused west which required lots of resources for not much gain that can be better spent in the east. Of course Muscovy also has lots of leaders with siege boni in the 15th century making winter warfare much less costly.

 

[unmerged(6147)]

I thought a little more about the "percent of world trade that I own" column in the tables.

Basically I believe the TE of the other nations are irrelevant, as is mine. I agree with Lawkeeper that the world trade value should be regarded as a fixed value, and have nothing to do with the TE of the nations.

On page 14 there is a column for the total trade value of the COTs, as has been pointed out. That is the total present trade value to compete for.

To get your own value I do not consider page 9 a good one since, as I pointed out before, it refers to old values. If you use it in February you can see your precise income for January but that is the only month you can do that. The new idea I have is to instead use the information in the income window. There you can see your unadjusted (for TE) income from trade the previous month all the year around. Now multiply that by 12 and compare with the total trade value on page 14 and you have a pretty good figure and do not need to go through the much math yourself.

So

take your anadjusted income from trade last month (income window) and multiply by 12 and then divide it with the present total trade value of all COTs on page 14. The only error in this is that you compare your income from the previous month with the current value of the COTs. That can be fixed if you just write down the figure on page 14 and wait with the calculation until after the turn of the month when you get your income for the previous month in the income window.

 

[unmerged(6147)]

So I did start a Muscovy game tonight.
I'm close to 100 years more advanced in tech compared to my Novgorod game.

Very interesting. 100 years more advanced! Why the difference? The refineries? More colonising? More focus on trade/infra tech?

How much have the refineries contributed (and no one has burned for during all these years? )

BTW, you played 230 years during "one night"... That's speedy

PS But your techs are still a long way from Lawkeeper's benchmarks

 

[unmerged(9146)]

On page 14 there is a column for the total trade value of the COTs, as has been pointed out. That is the total present trade value to compete for.

No, this is the value that could be competed for if all nations had 100% efficiency. The actual value that is traded can be lower or much higher than that.

mulltiply that by 12 and compare with the total trade value on page 14 and you have a pretty good figure and do not need to go through the much math yourself.

I can only refer you back to my example with nations of different trade efficiencies. I'm not sure how you concluded that trade efficiencies will not have significant effect on your trade share. They do. I don't believe you can just assume them out off your calculations.

The only error in this is that you compare your income from the previous month with the current value of the COTs.

No. The major error is that this way you make the implicit assumption that all nations have the same trade efficiency that you do. Which is clearly not true.

Again, to give a simple example - if all other nations had a trade efficiency of 0%, then they would not have any impact on trade, and so the value of your share in the world trade would be 100% if only you have some positive efficiency, since you would be the only nation that gets any revenue from trade.
Well, is 100% the number you would get from your calculations? No, of course not. It wouldn't be anywhere close to it.
You might argue that this argument is exaggerated, and of course it is. But still the point is that the number you get your way is biased - and the direction of bias depends on how your trade efficiency compares to the average trade efficiency of nations trading in all CoTs.

 

[unmerged(25696)]

Trade efficiencies only show how efficient each country is at getting the most of their 'share' of world trade. A higher TE doesn't mean you get more trade going on in your share, just that your merchants are better, and your taxes higher. Hence the reason why Daniel and I propose to discard TE.

 

[unmerged(6147)]

No, this is the value that could be competed for if all nations had 100% efficiency.

Robin!

I suggest you become a little bit more humble in your attitude. The reason for this is that the concept of "your part in the world trade" is not one that has an official definition, rather its definition is stipulated.

No. The major error is that this way you make the implicit assumption that all nations have the same trade efficiency that you do. Which is clearly not true.

If you had been that you would not have made the mistake of writing this.

Again, to give a simple example - if all other nations had a trade efficiency of 0%, then they would not have any impact on trade, and so the value of your share in the world trade would be 100% if only you have some positive efficiency, since you would be the only nation that gets any revenue from trade.

No, as you can see from my suggested way of calculating it would not be 100%. 100% can only be achieved by owning all slots.

You might argue that this argument is exaggerated, and of course it is.

I thought it would be fun to compare how large part of the world trade we could take and my first method was an easy way to calculate it but it was not exact as you correctly pointed out in your previous posts. However, the present method exactly describes what I (and Lawkeeper) mean with this concept, that is a fact and not an opinion. It is a fact because we have stipulated so. Hence your opinion is of no consequence although it might present an alternative and perhaps interesting way to compare games.

 

[Iasius]

I don't think I'll play much further, so I'll post the data again and a comparison of what I spent my income on. I think it's quite enlightening to look at a game in retrospect in this way.

Novgorod, vanilla, sept. 5 beta, 10 years easy/normal then vh/normal

Year  Sta Income                           CTax Manu  No Prov     BB         Tech          IN   PE  TE  T%  StaC   MPp/support    
1450  0   13.8   3.4   0.9     0 =  18.7d  57    0   12+ 0+ 0 =  12  1.5/38   1- 1- 2- 2   2.8  24  36  X   215     24/ 35
1505  +2  29.2   9.0   1.4     0 =  39.6d  173   0   28+ 0+ 0 =  28 14.0/39   2- 2- 2- 3   9.4  29  32  X   548     74/110
1553  +3  42.7  15.9   1.7   6.7 =  67.5d  253   1   37+ 0+ 0 =  37 15.8/43   2- 2- 2- 4   9.6  41  31  X   492    128/188
1600  +2  63.1  32.7   2.5  14.4 = 112.7d  401   1   58+ 8+ 0 =  66 17.5/44   3- 2- 2- 5  34.9  49  32  X   638    196/292
1650  +2  94.5  49.6  58.9  20.3 = 223.4d  480   0   75+10+ 0 =  85 10.6/46   6- 3- 5- 5   9.8  54  56  X   478    211/369
1700  +2 181.8  79.0 186.9  73.2 = 521.4d  595  25  102+10+ 0 = 112  1.9/48  10- 4- 8- 5  21.4  52 107  X  1384    211/434

Muscovy, vanilla, sept. 5 beta, vh/normal

Year  Sta Income                           CTax Manu  No Prov     BB         Tech         IN   PE  TE  T%  StaC   MPp/support    
1450  +2  17.0   2.9   0.6   5.6 =  26.1d   97   0   13+ 1+ 0 =  14 12.4/37   1- 1- 2- 2  0.2  18  30  X   153     61/ 78
1500  +2  30.2  12.6   8.1   5.6 =  56.6d  144   4   25+ 0+ 0 =  25 13.1/42   2- 2- 3- 3  4.8  44  47  X   661     58/117
1550  +2  46.8  21.6  24.5   8.9 = 101.7d  236   4   31+ 0+ 0 =  31 12.1/45   3- 2- 4- 5  6.5  55  52  X   889     92/164
1600  -1  74.7  32.6  74.5  19.7 = 201.3d  300   4   57+14+ 0 =  71 17.9/44  11- 3- 7- 5 13.7  41  66  X   724    116/226
1650  +3 157.9  65.0 175.5  74.8 = 473.7d  545   4  100+ 7+ 0 = 107 21.9/46  16-11- 8- 6  0.9  54  85  X   874    124/294
1700  +3 337.8 152.4 534.1 105.2 =1130.1d  909  42  171+ 8+ 0 = 179 32.1/53  18-12- 8- 7 19.3  60 127  X  2661    154/461

What I find really interesting is this (only data from 1419 to 1669 is included, stupid openoffice ):

With Novgorod I had to cut military spending basically to zero just to keep up with economic techs compared to Muscovy. This hampered my growth in the 17th century.
I even got 3 more deflation events with Novgorod than with Muscovy and I still couldn't keep my inflation down.
I'm not sure what kind of difference this really made, but I went naval with Muscovy and land with Novgorod. :wacko:

What do you make of this?

Very interesting. 100 years more advanced! Why the difference? The refineries? More colonising? More focus on trade/infra tech?

How much have the refineries contributed (and no one has burned for during all these years? )

BTW, you played 230 years during "one night"... That's speedy

PS But your techs are still a long way from Lawkeeper's benchmarks

Why the difference? I built four refineries early on in 1470 or so. At the time the 20 ducats per month bonus was more than half of my total income, so I'm sure they helped a lot. I could afford to build them and still keep my inflation lower because winter warfare is much easier with leaders, especially those with siege boni. Muscovy has lots of early leaders, Novgorod none.
I made a mistake with Novgorod in invading Sweden in 1420 (that elevel years war). Finland might be ugric, but converting those provinces is costly and they are not really richer than provinces to the east. I wanted to cripple Sweden early, but instead got bogged down in a long war that was not really worth it.
I also conquered Samara very early with Muscovy compared to Novgorod, abou 100 years earlier. That gold income is crucial I think.
And lastly, I vassalized Lithuania in 1550 or so with Novgorod and 1456 with Muscovy. This was really easy with Muscovy due to the many leaders.
Once I fell behind in income with Novgorod I was unable to catch up. I tried for a while to expand like I remembered from earlier Muscovy games, but that drove up inflation which meant I had to spend too much on infra/trade tech (I spent 50% more with Novgorod until 1669 and was still behind in infra tech and equal in trade).

I think two refineries burned down sometime in the 17th century, I only really realized that I had to remember this for the stats when I built new ones in the 1690s. So I'm not really sure when they burned down.

I always play on extremely fast even during wars. This might be somewhat inefficient, but I don't like waiting.

What was lawkeepers bechnmark?

 

[stuartdm]

I have an interesting little problem in my Muscovy 1.08 vanilla game. It is 1502 and I have all my cores except Vladimir, I also own Ufa and Samara. I would like to take Vladimir and start reducing BB and building cash for later on. Suzdal has been my vassal for about 40 years.

But:

I cannot diplo-annex Suzdal as it has been at war with GH, Nogtai, Sibir, and IIRC Transoxania for over 20 years. Suzdal has occupied Kazan for about 15 years and keeps a small army there. Also I am at –165 with them. If I invade Vladimir and capture it the army in Kazan stays there out of my reach. If I DOW on GH (without CB!), I cannot take Kazan although I can enter it. My choice is I suppose, to DOW on both Suzdal and GH (and its allies) which might be tricky, or to try and get in an alliance with Suzdal against GH and capture Kazan for either side which might not work.

What would be nice would be for a diplomatic option to offer military access to GH without them having asked for it – if I were them I’d have asked even if there was little chance.

 

[unmerged(6147)]

What was lawkeepers benchmark?

17-17-6-6 in 1550 with any Christian! I don't think he believes in it anymore but until he goes public with this I will continue to tease him

Concerning your game. Yes, IMO Naval is imperative, with any nation in the game. So is Samara. The COT in Courland will always move to Danzig, or?

Leaders early on is extremely useful and I agree with you that this is one reason Russia is much simpler than Novgorod (the other thing is the automatic DOWs you get at start as Novgorod). Incidentally this game was the first of the three Novogorod starts I have made since 2002 that I succeded in - and that was only because Muscowy decided to open up another front (against Tver I think it was).

When you reach 1650 or so Leaders are of very little use because then your economy will be so good that you can do virtually anything you want to.

 

[Iasius]

I suppose you could ...
1) DoW both the Golden Horde and Suzdal
2) DoW Suzdal and bribe GH until they give you military access so you can take back Kazan for them.
3) Edit the savegame to remove Suzdal's control of Kazan or start a game as Suzdal, make peace with GH and then switch back to Muscovy.
4) Ignore Suzdal for now.

Being able to offer military access would be a nice option to have, but I suppose that's not something we'll see added in a patch.

 

[unmerged(6147)]

I have an interesting little problem in my Muscovy 1.08 vanilla game. It is 1502 and I have all my cores except Vladimir, I also own Ufa and Samara. I would like to take Vladimir and start reducing BB and building cash for later on. Suzdal has been my vassal for about 40 years.

But:

I cannot diplo-annex Suzdal as it has been at war with GH, Nogtai, Sibir, and IIRC Transoxania for over 20 years. Suzdal has occupied Kazan for about 15 years and keeps a small army there. Also I am at –165 with them. If I invade Vladimir and capture it the army in Kazan stays there out of my reach. If I DOW on GH (without CB!), I cannot take Kazan although I can enter it. My choice is I suppose, to DOW on both Suzdal and GH (and its allies) which might be tricky, or to try and get in an alliance with Suzdal against GH and capture Kazan for either side which might not work.

What would be nice would be for a diplomatic option to offer military access to GH without them having asked for it – if I were them I’d have asked even if there was little chance.

I'm not sure I get it but is it a locked situation you have? Then it will not end until a third party DOWs any of the nations and then changes the present situation (like e.g. taking control of all provinces involved).

What I usually do after say 50-100 years or so is to go into the savefile and edit

1. away the war
2. correct controlship of provinces
3. if a siege is ongoing (i.e. a covering force) then also delete that item at the bottom of the file

Another variant is to start up the save as the other nation and offer peace in one direction or the other. And then restart as you own nation. But that is extra difficult as Russia since they are not among the nations you select from start. If you need more help say so and I will tell you how to handle that situation.

 

[Iasius]

17-17-6-6 in 1550 with any Christian! I don't think he believes in it anymore but until he goes public with this I will continue to tease him

Even with Ethiopia or Nubia, or just European Christians?

Concerning your game. Yes, IMO Naval is imperative, with any nation in the game. So is Samara. The COT in Courland will always move to Danzig, or?

The CoT will move in 1452 if the The Nieszawa Privileges-'Conventiones Particulares'-event fires and Poland chooses option A. Option B will just add the Danzig CoT and C doesn't change the CoTs. However even if the CoT remains, it's in the Teutonic Order's capital so you'll have to annex them.

 

[unmerged(6147)]

Even with Ethiopia or Nubia, or just European Christians?

He-he! I believe he forgot to exempt them.

(I take for granted they belong to a worse techgroup than normal Christians, theoretically their retarded economy could perhaps be explained solely as a result of the isolation penalty - IMO they usually do not know much of the world even when we enter the 18th century).

As a matter of fact I have always considered a game as Ethiopia. That might be my next one.

 

[stuartdm]

I'm not sure I get it but is it a locked situation you have? Then it will not end until a third party DOWs any of the nations and then changes the present situation (like e.g. taking control of all provinces involved).

What I usually do after say 50-100 years or so is to go into the savefile and edit

1. away the war
2. correct controlship of provinces
3. if a siege is ongoing (i.e. a covering force) then also delete that item at the bottom of the file

Another variant is to start up the save as the other nation and offer peace in one direction or the other. And then restart as you own nation. But that is extra difficult as Russia since they are not among the nations you select from start. If you need more help say so and I will tell you how to handle that situation.

I suppose I'll edit the savegame then - it sort of feels like cheating but I suppose its a sort of bug in the game really. I mean IRL nobody would stay at war for 30 years without fightin ant battles. (except North and South Korea ed. )

 

[stuartdm]

fightin ant battles.

Now there's a concept!!

 

[unmerged(6147)]

I suppose I'll edit the savegame then - it sort of feels like cheating but I suppose its a sort of bug in the game really. I mean IRL nobody would stay at war for 30 years without fightin ant battles. (except North and South Korea ed. )

You may feel so at first but as you say, this is an obvious bug in the game and it is sad that Johan has not solved it.

 

[Iasius]

So I did play until 1750. I usually get bored in the 18th century. Not this time.

Muscovy, vanilla, sept. 5 beta, vh/normal

Year  Sta Income                            CTax Manu  No Prov     BB         Tech         IN   PE  TE  T%  StaC   MPp/support    
1450  +2  17.0   2.9    0.6   5.6 =   26.1d   97   0   13+ 1+ 0 =  14 12.4/37   1- 1- 2- 2  0.2  18  30  X   153     61/ 78
1500  +2  30.2  12.6    8.1   5.6 =   56.6d  144   4   25+ 0+ 0 =  25 13.1/42   2- 2- 3- 3  4.8  44  47  X   661     58/117
1550  +2  46.8  21.6   24.5   8.9 =  101.7d  236   4   31+ 0+ 0 =  31 12.1/45   3- 2- 4- 5  6.5  55  52  X   889     92/164
1600  -1  74.7  32.6   74.5  19.7 =  201.3d  300   4   57+14+ 0 =  71 17.9/44  11- 3- 7- 5 13.7  41  66  X   724    116/226
1650  +3 157.9  65.0  175.5  74.8 =  473.7d  545   4  100+ 7+ 0 = 107 21.9/46  16-11- 8- 6  0.9  54  85  X   874    124/294
1700  +3 337.8 152.4  534.1 105.2 = 1130.1d  909  42  171+ 8+ 0 = 179 32.1/53  18-12- 8- 7 19.3  60 127  X  2661    154/461
1750  +3 608.6 279.6 1160.6 193.7 = 2242.5d 1463  46  254+10+ 0 = 264 27.9/55  52-28-10-10  2.4  91 171  X  2966    164/693

Conquered the last pagans this time, vassalized Austria, fought a few wars to lift embargoes. Still not sure whether I'm going to try my first ever WC attempt.
I haven't build any CCs yet, but I saved up 100k ducats already.