-
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.
I remember having Manpower events countless times on colonies. Ouch.
...
What about the French religion wars converting 4 times the same province?
I have always heard this as well but i never noticed anything tbh. The more vassals always mean more manpower. (obviously if your decentralization is somewhat big).
BurningEGO said:IWhat about the French religion wars converting 4 times the same province?
Doesn't that occur only when you have only 1 province left to convert?
BurningEGO said:
try this ego
load as ottos
use robespierre to go full decentral
delete all vassals xept 1 ingame
see what the difference is between all vassals and 1left
then do it again with last vassal and see howmuch it is without vassals
Mats_SX said:
Wasn't it agreed upon, after the Poland - BBurg switch?
As you said, my awareness is superior, so I don't know what was agreed
:rofl: It was surely a joke, but someone suggested that all Polish and Brandenburgian leaders should be named "You suck!".HALNY (HAL) said:As you said, my awareness is superior, so I don't know what was agreed
bluelotus said:
No it hapened to me before. And it also hapened to King John once if i remember properly.
I remember King John complaining about it on CQS when he got the same province in india converted a lot of times thanks to the event. But funily enough, he did get the edit done because the GM, Drake, agreed to it.
Last edited:
Mats_SX said::rofl: It was surely a joke, but someone suggested that all Polish and Brandenburgian leaders should be named "You suck!".
Maybe we deserve it. It was first time when such thing happened to me. Of course it was Kanth's fault (he selected Poland), but I should check what I was selecting, not just click on last free slot.
I think the punishment is appropriateHALNY (HAL) said:
Download: 49941 kb/sek (6242.6 KB/sek)
Upload: 34694 kb/sek (4336.8 KB/sek)
Yihaa !!!
Upload: 34694 kb/sek (4336.8 KB/sek)
Yihaa !!!
Sekund = second.
Anyway ran a few more to test the average speed.
Download: 41547 kb/sek (5193.4 KB/sek)
Upload: 46645 kb/sek (5830.6 KB/sek)
Download: 39483 kb/sek (4935.4 KB/sek)
Upload: 46645 kb/sek (5830.6 KB/sek)
Download: 41049 kb/sek (5131.1 KB/sek)
Upload: 46645 kb/sek (5830.6 KB/sek)
I should be able to host from now on, just need to test if everyone can connect to me.
Anyway ran a few more to test the average speed.
Download: 41547 kb/sek (5193.4 KB/sek)
Upload: 46645 kb/sek (5830.6 KB/sek)
Download: 39483 kb/sek (4935.4 KB/sek)
Upload: 46645 kb/sek (5830.6 KB/sek)
Download: 41049 kb/sek (5131.1 KB/sek)
Upload: 46645 kb/sek (5830.6 KB/sek)
I should be able to host from now on, just need to test if everyone can connect to me.
after talking to ampo i'm curious what you guys think about making a rule to change navalwarfare in the later half of this game since where reaching the point warships are better then galleys
my suggestion would be that we put a limit on the amount of warships that can be build by a player
the concept i was thinking is
we can build max 10% warships of the total fleet
wich basicle means 100warships out of 1000ships fleet
ofcourse this is just a example but limiting it this way would give us several advantages lategame
- fleets won't be whiped out so fast since galleyfirepower aint great
- uber admirals won't be so insane, able to win a war in 1batle is less likly due to the reduced firepower
- easyer to rebuild after fighting a war or even during a war since a galley cost 1/5 of a warship often and take 1/3 of the time to build
- cheaper for everybody so you don't loose 50 000 gold in 1 batle or even in a war
- easyer to go over support since galleys don't cost insane amounts to go over support like with warships wich benefits countrys like dutch or portugal ect
- makes it more likly poorer nations can keep a descent fleet going and less likly that a single player can dominate the sea
and ofcourse i realize certain people got a warship fleet already but thats easy to fix by refund tbh
my suggestion would be that we put a limit on the amount of warships that can be build by a player
the concept i was thinking is
we can build max 10% warships of the total fleet
wich basicle means 100warships out of 1000ships fleet
ofcourse this is just a example but limiting it this way would give us several advantages lategame
- fleets won't be whiped out so fast since galleyfirepower aint great
- uber admirals won't be so insane, able to win a war in 1batle is less likly due to the reduced firepower
- easyer to rebuild after fighting a war or even during a war since a galley cost 1/5 of a warship often and take 1/3 of the time to build
- cheaper for everybody so you don't loose 50 000 gold in 1 batle or even in a war
- easyer to go over support since galleys don't cost insane amounts to go over support like with warships wich benefits countrys like dutch or portugal ect
- makes it more likly poorer nations can keep a descent fleet going and less likly that a single player can dominate the sea
and ofcourse i realize certain people got a warship fleet already but thats easy to fix by refund tbh
I generally oppose hard-to-control rules like these, but I'll stay neutral in this matter and listen to what other people think.
i dont like it too...just think about someone who went pluto because of cheaper warships...
such a rule should be proposed before the game starts...not in the middle...
such a rule should be proposed before the game starts...not in the middle...
EarendilHE said:
plutocrasy is stil better for income eitherway tho
well was just a idea, i won't bother to go further in this if people wan't it
however it doesn't really matter when its proposed, its stil a viable concept to make the endgame better
admiral drake said:
Just nerf endgame admirals.
Or was that done by AGCEEP leaders?