There's also the fact that Portugal and Castille launch wars against Mali and don't move their troops... So they're losing time and potentially gold..
Didn't see Poland and Spain suceed since Third Rome
- Thread starter Vince75
- 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.
imo the hardest problem for poland is their starting Ruler when they take the PU. While all around them start with some mil-skill they got one point. Also it seems to me, that they have a realy hard time with the renaissance. So they are on miltech 3, while everyone around them is 4-5. Thats the perfect dogpilling setup (besides everyone seems to hate them or at least not like poland well enough to help).Its propably conformation bias tho...
I can also confirm that Spain doesn't colonize America as they used too and Portugal doesn't go exploring the coast of Africa. And Collonism almost always spawns in England
Every country not in Italy will have problems with Renesanse, Portugal, England, Denmark. Poland will have good times with Printing Press instead. Also Eastern Europe should be a bit behind.
Poland is not attacked in 1st 10 years. And in that period they get Jagielon who is ok ruler.
Dogpiling is historically accurate, exept there should be "historical friend" mod with Poland and HUngary, due to strong dynastical ties, same rules Wladislaw of Varna, and recent crusade against Ottomans. There is even a truce in game after Crusade of Varna.
And playing poland could be more interesting. With more interaction with election and Sejm doing something. Or mission to bind Livonia and turn it into Kurland duchy.
Last edited:
But Poland gets a 30-40% "problem" with the renaissance, while the ottomans get a 20% like "porblem with the renaissance. Their Jagielon Ruler was a wonderful 1 skill in mil, so they are stuck with tech 3 like forever. In my games the turks are stomping the poles frequently with a tech 5 to tech 3, which leads to a 1500 dogpiling which is a bit early for the "history" argument imo.
What is the statline of Wladyslaw Jagiellon?
Maybe game should value Kazimir a bit higher. He made some effort to pimp Lithunia economy, war with TO was quite succesful, diplomatic polka with Papacy was also a task.
Overall quite good ruler. And the game could show that more.
Yet, still i want that Angvenian union, since that would be very different alternative story. (Louis the Great, Wladyslaw of Warna).
And polish Sejm could show more internat struggle, with factions of nobles, crown, oligarchy, and commoners fighting each other.
Renaissance in Poland was kinda delayed. And 40% is about right.
Maybe game should value Kazimir a bit higher. He made some effort to pimp Lithunia economy, war with TO was quite succesful, diplomatic polka with Papacy was also a task.
Overall quite good ruler. And the game could show that more.
Yet, still i want that Angvenian union, since that would be very different alternative story. (Louis the Great, Wladyslaw of Warna).
And polish Sejm could show more internat struggle, with factions of nobles, crown, oligarchy, and commoners fighting each other.
Renaissance in Poland was kinda delayed. And 40% is about right.
Last edited:
I don't argue against the renaissance taking long for eastern europe but it doesn't help them.
His Statline is 4 4 1. Admin and Diplo is ok'ish to good, but his Militaryskill is crucial bad, when your neighbours have all better stats and/or a quicker institution (also lithuania as juniorpartner takes even longer to tech up because of their huge but low-dev land). Maybe it will get better with the ottoman treatment (they will lose their anatolian cores in 1.23), so they need longer to set their eye beyond anatolia and Byzantium. But at least a early/midgame polish powerhouse (or horse... ok i stop joking) would be nice to see again.
- Both Poland and Spain sometimes reject unions offers
- Both Poland and Spain have vastly superior neighbors
- Both Poland and Spain have not very good starting rulers
For Spain the main problem is that France has 100 development more from the start and after some initial expansion the development gap increases dramatically. Portugal witthout any military NIs is more of a burden than a help and French military NIs are better than Spanish ones.
AI colonization is a complete farce/joke/laughingstock. Playing a game just screwing around as Castile (fishing out some of the easy achievements I've not bothered with ever), I have ToT on literally every single colonial region in the default world aside Canada, which France got.
You might think this is because I killed Portugal or something, but no. I allied Portugal and France from the start and chewed through Africa to beat down Ottomans + West Africa while colonizing with only exploration.
So despite that I left Portugal intact, Portugal allied France too, and I completely plastered Morocco (so no bad Portuguese war there)...POORtugal has 0 new world colonies. Despite a 25% range NI that lets then colonize Caribbean at DIP 3, they could send nothing before I ToT claimed every region without exception.
This is not something that should be possible without actually contesting other colonizers. The AI has fallen to pieces with this stuff. This isn't something you fix by trying to buff Iberia.
Poland gets crushed by superbuff Ottomans and Russia...the latter often a target of complaints about strength despite having been stronger than history at 1444 in every single patch of EU 4's existence.
Of course despite that my CNs have fought either literally nothing or some natives at worst they've found ways to accrue > 5000 ducats in total debt between them all less than halfway into the game. Colonial Caribbean is particularly egregious, having built a few forts --> income of > 20 still but managing to go into debt having contributed nothing to any war in its existence.
Edicts and fort logic are killing the AI and apparently it doesn't know how to colonize decently.
You might think this is because I killed Portugal or something, but no. I allied Portugal and France from the start and chewed through Africa to beat down Ottomans + West Africa while colonizing with only exploration.
So despite that I left Portugal intact, Portugal allied France too, and I completely plastered Morocco (so no bad Portuguese war there)...POORtugal has 0 new world colonies. Despite a 25% range NI that lets then colonize Caribbean at DIP 3, they could send nothing before I ToT claimed every region without exception.
This is not something that should be possible without actually contesting other colonizers. The AI has fallen to pieces with this stuff. This isn't something you fix by trying to buff Iberia.
Poland gets crushed by superbuff Ottomans and Russia...the latter often a target of complaints about strength despite having been stronger than history at 1444 in every single patch of EU 4's existence.
Of course despite that my CNs have fought either literally nothing or some natives at worst they've found ways to accrue > 5000 ducats in total debt between them all less than halfway into the game. Colonial Caribbean is particularly egregious, having built a few forts --> income of > 20 still but managing to go into debt having contributed nothing to any war in its existence.
Edicts and fort logic are killing the AI and apparently it doesn't know how to colonize decently.
Spain doesn't have vastly superior neighbors, they have 1 neighbor with an ahistorically fast start
Spain being lower dev than France is quite historical, I mean it's economy depended on the low countries and the colonies. Also Spain gains about as much dev through the unions as France through uniting the French lands
Spain should really get a lot of area wide claims, maybe even perma claims on mesos and incas through missions to increase their chances of gaining those crucial gold fleets from colonies. And the naval AI is a problem with Spain/Portugal, less than with GB but still
What would really help them is to slow France down, at least in the first 50 years or so. Whenever I ally them and they get the union, they expand to 1000dev or more all by themselves without any help, just saving them from aggression in the first 50 years
The thing is that as soon as Spain&Portugal are getting DOW by Aragon&France or even France alone, Morocco and other maghreb countries DOW them, and they often win, and they also sometimes have a better fleet... It should be very rare...
That's a thing that I observed also sometimes. Looked really weird that Portugal had exactly 2 provinces in Africa by 1500 (that northernmost desert colony + a random other province like south of Beafada). They did not even take Cape Verde (!?) nor did they expand to the Americas, while they were not really under pressure in Europe.
In 5 games I've seen Poland fail every time, by about the mid 1500s it's completely gone. Combination of having all it's diplo slots taken at the start so no alliances and being surrounded by powers that have been buffed consistently over the past few patches (Bohemia, Hungary, Russia, Denmark). Teutonic Order and Livonians alone can take them some time and attrition to get through due to having stellar starting armies and a ton of forts, add in the usual Hungary and Kalmar Union allies and even a player would have some difficulty managing it. In fact, I usually see them get wrecked before Muscovy is really a problem for them, though a powerful Russia certainly seals the deal. Then of course Ottomans, the nigh invincible scourge of the AI that often allies Bohemia.
Add on to this Poland and Lithuania both can get wrecked by revolters and pinata pretty easily if they run into some war exhaustion.
As others have mentioned, a historical friendship with Hungary would go a long way towards giving both of those nations a realistic and helpful behavior. Let Hungary focus to the south, and Poland secure east and north (not to mention resulting in less hideous trans-carpathian borders!)
Spain is less doomed from what I've seen. Though the Civil War seems overly harsh on them. Funny how that's one that can ruin them while the War of the Roses that spanned decades is not always going to happen and spawns one rebel stack that's less of a threat than the lollards. Add in an unbelievably bad ruler and they can easily fall behind militarily and economically. And of course the AI is dumb as hell with colonizing, the greatest advantage of Castile. In fact, Castilian Caribbean or Mexico are quite the rarity, yet I see Castilian Mali more often.
Add on to this Poland and Lithuania both can get wrecked by revolters and pinata pretty easily if they run into some war exhaustion.
As others have mentioned, a historical friendship with Hungary would go a long way towards giving both of those nations a realistic and helpful behavior. Let Hungary focus to the south, and Poland secure east and north (not to mention resulting in less hideous trans-carpathian borders!)
Spain is less doomed from what I've seen. Though the Civil War seems overly harsh on them. Funny how that's one that can ruin them while the War of the Roses that spanned decades is not always going to happen and spawns one rebel stack that's less of a threat than the lollards. Add in an unbelievably bad ruler and they can easily fall behind militarily and economically. And of course the AI is dumb as hell with colonizing, the greatest advantage of Castile. In fact, Castilian Caribbean or Mexico are quite the rarity, yet I see Castilian Mali more often.
I don't have the last 2 DLCs (Mandate of Heaven & Third Rome) & I am not seeing the CN debt problem, so I think it is a safe assumption that edicts are a problem for the AI.
I have noticed that my CNs are very enthusiastic about culture-converting any provinces I conquer for them - which is something I almost never do, as I feel like I have better uses for my DIP. Wouldn't it be more cost-efficient for the CN to spend the DIP to accept the culture instead (they get +2 accepted cultures, right?), rather than to convert the individual provinces? Just wondering...
Without the recent DLCs, the colonizing countries do seem to colonize at a decent clip, so again edicts may be the source of the problem you are seeing. It wouldn't surprise me that AI overspending on edicts restricts the AI budget for colonizing.
One thing I have noticed about CN colonizing is that they seem obsessed with colonizing adjacent provinces & ignore (1 province) islands. My Colonial Caribbean CN colonized the rest of Cuba & Hispaniola working off adjacency from the provinces I colonized on each of those islands, but has never colonized any of the other islands in the Caribbean. Instead, it has colonized on mainland South America, working off adjacency from the Caribbean island (Trinidad?) with a strait to the mainland that I colonized originally.
And this is probably just confirmation bias, but my CNs really seem to love to colonize outside of their colonial region whenever they get the chance. Colonial California grabs as much of Alaska as it can get, Colonial Lousiana will colonize into Mexico & Eastern America if it can get away with it, Colonial Canada loves to take a bite of Eastern America, & Colonial Colombia will always colonize west past Panama s far as it can go. While I admire their aggressiveness, I would prefer that they fill in their colonial regions before they start coloring outside the box.
I don't have the last 2 DLCs (Mandate of Heaven & Third Rome) & I am not seeing the CN debt problem, so I think it is a safe assumption that edicts are a problem for the AI.
I have noticed that my CNs are very enthusiastic about culture-converting any provinces I conquer for them - which is something I almost never do, as I feel like I have better uses for my DIP. Wouldn't it be more cost-efficient for the CN to spend the DIP to accept the culture instead (they get +2 accepted cultures, right?), rather than to convert the individual provinces? Just wondering...
Without the recent DLCs, the colonizing countries do seem to colonize at a decent clip, so again edicts may be the source of the problem you are seeing. It wouldn't surprise me that AI overspending on edicts restricts the AI budget for colonizing.
One thing I have noticed about CN colonizing is that they seem obsessed with colonizing adjacent provinces & ignore (1 province) islands. My Colonial Caribbean CN colonized the rest of Cuba & Hispaniola working off adjacency from the provinces I colonized on each of those islands, but has never colonized any of the other islands in the Caribbean. Instead, it has colonized on mainland South America, working off adjacency from the Caribbean island (Trinidad?) with a strait to the mainland that I colonized originally.
And this is probably just confirmation bias, but my CNs really seem to love to colonize outside of their colonial region whenever they get the chance. Colonial California grabs as much of Alaska as it can get, Colonial Lousiana will colonize into Mexico & Eastern America if it can get away with it, Colonial Canada loves to take a bite of Eastern America, & Colonial Colombia will always colonize west past Panama s far as it can go. While I admire their aggressiveness, I would prefer that they fill in their colonial regions before they start coloring outside the box.
CNs will never colonize anything except adjacent provinces from what I've seen. They will not colonize 1 province islands at all. Australia won't colonize in the west or in NZ unless it has land there already. Caribbean won't colonize 1 province islands or provinces not connected by strait lines already bordering one of their provinces.
I doubt CNs prioritize out-of-region, but I see no evidence that they care either...seems they just pick an adjacent province and colonize it. Now that their settler growth isn't kneecapped they are decent enough though, especially if getting ToT boost.
So basically if it doesn't have Trinidad colonial Caribbean will never colonize outside the Caribbean...but eventually colonial Columbia will colonize Trinidad. No CN will ever naturally colonize Jamaica (has to be the overlord) etc. I guess Pdox couldn't find a way to prevent them colonizing outside their colonial regions using sea pathing and just made them work on adjacency only.
Maybe it really is edict bankrupting the AI. That's kind of sad, and I find it difficult to believe that it didn't come up in basic testing since it's an every-game-without-exception deal if you watch subjects. Why didn't they just go the "sortie" route and have the AI never use edicts if they're going to be priced like this?
The only "upside" is that it's possible to feed 800+ development vassals and ignore LD since you can just pay off debt for nearly - 200% LD.
Wrong. I've already seen the West Indies colonize in Colombia or Mexico.
France has 40% more development and 30% larger force limit at start. But after France gets back it's cores and annexes Brittany and Provence, it's development reaches 568, which is overwhelmingly more than the whole Iberia combined.
The other problem for Castile is England: it's +20% Naval Morale in traditions is such a huge advantage, that Castile\Spain can be kicked out from the colonies with relatively no efforts.
Yes, historical, but the fact that Spain was kicked by France constantly is completely not.
Spain should really get a lot of area wide claims, maybe even perma claims on mesos and incas through missions to increase their chances of gaining those crucial gold fleets from colonies. And the naval AI is a problem with Spain/Portugal, less than with GB but still
IMO the whole Iberia needs a decent rework: more development, better provinces, updated setup (Castile rivaling Aragon is a complete fantasy) and updated NIs (not sure about Castile, but Portugal and Aragon might enjoy a better army quality for sure).
Main issue I feel with Castille is that the historical outcome does not at all follow game-wise from the way it's setup. Castille has a terrible start, at least for a major power. They start with one ally in Portugal, but Portugal is basically useless. Portugal doesn't have a large army and only a decent navy, and starts the game getting involved with England's disastrous war with France and/or getting involved with defending territory in Africa that it can't defend without Castillian aid. If handled right Portugal can be some help, but especially for the AI it's worse than useless. There's good reason why a popular tactic is still to just eat Portugal.
Then there's Aragon. They practically start rivaled. While Aragon is somewhat weaker than Castille it isn't by much and they've got good allies typically. Naples is a good draw, and getting France just demolishes Castille. They don't gain much there. And it's so very pointless if the PU pops up, as now two rivals come together after they've been spending money and manpower killing each other.
Down south you've got foes that aren't up to par for Castille, but more than capable to take advantage if Castille gets weakened, and are usually willing to give it a go. If Castille wins such a fight, they get little as the lands aren't great, can't be converted till later, and are great for rebels. All while costing double the admin. But if they lose they lose territory. Terrible combo, lose/lose.
France can sometimes be an ally, but more often goes towards Aragon. Allying France usually leads to status quo, while fighting France means losing.
They've got pretty much the worst ruler setup imaginable. That certainly never helps. Terrible rulers, need to roll the die to get the PU to become like traditional Spain, and they'll spend the first years being backwards in tech advancement because they lack much connection to Italy. Made then worse by a disaster that just sucks. The rewards are terrible and the rebels are harsh.
Then there's Aragon. They practically start rivaled. While Aragon is somewhat weaker than Castille it isn't by much and they've got good allies typically. Naples is a good draw, and getting France just demolishes Castille. They don't gain much there. And it's so very pointless if the PU pops up, as now two rivals come together after they've been spending money and manpower killing each other.
Down south you've got foes that aren't up to par for Castille, but more than capable to take advantage if Castille gets weakened, and are usually willing to give it a go. If Castille wins such a fight, they get little as the lands aren't great, can't be converted till later, and are great for rebels. All while costing double the admin. But if they lose they lose territory. Terrible combo, lose/lose.
France can sometimes be an ally, but more often goes towards Aragon. Allying France usually leads to status quo, while fighting France means losing.
They've got pretty much the worst ruler setup imaginable. That certainly never helps. Terrible rulers, need to roll the die to get the PU to become like traditional Spain, and they'll spend the first years being backwards in tech advancement because they lack much connection to Italy. Made then worse by a disaster that just sucks. The rewards are terrible and the rebels are harsh.
They won't do it unless they have a province there. Obviously, if they have Trinidad already they can reach Columbia.
This rule also doesn't apply to independent CNs or conquest.