diplo annex cost for subjects in 1.13

[atwix]

wiki says (for 1.11)

Even with a −100% modifier to annexation cost, annexation will still cost a minimum of 12.5% of the full annexation cost.

Is this still correct for 1.13? I find 12,5% a weird number..

So all bonuses to diminish diplo annexation cost stack then?

I just need some feedback, to plan my QING campaign up to 1821

 

[ThePatriotOfDreumel]

It's 12,5% because the base cost is 8 per development, and the minimal cost per development is 1.

 

[SolSys]

Minimum annexation/coring will always be 1 MP per 1 development.

The reason for the 'weird' number is the starting base cost [annexation-dip 1/8 * 100% = 12.5% ; coring-adm 1/10 * 100% = 10%].

 

[atwix]

It's 12,5% because the base cost is 8 per development, and the minimal cost per development is 1.

I've never been good at memorizing the formulae behind eu4 mechanics.

One thing I still want to know:

How is diplo annex cost from admin efficiency calculated?

Is 20% administrative efficiency same as 20% diplo annex cost less?

Let me do quick calculation then..

influence idea group -25%, admin+infl policy -20% and two levels of administrative efficiency will almost be close to minimal diplo annex cost then.. right? aka 85% out of 87,5% max reduction?

 

[Aythne]

I've never been good at memorizing the formulae behind eu4 mechanics.

One thing I still want to know:

How is diplo annex cost from admin efficiency calculated?

Is 20% administrative efficiency same as 20% diplo annex cost less?

Let me do quick calculation then..

influence idea group -25%, admin+infl policy -20% and two levels of administrative efficiency will almost be close to minimal diplo annex cost then.. right? aka 85% out of 87,5% max reduction?

No, Efficiency is multiplicative. Yes, Paradox is infuriating sometimes as it is impossible to figure out which percentages are additive and which are multiplicative. (The vast majority are additive though, thus why -merc maintenance is a garbage bonus.)

 

[atwix]

ehh..

sigh. I got no clue how to calculate then what is needed to get 87,5% reduced cost of 1 diplo power for 1 development.

If I read the word MULTIPLICATIVE I tend to think "run for the hills!!!'

 

[Vaximillian]

No, Efficiency is multiplicative. Yes, Paradox is infuriating sometimes as it is impossible to figure out which percentages are additive and which are multiplicative. (The vast majority are additive though, thus why -merc maintenance is a garbage bonus.)

I think they should standartise the bonuses, make them either all additive or all multiplicative. All of them.

 

[Path]

ehh..

sigh. I got no clue how to calculate then what is needed to get 87,5% reduced cost of 1 diplo power for 1 development.

If I read the word MULTIPLICATIVE I tend to think "run for the hills!!!'

Most tags can't, period. With max efficiency, influence and the Rapid-Integration Act you're looking at 1.76 bird mana per development--you'd need NIs that reduce the cost (or pray for events that lower it temporarily). Because Paradox maths. Whether this is intended is debatable--it's inconsistent with how coring works, and the UI flat out lies about the cost, so either the UI is wrong or diplo annexation is (still) bugged. It gets even better if some of the clay you're annexing has ICC...

 

[Aythne]

I think they should standartise the bonuses, make them either all additive or all multiplicative. All of them.

Eh, that's very limiting. If anything, there should be more multiplicative bonuses (Merc Maintenance, as I mentioned. Overseas Coring, since I feel like getting a lot of "Respectful Disagreements".)

The issue is that there is not enough information given to the player in the interface. -33% merc maintenance seems great to a new player until they realize it's only added after the merc cost increase and so doesn't do nearly as much as they imagined it would. If in the mercenary costs you could see the maintenance breakdown (i.e. base cost + 150% - whatever bonus) it would clear up a lot of misunderstandings.

 

[atwix]

Most tags can't, period. With max efficiency, influence and the Rapid-Integration Act you're looking at 1.76 bird mana per development--you'd need NIs that reduce the cost (or pray for events that lower it temporarily). Because Paradox maths. Whether this is intended is debatable--it's inconsistent with how coring works, and the UI flat out lies about the cost, so either the UI is wrong or diplo annexation is (still) bugged. It gets even better if some of the clay you're annexing has ICC...

at least i got a number now I can trust (if it comes from you @Path I believe it )

Hmpfrt. So what if I win a debate in parliament for extra -diplo annex cost...

What event lowers diplo annex cost permanently? Specific nation events?

anyways, 1,76 diplo point cost per development doesn't sound too bad.

Think i'll take diplomatic and influence idea group and see where I can get.

 

[Vaximillian]

What event lowers diplo annex cost permanently?

I don't know about a permanent decrease, but there is an event in CS that gives -15% for 5 years:

Trigger:

• 
  
  
  • Has the DLC common sense
  • The following returns at least 3 entities:
    • All subject countries:
      • Has an opinion of at least 125 with our country
      • Liberty desire is less than 10

Base mean time to happen of 1 days


Option "This time will be remembered":

• 
  
  
  • Adds the modifier "Loyal Subjects" for 5 years:
    • +1 diplomatic reputation
    • -15% diplomatic annexation cost

Option "This should be exploited":

• 
  
  
  • Changes diplomatic power stored by 60

Spoiler

[/code]
# Loyal Subjects
country_event = {
id = subject_interaction_events.34
title = subject_interaction_events.34.t
desc = subject_interaction_events.34.d
picture = COURT_eventPicture

is_triggered_only = yes

trigger = {
has_dlc = "Common Sense"
calc_true_if = {
all_subject_country = {
has_opinion = {
who = ROOT
value = 125
}
NOT = { liberty_desire = 10 }
}
amount = 3
}
}
mean_time_to_happen = {
days = 1
}
option = {
name = subject_interaction_events.34.a # Long term gain
add_country_modifier = {
name = "loyal_subjects"
duration = 1825 #About 5 years
}
}
option = {
name = subject_interaction_events.34.b # Short term gain
add_dip_power = 60
}
}[/code]

 

[atwix]

hmm, that seems usable to knock off cost at the very last moment.

 

[SolSys]

It might be easier with the formula in front of you [taken from the wiki]:

dip cost = 8 * dev * [1 - admin efficiency] * [1 - annexation modifiers] * [1 + hostile core modifiers]

For example: max admin efficiency + Influence idea and policy modifiers + max hostile modifiers

dip cost = 8 * dev * [1 - 0.6] * [1 - 0.45] * [1 + 0.5] = 2.64 * dev


EDIT: I left out the rounding down to make it easy to remember.

 

[Zelius]

Doesn't it stack additively?

Recently at admin efficiency 1 with Influence + Vassal Integration Act I've diplo-annexed two vassals of 200 dev for 400 dip each, meaning:

dip cost = 8 * (1 - 0.2 - 0.45 + 0) = 2.8. This is then rounded down to 2.

 

[Aythne]

It might be easier with the formula in front of you [taken from the wiki]:

dip cost = 8 * dev * [1 - admin efficiency] * [1 - annexation modifiers] * [1 + hostile core modifiers]

For example: max admin efficiency + Influence idea and policy modifiers + max hostile modifiers

dip cost = 8 * dev * [1 - 0.6] * [1 - 0.45] * [1 + 0.5] = 2.64 * dev

If that formula is on the wiki, then someone made a big mistake.

There are not three categories of modifiers: both your "annexation modifiers" and "hostile core modifiers" are simply additive modifiers, and are calculated together. This is the easiest thing in the world to verify. Choose any nation who is overseas vis-à-vis a nation with hostile coring cost. Fez is 10 development and according to this formula should cost 75 admin to core in 1444 (10*10*1*0.5*1.5), but it costs 100, meaning the -50% and +50% are just cancelling each other out.

Doesn't it stack additively?

Recently at admin efficiency 1 with Influence + Vassal Integration Act I've diplo-annexed two vassals of 200 dev for 400 dip each, meaning:

dip cost = 8 * (1 - 0.2 - 0.45 + 0) = 2.8. This is then rounded down to 2.

When first implemented Administrative Efficiency stacked additively, but this was an error. If it's still doing that then they've buggered it up once again.

 

[Zelius]

When first implemented Administrative Efficiency stacked additively, but this was an error. If it's still doing that then they've buggered it up once again.

That's what I think I've been getting; now that I come to think on it, it's within the realm of possibility that I had admin efficiency 2, so 8 * (0.6) * (0.55) = 2.64 which rounds down to 2. Will test in detail later.

 

[SolSys]

If that formula is on the wiki, then someone made a big mistake.
*unrelated stuff*

Yes, what you said is right.
About CORING.

The thing is he asked about ANNEXATION.

 

[Aythne]

Yes, what you said is right.
About CORING.

The thing is he asked about ANNEXATION.

Tested and true. This is the dumbest thing I've ever seen, though. You've got two parallel systems, using all the same modifiers but behaving completely differently... I really, really love Paradox, but sometimes they make it hard to.

 

[SolSys]

Tested and true. This is the dumbest thing I've ever seen, though. You've got two parallel systems, using all the same modifiers but behaving completely differently... I really, really love Paradox, but sometimes they make it hard to.

They are supposed to work differently.
One is a diplomatic approach [dip] and the other is a militaristic approach [adm].

 

[Aythne]

They are supposed to work differently.
One is a diplomatic approach [dip] and the other is a militaristic approach [adm].

Complexity for complexity's sake is bad design. They're already different mechanics (one is paid for upfront with each province taken, the other over a longer period of time during diplomatic annexation). But there is zero reason for the behind-the-scenes numbers to behave differently when their structure is identical (base cost, modified by administrative efficiency, positive modifiers and negative modifiers that are carbon copies of each other). It just obfuscates things for the player without any benefits.