Expansion idea set

[makaramus]

its good for very late game colonizing where you got very huge colonize range + good to claim india. other than that its junk
only reason I will pick it is if I am playing hre france game where I need to pick 2 diplo idea allready

 

[Mr. G]

It is good for eg. the Mamelucks since you want the CB on the trade regions, one colonist is enough, and the extra merchant is handy.

 

[Badesumofu]

It is good for eg. the Mamelucks since you want the CB on the trade regions, one colonist is enough, and the extra merchant is handy.

Or you could just conquer your way to India or simply no-CB your way in. That's a lot better vale than getting an entire Admin group just so you can fabricate claims.

Exploration gets missions that give claims into the TC regions not to mention that you can just drop colonists onto islands to get fabricating range.

 

[TheMeInTeam]

Or you could just conquer your way to India or simply no-CB your way in. That's a lot better vale than getting an entire Admin group just so you can fabricate claims.

Exploration gets missions that give claims into the TC regions not to mention that you can just drop colonists onto islands to get fabricating range.

Oman --> Baluchistan isn't even that far :/.

 

[ThatRabidPotato]

All the Norway discussion in this thread makes me depressed. That's the only country I've tried so far in EU that I just can't make work. All my Norway runs end in 1500 at the latest with England backstabbing me and beating my rear end. I've had more success with no cheese Byzantium.

 

[Kergan]

Or you could just conquer your way to India or simply no-CB your way in. That's a lot better vale than getting an entire Admin group just so you can fabricate claims.

Better yet, temporarily enable the group at tech 10 to pick a base in india mission, and then dump the group - free claim.

 

[TenshiN]

I only ever take it as a coloniser and because its extra colonist is a first idea. Everything else is of questionable use though.

 

[Mr. G]

Or you could just conquer your way to India or simply no-CB your way in. That's a lot better vale than getting an entire Admin group just so you can fabricate claims.

Exploration gets missions that give claims into the TC regions not to mention that you can just drop colonists onto islands to get fabricating range.

Yeah, but you need the colonist for filling out the gaps in Africa. And like I said, the merchant is good to have.

 

[bbqftw]

What is also good. Not having +33% core cost, not having +2 unrest, or not being locked out of picking an admin group for the next pick...

It is best to express things in terms of opportunity cost.

For example nothing is quite so illuminating about why you should run wars in parallel as realizing that you are taking a 0.1 local autonomy penalty for every month you needlessly ran a war in sequence..

 

[makaramus]

it needs a rework and colonist must be placed to end of idea group!

it should be idea about expanding borders of nation.

here is the group I have in mind

1)Core creation speed %25
2)envoy travel time %35 + you can allways see adjent lands to you
3)Army movement speed %5
4)+1 diplomatic relations
5)+1 colonist
6)+1 merchant
7)faster colonial growth

same bonus.

 

[TheMeInTeam]

^ That would be incredibly strong, but I doubt we'd see it exist without a major nerf to administrative. I doubt Pdox would allow so much stacked RCC to become generally available. Generic nations could hit 50-60% easily enough, and any nation with a 20% NI or better could go Hindu or Coptic and routinely eat hundreds of OE at once, coring it away before rebels pop...for most of the game.

I like the -OE idea. If that's made strong enough it could make the group worth taking, and -OE impact by itself is a modifier that does not yet exist. It fits thematically with the idea group title too.

 

[makaramus]

^ That would be incredibly strong, but I doubt we'd see it exist without a major nerf to administrative. I doubt Pdox would allow so much stacked RCC to become generally available. Generic nations could hit 50-60% easily enough, and any nation with a 20% NI or better could go Hindu or Coptic and routinely eat hundreds of OE at once, coring it away before rebels pop...for most of the game.

I like the -OE idea. If that's made strong enough it could make the group worth taking, and -OE impact by itself is a modifier that does not yet exist. It fits thematically with the idea group title too.

yea but that idea is not reducing core cost just overall speed ^_^'''

 

[TheMeInTeam]

yea but that idea is not reducing core cost just overall speed ^_^'''

It's the speed that would let you core 500% OE at once though, so I doubt we'd see that absent other changes.

-OE impact could be implemented in its own right without as much interaction potential, other than wanting more vassals to take it.

 

[Coffer]

For example nothing is quite so illuminating about why you should run wars in parallel as realizing that you are taking a 0.1 local autonomy penalty for every month you needlessly ran a war in sequence..

I don't get why it shouldn't stack when running them in parallel. As it stands, that sounds cheesy.

 

[ShoGuL]

I have only ever picked Expansion twice.

First, as Portugal going Exploration -> Expansion, only picking the very first idea until the Age of Exploration ends for the extra colonist while you have +50 settler growth and +3 dev per colony (you can use spare admin points to increase tariffs instead). Then immediately dumping the idea in favour of economic or humanist (depending on you want to focus new world or africa/asia first).

Second, I picked it recently in a Tall Japan colonizer game. Idea being that I house ruled myself out of doing anything but developing and colonizing (+taiwan and korea), taking advantage of -30% dev cost of national idea / shinto / mandate of heaven

If you want to actually play the game and do anything but colonize, virtually every admin group is a better pick. In the long run, even the +1 colonistis is barely worth it for colonizing since other groups will let you earn more money faster, and thus run an extra colony above your limit.

 

[Badesumofu]

I don't get why it shouldn't stack when running them in parallel. As it stands, that sounds cheesy.

Being at peace grants a monthly LA reduction. When you're at war you don't get it. I'm not sure how that effect could conceivably stack.

 

[Coffer]

Being at peace grants a monthly LA reduction. When you're at war you don't get it. I'm not sure how that effect could conceivably stack.

That's exactly why it sounds weird to me as a newish player, so I'm trying to understand why it is the way it is. Using a static reduction for when you're not at war (ie making being at war the neutral state) instead of a constant increase for each war you're in (making NOT being at war the neutral state, ie the opposite) is a weird design choice to me, and facilitating the ability to do multiple parallel wars is one of the reasons for it.

 

[Badesumofu]

That's exactly why it sounds weird to me as a newish player, so I'm trying to understand why it is the way it is. Using a static reduction for when you're not at war (ie making being at war the neutral state) instead of a constant increase for each war you're in (making NOT being at war the neutral state, ie the opposite) is a weird design choice to me, and facilitating the ability to do multiple parallel wars is one of the reasons for it.

That's not quite a fair description of how it works. Being at war negates the monthly LA reduction you get when you're at peace. You're either at peace or you're at war - it's a binary proposition. If you're at peace you get -LA per month as a bonus. If you're not at peace you don't get it.

A natural consequence of that is that it makes more sense to run wars in parallel where it's convenient to do so. There are circumstances where it makes more sense to run them in serial, by the way.

That doesn't make either war or peace the neutral state anymore than the 75% tax modifier you get from having a core on a province makes having a province be uncored the neutral state.

 

[Coffer]

That's not quite a fair description of how it works. Being at war negates the monthly LA reduction you get when you're at peace. You're either at peace or you're at war - it's a binary proposition. If you're at peace you get -LA per month as a bonus. If you're not at peace you don't get it.

? That's exactly my point - I see that binary proposition as being a weird design choice that I'm not sure I understand just yet. You even described exactly how being at war is made to be the neutral state, because you get something ("bonus", as you said) when you're not at war, ie it's something you don't "normally" have.

That doesn't make either war or peace the neutral state anymore than the 75% tax modifier you get from having a core on a province makes having a province be uncored the neutral state.

That is a more convoluted example, but if that's how it works then I do indeed see that as being a case where no core = neutral state, even if that means the neutral state is almost never in effect.

 

[gia257]

Expansion has been functioning as a poor man's hybrid of Exploration and Trade, yet hogs up an admin spot. so many of the ideas are putrid....the -10% recruitment time and -10% shipbuilding time for starters. the -25% state maintenance and finisher also seem underwhelming. I don't even think it has AE reduction in it excluding policies (the old finisher CB used to give this).

could this idea set be re-evaluated like Aristocratic was?

the finisher is good even if you dont care bout it

now the 10%s suck yeah

+1 colonist
settler increase +10, uncover terra incognita neighboring your cores (also across sea zones)
+1 merchant
-10% recruitment time -10% shipbuilding time
+1 diplo rel
-25% state maintenance // or +10% land force limit to mimic exploration
trade power +20%
may claim across trade company regions, threaten war recovers at double rate