I just finished (or close to finishing, won't continue till time runs out, reasons later) a campaign as Milan -> Italy. This is how I ended up:
Nothing grand but I've never been one to blob. I like to roleplay my conquests. Savoy is my vassal and Carlogrecia a client state. France has been my ally almost the whole game. They hated and rivaled me for a couple of years as they had the "conquer lombardy" -mission but as soon as they abandoned that, they became my friends again.
Things I like in DLC:
- Client states. I like redrawing the map so these are fun. It's a shame that you can't make them on other continents and I recall Wiz(?) saying that they don't use diplomatic relations but for some reason they did for me.
- Papacy change. The system is much better than the old one. I don't fully understand it yet as I demoted the pope pretty early on in the game so it meant 0 influence for me for the rest of the game
- Religious war. Probably my favourite feature (the religious war in the empire turned France from hating me to being best buddies for life). I was unable to expand for quite a long time because Austria was constantly bullying me but when the religious war kicked in I joined the protestants (while being catholic myself) and managed to make complete balance shift in Europe as protestantism was made the official religion of the empire.
Features I'm not sure about:
- Unrest and autonomy. I think it's better than the old system but it seems way too easy to manage rebels now. I think I had only one revolt and that was pretty much instantly after conquering Tunisia (Tunisian patriots). Pretty much at the end of the game I was making tons of money so I decided to fund rebels in my rivals but noticed that pretty much throughout the whole game the unrest of every rebel type was 0 and most European nations had basically no revolts. So basically funding rebels was pointless.
Now to the bit I don't like. This is the reason why didn't bother to play until the end date:
Yes, almost every country westernised (apart from Incas, a couple of African minors and China with its neighbours). Westernisation is just way too easy and common now. The first country to westernise was Fulo and that happened in the first fifty(!) years of the game when Portugal conquered the coast. I understand that Paradox wanted to even out the playing field and previously a lot of players were complaining about the harshness of westernisation but this is just too much now. Westernisation is something that should happen quite rarely and it should be hard. A country the size of Egypt, Timurids or Ming should be nigh impossible to get westernised without massive revolts. In addition, westernisation should be incremental, a country in the African tech group shouldn't instantly jump to Western tech group but it should first westernise to Asian, then Eastern and then Western (like it was in EU3). The funny thing is that countries like the Commonwealth and Muscowy are still in the Eastern tech group where as most of Africa and Middle East is more advanced.
On to the bit that I didn't bother with: I just wanted to conquer Tunis just to get pretty borders. Tunisia is a vassal of Egypt, so going to war with them means dealing with quite a lot of doomstacks. I have slightly better military than Egypt, so I have no trouble defeating them. The problem is that in order to get territory I need to siege, and in order to siege I have to be in a situation where there isn't a doomstack constantly sitting next to my troops. I defeat one stack and before I have time to siege there's another one coming. Basically I could win just by ping ponging their armies to oblivion but that means marching back and forth deep into Egypt and I can't be bothered.
Of course, you might say that I'm just upset because I can't roflstomp a couple of North African states. Yes and no. If I was fighting Austria, I'd have no trouble with it because that's what I expect, I've been warring them the entire game. But fighting Tunisia, Tlemcen and Egypt, all of which are equal to Austria, Spain or France? Ridiculous, if you ask me. I'd understand if Tlemcen was westernised, they've been sitting next to Spain the whole game pretty peacefully so no trouble there. But Egypt? The only reason they are westernised (along with the Timurids) is because the Ottomans westernised. And that's the second problem with westernisation, when one country westernises, it causes a domino effect in all the countries behind it. There are countries in the middle of Africa that have never been at war any Western countries, they don't border them and they probably have never even met a Westerner and they are still in the Western tech group. It would be better if you could only Westernise when you are neighbouring a country that has been in the Western tech group since day one. No African tribe goes "Oh look, our neighbouring tribe has westernised. Let's learn all this stuff from them!".
Basically:
- Make westernisation harsher for large countries and make it incremental
- Westernising should only be possible when there is a country next to you that has been in a higher tech group since the beginning.
Nothing grand but I've never been one to blob. I like to roleplay my conquests. Savoy is my vassal and Carlogrecia a client state. France has been my ally almost the whole game. They hated and rivaled me for a couple of years as they had the "conquer lombardy" -mission but as soon as they abandoned that, they became my friends again.
Things I like in DLC:
- Client states. I like redrawing the map so these are fun. It's a shame that you can't make them on other continents and I recall Wiz(?) saying that they don't use diplomatic relations but for some reason they did for me.
- Papacy change. The system is much better than the old one. I don't fully understand it yet as I demoted the pope pretty early on in the game so it meant 0 influence for me for the rest of the game
- Religious war. Probably my favourite feature (the religious war in the empire turned France from hating me to being best buddies for life). I was unable to expand for quite a long time because Austria was constantly bullying me but when the religious war kicked in I joined the protestants (while being catholic myself) and managed to make complete balance shift in Europe as protestantism was made the official religion of the empire.
Features I'm not sure about:
- Unrest and autonomy. I think it's better than the old system but it seems way too easy to manage rebels now. I think I had only one revolt and that was pretty much instantly after conquering Tunisia (Tunisian patriots). Pretty much at the end of the game I was making tons of money so I decided to fund rebels in my rivals but noticed that pretty much throughout the whole game the unrest of every rebel type was 0 and most European nations had basically no revolts. So basically funding rebels was pointless.
Now to the bit I don't like. This is the reason why didn't bother to play until the end date:
Yes, almost every country westernised (apart from Incas, a couple of African minors and China with its neighbours). Westernisation is just way too easy and common now. The first country to westernise was Fulo and that happened in the first fifty(!) years of the game when Portugal conquered the coast. I understand that Paradox wanted to even out the playing field and previously a lot of players were complaining about the harshness of westernisation but this is just too much now. Westernisation is something that should happen quite rarely and it should be hard. A country the size of Egypt, Timurids or Ming should be nigh impossible to get westernised without massive revolts. In addition, westernisation should be incremental, a country in the African tech group shouldn't instantly jump to Western tech group but it should first westernise to Asian, then Eastern and then Western (like it was in EU3). The funny thing is that countries like the Commonwealth and Muscowy are still in the Eastern tech group where as most of Africa and Middle East is more advanced.
On to the bit that I didn't bother with: I just wanted to conquer Tunis just to get pretty borders. Tunisia is a vassal of Egypt, so going to war with them means dealing with quite a lot of doomstacks. I have slightly better military than Egypt, so I have no trouble defeating them. The problem is that in order to get territory I need to siege, and in order to siege I have to be in a situation where there isn't a doomstack constantly sitting next to my troops. I defeat one stack and before I have time to siege there's another one coming. Basically I could win just by ping ponging their armies to oblivion but that means marching back and forth deep into Egypt and I can't be bothered.
Of course, you might say that I'm just upset because I can't roflstomp a couple of North African states. Yes and no. If I was fighting Austria, I'd have no trouble with it because that's what I expect, I've been warring them the entire game. But fighting Tunisia, Tlemcen and Egypt, all of which are equal to Austria, Spain or France? Ridiculous, if you ask me. I'd understand if Tlemcen was westernised, they've been sitting next to Spain the whole game pretty peacefully so no trouble there. But Egypt? The only reason they are westernised (along with the Timurids) is because the Ottomans westernised. And that's the second problem with westernisation, when one country westernises, it causes a domino effect in all the countries behind it. There are countries in the middle of Africa that have never been at war any Western countries, they don't border them and they probably have never even met a Westerner and they are still in the Western tech group. It would be better if you could only Westernise when you are neighbouring a country that has been in the Western tech group since day one. No African tribe goes "Oh look, our neighbouring tribe has westernised. Let's learn all this stuff from them!".
Basically:
- Make westernisation harsher for large countries and make it incremental
- Westernising should only be possible when there is a country next to you that has been in a higher tech group since the beginning.
