For the love of god, lower the coring costs.

[GrounchoVilla]

Add an advisor type with -% coring costs

 

[mvm900]

My problem with this patch is that it makes being an OPM really difficult and makes nations with already increased coring costs really really obscene to conquer. I agree with the idea of increasing coring costs. They want to stop blobbing. I disagree with how /much/ they increased them. I mean it makes me actively not want to play smaller countries or countries that don't get autocores due to events or missions. It's not difficult at this point, it's just /annoying/.

 

[Sol_Invictus]

Mappainter genocide best day of my life
Being able to build those huge, efficient and stable empires with ease was always the biggest flaw of this game and I'm glad it's no longer the easiest way to build a strong nation. Perhaps we'll actually see some meaningful contest between regional powers now instead of a blobbing contest until ~1550 and stagnation and/or total war after that.

 

[RandomZach]

That's a bit extreme. Just mod core cost in the defines.. (nevermind, you can only change the cost for diplo annexing) this DLC is actually pretty excellent overall. I really like the forts and the revamped missions. The core cost is my only real gripe with Common Sense.

Spoiler

ANNEX_DIP_COST_PER_DEVELOPMENT = 10, -- per development

The define for coring cost is "PS_MAKE_PROVINCE_CORE".

 

[Morwys]

So what OP's saying is that early-modern Italy will be...difficult, time-consuming and expensive to conquer?

...

Not yet seeing the problem here

Me too.

Any province in Europe should be very difficult to core directly, if not impossible. WAD, for the first time since launch in my opinion. To me, the actual difference is that the game is much harder. And this is not a problem to me...

 

[net.split]

My problem with this patch is that it makes being an OPM really difficult and makes nations with already increased coring costs really really obscene to conquer. I agree with the idea of increasing coring costs. They want to stop blobbing. I disagree with how /much/ they increased them. I mean it makes me actively not want to play smaller countries or countries that don't get autocores due to events or missions. It's not difficult at this point, it's just /annoying/.

OPMs are actually easier because you start with more money and troops relative to your neighbors than before. Expanding is more expensive, yes, but that cost is the same across the board; OPMs have no special penalty here.

Actually it may even be better than that; with the improved income, minors can afford advisors a lot sooner than they otherwise could. So, you're behind larger nations in MP acquisition for much less time.

 

[Korashy]

Mappainter genocide best day of my life
Being able to build those huge, efficient and stable empires with ease was always the biggest flaw of this game and I'm glad it's no longer the easiest way to build a strong nation. Perhaps we'll actually see some meaningful contest between regional powers now instead of a blobbing contest until ~1550 and stagnation and/or total war after that.

I don't get it. This changes pretty much nothing for the AI. everything you don't touch is still going to look pretty much the same. Furthermore you are the only player in your single player match, but want stuff nerfed and made artificially "harder" for other people that have 0 effect on you and your game.

 

[TheDungen]

This is simply not fun. A skilled player already measured their pace by feeding 1 - 4 vassals and constantly running 100% overextension. With the new changes, it may very well be literally impossible to world conquest, let alone one tag, due to the cost changes. This is discouraging and not fun, and I play for fun.

Then mod the game to make blobbing easy, just as those of us who wanted blobbing to be harder have had to do until now. You've had EU4 your way since launch now it's our way and by any right we should get two years of this for it to be even.

 

[grommile]

Then mod the game to make blobbing easi, just as those of us who wanted blobbing to be harder have had to do until now. You've had EU4 your way since launch now it's our way and by any right we should get two years of this for it to be even.

The game should, in the first instance, be one the devs want to play. That's the only way to deliberately write a good game, y'see: write one that you yourself want to play.

 

[TheDungen]

You should give Administrative some other bonuses than just Mercenaries and loans. I hate Mercenaries and I hate loans but I love coring and production.

Well that's nice for you I love mercs and loans.

 

[TheDungen]

The game should, in the first instance, be one the devs want to play. That's the only way to deliberately write a good game, y'see: write one that you yourself want to play.

And aperantly the devs have decided that those of us saying that blobbing is boring were right all along.

 

[billclintonmask]

"LOL NOPE! We just gave you a 0/1/0 monarch. And he has a weak claim. And he's 1

Heirs coming to power with a weak claim come also with pretender rebels.

Pretenders usually have better stats than 0/1/0. Collapse to pretenders and now you have a king with a strong claim and full legitimacy.

 

[TheDarkMaster]

Heirs coming to power with a weak claim come also with pretender rebels.

Pretenders usually have better stats than 0/1/0. Collapse to pretenders and now you have a king with a strong claim and full legitimacy.

Pretenders always have low legitimacy when they win and are stuck as a general after they do. Losing to pretenders is not always the best choice when they spawn. Allies and vassals might also fight the rebels off.

 

[grommile]

Pretenders always have low legitimacy when they win and are stuck as a general after they do.

I'll take zero Legitimacy and a 2/2/2 ruler over a 15-year regency for a troglodytic derplord. At least with zero Legitimacy and a 2/2/2 ruler there's the possibility that I can engage in my favourite part of the game (fighting wars of my choice).

 

[Korashy]

Add an advisor type with -% coring costs

A man can dream. But that would be too good. That and Dip rep/BROT adviser would be everything anyone would want.

 

[Ungerargh]

Anyone done the math on what total cost to core the world is on 11/11/1444 in 1.12 vs. 1.11? Obviously costs now go up over time, but am curious.

 

[TheDarkMaster]

Anyone done the math on what total cost to core the world is on 11/11/1444 in 1.12 vs. 1.11? Obviously costs now go up over time, but am curious.

Up if you're playing with Common Sense enabled only. Also remember that when admin efficiency kicks in the prices go down.

 

[wingzero890]

Possibly, also possibly have the first 25% unlock earlier.

You could break it up into 5% intervals, and unlock an extra diplomat at diplo 10 while we're at it.

 

[chrnno]

Anyone done the math on what total cost to core the world is on 11/11/1444 in 1.12 vs. 1.11? Obviously costs now go up over time, but am curious.

Cost went up by twice and non-colonized provinces were nerfed a bit so I presume about double current.

 

[darkyouck]

To expound on my reply from yesterday, coring costs have gone up somewhere around 40% compared to 1.11 (more for dipannexation) because we wanted to create some more interesting dynamics where conquering everything around you was not necessarily always the best option.

It is still both possible and rewarding to expand, particularly if you take the right ideas, put money into advisors and use a mix of conquest and diploannexing. .

This, Wiz, you just said all I wanted the game to be.

I never liked blobbing in this " historical " game which are EU3 and EU4 and this feeling which I could conquer Europe so easily and had to stop myself from doing it every game to have some RP did leave a bitter taste when playing.

With this patch, I feel like doing a jack of all trades with conquest, diplomacy and especially development is finally rewarding. This is great.
Thank you Wiz and your team, you are on the right path for me.