For the love of god, lower the coring costs.

[Mjarr]

Do it yourself. common/defines.lua is your friend.

I haven't touched EU4 in a long time but CORE_TIME_SIZE_MODIFIER is missing in current defines.lua. Nor there seems to be anything effecting base core costs directly, for those who are interested about it.

(Then again it may have been removed ages ago. I haven't played since last September.)

 

[Korashy]

I haven't touched EU4 in a long time but CORE_TIME_SIZE_MODIFIER is missing in current defines.lua. Nor there seems to be anything effecting base core costs directly, for those who are interested about it.

(Then again it may have been removed ages ago. I haven't played since last September.)

Thankfully doesn't scale based on your country size anymore. It's now a flat 30 months with modifiers.

 

[wingzero890]

I haven't touched EU4 in a long time but CORE_TIME_SIZE_MODIFIER is missing in current defines.lua. Nor there seems to be anything effecting base core costs directly, for those who are interested about it.

(Then again it may have been removed ages ago. I haven't played since last September.)

The name of the value was changed, it's now

Spoiler

PS_MAKE_PROVINCE_CORE = 10
ANNEX_DIP_COST_PER_DEVELOPMENT = 10

And development is
PS_IMPROVE_PROVINCE_BASE = 50,
PS_IMPROVE_PROVINCE_MUL = 5

 

[Stolen Rutters]

I guess all those "disagree" votes feel pretty silly now, huh?

Well, thanks for making the right decision in the face of feedback, Paradox.

All that did was lower diploannex costs to be closer to core cost apparently. From the dev diary thread, it appears core cost is unchanged in the hotfix.

I'll accept cost parity any day. There is no strategic choice when vassal/diploannex was clearly the optimized cost path. I personally prefer diploannex to be costlier, but I understand that's just reversing/switching the optimal cost path to pander to my personal game preference. I really disliked when diploannex was much cheaper than coring.

edit - And in another post, they are looking to add a diplomat to the king rank in the larger hotfix later this month. That should help us recover from the loss of the embassy building's diplomat.

 

[TenshiN]

Please don't lower the coring costs, or it will be even blobbier, than before:

 

[JagLover]

I can understand why they have increased coring costs in general, but not why they have reduced so much the claim discount.

Yes “carpet-claiming” was probably an issue, but you now have a situation where it is very difficult to core same culture, same religion provinces, which seems ahistorical to me. A better solution, IMO, would have been to change the claim system so that you could only fabricate a claim where you had a realistic claim based on history/nationality.

Take Muscovy as an example (my favourite starting country). A realistic scenario would surely be to have easy cores on the Russian lands and far more difficult coring of Horde lands. This would then also surely produce a far more historically accurate game, while also stopping unfocused “blobbing”.

 

[YuriiH]

Just two examples:

Oirat took crappy undeveloped lands that were basetax 1-3 pre 1.12.
You may see he has NO really valuable China / Indian provinces. And it's not even in the endgame...

 

[TheDungen]

Please don't lower the coring costs, or it will be even blobbier, than before:

Arumba? Well blobbing is in his nature. He's the guy who showed of WoL for CK2 with a blobbing series after all.

 

[TenshiN]

Arumba? Well blobbing is in his nature. He's the guy who showed of WoL for CK2 with a blobbing series after all.

I honestly have no idea what you're saying

 

[josh127]

Please don't lower the coring costs, or it will be even blobbier, than before:

If that's all the further Oirat is in 1757, there's nothing blobby going on. That screen is showing a bunch of underdeveloped provinces late in the game with the full 50% admin efficiency reduction. If Oirat is blobby they should have China totally under their control at this point in the game.

 

[romothecus]

You can afford to core all of Europe, easily. So, you're right - coring costs are realistic considering contemporary empires, they're much too low.

The difference is that the real world had realistic competitions between great powers and realistic economics.

The irony is that can't even duplicate several historical conquests on a historical timeframe.

 

[TenshiN]

If that's all the further Oirat is in 1757, there's nothing blobby going on. That screen is showing a bunch of underdeveloped provinces late in the game with the full 50% admin efficiency reduction. If Oirat is blobby they should have China totally under their control at this point in the game.

The point being 22-Admpower core for a 22-development-lvl (8 BT) province. Basically, the endgame is much blobbier than before being my point.

 

[Ratanka]

as i am who defend this dlc alot THIS CORING COSTS ARE TO HIGH ! ur absolutly right ... its to much to much to much !
at LEAST get rid of the +521626% modifier for being whatever
coring wallachia costs like 600 700 admin WHAT ON EARTH

Terrible example, since Muntenia province already cost 280 ADM to core under the old regime, and you would have to be cheesing every conceivable source of reduction to get that figure below 160.

but they made 3 provinces out of it and its just to god damn high ...

 

[LastSalian]

The point being 22-Admpower core for a 22-development-lvl (8 BT) province. Basically, the endgame is much blobbier than before being my point.

His point is that that Oirat is a dwarf compared to what you could do before, at least based on your scree capture. I don't imagine myself playing 400 years to get that.

 

[Ratanka]

The point being 22-Admpower core for a 22-development-lvl (8 BT) province. Basically, the endgame is much blobbier than before being my point.

in 3000 hours eu4 i never got past the year 1700 ...

 

[josh127]

The point being 22-Admpower core for a 22-development-lvl (8 BT) province. Basically, the endgame is much blobbier than before being my point.

Late game with full admin efficiency the limiting factor is juggling OE so that you don't go over 100% (or whatever number you feel comfortable with dealing with the rebels).

Also, if late game blobbing was considered "bad" by Paradox, admin efficiency wouldn't even exist. The whole point of it is to allow you to go a bit crazy at the end game. To have it, but say "sorry you don't have admin points to core it" would make no sense.

 

[chrnno]

in 3000 hours eu4 i never got past the year 1700 ...

If you have a good computer it is easy, when you are about to give up on a game backup your message settings and turn off all pauses before letting it run.

 

[Rebel1776]

The thousands of Manpower saved on placing buildings......

Increased coring and diplo-annexation costs to re-balance these changes.....

Paradox "fanboy" reaction, priceless.

 

[Ratanka]

If you have a good computer it is easy, when you are about to give up on a game backup your message settings and turn off all pauses before letting it run.

you not understand me ...
i ditnt PLAYED because it was to EASY there is no "good" computer possible i just destroy the world as mainz -_- no fun playing when to big.
i need challange and not "oh u cant conquer because oyu not have enough monarch points"

 

[chrnno]

you not understand me ...
i ditnt PLAYED because it was to EASY there is no "good" computer possible i just destroy the world as mainz -_- no fun playing when to big.
i need challange and not "oh u cant conquer because oyu not have enough monarch points"

When, precisely, did I say anything about playing? Just let the game run and you will get past that year. Good computer is for not taking long to hit 1821.

That said I find not being that big far more interesting after the first time you do it for the hell of it so if you want challenge then don't blob uncontrollably, don't make use of major powers to fight for you and so on.