For the love of god, lower the coring costs.
- Thread starter Bagfisch
- Start date
-
We have updated our Community Code of Conduct. Please read through the new rules for the forum that are an integral part of Paradox Interactive’s User Agreement.
Some (very strange, IMO) people are using 'Helpful' in a sarcastic manner. Others probably genuinely think that a blunt, curt 'no' can be more useful than a lengthy explanation that doesn't actually placate the ragers.
- 2
- 1
Even if you don't lower the cost, you may at least lower time it takes to make up for the loss. Since core time is tied to core cost, it has increased a lot as well.
- 1
Holy bleep of bleep of bleep you better release a vassal and diplo annex that later that is just absolutely ridiculous damn now ive noticed constantinople develop even more i wonder what an annexation of that woul be.
Mind telling me what year that is???
- 2
Sorry this is not my game, I got this SS from a steam mod page that decreases core cost. Here is a link.
http://steamcommunity.com/sharedfiles/filedetails/?id=458711743
Fixed that for you. That Prague has 47 development. This player conquered a total of 134 development (more than half the starting total development of England) from Bohemia with local nobility and Czech ideas, without bothering to counter it with admin ideas. I don't see a problem here. If you really want to annex this beast, take admin, influence, and plutocratic ideas; vassalize Bohemia and activate the two policies that reduce diplo-annexation cost.
It's also worth noting that Prague starts with 21 development, which means Bohemia must have spent far more than 940 MP developing it. I'd call this fair.
edit: I got curious, so I checked with Wolfram Alpha to determine just how much it would cost to develop Prague from 21 development to 47 (assuming no events helped to boost it, which to be fair is highly unlikely, so this will be an upper-limit). Plugging in sum((50+5n)(1.06+.01n), n=0 to 25), the result I got was 3539.25 monarch points (with both economic ideas and a university in Prague, it would be (.66+.01n) for 2369.25); natrually, the game itself rounds off with each successive development, but that's way more math than I'm interested in doing. The true cost will be within 26 points of that number.
This strikes me as a perfect example of the advantages of tall play: mash development, get local nobility, become too troublesome to conquer; the one problem with this is of course that for a deterrent to work, your enemy must be smart enough to appreciate the threat.
Last edited:
- 7
- 3
- 1
Given that the coring costs have such a higher base, would it make sense to have the increased coring cost modifiers scale up a bit slower? Say only 25% for local nobility?
They already tried to "balance" that. Used to be 100%, now it's 50%.
There's also the issue of balancing for if provinces are going up in cost over time or not. Not everyone is playing with Common Sense.
- 1
Come on Paradox how many more posts and threads do we need to have before you lower coring costs to more sane levels?!
Haven't you seen how the counter-arguments to high coring costs are worthless? Seriously? Don't conquer, wait 200 years for coring reductions, devolve your ideas in coring reduction, play "tall" (aka speed 5 galore).
Haven't you seen how the counter-arguments to high coring costs are worthless? Seriously? Don't conquer, wait 200 years for coring reductions, devolve your ideas in coring reduction, play "tall" (aka speed 5 galore).
- 8
- 8
I also use helpful as funny. Becuase agree and disagree feel more like judging the sentiments of the poster.
I still think that if claim were 25% and adm effincency were more spread in the adm tech tree (that way oriental nation (like malaya) can use it effectively), the coring cost would be fine. But if not just reduce them.
Last edited:
- 1
I'm getting a new comp soon which means that speed 5 will be mucho faster.
Maybe the new slower gameplay will be more enjoyable then-.-
Maybe the new slower gameplay will be more enjoyable then-.-
- 2
Since I play with AI hard, the AE is so steep that I can only take 1 max 2 provinces ( depiending on who I am). then the AE needs to burn down agian before next war, takes about 15-17 years if you did not get busted. so I got more than enuff time to save up the admin points.
I know its hard when stuff is hard, but try before you cry about it ?
I know its hard when stuff is hard, but try before you cry about it ?
- 8
- 1
Hard? What's hard?
The ai can't even handle the instasieging rebels, it's always deep in debt and low on manpower, you can slap them around like a pinata
The ai can't even handle the instasieging rebels, it's always deep in debt and low on manpower, you can slap them around like a pinata
- 4
The more I play the more I resent the coring cost increase. Not because it's unreasonable or even particularly unfair - it is purely that it makes you realise how boring development is!
That's it: gameplay reasons. I see no reason why you should easily core Prague or Paris. But the mundanity that is development is clearly not fleshed out enough to fill the gap that was left when map painting is curtailed.
Development requires almost no investment on my part: Most of the time I am saving to tech up, I rarely think where to develop as the benefits always seem to be the same wherever I do it - and there is no feeling of consequence from your decision and no feeling that it is dynamic. Rather it is one track and you just decide how fast...
I hope in time, development will be improved, peacetime made more interesting and then I will be fine with these coring costs. Until then I feel like the games a bit more of a chore in this version.
That's it: gameplay reasons. I see no reason why you should easily core Prague or Paris. But the mundanity that is development is clearly not fleshed out enough to fill the gap that was left when map painting is curtailed.
Development requires almost no investment on my part: Most of the time I am saving to tech up, I rarely think where to develop as the benefits always seem to be the same wherever I do it - and there is no feeling of consequence from your decision and no feeling that it is dynamic. Rather it is one track and you just decide how fast...
I hope in time, development will be improved, peacetime made more interesting and then I will be fine with these coring costs. Until then I feel like the games a bit more of a chore in this version.
- 6
- 2
Development and tech should really be linked. Tech should be a thing that ticks on it's own depending on your development in the three cathegories.
More like "average development". Being huge shouldn't be a way to best tech ever, on its own.
- 2
True. Eu4 needs to rid itself of the notion that holding land for holding lands sake is a good thing. Sure it's more land to be taxed but it should also be a vulnerability.
- 1