To be fair after 2000 hours if they completely removed the declare war button you could still consider that you got your moneys worth. These changes are far from that drastic.
- 5
- 3
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.
Going by the historical map of 1.11.4 you should historical conquest the "entire" of Novgorod by a certain date which I forget. With the truce and claims expiring after 50 years and horde attacking you. I would be surprised to see if anybody manage to match achievement done in IRL without breaking the game.
Did you meant Zaporozhian Cossacks? There is NOT a good way to represent a horde like that while being "independent". The closest I can come is client state (even so they will end up with either republic or monarchy not a khan/suzerainty) and that unlock in 1687 with zero ahead of time penalty.
They become "subject" of Russia in 1654 in real life. So either you have to use a reuglar vassal or march at that point and neither are a good fit for them. Bear in mind I am not account for the fact that you can't formally create them as a country in-game short of custom nation.
- 1
- 1
- 1
Yo, I'm happy for you, and I'mma rate you helpful, but Johan has the best one word answers of all time. Of all time!
- 4
- 2
- 1
I want to see what optimal strategies emerge before making judgment on whether the formulas are bad.
So far I think your starting position must match your desired playstyle. If you want to go wide with conquests, you probably shouldn't start around the areas with the highest development in the game; that's more for going tall. I mean you can probably do it anyway, but mostly as a colonial game with foreign expansion, slowly integrating the area around you with diploannexing (once you can start throwing away Dip) or leaving it to last when you have stacked bonuses to core costs.
I mean that's actually the reason colonization was a thing. It was the most sensible method of expansion during the period for the nations that were able to do it. Conquering neighbors became less feasible as neighbors coalesced beyond feudalism and broad alliances helped protect integrity.
So, I guess, if going wide, start elsewhere and conquer expensive Europe last when you no longer have to buy ideas or worry as much about tech & internal development. Or, if you start in Europe, maybe begin slow but pick up later once you've grabbed many of the expensive provinces and rapidly steamroll the rest of the world.
So far I think your starting position must match your desired playstyle. If you want to go wide with conquests, you probably shouldn't start around the areas with the highest development in the game; that's more for going tall. I mean you can probably do it anyway, but mostly as a colonial game with foreign expansion, slowly integrating the area around you with diploannexing (once you can start throwing away Dip) or leaving it to last when you have stacked bonuses to core costs.
I mean that's actually the reason colonization was a thing. It was the most sensible method of expansion during the period for the nations that were able to do it. Conquering neighbors became less feasible as neighbors coalesced beyond feudalism and broad alliances helped protect integrity.
So, I guess, if going wide, start elsewhere and conquer expensive Europe last when you no longer have to buy ideas or worry as much about tech & internal development. Or, if you start in Europe, maybe begin slow but pick up later once you've grabbed many of the expensive provinces and rapidly steamroll the rest of the world.
- 9
- 1
Fanboys.
I'm actually thankful with them. Europa Universalis would have never been version 4 if it weren't for them. So you better just ignore them.
- 2
- 1
I'm not denying I didn't get my moneys worth, but this game has also become something I care about, and continue to spend money on (I've bought every single DLC, even during pauses where I skipped a patch or DLC i bought them to support Pdox), but it's a bit saddening when players like me, who have not much left expect to paint get their playstyles gimped. I've done WC and don't plan on making every game a WC, but hopping on a new campaign, blobbing till 1600ish and then making a decision (yup this would be a WC, or conceding defeat (to the AI)), is what I like to do. If I want to experience late game, I start in a later bookmark.
It's a bid saddening when it really may not be the right game for me anymore.
- 2
- 1
I think you're turning into Johan.
But, as for the thread itself; Common Sense has only been out for a few hours. Wait a while, play a few games, and get a feel for how it measures up overall, and then make a judgment. I'm actually quite fine with slowing down early game expansion.
- 9
You can't please everybody, I prefer the game in this state, than the unrealistic civ it was before(I only began playing when AOW came out for this reason)
- 3
Why are you talking about early game expansion when core cost are dynamic and more likely to raise by late game. Nevermind the downtune of 75% to 50% admin effectiveness.
- 2
- 1
Ulster is a far better province than it used to be. Unreasonably so even, in comparison to other Irish provinces.
It's not just cost prohibitive. With fairly static coring costs and tax base, you could balance AE and coring more easily. Now, you have to make 1 set of rules apply to two vastly different places (Europe and RotW). Mid to late game province AE and coring cost will be absolutely stupid in Europe, especially with small countries and the HRE.
How many of them will last to the 1600? As Muscovy I know I will, once the nasty black screen on startup glitch get fixed, eat up as many of them especially hordes.
The point is they, and smaller nations in general will spend time building up their development. And this isn't that relevant to the main point of my post, either.
Which would be fine if colonization wasn't like watching paint dry.
- 1
- 1
Again the cost to raise development will grow with each development in province so there is a certain point where it become counter-productive to grow tall vs wide. The question is where should that point be?
The old if you agree with a dev you must be a fanboy arguement, good one.
- 9
- 2
If you want it changed to a more reasonable level and don't play Ironman, go into defines.lua and find the line "PS_MAKE_PROVINCE_CORE = 10". Change the 10 to a 6.
- 3
- 2
To the people who say it's more realistic when it costs more EU IV is not realistic it's an empire builder with historical setting and it's core mechanic is expanding if you make that slower you just sit there at speed 5 and wait for you mana to fill again. That is not my definition of fun.
- 13
- 6