it wasn't different in eu 3 in case of Balkan Religion, hell you could get them sunni in 10 years.
Great demo. Too bad culture is a joke
- Thread starter Jia Xu
- 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.
it wasn't different in eu 3 in case of Balkan Religion, hell you could get them sunni in 10 years.
Jia Xu, you claim MP superiority, but I'm curious as to how this could possibly be true as no one would ever play with someone like you. It seems to me that you simply get off by putting other people down. I would encourage you to be more civil towards others.
If you insist on continuing your petty arguments, perhaps I could redirect you to the YouTube comment section.
If you insist on continuing your petty arguments, perhaps I could redirect you to the YouTube comment section.
maybe this thread is a good place to ask what is needed to get a culture accepted?
Damn, I hate when my opinions and my game-play arguments based on game mechanics in favour of those opinions based on my experiences are reduced to "a very subjective view" by somebody who considers his own opinions and arguments based on his own experiences to be "objective reasoning". I guess I will have to give in and bow to such a superior line of reasoning.
Here is something for those people who happen NOT to be the man with the superior line of reasoning, who knows everything there is to know about manpower because of his EU3 MP experience, to think about.
The manpower provided by a province is based on its base manpower, its base factor, and buildings providing a fixed boost, which is then modified by provincial percentage modifiers.
Wrong culture gives a -33% modifier to manpower. As I noted in post 75, this is additive, not multiplicative.
Other relevant modifiers for somebody playing Muscowy would be the following:
Russian Traditions +25% (you get this from the start)
Russian Ambitions +100% (you get this as soon as you have 21 ideas, which can be accomplished with 3 full idea groups)
Thus, completely disregarding other provincial manpower modifiers such as from the Offensive idea group (+25%), the Aristocratic idea group (+25%), and the Quantity idea group (+50%), and assuming that none of the higher tier army buildings are built (tier 4+ increases the local manpower modifier, up to a total of +70%), any Muscowy that is out of the early game is rocking a base of 225% manpower in every single core province before culture is calculated into the mix.
Which means that the difference made by the culture to manpower is the difference between gaining 192% of base manpower and 225% of base manpower. Yes, the later is better than the former, but it really is not all that big a deal, and especially not when compared to e.g. dumping DMP into exploration/expansion and getting more provinces providing manpower in the first place.
But overall, even without any of the huge benefits Muscowy gets, even if it is 67% vs 100% (something that is never the case for Muscowy, which cannot go below 92% vs 125%), in Eu4, huge increases to manpower are gained by controlling vast amounts of territory (yes, certainly, conquering Lithuania for the manpower is a fine idea) and spamming them with cheap military buildings or by choosing the proper idea groups. Overall, culture conversion plays little part, and for Muscowy in particular the idea that mass cultural conversion provides a significant boost to manpower is a joke.
If you really must do it, do it in conquered provinces that have a low base tax and a high base manpower to get the most bang for the buck, but even then, you would probably have been better off in both the long and short run spending the DMPs on other pursuits unless you get exceptionally good DIP monarchs and thus have more than enough to spare.
Here is something for those people who happen NOT to be the man with the superior line of reasoning, who knows everything there is to know about manpower because of his EU3 MP experience, to think about.
The manpower provided by a province is based on its base manpower, its base factor, and buildings providing a fixed boost, which is then modified by provincial percentage modifiers.
Wrong culture gives a -33% modifier to manpower. As I noted in post 75, this is additive, not multiplicative.
Other relevant modifiers for somebody playing Muscowy would be the following:
Russian Traditions +25% (you get this from the start)
Russian Ambitions +100% (you get this as soon as you have 21 ideas, which can be accomplished with 3 full idea groups)
Thus, completely disregarding other provincial manpower modifiers such as from the Offensive idea group (+25%), the Aristocratic idea group (+25%), and the Quantity idea group (+50%), and assuming that none of the higher tier army buildings are built (tier 4+ increases the local manpower modifier, up to a total of +70%), any Muscowy that is out of the early game is rocking a base of 225% manpower in every single core province before culture is calculated into the mix.
Which means that the difference made by the culture to manpower is the difference between gaining 192% of base manpower and 225% of base manpower. Yes, the later is better than the former, but it really is not all that big a deal, and especially not when compared to e.g. dumping DMP into exploration/expansion and getting more provinces providing manpower in the first place.
But overall, even without any of the huge benefits Muscowy gets, even if it is 67% vs 100% (something that is never the case for Muscowy, which cannot go below 92% vs 125%), in Eu4, huge increases to manpower are gained by controlling vast amounts of territory (yes, certainly, conquering Lithuania for the manpower is a fine idea) and spamming them with cheap military buildings or by choosing the proper idea groups. Overall, culture conversion plays little part, and for Muscowy in particular the idea that mass cultural conversion provides a significant boost to manpower is a joke.
If you really must do it, do it in conquered provinces that have a low base tax and a high base manpower to get the most bang for the buck, but even then, you would probably have been better off in both the long and short run spending the DMPs on other pursuits unless you get exceptionally good DIP monarchs and thus have more than enough to spare.
Last edited:
It seems to me that the problem is that Morocco is classified as "overseas". This makes it cost-effective to culturally convert Morocco, which results in very ahistoric play. If the example were conquering the Aztecs or Incas and culturally converting their provinces, then I don't think anyone would have a problem with that being easy. Getting those own-culture provinces is just part of the reward for colonization. But, historically, Morocco shouldn't be any easier to culturally convert than Castille.
Yet another wah wah wah thread about religious and culture change in the EU series.
What blows my mind is we get a sweeping statement of "culture is a joke" base on a sample size of one. Does the OP bother to see the price of culture change in the other 3 playable nations? NOPE. Why because it doesn't fit his narrative which really is "I don't want those nasty Turks changing the Balkans Sunni and Turkish." It has a far greater impact to take an example of the cost of culture change from the lowest cost range then from the highest.
Does the OP show the true cost of culture change even in his example? NOPE. Culture change requires a core province so you have to factor that into the cost if your true objective is to be honest. You need the same religion so you have to factor this into the cost. So it doesn't just cost the one time price of X monarch points. Again this all goes back to the endless QQing and dick measuring people do over nationalistic posturing. Its a GAME people get over it!
While the game breaks up culture change into three stages coring, proselytizing and actually changing culture. Cultural pressure is happening during all three stages not just in the last game mechanic. Do you honestly think then when you are coring and structuring the province's bureaucracy to secure your rule that there is no cultural influence going on? Or when your missionaries are converting the people that culture is devoid of the picture during this process? While the game mechanics are separated there is a reason why each stage requires the other as a prerequisite, because its an on going process that doesn't just start when you click change culture or end when the culture flips.
I would also present that culture change in Paradox games does not represent all the people in a province suddenly changing their language, customs and beliefs but rather it represents the acceptance of new ruling culture. And that the while the mechanic in the game says cultural assimilation has finished it is in fact still going on, it simply has reach a stage where the populace of the province is reasonable content or at least no longer looks upon the "them" as cultureless barbarians invading their homes.
I will not try and state that the game is perfect and tweaks may or may not be needed in all areas of the game including culture flipping but two decades of early game play, from only 1 nation is a piss poor sample size to indicate a problem especially when the OP deliberately ignores a simple comparison cost by showing the cost of flipping a castile province. Why not show this? Again because that wouldn't fit his narrative as it would change the thread from culture is a joke to "Hey maybe there needs to be a tweak in north Africa in relation to culture flipping." But that doesn't get OP closer to his goal.
People invest far too much nationalism into the game and its mechanics, I switch Irish provinces English when I can in EU3, even though my Irish ancestors are spinning in their graves. Why? because I invest zero nationalism into the game. I also invade Scotland as England every game I play as England even though my Scottish ancestors are also spinning in their graves. But do you want to know why the ghosts of my ancestors don't haunt me for doing these things?
1) Because its just a bloody game!
2) They're dead so they don't care about petty nationalism anymore.
3) Ghosts aren't real
What blows my mind is we get a sweeping statement of "culture is a joke" base on a sample size of one. Does the OP bother to see the price of culture change in the other 3 playable nations? NOPE. Why because it doesn't fit his narrative which really is "I don't want those nasty Turks changing the Balkans Sunni and Turkish." It has a far greater impact to take an example of the cost of culture change from the lowest cost range then from the highest.
Does the OP show the true cost of culture change even in his example? NOPE. Culture change requires a core province so you have to factor that into the cost if your true objective is to be honest. You need the same religion so you have to factor this into the cost. So it doesn't just cost the one time price of X monarch points. Again this all goes back to the endless QQing and dick measuring people do over nationalistic posturing. Its a GAME people get over it!
While the game breaks up culture change into three stages coring, proselytizing and actually changing culture. Cultural pressure is happening during all three stages not just in the last game mechanic. Do you honestly think then when you are coring and structuring the province's bureaucracy to secure your rule that there is no cultural influence going on? Or when your missionaries are converting the people that culture is devoid of the picture during this process? While the game mechanics are separated there is a reason why each stage requires the other as a prerequisite, because its an on going process that doesn't just start when you click change culture or end when the culture flips.
I would also present that culture change in Paradox games does not represent all the people in a province suddenly changing their language, customs and beliefs but rather it represents the acceptance of new ruling culture. And that the while the mechanic in the game says cultural assimilation has finished it is in fact still going on, it simply has reach a stage where the populace of the province is reasonable content or at least no longer looks upon the "them" as cultureless barbarians invading their homes.
I will not try and state that the game is perfect and tweaks may or may not be needed in all areas of the game including culture flipping but two decades of early game play, from only 1 nation is a piss poor sample size to indicate a problem especially when the OP deliberately ignores a simple comparison cost by showing the cost of flipping a castile province. Why not show this? Again because that wouldn't fit his narrative as it would change the thread from culture is a joke to "Hey maybe there needs to be a tweak in north Africa in relation to culture flipping." But that doesn't get OP closer to his goal.
People invest far too much nationalism into the game and its mechanics, I switch Irish provinces English when I can in EU3, even though my Irish ancestors are spinning in their graves. Why? because I invest zero nationalism into the game. I also invade Scotland as England every game I play as England even though my Scottish ancestors are also spinning in their graves. But do you want to know why the ghosts of my ancestors don't haunt me for doing these things?
1) Because its just a bloody game!
2) They're dead so they don't care about petty nationalism anymore.
3) Ghosts aren't real
You're all still forgetting about Rebels. You're all forgetting that manpower is way different in Eu4, I've never seen a country with more than 50,000 manpower in the ledger and that takes 10 years to fill up.
Play as the Ottomans in the Demo and get back to me. When I was playing as the Ottomans, even when I boosted my stability, I was getting constant nationalist revolts and that was despite +2 stability. Each time you run into a Rebel army of 10,000 or 15,000 - you're going to take a thousand casualities and it can take half a year just to recover from one battle - what happens when you're fighting a half dozen or more revolts a year? What happens if you roll dices badly and you lose thousands?
That happened to my Ottoman Empire and that was it, expansion wasn't possible because I couldn't maintain a manpower level high enough to oppose Austria or Hungary or Ak Qurulo-something.
Play as the Ottomans in the Demo and get back to me. When I was playing as the Ottomans, even when I boosted my stability, I was getting constant nationalist revolts and that was despite +2 stability. Each time you run into a Rebel army of 10,000 or 15,000 - you're going to take a thousand casualities and it can take half a year just to recover from one battle - what happens when you're fighting a half dozen or more revolts a year? What happens if you roll dices badly and you lose thousands?
That happened to my Ottoman Empire and that was it, expansion wasn't possible because I couldn't maintain a manpower level high enough to oppose Austria or Hungary or Ak Qurulo-something.
Well culture change was actually rare in this period, minus the exceptions like how the Russians replaced the Tatars in Eastern Europe.
It's predictable but I imagine the big single player mods will remove the culture conversion stuff, except for the Steppes.
It's predictable but I imagine the big single player mods will remove the culture conversion stuff, except for the Steppes.
Doesn't missionary power represent a % chance of conversion and that it increases each month? So while it may take 1111 months to reach 100% you are far more likely to get a conversion significantly sooner. Or am I mistaken?
It have changed. Now it is like a meter that slowly fills up and you first convert when it hits 100%
This, I think is the important part here that's unfortunately gotten lost. It seems like that in order to allow easy cultural conversion for colonies, we've also got cultural conversion that is probably too easy (regardless of whether it's a good idea) for situations like Morocco. I'd be happy to hear good reasons for why if you're in Europe it should be easy to culture convert Morocco, or provinces in India or China (or are those not "overseas" since they are part of the Eurasion landmass?), but nothing comes to my mind.
I knew about that function but spending 50 military points to suppress a revolt is meant to be a desperation move, not a standard countermeasure towards rebel armies. Spamming suppression with military power is going to cause you to fall behind in army technology or ideas, and you can't afford to fall behind.
At the risk of shameless self-promotion, read my Purple Phoenix beta AAR if you want to see more than 50,000 manpower.
That said, you have a good point about manpower in EU4. People are going to have to relearn a few lessons regarding manpower. It is much more precious now with the 10 year manpower pool and game mechanics based on that (including the rebalanced attrition), and one of the very best modifiers for manpower is the one that increases manpower recovery speed.
And THAT said, a Russian Empire of historical size in the Napoleonic wars with the basic army buildings everywhere (if it could afford the MMP cost) would have a gigantic 600k manpower pool or so. Barracks, Training Field, Armoury (30 MMP) is 100 manpower, so with Russian ambitions and traditions (and ignoring everything else), the buildings alone would contribute at least 225 manpower/province, and more probably 250-275 depending on ideas. It all adds up and this is in addition to the base manpower.
If you are having serious rebel troubles while manpower is low, I would advise you to solve your short-term problems by using the "Harsh Measures" in the hardest affected provinces and stationing troops there as well. This is bloody expensive, but it is a good temporary solution if you are in desperate need. Harsh measures gives -5RR for 5 years at a cost of MMP (I forget how many in the demo: 25? 30? Something like that, probably), friendly troops give -0.25/regiment.
Long term, high revolt risk is typically caused by overextension or war exhaustion, the one to be combatted by coring your conquests, the other by letting time pass or using direct reduction at the cost of DMPs. And by avoiding decisions that add +1.0% base RR to all provinces until 1821 like the plague, even if they come with nice effects.
It's not THAT ahistorical.
Just look at the whole adriatic coast, or Anatolia, even Granada.
Was converting Morocco that cheap because it was counted as overseas from Portugal? If so then the problem is not culture conversion but the overseas mechanic. Either Morocco should not be counted as overseas from Portugal or being overseas should not give as large bonus to culture conversion.
I don't think we should judge a game on a Demo. Let the game come out and then we can start complaining.