Is it just me or does this DLC make the game a billion times harder. Every game i've played I've been thoroughly pummeled.
harder?
- Thread starter sskrypteia
- 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.
its more of a general question. I just don't feel like I can expand as quickly as I used to. For every victory I have i get about 2 declarations of war and my gains are taken from me. The AI doesn't accept peace as easily as before, particularly with vassalage.
I am not sure any genereal conclusions can be drawn about whether the game is harder or easier, since it partly depends upon who recieved new provinces added. My first game is as Ottomans, and that seems significantly easier, probably because the Constantinople trade node is much more profitable than before.
I've played as Brandenburg and recently alt f4-ed out of a Sweden one (i rage re-declared war and promptly lost it). Both of which Poland basically spits on the empire and the empire does nothing about it.
Well, I have started my second game as Crimea and it's much easier in 1.8 than in 1.6 (played Crimea in 1.6 before). But this may caused by the experience from the first game. At least rebels are more manageable. The predictable enemy allies make it a lot easier, too.
So no big difference for me.
Difficulty in this game is country specific, as is the specific definition of difficult.
But this wasn't the question. We are comparing the same countries against pre1.8.
I've found with regards to military the enemy AI has definitely improved while allied AI seems a bit confused and less cooperative meaning Wars are trickier.
Depends on the luck I would guess, had 3 restarts with "Die Hanse" in ironman mode. Everytime I did a really big mistake in the first year (i.e. to early supporting swedens independence). BUT in this turn everything works perfect. In 1490 I own the additional provinces: Antwerpen, Holland, Utrecht (was given to me in a peace deal from sweden!), Frisia, East Frisia, Bergenshus, Stettin (have it as a OPM Vassal), Danzig, Ostpreußen, Neva, Novgorod, Archelangsk (Novgorod as Vassal). Additionally Holstein, Norway and Sweden are independent from Denmark. Denmark lost a lot of Provinces to Sweden (with my help, I love "Der Adler" to destroy the Danish Navy). Sweden and Austria love me with 200 relations, in the beginning France too (helped alot against burgundy) but then I had to decide between Austria and France, and I'm a loyal HRE Member (and France interferes more with my Plans). In this stage I earn only by Trade 50-60 Ducats (without Light Ship Usage, I have in Lübeck Trade node 300 TP).
Not to talk too much about this savegame, but I had NEVER this much success with Die Hanse in previous Versions. Its a bit different than before, but I like it alot. And I'm surely not the best EUIV player. A mighty tool to use in 1.8 is the transfer of Occupations! Even for Vassals with AE Penalty its worth, because selling the Provinces they would take only 1 at a time, and only of their culture (With Castille against Portugal, France etc, I transferred everything to Aragon!!!, OK in this case its a big cheat because you inherit everything diplomatically, and no Autonomy increase to 75%). And as Nereid said: The predictable War participants are of big advantage, if you want only one province of an ally, there is no need to make the ally a co-billigerent
Not to talk too much about this savegame, but I had NEVER this much success with Die Hanse in previous Versions. Its a bit different than before, but I like it alot. And I'm surely not the best EUIV player. A mighty tool to use in 1.8 is the transfer of Occupations! Even for Vassals with AE Penalty its worth, because selling the Provinces they would take only 1 at a time, and only of their culture (With Castille against Portugal, France etc, I transferred everything to Aragon!!!, OK in this case its a big cheat because you inherit everything diplomatically, and no Autonomy increase to 75%). And as Nereid said: The predictable War participants are of big advantage, if you want only one province of an ally, there is no need to make the ally a co-billigerent
Depends what is meant by "harder". Harder to conquer the world, probably. Harder to outperform the AI? I have my reservations.
The A.I got better at transporting troops in my opinion so yes a little bit harder. For example England sent big armies to their ally Poland when I fought them as Russia. However it is easier to give provinces to your vassals which made the game a bit easier, also it's easier to avoid rebels (and the rebels are easier to squish as well).
Well coalitions can be disabled by truce, so it should be easier for serious expanders.
YES! thats one of the things i forgot about. My allies are mongoloids but my enemies are cooperative.
I'd say it's a little easier if anything. I'm playing as Naples and just won consecutive wars first against France and then against Austria. Well I gotta admit I got some help from Austria in the first on and from France in the second lol. I may be the worst backstabber ever 
I think it's very enjoyable now and perhaps if I was a better player it might be a tad too easy.
I think it's very enjoyable now and perhaps if I was a better player it might be a tad too easy.
I'd say its much easier and logical thanks to LA, vassal feeding and generally lower army maintenance.
Last edited:
The fact that you can disable coalitions, rebels are not random anymore and you can change occupier to feed land to whatever vassal you want made the game easier, but also slightly harder since you are much more likely to go total ham
Speaking of which, I've seen Hungary ally France at practically game start, get called into the 100 years war and England sending guys to wreck Hungary's armies and siege their coastal provinces. Instead of sending them to fight the french, which would be smarter.