Indian nations westernising by 1600

[NI_Mcknight]

I realise my mistake was to have bordering territories to them that allowed them to westernise or something, but surely the ai shouldn't be able to westernise that quickly, when I can load up my 1914 save on Victoria 2 and they will still be uncivilised. This is the furthest I have gone from the hundred year war start, but I think my chances of taking India have gone with that. I guess I will just start again -.-

 

[Wildcat_PL]

Their military units are still in indian group so your western/easter troops are still superior - even if you are on par with tech level.

 

[Denkt]

That highly depends on tech level, at some tech levels Indian units are better.

 

[toroltao]

Westernization wasn't even a thing until the 18th century. Imo Westernization shouldn't even be a thing in this game but PI had to implement a gamey mechanic draining all fun out of the game.

 

[Denkt]

Westernization wasn't even a thing until the 18th century. Imo Westernization shouldn't even be a thing in this game but PI had to implement a gamey mechanic draining all fun out of the game.

It is extreamly expensive to do and make you vulnerable while you are doing it and it also give you some nasty events while doing it.
Nations could very well improve their tech to face more advanced opponents and alot actually did that.

 

[clockworkBabbag]

Westernization wasn't even a thing until the 18th century. Imo Westernization shouldn't even be a thing in this game but PI had to implement a gamey mechanic draining all fun out of the game.

Today I learned that it "drains all the fun out of the game" to have a mechanic that allows you to play in the ROTW and not get curbstomped by Europe.

As much as I'd prefer that the ROTW didn't have to westernize in order to still have a chance against Europe and where there wasn't as much historical railroading to make Europe just inherently better than everyone else for no reason, westernization is still a better state of affairs than no westernization. What you seem to be advocating is a game where it's incredibly not fun to play anything other than a European nation.

 

[hashinshin]

Westernization in this game is not even historical westernization. Lets look at the facts:

It does NOT catch you up in technology, instead of spends 5000 points to bring you up to the same level of progression. Other than getting god himself as your king there is simply no way you'll catch up to France before the game is over unless you westernized in like the 1500s. This is the opposite of historical westernization where you WOULD catch your technology up. This game's Westernization is basically "civilizationizing" where your country realizes it needs to start putting research in to technolgy.

It completely drains all your military tradition. Instead of bringing your generals and military up to snuff it does NOT increase your technology and it DOES drain all your tradition. It's the complete opposite of a historical westernization. You start back from the beginning and have to spend the next 50 years learning to fight again while your technology wasn't even brought up to par (and you spend 5000 points, so neighbors will be 1 tech ahead of you by the time you're done, giving you only an advantage in the future.)

For those reasons westernization is basically Paradox's way of saying in a politically correct way "theses people are civilizing."

And yes it's a bit of a bad representation. The Ottomans civilizing is a bit weird, no?

 

[Qoff]

Westernization is necessary or playing as ROTW would be really boring. The players can also westernize very quicly so I don't understand the complaints about the AI, the AI should do everything possible to achieve its goals, and this includes westernize, and about "historical", I really lol'd everytime I see someone talking about it, IMO the game should be historical only in 1444 and after that they could even put robots and aliens in this game that I wouldn't care.

 

[unmerged(463193)]

Westernization wasn't even a thing until the 18th century. Imo Westernization shouldn't even be a thing in this game but PI had to implement a gamey mechanic draining all fun out of the game.

westernization does not give you western units, so europe will still curbstomp the heck out of rotw nations if that's what you're worried about.

 

[Denkt]

westernization does not give you western units, so europe will still curbstomp the heck out of rotw nations if that's what you're worried about.

Western units are great late game but only average below average otherwise, often a penalty seldom an advantage.

 

[unmerged(463193)]

Western units are great late game but only average below average otherwise, often a penalty seldom an advantage.

considering most players and AI westernize after 1600, later game pips are more important than early game pips. mid and late game is also when europe comes into contact with the rotw (other than ottomans and some hordes, which dont get new unit types), so again late game pips are key.

 

[artemis667]

If you take westernisation out of the game, what do you replace it with? It's a funny old mechanic, it's not entirely historical, but it does serve a purpose nonetheless. Assuming we want a game that roughly parallels history, and if you don't why would you be playing EU?

 

[Wildcat_PL]

Western units are great late game but only average below average otherwise, often a penalty seldom an advantage.

I'm not sure what do you mean by late game - but for me, once tertios and mauritian infantry shows up europeans can eat ROTW easily.

 

[Brainblow]

Westernization wasn't even a thing until the 18th century. Imo Westernization shouldn't even be a thing in this game but PI had to implement a gamey mechanic draining all fun out of the game.

This is the first time I've seen someone complain about Paradox not removing ways to "game" the game.

 

[TheMeInTeam]

I'm not sure what do you mean by late game - but for me, once tertios and mauritian infantry shows up europeans can eat ROTW easily.

That's due to a tech and ideas lead, not due to better units at the same technology.

I realise my mistake was to have bordering territories to them that allowed them to westernise or something, but surely the ai shouldn't be able to westernise that quickly, when I can load up my 1914 save on Victoria 2 and they will still be uncivilised. This is the furthest I have gone from the hundred year war start, but I think my chances of taking India have gone with that. I guess I will just start again -.-

I think you missed my point, which is that realism only tends to come up as an argument when people argue against features they don't like. It's fine not to like the large revolts, it's fine to argue against them, but demanding that the game should be highly specifically realistic in one particular area while ignoring for example your own ability to project massively unrealistic amounts of military force anywhere you can see means that I'm not going to take your argument seriously.

Besides, if a still-behind nation westernizing is a serious barrier to your expansion, there's something off. Mowing down an Indian nation at any point in the game should be trivial to anybody using a major power, or literally any nation in the hands of an experienced player.

 

[unmerged(463193)]

I realise my mistake was to have bordering territories to them that allowed them to westernise or something, but surely the ai shouldn't be able to westernise that quickly, when I can load up my 1914 save on Victoria 2 and they will still be uncivilised. This is the furthest I have gone from the hundred year war start, but I think my chances of taking India have gone with that. I guess I will just start again -.-

if you are trying to get the steam achievement, try playing the ottomans since they are counted as european in that achievement.

 

[Zander]

If you take westernisation out of the game, what do you replace it with? It's a funny old mechanic, it's not entirely historical, but it does serve a purpose nonetheless. Assuming we want a game that roughly parallels history, and if you don't why would you be playing EU?

At this point I'm considering going back to the system I had modded in for 1.4, where there is no westernization, but nations get large tech discounts for (actual) neighbors who have significantly higher tech than them in a given category.
IMHO no nation "westernized" in the EU4 sense during this time period. (Japan did after game ends.) I'm just not sure the current system adds so much to the game that it's really made better by everyone in the world westernizing.

 

[Sweawm]

You think that's bad? I had half of East Africa westernizing during the 1500's and they pulled it off successfully.

 

[TheMeInTeam]

IMHO no nation "westernized" in the EU4 sense during this time period.

You don't and can't know that, because the "EU4 sense" is whatever a player pretends it is.

You think that's bad? I had half of East Africa westernizing during the 1500's and they pulled it off successfully.

And why is that bad? How exactly did they get a non-trade company border?

 

[Kansai-kun]

Besides, if a still-behind nation westernizing is a serious barrier to your expansion, there's something off. Mowing down an Indian nation at any point in the game should be trivial to anybody using a major power, or literally any nation in the hands of an experienced player.

It depends. Pre-AoW a friend of mine lost a war against Vijayanagar as England because he thought the troops he sent would suffice - he got Zulu'd by the AI. If you're not preparing for a war, even a technological backwater can defeat you.