is innovative better than economic ideas for france?

[yerm]

For all of its advantages, France is surprisingly tricky to play, and 1.8 made it trickier: France starts with a bunch of vassals eating up dip slots, and local autonomy means that integrating vassals makes you weaker in the short-mid term. Add that France is surrounded by great powers that hate its guts. Not exactly a hard start in the grand scheme of things, but there are easier and/or more straightforward starts available. On paper, France is the most powerful nation in the game, so the temptation is to go nuts crushing your neighbors from the first moment, but that's unlikely to end well unless you're an experienced player.

The only problem comes when you are new and try to set untenable goals. You can get obliterated, lose vassals, lose cores, and still be a colonial powerhouse. I guess there is this strong sentiment for many people that losing cannot be an option, but for a few countries (france and ottomans) you can get flattened and still play the game, unless the idea that you aren't dominating is a problem in itself. You have to really try, like, give away concessions in separate peace and the like, to get knocked out. Your vassals should be able to independently win wars against anyone but Austria, Burgundy, Castille, or a coalition. If you simply don't fight any of these, even if it means progress is slow or someone you REALLY wanted like Provence is off the table... oh well! I was under the impression that if your army is intact and standing, and your manpower is fine, the ai doesn't attack you - you look too strong. If you do get attacked, just lose. It's not the end of the game!

I don't see how there are too many easier starts. Ottomans, Castile, maybe Poland?

 

[TheMeInTeam]

The only problem comes when you are new and try to set untenable goals. You can get obliterated, lose vassals, lose cores, and still be a colonial powerhouse. I guess there is this strong sentiment for many people that losing cannot be an option, but for a few countries (france and ottomans) you can get flattened and still play the game, unless the idea that you aren't dominating is a problem in itself. You have to really try, like, give away concessions in separate peace and the like, to get knocked out. Your vassals should be able to independently win wars against anyone but Austria, Burgundy, Castille, or a coalition. If you simply don't fight any of these, even if it means progress is slow or someone you REALLY wanted like Provence is off the table... oh well! I was under the impression that if your army is intact and standing, and your manpower is fine, the ai doesn't attack you - you look too strong. If you do get attacked, just lose. It's not the end of the game!

I don't see how there are too many easier starts. Ottomans, Castile, maybe Poland?

Portugal, Castile, Ottomans are easier to play than France, and England is about the same. Muscovy is only slightly harder, same with Poland (and Poland only due to its unique mechanics and legitimacy concerns).

 

[FrigidSoul]

The only problem comes when you are new and try to set untenable goals. You can get obliterated, lose vassals, lose cores, and still be a colonial powerhouse. I guess there is this strong sentiment for many people that losing cannot be an option, but for a few countries (france and ottomans) you can get flattened and still play the game, unless the idea that you aren't dominating is a problem in itself.

Losing a single war isn't the end of the game, it's true. But if you're playing the putatively strongest nation then you don't expect to lose much if at all. Many people, particularly on this forum, would say that if you're not dominating as France you're doing it wrong.

The more I play this game, the more I think that the easiest starts feature smaller nations in a position to acquire and exploit strong allies. Maybe that's just my own personal bias talking; maybe I feel like I have to go balls-to-the-wall with larger nations and therefore find the slower pace of smaller nations more relaxing. Dunno. What I do know is that the autonomy change combined with England's new income/AI combined with the extant rival web makes France feel like a caged lion at game's start, which is appropriate but no less surprising if you're used to playing against dominant France.

 

[Beagá]

But that´s because ultimatedly any experienced AND good player will have no trouble playing as France. Ever.

Do note that I said good players, as indeed some people have trouble with the AI on Normal.

 

[winsingtonIII]

And how can that be then income is the first thing to compare if you wan't to know the relative power of nations.

Are you talking about real life or in game? If you mean in game, I don't really agree. When I prepare to declare war on a nation, I never really check their income, but I do check their forcelimits,manpower, and how many regiments they currently have.

That said, having ridiculous income is actually really good because it means you can just go ham and hire tons of mercenaries over your forcelimit and still be making a profit. Playing the Netherlands proved to me that having a ton of money can win you wars you should lose (versus France, who had a much higher force limit than I did, for instance).

However, as France, who is already set up to have a good economy and high forcelimits, manpower, etc. I don't think economic ideas are really necessary right off the bat.

 

[yerm]

Portugal, Castile, Ottomans are easier to play than France, and England is about the same. Muscovy is only slightly harder, same with Poland (and Poland only due to its unique mechanics and legitimacy concerns).

I forgot Portugal, which is almost the same as Castile. Muscovy is pretty similar to France, but I'd say France definitely has it easier. They're both easy though.

I disagree 100% on England. They are NOT an easy nation for a brand new player! You start in a war you need to know the game very well to win, with a monarch who is awful and sets you back on points, and your neighbor/rival Scotland is guaranteed by said France. It's gotten better now that France won't take war lead, so you can still faceroll the scots and irish no matter what, but you still are staring down garbage monarch points and almost guaranteed awful revolt events. I hear a ton of people argue that England is good for new players and I would love if someone (you seem a good candidate) can explain how this is the case, despite Henry, HYW, WOTR, etc. all right off the bat smacking you in the face.

 

[TheMeInTeam]

I forgot Portugal, which is almost the same as Castile. Muscovy is pretty similar to France, but I'd say France definitely has it easier. They're both easy though.

I disagree 100% on England. They are NOT an easy nation for a brand new player! You start in a war you need to know the game very well to win, with a monarch who is awful and sets you back on points, and your neighbor/rival Scotland is guaranteed by said France. It's gotten better now that France won't take war lead, so you can still faceroll the scots and irish no matter what, but you still are staring down garbage monarch points and almost guaranteed awful revolt events. I hear a ton of people argue that England is good for new players and I would love if someone (you seem a good candidate) can explain how this is the case, despite Henry, HYW, WOTR, etc. all right off the bat smacking you in the face.

You get smacked with a lot of stuff, but in spite of it all you're very powerful rarely targeted and can afford mishaps. As France, you might lose land if you screw up. As England, that's Wales and Northumberland only in most cases. Short of somehow losing territory to Scotland, despite all the random crap that happens to England it's a strong nation with almost no existential threat and an eventual easy colonial game. It's not as easy as Castile or Portugal, but I don't see how it's materially "harder" than France in the sense of "new player using this nation isn't going to die". Even coalitions would struggle to invade the isles.

 

[ecrurudesby]

I disagree 100% on England. They are NOT an easy nation for a brand new player! You start in a war you need to know the game very well to win, with a monarch who is awful and sets you back on points, and your neighbor/rival Scotland is guaranteed by said France. It's gotten better now that France won't take war lead, so you can still faceroll the scots and irish no matter what, but you still are staring down garbage monarch points and almost guaranteed awful revolt events. I hear a ton of people argue that England is good for new players and I would love if someone (you seem a good candidate) can explain how this is the case, despite Henry, HYW, WOTR, etc. all right off the bat smacking you in the face.

Abandon the HYW and all mainland holdings as soon as possible, don't attack Scotland until France stops guaranteeing them, and attack Ireland at your whim. I found that England's trade income can afford an army big enough to get through the WotR with little difficulty, and only a fool suppresses Lollards.

The Channel means England doesn't have to worry about France's or anyone's army nearly as much as a Spain or an Austria does. Focus on colonisation and trade and you're laughing.

 

[FrigidSoul]

You get smacked with a lot of stuff, but in spite of it all you're very powerful rarely targeted and can afford mishaps. As France, you might lose land if you screw up. As England, that's Wales and Northumberland only in most cases. Short of somehow losing territory to Scotland, despite all the random crap that happens to England it's a strong nation with almost no existential threat and an eventual easy colonial game. It's not as easy as Castile or Portugal, but I don't see how it's materially "harder" than France in the sense of "new player using this nation isn't going to die". Even coalitions would struggle to invade the isles.

Right, this convo boils down to shifting standards. I started by saying that France is 'surprisingly tricky' to play given that it's probably the most powerful nation in the game. Yerm then argued that France is easy because it's nearly impossible to be wiped off the map -- and that much is true. But when you fire up the game as France, survival isn't the standard. Dominating the world as fast as possible is the standard, and if you go into the game with that mindset you might just be surprised at how hemmed in France feels at the beginning.

Personally, I can't stand playing the colonial game, but Castile, Portugal, and England all have that as an easy option to expand early on. Castile can pretty easily take all of Iberia too to get started. Austria's got semi-complex mechanics to go along with its emperorship, but I wouldn't say it's any harder than France to play, and in the current patch fast-revoke Austria seems significantly more powerful to boot. What's funny is that all of the above benefit from the option of allying France and using it as their personal win-war button. France, being in the middle, and dip-relation-starved as it is with all those vassals, has a harder time abusing allies in like fashion.

What are your thoughts on Denmark? Seems to be in a pretty sweet position to start, but I spose the Sweden PU is easily destabilized.

 

[ikkiks]

What are your thoughts on Denmark? Seems to be in a pretty sweet position to start, but I spose the Sweden PU is easily destabilized.

Sweden is actually easier than Denmark. Just do this:

Day1: Ask Hansa and someone else to support your independence.
Declare independence asap before Denmark get any strong ally. Close the Öresund strait using galleys before Denmark troops march. Easy victory, good spot to begin and stronger national ideas.

For an easy experience, ally Muscovy and don't conquer russian provinces (or else Muscovy will hate you).

 

[slv]

Sweden is actually easier than Denmark. Just do this:

Denmark:
1. Attack anyone, get two provinces.
2. Annex Holstein.
3. Integrate Norway.
4. Wait till diprep goes off, integrate Sweden.

As a Denmark you have an advantage that you don't need to fight at Scandinavia at all. All you fight can be vs outsiders like Hansa/Muscovy. Sweden on the other hand has a long way to consolidate it's lake and lands. Of course ideas, decisions and events are so much better than Danish ones. Also if Denmark allies France they will not be constantly confused with flag issues (hey, why aren't my troops moving!Oh, they're French, nevermind)

 

[ikkiks]

Denmark:
1. Attack anyone, get two provinces.
2. Annex Holstein.
3. Integrate Norway.
4. Wait till diprep goes off, integrate Sweden.

As a Denmark you have an advantage that you don't need to fight at Scandinavia at all. All you fight can be vs outsiders like Hansa/Muscovy. Sweden on the other hand has a long way to consolidate it's lake and lands. Of course ideas, decisions and events are so much better than Danish ones. Also if Denmark allies France they will not be constantly confused with flag issues (hey, why aren't my troops moving!Oh, they're French, nevermind)

Ofc Denmark is faster and better to expand early. But it is not easy to sustain a PU with Sweden as a new player. Any mistake you make and here comes a Swedish independence war. To a new player, fighting wars as Denmark could also be quite a challenge. There's not really any easy target for them... HRE down south, Russia to the east and now Poland/Commonwealth is a real great power. That's why I suggested Sweden. Scandinavian wars are easy to start and when you get your economy up, Sweden just becomes unstoppable.

For an experienced player, I agree with you. Denmark is at the best spot for an early expansion, you get a couple prussian provinces and you can stop Russia early annexing yourself some great provinces that don't raise much AE.

 

[Beagá]

Denmark should go for Teutonic knights and possibly warn a nation or two.

 

[Artyom87]

muscovy or england and france are incomparable in the difficulty department. As someone mentioned, key with france is take things carefully diplomatically. Muscovy is actually a pretty dam hard nation to play in 1.8, and England cant conquer mainland unless you use really gamey tactics

in 1.8, the difficulty of nations is as follows (considering you are an experienced player playing ironman/ai bonus/ai hard), and difficulty is measured in how easily successful you can be at expanding into dominating europe and score:
1. Castille (I have never played them but I assume theyre the easiest)
2. Ottos
3. Poland
4. Austria
5. France
6. Denmark

everyone else is significantly harder in my opinion. With England you'd have to wait couple hundred years before you can challenge europe, and with muscovy its a big (altho fun) challenge all throughout the game and you might end up in a deadlock situation of Overpowered Commonwealth

 

[ahyangyi]

Denmark:
1. Attack anyone, get two provinces.
2. Annex Holstein.
3. Integrate Norway.
4. Wait till diprep goes off, integrate Sweden.

As a Denmark you have an advantage that you don't need to fight at Scandinavia at all. All you fight can be vs outsiders like Hansa/Muscovy. Sweden on the other hand has a long way to consolidate it's lake and lands. Of course ideas, decisions and events are so much better than Danish ones. Also if Denmark allies France they will not be constantly confused with flag issues (hey, why aren't my troops moving!Oh, they're French, nevermind)

Well, Denmark was my pick in my first ever game. I actually read half the EU4 wiki before starting. I was still beaten to death.

I allied the PLC and another HRE member (so I was one over relationship limit). Then I got a mission to grab some land from Teutonic order, which I did and won. I chose Danzig as the one province I took from them. Then I took years to core Danzig. Then I realize I should have taken two weaker provinces instead of the "good" one so I can integrate Norway.

In 1454 I annexed Holstein. I still couldn't integrate Norway nor Sweden. I then lost a war PLC called me in somewhere. Seeing me devoid of troops Sweden DoWed on me for independence. Luckily with the help of the newly beaten PLC I actually won that war.

A few years later I decide to take another province to finish the integration thing. I targetted, well, the Hansa. Then the whole HRE came and beated me into death. In the end I was forced to release Holstein, annull treaties with PLC. Then Sweden DoWed again and I was hopeless.

Well this isn't actually much worse than actual history, but having such experience in your first game is a little... brutal.