Is this an exploit? (QftNW)

[Ex Mudder]

I hit on a strategy that works well for me. Playing England, I pick up QftNW when I get my second pick around 1496-98. I recruit an explorer and a conquistador, and begin my colonization of Delaware, while my Explorer and my Conquistador go exploring. Then I switch to a different National Idea (Mercantile practices, +10% compete chance) and take the 3 stability hit (painful, as it cuts into my merchants).

Meanwhile, my Explorer is still going strong, finding everything in the Atlantic (mil access with Portugal) and my Conquistador explores all the way from the Huron to the Aztecs. Once I find Zactecas, I send merchants there until I get around to conquering it.

Is this an abuse of the QftNW idea? I justify it on England having the Cabots at about that time historically, and then abandoning their exploration. Eventually, new areas come available, but by that time I've got a nice little strip of land from the Creek to the Iriquois claimed and settled and the demo is over.

 

[Strager]

You can't remove national ideas execpt by event (and no natural ones for that afaik)

-S

 

[unmerged(46069)]

You can't remove national ideas execpt by event (and no natural ones for that afaik)

-S

Yes, but you can change them to another national idea. So this exploit might work. In any case, it would make sense to do what you did, after all, you paid for it by taking the stab hit.

 

[EnderV]

I agree that -3 stab cost is way too low for changing the national idea. Especially, since in demo the only real difference with stab (as long as it's not negative which triggers some events) I noticed is +1 merchant . I hope it's different in the real game.

 

[Strager]

I agree that -3 stab cost is way too low for changing the national idea. Especially, since in demo the only real difference with stab (as long as it's not negative which triggers some events) I noticed is +1 merchant . I hope it's different in the real game.

well a -3 stability can be brutally crushing - revolts happen like mad, and your usually scrambling just to keep your empire afloat when it gets that low. Much worse than in EU2.... however that said some additional penalty would prolly be a good idea.

 

[EnderV]

Yes, it can, if you're at 0 or less (and some other circumstances). But, for either a rich nation, or a small nation (with small stab cost), changing can be fairly profitable.
In EU2, you had (apart from rev risk) tax incentive to keep stab high - 10% on taxes for each point over 1 is a lot of incentive! That doesn't exist (at least in demo). I haven't even noticed a significant merchant chance drop for low stab (although I wasn't looking at that in particular), which was another EU2 incentive.

If you'd put stab 5 hit & some monetary cost (representing the "rewiring" of administration or whatever), it would be better I think. If you really needed it, it could be done from a very stable base, but when I can get these three stab points back in three years with a good adviser (4 star) and a mediocre ruler (5 admin) even without any budget allocation? (IRRC, for a four province country 0->1 is about 100, 1-2> about 200, and 2->3 about 400 ducats. 5 from a ruler (average), 12 from average (3 star) advisor gives you 46 month, or say four years.)

 

[Jernau Gurgeh]

I really wish they'd made it so that you needed QftNW for at least overseas colonization. Would prevent this kind of exploit from happening, but otherwise I think the penalty for changing national ideas is ok.

 

[Laffertytig]

ive been meanin to ask what the hell does "qftnw" stand for?

 

[knul]

ive been meanin to ask what the hell does "qftnw" stand for?

Quest for the New World, a National Idea that enables you to create explorers and conquistadors.

 

[frpe02]

yes it'd be a good idea to make it so that you need QftNW to establish overseas colonies. If you want to have colonies, you have to atleast use one national idea for this. This way you need to make more of an commitment to make a large colonial empire, and maybe it'd stop inland minors from establishing colonies...

After a while more and more countries may decide to take this idea, and more and more countries will start to colonize. As in real life.

 

[Anaximander]

ive been meanin to ask what the hell does "qftnw" stand for?

QuestfortheNewWorld

 

[Golwar]

Well why would it be necessary to increase the penalty for changing national ideas at first ? Why not lock national ideas instead for a certain amount of years before you can switch them again ?
And if QftNW is dropped just kill all explorers and conquistadors. Exploit gone, everyone happy

 

[minority]

I hit on a strategy that works well for me. Playing England, I pick up QftNW when I get my second pick around 1496-98. I recruit an explorer and a conquistador, and begin my colonization of Delaware, while my Explorer and my Conquistador go exploring. Then I switch to a different National Idea (Mercantile practices, +10% compete chance) and take the 3 stability hit (painful, as it cuts into my merchants).

Meanwhile, my Explorer is still going strong, finding everything in the Atlantic (mil access with Portugal) and my Conquistador explores all the way from the Huron to the Aztecs. Once I find Zactecas, I send merchants there until I get around to conquering it.

Is this an abuse of the QftNW idea? I justify it on England having the Cabots at about that time historically, and then abandoning their exploration. Eventually, new areas come available, but by that time I've got a nice little strip of land from the Creek to the Iriquois claimed and settled and the demo is over.

Well, for one, it's already known that exploration is far too easy in the demo. This means that although you feel that exploration and colonisation has high profit returns in the demo, it won't be so in the release version (hopefully).

Hence, if what they say about exploration being tougher in the real game, there'll be more of an incentive to keep QftNW a little longer until you've got a sustainable overseas empire.

Also, since your maps can spread, it's sometimes advisable not to explore more than you can colonise. Being so, it's prolly better to not explore everything too much in one go, bearing also in mind explorations can be used to add naval tradition anytime. So, another incentive to keep QftNW as a long term idea.

Last of all, the stab hit is quite nasty as it is.

cheers

 

[unmerged(2833)]

What exploit? QftNW is required to HIRE explorers&conquistadors, not to HAVE them.

3 points of stability can be a killer for large empires, although it is true that it doesn't have to be for smaller/richer.

Effects of stab can be checked in static_modifiers i think.

 

[unmerged(2833)]

Ok, here are stab modifiers:

stability = {
interest = -1 #1% interest reduction for loan taken at positive stability point.
merchants = 1 #1 merchant for each positive stability
merchant_placement_chance = 0.05 #5% chance each step.
merchant_compete_chance = 0.01 #1% chance each step.
global_revolt_risk = -1 #-1% revolt risk each step
global_spy_defence = 0.05 #-15 to +15% modifier
}

Trade (and revolts) seem to be affected the most.

On a side note, it is excellent idea that you can change the idea when you have enough stability to actually lose it... i wish it would be implemented for few other things, like DP slider movement, etc, etc...

 

[unmerged(6777)]

Note that stability is also directly died into province production calculations so a -3 stab hit will also have a significant impact on your economy.

 

[EnderV]

Note that stability is also directly died into province production calculations so a -3 stab hit will also have a significant impact on your economy.

Ah, I haven't noticed that, but this would give good reason to think twice.
That said, I haven't noticed the difference in demo but will watch for it now.


Still, if I want to swap (say) QftNW for Viceroys, or Adam Smith or National Trade, chances are I will be comming on the plus side. But that just might be that some of the NI aren't fully balanced yet (or in demo).

10% on production/trade seems much much more than +1 merchant yearly, especially if I could get an advisor giving me the same or more (swapping stab spend for advisor spend, which is cheaper). Of course, I could need that (say) +1 diplomat/missionary badly with my slider settings, and not see such an advisor for a whole game.
Question is whether it's a better strategy to take a NI now, and pay the stab (and related) costs later when I don't need it anymore, or just rely of being able to get a good advisor sometime in future.

That said, I like NIs a lot, I think they open a whole few new dimensions to the game where before the slider settings were pretty "standard".

 

[Duke of Bavaria]

As metione dbefore the only problem is that colonisation is far to easy (at leat in the demo). If its would be harder you couldnt succed with just one explorer and had to keep up CQofNW.

 

[unmerged(1207)]

Is this an abuse of the QftNW idea? I justify it on England having the Cabots at about that time historically, and then abandoning their exploration. Eventually, new areas come available, but by that time I've got a nice little strip of land from the Creek to the Iriquois claimed and settled and the demo is over.

Actually if you start as England in 1497 or greater you start with John Cabot without having to select QftNW! Stating even later gives you the other Cabot. The bottom line is that you can explore without QftNW if you take advantage of (exploit) the explorers in the history files by selecting certain countries at the appropriate start dates.

I for one don't like this. A Nation ought to have QftNW to explore even if it has explorers or conquistadors. This would stop this potential exploit.

George

 

[Daunus]

you should need the quest for new world idea top explore or colonise.

After all if you government is not interested in colonies it will not fund expeditions or colonies.