This!
I'm missing the old AGCEEP mod for EUII, because I loved that old railroading, but otherwise? Most of the mods are, less than utterly engaging to me.
- 9
Merchant Republics are dead. RIP Venice.
- Thread starter stavro375
- 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.
I'm missing the old AGCEEP mod for EUII, because I loved that old railroading, but otherwise? Most of the mods are, less than utterly engaging to me.
.png){kind=avatar}
Whenever I start a new game, I have an achievement in mind as my goal. Can't get achievements with most mods, so I play what you call "vanilla" (although really "vanilla" would probably mean the base game without any DLC - or even, by some definitions, the original version of the game before any expansions were even released). That's the way Paradox intends the game to be played, and while I appreciate the modding community, I'm an achievement hunter myself.
- 9
I think that some kind of size/blobbing restriction on MRs is a good thing, but the current implementation is too inflexible.
The clearest solution as far as I can see is to let Merchant Republics reform into Oligarchic Republics (at a minimum: this should be possible by decision when you reach a certain size). That way MR is more like the Free City government type, a special arrangement while you're small that gets abolished when you go large. Another way to go is to make the penalties for being too large based on your number of provinces *in states* (this is not quite the same as a limit on number of states, as it encourages you to cherry-pick scattered outposts in the best MR style).
These are advantages of elective republics generally - Oligarchic still looks like a way better option for a typical country, never mind the more advanced ones. Then again, I think the whole republican re-election system is daft and doesn't really represent anything about how politics works in the real world.
I don't think trade leagues per se are such a big deal given the limitation to OPMs, but MR goods production bonus is a legit advantage that gets stronger as you get bigger, especially now that it applies to your own provinces. If there was no size cap on MRs, you'd end up with 100% trade control of several trade regions, and in each of those regions you'd have a substantial goods produced bonus (50%?) That would indeed be overpowered, so some kind of constraint needs to kick in.
Why should you have to go all the way to monarchy though? It makes no sense that republican government of any form is doomed just because you expanded a bit.
That was effectively DDRJake's answer. It's no good though when we are talking about whether Paradox has made a design error in their game. Yes, you can fix many flaws of the game by modding, but don't we want Paradox to make the game good in the first place? Mods should ideally be about getting an alternative game experience rather than just outright fixing/abolishing bad game mechanics.
The clearest solution as far as I can see is to let Merchant Republics reform into Oligarchic Republics (at a minimum: this should be possible by decision when you reach a certain size). That way MR is more like the Free City government type, a special arrangement while you're small that gets abolished when you go large. Another way to go is to make the penalties for being too large based on your number of provinces *in states* (this is not quite the same as a limit on number of states, as it encourages you to cherry-pick scattered outposts in the best MR style).
These are advantages of elective republics generally - Oligarchic still looks like a way better option for a typical country, never mind the more advanced ones. Then again, I think the whole republican re-election system is daft and doesn't really represent anything about how politics works in the real world.
I don't think trade leagues per se are such a big deal given the limitation to OPMs, but MR goods production bonus is a legit advantage that gets stronger as you get bigger, especially now that it applies to your own provinces. If there was no size cap on MRs, you'd end up with 100% trade control of several trade regions, and in each of those regions you'd have a substantial goods produced bonus (50%?) That would indeed be overpowered, so some kind of constraint needs to kick in.
Why should you have to go all the way to monarchy though? It makes no sense that republican government of any form is doomed just because you expanded a bit.
That was effectively DDRJake's answer. It's no good though when we are talking about whether Paradox has made a design error in their game. Yes, you can fix many flaws of the game by modding, but don't we want Paradox to make the game good in the first place? Mods should ideally be about getting an alternative game experience rather than just outright fixing/abolishing bad game mechanics.
Last edited:
- 10
- 1
@DDRJake , the solution to this is three fold:
1) Limit Merchant Republics with fewer states, not fewer provinces.
2) Have Merchant Republics gain disproportionately more corruption from having large numbers of territory provinces in relation to states, until reducing corruption makes expansion unprofitable.
3) Rework and improve Genoan ideas.
4) Give Merchant Republics development discounts in States.
1) Limit Merchant Republics with fewer states, not fewer provinces.
2) Have Merchant Republics gain disproportionately more corruption from having large numbers of territory provinces in relation to states, until reducing corruption makes expansion unprofitable.
3) Rework and improve Genoan ideas.
4) Give Merchant Republics development discounts in States.
- 10
Mmm... Might be better to give them a bonus to Tax and Production income in some way related to how few States they have. Something something *handwave* to represent the concentration of *more handwaving* things.
Or how about instead of a bonus to Development cost, raising the unpenalised Development cost from 10 to 20 for MRs? That way they can at least all get to Kingdom before getting penalties to Development.
- 1
Um. No. None of those CBs are particularly easy to get. Most are highly situational, at best. Some are actually impossible.
- 6
- 1
This, so much this. This isn't some minor detail anymore, Venice is one of the main nations advertised on the base 1444 scenario. If that nation is literally unplayable without having to buy an expansion pack that is pretty shady. Definitely opening up development as a free feature seems like a necessity if the developers want to make playing tall a more essential aspect of the game. Also think like others in this discussion I think enabling MR's to colonize/establish protectorates/territories and tying the cap to States rather than provinces is a good idea.
- 6
.png){kind=avatar}
ESPECIALLY since corruption was a free feature, not a DLC feature
- 5
I Do not agree with you. The two mods I am using are very balanced. I for one like the extra events they add. As for more provinces I am mixed on that. sometimes it is good and sometimes not depending on what they add.
- 1
- 1
I think this is going too far. A Republic that is committed to going tall (as a MR surely will be) has no trouble funding masses of development anyway. It's not the amount of tallness itself that's the problem here, just the lack of interesting things to do gameplay-wise once you reach the allotted number of provinces.
The other suggestions are good though.
- 4
Bluntly speaking, yes, acquiring territory efficiently requires a lot more game skill than taking economic ideas and waiting on speed 5.
Coalitions are very much still a threat 200 years in, at least with OPM starts.
- 9
- 2
I think forcing venice to play tall is a bad move. We should be able to choose if we want to play tall, but not be forced to do so.
- 12
Considering I was someone who suggested some kind of provinces cap for Merchant Republics. I like it.
Although my suggestion was that merchant republics should be encouraged to only take trade node provinces. There are lots of ways they could have implemented this. 20 provinces is ok.
But with the new states mechanic I'm not sure its even needed.
Either way, it encourages a merchant republic to only grab valuable provinces, or develop the ones they have. If you want to blob then you turn into a kingdom.
Although my suggestion was that merchant republics should be encouraged to only take trade node provinces. There are lots of ways they could have implemented this. 20 provinces is ok.
But with the new states mechanic I'm not sure its even needed.
Either way, it encourages a merchant republic to only grab valuable provinces, or develop the ones they have. If you want to blob then you turn into a kingdom.
- 4
- 3
The thing is, paradox has done nothing to make going tall a valid way to play the game. Blobbing is really the only thing that matters. Going tall is neither fun, nor actually worthwhile
- 5
- 3
Yeah, that idea was tacked on at the end.
Notice I said 'solution is three fold' and you are quoting my fourth point!
I suppose simply replacing the Genoan Ambition with a generous development discount would accomplish the same thing.
@DDRJake , you can replace Genoa's ambition with a nice development discount, and move the -20% naval maintenance to the last idea:
Overhaul the Bureaucracy+10% National tax modifier
Setup the Office of the Grand Admiral+25% Naval force limit modifier
Standardization of Designs-10% Shipbuilding time
Ambitions:-20% Naval maintenance modifier
BECOMES:
Overhaul the Bureaucracy+10% National tax modifier
Setup the Office of the Grand Admiral+25% Naval force limit modifier
Standardization of Designs-20% Naval maintenance modifier
Ambitions:-15% Development Cost
- 2
Again, I kind of have to disagree. Once you start blobbing, there is very little skill involved outside racing the clock, so to speak. At least if you go for 'tall' you tend to have more consistent difficulty when you do fight.
- 4
- 3
This DLC has been a distaster, just like CK2 Conclave. Idk what is with Paradox of late.
- 12
- 4
Concave was great by the way.. It was the free Patch that came with it that made everyone angry and everyone assumed it was the DLC that caused it.. But Nope it was the free patch.
I still do not understand trade leagues.. As when i hover over who they are transferring power too.. Even do i am the league leader.. They are not always transferring power to me it seems. Even though they are suppose to be doing it since I am league leader.. Which is quite annoying when you hover over a league member and find out they are not transferring trade power directly to you but to someone else.. Even though they are suppose to be transferring trade power to you.
Also why are trade leagues limited to.. OPM ?. Just wondering.. As i would think you would want a big nation to join as well. But maybe that is just me.
- 4
- 2
I don't understand these complaints at all. MRs now provide an interesting alternative to normal (blob) play. Instead of just conquering everything in sight they focus on taking strategic, high value provinces while maintaining trade leagues and securing trade power, using vast merc armies to make up for the lack of manpower. And if you want to blob, you can - just switch government types when you get too many provinces. There's an argument to be made that a voluntary government change should be an option, but other than that I don't see the issue.
- 7
- 5
- 1