Muscovy have been majorly nerfed

[1alexey]

Ok. Simple example:
Brandenburg have superior military ideas (top tier ideas, if you want to be warmonger). So, you can choose your idea sets based on your NIs. You can grab administrative for better mercs and -25% coring cost. Or you can go full warmonger with ~100% army tradition.
As Muscovy you have good set of expansion ideas. So, you can go quality or improve your ideas with quantity+expansion.

Basically, you're choosing between improving your weaknesses or maximizing your strengths.

In abstract, yes, in reality concerning EU4, stacking monarch point discounts is much stronger strategy than stacking military power, as it is very easy to get more military, and above certain point, you don`t need more military power.
I`m perfectly fine with playing a state without military-related NIs and only picking 2 military ideas, Offencive+Aristocracy/Defencive/Quantity/Qality.

Muscowy`s ideas are better, because they allow stacking stronger bonuses, or going good at everything strategy.

Hell, I said it, teutonic ideas are better, because they are not as military-focused.

 

[TheMeInTeam]

Don't tell me to chill out when we are fishing for quality of Romanian education.

Speaking of quality, let's add some of that to the argumentative constructs here.

 

[oblio-]

Don't tell me to chill out when we are fishing for quality of Romanian education.

I give up.

 

[Mortheim]

"not mindlessly building a colossus on clay feet by stacking everything in one aspect, ignoring other important things."
Choice and focus is just not his cup of tea. Equally mediocre is the way to go.

Not in all cases. Some countries have flexible NIs (like Muscovy, Ottoderps, BBB). So, even if you will get ideas, that will only improve their strength, they won't be colossus on clay feet.

And i didn't say, that you should get in one aspect - you should choose between improving your strengths or weaknesses.

 

[Zak Preston]

I don't understand that fuss around general 1.8 gameplay mechanics: everyone now has to deal with LA, more reasonable rebels, culture acceptance and it's limits. And some major powers like France, Austria and Muscovy => Russia are now to struggle a bit to earn their high status. But Russia in particular now has more provinces and more overall BT to conquer, but different Tartar cultures balance the issue a bit.. Castile => Spain and England => Great Britain have received well deserved buffs, AI Branderburg now struggles longer before their fall to HRE, Ottomans becae stronger, but Mamlucks seem to get buffed too.

There was a thread about Russia being underpowered recently, and I completely disagree with it: They have huge and relatively rich territories to conquer, a lot of trade nodes, insane quantity modifiers and generally a very good position to start. If someone feels that Muscovy ideas aren't on par with France in terms of military quality, then try to play any Russian minor: they have quite potent bonuses, just pick any state you like and play smart, giving tribute to Suvorov, Ushakov, Kutuzov and other military geniuses. =)

 

[nicechinos]

Speaking of quality, let's add some of that to the argumentative constructs here.

I appreciate that. Doesn't look like we could have quality discussion before we get larger sample size of AI Muscovy faults.

 

[Mortheim]

Muscowy`s ideas are better, because they allow stacking stronger bonuses, or going good at everything strategy.

Hell, I said it, teutonic ideas are better, because they are not as military-focused.
:

Bra is example, when you should improve your weaknesses before improving your strengths. Reason: they have superior military power and you should, somehow, get money, land and manpower to support this. Again, at this time Muscovy can get innovative and quality (10% combat ability + 20% combat ability from policy) to get practically the same army as yours.

 

[nicechinos]

I don't understand that fuss around general 1.8 gameplay mechanics: everyone now has to deal with LA, more reasonable rebels, culture acceptance and it's limits. And some major powers like France, Austria and Muscovy => Russia now to struggle a bit to earn their high status. But Russia in particular now has more provinces and more overall BT to conquer, but different Tartar cultures balance the issue a bit.. Castile => Spain and England => Great Britain have received well deserved buffs, AI Branderburg now struggles longer before their fall to HRE, Ottomans becae stronger, but Mamlucks seem to get buffed too.

There was a thread about Russia being underpowered recently, and I completely disagree with it: They have huge and relatively rich territories to conquer, a lot of trade nodes, insane quantity modifiers and generally a very good position to start. If someone feels that Muscovy ideas aren't on par with France in terms of military quality, then try to play any Russian minor: they have quite potent bonuses, just pick any state you like and play smart =)

It's not really a problem of playing Muscovy as a puny human that gets us here. It's AI Muscovy which completely fails at its historical mission concerns us (or me at least).
Muscovy has been nerfed:
1. By Balkanising Tatars
2. New trade goods pricing mechanics, which is somewhat balanced by introduction of Siberia node, but that's late game advantage
3. 50% LA cap on colonies
I think there is a consensus that all this is not significant compared with ease of conquest with new rebel system and LA. AI is the black sheep. It cannot annex Novgorod fully and fails to colonise, gets locked out by Uzbeks, Nogais, etc.

 

[oblio-]

I appreciate that. Doesn't look like we could have quality discussion before we get larger sample size of AI Muscovy faults.

Reddit.
Empire thread.
I actually provided some data sources a few posts back but who can read those parts?

Give them a few more weeks. But from what I've seen in dozens and dozens of screenshots, Muscovy looks just fine.

 

[Zak Preston]

It's not really a problem of playing Muscovy as a puny human that gets us here. It's AI Muscovy which completely fails at its historical mission concerns us (or me at least).
Muscovy has been nerfed:
1. By Balkanising Tatars
2. New trade goods pricing mechanics, which is somewhat balanced by introduction of Siberia node, but that's late game advantage
3. 50% LA cap on colonies
But I think there is a consensus that all this is not significant compared with ease of conquest with new rebel system and LA. AI is the black sheep.

In my 550-600 hours in EU4 I've never seen an AI Commonwealth. Not a single time. But in every single game when I didn't involve I've seen Russia being formed at 1600-1650. In 1.8 Russia has westernized twice without any serious problems. But have you ever seen Novgorod alive past 1600's?

and weren't we discussing "lackluster\bad" Russian NI's?

 

[nicechinos]

In my 550-600 hours in EU4 I've never seen an AI Commonwealth. Not a single time. But in every single game when I didn't involve I've seen Russia being formed at 1600-1650. In 1.8 Russia has westernized twice without any serious problems. But have you ever seen Novgorod alive past 1600's?

and weren't we discussing "lackluster\bad" Russian NI's?

When I do not play around Russian region PLC is always formed. The problem is Novgorod should be dead by 1480 the latest.

 

[nicechinos]

In my 550-600 hours in EU4 I've never seen an AI Commonwealth. Not a single time. But in every single game when I didn't involve I've seen Russia being formed at 1600-1650. In 1.8 Russia has westernized twice without any serious problems. But have you ever seen Novgorod alive past 1600's?

and weren't we discussing "lackluster\bad" Russian NI's?

I wouldn't say they are necessarily bad. Not top tier as a set but contains very strong bits: traditions + Siberian frontier + tech cost discount. Some of the ideas just do not fit.

 

[nicechinos]

Reddit.
Empire thread.
I actually provided some data sources a few posts back but who can read those parts?

Give them a few more weeks. But from what I've seen in dozens and dozens of screenshots, Muscovy looks just fine.

Kind of mixed bag really which is different story compared with 1.8. Russia never had a bad day back then.

Like this

 

[murlocmancer]

I have seen AI Muscovy lose every single game so far. Novgorod is so easy this patch since Poland/Lith crushes them with their new lucky advantages. Before you had to play smartly as Novgorod with Poland/Lith to beat Muscovy early on.

 

[oblio-]

Kind of mixed bag really which is different story compared with 1.8. Russia never had a bad day back then.

Well, then that's your problem - expectations.
Russia, as well as France or Austria or anyone else, should have bad days as well.
Expecting 100%, or even 90%, I'd say, is unrealistic. More than that, if a country is blobbing in 90% of games, its needs to be tweaked because it basically means that as far as the AI goes, it is over powered.

 

[nicechinos]

I have seen AI Muscovy lose every single game so far. Novgorod is so easy this patch since Poland/Lith crushes them with their new lucky advantages. Before you had to play smartly as Novgorod with Poland/Lith to beat Muscovy early on.

Agreed, Novgorod is shamefully easy with the whole transfer siege feature.

 

[nicechinos]

Well, then that's your problem - expectations.
Russia, as well as France or Austria or anyone else, should have bad days as well.
Expecting 100%, or even 90%, I'd say, is unrealistic. More than that, if a country is blobbing in 90% of games, its needs to be tweaked because it basically means that as far as the AI goes, it is over powered.

It's not about the expectations. Muscovy is supposed to crush Novgorod. It always did that without player intervention in 1.7. It is a sort of prerequisite. Novgorod alive is almost the same thing as AI France losing HYW. It might be fun but that's a different kind of game. Not the one based on history.

 

[Novacat]

Poor Brandenburg and Prussia - they have terrible idea set...

The only thing that makes Brandenburg's ideas good is the ability to sit on 100% army tradition in peacetime... If it were not for that, Brandenburg's ideas would not be special at all.

 

[TheMeInTeam]

The only thing that makes Brandenburg's ideas good is the ability to sit on 100% army tradition in peacetime... If it were not for that, Brandenburg's ideas would not be special at all.

Any of the +1 AT guys can sit at 90, which isn't very different considering a decay of 1/year at 100, then .5/year at 95.

Anyway, I'd argue that the 7.5% discipline and 20% morale/infantry combat stand out more so than that in the late game. AT decay and whatnot is more so an early game thing, but not an enormous one. Before ideas start getting filled Hungary's ideas are scarier than Prussia's, but that stops being true soon enough.

 

[nicechinos]

Any of the +1 AT guys can sit at 90, which isn't very different considering a decay of 1/year at 100, then .5/year at 95.

Anyway, I'd argue that the 7.5% discipline and 20% morale/infantry combat stand out more so than that in the late game. AT decay and whatnot is more so an early game thing, but not an enormous one. Before ideas start getting filled Hungary's ideas are scarier than Prussia's, but that stops being true soon enough.

I agree with that, especially since discipline guarantees a tactics bonus. AT buffing loses its relevance mid game.