YES! THANK YOU PARADOX! Hopefully this means that Muscovy forming Russia and accomplishing all of its historical conquests is no longer a givent constant, but actually a variable.
Muscovy have been majorly nerfed
- Thread starter Gigawot
- 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.
Think yourself lucky that you find playing majors powers a challenge.
I'm wondering though, with all that coring (Novgorod, then Ruthenia/Belarus), are you still able to take Expansion first and tech as the same time? Of course, focus is on ADM from day one (and unlikely to move) and with ADM advisor.
Revolts are no problem with the armies and this manpower (both mine and vassals) so you missed by a thousand miles again, buddy. You had to put these 800 hours to better use.
just finished a game as utrect> netherlands. no its not that i cant play major powers. its that this one has been overly nerfed.
thanks those who are actually giving helpful advice, those who say its just me get that stick out your arse.
Which they can still do. The only nations that took it on the chin hard from the change to colonization are nations that begin the game in the new world. Africa got hit too, but less so as they were less dependent on it and they got more buffed in return.
Trashcovy is the soundest bet to form Russia, and they start with a shock 4 general and more troops than most of the nations near them, with candy/unicorns/easy land to the East.
Quantity is solid on them, just not as a first idea as you have more pressing needs. The reduction in monarch point cost on buildings + ability to easily lock down trade in multiple nodes + multiple fronts makes quantity an attractive mid game choice to conquer into multiple areas at once and develop them.
I don't do this. I go mil focus first and Aristocratic ideas and fill these out as quickly as possible to get cheaper than Western tech (120% - 34%). Expansion comes second but it's not a problem since there is no large competition for Siberia these days. Also it's not as valuable as it was. It becomes valuable once you can build all the manufactories and transfer trade (Siberia-Kazan-Novgorod).
What's solid about quantity? To have 560 forcelimit instead of 458? To have 1.5m instead 1m manpower?
you did receive tons of advice from me. These stupid topics with the very same narrative appear every day which is sickening. Go read the previous 1kk topics instead of creating another one.
Yeah sure. If that is not confirmation bias, you are blatantly lying. Who'd beat up Muscovy anyway? Novgorod? The awfully weak hordes? PU'd Lithuania? 50% of the time integrated Sweden?
I'm not even playing with Lucky Nations atm and Muscovy is doing just fine.
Are you serious? Quantity is an idea which scales better the more manpower you have. It is better on Russia than it is on just about any other nation.
I can't believe this far in people still don't understand that Quantity does not scale linearly. If you already have huge manpower then Quantity will mean you'll never dip below the cap.
I am more than serious. Quantity is the worst choice for Muscovy because existing bonuses are huge. How can 150k can be spent early game? Why would I want more manpower than I can spend in any war? Quality of troops is always an issue with early game Ottomans or mid-game Austrians or French. It makes sense if you love sieging with 15k infantry stack on Finnmark which I don't do.
Earlier +3 advisors via more money from a military group.
Regiment costs and maintenance ideas both reduce maintenance, and the -power cost on buildings lets you set up faster, and speed is what we care about here.
When you're at the 400+ FL range, literally the only ideas that matter are -core cost and -dipannex cost. However, earlier on getting +3/+3/+3 while still being able to fight in multiple areas at once is more valuable.
Ideally Russia has religious, expansion, administrative, diplomatic, influence, offensive, aristorcratic, quantity, but not necessarily in that order.
Quantity also happens to be one of the ideas that increases naval FL too.
Muscovy > Russia is fine. Early Siberian expansion was grossly overrated before 1.8. Its primary purpose was to get a border with China before the cores expire, and that meant being strong enough in Europe to actually eat China. The standard pattern is still: eat Novgorod, eat all other vassals, expand. Which direction you expand in will depend on the situation. Some games Lithuania implodes within the first fifty years and I go west; some games the hordes wind up fighting each other and the Ottomans and I go south, and sometimes west and south are solid alliance walls and I go east.
You get rid of revolt risk efficiently in two ways:
(1) Vassal feeding.
(2) Religious conversion.
Annexed vassals start at 75% local autonomy, but that can be immediately decreased with minimal risk for same-culture and same-religion provinces. Directly annexed provinces on paper start with lower local autonomy, but they get the +15 nationalism revolt risk which means you have to immediately boost local autonomy or else waste military points on harsh treatment or armies on rebel roach patrol.
Religious is better than Humanism for Russia if you plan to stay Orthodox. It stacks with Orthodox missionary bonuses for converting all of those high-tax heathen provinces and provides the Deus Vult casus belli for efficient conquest. I would probably take Religious second or even third, and either a diplo idea or a military idea first, unless all of the hordes ally with the Ottomans or something. With the removal of cascading alliance chains, conquering hordes as Russia should be much easier because you won't have to worry about the Ottomans crashing the party.
You get rid of revolt risk efficiently in two ways:
(1) Vassal feeding.
(2) Religious conversion.
Annexed vassals start at 75% local autonomy, but that can be immediately decreased with minimal risk for same-culture and same-religion provinces. Directly annexed provinces on paper start with lower local autonomy, but they get the +15 nationalism revolt risk which means you have to immediately boost local autonomy or else waste military points on harsh treatment or armies on rebel roach patrol.
Religious is better than Humanism for Russia if you plan to stay Orthodox. It stacks with Orthodox missionary bonuses for converting all of those high-tax heathen provinces and provides the Deus Vult casus belli for efficient conquest. I would probably take Religious second or even third, and either a diplo idea or a military idea first, unless all of the hordes ally with the Ottomans or something. With the removal of cascading alliance chains, conquering hordes as Russia should be much easier because you won't have to worry about the Ottomans crashing the party.
Do you imply taking Quantity *along* with Offensive+Quality/Aristocratic, or instead of any of them? Picking 3 military idea groups is an overkill, really (unless the 3rd one fills the very last idea slot, but that one is kinda irrelevant anyway), much less picking 4.
How are you going to convert the hordes culturally and religiously without the religious NI?
I don't contest your right to quantity but what's the point of having more than you are 2 techs ahead of Austria (Aristocratic + Livonian western arms trade) and already have the highest forcelmit and largest MP pool in the world?
Culture Conversion? It's one of the most overrated features in the game. If not for RP-reasons or inability to spend Dip anywhere else, I would never hit the button.
Hordes MUST be culture converted, not just because of a bunch of non-accepted cultures but also to follow what Russia did in the real history! Go kick out a bunch of horsemen from a steppe, found a handful of cities, develop local aggriculture and bring civilization to these lands. I don't see any other way to play as Russia, lel.