It is, and an important one. You won't have tech penalty, but you will have unit types penalty. Eastern have a large gap with western nations in terms of unit for most of the game, until lvl 26+ where it's 'reduced' (proportionally) to 3 pips.
Muscowy/Russia's a joke. How do you counter it?
- Thread starter unmerged(38985)
- 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.
This is also a much smaller gap than between Western and any other tech group. Out of any of the non-western tech groups in the game, Eastern is easily the best.
quick question;
I'm playing Denmark -> Scandinavia. Colonized a good part of North America, all coastal areas of the Baltic. Russia is the bain of my (EUIV) existance. Everything mentioned here. Do I stand a chance?
Its 1620
Russia Tech A=15 D=16 M=17
(Me) Scandi Tech A=16 D=17 M=17
(best ally and just about anyone else of importance) Spain A=17 D=15 M=17
Russia has expanded to the Pacific. They only have one province in the Black Sea, thank you Crimea.
EVERY. SINGLE. BATTLE. I lose. I am using 28/8/20, they are 21/10/12, although they usually have three stacks of these
the only way I am making out alive with any war with Russia is because they are allied with France and for some freaky reason Spain has taken half of France, and then England and Austria dog pile onto them every war. PS i am defending, generals are about them same and their moral is always higher/recovers faster
Help me
I'm playing Denmark -> Scandinavia. Colonized a good part of North America, all coastal areas of the Baltic. Russia is the bain of my (EUIV) existance. Everything mentioned here. Do I stand a chance?
Its 1620
Russia Tech A=15 D=16 M=17
(Me) Scandi Tech A=16 D=17 M=17
(best ally and just about anyone else of importance) Spain A=17 D=15 M=17
Russia has expanded to the Pacific. They only have one province in the Black Sea, thank you Crimea.
EVERY. SINGLE. BATTLE. I lose. I am using 28/8/20, they are 21/10/12, although they usually have three stacks of these
the only way I am making out alive with any war with Russia is because they are allied with France and for some freaky reason Spain has taken half of France, and then England and Austria dog pile onto them every war. PS i am defending, generals are about them same and their moral is always higher/recovers faster
Help me
What exactly got changed between 1.1 and 1.2?
I've never played russia, they are better used as THE late game bad guy...
But in 1.1 It was always sweden/denmark gobbling up novgorod and muscovy... now it's always russia gobbling the east (but nothing in the west). Did they just rewrite all the ai behaviors to respect borders in the great white north? I've had maybe 6 total 1.2 games and russia was pretty much identical each one.
I've never played russia, they are better used as THE late game bad guy...
But in 1.1 It was always sweden/denmark gobbling up novgorod and muscovy... now it's always russia gobbling the east (but nothing in the west). Did they just rewrite all the ai behaviors to respect borders in the great white north? I've had maybe 6 total 1.2 games and russia was pretty much identical each one.
Well, Deal with it : Russia is the big bad blob of the east. And it should be so. Russia should be ultimate endgame boss. Nerfing Russia would be seriously not fun. THEY WERE THAT POWERFULL. England won crimean war, because :
1. It had superior navy
2. It quickly captured some ports in kaffa region, and just mostly defended.
3. It had good supplies, and brought more men than russia did. Don't forget - poland and lithuania was quite rebelious by then, they needed their grand armies to defend territories from uprisings.
4. Britain did not started full scale invasion of russia. If it would, i am 100% sure it would fail. It was more of defensive war, to protect ottomans from getting into russian hands.
1. It had superior navy
2. It quickly captured some ports in kaffa region, and just mostly defended.
3. It had good supplies, and brought more men than russia did. Don't forget - poland and lithuania was quite rebelious by then, they needed their grand armies to defend territories from uprisings.
4. Britain did not started full scale invasion of russia. If it would, i am 100% sure it would fail. It was more of defensive war, to protect ottomans from getting into russian hands.
Last edited:
And to me, this is the major problem, because with how Russia (or anyone else for that matter) can move their entire army to anywhere (relatively) rapidly, you can't effectively get situational superiority for an extended period.
The greatest weakness of Russia historically (large territory that required a lot of garrisoning and a LOT of travel time, where travel was even possible) is nothing in the game.
I can't believe people are complaining about Russia when Ottomans are even better.
In the multiplayer games i have played till now Ottomans tend to bully Russia.
And anyway diplomacy is there for something, if you have an enemy very strong maybe you want to search allies
In the multiplayer games i have played till now Ottomans tend to bully Russia.
And anyway diplomacy is there for something, if you have an enemy very strong maybe you want to search allies
This is true of every large nation in the game though. It's just less obvious with colonial powers because the ai is not the greatest at dealing with transporting troops across water. To counter that, though, if you are facing an ai monster-blob Russia you can take advantage of the ai's tendency to all-out attack. Drive up WE through scorched earth/siege attrition, foment rebellions, attack on multiple fronts so their stacks spend months maneuvering back and forth, etc.
They also are much less valuable than the colonies the western powers get, at least the early ones (Caribbean, Brazil, 13 Colonies). Russia also has a much tougher time getting any trade value from its colonies in Siberia, particularly an ai Russia as it almost never expands into the Astrakhan and Samarkand trade nodes.
Russia has three things going for it: Easy expansion, better tech group, and powerful NIs. Ottomans do not get a free ride into Asia and then the ability to conquer Asia willy-nilly.
And anyway diplomacy is there for something, if you have an enemy very strong maybe you want to search allies
By the time the Russians reach Asia, they can take on all chinese/indian tech group nations at once and win...
Except its production that is the main source of income from Siberia, becaues unlike the Americas and Africa, Russia does not have to deal with overseas penalties.
Better tech group? xDDDDD
Have you tried a multiplayer game as Russia against Ottomans? You have to westernize or die.
Eastern troops are made of paper. Ottoman troops are good. Ottomans NIs are good, as well as russian ones.
And saying they have Asia to expand is like saying Spain has South America to expand. Deal with it, Russia is big
Ottoman troops are good likely because of the Janissaries giving a massive boost to discipline (but the Janissaries are a temporary buff), not because of Ottoman troops themselves.
As for the Ottoman troops, yes, they are good in 1500-1600, but Ottoman units decline rapidly in quality while Eastern troops rapidly increase in quality.
Again, Russia should not be expanding into China/India, and yet they can easily do so.
Ottoman NIs are stability oriented, not combat oriented. Their meager military bonuses get trounced by Russian +125% Manpower, -50% infantry Cost, +50% Land Force Limits.
Lucky nations off, quite simple solution.
Russia (and Ottomans, which are even more OP than Russia probably) needs to be strong. Those two are endgame bosses in the east.
Russia (and Ottomans, which are even more OP than Russia probably) needs to be strong. Those two are endgame bosses in the east.
That, I can confirm. I started my wars with Ming in the mid-17th century, after taking on the Oirat and Mongol hordes first, and I could easily burn their 120k manpower in one war without my own manpower counter even moving. And with Expansion CB and release cores, the AE is actually fairly low, so Russia can expand into Asia at breakneck speed.
Funny, we had a similar discussion on "how to beat Muscovy" in this thread earlier on: http://forum.paradoxplaza.com/forum...scovy-gt-Russia-sharing-experience-and-advice.
To sum it up: yes it's powerful, especially if you let Muscovy have its way with Novgorod, get its NIs and start colonizing Siberia, then it has sheer endless manpower. Some nations need to be kept in check by a coalition, and Russia's main vulnerabilities are its sheer bulk (rout a stack and it runs so far east you will barely see it again), its need to commit forces to multiple fronts (in the start, against hordes, poland/lithuania, and Novgorod; later Otto), and a hard-coded in self-destruct event between 1550 and 1650 called Times of Trouble that, if it fires, sets Russia back enormously. It's just like how you deal with BBB: you don't beat it on your own, you gang up on it and kick it when it's down.
In miutiplayer games Ottoman is much stronger than Russia. In single games AI ottoman is much more awesome than AI russia in the early game. When the game comes to 18th century, perhaps Russia is stronger than Ottomans like what it is in history. But at that time, it is always easy for Mr human to beat every AI country in the world
And the Ottomans have better troops (until late in the game), start with better rulers, and can use diplomatic expansion into Asia. Let's not forget they also can get by without the Religious group because they don't have to convert the Sunni provinces that require religious ideas. They also start in a much stronger position than Muscovy and have NIs that are pretty strong in their own right (triple manpower when fighting a religious enemy beats Russia's two manpower ideas combined when applicable, 10% discipline, 15% cav power).
Which is not really a viable option for Asian countries.
Um, its not very easy for the Ottomans to get into Asia, considering they would have to fight through the Middle East and India before reaching it. Russia gets a highway to Asia via the Hordes/Siberia.
As for better troops, ill run a comparison before judging.
I have never seen AI russia expanding into India and seldomly seen AI russia expanding into China. If you mean Mr human, come on, every country which is controled by human player can expand into China and india easily because of the advantage of technology and military unit.
Lol. The Ottomans have a straight way to India. Can also go north and conquer the nomads.
Eastern tech group troops are mostly inferior, for whatever reason... it is annoying, since polish nobles were best fencers in the period, because of how they used sabre. And they did often fought on foot, since some of the nobility were quite poor(szlachta-gołota). Lack of such thing as need for mobilization, makes game bit shallow... Standing armies, for the periods were quite small, until about near french revolution and napoleonic period.