National Ideagroups - 15th of October - B

[Freudia]

It's not a great set, but it won't feel terrible to use it either. A lot of the new sets lately don't stand out (other than annoying hostile core creation spam), but that means they neither stand out as amazing nor terrible.

I think this is a decent approach, honestly. Not every nation needs (or should, for that matter) to have top tier idea sets, but ideally every nation's idea set should be passable.

 

[mgoetze]

Uhm, everything is OK with your math?

+15% MP is not 10 100 -> 10 115 but 10 100 -> 11 615 (I am 99% this was ironical exaggeration but I am never sure on such things) Well IMHO 1 515 more man can be hella important when you are tiny nation fighting with another tiny nations with equal armies.

My math is fine, your understanding of EU4 mechanics is not.

If your manpower is 10,000 base + 100 from provinces, then this idea will pump it up to 10,000 base + 115 from provinces.

 

[ChildeR]

I think this is a decent approach, honestly. Not every nation needs (or should, for that matter) to have top tier idea sets, but ideally every nation's idea set should be passable.

I don't really care about how strong they are, but optimally every set would lead to unique gameplay. Bad but different > good but vanilla.

 

[Thrake]

Most of the time, +1 Prestige ensures that you're at 100 prestige pretty much all of the time. It's a great bonus, but not as visible as +Discipline bonuses or something like that.

Frankly, +prestige ideas are terrible. If I'm a weak minor, I'll sit around 0 prestige (or 15/20 if doing fine), though overall I can't dow enough to keep a decent prestige level. Late game, I sit on 100. Early on it could have some uses, though 0 or 10 doesn't makes much of a difference and late game it's useless as maxed all the time (100 or 99: no difference and I'll likely get some +prestige or -prestige decay somewhere in idea groups to make it even more useless).

 

[oblio-]

Frankly, +prestige ideas are terrible. If I'm a weak minor, I'll sit around 0 prestige (or 15/20 if doing fine), though overall I can't dow enough to keep a decent prestige level. Late game, I sit on 100. Early on it could have some uses, though 0 or 10 doesn't makes much of a difference and late game it's useless as maxed all the time (100 or 99: no difference and I'll likely get some +prestige or -prestige decay somewhere in idea groups to make it even more useless).

This should really be fixed. Winning some battles shouldn't bring you at 100 prestige.
If you look at the descriptions in the ledger, they go something like this: "People look up to X", "People respect X".
I'm not sure that British campaigns against the Zulus made the French respect the British more, for example.
Prestige is either non-existent, as you said, or overabundant. It should be much more precious. And it should probably have a higher impact as well, I think.

 

[Thrake]

This should really be fixed. Winning some battles shouldn't bring you at 100 prestige.
If you look at the descriptions in the ledger, they go something like this: "People look up to X", "People respect X".
I'm not sure that British campaigns against the Zulus made the French respect the British more, for example.
Prestige is either non-existent, as you said, or overabundant. It should be much more precious. And it should probably have a higher impact as well, I think.

The worst is how you get like 2 prestige for stackwhiping 1k men when you have a 150k standing army... You get more prestige for stackwhiping 3 stacks of 1k than a stack of 20k