No point playing Russia anymore

[oblio-]

Well, Muscovy's portrayal might not be optimum, but the key question is: how often do you see Muscovy like this in 1530?

After playing quite a few games and seeing tens if not hundreds of empires here and on reddit, I almost never see it like that.

By 1530 it's usually much larger: all the vassals are already annexed, Novgorod is usually fully consumed, several colonies have been made, depending on the alliance luck several hordes are also gone.
It doesn't have Lithuanian lands (Poland/Lithuania fall a later - though this seems to be changing now that Poland is lucky).

I don't think there's any way that anyone could claim Russia is underpowered. Yes, EU4 Russia is more of a zerg-Russia instead of a tricky fox-Russia that maneuvers around its enemies, but it gets the job done.

 

[nicechinos]

That's a weak point to make. Please try to find significant sample size of many countries (not hardcoded by events ) out of hundred of empires that lived exactly by their borders in 1530. EU4 is not a movie, it's a simulation. The only sign of "right" (from the historical perspective) balance if AI nation more or less lives to its borders by 1820 (it should smoothen simulation deviations over the longer term if game balance is tight). Russia is Ok in this sense (AI is always pretty much in those although deviations can happen; Inkerman battle could go the other way IRL) but its ideas are nowhere near top-tier. Sweden which was not a superpower in 1722 or Poland (no independent Polen in 1821) have much better quality ideas.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Great_Game
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Russian_Partition#mediaviewer/File:Rzeczpospolita_Rozbiory_3.png

This is more relevant map.
http://worldmap.harvard.edu/maps/886 Choose in the menu on the left:
1. boundaries, historical data
2. Boundaries in 1825
These are only incorporated territories, sphere of influence was larger.

 

[Surgünoglu]

Our mileage will always vary, but it seems like at least a few of us experience the inevitable Moscow blitz. Like I said, it sounds like some welcome speed bumps are in the game now. And yeah, Catherine > Peter, of course, which means Moscow's early game domination is even moreanachronistic when it happens. Which is pretty frequently.

 

[nicechinos]

Our mileage will always vary, but it seems like at least a few of us experience the inevitable Moscow blitz. Like I said, it sounds like some welcome speed bumps are in the game now. And yeah, Catherine > Peter, of course, which means Moscow's early game domination is even moreanachronistic when it happens. Which is pretty frequently.

Catherine > Peter, did you learn that in school in math class? What is this supposed to mean? I didn't understand your post at all.

 

[G_Morgan]

"Sweden.... that raped PLC and HRE in EU4 timeframe" Not sure if it was clear earlier.

"Also swatting Sweden is hardly an achievement. The whole point is Sweden was not a great power." Mate, that's not even funny. Wiki knows about this stuff. Pdx knows about this stuff. AOW is about this stuff. Ok, another wiki quote.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thirty_Years'_War
"From 1630 to 1634, Swedish-led armies drove the Catholic forces back, regaining much of the lost Protestant territory. During his campaign he managed to conquer half of the Imperial kingdoms, making Sweden the continental leader of Protestantism until the Swedish Empire ended in 1721."

Any further objections to the case?

Sweden was being subsidised by France who basically used the whole war as a giant proxy war against Austria. The huge mercenary armies were paid by France. The Thirty Years War was more or less as follows:

1. France subsidises Denmark against Austria.

2. Sudden intervention of Denmark shakes the HRE and pushes them backwards.

3. Austria rallies and ends up negotiating a status quo with Denmark.

4. France immediately subsidises Sweden to fight a by now exhausted Austria.

5. Sweden's intervention drives back Austria.

6. Austria rallies and stalemates the conflict in mid Germany.

7. Austria pushes Sweden back into North Germany. Saxony and others sign a peace with Austria.

8. France decides to stop messing around and declares war on Austria.

 

[G_Morgan]

That's a weak point to make. Please try to find significant sample size of many countries (not hardcoded by events ) out of hundred of empires that lived exactly by their borders in 1530. EU4 is not a movie, it's a simulation. The only sign of "right" (from the historical perspective) balance if AI nation more or less lives to its borders by 1820 (it should smoothen simulation deviations over the longer term if game balance is tight). Russia is Ok in this sense (AI is always pretty much in those although deviations can happen; Inkerman battle could go the other way IRL) but its ideas are nowhere near top-tier. Sweden which was not a superpower in 1722 or Poland (no independent Polen in 1821) have much better quality ideas.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Great_Game
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Russian_Partition#mediaviewer/File:Rzeczpospolita_Rozbiory_3.png

This is more relevant map.
http://worldmap.harvard.edu/maps/886 Choose in the menu on the left:
1. boundaries, historical data
2. Boundaries in 1825
These are only incorporated territories, sphere of influence was larger.

Russia regularly reaches its post Vienna borders by 1650. It only gets checked at all if the Ottomans become strong.

 

[checro]

Catherine > Peter, did you learn that in school in math class? What is this supposed to mean? I didn't understand your post at all.

Maybe you shouldn't have skipped math...



I don't understand...
Is this about not liking the autonomy system??? That would make sense, although I like it, but then why is Russia special in that "problem"? Actually, maybe it is in same-continent-auto-cap, but you are ranting about culture???

Why would same culture erase autonomy of a conquered land?

 

[Novacat]

Russia regularly reaches its post Vienna borders by 1650. It only gets checked at all if the Ottomans become strong.

This is mainly because Hordes and Ming are pathetically weak, essentially making that whole region a glorified landgrab. Even better in that there is rarely anyone to compete or oppose them.

 

[StatikShocker]

ONLY in true faith provinces, though, which tend to not have revolt issues to begin with except in exceptional circumstances. I do agree Orthodox would be fairly powerful if Patriarch authority applied to all owned provinces, but it does not.



You are wrong. Russia's ideas are mostly focused on quantity but, ever since discipline and combat power was fixed quality has always been superior to quantity and the above three have quality in spades. While Russia would probably be better than Sweden on normal circumstances Sweden also gets a ton of permanent event modifiers which tips the scales back towards Sweden. Infact, Sweden's troops, after event modifiers, are cheaper than Russia's troops. Forcelimits are kind of semi-worthless because they stop being relevant once you blob beyond a certain size.

that's the whole point. with high patriarch authority, religious ideas, and a relatively baggage-less defender of the faith, you convert everything you conquer immediately. your super tolerance of true faith and -unrest negates nationalism... and you are good to go.

 

[oblio-]

That's a weak point to make. Please try to find significant sample size of many countries (not hardcoded by events ) out of hundred of empires that lived exactly by their borders in 1530. EU4 is not a movie, it's a simulation. The only sign of "right" (from the historical perspective) balance if AI nation more or less lives to its borders by 1820 (it should smoothen simulation deviations over the longer term if game balance is tight). Russia is Ok in this sense (AI is always pretty much in those although deviations can happen; Inkerman battle could go the other way IRL) but its ideas are nowhere near top-tier. Sweden which was not a superpower in 1722 or Poland (no independent Polen in 1821) have much better quality ideas.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Great_Game
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Russian_Partition#mediaviewer/File:Rzeczpospolita_Rozbiory_3.png

This is more relevant map.
http://worldmap.harvard.edu/maps/886 Choose in the menu on the left:
1. boundaries, historical data
2. Boundaries in 1825
These are only incorporated territories, sphere of influence was larger.

Well, except for Alaska, Russia usually has all those and more. Regarding ideas, the game is made by a Swedish company. Comparing anyone to Sweden doesn't really matter. And comparing Russian ideas to other countries:
1. Brandenburg - who cares, it's a 3 province minor in a much worse starting position.
2. France - you honestly do not want to compare Russia to France during this period.
3. Poland - has flashier ideas but for expansion the Russian ones are better, IMO. Also in a much worse starting position.
4. Ottomans - better ideas; however has a bit worse starting tech, a bit worse end game troops and for most of the period they were actually a lot stronger.

Anyway, make a separate topic IMO. Russia is very playable, both for the AI and for a player.
You actually want a change in the type of national ideas for Russia, from quantity to quality - post that suggestion alone, here it's drowned out in this entire discussion.

that's the whole point. with high patriarch authority, religious ideas, and a relatively baggage-less defender of the faith, you convert everything you conquer immediately. your super tolerance of true faith and -unrest negates nationalism... and you are good to go.

Apparently he's actually right now for another reason: the Orthodox events are now much better and much rarer so it's very hard to get 100% authority

 

[nicechinos]

Maybe you shouldn't have skipped math...



I don't understand...
Is this about not liking the autonomy system??? That would make sense, although I like it, but then why is Russia special in that "problem"? Actually, maybe it is in same-continent-auto-cap, but you are ranting about culture???

Why would same culture erase autonomy of a conquered land?

Mmmm? You might have mistaken me with someone. I'm not "ranting" about anything except sheer ignorance of some posters. I like the new autonomy system because rebs are much more manageable making conquest easier.

 

[nicechinos]

Well, except for Alaska, Russia usually has all those and more. Regarding ideas, the game is made by a Swedish company. Comparing anyone to Sweden doesn't really matter. And comparing Russian ideas to other countries:
1. Brandenburg - who cares, it's a 3 province minor in a much worse starting position.
2. France - you honestly do not want to compare Russia to France during this period.
3. Poland - has flashier ideas but for expansion the Russian ones are better, IMO. Also in a much worse starting position.
4. Ottomans - better ideas; however has a bit worse starting tech, a bit worse end game troops and for most of the period they were actually a lot stronger.

Anyway, make a separate topic IMO. Russia is very playable, both for the AI and for a player.
You actually want a change in the type of national ideas for Russia, from quantity to quality - post that suggestion alone, here it's drowned out in this entire discussion.

Apparently he's actually right now for another reason: the Orthodox events are now much better and much rarer so it's very hard to get 100% authority

I agree with that. Russia is playable both as Muscovy and Novgorod. I may make these suggestions once I have better understanding of AOW's balance. Honestly, I have more concerns about culture acceptance but it rather has to do with poor mechanics of cultures acceptance and conversions than Muscovy's ideas.

 

[nicechinos]

Well, except for Alaska, Russia usually has all those and more. Regarding ideas, the game is made by a Swedish company. Comparing anyone to Sweden doesn't really matter. And comparing Russian ideas to other countries:
1. Brandenburg - who cares, it's a 3 province minor in a much worse starting position.
2. France - you honestly do not want to compare Russia to France during this period.
3. Poland - has flashier ideas but for expansion the Russian ones are better, IMO. Also in a much worse starting position.
4. Ottomans - better ideas; however has a bit worse starting tech, a bit worse end game troops and for most of the period they were actually a lot stronger.

Anyway, make a separate topic IMO. Russia is very playable, both for the AI and for a player.
You actually want a change in the type of national ideas for Russia, from quantity to quality - post that suggestion alone, here it's drowned out in this entire discussion.

Apparently he's actually right now for another reason: the Orthodox events are now much better and much rarer so it's very hard to get 100% authority

Ottos were "a lot" stronger up until 1650s-1700s. After that they started degrading into sick man of Europe while Russia was rising into a superpower. The balance of wars is on Russia's side (should I say heavily? 6 out of 8 were Russian victories in the time period) probably due to the fact that in contrast to Europeans Russia didn't encounter Ottomans on the rise. The only exception was Ottoman Astrakhan expedition in 1568-1570 (after Russia annexed Kazan and Astrakhan) which catastrophically ended for them and Crimeans.

 

[MiniaAr]

If you want to play quality Russia, play Ryazan, simple as that.

[U]Traditions[/U]
-1 Global Unrest
+2.5% Army Morale Recovery Speed

[LIST=1]
[*]The Arsenal of Ryazan: +25% Land Forcelimit Modifier, +15% Global Manpower Modifier
[*]Tatar Mercenaries: -10% Cavalry Cost
[*]Land Charters: +15% Manpower Recovery Speed
[*]Russian Grain: +10% Production Efficiency
[*][B]March of Russia: -0.02 Monthly War Exhaustion, +5% Infantry Power[/B]
[*]Russian Ambition: -15% Core Creation Cost
[*]Western Contacts: -10% Advisor Cost
[/LIST]


[U]Ambition[/U]
[B]+10% Land Morale[/B]

 

[nicechinos]

If you want to play quality Russia, play Ryazan, simple as that.

[U]Traditions[/U]
-1 Global Unrest
+2.5% Army Morale Recovery Speed

[LIST=1]
[*]The Arsenal of Ryazan: +25% Land Forcelimit Modifier, +15% Global Manpower Modifier
[*]Tatar Mercenaries: -10% Cavalry Cost
[*]Land Charters: +15% Manpower Recovery Speed
[*]Russian Grain: +10% Production Efficiency
[*][B]March of Russia: -0.02 Monthly War Exhaustion, +5% Infantry Power[/B]
[*]Russian Ambition: -15% Core Creation Cost
[*]Western Contacts: -10% Advisor Cost
[/LIST]


[U]Ambition[/U]
[B]+10% Land Morale[/B]

Smolensk is too, damn good.

 

[balmung60]

If you want to play quality Russia, play Ryazan, simple as that.

[U]Traditions[/U]
-1 Global Unrest
+2.5% Army Morale Recovery Speed

[LIST=1]
[*]The Arsenal of Ryazan: +25% Land Forcelimit Modifier, +15% Global Manpower Modifier
[*]Tatar Mercenaries: -10% Cavalry Cost
[*]Land Charters: +15% Manpower Recovery Speed
[*]Russian Grain: +10% Production Efficiency
[*][B]March of Russia: -0.02 Monthly War Exhaustion, +5% Infantry Power[/B]
[*]Russian Ambition: -15% Core Creation Cost
[*]Western Contacts: -10% Advisor Cost
[/LIST]


[U]Ambition[/U]
[B]+10% Land Morale[/B]

I think you might actually be better off with Smolensk if you just want straight quality. Lose the morale bonus, gain +10% artillery combat ability, +1 land leader fire, and +10% siege ability. Oh, and 5% cheaper miltech and 20% cheaper artillery.

 

[MiniaAr]

I think you might actually be better off with Smolensk if you just want straight quality. Lose the morale bonus, gain +10% artillery combat ability, +1 land leader fire, and +10% siege ability. Oh, and 5% cheaper miltech and 20% cheaper artillery.

Oh I agree, but unfortunately Smolensk is not available to play on ironman (yet?). If you don't play ironman, then Smolensk ideas are pretty great for a quality Russia. I think however that Ryazan ideas mix quality and quantity in a very nice way.

Smolensk

Traditions
-1% Prestige Decay
-15% Advisor Cost

Smolenskian Resolve: +15% Religious Unity 
Armories of Smolensk: +5% Infantry Power & -5% Mil Tech Cost 
Western Mercenaries: -25% Mercenary Maintainance 
The Great Foundry: -20% Artillery Cost 
Hold the Line: +1 Leader Land Fire 
Artilerry before All: +5% Artillery Power 
Tsar Mortars: +10% Siege Ability 


Ambition
+15% Prestige from Land Battle

 

[DicRoNero]

These are pathetically weak quality bonuses, they grant far less than any military group does, so what's the point? Atm I consider myself lucky to finish just 2 military idea groups by the end of the game, so if I'd really want to sacrifice utility and gain military power, I'd easily do that. And by picking minors you give up pretty much all the goodies. Granted, it shouldn't be a fair trade anyway since Muscovy is kinda expected to have better NIs overall.

Edit: if you really want a quality-oriented Russia, go start with Teutonic Order. Trust me, it's great and far better than any Russian minor.

 

[Beagá]

that's the whole point. with high patriarch authority, religious ideas, and a relatively baggage-less defender of the faith, you convert everything you conquer immediately. your super tolerance of true faith and -unrest negates nationalism... and you are good to go.

Again, blame part of that on the -10% tech cost Russia gets.

It´s a big part of why it´s imbalanced and WAY better than Elan.

 

[balmung60]

Again, blame part of that on the -10% tech cost Russia gets.

It´s a big part of why it´s imbalanced and WAY better than Elan.

Actually, I think he was referring to the fact that, as an Orthodox (or Shia or Ibadi or Reformed or Coptic) nation, being Defender of the Faith doesn't really carry any obligations to actually defend anyone because you have few, if any coreligionists, and most of those tend to get shut down pretty fast.