Okay, small gripes thread. Here are my two small gripes, other free to gripe.

[Brannart]

There is far too much AI westernization going on.

 

[link777294]

Theocracies did not gain -autonomy per month, all other special governments did. This means theocracies will fall off by mid-late game

Sadly, Merchant Republics also didn't get -autonomy per month but almost every other republic did. At least I think most of the other republics did.

 

[Zqrfmb]

Sadly, Merchant Republics also didn't get -autonomy per month but almost every other republic did. At least I think most of the other republics did.

I think the idea behind that is that any government you can form as a tribe doesn't get the autonomy reduction. Except theocracies for some reason.

 

[oblio-]

Sadly, Merchant Republics also didn't get -autonomy per month but almost every other republic did. At least I think most of the other republics did.

Well, to be honest Merchant Republics are a fountain of monarch points and cash.
Especially since vassal annexation don't cost republican tradition anymore, re-elections ahoy!

 

[ultrapowerpie]

Personal Gripes? AI being able to call in allies years after a war is going on *eyes France after a failed Castile/Burgandy attempt*

Having an achievement to form Persia with a nation that still has the generic NIs...

France being France....

Byzantium's chances getting nerfed more and more... oh and the AI building way over their limits *eyes Turks*

Overall 1.8 did a lot of good though.

 

[TheMeInTeam]

There is far too much AI westernization going on.

If westernization is optimal, it is reasonable for the AI to attempt to do well. Absent requesting profound mechanics changes across the board, no complaint about AI westernization is logically consistent.

 

[Brannart]

If westernization is optimal, it is reasonable for the AI to attempt to do well. Absent requesting profound mechanics changes across the board, no complaint about AI westernization is logically consistent.

EU IV is a game that attempts to simulate history. Morocco colonizing in the new world breaks that simulation.

 

[StatikShocker]

mainly that warscore from battles was nerfed to the pits of hell. you can get like .21 for wiping 50k enemy troops. On top of that the a.i. is more unwilling than ever to make peace... so this patch encourages, no DEMANDS total carpet sieging. Which is not fun, and awful.

Also relative strength of alliances from colonial nations persists... +30 warscore on Spain and you can't even get a white peace due to "-56 relative strength of alliances"

 

[blackchoas]

I like the certain government types didn't get the local autonomy boost as they are mostly governments that didn't last past this time period like Theocracies and merchant republics

 

[TheMeInTeam]

EU IV is a game that attempts to simulate history. Morocco colonizing in the new world breaks that simulation.

You have yet to refute one word of what you quoted lol.

 

[Brannart]

You have yet to refute one word of what you quoted lol.

Can colonization occur without westernization? This is an honest question.

Edit: Yes, AI nations will pursue whatever optimal ends as they can. My argument is reasonably historical outcomes are preferred over logical but ahistoric outcomes. Will this "history" as represented by EU IV differ from actual history? Yep. But those divergences should be plausible. I'd rather the Moroccan colonies in the New World and westernized Aztec nations to be the exception rather than the rule.

 

[TheMeInTeam]

Can colonization occur without westernization? This is an honest question.

Yes, but not knowing that makes one wonder about arguments wrt game options and plausibility. This is the same game where Spain can hold inland Morocco or Mali, and where Aq Q never does anything. How is anybody going western an affront then? At least the ai is trying.

 

[AlphaSonic]

EU IV is a game that attempts to simulate history. Morocco colonizing in the new world breaks that simulation.

Ahmad al Mansur tried to colonize America.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ahmad_al-Mansur

 

[Brannart]

Ahmad al Mansur tried to colonize America.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ahmad_al-Mansur

Ambitions are not the same thing as attempts.

 

[AlphaSonic]

Like Kurland? Morocco is in an excelent position for colonizing, in an alternate history where he had lived more, he would've tried to colonize.

 

[Christopholes]

More goverments (Feudal monarchy, USA under the articles of confederation, USA Constional republic) not having autonomy floors. </federalism flame war>
Seriosuly the after all the vassal mangement in CK2 apparently in 1444 everyone decided to play nice

 

[Brannart]

Yes, but not knowing that makes one wonder about arguments wrt game options and plausibility. This is the same game where Spain can hold inland Morocco or Mali, and where Aq Q never does anything. How is anybody going western an affront then? At least the ai is trying.

I don't care for those thing, either. I'd much rather Spain focus on the New World - then at least we'd have New Spain and not westernized Aztec states.

You seem to be taking this personally.

 

[TheMeInTeam]

I don't care for those thing, either. I'd much rather Spain focus on the New World - then at least we'd have New Spain and not westernized Aztec states.

You seem to be taking this personally.

You seem to be using plausibility when convenient and not otherwise.

 

[Brannart]

Like Kurland? Morocco is in an excelent position for colonizing, in an alternate history where he had lived more, he would've tried to colonize.

I have no problem with Morocco colonizing in some games. But its happening in every play through now - same with NA states westernizing.

I love the alternate histories EU IV can create. But when these events always occur somethings amiss.

 

[Brannart]

You seem to be using plausibility when convenient and not otherwise.

How am I doing this?