Any chance you can take a look at out of control AE for a PU via "Claim Throne" CB. In 1750 the current AE cost is around 250 with -20% from ideas to PU Spain.
Thanks!
Thanks!
Open beta 1.6.1.4 - Checksum aa78
- Thread starter Besuchov
- 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.
- Status
Appears to be only 1.6.1.2 and 1.6.1.4 ?
confirmed fixedSet the wrong branch live, fixed now
Up to "disabled in game load" is 1.6.1.1, "Pacta Conventa ...." etc. is 1.6.1.2 and "Fixed fix for not being able to cancel transfer trade power without Wealth of Nations." is 1.6.1.3.
Actually just limiting AE for the lesser union partner is enough. In cases of PU over large countries like France, Austrai, Spain let the world fear the new Personal Union. But the issue arises when the lesser partner of the union hates the senior partner due to the PU so much that it causes the PU to break (on ruler death) before AE can realistically decrease in time. That just makes the Claim Throne CB and contesting PU not worth it at all.
I hate to repeat myself but could you please fix the reinforcement costs calculation?
I'm playing a Crimea game right now so it doesn't really affect me but I know I would be really annoyed if I were playing a nation that pays for reinforcements.
I'm playing a Crimea game right now so it doesn't really affect me but I know I would be really annoyed if I were playing a nation that pays for reinforcements.
This is propably not a feedback, but rather a question to developers. Do you plan to reintroduce the Observer Mode in the single playser game? I really liked this feature and feel cheated by it's removal, especially when it was part of paid expansion, rather than free patch.
The "Observer Mode" give you a option to go to the no-country view (same as typing observe in console, rebel flag as country flag) and in addition give you ability to go to in-country view, were you were able to see the game in the same way as the person playing this country would see, including terra incognita, fog of war or clicking to all tabs in the interface, but the country was still being controlled by the player or AI. This cannot be simulated by typing observe in console and then tag XXX, because doing this will give you controll of the specified country. Also clicking the country on map is much more convenient then searching it's tag.
Also I am not only person that feels the same way about removal of this feature for single player: http://forum.paradoxplaza.com/forum/showthread.php?778333-No-observe-mode.
The "Observer Mode" give you a option to go to the no-country view (same as typing observe in console, rebel flag as country flag) and in addition give you ability to go to in-country view, were you were able to see the game in the same way as the person playing this country would see, including terra incognita, fog of war or clicking to all tabs in the interface, but the country was still being controlled by the player or AI. This cannot be simulated by typing observe in console and then tag XXX, because doing this will give you controll of the specified country. Also clicking the country on map is much more convenient then searching it's tag.
Also I am not only person that feels the same way about removal of this feature for single player: http://forum.paradoxplaza.com/forum/showthread.php?778333-No-observe-mode.
So the patch notes say 1.6.2 does that mean the 1.6.1.4 beta will become 1.6.2? And if so will 1.6.2 be released soon?
Feedback: I love 1.6.1.4's revolt size and danger. For the first time in my hundreds of EU4 playthroughs, rebels managed to nearly bankrupt my country. Before 1.6 rebels were mere tedium but now they offer real fun given circumstances. I approve any added challenges to the point the said challenge breaks other AI nations. They all add to the dynamics and fun of the game.
Pretender rebels still can't win even when I want them to. My stupid allies came and killed them 4 months after they finally took the capital.
So, should we now assume that the next patch is just focusing on the issues outlined in the patchnotes?
People continue to be a bit confused and frustrated because there are many issues with 1.6 that seem like they aren't working as intended. Yet we've seen no official comments from Paradox to confirm or refute that. Their absence from the beta patch, and the reference to 1.6.2 suggests that things are perceived as acceptable; a reasonable, if disappointing, assumption, particularly in light of the announcement of a new DLC. However, I've seen veiled references to "internal builds" and the "beta branch", keeping hope alive that some of these issues are, indeed, being investigated and addressed. It would be useful if someone could confirm or correct either of these assumptions or hopes.
Not to be redundant, but if consolidation might be useful, I'll repost some of the issues that have seen discussion in the feedback or other threads, yet appear to be unaddressed.
General 1.6 issues:
1) Though AE decay is being tweaked, we see little else about AE. Is AE assignment and/or scaling where it is meant to be? AE for vassalizing and PUs is surprisingly high (esp when considering overseas provinces). AE also seems to be awfully light when reacting to large AI blobs and rather severe for OPM and minors (which seems contrary to the original intent). Known? Working as intended? Fixes in progress?
2) The operational AI seems to have degraded a bit in 1.6, doing things like chasing tiny regiments with their whole force and completely abandoning sieges, more often than previously. Known? Intended? Being worked?
3) Were the various nerfs to the RotW intended? Some of them seem so, others seem a bit like unintended consequences. For much of the world, outside Europe, their income was reduced, manpower was reduced, trade was reduced, and tech progress was greatly reduced. Sounds like the patch addresses some parts of the additional Westernization nerf, but not all of it. And countries are still going to be stuck, permanently with inferior units? I think most people can deal with things either way, but would appreciate some input regarding whether the nerfs were intentional and are here to stay? Or were people unaware of some of these impacts and working to address them?
4) Vassal integration costs were substantially increased, meaning it is now more expensive in DIP points to core than it is to core via ADM points, in many cases. Should that roll back some of the DIP point (and other) costs/restrictions that prior patches added to peace resolutions for returning cores or for vassalizing? Will there be any way to discount DIP integration costs, like there is for ADM point coring? Are people aware of and comfortable with the fact that the Diplomatic Reputation score has changed from being incredibly useful to being marginal, almost useless?
5) Peace costs don't scale for large countries any more. Known? Intended? Patch notes refer to some scaling being introduced for large coalitions; did I miss it, is that going to happen?
6) Aside from the massive decrease in trade values, other aspects of trade seem a bit off. Austria and Venice seem to get a bit screwed. Is Inland Trade Steering working as intended?
7) The new limitations on cultural conversion rely on a somewhat artificial designation of a primary tag. Rather than decreasing the incidence of odd cultural conversions, you now see odd cultural conversions by nations such as FRA that can never be reversed, without removing FRA from the map. Known? Intended?
8) Automatic exile was introduced when declaring war, for many situations. This has enabled some new exploits like invulnerable scouts and some oddities like exiling conquistador led armies on the other side of the world, in empty provinces. Known? Intended?
9) The "want our provinces" modifier seems way off. Particularly considering the observed changes in alliance willingness and longevity, it seems unlikely that this is simply a mechanic that was always present and is simply now more visible. Regardless, the number and locations of provinces that some nations desire is just bizarre, as is the speed with which nations acquire (but never lose) such a desire. WAD?
On some of the new features, we've see little comment. Does that means people are satisfied they are working as intended, specifically:
10) Policies: Are some of the wild discrepancies in their usefulness being addressed? Some just NEVER make sense to implement.
11) Rivals/Power Projection: Despite seeming among the most promising features of the patch, there are many oddities regarding who you can rival, who can rival you, when you can/can't declare rivals (i.e., during wars), vanishing rivals (particularly during wars), and no benefit from annexing/vassalizing rivals. Additionally, fewer historical rivalries but more ahistoric, long term alliances are now apparent in the game; are these related to the irregularities in the rivalry system. Are there any plans to make this promising systems more elegant? Or are we stuck where we are for the indefinite future?
12) Transfer Trade Power enhancements also sounded like a great idea. But with the decision to make it cost a diplomatic slot, it will never be utilized as a stand-alone relation (even without the simultaneous nerf to the number of diplo relations slots). In addition, the touted enhancement was that it was supposed to be indefinite rather than cancelled when truce ended. Is there any plan to make this feature more usable? If not, why not return to the old mechanism, which at least got used on rare occasion.
13) Forced Access during peace deals - Should forced military access during peace deals really take a diplo relations slot? Makes it a whole lot less useful. Similarly, should Fleet Basing Rights granted as part of a peace deal cost the winner money? Again, limited utility.
14) Justify Trade Conflict CB - is that supposed to be tied to the Transfer Trade Power feature, as it would seem? If so, another reason to make Transfer Trade Power a relevant option. Or is it intended as a catch all replacement for the elimination of Counter-revolution CB that Republics used to enjoy?
15) Many aspects and features of CoP and American Dream have been rendered useless or irrelevant by the subsequent patches. Are there any plans to reverse this?
16) Canals - incredibly minor, perhaps, since Canals are a bit of fluff prestige projects/eye candy, but is it really intended that anyone can go through them?
Misc Bugs (I assume these are being worked, but, on the off chance someone responds to this, it'd be nice to confirm):
17) Reinforcement costs now seem to accrue when maintenance is at 0?
18) Are the flawed UI and tooltips likely to be addressed anytime soon (e.g., Peace costs, CtA, Claim Fabrication)?
Last edited:
Do achievements work with this one? Willing to try it out.
EDIT: is France manageable now?
EDIT: is France manageable now?
Exactly the situation I got myself into. I was even silly enough to reclaim the throne and I am now sitting on -600 AE. It was stupid but I had never done it before so I was determined to try.
Do achievements work with this one? Willing to try it out.
EDIT: is France manageable now?
It always has been. There is multiple strategies to beat France, they all seem to still work. In my latest Ironman game France was top dog and actually still is #1 on score, but I've won 2 wars and taken 10 provinces from. It is impossible for them to come back and I havent't finished crushing them because of a PU debacle I'm trying on Spain.
I think diplo annex needs rework. France absorbs all of its OPM vassals in a few decade. Diplo annex should take longer for minor nations or a time between diplo annexations.
Last edited:
I know this is of minor importance, but
1. common/EUIV/decisions/economic.txt, colonial.txt - appear to be empty, might aswell be deleted ?
2. Why is the confirm thalassocracy decision in the venice.txt ?
1. common/EUIV/decisions/economic.txt, colonial.txt - appear to be empty, might aswell be deleted ?
2. Why is the confirm thalassocracy decision in the venice.txt ?
Yes achievements work with 1.6.1.4. I don't think we've gotten any confirmation to say that they will continue to work, but I'm running luck of the irish in it anyway.Do achievements work with this one? Willing to try it out.
EDIT: is France manageable now?
France is still the same France it is in 1.6.1.
Well it is the ONLY country that ever offers a challenge to a player so....
- Status