Paradox, why you hate Lithuania?

[Reezy]

http://forum.paradoxplaza.com/forum...rmy-composition/page5&p=16524790#post16524790

Infantry are beating Cavalry at 1:1 ratios, Cavalry costs 2.5 times as much as Infantry. Its hardly a 'claim', its proven fact.

I'll remember that next time I want my cavalry to sit in the center of the front line I guess.

 

[GamingHUD]

Possible solutions:

Reduce effects of low religious unity when tolerance, and by how tolerant you are.

OR

For every point of tolerance you have (above zero) add 5% religious unity but only if you have provinces that have those religion type.

 

[Legolas]

Well, as much as it pains me to say this, Lithuania wasn't a powerful country during the EU4 era. Its days of glory were the early 15th century, unless you consider the technological/cultural renaissance during the 17th-18th centuries (but that was after the Commonwealth was established). So it makes sense that the NIs are worse than those of Poland or, especially, Russia.

That said, I agree that the religious (dis)unity needs a rework. Lithuania was a shining example of religious tolerance, with not only Catholics and Orthodoxes, but also Tatars and Jews living in one country without much religious strife (and that's not just a Lithuanian point of view; as far as I know, the Belarussians and Ukrainians think the same). So countries with varied religions should be able to exist and not be wrecked by internal problems, if they make the right decisions.

 

[DrLulz]

There's quite a small number of countries in this game where the state religion is not the overwhelming majority province religion in 1444. Indian Sultanates are Muslim states with Hindu provinces, Ottomans are about 50/50 Sunni/Other, and Timurids have a substantial number of Shiite provinces. You'll notice that all of these get huge religious unity bonuses in their NIs so that they can cope. Then there's Lithuania, which has a clear majority of Orthodox provinces, but starts Catholic and gets no religious unity bonus. So right from the start, Lithuania is whacked with internal problems due to low religious unity.

Unfortunately, Lithuania's solution to the problem in terms of NIs is the worst option in the long term: heretic tolerance. (The best is to have missionary bonuses so that you can eradicate the heretics - short-term pain for long-term gain.) Tolerance would be OK, except that the 'religious leaders concerned' events that kick in at +2 heretic tolerance turn it into a poisoned chalice. Basically, Lithuania's default heretic tolerance is +2 with 100 legitimacy and Catholic religion, and if it converts to any other sect of Christianity (highly likely under the circumstances), it's at +2 with 50+ legitimacy. So Lithuania's missionaries have to play constant whack-a-mole if they want to get the country's religious unity up. Lithuania will probably take Religious ideas for the missionaries, but it can't afford to complete the group, as Ecumenism basically removes any hope of getting heretic tolerance down to a safe level.

The consequences when Lithuania is under AI control are all too predictable: if it survives to the Reformation, it becomes a jumble of different sects of Christianity, with the government and three factions of zealots constantly fighting for control, regardless of which sect the government favours (and the AI will often make poor choices here, reacting to religious shifts rather than trying to control them).

Now to be fair, the other Lithuanian NIs are OK (although Lithuanian Hussars is rather let down by the fact that cavalry is already in steep decline compared to infantry by the time Lithuania unlocks it). But the religious problems trump any advantages they might have. Either the ideas need to change, or the way tolerance and religious unity work needs a big rethink. (This also applies to decisions like Declaration of Indulgence - striving for a tolerant society simply doesn't work unless you have a big religious unity bonus, and only certain countries can get such a bonus.)

Duude, this isn't about Lithuania, but about "religious tolerance" having a certain event, which completely ruins the point of being tolerant. And this, I completely agree, is bad design - which apperently disproportionately hits Lithuania.

 

[Anjwalker]

Poor Lithuania can't even into Commonwealth without getting a lucky PU

Talking of that, shouldn't Poland and Lithuania already be PU'd at this point?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Union_of_Krewo

 

[MiniaAr]

One thing PI could do is lower the impact on religious unity if you have high tolerance (which I don't think it does right now).

Definitively that. Giving 10% religious unity per point of positive tolerance would be great. Much better would be if religious tolerance becomes a factor is the contribution to religious unity.

 

[Legolas]

Talking of that, shouldn't Poland and Lithuania already be PU'd at this point?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Union_of_Krewo

That was surprising to me as well. They were unioned at the start of the EU3 Grand campaign. However, the EU4 GC starts less than a year after the King of Poland and Lithuania was killed in the battle of Varna. I don't remember history very well, but it might be that there was an interregnum in both countries, after which the Union was renewed; the game just happens to start during the short period when the Union was not in effect (not that I'm complaining ).

 

[gaius valerius]

There's quite a small number of countries in this game where the state religion is not the overwhelming majority province religion in 1444. Indian Sultanates are Muslim states with Hindu provinces, Ottomans are about 50/50 Sunni/Other, and Timurids have a substantial number of Shiite provinces. You'll notice that all of these get huge religious unity bonuses in their NIs so that they can cope. Then there's Lithuania, which has a clear majority of Orthodox provinces, but starts Catholic and gets no religious unity bonus. So right from the start, Lithuania is whacked with internal problems due to low religious unity.

Unfortunately, Lithuania's solution to the problem in terms of NIs is the worst option in the long term: heretic tolerance. (The best is to have missionary bonuses so that you can eradicate the heretics - short-term pain for long-term gain.) Tolerance would be OK, except that the 'religious leaders concerned' events that kick in at +2 heretic tolerance turn it into a poisoned chalice. Basically, Lithuania's default heretic tolerance is +2 with 100 legitimacy and Catholic religion, and if it converts to any other sect of Christianity (highly likely under the circumstances), it's at +2 with 50+ legitimacy. So Lithuania's missionaries have to play constant whack-a-mole if they want to get the country's religious unity up. Lithuania will probably take Religious ideas for the missionaries, but it can't afford to complete the group, as Ecumenism basically removes any hope of getting heretic tolerance down to a safe level.

The consequences when Lithuania is under AI control are all too predictable: if it survives to the Reformation, it becomes a jumble of different sects of Christianity, with the government and three factions of zealots constantly fighting for control, regardless of which sect the government favours (and the AI will often make poor choices here, reacting to religious shifts rather than trying to control them).

Now to be fair, the other Lithuanian NIs are OK (although Lithuanian Hussars is rather let down by the fact that cavalry is already in steep decline compared to infantry by the time Lithuania unlocks it). But the religious problems trump any advantages they might have. Either the ideas need to change, or the way tolerance and religious unity work needs a big rethink. (This also applies to decisions like Declaration of Indulgence - striving for a tolerant society simply doesn't work unless you have a big religious unity bonus, and only certain countries can get such a bonus.)

I'm reading: Lithuania is more difficult than Ottomans, etc. Make Lithuania more easier.

Lithuania just is more difficult. There are hundreds of countries in EU IV, in varying degrees of difficulty. End of discussion All in all if I read your post Lithuania under AI control is pretty close to the real deal: anarchistic and incapable to hold its own. Just like it was. Lithuania had profited greatly in the medieval period of the weakness of her Slavic neighbours. For that they pay the price during the timeframe of our game. Unlike the Ottomans for example they had no clear cut policy to deal with their religious dissidence. On the whole I agree that religious mechanics need a rethinking, cause conversion is the only way, there is no sound option otherwise. But I disagree with your opinion on Lithuania otherwise.

PS: modding.

 

[MiniaAr]

I'm reading: Lithuania is more difficult than Ottomans, etc. Make Lithuania more easier.

Lithuania just is more difficult. There are hundreds of countries in EU IV, in varying degrees of difficulty. End of discussion All in all if I read your post Lithuania under AI control is pretty close to the real deal: anarchistic and incapable to hold its own. Just like it was.

PS: modding.

I will add that in the hand of a competent player, Lithuania is pretty powerfull. I've seen quite a lot of MP games already where the Russian player could not resist Lithuainia, which get quite powerfull generals when Offensive and it's NIs are combined. The religious situation is hard to deal with true, but the +4 tolerance to heretics makes it quite easier to perform a quick and relatively painless conversion to Protestantism (best religion for them imho).

 

[unmerged(26764)]

There are a good number of religious decisions that reduce heretic tolerance that can get you back down below 2. I know there's enough for Poland to never have that event fire even with full religious ideas. Lithuania has one more bonus heretic tolerance, but I think you should still be good. Just take every single decision that lowers heretic tolerance in your nation to reduce it back down below the threshold.

 

[panionios]

Paradox, why you hate Lithuania?

I believe Paradox's hatred for Lithuania is analogous to that for Serbia.

http://forum.paradoxplaza.com/forum...-as-Empire&p=14678953&viewfull=1#post14678953

To be fair, I've never seen Lithuania breaking up due to religious/patriot rebels in any of my games.

 

[Incompetent]

Well, as much as it pains me to say this, Lithuania wasn't a powerful country during the EU4 era. Its days of glory were the early 15th century, unless you consider the technological/cultural renaissance during the 17th-18th centuries (but that was after the Commonwealth was established). So it makes sense that the NIs are worse than those of Poland or, especially, Russia.

That said, I agree that the religious (dis)unity needs a rework. Lithuania was a shining example of religious tolerance, with not only Catholics and Orthodoxes, but also Tatars and Jews living in one country without much religious strife (and that's not just a Lithuanian point of view; as far as I know, the Belarussians and Ukrainians think the same). So countries with varied religions should be able to exist and not be wrecked by internal problems, if they make the right decisions.

Oh yes, it's definitely the religious thing that bothers me. I certainly don't think Lithuania should have superpower NIs like Muscovy, and AI Poland probably needs some help so that the Commonwealth forms more often. (It's more interesting as a CK2 power, being the last 'pagan' nation in Europe.) Just that it should have a chance of being functional under AI control, without unrealistically large mood swings when it comes to religion (especially in the provinces that start out Orthodox).