• Crusader Kings II Expansion Subscription

    Subscribe to the CK II Expansion and enjoy unlimited access to 13 major expansions and more!


  • Paradox Midsummer Sale has arrived! Up to 75% off!

    Enjoy some sun and song this Midsummer, but when the sun goes down, the fun doesn't have to stop! Paradox has a festive sale on plenty of games to keep your summer nights going!


    June 18th - June 30th
  • Crusader Kings III Available Now!

    The realm rejoices as Paradox Interactive announces the launch of Crusader Kings III, the latest entry in the publisher’s grand strategy role-playing game franchise. Advisors may now jockey for positions of influence and adversaries should save their schemes for another day, because on this day Crusader Kings III can be purchased on Steam, the Paradox Store, and other major online retailers.


    Real Strategy Requires Cunning
Status
Not open for further replies.

unmerged(31425)

Married Man
Jul 2, 2004
2.826
0
Hi AGCEEPers! I've not too long ago PMed Johan, asking why the heck there are these horrible trade efficiency penalties attached to TEs and TAs, and unfortunately recieved no response, so I made a petition in the regular EU2 discussions forum to have them removed. As I know you are all in agreement with this or most likely will be if you read my post there and since we're old pals and you're all veteran players/modders I'm putting a link to this post here.
http://www.europa-universalis.com/forum/showthread.php?t=180065
Please give your support by signing the petition as it undoubtedly is in the best interest of all of us modders.

Also I'll soon make another petition to have the next patch give us the ability to mod commodities, by adding more of them, without any old ones having to be removed, and by being able to mod what enhances the demand of commodities.
I'll put a link to that one here too when I make it, as undoubtedly you'll all be interested in getting the ability to mod that too.
 
Feb 12, 2004
4.656
0
Sorry, but I agree with those penalties. Try to find a strategy to work around them rather than complaining. ;)
 

unmerged(31425)

Married Man
Jul 2, 2004
2.826
0
lawkeeper said:
Sorry, but I agree with those penalties. Try to find a strategy to work around them rather than complaining. ;)
Why?

There is no strategy to work around AIs that have 10-20% less trade efficiency than me.

The strategy point is that TEs and TAs are simply not viable period with those kind of penalties. It has absolutely nothing to do with me being unable to find a strategy to work around. That's my whole point.
 

unmerged(2456)

Pure Evil Genius
Mar 29, 2001
11.211
0
www.hero6.com
These were added because as a whole to the changes that were done, such as changing the fact that monopoly nations aren't always the first merchants targeted, there is no stability drop for enacting or repealing, etc.
 

unmerged(31425)

Married Man
Jul 2, 2004
2.826
0
|AXiN| said:
Indeed. I see nothing wrong with them, and I SP only.
Unfortuantely you've summed up many people's opinions on this matter all too well.

But the fact that you or anybody else for that matter doesn't see anything wrong with them doesn't mean that there isn't anything wrong with them. It just means that you like many others haven't been paying attention to what's wrong with them. I'll be dry and technical friend so as to make you aware of the problem and hopefully not offend anyone in the process.

TEs and TAs have no viable usage to us humans. Although some of us may mistakingly believe that the trade efficiency penalties aren't that big of a deal, the fact is that they are. Trade efficiency losses results not only in the loss of income per merchant in COTs but also the loss of trade tax in every single province you own, including TPs. No province in your entire empire is unaffected by even one TE or TA. In addition to this the diminshed trade efficiency decreases the lifespans of your existing merchants as well as decreases the chances that recently placed merchants will be successful. This all translates into quite alot of dough.

Realistically the only really useful way to use TEs or TAs would be if you are a really small country and a TA or 2 would have a direct impact on you being able to double or say triple the amount of merchants you can sustain as active at a given time. The problem with this tactic is that human players don't stay small. They get big fast and then even a few more merchants being active isn't worth the loss of income from the 4 areas I mentioned above and consequently is not a viable options for us humans. In fact even if you made TAs early as a small country the benfit would probably not outweigh the CBs given to the countries that you break TAs with later as by the time it's no longer profitable for you to maintain them, you won't be big enough to survive the attacks of AIs, without a net financial loss bigger than your previous profit from the use of the TAs, that would most likely be your competitors. They would of course most likely be the AIs that are larger than you.

Altough Lawkeeper, Jinnai, and yourself may suppose that there is no big problem, undoubtedly because you aren't actually paying attention, while playing/playtesting a game, to what I'm talking about and doing the math while doing so, the second you actually look into what I'm talking about you'll find out that what I'm saying is correct. Until you do this, since apparently you are genuinely unaware of the effects of what I'm talking about, I reccommend you keep an open mind about the matter and not just suppose that I must be incorrect.

And as far as AIs are concerned, they of course only lose from them as they tend to stagnate around mid 30s to low 40s, in ducats anually per merchant, as of mid game. You see the penalties on them are so severe that when they hit trade tech 4, after they've gone through a bout of TEs, they actually lose trade efficiency overall not gain trade efficiency. Yes that's right they literally go down in income when they hit trade tech 4. Hard to believe? But the second you actually observe what I'm talking about, you'll know that I have a valid point as far as AIs and the trade efficicency penalties they incur from TEs and TAs. How could anyone, who actually does understand how these penalties are effecting the game, not think that it is crippling to AIs? It's pure math, zero opinion, although it does require actually paying attention to the matter to realize that the problem is genuinely there.

I hope this information was useful to you all and/or encourages you to actually go ahead and observe this phenomen. My apologies if I sound too abraisive. It's not my intention.
 

unmerged(2456)

Pure Evil Genius
Mar 29, 2001
11.211
0
www.hero6.com
On the reverse side, if you take away these penalties what is left?

TE do give CBs to those nations that you place them against, but if they already have one, what is the big deal?

TA's do make it so you can't compete out said countries merchants, but generally humans only make these when they know they'd have the advantage and they can be canceled at any time without penalties now.

So what is left then if you take those penalties away?
 

unmerged(31425)

Married Man
Jul 2, 2004
2.826
0
Jinnai said:
On the reverse side, if you take away these penalties what is left?
AIs that perform better because they aren't all en masse slammed with minus 10 to 20% trade efficiency.
Jinnai said:
TE do give CBs to those nations that you place them against, but if they already have one, what is the big deal?

TA's do make it so you can't compete out said countries merchants, but generally humans only make these when they know they'd have the advantage and they can be canceled at any time without penalties now.

So what is left then if you take those penalties away?
I think you're missing the point. TEs and TAs were a normal phenomenon during the time covered by the game and the EU2 makers intended it that way. They are completely useless to humans at present.

The real danger of unpenalized TEs and TAs is in the MP games. Humans TAing other humans and then as a group taking over all global trade. Perhaps forbidding TAs between 2 humans could actually solve this problem.

TEs so far are really only controversial because of the supposition that they did in fact hurt the economies of the embargoers, but as I pointed in posts in the main thread of this topic, the type of embargoes where a country refused to sell merchandise to an enemy port isn't represented by the TEs in the game. TEs in the game represent a country refusing access of another country to their ports, an entirely different concept.

I suspect that if TEs and TAs lose their trade efficiency penalties for humans too that they will be taken advantage of. But the idea that we will again TA or TE the entire world is really a straw man argument because the dissapearing COTs will prevent this.

One of the suggestions was to make TAs require a certain relation level. I reccommended 150 that way it costs money to coax an AI into doing it and won't just be a means through which we can get an easy advantage over the AI. Although admittedly, unpenalized TEs and TAs would wind up giving us less of an advantage that we currently get on account of the AIs blowing their own brains out by the penalties of they incur from TAs and TEs that they implement themselves.

I'm beggining to like the idea of needing say 150 relations more and more as I think about it. It makes alot of historical sense too. A nice costly present usually did preclude a TA.
 

unmerged(2456)

Pure Evil Genius
Mar 29, 2001
11.211
0
www.hero6.com
IDLF said:
I suspect that if TEs and TAs lose their trade efficiency penalties for humans too that they will be taken advantage of. But the idea that we will again TA or TE the entire world is really a straw man argument because the dissapearing COTs will prevent this.
Not really because there will always be 22 CoTs.
IDLF said:
I'm beggining to like the idea of needing say 150 relations more and more as I think about it. It makes alot of historical sense too. A nice costly present usually did preclude a TA.
Reguardlless, if there is no downside, TAs and TEs will be abused. This is no, as you call it, straw man argument. Anything that can help people infinatly with no downside is exploted. Maybe not by everyone, but by enough that it will matter.
 

|AXiN|

General
91 Badges
Apr 3, 2003
1.947
0
  • Europa Universalis IV: Pre-order
  • Europa Universalis III Complete
  • Europa Universalis IV: Res Publica
  • Victoria: Revolutions
  • Semper Fi
  • Victoria 2
  • Victoria 2: A House Divided
  • Victoria 2: Heart of Darkness
  • Warlock 2: The Exiled
  • Warlock 2: Wrath of the Nagas
  • 500k Club
  • Cities: Skylines
  • Europa Universalis IV: El Dorado
  • Majesty 2
  • Rise of Prussia
  • Mount & Blade: Warband
  • Crusader Kings II: Way of Life
  • Europa Universalis IV: Common Sense
  • Crusader Kings II: Horse Lords
  • Cities: Skylines - After Dark
  • Europa Universalis IV: Cossacks
  • Crusader Kings II: Conclave
  • Cities: Skylines - Snowfall
  • Achtung Panzer
  • Europa Universalis IV: Mare Nostrum
  • Stellaris: Necroids
  • Europa Universalis III: Chronicles
  • Crusader Kings II
  • Crusader Kings II: Charlemagne
  • Crusader Kings II: Legacy of Rome
  • Crusader Kings II: The Old Gods
  • Crusader Kings II: Rajas of India
  • Crusader Kings II: The Republic
  • Crusader Kings II: Sons of Abraham
  • Crusader Kings II: Sunset Invasion
  • Crusader Kings II: Sword of Islam
  • Deus Vult
  • East India Company Collection
  • Europa Universalis III
  • Arsenal of Democracy
  • Europa Universalis III Complete
  • Divine Wind
  • Europa Universalis IV
  • Europa Universalis IV: Art of War
  • Europa Universalis IV: Conquest of Paradise
  • Europa Universalis IV: Wealth of Nations
  • Europa Universalis IV: Call to arms event
  • For the Motherland
  • Hearts of Iron III
  • Heir to the Throne
Just quietly, is this thread absolutely necessary? It isn't actually directly related to the AGCEEP, and there's already a duplicate in the main forum.

And as I recall, IDFL, you already gave up on this forum. At least twice.
 

unmerged(31425)

Married Man
Jul 2, 2004
2.826
0
Jinnai said:
Not really because there will always be 22 CoTs.
Reguardlless, if there is no downside, TAs and TEs will be abused. This is no, as you call it, straw man argument. Anything that can help people infinatly with no downside is exploted. Maybe not by everyone, but by enough that it will matter.
You may be right here. I concede to that. I haven't actually personally abused TAs and TEs once the dissapearing COTs were added to the game. Someone in the other thread has stated that he still can.

|AXiN| said:
Just quietly, is this thread absolutely necessary? It isn't actually directly related to the AGCEEP, and there's already a duplicate in the main forum.
My assumption, which has to my dissapointment proved to be false, was that because we modders directly deal with trying to make AIs perform better that most if not all AGCEEPers would be keenly interested in fixing a massive AI performance defect like the trade efficiency penalties that come with TEs and TAs. I also thought that AGCEEPers would be interested in having these 2 commands added, once they are again made viable, to what we could mod. Unfortunately this is not understood well by many people and my explanations aren't convincing everyone. This is undoubtedly because some people are not grasping what I'm saying. It is completely unimaginable to me that if I could sit you down next to me and point out to you exactly what I'm talking about on my PC screen that you would not afterwards share my view about how catastrophically destructive these penalties are for AIs.
|AXiN| said:
And as I recall, IDFL, you already gave up on this forum. At least twice.
I didn't give up on the forum. I gave up on the mod. The forum serves a very useful purpose to me as some of the things being discussed and also some of the things being added to the AGCEEP are things I want in my version, which I am now and have been for some time working on. At present I am most likely going to release it too, although it may not be for a few more months as there are a few trouble areas left I would like to fix before I consider it to be an all round good mod. If the AGCEEP crew can benefit from things I point out through the course of discussion and later from things they see in my mod, that is fine with me, I'm not offended at that. It's not bitter or competitve thing to me.
 

Castellon

★Paradox Forum Manager★
Administrator
110 Badges
Mar 12, 2002
43.210
1.591
  • Europa Universalis IV
  • 200k Club
  • 500k Club
  • Hearts of Iron II: Beta
  • Victoria 2 Beta
  • Humble Paradox Bundle
  • Paradox Order
Same discussion in two threads = Cross posting.
*Closed
 
Status
Not open for further replies.