Please dont nerf corruption, Add the option to turn it off

[bbqftw]

Yeah I feel like this really is the best way, we can also lower tax income by pissing off the clergy! And as for trade im pretty sure there is no limit as to how many hurtfull embargos you can make! -200% trade efficiency here I come!

that is actually genius, though the amount of micromanagement involved in tanking your trade efficiency.....ow

and now that taking diplo tech is somewhat forced one's going to need to make even more clicks to make it work /o\

Revoking clergy to just below 40% clicks too /o\

Well. Doing so and at the same time stabbing other countries and making them give you all their ducats, so that you have a nice big cash pile to feed to the corruption monster.

I wonder if stolen ducats are counted as income.

I'm not sure which answer I'd be more surprised to see right now.

Interestingly, if not, an economy based purely on ruining your infrastructure and extorting your neighbors for cash would end up being the easiest to maintain low corruption - the inflation would be horrendous though, so its not like there are no tradeoffs. So toggle-ability is important - increase your income when you're about to steal enemy ducats to lower the inflation hit. Lower your income to root out corruption the rest of the time.

Tedious as it is, it might be worth it to create an OPM enclave farm and fight them every 10 years. Thus increasing the historical realism of the game.

 

[Arizal]

I don't mind the concept of making ROTW more difficult. That's the appeal of ROTW. I think most accomplished players will agree with me on this. However if instead of making corruption make all monarch points cost more and instead made it impact things like inflation, tax income, etc... You'd make it more difficult without making it a self digging hole if you insist on the whole tech imbalance being in.

I actually agree with part of this. From what I saw, corruption origin is 1/3 OE, 1/3 RU and 1/3... tech. While the two first modifiers make perfect sense to me, the last one seems strange. I tried to rationalize it, but it's not as clear for me than the others. Having an elaborate army organization as opposed as a crappy civilian administration can probably imbalance your country (make it more likely that a military junta is put in place instead of the legitimate monarch, perhaps), but I would like it if another modifier was put to reduce the tech imbalance modifier. Inflation could be a good idea, as it takes ADM power. You could simply divide the last tier to make it so that 1/6 of the corruption modifier would come from tech, and 1/6 from inflation. That way, tech imbalance would be less overkill, and you would have to do more to manage your inflation.

As I said earlier, you could also boost the positive modifier on corruption given by positive stability, which could also act as an ADM drain.

 

[Drusain]

Interestingly, if not, an economy based purely on ruining your infrastructure and extorting your neighbors for cash would end up being the easiest to maintain low corruption.

I agree, that seems to be a very non-corrupt way to manage your nation as this feature is designed.

 

[AdAstra]

AI spends money they get from fort upkeep ON corruption.

Players spend money on fort upkeep AND corruption. Semi double standard right here.

 

[Korashy]

that is actually genius, though the amount of micromanagement involved in tanking your trade efficiency.....ow

and now that taking diplo tech is somewhat forced one's going to need to make even more clicks to make it work /o\

Revoking clergy to just below 40% clicks too /o\


I wonder if stolen ducats are counted as income.

I'm not sure which answer I'd be more surprised to see right now.

Interestingly, if not, an economy based purely on ruining your infrastructure and extorting your neighbors for cash would end up being the easiest to maintain low corruption - the inflation would be horrendous though, so its not like there are no tradeoffs. So toggle-ability is important - increase your income when you're about to steal enemy ducats to lower the inflation hit. Lower your income to root out corruption the rest of the time.

Tedious as it is, it might be worth it to create an OPM enclave farm and fight them every 10 years. Thus increasing the historical realism of the game.

War reps do. Lump sum counts for 1 month under "Spoils of War".

 

[bbqftw]

War reps do. Lump sum counts for 1 month under "Spoils of War".

wait, if you have the slider to max the month you take ducats from an enemy, it will automatically take all the ducats you stole?

that's actually hilarious.

 

[Florryworry__]

that is actually genius, though the amount of micromanagement involved in tanking your trade efficiency.....ow

and now that taking diplo tech is somewhat forced one's going to need to make even more clicks to make it work /o\

Revoking clergy to just below 40% clicks too /o\


I wonder if stolen ducats are counted as income.

I'm not sure which answer I'd be more surprised to see right now.

Interestingly, if not, an economy based purely on ruining your infrastructure and extorting your neighbors for cash would end up being the easiest to maintain low corruption - the inflation would be horrendous though, so its not like there are no tradeoffs. So toggle-ability is important - increase your income when you're about to steal enemy ducats to lower the inflation hit. Lower your income to root out corruption the rest of the time.

Tedious as it is, it might be worth it to create an OPM enclave farm and fight them every 10 years. Thus increasing the historical realism of the game.

Yeah yeah, we'd do something like Stack money phase: High trade income and tax income with that merchant inflation guy. Dow nations using trade CB and steal their ducats by simply blockading and ticking Warscore from that. Save up about 2k ducats, (or whatever works) and then CRASH THAT ECO! Piss off the clergy embargo urrbody and move that corruption slider to the moon then when it's down we can go back to ignoring it and lift the embargo's make the clergy happy again and start saving another 2k ducats.

 

[Korashy]

wait, if you have the slider to max the month you take ducats from an enemy, it will automatically take all the ducats you stole?

that's actually hilarious.

Not sure. I'm pretty sure they fixed events to no longer include spoils of war money afaik (gift of the state = 5k ducats earlyish, yes please ). I'm going to assume it doesn't.

 

[BarrosRodrigues]

I actually agree with part of this. From what I saw, corruption origin is 1/3 OE, 1/3 RU and 1/3... tech. While the two first modifiers make perfect sense to me, the last one seems strange. I tried to rationalize it, but it's not as clear for me than the others. Having an elaborate army organization as opposed as a crappy civilian administration can probably imbalance your country, but I would like it if another modifier was put to reduce the tech imbalance modifier. Inflation could be a good idea, as it takes ADM power. You could simply divide the last tier to make it so that 1/6 of the corruption modifier would come from tech, and 1/6 from inflation. That way, tech imbalance would be less overkill, and you would have to do more to manage your inflation.

As I said earlier, you could also boost the positive modifier on corruption given by positive stability, which could also act as a ADM drain.

The OE effect over corruption does not seem to have any cap and it can "easily" (200% OE) eat your annual max "root out corruption" ability (1.0). This means that sometimes even if you dump 100% of the yearly income into fighting corruption, despite that it will still rise. Like I said before IMHO the best option to duck corruption (make it as irrelevant as possible) seems to be to expand solely through vassal feeding (coring and conversion) and strive to have ADM ahead of time to duck 50% of the tech imbalance corruption effect; when combined with very high stab should make it sustainable. The million dollar question IMO is: but is it fun? Very doubtful especially because this game has come a long way go back solely to EU IVs early day’s expansion strategies.

 

[Drusain]

Not sure. I'm pretty sure they fixed events to no longer include spoils of war money afaik (gift of the state = 5k ducats earlyish, yes please ). I'm going to assume it doesn't.

If it's part of your income while you're having corruption, it is being taken away.

 

[bbqftw]

Yeah yeah, we'd do something like Stack money phase: High trade income and tax income with that merchant inflation guy. Dow nations using trade CB and steal their ducats by simply blockading and ticking Warscore from that. Save up about 2k ducats, (or whatever works) and then CRASH THAT ECO! Piss off the clergy embargo urrbody and move that corruption slider to the moon then when it's down we can go back to ignoring it and lift the embargo's make the clergy happy again and start saving another 2k ducats.

there is something delightfully Keynesian about that

you people are actually doing something I thought impossible, actually making me somewhat excited to play this patch

 

[Korashy]

If it's part of your income while you're having corruption, it is being taken away.

Does it recalculate though? I thought it was based on percentage of yearly income and not on 100% monthly income.

 

[Florryworry__]

Does it recalculate though? I thought it was based on percentage of yearly income and not on 100% monthly income.

No if you ask for lump sums you have to pay a % to the Corruption-IRS but thats ok just do that in the stack money phase

 

[Drusain]

Does it recalculate though? I thought it was based on percentage of yearly income and not on 100% monthly income.

I could be wrong, but from what I saw when I was playing it yesterday, the calculation is just straight up "% of your income each month until X amount of months"

 

[bbqftw]

No if you ask for lump sums you have to pay a % to the Corruption-IRS but thats ok just do that in the stack money phase

paradox literally teaching people how to cheat on taxes

 

[Arizal]

The OE effect over corruption does not seem to have any cap and it can "easily" (200% OE) eat your annual max "root out corruption" ability (1.0). This means that sometimes even if you dump 100% of the yearly income into fighting corruption, despite that it will still rise. Like I said before IMHO the best option to duck corruption (make it as irrelevant as possible) seems to be to expand solely through vassal feeding (coring and conversion) and strive to have ADM ahead of time to duck 50% of the tech imbalance corruption effect which combined with high stab should make it sustainable. The million dollar question IMO is: but is it fun? Very doubtful especially because this game has come long way go back solely to EU IVs early day’s expansion strategies.

No, 100% OE is supposed to be that : you are stretched to your limit, you are not supposed to go further. I never tought of going above that number, and I think the fact it is a percentage and has all those nasty modifiers attached to it shows that, even if you are able to temporarily go above that, you shouldn't. It's like FL.

However, and I am not sure if it already does that, OE should scale better with the size of your empire, so that eating a few provinces shouldn't put you at 100% OE as a big empire, but should totally do it if you are a medium power eating a third of a country of your size. To summarize, I think that the effect of corruption on OE is fine, but OE itself should be nerfed so that 100% is close to doubling your size.

That way, you would have a snowballing effect which can be stopped since you would experience a period of vulnerability if you go too far too fast with your expansion.

 

[Frogbait]

there is something delightfully Keynesian about that

you people are actually doing something I thought impossible, actually making me somewhat excited to play this patch

i was going to try to sink your excitement to tell you forts are mandatory but that just enhances this strategy. Mothball and unmothball island forts. That said, think I'm taking the Atwix approach and not touching this patch and instead waiting on 1.17. That said, until that comes out not sure if I'll be playing EU. If 1.17 doesn't seem appealing to me EU will probably collect dust as I play Stellaris and other games

 

[Peachrocks]

paradox literally teaching people how to cheat on taxes

I was done but I had to reply to this.

They also taught us...

'You can never have too many slaves'

 

[Korashy]

No, 100% OE is supposed to be that : you are stretched to your limit, you are not supposed to go further. I never tought of going above that number, and I think the fact it is a percentage and has all those nasty modifiers attached to it shows that, even if you are able to temporarily go above that, you shouldn't. It's like FL.

However, and I am not sure if it already does that, OE should scale better with the size of your empire, so that eating a few provinces shouldn't put you at 100% OE as a big empire, but should totally do it if you are a medium power eating a third of a country of your size. To summarize, I think that the effect of corruption on OE is fine, but OE itself should be nerfed so that 100% is close to doubling your size.

If you aren't supposed to go over it, then it would be a hardcap. Softcaps penalize you, but if you properly prepare you can go over them, and do it consistently.

 

[bbqftw]

However, and I am not sure if it already does that, OE should scale better with the size of your empire

it does not scale at all. You get the same OE for annexing the same amount of land whether you're an OPM or have conquered half the world.

Pretty sure less than 1% of the playerbase routinely does 100% OE play, not sure that really needed to be targeted with the nerfbat.