Realistically is this justifiable

[doktorstick]

The in-favor-of-high-cost-camp tends to ignore other certain facts. Using their logic...

Alexander the Great conquered a huge swath of land in about 15 years. You can't do that in EUIV. Ergo, EUIV's mechanics are wrong.

 

[s1234567890m]

You can't do that in EUIV

Well you can... you just get large amounts of rebels.

 

[WeissRaben]

The in-favor-of-high-cost-camp tends to ignore other certain facts. Using their logic...

Alexander the Great conquered a huge swath of land in about 15 years. You can't do that in EUIV. Ergo, EUIV's mechanics are wrong.

It lasted a lot, they tell me.

 

[Orosius]

Is there any comparable historical situations that could be argued to be representative of the situation? Is there anything like that influencing your level of ridicule?

Is there any comparable situtation where annexing a country would slow down your ability to unlock some technology ?

 

[LastSalian]

Let's suppose it is realistic. Let's assume that it's historical. Let's also suppose that indeed it should be tough because it's a lot of land and blah blah blah.

Question now is, where the heck is the fun supposed to be?

Because increasing diploannexation costs in like 150% including time to annex, same as increasing coring costs has been obviously done as a deterrent to expansion.

We could double a soccer field size and say "yeah, it is suppose to be tough, a real challenge and blah blah blah" and obviously normal people would absolutely hate it.

My hypothesis is, towards SP, they did it to promote the useless new development system and the nice new vassal features. Towards MP, to keep players alive longer. News for you guys, it sucks. Really.

My only remote relief, regardless of Wiz' plagiaristic answer, is that obviously they didn't extensively check how this change affected every nation and they are probably looking to tune it up, even if not generally, at least country-specifically.

Finally, again, if you guys really pretend to force people to build more tall vs wide, and enjoy it, you are losing your vision. Most new and some old players love expansion and did their first EU4 buy with that purpose, not to increase stupid development indicators.

 

[Metagel]

Let's suppose it is realistic. Let's assume that it's historical. Let's also suppose that indeed it should be tough because it's a lot of land and blah blah blah.

Question now is, where the heck is the fun supposed to be?

Because increasing diploannexation costs in like 150% including time to annex, same as increasing coring costs has been obviously done as a deterrent to expansion.

We could double a soccer field size and say "yeah, it is suppose to be tough, a real challenge and blah blah blah" and obviously normal people would absolutely hate it.

My hypothesis is, towards SP, they did it to promote the useless new development system and the nice new vassal features. Towards MP, to keep players alive longer. News for you guys, it sucks. Really.

My only remote relief, regardless of Wiz' plagiaristic answer, is that obviously they didn't extensively check how this change affected every nation and they are probably looking to tune it up, even if not generally, at least country-specifically.

Finally, again, if you guys really pretend to force people to build more tall vs wide, and enjoy it, you are losing your vision. Most new and some old players love expansion and did their first EU4 buy with that purpose, not to increase stupid development indicators.

This really is exactly it. I play EU4 entirely single player and I play it to blob. This patch offers nothing but extra time spent not playing the game waiting for points. It's horribly unfun. I bought EU4 to conquer stuff, not to develop a tiny nation on speed 5.

 

[Pro]

Does the patch introduce anything to do other than blob?

 

[WeissRaben]

Let's suppose it is realistic. Let's assume that it's historical. Let's also suppose that indeed it should be tough because it's a lot of land and blah blah blah.

Question now is, where the heck is the fun supposed to be?

Because increasing diploannexation costs in like 150% including time to annex, same as increasing coring costs has been obviously done as a deterrent to expansion.

We could double a soccer field size and say "yeah, it is suppose to be tough, a real challenge and blah blah blah" and obviously normal people would absolutely hate it.

My hypothesis is, towards SP, they did it to promote the useless new development system and the nice new vassal features. Towards MP, to keep players alive longer. News for you guys, it sucks. Really.

My only remote relief, regardless of Wiz' plagiaristic answer, is that obviously they didn't extensively check how this change affected every nation and they are probably looking to tune it up, even if not generally, at least country-specifically.

Finally, again, if you guys really pretend to force people to build more tall vs wide, and enjoy it, you are losing your vision. Most new and some old players love expansion and did their first EU4 buy with that purpose, not to increase stupid development indicators.

Honestly, if PDS starts looking more at me and less at you, I'm not going to cry. Call me selfish, but I didn't get a lot of sympathy when I pointed out that, maybe, I didn't want to conquer the world. I still own the game, and surprise! I still have fun, even though it's the Grand Strategy version of Hungry Hungry Hippo.

 

[Twoflower]

Is there any comparable situtation where annexing a country would slow down your ability to unlock some technology ?

Bear in mind that "unlocking" a technology in EU4 does not merely represent discovery, it represents advances and discoveries being adopted throughout your country. It is an administrative process, and not just research.
I don't think it is theoretically implausible that if you have to focus your efforts on integrating and assimilating the customs, institutions, people and laws of a large independent country, you can spend less ressources on e.g. modernizing your shipyards for the construction of new ships or expanding and improving your trade networks, which is what reaching a new level of diplomatic technology really represents.
As for historical examples, it is not that far-fetched to assume that one reason why e.g. Poland's economic and societal process was stalled quite a lot in the late 16th century was that they were busy integrating Lithuania.
Or, to take a recent - and therefore only partially relevant - example, when West Germany "diplomatically annexed" East Germany in 1990, the necessary process of adjustment did delay several economic and social reforms in unified Germany and, to a certain extent, can be viewed as a main reason for West Germany losing its economic edge in the 90s.

 

[Prom_STar]

The only problem I have with diplo annex cost in CS is we've lost the embassy and so we're a little diplomat starved. Wiz said in the other core/annex cost thread that that was something he wanted to look at.

 

[Lee Saxon]

Administrative Ideas + Influence Ideas -> -25% diplo annexation cost from Influence Ideas , -20% diplo annexation cost from policy (Vassal Integration Act). So -45% in total from just two ideas. Problem solved.

Another Policy for reducing coring costs would be nice though.

That's not "from just two ideas." 25% diplo annex cost is the third idea in and the two before it suck. And the policy only comes once you've completed two entire idea groups (ie by the time you can afford the advisors to produce enough monarch points to not need the policy [the same could be said about any number of policies, many of the later ideas, and most of the higher tech level buildings, but that's a whole different can of worms).

 

[iShurik]

That's not "from just two ideas." 25% diplo annex cost is the third idea in and the two before it suck. And the policy only comes once you've completed two entire idea groups (ie by the time you can afford the advisors to produce enough monarch points to not need the policy [the same could be said about any number of policies, many of the later ideas, and most of the higher tech level buildings, but that's a whole different can of worms).

You're right, what I meant is "From just two completed Idea Groups". But I do not agree with the other part, -45% diplo annex cost is something I would even use with a lvl 3 advisor.

 

[LastSalian]

Honestly, if PDS starts looking more at me and less at you, I'm not going to cry. Call me selfish, but I didn't get a lot of sympathy when I pointed out that, maybe, I didn't want to conquer the world. I still own the game, and surprise! I still have fun, even though it's the Grand Strategy version of Hungry Hungry Hippo.

It's not about conquering the world or getting achievements. It's about the game phase; what you do when you play. The current ridiculous costs for expanding oblige you to either fast-forward at maximum speed or watch the screen for an hour while you eat some salad. I didn't buy this game nor their DLCs with that in mind. Did you?

 

[sumo0]

I can only agree that the new core/integrate/annex prices are abit ludicrous.
Integrating Pskov and Yaroslavl alone in the beginning as Muscovy got me behind in tech.
I had fed Pskov with 2 provinces, and Yaroslavl with 3. So they had 4 provinces each.
900something dip.

Now Perm i have given 4 provinces from Kazan, 1400 dip...

And i have spent about 1000 adm to core Novgorod.

Suffice to say i am faar behind in tech in 1475. And i didn't even develop any provinces yet.

 

[Twoflower]

I can only agree that the new core/integrate/annex prices are abit ludicrous.
Integrating Pskov and Yaroslavl alone in the beginning as Muscovy got me behind in tech.
I had fed Pskov with 2 provinces, and Yaroslavl with 3. So they had 4 provinces each.
900something dip.

Now Perm i have given 4 provinces from Kazan, 1400 dip...

And i have spent about 1000 adm to core Novgorod.

Suffice to say i am faar behind in tech in 1475. And i didn't even develop any provinces yet.

So, you have impressively outdone historical Muscovy and are apparently doing very well. Where, exactly, is the problem?

 

[Nexxes]

The in-favor-of-high-cost-camp tends to ignore other certain facts. Using their logic...

Alexander the Great conquered a huge swath of land in about 15 years. You can't do that in EUIV. Ergo, EUIV's mechanics are wrong.

One could argue that Alexander the Great never cored his lands, nor did he ensure a line of succession.
He simply conquered a large amount of provinces, spent all his MIL-Points on Harsh Treatment and the moment he died hell broke loose.
He had no successor, lots of pretenders rised and yeah.

That's pretty much what would happen in EU IV I might say.

 

[Hecastomp]

that influence idea group is going to be SO useful...

To be honest, i dont see how anyone that actually wants to expand with the next patch will ever be able to do it without influence and administrative for vassal anex and province conquest respectively. I just think those 2 groups are a complete must now...

 

[mazyus]

This really is exactly it. I play EU4 entirely single player and I play it to blob. This patch offers nothing but extra time spent not playing the game waiting for points. It's horribly unfun. I bought EU4 to conquer stuff, not to develop a tiny nation on speed 5.

That's what happens when Paradox focuses on MPs and doesn't care of the people who like playing SP and make achievements.

 

[Pro]

One could argue that Alexander the Great never cored his lands, nor did he ensure a line of succession.

Of course he cored it. If he didn't he couldn't have held it for more than a month. He'd be at 3000% overextension.

 

[Jomini]

So, you have impressively outdone historical Muscovy and are apparently doing very well. Where, exactly, is the problem?

Where you end up staring at the computer doing nothing and having no strategic decisions to make. Nobody gives a rat's ass if the point of the game is to get to WC or to master of Eastern Europe. The problem is that you do something really idiotically obvious (integrate a small amount of land at a rate vastly lower than Russia's historical expansion rate over the last 500 years) and you are forced to wait for no purpose.

The game just got mind numbingly easy. Slow. But easy. Now you don't have to worry about the AI ever coming close to outgrowing you - unless they take Influence and administration you can just slowly poach off minors until you are bigger than them. Even if you were to lose a war, the AI won't be able to make a dent into your holdings.

When you suck down the rate of reward in a mostly zero-sum game you also suck down the risk.

So slow, easy, and ahistorical. Clearly THIS is the way to go.