Rebels breaking the game

[jamesmarshall]

1. Rebels should not reinforce.
2. You should NOT be playing ping pong with Rebel armies, if you defeat them where they rebel, they should NOT retreat easily only to besiege another province (as luck would have It often a great defensive province)
3. They should not (almost always!) have excellent commanders.

Getting sick and tired of chasing rebels all over Scotland, defeat them in Highlands taking heavy losses because their commander is excellent only for them to retreat and besiege Fife, defeat them in Fife only for them to retreat and besiege Ayreshire, defeat them only for them to retreat to bloody England! Stacks of 6k are taking stacks of 3/4 times spread out in multiple provinces...manpower dwindling and temper fraying. West Isles rebels should end up besieging Derby!

They have made rebels way way to strong here.

Anyone else agree?

J

 

[jonnydesperado]

It's either that or the classical "A rebel! How peculiar! *CRUSH*".

Using soldiers is not the only way to try to get rid of rebels.

 

[Dnote]

I've yet to deal with them, but I did notice that a rebel stack of 9,000 appear in Delhi, where they can only field an army of 4,000... suffice to say they lost miserably.

 

[jamesmarshall]

I don't mind a challenge with rebels, I'm no noob. I don't mind the noble rebellion with a strong leader and good rebel army...but I DO mind a rebellion every 10mins (with stability 2/3 and minimal revolt risk), with every rebel army lead by a top commander and bouncing around the country.

I know they are not the only way, but I shouldn't have to continually put up with either the rebel warfare or giving in.

 

[jamesmarshall]

I've yet to deal with them, but I did notice that a rebel stack of 9,000 appear in Delhi, where they can only field an army of 4,000... suffice to say they lost miserably.

Tell me about it, I'm watching 12k stacks of corning rebels, derby rebels, Essex rebels popping up every 10mins or so its crazy when I've got 2 or 3 stability.

You should NOT have to loose your entire manpower as a stable nation with rebels.

 

[Ekimus]

How is your relationship with the friendly Southern neighbor? Maybe he's supporting/creating rebels?

 

[jamesmarshall]

How is your relationship with the friendly Southern neighbor? Maybe he's supporting/creating rebels?

Do you know how I would check that? I could see how that could create more rebels, but not how tough it is to kill them. I seem to be wasting my entire manpower on these bloody rebels.

 

[Ekimus]

Do you know how I would check that? I could see how that could create more rebels, but not how tough it is to kill them. I seem to be wasting my entire manpower on these bloody rebels.

I'm afraid not. But the wiki tells me that the reinforcement rate is tied to the amount of money spent. That could explain why they're so tough?
http://eu4wiki.com/Espionage#Support_Rebels

 

[Dunbal]

Getting sick and tired of chasing rebels all over Scotland

I dunno I played Spain (Castille) yesterday and only had rebel troubles when I started converting the muzzies down in granada, taking over the basque counties, or subjugating the Papal States. Or when my stability dropped a lot. Certainly there's no "problem" with rebels like there was in the Victoria 2 initial release. Maybe your problem is specific to Scotland?

 

[shaldon]

I disagree with the OP. Strong rebels are great.

Why wouldn't they reinforce and regroup, if they have a cause to rebel, others will follow.

You need to look after your revolt risk and overextension to make sure you can deal with them.

 

[rene_starson]

Try playing as a warmongering Daimyo in Japan, when the Portuguese event fires and one of your provinces insta-converts to Catholicism. Queue the MTTH... Kiri-whatever Tensions. Bam! Rebels. Moar rebels. REBELS. All with the goal of converting your nation to Catholic. Except you are Shinto. And Shinto cannot convert. Theres an decision to convert, but you need Stability for it. So the rebels roll over you, and when their bar fills up to meet their demands, it fires a peace, your nation collapses, and six months later they do it again.

 

[letswait]

1. Rebels should not reinforce.
2. You should NOT be playing ping pong with Rebel armies, if you defeat them where they rebel, they should NOT retreat easily only to besiege another province (as luck would have It often a great defensive province)
3. They should not (almost always!) have excellent commanders.

Getting sick and tired of chasing rebels all over Scotland, defeat them in Highlands taking heavy losses because their commander is excellent only for them to retreat and besiege Fife, defeat them in Fife only for them to retreat and besiege Ayreshire, defeat them only for them to retreat to bloody England! Stacks of 6k are taking stacks of 3/4 times spread out in multiple provinces...manpower dwindling and temper fraying. West Isles rebels should end up besieging Derby!

They have made rebels way way to strong here.

Anyone else agree?

J

Playing ping-pong and whack-a-mole with rebels was a pastime in EU3, but in EU4 you might be against a doomstack of rebels before you know it..repeatedly.
I had 16k troops (with a general) that won against a 13k rebel stack, they were force-retreated and I followed immediately.
The next thing you know, my now 11k troops were whacked by the remaining 7k rebels (with no morale).

 

[jamesmarshall]

Yep, I have minimal revolt risk, no war, minimal war exhaust, and its taking forever to reinforce armies...

As I type 17k stack appears, I'm sick of this.

 

[Andy_Dandy]

Easier rebells would mean easier to overexpand, less consequences of less stability etc. So far i think the game has a perfect balance here.

 

[letswait]

Easier rebells would mean easier to overexpand, less consequences of less stability etc. So far i think the game has a perfect balance here.

Well, that's true in a sense.. if only the game didn't do it's best to drop you to -3 because of "random" events.
Random as in 80% (the number is taken from the air, but it appears to be thereabout) or so chance for it to occur (repeatedly) in the first 2 months after you gained stability.

If it occurs that often, there's no reason to try to gain stability because that stability only lasts 1-2 months max, then you're back down again, wasting admin power again and again.
Another way to think about it is that if it's more a rule than the exception, then the stab hit from war without casus belli is quite pointless because you're
more or less at the bottom anyway.

Based on Castille, it seems to be a haven for 0 0 0 rulers.. Since I started I haven't had a single ruler that wasn't 0 0 0 (excluding the first two months of the game).

 

[kemor]

Well, that's true in a sense.. if only the game didn't do it's best to drop you to -3 because of "random" events.
Random as in 80% (the number is taken from the air, but it appears to be thereabout) or so chance for it to occur (repeatedly) in the first 2 months after you gained stability.

If it occurs that often, there's no reason to try to gain stability because that stability only lasts 1-2 months max, then you're back down again, wasting admin power again and again.
Another way to think about it is that if it's more a rule than the exception, then the stab hit from war without casus belli is quite pointless because you're
more or less at the bottom anyway.

Based on Castille, it seems to be a haven for 0 0 0 rulers.. Since I started I haven't had a single ruler that wasn't 0 0 0 (excluding the first two months of the game).

That's my biggest beef so far. When you have 0 stability, you rarely get any bat shit crazy events. If you're stability 3, within a month or two, BAM, comets start showing up or some other crazy stuff. So far, I only found at maximum stability 1 to be of any use. Anything above has proven to be a waste of power unless you have a very stable situation that allows you to deal with whatever crazy stuff is gonna happen.

As for rebels, they are split into 2 categories: normal rebels and event rebels. Normal rebels are easy to handle usually, just boot them before they formed, stabilize, etc. Event rebels, if you don't want them to win, you HAVE to be ready before hand. As Britanny for example, you WILL get a "turmoil era" event at some point and stacks of doom will pop up out of nowhere. If you're not ready (with max army supply, etc), you're screwed.
That said, you could just let rebels win and deal with it later, it's not game over and sometimes it's FAR less costy. Rebels usually have an end goal and once it's reached, they'll just disappear. Consequences can be tough to handle, but compared to endless conflict, depleted manpower and complete bankruptcy, might want to take the least worst

 

[unmerged(736372)]

I don't mind stacks of rebels popping up now and again, controlled punishment is their purpose after all.
Getting several doomstacks from the same province several times a year is a fun killer, however. Could the amount of rebels correlate with manpower mechanics?