Russia needs nerf

[Colombo]

1. France may be rolling over asia as well, having land connection. But there isn't land connection to asia from France, only through HRE and other strong states that keeps France in check.
--> France argument fails.
2.Russia have land connection to asia and because of a lot of weak nations on the way, it is even rewarded for it. Given manpower bonuses, one can't fight successful attrition war with russia and has to beat them down. This is impossible for asian nations given their weaker tech and troops.
There isn't enough strong nations keeping Russia in from exterminating asia as Russia isn't required to keep a lot of troops on borders and can then march their bear cavalry through siberia into china etc. without problems they realistically had.
--> Russian problem needs rebalance. Either buff ROTW nations or try to simulate difficulties of moving troops around globe. This could solve successfully all the problems that appear and are emancipated in Russia to greater extent (as the only things that keeps other powers from doing the same is incapable navy AI)

 

[lordelenath]

We all know France doesn't have a land connection. The argument serves it's purpose: to showcase that Russia in itself is not overpowered but it's combination of starting position, weak neighbors and strong NIs is the problem. If the Hordes would be buffed and Siberian provinces slightly nerfed it should be a lot better - and that's without introducing new mechanics, which means easily doable.

Ideally we would need a better attrition and supply system, but I don't think PI will do something that big.

 

[Colombo]

We all know France doesn't have a land connection. The argument serves it's purpose: to showcase that Russia in itself is not overpowered but it's combination of starting position, weak neighbors and strong NIs is the problem. If the Hordes would be buffed and Siberian provinces slightly nerfed it should be a lot better - and that's without introducing new mechanics, which means easily doable.

Ideally we would need a better attrition and supply system, but I don't think PI will do something that big.

The problem with what you say is "Russia in itself is not overpowered". You can't measure how some nation is "strong" or "weak" without looking at other nations. Thus, "Russia in itself" is nonsense.

And thus, Russia may not be overpowered compared to strong sweden, unified France or overgrown brandenburg-prussia. Compared to anything else on the east from Ottomans, Russia is overpowered as hell.

If Hordes are buffed, you need to buff other nations so Hordes don't roflstomp them.
If you buff other nations, you need to buff nations that they are bordering, are in conflict, aren't checked against expansion and could roflstomp them.
So, you would have to quite probably buff everything south of Ottomans.

So lets say you have strength curve:
10 in western europe 9 in east europe, 7 muslims, 6 indians, 5 chinesen and hordes.
When 10 borders 9, its OK, you can compensate it. If 9 borders 7, there is bit difference, but one can still compensate this. The same with 7 and 6; 6 and 5. But when 9 borders 5, you have problem. Or 10 bordering 7 as was case with North Africa, which was solved by penalties for holding such lands (thus likelihood of province-grab conflict, not strength in such conflict).
And now, look at France. It doesn't border muslims, indians or hordes/chinese. So you don't hear things like "France is OP". The same with Brandenburg etc. But Russia through siberia get in touch with all these groups. It is buffed so it could successfully stand against big powers in wEurope but the same buffs when in contact with anything out of europe proves to be too much.

 

[Novacat]

I would give a minor buff to Hordes, basically give them additional units and maybe lighten the tech penalty so they only start hurting after 1600, then I would massively buff Manchu and Timurids. Both of these countries are massively underperforming compared to history, and they will serve as a useful bulwark against the Russians.

 

[Hatting]

If Russia needs a nerf, the Ottomans need 2 nerfs xD

 

[Umega]

If Russia needs a nerf, the Ottomans need 2 nerfs xD

In my games Ottomans need buffs, they just sit there while their enemies gobble up provinces around them.

 

[brifbates]

I cannot form a full argument at the moment, but I am really startled by those who think that +125% manpower should be present in the national ideas of any country.

One would point out that

1) the +125% is actually two ideas, not one
2) ghazi is +200% and several nations get it including the OE. Granted it is situational but that situation is also highly subject to abuse plus it is a single idea

Muscovy, meanwhile, currently starts off as a superpower in its region (no other neighboring country comes even close to Muscovy's basetax/manpower in 1444) and has a plethora of weak neighbors and uncolonised land to conquer which allows it to effortlessly expand.

Your bias (or lack of math skills) is showing. Lithuania's base tax is quite a bit higher than Muscovy's, even if you include the at-start vassals at full strength (102 vs 58/76) also manpower (31.5k vs 25.5k). Sweden, if it gets its cores back, is at 59, Poland is 51+vassals (76 combined), the rest of the significant neighbors range from 32-40-not exactly pushovers when you consider that starting horde units >> starting eastern units. Yes, once it gets rolling and forms Russia it is as strong/stronger than the neighbors (assuming it gets the Rus lands before someone else does) but doing so is not guaranteed, particularly as an ai if lucky nations are disabled.

 

[Novacat]

Your bias (or lack of math skills) is showing. Lithuania's base tax is quite a bit higher than Muscovy's, even if you include the at-start vassals at full strength (102 vs 58/76) also manpower (31.5k vs 25.5k). Sweden, if it gets its cores back, is at 59, Poland is 51+vassals (76 combined), the rest of the significant neighbors range from 32-40-not exactly pushovers when you consider that starting horde units >> starting eastern units. Yes, once it gets rolling and forms Russia it is as strong/stronger than the neighbors (assuming it gets the Rus lands before someone else does) but doing so is not guaranteed, particularly as an ai if lucky nations are disabled.

Okay, I will concede the Lithuanians being bigger, but Sweden getting its cores back basically works under the unlikely assumption that it breaks away from PU, still, its the only power thats 'technically' bigger than Muscovy at 1444.

Does beg the question of why Lithuania underperforms so much, maybe its because it has one of the worst ideasets in the entire game.

the rest of the significant neighbors range from 32-40-not exactly pushovers when you consider that starting horde units >> starting eastern units

Except what your failing to mention is that by 1500, Muscovy will already be far ahead of the Hordes both in technology and units to the point where Muscovy could (and often does) faceroll the hordes. The hordes strength is static, in 1444 it starts off at its strongest extent, and does not get any stronger.

It also does not refute the fact that Muscovy has a much stronger starting position. Virtually all of Muscovy's neighbors would have to go through a strong country in order to expand. Muscovy, meanwhile, has the Hordes and China for an easy route to expansion without even having to fight any of the 'strong' countries.

Oh, and Lithuania? Its stuck between Poland, Muscovy,

 

[Pilot00]

So wouldnt that make it even easier for the Russians? Especially considering Lithuania is the strongest neighbor Russia has.

Sigh...I quit I simply do.....

1. France may be rolling over asia as well, having land connection. But there isn't land connection to asia from France, only through HRE and other strong states that keeps France in check.
--> France argument fails.
2.Russia have land connection to asia and because of a lot of weak nations on the way, it is even rewarded for it. Given manpower bonuses, one can't fight successful attrition war with russia and has to beat them down. This is impossible for asian nations given their weaker tech and troops.
There isn't enough strong nations keeping Russia in from exterminating asia as Russia isn't required to keep a lot of troops on borders and can then march their bear cavalry through siberia into china etc. without problems they realistically had.
--> Russian problem needs rebalance. Either buff ROTW nations or try to simulate difficulties of moving troops around globe. This could solve successfully all the problems that appear and are emancipated in Russia to greater extent (as the only things that keeps other powers from doing the same is incapable navy AI)

Nothing fails. Your basic arguement is that France has no land connection to asia (what for anyway?) and that Russia can colonise its adjacent provinces (so too can the African nations BTW if they choose the right ideas but that never happens, nerf the west for the win /sarcasm) which is no arguement to be frank. France and Castille can colonise the entire western world with abandon and nothing to hold them back at all. What they find once they reach there is open land and natives that cant expand asside from their starting locations and tech worst that the hordes. At least Russia must form from Muscovy, after having to go through the Commonwealth or Lithuania at least. Sweden or whatever is forming into a blob up there is a serius threat as well and in order to conquer asia they must go through the Hordes. The French and Castillians have to take a couple national ideas and simply go west.
How do you guys keep comparing one to other is beyond me....
As for the second Russia needs to be formed from Muscovy to do what you describe, IF that happens good show, if not instead of Russia most likely youll be reading Protugal

In my games Ottomans need buffs, they just sit there while their enemies gobble up provinces around them.

And thats the basis of the problem IMHO. The AI in general needs a buff not in techs or anything, but its ability to lay on plans and handle its stuff. The afore mentioned Timurids have never fallen by outside factors in my games. It has always been multiple wars or empire wide rebellions that torn them appart. Thats not a tech or neibour problem. Except if you want to tell me that one province Persia that gobled them up last game is OP too.

Except what your failing to mention is that by 1500, Muscovy will already be far ahead of the Hordes both in technology and units to the point where Muscovy could (and often does) faceroll the hordes. The hordes strength is static, in 1444 it starts off at its strongest extent, and does not get any stronger.

Sorry for the snide tone but....We should complain about the Mayans not having artillery then by the time you arrive to them...You do understand that is not a problem of one nation been OP but of the AI not been capable of making large scale plans right? (westernising when having no western neighbours is one of those).

 

[Novacat]

Sigh...I quit I simply do.....

Because I cought you in your pretzel logic?

 

[CrabHelmet]

In my games Ottomans need buffs, they just sit there while their enemies gobble up provinces around them.

Yeah, I get this too, it's really strange. The Ottomans are theoretically really strong - whenever I look at them in the ledger, they have big armies, great manpower and high wealth - and yet they just... sit there. Doing absolutely nothing.

 

[Pilot00]

Because I cought you in your pretzel logic?

I dont know what a pretzel is but, I guit because you have NO LOGIC. You just go round and round in circles and simply repeat that Russia is Op and has too much space to colonise, and that hordes need buffing ignoring every argument posted against it and the reasons that such an argument doesnt make sense in the way the game runs.

BTW ive done a lot of editing in my previous post.

EDIT: Gotta love the internets. No my friend if you want someone who uses pretzel logic, thats you
I call you on irony and raise you some

 

[Novacat]

I dont know what a pretzel is but, I guit because you have NO LOGIC. You just go round and round in circles and simply repeat that Russia is Op and has too much space to colonise, and that hordes need buffing ignoring every argument posted against it and the reasons that such an argument doesnt make sense in the way the game runs.

You argue that Lithuania is weak in the context of Ottomans
You argue that Lithuania is strong in the context of Russia

That is pretzel logic. Its when you spam so many different arguments that they start to contradict eachother.

 

[Pilot00]

You argue that Lithuania is weak in the context of Ottomans
You argue that Lithuania is strong in the context of Russia

That is pretzel logic. Its when you spam so many different arguments that they start to contradict eachother.

When did I did either? I said that Lithuania is strong if it forms the Commonwealth and posses a barrier that IF Muscovy or Novgorod survive thus far must be overcome. Yes if they dont form the Commonwealth their status is greatly dimminished and are a far weaker opponent than they are individually (Lithuania and Poland). And they get steamrolled pretty easily instead of forming the barrier against Russia they are supposed to.

So I would kindly ask you to reread what I said and perhaps try to answer the questions I set on the discussion table because If you are resorting to this kind of 'debate' it seems you are running out of arguments.

 

[Novacat]

So, considering that Lithuania is pretty much the only barrier that Russia has, dont you think Russia is in kind of too good a shape by having mostly weak neighbors. At the most they get one strong neighbor IF that neighbor forms the commonwealth, which is highly unlikely for the AI considering the stringent requirements.

 

[Pilot00]

So, considering that Lithuania is pretty much the only barrier that Russia has, dont you think Russia is in kind of too good a shape by having mostly weak neighbors. At the most they get one strong neighbor IF that neighbor forms the commonwealth, which is highly unlikely for the AI considering the stringent requirements.

Denmark, Norway, Sweden or the formed Skandinavia dont catch your fancy? Neither the quite realistic chance of not even having Russia formed? Or that Muscovy can be wipped out?

EDIT: And even if that would happen Id say again NO. Because (I keep repeating myself and noone listens) this is not a border, neighbour or tech or NI problem. This is a problem of how the AI progresses through the game. If anything needs fixing its that.

EDIT2: Why is forming the commonwealth a stringe requirment when the countries involved start in PU, and forming another country by waging multiple wars with western neighbours is considered easy?

 

[Novacat]

Norway and Sweden get annexed into Denmark 90% of the time, and Denmark rarely gives two shits about Muscovy and usually expands into the HRE instead.

Sweden has a real shortage of manpower/basetax, by the time they can break away Muscovy would already have Novgorod and probably several of the Hordes, which means they already enormously outnumber the Swedes.

Denmark without Norway/Sweden is too far away. Norway barely has ~10 basetax to its name and very little NIs to improve its army.

 

[Pilot00]

Norway and Sweden get annexed into Denmark 90% of the time, and Denmark rarely gives two shits about Muscovy and usually expands into the HRE instead.

Sweden has a real shortage of manpower/basetax, by the time they can break away Muscovy would already have Novgorod and probably several of the Hordes, which means they already enormously outnumber the Swedes.

Denmark without Norway/Sweden is too far away. Norway barely has ~10 basetax to its name and very little NIs to improve its army.

Good theory, where do you get the percentages from? Cause I am 3 out of 3 games (the other games I am guilty of not paying attention to the north) with mega Sweden eating its way eastwards. You cant have something happen 90% of the time in this game, except the opening moves that depend on missions that is.

 

[Novacat]

Good theory, where do you get the percentages from? Cause I am 3 out of 3 games (the other games I am guilty of not paying attention to the north) with mega Sweden eating its way eastwards. You cant have something happen 90% of the time in this game, except the opening moves that depend on missions that is.

What version are you playing?

 

[Pilot00]

What version are you playing?

Is that a question with a meaning? 1.3.2