Staying small. Is there a point, or a way?

[ChildeR]

how the hell is expanding a BUG.

That's not what I meant. The fact that the game is "all about expanding" is a bug.

 

[Cymsdale]

Compare 1PM and 2PM in RL and in game. In RL i would expect 2PM to have twice the manpower, FL, naval FL, traders, diplomats, generals. 2PM would get 50% less overexstensoin, would be able to core, convert and colonize twice more land. And so on.

In game though there is practically no difference between 2PM and 1PM.

What you're pointing out is that there is diminishing returns on the value of more provinces, not that the mechanics of the game favor smaller nations.

The size/power of a nation is really better represented by its total effective base tax anyway.

 

[Cymsdale]

I'd rather buff buildings. A large nation that expands cannot afford the monarch points to keep all their provinces fully upgraded, so make that matter. Double the effects of most buildings, maybe increse MP cost some, but keep gold cost the same or increase only slightly. Also, conquering provinces could destroy some buildings.

I do think buildings is really the key mechanic for this. It's harder for a larger nation to develop all provinces. Adding a zero-building province is still an overall net gain though.

 

[G_Morgan]

That's not what I meant. The fact that the game is "all about expanding" is a bug.

The game was designed as an "empire building game" according to the devs.

 

[butcherlyfly]

The size/power of a nation is really better represented by its total effective base tax anyway.

Okay, just substitute 1PM and 2PM in my post by 5BT and 10BT.

 

[ChildeR]

Compare 1PM and 2PM in RL and in game. In RL i would expect 2PM to have twice the manpower, FL, naval FL, traders, diplomats, generals. 2PM would get 50% less overexstensoin, would be able to core, convert and colonize twice more land. And so on.

The only one of those I'd expect to scale ~linearly is manpower. For all the others an increase is bureaucracy needed will eat some of the gains.

 

[lordelenath]

That's not what I meant. The fact that the game is "all about expanding" is a bug.

Just because you do not like the design approach doesn't make it a bug. The game is clearly and obviously designed for expansion and empire building. You might prefer it differently (and you are probably not alone in that), but that doesn't make it a bug.

 

[kitemasaki]

I do think buildings is really the key mechanic for this. It's harder for a larger nation to develop all provinces. Adding a zero-building province is still an overall net gain though.

I think some people, not saying you, are confused by assuming you are supposed to have buildings in all your provinces. Thats a waste of efficiency and not necessary. It is useful to have a solid 'core' that is based in your main culture group since that is all 100% efficiency. Everything else is just fluff to your empire and to satisfy the map porn

 

[ChildeR]

Just because you do not like the design approach doesn't make it a bug.

Obviously I meant IMO.

 

[masterpaul666]

I'm not trying to start some giant fight. I'm just trying to come up with ways to make a small nation work, and survive. Simple as that. Lowering tech cost a bit for larger countries seems a decent way, to me.

Buildings could work, but as a large country, I usualy have all trade, forts and army buildings built more or less as soon as they get unlocked. It's expansive, but well worth it, usualy. So a few provinces, even with all possible buildings, isn't that much better than a larger country. Think ireland VS England. Ireland, fully united, can't fight off england, at best they can fight off britanny, maybe scottland with some luck. There's no point, really. So, everyone would just play england, or even scottland, since they can just beat england and get stronger. Playing small should be doable, not impossible. Right now its not hard, its stupid. Go ahead, play a 1province minor bordering france, see how long you survive.

 

[butcherlyfly]

The only one of those I'd expect to scale ~linearly is manpower. For all the others an increase is bureaucracy needed will eat some of the gains.

But most of those things does not scale at all! You don't get more traders, diplomats, generals, culture conversion, buildings, less overexstension etc. even if you are x100 times larger.

 

[deezee]

But most of those things does not scale at all! You don't get more traders, diplomats, generals, culture conversion, buildings, less overexstension etc. even if you are x100 times larger.

In general the whole monarch point system is one massive buff to small nations; aside from advisors, an OPM gets the same number of monarch points as a world spanning empire, which means the latter is always running short.

I guess if you wanted to make the buff to OPMs complete, the logical way is to make advisor costs scale with size, but I don't think its really necessary. The advantages to being small are fairly substantial, but not enough to allow David vs Goliath victories to happen regularly, which is how it should be.

 

[Mef]

per say

It was a lot more fun. Blobbing is boring, and too easy.

EU3 was not about blobbing? Blobbing was even more extreme, who doesn't remember the Bohemian snake in Russia?

Countries didn't just expand back then, why would we have a ''history simulator'' that only favors expanding.

Look at the map in 1444. Now look at the map in 1821. The EU4 period was all about transitioning Europe and many other parts of the world from being split up into a multitude of smaller, feudal states, to being dominated by a small number of great powers. Making EU4 a game about blobbing is historically accurate.

 

[masterpaul666]

In general the whole monarch point system is one massive buff to small nations; aside from advisors, an OPM gets the same number of monarch points as a world spanning empire, which means the latter is always running short.

I guess if you wanted to make the buff to OPMs complete, the logical way is to make advisor costs scale with size, but I don't think its really necessary. The advantages to being small are fairly substantial, but not enough to allow David vs Goliath victories to happen regularly, which is how it should be.

right now, i see a province being independant at my border, I just eat them. They have no chance. I just walk on them with 5x the forces, siege, annex and walk away. 3 years province. 5 tops. It's a joke. I want there to be a way for that 1 province to survive. Not kill a bigger enemy, but at least keep them at bay, like better defence or higher tech or something.

 

[butcherlyfly]

I would suggest you research some history examples of small nations surviving near big and aggressive neighbors. And then come up with a way to implement it in the game mechanics. No sarcasm, that would be pretty cool.

 

[ChildeR]

In general the whole monarch point system is one massive buff to small nations; aside from advisors, an OPM gets the same number of monarch points as a world spanning empire, which means the latter is always running short.

Yes, but in practice is often the other way around... A small minor will have nothing useful to spend all their MP on. They can stay a couple of years (more) ahead in admin and diplo tech, but that's about it. Even large nations need to expand very fast or get crappy rulers before you run so short that it hurts, at least with western tech or anything close.

 

[Rudolph]

I would suggest you research some history examples of small nations surviving near big and aggressive neighbors. And then come up with a way to implement it in the game mechanics. No sarcasm, that would be pretty cool.

The mechanic is already in the game, its called alliances. And since 1.8 changed how warscore is calculated after cascading CTA was removed, your allies actually have a chance to save you now. Befriending your big neighbor also helps. AI takes into account the relationship between you before attacking, though if it has decided it wants your province(s) you better have bigger friends.

 

[Thrake]

Thanks balmung(any issues if I just use that?)

And, sassassin, I'm aware of the implications. I'm not really asking for a nerf per say, just some kind of power difference. A bonus to smaller nation, would work just as well.
In eu3, tech cost was directly related to size, being a small trade nation made you quite advanced in tech. Enough to keep at bay bigger enemies. In this version, there's nothing small nation can do beside allie other big nations. And with the damn missions to just get random land, allies rival me on a daily basis.

I'm just trying to find a point/a way to stay small. It was a lot more fun. Blobbing is boring, and too easy.

Well, so having a horde of vassals as your former EUIII strategy doesn't counts as blobbing? Btw, you can still stay small and be powerful. In my game, AI Hansa fields 30kish army with 6 provinces, which is as much as Hungary, Poland, or even more than Bohemia. Only real majors as France or Spain outnumbers them. Balance could use some more incentives in staying small but going trade definately goes a long way. Add colonization on top and you can stay small but not insignificant.

 

[masterpaul666]

My list so far
Tech cost, 1% more for every 5 province, up to 15(75 provinces)

Building level 4 and above being 3X more expansive and cost 50points, rather than 10. Making said building better as well to make them worth building, at least.

Making the base tax/manpower event proc a bit more often. Would allow a small country to steadily grow in power, while not nerfing large nation, since htey'd get it either way. It's a drop in the ocean for france or spain, but tuscanny, far more usefull. I see this as a buff to everyone, but only really good if you're small.

Increase the negative effect of culture, about 3X the current values. (to be nerfed back down to current value with a core)

Coring should remain the same cost, but take 3X as long. Keeps large country a bit more on the slow path.

Increasing AE for the ''full annex'' option. Outright killing someone should be looked down by other people. Everyone would fee threatened and hatefull toward someone who just destroyed an entire country. Far more than right now.

I'd also suggest nerfing revolts, to NEVER be over 70% of your force limit. Otherwise, it's just dumb.

I'm sure I can add more later, but I'll try and build a mod for those things.

 

[Cymsdale]

I'd also suggest nerfing revolts, to NEVER be over 70% of your force limit.

That's ridiculous.