The BIG technology problem.

[unmerged(24934)]

Hello.

Playing yesterday another Muscowy GC I realized when I reached 1550, that it was, if not impossible, very hard to follow an historical pathline with Russia.

Why?

I think the biggest problem right now it's the technology and how's distributed.

For example, at 1550: the more advanced country it's (by far) France with 11 Land Tech.And this is not Rennassaince still. (Should start at 1510 or so, I think). The rest of the Catholic, Protestantcountries with 9 and 10, and Mother (Snif) Russia with 3. 3!? Yes, 3.

Now, I know Russia was an Asian country, semi-barbaric, brutal and fredomless; BUT here's there's a huge difference between real Russia and this Russia. Remember Ivan Grozny's (IV) armies crushed the tatar city of Kazan with heavy cannons at the middle of the 16th century.

The question then is: How can WE modify this technology problem by making: 1st) Tech cost cheaper at the beginning and more expensive at the end.
2nd) More permeable this changed technologies values.

It was indeed the 'Christian Europe' the one who brought the 'light' of the 'civilization' to the rest of the 'brutal and ferocious nations', but I know those 'barbarians' could also learn of the 'enlightned sons of Europe'.

This is a big issue, I thinks.Making the techs more permeable would make the game more entertained. I do not mean the Golden Horde at 1450 with 10 land tech. But yes, a slow and deep investigation to found out what was more or less the land, naval, infra and trade technologies of the period of the nations.

That's all.

Maybe there is already an alternative patch offering this. If it is so, I apologize for my ignorance. But you should forgive me, because I thin this is the greatest 'problem' the game has not resolved yet if you want to try a GC.

 

[Rythin]

Well, you had very bad timing in teching You can play in modding and change Russian techgroup to latin... http://home.broadpark.no/~havmoe/EU/events.htm

 

[saskganesh]

a simple and elegant fix would be to make an event that would give Russia a weapons Manu in 1492, and then have this manu burn down during the Time of Troubles.

but land tech 3 by 1550 is very slow though. are you even bothering to invest in land tech?

 

[Barbarossa II]

Land tech 9 and 3, or 11 and 3 is not that big of a tech advantage, I assume you have invested in infra. If so then you should be able to catch up with the other countries and even France in no time. Also you should remember that land tech levels 6 through 9 are very cheap, so as soon as you hit level 5 you should get to 9 or 10 in no time.

 

[Hallsten]

How have you prioritized your techs? When I played Muscovy last time I was far better off then 3 in 1550.

 

[unmerged(38752)]

I'm playing Muscovy right now (have just become russia) and I am now at land tech 5, while france is at 12. However, since my infra is at 5 (which is pretty high I think ) I can catch up in 3 years or so... I don't think techs are too cheap, even with russia you can make land tech 60 before 1800.

 

[unmerged(29041)]

I think the biggest problem right now it's the technology and how's distributed.

No I don't think so. The biggest problem with technology is that with a Latin, by 1750 you have 60/60/10/10 and then you are doomed to a 0.75% inflation every year for the next 70 years, almost 50% inflation by game's end.

Your comparison is not good. AI versus human technology does not compare well because you do not/could not invest like the AI does. Russia's Land level when is AI run is higher by 1550 that what you achieved. The AI is better at investing at Land technology and sucks investing in Trade and Infra. Russia is one of the few nations in EU2 that always performs. I have to finish a game in which Russia was not a really big nation.

But another question is that Torthodox tech group underperforms because is cheated in the neighbor bonus because of lack of crowding factor (too few torthodox nations). Still they are better than muslims.

Human players, if they follow the economy dogma, lag badly in Military technology, but that should not prevent them from winning most wars or at least bringing them to a draw.

IMHO the technology is well represented in EU2. Fire weapons sucked badly when they were introduced in Western countries, and a composite recurved bow was far superior to an arquebus. The great advantage was that the composite bow required a lifelong development of a skill, and was therefore in limited supply, while you could train a decent arquebuissier in an afternoon.

 

[unmerged(24934)]

Hello again. I'll try to answer and to ask somethings that are obviously usual to you, but maybe not to me.

Rythin said I have a bad timing in tech.That phrase suposses there is a good timing in tech. Maybe, perhaps, a theory, method or dogma to perform well and avoid staying at the stone age. Is it right Rythin? If it is, could you explain how to develop a good timing in tech, please?

Saksganesh said: but land tech 3 by 1550 is very slow though. are you even bothering to invest in land tech?

I'm doing. Shouldn't I?

Hallsten asked me if I priorized my techs. What should I priorize, Hallsten?

At last Fodoron said that most human players follow an economy dogma (?). And that the dogma leads to a military-tech lag.

What is that dogma, and is it bad for the military-tech?

That's all. Thanks for helping this blind man.

 

[unmerged(29041)]

Well, the dogma was stablished by Ryoken a long time ago IIRC.

As a general rule invest 85-100% of all investments into one of the economy techs until you reach that level and then shift to the next economical tech that you want to achieve. That allows you to quickly raise infra and trade levels compared to the AI.

Your military tech advances due to that 0-15% that you dedicate to it, and most importantly by the neighbor bonus that is bigger the farther behind that you fall (specially for latins). Basically your neighbors finance part of your military research.

Once you are ten times richer than any other nation (with trade domination), your small military percentage is more money than your neighbors 100%, and you reach them quickly. Once you reach Trade 10 and Infra 10, and dedicate 100% to military, you shoot past them and they are at your mercy.

You are suppose to win your wars even with one CRT disadvantage. If you fall back too much you can invest more in land for a while, for example between levels 5 and 10 that are researched very fast.

But economic domination leads to military domination without fail.

 

[Incompetent]

The economic doctrine is that the military doesn't really matter - you should always do whatever it takes to maximise economic power, ie inflation-adjusted income.

Muscovy/Russia aren't easy countries to play for tech purposes, as on top of the tech penalties, Russian provinces just aren't as good as French, German or Italian ones. But as in real life, the economy is the key to everything. What's your monthly income? How much inflation do you have? What have you done besides acquiring land and investing in tech to improve your income?

 

[Nil-The-Frogg]

Is there a way to mod techgroups costs? Latin could receive a slightly lighter bonus, for instance. This would both give a chance to orthodox techgroup and reduce this end-game doom mentionned by Fodoron...

Another option might be to mod the scenario so that everybody in europe is in orthodox techgroup? But Russia would become the Super Big Red Blob .

 

[unmerged(6147)]

Well, the dogma was established by Ryoken a long time ago IIRC.

Well, it is much older than that. Some players played like this from the first day they played this game and have always advocated that strategy. It's common sense that if you want to be a as big/strong as possible in the end you need e.g. to invest in your economy first and military tech later on.

What Ryoken did was to write an essay on the topic, taking a more holistic grip on the subject.

 

[unmerged(9404)]

Fodoron and Daniel are talking about economic domination guide by Ryoken. Read it!

 

[unmerged(29041)]

Well, it is much older than that. Some players played like this from the first day they played this game and have always advocated that strategy. It's common sense that if you want to be a as big/strong as possible in the end you need e.g. to invest in your economy first and military tech later on.

What Ryoken did was to write an essay on the topic, taking a more holistic grip on the subject.

I know it is basic economy theory, but for some of us, economic illiterates, the whole thing was big news

 

[unmerged(11496)]

Have you checked any of the various mods to see if their version of Russia is more to your pleasing?

 

[Rythin]

Igneo,
It comes with the experience and after some experiments.

 

[N Katsyev]

There is a technology problem, though i'm not certain it rests totally with with Russia. Its this whole economic policy that players use, really bothers me as it offers logically only one way to play, which i'm sure is very far from what the game designers originally intended. We really need to work I think on making tech caps much harder and more expensive so at some point it just isn't logical anymore to eat your way up to infra 10 and call it a day.

What could be very interesting is to relate spending caps themselves to a monarch's ability. The best monarchs (9 I believe it is) could invest fully, therefore a 9 military monarch could invest fully in land and navy, a 9 administrator could invest fully in Infra and Trade. This however has the unfortunate effect of making Administrative and Military more important. But it could be yet another way to reign in player's ability to quite frankly abuse the technology system.

Now, I know Russia was an Asian country, semi-barbaric, brutal and fredomless; BUT here's there's a huge difference between real Russia and this Russia. Remember Ivan Grozny's (IV) armies crushed the tatar city of Kazan with heavy cannons at the middle of the 16th century.

Then you know wrong. One of the greatest, longest lasting (i'm sure the cold war didn't help things) and erroneous stereotypes in history. Serfdom for instance, you mention freedomless (though this was greatly true later on), only reached a state much worse than any western country in early 17th century in response to the losses during the Time of Troubles. Semi-barbaric? Not by any definition of barbaric i've ever come across. As for being Asian, not fully, nor was it ever fully European, not by the time of Moscovy ascendance anyway. Once can make a case however that Moscovy was little more at its conception than a Mongol breakaway state, but that still doesen't really make it Asian.

Ultimately, Moscovy/Russia was very much behind in the early part of the period the game covers. The Mongol oppression cut Russia off from much of what happened in the west and Mongol policies continued in many forms (some beneficial/some not). However behind as they may be, the Russians were experimenting with firearms at the same time they were doing so in the west. And as you say Kazan was the first large-scale use of Russian artillery.

What we need however is a Russia that goes into the Latin techgroup following Peter the Great. It wasn't very long after Peter that Russian arms, both naval and land were very quickly catching up to and in some ways surpassing their western counter-parts. Russian artillery in particular held a distinction of superiority.

I always find my problem playing Russia is the inability to truly catch up ever in naval tech because of the need to prioritize into economy and land techs. Sure Russia shouldn't lead the pack in naval technology, but she should be competitive. It was the Russian and French fleets that posed the most threat to British naval dominance by Napoleon's time.

 

[unmerged(6147)]

Concerning teching as Russia you might find this thread rewarding.

http://forum.paradoxplaza.com/forum/showthread.php?t=172594

 

[unmerged(24934)]

There is a technology problem, though i'm not certain it rests totally with with Russia. Its this whole economic policy that players use, really bothers me as it offers logically only one way to play, which i'm sure is very far from what the game designers originally intended. We really need to work I think on making tech caps much harder and more expensive so at some point it just isn't logical anymore to eat your way up to infra 10 and call it a day.

We might try to use (I mean in a SP game) a balanced investment. Let's say you are Muscowy and you want to stay on an historical pathline, without going too behind in technology. Maybe you can affor to invest heavily in both trade and infrastructure without losing the land tech. Let's say you invest 60% in trade and infra, and the 40% in land. I don't know exactly because I'm a newbie, but maybe this way you can perform ok without falling in the economic doctrine (I rather this word). =)

Then you know wrong. One of the greatest, longest lasting (i'm sure the cold war didn't help things) and erroneous stereotypes in history. Serfdom for instance, you mention freedomless (though this was greatly true later on), only reached a state much worse than any western country in early 17th century in response to the losses during the Time of Troubles. Semi-barbaric? Not by any definition of barbaric i've ever come across. As for being Asian, not fully, nor was it ever fully European, not by the time of Moscovy ascendance anyway. Once can make a case however that Moscovy was little more at its conception than a Mongol breakaway state, but that still doesen't really make it Asian.

We agree modern wars did not help losers (in this case the Soviet Union) to look nice on the 'civilized world' eyes, specially on what's up to the beggining of it's history.
I did not know serfdom was introduced or worsened after the Time of Troubles. I thought that Russia only crushed rebellions asking a change.
Regarding the semi-barbaric conditions: again, I can't but agree I made a mistake. It's with our western look that we can say that TODAY. But Russia was indeed a lot less 'civilized' than the western countries, and the people had to stand a tyrannical regime sometimes.
Remember the definition of barbaric is: those that do not speak greek. According to that, Russia was less barbaric then than the rest of Europe.

What we need however is a Russia that goes into the Latin techgroup following Peter the Great. It wasn't very long after Peter that Russian arms, both naval and land were very quickly catching up to and in some ways surpassing their western counter-parts. Russian artillery in particular held a distinction of superiority.

Yes, I agree. The reformation Peter made would be properly reflected in a change on the culture techgroup. Maybe wouldn't be hard to introduce it on a self-made event.

Thanks for answering.

 

[jdrou]

What we need however is a Russia that goes into the Latin techgroup following Peter the Great.

AGCEEP currently does this in the "Peter the Great and the Army Reform" event. Has anyone argued for this in the bug forum yet? I didn't find anything doing a search.