-
We have updated our Community Code of Conduct. Please read through the new rules for the forum that are an integral part of Paradox Interactive’s User Agreement.
Yes, it's always the question - take the hit now or later with vassals. However, I would submit that allowing them to grow and gobble up provinces you'd like costs less in the long run when you annex them diplomatically than if you take them directly from a peace deal and then annex that OPM in war. Diplomatically annexing a vassal doesn't give as much BB as annexing in war, to be sure. And the more powerful a vassal, the more useful they are as ally.
Oh, and you are quite right about the regency counsel - some really do have better stats.
Oh, and you are quite right about the regency counsel - some really do have better stats.
Burgundy - interim evaluation
Exactly the right time to make a review and what´s right/what´s wrong for Burgundy:
- Slider settings:
Aristocracy - plutocracy
Feudal monarchy limits your possibility to move that slider above a certain value for Plutocracy. But being more aristocratic is the right choice anyway starting as a European landpower as it lowers cavalry cost
Innovative - Narrowminded
Moving towards Innovatrive is a BIG mistake for empire builders. The lowered tech costs are NOT outweihing the huge drop in province values once they receive another religion or/and have a non accepted culture. And its only narrowminded providing missionaries - you´ll definitely going to need them empire building
Centralized - decentralized
Burgundy starts decentralized all the way and it simply costs too much changing that
Mercantilism - free trade
The choice to move towards free trade is good for any kind of empire as well as for a world class trader. Free trade provides traders, colonists and improves trade gains. Its downside is - no spies!
Offensive - defensive
As already said - having cleared the landscape of opposing armies gives you all the time for sieges you need. A no brainer and the least balanced slider of them all
Land - navy
Simple - your very existence depends on military self defense. If you are on an island you may go Navy all the way - an enemy should never be able to land. As a power in Europe you will have much more land than navy threats in term of existential problems, thus land is never the wrong direction. Keep in mind though that ship prices as trade efficiency are influenced by this slider setting as well
Quality - quantity
I do not know if this slider has a significant influence - from the stats influence on morale I´d say no anyway. Except for one thing - with a low army maintenance you already need the size of the rebels spawned to defeat rebellions (unavoidable by events). With an additional lowered morale (albeit small) you would actually need bigger armies ...
Serfdom - free subjects
Unsure on this one. I always chose free subjects - if I ever got to move this slider at all, in the first 150 game years there are often other priorities - mainly for the colonist growth attached to it. And there is one of the things I do not fully understand in game design - everything leading to greater autonomy leads to increased stability costs. Which in return means that decentralized countries would be more unstable ...
- National ideas
Burgundy started with "Conscript" in 1473, a decent choice for its lack of manpower compared to France. The players choices were "Smithsonian economy" and "Bureaucracy", both boosting production and tax income in the early years of Burgundian expansion. In hindsight a better choice would have been "deus vult" as the third idea for two reasons - you do not need a casus belli to declare war against any non catholic country (zero stab hit!) and it stops the spread of Protestantism in your country completely. (read that again. Half of your provinces around 1600 with full taxes instead of 30% reduced). Which btw may well mean that Protestantism is a minor concern overall, as only "infected" provinces infect others ... Planned national ideas for the future include anything boosting colonists, supporting trade and lower tech costs. As a general rule - no real big country which is at least following the other majors closely in tech needs any idea which boosts army tradition, gives better leaders or improves prestige. If your armies are big enough, everything else comes naturally. And the one thing you need for a good army is a healthy economy.
- Military choices
Not much to say yet. Except that it was the right decision to make half of the army cavalry (do not go overboard with this, though. Except you like to see victorious armies with their morale in the hole and - as infantry gets better equipped - with far bigger losses than the enemy ...), to work with dedicated siege teams and to stay away from Navy at all in the years up to 1525. As a hint, starting navies early not only cost you their build price - the maintenance is negligible - which you can´t use for other things, but you may find yourself sit on a numerous, but outdated navy by let´s say 1580, when your carracks and barques meet early frifates and galleons. Thus, as a land power start building a navy when you see the necessity occur. Not earlier, except you HAVE to avoid blockades because you heavily depend on trade.
Exactly the right time to make a review and what´s right/what´s wrong for Burgundy:
- Slider settings:
Aristocracy - plutocracy
Feudal monarchy limits your possibility to move that slider above a certain value for Plutocracy. But being more aristocratic is the right choice anyway starting as a European landpower as it lowers cavalry cost
Innovative - Narrowminded
Moving towards Innovatrive is a BIG mistake for empire builders. The lowered tech costs are NOT outweihing the huge drop in province values once they receive another religion or/and have a non accepted culture. And its only narrowminded providing missionaries - you´ll definitely going to need them empire building
Centralized - decentralized
Burgundy starts decentralized all the way and it simply costs too much changing that
Mercantilism - free trade
The choice to move towards free trade is good for any kind of empire as well as for a world class trader. Free trade provides traders, colonists and improves trade gains. Its downside is - no spies!
Offensive - defensive
As already said - having cleared the landscape of opposing armies gives you all the time for sieges you need. A no brainer and the least balanced slider of them all
Land - navy
Simple - your very existence depends on military self defense. If you are on an island you may go Navy all the way - an enemy should never be able to land
. As a power in Europe you will have much more land than navy threats in term of existential problems, thus land is never the wrong direction. Keep in mind though that ship prices as trade efficiency are influenced by this slider setting as wellQuality - quantity
I do not know if this slider has a significant influence - from the stats influence on morale I´d say no anyway. Except for one thing - with a low army maintenance you already need the size of the rebels spawned to defeat rebellions (unavoidable by events). With an additional lowered morale (albeit small) you would actually need bigger armies ...
Serfdom - free subjects
Unsure on this one. I always chose free subjects - if I ever got to move this slider at all, in the first 150 game years there are often other priorities - mainly for the colonist growth attached to it. And there is one of the things I do not fully understand in game design - everything leading to greater autonomy leads to increased stability costs. Which in return means that decentralized countries would be more unstable ...
- National ideas
Burgundy started with "Conscript" in 1473, a decent choice for its lack of manpower compared to France. The players choices were "Smithsonian economy" and "Bureaucracy", both boosting production and tax income in the early years of Burgundian expansion. In hindsight a better choice would have been "deus vult" as the third idea for two reasons - you do not need a casus belli to declare war against any non catholic country (zero stab hit!) and it stops the spread of Protestantism in your country completely. (read that again
. Half of your provinces around 1600 with full taxes instead of 30% reduced). Which btw may well mean that Protestantism is a minor concern overall, as only "infected" provinces infect others ... Planned national ideas for the future include anything boosting colonists, supporting trade and lower tech costs. As a general rule - no real big country which is at least following the other majors closely in tech needs any idea which boosts army tradition, gives better leaders or improves prestige. If your armies are big enough, everything else comes naturally. And the one thing you need for a good army is a healthy economy.- Military choices
Not much to say yet. Except that it was the right decision to make half of the army cavalry (do not go overboard with this, though. Except you like to see victorious armies with their morale in the hole and - as infantry gets better equipped - with far bigger losses than the enemy ...), to work with dedicated siege teams and to stay away from Navy at all in the years up to 1525. As a hint, starting navies early not only cost you their build price - the maintenance is negligible - which you can´t use for other things, but you may find yourself sit on a numerous, but outdated navy by let´s say 1580, when your carracks and barques meet early frifates and galleons. Thus, as a land power start building a navy when you see the necessity occur. Not earlier, except you HAVE to avoid blockades because you heavily depend on trade.
Last edited:
Burgundy 1525 - 1550 (1)
The boring time: In 1522 Burgundy found the Regency Council replaced by a Personal Union under England :wacko: . And this one was going - Murphy´s law - to hold until late 1540s. No aggressive wars, no Royal Marriages.
I used this time to build all the infrastructure possible - workshops, temples, courts, level 2 forts in important provinces. But honestly I was at the brink of quitting the game, although in hindsight this time was not lost at all. It left Burgundy with a +3 stability, an astoonishing economy despite the lack of trade, a standing army of 99,000 men, the diplo-annexation of what´s left from Savoie and a foothold in the Caribean (St. Kitts), although that was already a mistake due to frustration (should have been Little Karoo instead with respect to Burgundys goal - India). And it seems the AI is uncapable of using this opportunity where even a violated guarantee would have left me helpless, there was not one attempt to seize a German minor ... The only real downside - Sicily grabbing what was left of Italy - turned out to be an advantage at last. Instead of having to fight 3 wars to get hold of Tuscany et al Burgundy only had to fight one after it gained an own king again.
So let´s take a look at the European theatre in 1538:
What makes this game different to others I played is noteably that Burgundy´s determined goal to keep the HRE alive pays off - the landscape except in North Italy has not changed that much (at the expense of Austria, which is not going to build the big red blob in this game). Even in Eastern Europe/Russia there was no real blobbification yet, only Muscovy found its regular fate and had already vanished.
Lessons on colonization risks:
Wherever you colonize, there is one real danger. It´s not the AI enemies and not the natives, but a hostile European neighbour. If you colonize without a standing army in the area it all too often happens that spies from various European neighbours incite native uprisings, which especially below 500 colonists may cost you the complete colony in just 2 events.
The boring time: In 1522 Burgundy found the Regency Council replaced by a Personal Union under England :wacko: . And this one was going - Murphy´s law - to hold until late 1540s. No aggressive wars, no Royal Marriages.
I used this time to build all the infrastructure possible - workshops, temples, courts, level 2 forts in important provinces. But honestly I was at the brink of quitting the game, although in hindsight this time was not lost at all. It left Burgundy with a +3 stability, an astoonishing economy despite the lack of trade, a standing army of 99,000 men, the diplo-annexation of what´s left from Savoie and a foothold in the Caribean (St. Kitts), although that was already a mistake due to frustration (should have been Little Karoo instead
with respect to Burgundys goal - India). And it seems the AI is uncapable of using this opportunity where even a violated guarantee would have left me helpless, there was not one attempt to seize a German minor ... The only real downside - Sicily grabbing what was left of Italy - turned out to be an advantage at last. Instead of having to fight 3 wars to get hold of Tuscany et al Burgundy only had to fight one after it gained an own king again.So let´s take a look at the European theatre in 1538:
What makes this game different to others I played is noteably that Burgundy´s determined goal to keep the HRE alive pays off - the landscape except in North Italy has not changed that much (at the expense of Austria, which is not going to build the big red blob in this game). Even in Eastern Europe/Russia there was no real blobbification yet, only Muscovy found its regular fate and had already vanished.
Lessons on colonization risks:
Wherever you colonize, there is one real danger. It´s not the AI enemies and not the natives, but a hostile European neighbour. If you colonize without a standing army in the area it all too often happens that spies from various European neighbours incite native uprisings, which especially below 500 colonists may cost you the complete colony in just 2 events.
Burgundy on its own again
In January 1545 Burgundy receieved its own ruler after 23 years of being the junior in a personal union. And a pretty good one, but that did not matter. And it was an administrative monarchy (changed way back) for once again the production boost, the manpower boostz of the feudal monarchy was no longer necessary.
The first target was still an old one - to get hold of all North Italian cities with universities. The power of the standing armies allowed an immediate (without further army builds) warfare, thus the war started in April 1545 and was for practical reasons over in August already.
5 undermanned Sicilian regiments where fleeing and the Burgundian armies sieged or better assaulted each Sicilian province they reached. Sicily had no allies thus there was no danger to fear by allied armies. Ferrara, Romagna and Fiorence were the provinces Burgundy would take in the peace settlement, further crippling Sicily´s pathetic economy by dividing its country.
A lesson on country rulers:
For a mighty country the statistics of its ruler abilities are really a minor concern, except specific cases like diplo-annexation. For smaller countries it can make all the difference. Let´s look on the benefits that one ability point of a king in the different fields net.
Administration: -1% infrastructure build costs, +2 ducats invested in stability, -5% trader costs, +3% trader placing chance, +5% colonist placing chance, +4% missionary mission chance, +1 ducat each for government, trade and production tech
Diplomacy: +0.3 diplomats/year, -0.11% war weariness, +5% spy chaces, 0.1 points of reputation gain/year
Military: +0.1 morale army/navy, +1 ducat for army/navy tech
It is easy to see that a king like my Louis I, with his admin 6, diplomacy 7 and military 7 may actually acheive much more e.g. for tech investments than budget in a 2 province minor. Note though, that the number of stars displayed (roughly 1 for 2 ability points) is only somewhat connected to the leader abilities, there seem to be more factors (like reputation and economic situation) involved.
Rulers are completely random, at least for a country like Burgundy which in reality vanished after 1473.
A lesson on warfare dangers:
Even if an enemy has a definite advantage in naval, do not fear an invasion by sea. The AI seems to be completely unable to fare more than 1 regiment at a time to hostile shores and I have never personally experienced (and very rarely watched) an invasion by sea. Which is especially nice if you´re running a colony empire with no land connection to enemy landforces .
In January 1545 Burgundy receieved its own ruler after 23 years of being the junior in a personal union. And a pretty good one, but that did not matter. And it was an administrative monarchy (changed way back) for once again the production boost, the manpower boostz of the feudal monarchy was no longer necessary.
The first target was still an old one - to get hold of all North Italian cities with universities. The power of the standing armies allowed an immediate (without further army builds) warfare, thus the war started in April 1545 and was for practical reasons over in August already.
5 undermanned Sicilian regiments where fleeing and the Burgundian armies sieged or better assaulted each Sicilian province they reached. Sicily had no allies thus there was no danger to fear by allied armies. Ferrara, Romagna and Fiorence were the provinces Burgundy would take in the peace settlement, further crippling Sicily´s pathetic economy by dividing its country.
A lesson on country rulers:
For a mighty country the statistics of its ruler abilities are really a minor concern, except specific cases like diplo-annexation. For smaller countries it can make all the difference. Let´s look on the benefits that one ability point of a king in the different fields net.
Administration: -1% infrastructure build costs, +2 ducats invested in stability, -5% trader costs, +3% trader placing chance, +5% colonist placing chance, +4% missionary mission chance, +1 ducat each for government, trade and production tech
Diplomacy: +0.3 diplomats/year, -0.11% war weariness, +5% spy chaces, 0.1 points of reputation gain/year
Military: +0.1 morale army/navy, +1 ducat for army/navy tech
It is easy to see that a king like my Louis I, with his admin 6, diplomacy 7 and military 7 may actually acheive much more e.g. for tech investments than budget in a 2 province minor. Note though, that the number of stars displayed (roughly 1 for 2 ability points) is only somewhat connected to the leader abilities, there seem to be more factors (like reputation and economic situation) involved.
Rulers are completely random, at least for a country like Burgundy which in reality vanished after 1473.
A lesson on warfare dangers:
Even if an enemy has a definite advantage in naval, do not fear an invasion by sea. The AI seems to be completely unable to fare more than 1 regiment at a time to hostile shores and I have never personally experienced (and very rarely watched) an invasion by sea. Which is especially nice if you´re running a colony empire with no land connection to enemy landforces
.
Last edited:
You certainly used your time well and it is sure to pay off. But I agree, those periods of Regency and PU's are not entirely fun, and to have them back to back? Ooof.
coz1 said:
You do not imagine what relief it was to have a king again. Did not even realize that it was a good one, I was so eager to go warfare. 25 in game years having to prey that my HRE survives - pooooh
.Regards
Thorsten
Burgundian future
I will be a few days off my game computer, thus the next update will occur not before Thursday, September 6.
The Burgundian development will contain
- roundup of the North Italian holdings
- yet another war with France
- unexpected warfare with Austria
- first settlements in South East Asia and the benefits
The associated lessons will deal with
- warfare in more detail (when to do what and how)
- Decisions on National Ideas and the trade offs
- Colonization experiences
- Trade analysis
Regards
Thorsten
I will be a few days off my game computer, thus the next update will occur not before Thursday, September 6.
The Burgundian development will contain
- roundup of the North Italian holdings
- yet another war with France
- unexpected warfare with Austria
- first settlements in South East Asia and the benefits
The associated lessons will deal with
- warfare in more detail (when to do what and how)
- Decisions on National Ideas and the trade offs
- Colonization experiences
- Trade analysis
Regards
Thorsten
Burgundy1550 - 1575 (1)
In 1547 - Burgundy´s reputation respectable - ist again sought war with France to fulfill its destiny. Starting the war well prepared and with odds of roughly 2:1 (101,000 against 45,000) the war was never in danger to be lost, not counting the allies in.
By 1548, after just 1 year and 3 months, the war was over. England took the advantage of its alliance to get hold of all north american French holdings, Burgundy was in control of all French European provinces.
Burgundy´s goal was to eliminate the access of France to the Mediterrenean first, thus it only demanded Provence and Savoy in the peace deal, and a province in North America to satisfy its ally England. The French gave in, no wonder, at 100% warscore and no army left. Note that Burgundy still is without a navy if you do not consider the pathetic 3 transports necessary to shuffle an army to its sole Caribean island.
Lessons on warfare:
Lets assume you are preparing a war against an opponent which is a match, not in a defender position, against a surprise and what not. Stick to principle rules than
- Never make an army bigger than the supply limit of the province it is meant for, otherwise you suffer attrition. Even if that´s not an issue for your manpower, stick to that rule
- Place your armies before a war with a specific target for each of them for the initial stage! This is what the AI can´t and what makes your warfare superior.
- Against the 2, 3 or 4 big stacks a major enemy will usually field, wotk with 1,5 smaller stacks for each of the big ones. And wait opposite to such enemy armies for your opponent to make the firs move. It will almost certainly be a siege/assault of one of your border provinces. Great! Let them siege or assault, no matter what, the opponent will get reduced by attrition/assault losses pretty quick. Even if he wins the province - the army will be low on morale and reduced. We waited for that! Move 2 of your smaller armies in in a coordinated fashion, beat his former big stack and start chasing what´s left of his "super"armies. Meanwhile small stacks (your siege teams) already lay siege to a couple of enemy provinces and wil get them in the end.
- Regarding advantages/disadvantages of terrain - the only one you really need to look at are the likely attrition rates for your troops. Forget the modifiers for combat, they do not make much difference at all.
- Remember the replenishment is evenly distributed among your armies. Which means do NOT build too much, as this after battles leaves you with troops that are extremely slowly regaining strength. And don´t forget that mercenaries once hired draw from your manpower as well - they only are manpower-free to hire in first place.
Even starting on equal manpower/tech terms you will easily win this way - the one or two provinces lost will have a very small fortress team if the counterattack succeeeds (just 100 men in the first week after a successfull siege or assault) - and in these cases an assault will assure victory without considerable losses on manpower and morale!
In 1547 - Burgundy´s reputation respectable - ist again sought war with France to fulfill its destiny. Starting the war well prepared and with odds of roughly 2:1 (101,000 against 45,000) the war was never in danger to be lost, not counting the allies in.
By 1548, after just 1 year and 3 months, the war was over. England took the advantage of its alliance to get hold of all north american French holdings, Burgundy was in control of all French European provinces.
Burgundy´s goal was to eliminate the access of France to the Mediterrenean first, thus it only demanded Provence and Savoy in the peace deal, and a province in North America to satisfy its ally England. The French gave in, no wonder, at 100% warscore and no army left. Note that Burgundy still is without a navy if you do not consider the pathetic 3 transports necessary to shuffle an army to its sole Caribean island.
Lessons on warfare:
Lets assume you are preparing a war against an opponent which is a match, not in a defender position, against a surprise and what not. Stick to principle rules than
- Never make an army bigger than the supply limit of the province it is meant for, otherwise you suffer attrition. Even if that´s not an issue for your manpower, stick to that rule
- Place your armies before a war with a specific target for each of them for the initial stage! This is what the AI can´t and what makes your warfare superior.
- Against the 2, 3 or 4 big stacks a major enemy will usually field, wotk with 1,5 smaller stacks for each of the big ones. And wait opposite to such enemy armies for your opponent to make the firs move. It will almost certainly be a siege/assault of one of your border provinces. Great! Let them siege or assault, no matter what, the opponent will get reduced by attrition/assault losses pretty quick. Even if he wins the province - the army will be low on morale and reduced. We waited for that! Move 2 of your smaller armies in in a coordinated fashion, beat his former big stack and start chasing what´s left of his "super"armies. Meanwhile small stacks (your siege teams) already lay siege to a couple of enemy provinces and wil get them in the end.
- Regarding advantages/disadvantages of terrain - the only one you really need to look at are the likely attrition rates for your troops. Forget the modifiers for combat, they do not make much difference at all.
- Remember the replenishment is evenly distributed among your armies. Which means do NOT build too much, as this after battles leaves you with troops that are extremely slowly regaining strength. And don´t forget that mercenaries once hired draw from your manpower as well - they only are manpower-free to hire in first place.
Even starting on equal manpower/tech terms you will easily win this way - the one or two provinces lost will have a very small fortress team if the counterattack succeeeds (just 100 men in the first week after a successfull siege or assault) - and in these cases an assault will assure victory without considerable losses on manpower and morale!
Last edited:
Morgon1988 said:
The way the AI handles sea landings is a real shortcoming in the game. If the AI could mount a sea landing with 4 or 5 thousand men it would radically change warfare since you would not be able to ignore the threat and the threat would be everywhere.
Joe
Storey said:
Agreed. The strategy I pursued with Burgundy would be not viable if invasion by sea would be an option. Except that the loyal ally England often secures the sea borders of Burgundy
.Regards
Thorsten
Burgundy1550 - 1575 (2)
Let´s take a look on Burgundy´s overall situation in 1550. You should make it a habit to check certain ledgers in the statistics screen regularly to determine strenths and weaknesses of potential allies and foes.
The income comparison shows Burgundy ahead of the pack by a wide margin. Its next contender - Portugal - is on good terms with us and shows another game flaw quite clearly - the completely overpowered income boosts by conquering Pagan provinces or from tiny colonies. In this case its a bunch of northern West African holdings that brings Portugal in second place - historically bullshit, but that´s just another complaint.
The tech comparison shows the overall lead of Burgundy quite niecely - it leads in land tech by a wide margin and is always leading or among the first in the other categories. Especially in government tech the North Italian first strategy pays off - the lead has been accomplished (already 25 years ahead of time btw) without inbvesting in gov at all since a long time. This is the ledger to check in first place especially for sea tech - better navy techs have definitely a bigger impact on the battles than land at comparable margins.
Province comparison shows that Burgundy is the biggest European power meanwhile. The usual frontrunner in 1.3 is Ming, the fastest grower Rajputna (a former Indian 7 provinces power). Keep in mind that tech costs and especially stability costs rise with each additional province. While the first - given full or at least 70% revenue provinces (same culture but different religion) - is outmatched by the income growth, the latter is not. Especially to grow from +1 stability to better levels can be a real pain with large empires, which makes trade harder for them (the chances to compete heavily depending on stability).
Let´s take a look on Burgundy´s overall situation in 1550. You should make it a habit to check certain ledgers in the statistics screen regularly to determine strenths and weaknesses of potential allies and foes.
The income comparison shows Burgundy ahead of the pack by a wide margin. Its next contender - Portugal - is on good terms with us and shows another game flaw quite clearly - the completely overpowered income boosts by conquering Pagan provinces or from tiny colonies. In this case its a bunch of northern West African holdings that brings Portugal in second place - historically bullshit, but that´s just another complaint
.
The tech comparison shows the overall lead of Burgundy quite niecely - it leads in land tech by a wide margin and is always leading or among the first in the other categories. Especially in government tech the North Italian first strategy pays off - the lead has been accomplished (already 25 years ahead of time btw) without inbvesting in gov at all since a long time. This is the ledger to check in first place especially for sea tech - better navy techs have definitely a bigger impact on the battles than land at comparable margins.
Province comparison shows that Burgundy is the biggest European power meanwhile. The usual frontrunner in 1.3 is Ming, the fastest grower Rajputna (a former Indian 7 provinces power). Keep in mind that tech costs and especially stability costs rise with each additional province. While the first - given full or at least 70% revenue provinces (same culture but different religion) - is outmatched by the income growth, the latter is not. Especially to grow from +1 stability to better levels can be a real pain with large empires, which makes trade harder for them (the chances to compete heavily depending on stability).
Agreed - cutting Med access is first priority. And then, try and cut channel access. That should help England and should further reduce your need to field a powerful navy against them.
One thought though - watch out for French colonies in NA. England can assist you here for as long as they are allies, but if that should change, you will have a hell of a time getting war score where it needs to be even with superior tactics (and a nice guide on that, by the way.)
One thought though - watch out for French colonies in NA. England can assist you here for as long as they are allies, but if that should change, you will have a hell of a time getting war score where it needs to be even with superior tactics (and a nice guide on that, by the way.)
coz1 said:
Right
. The war capacity thing leads to completely weird results - and a big colonial empire could even mean that the main armies are overseas, the AI in this case lets you happily take its European holdings ...Regards
Thorsten
Burgundy1550 - 1575 (3)
A call to arms from ally England brought an unexpected but pleasant surprise in 1553 - France tried to get rid of the English provinces at its channel coast. The war was much shorter than the last one, as France did not have time to rebuild its army.
Burgundy fought this war with its standing army alone, no need for additional men in the field. The inevitable victory was settled with a piece finally adding Dauphine and Avignon to Burgundys holdings. Its gravity center meanwhile is the mediterrenean coast with all the provinces added from France and North Italy. Englands profit was a province in the former scotish area held by France as a result of former wars without Burgundian involvement - I did not really notice until this time.
Religion was becoming a concern though. Protestantism spreading fast and Burgundy was its main victim ... The concern is purely economical, though. You can always happily live with 2 or 3 religions inside your borders, the tolerance sliders allow for 3 that are maxed out to full tolerance (which is again completely ahistorical). But the 30% drop in taxes may hurt, especially when rich parts are affected. Protestantism spread in EUIII is random, the first provinces affected that is, and springbording from the first affexted to neighbours until it stops somewhere in the 17th century.
The colonial picture is different to many other game pictures published on the board - only Castille and to a certain extent England are making headway, most of the rich caribbean islands have no owner yet. Tempting, but with its low colonist growth and the target India Burgundy backs off racing towards these juicy targets. Although a chain of events eventually led to American holdings in the future. Fortunately, although not visible yet, France only has 2 colonies in North America.
On core wars:
No matter what the AI will wage war as long as one province is under control of another country where it has a core on. Economy souring, war exhaustion through the roof? Doesn´t matter, a war has to be fought to keep the core alive. Thus bordering a country which has a core on one of your posessions makes war inevitable - so be prepared. The only exception I have seen yet is when the odds really are against the AI regarding standing armies, at a 1 to 1.5 or worse relation (I don´t know if economy figures into the equation as well), this stupid hardcoded behavious stops. If you happen to receive a core you don´t want don´t bother - just let it slip after the usual 50 years. Ooops, naturally being allied helps as well.
On alliances:
The alliane system may be a bit puzzling - why the hell are your allies at war without you even taking notice? Well, you may have different allies and your allies may again have different allies as well. If your ally gets drawn into a war by another of its allies and you do NOT have an alliance with that country as well, you are not concerned. At least that is what the developers made it ...
A call to arms from ally England brought an unexpected but pleasant surprise in 1553 - France tried to get rid of the English provinces at its channel coast. The war was much shorter than the last one, as France did not have time to rebuild its army.
Burgundy fought this war with its standing army alone, no need for additional men in the field. The inevitable victory was settled with a piece finally adding Dauphine and Avignon to Burgundys holdings. Its gravity center meanwhile is the mediterrenean coast with all the provinces added from France and North Italy. Englands profit was a province in the former scotish area held by France as a result of former wars without Burgundian involvement - I did not really notice until this time.
Religion was becoming a concern though. Protestantism spreading fast and Burgundy was its main victim ... The concern is purely economical, though. You can always happily live with 2 or 3 religions inside your borders, the tolerance sliders allow for 3 that are maxed out to full tolerance (which is again completely ahistorical). But the 30% drop in taxes may hurt, especially when rich parts are affected. Protestantism spread in EUIII is random, the first provinces affected that is, and springbording from the first affexted to neighbours until it stops somewhere in the 17th century.
The colonial picture is different to many other game pictures published on the board - only Castille and to a certain extent England are making headway, most of the rich caribbean islands have no owner yet. Tempting, but with its low colonist growth and the target India Burgundy backs off racing towards these juicy targets. Although a chain of events eventually led to American holdings in the future. Fortunately, although not visible yet, France only has 2 colonies in North America.
On core wars:
No matter what the AI will wage war as long as one province is under control of another country where it has a core on. Economy souring, war exhaustion through the roof? Doesn´t matter, a war has to be fought to keep the core alive. Thus bordering a country which has a core on one of your posessions makes war inevitable - so be prepared. The only exception I have seen yet is when the odds really are against the AI regarding standing armies, at a 1 to 1.5 or worse relation (I don´t know if economy figures into the equation as well), this stupid hardcoded behavious stops. If you happen to receive a core you don´t want don´t bother - just let it slip after the usual 50 years. Ooops, naturally being allied helps as well
.On alliances:
The alliane system may be a bit puzzling - why the hell are your allies at war without you even taking notice? Well, you may have different allies and your allies may again have different allies as well. If your ally gets drawn into a war by another of its allies and you do NOT have an alliance with that country as well, you are not concerned. At least that is what the developers made it ...
Last edited:
Nice job kicking France while they are down. As for religion, I had great success going Prot. with Burgundy in my recent MM game. You take an immediate hit, but the rewards are readily apparent soon. Alternately, consider Deus Vult as NI as it will slow down the spread.
Burgundy1550 - 1575 (4)
In 1557 yet another war meant to secure Burgudys leading rule in Western Europe. The target - Austria. Despite them having military access the relations had steadily declined and were at -198 meanwhile. To be safe from surprises Burgundy decided to cripple it an massed its armies at the borders.
Interesting enough it was the hardest war to fight yet - Austria had a standing army close to Burgundy and the initial fights were tough.
Fortunately the AI was lazy as usual protecting its capital and after a year the war was already won, although the stubborn AI needed a year more to give in after all of its armies had left existence.
Austria - having been allied with Hungary - lost Tirol and Breisgau to Burgundy, Trier went to my loyal vassal (and future diplo annexation target) Cologne, Hungary had to cede Erfurt to Bavaria, which made Bavaria a 6 province medium power and Burgundys best ally.
On relations:
The relation thing looks pretty straightforward, but in reality is not that clear. It is clear that positive diplomatic moves boost relations - Royal Marriages, trade agreements, guarantees and so forth. Its not only a one time effect but gives a slöight improvement each year. But it looks like there is a hardcoded cap at +100 for these effects, vassals or not?
Not completely clear to me is what deteriorates them. Lets take the example Austria - the relations were at +80 when they got military access way back in the 15th century. Since then no war was fought and no hostile action taken, yet the relation was ruined completely. I do not beleive the AI takes even notice that I blocked its advance in Germany, though. Thus the only likely reason is that AI Austria is coded to dislike my wars against other catholic nations.
What I did observe is that traders kicked out of Centers worsen relations a bit - one of the reasons to monitor your vassals closely when going into trade. Relations deteriorate after each war among all allies, but that is not completely consistent - it hold true for my vassals, but not for England, where relations even improved during wartime ...
In 1557 yet another war meant to secure Burgudys leading rule in Western Europe. The target - Austria. Despite them having military access the relations had steadily declined and were at -198 meanwhile. To be safe from surprises Burgundy decided to cripple it an massed its armies at the borders.
Interesting enough it was the hardest war to fight yet - Austria had a standing army close to Burgundy and the initial fights were tough.
Fortunately the AI was lazy as usual protecting its capital and after a year the war was already won, although the stubborn AI needed a year more to give in after all of its armies had left existence.
Austria - having been allied with Hungary - lost Tirol and Breisgau to Burgundy, Trier went to my loyal vassal (and future diplo annexation target) Cologne, Hungary had to cede Erfurt to Bavaria, which made Bavaria a 6 province medium power and Burgundys best ally.
On relations:
The relation thing looks pretty straightforward, but in reality is not that clear. It is clear that positive diplomatic moves boost relations - Royal Marriages, trade agreements, guarantees and so forth. Its not only a one time effect but gives a slöight improvement each year. But it looks like there is a hardcoded cap at +100 for these effects, vassals or not?
Not completely clear to me is what deteriorates them. Lets take the example Austria - the relations were at +80 when they got military access way back in the 15th century. Since then no war was fought and no hostile action taken, yet the relation was ruined completely. I do not beleive the AI takes even notice that I blocked its advance in Germany, though
. Thus the only likely reason is that AI Austria is coded to dislike my wars against other catholic nations. What I did observe is that traders kicked out of Centers worsen relations a bit - one of the reasons to monitor your vassals closely when going into trade. Relations deteriorate after each war among all allies, but that is not completely consistent - it hold true for my vassals, but not for England, where relations even improved during wartime ...
I may not be posting, but I certainly am reading. I await the next update!
(You know, we AAR-readers really are an insatiable bunch. Especially when it comes to favoured AARs.)
(You know, we AAR-readers really are an insatiable bunch. Especially when it comes to favoured AARs.)
coz1 said:
Yep, converting to Protestantism would be an option, if the majority of your lands already has converted on its own. Unfortunately though Burgundy in this specific game inherits/neighbours 3 of the initial protestant sources and is slowly moving towards an equal balance between Protestant and Catholic. Thus any state religion will cost you 30% of the taxes of all the provinces with the other religion ...
So I´ll go the second road - Deus Vult (which serves for stab hit free declarations of war when Indian conquest starts). And I will definitely go back to narrowminded in the future to be able to convert provinces back to Catholicism. There is no good reason for that specific move other than dislike of economic inefficiency
. Burgundy could otherwise happily develop as a multireligious country and still be the No. 1 powerhouse in the world ...Regards
Thorsten
oddman said:
Yep, good to know there are readers out there
. Unfortunately I have to admit this AAR is not as telling, funny and exciting as some others and is not meant to be - many will find it outright boring Regards
Thorsten