Time for a break from this game.

[Beagá]

Not true. You're forgetting the French vassals. France FL + sum of vassal FL is about twice the size of Castile's. They're a behemoth.

(But yes, with Burgundy as an ally you should be able to beat them handily.)

Perhaps but if you ally Burgundy won´t they troll you by declaring war on a HRE minor first or something?

Guess I should give a try to the new patch heh

 

[hwoosh]

Perhaps but if you ally Burgundy won´t they troll you by declaring war on a HRE minor first or something?

Guess I should give a try to the new patch heh

I'm pretty sure the AI doesn't like to declare wars when it's already at war. Anyway, the best opener for Castile is no-CBing Austria to release Styria and ensure you get the Burgundian Inheritance. After that you can discard the alliance with Burgundy if they do something stupid.

 

[Sandmann]

I don't suck at the game.

Yes you do, sorry..

 

[Sandmann]

Never attack your own rebels when outnumbered. NEVER. Even if you win it will cost you too much manpower.
Rather go to debt and buy some mercs, or just give into their demands.

Exactly, OP should have known this with 1000 hours.

 

[anomanderus]

OP's post is how I felt playing as Liberia in V2 while trying to colonize a decent portion of West Africa before the Eurocucks took everything. V3 colonization system should probably be reworked, Liberia should also be Western tech at start.

I can't help but feel that maybe you should be less ambitious in your wars of conquest, failing so hard as great powers can only be the result of rapid and rampant expansion.

 

[TheBromgrev]

Seriously but how the hell you lost that? Four 0 in a row?



Nope.

To me, the far bigger question is how did he only get 0.1 AT when the Spanish got 0.2?

 

[zach6844]

This thread hurts my brain.

 

[Beagá]

There is a really good doctor for that, Doctor Gumby.

 

[Vishaing]

I don't want my 13,000 army with various bonuses (infantry combat ability, discipline) and a 100 tradition general get utterly destroyed by a peasant rebel stack of 16,000. Peasants were not well armed, nor well trained, nor disciplined. But for some reason, in Eu4 they are. People tell me I need to harsh treatment rebels -- I made a mistake thinking peasants were not trained in the arts of ninja, but I will not make the same mistake again.

In 1542 A Peasant Rebellion known as the Dacke War broke out in Sweden. The Swedish Army, led by the Father-in-Law of King Gustav Vasa himself was defeated by the rebels. The rebels were only defeated after being starved out and having their morale lowered with propaganda.

I understand that you don't understand how armies worked in this time period, but Peasants are where you are drawing your own armies from. Until you have actually invested in training, through Ideas, Policies, Advisors, and Sweden's absurdly overpowered bullshit modifiers, your armies are themselves just as much a horde of peasants with barely any actual training as the rebels.

This is not the age of Professional Soldiers, well actually it is, but that's done by mercenaries.

 

[Oogh]

There is a really good doctor for that, Doctor Gumby.

I like to hear the sound of two bricks being smashed together!

 

[wingzero890]

I understand that you don't understand how armies worked in this time period, but Peasants are where you are drawing your own armies from. Until you have actually invested in training, through Ideas, Policies, Advisors, and Sweden's absurdly overpowered bullshit modifiers, your armies are themselves just as much a horde of peasants with barely any actual training as the rebels.

Except this makes no sense when say, the Ottomans have to fight peasants that use Janissary infantry. I understand you may not understand how the Ottomans trained the Janissaries, but they were recruited as boys and trained for their entire lives.

 

[frolix42]

Except this makes no sense when say, the Ottomans have to fight peasants that use Janissary infantry. I understand you may not understand how the Ottomans trained the Janissaries, but they were recruited as boys and trained for their entire lives.

The flip side of that is actual "Janissaries" were a only small and elite part of the Ottoman infantry.

 

[RaptorCommander]

I feel like people are not really reading my posts, but I guess I'll continue repeating myself:

• I don't want to go to war against Austria, Bohemia, and Salzburg to attempt to force a Personal Union only for a year to pass and see Lithuania, Denmark, and Aragon joining the enemy side. These were not allies to any of my enemies when the war started, and I could not possibly know they were going to get called into the war. In past versions of the game, alliances were not made during wars. Maybe consider changing the way that the 'enforce peace' option works to allow people outside of wars some interesting ways to stymie their rivals' growth.
  
• I would prefer to fight the computer on a grand strategy scale without feeling like I must sacrifice cows and goats to RNGesus before deciding battles. Seriously, dice rolls ranging from 1-6 and general pips from 0-4 would take a way a lot of the random early game issues where armies just get obliterated due to weird rolls. Increase dice range and general pips caps with military tech and/or ideas.

......... To be honest, I'd prefer coalitions being something started by one nation; the nation must decide a type of coalition (punitive, defensive, etcetera); and that nation can then invite other nations to join it as diplomatic actions. This creates a much more interesting political landscape. For example, your nation can be the target of multiple coalitions at the same time and in multiplayer, it will be possible to create far-reaching political schemes. Another thing that would make coalitions more interesting would be separate peaces. Basically, like normal wars, except each participant has the -30 penalty to peace deals for being in a coalition war. It would make coalitions less of an all-or-nothing and add another layer of dynamic warfare to the game. .......

reasons.'

Good ideas in that mix for the Wiz

 

[hashinshin]

The flip side of that is actual "Janissaries" were a only small and elite part of the Ottoman infantry.

I take it to mean that the janissary modifier is for the entire army. As in if say 1,000 out of your 10,000 men are janissaries that overall 10% infantry combat and 5% discipline represents their effect.

 

[Zelius]

Except this makes no sense when say, the Ottomans have to fight peasants that use Janissary infantry. I understand you may not understand how the Ottomans trained the Janissaries, but they were recruited as boys and trained for their entire lives.

I agree with hashinshin above.

Consider: 100% longbowmen... 100% arquebusiers without pikes...

 

[happymix91]

No dev can make perfect ai, so they must use some restriction and treak to make game be seen realistic and playable. Players will get used to this, and dev should make another treak.

If players didn't find and use the treak of the game, it would be seen as real world and would not be beaten easily by naive strategy of players. You just don't get a way to use treaks, so you must play game as you manage real country at real world.

If a country in real world didn't be a target of grand coalition, it would've paid many efforts and golds to make other countries not join coalition. You did that? Send your diplomat and make them neutral to prevent them from joining coalition? Because you played too naive and pay little attention to another countries, you were punished for your aggresive expansion.

 

[Maldazar]

No offense, but the fact that you have 1000 hours of play and still pick major powers (and have a hard time with them) goes to show that you are NOT a good player.... I have 1061 hours into the game, and I think for the last 800 hours I haven't played a game as any major power because there is no challenge in it. The strongest start I did was probably Scotland, and that was already kind of too easy (for the Reversed Auld Alliance).

For example, even if a peace deal with give you like 40 AE with nations you can easely make sure that no major power joins a coalition as long as you have them improved by +/- 100 (that easely offsets the agressive expansion), heck, I have had multiple great powers with >70 AE and still not joining coalitions against me. It is also not wrong to keep a war going a little longer to get the relations improved with the people that you might fear in a coalition.

Second, losing your navy to Mamluk + Venice as Ottomans is just plain out stuppid (no offense) there is no need to ever lose your entire navy like that... Just don't engage if you are outnumbered like that. If they engage you, retreat right away, recover at port and as soon as you are fully healed, engage them again, retreat as soon as you can, so that you don't lose ships, heal again and engage again... AI is extreemly stupid with ships, they often don't go back to heal or they split up their ships, so you can just to hit and run tactics and often destroy a fleet 3x your size without losing a single ship (ok, sometimes you lose like 1-3 ships)..

 

[Maldazar]

Orkonkel, welcome to the club.

Used to be that you could expand without using expliots like the ones you mentioned or coalition juggling etc. The "Grand" in grand strategy is gone. You have to find DDRJake-like exploits to have a chance at any of the trickier achivements and that is simply not fun.

After every expansion it is more and more diplomat fiddling and speed 5-ing and less and less wars of expansion.

I quit after art of war....

I really don't understand this.. Expanding didn't get any more dificult, heck, i would even go as far as saying that, with vassal feeding and truces removing people from coalitions, expanding is easier then it ever was before...

Also, if you are playing on speed 5 you honestly are already doing something wrong. In any of my games I never play on speed 5, because there are always things to be doing. Even speed 4 is mostly too fast, speed 3, with a lot of pauses is my standard. You probably are not expanding exactly because you speed 5, with that you don't have enough time to look around and analyse the entire world and see exactly where your opportunities are.

Also, in all my games I think i'm at war like 90% of the time, most oftens my cores of the last war are not even done and I'm already starting a new war. (that when I don't just have like 50 years of overlapping constant wars)

Go check your message settings, put messages on for every war/peace that happens, look around on the map, see where your opportunities are.. You will see that there is enough to do in the game.

 

[Itchel]

1600 hours almost and I make sure never to attack a rebel stack unless I have a bigger army, even then they sometimes win ;p

because i'm a scrub when it comes to armies...

(no i'm not complaining)

 

[hwoosh]

I take it to mean that the janissary modifier is for the entire army. As in if say 1,000 out of your 10,000 men are janissaries that overall 10% infantry combat and 5% discipline represents their effect.

I think he was referring to the fact that "Janissary Infantry" is the name of the unit type that the Ottomans get at certain tech levels, even though the entire army wouldn't have been composed of janissaries.