What do you do during peacetime?

[Incompetent]

Loans are bad, m'kay?

While I would agree with you in earlier versions when loans meant inflation, loans are only a minor cost in 1.08 if you manage them properly. One key loan question is the following: do you mint to pay maintenance, or do you put the treasury slider hard left? The danger is you'll be hit by a random event, forcing you to take out a loan. But the benefit is you run up no inflation at all. Suppose your military maintenance is 20% of monthly income; is it really worth 0.2% inflation/year to hold onto money for a rainy day? Are you going to incur more or less inflation by minting to pay back loans, bearing in mind it's money you would have spent come what may (otherwise you'd have taken the stabhit or whatever in the event)? I think the answer, once you're in a position to pay back loans, is to keep it hard left, unless you have either low inflation and governors, or a terrible credit rating. If you're too poor to pay back loans without massive inflation, you should be turning down 'Drill Instructor available' and the like anyway.

 

[LlywelynII]

Loans are good, m'kay?

Of course, if you keep enough cash on hand from your annual salary to keep a rainy day fund (and so avoid loans,) and keep inflation down... well, that's what you should be doing in the first place, doofus.

Just like real life, all loans are is paying 15% more for the same amount of money. There are plenty of excuses for being forced into them - but as a policy? Save up and pay cash.

You make a mistake here. There is no malus against cavalry alone in such terrain; the malus applies to the roll for all troops.

.wanders off.
.reads through the FAQ...

D@mn: just learned something new. IIRC, cavalry numbers are grayed out in rough terrain similar to sieges and I had always thought they were ignored or discounted for the combat rolls, even at the low tech levels. The FAQ says their shock value (and hence, their value) disappears on rough terrain in the Renaissance, which must be what I'm remembering - but you're right: they seem to work just as well/better for the low techs.

Trade no goodie

Eh, if you end up with your tech high enough to dominate trade, go for it. You should use your connexions with Spain and Portugal to get their maps and military access, after all. But he's right that it'll be unimportant for HAB til the end of the game.

jay.

 

[Marshall Thomas]

Is that historically accurate?-that Austria was not active in international trade until the 17th century.

In mountains,swamps, and forest are calvary: better than infantry?-the same as infantry?-or worse than infantry? When the calvary advantage is not displayed in the information window during the combat phase, what effect do calvary have?

 

[DSYoungEsq]

Is that historically accurate?-that Austria was not active in international trade until the 17th century.

In mountains,swamps, and forest are calvary: better than infantry?-the same as infantry?-or worse than infantry? When the calvary advantage is not displayed in the information window during the combat phase, what effect do calvary have?

1. Historically accurate? No. But the whole Center of Trade system isn't historically accurate. It's an attempt by Paradox to model the even more cumbersome system found in the table-top game for determining how much a country gets from foreign trade.

2. Cavalry have essentially no fire power. From LT 0 to LT 6, this doesn't matter; if neither side of a battle has hit LT 7, you don't even GET a fire phase, just the shock phase over and over. In the shock phase, cavalry have a "power" rating of 400 per unit. Power is what determines casualties in the battle. The combined power rating of the forces on one side is added up, and each round, the die roll gives a percentage of that power rating as casualties to the other side. Thus, the higher your power rating, the better.

Until very late in the game, the combined fire and shock power of infantry doesn't equal the shock power of cavalry. So cavalry have a decisive advanatage in causing casualties. Their only downside is that they don't cause any casualties during the fire phase, so unless you have some infantry along for the ride (so to speak), you spend the first four days of the battle just soaking up casualties, before your cavalry start evening things up.

To really understand it all, read the Battle System FAQ I linked to in post #20.

 

[Muizer]

I am playing my first ever game of EU2 as Austria in the 1419 grand campaign. Now it is the 1450's and my economy(especially production and trade) is almost non existant. My question is what do players do when they have a very poor economy and they are at peace for a long time? As the days and months are moving by what should I be doing?

My strategy for European minors would be something like this:

1419-1450:
- invest in building an army as large as you can afford on full maintenance (but keep maintenance to that 50% when not at war). Point: avoid loans at all cost except losing the game.
- get yourself in a useful alliance. That is probably one which includes a strong neighbour.
- perhaps expand your territory at the expense of a one province minor.

1450-1480
- If you have a reasonable trade tech level and monarchs with good admin ratings, you might start sending merchants. If you have neither, don't bother until you reach at least trade tech level 3 and, I dare say, don't bother with trade research at all if you can't get the prognosis for reaching that level below 1470-1480 or so.

1480-1550
here scenarios diverge, but the goal should be to reach Infra 5 as fast as possible.

Of course Austria won't stay small for long with inheritances and all.

Muizer

 

[LlywelynII]

Is that historically accurate?-that Austria was not active in international trade until the 17th century.

DS is right that the COTs are iffy about recreating history, but Austria per se wasn't and couldn't be an economic power until the interior infrastructure in Germany improved. Their Burgundian inheritance was the most economically supercharged region in Europe and the Fuggers dominated the trade from Bruges and Antwerp into the interior, but that was one family and they got wiped out by the Spanish bankrupcies, the Lowlands revolted, and the only really profitable stuff in Austria - the Tyrolian mines - got closed due to all the American gold flooding Europe.

So, yes, it's realistic, kinda


jay.

 

[Marshall Thomas]

Did Austria eventually become an international trading power? If so , does EU2 reflect this later in the campaign?

 

[Marshall Thomas]

Do you have any advice to give on a trade strategy for Austria once the 1500s began? Thanks

 

[Incompetent]

Did Austria eventually become an international trading power? If so , does EU2 reflect this later in the campaign?

If played by a human, any country will become a trading superpower, with more control over the world market than Victorian Britian. This is reflected by the player soaring ahead in trade tech and refineries, and the AI crippling itself with trade agreements and embargoes, which carry colossal penalties to trade efficiency :rofl:

Seriously though, I think you might get a COT in Prague at some point, which is quite handy. There are also some nice colonial/trade events if you hang onto part of the Low Countries, IIRC.

 

[Error_page_07]

"Peace"?? It's only name of intermezzo between warrrrrs!!
As Austria(or another country), the first thing I do is limiting number of cavalries, they're too expensive and I use them only rarely. I also move the budget sliders to have +monthly income (or max. to -0,5), leave a little bit for naval tech, raise land to be the highest of all, then put trade higher than infra. And remember one word - TAX COLLECTORS

Why are you getting loans?
Loans should (IMHO) be avoided at nearly all costs, as they can absolutely ruin the finances of any small nation.

I also hate them, but there's one exception - When I don't have enough money for some events...

EDIT: for trade - Every time I play, no matter which country(especially AUSTRIA), after getting 3trade level and one manufactory, trading is my major income. In most games, I have monopolies everywhere at the end of game...

 

[Marshall Thomas]

What trading strategys do you recomend for Austria in the late 1400s?

 

[unmerged(28056)]

The wise man in times of peace prepares for war.

Nah, basically, I rebuild my army, (or cut it to a proper size, either way), develop my provinces, research, etc.

 

[MAlexander06]

Haven't you ever read Orwell? War is peace.

 

[LlywelynII]

What trading strategys do you recomend for Austria in the late 1400s?

Poor Marsh, no one answering your question

Anyway, there is no trading strategy to speak of in eu2 - you don't bother to trade when it's not worth it; then you do if it is. Early on, your merchants get competed out of the good CsOT and don't earn their cost back; later, you can maintain monopolies in most world CsOT and it's the most lucrative source of revenue you've got.

You just have to get a feel for when it becomes worthwhile. Meantime, conquer or trade for Spanish and Portuguese maps and try to annex CsOT close to you - in Venice and Holland and Danzig, eg. Owning CsOT will make your merchants cheaper and allow you to block trading nations (like Genoa and Venice) after trade3.
jay.

 

[Muizer]

the AI crippling itself with trade agreements and embargoes, which carry colossal penalties to trade efficiency :rofl:

The penalties aren't colossal unless you're using the 1.08 betas, which are designed for use in Multiplayer.

Muizer

 

[Marshall Thomas]

For single player, what is better-the plain 1.08 or the 1.08 with the April 21, 2005 beta?

 

[CatKnight]

The penalties are smaller now than they were in earlier betas (3% now vs. 5% before vs 1% in 1.08 vanilla)

Marshall - Your question is hard to answer...and didn't you ask on another thread about the advantages of beta vs. vanilla? At any rate, here's my view.

When the betas first started attacking the TA/TE issue, I was *incensed.* It was pretty much as Mulzer explained - the programmer wanted to focus on multi-player issues and dealing with trade apparently helped him deal with that ... but at the cost of single player play. In earlier betas the AI would positively cripple itself and it wasn't even fun.

Some people persevered anyway, while others stayed with 1.08 vanilla for SP play. (The MPers, honestly, didn't help with their one sentence mantra to just start playing MP.)

In time the penalty was lessened, and more SPers downloaded and used the beta. Now you have a solid core of people who believe the beta is the way to go, being the 'latest' version of EU2... and there are still diehards who play only Vanilla without the betas.

I said to you before and I'll say now: I don't believe you should be playing beta at this time. My reason is simple: You're a relatively new player, and it would be good to learn how the game works before adding bells and whistles. The betas are more complex, the betas have tweaked with game balance, and perhaps most importantly the betas are BETAS. There's no guarantee you'll like what was done.

On each beta Johan (the programmer) lists what changes he made. This is wonderful because it allows us to decide whether we like what he's done. For example, you mentioned in another thread concern about the straits... well, you weren't alone and several people stopped downloading at that point. Others think it adds to the game and have the latest beta, more power to them.

I believe as a new player your best option is 1.08. Play a game or three. FORGET the mods. The mods are wonderful things, but they're also extra bells and whistles you don't need right now. Get the basics under your belt, read all these threads, by all means keep asking questions, and maybe read an AAR or two. THEN you'll understand the game mechanics enough to decide if the betas and mods are right for you.

Personally I finally decided: I'm back to Vanilla after a brief sojourn with the Betas - I like it better. It also lets me play my favorite mod again, bonus. Your decision may be different, that's wonderful ... but I think you need to play a little more before you make that decision.

Think about it.

 

[iBaLkiD]

For the numbers, look at the [thread=162087]Battle System FAQ v1.08[/thread]

Unfortunately, the Combat Power graphs link is no longer working. And it wasn't up to date, anyway.

Artillery don't really do you much good until LT 31. To see why, look at the shock power value of a "unit" of cavalry (actually, for reasons I can't figure, the power value seems to be for every .1 of a unit, but whatever...). At LT 0, this is already 400. It stays at 400 until LT 31, when it goes to 420. It never goes above 450, and by the Dentelles era (LT 51), it is back to 400. Cavalry never has a fire power value of more than a piddling amount. So all told, each unit of cavalry has the same "power" the whole game.

Artillery start with no value at all. They don't gain any real power until LT 10, when they are at 100. Notice that that is only 1/4 the value for cavalry, though applied in the fire phase, not the shock phase. But infantry have shock power of 100 at the same time, and by LT 18, infantry are contributing essentially the same power in both phases; thus they are half as powerful as cavalry.

At LT 31 (when you get new sprites!), you see artillery finally start to come into its own. Fire power of 400 puts it level with cavalry. Infantry is still mired in a combined fire+shock power of about 250, so artillery are more deadly at this point. By the Dentelles era (LT 51), artillery have accelerated to being twice as powerful (800) as cavalry, and infantry never manage more than 450 combined.

The trouble with artillery, of course, is its lack of mobility. When you are trying to catch a moving army, they hold you back. Thus, their primary function remains twofold:

1. Defense of a province where they remain stationary, and

2. Assault of large fortresses during siege efforts.

Why the heck would you try to chase an army down with your own when you have artillery present? You should catch your enemy with Cav or a pure inf army with your arty not far behind. Thats what detachment is for.

Why you think someone would not be able to use arty on the offensive is beyond me. Most good MP players have there armies specialized or at least organized in such a way. Whoever said you had to try and give chase with artillery? Why not do it as it was done in real life? Engage the enemy with your faster units, so they cant flee, then bring up the artillery. :wacko: Its kinda irrelevant as you pointed out until late mid game any way but still...

 

[unmerged(10426)]

What do I do during peacetime? Sit on my arse mostly.

 

[DSYoungEsq]

Why the heck would you try to chase an army down with your own when you have artillery present? You should catch your enemy with Cav or a pure inf army with your arty not far behind. Thats what detachment is for.

Why you think someone would not be able to use arty on the offensive is beyond me. Most good MP players have there armies specialized or at least organized in such a way. Whoever said you had to try and give chase with artillery? Why not do it as it was done in real life? Engage the enemy with your faster units, so they cant flee, then bring up the artillery. :wacko: Its kinda irrelevant as you pointed out until late mid game any way but still...

Unless you are into real micro-management in SP with use of the pause key, this is impractical. In MP it is damn near impossible except if you set the trap ahead of time and the enemy falls into it.

For example: You have just seen that the enemy is about to move to a plains province, where you hope to catch it with your large cavalry detachment. You have your army in three seperate detachments: cavalry, infantry, and artillery (presumably you guard that artillery with some inf, or woe betide you if it gets caught!). You start all three into the province at the same time (Day 1). No river is being crossed.

The cavalry arrives on Day 11. They have essentially no firepower, so they get hammered on by the opposition infantry (and artillery, if they are using any). You take four successive days of this pounding. On Day 15, after having absorbed your fire losses, your shock phase starts. In go your cavalry! Great! Except that, the very next day (Day 16), one day too late, your infantry arrive. They add nothing to the die roll result (which got set on Day 15), but they absorb losses in the same proportion as if the die roll had occurred while they were there. So your cavalry shock power is the only shock power used. The infantry shock power isn't included in determining your enemy's losses. But your infantry takes casualties.

Now, Day 20 arrives. You take your last shock losses and a new fire phase begins. Great! Except it isn't until Day 21 that those silly artillery arrive, and so you lose their great fire power. Your only fire power comes from the infantry, but, again, your cavalry get to soak up the resulting casualties from enemy fire power. And the bright reader will by this point figure out that those artillery don't contribute to the battle at all until Day 30, when the third fire phase starts, assuming your battle ever gets that far!

To avoid this, of course, you have to start the cavalry into the province on the day AFTER you start your infantry and artillery detachments going. Enjoy that level of micro-managing if you like; most people prefer to group and click, I think. And yes, I know there are MP players who do elaborate things, or claim to do elaborate things, but, frankly, from what I've seen, it usually involves doing something once at best in a "set-up" and rarely gets repeated.