What do you feel is the worst idea group in 1.8?

[Umbosch]

Double check that you have the AoW DLC. And that it is active.

Yes! Vasalls and marks have to many excuses. I will sell a fleet at CN but i can't. The message is: CN is bankrupt. Ok i spend him money (bankrupt message lost) but he will not buy. Self as a gift was the fleet not acceptet. Message is now: fleet is out of range. What? The fleet is in your capitol harbour. Other problem for sell or gift with provinces. The Vasall don't accept culture.

 

[ChildeR]

The three worst if SP are espionage, maritime and naval. A second group is the situational ones economic, expansion, exploration, which are essential for some nations, but below average or trash for others. Trade and quality are frequently sort of meh, but can be good. The other ten available groups are usually good no matter who you are, even if only some of them are optimal for the situation.

 

[slv]

Trade and quality are frequently sort of meh, but can be good.

What's wrong with quality? Discipline is good, combat ability is good. Naval stuff not worth it, but at all it is ok. You can't get the main bonus (discipline) before you finish it, but isn't it a solid choice? There are some good policies with it, afair.

Trade is needed if you need money and merchants. Say, if you're playing Venice and can't form trade companies because you have a land connection so nothing is overseas. In that case it provides you much more money than all alternatives. Also it seems that it is more valuable in MP, money are not infinite and useful there and it's harder to get trade company merchants.

 

[TheMeInTeam]

What's wrong with quality? Discipline is good, combat ability is good. Naval stuff not worth it, but at all it is ok. You can't get the main bonus (discipline) before you finish it, but isn't it a solid choice? There are some good policies with it, afair.

Trade is needed if you need money and merchants. Say, if you're playing Venice and can't form trade companies because you have a land connection so nothing is overseas. In that case it provides you much more money than all alternatives. Also it seems that it is more valuable in MP, money are not infinite and useful there and it's harder to get trade company merchants.

He said for sp. Trade is very niche, best for poor minors who want to artificially inflate FL or poor nations. Quality is junk in sp, its best stuff is later in the tree unlike say instant leader shock, and in sp you won't need the policies since the ai isn't even good at unit comp or moving units.

 

[Denkt]

It is easier I think to say which groups are best instead of worst but every play will likley even then have very different opinions:

I dont know about MP but these are the idea I feel are best which however don't mean I always pick them:

Admistrative Idea Groups (Idea groups costing admin points)

1. Expansion (if western tech thanks to trade companies who are extreamly powerful and an very very easy way to become the strongest nation in the world, expansion is not needed to form trade compaines however the cb is very nice and it has powerful policies.)

2. Religious (If you can make good use of the cb, but the cb and how early you get it giving religious this spot, also have access to some good policies.)

3. Admistrative (Coring cost reduction is nice however vassals feeding and annexation is often much cheaper and fast expanders will likley make alot of use of vassals, mercs are very nice becuase they don't use manpower and boosting them is very good.)

The other admistrative ideas feels limited in their usefulness.
Innovative may make you lose less tradition but you can only store 100 and if you are alot in war it will be barley a bonus and the loss of war exhaustion may not matter much later on.

Economic gets stronger the bigger you get but the problem is if you are big the less idea choices matters, it feels rather weak for smal countries and the inflation reduction will like need a 100 year to save back its cost and that is if it can work full speed in all these years.

Humanism strength is pretty much neutralized with vassals, may be good to pick later then you may be very large.

Diplomatic Idea Groups (Idea groups costing diplo points)

1. Trade (For most nations this idea group can make you noticable powerful all by itself, its hidden bonus of adding 15 naval force limit is very useful to as is that it has access to some good policies, a pick you can seldom go wrong with.)

2. Exploration (Should probably be 1 for alot of nations, espacially non western ones that look for westernization, also maybe better longterm then trade but trade give you more of a bonus directly which is often more important. For many other nations however this should rank much lower)

2. Influence (Share the second spot with exploration because of the importance of vassals however I feel trade is more powerful overall but this is probably a better choice if you are powerful because you may want to integrate vassals even then.)

3. Diplomatic (An idea group you may pick often but it feels just a bit weaker then influence but you can have both but I moreoften pick influence first.)

Maritime and Espioanage have their use to and I feel diplomatic ideas is a bit more balanced then the administrative ideas and maybe generaly more powerful espacially if you are rather weak.

Military Idea Groups

1. Quantity (Quantity have alot going for it, making armies cheaper, reducing cost of buildings, giving more manpower and forcelimit then any other idea and also access to many powerful policies including a colonist, it has little trouble in getting a top spot.)

2. Quality (If you got trade ideas otherwise it would not rank this high but a must to get maybe the most powerful policy in the game 20% trade efficiency and also an simple army booster.)

The other military idea groups are hard to rank against eachother, maybe you can place naval in the bottom, but otherwise hard to say more then like this.
The problem is that you can often do well without military ideas and it is harder to say how much they may help you compared to for example trade or religious.

I would like to see better balancing with all idea groups.

 

[Incompetent]

Naval is the worst for me. In raw power terms, it improves the fighting strength of your navy by about as much as Quality strengthens your army, but navies are less important for warfare than armies. Also, buffing the quality of your navy is unnecessary from a military perspective because naval battles can always be won by just throwing more ships at the enemy, unlike on land where combat width means it's essential to have high-quality troops and leadership no matter how many men you have. Even if you do want to improve your navy directly, Naval doesn't really do anything that Maritime can't do better. I can see it being taken maybe in MP in an arms race between two great naval powers (both of whom already have Maritime), but that's about it.

Economic is also kind of meh for most purposes, although it does have a niche for countries that start with a lot of gold mines, or if you're pursuing a very inflationary starting strategy because your starting economy is weak (e.g. a horde paying for everything by loans and plunder, or a tiny country trying to get good advisors and/or colonise as fast as possible). I would never take it with a big, comfortable country with a stable economy, because the bonuses to tax and goods produced just aren't good enough to make a difference.

Maritime is rarely a 'must have', but it does at least have some unique benefits that can't be replicated with other ideas. Ships repairing at sea and increased blockade efficiency are both pretty helpful when it comes to grinding down a stubborn enemy at sea, and naval leader manoeuvre is an underrated bonus (and can even earn you a significant amount of money, now that the dominant trade strategy is to put a grand armada on your favourite end node). There's also that Thalassocracy decision, which is very nice for heavily trade-oriented countries. I'd say this idea group is about right, neither too weak nor too strong.

Espionage is quite niche and I haven't used it, but I can see how it could be very powerful, especially in MP. Even in SP, you can potentially devastate an AI major with rebels, when ordinarily it would take a long time to weaken them through straight conquest due to warscore/truces/AE etc. It's a group that should appeal to players who like to bring their country to dominance by wrecking all possible rivals instead of just blobbing everywhere. I'm not sure about the power level in practice, but the idea group should definitely exist in some form.

 

[balmung60]

I'm gonna say number one worst is Naval. It brings nothing of value to the table in SP and since I don't play MP, I really don't care about that. Espionage is almost as bad, but its policies are more generally useful, so there's some redeeming factor. Maritime is also nearly as bad, but at least I like its finisher, since it reduces micromanagement of blockade stacks. Economic would also be a contender, but it has some amazing policies and its bonuses, while bad, aren't completely worthless like Naval and Espionage are.

To "sell" these groups, some buffs need to be made.

For Economic, double the tax bonus and production efficiency bonus to 20% and replace the finisher with something that isn't made completely obsolete by National Bank (aka "never worry about inflation ever again"). Maybe something like +25% goods produced bonus to manufactories or something.

For Naval and Maritime, the bonuses aren't bad per se, it's just that with how naval combat works, bonuses to it aren't terribly helpful. If there was more to naval combat than "throw a bunch of heavies/galleys at the problem until it sinks", then maybe it would matter more. Though maybe we could throw in faster ship repair, faster ship build time, or a discount on upgrading ships.

For Espionage, I'm not certain you could do to make it useful without some sort of substantial change to the espionage system. I like some of the ideas for non-diplomat espionage actions that could help.

 

[Zombiemutant]

I've pretty much never used Influence, Espionage, Humanist, Maritime, Admin, Plutocratic, or Economic. I also think Religious is pretty overrated.

I use Diplo, Trade, Off, Def, and Quantity pretty much every playthrough.

Humanism is quite nice for map painting. It helps a lot in my current game with the ottomans.

 

[Incompetent]

For Economic, double the tax bonus and production efficiency bonus to 20% and replace the finisher with something that isn't made completely obsolete by National Bank (aka "never worry about inflation ever again"). Maybe something like +25% goods produced bonus to manufactories or something.

I think Economic also needs to stick closer to the theme and not have so much overlap with Administrative. So ditch 'Centralisation' and 'Nationalistic Enthusiasm', neither of which is a remotely economic concept, and replace them with something that directly relates to a stronger economy. (Also ditch 'Resilient State' in the Innovative group - it's utterly useless and has nothing to do with innovativeness.)

Incidentally, the production bonus used to be 20%, but Paradox decided that was too strong for some reason. I would change it to +10% goods produced, as this is a superior bonus economically (maybe change the Admin finisher to production efficiency).

Also, I think Economic ideas should also reduce the monarch point cost of buildings. (The cheap buildings idea in Quantity is good, but it doesn't belong in a military idea group.) Alternatively, you could give Economic ideas more of a 'building' focus by changing the finishing bonus to '+20% building efficiency' (i.e. it makes your buildings 20% more powerful, so e.g. a Temple gives +1.2 base tax instead of +1).

Naval is the only idea group that I think doesn't belong in the game. It was a mistake to divide the old Naval ideas into two idea groups, because there's just not enough you can do with ships to justify two dedicated idea groups. Instead, I would make the sixth military idea group 'Leadership' and take some of the leader bonuses from other groups. (Generals also need to be made less OP by adjusting the combat formula, but that's another story.)

 

[Vistariel]

The idea groups I have never used are only Espionage and Naval.

Contrary to what others are saying, I like maritime, mainly because it gives you that nice boost to base naval tradition, light ship combat (I love my light ships), and especially the increase to naval force limits. Of course, as mentioned, that last perk has been somewhat nerfed by the trade company dynamics...since you get additional naval force limits from assigning provinces to them.

While I like espionage in theory, there are simply too many better ideas to choose from. Although it is now made more attractive by support rebels causus belli, until there is a covert action that amounts to "assassinate monarch or heir" or "increase dynastic influence" I will be passing on it. I will settle firmly on espionage being presently the least useful idea group.

Naval, I imagine can be useful and I actually intend to try it on my next run as a naval power - particularly England. Grab Innovative, Naval, and Maritime on England and their navies would be completely unstoppable. Alternatively, if you are playing Italy, Venice, Genoa, Ottomans, etc, they benefit strongly from the galley boosts - in which case number of heavy ships DOES NOT matter by comparison to the galleys. The only reason everyone is saying that ship counts matter more is because they have yet to be faced with a naval equivalent skirmish to fighting Prussia on land. You know, when you have nearly twice the army size but it gets almost completely wiped out while their army took minimal losses? That one. Experience that and you may find naval to be more to your liking. Many of you are just so used to manning deathfleets and going against comparably weaker opponents, but do play a multiplayer match when someone is actually playing GB, Netherlands, or Spain with great naval efficiency for a contrast of perspective.

Probably my personal favorite idea group is Humanist. I almost always go protestant or reformed, so it guarantees I survive the reformation without religious turmoil. It is great for expansion (especially with the new autonomy system) in reducing nationalism and increasing cultural acceptance. Decreased unrest, combined with high levels of tolerance, you will never have revolt problems again. The ability to quickly assimilate conquered and annexed provinces makes this highly valuable for mainland expansionists. Finally, the decrease to idea cost is also wonderful, and for that reason I usually grab this idea group first.

Religious synergies well with humanist ideas, giving you that extra 20-25 base prestige (depending on whether you have innovative ideas or not) and that stability cost modifier are excellent. While it could be argued that it is better to take one or the other (in which case I usually lean toward humanist) they do work together well in that humanist keeps the peace while religious allows you to convert to your religion and culture more efficiently.

Economic and administrative have their place, and to be honest I think I'd lean more to economic than trade since the wealth of nations expansion.

Plutocratic gives that wonderful tech bonus, plus all of those trade bonuses and increase to morale.

Altogether, I think every tree is redeeming in some way for your style of play - except espionage (unless combined with a nation with espionage bonuses, like Ireland).

 

[Karnak]

Espionage. There needs to be more espionage-related diplomatic actions.
And the ones that exist need to be able to be used without unlocking them, with the idea group buffing them.

I for one never bothered to learn how or why you would use them, i even use support rebels very sparingly, only to gain PP.

Renaming it 'Covert' and putting in some generally useful things in there and spreading the espionage-exclusive ideas among several idea groups would be a good idea, right now it's a one-trick pony that you well can do without. It synergises with nothing, but instead adds another moment to the game that in the ends demands a lot of attention but does not pay off very well..

 

[User4035]

Currently:
Economic: because your swimming in money as soon as you hit play.

Otherwise I would say influence.
-income from vassals doesn't seem to work properly
-don't really need to fabricate claims faster or faster envoy time. I'd rather just have an extra diplomat from a different idea.
-Diplo rep? meh still pretty useless.
-subject forcelimits boost vs less diplo annex cost - part of this idea wants me to annex vassals, part of it wants me to keep them around?
- unjustified demands - I'd rather use religious cassus belli or use the horde cassus belli to take provinces for free.
- extra diplo slot is ok.
-Aggressive expandion impact. Besides the early game for an HRE minor this isn't usually a big deal.


People say espionage is worse than influence?
They both are pretty lackluster. I guess influence does save you monarch points even if they are just diplo points.

 

[Hari ganesh]

The three worst if SP are espionage, maritime and naval. A second group is the situational ones economic, expansion, exploration, which are essential for some nations, but below average or trash for others. Trade and quality are frequently sort of meh, but can be good. The other ten available groups are usually good no matter who you are, even if only some of them are optimal for the situation.

What is wrong with quality it is the best idea group out there it is required for discipline policies and the combat ability is great too even the naval bonuses arent bad.

 

[Umbosch]

A second group is the situational ones economic, expansion, exploration, which are essential for some nations, but below average or trash for others.

For natives in AoW they are duty. First exploration and second expansion. You need the 3 colonists to colonice the many old and new provinces (+90 NA) and the police. With military ideas you can better fight again europe but without colonized provinces you have no big army. I believe LA limited the troopsize.

 

[CaptainChiatrol]

-Aggressive expandion impact. Besides the early game for an HRE minor this isn't usually a big deal.

Something about our playstyle. I am always floating in and away from aggressive expansion mad coalitions.

 

[ChildeR]

What is wrong with quality it is the best idea group out there it is required for discipline policies and the combat ability is great too even the naval bonuses arent bad.

Disregarding the naval stuff, which is worth little for the same reason that naval is bad, you are left with three things: +10% combat ability for all, +5% morale recovery, +5% discipline. The second one is rarely useful, IMO. The other two are a good, but come late and are fairly equally matched by many other groups' troop improvement ideas. Offensive gives +1 fire & shock and the same +5% discipline, but also gives other useful bonuses. Early game the +10% CA bonuses of quality are beaten by both +15% morale from defensive and the cavalry CA + shock from aristocracy, so quality only pulls ahead when you get to the last idea... and unlike quality those groups have other useful ideas.

 

[StatikShocker]

I'll never understand why administrative is so overhyped, what a weak tree.

 

[CaptainChiatrol]

I'll never understand why administrative is so overhyped, what a weak tree.

I think it's because without vassal feeling you lose A LOT of admin points on coring and with vassal feeding you can lose a lot of diplo points to it. So people want either admin, influence or both.

Also I use a lot of mercs to limit manpower losses.

 

[balmung60]

I'll never understand why administrative is so overhyped, what a weak tree.

The biggest reason? -25% coring cost (and time), which is huge enough to carry the entire idea group, especially if you're stacking it with Ottoman, Mughal, Horde, or similar NIs that also reduce coring cost. In addition, +1 advisor is actually pretty strong (I find that you normally want to hit at least +2 for a good selection of advisors that has a good chance of having the right level or type (even if not both) available), and the mercenary bonuses aren't bad (and they throw in +6 force limits, which can be substantial if you take Administrative early).

 

[Achanei]

Naval leader maneuver + extra durability = your ships drop like flies due to better focusing and less durability, and as they sink fleet does less damage.

In SP, overwhelming #s wins. In MP, fighting someone with enough naval trad to slap on a strong admiral on buffed heavies (with more FL to afford them) is an invitation to be massacred at sea.

hm, reading this makes me notice that I actually have no clue how the naval combat system works in detail, being basically a SP only player...
the wiki does not mention anything about focusing - ship durability is an obvious bonus, but from your post it seems there is something else there, would you mind explaining that to me?


On topic: Idea discussions are often quite heated because people judge ideas from their own playstyle and individual goals, and those are surprisingly different - so it would make sense to first determine a goal condition before arguing which idea groups work best to get one there. having an unbeatable army or cracking the 1 mil gold mark favor diefferent idea sets than a world conquest or some tricky achievement run. I think this discussion would be more fruitful if people stated goals along with their preferred idea groups.

My goal is usually controlling as much territory as possible with a given start (usually tricky small starts) and for that, I usually take influence, quantity, administrative in that order followed by some out of religious, diplomatic, trade, offensive, humanist depending on my position at that point and things like wealth and MP distribution. if it is a colonist start, I take exploration, quantity, expansion followed by some of the above. I think I've not used espionage, quality or naval in any game since 1.6 or so.