Why all the Portugal nerfs?

[Grand Historian]

The problem in EU4 isn't so much troop quality (though they could use a slight buff) but rather army size. The truth is that, for a long time during the late 16th - early 17th centuries, Spain's armies outnumbered the French nearly 2:1 (though not all of those were actually engaging the French...), due to loads of gold from the Americas allowing them "go over forcelimits" and attracting tens of thousands of mercenaries to their banners.


Suggestion: a great power with a high percentage of gold income could have some triggered modifiers increasing the size of their mercenary poll, to simulate the allure of gold...

True (though, as you pointed out, Spain's forces were divided across the world while France could usually consolidate all or the majority of theirs), and I do like the idea of Gold increasing mercenary pool, but I wish that there was a greater emphasis on Quality in game. Historically, the side that had the higher quality troops/better leadership has almost always won.

 

[celethiel]

Well, the discipline and professionalism of the Tercios probably factored into it...

Besides, Spain's other European possessions arguably caused it more trouble than good.

you mean the Spanish Netherlands?

France's early game was nerfed because the vassals were absorbed and replaced with core provinces plagued by high autonomy. On the long (and even middle) run it's a buff, but for the first decades they'll be able to bring less troops to war.

so you're saying England finally stands a chance in the 100 Years War
............
I have always considered Both Spain, AND Portugal to be at best to be second rate powers... and their power mainly came from being Colonial nations... Ie beating up on people far less advanced and of a different religion than your own...(but then by that standard, France is the only major power in Europe at the Start Date) for the reason that they are less advanced and of a different Religion... lets face it... Spain may have a military... but it usually was tied up in the colonies...at least when I played as Spain... Mind you i have a Brandenburg To Germany Campaign that I am doing, that has Spain, Portugal, and England Allied and they've cut France to pieces (in the litteral sense) the only time they've stopped being allies is due to third Party Wars.... either Colonies or in the Netherlands...

 

[Tacticus101]

I won't buy the DLC. Are you saying that Portugal can only be strong in the complete game? Hmmmm...

What the hell are you on about?

I was saying don't judge the balance until you have tried the new features, it seems a bit premature to demand buffs to Portugal based on your (contested) theories.

 

[Magean]

You want castile to be able to beat portugal and aragon, which never happened historically, and im the one asking special treatment?

It didn't happen because there was to my knowledge no plan for a partition of Castille between France, Aragon and Portugal. In game, that's what would likely happen if Portugal's army was brought on par with Castille's with no Historical Friend modifier. Portugal did a great job at keeping its borders but did it on multiple occasions want to expand aggressively into Spain during the game's timeframe ? Did it try to exploit Castillian/Spanish weakness to grab entire provinces (not just fixing bordering locations) ? In game, it would. Because of its isolation, one of the main checks on expansion - namely, aggressive expansion - isn't as efficient a hurdler as it's elsewhere.

I want Castille to be able to survive more often than not, and if possible to become a major power. And that happened historically.

Besides, if Portugal is supposed to be a match for Castille which in turn is supposed to be a match for France, then what ? Portugal = France ?

 

[Magean]

Overall, the game fails on many occasions at modeling the reasons why a country can be successful militarily while not trying to expand. And no guerrilla warfare, no patriotic sentiments to boost the defender (or the rebellious subject) qualitatively and quantitatively - the latter come after annexation, when the conqueror has to deal with rebels and possibly increased coring cost.

Until this is fixed, the situation in Iberia is adequately dealt with the historical friend modifier keeping Spain out of Portugal and Portugal out of Spain. IMO.

 

[Seducer_McCoon]

There is no chance that this patch nerfs Portugal at all. Portugal sits there and doesn't expand into Europe in 90% of my games I play. They'll often vassalize a released Galicia or snipe Granada but that is the extent of their European ambitions. They probably overflow in monarch points. Development is a huge buff for Portugal. They will be one of the most annoying nations to fight against in common sense, they will still make an enormous amount of money and spend it all on buildings and forts.

Even without the DLC, Portugal remains just as strong as they were before. The changes to the trade flow won't matter to the Iberians. They will have 100% of the control in the node staying in Sevilla unless an Italian power gets his nose in Iberia (Genoese Gibraltar).

 

[Magean]

There is no chance that this patch nerfs Portugal at all. Portugal sits there and doesn't expand into Europe in 90% of my games I play. They'll often vassalize a released Galicia or snipe Granada but that is the extent of their European ambitions. They probably overflow in monarch points. Development is a huge buff for Portugal. They will be one of the most annoying nations to fight against in common sense, they will still make an enormous amount of money and spend it all on buildings and forts.

Even without the DLC, Portugal remains just as strong as they were before. The changes to the trade flow won't matter to the Iberians. They will have 100% of the control in the node staying in Sevilla unless an Italian power gets his nose in Iberia (Genoese Gibraltar).

The changes to the trade flow do matter for Portugal because Spain has now incentives to expand in Italy and move its trade port in the Genoa node : this is the reason, stated by Wiz, why these changes have been implemented. Portugal, for its part, can't do that unless it absorbs Spain. As a consequence, Portugal will be collecting in a node where Spain is supposed to pull trade. Even though the Iberians have 100% power in Sevilla, they don't work together as well as they did.

 

[frivolity]

I have always considered Both Spain, AND Portugal to be at best to be second rate powers...

I'm curious to know which countries you consider to be first rate powers then. Who was stronger/more influential than Spain in the mid-16th century?

 

[Magean]

I'm curious to know which countries you consider to be first rate powers then. Who was stronger/more influential than Spain in the mid-16th century?

I think he was talking about their in-game counterparts being effectively secondary powers.

 

[EMT0]

+1 colonist? Holy shit, for what, to make them colonize Siberia even more often?

Historical Portugal had very limited manpower so it only colonized coast of Brasil and founded (multiethnic) trade factories along African/Asian coasts.

Actually not true. Portugal because of its geographic isolation and relative poverty was actually the greatest exporter of people from 1500 to 1700, at roughly 1.5 million individuals. Spain in contrast shipped 700,000. The thing is, Portugal shipped them mostly to Brazil, ie the tropics. Very high mortality rates that required a continued stream of colonists to eventually populate the land. In contrast, take the Dutch colonization of South Africa. Settled by approximately 6,000 colonists before the British takeover, but had over 250,000 Dutch speakers at the time of takeover due to low mortality rates and lots of arable land. Portugal was by far the biggest exporter of people, but everybody wants the profitable jungles, not the agricultural colonies that are effectively money sinks.

Also, is BFTeixeira going to be

 

[Magean]

To clarify my opinion... I am not opposed to a slight buff to Portugal province base. But balancing its armies around that of Spain because Portugal did well in wars vs Spain and retained its entire territory throughout the course of the period is not the proper way to go. EU4 has no way to distinguish between offensive and defensive/liberation wars ; countries have standing armies with relatively static force limits, this has been discussed a million times - there is no emergency levies/draft, or morale boost that could help the defender. Giving a country the strength of its neighbor because it historically survived against said neighbor is not how things are handled : historical survival without expansion is usually depicted in game with increased coring cost, relations buffs and other deterrent to invasion. This kinda sucks but that's how it is.

Within the current mechanics of the game, we cannot have a Spain that's capable of beating France while losing against Portugal, unless we want Portugal to be consistently tougher than France. Does anyone want that ? And we cannot have a Portugal strong enough to resist Spanish expansionism without having a Portugal strong enough to more often than not expand within Spain, especially considering that, given the current rival mechanics and diplomacy setup, that Portugal would likely ally with Aragon or France to polandize its yellow neighbor.

Finally, if we judge how well a nation is balanced according to its historical achievements, then Portugal has one of the better balances ; it's even slightly OP. A successful Portugal retains its territorial integrity and becomes a colonial and trade powerhouse, and such is the outcome of most of my games. Portugal is usually even richer than it was, and has a bigger empire. A trade and colonization nerf for it isn't a disaster. There are other nations that, by such standards, are way more underpowered. Does AI Russia consistently colonize Siberia and conquers big chunks of Lithuania/Commonwealth while completely destroying the Hordes ? Not even close. Does AI Great Britain becomes a dominant colonial power with the richest Asian trade companies ? Usually not. Even the Ottomans are relatively tame compared to their historical counterparts. That's why I get slightly annoyed when I see recurrent complaints - obviously fueled more by nationalist sentiments than by concerns for gameplay - about Portugal being underpowered and in need of a substantial buff.

 

[Liquidstuff]

I very much agree with the OP point of view. Here I'll only be talking multiplayer wise. (I'm not a fan of the + 1 colonist though)

The way Sevilla and the English Channel worked in MP games made The Netherlands and England cooperating and not competing as both of them would bring wealth in the same node and share it. Most of the time, these two were facing the Iberians, who also tends to cooperate for the same reason.

But from now on, the fight isn't really fair anymore :

Portugal is exceptionally weak on the continent. While you can compare Castille with England, you can't really do the same with The Netherlands with Portugal. Further more, there always is a Moroccan player, which makes expanding in Africa quite a bit more difficult. Sure, you gonna win the first war but then, you'll have to deal with the fact Morocco will ally England, or France or both. Finally, the Portuguese is very weak (quality) compared to the last three bad-boys.

If you nerf the Iberians, you HAVE to nerf England and the Netherlands. Now, Spain will have to challenge France AND the Italians on the ground while keeping in check the British Navy. Add Morocco to the pile and you are in a rough shape. Good luck.

 

[LikeNothing]

Portugal is militarily underpowered. People tend to forget that while considering Spain a super-power, Portugal broke free from the kingdom of Leon and Castile, and maintained it's independence for almost 900 years amidst countless wars between them, never surrendering it's borders.

San Marino broke free from the Roman Empire, and maintaned its independence for almost 1,800 years, against threats such as the Huns, HRE Emperors, French Kings, Napoleon, and the Nazis, never surrendering its borders.

So in my opinion San Marino if introduced into the game should have its military made at least as strong as Portugal's.

 

[rohirrimelf]

Portugal is fine. Still in my top 10 list of best nations to start the game with.

 

[Falc]

Within the current mechanics of the game, we cannot have a Spain that's capable of beating France while losing against Portugal, unless we want Portugal to be consistently tougher than France. Does anyone want that ? And we cannot have a Portugal strong enough to resist Spanish expansionism without having a Portugal strong enough to more often than not expand within Spain, especially considering that, given the current rival mechanics and diplomacy setup, that Portugal would likely ally with Aragon or France to polandize its yellow neighbor.

I think the new Forts and Development might enable this.

Portugal is small and rich and should be able to pay for the best Forts possible in their mainland. This should make it sensibly harder for Castille/Spain to invade them, than France which needs to maintain a LOT more borders.

You need 3k men per fort level.
If Castille has 17k men and Portugal has 2 level 3 Forts, they can only siege one of them.
Meanwhile, Portugal with 12k men can siege two level 2 Forts at the same time.

 

[BFTeixeira]

What the hell are you on about?

I was saying don't judge the balance until you have tried the new features, it seems a bit premature to demand buffs to Portugal based on your (contested) theories.

You said try the new DLC before making judgements. I won't have the new DLC, which means no Province Development.

 

[BFTeixeira]

It didn't happen because there was to my knowledge no plan for a partition of Castille between France, Aragon and Portugal. In game, that's what would likely happen if Portugal's army was brought on par with Castille's with no Historical Friend modifier. Portugal did a great job at keeping its borders but did it on multiple occasions want to expand aggressively into Spain during the game's timeframe ? Did it try to exploit Castillian/Spanish weakness to grab entire provinces (not just fixing bordering locations) ? In game, it would. Because of its isolation, one of the main checks on expansion - namely, aggressive expansion - isn't as efficient a hurdler as it's elsewhere.

I want Castille to be able to survive more often than not, and if possible to become a major power. And that happened historically.

Besides, if Portugal is supposed to be a match for Castille which in turn is supposed to be a match for France, then what ? Portugal = France ?

Yes, historically Portugal also tried to take Castilian territory. But they were so balanced that neither could muster an advantage that allowed them to take any territory to each other.
The game does a poor job in having geographic obstacles define borders. One of the reasons why France couldn't take Castile, was the Pirineos. Was too difficult to go through them, and they had to also worry about spanish netherlands, and still had the Habsburgs. Historically, war was nothing near to what you have in EU4. If you're France and you send all your army to Spain, France's enemies would jump immediately on France taking advantage of the distance to their armies.

And has someone already stated, one of the problems with combat is that numbers are too decisive for the outcome. Completelly ahistorical.

 

[BFTeixeira]

There is no chance that this patch nerfs Portugal at all. Portugal sits there and doesn't expand into Europe in 90% of my games I play. They'll often vassalize a released Galicia or snipe Granada but that is the extent of their European ambitions. They probably overflow in monarch points. Development is a huge buff for Portugal. They will be one of the most annoying nations to fight against in common sense, they will still make an enormous amount of money and spend it all on buildings and forts.

Even without the DLC, Portugal remains just as strong as they were before. The changes to the trade flow won't matter to the Iberians. They will have 100% of the control in the node staying in Sevilla unless an Italian power gets his nose in Iberia (Genoese Gibraltar).

Actually i think that now France will more oftenly try to conquer the Iberians.

 

[BFTeixeira]

To clarify my opinion... I am not opposed to a slight buff to Portugal province base. But balancing its armies around that of Spain because Portugal did well in wars vs Spain and retained its entire territory throughout the course of the period is not the proper way to go. EU4 has no way to distinguish between offensive and defensive/liberation wars ; countries have standing armies with relatively static force limits, this has been discussed a million times - there is no emergency levies/draft, or morale boost that could help the defender. Giving a country the strength of its neighbor because it historically survived against said neighbor is not how things are handled : historical survival without expansion is usually depicted in game with increased coring cost, relations buffs and other deterrent to invasion. This kinda sucks but that's how it is.

Within the current mechanics of the game, we cannot have a Spain that's capable of beating France while losing against Portugal, unless we want Portugal to be consistently tougher than France. Does anyone want that ? And we cannot have a Portugal strong enough to resist Spanish expansionism without having a Portugal strong enough to more often than not expand within Spain, especially considering that, given the current rival mechanics and diplomacy setup, that Portugal would likely ally with Aragon or France to polandize its yellow neighbor.

Finally, if we judge how well a nation is balanced according to its historical achievements, then Portugal has one of the better balances ; it's even slightly OP. A successful Portugal retains its territorial integrity and becomes a colonial and trade powerhouse, and such is the outcome of most of my games. Portugal is usually even richer than it was, and has a bigger empire. A trade and colonization nerf for it isn't a disaster. There are other nations that, by such standards, are way more underpowered. Does AI Russia consistently colonize Siberia and conquers big chunks of Lithuania/Commonwealth while completely destroying the Hordes ? Not even close. Does AI Great Britain becomes a dominant colonial power with the richest Asian trade companies ? Usually not. Even the Ottomans are relatively tame compared to their historical counterparts. That's why I get slightly annoyed when I see recurrent complaints - obviously fueled more by nationalist sentiments than by concerns for gameplay - about Portugal being underpowered and in need of a substantial buff.

As of 1.11.4 Portugal usually loses Brazil in the XVI century. That shows that something's wrong with it.

 

[BFTeixeira]

San Marino broke free from the Roman Empire, and maintaned its independence for almost 1,800 years, against threats such as the Huns, HRE Emperors, French Kings, Napoleon, and the Nazis, never surrendering its borders.

So in my opinion San Marino if introduced into the game should have its military made at least as strong as Portugal's.

San Marino relied on diplomacy not military power. Or are you saying that Switzerland had a far better army than France and Russia in WWII because they never lost an inch to the Nazis?