Why all the Portugal nerfs?

[BFTeixeira]

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.

If Development helps solve the problem, then it means that they only solved the problem for DLC payers.

 

[Wizzington]

They're so underpowered that you had to come up with a 'Historical Friends' modifier so it wouldn't be annexed by Castile before 1500.

Actually I strongly suspect (AI) Castile would be the one getting wrecked without that modifier since Aragon and Portugal would gang up on them.

 

[BFTeixeira]

Actually I strongly suspect (AI) Castile would be the one getting wrecked without that modifier since Aragon and Portugal would gang up on them.

Something's wrong with the equation when you need to plug a number to balance it out.

 

[Magean]

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.

But to what extent ? Was it about pushing the borders a few miles East or North to include a couple cities, or about all-out conquest of territories the size of EU4 provinces ?

That being said, I agree with you that the game fails to model how difficult it could be to pierce geographical borders. It's the same thing for the Caucasus, the local countries have increased coring cost because the game can't model the pain it was to control the area militarily.

Besides, I've never seen a colonial nation going independent in the XVIth century. Usually, the biggest Portuguese colonies sit at 100% liberty desire (OK, that's a problem, I agree with you) for 250 years. Sometimes, they win their independence war in the late game because somebody helped them getting more than just +25 ticking warscore (and a lot of negative warscore from naval battles).

 

[Wizzington]

Something's wrong with the equation when you need to plug a number to balance it out.

Not at all, their proportional power is pretty accurate. It's just that EU4's rival/diplomacy system cannot accurately represent actual 15th century diplomacy (because no game possibly can) and needs the occasional stopgap solution to make some historical outcomes possible.

I mean, AI states tend to rival neighbours, and with Portugal's only neighbour being Castile they'd probably rival them 99% of the time. There was a time when AI looked less at proximity when deciding on rivals and this was (rightfully) near-universally despised by players because they couldn't predict AI rival behaviour at all. Thus why you need the historical friends modifier if you want the possibility of Portugal and Spain co-existing.

 

[Magean]

Something's wrong with the equation when you need to plug a number to balance it out.

Back to your other point, another reason why Portugal won wars against Castille/Spain is that Spain had other business to attend in Europe and other neighbors to watch. In the game, you can just move entire armies from any point of your empire without taking much risks. Until the game handles all of these issues (including logistics), the Historical Friend modifier doesn't make less sense than giving Portugal the same overall strength as Castille.

 

[BFTeixeira]

But to what extent ? Was it about pushing the borders a few miles East or North to include a couple cities, or about all-out conquest of territories the size of EU4 provinces ?

That being said, I agree with you that the game fails to model how difficult it could be to pierce geographical borders. It's the same thing for the Caucasus, the local countries have increased coring cost because the game can't model the pain it was to control the area militarily.

Besides, I've never seen a colonial nation going independent in the XVIth century. Usually, the biggest Portuguese colonies sit at 100% liberty desire (OK, that's a problem, I agree with you) for 250 years. Sometimes, they win their independence war in the late game because somebody helped them getting more than just +25 ticking warscore (and a lot of negative warscore from naval battles).

It was about taking whole provinces, and Castile even laid siege to Lisbon. But they were pushed back (two things missing: 1 - diseases in sieges were very commom; 2 - supply lines disruption). Portugal also tried to do the same, occupying castles and towns towards Madrid, but the war ended in a stalemate with no change to borders.

In my last 3 games (Ethiopia, PLC, France) i allied Brazil. In the France game i allied them by circa 1570. And no, i didn't help them become independent and never invaded Portugal. I know that 3 games is a ridiculous sample, but this never happened before 1.11.4. But I admit I could be wrong here, and maybe this is only something to be looked to understand if this a legit balance problem, or just a coincidence.

 

[WeissRaben]

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

Yes - that Brazil in 1550 had historically 15000 inhabitants, and as such there would be no way for it to conquer its independence. It tells little about Portugal's strength.

 

[BFTeixeira]

Not at all, their proportional power is pretty accurate. It's just that EU4's rival/diplomacy system cannot accurately represent actual 15th century diplomacy (because no game possibly can) and needs the occasional stopgap solution to make some historical outcomes possible.

I mean, AI states tend to rival neighbours, and with Portugal's only neighbour being Castile they'd probably rival them 99% of the time. There was a time when AI looked less at proximity when deciding on rivals and this was (rightfully) near-universally despised by players because they couldn't predict AI rival behaviour at all. Thus why you need the historical friends modifier if you want the possibility of Portugal and Spain co-existing.

I understand the reason to put there the modifier, but the numbers (army and, specialy, naval) don't add up. The portuguese fleet was superior to the castilian one, as the outcome of the castilian war of succession shows.
Also, maybe the rival mechanic should be re-visited. Maybe you should have to explain the rivalry reason (desire provinces, religious rivalry, trade rivalry, etc.), and that would have an effect on other nations (if say Portugal rivals Castile over provinces desire, other Catholic nations should have lower opinion of Portugal; If Portugal rivals Castile over trade, then other nations who share trade nodes with them should have the opinion influenced maybe improving relations to the weaker nation on the trade node between both of them). Right now, the rivalry mechanic is kind of shallow, imo.

 

[BFTeixeira]

Back to your other point, another reason why Portugal won wars against Castille/Spain is that Spain had other business to attend in Europe and other neighbors to watch. In the game, you can just move entire armies from any point of your empire without taking much risks. Until the game handles all of these issues (including logistics), the Historical Friend modifier doesn't make less sense than giving Portugal the same overall strength as Castille.

You got a point there. Back then you couldn't let your borders unguarded. But still, i think that the numbers difference in the game is to great compared to reality. And i'm not saying that Portugal should have exactly the same numbers as Castile. I'm just saying that it should be more leveled, or there should be some kind of military modifier that makes their combats more leveled. Right now, it's almost impossible for Castile to lose a war to Portugal.

 

[BFTeixeira]

Yes - that Brazil in 1550 had historically 15000 inhabitants, and as such there would be no way for it to conquer its independence. It tells little about Portugal's strength.

Given that Brazil became independent in the XIX century as an indirect result of the Napoleonic invasions, yes it says something about Portugal's strength.

 

[GamingHUD]

Given that Brazil became independent in the XIX century as an indirect result of the Napoleonic invasions, yes it says something about Portugal's strength.

You missed the point.

If Brazil colony is frequently getting independent in XVI century (I've never seen this happen without player interference, but whatever, small sample size) it isn't because Portugal are too weak. It's because the colony is stronger (perhaps significantly so, military power) than it should be.

 

[zdlugasz]

You missed the point.

If Brazil colony is frequently getting independent in XVI century (I've never seen this happen without player interference, but whatever, small sample size) it isn't because Portugal are too weak. It's because the colony is stronger (perhaps significantly so, military power) than it should be.

Yes, which is little side effect of getting rid of population, much higher number of american provinces in latest patches and good-very good tax (although Wiz said that New World development is being reduced). I would gladly add general FL, manpower, etc nerfs to at least colonial nations.

 

[BFTeixeira]

You missed the point.

If Brazil colony is frequently getting independent in XVI century (I've never seen this happen without player interference, but whatever, small sample size) it isn't because Portugal are too weak. It's because the colony is stronger (perhaps significantly so, military power) than it should be.

Or, that Portugal is too weak to handle the LD Mechanism.

 

[grommile]

Yes, which is little side effect of getting rid of population,

No, it's not a side effect of getting rid of population, because EU3's population mechanic, which was the one that was got rid of, was pretty close to meaningless (it gave you a modest boost to goods production and altered the probability of certain events) and certainly had no effect on a country's military strength.

 

[zdlugasz]

No, it's not a side effect of getting rid of population, because EU3's population mechanic, which was the one that was got rid of, was pretty close to meaningless (it gave you a modest boost to goods production and altered the probability of certain events) and certainly had no effect on a country's military strength.

I do not really recall all effects of population in EU3, but in EU2 both tax and manpower were scaled by population, thus huge Chinese cities were much better than 1200 population new world provinces.

 

[bbqftw]

I am going to do a scientific experiment. Steps to reproduce:

1) Start Portugal game
2) Sell Ceuta, ally Castile
3) go afk
4) see how much score I end up with.

 

[grommile]

1) Start Portugal game
2) Sell Ceuta, ally Castile
3) go afk
4) see how much score I end up with.

Hardly any, because you'll fall off the bottom of all three scoring categories due to never teching or buying ideas (and you'll reject Castile's first CtA and all subsequent alliance invitations, too).

 

[yerm]

I am going to do a scientific experiment. Steps to reproduce:

1) Start Portugal game
2) Sell Ceuta, ally Castile
3) go afk
4) see how much score I end up with.

Don't actually ally Castile, just set their rivals as your rivals. You will miss a CTA and dishonor the alliance if you ally them.

 

[Magean]

Or, that Portugal is too weak to handle the LD Mechanism.

Could be, but over the two possibilities I would rather vote for "Brazil OP" than "Portugal UP". That a newly founded colony can muster more men than its motherland after a few decades is nonsensical. Once again, for Portugal to be able to cope with Liberty Desire, it would need a force limit increase to the level of the other Big 3 colonizers, the weakest of which being Great Britain (or Castille if no Iberian Wedding), and it would be quite a stretch. Or maybe, the Liberty Desire mechanics themselves need a rework.

EDIT : replaced Force Limits by Liberty Desire in the last sentence.