Why is it this way?

[SetaX]

Hi,

After ~400h of gameplay here are my concerns with the game.

First and foremost the biggest issue for me ATM is that there's only one really efficient way to play the game,and that is agression. Theres no way that you would be better off without agressively expanding your empire. Even in the HRE and the New World it's better that way. I've tried to find the reasons and here's a list I find a bit "odd".

1:
Why you guys keeping the developement system so ineffective and expensive? Why would I pay 100+ Monarch Points for 2 lvl of development if I can core a 10 Dev lvl province for the same price? Not to mention I'll be gaining 10 development while my enemy will be losing it... It really need some work cos' ATM it's completely useless.

2:
How come we can get prestige for being agressors? How does that make sense? How come we dont get any prestige for having long term allies or any other honorable diplomatic acts?? I might be wrong but theres nothing prestigious about conquering peaceful neighbours. Sure would imply fear in them but surely not prestige. Why dont we get prestige if we honor a defensive call for war? That's surely a prestigious act.

3:
Having said that,IMO the whole Prestige and Power Projection system is messed up. Prestige should give you diplomatic,maybe economical bonuses but not military as it does now. PP should give us only military bonuses, should be raised or lowered by those actions and should be a tradoff in Prestige. For example: Going for an agressive war,taking 2 provinces. I should gain PP but lose prestige for waging agressive wars against my neighbours. My country should be weakened diplomatically and economically.

4:
Why do we have a stability hit for braking royal marriages? Sure,it would upset the country Im braking the marriage with so I would understand a major diplo relation penalty but a stability drop for my country? I can imagine how upset Pete The Farmer on the fields would be with me not being married to that French princess anymore...

5:
Honestly...do you know anyone who chooses Concede defeat for that 10 Prestige? Especially because its "incompatible" with all the other terms. I dont see a reason why it cannot be chosen combined with other terms. Even war reparation is way better option. I might consider choosing it if it would give me 10 prestige + 10 PP and could combine with some other terms like war reparation. That would be a decent 20% warscore deal instead of taking 1 province I guess.

6:
Theres no burocracy or any sort of efficiency penalty for big empires. Zero. It absolutely makes no difference if your empire has 3 or 50 provinces which I find highly inaccurate,unrealistic and maybe even game braking. Sure you have to travel further for dealing with revolts but thats all. Theres no revolt risk for being big and ineffective. Theres no corruption or stealing or anything like that.

So this is it. Don't get me wrong,the game is great,I love it. Still my final conclusion is that you either play agressively or you gonna be underdog forever.
Diplo vassalisation hard,slow and ineffective just like province development. Colonization is pretty boring after a while (and again more affective if you conquer native territories)
Doesnt matter if you are Prussia, Papal State or The Hansa,sooner or later you'll end up conquering province after province to keep it up with the rest of the world.
I wish there was some other ways to stay competitive...

 

[GiftGruen]

1: To stop OPMs from developing their capitals like crazy.
2.: Because in the timeframe of EU IV, aggression was not the big taboo it is nowadays. War was just a continuation of diplomacy by other means. Caring for your peasants gave you about as much prestige as caring for the dogs in your kennel. Sending them to war to die for you, and winning battles / gaining land in the process made you look badass and strong.
3.: Because players stop caring about prestige as soon as it doesn't give military bonuses anymore.
4.: Gameplay reasons. Also, a royal marriage is usually only made with countries you want to be long-term allies with. Breaking one is a bit like breaking a non-aggression pact. Makes you look suspicious and/or not good in what you're doing.
5.: Concession of defeat is there for AIs to have something to offer each other, especially if treating with minor allies in the war. Also, cheap way to trade prestige for making France leave your war with East Frisia after 5 years...
6.: Local autonomy should probably have filled that role, but it seems you really have to rely on mods if you want a real efficiency system right now.

Just to make it clear: I'm not trying to argue against you here, just giving you more input.

 

[TheMeInTeam]

Why you guys keeping the developement system so ineffective and expensive? Why would I pay 100+ Monarch Points for 2 lvl of development if I can core a 10 Dev lvl province for the same price? Not to mention I'll be gaining 10 development while my enemy will be losing it... It really need some work cos' ATM it's completely useless.

Because development is a brainless 1-click action that carries no risk, while expansion is risky and costs more than monarch points. From a balance/gameplay perspective, expansion *has* to be more efficient or you get incentives to do nothing at all.

Why do we have a stability hit for braking royal marriages? Sure,it would upset the country Im braking the marriage with so I would understand a major diplo relation penalty but a stability drop for my country? I can imagine how upset Pete The Farmer on the fields would be with me not being married to that French princess anymore...

Arcade mode disincentive to do them willy nilly w/o investing in something that removes the stabhit.

Honestly...do you know anyone who chooses Concede defeat for that 10 Prestige? Especially because its "incompatible" with all the other terms. I dont see a reason why it cannot be chosen combined with other terms. Even war reparation is way better option. I might consider choosing it if it would give me 10 prestige + 10 PP and could combine with some other terms like war reparation. That would be a decent 20% warscore deal instead of taking 1 province I guess.

I can't think of any good reason concede defeat locks out other options.

Theres no burocracy or any sort of efficiency penalty for big empires. Zero. It absolutely makes no difference if your empire has 3 or 50 provinces which I find highly inaccurate,unrealistic and maybe even game braking. Sure you have to travel further for dealing with revolts but thats all. Theres no revolt risk for being big and ineffective. Theres no corruption or stealing or anything like that.

I've advocated this instead of some of the more nonsensical constraints for a long time especially because it helps temper the overwhelming late-game runaway power of blobbing so it's hard to disagree. Maybe stuff other than pure blobber groups would be viable in SP if blobbing alone wasn't so linearly lucrative.

Also, cheap way to trade prestige for making France leave your war with East Frisia after 5 years...

Used to be, you mean. AFAIK they stealthed it out as something you can offer the AI because reasons.

 

[SetaX]

1: To stop OPMs from developing their capitals like crazy.
2.: Because in the timeframe of EU IV, aggression was not the big taboo it is nowadays. War was just a continuation of diplomacy by other means. Caring for your peasants gave you about as much prestige as caring for the dogs in your kennel. Sending them to war to die for you, and winning battles / gaining land in the process made you look badass and strong.
3.: Because players stop caring about prestige as soon as it doesn't give military bonuses anymore.
4.: Gameplay reasons. Also, a royal marriage is usually only made with countries you want to be long-term allies with. Breaking one is a bit like breaking a non-aggression pact. Makes you look suspicious and/or not good in what you're doing.
5.: Concession of defeat is there for AIs to have something to offer each other, especially if treating with minor allies in the war. Also, cheap way to trade prestige for making France leave your war with East Frisia after 5 years...
6.: Local autonomy should probably have filled that role, but it seems you really have to rely on mods if you want a real efficiency system right now.

Just to make it clear: I'm not trying to argue against you here, just giving you more input.

Its ok. We're here to discuss it

1. Im sure there's a way around that.
2.Im not saying that shouldn't be a "reward" for it. Im saying it should rather be Power Projection with military bonuses than Prestige.
3.If someone would like to play more peacefully,diplomatically they sure would care if Prestige would give them significant bonuses for vassalization,trade power,economical efficiencies...etc.
4.Understand that. That would make me look bad in THEIR eyes but wouldn't destabilize my country. Give my country a diplomatic malus,fine. Still cant see how a stability drop in the country is justified..
5.Fine.
6.Do you know such a mod?

 

[Woifee]

4) It's not your peasants you have to worry about, it's your nobility and they value royal marriages very much and breaking such a thing would propably upset them.

 

[GiftGruen]

4.: Think of it this way: Your merchants and nobles have seen your RM and seen that making trade partners / friends in this country is politically OK. You are acting like a loyal subject if you make connnections with this country. Now, suddenly, this link is broken. Remember that during this timeframe, symbolism was very important. You're showing that not only are you no longer friends with this nation, you are officially breaking with them. So, suddenly, dealing with them is seen not merely as making business with a neutral nation, but could be interpreted as doing something against the will of your liege. Of course, most people will break official ties with people from that nation. This restructuration is how I see the stabhit.
6.: Such a mod would be MEIOU and Taxes, also called M&T, it has a separate subforum in the mods subforum of EU IV.

 

[OBRkenobi]

I agreed with points 1,5 and 6. I disagree with the rest but I'm too lazy to explain why. Mostly due to you being factually wrong and un-historical in some of your points.

 

[SetaX]

I agreed with points 1,5 and 6. I disagree with the rest but I'm too lazy to explain why. Mostly due to you being factually wrong and un-historical in some of your points.

Well, I might be unhistorical. Let me rephrase a bit. I think the ways of earning prestige and PP is unbalanced ATM. Whats the best way of getting prestige? Waging and winning wars (Agression) Whats the best way of getting PP? Waging and winning wars (Agression)Im not sure about Legitimacy but the high Prestige plays a huge roll in keeping that high as well. That means agression again.
ATM you dont really have to worry about most of the things. All you have to do is figure the most efficient way of expansion for your country and thats it. Get in there in 1444,make some alliances let them win you wars at first then when you got enough territory just run over the rest and GG. I know,its a bit too simplistic but this is it really.
My "suggestions" are just some blurry ideas. Dont take them too seriously. My point here is the game IMHO unbalanced in these aspect and they need to be rebalanced. There should be a tradeoff for being a warmonger and trying to controll huge areas and there should be other efficient ways of playing the game. There's no such thing in the game now.

 

[SetaX]

4.: Think of it this way: Your merchants and nobles have seen your RM and seen that making trade partners / friends in this country is politically OK. You are acting like a loyal subject if you make connnections with this country. Now, suddenly, this link is broken. Remember that during this timeframe, symbolism was very important. You're showing that not only are you no longer friends with this nation, you are officially breaking with them. So, suddenly, dealing with them is seen not merely as making business with a neutral nation, but could be interpreted as doing something against the will of your liege. Of course, most people will break official ties with people from that nation. This restructuration is how I see the stabhit.
6.: Such a mod would be MEIOU and Taxes, also called M&T, it has a separate subforum in the mods subforum of EU IV.

That mod looks promising,thank you Sir

 

[Woifee]

Well, I might be unhistorical. Let me rephrase a bit. I think the ways of earning prestige and PP is unbalanced ATM. Whats the best way of getting prestige? Waging and winning wars (Agression) Whats the best way of getting PP? Waging and winning wars (Agression)Im not sure about Legitimacy but the high Prestige plays a huge roll in keeping that high as well. That means agression again.
ATM you dont really have to worry about most of the things. All you have to do is figure the most efficient way of expansion for your country and thats it. Get in there in 1444,make some alliances let them win you wars at first then when you got enough territory just run over the rest and GG. I know,its a bit too simplistic but this is it really.
My "suggestions" are just some blurry ideas. Dont take them too seriously. My point here is the game IMHO unbalanced in these aspect and they need to be rebalanced. There should be a tradeoff for being a warmonger and trying to controll huge areas and there should be other efficient ways of playing the game. There's no such thing in the game now.

The game has actually no target except that goals you set yoyrself.

If you want to stay smal you can easily do that. PP is acually easier to get this way because all your rivals a beaten quickly. Dont annex anything and beat them later again. With all tour rivals at the same trade node you also can get send privateers to all of them at the same time.

The Proble: Staying small isn't that fun.