I'm talking about the NPC's in the world as a simulation before the player has a chance to interact and then once the player begins playing the world begins to change as well as the levels within it. Player agency does not generally compute into other NPC's levels during rpgs. It's rather arbitrary and for game balance.
Playable nations are playable. NPC stands for something else entirely, in an entirely different game genre, making a point that seems to be non-sequitur. We probably don't need this to discuss whether the game rules for monarch points are consistent with the average values at the start of EU 4.
I've actually answered this in a previous post, the renaissance, birth of thinkers, constant advancement in ideas, more globalization and trade of ideas across the world, etc, etc.
This was refuted in earlier posts, which mentioned the large number of places in the world which get 2d4-2 while none of those things were in play. Even after they are in play, it is still 2d4-2. If "renaissance etc" predicted ruler stat/capability changes, this is not an observation we would anticipate.
The same argument applies to later start dates, which further showcases my point. The starting rulers on late start dates are inconsistent with what you would get if you played from an early start date. Not only does that contradict the quoted argument above, it also further shows internal inconsistency (advancing date vs playing the game result in different outcomes).
By game state I mean that quite literally the state of the game. You will find that as you play you will not always have a perfect 3/3/3 (9 point) average throughout the game. It can and will be much lower or much higher. That's what I mean by it's not an absolute.
Oh. I didn't consider that, because it's tangential to discussion.
OP is talking about average points generate vs average starting ruler stats. Picking an individual data point will not enforce an argument about averages.
Also, Cost to core a province is not absolute. Neither is the cap on taking land in peace deals based on CBs
Time to define "absolute". The game has defines for each of these, and modifiers that apply to them. So too for ruler stats.
Actually, this is important so I'll repost it:
If you disagree, I would be interested to see what your basis is from separating "absolute" game mechanics/rules from those that are not, in a way that does not contradict EU 4.
That wasn't a question just thrown out arbitrarily. For the argument you're making to make sense, for it to be coherent, you MUST be able to do this. For example, the "renaissance happens" argument above contradicts how the EU 4 mechanic works, so it is not a valid explanation for the disparity noted by the OP. It does not and can't resolve the internal inconsistency.
I think you're missing a could chunk of the context me and the OP were talking about (At least I think it was the OP). According to the OP, 3/3/3 would be representative of a 0/0/0 in 1444 as long as every ruler on average was acting like a 0/0/0.
X>Y=X is not a valid logical proposition. Replacing the variables with average stats at starts vs generated by the game's rules doesn't change that.
The pre-EU4 rulers ruled in a time when they had generally less control over the state administrative apparatus. The monarch point values of a ruler don’t necessarily reflect innate capability so much as the extent to which a ruler could leverage their abilities to strengthen and advance their nation.
The default generated ruler stat per category is 2d4-2 in 1444, 1550, 1700, and 1820. That is not an outcome we would anticipate if the quoted explanation were valid for the internal inconsistency, so we can (and should have multiple times already) reject said explanation as necessarily inaccurate and look for a different one.
"Game balance" also does not square with observations. In EU 4, "game balance" is usually a false explanation anyway, since starting positions are necessarily imbalanced by design and it's not clear what the goal of such "balance" even could be. Ryukyu or Busoga having 2 better in each category also wouldn't seem to impact the game world significantly unless in player hands, for example.
.png){kind=avatar}
