Why nerf hordes more

[Novacat]

I don't like people who behave that way. We won't get along. So before this goes much further, I will ask you to concisely explain what you mean without resorting to character attacks on someone you know literally nothing about other than their disagreement with you over a video game.

Your entire argument hinges on the 'HURHUR STEPPES ARE DUMB NOMADS' trope which is fiction. A vast percentage of the 'Steppe Horde' states had settled capitals and at least one (Samarkand) was a center of culture and science. Your bringing up a strict definition that does not even hold for a vast majority of states with the 'Steppe Horde' government type.

I grow tierd of dealing with people like you because theres no reasoning. Bring up any number of specific situations where the hordes do not fit your stereotype and you just ignore it.

Explain why my data which was historical and real, coming from my cultural anthropology class

If thats what you call data, then I would be very suprised if you were not getting an F in your class.

 

[TheMeInTeam]

Recruiting latin tercios from Kaffa because it once belonged to Genoa doesn't make a terrible amount of sense, no.

It was an exploit in regards to hordes because hordes were not meant to get better units. It wasn't an exploit for anyone else, but it's a redundant mechanic for everyone else now that tech groups are balanced anyhow.

How is it that North American natives were meant to get better units, but not hordes? No matter where you look there just doesn't seem to be any historical basis for this. Did Kazakh not have infantry with firearms? It's an extremely arbitrary implementation that's hard to come to grips with, especially on nations that historically adapted opposing weaponry quite well, and whose units OTHER nations used for mercenaries well into this game's timeline.

 

[Garbon]

Not so much collapsed as in conquered. The Timurid empire was more or less conquered by the White Sheep Turks (Aq Q ingame) and the Uzbeks. The rump state that was left was what eventually became the Mughals.

I'm not sure that's the best way to describe it. The Timurids were already a bunch of little statelets fighting one another when Babur came about. And the "rump state" was really just what Babur had managed to conquer around Kabul after being booted from ancestral Timurid lands.

 

[Squirrelloid]

Recruiting latin tercios from Kaffa because it once belonged to Genoa doesn't make a terrible amount of sense, no.

And what do you imagine Kaffa's military organization looks like right after they're conquered by Crimea? If Genoa had Tercios, I'd bet it looks a lot like Tercios, so actually yes, that makes a lot of sense. They certainly don't know how to fight like horde soldiers. Local unit organization with local commanders was *normal* until Napoleon in most of the world. (And to a lesser degree, it was normal even after that).

It was an exploit in regards to hordes because hordes were not meant to get better units. It wasn't an exploit for anyone else, but it's a redundant mechanic for everyone else now that tech groups are balanced anyhow.

This word "exploit", it does not mean what you think it means. Just because the mechanic of hiring foreign units, working as intended, interacted in an unintended way with another mechanic, horde military, doesn't make it an exploit. The interaction may be unintended, but calling it an exploit means that the entire mechanic was unintended (hiring foreign units), and that beggars suspension of disbelief. Unintended consequences from interactions are just that, unintended consequences.

I'm kind of sad that, as a game designer, you don't understand the difference.

 

[Novacat]

I'm not sure that's the best way to describe it. The Timurids were already a bunch of little statelets fighting one another when Babur came about. And the "rump state" was really just what Babur had managed to conquer around Kabul after being booted from ancestral Timurid lands.

It is what happened, though. Yes, Babur did have to conquer a number of rivals around Kabul, but by and large most of 'Ancestral Timurid Lands' was conquered by external powers and Babur had conquered what was left in what could be described as a really nasty succession crisis.

It was an exploit in regards to hordes because hordes were not meant to get better units. It wasn't an exploit for anyone else, but it's a redundant mechanic for everyone else now that tech groups are balanced anyhow.

The issue is that the whole concept of Hordes not getting unit upgrades makes no sense and serves no purpose except to make Hordes exceptionally weak. Comradebot was right on the money when he said that hordes are starting to resemble pre-ToG CK2 Pagans, in that their only purpose was to roll over and die for the first European power that deigns to conquer it.

 

[Aigars]

why do i feel that paradox start to become more EA like? :mellow:
Honestly i feel like i will leave game on 1.7.3 and just forget about other updates forever dlc to.
BTW were can i get EU4 1.0 its not in beta patches.

 

[RobRoy3]

It was an exploit in regards to hordes because hordes were not meant to get better units. It wasn't an exploit for anyone else, but it's a redundant mechanic for everyone else now that tech groups are balanced anyhow.

Disagree. I've still found a few instances where it is possible and useful to recruit the slightly better mongol, muslim, or ottoman cavalry in the very early game.

I will miss what used to be an interesting (and historical) feature of the game, since it's now been defined as a game-breaking exploit when used by people who insist on playing Hordes. (Why they insist, I'll never get, since each patch has screamed "we don't want you to play Hordes", since release)

 

[DDRJake]

Having thought about it, I'm okay with this change. Coming up with strategies to terrorize as a late game horde will be fun.

 

[ABookshelf]

And what do you imagine Kaffa's military organization looks like right after they're conquered by Crimea? If Genoa had Tercios, I'd bet it looks a lot like Tercios, so actually yes, that makes a lot of sense.

If a horde conquers Kaffa, it means they killed all the Tercios. So a horde raising Tercios means they suddenly gained all the logistical and tactical know-how to raise Tercios and Napoleonic-era infantry which isn't historical and makes no sense anyway.

Why aren't the complainers reveling in the challenge of horde gameplay? As someone who plays hordes heavily, I was drawn to hordes because of the challenge of playing hordes against more technologically advanced foes, so Wiz I thank you for this change.

 

[oblio-]

Having thought about it, I'm okay with this change. Coming up with strategies to terrorize as a late game horde will be fun.

It might be doable after the pip rework, if they've not bumped up the pips again.
But I doubt you'd be able to make it work with less than 2x their numbers.

 

[Squirrelloid]

If a horde conquers Kaffa, it means they killed all the Tercios. So a horde raising Tercios means they suddenly gained all the logistical and tactical know-how to raise Tercios and Napoleonic-era infantry which isn't historical and makes no sense anyway.

Why aren't the complainers reveling in the challenge of horde gameplay? As someone who plays hordes heavily, I was drawn to hordes because of the challenge of playing hordes against more technologically advanced foes, so Wiz I thank you for this change.

Or, you know, some of them surrendered? And even the non-military is vastly more familiar with the Genoan way of doing things. It's not like they magically know how to fight as horde members on conquest - any military knowledge they do have (and there will be some) will be Genoan knowledge. It will be far easier for them to train Tercios then it would for them to train steppe archers, especially since you *just captured a bunch of pikes and arquebuses*.

I completed GK without using anything but horde cavalry and cannons as GH. (Did not hire any infantry, and disbanded every infantry unit I ended up with). That you kill Muscovy really early, hit Ming afterwards - who is a pushover, and fight Timmy for Persia (who has the same units, except worse cannon, because they can't tech well) makes this easily doable. Powerful vassals (fed Ryazan, Shun, Ukraine) did most of the fighting for me vs. significant opponents (pretty much Lithuania/Poland), who rarely declare on you once you own half of Asia anyway.

All the removal really encourages is creating strong vassals who aren't hordes, and using them as your beat-stick. (You supply the cannon). I can easily imagine late-game horde armies being nothing but cannon, designed to back-up their vassals who have real front-line forces.

 

[wingzero890]

The existing design on Hordes is that they should reform or die, pretty much. You can argue that design should change, but leaving an exploity workaround (recruiting in foreign cores) is not the way to go about it.

I called this months ago and everyone refused to admit it was an exploit. Can't really say well done since you apparently are not changing the reform reqs, but yeah.

 

[TheMeInTeam]

Having thought about it, I'm okay with this change. Coming up with strategies to terrorize as a late game horde will be fun.

This isn't a question of challenge or what can be done lol. It's vexing due to it's dissonance with history, an overt break from reality and in the process we lost a fun option for all nations. If you peak at different times using other units makes sense.

 

[ABookshelf]

Or, you know, some of them surrendered? .

Well historically if they were conquered by a horde they were more likely to be slaughtered so now you're not even being historical anymore in your "historical" argument.

Also you're saying that horde commanders that conquer a more advanced territory will suddenly have the knowledge of all the tactics, equipment, and logistics behind the military of the previous owner. So you're saying if some Siberian horde manages to take over some far-flung Russian Siberian province late in the game, it makes sense that these Siberians, who were previously fighting as an unorganized horde of cavalry archers, suddenly know how to drill their soldiers in the use of Napoleonic infantry/cavalry tactics, the use of Napoleonic-era equipment, and also be aware of the organization and logistics behind Napleonic military regiments. You're also saying that the Siberians will be 100% willing to abandon their own possibly sacred military customs and culture in favor of modern military culture.

I can only see justification in hordes being able to suddenly train cannons because it makes sense that they'll subjugate the local smiths and force them to build cannons. Its more believable that they could figure out how to use those on their own.

 

[CzokletMuss]

To answer OP's question ("why nerf hordes more") there are three compelling arguments why this has to be done:

1. They aren't white Europeans (who are the best group of people in Europa Universalis - genetics, man!)
2. They aren't Christians (and Christianity is the religion of the world which deserves best bonuses, amirite folks?)
3. They are far away from Sweden (which is a centre of civilisation as we all know and the further away you go the less important things become)
4. They aren't Norse (VIKINGS! BEARDS!)

Plus they are primitive barbarians whose only point of existence is to be devoured by blobbing Russia and Ottomans (and perhaps Spain during Spanish conquest of Siberia), so they really don't deserve any attention. /s

Seriously though I think that Paradox is just nerfing them into oblivion to charge for a DLC later, I see no other explanation seeing how much attention every corner of ROTW got in AoW.

 

[TheMeInTeam]

Hordes did not regularly slaughter those that surrendered. The would if you didn't, and collect tribute and draft your men for front line duty otherwise. This encouraged future surrender. There were exceptions of course.

 

[ABookshelf]

Hordes did not regularly slaughter those that surrendered. The would if you didn't, and collect tribute and draft your men for front line duty otherwise. This encouraged future surrender. There were exceptions of course.

Yeah there were a few exceptions...maybe a little more than a few....then again thats why I said "more likely"

Now that thats sorted, please explain why it makes sense that Hordes would suddenly be able to raise Napoleonic-era armies in only the province they just conquered and nowhere else.

 

[TheMeInTeam]

Because they are that advanced themselves, having teched all the necessary concepts, and are just adapting equipment.

Isn't that what the 75% penalty was to make harder?

 

[Jango40]

Having thought about it, I'm okay with this change. Coming up with strategies to terrorize as a late game horde will be fun.

Might be okay for you.. But you're a player of a completely different league and balancing things around the small elite shouldn't be done ;D

For the majority for players, hordes are a suicide ATM.

 

[Vishaing]

Now that thats sorted, please explain why it makes sense that Hordes would suddenly be able to raise Napoleonic-era armies in only the province they just conquered and nowhere else.

It doesn't. But it makes more sense then Hordes being permanently and arbitrarily locked in the Middle Ages.

In reality technology naturally diffuses through repeated contact and the Hordes incorporated firearms into their armies without much difficulty. After all they were already used to using ranged weapons from horse and camel-back.

Unfortunately Paradox remains married to a rigid and inflexible technological model that is largely divorced from reality, combined with a unit type model that is pure fantasy and which fails miserably to represent any of the strengths or weaknesses of multi-ethnic states in particular. Their extremely simplified manpower and force limits model exacerbates these flaws considerably.

But alas, we're not seeing nearly as many improvements to warfare as I hoped an Expansion entitled "Art of War" would include.