Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[Mictlantecuhtli]

I ninja'd your idea there, mate. I've done that. Multiple times, actually. I might have my Delhi save from a situation I'm describing where I've done this testing.

Edit: Nope, must've wiped it when my save files piled up. I'll keep one around next time I come across a situation where I get a no-CB/married/peace treaty breaking attack.

[a1s]

I might have my Delhi save from a situation I'm describing where I've done this testing.

I would be very interested. Alternatively, I'd like to know how to aggro the AI better. I guess I play to passively, but it just doesn't seem to happen to me all that often...

[Mictlantecuhtli]

I might have my Delhi save from a situation I'm describing where I've done this testing.

I would be very interested. Alternatively, I'd like to know how to aggro the AI better. I guess I play to passively, but it just doesn't seem to happen to me all that often...

I'm thinking of an easier way to invoke this: Spamming stability decreasing spies and checking said AI nation's admin points between stability changes. Unsure of if this would be a similar representation of what is happening during the warring-stability hits, but its easy to test.

And on this: I was Delhi forming Hindustan so of course I got coalition spam from the very beginning, breaking their countries into nothing and expanding ruthlessly so everyone in the area hated me for the land penalties, especially my Royally-married Ahmednagar. They join the coalition, I get Dow'd by the coalition for punitive actions, smashed them to nothing again. A majority of countries then leave the coalition from me gaining cores and the cooldown hitting on their anger-meters.

Then Ahmednagar, a royally-married, no-Cb-having, peace treaty having country to my south declares war on me citing no CB. I check the stability of said country, and it is at.. 3.

The dialogue when you get war declared on you, as it pops up, shows you the stability hits the attacker is incurring: -2 from no CB, -1 from marriage, -2 [I think? 3 maybe] from breaking treaty. This would have put Ahmednagar into negative stability with a cost in the thousands to bring it back up [due to their own overextension and large province count without cores thanks to me].

Loading at that day of the declaration showed me that they had.. 700? Admin points and 3 stability. On the day they should have gotten that massive stability hit. Comparing the admin points to what they had at the start of the month.. negligible difference.

Maybe it is better that they completely ignore those nuances. The game isn't necessarily hard..

[a1s]

I'm thinking of an easier way to invoke this: Spamming stability decreasing spies and checking said AI nation's admin points between stability changes. Unsure of if this would be a similar representation of what is happening during the warring-stability hits, but its easy to test.

I'm fairly sure there's no such thing as stability decreasing spies. The closest thing I know of is 'Sow discontent', which increases revolt risk and stability cost.

[Mictlantecuhtli]

I'm thinking of an easier way to invoke this: Spamming stability decreasing spies and checking said AI nation's admin points between stability changes. Unsure of if this would be a similar representation of what is happening during the warring-stability hits, but its easy to test.

I'm fairly sure there's no such thing as stability decreasing spies. The closest thing I know of is 'Sow discontent', which increases revolt risk and stability cost.

I swear there's one which would knock stability.

[fivex]

I'm thinking of an easier way to invoke this: Spamming stability decreasing spies and checking said AI nation's admin points between stability changes. Unsure of if this would be a similar representation of what is happening during the warring-stability hits, but its easy to test.

I'm fairly sure there's no such thing as stability decreasing spies. The closest thing I know of is 'Sow discontent', which increases revolt risk and stability cost.

I swear there's one which would knock stability.

There was one in EU3, I think.

[EnigmaticHat]

I understand that the AI works in ticks, but why can't the AI in the same tick declare a war without CB and raise stability because it knows its declaring a war without CB as one action?

Tick: Action -> Tick: Reaction

So... why do you think that the AI can only take a single action in a tick?  Why do you assume that one tick = one action?

I did some google searches to figure out what AI tick means in EU, and what AI tick means in general, and got absolutely nothing except the AI cheats page already linked to, the paradox forum post that came from, and THIS THREAD.

Now, if you have a source that I don't have, ignore this and link me to it.  However, assuming you're in the dark as much as everyone else... why would you assume that an AI tick refers to a single action that the AI takes?  In DF "tick" it means an interval of time.  In RL, "tick" refers to the noise a clock makes, which is a reference to time.  So, to me, it seems logical that the AI ticks refer to how OFTEN it acts, not how many times it gets to act in a single space of time as you refer to.

Also, seriously, please include some proof for what you're saying here  You're making a lot of very confident declarations, and asking people to include screenshots to prove their points, without doing the same for your points.  The opposition to your argument already has a forum post from a Paradox dev that strongly contradicts what you're trying to say here.

[Lightning4]

I might have my Delhi save from a situation I'm describing where I've done this testing.

I would be very interested. Alternatively, I'd like to know how to aggro the AI better. I guess I play to passively, but it just doesn't seem to happen to me all that often...

I'm thinking of an easier way to invoke this: Spamming stability decreasing spies and checking said AI nation's admin points between stability changes. Unsure of if this would be a similar representation of what is happening during the warring-stability hits, but its easy to test.

And on this: I was Delhi forming Hindustan so of course I got coalition spam from the very beginning, breaking their countries into nothing and expanding ruthlessly so everyone in the area hated me for the land penalties, especially my Royally-married Ahmednagar. They join the coalition, I get Dow'd by the coalition for punitive actions, smashed them to nothing again. A majority of countries then leave the coalition from me gaining cores and the cooldown hitting on their anger-meters.

Then Ahmednagar, a royally-married, no-Cb-having, peace treaty having country to my south declares war on me citing no CB. I check the stability of said country, and it is at.. 3.

The dialogue when you get war declared on you, as it pops up, shows you the stability hits the attacker is incurring: -2 from no CB, -1 from marriage, -2 [I think? 3 maybe] from breaking treaty. This would have put Ahmednagar into negative stability with a cost in the thousands to bring it back up [due to their own overextension and large province count without cores thanks to me].

Loading at that day of the declaration showed me that they had.. 700? Admin points and 3 stability. On the day they should have gotten that massive stability hit. Comparing the admin points to what they had at the start of the month.. negligible difference.

Maybe it is better that they completely ignore those nuances. The game isn't necessarily hard..

Hmm.
I wonder. Maybe it's a bug, then? To me, everything points to the fact that AI should be getting stability hits on war declarations.
If they aren't, it's pretty inconsistent with everything else in the game. There are mechanics in place that allow the AI, at some level, to factor in stability hits for certain actions... and seems pretty silly to have a popup show you how much of a stability hit the AI will take, only for them not to get hit with it.

Unless, of course, stability costs for AI are significantly cheaper... wonder if there's a way of determining that?

[EnigmaticHat]

OK, that stuff Mictlantecuhtli said about Ahmednagar sounds kind of convincing.  (not that its an intentional design decision, but that its happening).  Just as an experiment, did you try waging war on your former self, as them?  Maybe the dialogue telling you what stability hits they got was wrong, or something?

[FritzPL]

necro, but

I'm playing as Italy after forming it in 1520s, starting as Tuscany. I managed to eat Genoa, half Venice, Nice and Cuneo provinces of Savoy, vassalized what was left of them and integrated Corsica. I was going to make good use of 25 year claims I got after forming Italy, but after getting Genoa and Savoy I didn't risk overexpansion and aggresive expansion, as well as Great Britain(yes, they formed as well) joining the war on Venice's side. I went around building things for about 20 years, savescumming after failed wars with Naples and Venetians. Then, Venice declared war on me, 'coalition' their CB. Guess what?
Spain(yep, they formed too) joined. I shat my pants at that moment, as my navy could barely compare to their 12 carracks and 40+ caravels. Fortunately, Hungary honored the alliance and I got a few moments of breath, and I focused on getting Sicily and Sardinia. I managed to somehow scramble 10 galleys and caravels, join up with Hungary's fleet and beat combined Venetian-Ferrarian naval forces, fixed my ships, then I saw the Ottomans in a 70v41 battle, them being the former number. I quickly joined in and together with them crushed the Spaniards - after that battle everything went a lot easier. I occupied Venice and Ferrara, got Sicily and the 14 reg garrison that was there, went to Sardinia, blocked all of their ports, went for Madrid, went back to destroy what remained of their army, went back and I'm in progress of occupying entire Spain.
My question is:
Which religion should I convert to?
I'm obviously not gonna stay Catholic, but I don't know if I should go Reformed or Protestant. Protestant sounds awesome for me, because tax modifier is always good, and I'm planning on leaving HRE soon. Reformed isn't bad either though, as I'm controlling trade in Genoa and Venice, and trade income makes up 1/4th of my overall income. What do you guys think?

[Descan]

5 days does not a necro make. :V

[Catastrophic lolcats]

Stay Catholic. The Italian states have hidden modifiers which will make provinces flip back to Catholic fairly regularly and I don't think they get any free reformation "religious zeal" effects. Couple that with a high tax rate which slows conversion rates and you're just going to have a pain in the neck.

The reformation doesn't seem to be as powerful than in EU4 as most countries often tend to drift back to Catholicism. However Protestantism is the best christian religion if you can't completely control 100% of the curia.

[Lightning4]

Reminds me that the reformation is kind of... weird in my current playthrough.

It started at its normal time around the early 1500s, but it's somehow still going in the 1600s and later. Every time I look up into Europe, there's like ten more new protestant provinces, and someone else has converted.

I didn't even think it was supposed to spread anymore after about 100 years, since the spreading event gets a very nasty multiplier against its MTTH as time drags on. So, I guess nations are either warring to do it, or just flipping on their own.

[Micro102]

Well, Denmark seemed to have inherited Norway.....And then Sweden. And I can ally with them but I'm already 1 over my diplomatic relations limit.

[Ivan Issaccs]

Sometimes its worth scrapping a shitty alliance, I mean if I play brandenburg the first thing I do is break royal ties with Mantua as soon as I have enough admin power to repair the stability hit.