Print

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

[Sheb]

So I've got this Navarre CK2 game that went really well, and I was wondering what to do with it. I've got several idea:

-Make it a low authority HRE and play again as Navarre trying to hold onto the throne of an Europe-wide Empire.
-Make it a low to mid-authority HRE and then play as some Indian state with the end goal being becoming Emperor.
-Make it a Roman Empire and then play as Aztec or Inca (I've got the Sunset Invasion DLC) trying to get a foothold in Europe and generally hold them back.


So, what do you think would be the most fun?

[casserol]

I like the Indian Emperor and the independant Incan America ideas . especially the Indian Emperor now that I think of it.


So I tried a bit of EU IV. My first impressions were great, but after a couple hour I finally reinstalled EU III

My biggest problem is monarch points. Are they here for anything but slowing down the game ?

On the other hand, there's been quite a few improvement, and after replaying a bit of EUIII I'm not satisfied either and want to give EUIV a second try.

Please tell me positive things about monarch points


Fake edit : and on the technical side, how do you deal with warning ? Playing as Armenia (I started a game as Aq Konyulu and released them) I find myself constantly warned by my huges hostiles neighbours (namely the ottomans and Qara Konyulu) and have to wait for them to be embroiled in big wars just so I can dow my small neighbours, which is crippling my expansion. I apparently managed to fend off warning by the Qaras by guaranteeing them, which as absurd as it is seemed to please them, but now i got warned by the ottomans and I'm in for 20 years of forced peace

True edit : I mean EUIII was already all about playing around the obstacles to expansions the devs put in, but damn EUIV does it even worse, looks like they got it really expansion-proof that time.

[Catastrophic lolcats]

EUIV is currently in the worst state it's been in so far. Conquest of Paradise introduced a patch that completely changed the balance of the game which the majority believes negatively impacted the game. I, and I'm sure many others, are waiting for the Wealth of Nations DLC to hopefully fix the abysmal state protectorates are in at least.

The point of monarch points is to add a random aspect to nations so not everything can be calculated and gamed. It's purposes are meant to simulate the rise and fall of nations and possibly stop the snowballing of nations once they get too big. It does work to a degree but is heavily reliant on luck. I personally prefer having more than a single currency and found tech rates and the like much more reasonable than in EU3 (where a HRE OPM can be like 15 levels higher in tech).
Some people argue that MP is nothing than a stupid luck mechanic that negates tactics but I would personally argue against this by saying that there is some tactics and indeed even skill in working around a 0/0/1 monarch. This is especially true in Multiplayer where you have to really start playing the diplomacy game where you get a bad ruler so you have some allies to shield you in your moment of need.
If you're having a lot of trouble getting into EUIV due to the MP system try starting with a republic. My first game was with Venice and I felt that really eased me into the system and learning where and when to spend points.

As for warnings remember that a nation cannot warn you if you've warned them. I used this in my Ireland game when I knew I would never be able to be friends with England so I both warned them and embargoed them. AI will also not always go through with the warnings especially if they're in a big war, lack funds/manpower or you have a big mean ally to protect you.

[MoLAoS]

Monarch points are honestly dumb. I can and do game them but I don't like it. All they do is piss off players. The problem with EU games is that they don't simulate the REAL reason big countries fell apart. Which is infighting and multiple rulers with different goals and policies. The player is an eternal monarch which is a huge advantage and they also have too other advantages. One is that even with Ironman you can start a new game and avoid previous mistakes, even if you can't save scum. The other is that you can access real advisers, not fake monarch point giving ones, by breaking out the Google.

So shitty monarchs will slow a smart player down and bore them out of their minds, but they won't collapse the player nation to any significant degree. Even my most disastrous mistakes have consequences of mostly waiting for manpower to recharge and maybe wait to deal with loans I may have taken trying to fight against the AI's super generals and constant 9 rolls in battles. but I don't LOSE, and my empire never collapses. Maybe I release a couple nations with low base tax provinces, like Finland. But mostly not even that.

If I want to savescum and break out the Google, a real sandbox would let me. If I want to try and play the game all by myself, the poor design decisions and programming of Paradox will be a far greater limiter to my expansion than any intentional mechanic they design. Well that combined with their poor in game descriptions. Anyone who remembers the combat power modifier debacle, or the ongoing cavalry are worthless for anyone but Poland with full Aristocratic and National Ideas problem, understands what I mean.

[casserol]

I was just sitting there doing nothing, and suddenly the worst (or at least top 10) pun in history (or at least video game history) hit me.


Why is Paradox calling its add-ons "DLC" ?

Spoiler (click to show/hide)

Because they don't want no expansion in EU IV

[Sheb]

I love it.

[Micro102]

*claps*

[Dutchling]

I had to read it four times to get it, but still:

* Dutchling claps

[MoLAoS]

You are my new hero.

[MoLAoS]

How has this not been posted in in 2.5 months?

Anyways, does anyone have any experience modding in major landmasses in the northern atlantic? I am doing a huge personal Atlantis mod, and I was wondering how hard it hits colonizers and how it might affect the politics of Europe.

Will France, Castille, Portugal, and England attack the new lands, thus altering the balance of power in Europe? Hows does having to cross at the A/SA or Ice/Green links affect colonizing the new world?

I am somewhat afraid that my new nations/continent shall empower Russia. With Norway and Denmark and Sweden having to look at a more northwest threat than the usual Russian one change the balance? Or will Poland be free to clear out the Orders and perhaps go after Muscovy rather than fight the vikings?

I also wonder how the HRE/France/Bur fight will go with England and Castille being worried about a major power in the west.

[EnigmaticHat]

How has this not been posted in in 2.5 months?

I don't know why others haven't posted, but I personally stopped playing early on because coalitions pissed me off and I assumed they would be toned down at some point.  Apparently this hasn't happened so I never came back to it.

Also CK2 is pretty much more awesome than EU 3 or 4, in my opinion of course.

[snelg]

How has this not been posted in in 2.5 months?

I'm having trouble enjoying the game, have started 4 or so campaigns since it came out and probably haven't played it more than 10 hours or so in total. Between the vassal-feeding, monarch points and so on I don't feel like I'm having fun with it. On the other hand, I've been playing a lot of V2, HoI3, CK2 and even EU3.

Maybe I should give it another go soon.

[Catastrophic lolcats]

I'm personally loving the game. There are some mechanics I'm not too fond of but it's still pretty good.
Just finishing up my Ethiopian restore the patriarchy campaign. I've got all the provinces needed except for Constantinople but I'm slowly grinding them into paste with my fully westernised 146% discipline armies.

Looking forward to the new expansion especially since the units from all tech groups are being rebalanced. I would love to play a non-western game where I don't have to rush exploration and westernise ASAP to survive. Hopefully there's a nerf to the rate of colonising so Castile and Portugal don't own everything east of South Africa.

[MoLAoS]

How has this not been posted in in 2.5 months?

I don't know why others haven't posted, but I personally stopped playing early on because coalitions pissed me off and I assumed they would be toned down at some point.  Apparently this hasn't happened so I never came back to it.

Also CK2 is pretty much more awesome than EU 3 or 4, in my opinion of course.

No, no. Coalitions were really toned down from what I've seen. As the Ottoman Empire, I found that when I started taking land willy-nilly, most of the countries that joined a coalition against me were weaker neighbors. As England against France, I found that the only person who joined a coalition against me when I took some French land was... well, France. Mind you, I play MEIOU and Taxes, but that doesn't touch coalitions.

Are you sure MEIOU doesn't nerf AE?

Also the Ottomans can avoid coalitions by taking land in 3 different regions. I'd say AE gain is currently a bit too high, but its mainly important for the HRE. AE in the HRE is just so overdone. You can conquer anywhere else decently well, still a bit high, without getting tons of powerful coalitions.

[Tarran]

How has this not been posted in in 2.5 months?

Three reasons for me:

1: I don't have any questions (I believe I know a lot of the game, I believe the Paradox forums are best for answers, and I have come to the fact that the game hides things from you anyway[e.g, warscore costs]), nor do feel like anything I do in-game is particularly worthy of telling to the rest of the world.
2: Due to the behavior of Paradox, I have grown largely dissatisfied and disinterested with the future of the game. It doesn't help that I still play 1.4.
3: I am neither interested in starting a conversation nor am I very interested in helping people.