Print

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

[Catastrophic lolcats]

Argh, so much RAGE.

Been playing a Jurchen tribe -> Manchu -> buddhist Qing, wanting to get Eastern Jade, Manchurian Candidate and Silk Road in one game.

Just had two back to back regencies with both heirs dying just a few years away from adulthood. I'm now forced to endure 26 years of complete peace, losing a 6/4/6 heir (Johan) and my starting dynasty.
France also managed to get a foothold into Mexico since I couldn't burn/snipe their colonies and is now starting to outcompete me for the little trade I can suck out of the New World. Here's hoping they don't swallow up the rest of Meso-Americans before my new (shitty) heir comes to age.

[Tarran]

As an aside, is anybody interested in another attempt at getting a Bay12 EU4 game going again? I know the last one didn't end all that well but I've got some ideas on how to make it so we don't end up in the same sort of stalemate we did last time.

It probably would be a good idea to mention the ideas if you're trying to stir up attention. "Some ideas" is very vague, and your ideas might work better with second opinions.

[Andrew425]

As an aside, is anybody interested in another attempt at getting a Bay12 EU4 game going again? I know the last one didn't end all that well but I've got some ideas on how to make it so we don't end up in the same sort of stalemate we did last time.

It probably would be a good idea to mention the ideas if you're trying to stir up attention. "Some ideas" is very vague, and your ideas might work better with second opinions.

This game would require at a minimum eight players divided into five different teams.

Catholics
Austria
Castille

Protestants
England
Denmark (or Sweden depending on the player's choice)

Reformed
France
Poland

Orthodox
Muscovy
Georgia (If we have enough players)

Sunni
Ottomans
Najd (If we have enough players)

Additional players would be assigned to other smaller nations such as Morocco or Brandenburg

All players would then try their hardest to spread their faith to the four corners of the world. The winning religion would have the most provinces following their doctrine by the end of the game.

This would make the multiplayer game different then the standard version as alliances would change over the course of the game as lesser powerful religions might temporarily band together to stop the expansion of a stronger religion.

Standard rules for the other parts would of course apply

[WealthyRadish]

Argh, so much RAGE.

Been playing a Jurchen tribe -> Manchu -> buddhist Qing, wanting to get Eastern Jade, Manchurian Candidate and Silk Road in one game.

Just had two back to back regencies with both heirs dying just a few years away from adulthood. I'm now forced to endure 26 years of complete peace, losing a 6/4/6 heir (Johan) and my starting dynasty.
France also managed to get a foothold into Mexico since I couldn't burn/snipe their colonies and is now starting to outcompete me for the little trade I can suck out of the New World. Here's hoping they don't swallow up the rest of Meso-Americans before my new (shitty) heir comes to age.

I actually just wrapped up a Manchu game. The crappy thing about colonial nations as a non-western tech group is that they'll fall way behind in tech, even if you can match the west yourself (or at least the mil tech). It was fun at first helping Qingxico blob and kick New Spain out, but eventually they'll end up like, 10 levels behind and pretty useless.

I wouldn't worry about not being able to colonize a province in the central american region for the cheevo. With all the new little mesoamerican nations, it's not like before when someone could just come in and annex the whole region and get a megablob colonial nation right away. In that Manchu game, over 50% of the area was still independent by 1600, which I found pretty weird.

[Tarran]

As an aside, is anybody interested in another attempt at getting a Bay12 EU4 game going again? I know the last one didn't end all that well but I've got some ideas on how to make it so we don't end up in the same sort of stalemate we did last time.

It probably would be a good idea to mention the ideas if you're trying to stir up attention. "Some ideas" is very vague, and your ideas might work better with second opinions.

This game would require at a minimum eight players divided into five different teams.

Catholics
Austria
Castille

Protestants
England
Denmark (or Sweden depending on the player's choice)

Reformed
France
Poland

Orthodox
Muscovy
Georgia (If we have enough players)

Sunni
Ottomans
Najd (If we have enough players)

Additional players would be assigned to other smaller nations such as Morocco or Brandenburg

All players would then try their hardest to spread their faith to the four corners of the world. The winning religion would have the most provinces following their doctrine by the end of the game.

This would make the multiplayer game different then the standard version as alliances would change over the course of the game as lesser powerful religions might temporarily band together to stop the expansion of a stronger religion.

Standard rules for the other parts would of course apply

Unfortunately, I don't see how this would majorly change the way things worked in the previous game. I don't quite remember the game, so I can't really remember everything that went wrong. But I still don't see how this would change things.

In the previous game, people already sort-of teamed up into small groups of players with vaguely similar goals which then teamed up with another similar group to beat up on another team that is growing too powerful. How is this different besides the introduction of forced alliances and a religious factor?

[Tarran]

I don't think many people are interested in doing MEIOU or mods in general. In addition, I'm not really sure how stable MEIOU is on multiplayer.

There's also the problem of MEIOU not being updated yet.

So it's probably not going to happen, even though it really is a well developed mod.

[Andrew425]

Unfortunately, I don't see how this would majorly change the way things worked in the previous game. I don't quite remember the game, so I can't really remember everything that went wrong. But I still don't see how this would change things.

In the previous game, people already sort-of teamed up into small groups of players with vaguely similar goals which then teamed up with another similar group to beat up on another team that is growing too powerful. How is this different besides the introduction of forced alliances and a religious factor?

From what I remember of that game an attempt by the British and Spanish players to open up the gulf of Aden trade node was opposed by the French, who caused the Russians to side with British. Which in turn led to the Italians and Hansa player joining the French.

That led to a near stalemate and a bit of hostilities, as neither side was willing to budge on their terms.

My way would hopefully be a bit different in the sense that everyone would have a distinct endgame in mind and they would be willing to switch alliances to achieve that. Also because their would be 5 different alliance groups it would be unlikely for them to end up in a permanent state of hostilities towards a single group.

Last game we also had a lack of balancing forces. France was able to take on the next two largest armies in the world and wipe them out, as well as march into Russia during the winter time. Now we would have enough European states to be able to form a coalition if needed.

[Tarran]

If balancing is a problem, you could always make players play minors and TPM/OPMs and ban the majors.

Also, the lack of budging was more the problem of a few players being stubborn as opposed to there being two sides. France wanted to get something severe out of Spain, who was going to fight to the death. The problem lay with the players, not the alliance, which is why ultimately everyone else peaced out without at least one of the partner's consent.

[lijacote]

I'm totally interested in a Bay 12 MP game, and I don't care that much for balance. I'm a bigger fan of using diplomacy in curbing threats to world peace.
My timezone is EEST or so. Or GMT +3. Or +2. Sometimes hours shift, because lol consistency.

[Isdar]

I would be up for EU IV MP.

Regarding the last MP game I didn't have a problem with the stalemate, not every war should be a total defeat or victory, and if the war had continued for a few more years I think one of the sides would have won. What we did was basically the equivalent of the Entente and Central Powers in WWI signing a white peace immediately after the trenches had been dug and everything descended into a tugging match. That's how I viewed the war as the Hansa.

[Micro102]

Been trying to play Byzantium and just cannot make it work. The strategies I've read don't seem to be up to date, as they ask you to declare war on countries that you don't have cores on.

The Ottomans almost instantly warn you and unless they get severely hurt by either Venice or the Mamalukes they WILL attack you and annex you. And if you wait too long they attack and annex you.

It seems like my only hope is to get 6 cities and the noble knights idea before the ottomans attack so I can fight them with the knights decision, but this seems heavily reliant on luck as I need the Ottomans to lose a war to get an opportunity to attack someone.

[Teneb]

Been trying to play Byzantium and just cannot make it work. The strategies I've read don't seem to be up to date, as they ask you to declare war on countries that you don't have cores on.

The Ottomans almost instantly warn you and unless they get severely hurt by either Venice or the Mamalukes they WILL attack you and annex you. And if you wait too long they attack and annex you.

It seems like my only hope is to get 6 cities and the noble knights idea before the ottomans attack so I can fight them with the knights decision, but this seems heavily reliant on luck as I need the Ottomans to lose a war to get an opportunity to attack someone.

The one thing I've seen that gives you an edge is DoW'ing Cyprus before you unpause. As long as you do it before you unpause, the Mamluks won't join the war despite their guarantee. Other than that, all I can think of is a lot of loans, mercenaries and rebels.

[Karlito]

Byzantium is super easy in the latest patch. I just built as many galleys as possible and then won my first war with the Ottomans about 3 years into the game after waiting for them to go fight in Asia minor and blocking the strait. It's much more difficult for them to get military access through the Caucasus, at least in the early game.

In the long term, an alliance with Poland was helpful.

[Micro102]

Byzantium is super easy in the latest patch. I just built as many galleys as possible and then won my first war with the Ottomans about 3 years into the game after waiting for them to go fight in Asia minor and blocking the strait. It's much more difficult for them to get military access through the Caucasus, at least in the early game.

In the long term, an alliance with Poland was helpful.

Ok first off, your navy force limit is like.....12. The ottomans have over 40 ships. Do you sacrifice advisers or something? Because it sounds like it will get expensive if you go 300% over your force limit.

Secondly, Poland doesn't seem to be bordering water or the ottomans, so how do they help?

Been trying to play Byzantium and just cannot make it work. The strategies I've read don't seem to be up to date, as they ask you to declare war on countries that you don't have cores on.

The Ottomans almost instantly warn you and unless they get severely hurt by either Venice or the Mamalukes they WILL attack you and annex you. And if you wait too long they attack and annex you.

It seems like my only hope is to get 6 cities and the noble knights idea before the ottomans attack so I can fight them with the knights decision, but this seems heavily reliant on luck as I need the Ottomans to lose a war to get an opportunity to attack someone.

The one thing I've seen that gives you an edge is DoW'ing Cyprus before you unpause. As long as you do it before you unpause, the Mamluks won't join the war despite their guarantee. Other than that, all I can think of is a lot of loans, mercenaries and rebels.

I view that as a bug and don't plan on exploiting it.

[FritzPL]

I'm up for a MP game. When and where?
Also, the host's gotta have most, if not all of the dlcs. That way we can benefit, too.