Print

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

[Baffler]

I'm not sure how much I like Common Sense's patch changes, they seem like they only make sense with the DLC installed as well and I've sunk enough money into this game as it is.

For one, the limit on construction seems too low, and with no real way to make it get any higher without hoping for random events that -might- bump the development level up the vast majority of provinces will be stuck underdeveloped and empty no matter how much money and resources I may have at hand, because that province was historically underdeveloped and empty. I want to make the desert bloom, dammit, and relying on random whims isn't going to do it.

The forts are nicer though, it always seemed a bit silly for me to just be able (and expected) to put a gigantic fortress in every single one of my territories. I still can, technically, but the cost of maintaining the things (another sensible change) means that that probably isn't going to happen. That and the looting makes the strategic game a lot more considered as well, and makes enemy territory much more dangerous even if there aren't any active divisions around.

[forsaken1111]

Wait, can you not spend power points to develop a province without the DLC?

[WealthyRadish]

Yeah, the DLC is necessary for it. Without it the development cost modifiers get replaced by other modifiers. If it weren't for the building cap though, I'd say provice development is really unimportant (and even then it's only marginally important, since you can always just tear down whatever dumb buildings the AI built). Monarch points should almost always be prioritized over money, and I would say that the only case when developing a province is a good idea is when the alternative is paying an ahead of time penalty on a tech upgrade. For the most part this means western tech nations will have the most reason to develop, but since it's fairly easy for any tech group to maintain parity in military tech, military development is probably the only one worth it outside of Europe (it also happens to be the best of the three development bonuses IMO).

[lijacote]

There are a few provinces I think that really could use a trade building, but can't get one without demolition unless one develops them. I think this is bad practice, and it reeks of such free-to-play marvels as... ugh, I can't recall if Travian had bullshit like this. Surely it had?

[Persus13]

I'm not sure how much I like Common Sense's patch changes, they seem like they only make sense with the DLC installed as well and I've sunk enough money into this game as it is.

For one, the limit on construction seems too low, and with no real way to make it get any higher without hoping for random events that -might- bump the development level up the vast majority of provinces will be stuck underdeveloped and empty no matter how much money and resources I may have at hand, because that province was historically underdeveloped and empty. I want to make the desert bloom, dammit, and relying on random whims isn't going to do it.

The forts are nicer though, it always seemed a bit silly for me to just be able (and expected) to put a gigantic fortress in every single one of my territories. I still can, technically, but the cost of maintaining the things (another sensible change) means that that probably isn't going to happen. That and the looting makes the strategic game a lot more considered as well, and makes enemy territory much more dangerous even if there aren't any active divisions around.

The point of the building slots is that they've been limited even with the DLC. As a non-DLC player, while it is super annoying to have a province with 9 development and know you could develop it one and get another building, I've played with the DLC on in multiplayer and making a desert province bloom and being able to build more buildings will cost you something like 420 monarch points or more (assuming its a 3 development province)

You're expected to build forts in every province? That sounds like a huge waste of money.

There are a few provinces I think that really could use a trade building, but can't get one without demolition unless one develops them. I think this is bad practice, and it reeks of such free-to-play marvels as... ugh, I can't recall if Travian had bullshit like this. Surely it had?

So demolish a building, if its an estuary or a center of trade you'll get more money from that trade building any way. Out of curiousity why is that a bad thing?

The most annoying thing for me was that they got rid of the Unique buildings without replacements. Having that third diplomat and extra relation from the embassy was very useful and something I'm really annoyed about not having anymore.

[Chosrau]

The most annoying thing for me was that they got rid of the Unique buildings without replacements. Having that third diplomat and extra relation from the embassy was very useful and something I'm really annoyed about not having anymore.

While I also miss the third diplomat, I still think removing the embassy was a good choice. Since that change I actually start contemplating taking one of the +1 diplomat ideas, something I barely did before. Those idea groups really needed a little buff.

[Vendayn]

The most annoying thing for me was that they got rid of the Unique buildings without replacements. Having that third diplomat and extra relation from the embassy was very useful and something I'm really annoyed about not having anymore.

While I also miss the third diplomat, I still think removing the embassy was a good choice. Since that change I actually start contemplating taking one of the +1 diplomat ideas, something I barely did before. Those idea groups really needed a little buff.

That isn't really buffing the idea group though. That would have been the better solution.

Nerfing something to make something else "better" (when that something that is "better" wasn't touched) just makes its the same, just one thing is worse.

I actually liked the unique buildings. And now, the new system, I take the same buildings in every province...because that is whats optimal. At least before it was the same roughly (still just mass build same buildings), but I had more options before with the unique buildings.

The fort mechanics are awesome though, I like that feature. And playing theocratic empires (like papal states) is A LOT more fun.

[Chosrau]

While I also miss the third diplomat, I still think removing the embassy was a good choice. Since that change I actually start contemplating taking one of the +1 diplomat ideas, something I barely did before. Those idea groups really needed a little buff.

That isn't really buffing the idea group though. That would have been the better solution.

Nerfing something to make something else "better" (when that something that is "better" wasn't touched) just makes its the same, just one thing is worse.

They turned one of the ideas from "meh, anything above 3 diplomats is overkill" into " ohh, 3rd diplomat would be nice". And this idea especially they could have not just increased the values to make it better. Even if it gave something like ludicrous +4 diplomats, I would have not taken it, since I really don't need more then 3 diplos. The way they changed it, it now is a qualitative difference, rather then a quantitative one.

The only unique building I really liked mechanics-wise was the march, even though I never managed to make proper use of it. All others were simply built whenever I hit the techlevel, not really caring about the placement. They might as well have made them into decisions that cost alot of gold and some time to implement, wouldn't have changed them in any way that mattered.

[WealthyRadish]

Worth pointing out that the diplomatic idea group is one of the best in the game (and was before the patch removing embassies). Province warscore cost reduction, the extra diplomat + improve relations bonus, 10% tech reduction, and +2 dip rep are all huge, and every other idea in the group is worth it as well (though the increased diplo-annex costs make me think that influence is often going to be the better 1st/2nd/3rd choice over diplo). Espionage also gets a diplomat, but is of course one of the worst idea groups.

I would also say that having 4+ diplomats is pretty great, if only because it allows for simultaneously integrating up to 3 small/medium vassals (to avoid that dip rep malus if timed correctly), and it makes coalition dodging in the HRE much easier. It's a shame the only good policy that gives a diplomat seems to be the one from exploration and aristocratic.

[Vendayn]

I like espionage Just a bit later down the line, definitely not my 1st...2nd...3rd and sometimes its the 4th but usually 5th idea I take (if i do).

I broke the HRE apart with espionage. I played that game like a CK2 game pretty much lol. Dunno if it was part of MEIOU or the game is just like that as maybe its realistic...but I had everyone hate Australia (the leader of HRE) and they all attacked him. Didn't think HRE would turn on the leader, but they did lol. On top of that, Austria (which was HUGE by the time I got espionage) had so many rebellions ( ) that it pretty much crumbled.

One by one I took down HRE In its place, Lithuania took the eastern part, and for some reason islam owned that game and took over spain and france. But couldn't beat england. Islam (mamluks still survived, and so did Fez) was also very advanced in tech. It outclassed me lol. But maybe I just sucked at it as it was my first game I did with EU4. In any case, they really owned.

And then my save corrupted

(edit: Early on, espionage is definitely rather useless (most of the time). I tried it as Byzantines to take down ottomans. And well, that actually worked VERY well...all of that area had massive rebellions and the entire area fell apart and I took over easily. Wasn't meant to do that good on a test game lol, but ah well.

Next game I tried Cilicia (the armenia guys), and tried espionage against mamluks. But it didn't do anything at all. No rebellions, nothing.

Could depend on the nation, maybe mamluks get high lower revolt risk or something. Or its random. But it sure worked as Byzantines that one game, ottomans (and everyone else in that region (that was islam) got crushed by revolts.)

[WealthyRadish]

I feel like if I played with SPY_DISCOVERY_COOLDOWN_MONTHS in the defines set to something like 5 months (instead of 5 years) I could have some fun with espionage. Not really sure what they were thinking setting it that high, although in EU3 it was always hilarious (and really quite annoying) how the AI would do all sorts of dumb spy stuff constantly.

[Vendayn]

I feel like if I played with SPY_DISCOVERY_COOLDOWN_MONTHS in the defines set to something like 5 months (instead of 5 years) I could have some fun with espionage. Not really sure what they were thinking setting it that high, although in EU3 it was always hilarious (and really quite annoying) how the AI would do all sorts of dumb spy stuff constantly.

Well, now I'm going to have to tweak that

5 years is way too long
5 months way too short...

wonder what a good balance is. Maybe just a year, I'll try that. Cause a year is quite long really, and that seems better.

Having the AI do more spy stuff would be a lot better. Be a lot more realistic, nations always spy on each other.

[Persus13]

Well they certainly seem to constantly be finding "legitimate documents" claiming my territory or what hopefully will be my territory really belongs to them.

[Bouchart]

I can't decide whether I like EU3 or EU4 better.  I'm leaning towards EU3.

[Rakonas]

I like espionage Just a bit later down the line, definitely not my 1st...2nd...3rd and sometimes its the 4th but usually 5th idea I take (if i do).

I broke the HRE apart with espionage. I played that game like a CK2 game pretty much lol. Dunno if it was part of MEIOU or the game is just like that as maybe its realistic...but I had everyone hate Australia (the leader of HRE) and they all attacked him. Didn't think HRE would turn on the leader, but they did lol. On top of that, Austria (which was HUGE by the time I got espionage) had so many rebellions ( ) that it pretty much crumbled.

One by one I took down HRE In its place, Lithuania took the eastern part, and for some reason islam owned that game and took over spain and france. But couldn't beat england. Islam (mamluks still survived, and so did Fez) was also very advanced in tech. It outclassed me lol. But maybe I just sucked at it as it was my first game I did with EU4. In any case, they really owned.

And then my save corrupted

(edit: Early on, espionage is definitely rather useless (most of the time). I tried it as Byzantines to take down ottomans. And well, that actually worked VERY well...all of that area had massive rebellions and the entire area fell apart and I took over easily. Wasn't meant to do that good on a test game lol, but ah well.

Next game I tried Cilicia (the armenia guys), and tried espionage against mamluks. But it didn't do anything at all. No rebellions, nothing.

Could depend on the nation, maybe mamluks get high lower revolt risk or something. Or its random. But it sure worked as Byzantines that one game, ottomans (and everyone else in that region (that was islam) got crushed by revolts.)

Espionage is broken imo because of how easy it is to prevent rebellions from happening so long as you have no war exhaustion. Especially with lucky nations and such. The AI is smart enough to raise autonomy and the like so you generally don't have many rebel options or at least nothing viable. For instance vs the ottomans you'll generally be unable to encourage any orthodox rebels because they'll tolerate them. Any province with below 0% revolt risk cannot be affected by foreign support for rebels, so it's hard to upset the status quo. But at the same time the ottomans will slowly sink in religious unity because they only have like +20 now and will rarely convert.