EPTEuropa Universalis IV - Page 176
| Forum Index > General Games |
|
419
Russian Federation3631 Posts
| ||
|
WindWolf
Sweden11767 Posts
On May 26 2016 19:52 419 wrote: And I read on the Paradox forum that there will be no more westernisation after this patch! Horrah! That probably means that technology groups will only be used for different unit types.this change has the potential to be really amazing Also, there is a new menu icon between government and diplomacy ones | ||
|
Silvanel
Poland4736 Posts
If i wanna see Egyptians in space i play CIV not EU. | ||
|
Xafnia
Canada874 Posts
Carib Strong. ![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/Xs045N3.jpg) Converted from Animist to Inti from event in Lima. ![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/59On0qf.jpg) Cleansed the lands of awful euro-culture ![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/J98NIMC.jpg) One of my worst games ever, ruler-wise. ![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/Nq3TQ5J.jpg) Ironman proof. ![[image loading]](https://i.imgur.com/mtmnNPY.jpg) Exploration was dropped when everything was colonized. | ||
|
jtype
England2167 Posts
In my game right now I'm on my 3rd regency council, the first two of which lasted around 13 years each. I think that might cost me my run, but I'm not sure. | ||
|
Xafnia
Canada874 Posts
I took exploration/expansion/offensive. Jumping to 6 colonists :D (3 from ideas, 1 from carib ideas, 1 from inti reformation, 1 from native american reforms) | ||
|
Salazarz
Korea (South)2591 Posts
On May 26 2016 21:20 Silvanel wrote: I want to check it out in game. But from Dev Diary is loks retarded to me. One thing i find appealing in EU is that countries and cultures are not equal (like they are in CIV games for example). Last thing i wanna see in EU game is Indian tech being on par with Europe. If i wanna see Egyptians in space i play CIV not EU. While I definitely agree with you that different countries / cultures etc in the game being asymmetric is a big part of the attraction of EU4, the whole notion of European technology being more advanced than that of the rest of the world in EU4's time period is very silly. Muslim and Asian countries were in fact well ahead of Europe in terms of technological and social developments, their administration was better organized, etc. The thing that allowed Europe to dominate the globe was their aggression and also the infinite wars in Europe contribution a lot to advancement of military tactics -- and even still, many of Asian nations provided stiff resistance to European colonialism and a more military-focused country like Japan, for example, could field armies that could go toe to toe with the best of what Europeans could show up with. Heck, having Spain or something dismantling and forcibly conquering India before 1800 is probably more 'ahistorical' and hard to picture as a possibility in real historical context than India uniting under a strong, expansion-focused ruler and rolling its borders out all the way to Europe. | ||
|
WindWolf
Sweden11767 Posts
On May 26 2016 21:20 Silvanel wrote: I want to check it out in game. But from Dev Diary is loks retarded to me. One thing i find appealing in EU is that countries and cultures are not equal (like they are in CIV games for example). Last thing i wanna see in EU game is Indian tech being on par with Europe. If i wanna see Egyptians in space i play CIV not EU. While I also like the fact that countries aren't equal in this game, the tech group system made it very hard to play lower tech-groups. For example, there has been several times where I have played as a nation in America and had to give up as soon as a western nation arrives because I'm way to far behind in technology. | ||
|
Silvanel
Poland4736 Posts
All of which is adequatly depicted in EU. Asian units of the same tech are stronger than European and early Muslim stronger than EU. But Europeans tech faster- precisly what happend in our world. If something its wrong its TOO EASY to catchup with Europe not too hard. By the time EUIV starts the time of great Muslim scholars is long gone: Avicenna 980-1037, Al-Farabi - 872-950,Averroes 1126 -1198 or just see here: http://www.famousscientists.org/famous-muslim-arab-persian-scientists-and-their-inventions/ There was a time when Europe was far bahind in terms of techonology compared to Middleast, China, Iran Area, even Niger delta and some subharran cultures. But when game starts its no longer the case, Europeans are starting to get ahead and are using their advantage. And when it comes to India their advancment always came from their nieghbors either from Iran area or China. Recomneded reading: History of Metallurgy by Ronald F. Tylecote. This book is great because its discusses actual facts not compares culture to culture like some pseudo-science books do. And its actual academic level book not pop-science when everything goes. Great read if Your intrested both in enginnering and archeology. | ||
|
Yurie
11975 Posts
China was probably too big and didn't want to collapse (again), so makes sense seen in their time. They couldn't have known the industrial revolution was only a few hundred years away if they kept developing. | ||
|
Silvanel
Poland4736 Posts
In regards to game i think bonuses to technology should be transfred trough trade nodes and by warfare. | ||
|
WindWolf
Sweden11767 Posts
| ||
|
Xafnia
Canada874 Posts
As for native Americans, well it's normal they are hard. Spanish with horses, guns, iron and had just finished the reconquista vs Natives that were decimated by disease and lacked all sorts of technology taken for granted for thousands of years anywhere in the old world. Also, started a new game. That feeling when your empire is starting to take hold. ![[image loading]](http://puu.sh/p8Y5z/8b75e5967a.jpg) And then you make a monumental fuck-up (Coalition war) ![[image loading]](http://puu.sh/p8Y3z/d51e4b0aa4.jpg) | ||
|
jtype
England2167 Posts
![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/Fk83tbv.jpg) Finally got Mare Nostrum after almost having it ruined by a 4th full-length regency council. Sadly Basileus didn't trigger, so I guess you have to start as Byzantium and not form them to make that work. | ||
|
Xafnia
Canada874 Posts
| ||
|
jtype
England2167 Posts
| ||
|
Yurie
11975 Posts
On May 29 2016 20:48 Xafnia wrote: As for native Americans, well it's normal they are hard. Spanish with horses, guns, iron and had just finished the reconquista vs Natives that were decimated by disease and lacked all sorts of technology taken for granted for thousands of years anywhere in the old world. I like the book "Guns, Germs, and Steel" to explain why America was so far behind and why diseases came from Europe to them instead of the opposite. Seems to be a TV series based on it as well but havn't seen that. (Explanation can be boiled down to no suitable plants for large scale agriculture and no suitable draft/milk animals. First two makes civilisation take longer to form, second also mean less germs in general since almost all plagues we faced are mutations of benign animal diseases that need a very large population of humans to survive and cycle back later.) | ||
|
hfglgg
Germany5372 Posts
On May 29 2016 17:28 Silvanel wrote: Actualy its slightly more complicated. Even during strongest periods of so called "isolationism" technological transfer took place especially to India and Indo-China penisula. China was always better organized than European countries and MUCH more populus. (Which isnt adequatly depicted in EU). If i remmeber correctly combined production of cast iron of entire Europe only matched China's by the end of XVII century. But Europe metallurgy while smaller in scale was of better quality in some important areas (like canon making) and to much greater degree directed towards warfare. In regards to game i think bonuses to technology should be transfred trough trade nodes and by warfare. wasnt china relatively immune to europe until the 19th century anyway? from what i remember of the few lectures i visited, the biggest advantage europe had was its superior ships and a centralized government for all big players (portugal, spain, england, france, netherlands). south of the mughal empire india and the pacific islands were mostly small independent states, that could be easily played against each other or subdued if on their own. the centralized countries in asia, i.e. mughals or china were way to strong to be influenced or even dominated by european powers. this only changed at the end of the eu4 time period. the whole painting the map thingy which is a big part of eu4 was something that historically only happend at the very end of the timespan eu4 covers. | ||
|
Yurie
11975 Posts
On May 30 2016 00:39 hfglgg wrote: wasnt china relatively immune to europe until the 19th century anyway? from what i remember of the few lectures i visited, the biggest advantage europe had was its superior ships and a centralized government for all big players (portugal, spain, england, france, netherlands). south of the mughal empire india and the pacific islands were mostly small independent states, that could be easily played against each other or subdued if on their own. the centralized countries in asia, i.e. mughals or china were way to strong to be influenced or even dominated by european powers. this only changed at the end of the eu4 time period. the whole painting the map thingy which is a big part of eu4 was something that historically only happend at the very end of the timespan eu4 covers. It also happened before the time period of EU4 as can be seen by all the horde nations that are the remains of the earlier empire. There is no real reason it can't happen in EU4 time, there was nothing spectacularly different to Mongol era until the rifles got good. China going on a rampage map painting would be logical if their government system was different and more centralised. | ||
|
Salazarz
Korea (South)2591 Posts
On May 29 2016 16:55 Silvanel wrote: You are factualy wrong. By the time EUIV starts only areas of the world being on par (or slightly ahead) with Europeans when it comes to technological advancment was China and close Muslim states. With China being surpased in XVI-XVII century and only area in the world remaining competive being Ottoman Empire (by share virtue of proximity). When Europeans landed in America the "Great" Aztec culture havent even entered Bronze Age... All of which is adequatly depicted in EU. Asian units of the same tech are stronger than European and early Muslim stronger than EU. But Europeans tech faster- precisly what happend in our world. If something its wrong its TOO EASY to catchup with Europe not too hard. By the time EUIV starts the time of great Muslim scholars is long gone: Avicenna 980-1037, Al-Farabi - 872-950,Averroes 1126 -1198 or just see here: http://www.famousscientists.org/famous-muslim-arab-persian-scientists-and-their-inventions/ There was a time when Europe was far bahind in terms of techonology compared to Middleast, China, Iran Area, even Niger delta and some subharran cultures. But when game starts its no longer the case, Europeans are starting to get ahead and are using their advantage. And when it comes to India their advancment always came from their nieghbors either from Iran area or China. Recomneded reading: History of Metallurgy by Ronald F. Tylecote. This book is great because its discusses actual facts not compares culture to culture like some pseudo-science books do. And its actual academic level book not pop-science when everything goes. Great read if Your intrested both in enginnering and archeology. No, you're the one who is factually wrong. There is far more to technology and development of a country than metallurgy and cannon making. Once gunpowder weapons became truly commonplace (which by the way isn't until a while after EU4 start date but whatever), Europeans started to get ahead in terms of weapons industry yes, and many years later their shipmaking also eclipsed that of any other nation in the world; but in terms of infrastructure, social development, country administration, even agriculture Europeans had massive plateaus of stagnancy both before and after the fabled Renaissance and often fell well behind other regions of the world. Heck, even on topic of military-related things, Europeans haven't come up with a way to organize their armies in such a way that they'd at least know how many people would actually show up on the day of battle and a proper way to account for casualties / prisoners etc until like 18th century, something the Far Eastern countries managed to figure out a good thousand years before. Your dismissive comment about Aztecs being 'not even bronze age level' is typical Euro-centric nonsense. The reason Aztecs didn't use bronze has nothing to do with them lacking development to do it or something, they simply had no need for it because of how common and easy to extract and work with copper was in their land. Using their lack of bronzeworking technique as a way to put their advancement level below that of Ancient Egypt is just ridiculous. If admin / diplo (naval) / military tech were all separated and different nations had their own bonuses and penalties to each, that could work, but having a blanket tech penalty for anyone outside of Europe is a little silly, especially when one of the tech branches is literally devoted to administration, something that Far East nations for example were much, much better than Europeans at. | ||
| ||
