EPT
.+ Show Spoiler +
![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/GmAfdUL.png)
Edit* turns out the image is huge so you have to click on the image to see it or else you will just see alaska..
Europa Universalis IV - Page 29
| Forum Index > General Games |
|
Bourneq
Sweden800 Posts
.+ Show Spoiler + Edit* turns out the image is huge so you have to click on the image to see it or else you will just see alaska.. | ||
|
Ramong
Denmark1706 Posts
| ||
|
Bourneq
Sweden800 Posts
On September 12 2013 21:40 Ramong wrote: Is that Grenada in southern Spain? Sure is! They recently lost a war with France, and in the peace treatie France got them to release a lot of nations, you can see colombia, mexico and venezuela in south america aswell. Spain has never been the same, rebells rebells rebells and more rebells. Oh and a war with me since they are allied with tuscany. | ||
|
Tobberoth
Sweden6375 Posts
On September 12 2013 08:11 Sermokala wrote: buildings are also bad beacuse they cost monarch points that can be used for tech. better to use it as a stockpile so you can get mercs in a war to suicide onto their stack and grind down some moral for a better victory. expecialy if your in a backwater country you need every point to keep your military tech up. This isn't perfectly true, though buildings are kind of meh. The exception is temples since they count as base tax, giving you a higher force limit. | ||
|
Bourneq
Sweden800 Posts
| ||
|
Sermokala
United States13822 Posts
| ||
|
Drake
Germany6146 Posts
On September 12 2013 21:38 Bourneq wrote: My Byzantine playthrough in all its glory. Yes, thats me in india, china and korea. The year is 1794 so I problably wont have time to conquer the rest of italy nor africa. Too bad I could not recreate the roman empire, but atleast I got to become one of the most powerfull nations. And hell, it does look like the eastern roman emprie .+ Show Spoiler + Edit* turns out the image is huge so you have to click on the image to see it or else you will just see alaska.. my byzantium looks similar without india, but its just 1590 so i have alot time left byzantium is abuseable as shit, with a trick you can instatn win west ottoman empire and then from there on destroy the ottomans so fast ... to bad ai is not clever enough to prevent it | ||
|
Bourneq
Sweden800 Posts
On September 12 2013 23:30 Drake wrote: my byzantium looks similar without india, but its just 1590 so i have alot time left byzantium is abuseable as shit, with a trick you can instatn win west ottoman empire and then from there on destroy the ottomans so fast ... to bad ai is not clever enough to prevent it Ye just block the strait inbetween you and seige all their provinces in greece. My campaign was halted by the mamulukes and onverextention. | ||
|
Ramong
Denmark1706 Posts
Say I am 6 years ahead in military tech, and no ideas to spend military points on, then I like to build forts in border provinces, Islands and capital. Same goes for the other techs. | ||
|
mTwRINE
Germany318 Posts
Military gives base Manpower, Production adds Production/value and %-Manpower, Trade increases Tradevalue of Production. And while building when points are not needed for tech/ideas is possible, buildings still take a long time to return their investement. Things Im looking out for: Estuary, good Basetax, good Basemanpower, Tradebonus I could maybe grab in the future and landlocked Tradenodes. I hope they fix trade a bit in the near future, so going over Forcelimit hurts more and maybe only 75% or 50% extra Forcelimit, so Income and Infrastructure becomes more challenging. Reducing Warexhaustion or increasing Stability equals several Buildings creating wealth for the rest of the game, which could be really interesting but doesnt really matter right now, since you can afford biggest army in the world most of the times with trade only and the natural progress of production/tax without any buildings besides manufactorys. | ||
|
Nyvis
France284 Posts
| ||
|
Bourneq
Sweden800 Posts
+ Show Spoiler + ![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/aZc3UgA.png) | ||
|
screamingpalm
United States1527 Posts
One game I randomly rolled Saxe-Lauenburg and claimed the throne of Mecklenburg when they broke alliance. Leader was 57 and I stood to gain the personal union, but lived long enough for The Hansa to gobble them up first  . Then took me out next (although my fault- I could have allied with Brandenburg). Lesson learned- take opportunities while you have them (DoW for a union if there's a chance someone else will take them out)!Was going to post my Russian (Muskovy) empire, but was my first complete playthrough and actually could have done even better. Also can vouch for noticing nations joining and leaving coalitions against you at the -100/-99 mark. Have seen it happen over and over in my Russia game. On September 09 2013 07:55 Intact wrote: So I was playing Creek, one of the indian tribest around Florida. Counquered all the other indian tribes in a few years, built every building I could, was sitting on 3000 gold and started colonizing all of the south. Then England showed up and was like "YEAH THIS IS OUR LAND NOW". What are you supposed to do ? Just keep a massive army far above landlimit? lol that's exactly how my game as Shawnee went. Spain even arrived before England, and I had the enemy of our enemy mission (telling me to befriend England- which I couldn't until they had finished colonizing and then too late anyway). My theory is to try not fully conquering neighbors so you can still get the neighbor bonus for tech (let them tech ahead so you can get the discount on power points) and maybe aggressively take out colonies when they arrive. Westernize at some point... Not sure how successful it would be even then though. :D | ||
|
Tobberoth
Sweden6375 Posts
I've now started a game as Dublin where I'm finally doing something else than waiting for fabricated claims on max speed. I'm currently king of ireland, owning (if you include vassals) every province in ireland except ulster (which is under scotland). I also have 3 counties in Wales. With my current ruler, my raised leavies is about equal to scotland, though my king is over 70 years old (their queen is too though). Fortunately I changed succession to Elective so I won't get a shitstorm when I die. Is it just me, or is CK2 sort of overrated? I see people on the forums all the time whine that CK2 is better than EU4, there's more to do in peacetime, it stops blobbing better etc... While I agree it stops blobbing better because everything is vassals, I feel there's almost nothing to do compared to EU4. You stabilize your country, then wait for claims. When your monach dies, you stabilize the country, then wait again. There's a lot of talk of intrigue etc, but I just can't see how to get that ball rolling... It's not like I'm even in the succession for another area, and even if I was, killing someone takes ages unless you have amazing intrigue. The only way to somehow force that succession is to play The Sims with your daughters etc to get claims, but if it's a big country, they just use the weak claim they got to declare on you and I don't even feel the marriage game is interesting since in any situation which benefits you, they will just say no. Also, why the hell does the game ask you to marry off and educate people NOT of your dynasty? It's just feels like a waste of time, like it won't affect you anyway. On September 13 2013 12:58 screamingpalm wrote: I feel bad about my critical first impressions earlier, this game is awesome and my new addiction lol. Still trying to learn all the ins and outs, and wonder what the advisor mod "better relations over time" does exactly? Sounds obvious enough, but I honestly can't tell what it affects. I think that it simply affects the rate at which "Improve relations" work, which is obviously quite useless except for certain situations where it's a must have (in my Ottomans game, I forced a personal union with Crimea, but they hated me pretty badly and my ruler was about to die so I was afraid they would leave the PU... but was able to get high enough relations only a year or so before my ruler died). I don't know though, it's possible it increases the rate at which Aggressive Expansion etc drops. | ||
|
Nyvis
France284 Posts
Is it just me, or is CK2 sort of overrated? I see people on the forums all the time whine that CK2 is better than EU4, there's more to do in peacetime, it stops blobbing better etc... While I agree it stops blobbing better because everything is vassals, I feel there's almost nothing to do compared to EU4. You stabilize your country, then wait for claims. When your monach dies, you stabilize the country, then wait again. There's a lot of talk of intrigue etc, but I just can't see how to get that ball rolling... It's not like I'm even in the succession for another area, and even if I was, killing someone takes ages unless you have amazing intrigue. The only way to somehow force that succession is to play The Sims with your daughters etc to get claims, but if it's a big country, they just use the weak claim they got to declare on you and I don't even feel the marriage game is interesting since in any situation which benefits you, they will just say no. People are plainly lying, and complaining for the sake of complaining. From what I've seen from converted games, it's especially easy to blob on CK2 because there is no coalition mechanic to stop you from outside. If you manage your country correctly, you can blob as much as you want. The main reason to play CK2 is as a way to get new, different EU4 maps to play on :D I think that it simply affects the rate at which "Improve relations" work, which is obviously quite useless except for certain situations where it's a must have (in my Ottomans game, I forced a personal union with Crimea, but they hated me pretty badly and my ruler was about to die so I was afraid they would leave the PU... but was able to get high enough relations only a year or so before my ruler died). I don't know though, it's possible it increases the rate at which Aggressive Expansion etc drops. Pretty sure it does. | ||
|
Talin
Montenegro10532 Posts
I feel the most viable Irish county to play is Tyrone. The dude is married to the Scottish princess that has a good shot at becoming the ruler of Scotland if you can get a few things to pan out in your favor, and a couple of dynastic allies that you can get to do things for you and peacefully vassalise them easier once you get a county or two. Intrigue is definitely the core of CK2 though, there's just not a lot of space to do it in Ireland early on. | ||
|
Velr
Switzerland10661 Posts
I felt like all i was doing, was educating/marrying my children and trying to get some claims... Bored the shit out of me and felt very, very tedious. | ||
|
Talin
Montenegro10532 Posts
EU series is traditionally more "gamey" though, in the sense of setting and accomplishing goals directly. If you try to "game" CK2 in the same way, it's going to feel really slow and give you the sense that the mechanics are holding you back. | ||
|
Tobberoth
Sweden6375 Posts
On September 13 2013 18:02 Talin wrote: The only reason Ireland is a recommended start in CK2 is because you're not under immediate threat from anybody. But other than that it's bloody painful to get anything done. I feel the most viable Irish county to play is Tyrone. The dude is married to the Scottish princess that has a good shot at becoming the ruler of Scotland if you can get a few things to pan out in your favor, and a couple of dynastic allies that you can get to do things for you and peacefully vassalise them easier once you get a county or two. Intrigue is definitely the core of CK2 though, there's just not a lot of space to do it in Ireland early on. What things? Can you explain in detail how you can become king of scotland by this marriage? Because honestly, this kind of stuff just never happens when I play. People have babies like machineguns, so unless you have 30 intrigue, you're not going to be able to kill them all off... and then there's usually 10 or so heirs in line before yourself. And from what I've seen so far, there's really not much more to it: Get someone in your court with a claim, preferably make it so that your heir has a claim. Then either A. kill other heirs until you're first in line. Or B. declare war to take the claim, which in the case of Tyrone vs Scotland is a suicide endeavor. | ||
|
Madkipz
Norway1643 Posts
On September 13 2013 15:39 Tobberoth wrote: I've taken a break from EU4 a few days now to try out Crusader Kings 2 which was included in the preorder. I've dabbled with it before but never really understood it. In fact, I still kind of don't, it's amazing how much more intuitive EU4 is. I read some advice online that it's good to start in Ireland... well, I tried as Ulster, Oriel and some other nothern county and it was ridiculous. As a county in ulster, you need 3 counties to form a duchy (which I guess was a recent patch because every guide claims you only need 50% of the counties, you need 51% though). In my best game I was able to become a duke of ulster with 3 counties, at which point scotland declared war on me and ruined everything. I've now started a game as Dublin where I'm finally doing something else than waiting for fabricated claims on max speed. I'm currently king of ireland, owning (if you include vassals) every province in ireland except ulster (which is under scotland). I also have 3 counties in Wales. With my current ruler, my raised leavies is about equal to scotland, though my king is over 70 years old (their queen is too though). Fortunately I changed succession to Elective so I won't get a shitstorm when I die. Is it just me, or is CK2 sort of overrated? I see people on the forums all the time whine that CK2 is better than EU4, there's more to do in peacetime, it stops blobbing better etc... While I agree it stops blobbing better because everything is vassals, I feel there's almost nothing to do compared to EU4. You stabilize your country, then wait for claims. When your monach dies, you stabilize the country, then wait again. There's a lot of talk of intrigue etc, but I just can't see how to get that ball rolling... It's not like I'm even in the succession for another area, and even if I was, killing someone takes ages unless you have amazing intrigue. The only way to somehow force that succession is to play The Sims with your daughters etc to get claims, but if it's a big country, they just use the weak claim they got to declare on you and I don't even feel the marriage game is interesting since in any situation which benefits you, they will just say no. Also, why the hell does the game ask you to marry off and educate people NOT of your dynasty? It's just feels like a waste of time, like it won't affect you anyway. I think that it simply affects the rate at which "Improve relations" work, which is obviously quite useless except for certain situations where it's a must have (in my Ottomans game, I forced a personal union with Crimea, but they hated me pretty badly and my ruler was about to die so I was afraid they would leave the PU... but was able to get high enough relations only a year or so before my ruler died). I don't know though, it's possible it increases the rate at which Aggressive Expansion etc drops. You have to intentionally make it hard by placing arbitrary restrictions on yourself, giving your other sons ways to fight the one you play as and other things like that. Personally I find both games lacking in that traits and negative traits hardly give the wide array of options that they should. A negative trait like Homosexual or a positive trait like attractive can only be called lackluster in their interactivity. With EU4 it's a different thing. Colonization is too easy and once you master the coalition system there's very little to do but blob your way through europe and the americas or the australian islands. The mere fact that a simple "improve relations" button can have such an impact as you say it does detracts from giving you the more dire of consequences to your actions. | ||
| ||
