EPTMy Tuscany game is hard enough as it is
Europa Universalis IV - Page 60
| Forum Index > General Games |
|
BamBam
745 Posts
My Tuscany game is hard enough as it is | ||
|
zulu_nation8
China26351 Posts
| ||
|
dogmode
Philippines491 Posts
| ||
|
Monsen
Germany2548 Posts
On May 31 2014 08:45 Energizer wrote: Funnily enough, EU4 was intended of more of a conquest game, by nerfing conquest in the way they are, they are limiting their own gameplay. I mean hell, with the lackluster diplomacy there really isn't much else you can do in EU4, especially in the era the game is supposed to be played. My Tuscany game is hard enough as it is If you're having trouble you might want to watch this complete Tuscany playthrough . It's pre 1.6 (obviously) but pretty impressive what the guy turns that 2 province minor into. | ||
|
Monsen
Germany2548 Posts
On May 31 2014 09:06 zulu_nation8 wrote: Is it safe to play now? Works for me, ironman saving/loading seems to be a bit messy at the moment- be sure to load via the menu (exit to menu -> load). Good luck. | ||
|
RvB
Netherlands6271 Posts
On June 01 2014 03:36 Monsen wrote: If you're having trouble you might want to watch this complete Tuscany playthrough . It's pre 1.6 (obviously) but pretty impressive what the guy turns that 2 province minor into. Or watch any campaign from DDRJake the guy is ridiculous... https://www.youtube.com/user/DDRJake | ||
|
LSB
United States5171 Posts
Although paradox 'fixed it'. It really made me disillusioned with the paradox development studio. It became immediately obvious paradox did not play a single player game with or, nor did not try to play a game where there were some minor. All that happened was some multiplayer game which is a much different beast than singleplayer. They did not test most of their changes, nor did not try to see what would happen to an old 1.5.2 game. On June 01 2014 02:14 dogmode wrote: just bought extreme edition from steam, is conquest of paradise worth getting? wealth of nations still seems buggy (?) so i'll probably wait a bit before getting that Conquest of paradise is necessary if you a) Want to play as a native and see the cool new features or b) Want to play as a nation under vassalage at the start (Mongol Kahanate, Sweden, Norway) for the support independence mechanic I don't know if b) is necessary anymore since you can declare independence during war. | ||
|
Ana_
Finland453 Posts
On June 04 2014 01:02 LSB wrote: 1.6.0 makes me thankful that icefrog is such a good balance tester. Heck it even made Wizards of the Coast seem like a good balance tester as much as I disagree with their decisions. Although paradox 'fixed it'. It really made me disillusioned with the paradox development studio. It became immediately obvious paradox did not play a single player game with or, nor did not try to play a game where there were some minor. All that happened was some multiplayer game which is a much different beast than singleplayer. They did not test most of their changes, nor did not try to see what would happen to an old 1.5.2 game. Conquest of paradise is necessary if you a) Want to play as a native and see the cool new features or b) Want to play as a nation under vassalage at the start (Mongol Kahanate, Sweden, Norway) for the support independence mechanic I don't know if b) is necessary anymore since you can declare independence during war. Plus a chance to create random new world to discover, instead of good old 'murica all the time. | ||
|
LSB
United States5171 Posts
| ||
|
RvB
Netherlands6271 Posts
On June 04 2014 02:42 LSB wrote: I hate colonization (unless we are talking about siberia). Why mess around with distant overseas penalties and useless colonia nations when you can simply take you neighbor's land :D Fully annexing Mexico and Inca at once is now a nightmare with the new rebel system. I think I've had to take care of the rebels from the colonial nations for decades since they can't handle them. Worse yet I was in a non ending war with the ottomans as well. | ||
|
419
Russian Federation3631 Posts
| ||
|
LSB
United States5171 Posts
Although Rebels will be a problem, if you have a giant nation, you should have much more force limit than rebels. | ||
|
WindWolf
Sweden11767 Posts
 Or atop of all, I just want to play a proper game that teaches me the fundamentals of this game | ||
|
Velr
Switzerland10870 Posts
I learned it by playing Switzerland (again and again and again…). France might give you fast „success“, but well, your playing the strongest country in the game so its also not „really“ playing the game. I would recommend countries like Switzerland, Mailand, Bavaria, Brandenburg or Savoy (you probably won’t colonise much with them, but colonising is really boring anyway… These countries are actually decently strong but start MUCH weaker than the big powerhouses). You will likely get mauled horribly, but you actually „learn“ how to play. When playing France, the Ottomans or Austria you just learn how to steamroll, as Portugal, England and Castille you most likely learn how to „flee“ europe more than anything else. | ||
|
Simberto
Germany11792 Posts
Start at the earliest date possible. Play France, Ottomans if you want to conquer in europe. England/Castille if you want to colonise and still do something in europe. Austria if you want to do politicking in the HRE. | ||
|
Gladness
United States59 Posts
On June 05 2014 00:46 Simberto wrote: I highly disagree. Play something strong on your first game. More margins of error, more wrong choices that don't instantly destroy everything you worked for but still make it obvious they were wrong choices. You learn basics. And you still get successes instead of just dying over and over without knowing why. There will still be challenges you have to deal with, and you can always stop playing and play another country if you feel like you have "won". This allows you to get used to basic concepts of the game in a more comfortable enviroment. Also you can always do something, unlike smaller countries where you need to be incredibly opportunistic, and to be opportunistic you actually need to understand how stuff works to understand what an opportunity is or isn't, and what actual consequences of decisions might be. Start at the earliest date possible. Play France, Ottomans if you want to conquer in europe. England/Castille if you want to colonise and still do something in europe. Austria if you want to do politicking in the HRE. I second this advice. Once you figure out how to form Great Britain starting as Connacht, it becomes rather less fun to do so as England. So play the big countries now while they're still fun, and learn how to turn a small country into a big one later. Most of the historical flavor events are written for big powers like England and Spain too, and you'll enjoy them more while you're learning the game than you will once you've boiled down everything into raw stats. The most fun part of EU4 and CK2 is learning how they work. I don't think that minimizing the time you spend learning is the right choice. But if you prefer the Dwarf Fortress experience, spamming games as Switzerland or Utrecht while reading the wiki can be fun too. | ||
|
Chocolate
United States2350 Posts
| ||
|
RvB
Netherlands6271 Posts
Anyway what do you guys think about the power projection system? I think it's pretty sweet it rewards monarch points for good play and it takes some randomness away from the whole monarch point system. | ||
|
Monsen
Germany2548 Posts
On June 04 2014 09:43 LSB wrote: What I really want to try in 1.6, once I get the time is the Ottoman WC, lower your core creation cost and play as if it was the minghals. Although Rebels will be a problem, if you have a giant nation, you should have much more force limit than rebels. I hope you try it, but I think any WC attempt is doomed to fail with the current rebel mechanics. (Force limits don't matter at all- you'll be at 0 manpower from squashing all the rebel uprisings for the entire game). Maybe with the fast coring you can get enough money to support a myriad mercs but I doubt it. | ||
|
Broetchenholer
Germany1961 Posts
I am actually trying to play without reforming the government in the first place, as that takes away all the bonuses you get from being native american. So, i would try to be the king of the blind and pray that none of the colonial nations wants to kill me off, as i am already basically locking off the continent from the western powers. That way, i had 250% techcost throughout the whole game, i am currently at 3/3/3 with spain having 10/10/10 and it will only get worse, so not sure if this is viable at all. I could reform the government at a very late part of the game and hope that getting level 24 techor something is nenough to throw them of the continent. Pro: i can play the game for the longest time Contra: i can't ever really fight against worthy opoonents and get thrashed by everyone else I could also try to get close to a colonial nation with low tech, reform the government and then give for example france a colony that borders mine but never will become a colonial nation. That way, i might be able to westernise sooner, as i am not getting as many techlevels in the first place and therefore don't have to wait that long. Afterwards, the main problem with westernisation is how long it takes, now that your income reduces it. So, to make it sufferable, i would have to stop collecting from trade, and do my best to get the tax-income and production down. It will still be brutal and long. It would also mean that i have to completely forget about getting island provinces, cause the rebels would destroy me. Can anyone comment on the monarch points needed to westernise? Patchnotes say 5000, but a screenshot i saw recently had 2500 points in it. I am so confused. Pro: After maybe 100 years of doing nothing except whacking rebels and hating popups more then joffrey baratheon, i might actually become able to defeat europeans contra: the road to it is essentially complete bullshit Any other way to play that game i dont see? | ||
| ||
