Europa Universalis IV

Is this a trick question? A core province is considered a core part of your country.

 

Nope, not a trick question.

What do you mean with core part of your country? This is not more specific than core province.

 

watching people fight over videogames concepts is worse than watching people argue which religion is best.

 

Please tell me you are playing dumb now.

 

L1beral!

 

So there is discussion about which religion is best? Someone is having doubts.

 

EU4 isn't a good game and Paradox's lack of clear vision about what they going to do with it didn't help the situation. But these nostalgic posts about how good EU3 was, as wasn't just bland and crazy sandbox which only redeeming feature was a great moding opportunities. And speaking about EU3, only galf of them changed the game for the better and half of them were as lackluster as EU4 DLC. More so, the last one was so broken, that Paradox decided to remove some features from it alltogether Instead of trying to fix it.

 

Why is it always on codex that "I don't like it" is equated to "dumbed down"? Having far more difficult decisions is the very opposite of dumbing down, your like/dislike of the game nonwithstanding.

I do agree however that Paradox, or at least the EU team, don't seem to know how to do proper system design.

 

EU IV was dumbed down. I don't like it.

 

Ah, the classical response. If you can't explain something adequately, just accuse the other guy of being dumb.

 

Ah, the classical internet retard tactic. Pretend you are so dumb that no one wants to go through the length of explaining basic english word definitions to you, then claim victory.

 

And yet, you still have not explained what you understand under core province and why the EU III implementation fits this concept while the EU IV one does not. Why is fast coring that costs you monarch points you could better spent elsewhere worse than slow but essentially automatic coring?

 

i am curious about that mod of your lillebror, what have you changed and what does it do?

 

Because the definition is obvious. A core is a core part of your realm. This means that the land is recognized as being rightfully yours by other nations and by the people within.

Because that's how it works in real life and because monarch power is retarded? How dumb are you going to play?

 

Which can mean anything from just a diplomatic claim with barely any significance to well integrated province which will be defended to the last drop of blood. This in no way implies a specific implementation.

Really in real life there is a timer of 50 years and afterwards occupied land becomes legally part of the occupiers territory. And magically increases tax rate. Sure, super realistic...

And of course, you are another "monarch points in EU IV are retard but equally gamey stuff from EU III is not TROLOLOL" dumbfuck

The EU series was always the Paradoy product line which had the most gamey stuff in it, so arguing mechanics in EU games solely based on realism is pretty much retarded.

 

If you can't see the difference between a province being accepted as a core part of a country because of 50 year of being held vs. being accepted because a magic monarch wizard waved his wand and produced a magical core in a matter of years if not months, then I don't know what to say. Good going, retard?

Obviously things need to be abstracted in games. That doesn't mean that some abstractions can't be massively, earth-shatteringly better and appropriate than others.

Also Gamey != Retarded. Gamey things are appropriate in a game. Monarch Mana as the basis on which all national actions depend is not appropriate in a historical simulation. I'm pretty sure that CK2 is the gamiest of Paradox games, but that certainly doesn't stop it from being good.

 

If at least we just had one single form of mana and not 3, all of different importance. That way you could specialize and somewhat alleviate a string of bad monarchs. Right now its just retarded, they might as well just give everyone a tech-level every X years.

 

50 years coring is as arbitrary and unrealistic as are monarch points. Some provinces took centuries to core and the fires of revolt never really stopped (like Ireland) some provinces were cored instantly - like Constantinople. The Constantinople example shows what monarch point coring is all about - you use your monarch power and move people into the province to establish your rule. You do not wait for the local population to accept it, you make them accept it.

Also you cant really argue that monarch ability wasnt the driving factor behind the era. Poland wouldnt have collapsed if it had a string of strong monarchs. Austria wouldnt have achieved nearly as much without Habsburgs. Spain lost its empire due to bad rulers too. One bad ruler could mean total collapse of a successful state. MP are an abstraction of this ability and a 000 ruler should be a real pain in the ass. Granted I would weaken advisers and instead move some point generation towards parliaments to simulate the situation in republics and later in the era when monarch role diminished.

 

This is a highschooler's misconception.

Funny you mention Austria and the Habsburgs too, since the Habsburg's greatest strength can not be parametrized in this game.

Spain collapsed due to the insane pressures exercised from all sides, France regaining stability being the killing blow. Iberia isn't a particularly rich land, low demographic potential, at the time, yields less resources than the northern neighbors. They had gold and were pioneering trans-oceanic trade. Monopoly on trade you can lose, especially as France, England or the Netherlands starts doing what you do. Gold gives you an all time high, then comes back to bit you in the ass. Then there is also the emigrants, in this case the elite was moving to the new world. It was a country bound to be satellited if a strong and stable nation state was to arise above the Pyrenees, which eventually happened.

Yes, and every 6 month 35 000 Irishmen were rising against the English oppressor. Equipped with state of the art canons and riffles, rigid organization led by the most competent officers, right out the finest rebel academies (a network which apparently spans world wide). It's a wonder how the English could hold on to those land and their own country while replacing their royal army every year.

 

Haven't yet gotten around to the new expansion, where I'll probably roll back the changes to truces and whatnot if I find them too annoying. Otherwise just my old modification to accepted culture loss threshold and some special minority flipping on culture conversion (currently just for Poland/PLC for anything East/North of Vilnius becoming either Ruthenian or Lithuanian on culture-flip + accepted add if not accepted at the moment; and another one for Sweden/Scandinavia for Finns and Estonians east of Turku; should add one for Austrians and Hungarians). I took a liking to the way the game occasionally spawns you advisors with accepted culture names instead of normal namegen, so I figured might as well ensure those stick around.

EDIT: My personal pet peeve that I've been trying to come up with a solution for has been "how to stop fucking Spaniards from colonizing in Australia and Siberia".

 

Which has nothing to do with the Coring mechanic in EU IV and everything with a borked rebellion system. With EU III coring you would see exactly the same rebel spam.

 

Was it different in EU3 from older EU games or isn't the 50 years just the mtth (mean time to happen) meaning that sometimes you get a core very quickly and sometimes you wait on it for a very long time? Perhaps I am confusing it with how religious conversion happened?

 

No, MTTH was with some mods like MMU in vanilla EU3 you had 50 years to the day to core a province. You could change it in game settings but it always was an arbitrary number.

Besides in EU4 coring does not kill province nationalism. Only once that ends you can really tell the province truly is yours. Therefore we can safely assume that cores in EU4 represent claims and set up of administration.

 

Instead not having cores in EU4 causes magical world-wide rebellion, which is even worse (and ridiculously dumb). Furthermore it DID in fact kill province nationalism in earlier versions, and we can take that to be the original vision of the game rather than the current random-changes-every-patch thing we have.

 

Actually if we consider cores as an administrative issue then those rebellions arent very magical - simply locals decide to leave your nation due to lack of actual control. Many empires collapsed this way.

Of course rebel numbers and actual threat are another thing entirely but that issue was present in EU1 and havent been fixed till now.