Europa Universalis IV

[MadMaxHellfire]

Oh, I don't doubt there are game mechanics about it which I didn't prepare for since I didn't yet know how stupid the game is and safely assumed that if I completely destroyed Scottish army I will be able to do the same with their rebels just fine. What I mean is that nothing explains a country previously fielding a 12k regular army spawning 3x that and completely destroying what the game itself deemed at that point a number 1 military in the world.

first you beat an army, then you fought the entire population.
dude, you're digging deeper and deeper your own grave.

 

[Hoodoo]

Generally autonomy + Stationing troops is enough. To say nothing of national ideas and common religion. If not, you can always just leave your troops in the province, making use of the terrain modifier to break the rebel troops as they come up.

Sometimes the blame is on you.

Britain never had to maintain 30k troops on the continent to prevent imperial rebel armies from popping out of nowhere. And that's considering the number of soldiers reasonably fielded is generally deflated in this game compared to how much they did in history. It would probably be closer to 60K.

Rebellions are bullshit, the entire conquest mechanism in this game is bullshit, and power structure mechanism non existent.

 

[Delterius]

And as we all know the ultimate union of great britain was a smooth afair between two peaceful and orderly peoples after conquest and most certainly not personal union.

 

[Hoodoo]

How does that interfere with my point?

 

[Delterius]

In multiple ways but I'd rather stand by the clear notion that you are not very good at this game.

 

[MoLAoS]

Rebellions in EU4 are a non issue. If they mess you up you suck.

 

[Beastro]

I'm not certain what "rapidly" means in this game. I've annexed entire Ireland without fighting a single war and gobbled Scotland in two wars (first one included a war against France). Regardless of circumstances, this is just idiotic beyond comprehension and having stuff like that in a game that was "updated" so many times (with many of said updates being sold) is just horrible.

Anyway, just wanted to rant. The game didn't feel fun anyway and that ridiculous rebel situation didn't change my impression that much.

All this is anti-map paint mechanics, has nothing to do with history.

Crap like this is why I'm thankful for console commands to keep things historical.

 

[MoLAoS]

I'm not certain what "rapidly" means in this game. I've annexed entire Ireland without fighting a single war and gobbled Scotland in two wars (first one included a war against France). Regardless of circumstances, this is just idiotic beyond comprehension and having stuff like that in a game that was "updated" so many times (with many of said updates being sold) is just horrible.

Anyway, just wanted to rant. The game didn't feel fun anyway and that ridiculous rebel situation didn't change my impression that much.

All this is anti-map paint mechanics, has nothing to do with history.

Crap like this is why I'm thankful for console commands to keep things historical.

As I've explained numerous times, EU4 doesn't have the fidelity of simulation to simulate historical reality. Even if you take the player out of it. Every time you abstract something you remove part of the ability to simulate history.

 

[Space Satan]

There were no successful peasant rebellion in Europe at ALL. At least I can't remember a single example. That doesn't mean there should not be rebellions at all.

 

[Grinolf]

There were no successful peasant rebellion in Europe at ALL. At least I can't remember a single example. That doesn't mean there should not be rebellions at all.

If "no successful" means that they all were eventually crushed, then yes. But there were quite a few that managed wreaked havoc before doing so and achieve some initial victories.

 

[Delterius]

There were no successful peasant rebellion in Europe at ALL. At least I can't remember a single example. That doesn't mean there should not be rebellions at all.

That is generally true of most EUIV campaigns as well.

Mind you we are not discussing the games equivalent to peasant rebellions.

 

[Vaarna_Aarne]

There were no successful peasant rebellion in Europe at ALL. At least I can't remember a single example. That doesn't mean there should not be rebellions at all.

If "no successful" means that they all were eventually crushed, then yes. But there were quite a few that managed wreaked havoc before doing so and achieve some initial victories.

It also depends on how we define a peasant rebellion. Gustav Vasa's campaign against union king Christian II started by rallying a peasant army in Dalarna, and the Dutch revolt against Spanish rule was also a popular uprising that mobilized the entire social strata of the Northern Provinces.

I'd say it's more of an issue that there isn't more rebel overlap or fluidity. But overall I think the important thing is that the rebellion system is intuitive to understand mechanically.

 

[Hoodoo]

In multiple ways but I'd rather stand by the clear notion that you are not very good at this game.

LMAO missed that one. I'm pretty sure I would outclass you in multi easily if you want me to humiliate you and make you bugger off from these threads hola at me on steam and we'll fight it out. I have 1500 hours purely exploiting the shit out of it against other power gamers.

 

[MoLAoS]

In multiple ways but I'd rather stand by the clear notion that you are not very good at this game.

LMAO missed that one. I'm pretty sure I would outclass you in multi easily if you want me to humiliate you and make you bugger off from these threads hola at me on steam and we'll fight it out. I have 1500 hours purely exploiting the shit out of it against other power gamers.

Then you could handle a few shitty rebels.

 

[Hoodoo]

Who said I didn't. I was the one at all who recounted the story about rebels. That's something you would figure out by reading the posts that lead to a conversation.

I know when to see cheap ahistorical difficulty when I see it doesn't mean I don't crush it for the exploitable mess of a game it is.

 

[MadMaxHellfire]

 

[Beastro]

There were no successful peasant rebellion in Europe at ALL. At least I can't remember a single example. That doesn't mean there should not be rebellions at all.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ivaylo_of_Bulgaria

As you can see by his reign years it didn't go anywhere.

 

[Delterius]

In multiple ways but I'd rather stand by the clear notion that you are not very good at this game.

LMAO missed that one. I'm pretty sure I would outclass you in multi easily if you want me to humiliate you and make you bugger off from these threads hola at me on steam and we'll fight it out. I have 1500 hours purely exploiting the shit out of it against other power gamers.

It took you 1500 hours to not know how to deal with rebels?

 

[Grinolf]

It also depends on how we define a peasant rebellion. Gustav Vasa's campaign against union king Christian II started by rallying a peasant army in Dalarna, and the Dutch revolt against Spanish rule was also a popular uprising that mobilized the entire social strata of the Northern Provinces.

I'd say it's more of an issue that there isn't more rebel overlap or fluidity. But overall I think the important thing is that the rebellion system is intuitive to understand mechanically.

Well, popular uprising by definition contain all/most of social classes, and peasants back tended to be the majority of populace, while "peasant rebellions" are defined by peasants rebelling because of pure peasant's reasons.
But the opposite case is true, and peasant revolts weren't always purely peasant. Like in two of the biggest peasant rebellions in this time period german one had a heavy mix of religious motives and Pugachev's one had and elements of "pretender rebellion" (the leader claimed to be an assassinated emperor), also had cossacks as a core of it (completely different social group) and also had bunch of muslims fighting in it (again religious rebels). I guess it's not an easy task to emulate properly the last one.

 

[kris]

I know when to see cheap ahistorical difficulty when I see it doesn't mean I don't crush it for the exploitable mess of a game it is.

the game is indeed ahistorically easy.

 

[Hoodoo]

Because the diplomacy isn't as tight as it was then.

 

[Tigranes]

Has anyone tried mods for alternative eras? There seem to be a couple for antiquity, one where Rome doesn't quite fall with the coming of the Huns, etc.

Hoping to try something different but not the Elder Scrolls / Game of Thrones stuff.

 

[MadMaxHellfire]

what's the point? what do those mods add other than names and a different map?

 

[hpstg]

LMAO missed that one. I'm pretty sure I would outclass you in multi easily if you want me to humiliate you and make you bugger off from these threads hola at me on steam and we'll fight it out. I have 1500 hours purely exploiting the shit out of it against other power gamers.

Man, even if you say the truth, you sound like Dwight from The Office

 

[Delterius]

He is trained in gorilla map painting.