Europa Universalis IV

[Malakal]

So, no Byzantine in vanilla EU4 I'm guessing?

Why? The game starts in 1444 so they are still around.

 

[Grinolf]

Man, I was hoping that we wouldn't have magical convertions of the entire population in EUIV.... I mean, there are orthodox christians in Egypt hundreds of years after the Muslim conquest. If we're lucky, it will at least be harder to convert every province in a region.

Then you will be really happy to know, that Paradox not only refuse to do it in EU 4, but also remove mechanics, that allowed creating it by modders. So existence Dei Gratia mod for EU4 are now very questonable. It isn't yet clear, created they some alternative or not, but there was already pretty big drama some time ago.

So, no Byzantine in vanilla EU4 I'm guessing?

Only if Paradox staff want be crucified by army of byzantinophiles, which is significant part of they customers. Even Vic2 have Byzantine as formable state.

 

[Zeriel]

Man, I was hoping that we wouldn't have magical convertions of the entire population in EUIV.... I mean, there are orthodox christians in Egypt hundreds of years after the Muslim conquest. If we're lucky, it will at least be harder to convert every province in a region.

Then you will be really happy to know, that Paradox not only refuse to do it in EU 4, but also remove mechanics, that allowed creating it by modders. So existence Dei Gratia mod for EU4 are now very questonable. It isn't yet clear, created they some alternative or not, but there was already pretty big drama some time ago.

So, no Byzantine in vanilla EU4 I'm guessing?

Only if Paradox staff want be crucified by army of byzantinophiles, which is significant part of they customers. Even Vic2 have Byzantine as formable state.

Lol WAT? Really? I was put off by Vic2's weirdness, but man, if this is true, I need to get back into it. Although... holy hell, how? I mean, Vic2's start date is centuries after ERE existed.

Ahem! Fixed for GLORY OF ROME!

No way, its there... its just that Anatolia and the Balkans got even more provinces... and ERE is a even more smaller and pathetic little city on the tip of Thrace.

These Ottomans will never see it coming, MwhahahahaHAHAHHAHA!

Yeah, I ended up googling it after I asked the question, and it turned out the start date is still early enough to technically allow Strongest Rome to still exist. Definitely going to be interesting to see how it plays. I really wish they'd give up their love of cascading alliances for the Byzantium strategy, though, and just focus on making it difficult in gameplay fundamentals rather than silly arbitrary diplomatic ways.

 

[Delterius]

Lol WAT? Really? I was put off by Vic2's weirdness, but man, if this is true, I need to get back into it. Although... holy hell, how? I mean, Vic2's start date is centuries after ERE existed.

Oh its neat. You start off as Greece and do the crazy Megali Idea, without failling that is, and become Byzantium Reborn. I never tried it because I think I'd just hate the game for not letting me take Constantinople back since its a capital.

 

[Average Manatee]

You could get the tolerance of heretic and heathen religions above 0, which would remove most if not all of the penalties (certain nations like the Ottomans can actually get insanely high tolerance, greater than for their own religion). Problem of course being that NIs are ridiculously useful compare to tolerating other religions. It's not like tolerating them removes the 30 years or whatever of nationalism.

Lol WAT? Really? I was put off by Vic2's weirdness, but man, if this is true, I need to get back into it. Although... holy hell, how? I mean, Vic2's start date is centuries after ERE existed.

Oh its neat. You start off as Greece and do the crazy Megali Idea, without failling that is, and become Byzantium Reborn. I never tried it because I think I'd just hate the game for not letting me take Constantinople back since its a capital.

IIRC the Ottomans move their capital or something.

 

[Grinolf]

Although... holy hell, how? I mean, Vic2's start date is centuries after ERE existed.

But Greeks didn't forgot, that they had Empire. So they tried to return their former territories but failed at that.
And again ERE is very popular nation amongst Paradox fans, so it isn't strange to include possibility restore it.
But I must warn you, that it is pretty hard task and require to have experience of Vic2. It much more harder than it was in EU3. Mostly because you have shit economy as Greece, and economy is all in Vic2.

IIRC the Ottomans move their capital or something.

Spoiler

country_event = {

id = 31102 # Flight to Ankara

trigger = {
tag = TUR
NOT = { is_greater_power = yes }
capital = 860
NOT = { owns = 817 }
NOT = { owns = 816 }
NOT = { owns = 830 }
owns = 876

}

mean_time_to_happen = {
months = 1
}

title = "EVTNAME31102" #Flight from Istanbul
desc = "EVTDESC31102" #Our position in Istanbul is no longer secure. We should move our government to a safer place.
picture = "administration"

option = {
name = "EVTOPTA31102" #We have been ultimately driven from Europe...
prestige = -10
capital = 876
}

In other words, they need to lose Bulgaria, East Macedonia and GP status, but still own Ankara.

 

[Vaarna_Aarne]

All of those are pretty likely to happen too, Ottomans are generally a punching bag the moment they're not allied with one of the biggest dogs.

EDIT: Though with Greece, the real issue isn't so much the economy but the population. Due to the way army sizes are calculated, you've got a bad case of deep shit due to having such a low population (since any usual suspect GP that intervenes in your reconquest can just casually dump enough troops to drown you).

 

[Malakal]

Yes, the population is the problem, you just cant field enough troops to defeat any great power and even handling the OE alone is difficult. Especially if they do some naval invasions.

 

[Grinolf]

Can someone help me with this topic?
Anyway, what are you guys thinking of the new mechanics and the end of old ones like sliders?
I think it was time sliders wernt away, but they needed IMHO a substitute in place. IMHO the idea system can't do it, ideas only have good benefits, not bad ones.
I'm playing EU2 FTG now and before I attack a country I always look at their sliders to see how well my troops will do against them. For example, I did quite well when me and Aragon invaded France because my 9 Quality +9 Offensive cavalry troopers often defeated 30k french cannonfodder on plains. Without sliders I would've been drowned by sheer numbers, and that France was weakened by other wars.I only fight enemies with superior naval sliders when I have a large naval superiority in numbers, or when they're oceanic powers with big ships and I'm a mediterranean power that can just roflpwn them with galleys.

Centralization and serfdom were very one-sided. But I liked the idea of long modernization process, which you need to accomplish in order for your country to success. Especially since countries which have no political will to do it failed in real life. But it can be accomplished via decisions, so I place my hopes on modders.
Aristocrasy as idea group or slider doesn't make much sence. And it representation already was abstracted by centralization and serfdom. But it can be some modifier, which gives some military bonuses, but gradually weakens as you proceed with your reforms.
Free market doesn't belong in that time period and new trade system better abstracted it anyway. So who cares?
Religion sliders was the most balansed amongst them. But ortodox and muslim have new mechanics, which is alternative to it.
And military sliders didn't have much sence as binary choises. How you can choose between quality and quantity for French army, when in real life it was both in the same time?

 

[tuluse]

The quality/quantity slider didn't make much sense anyways because the most populous countries were the ones who could "afford" high quality.

 

[tuluse]

With France, I bet you can set the slider anywhere and field a better army than most other nations.

 

[Malakal]

Sliders were a good idea as anything that helps you customize your nation but unfortunately the options were badly thought up. Not only the centralization/decentralization but others too, especially social ones like aristocracy/plutocracy/theocracy.

I guess sliders would need to be seriously reworked to work properly, perhaps with added laws system and some basic way to represent different holdings within the province. Like having feudal divisions or church lands in a visible way and not abstracted to 25 gold once you reform...

 

[Grinolf]

Centralization was intentionally one-sided, through I dislike it because I think its deterministic. Why can't feudalism survive and everyone centralizes?

I think HRE and PLC were very colorful exapmles, why you don't want your country be decentralized

I don't remember it being bad in EU3.

You are pushed towards Free Subject by events, which is pretty stupid. Contrary, moving towards Free Subject must be very hard for the most countries and doing that must piss your elite.
And Free Subject gives your better technology and better army, which is superior than reduction of stability. And if you want to reduce stability cost, it was much better stay narrowminded. Even after westernization some players preffer move that slider back.

My big problem with sliders is that staying in the centre is the worst position of all: No bonus, no penalty.

That said, Ideas only give bonuses, don't it? I don't like it one bit, I liked how you had to make hard choices and swallow when it came to sliders.

In vanilla you leave your slider in center only when you don't want waste your policy change on it. But MM tried to improve it and gave player bonuses if he stayed in [-2;2] interval for all sliders.

Yes, even clearly negative ones, like serfdom. And that is realy sucks. But maybe there are some events, which can fire if you have that particular idea.

Seriously bro, help me with that patch plz, I wanna play more recent mods!

Sorry, I don't own that game. And I don't see in the internet anybody, who cares enough to follow that game recent uptades. Even threads on strategy forums didn't have new posts for about several months.

 

[hakuroshi]

Seriously bro, help me with that patch plz, I wanna play more recent mods!

In your thread.

 

[Grinolf]

Yes, but we can take over the world in this game, so being forced to decentralize or your empire desintegrates is very sensible. Kinda hard to rule a centralized Europe-spanning empire in that time.

I think, main proble there is not, that "centralization always good" mechanic not properly representing such giant empires, but that player can create such empires in the first place with no significant drawback. You can make a point, that the empire in order to be successful must grant it's subjects some degree of autonomy and take situation under direct control only when local authorities can't properly deal with it. But relatively sliders it is somewhere in the middle.
And I think, disappearance of feudalism in EU time frame no more deterministic, than disappearance of absolute monarchies in Vic time frame. That system clearly already outlive itself at the begining of the game, so no much point to complain about railroading.

Better tech and army ins't superior to reduction of stability when you own a large empire. Stab-hit don't hurt small countries, but a big empire (especially those humongous multi-ethnic multi-religious ones) can collapse under low stability.

I didn't play vanilla games don't remember how much long, but I don't remember stability be that much of problem. CAD + narrowminded/serfdom must be more than sufficient.
And CAD + narrowminded > CAD + serfdom. It also help transform your multi-religious empire into mono-religious one. And there are goverment buildings that very useful for large countries.

Though with Greece, the real issue isn't so much the economy but the population. Due to the way army sizes are calculated, you've got a bad case of deep shit due to having such a low population (since any usual suspect GP that intervenes in your reconquest can just casually dump enough troops to drown you).

Greece have a decent army for its size. It is enough to deal with Turks after establishing tech advantage and establishing tech advantage against Ottomans is a trivial task. Been in UK sphere and been allied with Russia solve most of my problems. Troubles begans when Ottomans cease been GP and been sphered by said UK or Russia. But until they lose they GP status my problems weren't about fielding sufficient army and navy, but properly financing them.
From what I see, difficulty of playing as Greese is inversely proportional to success of Ottomans to stay in top 8 as long as possible. Especially with crisis mechanic.

 

[Vaarna_Aarne]

Better tech and army ins't superior to reduction of stability when you own a large empire. Stab-hit don't hurt small countries, but a big empire (especially those humongous multi-ethnic multi-religious ones) can collapse under low stability.

I didn't play vanilla games don't remember how much long, but I don't remember stability be that much of problem. CAD + narrowminded/serfdom must be more than sufficient.
And CAD + narrowminded > CAD + serfdom. It also help transform your multi-religious empire into mono-religious one. And there are goverment buildings that very useful for large countries.

You don't even need Narrowminded or CAD after the early game (the real reason to have CAD in vanilla is that it considerably speeds up Cultural Assimilation events and enables Gilded Iconography cultural decision). Just shifting all of your non-treasury spending to Stability makes it clear within two years at most. Stability is only a problem if you don't put money into it.

 

[tuluse]

Greece have a decent army for its size. It is enough to deal with Turks after establishing tech advantage and establishing tech advantage against Ottomans is a trivial task. Been in UK sphere and been allied with Russia solve most of my problems. Troubles begans when Ottomans cease been GP and been sphered by said UK or Russia. But until they lose they GP status my problems weren't about fielding sufficient army and navy, but properly financing them.
From what I see, difficulty of playing as Greese is inversely proportional to success of Ottomans to stay in top 8 as long as possible. Especially with crisis mechanic.

Yeah, you start with a huge army that you can't pay for, and when you cut military spending the solidiers disappear and you can't maintain that army at all. Also, you can still use crises against the Ottomans if they're a secondary power, probably even if they drop below that, but I've never played that long.

 

[Grinolf]

Yes, but what about a big, sprawling empire? Makes sense to descentralize it in order to manage it properly.

It makes sence not overly centralize it, but I hardly doubt decentralization would work any better. Atleast I don't know any examples of properly decentralized empires. If you want my opinion (And I must let you know beforehand, that I don't have a experience of ruling large empire), I would plaice my "centralization slider" at 0. So it would be somewhat similar to modern day USA.

Feudalism was on its way out in Portugal and France by 1400, true. In England it was starting. But not on eastern europe, Africa, Middle-East and Southeastern Asia. Nothing inevitable about it.

15 centure Russia also begane transforming from feudal state. In China feudalism was already gone long time ago.
Well, Japan was in middle of something, that resembles european feudalism. I am not sure about rest of the world.
But point is, that feudalism wasn't already effective as means of governance in reality of 15 centure Europe. And its disadvantages was already pretty obvious. So it disappearance was regular process, which already begane in Europe at the game start. There is nothing determistic, that it will continue.

IMHO the biggest problem of EU3 is that due to simplification and lacking the dinastic mechanics of CKII, you essentially have Westphalian states two hundred years before such a thing ever existed in the west, but Paradox gonna Paradox. This is why IMHO the best Grand Strategy game ever would be a mix of EU and CK mechanics, from 1000 or so until 1820. HRE is the only exception.

Problem with CK mechanic, that it also don't properly represent everything even in it's own time frame on limited territory. ERE is prime example of it. And I don't think you ever want to try CK mechanic on China. So it would create no less problem, than it solve.

Stability is only a problem in vanilla with ridiculous holdings, but in Magna Mundi or most other mods you're going to be assraped by rebelion and poverty if you have a big domain and stab slips to -1 for a long time. Go play MMU, do something to dump China stability to -3, grab some popcorn and watch the fireworks.

But we talk about vanilla. And in vanilla stability doesn't matter that much. That makes serfdom useless compared to Free Subject. It was original point of discussion.
And I have -2 stability as China in MM. And I survive it.

 

[Grinolf]

Yeah, you start with a huge army that you can't pay for, and when you cut military spending the solidiers disappear and you can't maintain that army at all. Also, you can still use crises against the Ottomans if they're a secondary power, probably even if they drop below that, but I've never played that long.

Yes, you can still use crises against Ottomans after they fall from GP. But good luck finding someone, who would want to defend them and let crises rise.
And if you find, it most likely be Russia. So you will be fucked.

 

[Zeriel]

With a empire of sufficient size, you can just plow thousands of ducats of income into stability investment whenever you get below +3, assuming you even feel like you need to. Stability penalties were never something to avoid in un-modded EU3, investing in things that ignore stability (tech/production/income with attached stability penalties) was the go-to route to success.

 

[RedScum]

EUIV 30 minutes preview.



EDIT: This is part one, two more are up.

 

[Grinolf]

That said, Ideas only give bonuses, don't it? I don't like it one bit, I liked how you had to make hard choices and swallow when it came to sliders.

I only now remembered, that lied to you. There is one confirmed idea, that gives country a malus. It is unique for Burgundi and helps them dissapear completely from the world map more often. So there can be other ideas, which give not only bonuses, but they most likely be counry specific. Or why would someone ever want to choose something that gives him disadvantages, when there are plenty of other ideas, that don't do it.

 

[Zeriel]

Wait, what. Disappear from the world map? What does that even mean?

 

[Grinolf]

Wait, what. Disappear from the world map? What does that even mean?

I slightly corrected my post. It is about Burgundian Inheritance. Very tricky episode to do, since it as much important, as it is unlikely to happen in the game without some help from devs or modders.

 

[Luzur]

EUIV 30 minutes preview.



EDIT: This is part one, two more are up.

shit is looking fine, also i like the diplomat redo.