Europa Universalis IV

[Heroic Liberator]

monuments

Bad feature imho. Should've been like in Imperator where you could build your own monuments rather than being limited solely to a few arbitrarily selected landmarks with completely arbitrary bonuses.

 

[Joggerino]

This game died when they introduced development.

 

[Riddler]

monuments

Bad feature imho. Should've been like in Imperator where you could build your own monuments rather than being limited solely to a few arbitrarily selected landmarks with completely arbitrary bonuses.

I disagree. It gives you a reason to capture certain provinces outside of development/location.

Perhaps from a simulationist perspective it isn't great but I don't really care. Perhaps you could gate them behind more preconditions like build dates or something and have ages affect their effects to make it a bit more historical.

Some of them are a bit silly though and could stand to be replaced. I mean, Stonehenge? Lol. You might as well add Hadrian's wall.

 

[Heroic Liberator]

I disagree. It gives you a reason to capture certain provinces outside of development/location.

Something that can be achieved with an Imperator style monument system too by having various landmarks being already built in the various start dates. And if you wanted to account for their oldness as it were, you could add some prestige modifier based on their construction date (besides the various bonuses afforded by monument type, construction materials and so on which would apply the same to monuments old and new, naturally).

 

[Fedora Master]

>Actually buying PDX DLC in this day and age

 

[Preben]

Good vid:

EU4 didn't run off its course.
It was bad to begin with. A mixture of authenticated concepts (such as no characters) and bad ideas (such as mana).

 

[Kem0sabe]

I'm waiting for the new version of meiou to do one last playthrough and then I'm done. As many have said here, the game is fundamentally broken and I don't think there's any fixing that.

 

[Heroic Liberator]

Post-Leviathan natives are finally getting fixed.

 

[Riddler]

Post-Leviathan natives are finally getting fixed.

Alhamdullilah!

 

[Lady Error]

It's a fun game, you edgelords. Why else are you still talking about it?

I have reached the point with the current Russia playthrough where I feel sort of done with it - after I beat the number two great power in a colonial world war. I still might finish my objective of getting Persia and parts of India to establish a good trade network. But even without it I am already almost overpowered.

Even the new native nations all over the place were kind of fun, since it is different. Not sure if it is an improvement though. I do feel that getting most of North America, as well as Peru and Australia is quite an achievement for Russia - and it shows that focusing on Quest for the New World is a viable strategy for it. You do need to get Iceland or Corsica though for it to work.

 

[Riddler]

Burgundy Stronk:

 

[Lady Error]

My proof of work:

Not too much has changed, except Castille was obliterated by everyone and I also took some of his islands and colonies. Turks completely gone and Croatia and the Knights stronk.

Allied with Poland and Austria for basically the whole game.

The Leviathan mess of North America actually played into my hands. The other colonials did not dare attack the natives while I did and got something like 1000 AE with most of them.

Britain inherited the huge Portuguese colonies, of which Cuba, Brazil and Chile rebelled and I helped them.

Having the strongest colony in Australia and NZ means it would have been only a matter of time to take over all of it by letting the colony fight on its own.

One thing that was a dud was the realization that I get no trade from North America despite a trade route going from there to Siberia. Colonies use the trade nodes for themselves.

 

[Riddler]

Divert trade?

 

[Lady Error]

Divert trade?

Is that in the colony options? Or do you mean placing a merchant in the colony trade nodes?

 

[Riddler]

Divert trade?

Is that in the colony options? Or do you mean placing a merchant in the colony trade nodes?

Either you get a vassal and hand them the trade nodes and divert trade from them and/or you just use the merchant you get from the CN to transfer trade + light ships, you usually end up with the majority of the trade. Colonial nations divert 50% of their trade by default so you just need to put a merchant in their node.

 

[Higher Game]

Russia is capable of over 3000 stated development by 1600. And it should always roll with level 5 advisors after the tech 11 manufactory spam and strategic bankruptcy. For some reason it just feels wrong to play a bro nation like Russia and not power game.

And by the way you should always state everything in your own subcontinent because you can't use trade companies there, and territories are horrible.

 

[Average Manatee]

Russia is capable of over 3000 stated development by 1600. And it should always roll with level 5 advisors after the tech 11 manufactory spam and strategic bankruptcy. For some reason it just feels wrong to play a bro nation like Russia and not power game.

Don't understand why you would ever need/want to do a bankruptcy as a major. Even on VH Russia should never run out of money.

And by the way you should always state everything in your own subcontinent because you can't use trade companies there, and territories are horrible.

Worth noting that you can state something but not full core (saving 50% core cost) it in order to get 50% autonomy and the ability to bank prosperity/use edict while still keeping the normal 25% territory GC cost.

 

[Lady Error]

And by the way you should always state everything in your own subcontinent because you can't use trade companies there, and territories are horrible.

The low development areas of Ukraine did not seem worth it to waste admin points on coring them in a state. Though I did not know that just making a state without coring also gives advantages.

 

[Higher Game]

Don't understand why you would ever need/want to do a bankruptcy as a major. Even on VH Russia should never run out of money.

Bankruptcies help you add quality weight by manufactory spam, which is a kind of indirect governing capacity when you think about it. They're simply stronger than courthouses or blowing up past the GC limit too soon. The other alternatives to blowing up too fast are of course innovativeness and colonial regions.

Level 5 advisors, forts, artillery, cavalry, colonies, great projects, gifts for coalition control, etc all cost lots of money. Russia needs money more than most because it has such good manpower.

Worth noting that you can state something but not full core (saving 50% core cost) it in order to get 50% autonomy and the ability to bank prosperity/use edict while still keeping the normal 25% territory GC cost.

This is handy for smaller nations, but Russia has the governing capacity to comfortably fit all of Eastern Europe even if it requires courthouses and state houses and great projects. Everything else can be a trade company and should be, once the bankruptcy era is over.

The low development areas of Ukraine did not seem worth it to waste admin points on coring them in a state. Though I did not know that just making a state without coring also gives advantages.

When they have your same religion, culture, and subcontinent then they're naturally best as states.

 

[Average Manatee]

Don't understand why you would ever need/want to do a bankruptcy as a major. Even on VH Russia should never run out of money.

Bankruptcies help you add quality weight by manufactory spam, which is a kind of indirect governing capacity when you think about it. They're simply stronger than courthouses or blowing up past the GC limit too soon. The other alternatives to blowing up too fast are of course innovativeness and colonial regions.

Level 5 advisors, forts, artillery, cavalry, colonies, great projects, gifts for coalition control, etc all cost lots of money. Russia needs money more than most because it has such good manpower.

Worth noting that you can state something but not full core (saving 50% core cost) it in order to get 50% autonomy and the ability to bank prosperity/use edict while still keeping the normal 25% territory GC cost.

This is handy for smaller nations, but Russia has the governing capacity to comfortably fit all of Eastern Europe even if it requires courthouses and state houses and great projects. Everything else can be a trade company and should be, once the bankruptcy era is over.

You say you go bankrupt because you don't want to build courthouses, then you say that want to state all of europe. Which is it? The easy way to handle everything GC-related while making all the money you need is to just state without coring as I said above. Bankruptcy ultimately means wasting a lot of time and mana on something you don't really need since you can just make more money by being at war and taking war reps + land.

You should make more than enough money just spamming sell land to estates as anyone imo. It's absurd how powerful hitting that button on cooldown is.

 

[Higher Game]

You say you go bankrupt because you don't want to build courthouses, then you say that want to state all of europe. Which is it? The easy way to handle everything GC-related while making all the money you need is to just state without coring as I said above. Bankruptcy ultimately means wasting a lot of time and mana on something you don't really need since you can just make more money by being at war and taking war reps + land.

You should make more than enough money just spamming sell land to estates as anyone imo. It's absurd how powerful hitting that button on cooldown is.

Manufactories are the first priority, usually followed by courthouses. Everything should be a state for as long as possible before switching to trade companies, but when trade companies aren't even possible then states are best. All cored. Autonomy is AIDS.

Selling land to estates is very good early in the game. Smaller nations are pulled down to equilibrium hard if they seize a lot of land so selling is better then to gain more money and size quickly and ultimately make seizing more effective later.

Bankruptcy isn't so bad as Russia because low legitimacy and thus lots of rebels isn't a problem since you have much more manpower than money, and because the icon with -10% construction cost makes buildings much better. Admin ideas and the burgher privilege will get interest down to 3% which allows for lots of loans and buildings and a quick payback. Going to -100/-100/-100 mana is worth it if that bankruptcy lets you afford to skill up the advisors by 1 from then on. 2 bankruptcies for farm estates (hopefully under the same ruler who dies soon afterward) and 1 for the tech 11 buildings sounds right to me but a fourth one might be needed if Ottomans or Ming start getting really big really early. High quality provinces with the trading bonuses are better than sprawling too much early on.

I start out with level 2 advisors as Russia from day 1 by the way because of how thirsty Russia is for mana, due to improving the Kazan gold mine to 5/10/5 plus needing to rush buy the renaissance and colonialism.

 

[Average Manatee]

Bankruptcy means you aren't fighting wars which means you aren't making ducats from wars. It's silly to go bankrupt. It's also silly to pay for high level advisors then screw your mana by going to -100 in all mana types. Even assuming you only lose 600 mana from going bankrupt that will cost you 1800 ducats in upgrading an advisor from level 1 to level 2 to make back, and even worse if you are upgrading from level 2 to level 3. In the meantime you could have fought a war to show strength which both fucks your competition's strength, lets you take war reps from their allies, and gives you 100/100/100 mana, equivalent to around a thousand ducats at least.

You absolutely don't need to full core things. It usually doesn't even help you early game. Conquered land is going to be ~50% autonomy anyway and you will have only a little autonomy decrease (or a slight increase over time) thanks to 5% crownland, meaning stated half-cored land is producing about the same or only a little less than full cored land. The only reason to full core lands would be if you spammed reduce autonomy in all lands, which does work but is kind of annoying since constant rebels. In exchange for keeping half cores you pay 1/4th the GC cost which allows you to blob pretty much endlessly. The only things to full core early game are gold mines (which are also worth reducing autonomy on and devving to 10) and if you run out of things to spend admin on.

EDIT: Almost forgot, great trick you can do with the half-cored state thing. Whenever you get an institution you can unstate all that land to easily and cheaply embrace, then restate the next month and go right back to 50% autonomy. There's also the government reform that reduces the autonomy floor by 10% (and some other stuff like the state house and economic ideas).

 

[Oreshnik Missile]

I spent thousands of hours in this game before deciding it's a cookie clicker with map+armies and now I hate myself.

 

[fantadomat]

I spent thousands of hours in this game before deciding it's a cookie clicker with map+armies and now I hate myself.

That is why i use it to listen to horror stories

 

[NaturallyCarnivorousSheep]

Indonesian vassal mogging is kinda fun to play.