Europa Universalis IV

[Vaarna_Aarne]

This is with the perspective of purely AI nations, and the key problem is that there's absolutely no limit to Spain's colonization ability. In an AI environment, Spain will colonize far beyond its historical empire (but not according to its historical empire because Portugal also has unchecked colonization and isn't limited to a particular area). The best solution in my opinion would be to at some point limit colonist numbers after colonial vassals have reached X number. This does not limit the size of colonial holdings because war remains an option, but it does limit wanton colonization (read: fookin Spanish 'Straya), and if it's an event activated modifier then it can also be customized according to countries (ie, lowest value for France, highest value for Great Britain).

Should be more interesting than normal to begin with though, since I've more than doubled the number of AI colonizer nations.

 

[tyrannosaurus rex]

This is with the perspective of purely AI nations, and the key problem is that there's absolutely no limit to Spain's colonization ability. In an AI environment, Spain will colonize far beyond its historical empire (but not according to its historical empire because Portugal also has unchecked colonization and isn't limited to a particular area). The best solution in my opinion would be to at some point limit colonist numbers after colonial vassals have reached X number. This does not limit the size of colonial holdings because war remains an option, but it does limit wanton colonization (read: fookin Spanish 'Straya), and if it's an event activated modifier then it can also be customized according to countries (ie, lowest value for France, highest value for Great Britain).

You can try and code settlers growth and continental bonuses. Spain and Portugal could get large starting bonuses, but those would decrease overtime, whereas England would get events related to starting dumping minorities in specific colonies to decrease unrest and increase colonial growth. Maybe continental affinities if you want them to stick to their historical borders?

Then there's the native population. Currently it's not a pertinent system. I think the presence of large agglomerations and organized states made the conquest of South America another matter than the occupation of the North American plains.

Specific resources, other than gold, have always acted as a strong incentive. In game not so much. Louis 15 considered 2 Islands more precious than his entire North American colony.

 

[Vaarna_Aarne]

Far too much work for little benefit.

 

[tyrannosaurus rex]

The resources I think would provide very interesting Gameplay benefits. Right now I barely even care if tobacco was discovered on an island instead of fur, sugar or slaves. The two Islands I mentioned were produced Sugar, and were bringing more money to the crown than New France. That would make for an interesting mechanism. Depending on the state of the market you would have key provinces that would be worth waging entire coalition wars for a single one.

 

[Norfleet]

Maybe continental affinities if you want them to stick to their historical borders?

I don't think there would be any historically logical reason to enforce specific colonies: Which colonies belonged to which nation were as much due to chance and who-got-there-first as much as anything else. There was no specific reason why the English would better at colonizing a specific place than the Spanish, necessarily. It was all just luck of who-landed-where, who-found-what. Hell, given the fact that things will go totally different from the moment the game starts, where it's not like history will unfold the same if the player is absent, there's no guarantee the same nations will even come to exist and be the colonizers.

 

[Vaarna_Aarne]

Maybe continental affinities if you want them to stick to their historical borders?

I don't think there would be any historically logical reason to enforce specific colonies: Which colonies belonged to which nation were as much due to chance and who-got-there-first as much as anything else. There was no specific reason why the English would better at colonizing a specific place than the Spanish, necessarily. It was all just luck of who-landed-where, who-found-what. Hell, given the fact that things will go totally different from the moment the game starts, where it's not like history will unfold the same if the player is absent, there's no guarantee the same nations will even come to exist and be the colonizers.

A big problem though is that in EU4 there is a practically non-existent pool of colonizer nations. Only a tiny few AI countries are set by default to take the Exploration idea group, necessary for colonialism. The only standard colonizers that are potentially absent in default historical grand campaign are Portugal (which may get gobbled up by Spain) and Netherlands (which may never exist). Castille/Spain, France and England are too powerful even without Lucky Nations option turned on to not be major powers of the Western Hemisphere (assuming no player intervention).

 

[Horus]

90% of the time you don't want to transfer trade, just collect where it is. Feel free to spend a few months arranging ships or moving merchants around and comparing trade income.

Also build trade buildings on provinces that have trade boosts, and remember that mercantilism is king.



I'm pretty sure colonies in real life would rebel pretty soon after hearing that their king expects them to pay a 95% tax rate, which you can go a whole game of EU4 with without a single rebellion.

You get less money gradually as you send more merchants to collect money. Best way to maximise your profits is through steering trade of other nodes to your main node because you collect the money at the full capacity even without sending merchant in your capitol's node. This also has the added benefit of stealing trade value from your opponents provinces if you do it right.

I recommend playing as the glorious Great Britain to get a sense of it and rake in the trade cash. I was manipulating most of the important nodes to send their trade to the English Channel(Use light ships!) so i was earning 200 gold(trade value 102g) per month just from my main trade node while Sevilla and Bordeux nodes only saw 35 gold per month at most. There is nothing better than destroying your opponents economical potential in this game. It really feels like true empire game when you are bullying and destroying everyone around you without taking even one of their provinces or their armies.

 

[Erzherzog]

I recommend playing as the glorious Great Britain to get a sense of it and rake in the trade cash. I was manipulating most of the important nodes to send their trade to the English Channel(Use light ships!) so i was earning 200 gold(trade value 102g) per month just from my main trade node while Sevilla and Bordeux nodes only saw 35 gold per month at most. There is nothing better than destroying your opponents economical potential in this game. It really feels like true empire game when you are bullying and destroying everyone around you without taking even one of their provinces or their armies.

Not trying to just snipe comments, but isn't that EXACTLY what Britain did historically?

 

[Horus]

Yup, and that's why it's greatest nation to play in the game if you wanna be a colonial-trade empire. It's much more superior to the portugal and spain in everything due to their ability to massacre everyone at sea and their natural defensive position.
You just conquer everywhere you want in the world besides europoor and enjoy your financial superiority over everyone.

 

[Irenaeus]

I tried keeping competitive with the British as Portugal and managed up to the mid-1700s due to being extremely lucky with events, wars and colonization. Then in one single war they devastated my huge fleet with their even bigger fleet and it was over for my trade empire until end game.

 

[Horus]

Relevant screenshot about Finland:

Also, it is, for some reason, orthodox.

Overall though, I'm enjoying The Art of War. Feels like you can do a lot more with not-Europe.

Did you turned off the lucky nations?

 

[Delterius]

I tried keeping competitive with the British as Portugal and managed up to the mid-1700s due to being extremely lucky with events, wars and colonization. Then in one single war they devastated my huge fleet with their even bigger fleet and it was over for my trade empire until end game.

Overtaking Britain is not impossible and Portugal is well equipped to do it. What exactly did you do?

 

[Irenaeus]

Overtaking Britain is not impossible and Portugal is well equipped to do it. What exactly did you do?

A trade maritime empire, colonized Brazil, large parts of West Africa, India, South East Asia, China, invaded North Africa,occupied and converted most Morocco. Then I had to fight a war against the British and French combined, around 1730s, that's what fucked me in the end.

 

[Horus]

A trade maritime empire, colonized Brazil, large parts of West Africa, India, South East Asia, China, invaded North Africa,occupied and converted most Morocco. Then I had to fight a war against the British and French combined, around 1730s, that's what fucked me in the end.

French in the land and england in the sea. Best tag team of the EU.

 

[thesheeep]

Relevant screenshot about Finland:

Also, it is, for some reason, orthodox.

Also happened to me in a game. Though there it stayed a single province minor for the entire game.
No idea how it managed to conquer so much in your game, that is kinda weird.

I think what happened there is that Sweden lost a war against Russia and had to free Finland (I guess it is cheap).
And then it becomes orthodox because... uhm.... yeah, no idea.
Freed nations do not usually convert to the religion of their liberators, do they?

 

[Vaarna_Aarne]

It usually happens in early game, where Orthodox conversion resistance gives them much better odds of revolting repeatedly and eventually succesfully.

 

[Dead Guy]

In my game Finland was formed in Karelia after Muscovy lost several wars at once to Poland, an increasingly scary Lithuania, and against my ally Denmark with her vassals (I'm playing Gelre into Netherlands). They became Orthodox, I assume because their only province was Orthodox. But they got gobbled by Denmark, then re-appeared in Karelia again after a revolt or something, I was busy in India.

Also, a great way to defeat England is to be in their trade node and to have more trade power than them. Drink their milkshake, then kick'em when they're down.

 

[tyrannosaurus rex]

I think I've figured what's wrong with this game and why it's not living to it's full potential.

The AI is militarily aggressive, but diplomatically conservative.

It should be the complete opposite. Then a campaign would finally be more sensible and more interesting than a dull map painting simulator. Where the AI doesn't nonsensically waste it's entire manpower and gold reserves in an pointless allied conflict before getting eaten alive by it's hungry neighbor. And where an aggressive player is properly contained and has to plan his next move carefully instead of packing his 3rd doomstack to gobble 5 new provinces.
We also get rid of gamey stuff that prevents the player to do what other nations did in real life without falling apart. Granted he's ready to face the diplomatical consequences if the neighbors are watching.

We still need a special UI for peace councils involving more than a single pair of belligerent (Westphalia...) and a proper coalition mechanic where you aren't the slave of the coalition leader.

 

[Irenaeus]

Also, a great way to defeat England is to be in their trade node and to have more trade power than them. Drink their milkshake, then kick'em when they're down.

That's exactly what I did in my Portugal game until aforementioned crushing in the early 1700s.

 

[tyrannosaurus rex]

I find it hilarious that sub-saharian tribesmen still have a better technology group than the Andean empire, by 100%.

Or that the Barbary pirates get a 30% bonus over the Chinese and other far easterners. And they even had the balls to put them 1 level behind, in 1444

 

[Mortmal]

Its not odd the brabary pirates get a significant bonus, they had far better ships by then.
http://concept-naval.el-bahri.com/i...ticle&id=55:chapman&catid=43:chebec&Itemid=86
Look for the algerian chebec or xebec ; it was considered as the fastest meditteranean sea vessel.

 

[Irenaeus]

Agreed. Only the sub-saharian shit versus andean is wrong. But I'd still put them at close levels. Incas and shit were retarded.

 

[tyrannosaurus rex]

Its not odd the brabary pirates get a significant bonus, they had far better ships by then.
.

The Chinese had immense ocean faring junks and quite possibly crossed the pacific in addition the Zeng He's Indian ocean expedition. Their administrative system was impeccable and not matched in efficiency by Europe until the 19th century. That's not speaking of the other civilian and scholarly sciences in which they remained the forerunners for a while after the starting date.
Apart from that the Barbary's military was utterly pathetic and carried almost entirely by the Ottomans and the western arm trade, which is the case for most of the middle easterners past the 15th century.

Only the sub-saharian shit versus andean is wrong. But I'd still put them at close levels. Incas and shit were retarded.

At their lowest they were far more advanced than the Mali "Empire" was at it's peak. Don't even talk about Congo. And what makes you say they were retarded.

 

[Irenaeus]

Just look at this shit, seriously?

It's retarded. Thankfully the Spanish Empire took over and developed the region.

 

[JarlFrank]

Just look at this shit, seriously?

It's retarded. Thankfully the Spanish Empire took over and developed the region.

It's 1000000 times more developed than African mud huts though.