Hello everyone,
It took me to write this message for violence, playing since the release EU I have spent countless and arguably indecent hours on it, but finally I had to face facts : agceep version with "For The Glory", my reflexes are rusty. Taken with a vague nostalgia I got handed for some time, and after a party with the usual ease of Spain, I followed up with the defeats of nations yet easy to manage in my memory: Sweden, Ottomans ...
It would seem that I should review the mechanisms ... Hence this topic.
As far as I can remember winning a game was not very difficult with major nations: I balance research based opportunities, but always with an emphasis on trade, I put the automatic sending of merchants , and waited for the good generals to get my core provinces. While adjusting to my inner political centralization, the plutocracy, the end of serfdom and innovation. Gradually trade-related income increased, the research progressed, and towards the end I could afford the fancy to declare wars without casus belli who finished giving me an empire plump. Some manufacturers also on the end. And that was it, in general I finished all my research early 19th century, if not before with Spain or France.
But in my recent parties, things are different. Take the example of a game with Sweden. My business income is stagnant, I'm the head of research at this level, merchants aren't very succesfull, and to stay level I must sacrifice the marine and infrastructure. And the army, I'm still full Baroque in 1700 (but everyone is at the same point though).
And Spain is 3000 points above me. I do not see how more than a century at this rate ...
The warmongers say that I have from the outset that attach anything that comes handy, but anyway I like not to get on to conquer the world and in my memory style game relatively quiet so do not leave behind.
Besides Spain leads apparently its economy more than his conquests.
So what's your advice? does not focus on trade? send-your-own merchants? Have a more hawkish?
It took me to write this message for violence, playing since the release EU I have spent countless and arguably indecent hours on it, but finally I had to face facts : agceep version with "For The Glory", my reflexes are rusty. Taken with a vague nostalgia I got handed for some time, and after a party with the usual ease of Spain, I followed up with the defeats of nations yet easy to manage in my memory: Sweden, Ottomans ...
It would seem that I should review the mechanisms ... Hence this topic.
As far as I can remember winning a game was not very difficult with major nations: I balance research based opportunities, but always with an emphasis on trade, I put the automatic sending of merchants , and waited for the good generals to get my core provinces. While adjusting to my inner political centralization, the plutocracy, the end of serfdom and innovation. Gradually trade-related income increased, the research progressed, and towards the end I could afford the fancy to declare wars without casus belli who finished giving me an empire plump. Some manufacturers also on the end. And that was it, in general I finished all my research early 19th century, if not before with Spain or France.
But in my recent parties, things are different. Take the example of a game with Sweden. My business income is stagnant, I'm the head of research at this level, merchants aren't very succesfull, and to stay level I must sacrifice the marine and infrastructure. And the army, I'm still full Baroque in 1700 (but everyone is at the same point though).
And Spain is 3000 points above me. I do not see how more than a century at this rate ...
The warmongers say that I have from the outset that attach anything that comes handy, but anyway I like not to get on to conquer the world and in my memory style game relatively quiet so do not leave behind.
Besides Spain leads apparently its economy more than his conquests.
So what's your advice? does not focus on trade? send-your-own merchants? Have a more hawkish?
