CCR must die (mostly)

[klingonadmiral]

In SP, CCR is one of the "big 3" modifiers for a wide playstyle, together with province warscore cost reduction and administrative efficiency. On the other hand it is night-useless in MP where conquests are very limited and military bonuses are everything in order to overcome rival players. This creates a highly binary gameplay style, in SP people jump through a thousand hoops to maximize their CCR while runs that don't pick Admin ideas and don't go for some specific achievements are borderline memes, while in MP picking Admin idea get's you laughed out of the lobby.

In recent times there has also been a "CCR creep", where Paradox's way to buff tags/reward players for picking a tag was to give them a CCR idea. France and Byzantium in Dominion and King of Kings respectively are merely the most recent examples, you can find CCR creep at least as far back as Dharma.

I hate this. As it is currently I almost feel forced to play a country that gets CCR, or form a country that gets this bonus.

I believe the only way out of this situation is to (nearly) completely remove CCR from the game. Here would be my proposal for balancing in a CCR-free world:

Base Coring Cost is reduced from 10 Adm/dev to 8 Adm/dev​

​

Base Coring Time is reduced from 36 months to 24 months​

​

Permaclaims no longer offer additional CCR compared to normal claims​

​

CCR is removed from the game, with the following exceptions:​

​

Unified HRE Idea Set (still worse than the vassal swarm, but at least it's something)​

​

"Establish Lifan Yuan" Celestial Reform (reward for going the EoC path, perhaps even buff it to 15% CCR)​

​

Maya and Inti Reforms (indirect Native buff)​

​

the Unrestricted Coring Age ability in the Age of Revolutions is already pretty great, but maybe put a small CCR bonus on it (late game acceleration)​

​

For coring cost, this means that now all countries core for the cost of a country that currently has 20% CCR. Meaning that every country now cores like a beylik, but can not easily augment their coring efficiency.

For coring speed, this is equal to a country with 33% CCR. This is larger than the reduction to cost, but arguably the reduction in time was already the main appeal of stacking CCR - 6 month cores are pretty damn degenerate.

Bringing permaclaims in line with normal claims narrows the gulf between countries with mission trees and those without.

 

[Maxxie42]

I don't see how SP and MP games being different is a problem ; I certainly don't see why MP games should be the standard that singleplayer tries to replicate. They're just different things, and multiplayer should never ve used as a reference for how to implement changes to singleplayer. Every time PDX has done that, it's led to crap changes.

Now, regarding CCR itself - you're right that it's a crucial modifier for any wide campaign, and collecting it justifies jumping through many hoops. But not every campaign aspires to be a World Conquest. You say you don't want to play countries without CCR anymore because of the way it makes you feel, like you're missing out ; but that's on you, not on the game. I know people don't wanna hear this, but to me it's just like with mission trees - set a goal for your campaign, and then if CCR, or missions, help you get there, go for it, otherwise ignore it. It really is easier to do than you seem to think.

There's a thread where people post screenshots and summaries of their campaigns, and if you have a look at those, I think you'll find that many players have great fun with campaigns that don't set out to conquer entire continents. I don't think the game should be changed simply because you've lost sight of the many different ways you can play it.

 

[TheMeInTeam]

I mean - wouldn't we all be happy if AI was as smart as the human players and not just a punchbag?

We would all be happier if the hardware we have could run the game 100x faster while costing 10x less, too. If only that could be implemented!

 

[brantodb01]

I mean - wouldn't we all be happy if AI was as smart as the human players and not just a punchbag?

No. They're different experiences that are appealing to different people.
I like MP which can play more like diplomacy, I like MP that plays more PvE and I like singleplayer map painting.
However there's no guarantee the majority map painting singleplayer crowd would enjoy it if the AI instantly banded together against anyone who might be a threat.
EU4 is very arcadey and people like it that way, it's part of its design and I don't see why you would change it over ten years into its lifespan.

 

[klingonadmiral]

There's a thread where people post screenshots and summaries of their campaigns

I'm the most recent and #3 alltime poster in that thread.

I mean - wouldn't we all be happy if AI was as smart as the human players and not just a punchbag?

Paradox attempted that with Korea and people were (and still are) less than happy with it.

 

[Blizzrd33]

So CCR modifiers should die because you feel forced to play nations that get CCR bonuses?

That's one of the least convincing arguments I've heard for a while around here.

 

[klingonadmiral]

So CCR modifiers should die because you feel forced to play nations that get CCR bonuses?

No, they should die because they are the strongest way to achive anything.

Stronger army? Consolidate a massive territory to support a large army. Quality bonuses win battles, but since the AI never truly goes for full quality stacking quantity wins wars.

Bigger income? More provinces -> more money.

Dominate trade? The best way to keep other people out of your node is to annex them.

 

[Kurfürstin Adelheid]

The bonus is given out too liberally now in my opinion. So many countries get it (over 70, do a search for "core-creation" on the national ideas page of the wiki), and often it's a big amount like -15% or -20% or -25%. It should be reduced to a more moderate and proportionate amount or replaced with another bonus. Some countries almost seem like they have it for no reason. Why does Alaska get -20% CCR? Why does Gotland have it as a tradition? I get it for big, expansionist formables like Yuan, Qing or Russia; or hordes, but for some of the countries that get it, the link seems rather tenuous. Also, too many have it as an idea you unlock really early on or a tradition. Sometimes it doesn't make much sense when you look at the context of the idea either. Why does 'Decentralised Rule' for Angevin give CCR? Surely a more appropriate bonus for that would be unrest reduction or max promoted cultures?

 

[Riukus]

Imagine PDX selling DLC "Self Control for Players." Introducing new game mechanics that allow you not to conquer the land you don't want to conquer. Game changer!

 

[Oceanflex]

Why does Alaska get -20% CCR? Why does Gotland have it as a tradition? Why does 'Decentralised Rule' for Angevin give CCR?

I'm not really sure about Gotland, I think it's an incentive to think about keeping the ideas if you replace Denmark, or go blobbing into Scandinavia. Angevin is just as much of a blobby expansionist formable as Yuan, Russia, or Mughals, so I'm not sure why you have them separated, other than disliking the name. Alaska seems to be the only Colonial Formable with CCR, I don't see why one of them can't have it, and Alaska is pretty well positioned to crack back into the Old World rather than colonizing deeper into North America.

Back to OP, I disagree that CCR is in the "big three". It's a powerful modifier, but the main advantage is not needing to be wildly overextended (and thus getting those horrible events) for years at a time. You can do the same by faffing about with vassals, or not going for a WC. Any goals short of a WC don't really need it, you'll run out of Governing Capacity or Aggressive Expansion space way before you run low on admin or feel the need to be above 100% OE more than a single time. Maybe the speed achievements, but you can't stack CCR in time for those anyway. Administrative Efficiency (and development efficiency( is the king of all modifiers, absolutely, but governing cap just absolutely brutalizes CCR's usefulness.

 

[Riukus]

Btw, why not complaining about dip annexation cost also? Is it to weak for you?

 

[Testerian2]

Imagine PDX selling DLC "Self Control for Players." Introducing new game mechanics that allow you not to conquer the land you don't want to conquer. Game changer!

I can even play DLC "Another game with decent strategic choices", some of them are free.

 

[grommile]

In SP, CCR is one of the "big 3" modifiers for a wide playstyle, together with province warscore cost reduction and administrative efficiency.

Because in SP, 100% of your opponents are bad at the game, so it's easy to get more territory, so you don't need to make the choices that make the most of the territory you already have.

 

[klingonadmiral]

Btw, why not complaining about dip annexation cost also? Is it to weak for you?

There are only ~20 countries that get any subject annexation cost bonus, plus a few that any nation can pick up. There is an issue of a rather degenerate Provence -> S-P -> Austria -> Spain path that that results in hitting a -70% subject interaction cost modifier before any general modifiers (Influence ideas, Papal Legate, etc...).

But that is *one* path.

Meanwhile you have:

Timurids -> Mughals -> flip Hindu ( -55% CCR)

Manchu -> Qing -> take Eoc -> flip Hindu (-65% CCR)

Ottomans -> flip Christian -> become HRE -> pass Erbkaisertum -> flip Hindu (-55% CCR)

... and the list goes on.

55% CCR is an important benchmark to hit since with Admin ideas it brings you to the 80% CCR cap which means coring takes 6 months. (Though I'd go so far as to say that any coring time under 10 months already suffices)

France is an interesting case because while the addition of a -10% CCR idea should have been a buff, the fact that it became an endgame tag in the same patch means that it can no longer form Italy which actually means that in that regard France was nerfed.

Administrative Efficiency

Administrative Efficiency is in my opinion the weakest modifier of the big 3. The fact that it does not influence coring time hurts it a lot, actually. Also it takes until the lategame for Administrative Efficiency to get really going, as it needs to get close to the 90% Administrative Efficiency cap to get truly powerful.

 

[Jarvin]

Every time PDX has done that

When has PDX done that?

 

[TheMeInTeam]

Administrative Efficiency is in my opinion the weakest modifier of the big 3. The fact that it does not influence coring time hurts it a lot, actually. Also it takes until the lategame for Administrative Efficiency to get really going, as it needs to get close to the 90% Administrative Efficiency cap to get truly powerful.

I'm not so sure, since it interacts with all of core cost, province score cost, and dip annex cost. It doesn't speed coring and doesn't stack additively with the other two, but its influence is very noticeable there. You might also be confusing "weakest" with "less available", since it's definitely not handed out with the frequency of CCR.

On the other hand, CCR carries a break point at < 10 months. It is consistently useful before that, but not to nearly the extent as it is once you can core large amounts of OE before you blow up. When fishing for achievements that disallow tag switching, it's challenging or impossible to hit this break point. For a completely generic nation, maybe they want to do late game theocracy swap --> stack diplomatic + open public elections + one state under god + malta forts + military hegemon, then just use as much admin efficiency as their tag allows. Something like "feed a bunch of client states" then stack Catholic + influence + administrative (policy) + admin efficiency to try to annex them in time.

 

[Riukus]

There are only ~20 countries that get any subject annexation cost bonus, plus a few that any nation can pick up. There is an issue of a rather degenerate Provence -> S-P -> Austria -> Spain path that that results in hitting a -70% subject interaction cost modifier before any general modifiers (Influence ideas, Papal Legate, etc...).

Anyone can form Austria if they not end game tag. Some nations need extra steps though. You mentioned tag formation and religion flip in your post, so it legit too.

 

[Chief of Staff]

I had to look up what CCR is. I am assuming you are referring to Coring Cost Reduction.

So, for everyone, let me ask this question... is there a mod out there that eliminated almost all of the CCR, as @klingonadmiral put it? If so, what is your SP experience with that? What about MP experience?

Just asking out of curiosity, as I wonder how much what klingonadmiral is suggesting in the OP would change the gameplay experience.

 

[TheMeInTeam]

I had to look up what CCR is. I am assuming you are referring to Coring Cost Reduction.

So, for everyone, let me ask this question... is there a mod out there that eliminated almost all of the CCR, as @klingonadmiral put it? If so, what is your SP experience with that? What about MP experience?

Just asking out of curiosity, as I wonder how much what klingonadmiral is suggesting in the OP would change the gameplay experience.

You can just play a tag w/o it and stay in a religion that doesn't give it, such that administrative ideas are all you get. It's harder to do one-tag WC like that, but numerous players have. Could also skip admin ideas.

I think Florry did a one tag a long time ago while avoiding ideas entirely or something. Lambda did a one tag as Ryukyu w/o switching government or tag and finished in 1600s, which was more recent. There's enough wiggle room that you could still one tag w/o horde or special mechanics while deliberately picking awful ideas for WC, though it would be significantly slower at same level of skill.

OP didn't specifically say to remove administrative ideas either. 18 month coring (or 15.4 with claim) would be pretty strong. Especially because you could culture drift to break the 10mo barrier w/o tag switching or relying on missions, and client state feeding/vassal feeding would handle the admin burden better.

 

[EUnderhill]

Because in SP, 100% of your opponents are bad at the game,...

Sometimes the hardest part of the game is pretending this is not the case and keeping myself from unfairly exploiting this.