Can Burgundy and Co. land on the isles? I'd be fairly surprised if they could actually help aside with maybe sieging the continental forts.
-
We have updated our Community Code of Conduct. Please read through the new rules for the forum that are an integral part of Paradox Interactive’s User Agreement.
I dont remember that ever being a policy but Ill take your word for it.
Quality Eco, even to this day, has 5% disc as its policy, and then if you take trade 3rd you have an adm, dip and mil policy from your first 3 ideas, all of which are really good. The nerf to Eco was removing dev cost from its finisher, which was a good thing imo.
- 1
Eco gave -20% dev cost and Eco-Quantity gave a further -10% dev cost and +10% force limit (which is also a very, very good modifier, you go over FL hard to win wars in MP). And this was also back when Quantity was also much stronger on its own (50% manpower/50% FL). Both idea groups and the policy took heavy nerfbats.
Last edited:
- 2
Ah ok.
Last time I tried going for it and checked tje requirements was before emperor.
I think they just went down a selection list with emperor first (who got rejected in 90% ot something similar) and then royal marriage partners (I think electors got a bonus or something).
.png){kind=avatar}
Burgundy doesn't have to land on the isles. If Mary dies, you directly inherit the land, which lifts your force limit and income far above England's.
- 2
He could mean the ecology group. You gotta stop depleting the European Beaver man!
- 3
I dunno, but since 1.35 I'm 4 for 4 getting it with a RM.... France, Brandenburg, Poland (Poland getting it early is just wtf op crazy.
Another example of powercreep after TC rework: you can now have 20+ merchants easily. In such extend I don't even know why we have additional merchant in trade idea group.
Take a decent medium player with France now and he can WC pretty easily. Take the same player with France in 1.17 patch and he will hardly fail. I don't even know how the Dev can say they try to avoid power creep.
Take a decent medium player with France now and he can WC pretty easily. Take the same player with France in 1.17 patch and he will hardly fail. I don't even know how the Dev can say they try to avoid power creep.
- 3
- 1
in 1.17 TC had 0 autonomy, you had less income but more manpower and higher FL
- 1
I'll take the opportunity to ask: why does every other mission grants permanent claims? Wouldn't it be better if most gave temporary claims and only the more "special" missions (be it for flavor or strategic value of the area covered) granted permaclaims? Permaclaim bloat makes it a lot easier and cheaper to expand imo.
But far less free AE expansion with PU and claims everywhere and far more countries to deal with instead of 7 countries left (outside hre) in 1650 as the current state of the game.
@FrogCrusher I can agree with that, there are lots of new bonuses and stacking them is OP. In my last Andalusia game about 1550 I annexed 300 dev nation for 40% warscore because of all cost reduction modifiers - 25% from monuments, 25% from mission, 20% from age ability = -70% warscore vs other religion and I had diplomatic ideas for extra reduction. I wasn't even trying to stack it and I just followed missions becoming Shia - that made almost everyone other religion
Power creep? Well yeah.
But the main issue with it is stacking modifiers: PWC + WS + CCC + AE = easy WC.
Max out the above modifiers and you can sleepwalk into a WC.
But the main issue with it is stacking modifiers: PWC + WS + CCC + AE = easy WC.
Max out the above modifiers and you can sleepwalk into a WC.
- 1
Very few game devs openly state "our official policy for this game is to power creep it".
Similarly, very few can avoid it while updating and adding content to long-running games. The selective pressures from a "can we sell more of this game" perspective are enormous.
- 3
Its not power creep per se, it's the DLCtitis, the DLC creep that forces the devs to make the overhauled thing the next coolest stuff ever. Hence from dlc to dlc we are left with unbalanced mess of a country, that maybe, maybe get some balance patch months or a year afterwards.
I did a WC on patch 1.32 in which I had more merchants than every trade node in the game from colonies, TC's and taking trade ideas (after I had already done the WC).
- 1
Not from a financial perspective. They still end up in incredible amounts of debt trying to maintain an army capable of fighting the Ottomans.
Consider the fact that Hordes have this ability to pull insane alliance networks on terrain that suits them (Kazan allied to Uzbek, Crimea, Chagati + Yarkand) it's not uncommon to see them die. Especially if Lithuania is independent, allies Novgorod and Muscovy get scared to attack them.
But I think the most common outcome for Russia is they do grow large but they're just in an endless debt spiral. They're a useless ally because of their permanent debt. You just ally them to curry favours, place relative as heir and PU them because they're so in debt (and often behind on tech) that they're easy to smash in one war.
- 2
- 1
As an f2p gacha player the Asian is even better than that. Turns out people will pay to get character they want the most and in gacha games usually there are a lot of charcater you want to get even if they are not the Meta pick.
Eu4 have actually have a miss with their DLC because it makes the game easy to the point it got too fast that it ends around 1500-1600. But it doesn't make the experience any more unique just easier. I haven't tried the latest one yet but it seems Ming or be Emperor of China is their biggest attempt in making the gameplay unique but i don't know what people feels about the new Ming/Emperor of China.
- 2
These generally fall under "meta within a specific niche", "not meta, but close enough for 95% of content and a hell of a lot cheaper to bring up to peak performance", and "mai waifu".
- 3