galuska said:
Hungary definietly isn't a good country to learn to play with minors.
- Fixed wars with the ottos
- lots of vassal/breakvassal events (you form an alliance, only to find your efforts are wasted because of those)
- difficult-to-evade partition event (at minimum, you have to study the hungarian, austrian, ottoman event file)
i fully agree
galuska said:
On the other hand, sweden is a good country to learn the game with a somewhat handicapped nation. (imho sweden is a good learning country in all paradox games)
i do not agree becouse the high militarry costs at start as compared with income. unless the player knows already what sliders to move first or how to "manipulate" random events + a lot of patience. as an easy example of what could happen, he, the player, can find himself in a tought situation around 1500's since russian ai can simplly overrun a new player with its huge and cheap manpower. and sweeden awsome leaders and good times last realtivelly very short in agceep. also denemark ai generally expands and becomes a power house if not constantlly "checked"( as ai versus ai is designed to be)
galuska said:
You are right from a point of view.
EU2 is about the building of great empires and colonization.
Basicly you can only be successful with a small country if you expand, there is no choice.
take the balkan nations for example: you are either destroyed by the ottos, or take them out sooner or later. Either fall, or become a great power.
There is no middle way, EU2 isn't as detailed as Victoria, where you may be successful with improving your starting provinces.
looking from this perspective, this is very true; but i never played eu2(even when a complete "noob" myself) withhout any thoughts of empire building. i always seen eu2 as a "struggle" and a challange to form an empire( with any nation) and not JUST "sit" the WHOLE game. at the same time i find the "world conquest" as absolute fantesy. i guess i am walking a middle line in general.
the way i see this whole eu2 concept is like this: grow constantlly without growing too much OR to little; everything is based on following steps, expand a bit, then ABSORB(or assimilate) for a while(let bb decrease to " a slightly tamished reputation, CONVERT where possible and cheap to do so, attempting to create good relations again with key states,attempt to diplovassal or even forevassal/diploannex); and then repeat same step again with diffrent approaches based on time lines
the time lines, with each of them needing a diffrent overall strategy(in general take or add a few years). this is just a GENERAL thought with a lot more detailes within regarding other less general issues:
-1419(i only play gc) to 1490---. before reaching LT9 and having level 2 forts everywhere . the player needs to get his house in order, and expand enough to have economic growth POSSIBLe later on. basically take enough provinces so he can have enough room to "breath" later on economically, and most important in achiving the desired SLIDERS with respect to stability costs versus provinces owned and technology/economic bonuses where possible. at the same time NEVER over expanding and attempting that "dreamed " empire at this stage (unless ottomans or france or maybe spain and england).in this period the player MUST decide what path will take, with the reccomended one as beeing to make sure he achives CHEAP troops with ANY nation(even england if he has any european "ambitions").
1490's to 1550's.--- this definatelly i call it "uncertain times" especially since an european. this is the period wich has the most wars, in europe especially due to extra "havoc" protestants create in "adjusting" ai behaviours. generally this is the time where the empires are created and the player needs to be fully aware of ai strenght/behaviours all around. the diffrences between LT 9 and LT 18 is HUGE as compared with advantages it can give. if the player is trying powerteching this is the only stage that could really prove difficult to him , ESPECIally if he did not take steps into expanding at all in the previous period. this is the stage where player has 2 main choices: either let ai fight it out while he only attempts to get as many vassals as possible( and a folowing strong alliance with him as leader), OR attempt to "manipulate" ai into dowing him, etc and take advantage of defensive wars for reaching a DESIRED size that BALANCES his stability costs firs of all , regardless of his sliders( it can be done with 10 innovative as well).or combine the both aspects(my favourite "path").
1550's to 1600's---- the dust slowlly "settles". the player can adopt specific objectives now including settings for possible colonialism( if he wishes). the land LT diffrence will become more and more LESS relevant from now on. all that it matters is the economical balance. what i mean is that ai behaviour takes MORE AND MORE into account the economic sizes and LESS AND LESS the militarry "oportunities" present all over the previous stages.
1600's to 1800's ---empire building. a relativelly boring part( many give up game at this stage) UNLESS the player is willing and WANTING to do ROLE PLAYING.of course this might be true ONLY for europeans, and this is where playing an african/asian or even pagan country might prove CHALANGING, at least into attempting to "catch up" with european empires. but if an european nation, role playing is the only thing that will keep anyone intreasted into "finishing"(reaching 1800's). of course "role playing" take diffrent forms, for me is the possible RICH eventfile OR attempting to reach THE BIGGEST size i possiblly could, without crossing bb limit( to me that bb limit represents that line never to be crossed since the line represent the END of any possible justifications given for expansions. a bit difficult to explain, but it is that line at wich every nation in the world will LITERALLY "hate" you as beeing a "dishonorable scum" etc, and everyone unites against the main "opressor" no matter what, i take bb wars as a FAILING empire perspective...).generally i see empire building as a chalange when factoring in the "responsability" factor towards a "peacefull world"(of course wars are a mean to an end ONLY - peace and prosperity).
taking away france and otomans as absolutelly beeing too easy, i would add that the best "learning" nation is actually england
. every eu2 aspect needs to be considered with her IF the player decides to stay involved in european affairs. at same time it has great start-up for a "noob" to afford lose some and win some.
if looking for a diplomatic path( MAIN eu2 strenght for anyone willing to complete a WHOLE gc 1419 to 1819) then i would say venice is the best OR austria(in agceep especially).
for powerteching alone reasons, i always reccomend denemark.
-portugal is very boring unless the player plays with the "alt-iberia" option on, and that would be very difficult for a new player to achive.
- muscovy is a great nation for any new player that has lots of patience. very good for having a "learning curve" and constantlly chalanging( for a new player again). for a beginer muscovy is one of those nations that one can not really "die" and get fully annexed(even if having a death wish), unless the player uses no logic at all of course wich would be almost impossible.
also has great learning curve on colonialism as well and trade aspects in late game.
as for nations where i advise a "noob" to stay away from(in europe or latin/orthodox tech , and in the agceep mode) , would be all the balkan minors, gerogia, 1 province german minors,navarra and the russian minors as well.
for a new player, the best nation OUTSIDE europe that offers excelent events and historical backround, on top of learning the eu2 engine, is JAPAN
hands down. she has soo many sliders movements, revolts, etc. also changing religion, various paths of expansion(colonialism OR mainland china for a bit more "advanced" players). also new european interaction events in latest beta(agceep). the only thing it lacks is diplomacy in earlly stage.
