Incompetent said:Places like Hudson's Bay or the West African coast were not heavily settled by Europeans in the EU2 era, and it would be better if players put TPs there.
Better as in stupid?
TPs burn like cinder..
Incompetent said:Places like Hudson's Bay or the West African coast were not heavily settled by Europeans in the EU2 era, and it would be better if players put TPs there.
MattyG said:Whoa, harsh response.
Perhaps we can alter the original statement too ...
"Because the areas of labrador and Hundson's Bay are STILL not genuinely colonized by Europeans, we need to do everything we can to discourage this from happening. Players will still be able to establish TPs, but, of course, these can be very fragile. Apparently they burn tike tinder ..."
MattyG said:I actually think TPs are good value, except that Colonies are soooo much better because they are stable, ie they cannot be burnt.
However, if an area is worthles to colonise because the chance is 2%, then establishing a TP is worthwhile. Level one will cost you, what, 6-7 ducats. And the place becomes a part of your main CoT. You will make this money back in a few years, as long as you have a few merchants in the CoT. And if it burns to the ground, the cost to rebuild is 6-7 ducats. Pretty sweet.
MattyG said:Whoa, harsh response.
Perhaps we can alter the original statement too ...