In terms of trade income, taxes, tech development, etc. I mean obviously the more difficult the setting, the lower these things are, but does anyone have exact figures on these?
Last edited:
-
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.
This has been mentioned before but there has never been a detailed answer.
Maybe its time for Patric or someone to spill the beans?
Maybe its time for Patric or someone to spill the beans?
troops cost for sure
wonder if it's affects ai
hope not, cause i don't know why it would be harder
wonder if it's affects ai
hope not, cause i don't know why it would be harder
Nope.
Wouldn't be much point with it then would it. Actually VEry hard would then for the player be easier then normal since every AI would be handicapped =)
Tax settings do affect the AI though. Playing with everything set to the hardest settings atm and the AI armies are much smaller (mine are too so it evens out sorta, cept mine are cheaper 
), they dont upgrade forts to rediculous levels or mass build manufactories.
), they dont upgrade forts to rediculous levels or mass build manufactories.
vassalization/annexation
Has it ever been discussed/answered whether playing at higher levels reduces chances of vassalization and annexation?
I've been playing EU for about 2 months now. OK I admit, I stop for eating and drinkign every once in a while. I'm in my first GC at very hard/normal, playing Turkey. I have experienced that colonization is definitely a lot harder, both for me and the AI, it seems. And that's definitely a good thing.
I got very frustrated in this game trying to vassalize my allie Crimea. In spite of having relationships of 200, a very diplomatic monarch, and following the general advice of waiting till just after a war and what not, they just kept turning me down. Fortunately, I inherited their realm in the end.
And much the same for Cyraneica. After they turned me down the 56th time, they got vassalized by Oman.
You guys think this is due to
1) bad luck
2) bad luck combined with the difficulty level
3) vassalization is just a lot harder when you're playing Turkey.
4) sunni's are very bad at vassalization
Has it ever been discussed/answered whether playing at higher levels reduces chances of vassalization and annexation?
I've been playing EU for about 2 months now. OK I admit, I stop for eating and drinkign every once in a while. I'm in my first GC at very hard/normal, playing Turkey. I have experienced that colonization is definitely a lot harder, both for me and the AI, it seems. And that's definitely a good thing.
I got very frustrated in this game trying to vassalize my allie Crimea. In spite of having relationships of 200, a very diplomatic monarch, and following the general advice of waiting till just after a war and what not, they just kept turning me down. Fortunately, I inherited their realm in the end.
And much the same for Cyraneica. After they turned me down the 56th time, they got vassalized by Oman.
You guys think this is due to
1) bad luck
2) bad luck combined with the difficulty level
3) vassalization is just a lot harder when you're playing Turkey.
4) sunni's are very bad at vassalization
Very hard settings mean everybody - AI included - has less money to start with, more expensive costs for troops/ships, and longer times taken to settle new provinces. (Upgrading colonies/TPs not affected, or not much.) No idea about likelihood of diplomatic success, but I'm pretty sure that gifts are generally less effective at improving relations, and relations with non-aligned religions deteriorate more quickly.
anyone else ?
Thanks Heyesey for your answer.
I think you are correct when you say that difficulty level affects effectiveness of gifts. Though it is hard to check, as the same gift in what looks like equal circumstances sometimes have very different effects.
I am basically just reposting to try and see whether anybody else has an opinion whether vassalization/annexation chances are influenced by difficulty level. Though I realize people are probably worrying about other issues today. I don't even know for sure why I'm posting this myself.
Thanks Heyesey for your answer.
I think you are correct when you say that difficulty level affects effectiveness of gifts. Though it is hard to check, as the same gift in what looks like equal circumstances sometimes have very different effects.
I am basically just reposting to try and see whether anybody else has an opinion whether vassalization/annexation chances are influenced by difficulty level. Though I realize people are probably worrying about other issues today. I don't even know for sure why I'm posting this myself.
Life goes on. At least, for those who weren't inside the Trade Center at the time.
As far as I can guess, the chances of vassalising are still effectively the same, but it's going to cost you more money and effort to reach the requirements.
As far as I can guess, the chances of vassalising are still effectively the same, but it's going to cost you more money and effort to reach the requirements.
Two Q's by me:
* Wot does 'spilling the beans' mean?
* How do you do those darn cool smileys?
* Wot does 'spilling the beans' mean?
* How do you do those darn cool smileys?
Prices concerning difficulty level
I have just checked this due to the fact that me and my friends/enemies are about to change the difficultylevel in our multiplayergames from now on.
It seems that the prices in question, I have only checked landunitprices, rise with identical sums for all the nations in play no matter what the initial cost.
infantry go up by one pr lvl
cavalry by two
cannons by five
My comment to this is simple; it just isn't fair. Those with the cheapest troops at, say normal settings, will be the ones to get hit the hardest, if you will.
Raising the difficultylevel two steps, for instance from normal to very hard, will double russian infantry costs, while spanish infantry can be bought for only twleve percent more or so.
Of course it evens somewhat out since some has cheap artillery or cavalry etc., but not enough to change the fact that Russia and Turkey are the ones to feel this the incomparably hardest up their..
These warriornations loose some of their main advantage which is the ability to produce lots of cheap troops - and the only thing that counts here is the difference in percentage; the argument that the prices rise identically for all nations is plainly false.
I have just checked this due to the fact that me and my friends/enemies are about to change the difficultylevel in our multiplayergames from now on.
It seems that the prices in question, I have only checked landunitprices, rise with identical sums for all the nations in play no matter what the initial cost.
infantry go up by one pr lvl
cavalry by two
cannons by five
My comment to this is simple; it just isn't fair. Those with the cheapest troops at, say normal settings, will be the ones to get hit the hardest, if you will.
Raising the difficultylevel two steps, for instance from normal to very hard, will double russian infantry costs, while spanish infantry can be bought for only twleve percent more or so.
Of course it evens somewhat out since some has cheap artillery or cavalry etc., but not enough to change the fact that Russia and Turkey are the ones to feel this the incomparably hardest up their..
These warriornations loose some of their main advantage which is the ability to produce lots of cheap troops - and the only thing that counts here is the difference in percentage; the argument that the prices rise identically for all nations is plainly false.
