Ersatz edition All discussion of playcounts is banned. The people making these posts have never played the game and already got blown out on this. Please direct such posters to their appropriate general >>2431755 and report their posts as off-topic.# NewsGone are the hourly ticks, performance changes https://forum.paradoxplaza.com/forum/developer-diary/tinto-talks-123-1-4-performance-and-campaign-timeline.1941000/Old Thread >>2478068
First for minor shitties, which ones do you anons like? Bonus for those in relevant continents
>>2486051AachenImperial capital
>>2486050>entirely incidental>entirely incidentallmao, literally admitting im righti accept your concessionkeep consoling ulm into samoa and expecting them to keep madgeburg rights and benefit from european institutions though, eu4shitter
>>2486084Any of those countries can take the idea groups that give colonists and will use them in siberia if they have the opportunity. Ottomans and Mamluks colonizing the spice islands was pretty common actually.
>>2486063Concession accepted.>>2486096>Any of those countries can take the idea groupsCan but won't. Again This is a specific action that has to be done and won't actually happen vs all the countries being 100% interchangeable. You already got blown out on this.
>>2486048So how is it now? Johan lost me months ago
>>2486097Ottomans regularly blob into Russia if they are strong enough to do so, as will any other country in a similar position. Ottomans regularly take expansion ideas in the mid-late game, as can most other countries unless coding blocks them from doing so. If they have colonial range to siberia they will colonize it, as will any other country with the same position.Plenty of things exist in EU4 to make countries inherently different just for their tag, colonizing, siberia or anywhere else) is not one of them.
>>2486072You are such a massive inconceivably stupid idiot that this concept can't be explained to you. Nevertheless, I will keep attempting to do so because the idea that someone as retarded as you saying such imbecilic things unchecked is intrinsically disgusting to me.Russia did not colonize Siberia because it was the "Russia" tag, it had the "Russia" ideas, or completed the "Russia" focus tree. Russia colonized Siberia because>they were an emergent power who found themselves with excess resources to expend following the collapse of the Tatar yoke>while fur was always a lucrative resource it became even more so during the little ice age, as increased demand made it more valuableAny nation, or "tag" as you can only understand them in this time period would do the same, if somehow Poland did manage to form the hypothesized Polish–Lithuanian–Muscovite Commonwealth they would have done the same, likewise in your scenario where England and Russia magically swap places (which makes no fucking sense) this "England" would have colonized Siberia also.Your entire worldview that "tags" are magical entities that have inherent properties instead of being products of their specific history and geography is why this conversation with you is moot. You are so EU4 brained that you will never be able to see actual historical nations as anything other than a list of modifiers to stack and mission trees to complete. If you want to get into it, both Russia and England are descended from a Norsemen ruling class (Russia through Rurik, England through William the Conquerer, and thus Rollo), so by your definition they should both have the "Norseman ideas", except they don't and they didn't, because they did what you are failing to understand, adapted to their geographic and historical conditions. "Swapping the tags" makes no sense to anyone that isn't a braindamaged EU4 manashitter, because you can't fundamentally change a nation's geographic and historic properties in this way.
>>2486103>Ottomans regularly blob into Russia if they are strong enough to do so, as will any other country in a similar position.Reading comprehension>Ottomans regularly take expansion ideas in the mid-late game,Reading comprehension. They have to choose to do this, instead of immediately and instantly replacing the target no matter what the game state is.>siberia or anywhere else) is not one of them.It absolutely is. >>2486104>Russia did not colonize Siberia because it was the "Russia" tagRussia was not a video game. You have already been blown out on this and I find it extremely disturbing that you have to be blown out multiple times on "reality is not a video game". In EU4 Russia does it because it's Russia. Lithuania will not colonize Siberia like Russia will. Sweden will not colonize Siberia like Russia will. Ottomans will not colonize Siberia like Russia will. In EU5 Sweden, Lithuania and Ottomans will colonize Siberia like Russia will.
>>2486048>You have already been blown out on thisIs this a meme I've missed or one ESL guys favourite phrase?
>>2486107Yes.
>>2486107The Indian got blown out by it in a hilarious manner and has been spamming it ever since.
>>2486107>or one ESL guysphysician heal thyself
>>2486107You have never played the game.
>>2486106It absolutely isn't. If Russia has a real colonist and range on both cuba and sibera they will pick cuba because the terrain is more valuable. If the ottomans were in the same position they would do the same. If Norway were in the same position they would do the same. You have in fact been blown out on this.
>>2486113>If Russia has a real colonist And Russia has a real colonist in 100% of the games I presume?
>>2486106>In EU4 Russia does it because it's Russia. Lithuania will not colonize Siberia like Russia will. Sweden will not colonize Siberia like Russia will. Ottomans will not colonize Siberia like Russia will. This is a bad and illogical thing.>In EU5 Sweden, Lithuania and Ottomans will colonize Siberia like Russia will.This is a good and logical thing.Imagine if in real life Poland-Lithuania conquered Russia, which do you think makes more sense:>They refuse to tap the extremely lucrative, open, and available land that they have ample resources to because they do not have the pre-destined "Russia" tag, "Russia" ideas, and "Russia" mission treeor>They do exactly what Russia did historically despite not being Russia, because their economic and strategic conditions were identical.How you answer this question is the difference between if you're a braindead EU4shitter who can't make logical inferences because you're too mindbroke by your shitty mana blobber OR you're a rational human being capable of independent thought.
>>2486116Real life isn't a video game. This is the third time you have been blown out on this. Every country being a same in a video game is a problem, every country being the same in real life is not. This is not a hard concept. How would you feel if you hadn’t eaten breakfast btw?
>>2486115If they take expansion ideas, yes, ans they havw decent weight to do so. Siberian frontiers don't require a colonist and can't be used overseas so aren't the same as an actual colonist.
>>2486118>heckin vidyaerino!Go play EU4 if you want bing-bing wahoo power ups, this game is not EU4 2, and no matter how much you shriek and whine it will not become so. The reasons for Russia's colonization of Siberia will continue to be modelled, artificial arbitrary bullshit tag restrictions and bonuses have fallen.You WILL research the underlying historical factors that motivated the progression of history and you will like it.
>>2486048>2486051>>2486059>2486063>>2486096>2486097>>2486102>2486103>>2486104>2486106>>2486107>2486108>>2486110>2486111>>2486112>2486113>>2486115>2486116>>2486118>2486121You already got blown out on this
>>2486121>If they take expansion ideas, yesAnd they presumably start out with these "if they take the expansion ideas" sorry I have not played EU4. Because in EU5 the countries are all interchangeable from day 1 so I figure if you are arguing this point Russia must have these ideas immediately and always.
>>2486124Youtubers shrieking is in fact influencing the game to become EU4 2 actually.
>>2486124You already got blown out on this. 4th time by now.
>>2486126No country starts with a colonist, and almost all of them could possibly take expansion or explo right away to get one. They are indeed interchangeable in this regard.
>>2486127True, but that anon's specific shrieking won't do anything here. He should join his compatriots on the forums, /r/eu5, and those youtubers' comment sections instead of shitting up the one space on the internet for people who want EU5 to be good, with his braindead historically illiterate and intellectually bankrupt takes.
>>2486129>could You seem to be speaking this weird hypothetical language even though you claim all the countries WILL do this at the same time because that's how it happens in EU5. Are you ok?
>>2486129Also the more relevant point is that any country that has a colonist will use them in the same way, because all they do is look at the terrain modifiers.
>>2486128
>>2486133But don't all countries have colonists, in EU5 they all do.
>>2486131>>2486135In eu5 everyone is allowed to colonize without restrictions, in eu4 everyone is allowed to colonize because they are allowed to take the idea groups that unlock it. What they take and when only depends on what they can reach. They are the same.
i think scrapping complacency is a mistakeforcing "historical" decline via disasters and events is cringe
>>2486124>this game is not EU4 2,You know very well you've only got about half a year before thats no longer true
>>2486136That doesn't seem quite right. Are you sure you understand English enough to differentiate between "can do something" and "will do something"
>>2486137>forcingMegakyiv enthusiast spotted
>>2486136>in eu4 everyone is allowed to colonize because they are allowed to take the idea groups that unlock it. What they take and when only depends on what they can reach.Which frankly I think was a better system because by and large (other than random countries with ideas like Norway or Asturias) it only led to nations facing the Atlantic with large fleets colonising the New World not the fucking Pope.
>>2486140They will indeed colonize anything in range in both games. How much clearer does this need to be for you?
>>2486139More like a month until 1.4 comes out with ring mana, actually.Let me enjoy the last time the game will actually be good and I can feel smug and superior to EU4lets.Not by actually playing the game, obviously, but by arguing with people on 4chan about it.
>>2486142Ironically the pope is now blocked from colonizing in 5 because people complained it was silly, while they still can in 4.
>>2486048>All discussion of playcounts is banned.
>>2486146>while they still can in 4.Only if the player chooses to do it which frankly I don't know why they would because you'd first have to conquer Seville and whatever the trade node in North Africa is called first to make it worth while
what now chuds?
This game is over. Concessions to EU4 players (instant estate actions for +20 stab, free money, and free legitimacy, ring mana) will NOT bring them back. They've lost the EU4 players, they don't care for microing buildings or waiting 100 years for prosperity and development modifiers to pay off.Likewise, these concessions will just further drive away the (evidently smaller) contingent of people who actually want an autism simulator.They should either have fully committed to making it EU4 2 years ago, during development, or fully committed to making it a spiritual successor to Victoria 2 autism simulator. A house divided cannot stand, they could have at least made bank of autismo whales buying every piece of DLC, but now they're jettisoning them.
ring mana is very gay, why do I need a very slowly accumulating resource to represent how much the king can get done?
>>2486156The saar said this can't be done so this must be a fake screenshot.
>>2486156>i hyav no sibiria yand i moost colonatzi...>shan't be 'avin a spot of the old colonizin' siberia, ain't got me roight ideas oi 'avent
>>2486154AI pope is allowed to take exploration because none of the x0 weights apply to them, unless they lose all their coasts or something. Seeing random little papal colonies in africa is rare but does indeed happen sometimes.
>>2486146Do you not know what irony is because that's not ironic.
>>2486161>england should still be at war with france, because they're the "england" tag, with "england" content, and "england" situations>despite this making absolutely no sensejust swap tags anon utterly btfod on this
>>2486161did 100 years war not go way?
>>2486166It's ironic because they're arguing that EU5 is the perfect simulation that doesn't need arbitrary restrictions or nudging to force outcomes unlike that pleb game eu4, except on this issue EU4 doesn't have the nudging and EU5 does.
>>2486174Ah I thought you were replying to the guy you quoted not agreeing with him, my bad there.
>>2486171250k French levies marching into the Caucasus
I just witnessed the Muscovite army being transported to the Black Sea and then immediately transported back to England
>>2486181Now this is what I call immersive gameplay stemming from pure geography right here.
>what the fuck.pngliterally never played the game awardenglish civil war is coded to firemuscovites are coded to break out of the tatar yoke
>>2486189They're still part of the Tatar yoke though
are they colonizing siberia doe
are you damagedthat is literally what the war is about and what i just saidbot post
>>2486197no the war ended
merchants quarters spam a must for trade capacity and therefore market profit?
so they failed to achieve the war goaldo you actually have problems or are you trolling me epic style by merely pretending to be retarded
>>2486209They always have somewhat of a return, but they're most profitable if you stack trade modifiers and have a domestic surplus of some in demand good you can export.
>>2486209Trade buildings are pretty obviously required for trade to work. If you are more into if you could replace marketplace with villages or foreign trade buildings then the answer is kinda. Anything with trade capacity will work for trade, the marketplace chain is just the best at it. Trade offices in particular can make insane bank regardless of what you are doing in your home markets though you would ideally want to be some kind of merchant republic or some such for them to work the best.
>>2485798I never got the "EU5 has no content" argument. It has roughly the same amount of content as EU5 in the form of reforms/advances, and actually a hell of a lot more in terms of events (granted a lot of them are meme events about some literally who artist who once painted a church or some shit).The only difference is the interactability. In EU4 mission trees and national ideas are something you can actively unlock and progress towards through your actions as a player, in EU5 reforms are either hidden behind events, locked to certain years, or you have to manually go through your events to see the requirements for it to fire.Also reforms are often times less impactful than their EU4 counterparts, so they don't feel as rewarding to get.
>>2486210I know why they're waging war but they keep failing to break free because they can't use the navy
>>2486215>Trade offices in particular can make insane bankThey eat your pops like a bitch though. I can't justify them anywhere but Indonesia.
>>2486181>just switch tags bro every country is the same!KEK
>>2486217But I was told the simulation™ would mean if Muscovy existed in England they'd naturally become a naval power.
>>2486216EU5 has extremely limited meaningful content because of the exact thing you identified. When people say "it has no content" they mean "it has no content that matters". People care about stuff they can make decisions with and you just can't do that with most EU5 content. You just have to understand what people mean when they use shorthands like no content.>>2486219They eat 100 burghers, the same as marketplace. They do provide less capacity per pop though so they are worse for pop efficiency but in exchange you can put them in places where there are actual good trades available so I feel it sort of evens out.>>2486222They are doing that the situations are just fucked. He could have swapped the English vassals over to Muscovy, ended HYW and swapped the golden horde subject and things would have proceeded without the hickups at the start.
>>2486232>They eat 100 burghers, the same as marketplace.I feel that all the lose pops actions are a net negative.Trade offices and colonizing, those pops make more immediate gaines just being shifted around to form towns and cities in your own country, due to the way time value of money works.Sure, sending 50k pops to the new world and in 100 years they'll be 5 million is neat, but the better immediate investment is forming a city and spanning spinners guilds.
>>2486235You don't really lose them you just invest them into a market, basically the same as if you built a market in your cap. I guess you lose the compounding pops but the foreign merchants are going to be pretty small amount of your overall pops so it doesn't really matter. You can always recall them if you run out of pops.Colonizing is really shit though.
>>2486236>You can always recall themDeleting the buildings brings them back?I just assumed they stayed in their new location forever.
>>2486241desu you should build trade office with the assumption that it's going to be there forever but it's still not really losing you pops the same way a colony is and more like the way marketplace is losing you pops.
>>2486134Imagine the western mulattoes
>>2486216>I never got the "EU5 has no content" argument.Play other countries that are not your usual "won by the start date".
Has ANYONE tried to manually control colonies and see if it's viable? Provided you keep sliders on nothing it should still be possible to turn a profit, right?I suppose if you kept individual city locations you could get>+20% control from core>+10% control from city>+2.5% control from local council
>>2486245Would you consider Muscovy won by the start date?
>>2486181>chinggolas khaandera...
>>2486246If by manually control you mean own yourself then ye it's viable. Almost all of the value of the colony comes from the RGO trade so the control is almost totally irrelevant.
>watch a woman play eu5 on youtube>she devotes all her attention to how her heir carried all her father's 'chud' genetics rather than his mother's and how that ruined her entire day>goes into bankruptcy in 1345women are not capable of achieving big green numbers in this gamei doubt they are even capable of making to the 15th century
source
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Drk9sZCtR-s>>2486259
>a woman
how could a game that lets you genocide other people and conduct ethnic replacement be bad?
*assimilates to french*
>>2486326it isn't
Is there a tooltip that explains in detail how many Levy's are available and what can be raised? Like cool I can raise 30,000 dudes, but I want to know why 5 years ago I could only raise 25,000 dudes
I really wish they'd make it so non-culture groups can't assimilate.For example, a Bavarian moves to Danzig. He can assimilate to Prussian.A Kashubian can not assimilate to Prussian.A Pole can not assimilate to Prussian.This would also fix all the world's Jews disappearing in the first 10 years.I might actually make a forum post that the current model is anti-semitic to get them to do this.
>>2486326What game could you be talking about? I want to try it.
>>2486377Victoria 2.
why does the reformation always fail to kickstart? there are a ton of locations in iberia, poland, england, france and italy that convert to lutheranism insanely quickly meanwhile all of germany stays fully catholic save a handful of princescalvinism is a meme in swiss and scotland, and anglicanism doesn't even appear
>>2486359>This would also fix all the world's Jews disappearing in the first 10 years.Feature, not a bug
believable worlds
>>2486181ai starts these retarded wars, while their allies have no way of reaching them to help, and then looses
>he thought his cropping would stop us seeing he's playing as b*ninpost your blobberino
>>2486391It used to just turn 50% of all catholics protestant with no weighing, so Iberia would be as protestant Scandinavia.Then they added the new disease spread reformation but its been way undertuned ever since, because the developers don't play their own game.
>>2486391>anglicanism doesn't even appearAre the requirements for it still convoluted as hell? I remember it being the case early in the games life but i dont know if they made changes to it.
>>2486326this is what happens in eu5
Should I not urbanise an iron location considering how valuable iron is?
muh pipo nooo
>>2486418usually iron is in mountains, that are shit for urbanization for obvious reasons
>>2486418only if its cheap as fuck in your market, so mostly never, no. Ai tho always does that, retarded fuck
>>2486418you should urbanize places like this
>>2486423good point
I LOVE how my "allies" revoke food access 2 months after i spent a diplomat to get it and my army is in the middle of their territory!
>>2486429Shouldn't have tried to gruel him
>>2486358Provincial military screen shows you the detailed information. >>2486418Urbanizing gives you more RGO when you actually need it because it increases pop growth and lowers pop losses. Iron isn't even particularly valuable so it should go in the the second pass (after the really trashy and excess food RGO's but before the really valuable ones and the last foods)
Ulm WC. Such a simple phrase. And yet it has unfathomable power held within. Like uttering the true name of a demon or spirit, merely seeing those two words together is enough to drive a simmie into a fit of spastic rage.
>>2486216the reforms are equivalent to eu4s govtypes and advances are just traditionseu5 has multiple major european and middle eastern nations that have 0-5 events and half are inevitably 'pay 10 trillion for this artist'
>>2486257Was it at least a vtuber?
>Iron isn't even particularly valuableWait, I thought "never played the game" was a meme. Are there actually people here who have never played the game?
>>2486445The base price is only 3 which is the value that matters when deciding in what order you urbanize non food goods. Have you not played the game before?
imagine playing the game this little to not know you always need infinite iron
>>2486447Oh it seems you have not played the game before. You have urbanized every tile long before you need that much iron and you specifically urbanize iron because you need more of it. Try playing the game a bit and then posting next time.
>doesn't even know urbanizing reduces rgo sizethey're saying it's the least anyone's ever played the game, maybe ever
>>2486450I know it's kinda obvious that you have not played the game before but I already explained to you why urbanizing increases RGO production. Let's add massive reading comprehension problems into your tab as well.
You already got blown out on this. You get more net iron by migrating pops to a rural location than urbanizing and waiting for pop growth. Of course, you would already know this, had you played the game.
>why is AI so weak?i dunno, maybe because you didnt teach it to play the game?
>>2486458
>>2486456you get much higher RGO levels with urbanizing and resettling pops to a location. sure, at bare minimum urbanizing pops the difference is real, but it doesnt matter since urbanizing significantly increases the pop cap. don't believe me? look at cairo.
>>2486462You also need the city to defend the pops in the location, you will lose way more to diseases if you have rural locations not only in the rural location itself but also in every location connected to it because you don't have a continuous wall of cities acting as breakwater for disease
take that chuds lololo
>>2486377Stellaris
>>2486415Its a time window of like 20 years where bongland's king has to be married with no heir, and even then you still have mtth to actually fire the event. They should just make it possible for the whole age instead.
I can see how urbanizing for more POPs to get more levels is the better play in the very long term, but I played one game until the end and even in 1836 my rural locations were at level 50-55 and the urban ones around 40. This was at very high development though so that would have diluted out the POP element. I just dont think in the timeframe in which you would actually play the game (up to like 1600) the pop growth from urbanising would even come close to compensating for the +100% (133 with max trad econ) bonus from rural.Not to mention you could get most of the pop growth advantage from just urbanising your local slop RGOs anyway.>ok but what about CairoCairo has high RGO levels because it has a high starting population and decent dev, not because it's an urban location. Plenty of urban locations at game start that have 4 RGO levels or some bullshit
Is it bad to let them migrate?>>2486474They should make it like it was in EU4 where you just get an event to flip. Just like the Ambrosia Republic for MIlan they over complicated some event chains for no reason.
>>2486481it's arguably one of the worst privileges you can grant.>allows your pops to leave the place you actually want them in>lowers noble satisfaction>increases enfranchisement (bad)>pushes free subjects (one of the worst values in the game)there is literally never a case where it's good. you should always be serfmaxxing and lowering enfranchisement so your nobles can be gigataxed. and taxing peasants is retarded since it lowers control.
>>2486481you could manipulate rgo sizes by attracting migrants this way
>>2486485you are much better served by expelling+encouraging migration to an actually useful RGO.
>>2486481Yes. None of the modifiers are good and the migration is very slow and entirely disabled by the granary towns that you should have in every location regardless. If you need to move people around just use the expel pops actions it's so much faster and more targeted.
>>2486483>>2486497Thanks anons, ill ignore it then.
i despise their economic model of punishing the player for success so much
i push free subjects every game
>max free subjects>max traditional economy>max decentralisationYou are committed to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness, right Anon?
>>2486570i max my liberty related values but also capital economy because my peasantry should advance into the middle class
>>2486585>>2486570Ye I think if you are larping liberal you should be going capital for economy.
why don't estates get punished for constructing buildings in terrible locations where they don't have production efficiency and turn a profitit's so fucking annoying having to go around and remove them because they're taking up building slots
>>2486635What does that even mean, just demolish the building if it's on the way
>>2486642>just demolish the building if it's on the wayyeah no shit retard that's what i just said
>>2486644Yes which is why I fail to see the issue. If the building doesn't make profit just close it. There's no such thing as net negative buildings. Estates are already "punished" because they pay extra for buiding. Estate buildings ARE the punishment for you for not properly taxing the estates so they can't afford to build garbage. Raise their taxes retard.
for me its the endless clay pits and fruit orchards
>>2486645are you being obtuse on purpose
I want an Atlas or Empire mapmode like Imperator: Rome had where they showed roads, major cities and holy sites in your country.I also want a way to depict the entire population of your empire including colonies, vassals, unions, etc.And they should also give a major peasant enfranchisement and enrichment boost for the commoners following the Black Death.
>>2486645>the punishment for playing incorrectly is having to interact with the gamenot beating the idle game accusations
so the Columbian Exchange starts in 1637, but before then how the fuck does anyone get horses into the New World or some other goods to Commission Conquistadors?
>>2486781manual trade :)
>>2486781Manual trade? Assuming you are the only country that has conquistadors (Castille) you should be able to get some into your new world subject’s market
>>2486781lol automation made people completely unaware of how the game even works
>>2486645you have never played the game
I havent checked in on this game since release, what’s the consensus among 4chan standards? Steam reviews complained that the combat was awful and there was a lot to do but none of it was meaningful.Should i stick with eu4? i want more in depth control of goods and population groups. In eu3 and 4 i felt like the economy was only about controlling trade nodes, trade buildings, and trade ships. eu combat has always been trash to me so i can’t imagine they could make it worse.actually looking back on it i feel like the whole game is bad, i just enjoy the setting and feel of it and i’ve just been putting up with the mechanics because there’s nothing else out there like it. feel like an abused housewife desu
>>2486821the entire studio is garbage. eu5 was their last shot.
better question is how am i able to get cavalry levies with no horses
>>2486821>eu4fucking zoomer trasheu1 is where its at
>>2486823nobles riding peasants in horse costumes
>>2486825the only explanation
>>2486821This game has destroyed the whole Paradox illusion for me. None of their games are fun or deep.
>game has been out for over 10 months>best part is still a song that was in the initial releasePAINISSAL VA TION
>>2486832That song could've been cool if they didn't play it 10000 times an hour.
>>2486834not the song's problemthat's just the game's fault for having like seven songs and for making it a bitch to add any
is it worth it to build fruit orchards in some provinces with lots of population but little or missing food rgos? doesn't it mitigate a tiny bit of the food need alongside fishing and forest villages?
>>2486838noit eats lumber which ends up costing you more money than it makes
This game is much better at simulating a polity with many subjects/autonomous areas especially since it isn't that handicapped by an arbitrary number of diplomatic relations like EU4 had.
>>2486836They could've made it work with 7 songs if there were one song that isn't too busy and loops well playing 99% of the time.
>>2486709I agree that the game is largely an idler. Despite what I wrote though it's better to not think of the estate buildings as punishment so much as little something you get when you are struggling to help you out. It's worse than if you got the money yourself but the money doesn't go 100% into the ether either. Like a discount on an overpriced item perhaps. You are better off just getting the regular priced version but if you must get the overpriced one you may as well get a small discount.>>2486781For exploration and army supply purposes you just manually trade. Once you have actual colonies the automatic trade kicks in and handles it pretty well. >>2486821There was a real struggle period right after launch but they have mostly gotten their act together now. The game is the same but better than it was at launch. If you didn't like it then you won't like it now but if you did then it's probably better now. >>2486838They do provide food but it's not worth doing that (unless the number itself is green enough to justify building them for that sake which is extremely rare). The paradox of population in this game is that if you have lots of population you no longer need food because subsistence peasants are so efficient. If you take those Indian mega provinces and replace all the food RGO's with colombian exchange they just won't starve for instance. Similarly if you have a province that's struggling with food just import more peasants there that way the subsistence is enough to support the province.
They're apparently changing food/population and urban/rural balance next patch so watch out for that when it happens.
>>2486868That sounds save game ruining
How good is the AI automation at trading? Is it worth doing it yourself?
>>2486875It more or less works perfectly. No reasonable amount of micro spent on trade could outdo the AI trading. You only do it yourself when you have a strategic need for a good like the horses in the new world so your cavalry can stomp the natives example from above.
>>2486875to learn how it works yes, also ai doesnt know what you actually need or will need in the future, it just seeks immediate profit.
>>2486868did they provide any numbers in the dev diary or just broad strokesthink i remember something about moving the pop growth from storage to productioni got a foodmaxxed poland game im curious how it'll look
free subjects or serfdom for republics?
>wtf did my tax base just flatline instead of grow exponentially way beyond all other great powers combined? and why is my control not 100 in every location in 1400? and why is my trade advantage and trade profit not six gorillion? wtf i'm going to go to r/EU5 and /eu5/ to complain about it !!
playing austria or bohemia as the HRE is obnoxious as you just get spammed with requests to start a diet every single fucking day
>gsg player afraid of starting a dietjej
>>2486924Serfdom is way better than free subjects on everything.
>>2486585>>2486588FEDERALISTS GET OUT REEEEE>>2486924Serfdom is basically nearly always better (except if you're a literal city state I think) but Free Subjects if you're a roleplayGOD
>>2486954LOOK AT THIS SHIT IT'S CONSTANT
>>2486983It would be a shame if a dev would have picked the Emperor even once hehe
>>2486983stop being fat
also sidenote to the anons talking about the reformation being a joke earlier, yeah this is barely even a nuisancei didn't even try to stop it at any point it just never went anywhere
>>2486988Did they fix peace of westfalia? Last time I checked nobody wished for peace even with 100% occupation and then AI separate peaced out someone from your side so whole desire for peace mechanic got blocked out
>>2486458>>2486460How can the devs teach the AI to play a game they both don't know how to play and don't play?
word on the street is the next thing getting removed is the rural-town-city-megopolis distinction. Reddit and the forums are getting mighty ornery about it being "micro intensive", "arbitrary", and "not how it was in real life"
>>2486821it's bad right now but that is because claude code is still pretty bad at coding, and even worse at planningnow that chat gpt 6 is out anthropic should release a newer claude so tinto's coding should get a little better
>>2486832Best song in the game by far is: https://youtu.be/WrQXNWJoyzASad part is you need to play m*dslimes to get it.
>start as novgorod >lithuania attacks me few years down the game with 15k troops (i could maybe get 3k) and im too poor to defend myself as historically the richest state in that region>it doesnt attack kiev tho that didnt even have its own army at the time due to being a barren wasteland after years of looting
>>2487036It starts as a tributary of golden horde (golden horde would get called in) so AI won't attack it easily.
>>2487044it gets its independence pretty quick, which is ofcourse another nonsense
>>2487036>im too poor to defend myself as historically the richest state in that regionskill issue, anon.As a merchant republic you should be able to make infinite bank. I haven't played one in a while, but the last time I did I decided never to play one again because they're comedically broken.>you get discounts on trade offices so they only cost 14 ducats to build>you get merchant efficiency bonuses out the ass, so your trades cost almost nothing to run>on top of this you got trade efficiency (now maybe you get selling efficiency? idk) so your trades that were already ludicrously OP are now even more OPUnless you're purposefully gimping yourself by not building them then w/e
>>2487051you have 10 years to create a 20k army starting with 1k levies and 6 ducats per month income, go
>>2487062Do what I said then hire mercenaries, you do NOT need 20k mercenaries to beat 15k peasant levies.
>>2487066i did get A mercenary, 500 units cost 300 ducats.
>>2487072The spoon feeding is over. You either spam the trade offices or stop posting. You have never played the game btw AND already got blown out on this.
>>2487078you arent spoon feeding shityou just being stubbornly retardedgo ahead try collecting 5k gold in 10 years as a shithole yourself
>>2487036so... the challenge is beat lithuania as novgorod. sure, fine. brb.
>>2487082just build trade offices bro, it's that fucking hard
Every country plays the exact same way
you can just improve relations send gifts and ally them
>>2487090(...and that's a good thing!)
why are all eu5 youtubers so fucking annoyinghttps://youtu.be/a4L6v22klEM&t=18
>>2487087Are you really building trade offices in the first 30 years? I thought you were supposed to build roads and stuff
>>2486481>They should make it like it was in EU4 where you just get an event to flip.That's what they're doing, except it's a decision.
>>2487107We're talking specifically about merchant republics. Granted what I'm saying applies more to compact merchant republics which is what I played, but I don't imagine Novgorod has the pops/resources to build tall rather than just abuse trade. For normal countries trade offices are only really viable once you discover third world blobs whose rare goods you want but that are too big to conquer, like India and Majapahit..
>just make a giganigga blob of control and pop growth>don't do anything adventurous, unique or interesting>win
>>2487103EU5 youtubers don't even hype the game anymore they just look at you like this
Is going favor the ruler for distribution of power still the best way to go? Ive only recently returned and back when i played around release people just said max out crown power.
>>2486862>playing 99% of the timeIt doesn't thoughyou just think it does because it mogs every other song you hear that it's the only one that sticks with youwhich would still not be an issue if it were possible to mod the goddamn soundtrack
>>2487132Yes and the food production privilege
>>2487132crown power is everything but the more bonuses you stack the less impactful the 10th +10% bonus is
I luv boggies
>>2487132it was never the best option diminishing returns destroy crown power bonuses, it's just not worth the satisfaction hit favor the elites and favor the wealthy are the best options depending on taxation of which estate if bottlenecked by the max tax
>>2487132Short answer yes with an but, long answer no with an if.At the start of the game you have no crown power modifiers, so you really need to go favor the ruler otherwise you'll be sub 25%, which is the cut-off point for where having low crown power actively harms you. Once the game has progressed a bit you want to switch over to favor the elites, because your nobles will still be the ones with the most power and wealth. Now this could stay this way the whole game, depending on if you're serfmaxxing or liberal RPing.If you're liberal rping you'll be pushing stuff like plutocracy, capital economy, and free subjects, this will do two things. It will give you full peasant enfranchisement, so the nobles have little/no money. And it will empower the Burghers to be richer than every other estate. So at that point you switch over to favor the wealthy, for the increased burgher tax.Typical progression for me is:1337-1437~ Favor the Ruler1437-1537~ Favor the Elites1537-1837~ Favor the Wealthy
I fucking hate how inherently disloyal colonies are.I have a much higher tax base than them, 10x the army of them, and I want to force divert trade to make back the money I spent colonizing for them, but they're at 40% loyalty with full diplomatic spending because they think they're stronger than me together, even though I could easily merk everyone of them at the same time.
>>2487143also funny in the final age they are scripted to dow you soon as truces are up
>>2487143Did this change in 1.3? I picked confederal union in my colony-heavy run, but even so they never even got close to bothering me, while my it wasn't uncommon for my regular vassals to go under 50%.
>>2487143just turn them into dominions bwo
>>2487136>>2487140>>2487142Okay sounds good. Its still only 1389 so ill stick with the ruler for now as im still at 24% crown power. One day a decent crown character wont die in a hunting accident and i can put them in the cabinet.
>>2487147Would be nice if there was some age of revolutions tech that made it so you could project proximity over oceans and rule them directly at that point."Packet boats" or some such.
>>2487111Would you even conquer India and Majapahit? Guaranteed zero control.
>>2487160dude governors lmao
Look at Navarre go.
>>2487162You get one governor and that's if you're >50% naval, which seems unlikely for most countries
>>2487158You can put a shitter in the cabinet, their skill matters far less than you may think, definitely worth it to just throw any crow character there in the early game to get some crown power. Same with navies and armies, make one transport and one professional unit so you can have crown characters lead those.
>>2487085>>2487082Here you go bubPlain vanilla, no mods, default settings. didn't even need mercenaries.I think you were surprised by the tribal cavalry, which is hands down the strongest unit in the game before age 4. 90% of my casualties were from 3 units of 200 tribal cavalry, but still won the war via attrition and the retarded AI spazzing out and moving into my much larger army on unfavorable terrain.In other words, get gud
>>2487174GG, ez
>>2487179Raped and gaped
>>2487179>>2487180On the topic of that area, with the changes to vassals and proximity is it still the best option to go big vassal swarm at the start with Muscovy?
>>2487186make vassals have 20 locations, because of the gay as fuck minimum annex cost. but otherwise, yes
>>2487186vassals are for cucks
>>2487129Fuck this guy getting a facecam was a total disaster.
>>2487129Rage/doombait are the best videos for views. Its why they do them so much. This is across all of youtube.
>>2487174>look at me cheesing the AI, aren't I cool now?no buddy, you aren't
>>2487275you have never played the game.
>>2486813manual trading was and is tedious and is only fundamentally required for a small number of scenarios (such as this one) so it doesnt surpise me that people who dont colonise (because it sucks) arent aware of that
>>2486942>wtf did my tax base just flatline instead of grow exponentially way beyond all other great powers combined?unironic skill issue
>>2487312you didnt play the game
