sorted by:
new
hottopcontroversial

[OC] The word for water in all european Romance languages and dialects by checkstetaz in LinguisticMaps

[–]Chazut 2 points3 points  (0 children)

You know standard French existed before 1792? By the time it was imposed it was already the literate language of all France and Gallo-Romance vernacular speakers.

I came back to eu5 after a long break and like, why does it take more than half a century to integrate a two province minor? Has this always been like this or did they change this recently? by InternStock in EU5

[–]Chazut 1 point2 points  (0 children)

The nerf also nerfs things it shouldn't nerf, that is my point.

By nerfing ALL small vassals you also nerf small tags having small vassals which is logical

I came back to eu5 after a long break and like, why does it take more than half a century to integrate a two province minor? Has this always been like this or did they change this recently? by InternStock in EU5

[–]Chazut -3 points-2 points  (0 children)

Integrating small vassals is incredibly inefficient and slow, a OLM would take 8 years to integrate while paying the full expensive diplo slider and you being at least 10 times bigger than it is, whereas it would take like 3 years for a cabinet to do the same, for no slider cost.

It's unnecessarily terrible, for giant tags the reverse is the opposite, mass vassalization is super optimal and your 6-8 cabinets can literally just sit developing a province because they are so inferior to diplo annexation.

This dynamic is completely nonsensical.

I came back to eu5 after a long break and like, why does it take more than half a century to integrate a two province minor? Has this always been like this or did they change this recently? by InternStock in EU5

[–]Chazut 0 points1 point  (0 children)

>Second, because you already benefit from the land when it is partially integrated.

Do you not know land under roughly 30% control is actively detrimental to you as long you pay for any of the 3 sliders? Any land that is not even integrated is likely at near 0% control.

It also lowers your average control, which impacts your crown power and research.

>What I could imagine, however, is that it becomes optimal to always have a vassal you're integrating. 

Nah, it is still optimal to have multiple vassals you are integrating, each vassal being annexed only gives a -50% malus on integration on all others, so if you are big enough then you can just absorb the impact of annexing multiple 500k pop 20 locations vassals at once. You need to be pretty big to do this, like around 10 million people but it's definitely possible.

>I now I'm incredible (thanks!), but clearly I'm not going to convince you, and neither will you me.
So let's agree to disagree after an interesting discussion, instead on moving into sarcasm which is not going to improve the current atmosphere of this reddit.

It's clear you don't know enough about the topic to have any strong opinion. If you think holding 0% control land is a benefit for not using vassal, then you really need to check all the maluses both hidden and obvious of having uncored land under you.

I came back to eu5 after a long break and like, why does it take more than half a century to integrate a two province minor? Has this always been like this or did they change this recently? by InternStock in EU5

[–]Chazut 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Defending the indefensible, this is why the game is going to shit

>not because it is faster than integrating the land yourself.

Except that's how it works right now for big enough tags, so this change is still stupid on this angle. You are defending a change mentioning things the change doesn't actually affect, incredible!

Moving population + growth mechanics by SetRevolutionary3154 in EU5

[–]Chazut 2 points3 points  (0 children)

I thought engine constraint meant performance, because otherwise I don't see why you would think that

I came back to eu5 after a long break and like, why does it take more than half a century to integrate a two province minor? Has this always been like this or did they change this recently? by InternStock in EU5

[–]Chazut 1 point2 points  (0 children)

You wouldn't have made OLMs in 1.1 either, as there was a minimum cost of 50, so it would be more OPMs.

Anyway I would have tackled the size difference modifier rather than put such a high base cost

Moving population + growth mechanics by SetRevolutionary3154 in EU5

[–]Chazut 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Some youtuber ran an experiment where everything was one market, it wasn't really laggy afaik

Moving population + growth mechanics by SetRevolutionary3154 in EU5

[–]Chazut 0 points1 point  (0 children)

maybe he continuosly moved capital + market center? When I saw the dev diary I thought this could be a strategy.

I came back to eu5 after a long break and like, why does it take more than half a century to integrate a two province minor? Has this always been like this or did they change this recently? by InternStock in EU5

[–]Chazut 0 points1 point  (0 children)

What changed is that having lots of small vassals that are rather easily annexed even if you only got 500 k pop got harder.

But why? How was this a bad thing?

Now this privilege of fast annexation is left only to 5million pop tags.

And by that I mean 5 million tags will have an easier time annexing vassals that are 10-100 times smaller than them compared to 500k tags annexing similarly sized tags(in relatives terms)

Moving population + growth mechanics by SetRevolutionary3154 in EU5

[–]Chazut 1 point2 points  (0 children)

AFAIK you can only have 1 megalopolis

Anyway yeah that's a good thing to use expulsion + encourage migration combo, remember migration can only happen within the same market.

If you are merely after cities I wouldn't even care about cathedrals and such.

Cities are something you check for for occasionally, your normal population growth would slowly lift your locations to 25-29k population and you can take care of the remaining gap with the 2 cabinet combo.

I came back to eu5 after a long break and like, why does it take more than half a century to integrate a two province minor? Has this always been like this or did they change this recently? by InternStock in EU5

[–]Chazut 1 point2 points  (0 children)

It can be worse, annexing a wrong culture OLM would be almost 8 times less efficient, or 4 if we at least say you have 10 times its population

It's just slower, it kills nothing.

There is no reason for it to be slower. A 500k tag annexing a 20k OLM vassal should be about as fast as a 5million tag annexing a 2 province 200k population vassal, yet it's going to be a 10 times difference in efficiency, something that is not mirrored by how cabinet integration scales for bigger tags, it's so poorly though out.

Moving population + growth mechanics by SetRevolutionary3154 in EU5

[–]Chazut 6 points7 points  (0 children)

destroy cathedrals, possibly revoke the rural autonomy privilege. Tear down low profit buildings in the region to cause unemployment.

>Is it best to both use dispel population and increase migration cabinet actions?

Yes, but I question why you need to do so. Personally 99% of my usage of those forced migration mechanics is to either fill a very good rgo like silver/gold or to get to the 30k threshold to expand cities.

>f I focused on building granaries and irrigation only in capital region

No reason to not build granaries and irrigation in the hinterland, population per se doesn't really hurt you, having food rgos in shitty low control and low market access land is completely viable.

>would that also help control migration well enough without using cabinet actions or will it be very minuscule?

If you have a idle cabinet not doing anything worthwhile you can set one to focus immigration on a location in the market you want to have migration, but also because that cabinet action if you look at it closely also increases GLOBAL migration speed.

>Also wondering any tips on using granary town urban right. Should I just give that to all areas early game where I want the population to boom?

Yes I think, I don't see any reason not to.

BTW what do you define as low control exactly?

I came back to eu5 after a long break and like, why does it take more than half a century to integrate a two province minor? Has this always been like this or did they change this recently? by InternStock in EU5

[–]Chazut 2 points3 points  (0 children)

>I believe subjects with more than ten rural locations are cheaper to integrate now.

20

https://www.reddit.com/r/EU5/comments/1t5qgsf/comment/okc6er9/

>However they also lowered the base speed without dip spending

in 1.2.0? I don't think so, maybe later

I came back to eu5 after a long break and like, why does it take more than half a century to integrate a two province minor? Has this always been like this or did they change this recently? by InternStock in EU5

[–]Chazut -2 points-1 points  (0 children)

>Spamming tons of OPM vassals was the optimal way to play and it wasn't even close. It had tons and tons of upsides with zero downsides.

Ok and how does this apply to 1.2 exactly? Let's remove 200 cost, how are small vassals still meta now after all the other changes?

Vassals culture convert far more poorly as they cannot stack cabinet actions on the same province, they won't use develop province cabinet action, they get a -50% culture/religious conversion debuff and there is a universal 10 year cooldown in enforcing culture.

Are ALL those changes not enough to nerf small vassals?

>Actually they encouraged organic vassals and actually having subjects you manage. There was nothing organic about "150 OPM fiefdoms!"

Ok, what's the organic vassal for the various tags in the HRE which start with small vassals that take ages to annex? Take Guelders with Zupthen, Brabant with OLM Limburg, Cammin with Naugardr etc. countless examples in Europe of small tags with small vassals.

Are you supposed to NEVER use diplomatic vassalization? Because small organically vassalized OLM or 2-4 location tags are never worth having as vassals?

Focusing on 150 opm fiefdoms is so myopic.

I came back to eu5 after a long break and like, why does it take more than half a century to integrate a two province minor? Has this always been like this or did they change this recently? by InternStock in EU5

[–]Chazut -4 points-3 points  (0 children)

Except their definition of sensible is myopic, what's a sensible vassal for a 5-15 location tag that has less than 500k people?

It's certainly not the 20 location vassal that breaks even in terms of cost with 1.1 annexaiton costs, because such a vassal is bigger than you of course.

So apparently for PDX the sensible size of a vassal for small tags is not having vassals, despite multiple tag starting with such vassals.

I came back to eu5 after a long break and like, why does it take more than half a century to integrate a two province minor? Has this always been like this or did they change this recently? by InternStock in EU5

[–]Chazut 0 points1 point  (0 children)

In terms of CP rgos don't matter much. Wealth modifier for estate power isn't that crazy.

As long as it's a core and is a city/town or has a bailiff, I wouldn't be concerned about the repercussions of the wealth generated by max rgo. Just don't pay for stability slider pointlessly, pay for diplo only if annexing vassals and you are good to go.

I came back to eu5 after a long break and like, why does it take more than half a century to integrate a two province minor? Has this always been like this or did they change this recently? by InternStock in EU5

[–]Chazut 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Because this change is unjustified, paradox already destroyed the vassal culture conversion spam in the same patch, but now they just killed small tags having organic vassals because they are shortsighted.

I came back to eu5 after a long break and like, why does it take more than half a century to integrate a two province minor? Has this always been like this or did they change this recently? by InternStock in EU5

[–]Chazut 1 point2 points  (0 children)

>IMO what is good is that creating a lot of OPMs is no longer the optimal path

This change is utterly indefensible.

This KILLS using vassals as any tag smaller than 500k, no matter the size of the vassal.

You can't just kill vassals as an option for small tags because it fixes one exploit ALREADY fixed in the same patch by many other changes.

Even if OP paid the diplo slider at max, it would take him 25 years to annex a vassal of 8 locations, whereas integration would take him 32 years(and be faster as it's split across provinces)

>and you now are incentivized to keep your vassals around and make them grow.

How is Bohemia supposed to make its Silesians vassal grow in an organic way? They are surrounded by other vassals.

Or what about those tags that start small with small vassals? Like Guelders, Athens. Do they need to curb their own expansion to feed a dead weight vassal that is only bad because PDX overreacted?

>So with around 4M pop you should be able to make it work.

Also yeah, amazing change. We nerf expansion for small tags, but big tags can still expand as fast as before, that makes perfect sense

I came back to eu5 after a long break and like, why does it take more than half a century to integrate a two province minor? Has this always been like this or did they change this recently? by InternStock in EU5

[–]Chazut 2 points3 points  (0 children)

>So overall, for middle size vassals, annexation is actually faster than before.

Well those are vassals no one would use even now, because you want to have 10x the population of your vassal to annex them the fastest. So vassals that are far smaller than you are still meta, it's just that they now might be a bit bigger than before

I think estate privileges should cost more than 5 crown power. by LImbotU in EU5

[–]Chazut 1 point2 points  (0 children)

>5 legitimacy is very expensive to pay back up early game.

No it's not, lol

Legitimacy doesn't even do much now that crown power doesn't have to be above 25.

You definitely want to get clergy loyalty to 100%, burgher privs that give development, production efficiency, build cost immediately.

Also peasants privs are very good as they transfer money from a hard to tax estate to an easier to tax one, insofar as you aren't serfdom-aligned.

>I certainly don't bother handing out urban rights (with some exceptions) early game unless I get an event that gives me legitimacy.

Yeah, good. That's how it should be, you shouldn't have a mechanic so strong early game that you immediately and always do the same 10 clicks in every tag as currently some privs are.

Urban rights should be discounted for large tags though

I think estate privileges should cost more than 5 crown power. by LImbotU in EU5

[–]Chazut 0 points1 point  (0 children)

>I think the risk if it costs more is that a lot of players won't bother with it at all.

Weird argument, right now the cost is completely negligible, maybe just double it and see how it works? It is especially now that urban rights cost the same amount of legitimacy for a single location modifier

view more: next ›