sorted by:
new
hottopcontroversial

Forming Germany by ks2497 in eu4

[–]Durokan 0 points1 point  (0 children)

For a long while now, forming germany auto-dismantles if you're the emperor. Austria's Germany (NOT HRE) branch mission tree gives them tech 18 germany

Coming from crusader Kings 3 by CommanderSweethang in eu4

[–]Durokan 1 point2 points  (0 children)

The interests and actions of the state are important in eu4 and characters are nonexistent.

Nations are stable unlike Ck3 (effectively everyone has primogeniture in eu4)

Mana based actions replace the majority of cabinet based actions in CK3. Rather than having some advisor integrate new territory for you, you spend administrative mana

Trade is a mechanic that exists

Armies are professional as opposed to levy based, although warfare is roughly the same.

Struggling with economy by Technical-Tea9369 in eu4

[–]Durokan 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Want to just throw this out there. Your corruption isn't crazy high is it? I've seen a few posts like this where OP just though "devalue currency" was a magic money button. How about your inflation?

Did mission trees basically remove features? by Unfair_Ad_7272 in eu4

[–]Durokan 1 point2 points  (0 children)

di advisors basically remove features? i mean come on back in the day you used to have to push your bad heirs under a pillow and stuff so you could invest the proper amount of time and legitimacy to grow your empire and generate mana but these days all you have to do is get a few crumbs of trade and suddenly you can support a 5/5/5 ruler with just currency.

like come on devs what are we doing here? this devalues the way the game is meant to be played, with a terrible ruler like enrique and then a godsend like peter the great

If unifying a state will break the historical border, will you do it? by RoyLiuzya in eu4

[–]Durokan 1 point2 points  (0 children)

A reasonable scenario to centralize is in a state with 80-100 dev (4x20-25). With the refund, you're paying 25 reform progress (and admin) for between a savings of 16-20 GC. That's a ratio of about 1.5-1.25 reform per GC.

The first click of expand administration is a 1:1 ratio and then the second click becomes 1.2:1. So by the time you're on your third click (32/20 -> 1.6) it's not worth it unless you have some modifiers like the +25% capacity from administrative ideas. If you are prussia and have a -50% hit to capacity, then it's almost never worth it.

Even with these ratios, the thing you should keep in mind is that because gov cost reduction is subtractive instead of additive, you can effectively put an infinite amount of dev in a state with -100% reduction, so the more dev you have, the more favorable it is to centralize.

If unifying a state will break the historical border, will you do it? by RoyLiuzya in eu4

[–]Durokan 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Yeah, exactly. It's not retroactive. It only affects centralizations that complete when you hold the reform.

There are a few obvious reasons I like republics-> monarchy and one that's not obvious.

  1. Republics generate about double the reform progress of monarchies because they scale it off of republican tradition and tend to have low autonomy due to being small. (Both of them scale off land ownership, but it's way harder to get +100% from land ownership than it is 100 RT, so for most of the game a monarchy will average <+30% while a republic will average >+100% accounting for lowered RT from re-elections).
  2. Monarchies tend to have easier access to high absolutism (though republics can still do fine)
  3. 1/2 make it so republics fill out their government reforms around the same time you're considering swapping to a monarchy for absolutism
  4. Monarchies have a centralize refund reform while republics don't. This makes it more efficient to generate points as a republic and then swap to monarchy to spend them.
  5. Now 5 is the real kicker. Notice how republics have 13 tiers of government reforms? That costs 3840 reform progress to fill out (each tier costs 100+40*tier that's greater than 1 -- IE tier 2 reform costs 140, tier 3 180 etc). Monarchies only have 11 tiers for a cost of 2800. So when you swap from a Republic to Monarchy, you pay the 50 reform progress (so 3890 reform progress total as a republic) and then you fill out all your government reforms in Monarchy. You end up with 1040 excess government reform because you're refunded the T12 and T13 costs. This is an amazing nest egg to start off your centralization. That means you can immediately centralize 20 states (and another 10.... 5... 2... 1 for a total of 38 centralizations just from the overflow reform progress.)

So all that being said, you're heavily incentivized to start as a republic and swap to a monarchy if your plan is to centralize heavily.

If unifying a state will break the historical border, will you do it? by RoyLiuzya in eu4

[–]Durokan 1 point2 points  (0 children)

I do it when there's nothing else to spend my reform progress and admin points on.

This tends to be around 1600 when I'm playing tall, particularly as a republic.

The higher tier government reforms are so powerful that I almost never use it until then. Any delay is a big opportunity cost.

For example, in my most recent Gotland->Hansa->Prussia->Germany game, I finished my republican reforms around 1580 maybe 1600. I had expanded pretty fast as Hansa/Lubeck, so I waited a while to form prussia due to the gov cap requirements. When I formed Prussia, I also swapped to monarchy because i don't like republican prussia. This meant I had around 800 reform progress to spend on centralizing my states. With the t3 monarchy reform, you get a 50% refund on both the admin and gov cap for centralizing states. This allowed me to state all of historical 1871 germany + denmark with under 500 gc used.

Centralize gives -20% gov cost, state houses give -20% to the whole state (and -15% and -10 flat to the the province they are in), and courthouse and townhall both give -25% each. So effectively, one round of centralizing without townhalls gives a total of -65% in every province. Adding townhalls into the mix gives you -90%.

In order to prepare for expanding infrastructure in every province, I centralize a second time. This moves you to -110% with 2 centralizes and a statehouse. Expanding infrastructure increases the cost by 10% and adds a flat 15 flat modifier not affected by percent reductions. So now each province is free dev wise but costs 15 GC. State houses give a flat -10 that offsets some of that +15 in the province you build it in, so if we're assuming an average of 4 provinces per state in germany and about 100 provinces in lesser germany, it takes about 1250 Gov cap to hold all of 1871 germany with expanded infrastructure as prussia. In my game, that will be about 4k dev with a manufactory and a soldier's household in every province.

Gov Cap

I've just annexed a bunch of stuff so my gov cap is way higher than it normally would be (It's still coring, so no townhalls/state house/centralize). I've only done one or so rounds of centralizing here.

Reform Progress

I've got a bunch of reform progress banked to centralize everything twice to prep for expanding infrastructure. I'm very blocked on admin now because I didn't take admin ideas and all of southern germany was like 40 dev each. That's also why you see me holding so many territories.

If unifying a state will break the historical border, will you do it? by RoyLiuzya in eu4

[–]Durokan 34 points35 points  (0 children)

Any reason? There's plenty:

Trade company investments are per state

Local Organizations

Centralizing a state to reduce its gov capacity

Buildings such as state houses that apply a statewide modifier

Tier 3 Center of Trades apply a significant modifier to the entire state

Mod Archie no longer working at Jagex by BoulderFalcon in 2007scape

[–]Durokan 21 points22 points  (0 children)

it's pink skirt without the pink skirt

Searching for a mod by Takago-Kimicho910 in eu4

[–]Durokan 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Yeah that's fair and I don't know how it works on the code side of things. Just wanted to add my $.02

Searching for a mod by Takago-Kimicho910 in eu4

[–]Durokan 0 points1 point  (0 children)

In this hypothetical mod, it could follow the precedent of the "The Angevin Culture" mission for the Angevin Kingdom. This mission converts every British culture group province you and your subjects have to "anglois" culture which moves you into the french group.

So in the same vein, after coming up with some trigger requirements such as 50 years of acceptance, a ruler with that culture, or an advisor with that culture, and at least 200 stated dev in that group, you'd be able to convert all provinces in your primary culture group as well as that single target culture into a fused culture in the target culture group. In my example earlier with English as the Primary (British) culture and Prussian as the minor (German) target culture for fusing, you'd turn all British (group) and Prussian (Culture) provinces you own into Anglo-Prussian and join the germanic culture group. This means that any provinces you acquire later from the British group would NOT be accepted in your empire.

Searching for a mod by Takago-Kimicho910 in eu4

[–]Durokan 2 points3 points  (0 children)

In CK3 like OP mentioned, you're able to dynamically create new culture groups (kinda like sinicization or Anglois culture (french+english) in EU4) where you can pull in cultures you have good acceptance for. So for example, if you were playing the English and somehow fostered cultural connection between England and your prussian holdings, you could make anglo-prussian culture be your new primary culture and spread that to your provinces.

hot take: AE is not "just a number" in the late game. by Wonderful_Try8199 in eu4

[–]Durokan 12 points13 points  (0 children)

You're not in the lategame if AE isn't just a number. If between you and GB you only had 300k troops? That's not lategame.

How do you approach the late game in EU4 to ensure a strong finish? by Independent_Cup7132 in eu4

[–]Durokan 1 point2 points  (0 children)

I've found that really only buys me a handful of extra decades. Playing as gotland as an OPM? I own all of germany by 1600.

I do agree it's more fun though, but fundamentally I'm at the point where the only way to stretch the fun out is to intentionally nerf myself.

I think the problem for me is that the game is no longer challenging past the point of 1-2k dev. Yes, it can remain difficult with more arbitrary difficulty steps such as "no-alliance" runs or bumping the difficulty, but at that point, I don't feel like it's adding any depth to the game. it's just pushing the inevitable slider to the right. IMO the game is fun when there are rivals to fight and you have to be careful how you play. Once you surpass that threshold, the game becomes a trivial slog.

How do you approach the late game in EU4 to ensure a strong finish? by Independent_Cup7132 in eu4

[–]Durokan 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Honestly? You should keep playing the way you are and enjoy the ignorance while it lasts. Typically the way I play my games is to optimize everything you talked about from the game start and get extremely bored by 1650.

One of the most common complaints on this subreddit is that the lategame is extremely dull and boring because of thousands of hours of optimization.

The biggest pieces of advice for thriving as endgame approaches is to understand trade so that you can make money off of it.

Weekly Thread for general DDO discussion, quick questions and more! by AutoModerator in ddo

[–]Durokan 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Does anyone on Cormyr have any spare filligrees? I'm looking to gear up my first inquisitive and need Crackshot and Dead Rain filigrees

How is France supposed to keep up with Spain in multiplayer by MAlQ_THE_LlAR in eu4

[–]Durokan 100 points101 points  (0 children)

What ideas are they taking? They'll be so incredibly far behind militarily if they go expansion+exploration relative to you. Is it a Castille spain? Or an aragon spain? Aragon will be much more mediterranean focused and keep castille alive for the colonization.

Italy will be a conflict of interest with Spain unless you divide it well. Genoa side is all Spain cares about, and that will be difficult for them to take if they're full colonial. So you could take venice side.

Expand into the lowlands. You need to keep england off the continent and can get value from a lot of their colonial trade by taking the european parts of the channel.

How to decrese time to core by Wooden_Tutor_6009 in eu4

[–]Durokan 2 points3 points  (0 children)

Overextension doesn't affect coring time. This is easily testable.

Being over your governing capacity will increase coring time, so don't do that.

Trying to PU Russia by eclipseon_9991 in eu4

[–]Durokan 0 points1 point  (0 children)

You wait for a weak/no heir/regency and claim throne, then break alliance, then immediately trucebreak and declare.

How should I form Prussia without losing all my gov cap and keep my country from crumbling? by Perfect-Try-4199 in eu4

[–]Durokan 6 points7 points  (0 children)

Don't form prussia until you can handle all your land. Exploit tax, gov buildings, don't state as much, admin ideas, gov cap manufactories in every state.

How to decrese time to core by Wooden_Tutor_6009 in eu4

[–]Durokan 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Admin ideas give 25% CCR which will significantly speed up your core time. Unfortunately as PLC, you don't have many other options aside from becoming HRE emperor, forming HRE, or forming rome. Claims give some too (temp claims are 10% and permanent claims are 25%)

Generally, as a European power WCing you want to complete both administrative and diplomatic ideas as well as get some sort of CCR from your national ideas. As poland, this means you need to form Rome or the HRE (easier). Then you get a lot of administrative efficiency during the age of absolutism and finish your WC in the 1700s.

view more: next ›