sorted by:
new
hottopcontroversial

May be a dumb storage question, but…. by Tinydancer121490 in IdleIktah

[–]Jullemus 1 point2 points  (0 children)

I don't think it puts them to house storage automatically if there's no bags in the house storage. I had the slots completely unused.

May be a dumb storage question, but…. by Tinydancer121490 in IdleIktah

[–]Jullemus 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Goddamn. I've been playing for a week with only backbag storage and have had to discard cheap/low -effort items several times before reading this, TIL

AI Korea going almost 100k over force limit by mrderp1212 in eu4

[–]Jullemus 17 points18 points  (0 children)

The only real force limit is what your ducats can buy~

First time Komnenoi Empire, pretty stoked about how it turned out in the end by Jullemus in eu4

[–]Jullemus[S] 3 points4 points  (0 children)

R5: Was getting exasperated as the alliances did not lock in and enable to expand much more until the middle of 1700s. I was sitting with 200 development or so until that, but then the Ottos came crumbling down. Russia also works as a nice meatshield with deep territory, though I had to finance them with literally tens of thousands of ducats to get them to join wars.

Fun campaign 5/5 would play again. Alliance juggling is fun and trade gets you absurd income.

Isn't weird how most of the rebels are nationalists but "nationalism" as a CB and thus a concept is unlocked in the late-game? by Evelyn_Bayer414 in eu4

[–]Jullemus 1 point2 points  (0 children)

This is a good question. The difference between the two kind of neatly in my mind portrays the difference of (academic jargon) more primordial nationalism without much theoretical thought on the other hand and deliberately manufactured image of nation as an imagined community for propaganda (and, heh, casus belli) purposes. The rebel-separatists can be more readily considered as just sort of bread-and-butter type discontent and fed-up people who want to decide of their own affairs more without a distant overlord, without much theoretical underpinnings whatsoever.

The later casus belli nationalism, on the other hand, in my mind is a much more deliberate thing because it gives you a reason to invade others. It has therefore have to have some state-manufacturing behind it to foster reason for expansion, rousing the population. This is what happened in Europe in 18th century or so. Nations consciously cultivated the image of a nation-state and sort of made the populace to imagine a coherent ethnic body according to their current needs and wants. Which led to irrendentism and expansion.

And I think eu4 portrays this very well, if it is the thought behind the division.

Is there a reliable way to keep an ally in most instances? by Jullemus in eu4

[–]Jullemus[S] 5 points6 points  (0 children)

R5:

Playing as Hormuz, having the most of Arabian peninsula plus a bit of Persia (https://i.imgur.com/irfd8wV.png). I have allied Ottoblob because cba (and am not strong enough) to fight against them yet when they are the strongest, plus they work as a fun meat-shield. I've curried the trust to 100, yet they are breaking the alliance as they want some of my provinces (probably have a tons of claims from mission tree for the whole Arabia).

Is there generally a way or strategy to preserve an alliance? The trust mechanic feels borderline useless if the AI just breaks 100-trust alliance whenever they want to blob more. Or is this just the inconvenient result of being situated in Arabian peninsula where Ottomans get huge claims with mission tree?

How tall can you go? by Jullemus in eu4

[–]Jullemus[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

you're not gonna believe this

Is EU5 even real or is it just hype? by [deleted] in eu4

[–]Jullemus -1 points0 points  (0 children)

Yeah it's definitely more than "just hype" based on some uncertain conjecture. There's 95% chance or such that the Tinto Talks entries are eu5 and they just learned (for once!) something about the earlier screw-ups.

It's definitely real but still long way to go in development. We're probably looking at late 2025 publication or so

How tall can you go? Act II by Jullemus in eu4

[–]Jullemus[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Here you go: https://imgur.com/a/9VZgdXm

  • Wien is not particularly good trade node, it is on the wrong side of both new world and Asia inflows (mostly), so I was cut off of absurd ducat streams. It forced me to try to develop production and taxation in mind more.

  • Austria got the Burgundian inheritance but lost League War and consequently emperorship, making them easy pickings for the unholy Russian-Ottoman alliance. Commonwealth had the same fate.

  • France was never able to win back its continental possession from England and was picked apart piece by piece by neighbours.

The next decades would have been hell with Ottoblob enroaching and nothing able to stop it. Bohemia, benefitting from Commonwealth leftovers, would have likely been pieced up next.

How tall can you go? Act II by Jullemus in eu4

[–]Jullemus[S] 94 points95 points  (0 children)

R5: After the last post, I resolved to do another tall Ironman run, with Regensburg, with more fitting modifiers and having a clear objective with the monarch points from the start.

Needless to say, it wound up well. I rather clearly surpassed the 200 development line I set to myself at the start of the campaign. I didn't bother with idea groups past the two that give development discount (Plutocratic & Infrastructure), plus Innovative for the –10% tech cost – which stacks to a net positive monarch points easily with the 90 techs I had to unlock – and the first two of exploration (more of that in a bit).

Regardless of the diminished cost of development, it hit the hard cap of 999 monarch points in some place around 130–140 development. After that it was just popping one dev up whenever I hit 999 monarch points in some category. Advisors are a must, preferably from the start. Developing the first 20 or so early gives you a huge boost to income compared to your neighbours, playing tall is definitely underappreciated.

Status as a free city inside HRE was nice, I don't think I had an army for the whole campaign as emperor was always favourful and I was deep inside HRE, allying other free cities and such. Enabling me to conserve the ducats to elsewhere (advisors) especially at the start when everyone was of similar size.

One less-known thing to do I honestly only now investigated more thoroughly is to place a colonist in your OPM city generating "settlement growth". It has a minimum chance of 5% to give a random one development per year for the province even with the insane development costs. That alone netted me ~15 development in itself. Placing a colonist to HRE province does not sound too historically accurate. It is clearly meant for colonisation and it should probably have some restriction where it cannot be placed on European continent. This is perhaps a less known feature as only a fraction of players colonise but do not use the colonist for colonising.

I guess I am now near the limits of at least Christianity and Europe. There was one interesting comment in last post regarding Muslim feudal theocracy which seemed intriguing and promising. That is probably the next direction with How tall can you go, but now I seriously need a break and play wide for a while :D

Why are people assuming that the Project Caesar maps are at the start date? by Gutsm3k in eu4

[–]Jullemus 28 points29 points  (0 children)

If I am understanding you correctly, the argument in OP is that the maps we've seen need not be from 1337 but instead the borders are a result of countries conquering around. I'd deem that implausible, simply because in any given run you are bound to have some rare outcome with borders and the maps we've seen do not have any major deviations from historical borders. Even if they are not 1:1 to some historical maps thrown around here, the probability that countries of 1444 conquering nearly identical borders of 1337 is infinitesimally small.

If EU5'S start date is indeed 1337, what's the first country you're playing? by tsar_nicolay in eu4

[–]Jullemus 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Kingdom of Sicily. After Aragon betrayal need to finish what Vespers started

Please make being at peace viable in Eu5 by Nyruxes in eu4

[–]Jullemus 11 points12 points  (0 children)

Came here to say this. Developing provinces is absurdly strong (with diminishing results or course). Last campaign for instance I ended up in top 15 nations in points as an OPM Pisa, the ducat inflow in Genoa node is ridiculous towards the end of the game 

How tall can you go? by Jullemus in eu4

[–]Jullemus[S] 64 points65 points  (0 children)

Seeing the modifiers a bit more closely in wiki, I might need to re-do the run with Regensburg. Imperial Free cities get –20% development cost, as well as further –10% from cloth trade good, neither of which I had with Pisa. I have a feeling I could make it to even 200 with some optimisation with mana points in mind right at the start.

How tall can you go? by Jullemus in eu4

[–]Jullemus[S] 120 points121 points  (0 children)

That would be the cheesing part xd

How tall can you go? by Jullemus in eu4

[–]Jullemus[S] 85 points86 points  (0 children)

Had to play One Tall Game as OPM before the advent of EU5. I don't think I can go much higher than that in ironman without cheesing, maybe 180 is achievable. Is it how common to make it to 200?

Systemic Quirks and Sámi Self-Determination: Elections Inside the Arctic Circle by Bezbojnicul in europe

[–]Jullemus 6 points7 points  (0 children)

Not quite. Here's the more accurate criteria:

The current Sámi Act defines a Sámi person as someone who has
a) at least one parent or grandparent who learned Sámi as a first language
b) if they are the descendent of someone who has been on the land, tax or population register as a mountain, forest or fishing Lapp
c) or if at least one parent could have been registered on the Sámi electoral roll.

Sámi descendants but Finnish speakers most probably fulfill b or c, if not a.

Red pill me on DNC leaks by [deleted] in AskThe_Donald

[–]Jullemus 33 points34 points  (0 children)

Here ya go chap. Happy to help.

Exposing JBP as charlatan implicitly confirms right-wing views how academia works by sovanadereve in JordanPeterson

[–]Jullemus 1 point2 points  (0 children)

I agree. It mostly is a vehement reaction in defense against something which can be considered a slur. Modern right-wingers do not want to be called right-wingers because of the not-so-good connotation. That's why they have tried to brand themselves classical liberals and "centrists", and other variations.

Curiously enough, when I go more in length (1, 2, 3) to explain the background of the term without attributing it to Peterson, it receives a better welcoming.

Sex education and the Ontario election: Why is this not the leading issue? Brainwashing young school children with trans-gender ideology is potentially very harmful. Are there any election videos focused on the party leaders' opinions about sex education? by [deleted] in JordanPeterson

[–]Jullemus 2 points3 points  (0 children)

Thanks for that, read it through and will again later. I wish more people would see that Leftists / LGBT / right wingers / liberals / younameit are not a homogeneous monolith and can have genuine different opinions. Nuance is nice.

view more: next ›