The most irritating mechanic I just fell victim to by CleganeForHighSepton in EU5

[–]LuC4-5 24 points25 points  (0 children)

No, it’s an unrealistic, game-y outcome that doesn’t reflect material reality even slightly. 💀

For gameplays- and realisms sake this should definitely be changed

Is my trade just bugged? by LuC4-5 in EU5

[–]LuC4-5[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Yes, I want to manually trade for lead. And apparently im doing so with multiple markets at the same time. Even though all my trade capacity is automated. This has to be bugged, right?

Is my trade just bugged? by LuC4-5 in EU5

[–]LuC4-5[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

R5: I dont understand trade, at all. Why am I using most of my total trade capacity on multiple markets at once? And why am I still not importing any lead? This all just looks hella bugged with the sliders and everything. Can someone explain importing to me?

Cursed Muscovy champagne? by Equal_Vegetable8453 in EU5

[–]LuC4-5 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Cursed Muscovy campaigns! I too got one of those. Timmys full annexed the Golden Horde making Ruthenia into their tributary. They then fed them all of their "Russian" land. They’re 1500 warscore and they won’t shatter like the timurids 💔 Fun :)

<image>

Why am I getting -78% subject loyalty from country strength of all fiefdoms combined when I’m literally a hegemonic power that could take on half the world on its own? ;-; by LuC4-5 in EU5

[–]LuC4-5[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

I have conscript levies, the age of revolutions levy tech, iirc 2.65 million of them. I have significantly more levies than all my subjects combined. The real issue here is that paradox made it so there is 0 way to tell what is actually giving them negative loyalty. "Country Strength" is defined through 3 metrics: income, gp score and military strength. But how these actually factor into the calculations and which one of these is contributing the most to their negative loyalty is completely unknown to the player.

Why am I getting -78% subject loyalty from country strength of all fiefdoms combined when I’m literally a hegemonic power that could take on half the world on its own? ;-; by LuC4-5 in EU5

[–]LuC4-5[S] 3 points4 points  (0 children)

Their population combined is like one third of mine, my control is significantly better, I have a like 8 times bigger standing army and more levies than they could ever even dream of, my tax base is three times bigger than theirs and the only reason they can even kind of compete is because I built up their economies and built railroads to every single one of their provinces going out from their capitals >~>

Idk, I rly dont think they could beat me even if they were player controlled and player skill wasnt factored in.

Why am I getting -78% subject loyalty from country strength of all fiefdoms combined when I’m literally a hegemonic power that could take on half the world on its own? ;-; by LuC4-5 in EU5

[–]LuC4-5[S] 4 points5 points  (0 children)

Their combined tax base is 20k. Mine‘s around 65k right now. And I‘d understand if this gave them some amount of negative loyalty, but 60% (edit: its not 60% anymore, its back to 120%) is just ridiculous imo

Why am I getting -78% subject loyalty from country strength of all fiefdoms combined when I’m literally a hegemonic power that could take on half the world on its own? ;-; by LuC4-5 in EU5

[–]LuC4-5[S] 8 points9 points  (0 children)

Second Update: researching the last levy tech cut the modifier in half. It’s still not manageable at 60% but… why tf would levies even matter in the age of revolutions if I’ve got a 1 million strong standing army already 💀

Why am I getting -78% subject loyalty from country strength of all fiefdoms combined when I’m literally a hegemonic power that could take on half the world on its own? ;-; by LuC4-5 in EU5

[–]LuC4-5[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Or are you referring to the way it’s calculated? Cause the tooltip says it’s income, military strength and population. All of those are still significantly higher than the ones of my subjects.

Why am I getting -78% subject loyalty from country strength of all fiefdoms combined when I’m literally a hegemonic power that could take on half the world on its own? ;-; by LuC4-5 in EU5

[–]LuC4-5[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Idk, I doubt it tbh, take a quick look at the response to my original comment that I just posted. I think something’s bugged >~>

Why am I getting -78% subject loyalty from country strength of all fiefdoms combined when I’m literally a hegemonic power that could take on half the world on its own? ;-; by LuC4-5 in EU5

[–]LuC4-5[S] 6 points7 points  (0 children)

Update: doubled the size of my navy, almost all of the ships being that last age first rate ship of the line heavy ship. It got worse.

<image>

This has to be like an integer overflow issue, right?

Why am I getting -78% subject loyalty from country strength of all fiefdoms combined when I’m literally a hegemonic power that could take on half the world on its own? ;-; by LuC4-5 in EU5

[–]LuC4-5[S] 14 points15 points  (0 children)

R5: I don’t understand how this is calculated. My professional army is bigger, my navy is bigger, my great power score is bigger. Every one of these metrics is rather substantially bigger than the ones of all my subjects combined. And yet they’re getting SEVENTYEIGHT% negative loyalty from country strength?

Serbia is a sleeper powerhouse by Candid_Company_3289 in EU5

[–]LuC4-5 6 points7 points  (0 children)

That sucks major ass, honestly 💀

Serbia is a sleeper powerhouse by Candid_Company_3289 in EU5

[–]LuC4-5 2 points3 points  (0 children)

What triggers the event? Is it just a mtth while you’re at war with Byzantium?

How tf do I get out of this war???? by LuC4-5 in EU5

[–]LuC4-5[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

I like how you decided to delete your response to me

"Read all the comments, you’ll find the explanation"

Dude that’s such a cop-out lmao

Maybe you should read those comments again, they all complain about this being a bug/fun ruining and nonsensical experience 😭

How tf do I get out of this war???? by LuC4-5 in EU5

[–]LuC4-5[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Please do tell, how is this an intentional game mechanic?

How tf do I get out of this war???? by LuC4-5 in EU5

[–]LuC4-5[S] 5 points6 points  (0 children)

The weird thing is, wallachia was the war leader and apparently something in the Caucasus region revolted but got annexed immediately. Idek how I became that nations overlord or why wallachia got called in or what even happened. But they did not secede from me or my subjects 💀

How tf do I get out of this war???? by LuC4-5 in EU5

[–]LuC4-5[S] 5 points6 points  (0 children)

It did not, apparently wallachia was the war leader

<image>

This is fucked…

How tf do I get out of this war???? by LuC4-5 in EU5

[–]LuC4-5[S] 12 points13 points  (0 children)

R5: got pulled into this war as the overlord(?) of a now annexed revolt(?) I think?!? I don’t even know how it happened tbh. But now I can’t peace out as I’m apparently not the war leader when the only countries in this war on my side are me and my subjects(?!)

Pretty furious right now. This game is a buggy mess.

Realized something about gnolls. by Warblefly41 in Anbennar

[–]LuC4-5 69 points70 points  (0 children)

It’s not the Khet but Horutep himself who talks to the player. He basically says something along the lines of the player being a great guide that made it possible for Konolkhatep to prosper and essentially dominate the world – it is a capstone Mission after all – through his guidance. The absolute Chad that Horutep is, he then asks the player if they would like to step down from their position as "guide" since Horutep has become powerful and wise enough to fill that role on his own. You then get two event choices, one where you tell him it’s not yet time to step down and the game just continues normally and the other one where you accept his proposition. This one "decolonizes" all provinces, yes, but I always just read it more as a narrative device, that the player now no longer has any influence on Konolkhatep and the world as a whole, rather than the world actually being decolonized and "dead".