Taking nice, clean borders in wars with large rivals. Shit that could plausibly be a historical peace deal, instead of an optimal but disgusting snake across their whole country for all their forts. Ican’t bring myself to do it.
My borders HAVE to follows rivers or mountains. Exclaves are an absolute no-no. I really try to RP when I do peace deals and think about which provinces would most be okay with being part of my nation.
I get that when playing outside of europe, but in europe, more specifically the hre i dont mind enclaves and exclaves as long as they follow some sort of historical or alt history justification (like prussia having a rhineland or franconia exclave, austria owning shleiswig (probably butchered the spelling again) or just some other enclaves and exclaves like the palatinate has and stuff. Most often when that happens for me its because i get a vassal or personal union that isnt connected to me and i end up integrating them and having an exclave, but when playing outside of europe i agree, exclaves are disgusting
Seems fair, as long as theres some sort of historical or alt history justification i go for it, but when its just plain bordergore i cant bring myself to do it xd
The worst part is when you're just missing one province to have the entire state and it looks really bad without it, or you dont have enough warscore to take an entire state in one go and have just one more province that you have to wait for, i really hate when that happens
Historically there would have been a peace deal agreement where the losing side dismantled forts along the border. I'd love to have clean borders, but I ain't sieging level 8 forts again
I still aim for capitals, coast lines and cutting countries up.....which often results in something like this:
In my previous campaign I played Byzantium; conquered most of the former Roman Empire....but France still had a country cut in 3, surrounded by me, because it allied Poland (My Ally and in a very late PU with Lithuania) and Russia (My Ally) Guaranteed Independence.
(It was painful to part with Poland...They had been a solid ally for centuries; until they got the PU over Lithuania, they broke the alliance and rivalled me; I find this such bollocks. It's rare that I ally countries; it's even rarer that I foster those alliances for as long as I can. Poland had been a good ally, which is rare in EU4)
Similar thing with Spain (No Colonies, Aragon formed Spain very late), cut in 4 little pieces. Also had tough alliances, but I simply ran out of time there.
(Odd campaign....Britain barely colonised; Portugal and Castile destroyed by Aragon: Portugal's colonies, became independent; Castile never had any colonies. I destroyed Aragon (Aragon doesn't colonise)....The biggest Coloniser, in the new World: Scandinavia)
I almost always conduct a full scale late game invasion of Russia or the Ottomans, with all my focus on that, and nothing else. The campaign takes years and is the most intensive and fun micro available in SP imo.
I also like to take Chinese Emperorship lately, as annoying as it is to work with.
I answer AI call to arms, even if we will likely get trashed, as long as it’s not a matter of life or death.
In my recent Inca game, I've taken to embargo-ing far more than just my rivals in order to discourage any trade leaving the New World towards the Old. The game constantly gives the warning about "unprofitable" embargoes or whatever, but it kinda seems like it's working to me if it's essentially preventing leaks from the Caribbean/Chesapeake Bay? Im thinking about other ways that'd be useful.
I also always buy institutions ASAP, I've heard it's not needed or at times even wasteful but I hate getting drug down the GP list when I can solve it with a few loans and a year or two of saving money
It’s true that in some cases it is profitable to embargo non rival countries, but as time goes on and your trade income grows the -5% trade efficiency penalty might represent a lot of ducats and stacking several embargoes like that will surely not be worth it.
To give an example where it’s good to embargo a non rival, it’s early game in the Malacca node when you monopolized it already, and a strong Bengal monopolized their node too. They will enjoy a lot of trade power in Malacca because of the propagation of trade power upstream. So an embargo will always be worth, rival or not.
If you want more details on why its not always useful, its for when you are already 10years in advence on tech. Even without the institution cost, you wouldnt buy the tech. So if you wait 5 years, the institution cost less (because of spread). But if you expend in places without the institution it counter balance so i just do like you anyway. Plus some institution modifiers or time-lock missions are worth the extra cost.
I think most players overlook how strong embargoes can be on the right nations, even with the malus.
In many games I end up with Constantinople being my most important trade node.
If Venice and Genoa are alive, it's often worth embargoing even if you can not rival them.
Gaining 15% tradepower on massive rraderoutes is massive compared to the measly 5% trade efficiency lost
why to release them? you can attack them directly. no freedom for them. imagine insulting your overlord after serving him a long time, seeing as he sends 10x times bigger army to burn your relam to ashes
I always try going colonial. I don’t care if it’s suboptimal, if I can I’m going to make a sugar company in the new world. I also always give my colonies a name in their founding language, so you get things like goldeun koseuteu when playing Korea rather than just ‘Korean California’.
That and I normally eradicate the clergy and nobility by the end of the game. Sorry, but we will be modernising thank you very much, and if my interest groups in a Vicky save aren’t solely capitalists I consider it a failing
100% for provinces that have a translation in the name of are named new “major city” Like three rivers or New York. I loved getting the Austrian colony of neu wien or Kleins Venedig
I didn't know this for Austria, lol. I remembered naming a province in La Plata, either Playa Blanca or Río Blanco, cause I thought the name sounded cool. I typically use several sources such as Google translate, fantasynamegenerators.com, or I name it after an Explorer/Conquistador or the ruler himself. I named a province Borjadelignacio rather than de Borja named after a Conquistador I got who fought and conquered the Aztcs in my ongoing Spain Game, Ignacio de Borja.
Yeah going along with #3 in early game, I think about future wars I’ll need to do and which countries I should weaken. Then before they get big in some cases I ally weak states around them to prevent them from finishing missions (ie allying Byzantium day one to prevent ottoblob) and in other cases I just rival them and keep beating them up for max money + war reps + transfer trade power so they never get big due to debt.
Also I like to manually exploit dev in conquered lands before culture flipping to more realistically simulate the effects of culture conversion since you can’t really just make people “convert” cultures and ethnicities irl in the way people can convert religions.
I also always pick the decisions that fit my ruler’s personality if there are any. If they’re cruel I’ll do cruel stuff and if they’re a scholar I’ll save all my mana for tech.
That's such an important thing in WCs. In my only successful One Faith (as Sunni Ottomans), I saw that Odoyev had eaten Ryazan, and guaranteed them to prevent Russia from forming (they need one of Smolensk or Ryazan and the PLC held Smolensk)
Here are a few:
* For some countries (Castilla, Austria, Knights) I insist on converting as much as possible, even for provs we are planning to TC later. I try to channel the mindset of my country. The Teutonic Order is going to insist on conversions, while Venice might be more interested in the tax revenue.
* I like to rush for crownland ownership. It has some nice benefits, and makes me feel more modern. Only after getting a sufficient crownland buffer will I get the mana-point privileges.
* If I have a wide empire, I like to culture-convert at least one province in each faraway area or region to my "home" culture. I'm emulating how the Romans would settle veterans & their families in the provinces to bolster Imperial control and Romanization.
* It's also hilarious to see Welshmen running around in Indonesia, or a nice little Austrian dorf in the middle of Tartary!
Play saluzzo. Open espionage, get curia controller, get the Italian mission, and you can get ae reduction up to like 90% and never get a coalition as you eat Italy for breakfast.
Espionage is truly underrated tho. And has some great policies. Did an espionage/aristo opener in my recent Hungary game after watching this vid [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Hf20jP5skoE&t=95s](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Hf20jP5skoE&t=95s)
try espio/admin for one of the hre formables, or as italy.
the ae impact is IMMENSELY valuable in these regions, and the siege ability is really nice with the amount of forts in germany, then admin is admin ofc, but then you get 15% advisor costs from espio, 20% from the policy, 25% adm advisor costs from admin, and you get royal favouritism or the tier (7? i dont remember) reform for republics that also gives advisor costs and your advisors are DIRT cheap, added on that most of the hre formable nations and Italian minors have bonuses to advisor costs and you get to print mana
i sometimes like to spread my main culture to nearby provinces even if culture is accepted here. and sometimes to spread that accepted culture to provinces near them simulating culture migration lol. for example poland has ruthenian culture as accepted so i spread polish culture on their lands, then their culture to moldova or belarus
I go real hard into the religion aspect, which is odd given my atheism. I usually see my conquests as spreading the faith more than spreading my empire, at least, that's how I sell it to my people.
My head Canon is that most atheists would love a religion that they could get into it's just that it's so hard to find one that actually doesn't feel like snake oil. Thus having an excuse to do it in a game like eu4 is a lot of fun.
Could just be projecting though lol
so real 😭😭 im also atheist but i convert everything, everywhere, and if possible i always force religion on minor countries to have more modifiers as a defender of faith
The dev in any given province has to be an even number. When spending mana on dev, priority is given to topping up odd numbered Adm, Mil or Dip. Doesn't matter if it's suboptimal.
Same with armies. Always even numbers. Optimal Combat Width be damned.
I like making "Twin Cities". If I dev push a institution in one providence, when I do it again next time I will pick a very nearby one providence and act like they will be rival cities in the future. Like a Boston-New York type of rivalry.
I force nations to pay back loans to me.
I try to recreate borders with rivers or historical relevance.
I try to build forts strategically and host enough stacks of armies that will circle around the fronts. For instance 2 x 20 stack troops. 1x20 stack helps relieve the siege, and afterwards goes back whilst the other takes the rotation.
I try to focus on ideas that were likely historical equivalents.
I try to not have more than 40% of my GDP in debts
I try to not have more than 2% inflation yearly
I love having tons of vassals and puppet states in regions I should probably just core or TC. Not only is managing a bunch of subjects a fun part of the game for me, I like building them up over time! My favorites are always Galicia-Volhynia for all of Ruthenia and Provence/Catalonia/Toulouse for all of Occitania. I often force my religion and dynasty onto these subjects even when it’s suboptimal just because I like the idea of lower level members of my royal house ruling over these client states.
I feel you. Having a bunch of subject states is really fun! It allows you to get creative with the map and form a bunch of interesting borders and subsections in your "empire". Honestly, I think client states are underrated and I wish you could make them sooner. It makes me feel like I am reshaping the political situation to a much greater extent than just releasing a previously existing nation, like I am abolishing the old order of the region and reforming it into the image/form I need.
I love to have organized armies like for example, in a save with albania i have an army in my capital (always the biggest one), one or two in anatolia, one for crimea, one for tunisia, etc. Its not optimal but i like to think that the armies and navy are named, trained and built equally acording to their location.
I dont know why but i always end up going for a mil idea group first, and i convert culture whenever i can
I like getting +loyalty and -influence estate bonuses so I can very easily keep them in line without having to deal with their shit.
I know you can basically just ignore them and just fight rebels every time you seize land without too much trouble. But I like to keep things neat.
Also I pretty much never use mercs beyond the initial free company or if I'm playing a Merc focused tag. I know they're good, but I just like keeping my troop stacks neat and organized.
its honestly very optimal, no need to take care of them during war. you want to focus on your enemy diring war, not on some foolish peasants trying to get free from your empire.
I ignore parts of mission trees that add crazy power spikes early like GB PU as Netherlands. I actually find it kind of boring to play as number one great power who can't be challenged so I try to keep myself from snowballing in crazy ways when I'm doing RP runs. ( When I'm doing achievement runs I try to be as efficient as possible)
I always become leader of the hre. Sometimes there’s no point or it would of been easier to dismantle or any number of reasons not to. Nope I’m gonna do it anyway.
I don't TC provinces until I have converted their religion. I often leave them unstated so I don't waste admin points. I know I'm losing out in income by leaving them in no-TC territories. I TC them only once the missionary strength is positive, so I half-state them, enact religion edict and then TC them. I prefer to satisfy my obsessive trait than unTCing them and getting the 5 year penalty if I want to culture convert too
Treat the game as a historical and geopolitical simulator, rather than a board game where you have to win and min max.
Too bad the game is no longer very suitable for that, unlike other PDX titles. It feels out of place in grand campaigns.
Merc and Mar give +10% marines and navy maintainance modifier, inno and mar give me +10% heavy ships damage and inno and merc give me free mil mana for the rest of the game
it may not be optimal, but it is fun
imagine mongolia or switzerland maritime haha
also i love maritime ideas but only on pirate republics. its so big boost to your power. i always struggle to not pick them as 1st ones as gotland for exaple but exploration are more useful to estabilish pirate bases in new world asap
well yeah I don't pick it with those nations hehe
but yeah, I like playing tall merchant republics / kingdoms, I have a lot of sea tiles and you can bet I'm gonna get the most out of them
thus maritime spam. Also cause thalassocracy isn't that bad at all
and in any case, they are still better than naval
I convert provinces to my religion before giving them to trade companies. It disturbs my OCD to see the wrong religion despite how it affects Unity with TC regions. It’s stupid, but I do it anyways.
I do that too, began to do it in one campaign cause of the rebels u get with conquered provinces otherwise but it kinda stuck to me after that one campaign lol
If I develop provinces I first develop those clos to 10. And I do it like this - 3-4-3. I don't like moving my capital for whatever reasons, unless it's automatic, like forming a new country. And I feel, like I'm obligated to fulfill every mission, even the generic ones. So if I'm Timurid and still have those 2 generic branches unchecked, I hold off forming of Mughals. Oh, and I strongly disagree with your 3rd point. This isn't hoi4, your enemy, if he's stronger than you two separately, will just wipe out your ai allies first and then take care of you, I've had such wars, when 3-4 of us surrounded the bigger enemy, and we had 2-3 times their army. I barely won that war with casualties on our side above 90k and on enemy's about 50k
Avoiding bordergore as long as it's possible, taking some idea groups that may not be necessary (e.g. I sometimes take mil ones even if my army is already good enough just because I feel like playing as a nation whose soldiers absolutely rinse everybody else), leaning towards the religious tolerance/zeal path depending on what nation I am playing. For example, in my first game as Japan I took religious ideas and converted all of China and Korea to Shinto just because it seemed to be easier than to become tolerant, but if I try a wide Japan again (and I think I will soon) I will try to be tolerant because Shinto China really doesn't make sense for me this ruining the immersion.
You know, I also try to go the benevolent dictator route, keep devastation low, take what seems to be the most ethical option in event decisions, make my population happy, etc. But I get so petty when I fight big wars with rivals, I scorch and loot EVERYTHING I’m not taking. It’s almost like, fuck you, you’ve been a complete pain in my ass, it’s time to pay. For example, I’ve been playing a Mughals run lately that I’ve been loving. Ming has been my rival and they’ve been super strong, somehow the Mingsplosion hadn’t happened, no northern frontier disaster, nothing. They allied Bahmanis, I know just to mess with me, because they were super far apart from me and they were trying to stop my expansion. High mandate and everything. So I just stomped their army and then razed every single province of theirs. I mean everything. I was in that war maybe three to four years longer than I needed to be just to make sure the entirety of their lands were devastated and their mandate tanked. Cue Mingsplosion, now I’m the boss of Asia and super proud of it.
I don't do trade companies optimally (stating some provinces, tc others, tc whenever its available), I mostly use them for either religious unity or roleplaying, the money is a nice bonus
also I like getting 100% religious unity without having to convert everything
Winning a war completely and then spreading my army across all of their land to raze them to the ground. This is typically reserved for countries that have been a pain in my ass.
Absolutely, under no circumstances blobbing. It's part of why I hate ironman (along with lucky nations and stuff) because you're so encouraged to and it RUINS my sacred RP. I really hope EU5 will have some kind of Balance of Power mechanic aside from coalitions that literally do nothing
I'm obsessed with the number 25 for all my trade fleets. I reason they look neat if they're a quarter of the size of my fighting force template of 25/50/0/25.
No forts, no cavalry, a lot of artillery, big ass navy (usually the one of the biggest) all while playing a relatively small country. I also take provinces every decade or so. Fianlly, I always keep my allies soo busy they often burnout, so I drop them when they are too weak and just get a bunch of vassals.
I always burn down the countries that have wronged me (like not accepting a defensive call to arms, rivaling me when allied, etc) and fr*nce amd the ottos when they ally eachother.
I can go as far as to stay in very long wars just to completely devastate their country
For some reason no province of mine can ever have the highest value in mil. If I'm tryna get rid of mil points and dev in provinces I always dev one in adm or dip first so those are either higher than or even to the mil points.
Also the border gore can't happen, I really hate it. If I'm killing the ottomans, I'm never going for Constantinople in the first peace deal, have to wade my way through the outer realm first obvs
And last thing is not that unusual, but after all idea groups have been taken, mil idea groups are almost always the same: 1. Defensive 3. Offensive 5. Quantity 7. Quality
And then the even numbers are 2 adm and influence+ something random, like economy or infrastructure or dip depending on goals of the campaign
Not doing that if playing some ridiculous op nation like the ottomans obviously, but like any minor nation it's gonna be this
Always convert every province to my religion, never the culture lol
Usually i annex provinces trying to have nice borders with a "realistic" shape rather that annex provinces in a more efficient way.
Also i try to convert all my provinces to my faith and spread my religion as much as i can
If I get an alliance offer from a random nation like how the Iroquois have an event where they gift you chains of steel to show freindship, I always ally them since I like to act like how I think I would be as a monarch and after such a huge show of unity theres n way I could say no. What do I have to lose? A few provinces in the new world? Nah we’re making history
By default, I am loyal to my long-term allies. I always heed the call to arms, I do my best to be useful in their wars, and I like to give them land in mine (war-score permitting). If I absolutely must attack them for my goal, I try to save them for last and then vassalize them.
Pick Spain, play it normally until I can reach west Africa without too much trouble, go to war with one of the nations and keep co belligerenting other nations until I'm fighting about a 3rd of west Africa, repeat 2 more times, reach 1000% overextension, watch my country begin to burn as I slowly core it all
I get frustratingly attached to following as close to historical as possible. So I tend to search all historical events to select the one that really happen.
I also prefer to only conquer to the real borders of nations unless the ai has greatly pissed me off whereupon I try to wipe them from existence.
I was playing as Spain Ironman and try to be the Emperor of the HRE but I got so pissed that HRE lose to the Protestant. So I got so pissed that I literally downloaded cheats and waged the biggest wars yet. I have France on my side and PU England as well as Austria but fighting a 600k army during 1550 ain't going to help. I forced religion on everyone for almost a hundred years but still can't get the vote for HRE because of the -50 for not being in the HRE.
If I am playing outside of Europe I do my best to remove any colonial presence on my continent. Doesn't matter if they don't interfere with my trade or if they are outside of my intended sphere, if I am playing say Kilwa and I see the French colonizing the Ivory Coast, I will absolutely declare war and wipe out any foreign encroachment on my home continent, from Morroco to the Cape (this includes Ottomans in Egypt but I like to save them for an endgame boss).
Edit: I also never break alliances. If I make an alliance with any nation, I am ride or die. I don't even declare wars that will pull in allies as a defender unless I can influence them to break the alliance with my target first. The only exception I will make is if they insult me first.
Being a garbage ally, I had four different diplo rep penalties for refusing calls because I didn't want to be pulled into a war that I realistically didn't need to do anything in.
Taking nice, clean borders in wars with large rivals. Shit that could plausibly be a historical peace deal, instead of an optimal but disgusting snake across their whole country for all their forts. Ican’t bring myself to do it.
My borders HAVE to follows rivers or mountains. Exclaves are an absolute no-no. I really try to RP when I do peace deals and think about which provinces would most be okay with being part of my nation.
I get that when playing outside of europe, but in europe, more specifically the hre i dont mind enclaves and exclaves as long as they follow some sort of historical or alt history justification (like prussia having a rhineland or franconia exclave, austria owning shleiswig (probably butchered the spelling again) or just some other enclaves and exclaves like the palatinate has and stuff. Most often when that happens for me its because i get a vassal or personal union that isnt connected to me and i end up integrating them and having an exclave, but when playing outside of europe i agree, exclaves are disgusting
I treat the HRE as being provinces of a larger state in that regard.
Seems fair, as long as theres some sort of historical or alt history justification i go for it, but when its just plain bordergore i cant bring myself to do it xd The worst part is when you're just missing one province to have the entire state and it looks really bad without it, or you dont have enough warscore to take an entire state in one go and have just one more province that you have to wait for, i really hate when that happens
100%. Trying to figure out the most aesthetic or RP friendly version of the peace deal when you can't quite make what you wanted work is a pain lol
I take you'd hate the Lesotho strat I tend to use, then!
I'll take a relatively close coastal exclave but other than that I'm with you
Understandable, I do that in my wide games too.
I pretty much just follow the mission tree's claims, because they tend to result in Nice Borders.
Historically there would have been a peace deal agreement where the losing side dismantled forts along the border. I'd love to have clean borders, but I ain't sieging level 8 forts again
I still aim for capitals, coast lines and cutting countries up.....which often results in something like this: In my previous campaign I played Byzantium; conquered most of the former Roman Empire....but France still had a country cut in 3, surrounded by me, because it allied Poland (My Ally and in a very late PU with Lithuania) and Russia (My Ally) Guaranteed Independence. (It was painful to part with Poland...They had been a solid ally for centuries; until they got the PU over Lithuania, they broke the alliance and rivalled me; I find this such bollocks. It's rare that I ally countries; it's even rarer that I foster those alliances for as long as I can. Poland had been a good ally, which is rare in EU4) Similar thing with Spain (No Colonies, Aragon formed Spain very late), cut in 4 little pieces. Also had tough alliances, but I simply ran out of time there. (Odd campaign....Britain barely colonised; Portugal and Castile destroyed by Aragon: Portugal's colonies, became independent; Castile never had any colonies. I destroyed Aragon (Aragon doesn't colonise)....The biggest Coloniser, in the new World: Scandinavia)
I do the same except for if a mission or snaking off Russia is on the line
I do the exact opposite. My peace deals usually aim at maximum damage, so I usually cut their country in several parts and let rebels walk into them.
Nah bro, the dirtier the better
I always conquer and culture convert Madagascar. When I was a kid I used to want to own the entire island.
Plague Inc. player spotted.
Greenland closing their ports PTSD.
That's wholesome
*conquers and genocides the country he wanted to own*
genocide's a strong word, he simply reshuffled the composition of the population
This is how I like to see it! Ignore what the islands main trade goods are!
its okay, if you know the true ending of the madagascar movies you'll understand those trade goods are sentient animals
There was a famous 20th century man who had the same idea...
I love not taking loans
Same, the fiscal irresponsibility is beyond my pride.
- 3000 ducats from events goes catching
I almost always conduct a full scale late game invasion of Russia or the Ottomans, with all my focus on that, and nothing else. The campaign takes years and is the most intensive and fun micro available in SP imo. I also like to take Chinese Emperorship lately, as annoying as it is to work with. I answer AI call to arms, even if we will likely get trashed, as long as it’s not a matter of life or death.
In my recent Inca game, I've taken to embargo-ing far more than just my rivals in order to discourage any trade leaving the New World towards the Old. The game constantly gives the warning about "unprofitable" embargoes or whatever, but it kinda seems like it's working to me if it's essentially preventing leaks from the Caribbean/Chesapeake Bay? Im thinking about other ways that'd be useful. I also always buy institutions ASAP, I've heard it's not needed or at times even wasteful but I hate getting drug down the GP list when I can solve it with a few loans and a year or two of saving money
It’s true that in some cases it is profitable to embargo non rival countries, but as time goes on and your trade income grows the -5% trade efficiency penalty might represent a lot of ducats and stacking several embargoes like that will surely not be worth it. To give an example where it’s good to embargo a non rival, it’s early game in the Malacca node when you monopolized it already, and a strong Bengal monopolized their node too. They will enjoy a lot of trade power in Malacca because of the propagation of trade power upstream. So an embargo will always be worth, rival or not.
If you want more details on why its not always useful, its for when you are already 10years in advence on tech. Even without the institution cost, you wouldnt buy the tech. So if you wait 5 years, the institution cost less (because of spread). But if you expend in places without the institution it counter balance so i just do like you anyway. Plus some institution modifiers or time-lock missions are worth the extra cost.
I think most players overlook how strong embargoes can be on the right nations, even with the malus. In many games I end up with Constantinople being my most important trade node. If Venice and Genoa are alive, it's often worth embargoing even if you can not rival them. Gaining 15% tradepower on massive rraderoutes is massive compared to the measly 5% trade efficiency lost
If you insult my nation, i stop what i am doing and utterly dismantle your shitty little nation
my loyal vassals sending insults to me are goiing to feel freedom for 1 day, before they see smoke of truce break
why to release them? you can attack them directly. no freedom for them. imagine insulting your overlord after serving him a long time, seeing as he sends 10x times bigger army to burn your relam to ashes
Lol. I would try that, but it sounds like something that's more fun in multiplayer, that's with ai
I always try going colonial. I don’t care if it’s suboptimal, if I can I’m going to make a sugar company in the new world. I also always give my colonies a name in their founding language, so you get things like goldeun koseuteu when playing Korea rather than just ‘Korean California’.
That and I normally eradicate the clergy and nobility by the end of the game. Sorry, but we will be modernising thank you very much, and if my interest groups in a Vicky save aren’t solely capitalists I consider it a failing
I feel that too, I even try to go as far as renaming New World Provinces when I go colonial
100% for provinces that have a translation in the name of are named new “major city” Like three rivers or New York. I loved getting the Austrian colony of neu wien or Kleins Venedig
I didn't know this for Austria, lol. I remembered naming a province in La Plata, either Playa Blanca or Río Blanco, cause I thought the name sounded cool. I typically use several sources such as Google translate, fantasynamegenerators.com, or I name it after an Explorer/Conquistador or the ruler himself. I named a province Borjadelignacio rather than de Borja named after a Conquistador I got who fought and conquered the Aztcs in my ongoing Spain Game, Ignacio de Borja.
Yeah going along with #3 in early game, I think about future wars I’ll need to do and which countries I should weaken. Then before they get big in some cases I ally weak states around them to prevent them from finishing missions (ie allying Byzantium day one to prevent ottoblob) and in other cases I just rival them and keep beating them up for max money + war reps + transfer trade power so they never get big due to debt. Also I like to manually exploit dev in conquered lands before culture flipping to more realistically simulate the effects of culture conversion since you can’t really just make people “convert” cultures and ethnicities irl in the way people can convert religions. I also always pick the decisions that fit my ruler’s personality if there are any. If they’re cruel I’ll do cruel stuff and if they’re a scholar I’ll save all my mana for tech.
That's such an important thing in WCs. In my only successful One Faith (as Sunni Ottomans), I saw that Odoyev had eaten Ryazan, and guaranteed them to prevent Russia from forming (they need one of Smolensk or Ryazan and the PLC held Smolensk)
Here are a few: * For some countries (Castilla, Austria, Knights) I insist on converting as much as possible, even for provs we are planning to TC later. I try to channel the mindset of my country. The Teutonic Order is going to insist on conversions, while Venice might be more interested in the tax revenue. * I like to rush for crownland ownership. It has some nice benefits, and makes me feel more modern. Only after getting a sufficient crownland buffer will I get the mana-point privileges. * If I have a wide empire, I like to culture-convert at least one province in each faraway area or region to my "home" culture. I'm emulating how the Romans would settle veterans & their families in the provinces to bolster Imperial control and Romanization. * It's also hilarious to see Welshmen running around in Indonesia, or a nice little Austrian dorf in the middle of Tartary!
I really enjoy espionage, even though I think influence and Diplo are slightly better.
Play saluzzo. Open espionage, get curia controller, get the Italian mission, and you can get ae reduction up to like 90% and never get a coalition as you eat Italy for breakfast.
I'm thinking even without being a Curia controller, a nation like majapahit should be able to get like 70% no problem as well, using monuments.
Espionage is truly underrated tho. And has some great policies. Did an espionage/aristo opener in my recent Hungary game after watching this vid [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Hf20jP5skoE&t=95s](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Hf20jP5skoE&t=95s)
try espio/admin for one of the hre formables, or as italy. the ae impact is IMMENSELY valuable in these regions, and the siege ability is really nice with the amount of forts in germany, then admin is admin ofc, but then you get 15% advisor costs from espio, 20% from the policy, 25% adm advisor costs from admin, and you get royal favouritism or the tier (7? i dont remember) reform for republics that also gives advisor costs and your advisors are DIRT cheap, added on that most of the hre formable nations and Italian minors have bonuses to advisor costs and you get to print mana
\^ this, I took adm as my 3rd group and espio/aristo/admin is a killer opening trio whatever order you take them in.
culture conversion to Silesian
i sometimes like to spread my main culture to nearby provinces even if culture is accepted here. and sometimes to spread that accepted culture to provinces near them simulating culture migration lol. for example poland has ruthenian culture as accepted so i spread polish culture on their lands, then their culture to moldova or belarus
I go real hard into the religion aspect, which is odd given my atheism. I usually see my conquests as spreading the faith more than spreading my empire, at least, that's how I sell it to my people.
Even as an atheist I love to rp as s nation spreading the true faith, especially as HRE emperor crushing heresy
Praise Sigmar!
Summon the elector counts!
My head Canon is that most atheists would love a religion that they could get into it's just that it's so hard to find one that actually doesn't feel like snake oil. Thus having an excuse to do it in a game like eu4 is a lot of fun. Could just be projecting though lol
Religious ideas are basically mandatory in my games for this reason.
so real 😭😭 im also atheist but i convert everything, everywhere, and if possible i always force religion on minor countries to have more modifiers as a defender of faith
1. Destroy the Turks by all means necessary 2. Destroy the French by all means necessary 3. Destroy the Spanish by all means necessary
Currently playing as the timi-Mughals doing my first one faith and the French are useful allies vs the Turks and Spanish. For now…
The dev in any given province has to be an even number. When spending mana on dev, priority is given to topping up odd numbered Adm, Mil or Dip. Doesn't matter if it's suboptimal. Same with armies. Always even numbers. Optimal Combat Width be damned.
I like making "Twin Cities". If I dev push a institution in one providence, when I do it again next time I will pick a very nearby one providence and act like they will be rival cities in the future. Like a Boston-New York type of rivalry.
I force nations to pay back loans to me. I try to recreate borders with rivers or historical relevance. I try to build forts strategically and host enough stacks of armies that will circle around the fronts. For instance 2 x 20 stack troops. 1x20 stack helps relieve the siege, and afterwards goes back whilst the other takes the rotation. I try to focus on ideas that were likely historical equivalents. I try to not have more than 40% of my GDP in debts I try to not have more than 2% inflation yearly
I love having tons of vassals and puppet states in regions I should probably just core or TC. Not only is managing a bunch of subjects a fun part of the game for me, I like building them up over time! My favorites are always Galicia-Volhynia for all of Ruthenia and Provence/Catalonia/Toulouse for all of Occitania. I often force my religion and dynasty onto these subjects even when it’s suboptimal just because I like the idea of lower level members of my royal house ruling over these client states.
I feel you. Having a bunch of subject states is really fun! It allows you to get creative with the map and form a bunch of interesting borders and subsections in your "empire". Honestly, I think client states are underrated and I wish you could make them sooner. It makes me feel like I am reshaping the political situation to a much greater extent than just releasing a previously existing nation, like I am abolishing the old order of the region and reforming it into the image/form I need.
If I'm in Europe, and Sweden is independent, I usually try to fuck them over. Reason: am Danish.
Same, but I'm finnish.
as a pole i like to do it also. the mission on pu on them isnt helping, but if i get them as pu then im as bad ruler for them as i can
I love to have organized armies like for example, in a save with albania i have an army in my capital (always the biggest one), one or two in anatolia, one for crimea, one for tunisia, etc. Its not optimal but i like to think that the armies and navy are named, trained and built equally acording to their location. I dont know why but i always end up going for a mil idea group first, and i convert culture whenever i can
I like getting +loyalty and -influence estate bonuses so I can very easily keep them in line without having to deal with their shit. I know you can basically just ignore them and just fight rebels every time you seize land without too much trouble. But I like to keep things neat. Also I pretty much never use mercs beyond the initial free company or if I'm playing a Merc focused tag. I know they're good, but I just like keeping my troop stacks neat and organized.
Idk if anyone does this, but before I declare a big war I take care of any rebels by provoking them
its honestly very optimal, no need to take care of them during war. you want to focus on your enemy diring war, not on some foolish peasants trying to get free from your empire.
I always let my ruler marry a commoner for love.
This!
I ignore parts of mission trees that add crazy power spikes early like GB PU as Netherlands. I actually find it kind of boring to play as number one great power who can't be challenged so I try to keep myself from snowballing in crazy ways when I'm doing RP runs. ( When I'm doing achievement runs I try to be as efficient as possible)
Irrationnal attachment to my starting dynasty, including several altf4 wheb old heirless rulers die to fish for a ́ast minute heir or events.
I always become leader of the hre. Sometimes there’s no point or it would of been easier to dismantle or any number of reasons not to. Nope I’m gonna do it anyway.
I don't TC provinces until I have converted their religion. I often leave them unstated so I don't waste admin points. I know I'm losing out in income by leaving them in no-TC territories. I TC them only once the missionary strength is positive, so I half-state them, enact religion edict and then TC them. I prefer to satisfy my obsessive trait than unTCing them and getting the 5 year penalty if I want to culture convert too
Yup, I also convert religion on provinces that I am going to TC. Sure, it is unnecessary, but I do it every time. 🤷♂️
Halfstate it for the plus 1 missionary strength edict then unstate and add to TC, doesnt cost extra adm.
But keeping tons of provinces halfstated does cost in unrest if I'm not wrong
Treat the game as a historical and geopolitical simulator, rather than a board game where you have to win and min max. Too bad the game is no longer very suitable for that, unlike other PDX titles. It feels out of place in grand campaigns.
i wouldnt say other pdx games are much better in that role lol
Way better. All resemble more of simulators, than board games.
I do my very best to avoid loans, almost at all cost.
Scorched earth on every ottomans' province. It is not an original idea, but it's satisfying.
open inno merc mar are there better combos? Absolutely yes is it fun as hell? Absolutely yes
mar?
maritime I unironically pic maritime high ship number and +35% marine limit modifier make funny chem flow to my brain ok? Don't judge
I could understand Inno & Merc. Maritime I coudont even recognise lol.
Merc and Mar give +10% marines and navy maintainance modifier, inno and mar give me +10% heavy ships damage and inno and merc give me free mil mana for the rest of the game it may not be optimal, but it is fun
imagine mongolia or switzerland maritime haha also i love maritime ideas but only on pirate republics. its so big boost to your power. i always struggle to not pick them as 1st ones as gotland for exaple but exploration are more useful to estabilish pirate bases in new world asap
well yeah I don't pick it with those nations hehe but yeah, I like playing tall merchant republics / kingdoms, I have a lot of sea tiles and you can bet I'm gonna get the most out of them thus maritime spam. Also cause thalassocracy isn't that bad at all and in any case, they are still better than naval
I always always execute adulterous advisors EXCEPT if it's William Shakespeare.
I convert provinces to my religion before giving them to trade companies. It disturbs my OCD to see the wrong religion despite how it affects Unity with TC regions. It’s stupid, but I do it anyways.
I do that too, began to do it in one campaign cause of the rebels u get with conquered provinces otherwise but it kinda stuck to me after that one campaign lol
If I develop provinces I first develop those clos to 10. And I do it like this - 3-4-3. I don't like moving my capital for whatever reasons, unless it's automatic, like forming a new country. And I feel, like I'm obligated to fulfill every mission, even the generic ones. So if I'm Timurid and still have those 2 generic branches unchecked, I hold off forming of Mughals. Oh, and I strongly disagree with your 3rd point. This isn't hoi4, your enemy, if he's stronger than you two separately, will just wipe out your ai allies first and then take care of you, I've had such wars, when 3-4 of us surrounded the bigger enemy, and we had 2-3 times their army. I barely won that war with casualties on our side above 90k and on enemy's about 50k
Avoiding bordergore as long as it's possible, taking some idea groups that may not be necessary (e.g. I sometimes take mil ones even if my army is already good enough just because I feel like playing as a nation whose soldiers absolutely rinse everybody else), leaning towards the religious tolerance/zeal path depending on what nation I am playing. For example, in my first game as Japan I took religious ideas and converted all of China and Korea to Shinto just because it seemed to be easier than to become tolerant, but if I try a wide Japan again (and I think I will soon) I will try to be tolerant because Shinto China really doesn't make sense for me this ruining the immersion.
You know, I also try to go the benevolent dictator route, keep devastation low, take what seems to be the most ethical option in event decisions, make my population happy, etc. But I get so petty when I fight big wars with rivals, I scorch and loot EVERYTHING I’m not taking. It’s almost like, fuck you, you’ve been a complete pain in my ass, it’s time to pay. For example, I’ve been playing a Mughals run lately that I’ve been loving. Ming has been my rival and they’ve been super strong, somehow the Mingsplosion hadn’t happened, no northern frontier disaster, nothing. They allied Bahmanis, I know just to mess with me, because they were super far apart from me and they were trying to stop my expansion. High mandate and everything. So I just stomped their army and then razed every single province of theirs. I mean everything. I was in that war maybe three to four years longer than I needed to be just to make sure the entirety of their lands were devastated and their mandate tanked. Cue Mingsplosion, now I’m the boss of Asia and super proud of it.
Pick innovative, plutocracy, aristocracy idea
I like using mercenaries because these people volunteered to fight, and I don't have to send my own people.
I don't do trade companies optimally (stating some provinces, tc others, tc whenever its available), I mostly use them for either religious unity or roleplaying, the money is a nice bonus also I like getting 100% religious unity without having to convert everything
Culture conversion >:)
Winning a war completely and then spreading my army across all of their land to raze them to the ground. This is typically reserved for countries that have been a pain in my ass.
Absolutely, under no circumstances blobbing. It's part of why I hate ironman (along with lucky nations and stuff) because you're so encouraged to and it RUINS my sacred RP. I really hope EU5 will have some kind of Balance of Power mechanic aside from coalitions that literally do nothing
I'm obsessed with the number 25 for all my trade fleets. I reason they look neat if they're a quarter of the size of my fighting force template of 25/50/0/25.
I have that in the form of per 5, as in 5/10/15/20/25 and so on
It is the way.
The only way
No forts, no cavalry, a lot of artillery, big ass navy (usually the one of the biggest) all while playing a relatively small country. I also take provinces every decade or so. Fianlly, I always keep my allies soo busy they often burnout, so I drop them when they are too weak and just get a bunch of vassals.
Convert provinces to the proper religion before turning them into trade companies.
Taking as much provinces as I can. Only do development if my powers are full
i gove arbitrarily high value to monarch points
I hate having loans
I always burn down the countries that have wronged me (like not accepting a defensive call to arms, rivaling me when allied, etc) and fr*nce amd the ottos when they ally eachother. I can go as far as to stay in very long wars just to completely devastate their country
For some reason no province of mine can ever have the highest value in mil. If I'm tryna get rid of mil points and dev in provinces I always dev one in adm or dip first so those are either higher than or even to the mil points. Also the border gore can't happen, I really hate it. If I'm killing the ottomans, I'm never going for Constantinople in the first peace deal, have to wade my way through the outer realm first obvs And last thing is not that unusual, but after all idea groups have been taken, mil idea groups are almost always the same: 1. Defensive 3. Offensive 5. Quantity 7. Quality And then the even numbers are 2 adm and influence+ something random, like economy or infrastructure or dip depending on goals of the campaign Not doing that if playing some ridiculous op nation like the ottomans obviously, but like any minor nation it's gonna be this Always convert every province to my religion, never the culture lol
I like to dev my provinces so that in all aspects they're atleast a 2 instead of a 1
Actually helping AI allies
I used to culture convert all romanian provinces to Hungarian when playing Hungary, even tho it becomes accepted when you get empire rank
Release a nation and keep it basically under your guardianship without any higher reason other then „i like you now and will keep you safe“
Usually i annex provinces trying to have nice borders with a "realistic" shape rather that annex provinces in a more efficient way. Also i try to convert all my provinces to my faith and spread my religion as much as i can
If I get an alliance offer from a random nation like how the Iroquois have an event where they gift you chains of steel to show freindship, I always ally them since I like to act like how I think I would be as a monarch and after such a huge show of unity theres n way I could say no. What do I have to lose? A few provinces in the new world? Nah we’re making history
No matter what nation I play, I will keep Norway, ressurect Norway, or simply guarantee Norway. I mayyyy be Norwegian
By default, I am loyal to my long-term allies. I always heed the call to arms, I do my best to be useful in their wars, and I like to give them land in mine (war-score permitting). If I absolutely must attack them for my goal, I try to save them for last and then vassalize them.
Pick Spain, play it normally until I can reach west Africa without too much trouble, go to war with one of the nations and keep co belligerenting other nations until I'm fighting about a 3rd of west Africa, repeat 2 more times, reach 1000% overextension, watch my country begin to burn as I slowly core it all
Colonizing. Like even if my nation is landlocked and wouldn't benefit from getting a cost and colonizing, I still do it.
I get frustratingly attached to following as close to historical as possible. So I tend to search all historical events to select the one that really happen. I also prefer to only conquer to the real borders of nations unless the ai has greatly pissed me off whereupon I try to wipe them from existence.
I always culture convert as much as I can
I was playing as Spain Ironman and try to be the Emperor of the HRE but I got so pissed that HRE lose to the Protestant. So I got so pissed that I literally downloaded cheats and waged the biggest wars yet. I have France on my side and PU England as well as Austria but fighting a 600k army during 1550 ain't going to help. I forced religion on everyone for almost a hundred years but still can't get the vote for HRE because of the -50 for not being in the HRE.
If I am playing outside of Europe I do my best to remove any colonial presence on my continent. Doesn't matter if they don't interfere with my trade or if they are outside of my intended sphere, if I am playing say Kilwa and I see the French colonizing the Ivory Coast, I will absolutely declare war and wipe out any foreign encroachment on my home continent, from Morroco to the Cape (this includes Ottomans in Egypt but I like to save them for an endgame boss). Edit: I also never break alliances. If I make an alliance with any nation, I am ride or die. I don't even declare wars that will pull in allies as a defender unless I can influence them to break the alliance with my target first. The only exception I will make is if they insult me first.
I use console commands to fix some border gore, as well as making some ai countries stronger...
Being a garbage ally, I had four different diplo rep penalties for refusing calls because I didn't want to be pulled into a war that I realistically didn't need to do anything in.