Gaming The Europa Universalis 4 Experiment III
- Thread starter Phil Jones Face
- Start date
-
In the latest episode of the United Hour Podcast, Nik and Imran discuss a horrific month of December and a depressing FOUR defeats in a row - the latest coming against Wolves and Newcastle.
They discuss how much blame is on Ruben Amorim and rank our squad against other Premier League teams.
Do we have any chance of avoiding defeat at Anfield?
The only world conquest I ever did was with France in EU3. Or maybe it was EU2? Anyway, I'm never, ever doing that again. Even with France it was an un-fun slog.
I finished mine as Austria -> HRE (I know, unimaginative), but I missed the one faith by about 10 years as I just ran out of time. Those last 50 years were a slog and required numerous week long breaks to complete.
You managed world conquest?
You need to own ALL provinces for that?I tried with France. In 1750 i had situations when Persia and Russia were in alliance and holding nearly all Asia (i had the rest of the world, Japan and India).
I just didn't have will to do dozen wars against them.
You managed world conquest?
I tried with France. In 1750 i had situations when Persia and Russia were in alliance and holding nearly all Asia (i had the rest of the world, Japan and India).
I just didn't have will to do dozen wars against them.
To do one you either have to be a great player (i. e. great abuser of game mechanics), or for us mere mortals you have to start basically from day 1 with that goal in mind. Which is why it's such a slog, and why I'm never going to try it again. I'm happy to settle for having fun conquering Europe (if that's what I want to do with that particular game), instead of not having fun conquering everything.
My goal is always to own whole New World. Portugal, Brandenburg, Denmark....no matter with who i play, i always go for that sweet, sweet gold, tobacco and coffe
.It was fun when i did it with Turks. Having Turkish California was something.
Fellow Eu4 nerds, you might know this; do Ludi and Red Hawk play their runs which they post on youtube on hard dif or normal one?
Their runs look so easy (close to cheating).
Their runs look so easy (close to cheating).
100% Normal difficulty and I'm sure they use alt F4 when they get bad rng also. If you want to learn more about the mechanics in the game and get better I'd suggest you watch Florryworry on Twitch. He plays on very hard difficulty and usually also plays his saves witn no loans and no allies allowed.
I do enjoy watching both of them as they are entertaining and as I started playing I got a good feel for game mechanics while doing so. Normal difficulty makes sense I think as, especially for RH, the target audience is newer players trying to figure out how to start their run.
Ludi was caught up in a couple of cheating dramas a couple years back with save scumming. Wouldn't trust anything he puts out.
I wouldn't read too much into difficulty in general. It's RNG that's the killer of achieve runs. Not bonuses.
I wouldn't read too much into difficulty in general. It's RNG that's the killer of achieve runs. Not bonuses.
I usually play on hard with powers and normal with smaller countries. Difference between normal and hard is huge. You fought against France on hard? When 20k French wipe your 40k army with best general as leader and military ideas?
Difference between modifiers on hard and normal are crazy.
Tbf I learned a lot from Ludi and Hawk, they definitely Alt F4 every video but its for the benefit of content, showing what we can ultimately achieve with a certain province/nation and what is needed to do it. I have about 1200 hours which is still considered rookie numbers I guess but those two dudes are definitely the way to go for people learning EU4.
Florry is not a normal human being. That guy is so cracked at the game, IMO it's hard to learn from him as a noob because it's difficult to understand what he's doing and why he's doing things. He's definitely S tier content if you do understand the game though, but he plays way too fast for any noob to understand what's going on and he barely gives any insightful commentary needed for new people (which is understandable for a guy like him).
It really isn't that big.
The only modifiers hard has over normal is:
 | +50% | Manpower recovery speed |
 | −1 | National unrest |
 | −0.05 | Monthly war exhaustion |
 | −1 | Interest per annum |
 | −33% | Aggressive expansion impact |
 | −15% | Missionary maintenance cost |
Yeah for newbies Ludi and Red Hawk are definitely the way to go but once you start getting the hang of the mechanics I feel you learn very little from videos like theirs.
I agree it's impossible for anyone normal to copy what Florry is doing but at least I have learned a lot from watching his content especially about how to fight wars as effectively as possible which is something most of the Youtube video creators tend to cut out from their videos.
It is though. AEI -33% and 50% manpower in hands of Austria or France is a huge deal.It really isn't that big.
The only modifiers hard has over normal is:
+50% Manpower recovery speed −1 National unrest −0.05 Monthly war exhaustion −1 Interest per annum −33% Aggressive expansion impact −15% Missionary maintenance cost
Plus; don't forget that AI on hard is very aggressive towards human player. So you will be attacked A LOT. On normal you can end game without being declared war on.
And biggest part; lucky nations. If you play with that in addition to hard dif then.......you will end with swearing in all directions.
It is though. AEI -33% and 50% manpower in hands of Austria or France is a huge deal.
Plus; don't forget that AI on hard is very aggressive towards human player. So you will be attacked A LOT. On normal you can end game without being declared war on.
And biggest part; lucky nations. If you play with that in addition to hard dif then.......you will end with swearing in all directions.
Neither would help in your 20k vs 40K situation though. AE is just for blobbing and avoiding coalitions (which the AI tends to manage fairly well, irrespective of difficulty) and manpower is the downtime between wars.
I don't think there is any difference in AI aggressiveness between difficulties. Sure, an AI country will play more aggressively because they're stronger after they've got difficulty bonuses, but I don't think the devs ever coded in aggressiveness for each separate difficulty
It is. It literally says when you switch between difficulty. That AI is more aggressive on hard. And i can confirm that based on my 100 saves
Btw; manpower fills during war too. So when you are stuck in 10y war.....it helps to have 50% quicker fill.
Last edited:
It is. It literally says when you switch between difficulty. That AI is more aggressive on hard. And i can confirm that based on my 100 saves
Btw; manpower fills during war too. So when you are stuck in 10y war.....it helps to have 50% quicker fill.
Right, but that's because the AI is stronger because it has received bonuses, not because it's coded to act more aggressive on a higher difficulty setting. You have to remember this is a 10+ year old game. Pdox weren't making individual difficulty aggressive modifiers back then, just like how they aren't for their more recent games. This is all pre-smart AI. The differences between settings are all laid out in the wiki and normal to hard is rather minor.
And I know.
I've got 1900 hours on EU4. Your original question was about 20k stacks beating 40k stacks, which again, isn't affected by AE, manpower recovery or any of the other hard bonuses.Yeah, regarding that; wasn't in earlier patches extra morale to AI armies on hard dif? I could swear it was.Right, but that's because the AI is stronger because it has received bonuses, not because it's coded to act more aggressive on a higher difficulty setting. You have to remember this is a 10+ year old game. Pdox weren't making individual difficulty aggressive modifiers back then, just like how they aren't for their more recent games. This is all pre-smart AI. The differences between settings are all laid out in the wiki and normal to hard is rather minor.
And I know.
50k France were literally beating my 200k armies of Austria.
True, I learned a lot later on from his Albania run, although it wasn't always as easy elsewhere for me with no Skanderbeg
Do you remember what ideas groups you both went? That'll be the key decider, besides mil tech level and generals.
I use their videos just to see some little tricks which can be very, very useful. Although, one thing i don't agree; thry both avoid going to New World early. They always start with diplo or influence. I think it is huge mistake. My first two ideas are always New World related.
I doubt it was about ideas. It was late in the game. France does have national idea for plus 10 morale.
But i think (not sure) that few years ago, difficulty did give bonus to armies.
Army quality can depend a lot from save to save and even from war to war. Ideas, advisors, ruler traits and events all can make a big difference. The army reform event for example can give +20% moral of armies which can be huge early on in the game.
Also you shouldn't build massive stacks to fight with as you can only fill a front line (infantry and cavalry) and a back line (cannons) up to your current combat width, the rest of the regiments are put into the reserve and take moral damage on every dice roll even if they are not fighting. It's much better to keep reinforcements in a neighbouring province and have them walk in during the battle, that way they don't take moral damage in the early dice rolls.
Oi, you think that you are talking with some noob?
Ideas are everything late in the game. Take for example.
Offensive
+1 land leader shock (average late game)
+1 land leader fire (good late game)
20% siege ability (great late game)
5% discipline (great late game)
vs
Quantity
10% infantry ability (good late game)
10% cavalry ability (poor late game)
10% artillery ability (great late game)
5% discipline (great late game)
Defensive
+15% morale (average late game)
..and uh. That's it for defensive.
Interesting as I do the opposite and typically go diplo/admin and then off/qual unless I’m playing as Portugal or Castile. Although, these days I usually would just go as Aragon and PU both of them (to be colonizing tools) if I want an Iberian playthrough.
If playing as any European/Mediterranean country the war score for colonial provinces is so low (but not the diplomat hit) that you can grab a handful of them from Por/Cas in a quick war and launch your colonies that way. Well, that’s my strategy at least.
Excuse my ignorance, but what the hell is this thread?
That's because you're probably playing with different goals.
Diplo and influence are required for world conquests, mass blobbing, achievement hunting playstyles. You need to rotate aggressive expansion to expand. Going exploration while a colonial nations is fine for strong early growth, but late game colonial nations provide little in the way of support (e.g. fighting in Europe)
It was a simulation for the game called EU4. Now it's for theorycrafting amongst nerds.
Wow. Looks interesting though. I’m gonna check out EU4…It was a simulation for the game called EU4. Now it's for theorycrafting amongst nerds.
I do mass blobbing too. But i use diplo and influence as 3rd and 4th. It is worth it. Basically i take a hit on diplo points for having too many relations but all that money and bonusses which i get from colonials, give me money and space for huge army and navy.
In early game i prefer conquest through sex than fighting. PU is meta.
It was a simulation for the game called EU4. Now it's for theorycrafting amongst nerds.
Don't. After EU every other game will look like shit.
Didn't mean to offend youOi, you think that you are talking with some noob?
but you did say that you hadd a 200k stack.Actually after reading your post again you said 200k army not stack so shame on me.
Yeah, i agree. That is what i did with Austria. With them you must go with diplo and influence no matter what.
With world conq with France i did expl and expan first.
Didn't play with Aragon a while now. Any good?
Last edited:
I enjoyed it. If you get lucky enough the Iberian Wedding will occur after Castile chooses exploration. Tack on Portugal as a PU via a mission, keep Naples, and by 1470 you basically have the entire Iberian peninsula and half of Italy under your control and your vessels are dominating the new world. Oh, and I think there are missions to snap up North Africa as well. It’s the easiest, in my mind, nation to form the Roman Empire with.
That is what i was thinking. With some countries, i waited for Portugal to choose Exp and then i would vassalize them and leave them to colonize for me. But if that Iberian wedding kicks too early (and probably it will) then Spain will not colonize.
But yes, it is settled. My next save is Aragon.
Last edited:
Shameless bump, but I'm running a Game of Thrones themed Werewolf game from the 31st August.
If you enjoyed the EU4 experiments and want to take part in something more interactive, feel free to sign up: https://www.redcafe.net/threads/werewolves-game-got-theme-sign-up-thread-starts-31st-august.484383/
If you enjoyed the EU4 experiments and want to take part in something more interactive, feel free to sign up: https://www.redcafe.net/threads/werewolves-game-got-theme-sign-up-thread-starts-31st-august.484383/