Worste advice ever given for EU3?

**Kennylz** · June 12, 2008, 11:41 PM

I have to say that the best advice is just to devote a lot of time to figuring the game out yourself, but after a long stretch of failed attempts I finally succeeded with Poland. I was doing decently for the early game, but I had a break-through that allowed me to run rough-shot over everyone in my way. I was told, nearly the first tip ever given to me, not to mint money because inflation was horrible. Well, with that in mind I seemed to always go broke and have to take out loans and I was never ever able to field a respectable army that could do more than harass any nation worth their salt without getting some crazy ass losses per year.

Well, I finally realized that if I compared how low my inflation was to the computers it was like we were playing two different games. The only nations that had low inflation were the single state traders that just mind their own business the whole game and get stupid high research levels. Needless to say I didn't feel like playing as such a pacifist, I then looked and checked the inflation rates of every decent sized or large nation in the game and they had huge inflation rates, yet they were doing very well for themselves. I then loaded up a game of one said nation (France) and found out that it didn't cost that much more to build and recruit things than my tiny inflation having country. Needless to say I felt like I'd been cheated.

After that I put my army and financial needs first, then, after all is said and done I keep my money minting level to the point where I'm losing plenty each month, but is manageable and don't worry about the inflation. After I did that I was able to expand so rapidly that I had to struggle to keep from becoming bad boy. I went from nearly caput to going into a golden age.

Needless to say, telling people to not mint money and that inflation is the boogeyman is probably the biggest handicap I could give someone. If you are going to be fighting wars have a damn army already! I don't understand how people can play a game where they don't mint money at all.

Btw, it is the very late 1500's and my inflation is 9%. France is around 25 or so, and it is even higher for the Ottomans.

^ Said inappropriate priorities are what kept me from having a successful Russian campaign. You just can not worry about that crap until you solidify your place. Those steppe tribes are ruthless and could care less how high their inflation has to get to field those 25 thousand strong cavalry armies, while you are fielding 2 little armies of 5 thousand in order to balance your soon to be conquered budget.

Yes? No? Horribly incorrect? I'd also like to hear of some others...

**Darkarbiter** · June 13, 2008, 02:03 AM

25 inflation isn't that much. Its easily worth getting inflation if your expanding your countries power by at least 2x the amount of inflation your getting.

**Serious J** · June 13, 2008, 04:19 AM

I have been able to stay at 0% inflation for my games so far. It's just a matter of carefully managing your treasury to keep it at levels that you can recover from where all it takes is a few months of full research to bring it back down. Trick is to keep an eye on it. With my first game of EU3 I went up to about 60% inflation pretty quick because I had no idea what I was doing.

**Xam Enyap** · June 13, 2008, 06:34 AM

Minting is really not needed for major powers like France and such. But its really nothing much if you get few % up playing as minor or mid level countries.

**imb39** · June 14, 2008, 04:20 AM

What you have not factored into this 'inflation equation' is the impact on research. This is where inflation really hurts. It slows you down. Of course, you could try and get everything you would want in the first few years but you will be terribly vulnerable in the future.

**Lysander13** · June 14, 2008, 10:22 AM

I would have to agree the main impact of minting money is the unintended consequence of falling behind on research. No question it does slow you down. I do mint on occasion but i must admit it is rare and if i do it's usually with a very specific purpose in mind. I don't simply mint just so i can keep a very large standing army and fight in war after war. I personally don't enjoy this style of play. I guess i'm a slow and boring player. I could see however for those who like to play with a war mongering style from the beginning ( for a lack of a better description ) the benefits of minting early. Though at some point i would suggest the heavy early minting will come back to haunt that player. So i don't know if there's a right or wrong answer here per say....
Perhaps just an issue of playing style is all......

**Kennylz** · June 14, 2008, 02:34 PM

Couple questions for the last two players...

1. If you stand by not minting, then how are you able to succeed as a very early Russia? I've had a hell of a time with them because it seems like it is impossible to not be DOW'ed on early and sometimes by an eastern enemy who has no problem crippling their economy to support huge armies.

2. I don't Warmonger because I just love it so much (Though it is fun seeing those striped lines and all the political drama afterwords) but it is the only way I know how to judge success. As Poland I have an immense land empire and I'm probably about to be wiped out by a bad boy war, but I also have level 5's in 7 centers of trade and some tech levels that are ahead of their time.

Can you show me some alternative goals and ways to measure success without being a Napoleon?

**Serious J** · June 14, 2008, 05:31 PM

How do you see your current inflation anyways? I thought it was the number above the treasury slider but figured it can't be since it was at 0 when I saw that it was going to cost me 1800 ducats to build a university in my France campaign.

**Kennylz** · June 14, 2008, 08:34 PM

Eh, it is on your financial break-down to the left.

**zznɟ ǝɥʇ** · June 14, 2008, 08:36 PM

How the heck do you reduce inflation? Mine's steadily rising and I can't grasp economics to save my life. My first idea is the bank, but it still rises. It's at 25 now, in 1476ish.

**Kennylz** · June 14, 2008, 08:43 PM

What the heck? I never have inflation problems like such. Mine is only 10% at 1583 as Poland with a huge land empire.

Though, I never seem to ever have as large armies as all the other people who post screens on here. It seems like no one ever has middle ground. It is either no inflation or huge inflation.

**Serious J** · June 15, 2008, 06:55 AM

Originally Posted by Kennylz

Eh, it is on your financial break-down to the left.

Jesus, I must be blind. Never noticed that field there. Danke!

**Lysander13** · June 15, 2008, 11:51 AM

Originally Posted by Kennylz

Couple questions for the last two players...

1. If you stand by not minting, then how are you able to succeed as a very early Russia? I've had a hell of a time with them because it seems like it is impossible to not be DOW'ed on early and sometimes by an eastern enemy who has no problem crippling their economy to support huge armies.

2. I don't Warmonger because I just love it so much (Though it is fun seeing those striped lines and all the political drama afterwords) but it is the only way I know how to judge success. As Poland I have an immense land empire and I'm probably about to be wiped out by a bad boy war, but I also have level 5's in 7 centers of trade and some tech levels that are ahead of their time.

Can you show me some alternative goals and ways to measure success without being a Napoleon?

Admitedly, i've never played with any of the faction(s) that can form Russia yet.

The beauty of EU3, IMO, is that goals and measurement of success is open to interpretation. There is no one way to play. If one wants to play at Napoleon and attempt to conquer all of Europe he can do so. Alternatively, the player can choose to concentrate on a colonial empire and leave the fighting in Europe to others or become a trading heavyweight. I was waiting for In Nomine to finally get around to the Castille campaign i've always wanted to do. I'm concentrating on colonizing and trading. I avoid all wars in Europe and choose my allies very carefully so i won't get dragged into anyone else's wars. I'm concentrating fully on building a powerhouse economy and getting ready for QFTNW. The only wars i've been involved in so far in the early going are a few on the African continent when i have to smack around Morocco or Algiers when they start getting a little too ambitious for my tastes. I've already completed the reconquista and i'm content with my current position in Europe. So i'm playing a trading/colonizing style game for the moment while building an economic powerhouse. While all my neighbors are busy doing the exact opposite. France and her vassals, England, Scotland, Aragon, Portugal, and Burgundy have all been in a perpetual state of war with each other. They just can't get out of each other's way and with a little subsidizing on my part, I'll do my best to keep in that way for the time being...

All the while my economy gets better and i'm outpacing the pack as far as tech levels are concerned. For the time being anyways.....

**Elrond** · June 15, 2008, 12:03 PM

The obvious way to reduce inflation is to get the national bank idea as soon as you can - if you have a long period of peace were you are not spending anything it can reduce your inflation significantly.

**scottishranger** · June 16, 2008, 06:05 PM

I managed to form russia (with Muscovy) with low inflation because I got lucky and caught Novgorod in a long war with the Teutonic knights. I managed to pry away some of their key provinces in the West. This then allowed me to slowly, ever so slowly take down Kazan. Once Kazan is down though, the only true threat is Lithuania. If they declare war on you and your not ready, there goes all hopes of a russian state. However, once you annex Kazan, you should be powerful enough to stalemate Lithuania.