Europa Universalis IV Multiplayer Game IV

**Musthavename** · June 03, 2014, 01:06 PM

Originally Posted by theostrich

Do we need Skype or anything btw?

Game is organised via Steam. There's an associated Skype call that generally happens which you're welcome to join, but it's optional.

**Ynen** · June 03, 2014, 01:31 PM

Originally Posted by theostrich

Denmark
Scotland
Portugal
Do we need Skype or anything btw?

Not if you don't want to, but we recommend it.

Originally Posted by Ciciro

Yes, you need Skype, and heres a tiny recommendation- NEVER PICK DENMARK WHEN THERE IS A SWEDEN PLAYER. Same goes for Scotland and an England player.

Denmark can defeat Sweden bro. Especially if Denmark has, like, one capable ally (AI or player doesn't matter).

**Pat89** · June 03, 2014, 01:57 PM

It's a 50% chance really. You either kill Sweden or you die. If Sweden gets a decent ally they have as much chance of killing Denmark as the other way round.

**High Chunker Greens** · June 03, 2014, 02:00 PM

Would be awesome to see closer competition or even co-operation between them. Danish invasion of Scotland and ultimately England is perfectly possible as an expansion route, provided Sweden gives him the necessary help and they're smart about their invasion plan. That said, it would be difficult. Denmark can also go colonial or expand into Germany - take Denmark if you want, the possibilities with the Danes are actually surprisingly large.

**Musthavename** · June 03, 2014, 02:39 PM

On careful consideration, I'm going to leave England open. I don't feel enough commitment to the game with the latest changes to warrant playing a major.

However, I might still play as a lulzy minor (part of me is thinking the Knights, but I'd need some voices of support to do anything with them that doesn't involve dying), as at least on that basis if I drop I shouldn't affect game balance too much. I'm open to suggestions. Would be keen to play Christian of some variety though, preferably Western (the horrible westernisation changes means I can't use Ethiopia and their unqiue religion :'().

**Cryers-** · June 03, 2014, 02:41 PM

If England is open then I'll take them.

England
Sweden
Denmark

**High Chunker Greens** · June 03, 2014, 02:56 PM

Then yes definitely put someone in Denmark, I love seeing a large Denmark doing some colonising.

**Petrucci** · June 03, 2014, 03:51 PM

Originally Posted by Musthavename

On careful consideration, I'm going to leave England open. I don't feel enough commitment to the game with the latest changes to warrant playing a major.

However, I might still play as a lulzy minor (part of me is thinking the Knights, but I'd need some voices of support to do anything with them that doesn't involve dying), as at least on that basis if I drop I shouldn't affect game balance too much. I'm open to suggestions. Would be keen to play Christian of some variety though, preferably Western (the horrible westernisation changes means I can't use Ethiopia and their unqiue religion :'().

Brittany , Austria, BB, Hansa? There is a lot of place in HRE left. We have only Bohemia and Savoy for now.
Ethiopia and Mali are nice picks too if you want to take a rest from Asia. Irish or Norwegian Canada sounds pretty decent too me. You are also more then welcome to play as trade powerhouse Novgorod or some horde (you did the latter ).

**Scipio Afracanis** · June 03, 2014, 04:04 PM

Loved the last couple of threads, will be reading with interest.

**Musthavename** · June 03, 2014, 04:08 PM

Originally Posted by Petrucci

Brittany , Austria, BB, Hansa? There is a lot of place in HRE left. We have only Bohemia and Savoy for now.
Ethiopia and Mali are nice picks too if you want to take a rest from Asia. Irish or Norwegian Canada sounds pretty decent too me. You are also more then welcome to play as trade powerhouse Novgorod or some horde (you did the latter ).

Those European nations aren't really minors or "lulzy". As for non-Western nations, Paradox broke Westernisation.

**High Chunker Greens** · June 03, 2014, 04:17 PM

Not entirely, they buffed non-western troops so you can still use them effectively.

**Musthavename** · June 04, 2014, 01:21 PM

Originally Posted by Archduke Greens

Not entirely, they buffed non-western troops so you can still use them effectively.

Westernisation and non-Western nations got a huge nerf this patch:

Westernisation is slower for nations with high income. For every multiple of 40 your income is, you lose 1 point of investment a month, meaning you want to westernise early. And from reading the Paradox forums, the actual figure in the files is 15 and not 40, and they're not sure which one is actually used!
Yet the "techs behind" requirement now increases the worse your tech group is, proportional to your tech group, away from 7, rounded down. Got a tech penalty of 50%? Then you need to be 7 * 1.5 = 10.5 => 10 techs behind, instead of just 8. To show how little thought Paradox had into this system, if you're a Native American it's basically impossible, since you have to be 7 * 3.5 = 24.5 => 24 techs behind. Where it gets even stupider, is that to westernise as a native you have to modernise your tribe, which in turn gives you a huge instant jump in tech, making it even harder to westernise!
The RR from westernisation was increased from +5 to +10.
Despite the buffs to other troop types, western endgame troops have the advantage late game. So non-western nations are at an irreversible disadvantage when the game is entering the closing stages because they keep those troops instead of upgrading.

The complete lack of thought with the Westernisation changes is astounding, especially how it affects natives.

Edit: Seems Paradox have realised how stupid that change was. There is an open beta available, which amongst its fixes restores the behind penalty to 8 everywhere. Incidentally, we might want to be playing with this instead.

**Pat89** · June 04, 2014, 04:01 PM

Sounds fair.

**IZob** · June 04, 2014, 07:47 PM

Originally Posted by Musthavename

Westernisation and non-Western nations got a huge nerf this patch:

Westernisation is slower for nations with high income. For every multiple of 40 your income is, you lose 1 point of investment a month, meaning you want to westernise early. And from reading the Paradox forums, the actual figure in the files is 15 and not 40, and they're not sure which one is actually used!
Yet the "techs behind" requirement now increases the worse your tech group is, proportional to your tech group, away from 7, rounded down. Got a tech penalty of 50%? Then you need to be 7 * 1.5 = 10.5 => 10 techs behind, instead of just 8. To show how little thought Paradox had into this system, if you're a Native American it's basically impossible, since you have to be 7 * 3.5 = 24.5 => 24 techs behind. Where it gets even stupider, is that to westernise as a native you have to modernise your tribe, which in turn gives you a huge instant jump in tech, making it even harder to westernise!
The RR from westernisation was increased from +5 to +10.
Despite the buffs to other troop types, western endgame troops have the advantage late game. So non-western nations are at an irreversible disadvantage when the game is entering the closing stages because they keep those troops instead of upgrading.

The complete lack of thought with the Westernisation changes is astounding, especially how it affects natives.

Edit: Seems Paradox have realised how stupid that change was. There is an open beta available, which amongst its fixes restores the behind penalty to 8 everywhere. Incidentally, we might want to be playing with this instead.

Paradox are unable to "westernise" their westernisation mechanic imo. It's almost a year sine Eu4 was released, and it (westernisation) still feels as bad as it initially came out.

At least the behind level was fixed.