NATION

PASSWORD

Paradox Games VIII: Ding Dong Your Species Is Wrong

A coffee shop for those who like to discuss art, music, books, movies, TV, each other's own works, and existential angst.

Advertisement

Remove ads

Which dynasty is best dynasty?

Han, like any reasonable person would say.
3
10%
Wei, you silly fool they were the rightful dynasty.
0
No votes
Jin, hahahahahaha nobody likes the Jin.
4
13%
Tang, like the Han but cooler.
10
33%
Song, underappreciated like my favorite game.
4
13%
Yuan, might makes right and we're the fucking Mongols.
4
13%
Ming, MINGLE MINGLE MOTHERFUCKER
2
7%
Qing, We are the most powerful- OH SHIT ITS THE BRITISH
3
10%
 
Total votes : 30

User avatar
Evil Dictators Happyland
Minister
 
Posts: 3004
Founded: Aug 03, 2016
Corrupt Dictatorship

Postby Evil Dictators Happyland » Wed Sep 04, 2019 6:31 am

I had a thought about warfare in CK2, and I figured I should share it.
So, you know how sieging down every single holding your enemy has gives you 125% warscore (i.e. you only have to siege down 80% of their holdings to have 100% warscore)?
What if killing armies worked the same way, so that wiping out 80% of the enemy army gives you 100% warscore? The way I see it, if you manage to obliterate the other guy's army, then him continuing to fight is just delaying the inevitable, and it's not especially fun to have to siege down a bunch of counties to win a war you've already won just because warscore from battles caps at 75% for most CBs.

Corollary to this: What if the target's traits affected how much warscore you need to force their surrender, sort of like how some civics in Stellaris reduce war exhaustion gain? Like, if your enemy is brave, then you might need 110% warscore (that is, it takes a lot more to force them to surrender - also yes, this means it would be tracked above 100%, but plot power does that too so it's not without precedent), while craven characters would only need 90% or so. And maybe it could also be changed for certain CBs, like zealous characters would be much less likely to surrender to holy wars or crusades.

And perhaps martial could also directly affect army performance, like giving the flank +1% morale damage and defense per point of martial. The AI loves assigning commanders based purely on martial without considering traits, so that might also make it more competitive on the battlefield.

The reason I bring this up is because I think that CK2's warfare system is the most robotic part of the game (as there's not much difference between different realms except for army size and composition - really, what's the big difference between the feudal HI-based 10k English army and the feudal HI-based 10k Swedish army?) and accounting for traits and stats might make it a bit less robotic and more adaptive. Having to account for the other guy's traits when fighting - even if they aren't directly relevant to the individual battles - might make you reconsider a war that you could otherwise win.

I admit that this is very bare bones and it's definitely not even fleshed out enough for a mod, much less the base game, but I thought I'd ask what y'all think.
IC name is "The United Socialist States of America". It is best described as "North Korea if its propaganda were true", down to the presence of an immortal, quasi-divine leader.
NS stats are mostly canon. The above description was derived from them.
Factbooks are quite messy, don't use them.
Political compass: -6.38 economic, -3.64 social (social democrat), will retake every few months.
Agnostic apatheist. Faith is by no means a bad thing, it's just not for me.

Reploid Productions wrote:Two pages in... and everybody is pretty much agreeing that "This is fucking stupid!"? Dear gods, NSG agreeing on something?! I SPOTTED A UNICORN!!

And to add my US$0.02: This is fucking stupid.

User avatar
Bralia
Postmaster of the Fleet
 
Posts: 29340
Founded: Mar 07, 2010
Democratic Socialists

Postby Bralia » Wed Sep 04, 2019 6:52 am

Last edited by Bralia on Wed Sep 04, 2019 6:53 am, edited 2 times in total.
Romantic slut. Self-deprecating egotist. Benevolent communist.
Wife and queen to King Huskar the Mannis. May his reign be long and great.
Entranced and enchanted by an embrace. In love with locked lips. I cannot lie when I meet your eyes.

User avatar
Grenartia
Post Czar
 
Posts: 40769
Founded: Feb 14, 2010
Left-wing Utopia

Postby Grenartia » Wed Sep 04, 2019 7:08 am



Virgin invaders vs the Chad resistance.
Impeach Humanity, Legalize Death Stars, Life is TheftWis/Gren 2016 Something all cisgender allies should start doing. I wear teal, blue & pink for Swith. ⚧Copy and paste this in your sig if you passed biology and know gender and sex aren't the same thing.⚧
"Don't take life so serious. It isn't permanent."-Dyakovo
I'm a pansexual Androgyne. Also a Christian.
Please use they/them/their when referencing me, as I do NOT appreciate the other pronouns.
Textbook definition of irony
Quotes of awesomeness

User avatar
Evil Dictators Happyland
Minister
 
Posts: 3004
Founded: Aug 03, 2016
Corrupt Dictatorship

Postby Evil Dictators Happyland » Wed Sep 04, 2019 7:09 am

Grenartia wrote:


Virgin invaders vs the Chad resistance.

New HOI4 achievement: Conquer Chad as the Virgin Islands
IC name is "The United Socialist States of America". It is best described as "North Korea if its propaganda were true", down to the presence of an immortal, quasi-divine leader.
NS stats are mostly canon. The above description was derived from them.
Factbooks are quite messy, don't use them.
Political compass: -6.38 economic, -3.64 social (social democrat), will retake every few months.
Agnostic apatheist. Faith is by no means a bad thing, it's just not for me.

Reploid Productions wrote:Two pages in... and everybody is pretty much agreeing that "This is fucking stupid!"? Dear gods, NSG agreeing on something?! I SPOTTED A UNICORN!!

And to add my US$0.02: This is fucking stupid.

User avatar
Valrifell
Postmaster of the Fleet
 
Posts: 21708
Founded: Aug 18, 2013
Left-Leaning College State

Postby Valrifell » Wed Sep 04, 2019 7:14 am

Evil Dictators Happyland wrote:
Grenartia wrote:
Virgin invaders vs the Chad resistance.

New HOI4 achievement: Conquer Chad as the Virgin Islands


Gamers Rise Up: Conquer Chad as the Virgin Islands
I like to imagine Sisyphus happy
I did some things

User avatar
Impaled Nazarene
Powerbroker
 
Posts: 8387
Founded: Aug 09, 2015
Father Knows Best State

Postby Impaled Nazarene » Wed Sep 04, 2019 7:55 am

Evil Dictators Happyland wrote:
Grenartia wrote:
Virgin invaders vs the Chad resistance.

New HOI4 achievement: Conquer Chad as the Virgin Islands

Smells like new thread title.
Non-binary Aromantic Asexual Asperger's Syndrome Anarchist
Kiaculta wrote:Oh, Kar, you silly sack of shit.
Soviet Haaregrad wrote:Bickering ist krieg.
Infected Mushroom wrote:isn't this a bit extreme?
Finland SSR wrote:"Many dictatorships are oligarchies.
Many democracies are oligarchies.
Therefore, many dictatorships are democracies."

-said no one ever. I made these words up.
Genivaria wrote:"WHY!? Why do this!? Thousands of planets and trillions of innocent lives gone! For what!?"
"It seemed like fun at the time."

User avatar
Genivaria
Khan of Spam
 
Posts: 63197
Founded: Mar 29, 2011
Moralistic Democracy

Postby Genivaria » Thu Sep 05, 2019 2:25 pm


The implications of manpower bonuses from compliance....
General Sherman did nothing wrong, fact.
Liberal Social Democrat.

Proud denouncer of the Taliban.

User avatar
Impaled Nazarene
Powerbroker
 
Posts: 8387
Founded: Aug 09, 2015
Father Knows Best State

Postby Impaled Nazarene » Thu Sep 05, 2019 3:08 pm

Evil Dictators Happyland wrote:I had a thought about warfare in CK2, and I figured I should share it.
So, you know how sieging down every single holding your enemy has gives you 125% warscore (i.e. you only have to siege down 80% of their holdings to have 100% warscore)?
What if killing armies worked the same way, so that wiping out 80% of the enemy army gives you 100% warscore? The way I see it, if you manage to obliterate the other guy's army, then him continuing to fight is just delaying the inevitable, and it's not especially fun to have to siege down a bunch of counties to win a war you've already won just because warscore from battles caps at 75% for most CBs.

Corollary to this: What if the target's traits affected how much warscore you need to force their surrender, sort of like how some civics in Stellaris reduce war exhaustion gain? Like, if your enemy is brave, then you might need 110% warscore (that is, it takes a lot more to force them to surrender - also yes, this means it would be tracked above 100%, but plot power does that too so it's not without precedent), while craven characters would only need 90% or so. And maybe it could also be changed for certain CBs, like zealous characters would be much less likely to surrender to holy wars or crusades.

And perhaps martial could also directly affect army performance, like giving the flank +1% morale damage and defense per point of martial. The AI loves assigning commanders based purely on martial without considering traits, so that might also make it more competitive on the battlefield.

The reason I bring this up is because I think that CK2's warfare system is the most robotic part of the game (as there's not much difference between different realms except for army size and composition - really, what's the big difference between the feudal HI-based 10k English army and the feudal HI-based 10k Swedish army?) and accounting for traits and stats might make it a bit less robotic and more adaptive. Having to account for the other guy's traits when fighting - even if they aren't directly relevant to the individual battles - might make you reconsider a war that you could otherwise win.

I admit that this is very bare bones and it's definitely not even fleshed out enough for a mod, much less the base game, but I thought I'd ask what y'all think.

It needs an entire overhaul. Unless you're waging a major claim, holy war, invasion etc. You should not need 99-100% warscore to enforce demands. It's annoying having to siege down half of France and defeat their stack a few times just to acquire a 1 county claim from Flanders.
Say nothing of an empire.

Aside from the AI being stubborn and otherwise unreasonable EUIV beats CK2 in this matter. I'm shocked to say that.
Last edited by Impaled Nazarene on Thu Sep 05, 2019 3:25 pm, edited 2 times in total.
Non-binary Aromantic Asexual Asperger's Syndrome Anarchist
Kiaculta wrote:Oh, Kar, you silly sack of shit.
Soviet Haaregrad wrote:Bickering ist krieg.
Infected Mushroom wrote:isn't this a bit extreme?
Finland SSR wrote:"Many dictatorships are oligarchies.
Many democracies are oligarchies.
Therefore, many dictatorships are democracies."

-said no one ever. I made these words up.
Genivaria wrote:"WHY!? Why do this!? Thousands of planets and trillions of innocent lives gone! For what!?"
"It seemed like fun at the time."

User avatar
Ifreann
Post Overlord
 
Posts: 132493
Founded: Aug 07, 2005
Democratic Socialists

Postby Ifreann » Thu Sep 05, 2019 3:10 pm

Impaled Nazarene wrote:
Evil Dictators Happyland wrote:I had a thought about warfare in CK2, and I figured I should share it.
So, you know how sieging down every single holding your enemy has gives you 125% warscore (i.e. you only have to siege down 80% of their holdings to have 100% warscore)?
What if killing armies worked the same way, so that wiping out 80% of the enemy army gives you 100% warscore? The way I see it, if you manage to obliterate the other guy's army, then him continuing to fight is just delaying the inevitable, and it's not especially fun to have to siege down a bunch of counties to win a war you've already won just because warscore from battles caps at 75% for most CBs.

Corollary to this: What if the target's traits affected how much warscore you need to force their surrender, sort of like how some civics in Stellaris reduce war exhaustion gain? Like, if your enemy is brave, then you might need 110% warscore (that is, it takes a lot more to force them to surrender - also yes, this means it would be tracked above 100%, but plot power does that too so it's not without precedent), while craven characters would only need 90% or so. And maybe it could also be changed for certain CBs, like zealous characters would be much less likely to surrender to holy wars or crusades.

And perhaps martial could also directly affect army performance, like giving the flank +1% morale damage and defense per point of martial. The AI loves assigning commanders based purely on martial without considering traits, so that might also make it more competitive on the battlefield.

The reason I bring this up is because I think that CK2's warfare system is the most robotic part of the game (as there's not much difference between different realms except for army size and composition - really, what's the big difference between the feudal HI-based 10k English army and the feudal HI-based 10k Swedish army?) and accounting for traits and stats might make it a bit less robotic and more adaptive. Having to account for the other guy's traits when fighting - even if they aren't directly relevant to the individual battles - might make you reconsider a war that you could otherwise win.

I admit that this is very bare bones and it's definitely not even fleshed out enough for a mod, much less the base game, but I thought I'd ask what y'all think.

It needs an entire overhaul. Unless you're waging a major claim, holy war, invasion etc. You should not need 99-100% warscore to enforce demands. It's annoying having to siege down half of France and defeat their stack a few times just to get acquire a 1 county claim from Flanders.
Say nothing of an empire.

Stupid stubborn Flanders.
Mistake Not My Current State Of Joshing Gentle Banter For The Awesome And Terrible Majesty Of The Towering Seas Of Snark That Are Themselves The Mere Milquetoast Shallows Fringing My Vast Oceans Of Sarcasm
He/Him

Dangerous this Jack o' Hearts.
With his kiss
the riot
starts

User avatar
Holy Tedalonia
Powerbroker
 
Posts: 9699
Founded: Nov 14, 2016
Moralistic Democracy

Postby Holy Tedalonia » Fri Sep 06, 2019 9:41 pm

Impaled Nazarene wrote:
Evil Dictators Happyland wrote:I had a thought about warfare in CK2, and I figured I should share it.
So, you know how sieging down every single holding your enemy has gives you 125% warscore (i.e. you only have to siege down 80% of their holdings to have 100% warscore)?
What if killing armies worked the same way, so that wiping out 80% of the enemy army gives you 100% warscore? The way I see it, if you manage to obliterate the other guy's army, then him continuing to fight is just delaying the inevitable, and it's not especially fun to have to siege down a bunch of counties to win a war you've already won just because warscore from battles caps at 75% for most CBs.

Corollary to this: What if the target's traits affected how much warscore you need to force their surrender, sort of like how some civics in Stellaris reduce war exhaustion gain? Like, if your enemy is brave, then you might need 110% warscore (that is, it takes a lot more to force them to surrender - also yes, this means it would be tracked above 100%, but plot power does that too so it's not without precedent), while craven characters would only need 90% or so. And maybe it could also be changed for certain CBs, like zealous characters would be much less likely to surrender to holy wars or crusades.

And perhaps martial could also directly affect army performance, like giving the flank +1% morale damage and defense per point of martial. The AI loves assigning commanders based purely on martial without considering traits, so that might also make it more competitive on the battlefield.

The reason I bring this up is because I think that CK2's warfare system is the most robotic part of the game (as there's not much difference between different realms except for army size and composition - really, what's the big difference between the feudal HI-based 10k English army and the feudal HI-based 10k Swedish army?) and accounting for traits and stats might make it a bit less robotic and more adaptive. Having to account for the other guy's traits when fighting - even if they aren't directly relevant to the individual battles - might make you reconsider a war that you could otherwise win.

I admit that this is very bare bones and it's definitely not even fleshed out enough for a mod, much less the base game, but I thought I'd ask what y'all think.

It needs an entire overhaul. Unless you're waging a major claim, holy war, invasion etc. You should not need 99-100% warscore to enforce demands. It's annoying having to siege down half of France and defeat their stack a few times just to acquire a 1 county claim from Flanders.
Say nothing of an empire.

Aside from the AI being stubborn and otherwise unreasonable EUIV beats CK2 in this matter. I'm shocked to say that.

The mideval general strategy was to pretty much turtle. I think it's mainly diplomacy that really needs that most improvement. Ai is simply to stubborn to surrender even facing like 5 wars all at once. I also get what their going for too by warfare being down by county by county/duchy by duchy, because the majority of wars in that period were done in that way, but I can't see why you can't make additional demands or even try to compromise.
Otho Tedgustus President Esteemed of Holy Tedalonia.
FACTBOOK
Status based off index:
Tier: 7
Level: 0
Type: 6
A 12 civilization, according to this index.
NS Stats don't matter | warning leader does not represent everyone's attitude | Massive Update in progress, gist is a succession of power is about to happen. Q&A about Holy Tedalonia and more
Name: Ted
Ideology: Capitalism
Political Compass: Social Libertarian for some reason
Race: Vampire
Political Side: Right
Favorite Senator: Ted Cruz (Ted's have to help out Ted's)
Status: Healthy and as strong as a starved ox
Religion: a Pious Christian (although that doesn't stop me from RPing against good every now and then)
I M P E R I A LR E P U B L I C

User avatar
Impaled Nazarene
Powerbroker
 
Posts: 8387
Founded: Aug 09, 2015
Father Knows Best State

Postby Impaled Nazarene » Sat Sep 07, 2019 4:45 am

Holy Tedalonia wrote:
Impaled Nazarene wrote:It needs an entire overhaul. Unless you're waging a major claim, holy war, invasion etc. You should not need 99-100% warscore to enforce demands. It's annoying having to siege down half of France and defeat their stack a few times just to acquire a 1 county claim from Flanders.
Say nothing of an empire.

Aside from the AI being stubborn and otherwise unreasonable EUIV beats CK2 in this matter. I'm shocked to say that.

The mideval general strategy was to pretty much turtle. I think it's mainly diplomacy that really needs that most improvement. Ai is simply to stubborn to surrender even facing like 5 wars all at once. I also get what their going for too by warfare being down by county by county/duchy by duchy, because the majority of wars in that period were done in that way, but I can't see why you can't make additional demands or even try to compromise.

Peace conferences where you can add or modify demands would make the wars a lot less bothersome. If I siege half of France I'm gonna want a little more than a small county.
Non-binary Aromantic Asexual Asperger's Syndrome Anarchist
Kiaculta wrote:Oh, Kar, you silly sack of shit.
Soviet Haaregrad wrote:Bickering ist krieg.
Infected Mushroom wrote:isn't this a bit extreme?
Finland SSR wrote:"Many dictatorships are oligarchies.
Many democracies are oligarchies.
Therefore, many dictatorships are democracies."

-said no one ever. I made these words up.
Genivaria wrote:"WHY!? Why do this!? Thousands of planets and trillions of innocent lives gone! For what!?"
"It seemed like fun at the time."

User avatar
Ostroeuropa
Khan of Spam
 
Posts: 51888
Founded: Jun 14, 2006
Inoffensive Centrist Democracy

Postby Ostroeuropa » Sat Sep 07, 2019 8:11 am

Gonna do a Castille game in Eu4.

Aims for opening;

Vassalize Navarra diplomatically, ally france and rush Labourd during their war with England, seperate peace for Labourd and release it as a Gasconese vassal (For eating Gascony cores in France.). Once Gascone is vassalized, break alliance with france, deal with Granada and that shit. At some point before 1490, invade France for the Gascone cores.

If possible, Diplovassalize Britanny. Basically expand into Italy with admin points, into france with diplo points, into north africa with both, and colonize new world.

Meanwhile use my missions to seize portugal, aragon, England, Austria in personal unions and muscle my way into the Emperorship.

I think the major thing is the Labourd part. If you day 1 relationship boost navarrra, month 2 ally them, and then stack all the relationship boosters before giving them a gift at 165 relations, you can vassalize them before Aragon PU's them.

You can always rush to seize Labourd easily enough, the problem comes with waiting for England to peace out seperately with you, as France might win the war too quickly.

France can eat my accepted culture slots. (Mostly), with Italy gaining a few too.

With an early rush to cripple france and begin eating it, missions will take care of the other major european powers. (Except Russia/Ottomans I guess.).

If all that goes well i'll have a Spanish empire in Europe right up to Scandinavia/Poland in the north and east, and up to the Balkans in the south and east. (Religious ideas to holy war and link up the north african part with the balkan part with routine fights against ottomans.).

Poland and Scandinavia will be a pickle. If Scandinavia goes protestant, all good, we'll carve through there too. Poland though isn't likely to. I guess I just gotta spam that thing to put a spaniard on the polish throne and hope that event triggers to give me a PU casus belli. (I think it's if you get your dynasty on the commonwealth throne 3 times in a row there's a chance it'll proc each succession from then on.).
Last edited by Ostroeuropa on Sat Sep 07, 2019 8:21 am, edited 6 times in total.
New Sig, who dis?
Patriarchy theory is a valid academic theory, not incel tier psychological abuse which maps on to any situation a woman doesn't like and enables them to rationalize a hostility to men, we swear.
https://i.redd.it/zj1a11ooxwb31.jpg

User avatar
Bralia
Postmaster of the Fleet
 
Posts: 29340
Founded: Mar 07, 2010
Democratic Socialists

Postby Bralia » Sat Sep 07, 2019 9:16 am

Ostroeuropa wrote:Gonna do a Castille game in Eu4.

Aims for opening;

Vassalize Navarra diplomatically, ally france and rush Labourd during their war with England, seperate peace for Labourd and release it as a Gasconese vassal (For eating Gascony cores in France.). Once Gascone is vassalized, break alliance with france, deal with Granada and that shit. At some point before 1490, invade France for the Gascone cores.

If possible, Diplovassalize Britanny. Basically expand into Italy with admin points, into france with diplo points, into north africa with both, and colonize new world.

Meanwhile use my missions to seize portugal, aragon, England, Austria in personal unions and muscle my way into the Emperorship.

I think the major thing is the Labourd part. If you day 1 relationship boost navarrra, month 2 ally them, and then stack all the relationship boosters before giving them a gift at 165 relations, you can vassalize them before Aragon PU's them.

You can always rush to seize Labourd easily enough, the problem comes with waiting for England to peace out seperately with you, as France might win the war too quickly.

France can eat my accepted culture slots. (Mostly), with Italy gaining a few too.

With an early rush to cripple france and begin eating it, missions will take care of the other major european powers. (Except Russia/Ottomans I guess.).

If all that goes well i'll have a Spanish empire in Europe right up to Scandinavia/Poland in the north and east, and up to the Balkans in the south and east. (Religious ideas to holy war and link up the north african part with the balkan part with routine fights against ottomans.).

Poland and Scandinavia will be a pickle. If Scandinavia goes protestant, all good, we'll carve through there too. Poland though isn't likely to. I guess I just gotta spam that thing to put a spaniard on the polish throne and hope that event triggers to give me a PU casus belli. (I think it's if you get your dynasty on the commonwealth throne 3 times in a row there's a chance it'll proc each succession from then on.).

Suffer not the Portuguese to live. Exterminate the Portuguese, don't get in bed with them.
Romantic slut. Self-deprecating egotist. Benevolent communist.
Wife and queen to King Huskar the Mannis. May his reign be long and great.
Entranced and enchanted by an embrace. In love with locked lips. I cannot lie when I meet your eyes.

User avatar
Ostroeuropa
Khan of Spam
 
Posts: 51888
Founded: Jun 14, 2006
Inoffensive Centrist Democracy

Postby Ostroeuropa » Sat Sep 07, 2019 10:16 am

Bralia wrote:
Ostroeuropa wrote:Gonna do a Castille game in Eu4.

Aims for opening;

Vassalize Navarra diplomatically, ally france and rush Labourd during their war with England, seperate peace for Labourd and release it as a Gasconese vassal (For eating Gascony cores in France.). Once Gascone is vassalized, break alliance with france, deal with Granada and that shit. At some point before 1490, invade France for the Gascone cores.

If possible, Diplovassalize Britanny. Basically expand into Italy with admin points, into france with diplo points, into north africa with both, and colonize new world.

Meanwhile use my missions to seize portugal, aragon, England, Austria in personal unions and muscle my way into the Emperorship.

I think the major thing is the Labourd part. If you day 1 relationship boost navarrra, month 2 ally them, and then stack all the relationship boosters before giving them a gift at 165 relations, you can vassalize them before Aragon PU's them.

You can always rush to seize Labourd easily enough, the problem comes with waiting for England to peace out seperately with you, as France might win the war too quickly.

France can eat my accepted culture slots. (Mostly), with Italy gaining a few too.

With an early rush to cripple france and begin eating it, missions will take care of the other major european powers. (Except Russia/Ottomans I guess.).

If all that goes well i'll have a Spanish empire in Europe right up to Scandinavia/Poland in the north and east, and up to the Balkans in the south and east. (Religious ideas to holy war and link up the north african part with the balkan part with routine fights against ottomans.).

Poland and Scandinavia will be a pickle. If Scandinavia goes protestant, all good, we'll carve through there too. Poland though isn't likely to. I guess I just gotta spam that thing to put a spaniard on the polish throne and hope that event triggers to give me a PU casus belli. (I think it's if you get your dynasty on the commonwealth throne 3 times in a row there's a chance it'll proc each succession from then on.).

Suffer not the Portuguese to live. Exterminate the Portuguese, don't get in bed with them.


There's a mission to PU them after you get Aragon.

I'm now waiting for the Aragonese king to die, if he does within the next 3 years (He's 61) I get a PU on them. (I'm already pre-emptively improving relations with both them and naples.). Then i'll round on Portugal and PU them, then it's a matter of invading france. Game is going very well, managed to snipe Labourd and stuff.

I outnumber France's armies by myself. With Aragon, Naples, and Portugal as subjects, we'll swarm them. Then that's around 1/4th of France just glomped away into a vassal state. Following that i'll do the same with Occitania.

Poor France only has Britanny and Provence as Allies.
Last edited by Ostroeuropa on Sat Sep 07, 2019 10:18 am, edited 3 times in total.
New Sig, who dis?
Patriarchy theory is a valid academic theory, not incel tier psychological abuse which maps on to any situation a woman doesn't like and enables them to rationalize a hostility to men, we swear.
https://i.redd.it/zj1a11ooxwb31.jpg

User avatar
Ostroeuropa
Khan of Spam
 
Posts: 51888
Founded: Jun 14, 2006
Inoffensive Centrist Democracy

Postby Ostroeuropa » Sat Sep 07, 2019 11:12 am

Aragon and Naples are mine and the portuguese war has begun, as well as colonization. (Snapped up the Canarias during this war.).

Some manpower issues but mostly going alright. (Well, I mean, manpower is zero, but i've stackwiped Portugal and England a few times.) Once portugal is down it'll be a period of recovery in terms of gold and manpower with some light colonizing before striking at France.

Might need to take a loan, which makes me sad, but oh well, we're already getting Inflation from gold mines and that'll need to be dealt with sooner or later. I guess every now and then I can drop some admin on it (boo.).

After France we'll move in to the claims i've got in Italy (Assuming the shadow kingdom event fires by then), and hopefully by then i'll have converted Granada (Went the co-existence route.).

If it's too early for Shadow Kingdom idk. Maybe hit Provence or Britanny or something.

Colonization wise i'm gunning for the historical ones and assuming Portugal will do Brazil, so i'll inherit their colonial nation eventually and expand it myself. Maybe Portugal will tag some of the african provinces for me which would be nice. I'm gonna get the new world on lockdown and focus on European expansion before turning to Africa and the east.
Last edited by Ostroeuropa on Sat Sep 07, 2019 11:18 am, edited 5 times in total.
New Sig, who dis?
Patriarchy theory is a valid academic theory, not incel tier psychological abuse which maps on to any situation a woman doesn't like and enables them to rationalize a hostility to men, we swear.
https://i.redd.it/zj1a11ooxwb31.jpg

User avatar
Serrus
Ambassador
 
Posts: 1197
Founded: Feb 06, 2017
Civil Rights Lovefest

Postby Serrus » Sun Sep 08, 2019 7:04 am

Katganistan wrote:
Ethel mermania wrote:maybe japan wanted the zombie attack.

Possible. Zombies are cool now.

Eastern Raarothorgren wrote:News websites are good and reasonable soruces of information or they would not be on the internet if they were saying things that were incorrect.

This is why rules exist, kids!
Keshiland wrote:I am yes arguing that the 1st 4 are not binding to the states and yes I know that in most Republican states they would ban the freedom of religion and the freedom of essembally but I don't live there and I hate guns!

The Huskar Social Union wrote:
You glorifted ducking wanabe sea pheasant

Platapusses are not rel

User avatar
Abserdia
Post Marshal
 
Posts: 19159
Founded: Aug 05, 2014
Democratic Socialists

Postby Abserdia » Sun Sep 08, 2019 4:14 pm

Thought Bralia might like to see this mod.

I don’t think anyone else cares.
”Game overs are a failure of the game designer.”

Blue canary in the outlet by the light switch,
who watches over you!
Make a little birdhouse in your soul

User avatar
Harmonic Empire
Envoy
 
Posts: 261
Founded: Mar 17, 2017
Iron Fist Consumerists

Postby Harmonic Empire » Sun Sep 08, 2019 11:02 pm

Hey Hey!

I need your EU4 tips, im playing as Byzantium. What should i pick in Third ideas slot?
THE REVOLUTIONARY EMPIRE OF HARMONIA / THE IMPERIAL HARMONIC
"Baptised in the blood of her forefathers, she stood against the Heaven despite all odds."
Napoleon Bonaparte + Gustavus Adolphus + Charles XII + Hannibal Barca + Tamerlane + Olga of Kiev = Ylva Raymryt
Yverdepedia
Proud member of The Anti Democracy League | *Regret forcing Denmark into Union but who cares, the game gonna end in 20 years*

User avatar
Bralia
Postmaster of the Fleet
 
Posts: 29340
Founded: Mar 07, 2010
Democratic Socialists

Postby Bralia » Sun Sep 08, 2019 11:28 pm

Romantic slut. Self-deprecating egotist. Benevolent communist.
Wife and queen to King Huskar the Mannis. May his reign be long and great.
Entranced and enchanted by an embrace. In love with locked lips. I cannot lie when I meet your eyes.

User avatar
Genivaria
Khan of Spam
 
Posts: 63197
Founded: Mar 29, 2011
Moralistic Democracy

Postby Genivaria » Mon Sep 09, 2019 10:05 am

My run with the Commonwealth of America in KR has given me a headcanon of the Commonwealth Minutemen from Fallout in Syndicalist colors leading the charge.
"General, another Reichspakt stronghold is in need of assaulting, I'll mark it on your map." :D
General Sherman did nothing wrong, fact.
Liberal Social Democrat.

Proud denouncer of the Taliban.

User avatar
Bralia
Postmaster of the Fleet
 
Posts: 29340
Founded: Mar 07, 2010
Democratic Socialists

Postby Bralia » Mon Sep 09, 2019 10:14 am

Romantic slut. Self-deprecating egotist. Benevolent communist.
Wife and queen to King Huskar the Mannis. May his reign be long and great.
Entranced and enchanted by an embrace. In love with locked lips. I cannot lie when I meet your eyes.

User avatar
Renoa
Ambassador
 
Posts: 1423
Founded: Apr 19, 2013
Left-wing Utopia

Postby Renoa » Mon Sep 09, 2019 10:57 am

I'm started a game in CK2 as a Muslim ruler for the first time since getting all the DLC. For the first few years I was thinking that Muslim mechanics were amazing and wondering why anyone would want to play as any other religion, then my ruler died and I had to spend twenty years killing and being killed between his assorted sons and grandsons and then was very well aware of why not. And that was even AFTER a third of them culled each other.

On an unrelated note but from the same game:
Swedish ruler of Norway, which is based in Scotland and doesn't own any land in Scandinavia
Norwegian ruler of Sweden, which is based in Norway
I'm the Paradox Thread's Self-Appointed Court Chaplain. Don't tell Huskar, even though someone already did.
Sapin Military District wrote:If god doesn't exist, then why does a tissue pop up every time you take the old one out of the box?

Benomia 3 wrote: Well if we're sharing our feelings now, I feel that royal purple is a fine color, but sadly underused in modern fashion.
Pro: Emo revival, fighting climate change, the New Orleans Saints, thick thighs, Mean Girls
Anti: Egos larger than my own, Eurocentrism, most seafood, the designated hitter rule, the Atlanta Falcons

User avatar
Harmonic Empire
Envoy
 
Posts: 261
Founded: Mar 17, 2017
Iron Fist Consumerists

Postby Harmonic Empire » Mon Sep 09, 2019 12:21 pm

THE REVOLUTIONARY EMPIRE OF HARMONIA / THE IMPERIAL HARMONIC
"Baptised in the blood of her forefathers, she stood against the Heaven despite all odds."
Napoleon Bonaparte + Gustavus Adolphus + Charles XII + Hannibal Barca + Tamerlane + Olga of Kiev = Ylva Raymryt
Yverdepedia
Proud member of The Anti Democracy League | *Regret forcing Denmark into Union but who cares, the game gonna end in 20 years*

User avatar
United Muscovite Nations
Postmaster of the Fleet
 
Posts: 20287
Founded: Feb 01, 2017
Corrupt Dictatorship

Postby United Muscovite Nations » Mon Sep 09, 2019 1:35 pm

Renoa wrote:I'm started a game in CK2 as a Muslim ruler for the first time since getting all the DLC. For the first few years I was thinking that Muslim mechanics were amazing and wondering why anyone would want to play as any other religion, then my ruler died and I had to spend twenty years killing and being killed between his assorted sons and grandsons and then was very well aware of why not. And that was even AFTER a third of them culled each other.

On an unrelated note but from the same game:
Swedish ruler of Norway, which is based in Scotland and doesn't own any land in Scandinavia
Norwegian ruler of Sweden, which is based in Norway

Play as a custom Sunni Caliph and make your character immortal. Without the problems of succession, the mechanics make it awesome.
Formerly United Marxist Nations, Dec 02, 2011- Feb 01, 2017. +33,837 posts Eastern Orthodox Christian. Christian Anarchist and Monarchist. Supporter of Pan-Arabism. 22-year old Doomer
Even the apologists of industrialism have been obliged to admit that some economic evils follow in the wake of the machines. These are such as overproduction, unemployment, and a growing inequality in the distribution of wealth. But the remedies proposed by the apologists are always homeopathic. They expect the evils to disappear when we have bigger and better machines, and more of them. Their remedial programs, therefore, look forward to more industrialism.
Pro and Anti: https://www.nationstates.net/nation=uni ... id=1166847

User avatar
Bralia
Postmaster of the Fleet
 
Posts: 29340
Founded: Mar 07, 2010
Democratic Socialists

Postby Bralia » Tue Sep 10, 2019 1:06 am

This is the kind of EUIV Dev Diary I like to see. Super large and super dense. I don't actually even have time to read it right now, so I'm just going to make the tagline the release date: 1.29 releases in precisely a week.
Romantic slut. Self-deprecating egotist. Benevolent communist.
Wife and queen to King Huskar the Mannis. May his reign be long and great.
Entranced and enchanted by an embrace. In love with locked lips. I cannot lie when I meet your eyes.

PreviousNext

Advertisement

Remove ads

Return to Arts & Fiction

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users

Advertisement

Remove ads