/gsg/ - Grand Strategy General

How did they nerf Europeans

>>2879
The military units have been rebalanced to absurdity. I mean, westernising doesn't even give you western units any more, because there's no real difference. And everyone and their grandmother can easily catch up in tech, because of the "reform government" stuff. And European cavalry sucks terribly.

>>2881
Indian tags need 50% more monarch points to buy techs, it's fine.

>>2881
But Europeans still can tech faster, and no one else has their superior units come the 1700s. They're fine.

>>2884
Their "superior units" are superior by ONE pip. One. Also, yeah, muslims and indian people (those actually living in india) are screwed, but the hell, Aztecs can actually fight Europeans 1vs1 now. And so can the natives.

What do you mean by 'politically correct', OP? Do you mean 'historically correct'?

>>2891
No, he means historically inaccurate. Historically speaking apart from the Ottomans this was the time period when Europe began kicking the rest of the world's ass. And this was simulated decently in earlier versions of EU4 but it's gotten less and less historically accurate as time goes by.

Funny, I've always considered Western countries as far too superior throughout the game, due to the trade system which causes all wealth to passively and actively seek out the end nodes. European great powers who reside around end nodes can easily wreak havoc on any other nation because they have the money to fill up their naval forcelimit and land forcelimit.

As the game progresses into the 1700's the units of Western nations gain a 1 to 2 pip lead on all other tech groups except Eastern. Pips that ensure 4 fire and 4 morale, other tech groups don't have this.

The game HAS to have a sense of player agency where you can take some backwater African state and then turn it into a regional or even global powerhouse.

It really icks me, how the game railroads all wealth to go directly into Europe. No amount of mercantilism or westernization, can save you, when the 120 strong light ship fleet of Portugal, Spain or England comes along to seize the wealth in your backwater Asian trade node.

>>2892
The West took off at the end of the game, the 1700s onwards. The game gives marginal bonuses to the Western tech group that add up over the previous 300 years to do just that.

>>2901
>the 1700s onwards
Not really, it started around the 1500s actually, with the Spanish and Portugese golden age of colonialism. Unfortunately, Paracocks made native countries and especially the mesoamerican countries more and more overpowered as the updates and DLC went on..

>>2906
Sure, it started in the 1500s but Europe's technological breakthrough was later. It was related to the colonial conquests (the creation of a world-economy) but it wasn't coterminous with them. Simple conquest alone doesn't guarantee a technological leap. If it did the Mongol or Frankish empires should have sparked the industrial revolution.

>>2906
>mesoamerican countries
>overpowered because it's POSSIBLE that they might survive

This is a game, and it is boring to play Europe every single time. Having a chance as other cultures to create an ahistorical outcome is pretty much the only reason to play this game once you've dominated the world as a European power.

okay, guys - OP here. About the reasons - okay, we can argue. But can someone please help me with a mobilisation decision that would be available to western countries starting 1700? I know how to mod things, I just want ideas how how to de-mobilize properly. (I promise, I will share the minimod. Maybe will add some other historically accurate things. Independent Muscovy in 1444? The tatar yoke lasted until 1480, you bastards, where is my Urga river?)

>>2881
Which update was it and can I see the thread?

>>2910
Maybe raise the force limit and reduce army maintenance while mobilisation is active, to go along with your free troops. When you demobilise, it goes back to normal, getting you in debt if you don't disband the mobilised units.

>>2910
Just get good

>>2909
It should be very rare for natives to survive. It should only happen if they absolutely blob out of control before Europeans arrive. A player should only be able to survive if they are very lucky or very good.

>>2916
This, the natives were in no position to fight back against the Europeans, the way they are portrayed in EU4 right now is dreadfully inaccurate. The smallpox epidemic, one of the most important factors that led to the natives' demise, is not represented at all.

Stringent historical accuracy doesn't always make a game more enjoyable. Yeah, its weird that the Indian nations don't just get annihilated the moment the Europeans arrive in the Americas but its arguably less fun that way. If you wanted to to play as the Aztecs for example, it wouldn't be very engaging if every game ended prematurely with you getting fucked from every angle, much like what happened to the Aztecs in real life.

Epidemics aren't well-represented, that much is true. But if the American nations were as irreversibly boned in the game as they were in real life it wouldn't be fun to play as them. Giving them a slight upgrade adds more variety to the game and makes them more interesting to play as.

Also, when is EU4 ever that concerned about historical accuracy beyond what the start dates are like?