/gsg/ - Grand Strategy General

it's actually the Spanish friar Enrique de la Dandelion

Enrico

I'm having fun.

Slow, crashy fun, but fun nonetheless.

Based

>free Trust mana with the Ottomans while balkanizing my rival at the same time

based

Danadlo

oops lmao

>cant take the rest of vietnam because muh red flag mana
fugg

infamy isnt mana tho eu4 baby

Wastelands in EU4 can make sense since controlling most provinces bordering it mark it was yours, preventing huge holes in your map.

In Ck2 it's pretty dumb.

I've been kiting the AI for an entire year around this mountain and he just keep going in circles while his 35 stack is melted down to 21 due to attrition

just do it pussy. it's easy to win containment wars.

result: 16.8k

How would Victoria III look like if paradox makes it in the next three years? Better or worse?

Is this a rhetorical question?

It will look much better and hopefully play much better after the first 20 years. Vic2 a shit

Stop asking this fucking question

ching chong nip nong

epic

Everyone knows V2 is objectively shit after 20 - 30 years.

>tfw no director's cut like Vicky III

The only thing I would add is shit like a minigame for underground movements. This would make having big empires and blobbing more difficult.
>le 20 years meme

I agree with this. We need to make gsg more railroaded and more like wikipedia

>le 20 years meme
Not an argument.

Alliance with the Ottomans in EU4 101:

>wait for Sultanate of Rum CB war
>suicide your army into the enemy stack several times so the Ottomans are unable to get high warscore
>let the Ottomans invade the desert region, subtracting an entire 150k of their manpower from attrition
>your other enemy also loses about 50k manpower from sieging and attrition
>keep suiciding your army to bring the score to about 0
>they sign a pyrrhic white peace with both of them being damaged greatly while the Ottomans haven't expanded even one province further
>receive upwards of 30 Trust mana with the Ottomans because you lost a lot this war, allowing you to call them in for free in the next 3 wars

>I want to blob as Russia and conquer Germany
Nigga pls. Underground movements could be cool. I know that the "Increase tension" somewhat represents that, but why can't you finance rebels like in EUIII?

>why can't you finance rebels like in EUIII?
Because it opens the door to things happening that did not happen in history and that is shit gameplay.

what the fuck, are you trying to trick me again?

>Because it opens the door to things happening that did not happen in history and that is shit gameplay.
>EU4

result:

>turkish manpower: 0
>mamluk manpower: 0
>provinces taken: 0 because 20% warscore for full occupation

>implying I play such an ahistoric game

what games could you possibly be playing if you're that concerned with historical accuracy?
other than HPM of course

>180k

madmen

>implying you aren't one of those retards who was amused at the idea of having all France cored by forming the Angevin Empire in EUIII D&T

Vicky 2.

What the fuck are you on about? Go back to your Dutch Stockholm fag

>rgo output techs
>railroads
>up to 20% input/output industrial tech bonuses
>shit countries getting their education up

this is where you are wrong. i guess it becomes shit for eu4babs because you actually need to develop your land instead of blobbing.

Sure thing young lad from the Prussia meme.

does losing soldiers in mayo and texas reduce your pops? for example would losing 20 full brigades cause you to lose 2 pops? if not you are cheating.

>Vicky 2
>historical
off yourself

Sure thing Tidore Canada

seems kinda gamey and i can see why paradox makes it so AI doesnt get attrition in vanilla

>he sent his entire army (which is now equal to mine in size) in the middle of the desert
based

>for example would losing 20 full brigades cause you to lose 2 pops?
I think that they intend to do such a thing in the future but there's no such mechanic yet. And I'm losing mercs by the way, which I afford to reinforce by leeching my Burgher estate

nice argument

Kys fagget. Return to your March of the Eagles game.

h8 eu4

`

not an argument

Why did you guys create a /gsg/ board on 32ch...

Any game where you can blob outside historical borders is pathetic and you should feel bad for insulting history. Ever saw Greece colonising India? Italy colonising Scoltand? Worthless.

Honestly it should only make sense if you are playing EUIV (or EUIII) since shit like nationalism was still a concept and historical shit like routes to the sea and financing of explorers was starting.

No blobbing. In any game. It never happened.

>Ever saw Greece colonising India?
Didn't alexander do that

>seems kinda gamey and i can see why paradox makes it so AI doesnt get attrition in vanilla
Even after considering this mechanic and that they're fully occupied, Mamluks are up 8.5k manpower while the Ottomans are hiring free Mercs. Once peace is signed they both will have maxed manpower in about a decade or two because the AI has insane hidden bonuses to compensate for attrition. It's not that "gamey" because there's no much use in it but slowing down the Ottomans a little while making sure that the Mamluks will have a civil war so you conquer them easier next war

>not thinking Vicky 2 is historical makes you think eu4 is historical
That's great logic there

Italy had a go at Scotland too. It's a good bit of bait that the anti-blobbing autists fall for every time.

>Italy had a go at Scotland too
Really? When and how?

Austria blobbed pretty hard into Slavland. So did Russian in Central Asia. That's why the missions, decisions and events represent this and makes you expand into these regions.

That's why there should be some sort of even harsher penalty if you are blobbing outside of your "Greater X" territory. However, that would mean a whole new level of abstraction and shit like trade networks and diplomatic agreements represented just by a rebellion modifier.

Blobbing never happened.

thanks for those (You)'s, I appreciate it.

Sure thing eu4

in my opinion they should just make a game were you can't blob ahistorically not because of railroading, but because of the historical consequences it would have.

why didn't greece colonize johore at 1840? because the mainland was unstable and poor, they had no ships that could safely travel all around africa and asia, they had no officials who knew how to manage a colony, they had no political support to send thousands of soldiers across the world for a campaign that could fail, they couldn't spare the soldiers as they were needed for a potential war with the ottomans and they would be intercepted by the great powers who wouldn't accept a shithole getting those gold mines.

if those things can be well modeled, then there shouldn't be artificial limitations on what to do, as everything is a relatively accurate depiction of reality.

can we PLEASE KICK EU4 OUT OF THIS GENERAL AND MAKE IT FOR VICTORIA 2 ONLY and hoi3

Yes! If you blob outside your cultural borders the entire world forms a coalition against you. This would be perfect.

What would a GroßSaxonium look like, lads?

germany

That's a blobby Saxony tbf

That would make EUIV into a simulation game. Way too much autism for the paradox audience.

When will the "All australians are descended from ex-convicts" meme will stop?

Also, if you watch old videos where there are abbos they actually look human. They look like indians mixed with west africans.

lmao another German that thinks he can get away with killing other white men while Turks take everything from under him

it's historically accurate since the proddies had an alliance with the turks

All of pooland at least

I know the meme is false. Some Australians are descended from the prison guards as well.

>5
I don't understand how other nation have it up so much higher than me. I don't have the population to fit all of my factories but my population is bigger in my non-colonial states than other nations. For exmaple, why does to US have so much industrial power but has half my population?

Enjoy giving your children to Mehmet in that world, Hans

Does Tuscany form Italy often?

So now the occupied provinces are getting re-occupied by rebels, which is great, but it also seems that the game gave the Ottomans cores in Syria and they just got the provinces through the War Dynamism mechanic anyway, which is bad and shouldn't have happened because now I can't annex them.

Rebels took the capital and the warscore dropped to -22%, but the Ottomans keep getting provinces due to War Dynamism for some fucking reason. Probably a bug

Europe
Presented by: Feudalism

There we go

>300k

Encourage craftsmen mate.

>tfw no mommy crushing my balls while I play the gsg

*blobs*

also, won't increasing party loyalty to a faction that's in power make people less militant?

The fuck?

It's only the way they vote, it doesn't encourage how they actually think.

It's literally useless in absolute monarchies or dictatorships. You can look it up and find some reddit posts about it too if you don't believe me.

It doesn't make them like the ideology, it makes them like the party. Which is useless as a dictatorship, its only use is when you're a government with elections.

he wasn't a faggot so he went straight for the hard stuff

is events to only way to change how they think? also what does party loyalty do (the one that's done through decisions)?

cuck

>Lombardy declared war on Wallachia
>teutonic order and golden horde signed a pact of non aggression
BELIEVABLE

At the dawn of the year 1349, the mighty kingdom of Bdin looks for new possible trade partners since the once mighty empires of the past have collectivly crumbled to dust. Small but effective ruled duchies emerged victorius over the power struggle and became serious regional powers.

Bdin recently payed tribute to the greedy swizz so both powers can prosper fom trade.

>lets check how Baghd-