Europa Universalis IV

[stfoskey12]

So I'm playing a game as France, and England, Burgundy, and Provence all have an alliance against me. Brittany is my vassal but they're only one territory. I got Scotland through a royal marriage without trying. I have a couple colonies in West Africa but that's all I have overseas. Spain seems almost as powerful as it actually was in the 1500s. I could maybe try expanding into Italy but there are so many alliances I think it would be a challenge. Anyway I'm fairly new to the game so I'm wondering what you recommend. I have the second largest army but I can't fight off large alliances effectively. What do you recommend I do?

 

[jackelgull]

So I'm playing a game as France, and England, Burgundy, and Provence all have an alliance against me. Brittany is my vassal but they're only one territory. I got Scotland through a royal marriage without trying. I have a couple colonies in West Africa but that's all I have overseas. Spain seems almost as powerful as it actually was in the 1500s. I could maybe try expanding into Italy but there are so many alliances I think it would be a challenge. Anyway I'm fairly new to the game so I'm wondering what you recommend. I have the second largest army but I can't fight off large alliances effectively. What do you recommend I do?

You ever heard the six degrees of separation theory, the idea that all people in the world are connected to each other through six people? Well, apply that idea to alliances.

Let me explain. Say England is allied to Burgundy and Provence, and they're too strong to face on your own. Well, who are England's allies allied too? If you're lucky, you'll find that Provence is allied to some HRE minor who only has Provence as their ally. Attack that minor. It will drag Provence into the fight. Move on Provence like a (insert word of your choice) and get enough war score to force it to break it's alliance with England. It doesn't matter what you do with the minor after it served its purpose. Also, don't get nervous if you don't have a casus belli, war without a cb is 2 stab + 2 we. That's roughly 200 adm and 75 dip. Expensive yes, but not as expensive as that big war you avoided. And don't worry. You're probably not gonna have to no cb often

 

[stfoskey12]

You ever heard the six degrees of separation theory, the idea that all people in the world are connected to each other through six people? Well, apply that idea to alliances.

Let me explain. Say England is allied to Burgundy and Provence, and they're too strong to face on your own. Well, who are England's allies allied too? If you're lucky, you'll find that Provence is allied to some HRE minor who only has Provence as their ally. Attack that minor. It will drag Provence into the fight. Move on Provence like a (insert word of your choice) and get enough war score to force it to break it's alliance with England. It doesn't matter what you do with the minor after it served its purpose. Also, don't get nervous if you don't have a casus belli, war without a cb is 2 stab + 2 we. That's roughly 200 adm and 75 dip. Expensive yes, but not as expensive as that big war you avoided. And don't worry. You're probably not gonna have to no cb often

I could maybe fight Tuscany, Austria, and Provence but I'd have to count on Austria having trouble crossing Switzerland, which I'm not sure I can do. I'd obviously need to boost my stability first, and would probably fabricate a few more claims. Do you think I could take on Austria/Tuscany/Provence? I played a little more tonight without declaring war. Burgundy is a junior partner of England, so a war with Burgundy automatically leads to war with England.
Here are some screenshots:

 

[cardgame]

France is stronk, you can steamroll Provence and then focus all your military on Austria (who will probably have no trouble moving through HRE provinces to reach you). Tuscany can be almost disregarded.

 

[jackelgull]

France is stronk, you can steamroll Provence and then focus all your military on Austria (who will probably have no trouble moving through HRE provinces to reach you). Tuscany can be almost disregarded.

More or less, although without lots of artillery it'll take some time to siege down Provence, and if that gives Austria time to join up with its ally, that'll mean bad things. Especially given the recent changes that forts always give the owner a defensive bonus.

 

[stfoskey12]

I got Anjou but that was all I could get with my war score against Provence. My total war score was negative most of the time because my allies were losing. I managed to get a white peace from Austria and Tuscany after getting Anjou, waiting a long time, and winning a couple battles. Unfortunately, the war made me broke, so I'm now ~900 ducats in debt and making only 3.8 ducats/month, and that's with all my forts mothballed and my army maintenance as low as possible. Also, I got excommunicated, so my diplomatic options aren't the best.

 

[stfoskey12]

I started another game as the Ottomans. I'm doing alright, but not well economically or technologically. Any ideas? I think I relied too heavily on harsh treatment to handle rebels early on, which slowed me down.

 

[JohannaK]

Yes, you are doing alright but nowhere near as good as a player or just the AI can do with the Ottomans. This late, I dont know what you could do. Save up as much money as possible, save up on monarch points to buy the tech...

 

[Arakhor]

I do wonder what you've been doing for 200 years. No one expects you to pull an Arumba or DDRJake at any time, let alone when not very good, but you seem to have grabbed, what, just 20 provinces in over two centuries?

 

[stfoskey12]

Yes, you are doing alright but nowhere near as good as a player or just the AI can do with the Ottomans. This late, I dont know what you could do. Save up as much money as possible, save up on monarch points to buy the tech...

What should I have done? I know I should have vassalized Crimea when it was a bit bigger, and maybe been more aggressive, but I'm not sure what else.

I do wonder what you've been doing for 200 years. No one expects you to pull an Arumba or DDRJake at any time, let alone when not very good, but you seem to have grabbed, what, just 20 provinces in over two centuries?

I got around 30-40 provinces I think. But every war in the past hundred years would send me well into debt, which would take 5-10 years to pay. And I allied with Alodia against the Mamluks, and they kept dragging me into wars. Also, I was scared to attack the Mamluks for a while, because their force limit was about as big as mine, and I figured a war with them wouldn't get me anywhere.

I'm really not sure how to handle economics; I started another game as England and had seven loans by 1470. Granted, I was busy taking parts of Ireland and getting into an Aragon v. Castille war in Spain, but still. I do try to cut military funding during peacetime and mothball my forts, but I can't do that as much when I have unrest and have to fight off rebels.

 

[jackelgull]

What should I have done? I know I should have vassalized Crimea when it was a bit bigger, and maybe been more aggressive, but I'm not sure what else.



I got around 30-40 provinces I think. But every war in the past hundred years would send me well into debt, which would take 5-10 years to pay. And I allied with Alodia against the Mamluks, and they kept dragging me into wars. Also, I was scared to attack the Mamluks for a while, because their force limit was about as big as mine, and I figured a war with them wouldn't get me anywhere.

OK dude, this is where you got the first part wrong.
A) You should not be scared of the Mamluks - they should be scared of you. As soon as you get your cores you should be preparing to bend the Mamluks over a table.
B) No longstanding alliances against the Mamluks. There's literally 0 need after the first war. So ally Tunis and/or Alodia, promise them land in the first war, then break your promise and the alliances. Alliances are not obligations, they are mechanisms to serve your own interest.

I can't comment on your money problems except to say loans are only bad if you go bankrupt.

 

[grandad1982]

I started a game up for the first time in ages last night, only looked in briefly since mare nostrum.

I forgot about all the things you need to keep an eye on.

The two things I forgot that really screwed me were the straight between africa and gib and that if the enemy attack you while you siege their fort your the attacker! As Portugal I lost my entire 18 stack in Fez when Morocco and granada attacked me. Doh! I guess the real mistake was not waiting a couple more years to hit tech 4 and be able to call spain in to help to.

After playing a bit of Stellaris recently eu4 just feels like a game with real meaningful choices.

 

[Quintillus]

stfoskey12 - My suggestion in general would be to focus more on economic buildings; in both games you mentioned running up considerable debts while at war and having modest surpluses even when the army is at minimum funding. Perhaps taking an economic or trade idea earlier too. The sinews of war and gold and men, as they say, and spending a bit less on military early on, to develop the economy, can pay off in spades later.

Another thing that I typically do is only keep forts funded if I expect they may be involved in combat in the near future. By default the game fully funds all forts when a war starts, but as a larger nation most wars won't threaten all your forts. So I generally uncheck that option on the military tab. Then I'll fund only those forts that are near a front during that war (and perhaps a few along other boarders as insurance lest someone else attack - but not all my forts).

With rebels, it's similar. Fund forts near where you expect rebels, but don't keep your armies funded all the time. Start funding them once they reach 80-90% organization, or 6 months or less from likely rebellion. If your army morale is still poor when the rebels revolt, that's okay, wait a few months; the forts will keep any damage they cause contained. Harsh treatment should generally be a last resort when there are simply too many rebels (which is rare outside of disasters or way too high of overextension), or only used when there is excess military power to burn. I tend to use it only when I have military points with nothing to spend on, or when previous wars and revolts have bled my manpower (including troops in the field) to dangerously low levels.

In the Ottoman game, my suggestions would depend on possible alliances. I wouldn't mess with that Commonwealth, but Austria might help against Venice, and Persia's eastern neighbor could prove a valuable ally (and Persia is likely the easiest of your neighbors to defeat). Timing is also key; the one time it may have been possible to mess with the Commonwealth is right after their war with Russia started, especially if Nogai, Sweden, or perhaps even Bohemia were an ally. Now Russia has been reduced too much to be a counterweight in this war, but if they don't lose too much land perhaps you can wait for the next time the Commonwealth is at war with them (and similarly with other neighbors and their eventual wars).

 

[stfoskey12]

I was able to expand somewhat and get a decent economy in the next hundred years. But then Genoa declared war on me with their allies Venice and France. I was able to peace out with Venice and lost about five territories, and then a year later get a small sum of gold from Genoa in that peace deal. It wasn't the best war, but it could have been worse. Here's my empire during that war. I think I could have had a better game with more aggressive early expansion and better money management.

 

[JohannaK]

That is a large enough empire that you should not have yielded anything, you could have worn them out.

 

[cardgame]

But at what cost? Poland looks super stronk and might have invaded once the military exhaustion and casualties went up.

 

[Quintillus]

It's a tough one to say not knowing more than what is in that screenshot. The overall warscore is +2 and there is over 40K manpower left (and about 170K troops in the field according to the sidebar), which suggests playing a cautious defensive strategy and holding out for a white peace (particularly as defending Istanbul will give warscore over time), at least, should be feasible, even if an offensive strategy would result in too many losses. But the opposing forces may be stronger yet - especially if France has near maximum manpower - so cardgame's point about potentially overextending is a valid concern. An invasion from the Commonwealth could transform that nuisance war to a crisis. I probably would have tried to peace out with Genoa and end the whole thing, though, rather than Venice alone. Though perhaps Genoa would have demanded far more.

Perhaps the most concerning is the lack of allies. In a defensive war, there should be more than one ally, preferably including at least one decently strong one. Spain would be ideal, Great Britain pretty good, and the Netherlands and Denmark would be nice. But in the end, even one of them would have decreased the chances of Genoa starting a war, and also would decrease the chances of overextension and the Commonwealth invading even if Genoa had still started this war.

 

[stfoskey12]

So I started a new game as Austria, and I'm not quite sure where I should go from here. I feel like I've had a relatively successful early game, taking out most of Venice and a good part of Southeast Europe, but I'm not sure what I should do now. My imperial authority seems to be shrinking, and I lost recent alliances with Burgundy and Bohemia. Is it a good or bad idea to expand by conquest within the HRE? I had the shadow kingdom event trigger because I forgot about Italy.

 

[Lohrenswald]

I think its a waste to go for germany. Try rather taking stuff elsewhere while building imperial authority, so that the empire provinces gets developed without you having to spend on it

 

[stfoskey12]

No one wants to vote for me for emperor. What should I do?