Europa Universalis III

[Roberto]

I got the game a couple months ago. I personally love it, though it takes a lot of patience and time. I haven't even completely finished a game yet. So what do the board's other EUIII owners think?

[Dutchie]

I too have been playing it for a few months, and find it tries my patience... things just take so damn long... I too have yet to finish a game - in fact I haven't reached 1600 yet because I keep restarting as another country (though I usually play Burgundy).

I found the colour choices annoying for the various countries - too many shades of red/burgundy/purple next to each other in Europe. I found a way to change the colours on an EUIII forum, which has helped some with the look.

[Ofaloaf]

Is there a limit to how many allies a player can have in a game? I'm playing a game as Austria right now, with my goal being to vassalize and ally the world. However, I can't seem to ally with my new 100+ relation vassal the Mamluks. Any advice? Pic attatched to inflate my ego.

[Roberto]

Originally Posted by Ofaloaf

Is there a limit to how many allies a player can have in a game? I'm playing a game as Austria right now, with my goal being to vassalize and ally the world. However, I can't seem to ally with my new 100+ relation vassal the Mamluks. Any advice? Pic attatched to inflate my ego.

I think my jaw just unhinged.

[Ofaloaf]

Originally Posted by AHF

I think my jaw just unhinged.

France, Aragon, The Ottoman Empire, and the Mamluks all bow down to me in that game.

and Saxony, Bradenburg, Burgundy, Flanders, Bulgaria, Muscovy, Novgorod, Hedjaz, Oman, and practically everybody in Europe except for Portugal, England, Sweden, and Castille.

[aktarian]

Originally Posted by Ofaloaf

Is there a limit to how many allies a player can have in a game? I'm playing a game as Austria right now, with my goal being to vassalize and ally the world. However, I can't seem to ally with my new 100+ relation vassal the Mamluks. Any advice? Pic attatched to inflate my ego.

why ally and vassalise when you can annex?

[Ofaloaf]

Originally Posted by aktarian

why ally and vassalise when you can annex?

Less badboy points, for one thing. I also don't have to pay upkeep for my allies' armies, and they'll usually go whereever the fighting is, so it's cheaper for me. I don't have to worry about rebellion as much, too, because having less actual territory for myself means that stability research goes faster and my vassal governments generally only have to deal with one ethnicity in their territories, keeping rebellion amongst my allies also low. No worries with religion, either. There's no need to spend thousands to convert the Middle East to Christianity now.

[aktarian]

Originally Posted by Ofaloaf

Less badboy points, for one thing.

I like being bad boy of the 'hood. Gives you opportunity to go to war and expand without suffering stability penalty (specially if you play european coutnry expanding into Europe)

Originally Posted by Ofaloaf

I also don't have to pay upkeep for my allies' armies, and they'll usually go whereever the fighting is, so it's cheaper for me.

You can't control them and if they take a territory it's theirs, not yours

Originally Posted by Ofaloaf

I don't have to worry about rebellion as much, too, because having less actual territory for myself means that stability research goes faster and my vassal governments generally only have to deal with one ethnicity in their territories, keeping rebellion amongst my allies also low. No worries with religion, either. There's no need to spend thousands to convert the Middle East to Christianity now.

but you get less money from that, attrition is higher in their territory (this is specially important when you have big (20+) armies (which I do).

If I have several religions I move tolerance to maximum then eradicate them one by one, starting with smallest. Playing both austria and Rusia I had a lot of muslims so I left them alone and focused on converting pagans and other christians.

[DAv]

Took me ages to figure out how to declare War while getting a casus beli but now I do! Although I was unable to annex the capital of an Indian State for some reason despite occupying their entire country.

[Ofaloaf]

Originally Posted by aktarian

I like being bad boy of the 'hood. Gives you opportunity to go to war and expand without suffering stability penalty (specially if you play european coutnry expanding into Europe)

I'm really not that aggressive- I only attack when I'm pretty confident I can beat the enemy.

You can't control them and if they take a territory it's theirs, not yours

You still get a small percentage of the taxes they take, which is enough. Also, I generally see these things as chances to take territory away from the enemy, not to gain more territory for myself.

but you get less money from that, attrition is higher in their territory (this is specially important when you have big (20+) armies (which I do).

If I have several religions I move tolerance to maximum then eradicate them one by one, starting with smallest. Playing both austria and Rusia I had a lot of muslims so I left them alone and focused on converting pagans and other christians.

It's still decent money, and generally having military access is enough for me. Attrition isn't so much of an issue at this point, either. When I attacked the Ottomans, there was usually only a one-or-two vassal-province buffer between us, which didn't cause too much damage. The few wars I had with the Mamluks all started off with naval landings, so there was no issue of land attrition there. I had one large army march through three or four provinces in France before I reached the Aragonese border, and most of the provinces I occupied to force their vassalization were Italian provinces that shared a border with Austria proper.

Outright annexation is too much work for me. With vassalization, I still get more money from my conquests, as well as a huge buffer between me and any remaining enemies, and stability throughout most of Europe.

[aktarian]

Originally Posted by DAv

Took me ages to figure out how to declare War while getting a casus beli but now I do! Although I was unable to annex the capital of an Indian State for some reason despite occupying their entire country.

Deus Vult is great idea. Very practical if you play Russia or Ottomans, less so if you playAustria. But you get to beat up ottomans and once protestantism starts you get a free ticket

and you can't demand their capital in negotiations (except if you annex them). Also you can't annex big countries.

Originally Posted by Ofaloaf

I'm really not that aggressive- I only attack when I'm pretty confident I can beat the enemy.

I attack when I have casus belli and have moved enough forces on the border

Originally Posted by Ofaloaf

You still get a small percentage of the taxes they take, which is enough. Also, I generally see these things as chances to take territory away from the enemy, not to gain more territory for myself.

Not for me, I prefer to have territory for myself rather then see my allies getting fat off my sacrifice. Except when I'm fighting far away country that has land border with my ally. If they captured some territory they can keep it (I'll demand it during negotiation). e.g. I'm playing Austria, was allied to Livonian order and fought Lithuania. Livonians took Memel while I took Ostpreussen. I demanded both provinces.

Originally Posted by Ofaloaf

It's still decent money, and generally having military access is enough for me. Attrition isn't so much of an issue at this point, either. When I attacked the Ottomans, there was usually only a one-or-two vassal-province buffer between us, which didn't cause too much damage. The few wars I had with the Mamluks all started off with naval landings, so there was no issue of land attrition there. I had one large army march through three or four provinces in France before I reached the Aragonese border, and most of the provinces I occupied to force their vassalization were Italian provinces that shared a border with Austria proper.

Why settle with decent money and access when you can get all of money and full movement?

Originally Posted by Ofaloaf

Outright annexation is too much work for me. With vassalization, I still get more money from my conquests, as well as a huge buffer between me and any remaining enemies, and stability throughout most of Europe.

I'm only demanding vassalisation when I kiked their asses but can't annex them. then I demand all of their provinces except capital, vassalisation and as much money as I can. Or if they are HRE electors.

[DAv]

Deus Vult is great idea. Very practical if you play Russia or Ottomans, less so if you playAustria. But you get to beat up ottomans and once protestantism starts you get a free ticket

and you can't demand their capital in negotiations (except if you annex them). Also you can't annex big countries.

I actually just fake a land claim and then attack. And the state wasn't big, it was Mysore in India.

[wilcoxchar]

And the state wasn't big, it was Mysore in India.

In all the games in the Europa Universalis series (not counting CK, etc.) you can't annex countries that own more than one province.

[aktarian]

Originally Posted by wilcoxchar

In all the games in the Europa Universalis series (not counting CK, etc.) you can't annex countries that own more than one province.

not true. you can annex them if they are small. I think 4 provinces is the limit.

[wilcoxchar]

not true. you can annex them if they are small. I think 4 provinces is the limit.

Actually, it is true. I've been playing Paradox games since EU2, and I know for a fact that you can't annex countries in EU2 or EU3 if they own more than one prov. I know in Victoria that the limit was changed to uncivs or 3 provinces or smaller, but definitely not in EU3.

[Dutchie]

Agreed - I have yet to see the option to annex be allowed if the losing country is more than one territory. I usually vassallize 2+ countires and annex the little countries.

[rcduggan]

the problem with the game is (among other things, endlessly complained about on ParadoxPlaza, ) that Paradox decided to integrate the AI into the game instead of making it in editable text files. now, this just might be me being spoiled from their extreme mod-ability from previous games, but not being able to edit the AI really takes a lot away. the tendencey for blobification was really annoying, and Paradox has done little to patch it. that said, it is a very fun game, and has awesome replay value. (still not old after a year of playing it)

[Alikchi]

I love this game - I have yet to finish a playthrough. I love setting semi-impossible goals, like ressurecting the Byzantines or reconquering Russia as the Golden Horde (my current task). For those of you that aren't aware, the Magna Mundi mod is AMAZING and makes the game much better, although as rcduggan mentioned, the ai files are untouchable.

[DAv]

Originally Posted by wilcoxchar

In all the games in the Europa Universalis series (not counting CK, etc.) you can't annex countries that own more than one province.

But I annexed both some Native American Nations and they were even bigger or roughly the same size.

[Alikchi]

A thought - would anyone like to exchange savegames? I'd like to see what some of you have done.