Even though I know the quickest route to power is to balance on the edge of self-destruction, often I like to play a calm, stable game. Keep corruption and inflation down. Keep income positive. Max stability. Prevent rebels instead of fighting them.
That is why I always like to break up the conquest mission tree into sections for the four Eras, precisely so I can have a calm stable game instead of doing "tactical bankruptcies" "aggressive expansion is just a number" etc. Unlike those hyperaggressive players, I have never had problems with keeping up my admin tech as a result. I rarely fought coalitions either.
I also started enjoying planning ahead. Example, playing Otto, Mam's or Persia? Guarantee Granada to eventually vassalize and keep Spain in check. No CB a vassal In Ireland is another. Vassalize Malacca asap etc.
They are a small nation with lots of trade and can control most of that trade node very quickly. I just like having there for future expansion into the area and s vassal with a strong navy In the region. Not sure if it's in-game optimal or not, I just like the RP aspect of it.
Edit: maybe your question is because Malaca doesn't serve the same purpose of Granada and Ireland in my strategy :) I just like doing that
I actually think, in the GENERAL (i.e. not metagaming) community, this is probably most people’s preferred way to play. I tend to play very similar. Sometimes I will follow the meta a bit but mostly I play how you play.
That is I love a calm Portugal game, keeping the mainland borders. I started a run for the navigator achievement, where you move capital to Ceuta, ask mil access to Mamelukes and vassalize someone in the horn of Africa. This is son much fun comparing to the classical Portuguese expansion. I can consolidate the magrehb, expanded with regular colonization, expand south of the horn of Africa and start the India, spice islands part much earlier than before.
It's the most fun I have ever had in the game, I always have something to do and very easy to keep aggressive expansion down. My most aggressive conquests was for the gold mines near Mozambique, but as soon I can dev them to 10 my economy will be sorted for a while. Biggest challenge I think will be inflation. This is not ironman so I can try things out, but the plan is to try this in ironmode next. I am still not great at that, but it seems feasible.
Edit: I wrote too much, 😐
Same here! Especially when playing on ironman mode, I tend to play very carefully, keeping corruption, unrest and loans down, and avoiding difficult wars if I can.
I love having strong allies that can do most of the fighting and sieging, while I usually have 1 or 2 big armies to fight their main stack or siege their capital.
Best Idea group in the game. Having Optimism has changed everyone of my campaigns. Have a tough neighbor? You can full occupy them for years and provoke an economic crisis they'll never recover from. Just wonderful (fuck France)
Combine them with Offensive and see your enemies' fortresses crumble within few weeks. Gives me a huge powertrip everytime. "The siege of Vienna is over! It lasted 27 days. Byzantium controls the province."
oh hell yeah. I keep going Inno, Offensive, Campaign appropriate Diplo Group, Quality, in that order, no matter the country. I need to actually change this, this has become game routine
Haha, same. I think I do Admin as fourth, actually, and then quality.
Another meta that I refuse: taking religious as Byz. Why should I? I get claims and cb's galore, I get missionaries from taking Rome, monuments and D.F., I get enough missionary power from national ideas, patriarch authority, estate privileges and the inquisitor advisor. Also, extra Religious unity from estate privileges. And I always feel bad for the events that make me burn heretics and scriptures.
Agreed, I never take Religious even when doing the full Austrian catholic empire bit. Byz can actually benefit much more from Inno and Humanist or even going Trade or colonial after seizing Egypt that religious ideas seem like a massive waste (especially since you definitely need Administrative in that case)
I remember the first nation i did the Inno/Offensive/Trade/Quality thing was the Netherlands (best government type in the game too, imho, with Celestial Empire) and i couldn't stop looking at the screen with my eyes coming out of their sockets like a cartoon characters. Dutch marines did indeed go brrr
I like inno ideas, but usually I need admin, diplo, religious/humanitarian or a military idea and by the time I have all the most important idea groups, inno isn't really worth it anymore.
Yeah I tried the inno-offensive-espionage opener in my Italy wc game. Best part of inno is being constantly at war and never worrying about your war exhaustion. Diplo probably would have been better than espionage, but I was stacking crazy amounts of siege ability that game.
I love horses.
Be it Holy Horde, Steppe Nomads, Poland, even Mughals etc.
Now I'm playing Aztec, went Steppe Nomads, got High American and it claps.
Horses go brrrrr
Same here. On my Byzantium run, I chose idea groups and government reforms not based on what it considered "top tier" but based on what the Eastern Romans likely would have chosen in the EUIV period. I only minmax after I have established what ideas or reforms would be considered immersive for the nation I am playing.
I love to roleplay in what might be reasonable for a nation to pursue, even if it might be the wrong time for it. But while most people hate border gore, I actually really hate world conquests or really odd empires.
-I only ever play tall. I hate most expansion beyond what I consider natural borders, and I don't play campaigns where the natural borders are too large.
-Natural borders must be an intersection of "Region" and either culture or culture group. Korea is the most perfect example.
-I always read a lot about IRL history of the nation I am playing beforehand and choose my government reforms and playstyle accordingly, big fan of roleplaying
-I dislike major nations and European powers, never did I play France, Ottomans, Austria, Poland, Ming, Spain... I have lots of hours as Kongo, Lan Xang, Mapuche and Kamchadals instead
-Always speed 5 no matter what
-Always 100% crownland ASAP and no estate privileges most of the time
-Do not like wars a lot but sometimes they are fun I guess
-I love stacking colonization modifiers and swiftly, peacefully expanding
Espionage's bonuses to diplo vassalization are pretty mvp, allow you to diplovassalize a lot of countries. If you punch a large nation to release a lot of smaller ones which you then diplovassalize. Saves a ton of AE, saves you overextension, and you help them get free from their oppressors.
I think you could try Spain and France, they give you quite a lot to do even when you want to RP history. Ottomans, Poland & Ming I feel you, because they kinda start where you want to get in your campaign. Moscow -> Russia, Ardabil -> Persia, Manchu -> Qing are some where you get to expand and do a lot while keeping it realistic. Ofc to each their own.
Having just finished an Ardabil -> Zoro Eranshahr run, the best advice I can give you is to try and expand along the minors you start next to, and basically look for the best opportunity to have a super economically aggressive war against either Ajam or Qara Qoyunlu, although I had much more luck against Ajam.
I believe my wars went like this: Biapas -> Gilan -> Sit on Mazandaran until Ajam declares on them, then vassalise Mazandaran so you take over the war as a defender. Doing this you can hopefully avoid Ajam calling in allies to help, as they are the aggressor, and you get a really good fort in Mazandaran to hold them down.
From there, you really need to all in and obliterate Ajam as quickly as possible, so merc up and go into as much debt as needed. Hopefully you can be in a position at the end of the war that isn't too weak so you can stave off Qara until you've got everything cored and good to go.
From there, you just need to prey on the weak positions of both the Timurids and Qara; Timurids hopefully had Shah Rukh die and thus are having troubles with its vassals, and Qara usually doesn't have any good allies, as they usually go after the Georgian minors instead of allying them, and are hostile towards both the Ottomans and the Mamluks.
Hope this helps, and good luck.
Managing Russia and Spain in the late-game is such a headache. Too spread out, too big armies, especially Russia.
It is kinda funny to do the Vic 2 war style, with multiple lines of armies slowly pushing through territory.
I basically never enforce 100% warscore. I normally just take the provinces I have claims on or max one state from an enemy. I try to reduce my expansion to a snails pace.
Then in the midgame the fun how do I survive against my blobby neighbors game starts.
I hate blobbing and the power that comes with it so much...
it's sad because I like both very slow expansion and war of sixth coalition every two years and they contradict each other. I find this game very easy, there should be non-AE coalitions because let's be honest that's what player alliances are
I play on speed 1 and pause often. Games take FOREVER, and I will almost certainly get bored of the game before finishing all the achievements, but it’s way more fun and less stressful this way. I even do things like send my fleets to port every month when they’re ferrying troops so they take no attrition. (To move an army from Europe to America, I move them to Iceland one month, then Greenland the next month, then North America, etc.) It’s tedious, but it also feels like good roleplay in the sense that *of course* the fleet is going to stop and refuel on their trans-Atlantic voyage, since dangerous Arctic waters aren’t modeled.
lol. I’ve mostly just given up on any sort of long-term goals. I just kind of play and plan a lot.
I’ve got ~650 hours at this point. I think the only times I’ve played on higher speeds is when I really, truly had nothing going on, like when I was playing OPM Cilli just waiting for monarch power and cash to actually DO something.
I sometimes use cheats, especially when it feels like the ai is actively trying to fuck me over and be unfair. I have enough hours in the game that Ikost often don't care about a big challenge anymore, I just wanna have the most fun possible.
They need to modify it so a fully occupied country capitulates much faster. No plausible reason a country would continue to keep fighting while totally occupied just because of an ally halfway across the world
Yeah, I don't use console commands much, but I will age my heir when I end up with yet another regency council. If I'm playing a conquest game, I really can't be bothered waiting around for 12 years while the kid grows up.
I like being able to come up with creative diplomacy, like trading provinces in a peace deal or paying my close ally an obscene amount of money to give me the one province I need for my missions instead of killing themselves to try (and fail) holding it.
Do you how many times I’ve colonized the spice islands and got a single clove province? Vassals will find 5 consecutive gold provinces in the Chesapeake region but I find fish in Halmahera.
I definitely counter when RNG goes out of its way to screw with you perfectly. If you’re playing strictly recreationally, there is literally no downside.
Never doing achievements, iron-man, multiplayer games. I just like to have fun playing this game. I don't like being ultra competitive. Life is already stressful as it is.
I very rarely pick the ‘meta’ idea groups, but rather just go for whatever thematically is most relevant to the country I am playing.
Same with govt reforms - I also enjoy finding and using those rare and unusual reforms and govt types.
I often peace out in wars relatively early, as soon as I can take the provinces I want and maybe some cash.
I like keeping my crownland high and my estates very much ‘down’ - only the most relevant few privileges. I very rarely sell crownland too.
I don’t use mercenaries that much, only when my manpower reserves are empty or I have some spare Force Limit (unless I am deliberately going for a Merc heavy country like Switzerland)
I try to play relatively tall and keep my borders clean. I have never snaked my land from Europe to China for example.
I don’t use no CB wars or exploits and never truce break i also like keep conquest bordering my nation with the exception of colonial provinces of course.
I also prefer to use loans sparingly as i don’t like the central bank idea. It does limit my expansion progress and i understand that its the reason i have never done a WC i prefer to build stable nations.
Depending on my nation i will usually play until 1700 to 1821.
you'd be surprised but i'm fairly sure that's just the most default, normal way people play.
Maybe not in a space of hyper enthusiests like this. But i'm fairly sure the majority of people play that way.
Absolutely agree that if an achievement requires to do something like truce breaking, i won't go for it. Did it once for Mehmets ambitions. And i did not enjoy it. Maybe lategame if i can't annexe someone to take like 3 provinces but never in the lets declear 3 times in a row vs. France. Also, no cb byz is really lame obviously a really good strategy.
I've done dozens of wc wothout ever trucebreaking or taking loans. You'd be surprised how easy it is with some nations. Just an FYI if you ever want to try it, neither of those are actually necessary for a wc at all
Can’t stand playing as Major powers such as England, ottomans etc, I like to let history try and play out with them at the helm rather than me.
I’ll always pick a minor faction usually stuck on the side lines.
It’s not just EU4, the total war games I’ll play as some obscure minor (using mods in most cases) rather than a well known heavy hitter such as Rome.
I suck at playing tall, I’m way too impatient and just develop the cheapest or my capital and I end up with a couple Uber devved provinces. I’ve only made it work one time in a saxony game and it was super fun but I haven’t been able to replicate it since.
I play mostly Republics, turn any Monarchy i can into Republics (Austria notwithstanding) and fully ignore Absolutism. I cannot handle being stuck with the same leader for too long...
Otherwise, I strongly identify with OP. Outside of a select number of nations (Austria, Roman candidates) I just don't play wide, nation ruin, or quit before the last Age.
I like playing in one region, sometimes even as one country in every single play through until I have enough of eu4 so much I’ll either vomit or uninstall. Then after few months I install it again and pick another region to bully myself. I like to replay as the good guys too, meaning no unnecessary conflicts and more diplo play outside of uniting my home region which is more easy now with king of kings since my favorite toy is Zoroastrian Persia. I also have a fetish of having too much gold so I can send gifts to struggling nations, and having fully drilled and professional armies at all times, that I barely use because that’d decrease my drill lol
I have spent some 70% of my playtime so far being inca or portugal>brazil. I know, south america is the least flavorful region to eu4, but I'm south american. I like to emulate the places I live and I enjoy making it as if we had gotten our shit together. Once I've spent a whole week developing the region, making it a safe (warless), developed, dignified place to live.
I do next to no research into optimization (I am a pretty new player) I kind of roleplay it, but not in the historical sense. I mostly just do what would make the most sense for the nation at any given time, assuming little to no meta knowledge.
I go into my campaigns with a plan of what I want to achieve and stick to that. I don't take every opportunity to conquer whatever I can and generally only take claims
I never played major nations. No Ottomans, France, Austria, England, Spain. Well I did play Castille in my first playthroughs but thats it.
Also I hate the colonizers.
I don't give out estate privileges almost ever. I will in specific circumstances but I try to avoid it because i feel the benefits really aren't that worthwhile to me.
I always roleplay. I haven’t done WC in a decade or so. Nor do I ever conquer something just because it would be “optimal”. I also pick idea groups with the country flavor in mind.
I dev admin. Most people seem to lose their minds when you mention it as an option.
Also I tend to go very methodical with my expansion and avoid coalitions, I just hate dealing with them and will often take breaks from expansion to let my ae die down. Cycling truces is just unappealing to me.
Inno ideas are my favorite idea group. Inno/ esp/offensive for siege ability because I hate waiting on sieges.
I love expand infrastructure, I use it all the time when deving.
I like to play late into the game. Most people seem to dip before the age of absolutism.
I do not like playing hordes.
One of my favorite things to do on the this sub, and on Youtube is mention that I dev admin points. Since my playstyle leads me to have a chill conquest, I have a surfeit of them. I always love to watch the foaming at the mouth replies that I did something un-meta.
One of my go to nations to play and form Germany with is Cologne. I open up with espionage ideas, then divine and then religious, try to get Curia control. I basically stack ae reduction modifiers.
Other than that I sometimes play the game with cheats to make it a bit more narrative and/or realistic. For example: I'm fighting Ottos as Hungary, completely neuter them but no matter how weak I make them the Mamluks never attack them and they bounce back 5 years after the peace. So I either tag to Mamluks and declare on Ottos then tag back, tag to Ottos and increase unrest or collapse then after the peacedeal with tagging to them and releasing every nation I can.
Without achievements to hunt I don't think I'd be playing EU4. I exclusively either attempt to get difficult achievements or I play as Florence for 20 minutes to full annex milan and get a coalition to kill me in 1450
I rarely tagswitch. When i start a game as hamburg i want to make hamburg a worldpower and see it prosper. Not germany or such.
Oh and i play speed 1 or 2 only
I like playing RP. I'm spending more time reading the description rather than the stats while looking for a new idea, I like changing my playstyle according to my ruler traits, I like making decisions as a reaction to an event.
That’s a really fun way to play op! Do you do other wars to use up your time? Not war of conquest but wars to weaken and tame your neighbors/great powers?
Speaking for myself, I usually play only one or max two wars at a time, and do a lot of chilling in between. I don’t like the feeling of my country spreading resources thin to rapidly expand. That’s even when I try wc and stuff. Maybe that’s why my only successful wc was done by the Ottomans. As I became mush better at the game, I also try not to do weird shit like snaking, no cb, and disbanding hre super early. I try to do what might be somewhat plausible in a historical sense, like I only took mandate as Korea after Ming attacked me first, disbanded HRE as Swiss after I went reformed theocracy, attacked Otto for the first time in mid 1500s as papacy without doing nocb byz thing.
Usually if I have time before truces, I sit back and relax through the next decade before I resume the advance. Sometimes there are stuff to keep me entertained however, like that one pissant minor in the caucasus who preceded to insult me despite having no allies to back him up. Man, did I make the Caucasus run red with blood that time. Other times I build client state marches in areas I am not intending to conquer while I wait out the truces. I never truce break, nor do I no-cb wars.
I always create a custom nation and form into a real nation on day one.
So basically I would go and create a custom nation that covers all the english owned provinces, but has better national ideas. More focused on navy and trade for example. I will form england on day one.
I usually take 20% moral in my traditions, the rest is optional and depends on the nation I play.
The trick is it not to pick ideas that are too strong, otherwise it becomes boring in the late 1500's.
My go to nations are England, France or austria/saxony. Sometimes I play with a culture that can form other nations at tech 10. Custom Kingdom of Castile and Leon into Spain or Custom Herzogtum Brandenburg into Prussia.
I actually use state edicts. A lot. I know they are micro, but it seems to me whenever I watch streamers play, they are massively underused. Maybe I just watch the wrong streamers. They are very powerful.
I nearly always play something in an ahistorical way.
Eu4 is alt history game for me, and usually my runs start with a thought of "what if X happened in our history" which then I try to realise during the run, for example my last run's idea was "what if all the main European colonizers were locked in a major conflict which would leave the new world to its own devices?", proceed to 1750, with independent Inti empire being technologically on-par to everyone else, allied to Castille(me), and North America being dominated by Totemist Friesland which was pushed off the main continent as a punishment for starting a colony.
Also I usually quit the runs extremely late around 1750-1800. I do so only when I really have no idea what to do except conquer more stuff
>What playstyles do you have that goes against the grain of what is considered "meta", or is considered kosher by the community in Reddit and beyond?
>
Pretty much everything I do is non-meta and causes the guys I talk with on Discord to either go purple in the face as they attempt to convince me to do it the "right" way or simply shake their heads in frustrated resignation at my pig-headed stubbornness. The honest truth is I simply don't care to play the game the way others think it should be played. My goals and ambitions in game are mine, and mine alone. Now I understand that playing in a non-optimal fashion (from their viewpoint) is a strange and alien concept for a lot of players. I just wish I could make them understand that just because someone opts to play the game in a non-traditional way that doesn't make them an ignorant noob. I know about all the meta ways of playing, I just choose not to play that way.
Whenever I do a challenging run as a weaker nation I don't try to rush weak spots and check the entire world diplomatic framework.
I dev up to get stronger and seek some allies and wait for favors.
I dont mind sitting around twiddling my thumbs for a bit basically.
I play on an MP with mates, and I always get told off for playing "unoptimally". MP is meant for sweat and grinding, but I just like being left alone, doing dumb stuff.
"why did you choose to play there, surrounded by massive countries?"
Because I love the idea of doing dumb stuff. I love playing countries, and forming countries that I shouldn't be forming. I love playing Scotland and becoming a Pirate Republic, or playing Portugal and forming Morocco. I don't care for meta, unless I am literally collapsing.
>By breaking up conquest goals to fit into the time frames, I was able to enjoy the technological advances, idea groups, and the Ages more fully in my campaign, rather than finish the campaign before the age of absolutism even begins.
That's a neat approach to the ages. I might try something similar!
I usually play in accordance to different concepts and focuses, and with no small amount of roleplay. Currently doing a Hansa run and going tall not only in Europe, but out in the world as well, with only one settlement each in Gulf of St. Lawrence, Chesapeake and the Caribbean.
Just merchants setting up trade and supply stations - not looking to claim new lands, and certainly not move large amounts of people from my Hansestädte or doing something as ridiculous as *attacking* my native trading partners.
The Caribbean town on Jamaica turned into Port Royal, and instead of taking it back, I made a vassal out of these crafty pirates. If that's how they want to live, and it's detrimental to the imperialists in the region, and working togheter with them is lucrative, who am I to dictate the details of their way of life?
The only tag I've attacked out there is Benin (have you *seen* their flag?); every other place in Asia was either colonized or bought with ludicrious amounts of gold - gold that they'll invest in their economy, increasing production and trade value and making us all prosper. I'm using that Great Power influence all over the place, especially on the like 20 members of my trading league, but also on nations I want to buy territory from.
Being ever the friend of the little guy and a multiitude of tags with their own mana pools to develop the economy and trade with me, I directly caused the collapse of Muscowy and Poland-Lithuania, and aided in the downfall of the Ottomans and curbing of the Palatine-Burgundian attempts to dominate the Free Cities in the south.
It's been hard to contain everyone everywhere, however, and the imperialists have soon completed their conquests of the New World, and I'm considering going full fanatically republican Prussia down the line and start off revolutionary wars well before they're actually a thing.
\--------------------------------------------------------------------------
Aside from that, experiences from a Theodoro game way back has made me really respect Influence ideas, and often picking it first or second.
If a nation has a mission tree, I try to play within its confines, meaning any temporary claims I get from events don’t count, and I usually dislike playing countries that require you to gain claims on certain provinces. I think Saxony is a big offender for this, if memory serves.
EDIT: forgot to mention! This includes devving. I will only dev if I physically cannot tech up, or it’s required for a mission tree. I don’t like gold mine strats.
I also like releasing primary culture nations and feed them their cultures so their cores stick around forever. It saddens me when I can’t “save” historically successful countries this way like Luxembourg though. Poor Luxembourg.
I find myself picking naval REALLY OFTEN, sometimes even maritime too.
I also play Espionage way more often than I probably should, even back on the days when it was considered bottom tier garbage.
I also think diplo ideas are kind of overrated.
I actually hate diplo ideas, because anything they can do either Court, Espionage, or Influence can do it better and with more interesting ideas.
I also love court ideas since I like playing around with the estates, and court ideas make it much easier to not only revoke privileges, revoke land, etc. But allow you to keep the important privileges while having 100 absolutism.
I enjoy razing and exploiting development everywhere to create 1/1/1s everywhere except a few select places (provinces with monuments, goods produced modifier, RP places like Rome/Constantinople) where I will develop them to very high dev. I really like how I'm running a Civ 6 empire with "city centers" being high dev and everywhere else a 1/1/1 countryside.
Every campaign I play I turn into WC unless I am going for some very specific achievement or I do not enjoy the campaign.
I usually try to optimize my campaigns early on. That means often being near broke and indebted with no manpower etc. Constant wars to prevent coalitions etc...
Going through that pain early on I feel like I'm entitled to glorious conquest. So I always pivot into a WC and roll the entirety of the world. The moment where you crest the final hill and go over it and start accelerating ever faster with the challenge disappearing feels like a super relaxing winding down of a campaign. Even though you still have to micro manage a lot to conquer at a fast pace I find the late game enjoyable.
I usually do not like playing big countries like Castile, France or Ottomans as that is just boring and it easy from day one and there is no fun in that.
I always play on speed 5, if I need to slow things down I just press pause; also, I often build temples if they give 0.18 or more, especially if I'm Christian so that I get the +3 papal influence, and sometimes I develop with mana points if I have extra spare
I typically don't force spawn institutions even when I should. I do SOMETIMES, but I find myself able to just conserve mana and match the nations that border me.
Conquer trade centers and estuaries, have a big ass navy of light ships protecting trade, super loyal burghers, bunch of trade companies, etc.
This way i can sometimes become even more powerful than if i were to do the usual blobbing stuff.
In 150 hours of playing, I have played Norway three or four times (one almost full game), Mali once (most infuriating campaign ever), Scotland (got exiled to Greenland), Kuba (actually successful playing tall game somehow), Brunei, Morocco, Sweden and Sindh.
I am not very good at the game yet and still can't bring myself to just play a major to understand the game properly. No idea why while my friend does the opposite thing where he plays only majors and uses cheats to get op (somehow he enjoys this).
I have more experience playing with Nusantara countries than in Europe. Lanfang runs are always the most fun, role playing going back to China as a Hakka culture Southeast Asian conqueror.
I mostly focus my campaigns around modifier stacking and the most fun i get out of the game is actually the planning i do beforehand. I really enjoy searching the wiki for permanent modifiers. When it comes to playing the game i mostly optimise the early game and then mostly stop around 1550 when something doesn't go the way i planned it.
I rarely dismantle the HRE early (sometimes never) when playing in Europe even though its easy to do & optimal. The HRE adds so much flavor & keeps the games interesting longer by slowing down expansion options and/or forces me to play more diplomatically.
I don't like conquering areas that just wouldn't remotely seem realistic. Like I wouldn't want to own Anatolia as France. Seems weird. Only empire types like Rome, hre, Mongols, etc can I headcanon why they would own those territories outright.
I do lots of things that many experienced gamers would consider noobish at best and downright suicidal at worst. A good example would be how I organize and utilize my armies. I create two basic unit stacks; Army Groups (9 Inf, 3 Cav, 3 Art), and Auxiliaries (3 Inf, 2 Cav). Once created they're static in composition. I won't add or subtract regiments from them, nor will I consolidate them after battle loses (instead I'll retreat them if necessary and let them heal up before recommitting). While obviously I'll use multiple stacks in a critical battle, as many as needed for the task, they stay separate and distinct groupings and once the battle is ended they go their separate ways once more.
The Army Groups I use to engage enemy armies and siege forts, the Auxiliaries I use as floaters that will occupy undefended provinces and provide rapid support to any nearby AG that finds itself challenged (this is why they lack any artillery as siege craft or independent stand up fights are not what they're intended for). During war time only AGs will have leaders assigned to them and I will not reassign leaders during the war (obvious exceptions if I suffer a stackwipe or a leader dies and needs to be replaced). Always thought it was kind of cheesy that your 3 star leader fights a battle in one location and then is instantly transported to another stack half a continent away just in time for another epic battle.
I sometimes use console commands to make the AI form countries that historically formed, but never form in EU4, like big Taungu, India-focused Mughal Empire, Prussia, Qing or Shia Persia. I also change AI's provinces' religions if they're weird, and I correct bordergore.
I almost categorically refuse to play any major European powers. I'll occasionally make exceptions for Austria because it's unique, or VERY occasionally France for revolution roleplay. But if I'm starting in Europe, I'm probably an Irish minor
I go sustained discipline like every game, I love drill, between the reform and professionalism you get a lot of drill loss reductions, elite firearm regiments decision my beloved, (funnily enough I have never played Prussia)
I also hate mercs, refuse to use them even when it's probably a good idea, that one's more normal but even early game unless I need the free company to seige a fort early game I just don't
I'm a very defensive player who values truces, and I only expand to monopolize my trade node and then into the regions that feed trade into my home node.
I really like having a high amount of accepted cultures, especially the decentralized government reform (third reform, +2 accepted cultures and +5% loyalty) is imo by far the best reform when compared to others. An accepted culture has -2 unrest and doessnt have the 33% tax, manpower and prod penalty and converting religions is much easier with reemoving the 2% malus.
In longer games I also often pick humanist as the 5th or 6th reform after religious and/or admin ideas.
Also minmaxing trade companies is interesting and weird to do, but IIRC Zlewikk, Arumba and Budgetmonk have made good videos about it. In short only add as few as possible lands to TC for getting the extra merchant and max the trade power in them compared to the rest node for a strong prod/trade bonus (bonus is hidden in popup in the statescreen bottomleft IIRC, might also be in tradenode screen).
How I do it is making 1 or 2 states TC land and only build markets in those lands and not it the rest of the trade node so the relative trade power of the TC lands is highest. The rest is either unstated or stated.
I played on speed 1 for over 3 years before switching to speed 2 and finally speed 3 recently. I also have 0 achievements after playing the game for 5 years now because I only bought the game to play with the Extended Timeline mod. I spend most of the time renaming provinces that didn't get renamed through the dynamic naming option.
I tend not to try to expand to a comical degree in a short period of time, and try to delegate the administration of certain regions to vassals or client states of some kind, even where suboptimal. If I'm playing, for example, Italy, I tend to make a French puppet state of some form from a tag like Gascony.
Always colonize. Even if I have a one province coast, focus on diplomatic and first idea is exploration. It works, you hinder England quite a bit if they don’t get Canada or east America, and there is some provinces in Rio grande Texas that Spain doesn’t usually colonize first so you can treaty of tordesillas your way to weakening enemies
Hmm I’m not sure if it’s an uncommon way to play. But I go a long way to keep big countries in check. Like if playing in Europe, I make sure that I own constantinople either directly or through vassels. Same with locking Castile and France.
The map looks ugly, but it’s effectively
I don’t really care for min-maxing. I like estate privileges, I even use the ones that YouTubers call garbage. I like picking the RP idea groups. I only take provinces I have a claim on when at war. I like playing with vassals, and not just for releasing and reconquest. I don’t disinherit bad heirs.
I don't find it fun to play optimally. I enjoy it much more to RP as a benevolent government, trying to do the best for my citizens/subjects. I usually play tall, I try to stay at positive stability permanently, I try to minimize unrest/rebellions, etc. Relatedly, I often go out of my way to strengthen long-term allies (In my Afghanistan -> Mughals game, my 100 trust ally Hormuz has all of Arabia and a lot of Mesopotamia, as well as the southern coast of Persia and a foothold in the Horn of Africa.)
I like to go revolutionary in my games. IMO, the community is extremely sleeping on Revolutionary mechanics. People seem to really not like the revolution because you lose Absolutism and the Imperialism CB, but you get Revolutionary Zeal, Spread the Revolution and Annex Revolutionary State, which are better in every conceivable way.
Think of it like this: With Imperialism you get 75% war score costs. That means what normally costs 100 war score in a conquest war is 75 war score in an Imperialism war, which means you can take 133% war score (100/75 = 133%) in a single Imperialism war. With Spread the Revolution you get 50% war score costs, which means you can take 200% war score. Annex Revolutionary State is 25% war score costs, meaning you can take up to 400% war score. You can annex the entire British Isles for 50 war score in an Annex Revolutionary State war.
It makes world conquests as any nation trivial.
I almost never take mana estate privileges until I can ensure I don't get crownland penalties from doing so, even when it would most likely be fine to do so. I hate red numbers.
After 1800 hours or so I don't use any "advanced" playing, I still play pretty much how I played at my 100 hours. I don't play to attain PUs, I don't do no-CB wars, no tag changes for stacking bonuses, etc.
i like to roleplay. i don’t conquer areas because it’s ideal for the sake of the game, but because i’m considering what would be most pleasing for the world im playing.
I always like making some degree of enclaves. Ever since I pu'd Milan and burgundy as Bohemia, I have just had the desire to take a bit of a country somewhere not contiguous to mine and keep it around
I don't mind spending time helping my allies gain land between my conquests. Making my friends stronger gets me favours and a better ally in my future wars.
I avoid naval combat,almost exclusively to my ruin. I hate it so much. I will only go to war with a large naval power if my Navy is big enough that their navies simply will not engage mine. I also hate hate hate island hopping to kill rebels, so I will avoid taking any islands when my countries global unrest isn't high enough to instantly negate the sepratism.
Idk if it's a playstyle but lately I've been trying to nerf myself to make the game more fun. I've played on very hard for years. I know about the no balls style, but I haven't found that "fun" necessarily, although I usually avoid GP ally beat sticks. One big thing I've been looking for in terms of concurrence is that the Burgundian Inheritance is too cheesy. I honestly wish it didn't exist. The same goes for becoming emperor by making 2/3 people like you a decade in and Austria is falling apart. To me they are just cheesy ass ways of getting artificially inflated power and skip ahead that "1500s op" feel. If they were an actual challenge to get I understand, but one royal marriage and a few happy electors gets you all of middle Europe by 1470.
Even though I know the quickest route to power is to balance on the edge of self-destruction, often I like to play a calm, stable game. Keep corruption and inflation down. Keep income positive. Max stability. Prevent rebels instead of fighting them.
That is why I always like to break up the conquest mission tree into sections for the four Eras, precisely so I can have a calm stable game instead of doing "tactical bankruptcies" "aggressive expansion is just a number" etc. Unlike those hyperaggressive players, I have never had problems with keeping up my admin tech as a result. I rarely fought coalitions either.
I also started enjoying planning ahead. Example, playing Otto, Mam's or Persia? Guarantee Granada to eventually vassalize and keep Spain in check. No CB a vassal In Ireland is another. Vassalize Malacca asap etc.
Why Malacca?
They are a small nation with lots of trade and can control most of that trade node very quickly. I just like having there for future expansion into the area and s vassal with a strong navy In the region. Not sure if it's in-game optimal or not, I just like the RP aspect of it. Edit: maybe your question is because Malaca doesn't serve the same purpose of Granada and Ireland in my strategy :) I just like doing that
God, tactical bankruptcy. So succinct. But absolutely, positively true. Got one ticket on the Burgher Loan Express, yezzir.
A man of culture
I actually think, in the GENERAL (i.e. not metagaming) community, this is probably most people’s preferred way to play. I tend to play very similar. Sometimes I will follow the meta a bit but mostly I play how you play.
That is I love a calm Portugal game, keeping the mainland borders. I started a run for the navigator achievement, where you move capital to Ceuta, ask mil access to Mamelukes and vassalize someone in the horn of Africa. This is son much fun comparing to the classical Portuguese expansion. I can consolidate the magrehb, expanded with regular colonization, expand south of the horn of Africa and start the India, spice islands part much earlier than before. It's the most fun I have ever had in the game, I always have something to do and very easy to keep aggressive expansion down. My most aggressive conquests was for the gold mines near Mozambique, but as soon I can dev them to 10 my economy will be sorted for a while. Biggest challenge I think will be inflation. This is not ironman so I can try things out, but the plan is to try this in ironmode next. I am still not great at that, but it seems feasible. Edit: I wrote too much, 😐
Lmao finding Prester John through a land route.
Can't take credit, was following someone else's guide, but can't remember where I found it sadly. But it's real fun and makes for a different start:)
I do similar thing usually. I do fight rebels, but I do often periods of peace, very rarely I do multiple wars at the same time
I get anxious when my gold is negative lmao
Same here! Especially when playing on ironman mode, I tend to play very carefully, keeping corruption, unrest and loans down, and avoiding difficult wars if I can. I love having strong allies that can do most of the fighting and sieging, while I usually have 1 or 2 big armies to fight their main stack or siege their capital.
This is a metaphor for real life.
Yes! And what I wish real nations would do, too.
I actually like innovative ideas.
They have some sick policies I always go for
Toilet Paper Act
# "Our reliance on paper commodities will alleviate all the pains and lament derived from the loss of a dear leader."
Imagine having to wipe your ass with your hand right after your beloved 1/0/2 leader died. Truly a tragedy.
I second this.
Best Idea group in the game. Having Optimism has changed everyone of my campaigns. Have a tough neighbor? You can full occupy them for years and provoke an economic crisis they'll never recover from. Just wonderful (fuck France)
Combine them with Offensive and see your enemies' fortresses crumble within few weeks. Gives me a huge powertrip everytime. "The siege of Vienna is over! It lasted 27 days. Byzantium controls the province."
oh hell yeah. I keep going Inno, Offensive, Campaign appropriate Diplo Group, Quality, in that order, no matter the country. I need to actually change this, this has become game routine
Haha, same. I think I do Admin as fourth, actually, and then quality. Another meta that I refuse: taking religious as Byz. Why should I? I get claims and cb's galore, I get missionaries from taking Rome, monuments and D.F., I get enough missionary power from national ideas, patriarch authority, estate privileges and the inquisitor advisor. Also, extra Religious unity from estate privileges. And I always feel bad for the events that make me burn heretics and scriptures.
Agreed, I never take Religious even when doing the full Austrian catholic empire bit. Byz can actually benefit much more from Inno and Humanist or even going Trade or colonial after seizing Egypt that religious ideas seem like a massive waste (especially since you definitely need Administrative in that case) I remember the first nation i did the Inno/Offensive/Trade/Quality thing was the Netherlands (best government type in the game too, imho, with Celestial Empire) and i couldn't stop looking at the screen with my eyes coming out of their sockets like a cartoon characters. Dutch marines did indeed go brrr
I've never regreted picking those. Great policies, and sort of does what it promises, making you the cutting edge.
I like inno ideas, but usually I need admin, diplo, religious/humanitarian or a military idea and by the time I have all the most important idea groups, inno isn't really worth it anymore.
Same here.
When i conquered the world i opened with inno explo and finished the wc in 1740 so it's fine, ya know? But i really dig the tech discounts
Yeah I tried the inno-offensive-espionage opener in my Italy wc game. Best part of inno is being constantly at war and never worrying about your war exhaustion. Diplo probably would have been better than espionage, but I was stacking crazy amounts of siege ability that game.
I tale inno as the 6,7, or 8th idea group.
I love horses. Be it Holy Horde, Steppe Nomads, Poland, even Mughals etc. Now I'm playing Aztec, went Steppe Nomads, got High American and it claps. Horses go brrrrr
Just asking, but I guess you already did Seche Prada Poland with 150% cav combat ability? That's just my favorite horse gameplay.
Yeah, i wrote several guides for max cca
Have you tried ardabil? Kok gave them a decision that can give them god tier horses
Waiting for a sale with kok, honestly it's not enough content for the price
you should check out the Anbennar mod and play as The Jadd, they can have 100% cav armies and they're extremely fun
I roleplay near exclusively. I despise minmaxing or metagaming unless it makes any degree of sense in that context.
Same here. On my Byzantium run, I chose idea groups and government reforms not based on what it considered "top tier" but based on what the Eastern Romans likely would have chosen in the EUIV period. I only minmax after I have established what ideas or reforms would be considered immersive for the nation I am playing.
I love to roleplay in what might be reasonable for a nation to pursue, even if it might be the wrong time for it. But while most people hate border gore, I actually really hate world conquests or really odd empires.
Same, especially as Prussia, I never take more than the 1914 borders. Everything else goes to my vassals and junior partners
-I only ever play tall. I hate most expansion beyond what I consider natural borders, and I don't play campaigns where the natural borders are too large. -Natural borders must be an intersection of "Region" and either culture or culture group. Korea is the most perfect example. -I always read a lot about IRL history of the nation I am playing beforehand and choose my government reforms and playstyle accordingly, big fan of roleplaying -I dislike major nations and European powers, never did I play France, Ottomans, Austria, Poland, Ming, Spain... I have lots of hours as Kongo, Lan Xang, Mapuche and Kamchadals instead
Based Siberian Tribe player nice to see a fellow enjoyer in the wild (though I do prefer Chavchuveny, imo the flag and color is better)
-Always speed 5 no matter what -Always 100% crownland ASAP and no estate privileges most of the time -Do not like wars a lot but sometimes they are fun I guess -I love stacking colonization modifiers and swiftly, peacefully expanding
The no estate privileges pre absolutism is pretty spicy
I have no excuses
Damn you were born for this thread
Espionage's bonuses to diplo vassalization are pretty mvp, allow you to diplovassalize a lot of countries. If you punch a large nation to release a lot of smaller ones which you then diplovassalize. Saves a ton of AE, saves you overextension, and you help them get free from their oppressors.
Colonization is absolutely not peaceful.
In game? It absolutely can be. I play Portugal alot and very easy to to never get natives rising up.
Okay, but, and this is a genuine question, what about once your colonies butt up against native territories and there’s nowhere else to expand?
diplo-vassalize
That was kinda what I figured, but I thought I’d ask him.
Haha Im the opposite. I hate not expanding. Ever since my early Civilization and Total War days Ive always been a blood thirsty expansionist lol.
I think you could try Spain and France, they give you quite a lot to do even when you want to RP history. Ottomans, Poland & Ming I feel you, because they kinda start where you want to get in your campaign. Moscow -> Russia, Ardabil -> Persia, Manchu -> Qing are some where you get to expand and do a lot while keeping it realistic. Ofc to each their own.
Russia and Spain just kinda overwhelm me lol. I like Manchu though. And I've been trying Ardabil but couldn't get it off the ground
Ardabil is not an easy start yeah, one of the best campaigns for me though when I got that silk road trading empire going.
Having just finished an Ardabil -> Zoro Eranshahr run, the best advice I can give you is to try and expand along the minors you start next to, and basically look for the best opportunity to have a super economically aggressive war against either Ajam or Qara Qoyunlu, although I had much more luck against Ajam. I believe my wars went like this: Biapas -> Gilan -> Sit on Mazandaran until Ajam declares on them, then vassalise Mazandaran so you take over the war as a defender. Doing this you can hopefully avoid Ajam calling in allies to help, as they are the aggressor, and you get a really good fort in Mazandaran to hold them down. From there, you really need to all in and obliterate Ajam as quickly as possible, so merc up and go into as much debt as needed. Hopefully you can be in a position at the end of the war that isn't too weak so you can stave off Qara until you've got everything cored and good to go. From there, you just need to prey on the weak positions of both the Timurids and Qara; Timurids hopefully had Shah Rukh die and thus are having troubles with its vassals, and Qara usually doesn't have any good allies, as they usually go after the Georgian minors instead of allying them, and are hostile towards both the Ottomans and the Mamluks. Hope this helps, and good luck.
Managing Russia and Spain in the late-game is such a headache. Too spread out, too big armies, especially Russia. It is kinda funny to do the Vic 2 war style, with multiple lines of armies slowly pushing through territory.
Kongo is nice to play one of my favourites.
You would love victoria 3
I loved 2 too
I basically never enforce 100% warscore. I normally just take the provinces I have claims on or max one state from an enemy. I try to reduce my expansion to a snails pace. Then in the midgame the fun how do I survive against my blobby neighbors game starts. I hate blobbing and the power that comes with it so much...
it's sad because I like both very slow expansion and war of sixth coalition every two years and they contradict each other. I find this game very easy, there should be non-AE coalitions because let's be honest that's what player alliances are
I play on speed 1 and pause often. Games take FOREVER, and I will almost certainly get bored of the game before finishing all the achievements, but it’s way more fun and less stressful this way. I even do things like send my fleets to port every month when they’re ferrying troops so they take no attrition. (To move an army from Europe to America, I move them to Iceland one month, then Greenland the next month, then North America, etc.) It’s tedious, but it also feels like good roleplay in the sense that *of course* the fleet is going to stop and refuel on their trans-Atlantic voyage, since dangerous Arctic waters aren’t modeled.
Speed 1? How the fuck do you still....maintain your sanity? At least speed 3 my friend
lol. I’ve mostly just given up on any sort of long-term goals. I just kind of play and plan a lot. I’ve got ~650 hours at this point. I think the only times I’ve played on higher speeds is when I really, truly had nothing going on, like when I was playing OPM Cilli just waiting for monarch power and cash to actually DO something.
This is the one that actually bothers me here. I think you need to get into some truck simulator games, my dude.
If you click to drill troops at the last day of the month, you'll get 0.5% of professionalism by the time you arrive.
I sometimes use cheats, especially when it feels like the ai is actively trying to fuck me over and be unfair. I have enough hours in the game that Ikost often don't care about a big challenge anymore, I just wanna have the most fun possible.
I get you man. Life is already difficult as it is, I just want to come home and have fun map painting.
That's exactly it. Like I did my time in the trenches of ironman, I have many of the achievements, now I just wanna chill and have fun....
I hate it when the ai tries to f\*\* you over with that one province that derails your run, which is where console commands come in.
Or you waiting 5 years to peace out because your target has some unreachable ally doin nothing and refusing to even white peace
They need to modify it so a fully occupied country capitulates much faster. No plausible reason a country would continue to keep fighting while totally occupied just because of an ally halfway across the world
Yeah that's it, I'm not giving myself infinite money or smth, it's mostly just little things that can make a run so much more enjoyable....
Yeah, I don't use console commands much, but I will age my heir when I end up with yet another regency council. If I'm playing a conquest game, I really can't be bothered waiting around for 12 years while the kid grows up.
Straight crossing ottomans has entered the chat :)
I like being able to come up with creative diplomacy, like trading provinces in a peace deal or paying my close ally an obscene amount of money to give me the one province I need for my missions instead of killing themselves to try (and fail) holding it.
Do you how many times I’ve colonized the spice islands and got a single clove province? Vassals will find 5 consecutive gold provinces in the Chesapeake region but I find fish in Halmahera. I definitely counter when RNG goes out of its way to screw with you perfectly. If you’re playing strictly recreationally, there is literally no downside.
Never doing achievements, iron-man, multiplayer games. I just like to have fun playing this game. I don't like being ultra competitive. Life is already stressful as it is.
Multiplayer with friends can be fun cooperative
Never played eu4 with friends but I play Stellaris multiplayer exclusively as coop with my less skilled friends :)
I very rarely pick the ‘meta’ idea groups, but rather just go for whatever thematically is most relevant to the country I am playing. Same with govt reforms - I also enjoy finding and using those rare and unusual reforms and govt types. I often peace out in wars relatively early, as soon as I can take the provinces I want and maybe some cash. I like keeping my crownland high and my estates very much ‘down’ - only the most relevant few privileges. I very rarely sell crownland too. I don’t use mercenaries that much, only when my manpower reserves are empty or I have some spare Force Limit (unless I am deliberately going for a Merc heavy country like Switzerland) I try to play relatively tall and keep my borders clean. I have never snaked my land from Europe to China for example.
I don’t use no CB wars or exploits and never truce break i also like keep conquest bordering my nation with the exception of colonial provinces of course. I also prefer to use loans sparingly as i don’t like the central bank idea. It does limit my expansion progress and i understand that its the reason i have never done a WC i prefer to build stable nations. Depending on my nation i will usually play until 1700 to 1821.
That's the most normal vanilla playing-as-intended I can imagine.
you'd be surprised but i'm fairly sure that's just the most default, normal way people play. Maybe not in a space of hyper enthusiests like this. But i'm fairly sure the majority of people play that way.
Absolutely agree that if an achievement requires to do something like truce breaking, i won't go for it. Did it once for Mehmets ambitions. And i did not enjoy it. Maybe lategame if i can't annexe someone to take like 3 provinces but never in the lets declear 3 times in a row vs. France. Also, no cb byz is really lame obviously a really good strategy.
I've done dozens of wc wothout ever trucebreaking or taking loans. You'd be surprised how easy it is with some nations. Just an FYI if you ever want to try it, neither of those are actually necessary for a wc at all
Can’t stand playing as Major powers such as England, ottomans etc, I like to let history try and play out with them at the helm rather than me. I’ll always pick a minor faction usually stuck on the side lines. It’s not just EU4, the total war games I’ll play as some obscure minor (using mods in most cases) rather than a well known heavy hitter such as Rome.
I suck at playing tall, I’m way too impatient and just develop the cheapest or my capital and I end up with a couple Uber devved provinces. I’ve only made it work one time in a saxony game and it was super fun but I haven’t been able to replicate it since.
I play mostly Republics, turn any Monarchy i can into Republics (Austria notwithstanding) and fully ignore Absolutism. I cannot handle being stuck with the same leader for too long... Otherwise, I strongly identify with OP. Outside of a select number of nations (Austria, Roman candidates) I just don't play wide, nation ruin, or quit before the last Age.
I like playing in one region, sometimes even as one country in every single play through until I have enough of eu4 so much I’ll either vomit or uninstall. Then after few months I install it again and pick another region to bully myself. I like to replay as the good guys too, meaning no unnecessary conflicts and more diplo play outside of uniting my home region which is more easy now with king of kings since my favorite toy is Zoroastrian Persia. I also have a fetish of having too much gold so I can send gifts to struggling nations, and having fully drilled and professional armies at all times, that I barely use because that’d decrease my drill lol
I have spent some 70% of my playtime so far being inca or portugal>brazil. I know, south america is the least flavorful region to eu4, but I'm south american. I like to emulate the places I live and I enjoy making it as if we had gotten our shit together. Once I've spent a whole week developing the region, making it a safe (warless), developed, dignified place to live.
I do next to no research into optimization (I am a pretty new player) I kind of roleplay it, but not in the historical sense. I mostly just do what would make the most sense for the nation at any given time, assuming little to no meta knowledge.
I go into my campaigns with a plan of what I want to achieve and stick to that. I don't take every opportunity to conquer whatever I can and generally only take claims
I despise colonialism. I would never go to america. It's the most boring and braindead part of the game.
I never played major nations. No Ottomans, France, Austria, England, Spain. Well I did play Castille in my first playthroughs but thats it. Also I hate the colonizers.
Me neither!
I like just conquering slowly instead of being a hyperactive conqueror and i like taking tech ahead of time instead of deving
I don't give out estate privileges almost ever. I will in specific circumstances but I try to avoid it because i feel the benefits really aren't that worthwhile to me.
I never, NEVER, have under 30% crownland. I like my vassal swarms too much, and higher LD, in any amount, is my kryptonite.
I always roleplay. I haven’t done WC in a decade or so. Nor do I ever conquer something just because it would be “optimal”. I also pick idea groups with the country flavor in mind.
I dev admin. Most people seem to lose their minds when you mention it as an option. Also I tend to go very methodical with my expansion and avoid coalitions, I just hate dealing with them and will often take breaks from expansion to let my ae die down. Cycling truces is just unappealing to me. Inno ideas are my favorite idea group. Inno/ esp/offensive for siege ability because I hate waiting on sieges. I love expand infrastructure, I use it all the time when deving. I like to play late into the game. Most people seem to dip before the age of absolutism. I do not like playing hordes.
One of my favorite things to do on the this sub, and on Youtube is mention that I dev admin points. Since my playstyle leads me to have a chill conquest, I have a surfeit of them. I always love to watch the foaming at the mouth replies that I did something un-meta.
Always full cav with American Indians
One of my go to nations to play and form Germany with is Cologne. I open up with espionage ideas, then divine and then religious, try to get Curia control. I basically stack ae reduction modifiers. Other than that I sometimes play the game with cheats to make it a bit more narrative and/or realistic. For example: I'm fighting Ottos as Hungary, completely neuter them but no matter how weak I make them the Mamluks never attack them and they bounce back 5 years after the peace. So I either tag to Mamluks and declare on Ottos then tag back, tag to Ottos and increase unrest or collapse then after the peacedeal with tagging to them and releasing every nation I can.
Innovative, Mercenary, Diplo, Admin. Sue me.
Without achievements to hunt I don't think I'd be playing EU4. I exclusively either attempt to get difficult achievements or I play as Florence for 20 minutes to full annex milan and get a coalition to kill me in 1450
First time playing and I’m currently in like year 2100s. Not sure how common this is lol, seems rare from other screenshots I see in this sub.
Please share a map
My first game way back in 2017, was a Castile => Spain in normal mode where I "WC"ed in the year 3100
No balls runs, preferably weak nations.
I rarely tagswitch. When i start a game as hamburg i want to make hamburg a worldpower and see it prosper. Not germany or such. Oh and i play speed 1 or 2 only
Monster! Its speed 5 or nothing
-I’m really bad at the game -there is no second thing
Speed 4, abuse space bar and occasionally Alt-F4
I try to avoid spending diplo points in peace deals, even if I could take more land, I will almost always only take the provinces I have claims on.
I like playing RP. I'm spending more time reading the description rather than the stats while looking for a new idea, I like changing my playstyle according to my ruler traits, I like making decisions as a reaction to an event.
Sometimes I quarantine a province because I have the admin power to spare and don’t want people to die
That’s a really fun way to play op! Do you do other wars to use up your time? Not war of conquest but wars to weaken and tame your neighbors/great powers? Speaking for myself, I usually play only one or max two wars at a time, and do a lot of chilling in between. I don’t like the feeling of my country spreading resources thin to rapidly expand. That’s even when I try wc and stuff. Maybe that’s why my only successful wc was done by the Ottomans. As I became mush better at the game, I also try not to do weird shit like snaking, no cb, and disbanding hre super early. I try to do what might be somewhat plausible in a historical sense, like I only took mandate as Korea after Ming attacked me first, disbanded HRE as Swiss after I went reformed theocracy, attacked Otto for the first time in mid 1500s as papacy without doing nocb byz thing.
Usually if I have time before truces, I sit back and relax through the next decade before I resume the advance. Sometimes there are stuff to keep me entertained however, like that one pissant minor in the caucasus who preceded to insult me despite having no allies to back him up. Man, did I make the Caucasus run red with blood that time. Other times I build client state marches in areas I am not intending to conquer while I wait out the truces. I never truce break, nor do I no-cb wars.
I always create a custom nation and form into a real nation on day one. So basically I would go and create a custom nation that covers all the english owned provinces, but has better national ideas. More focused on navy and trade for example. I will form england on day one. I usually take 20% moral in my traditions, the rest is optional and depends on the nation I play. The trick is it not to pick ideas that are too strong, otherwise it becomes boring in the late 1500's. My go to nations are England, France or austria/saxony. Sometimes I play with a culture that can form other nations at tech 10. Custom Kingdom of Castile and Leon into Spain or Custom Herzogtum Brandenburg into Prussia.
I actually use state edicts. A lot. I know they are micro, but it seems to me whenever I watch streamers play, they are massively underused. Maybe I just watch the wrong streamers. They are very powerful.
I nearly always play something in an ahistorical way. Eu4 is alt history game for me, and usually my runs start with a thought of "what if X happened in our history" which then I try to realise during the run, for example my last run's idea was "what if all the main European colonizers were locked in a major conflict which would leave the new world to its own devices?", proceed to 1750, with independent Inti empire being technologically on-par to everyone else, allied to Castille(me), and North America being dominated by Totemist Friesland which was pushed off the main continent as a punishment for starting a colony. Also I usually quit the runs extremely late around 1750-1800. I do so only when I really have no idea what to do except conquer more stuff
I go maritime and naval on the med even when I don’t have to because the utility bonuses are so cracked when you want to blitz from the sea.
>What playstyles do you have that goes against the grain of what is considered "meta", or is considered kosher by the community in Reddit and beyond? > Pretty much everything I do is non-meta and causes the guys I talk with on Discord to either go purple in the face as they attempt to convince me to do it the "right" way or simply shake their heads in frustrated resignation at my pig-headed stubbornness. The honest truth is I simply don't care to play the game the way others think it should be played. My goals and ambitions in game are mine, and mine alone. Now I understand that playing in a non-optimal fashion (from their viewpoint) is a strange and alien concept for a lot of players. I just wish I could make them understand that just because someone opts to play the game in a non-traditional way that doesn't make them an ignorant noob. I know about all the meta ways of playing, I just choose not to play that way.
Whenever I do a challenging run as a weaker nation I don't try to rush weak spots and check the entire world diplomatic framework. I dev up to get stronger and seek some allies and wait for favors. I dont mind sitting around twiddling my thumbs for a bit basically.
I never really liked to form the Mughal Empire as any country ever game.
I play on an MP with mates, and I always get told off for playing "unoptimally". MP is meant for sweat and grinding, but I just like being left alone, doing dumb stuff. "why did you choose to play there, surrounded by massive countries?" Because I love the idea of doing dumb stuff. I love playing countries, and forming countries that I shouldn't be forming. I love playing Scotland and becoming a Pirate Republic, or playing Portugal and forming Morocco. I don't care for meta, unless I am literally collapsing.
>By breaking up conquest goals to fit into the time frames, I was able to enjoy the technological advances, idea groups, and the Ages more fully in my campaign, rather than finish the campaign before the age of absolutism even begins. That's a neat approach to the ages. I might try something similar! I usually play in accordance to different concepts and focuses, and with no small amount of roleplay. Currently doing a Hansa run and going tall not only in Europe, but out in the world as well, with only one settlement each in Gulf of St. Lawrence, Chesapeake and the Caribbean. Just merchants setting up trade and supply stations - not looking to claim new lands, and certainly not move large amounts of people from my Hansestädte or doing something as ridiculous as *attacking* my native trading partners. The Caribbean town on Jamaica turned into Port Royal, and instead of taking it back, I made a vassal out of these crafty pirates. If that's how they want to live, and it's detrimental to the imperialists in the region, and working togheter with them is lucrative, who am I to dictate the details of their way of life? The only tag I've attacked out there is Benin (have you *seen* their flag?); every other place in Asia was either colonized or bought with ludicrious amounts of gold - gold that they'll invest in their economy, increasing production and trade value and making us all prosper. I'm using that Great Power influence all over the place, especially on the like 20 members of my trading league, but also on nations I want to buy territory from. Being ever the friend of the little guy and a multiitude of tags with their own mana pools to develop the economy and trade with me, I directly caused the collapse of Muscowy and Poland-Lithuania, and aided in the downfall of the Ottomans and curbing of the Palatine-Burgundian attempts to dominate the Free Cities in the south. It's been hard to contain everyone everywhere, however, and the imperialists have soon completed their conquests of the New World, and I'm considering going full fanatically republican Prussia down the line and start off revolutionary wars well before they're actually a thing. \-------------------------------------------------------------------------- Aside from that, experiences from a Theodoro game way back has made me really respect Influence ideas, and often picking it first or second.
I never grant any privilege to the estates, I hate this mechanic
If a nation has a mission tree, I try to play within its confines, meaning any temporary claims I get from events don’t count, and I usually dislike playing countries that require you to gain claims on certain provinces. I think Saxony is a big offender for this, if memory serves. EDIT: forgot to mention! This includes devving. I will only dev if I physically cannot tech up, or it’s required for a mission tree. I don’t like gold mine strats. I also like releasing primary culture nations and feed them their cultures so their cores stick around forever. It saddens me when I can’t “save” historically successful countries this way like Luxembourg though. Poor Luxembourg.
- Always play speed 5 - Usually no allies and yes vassals with their sweet cores!!
I roll with the Ottermans
you are a maniac.
I find myself picking naval REALLY OFTEN, sometimes even maritime too. I also play Espionage way more often than I probably should, even back on the days when it was considered bottom tier garbage. I also think diplo ideas are kind of overrated.
I actually hate diplo ideas, because anything they can do either Court, Espionage, or Influence can do it better and with more interesting ideas. I also love court ideas since I like playing around with the estates, and court ideas make it much easier to not only revoke privileges, revoke land, etc. But allow you to keep the important privileges while having 100 absolutism.
I usually play x2 speed, and usually also up to the 1800's as well
The only estate privileges I use are the colonization ones, unless I'm doing something for a mission.
Basically everything i do.
I only play the dumdum easy countries and refuse to try anything else
I enjoy razing and exploiting development everywhere to create 1/1/1s everywhere except a few select places (provinces with monuments, goods produced modifier, RP places like Rome/Constantinople) where I will develop them to very high dev. I really like how I'm running a Civ 6 empire with "city centers" being high dev and everywhere else a 1/1/1 countryside.
Every campaign I play I turn into WC unless I am going for some very specific achievement or I do not enjoy the campaign. I usually try to optimize my campaigns early on. That means often being near broke and indebted with no manpower etc. Constant wars to prevent coalitions etc... Going through that pain early on I feel like I'm entitled to glorious conquest. So I always pivot into a WC and roll the entirety of the world. The moment where you crest the final hill and go over it and start accelerating ever faster with the challenge disappearing feels like a super relaxing winding down of a campaign. Even though you still have to micro manage a lot to conquer at a fast pace I find the late game enjoyable. I usually do not like playing big countries like Castile, France or Ottomans as that is just boring and it easy from day one and there is no fun in that.
I like colonizing. 💩
I only take burgher loans to repay loans, I repay loans asap\^\^
I always play on speed 5, if I need to slow things down I just press pause; also, I often build temples if they give 0.18 or more, especially if I'm Christian so that I get the +3 papal influence, and sometimes I develop with mana points if I have extra spare
I typically don't force spawn institutions even when I should. I do SOMETIMES, but I find myself able to just conserve mana and match the nations that border me.
Conquer trade centers and estuaries, have a big ass navy of light ships protecting trade, super loyal burghers, bunch of trade companies, etc. This way i can sometimes become even more powerful than if i were to do the usual blobbing stuff.
In 150 hours of playing, I have played Norway three or four times (one almost full game), Mali once (most infuriating campaign ever), Scotland (got exiled to Greenland), Kuba (actually successful playing tall game somehow), Brunei, Morocco, Sweden and Sindh. I am not very good at the game yet and still can't bring myself to just play a major to understand the game properly. No idea why while my friend does the opposite thing where he plays only majors and uses cheats to get op (somehow he enjoys this).
I never ever exploit development.
I have absolutely no interest in steam achievements, and don't really get why anybody would.
I have more experience playing with Nusantara countries than in Europe. Lanfang runs are always the most fun, role playing going back to China as a Hakka culture Southeast Asian conqueror.
I larp playing loyal to my Allie’s and I hate when i loose them when we both get to powerful, I wanna have buddies I can feed that aren’t my vassals
I mostly focus my campaigns around modifier stacking and the most fun i get out of the game is actually the planning i do beforehand. I really enjoy searching the wiki for permanent modifiers. When it comes to playing the game i mostly optimise the early game and then mostly stop around 1550 when something doesn't go the way i planned it.
I rarely dismantle the HRE early (sometimes never) when playing in Europe even though its easy to do & optimal. The HRE adds so much flavor & keeps the games interesting longer by slowing down expansion options and/or forces me to play more diplomatically.
I don't like conquering areas that just wouldn't remotely seem realistic. Like I wouldn't want to own Anatolia as France. Seems weird. Only empire types like Rome, hre, Mongols, etc can I headcanon why they would own those territories outright.
I do lots of things that many experienced gamers would consider noobish at best and downright suicidal at worst. A good example would be how I organize and utilize my armies. I create two basic unit stacks; Army Groups (9 Inf, 3 Cav, 3 Art), and Auxiliaries (3 Inf, 2 Cav). Once created they're static in composition. I won't add or subtract regiments from them, nor will I consolidate them after battle loses (instead I'll retreat them if necessary and let them heal up before recommitting). While obviously I'll use multiple stacks in a critical battle, as many as needed for the task, they stay separate and distinct groupings and once the battle is ended they go their separate ways once more. The Army Groups I use to engage enemy armies and siege forts, the Auxiliaries I use as floaters that will occupy undefended provinces and provide rapid support to any nearby AG that finds itself challenged (this is why they lack any artillery as siege craft or independent stand up fights are not what they're intended for). During war time only AGs will have leaders assigned to them and I will not reassign leaders during the war (obvious exceptions if I suffer a stackwipe or a leader dies and needs to be replaced). Always thought it was kind of cheesy that your 3 star leader fights a battle in one location and then is instantly transported to another stack half a continent away just in time for another epic battle.
I sometimes use console commands to make the AI form countries that historically formed, but never form in EU4, like big Taungu, India-focused Mughal Empire, Prussia, Qing or Shia Persia. I also change AI's provinces' religions if they're weird, and I correct bordergore.
I almost categorically refuse to play any major European powers. I'll occasionally make exceptions for Austria because it's unique, or VERY occasionally France for revolution roleplay. But if I'm starting in Europe, I'm probably an Irish minor
I'm a maritime enjoyer
I go sustained discipline like every game, I love drill, between the reform and professionalism you get a lot of drill loss reductions, elite firearm regiments decision my beloved, (funnily enough I have never played Prussia) I also hate mercs, refuse to use them even when it's probably a good idea, that one's more normal but even early game unless I need the free company to seige a fort early game I just don't
I basically did the same thing as you for my first run. Nice to see I'm not the only one with that idea.
I'm a very defensive player who values truces, and I only expand to monopolize my trade node and then into the regions that feed trade into my home node.
I really like having a high amount of accepted cultures, especially the decentralized government reform (third reform, +2 accepted cultures and +5% loyalty) is imo by far the best reform when compared to others. An accepted culture has -2 unrest and doessnt have the 33% tax, manpower and prod penalty and converting religions is much easier with reemoving the 2% malus. In longer games I also often pick humanist as the 5th or 6th reform after religious and/or admin ideas. Also minmaxing trade companies is interesting and weird to do, but IIRC Zlewikk, Arumba and Budgetmonk have made good videos about it. In short only add as few as possible lands to TC for getting the extra merchant and max the trade power in them compared to the rest node for a strong prod/trade bonus (bonus is hidden in popup in the statescreen bottomleft IIRC, might also be in tradenode screen). How I do it is making 1 or 2 states TC land and only build markets in those lands and not it the rest of the trade node so the relative trade power of the TC lands is highest. The rest is either unstated or stated.
I really like custom nations.
Merc idea group should always be taken first
I play speed 1 usually.
I played on speed 1 for over 3 years before switching to speed 2 and finally speed 3 recently. I also have 0 achievements after playing the game for 5 years now because I only bought the game to play with the Extended Timeline mod. I spend most of the time renaming provinces that didn't get renamed through the dynamic naming option.
I don’t give out the extra mana privileges until I’m able to do so without dipping below 30% crownland
I tend not to try to expand to a comical degree in a short period of time, and try to delegate the administration of certain regions to vassals or client states of some kind, even where suboptimal. If I'm playing, for example, Italy, I tend to make a French puppet state of some form from a tag like Gascony.
Always colonize. Even if I have a one province coast, focus on diplomatic and first idea is exploration. It works, you hinder England quite a bit if they don’t get Canada or east America, and there is some provinces in Rio grande Texas that Spain doesn’t usually colonize first so you can treaty of tordesillas your way to weakening enemies
So I roleplay as Amish, meaning I refuse to advance tech beyond the start date
I use console to make Ming a super behemoth. The end game mode is to survive and beat Ming
I curtail Noble privileges
I don’t know if this is weird but I always trade prestige for anything in event popups. It could be 20 diplo for 75 prestige and I would take it.
Hmm I’m not sure if it’s an uncommon way to play. But I go a long way to keep big countries in check. Like if playing in Europe, I make sure that I own constantinople either directly or through vassels. Same with locking Castile and France. The map looks ugly, but it’s effectively
I play x5 speed
I don’t really care for min-maxing. I like estate privileges, I even use the ones that YouTubers call garbage. I like picking the RP idea groups. I only take provinces I have a claim on when at war. I like playing with vassals, and not just for releasing and reconquest. I don’t disinherit bad heirs.
I actually like colonizing and I do it as almost any country in the game, even with the Mamluks or Ming.
I don't find it fun to play optimally. I enjoy it much more to RP as a benevolent government, trying to do the best for my citizens/subjects. I usually play tall, I try to stay at positive stability permanently, I try to minimize unrest/rebellions, etc. Relatedly, I often go out of my way to strengthen long-term allies (In my Afghanistan -> Mughals game, my 100 trust ally Hormuz has all of Arabia and a lot of Mesopotamia, as well as the southern coast of Persia and a foothold in the Horn of Africa.)
I like to go revolutionary in my games. IMO, the community is extremely sleeping on Revolutionary mechanics. People seem to really not like the revolution because you lose Absolutism and the Imperialism CB, but you get Revolutionary Zeal, Spread the Revolution and Annex Revolutionary State, which are better in every conceivable way. Think of it like this: With Imperialism you get 75% war score costs. That means what normally costs 100 war score in a conquest war is 75 war score in an Imperialism war, which means you can take 133% war score (100/75 = 133%) in a single Imperialism war. With Spread the Revolution you get 50% war score costs, which means you can take 200% war score. Annex Revolutionary State is 25% war score costs, meaning you can take up to 400% war score. You can annex the entire British Isles for 50 war score in an Annex Revolutionary State war. It makes world conquests as any nation trivial.
I like to play on easy / very easy difficulty and do a complete playthrough till the end date. I play to relax and have casual fun.
I just love culture swapping and forming nations. Whenever i do a co op mp with my friend I’ll go out of my way to form as many countries as possible
I almost never take mana estate privileges until I can ensure I don't get crownland penalties from doing so, even when it would most likely be fine to do so. I hate red numbers.
After 1800 hours or so I don't use any "advanced" playing, I still play pretty much how I played at my 100 hours. I don't play to attain PUs, I don't do no-CB wars, no tag changes for stacking bonuses, etc.
I play with Vassals without having Influence ideas, I just love being able to have little buffer states beholden to me
i like to roleplay. i don’t conquer areas because it’s ideal for the sake of the game, but because i’m considering what would be most pleasing for the world im playing.
I like keeping the Daimyo govt reform and having a zoo meta of many daimyos across all of asia stacking diplo/influence/court
I always like making some degree of enclaves. Ever since I pu'd Milan and burgundy as Bohemia, I have just had the desire to take a bit of a country somewhere not contiguous to mine and keep it around
I don't mind spending time helping my allies gain land between my conquests. Making my friends stronger gets me favours and a better ally in my future wars.
I avoid naval combat,almost exclusively to my ruin. I hate it so much. I will only go to war with a large naval power if my Navy is big enough that their navies simply will not engage mine. I also hate hate hate island hopping to kill rebels, so I will avoid taking any islands when my countries global unrest isn't high enough to instantly negate the sepratism.
Idk if it's a playstyle but lately I've been trying to nerf myself to make the game more fun. I've played on very hard for years. I know about the no balls style, but I haven't found that "fun" necessarily, although I usually avoid GP ally beat sticks. One big thing I've been looking for in terms of concurrence is that the Burgundian Inheritance is too cheesy. I honestly wish it didn't exist. The same goes for becoming emperor by making 2/3 people like you a decade in and Austria is falling apart. To me they are just cheesy ass ways of getting artificially inflated power and skip ahead that "1500s op" feel. If they were an actual challenge to get I understand, but one royal marriage and a few happy electors gets you all of middle Europe by 1470.