Ze Core Gamer Not really. it's nice to ave, i guess, but there are better ideas even in that scenario. After you have enough transport ships to bring enough troops to the new world to deal with all the natives, you'll have enough income to beat any AI out in terms of heavy ships.
Once I played MP with someone who played as England and got both Maritime AND Naval Ideas. He was able to get a much larger navy that was also much stronger because of the triple idea combo. He never expanded outside of Britain (except for colonies) so I couldn't touch him once we finally went to war. My colonies had to fight alone because I couldn't sail anywhere. It is impossible to beat England in that situation because you can't occupy any of their land. He also couldn't touch me in Europe though because his army was shit (since he got 2 crappy idea groups).
I can't argue about Naval Ideas being worthless. But I think you are underestimating the effect of blockades in EU4. In addition to warscore full blockading an enemy will raise their war exhaustion which tank their war enthusiasm. This will make your enemy more likely to surrender and take peace deals. Also in the time period of EU4. Ships cannot really effect forts. Naval high-explosive shells would only come into use at the very end of the EU4 timeline (1822 Paixhans gun).
Even then coastal guns were far, far more effective at destroying ships than ships were at destroying the coastal fortifications. That was one of the reasons the Royal Navy adopted the distant blockade in WWI.
Not to mention raiding requires you to have more blockade ability than the provinces you're trying to raid and the last I remember you actually get ducats for blockading provinces and pirating which can completely destroy an enemy's economy.
I did both in my last Russia and got Sibir and Alaska quite fast. But I played for a lot of time without administrative and had a idle colonist 30% of the time.
you can "colonize" without exploration and/or expansion ideas (except when you play castille, portugal, england or france). in my campaign as sweden a beat the crap out of england and france and simply took their colonies in north america. at the end of the game my colonies had bigger armies than all european nations except sweden of course and conquered like 70% of north america haha :D
I am 100% on your side. Even more so because there are so many historical instances of coastal raids! Seaside forts were build because of the very real threat of ships with marines on them showing up and just destroying and raiding your whole city! The best example I could find is the Raid on the Medway, where a dutch feet sailed up the River Medway to attack the mothballed english ships in Chatham. They destroyed two small towns, several fortifications, three British capital ships (and some smaller ones) and captured and towed away two other ships of the line. There are also several instances of ships fighting forts in the north american theater of the seven years war and in the American revolutionary war.
that's true. I've played eu4 for about 1000 hours and i have only taken Naval once and Maritime twice, all of which i was playing outside of Europe, either in Japan or Indonesia.
ita-eng subber Russia has little need of exploration if it decides to go east through Siberia, but Portugal would likely need both exploration and expansion if it wants to take control of the Americas quickly. Honestely I would like to have expansion to have the ability to reduce both coring costs and war-score cost handy if you want to take control
You have some good ideas in the end about ships being able to do more. I had another idea. It could help land combat in the provinces that are coastal( coastal desert/ coastal terain). Asuming the battle is near the shore in these provinces the ship could help bombard the enemies. A simple way to not mess up the balance would be that when the enemy has a fleet the same size that it would normaly blockade said province then the opposing army of that fleet would get a -1 dice roll just like bad terrain would normally do. Only for provinces with coastal modifier. You already have lower combat with there suggesting you fight near the shoreline.
"No one gives a flying ffff assffart" Brilliant, absolutely brilliant :"D good job as always, but keep up the Britain and M&B series, I can't wait for those :3
Navies can be very useful when fighting colonial wars with other European nations. Played a game as Portugal where I pretty much controlled the new world because my navy was large enough to completely block the choke points of giblatar and the English Channel so reinforcements couldn't arrive. They couldn't even reach Portugal because of the navy and me being allied with France. Having both maritime and naval ideas sealed my colonial empire from European competition, excluding Great Britain
Nakas Dougen Maritime Ideas is a must for a Historical Borders Portugal run, because 90% of your wars would be overseas over coastal provinces, so naval superiority is an absolute must. Also if you ally Castille them you become essentially an Island.
I think a reason that they didn't let ships give bonuses to sieges is because they rarely did that during this time period. Shore bombardment wasn't really a thing until the development of guns that could shoot over 3 kilometers and that could shoot exploding shells. One thing they could do though is that if you don't put a blockade on a coastal province that has a lot of trade you basically can't conquer it.
I think you're onto something. Letting ships siege coastal forts if supported by infantry is a good idea. Kinda like how cannons can't siege a city by themselves but they drastically impact each phase and can pause a siege if supporting infantry leaves but they stay.
one thing I wish you would had added in this video for new players would had been if you had pointed out that in addition that Maritime is far superior idea group is that it also lets you click on "Confirm Thalassocracy" decision if you ever manage to get control of the specific trade nodes such as the Indian coastal trade nodes or the main Mediterranean trade nodes
Maritime ideas is even slightly better than mentioned. Basically, they are most useful for trading nations ( Venice, Genoa, Holland, etc.) anyways. Filling out the group allows to go for Thalassocracy (if you control the associated trade nodes) , adding navy tradition, further reduced Light Ship costs, and a further merchant to the list . Clearly only a light buff, only available quite late in the game, and maybe a case of "Win More" . However, it still deserves to be mentioned.
"Sailor recovery speed... who gives a sh... like flying ... ass fart" hahaha that line made my day. love your vids and your approach to give insights to EU4 :)
naval ideas need buffing like an idea that allows you to siege costal provinces, reduce the time and crossing penalties for amphibious invasions and able to launch an attack on any enemy ships that are trying to bunker down in a harbour. It would make navies aspect more interesting and important for gameplay
Maritime is even better (/ less worse) than you made it look like. Naval maneuver also increase combat width. With complete maritime you can get an extra merchant and some other bonus as well. I sometimes use maritime, but only with island nations. If I plan to attack island nations I often just get quality.
"Naval combat just isn't that important overall in EU4" That gave everyone who plays big multiplayer games cancer. Having a strong/the best navy in huge multiplayers are so strong. It opens op many things. You can dominate colonial wars. You can win trade wars so easy. And most of the major powers wants a friend with a strong navy, so it also gives you massive power when it comes to diplomacy. You become a way more attractive friend when you have a huge armada ready to block down all the trade ships while the big wars are on. When you get to around year 1650+ most of the income comes from trade and being able to be in the side of the war that says fuck your trade ships is a huge factor of getting gold while the war is going on. Having a massive navy with lots of transporters is also a very very strong way to fast move around troops and lock down key positions in big wars. Let me give you an example with 1444 borders. Poland, Aragon and France is at war against Austria, Bohemia and Hungary. So its PAF vs ABH. ABH would be smart and killing off Poland fast. So they begin to siege him down. And they see the PAF armies in Austrian mountains taking attrition. This siege trade goes on. Poland loses forts and Austria loses forts. But instead of having a turtle tactic of polish soldiers being outnumbered, he sailed his army from black sea into iberia and now they have unified their armies to go into a solid front. Instead of having the polish army getting stuck in a corner and wiped out. So yes darkfireslide. Navy is so ever fucking important in EU4 when you are not playing with the AI only. When you play with smart people and the game is full of them. Navy tricks is a huge game changer.
they should just let heavy ships siege down coastal provinces and force parked ships to fight them in exchange for this, you cant land any land units unless you occupy that province
If they want to keep it historical, you could use ships to siege forts but either at a certain fort level and probably after a certain year, the ships will take damage. (Easier to hit a ship from a fort, than a fort from a ship). It would give great incentive for fort building on coasts, as there are multiple areas on the map of one coastal zone attached to many provinces, own them all and you'd have heavy ship damage.
naval ideas do what they say on the tin, i think the only way to really benefit them is to, like dark said, change the impact that naval warfare has on the game.
I, as a colonizer, like maritime ideas quite well. Not being have to micro manage ship repair and keeping ships on missions figuritively for forever is pretty nice. Of course, it's all about the light ships and trade. Which would make you filthy rich if you're in an end nod or even a decent one.
Meritime ideas are also good idea groups for England/Great Britian and any of the Dutch nations. Their national ideas not only give them naval benefits, but they're both are also heavily reliant on their navies. Venice and other merchant republics can also benefit, but they have better uses for their bird mana.
Using your sailors to siege provinces after or during (depending on whether or not you decide to use your entire fleet on attacking) a bombardment from the sea would also greatly increase the need and use of sailor-related modifiers. Does that mean your sailors could be killed by an army and leave your ships for the enemy to capture undefended? Yes, but it just means you actually have to think before leaving your ships and sieging a province.
yeah, they should add a siege mod for naval units (at least for heavy ships) and a mechanic like: if there is an army of yours besieging the province. (cause siege only with boats would be strange) and a harsh trade/tax modifier Nice video btw. =)
Hahaha. I really didn't think you would take my idea seriously and do this video. But I will still watch and enjoy it ^,^ good suggestions to improve btw.
I'm playing Lübeck in a pretty relaxed Multiplayer, and I am actually thinking about taking maritime as my second diplo idea (after trade, obviously). I don't know how suboptimal that would be, but I kinda like the role playing aspect of it
I agree that the navy isn't that much important in EU4 compared to your army. But you can't siege a fort with a navy either because the reason is simple. Sure the navy could dish out some serious fire power against the fort but can't take any serious return fire. What I'm saying is that a fort is unsinkable while a ship isn't. This is why sieges even at the start of 18th centuries took months or even years to accomplish because the army had to dig and slowly but surely had to take the defences of the fort down one by one. Most of the times the forts surrendered because of the lack of food and/or ammo to hold down rather then being stormed. EU4 portrays in that aspect how things really were in those times.
How to determine if you need Naval or Maritime: Is you name DDRJake and you play specifically to take suboptimal ideas? No? Well, that's your answer, ya nerd!
EU4 needs marines. They were a thing in this time period, especially in the 17th century onwards. Just have units that can embark really quickly from ships or something.
You forgot the most important part about maritime ideas. It allows the 'confirm thalassocracy' decision which is actually pretty awesome if you manage to get it.
A bit of a late response to your video, but I believe that blockading a province with a fort increases the rolls for the sieging army. You might want to give it a try, though, since I am not one-hundred percent sure.
Megacaesar On coastal provinces, having a blockade removes the penalty, but doesn't increase the speed, it just makes it like a normal siege at that point.
Ah, thanks! That'll help me better estimate situations and decide how to apply my navies and siege armies. I tended to siege coastal forts first because I thought my fleets were making them easier to siege down. I suppose we could still argue that fleets help with sieges, though. Isn't removing a penalty a net improvement? No matter your thoughts on the topic of navies contributing to sieges, I agree with you that the naval system could still use a bit of a rework. It would be interesting to see a fairly hefty amount of war exhaustion from blockades of major trade routes, and it might also help if Paradox added unrest in blockaded provinces (after all, coastal provinces and cities usually strongly rely on their access to the sea for trade, fishery and transportation, and removing their main source of livelihood will make life in such a province quite difficult.
Unless you use a bonus later in the game that increases the effects of blockade on the siege. Still, naval ideas are crap - maritime at least has some uses.
I actually encountered a moment where I needed Naval ideas badly. I was Japan and fought england for islands and colonies and for the life of me I couldn't win any heavy ship naval battles agianst him all because england has a very OP +20% naval morale NI.
it's too subjective and ideas work in different situations. I think Humanist is generally the best but the people i play multiplayer with always give me stick for choosing it. exploration is amazing for a few nations, and shit for others. Trade can be great, but for some nations its awful
Just because different idea groups are better for different situations doesn't mean that it is subjective, for instance admin ideas are useful if you are going to be coring a lot of land otherwise you'd be better going for economic, but that doesn't mean that they are equally viable.
Abstract.ipz If you decide to go tall, admin is a fairly useless idea group and economic would work much better. Sure, you would core a little, but most of your time would be spent developing
The only use i find in having a giant navy is to take out ships blockading land passages. Very annoying when the ottomans blockade constantinople and you have to go all the way around to get to the anatolian part of the ottomans.
How about an idea that negates beach landing penalties? Make it available for completing the idea group, so that you have to invest in it. But that way, spearheading an assault on single islands would be less costly, and save you manpower.
You really confused me because near the end of the video an alarm went off on what I assume is your phone that is the exact same as the timer I use on mine.
They should make the effects of a blockades be more drastic. The British became the predominant power because of this ability to slowly starve their enemies. This was how they were able to punch above their weight.
I think you should also consider multiplayer games. Taking either Maritime or Naval can help an England player that got locked on his island to smash all the fleets of opposing colonizers and take their shit abroad. What are they going to do about it? Swim across the ocean? He we also lose tons of ducats in trade as his tradehsips cannot function during the war. You cannot be touched so you can stall it as well. In singleplayer it doesn't matter because you will build more ships as the ai anyway. I do feel the sailorpowerrecovery should be changed for cheaper maintaince though
They thing with England is though that your military NI SUCK. you only have 5% discipline. You are taking exploration and expansion so that is two less slots you can use for military ideas. If you take an ideagroup for your ships as well you armies are going to be useless. Nations with Military ideas need at least 2 military ideas (i usually don't come further than the6th idea group) to be able to compete.
it just makes it like a normal fort seige by getting rid of a BS modifier coastal forts are just harder to siege without a blockade it would be somewhat nice ifinstead of going from -2 to 0 it went from -2 to +2 siege modifier when blockaded
i'd say that depends on where you are in the world, if theres a nice chain of trade nodes you could be using and your trade income is superior to your tax then i would go for trade. If like france you're using mostly tax to fund yourself then i would go economic along with the other (reduced autonomy etc) benefits that come with economic that arent so specific to income Of course once you get big enough you'll likely want both.
I'd like to start by saying I prefer Maritime over Naval. THAT SAID you're completely wrong about navies being useless. All colonial and trade nations NEED navies to defend their and oversea territories and income. Also the blockade modifier does greatly shorten siege time of coastal provinces and it really hurts the blockaded nation's trade income.
or if youre playing GB for some of the nice decisions you can get after completing ships penny. And also confirm the thelassocracy(sp?) can be great for colonisers/traders
Yes most of the time though you have maybe one ship that is low and the rest are on like 73%.But yeah at least its not a military group.You also didnt mention some of the decisions like confirm thelassowhatever for which u need maritime.
Well, you only talk about the mainstream game where you need to get a better army to win wars. But just think a second about the situation of e.g. sweden. I can only recommend taking naval ideas first as sweden to win the wars against denmark because they can build more boats then u do, and when u beat them down u can still use the better ships to invade england and later on france . Your Army is already really good so its not a drama if u miss one ''good'' military idea group. Best example when u should take naval ideas in my opinion.
Naval ideas are complete shit, Maritime is a great 'second trade idea' set. I always take it whenever I'm a hyper-wealthy, tall trade nation like the Netherlands, and I just flood key trade nodes with 100 light ship trade fleets.
Force limit of 12 ships? Okay then. 12 heavies it is. Fuck you England I win on the sea. What's the point in navies when in the year 1550 England finally gets 20 heavies? That's IF they DON'T EVER get their navy crushed. If you crush there navy at the start or near the start of the game it takes about 50+ years for them to build them back. I got a PU over England and integrated them in 1700 and then I had 100 heavies. I also had 600 light ships but that's aside the point. Anyways so I just took 100k troops to China and the huge 2 nations that made up most of China and owned the sea had like 40 heavies combined... I also with those 600 light ships had 99% trade power over the English trade node... and I only owned London heheh. If I stopped protecting trade I'd lose like 200 of my income and only own 50% of the English trade node.
![[EU4] Maritime Ideas are for real a top tier Idea Group! Here is why: [Guide][1.34]](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/DwwfNfLnpI0/mqdefault.jpg)
"when should i take maritime/naval ideas"
"are you England/Venice?"
"no"
"never"
Would maritime/naval ideas be good for Genoa as well? Genoa is like Venice's long lost brother that he doesn't care about.
Captain Tamauzki Trade would always be better, but yea I suppose Naval would be a good bet. Maritime only after trade
x2dylan So pretty much trade trade then Maritime, i never used naval ideas, i don't think they would be worth it.
x2dylan or any nation you want to be a colonial power as
Ze Core Gamer Not really. it's nice to ave, i guess, but there are better ideas even in that scenario. After you have enough transport ships to bring enough troops to the new world to deal with all the natives, you'll have enough income to beat any AI out in terms of heavy ships.
Once I played MP with someone who played as England and got both Maritime AND Naval Ideas. He was able to get a much larger navy that was also much stronger because of the triple idea combo. He never expanded outside of Britain (except for colonies) so I couldn't touch him once we finally went to war. My colonies had to fight alone because I couldn't sail anywhere. It is impossible to beat England in that situation because you can't occupy any of their land. He also couldn't touch me in Europe though because his army was shit (since he got 2 crappy idea groups).
I can't argue about Naval Ideas being worthless. But I think you are underestimating the effect of blockades in EU4. In addition to warscore full blockading an enemy will raise their war exhaustion which tank their war enthusiasm. This will make your enemy more likely to surrender and take peace deals.
Also in the time period of EU4. Ships cannot really effect forts. Naval high-explosive shells would only come into use at the very end of the EU4 timeline (1822 Paixhans gun).
Even then coastal guns were far, far more effective at destroying ships than ships were at destroying the coastal fortifications. That was one of the reasons the Royal Navy adopted the distant blockade in WWI.
Not to mention raiding requires you to have more blockade ability than the provinces you're trying to raid and the last I remember you actually get ducats for blockading provinces and pirating which can completely destroy an enemy's economy.
It's not that it helps bombard the fort. It's a blockade, the ships are preventing the fort from getting resupplied by boats.
Exploration vs Expansion?
quick question about this question... WHY WOULD YOU NEVER NOT TAKE BOTH? if your colonizing may as well have both
Because expansion is a fairly awful group and it's not worth the amount of admin points you spend just to get an extra colonist
I always do explorations first then expansion right after.
I did both in my last Russia and got Sibir and Alaska quite fast. But I played for a lot of time without administrative and had a idle colonist 30% of the time.
you can "colonize" without exploration and/or expansion ideas (except when you play castille, portugal, england or france). in my campaign as sweden a beat the crap out of england and france and simply took their colonies in north america. at the end of the game my colonies had bigger armies than all european nations except sweden of course and conquered like 70% of north america haha :D
I am 100% on your side. Even more so because there are so many historical instances of coastal raids! Seaside forts were build because of the very real threat of ships with marines on them showing up and just destroying and raiding your whole city! The best example I could find is the Raid on the Medway, where a dutch feet sailed up the River Medway to attack the mothballed english ships in Chatham. They destroyed two small towns, several fortifications, three British capital ships (and some smaller ones) and captured and towed away two other ships of the line.
There are also several instances of ships fighting forts in the north american theater of the seven years war and in the American revolutionary war.
When a tutorial turns into a rant.
True, but the subject is somewhat silly considering both of these idea groups are on the lower end lol
that's true. I've played eu4 for about 1000 hours and i have only taken Naval once and Maritime twice, all of which i was playing outside of Europe, either in Japan or Indonesia.
@@AwayAtKeyboard even then, exploration is just better than maritime.
There needs to be a petition addressing all the suggestions you made for naval and maritime ideas, the time for change is now!
Do exploration vs expansion ideas
They work togheter.No exploration,no utillity for expansion
I dislike expansion cause of those -10% recruting time ideas. They've never been useful to me.
Only take expansion if you are Russia or have Exploration idea already. And if you are not Russia, only take the first 3 ideas in expansion.
exploration is for players when they initially settling out for the America's. Expansion is for taking control of explored regions
ita-eng subber Russia has little need of exploration if it decides to go east through Siberia, but Portugal would likely need both exploration and expansion if it wants to take control of the Americas quickly.
Honestely I would like to have expansion to have the ability to reduce both coring costs and war-score cost handy if you want to take control
So should I take naval or Espionage first as Brandenburg?
TheAnonymousMrGrape Probably neither unless you’re in the late game then espionage is okay.
You have some good ideas in the end about ships being able to do more. I had another idea. It could help land combat in the provinces that are coastal( coastal desert/ coastal terain). Asuming the battle is near the shore in these provinces the ship could help bombard the enemies. A simple way to not mess up the balance would be that when the enemy has a fleet the same size that it would normaly blockade said province then the opposing army of that fleet would get a -1 dice roll just like bad terrain would normally do.
Only for provinces with coastal modifier. You already have lower combat with there suggesting you fight near the shoreline.
Great channel. Subscribed, keep up the good work.
"No one gives a flying ffff assffart" Brilliant, absolutely brilliant :"D good job as always, but keep up the Britain and M&B series, I can't wait for those :3
Navies can be very useful when fighting colonial wars with other European nations. Played a game as Portugal where I pretty much controlled the new world because my navy was large enough to completely block the choke points of giblatar and the English Channel so reinforcements couldn't arrive. They couldn't even reach Portugal because of the navy and me being allied with France.
Having both maritime and naval ideas sealed my colonial empire from European competition, excluding Great Britain
Nakas Dougen
Maritime Ideas is a must for a Historical Borders Portugal run, because 90% of your wars would be overseas over coastal provinces, so naval superiority is an absolute must.
Also if you ally Castille them you become essentially an Island.
I think a reason that they didn't let ships give bonuses to sieges is because they rarely did that during this time period. Shore bombardment wasn't really a thing until the development of guns that could shoot over 3 kilometers and that could shoot exploding shells.
One thing they could do though is that if you don't put a blockade on a coastal province that has a lot of trade you basically can't conquer it.
I think you're onto something. Letting ships siege coastal forts if supported by infantry is a good idea. Kinda like how cannons can't siege a city by themselves but they drastically impact each phase and can pause a siege if supporting infantry leaves but they stay.
Maybe nations with large quantities of light ships should get dev cost reductions. The idea being that safe trade is good for construction.
one thing I wish you would had added in this video for new players would had been if you had pointed out that in addition that Maritime is far superior idea group is that it also lets you click on "Confirm Thalassocracy" decision if you ever manage to get control of the specific trade nodes such as the Indian coastal trade nodes or the main Mediterranean trade nodes
I always rush espionage ideas as Prussia , it surely scares the AI :^) ... btw i laughed at the sound you made when mentioning them :D
Maritime ideas is even slightly better than mentioned. Basically, they are most useful for trading nations ( Venice, Genoa, Holland, etc.) anyways. Filling out the group allows to go for Thalassocracy (if you control the associated trade nodes) , adding navy tradition, further reduced Light Ship costs, and a further merchant to the list . Clearly only a light buff, only available quite late in the game, and maybe a case of "Win More" . However, it still deserves to be mentioned.
Diplomatic ideas vs influence.
"Sailor recovery speed... who gives a sh... like flying ... ass fart" hahaha that line made my day. love your vids and your approach to give insights to EU4 :)
naval ideas need buffing like an idea that allows you to siege costal provinces, reduce the time and crossing penalties for amphibious invasions and able to launch an attack on any enemy ships that are trying to bunker down in a harbour. It would make navies aspect more interesting and important for gameplay
Maritime is even better (/ less worse) than you made it look like. Naval maneuver also increase combat width. With complete maritime you can get an extra merchant and some other bonus as well.
I sometimes use maritime, but only with island nations. If I plan to attack island nations I often just get quality.
"Naval combat just isn't that important overall in EU4"
That gave everyone who plays big multiplayer games cancer.
Having a strong/the best navy in huge multiplayers are so strong. It opens op many things. You can dominate colonial wars. You can win trade wars so easy. And most of the major powers wants a friend with a strong navy, so it also gives you massive power when it comes to diplomacy. You become a way more attractive friend when you have a huge armada ready to block down all the trade ships while the big wars are on. When you get to around year 1650+ most of the income comes from trade and being able to be in the side of the war that says fuck your trade ships is a huge factor of getting gold while the war is going on.
Having a massive navy with lots of transporters is also a very very strong way to fast move around troops and lock down key positions in big wars. Let me give you an example with 1444 borders. Poland, Aragon and France is at war against Austria, Bohemia and Hungary. So its PAF vs ABH. ABH would be smart and killing off Poland fast. So they begin to siege him down. And they see the PAF armies in Austrian mountains taking attrition. This siege trade goes on. Poland loses forts and Austria loses forts. But instead of having a turtle tactic of polish soldiers being outnumbered, he sailed his army from black sea into iberia and now they have unified their armies to go into a solid front. Instead of having the polish army getting stuck in a corner and wiped out.
So yes darkfireslide. Navy is so ever fucking important in EU4 when you are not playing with the AI only. When you play with smart people and the game is full of them. Navy tricks is a huge game changer.
they should just let heavy ships siege down coastal provinces and force parked ships to fight them in exchange for this, you cant land any land units unless you occupy that province
If they want to keep it historical, you could use ships to siege forts but either at a certain fort level and probably after a certain year, the ships will take damage. (Easier to hit a ship from a fort, than a fort from a ship).
It would give great incentive for fort building on coasts, as there are multiple areas on the map of one coastal zone attached to many provinces, own them all and you'd have heavy ship damage.
I think naval ideas should be buffed so they will be useful for nations such as England and Portugal who will heavily rely on navies
naval ideas do what they say on the tin, i think the only way to really benefit them is to, like dark said, change the impact that naval warfare has on the game.
GB's navy modifiers make it unstoppable already, which makes naval ideas pointless.
I, as a colonizer, like maritime ideas quite well. Not being have to micro manage ship repair and keeping ships on missions figuritively for forever is pretty nice. Of course, it's all about the light ships and trade. Which would make you filthy rich if you're in an end nod or even a decent one.
Meritime ideas are also good idea groups for England/Great Britian and any of the Dutch nations. Their national ideas not only give them naval benefits, but they're both are also heavily reliant on their navies. Venice and other merchant republics can also benefit, but they have better uses for their bird mana.
Using your sailors to siege provinces after or during (depending on whether or not you decide to use your entire fleet on attacking) a bombardment from the sea would also greatly increase the need and use of sailor-related modifiers. Does that mean your sailors could be killed by an army and leave your ships for the enemy to capture undefended? Yes, but it just means you actually have to think before leaving your ships and sieging a province.
Love this kind of videos, good job!
yeah, they should add a siege mod for naval units (at least for heavy ships) and a mechanic like: if there is an army of yours besieging the province. (cause siege only with boats would be strange) and a harsh trade/tax modifier
Nice video btw. =)
Hahaha. I really didn't think you would take my idea seriously and do this video. But I will still watch and enjoy it ^,^
good suggestions to improve btw.
i wish you could attack the port like in Total war, it would make ships less usless
I'm playing Lübeck in a pretty relaxed Multiplayer, and I am actually thinking about taking maritime as my second diplo idea (after trade, obviously). I don't know how suboptimal that would be, but I kinda like the role playing aspect of it
I agree that the navy isn't that much important in EU4 compared to your army. But you can't siege a fort with a navy either because the reason is simple. Sure the navy could dish out some serious fire power against the fort but can't take any serious return fire. What I'm saying is that a fort is unsinkable while a ship isn't. This is why sieges even at the start of 18th centuries took months or even years to accomplish because the army had to dig and slowly but surely had to take the defences of the fort down one by one.
Most of the times the forts surrendered because of the lack of food and/or ammo to hold down rather then being stormed. EU4 portrays in that aspect how things really were in those times.
How to determine if you need Naval or Maritime:
Is you name DDRJake and you play specifically to take suboptimal ideas? No? Well, that's your answer, ya nerd!
influence vs diplo next?
If the province is blockaded it actually does capitulate faster and give out earlier in a siege, but not by much. It's suppose to lower morale.
EU4 needs marines. They were a thing in this time period, especially in the 17th century onwards. Just have units that can embark really quickly from ships or something.
Hey idk if you know of one but I would love a video about trade. Maybe after Rights of Man?
The nerf to navies with blocking straits sucks.
Well it was to stop the players from exploiting it.
DraconicEpic More fault of the AI getting itself trapped. At least it made sense as a mechanic.
abopfred The AI is only so good. I'll take a fix over Paradox giving the AI more hacks like free border/coastal forts.
IMO admiral’s siege ability should be able to stack with the general’s siege when sieging
You forgot the most important part about maritime ideas. It allows the 'confirm thalassocracy' decision which is actually pretty awesome if you manage to get it.
can you make a guide "how to become republic"?
Maybe do Influence Vs Diplomatic
A bit of a late response to your video, but I believe that blockading a province with a fort increases the rolls for the sieging army. You might want to give it a try, though, since I am not one-hundred percent sure.
Megacaesar On coastal provinces, having a blockade removes the penalty, but doesn't increase the speed, it just makes it like a normal siege at that point.
Ah, thanks! That'll help me better estimate situations and decide how to apply my navies and siege armies. I tended to siege coastal forts first because I thought my fleets were making them easier to siege down.
I suppose we could still argue that fleets help with sieges, though. Isn't removing a penalty a net improvement?
No matter your thoughts on the topic of navies contributing to sieges, I agree with you that the naval system could still use a bit of a rework.
It would be interesting to see a fairly hefty amount of war exhaustion from blockades of major trade routes, and it might also help if Paradox added unrest in blockaded provinces (after all, coastal provinces and cities usually strongly rely on their access to the sea for trade, fishery and transportation, and removing their main source of livelihood will make life in such a province quite difficult.
Unless you use a bonus later in the game that increases the effects of blockade on the siege. Still, naval ideas are crap - maritime at least has some uses.
I actually encountered a moment where I needed Naval ideas badly. I was Japan and fought england for islands and colonies and for the life of me I couldn't win any heavy ship naval battles agianst him all because england has a very OP +20% naval morale NI.
Isn't there siege admirals that decrease the time it takes to siege provinces?
siege pips on admirals only increase blockade efficiency as far as I'm aware. It's extremely lame
Can confirm that, only improves blockading :(
I ❤️ Desmond
Hey Dark! I love this kind of videos and all, but please upload something from your GB series :( I'm missing it a bit
I plan on releasing an episode sometime tomorrow. :)
well... it's something, I guess :/
+SoyLuciano don't worry! and hey, before too long Rights of Man is going to come out and we'll be able to have ourselves a good time as Byzantium!
+darkfireslide definetly looking forward to that ;D
Could you do a video where you rank all the idea groups from best to worst with a brief explanation of what makes a specific group bad/good. Thanks!
there is no best idea group depends on nation
it's too subjective and ideas work in different situations. I think Humanist is generally the best but the people i play multiplayer with always give me stick for choosing it. exploration is amazing for a few nations, and shit for others. Trade can be great, but for some nations its awful
Just because different idea groups are better for different situations doesn't mean that it is subjective, for instance admin ideas are useful if you are going to be coring a lot of land otherwise you'd be better going for economic, but that doesn't mean that they are equally viable.
Abstract.ipz If you decide to go tall, admin is a fairly useless idea group and economic would work much better. Sure, you would core a little, but most of your time would be spent developing
x2dylan That's what I said.
The only use i find in having a giant navy is to take out ships blockading land passages. Very annoying when the ottomans blockade constantinople and you have to go all the way around to get to the anatolian part of the ottomans.
Show us how to get a nice Jerusalem game going like yours, I want to try it in Multiplayer
well to do it in multiplayer you would need a way to defeat the Ottomans, because otherwise you're going to have a bad time.
Rule No.1 in MP: have nobody playing the Ottomans.
Rule No. 2 Nobody playing France
Rule No. 2 Nobody playing Poland
I love your canal
Blockades on London have won me many wars without having to land on the isles themseleves
Also if u take Maritime you have the option of the policy to buff Moral by 20
How about an idea that negates beach landing penalties? Make it available for completing the idea group, so that you have to invest in it. But that way, spearheading an assault on single islands would be less costly, and save you manpower.
One point of order: naval artillery is not the same as land artillery. It was (and is) often much more powerful.
diplomatic vs influence?
Very few exploding ordinance in Eu4's timeline.
But I completely agree that navies are underpowered in EU4.
You really confused me because near the end of the video an alarm went off on what I assume is your phone that is the exact same as the timer I use on mine.
7:27 an alarm goes off
hey, what version is this?
They should make the effects of a blockades be more drastic. The British became the predominant power because of this ability to slowly starve their enemies. This was how they were able to punch above their weight.
WHY NOT BOTH
I think you should also consider multiplayer games. Taking either Maritime or Naval can help an England player that got locked on his island to smash all the fleets of opposing colonizers and take their shit abroad. What are they going to do about it? Swim across the ocean? He we also lose tons of ducats in trade as his tradehsips cannot function during the war. You cannot be touched so you can stall it as well. In singleplayer it doesn't matter because you will build more ships as the ai anyway. I do feel the sailorpowerrecovery should be changed for cheaper maintaince though
They thing with England is though that your military NI SUCK. you only have 5% discipline. You are taking exploration and expansion so that is two less slots you can use for military ideas. If you take an ideagroup for your ships as well you armies are going to be useless. Nations with Military ideas need at least 2 military ideas (i usually don't come further than the6th idea group) to be able to compete.
I hate how I can easily go the entire game without building a single ship and still be the strongest by far
do an England eu4 run with maritime ideas and 1.20 naval fort siege changes
Economic and trade?
TL;DR never take either of them.
Blockading does decrease the time to siege a province
it just makes it like a normal fort seige by getting rid of a BS modifier coastal forts are just harder to siege without a blockade
it would be somewhat nice ifinstead of going from -2 to 0 it went from -2 to +2 siege modifier when blockaded
Berder ideas + exploration + maritime. Ship spam!!!!!
Economic or Trade? or both?
i'd say that depends on where you are in the world, if theres a nice chain of trade nodes you could be using and your trade income is superior to your tax then i would go for trade. If like france you're using mostly tax to fund yourself then i would go economic along with the other (reduced autonomy etc) benefits that come with economic that arent so specific to income
Of course once you get big enough you'll likely want both.
I'd like to start by saying I prefer Maritime over Naval. THAT SAID you're completely wrong about navies being useless. All colonial and trade nations NEED navies to defend their and oversea territories and income. Also the blockade modifier does greatly shorten siege time of coastal provinces and it really hurts the blockaded nation's trade income.
I think he doesn't mention it because a couple weeks ago he said he doesn't like colonizing so he doesn't face that problem
Naval battles, when they do actually happen, give way to little war score
Trade vs Economic
This with the x10 mod... e.e thanks!
They work really well for England or GB though.
i think you mean against England or GB
Bluestrawberry Either works.
Jokes on me I once took both
So basically here's what I'm getting out of this.
Never take Naval.
Only take Maritime when you don't need a different diplo idea.
Basically
or if youre playing GB for some of the nice decisions you can get after completing ships penny. And also confirm the thelassocracy(sp?) can be great for colonisers/traders
the global ship repair in maritime just means that each month your ships heal 12% instead of 10% which is just garbage
I mean it saves you like 2 months or so in repair time but yeahh at least it's not a mil group
Yes most of the time though you have maybe one ship that is low and the rest are on like 73%.But yeah at least its not a military group.You also didnt mention some of the decisions like confirm thelassowhatever for which u need maritime.
Ayyyy, nice
Wrong: take both, naval 1st Maritime 2nd
Well, you only talk about the mainstream game where you need to get a better army to win wars. But just think a second about the situation of e.g. sweden. I can only recommend taking naval ideas first as sweden to win the wars against denmark because they can build more boats then u do, and when u beat them down u can still use the better ships to invade england and later on france . Your Army is already really good so its not a drama if u miss one ''good'' military idea group. Best example when u should take naval ideas in my opinion.
Economic vs Trade.
Flying ass fart hahahhahHHHHgHgagg
flying ass fart 😂
the Ottomans are already op enough without having 200 galleys attacking your lands.
GeneralAlphaShark that's why 300 galleys is so much better
Offensive vs defensive
"208 ships -> 416 ships."
.... wtf. Hey Malacca, Bengal, Genoa, Goa, Caribbean, Mexico, Panama, and Nippon trade notes; All your trade now belongs to Portugal!
Naval ideas are complete shit, Maritime is a great 'second trade idea' set. I always take it whenever I'm a hyper-wealthy, tall trade nation like the Netherlands, and I just flood key trade nodes with 100 light ship trade fleets.
You should never take both take quality and ideas and polices for discipline it makes it your you non heavies can destroy fleets that have heavies.
Naval or maritime? Bah, use both.
Captain Davian I dont think Its worth it, I dont take neither
Juca Lebre You are only truly playing when you pick the shit ideas.
aristocratic vs plutocratic :^)
Plutocratic automatically wins. It is just better across the board.
Force limit of 12 ships? Okay then. 12 heavies it is. Fuck you England I win on the sea.
What's the point in navies when in the year 1550 England finally gets 20 heavies? That's IF they DON'T EVER get their navy crushed. If you crush there navy at the start or near the start of the game it takes about 50+ years for them to build them back.
I got a PU over England and integrated them in 1700 and then I had 100 heavies. I also had 600 light ships but that's aside the point. Anyways so I just took 100k troops to China and the huge 2 nations that made up most of China and owned the sea had like 40 heavies combined...
I also with those 600 light ships had 99% trade power over the English trade node... and I only owned London heheh. If I stopped protecting trade I'd lose like 200 of my income and only own 50% of the English trade node.
Take Naval ideas when you have to invade England or are a American nation fighting colonizer navies.
Austria Jerusalem border...
Navy in eu4 is useless it pisses me off
You don't /video