Install Steam
login
|
language
简体中文 (Simplified Chinese)
繁體中文 (Traditional Chinese)
日本語 (Japanese)
한국어 (Korean)
ไทย (Thai)
Български (Bulgarian)
Čeština (Czech)
Dansk (Danish)
Deutsch (German)
Español - España (Spanish - Spain)
Español - Latinoamérica (Spanish - Latin America)
Ελληνικά (Greek)
Français (French)
Italiano (Italian)
Bahasa Indonesia (Indonesian)
Magyar (Hungarian)
Nederlands (Dutch)
Norsk (Norwegian)
Polski (Polish)
Português (Portuguese - Portugal)
Português - Brasil (Portuguese - Brazil)
Română (Romanian)
Русский (Russian)
Suomi (Finnish)
Svenska (Swedish)
Türkçe (Turkish)
Tiếng Việt (Vietnamese)
Українська (Ukrainian)
Report a translation problem
Discussions Rules and Guidelines
Report this post
To get that disaster one of the following must be true.
* has a regency.
* the heir's claim strength is less than 80.
* has a female heir.
Only during the Age of Discovery.
I'm thinking that's just a disaster Castille has a chance of getting. You can avoid it by getting a pu over aragon or make portugal a vassal.
I just don't know what to do.
I'm still pretty new to the game as well, but I'll weigh in on your little issue.
First thing's first: don't get discouraged! Estates deciding that they would do a better job at running the country instead of the divinely-appointed monarch is a natural occurrence both in times of strife and of prosperity, so you shouldn't get discouraged by rebels, of all things. Your rivals winning wars and expanding (at your expense), you losing out on being papal controller after sinking 50+ papal influence in appointing your obviously better prepared cardinals to the position, having +100% tech costs from lack of institutions and no money to embrace them plus associated tech penalties while getting declared on by invading men riding dragons showing up in wooden castles from across the Great Expanse, these are things to get discouraged by. But rebels? Screw them, we all know not even rebels like rebels. (it's true. They'll fight each other when it would be in their best interests to co-operate. Talk about hatred.)
In all seriousness though, sometimes rebels can spawn at really unfortunate times, and doubly so when the rebels are estate rebels (the worst of the worst imo). Let's think of what you can do to manage your situation. For this scenario, I will assume that their influence has already grown to the point that you have a ticking disaster edging closer to firing, and to make it worse I'll also consider if you are at war wth another country in the middle of all this. If either is not the case, then things are made a bit more manageable.
The first and easiest thing to do, would be to do nothing. If you are under no threat from the estate, even if they did get some random events pushing their influence way higher than you intended it to go, there might still be a case for sitting tight and not committing your forces. It involves a bit of math, but when hovering over the influence of the estate, calculate how long until it will drop naturally to a more manageable level just from events expiring, then compare that to the ticking disaster in months. If the disaster ticks up to 100 before the random influence events expire, then you must act on it; otherwise, just don't. Note that events are calculated individually, so you might realistically have to wait for too long to get the nobility's influence low this way, but it could still work.
If not, then you need to act and act reasonably quickly (depending on disaster progress). Having rebels spawn is one thing, annoying but manageable. But a disaster rebellion? That's a whole other kettle of fish. Revoke as many of their provinces as you need in order to get the disaster to stop ticking up. Having to eat a couple battles' worth of manpower is nothing compared to a full-blown civil war firing for your country, where you will lose many times that number in men and gold. When revoking, if possible, try to station an army of roughly equal size to the rebels spawning on the province you are revoking before you hit the button. If it will spawn a rebel stack, you get the defender bonus to attack and defense rolls in that case, and lessen your losses. Also, give the army a general - any general will do, but the better the better, and make sure you are at full morale when revoking. Noble rebels, while strongest of all (except maybe reolutionary rebels), are still no match for a full morale army of comparable strength.
In the case that you do end up losing the fight with the rebels however, still, don't lose hope! You get the advantage of being able to replenish your troops and training more, which the rebels don't get. Simply fall back, regroup, and deliver the second shattering blow later, while they are busy sitting in your fields playing backgammon or parcheesi (or whatever rebels do when they sit for years on the same province). You have the benefit of time, while the rebels have literally nothing.
On a side note, if your disaster is ticking up,you should consider more and more spending whatever it takes to curtail its progress the closer it is to firing. If the disaster is at 10% and one of the ways to cancel it is to have 80 Legitimacy, and you have 25, then you can wait until it is at 90% before you have to click the strengthen government button and waste your MIL points on that. For the most part, especially for newer players, preventing a disaster from firing is always the right call in any given situation (except for some specific cases, like revolutions or Court and Country, but don't worry about those).
I haven't talked about being at war with another power yet. In this case, you have a couple more options, in addition to the ones mentioned above.
Again, the first thing to do is to do nothing. If at war and rebels spawn, you might get a fortunate enemy army coming in to wipe your rebels for you, which solves the problem. For another, not doing anything - while giving you 10 years of separatism in the provinces they occupy, which isn't nothing - will make it so that they will eventually move onto one of your other provinces - sometimes occupied by the enemy - and the previous step repeats with your enemy eventually killing the rebel stack, and taking several losses in the process. If you do have an itchy finger however, you can wait and revoke provnces from the nobility while the war enemy is sieging down one of their granted estates; revoking that province will instantly spawn the rebel on top of the enemy army, guaranteeing a fight between two third parties while you get to conserve your manpower.
So, all in all, your game is entirely salvageable and you don't sound like you're in too bad a (e)state. :) Please don't take what I'm going to say next personally, I'm writing it down as much for myself as for you or other newer players out there that might get a bit disheartened by setbacks, like I did.
Because EU 4 does not have victory conditions (multplayer aside), it makes the entire experience a giant sandbox in which your actions have far-reaching effects and consequences, a world which is your oyster to shape and mould as you choose. Because of the sheer scope of the game, the way player growth and expansion is kept in check is through arbitrary goalposts, over which you cannot go without dire consequences (overextension, monarch points, gold, estate influence, coalitions, forcelimit, manpower, sailors etc). The further you get into the game and the better you do, the less any of these have an effect on your country's dominance of their region or of the world.
This is just to say that not only do these arbitrary limitations exist in-game, but also human propensity for making suboptimal decisions - i hesitate to call them "mistakes" - is added as an extra factor in curbing the effectiveness of your country's growth. Now, if it weren't for either and both of these checks on expansion, the game would feel a lot flatter and less gripping - at least to me - when it comes to overcoming the setbacks that sometimes we impose on ourselves. For an example: in my first actual game of EU4, when finally felt that I kinda got how the systems worked, I played a Cuzco into Inca campaign, going for the "A Sun God" achievement. I figured playing in South America would let me expand and conquer at my leisure and get to grips with the combat and fort mechanics, but also - because of the delay until colonizers arrive - allow me to better understand the timeframe of the game (previous to this, I couldn't get why monarch point generation was SO SLOW, money was SO SLOW, manpower and everything else was just SO DAMN SLOW). This was pre-Rights of Man, when you still needed to Westernize at the cost of exorbitant monarch points and gold and stuff. Well, I managed to somehow form Inca, militarized by taking and finishing the Quality and Offensive idea groups, and colonized up to Panama by the time the Portuguese ships were spotted on the shores (Yes, I kind of beelined it north, terrified as I was that I wouldn't get a foothold before the catholics showed up). I also sank thousands of military points into tech, so I wouldn't fall behind the Europeans when they did show up. And.... in the war that inevitably broke out, I had my 60.000 strong main (only) army, with a 3-star general, get absolutely destroyed in a defensive battle by a Portuguese force only 20.000-strong and only 1 tech level ahead, which then proceeded to ransack the entirety of the Andes since my manpower was in the gutter. That was soul-crushing, as I thought I had prepared well for the fight against the hateful Euros. However, thinking on it, I considered that maybe Defensive would have been a bettern choice (+1 attrition in jungles and mountains isn't nothing), maybe I should have built more forts and had a smaller army, maybe taken Quantity to be able to throw men under the cannons of the Portuguese just to wittle them down, and basically just bleed out the invaders until their willingness to fight was no more. I sadly quit that game and never returned to it, since Rights of Man came out shortly thereafter and changed Westernization (among other reasons), but I view that game as a testament of why EU 4 is a game whose brilliance stems from how our own "mistakes" and decisions are often the main limiting factor to our progress - and at the same time, the thing that gives the nation we are playing as the most flavour. Another, shorter, example: in my current game as Mewar (yes, everybody is gunning that achievement) in Dharma, I spent points developing my capital to 30 development before the Renaissance even spawned; an arguable mistake (the year is 1750 and I'm still behind on ADM tech), but one that game me huge immediate benefits for my early game. So, a stylistic choice, and one that I don't regret, even though I think that maybe I shouldn't have made it. Probably. Probably maybe.
And so, in a roundabout way, that's what I was thinking of when I noticed you felt disheartened by your rebels. Apologies for the ranty post, but the most important thing to take away from it is that your "mistakes", your "failures" are the thing that brigs life to your game the most, the reason you are able to take pride when you finally achieve your aims in a particular game IN SPITE of the imperfect plays you made on the road there. There is no right way or wrong way to play the game, and I don't think - apart from muliplayer, livestreaming or YouTube series - there is even an optimal way to play the game. Just different choices you are presented with, different paths to "victory", and different experiences every time you start a new game. So don't get disheartened at the curve balls the game throws at you, that's just its way of keeping itself interesting, diverse, and challenging.
EDIT: Formatting. Some typos.
This game didn't really have a decent tutorial. Instead, I see my whole time with this game as one big tutorial. I don't think I'll stop "screwing up" and learning from my mistakes but that's fine with me.
Cheers!
You're welcome, and my apologies for the lengthy post. I recently tried introducing a friend to the game and they had some of the same misgivings you did, then unceremoniously quit. I guess I got triggered and didn't want to see it happen again. :)
The tutorial tells you what things are important, but does a very bad job at telling you why they are important and how they play together, and doesn't give you a sense of the time-scale involved. The Cuzco game I mentioned earlier was, I think, my seventh or eighth iteration, so keep at it, the only way to go is up!
Best of luck in your journey of discovery!