Innovative vs Administrative

[swilhelm73]

I find I usually take one of these two as my first idea group since they both same significant monarch points. Administrative in coring and Innovative in tech/ideas. I tend to end up going with innovative for the WE reduction though because in practice that is a massive benefit...

[Narrowmind]

Have you also considered the policies offered by both?

[Ericus1]

I think the answer largely depends on what your goals are. Administrative is good if you're going for large scale conquest, innovative is better if you planning on staying smaller and focusing on internal growth.

[RCMidas]

Owing to how the game is designed, the mechanics reward playing wide. I mean this in a truly mathematical sense. You get stronger by expanding than by spending the same resources on developing a very few provinces. Administrative is therefore one of the very best ideas due to its CCR, whereas Innovative simply cannot compete. That said, if you are doing an RP run or aiming for a specific achievement, you may prefer to take Innovative just to make the run feel better or be easier for you.

[Marquoz]

Originally posted by RCMidas:

Owing to how the game is designed, the mechanics reward playing wide. I mean this in a truly mathematical sense. You get stronger by expanding than by spending the same resources on developing a very few provinces. Administrative is therefore one of the very best ideas due to its CCR, whereas Innovative simply cannot compete. That said, if you are doing an RP run or aiming for a specific achievement, you may prefer to take Innovative just to make the run feel better or be easier for you.

100% this. If you're looking to optimize your play, Admin is vastly better than Innovative. If you're roleplaying or deliberately increasing the game's difficulty level by making poor idea group picks, Innovative is a fine choice.

[Medicles]

The question is why do you want to save points in the first place? Its certainly beneficial in a world conquest, but i assume that most of your games dont even reach the enddate, so how practical is monarch point saving when the game doesnt even reach the year 1700?

Thats one of the reasons why streamers are going for military ideas at the beginning, because they are showing of games that dont take long and its more beneficial to take ideas that give upgrades for the short term than for the long game.

[Kapika96]

Originally posted by Ericus1:

innovative is better if you planning on staying smaller and focusing on internal growth.

If you're staying small then infrastructure is probably a better choice than innovative. The bonuses there will be much more useful for tall play.

I quite like infrastructure when I want a chill colonial game too. The +1/1/1 dev to colonies policy with exploration is nice for that. Works really well when you're playing somebody like England, Holland or Portugal and not doing much conquest in Europe.

[Marquoz]

Originally posted by Medicles:

Thats one of the reasons why streamers are going for military ideas at the beginning, because they are showing of games that dont take long and its more beneficial to take ideas that give upgrades for the short term than for the long game.

Those streamers would be stronger if they sank those military points into a permanent tech lead and hired dozens of generals instead. The combined power of a tech lead + strong generals + the army professionalism you get by hiring them is greater than a military group all by itself. And then you can use the slot on something actually useful instead, like the Big Three.

[Ericus1]

Originally posted by Kapika96:

Originally posted by Ericus1:

innovative is better if you planning on staying smaller and focusing on internal growth.

If you're staying small then infrastructure is probably a better choice than innovative. The bonuses there will be much more useful for tall play.

I quite like infrastructure when I want a chill colonial game too. The +1/1/1 dev to colonies policy with exploration is nice for that. Works really well when you're playing somebody like England, Holland or Portugal and not doing much conquest in Europe.

True, but since the OP directly asked about Admin vs Inno, I stuck to them in my response. The ideal idea set can vary dramatically with what your goals are and seemed outside the scope of the OPs question.

[Medicles]

Originally posted by Marquoz:

Those streamers would be stronger if they sank those military points into a permanent tech lead and hired dozens of generals instead. The combined power of a tech lead + strong generals + the army professionalism you get by hiring them is greater than a military group all by itself. And then you can use the slot on something actually useful instead, like the Big Three.

I mean, yeah, in regard to teaching people stuff this should certainly be the way, but many of their shown campaigns are over extremely early, like mid 1500. Depending on the country they are playing as well, its arguably a waste to even go for the big three, because they arent getting their worth out of them.

[dbond1]

I do it differently.

Only in very rare circumstances do I take an ADM group first. Since admin tech is what unlocks idea groups, taking an ADM idea group first slows down the others.

In specific circumstances I take a DIP idea group first, when I am playing a diplomatic game, or if rushing exploration.

In all others it is MIL first, since those points are least precious.

I just finished This is Persia over the weekend and this is what I took, in order

Quantity
Diplomatic
Administrative
Quality
Offensive
Trade
Defensive

Four of seven MIL groups. Obviously I have the balanced groups thing turned off. I am making buckets of ducats, so boosting economy through idea groups isn't needed. Swimming in MPs, so boosting my ability to expand and core newly won territory isn't needed. Having a good army is needed haha.

By taking ADM as a third group it dovetails nearly perfectly by having ADM 10 and Age of Discovery golden age intersect so I have three idea groups going at the same time with the MP cost discount.

MIL groups are just more interesting to me than infrastructure or court or something like that. And anyway, I take all groups at different points. I don't play min-max, just do whatever i feel like.

[Mr.M]

Originally posted by Kapika96:

Originally posted by Ericus1:

innovative is better if you planning on staying smaller and focusing on internal growth.

If you're staying small then infrastructure is probably a better choice than innovative. The bonuses there will be much more useful for tall play.

Infrastructure is pretty garbo. If you want to stack development cost you unfortunately need it... But innovative saves signifcantly more monarch points (which can then be poured into development).

I am also pretty sure innovative has better policies.

[Marquoz]

Originally posted by dbond1:

Only in very rare circumstances do I take an ADM group first. Since admin tech is what unlocks idea groups, taking an ADM idea group first slows down the others.

This is true, and my most common first idea group is Diplo for this reason--well, that and the fact that Diplo is most powerful early on.

But the rest of your post I strongly disagree with. As I said earlier in this thread:

Originally posted by Marquoz:

Originally posted by Medicles:

Thats one of the reasons why streamers are going for military ideas at the beginning, because they are showing of games that dont take long and its more beneficial to take ideas that give upgrades for the short term than for the long game.

Those streamers would be stronger if they sank those military points into a permanent tech lead and hired dozens of generals instead. The combined power of a tech lead + strong generals + the army professionalism you get by hiring them is greater than a military group all by itself. And then you can use the slot on something actually useful instead, like the Big Three.

Your army will be stronger if you don't take a military group early. I'm not kidding. It's an EU4 design flaw, but it's true.

[dbond1]

It's cool, I know you do it differently. Just posting about my approach. Not to convince anyone, and certainly not claiming it is the best approach. Just the way I go about it.

You take zero MIL groups, I take four. You conquer the world. I nick achievements just under the line lol.

[Marquoz]

If you aren't too set in your ways, you might enjoy a different, more efficient approach.

[dbond1]

Yeah maybe, but rigidly sticking to a 'method' for success sterilizes this game in a sense. I want to take Maritime. Or Defensive. Or Naval! Yeah, I might be the only one. It cannot become paint by numbers, there must be some room for artistry :)