Force PU costs too much AE

[Nicolas Cage]

Fix the bug that makes agressive expansion from force PU unreasonable. For instance if you want to get bohemian throne as Austria is costs over 100 AE.
HOT FIX IT.

[Medicles]

The beta has it fixed. Just wait until its released.

[M1A1 Abrams]

Originally posted by Medicles:

The beta has it fixed. Just wait until its released.

Was the increased AE Cost intentional or was it a bug that it was significantly higher than it should have been? Curious because i honestly am not sure

[Sneep Snorp]

Originally posted by M1A1 Abrams:

Originally posted by Medicles:

The beta has it fixed. Just wait until its released.

Was the increased AE Cost intentional or was it a bug that it was significantly higher than it should have been? Curious because i honestly am not sure

I feel like some increase was intentional since it was WAY to strong but at the same time it was way too high

[RCMidas]

All other AE increased changes were for a value of 0.08; PU was for 0.8, ten times greater. Someone fat-fingered that, we suspect.

[Madmanx]

That's what she said ...

[Medicles]

Originally posted by M1A1 Abrams:

Originally posted by Medicles:

The beta has it fixed. Just wait until its released.

Was the increased AE Cost intentional or was it a bug that it was significantly higher than it should have been? Curious because i honestly am not sure

Initially there was a bug that made it too high and they fixed it, but for balance reason they have increased the AE for PUs to a fair level, in my opinion.

[Totally Innocent Chatbot]

I disagree wholeheartedly that the initial 700% increase to Restoration of Union AE was a "fair level". The entire point of the "RESTORATION of Union" Casus Belli is that it should have massively less AE, because you have a strong claim to the other nation's throne that's widely considered legitimate - the original purpose of it is to take back a Junior Partner who has rebelled and broken free. The entire world around you isn't supposed to be outraged by it, because you're simply taking back what was already yours to begin with, much like the Reconquest CB. When the excuse of "balance reasons" gets in the way of historical accuracy this badly, it's an issue - even ignoring all the other things in the game that are both historically inaccurate and terribly balanced. I'm sure plenty of Czechs IRL were upset with how overpowered Austria was in the 15th century, too.

I just find it incredibly funny that the people who are constantly saying that the Ottomans should be buffed are fine with instead defending this moronic nerf to 3/4 of the major powers near them.

[bri]

Originally posted by Totally Innocent Chatbot:

I disagree wholeheartedly that the initial 700% increase to Restoration of Union AE was a "fair level". The entire point of the "RESTORATION of Union" Casus Belli is that it should have massively less AE, because you have a strong claim to the other nation's throne that's widely considered legitimate - the original purpose of it is to take back a Junior Partner who has rebelled and broken free. The entire world around you isn't supposed to be outraged by it, because you're simply taking back what was already yours to begin with, much like the Reconquest CB. When the excuse of "balance reasons" gets in the way of historical accuracy this badly, it's an issue - even ignoring all the other things in the game that are both historically inaccurate and terribly balanced. I'm sure plenty of Czechs IRL were upset with how overpowered Austria was in the 15th century, too.

I just find it incredibly funny that the people who are constantly saying that the Ottomans should be buffed are fine with instead defending this moronic nerf to 3/4 of the major powers near them.

How about because the restoration of union CB is handed out like candy in completely ahistoric fashion? I have no problem with actual restoration of a previous union not triggering massive ae but fantasyland crap missions are an entirely different story.

When did England ever rule France in a union? That would be never, and yet they can get that exact CB not once but twice. Lithuania over Russia? Again, that's a never happened thing. I could go on but don't see any real reason to. As long as the CB is being used in a fashion different than the original intent then it should be generating ae appropriate for the predominant usage.

[Xander Tyrann]

Originally posted by bri:

Originally posted by Totally Innocent Chatbot:

I disagree wholeheartedly that the initial 700% increase to Restoration of Union AE was a "fair level". The entire point of the "RESTORATION of Union" Casus Belli is that it should have massively less AE, because you have a strong claim to the other nation's throne that's widely considered legitimate - the original purpose of it is to take back a Junior Partner who has rebelled and broken free. The entire world around you isn't supposed to be outraged by it, because you're simply taking back what was already yours to begin with, much like the Reconquest CB. When the excuse of "balance reasons" gets in the way of historical accuracy this badly, it's an issue - even ignoring all the other things in the game that are both historically inaccurate and terribly balanced. I'm sure plenty of Czechs IRL were upset with how overpowered Austria was in the 15th century, too.

I just find it incredibly funny that the people who are constantly saying that the Ottomans should be buffed are fine with instead defending this moronic nerf to 3/4 of the major powers near them.

How about because the restoration of union CB is handed out like candy in completely ahistoric fashion? I have no problem with actual restoration of a previous union not triggering massive ae but fantasyland crap missions are an entirely different story.

When did England ever rule France in a union? That would be never, and yet they can get that exact CB not once but twice. Lithuania over Russia? Again, that's a never happened thing. I could go on but don't see any real reason to. As long as the CB is being used in a fashion different than the original intent then it should be generating ae appropriate for the predominant usage.

12th Century. 100 year war was a real war with this exact CB, England just lost.

[Totally Innocent Chatbot]

Originally posted by bri:

Originally posted by Totally Innocent Chatbot:

I disagree wholeheartedly that the initial 700% increase to Restoration of Union AE was a "fair level". The entire point of the "RESTORATION of Union" Casus Belli is that it should have massively less AE, because you have a strong claim to the other nation's throne that's widely considered legitimate - the original purpose of it is to take back a Junior Partner who has rebelled and broken free. The entire world around you isn't supposed to be outraged by it, because you're simply taking back what was already yours to begin with, much like the Reconquest CB. When the excuse of "balance reasons" gets in the way of historical accuracy this badly, it's an issue - even ignoring all the other things in the game that are both historically inaccurate and terribly balanced. I'm sure plenty of Czechs IRL were upset with how overpowered Austria was in the 15th century, too.

I just find it incredibly funny that the people who are constantly saying that the Ottomans should be buffed are fine with instead defending this moronic nerf to 3/4 of the major powers near them.

How about because the restoration of union CB is handed out like candy in completely ahistoric fashion? I have no problem with actual restoration of a previous union not triggering massive ae but fantasyland crap missions are an entirely different story.

When did England ever rule France in a union? That would be never, and yet they can get that exact CB not once but twice. Lithuania over Russia? Again, that's a never happened thing. I could go on but don't see any real reason to. As long as the CB is being used in a fashion different than the original intent then it should be generating ae appropriate for the predominant usage.

As I've suggested in the past, the best solution for this would simply be to create a separate CB, named "Force Union" or something like that, for the "fantasyland crap" missions that does the same thing but generates maybe 2 or 3 times as much AE. Makes balancing much easier while still leaving RoU intact for historical missions and regaining rebellious subjects.

[bri]

Originally posted by Xander Tyrann:

Originally posted by bri:

How about because the restoration of union CB is handed out like candy in completely ahistoric fashion? I have no problem with actual restoration of a previous union not triggering massive ae but fantasyland crap missions are an entirely different story.

When did England ever rule France in a union? That would be never, and yet they can get that exact CB not once but twice. Lithuania over Russia? Again, that's a never happened thing. I could go on but don't see any real reason to. As long as the CB is being used in a fashion different than the original intent then it should be generating ae appropriate for the predominant usage.

12th Century. 100 year war was a real war with this exact CB, England just lost.

Pretty sure that France actually ruled over England since king > duke (William the Conqueror was a French Duke after all). English rulers laid claim to the French crown but I don't see any record of them actually holding it...

[shrekening]

Originally posted by bri:

Originally posted by Xander Tyrann:

12th Century. 100 year war was a real war with this exact CB, England just lost.

Pretty sure that France actually ruled over England since king > duke (William the Conqueror was a French Duke after all). English rulers laid claim to the French crown but I don't see any record of them actually holding it...

https://simple.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/English_claims_to_the_French_throne

[Xander Tyrann]

Originally posted by bri:

Originally posted by Xander Tyrann:

12th Century. 100 year war was a real war with this exact CB, England just lost.

Pretty sure that France actually ruled over England since king > duke (William the Conqueror was a French Duke after all). English rulers laid claim to the French crown but I don't see any record of them actually holding it...

It was a person union between the Kingdom of England. Duke of Normandy, Duke of aquitaine, Duke of brittany, Anjou etc

Basically half of France, while claiming the full Kingdom. England fought to force a PU on the whole of France during the EUIV timeline but lost. It would be ahistoric not to have that CB in England's mission tree.

[Malvastor]

Originally posted by Totally Innocent Chatbot:

I disagree wholeheartedly that the initial 700% increase to Restoration of Union AE was a "fair level". The entire point of the "RESTORATION of Union" Casus Belli is that it should have massively less AE, because you have a strong claim to the other nation's throne that's widely considered legitimate - the original purpose of it is to take back a Junior Partner who has rebelled and broken free. The entire world around you isn't supposed to be outraged by it, because you're simply taking back what was already yours to begin with, much like the Reconquest CB. When the excuse of "balance reasons" gets in the way of historical accuracy this badly, it's an issue - even ignoring all the other things in the game that are both historically inaccurate and terribly balanced. I'm sure plenty of Czechs IRL were upset with how overpowered Austria was in the 15th century, too.

I just find it incredibly funny that the people who are constantly saying that the Ottomans should be buffed are fine with instead defending this moronic nerf to 3/4 of the major powers near them.

Has anyone said the 700% increase was a fair level? Most of what I've heard is "Forced PUs needed more AE but this is way too much".

[Medicles]

Originally posted by Totally Innocent Chatbot:

I disagree wholeheartedly that the initial 700% increase to Restoration of Union AE was a "fair level". The entire point of the "RESTORATION of Union" Casus Belli is that it should have massively less AE, because you have a strong claim to the other nation's throne that's widely considered legitimate - the original purpose of it is to take back a Junior Partner who has rebelled and broken free. The entire world around you isn't supposed to be outraged by it, because you're simply taking back what was already yours to begin with, much like the Reconquest CB. When the excuse of "balance reasons" gets in the way of historical accuracy this badly, it's an issue - even ignoring all the other things in the game that are both historically inaccurate and terribly balanced. I'm sure plenty of Czechs IRL were upset with how overpowered Austria was in the 15th century, too.

I just find it incredibly funny that the people who are constantly saying that the Ottomans should be buffed are fine with instead defending this moronic nerf to 3/4 of the major powers near them.

I think you misunderstood, i meant the current AE as fair level, not the bugged one.