EU4 is pretty good on late game (only problem is you become too strong at late game period), Stellaris is pretty garbage (the only cool thing are end-game crisis) and HoI4 is by far the worst for end-game.
18:00 I'd like to add that for maneuver pips, supply limit and reinforce speed are positively affected for each pip you have. At least that's how I understand maneuver.
Truly, the meta is starting as a North American Native, taking Indigenous, becoming a Horde, becoming a republic and then spamming as many troops as humanly possible
There's no eu4 player who would put quality at the bottom. Combat ability is absolutely busted in this game. Even if it's balanced in multiplayer against quantity, it has a hidden advantage against numbers. It inflicts emotional damage! -I won, but at what cost!(3x the casualties) -Sire, we will replenish those losses in 3 months. -I know, but we just suffered a million casualties! Same thing with defensive. Morale of armies is just as busted and way more important for quantity than quality army builds!
30:50 I would say that in single player aristocratic is usually the meta opener. You don't need military bonuses in SP. Aristocratic/plutocratic/divine and defensive are the only military idea groups I ever take, because those are the only idea groups that give you development cost reduction.
@@LemonCake101 Maybe I play minors too much, but I don't really sea point opening with admin. While diplo is great opener. And I do not do extreme try-hard runs, hence aristocratic is usually quite nice opener that gives you a little bit of everything. Usually waiting with admin for third or even fourth idea slot is not a problem, unless you are mega blobbing. Although I will admit that I recently suffered immensely because I opened Novgorod with plutocratic (my first republic run in 2500 hours) and I had to take admin as second, third was reserved for religious and I took diplomatic as a forth. Because I wanted finish Novgorod mission tree before forming Russia (I double checked, I do not inherit Novgorod mission tree after forming Russia, even though many people claimed that I should - maybe I am lacking some DLC, even though I have DLCs with missions for Novgorod and Russia) I was stuck with two diplomats for very long time. So I admit, that playing as Novgorod I should definitely open with diplo/admin if I had to for long time stay as Novgorod.
@@Hadar1991 oh roleplay games do whatever for tierlists we assume optimal play otherwise the best idea is whatever is more fun and hence rankings are all pointless and well you need admin for ccr.
My thesis on this topic is because paradox games choose to put their game in bubbles. They don’t want/expect you to advance past the era/timeline that they have set in place. Whether it be to make players buy their other games to experience different eras in time, or they simply just want their game to have a focus. Either way, it would be nice to see games advance past their given timeline constraints. You technically can keep going in most games, but nothing fundamentally changes. The units stay the same, the doctrines, etc. I’ve always wanted a grand strategy game to have implements of a civ game. Imagine starting from the Stone Age and it plays more like imperator, then you go to an era that feels more like crusader kings, then to an era that feels like HOI4, and finally to the modern/future era where it basically turns into stellaris.
Quality would be so much better if the +10% Artillery combat bonus came before all the naval buffs. It's really the naval buffs that make it pretty mid, if the group lacked all of the naval buffs and just had the land buffs as well as the discipline bonus at the end, it would be pretty good imo
Quality is mandatory in multiplayer where discipline, artillery combat ability and the policies are of huge value. But in singleplayer its just ass. Especially the three naval ideas make it awful.
i'm going to chalk any disagreements down to not covering national ideas, policies and the synergies there! because otherwise as an official list its hard to disagree
You neglected to mention that Land Leader Maneuver also reduces an Army's 'weight' in a province, essentially allowing a high Maneuver-pip general to field larger armies before going over support limit and taking attrition. A small but important detail.
