r/eu4 • u/127FiftyTop • 16h ago
Advice Wanted First idea set as Georgia
I am trying (again) a run as Georgia, and it's going quite well. I annexed all of Circassia, shirvan, the two daghestani nations + the steppe up to Astrakan and most of aq qoyunlu, Trebizond is my vassal, Muscovy is my ally (I also have Cyprus, Theodoro and mushasha but they are useless right now), I spawned renaissance and all of my army is composed by 16 strelicy infantry and 4 Cossack cavalry (force limit is 20). I unlocked my first idea set and I was wondering what to chose: main treats are a big QQ (they attacked aq after I nearly killed them and took one third of their ally ajam in the process) and of course the ottomans. I am on par with ottos as for military and diplomatic tech, but due to the many cores I created admin tech is behind my neighbours. For this reason I would avoid any adm idea group for now. The economy is in shambles, so trade is tempting me, but diplo is always useful and influence/espionnage could have a role too. If not, I was thinking about taking quality just for the first tree ideas (I don't have a navy beside a single trade ship) so I don't fall behind the ottos, but even so they will probably overtake me as soon as they get renaissance too...
What would you guys suggest? I am not an expert (at 1000 hours I am yet to finish the 1444 tutorial) but I would like to keep this run going as long as possible
6
u/iClips3 Map Staring Expert 16h ago
I'd go for Diplo ideas. Getting allies there is pretty hard, so it'll help a lot in getting those while also helping you take more land or money (since land costs less warscore) in peacedeals.
2
u/127FiftyTop 16h ago
Good advice, but do you think it would actually change who wants me as an ally? I wanted mamluks, but they were too much over their relation limit and now they lost a first war against the ottomans so they are severely weakened
3
u/iClips3 Map Staring Expert 16h ago
Allies you want would be mostly Poland, Austria and then the strongest guy in Iran. Muscovy is probably already your ally. If not, those come first but don't need Diplo ideas. If they are, you probably want to switch them out for Poland at some point so you can PU them through your MT.
Or any other sizeable nations you can get. Venice and Bohemia would also be solid ally choices.
3
u/GainPrestigious539 16h ago
If you're hurting economically, trade can do wonders for siphoning money from the Persia node. However if you have mil power to spare I'd probably go quantity to deter the Ottomans and give you an edge against your neighbors. The war will feed itself
3
u/127FiftyTop 15h ago
I was definitely thinking about that Persian caravan trade...
4
1
u/Little_Elia 11h ago
If you want the persian trade, conquer persia. Trade ideas will not do much, they are incredibly underwhelming
1
u/127FiftyTop 10h ago
Yeah I crushed qq and now I have both mamluks and Muscovy as deterrent agains ottos, so I can't expand anywhere but east
1
2
u/Sparta1890 16h ago
Only 2 admin groups worthy of the first slot and expansion doesn’t work for Georgia. Innovation does not solve your immediate needs.
I’d go diplomatic or maybe offensive. Given the elephant in the room, I could also make an argument for mercenary or defensive ideas but have never used either set.
1
u/127FiftyTop 16h ago
Mercenary is super as Switzerland but with my economy I can't afford them. Defensive would be good with my traditions, but the ottos have cannons and if I only rely on forts to beat them the walls will still fall after some years. Offensive more than quality? Hmm, idk, I probably must chose diplo anyway
4
u/Affectionate_Goat808 15h ago
I once played a Georgia run where I super focused on attrition and forts. There I literally reach a point where I could defeat Ottos (or literally anyone else regardless of their strength) without any battles, solely by draining all their manpower on my forts and then counterattacking.
Super fun campaign, maybe the best I have done in EU4.
1
u/127FiftyTop 15h ago
Might give it a try, would you suggest it as first idea though?
3
u/Affectionate_Goat808 14h ago
Hands down defensive in that case.
Though I should say that in my run I actually started as Circassia and culture-switched to form Georgia. This is because Circassia starts as a tribe and can then thus switch gov to stateless society - which grants a whopping 75% fort defense and 15% morale.
The downside is that you also get -99% gov cap, though by going for admin ideas you reduce that to "only" -79%, which makes it playable if still extremely difficult to manage. But the extra restriction was an interesting challenge, and you get around it by expanding using vassals which you then annex as soon as you have scraped up enough gov cap for it. Later on you can also use courthouses and centralize state on all your states to reduce local province gov cost by -99%, which means most states cost <10 gov cap which means that even if you don't have a lot of gov cap you can still use it very efficiently.
2
u/127FiftyTop 14h ago
Wow that surely makes for a crazy run. If you switch to Georgia you still keep your core on Genoa's province in the west?
2
u/Affectionate_Goat808 13h ago
I allied Genoa and got the core back from them via favors before forming Georgia, so idk.
And yeah, it was absolutely crazy. It was obvious that the AI wasn't built for 300% fort defense and +100% garrison size forts, they would exhaust themselves completely on 2 - 3 forts and then be attacked by all their neighbors sensing weakness when they didn't have any manpower left.
You could also juke them by assembling an army next to a fort they were besieging and then feigning an attack, that often caused them to abandon the siege and run away.
And by stacking garrison army damage modifiers (which also stacks with fort defense and garrison size) you could sally forth against any army <30k that walked onto your fort and win.
2
u/127FiftyTop 13h ago
Marvellous indeed, although I fear not starting as Circassia might lessen the whole idea
2
u/bassman1805 Trader 11h ago
Worth noting that one of the defensive ideas is a massive army morale boost. +15%; the only bigger morale boosts in the game are Prussian national ideas and Sudanese traditions (+20% each). That's an awfully powerful offensive boost, despite the group name.
+100% Army tradition from battles is also a nice boost to Army Morale and Manpower recovery if you're at war a lot. It's not all about turtling behind your forts.
2
u/127FiftyTop 10h ago
Yeah defensive Is strong, i Will pick It as second now (i got going crushing QQ after picking Diplo ideas)
2
u/bassman1805 Trader 10h ago
Diplo is maybe the best idea set in the game, so yeah that was a good move.
1
u/Little_Elia 15h ago
Inno is definitely never worth the first slot. It's a pretty bad group
1
u/bassman1805 Trader 11h ago
I'd say the first slot is almost the only time Inno is worth it.
1
u/Little_Elia 11h ago
Not at all, idea group slots are extremely precious early on, and wasting it on something that won't even pay for itself in a couple centuries is a massive waste. Later on when you've already completed 5 or 6 groups, and don't really know what to pick, inno can be a decent option because of its policies.
1
u/Affectionate_Goat808 15h ago edited 15h ago
I usually think going for a military idea first is best in eu4, you always want to focus mil power asap to unlock those significant early mil techs before your enemies. That usually means that by the time that you unlock your first idea group you will still be focusing mil, and will start building up a surplus of mil mana. It also gives your military an extra edge if you have a mil idea and your opponents do not (Ottos often go for Admin ideas first).
Which mil group you should go for depends. Offensive, quality, quantity or defensive are all good choices. I would probably think quantity or defensive would be best for you. Quantity gives you a big advantages in manpower and army size that might help you the most in future wars, but you do need the economy to fill your higher FL which it doesn't sound like you have. So if you feel like economy is in shambles then defensive might be the best option, it has some ideas that help you economically (lower fort and army maintenance) but it also gives you a big quality buff early with the 15% morale which makes your army better without you having to pay extra for it. I also think defensive works extremely well with Georgia due to the mountainous terrain and Georgias missions and NI benefitting forts.
Also a tip if you can, ally Genoa, they get renaissance early and thus you can get it to you by adjacency, they are also very likely to straight up offer to share it with you. Trebizond also sometimes gets cores on their Crimea lands if rebels spawn there, then you can ask to get the cores back for favors.
7
u/Gobe182 13h ago
I'm gonna have to really disagree here. Conventional wisdom is that you don't want to take a mil group first, you want to take a dip group.
While yeah you should be focusing mil power, you still need to hit those breakpoints for the next tech, not take a detour of 2800 mil points into offensive/defensive/quantity. Spend those 2800 points in a dip group as dip tech is the least important early. Spend your mil and adm warring and coring.
Certainly there are scenarios like having a 6 mil ruler where it makes sense, but I almost always see diplomatic as the "meta" opening idea group for the province warscore cost. Sometimes but rarely espionage/influence/exploration.
1
u/Affectionate_Goat808 12h ago
SP meta differs somewhat but in MP meta it is essential to always take a mil group if you can, and if you don't you risk being at a serious disadvantage against an opponent that does take a mil group. The only real exception is when you need to colonize.
Both admin and dip power are directly consumed for expansion (by coring and integrating vassals, both things you should be doing) which mil power is not. Outside of taking mil tech mil power isn't really used for anything essential, and unless you are in a difficult war you really don't want to take the mil tech early.
Like I said before, you almost always want to start by focusing mil power to get the early mil techs asap, which means that by the time you chose your first idea I almost always tend to have a surplus of mil power (unless I have a really bad mil ruler) right around the time you take your first idea. It is then smart to keep the focus on mil power whiles you fill your first idea group, and then once you unlock the next idea group you can switch it to whatever category the next idea is in. This is the fastest way to complete the first two idea groups.
Now, you are right in that it is a mistake to take mil ideas instead of mil tech, but again unless you are in a difficult war you don't really need the mil tech ahead of time so there is little reason to take it early instead of filling your idea group. The important thing to keep in mind is that you don't have to take the mil ideas as soon as you have the mil mana for it, instead you should wait until it is near overflowing before taking an idea. That way you always keep a good amount of mil mana in the bank if you suddenly need to take the mil tech early. So you aren't really "taking a detour" to fill your mil idea group this way.
2
u/ncory32 11h ago
Unless explicitly mentioned, no one is ever talking about MP.
Sitting around blowing mil points on shitty mil ideas while waiting for early mil techs to lose their ahead of time cost is the dumbest suggestion I've read on this sub in years. Spend mil points on mil techs way ahead of time and snowball that advantage into more clay which snowballs into a better economy faster, which snowballs.. Etc, etc.
Tech 4 is a 50% boost to base tactics with a 20% boost to base morale. Tech 5 is new infantry and 10% combat width. Tech 6 is a 33% boost to base tactics, and new cav. Tech 7 is a 25% boost to base tactics and artillery. Even just 1-3 artillery is impactful in fights but wholly worth for sieges and barrages with your excess mil points.
During this same time you'd at most be able to take 3 ideas without falling behind in mil tech. Quantity would just be manpower bonuses (which has plenty of other work arounds, awful early ideas), quality with 10% infantry and cav CA (worth less than 5% disc), offensive with +1 shock/fire on generals (can reliably get this or more from rolling generals with excess mil points), or defensive with 15% morale (best of the bunch, but a horrible idea group outside of this).
All of the tech bonuses absolutely dwarf any of the idea bonuses. Keep prestige high, power project, advisors, army tradition etc to keep morale up. Or disc advisor to compound on your higher base tactics. There's no reason to spend early points on mil ideas. Just snowball.
1
u/127FiftyTop 14h ago
Really great tips. I will follow your advice (i got renaissance kind of early in this game)
1
u/ncory32 11h ago edited 11h ago
This is horrible advice. Your first sentence absolutely contradicts itself. NEVER go for an early mil idea group except in a couple situations where it is at best arguable, but It's never optimal. Taking a mil idea first only serves to slow down your military techs. Military techs are literally the only thing to prioritize for military success. The few mil idea groups worth taking are not taken because of their effect on battles.
You definitely should be mil focused early so you can take each tech through tech 7 as fast as humanly possible. The techs are that impactful, especially techs 4 and 6. Take that shit as many years ahead of time as possible. You can fight ottomans with either basically 1v1 as Georgia if they don't have it yet. If you're capping out on it, roll generals. A single good general will do far more for military battles than any mil idea group will in the first few decades. Do NOT spend early mil points on shitty ideas (which 90% of mil ideas are).
For Georgia, like basically any normal country, your first idea group should be a Diplo one. Who gives a shit if you fall behind on Diplo tech. Optimal play is either Diplo or espionage. Followed by admin or maybe an argument can be made for religious.
0
u/Affectionate_Goat808 10h ago
This is horrible advice. Your first sentence absolutely contradicts itself. NEVER go for an early mil idea group except in a couple situations where it is at best arguable, but It's never optimal. Taking a mil idea first only serves to slow down your military techs. Military techs are literally the only thing to prioritize for military success. The few mil idea groups worth taking are not taken because of their effect on battles.
No, you are pretty much guaranteed to take mil tech 4, 5 and probably even 6 before you take adm tech 5 unlocking the first idea group. At which point you will be so far ahead in mil tech that you can't really take the next mil idea ahead of time even if you wanted to.
You definitely should be mil focused early so you can take each tech through tech 7 as fast as humanly possible. The techs are that impactful, especially tech 6. Take that shit as many years ahead of time as possible.
Taking mil ideas "as many years ahead of time as possible" is what is horrible advice. If you need the military advantage then yes, do take it early, and for tech 4 and 5 are such a big advantage that you can win battles significantly outnumbered if you have the tech and you opponent doesn't. But otherwise it really is circumstantial, you take the mil tech early if you need it to win or maybe if the innovative bonus is about to run out, otherwise it is better to use your mil power efficiently and take the tech later and save your mil power.
If you are playing somewhat correctly you will almost always be able to take the mil tech before the AI and still have mil power to spare. I almost always take tech 4 and 5 asap and still end up with a mil power surplus. By the time you reach adm tech 5 (usually a bit later if you are expanding and coring) I tend to have mostly mil power.
You can fight ottomans with it basically 1v1 as Georgia if they don't have it yet.
I would like to see you try to 1 vs 1 the Ottomans as Georgia with your sole advantage being ahead by 1 mil tech. Anatolian pips alone are almost enough negate the advantage from tech 7 vs 6, not to mention all the other advantages Ottomans has.
For a lot of wars you fight, taking the mil tech ahead of time will not be the one deciding factor whether you win or not. If you were already going to win the battles in the war without the tech then having it doesn't really help you that much. All you have achieved is wasting your mil power. Its really only in the cases in very difficult war were you need to squeeze out every single possible advantage that it would matter. So yeah, if that is the situation you are in, then yes you should take the mil tech asap, no regard for the cost. But saying always take mil tech "as many years ahead as possible" is just flat out wrong.
If you're capping out on it, roll generals. A single good general will do far more for military battles than any mil idea group will in the first few decades.
Whiles you are not wrong that a good general is among the biggest factors early game, using mil mana on rerolling generals is also terrible advice. You really only need one good general for your army, there is no additional benefit in rolling for additional ones once you have it. And if you have bad military tradition it is just wasteful to reroll for bad generals on the the slight chance that one of them has all their pips on shock or siege. If you really need a good general you hire a mercenary company with a good general, and if you have nothing to else to spend your mil mana on and you are approaching the cap you dev with it. Don't hire generals when you don't need one.
For Georgia, like basically any normal country, your first idea group should be a Diplo one. Who gives a shit if you fall behind on Diplo tech. Optimal play is either Diplo or espionage. Followed by admin or maybe an argument can be made for religious.
If you are expanding efficiently you should be both taking land for yourself to core and feeding vassals which you then integrate. If you are doing that correctly you shouldn't have a big surplus of either adm or dip power when you reach the first idea group, meanwhile (unless you are wasting it all on rerolling generals or barraging forts) you should be building up a surplus of mil power with the next mil tech being far off by the time you take your first idea.
If you somehow don't actually have the mil mana for it but do have a surplus in some other category then yes, obviously don't go for a mil group. But you are doing something wrong (or very unlucky with rulers) if that is the case.
1
u/fapacunter The economy, fools! 15h ago
The best way for you to fix your economy is probably to expand. You should be able to get Persia and the rest of the Caucasus before the Ottomans get courageous enough to declare on you.
War reps, loan cicles and seizing/selling crownland should keep you afloat for the near future. You mentioned that you’re behind in Admin tech so my advice would be to expand through allies.
Maybe try to carve up QQ before the Ottomans decide to do it themselves. Get money and lands, decentralize those lands and then give them to a vassal.
Vassals make you stronger (on paper) on short term so it can help to dissuade the Ottomans from declaring on you.
All that to say that, in your case, I’d probably go with Offensive Ideas, get 2-3 forced vassals in Persia (to get their tax, trade and manpower) and after some time diplo annex them.
Basically:
Admin mana -> catch up in tech
Diplo mana -> to vassalize and annex
Mil mana -> get stronger armies, better leaders, better siege (very useful in the Caucasus)
Also, always keep spy networks high on your war targets, it will help you with CCR (through claims), siege ability, AE and more.
1
u/127FiftyTop 15h ago
I have not border ottomans/their Crimea vassals, QQ and Kazan (whom I am already at war with because Muscovy called me in, and I occupied all the provinces I had a claim on). So yes attacking QQ is the best thing I can do, but I am afraid the ottos might sneak on me instead of them and Russia will never answer the defensive war... But if I wait for the ottos to declare they will take the land I need so I must trade carefully
1
u/fapacunter The economy, fools! 14h ago
The Ottos will declare on you if they outnumber you and your allies enough. That’s why you should (almost) always accept the call to arms but not engage in anything beyond your border. If you get to 0 manpower or too small army, they will come for you. The AI takes into account the standing army and the manpower reserves so get those allies even if they don’t have a very strong army. Numbers is the only thing that can deter them in my experience
Let Muscovy deal with QQ. The best case scenario you white peace early and then they both with peace as well. That way you can expand into QQ and Muscovy if the opportunity comes.
Circling back to the Ottoman threat, you should definitely try to get as many allies as possible, especially the ones in Europe. Poland is the absolute best ally in the game and should be your main focus. It’s better to have them as allies than it is to have Muscovy.
Russia kinda sucks as an ally and only works as a deterrent and manpower drain if they do accept the defensive war call to arms.
Poland (and PLC Commonwealth later on) on the other hand are always down for some Ottowar
1
u/127FiftyTop 14h ago
I accepted, seiged all the provinces of vital interest and then retreated (Trebizond is patrolling those provinces while i guard my borders with my 16 strelicy and 4 Cossack cavalry). Muscovy won't answer the call as they are always in debt, I hope they will join a defensive war (just for ottos, I can defeat QQ easily if I am defending and it's 1 on 1). Poland won't ally with me because they rival Muscovy... But time will come when Russia will desire my steppe territories and will break the alliance, that's for sure. Then I might try to ally the commonwealth
2
u/fapacunter The economy, fools! 13h ago
Yeah they suck as allies.
Just gotta keep watch of when Poland’s willingness to accept your alliance is -49 or less because then you can end yours with Muscovy, lose the -50 “allied to rival” debuff and swap the alliances almost instantly.
Then if you have a spare relation slot, you could keep getting Royal Marriages with Russia because they almost always end up becoming a PU for you since they tend to end up isolated and not many options of marriage.
Good luck
1
u/loick55 15h ago
I would take quantity first, as even if you have more money, force limit is limiting you. Making armies cheaper will also marginally help with money. quantity and trade also have nice policy to make even more money if you need to pivot to that second, or if money is fine you can take admin. Quantity will likely be a must to compete with the ottomans given their ambition gives force limit, and short term will help you overpower QQ to get Persia trade node.
1
u/Aurelio_Rossa 14h ago
Depends if you want to perform an optimal conquest or have a chill, smooth game.
Optimally, you’d like something like Diplomatic -> Religious -> Administrative.
But if you just want to have an easy, fun game, you can go Defensive -> Infrastructure -> something.
You can spam a lot of forts that will cost nothing, but will make your country unsiegeable.
2
u/127FiftyTop 14h ago
Basically I want to survive until 1821. I think it's already late for a world conquest, but if I could finish the mission tree, reform Byzantium and go on from there it would be great. The whole Diplo/admin/religious is the obvious choice if you want to blob but that won't let me take over the Otto's l, not with my low skills at least. Defensive, infrastructure and maybe trade is a good idea! Thanks for the tip
3
u/Aurelio_Rossa 13h ago
Please don’t go Trade, it’s one of the most useless groups and a waste of idea slot, really. I’d argue that Court is far better, because it allows you to sit on estates’ loyality bonuses 24/7, take some useful bonuses while not suffering on your max absolutism and get your all gov reforms 20% quicker (and reforms are more useful than some ducats that you get from conquering, anyway).
2
u/127FiftyTop 13h ago
I really like court in many games, especially if I don't need Diplo or influence. I think I'll go for defensive first and later I'll decide based on geopolitical situation and rulers stats
1
u/Aurelio_Rossa 13h ago
That’s fair enough. Personally I love blobbing and usually just go the same 3 idea groups (out of which Religious is my true love).
Very, very occasionally I take something quality of life, like court or humanist. I barely pick any military ideas at all, maybe Offensive for Humanist-Offensive policy.
Currently I am doing Croatia -> shi’a, yemeni flip -> Arabia to be able to get -30 years of separatism after two idea groups (-10 humanist, -5 human/off policy, -10 arabian ideas, -5 until the end of a game croatian missions)
1
u/Gobe182 13h ago
Why the trade hate? Is it just that TCs accomplish the same thing as trade ideas (i.e. merchants) without expending an idea slot?
3
u/bassman1805 Trader 11h ago
In order for trade ideas to be useful, you need to have an empire exerting trade influence over a large chain of trade regions. At that point, you're either already rolling in gold or have the foundations to be rolling in gold soon.
Gold is by far the most infinite resource in the game, once you have it solved it's solved, and it's not worth spending an idea slot on a problem that you already have 75% solved to begin with.
2
u/Aurelio_Rossa 11h ago
True af. I would endure the pain of playing on the edge of bankruptcy just for more core creation cost lmao
3
u/bassman1805 Trader 11h ago
One of the biggest leaps forward in my skill at this game was realizing that the most effective strategy is to just live in perpetual debt until you make so much money you just physically can't not pay it off anymore. I had a dicey run in as Kandy where I thought I might be screwed carrying 20 loans at once, but turns out if you conquer enough Indian trade nodes you get stupid rich.
If an event has an option that costs ducats, I almost don't even both reading the other options. I'll take out a loan now and deal with it eventually.
1
u/Aurelio_Rossa 11h ago
Yeah. I wonder why would people not prioritise mana, for instance? (Especially admin mana)
2
u/bassman1805 Trader 10h ago
It's hard to really define a conversion rate between mana and gold, but there are situations where you can have a surplus of mana and not enough gold. Usually I'd say "you need to be coring more land," but if it's pre-imperialism CB maybe you've got everybody on a truce timer (even in that case...you have 999 mana, just truce break and stab back up).
But ultimately it just comes back to "I can pay off that debt when I generate infinite gold in the lategame. Mana is far more limited throughout the entire game.
2
u/Aurelio_Rossa 12h ago
Money isn’t really crucial. You get going, expand and wreck everyone while being in deficit and heavily in debt. Bigger loans pay off smaller loans and larger you get, more in debt you can be without any risk of bankruptcy (while if you conquer smart, you’ll solve all money issues anyway).
What’s crucial is mana generation and management, speeding up you conquest (so you can out-snowball all bots around you) and staying somewhat stable (which tbf is a matter of staying sane, because if you know what you’re doing, you are unlikely to implode).
You are PERFECTLY able to earn SHYTTONES of ducats without any economy-related ideas and once you do… why would you need any? I recently started as Oman and within 110 years, I had a total income of 550-600. Trade Companies are OP and if you use them effectively, they are enough. So, if you can earn a lot without wasting idea slot, why waste an idea slot (they come around very rarerly; imagine how much you can conquer between 10 and 14 admin tech or between 14 and 18?)
That being said, snowball > money. You earn more than enough by smart and relentless conquering and abusing TCs. Religious, Admin and Diplo are better for money-making than Trade, Infra and Eco.
9
u/Professional-Web8436 16h ago
You never pick an adm group first anyways since you wanna take it on 7.
I would use dip ideas.