So, basically half state your home region, and trade company the rest, until you have more GC and buildings, than full state the rest of your half-states.
usually i only half state province i know i'll retrograde to territory when i'll be missing GC, full state early is too important to get full benefit from your investment
You can actually get another -15% minimum autonony by being Hindu with the Harmandir Sahib monument in Doaba and if you get Buddha as a personal deity which happens through an event if I am not mistaken you can get access to the Imperial City of Hue monument which also gives you another -10% on lvl 3. So a total -25% extra minimum autonony and you could have an absolute theoretical minimum of 20% autonomy in Territories which is beyond broken.
Only 3 countries can do that as of now, which are Majapahit, Sunda and Khmer. There are missions that unlocks Buddha as divinity. There was a bug at one point which allowed all hindu nations to get buddha via Choose Diety event but it's now fixed and you now have to start exclusively as those 3 nations to unlock Buddha. Since none of them can be reformed.
In general, it seems to me that a mix of Trading Companies and Half States would be the most valuable outcome. I also have a few problems with the conclusions you come to about States vs Trade Companies, which I'll also briefly address. 1.) States have multiple benefits compared to trade companies that weren't addressed in the video, from buildings being more efficient (and notice the trade company in the video has more than 300 gold per province invested into it, while the full stated provinces have nothing), they also benefit from Prosperity and the ability to use the Trade Company Goods Produced bonus. This means that in general, states should have more trade value added to a node than trade companies would, especially a mix of trade companies and states. 2.) The region wide benefits that trade companies give are non-discriminatory, meaning that you only need 1 TC state in order to get -5 minimum autonomy on your half states, with the manpower and sailors benefit included. While at the extremes of minimum autonomy TCs obviously catch up to states in overall tax and manpower, before that point they're going to be behind. Trade Value can also be given to states, which are also benefiting from the stacking Goods Produced from Prosperity and the TC, which can turbo-boost trade value in nodes to high levels. 3.) Trade Power has diminishing returns. Let's use a very simple example here. If a Trade Node contains 10 trade power, split 9:1, then the person with 9 Trade power collects 90% of the income in that node. If it's split 19:1, then the person with 19 only collects 95%. This is an increase of ~5.56% for a 90% Trade Power increase, an increase which presumably took investment to create. This implies that once a solid control of a Trade Node is established, continuing to invest in Trade Power becomes less efficient, compared to investing in other areas. As Trade Power is perhaps the area where TCs are at the clearest advantage compared to States, this is concerning regarding the claim that *every state* should be a TC, when available. I'd imagine that a mix of TCs and states would, on average, provide more income, manpower, and forcelimit than pure TCs would, if you're playing tall enough. 4.) All of this is to say, that if you only control a small number of states in a trade node, turning them into TCs is almost certainly worth it from the money making perspective. The more states you control in the node, and the more of the Trade Power in the node you control overall, the more turning the next state into a TC becomes a diminishing return. I believe this simply confirms the conventional thought. Use TCs to gain control of the node and dominate in Trade Power, then Half-State the rest of the Node area to get more Trade value and manpower, for the most efficient Governing Capacity.
A good summary, it looks at the direct difference. As a player I would recommend starting to use trade companies to make the most money, this gives you the money to invest into the trade company buildings and it also reduces the average autonomy for government reform progress by only putting a few selected provinces in the trade company. Once you have enough money it's better to switch to trade company all provinces exact one of very high trade value. Regarding the minimum autonomy, there are 3 more give sources of it. One is the monument in India near doab that gives 15% if the province is hindu or budda and exalted and there is the imperial castle for 10% between China and viatnam. Another is 20% for the Russian age bonus in the age of revolution. A broken mission is also Britain's master of India that gives 10%. So it is possible to get 0 autonomy in trade companies by playing a budda religious nation, form gb and conquer India, and then form Russia. While having both monuments, the government reforms and the trade company investments. Another not said bonus of trade companies is that you can easily switch in and out of a culture and there for cultureshift with less cost and distraction.
@@thestudentYT i read his statement more in the way of "i will leave this comment here as a sacrifice of my attention to the new gods so there benediction may fall upon this very channel" which might be influenced heavily by my recent reading of "american gods"
Great video! It's actually confirming something that I felt in my campaign - since I am doing Ditmarchen (with a plan for couple tag switches) and I felt that trade companies feel actually pretty good. Although I may still consider how I want to play, since my plan was to stack goods produced modifier for fun so I am losing on that 😂
Good info and great work on the research behind the mechanics. I would recommend at each section and at the end of the video give a recap and a check list for people to read as a tl;dr. When speaking english isn't your strong suit, use visuals and text walls to help. I would do it even when my english is "perfect" =).
I'm late to the party, but there are 2398 provinces in 63 trade company regions assuming the wiki is correct which averages out to 38 provinces per trade company region, not 20. I have no clue how much of an impact it has on all your calculations, but it's a pity seeing a video taking some pride in all the calculations being done and then having a number being off by that much. Also, assuming +600% trade power means +600% trade income is insane.
So, TC "states" are better than "full states" when you've invested heavily into minimum autonomy reduction, and a few hundred ducats per province in Investments. They still cost more governing capacity than territories until you invest twice as many ducats per province into town halls (or become a republic, disabling most special government mechanics). Territories are great because they're land that doesn't belong to your enemies, has a huge discount in governing cost, and still gets all the flat bonuses (like fort ZoC projection, monument ownership, mission completion, etc). TC "everything" isn't free until deep into the midgame, the GC cost really hurts unless you reach -50% GC. Territories are underrated, they belong to not-your-enemy. Which is another reason why vassals are strong, they also belong to not-your enemy, and don't even cost 25% GC (but they also don't exactly belong to you).
So first of all I did the calculation with 85% autonomy which can be achieved without ANY other modifier and second of all I presented you the income calculation and I think that 10x more income pays more than for itself regarding the investments, you just need to get the ball rolling which easily happenes just from the Trade power and stability already! And what do you mean with territories?? If you don't stack autonomy modifiers as you critiziced then Territories are literally the worst thing of all, "Half" States are just better and cost almost nothing more than territories for 5x more outcome!
@@thestudentYTI appreciate what you're saying but your head to head comparison in the video is still 1 full state with zero ducats invested vs 1 TC area with 2200 ducats invested. I don't really see this as a relevant comparison until you spend 2200 ducats building up the state. You also said that prosperity in the state wasn't relevant for your comparison, which I don't see how that can be as you compared income. TCs are definitely great, but I think your thesis here is on an uneven foundation.
@@lucasholcomb643 I mean I tested this more than once, did you do that as well? And also your critics are not really on a solid foundation as well: It was 1450 ducats per state because the special Investment is only once per Company so that is way less than you said it was and then also the income outcome was around 10x of the one in the states and even if it was "only" 9x because of Prosperity it is still more than enough to pay for itself. Also keep in mind that the highest source of income comes from the +100% Trade Power modifier AND from the negated tolerance and culture penalties which both aply directly after adding the Provinces to the TC without spending ANY money... And on top of that the income scale is exponentially (if you play good enough) so just this big difference for no cost is already enough to outscale the States Meta financially extremly fast which then again pays for the investments itself! And last but not least you may have missed that States also don't come for free: Not only do you have to pay twice as much Gov. Cap. which lets you run over the cap fairly fast even in early game, but also it costs you TWICE as many Adm. Mana to full state that and after all that is again something that you could just spend on expanding twice as much, adding it to a TC and then get like 20x Money from Trade and Production which again pays for the Investments themselfs. And btw woudn't you always pay Money for Mana Points in any case? So I can just give you the tip of testing it before saying that I'm wrong because I prepared this video for a long time and the calculations don't lie...
@@thestudentYT There no way 6x trade power = 6x trade income, it has massively diminishing returns once you control a majority of the trade. If you own an entire end node it doesnt do anything at all there.
@@thestudentYT I think the problem is TCs are long term investments that take a lot of ducats and effort to start getting profit out if them. In the early game, you need to expand your powerbase and economy primarily with power points, and spending ~200 admin to full core a state and decreasing autonomy is a reasonable price for getting that much needed increase in FL, income and manpower, especially starting as an OPM. One of the biggest clichés of EU4 is spending mana early to fuel your expansion, then with a good powerbase establishing an economy and using it to minimise your mana spending. Also on the topic of buildings, for example that one TC investment gives you goods produced and prod efficiency acts more like a manufactury as it benefits provinces mostly equally; but if you have a province which you say devved for an institution and has 12 production dev now, you will get more profit by having it stated and puting a workshop on it than saving up hundreds of ducats for TC investments. You too need to conquer a large chunk of the trade node/trade centers before you can benefit from collecting your goods produced in the node. Also on manpower, you might only have that 100 ducats to spare in the early game so it would be better spending it now on a barracks in a high dev province or merks for security/offensive wars than saving up for that 1000 ducat investment while your expansion opportunities are getting more difficult by the year. Another downside is because you cannot convert provinces, you can't use the strategy of stacking tolerance of true faith(you can easily get 10+ as catholic, you should do a video on that) so you will still get rebels with high overextension/revolution disaster/low stab.
I love your videos, but when I come back to them as a reference it is really hard to track down individual stuff I need to know. For example, in this one I'd love a summary card of all the gov cap modifiers and another of the autonomy in territory modifiers. Just hard to figure out what I'm missing when I try and recreate this without rewatching all 48 minutes :p. Even just a pinned comment or in the description would be great.
I have actually Time Stamps in all of my videos and as such also in this video: For example I have one going from 32:20 until 38:42 which is literally called "Goberning Capacity" and there is all what I am saying about Gov. Cap. in just 6 minutes... You should see the Time Stamps in the Timeline normally (I can see them) but anyways they are always listed in the video description as well!
Yep, and I totally appreciate the timestamps and use them. But sometimes I need a quick reference. For example the shots where you show the total comparison between TC and Full states, but listing the modifiers are great. A similar shot listing all the modifiers for gov cap or autonomy would really be excellent. Sometimes its just hard to keep track as you bounce between topics. Videos are great already, and you do a lot, this would just push them into another tier of awesome reference material. @@thestudentYT edit: also, I was specifically really looking for the autonomy modifiers when I wrote the original comment, which isnt a timestamp.
I'm not sure that I will do it like that, but this is interesting information that I would like to experiment with. I don't do very well with trading companies or trade in general. I have been trying to improve on that in my last couple of campaigns.
Trade is most easy income source, as long you start in one of the strong end nodes, or semi end nodes, like english channel, lübeck, genoa, venice. A TC gives you +1 merchant for free, the moment they get 50% of provincial trade power in a trade node, which means 1-2 trade center provinces, depending on the node. You also get 10% of your provincal trade power on all nodes downstream, so you can steer much trade into your nodes, even without conquest in them. And trade income is basicly all the production income of a trade node, which gets extra bonuns on value through steering, and trade eff. so you scale production, than steering, than trade eff, you get 3 multiplicator on 1 ducat production. So you get 1 ducat on production, than +1 ducat as trade, which becomes 2 ducats in the node you collect, (or even more), when you control very long steering roads from china into english channel.
Not running half states also has the benefit of you actually being able to use the core all button. And if you TC everything out of your home Subcontinent the "You may make States" alert will only show you those places you actually want to state.
As the Ottomans, you can assign pashas to your states, which, among other things, reduce the governing capacity cost of provinces in that state by 20% (from 50% to 30% in half-states) while increasing the minimum autonomy by 20% (from 50% to 70% in half-states), however if you assign them to at least 50 provinces that are not in the Levantine culture group at any point, you can complete a mission that halves that to 10%, meaning that you get 90% the efficiency for 80% the cost (0,9/0,8=1.125 times the efficiency per GC) in your states, and 40% the efficiency for 30% the cost (0,4/0,3=1.333 times the efficiency per GC) in your half-states. Now, the +20% and the -10% are actually two separate modifiers, and if you un-state a state with a pasha assigned without first removing it, you lose the pasha and its effects, but not the -10% minimum autonomy modifier, meaning that you can then add all those provinces to a trade company and enjoy all its benefits, but with a free -10% minimum autonomy modifier, on top of all the other modifiers you might have.
@@thestudentYT Oh, I cheat plenty more than just playing Ottomans. One of my favourite things about Paradox games is that I can freely use the console, edit saves, and even change game files as much as I want, to have fun shaping the game to how I want it to be. :)
25:36 How could you write exact numbers when it depends on: culture religion development buildings number of owned provinces in trade node etc ? Sometimes it worth it to turn all areas in TC, but usually it's better to get a merchant and make other areas states.
Okay so lots of things with this. I dont know if this video is serious or not, but for people curious here is a more accurate rundown: FIrst of all saying that Full states give 20% more manpower is wrong. A province with 10 mil dev will give you 2500 base MP in a fully stated province. In a Tradecompany(+building you can only build once) you will get 2750. If you make it 20 mil dev spread on multiple Provinces you get 3500 in TC land and 5000 in fully stated land, which is already more than 20%. It just works out like that in your example since you are in shit dev northern england and in the MP game you showed, it just makes more sense to full state stuff, because you have the gov cap and you have honestly quite low Manpower. Now all this theory is with infinite money in mind. It is just that trade companies and building/investments inside them scale way slower than buildings in full states. The trade company buff you get for provinces outside your tradecompany in the same node scales with institutions. Meaning that you can easily get +100% goods produced during the time global trade is active, by just putting your centers in the TC and leave the other ones out, which is a really good way to become rich quickly. In general, if you want Manpower you should full state, because in most cases it will be around twice as much as putting everything into a TC(assuming you own the entire node). If you want Money you should make a mix of trade companies and territories. If you are limited by gov cap and you are swimming in money, THEN you should TC everything.
Okay, so then for all those who were interested in this missleading comment: Yes, the example works only because the base manpower was fairly low... BUT in the example I also took only the base 85% autonomy into the count, so if you just get 5% less from Tier 3 Monarchies Gov. Reform then the entire calculation of TCs Manpower is already increased by +33% (5% more on the base of 15% before) and then the world already looks completly different! Also just assuming that every province has 10 mil dev is just nuts and was just mentioned to manipulate the calculation so that it works out in the commentors favour xd Tell when have you ever had a average base manpower of 10 per province when NOT playing tall because that's what I also said in the vid: If you only own Italy, have all of the cultures accepted and so on then of course states are better and also stating your home Subcontinent is always the most efficient thing because you simply cannot TC it. And also maybe you have also missed that TCs actually give more dev cost modifier (15% instead of 10% in states) which in reality means that you can get to the ridiculous 10 mil dev per province FASTER with TCs then with states! Then about the Trad thing: Yes the goods Produced Modifer scales with the Institutions... But funnily enough this is actually an argument for TC everything because it means that until Global Trade you get way less Goods Produced than the TC has Inlfuence (and yes ONLY the TC Provinces count for this) for example if you add every Trade Center and Estuary in a Trade Node to TC and nothing else then you'll end up at around 80% Trade Influence from the TC. Now let's say you've played until 1550 (which most people don't but anyways) and embraced Printing Press directly then you still get a modifier of ×0.8 on the Trade Influence, so you would get "only" 64% goods produced. And before that with Colonialism (×0.6) it's "only" 48%. And even with Global Trade (×1) it would be still "only" 80% Goods Produced so saying "that you can easily get +100% goods produces during the time global Trade is active, by just putting your centers in the TC" is just straight up fake news! But anyways, as I also said in the beginning of the video I am not even saying that this goods produced is bad... I way just asking if more money is really worth less manpower if you can also easily get super rich without the goods produced modifier! And last but not least there are more things that make TCs better not just the +100% Manpower Investment: It is all above Gov. Cap. (That is casually always to low if you play wide), Money (yes even without the goods produced modifier TCs simply give way More Money as States (around 6x more to be exact)), A Merchant, more Stability because of the ability to "accept" basically every culture and religion without converting it (which especially on Muslim Provinces is a big Problem), and also the fact that only small modifiers to autonomy in territories increase th value of TCs dramatically... So all in all for "the ones that are interested in a more accurate calculation": It is nor the one in this Comment xd
@@thestudentYT I appreciate the response. I actually didnt know, which of the things(like zlewwik thing) were jokes, so sorry if it came of condecending. Does it look completely different if you get reduced autonomy in territorries ? Well yes, but except for the government reforms all the other modifiers have opportunity cost, means i wouldnt go much lower than 80% in calculation, because opportunity cost is hard to evaluate, since its preference. The mil dev thing is not per province its combined for provinces in each trade region, since you get a fixed income from the +2000 MP building, which gets less effective the more manpower total you have in a trade region. If you assume +50 per province it is almost completely irrelevant once soldier households come along and every trade node has more than 20 MP dev total. For the whole argument: your claim is that 100% extra from the investment is worth it even at territory autonomy, which is just wrong. It ignores that every other modifier that you also have estates/ideas/reforms/buiildings etc get 1/5 of the value (at 80% autonomy). For the trade thing: I like securing my nodes to 100%. Easy example would be Alleppo as ottomans. If you put all the centers in, upgrade them you get 92%. Yes not 100, but you have almost no upfront cost in comparison. Now i admit that this rarely comes up and isnt really practical, but if you are struggling for money it is better to just TC centers and estruaries, which is what i said. BUT usually if you are good at the game, like most people watching this probably are, it doesnt matter to get more money. This is just for people that struggle getting income.
@@siinuxxblume5123 Thanks for the constructive critics but I still see the things a little different: As I said in the beginning of the video I assumed that you don`t need more money at some point where you would rather need Manpower, Stability and Gov. Cap.! And again yes if you dev every province to 10 mil, accept every culture and have enough Gov. Cap. and Adm. Mana free to spend then it is still better to make everything a full state BUT: realistically if you play in SP or even in most MP lobbies where Gov. Cap. is made worse and if you NOT play tall, You won`t be able to full state everything! And now all I was trying to show you is that if you Full State Half of your country just is worse than Full TC your entire country because that is after all what makes TCs so great: The Gov. Cap. efficiency! And also you didn`t respond to the other things that I mentioned which is that TCs give you just straight up more Money (again if you play wide not Tall), more Stability (and most of all instant stability after the conquest), a Merchant per Company and no reasonable object reason to convert the provinces which also saves Money, but most importantly also Time! So I would really like to know if this is like not worth considering also in your argumentation? And then as TCs take so less Gov. Cap. after you built Courthouses or became a republic because the -25% Gov. Cost are double the efficient to stack in TCs than in States, you can (and should) still Full State your Home Subcontinent (idealy even in a colonial region) and then at latest after building Townhalls as Monarchies/Theocracies when the Gov. Cost reaches the minimum 1% in TCs you can even start to Full State up to your Gov. Cap. (ideally no Trade Centres here) and still have everything else in a TC. So that scenario that I mentioned last would be of course the scenario that makes TCs still efficient in the Mid-Late Game when the strong buildings are unlocked. And before you can build all of those buildings then the +100% Modifier of TCs is simply the most efficient modifier you can get. And again all of that is for playing wide or at least wide enough so that you cannot afford the Gov. Cost of Full Stating everything and have to decide between Stating Half of your country or TC everything...
@@thestudentYT I am not saying 10 mil dev in every province. It can also be 10 provinces with 1 mil dev each. The problem with this calculation saying full states are 20% more manpower is that it is the base and only factors in 1 building. If i am Russia with 200% extra manpower outside of building modifiers then my full state gets 200% extra manpower and my TC land gets 40% extra manpower(considering 80% autonomy). This difference would probably be 100% instead of 20% more. I said in the first comment, that if you have money and are low on gov cap, then yes full companies are good. So i agree on that. Stability - I generally wouldnt state stuff that isnt my religion or culture. For territories, you can just increase autonomy, since it goes down to 90 again in no time. After absolutism you should be at a point where you can full tc everything anyway. Merchants - yeah, but you get those also by just tc'ing centers and if you state something for manpower you need manpower more than money, so a merchant doesnt really help when your max manpower is 20k. Money - compared to full states yes, obviously, but same thing as merchants. If you can afford to put 10k into 1 trade node for more money at the end, did you really need more money compared to full stating. compared to territories, if you wanna build up quick, then only putting centers in TC costs you a fraction of the money. 200 for each center and 100 for marketplaces for a similar result compared to all investments. if you can do the investment to make more money, then why not full state it ? If its just gov cap: YES i agree as mentioned first comment. What i usually do is this. Just gonna take spain and morocco node as an example. You full state your culture. Build manpower in all of those. conquer morocco and put the centers in TC until i am able to afford building the rest over doing the same in different nodes, since it costs almost 0 govcap after tech 8 to have territories and it gives you similar income to fully build up 100% TC, because of +36% goods produced and getting 100% of the trade money from that.
Good to see I've always been doing it correctly intuitively. Ever since they reworked TCs so they allowed them everywhere I always played by adding everything I can. Also often used the 0% GC you describe. Interesting to see a full analysis 👍
You are not doing it correctly and almost all of the “analysis” provided in this video varies from misleading to downright false. It’s a strong contender for the worst video on trade I’ve seen, despite the stiff competition.
we also shoud consider that me cant build trade companies on the same subcontinent as our capital is in, so probably our subcontinent provinces must be stated
Yes but the best would be as I said to move your Capital to a Colonial Region were you cannot create TCs anyways so it would be like literally perfectly efficient :)
Merc ideas + trading company to pay the Merc, together with tier government reform "elite Merc" to push money on even stronger mercs, and you only go +5 forcelimit, +trade and +production building. Manpower isn't needed, only if you run out of sailors for your fleet.
The thing is the trade company investment that gives +2000 manpower can be built if you only have a few trade company provinces and you can either have the rest as states to get more manpower or territories if you have low gov cap so thet you can get the goods produced bonus wich will increase your production andtrade income a lot If i make any mistakes about the topic correct me in the comments
No you can build the special buildings even if you have only 1 single province in the TC Area... But yes you are right, if you have Gov. Cap. free and enough Adm Points to spare then you could make some Territories Full States but keep in mind that the Goods Produced Modifier from TCs is relative to your current embraced institutions and therefor only gets really valueable after you embraced Printing Press and after you can build Manufactories to increase the Base Goods Produced as the TC only gives a Percentual Modifier... So before 1550 adding everything to a TC (except your home Subcontinent) is easily better anyways even if you have Gov. Cap. and Adm. Mana free
But after all you don't need to do that at all right... the only thing that this would give more is like 3-4 Tolerance or something, not really needed imo
@@LeastPatrioticIsraelbelike If you play Islam, you can just use that merchant interaction to convert it eventually as long as the TC region isn't Islamic heresy or Christian. Bypasses TC limitation and such.
What order would you recommend building the TC-investments, since they all seem pretty expensive in early game? Should you always start with the -5 minimum autonomy one?
I would recommend making the "Harbor" first, and the "Local Venture" Second as both of them increase your income significantly without even relying on autonomy at all basically. And then if you scaled enough economically then you can Start Investing into the "Govenors General Mansion" first for the autonomy and then into the "Military Administration" for the Manpower (up to that point you could also use the Money easily to expand and fight with Mercs as they only get inefficient in the Mid-Late Game but can save a lot of Manpower in the early game) But generally Money will only be a Problem in the very early Game because even just adding more and more Provinces to TCs already outscales Full States fairly fast without any investmenst!
I always build and conquer trade power first. When you get over 50% provincial trade power in the trade node, you get one extra merchant for free, which is always massive for trade steering or collecting the money in you high control nodes. After the extra merchants, go +0.3 good produced. If you go full trade company, and expand them fast like snakes in singleplayer ...you run very fast +100 ducats profit after 50years played. Or simply, 4 month to get +1 400 ducats investment
Some of your math isn't ideal - for example, the 1k investment giving 2k manpower happens even if you only have 1 province in the charter as a trade company, iirc. I don't think your overall argument is wrong, just that you are overselling the value in some cases.
Isn’t it more efficient to stay almost at max of your gov capacity? Like you can state 2x more provinces easily. What are the benefits of staying at half of capacity I don’t get.
Like your videos a lot, but one mistake I want to point out is that : the state that the teutons have is actually in the North Sea trade node. So the part of +600% trade power is not correct, but I guess the number is around +100%. :)
But I had a look on the North sea Trade Node when I compared that and the teutons literally had only 1% in there... so I think I did everything right :)
So is it better to make new territories you annex straight away in to trade companies? Or is it better to let them stand still until you get your already existing trade companies built up with the trade company investments first? Build them in order or just straight up trade company everything outside your subcontinent which you full state and then invest in trade companies as you can?
Dude, you seem to know what you are talking about :-) Are you up for a challenge? I would LOVE to see a playthrough where you get your TC's autonomy to 10% as fast as possible. I just did this, but I am awfully slow, but the results are totally bananas, especially if you move your capital to a place that allows you to TC almost everything (like Bermuda or Polynesia. I chose Rapanui). Even if you dont want to make a video about this - try it, it is sooooo much fun, sat here all day laughing like a maniac, until I reached the 10% autonomy in 1660. You probably wont need my help figuring out what tags to play 😛 Wpiould be happy to hear from you
I am very sure that this could be insane fun if it is done but to be honest I am not really interested in starting as Majapahit or Khmer to end up with a Buddist England in India xd But I will do some other interesting plays in India very soon :)
@@thestudentYT Almost :-P. Majapahit into Nusantra into England into Russia as Republic, stay Hindu, with Buddha as deity. Imagine Russia with Majapahit Campaigns CB, all the great stuff from english missions, and even the ability to turn the whole world Hindu just by controlling trade. Absolutely bananas, I cannot imagine anything stronger or more fun (but am up for suggestions, lol)
I think I get it, basically you're saying that once you reach a point in the game where money is no longer limiting you then optimizing income becomes super unnecessary and it's actually more optimal to prioritize getting the most out of your provinces while keeping them stable and keeping gov cap cost to a minimum
You still can build any normal buildings in a trade company province on top of the trade company investment. +50% product efficiency and +0.3 good produced is heavy production income, add +1 manufacturing bonus, and it goes crazy.
So for a Worldconquest run would you recommend to just TC everything?, when would you recommend keeping stuff as territories (so they benefit from goods produced modfier)? Or do you transition at a certain point?
Very nice analysis! I do a lot of this stuff as well, with a couple tweaks/differences... * It's not worth it to mix TC and non-TC provinces in the same area; too much micro * I like to convert religion on provinces before adding them to TC, then culture-convert the best of them later * When building a scenario like this, I rush the trade power / production efficiency / trade steering TC buildings first; that gives me the income to spam every possible TC building everywhere!
You know I understand if you want to have nice looking borders on the map modes or something but techbically Converting (except for true faith bonuses) and especially culture converting is completly wasted diplo points on TCs because it literally gives you NOT A SINGLE bonus to do that on TCs because they already get no culture penalty by adding them to the TCs
Thank you for the awesome analysis! I am currently doing a TTM run where my capital is in Mexico and I TC’ed all of China and Japan. Moneywise I am doing great, but I am lacking in manpower. So if I understand correctly I should build the manpower 400-investment and the manpower 1000-investment (aside from the two 400-investments for production and trade). I can TC the whole old world and get my forcelimit from the new world, correct?
Wouldn't prosperity matter in the income comparison? Prosperity gives goods produced, which should increase the production income of the full state (or a half state for that matter).
Yes that is true and it should definetly matter as well but you cannot assume that you simply have it all the time as the Provinces I am talking about are anyways not your home lands (where you cannot TC anyways) so they will often on the border and less protected and also it takes positive Stability and a long time to get it... but then yes it is really strong
If trade company gameplay is the most optimal for playing wide, what would be the best strategy to get to onefaith achievement ? Converting and expanding trade companies are two objectives that are almost completely at odds. Or would it be possible, with the trade company money, to increase the convertion power so much that the trade company penalty to convertion would be negated ?
If you want to convert all of your Provinces then the most efficient way would be to conquer them, core them, half State them, enact the religious missionary strenght State edict, convert all Provinces in the Half State, destate that Half State again anf then finally add everything to a TC :)
the money part got me questioning, you made the average investment per province (aipp) for tc to be 350 ducats, which in deed makes more money than teutons full state, but their state has no building at all. I still think a full state can give roughly same manpower and more production money than tcs, so 350 ducats in full state can be workshop-barracks-church
Yeah but you can build buildings in TCs as well even though they are not as valuable so to compare it more easily I wanted to take simply the base Provinces... so just see the 350 ducats as one time investment apart from buildings and deving etc. That you do anyways as well...And also keep in mind that all the relevant Buildings are Church, Workshop, Barrack and Marketplace/Courthouse so 4 buildings on average which cost already 400 ducats but give you only like +150% Money (maybe not even?) whereas the TC investments give you 4x the Money while costing less... so you can pay them off way faster so that you can build the buildings faster than and just snowball around 2-3x faster economically in total right? (Especially the insane Trade Power will push your economy to the sky if you know how to build a proper trade network)
@@thestudentYT i see, indeed just having a well invested tc in the channel can amount to great wealth if managed properly. Also would you do a provence guide? Im trying to replicate the best france video but i seem to struggle econ wise
how did you become norse? did you spawn animist rebels and made them island hop all the way to norway? if so how did you deal with europe in the meantime? did you not expand that much?
But you cant just neglect the cost to build all the tc-investments and what you could do with that instead when it comes to war etc in early game play where money isnt infinite at all.
But you only trade company the centers of trade and full state the once in the node that does not have a trade center. Now you get huge goods produced modifiers in your full states and lots of trade power.
And no Gov Cap xD The entire point that I was trying to make is that TCs are the most efficient Money-Gov.Cap Administration... so if you have Gov. Cap and Admin Mana free then go ahead and state everything!
@@thestudentYT It's still better to just have the trade centers be trade companies and the rest be unstated in nearly all cases if you want to change the argument away from trade company vs stated. The trade companies make a goods produced modifier for all provinces not in the trade company.
How about that monarchies reform that gives - 50% centralizing state cost(it used to be 100%) You used to could state a lot i havent tested since the change.
@@thestudentYT it de facto change full state governing cost to 0 if you have free govpoints. You can stack centralizing state up to 4 x 25%. The issue here you need decent govpoints generation - so rushing high crownland and low average autonomy. Thus playing with centralize state and trade companies is quite exclusive. And main benefit of TC is merchant spam. -50% centralizing state for monarchies is only to balance +100% govpoints generation for republics.
@@92thorstein I don't think playing with trade companies is in any kind "exclusive" you maybe just have to open your mind a little bit maybe, try it out in an actual game and you'll see that it is really easy and logical and simply better to play with TCs
@@thestudentYT i mean - if you commit to play with TCs you can't go centralized states because low goverment progress points gen and if you commit to centralized states you don't want TCs to keep gov progress points generation. Both ways are valid. I prefer TCs for more merchants though.
wow youtube recommended your channel you're famous :) I'm Brabant in the cursed lobby anyway if the goal is manpower full states are still better no? I'll be honest I'm not sure if that's even your claim the ending bit was kinda confusing
Haha nice to see you here :) You know if this Topic weren't like super complex and confusing (as EU4 is always if you really dive in deep) I wouldn't have need to make a 50 minutes vid on that xd But no, if you also consider buildings and if you assume that Money doesn't matter (which basically it doesn't if you know what you're doing) then TC are actuall 1v1 better in Manpower than Full States if you reach 70% autonomy or less! If you don't consider buildings then the TCs are simply better on Manpower even with the base 85% autonomy because Buildings are affected by autonomy so building in TCs is just less effective than in States but the +100% TC Investment just takes it over the edge then anyways... And if you take Gov. Cap. into the calculation then TCs are so much better that you could also just delete the "State" button completly ;)
@@Boscomon So I messed this up in the last comment a little because as I said in the video it is 1v1 like 20%-30% worse on Manpower so I ment that it is 1v1 better in terms of Gov. Cap. (So as it takes only half, you have to double the effects of TCs of course with assuming enough Money although TCs literally 1v1 give more Money than States anyways even without Gov. Cap. evaluation so the Investments should pay for themselves if you know how to build the economy up) That all of course assumes that as I said you don`t play as tall as you do in the MP but at least as wide as you cannot afford full stating everything Gov. Cap wise...
@@thestudentYT Ok so you're saying its more manpower per gov cap not just more manpower. The math on that makes more sense. I agree for sp only when you have tech 22 to remove the gov cost in tcs, if you're super wide in sp at tech 22 you have a lot of territories that can be easily converted to tcs so it does work out good to tc everything. In mp I would go above gov cap in most scenarios.
First of all it is 85% minimum because of the investment, second of all it will even less if you get just a few of the modifiers I mentioned and third of all you can of course Full State your Subcontinent and then it's not that bad... But yes as I said this is literally the ONLY downside of TCs instead of states but you cannot state everything but you can add everything to a TC... So do you want +60% Manpower and Sailors, way more Stability and 10x Money or like +70% more reform progress? I know what I would take for sure :)
Trade company emporiums states and full state non trade power states, you can get +70-90% bonus on goods produced in your full states and full manpower. Teir 3 inland trade center gives 33% manpower to state, states are easy to dev, in a normal game walicia gives me about 75k manpower in a single state, just a little bit of deving,trade company can’t do that
TC have even more dev cost modifiers (15%) and they get +100% Manpower extra on top of the buildings which a State simply doesn't have... But I don't really feel like that you were open minded enough to really understand this video because I talked about EVERYTHING that you just said xd
@@thestudentYT you get + 100% of the manpower so you actually only get 20% of the man power, if it was a state instead. And trade companies don’t get production bonus for having a strong trade company in the area, Your probably right it was a long video and I probably mossed your point if you did
@@DirtyOdin64 The big Point on that is that the TC Investment of +100% is simply not available for States and therefore an exclusive Bonus on TCs and same goes for the special investment of -5% autonomy and +2000 base Manpower (which is simply not affected by autonomy at all) and together with the fact that you could make two times the TCs instead of states because of halfed Gov. Cap. and halfed Adm. Mana Cost (the TC Investments anf the additional base Trade Power and Tolerance of Religion and Culture pay the for themselves) it makes TCs just better after all. But of course that is a little closer with only the base 85% autonomy, so the less autonomy you get, the clearer it gets :)
Regarding that TCs are Op, you are right but in practise if you play wide, not realy applicable as money on investments are short, also switching tags.. However idea to play half states is interesting, it just annoying button on a screen to core) To be honest i dont understand people who are trying to play tall , eu4 is not made for this. Maybe viki3 , but here wide always wins 100% as the game is designed so.
@@rasplay5761 Yes of course this is a very innovative and new and complex strategy to play wide and as I said in the last video already, Half States are also better than States if you play wide so you could also use them if you think TCs would be to much work to set up
Yes sorry I forgot that OP Nation that 0.01% of the Players play only to get a rare achievement before they then drop that Game agin directly afterwords because their OE is 1000% xd
I kinda never understood all these minmax guides/approaches to single player eu 4. Funny enough players who are not good at the game will most likely fail to minmax anyway since it actually requires a lot of knowledge and experience and players who are already good enough to play optimally sure realise without any trouble that you don't need it for anything even on hardest difficulty since there are plenty ways to get stronger than AI. Personally I almost never use TC because they are annoying to create and manage and I just couldn't bother.
So, basically half state your home region, and trade company the rest, until you have more GC and buildings, than full state the rest of your half-states.
That's exactly what this is all about :)
usually i only half state province i know i'll retrograde to territory when i'll be missing GC, full state early is too important to get full benefit from your investment
Just realized bro has 2k subs...despite having some of the most fire eu4 vids
I am just never saying "Please subcribe" like many others do
@@thestudentYT chadlord
His mic quality is shit so most people propably click off because of that
You can actually get another -15% minimum autonony by being Hindu with the Harmandir Sahib monument in Doaba and if you get Buddha as a personal deity which happens through an event if I am not mistaken you can get access to the Imperial City of Hue monument which also gives you another -10% on lvl 3. So a total -25% extra minimum autonony and you could have an absolute theoretical minimum of 20% autonomy in Territories which is beyond broken.
I would have known that if I ever played outside of europe ;)
The limit is 0. There are enough sources.
Also you can get the eastern plutocracy t1 monarchy reform
Only 3 countries can do that as of now, which are Majapahit, Sunda and Khmer. There are missions that unlocks Buddha as divinity. There was a bug at one point which allowed all hindu nations to get buddha via Choose Diety event but it's now fixed and you now have to start exclusively as those 3 nations to unlock Buddha. Since none of them can be reformed.
english mission of crown of india also gives -10%
In general, it seems to me that a mix of Trading Companies and Half States would be the most valuable outcome. I also have a few problems with the conclusions you come to about States vs Trade Companies, which I'll also briefly address.
1.) States have multiple benefits compared to trade companies that weren't addressed in the video, from buildings being more efficient (and notice the trade company in the video has more than 300 gold per province invested into it, while the full stated provinces have nothing), they also benefit from Prosperity and the ability to use the Trade Company Goods Produced bonus. This means that in general, states should have more trade value added to a node than trade companies would, especially a mix of trade companies and states.
2.) The region wide benefits that trade companies give are non-discriminatory, meaning that you only need 1 TC state in order to get -5 minimum autonomy on your half states, with the manpower and sailors benefit included. While at the extremes of minimum autonomy TCs obviously catch up to states in overall tax and manpower, before that point they're going to be behind. Trade Value can also be given to states, which are also benefiting from the stacking Goods Produced from Prosperity and the TC, which can turbo-boost trade value in nodes to high levels.
3.) Trade Power has diminishing returns. Let's use a very simple example here. If a Trade Node contains 10 trade power, split 9:1, then the person with 9 Trade power collects 90% of the income in that node. If it's split 19:1, then the person with 19 only collects 95%. This is an increase of ~5.56% for a 90% Trade Power increase, an increase which presumably took investment to create. This implies that once a solid control of a Trade Node is established, continuing to invest in Trade Power becomes less efficient, compared to investing in other areas. As Trade Power is perhaps the area where TCs are at the clearest advantage compared to States, this is concerning regarding the claim that *every state* should be a TC, when available. I'd imagine that a mix of TCs and states would, on average, provide more income, manpower, and forcelimit than pure TCs would, if you're playing tall enough.
4.) All of this is to say, that if you only control a small number of states in a trade node, turning them into TCs is almost certainly worth it from the money making perspective. The more states you control in the node, and the more of the Trade Power in the node you control overall, the more turning the next state into a TC becomes a diminishing return. I believe this simply confirms the conventional thought. Use TCs to gain control of the node and dominate in Trade Power, then Half-State the rest of the Node area to get more Trade value and manpower, for the most efficient Governing Capacity.
Majapahit into england into russia can have 0%autonomy in territories, you should check it out
Idk if its included but there is a monument in northern India that gives -15 Autonomy in Territories. Only available to Dharmic Religions.
A good summary, it looks at the direct difference. As a player I would recommend starting to use trade companies to make the most money, this gives you the money to invest into the trade company buildings and it also reduces the average autonomy for government reform progress by only putting a few selected provinces in the trade company. Once you have enough money it's better to switch to trade company all provinces exact one of very high trade value.
Regarding the minimum autonomy, there are 3 more give sources of it. One is the monument in India near doab that gives 15% if the province is hindu or budda and exalted and there is the imperial castle for 10% between China and viatnam. Another is 20% for the Russian age bonus in the age of revolution. A broken mission is also Britain's master of India that gives 10%. So it is possible to get 0 autonomy in trade companies by playing a budda religious nation, form gb and conquer India, and then form Russia. While having both monuments, the government reforms and the trade company investments.
Another not said bonus of trade companies is that you can easily switch in and out of a culture and there for cultureshift with less cost and distraction.
You make som of the most useful eu4 videos, but only 2k subs???? You deserve way more than that, so take some engagement
Thanks but no I won't "beg" for subs any time :)
@@thestudentYT i read his statement more in the way of "i will leave this comment here as a sacrifice of my attention to the new gods so there benediction may fall upon this very channel" which might be influenced heavily by my recent reading of "american gods"
@@alexmuller6752 Haha yes maybe xd
There is also tier 10 for monarchies that gives -%5 ccr and minimum autonomy
Great video! It's actually confirming something that I felt in my campaign - since I am doing Ditmarchen (with a plan for couple tag switches) and I felt that trade companies feel actually pretty good. Although I may still consider how I want to play, since my plan was to stack goods produced modifier for fun so I am losing on that 😂
Love your videos keep up the good work. You, Lemon Cake and Habibi improved my gameplay so much.
Good info and great work on the research behind the mechanics.
I would recommend at each section and at the end of the video give a recap and a check list for people to read as a tl;dr. When speaking english isn't your strong suit, use visuals and text walls to help. I would do it even when my english is "perfect" =).
Amazing video. Budgedmonk had a video along these lines, he was more focused on the manpower and sailors from TCs though
This was an excellent explanation about the advantages of and how best to use Trade Companies !
Insane that you don’t have more subs, mandatory viewing for all eu4 players
I'm late to the party, but there are 2398 provinces in 63 trade company regions assuming the wiki is correct which averages out to 38 provinces per trade company region, not 20. I have no clue how much of an impact it has on all your calculations, but it's a pity seeing a video taking some pride in all the calculations being done and then having a number being off by that much.
Also, assuming +600% trade power means +600% trade income is insane.
So, TC "states" are better than "full states" when you've invested heavily into minimum autonomy reduction, and a few hundred ducats per province in Investments. They still cost more governing capacity than territories until you invest twice as many ducats per province into town halls (or become a republic, disabling most special government mechanics). Territories are great because they're land that doesn't belong to your enemies, has a huge discount in governing cost, and still gets all the flat bonuses (like fort ZoC projection, monument ownership, mission completion, etc). TC "everything" isn't free until deep into the midgame, the GC cost really hurts unless you reach -50% GC.
Territories are underrated, they belong to not-your-enemy. Which is another reason why vassals are strong, they also belong to not-your enemy, and don't even cost 25% GC (but they also don't exactly belong to you).
So first of all I did the calculation with 85% autonomy which can be achieved without ANY other modifier and second of all I presented you the income calculation and I think that 10x more income pays more than for itself regarding the investments, you just need to get the ball rolling which easily happenes just from the Trade power and stability already!
And what do you mean with territories??
If you don't stack autonomy modifiers as you critiziced then Territories are literally the worst thing of all, "Half" States are just better and cost almost nothing more than territories for 5x more outcome!
@@thestudentYTI appreciate what you're saying but your head to head comparison in the video is still 1 full state with zero ducats invested vs 1 TC area with 2200 ducats invested.
I don't really see this as a relevant comparison until you spend 2200 ducats building up the state. You also said that prosperity in the state wasn't relevant for your comparison, which I don't see how that can be as you compared income.
TCs are definitely great, but I think your thesis here is on an uneven foundation.
@@lucasholcomb643 I mean I tested this more than once, did you do that as well?
And also your critics are not really on a solid foundation as well: It was 1450 ducats per state because the special Investment is only once per Company so that is way less than you said it was and then also the income outcome was around 10x of the one in the states and even if it was "only" 9x because of Prosperity it is still more than enough to pay for itself.
Also keep in mind that the highest source of income comes from the +100% Trade Power modifier AND from the negated tolerance and culture penalties which both aply directly after adding the Provinces to the TC without spending ANY money... And on top of that the income scale is exponentially (if you play good enough) so just this big difference for no cost is already enough to outscale the States Meta financially extremly fast which then again pays for the investments itself!
And last but not least you may have missed that States also don't come for free: Not only do you have to pay twice as much Gov. Cap. which lets you run over the cap fairly fast even in early game, but also it costs you TWICE as many Adm. Mana to full state that and after all that is again something that you could just spend on expanding twice as much, adding it to a TC and then get like 20x Money from Trade and Production which again pays for the Investments themselfs. And btw woudn't you always pay Money for Mana Points in any case?
So I can just give you the tip of testing it before saying that I'm wrong because I prepared this video for a long time and the calculations don't lie...
@@thestudentYT There no way 6x trade power = 6x trade income, it has massively diminishing returns once you control a majority of the trade. If you own an entire end node it doesnt do anything at all there.
@@thestudentYT I think the problem is TCs are long term investments that take a lot of ducats and effort to start getting profit out if them. In the early game, you need to expand your powerbase and economy primarily with power points, and spending ~200 admin to full core a state and decreasing autonomy is a reasonable price for getting that much needed increase in FL, income and manpower, especially starting as an OPM. One of the biggest clichés of EU4 is spending mana early to fuel your expansion, then with a good powerbase establishing an economy and using it to minimise your mana spending. Also on the topic of buildings, for example that one TC investment gives you goods produced and prod efficiency acts more like a manufactury as it benefits provinces mostly equally; but if you have a province which you say devved for an institution and has 12 production dev now, you will get more profit by having it stated and puting a workshop on it than saving up hundreds of ducats for TC investments. You too need to conquer a large chunk of the trade node/trade centers before you can benefit from collecting your goods produced in the node. Also on manpower, you might only have that 100 ducats to spare in the early game so it would be better spending it now on a barracks in a high dev province or merks for security/offensive wars than saving up for that 1000 ducat investment while your expansion opportunities are getting more difficult by the year.
Another downside is because you cannot convert provinces, you can't use the strategy of stacking tolerance of true faith(you can easily get 10+ as catholic, you should do a video on that) so you will still get rebels with high overextension/revolution disaster/low stab.
You blow my mind with this video dude.
I love your videos, but when I come back to them as a reference it is really hard to track down individual stuff I need to know. For example, in this one I'd love a summary card of all the gov cap modifiers and another of the autonomy in territory modifiers. Just hard to figure out what I'm missing when I try and recreate this without rewatching all 48 minutes :p. Even just a pinned comment or in the description would be great.
I have actually Time Stamps in all of my videos and as such also in this video: For example I have one going from 32:20 until 38:42 which is literally called "Goberning Capacity" and there is all what I am saying about Gov. Cap. in just 6 minutes...
You should see the Time Stamps in the Timeline normally (I can see them) but anyways they are always listed in the video description as well!
Yep, and I totally appreciate the timestamps and use them. But sometimes I need a quick reference. For example the shots where you show the total comparison between TC and Full states, but listing the modifiers are great. A similar shot listing all the modifiers for gov cap or autonomy would really be excellent. Sometimes its just hard to keep track as you bounce between topics. Videos are great already, and you do a lot, this would just push them into another tier of awesome reference material. @@thestudentYT
edit: also, I was specifically really looking for the autonomy modifiers when I wrote the original comment, which isnt a timestamp.
@@fabbyrob okay I'll see what I can do in the next videos :)
I'm not sure that I will do it like that, but this is interesting information that I would like to experiment with. I don't do very well with trading companies or trade in general. I have been trying to improve on that in my last couple of campaigns.
Trade is most easy income source, as long you start in one of the strong end nodes, or semi end nodes, like english channel, lübeck, genoa, venice.
A TC gives you +1 merchant for free, the moment they get 50% of provincial trade power in a trade node, which means 1-2 trade center provinces, depending on the node.
You also get 10% of your provincal trade power on all nodes downstream, so you can steer much trade into your nodes, even without conquest in them.
And trade income is basicly all the production income of a trade node, which gets extra bonuns on value through steering, and trade eff.
so you scale production, than steering, than trade eff, you get 3 multiplicator on 1 ducat production.
So you get 1 ducat on production, than +1 ducat as trade, which becomes 2 ducats in the node you collect, (or even more), when you control very long steering roads from china into english channel.
this is a really good and helpful video. keep going dude!
Not running half states also has the benefit of you actually being able to use the core all button. And if you TC everything out of your home Subcontinent the "You may make States" alert will only show you those places you actually want to state.
As the Ottomans, you can assign pashas to your states, which, among other things, reduce the governing capacity cost of provinces in that state by 20% (from 50% to 30% in half-states) while increasing the minimum autonomy by 20% (from 50% to 70% in half-states), however if you assign them to at least 50 provinces that are not in the Levantine culture group at any point, you can complete a mission that halves that to 10%, meaning that you get 90% the efficiency for 80% the cost (0,9/0,8=1.125 times the efficiency per GC) in your states, and 40% the efficiency for 30% the cost (0,4/0,3=1.333 times the efficiency per GC) in your half-states. Now, the +20% and the -10% are actually two separate modifiers, and if you un-state a state with a pasha assigned without first removing it, you lose the pasha and its effects, but not the -10% minimum autonomy modifier, meaning that you can then add all those provinces to a trade company and enjoy all its benefits, but with a free -10% minimum autonomy modifier, on top of all the other modifiers you might have.
Yeah but it's the Ottomans so it's basically cheating anyways
@@thestudentYT Oh, I cheat plenty more than just playing Ottomans. One of my favourite things about Paradox games is that I can freely use the console, edit saves, and even change game files as much as I want, to have fun shaping the game to how I want it to be. :)
25:36 How could you write exact numbers when it depends on:
culture
religion
development
buildings
number of owned provinces in trade node
etc
?
Sometimes it worth it to turn all areas in TC, but usually it's better to get a merchant and make other areas states.
Excellent, keep up the great work.
Okay so lots of things with this. I dont know if this video is serious or not, but for people curious here is a more accurate rundown:
FIrst of all saying that Full states give 20% more manpower is wrong. A province with 10 mil dev will give you 2500 base MP in a fully stated province. In a Tradecompany(+building you can only build once) you will get 2750. If you make it 20 mil dev spread on multiple Provinces you get 3500 in TC land and 5000 in fully stated land, which is already more than 20%. It just works out like that in your example since you are in shit dev northern england and in the MP game you showed, it just makes more sense to full state stuff, because you have the gov cap and you have honestly quite low Manpower.
Now all this theory is with infinite money in mind. It is just that trade companies and building/investments inside them scale way slower than buildings in full states.
The trade company buff you get for provinces outside your tradecompany in the same node scales with institutions. Meaning that you can easily get +100% goods produced during the time global trade is active, by just putting your centers in the TC and leave the other ones out, which is a really good way to become rich quickly.
In general, if you want Manpower you should full state, because in most cases it will be around twice as much as putting everything into a TC(assuming you own the entire node). If you want Money you should make a mix of trade companies and territories. If you are limited by gov cap and you are swimming in money, THEN you should TC everything.
Okay, so then for all those who were interested in this missleading comment:
Yes, the example works only because the base manpower was fairly low... BUT in the example I also took only the base 85% autonomy into the count, so if you just get 5% less from Tier 3 Monarchies Gov. Reform then the entire calculation of TCs Manpower is already increased by +33% (5% more on the base of 15% before) and then the world already looks completly different!
Also just assuming that every province has 10 mil dev is just nuts and was just mentioned to manipulate the calculation so that it works out in the commentors favour xd
Tell when have you ever had a average base manpower of 10 per province when NOT playing tall because that's what I also said in the vid: If you only own Italy, have all of the cultures accepted and so on then of course states are better and also stating your home Subcontinent is always the most efficient thing because you simply cannot TC it.
And also maybe you have also missed that TCs actually give more dev cost modifier (15% instead of 10% in states) which in reality means that you can get to the ridiculous 10 mil dev per province FASTER with TCs then with states!
Then about the Trad thing: Yes the goods Produced Modifer scales with the Institutions... But funnily enough this is actually an argument for TC everything because it means that until Global Trade you get way less Goods Produced than the TC has Inlfuence (and yes ONLY the TC Provinces count for this) for example if you add every Trade Center and Estuary in a Trade Node to TC and nothing else then you'll end up at around 80% Trade Influence from the TC. Now let's say you've played until 1550 (which most people don't but anyways) and embraced Printing Press directly then you still get a modifier of ×0.8 on the Trade Influence, so you would get "only" 64% goods produced. And before that with Colonialism (×0.6) it's "only" 48%. And even with Global Trade (×1) it would be still "only" 80% Goods Produced so saying "that you can easily get +100% goods produces during the time global Trade is active, by just putting your centers in the TC" is just straight up fake news!
But anyways, as I also said in the beginning of the video I am not even saying that this goods produced is bad... I way just asking if more money is really worth less manpower if you can also easily get super rich without the goods produced modifier!
And last but not least there are more things that make TCs better not just the +100% Manpower Investment: It is all above Gov. Cap. (That is casually always to low if you play wide), Money (yes even without the goods produced modifier TCs simply give way More Money as States (around 6x more to be exact)), A Merchant, more Stability because of the ability to "accept" basically every culture and religion without converting it (which especially on Muslim Provinces is a big Problem), and also the fact that only small modifiers to autonomy in territories increase th value of TCs dramatically...
So all in all for "the ones that are interested in a more accurate calculation": It is nor the one in this Comment xd
@@thestudentYT I appreciate the response. I actually didnt know, which of the things(like zlewwik thing) were jokes, so sorry if it came of condecending.
Does it look completely different if you get reduced autonomy in territorries ? Well yes, but except for the government reforms all the other modifiers have opportunity cost, means i wouldnt go much lower than 80% in calculation, because opportunity cost is hard to evaluate, since its preference.
The mil dev thing is not per province its combined for provinces in each trade region, since you get a fixed income from the +2000 MP building, which gets less effective the more manpower total you have in a trade region. If you assume +50 per province it is almost completely irrelevant once soldier households come along and every trade node has more than 20 MP dev total.
For the whole argument: your claim is that 100% extra from the investment is worth it even at territory autonomy, which is just wrong. It ignores that every other modifier that you also have estates/ideas/reforms/buiildings etc get 1/5 of the value (at 80% autonomy).
For the trade thing: I like securing my nodes to 100%. Easy example would be Alleppo as ottomans. If you put all the centers in, upgrade them you get 92%. Yes not 100, but you have almost no upfront cost in comparison. Now i admit that this rarely comes up and isnt really practical, but if you are struggling for money it is better to just TC centers and estruaries, which is what i said. BUT usually if you are good at the game, like most people watching this probably are, it doesnt matter to get more money. This is just for people that struggle getting income.
@@siinuxxblume5123 Thanks for the constructive critics but I still see the things a little different: As I said in the beginning of the video I assumed that you don`t need more money at some point where you would rather need Manpower, Stability and Gov. Cap.!
And again yes if you dev every province to 10 mil, accept every culture and have enough Gov. Cap. and Adm. Mana free to spend then it is still better to make everything a full state
BUT: realistically if you play in SP or even in most MP lobbies where Gov. Cap. is made worse and if you NOT play tall, You won`t be able to full state everything! And now all I was trying to show you is that if you Full State Half of your country just is worse than Full TC your entire country because that is after all what makes TCs so great: The Gov. Cap. efficiency! And also you didn`t respond to the other things that I mentioned which is that TCs give you just straight up more Money (again if you play wide not Tall), more Stability (and most of all instant stability after the conquest), a Merchant per Company and no reasonable object reason to convert the provinces which also saves Money, but most importantly also Time!
So I would really like to know if this is like not worth considering also in your argumentation?
And then as TCs take so less Gov. Cap. after you built Courthouses or became a republic because the -25% Gov. Cost are double the efficient to stack in TCs than in States, you can (and should) still Full State your Home Subcontinent (idealy even in a colonial region) and then at latest after building Townhalls as Monarchies/Theocracies when the Gov. Cost reaches the minimum 1% in TCs you can even start to Full State up to your Gov. Cap. (ideally no Trade Centres here) and still have everything else in a TC. So that scenario that I mentioned last would be of course the scenario that makes TCs still efficient in the Mid-Late Game when the strong buildings are unlocked.
And before you can build all of those buildings then the +100% Modifier of TCs is simply the most efficient modifier you can get.
And again all of that is for playing wide or at least wide enough so that you cannot afford the Gov. Cost of Full Stating everything and have to decide between Stating Half of your country or TC everything...
@@thestudentYT I am not saying 10 mil dev in every province. It can also be 10 provinces with 1 mil dev each. The problem with this calculation saying full states are 20% more manpower is that it is the base and only factors in 1 building. If i am Russia with 200% extra manpower outside of building modifiers then my full state gets 200% extra manpower and my TC land gets 40% extra manpower(considering 80% autonomy). This difference would probably be 100% instead of 20% more.
I said in the first comment, that if you have money and are low on gov cap, then yes full companies are good. So i agree on that.
Stability - I generally wouldnt state stuff that isnt my religion or culture. For territories, you can just increase autonomy, since it goes down to 90 again in no time. After absolutism you should be at a point where you can full tc everything anyway.
Merchants - yeah, but you get those also by just tc'ing centers and if you state something for manpower you need manpower more than money, so a merchant doesnt really help when your max manpower is 20k.
Money - compared to full states yes, obviously, but same thing as merchants. If you can afford to put 10k into 1 trade node for more money at the end, did you really need more money compared to full stating.
compared to territories, if you wanna build up quick, then only putting centers in TC costs you a fraction of the money. 200 for each center and 100 for marketplaces for a similar result compared to all investments. if you can do the investment to make more money, then why not full state it ? If its just gov cap: YES i agree as mentioned first comment.
What i usually do is this. Just gonna take spain and morocco node as an example. You full state your culture. Build manpower in all of those. conquer morocco and put the centers in TC until i am able to afford building the rest over doing the same in different nodes, since it costs almost 0 govcap after tech 8 to have territories and it gives you similar income to fully build up 100% TC, because of +36% goods produced and getting 100% of the trade money from that.
Good to see I've always been doing it correctly intuitively. Ever since they reworked TCs so they allowed them everywhere I always played by adding everything I can.
Also often used the 0% GC you describe.
Interesting to see a full analysis 👍
You are not doing it correctly and almost all of the “analysis” provided in this video varies from misleading to downright false. It’s a strong contender for the worst video on trade I’ve seen, despite the stiff competition.
we also shoud consider that me cant build trade companies on the same subcontinent as our capital is in, so probably our subcontinent provinces must be stated
Yes but the best would be as I said to move your Capital to a Colonial Region were you cannot create TCs anyways so it would be like literally perfectly efficient :)
Merc ideas + trading company to pay the Merc, together with tier government reform "elite Merc" to push money on even stronger mercs, and you only go +5 forcelimit, +trade and +production building.
Manpower isn't needed, only if you run out of sailors for your fleet.
The thing is the trade company investment that gives +2000 manpower can be built if you only have a few trade company provinces and you can either have the rest as states to get more manpower or territories if you have low gov cap so thet you can get the goods produced bonus wich will increase your production andtrade income a lot
If i make any mistakes about the topic correct me in the comments
No you can build the special buildings even if you have only 1 single province in the TC Area...
But yes you are right, if you have Gov. Cap. free and enough Adm Points to spare then you could make some Territories Full States but keep in mind that the Goods Produced Modifier from TCs is relative to your current embraced institutions and therefor only gets really valueable after you embraced Printing Press and after you can build Manufactories to increase the Base Goods Produced as the TC only gives a Percentual Modifier...
So before 1550 adding everything to a TC (except your home Subcontinent) is easily better anyways even if you have Gov. Cap. and Adm. Mana free
Now we need lambdax to make a video on this
I think it's possible for a Coptic nations to convert trade companies. Especially if your nation has the two great projects and missionary strength.
But after all you don't need to do that at all right... the only thing that this would give more is like 3-4 Tolerance or something, not really needed imo
@@thestudentYTits not about the unrest...ITS ABOUT THE UGLY RELIGIOUS MAP
@@LeastPatrioticIsraelbelike I see xd I guess you cannot have everything at ones ;)
@@LeastPatrioticIsraelbelike If you play Islam, you can just use that merchant interaction to convert it eventually as long as the TC region isn't Islamic heresy or Christian. Bypasses TC limitation and such.
@@TheMelnTeam only useful in some trade nodes and i barely play islam...there arent enough mechanics for being the second biggest religion in the game
What order would you recommend building the TC-investments, since they all seem pretty expensive in early game? Should you always start with the -5 minimum autonomy one?
I would recommend making the "Harbor" first, and the "Local Venture" Second as both of them increase your income significantly without even relying on autonomy at all basically. And then if you scaled enough economically then you can Start Investing into the "Govenors General Mansion" first for the autonomy and then into the "Military Administration" for the Manpower (up to that point you could also use the Money easily to expand and fight with Mercs as they only get inefficient in the Mid-Late Game but can save a lot of Manpower in the early game) But generally Money will only be a Problem in the very early Game because even just adding more and more Provinces to TCs already outscales Full States fairly fast without any investmenst!
I always build and conquer trade power first.
When you get over 50% provincial trade power in the trade node, you get one extra merchant for free, which is always massive for trade steering or collecting the money in you high control nodes.
After the extra merchants, go +0.3 good produced.
If you go full trade company, and expand them fast like snakes in singleplayer ...you run very fast +100 ducats profit after 50years played.
Or simply, 4 month to get +1 400 ducats investment
Some of your math isn't ideal - for example, the 1k investment giving 2k manpower happens even if you only have 1 province in the charter as a trade company, iirc. I don't think your overall argument is wrong, just that you are overselling the value in some cases.
Isn’t it more efficient to stay almost at max of your gov capacity? Like you can state 2x more provinces easily. What are the benefits of staying at half of capacity I don’t get.
Like your videos a lot, but one mistake I want to point out is that : the state that the teutons have is actually in the North Sea trade node. So the part of +600% trade power is not correct, but I guess the number is around +100%. :)
But I had a look on the North sea Trade Node when I compared that and the teutons literally had only 1% in there... so I think I did everything right :)
can somebody summerize when and which provinces should be added to TC trade companies to get benefit from buildings ?
So is it better to make new territories you annex straight away in to trade companies? Or is it better to let them stand still until you get your already existing trade companies built up with the trade company investments first? Build them in order or just straight up trade company everything outside your subcontinent which you full state and then invest in trade companies as you can?
No micro needed here... Straight up TCs are better for Money, Stability, Mana and Gov Cap (IF you get the Minimum Autonomy down by at least -15%)
may want to change title to "...Start adding EVERYTHING to a Trade Company... NOW!... If you can get below 70% autonomy in TCS."
Dude, you seem to know what you are talking about :-) Are you up for a challenge? I would LOVE to see a playthrough where you get your TC's autonomy to 10% as fast as possible. I just did this, but I am awfully slow, but the results are totally bananas, especially if you move your capital to a place that allows you to TC almost everything (like Bermuda or Polynesia. I chose Rapanui). Even if you dont want to make a video about this - try it, it is sooooo much fun, sat here all day laughing like a maniac, until I reached the 10% autonomy in 1660. You probably wont need my help figuring out what tags to play 😛
Wpiould be happy to hear from you
I am very sure that this could be insane fun if it is done but to be honest I am not really interested in starting as Majapahit or Khmer to end up with a Buddist England in India xd
But I will do some other interesting plays in India very soon :)
@@thestudentYT Almost :-P. Majapahit into Nusantra into England into Russia as Republic, stay Hindu, with Buddha as deity. Imagine Russia with Majapahit Campaigns CB, all the great stuff from english missions, and even the ability to turn the whole world Hindu just by controlling trade. Absolutely bananas, I cannot imagine anything stronger or more fun (but am up for suggestions, lol)
I think I get it, basically you're saying that once you reach a point in the game where money is no longer limiting you then optimizing income becomes super unnecessary and it's actually more optimal to prioritize getting the most out of your provinces while keeping them stable and keeping gov cap cost to a minimum
That is exactly what I tried to show :)
You still can build any normal buildings in a trade company province on top of the trade company investment.
+50% product efficiency and +0.3 good produced is heavy production income, add +1 manufacturing bonus, and it goes crazy.
So for a Worldconquest run would you recommend to just TC everything?, when would you recommend keeping stuff as territories (so they benefit from goods produced modfier)? Or do you transition at a certain point?
Keeping Territories for Goods Produced is only valid if you have serious Money issues and really need as lot of Money fast
Very nice analysis! I do a lot of this stuff as well, with a couple tweaks/differences...
* It's not worth it to mix TC and non-TC provinces in the same area; too much micro
* I like to convert religion on provinces before adding them to TC, then culture-convert the best of them later
* When building a scenario like this, I rush the trade power / production efficiency / trade steering TC buildings first; that gives me the income to spam every possible TC building everywhere!
You know I understand if you want to have nice looking borders on the map modes or something but techbically Converting (except for true faith bonuses) and especially culture converting is completly wasted diplo points on TCs because it literally gives you NOT A SINGLE bonus to do that on TCs because they already get no culture penalty by adding them to the TCs
It makes sense for regular runs but Ive been trying to do 1 faith 1 culture runs lately so I still waste the diplo
I have Wealth of Nations, cossacks, res publica, and common sense dlc, yet there is no ,,Trade Company Investments" in the state tab
I think you need “dharma”. Quite a fun dlc if you like to play in India.
@@fodonzor6847 Too bad I dont care about India, Ima Europe Guy
If you move your capital to America, you could as well form United States, to get extra minimum autonomy bonus.
Considering gold producing provinces, is a TC still better a full state?
No
@@thestudentYT Had the same question but i dont get you reply no to which? :)
@@Furious-Nomad No, for Gold Provinces TCs are not better than full states
Thank you for the awesome analysis! I am currently doing a TTM run where my capital is in Mexico and I TC’ed all of China and Japan. Moneywise I am doing great, but I am lacking in manpower.
So if I understand correctly I should build the manpower 400-investment and the manpower 1000-investment (aside from the two 400-investments for production and trade).
I can TC the whole old world and get my forcelimit from the new world, correct?
Sure, if you have some minimum autonomy in Territories modifiers
Wouldn't prosperity matter in the income comparison? Prosperity gives goods produced, which should increase the production income of the full state (or a half state for that matter).
Yes that is true and it should definetly matter as well but you cannot assume that you simply have it all the time as the Provinces I am talking about are anyways not your home lands (where you cannot TC anyways) so they will often on the border and less protected and also it takes positive Stability and a long time to get it... but then yes it is really strong
If trade company gameplay is the most optimal for playing wide, what would be the best strategy to get to onefaith achievement ? Converting and expanding trade companies are two objectives that are almost completely at odds. Or would it be possible, with the trade company money, to increase the convertion power so much that the trade company penalty to convertion would be negated ?
If you want to convert all of your Provinces then the most efficient way would be to conquer them, core them, half State them, enact the religious missionary strenght State edict, convert all Provinces in the Half State, destate that Half State again anf then finally add everything to a TC :)
the money part got me questioning, you made the average investment per province (aipp) for tc to be 350 ducats, which in deed makes more money than teutons full state, but their state has no building at all. I still think a full state can give roughly same manpower and more production money than tcs, so 350 ducats in full state can be workshop-barracks-church
Yeah but you can build buildings in TCs as well even though they are not as valuable so to compare it more easily I wanted to take simply the base Provinces... so just see the 350 ducats as one time investment apart from buildings and deving etc. That you do anyways as well...And also keep in mind that all the relevant Buildings are Church, Workshop, Barrack and Marketplace/Courthouse so 4 buildings on average which cost already 400 ducats but give you only like +150% Money (maybe not even?) whereas the TC investments give you 4x the Money while costing less... so you can pay them off way faster so that you can build the buildings faster than and just snowball around 2-3x faster economically in total right?
(Especially the insane Trade Power will push your economy to the sky if you know how to build a proper trade network)
@@thestudentYT i see, indeed just having a well invested tc in the channel can amount to great wealth if managed properly. Also would you do a provence guide? Im trying to replicate the best france video but i seem to struggle econ wise
@@minhuctrinh1059 I talked about Provence -> France already in one of my video: th-cam.com/video/VFlDjznmLnc/w-d-xo.html
The only problem is to get money for all TC investments :) So it`s possible about 1600 in general
I did it in my East India Company Game in the 1560s where I also became Economic Hegemon :)
How did the teutonic order get to the British isles?
This was a consol Game so I just cheated and gave it to them via the console to show the base idea of TCs
Great info
Guess I was onto something in my first Roman empire run
That is the perfect gameplay for Rome, trust me ;)
I'm gonna rolelay and not abuse the trade company mechanics
how did you become norse? did you spawn animist rebels and made them island hop all the way to norway? if so how did you deal with europe in the meantime? did you not expand that much?
Yes everything that you just said :)
@@thestudentYT planning to do this in my norwegian wood campaign, what can go wrong xD
@@simonlandenstad9719 nothing, because Norway is the #1 Colonizier in this Patch if you do a Norway into England into Skandinavia Campaign :)
@@thestudentYTcant form another nation since Im doing norwegian wood unfortunately
But you cant just neglect the cost to build all the tc-investments and what you could do with that instead when it comes to war etc in early game play where money isnt infinite at all.
You will like my video that comes tomorrow XD
So basically just TC everything and keep your home region in full states at some point? So actually pressing that button haha
I guess they set the malus on reform progress because TCs would be busted otherwise
I need to try that
But you only trade company the centers of trade and full state the once in the node that does not have a trade center.
Now you get huge goods produced modifiers in your full states and lots of trade power.
And no Gov Cap xD
The entire point that I was trying to make is that TCs are the most efficient Money-Gov.Cap Administration... so if you have Gov. Cap and Admin Mana free then go ahead and state everything!
@@thestudentYT It's still better to just have the trade centers be trade companies and the rest be unstated in nearly all cases if you want to change the argument away from trade company vs stated. The trade companies make a goods produced modifier for all provinces not in the trade company.
How about that monarchies reform that gives - 50% centralizing state cost(it used to be 100%) You used to could state a lot i havent tested since the change.
Centralizing State cost is a completly different modifier that Gov. Capacity...
if you centralize 4-5 times in row state will usually cost only floor of 1% dev@@thestudentYT
@@thestudentYT it de facto change full state governing cost to 0 if you have free govpoints. You can stack centralizing state up to 4 x 25%.
The issue here you need decent govpoints generation - so rushing high crownland and low average autonomy.
Thus playing with centralize state and trade companies is quite exclusive. And main benefit of TC is merchant spam.
-50% centralizing state for monarchies is only to balance +100% govpoints generation for republics.
@@92thorstein I don't think playing with trade companies is in any kind "exclusive" you maybe just have to open your mind a little bit maybe, try it out in an actual game and you'll see that it is really easy and logical and simply better to play with TCs
@@thestudentYT i mean - if you commit to play with TCs you can't go centralized states because low goverment progress points gen and if you commit to centralized states you don't want TCs to keep gov progress points generation.
Both ways are valid. I prefer TCs for more merchants though.
wow youtube recommended your channel you're famous :) I'm Brabant in the cursed lobby
anyway if the goal is manpower full states are still better no? I'll be honest I'm not sure if that's even your claim the ending bit was kinda confusing
Haha nice to see you here :)
You know if this Topic weren't like super complex and confusing (as EU4 is always if you really dive in deep) I wouldn't have need to make a 50 minutes vid on that xd
But no, if you also consider buildings and if you assume that Money doesn't matter (which basically it doesn't if you know what you're doing) then TC are actuall 1v1 better in Manpower than Full States if you reach 70% autonomy or less!
If you don't consider buildings then the TCs are simply better on Manpower even with the base 85% autonomy because Buildings are affected by autonomy so building in TCs is just less effective than in States but the +100% TC Investment just takes it over the edge then anyways...
And if you take Gov. Cap. into the calculation then TCs are so much better that you could also just delete the "State" button completly ;)
@@thestudentYT Can you explain your math on how 70% autonomy is better then full state?
@@Boscomon So I messed this up in the last comment a little because as I said in the video it is 1v1 like 20%-30% worse on Manpower so I ment that it is 1v1 better in terms of Gov. Cap. (So as it takes only half, you have to double the effects of TCs of course with assuming enough Money although TCs literally 1v1 give more Money than States anyways even without Gov. Cap. evaluation so the Investments should pay for themselves if you know how to build the economy up)
That all of course assumes that as I said you don`t play as tall as you do in the MP but at least as wide as you cannot afford full stating everything Gov. Cap wise...
@@Boscomon But you can also contect me on discord if you think I am wrong totally :)
@@thestudentYT Ok so you're saying its more manpower per gov cap not just more manpower. The math on that makes more sense. I agree for sp only when you have tech 22 to remove the gov cost in tcs, if you're super wide in sp at tech 22 you have a lot of territories that can be easily converted to tcs so it does work out good to tc everything. In mp I would go above gov cap in most scenarios.
What about the government reform progress, that +90% autonomy is gonna hit hard.
First of all it is 85% minimum because of the investment, second of all it will even less if you get just a few of the modifiers I mentioned and third of all you can of course Full State your Subcontinent and then it's not that bad...
But yes as I said this is literally the ONLY downside of TCs instead of states but you cannot state everything but you can add everything to a TC...
So do you want +60% Manpower and Sailors, way more Stability and 10x Money or like +70% more reform progress?
I know what I would take for sure :)
I so want to boot up this game again but I just don't have the time to burn right now :(
Game of modifiers!
Aren't you the one who earlier made a video that you should explicitly not trade company everything?
Did you not even watch the first 10 seconds of the video??
Trade company emporiums states and full state non trade power states, you can get +70-90% bonus on goods produced in your full states and full manpower.
Teir 3 inland trade center gives 33% manpower to state, states are easy to dev, in a normal game walicia gives me about 75k manpower in a single state, just a little bit of deving,trade company can’t do that
TC have even more dev cost modifiers (15%) and they get +100% Manpower extra on top of the buildings which a State simply doesn't have... But I don't really feel like that you were open minded enough to really understand this video because I talked about EVERYTHING that you just said xd
@@thestudentYT you get + 100% of the manpower so you actually only get 20% of the man power, if it was a state instead. And trade companies don’t get production bonus for having a strong trade company in the area,
Your probably right it was a long video and I probably mossed your point if you did
@@DirtyOdin64 The big Point on that is that the TC Investment of +100% is simply not available for States and therefore an exclusive Bonus on TCs and same goes for the special investment of -5% autonomy and +2000 base Manpower (which is simply not affected by autonomy at all) and together with the fact that you could make two times the TCs instead of states because of halfed Gov. Cap. and halfed Adm. Mana Cost (the TC Investments anf the additional base Trade Power and Tolerance of Religion and Culture pay the for themselves) it makes TCs just better after all.
But of course that is a little closer with only the base 85% autonomy, so the less autonomy you get, the clearer it gets :)
Why can't they just make trade companies understandable
39.41
NO WAY BRO TOOK MARITIME IDEAS!?!?
I even made 2 videos on why that is just a good idea group :)
After this vdeo,I think I know every detail how to built mercedez. economy of my country is run by neanderthals comparing to Student
Germans simply know how to build cars :)
Regarding that TCs are Op, you are right but in practise if you play wide, not realy applicable as money on investments are short, also switching tags.. However idea to play half states is interesting, it just annoying button on a screen to core)
To be honest i dont understand people who are trying to play tall , eu4 is not made for this. Maybe viki3 , but here wide always wins 100% as the game is designed so.
@@rasplay5761 Yes of course this is a very innovative and new and complex strategy to play wide and as I said in the last video already, Half States are also better than States if you play wide so you could also use them if you think TCs would be to much work to set up
@@thestudentYTslows down reform progress tho
@@logedimension7356 Yes as I said in the video
6:24 or you are playing mughals.
Yes sorry I forgot that OP Nation that 0.01% of the Players play only to get a rare achievement before they then drop that Game agin directly afterwords because their OE is 1000% xd
maney
You forgot the great projects
Yes with them it is even better :)
Deutsch accent eu4 youtuber > bond villain
As some angry comments under this video said because I destroyed their Eu4 Picture that could acrually be right ;)
Now I am even more confused 😮
It sadly also is a very complex topic :/
6:30 Mughals join the chat
Amazing, broke the game lol
i dont like that the game is balanced that way, this should be changed
I mean really VERY few people know this or are interested in that so it is not that game breaking for now :)
I kinda never understood all these minmax guides/approaches to single player eu 4. Funny enough players who are not good at the game will most likely fail to minmax anyway since it actually requires a lot of knowledge and experience and players who are already good enough to play optimally sure realise without any trouble that you don't need it for anything even on hardest difficulty since there are plenty ways to get stronger than AI. Personally I almost never use TC because they are annoying to create and manage and I just couldn't bother.
kann es sein das du deutscher bist?😅
No way!
@@thestudentYT kennen wir uns vielleicht sogar irgendwo her?
@@Marszockt2001 Who knows
Please stop!!! You are ruing my meta hahaha.