A - This article is considered an A-class article on the wiki quality scale
Below is a description of rewrites, where the page has been tagged delete the comments not needed and add in any special instructions.
- Use of you/your: Please change to third person
- Prescriptive instructions: Make more generic
- Excessive use of bold/capitals: Use italics instead for emphasis, if emphasis is not needed then remove is
- List: Reformat into prose (a listed ideas section is acceptable)
- Absence of links: Links missing or replaced by bold or italics which do not function
I have a combined interactions table for all estates here. The table is sortable by interaction, estate, cooldown. Table style up to debate. Still thinking on adding highlight-row-on-hover. Can some of you look at it and give an opinion? SolSys (talk) 11:04, 8 December 2015 (CET)
The changes to local autonomy (LA) from additive to multiplicative malus in the new patch had me very confused about the benefits of estates. From reading in the forum, I see that this confusion is not rare. I suggest a section to this page discussing the effects of LA and how think about the "bonuses" granted by the estates. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Karimjebari (Talk) 12:22, 10 December 2015 (CET)
This is a suggestion for estates strategy. I'm new to editing here so I would welcome feedback.
While estates seem to give good bonuses on specialized provinces, changes to local autonomy in 1.14 in fact make them very harmful. Local autonomy used to be additive, now it’s multiplicative.
Had LA been additive, there would have been a net gain in tax revenue from a 0% LA province granted to the dhimmi estate (which gives you +50%) of 25%, because LA reduced tax revenue by 25% additively.
However, now LA reduces tax (and everything else) multiplicatively, which means that the player loses 25% of their entire tax revenue. Since province tax revenue is affected by a number of bonuses, the effect of 25% LA is drastic.
For example: a province has 10 in base tax. Dhimmi gives a +50% additive bonus, and the province also gets +25% for being a city and +75% for being a core.
So bonuses increase tax revenue to 25 (+150%). Yet, LA is 25%, which means that the tax loss is 6,25 gold (25*0,25). Note that the dhimmi bonus only adds 5 gold (50% of 10). Giving a 0% LA autonomy to dhimmi means losing 1,25 gold from that province (when they are happy) and losing 25% of everything else.
However, note that granting an estate does not raise autonomy, rather they give the province an autonomy floor. This means that the player can grant newly conquered provinces to their estates without suffering an additional penalty.
Potential local autonomy still ticks down, even when an estate controls a province, which means that a province that was conquered a while a go may have a potential LA of say 5%, which means that an estate is robbing the nations economy of 20% LA. The player should keep an eye on provinces that were conquered at the same time as that province to get an idea of how worthwhile revoking that province would be.
Republics (except merchant and noble republics) now implies that the player has to give 20% of their non-overseas development to the burghers, which means that republics have been severely nerfed. While the decision to shift to a republic may seem attractive, it is not recommended until constitutional republic is available (which removes the nobility) or at least until the player has a significant proportion of their development overseas.
- Only grant estates to territory with more than 25% LA.
- If/when the player has enough high LA newly conquered territory, revoke estates from low LA-provinces and assign the periphery of the nation to the estates.
- If the players has many overseas provinces, the estate nationwide modifier will apply to them, making estates more worthwhile, especially burghers for colonial empires.
- Conquering provinces is now more worthwhile since the player can give those provinces to the estates rather than cripple low LA provinces. Rather than feeding a vassal with all provinces, annexing a few provinces to hand out to the estates may be a good idea if the estates are hurting the player’s income/manpower.
- Grant clergy to heathen/heretic provinces (+2 missionary strength) or provinces of an unaccepted culture, as the -2 unrest is most helpful here.
- As a general rule, burghers should n’t get any provinces in early game, since trade matters little at this point.
- It should be noted that trade power is reduced additively by LA, which means that burghers could provide a net gain even in a low LA province if trade is an important source of revenue, and if you give them a Center of Trade (CoT) with low development.
- This also means that, contrary to other estates, it makes sense to build +trade power buildings in your burgher-controlled provinces.
- Try to avoid giving non- CoT province to the burghers.
- Tribes give twice as much bonus to manpower as the nobility. Since hordes have poor LA reduction, and are likely to find themselves at war most of the time, their autonomy is not going to be ticking down much anyway.
- The influence of the tribes will grow as the number of provinces controlled by the player grows, up to 40%. This means that after conquering a 100% war score of poor Central Asian provinces, the player may find that the tribes now hold very close to 80% influence.
- In other words, it’s very risky to give the tribes more provinces than they demand, and the player should be very careful about increasing their influence.
- The dhimmi are a very problematic estate. While they give the player a slight increase in tolerance, the number of heathen provinces contributes to poor religious unity.
- The player has to give them a huge chunk of development for them to give the player the tech bonus, which in most situations is not worth it.
- Their loyalty is reduced by high piety, which means that they are not going to like the player that much.
- Their loyalty/influence is often in direct conflict with the clergy and the nobility, which means that dhimmi provinces will end up difficult to manage pretty often.
- Ergo, dhimmi shouldn’t get any provinces unless the following is true:
- The player has a large number of newly conquered heathen provinces with >25% LA.
- The clergy estate has too much influence.
- The nobility estate has too much influence.
- The burgher estate has too much influence.
- The player can’t convert those provinces at the moment.
- A Strategy section sounds nice. You mostly followed the style guide so there isn't a problem with that. I would suggest rewriting some of the tips or at least mention for what kind of play style they refer to since its obvious there is some kind of mindset behind some of them. You might want to hold with the section until the 1.15 patch is out though [most likely to be balanced in one way or another]. ~ SolSys (talk) 18:04, 3 January 2016 (CET)
- Your assumptions are way off. You seem to be thinking that there's a 100% base tax rate in addition to the 25% city and 75% core factors. But there isn't - the combined 100% from city and core IS the base. A cored 10 base tax province with 0 LA simply gives 10 tax (per year). With the Dhimmis and 25% LA, it would give 10 * (100% + 50% [estate bonus]) * (100% - 25% [LA]) = 11.25. So tax is 12.5% higher, while production and manpower are 25% lower.
- On balance, giving zero-unrest, zero-LA provinces to estates is generally a net negative in terms of income, but not nearly as negative as you're making it out to be. The reason to give out provinces (aside from avoiding loyalty penalties, of course) are either 1) if the secondary bonus is useful (nobility on a fort province, clergy if you want to convert, etc) 2) if it's newly conquered land so LA is way above 25% already or 3) if the nationwide bonus from high influence outweighs the local penalties. --Pyroclastic (talk) 18:55, 3 January 2016 (CET)
- Estate is a net gain when B * (M + E) * (1-P) > B*M with B being the base, M the modifier before giving the province to the estate, E the bonus the estate gives and P the local autonomy penality. We can cancel B on both sides, so the base doens't matter. With values 1/5 for the estate bonus and 1/4 for the penality we should be able to figure on what modifiers the estate is a net gain.
- (M + 1/2) * (1-1/4) > M
- (M + 1/2) * 3/4 > M
- 3M/4 + 3/8 > M
- 3/8 > M - 3M/4
- 3/8 > M/4
- 1.5 > M
- So estates are a net gain when the modifier to the province is lower than 150%. With only core and city it's a net gain, with a +50% building it's a wash, and with a +100% building or higher, or +50% building and some other bonus it's a net loss.
- If it's aditive in case of burguers it's always a net gain of +3/8 to the modifier
- But given that estates give even worse penalities on the development points outside theirs specialities if you have to give them something you should probably give them what they're focused on.
- We should probably also add their global bonus to the math, does someone have a table of bonus by loyalty and influence, and loyalty and influence by development %? We could probably do some optimum development share of each estate given some assumptions. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 18.104.22.168 (Talk) 22:35, 5 January 2016 (CET)
This entire discussion will be rendered moot by 1.15. With the changes announced for that patch, each estate removes the effect of local autonomy on whatever it gives bonuses to - nobles remove its effect on manpower, for example, so you no longer lose manpower for giving a province to them. Hairy Dude (talk) 05:38, 15 January 2016 (CET)
Why is the amount of tiers 5(, especially with defines.lua as reference)? I see only the definition of 3 limits, thus 4 tiers. Yes, there is an additional limit at 80 influence as trigger level for the disaster. But I would not include it in the count. – Lillebror (talk) 13:51, 21 August 2016 (CEST)
- I agree with you, my first change on this was cancelled by SolSys...FrogCrusher (talk) 14:24, 21 August 2016 (CEST)
- I propose the following: Estate influence is a measure of how much power the estate has over the nation's government and scales from 0 to 100. Influence determines the strength of the national effects conferred by the estate's loyalty through four levels: 0-19/20-39/40-59/60-100. These levels modify the effects by a factor 0.25/0.50/0.75/1. [by the way, I failed to found where it is stated (maybe it is hard-coded ?) but in the files ./estates/*.txt the written effects correspond to the last level 60-100] The provincial effects are not affected by influence and are applied in all provinces owned by the estate. Moreover if an estate's influence is 80 or higher, regardless of the estate's loyalty, the nation is at risk of the estate seizing power in a coup, in the form of a disaster. Influence affects also the strength as well as the possibility of some estate interactions. FrogCrusher (talk) 21:12, 21 August 2016 (CEST)
- These Influence tiers seem to be outdated in v1.29? I know the looming disaster triggers at 100+ influence now. I'm not sure were the tier boarders are (in that I haven't looked at any code), but they seem to be 0-50 = tier 1, 50-75 = tier 2, 75-100 = tier 3, 100+ = tier 4.
22.214.171.124 23:23, 6 January 2020 (UTC)
This should probably be the next target for a split. It will make it easier to update with the coming estate rework. I was thinking on breaking it up based on DLC group estate and one "main" page -- so a total of 4 sub-pages (3 groups + 1 main). Any thoughts for/against? ~ SolSys (talk) 23:47, 14 April 2020 (UTC)