I was planning to play Milan until Morfeo swooped in. Timurids were the low hanging fruit.
I know that feel.
I was planning to play Milan until Morfeo swooped in. Timurids were the low hanging fruit.
You can't really afford to fall behind militarily in a multiplayer game. Nor can you afford to fall decades behind if you get unlucky and are unable to reform your government in time. If this was a more aggressive multiplayer game, then the Timurids would be much harder to play. With that said, a good player shouldn't have a major problem with revolts.Revolts are not a problem. Just keep burning MIL. Stops you from expanding early on, but you don't need to - you're the Timurids, you're already huge - you have literally over 70 base tax more than France. Otherwise, just rush an ADM idea tree with focus on ADM and advisors. You will be clear in no time, and ready to Westernize effectively immediately because you've not put points into tech but instead supression/ideas. AI Timurids struggle, but that's because they're stupid. A human Timurids is always going to be one of the most powerful players in the game. I'd rather be Timurids than roughly 50% of the nations we have above them. This is also assuming that the human Portugal can find an early alliance against Castile, otherwise you'll be the same size in 1600 you were in 1444, just with some colonies.
Timurids are a top ten nation.
Do you just move the Capital to Brandenburg or some such thing to get a Germanic primary culture?I was planning on playing Bohemia until it became a 3.42 nation, rather than a 3.46. Damn you guys. I wanted to form Prussia! (Mostly because Prussia has Major Motoko Kusanagi on it's flag in the finest EU4 mod)
Do you just move the Capital to Brandenburg or some such thing to get a Germanic primary culture?
You can't really afford to fall behind militarily in a multiplayer game. Nor can you afford to fall decades behind if you get unlucky and are unable to reform your government in time. If this was a more aggressive multiplayer game, then the Timurids would be much harder to play. With that said, a good player shouldn't have a major problem with revolts.
Who will you be falling behind? Timurids border Indian-tech nations that struggle more than they do, and other nomads.
Interesting. I thought it was a nation tag specific thing.Yeah, you start with two Saxon culture provinces already and just need to conquer three more and move your capital to one of them to culture shift. Then you just need the regular requirements to form Prussia and you're there and get those ideas. All Saxon culture nations have access to the form Prussia decision.
In the early game, an Ottoman or a good Mamluks players; and in the mid-game a Russian player. That would prevent them from being a truly elite nation in my opinion.Who will you be falling behind? Timurids border Indian-tech nations that struggle more than they do, and other nomads.
Regarding starting date for this session, would 18th of march work (wednesday)?
We don't know, that depends on when 1.11 is out.
I would certainly strongly prefer we wait for 1.11, yes. 18th is fine for me otherwise.Do we have to wait for 1.11?
Anyhow, let us assume 1.11 is out by then, would 18th work for the rest of you?
In the early game, an Ottoman or a good Mamluks players; and in the mid-game a Russian player. That would prevent them from being a truly elite nation in my opinion.
I'd also favour a good Timurids player againt a good Mamluks player. Having even a two tech advantage probably does not make up for the fact the Timurids start with around just under double the manpower and force limits.
And the option to ally the powers in the region, especially the Ottomans, who will never ally with the Mamluks.
...about that "Ottomans never allying Mamluks" thing...
As my last girlfriend said, 'What is this, an erection for ants?'
Also, surely it's 'Is your penis smaller than fanboi's?' Three basic errors there, fanboi. For shame.
That is horrible engrish though
There's no rule on taking out a player in the first session, right?
There's no rule on taking out a player in the first session, right?
There's no rule on taking out a player in the first session, right?
This is the second time you're asking about this. I'm struggling to see who it would make any sense for you to take out first session. Don't you have vassals to integrate, Burgundy to crush, and Brits to have fun with?
Always after blood, this lad.
There's no rule on taking out a player in the first session, right?
I already know who's gonna die in session 1. Hint:it's me
This is the second time you're asking about this. I'm struggling to see who it would make any sense for you to take out first session. Don't you have vassals to integrate, Burgundy to crush, and Brits to have fun with?
Always after blood, this lad.
First time was when Red Arremer wanted to start as a French vassal, now it's in case someone *cough* wants to start this game with my destruction in mind.
well you don't have to worry about me, nudge nudge wink wink
well you don't have to worry about me, nudge nudge wink wink
Dat French conquest of Abyssinia though.
I already know who's gonna die in session 1. Hint:it's me
I doubt it. Mamluks are a major power, plus, there's always alliances you might be able to get.
First time was when Red Arremer wanted to start as a French vassal, now it's in case someone *cough* wants to start this game with my destruction in mind.
I mean, the Mamluks are at the gateway of Europe, Africa and Asia so they're a popular candidate for getting picked on.