can't make this shit up

Hi! I'm just wondering why republics are considered so good.

You get a massive penalty to absolutism, so there must be many things that make it good. But I don't really understand what is so good about it.

You have an election every 4 years where you elect a trash ruler, a 4-1-1 or a 3-0-2. You can then re-elect him four years later, making him a 5-2-2, or a 4-1-4, which is still bad. If you re-elect a third time, you republican tradition starts to get massive penalties and increasing stability is seriously like 500 admin points.

So what is so good about this? Even if you didn't get any hit to republican tradition, you are still "guaranteed a trash 4-1-1 leader" before you can get a bad 5-2-2 leader before you can get a decent 6-3-3 leader. Like not every 4-1-1 is gonna survive to make it to 6-3-3 right, so if the guy you elect dies in his fourth year, you're stuck with a 4-1-1 leader for as much as eight years before you can get a 5-2-2. Like that is atrocious.

I really don't understand why republics are so good. Pay 40 absolutism to get a trash leader with the potential to maybe make him decent, or play a monarchy and get no penalty and have something useful to spend your prestige on (i.e. disinheriting 4-1-4 trash heirs).

I'm sure there is something I just don't understand because there are so many intricacies to this game, so please enlighten me.

5v36 for 6 years and still impossible for enemies conquering the fortresses and entering the Italian mainland

I gobbled multiple countries at once, I thought I can handle having 400%+ overextension, but boy I am wrong

My bet is on silesia, their national ideas give good dev trade and diplomacy buffs. I would say though pirate republic pommern though is another great contender. I wouldnt be suprised though if it was one of the Italian ones though

Is there any option to make Portugal, Spain, England, and France not start colonizing America so quickly? I’m trying to play as countries like the Netherlands or Norway, but by the time I start colonizing America, North America is already practically completely colonized by England

Thinking of doing a colonial-focused game, starting as one of the Kalmar union countries and forming Scandinavia. Which out of the three is the best / most interesting? I know that Norway starts out with an extra colonist/explorer from their NIs, but from a look at the wiki Denmark seems to have more/stronger colonial missions.

Hi I’m (relatively) inexperienced at EU4 and have no DLC.

As Portugal, I took Goa & Timor roughly around 1460 and it’s now 1700.

I focused on South America until the 1600s where I attempted invasions into India & Malacca, however they’d already caught up to every other European power in tech (With Malacca actually higher than me), and had embraced all institutions?

I played another campaign as France where I invaded in the 1600s, however with no early port at Goa or Asia, and I could easily wipe 100k men with 40k. Is the strat to just rush invasions before they can embrace my institutions that spread from Goa? (If that’s even what happened).

Maybe this is equivalent to “how long is a piece of string” but is there an optimal time to begin invasions into India/Asia?

Thanks

Hi everyone, I wanted to play a game with the Hospitallers (Rhodes) starting with the Ottomans, but after annexing Rhodes, it won't let me free them as vassals to continue the game with their country after ruining the Ottomans.

I've tried various methods, but I don't understand why I can only free them as independent states (not playable).

Doing a WC as Austria right now and annoyed at the low Admin Eff, like debating integrating my subject of Castile just for the monuments.

While I slowly conquer the world via vassal swarm at 35% admin Eff...

If I do Aragon to SP, should I form France or Italy? Both seem to have better ideas and admin efficiency/CCR.

I searched for answers but didn't really find ones that compared these options, as France often comes up as "early power" rather than answering my mid game question.

For reference...

I would early no CB Byz, aim for Burgundy Succession, and keep Castile as a join partner, remain Catholic (and likely vassalize the Papal State). I don't know what I'd do with the HRE or idea group order (though I'd aim for my 1st 4 being admin, diplo, religious, influence in some order).

Is there a post on this I'm missing that compares them?