Lately I have started finding out that some of the conventional thinking in the game doesn't seem to hold up. Also, I have noticed a few things that I never knew before (though they might be common knowledge to others). Feel free to add to or dispute any of the items put forth by me or anyone else here.
Diplomacy: I have noticed that the relations hit you take from breaking a treaty isn't applied consistently - if at all - to all countries (and it doesn't have to be an alliance; even trade treaties seem to give a hit when broken). By going through and checking numerous countries I have noticed that some don't care if you broke a treaty or not while others do have a minus applied to relations with them. And I have yet to figure a pattern to it: I have had countries I was allied to not have the modifier applied when I broke a treaty but countries I was at war with hate me just a little more, as an example. It would take long and exhaustive testing to see under what conditions the minus modifier is applied and isn't but it is something worth checking since it doesn't seem to be a hard and fast rule.
More diplomacy: I have also noticed that being at war with a country that has no presence in a theatre is no guarantee they won't be irritated with your territorial expansion. As an example: I recently played as the Ottoman and had the Maratha come to hate me (large negative modifier due to territorial expansion) even though we had no territoties in the same theatre.
Units: Dragoons seem to benefit from fire-by-rank (at least the Swedish ones due; I haven't checked other countries). I was playing a battle and noticed my dragoons, arranged in 4 ranks, fired 3 times in rapid succession. I zoomed in and watched and sure enough, they were using fire-by-rank. I looked at the Abilities on the unit card and it showed they could do so but it only showed it when they were dismounted. When they mounted up it made no mention of their abilities to use fire-by-rank.
Life was much easier before I developed a sense of ethics.
Diplomacy: I have noticed that the relations hit you take from breaking a treaty isn't applied consistently - if at all - to all countries (and it doesn't have to be an alliance; even trade treaties seem to give a hit when broken). By going through and checking numerous countries I have noticed that some don't care if you broke a treaty or not while others do have a minus applied to relations with them. And I have yet to figure a pattern to it: I have had countries I was allied to not have the modifier applied when I broke a treaty but countries I was at war with hate me just a little more, as an example. It would take long and exhaustive testing to see under what conditions the minus modifier is applied and isn't but it is something worth checking since it doesn't seem to be a hard and fast rule.
More diplomacy: I have also noticed that being at war with a country that has no presence in a theatre is no guarantee they won't be irritated with your territorial expansion. As an example: I recently played as the Ottoman and had the Maratha come to hate me (large negative modifier due to territorial expansion) even though we had no territoties in the same theatre.
Units: Dragoons seem to benefit from fire-by-rank (at least the Swedish ones due; I haven't checked other countries). I was playing a battle and noticed my dragoons, arranged in 4 ranks, fired 3 times in rapid succession. I zoomed in and watched and sure enough, they were using fire-by-rank. I looked at the Abilities on the unit card and it showed they could do so but it only showed it when they were dismounted. When they mounted up it made no mention of their abilities to use fire-by-rank.
Life was much easier before I developed a sense of ethics.