|
A Buttery Pastry posted:Welfare states imply Capitalism, which would mean the satellites would just devolve into neoliberal states eventually anyway, especially with the threat of the USSR gone. Mans posted:But don't you see, the USSR actually impeded the rise of true Socialism. With the stigma of it gone Social Democratic states can democratically and voluntarily reach Socialism through shared prosperity and peace So is social democracy unpopular on SA, because apparently I was left out of the loop
|
#
?
Feb 8, 2013 00:33
|
|
Though I'll give you that it's preferable to just going full tilt neoliberal from day one.
|
|
| # ? May 29, 2024 11:39 |
|
|
Farecoal posted:So is social democracy unpopular on SA, because apparently I was left out of the loop 5 years ago it would have been unpopular because D&D was libertarian. Now it's unpopular because D&D is communist. Whether this is an improvement is left to your own opinion.
|
|
#
?
Feb 8, 2013 00:40
|
|
|
Cantorsdust posted:5 years ago it would have been unpopular because D&D was libertarian. Now it's unpopular because D&D is communist. Whether this is an improvement is left to your own opinion. Truly the answer is somewhere in the middle. 
|
|
#
?
Feb 8, 2013 00:54
|
|
|
Cantorsdust posted:Is Kersch's miscmods compatible with the most recent EU3 5.2 beta? I believe it was made specifically for 5.2, but don't quote me on that.
|
|
#
?
Feb 8, 2013 01:40
|
|
|
Coolodile posted:Truly the answer is somewhere in the middle. You mean somewhere in the right.  SOCIALISM IS EVIL
|
|
#
?
Feb 8, 2013 01:51
|
|
|
I don't understand that comic.
|
|
#
?
Feb 8, 2013 02:03
|
|
|
Gimmick Account posted:I don't understand that comic. It's one of a series of similar parody comics from the Onion.
|
|
#
?
Feb 8, 2013 02:07
|
|
|
It confuses me too, what kind of pizza lover enjoys Dominoes?
|
|
#
?
Feb 8, 2013 02:07
|
|
|
Cantorsdust posted:Is Kersch's miscmods compatible with the most recent EU3 5.2 beta?
|
|
#
?
Feb 8, 2013 02:19
|
|
|
Mans posted:This might be a dumb question but is there any fun in playing as an Asian state in EU3? The farthest i've played with was Persia, does the game still maintain any resemblance of fun after that or is it just "Gobble up a few neighbors, wait for the inevitable white conquest"?
|
|
#
?
Feb 8, 2013 02:43
|
|
|
I actually almost always play as Asians, mainly because of the extra challenge. It is, however, one of the reasons why I was so slow to upgrade to DW. Utterly breaking my favorite countries (Kazakh, Chagatai, etc.) with horde mechanics and utterly ruined Ming and Japan.  Nowadays I play Steppe Wolfe almost exclusively (always looking for things to show off for my thread) so it doesn't really matter. In SW, it doesn't matter who you're playing as, there's some way to break the game in half and become the most powerful country in the world if you just think hard enough. (Aboriginal Australians may be an exception to that rule)
|
|
#
?
Feb 8, 2013 03:18
|
|
|
Patter Song posted:I actually almost always play as Asians, mainly because of the extra challenge. Your Malaysia nogovernment was still my absolute favorite thing I've ever seen in a Paradox game. Second favorite would be Wiz's effortless Crusader Kings conquest.
|
|
#
?
Feb 8, 2013 03:21
|
|
|
So, what's the point of having monthly and yearly income?
|
|
#
?
Feb 8, 2013 03:40
|
|
|
catlord posted:So, what's the point of having monthly and yearly income? Yearly income is a larger lump sum at the end of the year, in addition to your regular monthly taxes. Generally, it is okay to be running a negative monthly income as long as you make it up at the end of the year. But yeah, the system is redundant, and EU4 will only have monthly income.
|
|
#
?
Feb 8, 2013 03:52
|
|
|
catlord posted:So, what's the point of having monthly and yearly income? A weird gameplay mechanic that seems to be going away in EUIV. It's basically to make minting and inflation have a point I guess. Patter Song posted:I actually almost always play as Asians, mainly because of the extra challenge. Personally I think the best way to fix Hordes in EUIII (I hope EUIV has a more elegant solution) is 1) chance succession crisis to not spawn rebels everywhere and instead just add RR as it already does and reduce stability, 2) use Tribal government instead of the awful Nomad one. It makes them slightly less painful to play though it kills a lot of what makes hordes unique. I dunno, I prefer to to eternal war + rebels loving everywhere. For Japan, I like EUIII+'s setup for Japan with basically each province being a new nation, makes the game a lot more interesting, makes unification harder (although once you get started, it's really easy to snowball) and it makes becoming Catholic Japan a bit easier to get started (since you start smaller, you will tend to be smaller by the time the Europeans arrive so 50% of your provinces converting to Catholicism doesn't take as long). It's not perfect but it's more interesting. Nothing for Ming sadly. Form China ASAP then blob away I guess.
|
|
#
?
Feb 8, 2013 03:55
|
|
|
Didn't see this mentioned yet, you can sign up for the V2:HoD beta here: http://beta.paradoxplaza.com/signup/42/ However the deadline is in ~6.5 hours. Edit: There's also a new EUIV dev diary about war: http://forum.paradoxplaza.com/forum...-so-much-fun... Vodos fucked around with this message at 10:54 on Feb 8, 2013 |
|
#
?
Feb 8, 2013 10:24
|
|
|
I really hope the Hungarian Question in The Old Gods is really just a trial run of nomad mechanics in EU4. Calling them horde mechanics makes it seem like they're just this huge marauding army and not a legit civilization that is spread out over multiple provinces and slowly building settlements and moving around to better use the land.
|
|
#
?
Feb 8, 2013 11:05
|
|
|
Vodos posted:Didn't see this mentioned yet, you can sign up for the V2:HoD beta here: http://beta.paradoxplaza.com/signup/42/ I just registered for this one. Please choose me Paradox! I love you all!
|
|
#
?
Feb 8, 2013 11:08
|
|
|
Vodos posted:Edit: There's also a new EUIV dev diary about war: http://forum.paradoxplaza.com/forum...-so-much-fun... I like what I see. Though if rebel ping pong is replaced with "rebels now run to your cap, because it's the best province, harr harr" I will be sad.
|
|
#
?
Feb 8, 2013 11:13
|
|
|
Yes! Rebels running to the cap is a great idea! Is there a way to mod that into V2?
|
|
#
?
Feb 8, 2013 11:23
|
|
|
Vodos posted:Edit: There's also a new EUIV dev diary about war: http://forum.paradoxplaza.com/forum...-so-much-fun... This all sounds amazing, combat width is especially important as it makes it a lot easier to hold natural borders in mountains etc.
|
|
#
?
Feb 8, 2013 11:27
|
|
|
RabidWeasel posted:This all sounds amazing, combat width is especially important as it makes it a lot easier to hold natural borders in mountains etc. I really hope though, given the talk of loans, that the suggestion others have made about peace deals is implemented. You know, the one about being able to ask for far more gold than the enemy has, forcing them to take a loan instead of having to settle for 25 ducats when you've absolutely destroyed them. The fact that warfare is apparently more expensive makes this even more important.
|
|
#
?
Feb 8, 2013 11:38
|
|
|
RabidWeasel posted:This all sounds amazing, combat width is especially important as it makes it a lot easier to hold natural borders in mountains etc. Yeah drat. I just read it. I had no clue EU3 had all that going on under the hood. Does V2 have the same system? I had no idea maneuver is how far the unit can engage. Is there URL to an explain all this stuff?
|
|
#
?
Feb 8, 2013 11:50
|
|
|
Baloogan posted:Yeah drat. I just read it. I had no clue EU3 had all that going on under the hood. Yes, Victoria 2 also uses a fairly complex combat system under the hood. ZearothK talked about it a bit some time ago in Wiz's Azeri LP, but mostly about composition and tech, although that's really one of the few things that the player can directly influence anyway, apart from terrain and leader allocation: ZearothK posted:Vicky doesn't have tech level, but it does have specific land techs, 30 technologies spread along 5 different lines: Army Doctrine, Light Armament, Heavy Armament, Military Science and Army Leadership. Also, each technology has several inventions within it that gives it specific bonuses (most are small gradual upgrades, but there are some major things like Gas Attacks and tanks).
|
|
#
?
Feb 8, 2013 17:06
|
|
|
That was quite dry DD, tbh, talking a lot about inaccessible (and, to me, rather pointless) complexity - did anyone really pay much attention to flanking, ranges and individual regiments attacking each other in EU3? Apart from 50%/4 unit cavalry rule, does micromanaging all of that makes/will make much difference in battles or is it the case of losing 1500 instead of 1700 men? Is it desirable for it to make much difference in a game like EU? If not, what's the point? The shattering/disorganization really needs to be seen in action. I have enough trust in Paradox to believe that the changes make sense and improve the experience.
|
|
#
?
Feb 8, 2013 17:16
|
|
|
Yeah, that's the big weakness to the EU3 and CK2 combat systems. There's a lot going on under the hood and some fairly clever and complex systems being run, but the game is really bad at showing the player what's happening and there's no way for the player to influence it even if they knew. Looks like EU4 won't be improving on that aspect of it much, although I do like the strategic-level changes.
|
|
#
?
Feb 8, 2013 17:40
|
|
|
Burning Rain posted:That was quite dry DD, tbh, talking a lot about inaccessible (and, to me, rather pointless) complexity - did anyone really pay much attention to flanking, ranges and individual regiments attacking each other in EU3? Apart from 50%/4 unit cavalry rule, does micromanaging all of that makes/will make much difference in battles or is it the case of losing 1500 instead of 1700 men? Is it desirable for it to make much difference in a game like EU? If not, what's the point? Sindai posted:Looks like EU4 won't be improving on that aspect of it much, although I do like the strategic-level changes.
|
|
#
?
Feb 8, 2013 17:44
|
|
|
It looks like tech bonuses apply on top of the terrain base. I'd much rather have each unit/army start out with some base width and tech bonuses add on that until you reach the max width of that province. Right now the Swiss Alps are narrow until you upgrade your tech to make them... not so narrow? It's changing the terrain and not how the unit uses it.
|
|
#
?
Feb 8, 2013 17:54
|
|
|
I like the idea that you will beat down an opposing army and actually force them to sit in a faraway province for months regrouping while you siege down their provinces. Much more realistic than pingponging armies to death before settling down to siege.
|
|
#
?
Feb 8, 2013 17:54
|
|
|
Sindai posted:Yeah, that's the big weakness to the EU3 and CK2 combat systems. There's a lot going on under the hood and some fairly clever and complex systems being run, but the game is really bad at showing the player what's happening and there's no way for the player to influence it even if they knew. It's interesting that only relatively recently are the Paradox forums people really looking into CK2's combat and realising that there is significant power possible.
|
|
#
?
Feb 8, 2013 17:57
|
|
|
Bloodly posted:It's interesting that only relatively recently are the Paradox forums people really looking into CK2's combat and realising that there is significant power possible. Wait, are you saying that they've found more than "get more cavalry, avoid crossing straits and doing amphibious landings"? That's the only conclusion I've gotten to.
|
|
#
?
Feb 8, 2013 18:27
|
|
|
HOI3: TFH is 50% off on GG currently. Can't believe I'm doing this, but I'm picking it and FTM up. Its reputation seems to be improving on the forums. Hope I'm right!
Tercio fucked around with this message at 18:40 on Feb 8, 2013 |
|
#
?
Feb 8, 2013 18:37
|
|
|
RabidWeasel posted:I like the idea that you will beat down an opposing army and actually force them to sit in a faraway province for months regrouping while you siege down their provinces. Much more realistic than pingponging armies to death before settling down to siege. Nolanar posted:Wait, are you saying that they've found more than "get more cavalry, avoid crossing straits and doing amphibious landings"? That's the only conclusion I've gotten to. Wolfgang Pauli fucked around with this message at 18:42 on Feb 8, 2013 |
|
#
?
Feb 8, 2013 18:39
|
|
|
Ray and Shirley posted:HOI3: TFH is 50% off on GG currently. Can't believe I'm doing this, but I'm picking it and FTM up. It's reputation seems to be improving on the forums. Hope I'm right! I'm not sure which one let you completely customize your OOB but that gave me a fighting chance at HOI3. I enjoyed it right up until Barbarossa then I decided to take an extended break.
|
|
#
?
Feb 8, 2013 18:40
|
|
|
RabidWeasel posted:I like the idea that you will beat down an opposing army and actually force them to sit in a faraway province for months regrouping while you siege down their provinces. Much more realistic than pingponging armies to death before settling down to siege. Although why would you spend your time sieging provinces and letting them regroup and recover? Wouldn't it be better to just march over to where they're retreated and locked in place and KILL THEM TO DEATH?
|
|
#
?
Feb 8, 2013 18:44
|
|
|
Wolfgang Pauli posted:It looks like tech bonuses apply on top of the terrain base. I'd much rather have each unit/army start out with some base width and tech bonuses add on that until you reach the max width of that province. Right now the Swiss Alps are narrow until you upgrade your tech to make them... not so narrow? It's changing the terrain and not how the unit uses it. Fintilgin posted:Although why would you spend your time sieging provinces and letting them regroup and recover? Wouldn't it be better to just march over to where they're retreated and locked in place and KILL THEM TO DEATH?
|
|
#
?
Feb 8, 2013 18:49
|
|
|
Fintilgin posted:Although why would you spend your time sieging provinces and letting them regroup and recover? Wouldn't it be better to just march over to where they're retreated and locked in place and KILL THEM TO DEATH? Because manpower is a lot more expensive now, and decisive battles might be more costly in the long run than quick sieges in the area of the country you're actually in.
|
|
#
?
Feb 8, 2013 18:50
|
|
|
A Buttery Pastry posted:Well, if the warscore system is closer to CK2, maybe quickly taking those provinces would allow you to potentially end the war right there, instead of risking more casualties?
|
|
#
?
Feb 8, 2013 18:52
|
|
|
Fintilgin posted:Although why would you spend your time sieging provinces and letting them regroup and recover? Wouldn't it be better to just march over to where they're retreated and locked in place and KILL THEM TO DEATH? They retreat a lot faster than you, you'll possibly be suffering attrition sending your guys further into their territory (and your forces will reinforce more slowly), they'll have the defensive advantage when you attack, and battles can be potentially very expensive in terms of both manpower (which is now more limited) and cash. It might well actually be more efficient to just siege!
|
|
#
?
Feb 8, 2013 18:54
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 29, 2024 11:39 |
|
|
I think multi-retreating just makes detached cavalry more important than it was in Vicky 2. I'm assuming that broken units will retreat along a path instead of trans-warping to the province, so encircling the province will be as effective as always.
|
|
#
?
Feb 8, 2013 18:57
|
|