|
Pornographic Memory posted:Also EU3 was like the blandest, most boring game ever at release. It was so barebones compared to even just a couple expansions later. Yeah. I actually found my old rear end OG EU3 install CD (I got the whole shebang on steam ages ago) and installed it for a lark. It is literally a completely different game. Every function and button and interface element you expect to be there isn't, or looks unbelievably primitive in comparison. And there isn't anything to do except war using that janky rear end early CB-less system or colonize. There's not even auto-send merchants yet!
|
#
?
Apr 4, 2013 00:23
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 30, 2024 11:22 |
|
|
Beet posted:Yeah. I actually found my old rear end OG EU3 install CD (I got the whole shebang on steam ages ago) and installed it for a lark. It is literally a completely different game. Every function and button and interface element you expect to be there isn't, or looks unbelievably primitive in comparison. And there isn't anything to do except war using that janky rear end early CB-less system or colonize. There's not even auto-send merchants yet! I've read that prior to IN rebels weren't grouped into Nationalists, Patriots, Fanatics, Peasants, and the like. There was just one generic "rebels". How did that work? What happened when they took provinces? Did they ever defect, declare independence, force convert, etc., or were they basically just there to keep you busy with an irritating game of whack-a-mole?
|
|
#
?
Apr 4, 2013 00:32
|
|
|
Bishop Rodan posted:I've read that prior to IN rebels weren't grouped into Nationalists, Patriots, Fanatics, Peasants, and the like. There was just one generic "rebels". How did that work? What happened when they took provinces? Did they ever defect, declare independence, force convert, etc., or were they basically just there to keep you busy with an irritating game of whack-a-mole? The worst part was that you couldn't set armies to auto hunt rebels.
|
|
#
?
Apr 4, 2013 00:36
|
|
|
Bishop Rodan posted:I've read that prior to IN rebels weren't grouped into Nationalists, Patriots, Fanatics, Peasants, and the like. There was just one generic "rebels". How did that work? What happened when they took provinces? Did they ever defect, declare independence, force convert, etc., or were they basically just there to keep you busy with an irritating game of whack-a-mole? Yeah, IN was the first big expansion that started to create modern EU3. It's been so long, and recently I didn't really play long enough to see, but yeah, there were just generic rebels so regardless of the issue they'd pretty much just break countries up into any loose cores. There was also a technique called turbo annexing that relied on the fact that when rebels broke a country, any countries they were at war with would instantly peace out taking ownership of land they had control of. So you'd just wait for rebels to siege the capital, then make sure you're occupying every other province. After the rebels held the capital for a year, the country would break and you'd get all of their land save the capital. It was a mite unbalanced. edit: Cantorsdust posted:The worst part was that you couldn't set armies to auto hunt rebels. poo poo, that little advancement didn't come until DW.
|
|
#
?
Apr 4, 2013 00:40
|
|
|
Beet posted:There's not even auto-send merchants yet! No auto-send? Luxury! When I were a lad, we had completely broken auto-send merchants in EU2 and we liked it!
|
|
#
?
Apr 4, 2013 01:07
|
|
|
Beet posted:Yeah. I actually found my old rear end OG EU3 install CD (I got the whole shebang on steam ages ago) and installed it for a lark. It is literally a completely different game. Every function and button and interface element you expect to be there isn't, or looks unbelievably primitive in comparison. And there isn't anything to do except war using that janky rear end early CB-less system or colonize. There's not even auto-send merchants yet! Yeah, it's actually pretty crazy. EUIII Chronicles is functionally EUIV compared to release date EUIII, making the upcoming EUIV actually EUV. Even the world map graphics are completely changed.
|
|
#
?
Apr 4, 2013 02:04
|
|
|
Don't forget that people got extremely mad at CA for fixing most of Empire's bugs, calling it Napoleon and asking the full money for it again. Step1: Release broken product for full price Step2: Patch some things while learning how you do them properly Step3: Release a full price game with the exact same mechanics as the first. Profit! A lot of people don't know if Napoleon is any good because they flat out refused to buy it. As someone who preordered ETW I could never again buy a CA game at full price. Paradox and CA seem to have completely different business models, and I much prefer Paradox' DLCs over CA's "hey a new game!". Not that I wouldn't love it if some ETW features made it into EU4: Unit/Commander experience, Pop growth influenced by tax rates, ability to trade/sell several provinces at once, differentiate between infrastructure and economy buildings....
|
|
#
?
Apr 4, 2013 08:24
|
|
|
Tahirovic posted:Paradox and CA seem to have completely different business models, and I much prefer Paradox' DLCs over CA's "hey a new game!". Paradox's expansion/DLC approach isn't even exclusive against CA! ETW, Napoleon and most recently Shogun all had half a dozen or more DLCs each.
|
|
#
?
Apr 4, 2013 08:33
|
|
|
Beet posted:Yeah, IN was the first big expansion that started to create modern EU3. It's been so long, and recently I didn't really play long enough to see, but yeah, there were just generic rebels so regardless of the issue they'd pretty much just break countries up into any loose cores. There was also a technique called turbo annexing that relied on the fact that when rebels broke a country, any countries they were at war with would instantly peace out taking ownership of land they had control of. So you'd just wait for rebels to siege the capital, then make sure you're occupying every other province. After the rebels held the capital for a year, the country would break and you'd get all of their land save the capital. It was a mite unbalanced. Oh that explains the text of the message for a country breaking to rebels.
|
|
#
?
Apr 4, 2013 09:00
|
|
|
Tahirovic posted:Don't forget that people got extremely mad at CA for fixing most of Empire's bugs, calling it Napoleon and asking the full money for it again. If I recall, didn't Napoleon retail for $30 or $40 at launch? So while they definitely shouldn't have left Empire in such a sorry state, it wasn't the $50 Empire was at least. Also, I would say that Napoleon did enough things different from Empire to justify the price. It doesn't justify them abandoning Empire but Napoleon was a whole new game practically. A lot of the "It's the same game just fixed" stuff comes from the bitter Empire customers who never ended up playing Napoleon because of their (rightful) skepticism and anger towards CA's brazen release policy. edit: Basically Napoleon was to Empire what March of the Eagles was to Victoria 2. I guess? Dr. Video Games 0031 fucked around with this message at 12:51 on Apr 4, 2013 |
|
#
?
Apr 4, 2013 12:48
|
|
|
Or, more relevantly to Total War, Napoleon was to Empire what Medieval 2 was to Rome. Napoleon had entirely new art assets, as many reworked mechanics and gameplay changes as Medieval 2 had in comparison to Rome, and so on. I remember a bunch of people in the Shogun 2 thread thinking that the reinforcement model was new to Shogun 2 and praising it to the heavens, because they'd skipped Napoleon and didn't realise it had been first used in that game.
|
|
#
?
Apr 4, 2013 13:03
|
|
|
Dr. Video Games 0031 posted:If I recall, didn't Napoleon retail for $30 or $40 at launch? So while they definitely shouldn't have left Empire in such a sorry state, it wasn't the $50 Empire was at least. Also, I would say that Napoleon did enough things different from Empire to justify the price. It doesn't justify them abandoning Empire but Napoleon was a whole new game practically. A lot of the "It's the same game just fixed" stuff comes from the bitter Empire customers who never ended up playing Napoleon because of their (rightful) skepticism and anger towards CA's brazen release policy. Napoleon was slightly more than an expansion and slightly less that a new game and priced as such, and I thought it was great.
|
|
#
?
Apr 4, 2013 13:06
|
|
|
Beet posted:Yeah, IN was the first big expansion that started to create modern EU3. What got me to buy EU3 (I was already a big HOI1/2 player at the time, but never tried the other titles) was reading this one IN AAR about an Iroquois player that managed to survive against European colonization, westernize himself, strike back into Europe and basically go off on a World Conquest. While on the Very Hard difficulty. Dr. Video Games 0031 posted:A lot of the "It's the same game just fixed" stuff comes from the bitter Empire customers who never ended up playing Napoleon because of their (rightful) skepticism and anger towards CA's brazen release policy. My experience was the other way around: My first Total War game was Napoleon, and I loved it so much that when I saw Empire, I jumped right in, thinking that the larger scope and more varied countries should be even better! 
|
|
#
?
Apr 4, 2013 13:16
|
|
|
Well I was one of those burned by preordering ETW, and as such I have to say that they simply stopped paying attention to it after they got the money. Instead they invested their time into Napoleon to get even more money out of us. The best part was the promised features that only ever made it into Napoleon. Napoleon really wasn't more than an expansion when you realize half it's "new" features were promised to be in ETW at launch. And ETW was really far from releaseready: - CTD by turn 20 - No AI naval invasion - Pirates that ignore ships in trade nodes - Combat AI who frontally rushes you, then realizes it takes heavy losses and retreats... to retry the same attack 1 minute later To put it in Paradox (the publisher) terms, it was Sword of the Stars II. vvvvvvvv MP campaign as one of the big ones Tahirovic fucked around with this message at 16:15 on Apr 4, 2013 |
|
#
?
Apr 4, 2013 13:22
|
|
|
Tahirovic posted:Well I was one of those burned by preordering ETW, and as such I have to say that they simply stopped paying attention to it after they got the money. Instead they invested their time into Napoleon to get even more money out of us. The best part was the promised features that only ever made it into Napoleon. Napoleon really wasn't more than an expansion when you realize half it's "new" features were promised to be in ETW at launch. Which features were those?
|
|
#
?
Apr 4, 2013 13:32
|
|
|
gradenko_2000 posted:What got me to buy EU3 (I was already a big HOI1/2 player at the time, but never tried the other titles) was reading this one IN AAR about an Iroquois player that managed to survive against European colonization, westernize himself, strike back into Europe and basically go off on a World Conquest. While on the Very Hard difficulty. The same guy went on to do an IN world conquest as unsettled, tribal Golden Horde and a DW world conquest as England without breaking the infamy cap.
|
|
#
?
Apr 4, 2013 17:13
|
|
|
Tahirovic posted:
To be honest they had been promising that for so long that I was surprised it actually happened in Napoleon. Seriously they were promising that as a feature of the Mongol invasion expansion for Shogun 1
|
|
#
?
Apr 4, 2013 17:43
|
|
|
Patter Song posted:The same guy went on to do an IN world conquest as unsettled, tribal Golden Horde and a DW world conquest as England without breaking the infamy cap. That would require a level of patience I can't even imagine. Playing hordes is obnoxious in the extreme with their near permanent succession crisis and revolt problems. The best I could manage was playing as the Timurids and forming the Mughal Empire ASAP.
|
|
#
?
Apr 4, 2013 18:51
|
|
|
Nuclearmonkee posted:That would require a level of patience I can't even imagine. Playing hordes is obnoxious in the extreme with their near permanent succession crisis and revolt problems. The best I could manage was playing as the Timurids and forming the Mughal Empire ASAP. That is the one time I could play the Hordes okay; I started as the Timurids, did anything necessary to secure peace with my western neighbors, and focused entirely on pushing deeper into India, pulling all my forces east and taking the lands I needed for the Mughal Empire before Timur died. I can't even begin to imagine a Golden Horde game, much less adding a "no settling" challenge. Settling and playing as a horde is something I really hope gets another look in EUIV
|
|
#
?
Apr 4, 2013 18:56
|
|
|
DrProsek posted:That is the one time I could play the Hordes okay; I started as the Timurids, did anything necessary to secure peace with my western neighbors, and focused entirely on pushing deeper into India, pulling all my forces east and taking the lands I needed for the Mughal Empire before Timur died. I can't even begin to imagine a Golden Horde game, much less adding a "no settling" challenge. You basically have to rush as fast as possible and get lucky with tribal successions crises. If you don't get most of Europe before firearms are a thing you are hosed and I don't think it would really be possible to win with lovely 5 land nomad troops at that point. In my golden horde game I simply ate the Russian kingdoms, converted cultures so I could take the Russian nation decision and then slogged through westernization as fast as I could to speed the way along to gov 10. It's a loving nightmare due to slider positions, the ensuing horrible revolt risk, and monstrous stability costs though. Hordes really are not that fun to play overall though unless you like ping ponging rebels in provinces that take 2 months to move through. Can only hope EU4 does it better. Nuclearmonkee fucked around with this message at 20:14 on Apr 4, 2013 |
|
#
?
Apr 4, 2013 20:10
|
|
|
That'll all come down to how Paradox handles the Magyar solution in The Old Gods, I think.
|
|
#
?
Apr 4, 2013 20:16
|
|
|
So apparently, MM still has a pulse.
|
|
#
?
Apr 4, 2013 21:53
|
|
|
James The 1st posted:So apparently, MM still has a pulse. YESSSSSS! Yet another reason to update the OP...
|
|
#
?
Apr 4, 2013 21:57
|
|
|
James The 1st posted:So apparently, MM still has a pulse.  Their 2d/3d artist still hasn't changed his section on "meet the devs".
|
|
#
?
Apr 4, 2013 21:57
|
|
|
James The 1st posted:So apparently, MM still has a pulse. The site's been alive for a while but this is the first time i seen this world demo. No one at Paradox has confirmed if it's alive though.
|
|
#
?
Apr 4, 2013 21:57
|
|
|
James The 1st posted:So apparently, MM still has a pulse. Hey, hey, hey this isn't MM, its World Stage which is a completely different game.
|
|
#
?
Apr 4, 2013 21:58
|
|
|
Noooooooooo. 
|
|
#
?
Apr 4, 2013 21:59
|
|
|
That site... it's everything I could have ever dreaded... 
|
|
#
?
Apr 4, 2013 21:59
|
|
|
Lets look at this demo then shall we?
|
|
#
?
Apr 4, 2013 22:03
|
|
|
What an exciting and enticing name for a video game!
|
|
#
?
Apr 4, 2013 22:04
|
|
|
Click Wallpapers on that page for a surpriiiiiise!
|
|
#
?
Apr 4, 2013 22:07
|
|
|
Oh jesus that website. Blast from the past there, eh. Also, that wallpapers page...lists the crew? Gah when is Heart of Darkness coming out? 
|
|
#
?
Apr 4, 2013 22:12
|
|
|
 Has never been so apt.
|
|
#
?
Apr 4, 2013 22:12
|
|
|
That is a thing of beauty, I am downloading the demo and I'm absolutely intrigued how it will play.
|
|
#
?
Apr 4, 2013 22:17
|
|
|
Frionnel posted:Click Wallpapers on that page for a surpriiiiiise!  Did I win it? 
|
|
#
?
Apr 4, 2013 22:18
|
|
|
Are they allowed to use the engine?
|
|
#
?
Apr 4, 2013 22:19
|
|
|
Baloogan posted:Are they allowed to use the engine? Haven't you followed what happened when Magna Mundi was cancelled? The great and glorious Ubik owns the engine now.
|
|
#
?
Apr 4, 2013 22:20
|
|
|
Ubik owns all rights to all Paradox engines, and is in fact leasing them back the assets for EU IV. He's a swell chap.
|
|
#
?
Apr 4, 2013 22:22
|
|
|
DrProsek posted:
NMS that poo poo. Ubik has written a new engine from scratch the, uh, Sun Tzu engine. Totally legit.
|
|
#
?
Apr 4, 2013 22:23
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 30, 2024 11:22 |
|
|
The staff list had a very obvious find-and-replace done on it, so we end up with things like this:quote:How strange that my most visible work in World Stage the Mod has so little to do with the areas of my expertise? Well, no more! World Stage the Mod! I've NEVER HEARD OF IT, Ubik. Tell me more!
|
|
#
?
Apr 4, 2013 22:24
|
|