|
SkySteak posted:Is this how you win Crusader Kings 2?
|
#
?
Jun 16, 2013 02:11
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 3, 2024 21:13 |
|
|
SkySteak posted:Is this how you win Crusader Kings 2? The second I saw this I started dry-heaving and wasn't sure why. Those borders  Unrelated: I'm playing through EU3 now in an effort to get my fix before EU4 comes out, and I figured I'd take a crack at forming Russia. I figured Muscovy would be a good country for this, are there any better options? Also, how do I deal with the Golden Horde, just keep paying them off until I can go toe-to-toe with their armies? Edit: every time I look at the quoted map I just see more  : it's not just the player country's borders that are a horror show; England and Sicily are all over the place, there are Umayyads in central France, etc. It's like some awful orchestra playing the aria of nauseating borders, and everyone's playing their instrument to perfection.
NEED TOILET PAPER fucked around with this message at 06:26 on Jun 16, 2013 |
|
#
?
Jun 16, 2013 02:46
|
|
|
NEED TOILET PAPER posted:The second I saw this I started dry-heaving and wasn't sure why. Those borders Try to get enough warscore to sign a peace, even if you're conceding defeat, as soon as possible in any war with them, before their giant armies come in to steal all your land, and pay them off in that way while you gobble up your Russian neighbours. Eventually either you'll be big enough to go toe-to-toe with them, or they'll get caught in a massive succession crisis and never recover, at which point you can start snatching up their territories as fast as you can colonize. You'll want to colonize south to the Black Sea as fast as possible to prevent any other major European powers from snaking past you, but other than that you can expand at your own pace once they're not a threat.
|
|
#
?
Jun 16, 2013 03:20
|
|
|
Good old rebellion maps. Also, the Seljuks are at the Alps.
|
|
#
?
Jun 16, 2013 05:52
|
|
|
SkySteak posted:Is this how you win Crusader Kings 2?
|
|
#
?
Jun 16, 2013 06:10
|
|
|
SkySteak posted:Is this how you win Crusader Kings 2? What the hell did you do to the world?
|
|
#
?
Jun 16, 2013 06:25
|
|
|
NEED TOILET PAPER posted:Unrelated: I'm playing through EU3 now in an effort to get my fix before EU4 comes out, and I figured I'd take a crack at forming Russia. I figured Muscovy would be a good country for this, are there any better options? Also, how do I deal with the Golden Horde, just keep paying them off until I can go toe-to-toe with their armies? I think the bigger country (Rus?) is technically easier but you can do it with Moscovy. As for the Golden Horde I believe you burn all your provinces along the border and watch the doom stacks starve to death in winter.
|
|
#
?
Jun 16, 2013 06:43
|
|
|
^^The other country is Novgorod. I thought Muscovy was considered to be easier due to their superior military and expansion routes. I haven't played either in vanilla though.^^ I was going through screenshots of my old games and found this beaut. Unfortunately SkyStreak is a tough act to follow. I have to say, my favorite part is Hokkaido.  This one is less terrible, but still amusing. 
Magissima fucked around with this message at 06:50 on Jun 16, 2013 |
|
#
?
Jun 16, 2013 06:47
|
|
|
Puella Magissima posted:^^The other country is Novgorod. I thought Muscovy was considered to be easier due to their superior military and expansion routes. I haven't played either in vanilla though.^^ Muscovy is easier as you get missions on your smaller neighbours and once you start eating Novgorod, you'll get a subjugate mission that'll vassalize them, letting you grab their remaining territory for 1 infamy a piece. Edit: The hilarity option is Teutonic Order to put the P into Russia. Cynic Jester fucked around with this message at 07:03 on Jun 16, 2013 |
|
#
?
Jun 16, 2013 06:57
|
|
|
I don't know if it was posted to the thread, I couldn't find it. If it's a repost, my bad. Quill's trip to stockholm and multiplayer experience detailed in vblog format: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rdUjBd5Q6J0 Everything I see on this game leaves me kind of stunned. It sounds spectacular. 
|
|
#
?
Jun 16, 2013 07:02
|
|
|
I gotta stop jocking paradox games on SA. I realized after I posted that, that some of the devs actually read my fanboying nonsense. :\
|
|
#
?
Jun 16, 2013 07:04
|
|
|
Cynic Jester posted:Edit: The hilarity option is Teutonic Order to put the P into Russia. Wait, how do you do that by 1477?
|
|
#
?
Jun 16, 2013 07:24
|
|
|
VainRobot posted:Wait, how do you do that by 1477? That's D&T, so a 50 year earlier start date.
|
|
#
?
Jun 16, 2013 07:37
|
|
|
VainRobot posted:Wait, how do you do that by 1477? Guessing by the Chobanids being in there that he's using Death and Taxes
|
|
#
?
Jun 16, 2013 07:38
|
|
|
Speaking of EU4, there's a new dev diary out: http://forum.paradoxplaza.com/forum/showthread.php?695756-Europa-Universalis-IV-Developer-diary-35-Alt-for-Norge! Also I don't recall seeing the previous dev diary posted, so here it is: http://forum.paradoxplaza.com/forum/showthread.php?693964-Europa-Universalis-IV-Developer-diary-34-Unit-Interface-and-more
|
|
#
?
Jun 16, 2013 08:14
|
|
|
Cynic Jester posted:That's D&T, so a 50 year earlier start date. Oh, that makes a lot more sense. Still a pretty crazy game though.
|
|
#
?
Jun 16, 2013 08:44
|
|
|
BBJoey posted:Speaking of EU4, there's a new dev diary out: http://forum.paradoxplaza.com/forum/showthread.php?695756-Europa-Universalis-IV-Developer-diary-35-Alt-for-Norge! Everything I've read and seen about EUIV makes it sound like you have so much deliberate control over your nation, whether it's creating cores, researching techs, activating national ideas and laying down trade routes. August really can't come soon enough.
|
|
#
?
Jun 16, 2013 09:45
|
|
|
Kavak posted:What the hell did you do to the world? Long story short, Muslims in Iberia overran most of Iberia, then France, then Germany. A few hundred years later, a large portion break off (Sicily). Soon after the Aztecs declare a holy war on the entire original Muslim nation. I, as Scandinavia called a Norse Crusade on them and took the land they took. This game is an amazing clusterfuck because both main denominations of Christianity struggle to keep a Moral Authority over 30. France has not existed for hundreds of years and a good portion of Europe is Shia.
|
|
#
?
Jun 16, 2013 15:11
|
|
|
Kavak posted:A sign that they're reworking the game to possibly make it not suck? Part of me wants this to work out, while another part wants this whole thing to explode like Magna Mundi and leave the way open for someone to make a Cold War game based off of Victoria. Sadly if EvW bombs itll be a really boring "game just is kinda meh" bomb. Magna Mundi was based off untested ideas from a decent but rather iffy mod (Designing a full game isnt like designing a game). The team at EvW have proven themselves actually competent since Arsenal of Democracy was a really good game for what it was (since it came out before Darkest Hour). That generally means itll just fizzle out into something mediocre rather than a glorious failure.
|
|
#
?
Jun 16, 2013 15:44
|
|
|
VainRobot posted:Oh, that makes a lot more sense. Still a pretty crazy game though. Yepp. I wanted to try Unam Sanctum and my friend playing Britain wanted to break the game in half with Britain, as back then it had a mission that gave you cores on pretty much all of France once you retook Normandy and then occupied Paris. I'm huge on the map, but at that stage my economy was probably half of what GB put out, and that's with nothing but Christian provinces.
|
|
#
?
Jun 16, 2013 15:58
|
|
|
gradenko_2000 posted:Everything I've read and seen about EUIV makes it sound like you have so much deliberate control over your nation, whether it's creating cores, researching techs, activating national ideas and laying down trade routes. August really can't come soon enough. It's EU3 with prettier graphics and roughly an expansion's worth of content. It's not really that big of a deal.
|
|
#
?
Jun 16, 2013 16:10
|
|
|
gradenko_2000 posted:Everything I've read and seen about EUIV makes it sound like you have so much deliberate control over your nation, whether it's creating cores, researching techs, activating national ideas and laying down trade routes. August really can't come soon enough. But the ultimate challenge of maintaining pretty borders remains yet unseen This is 100% serious, I expect to see English Africa within 50 years of the game starting
|
|
#
?
Jun 16, 2013 16:20
|
|
|
iCe-CuBe. posted:It's EU3 with prettier graphics and roughly an expansion's worth of content. It's not really that big of a deal. I'd disagree. So many of the core gameplay systems have changed. No sliders is huge for me, the removal of complexity through obscurity, a trade system that you can actually interact with, the addition of the powerpoint system and so forth. If you consider EU4 to have an expansions worth of content, I'm not sure what game sequel you'd actually consider to be a separate game and not just an expansion.
|
|
#
?
Jun 16, 2013 16:24
|
|
|
Cynic Jester posted:I'd disagree. So many of the core gameplay systems have changed. No sliders is huge for me, the removal of complexity through obscurity, a trade system that you can actually interact with, the addition of the powerpoint system and so forth. If you consider EU4 to have an expansions worth of content, I'm not sure what game sequel you'd actually consider to be a separate game and not just an expansion. Looks to be a more significant variation between nations as well via the decision system.
|
|
#
?
Jun 16, 2013 17:18
|
|
|
Cynic Jester posted:Muscovy is easier as you get missions on your smaller neighbours and once you start eating Novgorod, you'll get a subjugate mission that'll vassalize them, letting you grab their remaining territory for 1 infamy a piece.  Got land? Gotland.
|
|
#
?
Jun 16, 2013 17:42
|
|
|
Cynic Jester posted:No sliders is huge for me, Just curious, but why is this so? It seems like a lot of people hated sliders but I never had a problem with them. In fact, I'm not sure I like them being replaced by a broad, fuzzy concept like a bundle of national ideas.
|
|
#
?
Jun 16, 2013 20:29
|
|
|
Sliders were kind of stupid because there was usually an optimal position given your longterm strategy and that meant that there was no interesting decisionmaking associated with changing them other than the rare event where you had to choose between something bad with a good slider change and something good with a bad slider change. I do like how they helped make some countries distinct at the start of the game, though. I know that at least a one of the concepts which were previously covered by sliders are now distinct game concepts and not included as idea groups (mercantilism, though I don't think anyone knows exactly how it works yet) so there might be more that we don't know about yet.
|
|
#
?
Jun 16, 2013 21:28
|
|
|
Jabarto posted:Just curious, but why is this so? It seems like a lot of people hated sliders but I never had a problem with them. In fact, I'm not sure I like them being replaced by a broad, fuzzy concept like a bundle of national ideas. I'm not just referring to the government sliders, but also the investment and minting sliders. For the government sliders, so many of them are pointless. You'll always want to centralize. You'll always want to move away from Serfdom. You'll always want narrowminded unless you're westernizing and then you'll generally move back to narrowminded. Unless you're colonizing a ton, land is far more important than naval, even if you're a coastal nation. It's all very binary. One of two choices, often with one of them being a lot better. And each slider move doesn't feel very impactful unless it opens up a decision or something along those lines. Contrast that with the new national idea system where not only are your options greatly expanded, but it also competes for power points with other actions, making it an actual choice, compared to eu3, where you will always slidermove when you can. And the investment sliders are terrible. It's an opaque system that combined with the monthly/yearly split has turned a lot of people away from the game. Basically, EU4 looks to add a lot of decision points, whereas in EU3, I autopilot everything except expansion at this stage. If you're a trade nation in EU3, you set all the richest CoTs to 5 merchants, smaller ones to 2 and leave it. Occasionally you'll go into the ledger to update your priorities due to new trade centers and such, but there's never any meaningful choices to make. The same with techs. There's pretty much always a clear winner for which tech to get first, and in the cases there isn't, it's because all the techs have empty levels. Conversion? Drop as many missionaries as you can support, all the time. Pretty much the only meaningful choices you make in EU3 are centered around where and how you expand. EU4 at least seems to be fixing this by making each decision something you must weigh against all your other options for spending those power points. Sure, there will generally be a few choices that are vastly better than others, but that's still better than EU3s complete lack of them.
|
|
#
?
Jun 16, 2013 21:39
|
|
|
Okay, I see where you're coming from now. And I do agree with a lot of it, especially the bit about expansion being the only thing that requires attention from the player. In EU3, I never play as colonial nations, or try to expand diplomatically, or just try to be a small trading nation, because it's just so damned boring and oftentimes impossible to meaningfully influence.
|
|
#
?
Jun 16, 2013 22:11
|
|
|
Trade zones were also rather boring in EU3, it had no real amazing effect on anything. EU4 actually allows you to shape and dominate trade areas, so there's going to be an actual element of figuring out where to expand and colonize based on how much trade you want to control.
|
|
#
?
Jun 16, 2013 22:46
|
|
|
ThePutty posted:Trade zones were also rather boring in EU3, it had no real amazing effect on anything. EU4 actually allows you to shape and dominate trade areas, so there's going to be an actual element of figuring out where to expand and colonize based on how much trade you want to control. There is only one acceptable answer: All of it.
|
|
#
?
Jun 16, 2013 23:09
|
|
|
RabidWeasel posted:Sliders were kind of stupid because there was usually an optimal position given your longterm strategy and that meant that there was no interesting decisionmaking associated with changing them other than the rare event where you had to choose between something bad with a good slider change and something good with a bad slider change.
|
|
#
?
Jun 16, 2013 23:27
|
|
|
Strudel Man posted:It seems like you can make the precise same argument about national ideas, though. There's usually going to be an optimal one to pick given your longterm strategy, so there's no interesting decisionmaking associated with picking one. At least once you become familiar enough with the game to know the relative value of what's being offered. The difference is that the points you are using for a national idea could have been used for something else. Getting a new tech level, coring a province, declaring war, etc etc. Not to mention that the national ideas each have 7 different bonuses that you unlock separately, which is far better than a gradual improvement in a wide array. Add the cap stone bonuses, and you'll have more decisions to make and you'll be making them frequently. Slider moves only happen every 10-20 years in EU3. In EU4, you can progress your national ideas when you want to, but you'll have to sacrifice something else to do so. It makes for far more engaging decision making.
|
|
#
?
Jun 16, 2013 23:50
|
|
|
Sockerbagarn posted:I think you are mistaken about which is the real hilarity option. I have no idea why, but for some reason the idea of Gotland controlling North Korea is just hilarious to me.
|
|
#
?
Jun 17, 2013 00:01
|
|
|
Someone needs to post koreasnake.jpg
|
|
#
?
Jun 17, 2013 00:06
|
|
|
I have been taking a break from my Prussian EU3 campaign, got back to it today and was surprised by how little settlers I suddenly generated. Then I realized that I'm now in DW 5.2 and neighboring the Golden Horde only gives me +0.25 settlers a year. I know they have changed how the nomad neighbor bonus works, but is it supposed to be that low? And why can't I reconquer occupied Horde provinces that are taken over by rebels? I'm writing an AAR that takes place in 5.1 so all of this is a little inconvenient. 
|
|
#
?
Jun 17, 2013 00:18
|
|
|
Reset Smith posted:I have no idea why, but for some reason the idea of Gotland controlling North Korea is just hilarious to me. Dear Leader is dead, Long live Dear Leader! 
|
|
#
?
Jun 17, 2013 00:22
|
|
|
Sockerbagarn posted:Dear Leader is dead, Long live Dear Leader! What the gently caress
|
|
#
?
Jun 17, 2013 00:24
|
|
|
Sockerbagarn posted:Dear Leader is dead, Long live Dear Leader! HOW?
|
|
#
?
Jun 17, 2013 00:28
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 3, 2024 21:13 |
|
|
Reveilled posted:What the gently caress Claiming thrones and fabricating claims is by far the easiest way to completely destroy EU3s balance. I've completely stopped doing it as it trivializes, well, everything. A bunch of countries don't start with heirs, so if you're playing one of the larger european nations you can often claim a bunch of thrones and enforce a PU through war. My current record is 15 PUs in 10 years as Austria. It's especially bad in the HRE as you get cores.
|
|
#
?
Jun 17, 2013 00:30
|
|