|
Also I decided to go with the 1933 scenario, is it any better/worse than the 1936? The only thing is, I start with horrifying amounts of dissent, could I still build enough IC to make it worth it? On top of that, given I'm running around 1918 inf, when should I upgrade them?
|
#
?
Mar 22, 2014 16:39
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 31, 2024 05:20 |
|
|
SkySteak posted:Also I decided to go with the 1933 scenario, is it any better/worse than the 1936? The only thing is, I start with horrifying amounts of dissent, could I still build enough IC to make it worth it? The last time I played it (admittedly a fair long while ago) the 1933 scenario was terribly unbalanced. Expect non-player USA, Germany and USSR to reach absolutely ludicrous amounts of IC by 1940.
|
|
#
?
Mar 22, 2014 17:03
|
|
|
SkySteak posted:Also I decided to go with the 1933 scenario, is it any better/worse than the 1936? The only thing is, I start with horrifying amounts of dissent, could I still build enough IC to make it worth it? Remove all dissent before building IC, start no new IC building after 1936. Never upgrade old units unless you have no manpower.
|
|
#
?
Mar 22, 2014 17:53
|
|
|
I find 1933 scenario is nearly unwinnable because everyone builds IC like crazy.
|
|
#
?
Mar 22, 2014 20:20
|
|
|
I've tried it as Germany and as Britain so far (two attempts as the US were ended early because the German AI failed to expand properly, didn't even manage the Anschluss by 1939). Both are near unwinnable. As Britain, expect the US AI to be braindead and never invade anything ever while the German AI casually rolls up the Russians by 1940 and you are faced with a 450 base IC juggernaut. Without the Americans doing anything. On the other hand, if you play as Germany, expect a very aggressive US and British AI who will always attempt landings everywhere you don't have troops stationed right that second.
|
|
#
?
Mar 22, 2014 22:14
|
|
|
Riso posted:I find 1933 scenario is nearly unwinnable because everyone builds IC like crazy. Your amount of IC does not equal your chance to win, and if the AI builds IC, you can build IC too? 
|
|
#
?
Mar 22, 2014 22:44
|
|
|
If you've played that timeline mod for EU4 you guys would realize "tea partiers" don't revolt, it's the Castllian majority that constantly rise against the American government. Has anyone actually shown that mod off here? I did some pretty amazing things with the modern scenario.
|
|
#
?
Mar 22, 2014 23:57
|
|
|
Space Bat posted:If you've played that timeline mod for EU4 you guys would realize "tea partiers" don't revolt, it's the Castllian majority that constantly rise against the American government. Has anyone actually shown that mod off here? I did some pretty amazing things with the modern scenario. I showed a bit of it off but nobody took any interest. I solved the Israeli/Palestinian conflict as Assad. Turns out, all he has to do is become a fascist dictator and then invade half of the Middle East! E: Found it DrProsek posted:Guys who cares about the Paradox Cold War game, we have all the Cold War fun we could possibly want right here in the Extended Timeline EUIV mod, available at the Steam Workshop.
|
|
#
?
Mar 23, 2014 00:44
|
|
), South Africa has nothing but English and Dutch people, and more!
);
|
Based on the Dutch/English South Africans and the Egyptian Israelis I'd say it's almost a worthy successor to steppe wolf.
|
|
#
?
Mar 23, 2014 00:58
|
|
|
Riso posted:I find 1933 scenario is nearly unwinnable because everyone builds IC like crazy. ArchangeI posted:I've tried it as Germany and as Britain so far (two attempts as the US were ended early because the German AI failed to expand properly, didn't even manage the Anschluss by 1939). Both are near unwinnable. As Britain, expect the US AI to be braindead and never invade anything ever while the German AI casually rolls up the Russians by 1940 and you are faced with a 450 base IC juggernaut. Without the Americans doing anything. Why is the AI different in different scenarios? 
|
|
#
?
Mar 23, 2014 01:08
|
|
|
The "point" of the 1933 scenario is Germany (possibly) going communist which is going to need the ai to react just a tad differently to things.
|
|
#
?
Mar 23, 2014 01:14
|
|
|
Raskolnikov38 posted:The "point" of the 1933 scenario is Germany (possibly) going communist which is going to need the ai to react just a tad differently to things. I think he meant that there are different AI behaviors for each country depending on who the player is. Like ArchangeI said, playing Britain gets you a hyperagressive Germany and utterly passive USA (Which you can't get military control over because of IC differences), while playing Germany will have everyone launching spy missions at you around the clock and landings up the wazoo. Also Gort, while I get not doing any upgrades as a strategy thing, it seems just as ahistorical and gamey as switching doctrines.
|
|
#
?
Mar 23, 2014 01:30
|
|
|
Hey Paradox devs, for HoI 4 are there going to be efforts made to make epic conflicts like Barbarossa feel more... epic? What I mean is that in HoI 2 and its variants you basically win the war with Russia in the first couple months. If you know what you're doing as the Soviets you can blunt the German invasion and annihilate it before it reaches Minsk. And conversely if you play as the Germans once you've broken the Soviet doomstacks on the border the war is basically over already. The war doesn't need to get into Gary Grigsby WiTE levels of difficulty but surely there's a healthy medium.
|
|
#
?
Mar 23, 2014 01:43
|
|
|
The war in the east is probably pretty hard to get right because you'd want to achieve a balance where Russia loses the equivalent of the entirety of the Red Army in Barbarossa, raises an entirely new army...during Barbarossa...has it destroyed AGAIN, and rebuilds it again. Ideally without resorting to something like just giving them free units via event.
|
|
#
?
Mar 23, 2014 01:51
|
|
|
Kavak posted:Also Gort, while I get not doing any upgrades as a strategy thing, it seems just as ahistorical and gamey as switching doctrines. Well, the only reasons it's a bad idea to do upgrades as the USSR is that their economic slider gives them a massive penalty to it, and the upgrades aren't powerful enough to justify doing them compared to building new units. There's no real historical reason why Central Planning gives you a huge penalty to upgrades, or why 1939 infantry aren't walking all over 1918 infantry. But we play the game that's there, not the game we want to play. I'd say that a country deciding to neglect the equipment of existing formations in order to equip new formations with the newest kit is less ahistorical and gamey than every General in the Red Army getting a brain transplant with those in the Wehrmacht, though, and keep in mind that a lot of the kit used in World War 2 had been around since the 1800s.
|
|
#
?
Mar 23, 2014 02:35
|
|
|
Gort posted:But we play the game that's there, not the game we want to play. Except you could just mod out the penalty to upgrades and replace it with a huge malus to consumer goods production or something. I don't know how balanced that is, but like you said the penalty doesn't make any sense.
|
|
#
?
Mar 23, 2014 02:43
|
|
|
Kavak posted:Except you could just mod out the penalty to upgrades and replace it with a huge malus to consumer goods production or something. I don't know how balanced that is, but like you said the penalty doesn't make any sense. Central Planning is horrible enough that you could just edit out the upgrade penalty entirely and the game would be better off for it. Here are the modifiers for full Central Planning and Free Market: Full Central Planning: 8% more gearing bonus 25% penalty to upgrading time and cost 20% bonus IC & resources Full Free Market: 10% less gearing bonus 20% bonus to production time and cost 25% bonus to upgrading time and cost Time and cost are effectively cumulative - your total expended IC on an upgrade that costs 25% more and takes 25% more time to complete is 150% of the basic amount. So Free Market effectively gets units at a 40% discount while Central Planning gets 20% more IC. The only thing Central Planning has going for it is the gearing bonus, which is barely noticeable since it takes so long to get to the point where Central Planning will have more than Free Market. You should basically be running as close to full Free Market as you can at all times in Darkest Hour.
|
|
#
?
Mar 23, 2014 02:50
|
|
|
Why do Clausewitz-engine games use a coordinate system where the origin is in the lower left while graphics editors like GIMP have the origin set to the upper left? Is there any alternative to inverting maps that'll provide a game-acceptable set of coordinates, fit for mapping purposes?
|
|
#
?
Mar 23, 2014 03:06
|
|
|
Ofaloaf posted:Why do Clausewitz-engine games use a coordinate system where the origin is in the lower left while graphics editors like GIMP have the origin set to the upper left? Is there any alternative to inverting maps that'll provide a game-acceptable set of coordinates, fit for mapping purposes? I haven't taken a math class since I was a freshman, but why earth would someone do that? Every single graph I have ever made had the bottom left as the 0,0 coordinate.
|
|
#
?
Mar 23, 2014 03:19
|
|
|
Kavak posted:
Roughly, that's how computer screens/graphics memory work.
|
|
#
?
Mar 23, 2014 03:31
|
|
|
Kavak posted:
 It's been like that in Paint since forever.
|
|
#
?
Mar 23, 2014 03:34
|
|
|
Gort posted:-Central Planning problems- It honestly feels like a lot of the sliders have been just left alone since HOI2 and have never really had attention paid to them. Of course I guess the USSR 1936 start is still lowering dissent, building a fuckton of Militia/Infantry, lowering dissent again and resuming that construction process. 1936 doesn't exactly leave you with a lot of time to build IC I imagine.
|
|
#
?
Mar 23, 2014 03:42
|
|
|
Ofaloaf posted:Why do Clausewitz-engine games use a coordinate system where the origin is in the lower left while graphics editors like GIMP have the origin set to the upper left? Is there any alternative to inverting maps that'll provide a game-acceptable set of coordinates, fit for mapping purposes? I think the map used to be inverted until like, EU3?
|
|
#
?
Mar 23, 2014 04:09
|
|
|
Gort posted:Full Central Planning: Because of your post, for Hegemonia I now toy with the idea of doubling gearing and removing the upgrade costs. The other idea I have is changing the resource stockpile you can have depending on your policy.
|
|
#
?
Mar 23, 2014 08:48
|
|
|
Riso posted:Because of your post, for Hegemonia I now toy with the idea of doubling gearing and removing the upgrade costs. Gearing's still not that useful, and resource stockpiles would have to be totally crippled to make Free Market unappealing.
|
|
#
?
Mar 23, 2014 09:05
|
|
|
I feel like playing some Victoria II again, but it's been a while. How is the mod situation? POP Demand Mod used to be crippled by some weird design decisions as I recall, but is that still the case? Basically, what I'm asking is, which mods are worth playing for someone that appreciates a challenge, and realism in general?
|
|
#
?
Mar 23, 2014 09:36
|
|
|
A Buttery Pastry posted:I feel like playing some Victoria II again, but it's been a while. How is the mod situation? POP Demand Mod used to be crippled by some weird design decisions as I recall, but is that still the case? Basically, what I'm asking is, which mods are worth playing for someone that appreciates a challenge, and realism in general? New Nations Mod always gets my recommendation; it fleshes out the world with events and new nations (duh) but steers clear of the PDM-level fuckery.
|
|
#
?
Mar 23, 2014 09:53
|
|
|
Kavak posted:Gearing's still not that useful, and resource stockpiles would have to be totally crippled to make Free Market unappealing. A was thinking of halving it for FM actually.
|
|
#
?
Mar 23, 2014 09:54
|
|
|
What's the big issue with pop demand mod? I've been using it for a while and the only really big thing I noticed is that Korea is a subject nation which makes westernizing a bitch.
|
|
#
?
Mar 23, 2014 10:08
|
|
|
The Narrator posted:New Nations Mod always gets my recommendation; it fleshes out the world with events and new nations (duh) but steers clear of the PDM-level fuckery. Unfortunately NNM is no longer being updated, right? (Then again, I'm pretty sure Vicky 2 itself is also no longer being updated, sooo...)
|
|
#
?
Mar 23, 2014 10:30
|
|
|
Drone posted:Unfortunately NNM is no longer being updated, right? NNM worked fine with the last V2 game I played like a couple of months ago, and it hasn't been patched since then.
|
|
#
?
Mar 23, 2014 10:39
|
|
|
Pornographic Memory posted:The war in the east is probably pretty hard to get right because you'd want to achieve a balance where Russia loses the equivalent of the entirety of the Red Army in Barbarossa, raises an entirely new army...during Barbarossa...has it destroyed AGAIN, and rebuilds it again. Ideally without resorting to something like just giving them free units via event. Yup, it's tricky. We do have some ideas to make it interesting, but it's too early to really talk about them.
|
|
#
?
Mar 23, 2014 10:59
|
|
|
Darkrenown posted:Yup, it's tricky. We do have some ideas to make it interesting, but it's too early to really talk about them. I wouldn't consider it inappropriate to go full on "Russia is special and special things happen" in order to make it work.
|
|
#
?
Mar 23, 2014 11:04
|
|
|
The Narrator posted:New Nations Mod always gets my recommendation; it fleshes out the world with events and new nations (duh) but steers clear of the PDM-level fuckery. Demiurge4 posted:What's the big issue with pop demand mod? I've been using it for a while and the only really big thing I noticed is that Korea is a subject nation which makes westernizing a bitch.
|
|
#
?
Mar 23, 2014 11:23
|
|
|
Demiurge4 posted:What's the big issue with pop demand mod? I've been using it for a while and the only really big thing I noticed is that Korea is a subject nation which makes westernizing a bitch. Nah, it's a good mod. It's just that several years ago it had some dumb combat mechanics for several versions, and goons will never let it go. That said, since it's an overhaul mod that changes almost everything, NMM is better since it's more lightweight.
|
|
#
?
Mar 23, 2014 11:41
|
|
|
Disco Infiva posted:Nah, it's a good mod. It's just that several years ago it had some dumb combat mechanics for several versions, and goons will never let it go. That said, since it's an overhaul mod that changes almost everything, NMM is better since it's more lightweight. I've had some really fun games with PDM pre-Heart of Darkness. One of my favorite Vicky games to this day was Argentina -> La Plata takeover of South America with PDM, but my biggest issue with the mod is that it multiplies the normal Vicky 2 late-game system slowdown by a factor of 5.
|
|
#
?
Mar 23, 2014 11:43
|
|
|
Demiurge4 posted:What's the big issue with pop demand mod? I've been using it for a while and the only really big thing I noticed is that Korea is a subject nation which makes westernizing a bitch. There's a few, it's a mixed bag. I play it about half the time, as it fixes a lot of my main gripes with vanilla (like every industrialized country having a socialist government by 1900 because apparently the political system was written by Karl Marx) but for every issue it fixes, it introduces a new one. IMO it's kinda sad because a lot of the new features are really cool, they just don't play well with existing mechanics. The biggest one is, of course, the shitload of new goods and factories. While some of them are good ideas (banks, cigarette factories, synthetic rubber gently caress yes) there's just too many and it compounds the problems with capitalists. Since they have so many more ways to make lovely investment choices, laissez-faire manages to be even more utterly terrible. In particular, dividing certain factories into more and less advanced ones was a terrible choice. Of course, this doesn't particularly matter because every country is swimming in cash 24/7; whereas in vanilla countries go bankrupt all the time, PDM swings the pendulum the other way and nobody ever has financial issues short of being fully occupied. The second big thing is the military changes. I may just be dumb, or used to vanilla's various quirks, but I cannot make heads nor tails of how late-game warfare supposed to work, especially the changes to digging in. It isn't documented anywhere. The AI seems to build engineer brigades instead of regular infantry and apparently that works
|
|
#
?
Mar 23, 2014 11:57
|
|
|
Trying to unfuck PDM is more work than writing something new from scratch.
|
|
#
?
Mar 23, 2014 12:08
|
|
|
Disco Infiva posted:Nah, it's a good mod. It's just that several years ago it had some dumb combat mechanics for several versions, and goons will never let it go. That said, since it's an overhaul mod that changes almost everything, NMM is better since it's more lightweight. The moment I realised PDM was terrible was when my banks and stock exchanges, as Sweden, could not operate because there was a world paper shortage. That was before HoD but I honestly very much doubt the economy is any better balanced now. Guildencrantz posted:In particular, dividing certain factories into more and less advanced ones was a terrible choice. Oh yeah, your capitalists will build lovely early-game small arms and artillery factories when you're in the 1920s. And one only has so much patience for closing down lovely capitalist decisions.
|
|
#
?
Mar 23, 2014 12:12
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 31, 2024 05:20 |
|
|
YF-23 posted:The moment I realised PDM was terrible was when my banks and stock exchanges, as Sweden, could not operate because there was a world paper shortage. That was before HoD but I honestly very much doubt the economy is any better balanced now. To be fair, that's Vicky's mechanic. Shortages that are also present in the base game. YF-23 posted:Oh yeah, your capitalists will build lovely early-game small arms and artillery factories when you're in the 1920s. And one only has so much patience for closing down lovely capitalist decisions. This is true. There's no need for several different factories all producing the same thing from different materials. It could work if the transition is seamless, but that's impossible to do right now.
|
|
#
?
Mar 23, 2014 12:28
|
|