|
YF-23 posted:I mean really if you're going to be doing a lot of anything outside the game you might as well just not be playing the game at the same time. Or maybe I'm just a weirdo that doesn't leave his videogames running in the background outside of short breaks. I don't think I've ever played a game in windowed mode
|
#
?
Sep 22, 2014 15:55
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 30, 2024 17:17 |
|
|
Farecoal posted:I don't think I've ever played a game in windowed mode It's pretty much the only way to get Darkest Hour working in Windows 8. Full screen lags like crazy, but for some reason if you run it in Windowed Mode it works fine. ...Sort of. You have to set the resolution to like 1% less than your native res because if the window ever moves even a single pixel off screen, the game crashes.
|
|
#
?
Sep 22, 2014 17:30
|
|
|
Farecoal posted:I don't think I've ever played a game in windowed mode Do you not have two or more monitors?
|
|
#
?
Sep 22, 2014 18:17
|
|
|
SeaTard posted:Do you not have two or more monitors? No. Why would I need more than one?
|
|
#
?
Sep 22, 2014 18:28
|
|
|
Humble Bundle Store currently has the CK2 collection and EU4 heavily discounted. I didn't have EU4, so I picked it up for $8.
|
|
#
?
Sep 22, 2014 18:54
|
|
|
KOraithER posted:Humble Bundle Store currently has the CK2 collection and EU4 heavily discounted. I didn't have EU4, so I picked it up for $8. Those two games together make up at least like 600 hours of my life according to Steam, so you can never go wrong getting Paradox stuff when it's on sale. Which happens a lot. I love Paradox's financial model.
|
|
#
?
Sep 22, 2014 18:59
|
|
|
Farecoal posted:No. Why would I need more than one? It's really nice to be able to work on multiple large things simultaneously, but it really shines when playing games. It's nice to be able to have the game on one monitor, and info about the game in another one. MMOs get good use out of them, as you can have a wiki open and read the notes as you try and do whatever on the main monitor. There is a reason one of the more vocal requests for EU4 and CK2 was borderless windowed mode, aka full screen windowed. From a Paradox perspective, I love screwing around with the game, and firing various random events to make things chaotic, or transfer provinces around, whatever. So it's nice to have a screen up with province ids or common events I enjoy, without having to constantly flip back and forth from full screen to the desktop and back.
|
|
#
?
Sep 22, 2014 19:18
|
|
|
Ofaloaf posted:I've only had that issue if I try to flick back-and-forth while it's loading up. If it's just at a menu or the game's already there, I've not had an issue. Maybe it's an OS thing? It works like that with Windows 7, at least. Huh, I just messed with it and it's the same for me, also on Windows 7. The more you know! 
|
|
#
?
Sep 22, 2014 19:19
|
|
|
Never alt-tab on Paradox loading screens. A generally decent rule to follow for pretty much all games, but it goes double for Paradox.
|
|
#
?
Sep 22, 2014 19:20
|
|
|
This is very true, I once alt-tabbed a CK2 game while it was loading. Never again.quote:
|
|
#
?
Sep 22, 2014 19:30
|
|
|
Paradox did a stream showcasing Art of War features/new map regions. There's now a Kamchatka tag.
|
|
#
?
Sep 22, 2014 19:34
|
|
|
I'm playing a game of Victoria II as the USA and apparently I'm so bad at running the country (or maybe, I'm so good but I doubt that) that I can actually enact the decision to outlaw slavery before the slavery debate starts. I'm aware this will mean there will be no Civil War, and also that this will mean that all African minors will assimilate to being Yankees. Are there any other consequences, though? Is there any particular reason I'd want to have the civil war?
|
|
#
?
Sep 22, 2014 21:31
|
|
|
Reveilled posted:I'm playing a game of Victoria II as the USA and apparently I'm so bad at running the country (or maybe, I'm so good but I doubt that) that I can actually enact the decision to outlaw slavery before the slavery debate starts. I'm aware this will mean there will be no Civil War, and also that this will mean that all African minors will assimilate to being Yankees. You can't inherit Texas if they have slavery and you don't. Also I guess you get slavery outlawed for free when you win the Civil War via decision, so you're theoretically missing out on enacting a different political reform, but that's not really worth the cost 
|
|
#
?
Sep 22, 2014 21:35
|
|
|
If it's your first game as the USA, it might be useful to play to see what it's like.
|
|
#
?
Sep 22, 2014 22:16
|
|
|
Drone posted:Those two games together make up at least like 600 hours of my life according to Steam, so you can never go wrong getting Paradox stuff when it's on sale. Great until you end up with hoi3 collection and hahaha you're never going to play that
|
|
#
?
Sep 22, 2014 23:37
|
|
|
Baracula posted:Great until you end up with hoi3 collection and hahaha you're never going to play that Course you can. Steps to playing HOI3: 1) Turn on AI control everywhere you see it 2) Go read a book
|
|
#
?
Sep 22, 2014 23:40
|
|
|
Alchenar posted:Course you can. Steps to playing HOI3: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LamgAfVj980
|
|
#
?
Sep 22, 2014 23:55
|
|
|
GrossMurpel posted:If it's your first game as the USA, it might be useful to play to see what it's like. I'll save you the trouble, the Civil War in V2 is like this: 1.) Confederacy revolts. 2.) ~6 months later you've occupied the entire thing and the war is over! The boys are home for Christmas!
|
|
#
?
Sep 23, 2014 00:17
|
|
|
Fintilgin posted:I'll save you the trouble, the Civil War in V2 is like this: Yeah, I bit the bullet and just made everyone agree that Racism Is Over. This is my first game since vanilla though, and I understand the stuff about army composition changed somehow. Do armies that go 1:1 artillery:infantry with 2-4 cavalry still work? I am planning to organise my army into divisions of 35, made up of 5 infantry, 4 artillery, 1 engineer and 2 dragoons. Does that seem sensible? Also, is there a general rule about what percentage of your population should be soldiers? I'm trying to gauge what makes a decent military.
|
|
#
?
Sep 23, 2014 02:01
|
|
|
Is it just me or in CK2+ do Mongols seem to do jack and poo poo? I've had two games so far where I've gotten the event that announces the two hordes... and then nothing seems to happen...
|
|
#
?
Sep 23, 2014 02:51
|
|
|
Dr. Tough posted:Is it just me or in CK2+ do Mongols seem to do jack and poo poo? I've had two games so far where I've gotten the event that announces the two hordes... and then nothing seems to happen... I dunno about CK2+ but in vanilla there's about a 6% chance that the event to spawn the Ilkhanate won't occur in the six year window that follows Rumors of a Steppe Menace. You'd need really bad luck to do that twice in a row, so CK2+ might be loving something up. Have you checked the event triggers?
|
|
#
?
Sep 23, 2014 04:35
|
|
|
Reveilled posted:Yeah, I bit the bullet and just made everyone agree that Racism Is Over. This is my first game since vanilla though, and I understand the stuff about army composition changed somehow. Do armies that go 1:1 artillery:infantry with 2-4 cavalry still work? I am planning to organise my army into divisions of 35, made up of 5 infantry, 4 artillery, 1 engineer and 2 dragoons. Does that seem sensible? That'll work. I personally try to have two engineers so I can occupy at top speed but I doubt it'll make a huge difference. Yeah, you want a 1:1 ratio of infantry:artillery (except when making space for those engineers!) and a couple of cavalry. I heard hussars are better in some cases than dragoons, but I'm not sure on the specifics so I'll let someone else comment on that. Maybe throw in some Guards once you get them, but I usually don't since last I checked (which granted was a while ago) they tend to take heavy casualties and I don't like burning up my manpower.
|
|
#
?
Sep 23, 2014 05:52
|
|
|
CK2+ is kind of bad nowadays.
|
|
#
?
Sep 23, 2014 06:03
|
|
|
Reveilled posted:Yeah, I bit the bullet and just made everyone agree that Racism Is Over. This is my first game since vanilla though, and I understand the stuff about army composition changed somehow. Do armies that go 1:1 artillery:infantry with 2-4 cavalry still work? I am planning to organise my army into divisions of 35, made up of 5 infantry, 4 artillery, 1 engineer and 2 dragoons. Does that seem sensible? I'm pretty certain that all cavalry gets devastated in combat so you probably don't want to have any significant amount of it in your armies. You probably want to go roughly 1:1 with inf:art, then add in as much hussars and engineers as you need to have 100% reconnaissance and siege ability, then in the late game switch the hussars for airplanes and the engineers for armour, maybe.
|
|
#
?
Sep 23, 2014 08:20
|
|
|
I think armor ("barrels"  ) are kind of bad in combat but useful for pumping up your military score by virtue of being incredibly expensive.
|
|
#
?
Sep 23, 2014 08:36
|
|
|
Morholt posted:I think armor ("barrels" I thought they kept the "barrels" Turtledove reference out of V2, it's only in Ricky?
|
|
#
?
Sep 23, 2014 08:42
|
|
Drone posted:I thought they kept the "barrels" Turtledove reference out of V2, it's only in Ricky? There's something in the game regarding barrels as a tank synonym if you flip through the localization, but I'm not entirely sure where it comes into play.
|
|
|
#
?
Sep 23, 2014 08:48
|
|
|
Drone posted:I thought they kept the "barrels" Turtledove reference out of V2, it's only in Ricky? The tradegood is called barrels (though my current game says "Tanks" but this might be NNM, I distinctly remember V2 tradegood being "barrels"), the army unit is called armor. American spelling in Victoria 2, ugh. 
|
|
#
?
Sep 23, 2014 08:51
|
|
|
YF-23 posted:American spelling in Victoria 2, ugh.     
|
|
#
?
Sep 23, 2014 09:12
|
|
|
Morholt posted:CK2+ is kind of bad nowadays. What makes you say that?
|
|
#
?
Sep 23, 2014 12:40
|
|
|
Reveilled posted:Yeah, I bit the bullet and just made everyone agree that Racism Is Over. This is my first game since vanilla though, and I understand the stuff about army composition changed somehow. Do armies that go 1:1 artillery:infantry with 2-4 cavalry still work? I am planning to organise my army into divisions of 35, made up of 5 infantry, 4 artillery, 1 engineer and 2 dragoons. Does that seem sensible? Before tanks and planes, I go 5 inf, 3 art, 1 engi, 1 hussar because I'm too lazy to make separate siege stacks.
|
|
#
?
Sep 23, 2014 12:44
|
|
|
http://www.reddit.com/r/paradoxplaza/comments/2h5oag/summary_of_the_eu4_art_of_war_stream/ someone made a nice compliation of new stuff revealed in the stream
|
|
#
?
Sep 23, 2014 20:26
|
|
|
Tuskin38 posted:http://www.reddit.com/r/paradoxplaza/comments/2h5oag/summary_of_the_eu4_art_of_war_stream/ drat this is gonna be a big expansion.
|
|
#
?
Sep 24, 2014 02:52
|
|
|
Am I reading that right, and that hordes can be more centralised than Ming China? I mean I know it's a balancing thing but that seems a weird.
|
|
#
?
Sep 24, 2014 13:10
|
|
|
Reveilled posted:Yeah, I bit the bullet and just made everyone agree that Racism Is Over. This is my first game since vanilla though, and I understand the stuff about army composition changed somehow. Do armies that go 1:1 artillery:infantry with 2-4 cavalry still work? I am planning to organise my army into divisions of 35, made up of 5 infantry, 4 artillery, 1 engineer and 2 dragoons. Does that seem sensible? At least 10% of your armies need to have recon or siege units to get the full benefit of recon or siege. If you have at least 10% of each type, then that army's recon and siege values will be equal to the highest siege or recon value present on any unit in that army. You want to have the back row filled with as much artillery as you can manage. So if you had an army of 10, you'd want 1 hussar, 1 engineer, 4 infantry, 4 artillery ideally. 5/3 inf:art would be okay too, like the previous person mentioned. If the army has more than 10 total units, you'll need at least 2 recon and 2 siege units to have an army that sieges fortified and unfortified provinces optimally. That being said, you also siege provinces slower with fewer units in an army. Armies with fewer than 13 regiments will siege provinces slower, even with the right ratio of siege and recon. More than 13 units will do nothing for siege speed. The best 13 regiment build to have maximum siege speed is 2 engineers, 1 hussar, 1 dragoon, 5 infantry, 4 artillery. Make if 5 artillery if you want to fill the back row and can support a 42k stack with your province supply limits. Its impossible to promote soldiers past 5% or 6%, so once you get your bureaucrats, clergy, and other pops to your desired levels it may not be a bad idea to just leave your soldier focus on any states where you have the majority of your units coming from in order to try and keep them capped, and aid with replenishment while taking losses.
|
|
#
?
Sep 24, 2014 13:25
|
|
|
BBJoey posted:Am I reading that right, and that hordes can be more centralised than Ming China? I mean I know it's a balancing thing but that seems a weird. Well, the justification Paradox gave was that the Autonomy limit in the case of the Celestial Empire wasn't suppose to be saying that "The Ming were super decentralized", but rather simulating how the Ming were just bad at government. I'm not exactly an expert on the Ming dynasty though, so I have no idea how valid that excuse is.
|
|
#
?
Sep 24, 2014 14:44
|
|
|
Tuskin38 posted:http://www.reddit.com/r/paradoxplaza/comments/2h5oag/summary_of_the_eu4_art_of_war_stream/ A Crimean Gothic nation? This is going to be the next Byzantine or (for CK2) Zoroastrian or Jewish start.
|
|
#
?
Sep 24, 2014 15:08
|
|
|
VerdantSquire posted:Well, the justification Paradox gave was that the Autonomy limit in the case of the Celestial Empire wasn't suppose to be saying that "The Ming were super decentralized", but rather simulating how the Ming were just bad at government. I'm not exactly an expert on the Ming dynasty though, so I have no idea how valid that excuse is.  throughout history china has pretty much been a massive, centralized state complete with merit-based civil service positions and various delegated ministers more than a millenia ahead of most of europe. it's just that between the mongols/manchu and their own internal strife they never really expanded much beyond the last few dynasty's borders. i don't really understand the need to keep china 'under wraps' considering most of the nations in paradox games never achieved anything close to what they do. even more of them fall short of their historical path and just get rolled over and annexed or stripped down to some lovely backwater.
|
|
#
?
Sep 24, 2014 15:13
|
|
|
China never expanded because the Tang got thrashed by the Muslims in Central Asia and most the area around China was undesirable for a preindustrial society. Korea and Japan were resource poor, Southeast Asia was malarial jungle, and everything to the North was barren steppe. They already had everything worth having. China was also never really truly centralized because you can't have a centralized empire that big until at least the advent of the telegraph. The examination system was also a joke and required no relevant practical knowledge to pass in most dynasties. By the Qing, most takers barely even understood the text they rote memorized.
|
|
#
?
Sep 24, 2014 15:59
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 30, 2024 17:17 |
|
|
The ideal system would be to program the Ming AI to basically not take provinces at all unless they had cores on them and only establish vassals with countries it bordered, but let the player run wild. There was no impetus at the time to expand, but there shouldn't be bullshit roadblocks keeping me from colonizing the entirety of eastern Siberia.
|
|
#
?
Sep 24, 2014 16:12
|
|
