|
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. Larry Parrish posted:
RocknRollaAyatollah posted: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. The Ming Dynasty got tea party'd to death. Ming taxation rates started low and only went lower, not because the government couldn't collect taxes, but because the Confucian emphasis on good governance also advocated small governance. Ming tax rates dropped to between a 2-3% tax in kind and a salt tariff. Even pre-revolutionary France (which was constantly bankrupt) had more income than that. The Ming government tried to run their state with as light a touch as possible, so during the little ice age when agricultural output fell, the Ming treasury found itself completely empty, its armies deserted their posts because they had not been paid, and the Manchus practically walked in. So remember, the Tea Party is national suicide.
|
#
?
Sep 24, 2014 16:16
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 29, 2024 00:25 |
|
|
Note that even when Ming did try to expand, it never held its new territory long. See: holding what's basically the north half of Vietnam for a mere 20 years 1407-1427. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lam_S%C6%A1n_uprising
|
|
#
?
Sep 24, 2014 16:28
|
|
|
Anyone tried Ancient Space? I'm kind of in the mood for a Homeworld style game that isn't, well, Homeworld.
|
|
#
?
Sep 24, 2014 16:38
|
|
|
Dibujante posted:The Ming Dynasty got tea party'd to death. Ming taxation rates started low and only went lower, not because the government couldn't collect taxes, but because the Confucian emphasis on good governance also advocated small governance. Ming tax rates dropped to between a 2-3% tax in kind and a salt tariff. Even pre-revolutionary France (which was constantly bankrupt) had more income than that. The Ming government tried to run their state with as light a touch as possible, so during the little ice age when agricultural output fell, the Ming treasury found itself completely empty, its armies deserted their posts because they had not been paid, and the Manchus practically walked in. A Buttery Pastry fucked around with this message at 16:50 on Sep 24, 2014 |
|
#
?
Sep 24, 2014 16:48
|
|
|
It's also worth noting that the areas around China are also well known for being quagmires for modern armies. Imperial Chinese militaries after the Tang dynasty weren't well known for being exceptional. The Qing in the beginning were but they quickly lapsed into the same problems that happened with the janissaries. Banner generals spent more time walking their birds around town than improving their forces. It was more effective just to bully their neighbors into paying tribute rather than subjugating them. I wouldn't even call the relationship they had comparable to being vassals, more akin to a protection racket. A Buttery Pastry posted:I might be talking out of my rear end, but I believe the Qing faced their own administrative problems, due to not expanding the bureaucracy during a period where China's population grew immensely. Probably a tad difficult collecting taxes and making sure things run effectively if all your officials have to do the work of three or four men. I suppose Confucian principles might have made it nearly impossible to expand the bureaucracy, despite it clearly being needed? Or perhaps not so clearly, if the bureaucracy was too small to effectively keep tabs on the exploding population. The Qing were initially a foreign dynasty so they weren't ready to rock the boat. The Qing did reform the bureaucracy right before they were overthrown but that was after being humiliated by all of the world's great powers over a span of about 70 years. Qing emperors and empresses were a bit dense and refused to acknowledge the possibility that there might be a power in the world as powerful as China. Even today in modern China we don't know the exact population. Even though there's a "precise" number given, the actual amount is believed to be larger.
|
|
#
?
Sep 24, 2014 16:58
|
|
|
A Buttery Pastry posted:I might be talking out of my rear end, but I believe the Qing faced their own administrative problems, due to not expanding the bureaucracy during a period where China's population grew immensely. Probably a tad difficult collecting taxes and making sure things run effectively if all your officials have to do the work of three or four men. I suppose Confucian principles might have made it nearly impossible to expand the bureaucracy, despite it clearly being needed? Or perhaps not so clearly, if the bureaucracy was too small to effectively keep tabs on the exploding population. RocknRollaAyatollah posted:The Qing were initially a foreign dynasty so they weren't ready to rock the boat. The Qing did reform the bureaucracy right before they were overthrown but that was after being humiliated by all of the world's great powers over a span of about 70 years. Qing emperors and empresses were a bit dense and refused to acknowledge the possibility that there might be a power in the world as powerful as China. The Qing dynasty really just wanted to tap into that good old-fashioned Chinese greatness while remaining Manchurian. They ruled with a much heavier hand than the Ming, primarily because of their approach to problem-solving. In the economic sphere, the Qing depopulated huge areas of the coast, first in order to choke the remaining Ming rebels as well as pirates. This trade ban lasted for decades and was ruinous for southern China. Where the Ming dynasty's hand was too light, the Qing's was too heavy and too unaccountable. It's a good example of government overreach. China never really developed a concrete notion of checks and balances (why would the Manchus want to grant that kind of power to their Han subjects?) and this meant that the government vascillated between the tyranny of the Emperor and his court when the Emperor was strong, or the tyranny of bureaucrats and eunuchs when the Emperor was weak. Of course, the same thing happened to the Ottomans. And it happened in many "Western" states as well, but over the course of the Enlightenment, some of those states managed to put together national institutions representative enough to help harden them against this see-sawing of political power, and that mostly made the difference, as far as this time period is concerned.
|
|
#
?
Sep 24, 2014 19:00
|
|
|
Kavak posted: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. Hell I just gave a Japan-formation game (from Imperial Japan) a shot for the first time last night in V2 and it'll probably be the last because I modernized by 1850, got to 9th in the world by 1860 (while still being a three-province [3/5 of one state] satellite of the Shogunate), stomped the Shogunate into the ground within a few months when the time came, and am sitting 5th in the world in 1865 before even beginning to industrialize all but the single state I had, let alone stomping all the uncivilized/partial westernized nations nearby for free land/POP/RGOs and, later, industry. bUm fucked around with this message at 19:05 on Sep 24, 2014 |
|
#
?
Sep 24, 2014 19:02
|
|
|
How come in Darkest hour other nations won't negotiate with you even if you give them 100 supplies for 0.1 of energy. And what the hell is up with the manpower rates.
|
|
#
?
Sep 25, 2014 05:43
|
|
|
Mans posted:How come in Darkest hour other nations won't negotiate with you even if you give them 100 supplies for 0.1 of energy. Darkest Hour differs from other PDS-developed games in that manpower isn't generated just over time generally (it is, but at greatly reduced amounts). Instead you have to enact mobilization decisions/drafting to simulate your nations gearing up for war. Then you'll get a big truckload of manpower all at once, and when that runs out, you extend mobilization.
|
|
#
?
Sep 25, 2014 05:46
|
|
|
Yeah France declared war on me on September 1934 with loving 35 infantry divisions. They invaded so early that even my first infantry division couldn't be produced. They also had a massive airforce against my one (1) interceptor, which again, as alone because i literally didn't have the time to finish building a single one. I also noticed Poland had a sizable army on their border, a friend of mine playing Italy also commented on how large his army was. Is the 1933 simply retardedly unbalanced for the Germans? Because between confusing MP mechanics and the impossibility to present any trade negotiations and the massive hordes of enemy armies i don't think this game has much improved over the last version of Arsenal of Democracy. The auto-trade AI was also exporting 30 metal for 5 supplies 
|
|
#
?
Sep 25, 2014 06:14
|
|
|
The 1933 scenario has Germany hilariously weak and is really poorly balanced in general, I'd recommend 1936 or 1939.
|
|
#
?
Sep 25, 2014 06:16
|
|
|
I was led always to believe the 1933 scenario was either unbalanced or incredibly boring to play so 
|
|
#
?
Sep 25, 2014 06:18
|
|
Mans posted:Yeah France declared war on me on September 1934 with loving 35 infantry divisions. What. Did you enable "democracies can declare war" in the options or something like that? That is retardedly off-key and shouldn't happen unless something went VERY wrong. Like "holy poo poo a timetraveller showed up and told us to wreck this Hitler dude" wrong. EDIT: Also, playing as Germany in '33 involves building nothing but IC until like '37, then building a massive army with your massive industrial base. Believe me, by the time war comes, you'll be able to poo poo all over Poland easily, and France shouldn't be that big of an issue either. Then the Soviets show up and wreck you because their bullshit Great Patriotic War modifier is completely unbalanced and just gives them a fuckton of free units, but hey, at least you managed to follow the historical path. TheMcD fucked around with this message at 06:27 on Sep 25, 2014 |
|
|
#
?
Sep 25, 2014 06:20
|
|
|
ThePutty posted:I was led always to believe the 1933 scenario was either unbalanced or incredibly boring to play so You spend 6 years building nothing but IC and become literally unstoppable.
|
|
#
?
Sep 25, 2014 06:27
|
|
|
We went with 1933 because my friends didn't want to fight each other so we agreed to make a Germany-Italy-Hungary-Bulgaria circlejerk. One thing i've noticed is that after a month of war partisans started popping up on Britanny. Maybe France unlocked the barest, minimest, slightiest capacity to DoW me and did so ignoring all consequences? Either way, gently caress that, if they want to play axis they'll do it on 1936. Are there any decent minor faction guides? I was crying from laughing so hard at the sudden France DoW that only later i realized i had spent two hours in vain.
|
|
#
?
Sep 25, 2014 06:31
|
|
Mans posted:We went with 1933 because my friends didn't want to fight each other so we agreed to make a Germany-Italy-Hungary-Bulgaria circlejerk. Partisans over France in the early game are pretty much par for the course, that always happens. There still should be no way for them to DOW you - they're democratic, so they can only DOW if you picked up a certain amount of belligerence, and it's almost impossible to do that in '34 unless you were REALLY trying for it, and odds are that you weren't. For minors, there's really not a lot to know. It's like the majors, just smaller - less tech trees you go down, less unit types you build, less impact on the bigger picture. If you're doing something like Hungary, you're probably best off just concentrating on ground forces and leaving the air to the Luftwaffe, and at that point it becomes fairly simple. Tech infantry poo poo and doctrines, build infantry and raise conscription levels, then mobilize and build more infantry, maybe a motorized division if you're feeling frisky. Then eventually Germany gets you into the Axis and eventually declares war, then you just do whatever, since it's not like the AI has any real plan itself.
|
|
|
#
?
Sep 25, 2014 06:36
|
|
|
I seem to recall there being some unholy combination of ministers and policies that would have you passively gain belligerence at a huge rate.
|
|
#
?
Sep 25, 2014 06:41
|
|
Raskolnikov38 posted:I seem to recall there being some unholy combination of ministers and policies that would have you passively gain belligerence at a huge rate. Sounds strange, because looking in the files, the only minister that has passive belligerence effect is Hitler, and while he does raise it when at war, he lowers it while at peace.
|
|
|
#
?
Sep 25, 2014 06:45
|
|
|
I may just be remembering something from hoi2 since I recall it happening to AI Japan a couple of games. E: or some dumb mod I was playing Raskolnikov38 fucked around with this message at 06:50 on Sep 25, 2014 |
|
#
?
Sep 25, 2014 06:48
|
|
|
My idea for China is to have a fundemental prestige based mechanic for the Celestial Empire government where you need high prestige to be able to get away with such a large state, so anything less than 75 is where you start getting penalties instead of 0, and things like "having taxes" and "wars of conquest" are, as admissions that the middle kingdom is not already perfect, hazardous to your prestige, while a big boost will be getting tribute. I mean, it might be just as inaccurate as what they're already doing for all I know, but at least I think it would be more fun than anything they've tried for china so far.
|
|
#
?
Sep 25, 2014 06:54
|
|
|
....i'm so loving stupid. I forgot i had allied Italy at the start of the game because my buddy wanted to do a quicky invasion of Albania but couldn't grasp how to do amphibious invasions so i literally had to babby him into Tirana. In theory i would kick him off the Axis afterwards. ...but i forgot to do it  I guess an axis of Germany + Italy and an invasion of Albania probably triggered the war. Still, 1936 seems much more stable.
|
|
#
?
Sep 25, 2014 07:16
|
|
|
Mans posted:We went with 1933 because my friends didn't want to fight each other so we agreed to make a Germany-Italy-Hungary-Bulgaria circlejerk. The 1933 start is awful and unbalanced, use 1936. Or play Kaiserreich, which is much more balanced for multiplayer (since I think multiplayer balance is one of the focuses of the mod team).
|
|
#
?
Sep 25, 2014 08:15
|
|
|
HoI4 (and Magicka) dev stream starting: http://www.twitch.tv/paradoxinteractive
|
|
#
?
Sep 25, 2014 14:15
|
|
|
Dongattack posted:HoI4 (and Magicka) dev stream starting: http://www.twitch.tv/paradoxinteractive Anyone have notes/screenshots from the Magicka portion of that stream?
|
|
#
?
Sep 25, 2014 17:47
|
|
|
Isn't the only purpose of the 1933 start to allow Germany to go Communist for an alt-history WW2?
|
|
#
?
Sep 25, 2014 17:52
|
|
|
For the most part yes. It's a dumb start date and isn't any fun, just do a '36, '39 or better yet Kaiserreich start if you want to have a good time.
|
|
#
?
Sep 25, 2014 17:55
|
|
|
Mr Luxury Yacht posted:Isn't the only purpose of the 1933 start to allow Germany to go Communist for an alt-history WW2? It's still dumb that it means that AI Germany, USA and USSR will end up with >500 IC by the time WW2 kicks off.
|
|
#
?
Sep 25, 2014 18:00
|
|
|
SeaTard posted:Anyone have notes/screenshots from the Magicka portion of that stream? Nope, but it starts about 12 minutes in on the video if you want to do it yourself: http://www.twitch.tv/paradoxinteractive/b/571971786 (HOI4 starts at ~45m. Notes so far: podcat is wearing an Adventure Time t-shirt.) e: "We're going to be putting a lot more time into the tutorial this time." YOU SAY THAT EVERY TIME EVERY TIME 
KOGAHAZAN!! fucked around with this message at 18:19 on Sep 25, 2014 |
|
#
?
Sep 25, 2014 18:00
|
|
|
Autonomous Monster posted:e: "We're going to be putting a lot more time into the tutorial this time." Maybe this time we'll get a Hitler vs. Stalin rap battle.
|
|
#
?
Sep 25, 2014 18:27
|
|
|
Autonomous Monster posted:Nope, but it starts about 12 minutes in on the video if you want to do it yourself: http://www.twitch.tv/paradoxinteractive/b/571971786 we do though!
|
|
#
?
Sep 25, 2014 18:47
|
|
|
When you start from 0 every increase is significant
|
|
#
?
Sep 25, 2014 19:28
|
|
|
I'm going to go against the grain here and urge paradox not to change the tutorials in HoI4. Paradox are already making very casual games as it is and I for one am tired of the CODification of this genre. The sheer betrayal I would feel if Hitler wasn't back for the tutorial.... Well it would be a lot okay.
|
|
#
?
Sep 25, 2014 19:39
|
|
|
VostokProgram posted:I'm going to go against the grain here and urge paradox not to change the tutorials in HoI4. Paradox are already making very casual games as it is and I for one am tired of the CODification of this genre. The sheer betrayal I would feel if Hitler wasn't back for the tutorial.... Well it would be a lot okay. What if u cud play hilter in cod???
|
|
#
?
Sep 25, 2014 20:00
|
|
|
I for one am hoping HoI4's tutorial is going to be presented by Totally Not Stalin This Time.
|
|
#
?
Sep 25, 2014 20:13
|
|
|
The Hitler tutorial taught me that the Germans are not alone in being tone deaf and humourless.
|
|
#
?
Sep 25, 2014 20:19
|
|
|
Autonomous Monster posted:Nope, but it starts about 12 minutes in on the video if you want to do it yourself: http://www.twitch.tv/paradoxinteractive/b/571971786 Thanks, looks like it is all about the f2p pvp Magicka, and not Magicka 2 like I was hoping.
|
|
#
?
Sep 25, 2014 20:22
|
|
|
Drone posted:I for one am hoping HoI4's tutorial is going to be presented by Totally Not Stalin This Time. its not stalin, its a handsome bankrobber who dabbles in romantic poetry and political extremes
|
|
#
?
Sep 25, 2014 20:23
|
|
|
Dibujante posted:What if u cud play hilter in cod??? In my one and only GameDevTycoon playthrough, one of my first games was Kaiserreich. It sold alright, not spectacularly, but alright, so I decided to spin the franchise out and see what I could make of it. This eventually culminated in the smash-hit KaiserFist II: Now That's What I Call Punching!, a third-person brawler in which you play a bare-chested, bare-knuckle and heavily moustachioed Kaiser Wilhelm II kicking the poo poo out of syndies on the western front. This was, in fact, so popular that it propelled me into super-stardom and landed me in an essentially infinite pit of money. Alas, the other line of spinoffs- Kaiserreich: World Revolution, a sort of strategy/rpg hybrid where you control a team of UoB spies trying to topple tyrannies and install communism across the globe while being undercut and sidelined by a Maximalist executive that never really cared about The Cause anyway (  )- never really took off, no matter how many shots I gave it. 
|
|
#
?
Sep 25, 2014 20:28
|
|
|
Autonomous Monster posted:In my one and only GameDevTycoon playthrough, one of my first games was Kaiserreich. It sold alright, not spectacularly, but alright, so I decided to spin the franchise out and see what I could make of it. This eventually culminated in the smash-hit KaiserFist II: Now That's What I Call Punching!, a third-person brawler in which you play a bare-chested, bare-knuckle and heavily moustachioed Kaiser Wilhelm II kicking the poo poo out of syndies on the western front. This was, in fact, so popular that it propelled me into super-stardom and landed me in an essentially infinite pit of money. TBF I would play the poo poo out of KaiserFist. I hope the Paradox devs itt are taking notes.
|
|
#
?
Sep 25, 2014 20:39
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 29, 2024 00:25 |
|
|
Autonomous Monster posted:In my one and only GameDevTycoon playthrough, one of my first games was Kaiserreich. It sold alright, not spectacularly, but alright, so I decided to spin the franchise out and see what I could make of it. This eventually culminated in the smash-hit KaiserFist II: Now That's What I Call Punching!, a third-person brawler in which you play a bare-chested, bare-knuckle and heavily moustachioed Kaiser Wilhelm II kicking the poo poo out of syndies on the western front. If this isn't a proper hook for a kickstarter I don't know.
|
|
#
?
Sep 25, 2014 20:44
|
|