|
I don't give one solitary gently caress about cheevos so meh. Also regencies have never effected my choice of gov type, as I play monarchies exclusively.
|
#
?
Mar 9, 2016 21:19
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 16, 2024 19:57 |
|
|
CharlestheHammer posted:I don't give one solitary gently caress about cheevos so meh. Ok well, if you are playing Ironman, it is a significant consideration. If I'm starting a campaign that's going to take 10-20 hours, the last thing I need is for there to be a random chance I'll get hosed by a long regency at some point.
|
|
#
?
Mar 9, 2016 21:24
|
|
|
Bold Robot posted:I'm not defending regencies, of course they're awful and everything you say about mechanics here is right. My point was simply that Bortles makes a lot of posts about how frustrated he is when he gets stymied by X lovely mechanic in Ironman. When I get a long regency I immediately savescum because that shot is not fun at all. This is because I am not myself an iron man and I'd rather forgo ~cheebs~ than deal with the handful of features in EU4 that everyone agrees suck (like regencies). I'm suggesting maybe Bortles should do the same. I am doing Ironman because for the longest time I did exactly what you are saying - just savescum. But then it turned into savescumming often or using the console to fix it. Doing this was making the game less fun for me though because it meant nothing was a challenge and even doing one savescum or fixing one minor bug or mistake with the console made me feel deflated and I ended up quitting that game. Since just before Cossacks I realized the EU4 is in a really awesome spot right now. So many mechanics/features/functionalities are just so great and make the game so much fun. Since savescumming was hurting my enjoyment of the game I started playing Ironman so I could try to get some of these achievements. Playing Ironman has made me so much better at the game and I am enjoying it a ton. The main exception here is Monarchies being awful to play, which has come up often since....so many countries you play as are Monarchies. You do have a point, though, and I will try to post less complainy stuff. Seriously though, gently caress Regencies/Monarchies. edit: and yeah now Janissary Decadence is going to fire because there is no way I can conceive of to keep my AT above 70%, and I dont have a Monarch so I do not have a Monarch skill above 5  So yeah one Regency is going to derail this whole game.CharlestheHammer posted:I don't like them, I just don't dislike them. They honestly don't come up enough to care. AAAAA! Real Muenster fucked around with this message at 21:34 on Mar 9, 2016 |
|
#
?
Mar 9, 2016 21:31
|
|
|
CharlestheHammer posted:I don't like them, I just don't dislike them. They honestly don't come up enough to care. Thank you for your valuable input. Regencies would be fine for me if being a monarchy had any significant advantages to outweigh them. As it is, all you get are... royal marriages? The potential for personal unions? Those are definitely not worth having no control over your ruler's stats and the risk of not being able to declare war for up to 15 years.
|
|
#
?
Mar 9, 2016 21:34
|
|
|
PUs are actually outrageously broken but almost nobody abuses them that much. Look at some Atwix WCs on the Paradox forum, he has consistently PU'd most of Europe in every game he has posted.
|
|
#
?
Mar 9, 2016 21:45
|
|
|
Bort Bortles posted:You have a very good point, and I am self aware enough to know that I have been a little bitchy lately. I was super pissed when a mechanic I was unfamiliar with derailed an achievement run I was doing (supporting a vassal's independence does not generate a Call To Arms - you simply end up in the war. It was a bad way to learn, I reacted poorly, and I posted about it) Someone has to act as a counterbalance to yours.
|
|
#
?
Mar 9, 2016 21:45
|
|
|
I actually don't know how to abuse PUs these days. You can only enforce PUs on someone of your dynasty, so...?
|
|
#
?
Mar 9, 2016 21:50
|
|
|
CharlestheHammer posted:Someone has to act as a counterbalance to yours.
|
|
#
?
Mar 9, 2016 21:50
|
|
|
Pellisworth posted:Ok well, if you are playing Ironman, it is a significant consideration. If I'm starting a campaign that's going to take 10-20 hours, the last thing I need is for there to be a random chance I'll get hosed by a long regency at some point. I'm not trying to defend Regencies (they are bad and make no sense), but there's not all that many runs that should be disrupted by 15 years of no-war (WCs and similar certainly can be though). This is a game with >350 years of game play after all.
|
|
#
?
Mar 9, 2016 21:55
|
|
Yes, it's like a lava lamp.
|
Bort Bortles posted:You have a very good point, and I am self aware enough to know that I have been a little bitchy lately. I was super pissed when a mechanic I was unfamiliar with derailed an achievement run I was doing (supporting a vassal's independence does not generate a Call To Arms - you simply end up in the war. It was a bad way to learn, I reacted poorly, and I posted about it)  a very reasonable post and a good defense of Ironman. Not my thing at all for exactly the reasons you've mentioned - I would rather savescum or console than let a whole campaign be ruined by one of EU4's quirks - but I see where you're coming from.
|
|
#
?
Mar 9, 2016 21:55
|
|
|
Really they should add more to regencies. Your king gets sick? gently caress you regency till he recovers.
|
|
#
?
Mar 9, 2016 21:59
|
|
|
PittTheElder posted:I'm not trying to defend Regencies (they are bad and make no sense), but there's not all that many runs that should be disrupted by 15 years of no-war (WCs and similar certainly can be though). This is a game with >350 years of game play after all. Yeah I have 800 hours in this drat game and I literally cannot think of a time I've been screwed by them that much. I don't think monarchies need to have good to "outweigh" the bad either since switching out of being a monarchy is supposed to be a hard feat to accomplish with tangible rewards.
|
|
#
?
Mar 9, 2016 22:07
|
|
|
lmao I had no idea this was possible: I just got an event to let a female take the throne of the Ottoman Empire. She is a 4/4/3 with a Strong claim (my 10 year old heir is 6/3/2 but had an event fire that said he would get a Military Education (but nothing happened)). I am torn about what to do.Koramei posted:Yeah I have 800 hours in this drat game and I literally cannot think of a time I've been screwed by them that much. I don't think monarchies need to have good to "outweigh" the bad either since switching out of being a monarchy is supposed to be a hard feat to accomplish with tangible rewards.  .Bold Robot posted:
|
|
#
?
Mar 9, 2016 22:27
|
|
|
Bort Bortles posted:lmao I had no idea this was possible: I just got an event to let a female take the throne of the Ottoman Empire. She is a 4/4/3 with a Strong claim (my 10 year old heir is 6/3/2 but had an event fire that said he would get a Military Education (but nothing happened)). I am torn about what to do.
|
|
#
?
Mar 9, 2016 22:36
|
|
|
Pretty sure it's two points, and it indeed won't take effect until after they ascend to the throne.Bort Bortles posted:lmao I had no idea this was possible: I just got an event to let a female take the throne of the Ottoman Empire. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/K%C3%B6sem_Sultan
|
|
#
?
Mar 10, 2016 00:28
|
|
|
I have just started playing this again for the first time after the release of the base game, now with all the DLC, and I'm intimidated as hell. Every screen seems to have ten times as many buttons and stats, and I'm pretty sure I don't understand or remember most of the mechanics -- it looks like Victoria II now. Is there like a guide I can look at to get my bearings, preferably one that's up to date with Cossacks
|
|
#
?
Mar 10, 2016 05:01
|
|
|
CharlestheHammer posted:I hope they never "fix" regencies. I hope you never "post" again. But someday you will, and I am confident regencies will be changed as well.
|
|
#
?
Mar 10, 2016 05:21
|
|
|
CharlieFoxtrot posted:I have just started playing this again for the first time after the release of the base game, now with all the DLC, and I'm intimidated as hell. Every screen seems to have ten times as many buttons and stats, and I'm pretty sure I don't understand or remember most of the mechanics -- it looks like Victoria II now. Is there like a guide I can look at to get my bearings, preferably one that's up to date with Cossacks Not really. Just mouse-over everything. If you know the EU base game, you should be fine figuring out the DLC stuff.
|
|
#
?
Mar 10, 2016 05:22
|
|
|
Yashichi posted:I hope you never "post" again. But someday you will, and I am confident regencies will be changed as well. Nope. Luckily most things people suggest aren't going to be implemented because they are terrible.
|
|
#
?
Mar 10, 2016 05:30
|
|
|
Koramei posted:Yeah I have 800 hours in this drat game and I literally cannot think of a time I've been screwed by them that much. I don't think monarchies need to have good to "outweigh" the bad either since switching out of being a monarchy is supposed to be a hard feat to accomplish with tangible rewards. It's never really a game ender but losing a bunch of time with no way out is bad from a fun gameplay perspective. There's still barely anything to do during peacetime so being forced to sit on your hands and speed 5 through a decade can really kill your momentum and enjoyment. The worst regency experience I've had was playing Ming. I was terrified to do anything while westernizing for fear of exploding into rebels, and just before it finished my king died with a newborn heir. 30 years of nothing but clicking events!
|
|
#
?
Mar 10, 2016 05:38
|
|
|
CharlestheHammer posted:Nope. Luckily most things people suggest aren't going to be implemented because they are terrible. I didn't even suggest a change! You're in such a rush to fill the thread with useless contrarian bullshit you didn't even bother to comprehend what you read. Many mechanics in the game have changed for the better since release and I'm sure Paradox will do something interesting with regencies eventually.
|
|
#
?
Mar 10, 2016 05:48
|
|
|
Yashichi posted:I didn't even suggest a change! You're in such a rush to fill the thread with useless contrarian bullshit you didn't even bother to comprehend what you read. Many mechanics in the game have changed for the better since release and I'm sure Paradox will do something interesting with regencies eventually. What are you talking about. I never said you did. I wasn't the one in a rush to post it seems.
|
|
#
?
Mar 10, 2016 05:49
|
|
|
Bold Robot posted:The heir will get the extra mil points when he comes of age. That event is a little confusing because at first it seems like nothing happens, but the points will show up when they become relevant. I forget how many points it gives but it's at least 2. The 10 year old heir seems like the clear choice to me unless you are in a super hurry to get out of that regency. PittTheElder posted:Pretty sure it's two points, and it indeed won't take effect until after they ascend to the throne. Yashichi posted:I hope you never "post" again. But someday you will, and I am confident regencies will be changed as well.
|
|
#
?
Mar 10, 2016 05:49
|
|
|
I am not being contrarian, have ever considered you may be wrong?
|
|
#
?
Mar 10, 2016 05:50
|
|
|
CharlestheHammer posted:I am not being contrarian, have ever considered you may be wrong?
|
|
#
?
Mar 10, 2016 05:53
|
|
|
I have no issues with anyone posting here and am just doing the same thing you are so i don't see your issue. I don't really care if you all like or disike a mechanic it's not a popularity contest. Besides the thread is fine as long as it's not discussing changing game mechanics.
|
|
#
?
Mar 10, 2016 06:05
|
|
|
CharlestheHammer posted:I have no issues with anyone posting here and am just doing the same thing you are so i don't see your issue. I don't really care if you all like or disike a mechanic it's not a popularity contest. Besides the thread is fine as long as it's not discussing changing game mechanics. Bold Robot called me out on complaining a bunch lately, and he was right. I dont understand what you are going on about : CharlestheHammer posted:Regencies are fine tho. CharlestheHammer posted:I don't like them, I just don't dislike them. They honestly don't come up enough to care. CharlestheHammer posted:I hope they never "fix" regencies. CharlestheHammer posted:I don't give one solitary gently caress about cheevos so meh. CharlestheHammer posted:Someone has to act as a counterbalance to yours. CharlestheHammer posted:Really they should add more to regencies. Your king gets sick? gently caress you regency till he recovers. CharlestheHammer posted:Nope. Luckily most things people suggest aren't going to be implemented because they are terrible. CharlestheHammer posted:I am not being contrarian, have ever considered you may be wrong? We're not sitting here wailing at Paradox to add our "suggestions" to the game, we are discussing what we would love to see added or changed in the future and you are posting....pretty much nothing. Three or four people have called you out on being contrarian and obtuse and yet you keep posting. If you do not like what we are posting about stop reading the thread, or, I dont know, add something constructive like everyone else does? I'm not your dad so it doesnt make a big difference to me either way but seriously, look at your posts and try to explain to me what we are supposed to be taking away from them? AAAAA! Real Muenster fucked around with this message at 06:33 on Mar 10, 2016 |
|
#
?
Mar 10, 2016 06:31
|
|
|
Oh you don't know what contrarian means, that makes a lot more sense. Also no one has constructively posted about regencies. It's repeating "I don't like it" over and over again. Realistically you can't fix regencies without adding a regent character which goes completely against the design of EU4 as its not a character based game like CK2. This problem arises out of any attempt to fix this problem outside of cutting it completely. That is why it won't change there is no good way of fixing it without neutering it to the point of pointlessness. Like a lot of thoughts posted here on game mechanics it's half baked at best.
|
|
#
?
Mar 10, 2016 06:40
|
|
|
CharlestheHammer posted:Oh you don't know what contrarian means, that makes a lot more sense. Also no one has constructively posted about regencies. It's repeating "I don't like it" over and over again. Realistically you can't fix regencies without adding a regent character which goes completely against the design of EU4 as its not a character based game like CK2. This problem arises out of any attempt to fix this problem outside of cutting it completely. edit: I ask because the general consensus of the people that post in this thread is that Regencies are unfun, artificially limiting to the player, and a-historical (in a game based very closely on history). Which is why it keeps coming up.
|
|
#
?
Mar 10, 2016 06:45
|
|
|
CharlestheHammer posted:Oh you don't know what contrarian means, that makes a lot more sense. Also no one has constructively posted about regencies. It's repeating "I don't like it" over and over again. Realistically you can't fix regencies without adding a regent character which goes completely against the design of EU4 as its not a character based game like CK2. This problem arises out of any attempt to fix this problem outside of cutting it completely. I think a lot of good and constructive ideas have come up on the topic 1) Aristocratic ideas mitigating the penalties of regencies 2) Different government types of monarchies with different succession mechanics (like Polish elective monarchy or the new-ish theocracy design) 3) More events or missions that can improve the stats of long-reigning monarchs or their heirs I've heard these and more ideas in the thread that are all some degree of workable and would do something to stop monarchies from being the most stale and least powerful government types in the game despite being the most stable and dominant government type of the era the game takes place in.
|
|
#
?
Mar 10, 2016 07:00
|
|
|
420 Gank Mid posted:I think a lot of good and constructive ideas have come up on the topic 1. You can't mitigate the penalties as the issue most take is the no war thing which is pretty binary. 2.this doesn't really do anything besides effectively eliminating regencies in an over complicated way. 3.this doesn't have much to do with regencies.
|
|
#
?
Mar 10, 2016 07:07
|
|
|
I've suggested numerous times that they change it to being able to declare war during a regency at the cost of stability.
|
|
#
?
Mar 10, 2016 07:36
|
|
|
Fister Roboto posted:I've suggested numerous times that they change it to being able to declare war during a regency at the cost of stability. Wiz wanted that as well. Luckily i am in charge, so we can keep the rules as they have been for over a decade now!
|
|
#
?
Mar 10, 2016 08:49
|
|
|
pdxjohan posted:Wiz wanted that as well. Luckily i am in charge, so we can keep the rules as they have been for over a decade now! Are there any plans to at least rebalance monarchies so they're not downright inferior government forms at least? I personally don't mind regencies, but monarchies have a lot of downsides where other gov forms feel like they only have perks.
|
|
#
?
Mar 10, 2016 08:59
|
|
|
What if regencies had above average stats?
|
|
#
?
Mar 10, 2016 09:25
|
|
|
pdxjohan posted:Wiz wanted that as well. Luckily i am in charge, so we can keep the rules as they have been for over a decade now! without wiz we are all in a regency council now. RIP Wiz.
|
|
#
?
Mar 10, 2016 09:32
|
|
|
New DD about sea combat: https://forum.paradoxplaza.com/forum/index.php?threads/eu4-development-diary-10th-march-2016.912904/ Really like the sound of the sea mission changes.
|
|
#
?
Mar 10, 2016 12:25
|
|
|
What if regencies gave a discount to upgrading provinces instead?
|
|
#
?
Mar 10, 2016 12:42
|
|
|
YF-23 posted:Are there any plans to at least rebalance monarchies so they're not downright inferior government forms at least? I personally don't mind regencies, but monarchies have a lot of downsides where other gov forms feel like they only have perks.
|
|
#
?
Mar 10, 2016 13:00
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 16, 2024 19:57 |
|
|
I think a strong way to rebalance monarchies would to be remove the stabhit for when your monarch dies with a Strong claim heir, and introduce circumstances in which monarch death can lead to stab loss for non-monarchies (as someone had suggested a while ago, for example, republics forced to hold snap elections in wartime should have trouble). You could even set up a hierarchy going like "questionable succession" with -2 stab loss, "unstable succession" with -1 stab loss, "stable succession" with no stab loss. For monarchies that would be no heir or weak claim heir for questionable, medium claim for unstable and strong claim for stable, for republics it would be snap election in wartime for questionable, snap election in peacetime for unstable, and regular election for stable. But right now monarchies alone have to suffer through stabloss on monarch death, which is a constant drain on paper mana other gov forms simply never have to deal with.
|
|
#
?
Mar 10, 2016 13:03
|
|