|
Gamerofthegame posted:i mean Licensed Turtledove expansion. Everyone forced to drop their ideological conflicts to fight monarchical space lizards with 1970s weapons.
|
#
?
Aug 11, 2018 06:54
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 11, 2024 07:00 |
|
|
Have the devs mentioned anywhere the number of religions that might be in Imperator Rome? I've been thinking about my mod this last week and am experimenting with the idea of swapping out "Religion" for "Ideology", as I think ideology would play a more important factor in a post-apoc setting. Religion can be implied by certain ideology types, but it doesn't have the same weight overall that it did in 200 BCE. Ideally I'd need to come up with a similar number of ideologies for the mod to map to the religions in the base game, but I don't know if that number has been mentioned. The only religion I've seen mentioned in the screenshots seems to be Hellenic.
|
|
#
?
Aug 11, 2018 07:10
|
|
|
Charlz Guybon posted:I think you could roll the start back to 1789 and have it be good. Definitely should end at 1920. Having a strategy game start before but have most of the timeline take place after a massive world-changing event like the Napoleonic Wars would be a bad decision. There are too many points of divergence right at the beginning of the timeline that leads to radically different setups for Europe, leading to too many possibilities you have to model. Starting after the Napoleonic Wars is best.
|
|
#
?
Aug 11, 2018 07:53
|
|
|
Charlz Guybon posted:Licensed Turtledove expansion. Everyone forced to drop their ideological conflicts to fight monarchical space lizards with 1970s weapons. Modern era Paradox game that becomes a stealth X-Com sequel 10 years in.
|
|
#
?
Aug 11, 2018 08:15
|
|
|
ExtraNoise posted:Have the devs mentioned anywhere the number of religions that might be in Imperator Rome? I don't think they've discussed religion yet at all aside from stating it's not going to be a hugely impactful part of the game, but the Imperium Universalis mod for EU4 covers a slightly earlier time period and could give you an indication of how a grand strategy game would represent religious diversity at the time.
|
|
#
?
Aug 11, 2018 08:50
|
|
|
Dr. Video Games 0031 posted:Having a strategy game start before but have most of the timeline take place after a massive world-changing event like the Napoleonic Wars would be a bad decision. There are too many points of divergence right at the beginning of the timeline that leads to radically different setups for Europe, leading to too many possibilities you have to model. Starting after the Napoleonic Wars is best. For North Germans: - Create the North German Confederation (historically temporary, but maybe a reactionary version would just stay that way) - Achieve Northern Dominance in Germany (historical end point, but a liberal revolution could result in a push for more) - Unify Greater Germany - Greater German Dominance (taking inspiration from the HRE/Habsburgs, seeking dominance over all the old HRE) Then mirror the above for South Germans, with Southern Dominance in Germany being a variant unifies the South Germans plus the Ruhr and Silesia - leaving a rump Prussia. Non-generic stuff like Bismarck tricking France into a war could probably be part of an expanded crisis system. Really, I think the bigger issue is whether they can make the Napoleonic Wars satisfying, but also make it so their end doesn't just completely rob the player of the desire to play the game because it suddenly becomes way less dramatic.
|
|
#
?
Aug 11, 2018 09:43
|
|
|
A Buttery Pastry posted:Too many possibilities to model? The way V2 is set up, I don't see how that's a big issue - nearly everything is modeled as generics, just tuned to the specific thing it's dealing with. Like, nation formation is just a question of owning land and controlling spheres, as well as technology, and that could easily be defined for any culture group - possibly with a variety of possibilities for some - but none are particularly time-consuming to make. Maybe define different levels of nation formation, which the AI prioritizes differently based on the ruling ideology. An example would be in Germany, which could have the following decisions: V2 models everything dynamically, yeah, but it does so based on a very specific setup. If for example Napoleon was successful and maintained his empire, you'd need a very different set of mechanics to model the resultant socio-political environment. Like, you know how Kaiserreich is super different from vanilla HoI? But even then not as different as it would ideally be, due to limitations of modding. We're talking about that level of divergence, except all supported by a single dynamic game system. Even if they could pull it off, the focus would be so spread out that I'm not confident it would do any specific political setup especially well. I'd rather they just focus on one specific setup and make that as interesting as possible. Dr. Video Games 0031 fucked around with this message at 09:51 on Aug 11, 2018 |
|
#
?
Aug 11, 2018 09:47
|
|
|
Cease to Hope posted:move your armies from one end of the continent to the other without half of them dying from exposure Yes, europa universalis indeed has game mechanics that you have to interact with in order to receive a desired output. as far as i know this is indeed a unique thing in strategy games, known for really just being mostly cinematic set pieces
|
|
#
?
Aug 11, 2018 10:07
|
|
|
"You have to move armies and maintain diplomatic relations with neighbouring states. when will paradox learn that this is too much emotional effort  "
|
|
#
?
Aug 11, 2018 10:09
|
|
|
Mans posted:"You have to move armies and maintain diplomatic relations with neighbouring states. when will paradox learn that this is too much emotional effort gently caress off dude
|
|
#
?
Aug 11, 2018 10:14
|
|
|
Dr. Video Games 0031 posted:V2 models everything dynamically, yeah, but it does so based on a very specific setup. If for example Napoleon was successful and maintained his empire, you'd need a very different set of mechanics to model the resultant socio-political environment. In a scenario where the French Revolution isn't defeated, what was once considered uncomfortably liberal by some, like the UK, could end up becoming the conservative option in the face of liberal agitation - while old conservative states now appear reactionary and antiquated. This would help boost liberal agitation, as the ideology has proven itself workable and able to stand up to the forces of reaction. Conversely, if the French Revolution is defeated, the window would get pushed back closer to where it was before the revolution. Such a mechanic would have universal use, allowing players to export the revolution, or attempt to slow down reform by cracking down on any attempt at liberalism abroad - going all Gendarme of Europe on revolutionary asses. Thinking about it, that would strengthen the whole thing with V2, where you use international politics/imperialism to solve domestic issues.
|
|
#
?
Aug 11, 2018 11:13
|
|
|
Mans posted:"You have to move armies and maintain diplomatic relations with neighbouring states. when will paradox learn that this is too much emotional effort it's funny how you are accusing them of being a whiny baby, yet are the one actually throwin the fit your precious vidya game is safe bud, i promise
|
|
#
?
Aug 11, 2018 14:37
|
|
|
ExtraNoise posted:Have the devs mentioned anywhere the number of religions that might be in Imperator Rome? I was wondering a bit when you were mapping your trade goods 1:1, but with this especially, you gotta be more flexible with the pre-planning dude, we don't know poo poo yet. Things can and will change even well after the game is launched, and doubly so before it comes out, so you really don't want rigid plans that don't have any give at all. Just make a list of ideologies you think might fit and then prune it down once you actually have the information, you don't gain anything by being exact at the moment. I should probably follow your lead and actually start working on my map ahead of time, but for my China mod I'm trying to nail down as little as possible about the mechanics until we know more; I started thinking with population movement being a big thing but when they revealed more about that it turns out it's gonna be a lot more restrictive than I'd hoped, and who knows what systems are gonna be way more fleshed out or work in more interesting ways than we're expecting.
|
|
#
?
Aug 11, 2018 15:45
|
|
|
Dr. Video Games 0031 posted:V2 models everything dynamically, yeah, but it does so based on a very specific setup. If for example Napoleon was successful and maintained his empire, you'd need a very different set of mechanics to model the resultant socio-political environment. I get what you're saying regarding the Victorian period being setup right, but on the other hand, Victoria is meant to also cover the various liberal and socialist revolutions of the period, which, yanno, there was one big forerunner to those.
|
|
#
?
Aug 11, 2018 16:23
|
|
|
Koramei posted:I was wondering a bit when you were mapping your trade goods 1:1, but with this especially, you gotta be more flexible with the pre-planning dude, we don't know poo poo yet. Things can and will change even well after the game is launched, and doubly so before it comes out, so you really don't want rigid plans that don't have any give at all. Just make a list of ideologies you think might fit and then prune it down once you actually have the information, you don't gain anything by being exact at the moment. You're absolutely right. I just like to have kind of a "number for the scale" in my head to work with. Anything I have right now could be changed on the fly. No biggie.
|
|
#
?
Aug 11, 2018 16:54
|
|
|
|
|
#
?
Aug 11, 2018 18:51
|
|
|
can't wait for steppe wolf victoria edition
|
|
#
?
Aug 11, 2018 19:03
|
|
|
Victoria barely holds together inside its 100-year time frame. Please don't do this to Vicky, she doesn't deserve it.
|
|
#
?
Aug 11, 2018 19:06
|
|
|
 Doesn't V2 have some kind of problem where the entire economic system just sort of blows up after a certain number of years elapsed after the canonical end date? How would someone purport to run the game for hundreds of years??
|
|
#
?
Aug 11, 2018 19:11
|
|
|
DrSunshine posted:
After the end date?
|
|
#
?
Aug 11, 2018 19:26
|
|
|
Mans posted:Yes, europa universalis indeed has game mechanics that you have to interact with in order to receive a desired output. Gosh, it's almost as if there's a happy medium between having to babysit your troops all the time to get them to do anything and not interacting with the game at all. Seriously, anyone who plays this stupid "well I guess you don't like playing the game" card any time someone asks for basic automation is a loving moron. I don't care if I get probated for that again, it's an extremely stupid argument.
|
|
#
?
Aug 11, 2018 19:35
|
|
|
DrSunshine posted:
tank china's rgos so that it's not more productive than half of the rest of the world combined and you can probably buy time on that clock
|
|
#
?
Aug 11, 2018 19:50
|
|
|
Beamed posted:Yeah, splitting and microing armies to optimally have a front-line of only cav(or only inf later), making sure arty goes in the right place, etc. is just miserable. They've done a great job reducing micro with a lot of the rest, though. The worst one IMO is the AI's cunning plan of flanking armies nine thousand miles across europe to siege down your PU partner Britanny's capital while you're currently occupying 90% of their country. It happens a lot that you've won, or you're winning, but the AI is sending armies miles away on circuitous routes to siege something down and knock 5-10% off your warscore to stop you taking something useful.
|
|
#
?
Aug 11, 2018 20:50
|
|
|
Jeoh posted:can't wait for steppe wolf victoria edition That's almost exactly what Ultimate is. 
|
|
#
?
Aug 11, 2018 21:19
|
|
|
DrSunshine posted:
If the world goes on long enough it'll get stuck in a permanent overproduction/unemployment crisis. Vicky really is the most Marxist game. Also, factory space grows linearly, so eventually population growth will begin to outstrip the maximum possible rate of job creation, like some kind of bizarre para-Malthusian nightmare. Dr. Video Games 0031 posted:Having a strategy game start before but have most of the timeline take place after a massive world-changing event like the Napoleonic Wars would be a bad decision. There are too many points of divergence right at the beginning of the timeline that leads to radically different setups for Europe, leading to too many possibilities you have to model. Starting after the Napoleonic Wars is best. Now see, that's my biggest problem with V2, economic clusterfuck aside: the extremely limited scope for divergence. I'd much rather have a Vicky 3 that spanned three hundred years and only modelled half of it well than one that was eight decades long and precision engineered for it.
|
|
#
?
Aug 11, 2018 21:41
|
|
|
Freudian posted:After the end date? Yeah, people have made mods and stuff that extend the timeline.
|
|
#
?
Aug 11, 2018 22:11
|
|
|
DrSunshine posted:Yeah, people have made mods and stuff that extend the timeline. I mean, I thought Victoria 2's economy exploded long before 1936. Or 1836, to be honest.
|
|
#
?
Aug 11, 2018 22:31
|
|
|
DrSunshine posted:Yeah, people have made mods and stuff that extend the timeline.  Sometimes we answer questions unrelated to what's being asked.
|
|
#
?
Aug 11, 2018 22:49
|
|
|
Mans posted:"You have to move armies and maintain diplomatic relations with neighbouring states. when will paradox learn that this is too much emotional effort i know you're just shitposting, but it's worth going into detail. these problems are strictly a matter of bad UI. better UI options for each: - a HOI4- style logistic movement that isn't necessarily faster but would allow moving armies from one side of the Russian Empire to the other without half of them freezing to death they can already do this if you break them up and move them staggered; this preserves that ability (and could preserve the greater vulnerability by applying a morale penalty during logistic movement) but requires a lot fewer clicks and doesn't involve an arbitrary, non-intuitive trick - suppressing revolts by standing soldiers on top of them has never been fun or interesting. i dunno how you'd make this less poo poo but none of paradox's games (or anyone, really) has it solved yet - moving agents around is pointless busywork that's mostly a legacy mechanic leftover in EU4. if you could flag one diplo agent to improve relations in nations X, Y, and Z as best he can, it would make sucking up to electors, hemming in infamy/outrage, or keeping relations with your allies maxed a lot easier
|
|
#
?
Aug 11, 2018 22:50
|
|
|
Beamed posted:
Oh. I just got his comment. 
|
|
#
?
Aug 11, 2018 23:27
|
|
|
What's the current hotness in the Victoria II modding community? Still POP demand mod? Anything else I should get?
|
|
#
?
Aug 12, 2018 00:02
|
|
|
Cantorsdust posted:What's the current hotness in the Victoria II modding community? Still POP demand mod? Anything else I should get? Historical Flavor Mod is the new king of the hill, but I haven't tried it out. From what I've heard it can feel a little linear in its timeline.
|
|
#
?
Aug 12, 2018 02:03
|
|
|
Cease to Hope posted:i know you're just shitposting, but it's worth going into detail. honestly the entire concept of trying to make large, well organized armies during EU4's timeline that genuinely give a toss about logistics, paying their soldiers on time and everything else turns the game into an awkward area where large wars feel completely different from what you would expect. I'm not really sure how you counter the fact that blobing the way to go in EU4 wars without turning it into micro hell, which will always be a pain in the rear end for the player because the AI always knows how to do their part on the exact day that it's required. You either make attrition and winter campaigns a really serious issue which needs split armies and carefuly movement or you make it all more automatic and have the game decide the best course for you, which will never be satisfactory when they gently caress up. the comment of upping attrition to EU2 levels was kind of as a joke but it honestly was the only time in EU where not blobbing was the way to go. Seeing entire armies shatter in November when they entered Russia too stacked was amazing when you were on the defensive.
|
|
#
?
Aug 12, 2018 02:06
|
|
|
ExtraNoise posted:Historical Flavor Mod is the new king of the hill, but I haven't tried it out. From what I've heard it can feel a little linear in its timeline. I did a recent playthrough of that as the FRCA. Only got out of the first year because I got stupid lucky with how the rebels moved, after that I just chilled and watched my population skyrocket from immigration caused by the springtime of nations.
|
|
#
?
Aug 12, 2018 02:07
|
|
|
Mans posted:honestly the entire concept of trying to make large, well organized armies during EU4's timeline that genuinely give a toss about logistics, paying their soldiers on time and everything else turns the game into an awkward area where large wars feel completely different from what you would expect. I'm not really sure how you counter the fact that blobing the way to go in EU4 wars without turning it into micro hell, which will always be a pain in the rear end for the player because the AI always knows how to do their part on the exact day that it's required. yeah, armies are unrealistically cohesive in CK2 and most of EU4's timeline, but what we have now doesn't really fit historical logistics either. it's all a mess of ad hoc mini-rules that simulate specific situations they want to simulate (eg pushing into russian winters, tibet is unconquerable, etc.) but doesn't account for day to day history
|
|
#
?
Aug 12, 2018 02:13
|
|
|
Mans posted:honestly the entire concept of trying to make large, well organized armies during EU4's timeline that genuinely give a toss about logistics, paying their soldiers on time and everything else turns the game into an awkward area where large wars feel completely different from what you would expect. The trouble is this is already the best thing to do. It's just currently a pain in the rear end (which is distinct from being difficult; remembering to split armies up and stagger-walk them through snow or whatever isn't hard, it's just more clicks and more memory space).
|
|
#
?
Aug 12, 2018 13:11
|
|
|
Tech is this weeks Imperator dev diary: https://forum.paradoxplaza.com/forum/index.php?threads/imperator-development-diary-12-13th-of-august-2018.1114608/ I like how characters and their loyalty are involved in everything so far.
|
|
#
?
Aug 13, 2018 11:30
|
|
|
Mans posted:You either make attrition and winter campaigns a really serious issue which needs split armies and carefuly movement or you make it all more automatic and have the game decide the best course for you, which will never be satisfactory when they gently caress up. what you have to do is embrace the fuckups. make it clear when you assign generals that this guy is a drunken buffoon who'll set winter quarters a month early, or that he's certain to get himself killed charging a cannon, or lose half your army trying to squeeze through the alps, or really piss off the locals wherever he passes through, or etc etc. basically make the players blame the general portrait, not the ai programming
|
|
#
?
Aug 13, 2018 11:41
|
|
|
Fellblade posted:Tech is this weeks Imperator dev diary: It's cool that characters are involved. The obvious question/addition is whether we can steal inventions from other polities by getting a disloyal researcher or former researcher to defect, which would add another interesting layer to the decision to fire someone.
|
|
#
?
Aug 13, 2018 11:50
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 11, 2024 07:00 |
|
|
Red Bones posted:It's cool that characters are involved. The obvious question/addition is whether we can steal inventions from other polities by getting a disloyal researcher or former researcher to defect, which would add another interesting layer to the decision to fire someone.
|
|
#
?
Aug 13, 2018 14:31
|
|