|
Daimyo are still quite buggy unfortunately. It bums me out because there are a decent number of cool mechanics tied up in Japan now, but I feel like I can't play a game there without something going haywire.
|
#
?
Feb 6, 2019 00:41
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 24, 2024 07:27 |
|
|
Ofaloaf posted:I made that change! It's just the list of defenders of the Alamo, plus the Presidents of the Republic of Texas, plus a departed Texan goon. Were you at least a little tempted to add Hank Hill or Dale Gribble?
|
|
#
?
Feb 6, 2019 01:43
|
|
|
The OP mentions that Mandate of Heaven might have a huge impact on all interactions with Asia. Has that been patched out/tuned? Trying to decide whether to pick it up on sale.
|
|
#
?
Feb 6, 2019 02:32
|
|
|
New games should have a bunch of rules toggles like CK2 does, with only the ones that make the game noticeably easier disabling ironman. That way RNW could also have a variety of settings ranging from 'historical-style but random arrangement' all the way to 'literally Westeros complete with dragons'.
|
|
#
?
Feb 6, 2019 02:56
|
|
|
Roadie posted:New games should have a bunch of rules toggles like CK2 does, with only the ones that make the game noticeably easier disabling ironman. There is a little of this, in that you can choose the likely-hood of the fantastical new world nations. I'm not sure if there is an option for existing land setup with random nations placed or not. One thing I have noticed is that there really doesn't tend to be things like how the carribean is all ~10 dev provinces or the inca area is packed with gold. Kind of lowers the interesting aspects of it. If you spawn the fantasy religious empires (like 300-dev aztecs/mayans/incans) the AI is *really* bad at pushing through religious reforms and just sort of stalls out hard. For example the aztec empire will just sit around eating doom because it doesn't have anyone to fight or vassalize (they should probably start with small vassals or connected states to crush). It can be fun to take one for a whirl and aim to crash onto europe in a giant wave and gently caress their day up though (high american tech group get missions that give you big swaths of claims after you get a foothold).
|
|
#
?
Feb 6, 2019 03:11
|
|
|
Poil posted:Yeah, it's like their entire world view would collapse if they were to accept that 100 Spaniards didn't actually conquer the Aztecs on their own. There are plenty of historical problems with the game and it's only natural. The weirdness comes when people suddenly become very sensitive about some specific historical truth. More often than not it's just because people know more about edgy interesting historical facts or myths. And thus every WW2 game has players who ask why can't King Tiger destroy a hundred Shermans with a single shot. Or something about sexuality or racism in any story that touches on those topics. Like that Kingdom Come game where lead dev was not very polite about people wanting ahistorical representation in the game but didn't seem to have ahistorical RPG skills or alchemy or healing or armor in his game. So there are ahistorical things about Institutions but also every other mechanic in the game. Devs have to make sure those do not feel too weird. And it's more of a problem of flavor and naming, I'd say. A lot of people don't care about mechanics as much as terms and they'd be much more content if you'd think of a better name for monarch points or specific institutions.
|
|
#
?
Feb 6, 2019 05:02
|
|
|
White Coke posted:Were you at least a little tempted to add Hank Hill or Dale Gribble?
|
|
#
?
Feb 6, 2019 13:17
|
|
|
Part of what complicates this is that most people don’t have a very good idea of what’s ahistorical. It’s understandable — most of us aren’t historians — but it means that people get up in arms over things that feel ahistorical to them, which only has some vague relationship to history, and often has a strong relationship to their current prejudices. And then which ahistorical elements people decide are worth getting up in arms over says even more. Whenever I think about baked potatoes in The Witcher 3, I laugh and laugh.
|
|
#
?
Feb 6, 2019 13:27
|
|
|
I still feel it's very silly to complain about a computer game being ahistorical. Like fix things so they're fun to play and make sense, I am sure there's gonna be some super nerd who'll come up with his super historical mod that totally wont have any nationalistic bias.
|
|
#
?
Feb 6, 2019 14:15
|
|
|
doingitwrong posted:Whenever I think about baked potatoes in The Witcher 3, I laugh and laugh.
|
|
#
?
Feb 6, 2019 14:20
|
|
|
Potatoes are from the Americas.
|
|
#
?
Feb 6, 2019 14:38
|
|
|
Tahirovic posted:I still feel it's very silly to complain about a computer game being ahistorical. Like fix things so they're fun to play and make sense, I am sure there's gonna be some super nerd who'll come up with his super historical mod that totally wont have any nationalistic bias. Ehh, I don’t think anyone’s asking for this game to be made more historical at the cost of fun and usability. But it is a history themed game and I would just as soon it didn’t get more goofy fantasy content, CK2 went well overboard on this front and eventually had to introduce an option to just turn that poo poo off. The ahistorical stuff that really bothers me is the stuff that is not really fun either, like Ming still being virtually invincible to anyone but the player in most games. There was nothing historical about pre-MOH Ming collapses, but they were fun because they turned one of the most valuable and normally most boringly stable regions on the map into a circular firing squad.
|
|
#
?
Feb 6, 2019 14:40
|
|
|
TTBF posted:Potatoes are from the Americas. I thought about this point too, but the Witcher world isn't on literally Earth, so I was unsure what was so funny about it.
|
|
#
?
Feb 6, 2019 15:15
|
|
|
I'm mad that we made it this far into EU4, and there's still no event series or realistic way for the Italian Wars to happen. They're like the first big pan-European conflict of the era, and featured a series of shifting alliances which would go on to define European conflicts for ages, as well as regional conflict between France and Spain that didn't involve one massively invading the core territory of the other. And the game just isn't set up to do it at all. Also that Personal Union mechanics are still so poorly developed.
|
|
#
?
Feb 6, 2019 15:17
|
|
Yes, it's like a lava lamp.
|
mmkay posted:I thought about this point too, but the Witcher world isn't on literally Earth, so I was unsure what was so funny about it.  
Poil fucked around with this message at 16:04 on Feb 6, 2019 |
|
#
?
Feb 6, 2019 16:02
|
|
|
maybe the potatoes came from the monster world when it collided
|
|
#
?
Feb 6, 2019 16:07
|
|
|
Poil posted:The Witcher world is totally fantasy medieval Poland so it could obviously not be allowed to have any non-white people in the setting as it would be ahistorical. Would you like another potato? But brown people in my fiction MAKES ME FEEL ICKY!
|
|
#
?
Feb 6, 2019 16:13
|
|
|
Smiling Knight posted:The OP mentions that Mandate of Heaven might have a huge impact on all interactions with Asia. Has that been patched out/tuned? Trying to decide whether to pick it up on sale. Ming's tributary spam is no longer a thing, they are still extremely stable however, but MoH is basically safe to get now and doesn't make playing in India impossible.
|
|
#
?
Feb 6, 2019 18:41
|
|
|
The Witcher isn't literally earth, but there has been more than a few defenses of the lack of PoC in it as being something along the lines of "Medieval Europe didn't have brown people" which is funny because potatoes come from the Columbian Exchange which is centuries in the future while brown people come from just down south and trade between those parts of the world dates back to the Bronze Age. I recognize at this point that I'm dunking on strawmen who aren't posting in this thread about a game that this thread is not about. Let me try to un-derail by saying: Playing EU 4 has been a wonderful way for me to learn some real history. A bunch of crazy things will happen in game, and I'll get curious about how things really went, only to learn that reality was even crazier. It's certainly not a comprehensive education, but the stochastic studies of history that EU4 campaigns have led me on have been fascinating and supremely educational.
|
|
#
?
Feb 6, 2019 20:42
|
|
|
Mapgoons are about to start a new EU4 MP game. Full details in this thread in PGS: https://forums.somethingawful.com/showthread.php?noseen=0&threadid=3881044&perpage=40&pagenumber=1#post492177155 Sundays at 8PM UTC, beginning this week. All you need is a vanilla copy of eu4 and discord.
|
|
#
?
Feb 6, 2019 23:00
|
|
|
doingitwrong posted:The Witcher isn't literally earth, but there has been more than a few defenses of the lack of PoC in it as being something along the lines of "Medieval Europe didn't have brown people" Meanwhile, the good defense would be "it's their game and they make it the way you want it, you may not like that they didn't include something but you can't demand it". Same for Kingdom Come really even if the developer was an rear end about it. Justifying both inclusive and exclusive outcomes with history is beyond the point because fiction is rarely about something statistical probably. KCD is about blacksmith's son who rises to prominence and becomes a savior of the realm in Czechia. It wouldn't be less plausible if it was a story about some Ethiopian mercenary ending up in the same land saving the realm. But it's not the game those guys were doing and it is a defense enough. EU4 is good about notifying you about some things historically happening... but mostly through events and decisions. Those are things that people did or wanted to do in some cases. But it's affected by a lot of things from our modern perspective. Like focus on specific countries: if you play the game without learning history you'd think that Byzantines, Japan and, say, Netherlands and England were the most vital and eventful regions just because there's a lot of developer special attention focused on it. When you chose what to tell or not to tell people you're doing sort of censorship or propaganda, even if you're not trying to hide anything and are just limited by time constraints.
|
|
#
?
Feb 7, 2019 02:53
|
|
|
ilitarist posted:When you chose what to tell or not to tell people you're doing sort of censorship or propaganda, even if you're not trying to hide anything and are just limited by time constraints. Yeah, hugely. And for the same reason I kinda disagree with the first part of your post, at least in that, as much as it's the developers' right to include (and not include) what they want in their game, it's our right to criticize them for their choices. I think people grossly underestimate the impact history games (and media at large) have on peoples' understandings of history; people laugh at it, but I don't think I'm exaggerating at all when I say it's probably way more significant than what most people learn in school. And so IMO representing it well is actually pretty important. Going back to EU4, it's why I still feel kinda uneasy about the development values. Yeah it's a game, and those values are for gameplay reasons, but I think kids seeing Germany be as rich as China and India in 1444 is exactly the kind of thing that rubs off on them, even if only subconsciously. I know that sort of thing absolutely did for me back with Age of Empires. doingitwrong posted:I recognize at this point that I'm dunking on strawmen who aren't posting in this thread about a game that this thread is not about. They're not in this thread, but the "brown people weren't in Poland" line is definitely not a strawman, I distinctly remember the late great Totalbiscuit trotting that one out when the argument was still fresh and I doubt he was the only one.
|
|
#
?
Feb 7, 2019 03:29
|
|
|
Koramei posted:Yeah, hugely. And for the same reason I kinda disagree with the first part of your post, at least in that, as much as it's the developers' right to include (and not include) what they want in their game, it's our right to criticize them for their choices. I hope you use the benign meaning of "criticize" here. As long as the game or any other art object is not offensive (and even when it's offensive but there is a good reason for that) I can only see this kind of critique being about lost opportunities. Same as me being sad that, say, Crusader Kings 2 doesn't portray Rurikovich unique inheritance Rota system, or alliances between Crusaders and Muslims, or numerous technological updates. Or EU4 estates, parlaments and other types of factions not interacting with each other, or economics not being properly portrayed and so on. Koramei posted:I think people grossly underestimate the impact history games (and media at large) have on peoples' understandings of history; people laugh at it, but I don't think I'm exaggerating at all when I say it's probably way more significant than what most people learn in school. And so IMO representing it well is actually pretty important. Going back to EU4, it's why I still feel kinda uneasy about the development values. Yeah it's a game, and those values are for gameplay reasons, but I think kids seeing Germany be as rich as China and India in 1444 is exactly the kind of thing that rubs off on them, even if only subconsciously. I know that sort of thing absolutely did for me back with Age of Empires. I think the biggest offender in terms of influencing our generation's view on history is Tech Tree from civilization. It gives you a lot of dumb ideas like burning the library of Alexandria has "moved us back in tech tree" or something, or that the invention of stirrups means heavy cavalry means feudalism means renessaince and therefore Huns are forefathers of European civilization. It also carries a general idea of One True Path through history, you start with Babylonian clay village and by the end you get to New York skyscrapers and this is how God intended it. EU4 sidesteps the issue by pretending that a lot of history happens on its own and a lot of it is predetermined at the start, e.g. technology sorta happens whatever you do in the game. You only pay points to be on track or slightly ahead of historical development, and whatever you do sometime around 1710 the Age of Revolutions will come. Also, a funny thing: I find games like Age of Empires and Civilization easier to play without harming my inner historian. They're much more abstract and obviously just mirroring the historical reality. You get 100 hammers or food to produce a warrior and he beats another warrior - it could mean army clashes or just a small skirmish depending on the context. Meanwhile Paradox games will tell me that exactly 15232 people died in a battle and depending on the situation this number may seem ridiculous. It's fine when I build a market for a century or so in Civilization, it obviously represents something bigger - but in EU4 I have exact building time for the market and the detail is huge, so it's harder to swallow that Vienna didn't have a market in 1444 before the state invented and built it. Some mechanics like limits on warscore or attrition also make little sense in a detailed world of EU4 while in Civilization it's easier to pretend that attrition is never strong enough to affect the big picture.
|
|
#
?
Feb 7, 2019 04:33
|
|
|
Pretty sure potatoes came to Europe during the Sunset Invasion.
|
|
#
?
Feb 7, 2019 07:30
|
|
|
CK2 is great for inclusivity. PoC, WoC, PwD, list goes on
|
|
#
?
Feb 7, 2019 14:14
|
|
|
Does forming France with a french culture group minor give me access to the French mission tree or am I gonna be stuck with the lovely generic ones?
|
|
#
?
Feb 8, 2019 07:10
|
|
|
Unless SPECIFICALLY set out to not give you the mission tree, any country formation should give you the mission tree.
|
|
#
?
Feb 8, 2019 07:29
|
|
|
When it comes to cultural spread and stuff, my favorite fun fact on the subject is that all of ten years after Spain conquered the Aztecs, there was a Chinatown in Tenochtitlan with immigrant Asian workers producing ceramics and literal samurai protecting caravans to and from the coast.
|
|
#
?
Feb 8, 2019 07:31
|
|
|
Roadie posted:When it comes to cultural spread and stuff, my favorite fun fact on the subject is that all of ten years after Spain conquered the Aztecs, there was a Chinatown in Tenochtitlan with immigrant Asian workers producing ceramics and literal samurai protecting caravans to and from the coast. I would like to know more.
|
|
#
?
Feb 8, 2019 07:38
|
|
|
Spain was doing a lot of Asian trade through Manila. American silver moved westward into Asia, goods were brought back to Europe via Mexico. Plenty of people, low and high status, traversed the same routes. One of the more notable examples is Hasekura Tsunenaga, who came to Europe on a diplomatic mission, though religious politics meant that ultimately it came to nothing. But here he is painted in Rome, 1615. 
|
|
#
?
Feb 8, 2019 07:57
|
|
|
What's the simplest/most optimal way of getting the Spanish missions when starting as Aragon?
|
|
#
?
Feb 8, 2019 08:30
|
|
|
Looks like you currently need to not BE Aragon (or catalonia or i assume VAL is valencia) so you'd have to culture switch to something that has a non-endgame-formable, form that, culture switch back to something iberian, then form spain militarily after inheriting castille. Which is to say, there is not currently a simple way of getting the spanish missions when starting as aragon.
|
|
#
?
Feb 8, 2019 10:35
|
|
|
This might actually be simpler than you think, Al Andalus is not an end game tag I think?
|
|
#
?
Feb 8, 2019 15:28
|
|
|
Tuscany is pretty easy to switch to once you’ve conquered it
|
|
#
?
Feb 8, 2019 15:34
|
|
|
Fister Roboto posted:I would like to know more. I quite enjoyed A Splendid Exchange by William Bernstein. Told in a series of narratives, it is a kind of sweeping overview of global patterns of trade, from pre-history to modern times. Written from a particularly "globalization is good" perspective but full of surprising anecdotes and facts that drive home that humanity has been globally connected for a long, long time.
|
|
#
?
Feb 8, 2019 15:41
|
|
|
Doing a lazy Castile run just to own all the colonies in the world. Vassalize Portugal, stomp on England when they try to sail, eat France , the usual stuff. Had a long-running alliance with Brandenburg, which helped them turn into Prussia and dominate northern/central Europe. Just as I'm thinking about beaking the alliance and bringing them down to size a bit...oops, russian king dies, and I inherit giant Prussia after a short succession war with Russia (made trivial by the many doomstacks of 120k prussian troops I just got). So now I have 50 years left on the clock and no goals. Suggestions? Ottomans have already been crushed, France is mine, so it nearly all of the UK and the only colonies not mine are in Australia and not for long. PS- There really should be an achievment for building all three channels. PS2- Weird. I had my navy of 35 Threedeckers, 43 great frigates, 30 archipelago frigates and some transports utterly -owned- by 25 british Threedeckers. As in, I lost all of my heavy ships while the brits lost 2 and captured a bunch of mine. Do their naval ideas and doctrines really make that much difference?
|
|
#
?
Feb 8, 2019 17:11
|
|
|
Sephyr posted:Doing a lazy Castile run just to own all the colonies in the world. Vassalize Portugal, stomp on England when they try to sail, eat France , the usual stuff. Had a long-running alliance with Brandenburg, which helped them turn into Prussia and dominate northern/central Europe.
|
|
#
?
Feb 8, 2019 17:15
|
|
|
Sephyr posted:PS2- Weird. I had my navy of 35 Threedeckers, 43 great frigates, 30 archipelago frigates and some transports utterly -owned- by 25 british Threedeckers. As in, I lost all of my heavy ships while the brits lost 2 and captured a bunch of mine. Do their naval ideas and doctrines really make that much difference? Yepp. After a certain point, increasing the size of your fleet just increases your losses instead of actually increasing the power of your fleet.
|
|
#
?
Feb 8, 2019 17:24
|
|
|
Cynic Jester posted:Yepp. After a certain point, increasing the size of your fleet just increases your losses instead of actually increasing the power of your fleet. On that note, how good is the info on warfare on the EU4 wiki? Combat mechanics in Paradox games are something I never quite understood beyond "try to have more dudes and/or a general with better stats than the other guy, also pay attention to the terrain". What exactly the different numbers for shock, etc. do to affect a battle is something I never really learned.
|
|
#
?
Feb 8, 2019 19:17
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 24, 2024 07:27 |
|
|
cool dance moves posted:On that note, how good is the info on warfare on the EU4 wiki? Combat mechanics in Paradox games are something I never quite understood beyond "try to have more dudes and/or a general with better stats than the other guy, also pay attention to the terrain". What exactly the different numbers for shock, etc. do to affect a battle is something I never really learned. If you want the specifics I found Reman's videos basically the best resource out there.
|
|
#
?
Feb 8, 2019 19:22
|
|