|
Kaza42 posted:The thing that's turning me off of Imperator the most is the province count. I want to play as Rome, but I absolutely do not want to try and manage a hundred provinces to set up trade routes and governors and fiddly stuff. If there's a decent automation layer for that, I'll probably check it out, but I really do not like the trend towards higher and higher province numbers in recent paradox games I think you're supposed to do all your management at the state level which is like 10-15 provinces combined, or is there something that still has to be done at the prov level?
|
#
?
Feb 6, 2019 04:24
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 8, 2024 17:03 |
|
|
Senor Dog posted:I think you're supposed to do all your management at the state level which is like 10-15 provinces combined, or is there something that still has to be done at the prov level?
|
|
#
?
Feb 6, 2019 05:00
|
|
|
I thought trade was on a province not city level?
|
|
#
?
Feb 6, 2019 07:14
|
|
|
Takanago posted:I will buy it day one then immediately start working on a mod to make Populists as annoying as possible no need they already are 
|
|
#
?
Feb 6, 2019 09:51
|
|
|
Groogy posted:no need they already are  preorder re-ordered!
|
|
#
?
Feb 6, 2019 12:24
|
|
|
Groogy posted:no need they already are Excellent 
|
|
#
?
Feb 6, 2019 13:15
|
|
|
Pharnakes posted:I thought trade was on a province not city level? It is
|
|
#
?
Feb 6, 2019 13:21
|
|
|
Paradox’s site isn’t playing nice with my phone right now so I can’t check but if I remember right, each city has its own trade good, but actually trading them, the part you actually interact with, is done at the province level.
|
|
#
?
Feb 6, 2019 13:59
|
|
|
Groogy posted:no need they already are I'll pre-order it TODAY! You're truly PDS greatest asset, Groogy
|
|
#
?
Feb 6, 2019 18:28
|
|
|
The only thing holding me back from preordering Imperator is the lingering feeling of suspicion that the AI is going to suck. It doesn't really matter how nicely constructed the game is if the AI plays like it does in EU4.
|
|
#
?
Feb 6, 2019 18:36
|
|
|
RabidWeasel posted:The only thing holding me back from preordering Imperator is the lingering feeling of suspicion that the AI is going to suck. It doesn't really matter how nicely constructed the game is if the AI plays like it does in EU4. Yeah, or the AI in Stellaris. :notes the complete lack of Imperator dev diaries about the AI:
|
|
#
?
Feb 6, 2019 18:45
|
|
|
No dev diaries about sound design, what’s with Paradox’s dumb decision to make the game silent?
|
|
#
?
Feb 6, 2019 18:49
|
|
|
Koramei posted:No dev diaries about sound design, what’s with Paradox’s dumb decision to make the game silent?
|
|
#
?
Feb 6, 2019 18:49
|
|
|
RabidWeasel posted:The only thing holding me back from preordering Imperator is the lingering feeling of suspicion that the AI is going to suck. It doesn't really matter how nicely constructed the game is if the AI plays like it does in EU4. Did the AI in EU4 get a lot worse in the past couple years? I haven’t played in about that long but the AI always seemed fine to me and I never really heard anyone complaining about it. Not genius level but gets the job done and provides a decent challenge. Stellaris on the other hand...
|
|
#
?
Feb 6, 2019 18:51
|
|
|
EU4 AI is still fine, I think. It's not the best at battle micro but it can build states that actually challenge you.
|
|
#
?
Feb 6, 2019 18:54
|
|
|
Bold Robot posted:Did the AI in EU4 get a lot worse in the past couple years? I haven’t played in about that long but the AI always seemed fine to me and I never really heard anyone complaining about it. Not genius level but gets the job done and provides a decent challenge. It hasn't really gotten any worse, but it hasn't gotten much better either, and people like me with thousands of hours played are more aware of its shortcomings.
|
|
#
?
Feb 6, 2019 18:56
|
|
|
I just find the current AI very easy to exploit, even by mistake, since it hates actually fighting and mostly prefers wasting months in transit to siege fortless provinces. Earlier AI setups where the AI liked fighting more felt more challenging even if in actuality they probably would run themselves into a ground a lot doing it. Though part of the problem is also constant power creep which the AI is extremely poor at taking advantage of and I'm mildly hopeful that Imperator will be more balanced as a baseline.
|
|
#
?
Feb 6, 2019 19:02
|
|
|
Fister Roboto posted:It hasn't really gotten any worse, but it hasn't gotten much better either, and people like me with thousands of hours played are more aware of its shortcomings. If you have to play the game for thousands of hours to realize its shortcomings then it sounds like it's pretty good to me.
|
|
#
?
Feb 6, 2019 20:19
|
|
|
Yeah, I think there are valid things to complain about (like it constantly slipping behind your lines to siege Siberia) and obviously all sorts of ways it could be better, but Paradox AI is...really good. If you measure it by actually reasonable standards. Like what strategy game actually has better AI? Definitely not total war or civ.
|
|
#
?
Feb 6, 2019 20:52
|
|
|
Fister Roboto posted:It hasn't really gotten any worse, but it hasn't gotten much better either, and people like me with thousands of hours played are more aware of its shortcomings. I kind of feel like designing AI for people with thousands of hours of play time is an unreasonable request.
|
|
#
?
Feb 6, 2019 21:00
|
|
|
Koramei posted:Yeah, I think there are valid things to complain about (like it constantly slipping behind your lines to siege Siberia) and obviously all sorts of ways it could be better, but Paradox AI is...really good. If you measure it by actually reasonable standards. Like what strategy game actually has better AI? Definitely not total war or civ. AAAAA! Real Muenster fucked around with this message at 21:15 on Feb 6, 2019 |
|
#
?
Feb 6, 2019 21:06
|
|
|
Democrazy posted:I kind of feel like designing AI for people with thousands of hours of play time is an unreasonable request. It's not like the AI is perfect until it breaks down after a thousand hours or whatever. There are problems that everyone will encounter regardless of playtime, it's just that people who have played it more are more likely to recognize them. Fister Roboto fucked around with this message at 21:13 on Feb 6, 2019 |
|
#
?
Feb 6, 2019 21:11
|
|
|
Groogy posted:no need they already are If there are secret hidden Crete LP easter eggs I will be much more interested in Imperator.
|
|
#
?
Feb 6, 2019 21:14
|
|
|
Democrazy posted:I kind of feel like designing AI for people with thousands of hours of play time is an unreasonable request. it's more that it takes that long to realize that it's not you misunderstanding some subtle part of the game, but rather that the AI is just not very smart
|
|
#
?
Feb 6, 2019 21:18
|
|
|
I'm a sucker for everything grand-strategy Paradox makes, I own literally every single piece of (gameplay, not aesthetic) DLC for EU4 and CK2 (except Holy Fury, waiting for a bigger sale on that because I don't play CK2 that much anymore and I want it just for completionism), and I have more than 1000 hours in EU4 alone, if you count EU3 and CK2 too I'm close to 1500 hours I guess I'm getting Imperator on release, and I'm seriously tempted by Steam's "5€ off a single 30€ or more purchase" (yes it applies to preorders too) which would make it 35€ and I'm pretty sure I'll play it enough that it's basically a bargain price. Still I hate preordering and putting money down in advance... but I know I'll buy it anyway and why not save 5 bucks... Aaaargh 
TorakFade fucked around with this message at 21:37 on Feb 6, 2019 |
|
#
?
Feb 6, 2019 21:33
|
|
|
Democrazy posted:I kind of feel like designing AI for people with thousands of hours of play time is an unreasonable request. For example, North German OPMs getting military access through 10+ countries to occupy unfortified provinces at the rear end end of the Ottoman Empire because said OPM is allied Austria, who is fully occupied so marching straight in would be suicide. Yes, that is smart behavior (not suiciding their army in a direct fashion via marching straight into the enemy) but they are instead committing suicide by committing the entirety of their army to years of marching through neutral territory to add literally nothing to the war except tedium for human players and opening themselves up to a greedy neighbor watching their army gleefully march away. All of this in 1475, too, when marching from Germany to the Caucasus would essentially be suicide in and of itself. Or a tiny Italian power sailing their whole army and navy from Italy to India because they are buddies with the French, who are at war England.
|
|
#
?
Feb 6, 2019 21:37
|
|
|
Nothingtoseehere posted:EU4 AI is still fine, I think. It's not the best at battle micro but it can build states that actually challenge you. I am certainly not one of the crazy EU4 AI sucks people, but it has it's limitations. I don't think I'd be wrong to say that Imperator adds more complexity to combat (introducing selectable tactics, unit rock paper scissors style system, etc). When battle micro / army usage is the main issue with EU4 AI, a game that has had many years of development, it's easy to see how you could think it would be worse in release Imperator when the systems from EU4 have been made even more complex. Not to mention the fact that Attrition has been massively increased by the looks of things which is another historic paradox AI issue. That said, I pre-ordered already even thinking the AI will probably suck because I'll still get ridiculous value, hundreds of hours of gameplay for the price of a restaurant meal. Edit: I do worry that the apparent trend we are shown from paradox towards balancing around multiplayer is only going to make AI worse in future titles though. Fellblade fucked around with this message at 21:55 on Feb 6, 2019 |
|
#
?
Feb 6, 2019 21:48
|
|
|
AAAAA! Real Muenster posted:I dont think anyone is asking for AI to be "designed for people with thousands of hours"; I think they (we) are asking for AI that isnt either super loving braindead or designed to be annoying as gently caress in a completely and totally a-historical way in history-based games. I dont even have 1000 hours in EU4 but that doesnt mean I didnt notice this trend in AI behavior when it started and that it doesnt annoy the gently caress out of me, to the point that it is a major reason why I dont play anymore. Call me crazy, but I don’t actually think that this represents a big issue. It seems, at worst a minor inconvenience or an inconsequential goof. If that’s the kind of thing that represents the top issue with the AI, I imagine Paradox should be pretty pleased with themselves.
|
|
#
?
Feb 6, 2019 22:00
|
|
|
Democrazy posted:Call me crazy, but I don’t actually think that this represents a big issue. It seems, at worst a minor inconvenience or an inconsequential goof. If that’s the kind of thing that represents the top issue with the AI, I imagine Paradox should be pretty pleased with themselves. I dunno how much EU4 you have played or if you go for achievements but that plus the inability to delegate/program jobs for my armies really bogs down the mid and especially late game because there is so much going on. Its not a hill I'm ready to die on or even write another paragraph about, but its a big pain to me, and the AI wasnt always that way, so, yeah.
|
|
#
?
Feb 6, 2019 22:14
|
|
|
EU4 AI is serviceable, even clever at times, but it does piss you off and do boneheaded things. Enough that I can get why people, especially veterans, can be pretty burned out on it. Compared to Stellaris though it's loving HAL9000 levels and I would rather have Imperator be much closer to EU4 than Stellaris (which it will probably be, since Stellaris is a pretty different mold) I mean, if they can refine and improve it in a way that is probably impossible by now in EU4 - let's remember that it's a 5 and a half years old game, with a fuckton of DLC and new mechanics piled on top - I will be a happy happy player Fellblade posted:Edit: I do worry that the apparent trend we are shown from paradox towards balancing around multiplayer is only going to make AI worse in future titles though. Is this really a thing? I didn't hear anything that would make me think that but I don't follow all news closely, and it scares me - multiplayer is usually a highly competitive environment where people pile on the advantages and try to break the system so balancing for that makes for pretty bad single player, and I only play single player...
|
|
#
?
Feb 6, 2019 22:44
|
|
|
I love how we have a release date for Imperator before Man the Guns. Much excitement, regardless. On a payday as well, which is much appreciated. Swedish developers knows what's up.
|
|
#
?
Feb 6, 2019 22:47
|
|
|
Groogy posted:No, we just balance for MP. But we also don't give a gently caress about MP and only balance for SP. It's Schrodingers argument
|
|
#
?
Feb 6, 2019 22:47
|
|
|
Sliding in to say that if you play EU4, we are about to begin a new multiplayer game with goons. 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 22:59
|
|
|
LemonyTang posted:Sliding in to say that if you play EU4, we are about to begin a new multiplayer game with goons. I tried this once and it was wayyyyy too hardcore. Admittedly I had one of the worst starting countries (Bavaria) but even Norway and Pomerania were eaten up by the third play session or so. Then on the other end of the spectrum (only off-board that I can tell, but still) there are people who role-play too far the other direction, with rules outside of the game itself preventing war and so on. Is there a middling group of people like myself who are familiar with the game but are a little more relaxed about expanding in general? Sort of like the scenario I see when people describe playing with IRL friends: they help each other out and are pretty far apart from each other on the map.
|
|
#
?
Feb 6, 2019 23:13
|
|
|
TorakFade posted:Is this really a thing? I didn't hear anything that would make me think that but I don't follow all news closely, and it scares me - multiplayer is usually a highly competitive environment where people pile on the advantages and try to break the system so balancing for that makes for pretty bad single player, and I only play single player...
|
|
#
?
Feb 6, 2019 23:31
|
|
|
Jedi Knight Luigi posted:Is there a middling group of people like myself who are familiar with the game but are a little more relaxed about expanding in general? Sort of like the scenario I see when people describe playing with IRL friends: they help each other out and are pretty far apart from each other on the map. You can ask people to get together for a more casual game. You'd still need to establish some guidelines like "all on the Med" or "all in East Asia" so you can actually communicate and attack or help each other.
|
|
#
?
Feb 7, 2019 03:06
|
|
|
Jedi Knight Luigi posted:I tried this once and it was wayyyyy too hardcore. Admittedly I had one of the worst starting countries (Bavaria) but even Norway and Pomerania were eaten up by the third play session or so. I don't know about specific groups but I've forced my friends to play EU4 and learn by dying, and it was still surprisingly fun if you pick a large country and can help shield them from some of their more excessive mistakes, or they only pick giant countries and then find out the hard way why aggressive expansion in the HRE is not something to be trifled with early game. Now that they have the basics down we'll sometimes just sit around for an evening and just wing it as we go along.
|
|
#
?
Feb 7, 2019 04:09
|
|
|
AAAAA! Real Muenster posted:I dont think anyone is asking for AI to be "designed for people with thousands of hours"; I think they (we) are asking for AI that isnt either super loving braindead or designed to be annoying as gently caress in a completely and totally a-historical way in history-based games. I dont even have 1000 hours in EU4 but that doesnt mean I didnt notice this trend in AI behavior when it started and that it doesnt annoy the gently caress out of me, to the point that it is a major reason why I dont play anymore. At the end of the day it's a video game and not a history simulator, so historical realism has to take a backseat to gameplay. I think the AI is mostly fine; the only two complaints I have are: a) The AI is pretty bad at coordinating multiple armies; a weak army (like your North German OPM ally of Austria) should be looking for a main force to attach to. Also, a weak army should only consider going off and sieging the Caucasus if their side is winning, otherwise just go home and defend. It'd be far more challenging if those 3 Austrian ally OPMs merged up into a single more sizable force. Burgundy's vassal swarm would be a lot stronger if they could actually coordinate. b) The AI is pretty bad at naval stuff, like sending unescorted transports off to be easily killed, or failing to prevent invasions of the homeland. England/GB is a naval godzilla in the hands of a player but the AI is so dumb that you can easily just sidestep their naval superiority.
|
|
#
?
Feb 7, 2019 05:56
|
|
|
The AI is really good and -- according to Paradox -- is NOT cheating. This was a walk down memory lane; that's actually the article that made me find PDX and EU2(the hot new sequel to EU1) all those years ago.
|
|
#
?
Feb 7, 2019 07:27
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 8, 2024 17:03 |
|
|
64MB of RAM... maybe I'll be able to play Europa Universalis 2 when/if it rolls around 
|
|
#
?
Feb 7, 2019 07:44
|
|
