|
You don't really directly interact with the regiments(subunits), they take performance but what Johan here is talking about is when the AI is trying to figure out where in the world he should be placing his armies(units). It's not as easy as just "make less armies" though because the wars towards the end usually means the AI is aware of the entire world as TI has been explored they have a lot more provinces to evaluate. Plus the AI is usually fewer and larger meaning the spreading their calculations over several cores becomes less efficient (though that should not be as noticeable anymore since we dynamically balance that now)
|
#
?
Jul 7, 2019 13:25
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 9, 2024 17:50 |
|
|
Groogy posted:You don't really directly interact with the regiments(subunits), they take performance but what Johan here is talking about is when the AI is trying to figure out where in the world he should be placing his armies(units). It's not as easy as just "make less armies" though because the wars towards the end usually means the AI is aware of the entire world as TI has been explored they have a lot more provinces to evaluate. Plus the AI is usually fewer and larger meaning the spreading their calculations over several cores becomes less efficient (though that should not be as noticeable anymore since we dynamically balance that now) e: It'd still scale over time due to improved force projection capabilities, but shouldn't ever become "literally checking every province in the world". A Buttery Pastry fucked around with this message at 17:02 on Jul 7, 2019 |
|
#
?
Jul 7, 2019 17:00
|
|
|
I'd think that adding logistics to calculate would end up increasing the overall calculations even if the total amount of provinces in consideration is less. But I'm a super-layman, so idk
|
|
#
?
Jul 7, 2019 17:40
|
|
|
ThatBasqueGuy posted:I'd think that adding logistics to calculate would end up increasing the overall calculations even if the total amount of provinces in consideration is less. But I'm a super-layman, so idk
|
|
#
?
Jul 7, 2019 17:56
|
|
|
ThatBasqueGuy posted:I'd think that adding logistics to calculate would end up increasing the overall calculations even if the total amount of provinces in consideration is less. But I'm a super-layman, so idk It depends how complex the calculations are and how much they can save by being done. There's a fairly common computer science pattern where you set up higher level calculations to be performed where you only move down to the lower ones if they return as true - a simple example of this is in an FPS where you might perform a hitscan calculation by checking against a simple box surrounding a character, and if the shot is found to pass through that box, then you move down and do a more detailed calculation to check against the model itself. It adds one extra calculation, but if it doesn't pass then it SAVES you a ton of much more complex ones. That kind of thing is likely what they were talking about here - a way to basically mark a bunch of territory as "ignore this" without having to go in and check it manually, because it's all "downstream" from a territory it's already determined to be irrelevant.
|
|
#
?
Jul 7, 2019 18:29
|
|
|
For an example of that, see the HOI4 supply areas compared to how HOI3 did supply. Instead of building a supply chain per unit and per province, it simplifies it to supply areas which apply to all units in that area. But then it is also possible to have units cut off within the same area, so now their supply is coming entirely from local VPs and transport planes. I'm sure these instances fall under what you described, otherwise there wouldn't be a point to supply areas. The system works great until you end up with a front line that pushes slightly into the neighboring supply area, which happens to be at 1 infrastructure in a state you don't own and is also in another air zone. Bonus points if that air zone is so massive you can't possibly get decent air cover despite your airbase being located only a few miles away from the front.
|
|
#
?
Jul 8, 2019 21:17
|
|
|
A Buttery Pastry posted:The game wouldn't have to recalculate logistics though, other than when armies get a new home province or you get tech/ideas that expand your range. The majority of the time, it'd just be a limit on your movement, like you had a ring of unbreakable fortresses preventing further movement. Is this essentially the naval supply range but over land? If it was 100% within your borders (at least with no unrest) and then degraded the further you got, that could be pretty cool. It'd definitely make grabbing - and keeping - a foothold across the world far more important. The question is how something like inland seas separating territory (like in Iberia/North Africa) would function.
|
|
#
?
Jul 9, 2019 02:31
|
|
|
An inland sea could function as owned territory for logistics as long as you have a coast on it probably? Unless it gets blockaded/enemy nations have naval superiority in it, or you need to have x number of ships active in it. That's super simplified but you don't really need to model it more than that probably.
|
|
#
?
Jul 9, 2019 11:52
|
|
|
Sampatrick posted:Dev does passively increase and is more like to increase in larger states.
|
|
#
?
Jul 10, 2019 18:10
|
|
|
AAAAA! Real Muenster posted:Is this a new feature in EU4? I havent played the game in a long while and other than very few random events I never noticed Dev passively increasing (via event or otherwise) to nearly the degree that it should to even remotely sorta follow historical growth. Noo he's just talking about the random events.
|
|
#
?
Jul 10, 2019 20:50
|
|
|
AAAAA! Real Muenster posted:Is this a new feature in EU4? I havent played the game in a long while and other than very few random events I never noticed Dev passively increasing (via event or otherwise) to nearly the degree that it should to even remotely sorta follow historical growth. One of the new DLCs also lets you send a colonist to your provinces to have a pretty decent yearly chance at increasing one of their dev scores. Doesn’t work really for big provinces but they can develop backwater hamlets decentlyish I think.
|
|
#
?
Jul 11, 2019 00:46
|
|
|
Nothingtoseehere posted:Noo he's just talking about the random events. Anno posted:One of the new DLCs also lets you send a colonist to your provinces to have a pretty decent yearly chance at increasing one of their dev scores. Doesn’t work really for big provinces but they can develop backwater hamlets decentlyish I think.
|
|
#
?
Jul 11, 2019 14:45
|
|
|
AAAAA! Real Muenster posted:Yeaahhh those do not mimic historical growth across the world, at all. A system would not either to be honest, emphasis on "mimic historical". In Vic2 you can get a huge population of Jews in China and that's more out of a limitation in the system than simulation. (Any pops smaller than 100 gets forced up to be 100) Groogy fucked around with this message at 15:43 on Jul 11, 2019 |
|
#
?
Jul 11, 2019 15:38
|
|
|
why are you so mad that we like one of the games your company made, groogy
|
|
#
?
Jul 11, 2019 15:44
|
|
|
Groogy posted:A system would not either to be honest, emphasis on "mimic historical". In Vic2 you can get a huge population of Jews in China and that's more out of a limitation in the system than simulation. (Any pops smaller than 100 gets forced up to be 100) AAAAA! Real Muenster fucked around with this message at 15:49 on Jul 11, 2019 |
|
#
?
Jul 11, 2019 15:47
|
|
|
Stairmaster posted:why are you so mad that we like one of the games your company made, groogy That was just the best example I could come up with. AAAAA! Real Muenster posted:Oh absolutely. The discussion was about how Dev doesnt do that, but Sampatrick was saying that "dev does grow naturally, especially in larger states (without the player or AI 'manually' increasing it)", which is wrong. I dont really have a horse in the race though so it doesnt matter to me. Ah no dev doesn't do that no
|
|
#
?
Jul 11, 2019 15:51
|
|
|
AAAAA! Real Muenster posted:Oh absolutely. The discussion was about how Dev doesnt do that, but Sampatrick was saying that "dev does grow naturally, especially in larger states (without the player or AI 'manually' increasing it)", which is wrong. I dont really have a horse in the race though so it doesnt matter to me. I mean, I wasn't saying that it mimics growth over the course of history, I was just saying that dev definitely does increase over time without any input from the player.
|
|
#
?
Jul 11, 2019 16:44
|
|
|
Sampatrick posted:I mean, I wasn't saying that it mimics growth over the course of history Sampatrick posted:I was just saying that dev definitely does increase over time without any input from the player.
|
|
#
?
Jul 11, 2019 16:49
|
|
|
AAAAA! Real Muenster posted:Fair enough. I was talking about the events, yes. It doesn't model huge amounts of economic growth, but it definitely does result in dev being noticeably higher at the end of the game versus at the start of the game.
|
|
#
?
Jul 11, 2019 16:55
|
|
|
Sampatrick posted:I was talking about the events, yes. It doesn't model huge amounts of economic growth, but it definitely does result in dev being noticeably higher at the end of the game versus at the start of the game.
|
|
#
?
Jul 11, 2019 16:56
|
|
|
There's a couple of other things, I think some parliament debates can give development when they conclude. But yeah for the most part you just sort of have to assume that the same development in 1444 and in 1821 mean different things. Which is the exact opposite of how Victoria handles things, but doing it the other way is basically what MEIOU & Taxes does so we know what that sort of system looks like already, and we have it if we really want it.
|
|
#
?
Jul 11, 2019 17:59
|
|
|
Farecoal posted:I'd prefer V3 being kept more simulationist, you guys already have all the other series Same. subprime mortgage crisis posted:Did you just ignore all of the bugs I just brought up in the economy? I have more if you want. I can make all the money disappear in the world. Moridin920 fucked around with this message at 18:18 on Jul 11, 2019 |
|
#
?
Jul 11, 2019 18:08
|
|
|
Groogy posted:That was just the best example I could come up with. But why you mad
|
|
#
?
Jul 11, 2019 19:00
|
|
|
I find it kind of funny how horribly suited Russia is for having a planned economy in the game. The micromanagement is traumatizing. e: by comparison, taking control over every single aspect of the economy worked remarkably well when forming Yugoslavia...
|
|
#
?
Jul 11, 2019 19:17
|
|
|
AAAAA! Real Muenster posted:Gotchya, thank you. I was thinking of playing the other day but then I remembered that they are working on a huge change to the game so I'll wait, but I'll have to keep an eye out for those events when I play. You'll be waiting a while since these changes aren't coming until next year.
|
|
#
?
Jul 11, 2019 20:22
|
|
|
Dr. Video Games 0031 posted:You'll be waiting a while since these changes aren't coming until next year. edit: and please no one explain Innovativeness to me, I read the EU4 thread and understand the mechanic, its just such a joke to me that I cannot take it seriously. edit2: I would like to see Paradox give the same treatment to Stellaris. I like the new DLC but the game just has so many layers of complexity; the DLC/expansions have added great quality to the game but there is a ton of jank that they need to resolve. AAAAA! Real Muenster fucked around with this message at 20:29 on Jul 11, 2019 |
|
#
?
Jul 11, 2019 20:26
|
|
|
Stairmaster posted:But why you mad What? Did I come across as mad? I've just been giving random quirks most people might not know about V2.
|
|
#
?
Jul 11, 2019 21:06
|
|
|
Why is innovativeness such a meme? Is it just the dumb name? I’ve only just recently started playing the game but I actually find it a satisfying mechanic because it just kinda slowly grows over the course of the game and gives some nice benefits. But I also really like seeing small decimals slowly increment.
|
|
#
?
Jul 11, 2019 21:15
|
|
|
Anno posted:Why is innovativeness such a meme? Is it just the dumb name? I’ve only just recently started playing the game but I actually find it a satisfying mechanic because it just kinda slowly grows over the course of the game and gives some nice benefits. But I also really like seeing small decimals slowly increment. It's a dumb name and the benefits are so incredibly small it's barely worth paying attention to
|
|
#
?
Jul 11, 2019 21:36
|
|
|
Kaza42 posted:It's a dumb name and the benefits are so incredibly small it's barely worth paying attention to It's also extremely RNG dependant and difficult to figure out when and if it's actually worth it. It's basically flavor text.
|
|
#
?
Jul 11, 2019 22:52
|
|
|
Sampatrick posted:It's also extremely RNG dependant and difficult to figure out when and if it's actually worth it. It's basically flavor text. Yeah I don’t think I’ve ever made a decision to try to obtain it but I get some satisfaction every time I pay for some power and see it saving me a couple.
|
|
#
?
Jul 11, 2019 23:11
|
|
|
I think it's worth it only if you're playing Britain, it seems to be designed for them. Just a reinforcing cycle to develop the isles into 'richer than China' by 1650.
|
|
#
?
Jul 11, 2019 23:21
|
|
Yes, it's like a lava lamp.
|
Innovativeness is super strong if you play to the end game and make an effort in maxing your gains. Most games don't go past the 1600s, so it doesn't have that much of an impact in most games.
Cynic Jester fucked around with this message at 00:51 on Jul 12, 2019 |
|
#
?
Jul 12, 2019 00:48
|
|
|
Groogy posted:What? Did I come across as mad? I've just been giving random quirks most people might not know about V2. Please share more bugs
|
|
#
?
Jul 12, 2019 01:05
|
|
|
VostokProgram posted:Please share more bugs Yes, please! It's fun!
|
|
#
?
Jul 12, 2019 02:08
|
|
|
hes so loving mad
|
|
#
?
Jul 12, 2019 03:16
|
|
|
Cynic Jester posted:Innovativeness is super strong if you play to the end game and make an effort in maxing your gains. Most games don't go past the 1600s, so it doesn't have that much of an impact in most games. It's not really that strong though because of the opportunity cost. It's much more powerful to take a bunch of dev in 1500 than to get a bit of innovativeness. By the late game, you're likely already unstoppable anyway.
|
|
#
?
Jul 12, 2019 03:29
|
|
|
VostokProgram posted:Please share more bugs Every pop in the game tracks some basic demographic information like culture and religion. Religion does next to nothing. Every party in the game has a religious policy, but how this influences voting is a mystery. Morrow fucked around with this message at 03:43 on Jul 12, 2019 |
|
#
?
Jul 12, 2019 03:39
|
|
|
AnoHito posted:It's not really that strong though because of the opportunity cost. It's much more powerful to take a bunch of dev in 1500 than to get a bit of innovativeness. By the late game, you're likely already unstoppable anyway. Sure, but that dev in the late game does nothing as compared to the amount you conquered, it is a pittance. If you don't need the dev to steamroll your way to otto-tier(and you usually don't unless you start as an OPM without similar size targets), paying extra for innovativeness is correct. Unless you won't make it to the point at which it becomes useful, because the last two hundred years of EU4 single player tends to feel like a victory lap and ain't nobody got time for that when there's other nations to play as.
|
|
#
?
Jul 12, 2019 08:18
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 9, 2024 17:50 |
|
|
Is forming Bharat one of the exceptions to the whole "you've achieved all your goals before the end of the 1600s" thing in EU4, or am I just being slow? I started as a Nepalese princedom and by the 1690s I only own the big top half of India, I've still got to betray my ally who owns all of Deccan and eat them. I kept on running into the state limit and just focused on assembling some big marches instead of doing more conquering, was this the wrong choice?
|
|
#
?
Jul 12, 2019 10:04
|
|
