|
Cyrano4747 posted:Where is this button? 
|
#
?
Oct 16, 2019 16:22
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 28, 2024 13:26 |
|
|
Reminder, for this to not be grayed out, you must dismiss your general first.
|
|
#
?
Oct 16, 2019 16:24
|
|
|
*Hears tales of armies reducing unrest by being assigned to regions* Is it possible to learn this power?
|
|
#
?
Oct 16, 2019 16:25
|
|
|
... not from a general.
|
|
#
?
Oct 16, 2019 16:26
|
|
|
Dalael posted:Aggressive Expansion is just a number. Using client kings should be something you have to, as that's historical, so nice to see it working out if you're going for the world conquest. Also something that strikes me for being omitted from the game, especially if it wants to have any character focus at all, is the client system. You even have personal wealth modeled! While I don't think any other non Roman powers had anything similar, clientele should be an important part of managing the Republic drat it. 
|
|
#
?
Oct 16, 2019 18:13
|
|
|
Eimi posted:Using client kings should be something you have to, as that's historical, so nice to see it working out if you're going for the world conquest. On my first try, I avoided those at all costs and it was clear I wasn't going to envelop the mediterranean in time considering how much I had to wait for AE to go down. the 2nd run was going better until I ended up on Egypt's wrong side with its over 900 cohorts (Wtf was that about?!?) I'm on my 3rd try and.. yeah I don't think i'm gonna succeed this time either
|
|
#
?
Oct 16, 2019 18:17
|
|
|
Jazerus posted:
Yes I like this, thanks for articulating far better than I could.
|
|
#
?
Oct 16, 2019 22:48
|
|
|
Jazerus posted:
Yes I like this, thanks for articulating far better than I could.
|
|
#
?
Oct 16, 2019 22:48
|
|
|
Yeah Cicero makes the IR feel much more organic. To me that’s always been key in the paradox map games.
|
|
#
?
Oct 16, 2019 23:13
|
|
|
StarMinstrel posted:Yeah Cicero makes the IR feel much more organic. To me that’s always been key in the paradox map games. Oh for sure, in a big way. imo this is most apparent with cultural/religious conversion. I find myself actually considering how much I want to buy theatres/temples and whether to spend PP to make governors use conversion policies. Because if you do neither, it will take an absolute eternity to get people converted, especially if they are totally out of your culture group. It's nuanced and a whole lot better than "have mana? --> push button!"
|
|
#
?
Oct 16, 2019 23:19
|
|
|
Dunno if Johan still reads this thread after the initial thrashing, but he seems to be making, him and his team, great stride toward a decent product. I never had an opinion on the mana system, only that everything felt clunky/systemic/mechanical, and now it feels more that you’re painting a living world instead of painting a pool of pins to convert, if that makes sense. He definitely pulled my interest back and although not totally satisfied yet, I’m definite gonna be trying all future patches. Can’t wait till republics become a bit less nebulous in terms of following leaders. Right now I’m having the most fun with dictatorships/monarchies.
|
|
#
?
Oct 16, 2019 23:24
|
|
|
StarMinstrel posted:Dunno if Johan still reads this thread after the initial thrashing, but he seems to be making, him and his team, great stride toward a decent product. I never had an opinion on the mana system, only that everything felt clunky/systemic/mechanical, and now it feels more that you’re painting a living world instead of painting a pool of pins to convert, if that makes sense. He definitely pulled my interest back and although not totally satisfied yet, I’m definite gonna be trying all future patches. I have tried to turn my Rome in a dictature and failed. I just cant get 80% popularist support. 
|
|
#
?
Oct 16, 2019 23:27
|
|
|
Dalael posted:I have tried to turn my Rome in a dictature and failed. I just cant get 80% popularist support.  I've given up on the populists. Like three times I've tried tried to do it, and every time I just end up languishing in 75% hell, my handpicked dictator having inevitably having turned into an arthritic moron, and -33% PP stretching out to the horizon. Long live the Republic.
|
|
#
?
Oct 16, 2019 23:38
|
|
|
I managed it once somehow but every other time I hit that 75% wall too. It’s really frustrating putting so much effort and resources into trying to manipulate a number you have no direct control over and getting so close only to slide back to 50 or 60% over and over. I hope that gets tweaked at some point. They could just change the required populist support to 70 and you’d still have to put some effort in but it’d be actually reasonably doable
|
|
#
?
Oct 16, 2019 23:48
|
|
|
Jazerus posted:timers are important for immersion. i know some folks treat paradox games as abstract board games but to me, pressing a button and getting instant results feels like playing as a god, not a government. governments make decisions and then wait to see what happens while those decisions are slowly implemented at the ground level. I get that, but I still feel that it'd make more sense if there was a "wait to see what happens" part, if things could just go wrong and not work as intended (like it often happens in CK2, but the game is balanced around that while EU4 and Imperator clearly aren't) - we know exactly what will happen because the game is all about getting incremental modifiers to things, you know what those modifiers are and it's relatively easy to understand how to get the result you want, and there is no chance of failure. I guess I'm one of those that treat the games like board games (even though I still value some immersion, and I still love CK2 which doesn't feel like a board game at all) Again, on claims, in EU4 there's a point, a decision to be made: getting an extra claim or not? Do I take more time to get more claims and prepare for war, or do I pounce now while their allies are at war? Will someone else declare on them before me, robbing me of the chance to get those claimed lands for myself? In Imperator it just doesn't feel that way to me; I just want a claim to start a war, if I have a truce or am too high on AE and planning to conquer a few highly populated provinces I might want to get another one, but it's pretty rare since it takes a comparatively long time and the game is shorter than other Paradox games (277 years vs CK2's minimum of 387, and EU4's 376...) - 99% of the time I just want a casus belli. That waiting period just irritates me because there's no "choice" to be made, I want a claim, and I want it ASAP, there's no real risk or tradeoff involved in waiting two more years for a claim in my experience since the geopolitical situation remains very stable generally, it's just waiting because the game said so. It could be better if you had different way of getting casus belli... as far as I can tell, having a claim is the only one you ever get. This reminds me: I was pretty excited about stability being on a 0-100 dynamic scale tending to equilibrium at 50 over time, but in game it doesn't feel very good The button to push to raise stability is relatively expensive and really doesn't speed the rate of stability gain very much, and except for laws, successions, and random events (of those, only laws are a real big hit generally) there's not a lot of way to manipulate it. Yes you can sacrifice a lot of pigs for a lot of currency, getting 5 years of great stability growth... which will then decline very quickly to 50 anyway, because the higher it is, the faster it ticks down. I rarely have it under 40 (unless I'm changing laws) or over 60, even if I try to manipulate it but without completely neglecting the rest of my stuff, because the effort to get there is way more than what you'd gain. Right now I tried something: starting from a stability of 60 and 500PI, I spent literally all my influence in stabbing pigs, and got +1 ticking stability per month. After 5 years I'm at 80 stability, and now that the pigs expired I get a decay of 0.55 which will put me back where I was in about 4 years or so (maybe 5). If I wanted to keep it up, I can spend my 180 or so PI gained in those 5 years to reduce the decay to 0.15, meaning I get a couple more years of stability around 70 before the decay really kicks in (and 0 PI available, and no PI use at all for the past 5 years of course). How are you even supposed to get it to 100? Do nothing but stab pigs? Basically it feels like Estates in EU4, which is the worst part of that game for me. Game is still very good, mind, I'm just venting here. Plus, there's still many patches, DLC etc to go through so I'm willing to bet that it will all make much more sense later on. 
TorakFade fucked around with this message at 08:45 on Oct 17, 2019 |
|
#
?
Oct 17, 2019 08:20
|
|
|
About timers, immersion and again why many didn't like the switch from EU3 to EU4. Timers (and also gradual fill of some bars with resources a la EU3 technology progress or, in a sense, Civilization scientific progress) also give strategic depth do decisions. Many old school people despised EU3 for lack of this. When you decide you want a new tech, higher stability, lower autonomy etc you just get it instantly. You don't have to plan ahead. It also means that in theory attacking someone unstable and with bad military tech might be pointless cause they had enough MP to instantly get well. The right way to play is not to plan well what will you need in a few years but to know if you might need spare resources which is a much simpler decision. Pro-EU4 point of view is probably that the planning you lose is compensated with flexibility: it was a rare occasion when you would stray from a safe play of preparing for the worst, spending resources on all techs at the same time and so on. Curiously EU4 also has many more of those addictive bars to fill. In EU3 a lot of things you do had a chance of success: missionaries could theoretically convert any province in a year with a bit of luck, spies had a chance to generate a claim (or core), merchants had a chance to compete in a trade center. Nowadays you can only see stuff like that in colonizing, and even there it's just auxiliary. Also warfare, of course. Instead of a more chaotic, simulationist environment of EU3 (remember, diplomacy there was percentage-based, so you never knew if those guys who are Very Likely to defend you in an alliance will really do it) you got a strategic game where most of the things are deterministic. You will convert this province in 18 months, you'll have enough MP to get a new tech by this date and if you want this is because you've spent points elsewhere, you get espionage points and that specific rate and will have those claims at this specific date. Note that CK2 is still full of chance-based stuff even where Imperator does very similar things differently. Like in Imperator health is deterministic mechanic, in CK2 it constantly affects a dice roll checking whether your ruler dies. So many oldschool EU3 fans liked Paradox games as roleplaying simulations and didn't want to get a more complex version of Age of Empires or whatever. And of course many strategically-inclined people like decisions that have weight behind them and view points as the antithesis of that. Paradox didn't help also by calling them POINTS (it's often called POWER but it's not consistent, even wiki calls them monarch points quite often) as opposed to envoys they had previously.
|
|
#
?
Oct 17, 2019 10:09
|
|
|
Yeah I think going for what you describe for EU3 or a CK2 type way of doing those decisions would make them more interesting, and bring characters in more. They do a little bit, since your rulers stats influence how quick the claims complete, but they are 100% chance. As well I do not think they should be called claims, as in this period you weren't going around fabricating documents that said you totally should own this clay. Just call them justifications since you know it's a famous tactic of the Romans to claim they were attacked and thus this war is totally defensive and justified and we're just going to take all their land and make them slaves. You could roll in the randomness in some places as is fairly easily too. Like instead of omens being push this button every 5 years for x bonus, make it so when you click it, there's an event based on the skill of your current high priest, perhaps the omens are incredibly beneficial and you gain more than the listed bonus, or perhaps the drat chickens say it's not the time yet and you get less of the benefit.
|
|
#
?
Oct 17, 2019 18:20
|
|
|
But Johan is clearly more interested in strategy rather than simulation. So it seems now he allowed other people to bring indirectly controlled systems into the game. It's not just updated, it's transformed into something with a different philosophy. I think Stellaris had a transformation into an opposite direction - chaotic world became less chaotic with starlanes, but I don't know that game that well.
|
|
#
?
Oct 17, 2019 18:37
|
|
|
ilitarist posted:But Johan is clearly more interested in strategy rather than simulation. So it seems now he allowed other people to bring indirectly controlled systems into the game. It's not just updated, it's transformed into something with a different philosophy. I think Stellaris had a transformation into an opposite direction - chaotic world became less chaotic with starlanes, but I don't know that game that well. The transition to star lanes wasn't just more chaotic --> less chaotic. It was bad design --> good design. The release version of FTL systems was not only imbalanced, it was complete nonsense and unfun to play with. Meme Poker Party fucked around with this message at 22:12 on Oct 19, 2019 |
|
#
?
Oct 17, 2019 18:54
|
|
|
Chomp8645 posted:... not from a general. It sorta makes sense, they're being reassigned from the control of the general, to the province's governor.
|
|
#
?
Oct 19, 2019 19:04
|
|
|
https://steamcommunity.com/games/859580/announcements/detail/1580126850055048474 didn't see anyone post this yet
|
|
#
?
Oct 20, 2019 15:59
|
|
|
>Character Experience System: The more characters are asked to do, the better they become. Cultivate young talent as they climb the ranks, with new events for experienced statesmen. EUR and I:R was already better about it than CK2 but I always wondered in those games how can a teen - even if he's genius - do a better job as accountant or a general than your average guy with 30 years of experience. Today you can argue that older guys could have problems understanding what PDF means but back in BC times I can't imagine problems such as that. On the other hand, let's hope it doesn't turn into the extremely gamey system.
|
|
#
?
Oct 20, 2019 16:16
|
|
|
Pruning the families a bit sounds like a good Idea though since every time I opened the family screen I got overwhelmed by a bunch of meaningless nobodies and never opened it again.
|
|
#
?
Oct 20, 2019 16:18
|
|
|
Yeah, it was a very strange decision to make dozens of them. At the same time one of the incentives for conquering seems to be getting more families even know. Not sure how will it work, prominence will hit the reproduction system of lesser people even harder? Also they offer graphical improvements again. It seems that they've reworked their engine a lot cause in few months Imperator got more graphical upgrades than CK2 or EU4 ever did. Now they promise burning cities which we can all agree is good.
|
|
#
?
Oct 20, 2019 16:25
|
|
|
Never not crucify everyone.
|
|
#
?
Oct 20, 2019 16:47
|
|
|
ilitarist posted:Yeah, it was a very strange decision to make dozens of them. At the same time one of the incentives for conquering seems to be getting more families even know. Cyrano4747 posted:Never not crucify everyone. I think this is one of those things that changes a lot based on who you play as. I've mainly just done Rome so far, so maybe as a smaller tribal you really need more families as you start expanding. But for Rome the idea of ever wanting, much less needing more families is kind of laughable. You will have scorned families basically the entire run. Maybe if you have really have a good run and grab just astounding amounts of land you'd need more to people to manage it. Mainly you just headhunt for individuals with amazing stats, and the rest are left to God to sort out.
|
|
#
?
Oct 20, 2019 16:59
|
|
|
i dont even care, i have to burn this constant Aggressive Expansion. Roma Invicta!
|
|
#
?
Oct 20, 2019 17:05
|
|
|
AnEdgelord posted:https://steamcommunity.com/games/859580/announcements/detail/1580126850055048474 This all sounds v good, especially reworking families
|
|
#
?
Oct 20, 2019 17:23
|
|
|
Fewer families and characters that you have to invest into to get good results both sound extremely good. I'm not a huge CK2 fan (I liked when it was a medieval Europe themed strategy game and not a dynastic power fantasy RPG) but one of the things I did enjoy a lot was educating your children and going through various event chains which let you choose how to develop your characters.
|
|
#
?
Oct 20, 2019 17:29
|
|
|
RabidWeasel posted:(I liked when it was a medieval Europe themed strategy game and not a dynastic power fantasy RPG) Ignoring the supernatural and absurd events you can turn off for a second, was it ever anything other than a dynastic power fantasy?
|
|
#
?
Oct 20, 2019 17:46
|
|
|
INFERNO GRAPHICS. Works best with BLAST PROCESSING.
|
|
#
?
Oct 20, 2019 17:48
|
|
|
Top Hats Monthly posted:Ignoring the supernatural and absurd events you can turn off for a second, was it ever anything other than a dynastic power fantasy? Before the old gods I'd say yes. There just wasn't that much in the game which really played into the "make your ruler into a huge badass" side of things, it was just a strategy map game like EU4 but with a significant but not overwhelming focus on characters.
|
|
#
?
Oct 20, 2019 17:51
|
|
|
RabidWeasel posted:Before the old gods I'd say yes. There just wasn't that much in the game which really played into the "make your ruler into a huge badass" side of things, it was just a strategy map game like EU4 but with a significant but not overwhelming focus on characters. I don't really think that's true, even CK1 was always billed as "The Sims but in Medieval Times".
|
|
#
?
Oct 20, 2019 18:05
|
|
|
Beamed posted:I don't really think that's true, even CK1 was always billed as "The Sims but in Medieval Times". I refuse to believe anyone who actually played CK1 would call it this but people have weird opinions about things so it's possible.
|
|
#
?
Oct 20, 2019 18:52
|
|
|
I agree it wasn't really that, but it's how people talked about it - it was always considered more of an RPG (though this isn't really right either) than an EU4-esque game.
|
|
#
?
Oct 20, 2019 19:04
|
|
|
Devs didn't realize they'r selling medieval Sims even when they were doing CK2. That's why they've made it GSG with a GSG UI and made sure that at all times most of the screen is filled with either map or ledger. And shipped the game with 2 portrait packs. See older devidaries: https://ck2.paradoxwikis.com/Developer_diaries#Base_game They say it's a character driven game but there are 3 devdiaries on war but very few directly related to characters.
|
|
#
?
Oct 20, 2019 19:05
|
|
|
Finally got back to this instead of Stellaris since the big patch for that game is coming later this year, and got my Epirus game off to a great start by successfully choking Macedon out from the rest of Greece by taking their key mountain fort that allows passage to the peninsula. Also went on a rampage in their capital and two cities, and man, tall play is definitely viable when you're a bastard hauling slaves back to the homeland from wars.
|
|
#
?
Oct 20, 2019 20:54
|
|
|
Yeah, you can get some pretty ridiculous science going if you don't take land, but go in a lot of wars and take slaves by provincial occupation. But then you're not painting the map?
|
|
#
?
Oct 20, 2019 23:03
|
|
|
In my current Atropatene -> Media game, I've taken so many slaves from the Seleucids that I've had to spend thousands of ducats evacuating them from my capital and some provincial capitals to prevent starvation. I think that there should be a mechanism for food imports (maybe just from neighboring provinces) that doesn't require spending a trade route on 5 measly food, but it's a pretty cool problem to have. I guess the real lesson is to never put your capital in a province with mostly mountains and hills and few or no food producing resources, although in my case forming Media moved it there against my will.
|
|
#
?
Oct 21, 2019 00:01
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 28, 2024 13:26 |
|
|
OK, now that I'm getting back into the game, I assume the usual strategy for where to put your pops is dependent on terrain and goods, yes? Stuff like: - Establish cities on farmland for higher pop capacity, then concentrate on either freemen or slaves depending on whether the trade good is valuable. - Build the appropriate settlement upgrade on regions with good resources and funnel pops to them. And so on and so forth, yes? I feel like I already hosed up by turning Kassope into a city since it got an influx of slaves from my war with Macedon, but it has livestock and is a hills region and so might be better off as a food producer instead.
|
|
#
?
Oct 21, 2019 09:34
|
|