|
The mod definitely peaked at the same time EU3 did: In Nomine / MMP2.
|
#
?
Mar 14, 2020 23:29
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 9, 2024 18:56 |
|
|
The pirates were really annoying but I guess I mostly used to play land powers and ignore everything to do with the sea entirely
|
|
#
?
Mar 14, 2020 23:41
|
|
|
Edgar Allen Ho posted:I remember the mod starting out fun and then increasingly becoming a mess. I mean that's on brand for a paradox game
|
|
#
?
Mar 15, 2020 05:25
|
|
|
RabidWeasel posted:Wasn't there more to that story and his family were actually trying to get him declared insane because of some kind of inheritance? I'm sure I remember this from when it first came up years ago but I'm damned if I'm going to try and find anything to corroborate that now. RabidWeasel posted:The pirates were really annoying but I guess I mostly used to play land powers and ignore everything to do with the sea entirely I still ended up modding them out of the mod/tuning them way down though, IIRC, no reason to have to suffer through those when you can get the good parts without the bad.
|
|
#
?
Mar 15, 2020 07:22
|
|
|
As far as I remember both mod and later game were very much about simulating stuff. Not about strategic decisions or variety of gameplay but about details. E.g. in the game battles were described by what generals do in text. From what I understand the system was simpler than CK2 but CK2 tells you a story of a battle through icons and in MM the game it was just a wall of text about one army encircling the other.
|
|
#
?
Mar 15, 2020 08:33
|
|
|
That sounds like the sort of thing that would be very fun for the person programming it, but not so fun to actually play.
|
|
#
?
Mar 15, 2020 08:48
|
|
|
Didn't March of Eagles have a text description of all battles too?
|
|
#
?
Mar 15, 2020 11:05
|
|
|
Edgar Allen Ho posted:I remember the mod starting out fun and then increasingly becoming a mess. The mod was a loving godsend in a time where vanilla EU3 sucked tremendously.
|
|
#
?
Mar 15, 2020 12:15
|
|
|
Was there not a goon modmod of Magna Mundi? Fun2MM? Anyone got an archive of that?
|
|
#
?
Mar 15, 2020 13:18
|
|
|
KOGAHAZAN!! posted:Was there not a goon modmod of Magna Mundi? Fun2MM? Yeah, but IIRC it was made by the one goon modder who turned out to be a Nazi. 
|
|
#
?
Mar 15, 2020 20:32
|
|
|
  Well it's about time. Beamed posted:Yeah, but IIRC it was made by the one goon modder who turned out to be a Nazi. 
|
|
#
?
Mar 16, 2020 11:16
|
|
|
Beamed posted:Yeah, but IIRC it was made by the one goon modder who turned out to be a Nazi. KOGAHAZAN!! posted:
Aside from that, pops also means the player can properly do the whole Victoria thing of trying to grow strong internally. A Buttery Pastry fucked around with this message at 12:18 on Mar 16, 2020 |
|
#
?
Mar 16, 2020 12:00
|
|
|
KOGAHAZAN!! posted:
I'm curious how will it work. To be honest I don't quite understand what POPs do in I:R itself. With Victoria 2 you have a period of great social changes and migration. If I:R was about the Imperial period I'd understand the focus on holding on to urban economy in the wake of the great migration and economy simplification. Same with EU timeline: the world is mostly rural and stays that way by the end of the timeline, and it only starts to change late in the period. You get the raise of burgers but it's not like they were a significant portion of the population. I think some faction/estate system is what you need to represent processes of the timeline.
|
|
#
?
Mar 16, 2020 12:08
|
|
|
ilitarist posted:I'm curious how will it work. On top of these faction/estate-aligned uses, there is also culture and religion, where pops can help make the system less binary and create interesting dynamics around for example the wars of religion in Europe.
|
|
#
?
Mar 16, 2020 13:02
|
|
|
You describe very different processes and, as you've said, they are all uneven. In Vic2 the whole world goes from laborers and farmers and aristocrats to workers and clerks and capitalists. Some countries have to deal with slaves, some countries have national minorities but everyone has to deal with progress as well as migrations and nationalism. Of course, Netherlands have a significant urban population but you can almost make it a special mechanic for certain states like mayb Italian cities. You have regional problems like steppes that you can't really integrate till people switch from nomads to settled people, but again it's a regional problem - even in America where it's superficially similar you wouldn't portray that situation in the same way. It's true that religion/culture switches would become more interesting, no doubt about it. But adding POPs just for that feels very superficial. I can maybe see it with a classless system but then again why do you need POPs, just make the province 80% Catholic 20% Muslim and 60% Serbian 40% Bosnian or something. And if you add classes then you need special ones for every region.
|
|
#
?
Mar 16, 2020 13:17
|
|
|
ilitarist posted:I'm curious how will it work. The context of this is a discussion of a potential rebalance of the "expel minorities" mechanic in EU4. People were mad that it was useful, so they're making it useless (I abridge only slightly). So the conversation goes like "The game can't really handle minorities properly because provinces are culturally and religiously monolithic" -> "We need pops to do minorities effectively" -> "EU5  have pops"Johan also says quote:I wrote a design to change development into pops to simulate minorities. It was way too big for an EU expansion when it comes to scope, so we decided to not do it. So the motivation here is clearly representation of sub-provincial minorities. And I agree with Butters: divergent population growth rates are significant, urbanisation is significant, idiosyncratic social structures and land use patterns organically producing unique play experiences for different countries could be really interesting... but we'll see that last one when pigs fly and capitalists willingly give themselves to the guillotine, I think.
|
|
#
?
Mar 16, 2020 13:34
|
|
|
KOGAHAZAN!! posted:The context of this is a discussion of a potential rebalance of the "expel minorities" mechanic in EU4. People were mad that it was useful, so they're making it useless (I abridge only slightly). Lol. Are the Paradox forums the reason we can't have good things? Can we nuke them from orbit?
|
|
#
?
Mar 16, 2020 14:02
|
|
|
In seriousness, it's maybe too easy to monoculture your empire with it. But I have no idea why I'd want to use the proposed new version. You ship your development off to the colonies? No thanks?
|
|
#
?
Mar 16, 2020 14:12
|
|
|
KOGAHAZAN!! posted:In seriousness, it's maybe too easy to monoculture your empire with it. But I have no idea why I'd want to use the proposed new version. You ship your development off to the colonies? No thanks? Yeah, with the proposed change it would be like : - reduce your own dev - give more dev to a colonial nation that could potentially rebel and gain independence, without having the benefit of reducing their Liberty Desire - keep wrong culture/religion in your province (which.. kinda goes against the point of expelling minorities?) - still give wrong culture/religion to the colonial nation (unless you form the CN by expelling minorities giving it all that culture/religion which is of course even worse) - still keep your colonist locked for the duration - still cost you the same amount of money unless you invest in the mechanic (ideas or whatever) - the only advantage would be the quicker colonization, which is good but not THAT good I would almost never do all that, so ... uh... well it's a way to basically "remove" a paid DLC feature without actually removing it! While we're at it, why don't we remove the Russian streltsy or make it so using it is measurably worse than just recruiting normal regiments? It's too easy to have a big army of streltsy as Russia!
|
|
#
?
Mar 16, 2020 14:19
|
|
|
The changes are bad but "expel minorities" is also dumb as poo poo in an ostensibly historical strategy game. It just shouldn't have been added. Mexico is not full of sunni berbers and sephardic jews and never was. The US and Australia didn't become irish and Ireland didn't become english and protestant even though Ireland in 2020 still hasn't recovered to its pre-famine, pre-mass emigration population. Occitain is not thriving in Montréal.
|
|
#
?
Mar 16, 2020 14:34
|
|
|
The expel minorities feature as it currently exists is ridiculous and I'm glad they're neutering it. And honestly, the changes make sense. Expelling a few minorities from a province shouldn't result in wholesale conversion of the province. Maybe expelling should give the province a modifier that makes it easier to convert later on.
|
|
#
?
Mar 16, 2020 14:41
|
|
|
Edgar Allen Ho posted:The changes are bad but "expel minorities" is also dumb as poo poo in an ostensibly historical strategy game. It just shouldn't have been added. Mexico is not full of sunni berbers and sephardic jews and never was. The US and Australia didn't become irish and Ireland didn't become english and protestant even though Ireland in 2020 still hasn't recovered to its pre-famine, pre-mass emigration population. Occitain is not thriving in Montréal. That's fair but I'm still left with the question of why I would ever want to use this new version.
|
|
#
?
Mar 16, 2020 14:50
|
|
|
Weebus posted:The expel minorities feature as it currently exists is ridiculous and I'm glad they're neutering it. And honestly, the changes make sense. Expelling a few minorities from a province shouldn't result in wholesale conversion of the province. Maybe expelling should give the province a modifier that makes it easier to convert later on. This way no one will ever use it. What's the point of even having it then?
|
|
#
?
Mar 16, 2020 14:53
|
|
|
TorakFade posted:This way no one will ever use it. What's the point of even having it then? remove it because it's dumb, or make it an edict where you gain unrest for boost to colony growth or something.
|
|
#
?
Mar 16, 2020 15:01
|
|
|
TorakFade posted:This way no one will ever use it. What's the point of even having it then? You still get faster colonization which is a pretty big deal and it no longer costs mana. Sure it won't be as broken anymore but I don't think it's as bad as people are making it out to be. And most importantly we still don't know about all the changes that are going to take place. Maybe it's going to be buffed in other ways. My point is that the feature as it currently exists is Bad and I'll be happy with almost any changes made to it (best case scenario being the feature getting scrapped altogether). e: someone on the pdx forums suggested disabling it for the ai and that seems like a good compromise. I'm mainly salty about spain and portugal deporting the entire muslim population of north africa to the americas in every single game. Weebus fucked around with this message at 15:17 on Mar 16, 2020 |
|
#
?
Mar 16, 2020 15:11
|
|
|
Edgar Allen Ho posted:remove it because it's dumb, or make it an edict where you gain unrest for boost to colony growth or something. Well they can't really remove it, having advertised it as a paid DLC feature, and a recent one at that. People would - rightly, for once - be up in arms about it since it was a selling point that you'd be able to get a new mechanic to improve the colonization game. Replacing it with an edict would be better, but then it's still not a new mechanic but latching on a previous one, and people have paid for that new mechanic. Once again showing how this DLC model is far from perfect... The game is also about abstraction, of course "expelling minorities" doesn't mean in real life that Mexico get filled with Sunnis or that every single Sunni gets kicked out of Spain, but rather means that the most vocal/pissy minorities are chased out of the country to the CN where they can't do much damage, and the rest "fall in line" which is represented in game by "the province now follows True Faith/have accepted culture" I'm almost willing to bet that those complaining about this are the same people that complain about having "mana" to do actions  e: Weebus posted:You still get faster colonization which is a pretty big deal and it no longer costs mana. Sure it won't be as broken anymore but I don't think it's as bad as people are making it out to be. And most importantly we still don't know about all the changes that are going to take place. Maybe it's going to be buffed in other ways. My point is that the feature as it currently exists is Bad and I'll be happy with almost any changes made to it (best case scenario being the feature getting scrapped altogether). Hmm I don't think so, honestly. Faster colonization is a big deal in the beginning to lock down territory for your first CNs, which is better done by moving up your colonists to new provinces and leaving some provinces without one (and you can't do that with expel minorities since it locks the colonist), also if you turboexpel minorities at the start your CN will be sunni/moroccan (or whatever) as main religion/culture and that's not good. Expel minorities, in most of my games, is used later on when you start getting heretics in your country, and you'll expel one minority to one CN, another to another one ... at least it's how I always used it. BTW you can also literally make the entire muslim population of north africa disappear through "culture / religious conversion", that's totally fine for some reason? TorakFade fucked around with this message at 15:25 on Mar 16, 2020 |
|
#
?
Mar 16, 2020 15:19
|
|
|
TorakFade posted:
No that's also extremely dumb and my ideal EU5 wouldn't have Portugal and Castile steamrolling Africa as an afterthought. It also wouldn't have Castile steamrolling Portugal as an afterthought, but that all goes back to pops and internal management
|
|
#
?
Mar 16, 2020 15:26
|
|
|
TorakFade posted:Hmm I don't think so, honestly. Faster colonization is a big deal in the beginning to lock down territory for your first CNs, which is better done by moving up your colonists to new provinces and leaving some provinces without one (and you can't do that with expel minorities since it locks the colonist), also if you turboexpel minorities at the start your CN will be sunni/moroccan (or whatever) as main religion/culture and that's not good. But that's what the AI does. Hence, you get sunni moroccan brazil and welsh canada. TorakFade posted:BTW you can also literally make the entire muslim population of north africa disappear through "culture / religious conversion", that's totally fine for some reason? Not really happy about that either, but converting the local populace by the sword or whatever is different from shipping them all across the atlantic and replacing them with catholic spaniards who magically pop out of the ground.
|
|
#
?
Mar 16, 2020 15:42
|
|
|
ilitarist posted:You describe very different processes and, as you've said, they are all uneven. In Vic2 the whole world goes from laborers and farmers and aristocrats to workers and clerks and capitalists. Some countries have to deal with slaves, some countries have national minorities but everyone has to deal with progress as well as migrations and nationalism. Of course, Netherlands have a significant urban population but you can almost make it a special mechanic for certain states like mayb Italian cities. You have regional problems like steppes that you can't really integrate till people switch from nomads to settled people, but again it's a regional problem - even in America where it's superficially similar you wouldn't portray that situation in the same way. ilitarist posted:It's true that religion/culture switches would become more interesting, no doubt about it. But adding POPs just for that feels very superficial. I can maybe see it with a classless system but then again why do you need POPs, just make the province 80% Catholic 20% Muslim and 60% Serbian 40% Bosnian or something. ilitarist posted:And if you add classes then you need special ones for every region. KOGAHAZAN!! posted:And I agree with Butters: divergent population growth rates are significant, urbanisation is significant, idiosyncratic social structures and land use patterns organically producing unique play experiences for different countries could be really interesting... but we'll see that last one when pigs fly and capitalists willingly give themselves to the guillotine, I think.
|
|
#
?
Mar 16, 2020 17:03
|
|
|
expel minorities sucks because except for australia it was never a thing however colonized provinces having a chance of rolling any of the religion/culture combos in your empire would be interesting. obviously make the dominant culture/religion the most likely by a lot, but spontaneous minority provinces (that maybe give a conversion event in a homeland province?) would be cool.
|
|
#
?
Mar 16, 2020 17:31
|
|
|
Expel minorities is awesome, Castile used it in my current Dauphine game and created Sunni Brazil. What else would you ever use it for?
|
|
#
?
Mar 16, 2020 17:47
|
|
|
it's a grand strategy series focused on conquest all the nuances you want to see aren't going to happen as they feel bad for that kind of objective
|
|
#
?
Mar 16, 2020 19:40
|
|
|
A Buttery Pastry posted:Any state that takes control of provinces with nomads will have to deal with that, whether it's China, Russia, Persia, or someone else entirely. Likewise, urbanization as a thing the player can pursue would give the player greater ability to mold the nation as they see fit, which seems like something that's popular among at least a significant segment of the player base. Like, why not allow a successful Hansa player to create their little Netherlands knockoff, where they can actually tell that their provinces aren't just a bunch of farmland like the rest of Germany? But that's already like that with, say, Cossacks which are not tied to a land, they're tied to provinces and culture. And urbanization cries for province modifier, not to be represented through POPs. In any case, I don't see anything like that system giving you interesting choices, being somewhat based in history and is as simple as I:R at the same time. Culture and religion for POPs seems to be more needed than in Rome, but then you'll basically have a fusion of development with granular culture/religion for an easier comprehension instead of percentages. I don't see it representing social changes of the period or specifics of population in different countries. Not more complex than Civilization.
|
|
#
?
Mar 16, 2020 20:52
|
|
|
Jazerus posted:expel minorities sucks because except for australia it was never a thing i mean, it kinda fits the expulsion of the huguenots and puritans?
|
|
#
?
Mar 16, 2020 21:52
|
|
|
oscarthewilde posted:i mean, it kinda fits the expulsion of the huguenots and puritans? and that's why there were fiercely huguenot and occitain communites in Québec, New Orleans, and the caribbean in the late 18th century
|
|
#
?
Mar 16, 2020 22:01
|
|
|
ilitarist posted:But that's already like that with, say, Cossacks which are not tied to a land, they're tied to provinces and culture. And urbanization cries for province modifier, not to be represented through POPs. ilitarist posted:In any case, I don't see anything like that system giving you interesting choices, being somewhat based in history and is as simple as I:R at the same time. Culture and religion for POPs seems to be more needed than in Rome, but then you'll basically have a fusion of development with granular culture/religion for an easier comprehension instead of percentages. I don't see it representing social changes of the period or specifics of population in different countries. Not more complex than Civilization. Edgar Allen Ho posted:and that's why there were fiercely huguenot and occitain communites in Québec, New Orleans, and the caribbean in the late 18th century
|
|
#
?
Mar 16, 2020 23:06
|
|
|
You'd kinda want some kind of dynamic system where non-insular culture groups can steadily blend together into a new melting pot culture like they did in real life, but aesthetically it's unsatisfying if whatever peoples you settle into Canada eventually fuse into Canadians, no matter how incredibly different their composition was. Maybe they could build a weird, purely aesthetic, easily ignorable system where each culture has a bunch of attributes, like language, cultural heroes, popular foods, dominant religion (or even the relative importance of religion), or whatever else might define a culture, and the melting pot cultures would become fusions of all of those attributes with a few random mutations form nowhere as well. That could even be a "safer" way of giving players access to the perspective of people who are either trying to forge a united identity between wildly disparate groups or people who are reactionaries trying to maintain some kind of cultural purism in the face of outside influence, so they could spend their resources on campaigns to change things. It could even just be a pointless canvas for the player to craft whatever their absurd ideal was, like trying to make a language dominant from entirely outside your dominion or trying to force italians to give up their noodles in favor of rice. There's always the problem with these games that real people tended to piss away a lot of money and power on weird projects that would have no real purpose in a pure strategy game, but if you give the player some kind of extra level of engagement, you can fool them into playing around more. I think that's what a lot of the appeal of CK2 is. It's not just characters, it's giving them the same strategically meaningless sentimentality as a real ruler. And of course you could also make that into part of AI behavior to make them more "realistically" not optimal in a way that a player could understand and manipulate.
|
|
#
?
Mar 16, 2020 23:07
|
|
|
picked up Victoria 2 with all the bells and whistles (dlc) a few days ago and looking at setting things up for my increasingly likely quarantine I know HPM and HFM are the good mods that make the game good but which one should I install and why?
|
|
#
?
Mar 17, 2020 01:07
|
|
|
AnEdgelord posted:picked up Victoria 2 with all the bells and whistles (dlc) a few days ago and looking at setting things up for my increasingly likely quarantine HFM is based on HPM but eventually stopped updating, HPM gets (semi) regular updates. HFM is more railroaded than HPM but you can toggle some of the railroad-y aspects like the Scramble for Africa. HFM also has a cool map mod built into it. I prefer HPM overall, there is a bit more freedom to carve your own path. But keep in mind that both mods are much more based on history, and will have historical events that can make them both seem railroad-y because otherwise it would be impossible for things that happened in history to happen in the game engine naturally.
|
|
#
?
Mar 17, 2020 03:28
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 9, 2024 18:56 |
|
|
trapped mouse posted:HFM is based on HPM but eventually stopped updating, HPM gets (semi) regular updates. HFM is more railroaded than HPM but you can toggle some of the railroad-y aspects like the Scramble for Africa. HFM also has a cool map mod built into it. This is kind of Vicky 2 in general. It slightly predates Paradox's shift to more dynamic systems so while it has some elements that hint at them (like the crisis system), a lot of the game is just set up to force things to happen with nation-specific events and decisions. So the modders just kind of had to work within that framework since Victoria 2 doesn't really have a good way to simulate things more broadly.
|
|
#
?
Mar 17, 2020 03:37
|
|
