|
V2 doesn't have manually splitting pops that's V1
|
#
?
Oct 7, 2023 22:10
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 5, 2024 08:27 |
|
|
That's what they're saying. They're nostalgic for Ricky
|
|
#
?
Oct 7, 2023 22:11
|
|
|
CharlestheHammer posted:Being nostalgic for the mess that is Vicky 2 is really funny. I've been playing PDX games since 2006, I think, and I always enjoy people discovering that nowadays these are dumbed down games for casuals and mass market. The first time I remember this was with EU3 which switched to 3D and lost EU2's hundreds of historical events. For a while PDX published glorified mods based on 2D games for nostlagic gamers. For the Glory, Arsenal of Democracy and some other HoI2 mod. They planned to release Victoria 1 mod but it never came to be. Maybe they should do it again, start selling CK2+ or EU4 Classic.
|
|
#
?
Oct 7, 2023 23:24
|
|
|
Then they black bagged Ubik to a site in the forests of Lappland for making a better EU
Edgar Allen Ho fucked around with this message at 23:38 on Oct 7, 2023 |
|
#
?
Oct 7, 2023 23:36
|
|
|
Party In My Diapee posted:I am having so much more fun with CK2 and Victoria 2 which is really sad. It seems like some lead dev is trying to make their own spin on every sequel, instead of continuing with what people liked and changing the unpopular parts. actually a true victoriahead wants each entry in the series to be a completely different mad model/attempt. That being said, a v2 remastered would go hard
|
|
#
?
Oct 7, 2023 23:57
|
|
|
Party In My Diapee posted:Victoria 2 (modded, but that is what you have to compare with) has some major issues, but the important thing is that it attempts to place you in the period, has lots of flavour depending on which country you are, plausible outcomes, and you can have a major impact on the political side of things which is pretty major in a paradox game. Victoria 3 might as well be set in a generic fantasy world where anything can happen, and is primarily about the economy to the exclusion of everything else. Purely as a game Victoria 3 it might be objectively better, but i am too limited and everything is generic. A big part of paradox for me isn't the gameplay systems, but the historical atmosphere. New Paradox games feel "generic" because they generally focus on getting the basic systems right first, and then start adding flavor and country/culture-specific stuff in later updates. That goes back at least to CKII, where at launch all you could play was feudal Christians. It's not like EU4 launched with mission trees for basically every single country on the planet either, that was stuff that was added in bit by bit over a decade of updates and DLCs. That said, Vicky 3 already has plenty of country-by-country flavor in its politics.
|
|
#
?
Oct 8, 2023 00:06
|
|
|
Vizuyos posted:New Paradox games feel "generic" because they generally focus on getting the basic systems right first, and then start adding flavor and country/culture-specific stuff in later updates. That goes back at least to CKII, where at launch all you could play was feudal Christians. It's not like EU4 launched with mission trees for basically every single country on the planet either, that was stuff that was added in bit by bit over a decade of updates and DLCs. I mean the ck2 model was "attempt to get one subset of things right first", rather than true "genericism first."
|
|
#
?
Oct 8, 2023 00:08
|
|
|
Vizuyos posted:New Paradox games feel "generic" because they generally focus on getting the basic systems right first, and then start adding flavor and country/culture-specific stuff in later updates. That goes back at least to CKII, where at launch all you could play was feudal Christians. It's not like EU4 launched with mission trees for basically every single country on the planet either, that was stuff that was added in bit by bit over a decade of updates and DLCs. lmao
|
|
#
?
Oct 8, 2023 00:09
|
|
|
The names of some interest groups are changed and there’s a dlc for halfassed France so the country that had revolustiamas every year this period can be out of the way for the pops and politics game; and they failed at the cartoon revolution politics economy and imperialism country dlc? Forgive me but I am not impressed
|
|
#
?
Oct 8, 2023 00:39
|
|
|
nessin posted:You do realize Baldur's Gate 3 was first available for sale three years ago, right? That's a weird write up for someone making an argument for early access as a good thing but you couldn't mean it the other way around given BG3 was an early access product. Early access is ok. Paradox kicks like pre-EA quality games out the door then spends the next 5 years doing the standard early access stuff.
|
|
#
?
Oct 8, 2023 01:15
|
|
|
ilitarist posted:I like CK3 but it went too much into roleplaying side of things and I can't get into it. Lives are too short for me to remember the drat characters, and the long-term story of the developing realm seems undercooked in comparison, and I can't put the stories of my characters into a grand tapestry of my kingdom. I understand why they did it - every other empire building game gives you this development story, but the fact that all development caps 150 years before the end feels like negligence, and law transformation or country formations do not feel impactful. Like even in Imperator Rome you have tiered country formation and each of those do interesting things like boosting specific development types of your country. I agree with many of those points, but "lives are too short " seems the opposite of my experience: with some minimal caution and some basic perks, I find my characters live a lot longer in average than they did in Ck2. And with some legacies and getting the full health perk tree, you can have +80 characters every time if you want Vizuyos posted:New Paradox games feel "generic" because they generally focus on getting the basic systems right first, and then start adding flavor and country/culture-specific stuff in later updates. They are taking too much time to do that, imo Best Friends posted:Ck2 and ck3 are both rpgs with map components. Ck3 has vastly better graphics and UI but NPC aggression is effectively way lower both in court and on the map, it’s even easier to make an invincible army, and due to the dev cycle you see the same exact events over and over much more often. It’s just imo much less fun to play on several levels. I think thats a big factor indeed: they AI is too passive, a lot more than it was in CK2. Huge neighbours of enemy faiths that could easily crush you will mostly just leave you alone while you grow, vassals are too easy to please, and kinda hard to rebel. All the challenge in the game is usually gone after 2 or successful 3 rulers. And even in this beginning you dont have much to fear cause you are hardly going to be attacked from the outside, and you still barely have vassals to worry about. And than you get big, outside threats become 100% irrelevant and at the same time, you got too strong to be taken by your vassals too, no matter how many and how big they are I still think CK3 is an evolution from CK2, but I did got tired of it a lot sooner, and I do miss some CK2 systems than I thought were inferior at first. Like for example tech: at first I thought CK3 had a much improved system. In practice is terribly balanced (favoring small cultures too much and being too easy game) and you will always have researched all techs much before the time limit, which is boring. Also, when you think about it, is not even that different from CK2: for each era you have basically a new tech of each kind, and they kinda correspond to the CK2 technology bars. So its almost the same except in CK2 it was were more granular
|
|
#
?
Oct 8, 2023 13:43
|
|
|
Elias_Maluco posted:I agree with many of those points, but "lives are too short " seems the opposite of my experience: with some minimal caution and some basic perks, I find my characters live a lot longer in average than they did in Ck2. And with some legacies and getting the full health perk tree, you can have +80 characters every time if you want I must have not been clear about this: I don't want the people to live longer, I want their lives getting twice as much stuff in them. With the density of events (truces, sieges, building times, activity cooldowns etc) it's very rare that you get more than a couple meaningful interactions with the same character. They've even added some features like dynastic vendettas to compensate for this, I think. I also think CK3 had a great idea with adding flavor to every culture. But they don't feel significant enough to dictate the way you play. I wonder how would the game feel if you doyble all positive and negative effects from traits both personal and cultural ones (not the perks, these feel significant enough). It's like early in EU4 lifetime you had countries with unique national ideas or triggered modifiers and these felt cool because there weren't that many ways to get bonuses. Nowadays you have a lot of modifiers from government reforms, permanent bonuses from missions, great projects, special governments... National ideas modifiers get lost in the swarm of modifiers. Same with CK3 cultures and religions: it's cool that my culture gets 4 traits like -15% cost of building a temple barony, but I'd prefer 2 traits with one of them being -50% cost of building a temple. ilitarist fucked around with this message at 16:00 on Oct 8, 2023 |
|
#
?
Oct 8, 2023 15:49
|
|
|
Vizuyos posted:New Paradox games feel "generic" because they generally focus on getting the basic systems right first, and then start adding flavor and country/culture-specific stuff in later updates. That goes back at least to CKII, where at launch all you could play was feudal Christians. It's not like EU4 launched with mission trees for basically every single country on the planet either, that was stuff that was added in bit by bit over a decade of updates and DLCs. EU4 didn't launch with mission trees at all  EU5 when Paradox, EU5 when
|
|
#
?
Oct 8, 2023 17:29
|
|
Yes, it's like a lava lamp.
|
PittTheElder posted:EU4 didn't launch with mission trees at all It did have national ideas... but hardly for every country, either.
|
|
#
?
Oct 8, 2023 18:14
|
|
|
EU4 in its current state feels like what you'd get from a complete game running like three or four content mods at the same time that each adds its own submechanic tospice the gameplay up but ends up feeling a little vestigial to the core gameplay. Army professionalism feels like that, monuments feel like that. I don't hate it but it's not for everyone and it feels like it's dilluted the core gameplay experience somewhat. I played about half of a campaign of it back in the summer and it felt like, oh I forgot that army drilling is a thing so now I'm competing with a noticeably worse military than everyone else because I'm like 30 professionalism behind the average (on top of playing in Africa and suffering having worse units than European competitors fundamentally). I would like to see EU4 receive an end-of-life rework that bundles up most of the DLC in it or adjusts their pricing to compensate for superfluous mechanics getting axed or adjusted in order to close off the game in a solid state, but that is probably asking for a lot.
|
|
#
?
Oct 8, 2023 18:27
|
|
|
I agree even though I still think EU4 is the best empire building game. I like great projects but a lot, a lot of this game is overlapping or repeating mechanics. Unique government mechanics, estates and government reforms are regularly doing the same things. If the game was designed from the ground up they'd probably remove national ideas and instead make these permanent bonuses from mission trees more systemic (right now to remember if you have some permanent modifier you must scroll through the list of modifiers). It's also telling that while Imperator Rome ended up being a good game even it became slightly bloated. Dieties basically became national ideas but with an interesting twist, military traditions also became interesting - yet old boring national ideas still remained and took up prominent place in diplomacy screen even when their influence was minimal compared to military traditions, dieties and inventions.
|
|
#
?
Oct 8, 2023 18:39
|
|
|
PittTheElder posted:EU4 didn't launch with mission trees at all EU5 and it's literally Imperator at its murder date, I preorder
|
|
#
?
Oct 8, 2023 18:48
|
|
|
It's disappointing to hear that CK3 is still kinda dull and has issues with not being challenging enough, but I do remember CK2 at release was a lot less interesting. Conclave dramatically increased the complexity of maintaining a realm, Reaper's Due made things extremely deadly. There's plenty of room for CK3 to mix things up with future expansions, but that could take a while. Anyway, I'd sure like advice for dealing with the council, because not being able to appoint loyalists seems like a pretty big bug that would make things unplayable over time.
|
|
#
?
Oct 8, 2023 18:52
|
|
|
I haven't launched CK2 for a while but IIRC conclave doesn't make your life harder as much as it makes expansion harder. Also I loathe Reapers Due because it shows PDX DLCs of the era at their worst: they felt the need to add something important with every DLC, and it made epidemics and disabilities too prominent. It might have been historical and balanced in the gameplay sense, but it was unbalanced in terms of narrative: too many of events in life of your characters was spent on dealing with sickness. And later with societies update the same happened, and as a result it felt like your character's time is only spent on getting their leg sawed off and visiting a reading club with absurd bonuses.
|
|
#
?
Oct 8, 2023 19:58
|
|
|
First post: I really need more events! Second post: nooooo not those kind of events!
|
|
#
?
Oct 8, 2023 20:10
|
|
|
Drone posted:First post: I really need more events! I'll spell it out more clearly: these big expansions made it so that specific themes are much more prominent than the others. It's fine to have all kinds of events about sickness or societies, but they haven't ever added events about other sides of life and so the balance was off. Unless you set the stewardship bonus in CK2 you're unlikely to see any event concerning the actual governing of the kingdom. CK3 is much better in that regard cause the expansions are better thought-out and well-rounded, but the density of events combined with many of them being mundane and low impact feels too low to me.
|
|
#
?
Oct 8, 2023 23:17
|
|
|
Elias_Maluco posted:They are taking too much time to do that, imo Oh yeah, definitely It's forgivable for Vicky 3 because hey, it's a new Vicky game But we're now three years into CK3's life. Three years into CK2's life, the following DLCs had already been released:
Compared to that, CK3's DLC list is pretty sparse.
|
|
#
?
Oct 9, 2023 00:44
|
|
|
It's tricky because Paradox took a shitload of (imo pretty unfair) flack for being the company that piled on stupid amounts of DLC to their games, so clearly they've been trying to go for a quality over quantity thing lately. 3 has a lot less than 2 did, but what it has is mostly considerably deeper. But then I think shallower content that covers a lot of variety is... this is kind of dumb, but psychologically fulfilling? I can buy the Indian DLC and even if 90% of my games are as countess in Hesse, I feel like "wow there's so much more I could be doing in this game" that makes it all feel richer and deeper than it is. Just like how games back in the 1990s are actually often mechanically surprisingly shallow, but guides being so much less thorough made them all feel so much more complex than they were. I think some of the choices for DLC topics (still think Royal Court, while apparently being pretty good, was a huge mistake to start on) definitely don't help, but part of the issue is kind of out of Paradox's hands. I bought the super-edition on launch that came with the first few DLCs bundled but I still haven't gone back (despite liking what I played) because it still feels like they haven't touched half the map.
|
|
#
?
Oct 9, 2023 01:18
|
|
|
Vizuyos posted:Oh yeah, definitely In fairness, CK2 didn't also release on the same year that a giant pandemic was happening. Which isn't to say CK3's development isn't lacklustre (I wouldn't know, I have not played it except for 30 minutes when it was on gamepass and it made me too annoyed at the windows store to keep playing), but more that between that and a different expansion plan it feels a bit like comparing apples to oranges.
|
|
#
?
Oct 9, 2023 01:31
|
|
|
See I can kind of agree about the dlc being fairly in depth, I just think it's indepth in the wrong thing. Is the traveling system and events lots of fun? Yeah it's great. I love it. The problem is, it's generically great. It doesn't differentiate any part of the from any other part. You'll still be touring your realm and hosting tournaments whether you are in Egypt or Russia. Which is entirely my problem with CK3. I can stack a bunch of different modifiers, but fundamentally my gameplay feels the same. Meanwhile muslims vs christians in CK2 felt VERY different. Sure they were released at different times, but why couldn't they have built off what ck2 did instead of starting over again?
|
|
#
?
Oct 9, 2023 01:38
|
|
|
CK3 launched with a more concise version of much of the content of those DLC. Islam, Steppe Nomads and jewish characters are already playable, India and the 867 start are already there, much of the philosophy of Way of Life informed the game design, the religious reformation system is basically the same but better, and it already came out with a much expanded Ruler Designer. They're never gonna do more start dates so Charlemagne is already tossed out, and while an official EU4 converter and Sunset Invasion 2 would be nice, the latter might make people lose their ability to feel human again. I agree that it's missing much of the fun flavor of those DLCs, but what it has is solid. Honestly it's really that, looking back, CK2 was incredibly barebones at release (remember how there were only 2 de jure empires on the whole map at release, the HRE and Byz?), and we've since grown used to all the, frankly, basic things that Paradox had to add to it. The things we're really fully missing that i think are sorely needed, aside from regional flavor, are playable republics, the College of Cardinals and better mechanics for the ERE. The only way to do a big map expansion again would be adding China, and that would be a massive effort. But honestly i was very sick of CK2's DLC bloat at the end of its lifetime, like how people (justifiably) feel about EU4 currently. Frionnel fucked around with this message at 02:09 on Oct 9, 2023 |
|
#
?
Oct 9, 2023 01:48
|
|
|
One thing I wonder - as a relative newcomer to PDS games - is if there's some form of "first MMO" syndrome. That is, the first game or two you played like this where you really had to figure stuff out and care about every small advantage as you learned the systems are the ones that stick with you, and Paradox arguably hasn't done enough to shake up the moment-to-moment strategy of their games over there years, instead focusing on other stuff (roleplaying in CK3, number-go-uping in V3 etc.)
|
|
#
?
Oct 9, 2023 01:57
|
|
|
Eimi posted:See I can kind of agree about the dlc being fairly in depth, I just think it's indepth in the wrong thing. Is the traveling system and events lots of fun? Yeah it's great. I love it. The problem is, it's generically great. It doesn't differentiate any part of the from any other part. You'll still be touring your realm and hosting tournaments whether you are in Egypt or Russia. Which is entirely my problem with CK3. I can stack a bunch of different modifiers, but fundamentally my gameplay feels the same. Meanwhile muslims vs christians in CK2 felt VERY different. Sure they were released at different times, but why couldn't they have built off what ck2 did instead of starting over again? The DLC that added cultural traits added more flavour to all parts of the world than all the CK2 DLCs combined (excluding Horse Lords maybe). Looking at that list of CK2 DLCs I'd wish half of these DLCs were never released. I know a lot of players are fascinated by possibilities, but I'm sure there are numerous additions that no one is satisfied with. Does anybody like the way Republics work in CK2? It's cool they're there, but they have remained forever bugged and undercooked. Same for societies, China, Charlemagne start date and chronicle, Sunset Invasion. Half of the features in CK2 are either might as well not exist or I wish they didn't exist. With CK3 some rare specific things got similar reaction (like cat-a-pult event which, I understand, they moved to something only eccentric character might do) but in general there isn't a single feature in that game I'd want removed or feels half-baked to me. I may not like the overall vision of a game (I want to play empire building game and not character-focused game on the map), I may not like the balance of some things, but it's a matter of taste. Plus I can recommend vanilla DLC-less CK3 to anyone and while CK2 is free now I wouldn't advise people to play it without doing a 2-hour long research on what DLCs they have to buy.
|
|
#
?
Oct 9, 2023 09:19
|
|
|
Anno posted:One thing I wonder - as a relative newcomer to PDS games - is if there's some form of "first MMO" syndrome. That is, the first game or two you played like this where you really had to figure stuff out and care about every small advantage as you learned the systems are the ones that stick with you, and Paradox arguably hasn't done enough to shake up the moment-to-moment strategy of their games over there years, instead focusing on other stuff (roleplaying in CK3, number-go-uping in V3 etc.) I think a lot of the appeal of these games comes from the learning process. This is one of the reasons mission trees are so popular - it's like a new game every time you start as a new country. And one of the contributing factors to people not finishing their campaigns, cause mid/end-game hegemons have their differences smoothed out compared to early game countries, each with their own small set of advantages and problems. And if you're like that you probably prefer CK2/EU4/Stellaris model of having dozens of small half-baked features which are enjoyable to explore compared to relatively small amount of systems in CK3/Vic3 where you're supposed to master a small number of systems (which you might not care to do because AI doesn't pressure you to). This fun part is definitely the biggest in your first games. They all (except for Stellaris) operate in sort of realpolitik framework with hundreds of actors that is very different from other empire-building games, and it's amazing to wrap your head around. That feeling you'll probably never experience again, same as you'll never again experience the joy of realising you can shoot a red barrel in an FPS to kill a lot of enemies with one shot.
|
|
#
?
Oct 9, 2023 10:18
|
|
|
I think they should add the americas before china, really flesh out sunset invasion
|
|
#
?
Oct 9, 2023 15:19
|
|
|
Is mission trees that popular? I never really liked them when they got introduced into EU4. Railroading and claims given out like candy. Not really my thing.
|
|
#
?
Oct 9, 2023 15:31
|
|
|
Hryme posted:Is mission trees that popular? I never really liked them when they got introduced into EU4. Railroading and claims given out like candy. Not really my thing. There are a lot of people who really want their games to play out mostly historically and the mission trees facilitate this. I don't know what the real numbers are, but I think there's at least 50% of the playerbase who really dislike random outcomes. The good part about the trees is that you can always just ignore them and do your own thing without being negatively impacted.
|
|
#
?
Oct 9, 2023 15:41
|
|
|
Hryme posted:Is mission trees that popular? I never really liked them when they got introduced into EU4. Railroading and claims given out like candy. Not really my thing. The basic "conquer home region" "acquire subjects" "high income" missions aren't great, but the ones that are custom designed for a nation, e.g. letting the Teutonic Order form a Christian Monastic Horde capable of getting 100%+ cav ratio and the ability to raze are wild and cool. Lots of nations get neat poo poo that to me feels less a railroad and more like a focal point. Hyper-optimized WC players do tag switching to layer permanent bonuses by e.g. starting as Florence, getting the easy-to-acquire Florentine end-of-game economic bonuses from early missions, expanding north-east and becoming Sardinia-Piedmont, getting permanent admin efficiency, blobbing out, tag switching to Prussia, and then later to Germany to have stinking gigantic admin efficiency for the late game blob fest. For different regions of the world there are lateral mission tree pathways that can cause some funny degenerate poo poo to happen. There's one involving forming Siam and then a Tibetan Horde that gives a silly amount of cavalry bonuses.
|
|
#
?
Oct 9, 2023 15:42
|
|
|
Hryme posted:Is mission trees that popular? I never really liked them when they got introduced into EU4. Railroading and claims given out like candy. Not really my thing. If you don't go deep into mechanics even the countries with unique additions may feel samey, and it may seem repetitive to form a big country and you might feel aimless once you've formed a cultural union unless you go for some achievement. I think the longevity of EU4 is there because of Mission Trees. On forums I see plenty of people saying stuff like I don't want to play as this country, they have unique MT but it wasn't updated for a long time.
|
|
#
?
Oct 9, 2023 15:58
|
|
|
People like having direction in video games imo, as much as paradox games have a reputation as sandboxes I think they work better with something to give you an objective.
|
|
#
?
Oct 9, 2023 16:32
|
|
|
Looks like I am the minority here. Not surprising.
|
|
#
?
Oct 9, 2023 16:59
|
|
|
I do enjoy random outcomes and seeing how weird the world gets at the end of a HoI or EU playthrough, but for the country I'm playing I usually try to go historical, mostly because I get decision paralysis very easily and having the, broad, knowledge of what happens helps prevent that.
|
|
#
?
Oct 9, 2023 17:04
|
|
|
Custom mission trees add flavour which is one of the things people are complaining is missing in the more recent games. It's just a balancing act between whether pursuing the historical path is so strong that you want to do it every time no matter what or not.
|
|
#
?
Oct 9, 2023 17:29
|
|
|
YF-23 posted:EU4 in its current state feels like what you'd get from a complete game running like three or four content mods at the same time that each adds its own submechanic tospice the gameplay up but ends up feeling a little vestigial to the core gameplay. Army professionalism feels like that, monuments feel like that. I don't hate it but it's not for everyone and it feels like it's dilluted the core gameplay experience somewhat. I played about half of a campaign of it back in the summer and it felt like, oh I forgot that army drilling is a thing so now I'm competing with a noticeably worse military than everyone else because I'm like 30 professionalism behind the average (on top of playing in Africa and suffering having worse units than European competitors fundamentally). I'm not going to come in here and say EU4 is some amazing pinnacle of videogame design because it has its flaws and a better DLC model could have helped make some of the various systems work together better, but it is also worth mentioning that the dev team has been good about taking player feedback and has moved newer mission trees away from just "historical claims galore" (and not much else) towards having a variety of things to go after. Many of the rough edges of some of the mechanics have had their rough edges smoothed out and they all feel like they have their place, even if the game is complicated and has lots of menus and stuff. I will say that there are a few too many places to get modifiers (ideas, policies, gov reforms, decisions, estates, religious interactions/mechanics, and probably more I cannot think of off of the top of my head) but the things you can do are *awesome*. I love that I can do what I call "gimmick" builds with my country. The next thing I want to try is getting forts with free upkeep and almost double-sized garrisons. I once made a Somalian country with trade ships that had 90% lower upkeep so I had a million of them out pirating every trade node I could reach and it was hilarious.
|
|
#
?
Oct 9, 2023 17:37
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 5, 2024 08:27 |
|
|
AAAAA! Real Muenster posted:The truth Agree on a lot of this. I was happy about Tinto focusing on polishing the game and when they add bloat it's localized and won't affect you in most of the games where you don't initiate the bloat. Like next expansion adds new types of vassals, but they only appear due to missions of countries that will always never get there without your help, so it's fine. I do not like them adding new government reform tiers cause this means many more modifiers devaluing existing ones, but at least it wasn't a separate mechanic you don't remember about till the popup appears, like naval doctrines (which should have been retroactively shoved into government reforms). Would be cooler if the government reforms were condensed in a smaller amount of tiers.
|
|
#
?
Oct 9, 2023 18:53
|
|