|
Lori posted:https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kPP1mBcZf-E do this, I like having more people in a game to screw with
|
#
?
Mar 31, 2016 16:44
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 28, 2024 14:56 |
|
|
So does anyone know how the new 'play past the end date' feature works with ironman? One of the video previews made it sound like it wouldn't work with ironman at all? Is it: 1.) Doesn't let you continue playing if ironman is on. (Bad) 2.) Let's you keep playing, but deactivates achievements. (Good)
|
|
#
?
Mar 31, 2016 17:06
|
|
|
It's the second, Ironman and achievements get deactivated but the game goes on forever.
|
|
#
?
Mar 31, 2016 21:48
|
|
|
Tendronai posted:It's the second, Ironman and achievements get deactivated but the game goes on forever. Cool. I'm sort of brainstorming a minimal time extension mod, which just extrapolates a bunch of tech levels from the existing ones. So like every odd military tech gives 0.5 morale and every even gives 0.25 military tactics or something. Not new buildings or tags or poo poo, just a basic extension so that there's still a reason to invest in tech if you want to play until 1925.
|
|
#
?
Mar 31, 2016 21:57
|
|
|
You should slip in a ridiculous CB that unlocks around 1914 for a big bash at the end.
|
|
#
?
Mar 31, 2016 22:34
|
|
|
I really don't get this states/territories thing. I mean it looks like your average kingdom gets to have 3 states in 1444 so it won't be that annoying, but I don't understand what problem this is supposed to solve.
|
|
#
?
Apr 1, 2016 00:23
|
|
|
Vivian Darkbloom posted:I really don't get this states/territories thing. I mean it looks like your average kingdom gets to have 3 states in 1444 so it won't be that annoying, but I don't understand what problem this is supposed to solve. Abuse of distant overseas core discounts.
|
|
#
?
Apr 1, 2016 00:25
|
|
|
YF-23 posted:Abuse of distant overseas core discounts. I see. That was a silly system all along, but it's weird how the Bundesländer are going to co-exist with colonial nations, trade companies, autonomy, estates, etc. I know others have mentioned it but I get the feeling that all these different modules make the game too crowded. e: Oh right, they're smaller, like EU4 areas.
|
|
#
?
Apr 1, 2016 00:33
|
|
|
YF-23 posted:Abuse of distant overseas core discounts. I would think a simpler solution to that would be that the distant overseas cores don't immediately lose the autonomy and just drift down.
|
|
#
?
Apr 1, 2016 00:35
|
|
|
Maybe I'm just a party pooper but this might be the first EU4 expansion I don't buy on release, I'm not excited about most of the features. Espionage looks cool, really looking forward to the expanded Africa map. Most everything else seems like feature bloat so far. Edit: as I understand the new states/territories system will replace the current overseas province mechanic but also limits you to a certain number of states based on government rank, tech, and other things. So it seems like a bit of a restriction on large nations, you'll be forced to have many of your provinces effectively overseas until you can afford enough states to bring them fully under control. The dev diary also mentions paying gold for each state you have. Pellisworth fucked around with this message at 00:51 on Apr 1, 2016 |
|
#
?
Apr 1, 2016 00:43
|
|
|
Will territories/States/Corruption be a paid feature with the DLC or free? I imagine with such a sweeping change it will be part of the free update, but personally I hope it is part of the paid DLC.
|
|
#
?
Apr 1, 2016 00:47
|
|
|
IncredibleIgloo posted:Will territories/States/Corruption be a paid feature with the DLC or free? I imagine with such a sweeping change it will be part of the free update, but personally I hope it is part of the paid DLC. I haven't seen a listing of what will be free/paid but would be interested to know. Personally: -Naval overhaul I'm sort of ambivalent about, might be cool but I'm not crazy about managing naval manpower (sailors). -Corruption seems like a poo poo sandwich mechanic. Unless it's going to do something interesting other than force me to pay cash in order to avoid Monarch Point cost penalties, do not want. -Territories/States seems like a decent substitute for the old overseas mechanic but it also means larger nations will be forced to have "overseas" provinces (territories) because they're limited on the number of states they can have, and have to pay gold maintenance per state. On the other hand you can choose to pay 50% coring cost on whichever territories, so in the grand scheme of things I think it'll be a wash or net positive for players. -Espionage overhaul looks cool. -Expanded Africa and other map changes HELL YES. edit: if the map changes in particular are free (I'm guessing that's the case) I probably will hold off on buying it 
|
|
#
?
Apr 1, 2016 00:59
|
|
|
On espionage, has any strategy game ever had a compelling espionage system? There are spies through the the Civ family and SMAC, but they are not really entertaining for long. In Paradox games you are usually just clicking a button to roll the dice on a spy misson -- very dry. CK2 is the exception, I think because diplomacy (and plotting) are so personal.
Vivian Darkbloom fucked around with this message at 01:28 on Apr 1, 2016 |
|
#
?
Apr 1, 2016 01:10
|
|
|
Pellisworth posted:Most everything else seems like feature bloat so far. That's basically all of the expansions
|
|
#
?
Apr 1, 2016 01:12
|
|
|
I realized that what I said could be viewed by the game developers as a complaint, and I want to clarify that that is not really the case. I would like them to know that I very much enjoy their game and appreciate them putting new options in. I just feel the game is pretty muched tuned to the point of near perfection, *for me*, at this point.
|
|
#
?
Apr 1, 2016 02:18
|
|
|
IncredibleIgloo posted:I realized that what I said could be viewed by the game developers as a complaint, and I want to clarify that that is not really the case. I would like them to know that I very much enjoy their game and appreciate them putting new options in. I just feel the game is pretty muched tuned to the point of near perfection, *for me*, at this point. Yeah that's pretty much how I feel. EU4 is actually EU5 or maybe even EU6 at this point with how much it's grown since release, and the DLC and free patches have generally been excellent. It just feels like most everything has been tuned up and expanded at least once, with a few exceptions, and I'm not sure we need more stuff. Naval combat certainly needed a revamp, no argument from me there. I'm just skeptical of adding more resource systems to manage (like sailors) or abstracted scaling values (like Corruption). Expanding the map in Africa and elsewhere and adding nations and achievements is great because it gives players new and different scenarios/campaigns to play. But for me the game is plenty complex and the UI cramped without adding even more. Honestly Corruption seems like an example of pure feature bloat to me, unless I'm missing something. It increases Monarch Point costs and builds if you're 1) a large empire 2) behind on technology 3) highly mercantile and/or 5) can't afford to throw money at lowering Corruption. Why can't that just be baked into the existing government rank, tech cost, and mercantilism systems? Why does it need to be it's own system taking up UI space and player attention? We just got Estates and while I like them I totally get why a lot of players hate the micromanagement and the UI is really crowded. More is not always better.
|
|
#
?
Apr 1, 2016 02:40
|
|
|
IncredibleIgloo posted:I realized that what I said could be viewed by the game developers as a complaint, and I want to clarify that that is not really the case. I would like them to know that I very much enjoy their game and appreciate them putting new options in. I just feel the game is pretty muched tuned to the point of near perfection, *for me*, at this point. Steam lets you pick what version of the game you want to play with so if you think EU4 is perfect as it is and don't want any of the upcoming changes you can totally just not get them.
|
|
#
?
Apr 1, 2016 03:03
|
|
|
Pellisworth posted:More is not always better. My custom game with the Cossacks has been pretty much this. Also, the favors mechanic: I can't  Eh. Dunno. I pretty much rarely play EU nowadays so I don't feel really able to talk about, but if I had a small thing to say, it would be that it feels really bloated. Sure, a lot has been enhanced for the better, but I think many new ideas would require new structures in the way the game is being developed. IMHO, the game got a whole lot more micromanagement for too little gain, with things like Development being situational and not even worth it when compared to expanding, Estates being one more thing to look at, and now more stuff?
|
|
#
?
Apr 1, 2016 03:39
|
|
|
Seems odd to call development micromanagement, since as you point out, you can easily go a whole game and never do it.
|
|
#
?
Apr 1, 2016 07:01
|
|
Yes, it's like a lava lamp.
|
As a new player playing Portugal, and colonizing the carribean, should I be building Marketplaces, or Workshops in the colonies? I'm steering all trade back to the sevilla node, but I'm not sure what exactly is going to yeild more money.
|
|
#
?
Apr 1, 2016 07:30
|
|
|
Pellisworth posted:Yeah that's pretty much how I feel. EU4 is actually EU5 or maybe even EU6 at this point with how much it's grown since release, and the DLC and free patches have generally been excellent. Same here, not gonna be playing past this patch, it just seems to make a lot of things less fun for no reason. Who wanted corruption and why? It sounds like a mix of legitimacy, stability and other similar systems with the sole intention on slowing your expansion and making GBS threads on you. At this point they really should consider a system to disable what they call a feature.
|
|
#
?
Apr 1, 2016 09:27
|
|
|
Zotix posted:As a new player playing Portugal, and colonizing the carribean, should I be building Marketplaces, or Workshops in the colonies? I'm steering all trade back to the sevilla node, but I'm not sure what exactly is going to yeild more money. When you try and build something or use the quickbuild menu the game will tell you what affect it will have on income, trade power or manpower (trade income is trickier and you have to get a feel for it, or just do whatever you want). For example if a workshop would increase the monthly income by 0.01 it'll take over 800 years to be profitable.
Poil fucked around with this message at 11:00 on Apr 1, 2016 |
|
#
?
Apr 1, 2016 10:57
|
|
|
You get Colonial Nations even if you don't have any DLC so building up colonial provinces is a moot point past the first four in a colonial region. What you need CoP for is to be able to play as a CN.
|
|
#
?
Apr 1, 2016 11:07
|
|
|
Poil posted:For example if a workshop would increase the monthly income by 0.01 it'll take over 800 years to be profitable. Doesn't the greater production from workshops also increase the value of trade in the node too? So it wouldn't be as bad as that.
|
|
#
?
Apr 1, 2016 12:02
|
|
|
Got the Spain is the Emperor achievement, even if it took way too long, too many wars and probably a lot of unnecessary death for everyone involved. Thanks for the tips, thread. I'm going to second what someone said here or in the Stellaris thread, Paradox is the only company that does Achievements right.
|
|
#
?
Apr 1, 2016 12:08
|
|
|
PittTheElder posted:Seems odd to call development micromanagement, since as you point out, you can easily go a whole game and never do it. Well it's managing something, and it's not macro. I don't see what necessity has to do with whether something is micromanagement anyway.
|
|
#
?
Apr 1, 2016 12:38
|
|
|
Captain Mediocre posted:Doesn't the greater production from workshops also increase the value of trade in the node too? So it wouldn't be as bad as that.
|
|
#
?
Apr 1, 2016 12:39
|
|
|
Captain Mediocre posted:Doesn't the greater production from workshops also increase the value of trade in the node too? So it wouldn't be as bad as that. Do Workshops give production efficiency or goods produced? Goods produced affect the trade income, production efficiency is more like taxation on existing production and do not have an effect on trade value. But again, in either case you can only build those in four provinces for each colonial region since after that a colonial state pops up, so it's really not worth bothering. If you're investing in your colonial provinces, a fort would be a much better choice since colonial states don't build many of these themselves and could very much use the strategic depth when they get in colonial wars.
|
|
#
?
Apr 1, 2016 12:42
|
|
|
YF-23 posted:Do Workshops give production efficiency or goods produced? Goods produced affect the trade income, production efficiency is more like taxation on existing production and do not have an effect on trade value. I thought you could build buildings in subjects now. Or maybe I just thought that would be a good feature. 
|
|
#
?
Apr 1, 2016 13:20
|
|
|
I think it's fair to say that the devs want to incentivize a combination of expanding wide and building tall; it's just a strange direction (to us) for the series to take because the EU games have traditionally just been map painting simulators. You can still conquer stuff, but you're limited by a bunch of in-game systems (aggressive expansion, overextension, truces, coalitions). You can build tall, but you're limited by increasing development costs and you risk falling behind militarily and can't develop a complex trade network. It's a different game than EU3 was or even than launch EU4 was, but I think it's a much more balanced game than "oh poo poo Russia and the Ottomans are getting pretty big, I'd better conquer Germany before they do" and doesn't really boil down to "conquer or be conquered." Playing a game in the HRE has been a pretty good chance for me to stop worrying and love development.
|
|
#
?
Apr 1, 2016 13:22
|
|
|
So what is the sense in developing overseas colonies if the overseas penalty is so bad?
|
|
#
?
Apr 1, 2016 16:47
|
|
|
Zotix posted:So what is the sense in developing overseas colonies if the overseas penalty is so bad? Are you coming in from all the way back to EU3 or EU4 on its initial release? The very first expansion to EU4 added in colonial nations, which are a sort of vassal state that becomes automatically established in the new world colonial regions which manages the colonial territories for its owner. It pays a small amount of money to its owner in tariffs, does some expanding on its own (with the distinct possibility it might have its teeth caved in), develops its land itself, and in time might revolt if its overlord doesn't maintain a power balance with it. The bulk of the money the colonies net the home state is in trade value, because colonial nations give their overlord half their trade power, so the idea is that you as Portugal set a really sweet colonial nation in the Carribean and Brazil, then use your merchants and trade fleets to draw the value produced from all the great sugar/brazilwood/etc provinces to your home node (Sevilla).
|
|
#
?
Apr 1, 2016 17:07
|
|
|
PittTheElder posted:Seems odd to call development micromanagement, since as you point out, you can easily go a whole game and never do it. I consider that it was, perhaps, the wrong choice of word. I meant in the sense that it is a mechanic that feels much more cumbersome than it actually should be, I don't know. It is more sophisticated than base tax? Yes, certainly. Does it help you to go really tall? Like, be ridiculously powerful as a Free City? No, I think not. What I feel about such mechanics is that they bring more complexity in foundations that are not readily prepared to work with, in detriment of gameplay, while not working with more critical things (again IMHO) things that could be elaborated upon and simplified for the sake of better game mechanics. For example, combat. There are cartloads of information on it and even after 500+ hours of gameplay I really can't do much better than "try to have more dudes on your side and not get caught in a mountain battle against a lucky nation". You have so many variables and information, but how many factors are really relevant? I am still not sure if unit types matter (completely anecdotal, of course. Someone will show now a ddrjake video where he exploits the poo poo of galloglaigh infantry due to some genius insight) Sorry for ranting. I should of course say that are a lot of improvements done, particularly in terms of quality of life for the player, that must be praised. Automatic exploration, fleet management, add-on-army, the have-it-all minimenu for management, many many many new provinces since the base game, religions, custom nations, a fuckton of specifics and details for different corners of the world, etc.
|
|
#
?
Apr 1, 2016 17:10
|
|
|
YF-23 posted:does some expanding on its own (with the distinct possibility it might have its teeth caved in) This essentially never happens. Native American AI is really bad still and the federation system doesn't end up empowering them to threaten colonial nations.
|
|
#
?
Apr 1, 2016 17:10
|
|
|
I'm playing base Eu4 without any expansions turned on. Trying to get a feel for things first before I turn them back on. I did notice that I created a colonial state earlier but didn't know what it did exactly. I'm still colonizing the carribean myself since they seem really slow at it. I'm slowly getting most mechanics, but buildings in general I'm having a hard time with. Basically I'm just building them if they make numbers go up more than other areas. Also why isn't North Africa considered for a colonizing penalty for Portugal? Also the Ivory Coast seems lackluster compared to the carribean, but I guess that's because it's early and the Asian trade hasn't started flowing in yet.
|
|
#
?
Apr 1, 2016 17:18
|
|
|
How feasible is it as Portugal to kick castille's teeth in and lock down their shoreline before the iberian wedding and/or they get colonies underway?
|
|
#
?
Apr 1, 2016 17:21
|
|
|
Transmetropolitan posted:For example, combat. There are cartloads of information on it and even after 500+ hours of gameplay I really can't do much better than "try to have more dudes on your side and not get caught in a mountain battle against a lucky nation". You have so many variables and information, but how many factors are really relevant? I am still not sure if unit types matter Unit types matter quite a bit. Each offensive pip is a +1 on your die roll, and each defensive pip is a -1 on your enemy's, and those translate to more enemy casualties or less friendly casualties respectively. Galloglaigh, for example, which focus on offensiveness, are great for inflicting casualties on your enemy. They're great if you have a lot of manpower at your disposal, or if you have good discipline or infantry combat power, like Sweden's +20% power tradition.
|
|
#
?
Apr 1, 2016 17:22
|
|
|
For me, the best part of MN is going to be importing my CK2 Norse game and giving myself the new slave-raiding ideas. Never stop Viking!
|
|
#
?
Apr 1, 2016 17:26
|
|
|
double nine posted:How feasible is it as Portugal to kick castille's teeth in and lock down their shoreline before the iberian wedding and/or they get colonies underway? I managed this easily by getting France and Aragon as allies and stomping them early on to take their islands off them, after that it's just war as soon as the truce goes down.
|
|
#
?
Apr 1, 2016 17:31
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 28, 2024 14:56 |
|
|
Fellblade posted:I managed this easily by getting France and Aragon as allies and stomping them early on to take their islands off them, after that it's just war as soon as the truce goes down. ... but that involves allying france... 
|
|
#
?
Apr 1, 2016 17:34
|
|