|
You should check out the Military History thread in Ask/Tell its pretty much stuff like that all the time.
|
#
?
Sep 24, 2015 18:19
|
|
|
|
| # ? Apr 29, 2024 03:19 |
|
|
A Buttery Pastry posted:It might surprise you to know, but the Portuguese actually made several versions of that map. The one I parodied must have been a later version, when the spread of discoveries finally revealed to them that the Black Sea was in fact a sea. The Portuguese truly are mighty explorers.
|
|
#
?
Sep 24, 2015 18:46
|
|
|
Bort Bortles posted:That is loving bananas what the hell history is stranger than fiction. The bear was subsequently fed with fruit, marmalade, honey and syrup, and was often rewarded with beer, which became his favourite drink. He also enjoyed smoking cigarettes. He enjoyed wrestling and was taught to salute when greeted. 
|
|
#
?
Sep 24, 2015 18:47
|
|
|
Speaking of history being strange, you should look up the Taiping Rebellion. A man declares himself the brother of jesus christ and forms his own state. The end result? 20 million dead using melee weapons and firearms that were junk when they were new  aint no civil war like a chinese civil war
|
|
#
?
Sep 24, 2015 18:58
|
|
|
Agean90 posted:Speaking of history being strange, you should look up the Taiping Rebellion. A man declares himself the brother of jesus christ and forms his own state. The end result? 20 million dead using melee weapons and firearms that were junk when they were new Actually, the Taipings ended up importing European weaponry as soon as they established a power base with access to the coast. They were often better armed than Qing troops. The Qing were really, really good at hamstringing their own military. e: the Boxers, on the other hand, fought mostly with sticks and "magic".
|
|
#
?
Sep 24, 2015 19:39
|
|
|
Agean90 posted:Speaking of history being strange, you should look up the Taiping Rebellion. A man declares himself the brother of jesus christ and forms his own state. The end result? 20 million dead using melee weapons and firearms that were junk when they were new You also forgot to add that it was pre Marx communist rebellion, or all the zaniness that came from its religion being syncretic of the bible, chinese folk lore/mythos, and a bit of Confucius.
|
|
#
?
Sep 24, 2015 19:53
|
|
|
I could add it, or you can read this guys posts it get it in much better detail than my dumb rear end can provide.
|
|
#
?
Sep 24, 2015 20:06
|
|
|
Hey Kavak, I found a sweet Kaiserreich bug. If you play as the Bhartiya Commune, unify India, and then annex Afghanistan, you get an event called "The Annexation of Afghanistan." Choice between releasing a puppet Afghanistan, getting 1000 supplies, and -5% dissent, or doing nothing, getting 1000 supplies, and -5% dissent. Sure, fine. But if you choose the second option (do nothing) the event fires again after about two weeks. And again. And again. And again. As far as I can tell it will just keep firing forever, giving you a free 1000 supplies and 5% dissent reduction on a very regular basis. I imagine there's a flag gone wrong in there somewhere that should be triggering to stop the event recurring but isn't. For everybody else, go try conquering the world as super democratic Bhartiya Commune. Declare war on whoever you want and dgaf about dissent or spending IC on supplies because the care bear mines in Afghanistan will take care of it for you!
|
|
#
?
Sep 25, 2015 03:00
|
|
|
Agean90 posted:You should check out the Military History thread in Ask/Tell its pretty much stuff like that all the time. If anything the MilHist thread is so sick of that story by now. So how about them tank destroyers, huh?
|
|
#
?
Sep 25, 2015 03:23
|
|
|
That Afghanistan bug works for everyone for whom the event fires.
|
|
#
?
Sep 25, 2015 12:33
|
|
|
Johan posted:Hello and Welcome to the 26th Development Diary for Hearts of Iron IV. This time we’ll delve into details about the navy. A: Is that Fleet in Being doctrine transitioning to a carrier basis at the end there? B: "Split off and repair" sounds cool, but do the detached ships automagically reattach once they're done repairing? Because if they don't I'm probably going to end up never using it. Too much hassle.
|
|
#
?
Sep 25, 2015 13:58
|
|
|
Autonomous Monster posted:A: Is that Fleet in Being doctrine transitioning to a carrier basis at the end there? Looks like both Fleet in Being and Trade Interdiction have carrier doctrines down at the bottom, which makes sense since by the end of the war it was pretty apparent that carriers were the future.
|
|
#
?
Sep 25, 2015 14:09
|
|
|
Yeah, the trees are speciaised but not entirely single-purpose.
|
|
#
?
Sep 25, 2015 14:30
|
|
|
Darkrenown posted:Yeah, the trees are speciaised but not entirely single-purpose. This is a very good idea/development, I hated how punishing naval techs were in 3- both in actual ship design and needing to research 3 different trees just to get basic DD/CL/CA org improvements. Unrelated- playing Vicky-2 again and I'm starting to feel EUIV basically does everything better than Vicky2, except having no industrialization mechanic.
|
|
#
?
Sep 25, 2015 14:41
|
|
|
Slime Bro Helpdesk posted:This is a very good idea/development, I hated how punishing naval techs were in 3- both in actual ship design and needing to research 3 different trees just to get basic DD/CL/CA org improvements. There's something about Vicky 2 that I really, really like that keeps me coming back yet I still agree with you completely. Maybe it's just the time period, could be the pops.
|
|
#
?
Sep 25, 2015 17:29
|
|
|
Darkrenown posted:Yeah, the trees are speciaised but not entirely single-purpose. Obviously I won't know for sure until the game comes out and I've seen how they play, but I really like what we've heard about the land and naval doctrine trees so far, and the way they sort militaries into distinctive archetypes but still leave room within those for further specialization.
|
|
#
?
Sep 25, 2015 17:45
|
|
|
LaSalsaVerde posted:There's something about Vicky 2 that I really, really like that keeps me coming back yet I still agree with you completely. Maybe it's just the time period, could be the pops. It's a cool time period for sure, and really lends itself to interesting scenarios. You've basically got the entire world going through huge economic and political change in a very compressed period and nations that can't keep up end up getting crushed. I really like the pops as well - I just like being able to actually see a full demographic breakdown of everyone in my nation in a strategy game, rather than having it abstracted as some arbitrary unit like population in Civ games. It's really cool to be able to actually see the effects of prolonged conflict reflected in your population - seeing the difference in numbers from the start of the war compared to the end, especially if you were heavily occupied and had your economy grind to a halt causing mass starvation and emigration. Even peacetime economic crunch is reflected as pops drop from higher classes to lower ones since they either can't afford their needs at the higher levels, or there's just not enough goods to go around. I'd really like to see a Victoria 3 just to see a refinement on the mechanics - smooth out some of the rougher edges of Vicky 2 like the brick-stupid capitalist AI or the incredibly confusing interface. I'd also love to see its time period extended through the cold war - I know HOI covers part of that period already, but the cold war period has a lot of stuff going on outside of big WW2 direct conflict and a lot of the issues are very related to the things Victoria already covers - massive economic and political reform/revolution, colonialism by spreading ideology rather than literally planting flags, and the growing dominance of industrial nations over old world empires.
|
|
#
?
Sep 26, 2015 00:00
|
|
|
The Cheshire Cat posted:It's a cool time period for sure, and really lends itself to interesting scenarios. You've basically got the entire world going through huge economic and political change in a very compressed period and nations that can't keep up end up getting crushed. Capitalists autonomously building factories should maybe be dropped, because it doesn't really seem to be working really well. Replace it instead with the player (or nation AI) ordering factories and then capitalist POPs in the state investing money in it, with higher levels of economic freedom lowering the threshold for them doing this, while restricting the player's ability to fund and directly collect the profits of factories.
|
|
#
?
Sep 26, 2015 00:12
|
|
|
Just to spitball, maybe have the capitalist AI keep track of which factory types would have made the most profit over the previous year after factoring in state RGO bonuses and poo poo and choose one of the top ones. It's not an unsolvable problem, Victoria 2 just has a really lame solution to it.
|
|
#
?
Sep 26, 2015 00:45
|
|
|
Slime Bro Helpdesk posted:Unrelated- playing Vicky-2 again and I'm starting to feel EUIV basically does everything better than Vicky2, except having no industrialization mechanic.
|
|
#
?
Sep 26, 2015 00:47
|
|
|
I want to make the capitalists hang. It's not a communist revolution until I clean the streets of the stain of the bourgeois using their own blood  Also they need to be punished for causing a worldwide concrete shortage while producing more cars than people.
|
|
#
?
Sep 26, 2015 00:51
|
|
|
What exactly DOES the Vicky 2 AI use to decide what factories to build anyway? Does it basically just look at whatever is in high demand that particular day, and plops one of those down regardless of whether there's actually a long-term need for it or it's just a sudden spike in demand? I feel like having capitalists build factories is still an interesting part of the game - it's only sub-optimal because they're so awful at keeping them open on their own, and I think part of that is the weird way that Vicky 2 simulates profitability as a day by day thing. EVERY factory in the game is operating on the razor's edge and a few days in the red basically send them into a death spiral, which just makes no sense compared to how a business in real life operates. Investment shouldn't just be for construction costs but a certain amount of running cost as well, giving them a buffer so they can operate at a loss without subsidies and not immediately shut down. Capitalists could even be made to borrow money from the national bank, allowing it serve as more than just an emergency fund if the player drains the national treasury, and also making it so that a strong national bank means stronger industry (since more money to lend = more money capitalists can invest in factories). Could even have some kind of banking/investment regulatory policy as part of the nation's economic policy, essentially serving as a sliding scale between "banks can take more risks for a big industry boom, but potentially screwing everyone if the whole thing collapses" to "banks aren't allowed to lend to capitalists unless they have enough in reserve to take the loss". The main reason why I think pops should be able to build factories is just because I think what makes the Vicky 2 pops so interesting is that they actually can affect the world of the game beyond just generating tax money for your nation and soldiers to go die in your wars. Rather than just being a big resource sink that you need to provide for, they will actually give BACK to your economy if they're financially secure enough.
|
|
#
?
Sep 26, 2015 01:06
|
|
|
Yeah the day to day profits thing is weird since it means that your factory will fire thousands of people and rehire them in the same month because of a supply hiccup
|
|
#
?
Sep 26, 2015 01:12
|
|
|
It's really annoying that the economy is more or less global overnight too. I get that in the period a lot of ex-colonial nations were still exporting raw materials and importing manufactured goods but why exactly does England buying a bunch of cement on the global market have to ruin my efforts to use it in Mexico, if the Mexican government owns the factories. It makes no sense.
|
|
#
?
Sep 26, 2015 01:31
|
|
|
Mans posted:Portugal IS NOT a small country, stop trolling. Late to the party but: Portugal is wannabe Spain with shittier accents 
|
|
#
?
Sep 26, 2015 01:46
|
|
|
Larry Parrish posted:It's really annoying that the economy is more or less global overnight too. I get that in the period a lot of ex-colonial nations were still exporting raw materials and importing manufactured goods but why exactly does England buying a bunch of cement on the global market have to ruin my efforts to use it in Mexico, if the Mexican government owns the factories. It makes no sense. Yeah the global market is kind of a pain because it means you're competing for poo poo in your backyard with people halfway across the globe, but I imagine they basically had to simplify it this way to have even a hope of being able to balance it. I mean it's already fairly unstable anyway, can you imagine how hard it would be to ensure that it worked if it was set up to grow from just being able to import/export to your near neighbours to eventually being a global economy? Forget to put fish somewhere around Argentina and suddenly you've got mass starvation in South America at game start because the nearest source is too far away to trade. But make too many resources available around the globe and then the early game is fine but the late game gives you a glut of everything and then there's no economic competition at all. I mean pop requirements are simpler to fulfill at lower tech levels already, so you could kind of balance it around that - as trade range expands pop demands get more esoteric and require more goods from around the world, but it would still be difficult to make it work right for every nation.
|
|
#
?
Sep 26, 2015 01:55
|
|
|
So is the correct thing to do with factories early on to only build factories that use resources you already have? Like how Argentina has some trees so I should build a lumber factory in the state that has trees as the RGO?
|
|
#
?
Sep 26, 2015 02:07
|
|
|
Funky Valentine posted:So is the correct thing to do with factories early on to only build factories that use resources you already have? Like how Argentina has some trees so I should build a lumber factory in the state that has trees as the RGO? Just build glass factories and liquor distilleries.
|
|
#
?
Sep 26, 2015 02:45
|
|
|
I'd also say the player should have triggers where- if the AI is screwing up- you politically jump from LF to Interventionalism. Even in the hay-day of the Guilded Era, I don't think both factory owners and employees were like "nope we really are committed to this!!" when 5 factories suddenly shut down because everyone forgot dyes were expensive. But on top of making the economy work better: -It should be a little easier/clearer on how to get political/social reforms enacted, or how to steer politics in general. It's particularly frustrating to push for liberal support for a decade because you're trying to get some basic democracy in place, only to then have the liberal party reorganize and go from interventionalist to LF -The Influence/Sphere/War Goals/Peace Offer stuff should probably all be EUIV now, since I think that's about the clearest Paradox has made that section of the game Edit- also running a war is loving dreadful. Fidel Cuckstro fucked around with this message at 20:39 on Sep 26, 2015 |
|
#
?
Sep 26, 2015 03:15
|
|
|
So have any of you guys tried Grand Ages: Medieval yet?
|
|
#
?
Sep 26, 2015 10:00
|
|
|
Megazver posted:So have any of you guys tried Grand Ages: Medieval yet? And that brings us to the horrible piece of poo poo that is the combat system in this game. Units automatically engage enemy units around them, however one units can only be engaged by a couple of units and all units are way too durable. If you engage 100 bandits with your main army of 2000 men it takes minutes at speed *10 (holding space down) to kill them because most of the army just stands around looking at the 2-3 units fighting. Besieging a city is a massive pain in the rear end, in theory your units should set up siege camps around the city and slowly reduce its "siege points" or whatever, but the city keeps spitting out units and every time they do, your units start moving around, breaking the siege and more often than not get stuck doing nothing at all. I literally spent over half an hour at speed *10 trying to take a single neutral city. Bandit camps are almost worse because if you don't engage them soon after they spawn, they grow and then they spawn units so quickly that you never even get to siege the camp. TL,DR: The trading part is similar to the Patrician games but the land combat is lovely and frustrating and you can't really just build a peaceful trading empire.
|
|
#
?
Sep 26, 2015 11:03
|
|
|
The CK2 thread is ancient and archived, can't find a new one. Does anyone know why I can't transfer vassalage in this case? I am the emperor of all this stuff. The guy in the upper left is the king of italy, and the guy in the bottom right is in his de jure territory. I am the bottom right's direct leige. I should be able to transfer, no? He's a duke, if that makes a difference...
|
|
#
?
Sep 27, 2015 18:21
|
|
|
Vodos posted:I can't recommend it. The trade aspect is fine, it's Patrician/Port Royale but with land trade routes instead of ships. You can build new cities pretty much anywhere on the map, the location decides what resources you have access to for production. City growth is strictly tied to the number of businesses you have, which is a bit weird. As the city population grows, its influence area grows and your influence is what progresses you through the trader ranks instead of wealth/cargo space. Each rank increases your unit limit and gives you 3 points to spend in the tech tree. Tech is used to unlock new or improved production, infrastructure and units. Yeah, I tried it.  It might get good after an addon or two, but right now, definitely avoid.
|
|
#
?
Sep 27, 2015 18:27
|
|
|
Elendil004 posted:The CK2 thread is ancient and archived, can't find a new one. If you just checked the "Politics" tag, you'd have found this 
|
|
#
?
Sep 27, 2015 18:28
|
|
|
Elendil004 posted:The CK2 thread is ancient and archived, can't find a new one. Does anyone know why I can't transfer vassalage in this case? Does the diplomatic option say anything? Are you at war?
|
|
#
?
Sep 27, 2015 18:29
|
|
|
Hitlers Gay Secret posted:If you just checked the "Politics" tag, you'd have found this Well the link the OP is broken two threads deep, and search didn't turn anything up, and I wasn't about to guess at what tag the thread was under. Thanks though. BravestOfTheLamps posted:Does the diplomatic option say anything? Are you at war? When I go to do it, he's just not in the list of people I can transfer. A bunch of my regular vassals are, but not the guy I want. Edit: He's in the list now, gently caress it, it works now. No idea why it wasn't though. How bizarre.
|
|
#
?
Sep 27, 2015 18:31
|
|
|
Elendil004 posted:The CK2 thread is ancient and archived, can't find a new one. Does anyone know why I can't transfer vassalage in this case? Check to make sure the guy in the bottom right is still in Italy's de jure Kingdom? It may have drifted out over the years and you hadn't noticed maybe. Also make sure there's no wars going on, you can't transfer vassalage if any of the affected parties are at war.
|
|
#
?
Sep 27, 2015 18:36
|
|
|
I thought we would have had some sort of new megathread by now, this one is old as gently caress. 
|
|
#
?
Sep 27, 2015 18:42
|
|
|
Elendil004 posted:Edit: He's in the list now, gently caress it, it works now. No idea why it wasn't though. How bizarre. He was probably at war. He's got his ships out in the picture.
|
|
#
?
Sep 27, 2015 18:46
|
|
|
|
| # ? Apr 29, 2024 03:19 |
|
|
BillBear posted:I thought we would have had some sort of new megathread by now, this one is old as gently caress. It should at least have updated first post links 
|
|
#
?
Sep 27, 2015 19:13
|
|