|
Thread title lost on succession 
|
#
¿
Jan 2, 2013 21:17
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ May 16, 2024 00:06 |
|
|
They haven't actually mentioned yet if that will be in or not, I mean I would expect it to be but it's not like Paradox hasn't dropped good features between games before.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 3, 2013 01:11
|
|
|
Vegetable posted:Am I right to say in EU3 (and EU3+), there is no point in constructing trade buildings if you don't send your merchants out? Trade value affects a province's production income (income = trade value x PE%) so you'd be wrong 
|
|
#
¿
Jan 4, 2013 15:08
|
|
|
Looks like we're not getting another EU4 dev dairy again this week. Why do you have to bust my balls like this, Paradox? 
|
|
#
¿
Jan 4, 2013 17:42
|
|
|
It's an easter egg from when Wiz somehow had a streak of unnamed rulers in his CK1 game in the Azeri thread.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 4, 2013 23:29
|
|
|
If anyone knows about becoming a faded footnote in the Annals of History, it's Ubik 
|
|
#
¿
Jan 16, 2013 14:05
|
|
|
New EU4 Dev Diary. Honestly this was pretty disappointing to me, though the new UI looks nice. I was hoping for things to be closer to CK2, and 'aggressive expansion' seems like BB in all but name (are people still going to get pissed off because you conquered provinces that they don't even know exist?)
|
|
#
¿
Jan 18, 2013 10:37
|
|
|
Dr. Video Games 0031 posted:Oh, I did not know this. This isn't really the way Paradox initially advertised that, but that's cool. IIRC they changed it some time after SOI came out, originally you all needed the DLC but the host could choose to deactivate his DLC so that people without the DLC could play.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 22, 2013 10:45
|
|
|
I always felt like Rome had a huge amount of wasted potential, Rome 2 could easily be my favourite Paradox game if done right. The Senate, barbarian uprisings as a serious threat, and the 3 population types were mechanics I'd really like to see in an up-to-date game, tempered with CK2's character engine and whatever new stuff EU4 introduces.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 30, 2013 16:33
|
|
|
I find it really hard to not just try and expand as fast as possible which is why I only ever play with mods to make the game harder. I was one of those weird people who was pretty OK with MM being full of bullshit events because history is more or less a big chain of bullshit followed by outrageous luck. It's really too easy to get great inherited claims or lands in CK2, once you're a king you can easily become a multiking in 1 or 2 generations.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 1, 2013 18:23
|
|
|
I just found this interesting thread on the EU4 forums with some discussion about planned EU4 multiplayer features. It sounds really exciting and should massively broaden the appeal of the multiplayer game compared to previous Paradox efforts.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 6, 2013 15:49
|
|
|
Vodos posted:Edit: There's also a new EUIV dev diary about war: http://forum.paradoxplaza.com/forum...-so-much-fun... This all sounds amazing, combat width is especially important as it makes it a lot easier to hold natural borders in mountains etc.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 8, 2013 11:27
|
|
|
I like the idea that you will beat down an opposing army and actually force them to sit in a faraway province for months regrouping while you siege down their provinces. Much more realistic than pingponging armies to death before settling down to siege.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 8, 2013 17:54
|
|
|
Fintilgin posted:Although why would you spend your time sieging provinces and letting them regroup and recover? Wouldn't it be better to just march over to where they're retreated and locked in place and KILL THEM TO DEATH? They retreat a lot faster than you, you'll possibly be suffering attrition sending your guys further into their territory (and your forces will reinforce more slowly), they'll have the defensive advantage when you attack, and battles can be potentially very expensive in terms of both manpower (which is now more limited) and cash. It might well actually be more efficient to just siege!
|
|
#
¿
Feb 8, 2013 18:54
|
|
|
gradenko_2000 posted:One thing I'd actually like to see instead is a Diplomacy view that shows war progress. Like, your provinces are green, your enemy's are red, any enemy provinces you're occupying are red with green stripes, and any of your provinces that are occupied are green with red stripes. I'd probably stay in that view for a while, especially with CK/EU/Victoria wars where borders can get messy. I've always wanted something like this, in large wars it can be easy to forget who exactly you're at war with, especially in the HRE where there's tons of minors and alliance webs and disjointed provinces everywhere.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 9, 2013 12:35
|
|
|
Darkrenown posted:But, uh, we have that already? Isn't that in all our recent games? It's not very practical to use because if you click on an enemy province it starts showing you who they are at war with, so you can't exactly fight a war using it. gradenko_2000 posted:I know, why is why I said "a Diplomacy view that shows war progress". The current Diplomatic map mode in the recent games uses striping and alternate colors for non-war-related uses, such as unclaimed cores. This, basically.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 9, 2013 18:08
|
|
|
Darkrenown posted:you don't actually need to click on someone's provinces often/at all to fight them. This is obviously a difference of opinion thing because I probably spend more time looking at province stats than anything else other than directing armies while fighting wars (checking fort levels and garrisons, supply limit, province revolt risk, etc.) and it makes the diplomacy view fairly awkward for actually fighting with.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 9, 2013 19:44
|
|
|
CK2 is in kind of a weird place because if you're playing optimally there's actually way too much stuff to do and the game plays really drat slowly since you're constantly making marriages and education choices for your entire extended family (which is always huge since having tons of children and relatives is a good strategy). You should probably have less control over characters that aren't your direct relatives.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 15, 2013 10:41
|
|
|
Viscardus posted:For anyone who's interested, I have restarted Sicily LP. This time I will be vigilant against Wiz's dastardly acts of sabotage. This is great news. Also: New EU4 dev diary: Venice/Genoa. Sounds like Venice especially will be rich as gently caress thanks to its early government and NI bonuses stacking together. Venice seems like a good poster boy for some of the new game mechanics such as mercenaries, the new trade system, and republican tradition so they'll probably be one of my first choices.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 15, 2013 12:17
|
|
|
Assuming that any non-transport ship is as good at steering trade than another, galleys will still have their use as the cheapest ships and hopefully won't get totally outclassed even in inland seas as easily as they were in EU3. It might also no longer be as viable to keep a massive navy of big ships due to increased costs and needing money for other stuff. I'm really hoping these kinds of underlying issues are a big priority for EU4 as one of EU3's biggest problems was easily getting enough cash that you didn't need to compromise on anything.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 15, 2013 16:36
|
|
|
Darkrenown posted:Certainly. I love the newspapers, something similar in CK2/EU4 would be amazing (town crier in CK2?) but it does fit the feel of the Victorian period more than it would that of other games. John Charity Spring posted:I've been giving the Communist Germany mod for Darkest Hour a go this week and I'm actually very impressed. It's a lot more fleshed-out than I was expecting and the knock-on effects of having Germany be communist (and especially non-Stalinist and leader of the Fourth International) are really interestingly played. Britain going fascist then having a civil war in which I am intervening is just the icing on the cake of my playthrough. I just read through that thread and holy poo poo I want someone to LP this, it sounds like it's actually pretty historically plausible and a very interesting scenario. RabidWeasel fucked around with this message at 14:42 on Feb 21, 2013 |
|
#
¿
Feb 21, 2013 14:37
|
|
|
Fintilgin posted:Speaking of Mars/sci-fi games, I could go for Paradox Presents: This would be literally the best game ever for so many reasons.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 25, 2013 20:08
|
|
|
For some reason I always assumed that people had a Ghost In The Shell style 'hole in neck to plug into computers' and nerve stapling was literally jamming something like a tazer in there. I... don't really know why I thought that but it sure sounds horrible!
|
|
#
¿
Feb 25, 2013 23:49
|
|
|
From reading that it sounds like if the attacker gets GP support and the defender doesn't then nothing happens. Shouldn't this result in a forced transfer of territory or war? It doesn't seem to make much sense that if you're not a GP then you can avoid being affected by crises simply by not having GP support.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 28, 2013 18:17
|
|
|
New EU4 dev diary on military matters. Basically armies and navies are identical to EU3, the military overview screen is a bit prettier and more legible and leaders cost monarch points (mil/dip depending on land/naval leaders) and have an upkeep cost. Mercenaries do count towards forcelimit but have equal morale to your regular troops and reinforce by themselves without using your manpower so they're probably worth using now at least from time to time.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 1, 2013 10:39
|
|
|
Yeah I don't really know why they haven't added V2's leader traits to EU4, it seems like an obvious step and makes them more like individual characters and less like a brick of numbers you beat your enemy with.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 1, 2013 11:59
|
|
|
MM the mod was actually pretty good, though, doubly so if you removed the pirates and Framed! (i.e. the taint of Ubik)
|
|
#
¿
Mar 6, 2013 19:12
|
|
|
Beamed posted:And those god-awful country ruining events if you dared to move a slider past 2/-2 They weren't too bad because you also got good events sometimes and the bad events could occasionally let you get beneficial slider movements. You just had to get used to rarely being at 3 stability.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 6, 2013 20:28
|
|
|
Just eliminating infinite battleship spam to get your mil score up is a fantastic change.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 7, 2013 15:11
|
|
|
Wolfgang Pauli posted:podcat posted a Careful Wiz, Podcat is coming for your "coolest Paradox employee" badge.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 7, 2013 19:18
|
|
in the DD thread and everyone's trying to figure out what the gently caress.
|
Cowcatcher posted:I like how Balkans is the most stable part of Europe where nothing changed in 100+ years despite you going full bismarck Reading this has reminded me that I really hope that they get rid of the senseless same religion requirement for diplo annexing in EU4. Yeah sure make it more difficult but it's not it's unheard of and I'm sick of seeing Bosnia and Serbia existing forever as Ottoman vassals (not that this will be a problem with the new start date, but still).
|
|
#
¿
Mar 7, 2013 22:18
|
|
|
I agree with that but that's more of an AI issue since the human player does just that all the time (break vassal status => invade).
|
|
#
¿
Mar 8, 2013 00:22
|
|
|
EU IV Dev Diary: Austria/HRE. Again nothing too revolutionary but the changes to the HRE election and voting systems sound like they will make a lot more sense and be less abusable, hopefully forming the HRE will be a lot more difficult.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 8, 2013 13:26
|
|
|
They mentioned in one of the dev diaries that you will be able to swap NIs around by event so there's plenty of room for modders to make the NI system into something with the same or similar gameplay impact but without the weird anachronisticities. Let's not forget that if EU4 follows CK2's development path, there will be multiple major additions to the game in the form of patches. What we're getting at first is just the 'new' EU3 vanilla so there's plenty of hope for new major gameplay systems (such as factions!) to be added later. They really seem to be concentrating on the core gameplay of trade and diplomacy which is really where the focus of the period should be so perhaps it's for the best that there isn't too much totally cool new stuff for them to work on at once. Nobody wants another HoI3.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 9, 2013 11:13
|
|
|
NihilCredo posted:e: Nitpick time! I'm not quite sure why overextension increases your mercenary costs: it seems like having a hastily-organised country with recent conquests should, if anything, hurt your manpower and encourage you to use more mercenaries. The other modifiers look good, though. I'm guessing it's there for gameplay rather than 'realism' reasons. I'm guessing if you were large and wealthy enough you could use large mercenary armies to bludgeon your way through the penalties and this just makes that a bit less viable. It's kind of interesting to speculate about how these sorts of changes are going to impact how the game is played. 'Mid tier' nations should be able to bootstrap themselves up to a decent strength fairly quickly compared to the large powers being more constrained by overextension. This should hopefully lead to a more dynamic map and thus more varied and interesting gameplay, as well as making trade powers such as Venice closer to their historical strength, though if they fail to make use of their early power to get territorial gains they will be quickly left in the dust.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 15, 2013 11:09
|
|
|
Yeah ironman mode is going to be boss, not having the temptation of reloading should make the game a bit more challenging.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 15, 2013 15:35
|
|
|
Patter Song posted:Vijayanagar is one of the Tiered countries, so it will eventually get its own Dev Diary, IIRC. They already said that EU4 will completely change the map of India. They've shown a screenshot of most of South India and it's not terribly encouraging, the borders are a bit more sensible but the provinces are only slightly smaller overall. Perhaps the North will be better, since it was definitely the cultural and political focus of the subcontinent during most of the period.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 21, 2013 00:13
|
|
|
SeaTard posted:I was disappointed to see that too. One of the first changes I'll make is mod it from any_neighbor_country to any_known_country. In reality it should really require a friendly (or at least non-hostile) western power that you're trading with, but I prefer the any_known abstraction to any_neighbour.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 22, 2013 17:50
|
|
|
DrProsek posted:I think at least in EUIII there's already a way to set the potential so you need a western nation with 150 relations; that's what the arms trade modifier needed, so unless it goes away in EUIV, it should be doable. Yeah I knew this but my point was that in EU3 you could just diplomat spam someone who you knew existed and get good relations with them, whereas in reality you should require a long term relationship between two countries for westernisation to take place; EU4's relations system will likely be better for this sort of thing, since you could require both parties to have good relations with the other.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 22, 2013 19:00
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ May 16, 2024 00:06 |
|
|
ThePutty posted:Restoring the Roman Empire as the Ottomans is overrated. I say this a lot, Persia has some amazingly good provinces. There must be at least half a dozen 8+ base tax with high manpower and quite a few 10+ ones.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 27, 2013 14:33
|
|