|
Hey, newbie here. I picked up EU3 on steam, and I'm finding the tutorials... less than adequate. The big problem is that the one which teaches you how units and battles work appears to be glitched: I can't trigger the "Move your army to Brandenburg" objective. Is there a workaround, or am I just doing something wrong?
|
#
¿
Jul 21, 2013 22:02
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ May 15, 2024 05:27 |
|
|
This is going to sound racist as hell, but what is it with Poles and strategy games? You don't see anybody else losing their loving minds over how/if their country exists as a faction. Is there just a really big strategy game fanbase in Poland? (please do not probate me, I am not racist against Poles.  )
|
|
#
¿
Jul 24, 2013 04:01
|
|
|
RagnarokAngel posted:It was not the first civ to do that. Seoul was a city-state I believe, and Jakarta definitely was. I think that Civ V uses city-states mostly as a way of having a gameplay mechanic for countries that never become great powers. So lots of city-states are just major cities from nations that wouldn't make sense for a full-out faction (Canada, for instance), and global politics become more realistic when (numerically) most states aren't huge and powerful.
|
|
#
¿
Jul 24, 2013 05:00
|
|
|
Anyway, to try to fix the derail I caused, reading that LP was a huge help in getting into the game. I've tried a few games of EU3 now, but since I'm still learning, and have a tendency to not go with easy choices, it tends to be a game of "What's going to gently caress me this time?" A couple of Venice games died early due to not realizing that small states often have big allies, and that I need allies of my own. My most successful Venice game eventually got doomed when I bit off more than I could chew in an invasion of Granada (provoking the wrath of Morocco), followed by not waiting nearly long enough to begin my next campaign, eventually bankrupting me; at which point I called it quits. My next game was Ethiopia, which was pretty drat successful until it turned into an abject clusterfuck. My problems started when I annexed my neighbour in Somalia, I began getting fierce nationalist rebels which would never cease for the rest of the game, even after I released that neighbour as a vassal. Then my king died, and I had a massive succession crisis which caused the country to collapse; and the pretender uprisings never stopped. I ultimately wound up writing off my southern provinces as pretender controlled, since their armies were literally impossible to finish off; I was eventually killing <100 soldiers per combat. If rebels rose in the north, I simply corralled them south behind my wall of armies. Then I had another succession crisis. And a simultaneous invasion from Yemen and Oman. At that point I gave up.
|
|
#
¿
Jul 24, 2013 15:21
|
|
|
There's something stupid going on; I'm playing as Ethiopia again, now dealing with some one-off pretender rebels I got from a slider shift. I'm following them, and consistently winning battles, but I never inflict any casualties, so the sons of bitches just march to a different province and the whole thing becomes a scene from Benny loving Hill. It's ridiculous! Is this a glitch, or some intended behaviour I'm not aware of?
|
|
#
¿
Jul 24, 2013 18:45
|
|
|
A Buttery Pastry posted:*Which I believe was Luther's intention in the first place. Luther's original intention was to fix the Catholic Church. The Reformation only resulted in a schism when it became clear that the Church would not address most of the Protestant issues, and arguably could not while still remaining the Roman Catholic Church.
|
|
#
¿
Jul 24, 2013 21:38
|
|
|
Holy poo poo, this morning I was looking into getting CKII, but I decided it was probably too much to get both it and Total War: Rome II in the fall, so I play some TF2 instead. Then I think to myself "...Maybe I'll get CKII instead.... I'm gonna look at it on Steam again", and HOLY poo poo SUDDENLY 75% OFF. Today is a good day. 
|
|
#
¿
Jul 27, 2013 20:01
|
|
|
rhazes posted:I do hope Paradox makes EU:Rome 2, it had a lot of redeeming qualities, but there were some things that were totally bizarre- for example, the whole religious influence thing. Could never figure out what affected the prestige or whatever of the various religions. Or just straight-up start a new classical antiquity-era franchise. With the requisite save converters, of course... 500BC - 1935, anybody? 
|
|
#
¿
Sep 10, 2013 04:57
|
|
|
My steam copy of Victoria II won't ever start properly. It always gets stuck at loading the map data, and when I alt-tab out there's an error message saying that a file is missing. I tried using Steam to repair the install, no luck. Does this sound familiar to anybody?
|
|
#
¿
Sep 12, 2013 02:39
|
|
|
Wolfgang Pauli posted:Don't they mean the team here, not the players? Shogun was guilty of the same thing. The problem with the the Sengoku Jidai is that it only goes so far as a setting. It's really great for a Total War game, since it presents a lot of cool fighting and a bunch of fairly balanced factions, any of whom could have historically come out on top; but if you go for a Paradox angle, where you don't fight the battles and war isn't such a focus, well, it's really just Japan vs. Different Japan. It loses its novelty fast. So the Nobunaga came out on top this time, whoop-de-poo poo. Not quite as interesting as Burgundy Florida, Ottoman Quebec, and Papal States Brazil, is it?
|
|
#
¿
Sep 20, 2013 07:09
|
|
|
Kikka posted:I want to get into the Paradox games. Do you recommend Crusader Kings 2 or Europa Universalis IV? Personally, I would recommend CKII. It's a much more "holistic" game, in that the gameplay elements flow pretty naturally from each other and are all closely intertwined, whereas the EU series has always felt to me like a bunch of loosely-connected gameplay mechanics frankensteined into a game. To get more in-depth, a lot of CKII is counter-intuitive if you're approaching it with the experience of other strategy games, the two biggest ones being that A) you are not your country, you are a person; and B) you do not maintain a standing army. However, once you get over this, CKII is actually pretty drat intuitive. Once you understand succession, plots, and the de jure territory system, that's roughly 70% of the game right there. Military ultimately boils down to having more dudes than your enemy. (All that having been said, I still have no clue how trade works in either CKII or EU4, or how one carries over to the other.)
|
|
#
¿
Sep 21, 2013 20:23
|
|
|
It probably won't ever happen, but I think a cool idea for a Paradox game could be a timespan covering the dawn of civilization. You'd build your society literally from scratch, utterly rewriting history. I don't know what a good end date would be, though, maybe the rise of the Roman Republic? That would be a hell of a long time span, but it could be interesting.
|
|
#
¿
Sep 22, 2013 20:00
|
|
|
Wolfgang Pauli posted:I think it could work if Paradox put some thought into it. All of their grand strategy games are about changing paradigms: CK2 is about the transition from Medieval to Renaissance, EU3 is Renaissance to Industrialization, and Vicky 2 is the early Industrial Revolution to 20th century modernity. For something spanning so broad a period, Paradox might have to make it more obvious. I'm not sure if this could even have an end date. Maybe industrialization, since that's the one big marker independent of our own cultures and history that signifies that big a change. I'm not talking about an all-of-history game, Paradox have said they'll never do it, I'm strictly speaking of early history. And if you're looking for a transition, you could go with the transition from nomadic living to the agricultural revolution to city dwelling.
|
|
#
¿
Sep 22, 2013 20:17
|
|
|
A GIANT PARSNIP posted:has HOI3 killed the franchise off forever? IIRC, HOI3 is the bestselling Paradox developed game ever, so nope.
|
|
#
¿
Sep 26, 2013 00:53
|
|
|
Moridin920 posted:You actually don't necessarily want to just crank taxes up if you're losing cash, that results in POPs not having as much money to spend and thus your economy does lovely and thus you actually get less tax money (if I remember right). Same with tariffs; unless you're actually trying to protect a fairly large domestic industry base from cheaper foreign goods, I wouldn't crank it up to maximum. You'll stop getting as many (usually necessary) imports and won't actually see as much tariff income. This is all just based on me fiddling with the economics, I could be dead wrong but I notice as soon as taxes and tariffs get high, my income starts to plummet. Wait, so the secret to success in Vicky 2 is literally Reaganomics?
|
|
#
¿
Oct 1, 2013 17:09
|
|
|
Kersch's Vicky 2 LP has finally helped me figure out how to play the drat game, so big thanks on that! Paradox really should fire whoever does their tutorials now and just bring him on, since his EU3 and CK2 LP's were how I learned those games, too.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 6, 2013 16:56
|
|
|
PleasingFungus posted:
Holy gently caress, what? I genuinely laughed out loud at this picture. I really love that Anticosti Island is its own region despite being almost enirely uninhabited, Labrador being 5 different regions is also pretty hysterical (less than 30,000 people live in Labrador proper). Gotta give credit for the Southwestern Ontario region names though, can't say I've ever in my life seen Kitchener represented in a video game.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 7, 2013 22:17
|
|
|
Looking for some advice here, if there's any to be had: I'm playing Vicky 2, my first game ever of it actually, and I'm playing as Haiti. I've made it all the way to 1900 without issue, and industrializing has gone fairly well, but a problem that I'm running into is that my workforce simply isn't large enough to support more than 2 factories, making my economy insanely susceptible to market shifts. My three biggest exports, tobacco, liquor, and glass, all have fairly stable market prices, so I assume what's happening is that the prices are increasing on the materials my factories have to import (since Haiti produces nothing but tobacco from its RGOs). So, basically, every time the market prices of a select few commodities shift, my economy goes to hell because I have to subsidize the poo poo out of my two factories, since if I don't subsidize them they'll close and I'll have massive unemployment and that will probably permafuck me. Austerity measures simply aren't sufficient to pay for the massive gently caress-off subsidies I wind up paying. Is there anything I can do about this?
|
|
#
¿
Oct 7, 2013 23:30
|
|
|
V for Vegas posted:What have you been doing if it's 1900 and you're still stuck on Hispaniola? You should own most of the Caribbean/Central America by now. All of the Carribean except me is under the direct control of great powers. Is it possible to take those smaller islands without getting the mother of all whuppings called down on me?
|
|
#
¿
Oct 8, 2013 00:28
|
|
|
V for Vegas posted:Probably a bit late now. You should have started expanding at the start - like this guy. Yup. Just tried going for Puerto Rico, wound up at war with Spain, Austria, China, Persia, and the Ottoman Empire. I had nearly completed the occupation when the loving Ottomans show up with a stack 5x bigger than my entire military. Also by now my industry has tanked completely, since the factory employing most of my workers was terminally unprofitable, and the only thing keeping it open was my increasingly large subsidies.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 8, 2013 00:50
|
|
|
ThatBasqueGuy posted:Poor Florida doesn't get any friends Based on the article, it isn't "friends", its "places the main states could immediately occupy". And Georgia is one of the main states for the purposes of the article, so it blocks Florida from the starting gate.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 8, 2013 23:50
|
|
|
What I find to be sorely missing from Crusader Kings and Vicky is the EU history log thing, even though I rarely find it useful in EU itself. Paradox games tend to involve a lot of things happening all over the world, and it would be nice if they'd have better ways of communicating the "narrative" of what's happening. The casus belli system helps to build this into the gameplay itself, but when I'm playing V2 and England suddenly has a communist revolution, it would be cool to get more than a newspaper blurb letting me know that it happened. Even more than this, it would be nice to get reasonably succinct reasons for why things happen, for example, prices on the V2 market. However, I do understand that this is, to put it mildly, non-trivial from a programming perspective. But a guy can dream, can't he?
|
|
#
¿
Oct 11, 2013 21:30
|
|
|
Dauntasa posted:I'd say the Old Gods is worth getting even if you don't want to play as a pagan just for the rebels and tech mechanics(is the new tech system in the base game? I bought Old gods right away) and the new start date. Although if you don't want to play pagan and you only buy the Old Gods you may find that Christendom in the 867 start date is an extreme clusterfuck, and it's all the fault of the loving Karlings. There are so many of them and they control pretty much all of Western Europe. They're like termites. The bastards are everywhere and never stop getting into things and messing with them. Asking as somebody who has never gotten more than a hundred years into an Old Gods start, do the Karlings ever go away?
|
|
#
¿
Oct 21, 2013 17:31
|
|
|
Emanuel Collective posted:To be fair, the crowns of France and Germany remained in direct Carolignian hands until around 1000, and the Capets/Salians were blood related to the Carolingians. They didn't just disappear so much as their massive dynasty got swallowed up by extended families That's basically what I mean. I understand that bastard dynasties are a thing in the game, but is there any way for branches to split off into their own dynasties?
|
|
#
¿
Oct 22, 2013 02:34
|
|
|
Viscardus posted:No, there is no way to create cadet branches, but to be fair that's not really what happened to the Karlings anyway. The whole dynasty was really, really bad at having kids, especially sons. By 1066 (i.e. the original start date for CK2), the only male-line descendent of Charles Martel still alive was the Count of Vermandois. His male line died out shortly thereafter. It would be interesting if there was a possible event for a cadet branch being created if somebody is, say, a different culture than their dynasty's founder, and attains a title of duke level or higher. It would probably need to have more checks than that, but cadet branches seem to be a pretty major omission from the dynasty system.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 22, 2013 18:05
|
|
|
Dauntasa posted:Wasn't there an episode of QI where a question was "who here is descended from Charlemagne" and the answer was "everyone"? Yup.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 23, 2013 19:26
|
|
|
Fintilgin posted:And CKIII after 2020. What's wrong with CKII that we need a new one?
|
|
#
¿
Oct 24, 2013 20:12
|
|
|
I think any kind of Paradox game in a completely fictional setting would... have issues... since Paradox's usual game design M.O. is retrofitting historical events into fun gameplay. It would be interesting to see what they'd do given free reign to shape the world to their gameplay, but it would be a very, very different design process. I'd much rather see a Paradox Cold War game. An actual, factual Paradox Cold War game. Something like Chris Crawford's Balance of Power, but with the Paradox bells and whistles. The Doomsday Clock would have to be a gameplay element. And proxy wars fought to turn third-world countries to your ideology, at the chance of escalating into a major conflict. Core gameplay would focus on the balance between pushing to win, but not pushing so hard you ignite WWIII and end the world. Not a half-baked HOI3 mod where you can restore monarchist Prussia.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 30, 2013 05:02
|
|
|
Westminster System posted:Cardinal Bieber. I also see Frank Zappa and Chuck Testa.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 30, 2013 16:40
|
|
|
Farecoal posted:Sid Meier's Galactic Alpha Master of Orion Civilizations Centauri Universalis? Sid Meier's Galactic Alpha Master of Orion Civilizations Centauri Universalis II: It’s Straight-Up Dawg Time
|
|
#
¿
Nov 1, 2013 05:52
|
|
|
Pimpmust posted:e: Especially this part: Wouldn't the trade route system put the kibosh on that?
|
|
#
¿
Nov 4, 2013 20:13
|
|
|
NihilCredo posted:Wiz, I'm not sure if as the AI programmer this falls in your area of competence or if you never touched anything but the combat AI for CK2, but I figure leaving this here is the best shot either way: Didn't the latest patch kill all cultural/religious requirements for non-special-event kingdoms and empires?
|
|
#
¿
Nov 26, 2013 04:16
|
|
|
grancheater posted:Only for the player, and not even all of them. You still can't create Jerusalem if you're not Christian, or Byzantium if you're not Orthodox. Jerusalem is a special event kingdom, created by a crusade.  I wasn't aware that was only for the player, though. That's... understandable, but still weird.
|
|
#
¿
Nov 26, 2013 07:35
|
|
|
grancheater posted:Jerusalem is a de-jure kingdom though, so if you're not catholic you will be plagued by Jerusalemite Liberation rebels until it de-jure drifts. Or forever if you're an empire. Well. That's pretty silly. Why not have it be the de jure Sultanate of Palestine?
|
|
#
¿
Nov 26, 2013 17:33
|
|
|
Alchenar posted:It was only after playing a game as Belgium that I realised what an anomaly the USA is in V2 because it spends the whole game vastly underpopulated. That sounds pretty historically accurate. Hell, I'm pretty sure it's pretty accurate even today. According to Wikipedia, the USA comes in at 179th in the world in terms of population density. It's a huge loving country. It has less than half the population of Europe, and almost three times the land area. Canada's even emptier, though. I remember reading that over 90% of the population lives within 100 miles of the American border, and we're the second biggest country on the planet. 
|
|
#
¿
Nov 27, 2013 14:58
|
|
|
Fintilgin posted:
Yeah, gently caress people who want to play a sandbox game in any more than the one true way. Like, I get having a defined game scope, trying to include every drat thing there is to do will always result in a muddled, lovely design. But this is just moronic. If EU4 is about building an empire, and nothing else, why the gently caress can I even play as Kongo? Why is that even in the game as a thing that you can do, when it's completely impossible to play in the ONE TRUE PLAYSTYLE? There's also the issue that EU4 combat is not particularly engaging or fun on its own. Civ 5 is pretty fundamentally about warfare, but that's OK because its combat mechanics are pretty drat satisfying to play through. To make an even more apt comparison, Empire: Total War is entirely about conquering and warfare, but that's because it's built around an RTS core. And this doesn't even bring in the fact that if your game's scope is "Build an empire", and you have pretensions to historical realism, then there's a lot more involved in that than just painting the map.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 25, 2013 01:12
|
|
I wish the DLC would push the game in a direction that makes peace time and internal politics more interesting. Just painting the map does get a bit old after awhile.
|
Darkrenown posted:Do you? Because for the rest of your post you seem pretty mad we don't try to do everything, so I'm a little confused. I'm not mad that you can't do everything, I'm mad that there isn't always something to do. Darkrenown posted:And you can still play "Build your empire" as Kongo, it's just harder than, say, France. This is so much horseshit and you know it. You cannot possibly type this and mean it. Darkrenown posted:As Johan said, EU is primarily about building your empire - you can do other stuff if you like, but we can only put so much stuff into a game and that's the focus here. So what the hell is the trade system? Or the papal controller system? If you want me to take off the gloves, Europa Universalis is already a kludged together mess of systems. And don't act like internal management mechanics are "out of scope", otherwise what is the stability system? And amount of effort is immaterial here, since internal mechanics could be the subject of an expansion pack. But they won't, because here we have a quote from a dev drawing an entirely arbitrary line in the game's scope.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 25, 2013 02:03
|
|
|
Darkrenown posted:Saying something is the primary focus of a game doesn't mean there can be literally nothing else in said game... Are you listening to yourself at all? The trade system and papal control system can help you build an empire, but so would a million other things that would be obviously out of scope for EU. What I'm saying is that I can't see a sane scope definition that includes trade and papal control, but doesn't include internal politics. And you know what? I don't even care that trade and papal control are "out of scope", since they simulate systems that were very much a part of the era EU4 depicts. So stop feeding us bullshit about internal politics being "out of scope", and stop acting like I'm asking for a total quantum simulation. EU4 needs something interesting for the player to do when not at war. Period. Scope is important for guiding design, but it is not an inviolable law of the universe.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 25, 2013 04:34
|
|
|
Dibujante posted:e: also, whoah there! You're getting really mad at video games. RagnarokAngel posted:Seriously. I don't think your sentiments are wrong exactly but you're getting pretty mad at video games. Sorry for being passionate about anything I guess 
|
|
#
¿
Dec 25, 2013 15:10
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ May 15, 2024 05:27 |
|
|
When modding CKII, is there any way to implement custom succession systems? Basically what I want to do is create a system where you can unilaterally select an heir from among your children, but firstborn and landed characters will be seriously upset if you don't pick them, and disinheriting is a massive, massive opinion malus.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 27, 2013 16:31
|
|