Paradox Grand Strategy: From the Carnival of Lust to the Enlightened Times

The Something Awful Forums > Discussion > Video Games > Paradox Grand Strategy: From the Carnival of Lust to the Enlightened Times

«‹›2 »

Strudel Man: May 19, 2003; ROME DID NOT HAVE ROBOTS, FUCKWIT

Stairmaster posted:

If you want the USSR to be able to win in a game about the cold war, why wouldn't the US have events analogous to the collapse of the soviet union?

Yeah, the prospect I worry about with EvW is that it will be too deterministic, with the Soviet Union doomed either to collapse or to 'reform' into liberal democratic capitalism. Like the old Crisis in the Kremlin game. And for me, that doesn't really appeal at all - for it to be a decent game at all, either side should have a decent shot at winning. That does imply that there should be events for an American collapse.

# ¿ Feb 6, 2013 05:08

Adbot: ADBOT LOVES YOU

# ¿ May 15, 2024 14:16

Strudel Man: May 19, 2003; ROME DID NOT HAVE ROBOTS, FUCKWIT

A United States loss definitely has to involve Georgia breaking away from the republic, though.

# ¿ Feb 7, 2013 10:36

Strudel Man: May 19, 2003; ROME DID NOT HAVE ROBOTS, FUCKWIT

DrProsek posted:

I think you need to start repealing political rights; have no voting, an appointed upper house, and no parties and then I think if you are fascist it makes you into a dictatorship.

Keep in mind that in a vanilla democracy, this is essentially never possible to do, because you'll never have enough reactionaries/fascists in the upper house to roll back reforms unless it's already a fascist dictatorship.

Strudel Man fucked around with this message at 01:04 on Feb 22, 2013

# ¿ Feb 22, 2013 01:02

Strudel Man: May 19, 2003; ROME DID NOT HAVE ROBOTS, FUCKWIT

Nevets posted:

I always figured it was some kind of torture device they 'stapled' onto you, that let them remotely cause pain so you would be deterred from civil disobedience/rebellion.

I saw it as a high-tech version of a lobotomy. Suppress higher brain functions to make them into an obedient drone.

# ¿ Feb 26, 2013 00:03

Strudel Man: May 19, 2003; ROME DID NOT HAVE ROBOTS, FUCKWIT

DrProsek posted:

I guess leaving it out causes as many problems as leaving it in can.

It certainly doesn't seem to do much to stem the tide of hand-wringing on the subject.

# ¿ Apr 10, 2013 06:41

Strudel Man: May 19, 2003; ROME DID NOT HAVE ROBOTS, FUCKWIT

Fister Roboto posted:

Yeah, no, the stuff Belgium did in Africa was pretty horrific. You know the whole thing in Rwanda was directly caused by their colonial policies, right?

The Rwandan Genocide, you mean? That seems...difficult to prove, at best.

# ¿ May 6, 2013 05:08

Strudel Man: May 19, 2003; ROME DID NOT HAVE ROBOTS, FUCKWIT

Defeatist Elitist posted:

I don't know if I'd characterize it as direct causation, but the German and Belgian policies of favoring the minority Tutsis definitely didn't help ethnic tension. They even did poo poo like make them wear ID cards stating their ethnic identity. I always try to remain cautious when drawing causal links, but they certainly made things a lot worse.

Yeah, I mean, you could certainly argue that they exacerbated the existing conflicts by further institutionalizing them, but flat-out saying that the genocide was directly their fault strikes me as a little much.

In the Congo, though, yeesh. That stuff was just monstrous beyond belief.

# ¿ May 6, 2013 06:06

Strudel Man: May 19, 2003; ROME DID NOT HAVE ROBOTS, FUCKWIT

I just cannot get a handle on Vicky 2. Got the latest expansion and tried again, and just...blah. My factories never turn a consistent profit, I can't afford to maintain an army anywhere near significant in size, and it seems like anyone I'd ever want to go to war with is always allied with Great Britain.

# ¿ May 10, 2013 21:22

Strudel Man: May 19, 2003; ROME DID NOT HAVE ROBOTS, FUCKWIT

Kersch posted:

Hah, true enough. Another self-playing, slightly-manipulable system that has minor effects at best on actual gameplay. At least this one isn't quite as ruinously complicated, though.

# ¿ May 11, 2013 07:21

Strudel Man: May 19, 2003; ROME DID NOT HAVE ROBOTS, FUCKWIT

A Buttery Pastry posted:

E: Even if the crisis could be stopped by the trading of cities like that, I would suspect dissent to go through the roof, especially on the side that let the other have a free shot.

Absolutely. I don't necessarily agree with Tulip that a country hit by a nuke would immediately have its government dismantled by its own citizenry (that doesn't really sound like typical human behavior whatsoever), but if the nuclear strike was allowed and invited, that's a recipe for disaster.

# ¿ May 17, 2013 22:10

Strudel Man: May 19, 2003; ROME DID NOT HAVE ROBOTS, FUCKWIT

The mainstream ideologies (conservative, liberal, socialist) will cave to popular pressure in the upper house when militancy is high, to a degree based on how high it is. At 1 average militancy, 10% of each will vote for reforms they wouldn't normally support, at 2 average it's 20%, at 5 it's 50%, and so on and so forth.

The hardline ideologies (reactionary, anarcho-liberal, communist, fascist) do not adjust their voting choices based on militancy.

# ¿ May 22, 2013 07:19

Strudel Man: May 19, 2003; ROME DID NOT HAVE ROBOTS, FUCKWIT

Man, no wonder I've been terrible at war in this. I always tried to focus on guards instead of regular infantry, on the supposition that they were superior. (You can only use your primary culture and everything!)

# ¿ May 26, 2013 22:19

Strudel Man: May 19, 2003; ROME DID NOT HAVE ROBOTS, FUCKWIT

Ofaloaf posted:

CK2/EU3 modding question. I'm currently playing a game as a ruler-designed Roman Byzantine Emperor, and intend to remain Roman throughout the remainder of the game. If I were to mod a custom EU3 scenario after wrapping up this CK2(+) game, should the Roman Byzantine state be within the Greek culture group, the Italian culture group or a custom culture group separate from both?

I'd base it on where you eventually put your capital. If Rome, Italian it is.

# ¿ Jun 15, 2013 18:31

Strudel Man: May 19, 2003; ROME DID NOT HAVE ROBOTS, FUCKWIT

SkySteak posted:

Is this how you win Crusader Kings 2?

God, no. Those borders are hideous.

# ¿ Jun 16, 2013 02:11

Strudel Man: May 19, 2003; ROME DID NOT HAVE ROBOTS, FUCKWIT

RabidWeasel posted:

Sliders were kind of stupid because there was usually an optimal position given your longterm strategy and that meant that there was no interesting decisionmaking associated with changing them other than the rare event where you had to choose between something bad with a good slider change and something good with a bad slider change.

It seems like you can make the precise same argument about national ideas, though. There's usually going to be an optimal one to pick given your longterm strategy, so there's no interesting decisionmaking associated with picking one. At least once you become familiar enough with the game to know the relative value of what's being offered.

# ¿ Jun 16, 2013 23:27

Strudel Man: May 19, 2003; ROME DID NOT HAVE ROBOTS, FUCKWIT

But what about their "We Are The World" campaign? It sounds truly revolutionary.

# ¿ Jun 25, 2013 21:49

Strudel Man: May 19, 2003; ROME DID NOT HAVE ROBOTS, FUCKWIT

Ofaloaf posted:

Why is so much attention given to individual blueprints of ships?

That is seriously baffling. I cannot imagine caring about the exact number of heavy guns or whatever on a battleship. Particularly in a game about the cold war.

# ¿ Jun 25, 2013 22:02

Strudel Man: May 19, 2003; ROME DID NOT HAVE ROBOTS, FUCKWIT

Drone posted:

Edit: or, for that matter, PR people whose job it is to go before the camera during events like this and present Paradox professionally, and not by a stammering nerd who is clearly terrified of having an audience?

See, I don't mind that so much. That's an artifact of being a small studio, composed of the people who actually make the product.

But the product itself should be decent.

edit: "For those who don't know what NATO and the Warsaw Pact are..."

Strudel Man fucked around with this message at 22:13 on Jun 25, 2013

# ¿ Jun 25, 2013 22:10

Strudel Man: May 19, 2003; ROME DID NOT HAVE ROBOTS, FUCKWIT

"Yeah, I made a horrible mistake here, and somehow the Palestinians have invaded Jerusalem."

Not actually a strike against the game, in any realistic sense. But still funny.

# ¿ Jun 25, 2013 22:16

Strudel Man: May 19, 2003; ROME DID NOT HAVE ROBOTS, FUCKWIT

Drone posted:

I don't think it'd be that difficult to find someone who strikes the right balance between actual, real enthusiasm for a game (and the social skills necessary to convey and instill that enthusiasm in the market) and a developer who knows the technical details of the game they're working on.

To find someone who strikes that balance within the small group of people who are in actual fact working on the game? Why would that be less than difficult?

Now, they could plan and practice these things out a lot better, I'm sure, but it's not like it's an easy thing to come across well when plopped down in front of a camera. It's a skill, and it's not the skill that these guys normally rely on.

# ¿ Jun 25, 2013 22:21

Strudel Man: May 19, 2003; ROME DID NOT HAVE ROBOTS, FUCKWIT

Drone posted:

By hiring a PR person who isn't just a stooge who spouts buzzwords? Or an actual dev who just so happens to have a few points dumped into their Charisma stat for a change?

If you hire a PR person for a presentation, a stooge is exactly what they're going to be. If they're really good at their job, they might not come across as a stooge, but they're not someone who's actually familiar with the game or, most likely, who has any genuine enthusiasm for it.

And your other suggestion isn't exactly a course of action they can undertake. Yeah, it'd be great if they happen to have a charismatic developer onstaff, but most developers don't qualify as such, and it's hardly surprising if a small team doesn't happen to have one.

It always strikes me as a trifle weird for individuals to demand that companies advertise to them better, since it basically amounts to "lie to me more." Hearing from developers directly often isn't pretty, but usually it gives you a better idea of the truth of the situation than a slickly-produced PR campaign.

Strudel Man fucked around with this message at 22:35 on Jun 25, 2013

# ¿ Jun 25, 2013 22:30

Strudel Man: May 19, 2003; ROME DID NOT HAVE ROBOTS, FUCKWIT

uPen posted:

Supreme Ruler: Cold war at least pretended to model the space race.

So does this. That was one of the tech sections they showed off, briefly. There was an awkward section where they didn't get the reference someone was making with "can poland into space."

I guess I don't really get it either, but I have heard it before, at least.

# ¿ Jun 27, 2013 07:22

Strudel Man: May 19, 2003; ROME DID NOT HAVE ROBOTS, FUCKWIT

canepazzo posted:

Paradox Interactive ‏@PdxInteractive 17m
We're announcing a new game today that has the whole office buzzing - and we're streaming live with the devs at 8pm CEST !!

Are they finally making Bees of Iron?!

# ¿ Jun 27, 2013 07:37

Strudel Man: May 19, 2003; ROME DID NOT HAVE ROBOTS, FUCKWIT

Chief Savage Man posted:

Man, my brain keeps trying to parse the grey as the water, and the purple and white as land. I thought you had a random map generator going at first.

Though admittedly, the tiny islands didn't make a lot of sense that way.

# ¿ Jul 1, 2013 10:32

Strudel Man: May 19, 2003; ROME DID NOT HAVE ROBOTS, FUCKWIT

ExtraNoise posted:

Is there a word that describes feeling embarrassed for someone else? Because I'm feeling it all over.

The English term is "douche chills."

# ¿ Jul 29, 2013 00:50

Strudel Man: May 19, 2003; ROME DID NOT HAVE ROBOTS, FUCKWIT

Puella Magissima posted:

So I noticed in the ledger in CK2 that there's a Hellenic religion. Is there any way for it to appear organically, or is it just there for modders to use? Either way, I think I've found a good game to convert to EU4.

Neither one, really. It's there so long-dead characters in the history of like the Byzantine Empire can be of the proper religion instead of being generic pagan.

# ¿ Aug 4, 2013 10:08

Strudel Man: May 19, 2003; ROME DID NOT HAVE ROBOTS, FUCKWIT

Orv posted:

Have they said anything about how the converter is going to handle unions, or whatever they're called in EU? Is there a CK2 treaty/alliance/vassalage condition that will translate into that?

You mean cultural unions, or personal unions?

# ¿ Aug 7, 2013 04:23

Strudel Man: May 19, 2003; ROME DID NOT HAVE ROBOTS, FUCKWIT

Orv posted:

Personal, I forgot cultural ones were a thing.

I guess countries could potentially start out as a personal union if one character owns two kingdoms with different (or maybe just significantly different) inheritance laws. But I suspect it's more likely just that the converter won't result in any nations that begin in personal unions.

# ¿ Aug 7, 2013 04:53

Strudel Man: May 19, 2003; ROME DID NOT HAVE ROBOTS, FUCKWIT

ThomasPaine posted:

I agree with this. It's a little odd to be getting piety for being chaste and temperate, and having vassals dislike you for your drunkenness, as a viking. Trait effects should really be localised to your religion (and maybe even culture) though I realise it would involve a lot of research/effort. I wouldn't be entirely opposed to paying �5 for a DLC that did this sort of thing and maybe added a whole pile of new culturally/religiously specific events though.

There's a mod that addresses this for Norse characters by popping up events that give you modifiers with prestige and/or piety effects to cancel out or otherwise affect the values from the traits. Sadly, it's pretty buggy.

# ¿ Aug 12, 2013 00:48

Strudel Man: May 19, 2003; ROME DID NOT HAVE ROBOTS, FUCKWIT

uPen posted:

There's no upper limit to how far you can improve relations with a vassal. With normal nations you can only hit +100 before your guy says I can't do it anymore but with vassals I've gotten it up to 140+ from that modifier alone so that I could annex.

That doesn't really help you if you're trying to get it up to 190 in order to OFFER vassalization.

# ¿ Aug 15, 2013 08:55

Strudel Man: May 19, 2003; ROME DID NOT HAVE ROBOTS, FUCKWIT

thatdarnedbob posted:

Except if every nation you would conceivably want to declare on was in that coalition. It's easy to piss off most of the world as the Ottomans.

Plus, engaging in still more aggressive warfare in the downtime is the perfect way to balloon up the coalition against you still larger.

# ¿ Aug 23, 2013 21:51

Strudel Man: May 19, 2003; ROME DID NOT HAVE ROBOTS, FUCKWIT

podcat posted:

Pony Pops obviously.

as for HoI:

Aren't the ponies all girls? Clearly they should be maternal autocrats.

# ¿ Oct 4, 2013 21:58

Strudel Man: May 19, 2003; ROME DID NOT HAVE ROBOTS, FUCKWIT

Chief Savage Man posted:

Well if we're the worst, then maybe stormfront.org will be more palatable.

This, fyi, is why we're the worst.

# ¿ Oct 17, 2013 21:23

Strudel Man: May 19, 2003; ROME DID NOT HAVE ROBOTS, FUCKWIT

Chief Savage Man posted:

That's a pretty high bar for worst then.

I don't know, there's plenty of places on the internet that don't crank out racism accusations with quite the volume that SA does. Maybe that's just because they're all racist though, idk.

# ¿ Oct 17, 2013 21:36

Strudel Man: May 19, 2003; ROME DID NOT HAVE ROBOTS, FUCKWIT

DStecks posted:

OK, I understand. Somebody earlier mentioned something like "you should get game over if nuclear winter causes the Earth's agriculture to no longer be able to support the remaining population", and I think that was what you're arguing against: truly excessive detail devoted to what is, essentially, a failure state.

In fairness, that wouldn't necessarily require excessive detail. You could approximate it as simply as total megatonnage of nuclear weapons used, which seems like a decent method to distinguish between a limited nuclear exchange and apocalyptic nuclear war.

# ¿ Feb 2, 2014 00:34

Strudel Man: May 19, 2003; ROME DID NOT HAVE ROBOTS, FUCKWIT

GrossMurpel posted:

I liked faux-Cyrillic.

Yeah, I do too. It's neat.

# ¿ Feb 7, 2014 22:28

Strudel Man: May 19, 2003; ROME DID NOT HAVE ROBOTS, FUCKWIT

vyelkin posted:

Nzdyats ff Iyafi IV: Utsyai's Yazvzigz.

This broke my brain

Oh, don't be silly. I can read cyrillic as well, and the ability doesn't make it any harder to read it as English substitute letters.

# ¿ Feb 7, 2014 23:16

Strudel Man: May 19, 2003; ROME DID NOT HAVE ROBOTS, FUCKWIT

asaf posted:

I'd love it if there were a way to build wormholes between provinces in a Paradox game, though you'd need to make it science fiction to justify it and it would probably screw with the AI / pathfinding.

I don't know why it would screw with AI pathfinding, since it just operates on a pretty arbitrary list of connections and distances anyway. If anything, it would probably screw with human pathfinding, as it could easily lead to some counterintuitive paths being the most efficient route.

# ¿ Feb 13, 2014 06:28

Strudel Man: May 19, 2003; ROME DID NOT HAVE ROBOTS, FUCKWIT

This no longer has anything to do with Paradox games. Can you guys possibly take it to D&D, or else just drop it, since it's clearly not going to be a remotely productive discussion?

# ¿ Feb 13, 2014 20:14

Adbot: ADBOT LOVES YOU

# ¿ May 15, 2024 14:16

Strudel Man: May 19, 2003; ROME DID NOT HAVE ROBOTS, FUCKWIT

But just think of the AARs that you'll be able to write.

# ¿ Feb 19, 2014 03:32

The Something Awful Forums > Discussion > Video Games > Paradox Grand Strategy: From the Carnival of Lust to the Enlightened Times

«‹›2 »