|
420 Gank Mid posted:Almost all the bad reviews are 'protest' reviews about how development is locked to people who own the expansion and buildings are limited by development Not that it makes any difference to me (I already bought CS), but thinking about it, they do have a point: it makes CS kinda of a mandatory DLC, dont it?
|
#
¿
Oct 2, 2015 17:45
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ Apr 27, 2024 09:54 |
|
|
Dibujante posted:I don't think so. You can easily play the whole game without developing any provinces. It takes some strategies away (like playing a free city and going development-heavy) but that's not unique: e.g. without art of war you can't make client states. That changes your ability to conquer your same continent past tech 23 but it doesn't break the game. You can easily play the whole game without making client states. Yeah, but building slots depends on development, so without the ability to raise the latter, the former (buildings) becomes somewhat crippled. And I guess the complain is that the changes cripples a native feature and forces people to buy a DLC to be able to properly use it. Chief Savage Man posted:When the game first came out, you couldn't do most of what you can do now, so the free features alone are probably a few DLC in and of themselves. It's not often that a game evolves into something that feels like a sequel of itself, and that's definitely worth paying for. I guess that's a good point.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 2, 2015 19:09
|
|
|
Dibujante posted:That's true, but! A building slot costs at least 500 monarch points to gain the 10 development you need. This is a very marginal case unless you're going for a very specific strategy. Since buildings only cost cash now, it's likely that you can build more buildings total now than you could before, even if you can't develop provinces. Developing one province enough to gain a single building costs as much as 5 buildings used to cost. Ok, makes sense
|
|
#
¿
Oct 2, 2015 20:20
|
|
|
The Sharmat posted:The concept was more of a novelty at the time probably. I'm sure nostalgia plays a role. I wouldn't go as far as what you're saying though. Yeah, I never played it back then and when I decided to try, a couple of years ago, it just felt terribly outdated and unfun. Did not care about the supposedly superb writing neither (who gives a poo poo about writing on a strategy game). At the same time, Master of Magic is even older and still a great game.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 21, 2015 13:17
|
|
|
The Sharmat posted:Master of Magic is beautiful but the ancient braindead AI ruins it. Not that some modern strategy games are much better. I guess its really a challenge to make a strategy game with such complex mechanics and have an AI that knows how to play it. Endless Legend is my favorite "fantasy-civ" game since MoM but the AI also really sucks at it, and that makes the game a lot less interesting and replayable.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 21, 2015 16:35
|
|
|
oops EDIT != QUOTE
|
|
#
¿
Oct 21, 2015 16:35
|
|
|
Another Person posted:since paradox is in the business of buying beloved ips right now Pls paradox by the Jagged Alliance ip and and give us the proper not-bad sequel we have been waiting for since 98
|
|
#
¿
Oct 29, 2015 22:44
|
|
|
Mans posted:it's kind of sad how many Jagged Alliance "sucessors" have showed up in the JA thread and how creatively every single one of them fails to do even the basics of what made JA2 a game that is still played today. Yeah, I bought Back in Action and Flashback and they both try so hard but fall so far away to recreating what made JA2 great. They propose to update JA2 but arent even able to be on par, in features, size and depth, to the game they are trying to improve on. Not to mention style, charm and personality, of which they both have none at all. And that's part of the problem too: you cant remake JA2: its an absolute classic. Any game that claims to be a remake of it will be compared to the original and it will look bad. If they had at least tried to go further, to be JA3 instead, maybe they would not look so poor.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 30, 2015 12:39
|
|
|
I vaguely remember reading somewhere that a game is a self-contained set of rules through which the player interacts with other players or things or the game itself. It makes sense to me and applies to every game I can think of. Why are we discussing this again
|
|
#
¿
Nov 4, 2015 22:23
|
|
|
"historical accuracy" is an unattainable goal and trying too hard to achieve is probably the best receipt for bad gameplay. At the same time, I do have some problems with the "historicity" of EU4 model. Specifically: monarch points. This is some kind of magical energy which is required to do almost anything in the world, like improving or technology and infrastructure, defining you culture, fixing you economy, making peace deals, developing your cities. Anything. And basically the only source for this mystical fuel is your current ruler's rear end (that and advisors, but their contribution is a lot less). I just cant understand what in the real world this system is supposed to represent. It does works very well as gameplay mechanic so who cares anyway. The old ledger system was probably more realistic, but also a lot less fun. Elias_Maluco fucked around with this message at 12:24 on Nov 11, 2015 |
|
#
¿
Nov 11, 2015 12:19
|
|
|
Demiurge4 posted:Monarch points aren't mana. They specifically are supposed to model the competency of your nations administration. More competent leadership let's you progress faster. Well, I dont know, to me it seems is more like mana really. Competent leadership alone cant develop provinces or advance technology level nationwide, to cite a few examples. Your nation riches, resources, institutions, population (and population education level) etc, it all should have an impact on your capability of progressing technology or developing infrastructure etc. But it dont, its all about your ruler, plus few extra points from advisors. Nothing else is represented in the game but the "competent leadership" factor. So basically the only difference between France and any lovely one-province western nation is that France can raise more armies (the one thing that is not derived from MP). EDIT: vvvvvv I know it is, and I said it above. I just dont like it from a "historical realism" point of view (from a pure gameplay perspective, it works pretty well). And no, I dont know what could be better, but maybe something between the old system and the new. Elias_Maluco fucked around with this message at 12:59 on Nov 11, 2015 |
|
#
¿
Nov 11, 2015 12:43
|
|
|
I dont think Ive ever played a space 4X game ever since MOO 1, but all this talk here is making me want to try. Can someone recommend me some good games, past and present, of the genre?
|
|
#
¿
Nov 17, 2015 18:58
|
|
|
Thanks for the recommendations all. Stardrive 2 seems cool and works on linux (forgot to mention that this is a requirement for me at the moment), but the Steam reviews are terrible. Is these ones any good? The Last Federation http://store.steampowered.com/app/273070/?snr=1_5_9__300 AI War: Fleet Command http://store.steampowered.com/app/40400/ Elias_Maluco fucked around with this message at 19:21 on Nov 17, 2015 |
|
#
¿
Nov 17, 2015 19:17
|
|
|
Tomn posted:It really depends on what kind of player you are. The developers are huge fans of statistics, to the point where I think they rely on statistics to carry the narrative of the game, as it were - there's a lot of emergent narratives that come out of the gameplay, but you can only tell that it's there if you learn how to parse the absolute shitload of numbers they throw at you from every angle. Without that knowledge (or the patience to gain that knowledge) the game's a giant, overwhelming infodump that doesn't feel much like anything at all. I wasn't a fan myself, but if you're into that it could scratch your itch. Well I do like CK2 and EU4 and most of this applies to then too. I think ill get this one then. Gwyrgyn Blood posted:This is an RTS with Tower Defense sensibilities and a handful of 4x-like things. It's a pretty cool game though, great for comp-stomp (it's built entirely around that). Kind of an absurdly obtuse number of keyboard commands you need to learn though, and it's got a lot of counter-intuitive mechanics. Definitely worth a look if it sounds fun to you, especially if you've got some friends to play with. Not my kind of thing then, thanks.
|
|
#
¿
Nov 17, 2015 19:30
|
|
|
Oberleutnant posted:Make both your hands into fists, put them together side by side so all your knuckles are in a row. Pinky knuckle left hand is january, indentation between it and left ring finger is february, ring finger is march, and so on. All knuckles are months with 31 days. Indentations are months with 30 or 28 for feb. Or maybe you can just get your phone out of your pocket and look at the calendar it has there.
|
|
#
¿
Nov 26, 2015 19:10
|
|
|
vyelkin posted:Be honest, are you the person who created this website by directly stealing stuff from Europa Universalis 4? Not only the names, the provinces thenselves. And is not even determined by date, even in 1990 the provinces are the same fictitious EU4 ones .
|
|
#
¿
Dec 9, 2015 19:32
|
|
|
The only DLC that really can be described with "poo poo expanding it the wrong way" is Rajas of India, IMHO
|
|
#
¿
Jan 27, 2016 12:05
|
|
|
CharlestheHammer posted:Nah I think people just really want to hate India despite it being perfectly fine. Yeah, except that playing there is mind boggling boring and basically all unique mechanics (like the caste system) are half arsed and shoehorned into the game with little care
|
|
#
¿
Jan 27, 2016 16:21
|
|
|
AdjectiveNoun posted:I dunno if you can even say Decadence 'works' now. It was a really poorly thought out mechanic designed to punish you, now it's a slightly less exploitable mechanic designed to punish you. Its easier to handle now than it used to be. But yeah, its annoying and kinda stupid and I dont think there's any way to fix it. The right thing to do wopuld be to scrap it entirely, but then muslins would became just an easier and overpowered version of regular feudal.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 27, 2016 17:37
|
|
|
Torrannor posted:And in return, aside from decadence Muslims are fun to play with. There's the jostling between your wives, the choice of A'shari vs. Mu'tatelite (most of my vassals are A'shari, but the most powerful are Mu'tatelite, what do I chose? I like it too, and being caliph is awesome. But decadence is unfun and shia could get a little more flavor IMHO (you dont even have the A'shari vs. Mu'tatelite thing)
|
|
#
¿
Jan 28, 2016 11:59
|
|
), you can play with fatwas, the haji is one of the better event chains, etc.
|
I just want Rome 2 and also a game that ranges from the around the Peloponnesian Wars (or a bit earlier) to early Rome I dont think that was ever a really good strategy game set on this timeframe
|
|
#
¿
Feb 10, 2016 21:01
|
|
|
It seems like some people just need an excuse to fap at anime so you can just throw together anything that could be called a game with a lot of anime girls in sexy outfit all over the place and... profit
|
|
#
¿
Feb 20, 2016 15:58
|
|
|
Gort posted:Mods got really good. Play the Community Patch - it even fixes your pet peeve with taking cities. (though I'd still suggest bringing siege units, that's what they're for after all) Speaking about it (and sorry for the derail): is there any way to make this work with the linux version?
|
|
#
¿
Feb 26, 2016 23:15
|
|
|
Hot Dog Day #82 posted:Not a big deal for we super nerds who drop No linux port?
|
|
#
¿
Mar 7, 2016 17:19
|
|
to talk about videogames, but the Stellaris team recently updated the minimum requirements for the game to:
|
Groogy posted:Check the steam page yourself, Linux and Mac support is all listed there. I would be surprised if we suddenly decided to drop Linux support since we have several programmers working exclusively on the games through Linux. Mac is just lucky that Podcat likes it(and have more players than Linux). Great, thanks. I did expected it would be a linux version, that's why I asked, since all recent paradox games had
|
|
#
¿
Mar 7, 2016 18:06
|
|
|
Slime Bro Helpdesk posted:I'm not sure I buy that you'd be able to really control a PDX map game all that well via tablet? Like between needing to see the map or pieces of info you'd want to make actions on, and the various menus like budget control and whatnot. Specially when so much information is located in tooltips, as in CK2 and EU4
|
|
#
¿
Mar 8, 2016 18:35
|
|
|
I honestly dont even know what a "NATO counter" is. I was wanting to try 4, but HoI is probably not for me really
|
|
#
¿
Mar 29, 2016 12:55
|
|
|
In CK2 you don't really have to understand the underlying mechanics since larger numbers almost always win (the exception being nomad armies of full cavalry which can take much larger armies) Combat in Eu4 is a lot harder and more complex and I never understood it completely, but admittedly I never really tried either
|
|
#
¿
May 17, 2016 00:47
|
|
|
Tahirovic posted:Not sure where all the Stellaris hate is coming from, admittedly I've only put 12 hours into it but I am really enjoying it, more so than the current EU4 patch with 4 lovely useless systems that were tacked on top of it. What happened with EU4 lately? Last time Ive played was a little after Art of War and it was still fine
|
|
#
¿
May 17, 2016 14:15
|
|
|
Phlegmish posted:My issue with EUIV and CK2 is that they've been moving in the opposite direction, losing focus with various new systems constantly being superimposed on each other. Each Paradox franchise has its own feel, its own emphasis. Systems and mechanics should only be implemented or ported from one franchise to another if they can be integrated in a way that contributes to that. Exactly. I cant talk about EU4, I havent played it for a while, but the addition of EU4-style mechanics to CK2, coalitions and shattered retreat, was a very bad idea EDIT: is like, people used to complain about the game getting boring and easy after you become a big enough blob. Conclave tries to address it the right way, by making internal management more interesting and challenging. It aint perfect, but its a step on the right direction, because that's what CK2 is about. Coalitions, instead, is the wrong kind of solution. Is just take a mechanic from a complete different game and just throws it there in a simplified version. It makes little sense in the context of CK2, its badly integrated in the game and is just unfun. It doenst even makes expansion actually much harder, just more annoying. It is like: "so do you want to expand, player? Well gently caress you, you are going to have to fight half of the world for this county. just because". Coupled with shattered retreat, which also doenst makes war harder or more interesting, just longer, it just made the game less fun Elias_Maluco fucked around with this message at 13:50 on May 24, 2016 |
|
#
¿
May 24, 2016 13:30
|
|
|
Is not a bad DLC model but paradox must learn when and where to stop just my 2 cents
|
|
#
¿
May 29, 2016 15:16
|
|
|
I dont think is unethical or anything, I just think that, beyond a certain point, to keep developing above then might start hurting the games instead of improving then I think CK2 was probably as good as it could ever be after Horse Lords. Some Concalve features are nice, but I do think they came too late and, being optional, cant fully integrate into the rest of the game as they could. And everything else that came with it (DLC locked or free) were kinda bad (coalitions, shattered retreat) or unnecessary (the new education system that replaces the old, which wanst so great, with something that is not so great either, but gives the player less control) And of course we can always stop buying the DLC. But then many changes come in patches released together with the DLC (like the worst new features in CK2 recent history). Of course you can stop updating, but then you wont have the bug fixes and perfomance improvments and whatnot, and the mods you play will update to the lastest version etc etc. So is not that simple But that's just my opinion, of course. If people are still buying it, I see no reason to stop really Elias_Maluco fucked around with this message at 15:41 on May 29, 2016 |
|
#
¿
May 29, 2016 15:30
|
|
|
Fellblade posted:Haha ruined what the gently caress get some perspective. Ruined is a strong word, but Im personally waiting to coalllitions and shattered retreat to be optional for going back to the game because gently caress this poo poo
|
|
#
¿
May 30, 2016 15:19
|
|
|
Larry Parrish posted:Last truly good CK2 patch was probably the post-Old Gods hotfix... There's been a lot of good changes since but they always come with retarded stuff like India and tribals Tribals are fun. India is lame to play, but it wont affect your game in any way if you stay clear of it.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 2, 2016 15:17
|
|
|
Phlegmish posted:What makes India so lame to play? You'd expect it to be like anywhere else, with a few twists. Is just like anywhere else feudal, but in a corner of the world where nothing interesting happens and habing to deal with a few bad implemented mechanics that feel shoehorned in, like the caste system. Its just boring Elias_Maluco fucked around with this message at 15:33 on Jun 2, 2016 |
|
#
¿
Jun 2, 2016 15:28
|
|
|
Phi230 posted:Which boggles my mind why people want something like China. Its just more performance degradation for something that doesn't really add all that much Who wants it? In any case, it could be cool if they create some fun and unique mechanics to it, like they did with the hordes (and unlike what they did to India). Aditionaly, it would make India and hordes more fun to play too. And just make both India and China options (if you set it off, the whole area become empty and impassable), so it wont affect the performance for people who arent interested on playing there. Anything is better than messing more with the base gameplay IMHO
|
|
#
¿
Jun 2, 2016 16:00
|
|
|
Drone posted:Totally agree, I just think Paradox is going to have a hell of a time making an economics simulator that is fun. And unfortunately the V1/V2 style of fun isn't mass-market enough to fit in with modern Paradox design philosophy or their customers now. EU4 is pretty complex though? I mean, the combat system and the trade system at least are very far from simple to understand
|
|
#
¿
Jun 3, 2016 13:02
|
|
|
Oberleutnant posted:The whole story of paradox in the last few years was them cleaning their act up and releasing stable, functioning games that didn't require months of patches just to get working to the minimum acceptable standard. They did got better, but most DLCs (at least for CK2) still always ship with broken stuff, awful bugs and terrible unbalances, and require a patch or 2 to be really in shape
|
|
#
¿
Jun 4, 2016 15:42
|
|
|
PleasingFungus posted:The level of betrayal I felt when Paradox removed their games from SteamSpy tore something from me that I'll never be able to recover. They tore away my ability to respect anything, and they tore away my ability to feel human. Same, even though I've never even heard of steam spy before reading about it here
|
|
#
¿
Jun 4, 2016 17:47
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ Apr 27, 2024 09:54 |
|
|
Im thinking of getting both HoI 4 and Stellaris, but only when they get in a sale. Just like poster above, I tried HoI 2 and I felt overwhelmed. I felt I didnt know enough o WW2 and warfare to even begin trying to understand the UI and mechanics. But I want to try again. As for Stellaris, I just want to say is interesting that in this thread the consensus seems to be that it was a huge disappointment, while everywhere else it (even other threads here in SA) seems to be that it is awesome. In any case, I will buy it in a sale and wait for a couple of patches and DLCs to even try it
|
|
#
¿
Jun 14, 2016 17:12
|
|