mmkay posted:

I was playing on Ironman, which is why I'm slightly bitter about being wiped from the game by 10k upkeep-free event troops and I'm wondering if this is the norm in the earlier starts and if I should just ignore them all together whenever I'll fire up CK2 next time.

Freudian posted:

Erev posted:

So I'm set to go on a two and a half week repositioning cruise starting tomorrow and it'll have something like twelve 'at sea' days. As such I'm planning to spend at least part of the boat time catching up on strategy games. Now, with the understanding that I'll have no real net-connection and thus wiki access should I install CK2 or EU4? I've got most of the DLC for the first and like the setting but on the other hand I've really gained a budding interest in the early modern world over the last few years. Which one might I get more mileage out of (assuming that I plan to go out and nab any missing DLC)?

Another Person posted:

Viccy 3 would need a lot of transparency added to it to improve over 2. Such as...

"What on earth do all these different tech modifiers actually do? Is 0.2% pop growth huge, or tiny? How about 5% factory throughput? 1% tax efficiency? Where are these modifiers being applied? Are they additive or multiplicative?"
"How is it that you gain more troops, and why when the whole regiment dies once they disappear for a long time, but if they get knocked down to 100 men they will recover just fine? Why can't I disband a regiment and then train another with the same men from the population? Those men never left the population, and never died."
"How am I really influencing these political party changes? If I consistently made motions in favour of State Capitalism in the last 5 elections, why am I still getting in free market liberals every time? They don't even suit any of the other policies I supported."
"Why do I care about a 30% increase of individuals towards protectionism in a province which only has .2% who already support it? Is it making the value 30.2%, or does it mean +30% of that .2%? Does this influence the stances that the political parties actually take to make themselves electable?"
"Why am I killing no men in this battle when the enemy has 0% organisation left and I have 80%, yet they are getting kills on me?"
"If I am the 5th great power and have been for a decade, why does Austria, the 6th greatest power, take over war leadership from me on a war declared against me?"


There is a lot of demystifying that needs to be done to a lot of the mechanics that operate in this game if it were to get a sequel. I consider myself pretty decent at EUIV, and very good at CK2, but this game is impenetrable. It would also need to get rid of chain alliance war leader nonsense which makes no sense.

The economy is the biggest candidate for reform, but there is a hell of a lot of other things that need some work.

Westminster System posted:

Isn't the idea that "Romans" were literally only the people from Rome as far as Rome itself was concerned, it was just really liberal in its application of whom it called Roman Citizens.

Empress Theonora posted:

Operation Sea Lion (wargame)

Randarkman posted:

Germany really should have the option to just declare war on Poland anyway regardless of whether Poland folds to their territorial demands or not. That was pretty much the real life case, the German ultimatum was one pretty much designed to be impossible for the Poles to accept, especially when it came to deadline (it was announced to the German Reichstag and communicated to the British in the evening and expired the same midnight, the Polish government had to obtain a translation by way of the British) and who the Germans were willing to accept as negotiators (they rejected the authority of the Polish ambassador in Berlin to do so after he signalled that Poland was ready to negotiate after the deadline expired).

Hitler wanted war, the ultimatum and territorial demands were just means to obtain an excuse. In fact it bears some similarites to the Austro-Hungarians' approach towards Serbia at the start of World War I.

Enjoy posted:

The COMINTERM, the much feared left-wing association of school timetable planners.

Lord Tywin posted:

I dunno if it's the best idea to attack the Soviet Union with 150 divisions in October, the German doctrines all being researched by 1940 might pull him through though. It's also quite hilarious since Jakob's plan was to ally the Soviets

Psychotic Weasel posted:

Oh poo poo - releasing the games a month apart!

Athaboros posted:

New IP, looks like? "Tyranny" from Obsidian and Paradox.

Randarkman posted:

EU4 is pretty much a new game compared to what it was at launch now. Will be interesting to see how HoI4 and Stellaris change over the years as well.

SeaTard posted:

I agree, CK2 has been more enjoyable than EU4 for some time now.

COOL CORN posted:

So, I have all EU4 DLC except for El Dorado, Common Sense, The Cossacks, and Mare Nostrum. Which of these, if any, are essential? I don't really feel like dropping $65 on DLC right now (well obviously I could wait on sales)

RocknRollaAyatollah posted:

China getting taken out in 2 years by an unprepared Japan is pretty crazy. The AI needs a serious reworking.

It's not too say it's terrible or doomed, just seems like a Paradox title at launch. EUIV was pretty bad in that regard at launch and now it's pretty great.

John Charity Spring posted:

This is weird - Hearts of Iron: War Stories has just been released, a choose your own adventure game on mobile about being a Battle of Britain pilot. It's free - or at least the first 5 chapters out of 22 are free - so I gave it a shot. It's, uh. It's pretty loving badly written, apparently by someone who doesn't really know what England is, or maybe even what the target age group for the game is meant to be. Also all the characters sound extremely American, and maybe as if they get all their vocabulary from Simple English Wikipedia.



I stopped playing at this point. I feel like I've seen all I need to see.

Athaboros posted:

I see this sentiment in lots of places these days -- what do people consider to be the 'best' version of EU4, then? Since you can roll back to previous patches in Steam, I'd like to compare how it's changed over the past year or two.

Slaughterhouse-Ive posted:

I've said it before but I just think it was weird to not give Stellaris a little more time in the oven when Pdox was launching a major title a month later. Most of what people complained about would've probably been fixed if it got a Q4 release IMO.

I feel like people got way too over invested in it though. Like it's cool a good chunk of the dev team posts here but if they can endure code reviews they can ensure shitposting, and if you hated it $40 isn't that much in the grand scheme of things and if it is such a colossal dent in your disposable income you should probably wait for a sale or consider a cheaper hobby.

corn in the bible posted:

anyway ck2 is cool but conclave is irredeemable. explain yourselves pdox

Hot Dog Day #82 posted:

So this has little to do with videogames buuuutt.... I just finished watching The Tudors on Netflix. I've already seen both Borgia series, is there anything else I can be watching to wet my Western European historical soap opera whistle?

Jack Trades posted:

I was hoping maybe you guys could recommend me a Paradox game.

I've been playing Stellaris a whole lot lately (which was my first Paradox game) and I am really liking the whole "roleplaying" thing it has going on and especially how it simulates different groups of populations and such.
Unfortunately Stellaris is quite unfinished so far so I was thinking about trying a different Paradox game meanwhile. Which one of the other Paradox games does those two particular things best?

Prism posted:

Which history is this? I'm always looking out for new historical stuff to read and this sounds interesting unless it's extremely technical.

Enjoy posted:

You might need an option for everyone else for it to fire. Also ENG might get both option 1 and 2

Try this

ArchangeI posted:

Also why are you using a newsevent to actually do a thing?

ArchangeI posted:

That's not elegant and tries to fit a square peg into a round hole. You make an event for England and fire the news event from that. Besides, everyone already gets a capitulation news event for the RAJ, so I dunno why they need to be told that the Raj has capitulated, again.