Register a SA Forums Account here!
JOINING THE SA FORUMS WILL REMOVE THIS BIG AD, THE ANNOYING UNDERLINED ADS, AND STUPID INTERSTITIAL ADS!!!

You can: log in, read the tech support FAQ, or request your lost password. This dumb message (and those ads) will appear on every screen until you register! Get rid of this crap by registering your own SA Forums Account and joining roughly 150,000 Goons, for the one-time price of $9.95! We charge money because it costs us money per month for bills, and since we don't believe in showing ads to our users, we try to make the money back through forum registrations.
 
  • Post
  • Reply
Pakled
Aug 6, 2011

WE ARE SMART

Wolfechu posted:

No one going with stellaris for 'best/worst paradox atrocities', huh? I mean, aside from destroying entire planets, you can turn entire civilizations into mindless slaves, or livestock.

Stellaris atrocities are a lot less visceral than other Paradox atrocities (at least to me) because
A. they're against cultures that do not, did not, and will not actually exist in real life, and
B. the nature of the atrocities are for the most part things that have not happened in human history and are not possible given human technology

Adbot
ADBOT LOVES YOU

Pakled
Aug 6, 2011

WE ARE SMART

Crazycryodude posted:

Bronze Age Mesopotamian city-states game or maybe Egypt would be really cool. Or MotE II, that'd be nice. I'd ask for a Cold War game but I'm not really sure how well the cloak and dagger bullshit and insurgencies that really characterize the era would work with the traditional map game format.

I think a Cold War mapgame would work best if the main actors were organizations rather than people or counties. Like, political parties, politburo factions, armed rebellions, and terrorist groups, all represented under one system. Countries, like in CK2, are tools to be used by the group that controls it, with their own laws governing how the country is run and what the group in charge is allowed to do (with, of course, the option to perform illegal activities if you think you can can keep it quiet or have enough control over your country that it doesn't matter if you get caught), and fought over by other groups, either peacefully or violently. Armed rebellions can become political parties after they seize control of a country/declare independence in a controlled region, or as part of a peace agreement. Political parties can transition into armed groups if another party takes over and goes all tyrannical. Receiving support and exploiting popular dissent could turn groups that were complete jokes in our timeline into powerhouses.

Pakled
Aug 6, 2011

WE ARE SMART
Yeah I wouldn't worry about the graphics when the army icon is still a platypus.

Pakled
Aug 6, 2011

WE ARE SMART
https://twitter.com/producerjohan/status/1033617854187356160

I know the populists are supposed to be the "gently caress you, player" faction, but it makes no sense for them to be against a law like this. It's socialists being against legalizing unions all over again.

Pakled
Aug 6, 2011

WE ARE SMART

Deceitful Penguin posted:

Socialists or Communists?

Because uhh, unions are not something that the latter supports at all, for what I'd hope was obvious reasons. (Reform, not revolution)

Yeah, as StealthArcher said, I was referring to Socialists in Vicky 2, who are explicitly separate from Communists.

Pakled fucked around with this message at 15:11 on Aug 27, 2018

Pakled
Aug 6, 2011

WE ARE SMART

Jazerus posted:

*stares at charles II-esque self in mirror* i'm...0/0/0?



lol

Pakled
Aug 6, 2011

WE ARE SMART

Drone posted:

Yeah, it's definitely a (minor) step in the right direction.

As much as I think Paradox's continuous development cycle is a good thing, I also cannot fathom how they plan on breaking out of the current generation. Building a successor to a game like CK2 (which has been in constant post-release development for like seven years now) is going to be an absolutely monumental task, given that vanilla, launch-status CK3 will not be able to even scratch the surface of the depth of CK2 + expansions.

It's like the Civ 5 to Civ 6 problem amplified by a factor of ten.

Yeah, CK3 couldn't possibly be "CK2 but better" on a realistic dev cycle. I have to imagine, if they ever make CK3, it'd have to diverge from the standard mapgame paradigm pretty immensely to justify stripping away so many features added by CK2 DLC. I know this is a ridiculous thought and it would never work but in the deepest recesses of my mind, there's a voice telling me that combining CK2 and Mount & Blade would produce the greatest video game ever made.

Pakled
Aug 6, 2011

WE ARE SMART
I guess Persians and Indians didn't know how to build roads.

Pakled
Aug 6, 2011

WE ARE SMART

Ulio posted:

First time playing a Paradox game, how do I find someone valuable to marry? Only courtiers want to marry me but I am a king and I gain no value from them.

There should be a ring button on your character sheet, click that and it'll bring up a decently sized list of suggested brides. If you wanna search more exhaustively, use the character finder (the button with two people in the bottom right of your screen) to narrow down the results, search by traits, abilities, etc.

Pakled
Aug 6, 2011

WE ARE SMART

The Cheshire Cat posted:

Prussia is usually recommended as the starting country just because it kind of shows you the whole game. You don't immediately start at #1 like with Britain but you're so strong that the conflicts you'll encounter you will almost certainly win, so it has a nice satisfying progression going form Prussia -> Germany without actually being too challenging to do.

I actually don't like Prussia as a starter country because up until you defeat AH in the Brothers' War, micromanaging influence is important, and if you're don't know what you're doing and don't pick up on the system for a while it can cause you big headaches later when you're trying to unify Germany any way other than the Gutter Crown. I think Brazil is a better choice.

Pakled
Aug 6, 2011

WE ARE SMART

Corbeau posted:

Don't coward out, your first game should be making Haiti a Great Power.

This was literally my first game of Vicky 1, also my first Paradox game

Pakled
Aug 6, 2011

WE ARE SMART

Funky Valentine posted:

I think this is how flat earthers conceive of the world.

Flat Earthers think it's the other way around, with the North Pole in the center and Antarctica as an impassible wall of ice surrounding the world that the government is hiding from us.

Pakled
Aug 6, 2011

WE ARE SMART

A Strange Aeon posted:

I'm still a huge noob when it comes to CK, despite playing 2 a bunch. I've just been playing past the tutorial in 3 and wanted to confirm a mistake I think I made.

After having titles to most of Ireland and two sons only, my soulmate wife died and I remarried someone for a big prestige boost, who happened to be a fornicator I could have imprisoned with no tyranny.

I didn't, though, and we had multiple sons and then I died, so now my new guy has to contend with those sons to get back the 7 titles lost due to confederation partition inheritance (I think that's what it is called).

My previous guy could have created the kingdom of Ireland, but didn't have enough money before he died. If that was my goal, am I correct that remarrying and having more kids actually made that more difficult?

Like, I should have stayed unmarried or if I did get the wife I chose, should have imprisoned her right away to not risk having more kids?

Until I can change the inheritance laws, what's the general strategy to avoid having inconvenient heirs? I don't mind the narrative but winning back titles I already had feels like retreading the same ground and I'd like to minimize that if possible moving forward.

The number of kids you have is a balancing act. Until you've unlocked Primogeniture, you don't want too many sons because it makes succession messy. But having daughters to marry off for alliances is a good thing. And it can help you in the long run to position dynasty members to inherit foreign titles and spread your dynasty far and wide because having more rulers of your dynasty increases your dynasty's renown, and the dynasty head gets a cheap "claim title" interaction over foreign dynasty members.

If you want to be married for the stats/alliance but don't want to have any more kids, then you could marry a woman over 45, or you could go down the medicine lifestyle tree to unlock the decision to adopt/abandon celibacy.

Pakled fucked around with this message at 15:52 on Mar 29, 2021

Pakled
Aug 6, 2011

WE ARE SMART
Yeah I think you could push the start date back to Waterloo without making things too weird. Making it start at the beginning of the Congress of Vienna is fun to think about, but would probably introduce too much in the way of immediate monumental divergences, plus I don't know how you'd handle Napoleon's Hundred Days in a satisfying way.

Pakled
Aug 6, 2011

WE ARE SMART
That info dump reddit post has me excited. Vicky has always been the most conceptually interesting Paradox game to me, and POPs' standard of living has always been something I really hoped they'd focus on, and I'm ecstatic to see that it appears to be getting so much attention.

Pakled
Aug 6, 2011

WE ARE SMART

Mans posted:

Ah, that makes a lot of sense and yeah, I hope diplomacy is much better here than in Vic 2


No wars...on a game about the 19th century that ends in 1936?

Switzerland and Sweden managed to avoid war from 1836-1936!

Pakled
Aug 6, 2011

WE ARE SMART
The thing I miss most about CK1 is that one trumpet sound effect. You know the one.

Adbot
ADBOT LOVES YOU

Pakled
Aug 6, 2011

WE ARE SMART
I haven't explored CK3's mod scene so I dunno if there's anything like it out there yet but all the various total conversion mods for CK2 really expanded its lifetime for me. After The End was amazing.

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
  • Post
  • Reply