CKII is released.

[Delterius]

but I still felt more connected to the sliders than to the MP.

I think you are approaching this form the immershun point of view. That is an unwise path that leads people into thinking population was an important feature of EU3.

 

[Vaarna_Aarne]

Obviously it wasn't well implemented in EU3, but removing a feature rather than fixing it is bad. Plenty of things that were completely screwed up in EU3 were fixed in mods.

That said most of what was lost from EU3->EU4 was good mechanics being dropped in favor of worse mechanics (e.g. the trade system, tech system, monthly/yearly split income system), not a loss of features. EU3 was pretty feature-bare.

Tech system IMO got better, since now it had more active planning involved and it was not linked to the tax sliders and inflation. Monthly/Yearly split in taxation was also just unnecessary busywork for no real benefit in contrast to a more intuitive and simpler book-keeping. As for trade system, the only thing that was really lost mechanically is the creation of new trade centers, BUT the new system's trade route mechanic makes for a much better and overall interesting system where there's more than local production involved. Also it no longer has send merchant busywork either. Sure it'd be nice for the trade centers and trade routes (or at least trade center locations per trade center zone and the end node zones) be more fluid and mutable.

The thing I most dislike in EUIV is the monthly "salary" income. It's probably easy on bad players, but it reduces uncertainty in a bad way + it's unhistorical. Taxes were usually collected once a year.

Problem tho is that the argument of historicity cannot overtake game design in importance. I mean, being able to tax directly into currency is unhistorical, being able to directly control trade is unhistorical, armies not having lots of attrition from disease is unhistorical, being able to see next to your provinces and armies is unhistorical, being able to ship tens of thousands across the globe is unhistorical, being able to check statistical information of other countries is unhistorical, instant purely bilateral peace negotiations are unhistorical, having control over technological progress is unhistorical, standing armies as sole global standard are unhistorical, instant communications and reactivity are unhistorical, ping pong is unhistorical, not having Juche-jumbo-size proportion of military spending is unhistorical, not being neck-deep in loans is unhistorical, etc, etc. If we went with historical accuracy the player should have fog of war limited to the national leader's current physical location, most of the game would deal with indirect messages and reports, managing your delegating of all sorts of tasks and trying to keep up with the results of those delegated tasks and their delegated tasks results and effectiveness, lack any sort of direct control over population, revolt risk, production, trade, taxation, diplomacy, etc. It would be an interesting game, maybe, but it wouldn't be what you'd expect from a grand strategy game spanning centuries.

Bottom line is that in a game, the question of historical accuracy should be "does this add anything of value to THIS type of game."

 

[Average Manatee]

Obviously it wasn't well implemented in EU3, but removing a feature rather than fixing it is bad. Plenty of things that were completely screwed up in EU3 were fixed in mods.

That said most of what was lost from EU3->EU4 was good mechanics being dropped in favor of worse mechanics (e.g. the trade system, tech system, monthly/yearly split income system), not a loss of features. EU3 was pretty feature-bare.

Tech system IMO got better, since now it had more active planning involved and it was not linked to the tax sliders and inflation.

Active planning? What? In EU3 you had to plan and invest over years, in EU4 you click a button.

Monthly/Yearly split in taxation was also just unnecessary busywork for no real benefit in contrast to a more intuitive and simpler book-keeping.

It added a penalty for messing up your finances and incentivized keeping a some money in the bank to deal with things. In EU4 there's essentially no reason not to spend money as soon as you get it. You could even say that EU4 created more busywork, since in EU4 you want to buy a building or something every time you get 100 ducats in the bank, meaning you need to be watching your money counter every month, while in EU3 you could simply spent your surplus at the end of the year.

As for trade system, the only thing that was really lost mechanically is the creation of new trade centers, BUT the new system's trade route mechanic makes for a much better and overall interesting system where there's more than local production involved. Also it no longer has send merchant busywork either. Sure it'd be nice for the trade centers and trade routes (or at least trade center locations per trade center zone and the end node zones) be more fluid and mutable.

New trade system is pure crap. Money only flows one direction and it forces you to blob across entire continents to actually make profits. In EU3 and real life countries like Portugal and Netherlands controlled substantial amounts of trade while having only 1 or 2 ports in Asia. In EU4 this is impossible, they need to control most of India/Arabia/East Africa in order to profit. Apparently EU4 thinks that if you send trade through an area without owning the area all your trade ships get boarded and looted due to magical province power. Also merchants were completely automated, what are you talking about busywork?

 

[Vaarna_Aarne]

Technically you can do the same strategic province taking in EU4 as well, but IMO that runs into a problem across the whole series which is that there is never reason NOT to blob across entire continents if you have the opportunity. In EU3 you'd still get the real trade income from blobbing the trade center (and preferably destroying any ones you didn't want nearby). I'm not really happy with the trade system in either game, since there's no refinement of goods or any kind of Triangle Trade mechanic for moving about various goods in exchange for other goods. It sort of ties in with how I think the best way to handle the military aspect would be some kind of mobilization system instead of standing armies that you build with gold, with things like muskets (of all sorts) and cannons being trade goods that you acquire precisely so you can equip your mobilized peons, it'd be a much better system than having a tech system handle units in war (in fact, the tech aspect really should be some kind of national idea or institution esque thing for tactical innovations). Sort of like how armies work in that recent Nobunaga's Ambition (also adding that whole looting and burning thing would also be very apt given how that was von Wallenstein's solution to logistics during the Wars of Religion). A mobilization and goods based military model would probably be around the same level of "do want" list of features to me as indepth negotiation processes in style of Treaty of Westphalia and Tordesillas.

(Also IIRC the merchant sending automation happened only in Divine Wind)

In regards to taxation, I'd say the only thing the yearly/monthly model did was make early game more tiresome because your accounting was done on a yearly scale instead of a monthly economy. Ultimately in case of both games the same principle in saving money is first and foremost for large-scale investments, event crisis fund, and hiring extra mercenaries.

 

[AwesomeButton]

I don't want to turn the thread to an argument about EUIV. Vaarna_Aarne , I've read your argument quite a few times, posted by a multitude of different people in various threads. You are not discovering anything new here. If we had true history-based gameplay, the player would have to be surrounded by so much uncertainty and deliberately false information, that the real fun from a game would be watching your "replay" (if there was such a feature), with all the "fog" lifted from all the internal workings, and being able to see the things you only suspected or expected while playing.

Still, ultimately everyone draws the line beyond which gamey mechanics break his immersion and fun somewhere. And funnily enough, for most self-proclaimed gamists, ridiculing players who seek "immurshun", the line really invovles shiny graphics, and is not really connected with game mechanics. Not saying you are one of them.

 

[Anthedon]

MEIOU and Taxes 2.0 will fix it, performance permitting.

 

[sser]

Problem with CK3 is that it would be bare bones again.

Didn't EUIV pretty much incorporate every feature from EUIII? I think they're aware of that.

Different pay and feature structure, though. I'm actually interested to see if they got the Sims route with the sequels -- the Sims frequently takes all those expensive DLC/expansions and tosses 'em right out the window when starting a new iteration.

 

[Vaarna_Aarne]

So anyway, we should get back to hailing Satan.

 

[Delterius]

So anyway, we should get to praising the Zun.

May all the Caliph's armies die in the siege of Quetta.

 

[Starwars]

So, has anyone played somewhat extensively with the new DLC? I'm aware that it seems to be mostly lulzy but does it add anything worthwhile to the game? I quite liked the Reaper's Due.

 

[34scell]

I think the best stuff (crypto-religion, UI changes, optimisations) are free with the patch. The actual societies are completely under cooked, so just wait for more patches/mods if that's what interests you.

 

[Tigranes]

I really hope (but don't expect) that with CK3/EU5, they'd actually really rework core mechanics and try to produce a very different experience. They've gotten as far as they can go with the current setup. I could excuse a more bare-bones release if they did that.

 

[Average Manatee]

I think the best stuff (crypto-religion, UI changes, optimisations) are free with the patch. The actual societies are completely under cooked, so just wait for more patches/mods if that's what interests you.

Definitely this.

The societies seem to be proof-of-concept stuff to guide modders in how to make missions and stuff. They are badly imbalanced and feel out of place. The devil-worshipping society in particular basically gives you guaranteed immortality + ability to kidnap and execute anyone without tyranny. Unfortunately Paradox made societies hardcoded to be mutually exclusive which seems to screw over modders who were planning to let characters be in multiple societies at once.

 

[wwsd]

I think the best stuff (crypto-religion, UI changes, optimisations) are free with the patch. The actual societies are completely under cooked, so just wait for more patches/mods if that's what interests you.

Definitely this.

The societies seem to be proof-of-concept stuff to guide modders in how to make missions and stuff. They are badly imbalanced and feel out of place. The devil-worshipping society in particular basically gives you guaranteed immortality + ability to kidnap and execute anyone without tyranny. Unfortunately Paradox made societies hardcoded to be mutually exclusive which seems to screw over modders who were planning to let characters be in multiple societies at once.

Good. If there's one thing CK2 needed, it was guaranteed immortality. Because just getting the immortality quest line in every single game wasn't enough. The game is so hard, you really need Godmode. And then people will whine about not feeling challenged and they'll add in more stuff like shattered retreat and totally historical medieval concepts like "threat level" and "defensive pacts". Now all we need is nukes and pacts like NATO and the Warsaw Pact.

 

[Beastro]

and they'll add in more stuff like shattered retreat

They already did....

 

[Mortmal]

I think the best stuff (crypto-religion, UI changes, optimisations) are free with the patch. The actual societies are completely under cooked, so just wait for more patches/mods if that's what interests you.

Definitely this.

The societies seem to be proof-of-concept stuff to guide modders in how to make missions and stuff. They are badly imbalanced and feel out of place. The devil-worshipping society in particular basically gives you guaranteed immortality + ability to kidnap and execute anyone without tyranny. Unfortunately Paradox made societies hardcoded to be mutually exclusive which seems to screw over modders who were planning to let characters be in multiple societies at once.

Good. If there's one thing CK2 needed, it was guaranteed immortality. Because just getting the immortality quest line in every single game wasn't enough. The game is so hard, you really need Godmode. And then people will whine about not feeling challenged and they'll add in more stuff like shattered retreat and totally historical medieval concepts like "threat level" and "defensive pacts". Now all we need is nukes and pacts like NATO and the Warsaw Pact.

Why would you need nuke when you have demonic possession ? That last DLC "monk&mystic" should be renamed to "Hail lucifer" the advantages you get from that "secret" society are unbelievable.You see a lone county ? abduct the guy, demonic possession, force vassalize him , force revoke title. You are emperor with many powerful vassals ? Demonic possession, 100% loyal guy , although they rarely murder you.You need more money ? abduct some guy from lower rank than you and ransom it, 50 dark power= 70 gold thats the exchange rate.Want a new wife ? dark divorce. Want anyone dead ? tainted touch.Lucifer has a solution for everything and its costing you nothing at all.
The christians secret societies gives you a discount on temple building, a birth control system, free character virtues and a better medic, rather cool but not nearly as good. Hermetic order, immortality at the end, else nothing of worth.

 

[vonAchdorf]

Hermetic order, immortality at the end, else nothing of worth.

If you don't go to the extremes (immortality), I find the Hermetic order quite practical, because it has a cure for the annoying "Stressed" trait, which the game, imo, dishes out way too often.

 

[Mortmal]

Hermetic order, immortality at the end, else nothing of worth.

If you don't go to the extremes (immoralities), I find the Hermetic order quite practical, because it has a cure for the annoying "Stressed" trait, which the game, imo, dishes out way too often.

Playing them a little more i found you can easily exploit it to get massive learning bonuses too.

 

[Vaarna_Aarne]

Lucifer has a solution for everything and its costing you nothing at all.

 

[Average Manatee]

Hermetic order, immortality at the end, else nothing of worth.

If you don't go to the extremes (immortality), I find the Hermetic order quite practical, because it has a cure for the annoying "Stressed" trait, which the game, imo, dishes out way too often.

The health penalty of Stressed is truly awful. Feels like most of the time I get sick I'll recover just fine so long as I'm under 50 years old, but if I get Stressed + sick, it's death within a month.

 

[34scell]

Keep in mind, Sloth massively reduces the chance of getting Stressed.

 

[vonAchdorf]

The modern concept of stress was unknown in Medieval times anyway.

 

[Starwars]

Anyone noticed a change for the worse in how the AI handles its armies during war? I'm not sure whether I just hadn't noticed it before but it appears to be... just moving around more aimlessly than before. An army will siege something, then just go to some area that is not involved in the war effort, and then march back again.

 

[Andnjord]

Right, I was browsing the Warhammer mod subforum and saw this:

hopw roewur ne

followed by this:

Equip the ring and you will understand.

Which of you jokers was it?

 

[Multiple Sarcasm]

Haven't played the game in a long while, so might've forgotten how to do this, but why can't I find any proper options to force my vassals with negative opinion to pay their obligations? Who the fuck do they think they are? Feudalism isn't a popularity contest: you pay your liege or get your shit fucked up - and yet the game isn't giving me a casus belli for it, like all I'm supposed to do is suck up to my vassals or something. What's the deal here?