|
Rannos22 posted:Is there a steam group, IRC channel or Skype chat for playing Paradox games multiplayer with goons? I got a taste of CK2 multiplayer playing with friends a while back and now single player just feels like a pale imitation I don't think anyone replied to this, so here you go. There's a Steam group for Paradox goons called Comet Sighted, I'm part of it (as are a fair number of thread regulars) but it doesn't look like it's had much use as of late. I think a few people set up MP games from time to time in IRC or Skype, but I'm not really sure what channels to go to for that 'cause I don't really use either of them. Incidentally, if we want to keep using the Steam group it might be helpful for someone to update the information again, like with a fresh link to the new thread.
|
#
¿
Jan 6, 2013 14:32
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ Apr 19, 2024 23:00 |
|
|
I think I've finished maybe three games of EU3 to completion - one as France, where I basically couldn't be bothered with colonising and decided to just take over the HRE instead, one as what ended up as Italy (starting as one of the Italian minors - don't remember which one) and one as the Ottomans expanding through the middle east. It's actually quite satisfying to see the end screen, but it's just a shame that by that point there really isn't much challenge left in the game beyond rebel whack-a-mole and the same bitter-rivalry wars with the other blob superpowers.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 13, 2013 10:30
|
|
|
A Buttery Pastry posted:Not much to say really, other than that the deterministic style of the country specific national ideas still bugs me. LEF doesn't make a lot of sense if the French monarchy manages to kill The Revolution! Would prefer the national ideas being ones that would make sense no matter what turns the politics of the country takes. Napoleon (instead of just a Napoleon) appearing over 300 years after the start of the game annoys me as well, but at least that's purely cosmetic. For what it's worth, I imagine they would have some sort of random name bit there. It does seem odd that Napoleon would take power every time, and I hope they've gone with the random names (like rulers) with "Napoleon Bonaparte" being one of them to take the middle ground between history and pure randomness. It does seem kind of weird that the revolution is always assumed to be violent and bloody, though. I suppose that's how the French do things? Though I guess peaceful reform would probably just be abstracted in the act of changing one's government type.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 14, 2013 10:53
|
|
|
A Buttery Pastry posted:If you don't mind me asking, what else would you expect from a revolution? Violence is pretty much inherent to revolution, unless the authorities capitulate to enough demands to take the wind out of its sails. They do point out that failure to reform is a major trigger, so a peaceful solution is off the table by that point. I suppose I was more picturing the American revolution (if it could be called a 'proper' revolution), where the government is forcibly overthrown through violence, but a government that more or less has its poo poo in order steps in with a realistic-ish constitution, etc. etc. Although looking back, it does seem like there's a pretty poor batting average for revolutions 
|
|
#
¿
Jan 14, 2013 22:27
|
|
|
ThePutty posted:
Oh no. Ohnoohnoohnoohno  This is just a nightmare, right? Or the fevered ramblings of madmen?
|
|
#
¿
Jan 15, 2013 14:25
|
|
|
DrSunshine posted:Has there been any talk hereabouts about March of the Eagles? Seems like a Napoleonic-era game focused more on warfare. I hadn't heard of it at all till I wandered past Paradox's main website on a whim today. Any opinions on this? From my take on it, anyway, the goons in this thread are either approaching it as a EU-HoI blend (a Europa game that has a bigger focus on more immediate warfare), which should be pretty cool, or they see it as a Beta for EU4 a la Sengoku. Some people seem kinda pessimistic about it. It wouldn't surprise me to see features from MotE being implemented into EU4 (or problems in MotE being addressed with new mechanics in EU4), but I'm hoping that March of the Eagles fills the niche for Napoleonic warfare that isn't quite suited for the EU series or the Vicky series. If it's anything like HoI-level micromanaging, though, I may not be very good at it at all 
|
|
#
¿
Jan 19, 2013 02:31
|
|
|
Vodos posted:I didn't get it either, turns out my "Receive email from admins" in the forum control panel was unchecked. I'm no really sure whether I ever touched that setting but apparently that's the reason. If I didn't have the "receive email from admins" option checked (it is now, just in case), is there anything I can do to still get my key for EU3 Chronicles? I'd love to be able to gift it to someone.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 23, 2013 02:25
|
|
|
My first EUIV playthrough will probably be England, because it's one of the cultures I'm more familiar with and it's a kind of pseudo-nationalism. Also because playing England gives me the opportunity to check out colonisation, naval warfare and playing World Police in Europe while absorbing Scotland and the Irish. I'd be really excited to see an English Civil War event chain, too; get some alt-history with a proper English commonwealth going 
|
|
#
¿
Jan 27, 2013 04:10
|
|
|
That makes me think: what is there in an East Vs West multiplayer game to stop a dickish USA player just destroy the world at the very start of an MP game? Apart from the logistics of building the nukes and etc., if there's a game over upon N nukes being fired, can't the US just decide to spit the dummy if things don't look like going their way?
|
|
#
¿
Jan 30, 2013 08:43
|
|
|
uPen posted:The first person to launch nukes loses. Ah. I wasn't sure whether nukes would be in as an actual mechanic (e.g.: the ability to use a tactical nuclear strike, which if I remember correctly was actually proposed in a couple of engagements [by madmen]) and doomsday would be represented by a countdown or doomsday clock or somesuch. It still kind of seems imperfect, though - if a nuclear weapon is instant "you lose", what's the incentive for the US or USSR to build up their stockpiles?
|
|
#
¿
Jan 30, 2013 08:56
|
|
|
Maybe not a War of the Worlds *exact* DLC, but something similar to that would be interesting. In the same way that the Sunset Invasion DLC forces the crusader kings to reconsider their position as the dominant power (they're not, but that's beside the point), an Alien Invasion could force the Great Powers of the 19th century to re-evaluate their position in the world. War of the Worlds played on people's fears over what the end of the 19th century would hold (Fin de siecle), some thinkers in Britain especially thought the world may have been on the way out when the 20th century hit. An alien invasion of apocalyptic proportions would be interesting not just for the military challenge (not that Vicky 2 is really a wargame), but also for the aftermath when the martians fizzle out from disease. What effect would something like this have on post-invasion politics? I honestly don't know, but the way it may affect politics in *the* Paradox politics game gives some interesting potential. edit: just to build a bit more, I'm envisioning huge swells in Fascist/Communist thought (or maybe Reactionary thought) because, say, "Liberalism proved itself too weak in the face of the invaders". You could also have bigger surges of unrest in colonies (because of the Empire's inability to protect the land) leading to possible early de- and re-colonization. The world market bubbles and explodes as nations suddenly need huge levels of concrete and other building materials to rebuild infrastructure... The Narrator fucked around with this message at 06:25 on Mar 2, 2013 |
|
#
¿
Mar 2, 2013 06:14
|
|
|
Wolfgang Pauli posted:Also, if you didn't mod your game, that's only 30 million dead. Welcome to the Paradox thread.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 17, 2013 05:46
|
|
|
DrSunshine posted:One more V2 thing-- what good does it do to have a country in your Sphere of Influence? Also, what's the benefit of having a country as your puppet? Do they pay tribute to you? If I remember correctly: having a nation in your sphere means that they are forced to buy their national imports from you (at least, you are their mandatory first option when purchasing goods, unless you cannot fulfill their order), and it also means you get first dibs on any resources of theirs you want to import. I don't really remember about puppets; it's been a while since I actually played V2 (before AHD even...) edit: beaten, though with oddly similar "first dibs" language... get out of my head, gradenko!
|
|
#
¿
Mar 22, 2013 03:46
|
|
|
brocretin posted:I've just started playing EUIII, and I'm having one hell of a time trying to keep any sort of balanced budget. It seems like I'm always in a downward spiral of debt and eventual bankruptcy due to loan payments. Can anyone clue me in on the basics? I'm rather new to Paradox games and my only substantial experience is with CKII, so I haven't the faintest what I'm really doing here. A bit of advice about how the $ works would be lovely. Don't worry about having a monthly deficit, so long as you make money at the end of the year. Don't be afraid to mint, especially in the early game when you're still trying to get set up. Use the minting money to make armies and invade your little neighbours or start filling up centers of trade. Try and see what policies you can enact or what specialists you can hire to try and find ways for you to make money. Who are you playing as?
|
|
#
¿
Mar 26, 2013 06:48
|
|
|
I'm guessing that the "A Hearts Of Iron Game" pigeonhole left the dev team kind of confused on the best way to approach a cold war game, particularly when HoI is historical/reasonable for *maybe* 15 years when this game has to hold onto a semblance of reality for 40 years.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 1, 2013 04:08
|
|
|
Drone posted:Playlist Thank you for this playlist, it makes a great accompaniment to planning out my moves for the Risk LP. It also makes me really want to get back into HoI3 again... Thank you for having the Red Army Choir on here. I feel so incredibly pumped to die uselessly for mother Russia 
|
|
#
¿
Apr 3, 2013 02:02
|
|
|
Wolfgang Pauli posted:Everything worth keeping from EU Rome could be tacked onto a CK2 DLC more easily than making a whole game out of it. If Sengoku can be turned into a CK2 mod then I don't know why EU Rome can't. I think you would have to make some non-merchant Republican mechanics first. I personally like the idea of the house and the different factions in Rome, so trying to find a way to implement that balance-of-power in a Republic would be quite difficult/janky under current CK2 mechanics.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 3, 2013 03:33
|
|
|
Drone posted:I don't think I've ever even seen the Free States in any of my V2 games. Is that the fascist/anarcho-liberal breakaway, like the communist People's Republic of America or whatever it's called? I think it's meant to happen if the US refuses to outlaw slavery, and represents the "free" states breaking away from the slavery-tolerating federal government. I thought it was an addition in PDM/APD or something like that, though.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 7, 2013 16:17
|
|
|
TheHoosier posted:drat Western capitalists choking out the world economy for blood and profit! And now you understand the history of the modern world 
|
|
#
¿
Apr 16, 2013 03:07
|
|
|
Starting as Sweden in the 1836 aHoD start, why does my economy instantly fall to pieces and gently caress itself out of recovery from go? Raising all taxes to 100, slashing military/clergy/bureaucracy funding and everything doesn't help much, I just inevitably slipstream down unable to make a consistent profit. It's been a long time since I've played Vicky 2 (didn't get A House Divided until today, even, and the bulk of my playtime would have been just after release of the original V2), what's happening here? I must say I'm enjoying Vicky with AHD and HoD, though. The crisis points are great at keeping the GPs on their toes, the colonial game appears to make for some interesting outcomes (my learn-to-play-again game as Brazil ended up with the UK releasing Canada in 1836 but then successfully colonising Oregon, Washington and Idaho without much competition. The only real issues at the moment, apart from me not really remembering how to play/what I should be doing are the constant dominion releases and the post-dominion colonising oddity. That, and as Brazil France kept deciding to dick on me for some reason
|
|
#
¿
Apr 17, 2013 11:32
|
|
|
Trip report part 2. I must have just been lucky with Brazil. Every country I pick so far seems to fall apart economically as soon as the game kicks in. I've attempted games as Sweden, Mexico, the Netherlands and a quick go of the CSA in the '61 start. Sweden, Mexico and the CSA's economy all lost it as soon as the game had started. As Mexico, should I just disband my starting army and build some regulars? I couldn't secure an alliance with any of the great powers (or the US), and buttering up the US only worked until I took one of Texas' territories, at which point the US decided to jump in anyway. In my first attempt, I dragged the US and myself into war for probably a couple of years. I managed to snag Washington and Oregon in the process, while the US was distracted with Oklahoma and Colorado. Even in my second game, when I managed to actually annex Texas, the US just refused to back down and slowly ground me into pieces. In the 61 start, there doesn't seem to be any way to win as the Confederacy. Your starting armies are spectacularly outnumbered by the US, and even with mobilisation and building new armies, the US just has to rush a few doomstacks onto you and it's all over. They instantly begin sieging provinces while I'm still trying to get my army together! Sweden... just doesn't work for some reason. I'd actually be fine with not fighting wars or anything for a while, if my economy would be working at the start of the game. Otherwise it's just a slow wait until I eventually can't cut any more costs or raise taxes, and I end up being unable to pay my loans. Is it possible the dominion issue is related to the world economy going nuts at the start of every game? I noticed while playing as Mexico and a couple other countries that other countries seem to go bankrupt (giving me the free cassus belli) very quickly.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 17, 2013 12:51
|
|
|
Jabu posted:God, this. I finally gave the CSA a try yesterday and it is utterly frustrating knowing that I could be rich and successful if only I managed to get the socialists in power. Twenty years of spamming elections and I can't get them above 12% Unrelated: How are you getting started as the CSA? Are you starting in the 1861 start or playing as the US until the civil war happens? I've tried the CSA in the 1861 start but I honestly have no idea what my options are. The union pretty quickly rolls over my troops and territory and I can't say I've managed to hold on long enough to start worrying about my factories and such. Related: I'm playing a Republican Prussia -> NGF -> Germany game, currently in about 1906 and I've had the liberals in power for about 30 straight years. I actually don't mind it, once you can encourage the capitalists to get off their rear end and pull in a few sphere countries for a captive market. I don't really like the micromanaging/voodoo that seems to get the factories working normally so my capitalists are doing a fine job anyway (in that my economy has actually skyrocketed and I'm ranked I think 4th industrially, 2nd overall).
|
|
#
¿
Apr 23, 2013 07:17
|
|
|
Serpentis posted:Is there some trick I'm missing in Vicky 2, or do all countries start the game with with their budget in the negative, forecast to go bankrupt in a month, unless I cut back every single spending element I can see because taxes don't (apparently when playing as any of the four recommended countries) do a drat? Yeah, ever since I picked up AHD+HoD together my games have always started in the negative. I have to raise all taxes to 100, cut drat near all spending (except military spending... I have a problem) and my first research techs have to be industrial or commercial to get myself back into the black.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 28, 2013 10:16
|
|
|
There really needs to be some sort of condition for the Redshirts rebels in V2 so that if another Italian Minor (say, like in my recent GP Two Sicilies game) has a higher prestige/score/is a GP than Sardinia-Piedmont, the crown of Italy goes to them. It was pretty annoying letting rebels seize Napoli and then getting sweet FA from it. So I reloaded and started doing the whole drudgery of snagging the Italian minors from France/Austria. Never did get the Papal States, France just would not let it go. But in any case, the Redshirts managed to storm Lucca, I figured it was going to be the easy way into Italy but THEN... nope. Instead, the rest of Italy decides they'll get together and drat Two Sicilies, right? The state which could best represent and act on the interests of a unified Italy in this timeline? Nope. That was... frustrating, to say the least.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 28, 2013 16:50
|
|
|
Take the Rheinland and reverse-revenge Prussia
|
|
#
¿
Apr 30, 2013 15:59
|
|
|
Is NNM for HoD worth a shot? How significant are the changes to Great Wars? The other things in the changelog all sound pretty good (mostly involved with some political fuckery to make communism more popular, some events regarded weird colonisation etc), so I'm starting to think of giving it a try. On a related note, is there a mod-management style for Vicky 2 in the same way as CK2 or EU3? Or will I have to backup my game and copy all the mod files over?
|
|
#
¿
May 1, 2013 04:01
|
|
|
In my current V2 game as Persia (which I'm really enjoying, except for the containment wars that inevitably happen after you civilize), the CSA won the civil war completely on their own accord (USA had not yet taken the Mexican Concession and Mexico had even gone as far as to colonize Idaho). I ended up going through and removing US cores on the CSA territories, mostly because I want to see how NA plays out with two counterbalances to the USA. This got me to thinking about making a decision for the US to lose those cores after a successful Civil War for CSA (much like "Abandon Finland", this would have to give some sort of tangible benefit for the US). This left me to think of the alt-history implications of a Confederate "victory" - read: not being eliminated. Considering the Confederate border stretches next-door to Washington, do people think the US would have considered moving their capital as a matter of security? I was thinking they might be tempted to shift their capital to, say, Philadelphia or New York. What else might happen as a consequence of a Union loss? Another thought just now was an increased demand to take more of Mexico and recoup the losses of the civil war?
|
|
#
¿
May 2, 2013 04:56
|
|
|
Major Isoor posted:Heh sorry; I was just slightly surprised that Japan was classified as an unciv at that point, (I mean, I know they adopted firearms a good while after Europe, although I had forgotten it was quite that much later on) so I wasn't certain if all of Brazil would be classed as that as well, (or is it an 'all or nothing' affair? I'm not really all that familiar with V2's mechanics) since aren't there swathes of it that are just forest/jungle? I wasn't sure how that would be categorized. "Civilization" in Vicky is a nebulous term that refers to a variety of abstracted factors. It generally means either 1) European-style government and principles or 2) "Modern" technology like post-Napoleonic combat and industrialization. Japan at the time was still a bit of a shut-in on the world stage and had trouble adopting modern technologies and government. Pretty much all of south America by this point has been colonized and has subsequently thrown off colonial oppression. Despite the fact that a lot of Brazil would be jungle, that jungle was still nominally under the control of a modern government with diplomatic recognition from the great powers. As far as uncivilized nations go, it's mostly Africa Asia (as well as the Pacific natives, but they mostly don't even get their own countries...) that are included in that term.
|
|
#
¿
May 5, 2013 13:41
|
|
|
Top Hats Monthly posted:This image is the best to show what Europeans thought, cicra 1821 Ugh, just imagine that nearly 200 years ago ol' W.C. Woodbridge was probably pretty proud to have his name on that thing, to be credited with making a work like that.
|
|
#
¿
May 5, 2013 15:23
|
|
|
I realise this is less Paradox related, but people in the thread are obviously well-informed of the background of these games: what was the impetus behind the end of the slave trade/slavery in general throughout Europe? The works of a few humanitarians who could argue that slavery was inhumane, or the realisation that slavery was impractical, which later had the humanitarian lens put on it for moral high ground? The general way Africans were treated (that is, as an inferior race) throughout the Victorian era makes me wonder what happened to change the perception from "Africans are sub-human and we should be able to own them" to "Africans are sub-human but we should at least try to Christianize/civilize them".
|
|
#
¿
May 7, 2013 08:15
|
|
|
Wiz posted:Yeah, don't want to give away the piano cat arc. Dude, come on. Also, nthing A Buttery Pastry's want for an ideology mapmode. I play Vicky 2 for the crazy political shenanigans, and I want to be able to tell whose politics are wrong, dammit! Speaking of which, here's the roundup from my NNM United States game in HoD, starting in 1836. I've wrapped up about halfway through 1933 because the double-punch of Communists and Jacobins every year is starting to be a drag (and my game's starting to slow down to the max):   The USA was a staunch and open democracy (passed every political reform I could) until shortly after Fascism unlocked. Somehow I managed to liberalise enough before the civil war struck to ban slavery and avoid wasting time. I've never played a Fascist nation before (normally I haven't lasted that long in a game of V2 before starting a new one), so I did some electioneering "encourage ideology" national focuses to help my Socialist voters see the iron fist's side of the argument  Fascism has done a lot better than Communism, becoming the popular choice for Britain (I think the Fascists got elected somehow), Russia and France (both of those two were the effects of a Total War), as well as GP Australia and formerly-GP Italy (both of those thanks to install Fascism wargoals courtesy of me). What few Proletarian Dictatorships there are are mostly bit-player decolonized African or Asian states ("dismantle empire" wargoals are great at giving the globe some exciting new secondary powers). The NNM Total Wars are suitably devastating. It's beautiful to see nations completely collapse in the post-war peace agreements. Thanks to some big wars and lots of rebel problems, Russia turned to a Presidential Dictatorship, then turned into the USSR, then Fascist, then USSR again, before finally sticking to Fascism. The UK released Rupert's Land and Canada, and I managed to get them and Columbia independent through war before bringing them into the US (mostly through war). Pretty much the day after Canada was released they petitioned to join the union Australia seems well-primed for becoming a GP for some reason, despite having not really done much colonising or war they became a GP of their own accord after being released as a dominion. I'm not sure whether it's a HoD effect or a NNM effect, but it seems like every country manages to civilize by the end of the game. China seems to civilize really frequently and ends up becoming a GP. At one stage in the game the GPs were UK, France, USA, republican North Germany, presidential-dictatorship Beiyang China, Japan and Australia. It made for an interesting balance in the world - Asia ended up fighting wars pretty frequently. China inevitably collapsed into civil war again, and seems pretty solidly shattered by now. Germany formed very late, the NGF only formed in about 1890-1900 or so and Germany only came about after 1920. I was kind of worried for a minute there about the alt-history implications of no strong unified German state. Austria got dicked on pretty solidly, losing Slovakia, forming A-H and eventually releasing Hungary and Croatia as satellite states. They also lost Slavonia somehow so Austria's empire went down pretty ignominiously.
|
|
#
¿
May 8, 2013 10:51
|
|
|
A Buttery Pastry posted:I think the AI has some events in NNM that can cause it form the NGF early, and even without all cores. (Usually those early NGF's lacks Sleschwig for some reason.) I'm guessing it has something to do with rebels. To form the NGF in NNM, Prussia doesn't need to have all of Germany's cores, just to have sphered north German cultured minors, etc I think. Not having to take Alsace-Lorraine would definitely help speed things up until Prussia/NGF can finally raise an army/industry to take on France (who inevitably allies with Russia). Part of the problem is definitely in the influence game. In my USA game, France managed to snavel Bavaria into their sphere. Instead of working toward it like I would've thought, the NGF was fine to just let France hold onto Bavaria and didn't even bother putting influence into them. When they finally did, they put only the lowest tier of influence into Bavaria AND the two German minors that were also left. It ticked... very slowly. I ended up just jumping in on the game to gently caress over France because I wanted to see Germany in our time.
|
|
#
¿
May 8, 2013 14:32
|
|
|
In the tradition of eagles, hawks and such, New Zealand should've had a kiwi 
|
|
#
¿
May 9, 2013 06:16
|
|
|
I could imagine a system of MotE-esque coalitions that sort of apply for ideology. I guess as a member of a specific ideology (communism, NATO/capitalist allies, Islamists, etc.) there would be an urging for you to join that particular coalition, which perhaps could be a pain for the player but *shrug* I'm not sure on that.
|
|
#
¿
May 18, 2013 04:52
|
|
|
YF-23 posted:Well why else did you think in taberna was the best CK2 music? I never put two and two together there... That's why that song (if it's the one I'm thinking of) was so drat catchy! e: VVV 10 seconds in, this is it. The Narrator fucked around with this message at 02:01 on May 20, 2013 |
|
#
¿
May 20, 2013 01:34
|
|
|
I'm (still) terrible at the HoI games, so I still can't do it. In the meantime, I'm too busy playing HoD or god knows else, so maybe during uni break I'll get back around to HoI3. I'm determined to love that game if it kills me It's been far too long since I play CK2 as well, and I think at this point I'm never going back to EU3.
|
|
#
¿
May 21, 2013 02:32
|
|
|
Gort posted:How come you lose a considerable amount of prestige for helping out your citizens during a potato blight, but not with other disasters like influenza? It's been said, but there's at least a few events in Vicky that seem to work like this. Basically, you have to imagine how a 19th-century government would have felt about the issue rather than a 21st-century person. Helping poor people will make us look like our poor people will need help, etc.
|
|
#
¿
May 28, 2013 11:22
|
|
|
There should probably/definitely be some mechanic to discourage nations from building forts everywhere except particularly vicious borders or otherwise strategically important provinces. Russia and France inevitably get carried away in my Germany games and end up with forts all over. Not that I blame them because Germany is
|
|
#
¿
May 31, 2013 07:24
|
|
|
sparatuvs posted:For some reason in Vicky 2 Switzerland decide to repeal and enact prohibition everyday for about 25 years. Really bad hangovers, every morning.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 3, 2013 05:19
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ Apr 19, 2024 23:00 |
|
|
I went and preordered EUIV extreme edition or whatever it's called. Normally I don't preorder games much but, hell, I get a bunch of free DLCs (including the possible CK2-EU4 converter that's been hinted at) and I got 10% off for already owning a Europa Universalis title. The game itself looks like it's been worked on heavily and it's going to be more-or-less fun at launch so V V
|
|
#
¿
Jun 7, 2013 04:38
|
|