|
Farecoal posted:Paradox games mods on Nexus Finally, the superiority of the Serbian penis can now be accurately represented.
|
#
?
Mar 7, 2014 01:44
|
|
|
|
| # ? Apr 25, 2024 03:30 |
|
|
Gorgo Primus posted:Padre Groggo... nooooo! Put the Lowtax entry, it was drat funny.
|
|
#
?
Mar 7, 2014 01:46
|
|
|
Of course its a Matrix Game. (At £60)
|
|
#
?
Mar 7, 2014 01:51
|
|
|
I was just reading the Paradox Forum about the cancellation and I ran into this post by a beta testerquote:Depends on your definition of bare bones. Espionage, diplomacy, economics, politics, research, war, building ships might be classified as bare bones I guess. It's been in development for three years and people wonder why it got cancelled. 
|
|
#
?
Mar 7, 2014 01:56
|
|
|
SeaTard posted:Put the Lowtax entry, it was drat funny. Got a link? I don't remember that one. Also for those who want to know the final thing submitted and accepted by EvW by Pattersong and I on the subject of Groggo, here is his stat block and the exact wording that you'd see on the pop up event on Groggo taking power. Country: Spain Leader: "Padre" Benjamín de las Casas de Groggo Ideology: Maoist Trait: Religious Start Date: 1945.8.15 End Date: 1990.2.26 Picture:  Oh poo poo, Groggo Took Power For Some Reason! posted:"Padre" Benjamín de las Casas de Groggo was raised for the cloth until a chance trip to Spanish Morocco exposed him to the suffering of the world's colonial underclass. They say a touch of Moorish blood flowed in the Padre’s blood, leading to his greater-than-usual sympathy for the oppressed in Morocco. During his combat on the Republican side of the Spanish Civil War, Groggo swiftly adapted the Biblical tales of his youth to the radical ideology of his fellow soldiers. After the war he had a prolonged stay in exile in Veracruz where he wrote his famous treatise "just as you did it to one of the least of these," making a case that the Franco dictatorship was morally bankrupt according to Christian theology despite the Franco regime's endorsement by the Roman Catholic Church. Yeah... we don't know how this got accepted as a serious entry, won, and got implemented(?) either. Gorgo Primus fucked around with this message at 04:18 on Mar 7, 2014 |
|
#
?
Mar 7, 2014 02:41
|
|
|
nutranurse posted:Sometimes I fool myself into thinking I'm kind of grognardy but then I see videos/videogames like this; I'm so loving far from being a grognard I might as well be playing call of duty. CMANO is actually rather easy to play, the interface looks intimidating since it's so bare bones but it's pretty well designed by wargame standards and it's easy to navigate/play the game. It's also pretty fun. SkySteak posted:Of course its a Matrix Game. It's also not worth the $80 they charge for it!
|
|
#
?
Mar 7, 2014 03:11
|
|
|
DStecks posted:I'd just like to re-iterate that we had precisely this discussion about a month ago, and I'll say the same thing I said then: if you're really simulating brinkmanship, than the actors involved never consciously make the decision to "press the button", it's something that just happens, because a situation has gotten out of control. It's a psychological phenomenon called the Hobbesian Trap. This is probably the best way to implement "nukes = game over", and it would probably be a pretty good system as well, but it still has the issue that in brinksmanship, all parties involved are willing to use the bomb if push comes to shove. The AI of course can simply be programmed to assume the player will use the bomb even if in reality the player is prepared to cave if it seems like nuclear war is inevitable/very likely, but without nuclear war actually being possible it loses that element where the player's side of the conflict might actually walk into negotiations fully willing to let it come to nuclear war if they don't get what they want. On the other hand though, if nuclear war is 'winnable', it creates another problem where the player might treat it too much like EUIV or something and gladly go to nuclear war and reduce parts of their own nation to nuclear wastelands because they know the game goes until 1991 and they can easily carve out the good parts of the USA/USSR for themselves as a replacement for their own losses. Simulating brinkmanship also suffers when one of the two parties is a sociopath willing to go to war the second their civilian population is high/dispersed enough so that they would still remain a great power after nuclear war.
|
|
#
?
Mar 7, 2014 03:15
|
|
|
On the Paradox forums a few days ago, somebody started a thread asking for a HoI4-EvW save converter. The thread's gone in a predictable direction since the cancellation announcement, but somebody seems to have a sense of humor.quote:For decades gamers have been anticipating a true late 20th-century strait blockade simulator. The thrill of closing off the critical maritime passage between South Island and Stewart Island, forcing NATO convoys in the far south pacific literally miles out of their way and cutting the flow of supplies to the dozens-strong New Zealand Territorial Force garrison there.
|
|
#
?
Mar 7, 2014 05:42
|
|
|
As for the "revolt" mentioned: the OP of that thread is a frequent poster in the closure thread, and has been advocating a campaign whereby Paradox forums posters will change their avatars to the red/black rebel flag to indicate they will boycott HOI4, which will force PI to release EvW after all.  Gorgo Primus posted:Yeah... we don't know how this got accepted as a serious entry, won, and got implemented(?) either. Helping draft this was more fun than EvW would ever have been. Rogue0071 fucked around with this message at 06:22 on Mar 7, 2014 |
|
#
?
Mar 7, 2014 06:18
|
|
|
DrProsek posted:On the other hand though, if nuclear war is 'winnable', it creates another problem where the player might treat it too much like EUIV or something and gladly go to nuclear war and reduce parts of their own nation to nuclear wastelands because they know the game goes until 1991 and they can easily carve out the good parts of the USA/USSR for themselves as a replacement for their own losses. Simulating brinkmanship also suffers when one of the two parties is a sociopath willing to go to war the second their civilian population is high/dispersed enough so that they would still remain a great power after nuclear war. Eh, that was literally Mao's planned strategy, which is one of the reasons he encouraged such enormous population growth in China when he was the big dog there. I believe the quote is something along the lines of "After World War III millions of Chinese will face hundreds of Americans and Russians". I've spoken in this thread before that I think nuclear war should absolutely not be a game over. If the consequences are that catastrophic then the player might just quit anyway and welp then they lost. I don't think it would be good design to punish players for a core aspect of the whole shebang. Yes, IRL the Cold War stayed cold, but that was a near thing more than once. To say that a Cold War game shouldn't have a Hot War aspect is nonsensical. At the heart of it I believe that a risk of serious in-game consequences would be good game design, but the risk of simply ending your game would be very poor game design that would not encourage the sort of gameplay that the Cold War would require, i.e. brinkmanship. It's punishing the player for going along a course which is, given the setting, a perfectly plausible one. Perhaps most strikingly in my eyes, Paradox games are about possibilities. In real life it was extremely unlikely that the Nazis would beat the Soviets in Barbarossa, but nobody is calling for a game to end because it's possible to do it in DH. I appreciate that it may be more striking due to the consequences of nuclear war, but there have been some good ideas in this thread bounced around about how to model that in a reasonable fashion. In addition, I think it was DrSunshine who pointed out that there are plenty of possibilities between all-out global Armageddon and no nuclear war at all. It would have been entirely viable for the USA to launch a pretty huge nuclear strike on the Soviet Union for several years without serious risk of retaliation. Using nukes in Korea or Vietnam would have opened up a can of worms, but would Moscow have risked its own hide when the Americans just showed they were perfectly willing to strike first? What if a single nuke was used by a rogue element; how do you respond to that? This isn't to say the game could necessarily address all possibilities well (though one would hope  ) but it seems to me that there are a huge number of ways nuclear weapons could come into play which are simply out of the window if you make their use a game over.And fundamentally I'm playing a videogame. I don't particularly play videogames to be browbeaten with the "Nukes are terrible weapons" stick. I also don't particularly regard World War 2 as all that great an event in real life, but I've conquered the world as the Nazis.
|
|
#
?
Mar 7, 2014 06:32
|
|
|
Just go play Defcon.
|
|
#
?
Mar 7, 2014 06:33
|
|
|
SeaTard posted:Put the Lowtax entry, it was drat funny.
|
|
#
?
Mar 7, 2014 07:17
|
|
|
"Don't play as a state, play as a political party" would be one way to solve the 'what if people are sociopaths contents with nuclear war as long as they've got enough spare population to still be a world power' problem but it'd probably be mutually exclusive with the whole world being playable. The united states/russia might survive but whatever faction brought the world into nuclear war would have a hard time not getting kicked out of power. EDIT: THOUGH a game that STARTED OUT with only Political Factions in the united states and USSR playable but the rest of the world eventually opened up with DLC wouldn't be entirely disagreeable.
|
|
#
?
Mar 7, 2014 07:43
|
|
|
Honestly, if they were so intent on making a WW3-in-Cold-War-times simulator, they should have just called it Red Storm Rising: The Game and hoped that the lawyers working for Tom Clancy's estate wouldn't hear about it.
|
|
#
?
Mar 7, 2014 07:43
|
|
|
Shimrra Jamaane posted:Just go play Defcon. Well yeah, Defcon's the best nuclear war game ever made, but you don't get to rebuild afterwards.
|
|
#
?
Mar 7, 2014 07:45
|
|
|
Gorgo Primus posted:Got a link? I don't remember that one. I think it was about 20 pages back, but I can't find it. No more than 3 weeks ago.
|
|
#
?
Mar 7, 2014 07:49
|
|
|
SeaTard posted:I think it was about 20 pages back, but I can't find it. No more than 3 weeks ago. Found it: Dibujante posted:Partway through this, I realized it was probably not a good idea, but here it is anyways:
|
|
#
?
Mar 7, 2014 08:33
|
|
|
gradenko_2000 posted:Wiz made an application that can automatically generate a bunch of random leaders for a country (that I can't find right now unfortunately), which was honestly my biggest issue with MOTE, but apart from that it's a pretty solid game on its own. DrProsek posted:Ooh, if anyone has a link to that handy that would be wonderful; I played the game once as Egypt on a friend's account and it was fun but it felt so stupid I couldn't get more than like 3 generals the whole game. The game is pretty solid on it's own; I was looking for mods that add stuff like nations that have unique cultures but no cores into the game, unification decisions, and just in general more decisions and events. Then again, that stuff is simple enough that I could probably mod it all in pretty easily. I think I'll keep an eye out for a MOTE sale during the next round of sales Yeah, I made a leader generator called EagleMaker for generating leaders for AzeriMOTE. I'll upload it when I get home tonight.
|
|
#
?
Mar 7, 2014 08:48
|
|
|
Johan, please tell whoever's in charge of your forums to keep the East vs. West one open until for a while longer, I'm choking on the schadenfreude here. They're really convinced this rebellion flag thing is going to get the game released.sane person responding to red flag people posted:Riiiiight. So the Paradox CEO is seriously going to release a game in an unfinished state (something PDS have taken massive stick for in the past) just because a handful of people have new avatars? Are you for real? dude with red flag av posted:You could take that position OR you could join us Also one guy seems to think the Ukrainian crisis is the reason the game was cancelled. Seems logical- that was why Red Dawn bombed and there's been a dearth of social collapse and other apocalyptic stuff since the financial crisis.
|
|
#
?
Mar 7, 2014 08:49
|
|
|
Kavak posted:Also one guy seems to think the Ukrainian crisis is the reason the game was cancelled. It is probably the dumbest though.
|
|
#
?
Mar 7, 2014 10:32
|
|
|
Littlefinger posted:Umm, what? That just doesn't make any sense. A potential supervolcano eruption isn't just "some volcano going off" and is fairly comparable to having a bunch of cities vapourised. Such an event would be to the order of tens to thousands (depending on severity) of times larger than the 1815 eruption of Mount Tambora which caused significant global cooling and crop failures.
|
|
#
?
Mar 7, 2014 12:19
|
|
|
It's disappointing that all the licensed Paradox projects went so poorly, besides DH which sounds like it lost money. PDS seems to be adding features requested by CK2 and EU4 modders, which is some consolation. Honestly most of the interesting fan projects have been mods for Europa/Clausewitz games, and not usually total conversions.
|
|
#
?
Mar 7, 2014 12:36
|
|
|
Hearts of Iron IV's Second Dev Diary is out. TL;DR: You build production lines of specific vehicle models and your divisions and wings draw from that pool. Upgrading is a gradual process, but old vehicles can be reused or traded. Divisions are built on the battalion level  . Something something chassis research.
|
|
#
?
Mar 7, 2014 12:40
|
|
|
Kavak posted:Divisions are built on the battalion level  I hope they implement the ability to repurpose conquered nations' equipment, like Germany taking over the Panzer 38(t) from the Czechs.
|
|
#
?
Mar 7, 2014 12:55
|
|
|
I won't mind making divisions at the battalion level as long as it's easy to replicate those changes at the army level. If I want to - for example - add an artillery battalion to every infantry division in the Wehrmacht, I should be able to do that with just a dozen clicks or so, rather than a dozen clicks for each of my 200 infantry divisions. I am looking forward to equipment being a bigger deal. It's a lot more interesting to say, "Oh poo poo, they have Tigers/IS-2s/Churchills" than "Oh look, some heavy tanks". Plus it puts a lot more character into the different sides when you're unlocking their actual planes and tanks with their actual strengths and weaknesses, so you might need to deal with the glacial speed of the Churchill or notorious unreliability of later German tanks.
|
|
#
?
Mar 7, 2014 12:58
|
|
|
Kavak posted:Divisions are built on the battalion level Divisions are designed on battalion level, not built on battalion level. There is a big difference in micro effort
|
|
#
?
Mar 7, 2014 13:00
|
|
|
podcat posted:Divisions are designed on battalion level, not built on battalion level. There is a big difference in micro effort What are the differences between choosing brigades for your divisions in HoI 3 and choosing battalions here?
|
|
#
?
Mar 7, 2014 13:04
|
|
|
Kavak posted:What are the differences between choosing brigades for your divisions in HoI 3 and choosing battalions here? I'd assume podcat means that you have a single screen where you decide what batallions make up a given type of division, and that change is automatically applied to all relevant division types. Meanwhile in the thread, someone's already sperging out. quote:The tech tree looks very simplistic, like for a console game.
|
|
#
?
Mar 7, 2014 13:07
|
|
|
That poo poo looks like a World of Tanks techtree and I can only say this is a good thing. Let's not pretend a big part of WW2 interest isn't the Cool Toys, making them more tangible like this and customizing your own divisions as part of it is a really smart move by Paradox. (Please don't ask Wargaming for any advice though)
|
|
#
?
Mar 7, 2014 13:10
|
|
|
maev posted:
I can't wait to fight Waffentigers at the siege of Berlin.
|
|
#
?
Mar 7, 2014 13:11
|
|
|
Darkrenown confirmed that one of the possible variants you can make with a given chassis is self-propelled rocket artillery. Can't wait to roll out my Tigerwerfers to storm Washington
|
|
#
?
Mar 7, 2014 13:35
|
|
|
Kavak posted:specific vehicle models Kavak posted:old vehicles can be reused or traded Kavak posted:Divisions are built on the battalion level  Oh god oh jeez oh god, I don't know if I have enough grogsperg in me to handle this. I think I am officially out of my depth. BBJoey posted:Meanwhile in the thread, someone's already sperging out. podcat posted:I'm sorry. We will try to create messier, hard to understand interfaces in the future instead  podcat
|
|
#
?
Mar 7, 2014 13:36
|
|
|
I know the chances for that are pretty much none-existent, but what I would really like would be a game similar to Victoria, that covers the 20th and maybe 21st century. What I always disliked about HoI is that, unlike Paradox other major title, it is really not about playing in a certain epoch throughout human history and basically just another WWII game. While the focus is definitely on Europe in EU and CK, you can still have a lot of fun playing another, minor nation. With HoI, you really doesn't have anything to do unless you play a nation that played historically a role in the war. e X fucked around with this message at 13:42 on Mar 7, 2014 |
|
#
?
Mar 7, 2014 13:40
|
|
|
Easily the best part of the dev diary:quote:You will now see results like "10 heavy tanks destroyed" rather than some abstracted strength percentage.  CasualtiesAlso: quote:
Darkrenown
|
|
#
?
Mar 7, 2014 13:43
|
|
|
It's very much giving off a vibe of 'this is what we wanted HOI3 to be about but we flubbed the mechanics, here's the second pass at the concept'. Which is good.
|
|
#
?
Mar 7, 2014 13:46
|
|
|
For once, I think the Paradox forum has a good idea about the interface. The tank types really should go, from left to right, Light -> Medium -> MBT -> Heavy -> Super Heavy.
|
|
#
?
Mar 7, 2014 13:53
|
|
|
I like that we can now truly recreate idiotic German equipment decisions. All production lines to Maus.
|
|
#
?
Mar 7, 2014 14:08
|
|
|
gradenko_2000 posted:
He replied with:  A victory all round, I think. BBJoey posted:Darkrenown confirmed that one of the possible variants you can make with a given chassis is self-propelled rocket artillery. Can't wait to roll out my Tigerwerfers to storm Washington  Best tank. A Buttery Pastry posted:For once, I think the Paradox forum has a good idea about the interface. The tank types really should go, from left to right, Light -> Medium -> MBT -> Heavy -> Super Heavy. I agreed, Podcat thinks it's crazy. I might switch it and see if it wins him over.
|
|
#
?
Mar 7, 2014 14:12
|
|
|
I am unreasonably excited about Battalion level customization in a Grand Strategy game that pits armies of millions against each other. I sounds like it would tickle the inner OoB sperg in me. Only one mechanized Battalion per Panzergrenadierregiment!! What about ships, though? Will there be a production line that pumps out Iowas?
|
|
#
?
Mar 7, 2014 14:13
|
|
|
|
| # ? Apr 25, 2024 03:30 |
|
|
VostokProgram posted:I like that we can now truly recreate idiotic German equipment decisions. All production lines to Maus. I just hope that the swapping-models-midstream gimmick doesn't cause too many problems. One of War in the East's biggest remaining flaws is that whatever code they're using for distributing reinforcements/replacements just cannot handle the kitbashed TOEs of German divisions when combined with the dozens of different AFV models and the drat thing tends to poo poo itself in 1943 onwards with unassigned tanks building up in the production pools like so much cordwood.
|
|
#
?
Mar 7, 2014 14:15
|
|