|
WhiskeyWhiskers posted:And what's this? A visible roman numeral in the picture showing what tier of tech it is? So you won't even get confused over whether auto-cannons are a side grade or an upgrade? It sounds like you've gotten confused by the roman numerals. It indicates the tier of that specific weapon type, not overall tech tier (which is not displayed anywhere ingame, I believe). Tier I autocannons are better than tier II railguns. Westminster System posted:Well I already know that lasers are bad against shields, good against armour, the damage details indicate as much and that's something that some people have already worked out but it could be better indicated. On the rest, it's exactly the same as an EU battle, except more enjoyable to watch most of the time. What do you mean by "lasers are bad against shields"? That they don't give a bonus against them? Does this mean kinetic weapons are bad against both armor and shields, or is the slightly better base dps enough that they're good against both?
|
#
?
May 16, 2016 09:46
|
|
|
|
| # ? Apr 25, 2024 01:50 |
|
|
Viral Warfare posted:You can't actually see what those red lasers and blue lasers are doing, how the ships are using them, which ships your ships are targeting, which ships are doing damage to them- you can't see any of that poo poo. All you're given is an extremely opaque and obtuse combat log that basically provides pretty useless information. You don't even get a summary of the ships you lost (!) You can actually see all of that in EU battles, and in fact you could see that at EU3 release (!) You can see stuff like who's shooting who, whether they're hitting or missing etc. by just looking at the battle in progress. The visuals are an accurate representation of the actual battle.
|
|
#
?
May 16, 2016 09:49
|
|
|
Jabor posted:You can see stuff like who's shooting who, whether they're hitting or missing etc. by just looking at the battle in progress. The visuals are an accurate representation of the actual battle. it's kind of difficult to discern any usable information at all from the whirling clusterfuck that is like, even 30 ship fleets interacting
|
|
#
?
May 16, 2016 10:00
|
|
|
Staltran posted:What do you mean by "lasers are bad against shields"? That they don't give a bonus against them? Does this mean kinetic weapons are bad against both armor and shields, or is the slightly better base dps enough that they're good against both? The trifecta as it's currently understood is: Energy weapons = less damage against shields, melt armour Kinetics = shred away energy shields, get reduced by armour Missiles = good all around, but PD can shoot them down All with varying degrees of accuracy - missiles seem to be really good at honing in but enough PD can effectively mean you're not firing. Then you have torpedoes which kind of always seem to hit but are slower and I think can be shot down by PD too. They also ignore shields entirely if I remember correctly.
|
|
#
?
May 16, 2016 10:07
|
|
|
Staltran posted:It sounds like you've gotten confused by the roman numerals. It indicates the tier of that specific weapon type, not overall tech tier (which is not displayed anywhere ingame, I believe). Tier I autocannons are better than tier II railguns. Huh, that is confusing. I thought autocannons would have just been a sidegrade with different downsides.
|
|
#
?
May 16, 2016 10:53
|
|
|
It's the same "tier" system, Autocannons are just a different weapon class within Kinetics, technically. Should always mouse over the little size icons under the weapons to see their damage and all that though. But, hey, this game has mods..  I love mods man.
|
|
#
?
May 16, 2016 10:59
|
|
|
Vanilla Mint Ice posted:Honestly I wouldn't recommend someone new get into eu4 the way it is now, not because of the combat which has largely remained unchanged since release, but because of all the other bloated, tacked on mechanics after each patch cycle. Until you slowly learn the mechanics you should really stick to major powers in eu4 so you have the room to make mistakes and learn. Through experience with Paradox games I know that I'll have to time my purchase of Stellaris just right, after they've fixed most of the bugs and added content, but before they've had the chance to add fifteen billion new systems on top of it. Probably in a year or two it will have hit the top of its curve.
|
|
#
?
May 16, 2016 14:05
|
|
|
Phlegmish posted:Through experience with Paradox games I know that I'll have to time my purchase of Stellaris just right, after they've fixed most of the bugs and added content, but before they've had the chance to add fifteen billion new systems on top of it. Probably in a year or two it will have hit the top of its curve. Paradox's recent games let you revert to old patches by opting in to the appropriate "beta" in Steam, I expect they'll do the same for Stellaris when they start putting out big content patches and not just bugfixes.
|
|
#
?
May 16, 2016 14:27
|
|
|
PleasingFungus posted:if eu4 combat was rng bullshit, it'd be pretty surprising to find players who could consistently pull off world conquests and other difficult feats. i think the fact that vanilla mint ice called it a "solved problem" was quite telling in regard to eu4's combat intuitiveness. to me, it's like poker, except most of the players only have enough chips to play one hand, and it turns out that your two pair loses to a 9 high because of subsection d(1)(e) of the stockholm players association rulebook. i suspect the reason tomviolence lost is rng bullshit (it sounded like he did everything "right" to me), but that doesn't mean that someone couldn't thwart that rng through experience. it's a matter of picking your battles, but if the most obvious indicators are misleading, the non-master is going to frequently feel cheated. like, haha, your general is mostly irrelevant bc none of your units have fire yet but that's his only stat! brilliant! speaking from my own experience, save-scumming, i have gotten absolutely obliterated (lost half my stack in phase one!) bc of rng bullshit on many occasions, only to reload and- hey, i clobbered them this time! gee, what was different? oh, i see- i wasn't facing a dice deficit of -6 that negated all the advantages i thought i had and inflicted massively disproportionate casualties from which my single army could never hope to recover. i only play ck2 and vic2 even though i'd really like to like eu4 bc they are much less flagrant, imo, about the rng dry-loving your imperial aspirations.
|
|
#
?
May 16, 2016 17:18
|
|
|
Victoria 2 has the same rng bullshit though?? It's just a lot easier to beat the AI because they have poo poo stack composition + getting ahead in tech is both easier and more decisive.
|
|
#
?
May 16, 2016 17:40
|
|
|
ThatBasqueGuy posted:Victoria 2 has the same rng bullshit though?? It's just a lot easier to beat the AI because they have poo poo stack composition + getting ahead in tech is both easier and more decisive. please file under "much less flagrant" related- the general selection is much better in vic2, both in terms of availability and quality.
|
|
#
?
May 16, 2016 17:48
|
|
|
Awful fancy way of saying 'automate everything and put your one general with good stats on your biggest stack' lol
|
|
#
?
May 16, 2016 18:22
|
|
|
QuarkJets posted:Hey OP I'd like to point out a correction Thanks will update. I picked up the expansion day one so messed up what was free vs. paid and haven't put in much time since because I must conquer the galaxy as Space Communists.
|
|
#
?
May 16, 2016 19:01
|
|
|
Viral Warfare posted:. You don't even get a summary of the ships you lost (!) You can actually see all of that in EU battles, and in fact you could see that at EU3 release (!) lmao stellaris is a loving fiasco
|
|
#
?
May 16, 2016 23:08
|
|
|
Not really? I mean there are a few interface issues like that, but I don't really think that's a huge deal. It's just a bit inconvenient? There are also issues with the mid-game, absolutely. I think I've been a bit luckier in having more stuff happen in mine than most, but I can understand those complaints. Overall, I think Stellaris is a pretty great game and is the best space 4x released in a very long time, and quite seriously has the potential to become the best ever with just a few patches.
|
|
#
?
May 16, 2016 23:20
|
|
|
Westminster System posted:The trifecta as it's currently understood is: Most energy weapons have at least 50% armor penetration, but don't get any penalties against shields - and disruptors do double damage to shields, but don't have armor penetration. Kinetics don't get any bonus against shields, or anything else for that matter. They do have slightly higher base dps than lasers and 5 more range, but tbh I'd say kinetics just suck curently. Tier V mass drivers have 2.3% more dps than tier V lasers, but even corvettes have enough base armor that lasers will do more damage once the shields are down, and corvettes generally don't have much shields. Anything bigger than a corvette and the lasers are just better, really. Missiles/torpedoes autohit, yes, and torpedoes do go through shields. Point defence is extremely effective, though, you need something like 4 pd modules to completely shut down a battleship full of missiles.
|
|
#
?
May 16, 2016 23:36
|
|
|
My first game of Stellaris I hit the problem I have with other 4Xs like MoO or Civ, where I think I'm doing well and then I get into a war and find out that my armies/fleets are woefully inadequate. So, I started a new game, playing the Star Trek humans again, and found out that the semi-random tech selection in my first game meant that I never even saw the tier 3 and higher missile tech which... probably didn't help my first game. I also found an early space age civilization, decided to watch them but not try to enlighten them (lack of resources at the time) and then they reached the stars by themselves. Unfortunately this meant they got their own sector which meant I lost a bunch of stuff I'd built in those systems, so I decided to declare war. It wasn't difficult, they were brand new to the galactic scene, and were Spiritual Pacifists but I feel like maybe that was, morally, the wrong thing to do. I doubt Picard would approve.
|
|
#
?
May 17, 2016 00:18
|
|
|
catlord posted:My first game of Stellaris I hit the problem I have with other 4Xs like MoO or Civ, where I think I'm doing well and then I get into a war and find out that my armies/fleets are woefully inadequate. So, I started a new game, playing the Star Trek humans again, and found out that the semi-random tech selection in my first game meant that I never even saw the tier 3 and higher missile tech which... probably didn't help my first game. You should basically always enlighten an early space age civ for what it's worth. Since they're so close already it only takes three or four years to get them up to speed on FTL. Nuclear age guys are usually a good idea too, as they only take a couple of years longer and might blow themselves up.
|
|
#
?
May 17, 2016 00:35
|
|
|
Drink Cheerwine posted:speaking from my own experience, save-scumming, i have gotten absolutely obliterated (lost half my stack in phase one!) bc of rng bullshit on many occasions, only to reload and- hey, i clobbered them this time! gee, what was different? oh, i see- i wasn't facing a dice deficit of -6 that negated all the advantages i thought i had and inflicted massively disproportionate casualties from which my single army could never hope to recover. i only play ck2 and vic2 even though i'd really like to like eu4 bc they are much less flagrant, imo, about the rng dry-loving your imperial aspirations. my personal experience with eu4 is that, pretty much every time i look at a battle, i can see why i'm losing - "oh, they have a better general", "oh, they have +20% morale, gently caress you france", etc. or why i'm winning. whichever. very rarely is it because of "rng bullshit". ck2's combat is a massive mess - i have never understood it, beyond the simple concepts of terrain & numerical superiority. there's a whole mess of different unit types and tactics and cultural tactics and technology and essentially no way to tell what's interacting with what. eu4's ui is flawed, but the underlying system is roughly comprehensible. ck2 is a bad ui over a bad system. vicky 2's combat is okay, but vicky 2 warfare is not great, past the early game. fighting a war is absolutely exhausting - micromanaging reinforcement stacks in long battles, sieging down every single province, etc. it's all the most tiring parts of eu3 combat, exaggerated by the excesses of the industrial revolution. and even that wouldn't be all that bad, but the way vicky 2 diplomacy and peace systems work tend to end with you fighting the same war again in another five or ten years. an endless succession of ww1s, starting in 1885 and continuing for the next 50 years. i love every paradox game, except for sengoku, but i wouldn't say any of them have better combat than eu4.
|
|
#
?
May 17, 2016 00:36
|
|
|
In CK2 you don't really have to understand the underlying mechanics since larger numbers almost always win (the exception being nomad armies of full cavalry which can take much larger armies) Combat in Eu4 is a lot harder and more complex and I never understood it completely, but admittedly I never really tried either
|
|
#
?
May 17, 2016 00:47
|
|
|
CK2's combat system having super obtuse unit types and strategies is especially bad because it's basically impossible to influence it, especially after they nerfed retinues. EU4 is also super obtuse but at least you can say "hmm should i go for +morale and +maneuver or +discipline and +siege ability?"
|
|
#
?
May 17, 2016 01:00
|
|
|
In EU4 you can pretty much get by on just 1. keep parity or ahead in tech 2. hire a general and 3. don't attack into mountains. Then add some cannons once you're past 1600 or so. It's a lot more involved if you're fighting wars against your peers but then the same is true of CK2, and you can usually avoid those wars if you try.
|
|
#
?
May 17, 2016 01:03
|
|
|
All warfare in all Paradox games is just about concentration of force.
|
|
#
?
May 17, 2016 01:07
|
|
|
V for Vegas posted:All warfare in all Paradox games is just about concentration of force. It's clausewitz engine after all
|
|
#
?
May 17, 2016 01:19
|
|
|
World War Wednesday is Tuesday this week. It will be a Co-Op game. https://forum.paradoxplaza.com/forum/index.php?threads/world-war-wednesday-on-tuesday-17-00cest-2-hours.932658/
|
|
#
?
May 17, 2016 02:35
|
|
|
I think it's being rebranded "World War II-sday" and this week will have a special 2 hour stream (don't know if they plan on making them 2 hours from now on though). I could also distinctly hear cKnoor in last week's teaser stream but I don't know if he'll be joining in the fun. Rumour has it that you will also be able to start pre-ordering HOI4 tomorrow after a Polish retailer totally ruined the surprise.
|
|
#
?
May 17, 2016 02:39
|
|
|
Psychotic Weasel posted:I think it's being rebranded "World War II-sday" and this week will have a special 2 hour stream (don't know if they plan on making them 2 hours from now on though). I could also distinctly hear cKnoor in last week's teaser stream but I don't know if he'll be joining in the fun. The HoI4 preorder was probably the worst kept surprise ever. Everyone knew that it had to be soon after Stellaris launched. Really the biggest part was that you couldn't preorder earlier.
|
|
#
?
May 17, 2016 03:21
|
|
|
Communist France! 
|
|
#
?
May 17, 2016 03:24
|
|
|
Tuskin38 posted:World War Wednesday is Tuesday this week. It will be a Co-Op game. I have a sinking feeling that it will be co-op because the AI is going to be unfixable garbage.
|
|
#
?
May 17, 2016 06:14
|
|
|
Psychotic Weasel posted:I could also distinctly hear cKnoor in last week's teaser stream but I don't know if he'll be joining in the fun. I thought I heard him! Hopefully he'll join in the fun this week.
|
|
#
?
May 17, 2016 06:36
|
|
|
Westminster System posted:Though frankly I'm not playing a paradox game for the combat. So... What? You play it for the numbers ticking up? All of Paradox's games are, at their heart, somewhere between a typical RTS and a full-on wargame. All other features like economies and diplomacy and characters exist merely to give background and flavor to the combat
|
|
#
?
May 17, 2016 07:00
|
|
|
i have put 5,000 hours into paradox games, all set to 'observe' mode. i use them as screensavers. the colors soothe me on a primal level...
|
|
#
?
May 17, 2016 07:35
|
|
|
Larry Parrish posted:So... What? You play it for the numbers ticking up? All of Paradox's games are, at their heart, somewhere between a typical RTS and a full-on wargame. All other features like economies and diplomacy and characters exist merely to give background and flavor to the combat i try and go entire games in Victoria 2 without a war 
|
|
#
?
May 17, 2016 07:42
|
|
|
PrinceRandom posted:i try and go entire games in Victoria 2 without a war Victoria 2 merely replaced traditional conquest with economic ones. You might as well play in sphere mapmode instead of political, because its showing you the same info as like, the EU4 diplomatic mapmode.
|
|
#
?
May 17, 2016 07:47
|
|
|
PrinceRandom posted:i try and go entire games in Victoria 2 without a war Why? A ton of wars were started during this era with economical growth as motivator. Also I want to know what nation you play as where you can avoid wars all together.
|
|
#
?
May 17, 2016 08:18
|
|
|
I'm... pretty sure you probably can fairly reliably avoid wars altogether as Any County That Doesn't Have Foreign Cores/Event Casus Belli. Wars are useful but only really NECESSARY in the event of getting bigger because of a scary neighbor likely to declare war on you.
|
|
#
?
May 17, 2016 08:37
|
|
|
Well only ones I can come up with would be South Americans, but for them to have any influence on the market and not stagnate/decline they kinda need to go to war. The germans all get auto-integrated by Prussia, the Italians will have endless revolts by the Redshirts unless they form Italy ( my latest play-through as Papal States I literally had to kill my entire lower strata of Italians and replace it with Beduins from my colonies).I mean technically I guess you could play as Sardinia Piedmont and wait for the Redshirts to just give you all of Italy for free. Groogy fucked around with this message at 08:43 on May 17, 2016 |
|
#
?
May 17, 2016 08:40
|
|
|
|
|
#
?
May 17, 2016 08:45
|
|
|
The Kiwi's and Kangaroos need to follow the whim of the Bulldog unfortunately so can't guarantee they won't be in a war.
|
|
#
?
May 17, 2016 08:48
|
|
|
|
| # ? Apr 25, 2024 01:50 |
|
|
So, uh, I have a question that I can't find the answer for online. Can you unlock achievements in EU IV via multiplayer?
|
|
#
?
May 17, 2016 08:51
|
|
