|
Gort posted:I didn't see the stream, but getting into character as a Nazi doesn't really sound like the best strategy... It appeals to our core demographic.
|
#
?
Jun 13, 2017 11:29
|
|
|
|
| # ? Apr 19, 2024 04:10 |
|
|
Can our dear resident Paradoxians please relay a bug report for Europa Universalis IV concerning the 'Immortality' trait to the rest of the team? I know that this is a rather roundabout way to do it, but in the past, every time I've tried to file a report on the official forums on any matter, it just got overlooked and quickly buried under all the other stuff. Right now, 'Immortality' only works in the most basic way: If an unmobilized ruler has the trait, they don't die as they age. However, the trait is completely nonfunctional for heirs (who can still carry it, however), and if a ruler is mobilized as a general, they will have an ever-increasing chance each day to die from that. Now I disagree in principle that rulers should be susceptible to death from peacetime drills (since they aren't in Crusader Kings 2, either, and they'll have enough opportunities to get themselves killed in battle, anyway), but no matter what stance the dev team ends up taking on this, the current state is still definitely bugged, because the chance of such a death keeps increasing, as if from old age. If the mechanic is kept in for immortals, the percentage chance needs to be changed to an unchanging value. To show that this isn't the first time people have noticed problems with immortality, here are some links to previous threads: https://forum.paradoxplaza.com/forum/index.php?threads/1-19-2-immortal-trait-not-working-properly.998700/ https://forum.paradoxplaza.com/forum/index.php?threads/1-18-2-immortal-ruler-dies-if-made-into-a-general-without-fights.974099/ https://forum.paradoxplaza.com/forum/index.php?threads/1-18-2-immortal-republic-ruler-still-dies-or-gets-unelected.974067/ Unfortunately, the QA guy who replied to two of those threads seems to not have looked at the problem in detail before proclaiming it to be 'WAD'.
|
|
#
?
Jun 13, 2017 12:21
|
|
|
Darkrenown posted:It appeals to our core demographic. That only makes it worse.
|
|
#
?
Jun 13, 2017 12:28
|
|
|
It's a good thing Darkrenown isn't known for sarcasm or anything like that. He might even be a bit British.
|
|
#
?
Jun 13, 2017 14:43
|
|
|
I'm pretty sure if you make your immortal ruler a general, you shouldn't be able to complain about them dying. Also don't make your immortal ruler a general. And the death chance is meant to balance you getting a free general, otherwise there's no reason not to roll your ruler as a general every time.
|
|
#
?
Jun 13, 2017 14:48
|
|
|
AnoHito posted:I'm pretty sure if you make your immortal ruler a general, you shouldn't be able to complain about them dying. Also don't make your immortal ruler a general. I think it's hilarious that you seem to have done exactly the same "not look at the problem in detail before responding" that he's complaining about happening on the PDX forums. (From what I gather, the complaint is that the chance of death increasing over time instead of being a static MTTH for an immortal general is probably wrong)
|
|
#
?
Jun 13, 2017 14:51
|
|
|
Jabor posted:I think it's hilarious that you seem to have done exactly the same "not look at the problem in detail before responding" that he's complaining about happening on the PDX forums. No, I saw that. I just think if you're stupid enough to make an immortal ruler a general, you should get a sort of "tempting fate" punishment for it.
|
|
#
?
Jun 13, 2017 14:53
|
|
|
AnoHito posted:No, I saw that. I just think if you're stupid enough to make an immortal ruler a general, you should get a sort of "tempting fate" punishment for it.
|
|
#
?
Jun 13, 2017 15:13
|
|
|
AnoHito posted:No, I saw that. I just think if you're stupid enough to make an immortal ruler a general, you should get a sort of "tempting fate" punishment for it. I just think that if you label something "immortal", it should actually, you know, do that. Also, moving your goalposts is very unbecoming.
|
|
#
?
Jun 13, 2017 15:24
|
|
|
AAAAA! Real Muenster posted:D...dont you therefore think that a *standing* chance to die would be more appropriate rather than an increasing chance to die? Rather than, you know, a functionality that means that an immortal ruler is guaranteed to die for having at one time commanded armies? Because you get that chance even if you are not currently commanding an army... If he commanded an army at some point he's still a general even if not currently commanding one. Over time, it becomes more likely that he's assassinated by the government for gaining too much influence or by the younger officers trying to push for their newfangled methods of waging war. Definitely WAD
|
|
#
?
Jun 13, 2017 15:25
|
|
|
gradenko_2000 posted:I just think that if you label something "immortal", it should actually, you know, do that. I'm fairly certain it's explicitly biological immortality, which it does fine. That doesn't stop you from eventually getting trampled by a horse because you decided you had to be a big badass warrior in addition to immortal god king.
|
|
#
?
Jun 13, 2017 15:38
|
|
|
AnoHito posted:I'm fairly certain it's explicitly biological immortality, which it does fine. That doesn't stop you from eventually getting trampled by a horse because you decided you had to be a big badass warrior in addition to immortal god king. AAAAA! Real Muenster posted:You get that chance even if you are not currently commanding an army.
|
|
#
?
Jun 13, 2017 16:08
|
|
|
AnoHito posted:I'm fairly certain it's explicitly biological immortality, which it does fine. That doesn't stop you from eventually getting trampled by a horse because you decided you had to be a big badass warrior in addition to immortal god king. Which is why it makes sense, in your mind, for the probability of getting trampled by a horse to continually increase until it's a near certainty, rather than being just as likely today as it is next wednesday, or any other wednesday years in the future?
|
|
#
?
Jun 13, 2017 16:28
|
|
|
gradenko_2000 posted:I just think that if you label something "immortal", it should actually, you know, do that. It literally says in the description that they're only immune to disease and old age. I'd like to see the trait work on heirs and I guess a flat chance on a ruler-general would be better, but this is hardly some pressing issue like that dude seems to be saying. edit: if we wanna talk about game breaking issues re: the immortal trait, look no further than this:  the interface breaks if your character is more than 1000 years old. inexcusable.
|
|
#
?
Jun 13, 2017 16:28
|
|
|
Gort posted:I didn't see the stream, but getting into character as a Nazi doesn't really sound like the best strategy... https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PiLVAz-Jczg
|
|
#
?
Jun 13, 2017 16:28
|
|
|
AnoHito posted:I'm pretty sure if you make your immortal ruler a general, you shouldn't be able to complain about them dying. Also don't make your immortal ruler a general. AnoHito posted:No, I saw that. I just think if you're stupid enough to make an immortal ruler a general, you should get a sort of "tempting fate" punishment for it. Why are you so immediately dismissive and hostile? I'm 'stupid' for making my immortal ruler a general? I should be 'punished' for that? Did I step on your toes in some other thread? I honestly don't understand this kind of reaction to a bug report. And yes, it is a bug, and I can complain about it. The implementation of peacetime leader deaths for immortals is a game design decision that can be debated (with the Crusader Kings 2 precedent of them not occurring), but with them enabled, the chance should be static. Right now it's increasing. At the end of my last game where I tried immortality plus generalship, it was hard to keep my ruler alive for even a full month, even with constant saving and loading.
|
|
#
?
Jun 13, 2017 16:45
|
|
|
It says not to do it in the description... I'm still unconvinced it's a bug at all.
|
|
#
?
Jun 13, 2017 16:56
|
|
|
Gimmick Account posted:Why are you so immediately dismissive and hostile? I'm 'stupid' for making my immortal ruler a general? I should be 'punished' for that? I apologize if I came off as overly hostile towards you personally, that was definitely not my intention. Honestly, you're probably correct that it wasn't intentionally designed to work this way for these circumstances. It does, however, seem like a really obscure edge case considering how rare an EU4 game with an immortal ruler is, and how exceedingly rare that ruler being made a general is. I personally believe that to be a really suboptimal decision, but that's just me.
|
|
#
?
Jun 13, 2017 16:58
|
|
|
Koramei posted:It says not to do it in the description... I'm still unconvinced it's a bug at all. If it's WAD, it seems like a bad design. What possible reason is there for an increasing risk of death rather than flat risk of death as a general?
|
|
#
?
Jun 13, 2017 16:59
|
|
|
It'd give you a free super-general for most of the campaign wouldn't it? Odds for death in battle are pretty low. Considering it's written into the trait explicitly to not do this, I think being punished for using your immortal god ruler as a general makes a lot of sense. I'm not necessarily against it being changed either way (or made moddable at least, so you can have a truly immortal god-king/queen- making it so death even as a general is impossible would be cool too) but it seems like a really peculiar thing to get so irate about.
|
|
#
?
Jun 13, 2017 17:11
|
|
|
Koramei posted:It'd give you a free super-general for most of the campaign wouldn't it? Odds for death in battle are pretty low. Considering it's written into the trait explicitly to not do this, I think being punished for using your immortal god ruler as a general makes a lot of sense. why the gently caress are you making a balance argument about a trait you only get through importing a ck2 save or using the "idgaf unlock everything" bit in the nation designer that's like complaining that jan mayen is overpowered
|
|
#
?
Jun 13, 2017 17:14
|
|
|
people use those settings, dumbo. why are you so angry about this?
|
|
#
?
Jun 13, 2017 17:18
|
|
|
Koramei posted:It'd give you a free super-general for most of the campaign wouldn't it? Odds for death in battle are pretty low. Considering it's written into the trait explicitly to not do this, I think being punished for using your immortal god ruler as a general makes a lot of sense. Who was irate? Koramei posted:people use those settings, dumbo. why are you so angry about this? Cursing doesn't mean someone is angry. This u mad schtick is pretty stupid.
|
|
#
?
Jun 13, 2017 18:15
|
|
|
I'm assuming the reason it works like that is because the ruler and the general version of him are two separate entities either of whose death triggers the other's. That would also explain why rulers that have been turned into generals tend to live shorter lives, I suppose. If that's the case it's less an instance of the God King as general having a drill accident and more a case of him in actuality being a very mortal king. It would be as if turning him into a general turned his immortality off, essentially. Which would be, I'm guessing, not WAD.
|
|
#
?
Jun 13, 2017 18:35
|
|
|
I don't think immortal rulers should have the death chance outside of battles, but I also doubt it'll be changed. Johan was super against adding it at all and it was quite the struggle to get it in after I added it to CK. Also, yeah, I wasn't serious with my core demographic comment. Although reading our OT forum makes me wonder.
|
|
#
?
Jun 13, 2017 19:19
|
|
|
Darkrenown posted:I don't think immortal rulers should have the death chance outside of battles, but I also doubt it'll be changed. Johan was super against adding it at all and it was quite the struggle to get it in after I added it to CK. Surely Johan wouldn't block a bugfix by one of the team members even if he didn't like the basic feature that the fix was about? Better that something already implemented is fixed than not, right? Right?  Do you think he would understand if I sent him a non-irate/angry message explaining the problem, like I did here?
|
|
#
?
Jun 13, 2017 19:28
|
|
|
Any bugfix will take at least some of a developer's time, have to go through QA, etc. In the end, it'll be fix this or fix one of a lot of more serious bugs in the game. Maybe you could screw with the save file and remove him as a general that way?
|
|
#
?
Jun 13, 2017 19:33
|
|
|
It's really a design "bug" rather than a bit of code not working, and he is game director for EU. It's possible Jake might sneak it in or I could be wrong about this, but I doubt it. Sorry. If QA are saying it's WAD they have likely asked and got told so.
|
|
#
?
Jun 13, 2017 19:44
|
|
|
I'm super bad at these games and was really thrilled when the immortal ruler I somehow managed to get in CK2 made it into EU. I didn't really expect it, and it made my day. I'm glad I didn't ever try to make him a general, that would have been a bummer if it turned out to be a guaranteed death sentence for picking up a sword even once.
|
|
#
?
Jun 14, 2017 18:36
|
|
|
We all know that old adage "live in proximity to a sword, die by probability"
|
|
#
?
Jun 14, 2017 20:23
|
|
|
Darkrenown posted:It's really a design "bug" rather than a bit of code not working, and he is game director for EU. It's possible Jake might sneak it in or I could be wrong about this, but I doubt it. Sorry. If QA are saying it's WAD they have likely asked and got told so. Jira what you think should be fixed, and it will eventually. I dont like it, as it doesnt fit eu, but it should at least work like the guys who wanted it intended.
|
|
#
?
Jun 15, 2017 14:41
|
|
|
pdxjohan posted:I dont like it, as it doesnt fit eu Yeah, there are a distinct lack of immortal rulers in that time period historically!
|
|
#
?
Jun 15, 2017 15:18
|
|
|
Lum_ posted:Yeah, there are a distinct lack of immortal rulers in that time period historically! This is more a problem with history than with EU4 imo
|
|
#
?
Jun 15, 2017 15:55
|
|
|
pdxjohan posted:Jira what you think should be fixed, and it will eventually. Thank you SO much! As someone who has been trying to build a playthrough around this feature in the past, I can assure you that you will make this small niche of your fanbase very happy! 
|
|
#
?
Jun 15, 2017 16:41
|
|
|
Gimmick Account posted:Thank you SO much! As someone who has been trying to build a playthrough around this feature in the past, I can assure you that you will make this small niche of your fanbase very happy! the playthough of the dude that never dies
|
|
#
?
Jun 16, 2017 19:25
|
|
|
Mans posted:the playthough of the dude that never dies ...and hails from the most pissant barbarian one-province shithole that I can find in the Extended Timeline mod. Bonus points if the country in question borders Rome or China at the start. 
|
|
#
?
Jun 16, 2017 20:52
|
|
|
doesn't the character die if a regime change occurs? Monarchs "die" if you switch to a republic even if voluntarily for example.
|
|
#
?
Jun 16, 2017 22:59
|
|
|
I remember keeping my Hochmeister as King when I secularized the Teutonic Order as Prussia, but that run was a looong time ago. But if you want to play around with an immortal character, elections are probably out of the question in general. God-emperor known best, anyway...
|
|
#
?
Jun 16, 2017 23:08
|
|
|
Looks like some Paradox games are getting review bombed on Steam for the recent price hike. I'd respect them more if they just came out and said 'we want your €€€' instead of using some bullshit excuse about purchasing power.
|
|
#
?
Jun 17, 2017 11:34
|
|
|
|
| # ? Apr 19, 2024 04:10 |
|
|
It is specially amusing in EU4, where apparently they almost doubled the price in Russia just ahead of releasing a Russia-DLC, which sounds like a poor idea.
|
|
#
?
Jun 17, 2017 13:17
|
|
