Yeah, the DLC model doesn't really seem to work well with this game....I'm pretty sure all nations being open was already confirmed...I guess it could be for new features added, but most of the "new feature" DLCs in CK2 were accompanied and made possible by unlocking a nation ie Pagans/Muslim...
So it can be used. Now, will it be used? ^^
He is abgry at your inefficency, since learning to disable DLCs is easier then jumping from the bridge, cooling down, swimming back, drying yourself and getting home to learn how to disable DLCs.ok i'm throwing myself off a bridge
hope you're happy johan
we should get a DLC called balkan conflict. The map will only consist of the balkans, the map will be super detailed(but have small errors so someone has something to QQ about) and you start off with -200 relations with everyone! Also in someway danubiancossack will be represented on this map.
To my mind, EU4 doesn't seem as easily able to modularly "expand" as CK2. With CK2 it was easy to make DLC that would enable factions, but in EU4 all factions begin as playable.
Even if you added game features, that were present within the game, but not "useable", what would happen in Multiplayer? You might have 5 players with access to the feature, and 3 who don't. Deactivating the feature for the 3 who don't have the DLC will make the 5 who have it annoyed, as they enjoy the DLC. In this circumstance, maybe players should be granted temporary access to a DLC if a host has it?
People should get over it.You don't have to buy it, ffs.do not mention the aztecs
the thing with the expansion model though is that you're required to buy them in a chain, while with the dlc model you can just mix and match features you want.I like the expansion model. Expansions seem to give the games more depth, while DLC's just give more options. Maybe it's just the nature of CK2, but the DLC's seem so shallow.
I imagine that's what it will be. Overhauls to systems (colonization, HRE, etc) will be big DLCs, more dynamic events for countries will be littler DLCs.
That's actually exactly what will happen. All of the actual Code of the DLCs is contained in the patches, just some features are not 'unlocked' unless you have the DLC Active. For instance with Sword of Islam, the Decadence was added in the patch, but you couldn't play as Muslims without the DLC, so although even without the DLC your Muslims would still play with the new rules, you couldn't. When it comes to Multiplayer, the Server Host decides what DLCs to use, and everyone uses those, even if the individual user hasn't purchased them.To my mind, EU4 doesn't seem as easily able to modularly "expand" as CK2. With CK2 it was easy to make DLC that would enable factions, but in EU4 all factions begin as playable.
Even if you added game features, that were present within the game, but not "useable", what would happen in Multiplayer? You might have 5 players with access to the feature, and 3 who don't. Deactivating the feature for the 3 who don't have the DLC will make the 5 who have it annoyed, as they enjoy the DLC. In this circumstance, maybe players should be granted temporary access to a DLC if a host has it?
This thread needs more Steam and determinism discussion. Might as well discuss the Balkans while we're at it
I do not like the CK2 DLC system. The result is that you always have a new game, but you never have a patched game. Things get fixed, but at the same time experimental things are added. So really it is up to chance whether or not the game will be balanced at any given time.