1.3.x = least fun to play version of the game. Please make the game more FUN!!

[Trickrs]

I actually did form the Netherlands with Gelre once, I have a AAR in building (which I can't update because i'm busy), and anyways, once I get a world empire all my neighbours, direct or indirect (Austria, France, Britain, etc.) will try to kill me, even though I have a godamn navy it's useless to defend the homefront, even with all the merc ideas I can't get quick soldiers to placate the 80-100K stacks France come out after DoWing someone.

Destroying the Iberians and the UK overseas is 10/10 breddy fun, but coalitions become VERY boring when immediately after the truce ends they DoW you again, after 6 straight coalitions against France, the UK and Austria I couldn't feel fun anymore. Great that was in 1.2, don't know in 1.3 now.

Any tip?

 

[unmerged(798670)]

I have to agree. I think 1.1 was the most fun for me. [falsehoods ...] it's become tedious in many ways.

This. I am just sad more people aren't able to play 1.1 as newer players join, and that it is no longer available for myself or others to enjoy.

 

[Karnak]

Nor has any your righteous attempts to label other's posts as snide made you right in the past. You are much more awesome when you choose to be informative and constructive.

Cmon dude, it was plain to all that he was being snide.

 

[lemonsquid]

sorry to say it, but my idea of fun isint yours

 

[Brawler]

Ok,

So I did not intend to get this into a "right/wrong" or "The game sucks/ the game is great"-discussion.

So back on topic, aside from the "lets play the waiting game" coalitions mechanic one of my other pet hates that wasn't mentioned in original post is:

Vastly different land force troop stats at same tech level.

I can understand troops being slightly different for different cultural/tech groups. However, I cannot understand why the decision was made to have units have vastly different stats at the same tech level when there is already penalties for acquiring that tech in the first place. Additionally, since one tech has abysmal land troops that have half the pips of a western nation's land units why suddenly their naval force is able to keep pace with western nations and have exact same units with same stats. If my land troops are 'inferior' then why isn't my navy, why is my navy special? All this does is funnel the player to westernise purely because of the fact their land units just suck regardless of tech level.

Since I purchased CK2 recently I can somewhat predict what will occur in the future. So i'll just hold out for rise of the orient or whatever named expansion is released that will flesh out the troop rosters for asian/indian nations etc. Until then I honestly cannot find a lot to do in EU4. I don't find the western nations appealing because they feel overpowered and can easily steamroll other non-western/eastern/ottoman nations of the world. Coalitions mechanic although manageable is just boring because all you do is wait and sit on your hands while your diplomats do their thing. It is not challenging at all.

Non-Western/Eastern/Ottoman tech nations feel bland to play because you can typically steamroll your tech level opponents but once they're all gone you have to go up against better tech units (not necessarily better tech level). Even if you have lvl33 military tech you get chocolate soldiers so you are forced to westernise because there is no other option to improve your troops. The problem in this case isn't westernising but the fact that once you westernise all those recently superior nations are suddenly pushovers so you start steam rolling them till you reach european nations. More boredom ensues.

My fix suggestions would be:

- Ease down on coalitions mechanic or create a better mechanic that doesn't force the player to sit on their hands and do nothing half the game. Warmongering players need love too.
- Equalise soldier stats for differing tech nations. Why a lvl33 western tech troop should have twice as many stats as a lvl33 chinese tech troop? It already took the poor player with 60% MP penalty to get that far so why force them to westernise? Alternatively, allow players to upgrade tech level gradually depending on tech level of their neighbours so at least they have some way of getting better stat land forces besides upgrading straight to the top of the cream western troops that will steamroll all their opposition (with exception of other western tech nations of course).
- Add more game changing random events and effects. +1 stability and -1 stability is about the only thing that effects the player. Need more depth than this. CK2 has a lot of RNG that can throw off the player and keep them occupied but EU4 is severely lacking in this department. I'm not saying make the game another dynasty builder, just need more flavour with events and missions.

I enjoyed the game and many hours I put into it but it just doesn't have replay value for me anymore untill the above is addressed. While waiting for DLC and expansions to further flesh out the game I'll continue to play Crusader Kings 2 because that is one engrossing game.

 

[mcmanusaur]

Just stopping by to reflect on how truly pointless requesting that a game be made more "fun" is... (that said I appreciate your post itself)

 

[xyra]

Wish Paradox would implement a "paint the map" difficulty - seems that easy isn't easy enough for some.

I like the coalitions forming. without coalitions there would be no limit for big nations and small nations would just get roflstomped. Yes you can't get historical outcome with coalitions in some cases. In other cases you wouldn't get historical outcome without too.

 

[Karnak]

I like to imagine that we'd manage snowballing and the conquest mentality better if there were diminishing returns in productivity(basetax, manpower, goods, etc) the more uncored provinces you had to cored provinces.
You should be able to demand a lot more from coalitions if they can't beat you, but the production of the rewards should be far far less.

That way you could still paint, but the biggest gain in taking new lands is to deprive your enemies of their cores, rather than growing linearly in power to the amount of provinces you hold.

See, i have the sort of mentality that map painters often do. I want to be challeneged to win my wars, and when i do to be granted that victory.
It's not that i want the game to be easy, it's about wanting it to be fair.
I'd like very much to see coalitions be a lot better than they actually are, but if i can't have that challenge, at least let me win.

A lot of the mentality comes from the simple fact that the map is painted your color. It's a handy indicator of progress and prowess. There is nothing in my mentality that says that every province in the empire should be as productive as the cores around my capital. Conquest is the main driving force, rather than an interest to see the empire grow in economic prowess.

With that in mind, i think you can do a lot to balance the game around the fact that gaining new provinces too fast would prove to be a loss in terms of economy, in a sense they'd be undefendable and non-productive assets. You should be able to turn an actual profit because of your ratio of uncored to cored provinces from vassalising territory, even with the penalties in vassal tax.

Of course, with those changes you'd really need to make vassals a lot more unreliable and a lot more prone to rebel against your warmongering ways.

 

[mcmanusaur]

I wish you could be a nice and strong country without being a blob.

This is pretty much it. In my experience the game is extremely punishing until you become a blob, after which it becomes less punishing but probably more tedious.

 

[gaius valerius]

Threads like these make me lol. I've yet to find myself annoyed with the game in any version... why do people want to be a blob? Isn't it that much more entertaining to be one of th players in the Concert of the Globe? (to use a historical analogy)

 

[milman]

dominating =/= ruling

Right now USA dominates in the world and do what ever wonts. In my country it is more important what USA ambasador say than how much % parties won on elections. That is domination. Of course if you dont listen USA ambasador than sanction, bombing, war ....

 

[lordelenath]

This is pretty much it. In my experience the game is extremely punishing until you become a blob, after which it becomes less punishing but probably more tedious.

In my experience that's not the actual problem. The first rise to power (while playing small nations) is one of the most interesting, albeit hardest parts of the game. I don't actually find the game-play punishing, but I still tend to blob in many games for a simple reason: there's not much to do but war. Ultimately everything you do is to improve your odds in the wars to come. In the end I start blobbing because it's inevitable if you want to actually do something - although I'm mostly having much more fun while being on par with other majors and the struggle to overtake them. That's obviously only true if you don't start as a major right off, in which case you will blob very fast anyway (which can be fun too, once in a while).

 

[panionios]

1 Expanding via vassals: Unfortunately the only way to play the game unless you want to play in semi-observe mode after the early game. This is mainly due to coalition mechanics.

Actually, the developer has said on a number of occasions that this is WAD.

2 Coalition mechanics: On hard-difficulty taking 2 provinces guarantees a hostile coalition unless a) you are allied with all surrounding neighbours or b) you fought against a nation without neighbours. Taking 1 province out of the HRE mostly does the same after rejecting "unjustified demands" from the emperor.
--> 1st you kinda have to vassal feed or you will grow a huge coalition if you want to expand. 2nd it forces a player who does not want to exploit game mechanics to... wait. On the bright side this leads to a more historical gameplay. On the other hand it forces the player to... wait. Waiting is no fun.

Don't play hard. Hard is supposed to be hard! After all, conquering is hard. And "just conquering two provinces" is actually a lot. I mean, if you were Spain or Burgundy or Austria and France just took two provinces from a minor, would you say: "Oh, he only took a couple of provinces. Who cares".

In any case, it really depends on who you are playing. The Ottomans and Russia (I guess this applies to others as well, but these two are the most obvious) can very easily expand aggressively as they can move in two directions and there is a huge distance between their borders. You fight Lithuania then Nogai then back to Lithuania. You fight Serbia/Bosnia then the Mamliks then Wallachia. While you fight one your AE with the others decreases and so on. Obviously this is unfair to the europeans who don't have much room to maneuver on the continent.

3 Vanishing cores

I think this is bugged and definitely not very clear.

4 Personal Unions: Just super random and basically impossible for the player unless you get extremely lucky or start in Iberia. The main problem is that there is no good way to counter them. Right now the only thing you can do in order to stop a personal union is to beat up the overlord to -100 prestige and hope for their king to die before the country recovers.

I agree. Castile has been in a PU with GB since, almost, the start of my current game and with GB not focusing in Europe (with the exception of France), one major opponent is out of my way making it easier. I'd prefer them independent going wild in the Med and being a threat to the Ottomans (and myself). It's 1740 and I just got (as Russia) a PU with France. How ridiculous is that. There should be PUs, but not as often and it should be more difficult to maintain. Because for big countries it's very easy to keep prestige above 0.

5 Lack of flavour (missions and events): After your initial missions I find myself repeating the "fortify province X" mission until I just ignore them. Flavour events just happen or they don't given certain triggers. However they are very scarce

I tend to ignore missions once I am satisfied with my progress.

6 Other stuff:
-My game is up to date but I still get AE from integrating vassals.. So even with vassal feeding you have coalitions non-stop which again hampers any expansion.
-Vassal attachement: Please add an option to tell them to attach/skirmish/hunt/siege. In wars I am constantly trying to avoid vassal-attrition. Since attrition can be extremely high army composition just doesn't matter at all. It's all just about avoiding attrition.

The one thing I hate in 1.3.: Vassal-always attach-attrition. I hope they introduce a never attach button. They just see my troops in the middle of nowhere and because they are closest to them go and attach to them rather than going to the battlefield. And I think AE from integration is only 4-5.

6 Summary: After you established your base in the early game, and afterwards you vassal fed yourself into a major power there is simply nothing left to do unless you are a coalition-masochist. In EU 4 you basically have only 1 option: Fight over provinces. And currently the game is designed to make this as hard, painful, low-rewarding, and slow as possible. I don't have a problem in it being hard, I don't have a problem it being painful, or low-rewarding, or slow. But all of them at once..?

I guess this is true of most similar games. Once you are big, no much harm can be done. It probably is a challenge for developers of such games to try to make their games equally fun in later stages.

 

[Anjwalker]

I've just finished a game as Austria > Holy Roman Empire, which I became the most powerful nation on the globe. How did I do that? By a combination! It's not all one thing. You need to combine tactics; RL, do you think the Counts of Habsburg become Emperors of Austria just by conquest? No, they inherited, they manipulated, vassalised, AND they conquered. Do you think the British Empire was formed just by conquest? Nope. They did the same, they built it by a combination.

Actually the major two empires that formed just of none stop conquest, the Mongols and Alexander's Macedonia, collapsed the moment their creators died. Proof enough that is a bad tactic RL for you?

This is supposed to be a realistic game, and its not intended to let people paint the world. The British Empire was the most powerful nation in history RL - it only looked like this;

Sizeable sure, but not paint'd.

 

[grommile]

That map's a bit cheaty, since it's a diachronic map of the Empire's maximum extents, rather than a synchronic map of its largest simultaneous extent. We didn't have the Thirteen Colonies and the Cape-to-Cairo stretch simultaneously, after all.

 

[gaius valerius]

And if you were to look at it from the more indirect 'influence' then the bipolar Cold War period also clearly had a winner able to press its ideas on the world for some decades, with even less direct control than the British Empire once had. That's the strenght of EU compare to TW: you can be the boss without needing to have everything.

 

[hitchens]

I've just finished a game as Austria > Holy Roman Empire, which I became the most powerful nation on the globe. How did I do that? By a combination! It's not all one thing. You need to combine tactics; RL, do you think the Counts of Habsburg become Emperors of Austria just by conquest?

Oh god, not again. Do you really think you are the first to form the HRE?

 

[tapewormlondon]

The date is 23rd July 2044. Dust settles across the globe as the third world war winds down with a narrow victory for the allies. Millions across the globe are displaced, with countless more dying of starvation and thirst, with many more suffering from horrific ailments caused by nucular fall out.

Americas president - Justin Bieber is under scrutiny trying to sort out the resulting economic crisis. China buys Japan for £300 Trillion and annexes the country. England win the FIFA world cup for the second time.

Meanwhile on the Paradox forums, the latest thread "version 21.5 is boring please revert to 1.1" goes live.

 

[unmerged(798670)]

The date is 23rd July 2044. Dust settles across the globe as the third world war winds down with a narrow victory for the allies. Millions across the globe are displaced, with countless more dying of starvation and thirst, with many more suffering from horrific ailments caused by nucular fall out.

Americas president - Justin Bieber is under scrutiny trying to sort out the resulting economic crisis. China buys Japan for £300 Trillion and annexes the country. England win the FIFA world cup for the second time.

Meanwhile on the Paradox forums, the latest thread "version 21.5 is boring please revert to 1.1" goes live.

I love that so much I want to figure out how to make it my signature.

 

[Hideous]

I kinda agree with OP. The single play game isn't fun, the mechanics are just annoying. I take 3 provinces from France as Castile and I get massive coalition against me. While Burgundy takes 3 provinces at the same time in a separate war from France and doesn't get any coalition against them. So I'm fighting Burgundy (which took just as much as I did), England, France and bunch of minors. Sure I can win the war, but all around it is just pretty silly. End of whine.