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

[geminisama]

it's the fact once you're a blob the game becomes an exercise in tedious frustration that is the problem because there is absolutely nothing to do other than... conquest?

This, so much. Outside of war, there is virtually NOTHING to do unless you create sweeping narratives as you watch your game in idleness. People like to tell others they're playing it wrong, and should be trading, colonizing, and other goodies instead of waging war; which equates to, "Click where the merchant goes. YAY TRADING", "Click where the colonist goes. YAY COLONIZING!", "Click to send diplomat. YAY DIPLOMACY", and then you're back to sitting around idle, hoping for something to do. Apparently wanting to wage war, arguably the one fleshed out mechanic, is not the "proper forum approved" way to play, and all the new game mechanics exist solely to frustrate the player, because apparently there were elements of the EU3 community that WERE FURIOUS THAT PEOPLE PULLED OFF CRAZY WC STUNTS IN THEIR SINGLEPLAYER GAME. They were so mad about what people did with their single player games, they want us to forget EU wasn't always about sitting-there-staring-at-the-screen-hoping-for-a-resource-to-click-and-use (the aforementioned LOVELY interwar game), while patronizing players who were used to/enjoyed the way Paradoxes flagship title used to play just one iteration ago.

 

[srd5090]

This, so much. Outside of war, there is virtually NOTHING to do unless you create sweeping narratives as you watch your game in idleness. People like to tell others they're playing it wrong, and should be trading, colonizing, and other goodies instead of waging war; which equates to, "Click where the merchant goes. YAY TRADING", "Click where the colonist goes. YAY COLONIZING!", "Click to send diplomat. YAY DIPLOMACY", and then you're back to sitting around idle, hoping for something to do. Apparently wanting to wage war, arguably the one fleshed out mechanic, is not the "proper forum approved" way to play, and all the new game mechanics exist solely to frustrate the player, because apparently there were elements of the EU3 community that WERE FURIOUS THAT PEOPLE PULLED OFF CRAZY WC STUNTS IN THEIR SINGLEPLAYER GAME. They were so mad about what people did with their single player games, they want us to forget EU wasn't always about sitting-there-staring-at-the-screen-hoping-for-a-resource-to-click-and-use (the aforementioned LOVELY interwar game), while patronizing players who were used to/enjoyed the way Paradoxes flagship title used to play just one iteration ago.

Geminisama you have summed up my feelings on the lack of non-war gameplay. There really isn't much to do if you're not expanding. In CK you can plot, plan your eugenic program, experience events and non-war decision making, etc. In Victoria you can work on building factories, managing your economy, and managing your POPs. And of course with HoI the whole point is warfare. EUIV currently doesn't give you a whole lot of interesting things to do besides fight wars. If you play as a land nation with little to no colonization potential, you don't even get to "click where the colonist goes". Diplomacy is pretty weak overall. It amounts to the typical actions you would expect, but it doesn't have the sphere mechanics of V2 for instance. If you are not in the HRE diplomacy is pretty straight forward.

So when you have warfare, which is probably the most exciting bit of gameplay the game offers, hamstrung by the fact that gaining land from warfare is so restricted, it leaves a stale cracker to chew on.

 

[InnocentIII]

As much as I didn't like the changes from 1.1 to 1.2, I've adjusted and I'm still having a good time playing. If you want to keep expanding, you need to broaden your horizons, and don't always expand in the same geographic area, and yes, you have to feed your vassals to grow explosively. I even updated on my laptop, which I'd kept at 1.1x until this weekend.

I, for one, welcome our new robot overlords.

 

[gaius valerius]

Doesn't matter what Domination mean. The 1st thing to come to mind is Domination by military means. By painting the world. Not of Domination the world by Trade, culture, or what ever. Especially when when you read this : "Global Domination ". I don't think Domination by Allies or ideas. Not In a East Vs West.

Easy way out of disregarding Dominion status of Canada or the coöperation of local princelings in India. When Great-Britain and France tried to force the Suez in 1956 in a - in hindsight - rather pitiful attempt to reassert past glory... USA just said "No"... When I read Global Domination more than anything I think of the full spectrum: military, diplomatically, economically, culturally, etc. A given, not all this can be recreated in EU, the prevalence of Italian, Castilian and French culture of course is not present in the game mechanics and the economic aspect is also only relevant for a country itself, not in a broader perspective (i.e. Wallensein and others, the idea of global domination through systems of finance and such). The military and diplomatic features however do feature as possible means. Then again, it's your opinion vs mine about the meaning of 'what Global Domination' means... yeah, that is just like... your opinion man.

 

[unmerged(798670)]

Then again, it's your opinion vs mine about the meaning of 'what Global Domination' means... yeah, that is just like... your opinion man.

If 5 out of 6 of the top definitions of domination imply conquest, and the 6th requires you to look up a word to see conquest, it is pretty clear that a reasonable person could conclude that it means conquest. Anyone who concludes that and attempts to play this game as a conquest game will be disappointed which was the original point... I don't see how your opinion of the use of a word is relevant to that point, nor how it is relevant to the topic at hand really.

 

[alanschu]

In this universe, in a language called English on a planet called Earth orbiting around Sol, which is a star in Milkyway, global domination or world domination exactly means conquering the whole world. Seems weird and can be interpreted as dominating other powers but it is not. It simply means painting the map.

As an English speaking person, I don't consider Global Domination as being "Conquering the entire world under one banner" so yay to that I guess.

 

[gaius valerius]

If 5 out of 6 of the top definitions of domination imply conquest, and the 6th requires you to look up a word to see conquest, it is pretty clear that a reasonable person could conclude that it means conquest. Anyone who concludes that and attempts to play this game as a conquest game will be disappointed which was the original point... I don't see how your opinion of the use of a word is relevant to that point, nor how it is relevant to the topic at hand really.

It's relevant in the sense of "what do you expect from the game", essentially it's a personal item but not wholly. The developpers had an idea in mind when making this game. Though if you read most of these topics you'd get the impression a lot of people are complaining that said idea isn't quite in line with what they want. So in that light it is relevant. That argument doesn't really cut it either btw, '5 out of 6 say...' means you are looking really really bad or are just quite content to use wikipedia.

 

[Roelath]

If their intention was to never allow WC at all within this game... why did they include several of them as achievements? The Three Mountains speaks volumes already considering you're a single province nation with the worst religion in game and you're expected to rule the globe within 380yrs or less.

Global Domination = One Color and Puppet/Vassal states.

 

[gaius valerius]

If their intention was to never allow WC at all within this game... why did they include several of them as achievements? The Three Mountains speaks volumes already considering you're a single province nation with the worst religion in game and you're expected to rule the globe within 380yrs or less.

Global Domination = One Color and Puppet/Vassal states.

You do realise that's a silly argument? It's included cause 'you can' if you want that, it's hardly the goal of every single game you start unless that is your personal game. Given that there are several achievements, your logic implies that each and every session is meant to... achieve them all. Your logic also implies that of course... WC is only the goal of the game in Ironman mode, cause 'achievements'. I don't think so. It's basically the ultimate achievement, a 'you-think-you-can-do-this?-go-ahead-and-try-punk', that seems painstakingly obvious not with an achievement like that?

 

[alanschu]

Well this thread quickly went off topic. The people posting for aggressive expansion to stay remind me of people that complain about space simulation games having sound, because there's no sound in space. Since they want their game to be more realistic they demand the developers remove sound from the game when all they have to do is turn off their speakers and problem is solved. If you don't want to paint the map that's your prerogative, then don't paint the map. Why are you against other people's enjoyment if they do want to paint the map? AE isn't the only limiting factor anyway, there's vassalisation wait times, Admin costs to core provinces, so on and so forth that is already a hindrence to world conquest.

If you'd prefer they could go back to the badboy score of the other games.

Dishonorable scum CB FTW?

 

[alanschu]

If their intention was to never allow WC at all within this game... why did they include several of them as achievements? The Three Mountains speaks volumes already considering you're a single province nation with the worst religion in game and you're expected to rule the globe within 380yrs or less.

Global Domination = One Color and Puppet/Vassal states.

I would say that you're not really expected to win with Ryukyu but rather, that it's something that is fundamentally very difficult to do.

 

[BBBD316]

If this topic has shown anything it is that we should be pushing for more to do in peace, a more detailed diplomatic system and a better representation of the shift of cultures and religion.

If this was there then there would be less focus on the need to war to "do" something.

 

[geminisama]

If this topic has shown anything it is that we should be pushing for more to do in peace, a more detailed diplomatic system and a better representation of the shift of cultures and religion.

If this was there then there would be less focus on the need to war to "do" something.

I agree with that notion, but non-war things to do during peace has always been a major shortcoming of Paradox games. I can think of 2 that have ANYTHING to do aside from war, CK2 and Vicky2.

 

[alanschu]

If this topic has shown anything it is that we should be pushing for more to do in peace, a more detailed diplomatic system and a better representation of the shift of cultures and religion.

If this was there then there would be less focus on the need to war to "do" something.

I wouldn't disagree. Though I'm also of the opinion that very large empires should have mechanics in them that make it increasingly likely that it can fall apart in some ways (which is a lot of what CK2 does so well, IMO). Though I have a feeling people don't actually want that (combat when it's rebels doesn't have the same reward mechanic as combat to gain more land). Maybe make it related to culture, so the more tax base you have that is not part of your culture group (or at least accepted culture) increases the chances of a faction splitting away (or at least increases the revolt risk with the demands being sovereignty).

 

[unmerged(798670)]

Well I'm having a hard time following your logic or points about the definitions of words Gaius, and your counterargument (?) for achievements is similarly difficult to parse.

It is not an uncommon leap from an achievement existing to the assumption that there should be a strategy that makes it reasonably likely to succeed at that achievement. Clearly the Ryukyu WC is intended to be the capstone one that requires the most strategy and best execution, but I don't even follow the point you're trying to make in saying if it exists it has to be the only goal of the game.

 

[wildbillhdmax01]

If this topic has shown anything it is that we should be pushing for more to do in peace, a more detailed diplomatic system and a better representation of the shift of cultures and religion.

If this was there then there would be less focus on the need to war to "do" something.

I agree with that notion, but non-war things to do during peace has always been a major shortcoming of Paradox games. I can think of 2 that have ANYTHING to do aside from war, CK2 and Vicky2.

1+

Thats why Vic2 is my Fav.

 

[Roelath]

You do realise that's a silly argument? It's included cause 'you can' if you want that, it's hardly the goal of every single game you start unless that is your personal game. Given that there are several achievements, your logic implies that each and every session is meant to... achieve them all. Your logic also implies that of course... WC is only the goal of the game in Ironman mode, cause 'achievements'. I don't think so. It's basically the ultimate achievement, a 'you-think-you-can-do-this?-go-ahead-and-try-punk', that seems painstakingly obvious not with an achievement like that?

Why create a post that is unattainable? That's the problem. If the game wasn't designed for painting the world then there needs to more to it. As of right now Genghis Khan II for the SNES probably has more options to do than EUIV does during downtime.

 

[AlricWaskir]

If this topic has shown anything it is that we should be pushing for more to do in peace, a more detailed diplomatic system and a better representation of the shift of cultures and religion.

If this was there then there would be less focus on the need to war to "do" something.

I absolutely agree. If there was more to do in peace it wouldn't be so bad to have peace for a longer time. It is the combination of AE-coalitions and little options in peace which make it frustrating.

 

[gaius valerius]

Why create a post that is unattainable? That's the problem. If the game wasn't designed for painting the world then there needs to more to it. As of right now Genghis Khan II for the SNES probably has more options to do than EUIV does during downtime.

Achievements, especially the most difficult should be... easy? Achievements weren't put in the game as 'do this each time this is what it is all about' options, just as 'hey wanna try something?' stuff, in varying degrees of difficulty.

 

[Anthropoid]

I'm gonna be pissed if you sissy WC whiners convince PI to make this game easy.