I would appreciate it if the reinforcement cost issues could make it onto this list.
1.6.1.1 Open Beta - checksum e2f7
- Thread starter Besuchov
- Start date
-
We have updated our Community Code of Conduct. Please read through the new rules for the forum that are an integral part of Paradox Interactive’s User Agreement.
- Status
I have downloaded this version.But still did not find the method to cancel transfer trade power relations.I don't have WON.Could you please tell me how to cancel transfer power relations in this new version?
Yeah! The game needs skill equalization so it's more fun to have caps that force waiting rather than resource management! It's better when strong outcomes in strategy games are less dependent on skill! Power to the below-average!
Edit: Some priority should probably be tossed in the direction of Linux MP, which is literally unplayable right now due to constant N_67 de-sync (or Y, if anyone is still trying to use THAT non-working feature
).
These two. I've noticed that Ironman only doesn't autosave for me when I use the ingame load to jump back in time for whatever reason; I imagine that by disabling the in-game load you will have resolved not autosaving issue. I'll test this new beta to find out if that's the case.
Just to mention it: After switching EUIV back to 1.6.1 and then again to 1.6.1.1, the bug with the 'non-inland inland' trade nodes vanished completely. So it was most likely just a download error.
This is a feedback thread for the patch, it's therefore an appropriate place for feedback on it.
And on topic, this is much better and glad to see the westernisation changes corrected. Now if the saving bugs could be fixed...
Eh? No tough guy act here.
Some priority should probably be tossed in the direction of Linux MP, which is literally unplayable right now due to constant N_67 de-sync (or Y, if anyone is still trying to use THAT non-working feature).
Seems like a reasonable point to make to me.
Thing is, people are understandably confused as to what is being considered a bug that is likely to be fixed (eventually), versus what is a design decision that was poorly thought out/implemented and hence might be subject to reworking/reconsideration, versus what was a design decision that is unlikely to change. Frankly, given that some balance things fluctuate wildly, nothing seems set in stone. But if the devs have no intention of revisiting certain areas, they would probably save themselves a lot of negative posts if they articulated direction in those areas more clearly (e.g., AE?). That way, people who disagree could decide whether to continue trying to like the game for its other strengths, try to mod it to suit their tastes, or move on.
Of the issues generating a lot of discussion, I only see AE decay addressed in this patch. Does that mean AE assignment is where it is meant to be?
I don't see anything on vassal integration costs. Are the devs really comfortable that it is more expensive in DIP points to core, now, than it is to core via ADM points, in many cases? Should that change some of the DIP point (and other) costs that had been added to peace resolutions in prior patches for returning cores or vassalizing? Should there be any way to discount DIP integration costs, like there is for ADM point coring? Are people comfortable with the fact that your Diplomatic Reputation score has changed from being critically useful to being almost useless?
Were the various nerfs to the RotW intended? Some of them seem so, others seem a bit like unintended consequences. For much of the world, outside Europe, their income was reduced, manpower was reduced, trade was reduced, and tech progress was reduced. Sounds like the patch addresses some parts of the additional Westernization nerf, but not all of it. And countries are still going to be stuck, permanently with inferior units? Personally, I can deal with things either way, but would appreciate some input regarding whether the nerfs were intentional and are here to stay? Or were people unaware of some of these impacts and working to address them?
On some of the new features, I see nothing. Does that means people are satisfied they are working as intended:
- Policies: Are some of the wild discrepancies in their usefulness being addressed? Some just NEVER make sense to implement.
- Rivals/Power Projection: Despite seeming among the most promising features of the patch, there are many oddities regarding who you can rival, who can rival you, when you can/can't declare rivals (i.e., during wars), vanishing rivals, no benefit from annexing/vassalizing rivals. Are there any plans to make this promising systems more elegant? Or are we stuck where we are?
- Transfer Trade Power enhancements also sounded like a great idea. But with the decision to make it cost a diplomatic slot, it will never be utilized (even without the simultaneous nerf to the number of diplo relations slots). Is there any plan to make this feature usable? If not, better to go back to the old mechanism, which people might use on occasion.
- Forced Access during peace deals - Should forced military access during peace deals really take a diplo relations slot? Makes it a whole lot less useful. Similarly, should Fleet Basing Rights granted as part of a peace deal cost the winner money? Again, limited utility.
- Justify Trade Conflict CB - is that supposed to be tied to the Transfer Trade Power feature, as it would seem? If so, another reason to make Transfer Trade Power a relevant option. Or is it intended as a catch all replacement for the elimination of Counter-revolution CB that Republics used to enjoy?
- Canals - incredibly minor, perhaps, since Canals are a bit of fluff prestige projects/eye candy, but is it really intended that anyone can go through them?
- Are privateers and Trade Companies working as intended?
Of the issues generating a lot of discussion, I only see AE decay addressed in this patch. Does that mean AE assignment is where it is meant to be?
I don't see anything on vassal integration costs. Are the devs really comfortable that it is more expensive in DIP points to core, now, than it is to core via ADM points, in many cases? Should that change some of the DIP point (and other) costs that had been added to peace resolutions in prior patches for returning cores or vassalizing? Should there be any way to discount DIP integration costs, like there is for ADM point coring? Are people comfortable with the fact that your Diplomatic Reputation score has changed from being critically useful to being almost useless?
Were the various nerfs to the RotW intended? Some of them seem so, others seem a bit like unintended consequences. For much of the world, outside Europe, their income was reduced, manpower was reduced, trade was reduced, and tech progress was reduced. Sounds like the patch addresses some parts of the additional Westernization nerf, but not all of it. And countries are still going to be stuck, permanently with inferior units? Personally, I can deal with things either way, but would appreciate some input regarding whether the nerfs were intentional and are here to stay? Or were people unaware of some of these impacts and working to address them?
On some of the new features, I see nothing. Does that means people are satisfied they are working as intended:
- Policies: Are some of the wild discrepancies in their usefulness being addressed? Some just NEVER make sense to implement.
- Rivals/Power Projection: Despite seeming among the most promising features of the patch, there are many oddities regarding who you can rival, who can rival you, when you can/can't declare rivals (i.e., during wars), vanishing rivals, no benefit from annexing/vassalizing rivals. Are there any plans to make this promising systems more elegant? Or are we stuck where we are?
- Transfer Trade Power enhancements also sounded like a great idea. But with the decision to make it cost a diplomatic slot, it will never be utilized (even without the simultaneous nerf to the number of diplo relations slots). Is there any plan to make this feature usable? If not, better to go back to the old mechanism, which people might use on occasion.
- Forced Access during peace deals - Should forced military access during peace deals really take a diplo relations slot? Makes it a whole lot less useful. Similarly, should Fleet Basing Rights granted as part of a peace deal cost the winner money? Again, limited utility.
- Justify Trade Conflict CB - is that supposed to be tied to the Transfer Trade Power feature, as it would seem? If so, another reason to make Transfer Trade Power a relevant option. Or is it intended as a catch all replacement for the elimination of Counter-revolution CB that Republics used to enjoy?
- Canals - incredibly minor, perhaps, since Canals are a bit of fluff prestige projects/eye candy, but is it really intended that anyone can go through them?
- Are privateers and Trade Companies working as intended?
Pardon me asking, but does it decay faster (easier to get rid of) or slower (longer to get rid of) in 1.6.1.1 compared to official patch 1.6.1?
Oh and I suggest a hardcoded block to prohibit Muscovy to take Expansion as first Idea Group to prevent it from colonizing Siberia in 1460... :closedeyes:
Feedback:
http://forum.paradoxplaza.com/forum...and-back-in-breaks-screen-resolution-on-Linux
is still present in 1.6.1.1.
http://forum.paradoxplaza.com/forum...and-back-in-breaks-screen-resolution-on-Linux
is still present in 1.6.1.1.
Base decay of 1.5 was -3/year, I think. 1.6.1 was -6, 1.6.1.1 set it back to -3. +- modifiers.
All in all, a sensible decision.
Nice changes thanks! Anything planned for the wonky rival system? Nations rivalling nations far away for no apparent reasons while being best buddis with neighbours (France and Spain, yes I'm looking at you) and overall allainces and rivalries being too stable and not reacting to what happens in-game?
So first you destroy expansion via diplomacy, then make expansion easier via direct coring and now you destroy that method also with rebels and huge AE/coalitions? So now no expanding at all? I feel totally happy when I reach my Ireland historical borders within gametime frame yay!!!
While I appreciate the rapid fixes, the whole beta mechanism isn't very discoverable, and you may have a bunch of puzzled pissed-off people who aren't yet trained to read the forums (their fault) or check for a new odd beta (not their fault). Maybe it's just the only good path for hot fixes on Steam? In any case, thanks for fixing stuff as quickly as you can. If I didn't like the game, I wouldn't care so much about it working, right?
What did I just say, in this thread? Oh that's right, it was this:
No name-calling, no junior moderating.
If you genuinely believe someone is trolling, report them as per that thread. Do not respond in kind.
Numerous posts deleted.
No name-calling, no junior moderating.
If you genuinely believe someone is trolling, report them as per that thread. Do not respond in kind.
Numerous posts deleted.
You should reverse back the "goods produced change" OR disable the good produced effect on manpower.
-Every province with 5+ base tax is buffed on manpower due to 1 base tax = 0,2 goods produced = 0,2 base province manpower.
-Rich provinces countries Like France and Ming got buffed hardcore on manpower due to this side effect, it's the REAL reason why France is OP this patch.
-every poor regions is the game got nerfed to death du to the same reason, having provinces like 1 base tax will only give you 0,2 base province manpower ( or something along this, i dont exactly remember the formule ).
Seriously, just take a look at this issue please.
I see no reason to play ATM due to how the whole manpower balance in the game is broken with 1.6.
-Every province with 5+ base tax is buffed on manpower due to 1 base tax = 0,2 goods produced = 0,2 base province manpower.
-Rich provinces countries Like France and Ming got buffed hardcore on manpower due to this side effect, it's the REAL reason why France is OP this patch.
-every poor regions is the game got nerfed to death du to the same reason, having provinces like 1 base tax will only give you 0,2 base province manpower ( or something along this, i dont exactly remember the formule ).
Seriously, just take a look at this issue please.
I see no reason to play ATM due to how the whole manpower balance in the game is broken with 1.6.
Last edited:
Getting a display error with the latest beta build where supply ship range is way off ( its still working like it should but the readout is way off).
screenshot
http://cloud-4.steampowered.com/ugc/561009955189425779/1E51E460CEB1B849C13D5238B193D036D17234C9/
fresh game with the 1.6.1.1 build.
screenshot
http://cloud-4.steampowered.com/ugc/561009955189425779/1E51E460CEB1B849C13D5238B193D036D17234C9/
fresh game with the 1.6.1.1 build.
90 AE ? for making ottomans Constaquest and vassaling serbia ? , this takes 30 years with this Ae decay do get deleted, in all the time u cannot do anything than waiting ? is this what paradox wanna make a Strategy game ? why than not renaming the Game in something better like: Europa Uniwaiting or Europa Boring or what is with "5 speed- Game over in 4 hours - Universalis" and as untertitle of your games u can write: YES its paradox and we know it
hmy:
90 AE ? for making ottomans Constaquest and vassaling serbia ? , this takes 30 years with this Ae decay do get deleted, in all the time u cannot do anything than waiting ? is this what paradox wanna make a Strategy game ? why than not renaming the Game in something better like: Europa Uniwaiting or Europa Boring or what is with "5 speed- Game over in 4 hours - Universalis" and as untertitle of your games u can write: YES its paradox and we know it
But that's 90 AE with only 1 weaker nation that should hardly provide a challenge to a human controlled Ottoman Empire. Plus you can always set your sights on the Middle East rather than further conquest into Europe if your AE is getting too high with European nations.
View attachment 109054
90 AE ? for making ottomans Constaquest and vassaling serbia ? , this takes 30 years with this Ae decay do get deleted, in all the time u cannot do anything than waiting ? is this what paradox wanna make a Strategy game ? why than not renaming the Game in something better like: Europa Uniwaiting or Europa Boring or what is with "5 speed- Game over in 4 hours - Universalis" and as untertitle of your games u can write: YES its paradox and we know it
yes because Bosnia is gonna stop you... LOL
- Status