It's the same with coalition strength calculation where you sometimes have to reload after finishing a war against a large country. Really wonky stuff
16 bugs/design inconsistencies that have existed for multiple patch cycles
- Thread starter bbqftw
- 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.
It's the same with coalition strength calculation where you sometimes have to reload after finishing a war against a large country. Really wonky stuff
To add to the list, the bug I've always hated the most is the UI bug where clicking on a popup that brings you to the New World will move the screen to the top of the map instead. I really can't imagine that it's too complicated to fix.
Yeah, all they need to do is add a check when the panning action is going to pan over where the map loops, then have it stop at the seam and start a new panning action from there to where it's actually meant to go.
I didn't know about some of those but I have encounter so many problem games that can be boiled to a few item on this list.
My like +1 isn't enough!!!
My like +1 isn't enough!!!
This is a great thread and kind of sad.
The issues I keep noticing patch after patch are:
1) Vassals don't delete expensive forts and stay locked in a bankruptcy/uselessness spiral. At least give us an option to manually delete those forts on behalf of our dumb AI!
2) No way to respond to or prevent coastal raiding. Give us a police action CB, or let protective fleets prevent this better.
3) Favor accumulation clock is often very wrong. In my current game I saw my top ally scheduled for January XXX1 a year ahead of time, watched the clock count down to that month, and then without adding a favor, simply jump to January XXX3. Then a favor finally appeared in early XXX2, without even changing the clock from January XXX3. It makes timing a war difficult.
Those are the ones that come to mind first, there are always others I forget about.
The issues I keep noticing patch after patch are:
1) Vassals don't delete expensive forts and stay locked in a bankruptcy/uselessness spiral. At least give us an option to manually delete those forts on behalf of our dumb AI!
2) No way to respond to or prevent coastal raiding. Give us a police action CB, or let protective fleets prevent this better.
3) Favor accumulation clock is often very wrong. In my current game I saw my top ally scheduled for January XXX1 a year ahead of time, watched the clock count down to that month, and then without adding a favor, simply jump to January XXX3. Then a favor finally appeared in early XXX2, without even changing the clock from January XXX3. It makes timing a war difficult.
Those are the ones that come to mind first, there are always others I forget about.
2) The efficiency of raid coasts is based off of the trade node's pirate efficiency, so the general advice is to use the Hunt Pirates mission. Not sure if you didn't know that or if you're saying that it's changed.
3) If your military power changes enough to change how often you accumulate favors (say from losing a bunch of men during a war, or building a lot of ships) then the timer resets instead of applying time invested already. Or at least that's what I heard months ago when this happened to FlorryWorry.
For the first, I knew about this, but I've never seen actual stats showing the exact number of guns needed to counter raids. A few heavies don't seem to prevent raids from even small countries.
For the second, that makes sense, but at the point I was tracking it, neither country was at war nor had been at war for a while, so it couldn't have been crazy manpower fluctuations or a major militarization drive (which I could imagine would skew things by a bit but not 2+ years of accrual time). SO I still can't really explain this one. I mean it wasn't just a leap of a month or two, it was a pretty major divergence between what was predicted and what happened from month to month.
I'm almost 100% certain the AI doesn't pay dip for military access
Yes, but since them raiding you gives you free 100% effective protection for [cooldown] years, and since your fleet only has interrupt its "pretend to hunt pirates" mission for a couple of months for them to raid you, doing "pretend to hunt pirates" is pretty much a waste of time and resources. I haven't actually done the math on the cost of dedicating a substantial fraction of your naval capacity to doing nothing except "hunt pirates", ever, but I doubt that it's much less than the cost of being raided, especially when you figure in the opportunity cost of not using a large part of your fleet for fighting wars or "protecting trade [during peacetime]" which is apparently something completely different from "hunting pirates". And if your "pretend to hunt pirates" fails however briefly for whatever reason you might as well not have bothered doing anything at all.
It's poor, half-finished, game design. This is supposedly a "strategy game" with "interesting decisions", but from the raider's point of view it's free money for pressing a button - hardly an interesting decision - and from the raidee's point of view you're probably better off just taking the raid rather than trying to protect against it (but, hey, there's that interesting micro-management of making a note of when the cooldown from the last pirate raid expires so you can start your ships on the protection mission the month before the timer expires). The raider has no chance of direct consequences. Ships "hunting pirates" never actually do anything to pirates. Being raided gives you no casus belli, even though historically such raids led to their share of counter-raids, and even though when other nations that pirate you (far less effectively) you get a CB. In a game where something as trivial as "diplomatic insults" gives you CB's that the game nags you and nags you and nags you about not using, this action that actually harms you gives you no diplomatic response. Also, an AI will raid countries which the UI says it has a "friendly" attitude towards, which is really bad strategy if the AI actually wants to have a friendly relationship with the country it's raiding (which presumably it does), and which makes diplomacy a useless strategy for this purpose.
If there was a chance of ships doing a pirate hunting mission costing a pirate raid some ships, that would make pirate raids a more interesting decision. If raids gave the raided countries a CB, perhaps one of those CB's that I've never had occasion to use like "cb_privateers", that would make pirate raids more interesting. If diplomacy that persuaded a country to have a "friendly" attitude towards you would make them stop raiding you, that would make it more interesting. If it were multiplayer, the player considering raiding me would have to think about diplomatic consequences, which might make it interesting depending on the context.
But as it is, there's no strategy to it and no interesting game play. It's just a "free money" button that some countries get to push, and which is really frustrating to be on the receiving end of because there's nothing cost-effective you can do about it.
Last edited:
They didn't use to and I don't remember any of the devs mentioning it has changed
Agree, you are best of to forget that raiding ever exists and disable any alert about it. However there is one way to prevent it. Take those enemies out of the game by conquering their costal provinces.
Or force those raider to convert to your religious and watch them go raid their own former friendly coastline.
Another 1: Occasionally see AI manage to survive breaking to Separatists, which has been around forever.
Just saw it happen with a 3 province Cleves which has two Munster cores occupied by Munster separatists.
Month ticks by and poof - occupations are gone, rebels disappear and the land still belongs to Cleves.
Just saw it happen with a 3 province Cleves which has two Munster cores occupied by Munster separatists.
Month ticks by and poof - occupations are gone, rebels disappear and the land still belongs to Cleves.
Previews for part 2
* almost everything wrong with promise land
* the miseries of CN vs new world war rules
* attached army issues
* AIs prioritizing building over cores
* continuation of wars after warleader annexation
* incan event rebels with diplomatic immunity
* did anyone playtest inti?
* everything wrong with autonomy
* everything wrong with peace deal "cannot core restriction"
* inconsistencies with subject independence actions (subject subject allying vs external support independence)
* dutch rebels fighting for the wrong country
* Netherlands alliances events
* lazily coded HRE war enthusiasm / war acceptance modifiers
* reinforcement rate coding abomination
* island rebels, annexed nation separatists
* special exception: how 1.25 screwed up tributaries again. Won't be fixed in 1.26 I'm sure so not that out of line
* almost everything wrong with promise land
* the miseries of CN vs new world war rules
* attached army issues
* AIs prioritizing building over cores
* continuation of wars after warleader annexation
* incan event rebels with diplomatic immunity
* did anyone playtest inti?
* everything wrong with autonomy
* everything wrong with peace deal "cannot core restriction"
* inconsistencies with subject independence actions (subject subject allying vs external support independence)
* dutch rebels fighting for the wrong country
* Netherlands alliances events
* lazily coded HRE war enthusiasm / war acceptance modifiers
* reinforcement rate coding abomination
* island rebels, annexed nation separatists
* special exception: how 1.25 screwed up tributaries again. Won't be fixed in 1.26 I'm sure so not that out of line
Bump in anticipation of Dharma patch notes.
Don't forget the bankrupting AIs and reversed "besieging war goal."
Looking forward to the 1.26 additions. I'm gonna go with a conservative guess of there will be more new bugs than fixed old bugs.
#freebbqftw
Don't forget the bankrupting AIs and reversed "besieging war goal."
Looking forward to the 1.26 additions. I'm gonna go with a conservative guess of there will be more new bugs than fixed old bugs.
#freebbqftw
All of these are still issues, same with the projected list.
Not that it's surprising given the extended periods during which these have all been ignored to this point, but still. I wonder how many of these will still be relevant in 2020? Is it too optimistic to set the over/under at half of them?
Not that it's surprising given the extended periods during which these have all been ignored to this point, but still. I wonder how many of these will still be relevant in 2020? Is it too optimistic to set the over/under at half of them?