D
Denkt
Guest
One boardgame that use the empire Rise and fall mechanic is smallworld but it would not translate well into paradox game but a version of it could add something to the game.
thanks for listening to my rant.
One boardgame that use the empire Rise and fall mechanic is smallworld but it would not translate well into paradox game but a version of it could add something to the game.
Well, everybody saw it.- Gold to Power was a stupid design decision.
I think there are too many comparisons between this game and CK 2, EU IV, Stellaris and Vicky 2.
This is a bit of a rambling of my thoughts, take them as you like.
My definitions are, and I hope you can agree with it enough to use it in this thread.
Some "currencies" tend to float between abstract and realistic, depending on your personal opinion, like prestige in CK, Diplomatic Influece in Vicky, etc.. Most importantly is that people are far more accepting of abstracted currencies and view them as realistic when they have ways to impact their gain, and they fit the flavor of the gam,.
- Abstract Currency - Monarch Power in EU4, Imperator
- Agent Mechanics - Council in CK2, Diplomats/Colonists in Eu4
- "Realistic" Currencies - Gold, Stability, Manpower.
I guess we can all agree that abstract currencies solves quite a few gamedesign problems, but they worked better in Eu4 than in Imperator.
What worked well with "abstract currencies" in Imperator
- Some decisions between short term and long term decisions. I personally liked how you could promote, convert and assimilate pops manually, but it was insanely cost inefficient but quick, and the other option was the policies over time that was far slower, but far more cost efficient.
What did not work well?
- Most of the usage were instant, making the game feel less like a world, but more like a boardgame.
- Not enough major choices between what to spend your currencies on. Some you use way too much, some you just stockpile for your next tradition.
- Gold to Power was a stupid design decision.
We are currently talking lots about this, but I am not happy with the current situation, and while I believe abstracted currencies makes for a better game-design, they need to become realistic currencies for a great design to become a great game.
thanks for listening to my rant.
I wish stability represented current status of country instead of being another currency. I like in hoi4 for instance when you get bombed or trade routes getting raided you lose stability temporary. In imperator/eu4 every province you have can be burning down but you could still easily have +3 stab.
You can achieve anti snowball by making empires actually work like the historically did which mean more territory don't equal more power and often made them weaker.
If power was far more tied to your core (capital region) you would need to have a strong core to become a large empire rather than just have direct snowballing.
The issue is that it should not be tall or wide but tall and wide. You should need to go tall in order to go wide and you would have to go wide in order to get taller but the larger you get the harder it should become to go in both directions.
Most of you tax, manpower and such could come from the capital region not your empire but other places should be useful to get more resources which you need to increase your ability to go tall.
Something like EU4's autonomy mechanic could be useful. Just make newly conquered territories start with lot's of autonomy.
It must be something radically different from EU4. It is easy - and booooring - to paint 1/4 of the world map in your colour in EU4.
This being said, autonomy can be an answer, together with culture, with religion, with instability in the provinces, with the emergence of local leaders that organize a rebellion, with rivals agitating regions, with...
Yes and also that the region is ruled by a characters that might hate you depending on traits and loyalty etc. Decreasing the autonomy should make your governor less loyal.
What worked well with "abstract currencies" in Imperator
- Some decisions between short term and long term decisions. I personally liked how you could promote, convert and assimilate pops manually, but it was insanely cost inefficient but quick, and the other option was the policies over time that was far slower, but far more cost efficient.
This is a bit of a rambling of my thoughts, take them as you like.
My definitions are, and I hope you can agree with it enough to use it in this thread.
Some "currencies" tend to float between abstract and realistic, depending on your personal opinion, like prestige in CK, Diplomatic Influece in Vicky, etc.. Most importantly is that people are far more accepting of abstracted currencies and view them as realistic when they have ways to impact their gain, and they fit the flavor of the gam,.
- Abstract Currency - Monarch Power in EU4, Imperator
- Agent Mechanics - Council in CK2, Diplomats/Colonists in Eu4
- "Realistic" Currencies - Gold, Stability, Manpower.
I guess we can all agree that abstract currencies solves quite a few gamedesign problems, but they worked better in Eu4 than in Imperator.
What worked well with "abstract currencies" in Imperator
- Some decisions between short term and long term decisions. I personally liked how you could promote, convert and assimilate pops manually, but it was insanely cost inefficient but quick, and the other option was the policies over time that was far slower, but far more cost efficient.
What did not work well?
- Most of the usage were instant, making the game feel less like a world, but more like a boardgame.
- Not enough major choices between what to spend your currencies on. Some you use way too much, some you just stockpile for your next tradition.
- Gold to Power was a stupid design decision.
We are currently talking lots about this, but I am not happy with the current situation, and while I believe abstracted currencies makes for a better game-design, they need to become realistic currencies for a great design to become a great game.
thanks for listening to my rant.
I think we'll have to agree to disagree on the whole "abstract currencies working better in EU4" part...
Part of the reason I quit EU4 and switched to CK2 was that it just felt way, way, way too abstract for my taste. (And that's a part of why I have no intention to buy Imperator anytime soon, and it's also part of why I quit Stellaris)
But then, different preferences and all of that...