Home Trending Latest threads New posts Developer diaries

Config Tool

Jump to latest Follow Reply
  • 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.
And those of us that would like to have both... ;)

Btw. I hope/think that there will be a config tool. AGC have one, and this is supposed to be an merger...:)
 
To that I'd counter however that there were simply too many options available in the AGC config tool. So I'd say that we should have options for features we absolutely can't agree on, but we should minimize its use whenever possible.
 
I agree with Garbon. Both EEP and AGC were extremely poorly tested, for bugs but mainly for how things played out and balance. A lot of options would make this even harder, since what can then be said of one setting might not be true for another. Some options yes, perhaps like NA natives, unification events, fantasy events and such, but not to many. OK, I know that some ppl doesn't want some of these, but it's an example.
 
I would very much prefer most energy, and more importantly, most ressources being devoted towards the main mod. It's ok to make some fantasy or unification events or cosmetic things optional but not:
1. things that require additional tags (with the unification of Italy the only exception)
2. massive setup changes that will need too much work and testing and may conflict with events etc.
3. huge optional event chains that will affect many existing events and will therefore require many alternate events that work with the optional chain (i.e. only "autonomous" event chains)
 
Originally posted by Twoflower
I would very much prefer most energy, and more importantly, most ressources being devoted towards the main mod. It's ok to make some fantasy or unification events or cosmetic things optional but not:
1. things that require additional tags (with the unification of Italy the only exception)
2. massive setup changes that will need too much work and testing and may conflict with events etc.
3. huge optional event chains that will affect many existing events and will therefore require many alternate events that work with the optional chain (i.e. only "autonomous" event chains)
Click to expand...

Agree.
 
Originally posted by Twoflower
I would very much prefer most energy, and more importantly, most ressources being devoted towards the main mod. It's ok to make some fantasy or unification events or cosmetic things optional but not:
1. things that require additional tags (with the unification of Italy the only exception)
2. massive setup changes that will need too much work and testing and may conflict with events etc.
3. huge optional event chains that will affect many existing events and will therefore require many alternate events that work with the optional chain (i.e. only "autonomous" event chains)
Click to expand...

Agree
 
Originally posted by Twoflower
1. things that require additional tags (with the unification of Italy the only exception)
Click to expand...
Why does italy get an examption?
 
What about a config tool for the CoT's? I really liked the AGC CoT configurator with the maps and option to make as many CoT's as wanted, and not necessarily choosing between an option of 2 or 3 like in EEP.
 
In addition, for now, can we reserve the HEI tag for a united Germany?
 
Originally posted by Stonewall
What about a config tool for the CoT's? I really liked the AGC CoT configurator with the maps and option to make as many CoT's as wanted, and not necessarily choosing between an option of 2 or 3 like in EEP.
Click to expand...

I'd actually think, that as soon as the removecot is in an official patch, the player's choice on CoTs should go away. I mean what good reason would there be to let the player choose if CoTs will be dynamic? So the player can mess up the flow? I mean, CoTs do play a role in-game as they can help or hurt the nation that owns one. Like in Morocco's case it would hurt it as every rushes to take from Morocco. So letting the player pick would alter the potential balance that was there and enters a different set of conditions that wouldn't be accounted for in any events.
 
Originally posted by Stonewall
In addition, for now, can we reserve the HEI tag for a united Germany?
Click to expand...

First somebody should point out how Germany could realistically have been united. I don't see why a tag should be wasted for something without any reasonable historical base.
Tpc and Barbalele have managed to work out a sensible, balanced, realistic way to unite Italy and were able to back everything with historical arguments, such as a national spirit clearly existing in Italy.
Such a historical base is much harder to find for Germany, and I doubt that a union by conquest could ever be justified. What could be used as a nice idea is Truchsess's concept of centralizing the Kingdom of Germany (that still existed until 1806, which many people seem to ignore) which he elaborated on a long time ago in the AGC Germany thread. If i find the posts, I'll copy them over to the uniting Germany thread.
 
Originally posted by Garbon
I'd actually think, that as soon as the removecot is in an official patch, the player's choice on CoTs should go away. I mean what good reason would there be to let the player choose if CoTs will be dynamic? So the player can mess up the flow? I mean, CoTs do play a role in-game as they can help or hurt the nation that owns one. Like in Morocco's case it would hurt it as every rushes to take from Morocco. So letting the player pick would alter the potential balance that was there and enters a different set of conditions that wouldn't be accounted for in any events.
Click to expand...

I was mainly thinking about the Ivoria versus Timbuktu CoT and the Indian CoT dispersement. There's lots of room for debate, and ultimately, I think the player should be able to decide where he wants the CoT's. Plus, since the AGC setup tool works brilliantly, its already tested and I am assuming could be compatible with EEP quite easily. Plus, altering the balance can be a good thing...it keeps replayability at a premium. As you say, change a CoT and watch everyone's strategy change.
 
Originally posted by Garbon
I'd actually think, that as soon as the removecot is in an official patch, the player's choice on CoTs should go away. I mean what good reason would there be to let the player choose if CoTs will be dynamic? So the player can mess up the flow? I mean, CoTs do play a role in-game as they can help or hurt the nation that owns one. Like in Morocco's case it would hurt it as every rushes to take from Morocco. So letting the player pick would alter the potential balance that was there and enters a different set of conditions that wouldn't be accounted for in any events.
Click to expand...

But there always be some hot topic there like location of CoT's in India or whether Atrakhan, Samarkand, Mascate should in or out. We never reach the consensus there and these are the things that exactly should be left for configurator.

The second case are cultural setup, like having one iberian culture or rather three in this place - the player may choose the option in config.

In any case the project makers should be responsible only for the default setup - it's impossible to test everything and most likely some changes may collide. Config tool is a great advantage and gives the project flexibility that is welcomed. We are giving our vision in the default scenario so let's other deal with changes they desire to do via configurator.

The Config in AGC was unfinished and prepared mainly to test some options. The final version of it would be much smaller and the same should be expected about the new version.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top Bottom
Back