Crisis events Can be to punishing

[Mister Analyst]

@Hawk_za ,

In my opinion, you have a legitimate complaint. Therefore, the HOI4 wiki Stability section was amended to include a note:

• Being involved in a war will cause an immediate -30% drop in stability. Raising stability prior to engaging in any wars is a good practice. A hover note "NCountry.BASE_STABILITY_WAR_FACTOR" accompanies the -30% which was derived from the defines file.

 

[ecpgieicg]

@Hawk_za ,

In my opinion, you have a legitimate complaint. Therefore, the HOI4 wiki Stability section was amended to include a note:

• Being involved in a war will cause an immediate -30% drop in stability. Raising stability prior to engaging in any wars is a good practice. A hover note "NCountry.BASE_STABILITY_WAR_FACTOR" accompanies the -30% which was derived from the defines file.

Didn't even realize the wiki doesn't have the warning.

Changed hover text to footnote though. Footnotes are easier to c&p for whoever needs to look them up in the game file.

 

[Hawk_za]

@Hawk_za ,

In my opinion, you have a legitimate complaint. Therefore, the HOI4 wiki Stability section was amended to include a note:

• Being involved in a war will cause an immediate -30% drop in stability. Raising stability prior to engaging in any wars is a good practice. A hover note "NCountry.BASE_STABILITY_WAR_FACTOR" accompanies the -30% which was derived from the defines file.

I thank you good sir I hope this may save some future player frustration

 

[Dlin369]

Yeah after looking at the wikia I think there should be more warnings regarding the crisis events for low stability/warscore. Some of the possible outcomes (which are low in probability and relatively avoidable but still) are very harsh and involve a downward spiral - you can end up in a civil war if you keep failing to deal with the draft dodging for example.

 

[ecpgieicg]

Yeah after looking at the wikia I think there should be more warnings regarding the crisis events for low stability/warscore. Some of the possible outcomes (which are low in probability and relatively avoidable but still) are very harsh and involve a downward spiral - you can end up in a civil war if you keep failing to deal with the draft dodging for example.

Added civil war in the sentence and linked to the exact event.

 

[FLUX2226]

The 80% success chance here is a part of a general complaint I have about HoI4: RNG deciding irreversible things with far-reaching consequences. Only in a few cases you can get a true 100% success chance for an event. The idea is probably to make all playthrough unique, but in the end all it does is create frustration because you get heavily punished without having done anything wrong.

E.g. if you want to recreate Austria-Hungary, in Ironman you'll very likely restart the run several times because you need direct control of Czechoslovakia if you want to have a decent and fun game, but the chance for them to accept annexation is quite low even if you fulfill all the optional conditions for the AI.

 

[Mister Analyst]

Yeah after looking at the wikia I think there should be more warnings regarding the crisis events for low stability/warscore. Some of the possible outcomes (which are low in probability and relatively avoidable but still) are very harsh and involve a downward spiral - you can end up in a civil war if you keep failing to deal with the draft dodging for example.

I agree with you, but good luck getting me to add more warnings to the wiki as my work was undermined.

The stability warning was downplayed by a recent change:

• from "Being involved in a war will cause an immediate -30% drop in stability. Raising stability prior to engaging in any wars is a good practice."
• to "Being in a war adds a one-time -30% drop in stability."

In my opinion, the revision no longer qualifies as a warning.

 

[Dlin369]

I was referring to the base game rather than the wikia (sorry if that wasn't clear), I appreciate the wikia a lot but some of the more dire things the base game should war about

 

[ecpgieicg]

I agree with you, but good luck getting me to add more warnings to the wiki as my work was undermined.

The stability warning was downplayed by a recent change:

• from "Being involved in a war will cause an immediate -30% drop in stability. Raising stability prior to engaging in any wars is a good practice."
• to "Being in a war adds a one-time -30% drop in stability."

In my opinion, the revision no longer qualifies as a warning.

The wiki should be general, neutral and informative. The complaint by the OP in this thread, for example, hinges on how the effects of low stability was not transparent ahead of time -- not just that he lost the game over the effects. So suppose the wiki was read by every player, then with the current version of wiki, OP wouldn't have been surprised and wouldn't have had the frustration. The purpose of warning is thus accomplished.

Whether the player chooses to raise stability prior to engaging in any wars is up to the player. And I would say it is not necessarily optimal to do so every time and in every circumstance either. It depends on the circumstance.

 

[Mister Analyst]

The wiki should be general, neutral and informative. The complaint by the OP in this thread, for example, hinges on how the effects of low stability was not transparent ahead of time -- not just that he lost the game over the effects. So suppose the wiki was read by every player, then with the current version of wiki, OP wouldn't have been surprised and wouldn't have had the frustration. The purpose of warning is thus accomplished.

Whether the player chooses to raise stability prior to engaging in any wars is up to the player. And I would say it is not necessarily optimal to do so every time and in every circumstance either. It depends on the circumstance.

I disagree. In my opinion general, neutral, and informative all mean to state facts without personal bias. The wiki is a large body of information for any person to read at one time. It makes sense to draw attention to the key aspects of the game where a player could find themselves in trouble rather quickly. Warnings and notes tend to serve that purpose.

Vehicle owner's manuals, consumer product manuals, prescription medication literature, and many other publications are general, neutral, and informative and do not contain bias. However the use of warnings and cautions is prevalent. Their purpose is to draw special attention to the most serious effects. It guides an individual to the most relevant information allowing an individual to skim the information without having to read all of the information. It is a good practice.

The wiki can and should operate in the same manner.

 

[ecpgieicg]

I disagree. In my opinion general, neutral, and informative all mean to state facts without personal bias. The wiki is a large body of information for any person to read at one time. It makes sense to draw attention to the key aspects of the game where a player could find themselves in trouble rather quickly. Warnings and notes tend to serve that purpose.

Vehicle owner's manuals, consumer product manuals, prescription medication literature, and many other publications are general, neutral, and informative and do not contain bias. However the use of warnings and cautions is prevalent. Their purpose is to draw special attention to the most serious effects. It guides an individual to the most relevant information allowing an individual to skim the information without having to read all of the information. It is a good practice.

The wiki can and should operate in the same manner.

No, wikis gathers and presents information about the game. They are not comparable to "vehicle owner's manuals" which gives you particular information and recommendations on using the vehicle as well as diagnosing when in trouble. A motor vehicle is not a game to play; it contains no puzzle for the driver to solve and strategize over. No recommendations on what fuels to use, when to change lubricants etc are ever at risk of constituting spoilers to the puzzle of solving these tasks. That is for the simple and obvious reason that those tasks are not puzzles for the driver to solve. Just as straightforwardly, a game is not a motor vehicle to operate.

So no, there is no reason whatsoever that a game wiki "should operate in the same manner" as vehicle owner's manuals or any manuals that you mentioned.

--------------

For your separate objection about warning -- to be clear, I don't disagree with conveying a warning, does the use of warning and highlight of particular in-game scenarios require the prescription of "raising stability before any war"?