• 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.

unmerged(37820)

Second Lieutenant
Jan 12, 2005
130
0
There's been a lot of discussion about unit differentiation, and the answer from Paradox has been "Doctrines is the answer" (more or less). I can buy that. In fact, I even like that. Still, there's a reason why everyone's upset about this.

Personally, I think it has a lot to do with presentation and feedback. All those values for Hard attack/Soft attack/Toughness/etc. are immediately visible when you build new units. The "soft" factors like organisation and morale (which are affected by doctrines) are not as obvious. No surprise then that people think all units are the same. Had the listing instead given you the figures for org, morale, event chance, etc. and left out the "hard" stats I don't think there would have been quite as many complaints.

So...

IMHO, there could be a lot more feedback as to what doctrines really do. Why not include information about ML in the org regain tooltip? Instead of seeing we regain X org/day, list the modifiers that show that increased morale=better org regain. List morale in the unit stat sheet if it isn't already listed. List maxorg in the unit stat sheet (don't think it's there, only current org) and make sure you can see how much doctrines get you. Perhaps list surprise chances in tooltips? Etc.

Just a suggestion that might help alleviate some of the criticism about there not being enough differentiation - and hopefully educate players about what's going on in the game too.
 
Upvote 0