Does the game feel historical to you?

[pirro]

Any reinforcements that arrived in a historical battle would be forces that were already present in the province in EU4 terms. The kind of marching half a country to reinforce a battle going badly is pure gameyness.

And they are rather pointless, because of the magic troops that appear from nowhere

 

[keynes2.0]

Any troops that are in the province would already be in the battle so can't enter mid battle.

 

[Pro]

Yes, that is a limitation of the current battle engine. But a far less history defying limitation than the ability to send reinforcements hundreds of kilometers to join a battle.

 

[wingzero890]

I really wish armies worked the way they did in CK2. You raise a levy which then goes off and fights and does not replenish in the field (except mercs and retinues). Reinforcements have to be raised back in your demesne. It would make distant armies actually have to worry about attrition.

 

[mcmanusaur]

I will simply say that I think historically credible mechanics and/or historically plausible narrative appeal most to me, but it seems that Paradox has many other priorities.

 

[justin6477]

The warfare has always been BS. Magic reinforcements, way too big armies in mid game while early game the armies are too small, no "leve en mase" system, battles that take forever, fortresses resisting for years a siege...

The battle numbers are always going to be bullshit so long as the military system relies on the current regiment system. Does anyone actually think that we're sending forty-thousand artillerymen into the field on a fully-pitched late-game battle? The infantry numbers are tolerable, for the most part, but the cav and artillery numbers get pretty intense.

 

[Siegfriedfr]

Try playing in a complete "random nations" world. You won't last long, because the game mechanics are not good enough to play in a non historical environement (contrary to the Civ series for example).
It's the historical background that makes this game interesting because you can paint the map ahistorically, and improve your learning on countries out of curiosity.

 

[Peachrocks]

Not a horrible idea, though I'd rather do it by simply reducing the effect of the modifier rather than having it 'tick' faster since the tick time is synced to a lot of other mechanics @ 5 years. I'll consider it.

If only I had more posts like this, and less people trying to armchair redesign the whole AI.

You do have loads of posts like this from people. Your usual response is 'ignore'. People have called out legitimate complaints over changes both that are currently implemented and those that are going to be implemented and have nothing in reply. Many of these cannot seemingly be understood from either a historical or gameplay point of view.

Some of it goes under the radar I'm sure and just gets overlooked, there's a lot of text out there, but other times I know that's just not the case. I know you feel it's not your job to explain your design making process but if you're wondering why sometimes the posts get less then constructive... well... there you have it.

I can only hit my head against a brick wall so many times.

 

[irgendwas1984]

The game is not historical at all it could also play on Mars and wouldnt change .... :/ it not even develop historical in the spectator-mode (and thats a problem in my eyes because when the human player does nothing it should develop historical) and thats a big problem for me i played for some time and after 100 years ugly bloobs everywhere and that kicks me always out of immersion so i dont want to play it any more ...

But its a fun game after all, but for me it would be more fun if it wasnt pseudo-historical but complete fantasy because then i wouldnt be angry about it

 

[alqemist]

Try playing in a complete "random nations" world.

How do you do that?

It's the historical background that makes this game interesting because you can paint the map ahistorically, and improve your learning on countries out of curiosity.

It's done that for me, if only to win arguments on the forum.

 

[grommile]

How do you do that?

Buy the El Dorado DLC if you haven't got it, then change a setting. (Which I don't know how you do because I don't have El Dorado.)

At least, I think you need the DLC...

 

[Lemont Elwood]

The game feels historical, but in a very detached way. Like I'm playing history, but there's such little content, such little detail, and such weird expansion that I can't invest in it like I can Vicky or CK2. I mean, I started a game of CK2 for the first time in months the other day, and I was immediately addicted again.

 

[Pyske]

Not a horrible idea, though I'd rather do it by simply reducing the effect of the modifier rather than having it 'tick' faster since the tick time is synced to a lot of other mechanics @ 5 years. I'll consider it.

If only I had more posts like this, and less people trying to armchair redesign the whole AI.

I think sometimes you just don't see them. By way of example:

https://forum.paradoxplaza.com/foru...i-war-stubbornness-accelerating-decay.847268/

Zwireq's idea is a simpler version of the suggestion I posted, but I did post it a couple months ago, and it was inspired by some forum discussion in another (longer) thread at the time.