Since when is frustration not fun
? That's one of the strongest appeals of video games for me.
don't you think EU genre go into wrong direction?
- Thread starter Dustman
- Start date
-
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.
Since when is frustration not fun
? That's one of the strongest appeals of video games for me.
I think the upkeep idea is a very good one, and I'm surprised no one (including me) gave this idea. It only makes total sense. There is however an option that lack, if it's the case : what about a "destroy building" buttin? I still think money should be more focused on instead of magistrates, that I would simply scrap and instead I would represent adequatly the diversity of each country (by making semi-autonomous countries that won't go away in a minute), but if upkeep was here (as it is for missionaries and colonies) and if it was possible to destroy a building, I would like that.
There's the frustration of "this is a lousy interface" or "this is pointless makework", and the frustration of "my competitors keep thwarting my plans".Since when is frustration not fun
The latter is good. The former is bad.
Um, you can already destroy buildings.
:glare: I guess I never found an utility of doing so because buildings once build cost nothing (except maybe RR for some of them). But how do we destroy them, if you can teach me that?
I had a closer look at them - turns out it's it's only for level 5 and 6 buildings... so I guess it's tied to only being able to have one. But you'll see a red (x) next to the buildings line in the province overview when it's possible, same for manufactories btw. Never noticed actually until anubisfike told me.
In general more complex systems are easier to break and harder to control. This applies also to computer games. If a game focuses on multiplayer, all shortcomings affect all players. If a game is singleplayer-oriented, shortcomings of AI should be fixed by bizarre methods, for example no AI naval attrition in EU. This is acceptable when one plays as a superpower, but frustrates to no end when more challenging minors are selected.
Simple, elegant model for economy, war and diplomacy would free time and resources of game developers to spend on most important part of any SP-oriented computer strategy -- AI. When AI of every country in the world is the same, except for geographical, tech and economical limitations, replayability value of the game drops dramatically. Several distinct AIs would strongly improve gaming experience for those of us who enjoy playing historical 'what if...' for entertrainment, as well as those looking for a challenge.
Simple, elegant model for economy, war and diplomacy would free time and resources of game developers to spend on most important part of any SP-oriented computer strategy -- AI. When AI of every country in the world is the same, except for geographical, tech and economical limitations, replayability value of the game drops dramatically. Several distinct AIs would strongly improve gaming experience for those of us who enjoy playing historical 'what if...' for entertrainment, as well as those looking for a challenge.
And I don't see any obvious way of extending that to lower-level buildings. It would be trivial to write some province decisions to remove buildings though if there was a reason to destroy them.
Same. The game is still not complex enough. Trying to play in a realistic sense. As in not dominating the map by 1500 requires you to sit back and stare at the map for a long time. I'd kill for more things to do in peace time.
Well... you could play a mod that encourages growth. I really only play Magna Mundi, and that isn't the type of mod you're looking for, so I'm not sure what it would be. But I'm sure it exists.
Came up with the idea of upkeep of building while reading this thread, realized how great an improvement this would be if implemented after reading posts of others who also came up with the same idea through this thread~ Gonna start a suggestion thread~
Last edited:
Yep yep. It's so easy and rewarding to smash and grab.
I'd love much more complex and involved law and court management. The political-diplomatic aspects of these games is my favorite part.
Just posted the idea earlier, hopefully some dev will look it up... [Suggestion] Buildings with upkeep
I'll agree that one major benefit of "Magistrates" in the system, is that it acts as a control on blobbing. A large blob can NEVER be as efficient as smaller, fully built-up nations. I think there should be checks on large nations, and this sort of check is a good one. I wouldn't mind seeing it scale less a bit, so maybe 10 province nations get +.1 magistrate per turn, 20 province get +.2 per turn, just to help mitigate some of it. As a 500 province colonial Holland(My last game), I definately felt the "pinch" on magistrates. (Still, all had forts, most had trade buildings)
What do you mean by efficient and antibloobing? The magistrate system is not restrictive enough for players and if you are talking about AI, it's stupid and doesn't know how to use magistrates. I even use magistrates for building forts lvl 3 and 4. With constitutional monarchy you are skyrocketing (my max was 6.8 magistrates per year). So you are in 1650 (170 years till the end) and you will make 1156 magistrates by 1820. Let say you need 14 magistrates per province (2 forts, 6 trade, 4 tax like you didn't build any building by 1650). That means that you can fully provide required magistrates to 82 provinces!!! That is not antibloobing system. Or 82 provinces is not a bloob. Then add 250 years (1399-1650) and 1.5 magistrates per year in worst case and you have additional 26 provinces fully built. That's 108 fully efficient provinces.
Other buildings than trade and production matter too. For example, suppose you have some sort of size restriction (say, it's multiplayer and people get nervous if you blob too much); someone with level 6 trade buildings may have a nearly limitless supply of money, but they'll be crushed by someone who built naval bases and conscription centres everywhere. Money is nice and all but eventually other resources become much, much more important.
I don't understand you. Both players have the same tools at their disposal. Will one be a warmonger or a banker/trader it's their choice. What does it mean "bloobed to much"? Is that 30 - 60 - 80 - 130 provinces? Or you wanted to say 14 magistrates per province is not enough? You also noticed that I didn't take in consideration those dirt poor provinces in which you will build nothing at all or just few buildings?
Also, a size restriction is in accordance with magistrate benefits. The smaller you are, more magistrates you have on disposal.
I don't play multiplayer but in every game I need 6-9 magistrates to build military buildings in 2-3 provinces. That is cost efficient. Building units all around the country is waste of money. Also, I don't lose any of my armies during the wars (only by big mistake. You have to be prepared for war. The AI doesn't deploy units before wars so there's no backstab. But without diplomacy, everything is useless. You can't play Poland and not have alliance with Bohemia or Austria.
I agree with the OP. There is something bizarre about giving an OPM the same number of magistrates as a major power. Also, the the building system weakens the AI relative to the human player, since the human will always build more sensibly. Same with advisors. I never see the AI use spare magistrates to get its cultural tech up to get really good advisors. So basically the whole magistrates system is a massive exploit that makes the game easier.
That isn't what annoys me the most, though. It's the mad peace offers you get. A OPM on the verge of annihilation should be begging for peace, not provoking the enemy. It's like the game is set on a planet populated by half-mad, suicidal aliens. Add to that cascading alliances, opms that can't even reach you declaring war on you, countries you can take down with one hand tied behind your back if you could be bothered to dedclaring war on you, and it's not really a historical strategy game the way EU2 was anymore. It's plain fantasy. And I haven't even mentioned the hordes, the inevitable destruction of the North African Muslim states, or the complete lack of any coherent AI colonial strategy.
I really wish one could take the best parts of this game - the map, hunt rebels feature, better AI military performance etc, and put them into EU2. That would be an awesome game.
That isn't what annoys me the most, though. It's the mad peace offers you get. A OPM on the verge of annihilation should be begging for peace, not provoking the enemy. It's like the game is set on a planet populated by half-mad, suicidal aliens. Add to that cascading alliances, opms that can't even reach you declaring war on you, countries you can take down with one hand tied behind your back if you could be bothered to dedclaring war on you, and it's not really a historical strategy game the way EU2 was anymore. It's plain fantasy. And I haven't even mentioned the hordes, the inevitable destruction of the North African Muslim states, or the complete lack of any coherent AI colonial strategy.
I really wish one could take the best parts of this game - the map, hunt rebels feature, better AI military performance etc, and put them into EU2. That would be an awesome game.
Last edited:
Well, all agent gains in EU3 are independent from country size, so you can´t fault Paradox from being consistent. Also, while larger empires have more manpower, it also requires a larger bureaucracy to run. Finally, as mgistrates IMO represents governmental influence, you could argue that a smaller nation´s central government has an easier time meddling in local affairs than a global empire.