-
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.
Well, as I said in my original post, I would never wish to radically alter the game's engine - particularly as many of FTG's players will be those who have been disappointed with EU3.
I'm not a great fan of monarch files, however - mainly for the reasons stated.
It's fun to play out periods of history, and I often find myself loading up the 1700 scenario to try and conquer much of Europe as Louis XIV's France... but when you play an entire game as opposed to just a specific bit of history, you often find yourself thinking 'how did this happen?' or 'how does this make sense?' when you've gone totally ahistorical in one sense, yet you're still left with strictly historical monarchs.
Clearly, this doesn't make sense unless you play more or less in accordance with that nation's history.
I think the current engine (with tweaks and fixes to improve it over EU2's) is generally fine, and particularly for those of us who love the AGCEEP it provides a good way of playing out history.
But, for those games when you just want to play a pure game - and not a game-ized (new word; remember it) version of history, I think a more dynamic system could work.
And I stress that it should be an option (ie, you select it from the game options menu) - not a replacement for the normal engine.
If you don't want to use it, don't select it - you're not losing out at all.
But, for those of us who want to experience a bit of 'what if?' and make the most of a game engine that is now open to pretty much anything, I say let's try a fresh alternative - but one always with history in mind, and not simply an EU3-style random names generator.
I'm not a great fan of monarch files, however - mainly for the reasons stated.
It's fun to play out periods of history, and I often find myself loading up the 1700 scenario to try and conquer much of Europe as Louis XIV's France... but when you play an entire game as opposed to just a specific bit of history, you often find yourself thinking 'how did this happen?' or 'how does this make sense?' when you've gone totally ahistorical in one sense, yet you're still left with strictly historical monarchs.
Clearly, this doesn't make sense unless you play more or less in accordance with that nation's history.
I think the current engine (with tweaks and fixes to improve it over EU2's) is generally fine, and particularly for those of us who love the AGCEEP it provides a good way of playing out history.
But, for those games when you just want to play a pure game - and not a game-ized (new word; remember it) version of history, I think a more dynamic system could work.
And I stress that it should be an option (ie, you select it from the game options menu) - not a replacement for the normal engine.
If you don't want to use it, don't select it - you're not losing out at all.
But, for those of us who want to experience a bit of 'what if?' and make the most of a game engine that is now open to pretty much anything, I say let's try a fresh alternative - but one always with history in mind, and not simply an EU3-style random names generator.
I would just like to show my support for L. Hale's idea. Remaining aware that it would involve a lot of work, probably (researching a few times the number of each nation's monarchs...), but I think this idea could be considered nevertheless.
This is only an exploit to ease the human player in winning.
Historical monarchs need to be kept, for good or bad ratings that they have. The option is dynamic domestic settings system to offset a bad monarch.
Next request will be, give me the best generals and admirals that existed in every period of our game.
Lets be serious, how much help does the human player require
what is the stick then ??
If you want an "ajustment" to monarch numbers, then it should be done via random event ie some sort of trigger to gain ..as an example +2 for the 3 categories etc etc
This is only an exploit to ease the human player in winning.
Historical monarchs need to be kept, for good or bad ratings that they have. The option is dynamic domestic settings system to offset a bad monarch.
Next request will be, give me the best generals and admirals that existed in every period of our game.
Lets be serious, how much help does the human player require
The biggest advantage the player can have is knowing what is coming and the AI not.
Thats cheating.
I never look at event, monarch or leader files prior to game, when I play, so there is no way I can support any advantage that gives the human benefit over the AI
???
I don't need to look at England, France or Spain's monarch files to know when their high and low points will occur.
I was saying in that I play by using what event, monarch or leaders I get ,regardless of good or bad. I do not prior to game looks at the files for the state I am about to play to determine my mode of play/direction etc etc.
You are repeatedly confusing difficult with different.
I do not propose this sort of system simply to make it easier for people to play. It's not about having consistently good monarchs with high stats; it's a case of having a different game every time, depending on the choices the player makes.
At present you can try and play every game differently, but you're always stuck within the framework of pre-determined monarchs and events.
Understood, however, the player still has the advantage as the historically inclinde and/or longtime players will be familiar with the monarchs/events of many nations that they play, without actually looking in the event/monarch/leader files.
The more "historical" the mod the more inclined I am to read carefully the event files and such, so as to avoid duplicative actions and screwing up carefully arranged event chains.
Thats totally untrue, if you select on the first domestic setting change something to swing positive and the next game with same state you select the same domestic setting and swing negative , there is a high chance you will get different random events. different game.
You can never play the same game twice because factors of AI alliances change, relations towards you change etc etc
Are you Mandead ???? because I had same arguement with him a while ago.
If that is the case, I personally have a hard time justifying static historical monarchs when the states that would've produced these monarchs are annexed. By annexing a single state, you alter, technically, the royal bloodlines of Europe than as they were. How does Louis XIV exist if his ancestors from a maternal line had everything taken away? If this is to be brushed aside, then that's fine I suppose, but that doesn't make it anymore plausible than EU3's random monarchs.
I sincerely hope that one of the fixes to the engine is to the RNG, so that the same (optimal) opening move won't lead to the same events, colony success and other rolls of the virtual dice.
I do not understand your reasoning.
When Charles got his head lopped off and cromwell took over ENG, Charles son escaped to france. When cromwell was ousted , the same royal blood line took the ENG throne again.
Same in our game, If a state is annexed, and gains its freedom 10, 20, 30 years later the blood line will exist and regain the throne. You need to remember the monarchy had a "club" where they looked after themselves unless one wanted the others lands.
Besides , read the forum as it states the AGCEEP will remain historical while the FTG ....well who knows