The realm rejoices as Paradox Interactive announces the launch of Crusader Kings III, the latest entry in the publisher’s grand strategy role-playing game franchise. Advisors may now jockey for positions of influence and adversaries should save their schemes for another day, because on this day Crusader Kings III can be purchased on Steam, the Paradox Store, and other major online retailers.
Too easy. Attach negative events to compensate.Finally, this new expansion will see a new diplomatic action called “Curry Favors”. This requires an active diplomat, and will slowly increase the amount of favors you have with them, depending on your diplomatic reputation and the target's opinion of you.
In my heart I disagree wholeheartedly. But I can’t ignore the past (2?) years now, both here in EU and elsewhere (Stellaris and Imperator in particular). It really just seems to be a stalemate of making progress in one place but losing something at the same time. It’s a bit disheartening sometimes.Not just EU4 but Paradox in general is a hot mess right now. Well it works for them and ultimately that’s what they are telling each other in board room meetings and huddles no doubt.
Only thing they never broke ironically is their own business and “saying things without saying much” PR policy.
I'm hoping for a way to request help via favors from a country you are not allied with when in a defensive war. Would it mean that country joining the war on your side or sending a condottieri I don't know....favors... will become far more used than just using it to get your allies to join you in offensive wars. More on that in later development diaries.
The North America mechanic changes are part of CoP (as was said in the DD).What will be included in the free patch, but not the expansion? Are Southeast Asia and it's new mission trees and events locked behind a DLC or allowed for everyone to experience it. The same goes for the tribal changes in North America.
While superficially a good idea, this would mean 1 more thing to micromanage. So I disagree with this proposal.Will diplomats continue to be "immortals"? I.e. you can do an entire gameplay and the diplomats will be the same while all the other characters have a life expectancy. This should be changed. For each new diplomat there must be a bonus (like the advisors) making them more or less efficient.
I don't see any evidence for the devs being "full of themselves", but clearly the DLC model after too many years leads to this feature bloat where every feature eventually is twice repeated in the game: 1- minimal version for everyone, 2 - expanded version for DLC owners.Well, that's how EU4 is right now. Really, yet another "expansion" without fixing the problems the game has, some of them for years, shows how full of themselves and disdainful of the community (the critics that is, not the fanboys who play anything they throw at them) the Paradox devs have become. Being present and responsive is not only showing Dev Diaries and Multiplayer Dev Sessions, you know, is actually listening to the old player base and fix what was identified as being broken before anything else.
I don't recognize the old Paradox Entertainment/Interactive anymore, really; the one from the humble beginnings and simpler yet more immersive games. In the case of EU4, it was going well until late 2016, «Rights of Man» for me was the peak of the game without the feature-bloat that clearly came afterwards (Mandate of Heaven and the ridiculous introduction of the "Eras" in an EU game, and all the rest after it).
Well, sorry for what some may call "a rant" as they say nowadays, just voicing what it seems to me that is going on with what used to be one of my most beloved games and gaming companies.
My mind flashes back to when they were messing around with TCs/territory corruption/capital movement restriction to pander to a very vocal, very small minority of purists who wanted the game to only be playable the way they played it (I guess because restricting your own decisions in game is very very difficult). When the community gave a collective "wtf is this" they were answered with words to the effect of "YOU DON'T KNOW ANYTHING ABOUT GAMES WE'RE THE DEVELOPERS SO WE KNOW BEST AND YOU'VE GOTTA DEAL WITH IT SO STOP BEING TOXIC".I don't see any evidence for the devs being "full of themselves"
Personally, I feel colonisation needs a rework with more depth/complexity: I think there should be different types of colonies.Any chances of some espionage reworks, as well? That's one of the few remaining facets of the game which I feel could really use more depth/complexity.
I don't believe I've made a comment on a thread before but I am making one now just to point out how absolutely genius this is, I really do hope the devs take a very good look at this.I believe that gaining favours with other nations shouldn't be as simple as simply "being an ally" or "sending a diplomat to pay lip service".
Now, I understand that "simply being an ally" is indeed valuable enough to be considered a favor, the best positioned chess piece is the one which needn't move, there mere fact that you are allied with someone, already passively protects them via deterrence, and is indeed already favour-worthy.
But that alone doesn't seem to be reasonable enough for Brittany to convince Spain to go to war with France for no tangible reward. I believe Favours should require a bit more proactive actions to be earned.
The "Friends in Need" event comes to mind. You should have to actually benefit your friends at your expense to gain favours with them.
Stuff like steering trade, sharing institutional knowledge, paying off debts, royal marriages, granting military/naval access, embargoing and insulting their rivals, sending gifts, helping your allies deal with their rebels, etc...
And maybe some new mechanics that could be introduced such as some sort of foreign investment or sending military advisors to train and guide technologically inferior nations.
Your allies should feel like they truly owe you a bunch of favours because you did help them multiple times in the past.