- Jan 26, 2007
I must say the art for this batch of achievements is WAY better than the ones introduced in Golden Century.
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.
Yup. I have 1,3K hours in EU4 and they only thing I do, and ever did, is achievement hunt. To me this list is extremely disappointing. Not only there are very few achievements, but I also don't see the point in hunting most of them.To answer some comments:
- Yes, some players only play for achievements.
- For any achievements hunter, this list is underwhelming and disappointing (just 15...).
Previous direction of EU4 understood the mindset and love of some EU4 players for achievements. Not the end of the world, it is just sad to see a step back on this.
While I value your opinion to dislike achievements (they often replace real replayability in games and I hate this, too) I don't think this is how EU4 dev works or should work. I guess achievements are kind of fast content even so also it is no mayor resource. But mostly: EU4 supports multiple ways to play. Roleplay. Tall. World conquest. Achievements.Achievements are a matter of taste.
I personally think they are the worst thing to have been introduced to the Europa Universalis franchise (yes, worse than expulsion of minorities ) because they create an expectation of the game and its mechanics that couldn't be any further from what I like about it. Therefore I am very glad for any developing second not spent on creating achievements. But that is just my two cents (and this is not supposed to disparage anybody that happens to enjoy achievements).
My problem with achievements is that their mere existence has in the past been an argument against changes to the game:While I value your opinion to dislike achievements (they often replace real replayability in games and I hate this, too) I don't think this is how EU4 dev works or should work. I guess achievements are kind of fast content even so also it is no mayor resource. But mostly: EU4 supports multiple ways to play. Roleplay. Tall. World conquest. Achievements.
They are a way to support a type of play (kind of like win conditions in multiplayer are) where the objective and also starting condition changes from game to game. I can totally feel this. It also incorporates a different type of difficulty. Not by giving the AI some additional changes to be hostile or haver better ruler but just by the hardness of start to target. This playstyle needs support as any other (and I therefor hope the new state mechanic supports wide play better that the current corruption). Only think I miss kind of are achievements to tallm play (I think venice has one).
I'm pretty sure you can't: Those formables require you to play as a former colonial nations. The player can form them by releasing and playing as their colonial nation.How exactly do you directly become Mexico or Texas as an Old World nation? Is there some way to move capitals now?
This is helpful inside and I totally agree on achievements should not drive the game development. If badly needed you can play on older versions anyways. And already to many achievements use the wording puns requiering a special name therefor discouraging name changes, province changes and nation redrawing. That IS bad design and I don't advocate that and in fact criticized the Mulhausen (? I'm German so I may spell this wrong) or Bologna achievement. Could have been any italian nation for the later and any German nation possesing the province of Mulhausen on the other one. This would have been bad enough.My problem with achievements is that their mere existence has in the past been an argument against changes to the game:
- against changes to discourage blobbing because there are achievements requiring world conquest
- the "One Faith" achievement has been used as an argument against changes that made conversion harder
- there will quite probably be someone complain about the (badly needed) changes to expulsion of minorities because of the "You get a new home, and you get a new home" achievement
And, in my opinion perhaps the worst offender, is the "Core-Fu" achievement. It evidently is based not on history, but on a rather silly pun, it has the rather random requirement of revoking five cores, and it has explicitly been used as an argument by the devs against removing Corfu as an independent vassal of Venice in 1444, although there is precious little historical reason for Corfu being independent at that point. Paradox have finally budged in 1.30 and given Corfu to Venice, but still, this is perhaps the main reason why I have a problem with achievements.
The fact that the achievement says "on islands" and not "are islands" leads me to believe that it uses the same definition for island that is used for the pirate republic and the Empire of Mann achievement and that it doesn't use the "province is an island" definition which is used to spawn institutions. By the first definition England and Ireland are islands.They missed out in the achievements if england and Irland dont count as islands they are all max very hard
I like achievements because they give me a bit of structure to games, and make sure I play a range of countries. I think they generally have been good in EU IV because a lot require you to play in quite different styles and settings, rather than just grind (increase power base until you're big enough to take over the target provinces). As a result the ones I am most looking forward to here as the Mulhouse achievement, the Defender of the Faith achievement and, despite having played France quite a bit, Napoleon's Ambition. A bit of potential to roleplay and potentially expend effort keeping other countries in line (or even just around) in ways that you wouldn't normally.
Not inspired by the Knights achievement. How many achievements require taking over all or some of the Levant/Anatolia/Egypt (i.e. either be or get big and fight the Ottomans/Mamluks)? I reckon about 12/15 depending on how strict you are , not including World Conquests. With the Knights already having an achievement to form Jerusalem, the new Knights achievement seems very much like retreading old ground in this area...
The fact that the achievement says "on islands" and not "are islands" leads me to believe that it uses the same definition for island that is used for the pirate republic and the Empire of Mann achievement and that it doesn't use the "province is an island" definition which is used to spawn institutions. By the first definition England and Ireland are islands.
Your comment inspired me to write an article about islands on the wiki