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.
I remember HOI3 being an utter shiteshow over 10 years ago too. People threatening legal action.
The best way of dealing with PDX is to moan like hell until they get sick of hearing it. Its always been like that.
Which is why this thread should be kept right at the top.
Either that or don't buy their products on a mass scale, but that's not going to happen.
This x1000. There are bugs that have been in the game for half a decade now with endless bug reports that simply go unfixed. To be honest, I wasn't really all that excited about many Emperor features. I was interested in the fixing of bugs and technical debt and governing capacity. I would buy the Emperor DLC if I felt like patch 1.30 fixed a lot of issues in the game. Instead, it just made almost everything actively worse. It's infuriating.I had a lot of fun with EU4, played hundreds of hours, even bought pretty much every DLC. But I stopped buying them at some point (i think Rule Britannia) because of:
I was actually looking forward to 1.30 Emperor expansion, because they announced that they would fix a lot of "technical debt", and wanted to take their time doing so. To me that meant bugs and AI issues. But even many new 1.30 features were totally broken upon release, and clearly the AI is more broken than ever as documented in this thread.
- Longtime, well documented bugs not getting fixed
- I got the feeling that each expansion introduces at least as many new bugs as it fixes
- AI not getting improved
- AI actually getting worse because it can't handle the changes with the patches and new functionalities.
Paradox, if you want my money again, then you need to fix bugs, improve AI and invest in QA to deliver patches which don't break totally obvious issues.
Is that VR Designs' Shadow Empire (published by Slitherine / Matrix Games) you're talking about?For that price i got shadow empires , an extraordinary game rivalling even alpha centauri, a very very complex game .
Yes i am speaking of that game . It's a life sucking 4X like paradox games so in my opinion in direct competion.Is that VR Designs' Shadow Empire (published by Slitherine / Matrix Games) you're talking about?
If so, that's not a competitor for Paradox's gamelines; that's a competitor for Civilization, Dominions, and Master of Orion.
Because the experiential difference between turn-based and RTwP matters, and for strategy games I'm firmly on the RTwP side of the line (whereas for tactics games I tend to be on the turn-based side).
I just bought the DLC two months after release to be sure its playable , being EU4 player since release so i kinda know what to expect from them...
Turns out its still not very playable, those issues are immediately obvious , and should not pass any serious QA. Allies dont follow you in wars but drag you in their endless ones, and of course coalitions against you still works.You wont enjoy playing minors for sure now.The new merc system is not even worth using either, armies composition are so off you need to micro attach to your regular , disband etc.
Last time i said there was no alternative to paradox, even slitherine softwares, but now i am not so sure anymore.
Let me see i paid 19.99 for the DLC , 5 euro for the content pack, the whole price of a a full indie game. For that price i got shadow empires , an extraordinary game rivalling even alpha centauri, a very very complex game . After days of playing i found a gamebreaking bug, i email the guy (one lone dev) with my save, 1 day later he answers me and the bug is fixed in a patch few days later.
Here two months later, radio silence, and a game breaking bug is still not fixed .
We shall have to agree to differ, then.Yes i am speaking of that game . It's a life sucking 4X like paradox games so in my opinion in direct competion.
The first two games of the original series and both games of the reboot series have an RTwP strategy phase and a turn-based tactics phase.
I love turn-based tactics phases.
Saw Spain with 20k debt yesterday. It just grew and grew and grew due to the inflation and interest. They had never lost a single war prior to this. They were never heavily contested by France or GB. They were the number 1 GP ever since their first colonial nation until this ridiculous debt. Sending them 40k just so they pay if off and accept CTA really hurt without autoclicker.
We can still agree on something its lame the game is still in such state 2 months after the dlc release.We shall have to agree to differ, then.
I have recently promised myself I will never buy any turn-based 4X from any studio ever again, because every turn-based 4X I have ever bought has ultimately disappointed me in exactly the same way, which is a way that Paradox Design Studio's RTwP grand strategy games have never disappointed me.
(I can't quite articulate what the problem is, but it is intimately connected to their turn-based nature.)