Gaming world tension as the USSR

[Kovax]

The point behind the rules is to have the game (both player and AI) follow a course that's RATIONAL for the situation, whether that course is entirely historical or not. The current WT mechanic forces, or at least strongly rewards, unrealistic behavior. Granted, you can decide NOT to take the freebies, but the fact that they're there with no rational response to exploiting them is a problem. Whether the seriousness of that problem (or lack thereof) is worth spending more than a passing glance by the developers is a matter of opinion, but it IS a problem.

 

[JerkyJerry]

Hello ant hill
Meet mountain

You have no idea if WT can be raised fast enough, high enough etc. to do jack, correct?
You have not played the game as of yet, correct?
You are not really basing any of your argument on any real game facts, correct?

So yeah, kinda sounds a lot like drama wouldn't you say?

 

[kalauer]

OMG then write a rule!
Stop with the drama already! This thread (sorry not post. not singling you out) and so oh so many others are just filled to the max with DRAMA, DRAMA, DRAMA.

As far as I can see, only one person goes Drama with caps and exclamation marks. Mostly, we see exchange of arguments.

@JerkyJerry I don't think anyone is advocating a railroad. I think they want to add meaningful tradeoffs to WT. At present, the no-brainer solution is "get yours before it's too late" and as the devs have said, if something is a no-brainer, it needs to change.

Really, the question is how can raising WT be made more of a tradeoff. Atm it's Free Lunch until point X, at which point all the late comers starve - of course you'll get a food stampede in that case. I don't personally like a random will they/wont they mechanic so I disagree with the earlier suggestion, but the point that WT can readily be gamed is a valid one.

Very true.

Why not in single player? I, me, the guy who purchased my game. Want to raise WT with Russia in 1937. Why can't I? Why do you think I should not be able to? Because you say it is not historically correct? Ok, but I'm playing ahistorical. So you are saying I can't do it then either? So why don't I just give you my game to play since you are writing all my rules for me?

Because it is DRAMA! Are you kidding me? You want to be the boss over my game. You want Paradox to change something that IMHO does not need to be changed at all. Why can't I raise WT whenever I want? Just because Stalin and Hitler didn't?
So in your version of the game that you want Paradox to make for you, America can't become Fascist or Communist? But wait, it's in the game! OH NO!!!!

You may raise WT as Russia all you like but there is no reason why Germany should be harmed by that. As far as we know, the current mechanic has this effect. So in truth, this is not about existing or not existing rules or about forcing you to play in some way, but a dysfunctional rule that can be abused. Now unless you say that raising WT as SU to stop Germany from expanding should be avali strategy, you surely have to agree this WT issue has to be taken care of.

Did they ever say how much a nation would have to raise world tension?
If Germany raises it by 1% would this be enough, i dont ever remember hearing anything about this. The only thing I have seen is the overall world tension effect gameplay and not limits for each nation that contributed to it.

In the DD, they said that the known threat-System from HoI3 is replaced. So it is a global value with no respect to raising nations. But this could havechanged.

 

[JerkyJerry]

The point behind the rules is to have the game (both player and AI) follow a course that's RATIONAL for the situation, whether that course is entirely historical or not. The current WT mechanic forces, or at least strongly rewards, unrealistic behavior. Granted, you can decide NOT to take the freebies, but the fact that they're there with no rational response to exploiting them is a problem. Whether the seriousness of that problem (or lack thereof) is worth spending more than a passing glance by the developers is a matter of opinion, but it IS a problem.

In your mind it is a problem. I want to play with a WT I can raise. On purpose. For my own purposes. Why have a WT if it can't be raised or lowered by the player? Of course I want to mess with that. See what it can and can't do. See what modders do and don't do with it.
You stating it is a problem does not make it one. You just seem to think that if your Russia and I am playing as Germany you are going to raise WT and roll over me? Or you gonna get who to help you? The UK? LOL France? OOOOHHHHHH I'm sooooo freakin scared! Ok so when you gonna get those badasses after me? 1938? 1939? 1941?

What good is it going to do? LOL
Your gonna get who and who to attack me as Germany early? LOL Um, ok. Should I say thank you now or after I take the British Isles?
You guys act like you could do something with this WT power you have! LOL

 

[kalauer]

Hello ant hill
Meet mountain

You have no idea if WT can be raised fast enough, high enough etc. to do jack, correct?
You have not played the game as of yet, correct?
You are not really basing any of your argument on any real game facts, correct?

So yeah, kinda sounds a lot like drama wouldn't you say?

Wrong
True, but irrelevant
Wrong

In Total: utterly wrong

We did see in WWW that Japan can raise WT to 40% and more in 1938 by annexing China. SU could Annex some stuff to, or some other countries. Hungry anyone?

We did not Play the game but what do you suggest? Wait with the Analysis until it is released and until then not comment? What do you think are the WWW, DD and this very forum for?

Wrong, People who are interested already saw a huge amount of game Facts. While those may still be issue to Balance, the main concepts are clear. Maybe you did not watch the WWW and DD? I recommend them, they tel you a lot about the game.

There are other threads with Drama here. Consider starting something (else) about shadowed pictures, you might really like the result.

edit: in Response to you post #44: ...

 

[zyphial]

I don't know... maybe... democracies can only guarantee nations threatened by other nations that have crossed a certain WT threshold? So when Daniel went nuts it didn't mean Germany had no options - the Democracies would guarantee anyone Hungary started fabricating claims against, but would try to appease Germany as per history.

It's still abusable of sorts, just threaten the nations Germany would threaten after kicking up the WT, but it does mitigate the problem somewhat without a railroad.

The ever escalating accusations of drama, however, are probably the most dramatic element of this thread...

Edit: What about replacing guarantees with Warns ala EU?

 

[JerkyJerry]

As far as I can see, only one person goes Drama with caps and exclamation marks. Mostly, we see exchange of arguments.

You stooped to semantics to make what you think is a point and I'm drama? Seriously?
And I'm done.
I hope Paradox does not change the game to suit your beliefs that would be a shame.

 

[kalauer]

I don't know... maybe... democracies can only guarantee nations threatened by other nations that have crossed a certain WT threshold? So when Daniel went nuts it didn't mean Germany had no options - the Democracies would guarantee anyone Hungary started fabricating claims against, but would try to appease Germany as per history.

It's still abusable of sorts, just threaten the nations Germany would threaten after kicking up the WT, but it does mitigate the problem somewhat without a railroad.

The ever escalating accusations of drama, however, are probably the most dramatic element of this thread...

Edit: What about replacing guarantees with Warns ala EU?

In the end, you would need an individual account of threat. But we had this in HoI3 and it was supposed to be replaced. I don't see a simple solution for Wt now, and just hope it does not affect the games too much. After all, it might have limited effects.

You stooped to semantics to make what you think is a point and I'm drama? Seriously?
And I'm done.
I hope Paradox does not change the game to suit your beliefs that would be a shame.

... what a pity. I still try to figure out what you are done with, but yeah. Bon voyage.

 

[JerkyJerry]

We did see in WWW that Japan can raise WT to 40% and more in 1938 by annexing China. SU could Annex some stuff to, or some other countries. Hungry anyone?

Sorry I did not see this I was typing.

Perfect example!
What else does Daniel say before each and every video (almost?)
Something about work in progress
Not final numbers
Things changing all the time
New build
Don't quote me
We are working on it and changing it all the time

Wanna tell me again about your lack of DRAMA?
Yeah, thought not

So what you have been stating has been all what?
Speculation?
Guessing?
Sounds good?
Suits my argument?
In other words.........

 

[JerkyJerry]

We did see in WWW that Japan can raise WT to 40% and more in 1938 by annexing China. SU could Annex some stuff to, or some other countries.

Prove SU could annex some stuff to or some other countries

Prove it. You stated it as fact now prove it. Prove YOUR argument.

 

[kalauer]

Sorry I did not see this I was typing.

Perfect example!
What else does Daniel say before each and every video (almost?)
Something about work in progress
Not final numbers
Things changing all the time
New build
Don't quote me
We are working on it and changing it all the time

That the game is not finished is of no consequence to the legitimacy of this discussion. Of course the numbers will change. And maybe this will not be an issue after all. But maybe all the WWW and DD are made not just for enternainment but to get opinion from people who are interested in the game. You are basically saying "wait until the game is finished, then you may complain". Why not highlighting troublesome issues when things can still be influenced? Again, this is similar to the TTIP-discussion:

Before:"Wait with you arguments until the conctract is signed."
After: "Sorry guys, but the contract is signed, we can not do anything about it."

So yeah, my claim is that the WWW and DD and what else are specifically there to encourage comments on the game. Your Position that one should not comment on it before it is released makes me ask: "Why are you here?"

Plus: The WT-issue is not in its core about numbers but the concept. So balancing might alleviate the problem but not solve it completely. Thus we can already say that without major caretaking, this will still be an issue at release. At last, we are not in Alpha, but two months away from release.

Prove SU could annex some stuff to or some other countries

Prove it. You stated it as fact now prove it. Prove YOUR argument.

I didn't know the ability of nations to annex others must be proven. Let's put it this way:

1. We saw in the DD and WWW (Japan, Hungry, Germany), (plus can assume by common sense), that nations can annex others in HoI4.
2. SU is a nation in HoI4.
3. Thus, SU can Annex other nations in HoI4.

But I guess from your behavior this is not proof enough. There is no footage of SU doing so, and I am saying this to explicitly point out that it is not needed. Claiming otherwise is just distraction from the topic at hand.

 

[JerkyJerry]

Well my good fellow I think we can absolutely agree to disagree. Great chatting with you. I understand your point. I just don't agree with it as you don't agree with mine. That's all good! Not everyone should agree about everything.

I think we should settle this on the field of battle. You can be your beloved U.S.S.R. and you can raise or lower the WT if you like or not. If you don't want me to I won't. If you allow me to I may. The choice will be yours! That is a good deal I must say!

I will be Germany. By doing this it will allow you to call in the Allies early. Or you may not want to. The choice will be yours.

Do we has date?

 

[kalauer]

You still did not get the point of the thread. Sad but true.

 

[Kovax]

I'm almost amused by the idea of playing a third world country, starting an almost immediate war to annex a couple of useless backwater uncivs, and boosting World Tension just to have the Allies declare war on Germany in 1936 when it remilitarizes the Rhineland. ALMOST amused.

We won't know exactly how it plays out until a few people intentionally test its limits. Until then, it's fair game for discussion.

 

[JerkyJerry]

You still did not get the point of the thread. Sad but true.

I absolutely get the point you are trying to make. It is just 100% not based on any facts what-so-ever. I can't discuss something that isn't true/real/known. You seem to be able to. I doff my cap to you sir. You know an unknown, again bravo.
Me I needs a bit more in the proof/fact department. Another area we are different!

So challenge denied?

 

[JerkyJerry]

I'm almost amused by the idea of playing a third world country, starting an almost immediate war to annex a couple of useless backwater uncivs, and boosting World Tension just to have the Allies declare war on Germany in 1936 when it remilitarizes the Rhineland. ALMOST amused.

We won't know exactly how it plays out until a few people intentionally test its limits. Until then, it's fair game for discussion.

What allies would be attacking Germany in '36?
What do they have to attack with?

 

[JerkyJerry]

I'm almost amused by the idea of playing a third world country, starting an almost immediate war to annex a couple of useless backwater uncivs, and boosting World Tension just to have the Allies declare war on Germany in 1936 when it remilitarizes the Rhineland. ALMOST amused.

We won't know exactly how it plays out until a few people intentionally test its limits. Until then, it's fair game for discussion.

Just a quick side note:
See Kalauer how Kovax caped ALMOST the second time? That is not drama. That was used to accentuate the time he used the word the sentence before.
Writing many posts about a game that is broken before you have the game, have any facts or any proof. That my friend is drama. See the difference? I'm just sayin.

 

[Scutatus]

What allies would be attacking Germany in '36?
What do they have to attack with?

Ok, in 1936, what does GERMANY have? Not a lot. It couldn't start a war in 36 any more than the allies could. And if you try to as a player you might get a nasty reality check of your own.
Please stop being so aggressive. It is clear how wonderfully devoted you are to the German cause, but everyone else is trying to talk about the game in general as a whole. Other people are trying to discuss a game mechanic - how it effects every player and every nation, as it relates to everyone, and not just to you personally. So please could you get off your Parapet Mr. Hitler and see the bigger picture?

 

[JerkyJerry]

Ok, in 1936, what does GERMANY have? Not a lot. It couldn't start a war in 36 any more than the allies could. And if you try to as a player you might get a nasty reality check of your own.
Please stop being so aggressive. It is clear how wonderfully devoted you are to the German cause, but everyone else is trying to talk about the game in general as a whole. Other people are trying to discuss a game mechanic - how it effects every player and every nation, as it relates to everyone, and not just to you personally. So please could you get off your Parapet Mr. Hitler and see the bigger picture?

LOL What posts have you been reading? Are you sure you're in the right forum?

 

[JerkyJerry]

It is clear how wonderfully devoted you are to the German cause,

Shows how much you know! I was going to say I would be the USA but I wanted to give him some semblance of hope.