How about a multiplayer matchmaking experience based on Steam?
- 6
- 3
It's time to kill EUIV
- Thread starter LokiusMaximus
- Start date
-
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.
If it worked the way you suggest, i wouldnt want to be the programmer who would have to code the AI to realize whats the time to strike back. The way it is now, where you have to take static points (forts) and use armies to defend them / capture enemy static points is ultimately the best. IMO at least. Also iirc battles to count toward WS, they just arent a major factor.
Lately ive been experimenting with this stuff. For example ive had war goals work like in CK2, if you capture a province thats your war goal, you get a ticking war score all the way to 100%. Too early to make definitive conclusions.
Problem with humans is that we tend to be pretty greedy. If you attack France with a claim to conquer a 12% war core worth province, will you really just take that 12% ws province? Of course you wont. Youll do what any human does. Youll occupy the entire France and demand 100% war score worth of concessions. And in that case you definitely will have to take a bunch of forts and i dont see anything wrong with that.
I rarely have to capture more than 2 or 3 forts + beat enemy several times in battles to get whatever i want.
- 5
- 1
Yeah this would defiantly be the biggest hurdle, although does the AI not already somewhat know this type of stuff? I mean the AI does not march smaller stacks against overwhelming force so to an extent it much already understand when it can win and when it can not. I dunno, you are probably right.
This is probably correct as you said I imagine most players will simply siege the AI until they can get exactly what they want, but there is an inherent problem with that. In most cases like that it is the AI's moronic stubbornness that forces you to siege the whole country. Often the war will have been won long before it actually ends, the only thing dragging it along is the AI's unwillingness to peace out because the player does not meet the prerequisites for peace(which ordinarily make sense but when defeat is certain these should really be ignored), even though the AI does not have the means to turn the war around and the player meeting the prerequisites for peace on their terms only is merely a matter of time.
Essentially what I am saying is that once a war gets to a certain point(which could be defined by things like remaining manpower compared to attackers, amount of regiments left compared to attackers, WE, loans, etc) the AI should "unconditionally surrender".
- 2
This seems like the same thing that was said about HOI3 3 or 4 years after release. Most people think everything needed can be done in DLC, but honestly... sometimes you need a fresh start.
- 9
- 2
Basically if they put EU3 into the EU4 engine, I'd be thrilled, because EU4 is much, much prettier to look at than EU3, but I have fun with EU3 nearly the whole time from start to end, I've played many games to the end there, but the only similar amount of fun I have in EU4 is in the first 50-100 years of the game and I have never finished a game in EU4 other than in observer mode.
I played to 1705 or so once and just said ahh, bored and let the game finish it. It did a remarkably poor job with my country that I'd left it, but that was more fun to watch than if I'd continued. I keep wanting to do the 3 mountains, or even just a WC for the bling of the achievement on Steam, but since I am not a bling hunter naturally, my desire does not outweigh my dread of the tediousness of the experience, so I haven't done them yet.
I played to 1705 or so once and just said ahh, bored and let the game finish it. It did a remarkably poor job with my country that I'd left it, but that was more fun to watch than if I'd continued. I keep wanting to do the 3 mountains, or even just a WC for the bling of the achievement on Steam, but since I am not a bling hunter naturally, my desire does not outweigh my dread of the tediousness of the experience, so I haven't done them yet.
- 6
There is the problem of combat in EU4 and CK2. It is very difficult to change the combats in both games, but both need some very important fixes that another game could very easily do but patches can not.
As for everything else detailed here, I disagree that there are an overflow of things wrong with the EU4 engine. It's really only how combat works.
As for everything else detailed here, I disagree that there are an overflow of things wrong with the EU4 engine. It's really only how combat works.
- 2
ahahahahahhaahhaahha
eu4 will be here for many more years! if ck2 is still going, you can expect eu4 to last much much longer! they will pull as many ideas out of.... until people stop buying
eu4 will be here for many more years! if ck2 is still going, you can expect eu4 to last much much longer! they will pull as many ideas out of.... until people stop buying
- 5
- 2
From my experience the AI is stubborn only when human tries to push unreasonable things; and there are some rules that can be annoying (like them not ceding stuff if you dont hold a fort in that area or w/e that rule was). But all of that is pretty much anti exploits measures.
This is literally how it works now, without them using the literal "unconditional surrender". After that certain point you will be able to enforce however many war score %s you have (and often +10-20% on top). If they let you do 100% worth of damage that would just be an exploit IMO.
- 1
It´s obvious the answer is to start Victoria 3 development.
Gibbe dreadnaught soon Johan, or stability -3
Afraid that HOI 4 isn´t that much of a fresh start. Hope the new features are enough to make it not feel HOI 3.5. The map full of tiny provinces certainly doesn´t help (BTW I think EU´s current map is worse than in release).
Gibbe dreadnaught soon Johan, or stability -3
Afraid that HOI 4 isn´t that much of a fresh start. Hope the new features are enough to make it not feel HOI 3.5. The map full of tiny provinces certainly doesn´t help (BTW I think EU´s current map is worse than in release).
- 3
- 3
Instead of vaguely remarking that "sometimes you need a fresh start" how about you actually give reasons for why we need a fresh start with a EU5?
What do you mean? I thought EU4 already uses Steam
- 3
- 2
I disagree with this. Imagine you are playing as Austria and Bavaria has four provinces. You have a core or maybe even only a claim on one of them. Bavaria, for whatever reason, has no allies at the moment. You have two that would be willing to enter war. You declare war and you try to demand that province immediately. They don't give it to you. Instead, you have to siege their entire nation which destroys their manpower, puts them into debt (so long as you leave one province open so they can build constant mercenaries), and may result in even harsher conditions than what the human initially wants. I know sometimes I get upset when the AI doesn't accept my peace deal so I 100% (or often 99% them) them and take even more out of spite. Why is it so hard to program Bavaria into thinking "oh crap, we have no chance here. We really want this province, but we know we cannot win so here you go." I know AI coding is super difficult, but peace deals already have the modifier of "relative strength of alliance" and the strength of military is also calculated in regards to making alliances and other things.
- 2
So by your own logic, with all the game play changes, ie: every patch and dlc, we won't ever have a better ai. So perhaps what EU4 needs for a better AI is less game play changes?
Is this possible in the current Paradox company design philosophy?
- 2
Its simple.
If everyone was that pragmatic;
Game would be boring.
Once you grow beyond certain point, most of everyone else would just give up their stuff without a fight.
- 5
No, the way war score works encourages you to go to 100% in every war. Someone who's played more recently can check me on the numbers, but it's been my experience that to get a 12% war score province you'll need a boat load of war score (let's call it 50%) because of the short length of the war and the AI's built-in stubbornness. Doubling your war score to 100% will allow you to get eight times the gains, since it doesn't matter how stubborn the AI is—it has to accept the peace at that point. Even if it wasn't more war score efficient you'd still have the incentive to go to 100% since by the time the AI is willing to accept the war's initial aims you've probably got the AI at a point where all it's going to take is time—their army is destroyed, and you're just besieging provinces to get the AI to agree that, yep, it can't win this.
- 3
Very true, I can count on one hand the number of times I've been able to take one province with less than 100% and that is usually because the capital is captured very early. The AI is the AI and it looks as though with all the game play changes, we won't get a better one any time soon.
It also bothers me when a nation declares war on me and I know I will lose, but the numbers are actually kind of close. There are times that I am willing to give up the one or two provinces they want so I can focus on other wars. Why would the AI not accept in these cases? I've also had it where I have been in a war, been declared on by a smaller power, and I am willing to offer the smaller power something just to end that war. They won't accept. So instead I duke it out with the larger power and make peace first (because obviously the length of war modifier affects that first war more). Due to that newly made peace, I may have lost some in that war, but I gain even more by destroying the small power that only declared on me because they saw I was in a bad position.
- 2
Ehm.
I captured 1 fort. And that+won battles gives me 19 war score.
I can annex 11 war score worth province.
This was played at normal difficulty no lucky nations.
- 3
- 2
AI of this game is bad compared to... what, exactly? Because I want to play that super complex modern age game too.
Let´s see... hmmm Empire Total War... that really looks cool...
Let´s see... hmmm Empire Total War... that really looks cool...
- 4