On coalitions: Maybe its your fault?

[lucaluca]

I love the coalitions and EUIV for the reasons you listed.

sadly it seems Paradox is going the other way with patch 1.4...

 

[WeissRaben]

Wow, just wow. I'm simply amazed by some people's ignorance. This is what happens if you read half-assed. All those people who posted their detailed opinions on why & how coalitions should be improved are simply noobs who shouldn't play and bask in your amazingness instead.



This is what Johan said in this thread

And seriously, go read those topics you talk about, but actually read them this time.

You omitted a small itty bitty part, though:

yeah, while it was the design we wanted, we realise that those who grow that big want to paint the map, and AE scaling just makes it impossible.

Which means "yeah, that's was the game we wanted you to play, but we'll change it because you continue asking for it".

 

[Drakken]

I see vassal feeding more as an expliot than a strategy.

Didn't stop Napoleon from using it.

 

[Eyestabber]

Napoleon was a vassal feeding exploiter!!!!!!!!!!!!1111111

 

[Kadanz]

The internet brings out the worst in people...

 

[Pellaken]

The internet brings out the worst in people...

This forum can be worse than others; in part because "being a ****" is not against the rules.

 

[hitchens]

Didn't stop Napoleon from using it.

And see where that got him, exile in Saint Helena.

 

[mcmanusaur]

On-topic, others have already re-posted that one quote a few times, but it pretty much sums things up.

I find posts like this incredibly annoying. You are playing one of the most abstract possible video games in existence. Hardly anything in the game is a direct representation of anything. Everything, even provinces, are incredibly high-level abstractions of some kind of real political unit. Hell, even some of the nations didn't really exist and are there for game purposes.

If anything in a Paradox grand strategy game feels "too gamey" for you, you're probably playing the wrong genre of game.

Why? There's only one valid way to approach the game? Some of us prefer a more immersive narrativist approach to the game, and thus making such gamey (or, more specifically, meta-gaming the systems) decisions inhibits that style of play. Paradox's games happen to be the ones out of the genre that offer the most nuance and depth (which facilitate a narrative-focused approach), even if they are also (unfortunately so given my motivations in playing) heavily abstraction-based, so why should gamist optimization be the only true way to play? There's a lot of valid points to be made that if EU shed its gamey abstractions the experience as a whole would be better for it.

Vassal feeding in EU can get to the point that it is ridiculous and completely unrealistic (i.e. when the "vassal" becomes bigger than the overlord), and that's where it truly feels like a gamey exploit.

 

[grisamentum]

On-topic, others have already re-posted that one quote a few times, but it pretty much sums things up.



Why? There's only one valid way to approach the game? Some of us prefer a more immersive narrativist approach to the game, and thus making such gamey (or, more specifically, meta-gaming the systems) decisions inhibits that style of play. Paradox's games happen to be the ones out of the genre that offer the most nuance and depth (which facilitate a narrative-focused approach), even if they are also (unfortunately so given my motivations in playing) heavily abstraction-based, so why should gamist optimization be the only true way to play? There's a lot of valid points to be made that if EU shed its gamey abstractions the experience as a whole would be better for it.

I guess I don't understand what you mean by "narrativist approach." It's not even clear who "you" (the player) is. You're not the ruler himself like in CK2... you're just some kind of abstraction of the nation? Who is narrating here?

 

[roman566]

And see where that got him, exile in Saint Helena.

Nah, he got there because he broke the cardinal rule of warfare - never invade Russia in winter.

 

[BBBD316]

I think with the scaling change it should fix neighbouring nations that you have maintained good relations with from join in fear.

I would prefer changes to the diplomatic options rather than changes to AE. Allow me to sign non-aggression pacts with real deterents so we can ignore each other (me and AI) and focus on other fronts. 2 give me a peace option that forces the defeated coalition members from rejoining for 10-20 years. Give me an option to dismember them.

 

[mcmanusaur]

I guess I don't understand what you mean by "narrativist approach." It's not even clear who "you" (the player) is. You're not the ruler himself like in CK2... you're just some kind of abstraction of the nation? Who is narrating here?

It doesn't matter "who I am", as long as I can maintain a decently immersive internal narrative of plausible/quasi-historical interactions between countries. I guess if anything I would consider my role as more of a director of sorts than a character. And while Paradox does seem invested in a gamist approach with their almost board game-esque trappings of heavy abstraction, I'd say they encourage a more immersive/narrative-oriented approach as well due to the emphasis on deciding your own victory conditions. (1) Dealing with clunky, unwieldy abstractions, and (2) having to utilize meta-gamey/exploitative tactics to achieve what should be a natural outcome are just about the only two things that interfere with this play style.