Patch 1.7 Is the Best so Far, By Far
- Thread starter ssuperflash1
- 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.
And?
Most people don´t care with WC because it´s boring and repetitive. Not because it´s hard per se.
Most people don´t care with WC because it´s boring and repetitive. Not because it´s hard per se.
I really want WC to be literally impossible even with Ottomans or Spain, not virtually impossible. The very fact the WC is possible means any decent players can conquer a continent or two before the game ends. I don't want easy blobbing.
Most.
So if something isn't achievable, why it should be there around?
What's the point?
In 1.7 paradox deleted that test achievement, resposible for checking verison... and they should do same for Ryuku, cause it's empty blank achievement, not allowing to gain 100% for achievement hunters or some fanboys or whateva, if they didn't gained this achievement in 1.0 or 1.1
It is not irrelevant, I said it would be more boring, you said I said it was never boring. That's a blatant lie and those are never irrelevant.
These are some more strawmans that I never claimed.
Considering the percent of people who accomplish WC I hardly think easy is appropriate.
"Easy blobbing" wasn't in reference to WC. It was in reference to continental conquest.
The Ottomans cannot even keep pace with what happened in reality...
I have never seen the AI ever with anything resembling a full contintent, not even in South America where it would be totally plausible for Spain and Portugal to have held the entire continent together.
It's classic to claim that something out of reach is "boring, not hard". It's a good way to minimize the accomplishments of others. What it does not do is reflect well on the people saying it.
hi!For me eux4 is a game of diplomacy. The problem with W.C. is it makes the diplomatic action obsolete. So what that serves to give subsidies, to proclaim guarantees, casus belli commercial or religious, etc...if we are the strongest with no competitor?W.C returns the spirit of the game useless.EU4 is a great game
Not that you are able to revert back to old patches.. oh wait, you are!
I was playing with GH had left ~30 years till final date when new patch came out, so i reverted back to 1.6.2 and ended that game on it.
Er, I do recall quite a bit of talk about how playing with various game mechanics is "boring, not hard." Regardless of the truth of it, lecturing someone on using that phrase when you yourself use it frequently seems unwise.
Patch is lacking in straight bananas, circular waffles, and chocolate sex-toys... pitchforks are ready to go!
You can only make this statement if you miss the points made here and elsewhere. Calling an individual mechanic boring =/= calling other people's accomplishments "boring, not hard".
I got it in 1.5. Pretty sure it's doable in 1.7 as well, thanks to ADM efficiency.
Calling playing with new mechanics slow but easy isn't incomparable to calling a certain way of playing slow but easy, and in any case, you're missing the point. As I said, regardless of the truth of it, criticizing someone else's use of the phrase when you apply it like bug spray in a Canadian summer makes all the cases you used it seem more questionable. A better criticism would have been to say that you suspect he's just jealous of WCers, which is what you were implying anyway.
No, using a phrase in a different context to create a different meaning does not make criticizing its usage in an inappropriate context less valid, regardless of usage volume in either case.
1. An individual mechanic versus a player-chosen style are, in fact, different things and the framework used to attack them is not comparable. A mechanic that necessarily makes the game easier is not the same thing as making choices as a player that make your future situation easier. A mechanic that makes the game more tedious is not comparable to a player choosing to play in a more tedious fashion.
2. WC isn't a play style, it's a goal.
3. Fundamentally attacking the achievement of a goal versus the underlying mechanics of the game are differing concepts and using the phrase has different implications in each case.
On a side note, why is it that the choices that give the player the strongest position in the game are tedious? I've seen more than once the same person say "WC is just tedious", but when attempting to defend borked mechanics, instead go on to say "WC should be hard". Tedium is not difficulty. I haven't seen many people claiming "WC *should* be tedious", and yet that's what some of the patch changes do, in addition to making more garden variety expansion somewhat more tedious.
Difficulty constraints should rationally be on how well a player manages his resources vs opposition doing the same; a hard-set timer that overpowers that management is pretty strong evidence of bad resource balance.
Besides, with the stated design intention to be protecting large player blobs, we were given hard evidence that this mechanic is intended to make playing as large blob nations easier in MP...something literally nobody has justified.
Pretty sure this is a troll account, but WC doesn't make diplomacy obsolete at all, in fact there's nothing that relies on diplomacy more than becoming the HRE emperor. Not to mention diplomacy in this game is pretty terrible anyway, amounting to clicking a few buttons and being best friends with a nation, a friendship which can be made meaningless at the slightest thing and doesn't actually get you anything like trade benefits or you know stuff that actually happens in reality from being friends with other countries.
WC, especially now, requires the most use out of guarantees, casus belli of all kinds.
Nothing is well received by many on this forum. It's like American politics, but with even worse grammar.
