Well, an unpopular opinion is below (a kind of devil's advocate).
Intro:
I have at least two examples:
1) one is my friend who bought EU4 two years ago, and keeps buying all DLCs. He likes the spirit of the game and the historical period it covers.
Moreover, he owns only EU4 and Heroes 3 at his PC, and plays them constantly as I see in Steam (with several GB save-games).
To the point, he does not make Rivals. He just does not know this feature. Playing for two years.
2) another example, please read a newcomer's thread about playing Ottomans and how he can't defeat Mameluks. I will repeat, being Ottomans. Vs. Mameluks.
Main part:
So, what I am trying to say. The game with all DLCs has SOOOOOO many parameters and features.
The majority of those parameters and features ARE NOT described in the in-game tutorial, tips are rather vague (still, none reads them most of time), and the interface is rather non-intuitive because it simply cannot be intuitive with so many things happening. (A good thing that Paradox added the most important notifications to the game).
On the top of that, recent versions of the blank game are virtually unplayable efficiently without DLCs, and Paradox does not advise to revert back to 1.5-1.8 so that a newcomer has pleasant experience with a blank game.
One should put an incredible amount of efforts just to learn how to play the game.
For a newcomer, it is a disaster. And don't say that he/she should come to forum and ask. As Wiz or Johan said, the forum is attended by 10% of buyers at most.
And imagine more parameters and features with Dynasties (which won't be tutorialized, for sure). The threshold of complexity will riser even higher.
Conclusion:
The game is extremely hard for a newcomer, and a piece of cake for an experienced player.
I would buy such DLC, as it will help to spend time during peace.
But it is up to Paradox whether it is reasonable to introduce mechanics that are not well documented or tutorialized in-game.
In addition, I won't judge for everyone, but 90% of buyers who don't attend the forum seem like to have a country simulator, rather than a dynasty simulator.
Intro:
I have at least two examples:
1) one is my friend who bought EU4 two years ago, and keeps buying all DLCs. He likes the spirit of the game and the historical period it covers.
Moreover, he owns only EU4 and Heroes 3 at his PC, and plays them constantly as I see in Steam (with several GB save-games).
To the point, he does not make Rivals. He just does not know this feature. Playing for two years.
2) another example, please read a newcomer's thread about playing Ottomans and how he can't defeat Mameluks. I will repeat, being Ottomans. Vs. Mameluks.
Main part:
So, what I am trying to say. The game with all DLCs has SOOOOOO many parameters and features.
The majority of those parameters and features ARE NOT described in the in-game tutorial, tips are rather vague (still, none reads them most of time), and the interface is rather non-intuitive because it simply cannot be intuitive with so many things happening. (A good thing that Paradox added the most important notifications to the game).
On the top of that, recent versions of the blank game are virtually unplayable efficiently without DLCs, and Paradox does not advise to revert back to 1.5-1.8 so that a newcomer has pleasant experience with a blank game.
One should put an incredible amount of efforts just to learn how to play the game.
For a newcomer, it is a disaster. And don't say that he/she should come to forum and ask. As Wiz or Johan said, the forum is attended by 10% of buyers at most.
And imagine more parameters and features with Dynasties (which won't be tutorialized, for sure). The threshold of complexity will riser even higher.
Conclusion:
The game is extremely hard for a newcomer, and a piece of cake for an experienced player.
I would buy such DLC, as it will help to spend time during peace.
But it is up to Paradox whether it is reasonable to introduce mechanics that are not well documented or tutorialized in-game.
In addition, I won't judge for everyone, but 90% of buyers who don't attend the forum seem like to have a country simulator, rather than a dynasty simulator.
Last edited:
- 5
- 3
- 1
My point was, that portraits doesn´t really add much, but won´t argue against it... The other argument was that leaders won´t evolve and devolve... Sure I hated in CK when my general got craven... But instead of having such all-around traits, they could make it traits for terrain and battles, like mountain and defensive, being a positive and negative so some generals might be bad at mountain, good at plains and better at defensive... Also, that a 2-pip general could become a 3-pip... Had a few major battles that a lousy general won and ended up winning a major war, though I had to hire another general due to AT increase instead of honouring the one that had fought and won some epic battles...
