Please get rid of AI cheating (i.e. Lucky Nations)

[LAF1994]

Lucky Nations need to go. They results in arbitrarily chosen AI countries getting massive supplies of inexplicable super-generals and rulers, which is incredibly unrealistic and ahistorical. They are also cripplingly bad for gameplay balance- in a recent Italy game Austria regularly had all 5/6 stat rulers and generals while I could barely obtain 2-star generals and had several extremely poor leaders.

 

[CommunistCookie]

Or you can turn it off. I like it, without it the game is less of a challenge.

 

[unmerged(755802)]

I want a way to still play ironman with lucky nations off. Does anyone know why they force you to play with it on?

 

[henzington]

There is no way sadly.

 

[Miravlix]

For some reason a lot of people around here don't get that EUIV is designed with certain challenges.

Like Horde not getting tech upgrades and a million other things people whine about.

Ironman has certain pre-set values because thats how the dev feels the challenge should be, whining about it won't make a difference, so it's a complete waste of time to ask for ironman balance changes, changes to the horde challenge, rotw countries being lesser than Europa, it's 100% intentional design in order to create many different ways to play.

 

[unmerged(755802)]

For some reason a lot of people around here don't get that EUIV is designed with certain challenges.

Like Horde not getting tech upgrades and a million other things people whine about.

Ironman has certain pre-set values because thats how the dev feels the challenge should be, whining about it won't make a difference, so it's a complete waste of time to ask for ironman balance changes, changes to the horde challenge, rotw countries being lesser than Europa, it's 100% intentional design in order to create many different ways to play.

Hmm yes, but after some of us have already played for hundreds of hours maybe we are capable of making our own challenges instead of having them forced upon us?

 

[unmerged(463193)]

For some reason a lot of people around here don't get that EUIV is designed with certain challenges.

Like Horde not getting tech upgrades and a million other things people whine about.

Ironman has certain pre-set values because thats how the dev feels the challenge should be, whining about it won't make a difference, so it's a complete waste of time to ask for ironman balance changes, changes to the horde challenge, rotw countries being lesser than Europa, it's 100% intentional design in order to create many different ways to play.

despite what you might believe, devs generally value constructive feedback. many of the patches and expansions are based off of fan feedback in addition to dev design decisions.

 

[Illianor123]

Arbitrary and ahistorical? The nations that did well, do well...

Also, all the AI nations 'cheat' lucky nations or not. This is to make for the inherent advantages the players have. Ability to plan, respond to events, manipulate the system. Getting rid of 'cheats' makes the AI even more of a pushover.

Also calling it 'cheating' is a stupid term. AI getting bonuses is a game mechanic, and AI nations Following their rules is not deliberately breaking the rules.

 

[Ranjid]

Arbitrary and ahistorical? The nations that did well, do well...

Also, all the AI nations 'cheat' lucky nations or not. This is to make for the inherent advantages the players have. Ability to plan, respond to events, manipulate the system. Getting rid of 'cheats' makes the AI even more of a pushover.

Also calling it 'cheating' is a stupid term. AI getting bonuses is a game mechanic, and AI nations Following their rules is not deliberately breaking the rules.

So what qualifies Poland to be a Lucky Nation historically? And what exactly disqualifies Manch from being one?

 

[anomanderus]

For some reason a lot of people around here don't get that EUIV is designed with certain challenges.

Like Horde not getting tech upgrades and a million other things people whine about.

Ironman has certain pre-set values because thats how the dev feels the challenge should be, whining about it won't make a difference, so it's a complete waste of time to ask for ironman balance changes, changes to the horde challenge, rotw countries being lesser than Europa, it's 100% intentional design in order to create many different ways to play.

EU games have always been more sandboxy than challengy. I usually start a game with a specific goal in mind and it becomes annoying when the AI seems to go out of it's way to get in my way.

 

[GabbyDieJaeger]

The reason I don't like the Lucky Nations bonus is that it's given to nations that 1) weren't lucky and 2) don't need it.
France wasn't the greatest land power in Europe because it was "lucky". It was because it had a long military history and was incredibly populated, something already represented with its high base tax provinces and strong military NIs.
There is absolutely no need to stack "Lucky Nations" on top of that, just to make France even more adept at casually steamrolling every AI-controlled nation in the world.

 

[CommunistCookie]

Hmm yes, but after some of us have already played for hundreds of hours maybe we are capable of making our own challenges instead of having them forced upon us?

Nothing is forced upon you. You can tick ironman off.

 

[Clownie]

The reason I don't like the Lucky Nations bonus is that it's given to nations that 1) weren't lucky and 2) don't need it.
France wasn't the greatest land power in Europe because it was "lucky". It was because it had a long military history and was incredibly populated, something already represented with its high base tax provinces and strong military NIs.
There is absolutely no need to stack "Lucky Nations" on top of that, just to make France even more adept at casually steamrolling every AI-controlled nation in the world.

I so, so, so agree with this sentiment. Spain, England, Russia, and France would have succeeded pretty much no matter what. Portugal succeeded because Spain decided to hugbox with their Iberian friends instead of conquering them (compare Aragon (yes, I know it wasn't conquest, point stands)). Russia was a massive, autocratic polity with access to nigh-unpopulated Siberian plains, as well as disorganised steppe nomads to conquer. The only nations that really need historical luck to achieve success in-game are Sweden and the Ottomans, and the latter is mostly because of game mechanics, since they were also in a really good position in 1444.

 

[grandadmiralbob]

Hmm yes, but after some of us have already played for hundreds of hours maybe we are capable of making our own challenges instead of having them forced upon us?

Not completely true troll!!!! Some of us have 1000s. ***sarcasm*** *completely agree* *it's just a game* *give more options* ...........oh I disgress as I have read many threads like this.

 

[clockworkBabbag]

For some reason a lot of people around here don't get that EUIV is designed with certain challenges.

Like Horde not getting tech upgrades and a million other things people whine about.

Ironman has certain pre-set values because thats how the dev feels the challenge should be, whining about it won't make a difference, so it's a complete waste of time to ask for ironman balance changes, changes to the horde challenge, rotw countries being lesser than Europa, it's 100% intentional design in order to create many different ways to play.

I'd disagree with that last statement I bolded. I'ts 100% intentional design, yes, but it's design with the idea of historical railroading in mind. Literally, that's the reason. The tooltip for Lucky Nations says pretty much exactly that. The ROTW being stupider/less powerful than Europe doesn't seem like a different playstyle, it seems like just Europe being better because that's what happened historically (with the possible exception of Native Americans with CoP, who actually do play a lot different and aren't that difficult to get to the point where they can compete with Europe).

I don't know about you, but I prefer my Paradox games to have mechanics that make an accurate model of the era being depicted in order to make plausible situations, ahistorical or not. What I don't want is for the game to go out of its way to try and make historical outcomes as likely as possible. If I wanted to just see history unfold I'd go open up a history textbook, not play an interactive game.

 

[fleetothemoon]

Lucky Nations need to go. They results in arbitrarily chosen AI countries getting massive supplies of inexplicable super-generals and rulers, which is incredibly unrealistic and ahistorical. They are also cripplingly bad for gameplay balance- in a recent Italy game Austria regularly had all 5/6 stat rulers and generals while I could barely obtain 2-star generals and had several extremely poor leaders.

Just turn it off if you don't like it. They are meant to give certain nations extra edge so they can develop into a powerhouse that can compete better with the player. Personally I prefer lucky nations to be on "random" just for a bit more variability.

I want a way to still play ironman with lucky nations off. Does anyone know why they force you to play with it on?

I imagine, the same reason they won't allow people to play ironman with settings changed to EASY. I would guess that they want people to earn achievements in a "fair" way.

Hmm yes, but after some of us have already played for hundreds of hours maybe we are capable of making our own challenges instead of having them forced upon us?

As CommunityCookie put it, you can. Just turn Ironman off. I do agree with you though. If people want to play Ironman with easy mode on, then let them... why not?

 

[Qoff]

Lucky Nations need to go. They results in arbitrarily chosen AI countries getting massive supplies of inexplicable super-generals and rulers, which is incredibly unrealistic and ahistorical. They are also cripplingly bad for gameplay balance- in a recent Italy game Austria regularly had all 5/6 stat rulers and generals while I could barely obtain 2-star generals and had several extremely poor leaders.

OMG AI is cheating, what about the fact that you have a brain and the AI don't? This isn't cheating as well?

 

[Zqrfmb]

Brandenburg was very lucky, luckier than what they'll achieve with the LN bonus, netherlands could also use it. As for the rest of the historical lucky nations, they have their position and NIs to give them luck, I'd rather see more interesting random LNs with tag-specific LN mechanics, like a lucky AI ming would have a reduced autonomy floor and maybe dampened inward perfection/mandate lost, lucky aragon and lithuania would have a chance to be leading their PUs with spain and poland instead of the other way around, lucky byzantium would get a major diprep boost for the first few decades to keep their butts out of the fire, lucky novgorod would get something to give them a better chance at throwing back muscovy.

 

[LAF1994]

OMG AI is cheating, what about the fact that you have a brain and the AI don't? This isn't cheating as well?

The difference is that the AI gets arbitrary bonuses that are extremely unrealistic. Additionally, with Ironman active, the player isn't capable of anything the AI is not.
It is ridiculous and incredibly cripplingly bad for balance that AI countries are able to pop 6/5/6 generals/rulers out en masse while player countries in similar circumstances can barely get a 3/3/3.

 

[Illianor123]

Additionally, with Ironman active, the player isn't capable of anything the AI is not.

Except making long term plans, and manipulating the game mechanics. Enough that they can survive as Byzantium, and Irish OPM, Albania etc.