shouldnt ideas be free choice instead of linear?

[smellymummy]

it just seems so limiting having to be forced into a progression tree, where a lot of the bonuses are situational for a certain situation. being able to select which idea you want instead of progressing seems to me the better way. you'll end up with spending more points across the board specializing instead of following select paths, which for a lot of idea groups there's a lot of low impact choices there, wouldnt you agree?

i know its kind of early to make these kind of judgements, but its just something that's rubbing me the wrong way i suppose. here we have this huge tree to choose from to steer our nations where we want, however we have to follow specific paths to these goals where often the bumps on the road along our goals we find things we really don't even care for

 

[calvinhobbeslik]

it just seems so limiting having to be forced into a progression tree, where a lot of the bonuses are situational for a certain situation. being able to select which idea you want instead of progressing seems to me the better way. you'll end up with spending more points across the board specializing instead of following select paths, which for a lot of idea groups there's a lot of low impact choices there, wouldnt you agree?

i know its kind of early to make these kind of judgements, but its just something that's rubbing me the wrong way i suppose. here we have this huge tree to choose from to steer our nations where we want, however we have to follow specific paths to these goals where often the bumps on the road along our goals we find things we really don't even care for

Then you can take the best ideas first instead of having to wait until later in the game, which they probably did for balance purposes.

 

[Jrocking]

Yes. It is quite imbalanced if you could just choose the best ones.

Edit: And why are you complaining about ideas being situational? It would't be fair if france could just get all their land and navy ideas right away.

 

[Belissarius]

it just seems so limiting having to be forced into a progression tree, where a lot of the bonuses are situational for a certain situation. being able to select which idea you want instead of progressing seems to me the better way. you'll end up with spending more points across the board specializing instead of following select paths, which for a lot of idea groups there's a lot of low impact choices there, wouldnt you agree?

i know its kind of early to make these kind of judgements, but its just something that's rubbing me the wrong way i suppose. here we have this huge tree to choose from to steer our nations where we want, however we have to follow specific paths to these goals where often the bumps on the road along our goals we find things we really don't even care for

NIs are Innovations, many innovations require something previous to have been invented before you can invent or innovate what you actually want. Technology in the game is broad understanding, NIs are innovations in key narrow fields, just because its a narrow focus doesn't mean its advancement shouldn't be linear.

 

[smellymummy]

Then you can take the best ideas first instead of having to wait until later in the game, which they probably did for balance purposes.

yeah that's a very valid point, though the best ideas vs the worst ones at least it would be a choice, until you get the ultimate benefit of the full set, which for the most part all seem very powerful. let's just say that maybe the evolution of the choices - as in the first idea, then second, and so on - could of used more practical feedback, as some idea groups seem very lacking in glamor compared to others

there's about 120 possible bonuses available? locking them all into a linear progression line is that really the best way to go, seeing as how groups are limited themselves based on your tech progress?

i'll admit that in some instances the progression seems to make some sense sometimes

 

[Belissarius]

/snip

there's about 120 possible bonuses available? locking them all into a linear progression line is that really the best way to go...
/snip

Yes.

 

[thebigj_a]

I think having ideas as choices would have been better, however they'd need to have been balanced for that purpose. You'd need them all to be at least roughly equivalent in power or utility (depending upon one's situation), with a significantly more powerful bonus for getting them all.

They aren't, though, so it's a moot point.

 

[smellymummy]

Yes.

but why yes? realize that we're already limited in our idea groups based on admin tech, so it's no like a player could just cherry pick which idea they want to get the best idea bonus whenever they want. if it was free choice for example, there will be many times where the choice of an idea is going to be a choice of an idea that doesn't really do much. however that choice will still be beneficial if only to get +1 closer to a nation idea or closer to the full group idea bonus

i can see how removing the linearity of choice could cripple the AI - having the 100+ nations decide on it's own what would best suit it at any specific time would be a huge task to program no doubt - though i still think it makes for a poor choice of progression for the player. at least we can tech up admin and branch out, but still i think it kind of sucks having to slog through the useless to get the useful to feel some matter of advancement

i'd gladly accept a penalty to buy ideas down the line instead of being limited to the next choice in the line

 

[Belissarius]

but why yes? realize that we're already limited in our idea groups based on admin tech, so it's no like a player could just cherry pick which idea they want to get the best idea bonus whenever they want. if it was free choice for example, there will be many times where the choice of an idea is going to be a choice of an idea that doesn't really do much. however that choice will still be beneficial if only to get +1 closer to a nation idea or closer to the full group idea bonus

i can see how removing the linearity of choice could cripple the AI - having the 100+ nations decide on it's own what would best suit it at any specific time would be a huge task to program no doubt - though i still think it makes for a poor choice of progression for the player. at least we can tech up admin and branch out, but still i think it kind of sucks having to slog through the useless to get the useful to feel some matter of advancement

i'd gladly accept a penalty to buy ideas down the line instead of being limited to the next choice in the line

I already said why in an early post in the thread.

 

[BrawijayaV]

Maybe like, split them in two halves? Some essential perks and starting bonuses are the first ideas you can choose, and the other half are the more advanced ones, while you can freely choose the ideas? Maybe some ideas can only be unlocked through a certain tech level?

 

[Misha Brianski]

Sounds like "Why do i have to invent the Wheel first if i want to invent Tank?"

 

[1alexey]

Because it allows to have powerfull bonuses inside ideas, and balances that with less usefull ones.

Eu3 had just 20ish ideas that you can simply choose from, and it didn`t work very well, since everone was picking almost same stuff, due to some ideas being plain better.

The new system largely looks like what EU3 Death and Taxes mod had, where idea gives you multiple bonuses to make ideas more balanced, just expanded.

 

[Saranis]

The way I think of it is like this...

You cant begin brainstorming ideas for a car before you have brainstormed the idea for an engine.

 

[airpirate]

I guess I would sort of prefer a civ5 like system (where you get a few different choices within each idea group, with some ideas leading to others and a massive capstone idea at the end), but the current system works fine as well.

 

[AliceK86]

The way I think of it is like this...

You cant begin brainstorming ideas for a car before you have brainstormed the idea for an engine.

Sail-powered cars?

 

[1alexey]

Sail-powered cars?

Horse powered cars.

 

[Summercat]

Horse powered cars.

Chariots.

...pulled by goats.

 

[Anaximander]

Split it in two, but the other way.

At each tech-up, there should be a choice between two ideas, both balanced to suit the country and time when they become available.
This way you couldn't game it all that much by choosing advanced ideas, but you would get a
sense of choice and could leave your mark on the country you are playing.


I generally like choice and active gameplay a little better than Paradox seems to, but it is by no way a game-breaker. All Paradox games tend to have an abundance of these little issues, were you feel another design-choice would have been obvious, but the games are still fantastic.

 

[BrawijayaV]

The way I think of it is like this...

You cant begin brainstorming ideas for a car before you have brainstormed the idea for an engine.

Except for the fact that, if you want to invent the car, you need to invent the spoon first. That's how you need to think of it, and why it's pretty flawed. There should certainly be groups that you have to research first before you unlock the next, but you should probably be able to choose as well, especially for the fact that a lot of these are mostly ideas that can't really be anachronistic.

 

[Andy_Dandy]

Nooo, another bad idea. This forum is full of them after the demo. Some people talks abot limitations like if it was a bad thing. When you have to pick from the first idea the ideas can be progressively better. Developers can also throw in a few that the player might not need that much, or some many concider not too usefull, but it's a part of the road to get what you want. A way of making pros and cons, and harder choices when you choose an idea group to lock into.

We have a system were you can unlock new idea groups based on tech (which is very good by the way to balance ideas vs tech), so the real choice is in what group to choose, then how fast to expand in it contra all other things and not to mention tech.