The tutorial scenario & learning experience is terrible!

[unmerged(1129)]

>>This game has a steep learning curve, and they need a FUN tutorial to get newbies up it quickly.

I know this is totally subjective, but adjectives I would heartily use to describe my experience with the tutorial include: thrilling, deep, profound, and most importantly, FUN.

It sounds like I'm in the minority, but I once I figured out the economic and military models and followed closely the tutorial screens, I found it quite engaging. I don't play things five times to torture myself. =) I really was quite hooked, and I'm now thoroughly ready to take on the GC.

 

[unmerged(940)]

So the solution is to play the tutorial to learn the mechanics and then play a GC at easy to learn the game?

Is there a small province to play (as oppose to Russia) at easy that would be best?

 

[unmerged(28)]

As some of you might know... I was a beta tester of EU before I started to work for Paradox. I started out with the tutorial and I liked it very much, though it was a bit too time consuming to find the Mamelucks for my taste. I played the scenario until I found the Catalans, then I moved over to the GC and played Russia until my head hurt from information overload and then I replayed the tutorial. Replaying the tutorial is actually good because the second time you already know the buttonology and can concentrate on the deep info. The second time you'll move on much faster as you already know what to do.

But I understand the criticism. Thank you for the input.

/Greven

 

[unmerged(168)]

Greven

I just think that you need to shorten the tutorial to speed it up and get people on to the Main Scenarios.

Basically, I think the Mamelukes are too far away, and the Alliance DOW will slow some people down.

Also - - Is there a way to assign the 'Pause Game' fuctionality to another button on the keyboard, pereferably an unused F# key.

I use a cordless keyboard and mouse, and for some reason the Pause key doesn't work. Also, I have a 3rd button on the mouse that I can program to F# keys, and I like to use that for pause in RTS games.

 

[unmerged(1129)]

I agree with that last post. Though I personally loved the tutorial, I can see how making it into more of a tutorial (and less of a scenario, which is what it really is more like right now) would speed things up. Plus, it would be nice to see how many more topics could be covered or elaborated on in more detail (such as attrition, trade, CoT, among other things I'm reading that most players are stumbling on).

The game is vastly complex and it does, admittedly, need a gentler interface for get-goers. I was pretty shocked to find that the Marmeluks were where they were. That's a lot of cross-country tunneling, nevermind the fact that--unless you grab multiple surrounding countries--you have one hell of a weak supply line if someone declares war (which, for no apparent reason, the Cat's did to me _before_ I'd discovered the Marmeluks.

 

[unmerged(930)]

I would agree with some of the criticisms of the tutorial. The Marmelukes are a little far away, although their distance does give you an idea of the distances involved in the game. And the alliance DOW threw me, too. But, overall, it is still a good way to learn some of the basic elements of the game. Did we really expect the tutorial to be a great scenario in its own right? I didn't.

 

[unmerged(1105)]

I agree that the tutorial has it's flaws. The first time I played it I didn't achieve one of the early goals and just went off on my own. Later, I accidently achieved the goal and a bunch of later ones that I had achieved in the meantime fell quickly into place. However, I reached one that I couldn't achieve. So, I quit the game. My second time through I followed the directions quickly and achieved success in about four hours of gameplay.

I would have preferred some sort of suggestion by the developers on what scenarios would be good for newbies. Many have mentioned Russia in the grand campaign as a good choice, and that's who I have chosen for my first game, but if you look at the difficulty ratings when you start, the game suggests that Austria, among others, is easier to play than Russia!

Miles

 

[unmerged(859)]

Well I must admit, that some of you actually had some fun with the tutorial so I would not discuss that point any further.

But I still believe, that playing an easy GC like thing, would give a much better view of the game and could also introduce you to game features by one by one.

As I suggested earlier, Play Portugal to learn a all you need to know about colonization, (and you can ignore most other parts for the time of a short scenario)
Then play Russia to learn about military (again if you only need to conquer Kazan and Golden Horde you can ignore anything else, because it won't have enough impact in such short a time)
And then have a scenario as France or England trying to build up an alliance of certain strength (like able to face the other side or able to make at least a white peace in a war against Spain)
I have no actual idea concerning economy, but you could probably do something using France otr Austria or a fantasy scenario

this way you have 3-5 scenarios each taking at most 3 hours play time, giving you insight in certain parts of the game. You can easily write helpful popups because in such short a time you would still know what would happen.

And all of them would be played in the historic context we like so much about EU. I mean how many would rather play the fantasy scenario then the GC.

Ciao
Kulko

 

[unmerged(930)]

Last night out of curiosity, I played the Fantasia scenario as the Incas. I didn't finish it, but managed to play more than 100 years. This was basically like the tutorial without the advice, giving me extended opportunities to colonize and develop my empire before I became entangled with other nations. Eventually I met the aggressive Iroquois and we had three wars. The first two ended in draws and return to the status quo. However, in the second I forced the nasty Iroquois to give me a province after a successful siege of one of their cities on the island of Cuba. This was my most successful moment thusfar in EU, and I went to bed quite happy.

The bottom line is that the Fantasia scenario, even though it has a situation drastically different from the historical scenarios and GC, might be a good learning experience for some people to try immediately after the tutorial. It was for me. I feel much more confident about my ability to play the game and had a great deal of fun in the process.

 

[Johan]

I might be cursing in church, but I personally have always been fond of the Fantasia scenario I think it works out pretty nicely to play when you are new, and it is an absolute blast in MP.

 

[unmerged(930)]

Originally posted by Johan
I might be cursing in church, but I personally have always been fond of the Fantasia scenario I think it works out pretty nicely to play when you are new, and it is an absolute blast in MP.

Yes, I have noticed that some people seem to think playing Fantasia is heretical, based on what I've read in a couple of other threads; however, I did thoroughly enjoy it and learned a great deal about the game by stumbling through it. I think I will finish my Fantasia game before going on to the GC. I had a slight lead in VP over the second place nation when I turned the game off last night, but my economy wasn't exactly going great, and I kept having lots of peasant revolts. I think another night or two with Fantasia would really develop my skills a little before I dive into the GC, doing things like changing my religion and the such just to see what happens.

 

[unmerged(485)]

I tried fantasia as Ukraine after being frustrated by the length of time trying to find the Mamelueks even though I knew where they were. I learned a lot about how the mechanics work without being bobmarded by a lot of things at once. By the time I found the Mamelukes in the fantasia scenario I had enough knowledge to carry on diplomatic relations etc. which I did not have at the start.

I think the fantasia scenario is really nice. It gives you a chance to develop your country (actually only one province at the start) the way you would like before getting involved with other distractions. Kinda like CIV2 on a much smaller time scale. And I imagine that as a mp game it would level the playing field for all.

 

[unmerged(1017)]

Use Fantasia as Tutorial

Originally posted by Majorw
The bottom line is that the Fantasia scenario, even though it has a situation drastically different from the historical scenarios and GC, might be a good learning experience for some people to try immediately after the tutorial. It was for me. I feel much more confident about my ability to play the game and had a great deal of fun in the process.

I definitely agree. I did almost the same thing. I did play the tutorial right to the end, but now I wonder why. Then I started the Fantasia scenario (chose the Iroquois), and same thing as for Majorw: Loads of time to build, beat the cr... doodah out of the natives, learn to colonize, discover, etc. Still playing it, but I may switch to a GC and try my hand at playing the real 'thang'

 

[unmerged(213)]

Hints on how to start

I don't have my game yet, but I appreciate the hints on the best ways to start and learn EU.

 

[unmerged(168)]

JeffM,

My advice is to play the Tutorial until you find Catalonia, then Surrender and go play Russia in the Grand Campaign to learn about Diplomacy and War.

Finding the Mamelukes takes too much time and if you miss a key message, you might not be able to finish.

 

[unmerged(930)]

If you aren't ready to dive into the Campaign Game after the tutorial, try Fantasia, which is similar to the tutorial but without the messages, plus you can pick among several countries. That is what I've done, and I'm very happy. But that is just my preference.

 

[unmerged(1406)]

Originally posted by Kurt
Gave up on the tutorial before very long. I didn't think it followed the philosophy of a decent tutorial, which should be a brief introduction to critical game mechanics. Did get some of that, but what I did NOT want to do was spend several hours trying to get a ship to the far end of the Mediterranean all the while learning more than I ever wanted to know about attrition!

LOL!!!! I hear that!

 

[unmerged(1451)]

building armies

i can't seem to figure out how to raise troops. I click away at the arrow beneath the infantry, but i get no result. can anyone help?

 

[unmerged(1051)]

Re: building armies

Originally posted by reinhard
i can't seem to figure out how to raise troops. I click away at the arrow beneath the infantry, but i get no result. can anyone help?

Try the down-arrow instead. One click on that adds one more army to build, and when you click ok, they commence building/training.

Hope this helps.

RoB

 

[unmerged(1455)]

Nice to know I'm not alone. I just got this game and after two frustrating sessions, I'm ready to toss it back. I spent about an hour and a half with the tutorial and, forced to abandon it in favor of earning a living, I was astounded that I couldn't save the game. Beware future travelers who pass this way.
In any case, I found the interface confusing and extremely unintuitive. I would cite in particular the way that the unit and activity sprites all seem to crowd on top of each other so that it's next to impossible to sort them out. Then, finding myself engaged in a battle with the locals of Munster, it was never clear to me how this exchange was going or precisely what the outcome was. There seem to be some places that units can be moved and others where they cannot but what those constraints might be I have been unable to determine. The manual, while extensive and full of information, seems to be long on concepts and maddeningly short on mechanics (an index or at least a table of contents would be much appreciated). Like many of you I tried the Grand Campaign in my next session but apparently made a grave mistake by playing England. After much trial and error I finally managed to get some troops on transports (the manual seems to contain erroneous advice in this regard) but once off the coast of France they stubbornly refused to disembark (their reasons remain obscure). In any case, the fleet floated about the Bay of Biscay for so long that they finally sank (I don't know whether to be pleased or frustrated by the game's demand that Guyenne be annexed. Guyenne [or Aquitaine] came to England with Eleanor and was lost again in the 100 Years War. It was thus an old and irritating bone of contention regardless of whether or not it was worth anything. In EU, apparently, one can nudge history but not wrestle it to the ground. I suppose that I'm too accustomed to God games. C'est la guere). Failing my first mission, I then tried to vassalize Scotland but my (remaining) troops simply refused to march into that cold and lonely place (the Firth? Hadrian's wall?). I was by this time so vexed by unanswered questions not to mention unimplemented commands that I chose the better part of valor and surrendered (to fate? fatique? my inner demons?).
Well, should I give up? Am I just hard to please (petulant old fart that I am)?
Or should I take your collective advice and try it again with Russia? Did someone say Portugal? FantasyLand?