Too much?

[unmerged(157031)]

It is not skillful knowing whether or not you will receive a bonus in combat in the same way that it is not skillful knowing how many troops the enemy has in an army. It is useful. It seems to me like some people are complaining because they are losing an edge over players who perhaps do not know how to acquire the information that they themselves are receiving.

It takes a skilled judgment to know whether or not you are likley to win or lose a battle. It takes memory recall to know whether or not you are following a formula. Anything that makes you put more focus on skill is an improvement in my books.

 

[unmerged(134833)]

I really like these and all other additions that have come with the patchs. (Just sharing my opinion)

 

[Palaiologos]

It seems to me like some people are complaining because they are losing an edge over players who perhaps do not know how to acquire the information that they themselves are receiving.
.

Hmmmm...
Thats rather swallow, don't you think?

 

[unmerged(138406)]

The point of all the tooltips is to help the player make better decisions, so to that end they work quite well. There is a fine line between simplifying a decision and dumbing it down, naturally that line is a bit different for everyone. They're all useful to me and I wouldn't want to see any of them gone.

 

[Palaiologos]

Just imagine the tooltips and help in general as an advice from your advisors. No king rules alone Or sultan, or even dictator.

But thats the whole point of the thread.
In my view the new tooltips are loosing their "role" as advisors and make it a no brainer.
But i suppose as interpolaris said that line is different for everyone.

 

[naggy]

Remember that mods can change everything, and without the tooltip to help you, it's a pain in the ass to try and figure out the difference.

Not everyone wants to crack open the game files and figure out why things happen the way they do.

 

[unmerged(114977)]

If these changes make the game easier to excess for new players, I'm all for it. The game shouldn't be an exercise in frustration and be played for ten hours and reading a manual and still not knowing what is going on for someone who hasn't played a paradox title and wants to get in on the fun too. ( I'm slightly exaggerating ). That would be selfish, paradox and the community would lose new members in the future.

It's a GAME, it should be FUN, not an elitist club of people who can play a game with the most minimalistic UI in the world.

 

[unmerged(76560)]

The game is becoming more democratic (in the sense not reserved to an elite) without losing any quality, richness or complexity, in the contrary.
I find much more gamey to seek hidden formulas to min/max everything, than to have the informations clear and open for all.

 

[Checco]

I'm sorry, but what makes the difference between a strategy game and any game based on luck is one and one thing: the chance for any player to know exactly what he's doing or about to do.

Think to Chess: you always know what it's going to happen, nothing is left to luck, not even 1%, and it's called the best example of strategy game.

If you want to play a game whose mechanics are more complicated than Risk (with all due respect to Risk, which is a very enjoyable game I play online myself daily), then you have to know how they work, otherwise you miss both essential and negligible info which may make the difference when you compete with another player.

If they make easier the evaluation of any given situation, they simply make it faster for those who would have to make it anyway with eyes, clicking, counting and so on (besides, I'd like to see someone playing while also desiring to win battles without having learned the combat rules OR trying to evaluate correctly the situations).

Should you dislike these info, just ignore it, leave them to the 'beginners', and feel free to gloat about your skill allowing you to win without even glancing at the battlefield, reinforcements, and so on .

 

[darktalon]

I prefer to play my games without having to have a calculator next to me.

This. Manually calculating the compete chance for every accessible CoT every time you get a spare merchant isn't fun or even skilful, it's just time-consuming mechanical work. (Especially the way CoT's proliferate in HttT.) For this and so much similar stuff it's for the best that Paradox are taking advantage of the fact that the games are played on a computer.

 

[Palaiologos]

I am not talking about the tooltips in general. I can't think of anyone, save einstein, who could master this game without any info.

But i can't really believe somebody actually calculated the compete chances of every CoT each time he got a merchant. I just targeted Eastern CoTs where the traders were less advanced than mine. BUT after i checked the CoT screen and saw if there were any western competitors there. I would then hover my mouse over some of the traders and ESTIMATED if it worthed the trouble.
Same thing for the battles; I couldn't understand why were my armies suffering a lot of casualties at the hands of the AI untill i realized the new combined arms concept. I thereafter took great care not to let the cav/inf ratio exceed 50%. Now the army not gaining the bonus simply flashes red. Everybody without achromatopsia can immedietaly realize there is a lack of infantry in the army.
etc etc.

For my definition of skill; Memory, experience, natural ability. All atribute to proper ESTIMATIONS in all situations-be it from what CoTs are cost effective, the chance to suceed in diplomacy,and the proper management of armies to the possibility of a sucessfull conclusion to war. But because these are HUMAN ESTIMATIONS the above mentioned definition of skill plays its role to winning a game. Now the way things are going i will just click everywhere green and avoid red.

 

[Grosshaus]

Whats next? A percentage chance of winning a battle?

Panzer General II had that and it was awesome. Not sure how one would apply this to Europa Universalis, but I hope Johan finds a way

 

[Kapt Torbjorn]

I think a lot of people have forgotten how daunting EU3 was when they first started playing it (at least it was for me!). Anything that makes the UI/interface more concise and informative is a definite bonus.

 

[Pitt The Elder]

There's actually people who find it *FUN* to move your mouse to a tooltip every time you select an army, and then compare two values?

I personally do not find that fun, especially not in a competetive game where you want to rely on tactics instead of twitch memory and fast-click skills.

+1. I love EUIII (particularly MM), but all the interface improvements are awesome. Plus I imagine it really cuts down some of the learning curve for new players.

 

[Spacehusky]

EU3's great user interface and ledger system is a big plus for me.

 

[Malurous]

I thereafter took great care not to let the cav/inf ratio exceed 50%. Now the army not gaining the bonus simply flashes red. Everybody without achromatopsia can immedietaly realize there is a lack of infantry in the army.

To be frank, anyone with a functioning brain can compare two numbers and find out which one is bigger. I don't think the coloring makes any real difference in terms of player skill.

 

[unmerged(91610)]

+1. I love EUIII (particularly MM), but all the interface improvements are awesome. Plus I imagine it really cuts down some of the learning curve for new players.

This, this, a thousand times this.

Think back to learning your first Paradox game. Think about doing that without the help of a patient friend, or realizing that this intriguing, yet unplayable game might have a very helpful forum...

 

[Mammoet]

But i can't really believe somebody actually calculated the compete chances of every CoT each time he got a merchant. I just targeted Eastern CoTs where the traders were less advanced than mine. BUT after i checked the CoT screen and saw if there were any western competitors there. I would then hover my mouse over some of the traders and ESTIMATED if it worthed the trouble.
Same thing for the battles; I couldn't understand why were my armies suffering a lot of casualties at the hands of the AI untill i realized the new combined arms concept. I thereafter took great care not to let the cav/inf ratio exceed 50%. Now the army not gaining the bonus simply flashes red. Everybody without achromatopsia can immedietaly realize there is a lack of infantry in the army.
etc etc.

To me it just sounds like you were only trying to compete in eastern CoT's because you didn't knew if there was any european CoT you had a chance of competing in. That's almost bad design, if you can't figure out if you had a reasonable chance of succeeding in doing something.

I've been playing eu3 since HttT is out and I didn't know about any cav/inf ratio making any difference, never occured to me that it could. Maybe I missed something in the manual, but it's a bit stupid that something like that is so hard to figure out.

 

[Beamed]

This, this, a thousand times this.

Think back to learning your first Paradox game. Think about doing that without the help of a patient friend, or realizing that this intriguing, yet unplayable game might have a very helpful forum...

I managed.

But regardless, improving the interface is ever a good thing, and I am quite glad that Paradox does not lose sight of it in lieu of other projects. Three cheers for the continued work on EU3!

Hip hip!

 

[Revshawn]

A good interface is the most important facet of a game. No one wants to play a game if they can't understand how it is played.