Unnessary Additions
- Thread starter Swirly Mango
- Start date
-
We have updated our Community Code of Conduct. Please read through the new rules for the forum that are an integral part of Paradox Interactive’s User Agreement.
Saying ‘we want region X to be better’ is fine. Saying ‘why are you making region Y better!?! It’s historically irrelevant!!!! You should have been working on region X! What’s wrong with you!?!’ is arrogant and annoying.
I like more provinces for the British Isles (surprise!), the one thing that disturbs me however is the already mentioned excessive manpower present due to all the OPMs.
Quite frankly, base manpower and base force limit are simply too high. I get that there has to be some base to make OPMs playable for both players and AI, but it's just too much right now. Ireland with 12 tags @ 6 units fields a combined army of 72 mid of the 15th century, much larger than what France or England can afford. Large trade leagues can bring down mid sized countries if they decide to properly stack their armies together - even if they combined have a fraction of their opponents development.
Poor OPMs should not exceed a force limit and corresponding manpower above maybe 3-4. Rich OPMs, e.g. in the HRE or northern Italy, should have to rely on mercenaries and condottieri to field larger armies. Maybe how mercenaries count towards the force limit would have to be reworked for that (make them count half, or something).
Quite frankly, base manpower and base force limit are simply too high. I get that there has to be some base to make OPMs playable for both players and AI, but it's just too much right now. Ireland with 12 tags @ 6 units fields a combined army of 72 mid of the 15th century, much larger than what France or England can afford. Large trade leagues can bring down mid sized countries if they decide to properly stack their armies together - even if they combined have a fraction of their opponents development.
Poor OPMs should not exceed a force limit and corresponding manpower above maybe 3-4. Rich OPMs, e.g. in the HRE or northern Italy, should have to rely on mercenaries and condottieri to field larger armies. Maybe how mercenaries count towards the force limit would have to be reworked for that (make them count half, or something).
In my opinion adding more provinces and unnecessary tags to Ireland changes absolutely nothing in the game. Like, who would even play all of those Irish OPMs? They are not unique, they don't add flavour to the game and they are simply useless. Just play as one single Irish OPM and you have played them all. Switching to another one will result in the exact same campaign as the previous one.
What Ireland really needs are unique gameplay mechanics, not dozens of additional tags and provinces. And no, I don't think of additional events or magic push for free goodies buttons like in Third Rome. Paradox should dig deeper into the history of Ireland and try to represent why this island went through history how it did.
For instance, the HRE isn't just a region with 100 different but same nations. It features unique gameplay elements. Those unique gameplay elements are what Ireland needs to make for a truly different experience and not another 20 tags and provinces.
What Ireland really needs are unique gameplay mechanics, not dozens of additional tags and provinces. And no, I don't think of additional events or magic push for free goodies buttons like in Third Rome. Paradox should dig deeper into the history of Ireland and try to represent why this island went through history how it did.
For instance, the HRE isn't just a region with 100 different but same nations. It features unique gameplay elements. Those unique gameplay elements are what Ireland needs to make for a truly different experience and not another 20 tags and provinces.
I really hope for at least some unique flavor missions and events both for a reconquest of Ireland to put it under English rule as well as for the Irish nations to form a united Ireland. Best case they come up with some Clan diplomacy system, something accessible only to regional powers with a new, unique government (Clans in this case, doh). Mechanism could be similar to HRE, electing a High King of Ireland and giving the current leader reforms to deepen relationships between Clans and finally unite Irland, just like revoking the privilege works.
Each tag doesn’t have to result in unique gameplay options. Adding more tags to the area changes the nature of play in that area. Playing as an Irish OPM in an Ireland with 5 provinces plays differently than in an Ireland with 9 which isn’t the same as one with 13 provinces. The consequences of alliances, English relations and conquests are all different.
And this has knock-on impacts when playing other countries. With more tags and provinces, the Irish minors will hopefully last longer, making them potentially useful allies to use against the English or Scottish (if only to provide a safe base to land troops in).
And this has knock-on impacts when playing other countries. With more tags and provinces, the Irish minors will hopefully last longer, making them potentially useful allies to use against the English or Scottish (if only to provide a safe base to land troops in).
Well, hello there. It is good to be noticed, but you are partially wrong. Third Rome, ofc, was a disaster: a lot of small mistakes, wizard-like abilities, not adding some important provinces (BRING THAT GODDMANDED PEREYASLAVL ZALESSKIY). But i had feedback and, well, i was asked to work on certain aspects so they would be able to improve region. Thou those talks were, mostly, in PMs. I still think that, if they gave me some paper to sign that i won't tell anything about DLC, i would made more. For me the thread was longlasting (!!!) project, after which they will take all of information and make something of it. The thread lacks A LOT. So does Third Rome. And, well, even when i blame PDX it is more like "guys, really, you COULD do better, what happened?". Like, why Russia missing kingdom rank? It was kingdom (more or less) till Peter I. Grand Duchy should be about uniting the Rus lands., Tsardom should be about expandign borders, Empire should be about development and improvement. Again, fear of bad modifiers is strong, thou, i think, you can give more advantageswith disadvantages you can overcome. Choosing between supporting boyars (inheriting land) or dvoryans (getting land for service) should be important part, as mestnichestvo (when the most noble leads the army) and ability to increase serfdom (so there will be peasants on land for dvoryans). There is a lot of interconnected complex things that could be interesting for people to see and understand "How Russia become what it is now?". I dunno what is written about rulers of Muscovy/Russia in western books (i use other sources only when it is someone coming to Russia and writing about it - like Ambrogio Contarini and Sigismund von Herberstain), but i doubt it is not biased. Even historical books in Russia are biased. Ivan IV is bad (cause Oprichnina and Livonian war), but we are never told how it was in reality. Oprichnina was good for centrilizing power and dealing with smaller princes without much bloodshed (like it happened during reign of Vasiliy II). Again, a lot of people seems to ignore that Kazan and Astrakhan sent their forces to fight in Livonian War and during Time of Troubles and still were part of the Russia after that. Why? Number of reasons which i won't list here, but one of them was Oprichnina, another is that Muscovy was part of bigger system which included hordes.
Anyway, this post is already too long
Just don't blame devs for it - it is more of economic decision.
I'd be content if they at least didn't just assign random words to mechanics (Oprichnina as a recurring thing which reduces rebellion progress, what on Earth... It makes about as much sense as giving France some "Reign of Terror" button from 1444 to 1821).Well, hello there. It is good to be noticed, but you are partially wrong. Third Rome, ofc, was a disaster: a lot of small mistakes, wizard-like abilities, not adding some important provinces (BRING THAT GODDMANDED PEREYASLAVL ZALESSKIY). But i had feedback and, well, i was asked to work on certain aspects so they would be able to improve region. Thou those talks were, mostly, in PMs. I still think that, if they gave me some paper to sign that i won't tell anything about DLC, i would made more. For me the thread was longlasting (!!!) project, after which they will take all of information and make something of it. The thread lacks A LOT. So does Third Rome. And, well, even when i blame PDX it is more like "guys, really, you COULD do better, what happened?". Like, why Russia missing kingdom rank? It was kingdom (more or less) till Peter I. Grand Duchy should be about uniting the Rus lands., Tsardom should be about expandign borders, Empire should be about development and improvement. Again, fear of bad modifiers is strong, thou, i think, you can give more advantageswith disadvantages you can overcome. Choosing between supporting boyars (inheriting land) or dvoryans (getting land for service) should be important part, as mestnichestvo (when the most noble leads the army) and ability to increase serfdom (so there will be peasants on land for dvoryans). There is a lot of interconnected complex things that could be interesting for people to see and understand "How Russia become what it is now?". I dunno what is written about rulers of Muscovy/Russia in western books (i use other sources only when it is someone coming to Russia and writing about it - like Ambrogio Contarini and Sigismund von Herberstain), but i doubt it is not biased. Even historical books in Russia are biased. Ivan IV is bad (cause Oprichnina and Livonian war), but we are never told how it was in reality. Oprichnina was good for centrilizing power and dealing with smaller princes without much bloodshed (like it happened during reign of Vasiliy II). Again, a lot of people seems to ignore that Kazan and Astrakhan sent their forces to fight in Livonian War and during Time of Troubles and still were part of the Russia after that. Why? Number of reasons which i won't list here, but one of them was Oprichnina, another is that Muscovy was part of bigger system which included hordes.
Anyway, this post is already too long
For an immersion pack it somehow managed to royally screw any immersion there was.
I might just forgive them for another immersion pack that just gives me a few sets of three buttons to push for something OP if one of those buttons is called 'Reign of Terror' TBH.
More seriously, I really do hope we see some more interesting and actually immersive mechanics this time around. I'd love to see more stuff about how France goes from a state that is very decentralised to the poster-child for absolute rulership. I'd love to see more about the relationship between France and England and the alt-history possibility of a union and how that could have played out and the problems that could have arisen.
It also seems like a perfect time to improve Parliamentary governments and the Revolution disaster. Deliberately No-CBing a minor and taking 50 loans despite already having 100k ducats saved in order to trigger a disaster that is really only a disaster for everyone else is not exactly immersive. I like going Revolutionary but I'm less enamored with the process for getting there. I also don't like that Napoleon frequently spawns as an old man who only lives 10 years. It makes it mechanically far safer to keep the Republic rather than risk a regency or a terrible heir taking over.
Anyway. The map changes look great (except for Labourd still being in Iberia). It appears that Calais is now in France, though. The mission changes look great too. Let's hope they have brought their A-game to the mechanics as well.
It's an attempt to make it into noob island - in order for it to work, it needs to have room for wars and a chance to rival England.
Ireland is never going to be noob island. There’s no room for failure and the ever-present threat of England sweeping in to crush. They already have a noob tag: the Ottomans.
