Serbia was fully independent, I think you are thinking about Bosnia, but pedantry aside, you're right.
War of the Triple Alliance
- Thread starter Luchofeio
- 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.
- Status
Serbia was fully independent, I think you are thinking about Bosnia, but pedantry aside, you're right.
Ack! You're right; thank you. Must have been confused by Princip's ethnicity. The assassination was Sarajevo. Duh.
Interessting theory, if you look past the point that vicky1, eu2 and hoi2 is paradox best games, just look what happened with rome when they decided to make it a sandbox, boring and uneventfull, do you really want the same for vicky2? Point is, there is many good games, that has a balance between events and sandbox, and its those games that really shines imo.
What we really need is more and better examples of vicky1 events, with more options for different outcomes, that way nothing is set in stone, and people could make their own choices
Interessting theory, if you look past the point that vicky1, eu2 and hoi2 is paradox best games, just look what happened with rome when they decided to make it a sandbox, boring and uneventfull, do you really want the same for vicky2? Point is, there is many good games, that has a balance between events and sandbox, and its those games that really shines imo.
It's not a theory, its a vague recap of what actually happened from 2002-2006 in development learning curves. I understand exactly what it is that you are looking for, we've all been there, the problem is that is that all those games proved its effectively impossible to create an all seeing script path.
Sadly, having been involved in the process of beta-ering in every single one of those early games and watched what happened I can say that the scripted path creates a huge amount of work to create a process that ultimately will never work. Sandbox is the only way you can have a working game in anything other than the immediate short term.
Again, this debate finished about 3 years ago and a decision was made to go a different way from the one you propose. I suggest its fairly pointless dragging up a debate upon which a decision has already been made.
I whole heartedly disagree with Surg's point of view. I do not see sandbox games as being inherently superior to determinist games in the slightest.
I offer that the absolutely *most* popular mods to come out for each of Paradox's games have all been more heavily deterministic than the vanilla version of that game.
I dont disagree with paradox's policy on making sandbox games, but let's not kid ourselves into thinking that they're any better than the determinist variety. If paradox wants to hand a clean slate over to OHGamer and the other venerable and talented modders, I fully support it.
I offer that the absolutely *most* popular mods to come out for each of Paradox's games have all been more heavily deterministic than the vanilla version of that game.
I dont disagree with paradox's policy on making sandbox games, but let's not kid ourselves into thinking that they're any better than the determinist variety. If paradox wants to hand a clean slate over to OHGamer and the other venerable and talented modders, I fully support it.
That may well be true - but are they more popular than the vanilla versions themselves? I doubt it.
Perhaps not, but it's better that the developers focus on making as good a sandbox game they can. That is to say, a finely tuned, dynamically reacting engine with lots of options for players, etc. The modders can then code in historically deterministic events to their hearts' content.
I at least would prefer (by far) for Paradox to prioritize making the game as good as it can be. Historical determinism would be a distant second, even if I wouldn't prefer a sandbox.
By the way, neither of the two major mods for Crusader Kings is any more deterministic than the vanilla game, which is in itself extremely sandbox.
Unfortunately, when one sets out to make a deterministic game, it always fails to be deterministic, so what's the point? Most you can achieve, as far as the human player's actions go, is annoyance with events unrelated to actual in-game circumstances. And designing clever and numerous country-specific event chains just takes away from work on other parts of the project and testing. Features + AI > events.
With the right triggers, events aren't deterministic at all; and flavor events add quite a bit to the game, the research for them has already been done for V1 - why not add them in V2? (in fact, I remember King saying they will be in)
I think paradox has gone with the view point of working on gameplay and ai and not so much mass ammounts of events and forced wars anymore. When they did i remember alot of "You guys put to much into events and not enough into the AI and Gameplay" from some and now that they put more work into the AI and gameplay and less into events people are mad. IMO its alot easier to mod in a ton of events and scripted wars then it is to mod AI so we just have to wait for the modders to do the event work and then i am sure sooner or later we will see most all the events we want (i'm looking at you VIP guys )
)
I think paradox has gone with the view point of working on gameplay and ai and not so much mass ammounts of events and forced wars anymore. When they did i remember alot of "You guys put to much into events and not enough into the AI and Gameplay" from some and now that they put more work into the AI and gameplay and less into events people are mad. IMO its alot easier to mod in a ton of events and scripted wars then it is to mod AI so we just have to wait for the modders to do the event work and then i am sure sooner or later we will see most all the events we want (i'm looking at you VIP guys
+1 I remember those complaints too...
Its best to make more playable mechanics and plain text files so modders can do whatever they want on top of a solid base game. An event here or there does not a game make.
I think paradox has gone with the view point of working on gameplay and ai and not so much mass ammounts of events and forced wars anymore. When they did i remember alot of "You guys put to much into events and not enough into the AI and Gameplay" from some and now that they put more work into the AI and gameplay and less into events people are mad. IMO its alot easier to mod in a ton of events and scripted wars then it is to mod AI so we just have to wait for the modders to do the event work and then i am sure sooner or later we will see most all the events we want (i'm looking at you VIP guys
No one is asking for a VIP-ton of events from Paradox; that would be, of course, completely unreasonable. What is being asked is that some historical events be included, like, the same amount that there was in V1, for instance. The problem I have is with this absolutist approach, which would mean NO historical events included.
I'm not saying thats what is being asked but when V1 came out there were those who said "too much events not enough work on AI ect ect" I like historical and Ahistorical events and chains myself but its not as if they have made it impossible to add it via modding and they said there would be events all be it generic if i remember right.
Quite.
A lot of people miss the feel of the deterministic history-telling approach, but aside from a few specific instances that can't be modelled by a logical system like the freaking European war of religion AKA 30 years war (yes that little insignificant affair you bastards you blew it all up damn yoooooooou) I think the superiority in this new philosophy lies in the fact that events now make sense. France gets inflation from owning the Mexican goldmines if it runs its economy poorly. There's no ACW if all americans peacefully agree on the need to keep the slaves on their plantations. Etc. Etc.
Take the bad with the awesome. This is not going to change any time soon.
Since the base of people who like the deterministic approach is so big, there will always be enough to make a comprehensive mod possible. We're essentially getting the best of both worlds here.
Events making sense has nothing to do with the new system, again, it's just a matter of setting the right triggers...
Not everything should be a mod. I'd like at least some events with the base game; alas, King already said flavor events will be in, so I'm happy.
Not everything should be a mod. I'd like at least some events with the base game; alas, King already said flavor events will be in, so I'm happy.
People still aren't getting that yes, there will be flavour events (and I don't think anybody opposes them, but the definition of flavour here is "nice, but has no major effect on gameplay"), but what the sandboxers are opposing are the deterministic events that forced you into wars, or always started the ACW on a certain date, even if eg. the Crimean war made no sense in the context of that particular campaign, or the US player was facing high RR in the North, not the South (or maybe everyone was completely happy... well, except the slaves), pre-ACW trigger date.
- Dec 14, 1999
- 18.402
- 38.945
It should be noted that EU2 never had events for the 30 years war and not even AGCEEP managed to have a thirty years war worth the name exactly because it's so hard to do deterministic events in a game world that's otherwise dynamic.
Events are basically exceptions to the rules set by the engine. The design philosophy change of paradox these last years is that they've started to improve the engine instead of riddling it with thousands of exceptions.
- Status