I'm told that the ahead of time modifier is applied relative to the current tech's historical year, not the next one's.
What is Paradox's Desired Scope for Player Accomplishments?
- Thread starter Mulleks
- 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.
Ah I didn't realize, my bad then poland into space looks relatively easy then.
uhh, I didn't say it did. Regardless, it obviously makes no sense to say equal numbers of players should be able to accomplish them.
A friend of mine put his finger on what was bothering me about this - implementing design and balance changes to make world conquest unattainable by someone in the 99.95% of skill will needlessly punish players in the lower 99%.
Yeah, and I found the Ireland achievement quite fun, actually... and a bit of a struggle all the way to the end since rump-England got in bed with Austria. Some of the other very-hard achievements have similar appeal to me, but I have no interest in any of those insane achievements. They're just... insane. Masochistic?
Well I'll be damned... learned something new here. Thanks for that.
.png){kind=avatar}
The targets are apparently set by category, and some category logically has to be the hardest. It's perfectly conceivable that the strategy required to pull off a WC isn't dependent on the extra 30-40 years Ryukyu might need to consolidate a power base compared to other countries, as could be seen in DDRJake's game, where he finished with half a century to spare. I don't see why you insist on claiming it makes no sense.
You missed my question. How many people is 0.03%? That is, how many people have actually completed the WC and the Three Mountains WC?
What bothers me about this is they are basically making it so difficult as to be something not to even strive for. I am not sure that I could WC under 1.13, but I was not that far off. In other words, I wanted to hop right back into the next game to see if I could come any closer. I am still playing 1.2, but abandon most games at about 1650 because the game becomes world spanning wars for 1 or 2 provinces. That is, a complete slogfest.
When you're dealing with a percentage as small as .01% of the population even the most minor of changes can drastically alter the difficulty. Even taking it as given than you can westernize and increase in size to the levels of france/austria starting within 40 years without having any important AE, that is still 10% of the game time taken, and the time limit of the game is by far one of the most important limiting factors stopping you from conquering the world. If your target percentage is .01% a 10% change in one of the limiting factors can easily shift the number of people who can complete it by several orders of magnitude, either making it effectively impossible (truly impossible is pretty difficult to do in a game with so much randomness, but eliminating stategic methods isn't too hard) or making it possible by many more techniques, and therefore people.
As for DDRJake, his strategy was fractally destroyed by the 1.2 changes and is pretty much irrelevant to current game mechanics, from every way he gained money to every way to gained land to the way he dealt with AE and the way he generated stability, his EU3 WC might actually be more relevant.
As for DDRJake, his strategy was fractally destroyed by the 1.2 changes and is pretty much irrelevant to current game mechanics, from every way he gained money to every way to gained land to the way he dealt with AE and the way he generated stability, his EU3 WC might actually be more relevant.
I am going to do the Norway achievement, maybe after next patch, w/o using cheesy tactics. I do not consider it "impossible", maybe very hard though.
It takes a lot longer than 30-40 years to put Ryukyu in a situation that's in any way comparable to 1444 Autria. Unless you get (very) lucky on the rulers front, 30 years merely gets you the Exploration ideas.
On top of having a sizable manpower and tax base, you're really in no shape to have WC ambitions until you're westernized, stable and caught up in Military tech IMO.
If I could get this done by 1520, leaving 3 centuries for the actual conquest, I'd consider it a *really* strong start. But the possibility of that happening is entirely dependent on the rulers you get. So it's also a *really* lucky start.
I'd also like to address the argument that he finished with 50 years to spare. I see that being repeated a lot, when AFAIK those years were pretty much all saved by a bug that made an event that increased relations fire every time the game started.
And the time he saved by not having to stabilize his economy by exploiting the money mission and phantom looting.
And the time he saved by ghost walking across Asia and conquering European countries before they could start colonizing and making him worry about the new world.
And the time he saved by truce cycling coalition wars.
(all of which have been fixed).
0.03% is 0.03%. We will not know how many people in total that is unless we get sales figures. Steam do not release these figures and Paradox (probably) have an NDA with Steam so they cannot say exactly how many either.
If EU4 has sold 100k units then 30 people have the Three Mountains achievement.
Yeah, I'm glad that the exploits were taken care of, but those were just exploits found through playing the game for ~1 month. Through time and creative thinking, new Ryukyu WC strats will be found, with or without "exploits"
This is correct. The "improve relations" bug which gave me +200 relations with all bordering countries saved me 30 years of waiting for AE to cool of with Ottoman Empire and England (AE decay of 6.7/year). Without the bug, assuming all other moves had gone off as planned, I would have finished with 15 - 20 years to spare.
It's certainly conceivable that they won't, though. I don't know if it's the case with the current state of the size/coalition/AE/OE mechanics but there is definitely some set of parameters that would mathematically prohibit killing all tags.
Don't think anyone is annoyed about any exploits being fixed.
Thing is.. many other things that were not exploits in any way, but were listed also - e.g. AE, CBs and so on, were also 'fixed' to make conquest much harder, which is a bit silly.
I don't like mods, I played Magna Mundi in EU3 and it was only because I enjoyed finding exploits in it.
What annoys me is that in EU3 you could paint the map so I assumed that it will be possible here... it was, until the projected amount of people got the achievements, after that everything was nerfed to prevent other people from getting it. If the amount of people drops below 0.01% PD will probably make it possible again. Except I won't be here any longer, there are other more interesting games, heck EU3 is much more enjoyable than this even when I am not conquering the world.
Well then good luck with that, whenever I can make the time I will be playing this game and working my way towards personal goals and obtaining achievements. Love it.
Steam logs peak number of players around 5,000 at the moment, which is a pretty fair estimate of the player base active at any given time. CK2 is hovering around 3,000, which has been the number for close to a year. People tend to either play these games actively or not at all, so I'd guess some number closer to 10K. The forum activity seems about right for that too - the games with 100K+ players have a very different level of community activity than is typical for Paradox, and it's reflected both in the official and unofficial forums (see, e.g. MMOs other than WoW - a number of them have active player bases in the 100K range.)
They could well have sold 100K units, but if they are anything like the industry norm 80+% barely touched the game.
They could well have sold 100K units, but if they are anything like the industry norm 80+% barely touched the game.
The most common complaint about 1.1 was that the game stalled and it got mechanically difficult to expand in the midgame. The solution they found was to make it stall earlier and harder.
Paradox, I would recommend you remove the ableist language from your game. Reasonable substitutes would include ridiculous, ludicrous, or absurd (nevermind substitutes which only slightly change the meaning, such as Expert, Impossible, or Grandmaster).