What is With Some People's Obsession with ROTW?

[Karabas1543]

Haha epic thread. I have also always wondered why some seem so overly enthusiastic about rotw.

I view it as a sort of EU 'hipsters'. They only play obscure, small nations and think of big European powers as "mainstream".

"Yeah, I actually only play as a small tribe in Mesoamerica, everything else is just so generic dude. I dont play the game like they WANT me to play it, Im not conformist."

You do realize that's a character assassination argument, right?

I play RotW, almost exclusively, for a few primary reasons. 1) I love underdogs, always had. When I play Football Manager, I always choose some semi-pro team and try to bring them up the top flight, european championships, etc. It's nothing to do with being hipster, I just enjoy taking something small and historically irrelevant and turning it into a major world power. 2) I find Western Europe boring. I don't know why. Maybe because I'm not West European? 3) I'm Muslim, I feel kinda weird playing a non-Muslim nation and converting Muslims to its religion. I know it's a game and I don't care if you do it, just feels weird for me to do it. And Muslim nations are by default RotW.

With regards to RotW buff/nerf issues, I want two things:

1) General historicity: I prefer the general trends of the game to be in line with historical ones. Europeans shouldn't be roflstomping Africa and colonizing all of it by 1550, same goes for North America. I DON'T mind the fact that RotW is designed to be generally weaker than European powers, which it is. RotW AI generally can't handle European AI.

2) Possibility of changing specific historical details: I would like to be able to take a backward country and turn it into a major power. What if Peter I wasn't born in Russia, but to the royal family of some West African sultanate? Would it be possible that instead of Muscovy it was Songhai that westernized, dominated its region, and became a primary competitor to European powers like Russia did? I think so and I would like to be able to create such scenarios. For this, RotW has to have reasonable potential to throw off its RotW limitations.

As it stands, I'm pretty happy with RotW in 1.8. I don't want it nerfed or buffed. Sure there's some fine tuning that could be done, but overall I think it's reasonably portrayed. If you guys want to play Western Europe, I don't mind. But if the game becomes all about Western Europe and nothing but, then I don't really want to play it anymore. I imagine there's a bunch of people who play EU who are like that too, so it's in Paradox's interests to provide decent RotW play.

 

[Freudia]

In some ways native Americans are too strong before the Europeans arrive. They should never be able to recruit cavalry, because THERE WERE NO HORSES. What are they riding, llamas? Diseases should also ravage them when they meet the Europeans first. Once Europeans arrive, though, they should be able to trade for guns and horses to greatly improve their armies without westernising fully. Remember that many natives (the Apache, for example) survived until after the EU4 timeline.

This wouldn't be very fun though. Imagine playing a native, Europeans show up, and you just outright lose due to disease without your input. Furthermore, imagine playing a European power, showing up on a native's doorstep, and they just up and die without you doing anything except sitting next to them.

Eastern Europe is in some ways underdeveloped. The Baltic region is utterly wrong, for a start.

And Wiz has said that this is noted and that the team is aware that a demand for an improvement for this area of the map exists. It might happen, maybe in 1.9. We'll see.

If Europeans, or anyone else, send their whole army overseas, they should 1. suffer horrendous attrition and 2. be invaded by their rivals back home.

Yes. Unfortunately, this isn't possible because of lack of logistics and because of fog of war. A nation has no way of knowing if their rival's army is entirely on the other side of the planet because they can't see into that country; real life had spies and general travel between nations in general.

The Manchu conquest of China was a highly unlikely event dependent on China's internal decline and a lot of luck. It should only very rarely happen in games running from a 1444 start.

The Burgundian Inheritance was a highly unlikely event dependent on Charles the Bold dying. It should only very rarely happen, but it happens nearly every game anyways, and the game specifically goes out of its way to railroad the event happening, as it ignores things like the House of Bourgogne having an heir to the throne of Burgundy.

 

[PiriReis]

@Karabas1543

Granada, Ottoman State, Albania, Bosnia, and perhaps to some extent Crimea aren't ROTW although they are treated as one, shouldnt for example Granada start as Western tech?

 

[hashinshin]

There are two types of people.

Person A: Sees the Burgundian inheritance and wants it to happen every game.

Person B: Sees the Burgundian inheritance and wants mechanics in the game such that it could happen to any country.

Person A sees person B and says "why do you want RotW to be stronger? It didn't happen." Person B says "but it could have happened just look at Japan or Russia, the game is just mechanically made so that it can never happen."

You either want EU to be a game that follows the strict historical accuracy, or you want it to be a game that can have historical events happen based on what actually happened but not the same exact way. For example, Brandenburg becoming a major power should happen like 1% of games just based on the sheer stupid luck involved. Why can't we have the game laid out that ANY HRE country can have similar power given enough luck? Why can't we have a game where instead of Russia becoming the major power it was the Golden Horde? Why not Vietnam? If Japan can westernize and become a modern power why can't Vietnam following the same rules laid out that Japan followed?

 

[FreeSoc]

It's a crime that Sweden has a patchwork few provinces, but India and Africa now have provinces out the wazoo that just suck performance.

Would you like to tell me how populated Sweden was compared to India in the early modern period, or are you just going to spout nonsense about how white people deserve more provinces?

 

[Druplesnubb]

The Manchu conquest of China was a highly unlikely event dependent on China's internal decline and a lot of luck. It should only very rarely happen in games running from a 1444 start.

While I agree that Manchu shouldn't be able to take on a strong and stable Ming, having one of the largest nations in the wold experience a time of instability and rebellion in a period of 400 years is not "highly unlikely".

 

[unmerged(243999)]

Sweden has the West to play in once it breaks free, comparing Sweden (a country) to India and Africa (continents) is a very... wat... standpoint.

And some of us like playing all over the place. Currently, running in my games and my history I have... Austria, Ottomans, Brandenburg, Sweden, Leinster, Teutonic Order, Aztecs, Japan, Orissa, and Ethiopia being played by various combinations of SP and MP, some finished some in progress. Maybe some people aren't necessarily 'obsessed' with the Rest of the World as they feel like they want different experiences. A Teutonic game is different than an Aztec game which is different from an Austria game or a Scotland game. But each of these should have their own benefits and maluses, their own level of fun and strategies.

The Rest of the World should be as fun as Europe, that's all.

 

[Taterthomp2]

Also many of those features are less useful for non-European western nations. For example, an Asian nation will get far less use out of trade companies than an American or European (or even African) western(ized) nation because it can't form most of the TCs.

And many of those European DHEs are also better. A lot of the ROTW DHEs are negative (revolts and MP loss) or relatively lame (glorified Great Person events).

...hmmmm...
could westernized ming make trade nations out of its core territories? XD OP.

 

[Koivin]

This wouldn't be very fun though. Imagine playing a native, Europeans show up, and you just outright lose due to disease without your input. Furthermore, imagine playing a European power, showing up on a native's doorstep, and they just up and die without you doing anything except sitting next to them.

I am not sure what you are getting at. You do know that this happened in history? It's not even a random chance either. They were genetically so isolated from the Old World that they could've fallen prey to pretty much any disease. Just because it's not fun doesn't mean it has to be changed. What do you want instead, to have the Spaniards bring paella and siestas?

 

[unmerged(243999)]

Just because it's not fun doesn't mean it has to be changed.

That's actually /exactly/ what it means - this is a game, not a history book. If it's not fun and doesn't add anything to gameplay, it shouldn't exist - which is why it doesn't

 

[Koivin]

That's actually /exactly/ what it means - this is a game, not a history book. If it's not fun and doesn't add anything to gameplay, it shouldn't exist - which is why it doesn't

this is a history simulator, not a sandbox game. If it's not historical and doesn't add anything to historical accuracy, it shouldn't exist - which is why it doesn't

wew, that was easy

 

[FreeSoc]

I am not sure what you are getting at. You do know that this happened in history? It's not even a random chance either. They were genetically so isolated from the Old World that they could've fallen prey to pretty much any disease. Just because it's not fun doesn't mean it has to be changed. What do you want instead, to have the Spaniards bring paella and siestas?

This would only be fair if Old World countries got properly ravaged by plague occasionally as well, and not just "Oh I'll have one province's trade power and income go through the floor for a very short period of time", because otherwise all you're saying is that the magical in-game Old World folk don't get horrible diseases because it'd ruin gameplay but Native Americans need to get decimated by smallpox BECAUSE REASONS AND IT HAPPENED.

 

[unmerged(243999)]

this is a history simulator, not a sandbox game. If it's not historical and doesn't add anything to historical accuracy, it shouldn't exist - which is why it doesn't

wew, that was easy

Ah, but here's the catch; you're wrong.

Paradox Development Studio is back with the fourth installment of the award-winning Europa Universalis series. The empire building game Europa Universalis IV gives you control of a nation to guide through the years in order to create a dominant global empire.

It's not a history simulator. It's an empire building game.

 

[LastSalian]

Forced to feed the troll; posting some facts for everyone:

1. This game is NOT historical accurate. Truce timers, coalitions, westernization, among many other stuff is non-sense from the historical POV.
2. As with any other game or software, they abstract the reality in order to get something useful without spending 100 years of development. In others words, for EU4, they combine playability, and try to get certain historical accuracy degree, to make the game fun, get more people buying the game, and make a life with it (money).
3. Some people likes watching the screen til year 1821, some others want to paint the map. Some people will always play Western countries only. Other people will play ROTW only. All of them, legit customers, deserve full attention from PDX, and no one should try to chill each other.
4. The argument "historically challenging" is ok until you find non-sense like autonomy caps. Remember, this games combines playability with historical accuracy. You can't add stupid rules to soccer and claim it's challenging.

 

[Druplesnubb]

I'd actually be totally up for plague simulating mechanics. There are two important things to remember about America; the plagues didn't kill everyone immediately, it killed everyone over a pretty long period of time, and the Europeans brought more than just disease, they also brought horses and firearms. So I see it less as "you lose everything" as much as "you enter a severe population decline in exchange for cavalry and much better infantry. You could also simulate the various plagues that prevented Europe from conquering West Africa, to help them survive without having a big wasteland barrier at their coast.

 

[Koivin]

This would only be fair if Old World countries got properly ravaged by plague occasionally as well, and not just "Oh I'll have one province's trade power and income go through the floor for a very short period of time", because otherwise all you're saying is that the magical in-game Old World folk don't get horrible diseases because it'd ruin gameplay but Native Americans need to get decimated by smallpox BECAUSE REASONS AND IT HAPPENED.

But I would love for that to happen as well. Too bad the black plague is out of the scope in this time period, but other major diseases could be modelled as well. Have them originate somewhere and spread through adjacency and trade routes.

In my ideal version, the world would slowly grow in base tax, only to be occasionally stomped in the head by events like these. You would lose manpower, monarch points and give you events on how you want to handle it.

Ah, but here's the catch; you're wrong. It's not a history simulator. It's an empire building game.

Wow, let us argue semantics and ignore the point I was trying to make. :laugh:

Also

Europa Universalis IV
Rule your nation through the centuries, with unparalleled freedom, depth and historical accuracy.

 

[itsuart]

Successful troll is successful.

 

[Mudcrab]

Great thread subject. Big peeve of mine.

I'm about to reach 1700 hours (give or take) played in EUIV with, roughly speaking, circa 10 hours spent playing as Hungary (interesting country as it goes) and roughly the same as England and another 10 as Ireland. So call it about 1600+ as ROTW nations or tribes or what-have-you. I'm a proud ROTW player then because in my case and it's utterly a personal view, is that EU is a Hapsburg/hre sim and it boils my carrots. In fact all of PDS big four franchises favour/fantasise over mitteleuropa in some manner when they offer a whole sandbox world to play in, in tandem:

Examples:

• Crusader Kings Charliemange celebrates, after a fashion, a mass murderer belonging to some trumped up polity which existed to piss off the actual Roman empire of the day, that which the base game can't pigeon-hole as a feudal polity but actually tries to. Karling my arse.

• EU series. Hre hre hre hre hapsburg HAP.tga palatinate ulm minigames. I constantly whinge here about the fact that I can't even toggle off the bloody eagle thing that pains my glaucoma as I play Malaya, Arabia or Ming or anything far far away from Hapsburgland. But hm, what is this? The papal icon thingy is not present on-screen. Is Freddy zu Hapsburg XVI more important than a religious leader of millions? Hmm. Looks like. Art of War addresses this silly bias to some extent. It soothes the savage breast in a pleasing manner. Better.

• Vicky. Buy some nice extra Prussian pointy helmet DLC, when other nations besides USA/CSA get tiny tablescrap DLCs because Germany is somehow more important, more mitteleuropa (of course it is) despite not being a massive coloniser nation, the heart, indeed the heart of darkness of Vicky. Don't worry, though, 1914 will come around soon enough. Wear your pointy DLC hat with pride. Ehm ...no. Fin, Vicky is excellent, I submit to her charms. Shame no russian revolution expansion/DLC though. Never mind. And no this is not an anti-german thing; I loved my time in northern Germany and its beautiful women and hearty food.

• Hearts of Iron. Mitteleuropa gone mad. Ww2. Not Paradox's fault that that happened. However, we can't have a Hapsburg sadly, but do have extra nazi pointy tanks DLC and an extra extra pointy gotterdammerung music, UI and tiger tank DLC when other nations get much less. Oh but we did have some nice soviet plane DLC with red stars topside (ugh), an irish coracle and a french motorbike*. Regardless, conquer the world like Charlie von Karling Hapsburg MXVIX would've wanted**.

* I made that up.
** This is turning into a baseless rant.
*** I still love you, PDS.
****

• is over-rated.
  
  We have an EU map full of exotic beach locations, forested tundras, sweltering bone-dry deserts, swathes of hundreds of small islands under Aegean-blue skies with Nations to represent all of them, and yet somehow boring hre in its dismal grey cocoon has more 'value', more 'worth'. No thanks. ROTW for me, ta.
  
  Sincerely, Mudscrub.

 

[unmerged(243999)]

But I would love for that to happen as well. Too bad the black plague is out of the scope in this time period, but other major diseases could be modelled as well. Have them originate somewhere and spread through adjacency and trade routes.

In my ideal version, the world would slowly grow in base tax, only to be occasionally stomped in the head by events like these. You would lose manpower, monarch points and give you events on how you want to handle it.

See, I like that idea; I play Veritas et Fortutido from time to time which does include the Black Death. And I wouldn't mind seeing more of these events - everywhere. But not just to ruin the New World powers when spain shows up. There's a different argument between 'more decisions to make and some mechanics to play around' and 'screw the New World once Spain/Portugal/Burgundy lands there'. I think we'd all like more historical and decision-based events, but this thread is about the idea that Western Europe should effortlessly dominate the ROTW, which I do not agree with.

Wow, let us argue semantics and ignore the point I was trying to make. :laugh:

Ooooh, lets. I do love a good debate about semantics.
Unparalleled (adj): having no parallel or equal; exceptional.
I would argue that EUIV in its current state doesn't have a parallel or equal in its freedom, depth, or historical accuracy as it really has no competitors that come close; still doesn't make it a historical simulator

 

[Karabas1543]

@Karabas1543

Granada, Ottoman State, Albania, Bosnia, and perhaps to some extent Crimea aren't ROTW although they are treated as one, shouldnt for example Granada start as Western tech?

I mean which counties are ROTW is debatable. Ottomans were definitely not Western. And yes, I think Granada should have Western tech, but that's not really what's preventing it from being an easily playable nation. Either way, the fact that it's Sunni is already RotW