What needs fixed?

[Knibis]

if it not has been said yet, Inlandseas... you they should work like regular seas, you should be able to claim and core over the water

 

[lyz]

about to upset your allies by not giving them provinces that they've occupied in their own name on which they have core or a claim

You are correct. This is not my primary complaint. The alliance with France held through when I didn't give them what they wanted one time and was docked a huge amount in relations penalty. That was my fault, I should've noticed the red, downward pointing thumb.

The random behavior of "Wants your provinces" is my primary complaint. It does not follow logically with cores or claims or even culture groupings. It is what killed the alliance with France and, more importantly for this game, Poland. As mentioned earlier, Poland would not buy the province it "wanted" for 0 ducats and the modifier suddenly left a few years later. All it did with Poland was drop the alliance for a few years. France rivaled me after they dropped the alliance. That killed our relations for the rest of the game.

 

[Dorevai]

if it not has been said yet, Inlandseas... you they should work like regular seas, you should be able to claim and core over the water

Like the caspian sea? You can.

 

[atwix]

caspian sea isn't a sea, its considered a lake. Thats why you can claim across.. I add to the list: fix the wonky coring range issues around caspian sea; inland lakes screw coring range up badly.

 

[Knibis]

also what about troop-travel-time for automated transport, it takes longer for the troops that way since they have to walk out to the boat from land....

 

[Sexual Velociraptor]

1- The interactions between exile and pathing are a huge one. Here's my post about it which got overlooked despite being able to reproduce the bug easily:

"I love this game but pathing could use a lot of work. I'm sure it's not easy to avoid 100% of the bugs, but units going into exile is the single biggest cause of them and should be fixed first.

For those who don't know: When a unit is in exile it's pathing doesn't take into account that exile can end, and thus will path poorly very often.

For example let's say I'm playing France and I've got a bunch of unit in exile in the Greece area from fighting the Ottomans and took just Ragusa in the peace deal and not the surrounding land. My exiled units will all path through Ragusa to get back to my territory, exit exile and take massive attrition until I can go get them with boat. (God forbid I don't notice for a year while colonizing and lose a ton of manpower and money.)

Additionally if I decided to path them around it and send them towards the Ild 'de France area. If I took over Italy and some of central Europe but have a line of OPMs in between my northern holdings my units will walk into my territory, clump up against the OPMS and take attrition even though simply repathing upon getting stuck could fix this one.

All in all I feel like exile is a good idea, but consistently causes problems with pathing that need to be fixed."

2- Can we get an option to choose which subjects we call into a war? If I'm fighting in Europe I know 100% my Colonies won't be of any help, so why should I have them not bleed off war exhaustion and autonomy?

Similarly my landlocked European vassals shouldn't need to be called into my American wars.

3- Can we get an option to mark rebels for destruction? If a 50k stack spawns and I've got a 30k stack there, but both of my allies have 25k stacks we should be able to all move next to it and once the game decides we have enough units to attack successfully all of the troops move in automatically.

4- Me killing a 50 stack for my vassal/ally with 20k troops should get me a bonus to relations. It's counter intuitive that I need to wait for them to siege his land to get the relations hit.

5- When I attack the Ottomans I often see small african nations backstab them. When I peace out they never do and then tend to lose all their occupied land and get demolished.

6- I believe that transfer trade power shouldn't use a diplo relations slot. I never request it in a peace deal, and I would if it didn't. That aside I'd be much more likely to leave OPMs alive if I could collect trade power from them, especially if they had hostile core creation cost.

7- You should be able to move troops through territory you can't get access to for diplo penalties with the nation. This would prevent the cheese France defeats as England and the retarded "Because of a single province owned by my rival I'm going to let rebels destroy half my country" that I as a player love to do to AIs and hate when it's done to me. Why am I so damn respectful? They're my rivals.

Just give them a diplo insult CB and another -50 relations that only decays when troops are outside the country and resets to -50 if they enter again.

8- Diplomatic insult CB should be more useful. I never see it used.

That's all for now. I know not all of them are bugs, but they all seem like no brainers except the last 3. Those ones are a bit more opinionated.

I'd like it a lot if a dev could give me a quick run through of his thoughts. Even one word answers on each would mean a lot given my ~45 minutes typing this up. (Not including the time it took to originally write the exile post I copy-pastaed for #1.)

Thanks!

 

[Knibis]

Like the caspian sea? You can.

i think its only claims and not coring distance, this is too unrealistic..

 

[grommile]

Like the caspian sea? You can.

You can claim across a lake, but you can't core across it - which is a pretty horrible landmine, really.

Not being able to claim across it would be fine. Being able to claim and core across it would be... OK-ish, though there's the whole "you can't build ships to haul troops across a lake" problem.

 

[blackchoas]

You can claim across a lake, but you can't core across it - which is a pretty horrible landmine, really.

Not being able to claim across it would be fine. Being able to claim and core across it would be... OK-ish, though there's the whole "you can't build ships to haul troops across a lake" problem.

Do we wanna start the navigable lakes discussion? because I can tell you a thing or two about Naval History in the American Great Lakes. Some of the most important battles in the War of 1812 were naval battles on Lake Erie, not to mention how they were used by early French explorers to get around the region, also it really doesn't make sense that Potawatomi is an "Inland Center of Trade" because thats where Detroit was built, which is only an important trading center because its on a key river between the lakes and thus controls naval trade in and out of the lakes,

 

[Knibis]

Flag Creator: more emblems maybe but atleast the ability to change color of the emblems (or some emblems)

 

[Metz]

Maybe if you own the most provinces touching wastelands, the wastelands become yours?

 

[WoollyMammoth]

Armies already have colour-coded labelling. There's a label below the sprite that indicates the army size. If the label is green, it's yours. If it's blue, it's an ally in one or more of your current wars. If it's red, it's an enemy. If it's grey, it's none of the above.

What kind of hedgehodgian magic is this? It is there, you say.

Over 400 hours in EUIV and well, will you look at that. Pretty little colors, aren't they?

Thank you kind sir.

@Paradox,
Not a call to make it clearer. Don't know why I didn't pick up on that... Am I the only one? Probably... Nothing to see here folks, move along.

Right, where were we? Ah, yes. Things that need fixing.

 

[Greyhound_Gen.]

Flag Creator: more emblems maybe but atleast the ability to change color of the emblems (or some emblems)

Definitely this if possible. Also the Random New World option could be improved by ensuring that it creates a similar number of provinces to what the Americas now have post-Art of War. At the moment it still seems to use the number (or less) than what pre-AoW America had, which messes up colonisation rates and leaves the Native Americans pretty cramped up.

Also I'm certain it's too late to ask for map changes for Common Sense, but I'd like to see Madagascar get a few more provinces (maybe increase it from 3 to 5 - 6?) and a tag for the Merina Kingdom - it kind of surprised me when it wasn't added in Art of War (though overall the map improvements were fantastic in my opinion). A Zanzibar tag would be nice too. Maybe in the next expansion?

 

[theJalden]

I've thought it was odd that the low lands of Europe are referred to as the Spanish Netherlands in the Region view. Especially when 90% of the time Spain never owns them. Could the region just be renamed to the Lowlands, or even the Netherlands would work.

 

[ikkiks]

Maybe if you own the most provinces touching wastelands, the wastelands become yours?

I thought of that before. Something on the lines of: if you own every province around a wasteland, it should use your color in the map. This would be great to paint maps and look at them, but it would be terrible for players that don't know wastelands and will keep wondering "why can't I cross this land? Isn't it mine?"

 

[grommile]

The colour-the-wastelands feature is available! It's just that you have to use an Ironman-invalidating mod to enable it, because it's controlled in defines.lua.

 

[IIWW]

I stumbled on one pretty annoying thing: if the alliance between countires becomes broken during a war (f.e. because of annual treaty from different war) make the secondary participant who is no longer allied to WL more likely to accept peace offer, he still has "ally in war" modifier, while it propably should reduce his war enthusiasm.

 

[Riekopo]

So many good posts in here. I never imagined the thread would blow up like this. Keep it up guys!

 

[Krajzen]

I think Wasteland_Coloured option should be set in main menu because

1) It is popular option and it's weird to have it hidden somewhere in txt defines
2) People ask about it frequently
3) It is idiotic for this cosmetic change to disable ironman...