When is Paradox going to get rid of the province system?

[unmerged(85016)]

I played EU3 and HOI2 for a bit, and they were both great games. But why stick with arbitrary province borders in the sand? Isn't it time to move to a make the troops walk wherever you want them to system? That way real campaign manuever can happen.

What do people think?

 

[basharious]

The game becomes a lot more tactical. I wouldn't like that. No sir.

 

[spl]

Making the game like total war games? No thanks.

 

[unmerged(85016)]

But why? Isn't Paradox all about depth? What's wrong with simulating real (or at least more so) campaign manuevers?

 

[Vladislav]

Because Paradox games have -always- been grand strategy games, and such a move would turn the game into a much more tactical war game.

All in all, it would end up making the game needlessly complicated in light of other features in the game, such as political and economic management.

 

[Surgünoglu]

I have got to say that I love smaller provinces, more numerous provinces, so that I can control army movements. But the Total War map is totally wrong for these games.

Grand strategy, as has been said. Choosing to fight at a bridge or in a mountain pass is not right for Paradox at all--provinces fit.

 

[unmerged(85016)]

Yes Paradox makes grand strategy games, but why not grand strategy games with a powerful war element? At the moment, war isn't terribly more interesting than non-war. The troop movements are simplistic and there simply isn't that much to do. I play on max speed all the way through. I would like the game to massively slow down in times of crisis, when there is a war, I should dial the speed meter to the first setting and have an anxious time fighting and actually directing the war effort.

That wouldn't detract from the grand strategy in any way, and war is a pretty important part of geopolitical history, I would say.

 

[Sir Humphrey]

Why mess with a system that works.

 

[unmerged(85016)]

I have got to say that I love smaller provinces, more numerous provinces, so that I can control army movements. But the Total War map is totally wrong for these games.

Grand strategy, as has been said. Choosing to fight at a bridge or in a mountain pass is not right for Paradox at all--provinces fit.

The total war map is trash, why that should be the standard is beyond me. A more comparable example might be Civ maps. Units have pretty good maneuverability there.

Small provinces is one way to achieve what I'm talking about, and if you like that, then your vision is the same as mine. But there needs to be a way to make most of those provinces non-productive provinces or else we'll be suffering from province overload and a micro nightmare.

 

[unmerged(85016)]

Why mess with a system that works.

Isn't the answer to that question the same every time, no matter what context it's asked in?

 

[spl]

As we continue this argument let's all stop mentioning the TW maps flaws
I think the map is just to big to handle it most of the time. If they got rid of it, battles would also be drastically changed. It would really change everything about how they make games.

 

[Surgünoglu]

Well, we might be at odds, General. How'd you feel about Victoria?

 

[unmerged(85016)]

I've seen it at a friend's, but I've never played it. I would enjoy a thorough economic simulation but only if it's completely 100% accurate and plausible. Any errors or irrationalities would destroy such a game for me. I suspect that any game I would like... I would end up not liking, because it would feel too much like work!

<- Banker, M&A

But as far as games go, I do have vague dream in my head of the ideal game that would encompass every aspect of running an empire. My suggestion takes Paradox's games a bit closer to that. Many of the greatest people in history were remembered for their martial exploits on the front lines, not just administrative talent.

Ceasar, Napoleon, Fredrick, etc. I just don't see why a video game should leave that element out.

To return to Victoria, I never bothered to get into it because of the poor reviews and the incomprehensible interface.

 

[basharious]

oh, during war I play on the second or third speed. There's a lot of micro-management to be done in combat. If you do do it, then you could win a war with a much superior enemy without much trouble.

I am reminded with the AAR where a WC was done with a one-province pagan African minor called Xhosa. Extreme tactical management was performed. Of course, I'd get bored doing that, but I think the abstract combat system is just fine.

 

[Azugal]

I hate to say it, mate, but you're in a very small minority here.

The problem you have is that this is not a war game. And the features you are asking for are far more fitting for war games than for grand strategy games. The needless complications that would arise wouldn't be worth the extra effort involved in coding, testing and patching. And for what, an arguably minimal gain in combat?

Think about it for a second. The AI as it is can't compete against a human opponent on the relatively simplistic province model that we have now. And you're asking to make it more complex by degrees? Humans would walk over it every time without raising a sweat.

Sorry, but you're asking to needlessly complicate a game for what the majority of players would see as little gain, and lower the difficulty fairly drastically without major recoding efforts. And let's be honest here, AI has never been Paradox's forte.

Sorry, mate, but it's just not a good fit for current Paradox games.

 

[shasla6]

When hell freezes over.

 

[unmerged(85016)]

It certainly is a war game, Rome expanded via conquest, how else? To say it isn't is just semantics.

But Azugal, you're arguing about execution. The next game that Paradox makes perhaps, on a different engine, can be built from the ground up to not use province movement.

And minimal game? I would say revolutionary. Remember that was why Rome Total War was so highly lauded over MTW, the freer movement.

AI admitely don't get a lot of attention in games, but certainly if it can be done well, then a free movement model would be much superior.

Think about it for a second. If war becomes more... interactive, then Paradox could possibly find a bigger audience outside of the spreadsheet crowd without losing anything that made their games great in the first place (which IMO is the excellent implementation of real time strategy). I think that's good for the company, and then maybe they will be able to afford a few more AI coders then.

@shasla6, who are you talking to?

@basharious, but you must admit that there would be more depth in a non-province movement system. If you get bored with the intricacies, then don't bother. Just send all your men across. If you have overwhelming superiority human wave attacks work well too!

 

[Tai-Pan]

What you are asking for is a very different game from a different developer. Paradox does what it does well and is probably best served following that path rather than venturing into unknown territory.

 

[Burning]

no, thank you, i like the paradox approach. these games are about grand strategy. when CA dropped the 1 province 1 location system, they also dropped what made their games brilliant.

again: these (paradox) games are in the genre grand strategy. which means that you do not control your regiments directly, you got only abstract control over them. changing this would break a running(loved) system.

i would not appreciate that.

if you thing of a province system with dynamic borders, i would like such a feature. if your troops are not able to totally take over a province, hold a part of it and split off from the main province. of course there must be a minimum for province size.

as i don't think such a feature is doable any time soon, i disagree with such major changes to the EU/HOI/VICKY Engines.

 

[unmerged(36774)]

No thanks from me too. I believe that would make 80 percent of Paradox fans abandon the company. Sure it might attract some RTS funs who are playing not so deep games. But that would not interest me at all. Smaller provinces are good, but no provinces at all makes it another real time click fest. Just like Age of Empire series, C&C series... But probably not as good, because Paradox doesn't have any experience from that kind of games.