Where do you want to go, Paradox?

[BFTeixeira]

Fun thing is that still none of the people that are crying 'Common Sense is necessary to play 1.12 patch' has given a single valid argument to why this is so... While everyone that has the DLC has already argumented, with actual real arguments, that it is totaly NOT the case.

Not true.
1. To state that no one presented a valid argument that CS is needed to play 1.12, means you didn't read any threads about it;
2. Your second statement is false. I've got CS and it TOTALLY is the case.

 

[DreadLindwyrm]

Custom nations is not a minor feature. Wiz said so himself. Custom nations are the most popular nation(s) in the game.(granted custom nations for me would fall into a higher category. comparing it to all or part of europe would make more sense to me. as custom nations can be any where in the world, over multiple areas. unlike playing static austria) i would not consider this minor. same goes for siege transfers.

and yes, where certain features fall does in fact matter. depending on the feature in question, it can be a major balancing point. you can read plenty of the balancing problems in regards to buildings/development on this forum for those with and without the dlc.

Siege transfers have a massive impact on the game, and indeed are not minor. They are the difference sometimes between whether your side in a war can take a province or not, since you can transfer a province you've captured to an ally so that they can get their claim (and thus not have a claim and relations penalty on you), or you can give it to a vassal more easily.

 

[taltamir]

Fun thing is that still none of the people that are crying 'Common Sense is necessary to play 1.12 patch' has given a single valid argument to why this is so... While everyone that has the DLC has already argumented, with actual real arguments, that it is totaly NOT the case

Your casual dismissal of all the well thought arguments as invalid aside, your second point is an outright lie since you argued with me while I personally told you I bought CS

 

[Gunnarr]

Let me get this straight. Johan sees no problem?

 

[grommile]

Fun thing is that still none of the people that are crying 'Common Sense is necessary to play 1.12 patch' has given a single valid argument to why this is so...

WeissRaben has actually made a very good point on this topic: the colonial game in 1.12 without CS is trash, because all the provinces are 1/1/1. The colonial game is a very important facet of several countries' gameplay. As such, your statement is on its face false.

 

[Outrider]

WeissRaben has actually made a very good point on this topic: the colonial game in 1.12 without CS is trash, because all the provinces are 1/1/1. The colonial game is a very important facet of several countries' gameplay. As such, your statement is on its face false.

He has alleged that. An argument typically requires evidence to support it. From his OP (which I'll assume you're referencing),

Want to colonize in North America, either as a Colonial Nation or as a native? Everything is 1/1/1 or thereabouts - meant to be developed later, of course, but without DLC - you can't

The colonial game in NA is definitely less rewarding than in prior versions, but being less profitable than before isn't, in itself, anything but evidence that change has occurred. but I haven't seen anyone present evidence to support any of these allegations:

1. The colonial game over-all is unviable ("trash").
2. Colonizing the uncolonized portions of NA/SA is unviable ("trash").
3. The 3 Development provinces are meant to be developed by player/AI with CS DLC.
______________________

1. Is an obvious no. Asian colonization/expansion (aided by explorers) is still extremely profitable. Central/South American native conquest (explorer needed) is still extremely profitable. The Caribbean is rather profitable for direct colonization. Which really only leaves us with #2.

2. I haven't tried to colonize NA in the current version (yay saxon mexico and carribbean), so have no idea how much you need to colonize until you reach break-even, let alone a profit. I do note that by opening the USA bookmark, the US has monthly income of around 40 ducats. Not nearly as much as you might have in prior versions but that setup doesn't appear to have any manufactures, which could improve income by leaps and bounds. Additional insight from anyone with data rather than rhetoric would be quite useful.

3. That USA bookmark. Not a single province has improved it's development. I also clicked through a majority of the provinces in a run of my own around 1600....couldn't find a single province where the AI had increased it's development. If the AI won't do it, I can't see how you argue, with a straight face, that it's meant to be done.
___________________________

This is my problem with most of the anti-CS threads. They identify a patch change that they don't like and assume that it's purely done to screw those who don't have CS. If NA got over-nerfed (it was overpowered), that's fine to take issue with, but it's not a DLC-locked development issue. There are quite a few legitimate issues with v1.12 changes and DLC locked features (largest by far is transfer occupation), but they tend to get buried underneath all the noise.

 

[Beagá]

WeissRaben has actually made a very good point on this topic: the colonial game in 1.12 without CS is trash, because all the provinces are 1/1/1. The colonial game is a very important facet of several countries' gameplay. As such, your statement is on its face false.

You 100% positive about this? Even colonies that are 4 or 5 BT end up having 1/1/1?

Because even good colonies don´t get more than 3/1/1 and similar in my CS game.

 

[TheChronoMaster]

Colonial provinces have always been more about the resources they have than their actual stats anyway.

 

[tapewormlondon]

Honestly CS isn't essential to game progression. Not having it doesn't end the game, it doesn't destroy nations. It does however add the ability to internally grow your nation. If you want that, buy it. If not don't. It is honestly that simple.

There is another option (which they luckily wont do because most people buy into the current model and purchase all DLCs like Johan said) and that is to revert to a model where the majority of people moaning about Common Senses patch/dlc content unfairness would still be playing version 1.0 with no patch, because EVERY SINGLE patch is tied to a DLC/ Expac that needed to be paid for in order to access and they wouldnt have bought any of them. You know those great old expansions of old everyone bangs on about being so great???

Either you cant afford the DLC, in which case I get it, that's bad, sad and I would be upset I couldn't get access to some of the better stuff too. But then either save up, or give it a rest, You wont get everything for free, in a PDox game or anywhere in a sane world.

Or you choose that the DLC isnt worth it, in which case stop whining!

Welcome to capitalism.

 

[Outrider]

I speak about computer software, you speak abour hardware. I think you're a bit confused.

You did say "a computer company", not a "software company", but I'd prefer you to have addressed the analogy, instead of leaping to a random semantics argument.

Also, it looks that you have a really closed mentality when you state that Pdx has to opt between balancing vanilla or vanilla+dlc. You know it's possible to balance both of them, right? Or do you think Pdx is so incompetent that they can't do it?

If vanilla is balanced, the game with expansions will only be balanced if the DLCs have a net effect on 0 on vanilla balance. While you can add features with a net 0 effect, you're extremely limited in what you can add. The issue has absolutely nothing to do with competence.

 

[radiatoren]

... If vanilla is balanced, the game with expansions will only be balanced if the DLCs have a net effect on 0 on vanilla balance. While you can add features with a net 0 effect, you're extremely limited in what you can add. The issue has absolutely nothing to do with competence.

You can balance both to an acceptable degree since balancing is somewhat subjective. The problem of trying to keep different games sharing most of the codebase balanced at the same time will, however, cause some serious headaches. So far most of the DLC-stuff has been limited to more specific flavouring, from random world, gameplay enhancement for only specific nations and different less balance-critical quality of life improvements.

If they want to balance the game with x major DLCs active, having the DLCs contain differences in the balance critical core game will make the balancing job completely impossible with 4 or more DLCs.

 

[sgt.stickybomb]

I agree with WeissRaben, the limited building slots without Common sense is particularly hurtful.

 

[Phr0ztByte]

I have always thought of EU4 as a subscription based game. I play for 90 hours, get a new DLC, pay a little, and play with a new game, always keeping it fresh. Like a continously updated board game.

Now. I think I have the solution. When the 2 years end (Which apparently Johan promised free updates) stop doing free DLC's. Then people will have the game they paid for, and if they want another game, they can buy the DLC. And if at one point you think "Hey.. this is not for me anymore" .. then find another game. Or.. mayhaps.. go outside. Chop down a tree, view a sunset or make love to a (less than) beautiful woman.. JK... but seriously. Seems like a lot of hoopla for almost nothing

 

[hwoosh]

Chop down a tree, view a sunset or make love to a (less than) beautiful woman.

Some of us prefer men!

 

[BFTeixeira]

Honestly CS isn't essential to game progression. Not having it doesn't end the game, it doesn't destroy nations. It does however add the ability to internally grow your nation. If you want that, buy it. If not don't. It is honestly that fucking simple.

There is another option (which they luckily wont do because most people buy into the current model and purchase all DLCs like Johan said) and that is to revert to a model where the majority of people moaning about Common Senses patch/dlc content unfairness would still be playing version 1.0 with no patch, because EVERY SINGLE patch is tied to a DLC/ Expac that needed to be paid for in order to access and they wouldnt have bought any of them. You know those great old expansions of old everyone bangs on about being so great???

Either you cant afford the DLC, in which case I get it, that's bad, sad and I would be upset I couldn't get access to some of the better stuff too. But then either save up, or give it a rest, You wont get everything for free, in a PDox game or anywhere in a sane world.

Or you choose that the DLC isnt worth it, in which case stop whining!

Welcome to capitalism.

LOL!!!! This has nothing to do with Capitalism, but good try in putting up a made sentence to make you feel superior to other users!

 

[Had a dad]

This has nothing to do with Capitalism

Actually it does. If Pdx doesn't make money they go out of business and no more games / patches / DLCs etc and the entire conversation becomes moot

 

[Had a dad]

It's fine to offer up your opinion, but leave hostility towards others at the door

 

[BFTeixeira]

Actually it does. If Pdx doesn't make money they go out of business and no more games / patches / DLCs etc and the entire conversation becomes moot

And where are people saying that Pdx shouldn't make money? Has anyone stated that Pdx should be a no-profit organization?

 

[Zoness]

I guess my frustration with EU4 isn't in the DLC (though that is a pain point and I recognize it) but rather that Multiplayer QA appears to just have never been a thing. With each DLC and patch release it seems like it actually gets marginally worse. Now every time I leave a single player or multiplayer game I need to restart the client? Ugh. Trivial I know but there's a lot of rough edges that simply don't seem to be given the time of day and THAT to me is the slow killer of the game.

Obviously if you play only single player it does not affect you.

 

[Had a dad]

And where are people saying that Pdx shouldn't make money? Has anyone stated that Pdx should be a no-profit organization?

You said it wasn't about capitalism. For them to continue game development they have to fund it else they cease to exist.