Why nerf hordes more

[Kalderus]

Unfortunately we won't have as much discussion on this matter as previously, due to the OP being banned. In my opinion, it would be a fair trade-off for hordes to get regular unit upgrades until at least tech 22, at which point, then reforming would be necessary for further advancements. Why tech 22? It seems to be a favourite for major changes, and marks a turning point between historical eras- both admin efficiency and the removal of naval attrition occur, and now client states will occur there too. Paradox seems to like tech 22 for big technological advances, so it would seem fitting to put the last horde units here too, and the time period (turn of the 18th century) more closely aligns with when hordes actually began to decline significantly.

 

[ldevarga]

Unfortunately we won't have as much discussion on this matter as previously, due to the OP being banned.

I asked this in another thread but anyone know why TMIT has be banned?

 

[Comes Imperii]

Why would you want it closed?

Because discussing is obviously an exploit!

 

[josh127]

Unfortunately we won't have as much discussion on this matter as previously, due to the OP being banned. In my opinion, it would be a fair trade-off for hordes to get regular unit upgrades until at least tech 22, at which point, then reforming would be necessary for further advancements. Why tech 22? It seems to be a favourite for major changes, and marks a turning point between historical eras- both admin efficiency and the removal of naval attrition occur, and now client states will occur there too. Paradox seems to like tech 22 for big technological advances, so it would seem fitting to put the last horde units here too, and the time period (turn of the 18th century) more closely aligns with when hordes actually began to decline significantly.

Or just give them units throughout, and have the special horde CBs expire at some point 1/2 or 2/3 through the game.

 

[Outrider]

Exactly. I mean this is pretty damn elementary and I'm just incredulous that Pdox didn't get this right. If there is one thing the Hordes had a lot of, it was horses. Yet it costs just as much for the Chagatai to raise cavalry as it does for the English.

This is preposterous.

Recruit cavalry, yes. Hordes do have a -20% land maintenance modifier and free reinforce though, so its cheaper for Hordes to regularly field cav than the for the English.

 

[itsuart]

In hands of human horde is almost unstoppable. So I say nerfing them a bit is good thing to do.

That kind of "argument" again? Look! A trick, called logic!
> In hands of human *any country* is almost unstoppable. So I say nerfing them a bit is good thing to do.

 

[itsuart]

Does the majority of this forum's demographic lack any semblance of a sense of humour..?

So it wasn't only me who's first thought was "dat sarcasm!". Nice to know.

 

[illathid]

Ok, so I was thinking about this a bit and I think a lot of it comes down to balance. Hordes have two very powerful CBs that let them expand very quickly, as well as a few other bonuses. Paradox tried to balance this by removing upgrades from horde units (whether this was good idea or not, I'll keep my mouth shut).

If Hordes were given unit upgrades like other nations, paradox would likely feel the need to give them a drawback in some other way. So assuming this all true, what does everyone think would be an appropriate drawback to give horde nations if the unit penalties were removed?

 

[itsuart]

So assuming this all true, what does everyone think would be an appropriate drawback to give horde nations if the unit penalties were removed?

All the other penalties.

 

[soran]

Double digit mechanics have been altered solely because of DDRJake, the true obsession with it is PI's .

what double digit mechanics? what did i miss? [an honest question, not sarcasm]

 

[Freudia]

If Hordes were given unit upgrades like other nations, paradox would likely feel the need to give them a drawback in some other way. So assuming this all true, what does everyone think would be an appropriate drawback to give horde nations if the unit penalties were removed?

The BROT penalties they already have, the 75% tech malus they already have, and possibly the local autonomy floor they have in 1.8.

what double digit mechanics? what did i miss? [an honest question, not sarcasm]

He's saying something in the realm of 10+ different mechanics have been adjusted solely because of how DDRJake used them. Which is not incorrect; it seems like every patch changes something in response to DDRJake using it.

 

[wingzero890]

Unfortunately we won't have as much discussion on this matter as previously, due to the OP being banned.

Lmao. TMIT only ever offered constructive criticism. Guess the devs don't like their lack of historical knowledge and bad game design to be deconstructed point by point.

 

[TheChronoMaster]

Lmao. TMIT only ever offered constructive criticism. Guess the devs don't like their lack of historical knowledge and bad game design to be deconstructed point by point.

It probably has more to do with him repeatedly calling them dishonest liars to their faces, which is at best a creative interpretation of events. Might also have to do with something we haven't seen, who knows.

 

[Freudia]

It probably has more to do with him repeatedly calling them dishonest liars to their faces, which is at best a creative interpretation of events. Might also have to do with something we haven't seen, who knows.

It's not incorrect, regardless of intent. It's very strange when you can't trust the patch notes from the official source to be 100% accurate.

 

[Baalshazar]

P-dox dun goofed it up again aw flip. Well Hordes were fun when I played (I used cheats so I didn't get swallowed up by Russia), I suppose now they will just lick the shoes as marches. I love you hordes even if you're a shell of your former self. Lonely nights you were there for me.

According to the post below me P-dox gonna rule us with an iron fist, everyone keep your head down and don't say a word. It's over man.

 

[TheChronoMaster]

It's not incorrect, regardless of intent. It's very strange when you can't trust the patch notes from the official source to be 100% accurate.

If you forget something, you would probably be pretty annoyed at someone calling you a dishonest liar and reminding you of it every chance they got, for months, even predicting the same 'dishonesty' in the future.

Especially when I know some games whose patch notes pretty much consist of:

"1) We rebalanced a whole lot of stuff.
2) We fixed a whole lot of bugs."

I have no idea why he's banned, for all I know it involves a deleted post somewhere, or a PM chain with a moderator or admin, or something. But on Paradox's forums, I've never seen anyone banned for expressing a dissenting opinion or suggesting the game in question was wrong in some way, save when they were belligerent and offensive in their arguments. All respect to TMIT, because I do have respect for him, mind.

 

[Freudia]

If you forget something, you would probably be pretty annoyed at someone calling you a dishonest liar and reminding you of it every chance they got, for months, even predicting the same 'dishonesty' in the future.

Especially when I know some games whose patch notes pretty much consist of:

"1) We rebalanced a whole lot of stuff.
2) We fixed a whole lot of bugs."

I have no idea why he's banned, for all I know it involves a deleted post somewhere, or a PM chain with a moderator or admin, or something. But on Paradox's forums, I've never seen anyone banned for expressing a dissenting opinion or suggesting the game in question was wrong in some way, save when they were belligerent and offensive in their arguments. All respect to TMIT, because I do have respect for him, mind.

Nah like, I think it's okay to forget to add a change to the list. But when you get things on the list that are outright false in actual practice ("War score cost for provinces now scales to the lower end against higher base tax war alliances", or something to that kind of wording, but actually was the opposite in practice), and it takes over a month to get a response to an inquiry about whether it's working as intended or not, and all you get is a QA intern going "Yeah, actually it's working as intended, patch notes were wrong, sorry.", it's kind of jarring.

With that said I don't like that TMIT is banned, but I can reasonably guess he was banned due to his approach to talking to people (it's generally a bit more blunt than anything else, and some with sensitive skin might get upset by that).

 

[oblio-]

P-dox dun goofed it up again aw flip. Well Hordes were fun when I played (I used cheats so I didn't get swallowed up by Russia), I suppose now they will just lick the shoes as marches. I love you hordes even if you're a shell of your former self. Lonely nights you were there for me.

According to the post below me P-dox gonna rule us with an iron fist, everyone keep your head down and don't say a word. It's over man.

Horde marches are only useful for about 100 years. After that they're downright harmful for the overlord except for the CB (which might or might not be available).

If you forget something, you would probably be pretty annoyed at someone calling you a dishonest liar and reminding you of it every chance they got, for months, even predicting the same 'dishonesty' in the future.

Especially when I know some games whose patch notes pretty much consist of:

"1) We rebalanced a whole lot of stuff.
2) We fixed a whole lot of bugs."

I have no idea why he's banned, for all I know it involves a deleted post somewhere, or a PM chain with a moderator or admin, or something. But on Paradox's forums, I've never seen anyone banned for expressing a dissenting opinion or suggesting the game in question was wrong in some way, save when they were belligerent and offensive in their arguments. All respect to TMIT, because I do have respect for him, mind.

For this kind of game a thorough changelog is almost mandatory. 1 small change could mean throwing away a campaign that took 40 hours. This is not Diablo 3, where you respec.
Paradox need better change tracking - it's a skill like any other, they just need to practice it.

 

[itsuart]

With that said I don't like that TMIT is banned, but I can reasonably guess he was banned due to his approach to talking to people (it's generally a bit more blunt than anything else, and some with sensitive skin might get upset by that).

If it's true, that would be another case to support "leave people who value their skin condition more than community members without access to banhammer" rule of thumb.
But we digress here, don't we?

 

[Haccoude]

If you forget something, you would probably be pretty annoyed at someone calling you a dishonest liar and reminding you of it every chance they got, for months, even predicting the same 'dishonesty' in the future.

Especially when I know some games whose patch notes pretty much consist of:

"1) We rebalanced a whole lot of stuff.
2) We fixed a whole lot of bugs."

I have no idea why he's banned, for all I know it involves a deleted post somewhere, or a PM chain with a moderator or admin, or something. But on Paradox's forums, I've never seen anyone banned for expressing a dissenting opinion or suggesting the game in question was wrong in some way, save when they were belligerent and offensive in their arguments. All respect to TMIT, because I do have respect for him, mind.

My first reaction to his ban was confusion and curiosity. I couldn't find anything particularly bad in his recent post history, and yet Paradoxplaza is one the forums where I have never previously witnessed a ban or a thread close I disagreed with, and yet still lacked the outright flamewars and offensive material indicative of neglecful and absent moderators.

So far I'm assuming PM's, deleted posts or something else hidden from us. The mods have generallt done an excellent job and I'm willing to give them benefit of the doubt on this one, even if I can't see anything he did wrong.

With that said, you reminded me of TMiT's tendency to express his frustration over woefully inaccurate patch notes as the dev team being liars. I could see that tendency relsting in a ban, but I didn't see a recent post of his doing that, which would have explained the ban.

Still, that doesn't mean he didn't make one, deleted posts are a thing as far as I understand.