Do not prevent World Conquest

[Paddy234]

Can you provide a link? My hazmat suit is at the dry cleaners so I'm not willing to delve into the steam community to find the comment you're referring to.

To be fair the fact that he mentioned it on there and not here among the "special fanbase" kind of proves my point. This forum doesn't represent at all the average EU gamer who just likes to build empires or attempt to.

How do you think his comment would have been recieved on here with such a passionate and niche outlook?

 

[JoshuaFitzgerald]

@Paddy234 Out of curiousity, which country do you plan to conquer the world as? (or try at least)

 

[Paddy234]

a 1-1 simulation of the world is quite hard to compute, if the game is following a simulation perspetive no country should be able to conquer the entire world 100% of the time

The game will never follow a simulation perspective. It's a game where one can make an empire out of a tribe, this has always been part of the magic with EU

 

[Lord Lambert]

This forum doesn't represent at all the average EU gamer who just likes to build empires or attempt to.

If the steam forums do represent the average EU gamer then I am exceptionally worried

How do you think his comment would have been recieved on here with such a passionate and niche outlook?

Well, probably as I took it, Id imagine.

 

[Paddy234]

If the steam forums do represent the average EU gamer then I am exceptionally worried

Well, probably as I took it, Id imagine.

No forum represents the more average gamer but steam is as close as it gets as there is less effort. It's why so many threads descend into politicial and social rants. Half the people on there are only casual minded (myself included) and so aren't as passionate as the more hardcore fansbase who have put in thousands of hours

 

[Paddy234]

@Paddy234 Out of curiousity, which country do you plan to conquer the world as? (or try at least)

I'll most certainly do it once as Ireland. Then from then on my playstyle is that of the typical EU gamer. Build an Empire until I get bored on a long plaughrough and then start over another time when I'm feeling the itch.

It's not about the map painting for me. It's about the journey in getting there. The different mini campaigns against different cultures, factions etc. It adds more flavor than just sticking to local regions or continents

 

[Lord Lambert]

I'll most certainly do it once as Ireland.

You will try to.

 

[Vohen]

Conquering the world was never possible i feel in any EU game within the timeframe

This has got to be a joke.

 

[JacceDON]

This is exactly my point which is why this thread proves the ridiculous of this niche fanbase that are complaining about something that won't affect them. This is a victory most importantly for the conqust fans like myself because it makes WC the ultimate challenge and I'll take than anyway rather than steamrolling the Ai early on.

If WC is possible then everyone who isn't a casual noob will steamroll the AI at every point and turn in the game (which is a shame).

 

[Enku7071]

Someone will make a World Conquest and put the video on YouTube at one point.

And we will see people complain about how the game is no harder than a child toy based off on that.

 

[Enku7071]

I personally don't mind WC, it being technically possible doesn't mean it's practically plausible within the game scope. I could see cracked up players finding every loopholes and exploits to pull it off. Speedrunning has been a thing, much to the chagrin of any game developers.

I think the best way for the game to handle massive empires is to make it absolutely nightmarish to control. Doomstacks of popular revolt forcing the empire to commit genocides after genocides. Absolute chaos and disruption of trade routes and nodes. Glaring lack of control over vast swathes of land. Court scandals with nobles and claimants fight each other to death. Having empires disintegrate for being a blobbing powerhouse is a RP I'd be loving to do.

 

[Jarvin]

I get all the arguments in favor of creating a world where WCs aren't feasible, but I also feel like creating a game where you can get a satisfying experience by hardly expanding outside of your historical borders is incredibly, incredibly difficult. Not because "if I cant map paint then the game isn't fun waaah" or anything like that, but because it's harder to design satisfying mechanics around "not failing", or "keeping pace of internal progression with other countries who also do the same" compared to just the very in-your-face act of beating other countries up and taking their land. This isn't me making a comment about some "objective fun" of either, just the challenge of game design as I see it

This is a wildly ambitious game, where a part of it being a successful release, will be if the players can find the entire 500 years satisfying, where currently in EU4 not that many players find the energy to play past 1600s.

I don't wanna make too many assumptions about how the game will feel come release, but I'd caution some people here from making many such assumptions either. All of this seems incredibly difficult in design, and I wouldn't be surprised if at some point letting players blob lots would be seen as just the simpler option, even if not an ideal one.

 

[JacceDON]

I think the best way for the game to handle massive empires is to make it absolutely nightmarish to control. Doomstacks of popular revolt forcing the empire to commit genocides after genocides. Absolute chaos and disruption of trade routes and nodes. Glaring lack of control over vast swathes of land. Court scandals with nobles and claimants fight each other to death. Having empires disintegrate for being a blobbing powerhouse is a RP I'd be loving to do.

Well, that isn't in the game so whatever.

I don't wanna make too many assumptions about how the game will feel come release, but I'd caution some people here from making such assumptions either. All of this seems incredibly difficult in design, and I wouldn't be surprised if at some point letting players blob lots would be seen as just the simpler option, even if not an ideal one.

If they pick the easy way out then the game isn't for us on this forum but rather for the people over on Steam. I hate to feel like a Leafs fan over here as well, but I guess that for some of us there is no such thing as winning.

Ever.

 

[zeruosi]

like with the pre 2.0 stellaris peoples who are like 8 years behind.

You've struck a nerve—I still prefer Stellaris pre-2.0. I've officially become a Fallen Empire.

 

[szmik]

I've never done WC in EU4 despite other people finishing it in under 100 years, so I completely miss the point of "let's prevent WC in EU5, because reasons".... I think it's personal playstyle thing more than anything... I know I'm capable of WC in eu4, but I don't like the idea or amount of work I'd have to put into it

 

[Stami]

a 1-1 simulation of the world is quite hard to compute, if the game is following a simulation perspetive no country should be able to conquer the entire world 100% of the time

And I agree. My comment in no way disputes this.

 

[Stami]

EU has always been a map painting game primarily. It's never going to change.

That's where you're wrong. And that is why everyone's disagreeing with what you're saying. If you can't understand why, that's your problem tbh.

WC will always be possible but it is not desirable from a gameplay perspective of a game such as EU5. It might have been in 1 and 2, perhaps even 3 and, to some extent, 4. But 5 is of a scope that is so overwhelming that calling it a Europa Universalis game is not enough to describe it.

This game is more than what you're used to, so having preconceptions of what it should be is not just wrong, it's naive.

Going back to your initial ironic comment, where you say that EU5 is not for those who are against WC, you'll soon find that it's the other way around. This is a game that will not reward you for WC.

 

[NoobishHeadache]

By the way, the OP has openly admitted over on Steam (as he pretty much does here as well) that he only opened this thread just to troll "hardcore fans" over on this forum, evidently looking at them as nothing more than a silly minority that is not at all representative of "real" EU players. You know, such a silly minority that they were the primary source of feedback for the game for the past more-than-a-year now.

 

[Citydisk2]

The game will never follow a simulation perspective. It's a game where one can make an empire out of a tribe, this has always been part of the magic with EU

ok that happened in reality - therefore covered under simulation, a world united is unlikely even today

 

[Cephei80]

Sadly it is true https://steamcommunity.com/app/3450310/discussions/0/604155654554285372/
Originally posted by PDX Katten:
Simple answer: Yes.
Longer answer: Yes, you will technically be able to do that, but comparing EU4 and EU5 is a completely different experience, and it's extremely difficult (at least for me) to do. But maybe you're up to the challenge?

" it's extremely difficult "
this is what we have been saying due to mechanical limitations .
you have changed your point not us . from the start YOU complained about it being impossible and how we have been influencing the game to a bad direction and we said it was for the good of the game and it was "technically impossible yes for gameplay reasons"
and this is exactly why they say its extremely difficult but somehow you take it as a W now thinking its something like eu4 or eu3.

This is exactly my point which is why this thread proves the ridiculous of this niche fanbase that are complaining about something that won't affect them. This is a victory most importantly for the conqust fans like myself because it makes WC the ultimate challenge and I'll take than anyway rather than steamrolling the Ai early on.

cut the niche bs , the niche is what you do , its like speedrunning in other games , most of us stop half way precisely to avoid wc. its crazy how you pass us for "some of the fanbase" with such ratio