Home Trending Latest threads New posts Developer diaries

Experiences with IGC 2.0k

Jump to latest Follow Reply
  • We have updated our Community Code of Conduct. Please read through the new rules for the forum that are an integral part of Paradox Interactive’s User Agreement.
Show only dev responses
I just started a game as Russia, or should I say restarted a game as Russia. In my first attempt I massed and DoW'd the Golden Horde only to find that I didn't have the ability to assault and had suffered a bunch of attrition losses as well as assault losses in assaults ordered by interloping allies for no good purpose since my allies were running around stealing sieges all over the place. I restarted and planned on waiting to get land tech 1 before doing anything else and got DoW'd by P-L within two years. The war that followed saw my allies not steal the sieges I wanted and at least I got Voronnes and Kursk.

The jury is still out on the changes to Russia but it's clear that Russia will be a much different power in the IGC than it was in the GC! I'm not sure about denying anyone the ability to assault fortifications at the outset though. IMO it's a design flaw in EU to require any tech whatsoever to assault fortifications. At the lower levels, especially before artillery it should be a high risk, high loss option.... but it should always be an option.
 
One really observation off the game (and this only 30 or so years in) and I only mention it becuase I've never seen it happen before:

Austria has been very agressive in my game. They have attacked Venice twice (taking Manuta) and also attacked an annexed Helvetica- a fact whihc scares me alot since I'm playing as France. It also makes the Habsburg alliance a whole lot scarier now.
 
Originally posted by Olaf_the_White


I just started a game as Russia, or should I say restarted a game as Russia. In my first attempt I massed and DoW'd the Golden Horde only to find that I didn't have the ability to assault and had suffered a bunch of attrition losses as well as assault losses in assaults ordered by interloping allies for no good purpose since my allies were running around stealing sieges all over the place. I restarted and planned on waiting to get land tech 1 before doing anything else and got DoW'd by P-L within two years. The war that followed saw my allies not steal the sieges I wanted and at least I got Voronnes and Kursk.

The jury is still out on the changes to Russia but it's clear that Russia will be a much different power in the IGC than it was in the GC! I'm not sure about denying anyone the ability to assault fortifications at the outset though. IMO it's a design flaw in EU to require any tech whatsoever to assault fortifications. At the lower levels, especially before artillery it should be a high risk, high loss option.... but it should always be an option.
Click to expand...

There's an error in the IGC with Russia's tech levels amongst others.
 
Originally posted by BiB


There's an error in the IGC with Russia's tech levels amongst others.
Click to expand...

Ah! So they shouldn't be starting at land tech 0? That seemed extremely odd actually. Are they working on a patch to fix the tech levels? Do they have an "errata sheet" for those willing to go in and edit their files manually?
 
Originally posted by BiB
Can't remember any more but I thought it was in the readme. Anyway I expect it to be fixed come next version but feel free to change so urself.
Click to expand...

Yep! It looks like they reversed the land and naval tech since the naval tech is listed as zero which makes perfect sense for Russia.
 
Colony names

Originally posted by BiB
Let us know.
Click to expand...

Yup. Fixing those lines in the colonynames.csv file seems to have corrected the problem with default colony names being assigned. I've been playing a game with Spain to test this and everything seems to be in order.

Incidentally... My God is Spain easy to play! They start with almost a 300 ducat census tax and have access to the easiest area to colonize in the game (the Antillies). I'm only afraid of what France might do, but that's it.

Cheers.
 
Okay

Aye mon capitan.

I'll have to try France then. :)
 
Re: Colony names

Originally posted by Medicine Man


Yup. Fixing those lines in the colonynames.csv file seems to have corrected the problem with default colony names being assigned. I've been playing a game with Spain to test this and everything seems to be in order.

Incidentally... My God is Spain easy to play! They start with almost a 300 ducat census tax and have access to the easiest area to colonize in the game (the Antillies). I'm only afraid of what France might do, but that's it.

Cheers.
Click to expand...

Hmmm..
I can confirm it, with the edited colonynames.csv everythings is alright now.
 
Yup. Fixing those lines in the colonynames.csv file seems to have corrected the problem with default colony names being assigned. I've been playing a game with Spain to test this and everything seems to be in order.
Click to expand...

Great! I will make sure to include that fix in the next IGC (2.1).

/Doomie
 
Playing Ireland..........

Its quite masochistic!Indeed!
Having no fortresses at all and lack of money and lack of
diplomatic skills make it actually impossible to survive against england.
Why that? The dukes/kings of ireland still were forcefull in the end of the
16th century. At least some minimal fortresses would be nice.
Give them a chance.
(I can't be the first mentioning that,right?)
 
A favor please:

In the next version of IGC could you lower the supply limit of countries that never had a very large army (compared to majors) or couldn't afford one? I hate it when a 1-province nation gets in an alliance war w/ someone they cannot reach at all but constantly build up troops and have 60k armies led by kings. The only solution I see would be tio increase the troops of theirs that die of attritrion.
 
Doomdark,

I've played a little game last night with IGC 2.0k with Spanish Lowlands. When Remormation occured all Lowland provinces started to rebel and in less than a year all provinces were controlled by rebels. 6 or 7 years later they are still controlled by rebels - Netherlands fails to become independent.

I will play more tonight and see what will happen next.


Cornelius.
 
Last edited:
Cornelius,

What you describe is an intended feature of the game (one not related to the IGC I might add). Sometimes rebellions simply fail. What happens is that some time after the required number of provinces (to form a nation) have rebelled a check is made to see if the area becomes independent. If it doesn't there won't be another check until the rebellion has been suppressed and there has been a new rebellion.
 
Doomdark,

Thanks for the info, I already thought that I found an error. What about if an already rebel-held province rebels again, is the check to independence made? Or it should be eliberated and than the next rebelion can turn into independence?

Cornelius.
 
This is with IGC2.1 and EU 1.08 (still no NA 1.09 patch). My ally was the country that used to be Parma and we were at work with the Turks. Ex-Parma didn't do any fighting because it couldn't get it's armies to Turkey. It had a 60k army sitting on it's lone province. The war was going fine. Turkey had tried 2 landings in Ex-Parma that were crushed. All of the sudded it sued for peace and accepted full annexation by Turkey! Now I had 3 Turkish provinces, Hungary one and we had won all the major battles. I have to assume this is a bug. Ex-Parma had not lost it's home province, never lost a battle and was part of the winning alliance. Yet it gets annexed. Any thoughts?
 
What about if an already rebel-held province rebels again, is the check to independence made? Or it should be eliberated and than the next rebelion can turn into independence?
Click to expand...

I honestly don't know, but I don't think so. The system could certainly be improved for EU 2.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top Bottom
Back