Tech meta

[Vohen]

In coming back to the game recently, it took me some good time to re-learn how to go about inventions, and this got me thinking: is there a "meta"/"more optimal" way or "must have inventions" established here?

I never put that much thought into it, taking a few glances at the key techs I'd want and use the planning tool to path the way to it, taking the most useful ones on the way there.
As I go along, I just prioritize based on any specific needs, like loyalty, founding cities, military, etc.

All in all, I find this system pretty cumbersome at times, so many small and incremental bonuses that could be condensed into a single invention, maybe having it cost 2, 3 or even 4 points depending on how many are condensed there.
And the bonuses are all over the place, it'd be more helpful to have focused branches, like one focusing on loyalty, another on commerce, another on city building, asimilation&conversion, etc etc. Maybe not on a straight line, even with branches crossing here and there, but I feel it'd make it far less convoluted to plan around at least.
Maybe that's just my opinion, but I think it would have a lot of room to improve, if modders ever look into that.

 

[Grandpa Maur]

is there a "meta"/"more optimal" way or "must have inventions" established here?

That raises the question, what is 'meta'. Say, is that the optimal choice for the fastest world conquest? Optimal choice for strongest country (what is strongest country?).

Now, world conquest in Imp seems terribly laborious playstyle, requiring more grit than anything else. I was never interested in doing it (the only time i did WC was EU2)

I never put that much thought into it, taking a few glances at the key techs I'd want and use the planning tool to path the way to it, taking the most useful ones on the way there.
As I go along, I just prioritize based on any specific needs, like loyalty, founding cities, military, etc.

Yep. Though personally i glutton for PI, so i end up prioritizing these, and the provincial investment costs reductions.

But most importantly, i get that invention that add finesse to ruler if he is close to 9, to get perfect apotheosis.

I hate it, it's gamey, but i can't stop.

Maybe that's just my opinion, but iI think it would have a lot of room to improve, if modders ever look into that.

You are likely not singular person with that opinion, but i have it the opposite. I dislike stacking modifiers (horribly, pdox strongly goes that way) in general so i'd ax inventions completely, in fact, i played without military traditions and it was better, less unbalanced and space mariney.

And, uh, the fact they are individually minor and numerous and all over the place is very much to my liking, so i am opposite here.

And modding is easy, if time consuming, especially modding such stuff.

 

[Vohen]

That raises the question, what is 'meta'. Say, is that the optimal choice for the fastest world conquest? Optimal choice for strongest country (what is strongest country?).

Now, world conquest in Imp seems terribly laborious playstyle, requiring more grit than anything else. I was never interested in doing it (the only time i did WC was EU2)

Let's just go with this:

I dislike stacking modifiers (horribly, pdox strongly goes that way) in general so i'd ax inventions completely, in fact, i played without military traditions and it was better, less unbalanced and space mariney.

On that I do agree, modifier stacking isn't to my liking either, I enjoy much more the techs which unlocks CBs, character interactions, laws, buildings, etc etc. If it were up to me, we'd dial it up to eleven.

And, uh, the fact they are individually minor and numerous and all over the place is very much to my liking, so i am opposite here.

It's a matter of opinion of course, but I tend to favor fewer but more impactful choices than being flooded with smaller ones. Which plays right into the point above.

And modding is easy, if time consuming, especially modding such stuff.

Indeed, I've tried my own hand at modding on EU4 a few years back, sadly time is a very scarse resource these days.

 

[DukeLeto42]

No, there really can't be a meta unless you're doing it nation-by-nation. There are some end goals that everyone finds useful (legions, building unlocks, Imperial Challenge), but the order of taking them depends on what you need.

If you're playing as the Diadocchi, by the time the wars are over nobody can really challenge you, but internal stability is a nightmare - theaters, temples, and conversion speed are your big hurdle. Rome, however, might want to beeline military techs to win its wars and rely on their missions and starting in a same-culture group and same-religion region to carry stability until later.

All in all, I find this system pretty cumbersome at times, so many small and incremental bonuses that could be condensed into a single invention, maybe having it cost 2, 3 or even 4 points depending on how many are condensed there.

That's way less interesting and worse for the player. Making it cost more means that you have to stockpile innovations instead of progressing towards a goal - instead of a nice small perk along the way, you'd have to sit there with a "you have innovations to spend" flag. It also means your tree is rather plain - questions of which branch you take to get down to a desired innovation (do I take the fastest path there or detour through some nice perks along the way) are part of what makes planning the path through the tree fun.

And the bonuses are all over the place, it'd be more helpful to have focused branches, like one focusing on loyalty, another on commerce, another on city building, asimilation&conversion, etc etc. Maybe not on a straight line, even with branches crossing here and there, but I feel it'd make it far less convoluted to plan around at least.

Usually the argument of "let's dumb down the gameplay" is only seen here as a strawman.

 

[Vohen]

That's way less interesting and worse for the player. Making it cost more means that you have to stockpile innovations instead of progressing towards a goal - instead of a nice small perk along the way, you'd have to sit there with a "you have innovations to spend" flag. It also means your tree is rather plain - questions of which branch you take to get down to a desired innovation (do I take the fastest path there or detour through some nice perks along the way) are part of what makes planning the path through the tree fun.

I suppose we'll have to agree to disagree, I find overabundance of small nearly inconsequential choices to be far less interesting than few but defining ones.

Usually the argument of "let's dumb down the gameplay" is only seen here as a strawman.

Nah, the point is really on complication vs complexity.