• 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.
I know this is controversial but I would like national ideas to remain in some shape or form. I like them because they make each country feel unique beyond 'this is a small country and this is a big country' or 'this country is X religion and this country is Y religion'.

As for things I'd be happy to see gone, Lucky Nations.
 
  • 14Like
  • 1
  • 1
Reactions:
Only by sticking to EU4's antiquated build of Clausewitz.

Recent Clausewitz games have crazily powerful UI modding compared to EU4, which is why Vicky 3 includes the UI in the checksum.

Also "everyone playing the same game" basically means you have to restrict achievements to people who have 100% of the gameplay DLCs installed and enabled.
And those achievements need to be on the same version. There have been multiple EU4 versions with exploits to basically invalidate everything (such as unlimited money, manpower, etc.) and versions where you could just do things like PU Ming as Ryukyu for easy Three Mountains.

Are we just going to make achievements version-controlled? '[Tag pun]: do X with [Tag] on version 1.1.1 (hotfix)'. And what happens when there's an achievement introduced in 1.1.0 that people get using the exploit which is hotfixed in 1.1.1? Are you going to invalidate them somehow? Does Steam even support that?
 
  • 2
  • 1
Reactions:
Does that *have* to be true for EU 5? What would be the costs of switching to the latter?
It would be a significant increase in complexity, for... questionable benefit.
 
  • 1
Reactions:
It would be a significant increase in complexity, for... questionable benefit.
I guess that benefit depends how much you care about legitimacy of ironman/achievements. Some care about that a lot, some people have never used ironman to get achievements anyway.
 
  • 1
Reactions:
I guess that benefit depends how much you care about legitimacy of ironman/achievements.
The people who say that ironman+no mods is a necessary condition for achievement integrity are correct in theory... and, on observable evidence, wrong in practice.

Go look at the achievement unlock rates for strategy games with a variable scale of achievement difficulty and no such enforcement mechanism, and you will see that easy achievements have high unlock rates, intermediate achievements have intermediate unlock rates, hard achievements have low unlock rates, and very hard achievements have very low unlock rates.

The reasonable, simple hypothesis is that most people either don't care enough about achievements to be motivated to cheat to get them, or care too much about achievements to be willing to cheat to get them.

If people who want hard achievements were routinely willing to cheat to get them, I would expect to see a hard floor on achievement completion rates somewhere in the intermediate-to-hard range.

And, finally: to actually achieve integrity on Steam achievements requires your game to use Valve Anti-Cheat, which I very much doubt Paradox are interested in doing.

If a game doesn't use VAC, people can use Steam Achievement Manager with impunity, and thus the achievements have, in theory, exactly zero integrity.

(All of this has been discussed at great length in the Vicky 3 forums.)
 
  • 9
  • 1Like
  • 1
Reactions:
Even worse, Africa completely colonised by games end, when in reality much of it wasn't colonised until Victorian period.
1.16's map expansion in Africa was the original reason I didn't buy Mare Nostrum.

Subsequent complaints about Mare Nostrum's features have made it clear to me that while my reason was not great, my decision was sound :)
 
I guess that benefit depends how much you care about legitimacy of ironman/achievements. Some care about that a lot, some people have never used ironman to get achievements anyway.
I'm sincerely surprised you specifically are arguing for ironman to matter.

There are three major problems with ironman that cannot be solved without egregious manhours. These problems make ironman impossibile to matter and even hypocritical.

1) It is possible to cheat and there is no usable detection against it.
2) The game is notorious for bugs and features not WAD
3) Backup_Backup_Backup_Save

Frankly, Ironman is good for learning the game and nothing else. Ironman is detrimental to a fun experience.
 
Last edited:
  • 6Like
  • 2
  • 1
Reactions:
I'm sincerely surprised you specifically are arguing for ironman to matter.
To be specific: I think same-settings "matter", insofar as any of this does.

In other games, I will see players ask for strategies to accomplish X or Y goal, and it's not uncommon to see multiple responses along the lines of "just mod it" or "I did this using Z homebrew mod which gives me the equivalent of 800 extra starting dev in EU 4".

While both of those are valid ways to play, they don't really help the discussion, and accomplishing X or Y goal that way is completely different from doing it unmodded. Even if both are "legit" in their own way, they're basically different games.

Frankly, Ironman is good for learning the game and nothing else.
I think it's the opposite of useful for learning. While a lot of players just scum to get favorable RNG and learn nothing, it is extremely helpful to make a save, and attempt different things from that point to see what performs best.

But maybe grommile is right...using "ironman" doesn't do anything useful to ensure same-settings than simply requiring settings to be within a certain range and not further policing cheating. As I said earlier, the game's limitations make ironman a one-way covenant pretty often, and that feels bad. You could be screwed over by the UI lying to you too, which is cheating the player. But yeah, EU 4's version of "ironman" is probably too draconian/doesn't actually do anything to prevent cheating.
 
  • 2
  • 1
Reactions:
I know this is controversial but I would like national ideas to remain in some shape or form. I like them because they make each country feel unique beyond 'this is a small country and this is a big country' or 'this country is X religion and this country is Y religion'.

NIs don't make tags feel unique to me because its all just percentage modifiers, so essentially they just make tags feel easier/harder relative to others. ie., Brandenburg and Brunswick feel similar to me, outside of their starting differences, but the different NIs just make the former feel significantly easier.

Plus, NI's also make each game feel much the same. I'll never have to worry about fighting England and Portugal in 1:1 battles, but not so with France or Brandenburg. It's the same every game. it never really deviates regardless of what happens.
 
Last edited:
  • 3
Reactions:
Current rebellions. They are not threat and can be easily crushed long before they manage to do anything outside forcing you to spend bit of manpower. Imo rebellions should be rarer, but more severe.
Another thing I would like to see is less of generic event spam.
 
  • 10Like
  • 2
  • 1
Reactions:
You could be screwed over by the UI lying to you too, which is cheating the player.
Or placing a game destroying multi-decision pop-up straight beneath your mouse pointer in the microsecond you wanted to click on an army, I don't know how often I clicked on a decision without even knowing what it was because the UI "stole" my click.
 
  • 1Like
  • 1Love
Reactions:
Regarding the Ironman debate, I personally like Ironman because it gives me an extra challenge and to have go through the negative events and disasters etc. Without I'd be way too tempted to just edit it out. Or make a save to prevent X or make X saves to get better RNG.
 
  • 4
Reactions:
The "Seize Land" mechanic as its currently designed. It's such a no-brainer choice that even the AI is told to use it as soon as it's available, rebels be damned.

Also devving up institutions. Institutions in general need a heavy rework in EU5, but I'm not sure they need to be removed completely.
 
  • 5
  • 1Like
Reactions:
The "Seize Land" mechanic as its currently designed. It's such a no-brainer choice that even the AI is told to use it as soon as it's available, rebels be damned.
I agree, strategy games should be about decision making, if an option is always good it is not a decision, it is a "do not forget". This specific mechanic was the main reason for the "no locked behind being not at war mechanics" in my initial post. I don't know how often I thought "should I Alt-F4?" because I just remembered about this in the second after I declared war...
 
Last edited:
  • 1
Reactions:
Regarding the Ironman debate, I personally like Ironman because it gives me an extra challenge and to have go through the negative events and disasters etc. Without I'd be way too tempted to just edit it out. Or make a save to prevent X or make X saves to get better RNG.
Ironman doesn't prevent you from windows+d plus copy savegame to desktop ;). And do not let us start to speak about third party savegame managers which are even more comfortable than the Pdox non ironman mode...

The ironman "safety" only works for the laziest and/or most IT-ingenuous users.

Edit: After rereading your post I can understand that it gives you an additional psychological resistance against cheating, which is a fair point, but I do not think that it is outweighing the right of e.g. colorblind persons to have access to the achievements too. But this could also be solved by using a better engine, one which would also support different language layouts for the keyboards... This is now offtopic, but the limitations of the Clausewitz Engine are so mindblowingly large that I can't understand why it is still in use.
 
Last edited:
  • 5
  • 3
Reactions:
the limitations of the Clausewitz Engine are so mindblowingly large that I can't understand why it is still in use.
Because Paradox own it.
 
  • 1Haha
  • 1
Reactions: