What are the things you don't want to see in EUV

[Aepdneds]

Because Paradox own it.

I know you meant this is to be a joke, but even Microsoft is using Linux instead of Windows for parts of their Azure infrastructure, heritage shouldn't hold you back. Having an engine which isn't able to provide absolute basic features like rebinding of the keyboard which are industry standard since the 90s is not logically explainable, even with ownership.

Because most persons don't believe that this is an engine problem please see the post of MonzUn in the linked thread: https://forum.paradoxplaza.com/forum/threads/please-do-something.1500522/#post-27929503

Just because I own a chariot I am not using it to transport my belongings to a new household, there is a moment when you have to realise that something belongs into a museum.

 

[cursorhiker]

Defender of the Faith in its current iteration (NATO-like guarantees on all same-faith countries). It should really only exist for Catholics and Muslims, and basically give prestige/religious relations. For Catholics, it could be high weighting to lead Holy Leagues or maybe guarantee the Papal State's territory, for Muslims give a perma-CB to take Mecca. Point being: Spain or the Ottomans being allied with every single Catholic/Sunni power is dumb.

Exploration should be slower and more event-based, also you shouldn't be able to send suicide missions to discover seazones (if the expedition doesn't return you don't get any maps!)

 

[EUnderhill]

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.

A cooldown on development would slow devving for institutions.

 

[EUnderhill]

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'd miss the coastal raids....they are a PITB, but still I'd miss them.

 

[I am the walrus]

natural decreases in development through war and revolts etc.

When I read this, Devastation came to my mind... So my conclusion is it's not only about good or bad mechanics, the problem is most EU mechanics don't matter do they? I'm about to finish a game completely ignoring estates. What were the consequences? Well whatever they were, they sure didn't prevent me from being the hegemon. It's the same with many other systems: you can either ignore them or only pay attention now and then to click a button, and you're fine.

EU has a lot of cool systems with lots of potential... wasted potential. I'd rather see a more simplistic game (in terms of quantity, that is) but where you need to carefully consider the different interactions between all systems or face serious consequences. No cosmetic, useless buttons and numbers just ocupying space in the ui that you can ignore.

Then again, I'm afraid Pdx games are now designed with a WC mindset, because they probably wouldn't sell copies in the millions otherwise, so I don't think any additions or changes in future iterations will try to make the game harder or deeper.

 

[Kurfürstin Adelheid]

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.

Brandenburg's and Brunswick's ideas do different things though. Brandenburg's ideas look to me like they are for expanding more quickly and developing their mediocre provinces and forming Prussia, whereas Brunswick's look to be more about culture, focused on technology and prestige compared to BB's more military focused ideas.

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.

But this issue is more to do with geography, is it not? If you play on the European mainland and expand a lot you usually have to fight the French troops at some point. Or are you talking about France's army size or military ideas? Because I do think 'Elan' should be unlocked later. As it is now because the AI (at least in my games) unlocks ideas so quickly France has semi-invincible armies running around by 1480 which is not how it was historically, for example they got beaten by Cesare and the HRE in the 16th century, something that I don't think could ever happen in-game due to 'Elan' being the second idea in their group.

What I like about the ideas is the flavour text you get when unlocking them. I like reading it. Sorry.

 

[TheMeInTeam]

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.

Yeah, stuff like that too hurts the legitimacy of ironman. It's fair to punish players for their mistakes, but not for developer mistakes. In that sense, the ability to "cheat" ironman turned these things into a smaller inconvenience, because you could at least undo some of them at the expense of hassle.

That's a good case for altering how ironman works generally, though.

 

[grommile]

I know you meant this is to be a joke,

No, I didn't.

I'm genuinely sure that "they own it" is a substantial part of the reason why they stick with it.

 

[grommile]

Because I do think 'Elan' should be unlocked later.

There's a limit to how far you can push that one out, really, if you want France to be any kind of threat rather than having its face torn off by Austria and the Spaniards.

 

[grommile]

Scenarios. Requires too much maintenance and get broken very easily.

Johan has already confirmed the odds of multiple start dates in EU5 are slim to none

 

[vaLor-]

That is one thing I will never agree on.

Thank god. Screw Vic3's achievement system.

 

[vaLor-]

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.)

Why is the completion rate of achievements so important?

If you don't want to play with the game's limitations (yes, that includes UI and QoL), why are you obligated to get achievements?

 

[grommile]

Why is the completion rate of achievements so important?

If you don't want to play with the game's limitations (yes, that includes UI and QoL), why are you obligated to get achievements?

Fair enough. You at least look like you've got some coherent principles here, rather than the usual selfishly elitist gatekeeping nonsense from people who think that savescumming with Ironman is hard and that Steam Achievement Manager doesn't exist.

There's probably not much point in continuing the conversation, though, since we're working from essentially incompatible axioms and thus cannot persuade each other of our respective positions.

 

[DominusNovus]

So, a decent argument against this is that Victoria 3 without UI, AI, and game speed mods is unplayable compared to Victoria 3 with those mods.

Thats an argument against Vicky3, not the same design approach Paradox has used on this matter for around a decade.

 

[Swirly Mango]

Thats an argument against Vicky3, not the same design approach Paradox has used on this matter for around a decade.

Are you really arguing that graphical and performance mods meaningfully change how hard a game is?

If you're not then you're comment is assuming EU5 on release will be an unimprovable* gameplay experience without UI, performance, or other buggy woes.

*removed the word perfect for your reading comprehension.

 

[John Smith74]

Brandenburg's and Brunswick's ideas do different things though. Brandenburg's ideas look to me like they are for expanding more quickly and developing their mediocre provinces and forming Prussia, whereas Brunswick's look to be more about culture, focused on technology and prestige compared to BB's more military focused ideas.

But this issue is more to do with geography, is it not? If you play on the European mainland and expand a lot you usually have to fight the French troops at some point. Or are you talking about France's army size or military ideas? Because I do think 'Elan' should be unlocked later. As it is now because the AI (at least in my games) unlocks ideas so quickly France has semi-invincible armies running around by 1480 which is not how it was historically, for example they got beaten by Cesare and the HRE in the 16th century, something that I don't think could ever happen in-game due to 'Elan' being the second idea in their group.

What I like about the ideas is the flavour text you get when unlocking them. I like reading it. Sorry.

I'm not talking about geography, just NIs. Take French Elan!, which I presume references the same term that usually describes French military ideas/doctrine/quality etc of the 18th century, but they get its +20% morale buff in the 15th even if they don’t fight a single war. So in 1470 even if you have 90 AT and fight a France that hasn’t fought a war for 26 years, you’ll still have the around the same morale, and morale is king in early game battles. It’s the same exact thing every game. France is hard to beat in battles in 1470 because they were hard to beat in 18th century battles in reality. Makes no sense when they already have general mechanics that specifically try to model WHY certain countries had good militaries in certain periods.

And what's there to like about flavour text such as Elan? It's super bland and vague. Hell, a lot of the French NI's text are only unique to France in the title and the actual descriptions could be switched around to any old country.

 

[Kurfürstin Adelheid]

I'm not talking about geography,

Okay. I think I understand what you mean now. I may not agree, but I understand why you feel that way. What I would suggest for the next game, then, is that countries still have national ideas and the flavour text, but rather than a predetermined static set, there is a 'pool' of national ideas for each country, organised into tiers, and each time you unlock a new NI you can pick from a number of options at each tier. That way you would keep the 'unique' part of the NIs but the set as a whole wouldn't be the same each time (unless you were inclined to pick that way).

Take French Elan!, which I presume references the same term that usually describes French military ideas/doctrine/quality etc of the 18th century, but they get its +20% morale buff in the 15th even if they don’t fight a single war.

Yes I do think this is a bit stupid and it should at least be unlocked later.

 

[eanske]

POPs. No one I have encountered has ever suggested a single thing POPs would do for an EU game that couldn’t be done better in some other way.

I don't know that other ways you mean, but what I would like out of pops is:
- manpower extracted from population, so a Ottoman army of 1M would actually result in a Constantinople with only women and children, thus having no work-force and the economy in shambles.
- realistic propagation of religion as to simulate the real internal battlesduring reformation, instead of a on-off switch off religion per province.
- colonization where actual people move to the new world at the price of population in their home country. Would also open up the failed expel minorities option again. And result in a new world with realistic culture distribution instead of a patchwork of old-world provinces and religion.

Plus it opens up possibilities of civil wars and empires collapsing because of those internal cultural and religious imbalances in provinces and states, economical output related to population and technology instead of 'development', et cetera.

If there are better ways to achieve this without pops I would obviously fine with it. But I would be pretty disappointed if EUV still had a magical manpower-pool and binary cultural and religious switches.

 

[Danskjävel]

I'm not talking about geography, just NIs. Take French Elan!, which I presume references the same term that usually describes French military ideas/doctrine/quality etc of the 18th century, but they get its +20% morale buff in the 15th even if they don’t fight a single war. So in 1470 even if you have 90 AT and fight a France that hasn’t fought a war for 26 years, you’ll still have the around the same morale, and morale is king in early game battles. It’s the same exact thing every game. France is hard to beat in battles in 1470 because they were hard to beat in 18th century battles in reality. Makes no sense when they already have general mechanics that specifically try to model WHY certain countries had good militaries in certain periods.

And what's there to like about flavour text such as Elan? It's super bland and vague. Hell, a lot of the French NI's text are only unique to France in the title and the actual descriptions could be switched around to any old country.

I don't think anyone is against dynamic national ideas though. Or a broader variety within ideas. The possibility to alter your NI's with the recent update has been very well recieved as far as I can see. But so far I don't see anyone coming up with a better suggestion than NI's to differentiate tags mechanically, while at the same time providing some cultural-historical context.

But of course dynamic NI's would be an improvement. But that's not to say that being at peace for 26 years should remove the idea completely - a militarized state can be at peace too.

 

[Me_]

Earlier start date