What's the WORST thing in EUV?

[MRhuman666]

Make terrain all about elevation. Rugged difficult terrain made hills, less rugged and flatter terrain made mountains etc. All just because the distance to sea level.

Here is an example were Marked red area is made hills and blue made mountains:
View attachment 1315250

Red in real life:
View attachment 1315254
View attachment 1315255
View attachment 1315256

Blue
in real life:
View attachment 1315258
Which one do you think would give an harder time for maneuvering an Army?

Is a reason nearly all Norwegian medieval battles were fought at sea, not land.
Here from Trollfjordslaget year 1890 between fishermen that happened in the
Red
area of Lofoten:
View attachment 1315280
Some times a bit jokingly called the last Viking battle in Norway.

End with some nice pictures portraying real medieval battles:
View attachment 1315283
View attachment 1315284
View attachment 1315285


Also both areas given Artic climate, when blue is, but red not according to climate data.
Not that big of a thing, but kills a bit immersion when you know the landscape and climate.

It is also inconsistent as hell. Urals/Guinean Highlands/The Rockies are "hills", while the alps are mostly wasteland & mountains. Paradox will violate their "design formula" in Europe to emphasize historical accuracy and enhanced gameplay (which is good). However, they will do the opposite in non-european regions seemingly based on vibes (and projected assumed player interest), even if it is detrimental to those regions.

 

[MRhuman666]

Well I like the 3D models and don't think they detract from the game at all. At first I was worried they'd look like the Vicky 3 ones, but luckily they look significantly better.

Was it worth the investment in time and resources though? That's hard to answer I think. For me personally, I would not like 2d pictures as much, as there's never enough of them so you see the same ones all the time and they also often look too similar on top of that. However, either way it would not detract from my enjoyment that much, I simply don't care about this particular part of the game as much as some others seem to.

I think the hardcore fans are going to play the game regardless of which portraits are used. So the real question is, will this improve the perception of the game by casuals? And I think it does, the best way to get the attention of more casual strategy gamers is with graphics like 3d characters, an attractive UI, and a beautiful map. Now, it's debatable if they succeeded at achieving these (the UI could be be better, and the map should have been based on Imperator IMO), but I think it makes sense for the developers to have these as goals. In addition, 3d models might attract CK3 casual fans, even if EU5 is a very different game. Ultimately, I think they'll improve the game's overall success, not detract from it.

The inclusion of 3D models is a by-product of shareholder and industry-wide spanning interests because its basically the "Fortnite 30$ skins" revenue model that has become mandatory, and everyone with an economics bachelor thinks is an ingenious idea to squeeze out profits. It was naive and even unrealistic to assume that the current dev team has truly a choice in the matter - its not the 90s anymore.

 

[PortDoubloon01]

Well I like the 3D models and don't think they detract from the game at all. At first I was worried they'd look like the Vicky 3 ones, but luckily they look significantly better.

Was it worth the investment in time and resources though? That's hard to answer I think. For me personally, I would not like 2d pictures as much, as there's never enough of them so you see the same ones all the time and they also often look too similar on top of that. However, either way it would not detract from my enjoyment that much, I simply don't care about this particular part of the game as much as some others seem to.

I think the hardcore fans are going to play the game regardless of which portraits are used. So the real question is, will this improve the perception of the game by casuals? And I think it does, the best way to get the attention of more casual strategy gamers is with graphics like 3d characters, an attractive UI, and a beautiful map. Now, it's debatable if they succeeded at achieving these (the UI could be be better, and the map should have been based on Imperator IMO), but I think it makes sense for the developers to have these as goals. In addition, 3d models might attract CK3 casual fans, even if EU5 is a very different game. Ultimately, I think they'll improve the game's overall success, not detract from it.

Fair enough, taste is subjective and I don't think either of us can show with any degree of certainty what the average buyer would prefer, or how strong the average preference is.

I'd bet after my first couple playthroughs a few things will come up that will be much more important than the 3d models. Right now without hands on experience, the poor reception of the models with many, the unfinished state, and the high apparent cost leads me to my opinion. However, at this point I think Paradox has already committed and ought to finish the 3d models as best they can.

 

[Bestiliand]

Direct Trade Income for everyone and their grandmother. State Monopolies were a thing, sure, but not on everything and especially not from 1337 on.

I think it would be easier if you simply earn the taxes on burghers. It could seem less funny (you cant trade now ) but in fact you do, you do the trade burghers earn and then you earn a fraction of it. And made monopolies (salt as example) as a direct income

Now it seems that every player that tested the game earn infinite amount of trade, is very broken

 

[gaplater]

I think it would be easier if you simply earn the taxes on burghers. It could seem less funny (you cant trade now ) but in fact you do, you do the trade burghers earn and then you earn a fraction of it. And made monopolies (salt as example) as a direct income

Now it seems that every player that tested the game earn infinite amount of trade, is very broken

Or simply make it so you can get trade capacity but you get far less compared to your burghers. So you can still manually handle 2-3 trade routes, but most of your trades will be done by your burghers

 

[Bestiliand]

Or simply make it so you can get trade capacity but you get far less compared to your burghers. So you can still manually handle 2-3 trade routes, but most of your trades will be done by your burghers

I though that you can do some Direct Routes but burghers earn also this routes (all the routes) and add something like privileged companies (EIC) that you put money, draw the route in the game or something and earn more percentage of money

 

[Nortrix]

It is also inconsistent as hell. Urals/Guinean Highlands/The Rockies are "hills", while the alps are mostly wasteland & mountains. Paradox will violate their "design formula" in Europe to emphasize historical accuracy and enhanced gameplay (which is good). However, they will do the opposite in non-european regions seemingly based on vibes (and projected assumed player interest), even if it is detrimental to those regions.

Yes. And seems it could be solved easily. You find out what is steep and what is gentle slope using Terrain maps:

example of steep:

Or even easier. Just take a trip in 3D mode on google earth and judge by what you think an army could do in the area:

 

[Lord Lambert]

Was it worth the investment in time and resources though? That's hard to answer I think.

I think the investment was largely done on a company wide basis. By CK3, specifically.

 

[Sizvahstar]

I wonder if a CK-to-EU conversion could port over the same realm ruler characters since the system is the same/so similar?

 

[Sirbab]

I wonder if a CK-to-EU conversion could port over the same realm ruler characters since the system is the same/so similar?

I would assume so! Trying to figure out how to convert 5(?) stats into three would take a bit of thinking, as well as traits I imagine, but this seems definitely doable. If they will... Maybe! I could see it driving purchases of ck3. This would be neat for sure.

 

[Praetorian44]

I think the investment was largely done on a company wide basis. By CK3, specifically.

Oh are the EU5 3D models based on the CK3 ones? It would certainly make sense to do so, but if that's the case I wonder why the Vicky 3 team didn't do the same, considering how bad theirs look.

 

[Lord Lambert]

Oh are the EU5 3D models based on the CK3 ones? It would certainly make sense to do so, but if that's the case I wonder why the Vicky 3 team didn't do the same, considering how bad theirs look.

Vic and CK3 were in development simultaneously afaik. And fwiw I kinda dislike htthe ck3 models more than the vic3 ones

 

[Sizvahstar]

Even the great Lord Lambert is not infallible :'(

 

[SaintDaveUK]

It was naive and even unrealistic to assume that the current dev team has truly a choice in the matter - its not the 90s anymore.

Apparently it is still the 90s; I still listen to Britpop, I recently rewatched Shawshank Redemtion, and the decision to make the portraits in 3D was between Johan and me right at the beginning of the project based on what we felt would be best for the game. I wouldn't choose differently today, they are the right decision for a game with infinite characters across countless cultures and ethincities.

 

[Lord Lambert]

Even the great Lord Lambert is not infallible :'(

I think my history proves i am incredibly fallible

 

[Koopatin]

I would assume so! Trying to figure out how to convert 5(?) stats into three would take a bit of thinking, as well as traits I imagine, but this seems definitely doable. If they will... Maybe! I could see it driving purchases of ck3. This would be neat for sure.

kind of neat. But from my own experience, you never really play the converted mods for more than 20 years. Something just doesn't seem to work right. While historical, EU4 had some balancing done by hand, and every time I try a converted CK3 game, the AI just fails. Of course, I assume no reason for that from EU4 is in EU5, but still, my anecdote.

Still, Norse HRE, split with custom Norse, for example, or a custom Christian HRE that did span all of Western Europe and the Balkans, were neat to see at least.

Spoiler: Pictures

 

[honkajoki]

Apparently it is still the 90s; I still listen to Britpop, I recently rewatched Shawshank Redemtion, and the decision to make the portraits in 3D was between Johan and me right at the beginning of the project based on what we felt would be best for the game. I wouldn't choose differently today, they are the right decision for a game with infinite characters across countless cultures and ethincities.

I thought it was 7 cultures or ethnicities. Does this mean there's going to be an infinite number of DLCs that add countless cultures and ethnicities?

 

[Sizvahstar]

Apparently it is still the 90s; I still listen to Britpop, I recently rewatched Shawshank Redemtion, and the decision to make the portraits in 3D was between Johan and me right at the beginning of the project based on what we felt would be best for the game. I wouldn't choose differently today, they are the right decision for a game with infinite characters across countless cultures and ethincities.

Shawshank Redemption really is a banger, we all need to dip into the 90's now and then.

 

[SaintDaveUK]

I thought it was 7 cultures or ethnicities. Does this mean there's going to be an infinite number of DLCs that add countless cultures and ethnicities?

There's 7 cultural archetypes, but for release we are doing as many ethnicities as we can. E.g. Swedish characters will look distinct from Catalan characters, Malay characters will look distinct from Chinese characters. There is absolutely no chance that we would be able to have that depth of variation across the whole world in 2D. And yes you raise the point that this also frees us to do as much post-release development on portrait variation as we like.

 

[Kvesir]

Another thing that's probably less obvious is that Imperator Rome had a system for regional governors, and EU5 has no such mechanic, because the devs are completely ignorant of anything that happened outside Europe. How you're meant to simulate the collapse of the Timurids or Mughals without governors, I have no idea.

Yeah, it's absurd, they've decided not to make a global governors system but then still implemented "governors" as flavor without such mechanics for Delhi, Timurids and others because it's a very important part of those countries' narrative.

I 100% anticipate governors being in a DLC.