Paradox Studio Thread

[Bobbobson]

Its still a game and fun should be the core of the game. did you have fun managing pops and resources in Vic2? Vic2 and IR are the games doing it the best and its still not fun. they are also the games that more or less require you to do it. there is also Stellaris, where you can both after 100 ingame years.

Totally did. IR is my favorite out of all PDX games and Vic2 with mods that actually make it work is pretty great too. The reason I HOI4 is my least played game is that it's internal politics management is complete joke and there are hundreds of games that do WW2 front line management much better. If there was a Gary Grigsby's Medieval Autism Simulator or Industrial Revolution Simulator I would drop other Paradox games too. I don't like Civ games because they are basically board games with historical theme. I know that perfect simulation of history won't ever be possible and millions of simplifications are necessary. Still the game that's being advertised as simulation of a given historical period should attempt to recreate realities of those times as closely as possible.
I dont see how CK3 is more complex than CK2. Base release was basically CK2 lite and after that, in DLCs, they are mostly adding stupid RP (if you can off map areas spamming you with a small pool of events a RP) mechanics and stuff like legends that is basically click and ignore (you can even skip clicking part for better experience). Haven't played VIC3 in a long time but when I did, I would just rush Corn Laws to get market liberal, introduce laissez faire to get more capitalist investment and leave the rest of the world economically behind in every game.

 

[Computer God Autism]

The concept of having a sort of bureaucratic capacity as a resource was a good idea.
It was implemented terribly in EU4 and came to devour the entire game.

I disagree Monarch Mana is supposed to even represent bureaucratic capacity since it's spent on so many things bureaucrats would have no business or hand in such as tech, but more importantly because EU4 has tried to represent hard bureaucratic capacity separately; first with states capacity, going through multiple iterations until we've gotten to modern governing capacity. Cores are the only part of expansion that are directly related to monarch mana funnily enough.

 

[Lurking no more]

I disagree Monarch Mana is supposed to even represent bureaucratic capacity since it's spent on so many things bureaucrats would have no business or hand in such as tech, but more importantly because EU4 has tried to represent hard bureaucratic capacity separately; first with states capacity, going through multiple iterations until we've gotten to modern governing capacity. Cores are the only part of expansion that are directly related to monarch mana funnily enough.

While the monarch and government agents wouldn't (usually) directly be developing tech, they would be in charge of actually implementing that change throughout a state. It doesn't matter if a new scythe or plow was invented somewhere unless it's actually be introduced to the peasantry of a region, and similarly, even if you've invented a new gun, that doesn't make it automatically appear in your soldiers' hands. Of course, all of this could instead be represented by a monetary cost and some required amount of proper pops if you want to go a more simulationist route, but an expensive and large bureaucracy does not imply a functional bureaucracy.

The real reason they were implemented as they were was to give a resource that didn't have as large a difference between large rich states and small poorer ones. Initially, a small poor state on average would be getting 6 mana per month in each category, while a large rich one would only be getting an average of 9 per month. In modern patches that's less true, with very rich countries being able to get over 14 on average, while smaller countries are closer to 7.

 

[Computer God Autism]

While the monarch and government agents wouldn't (usually) directly be developing tech, they would be in charge of actually implementing that change throughout a state. It doesn't matter if a new scythe or plow was invented somewhere unless it's actually be introduced to the peasantry of a region, and similarly, even if you've invented a new gun, that doesn't make it automatically appear in your soldiers' hands. Of course, all of this could instead be represented by a monetary cost and some required amount of proper pops if you want to go a more simulationist route, but an expensive and large bureaucracy does not imply a functional bureaucracy.

The real reason they were implemented as they were was to give a resource that didn't have as large a difference between large rich states and small poorer ones. Initially, a small poor state on average would be getting 6 mana per month in each category, while a large rich one would only be getting an average of 9 per month. In modern patches that's less true, with very rich countries being able to get over 14 on average, while smaller countries are closer to 7.

Yes, the government would sometimes be responsible for encouraging the adoption or proliferation of new technologies - but that's what we have the Institution system to represent, which is exactly the system that you're describing.

Really the whole tech system in EU4 is one massive trash fire of bloat. Where tech ends and national ideas and institutions begins have no clear or sensible delineation beyond the demands of mechanics and most of the changes that have been done to them in years have just been retroactive attempts to either add more depth to the system, or fix the issues caused by trying to add more depth to something that was design to be fundamentally shallow.

 

[Ughubughughughughughghlug]

I disagree Monarch Mana is supposed to even represent bureaucratic capacity since it's spent on so many things bureaucrats would have no business or hand in such as tech, but more importantly because EU4 has tried to represent hard bureaucratic capacity separately; first with states capacity, going through multiple iterations until we've gotten to modern governing capacity. Cores are the only part of expansion that are directly related to monarch mana funnily enough.

You're confusing junk they added way down the line with the original design of the game.

 

[Stoneheart]

Okay, and? Mana doesn't give you any more power in MP than in SP.

Thats correct, but you have to be much better using it than in SP.

No, it's not. Institutions are how most nations are 'nerfed' and even countries like Castile that start off with poor rulers don't typically have issue keeping up.

Castile yeah because they buffed the country way to much when they introduced Institutions.
Institutions also doesnt work to nerf nations in the western group. you get sooo many boni...

because mana simultaneously has little impact on a tag's day to day performance while still driving its progression. It's implementation is retarded and I would prefer 100 custom modifiers to a single instance of monarch mana because at least those modifiers help meaningfully customize tags and one of EU4's strong points is that its UI is actually good at helping the player understand them.

custom modifiers dont work because they need way to much time maintaining.
A Stellairs like system could work, i realy like how they implemented different government forms and that system could be used for other parts.
But even that needs Mana in Stellaris to keep you from breaking the game to much.

Such as... technology? You know, that system that's incredibly engaging in Victoria 2? Or maybe rulers and advisors? That system that is infinitely more interactive in CK2?

So you want more RNG?

And no, buildings and tech can't be ignored if you have enough piety or prestige - tell me you don't understand CK2 without telling me.

they can, thanks to all the crap from all the DLCs.

I did actually but then again I am severrey autistic. But seriously having a very important element of the game were you can only tweak around the edges is actually a super interesting mechanic and really immerses you into your role as the state in Vicky 2.

getting everything done right is a giant time sink, its good that somebody likes it, but the upsides from it are much to small for most people to care about.
Also the games should feel different, so having the Vic line of games focusing more on Pops and production is fine by me.

otally did. IR is my favorite out of all PDX games and Vic2 with mods that actually make it work is pretty great too.

I adore the mechanic in IR, but the implementation is just horseshit. Its fine for a tall build, but that cuts down the playable factions alot.
It doesnt work in western europe and its was the micro heavy for the big nations,

The reason I HOI4 is my least played game is that it's internal politics management is complete joke and there are hundreds of games that do WW2 front line management much better.

which internal politics management? they have 10+ systems and half of them are broken.

I dont see how CK3 is more complex than CK2. Base release was basically CK2 lite and after that, in DLCs, they are mostly adding stupid RP (if you can off map areas spamming you with a small pool of events a RP) mechanics and stuff like legends that is basically click and ignore (you can even skip clicking part for better experience). Haven't played VIC3 in a long time but when I did, I would just rush Corn Laws to get market liberal, introduce laissez faire to get more capitalist investment and leave the rest of the world economically behind in every game.

they arent. thats why nobody plays them.

I disagree Monarch Mana is supposed to even represent bureaucratic capacity since it's spent on so many things bureaucrats would have no business or hand in such as tech, but more importantly because EU4 has tried to represent hard bureaucratic capacity separately; first with states capacity, going through multiple iterations until we've gotten to modern governing capacity. Cores are the only part of expansion that are directly related to monarch mana funnily enough.

You need Bird mana in some peace deals.

The real reason they were implemented as they were was to give a resource that didn't have as large a difference between large rich states and small poorer ones. Initially, a small poor state on average would be getting 6 mana per month in each category, while a large rich one would only be getting an average of 9 per month. In modern patches that's less true, with very rich countries being able to get over 14 on average, while smaller countries are closer to 7.

dont forget about cost reductions for larger countries. getting more Mana snowballs in the newer system. you get reductions for getting ahead in tech.

You're confusing junk they added way down the line with the original design of the game.

adding new stuff isnt such a big problem, but they change stuff all the time and dont update older systems.
Its clearest in Hoi4 with the political systems. every DLC comes with a new system and old ones are never updated.

 

[Computer God Autism]

You're confusing junk they added way down the line with the original design of the game.

As more mechanics are added, what something represents changes accordingly as new values are made. If we were arguing 1.0 EU4 where the only thing to worry about are spending ADM on cores and the New World penalty, then yes, you'd be correct. But EU4 is a decade old game and my point is that its feature bloat has gotten to the point where mana has largely been obsoleted as a meaningfully engaging mechanic while still holding core progression hostage. Paradox realized that a few years into development and tried to decouple as many things from mana as they could, but their solution was just to build around it rather than rework it from the ground up. This approach is also why we still have the same trade system as 2013 EU4 and to this day have never had meaningful improvements to combat or army composition.

 

[Lurking no more]

On another topic entirely, I went and took a look at the EU4 forums, and to my surprise, Forum Universalis is still being updated, even if no one has added a country in a while. For those who don't know, it's a mod somewhat similar to the old EU2 Fantasia mode, in that most of the world is uncolonized with the only countries on the map holding a single province, except that all of the countries were made by forum users. It was as autistic and unbalanced as you'd expect, but I thought it was pretty fun back in the day. Would there be any interest in doing something similar as a Kiwi Universalis?

 

[LovisXVI]

Make it EU4 and allow for High American tech level and I would be interested in helping out (I have never modded EU2)

 

[Lurking no more]

It would be EU4, I meant that it's similar the Fantasia game mode for EU2, and people would be perfectly free to pick High American.

 

[foreman 89]

One Proud Bavarian's mixed review of Roads to Power - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rCuU-tFb5gA

 

[Lurking no more]

I've went ahead and blanked the map, and will start accepting submissions for Kiwi Universalis. The minimum I want for a submission is a country name, a flag, a capital province, a map color, your government type, culture, religion and your ruler. You may of course provide me with more if you desire, such as a name list (if not provided I'm just going to copy it from your culture), tech group (if not provided I'm just going to go with the normal for your culture), ship names, national ideas, province names (the names of provinces and their cities when you own them), and so on. For right now, I will not be adding any custom events, missions, disasters or the like as they require a bit more effort, which will be a waste of time if the mod doesn't take off, but I will be perfectly happy to add them later.

For balancing National Ideas, I'm just going to say no Colonists in your traditions, and don't go overboard. I expect ideas will be stronger than the average vanilla country, but I don't want to see someone running around with +20% Discipline. Negative ideas are possible, and you could have maluses to counteract a strong bonus, but I expect it to be an actual malus if you're wanting something big.

Assuming that there's enough interest (I'll say at least 5 entries, as that'd make 6 countries after mine, and I think that's a decent minimum for a mod), I'll make a separate thread and finish up the gameplay side of things.

Finally, would people prefer it if I keep the vanilla development, even it out around the world (capitals would have higher dev) or have development be randomly determined when you colonize a province?

 

[LovisXVI]

I will get something together soon, gotta update my CK3 mod first.

 

[Midwit]

I've went ahead and blanked the map, and will start accepting submissions for Kiwi Universalis.

The Thatcherreich. Its capitol is Grantham and the rest is self-explanitory.

 

[General Emílio Médici]

You may of course provide me with more if you desire, such as a name list (if not provided I'm just going to copy it from your culture), tech group (if not provided I'm just going to go with the normal for your culture), ship names, national ideas, province names (the names of provinces and their cities when you own them), and so on.

I am not very good, but here is my attempt at a Kiwi Universalis submission based on one of my pet lolcows Günther Fehlinger the Austrian NATO Hypebeast. It't a bit bigger than you asked but I gave it a different spin going more for a vassal swarm gameplay to mesh with Günther's own love of DISMANTLE and take over. Once the mod is ongoing it's provinces can be adjusted and all.



I couldn't find the name of Ms. Fehlinger and twitter is ass to browse so once anyone finds it it can be put here. Gunther doesn't have kid yet but he should get one as soon as the game starts.



The ideas are a bit of a mess, I am not very good at making custom nations. But I decided to take on the whole "I call to DISMANTLE!" thing and play into it. Gunther starts the game already being able to make Client States, and his play style should be to focus on beating his enemies and dismantling them into compliant subjects who will contribute to the Reich EU and NATO prosperity.

 

[Lurking no more]

The Thatcherreich. Its capitol is Grantham and the rest is self-explanitory.

Are you wanting Ms. Thatcher to be a monarch or the head of a republic? And do you want the flag to be the Union Jack, or just Mrs. Thatcher's face? If you're wanting ideas some guidance would be good.
Edit: Also, what color do you want?

The ideas are a bit of a mess, I am not very good at making custom nations. But I decided to take on the whole "I call to DISMANTLE!" thing and play into it. Gunther starts the game already being able to make Client States, and his play style should be to focus on beating his enemies and dismantling them into compliant subjects who will contribute to the Reich EU and NATO prosperity.

After thinking for a bit, those ideas should be fine. The main thing I'm worried about is the immediate access to client states, and while do allow you to effectively gain an extra colonist early on, you don't control it and as they expand their liberty desire would increase. If it ends up being a problem I'll move it down to idea 1. You will only be starting with Vienna, but it shouldn't be too hard for Mr. Gunther to take Austria and then rid it of that dreaded neutrality. If you want your ideas to have names or descriptions, let me know.

 

[General Emílio Médici]

You could move it out of traditions to one of the later ideas if you feel like you need to balance it. The vanilla game lets you have client states around 1500 despite what a lot of people think due to the Influence-Mercenary policy idea which lets you get access to them early so maybe having it be the 6th idea?

 

[Lurking no more]

You could move it out of traditions to one of the later ideas if you feel like you need to balance it. The vanilla game lets you have client states around 1500 despite what a lot of people think due to the Influence-Mercenary policy idea which lets you get access to them early so maybe having it be the 6th idea?

If I do move it, it won't need to go that far down, idea 2 or 3 would be the latest. It's the traditions and early ideas that would cause the most problems, just due to how quickly they can snowball.

 

[Gorilla Milk]

Started playing Stellaris again after several years of not playing it, and I have to say its... Quite fun. I miss the "three different types of FTL" since hyperlanes are boring, but even so i'm having quite a bit of fun with it.
I really appreciate the mods, because its kind of surreal in a fun way to be playing as the Mechanicum (Mechanicus shipset mod, fanatic spiritualist and xenophobe with the cyborg origin) and be engaged in a three way galactic war between the Klingon Empire and the Asari from mass effect.

 

[East_Clintwood]

Tinto Talks 30 is out:

Now, Project Caesar does not have a ‘Fabricate Claim’ button that magically creates a CB on any nation, nor do we have a system of claims, but you have several different options to get a CB.

Finally we have the way of creating a CB, when there is a more or less legitimate way to one. First of all, creating a CB on a country requires you to have a spy network in the target country, similar to how claim fabrication works in EU4, but you also need to have some sort of reason to create the type of CB you want. If you let's say play Denmark and want to take back Skåne from Sweden, as you have cores on it, then you can create a ‘Conquer Core’ CB on them, or if they have used Privateers in sea zones where you have a Maritime Presence, you can create another CB on them. There are 50+ different CB you can create depending on circumstances, including everything from ‘Flower Wars’ for countries of Nahuatl religion, ‘Dissolving the Tatar Yoke’ for the tributaries under that International Organization, or ‘Humiliating Rivals’.

A conquer CB will make taking land cheaper, while a ‘humiliation CB will make them more expensive.

Taking land on a Humiliation? Fuck yes.

How do you integrate a location then? Well, this is the challenge in Project Caesar, as you do not have any magic paper mana to spend on it, but instead you need to use one of the members of your cabinet to integrate it. At the start of the game, a cabinet member can integrate an entire province at once, but in the Age of Absolutism you have an advance that will let you integrate an entire area at once.

This integration is not instant, but depends on many factors, like the status and the population living in the locations affected, but on average integrating a province may take between 25 and 50 years.