Paradox Studio Thread

  • Want to keep track of this thread?
    Accounts can bookmark posts, watch threads for updates, and jump back to where you stopped reading.
    Create account

What are your expectations for the EU5 release?

  • Total voters
    83
  • Poll closed .
Do you need the new abysmal HoI4 DLC to engage with faction mechanics and to properly get all functionality out of navies?
I tried poking around a bit, but all my old saves were broken so i couldnt find any faction stuff at all and i also couldnt find "naval headquarters" which i saw someone post about.
And then it says it has "New Military Doctrines" but then in the screenshots and promo material its just Grand Battleplan which everyone has access too, lol.

Sometimes i feel like they make the DLC content descriptions extremely vague in order to make you think you are missing out on something.
 
Big Fart Bart said:
Do you need the new abysmal HoI4 DLC to engage with faction mechanics and to properly get all functionality out of navies?
I tried poking around a bit, but all my old saves were broken so i couldnt find any faction stuff at all and i also couldnt find "naval headquarters" which i saw someone post about.
And then it says it has "New Military Doctrines" but then in the screenshots and promo material its just Grand Battleplan which everyone has access too, lol.
Click to expand...
Naval HQ is DLC, as are I believe the new carrier stances and the new repair/support ships. The general change to dominance instead of supremacy, and the naval targeting options are both free IIRC.

Military doctrines shouldn't be locked behind NCNS, although IIRC some of the sub doctrines are potentially locked behind, or at least altered by, previous DLC.
If your doctrine screen looks like this:
Doctrines.PNG
You need to click on the Grand Battleplan icon to change it, similarly if you click on any of the sub doctrines it should let you change/select those.

Speaking of HoI 4, they're currently running an open beta looking at changing some of naval stuff. No fixes yet for the AI being retarded and/or way too passive, so far mostly just adjustments to manpower/IC/ranges and most importantly resource costs. From now on modules won't have a resource cost, but the base hull generally costs more. This means no more pimped out destroyers/cruisers absolutely raping your steel. Perhaps the most interesting change for me personally is Escort Carriers (which I've posted about my love of before), got a couple of nice buffs. 16% less IC, 40% less manpower and most importantly each shipyard assigned now costs 3 steel instead of 2 steel + 1 chromium. This is in stark contrast to carrier II's which got bumped from 3 steel + 1 chromium to 5 + 1.
 
Thank you.
They always manage to add at least one thing i would like (Naval HQ), but its a lot easier to say no now with these prices.
 
Big Fart Bart said:
Thank you.
They always manage to add at least one thing i would like (Naval HQ), but its a lot easier to say no now with these prices.
Click to expand...
Honestly Naval HQs are super underwhelming IMO. This is the measly bonus Japan gets from putting their best admiral, Yamamoto, in one, which you would never do because youy want your good admirals actually commanding fleets:
naval HQ.PNGnaval HQ.PNG
They also have a bunch of other issues. Shit range( Japan's starting one barely reaches the Northern Philippines/South China Sea), ridiculous cost (10-20k IC depending how many you have, not to mention the cost of getting a level 8 port to put it on). They also have the single worst sound alert/notification in the world.

All that being said if you really want to use them despite Paradox jewing everyone on the DLC price you should remember that no matter what, you should definitely not go download the dlc files from a pirate site and use Cream_API to let you play with them for free, because that would be piracy and wrong.
 
I'm getting back into CK2 and it handles fertility abysmally. Realtime-with-pause games already struggle with feeling like you're waiting for the game to play itself, and it's especially bad with certain mechanics. I understand there's some kind of malus applied to unlanded courtiers because we don't need commanders and functionaries pumping out kids. There is no reason for that malus to apply to kinsmen. I managed to get the heir of a foreign kingdom into my court and married matrilineally to a princess of my dynasty. 8 years of marriage and no children. The game wants you to be shrewd with political marriages but there's no incentive to engage with it when there's often no payoff to all this maneuvering relative to the time it takes. It feels cheap to use the Pope's "give claims please" button too often but it allows you to skip years of joyless non-gameplay. Even with a family Focus, I've only had three kids in 22 years on the throne. The general lack of second and third sons throughout a realm causes problems. I end up running out of good potential councilors, and there are never any landless men of my dynasty whenever I need to give away titles.
 
SHITTAHS CLOGGED! said:
I'm getting back into CK2 and it handles fertility abysmally.
Click to expand...
It isnt that bad imo, unless you are marrying old ass women, just stack traits that have fertility buffs, like you said here
SHITTAHS CLOGGED! said:
Even with a family Focus, I've only had three kids in 22 years on the throne.
Click to expand...
Just marry someone with fertility buffs and also stack them yourself if you really want a bunch of kids, I cant say I have ever really run into a problem with having kids in my 1000+ hours of playtime, if anything a lot of times I had issues with having too many kids.
SHITTAHS CLOGGED! said:
It feels cheap to use the Pope's "give claims please" button too often but it allows you to skip years of joyless non-gameplay.
Click to expand...
Sure it feels cheap but its better than having to play the game of waiting years to fabricate claims, or marrying into claims.
SHITTAHS CLOGGED! said:
I end up running out of good potential councilors
Click to expand...
There's two easy ways around this, if you are large enough (which I am sure you are) you can always just invite people from other lands who are landless with the stats you want, or the second option is to just summon someone with the stats you want through a decision which costs money and is a gamble cause you might end up getting someone shit
SHITTAHS CLOGGED! said:
there are never any landless men of my dynasty whenever I need to give away titles
Click to expand...
I dont know why you'd want to do this really, I stray away from doing it just due to the fact its a potential claimant who will more than likely try to take your throne down the line, most of the time I just try to find people with high stewardship or martial to give land away to (usually commanders)
 
The Count of Monte Cristo said:
I dont know why you'd want to do this really, I stray away from doing it just due to the fact its a potential claimant who will more than likely try to take your throne down the line, most of the time I just try to find people with high stewardship or martial to give land away to (usually commanders)
Click to expand...
It is useful if you want to split up your realm because it is too big to be stable, and you can later House Seniority the titles to consolidate later on.
 
SHITTAHS CLOGGED! said:
I'm getting back into CK2 and it handles fertility abysmally. Realtime-with-pause games already struggle with feeling like you're waiting for the game to play itself, and it's especially bad with certain mechanics. I understand there's some kind of malus applied to unlanded courtiers because we don't need commanders and functionaries pumping out kids. There is no reason for that malus to apply to kinsmen. I managed to get the heir of a foreign kingdom into my court and married matrilineally to a princess of my dynasty. 8 years of marriage and no children. The game wants you to be shrewd with political marriages but there's no incentive to engage with it when there's often no payoff to all this maneuvering relative to the time it takes. It feels cheap to use the Pope's "give claims please" button too often but it allows you to skip years of joyless non-gameplay. Even with a family Focus, I've only had three kids in 22 years on the throne. The general lack of second and third sons throughout a realm causes problems. I end up running out of good potential councilors, and there are never any landless men of my dynasty whenever I need to give away titles.
Click to expand...
I've never had issues with fertility in my games but fertility is partly randomized/genetic for characters. If you want to see a character's fertility turn on charinfo and it'll show you. Fertility for both parents is taken into account for likelihood to have children so an unlucky matchup can also result in fewer children even if one of the spouses is good.

Also always try to get your wife/husband to be your lover. It triples fertility in that respect.
 
Rome's rightful successor said:
Speaking of CK3, I find it strange how none of the expansions are about the Crusades in a game called Crusader Kings.
View attachment 8785183
Click to expand...
Paradox listened to the third world retards that were demanding China should be in the game.
Now the game is unfixable.
They will have to dumb the game down even more in order to not cause performance issues due to East Asia sucking up so much performance even though people will only play there maybe once.
India was already a mistake and Paradox tripled down on it like the tranny retards they are.
 
Monopolywheel said:
Paradox listened to the third world retards that were demanding China should be in the game.
Now the game is unfixable.
They will have to dumb the game down even more in order to not cause performance issues due to East Asia sucking up so much performance even though people will only play there maybe once.
India was already a mistake and Paradox tripled down on it like the tranny retards they are.
Click to expand...
Really agree with this, just got CK3 recently and it really slows down later in the game.
I actually like how CK2 implements China into the game much better
 
Computer God Autism said:
No, none of us are faggots. Unlike Panzer.
Click to expand...
Panzer trooned out afaik.
Also he used to work for Netease . Company owned by Grorious CPC.
Anyway every time when I hear about it I feel little bit of morbid curiosity. Because without autism of Panzer, Trooncifica et al. I would not be here.
But I am not buying CK3 and I can't be bothered to waste time to get it running on review copy.
 
Batko Bandera said:
Really agree with this, just got CK3 recently and it really slows down later in the game.
I actually like how CK2 implements China into the game much better
Click to expand...
The non-negotiable mod for CK2 imo is the eponymous "No India" mod.

The pre-India map is so much better.
 
Radola Gajda said:
Anyway every time when I hear about it I feel little bit of morbid curiosity. Because without autism of Panzer, Trooncifica et al. I would not be here.
Click to expand...
Whenever I get an inkling to play it again, for whatever reason, I am reminded of how utterly hollow it is. There is maybe two different kinds of gameplay, and they have the same loop. What a fucking shame that they wasted a perfectly good start on some shit that gets old quick, could have focused on religion and how it affected the society it was in, how they could change over time, reform, in ways that CK2 just couldn't, but NOPE had to add China for some goddamn reason. Never mind the fact that the Chinese religions are all fucked up and wrong. Maitreya was literally insulting in how stupid it is.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom