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 .
HeyYou said:
The next EU4 DLC will focus on the Scandinavian and Baltic nations, including the Teutonic Order. At least it's an area that people have wanted overhauled for awhile.
Click to expand...
That's officially the last one, right? I just got into EU4 after that $20 Humble Bundle, but I'm already wary of Paradox making more changes.
 
So what are less frequently played nations in europe, north africa, west or south asia? I want to try stuff that's not played to death in EU, Victoria and HoI
 
Zaryiu2 said:
So what are less frequently played nations in europe, north africa, west or south asia? I want to try stuff that's not played to death in EU, Victoria and HoI
Click to expand...
In Victoria 2, Egypt makes for a good uncivilized country to play with a lot of potential goals (like forming a pan-Arab state). If you really want a challenge play Algiers since they're pretty interesting if you can beat the French because Morocco is easy to annex at that point.

For HOI both Greece and Turkey are interesting since either Allied or Axis paths make sense for them and they're pretty open-ended for what your goals can be.
 
Zaryiu2 said:
So what are less frequently played nations in europe, north africa, west or south asia? I want to try stuff that's not played to death in EU, Victoria and HoI
Click to expand...
Ayutthaya is fun in EU4.
I like Bhaumakara (?) Raj (the one in Orissa) in CK2, is one of my most frequently played ones.
Play Thailand in Victoria II, only Southeast Asian state to not be colonized. Keep it that way.
 
If you want to hatewatch something I give you this overthought pseudointellectual bullshit
In short the lack of nation states in Africa is blamed on "eurocentrism", you know, instead of the actual lack of nation states. These people are arguing for ruining the gameplay for the sake of revising history so that Africa isn't 90% tribes and kingdoms with no potential for stopping the colonial powers, rather than wanting the developers to give more thought and attention towards the few powerful factions that did exist in Africa, they want the developers to dot the lands with hundreds of tiny nations that ultimately do not matter. Prepare for a absolutely horrid gameplay sessions where you'll have to micro manage wars against dozens of shitty tribal states that pose no challenge just to participate in the colonial race. Also no wonder Victoria 3 can't handle having a market simulation in the background when it has to simulate a hundred new african factions instead.
 
Übertroon said:
If you want to hatewatch something I give you this overthought pseudointellectual bullshit
https://youtube.com/watch?v=93MeQZYwsi8In short the lack of nation states in Africa is blamed on "eurocentrism", you know, instead of the actual lack of nation states. These people are arguing for ruining the gameplay for the sake of revising history so that Africa isn't 90% tribes and kingdoms with no potential for stopping the colonial powers, rather than wanting the developers to give more thought and attention towards the few powerful factions that did exist in Africa, they want the developers to dot the lands with hundreds of tiny nations that ultimately do not matter. Prepare for a absolutely horrid gameplay sessions where you'll have to micro manage wars against dozens of shitty tribal states that pose no challenge just to participate in the colonial race. Also no wonder Victoria 3 can't handle having a market simulation in the background when it has to simulate a hundred new african factions instead.
Click to expand...
The way shit's going down, EU4 natives are going to be a joke compared to the African blobbing before the scramble period. Instead of adding in more interesting mechanics and things to do as an unciv like how they've handled the tribal mechanics in CK3 where playing as a non Arab Africans can be engaging they chose to just go We WUZ KANGZ and sheit route, very disappointing.

We'll never see a modern PDX game outside of Stellaris Xenophobes doing this.
RUS.png
Anyways I decided to do a run in Vicky 2 as Qing China to forget how garbage the new game will be, suffice to say, things are not doing that great even If I'm ranked 9th in the world.
Qing 1.pngQing 2.png
 
Crabouse-united said:
The way shit's going down, EU4 natives are going to be a joke compared to the African blobbing before the scramble period. Instead of adding in more interesting mechanics and things to do as an unciv like how they've handled the tribal mechanics in CK3 where playing as a non Arab Africans can be engaging they chose to just go We WUZ KANGZ and sheit route, very disappointing.
Click to expand...
True, I'm expecting a lot of zoomer paradox lefties to be claiming that the Europeans steamrolling Africa was "just a fluke" and that we live in the "bad timeline" where the africans just weren't ready to form their mega huge empire with western tech before the Europeans colonized them. We've already seen paradox go full retard with alternative history in HoI4, expect lots of insane blobbing and unrealistic bullshit in Victoria 3 which just makes it tedious to actually try to build a solid empire
 
Übertroon said:
blamed on "eurocentrism"
Click to expand...
Lol Eurocentrism. World in 19. Century - first half of 20th century was Eurocentric. If you look at map of world in 1900
1024px-Flag-map_of_the_world_(1900).png

There are
A) European states
B) European colonies
C) Nation of European descent (USA,latin America)
D) China while not directlly ruled by Europeans it was still turned into their bitch. Same goes for Iran and Afghanistan.
E) Japan that quickly adopted European tech and Ethiopia that modernised enough to beat Italians. Only to be conquered in 1936.
 
Übertroon said:
If you want to hatewatch something I give you this overthought pseudointellectual bullshit
https://youtube.com/watch?v=93MeQZYwsi8In short the lack of nation states in Africa is blamed on "eurocentrism", you know, instead of the actual lack of nation states. These people are arguing for ruining the gameplay for the sake of revising history so that Africa isn't 90% tribes and kingdoms with no potential for stopping the colonial powers, rather than wanting the developers to give more thought and attention towards the few powerful factions that did exist in Africa, they want the developers to dot the lands with hundreds of tiny nations that ultimately do not matter. Prepare for a absolutely horrid gameplay sessions where you'll have to micro manage wars against dozens of shitty tribal states that pose no challenge just to participate in the colonial race. Also no wonder Victoria 3 can't handle having a market simulation in the background when it has to simulate a hundred new african factions instead.
Click to expand...
"Why is Africa so underdeveloped in Vicky 2? Must be that damn Eurocentrism"

Watch them give Africa a massive boost to Westernization due to "muh evil whitey"
 
Chuck Gruden said:
"Why is Africa so underdeveloped in Vicky 2? Must be that damn Eurocentrism"

Watch them give Africa a massive boost to Westernization due to "muh evil whitey"
Click to expand...
I'm late to the party, but the way they did that in eu4... Nigger shitholes like Mali have more dev than areas in Europe because "i read about heckin mali kang on wikipedia n he wuz rich". Even some woke soy guzzlers would admit that this is unironic "we wuz kangz" tier shit, right?. At this point I wonder why Paracuck doesn't go the CA route and starts making fantasy games only, that would suit them better and bring in more of their beloved shekels.
 
Kochmess said:
I'm late to the party, but the way they did that in eu4... Nigger shitholes like Mali have more dev than areas in Europe because "i read about heckin mali kang on wikipedia n he wuz rich". Even some woke soy guzzlers would admit that this is unironic "we wuz kangz" tier shit, right?. At this point I wonder why Paracuck doesn't go the CA route and starts making fantasy games only, that would suit them better and bring in more of their beloved shekels.
Click to expand...
That would require either A. originality or B. shelling out for a license. Its been demonstrated they don't have A. and B. would require hefty up-front costs to convince someone a map painter is the appropriate video game for their IP. Maybe they should talk to G. R. R. Martin about A Song of Ice and Fire given his total laziness there. Which given what we've seen out of PDX, the two of them deserve each other.
 
Snekposter said:
That would require either A. originality or B. shelling out for a license. Its been demonstrated they don't have A. and B. would require hefty up-front costs to convince someone a map painter is the appropriate video game for their IP. Maybe they should talk to G. R. R. Martin about A Song of Ice and Fire given his total laziness there. Which given what we've seen out of PDX, the two of them deserve each other.
Click to expand...
Why bother to buy licenses when you can have your players create mods for already existing properties and just let them do their thing under the table? I imagine Crusader Kings 2 got a few sales based on the fact it had a well known Game of Thrones mod when that was at its peak in popularity.
 
Breadbassket said:
Why bother to buy licenses when you can have your players create mods for already existing properties and just let them do their thing under the table? I imagine Crusader Kings 2 got a few sales based on the fact it had a well known Game of Thrones mod when that was at its peak in popularity.
Click to expand...

Did for me. Same with Third Age: Total War. I don't get why almost all publishers are anti-mod when outside of yearly releases like sports and Call of Duty they if anything add to sales, and building a game from the ground up to be mod friendly helps the development process of the base game.
 
Super Hans said:
Did for me. Same with Third Age: Total War. I don't get why almost all publishers are anti-mod when outside of yearly releases like sports and Call of Duty they if anything add to sales, and building a game from the ground up to be mod friendly helps the development process of the base game.
Click to expand...
Because most devs know the mods will outclass their cash grabs dlcs by far. And also because they hate freedom, imagine the horror of people making something funny or political incorrect.
 
Kochmess said:
Because most devs know the mods will outclass their cash grabs dlcs by far. And also because they hate freedom, imagine the horror of people making something funny or political incorrect.
Click to expand...
Big game companies seem to of collectively forget the power mods have to prolong a games lifespan. Classic DOOM still has a notable modding community to this day and people forget but Team Fortress and Counter-Strike of Valve fame were originally just mods. Its almost like the industry has regressed when it comes to embracing user created content.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom