Paradox Studio Thread

[Radola Gajda]

What's Vicky 3 like now? I haven't heard anyone talk about it since launch, is it better or totally dead?

There is nothing to talk about. Game is pretty much same as day it came out. Daily peak was 5k players last time I checked. All other modern pdx have 10k+ for comparison

 

[JJLiautaud]

The day that Paradox adds a 'be molested or -50 mana' event is the day I stop playing their games

In other news, CK3 dev diaries:
Steam presented me with "Dev Diary #116 - Agrarian Research Techniques"
Medievalistfags like me and most others who made CK2 a success probably lit up at the prospect of CK3 getting hardcore historical content, rather than 'Among Us' or 'You have a Small Penis Haha' events (both are in-game). Perhaps a focus on land-use, the most important aspect of human civlization before the advent of the atom bomb, would provide us with actual medieval stories? Maybe the advent of windmills or crop rotation would show up?. Perhaps Middlesex would no longer outproduce the entirity of Bohemia?
Nope. It was just a joke; https://forum.paradoxplaza.com/foru...iary-116-agrarian-research-techniques.1569914
I haven't followed 'dev diaries' and never will - but who are they appealing to? Who wants things like this? Casual or hardcore, this is an insult to your intelligence.

yeah for a game that focuses on a culture and society thats defined by agriculture and the rhythms of that life; its amazing that theres almost zero reference to agriculture in the game, also no chevauchee, no real reference to the way an army of the era absolutely wrecks a people and a place, its all just counters on a board.

 

[Just Some Other Guy]

Anyone still play Cities:Skylines? Does it still feel like baby's 1st SimCity?

 

[Ughubughughughughughghlug]

yeah for a game that focuses on a culture and society thats defined by agriculture and the rhythms of that life; its amazing that theres almost zero reference to agriculture in the game, also no chevauchee, no real reference to the way an army of the era absolutely wrecks a people and a place, its all just counters on a board.

I don't even remember how the supply system works, I think just the same boring ass "stay below the limit or suffer attrition" thing, but yeah, any Medieval army should be like this thing that eats up finite supplies in a province and in the process (especially at low levels of supplies) wrecks the economy of the province. I can easily imagine Chevauchee as a setting you can flip the army too, like flipping it to Looting in CK2, which makes the army destroy way more Supplies than it actually needs in order to quickly rack up that damage on deep penetration raids.

This also is, much like seas freezing in winter, something that maybe AI is too stupid to handle (Redditors DEFINITELY too stupid to handle), but didn't armies even as late as the 1800s avoid fighting in Winter for the most part? And even oftentimes disband and go home for the harvest? "Campaign season" should really be a thing. Even Total War makes an effort to disincentivize mindlessly roaming around enemy territory in the snow.

Sieges especially manage to be surprisingly lame given that it's the one era when they're the most iconic. In my fantasy CK3 (the good one, not the one that actually exists), sieges would have like a Wall integrity stat and if it's above a threshold that acts as a multiplier on army strength, siege engines take a while to build (construction starts automatically, dedicated engineers in the army speed it up and make better engines) but reduce Walls. Settlement also has Supplies that drain down. Surrender happens as a chance when Supplies are low and Walls take a long time to recover. Certain special statuses - breach in wall, cut off water supply, and cut off supplies in general - would effect these (if a defender can keep a supply channel open they can greatly prolong the siege).

When you combine that with supplies and plague for the besieging army, suddenly you get a situation (as in real life) where the sieger is on just as much of a time table as the defender, because when you're sitting in place with no logistical networks you could very well run out of food before they, with their storehouses, do.

Big thing, make siege much more interesting: have the ability to sort of gamble on it with threats. I've heard that it was customary in the Medieval period to threaten to obliterate a city if it didn't surrender immediately, often brought up by Crusader apologists for the Sack of Jerusalem. So, you roll up on a city, you get to set a promise of max looting if they do surrender and min looting if they don't. Big thing, if you make a severe threat they will be more likely to surrender, but if not then they'll hold out LONGER when they do fight (because it's so catastrophic to lose).

EU4 sieges currently feel much more intense and "epic" than CK2 sieges, probably because they are less predictable and frustrate through getting in your way.

 

[Knud Lavard]

yeah for a game that focuses on a culture and society thats defined by agriculture and the rhythms of that life; its amazing that theres almost zero reference to agriculture in the game, also no chevauchee, no real reference to the way an army of the era absolutely wrecks a people and a place, its all just counters on a board.

"Campaign season" should really be a thing. Even Total War makes an effort to disincentivize mindlessly roaming around enemy territory in the snow.

Campaign season being tied to the agricultural calendar was done very well in King of Dragon Pass (and Six Ages: Ride Like the Wind, but I'll stick to KoDP for brevity's sake). You play the Chieftain of a what's basically an early iron-age Germanic tribe. The calendar is divided into five seasons (spring, summer, autumn, midwinter, late winter/early spring), with each of these seasons acting as a 'turn'. You had two ways of conducting war: Small-scale cattle raids by professional warriors, and large-scale campaigns involving most of your tribe. The raids carried out by the professional warriors could be done in any season, though wintertime raids were hampered by poor mobility. Using your tribesmen for warfare during spring meant they weren't preparing their fields and sowing, and using them in autumn meant that the harvest wasn't being brought in - so doing either (or both!) was disasterous. Warring in winter was largely impossible due to the conditions, with most attempts leading to attrition losses and a war party that never reached their goal. Doing it in late winter/early spring was similar, though more doable due to warmer temperatures and the spring thaw. Thus, summer was the only real time you could carry out war - and this was the case for your enemies as well. It led to some interesting considerations:

• Do we send a small force to raid tribe A during the harvest? They rely on their friends in tribe B to protect them, but they will likely only send a token force during this time of the year.
• Tribe C slighted us during the sowing season, and honour demands that we attack them. Do we try to offset our poor harvest by slaughtering much of our livestock, preventing starvation but hurting our long-term food production?
• Our tribe is strong, but we also have many enemies. Do we risk sending a large war party to tribe D during the summer, well-knowing that tribe E or F may attack us while much of the tribe is away?

A similar system would be a great fit for Crusader Kings:

• We are fighting to replace Duke A with his uncle B. The campaigning season is over, but the old fart might croak soon. Do we waste soldiers and resources by keeping our men in the field?
• The Saracens are attacking King C in the Holy Land. It is currently winter, and the seas are treacherous. Do we sail now to ensure that he is not defeated before we arrive, or do we wait for calmer seas to preserve our strength?
• Our nomadic horsemen are not busy working the fields in spring and autumn, freeing them up for warfare. Do we raid our non-nomadic enemies in the spring to weaken them and prevent them from warring us in the summer, or do we wait for autumn and fatten ourselves on their rich harvest?

But until Johan is brought to the Hague to answer for his crimes, we sadly won't see systems like this in Paradox games. Sad!

 

[Lurking no more]

I don't even remember how the supply system works, I think just the same boring ass "stay below the limit or suffer attrition" thing, but yeah, any Medieval army should be like this thing that eats up finite supplies in a province and in the process (especially at low levels of supplies) wrecks the economy of the province. I can easily imagine Chevauchee as a setting you can flip the army too, like flipping it to Looting in CK2, which makes the army destroy way more Supplies than it actually needs in order to quickly rack up that damage on deep penetration raids.

This also is, much like seas freezing in winter, something that maybe AI is too stupid to handle (Redditors DEFINITELY too stupid to handle), but didn't armies even as late as the 1800s avoid fighting in Winter for the most part? And even oftentimes disband and go home for the harvest? "Campaign season" should really be a thing. Even Total War makes an effort to disincentivize mindlessly roaming around enemy territory in the snow.

Sieges especially manage to be surprisingly lame given that it's the one era when they're the most iconic. In my fantasy CK3 (the good one, not the one that actually exists), sieges would have like a Wall integrity stat and if it's above a threshold that acts as a multiplier on army strength, siege engines take a while to build (construction starts automatically, dedicated engineers in the army speed it up and make better engines) but reduce Walls. Settlement also has Supplies that drain down. Surrender happens as a chance when Supplies are low and Walls take a long time to recover. Certain special statuses - breach in wall, cut off water supply, and cut off supplies in general - would effect these (if a defender can keep a supply channel open they can greatly prolong the siege).

When you combine that with supplies and plague for the besieging army, suddenly you get a situation (as in real life) where the sieger is on just as much of a time table as the defender, because when you're sitting in place with no logistical networks you could very well run out of food before they, with their storehouses, do.

Big thing, make siege much more interesting: have the ability to sort of gamble on it with threats. I've heard that it was customary in the Medieval period to threaten to obliterate a city if it didn't surrender immediately, often brought up by Crusader apologists for the Sack of Jerusalem. So, you roll up on a city, you get to set a promise of max looting if they do surrender and min looting if they don't. Big thing, if you make a severe threat they will be more likely to surrender, but if not then they'll hold out LONGER when they do fight (because it's so catastrophic to lose).

EU4 sieges currently feel much more intense and "epic" than CK2 sieges, probably because they are less predictable and frustrate through getting in your way.

While CK sieges aren't great, if you are aiming for realism, EU4 sieges should be more intense than CK2 sieges. In the middle ages most sieges were relatively peaceful affairs, where the two forces would negotiate a timetable for a relief army to arrive. If no army showed up, the defenders would usually hand over the castle/city. The epic sieges of the middle ages that are remembered and used as the basis for movies were the exception, rather than the rule. Large drawn out battles finished by an assault on the city was far more common later due to the wide scale adoption of gunpowder, cities being controlled by more centralized states rather than feudal structures, and the breakdown of religious unity in Europe.

 

[JJLiautaud]

This also is, much like seas freezing in winter, something that maybe AI is too stupid to handle (Redditors DEFINITELY too stupid to handle), but didn't armies even as late as the 1800s avoid fighting in Winter for the most part? And even oftentimes disband and go home for the harvest? "Campaign season" should really be a thing. Even Total War makes an effort to disincentivize mindlessly roaming around enemy territory in the snow.

hell even today operations tempo slows down in the cold Perun did a neat video on how hard it is too fight in the cold even in the modern day. Also famously Hasting was lost because the anglo-saxon fyrd had to return home to harvest the crops.

 

[Ughubughughughughughghlug]

While CK sieges aren't great, if you are aiming for realism, EU4 sieges should be more intense than CK2 sieges. In the middle ages most sieges were relatively peaceful affairs, where the two forces would negotiate a timetable for a relief army to arrive. If no army showed up, the defenders would usually hand over the castle/city. The epic sieges of the middle ages that are remembered and used as the basis for movies were the exception, rather than the rule. Large drawn out battles finished by an assault on the city was far more common later due to the wide scale adoption of gunpowder, cities being controlled by more centralized states rather than feudal structures, and the breakdown of religious unity in Europe.

Well, if wall strength is very strong of an effect (as it was in real life) you'd win most sieges by running out the clock.

That's interesting, did the lords of the cities have much influence over the negotiation, like consequences for failure to put an effort in? I might imagine a very simple version of it would be that the besieged holding has a surrender timer it sets based on how long it would expect the army to take to get there (given how things are going) and then weigh it by loyalty.

There's also a problem in that CK2 has a million more holdings TO siege, so whatever mechanic there is has to be one that doesn't make the player stop and fiddle with things constantly. Perhaps the pitched siege would be an option that requires dedicated fortifications or a ruler/commander on the scene to enforce the decision to fight. So most sieges then become the equivalent of carpet-occupation like in Victoria 2, but the specific sieges that happen (at strategic locations) become much more memorable through detail.

 

[Lurking no more]

That's interesting, did the lords of the cities have much influence over the negotiation, like consequences for failure to put an effort in? I might imagine a very simple version of it would be that the besieged holding has a surrender timer it sets based on how long it would expect the army to take to get there (given how things are going) and then weigh it by loyalty.

A large part of it was just the nature of feudal contracts. The lord of the castle has an obligation to defend the land for his liege, but the liege also has the obligation to come defend his vassal. If the defenders wait it out and no relief arrives, then they could surrender the castle without any fighting and it not be considered treason or a shameful act.

 

[Cpl. Long Dong Silver]

So please don't laugh but I got Stellaris on console, I know I'm a peasant, but does anyone have tips/tricks for the latest version?

 

[Ughubughughughughughghlug]

So please don't laugh but I got Stellaris on console, I know I'm a peasant, but does anyone have tips/tricks for the latest version?

Turn off your console and do something else? Why would you voluntarily play a strategy game on a console? I had Halo Wars back in the day and that sucked even with being built around controller controls.

 

[Rendang]

So please don't laugh but I got Stellaris on console, I know I'm a peasant, but does anyone have tips/tricks for the latest version?

Torpedos are meta because of added bonus against big ship sizes (pirate stellaris), never build battleships (pirate stellaris), all the ascension paths (psionic, gene and synth) are good now (pirate stellaris), and forcing everyone to give tribute to you is now better.

Spoiler

(pirate stellaris)

 

[Honka Honka Burning Love]

So please don't laugh but I got Stellaris on console, I know I'm a peasant, but does anyone have tips/tricks for the latest version?

Is Overlord Active on Consoles yet? If yes..

Vassalize Niggers like you are Europe and the Universe is Africa.

Torpedos are meta because of added bonus against big ship sizes (pirate stellaris), never build battleships (pirate stellaris), all the ascension paths (psionic, gene and synth) are good now (pirate stellaris), and forcing everyone to give tribute to you is now better.

That may not be live on Console yet, given Console is a year behind PC in development.

 

[Quintex96]

I had Halo Wars back in the day and that sucked even with being built around controller controls.

Was it the hoverchair death beam or ODST spam that hurt you?

 

[JJLiautaud]

Paradox Announces Stuff: REAL Coverage

Big announcements about EU4 and CK3. Various assorted DLCs and indie games. I'm joined by Piechucker to provide honest, real reaction, analysis & banter. Is ...

www.youtube.com

Spuddy is doing a hype deflation Livestream.

 

[Rome's rightful successor]

Cities Skylines 2 look pretty cool.

 

[Ughubughughughughughghlug]

So the new CK3 DLC is more roleplaying bullshit.
I actually like the idea of having different royal forests and tournament grounds on map, but this is so far down the list of what should be priorities and mechanically changes nothing (just another button to click).

 

[Exterminatus]

Give the Eastern Roman Empire more fleshed out mechanics? I sleep

Roleplaying? REAL SHIT

 

[Acres of Clams]

Cities Skylines 2 look pretty cool.

Yeah. Thank goodness it was Cities Skylines 2 instead of yet another damn DLC. They were milking that dry.
The lack of gameplay footage, or really any info at all, is odd for a game that is supposedly going to come out this year though.

 

[Ughubughughughughughghlug]

Hey, you know what would be a good way to include royal forests and such? As part of a Robin Hood DLC with flavor and mechanics related to hunting, poaching, conflict over rights of land use between gentry and peasants, banditry, wood management (this would require navies to make sense), deeper peasant revolts, playable peasant republics. In other words, have mechanics about ruling AND role-playing flavor (gasp).

Also, the new EU4 DLC being named "Domination" just really shows how far they've fallen (all the old DLCs used to be thematically named after famous historical books).