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 .
Screenshot_2976.png
 
Slap47 said:
Russian soldiers were quite good during the 18th century. Napoleon comments that they were excellent soldiers lead by atrocious officers and they usually matched the French man for man at battles. A great what-if scenario is general Suvorov actually facing Napoleon in battle because of how well he and his armies performed.
Click to expand...
Russian soldiers were trained in the Prussian manner and with Prussian-style uniforms, complete with corporal punishment being common-place. The famously well-drilled British Army also regularly employed flogging as a means of enforcing discipline on its men. Funnily enough Suvorov was opposed to such harsh treatment, and one of the things he hated Paul I for doing was replacing Potemkin's comfortable uniform designs suitable for long marches and battles with those rough, uncomfortable Prussian-style outfits.

Get rid of the Prussian drill later on, and you can see the decline happen fast. Not that Suvorov was all that great at training men, mind you, considering the emphasis he placed on the bayonet over the more expedient combat method of just shooting the other guys.
 
Rome's rightful successor said:
View attachment 8412042
Click to expand...
Half of that stuff would genuinely make the game a lot better and solve half of its problems. I’ve been saying for ages it should start in 1921 or so. The only reason to play Paradox games is alternate history versus playing an even better strategic/operational war game focused on the specific stuff you care about. The timeframe is way too compressed for any ideological change to make sense. But the 1920s is dynamic, that’s a full generation to change politics. As for mission trees, they’re disgusting cancer. Paradox found they could sell literal choose your own adventure novel trees - revealed up front! - instead of having to model actual mechanics, real world historical triggers. The design philosophy of the Pop Demand Mod for Victoria II had tons of historical and alternate history content and stumbling into it was part of the point.
 
Slap47 said:
One theory I have seen is that the German-worship of the previous Tzar Paul I resulted in Russia having a higher number of German officers from the Baltics in their army. This could have made them an especially good army.
Click to expand...
The Russian officer class has been on decline pretty much since mandatory service (civil or military) for the nobility was abolished during the short reign of Peter III, who is mostly known for being a German, fanboying over Friedrich of Prussia (who had maintained mandatory nobility service which was IIRC implemented by his dad), getting out of the Seven Years War in such a manner it's considered a part of the "Miracle of the House of Brandenburg" (while fighting for French and Austrian interests hardly paid off and a Prussian collapse would be a strategic disaster, abandoning East Prussia after its denisens had swore fealty to Russia was a legitimately bad call) and getting killed by the people who fucked his wife.

The main problem was a lack of military education - while its quality was fine, there was nowhere near enough graduates and the volunteer officers were... varied at best. Veteran NCO promotion was used to plug the vacancies, the requirements were gradually loosened and it was a fairly important social ladder (even at the end of the Russian Empire the newly-minted officers had an unusually large percentage of devout monarchists - slander says that they just couldn't accept that they suffered through beatings just in time for them to be abolished and under the new regime they no longer had neither the nobility rights nor the right of beating a lower ranked soldier black and blue. It gets even funnier when you consider that the Imperial General Staff had overwhelmingly sided with... the Bolsheviks, and likely planned their entire coup).

Right, back to topic. The Russian Army of 1812 had been experienced, mostly through getting beaten up by Napoleon... usually because Alexander I overruled his commanding general and tried to do something retarded. It took about ten years and a disaster at Austerlitz for him to (mostly) drop that habit, and therefore he let his Minister of War, General Michael Barclay de Tolly, craft his military strategy, even if he was mad enough to not confirm him as the most senior commander. Barclay well understood that the Russian armies are spread out and he has little chance of fighting Napoleon before consolidating, and it was more reliable to retreat deeper into Russia, combine at least the two armies directly in the Napoleon's main force's line of advance, and threaten his flanks and supply with the other armies and mobile groups of daring cavalry officers waging guerrilla against the "Army of Twelve Languages"'s rear. Yeah, that's more or less what's happened (with more fighting retreats than he wanted because while he was in command of the 1st Army, the 2nd Army (which had both retreated East to Moscow) was commanded by a hot-blooded Caucasian mountaineer who had treated that strategy as a personal insult and squabbled until his death (which came very, very soon, as expected). Kutuzov was appointed as the supreme commander of both armies but he maintained the strategy because it worked and Barclay already got hit with most of the reputation tax.

Slap47 said:
During the Crimea War alot of Russia's army actually did just degenerate into drunken horde. It was also run by a Nicholas I who was a slavophile lunatic who micromanaged the army to do parades instead of fight.
Click to expand...
If this was the case, then surely the two Great Powers + their attendant contigents of Turks and other Turks Italians had marched deeper inland instead of jerking off in the periphery and losing to garrisons in ass ends of nowhere like Kamchatka.

No, Nicholas I was pretty much the last Russian emperor who knew what he was doing, had a comprehensive reform plan and stuck to it. His main mistake was maintaining an alliance with the Austrians and cleaning their revolutionary messes. Not even the threat of a united Germany was enough to justify the results.
 
Rome's rightful successor said:
Modern Paradox games
Click to expand...

Funnily enough, the Peace Without Victory mod for Darkest Hour started in 1919 and it was excellent. As the Weimar Republic you could barely get anything done because you were locked into unstable governments that forced you to spend most of your resources on consumer goods. To actually do stuff you were pushed to follow a path of becoming more authoritarian and politically extreme (Communist or Nazi). Russia could win the Polish-Soviet war and become an existential threat, but it was also nerfed by a long list of famine events and was also just economically poor. As both of these countries you basically had to squeeze them as hard as possible to catch up to the west who actually were just speeding ahead until the depression hit. When your invasion of France hits in 1940 it was literally the culmination of 20 years of planning and it was actually a challenging battle.


1768323964963.png

1768323978937.png

1768324061368.png

The developer was also an autistic ESL Russian who threw tantrums and got banned by literal tranny jannys until he threw one last tantrum. I personally found the spelling errors endearing.
 
Slap47 said:
1768324061368.png
Click to expand...
1768334907821.png

Nooo! Mr. Capiatlist! Not like this!
Been MIA since 2022, so we can safely assume the worst.
1768334954662.png1768335191139.png1768335435446.png
The blogsite (https://nhkendall.com/ archived at https://archive.is/NfjLh check out the 10 year old version for some CONTRAST) is a real hoot, starts off as you'd expect; your typical WORDS WORDS WORDS map autist, skip to current year and it's all about drumpf. The last post is the best one... 100% horny... several d*scord servers... mastodon :story:
1768335551964.png1768335648265.png1768335658957.png1768335666360.png
Not all that shocking really, MC was always the bad stereotype of an overly verbose custodial technician, and he was the n'wah who banned me back in the day but you still hate to see it :crocodile:
 
Last edited:
New Tinto Talks on the UI improvements for update 1.1:
1768391686449.png
You can hide alerts
1768391686466.png
You can automate balancing flanks so that you no longer have to do it all the time
1768391686586.png 1768391686625.png 1768391686669.png
Army Templates, Johan acknowledged that this was a feature that was expected to have been in the game on launch since it was an important and liked one in EU4.
1768391686708.png
Collapsible unit UI
1768391686720.png
You can detach and select units from an army
1768391686736.png
Call to arms pop ups
1768391686769.png
End of war pop ups
1768391686837.png
When raising all levies you can select a rallying point
1768391686869.png
Dedicated UI for buildings in a location
Multiples mapmodes have been added:
  • Economical Base
  • Potential Tax Base
  • Market Food Balance
  • Market Food Stockpile
  • Mapmodes for percentage for Nobles, Laborers, Burghers and Peasants.
  • Threat
  • Coalition
  • Rivers
  • Improved Roadbuilder mapmode
1768391686919.png
AI Conquer Desire map
1768391686906.png
Burgher percentage map
1768391686937.png
Mass upgrading buildings
1768391686982.png
Multiple locations can be sold/purchased at once

Johan also mentioned that the chance of 1.1 having an open beta is high, so hopefully we'll have it by the end of the month.
 
I've decided to update my pirated copy of EU5 from 1.0.9 to 1.0.10, and it's pretty bad. I wanted to fight Bohemia, but it annexed 1/3 of the HRE, has a PU with Castille and Portugal, and is allied to France, who also has annexed 1/3 of the HRE. Luckily, the "professional armies" institution spawned in my capital, and I can rush the latest military technologies thanks to that. I'm planning to build a shitton of regulars (I'll probably become a military hegemon due to that) and fight a war of attrition if I want to have a chance to win.

God, this game needs some balancing.
 
Last edited:
The Wise Shaman said:
I've decided to update my pirated copy of EU5 from 1.0.9 to 1.0.10, and it's pretty bad. I wanted to fight Bohemia, but they annexed 1/3 of the HRE, have a PU with Castille and Portugal, and are allied to France, who also have annexed 1/3 of the HRE. Luckily, the "professional armies" institution spawned in my capital, and I can rush the latest military technologies thanks to that.

God, this game needs some balancing.
Click to expand...

Oh this patch is complete mental illness. If you pay attention the other countries in your 1.0.10 theyr'e doing constant no CB wars and pushing them to extreme levels

If you want a good laugh open the coalition map mode and starting clicking your neighbors around you.
 
This User said:
Oh this patch is complete mental illness. If you pay attention the other countries in your 1.0.10 theyr'e doing constant no CB wars and pushing them to extreme levels

If you want a good laugh open the coalition map mode and starting clicking your neighbors around you.
Click to expand...
Yeah, I saw how big those coalitions can get. I've actually joined the coalition against Bohemia, but the game forces me to leave it because a German one location minor that is in a coalition against me also joined that coalition after I joined. Why is it a mechanic in the first place? I joined that coalition first, and I have the largest military; why would anyone care about a country that can only field 300 levies at best thinks about me? This is just dumb. I just wanted to take Moravia so my country could have an aesthetic border. Why does this game want me to suffer?

At least the Ottomans are actually expanding at a realistic rate.
 
Ughubughughughughughghlug said:
Me, contrarian midwit, thought that the British were a suck-ass second-rate army and the whole "Americans beat the greatest army in the world" thing was propaganda. I just plain did not know, did not get, that the British really did have a tiny but extremely good army because at some other point Prussian space marines and the French got drilled into my head, not getting that the thing was that the French were more balanced (not real huge until levee en masse, not real well trained but not Russian orcs, Napoleon was a massive force multiplier) and the Prussian space marines, well, bringing it back to my point, that's only true in two eras (Frederick and Wilhelmine).
Click to expand...

You were partially correct for assuming that, so don't feel too bad. Now, of course, the British had a competent and well-trained army and a fine-ass navy. However, most of that 'reputation' was the product of post-war mythification and glorification based on ""credible"" first-hand accounts, memoirs, or dispatches drafted up to poetically wax the heroics for an army that really had to pick and choose its few battles carefully. At which point the whole thing sort of ran away over the following two centuries or so, making a bunch of blank checks that the actual British army, as it was in reality, simply couldn't cash.

Any historian of the Enlightenment and Napoleonic Era worth their salt knows that British sources of land battles and other similar post-battle reports should be treated as a brief, slightly anachronistic summaries, to be read before diving into the more authentic, unembellished French, Russian, Prussian, Spanish and Austrian sources or first-hand accounts to actually get an accurate perspective on any specific battle of choice. That's something that should be done when researching any historical period, but it's extra poignant to do it when researching anything regarding the British during that era. We all know how they're the masters of propaganda, but I digress.

In terms of comparison between them and their continental neighbors, one often finds that they're a lot more similar in terms of quality, readiness, and overall "drill" and discipline than any English nationalist would ever care to admit outloud. Certain regiments and battlions of course, were nice examples of that reputation, showing a chunk of it was really earned in actuality. But, assuming the whole of the British army was like the "Highland Guards" or "Black Watch" would be like me thinking every French Battalion was a "Young Guard" battalion in waiting. They were great, not bombastically amazing, but great and well-supplied. Which is what they should be known for first and foremost. Being the most well-supplied of the great powers, because obviously they were.

Slap47 said:
Its kinda funny how Vic3 fans love all of their new DLCs while Hoi4/Stellaris are just demoralized and angry about theirs.
Click to expand...

The two March of the Eagles fans who are still left would proclaim Paradox the second coming if they even remembered the game at all, and implement a community hotfix or two to add some compatibility fixes to the game. If VIC 3 fans are living in the shitty part of town with pot-holes everywhere, they sometimes get fixed if they complain hard enough, then those two titular March of the Eagle fans are living in the most demilitarized ghetto in the most dilapidated and abandoned factory that even vermin would think twice about living in at all. There is always someone with less. The best they can hope for is an EU5 mod set in the Napoleonic Era. And that's already a major wish to be wishing for.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom