EPTEuropa Universalis IV - Page 13
| Forum Index > General Games |
|
KtheZ
United States813 Posts
| ||
|
OsaX Nymloth
Poland3244 Posts
Just fast question: how the EUIV looks so far in terms of bugs/balance? Should I wait a bit for patches or buy right away? Thanks in advance. | ||
Myles
United States5162 Posts
That being said, I highly recommend buying it right now. The new trade system is fantastic, the new diplomacy options are too, and despite my comment about peace deals, the AI isn't nearly as retarded as in EU3(it's still AI though). | ||
|
Stenstyren
Sweden619 Posts
On August 16 2013 05:59 OsaX Nymloth wrote: Reading all of these posts just makes me want to throw money at the monitor. I played every EU so far and I really like the series, shame I wasn't chosed to be the reviewer this time (yeah, working as game journalist has it's profits). Just fast question: how the EUIV looks so far in terms of bugs/balance? Should I wait a bit for patches or buy right away? Thanks in advance. I havn't found any major bugs so far in 20+ hours of playing, have heard reports of a few but by Paradox standards this is golden! | ||
|
Sub40APM
6336 Posts
A bigger bug is the infinite Lepante money problem. They have something like 1400 ducats that you can get from them in a peace deal, thus breaking the game. And also Portugal colonizing almost the entire known world -- from the Pacific Northwest to South Africa -- by 1600 other than that typical EU stuff, Austria gobbles up the HRE, France implodes under the weight of too many minors that can be broken out of it, Sweden is overpowered and so forth. Actually, my biggest beef is the same as it was with the other EU games, once you get large enough there is nothing the game can throw at you that will affect you in any way and there is nothing really to do. | ||
|
Stenstyren
Sweden619 Posts
On August 16 2013 06:37 Sub40APM wrote: other than that typical EU stuff, Austria gobbles up the HRE, France implodes under the weight of too many minors that can be broken out of it, Sweden is overpowered and so forth. Have to disagree with you there, in both of the games I've played so far Austria has become quite minor, France has become a big blob, once maintaining their position and once imploding after capturing most of Spain. One of my games was as Sweden and that was quite easy but in my game as Bohemia Norway(!) actually took control of the entire Scandinavian region, only loosing out a few provinces to the Livinian Order (!) which blobbed quite hard following the collapse of Novgorod and Muscowy  Agree with you that there is not too much to do once you blob but you just have to set yourself goals that are hard to reach, I'm already trying to work out how to do a world conquest (looking though). | ||
|
rezoacken
Canada2719 Posts
http://steamcommunity.com/sharedfiles/filedetails/?id=169287928 | ||
|
Nyvis
France284 Posts
On August 16 2013 08:54 Stenstyren wrote: Have to disagree with you there, in both of the games I've played so far Austria has become quite minor, France has become a big blob, once maintaining their position and once imploding after capturing most of Spain. One of my games was as Sweden and that was quite easy but in my game as Bohemia Norway(!) actually took control of the entire Scandinavian region, only loosing out a few provinces to the Livinian Order (!) which blobbed quite hard following the collapse of Novgorod and Muscowy Agree with you that there is not too much to do once you blob but you just have to set yourself goals that are hard to reach, I'm already trying to work out how to do a world conquest (looking though). In EU3, bohemia was so poor, and the german minors so stupid that austria was bound to blob. Here, though, I've seen my fair share of overpowered bohemia too (in EU3, it started at emperor with the 1399 starting date, and was "balanced" around that, here it can work without it). I've seen a lot of massive massive brandenburg too, gobbling all the close minors and becoming the superpower of northern germany. Austria de facto inheriting 3/4 of burgundy is a pain, but they usually loose most of their battles in flanders since it's not really connected to their main land. sub40APM, your norway story is amazing. I've been playing norway a few games, they get like half the force limit of denmark and 3/4 that of sweden, with most their trade power being outside their home trade node and their provinces being shit compared to sweden. But they have a good point for them: if they are lucky and peacefully go squeeze out of the personal union with denmark (no way they'll get out of there militarily, anyway), they get a hugely powerful ally against sweden, the dane army being larger than the swede. And once you have gobbled a fair share of sweden, you can turn around and beat denmark to form scandinavia. Of course, it's a lot easier to do as denmark or sweden. Or you could play it as a colonial and trade power. Grab groenland from iceland, then the northern americas, since you already control the north sea trade node, it's easy to reroute a lot from there to lübeck. Ally with denmark or the Hansa (both is hard, they often go at it against each other), because they'll go stronger with that too. Your worst enemy will be england, since they want the riches from america to go through london directly instead of through the north sea (where you and scotland own most of the provinces), and they also want to redirect the trade from the north sea to london, especially a pain if they get the scottish provinces. You can either help scotland or grab it for yourself to prevent that from happening. The light ships bonus norway get is really really good. Your early light ships fight like galleys while still improving your trade tremendously. (you need them to be able to collect in Lübeck). France implodes in EVERY game I've done of EU (be it 3 or 4, modded or not) I've played lately. Something to do with me being French I guess. At least in the 1444 start, burgundy isn't a threat for long. But once Austria inherits most of it, you can't really wage war against the empire with them so strong so close. And for spain, it presents a more united front to France in most of the games I've seen. If you manage to jump in a war while aragon and castille are going at it, though, it's pretty easy. | ||
|
Monsen
Germany2548 Posts
Also for me a big part of the enjoyment has been watching the developments in the rest of the world, the Norway story above is a good example of the surprising turns the game can take. | ||
|
Nyvis
France284 Posts
On August 16 2013 05:59 OsaX Nymloth wrote: Reading all of these posts just makes me want to throw money at the monitor. I played every EU so far and I really like the series, shame I wasn't chosed to be the reviewer this time (yeah, working as game journalist has it's profits). Just fast question: how the EUIV looks so far in terms of bugs/balance? Should I wait a bit for patches or buy right away? Thanks in advance. Some things are amazing, especially TRADE ! Seriously, it went from a tedious practice completely dominated by one province minors. Now it's something interesting, where nations with a lot of lands matter in the close trade networks, but more naval oriented nations have a better control over far away trade nodes. I''ve been playing a lot of Norway, and it's a lot of fun playing with trade since you control the north sea trade node (with Scotland) and can funnel trade to Lübeck from it, but you are supposed to collect from Lübeck (since your capital is in it's influence), meaning that you need a huge fleet to wrest some trade control from the Hanseatic League and Denmark. Sadly, the PU ended with me being annexed this time, I will have to play it again and hope for more Danish heirs dying. Coring, extension and aggressive extension are very good mechanics. You end up grabbing some land, then consolidating, before going at it again, instead of constantly grabbing land, because cores were automatic anyway. More realistic. Having control over culture assimilation is interesting too. Gives you the option to take a lot of a foreign culture and hope for it to become accepted, or assimilate bit by bit. Some are less good, like forced relations bonus/malus with the AIs, reducing the flexibility of diplomacy a lot, and border frictions preventing you from allying some of your neighbours without real reasons). Tech maluses for the nations outside of east-west Europe and Ottomans are way too steep though. Arabic Muslims were the home of a lot of innovations during the middle ages and them having 50% malus compared to the 25% Ottomans one isn't really fair. Ottomans are already considered a lucky nation for those who want historical correctness, and that should be enough to give them the power they had. Arabic Muslims with 30% tech penalty for everyone would be better I think (the Berber kingdoms are too poor to be relevant anyway, may be a problem with Mamluks though). I'll try to mod that if I delve into it some day. But Arabic nations having the same tech speed as India (which is way above China and Korea, another oddity, since those were the first to discover things like firearms). I've never understood the "too easy when blob" complaint. For one, you can always pick an even harder to play nation or set crazy goals. Check the old EU3 thread for cool ideas, we had quite some amazing stories there (some people even made aars with storylines and screenshots, might be in a different thread though, can't recall), but just on top of my head you can try becoming papal controller (with eventual invasion of Europe) as one of the american tribes, unite the HRE as Ethiopia or form Spain with The Knights. Byzantine games were always tricky and fun too, same as the smaller Hordes. Also for me a big part of the enjoyment has been watching the developments in the rest of the world, the Norway story above is a good example of the surprising turns the game can take. The sad part wasn't the fact that you could pick an easy nation, it was that your only option was to pick a hard ones since taking a relatively easy one often ended with you completely dominating because the AI was playing more conservatively than you and more faithful towards history (or else everyone would constantly be just under the infamy limit, excepted for the trade powers. Now, taking and coring lands is a choice, not something you automatically do, since it lowers your administration tech speed really hard. Nations more inward oriented will end up with a territory better utilized and a faster colonization since they'll use a ton less ADM to core and less DIP to culture convert. And even MIL to squash revolts (even if MIL tend to be the one you use the less overall, outside of teching/ideas). | ||
|
Zaphod Beeblebrox
Denmark697 Posts
I have had so many games where my nation is focussed on being really techy and innovative, but it doesn't matter since Europeans despite thier horrible tech decisions just inherently gets an advantage. I feel the simulation would just be better overall if there were deeper reasons for the European tech advantage that other nations with great difficulty (or luck) could emulate. | ||
|
KaiserJohan
Sweden1808 Posts
My only complain is that there is no way to change who is the war leader; for example, sweden gets DOWd upon by denmark and norway and I am allied to sweden, I do all the fighting and winning yet I must wait for the swedish to do the peace dealing, otherwise I only negiotiate for myself... ugh.. | ||
|
Talin
Montenegro10532 Posts
 | ||
|
Monsen
Germany2548 Posts
On August 16 2013 21:13 Nyvis wrote: The sad part wasn't the fact that you could pick an easy nation, it was that your only option was to pick a hard ones since taking a relatively easy one often ended with you completely dominating because the AI was playing more conservatively than you and more faithful towards history (or else everyone would constantly be just under the infamy limit, excepted for the trade powers. Now, taking and coring lands is a choice, not something you automatically do, since it lowers your administration tech speed really hard. Nations more inward oriented will end up with a territory better utilized and a faster colonization since they'll use a ton less ADM to core and less DIP to culture convert. And even MIL to squash revolts (even if MIL tend to be the one you use the less overall, outside of teching/ideas). Exactly my point. Why would you be surprised/annoyed/bored by completely dominating when picking an easy nation. That's what easy means. | ||
|
SKC
Brazil18828 Posts
On August 17 2013 00:26 Monsen wrote: Exactly my point. Why would you be surprised/annoyed/bored by completely dominating when picking an easy nation. That's what easy means. Well, people sometimes have a connection with a specific nation and would like the ability to play a challenging game with them, instead of having to rely on playing a completelly random nation with a absurd goal. Noone is surprised that playing an easy nation is easy in the current game, but it really isnt that hard to imagine that people would like being able to play something like France or England and have at least a moderate challenge when attempting something even remotely historically plausible. It really isnt something easy to develop though. | ||
|
imre
France9263 Posts
On August 17 2013 00:48 SKC wrote: Well, people sometimes have a connection with a specific nation and would like the ability to play a challenging game with them, instead of having to rely on playing a completelly random nation with a absurd goal. Noone is surprised that playing an easy nation is easy in the current game, but it really isnt that hard to imagine that people would like being able to play something like France or England and have at least a moderate challenge when attempting something even remotely historically plausible. It really isnt something easy to develop though. just make a lot of retarded decisions if you want sthg historically plausible. that would match. | ||
|
Sub40APM
6336 Posts
On August 16 2013 20:36 Monsen wrote: I've never understood the "too easy when blob" complaint. For one, you can always pick an even harder to play nation or set crazy goals. Check the old EU3 thread for cool ideas, we had quite some amazing stories there (some people even made aars with storylines and screenshots, might be in a different thread though, can't recall), but just on top of my head you can try becoming papal controller (with eventual invasion of Europe) as one of the american tribes, unite the HRE as Ethiopia or form Spain with The Knights. Byzantine games were always tricky and fun too, same as the smaller Hordes. Also for me a big part of the enjoyment has been watching the developments in the rest of the world, the Norway story above is a good example of the surprising turns the game can take. because you do nothing for the first 50 or so years and then you exploit the game to succeed. the fact that you *can* do it doesnt mean its fun to do it while playing, only afterwards when you sit back and enjoy your accomplishment. fundamentally the game is balanced, and its features focused, on the european states and the ottomans. | ||
|
Sermokala
United States13855 Posts
| ||
|
Invoker
Belgium686 Posts
| ||
|
Sub40APM
6336 Posts
On August 17 2013 02:45 Invoker wrote: I've played other Paradox games before but this will be my first time in the EU series. And I really don't like playing with major powers tho I would like to have a nice and challenging experience. What country would you recommend to someone like me? Burgundy because it has all the features of the game within its borders (good trade node, religious conflict, part of the HRE but not a voting member) and is close to UK/France/Austria/Spain for conflicts but isnt so small that you just sit around gathering money and waiting for a random opportune moment to steal a province from someone. | ||
| ||
