|
|
| Page 9 of 18 |
hirschq
Posts: 478
Location: Coromodir
|
 Posted: Mon, 19th Aug 2013 11:42 Post subject: |
|
 |
| Casus wrote: | | I guess it's great for fans of the series, but I still think it's dreadfully stale and dull. Slider gameplay to the maximum... I feel like I'm managing a huge spreadsheet, really. |
Had the same thoughts about CKII and the other EU title but this one is different... IMHO. I always had the feeling that nothing I decide barely have an impact on the situation.
try to play with portugal. it´s a little bit seperated from the heat points and you can forge strong alliances in the beginning which let´s you focus on gameplay. once you got the game mechanics it´s
The ballance between combat, diplomacy, technology and government is excellent!
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
| Posted: Mon, 19th Aug 2013 13:44 Post subject: |
|
|
Add the same feeling with CK II and skipped it after 15/30 mt or so. But this one I´m really liking.
Playing with Portugal helps, as the game starts at the beginning of the age off discovery. Steering a global empire among the big powers makes every decision matter years to come. And having colonies all over the world gives you something to do all the time.
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Doh!
Posts: 1361
Location: Wellhigh DK
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
| Posted: Mon, 19th Aug 2013 16:03 Post subject: |
|
|
Abstract is the opposite of tangible - which is about feeling a sense of control and having strong feedback for every action you take.
It's one of the most common complaints directed against the series and I fail to see how anyone can not understand that complaint, fan of the series or not.
But, as I said, I haven't played EU4 a lot.
But I've played most of the other Paradox games using the same engine - and they've all suffered from feeling WAY too abstract, as in I never felt like much was happening - and everything was about adjusting sliders and watching small numbers going from +1 to +2 or whatever.
The combat system was the same way, and armies are going every which way on the map - having large arrows pointing - and you just don't have a good sense of what's going on.
I know this is something you can adjust to, and it's obviously a very deep simulation of strategy - so it's down to personal preferences.
I feel the same way about games like EVE Online - which is very deep and complex, but ultimately feels more like a spreadsheet with a pretty spaceship screensaver than a space combat game with a real universe.
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
| Posted: Mon, 19th Aug 2013 16:27 Post subject: |
|
|
Control:
In CIV V you control everything to the nth degree, in this game some things are out of your control and its about how you deal with that, its about using what you can control to manipulative the game world and come out on top in the many hundreds of scenarios that form in a single game. Sometimes you have to submit to the tide of the game, and its beautiful when you set it up perfectly and watch as everything comes together.
Feedback:
Your point on feedback is a personal thing and obviously due to your limited experience with these games. As I can say, not even as an opinion, but as fact, this game gives you the exact amount of feedback required for every decision you make. When you try to form an alliance, you know why they are saying yes or no. When you go to war, you know exactly what for. etc. etc.
If you are not seeing something, it is either because you dont know where to find it, or its absence is by design, and the results of your decisions are more long form and protracted. Again it comes down to experience.
To sum up:
Tread lightly when making broad statements about a game when you haven't played it properly and long enough to learn its intricacies.
Fair enough if its all your personal opinions, but you are basically judging a book that you have read one page of, and evolving your personal distaste into a legitimate argument over why this game is bad just doesn't seem right.
And calling it a common complaint is stupid. It's a common complaint from people who have never even tried to understand the game. You wont find that complaint from people who actually took the time to dig in.
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
| Posted: Mon, 19th Aug 2013 16:39 Post subject: |
|
|
| grechzoo wrote: | To sum up:
Tread lightly when making broad statements about a game when you haven't played it properly and long enough to learn its intricacies.
Fair enough if its all your personal opinions, but you are basically judging a book that you have read one page of, and evolving your personal distaste into a legitimate argument over why this game is bad just doesn't seem right.
And calling it a common complaint is stupid. It's a common complaint from people who have never even tried to understand the game. You wont find that complaint from people who actually took the time to dig in. |
Unfortunately, you can't change the nature of the abstract by pretending that EU games aren't abstract.
When I say I haven't played EU4 much - that doesn't mean I haven't played EU games.
I played the first two EU games a lot - as in 40+ hours for both. I've played a lot of the Hearts of Iron games as well.
It has nothing to do with me not knowing where to find something - but about the concept of abstract versus tangible.
When something is tangible - you get an immediate and obvious reaction to your actions. In EU games - this doesn't happen much at all, which is why it's abstract.
I'm not saying your actions aren't important or that the game isn't very complex and deep.
I'm saying it's abstract - and yes, that's a very common complaint directed against the game. It's common because it's true - and because fans don't mind this aspect of the game, doesn't change that.
If you insist on namecalling - then I would direct it at yourself. Denying the obvious is stupid.
Misinterpreting it as some kind of objective problem with the game is stupid.
Games based on the EU engine ARE very abstract. You either mind this or you don't mind it - but they ARE abstract.
Unless you're being in denial, of course. I can't help that.
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Doh!
Posts: 1361
Location: Wellhigh DK
|
| Posted: Mon, 19th Aug 2013 16:51 Post subject: |
|
|
Um ok you go ahead and call it abstrakt then. And ill go back to the game which lucky for me I understand.
There are two kinds of people I can't stand in this world. People who are intolerant of other people's cultures, and the Dutch.
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
| Posted: Mon, 19th Aug 2013 16:56 Post subject: |
|
|
3DMGAME-Europa.Universalis.IV.v1.1.1.Update.Incl.7.DLCs.and.Crack-3DM
http://forum.paradoxplaza.com/forum/showthread.php?713122-Hotfix-version-1.1.1&s=c5bdd0151fe1e0c1989d1e0b4888db9f
Patch notes 1.1.1
------------------------
- Lots of localisation fixes (including the localised tutorials)
- Fixed crashes when failing to retrieve resolution (merged 8252)
- Hints and tutorial textboxes can now have scrollbars (fixes for too long text for non english)
- Sound are now disabled on standalone server.
- Chat now works with standalone server.
- Peasants' War more likely to end the longer it has been going on
- Peasants' War will not happen again for at least 10 years
- Fixed broken continent all trigger and fixed adding hidden modifiers.
- Jihad achievement should now work again
- African Power achievement should now work again
- Ruina Imperii achievement should now work again
- Correct version is now listed in serverbrowser
- Fixed crashes when failing to retrieve resolution
- Fixed issue with black areas on TI (bad/old graphics cards)
- Optimized mission and revolt risk alerts
- Optimized when we disable trees/terrain/water/borders
- Multiplayer lobby: Keep scrollbar position when a new server is added
- Fixed savegame lockup when having only one core
- Fixed white glow on Linux cursors
- Fixed some more broken localisations
- Religious rebels can no longer flip the Papacy's capital province
- Religious heathens breaking your country results in large prestige loss
- Religious rebels breaking the Papacy results in a stability loss
- MP: Renamed "Connect to IP" to "Connect to ID"
- MP: Version should now be correct in server browser
- Dx9: If we fail to determine refresh rate, default to 60
- Normal borderfriction now only applies if its the home territory bordering each other.
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Doh!
Posts: 1361
Location: Wellhigh DK
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
| Posted: Tue, 20th Aug 2013 03:20 Post subject: |
|
|
Europa_Universalis_IV_v1.1.1-FLTDOX
3DMGAME-Europa.Universalis.IV.v1.1.1c.Update.Incl.7.DLCs.and.Crack-3DM
FLT is probably v1.1.1c
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
| Posted: Tue, 20th Aug 2013 10:08 Post subject: c |
|
|
I've honestly never seen anyone call EU games abstract. Like all paradox titles it takes a lot of time to figure game mechanics. I've only played it for a little while (waiting for patches), and while I know a lot from previous game, I still felt bombarded with all the information that you are presented with right when you start the game. But that really is the only hurdle for enjoyment of the series, once you figure core mechanics it becomes a game with clearly defined rules. Everything else are only modifiers clearly shown with tooltips. Once you have that figured EU becomes basic. You just pick a country and paint the globe with its colour.
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
| Posted: Tue, 20th Aug 2013 10:20 Post subject: Re: c |
|
|
| fawe4 wrote: | | I've honestly never seen anyone call EU games abstract. Like all paradox titles it takes a lot of time to figure game mechanics. I've only played it for a little while (waiting for patches), and while I know a lot from previous game, I still felt bombarded with all the information that you are presented with right when you start the game. But that really is the only hurdle for enjoyment of the series, once you figure core mechanics it becomes a game with clearly defined rules. Everything else are only modifiers clearly shown with tooltips. Once you have that figured EU becomes quite basic. You just pick a country and paint the globe with its colour. |
The concept of the abstract has nothing to do with simplicity or complexity. Once again, it's the opposite of tangible - which I assume you're familiar with.
For instance, the game called Battle Chess is a computer game based on real Chess.
Real Chess is an abstract strategy game - where the pieces on the board are meant to represent soldiers, knights and so on. But they don't actually look like soldiers/knights in most games of Chess. They're symbolic - which means they're abstract compared to real soldiers and knights.
Battle Chess on the computer is much less abstract - because all the soldiers/knights/etc. are represented by actual animated soldiers/knights/etc. and fights are visible and visceral.
Essentially, the two examples of Chess are identical in terms of complexity and gameplay - but they're also very, very different in terms of one being tangible and the other being abstract.
In that very same way, EU-engine games are very abstract - because you're not getting much in the way of visceral feedback. You have to use your imagination a lot. Combat is a numbers game where you're seeing a breakdown of what's happening, but you're not actually watching it happen and you're not manually controlling much at all. Armies don't move naturallly across the board - they have destinations and static arrows pointing the way. Stuff like that.
That's what makes it abstract.
It's really very simple and there's no way you can be honest with yourself and deny that EU (all of them) are abstract compared to most other grand strategy games. Not ALL others, but most others - including Civilization, Master of Orion 2, Strategic Command, GalCiv, Colonization and so on.
Again, it's not a negative - it's just not my kind of thing.
Complexity is not what's holding me back - it's the abstract nature of the game. I like games with more feedback and where I don't have to imagine so much.
In short, I prefer tangible and complex grand strategy games to abstract and complex grand strategy games.
Also, I don't particularly enjoy the real-time nature of EU games either. I don't think the level of complexity is well suited for real-time play - pause or no pause.
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
| Posted: Tue, 20th Aug 2013 10:40 Post subject: |
|
|
From your posts. you really dont sound like someone who put in 40+ hours to the first two EUs
You don't like having to use your imagination so much in these games, and how combat is all numbers based. I forget was EU 1 and 2 done by creative assembly in the total war engine?
Because putting 40 hours into TWO games that you state are in no way to your tastes sounds like a fib to back up your point. Even more so because the first two games were even more complicated and abstract than EUIV.
40 hours is a long time....you would have to truly enjoy a game to play it for that long....no human being plays a game that he really doesn't like for more than 4 hours....in fact ill raise it to 10 hours just to give you the benefit of the doubt...But 40!
I'm sorry....but I could only believe that on the day a pig flew through my window.
If you want to express your opinion that's fine but define it as so, and be honest about the length of time you have put into these games. Maybe then instead of getting defensive we all could have helped you understand the game a bit more, and maybe got you into it.
However accusing us all of being in denial because you yourself have judged it this way is just dumb and its why you are getting scorn.
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
| Posted: Tue, 20th Aug 2013 10:51 Post subject: |
|
|
| grechzoo wrote: | From your posts. you really dont sound like someone who put in 40+ hours to the first two EUs
You don't like having to use your imagination so much in these games, and how combat is all numbers based. I forget was EU 1 and 2 done by creative assembly in the total war engine?
Because putting 40 hours into TWO games that you state are in no way to your tastes sounds like a fib to back up your point. Even more so because the first two games were even more complicated and abstract than EUIV.
40 hours is a long time....you would have to truly enjoy a game to play it for that long....no human being plays a game that he really doesn't like for more than 4 hours....in fact ill raise it to 10 hours just to give you the benefit of the doubt...But 40!
I'm sorry....but I could only believe that on the day a pig flew through my window.
If you want to express your opinion that's fine but define it as so, and be honest about the length of time you have put into these games. Maybe then instead of getting defensive we all could have helped you understand the game a bit more, and maybe got you into it.
However accusing us all of being in denial because you yourself have judged it this way is just dumb and its why you are getting scorn. |
No, I'm getting scorn because you're emotionally invested in this. If you were being reasonable, you'd be ok with me not liking the abstract nature of the game.
If you honestly can't see how it's more abstract than most strategy games - then you have a serious issue with reality.
In fact, Paradox have stated that they want to get away from some of the abstraction and from the "sliders" - which is why EU4 is different in that way.
I've played many, many games for many, many hours that I didn't particularly enjoy. If we count MMOs, that number increases significantly.
When EU originally came out - it was something entirely new - and I read many positive reviews about it. I liked the historical nature of the game - and I believe I played a SINGLE entire game from start to finish - which took a LONG time.
I had a bit of fun here and there, but I ultimately decided it wasn't my kind of game.
When HoI came out - I thought it sounded like a fantastic idea - because the scope is so much smaller (WW2) - and I imagined it would be much better.
I tried investing myself again - and spent a LOT of hours trying to have fun with it. One of the worst parts of HoI was the way you have to micromanage air forces and naval forces.
Absolutely abysmally bad.
But I'm a sucker for grand strategy and WW2 - so I gave it a big chance.
EU2 was the last game I gave a big shot - and while I can't remember exactly how long I played it - I remember spending around a week trying to get into it. I bought it and read most of the manual, for instance.
If you don't believe me - that's your business.
The games are abstract. Deal with it.
I gave a very clear and concise explanation for why that is above - and only a fool would deny that I have a point here.
You can say you don't think it's THAT abstract and that you have no problem with it. But outright denying something THAT obvious is a sure-fire sign of having a weak position based on emotional investment.
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Doh!
Posts: 1361
Location: Wellhigh DK
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
| Posted: Tue, 20th Aug 2013 15:13 Post subject: Re: c |
|
|
| Casus wrote: | | fawe4 wrote: | | I've honestly never seen anyone call EU games abstract. Like all paradox titles it takes a lot of time to figure game mechanics. I've only played it for a little while (waiting for patches), and while I know a lot from previous game, I still felt bombarded with all the information that you are presented with right when you start the game. But that really is the only hurdle for enjoyment of the series, once you figure core mechanics it becomes a game with clearly defined rules. Everything else are only modifiers clearly shown with tooltips. Once you have that figured EU becomes quite basic. You just pick a country and paint the globe with its colour. |
The concept of the abstract has nothing to do with simplicity or complexity. Once again, it's the opposite of tangible - which I assume you're familiar with.
For instance, the game called Battle Chess is a computer game based on real Chess.
Real Chess is an abstract strategy game - where the pieces on the board are meant to represent soldiers, knights and so on. But they don't actually look like soldiers/knights in most games of Chess. They're symbolic - which means they're abstract compared to real soldiers and knights.
Battle Chess on the computer is much less abstract - because all the soldiers/knights/etc. are represented by actual animated soldiers/knights/etc. and fights are visible and visceral.
Essentially, the two examples of Chess are identical in terms of complexity and gameplay - but they're also very, very different in terms of one being tangible and the other being abstract.
In that very same way, EU-engine games are very abstract - because you're not getting much in the way of visceral feedback. You have to use your imagination a lot. Combat is a numbers game where you're seeing a breakdown of what's happening, but you're not actually watching it happen and you're not manually controlling much at all. Armies don't move naturallly across the board - they have destinations and static arrows pointing the way. Stuff like that.
That's what makes it abstract.
It's really very simple and there's no way you can be honest with yourself and deny that EU (all of them) are abstract compared to most other grand strategy games. Not ALL others, but most others - including Civilization, Master of Orion 2, Strategic Command, GalCiv, Colonization and so on.
Again, it's not a negative - it's just not my kind of thing.
Complexity is not what's holding me back - it's the abstract nature of the game. I like games with more feedback and where I don't have to imagine so much.
In short, I prefer tangible and complex grand strategy games to abstract and complex grand strategy games.
Also, I don't particularly enjoy the real-time nature of EU games either. I don't think the level of complexity is well suited for real-time play - pause or no pause. |
You really lost me with that chess comparison. Battlechess is chess with cute animations. Same game, same rules. Heck, last Chessmaster also had couple of animated tilesets, does that make it abstract/tangible hybrid? 
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
| Posted: Tue, 20th Aug 2013 15:17 Post subject: |
|
|
I'm afraid that I can't help you to understand these concepts. Perhaps you could look them up? That might help.
I actually think my example was so clear that pretty much anyone would appreciate the distinction, but I guess not.
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
hirschq
Posts: 478
Location: Coromodir
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
kumkss
Posts: 4835
Location: Chile
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
| Posted: Tue, 20th Aug 2013 23:58 Post subject: |
|
|
Bribes, marriages and sending diplomats on improve relations mission. Last one is free, it only occupies a diplomat. Marriages are risky against big power, but sometime you need to take whatever you have available.
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
| Posted: Wed, 21st Aug 2013 00:30 Post subject: |
|
|
The easiest way is to pick the same rival which they have... You get +50. I have vassalized a lot of petty kingdoms this way. Quite OP.
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
| Posted: Wed, 21st Aug 2013 09:59 Post subject: |
|
|
Also same religion improves relations - it starts to matter once protestants will apear in Europe.
As there is one nice national idea that gives you free CBs to countries with different religion - purge heretics
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| Page 9 of 18 |
All times are GMT + 1 Hour |
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
|
Powered by phpBB 2.0.8 © 2001, 2002 phpBB Group
|
|
 |
|
