Paradox Grand Strategy |OT| Conquering the World one DLC at a time

eonden

Member
Oct 25, 2017
3,256
I'm not an expert, but grain of salt: the changes away from Tiles in general seem good (I'm doing a lot less micromanaging than I had to before), but unless I'm doing something horribly wrong machine empires seem absurdly weak- energy production is about ten times lower than it was at a similar point before the patch, even with trying to encourage energy 'jobs'. The AI also feels like it's back to square one after the last few patches brought them up to a modicum of competence, though raising the difficulty further might be able to solve that as a bandaid (I honestly forgot they added difficulties, it's been a while).

On the bright side, I'm paying attention to trade and special resources a lot more than I did before the patch and there's encouragement to specialise planets now, but might be worth waiting for a hotfix or two.
I think the main issue with robots is how easy they can roll out of control once they start getting population (due to fast reproduction, habitability everywhere and low housing necessities), so they probably nerfed them too much in the beginning.

Havent played it too much but yeah, the AI seems a little dumber than before in the economy side and the game seems to run slower than before on my shitty laptop.
 

cognizant

Member
Dec 19, 2017
4,393
I did it, finished my first game of EU4, woo!!! 158 hours total playtime. First 2 attempts at this game were disasterous (Hisn Kayfa and Oda), but I made it to the end this time as Mongolia. Didn't blob like a pro or anything, and being Ming's tributary for most of it kept a lot of nations off my back at times, so it was a weirdly noob-friendly playthrough with several close calls (as you can see Ming took a bite out of me at one point, humbling my burgeoning country). Learned alot along the way. Nabbed almost 20 achievements. Tried hard to get the '3 spies at 100 in 3 rival nations' but they kept getting caught so I gave up. Only major feature I didn't experience in my playthrough was colonization I think. Next time...

I'm going on a long break from EU4, because I'm all war'd out. Gonna go back to PS4 for a short while, and then the next PC strategy game for me might be CK2!

 

Toma

Member
Oct 25, 2017
731
Wth, we have a Paradox thread and no one told me?
I treat this as a diplomatic insult.
 

StereoVSN

Member
Nov 1, 2017
4,348
Eastern US
It better be either EU V or CK2. EU IV and CK2 are overloaded with DLC and cumbersome for newcomers. I mean, I'd love to see new Vic game, but I just don't see mass appeal there from sales perspective.
 

DBT85

Member
Oct 26, 2017
7,688
I can't believe they're already making Stellaris 2.
Well they might be, but they still have some milk to make there on the first one. Surely at this stage its EUV? IV has been out for over 5 years now.

I'll probably not buy another one of these games again as Stellaris and HOI IV were my first two and the constant DLCs make me feel like I'm missing out so wait for the next one, then the next one and I'm not going to carry on paying for it. Only reason I have any in HOI is because I got a good deal on the game from CD keys which came with what, 2 DLCs? Can't remember now.
 

Elynn

Member
Oct 28, 2017
1,945
Brittany, France
Don't know if anyone can help me. I'm playing my first ever game of EU4 with Castille/Spain with the latest DLC, trying to get the Havana and Hispanola missions. I colonized the required number of provinces (3 around Bani and 5 around Havana I believe) and put the required buildings in place, but my caribbean provinces suddenly formed a colonial nation ("Cuba") and now it seems like I can't complete the missions because I apparently don't own said provinces.

Here's a picture of the situation, my colonial nation is the yellow, green is Portugal


Is there any way I can still do these missions or am I stuck ?
Sorry if I'm missing something super obvious.
 

eonden

Member
Oct 25, 2017
3,256
Don't know if anyone can help me. I'm playing my first ever game of EU4 with Castille/Spain with the latest DLC, trying to get the Havana and Hispanola missions. I colonized the required number of provinces (3 around Bani and 5 around Havana I believe) and put the required buildings in place, but my caribbean provinces suddenly formed a colonial nation ("Cuba") and now it seems like I can't complete the missions because I apparently don't own said provinces.

Here's a picture of the situation, my colonial nation is the yellow, green is Portugal


Is there any way I can still do these missions or am I stuck ?
Sorry if I'm missing something super obvious.
You have to have to put a Holy order in the province . Otherwise it isnt a problem as a colonial nation is a non-tributary subject
 

Tim

Member
Oct 25, 2017
366
Wiz stepped down from Stellaris and now Vicky II is on sale on Steam. I want to believe.
 

jtb

Member
Oct 25, 2017
1,175
It better be either EU V or CK2. EU IV and CK2 are overloaded with DLC and cumbersome for newcomers. I mean, I'd love to see new Vic game, but I just don't see mass appeal there from sales perspective.
As much as I wish EU 5 would just be synthesizing all of EU4's best features and discarding the bloat, Paradox's m.o. remains the same -- they'll release a way underdeveloped base game and then continue adding half-assed expansions that add bloat. Stellaris, at least, seems to be completely reinventing itself every other expansion, except then instead of ever fixing anything, we just get different broken states to chose from.

Cities Skylines (which isn't even a Paradox game!) is probably the biggest disappointment on that front. It will be almost 4 years since the base game was released, and the core simulation is as barebones today as it was the day it launched.

Vicky III totally should be next. CK, HOI and EU all have very elaborate systems, but none is even close to matching Vicky's economy. I believe!
The best thing about Vicky is that it fundamentally not a game about blobbing.
 

Hella

Member
Oct 27, 2017
11,520
I've forgotten, is Wiz the guy that overhauled so many of Stellaris' core mechanics? 'Cause if that's him, I'm gonna miss that dude; hope whoever replaces him can match his vision. Stellaris has gotten a lot better of late, so I hope they aren't done with it.

Anyways, I noticed a cool flavour touch in the new version of Stellaris. When you're set on the Sol system, the terrain features are all Earth-themed and give bits of history, like so:

And now I've gotten past my struggles with the UI and am really enjoying the changes. The alloy/minerals split, for example, makes the economy/infrastructure aspect of Stellaris so much more interesting. It's no longer a game of exponentially-increasing numbers, or at least no longer feels like one from the outset.

Haven't actually gotten that far into the new Stellaris yet because literally every game (until now, hopefully) has dead-ended with an advanced start fanatical purifier neighbour as my first contact. That's... a real rough position to be in.
 

vacantseas

Member
Oct 27, 2017
967
Okay, so I have some general Stellaris question(s). I think these apply pre and post 2.2, so the new mechanics, etc aren't really what I'm trying to get my head around here. My question is basically regarding expansion. Game starts and I send science ships out, build some stations to mine energy/minerals....

Is it best to put a starbase on every system adjacent while doing all that, to grow your area? What about colonization? Best to colonize every hospitable planet in the area? How much expansion do you end up doing? I know it probably varies by playthrough and based on the person playing...
 

Anno

Member
Oct 25, 2017
2,264
Columbus, Ohio
Especially in 2.2 as currently balanced I think you want to colonize everything ASAP. The earlier you get that extra pop growth the better even if you’re paying more for those pops than you’d really want to.
 

eonden

Member
Oct 25, 2017
3,256
I would say population and pop growth is really important in 2.2. However, the first colonies are really the ones that will hit you the hardest if you arent ready specifically in alloy and customer goods. The fact that colonies are generally pretty useless until they reach 10 pops and stop being colonies is pretty important in the early game.

Remember colonies have a -50% growth that is only offset with a bigger immigration (i think it is 1.5 in each planet that it is not a colony) pull.
 

Hella

Member
Oct 27, 2017
11,520
Outside of like, one-planet challenges, you need a kind of balance, I think. Colonies are huge resource hogs and spreading yourself too thin can really cripple your economy. At the same time, you want a steady growth and basically a platform for your empire to grow tall in--making it too small will stifle you later in the game, when you start specialising your planets and send your economy into overdrive.

Like, once you pass your empire cap you'll rely on those cultivated planets to propel your economy ahead of the new penalties. You'll also need to juggle some buildings around when new specialist resources come into play. And keep in mind pops can also be juggled if necessary.

Because the thing I've been realising is, specialised planets are so much more efficient than generalist ones. It's not like in pre-Le Guin where you could just tweak a building here or there to maximise the output of the planet's tiles--now you really need to adapt your planets to your empire's needs, as well as the needs of the planet itself.

So you need that high-pop trade hub that rakes in the energy; you need a forge-world powering your infrastructure and military; you need an agri-world to feed everyone; you need researcr peppered in there to offset the size penalties; and on top of this, you need, essentially, support worlds bringing in raw resources as well as rare, unique resources to power the buildings in the others.

I don't think all of this is explained super well in-game, even with full tutorials on, but it's waaaaay more engaging than the old system.
 

eonden

Member
Oct 25, 2017
3,256
Yeah, I would also like to say that rare materials are really rare in the early and mid game, at least on the two playthroughs i have done. And you need them to improve some of the early building and to maintain them. Yes, you can use a building to transform minerals into them, but they are also a building slot that you might not have room for yet.
 

Sblargh

Member
Oct 25, 2017
2,389
Stellaris is in such a weird way right now. As soon as 2.2 hit, I gave it a shot after a year or so having not played the game and fell in love hard. Not having played since before the Apocalypse overhaul, experiencing both combat and economy overhauls, I was like "goddamn, this is it. This is the game I was waiting for" and in so many ways, it really is. The game is absolutely almost top notch.

But then it is this "almost" that kills me, it's like they are so close, but the AI right now is not functional. It's great for you to learn the systems and experience content, but the AI is kind of placeholders, so you have to use the Glaivus AI mod for the enemy to seem like a competitor.

But what is really killing me is the strata and job system and how it is perfection in theory and disappointing in practice thanks to half-baked AI.
-
So you have these three stratas: Rulers, Specialists, Workers/Slaves. Each do a type of job and different government types each distribute resources differently among them.
And then you have the different races and ways of, during the game, to modify them, via gene-modding or robo-modding. Also you have xeno-compatibility where races can produce mixed races with traits from both parents.

What I dream: whenever creating a new pop, the AI would at least give more weight to the available options in order to maximize pops and their jobs. So if a pop is really good at mining (either because I modded it that way somehow or because xeno-compatibility happened to mix someone like that), it would go to mining, and the previous miner would do something else (even if it means unemployment).
That would mean you could micro-manage at a macro scale either by fiddling with templates if you are doing the modding personally, or by letting the beautiful chaos of mass immigration and mixing naturally do its thing via xeno-compatibility.

How it works: AI don't care and just try to create equal parts of every race for whatever weird reason which means that, in a xenophile empire with 10 or 20 races you just accept your fate that your economy won't be optimized.
What is worse is when you are of a mechanical race and there isn't a system for create specialized robots for the job because, again, the AI don't care.

And it sucks because it's something that ultimately maybe don't matter, really, but the flavor is there, the system is there, we have very specific jobs and pops with very specific bonuses created in a myriad of ways that we... urgh... can't just match... I have this race that have very high habitability in this one world and also with bonuses to research jobs and the AI will ignore it. The only way I can kind of force it is by messing with which pop grows where (at the very hefty cost of a pop growth penalty), but then my natural scientist might just become a miner.
It's there! lol! I can taste the system working in such a way where I can be either an eugenics dictator or an egalitarian beacon of liberty and both will have their own unique ways of making the maximum out of the possibilities already in the game, but one crucial little part of the puzzle is simply missing.
-
Sorry for the rant, lol.
2.2 is full of little things right these where I am like "oh wow, this game is so great....... almost...... so very close...."
-
Edit:
Wait did I do this long rant and the game already tries to do that?
Why it isn't working? I guess the game does try to pair the best people with the best jobs given what it currently has on the planets, but what really messes it up is pop growth?
Goddamn it, see? Almost there. So close.
 
Last edited:

cognizant

Member
Dec 19, 2017
4,393
Yeah I've been keeping an eye on Stellaris (haven't played it yet) and judging from reactions on the forums it looked like a clusterfuck of a release for 2.2/Megacorp. I read so many complaints about game imbalance, things like crime and branch offices didn't seem to be working as intended when the patch first released, AI is apparently brain dead, micromanagement has risen intensely, sectors sound nightmarish, late game crisis issues, performance issues, etc, etc.

It seems to be getting slightly better with each patch Paradox put out, but I won't be touching that game for a while, not until the dust has settled. I kind of feel bad for all the complainers on PDX forums who enjoyed what the game was like before 2.2 and are now struggling with what the game has since become. As an outsider, I like the direction the game has gone in, I prefer tall 'peaceful' playthroughs in strategy games rather than painting the map my colour, so dealing with internal population issues is kind of appealing to me. But I still have sympathy for people who bought the game ages ago because the game was like X, but now it's turned into Y.

CK2 on the other hand does seem to have fixed its major issues since the Holy Fury patch, so I think I can start playing that soon.
 

eonden

Member
Oct 25, 2017
3,256
Yeah I've been keeping an eye on Stellaris (haven't played it yet) and judging from reactions on the forums it looked like a clusterfuck of a release for 2.2/Megacorp. I read so many complaints about game imbalance, things like crime and branch offices didn't seem to be working as intended when the patch first released, AI is apparently brain dead, micromanagement has risen intensely, sectors sound nightmarish, late game crisis issues, performance issues, etc, etc.

It seems to be getting slightly better with each patch Paradox put out, but I won't be touching that game for a while, not until the dust has settled. I kind of feel bad for all the complainers on PDX forums who enjoyed what the game was like before 2.2 and are now struggling with what the game has since become. As an outsider, I like the direction the game has gone in, I prefer tall 'peaceful' playthroughs in strategy games rather than painting the map my colour, so dealing with internal population issues is kind of appealing to me. But I still have sympathy for people who bought the game ages ago because the game was like X, but now it's turned into Y.

CK2 on the other hand does seem to have fixed its major issues since the Holy Fury patch, so I think I can start playing that soon.
All those complainers can easily go back to 2.1.x. Paradox allows everyone to download all previous patches of the game through steam easily (heck there is a sticked topic in the forum to explain how to do it). Same with those that want to play 1.9.x. The change in the game movement had to be done for it to be workable design.

They complain because the game is better but:
It had a step back in AI reasoning (due to major changes in the economy that probably were not as tested in AI). The game had finally gone to a decent state and now it went back. In my opinion it is mainly due to the AI having difficulties handling how rare the rare resources are (and how necessary they are for advanced buildings)
More micromanagement as Sectors went away (and if you had been there before you would have heard the complain of sectors being shit and wanting to take control from them back!)

Edit: Old patches had to be taken from Steam due to GDPR compliance and are only available in the Paradox website now and you have to accept a waver to access them (due to GDPR compliance).

Edit 2: I think the DLC was kinda rushed for Christmas, I kinda like that (as I could play way more than otherwise) but it also feels like it should have had some extra month of polish (so a february launch I guess)

Edit 3: OK I guess this sounded quite harsh. I am just annoyed by how most of the fans of 1.9.x and the three transport system are still bitching about the change, despite the change being necessary both for having a better game and for it to be balanced. The engine wasnt made for the assyncronous nature of the transport systems and basically made the whole combat a doomstack gallore of just warping into the main planets and nuking them out. It had to be changed to make the game better (and simplify the code).
 
Last edited:

Sblargh

Member
Oct 25, 2017
2,389
As of 2.2.3 the biggest problem of stellaris is the AI. The game doesn't know how to handle the new system. Most other problems were solved.
The problem is that the new system itself is great imo. The micromanagement complaint I am ambivalent.
It is the perfect amount of micro for about 10 planets, which is what you expand to before getting boxed in on a standard map.
After that, what starts to break imo is the UI. The outlier becomes a nightmare to scroll through once you have too many items and there is no better way to check for unemployment or open building slots without scrolling through the outlier every month.

But UI apart, as for the work needed to keep microing planets after you start conquering the galaxy, my take is that you accept that bargain when you start controlling enemy planets directly instead of turning them into vassals or possibly even changing their ethics to turn them into into allies. If you want to control the galaxy directly, of course the UI could help, but the work itself is the corollary of wanting to control the galaxy directly.

And you can also automate sectors, but it sucks because the AI sucks.
 

Anno

Member
Oct 25, 2017
2,264
Columbus, Ohio
Issues and all (a lot of which seem better on the beta patch), this version of Stellaris is and will probably remain my go-to strategy title. Especially as someone that just likes to empire build and watch numbers slowly go up, 2.2 is awesome. Can’t wait for more story pack content and eventually a diplomacy expansion that helps out with that side of things.
 

Sblargh

Member
Oct 25, 2017
2,389
No, I agree, as I rambling said, the game really captured me. The changes are great, which is what makes the issues frustrating. But I think I have been managing to mod it to my liking.
Glavius AI basically fix pretty much all AI issues (and I still play on the difficulty where the AI doesn't get any bonuses, so the game is only harder because now it is actually trying to play the game) and at first I was wary, but after installing Realistic Ethics Attraction and Better Diplomacy: Realistic Options, I don't think I can go back. They make too much sense. Bad stability *should* make some of my egalitarians to turn authoritarians and the appeal of better living conditions on egalitarian neighbouring empires should make my authoritarians pops start to desire that, too.
Diplomacy should take into account policies, civics and ascenscion perks when it makes sense.

The only problem with these two mods is that they are, in the end, the subjective opinion of the person who made it, but that's the price I guess. He or she at least seem to take a lot of feedback into account.

And I still want more done with the strata, gimme class warfare since now we have proper commies in space with Shared Burdens. But I hold hope that this will come with the diplomacy overhaul, since it introduces espionage and aiding the revolt of the working class of a stratified society makes too much sense.
 

Anno

Member
Oct 25, 2017
2,264
Columbus, Ohio
Also I’d just like to say that Stellaris is probably a top 3ish all time OST to me. I’m sad that Andreas is no longer on the project, presumably crafting another amazing score for Imperator, but I just love all but I think one track in the entire list.
 
OP
OP
Uzzy

Uzzy

Member
Oct 25, 2017
4,217
Not quite a release date, but it looks like we'll have Imperator Rome before June.

 

Brian Damage

Member
Nov 1, 2017
5,315
UK
That's a lot sooner that expected. Do we have any clue about what project Wiz has been transferred to yet or is that still under wraps?
 

eonden

Member
Oct 25, 2017
3,256
That's a lot sooner that expected. Do we have any clue about what project Wiz has been transferred to yet or is that still under wraps?
Under wraps. It seems that the project had already moved from prepoduction and that he is going to be the main director of the project now. I dont think we will get announcement for it this year but nexts (as they normally take 2-3 years of development time and Paradox moved to announcements -> release in less than a year).

There is another Paradox game in production if I remember correctly, which I can see announced in PDXCON (https://pdxcon.paradoxplaza.com/), but that is October sooooo long time.
 

Sblargh

Member
Oct 25, 2017
2,389
Performance on Stellaris since the 2.2.4 patch is pretty perfect for me now. It solved all the problems I was having there.
AI seems better, too. Excellent patch so far, imo.
 

Tachya

Member
Oct 25, 2017
1,496
I don’t really get the appeal of the Imperator Rome game. Seems like a super niche focus in an already niche genre, but people who fit into both will probably eat it up.

I’m just not sure of the point when it seems more like a skin or a mod for the standard Paradox Grand Strategy design model, rather than something that’s worth it as a stand-alone product, but I’m probably not aware of the finer differences in the details. Also I can’t say I’m a fan of Roman-era strategy games as they seem played out, much like WW2 FPS games were around when Call of Duty first came onto the scene and was popular or when it transitioned to modern day with CoD 4, etc.

At least Stellaris was a breath of fresh air, being set in a sci-fi future with more 4X elements than their other grand strategy games, so it caught my eye more.

Do we know of any details of other titles in the works other than that they’re making at least 1 or 2 new unannounced games which may or may not be sequels?

I know Stellaris for consoles is releasing soon, but that seems to be behind a significant number of patches from the PC version and I couldn’t easily figure out how they’re handling DLC and if any expansions are included out of the box at all for that version of the game. If someone has the answer, let me know, because it’s being obfuscated. Not that I even have a console to play it on right now, or that id want to double dip.

I do need to take a look at the new Battletech again, but the initial reviews of the game were a bit lukewarm at best and people seem to really not like their DLC scheme with an expansion pass and stuff. I think the first paid DLC released recently and it was. It well received, so I might be best waiting for a complete edition on sale later down the line if I want to try it, which is a shame cause mechs/zoids/etc. are a lovable pulpy topic. I’m probably better off finally buying the War of the Chosen expansion for Xcom 2 and maybe that newer small DLC. Can play longwar if I want or mess around with plenty of other mod support. I don’t know if Battletech has mod support, and if it does, it’s probably not that extensive?

Anyway, that’s it for now I guess.
 
OP
OP
Uzzy

Uzzy

Member
Oct 25, 2017
4,217
No details of any other games that are being made. They do have the World of Darkness license, and I do reckon a Vampire game based around CK2 mechanics could be something quite special. But that's just a long time desire of mine, there's been nothing to say they're making something like that.
 

eonden

Member
Oct 25, 2017
3,256
I don’t really get the appeal of the Imperator Rome game. Seems like a super niche focus in an already niche genre, but people who fit into both will probably eat it up.

I’m just not sure of the point when it seems more like a skin or a mod for the standard Paradox Grand Strategy design model, rather than something that’s worth it as a stand-alone product, but I’m probably not aware of the finer differences in the details. Also I can’t say I’m a fan of Roman-era strategy games as they seem played out, much like WW2 FPS games were around when Call of Duty first came onto the scene and was popular or when it transitioned to modern day with CoD 4, etc.

At least Stellaris was a breath of fresh air, being set in a sci-fi future with more 4X elements than their other grand strategy games, so it caught my eye more.

Do we know of any details of other titles in the works other than that they’re making at least 1 or 2 new unannounced games which may or may not be sequels?

I know Stellaris for consoles is releasing soon, but that seems to be behind a significant number of patches from the PC version and I couldn’t easily figure out how they’re handling DLC and if any expansions are included out of the box at all for that version of the game. If someone has the answer, let me know, because it’s being obfuscated. Not that I even have a console to play it on right now, or that id want to double dip.
"Super niche focus in an already niche genre" you say while talking about the second most popular era in western history after WW2. Grand Strategy gamers love that kind of thing and a popular setting together with a simpler introduction curve has done well in HoI4. I also dont see the great number of Strategy Roman games in the last 10 years (maybe TW:Rome 2 was the latest one?), while WW2 ones flood the market.

The change with EU4 (its more "similar" product) is way higher than EU:rome had with EU3, with a population system, different map design, different military system, different leader system (which takes inspiration from CK2) as well as taking lessons from EU4 failures (such as mercenaries being better integrated and a more dinamic economy).

Stellaris did great and I really hope we get a reintroduction of the high fantasy version grand strategy game, but Paradox knows that their core audience continue to be history and grand strategy buffs and that they need to also cater to them not gamble all the time.

Stellaris Console actually got a release date now, February 26:


It is basically 1.x locked to hyperlane only it seems, as the boundary growth is still a volumetric sphere. No expansions included and similarly to City Skilines (same port guys) will probably lag behind. Hopefully it runs well but I dont really dare to know how the fuck Stellaris would controll with a controller.
 

Tachya

Member
Oct 25, 2017
1,496
No details of any other games that are being made. They do have the World of Darkness license, and I do reckon a Vampire game based around CK2 mechanics could be something quite special. But that's just a long time desire of mine, there's been nothing to say they're making something like that.
Huh. Forget they ended up with that IP after CCP well..uh...does what CCP tends to do with anything that's not actually EVE Online itself. It's a modern miracle that game and the company as a whole has even survived this long with the immense string of poor business decisions, a lot to do with pursuing stuff ahead of its time.

eonden I'm speaking more of an outside to the Paradox brand of grand strategy games (no one else really does that style of real time or real time with pause simulation strategy). My personal experience is more with turn-based 4X games and older RTS/Dota (although I find it hard to put much playtime into those latter two now.)

So maybe I don't have as well of an understanding of the preferences of the grand strategy niche which is definitely more historical in origin. But to me as more of an outsider, the surface differences between one historical grand strategy game to another, especially if you're talking only Paradox titles, are minimal at best. There might be one greater defining mechanic and a change in time-period, but the underlying core of their games seems to be pretty much the exact tired formula. And there isn't anything specifically wrong with that if that's what the studio is experienced with and makes good profit on I suppose, but it's not broadening their base much either. And whether you like it or not, complex, cerebral strategy games (whether grand strategy, RTS, 4X, etc.) are all niches, especially since they only really exist on PC, even if the niche is relatively large and an old cornerstone of PC gaming. Too many people want instant gratification in gaming these days, and strategy games don't really provide that as much. But I guess that's why we've seen a resurgence in formerly beloved genres that have been ignored for a long time, especially as kickstarter indie projects.

And I wouldn't be here if I didn't like strategy games enough anyway. Personally I'm just probably biased against Roman Empire and WW2 eras of history in my media because they're SO overdone to death in general that I find them boring compared to more unusual settings. But chasing trends can be profitable a lot of the time, even if the "clone" products aren't as good as the one that broke ground originally, so I can't knock the hustle completely ;D
 

Tachya

Member
Oct 25, 2017
1,496
Actually I don't see how hard it'd be to make a Vampire Dark Ages mod for CK2...
HMMMMMMMMMM. I might be into that more than just any historical stuff. The vampire/supernatural theme on top of the whole lineage focus of CK2 could be very compelling for a lot of people I think, and would certainly be more unique to draw people into the genre. Just make it a little bit more accessible for new people like Stellaris and you probably have a real hit!

Speaking of mods, I saw a guy do a review of some Anime Girls mod(s) for Stellaris and uh, it's about as much as you'd expect, AND MORE! The faction traits are also apparently really overpowered, lol. There's some other interesting mods too, like Star Trek (maybe more than Star Wars for that game), and I think Stargate? There's a really well done Asari mod too I believe, if no other Mass Effect races. Weebs...find a way?
 

TiredGamer

Member
Oct 27, 2017
196
The vampire/supernatural theme on top of the whole lineage focus of CK2 could be very compelling for a lot of people I think, and would certainly be more unique to draw people into the genre. Just make it a little bit more accessible for new people like Stellaris and you probably have a real hit!
A Vampire Dark Ages mod for CK2 would be all about the historical stuff as well as the supernatural, that's the whole intent of the Dark Ages campaign for VTM. Also a lot of CK2 may seem daunting but it's really not as long as you don't try to start as a major King or Emperor or in one of the expansion countries.
Speaking of mods, I saw a guy do a review of some Anime Girls mod(s) for Stellaris and uh, it's about as much as you'd expect, AND MORE! The faction traits are also apparently really overpowered, lol. There's some other interesting mods too, like Star Trek (maybe more than Star Wars for that game), and I think Stargate? There's a really well done Asari mod too I believe, if no other Mass Effect races. Weebs...find a way?
Because Stellaris isn't locked to a map of Earth it gives a lot of freedom, but it's not really that odd -- one of the most popular CK2 mods is Game Of Thrones with a map of Westeros instead of Europe+India.
 

eonden

Member
Oct 25, 2017
3,256
A Vampire Dark Ages mod for CK2 would be all about the historical stuff as well as the supernatural, that's the whole intent of the Dark Ages campaign for VTM. Also a lot of CK2 may seem daunting but it's really not as long as you don't try to start as a major King or Emperor or in one of the expansion countries.

Because Stellaris isn't locked to a map of Earth it gives a lot of freedom, but it's not really that odd -- one of the most popular CK2 mods is Game Of Thrones with a map of Westeros instead of Europe+India.
Forgot to answerbut yeah that. Also, one of the best mods of HoI4 is a total conversion into the MLP universe.