• The GiftBot 2.0 Launch Giveaway Extravaganza has come to a close with an astounding 8073 games given away to the community by 696 members, a huge success thanks to you! The gifting now continues with more official prizes in the new Gaming Giveaways |OT|. Leftover Steam codes are also being given away to the PC Gaming Era community.

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

Oct 25, 2017
3,452
First proper CK3 DD on Dynasties

Sounds amazing to me. I’m a sucker for anything that boils down to working hard to passively spread a game mechanic.
Yeah, I really like what I'm hearing. The way cadet houses work sounds great, and I like that the game is going to be giving you different ways to spread your dynasty and have it make sense beyond just trying to get their titles for yourself.
 

karnage10

Member
Oct 27, 2017
1,303
Portugal
First proper CK3 DD on Dynasties

Sounds amazing to me. I’m a sucker for anything that boils down to working hard to passively spread a game mechanic.
This seems to be amazing. In ck2 i always enjoyed ploting to make my dynasty members important in other kingdoms. Its great to finally see that it will give something back!
I jsut hope that there is an easy way to know if a house is part of your dynasty or not (without needing an extra click or a tooltip). I imagine the way i play my dynasty will have a few dozen houses very quickly!


Also there was a DD of stellaris about federations
It sounds amazing!
 
Oct 25, 2017
3,452
This seems to be amazing. In ck2 i always enjoyed ploting to make my dynasty members important in other kingdoms. Its great to finally see that it will give something back!
I jsut hope that there is an easy way to know if a house is part of your dynasty or not (without needing an extra click or a tooltip). I imagine the way i play my dynasty will have a few dozen houses very quickly!


Also there was a DD of stellaris about federations
It sounds amazing!
I would assume members of different houses in your dynasty will probably get a slightly different colored version of the blood drop for dynasty members.
 

Hella

Member
Oct 27, 2017
14,576
The enhanced RPG elements in CK3 sound amazing, but I really, really hope it doesn't collapse under its own weight with all those modifiers and stuff flying around.

Same for Stellaris and its federations, actually.

I just want the AI to at least appear to be playing along the same game as me, even if its internal logic is a weird mess.
 

eonden

Member
Oct 25, 2017
4,893
The enhanced RPG elements in CK3 sound amazing, but I really, really hope it doesn't collapse under its own weight with all those modifiers and stuff flying around.

Same for Stellaris and its federations, actually.

I just want the AI to at least appear to be playing along the same game as me, even if its internal logic is a weird mess.
I really liked tying stress mechanics to you breaking the role playing of your character. It pushes you towards you actually roleplaying your characters while still giving you the option of doing more gamey stuff (although for a small hindrance).
 

Brian Damage

Member
Nov 1, 2017
6,874
UK
I really liked tying stress mechanics to you breaking the role playing of your character. It pushes you towards you actually roleplaying your characters while still giving you the option of doing more gamey stuff (although for a small hindrance).
I assume there'll be a toggle in the game setup to switch it off, in case you want to go nuts.
 

Hella

Member
Oct 27, 2017
14,576
I really liked tying stress mechanics to you breaking the role playing of your character. It pushes you towards you actually roleplaying your characters while still giving you the option of doing more gamey stuff (although for a small hindrance).
Definitely. That's a brilliant addition.

The way they're doubling down on 'roleplaying' and not just RPG mechanics fills me with a lot of hope. They really get what made CK2 so good.
 

Hella

Member
Oct 27, 2017
14,576
I don't mod, but I imagine it's tough modding when Stellaris' patches bring such sweeping changes all the time.
 

Anno

Member
Oct 25, 2017
2,680
Columbus, Ohio
CK3 Dev Diary 2

Regardless of if they're playable it seems a little weird to me that they're making a big deal of baronies being on the map but seemingly making them even less impactful on the game. I get the idea of wanting to further divide up the map, but the gameplay implications seem worse than them currently being abstracted. Hopefully something else pops up in future DDs to make use of the new system besides it just being easier to navigate armies around.
 

SaberVS7

Member
Oct 25, 2017
1,831
I mean I'm pretty sure army-movement and terrain granularity is precisely the point. That's been the primary emphasis in the Map Updates to CK2 and EU4, and the move to the new engine enables them to properly execute on it instead of hacking it in to old games in a rather awkward manner. Also as a neat side-effect it actually gives a sense of where said locations are in their counties.

And I believe they've already said that Baron-level characters are going to be much more of an influence than they are in CK2, particularly for Counts.
 

Hella

Member
Oct 27, 2017
14,576
Yeah it seems like they're getting serious about engaging military gameplay this time 'round. The map reminds me of Total War or something, with geography and logistics being more important than ever.

It should also make things like trade routes and rebellions more interesting, due to the increased precision of the map.
 

Anno

Member
Oct 25, 2017
2,680
Columbus, Ohio
I mean I'm pretty sure army-movement and terrain granularity is precisely the point. That's been the primary emphasis in the Map Updates to CK2 and EU4, and the move to the new engine enables them to properly execute on it instead of hacking it in to old games in a rather awkward manner. Also as a neat side-effect it actually gives a sense of where said locations are in their counties.

And I believe they've already said that Baron-level characters are going to be much more of an influence than they are in CK2, particularly for Counts.
I agree that the increased granularity is good both in terms of army movement and fleshing our the map. It just seems weird to then put restrictions on how that granularity is used in terms of your holdings.

When asked further downthread if barons would still be characters the answer was “[baronies] are still very much held by actual characters. We just put less emphasize on them.” So, I dunno? Maybe I missed something. I Guess we’ll just have to wait and see as more information comes out.
 

SaberVS7

Member
Oct 25, 2017
1,831
Hmm, since we are on the subject of Combat, I can't help but wonder which model Combat will follow this go around. A slight revision on the 3-Flanks system, or perhaps a switch to how EU4/Imperator handle things? Especially since Imperator has the Combat Tactics element in it, but as an element properly exposed to the Player.

...I still have no bloody clue how CK2 combat works, whereas the entirety of EU4's combat mechanics can be fully explained in a 20 minute video.
 

Poodlestrike

There is much talk, and I have listened...
Moderator
Oct 25, 2017
5,729
Tbh, while map and combat changes are good and all, what I'm really curious about is logistics. I've always thought that making it harder to send armies further afield would be a really dynamite anti-blobbing mechanic.
 

Brian Damage

Member
Nov 1, 2017
6,874
UK
Today's Stellaris dev diary is about The Galactic Community, which will be a part of Federations.

Resolutions are proposals you can put to the Galactic Community (GC) that add passive modifiers (positive and negative) to all empires and may have conditions you must satisfy to avoid being in breach of Galactic Law.

So anyone can propose Resolutions to the GC, and only one proposal can be considered at a time: others will be put in the proposal queue. When a Resolution is either passed or rejected, the next Resolution proposal in the queue is put forward. However, the queue is ordered according to Diplomatic Weight, so empires with high Diplomatic Weight will have higher priority given to their proposals. Diplomatic Weight is calculated based on tech level, number of pops, fleet strength and economy. It looks like the GC Senate goes into recess (don't know how often) so this might prevent prevent proposals being spammed. I don't know if there's a cost to proposing Resolutions but I assume there has to be a way to prevent the big diplomatic powers from completely smothering all other debate.

When empires vote on proposals, their Diplomatic Weight is added to either Support or Oppose (you can also Abstain). The total weights are compared and decide whether or not it is passed. Empires can call in Favours from other empires, which adds 10% of their Diplomatic Weight to a proposal for each Favour you call in. You can only be owed 10 Favours per empire, and are also used to improve your chances of securing a diplomatic deal with that empire. Favours can also be traded.

You can reform the GC to have a Galactic Council, comprised of the 3 empires with the highest diplomatic weight (though this number can be changed through Resolutions). Council members get powerful abilities to exercise over the rest of the GC, such as vetos and emergency votes (which bypass recess).

You can set a Galactic Focus (probably through a Resolution), which guides the GC towards a common goal like combating a crisis (which will make it illegal to close your borders to other GC members during the crisis). The Galactic Market is now founded as a Galactic Focus, and the GC itself is founded when one empire meets half the others. You can apply to join the GC if you know a member state, and you can also choose to leave it if it's screwing you over.
 

TiredGamer

Member
Oct 27, 2017
273
The barons and other petty nobility were (usually) the actual government of a country, so anything that expands or adds systems for them is better IMO. I don't think it's much to ask for ways to simulate the extraordinary influence these people had on the monarchs.
 

Hella

Member
Oct 27, 2017
14,576
Origins dev diary next week. Aw yiss.

And y'know, the most exciting part of the Galactic Community, to me, is the empires that won't be part of it. Seeing how Devouring Swarms or Fanatical Purifiers, or just xenophobic isolations or militaristis, affect the way the galactic community develops will be fascinating. It will also let Paradox be a bit bolder in terms of balance, since those groups will start getting the whole galaxy united against them.

Really exciting expansion.
 

AquaRegia

Member
Oct 25, 2017
855
The barons and other petty nobility were (usually) the actual government of a country, so anything that expands or adds systems for them is better IMO. I don't think it's much to ask for ways to simulate the extraordinary influence these people had on the monarchs.
Could be a fun mechanic avoiding a barons rebellion (Henry II and John, for instance),
until a stronger centralized government can be unlocked.
 

TiredGamer

Member
Oct 27, 2017
273
Could be a fun mechanic avoiding a barons rebellion (Henry II and John, for instance), until a stronger centralized government can be unlocked.
Minor rebellions as well, sometimes leading to neighboring barons seeking the player's help. All sorts of interesting gameplay could come out of them and they don't have to be this micromanagement hell.
 

karnage10

Member
Oct 27, 2017
1,303
Portugal
How does EU4 compare in complexity to something like CIV5 for example?
IMO they are very different types of strategy. The biggest differences are:
  • Assymetrical start: in EU IV "everyone" starts in a different situation. Thus if you start with a big country the game is easier while if you start with a very small country the game can be brutal.
  • Limited friendships: In Eu IV not only do you have rivals but the way the diplomacy works pushes for your enemies to band together in an alliance. This means that you can't be friendly with everyone (in CIV you can be a pacifist and very rarely will the AI gather to fight you). This also means that securing powerful friends is imperative if you don't want the AI to band together against you.
  • Heavy focus on money and manpower: While in CIV money is just a "shortcut", in EU IV is the lifeblood of every country. you can use it for everything. This means that controlling key regions that have bonus commerce as well as engaging in swift wars is a much better strategy. In civ there is very little penalty for an attrition war since you troops heal if you give them time. In EU IV having the military at full maintenance costs a fortune and will quickly force you to en-debt yourself. THis effectively means that unlike CIV where a war generally ends when you accomplish your objectives in EU IV it is normal to have wars that change just a little bit of territory because both countries might want to avoid an atrition war.
  • DLC make the game "harder". While In CIv each expansion gives a couple of features, each EU IV DLC adds a few mechanics. After at least 4 DLC EU IV has more new features then a CIV base- > complete edition.
IMO the best way to learn a game is to try and find someone that is either already knows the game and/or wants to learn too. Pick countries that are nearby but aren't direct opponents. For example castile and france. Castile player focus in colonization while france player focus in keeping europe under his thumb. The cool thing about being near each other is that you can intervene in each other wars if the other player is being overwhelmed by the AI.

If you are playing alone, IMO castile and the ottomans are good to learn. They have every limited enemies in the early game and have both lot of land to expand. IMO playing castile with a focus to colonization is the easiest way to start.
 

TiredGamer

Member
Oct 27, 2017
273
CIV is about building an empire from labor and diplomacy and EU is about building an empire through conquest and money.
 

Hella

Member
Oct 27, 2017
14,576
I've always felt that 4Xes are very numbers-driven in a way that grand strat games aren't. 4X games have players chasing a more optimal way to play, with Civ at the apex of the hunt, while GS games are more of a broad simulation sort of thing. It's not that 4X games are less complicated, they're just smaller in scale.

I think grand strategy games have a reputation for being deep more because they, as a genre, have not focused on tutorialising (and thus have less institutionalising) the way you play, which makes each new one seem like a much steeper cliff than, say, Civilization 5 to 6. It's sorta like Dark Souls in that its mystique adds to its perceived difficulty.

So, er... Grand strategy games are the Dark Souls of the broad strategy genre. I'm sorry.
 

karnage10

Member
Oct 27, 2017
1,303
Portugal
I've always felt that 4Xes are very numbers-driven in a way that grand strat games aren't. 4X games have players chasing a more optimal way to play, with Civ at the apex of the hunt, while GS games are more of a broad simulation sort of thing. It's not that 4X games are less complicated, they're just smaller in scale.

I think grand strategy games have a reputation for being deep more because they, as a genre, have not focused on tutorialising (and thus have less institutionalising) the way you play, which makes each new one seem like a much steeper cliff than, say, Civilization 5 to 6. It's sorta like Dark Souls in that its mystique adds to its perceived difficulty.

So, er... Grand strategy games are the Dark Souls of the broad strategy genre. I'm sorry.
i agree with the exception of base game stellaris i have yet to play a grand strategy game with a serviceable tutorial. HOI IV and Ck2 tutorials are so horrible that i still remember how quickly i lost.
That said i wonder if stellaris tutorial has been updated to explain the new concepts.
 

Iggy

Member
Oct 27, 2017
3,181
The tweet before:

As someone says in the comments, "that plan backfired beautifully".

Feels good to read that after the whole "deus vult" nonsense.
 
Oct 25, 2017
3,452
Speaking of CK2's music, whatever else changes with CK3, they better bring the main theme back. I can't imagine the game without it.
 

Hella

Member
Oct 27, 2017
14,576
PDX games are one of the few vg soundtracks to really benefit from Spotify availability. My appreciation for those OSTs has only grown due to it.
 

theodoranil

Member
Aug 2, 2019
252
Oxford / Melbourne
Really digging the look of the new mission system they've made for Imperator. So much less railroad-y than EU4's; think it's gonna consume a lot of my time once the patch and the free content pack drop together.
 

Hella

Member
Oct 27, 2017
14,576
Yo Stellaris' origins are SICK
There are currently 18 Origins in the game, where some of them were converted from previously being Civics. Origins that were converted will be unlocked by the same DLC that they were unlocked by when they were civics.

Origins are not meant to be balanced against each other, but rather balanced within themselves (as in they don't start in severe resource deficits or "feel broken" by themselves). There are Origins that are "stronger" than other Origins.

The Origins
Prosperous Unification: Start with 4 additional Pops and 2 additional Districts. (Available to everyone)

Mechanist: Start with 8 Pops being robots, and the ability to build more. (Utopia)

Syncretic Evolution: Start the game with 12 Pops being of another species. (Utopia)

Life-Seeded: Start on a Gaia World. (Apocalypse)

Post-Apocalyptic: Start on a Tomb World. (Apocalypse)

Remnants: Start on a Relic World. (Federations)

Shattered Ring: Start on a Shattered Ring World. Your empire lives on the only intact section of the ancient megastructure, and it is possible to repair most of the other sections. (Federations)

Void Dwellers: Start on a Habitat above your destroyed, former homeworld. Adept at living in habitats, and start with the technology to build new ones. (Federations)

Scion: Start as the vassal of a Fallen Empire. (Federations)

Galactic Doorstep: Start with a dormant Gateway in your home system. (Available to everyone)

Tree of Life: Only for Hive Minds. Start with a powerful Tree of Life on your homeworld. Disastrous if you would somehow lose control of it. (Federations)

On the Shoulder of Giants: Start with an Archaeological Site related to a mysterious benefactor. (Federations)

Calamitous Birth: Lithoid Only. Start with a Massive Crater on your Homeworld. You are also able to build Meteorite Colony Ships, which colonize planets in a more dramatic fashion. (Lithoids)

Resource Consolidation: Machines only. Start with a Machine World as your homeworld. (Synthetic Dawn)

Common Ground: Start with as the leader of a Galactic Union federation, and with The Federation tradition unlocked. (Federations)

Hegemon: Start with as the leader of a Hegemony federation, and with The Federation tradition unlocked. (Federations)

Doomsday: Your homeworld is doomed and it will explode after 64 years, so you need to find a new home for your species. (Federations)

Lost Colony: Another empire with the same species as you will exist somewhere in the galaxy. (Available to everyone)
Origins are gonna completely change the game. Those pesky 4X symmetrical starts (more or less) are finally gone, and now the galaxy can truly live.


This xpac's gonna be sooo good.
 

Anno

Member
Oct 25, 2017
2,680
Columbus, Ohio
I’m excited for the concept. Hopefully it’s easily moddable (and that mods get fixed?) and continues to be iterated on. The broken ringworld start will probably be my first go st it.
 

karnage10

Member
Oct 27, 2017
1,303
Portugal
I have a feeling the ringworld origin will be nerfed pretty quick. Seems like the only one that very OP imo.
IMO starting as fallen empire vassal is the most OP assuming the fallen empire doesn't mess with you and it works like a normal vassal. Since nobody can mess with you you can freely expand and attack to your heart's desire. Essentially you have a guardian so strong that only 4 other empires in the galaxy can pick a fight with.
you can even have atrition wars with more powerful foes since that even white peace can be beneficial after all i doubt any other empire will pick a fight with you even if you have almost 0 ships
 

Xando

Member
Oct 28, 2017
6,195
IMO starting as fallen empire vassal is the most OP assuming the fallen empire doesn't mess with you and it works like a normal vassal. Since nobody can mess with you you can freely expand and attack to your heart's desire. Essentially you have a guardian so strong that only 4 other empires in the galaxy can pick a fight with.
you can even have atrition wars with more powerful foes since that even white peace can be beneficial after all i doubt any other empire will pick a fight with you even if you have almost 0 ships
We'll have to see who the fallen empire AI reacts but i feel like they're gonna limit FE joining you. Otherwise this would be like me as nepal allying the soviets in HOI and taking over asia.

Nah, machine world start is also very OP.
I think that's still okay since it's only one planet whereas you get 4 on the ring world.
 

Xando

Member
Oct 28, 2017
6,195
i'm pretty sure you start only in 1 section and the other 3 are destroyed. I don't know if you start with the tech to repair it ready to be researched (which generaly happens when you discover a megastructure)
The dev diary says you will be able to repair the other 3 sections relatively quick which is the problem imo.
 

eonden

Member
Oct 25, 2017
4,893
The dev diary says you will be able to repair the other 3 sections relatively quick which is the problem imo.
It probably means that you can repair them without the technology, but taking into account the resource hog that fixing damaged ringworlds is, it isnt as op as you think (as until midgame you cannot really afford them without nuking your economy).