I have some thoughts about EU5's map!
Vložit
- čas přidán 3. 06. 2024
- I have some thoughts about the maps we have seen with Project Caesar (EU5)
Tinto Talks: forum.paradoxplaza.com/forum/...
Twitch ► / lordlambert_
Patreon ► / lambert2191
Paypal ► shorturl.at/tK579
Discord ► / discord
Twitter ► / lambert2191
Linktree ► linktr.ee/LordLambert
Help me out by using my referral links?
Humble Bundle: bit.ly/2RwJdDC
Nexus Store: www.nexus.gg/lordlambert
If you wish to become a member of the channel, click this link here: / @lord_lambert
If you like this video, please consider liking and subscribing.
Big thanks to my Patrons, you help give me motivation to keep this channel going
DISCLAIMER - You should assume all videos on this channel are recorded using review keys provided by the developers of their games.
#LordLambert #ParadoxTinto #EU5 - Hry
Tinto talk 2 says that these passages are locations which can't be inhabited but may allow trade to pass through, and also armies, with some heavy attrition.
Have we ruled out this project isn't Stellaris 2
You know you might be on to something!
Didn’t they say they wouldn’t make a stellaris sequel 💀
@@microplasticeater That would indeed be stupid from a business perpective.
I think we might find it's Stellaris 0
This is pre-alpha, I'm certain the map will have a *lot* added to it before the game is even announced by name
Any sane man would know these maps will change significantly 😂 idk why some people hated it like broo... 😅
So I really hope that Imperator's map is what is used as a basis mixed with the improvements from victoria 3. The political map mode and the atlas map mode in particular are great. as is the terrain map mode, which is how I tend to play in.
referring to the himalayan map image: alternatively there is no dedicated fort system or it’s completely revamped kinda like how imperator made you capture a fort to occupy provinces
Imperator has a dedicated fort system. Forts is the largest share of your budget, until you delete most of the ones you conquer, but even at 5 level per province, it's still a huge chunk
With regards to the passages, I'm wondering if some of them are not a single location but a chain of locations to cross things like the Appalachians or the Alps. Imagine if that line between two wastelands is 5 different locations, each of which has a movement penalty and attrition penalty applied to it, including reinforcement reduction (or a rework of the reinforcement mechanic) so yes you *could* send your army through the Himalayas to assault one of the unprotected heartlands of your opponent, but in doing so it takes a year, suffers attrition costing 40-50% of the army and upon arrival morale is terrible and the army is easily routed.
Definitively atlas map mode. IR also has those hashes where water meets the land in its flatmap. I find it a pain in the but to replicate.
That blank map mode reminds me a lot of the player map mode in IR.
A Supply System would be amazing because it would make warfare both realistic and much more strategic. This way you’ll have to plan out how and where you’ll conquer so that your supply line can still reach your armies and this also prevents those situations where French troops go to Kamchatka to siege a castle which is completely ridiculous
Johan already stated in a dev response, that the terrain map mode will have undulation, and the political map mode will not. However the other questions he hasn’t given a clear answer yet I think.
I hadnt seen that, thats great news thanks!
Hi Lambert. I think the thing you are missing in looking at the mountain pass locations is how strongly seasons played into it which I hope paradox are taking into account. Realistically in this time period there were many passes and routes across mountains that could be traversed by large armies. An example of this would on the other side of the Himalayas when the Mughal empire invaded through the Khyber pass. And in terms of their supply requirements we only begin to see proper supply lines quite a bit after the mass adoption of firearm infantry. The majority of supplies would either be collected locally (food and water) or supplied before a campaign began (weapons, armour, extra horses, uniforms ect) so a supply route would only be required for setting up depot in an occupied region. A good way to look at it is that you aren't supplying an army for its day to day needs, you are giving it say half a years worth of supplies for a campaign and the actions taken on that campaign can diminish or preserve how long those supplies last. When thinking about it this way you can very easily move an army across the Himalayas or the Appalachians but feasibly only in summer and any supply depot supplied over a mountain chain would have a greatly decreased efficiency.
Hello Lambert, thank you for your videos on the Tinto Talks series. I have enjoyed them greatly! I agree with you about the terrain and atlas thoughts. I hope a terrain mode is available similar to the one in imperator. Surely drawings of trees aren't the only terrain we will get to experience!
Regarding your thoughts on wasteland passageways: I think you are well founded to believe that supply, or attrition etc, will be factors that create a disincentive for some routes. We saw on the "atlas" map-mode that roads only connected to certain locations. I would think their presence will somehow make travel easier or harder with/without them. That line of thought nicely sets up towards how certain land routes will be more favourable than others, linking to your thoughts on wasteland passages.
I have been trying to look towards things more positively this year. I am very hopeful and excited for more of these reveals and understand that you are also!
Many thanks and Best wishes,
-Daniel
o7
This is the only project from PDX that I have any reserves of hopium left for.
@@Lord_LambertWait to see it all somehow crushed when the wafare dev diary comes out. (Please not!)
As for the map stuff. Maybe I'm kind of a boomer but the CK2, EU4, Vic2 maps are my favorite. Flat and without any transparency.
That being said, maybe they're doing a quick and lazy strait crossing through those areas. Applying a % attrition and then if you're defending the other side a massive defensive bonus. Though that might be too board gamey and be against what they're envisioning with the project.
Either way, I've been enjoying the speculation and Tinto Talks videos, cheers.
I wish they could just provide us with both
@@doctordrizzles1281apparently that’s the plan according to johan in dev responses (:
Same, I hope we can get those at full opacity or mix of 2 styles.
I hope the terrian bellow others map modes will be a toggle/option in the menu
I know this is probably asking for a lot, but I think the idea to combine map modes should be a thing. Personally, I hate the semi-transparent thing that Imperator did. But what if you could drag the terrain map-mode onto the political map-mode to get that effect? I don't know how hard that would be to implement, but I'm fairly certain that would make everyone happy.
It wouldnt surprise me if they take the mechanic of road building from Imperator but not have it tied to armies making it but giving a option for armies to build them with a type of cost. It also would make sense if provinces are no longer the smallest points of interest now. Trade, Army and diplomacy all have reasons for roads to be made if they decide to make it matter.
It also wouldnt surprise me if the travel of ships are affected by the trade winds too in a manner and naval logistics gets changed in a way.
India is a very diverse place, diverse is the word you're looking for lambert 7:08
I kinda like the hashed lines of the cultural map mode without the terrain. I guess I was also a fan of the Victoria 2 cultural map mode
I really hope that resupply of armies becomes something that isn't guarantee. Especially when they're a thousand miles from home and even moreso if there are oceans or hostile territory in the say. it seems ridiculous in EU4 that I can walk 20,000 Spanish troops through a Siberian winter and the replacements arrive for the thousand dead men every month like clockwork.
The pronunciations are almost spot on - nice!
I am learning swedish after all :P
I think it will mostly be trade caravans passing through these passages and that armies will take disgusting attrition passing through or not be able to do so at all
I think Johan said entire armies could pass through them at a steep attrition cost.
I miss hearing you break down dev diaries on No CB, so these videos have been so enjoyable ❤
There may be something happening on that front...
With passes in general i think you might be able to move small stacks through them while large stacks take such heavy attrition that its not worth it
So thinking a bit about these "passages" between the mountains, I have a few potential theories or lets say ideas how they could work. First up I would like to say though that I really like that they exist. Why? I live in the alps irl and no paradox game so far has managed to correctly represent the area and it's valleys and passes even remotely correctly. Imperator once again got the closest but they are all pretty wrong. This looks to take another shot at a better approach. Ok on to my theories. I don't think that they are completely impassable and I also believe that armies very likely can pass through, however I don't think that it will be too tedious to guard in practice. Likely there will be extreme attrition on the smaller passages and still very very severe on the major passages making it a real gamble to go through and in return a gamble on where to guard them or not. Something that I could see would be akin to Hoi4's garrison system and/or guard system where you could fairly easily order a swarm of small units to guard the passes. There could also be all kinds of variations of "early warning" systems like a cheap guard tower building that spots approaching enemies and either protects against them or alerts nearby guard units to automatically attack them for example.
They talked about a 3-basis terrain system
One of this basis being topography
I really hope they took their time and carefully design the topography. It was a mess in vicky 3, which dissapointed me as they had done a swell job in Imperator and CK3
Galicia and northern Portugal being flatlands will always haunt me.
I'd personally like to see an opacity slider for map color. I'm not a big fan of seeing terrain through the political map, but I understand why people like it. I'd love to have both since all it really takes is a slider in the options menu that honestly wouldn't be all that hard to implement.
That's a great idea
Would be cool to see the demographics in individual provinces and states as well aside from the population of the country as a whole
The demographic image is likely for one location, Constantinople. Not many other cities that big in Europe in the likely start of 1356
Also Sub-Saharan Africa seems surprisingly void of wasteland compared to earlier presentations
Really do hope they reuse the Imperator style map, yeah, its the best looking one.
The fact Johan is the lead dev gives me hope in that regard (even if in others it worries me a bit)
The moving armies thing, great, Vicky 3 has not yet figured out a good midpoint between the EU4 and HoI systems, no sense in following its design right now.
Just hope for some automation of armies like we got recently in EU4, because managing each army in late game there is still a slog..
Regarding the weblike passageways, I wonder if they are like the Imperator 'semi wastelands', armies CAN pass through them, but you really dont want to, because the attrition and speed of movement through those is murderous. So most wars you will not see them used as true frontlines, but rather for a sneak attack with a smaller force maybe?
One thing you didnt speak about I find interesting a design change, oceans are now corridors, very reminiscent of the TES EU4 mod, where most of the water is impassable terrain and there's paths through.
Personally I am worried about them, because it could mean you can 'wall' an ocean, if you say, have a fleet in each corridor patrolling between the lanes it has.
Resulting in it being easier to fortify the literal ocean than the Himalayas/Sahara web entries you showed.
You sure they would go with this map for eu5? Would be kinda fun Scandinavia run))
I completely agree on Imperators map. It's bafflingly more beautiful and good looking than any other Paradox Game. I just started dabbling a bit with CK3 again and it's map looks way worse.
I bet Tibetans will get modifiers that make them better at traversing and defending the mountain passes.
In before this is Vicki 4 nobody saw coming.
Bismarck; The spiritual successor to Victoria 2
It's March of the Eagles 2
I’ll be honest. With the locations for passageways I don’t understand your point?
They’ve stated that you can’t settle in them and they will have attrition.
I suppose, that’s sets it as at least as good as eu4, and sounds like imperator, I’m thinking the Bronze Age mod, where you’re in the levant, and you can walk into the desert around the edge of deep Syria, but you will die from a lack of food is you March 2armies through. I suppose, food supplies is probably the best way in imperator to model I because you can starve quickly. In eu5, I hope they have a food supply system, … the thing is we a,ways talk about supply lines, and it was ‘a thing’ in the pre Victoria era, but not like we know it today. Most armies either pillaged or found food locally through either foraging or purchasing it on the market/from lords with stockpiles/from merchants who came to the army offering food for a price. There isn’t much need to maintain a constant ammo supply when you’re fighting with swords and arrows. Food is the only concern, and that’s something that you can haul on a persons back, with a stockpile to last a couple weeks if you have horses/mules.
If I were to suggest the most blunt force application to the devs. 1. Give the AI a massive pathing malus through all terrain marked uninhabitable, or with attrition greater than 10%. Give a passageway a base 2% attrition? Then make starvation-attrition a thing. If your army is at 0% food stockpile(on the army) attrition at 10% a week, but do have the ability to forage some small amount in almost all provinces. At 10% a week if you’ve got a realistic travel time of 2 or 3 months through the Sahara, that’s 0.9^12 men survive 28%, that’s a quarter of the stack remaining. And in order to avoid starvation most of your army would’ve been miles anyway. I think that’s the best way to soft cap the ability to attack across the Sahara/Tibet.
My point is that I think we're either going to have to spam out fortresses to block entry, or there will be some mechanic that makes travelling through those passages prohibitively difficult.
By making it a realistic map in makes the importance of smaller region seem less important, for example europe. Hope it’s good game tho, if they need to delay it for more content do it
A lot of people would disagree on wanting a political/cultural map-mode with a well defined terrain on it. I think the best course of action would be another map-mode that one could just turn on/off for the terrain. Its kind of overstimulating to the eye when the terrain is added when the only information I want is the culture of said area. This is especially true when the color of the culture is a little transparent instead of the solid colors that older paradox games have.
This project obviously is the real Victoria 3 (the fake one was released as a prank/April Fools joke)
The app mountains aren't extremely high
i really hope we will have modern borders possible for africa so we can split colonies nicely with friends, but juding by the sahara deserts i dont think we will
I prefer eu4 map to any newer PX games. Especially the political map modes not being at 100% opacity just puts me off.
Thats fair. It is a personal preference thing after all. Whats great about EU4 is that there are so many map mods that can tailor your visuals to your own taste.
@@Lord_Lambert yup, in addition to plethora of mods that can change the visuals even further. Great video, thank you for showing all this about europ....I mean Project Ceasar, ofc!
Eu4 map mode is dog shit. Out dated. Literally every other map after eu4 is better.
@@roser5372 some people share your opinion, I don't. But I hope the developing team can satisfy both sides :D
@@jayjayjumper1026 ye
Imperator Rome 2
game starts in 14 century.
its eu5
I really really really hope that they don't go with what they did for CK3. A mostly terrain mapmode with slightly colored borders when you zoom in is awful. As someone who has been playing since Eu3 times, I must say I hate terrain mapmode. It just sucks: doesn't tell you what you want to know about terrain very well (simple terrain mapmode does that better), makes telling where borders and who ownes what just really difficult (hence why Political mapmode is the best default map), and don't even get me started on the whole zoom in/out shifting your mapmodes from political to terrain. They honestly should have kept the way it was in CK2.
I have never felt the need to mod mapmodes in any paradox game until CK3, and what makes it suck more is that the mods that fixes that issue aren't compatible with the biggest overhaul maps. If paradox forces us to have the terrain map on zoom in and political map only when zoomed out, it will kill a lot of my enthusiasm for this new game.
I hope they give us both options - dynamic terrain map mode that switches depending on zoom level (zoomed out - political, zoomed in - terrain) and a political map mode where it is always colored. Imperator has this system and it is the best looking map. However, terrain zoomed out should never return because it is useless (terrain mapmode in EU4 and CK2).
I agree, I really hope they give us a way to customize it and have both
I am wondering about the lack of the South and the North.. as a norwegian, it will be a turn off not to have the entire country.
And of course no south africa/ america.
I think you're overststing how difficult it would be to garrison the Himalayan frontier. For that to happen, you have to own a significant fraction of the entire Indian subcontinent. You can afford 20 forts between your 1,000 locations, and that's without counting the other 3,000 in the other parts of India. Alternatively, take and fortify the Tibetan Plateau.
Map layering and transparency may look cool, but they hinder map legibility. I hope they keep legibility as the main concern when designing map views.
8:05 I wouldn't.
For me it is less readeable. And it feels forced, because why would you like to have a context of a terrain map mode? It could be a context of religious map, or political map as well.
I personally hate the map modes where you can still see the terrain through it or map modes that change as you zoom in and out, if I want to see the mountains I'll use the terrain map mode, if I'm in the political map mode I don't what it to change while I zoom in.
they cant say eu5 cuz its a breach of contract 😂 rip jobs if they do that
The map in HoI4 was a complete and utter disaster. They must learn from it.
🤩
Why the hell would you want to see terrain in culture map? It makes no sense, even less sense when you dislike the details of minorities. With the terrain the map would be very poluted
I like texture over flat maps
Fair enough. You are cool
This video is a masterpiece!