The Difference between DISASTERS, SITUATIONS, and MECHANICS!
Vložit
- čas přidán 1. 06. 2024
- Saturday Building: forum.paradoxplaza.com/forum/...
Tinto Maps 4: forum.paradoxplaza.com/forum/...
Tinto Talks 14: forum.paradoxplaza.com/forum/...
Background music from Baldur's Gate III
Support the channel by subscribing, liking, and leaving a comment!
You can also join the channel members; / @lord_lambert
Becoming a patron; / lambert2191
Or donating via Paypal; www.paypal.com/donate/?hosted...
You can hang out with Lambert and join the regularly hosted Multiplayer games by joining the discord; / discord
Links;
Twitch ► / lordlambert_
Patreon ► / lambert2191
Paypal ► www.paypal.com/donate/?hosted...
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
#LordLambert #ParadoxTinto #EU5 - Hry
![EU4 1.36 Egypt is the BEST Mamluks Path [KoK]](/img/n.gif)
I get the slave trade is a sensitive subject. But the real issue is that we'll only get mechanics around the triangle slave trade, and the game will likely ignore all the other slaving activities that took place around the same time... I hope we see a real slave mechanic where no mater who you are you want to capture and buy slaves of any culture that isn't your own. And only through a few hundred year effort can you ban the practice for some buffs that offset the costs of losing all that free labor. I'm honestly tired of the triangle trade being the only example of slavery given. And I'm tired of tip-toing around the subject. Anyone with a brain knows it was terrible. Just because they include slavery in the game doesn't mean that Johan or anyone at Tinto condone slavery. They are making a game that emulates a time when the VAST majority of people believed the practice to be perfectly reasonable.
Gotta have it be politically correct bro, and the left have said that only white Europeans enslave.
So they have made a game that reflects that.
If they wanted to be true to history, they should have slavery and Indentured servitude (which many countries just got rid of slavery for indentured servitude)
Most likely they’ll only have slavery in the the Atlantic and ignore the Barbary slave trade, Eastern European Slave trade, Arab slave trade and South East Asian Slave trade
Honestly they're exposed to a PR problem whatever they do, if they go full historical they'lI be accused of condoning it and if they water it down they'll be accused of whitewashing. I honestly think they should go as historically accurate as possible with it, whilst including a game option to simply turn slavery off for players to whom it would be a sensitive issue. Would go a long way to quell the PR shitstorm that might well arise.
I really hope they have the trans-Saharan slave trade and Native American slavery
I'd like to know if the little ice age is a situation. That'd fit perfectly
Fantastic suggestion!
I feel like with the daimyo's it might be something like the locationless entites that were mentioned before with banking clans/families.
talking about pope-emperor struggle in the mid 14th century is weird, by that time it was getting less and less important by the year especially since we are talking about a period where the pope was controlled by france in avignon; the guelphs and ghibellins still existed but they didnt really reflect the "pope vs emperor" dichotomy anymore at this point
I simply find it crazy that there are people that basically want no historical flavor so as to prevent 'railroading', like I thought we were all in agreement that the more similar the game was to history the better it was.
To a certain extent. I think that its totally possible to go too far in the opposite direction. I dont want to see hand holding Lucky Nations mechanics to ensure the Ottomans and Russia rise to prominence in 95% of games, for example.
@@Lord_LambertYeah but 'Lucky nations' doesn't actually do much most of the time, I believe. Like, it only takes one bad war at the start for Muscovy, France or the Ottomans to start crumbling. Good point, however.
@@Lord_Lambert So you prefer HPM level railroading to HFM level railroading? To put it in Vicky 2 terms
@dr.vikyll7466 at this point if the alternative is bland shitty games on launch like ck3, vic 3, or imp rome (on launch for all 3) then yes.
It's a bit of a balance between ahistoricity and railroading. The Byzantine Empire is one of the most popular nations in EU4 because it allows you to subvert history. In EU4 playing outside of Europe it can also be entertaining to see ahistorical (yet plausible) outcomes such as France neutered by Burgundy and England, a Papal States that has consolidated much of Italy, or a united Scandinavia competing with the Commonwealth and Great Britain. And there are event chains right now which feel too railroaded for example Aragorn always forming a PU with Castille without human intervention.
What players want is to have detailed well-written custom content particular to a country/region/culture/period. This can be historical, but also (semi-)plausible counterfactual fantasy. What ought to do is pose challenges to historical losers, and opportunities to historical winners. What ought to be avoided at all costs is an over-reliance on ambiguous events/missions/decisions that are applicable anywhere and anytime so they can emerge organically and be applied in all situations.
Some situations such as the Norwegian nobles making the second son of the king the heir to the Norwegian throne in order to dissolve the personal union with Sweden is kind of sensible enough for elective monarchies like in Scandinavia and later Poland. Some generic thing to break pesonal unions like that would be nice.
Something everyone has been asking about: Easier to import custom models and animations. Like, OMG.
He said this??
I wonder if, if Anbennar chooses to go with a 1337 start, Anbennar might use situations for the Lilac Wars.
Maybe they could do 2 bookmarks, make a 1337 mod then port the 1444 start date, but it would be a massive work
@@MegaVictor1129multiple time bookmarks are unironically like 2x the work at least.
The Lilac Wars would be cool, but we’d also be able to play through the Greentide or the hobgoblin invasion of northern Rahen
@@SireBab i get that, but if they are going to make a 1337 start it needs to be done from nothing while a 1444 they just need to port the map and then the mechanics, but the anbenar team is crazy with multiple starts, they have a ck3 and vic3 team
@@MegaVictor1129 You know, that's a valid point, I forgot they've already committed to a lot of that other work.
the stuff we can mod in this game is gonna go crazy. imagine all the eu4 mods scaled up by 1000
First? huh anyways I love all the different ways you can interact with the Market, and how the "peace" time gameplay just got way more interesting.
I imagine a campaign as Venice or Lübeck will be super interesting because of the market
@@Lord_Lambert I am definitely playing Venice in EU5, or maybe production + trade Byzantium, just sticking to the "east Roman empire" regions and playing tall, maybe getting involved in the Italian situation, helping the Italian tags repel the other European powers. :)
@@Lord_Lambertas long as it's not like managing the market in vic 3 lol, that's just busy work. Doing things like establishing a trade route to Asia and monopolizing it? Sure 100%
I wonder if the spread of Old World diseases to the Indigenous populations in the New World will be a situation. I hope so, since, for example, the conquest of the Mexica (Aztecs) was successful in part due to the spread of diseases like smallpox killing a vast amount of the native populations.
We can leave trying to have dynamic names for ALL THE LOCATIONS to a team of insane modders
Can you route the canal around the other side of the hole instead?
Though the idea of making the hole a lake/pond and having a bit of water all around it - that is a great idea that someone else suggested
I think the thing with narrative guidelines is that the simulation isn't perfect. The mechanics alone simply cannot represent the entire historical situation, interactions, and dynamics - therefore, you have to put in narrative guidelines to fill in the gaps so it actually feels like the historical world - which is not the same thing as real history always needing to happen.
Anyone who thinks history will be repeated by properly and logically simulated world hasn't read a history book
I for one will probably use randomized black plague. I worry about having it show up the same every time will be tiresome. But I like the option to turn it off; the way situations work makes it so easy just to switch off any one you don’t like. And definitely, turning off important situations like this should disable Ironman/achievements, for the aforementioned balance issues. Man, I am so excited for the future of situations. They feel so well built compared to the hacked together event chains of old
I don't want to be railroaded. I think most of that camp is with me when I say; we don't care if historical events happen or not. I just want to create believable history.
As long as it can be less random than like Hoi4 random, absolutely.
Lol like to have an acurate simulation of history you would need to have a acurate simulation of weather everywhere for that entire timespan.
I had written quite the comment and I close the tab, very sad lol
I ain't writing all of that again.
TLDR, some people read Tinto Talks as if they were the same as EU4 dev diaries and I was very happy with Johan's "people want their own choices to affect history" whole comment
man as soon as i saw that kiev/kyiv thread pop up... you just knew what that shit was going to devolve into
If we were ever aiming for historical accuracy, all that was ever needed is looking up how the place was called in contemporary documents, and I deeply doubt it was the modern Ukrainian spelling. But the company that makes our games has explicit political opinions, whatever you might believe, which color everything they do. So there's really no point in blaming the fans if they aren't the ones who started it.
19:02 turning off Blackdeath. Fine with me, Johan already said achievements only through Ironman. I also then believe he’ll be sensible and say you can’t get achievements/proper Ironman game without blackdeath and that standard set of disasters
"Johan already said achievements only through Ironman"
Unless Johan made a different comment later on that I didn't see, that's not what he said.
He said that "if it was up to him" achievements would require ironman.
And from a few other comments he made, it seems the team hasn't completely decided on whether it'll require ironman or not.
> caring about others' achievements
I feel that if anything should be able to be turned off it should be the Columbian exchange as it would make natives nearly unplayable compared to the Black Death which is devastating but recoverable
With the Cannons, i think it's the same reason they put all armaments under weapons. If they had all these different types of cannons they system would have to register for every unit that could have them. Instead of having just a few ships, they would have at least 4 of every type. Considering there was four production types. Also they did say they didn't want any bonus stacking, even if it was base stats. Though i would like the idea of how HoI 4 does it, as if a production stays the same it will become faster at making something. And if you change production the bonus is lost.
the amount that is in the game already is great
I think EU5 is taking the ''more quality = more of the same goods'' , so a shitty cannon at 1400's would use 1 cannon, and a late game howitzer 10 cannons
yes you could build 10 cannonmakers and use 10x the pop and goods to supply a single howitzer unit, but it's unsustainable, you will need to modernize the way you make the goods.
I'm really not too terribly on board with that idea :/ it's something I hated in Vic3 (amongst all the other things I hated) and I'm not a fan of seeing that idea return.
@@Lord_Lambert how would you display the tecnological quality of the good in a system where you need to trade? because you could sell these cannons to other peoples markets and we don't know the quality of their army and all, its a hard question and i just think it's fine the way it looks, vic3 just did it in a shitty way, like everything else army related.
I have no idea :D
@@Lord_LambertI actually think it works pretty well for what EU5 is trying to accomplish, for example 10 high quality steel cannon regiments requiring the same amount of “cannon works” as 1000 really shitty wooden ones, bc in battle they provide the same amount of use
Edit: this actually reminds me of one of the first tinto talks where they abstracted the nobility into more = better to make the system easier to underatabd
31:45 i wonder if that will also let modders make the ai better in general.
The stats are not on the good themselves but the unit progression I would think.
24:39, that made me smile. Particularly since I'm a Norwegian. Though, ultimately that didn't amount to much historically speaking. Thanks Johan, I liked that response :) 25:26, I wonder though. If you got between different countries and tried to limit trade and other stuff. Would that make it potentially feasible to limit the black plague even if it's not altogether eliminated. I mean, you wouldn't naturally play as you normally would since you'd swap between countries, but I do wonder if such a thing would have an impact.
Maybe there is a governor system that the daimyos are a part of
Imagine if every Daimyo was its own estate along with the merchants and priests.
I imagine that japan will have a similar situation as yaun does where the sengoku kicks off and it starts having little pieces break off as semi loyal vassals that you have to play wack a mole with to prevent them becoming to strong and over throwing you
8:00 lol
3:50: you don't really upgrade your guns or cannons in PC do you? It's just a matter of what unit type you use and what kind of resources they need to have access to
Support the channel by subscribing, liking, and leaving a comment!
You can also join the channel members; czcams.com/channels/MiNEwsuXsMErGLRfS9UXAQ.htmljoin
Becoming a patron; www.patreon.com/Lambert2191
Or donating via Paypal; www.paypal.com/donate/?hosted_button_id=S24EUS4NKHLK4
You can hang out with Lambert and join the regularly hosted Multiplayer games by joining the discord; discord.gg/YcS5meV
22:20 there were never multiple shogunates at the same time. the shogun is sort of like the emperor of the HRE, in that he rules over a unified but still quite autonomous empire. the way they differ is that, instead of being picked from amongst the electors, the shogun was picked by the emperor(again, similar to when the HRE emperor was crowned by the pope).
my guess is the [redacted] part is about vassalage.
I meant to say Diamyo, my bad
29:35 lmao banger.
Also yeah personally I do want a good AI. I want a good AI that can do well. I was unaware the EU4 AI couldn't look at the requirements I just assumed it could, but just didn't care, guess I was wrong lmao. Make some mechanics that with a reasonable AI will help to create the powers we know, but within reason and not as blanket as "lucky nations" which tbf, the AI hardly even takes advantage of and most lucky nations do okay at best.
I personally feel like the black death options make sense to add. There will probably have been mods that just removed it otherwise anyway, although I can't remember what Johan said in regards to achievements I feel like for some country-based achievements it would make them completely trivial to remove. It becomes a grounding point of challenge for all your campaigns in EU5, making bigger countries have a bit of a challenge like when you're a small country in EU4 trying to quickly consolidate your region so the big blobs don't kick your teeth in (Looking at you, all of non-mediterranean Africa).
All players want an ai that acts logically, logical and difficult should be divorced when possible to let different players of different skill levels better enjoy the game. The difficultly cap can be by either giving the ai bonuses, the player harder starts, or giving the ai better starting moves/openings.
Wouldn't any kind of espionage system be made opsolete by the ledger? (In terms of levies, manpower and regulars)
The only time it would be relevant would be in MP games when the ledger is locked.
It could still work for making claims/covert actions but a bit chunk of the mechanic would be obsolete.
Only if ledger is not tied into the system. I could totally see the ledger just displaying what your country's information supplies. At worst you'd know like within an order of magnitude, so China may have 200k men, or 2m.
@@SireBab Yeah that would make sense if it only shows what info that has been collected.
The ledger in EU4 gives access to way too much info which I guess makes up for the lack of a deep espionage mechanic.
Yuck, you encouraged me to make a comment about the pms only changing gun quantity not quality. I really hope that doesn't make it to release candidate.
i think he will talk about colonization, many people have asked about that lol
To be fair, the pure sandbox crowd is single digits in the forums. And the anti railroad crowd is not united in what that would even mean.
None of the people should be listened to whatsoever. Especially forum cliques. Especially taking into account their quantity - that's completely insane. Games are the best when they are pure expression of the author's intent. However, I don't think Johan is that good of a visionary, and those games are more mechanical than artistic. EU is best as an alternate history toy rather than a game. For a long time I thought about something like an observer mode, where you don't control any country, or maybe have a small impact on all of them. But the permissive culture at paradox towards demands and expectations of gamercattle will probably never let them experiment with the formula.
willl horses get veternarians.
🌍
NO railroading, narrative guidelines only please
I genuinely do not understand why you are not %100 not on board with ability to turn off Black Death being in settings... Anything and everything being customizable is objectively good. There is a default setting, and if one chooses not to play with that setting they can tailor it to their liking. There shouldnt even be a single shred of doubt in your mind that it is a net positive for the game. There would be lots of noobs that would drop the game right away in first 2 hours after getting demolished by BD. Always try your best to not sound like a Dark Souls fanatic.More settings are good.
I don't agree that absolutely everything should be customisable. And I totally understand the reason why people would want this option, I just don't feel comfortable with it
I agree with this. Why would you be against having the option? Specially on a mainly singleplayer game. And even if you are multiplayer kinda person, just join or set up lobbies that have Black Death on.
@@Lord_Lambert As long as they make it obvious what the intended way of playing the game is and put it as default option. Please do tell me literally one downside to everything being customizable. People will mod even if things are not customizable anyways. With that logic you have to be against mods too.
What doesn't make sense to me is why someone would be upset about the black death, given that everyone gets fucked by it
@@BlueGamingRage Have you played CK with plagues on? Stuff like that can get overwhelming real fast for new players. It's always good to give people an option to learn the game at their own pace and then enable it later on.
Some wild engagement appears!
As a dad with two young kids, my gaming time is incredibly rare, but you are getting me very excited fot Project Caesar (theres a part of me that doenst want it to be EU5 just to see your face if it happens!!)
Obviously the next diary will be all about adding Glitterhoof into EU5...
With things like the Black Death, maybe there could be an option to tone down the effects in lower difficulty settings (so as to not put off beginners), and ramp it up in higher ones (for those who like a challenge)
Disagreed. Turn it off or deal with it.
I think the entire game is going to be balanced around the 40-60% loss of population from the Black Death, so it probably won't be as devastating (to the player - or at least the player's experience) as it sounds.
It will probably become one of the early-game meta's equivalent of "No-CB vassalise Byzantium" in current EU4, to work out how to minimise your losses to maybe 30-40% that will be the biggest snowball for your country.
@@Shayrin2 yeah, if people don't want to play with the Black Death, let them, it does not effect your game if someone else does not like it. The more options, the better, to let everyone adjust the experience to their liking. :)
d id h vikinngs figure ha heir new found land where not just islands.
Wow did you not look at your phone when you typed this? I'm not going to even try to respond to this unless you clarify lol.
Regarding different cannons, they could do what HOI4 does. I.e. each regiment type is configured to use a weapon archetype (cannon, long gun, spear etc.), and each weapon you produce belongs to one of these archetypes. All weapons have a rank, e.g. steal cannon is better than brass cannon. Then, when a regiment need weapons, it grabs the ones of the highest rank of its archetype from the country's stock. The regiment can also exchange its equiped weapons for better ones as they become available.
Yuck, you encouraged me to make a comment about the pms only changing gun quantity not quality. I really hope that doesn't make it to release candidate.