Paradox Grand Campaign

[John Galt]

lol, no. they were talking about in not next expo but expo after doing it mainly just tons of events. which i think is good, but the reason they don't do it alot is because of mulitplayer. maybe they should just reduce trigger chance in multiplayer or something (since in single player, event = pause) or at least give that as an easy to use option.

one of the pilgramages i went to rome, thought it was shit, and came back a closet atheist

[exploited]

[John Galt]

im sure you can find other 12 year olds to play civ 5 with no problem

civ 5 is unplayable at later stages of the game without being in the 2d mode. which is fine, i guess, but it takes so much computing power i don't know what's going on in there. it's ridiculously simplistic compared to a paradox games, but paradox games don't have that lag problem (only time i ever saw it was when someone was playing CKII N. Korea mode, aka, no vassals, and had thousands of holdings. only then it would be when getting new holdings.)

[The Comrade]

Yeah civ 5 is horribly inefficient. I hateplaying it due to how bogged down it gets.

[exploited]

Are you actually being elitist about a historical strategy game, Galt?



Oh, and yeah, it does get bogged down. Was getting a bit frustrating for me near the end, but it wasn't all that bad. Maybe 10 seconds per turn.

Once you've played anything by Bethesda on a console, you no longer care about stuff like that if the game is good.

[John Galt]

yeah sure, i'm being elitist. i used to be like you, then i tried a paradox game. it goes over your head at first, with so much going on, but once you get into it they are so much better games. their clusewitz engine beautifully displays data on the map. it's so great. you can zoom way in or way out, play in real time, pause when you like, speed up speed down. you can enter into royal marriages, and if a ruler arises from the same house you can claim the throne as your own when there is no heir. you can be a republic, against all such monarchist madness. you can unite the holy roman empire, or you can disband it. you can play as the byzantines against all odds. you can resist the spanish reconquista. you can have an event where you give some woman a good tumble and then you click "it's good to be king" abd months later have to deal with bastards, your wife plottting to kill them/you over it (seriously woman, get over it). you can do so much in the game. in civ? you just build up and make like simcity with some aspects from anno (a better game than simcity), and it's really fun for the first you know 100 turns. then it starts to suck. cuz that's all there is. there's only max 16 players on the map. not 250 like in paradox games. and it lags to all hell. unlike paradox games. which don't effing lag. and are better and more complex and awesome

with this new expansion to CKII they added the jews. i can expel all the jews from my realm if i please. or keep them around and borrow gold from them, with flat usury fee (although they changed it from "Borrow 300 gold from Jewish Usurers" to ""Borrow 300 gold from Jewish Merchants", at least, in the bavarian ducky i hold in my new game that's what it says). annoyingly your king can banish them, and they added events that make you need to borrow large sums quickly. ive had a few peasant rebellions against my liege that started in my duchy that were ~3x my max forcelimit. goddamn peasants. they took my wife! probably raped her. oh well, in the end, i got their leader's head.

anyway i can also be a jew and launch jewhad against the heathens and build the temple again. but that, for obvious reasons, is really difficult to do.

[The Comrade]

my one game breaking complaint regarding ck2 is that the muslims are wayyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyy too powerful. the byzantines were actually stronger, better trained, better armed, and had far more men. their reasons for losing were internal political nonsense and things like that. sometimes paradox games don't take into account that the historical strength of one country was actually just due to the weakness of someone else. like, once the muslims were repelled from france, they started to fall apart. but rarely are there independence wars for muslim kingdoms. the decadence wars almost always trigger a civil wars for control of the kingdom, not independence. it makes it really frustrating to play as a christian country. i think the pagans are balanced well though. they start out insanely strong in northern europe and england, and then begin to splinter and weaken as their culture shifts and what not. i just wish they would do something about the muslims.

[John Galt]

muslim decadence needs rework is the problem; yes it should impact desire for independence. and if you look, muslim tech is typically high on everything except military at start of the game. europe/byzantines are higher on that regard, and it only gets worse for them. still, their ability to create vast empires quickly makes them very strong. however, with the change to vassal opinion and martial skill of the charachter impacting levy size, that all may change. plus now muslims might end up eating eachother more often. also they redid crusade triggers. e.g., muslims in france? CRUSADE. not X year came about so now we crusade. this should drive the infidel from christian land

i was playing some yesterday starting in the county of krain and i have control of the duchy but fabricating claims has never happened and ive gone through several rulers. this is why i liked playing pagans more... i was always doing something crazy. my pagan games have united under the empire of scandinavia, reformed religion and changed to elective succession. then it all just steamrolls. but they nerfed them hard actually; there's hardly any shipyards in scandinavia at 867 start anymore

the byzantines... they were sacked by a misguided crusade. oh those crusaders.

[exploited]

Does this game require internet activation?

[John Galt]