Ts game is like hoi4 - few variabnility and playability

[Lisica]

Just like HOI4, ts game sucks major ass. EU4 had at least mission trees which let u go different paths, such as Poland joining HRE or going historical for example, or much more. Either way, most nations in the world were playable and had lots of content. Here there is only a few nations that are actually worth playing if u want to have fun and it's always the same. The historical events also depend a lot on characters which can randomly die and ruin ur entire run. But what I hate the most is not the lack of content, but instead the endless grind of just reinvesting all of ur money into buildings again and again and again. In EU4 people have some freedom with their money. Anyway, I regret buying ts ♥♥♥♥, I regret buying the DLC pre-order, one of my favorite games has been ruined. Paradox are lazy pieces of crap, snälla dra åt helvete giriga Paradox.

[Noname]

You are so true about how events in this game work - they don't.

Most events that Paradox prepared for us after the year 1500 will almost never trigger, because the list of things that need to happen at once are almost impossible to achieve. Even earlier events suck because, as you wrote, some random province is in wrong hands, some ruler died, or you don't have enough of x (gold, legitimacy, stability, or anything else that is used as trigger), then no event for you.

And even if they fire, they always end one way if you play achievement run, because someone in Paradox decided that in their game all events should always follow the historical path to get achievements. It doesn't matter that AI doesn't follow the same historical paths of expansion, etc., at all. Event resolution needs to be historical, end of story.

Part of the fun in EU4 was that events were triggering randomly. Some random OPM from HRE gets Burgundian inheritance and gets 10 times bigger was something that "what if" history players loved.

But to be close to true. Missions in EU 4 showed a long time after game launch. Around 5 years later. For the first 4 years, we got some random missions from a small pool of them. If I'm not wrong, we can trigger a similar system in EU 5, but it disables achievements.

[Medicles]

Someone doesnt know that not only were mission trees added to EU4 5 years after release, but the actual massive mission trees it has now were added close to the end of the EU4 support.

[Lisica]

Originally posted by Noname:

You are so true about how events in this game work - they don't.

Most events that Paradox prepared for us after the year 1500 will almost never trigger, because the list of things that need to happen at once are almost impossible to achieve. Even earlier events suck because, as you wrote, some random province is in wrong hands, some ruler died, or you don't have enough of x (gold, legitimacy, stability, or anything else that is used as trigger), then no event for you.

And even if they fire, they always end one way if you play achievement run, because someone in Paradox decided that in their game all events should always follow the historical path to get achievements. It doesn't matter that AI doesn't follow the same historical paths of expansion, etc., at all. Event resolution needs to be historical, end of story.

Part of the fun in EU4 was that events were triggering randomly. Some random OPM from HRE gets Burgundian inheritance and gets 10 times bigger was something that "what if" history players loved.

But to be close to true. Missions in EU 4 showed a long time after game launch. Around 5 years later. For the first 4 years, we got some random missions from a small pool of them. If I'm not wrong, we can trigger a similar system in EU 5, but it disables achievements.

Yeah, but I also enjoyed the mission triggered events a lot. Mission trees are entirely optional in EU4 but it's a fun way to add a mini goal and get a mini reward. Not even mentioning the glory u get (if u are to rp)

[Lisica]

Originally posted by Medicles:

Someone doesnt know that not only were mission trees added to EU4 5 years after release, but the actual massive mission trees it has now were added close to the end of the EU4 support.

I started playing in like 2020 so Idk. Even when I didn't have the DLCs, I enjoyed it a lot

[Medicles]

Originally posted by Lisica:

I started playing in like 2020 so Idk. Even when I didn't have the DLCs, I enjoyed it a lot

Then welcome to the very beginning of the life of a Paradox game. You may enjoy it in 7 years.

[KroganCharr]

Originally posted by Medicles:

Someone doesnt know that not only were mission trees added to EU4 5 years after release, but the actual massive mission trees it has now were added close to the end of the EU4 support.

Yes, and that is why a 2013 version of EU4 would be unacceptably bad today, too. That can't be the standard we measure EU5 by. They have 13 years of experience now that they didn't have when they made EU4, plus they have a lot more money, and a lot longer development time.

Nobody reasonable could have expected that EU5 would have the same amount of content at launch as EU4 has after over a decade of development. What we can expect is that the foundation of EU5 is as fun or more fun than EU4's. Let's take mission trees as an example. Nobody can expect that as many EU5 nations have unique, flavorful, and complex mission trees with alternate paths as they do in EU4, that's not the bar. What we were reasonable to expect is that a good handful, maybe a dozen or so nations at launch of EU5 have mission trees that measure up to the standards they set towards the end of the EU4 life cycle, meaning they are non-linear, offer alternate paths, have high player agency, and are packed with flavor. Examples for that would be the Angevin vs Great Britain routes for England, the Iranian vs Mughal routes for the Timurids, or even something crazy like creating a great Turkish power in the Eurasian steppe - how badass would it be as an alt history path where the Ottomans are going after the Mongol heritage rather than the Roman? We didn't expect this level of quality everywhere at launch, but give us a sample, a demonstration of what EU5 can do, and we'll happily wait for updates and even pay for DLC to get more of it. But we didn't get any of that. What we got instead was "Dynamic Historical Events", which are neither dynamic nor historical, and can barely called events. What they actually are in practice are mission trees, but unstructured, with next to zero relevance to gameplay, and contrary to assertions, they actually severely decrease player agency by adding a ton of RNG and time locks. You want an early game DHE to happen? You better be prepared to bend over backwards to fulfill the conditions ASAP, because even if you manage to do so before the deadline, it still might just not happen because they are governed by RNG! Oh, and your plans can also just be ruined by the wrong character dying, or the AI doing something other than what they needed to do to support the DHE.

We would have forgiven sparse content on release, we would have forgiven the usual amounts of bugs, we would have forgiven broken mechanics, none of that is new, every Paradox release has that. But downgrading from EU4 on a conceptual level, we aren't going to swallow that, we'd rather keep playing EU4.

[Medicles]

Originally posted by KroganCharr:

Originally posted by Medicles:

Someone doesnt know that not only were mission trees added to EU4 5 years after release, but the actual massive mission trees it has now were added close to the end of the EU4 support.

Yes, and that is why a 2013 version of EU4 would be unacceptably bad today, too. That can't be the standard we measure EU5 by. They have 13 years of experience now that they didn't have when they made EU4, plus they have a lot more money, and a lot longer development time.

Yeah, but you are forgetting the vast amount of idiots who campaigned against mission trees as a whole, even though only the overpowered mission trees at the end of the development cycle were largely seen as a mistake. You can thank them for this.

[ABoxFullOfKittens]

If I couldn't think up my own goals I'd probably need a mission tree to tell me what to do next..

[Medicles]

Originally posted by ABoxFullOfKittens:

If I couldn't think up my own goals I'd probably need a mission tree to tell me what to do next..

I wouldnt dismiss mission trees so easily. It was more about options than goals. It was another factor for theory crafting. You went into a campaign with an overall goal in mind and could use the mission tree as well as ideas and policies to build up a somewhat unique way to reach that goal.

[Krozan]

There is some mods for mission tree if u miss them so much

[KroganCharr]

Originally posted by Medicles:

Originally posted by KroganCharr:

Yes, and that is why a 2013 version of EU4 would be unacceptably bad today, too. That can't be the standard we measure EU5 by. They have 13 years of experience now that they didn't have when they made EU4, plus they have a lot more money, and a lot longer development time.

Yeah, but you are forgetting the vast amount of idiots who campaigned against mission trees as a whole, even though only the overpowered mission trees at the end of the development cycle were largely seen as a mistake. You can thank them for this.

I honestly don't see what's so terrible about a feature people can just choose to ignore. Or, if they don't have the self discipline, add an option to turn them off in the game rules.

I would be open to rebalancing ideas, of course. Mission tree rewards should primarily be about enabling the historical or alt historical path they follow, and anything beyond that needs to be justified. For example, gaining a claim on all of Greece and Anatolia after you successfully assert Eastern Roman heritage as someone like Byzantium or the Ottomans makes absolute sense, gaining a permanent discipline modifier because something something Theme System, less so. I would also radically cut down on modifier stacking from tag switching, because that was simply too overpowered a strategy (not that it ruined my game though, because just like people with mission trees in general, I was free to choose not to use it). We can have all of those discussions and changes, but we never got to see any of this, because apparently mission trees bad.

[KroganCharr]

Originally posted by ABoxFullOfKittens:

If I couldn't think up my own goals I'd probably need a mission tree to tell me what to do next..

It's not about setting goals. And before someone else jumps in, no, it's not about free rewards either (as I wrote above, I support cutting down on rewards). What it's about is support for interesting and flavorful historical and alt history campaigns. If I wanted to just paint a map in different colors, I'd play OpenFront.

[ABoxFullOfKittens]

Originally posted by KroganCharr:

Originally posted by ABoxFullOfKittens:

If I couldn't think up my own goals I'd probably need a mission tree to tell me what to do next..

It's not about setting goals. And before someone else jumps in, no, it's not about free rewards either (as I wrote above, I support cutting down on rewards). What it's about is support for interesting and flavorful historical and alt history campaigns. If I wanted to just paint a map in different colors, I'd play OpenFront.

So if it's not about needing the game to guide you, and it's not about getting the rewards from the tasks you complete by following that guide, then what is it about? I can't think of any other purpose.

[Aksolotli]

Originally posted by Medicles:

Someone doesnt know that not only were mission trees added to EU4 5 years after release, but the actual massive mission trees it has now were added close to the end of the EU4 support.

I played before 1.3 EU4 and i still had so much fun. Being France always felt powerful. Now playhing anything big on release date feels like playing handicapped or crippled. The proximity takes way too long to take effect.

[ABoxFullOfKittens]

Originally posted by Aksolotli:

Originally posted by Medicles:

Someone doesnt know that not only were mission trees added to EU4 5 years after release, but the actual massive mission trees it has now were added close to the end of the EU4 support.

I played before 1.3 EU4 and i still had so much fun. Being France always felt powerful. Now playhing anything big on release date feels like playing handicapped or crippled. The proximity takes way too long to take effect.

You're example is playing as France, arguably the strongest nation in the game, and they feel too weak, comparatively to how they felt in EU4? That's really sad commentary on your inclination to be challenged. You could probably get the same experience in EU5, if you changed all the sliders to easy.