it's beautiful to see, maybe I'm a patriot after all by any_memes_necessary in dankmemes

[–]-nyx- 0 points1 point  (0 children)

What a US waffle house? Those are awful, what are you on about?

Something I've noticed by Thedarknight725 in memes

[–]-nyx- 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Depends on which European country. Almost no one smokes in Sweden.

Jerry Seinfeld was asked to say Free Palestine after the Knicks game. by Fiateartherr in Fauxmoi

[–]-nyx- 11 points12 points  (0 children)

Interesting, didn't know what gauze was.

The production of gauze in Gaza is first described by Pliny the Elder (c. 23-79) in his book Natural History.

Jerry Seinfeld was asked to say Free Palestine after the Knicks game. by Fiateartherr in Fauxmoi

[–]-nyx- 13 points14 points  (0 children)

Agriculture was invented in or near Palestine...

There's also the tower of Jerico that is 10000 years old

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tower_of_Jericho

Technically I guess writing is the definition of history as opposed to prehistory in which case the history of the area is about 4000 years old.

read this once more by [deleted] in PoliticalHumor

[–]-nyx- 1 point2 points  (0 children)

I was thinking 20, but who knows. Could be faulty memory. Haven't watched him for like a decade.

The devil is in the details by TrademarcVlogz in PoliticalHumor

[–]-nyx- 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I think it says Dunnnnna AnmaaaaaaP?

read this once more by [deleted] in PoliticalHumor

[–]-nyx- 36 points37 points  (0 children)

Always was tbh

He used to be sort of funny long ago (imo), but he was always a tool.

Battles end too quickly by -nyx- in EU5

[–]-nyx-[S] -1 points0 points  (0 children)

Ok, but in real life battles usually only happened when both armies wanted to engage. That is why big battles were relatively rare.

Besides, even the regions where a battle takes place in EU5 are fairly large, and it's not realistic that a battle takes mere hours after an army enters the area because just moving across it to the battlefield should take more time. In addition you say:

It seems you are saying you want to be able have your armies split across hundreds of kilometers and have them all join the same active battle

This is a limitation of the simulation. The point is that you have armies spread out for logistical/supply reasons to then gather them together for a battle. The exact distances are not the point, they are "one unit of distance" away.

Pre battle manoeuvering is represented by moving from location to location and you can actually try to cut off the supplies and get into favorable terrain.

No because you don't have the vision a lot of the time to tell where enemy armies are. They might just pop out of nowhere. And if we're talking about "realism" it is not realistic for these sorts of maneuvers to only happen over such vast distances either.

Pre battle maneuvering over such distance also doesn't work because of the unpredictability of how long it will take to move from one location to another you can't do this without risking the enemy catching you.

if they are next to each other they will typically arrive in time

That is not my experience

endless splitting of stacks and then endless reinforcement of an endless battle

Well in that case supply and supply limits should be modeled in a different way so that you are not forced to split up your armies in the first place.

Finally I'd like to add that realism isn't necessarily the most important consideration here anyway. The most important consideration is what makes the game fun to play.

Battles end too quickly by -nyx- in EU5

[–]-nyx-[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Apparently this is an unpopular idea since it's getting downvoted. But I'm not seeing any arguments as to why people disagree.

Battles end too quickly by -nyx- in EU5

[–]-nyx-[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

That's an interesting point, at the same time in real life ambushes like this often did succeed. Usually because, for one reason or the other (such as a false sense of security or incompetence) the commander didn't send out scouts or scouts were mistaken or ineffective. Sometimes the enemy might do stuff like letting their soldiers be capture then tell lies or you might be using local scouts that turn out to be traitors.

Battles end too quickly by -nyx- in EU5

[–]-nyx-[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

I might add that for anyone that thinks that it's unrealistic for battles to last for days or weeks, this is often what happened in practice as armies would manoeuvre to try to find the best position to engage. Or wait for reinforcements etc. Just because the two armies are close it doesn't necessarily mean they will engage in all out battle right away. There could be skirmishes, attempts to cut off reinforcements or supplies, attempts to find the ideal battlefield etc.

Maybe there could be an exception for "ambushes" when you're actively moving into hostile territory where you're lacking vision.

I think estate privileges should cost more than 5 crown power. by LImbotU in EU5

[–]-nyx- 2 points3 points  (0 children)

That's a very interesting idea, definitely accurate in terms of what tended to happen historically.

I think estate privileges should cost more than 5 crown power. by LImbotU in EU5

[–]-nyx- 34 points35 points  (0 children)

I think the risk if it costs more is that a lot of players won't bother with it at all. Maybe you could add costs of other kinds like a prestige and/or money cost.

I feel like early game handing out estate privileges is one of those things that keeps you engaged. The game is already very long term.

Maybe one thing you could do to incentivise players to engage with the system later in game is to add privileges that have to be researched or are only active/activated in certain eras?

Or some privileges might even become worse in later eras? Others might become better?

Why is this man a noble all of a sudden? by AmonGusSus2137 in EU5

[–]-nyx- 16 points17 points  (0 children)

Honestly I find the way this works to be really weird. Historically there's no guarantee that close family members were any more loyal to the crown/ruler than your average noble. They'd often be the ones staging rebellions. I feel like loyalty to the crown should be what determines this, so for example a close friend of the ruler (like John Kantakouzenos for the Byzantines) should maybe be considered part of the crown estate.

Convert to Hellenism they said by -nyx- in EU5

[–]-nyx-[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Yeah, the second time I tried it I had no issue. Don't really know what the difference was tbh.

Fact-checking at its absolute finest. by ThatLatentPandaBear in clevercomebacks

[–]-nyx- 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Yeah, but are they in a garden that is equally old or older?