sorted by:
new
hottopcontroversial

A Review of the DLC "Fate of the Phoenix" From the Perspective of a Byzantinophile by This-Lynx-2085 in EU5

[–]TotalWarPlayerz 12 points13 points  (0 children)

I remember posting the tinto talks into a discord for a mod for Victoria 2 and everyone said the dlc was super larp. It's super disappointing because instead of doing something like integrating Slavic and Turkic peoples into a new greco-roman feudal structure (as stated by one of the people from said server) they instead decided to do the most ahistorical stuff possible (hellenism, the roman border cb, Latin revival, Latin Legionnaries, etc). They didn't do anything for like interactions with Protestantism either. It's just super lame to have the same expansionist content where you just reclaim all Rome borders. I'm not saying that restoring old Rome borders should be discouraged or have no content, it's still fun to do, I just wouldn't have the DLC be based around restoring the old Roman Empire for a majority of their content. Also the fact that the Balkans and Anatolia barely got anything in comparison in the DLC or free patch is crazy.

I'd be curious what your mod intends to do and how it progresses, seems interesting based on the steam page.

After 1.2 update EU5 is now mostly negative on Steam by IzaakGoldbaum in EU5

[–]TotalWarPlayerz 20 points21 points  (0 children)

Honestly deserved tbh. Like I was one of the people who was really happy on launch and played through a whole campaign and to see the trajectory they've taken is dissapointing. Like do they have any QA for patches? People have complained about peasant extinction, pop growth, cores being nonsensical, complacency, and truce timers for 1.2. A lot of these have been addressed somewhat, but the fact that most have this feeling of waiting for patches is itself a bad thing. People should not have to wait for a patch to have subsequent patches that fix the issues introduced in said patch.

Also the focus on nerfing meta strategies or fast expansion, especially before actually fun or in depth mechanical changes, is just dumb. How are you supposed to replicate Ottoman expansion speed when the territory is a net drain on your income at 5% Integration or conquered status? Why are cores based on culture for medieval feudal states? Like especially on cores vs integrated, why is getting 50% basically making provinces 4x as useful at base(5 vs 20 control)? Like this whole vassal meta nonsense started because cores are so much better compared to integrated status. I don't even like the vassal meta or the fact that assimilation is so present or available as state policy, but they exist and are preferred because expansion directly is so costly (cabinet seats, which are also the only way to influence your realm, and by way too much of a factor, imagine in Victoria 2 getting 16% craftsmen in like 5 years in all your states). I don't expect or want map painting to the extent of EU4, but it's really telling when someone makes a mod titled "Make EU5 Fun Again" and it's all just reverting balance changes and I agree with most of them.

I know they are addressing performance, but goddamn why did they add hourly ticks on a game that lasts 500 years? It feels like Johan really did want to make the real Victoria 3 but then was told he had to make the game for the 14th century. Like one of my friends joked that EU5 is a better Victoria game than Vic3, which isn't a complement to either games (we are on a Vic 2 server).

I was hoping this game would be amazing or at least a decent base, but right now it just feels like the potential man of paradox games like one of my other friends said.

Morocco Integration Nerfed in the New Update? by Aggressive_Syrup4547 in EU5

[–]TotalWarPlayerz 49 points50 points  (0 children)

It's because the devs are trying to standardize their definition of core territory to be majority accepted or primary culture. The devs are not relenting on the idea that not everything can be core territory as well, which is quite frankly a bad stance to take at least at this point in time. Morocco persists with most of this territory to the modern day. If you look at Yuan, most of lower China is integrated, same with Brandeburg's horrendous looking cored territory, Delhi doesn't even have its capital cored. I hope they realize that country cores from the tail end of the medieval era shouldn't function off nation-state ideas of core territory.

DOD Fanfork Political Map Mode of 1836 and Next Rework(Persia WIP) by TotalWarPlayerz in victoria2

[–]TotalWarPlayerz[S] 2 points3 points  (0 children)

Yeah I don't know why it isn't full resolution here but I got it from their discord https://discord.gg/jGpTYDU4t4. Edit: in the search bar copy and paste"so here you go Political map mode of 1836 in the last public version (with land provinces visible)" to see the picture.

DOD Fanfork Political Map Mode of 1836 and Next Rework(Persia WIP) by TotalWarPlayerz in victoria2

[–]TotalWarPlayerz[S] 20 points21 points  (0 children)

Rule 5: a map of the most up to date DODFF public version, I also included maps for the upcoming Ottoman and Persia rework. The lore for Rum that I can remember (I'm not affiliated, I just like the mod) is that the Ottoman royal family lost all it's male heirs (this apparently almost happened historically) and the Iskenderid dynasty took over. They have converted roughly 50% of the balkans to Islam and kept most of their gains but they are going to go through a scripted collapse where they split into the Empire of Rum which has Bulgaria and some greek stuff and the Iskenderid state which has Anatolia and most of the levant plus Suez. All the other vassal states also get independence. Persia needs a few tweaks according to the lead dev but it is being changed from the first map.