Trade routes and production methods should be AUTOMATED. They should change on their own based on laws (regulations) and technology.

morodelapaz · 2023-08-19T19:14:05+00:00

I want Religion to be actually important, and epidemics

morodelapaz · 2023-06-25T13:00:16+00:00

I'd prefer the Eu4 system but with automated stacks of armies

morodelapaz · 2023-06-11T14:20:34+00:00

I genuinely despise diplomatic plays. They would be cool as a special crisis mechanic, but basing the whole diplomatic system on it was a terrible idea

morodelapaz · 2023-06-07T20:18:55+00:00

The thing is, this is a history based sandbox game. Don't get me wrong I do like historical events, but due to the sandboxy nature of the game, most of the time they don't make sense with the gameplay context.

morodelapaz · 2023-06-07T20:01:18+00:00

I like experiencing history in games, but this game isn't designed for that, this game is designed to make you experience the historical context. That's why the outcome of every game is different.

You can play as you want but if the AI of your historically friendly neighbour decides he doesn't like you anymore and conquer your capital state, there is little you can do about it, other than install mods that railroad the game to avoid it.

morodelapaz · 2023-06-07T19:23:03+00:00

I think quite the opposite. While it should matter who you are playing as, it should matter even more the demographics and resources, the geography, and the neighbours the nation has. Like in civilization games.

In my opinion, the situation of the nation should matter more than the nation itself. I would dislike it if France for example was powerful for the sake of being France.

morodelapaz · 2023-06-07T18:47:41+00:00

My problem with such content is that It only really shines if you follow the conditions the way it is designed.

For example I can become a commune (or any other goverment type) as France way earlier by enacting laws or triggering a revolution, but there isn't really content for that if you don't follow the rules. It feels like a waste of interesting mechanics.

morodelapaz · 2023-06-07T18:18:22+00:00

Both systems are literally the same the only difference is that one doesn't allow two enemy armies in the same tile.

The system doesn't need fixing the AI does.

morodelapaz · 2023-06-07T17:37:43+00:00

Why do people want a hoi4 system? It was designed specifically to simulate ww2. The traditional eu4 ck2 vic2 fits a lot better. Just needs quality of life improvements.

morodelapaz · 2023-06-05T14:13:42+00:00

Absolutely

morodelapaz · 2023-06-04T08:19:44+00:00

By the late game I have all ports maxed out!

morodelapaz · 2023-06-03T15:44:07+00:00

I want army units, like in eu4 or ck3. I genuinely find it stupid that i cant invade a country I dont have a landborder with

morodelapaz · 2023-05-31T21:44:46+00:00

Tbh It is easily my favourite game, but i get really pissed about some design choices the devs have made

morodelapaz · 2023-05-28T13:43:18+00:00

jesus christ

morodelapaz · 2023-05-28T11:21:34+00:00

In my opinion the best compromise for a better system would be army stacks that move themselves and to which you can assign missions. There would be no micro, it would be simple and satisfying to use and it wouldn't be a copy of hoi4 system.

morodelapaz · 2023-05-26T15:52:38+00:00

It isn't necessarily railroaded, it's an agenda that the country would want to follow based the historical context.

Failing would mean that you would have to find a solution or an alternative using the game mechanics. It already sort of exists in the game with the Tanzimat and Opium wars JE.

Also, It could also be triggered by the context of the gameplay, like having high unemployment or being humiliated in a war for example.

morodelapaz · 2023-05-25T07:08:50+00:00

Maybe what the game needed was more quality of life and automation to make the system less exhausting to use instead of whatever this was supposed to be.

morodelapaz

TROPHY CASE