Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[Virex]

Taking over the world with a one-province minor? Well, I guess I'm lucky not to be too good a player, because I like the constant strugle of bringing a small country to a nominal force, but I don't feel like things get too easy over time. On the other hand, I have a strange preference for muslim and far-eastern minors, so perhaps that makes a difference.

[Majestic7]

Opinions may differ, but i'd say yes. However "yes" ONLY if you get Doomsday + Armageddon, and not the vanilla. Possibly with a mod called DAIM. You're in for some epic worldshaping and history being re-written.
The Paradox AI is very good mind you, much better than in 3, but still has some holes. DAIM turns it into something more.. worthy.

Some people love HoI3 though, and one should respect that too.

How about Arsenal of Democracy and the Darkest Hour? I haven't played them, but a friend is fapping to the Darkest Hour. I think HOI3 had potential, but it was too big to chew at one bite for Paradox. I like the idea of subordinate AIs, I'd like it even in Europa Universalis, so I could, say, let AI handle colonial warfare. Too bad it didn't work out too good.

[Simmura McCrea]

No, I like the challenge of building up a country from a few provinces. I've never managed a world conquest, and doubt I will for some time. I really enjoyed playing as Georgia and spending 30-some years getting the upper hand on that little horde next door. I enjoyed turning the Papal States into the Middle East. I loved turning Munster into the America-spanning, China crushing monster-Ireland it became.

I think all those things are possible and 600% more fun in MM.

I tried it, as Portugal, which should, theoretically, be okay. Did horribly. There's too much to look after, too much added with not enough guides on what the fuck everything does. I don't want to have to deal with some religious minority getting a bit pissy while my tiny army is ganking an army 3 times its size. I don't want to have to deal with all that crap. I want a fun sandbox, not a perfect simulator.

[IHateOutside]

One thing to bear in mind with HoI2 is the multiple versions (they licensed the engine out to teams) available.

You have stock HoI2 Doomsday + Armageddon, Arsenal of Democracy and Darkest Hour, plus the fan made expansion Iron Cross.
Its late here and I need to go to sleep, but If no-one has explained by the time I have access to my PC again, I will elaborate.

Also, for those new to Paradox Interactive : PATCH YOUR GAMES.

[Majestic7]

I tried it, as Portugal, which should, theoretically, be okay. Did horribly. There's too much to look after, too much added with not enough guides on what the fuck everything does. I don't want to have to deal with some religious minority getting a bit pissy while my tiny army is ganking an army 3 times its size. I don't want to have to deal with all that crap. I want a fun sandbox, not a perfect simulator.

Shows difference in taste, I guess. I find EUIII boring because there is so little to do, aside from the wars. You just let the time flow and occasionally build something. Most of the time there is just nothing happening and all the events are super generic. I got so used to the historical excellence of EU2 that was a huge disappointment. True, the time-related events of EU2 were silly when the actual situation in the game was often a lot different than the real history. I just found MM to fill that gap, providing plausible historical content instead of...emptiness of vanilla, while not running on rails regarding the events like EU2. More power to you if you like EU3 as it is though, means you got your moneys worth straight from the store. It doesn't take anything away from me if you like vanilla,  just voicing my opinion.

Anyway, MM has changed a lot between different versions and the current one is the final one with good documentation. So if you tried MM like, two years ago, it is entirely different beast now.

[Simmura McCrea]

It was last last year, IIRC. Pre-DW. But yeah, this is all taste difference.

[Toady Two]

Is anyone else considering picking up Darkest Hour?

I'm an avid Eu3 and Magna Mundi player. I haven't tried Hearts of Iron but the WW1 scenario in Darkest Hour makes me want to skip the basic game and play the mod spinoff.

I might be difficult to get a hang of things just like playing MM without trying vanilla EU3 first. I've also heard there are quite a few bugs in the initial release and I think I'll wait for a patch to show up before I buy.

[Stworca]

How about Arsenal of Democracy and the Darkest Hour? I haven't played them, but a friend is fapping to the Darkest Hour. I think HOI3 had potential, but it was too big to chew at one bite for Paradox. I like the idea of subordinate AIs, I'd like it even in Europa Universalis, so I could, say, let AI handle colonial warfare. Too bad it didn't work out too good.

To be honest i haven't even HEARD about either AoD or Darkest Hour 
I was however more than happy with Doomsday Armageddon. Played and still playing the **** out of it!

It has a problem though. The AI never accepts peace unless you either : Annex the entire country OR it's an event based peace. While the top players are understandable to never stand down, all the others? Let's assume you've taken 54 out of 59 provinces of country X, and offer it a deal : We only want ONE province! Hell, a white peace even. Decline. Decline. Decline. Decline.. Over and over.
DAIM is a must.

[Il Palazzo]

Some people love HoI3 though, and one should respect that too.

That'd be me and that other guy from Burkina Faso.

Seriously, I really loved the HQ AI system that they implemented. Finally there was no need for micromanaging the armies. Finally you could feel like you're running a country, not being some sort of a hivemind.

As for EU3, my opinion on it somewhat similar to that of Majestic7 - I totally hated the scripted historical events of previous installments of the series, and was all hyped up about EU3 doing away with (most) of those. And when I finally played it, it proved to be simply boring. Gave it away before having a chance to try Magna Mundi, so I can't really tell how much does that improve the overall experience.

[Majestic7]

Seriously, I really loved the HQ AI system that they implemented. Finally there was no need for micromanaging the armies. Finally you could feel like you're running a country, not being some sort of a hivemind.

It feels good on paper, however... I was playing Japan, fighting an awesome and interesting land war in China. I was building fleet at the same time and I had put it under AI. I was planning to wait aggression against the Allies till '42 or so. Well, USA declares war on me late '41. I have a good, advanced fleet, so no worries. I just give some objectives to the HQ. What does the AI do? It splits my fleet into tiny task forces, like, sending battleships and carriers on the sea ALONE without escorts. My whole fleet gets defeated in detail, because US Navy uses real battle groups while my idiot AI Admiral thinks it is a good idea for every ship play a lone rider. Raaaaaaage.

Maybe the sub-AI has improved since, I don't know. I plan to give HOI3 a spin after the second expansion comes out and has all the bugs ironed out.

[Ampersand]

I've got Darkest Hour. It uses Hearts on Iron 2 as a base, and has an expanded timeframe to cover two separate campaigns, for the first and second World War. You can't currently start with World War One and play straight through World War Two as far as I could tell, as there is no, 'Grand Campaign' option that I could see, but I could be mistaken on that regard.

[mainiac]

I'm not much of a fan of the Mangi Mundi mod.  The KISS principle means nothing to those people.  Maybe the game will be better but my experience with darkest hour has me squemish.  Darkest Hour sorely needed more playtesting.  I still like it and I think it made some excellent changes, but it feels clunky due to various mistakes.

[Desdichado]

Europa Universalis II was a good history teacher with all the historical events.

Not really. In the end, a gamer is left with a few more keywords to blurt out like "Council of Trent!" but is far from understanding the actual history. That comes from studying primary sources, the writings and other evidence left by people from that era. A game is just a game, and surrenders to fun gameplay 95% of the time.

[Cheese]

I haven't tried Magni Mundi so far but I love EU3. I do notice how there are a lot of times where you are just waiting for something to happen but I still find it quite fun. I already have an interest in history but I find EU3 gives me inspiration to look stuff up, though it doesn't teach me all that much.

As for HOI2, being able to play through the cold war sounds quite awesome. HOI3 has kept bugging out on me for the past month but I've finally tamed it, so I might try a campaign as Britain. Triple continent war sounds Fun.

So, has anybody accomplished anything particularly amazing in their Paradox games?

[Simmura McCrea]

Spoiler: EU3, Ireland as of 1821 (click to show/hide)

In all honesty, by the end of it, I was quite disappointed with the outcome. It was hella fun, but if I'd tried harder, I could've stopped Brabant and Scotland from getting Canada, I could've expanded further into Mexico/South America and I could've taken more of China.