Gray_Lensman wrote:Not sure if the other remark was directed at me or not, since I have no favorite strategy to use. Like Berto, I have yet to play a campaign game all the way thru, since I've been working to improve the AACW graphics and data files for over 15 months now. (rough guess 200 to 300 man-hours per month). I have also managed to "kill" a few non-historic gamey strategies with the cooperation of the discovering gamer. (Jabberwock being one of the discoverers). These are few and far between however, because again most of these cannot be solved by data changes alone, naval fort bombardment being just one of the examples.
Jarkko wrote:In fact, I am starting to believe the zeal behind the attacks against my comments may in fact be based on that some key people would be crapping their pants if their favourite gamey strategy would suddenly be fixed. Not the first time I'd see that (I do remember for example when I used the "neighbour bonus" in a *very* gamey way in EU2; it was nerfed real good and then fixed to more reasonable levels for EU3, and it was apparent to me it was done as a personal attack on me :neener .
Jarkko wrote: In addition, I suck at humour (usually I start laughing when others are in awkward silence, and vice versa).
Rafiki wrote:I recommend avoiding blanket statements when you don't have good reason too and also make sure that if you're writing something "to" someone, you make it clear enough who it's for
Comtedemeighan wrote:Paradox as a design house 'Jumped the Shark' with the release of Europa Universalis III. Now they release a game with many addons instead of a complete game basically all at once. I still visit there forums but alas I will never buy another paradox game. I also notice there forum community has become very vulgar there is alot of swearing on their forums now I don't mind swearing but I never saw it in the old days when the paradox forum community was much smaller. Also I like that Ageod just sticks to the games and doesn't have silly political threads like in the paradox OT were all here because war computer games are our hobby not because of our political viewpoints that's whats refreshing about the Ageod forums. Also Paradox's 3d units and maps are just plain ugly I don't like this new design of there games its just terrible. Ageod games are works of art compared to paradox's latest work. I think Paradox has forgot what made them great in the first place and now they only care about the $$$ I know the money is what keeps a game company alive, hopefully Ageod will be around for a long time because they are on of the few companies still releasing quality products I wish this company great success and hopefully when they become a big company like paradox they won't forget what made them great in the first place
Jayavarman wrote:BoA 2 was supposed to be an addon to BoA1.
Paradox used to make complete games? We begged Johan to expand EU2. Now we get that extra development.
Swearing? OT or game forums?
Obviously 3D is going to look bad on the first go. Rome has improved on the 3D.
Quality products? Check out the forum for AGEod's WW1.
Now, I am a fanboy of both companies, but just relax a bit.
comagoosie wrote:EU3 introduced me to modding, history, programming, life, women. If Ageod can top that then we shall see...
Clovis wrote:Where Paradox has really lost credit for my own is with his real unability to create real new set of rules. Let's face it: beyond the Ph. Thibault's work at start, Paradox has been unable to really design a new game system ( as far I know, CK is built on Thibault's ideas). Roma is just EUIII in Ancient world, Victoria is the best example of the computer wargaming plague ( I got a ton of economical spreadsheets, lets's now build a game interface around), the EUIII sandbox system has been amended by add-on as it was impossible in the long run to sutain this game to be a simulation of an historical period with so much distorted results)...
Jarkko wrote:. I use the words "historical game" for games that at least promote some historical strategies; a pretty map and a historical set-up does not a historical game make
Franciscus wrote:Interesting discussion, but I think that the arguments have a fundamental flaw. I believe it is intrinsically impossible to play "competitively" (ie, to win) and historically. Against the AI sooner or later one can allways find some "gamey" way to defeat her, and against another human, almost allways the motivation is to win at all costs, so, historical plausible strategies are the least concern of all (that's why I do not play PBEM, BTW). Personally I play strategy "historical" games against the AI and I do not necessarily play to win but almost allways instead to explore history (and alternate history). But to each it's own, of course
Franciscus wrote:Just to clarify, that's not my only reason to shun PBEM, the other being a complete and utter lack of dependable free time to dedicate to and acomodate other players. But I really do not have the motivation to try and find available time...
tagwyn wrote:Arsan: I am your friend! I am sorry to see you about to waste time and money on a Paradox product. Sadness. t
Users browsing this forum: MSN [Bot] and 2 guests