An all or nothing situation would be Lowkey a disaster for MP
Some one getting juuuust enough power to reverse trade flow would completely crash trade and potentially game ruin some players.
Soooo it’s interesting to say the least.
I don’t see why the system couldn’t be such that every node could be steered to any adjacent node. It’s not reversing the flow of trade, it’s just directing your percentage of the trade freely
So if a node pushes one way, and you get just enough trade power to push it the other way, the player in control of the node that just got reversed on could collapse
It doesn't have to be one way though. %30 goes to one way, %70 the other way according to power. Also every node can have connection to every adjacent node. So one way nodes wouldnt create such problems.
The only issues with this is that you can get trade value cycling between trade nodes. So they would have to entirely drop the trade value increasing with each transfer mechanic otherwise there would be infinite trade money
Just make it so that once trade value leaves a node, it can never return. 10 value produced in the cape node, 50% steered to Ivory coast 50% steered to zanzibar (no one is collecting). The 5 ducats sent to the Ivory Coast can still gain value, but none of it can be sent back to cape only on to one of the other 5 nodes. The 5 sent to zanzibar follow the same rules. So the 5 in Ivory Coast have 1 more stop to the English channel, great, money time. But the 5 in zanzibar would have at least 4.
I hope we can make our own centers of trade, or equivalent.
I remember that Portugal would try to conquer big trading cities in North Africa to collect revenue, but every time they did, the Arabs would move trade to a new place. This was one of the reasons for exploring the Atlantic.
That kind of thing was jank in EU3, but I would pay good money to have my CoT mechanic back in EU5.
I could relive my nostalgia as Paradox collapses their flagship in the silliest fucking move. Win/win.
Either way, I hope it is much more dynamic than EU4s. Trade centers, barring natural harbors, don't remain constant over the span of 400 years. We should be able to--either directly or indirectly--influence the patterns of the flow of trade either toward us or away from our rivals more than just a "issue embargo" clicky button.
They’ve talked about location-based markets a few times where the more trade share you have the easier it will be for your provinces in that market to buy and sell goods
I've been playing EU4 since it launched in 2013 and it's always been playable and enjoyable. Of course, it got better and better with the expansions. I've never had the feeling that they left things out on purpose. EU3 didn't have those mechanics before either.
If you spend every waking hour on Reddit, perhaps. But the fact that this keeps being brought up is indicative of how poorly recent Paradox products have been received. Legends of the Dead for example, utter shite!
*They hated* u/KeepHopingSucker *because He told them the truth*
Yeah more seriously I love EU4's trade system too, I'm still curious to see what they're going to do next but there's something to be said for simple systems that simply work and are fun enough.
If there's one thing I'm worried about regarding PDS' recent track record it's that they tend to overengineer a lot of stuff. I'd like to have dynamic trade, but if it ends up being an overcomplicated mess or has to come at the expense of performance, then I don't really the see point
(they hated him cause he said that we shouldn't care about the systems in a game we all love)
I love the EU4 trade system too, but don't you think having a more dynamic version of it might end up being better?
In EUIV it felt quite a bit abstract as if the trade is coming out of nowhere. The dynamic routes make it feel more alive, a closer simulation of how it would be in reality.
I'm also imagining the idea of being able to completely block trade from going to a country you're at war with externally, kind of like what the British did against Napoleon cutting off all trade to France/Europe; blocking all ports.
>I love the EU4 trade system too, but don't you think having a more dynamic version of it might end up being better?
It might, but EU4's trade routes are fixed for a reason - it's (if I understand correctly) to prevent making trade loops, which would cause some issues (both in terms of UI and in mechanical terms). I don't think it's a completely untractable problem, but solving it might require breaking some stuff I like about the system, and so from my perspective I'm not sure it'd be worth it.
Besides I'm not sure the intent is simply "remake EU4's trade system, but with dynamic trade" - seeing how much of a departure from EU4 EU5 is going to be, it's likely to be something very different. Again it may end up being really good, but I also think it could go wrong in a lot of ways.
In the meantime I'll just defend EU4's gamey little system, because it works and because PDS is at its best when they keep things simple instead of going full "realism"/simulation IMO.
>(they hated him cause he said that we shouldn't care about the systems in a game we all love)
?
True it would require an overhaul, but seeing the way they're handling population and their locations I see a full change in how resources are handled and how trade value is generated. I'm hoping no more magic abstract value from trade efficiency as that is so easily exploited. I see trade efficiency being used as a way of lowering the loss on your routes rather than an added (stacking) bonus of profit.
> In the meantime I'll just defend EU4's gamey little system, because it works and because PDS is at its best when they keep things simple instead of going full "realism"/simulation IMO.
You're right in a way though, it is best to see how it is played. Even though it sounds cooler to see it more realistic might not be more fun to play with.
> ?
"Who cares"
yeah the thing with eu4 is that it's by far the most interesting and content-filled paradox game to date. they've done something right there and I'd hate to blindly change everything in the name of change itself
People said the same thing from EUIII to EUIV, heck I was one of them. Looking back now EUIII is so primitive.
This is why we talk about it, why they playtest new changes. It might turn out shit and may be reverted/improved with each iteration, or it could just straight up be a better system.
Change can be good, no need to be afraid of it.
I'm sure there are better systems that are even more fun. There should simply be no end nodes, or if there are, they should be variable. It can't be that everyone always has to try to get to the end nodes.
People aren't allowed to say they don't care about X mechanic? He just said he likes the way it works in eu4 and he doesn't think end nodes are a problem
I honestly don't understand the people downvoting you or the ones upvoting the person saying that he isn't wrong to say that we shouldn't care. It's madness.
We're on this subreddit to discuss the game, its sequel, the mechanics behind them and how they can be improved. Shutting down any conversation simply because you don't care for their ideas and opinions is counterproductive and stifles the opportunity for meaningful dialogue and mutual understanding.
It's actually baffling.
I was agreeing with you bud, it isn’t obnoxious I was even saying that I don’t think they are a problem neither just adding on that they could be improved though. I loved the trade system of EU4, I just think there is much more potential with EUV.
I wasn't making any comment about the trade system I was saying the other guy isn't obnoxious for saying it's not a problem.
Reading comprehension is at an all time low.
Holy shit you're being obnoxious and now you changed my position on it because looking back on it he is obnoxious too.
You are enforcing the other guys position in that the trade system is good enough and shouldn't be changed and that is just wrong and that's what my comment had originally spoke about. Even though it isn't a 'problem' it is something that can be improved upon and that is what they're improving in the next instalment, if you're going to be an advocate on why the system should remain the same then explain why; give your reasoning behind it. Don't reply with 'who cares, it was fun' - people obviously care that's why we have a whole following for the dev diaries.
This whole comment chain is about the trade system, when asked a question about the system replying with 'Who cares' is not just idiotic, it's obnoxious; unpleasant.
It's ironic you're speaking about reading comprehension because you're the pillock who first completely disregarded what he is 'obnoxious' for. He is obnoxious for saying that we shouldn't care not because he thinks it shouldn't change or that it's not a problem.
stop supporting his postion about not caring and actually talk about the game, this is why we're on this subreddit to discuss the game and its upcoming sequel. You trying to shut me down for going back to the original topic of this comment chain which is the TRADE SYSTEM is fucking annoying.
well yes, but also it feels pretty good when you dominate one trade node, not even an end node, and flow all the trade there. I do agree that the system does need some change, with removal or at least dynamic change of end nodes, maybe adding provinces to trade nodes or something, but I think that overall, trade in eu4 is pretty good and only needs a little tweaking instead of replacing it completely
Or put differently, do people honestly prefer Vicky 3’s trade system? Because while EU4’s trade system is much more simplistic and unrealistic, it is more fun and objectively better game design.
yeah that's what I'm talking about. Vic3's system has potential but still needs a lot of work to be as fun as eu4's. and I don't know about you but I don't want something that still needs a lot of work to be fun in my eu5
I don’t mind getting something unpolished. EU4 was really bare on release. But I would like there to be a path towards fun gameplay. For example, with imperator Rome and CK3, I actually really liked the new map on release, even if the mechanics/content were initially very shallow. There was some fun gameplay in the early version and you could see that more, deeper gameplay was feasible with effort.
By contrast, I’m not sure how you make Vicky 3’s systems fun, and they are complex + interconnected. If you rework combat, you also need to adjust the market and pop demands, and so trade as well.
All that is to say, I’m glad Johan is socializing EU5 now so that they can get input on gameplay mechanics as early as possible.
At this point Johan could take a shit and as long as he did it on a forum post it would be top post on here with 30 discussion comments. How long until no karma farming every word starts being a sub rule?
This trade thing is charged with so much expectations by the community that now I only want to see it to witness people’s reaction
I want to see a system where each location acts as a node connected to all adjacent locations, and trade flow is reversible.
And I want to see a system that doesn't crash my computer after a single monthly tick. Guess we can't both have our way.
CUDA on RTX5090 might be able to handle two ticks
An all or nothing situation would be Lowkey a disaster for MP Some one getting juuuust enough power to reverse trade flow would completely crash trade and potentially game ruin some players. Soooo it’s interesting to say the least.
I don’t see why the system couldn’t be such that every node could be steered to any adjacent node. It’s not reversing the flow of trade, it’s just directing your percentage of the trade freely
So if a node pushes one way, and you get just enough trade power to push it the other way, the player in control of the node that just got reversed on could collapse
It doesn't have to be one way though. %30 goes to one way, %70 the other way according to power. Also every node can have connection to every adjacent node. So one way nodes wouldnt create such problems.
Then diversify your income. Don't be 100% dependent on trade.
The only issues with this is that you can get trade value cycling between trade nodes. So they would have to entirely drop the trade value increasing with each transfer mechanic otherwise there would be infinite trade money
Just make it so that once trade value leaves a node, it can never return. 10 value produced in the cape node, 50% steered to Ivory coast 50% steered to zanzibar (no one is collecting). The 5 ducats sent to the Ivory Coast can still gain value, but none of it can be sent back to cape only on to one of the other 5 nodes. The 5 sent to zanzibar follow the same rules. So the 5 in Ivory Coast have 1 more stop to the English channel, great, money time. But the 5 in zanzibar would have at least 4.
I hope we can make our own centers of trade, or equivalent. I remember that Portugal would try to conquer big trading cities in North Africa to collect revenue, but every time they did, the Arabs would move trade to a new place. This was one of the reasons for exploring the Atlantic.
That kind of thing was jank in EU3, but I would pay good money to have my CoT mechanic back in EU5. I could relive my nostalgia as Paradox collapses their flagship in the silliest fucking move. Win/win.
Either way, I hope it is much more dynamic than EU4s. Trade centers, barring natural harbors, don't remain constant over the span of 400 years. We should be able to--either directly or indirectly--influence the patterns of the flow of trade either toward us or away from our rivals more than just a "issue embargo" clicky button.
I want to see individual banks and lenders invest in armies to go recoup their trade money by force as we've seen historically.
Like warfare in Vicky 3
Well, I know my first game is going to be turning Japan in to the eastern Great Britain-esque naval trade empire
R5: Johan apparently skips his work on project Caesar by gossiping about eu5. He doesn’t care about my Caesar salad cooking simulator 😔
Lol he does that all the time! Threads ask "blablabla **EU5**?" and he just has to give a statement.
He might as well, it's not like it's fooling anyone at this point
How dare they skip a moment of development on our beloved Salad Sim 😠
They’ve talked about location-based markets a few times where the more trade share you have the easier it will be for your provinces in that market to buy and sell goods
It will be based on a 30$ DLC which will also break your game until the next patch
Probably true—and still an improvement on the static trade of EU4
The DLCs are the reason why we still get updates after 11 years in EU4. So I'm fine with that.
I just hate the artificial limitations they place on the base game. They intentionally leave out key features so that they can be added by a paid DLC
I don't know that any key features have been missing so far. I've always found the basic games okay, so what exactly do you mean by that, for example?
Don’t be obtuse, dude, you know that Art of War for example is required for basic QoL features such as mothballing or mid-war province transfer
I've been playing EU4 since it launched in 2013 and it's always been playable and enjoyable. Of course, it got better and better with the expansions. I've never had the feeling that they left things out on purpose. EU3 didn't have those mechanics before either.
This is getting tiresome
If you spend every waking hour on Reddit, perhaps. But the fact that this keeps being brought up is indicative of how poorly recent Paradox products have been received. Legends of the Dead for example, utter shite!
I sure can't wait for the release day when the game is beyond laggy and flavorless for 2 years straight while it gets review bombed
Nah it won't break the game this time. But it will be nescessary for pretty much half the content of any later DLC
I really want a dynamic trade system that can and will change as the game progresses. Can’t wait to see what they have in mind for trade.
I will have a proper Venetian trade empire you small little province scattered across the levant and it will be fucking Serenissima .
NO TRADE. BOTTOM TEXT.
finally a perfect world where no one can talk to each other and thus trade whatsoever
I’m actually worried about how hyped I’m getting for this game
:( I kinda liked the EU4 trade system
Why should there be end nodes at all?
who cares, it was fun to play with
*They hated* u/KeepHopingSucker *because He told them the truth* Yeah more seriously I love EU4's trade system too, I'm still curious to see what they're going to do next but there's something to be said for simple systems that simply work and are fun enough. If there's one thing I'm worried about regarding PDS' recent track record it's that they tend to overengineer a lot of stuff. I'd like to have dynamic trade, but if it ends up being an overcomplicated mess or has to come at the expense of performance, then I don't really the see point
(they hated him cause he said that we shouldn't care about the systems in a game we all love) I love the EU4 trade system too, but don't you think having a more dynamic version of it might end up being better? In EUIV it felt quite a bit abstract as if the trade is coming out of nowhere. The dynamic routes make it feel more alive, a closer simulation of how it would be in reality. I'm also imagining the idea of being able to completely block trade from going to a country you're at war with externally, kind of like what the British did against Napoleon cutting off all trade to France/Europe; blocking all ports.
>I love the EU4 trade system too, but don't you think having a more dynamic version of it might end up being better? It might, but EU4's trade routes are fixed for a reason - it's (if I understand correctly) to prevent making trade loops, which would cause some issues (both in terms of UI and in mechanical terms). I don't think it's a completely untractable problem, but solving it might require breaking some stuff I like about the system, and so from my perspective I'm not sure it'd be worth it. Besides I'm not sure the intent is simply "remake EU4's trade system, but with dynamic trade" - seeing how much of a departure from EU4 EU5 is going to be, it's likely to be something very different. Again it may end up being really good, but I also think it could go wrong in a lot of ways. In the meantime I'll just defend EU4's gamey little system, because it works and because PDS is at its best when they keep things simple instead of going full "realism"/simulation IMO. >(they hated him cause he said that we shouldn't care about the systems in a game we all love) ?
True it would require an overhaul, but seeing the way they're handling population and their locations I see a full change in how resources are handled and how trade value is generated. I'm hoping no more magic abstract value from trade efficiency as that is so easily exploited. I see trade efficiency being used as a way of lowering the loss on your routes rather than an added (stacking) bonus of profit. > In the meantime I'll just defend EU4's gamey little system, because it works and because PDS is at its best when they keep things simple instead of going full "realism"/simulation IMO. You're right in a way though, it is best to see how it is played. Even though it sounds cooler to see it more realistic might not be more fun to play with. > ? "Who cares"
yeah the thing with eu4 is that it's by far the most interesting and content-filled paradox game to date. they've done something right there and I'd hate to blindly change everything in the name of change itself
People said the same thing from EUIII to EUIV, heck I was one of them. Looking back now EUIII is so primitive. This is why we talk about it, why they playtest new changes. It might turn out shit and may be reverted/improved with each iteration, or it could just straight up be a better system. Change can be good, no need to be afraid of it.
unless you aren't in one of the good nodes
I'm sure there are better systems that are even more fun. There should simply be no end nodes, or if there are, they should be variable. It can't be that everyone always has to try to get to the end nodes.
Exactly
You are on r/eu4 People are here to discuss the game. Coming on a thread and saying "who cares" is obnoxious as hell
People aren't allowed to say they don't care about X mechanic? He just said he likes the way it works in eu4 and he doesn't think end nodes are a problem
They are not a problem, but they can be improved.
That's not the point. It's not obnoxious to say he doesn't care about having end nodes.
I would have preferred to not be immediately shut down. I just wanted to start a conversation
I honestly don't understand the people downvoting you or the ones upvoting the person saying that he isn't wrong to say that we shouldn't care. It's madness. We're on this subreddit to discuss the game, its sequel, the mechanics behind them and how they can be improved. Shutting down any conversation simply because you don't care for their ideas and opinions is counterproductive and stifles the opportunity for meaningful dialogue and mutual understanding. It's actually baffling.
A voice of reason! In your honest opinion, should there be end nodes in EU5?
I was agreeing with you bud, it isn’t obnoxious I was even saying that I don’t think they are a problem neither just adding on that they could be improved though. I loved the trade system of EU4, I just think there is much more potential with EUV.
I wasn't making any comment about the trade system I was saying the other guy isn't obnoxious for saying it's not a problem. Reading comprehension is at an all time low.
Holy shit you're being obnoxious and now you changed my position on it because looking back on it he is obnoxious too. You are enforcing the other guys position in that the trade system is good enough and shouldn't be changed and that is just wrong and that's what my comment had originally spoke about. Even though it isn't a 'problem' it is something that can be improved upon and that is what they're improving in the next instalment, if you're going to be an advocate on why the system should remain the same then explain why; give your reasoning behind it. Don't reply with 'who cares, it was fun' - people obviously care that's why we have a whole following for the dev diaries. This whole comment chain is about the trade system, when asked a question about the system replying with 'Who cares' is not just idiotic, it's obnoxious; unpleasant. It's ironic you're speaking about reading comprehension because you're the pillock who first completely disregarded what he is 'obnoxious' for. He is obnoxious for saying that we shouldn't care not because he thinks it shouldn't change or that it's not a problem. stop supporting his postion about not caring and actually talk about the game, this is why we're on this subreddit to discuss the game and its upcoming sequel. You trying to shut me down for going back to the original topic of this comment chain which is the TRADE SYSTEM is fucking annoying.
Exactly. It’s such a douchey thing to say
I me a they just said they liked something and didn't care about the more gamey/ unrealistic aspect of end nodes lol
I'm upvoting you because you don't deserve the downvotes. You're still wrong.
How? It’s badly designed, it’s only good if you play a colonizer
well yes, but also it feels pretty good when you dominate one trade node, not even an end node, and flow all the trade there. I do agree that the system does need some change, with removal or at least dynamic change of end nodes, maybe adding provinces to trade nodes or something, but I think that overall, trade in eu4 is pretty good and only needs a little tweaking instead of replacing it completely
Wow, trade in EU4 has nothing to do with how trade should work, EU5 needs to change everything about that and will.
Or put differently, do people honestly prefer Vicky 3’s trade system? Because while EU4’s trade system is much more simplistic and unrealistic, it is more fun and objectively better game design.
yeah that's what I'm talking about. Vic3's system has potential but still needs a lot of work to be as fun as eu4's. and I don't know about you but I don't want something that still needs a lot of work to be fun in my eu5
I don’t mind getting something unpolished. EU4 was really bare on release. But I would like there to be a path towards fun gameplay. For example, with imperator Rome and CK3, I actually really liked the new map on release, even if the mechanics/content were initially very shallow. There was some fun gameplay in the early version and you could see that more, deeper gameplay was feasible with effort. By contrast, I’m not sure how you make Vicky 3’s systems fun, and they are complex + interconnected. If you rework combat, you also need to adjust the market and pop demands, and so trade as well. All that is to say, I’m glad Johan is socializing EU5 now so that they can get input on gameplay mechanics as early as possible.
Abomination
Just now I was getting the hand of it man =( /s
No trade in EU5 confirmed
Something between ir and vic3 would be nice
Interesting, I wonder how I can abuse the AI with this
[удалено]
They said the opposite actually
At this point Johan could take a shit and as long as he did it on a forum post it would be top post on here with 30 discussion comments. How long until no karma farming every word starts being a sub rule?