Advertisement
by Danubian Peoples » Thu Apr 02, 2020 7:47 pm
by Bralia » Thu Apr 02, 2020 8:11 pm
The Huskar Social Union wrote:Whats a good Shared Burdens build for stellaris?
by Licana » Fri Apr 03, 2020 12:11 am
The Huskar Social Union wrote:Whats a good Shared Burdens build for stellaris?
Puzikas wrote:Gulf War One was like Slapstick: The War. Except, you know, up to 40,000 people died.
Vitaphone Racing wrote:Never in all my years have I seen someone actually quote the dictionary and still get the definition wrong.
Senestrum wrote:How are KEPs cowardly? Surely the "real man" would in fact be the one firing giant rods of nuclear waste at speeds best described as "hilarious".
by The Huskar Social Union » Fri Apr 03, 2020 2:57 am
Licana wrote:The Huskar Social Union wrote:Whats a good Shared Burdens build for stellaris?
I used to use a Shared Burdens + Byzantine Bureaucracy build to make consumer goods costs a joke, but that doesn't work anymore. You could go with a high diplomacy build using the civic that gives extra envoys as there's a space UN resolution that prohibits the use of living standards other than shared burdens, utopian abundance, or chemical bliss. If you pass that, every other empire that doesn't have shared burdens is forced onto one of the two other, much more costly living standards. Then you can pass all of the condemnation resolutions to make these other empires suck if they keep their old living standards.
edit: something like this
Either honestly, tho im leaning more towards mechanics this time around.
by Licana » Fri Apr 03, 2020 3:16 am
Puzikas wrote:Gulf War One was like Slapstick: The War. Except, you know, up to 40,000 people died.
Vitaphone Racing wrote:Never in all my years have I seen someone actually quote the dictionary and still get the definition wrong.
Senestrum wrote:How are KEPs cowardly? Surely the "real man" would in fact be the one firing giant rods of nuclear waste at speeds best described as "hilarious".
by The Huskar Social Union » Fri Apr 03, 2020 3:32 am
Licana wrote:The Huskar Social Union wrote:Either honestly, tho im leaning more towards mechanics this time around.
Mechanically I don't think shared burdens is all that great tbh, I think the cheesy diplo build I posted is probably the best way to leverage what Shared Burdens actually does in a way that benefits you (also it's thematically hilarious). You can still try a consumer goods-centric build using Shared Burden + Environmentalist civics and the Conservationist trait, but honestly consumer goods aren't really a problem unless you're running a lot of utopian abundance and if you're doing that then why pick up shared burdens in the first place? If you're going for something more thematic but still mechanically strong, here's a more militant space commie build.
by Danubian Peoples » Fri Apr 03, 2020 7:02 am
by Cisairse » Fri Apr 03, 2020 7:11 am
by Danubian Peoples » Fri Apr 03, 2020 7:24 am
Cisairse wrote:I very much enjoyed my first couple of hours with Imperator last night. I started as Rome, because I assumed it would be easy and have a lot of flavor to guide me through learning the mechanics.
It was lots of fun.
by The Huskar Social Union » Fri Apr 03, 2020 7:39 am
by Cisairse » Fri Apr 03, 2020 7:45 am
Danubian Peoples wrote:Cisairse wrote:I very much enjoyed my first couple of hours with Imperator last night. I started as Rome, because I assumed it would be easy and have a lot of flavor to guide me through learning the mechanics.
It was lots of fun.
What was it like? Tutorial was pretty confusing for me (learned about game mechanics a lot faster actually playing). And what are you planning to do. I'd reccomend Qataba if you like waiting decades to reform out of Tribal gov. Same is probably true for all other tribal countries.
by Serrus » Fri Apr 03, 2020 1:02 pm
Cisairse wrote:Serrus wrote: as the devs can't get everything all at once, can they?
They absolutely could if Paradox would stop releasing games in a pre-alpha state. EU4's metascore probably would be ten points higher if they had waited six months and released 1.8 as 1.0.
What worries me is that Imperator's awful launch, rather than teaching them that they need to actually release games instead of pre-alpha tech demos, instead was so much of a loss financially (compared to CK2, EU4, and Stellaris at least) that they're going to rush to release a pre-alpha CK3 in order to get the revenue stream back up. Especially considering CK2 is now f2p.
Grenartia wrote:United Muscovite Nations wrote:It would be ahistorical, yes, but you'd be going back so far in time in CK3 (presumably going back as far as the Charlemagne DLC?) that the theology of marriage would still be poorly developed.
I mean, if you can make your own religion, why not same-sex marriage in that religion?
Eastern Raarothorgren wrote:News websites are good and reasonable soruces of information or they would not be on the internet if they were saying things that were incorrect.
Keshiland wrote:I am yes arguing that the 1st 4 are not binding to the states and yes I know that in most Republican states they would ban the freedom of religion and the freedom of essembally but I don't live there and I hate guns!
by Cisairse » Fri Apr 03, 2020 1:10 pm
Serrus wrote:Cisairse wrote:
They absolutely could if Paradox would stop releasing games in a pre-alpha state. EU4's metascore probably would be ten points higher if they had waited six months and released 1.8 as 1.0.
What worries me is that Imperator's awful launch, rather than teaching them that they need to actually release games instead of pre-alpha tech demos, instead was so much of a loss financially (compared to CK2, EU4, and Stellaris at least) that they're going to rush to release a pre-alpha CK3 in order to get the revenue stream back up. Especially considering CK2 is now f2p.
I mean, clearly they have actually learned that lesson. Furthermore, if they had waited 6 months, someone in this thread would probably have wanted them to wait another 6, etc. etc. I'm not saying PDOX is perfect, I'm just saying that time isn't always the antidote, and games with a development cycle like this do eventually have to come out, or else we'd have a perfect game and a scant 5 minutes to play it before the sun explodes, so stuff will have to be temporarily left out. However, the issue with Imperator was most of the game being left out, which is clearly not the case here.Grenartia wrote:
I mean, if you can make your own religion, why not same-sex marriage in that religion?
If the After the End Fan Fork devs can do it, we can do it.
by United Muscovite Nations » Fri Apr 03, 2020 1:11 pm
Grenartia wrote:United Muscovite Nations wrote:It would be ahistorical, yes, but you'd be going back so far in time in CK3 (presumably going back as far as the Charlemagne DLC?) that the theology of marriage would still be poorly developed.
I mean, if you can make your own religion, why not same-sex marriage in that religion?
by The Huskar Social Union » Fri Apr 03, 2020 1:17 pm
by The Imperial Reach » Fri Apr 03, 2020 2:19 pm
Genivaria wrote:Can we make a clergy that is all female and have lust promoted as a virtue?
by Great Confederacy of Commonwealth States » Fri Apr 03, 2020 2:20 pm
The Imperial Reach wrote:Genivaria wrote:Can we make a clergy that is all female and have lust promoted as a virtue?
Zoroastrians actually lose piety for turning down the "I think [ X ] courtier fancies me..." event. Just go into a Random World game, set religions to historical, set religious traits to custom and give them Enatic Clains.
Presto!
by The Huskar Social Union » Fri Apr 03, 2020 2:26 pm
Roleplay reasons i would imagine. Its what i do with some characters on occasion. Others ill have bang anything that moves.Great Confederacy of Commonwealth States wrote:The Imperial Reach wrote:
Zoroastrians actually lose piety for turning down the "I think [ X ] courtier fancies me..." event. Just go into a Random World game, set religions to historical, set religious traits to custom and give them Enatic Clains.
Presto!
Why would you ever turn down that event?
by Genivaria » Fri Apr 03, 2020 2:29 pm
Great Confederacy of Commonwealth States wrote:The Imperial Reach wrote:
Zoroastrians actually lose piety for turning down the "I think [ X ] courtier fancies me..." event. Just go into a Random World game, set religions to historical, set religious traits to custom and give them Enatic Clains.
Presto!
Why would you ever turn down that event?
by Cisairse » Fri Apr 03, 2020 2:29 pm
by The Imperial Reach » Fri Apr 03, 2020 2:31 pm
Great Confederacy of Commonwealth States wrote:The Imperial Reach wrote:
Zoroastrians actually lose piety for turning down the "I think [ X ] courtier fancies me..." event. Just go into a Random World game, set religions to historical, set religious traits to custom and give them Enatic Clains.
Presto!
Why would you ever turn down that event?
by The Imperial Reach » Fri Apr 03, 2020 2:32 pm
by The Huskar Social Union » Fri Apr 03, 2020 2:41 pm
Bastards causing issues are forever too.
by The Huskar Social Union » Fri Apr 03, 2020 2:43 pm
Advertisement
Users browsing this forum: No registered users
Advertisement