View Full Version : New Rome game
Are you guys going to playing this when it comes out next month? http://www.paradoxplaza.com/ The game is the Rome Europa Universalli.
Looks good to me.
Denbo
Already pre ordered my copy :yes:
does anybody know what sort of battles it has?
Lord, if you're up there in the sky, save us from Paradox games. https://img.photobucket.com/albums/v121/dhampir/smilies/b906fe0f.gif
To put it simply, they just aren't worth the effort. I've played their games from Crown of the North through EU3 and I cannot stomach any more.
The company releases games in a pre-beta state and then patches them until they actually work, a process that takes up to a year. They will include some options in the game that don't actually do anything (like tank brigades in Victoria, a game which ends after WWI, have no stats and make no effect on the game except cost you money) and then call them "extra features" that "will be implemented later".
If you go onto their tech support forum and ask why something doesn't work right, you are bombarded by rude and insulting comments from fanbois about how you just can't appreciate how hard the programmers work and how they can't be expected to turn out a finished product until a moderator locks it with a comment like "the ability to save your game will be included in a later patch" or "the diplomacy system is a work in progress".
Spartan198
03-30-2008, 22:04
Lord, if you're up there in the sky, save us from Paradox games. https://img.photobucket.com/albums/v121/dhampir/smilies/b906fe0f.gif
To put it simply, they just aren't worth the effort. I've played their games from Crown of the North through EU3 and I cannot stomach any more.
The company releases games in a pre-beta state and then patches them until they actually work, a process that takes up to a year. They will include some options in the game that don't actually do anything (like tank brigades in Victoria, a game which ends after WWI, have no stats and make no effect on the game except cost you money) and then call them "extra features" that "will be implemented later".
If you go onto their tech support forum and ask why something doesn't work right, you are bombarded by rude and insulting comments from fanbois about how you just can't appreciate how hard the programmers work and how they can't be expected to turn out a finished product until a moderator locks it with a comment like "the ability to save your game will be included in a later patch" or "the diplomacy system is a work in progress".
In light of those words,probably not.
EB will probably quench the need for this era anyhow. Anything more is superfluous.
Already pre ordered my copy :yes:
does anybody know what sort of battles it has?
There are no battles you control--it's a grand strategy game. You just move your units from province to province and the AI initiates and resolves battles.
bigmilt16
03-31-2008, 01:15
I took a look at it...
I'd save my money and stick with EB. These guys are marketing their stuff for a profit :inquisitive: and can't even come close to EB's quality and craftsmanship. just my two cents.
Starforge
03-31-2008, 01:25
Lord, if you're up there in the sky, save us from Paradox games. https://img.photobucket.com/albums/v121/dhampir/smilies/b906fe0f.gif
To put it simply, they just aren't worth the effort. I've played their games from Crown of the North through EU3 and I cannot stomach any more.
The company releases games in a pre-beta state and then patches them until they actually work, a process that takes up to a year. They will include some options in the game that don't actually do anything (like tank brigades in Victoria, a game which ends after WWI, have no stats and make no effect on the game except cost you money) and then call them "extra features" that "will be implemented later".
If you go onto their tech support forum and ask why something doesn't work right, you are bombarded by rude and insulting comments from fanbois about how you just can't appreciate how hard the programmers work and how they can't be expected to turn out a finished product until a moderator locks it with a comment like "the ability to save your game will be included in a later patch" or "the diplomacy system is a work in progress".
Hammer meet nail....
The company releases software just above shareware and certainly below what one would expect or hope for from a real mainstream company. Without an internal Q/A change, I don't see myself purchasing any more of their products at release. For those who are able to contain their need to impulse buy - definately wait a year before buying it. It'll be cheaper and likely will be mostly (mostly) bug free by then. It will also give the modders time to fix all the gameplay issues with the game (and they do have a decent modding community for the most part - sadly IMO simply because the games just never play well at release.)
I know some of the EB team had discussed possibly modding it and I may be interested if that happened but only after the mod was done.
So I was looking at the EU:Rome forums & whaddayaknow (http://forum.paradoxplaza.com/forum/showthread.php?t=325959):juggle2:
Paradox's superior diplomacy, event engines, etc.
Now THATS funny. Belongs in the EB Jokes thread.https://img.photobucket.com/albums/v121/dhampir/smilies/smile_breakdance.gif
Starforge
03-31-2008, 05:11
Now THATS funny. Belongs in the EB Jokes thread.https://img.photobucket.com/albums/v121/dhampir/smilies/smile_breakdance.gif
Actually the diplomacy is better than what's in RTW (though still pretty weak) and then event engine is also not bad but again requires a decent modder to make it worthwhile since they're usually very barebones at release (it's like they hired coders but not people to add content.) Neither of those things bug me near so much as things like:
http://forum.paradoxplaza.com/forum/showthread.php?t=339153
An identified Deus Vult / CK problem wherein they sticky a player's workaround from back on January 21st and have left that there to address the issue leaving customers with such for the workaround until they finally get around to addressing it in a patch. I would be embarrased as the owner of a company to have to put up player made workarounds for software flaws in my product and certainly wouldn't have left it up for the 2+ months it's been there (and counting.) Let's just forget the fact that the relation shifts weren't even noticed or caught in testing.
Yep, all games shamefully these days ship with flaws but Paradox hits a new low with their releases (and DV's been out for 6 months and was an add on to an existing game.) Seriously - for those who can avoid having to have everything when it's out I'd wait at least 6mo to a year and check back in the forums for Rome to see how well it's actually working and what good mods are available before buying (but that's me.)
Actually the diplomacy is better than what's in RTW (though still pretty weak) and then event engine is also not bad but again requires a decent modder to make it worthwhile since they're usually very barebones at release (it's like they hired coders but not people to add content.)
It's still dumber than a bag of hammers.
I am bothered by the events system in Pdox games. It's like the developers think that everything that has ever happened in the world happened for set and certain reasons. It does not take into account ahistorical development--that something could arise by different means than what it says on Wikipedia.
Neither of those things bug me near so much as things like:
http://forum.paradoxplaza.com/forum/...d.php?t=339153
An identified Deus Vult / CK problem wherein they sticky a player's workaround from back on January 21st and have left that there to address the issue leaving customers with such for the workaround until they finally get around to addressing it in a patch. I would be embarrased as the owner of a company to have to put up player made workarounds for software flaws in my product and certainly wouldn't have left it up for the 2+ months it's been there (and counting.) Let's just forget the fact that the relation shifts weren't even noticed or caught in testing.
That's just unprofessional. But then again, the folks at Paradox have never struck me as professionals.
Yep, all games shamefully these days ship with flaws but Paradox hits a new low with their releases (and DV's been out for 6 months and was an add on to an existing game.) Seriously - for those who can avoid having to have everything when it's out I'd wait at least 6mo to a year and check back in the forums for Rome to see how well it's actually working and what good mods are available before buying (but that's me.)
After a dozen patches and a couple user mods, the game "Victoria" is a proper game. But it took two years to get there.
hmmm guess I will cancel my pre order then and wait for a few months. :wall:
I know only too well what it's like to get a game I've been looking forward to for weeks to find its bugged up to its eyeballs. cough*mtw2*cough
is there someone who likes those games? id like to hear 2 bells... i know there is people who like them, so id like to know something from them, i never played them, but until now, i always heard they were great.
Metalstrm
03-31-2008, 13:59
I do. I especially like Hearts of Iron 2, set in World War 2. Modded with Total Realism Project (TRP for short) it is one of the most amazing and to a very good degree historically accurate game you could get. With this mod you get all sorts of historical events. And if you play historically, you get countries responding close to history.
That mod is amazing, just like EB is. Lots of effort went into it, and it is also an ongoing project. Like people pointed out, the vanilla games are so so, but they have a great potential for modability. I really would find it difficult to say which is the better of HOI2 w/TRP and RTW w/EB. Without the mods RTW is better hands down, but like I said these games have a very good backbone for modders.
In terms of gameplay, the RTW games focus more on battlefield strategy/tactics, glossing over many of the elements of the big picture like economy, population, government, research, etc.
The Paradox games are the opposite, focussing on the grand strategy picture and abstracting the battle scene. In one of the games in the series, Victoria, you even get piecharts that divide your population in terms of their major issues as regards government, religion, etc. The detail is often incredible. Then again, the battles (except in the HOI series) I find to be somewhat lacking. You don't get the immersion factor of the TW battlescene, and they can be somewhat arbitrary. In HOI2 the battles were very good in my opinion. You obviously cannot expect anyone to recreate a battle of World War 2 on a computer, with maybe hundreds of thousands of soldiers and complicated pieces of machinery. Still, they were handled really well, especially if modded ala TRP.
As for anyone who said that diplomacy is worse than in TW, thats flat wrong. TW diplomacy is essentially non existent. In Paradox games you can set up all sorts of negotiations, exchanges of knowledge, materials, expeditionary forces, vassalisations, alliances, peace treaties. You win territory not simply by occupying it, After the adversary admits defeat you can arrange negotiations of their territories or any terms that you like. If the war was good enough for your side, you can even annex them, etc.
As for the event system, I can only say I liked it in HOI2-TRP. I am not a modder myself so obviously I cannot talk about that side, but I liked the effects, as did most of the people.
Still, expect several patches and updates. After that, you'll have a smooth ride. HOI never crashed on my computer (after patching).
LorDBulA
03-31-2008, 14:12
I especially like Hearts of Iron 2
Played it few times as Poland. It was terrible.
On one hand I couldnt defeat German 2 line outgun and outnumber forces when they attacked France first instead of Poland, on the other hand I could carve great empire straight to Mediterranean sea if I didnt get attacked by Germany.
Both this scenarios are jus redicolous and imo are result of great imbalance.
overweightninja
03-31-2008, 14:19
I do. I especially like Hearts of Iron 2, set in World War 2. Modded with Total Realism Project (TRP for short) it is one of the most amazing and to a very good degree historically accurate game you could get. With this mod you get all sorts of historical events. And if you play historically, you get countries responding close to history.
That mod is amazing, just like EB is. Lots of effort went into it, and it is also an ongoing project. Like people pointed out, the vanilla games are so so, but they have a great potential for modability. I really would find it difficult to say which is the better of HOI2 w/TRP and RTW w/EB. Without the mods RTW is better hands down, but like I said these games have a very good backbone for modders.
In terms of gameplay, the RTW games focus more on battlefield strategy/tactics, glossing over many of the elements of the big picture like economy, population, government, research, etc.
The Paradox games are the opposite, focussing on the grand strategy picture and abstracting the battle scene. In one of the games in the series, Victoria, you even get piecharts that divide your population in terms of their major issues as regards government, religion, etc. The detail is often incredible. Then again, the battles (except in the HOI series) I find to be somewhat lacking. You don't get the immersion factor of the TW battlescene, and they can be somewhat arbitrary. In HOI2 the battles were very good in my opinion. You obviously cannot expect anyone to recreate a battle of World War 2 on a computer, with maybe hundreds of thousands of soldiers and complicated pieces of machinery. Still, they were handled really well, especially if modded ala TRP.
As for anyone who said that diplomacy is worse than in TW, thats flat wrong. TW diplomacy is essentially non existent. In Paradox games you can set up all sorts of negotiations, exchanges of knowledge, materials, expeditionary forces, vassalisations, alliances, peace treaties. You win territory not simply by occupying it, After the adversary admits defeat you can arrange negotiations of their territories or any terms that you like. If the war was good enough for your side, you can even annex them, etc.
As for the event system, I can only say I liked it in HOI2-TRP. I am not a modder myself so obviously I cannot talk about that side, but I liked the effects, as did most of the people.
Still, expect several patches and updates. After that, you'll have a smooth ride. HOI never crashed on my computer (after patching).
I also play HoI 2, although I use the CORE mod, I can only really echo Metalstrm's comments about the game. Sorry to go off topic but Metalstrm, have you tried both? Do you know how the two compare? I've been looking at TRP recently but it seems quite difficult to find any information on what exactly it changes, if you could pm or pop a link up or something I'd appreciate it...
Back on topic, I'd treat EU:R as something that could potentially be good. As others have said Paradox have often released their games in a rather shoddy state, however they also tend to be very encouraging of fan modification. Give it a year or two and a couple of patches and you could have a nice Rome strat game on your hands IMHO, like HoI 2 is for WW2 now. Just don't preorder :)
Cheers
Starforge
03-31-2008, 14:22
is there someone who likes those games? id like to hear 2 bells... i know there is people who like them, so id like to know something from them, i never played them, but until now, i always heard they were great.
I'm sorry if you got the impression that I disliked the games. EU2 / CK / EU3 (modded with Magna Mundi) are all ok though EU3 has quite a few warts that still need to be tweaked on (if they can even be fixed) such as the AI's inability to effectively transport troops via boats. Because of flaws like this the arbitrary "warscore" that you need to run up in order to gain concessions in war is skewed by 20k of troops on an unknown island in the south pacific that France still thinks will someday come and retake Paris :stupido3: The game also runs essentially the same AI for each country making the larger ones blob and (unmodded) ruining the historic "feel" of the game past the names, map and starting point. If you like playing (and have the time) MP versus other players it's actually better geared for that (or so I've been told) but that doesn't really help those who have limited time or simply prefer a SP more roleplaying experience. Magna Mundi certainly helps there (/bow Ubik.)
My problem with Paradox lies more in the guarantee that the initial product is a given to not work without patches and updates. I'll still buy them but only once I'm sure they're working and properly modded. Add to that the unfortunate fact that lower selling games (such as CK) seemingly get dropped down on the priority list such that they are made "workable" but never really get finished.
Buyer beware.
Metalstrm
03-31-2008, 14:38
Played it few times as Poland. It was terrible.
On one hand I couldnt defeat German 2 line outgun and outnumber forces when they attacked France first instead of Poland, on the other hand I could carve great empire straight to Mediterranean sea if I didnt get attacked by Germany.
Both this scenarios are jus redicolous and imo are result of great imbalance.
Have you tried modding it with TRP? Well, it's ridiculous as far as history goes, but the same thing goes for playing as the Carhaginians and winning over Rome, or any other faction for that matter. And whats wrong with Germany outgunning Poland?
overweightninja, I haven't played with CORE though I've seen people talk about it almost as much as about TRP. Still, I suggest you try out TRP. This is their website: http://www.totalrealismproject.com/portal.php with all the downloads and forums etc. One thing I really liked over vanilla HOI2 was the battle simulation. Battles take much longer (may last a few days of gametime instead of simply a couple of hours) and are much more balanced. Then there's the thousands of modded events, graphics, etc...
As for anyone who said that diplomacy is worse than in TW, thats flat wrong. TW diplomacy is essentially non existent. In Paradox games you can set up all sorts of negotiations, exchanges of knowledge, materials, expeditionary forces, vassalisations, alliances, peace treaties. You win territory not simply by occupying it, After the adversary admits defeat you can arrange negotiations of their territories or any terms that you like. If the war was good enough for your side, you can even annex them, etc.
The problem with Pdox diplomacy is that although you can, in theory, do all that stuff--the AI is so bone-headed that even a completely occupied enemy will not accept them.
RTW is far better in this regard because you don't "occupy" enemy provinces, you conquer them and take them over. They immediately can benefit your war effort and when the war ends, you don't lose them. So not being able to bargain with a bone-headed AI isn't a problem.
It fits the time period far better.
EB: Rome will have Pox's system and when you conquer Gaul--you will not have conquered Gaul because it'll all revert back to Gallic control after you're forced to only accept Marseilles for your peace settlement. Crap.
edit- I find that the HoI games are too short a time period for Pdox's engine. As a small country, you cannot wait and see how things unfold as you build your forces up and then jump into conquest at the proper time because the end will have come by the time you're ready.
so, the battles are just "throw out your dices", or something like autoresolve?
Is there a way to manage the battle, even if they are not directly fought? i dont know, move cavalry etc.?
Who remember a great game for the Amiga 500, called "Centurion: Defender of Rome" (it is still playable via emulation), those battles where really nice, even if we had an 8Mhz computer.
so, the battles are just "throw out your dices", or something like autoresolve?
Is there a way to manage the battle, even if they are not directly fought? i dont know, move cavalry etc.?
Who remember a great game for the Amiga 500, called "Centurion: Defender of Rome" (it is still playable via emulation), those battles where really nice, even if we had an 8Mhz computer.
You move your units into a province with an enemy army in it and they immediately begin to fight. The game automatically resolves the battle, but it's not instantaneous. The two little avatars will act like they're fighting each other and eventually one side's morale will be exhausted and they'll withdraw to a friendly province.
Metalstrm
03-31-2008, 16:42
[QUOTE=Dhampir]The problem with Pdox diplomacy is that although you can, in theory, do all that stuff--the AI is so bone-headed that even a completely occupied enemy will not accept them.
[QUOTE]
Honestly, that never happened to me with HOI2 + TRP. They always accept my demands if reasonable. And playing as Germany is just beautiful, seeing the provinces gradually change color to your side. :D
I really suggest you trying out TRP. It is to HOI2 what EB is to RTW.
obelics Yes you manage the composition of your armies and you manage the directions of attack, support attack, etc. The generals have a huge effect on the battles, with military traits affecting the outcome. Terrain is also taken into consideration, along with weather, morale, unit strength, technology, and all other unit properties. Every kind of unit has several properties much like in RTW. For example you'd get soft attack (personnel targets), and hard attack (armored targets). Then there is supply efficiency, overstacking, and loads more. This is in HOI. In Europa Universalis the battles are quite boring in my opinion, less managey and all autoresolving kind of stuff.
Who remember a great game for the Amiga 500, called "Centurion: Defender of Rome" (it is still playable via emulation), those battles where really nice, even if we had an 8Mhz computer.
Ohh yes still have version of that somewhere on my pc, great game:laugh4:
You move your units into a province with an enemy army in it and they immediately begin to fight. The game automatically resolves the battle, but it's not instantaneous. The two little avatars will act like they're fighting each other and eventually one side's morale will be exhausted and they'll withdraw to a friendly province.
ah ok, i thought it was something like in that old game at last, it was simple, but nice battle, you could control.
https://img363.imageshack.us/img363/5047/centuriondorsq9.jpg (https://imageshack.us)
Ohh yes still have version of that somewhere on my pc, great game:laugh4:
another ex-Amighist here? wow that's make me feel good! Amigaforever!
obelics Yes you manage the composition of your armies and you manage the directions of attack, support attack, etc. The generals have a huge effect on the battles, with military traits affecting the outcome. Terrain is also taken into consideration, along with weather, morale, unit strength, technology, and all other unit properties. Every kind of unit has several properties much like in RTW. For example you'd get soft attack (personnel targets), and hard attack (armored targets). Then there is supply efficiency, overstacking, and loads more. This is in HOI. In Europa Universalis the battles are quite boring in my opinion, less managey and all autoresolving kind of stuff.
i missed your post, thanks for the nice infos metlstr
Metalstrm
03-31-2008, 16:55
another ex-Amighist here? wow that's make me feel good! Amigaforever!
i missed your post, thanks for the nice infos metlstr
Hey me too! :)
Though I preferred adventure or rpgs like B.A.T. II or Another World. They ruled man. Three quarters of the focus was on gameplay rather than the aesthetics like nowadays.
oh my... nostalgia... if i start to think on those days i could start crying... Space Rogue... Turrican, the myth of a man that was that Manfred Threnz... Cruise for a Corpse, Gods, Bitmap Brothers, Psignosys... and the good old School days, my first motorbike... ok stop before to get too much off topic...
ah, and i was forgetting... MONKEY ISLAND!!!!
Played it few times as Poland. It was terrible.
On one hand I couldnt defeat German 2 line outgun and outnumber forces when they attacked France first instead of Poland, on the other hand I could carve great empire straight to Mediterranean sea if I didnt get attacked by Germany.
Both this scenarios are jus redicolous and imo are result of great imbalance.
Ugh? The game as far as I'm aware (Played it for a year or so.) are supposed to be historical. As far as I'm aware, Germany had a very easy time taking Poland, due to many factors, most are inside HoI. They had a technologically superior army which accounts for a lot. They had several armored divisions which are vastly superior against Infantry Divisions Poland has (Softness Percentage comes into play), that coupled with an innexperienced player who doesn't know what exactly to do in the game to succeed (Yep, I was also disapointed the first times I played the game, I didn't know what to build, what to invest in, etc.) results in a quick victory of an AI Germany versus a player's Poland. I'd advise you to play as Germany to get a good feeling of how to play the game, since you score some easy victories first and the difficulty slowly improves. After you know how to take into account different factors such as weather, terrain, different divisions, air squadrons, etc. Then you see how awesome the game is. Just to see how realistic the game is, one member of the forum (Blue Emu) Once tried to emulate a proposed plan by Donitz (I think) to massively build submarines and use them in convoy raiding, strangulating economically the island, which only eventually lead to misery and famine. (Churchill had said that the success of such plan was his only fear). He tried to do such a thing in the game and succeeded as the submarines he built effectively destroyed the entire British Merchant Navy.
Just a glimpse of how real the game is.
Hey me too! :)
Though I preferred adventure or rpgs like B.A.T. II or Another World. They ruled man. Three quarters of the focus was on gameplay rather than the aesthetics like nowadays.
Another World was really the most epic of games I have ever played. I still remember clearly that music in the beginning when he was teleported to the other world. The Octopus in beginning and then the lion/tiger. That huge hole we had to open up so the caves would flood in the beginning. Oh the memories. :P
Metalstrm
03-31-2008, 17:19
^True :D Man that game was haunting. I played that as a small kid (7/8 or so) and remember that lion haunting me and my character running away... There were leeches if I remember correctly too.
Btw, he's right about Poland. Germany pretty much owned them within a couple/three weeks. Their resistance was negligible compared to Germany's blitzkrieg forces.
LorDBulA
03-31-2008, 17:50
And whats wrong with Germany outgunning Poland?
Ugh? The game as far as I'm aware (Played it for a year or so.) are supposed to be historical. As far as I'm aware, Germany had a very easy time taking Poland, due to many factors, most are inside HoI.
I am not talking about Germany attacking Poland.
In this game Germany attacked France first involving like 80% of German forces including all tanks.
I grab the chance and attack Germany with my whole army and still inspite of having more man and outgunning Germans my army couldnt make a dent in second grade German forces.
Sure German 1st line inf division was most likely slightly stronger then Polish first line division (when fighting infantry, they had much more antitank and anti aircraft weapons but it is not a factor here ) but not 3-4 times stronger.
The same aplies in different direction. Polish inf division was most likely a bit stronger then Romanian inf division but again not 2-3 times stronger.
So in vanilla HoI it wasnt possible to beat Germans from behind and it was possible to make Poland a Mediterranean country. I played few times and saw both scenarios.
I didnt play any mods.
Ugh? The game as far as I'm aware (Played it for a year or so.) are supposed to be historical. As far as I'm aware, Germany had a very easy time taking Poland, due to many factors, most are inside HoI. They had a technologically superior army which accounts for a lot. They had several armored divisions which are vastly superior against Infantry Divisions Poland has (Softness Percentage comes into play), that coupled with an innexperienced player who doesn't know what exactly to do in the game to succeed (Yep, I was also disapointed the first times I played the game, I didn't know what to build, what to invest in, etc.) results in a quick victory of an AI Germany versus a player's Poland. I'd advise you to play as Germany to get a good feeling of how to play the game, since you score some easy victories first and the difficulty slowly improves. After you know how to take into account different factors such as weather, terrain, different divisions, air squadrons, etc. Then you see how awesome the game is. Just to see how realistic the game is, one member of the forum (Blue Emu) Once tried to emulate a proposed plan by Donitz (I think) to massively build submarines and use them in convoy raiding, strangulating economically the island, which only eventually lead to misery and famine. (Churchill had said that the success of such plan was his only fear). He tried to do such a thing in the game and succeeded as the submarines he built effectively destroyed the entire British Merchant Navy.
Just a glimpse of how real the game is.
Have you HoI2 Armageddon w/patch? I just got it several weeks ago, and its AI is very good. Actually, its too good.
My Hearts of Iron II is still wrapped in plastic. I wonder when I'll get the time to tear it off.
Look at us Dutch.
We put up the bravest of resistance, and fought till the utter of our strength until we could no longer resist the vast hordes of Germans.
It took four days.
Metalstrm
03-31-2008, 22:10
Look at us Dutch.
We put up the bravest of resistance, and fought till the utter of our strength until we could no longer resist the vast hordes of Germans.
It took four days.
:egypt: I crushed you within three days back in '40! MWahahahhahahahaaaaa!!! :egypt:
:oops: Wait. In HOI2 I mean. :wall:
Look at us Dutch.
We put up the bravest of resistance, and fought till the utter of our strength until we could no longer resist the vast hordes of Germans.
It took four days.
I can beat that Denmark was defeated by germany in a matter of 2 hours
Starforge
03-31-2008, 23:27
The problem with Pdox diplomacy is that although you can, in theory, do all that stuff--the AI is so bone-headed that even a completely occupied enemy will not accept them.
RTW is far better in this regard because you don't "occupy" enemy provinces, you conquer them and take them over. They immediately can benefit your war effort and when the war ends, you don't lose them. So not being able to bargain with a bone-headed AI isn't a problem.
Some mods fix that in a couple different ways but vanilla - you're correct.
EB: Rome will have Pox's system and when you conquer Gaul--you will not have conquered Gaul because it'll all revert back to Gallic control after you're forced to only accept Marseilles for your peace settlement. Crap.
I fear you will be proven correct since it seems based on the EU3 engine.
so, the battles are just "throw out your dices", or something like autoresolve?
Is there a way to manage the battle, even if they are not directly fought? i dont know, move cavalry etc.?
Both sides roll a number from 0-9 modified by the stats on your general (0-4) and defending terrain (river, mountain, hills, whathaveyou.) If your tech level is vastly different, that can help but much of the time not so much.
You can't manage the battle BUT if you walk your 90k troops into a province with 10k troops and the AI is lucky enough to get a 9 while you draw a 0 you can manually back your troops out rather than take the losses / defeat. That's generally considered bad form - and the AI won't run given the same situation, but possible to micromanage none the less (if you so chose.)
Honestly, that never happened to me with HOI2 + TRP. They always accept my demands if reasonable. And playing as Germany is just beautiful, seeing the provinces gradually change color to your side. :D
I really suggest you trying out TRP. It is to HOI2 what EB is to RTW.
They changed their peace model for EU3 to a warscore calculation which on paper sounds like a good way of doing it and versus a contiguous, land locked nation works fairly well. It breaks down after the first 50-100 years or so when fighting the major powers because the AI is pretty damn foolish about where / how / when it will build land forces. You can't wage a war to take a carribean island from, say, France without not only taking the island but then marching on the mainland, destroying their armies, taking Paris, and hoping they don't have holdings elsewhere with 20k troops that the AI will be unable to move due to poor programming / pathing / use of transport but will still figure them as viable fighters.
In earlier games it was too easy to wring concessions from the AI, and their response was to make it a "Total War" style of bargaining so that to replicate the gains in the Spainish American war (in RL) America would have had to invade Spain, destroy their armies and take Madrid - just to get a few islands. This is one of the aspects that I feel personally needs to be worked on but /shrug. It's not so much the stubbornness but for those of us that like a more RP style of game rather than a powergamer style, it completely ruins immersion. You might as well be playing on a random world map with countries labeled A, B, C, etc. for the feel that you get.
It's also fair to point out that some of the mods address this by allowing provinces owned to go over to the owner if occupied for "x" years and that you can mod the game such that you own provinces as soon as you occupy them. The warscore / peace treaty aspect is hardcoded, however, so you unfortunately can't change the stubbornness of it - merely deal with the way occupied provinces are handled.
delablake
04-01-2008, 07:35
"Europa Universalis: Rome combines the best of the Empire Building, Conquest and Warfare genres, wrapped into a title that contains all main characteristics of a typical Paradox Interactive game", said Johan Andersson, Director of Development. "This project has the potential to become the most talked about grand strategy game to date."
hmm
put EB stead of EU and you got it.
I once had one of the europa universalis games: the greatest bummer since Scott's Antarctic Expedition in 1911.
Extremely unbalanced and chaotic game-play, completely inscrutable rules and balancing, mind-boggling micro-management etc. etc ...a deeply frustrating experience. I guess I can spend my 40 bucks (i.e. my 25 beloved Euro) on something more rewarding.
PS: They don't even offer a demo, and imo that's always a bad sign...
I stick with EB!
Hells of Iron Doomsday gave you the full game for 3 hours.
Have you HoI2 Armageddon w/patch? I just got it several weeks ago, and its AI is very good. Actually, its too good.
Nope. HoI Doomsday. Com China Campaign, 1947, now fighting Uber Nat. China (180 IC) alongside the Soviets. Loads of fun. Though it's rather stupid I can't deploy outside the initial Com China terrain plus the Northern China, despite having (had actually) most of Western China.
In EU: Rome, I think the game has the potential to be excellent. If I could play (My graphics card sucks), I'd play the Galatian Horde, and instead of settling in a puny area in middle of the Anatolian Peninsula, I'd sweep through Syria and settle in productive and rich Egypt! Hyksos reborned!
Unless your right on the Med. theres a good reason its called BF Egypt. Also the Hyksos may have been more Amorri than Hurri?
Warlord 11
04-02-2008, 10:01
PS: They don't even offer a demo, and imo that's always a bad sign...
Actually they do. See here (http://www.gamershell.com/download_17351.shtml)
I enjoy HoI 2 and EUIII, but Crusader Kings and Victoria are to complex and not fun for me. The other two take a few hours of frustration before you figure out what is going on, but after you get it, it is loads of fun, in my opinion.
Starforge
04-02-2008, 10:29
Actually they do. See here (http://www.gamershell.com/download_17351.shtml)
I enjoy HoI 2 and EUIII, but Crusader Kings and Victoria are to complex and not fun for me. The other two take a few hours of frustration before you figure out what is going on, but after you get it, it is loads of fun, in my opinion.
I believe he was referring to a EU:Rome demo (or lack thereof) rather than the EU3 one you linked though it's been bandied about that there will be one. It would be helpful if they actually updated their demo's to reflect the current level of gameplay since the EU3 demo is a year old and not reflective of either patches or expansions (though expansions from Paradox = paid for patches but that's a whole nuther story :yes: .)
Wow,
Seems I kinda distrupted a hornets nest with the original post. I have read everyone's posts on this new game coming out and I thought since I started this thread I would add my opinion.
I have pre-ordered the game because I play and continue to play hearts of iron 2 as I love the game. I have also played Victoria and EU2 and EU3.
I have to say that Paradox do normally release a game that has bugs but can anyone in this forum name a game that isn't released with bugs these days.
Has RTW not go more than one patch?
I love EB because it adds so much more depth to what RTW vanilla could have been but wasn't. If the paradox games of the past are anything to go by the diplomacy system will be excellent and the economics.
In closing Paradox games are more for people who appreciate the strategic thinking of a ruler rather than fighting glorious battle with nice graphics. I love RTW because it gives be these battles in this time period but what I hope Paradox delivers is a game where I can use economics and subterfuge to build my empire and crush my foes rather than just spamming stacks and building ports 4thewin easy cash.
Both are games are different for various reasons.
A fanboi's anticipation of EU: Rome.
For me,
its too bad RTW didn't go the realtime strategic route. I know why they didn't; thinking most don't like the stop and go of it. But, for me timing is everything and that covers both land and sea movement. To each their own, but thats how I see it for me alone.
Metalstrm
04-02-2008, 13:42
What I wonder is whether its possible to create a sort of Paradox/TW fusion. I think that would be the ideal. Obviously, you'd also need an engine that supports 10, 20k soldiers on each side, but I don't think its thaaaat far off.. I mean, just one order of magnitude, we're not talking about a factor of 1000.
It would be the perfect game to waste hundreds if not thousands of hours on.
Actually they do. See here (http://www.gamershell.com/download_17351.shtml)
I enjoy HoI 2 and EUIII, but Crusader Kings and Victoria are to complex and not fun for me. The other two take a few hours of frustration before you figure out what is going on, but after you get it, it is loads of fun, in my opinion.
Yeap, Victoria was also total bogus for me. (I have to disagree in the CK one. It just takes a bit of time to settle to the game. And believe me, some of the best (And realistic) things I ever saw in any game happened in CK.) But, I found what is called "The pillar of learning how to play Victoria AAR" Afterwards, I had much, much fun playing it. I'll link it here. Should you read it, it will answer most questions on how to play the game (Build the economy, etc.) all pretty simple.
For those of you who never heard of the game, I'd also recomend looking to the AAR. It is very detailed and insightful, easy to read IMO. A good introduction to the game. :)
Power By Production v 2.0 - A VIP:R 0.1 Prussia AAR (http://forum.paradoxplaza.com/forum/showthread.php?t=305484) by OHgamer.
Starforge
04-02-2008, 14:38
A fanboi's anticipation of EU: Rome.
And herein lies the problem. As long as there are folks out there who will forgive them their shoddy programming and attempt to distort the facts by saying everyone is equally as bad (not true btw) Johan and co. get a pass for their shoddy work. I suppose you'll be following little Johnny off the cliff as well eh?
Crusader Kings was never 100% and the Deus Vult "expansion" which was released 6 months ago has poor error reporting, poor support, and as stated in an earlier thread they allow user generated workarounds for their own buggy software as valid stickied fixes (links to a non-paradox site for the download) rather than bring it in-house, evaluate it, and post it yourselves. I defy you to find me another "mainstream" game company that would handle it in such a shoddy fashion. Add to it the fact that the error reporting in the program is so bad that they can't even track CTD's or have even included such basic things as error reporting when a program does crap out and tell customers that it's their machine when they can't duplicate a problem - problems generated in a non-fixed environment wherein, of course, variables will change and random numbers regenerated for each load. The EB folks here do a better job of error tracking and fixing in a program that they don't even have the source code to, so please, give me a break.
It's a good thing that it's merely entertainment they're marketing rather than something that might actually require quality. I guess the laws are pretty loose in Sweden regarding having to actually deliver working products. Then again - they'll have their share of fanboys who, sadly, don't expect any better.
For those of you who do preorder EU:Rome - may a miracle occur and the game work for you bug free, but if not, well, don't expect a lot of shock here. As I've said before - you would be much better served to wait and make sure the game functions before taking the leap. That's true of any game and company (not just Paradox) but the track record they've put forward over the years makes me believe it's especially true of them.
Starforge
04-02-2008, 14:47
For me,
its too bad RTW didn't go the realtime strategic route. I know why they didn't; thinking most don't like the stop and go of it. But, for me timing is everything and that covers both land and sea movement. To each their own, but thats how I see it for me alone.
Actually in their old RTW faq page regarding the release of BI and referring to how they had changed it (less provinces hoping for faster gameplay) I remember reading a quote from a CA employee stating that (from memory since it's not up anymore) "the campaign map existed solely to generate battles. That it turned out to be a good game in its own right was a bonus." That floored me since the campaign map and resulting empire expansion was much more of a draw for me (and I have to assume many folks) than merely conducting one land battle after another. Here's hoping Empire will bring a shift in attitude about that but I'm not holding my breath. If the focus remains on the visuals, quickness of gameplay for the presumed ADHD gamers, and lack of any real work on an AI then it'll probably only be a good game until the modders can work on it.
On the bright side - at least even my original vanilla version of RTW didn't crash out to desktop every hour or so unlike some other companies products mentioned here. Yep - they went through patches up to 1.6 but not for the glaring program flaws that *cough* other companies products exhibit.
I have to say that Paradox do normally release a game that has bugs but can anyone in this forum name a game that isn't released with bugs these days.
Well... Both companies can hardly be comparable, but I'd say Half Life 2: Episode Two runs in my computer, which I hardly believed (EU 3 doesn't :o) furthermore runs excellently, and as far as 1.0 goes, I finished it four times (2 Easy, 1 Normal then 1 Hard) and I don't recall any bugs whatsoever. I already e-mailed Valve my deepest congratulations for making that game playable as well as visually attractive (PES 2008 also runs in my computer but the graphics suck absolutely), and encouraged them to keep their minimum requirements as low as possible. I suppose it's these mails (As well as the money, of course :P) that encourage the Valve team to make such an awesome job.
Metalstrm
04-02-2008, 15:35
Well... Both companies can hardly be comparable, but I'd say Half Life 2: Episode Two runs in my computer, which I hardly believed (EU 3 doesn't :o) furthermore runs excellently, and as far as 1.0 goes, I finished it four times (2 Easy, 1 Normal then 1 Hard) and I don't recall any bugs whatsoever. I already e-mailed Valve my deepest congratulations for making that game playable as well as visually attractive (PES 2008 also runs in my computer but the graphics suck absolutely), and encouraged them to keep their minimum requirements as low as possible. I suppose it's these mails (As well as the money, of course :P) that encourage the Valve team to make such an awesome job.
I completely agree. I think Valve release some of the most efficient (besides visually beautiful) software of all game publishers. Their requirements are amazingly low compared to other games. They must have a crack team of programmers...
On the other hand, I don't really find CTDs (I still am not sure what it means... Is it Crash to Desktop?) all that game-breaking. I'd rather have gameplay and realism over perfect debugging when playing a supposedly historical game like HOI or RTW. Anyway, I'm not the kind that buys software as soon as it's out. And believe me, Paradox games with patches work just fine... haven't had a crash in ages. That doesn't mean that I condone releasing games in beta stages, but at least Paradox have the creativity and the talent to define the grand strategy genre. Well, as did Creative Assembly with the TW series.
Starforge
04-02-2008, 15:48
I completely agree. I think Valve release some of the most efficient (besides visually beautiful) software of all game publishers. Their requirements are amazingly low compared to other games. They must have a crack team of programmers...
On the other hand, I don't really find CTDs (I still am not sure what it means... Is it Crash to Desktop?) all that game-breaking. I'd rather have gameplay and realism over perfect debugging when playing a supposedly historical game like HOI or RTW. Anyway, I'm not the kind that buys software as soon as it's out. And believe me, Paradox games with patches work just fine... haven't had a crash in ages. That doesn't mean that I condone releasing games in beta stages, but at least Paradox have the creativity and the talent to define the grand strategy genre. Well, as did Creative Assembly with the TW series.
CTD = Crash to Desktop.
I agree regarding Paradox and their creativity (truly) it's just sad that the management skills are lacking there such that inadequate testing and poor coding make what would have been a great experience a frustrating one. :wall:
Chris1959
04-02-2008, 19:46
I like Paradox games and think they have a lot to offer, but will agree that they are half finished when they ship.
I liked RTW but when I discoverd EB it moved it into a different level. In fact in the last two years it's all I've played apart from some Fallout. It stopped me buying EUIII, so when I do it will be cheap and fully patched.
I'd advise getting older games that have full patches EUII, Victoria and Crusader Kings are my favourites.
But be warned they are as differnt from EB as Italian is from Thai food, some like both some like one and some don't liike either.
But in EUII what other game allows you to start as Medieval Burma and potentially conquer the world!
The EB folks here do a better job of error tracking and fixing in a program that they don't even have the source code to, so please, give me a break.
To be fair, there are quite a number of problems that we simply have to say "Dunno" to. But having the source code would definitely help.
"Cannot reproduce" is an entirely valid conclusion to a case. In my paid projects we have had to do that quite a few times. How are you supposed to fix something that seems to work by every test you do?
Starforge
04-03-2008, 07:20
"Cannot reproduce" is an entirely valid conclusion to a case. In my paid projects we have had to do that quite a few times. How are you supposed to fix something that seems to work by every test you do?
Perhaps that's true but the amount of verifiable bugs at release doensn't really leave the company with alot of credibility. Even so, I doubt that you would push the problem out to the customers either by making them have to track it down or accuse them of having bad hardware to avoid the issue. In this case - there's at least one verified part of the program not working properly. It seems it would take alot of hubris to point the finger elsewhere.
It's a complex piece of software and likely tough to debug but that burden still lies at their feet.
Actually I push the burden of finding the solution to people here all the time. I mostly come up with suggestions based on what has worked for others and experience with what can go wrong in computers. In my paid projects, less so. I then spend much time searching out what went wrong, and only push the burden of retesting to the customer. I of course unit test my piece first, but they need to test the functional effects.
The only thing I can guarantee about EB is that there are always going to be verifiable bugs, in every release.
Starforge
04-03-2008, 08:40
Actually I push the burden of finding the solution to people here all the time. I mostly come up with suggestions based on what has worked for others and experience with what can go wrong in computers. In my paid projects, less so. I then spend much time searching out what went wrong, and only push the burden of retesting to the customer. I of course unit test my piece first, but they need to test the functional effects.
The only thing I can guarantee about EB is that there are always going to be verifiable bugs, in every release.
Hmm...well maybe I didn't come across right - it was a compliment to you folks here and nothing less. Helping track down bugs here, where I paid nothing for a wonderful mod is entirely different. I believe both of our expectations would be different if you were providing a paid-for program.
It sounds like you're pretty much on your own with your paid projects. That model is very different from a company with a team of programmers making a commercial product. Perhaps I'm just being a bit too optimistic there :).
We have two customers on my current project, and each has two-digit numbers of people working to test the product. It is a domain where they have to do the testing, as the programmers don't necessarily know how the end users expect the product to work, beyond the specifications which are more or less accurate.
Ibn-Khaldun
04-03-2008, 09:14
so, the battles are just "throw out your dices", or something like autoresolve?
Is there a way to manage the battle, even if they are not directly fought? i dont know, move cavalry etc.?
Who remember a great game for the Amiga 500, called "Centurion: Defender of Rome" (it is still playable via emulation), those battles where really nice, even if we had an 8Mhz computer.
Thank you remembering that great game :2thumbsup:
I had looking for it for some time but didn't know it's real name so never found it :no:
Downloaded it yesterday and still love the game just as I did when I was a little kid :2thumbsup:
So .. "GO Centurion .. GO!!":2thumbsup:
btw .. have a balloon for this :balloon2: :2thumbsup:
Starforge
04-03-2008, 09:31
We have two customers on my current project, and each has two-digit numbers of people working to test the product. It is a domain where they have to do the testing, as the programmers don't necessarily know how the end users expect the product to work, beyond the specifications which are more or less accurate.
I have to assume you told them up front that this would be what the expectation would be? I also have to assume that when you buy, say, Visual Studio 2008 that you expect you'll be using the software not field testing it :) Really 2 different situations though I see the point you're making.
I played Centurion somewhat recently, but can't remember if I used an emulator or a PC version. I did have an Amiga back in the day.
I have to assume you told them up front that this would be what the expectation would be? I also have to assume that when you buy, say, Visual Studio 2008 that you expect you'll be using the software not field testing it :) Really 2 different situations though I see the point you're making.
It is not my role to tell them what the expectations, we have project managers who do that for us (and my role to prove them right in the end...). But indeed we have a closer relationship with our customers than for instance Microsoft has with Office or Visual Studio.
I bought UltraEdit, and have been reporting bugs in that, and I still think it's awesome and it has saved me tons of work if I had to use inferior software. It's the way of software development, I make mistakes, they make mistakes. Then we fix the mistakes we can, and the ones we can't, well, we can't. People are free to vote whether the effort is good enough with their wallets.
I for one am very glad that Paradox stays on the scene creating something that has become a rare breed in the last decade, complex games that unavoidably contain a lot of bugs.
Starforge
04-03-2008, 11:00
I for one am very glad that Paradox stays on the scene creating something that has become a rare breed in the last decade, complex games that unavoidably contain a lot of bugs.
I disagree with the unavoidably but now I see. Because they fullfill a niche for some customers there is a feeling that they deserve to be held to a lower standard.
Given that fact my earlier recommendations were spot on - they're good games, just wait the 6-12 months for them to become somewhat stable. I fail to see the problem with that or the lack of truth there.
Imagine how good their games would be if they made quality as high a priority as complexity.
You can say that it's a lower standard, of course, although I can't say I've found very many games that are error free the last decade or so. I also enjoyed EU3 in their initial version for a bit until 1.1 came out, and I haven't been playing it since, but I'm sure it's patched up more. Your suggestion to wait 6-12 months is of course sound, and I follow it myself, but if everyone did that there would be nothing more to wait for.
And that's where economics come into play. The initial sales normally determine the level of post-release support. How much time should you spend polishing and finding all the bugs before release? Someone else could release something similar while you are whacking the rest of the bugs, and you'd be left with no income to match the costs. Or people could decide they don't like your particular game, for any zillion reasons. That's a big risk. I admire Blizzard for their nearly exclusive level of polish, but have full understanding for those who rather go for the one bird in the hand.
Then again, I'm not arguing against your point that games are buggy upon release. I entered the discussion to provide another perspective to your odd perception of the reality of those who are doing the support you expect, and currently your unrealistic view of the games industry. I'm done with that, and probably won't contribute more in this thread. Our discussion was off-topic anyway.
Dubius Cato
04-03-2008, 12:47
It looks like the people over at the paradox forums are expecting the Rome demo to be released within the day...
Starforge
04-03-2008, 14:05
You can say that it's a lower standard, of course, although I can't say I've found very many games that are error free the last decade or so. I also enjoyed EU3 in their initial version for a bit until 1.1 came out, and I haven't been playing it since, but I'm sure it's patched up more. Your suggestion to wait 6-12 months is of course sound, and I follow it myself, but if everyone did that there would be nothing more to wait for.
And that's where economics come into play. The initial sales normally determine the level of post-release support. How much time should you spend polishing and finding all the bugs before release? Someone else could release something similar while you are whacking the rest of the bugs, and you'd be left with no income to match the costs. Or people could decide they don't like your particular game, for any zillion reasons. That's a big risk. I admire Blizzard for their nearly exclusive level of polish, but have full understanding for those who rather go for the one bird in the hand.
Then again, I'm not arguing against your point that games are buggy upon release. I entered the discussion to provide another perspective to your odd perception of the reality of those who are doing the support you expect, and currently your unrealistic view of the games industry. I'm done with that, and probably won't contribute more in this thread. Our discussion was off-topic anyway.
I respect your opinion even though I don't share it. I think I've made my points amply here and won't contribute farther myself.
Weird, I didn't even notice this thread. I've played HoI2 (and Doomsday), I liked it. Loads of good mods to choose from, but alternate history mods are it's thing: Kaiserreich, All the Russias, Anatolian Wars, Fatherland... I am actually a retired Kaiserreich modder. Now I just advise the Über Balkan Project, involving historical and ahistorical situations centered on the Balkan and the lower Danube. But I can't say I was too thrilled with Victoria or other releases by paradox, maybe EU2 is good, but I haven't played it. I don't think the Classical period will fit well with Paradox type games. I'm skeptical at this EU:R.
blacksnail
04-03-2008, 15:42
I respect your opinion even though I don't share it. I think I've made my points amply here and won't contribute farther myself.
Most desktop game programming involves making the stupid things work on a variety of systems with a variety of different exceptions involved. It's less of a big deal than the dark old days of game design, but it's a concern. Making it work consistently is still one of the biggest issues; making the gameplay work exactly as expected is less of a concern. Knowingly releasing a product with a ton of bugs is one thing; missing something in Q/A is another, because there's only so much you can test before you get into the diminishing returns aspect. If it's the latter, I am much more willing to forgive the minor issues as long as a) the patching is timely and b) it's not a showstopper.
That said, I have close to zero tolerance for any developer that releases a buggy console game. There is no excuse beyond bad management for that.
blacksnail
04-03-2008, 15:44
And for my on-topic followup, this is a hilarious take on EU: Rome (http://www.quartertothree.com/inhouse/news/411/).
Well, the demo's out, and from the looks of it (From what I read) it's very good.
Metalstrm
04-04-2008, 16:54
I've downloaded it. And I must say I'm very disappointed :(. There are only some 6 unit types (ok there's modifiers but still...) The worst is the battle system. Like I'm posting in the EU:Rome forum, the whole thing needs rethinking, and I'm not sure if it's even moddable.
There are practically no decisive battles where you get 50% dead or more. The enemy armies simply pingpong through all the provinces getting their asses kicked here and there. That's so unrealistic. Someone even had a battle were 9 soldiers on his side died and 0 on the enemy side. I think there needs to be decisive battles to make it realistic for the Roman period.
Anyone else downloaded it?
Someone even had a battle were 9 soldiers on his side died and 0 on the enemy side.
*Battle Initiates! 9000 Romans (AI) vs 24000 Punics (Player)!*
"Player: Yay! Go me! :2thumbsup: "
*Velites launch their first volley from very very far away killing a dozen of Mercenary Balearic Slingers!*
"Player: Oh well, it's just nine mercenaries! :sweatdrop: "
*The entire Punic army routs!*
"Player: ...Ugh... :inquisitive: "
CLEAR DEFEAT "Player: :furious3: "
Hehe. I must say from what I played in EU2 and what I heard from EU3, that doesn't surprise me a lot. :laugh4:
Metalstrm
04-04-2008, 17:51
It completely broke the game for me :/. If I play Pdox again I'll play HOI2 and nothing more. I really dislike the EU kind of combat.
Elmetiacos
04-04-2008, 23:58
EU Rome is not at all like RTW nor is it meant to be. It's grand strategy, more like Civ. The TW games are basically tactical wargames with a simple campaign system bolted on to give you a context for your battles, whereas Paradox does games with only the campaign and battles abstracted so you can get on with the scheming.
Metalstrm
04-05-2008, 01:00
I know Elmetiacos, but HOI has something that the demo of Rome so far does not. And the lack of any decisive battle is simply wrong...
Maximus Aurelius
04-05-2008, 10:59
I don't like the sloppy combat. This is how it usually goes for me. If i win a "victory" I lose 90 soldiers and they lose 100. And then just as i start to siege the town:smash: they retreat to my province and start besieging it!!!:wall: :wall:
I know that i should leave a small army behind, but armies are expensive.:dizzy2:
vBulletin® v3.7.1, Copyright ©2000-2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.