The 'Sidian Tyranny thread

[Rosbjerg]

I find it mildly annoying too, but they've been upfront about their motives several times - that they release non-critical cosmetic dlc, so they can keep a cashflow going, that allows them to make and keep fine-tuning their products. Which I can respect.

[Heijoushin]

That's it? A portrait pack? Don't get me long, I LOVE portraits, but considering we're talking about Tyranny, a game synonymous with "unfinished", I can't help but feel those efforts could have been better directed elsewhere...

[Chairchucker]

It's 'palate', you Paradoxical buffoons!

[Darkpriest]

I guess standard Paradox, also had to endure some plants DLC for Stellaris before real meat got out

[the_dog_days]

Inspired by the portrait pack DLC, I've decide to do a Tyranny let's play as Rita Repulsa (I was a 80s-90s kid).

[Heijoushin]

Inspired by the portrait pack DLC, I've decide to do a Tyranny let's play as Rita Repulsa (I was a 80s-90s kid).

 

Magic Wand, make my Barik GROWWWW!!!

Edited April 3, 2017 by Heijoushin

[the_dog_days]

Offensive magic and hand-to-hand.

[melkathi]

So I take it this Horde - Disfavored choice is permanent regardless of how much favor you have with the faction you do not choose?

[Infinitron]

FYI, Tyranny is 33% off on ParadoxPlaza now and the coupon from the PoE2 campaign stacks with that: https://www.paradoxplaza.com/tyranny

 

Which means you can get it for as low as $15.

Edited April 4, 2017 by Infinitron

[Leferd]

[the_dog_days]

^ 5:56, the moment to realizes that you aren't voicing a BioWare title.

[melkathi]

God this game has abysmal pathfinding.

[Fenixp]

Which is quite an achievement, considering the maps are like 3 by 3 meters large.

[melkathi]

They should get an award for it.

[melkathi]

This whole "Wimin are strong. Power to the matriarchy. Ain't we cool for making strong wimin in our game" is getting old.

Actually the next time I hear "Am not beastman! Am beastwoman! Rut-mate-kill-lol!" I might just end up uninstalling out of overexposure to badly written pseudo-feminism.

[algroth]

This whole "Wimin are strong. Power to the matriarchy. Ain't we cool for making strong wimin in our game" is getting old.

Actually the next time I hear "Am not beastman! Am beastwoman! Rut-mate-kill-lol!" I might just end up uninstalling out of overexposure to badly written pseudo-feminism.

I would agree on other titles but I do think that the way they justify this in Tyranny is pretty solidly done (i.e. men rule the seas, women the lands, due to one's interest for conquest, exploration and expansion and the other's maternal instincts anchoring them to the "nest" so to speak). I think the line of thought here is more practical than simply "wimin are strong", and probably explains why, despite what seems like a matriarchal society, the military/conquest branches are run by men (Nerat, Ashe, Tunon).

[Sannom]

Nerat, Ashe and Tunon aren't from the matriarchal society (the Tiers), so I don't think they're a good example. The Vendrien Guard is lead by multiple women, the town of Lethian's Crossing is owned by a lady because she is the only known female descendant of the settlement's founder, the Bronze Brotherhood specifically eschew the traditional separation of roles and Stalwart seems to have been a bit of an oddity as far as leadership went.

 

I've read The Tawny Man trilogy (the third in the Realm of the Elderlings series by Robin Hobb) after playing Tyranny and the basis of the separation of roles between men and women in the later reminded me of the former's Out Islands' culture, although that one felt like it was more fleshed out. The way men were considered as much as lovers than breeding material also reminded me of the Lescanzi in Dungeon Siege 3.

Edited April 11, 2017 by Sannom

[melkathi]

I felt so at first. but they are pushing it too often. They don't just let the world be what it is, they have your character - born and raised in this world - constantly reminded as if they were an astronaut in a 50s pulp magazine, landed on venus and confronted by amazons in the jungle.

 

My hunter character who was raised by beastwomen would not need to be lectured on male inferiority in that society. No character would need to be surprised when they figure out that an npc inherited a lot of land because she was female - it would be more of a "doh! How did we miss that?" moment for them, especially an adjudicator or sage. The game world was believably created, but the player is treated as if every encounter with the gender roles in the game were their first.

[algroth]

Nerat, Ashe and Tunon aren't from the matriarchal society (the Tiers), so I don't think they're a good example. The Vendrien Guard is lead by multiple women, the town of Lethian's Crossing is owned by a lady because she is the only known female descendant of the settlement's founder, the Bronze Brotherhood specifically eschew the traditional separation of roles and Stalwart seems to have been a bit of an oddity as far as leadership went.

 

True, I perhaps misunderstood and assumed this applied to all of the Known World and not just the Tiers. Though, echoing my initial thoughts and the game's argument, if this is a more universal split then it also makes sense that a woman should lead the defense and a man should lead the conquest. All the same the above seems to apply more to titles of property than specifically of power, as several of the leaders outside the Vendrien Guard are also male (e.g. Stalwart, the Unbroken, the Bronze Brotherhood, Halfgate... Lethian's Crossing is an intriguing example because the "mayor" or elder of the town is male but the one to own the lands is female, for example). Generally, though, I think the "gender politics" are pretty well-justified and sensible in this case, so as to not present an issue of pandering to feminism and whatnot.

[algroth]

I felt so at first. but they are pushing it too often. They don't just let the world be what it is, they have your character - born and raised in this world - constantly reminded as if they were an astronaut in a 50s pulp magazine, landed on venus and confronted by amazons in the jungle.

 

My hunter character who was raised by beastwomen would not need to be lectured on male inferiority in that society. No character would need to be surprised when they figure out that an npc inherited a lot of land because she was female - it would be more of a "doh! How did we miss that?" moment for them, especially an adjudicator or sage. The game world was believably created, but the player is treated as if every encounter with the gender roles in the game were their first.

 

Well, the only time I remember it coming up in my playthroughs was when talking with Eb, if I recall correctly. I can recall it coming to effect on a subquest involving a woman that owned Lethian's Crossing's lands, but I don't remember this being explained with much detail there, more like "she's the only daughter remaining of this bloodline, hence she inherited all this land that I want for me".

 

Regardless the problem in both cases, I think, has a bit to do with one of my personal overarching criticisms with the game, which is that it paints the world and experience in pretty broad strokes and seems pretty lacking on plenty of the finer details regarding interactions, lore, certain options and resolutions and the likes. To me the case you mention above is something akin to the lack of recognition a priest of Eothas got for worshipping Eothas in Pillars: it's just the exception to the rule that would have required its own dialogue trees to account for your character's background and wasn't given them. With this in mind and considering the fact that depending on which faction/storyline you follow, any of the four regions may appear as first for you, I reckon the chance of each of these encounters being the first time the player could come across this bit of world lore is what made the devs be more expositional in each case, more so than wanting to lecture the player on feminism.

 

I mean, to this regard of repetition I felt it a lot more tedious to hear the Disfavoured and Chorus members repeating ad nauseam their thoughts on each other, or the Tiers for that matter.

Edited April 11, 2017 by algroth

[Chairchucker]

I felt so at first. but they are pushing it too often. They don't just let the world be what it is, they have your character - born and raised in this world - constantly reminded as if they were an astronaut in a 50s pulp magazine, landed on venus and confronted by amazons in the jungle.

 

My hunter character who was raised by beastwomen would not need to be lectured on male inferiority in that society. No character would need to be surprised when they figure out that an npc inherited a lot of land because she was female - it would be more of a "doh! How did we miss that?" moment for them, especially an adjudicator or sage. The game world was believably created, but the player is treated as if every encounter with the gender roles in the game were their first.

That wasn't really unique to gender roles though, was it? It wasn't like every other peculiarity of the world you're in, they acknowledge your character's knowledge.

[melkathi]

I am starting to get the feeling that Kyros' whole scheme is to make a second overlord to have overlord babies with

[Sannom]

I personally think that she wanted someone comparable to her in power so that she could become a protector to her people rather than just a conqueror, so as to benefit from the "Loyalty" part of the fame system and not just the "Fear" part.

Edited April 12, 2017 by Sannom

[Wrath of Dagon]

You guys should really use spoiler tags.

[melkathi]

Sorry. I forgot. The forum has at times been very hostile to spoiler tags, so I got out of the habit.