Who uses BGR and who doesn't?

[Asterix]

K, so i wanted to see how many of us actually use Byg's Grim Reality with 6.3. Vote and tell us why you do or don't use BGR.

[AstroCat]

I don't currently because I'm pretty new to SS but I can for sure see myself using it in the future. I am definitely more of simulation/historical style player. As well I think I am going to check out the DLV mod. Not sure which one I'll end up liking more in the end, SS or DLV.

[RollingWave]

i've never quite grapsed how it worked after a few try... and most of the time i play very difficult factions that additional penalties simply kills me.

[Radzeer]

Not yet.
Probably will.

[Meneth]

I've tried BGR.
It didn't appeal to me.

[Caesar Clivus]

I would if I had time to play the game rather than mod the game.

[king spartacus]

I dont use BGR because it seemed rather difficult.

[Radiso-FIN]

I tried using it. It has many features I liked a lot, but it slowed turn time too much for me

[Ichon]

I use BGR every game in 6.3 since there is not an updated RR/RC for 6.3 yet. I find it is boring otherwise after adjusting to BGR. I am not enthusiastic about every single aspect of BGR but overall it is satisfying and adds alot to a rather basic game and helps the AI indirectly but imposing some realistic limitations on human players. If anyone enjoys roleplaying or medieval politics and history BGR adds alot. If you play just to fight battles then you might not enjoy it.

The part of BGR which adds the most time is the Longer Assimilation... play without it and turn times are only tiny bit longer than vanilla 6.3 but still adds alot.

Usually the part of BGR most people have trouble with is finances of the nobles and the Limited Activities where depending on morale of the Kingdom and specific rank of the general in that Kingdom/Faction certain activities are regulated. Also a general must be in residence to make new construction orders or recruit... which is quite easy to adjust to actually.

Finances I had alot of issues with myself when first playing BGR because if you don't read BGR instructions carefully you can miss a couple things which greatly affect the state of your treasury and FM's loyalty. However realistically BGR could go much further and make finances even more strained. Reading history of medieval period and you can see how much Kings were concerned about finances and taking certain actions or not taking them totally based on finances. I'd favor that except there is no way in MTW2 to take out loans or sell Royal titles/property which is how many Kings managed to survive.

I will always play with either RR/RC or BGR... both make decisions more important and add some longer term strategy to being successful.

[Epzilon]

I tried it once, but was overwhelmed of the complexity. I read up some guides regarding BGR and found it even more overwhelming!! It would be nice if someone bothered to make a video with commentary and put it out on youtube how to play it with BGR.

[DeMolay]

I use BGR every game in 6.3 since there is not an updated RR/RC for 6.3 yet. I find it is boring otherwise after adjusting to BGR. I am not enthusiastic about every single aspect of BGR but overall it is satisfying and adds alot to a rather basic game and helps the AI indirectly but imposing some realistic limitations on human players. If anyone enjoys roleplaying or medieval politics and history BGR adds alot. If you play just to fight battles then you might not enjoy it.

The part of BGR which adds the most time is the Longer Assimilation... play without it and turn times are only tiny bit longer than vanilla 6.3 but still adds alot.

Usually the part of BGR most people have trouble with is finances of the nobles and the Limited Activities where depending on morale of the Kingdom and specific rank of the general in that Kingdom/Faction certain activities are regulated. Also a general must be in residence to make new construction orders or recruit... which is quite easy to adjust to actually.

Finances I had alot of issues with myself when first playing BGR because if you don't read BGR instructions carefully you can miss a couple things which greatly affect the state of your treasury and FM's loyalty. However realistically BGR could go much further and make finances even more strained. Reading history of medieval period and you can see how much Kings were concerned about finances and taking certain actions or not taking them totally based on finances. I'd favor that except there is no way in MTW2 to take out loans or sell Royal titles/property which is how many Kings managed to survive.

I will always play with either RR/RC or BGR... both make decisions more important and add some longer term strategy to being successful.

I fully agree with you , saves me a long post

the only thing that annoys me (and sorry if it's not part of BGR ) is the fact that you have to stay several years in a castle to refill the "resupply train" and army supplies . In real life , resupplying an army took a few weeks or months at best , not 4 years , but ok , i'm not even sure it's a BRG feature

[Gogolometro]

I am satisfied with RR-RC. I love HV/VH and ussual I took the campaigns a bit different migrating. So maybe at one point I will became bored and took the BGR like option.

[Polycarpe]

I'm happy that Meneth brings back Byg II, with VH/VH, really interesting.

[Gpower]

I do. I don't want to play on hard or more - give the AI 3x more armies and gets into a boring stalemate situation, or a situation where I can win but it'll take too long fighting all the battles. So I use BGR and play on M/M. still a challenging games but less armies spammed on both sides.

[Arowaner]

I do. I don't want to play on hard or more - give the AI 3x more armies and gets into a boring stalemate situation, or a situation where I can win but it'll take too long fighting all the battles. So I use BGR and play on M/M. still a challenging games but less armies spammed on both sides.

Exactly what I am thinking. I do the same thing. I get less battles but each battle really has an impact. I love BGR IV enhanced. It adds so much to the game. I am worried that it will be boring for me should I ever choose to play normal SS 6.3 let alone kindoms vanilla again.

I love the struggle holding the ground with militia until my knights come to the rescue. No heavy cav spamming. Or not being able to attack because you have to wait for your heir or king to arrive at the scene to take the lead.

Great stuff

[rtcreator]

It would be nice to know how long people have been using BGR when commenting, so maybe a poll can go up for that soon?

I play without it right now and have comepleted a few games, but I must admit that I am sometimes looking for something more as in maybe BGR.

TY

Exactly what I am thinking. I do the same thing. I get less battles but each battle really has an impact. I love BGR IV enhanced. It adds so much to the game. I am worried that it will be boring for me should I ever choose to play normal SS 6.3 let alone kindoms vanilla again.

I love the struggle holding the ground with militia until my knights come to the rescue. No heavy cav spamming. Or not being able to attack because you have to wait for your heir or king to arrive at the scene to take the lead.

Great stuff

[HammeroftheGreeks]

Like someone has already said, playing VH/VH with BGR on makes it very, very hard.

Thats what makes it a "must" for all my games

[cezarip]

I'm fine without! I play the game for fun and BGR seems too much like work. Too much realism kills the game for me...

[convert]

I like realism but when I last tried BGR it made the game too hard and a bit tedious when you expanded your empire.

[Spoon]

I don't use it becouse it takes ages for loading a turn.