Demon1 said:
Agree with you except on point number 3. Capitalist economic theory came into play with The Wealth of Nations in late 18th century and communist ideas in mid-19th century. These are issues for Ricky
Europa Universalis IV
- Thread starter Madmonkey24
- Start date
-
We have updated our Community Code of Conduct. Please read through the new rules for the forum that are an integral part of Paradox Interactive’s User Agreement.
Agree with you except on point number 3. Capitalist economic theory came into play with The Wealth of Nations in late 18th century and communist ideas in mid-19th century. These are issues for Ricky
Trade, it was the worst part about EU2 and it was such a shame that the same system was used in EU3. Do a complete overhaul, building a strong economy should be a major part of the game, being innovative, having competition and a more market oriented economy should pay of in the long run, just like it did for e.g. the UK and the Netherlands, in complete contrast to for example France, Poland and Spain which eventually begun stagnating. The ability to restrict trade, attempts to control routes and such should be modelled. Sending government merchants to a fixed location is not really good tbh. A player should be able to control if he or she chooses to, and also to let it all loose, in an appropriate way given the timeframe, like VRicky.
I agree with curufin regarding the "tax system", if I change my capital to a new location and start building royal palaces, setting up well functioning systems et such, whilst enjoying peace and harmony it should result in a growth of wealth.
And I personally want to see POPS in a EU3 game, or something similar to represent ethnic diversity in provinces.
Graphically, I want the feeling of actually being in a particular region in a particular time frame by playing the game. Different cathedrals, different churches, different house types and so on, mountains, snow, vast rivers large forests, cities and so forth.
I agree with curufin regarding the "tax system", if I change my capital to a new location and start building royal palaces, setting up well functioning systems et such, whilst enjoying peace and harmony it should result in a growth of wealth.
And I personally want to see POPS in a EU3 game, or something similar to represent ethnic diversity in provinces.
Graphically, I want the feeling of actually being in a particular region in a particular time frame by playing the game. Different cathedrals, different churches, different house types and so on, mountains, snow, vast rivers large forests, cities and so forth.
- A trade system that would allow for monopolies of certain types of goods, rather than certain COTs. If you produce all the tobacco, you have a monopoly on that good. Perhaps combine with forming a Tobbaco Trust or something (late 19th century word, but still), to which other nations could opt into or undercut if they wish.
- I agree with the lumber idea being needed to make a navy. As more and more timber is used in a province, eventually it depletes (for several decades) and the player has to find another source or trade for it. Add stone or marble for certain types of buildings. Again each province should be adle to produce a variety of raw materials (3-4) and these feed in to improvements that refine the goods for a further secondary trade good, i.e. weapons, rum, cigars, bricks, cloth, etc.
- I agree with the lumber idea being needed to make a navy. As more and more timber is used in a province, eventually it depletes (for several decades) and the player has to find another source or trade for it. Add stone or marble for certain types of buildings. Again each province should be adle to produce a variety of raw materials (3-4) and these feed in to improvements that refine the goods for a further secondary trade good, i.e. weapons, rum, cigars, bricks, cloth, etc.
I havent played either EU2 or any Eu3 mods, i dont know if any of my ideas have been tried before.
Small changes which could be made with a new patch
* An indicator (like the revolt risk) which tells when your 50 ship strong fleet you have forgotten, in some ocean sqaure, is taking attrintion damage and is about to sink.
* Some way to know how much time there is left before you can annex again.
* In combat: instead of showing the dice and the modifers and letting you calculate the result, then let the computer display the actual number.
I know its not the hardest math ever, but its still pointless to calculate the numbers yourself every 5 day. I hate micromangement :wacko:
* In combat: eliminate the fire round if there is no fire value in both armies. Could you imagine that in the fire round the soldiers would point their swords at each others saying "bang-bang your dead" and then in shock round going back to hack-n-slash.
* The defenders in a fort should have the ability to sally forth and attack(with penalties) the besiegers. This way you cant "lockdown" a lvl 5 fort province, with a regiment with just 1 man.
*I think it is a bit odd that when a colony has 1000 people in it, no more colonist can be sent.
One colonist said to another. "Hey lets emmigrate to Delaware!" The other. "No we cant emmigrate to there, there is already 1000 people living there and they have taken all the land and refuses to share it".
One should be able to send a colonist to a province, which previously has been a colony, and it will increase population growth by some precent over some years.
*The war diplomacy should also be changed. I play as England and was allied with Spain and Portugal, then i DoW on some weak African and Asian alliences. Spain and Portugal crushed them after which i demanded like 2500 gold and despiste haivng occipied much territory Spain didnt get anything.
My point is that it is too easy to exploit your junior partners in a war. Some sort of war council should be made where the nations of a the allience meet and found out what they wants in case of a victory.
Example: France DoW on Spain, France is allied to Portugal who at they at the war council says to France that whould like to have the (Purtogese cultures) province which Spain stole from them in a previous war. France can still cheat Portugal but will lose the allience with Portugal and get a Badboy hit.
Changes i like to see in EU4
*Religous minorities: a new system where a province has a majority religion and then 2 slots for minorities. So one province could look like this,
Provence(in southern BBB): Catholic as majority and Judaism and Cathar as minority. another example could be the province Roma wich only have Catholic as major and no other religions in the
minority slots. when a majority becomes converted it falls into the minority slot. This system opens up for many new relgious sects and creeds, such as Judaism, Cathar, Annabaptism... just to name a few Europeans one.
Ofcourse having minorties in your realm should give some benifects and penalties.
*Natives: as it is now you can exterminate a native population FOREVER in just a few days. I think of a system where native populations have been increased greatly but if they rise up it should not be every single man, woman and child that attacks you. Also you should only be able to kill off 80% of the original populatian. And when a colony reaches city status, then the natives population should not be assilmilated right away.
So you have a native and settler population. and according to my religion system, animism or shamanism shold be a religous minority.
Natives can then be taxes and they can ofcourse revolt against their colonial overlord. The natives will gradually be assilminated over a timespand at 50-100 years.
I cant come up with more things right now.
Small changes which could be made with a new patch
* An indicator (like the revolt risk) which tells when your 50 ship strong fleet you have forgotten, in some ocean sqaure, is taking attrintion damage and is about to sink.
* Some way to know how much time there is left before you can annex again.
* In combat: instead of showing the dice and the modifers and letting you calculate the result, then let the computer display the actual number.
I know its not the hardest math ever, but its still pointless to calculate the numbers yourself every 5 day. I hate micromangement :wacko:
* In combat: eliminate the fire round if there is no fire value in both armies. Could you imagine that in the fire round the soldiers would point their swords at each others saying "bang-bang your dead" and then in shock round going back to hack-n-slash.
* The defenders in a fort should have the ability to sally forth and attack(with penalties) the besiegers. This way you cant "lockdown" a lvl 5 fort province, with a regiment with just 1 man.
*I think it is a bit odd that when a colony has 1000 people in it, no more colonist can be sent.
One colonist said to another. "Hey lets emmigrate to Delaware!" The other. "No we cant emmigrate to there, there is already 1000 people living there and they have taken all the land and refuses to share it".
One should be able to send a colonist to a province, which previously has been a colony, and it will increase population growth by some precent over some years.
*The war diplomacy should also be changed. I play as England and was allied with Spain and Portugal, then i DoW on some weak African and Asian alliences. Spain and Portugal crushed them after which i demanded like 2500 gold and despiste haivng occipied much territory Spain didnt get anything.
My point is that it is too easy to exploit your junior partners in a war. Some sort of war council should be made where the nations of a the allience meet and found out what they wants in case of a victory.
Example: France DoW on Spain, France is allied to Portugal who at they at the war council says to France that whould like to have the (Purtogese cultures) province which Spain stole from them in a previous war. France can still cheat Portugal but will lose the allience with Portugal and get a Badboy hit.
Changes i like to see in EU4
*Religous minorities: a new system where a province has a majority religion and then 2 slots for minorities. So one province could look like this,
Provence(in southern BBB): Catholic as majority and Judaism and Cathar as minority. another example could be the province Roma wich only have Catholic as major and no other religions in the
minority slots. when a majority becomes converted it falls into the minority slot. This system opens up for many new relgious sects and creeds, such as Judaism, Cathar, Annabaptism... just to name a few Europeans one.
Ofcourse having minorties in your realm should give some benifects and penalties.
*Natives: as it is now you can exterminate a native population FOREVER in just a few days. I think of a system where native populations have been increased greatly but if they rise up it should not be every single man, woman and child that attacks you. Also you should only be able to kill off 80% of the original populatian. And when a colony reaches city status, then the natives population should not be assilmilated right away.
So you have a native and settler population. and according to my religion system, animism or shamanism shold be a religous minority.
Natives can then be taxes and they can ofcourse revolt against their colonial overlord. The natives will gradually be assilminated over a timespand at 50-100 years.
I cant come up with more things right now.
Last edited:
Sleepyhead said:
Im not sure if you can call French economy "stagnating" at any point of the EU3 time line. At the end of 18th century it was the second economy in the world (with a very inefficient political system), it can't be compared to Spain or Poland. Otoh Netherlands economy DID stagnate in late 18th century (and finally almost collapsed after bankruptcy of the Dutch East India Company).
Also having a poor economy does not mean that a country must be weak or stagnating - exemples are Prussia or Russia, probably 2 strongest land military powers in 2nd half of 18th century.
The decline of Spain or Poland was more complicated than that, many factors contribued, not only economical ones.
Sorry for offtopic.
I do think that it is correct to call the French economy of the late 17th century / early 18th century as stagnating. But sure, not to the same extent to that of Poland and Spain. And I certainly agree with you regarding your other two points.Serus said:
Be good to see some different religions in the game..
Eastern Catholics.
Copts.
Cathars.
Lollards.
Maybe for the Meso-Americans, have Idolism instead of Animalism...
I love the idea of religious minorities, maybe they can have ethnic minorities too, say us IN for example. Burgas would have a Bulgarian majority but with Greek and Turkish minorities, or say even Thessalonika, would have a Greek majority but with Bulgarian and Turkish minorities. Even the Anatolian interior would by this stage, be Turkish majorities but with Greek and in places, Armenian minorities also.. This would make for interesting 'cultural evolution'..
Eastern Catholics.
Copts.
Cathars.
Lollards.
Maybe for the Meso-Americans, have Idolism instead of Animalism...
I love the idea of religious minorities, maybe they can have ethnic minorities too, say us IN for example. Burgas would have a Bulgarian majority but with Greek and Turkish minorities, or say even Thessalonika, would have a Greek majority but with Bulgarian and Turkish minorities. Even the Anatolian interior would by this stage, be Turkish majorities but with Greek and in places, Armenian minorities also.. This would make for interesting 'cultural evolution'..
I can't see ethnic minorities being in - particularly if population levels can drop substantially for various reasons. Y'know, banned topics n' all.
mandead said:I can't see ethnic minorities being in - particularly if population levels can drop substantially for various reasons. Y'know, banned topics n' all.
Despite the you know whats, ethnic minorities played in an important role in the politics of this time. They were appealed to by foreign powers, staged revolts, tried to break off from oppressors, and did all sorts of cool stuff that would give the game more depth. It's pretty unrealistic to say that everyone in Georgia was Georgian, or everyone in Venice was a Lombard.
I think paradox added a lot of depth to revolts already with patriots, nationalists, and religious zealots. It's not clear (at least to the outsider) what additional depth would be added by having more ethnic minorities in the game. Revolts are pretty mundane affairs. Chasing a rebel army back and forth between two provinces for a year, whether an ethnic minority or not, is not very interesting.
If perhaps there were a spy option to support ethic nationalism and ignite a sessionist movement (perhaps for each nation captured by the target country; scotland and wales for the british), or to work with ethnic armies (like Lawrence in Arabia in WWI) that might be interesting.
Perhaps the idea isn't clear to me or clearly stated.
If perhaps there were a spy option to support ethic nationalism and ignite a sessionist movement (perhaps for each nation captured by the target country; scotland and wales for the british), or to work with ethnic armies (like Lawrence in Arabia in WWI) that might be interesting.
Perhaps the idea isn't clear to me or clearly stated.
Last edited:
How about an option that notifies you when a specific country is engaged in a war. So you have neighbor that you have your eyes on, but you're waiting for the moment when he's got his hands full in another war. It would be nice to get some sort of official notice that he's gone to war, or been attacked, rather than checking intermittantly every several months or so.
This goes beyond "warning", which only tells you if the nation of interest stated the war. And guaranteeing only give you a CB on the nation that attacks your target.
This goes beyond "warning", which only tells you if the nation of interest stated the war. And guaranteeing only give you a CB on the nation that attacks your target.
Well, my personal wishes include:
1) a different approach to technology: something like CK (technology spreads naturally at province level) with the chance to influence the speed
2) a third administrative layer (state, region and province)
3) more unit types: light infantry/militia, line fire infantry, line shock infantry with the two evolving into line unified infantry with the introdution of bayonet, light cavalry, heavy cavalry, siege artillery, field artillery. You should be able to use different mixes for different approaches.
4) more effect from different governments types: for example a feudal monarchy should be able to raise feudal troops, a town republic to raise home militias.
5) improved use of mercenaries.
6) trade ruoutes
1) a different approach to technology: something like CK (technology spreads naturally at province level) with the chance to influence the speed
2) a third administrative layer (state, region and province)
3) more unit types: light infantry/militia, line fire infantry, line shock infantry with the two evolving into line unified infantry with the introdution of bayonet, light cavalry, heavy cavalry, siege artillery, field artillery. You should be able to use different mixes for different approaches.
4) more effect from different governments types: for example a feudal monarchy should be able to raise feudal troops, a town republic to raise home militias.
5) improved use of mercenaries.
6) trade ruoutes
Sleepyhead said:
You mean late Louis XIV era ? Too many prolonged wars can stagnate any economy. Even the strongest british economy having the resources of huge colonial empire felt the consequences of continental blockade/system and huge debt due to war after 1806.
Anyway i think we can agree at this point.
How about the ability to set up Alliance Systems, like the Triple Alliance and Triple Entente... I mean its possible to do it now but unlikely and doesn't really work too good..
I'd love more micromanagament, too. And how about increasing relations by taking out rebels in their country, and nations bordering their country that they view as threatening?
In my game right now, I'd also love to help Milan create Italy... I'd like more options on the peace deals. Like if I invade the Pope now, let me give the territories I got to Milan right away (not take it and sell it...).
I'd love more micromanagament, too. And how about increasing relations by taking out rebels in their country, and nations bordering their country that they view as threatening?
In my game right now, I'd also love to help Milan create Italy... I'd like more options on the peace deals. Like if I invade the Pope now, let me give the territories I got to Milan right away (not take it and sell it...).
Add language as a province attribute. People feel more in common with someone who speaks the same language they do than someone of the same religion that they can't understand. So France would have a revolt modifier if they take over England and don't rule in English (1066). Perhaps each province could have up to 3 languages like English, Latin, French? with one dominant and two latent, if you take over a province with your countries language as latent in the province, it's easier to convert to your own and the revolt risk is less. If the province doesn't have your langauge as dominant or one of the latent ones, you've got some real problems.
Yes, language would be very cool indeed!
Yes, language would be very cool indeed!
ahenobarb said:Add language as a province attribute. People feel more in common with someone who speaks the same language they do than someone of the same religion that they can't understand. So France would have a revolt modifier if they take over England and don't rule in English (1066). Perhaps each province could have up to 3 languages like English, Latin, French? with one dominant and two latent, if you take over a province with your countries language as latent in the province, it's easier to convert to your own and the revolt risk is less. If the province doesn't have your langauge as dominant or one of the latent ones, you've got some real problems.
Yes, language would be very cool indeed!
Isn't it very close to the culture concept already in the game?
ahenobarb said:
It's quite simple to cause a notifier to come up whenever a country goes to war- it creates maybe one extra thing to click every six months (depending of course) and it means you don't have to flag a certain country. Works for me OK.
Demon1 said:
I can't agree with this particular point- if anything inflation will decrease when you hold onto more money, ie. it is in treasury, and increase if you spend it in the country. As I mentioned, inflation is represented illogically atm in my view.
Paladin395 said:
which civil war are you talking about?
But i would like a longer timeline as well. maybe from 1066 until 1918.
Crusader Kings is just a different game, a ugly old one that I don't understand.
I would like to see more provinces, and ways to convert my provinces easier to my culture and religion.
But don't overhaul the graphics, just adjust them. It's the best looking game from Paradox
Greedo said:
I would love this.. or have an option before you declare war to ask your ally to join you in the war. Possibly have a map to highlight all the provinces that you get and he gets out of the war before hand.
I just wish their were far more diplomatic options in the game.. and give alliances names and terms of agreement.
berhaven said:
You have a point. However, culture can't be taught, but it is possible to teach a language. It would open up some interesting game aspects I believe.
The culture system as currently established is passive with messages from time to time about whether you "accept" or reject a culture in your borders.
The language system as I conceive it would be more active. You send scholars to teach your languge in the provinces, driving the local language down to a latent slot, while your language becomes dominant. Universities built would teach in your language, spreading and amplifying the effect of your scholars.
As for events, there could be several interesting events about translating the Bible or Koran into your local language leading to friction with religious leaders but increasing free subjects and free thinking for instance. This would paralell Tyndale's Bible in Britain for which he was executed.
Also, consider that the British were able to bring the English language to India (helping to solidfy and improve their administration there), but Indians did not become culturally British.
I've been watching "the adventure of English" on the history channel and there is quite a lot that could be done with language based on the series.