Alexander Seil said:
There *is* a 1939 scenario, you know.
I'll bet anything you want that if things really turn out to be crazy when playing from a 36 start with constantly wild ideologies all over the place and WWII triggered (if at all) by weird countries, the 39 scenario will be by far the most played. Assuming there is a 39' scenario or at least a way to start in 39' like in EU3.
Personally I want to play the WWII and be a decisive factor in it. If I want to play a war game where everyone is out to conquer the world then I'll just play a WAR board-game. Even better, chess.
It is the historical background that gives flavor to Paradox games. Just compare the popularity of Armaggedon scenarios and the 36' scenario. I never even started the Armaggedon scenarios, they don't interest me AT ALL. Has anyone, other then in MP, played those scenarios?
The EU3 route of reducing all countries to the same common denominator made it less fun then EU2. For me at least. I'd say from the popularity of Magna Mundi that I'm not alone though. (No need to go all fanboy...yes EU3 is still a fantastic game with huge improvements over EU2. )
The way I see it, most games go through a lot to create character and flavor for the "factions", parties, or whatever. Paradox has history, possibly the best character and flavor making tool of it all.
If HO3 just turns out to be a game where you are givent the setup of 1936 and then every country is out to do the same thing using the same tools I'll be disapointed. I'll probably play it anyway, and probably have a blast, I'll feel sorry that there isn't any more games on the market that carry that history flavor though.
Wait, I almost feel like deja vú. Oh yes, the same thing happened with EU3
Of course we are only guessing and I'll always want to wait and see what their vision of HOI3 turns out to be, but it is always a good idea to tell what your interests are.