The thing that I love most about EU, (which is tough to say, honestly), is the geopolitical aspect, and its simplicity. Seeing where wars are likely to erupt, who is going to join both sides, who is likely to win, and especially the blobs that form (), is very enjoyable to say the least. Also, I love how this game punishes brash and inopportune action, (unlike most strategy games that condone inconsequential, and poorly thought out wars). When I first started playing this game, I was disappointed when I would get dog-piled for a war of aggression over an adjacent OPM. Now, I see just how great this is - the web of diplomatic interrelation that one walks through in their conquest very often needs to be carefully thought out and planned around in almost every case (excluding the situation where you're absolutely unstoppable, which by then you've probably already 'won'). "One does not simply walk into a tight web of diplomatic interrelation" (I had to). Even a behemoth blob is subject to implosion or defeat if it is acted against prudently. These checks and balances make the game extremely exciting to me, and while it sometimes can be repetitious, (what game isn't?), it is very often immersive and quite fun.
The other thing that I highly enjoy about EU, (which is tied to the first), is its simplicity. While I certainly don't mind micromanagement or lots of detail, in the case of this game I am glad that it's exciting pace is not bogged down by this. In my opinion, it just doesn't fit the nature of the game. I would call this game a prime example of deep simplicity, (where Go might be the best example of all). What I mean by this in context is that the rules and factors that comprise an outcome in the game, (or the game itself), aren't necessarily complicated or hard to understand, but the situations that they form can be deep, sometimes very deep. Even while this game does have several factors and rules, most of them are under the hood and not something that player interacts with directly, he can still know how they contribute to the situation of the game, and use this knowledge as discernment in his action. This, I believe, is where the depth lies, in all of it's apparent simplicity.
I might have jumped around too much with my thoughts, and I apologize if this post wasn't clear. Now I know that this game is not perfect, and has its faults and failures just like anything else, and I didn't exactly express my thoughts as concisely as I would have wished, but this aspect of the game deserves praise IMO.
Does anyone else agree or disagree, or have general thoughts on the matter?