March of the Eagles, maybe the best Paradox game!

Unlike most Paradox GS games, it's pretty simple and easy to 'jump 'n' play'. You don't have to stop the clock every 3 minutes to see if everything is fine, like we see in Vicky2 and HoI3...

Bo7913DK said:

March of the Eagles is a fairly new game from Paradox Interactive. Alot of people are saying that its a bad game, but i gotta disagree. Even though i've only played one full game (which im not done with. I intend to play it till it gets boring) i clearly see its potential. The game has alot to it, but it clearly needs some fixing. I play as Denmark and i conquered 95% of Sweden and puppeted all of the African countries exept for Britains puppet but im still not a great power (Denmark is a minor power). Prussia (Which is a great power) was waging alot of wars against France and ended up with 2 provinces, but they are still a great power. Thats something that they should take their time to fix. I also think that every country should have a country idea. But thats just my oppinion. But all in all its the game i've had most fun in and the most managable game. No money wasted!
Great job Paradox! :laugh:

Click to expand...

This would seem to imply that this game sucks because it's way too easy to blob-out, but to each their own . . . .

FOARP said:

This would seem to imply that this game sucks because it's way too easy to blob-out, but to each their own . . . .

Click to expand...

+1

This game can give the most precious MP experience. One session, or two sessions and game is finished. No longer 10-30 sessions like EU or HoI series.

For what it was designed to be its very good. Of course it could be better but if it had deeper elements to: diplomacy, economy... etc you may as well play EU4 or a modified version of it and have a start scenario of 1805. However it was not meant to be as deep a game as the primary PDS titles, but an entry level game to help people learn the basics and get into those titles if they want something grander. Its also supposed to provide quick MP games which I think it does quite well.

I think we'd all like to see more effort put into rounding those scenarios where the AI just isnt as capable as it could be. A deeper economic model would also be good and a more convincing diplomatic war too.

Id also love to see more scenarios around the era etc... Maybe one day....!!!

The game has the best characteristics of AGEOD studio plus the expertise of Paradox Development studio. Because it is dedicated to war mainly and a small span of time, it is very well balanced. Fun is guaranteed indeed, especially in multiplayer.

It's really good at what it does. The overlapping world conquest goals mechanic is great. I really like the tactical component as well, and found HOI3s too complicated to get into.

I don't even know where to start.

SP is good. Not above average, but not excellent either. It is good on the operational level and you really feel that you're commanding vast armies moving and resupplying between epic battles.

MP is ughh...I don't know where to start. Most of the players in MP games just spam guards+arty and use Up The Guard tactics. It has nothing common with napoleonic warfare. It has nothing to do with realism. It's boring.

Furthermore there seems to be a clear division between players that want to have a 100% quality of mp experience with historical realism, diplo etc. and players that just play for fun, just for a few hours with no interest in historical flavour whatsoever.

MotE MP is polluted by the second type. Most of the serious players just go for something traditional and very long.

From the technical aspect, MP is buggy and games are hard to set up due to router issues which is hardly a 2000's standard.

When it comes to patches and DLC... not much of them tbh.

It seems that this game was just a scouting probe, to check how people will react on the EU IV engine.

So no, certainly not the best Paradox strategy. I was very interested in it when it was released but now... it's just a decent product that could be great but it isn't because it's not really polished.

Agree with the OP. Came back to this game after playing EU IV and realized how much potential is here. Not to bash EU, but that game just feels so much more contrived and forced. The mechanics in this game are great and much more interesting. I also like the way cities and provinces are set up- just makes the engine feel right and less weirdness that I saw in EU with armies bouncing around start-stop-start-stop cat and mouse nonsense. I feel like with some TLC this could easily be Paradox's best game. Maybe add some flavor events/National Decision type of things like in EU (should be easier to do in this game) tweak the AI, and flesh out some of these great mechanics and systems in place.

Shame it's so quiet around this forum.