Home Trending Latest threads New posts Developer diaries

High Council: Agenda

Jump to latest Follow Reply
  • 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.
Norrefeldt

Norrefeldt

Porphyrogenitus
Aug 1, 2001
7.433
2
Visit site
The HC is now formed and consists of:
see the High Council sticky

It will be business as usual mostly, Jester is doing a marvellous job in bug fixing. Please tell us if you need help!

How should we decide whether we want to vote on something?
Any member can bring up things for voting, if there is some issue that is deadlocked/totally ignored in the thread discussion since some time. I brought up the case of ignoring since some complicated issues can sometimes be ignored even though they are good. :) Post in this thread about it and I'll take care of the procedure via email if no one thinks we should discuss more. As you understand from this it will take some time from raising a question to the voting is concluded, at least two weeks.

I have a suggestion of some things that ought to be on the agenda:

  • All changes from beta patches needs to be taken care of. Please take a look in Isaac Brock's thread.
  • Threads for discussing culture splits from AGC, I strongly suggest we have one thread for each culture, otherwise it will soon be a mess. Since AGC and EEP were conflicting in this it cannot be implemented without discussion. It would be nice to put the last thing from then behind us.
  • Renumbering, what's going on? I'll check with richvh.
  • What is the name for our mod going to be? We have numerous ideas and a poll so we ought to be able to decide on it! Trying to reach some open consensus on it is of course futile, since you cannot really argue about it. I'd suggest that we first vote on whether we should keep AGCEEP as a name or not, then possibly vote in some way for a name.
  • Put together a FAQ for newcomers, people who want to help with modding and a playing guide for complicated sequences.
  • There are probably some issues from the implementation that can now be evaluated. Suggestions?

    Anything else we need to take care of? I think we should start to put in new material in the bugfix versions as well, otherwise the participation from occasional contributors will stagnate.

EDIT: This post is obsolete. Look into the submissions thread and High Counsil thread for details.
 
Last edited:
Norrefeldt said:
Anything else we need to take care of? I think we should start to put in new material in the bugfix versions as well, otherwise the participation from occasional contributors will stagnate.
[/list]
Click to expand...

Put together a FAQ for newcomers, people who want to help with modding and maybe a playing guide (for instance a bit of explanation on the HYW setup that you need to play Dauphine to become the historical France)
 
Ironfoundersson said:
Put together a FAQ for newcomers, people who want to help with modding and maybe a playing guide (for instance a bit of explanation on the HYW setup that you need to play Dauphine to become the historical France)
Click to expand...
Damn right.
I played HYW the other day and I would have needed a guide. KoI needs guidence, who can become France, Spain, Russia too. The rather complicated Anjou sequence involving Naples and Aragón needs some tips. What more?
(Edited the first post.)
 
chegitz guevara said:
What about the name? I thought we were gonna chage this project to EU2+ ?
Click to expand...
I don't know what was decided back then, since I wasn't part of the old HC. This is the current status of the poll:

Keep the name AGC-EEP until the full release 29 16.86%
AGEP - Alternative Grand Exchange Project 10 5.81%
AEU - Alternative Europa Universalis 13 7.56%
GSL - Grand Scenarios League 14 8.14%
IGC or IGC2 - Improved Grand Campaign (or 2) [bearing in mind that it is not officially 'blessed' by the EUI IGC team] 15 8.72%
EEUII or EU2E - Enhanced EU II or EU2 Enhanced 6 3.49%
Genevieve 15 8.72%
UGC - Unified Grand Campaign 23 13.37%
EGC - Enhanced Grand Campaign 14 8.14%
UMC - United Modding Community 5 2.91%
ESP - Enhanced Scenario Project 7 4.07%
UCP - Ultimate/Unified Campaign Project 6 3.49%
ACP - Alternate/Advanced Campaign Project 3 1.74%
P&G - Power and Glory 12 6.98%

When is the "full" release? After all those bug fixes it is playable, but not "finished". It will never be "finished". EEP is, since no-one is working on it anymore, but this is a on-going project.
 
I'm for keeping the name AGCEEP. Yeah, it's a bit inelegant, and yes, it's a bit inaccurate (once we have additional scenarios). But it's known, and that counts for a lot. I don't feel strongly about this, though.

MKJ brought up the idea a while back of using land tech 0 and 1 for especially primitive technology, and reserving it for the Incas, Aztecs, and other backward nations. Is this going to get implemented? It seemed like a very good idea to me.

As for additional issues, I'd like to see some of Daywalker's AI implemented for the major colonizing nations (Spain, Portugal, Netherlands, England, France, Russia). Actually, Portugal already seems to do fine in the AGCEEP, and the Netherlands does OK, but the others tend to underperform. Especially England and Russia. The Ottomans could also benefit from an AI overhaul.
 
Well yeah, we could open up a new poll... or...HC can simply vote on the names which received 5% or more of the votes. Seems a shame to waste all that poll effort just to include EU2+ in a second poll...we could always include EU2+ as one of the name candidates for an HC vote.

Personally, I liked the top two: AGCEEP or UGC. You know, if we change the name, what're we gonna do about all our thread and forum headings?!

EDIT: Maybe this thread should be stickied. Also, the FAQ could be located within the already stickied AGCEEP index thread, perhaps just after the index list. A reference to the FAQ on top of the first post, however, so that ppl know they only have to scroll down the post to see it. Just a suggestion. :)
 
Last edited:
Names

For historical and continuity purposes, the AGCEEP name could be retained.

Some other suggestions:
UGC - Unified Grand Campaign
EU2+ - signifying enhancements to EU2, the Plus version

Actually, I've come to know the AGCEEP acronym and it is everywhere, so it may be best just to keep it. A poll should be conducted on this topic.
 
I was thinking of reorganising the stickies. They are needed but we shouldn't have too many. One for monarch, event and leader ID:s. One for culture and nation tags. The FAQ and nation manuals should get one together, it ought to be easy to find. Latest patch should have one, just like today. We could keep the one for definitions, even if I'm not sure it's very useful right now.
The HC could have one, combined with Ironfounderssons post on links perhaps?
 
ribbon22 said:
Well yeah, we could open up a new poll... or...HC can simply vote on the names which received 5% or more of the votes. Seems a shame to waste all that poll effort just to include EU2+ in a second poll...we could always include EU2+ as one of the name candidates for an HC vote.
Click to expand...
true. but wasnt there something about the previous poll being multiple choice so it's not that accurate?
 
Sun_Zi_36 said:
true. but wasnt there something about the previous poll being multiple choice so it's not that accurate?
Click to expand...
Yes. Some people voted several times, some did not. It wasn't obvious that you actually could do that when the poll was started.
 
Sun_Zi_36 said:
true. but wasnt there something about the previous poll being multiple choice so it's not that accurate?
Click to expand...

Norrefeldt said:
Yes. Some people voted several times, some did not. It wasn't obvious that you actually could do that when the poll was started.
Click to expand...

oh yeah, I forgot about that. Shall do the same poll with the new additions and new, clearer instructions?
 
AGCEEP works just fine as a name. Why do we need anything else? Besides, we have name recognition around here as AGCEEP. Even in Hollywood, they realize that a name change is usually a bad career move :D
 
Archaalen said:
AGCEEP works just fine as a name. Why do we need anything else? Besides, we have name recognition around here as AGCEEP. Even in Hollywood, they realize that a name change is usually a bad career move :D
Click to expand...
I tend to agree. But I don't object to changing the name if some are unhappy with it. If the motion is to change the name, I would suggest opening up for name nominations, then close the list on x date. Once this is done Norrefeldt can e-mail/PM us to pick our top whatever number. Of course, the poll method could still be used, but it just seems odd to let someone else have a say in our babies name.
 
just curious, just exactly who's baby is it ? is there a list ?
 
SirJakop said:
just curious, just exactly who's baby is it ? is there a list ?
Click to expand...
The old list mentioned is near the top of the thread. As for the baby, I have a tendency to speak in metaphors, which has caused some confusion in the past (and present it seems). Especially when read by those from different backgrounds, culture or first langauge. :eek:

In this case, the baby is metaphor for this project, the AGCEEP (current name). In the past, one of the divisions was over how the project should be named. Some felt the community at large should have a voice in the project name. Myself (being the selfish bastard I am :D ), thought the former approach needlessly complicated a relatively unimportant decision. In other words, I thought the council itself should pick its own name for the project.

Of course, if you were just pulling my leg, feel free to do the following: :rofl:
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top Bottom
Back