Sure. Though in a medieval scn one could still try if the HRE mechanics that are in now can be useful for the earlier time.
Of course, people may just need it off for other setups.
-
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.
Sure. Though in a medieval scn one could still try if the HRE mechanics that are in now can be useful for the earlier time.
Of course, people may just need it off for other setups.
I certainly hope they've taken a look to see whether it was possible to make electors possible to change during gameplay, that happening historically.
I will look forward to seeing whether it was possible once FtG comes out (or a suitable Development Diary for revealing it is released), then.
Never make a post that ends on bottom of the page. It's bound to be not noticed
Yes, i was talking about company support, and i don't remember which one it was actually
oWhich boards should i check? I mean, back when the search function was on i used to stalk Paradox people as it was good source of info, but now
Unfortunately, i was always in the camp of "historical plausibility" and not "historical accuracy".
Not that EU3 is perfect, far from it - mainly because there are not enough changeable differences between countries. But then again, EU 2 was worse in this aspect compared to EU I already Ah yes, good old times. Everything was better back then.Actually it was 1.09.
Do i sound conservative enough? Is there still hope for me?
Oh man, the economic model of EU...
Was good for gameplay. That's all good that can be said about it
And one good per province ported straight into Victoria. D'oh
Unfortunately, i was always in the camp of "historical plausibility" and not "historical accuracy".
Historical plausability is fine and dandy in theory but doesn't work very well at game level. In the end, the developers chose it over historical accuracy in some kind of giant sandbox mode, in which everyone can colonize, everyone can conquer the world by 1600, everyone can have claims over everyone else.
I like EU2 because it is its own world, with its own rules. Austria gets big 95% of the time, Spain gets to the New World, Byzantium dissapears etc... I like those rules, it makes me feel at home in EU2. I like to know that my next monarch will be a famous one and I'll try to make him great in my own game.
Well, i always though that colonization potential should be linked to size of country's population, plus some other factors (like slaves), and that DP sliders were far too weak tool of country differentiation. Like magnitude too weak. Claims i actually like.
That said, come on, i remember basically doing world conquest with my first attempt at the game (EU2), as Timurids
(or much later, with Trebizond...)
EDIT/ And compared to EU I, in EU II everyone could colonize... and while i wasn't enthusiastic with EU I model, the EU II direction wasn't that good either, IMO. Mecklemburg colonizing eastern NA seaboard? Riiight...
That said, come on, i remember basically doing world conquest with my first attempt at the game (EU2), as Timurids
(or much later, with Trebizond...)
EDIT/ And compared to EU I, in EU II everyone could colonize... and while i wasn't enthusiastic with EU I model, the EU II direction wasn't that good either, IMO. Mecklemburg colonizing eastern NA seaboard? Riiight...
Well, i always though that colonization potential should be linked to size of country's population, plus some other factors (like slaves), and that DP sliders were far too weak tool of country differentiation. Like magnitude too weak. Claims i actually like.
That said, come on, i remember basically doing world conquest with my first attempt at the game (EU2), as Timurids
(or much later, with Trebizond...)
EDIT/ And compared to EU I, in EU II everyone could colonize... and while i wasn't enthusiastic with EU I model, the EU II direction wasn't that good either, IMO. Mecklemburg colonizing eastern NA seaboard? Riiight...
they couldnt colonise because they didnt have the explorers/conquistadores to do it. If they however get maps, nations like denmark and sweden established colonies of their own since they actually had some in real life.
In EU I they couldn't colonise, because they didn't have colonists, which were assigned per country basis. In EU II it was much easier due to random explorers and map capturing/trading.
Geez, just pay a visit to Lisbon and Madrid...
Geez, just pay a visit to Lisbon and Madrid...
I prefer that to just choosing a national idea that gives you infinite explorers. Plus, as I read about it, in EU3 you could discover half of the world with a single explorer, much more different than in EU2.
DarthMaur, just accept it: EU2 is an almost perfect experience. For me it's in the same league as Heroes III.
Almost perfect?
Its still a decent game, but its far from being a perfect experience for me.
Tempted to buy Eu2, but don't want too if FTG is close. Anyone got a closer idea on release date then "Before Christmas"?
there is room for lots of improvement, but no other game kept me hooked for so long. But that is probably because eu2 mp sessions only last a couple of hours per week
will surely help those who do not memorize their sliders and get faceed with a random event.
