Deciding on endgame goals

[Lord Curlyton]

I don't know how many people actually play through grand campaigns start to finish, even after the point wherein they've established themselves to where the AI doesn't pose a threat anymore, but I seem to be a stickler for that. Currently in an Austria game, 1780's, already was easily the best economy/military/etc (with the exception of naval as I am full on Land) and I just happened to inherit late game AI France, Spain, and Lithuania (meh for them). So now I have vast tracks of non-cored land which won't core in time so I'm left wondering: what end goals should I have now? Originally I was just trying to fully develop every province I took in my relatively peaceful expansion (all pre-cored sans the Hungary inheritance or cored on inheriting due to culture group/HRE) which is still a goal I intend to accomplish (burning my way through the Trade line on the last couple dozen provinces, plenty of time to spare). Pushed through the first 4 reforms eons ago but had no wish to pursue full unification, though I might now since I have a new goal as well: clean up the map. Obviously I can re-release Spain/France/Lithuania, and I can start selling provinces to revolter nations in the New World. But even then that is A LOT of provinces and I doubt I can generate the needed diplomats in time (curse you full plutocracy/free trade desire). I guess part of this is because I'm thinking of potentially converting this into a Vicky 2 game (I see it mentioned from time to time so i presume it is something that can be done without TOO much difficulty).
Anyone else tend to play full grand campaigns even after the "challenge" of beating the AI has left and the world is your sandbox? If so, what goals do you set yourself for the post-challenge time?

 

[unmerged(80402)]

I tend to leave one or two challenges to endgame... You can always do a country swap if there is no real competition.

 

[Caban]

Unless I'm doing a WC, I try and limit myself to plausible actions in an attempt to keep it from reaching a point where the game has zero challenge.

One neat thing I did was try and actually roleplay my ruler based on their stats. As in I would do some intentionally stupid crap when I had a godawful ruler... try it, it's pretty fun stuff and would make for a pretty great AAR.

 

[unmerged(238904)]

Unless I'm doing a WC, I try and limit myself to plausible actions in an attempt to keep it from reaching a point where the game has zero challenge.

One neat thing I did was try and actually roleplay my ruler based on their stats. As in I would do some intentionally stupid crap when I had a godawful ruler... try it, it's pretty fun stuff and would make for a pretty great AAR.

That sounds like it would've been great in my one Hungary game (had four heirs of the same line all with at least 6/6/6 stats in the span of I believe 70 years) if I were good enough to even do moderately well trying my hardest on Medium. ._.

 

[alexti]

One neat thing I did was try and actually roleplay my ruler based on their stats. As in I would do some intentionally stupid crap when I had a godawful ruler... try it, it's pretty fun stuff and would make for a pretty great AAR.

That's all good when you have a dump ruler. But I wouldn't know how to roleplay 9/9/9 ruler ;-)

 

[unmerged(80402)]

That's all good when you have a dump ruler. But I wouldn't know how to roleplay 9/9/9 ruler ;-)

Conqer all possible nations, increase economics greaty, and make our country the 1st on prestige, and be at 0 infamy or close to it. I think.

EDIT: And pass all possible "Good" reforms.