Do you miss the Population from EU3?

[Slavicist]

Do you miss population system from back EU3?

Both gameplay-wise and thematically.

 

[ZomgK3tchup]

Sorta.

I miss the idea of population being represented but not the implementation of it. It was a little immersion-breaking to see populations of "999,999" across your empire.

 

[ramius3443]

I'm perfectly content having abstract Tax/Prod/Manp development stand in for population so long as it dynamically increases/decreases much like population would. My biggest complaint about the current system is that dev only increases if you manually do it, which is uninteresting, rather then increasing through good governance and prosperity (and conversely decreasing in very bad scenarios).

I mean we already have an in game way of measuring prosperity and devastation in a province, so to me a logical next step would be increasing/decreasing development over time depending on which extreme it's at + relevant modifers (such as the currently worthless - development cost).

This to me perfectly simulates the importance of population without getting bogged down by dealing with the inevitable problems of pinning down actual population numbers and explaining both their distribution and exponential growth. It also can be taken as "My province is getting richer" rather then "My province is growing rapidly" in case the later grows immersion breaking.



(This is basically a simplified variant of Meiou's development system before they made pops. Which is great and all, but far too complex for vanilla.)

 

[Palatinus Germanicus]

Anybody remember that each province in EU3 was (for example):

36% plains, 20% forest, 14% farmland, 12% hills, 9% marshland, 9% mountains

... and you never knew exactly where the battle was going to take place. Generally (it seemed) the defender would get favorable terrain, but not always.

And the terrain map was made (graphically depicted) accordingly. In EU4, every province is practically 100% forest, or 100% plains, whatever. It doesn't look as good/realistic, it's less sophisticated, and less fun I guess. But yeah, somebody spent a lot of time deciding what all those %'s should be. It's as if they 1) made the map as realistic as possible, 2) cut it up and made provinces, then 3) looked at each province, and identified it's specific topography.

Of course, I could sit here and reminisce all day about EU3, but hey. Thanks for bringing it up.

 

[Warial]

Anybody remember that each province in EU3 was (for example):

36% plains, 20% forest, 14% farmland, 12% hills, 9% marshland, 9% mountains

... and you never knew exactly where the battle was going to take place. Generally (it seemed) the defender would get favorable terrain, but not always.

And the terrain map was made (graphically depicted) accordingly. In EU4, every province is practically 100% forest, or 100% plains, whatever. It doesn't look as good/realistic, it's less sophisticated, and less fun I guess. But yeah, somebody spent a lot of time deciding what all those %'s should be. It's as if they 1) made the map as realistic as possible, 2) cut it up and made provinces, then 3) looked at each province, and identified it's specific topography.

Of course, I could sit here and reminisce all day about EU3, but hey. Thanks for bringing it up.

It was also the case in EU4 until it was simplified in one patch.

 

[correctamundo]

Anybody remember that each province in EU3 was (for example):

36% plains, 20% forest, 14% farmland, 12% hills, 9% marshland, 9% mountains

... and you never knew exactly where the battle was going to take place. Generally (it seemed) the defender would get favorable terrain, but not always.

And the terrain map was made (graphically depicted) accordingly. In EU4, every province is practically 100% forest, or 100% plains, whatever. It doesn't look as good/realistic, it's less sophisticated, and less fun I guess. But yeah, somebody spent a lot of time deciding what all those %'s should be. It's as if they 1) made the map as realistic as possible, 2) cut it up and made provinces, then 3) looked at each province, and identified it's specific topography.

Of course, I could sit here and reminisce all day about EU3, but hey. Thanks for bringing it up.

I sure remember that from EU4 as well, and the whinging on the forums about the randomness of terrain modifiers on combat. Not strategic they said, bad game design they continued.

As for pops in EU4 I can't say that I miss it no.

 

[Palatinus Germanicus]

^The current situation seems more like EU2 (which I never played)... but a step backwards, in any case.


And for the population level, growth had an impact (over time) on production income & taxes. And the rate of POP growth was effected by things that made sense. Nowadays, you get more 'population', and corresponding income, by going around and saying "I am skilled and talented monarch"... snapping your fingers, and bam! --a whole new neighborhood materializes.

Oh wait, bro... my burghers are super loyal. Ima gonna triple the whole province development -INSTANTLY, son. Real monarchs know how to conjure human life, en masse, don't you know?

 

[correctamundo]

If tripling the provice development instantly breaks your immersion you should just refrain from doing it.

 

[Palatinus Germanicus]

If tripling the provice development instantly breaks your immersion you should just refrain from doing it.

But I gotta spawn the Renaissance in my capital in India, man! You can't expect me to wait 200 years for it to show up!



Hey, this is totally on topic: Anyone remember how Köln/Cologne had those 2 disconnected provinces (Westphalia)? And they would ALWAYS get that revolt, and couldn't/wouldn't do anything about it, for decades and decades... possibly even centuries? During rebel occupation, POP growth is rate stopped. And so if I'm sitting over there as Brandenburg & seeing that, I don't want MY future Westphalia to have totally stunted growth! How many times, Cologne?! How many times do I have to come over there and fix that?? You slacker.

Definitely don't miss that.

I do miss having unlimited vassals, though. Ever load as Napoleon circa 1807 in EU4? Hope you're not ever planning to get DIP tech. They also give you like 12 or 15 historical generals. No MIL tech for you, either, I guess. Somebody didn't think this whole manna point concept through...

 

[Nyrael]

Nope, it did not even do its job.
I much prefer the current Development instead of it.

 

[sprites]

Not really. it served no real purpose and it was weird to have every CoT have 999999 in the late game
plus it was almost irrelevant to units producedpast a point

 

[Me_]

No

 

[elektrizikekswerk]

My biggest complaint about the current system is that dev only increases if you manually do it, which is uninteresting, rather then increasing through good governance and prosperity (and conversely decreasing in very bad scenarios).

There are already several events for increasing/decreasing development. I don't know how much anything but chance affects them, though.

@Topic: I didn't play much EU III (20h or something like that) but I somewaht liked the population there. I didn't really figure out how to influence them but I realized that I can influence them and that this has some effect on taxes and stuff. I liked the idea.

/edit: But I wouldn't go as far as saying that I "miss" them...

 

[POemil]

I do miss population. But not exactly like it was in EU3 though.

I understand development is supposed to represent population now, but I find that a bit too abstracted. I would like to see some form of population implemented, even if it would only be visual, and had no impact.

Preferably though I would like population to have an impact and connect with other systems and features in the game. Not sure what or how, but i am certain some brainstorming sessions could result in some fun mechanics or features.

In my opinion things like population can help to make you feel like you are truly running an empire and guiding it through history, and you are not just clicking some buttons.

 

[SolSys]

And for the population level, growth had an impact (over time) on production income & taxes. And the rate of POP growth was effected by things that made sense.

You conveniently forgot to mention how negligible was the impact of population growth on the game.

 

[ramius3443]

There are already several events for increasing/decreasing development. I don't know how much anything but chance affects them, though.

@Topic: I didn't play much EU III (20h or something like that) but I somewaht liked the population there. I didn't really figure out how to influence them but I realized that I can influence them and that this has some effect on taxes and stuff. I liked the idea.

/edit: But I wouldn't go as far as saying that I "miss" them...

It is so unbelievably negligible that I have never once noticed it in over 1400 hours of play (not sure how much of that was after they introduced development, but you get the idea).