Do you want more EU3?

[Fredrik II]

I guess we need a meeting regarding our line-up...

Fred

 

[jdrou]

One very minor thin i want: Alliance coat of Arms: Changing Coat of arms depending on which regions are in the country. Perhaps even me affected by Centralisation: 100 % centraliization: CoA of the main Country
nearly no centralization: Combined flag like the Union Jack
in between there could be different styles of CoA with cent. affected space for each region CoA.

Dont tell me it cant be done: It was done nearly perfectly for CK in the "Dynastic Glory" tool.

Obviously it can be done by the developers; it just can't be done by mods without changing country tags since you can't currently change flags in EU3 (this would be another one of the 'missing' event commands I mentioned earlier in the thread). Changing tags means you are forced to reload if you want to keep the game stable and every added tag adds a performance hit.

 

[Polarisan]

They made the game... it is their sandbox.

Everything ( almost ) can be implemented, the question is if they have the time or willingness to do it.

Cheeres;
Nick

 

[marginoferror]

I would really appreciate a more stable multiplayer system. I don't think the current version is very usable. I would be willing to pay extra just for that.

 

[hito1]

But... We keep talking about eu3 regularly, bringing up new ideas on fleshing out gamemechanics, and improving flavor and playability. Me, Doomdark, King and other others of the team now have dozens up dozens of cool ideas for Eu3.

I voted NO before reading this, but the answer is of course YES. If you already had the ideas, there is no need to question. Do it, please!

 

[unmerged(514)]

I guess we need a meeting regarding our line-up...

Fred

CK2 or Vic2?

 

[Dagda]

Can we have CK2 instead?

 

[Covertops22]

I would fall in love with Johan if he would add a dynasty system to EU3. It's important to have that.. because it just is :rofl:

I'd really like a face to the name and stats of the ruler, it might seem really minor, but I think it just adds to the game. I really like a lot of the ideas that the others have mentioned, including updating the engine maybe? Although, I do like the engine we currently have.

The coat of arms thing that someone mentioned (sorry for not remembering your name) would be an awesome addition as well. I voted for yes, because I think the EU series is awesome, and should always be expanded. I would love to see the civil war and stuff added, but that would come into conflict with Vicky and we don't want that.

I think there needs to be an extremely hard look at this poll, and work on the material that we've all talked about. I think the development team has done amazing work up to this point, and will continue to do so. I just hope a lot of these ideas are added.

 

[jdrou]

Publishing (as opposed to development) suggestion:
Release a new combined version simultaneously with the expansion or somehow make the expansion actually a full version that you need to have the prerequisite games registered in order to get at a reduced cost.
A lot of people seem to have problems installing expansions correctly. Having multiple possible install paths (EU3->NA->IN->new or Complete->new) will probably make this even worse, especially with some people getting Complete from alternative distributors.

 

[unmerged(56754)]

More more more more!!

 

[sheep]

Do it after Victoria 2. Thanks in advance.

 

[twinxor]

A few things that could stand to be added:

Religion needs polish. Conversions need to be an incremental process. The religious hierarchy (and heretics) within the realm should be lobby groups with coherent political agendas.

Internal politics needs more meat. Some sort of dynasty system might be a godsend if it could be made to work. As might a nobility and other special interests within your realm.

Beyond government type there needs to be a reflection of the dissimilarity of European societies with those of the Far East, the steppe khanates and tribal nations - without recourse to huge blunt-instrument penalties like the one Confucian nations suffer.

As far as combat goes the focus should be on logistics. Per-province supply limits are one thing but there needs to be some way to prevent situations such as in my last Byzantium game where a 20k cavalry army ranged at will all over the khanates as far north as Ryazan in the 15th century - when I had no allies in the region and the nearest base was in Asia Minor.

Linked to logistics should be some way to prevent ahistorical large early standing armies and fleets.

Forts should also require maintenance and early game force limits should be much lower in general.

The game as a whole still lacks 'personality'. A reason to care about General #RAND #RAND or King Unknownstringwanted X.

I'd love to see all of this - EU could only be better with more historical flavor and more reason to play non-European powers.

Another issue is AI balance - the AI's pretty poor at teaming up to reign in runaway powers, meaning that an AI that gets a good break or (more often) a determined human can blob up like mad. IN and MMP have made some efforts to institute a realistic balance of power system, but there's much more to be done.

 

[unmerged(39280)]

can we have ck2 instead?

:d

 

[Alerias]

I definitely want an expansion, but please either make alliances reliable again in 3.2, and/or let us mod everything related to diplomacy. I find diplomatic options often really frustrating since IN and there's vast room for improvement, particularly in alliance reliability and the new diplo-annexation mechanics.

 

[Zeitgeist]

Publishing (as opposed to development) suggestion:
Release a new combined version simultaneously with the expansion or somehow make the expansion actually a full version that you need to have the prerequisite games registered in order to get at a reduced cost.
A lot of people seem to have problems installing expansions correctly. Having multiple possible install paths (EU3->NA->IN->new or Complete->new) will probably make this even worse, especially with some people getting Complete from alternative distributors.

This is a very good idea.

 

[Dylan305]

I personally think it's time to wrap up Eu3 and start developing for Eu4 with all these new ideas.

That's just me though.

 

[unmerged(105989)]

I don't see too much of a need for a EU IV if there isn't a significant change to the engine. If you can't do a massive game spanning the time frames of CK, EU, Vicky, and HOI, at least bring all of them to the same engine (i.e. vicky 2, then CK 2 in that order), so that you can do import games again. Then you could release a patch / expansion making the import games function properly.

 

[unmerged(72881)]

I would fall in love with Johan if he would add a dynasty system to EU3. It's important to have that.. because it just is :rofl:

I'd really like a face to the name and stats of the ruler, it might seem really minor, but I think it just adds to the game. I really like a lot of the ideas that the others have mentioned, including updating the engine maybe? Although, I do like the engine we currently have.

The coat of arms thing that someone mentioned (sorry for not remembering your name) would be an awesome addition as well. I voted for yes, because I think the EU series is awesome, and should always be expanded. I would love to see the civil war and stuff added, but that would come into conflict with Vicky and we don't want that.

I think there needs to be an extremely hard look at this poll, and work on the material that we've all talked about. I think the development team has done amazing work up to this point, and will continue to do so. I just hope a lot of these ideas are added.

+1 for everything you wrote here!

 

[alvaro]

Do it after Victoria 2. Thanks in advance.

there! +1

 

[unmerged(105989)]

I guess we need a meeting regarding our line-up...

Fred

This, and Johan even starting this thread, is what I like about this company.