Do you want more EU3?
- Thread starter Johan
- Start date
-
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.
- Status
True, I remember people crying for an historical setup à la EU2. In the end, most people never used it. So you'll know for EU4 not to make that mistake again
I remember ever since you first announced EU3, some guys and I were relentless in asking for you to bring over the POPs system used in Vicky and modify it so it can fit the EU franchise (I'm thinking of striping the working class system assignment to jobs feature off) - so it can represent cultural and religious demographics in a province - and at the same time it could form the core of the migrational flux in colonization depending on a number of social, states, religious and economic variables. It would also be very usefull to model demographic turmoils depending on the actions of a player (Revocation of the Edict of Nantes, 1685 or the sack of Antwerpen that spelled the end of the golden age for Flanders and the rise to power of Amsterdam). I'm still fighting mad for you to consider this once again If not for the next expansion, than maybe EU4.I take this short informations as a sign that our overwhealming cries for a CK-style of dynasticism has been heard
Rome is the game that could still be great with expansions,EU3 is good enough now.
A new expansion is quite welcome, but it has absolutely nothing to do with the Magna Mundi team.
Without even talking to Johan, I am pretty sure our work would not be destroyed by a new expansion. That would not make sense.
As for the smoothest possible integration, share of ideas, etc and given these great news, I am going to send Johan the password for the next alpha version of MMP2. Maybe he has the time to look and likes some of our new features.
We are open to look at any form of cooperation with Paradox.
Power, Power RAW POWER to MM!
God as long as you make ships actually mean something more than troop transports I'm all for it.
Also, please please introduce some type of limited-type or colonial-only wars, ala Victoria.
And make major AI nations actually form real alliances like IRL.
and Falallan.
Also, please please introduce some type of limited-type or colonial-only wars, ala Victoria.
And make major AI nations actually form real alliances like IRL.
and Falallan.
But it should still be possible to start at a variety of different dates in order to have totally different outcomes. Currently it's very hard for the world not to plunge into turmoil near the start.
Me want expansion pack
Definite possibilities to deepen the gameplay are:
- Some kind of dynastic system
- Parliament
- More provincial decisions
- More buildings
- More internal troubles (not just rebel armies, but actual economical problems, for example)
- The possibility to have more then one city in a province
- More abilities to hurt the trade of other nations
- Even better AI
Definite possibilities to deepen the gameplay are:
- Some kind of dynastic system
- Parliament
- More provincial decisions
- More buildings
- More internal troubles (not just rebel armies, but actual economical problems, for example)
- The possibility to have more then one city in a province
- More abilities to hurt the trade of other nations
- Even better AI
Last edited:
The legions of darkness and the card carrying members* of "don't overcomplicate things by multiplying necessary details for a player to keep track of, especially when it is something that scales by number of provinces" still remain and will fight you to the bitter end on that issue.
It would need one hell of a clever adaption to add more to the game than would be lost. There's always room for more complexity of gameplay mechanics under the hood, but only limited avenues of expansion for changes that intrude significantly on how many things a player needs to keep track of to do well if you want to make a game/expansion that is a good fit with old one, so anything that adds more things to keep track up should ideally do it in a very limitied and non-scaling way AND interface with the rest of the game through clever game mechanics.
* Okay, so some of us belong to both groups.
Just like the CK dynastic system, I don't want the same POPs system as we have seen in Victoria. We don't need to promote POPs in EU and it would be a pretty much hands off feature managed by the computer - anyways States at that time didn't have the means to influence demographics like they did in the XXth Century...
But POPs could be influenced by religious tolerance and economical variables. If you take the path Louis XIV's took with the Revocation of the Edict of Nantes, you'de see the Huguenots POPs emigrating to neighbouring calvinists and reformed countries (whoever they may be), enriching these provinces and if you set up religious tolerance in the colonies, it could be a major boost to your colonies. Right now, I have to say that even with the major changes of the IN expansion, the colonial representation is quite ahistorical and unsatisfying. Why should colonies all grow at the same regular pace -/+ 20 to 60 settlers per year? Why the State has SO much control over the demographics of colonies? Also, major demographic turmoils can't be represented in IN: Antwerpen even if sacked numerous times, will always remain the center of trade of the North sea...
But POPs could be influenced by religious tolerance and economical variables. If you take the path Louis XIV's took with the Revocation of the Edict of Nantes, you'de see the Huguenots POPs emigrating to neighbouring calvinists and reformed countries (whoever they may be), enriching these provinces and if you set up religious tolerance in the colonies, it could be a major boost to your colonies. Right now, I have to say that even with the major changes of the IN expansion, the colonial representation is quite ahistorical and unsatisfying. Why should colonies all grow at the same regular pace -/+ 20 to 60 settlers per year? Why the State has SO much control over the demographics of colonies? Also, major demographic turmoils can't be represented in IN: Antwerpen even if sacked numerous times, will always remain the center of trade of the North sea...
I voted EU3 is complete, because my preferences for Paradox games are thus
1. Victoria 2
2. EU4
3. EU3 Exp
EU3 is nicely complete imo, yes things can be added but it's not like they'd be plugging any holes.
Though my preferences for an expansion are as following:
1. Parliaments,
even if they were just senates ported over from Rome:VV, it would be a great inclusion.
2. Internal policies,
a bit more depth then just sliders, things like law policy, tax policy, military policy, land reform, etc. It seems paradox is heading that way with HoI3's laws though, so see how it goes there, add some depth (different policies for different cultures, religions etc.)
3. Expanded Colonization options
Historically, colonization was handled mostly by private companies with very little governmental input. It's hard for me to say exactly what could be added in this area, but I would strongly urge there be a higher barrier to entry in terms of colonialism, I have a personal vendetta against european minors colonizing, most likely there would be a requisite policy and level of power before a nation got colonists (See Magna Mundi).
Also, I would suggest rethinking what it is to send a colonist. Sending a colonist should represent not 100 pilgrims going forth, but a royal expedition to found a base that pilgrims will then flock to based on other factors like religious persecution, economic hardship and war. Less colonists, more factors influencing natural colony growth.
4. More detailed demographics,
a hard one to do I know, but I found it both odd and contentious how each province was 100% one culture, and as Magna Mundi showed, people could never quite settle for whether Welsh was british or not, or whether this was that... but to change that would probably be too big for an exp and have to wait for EU4
5. Family trees
I always found the absence of royal politicking odd, and it was included in Rome:VV well enough.
1. Victoria 2
2. EU4
3. EU3 Exp
EU3 is nicely complete imo, yes things can be added but it's not like they'd be plugging any holes.
Though my preferences for an expansion are as following:
1. Parliaments,
even if they were just senates ported over from Rome:VV, it would be a great inclusion.
2. Internal policies,
a bit more depth then just sliders, things like law policy, tax policy, military policy, land reform, etc. It seems paradox is heading that way with HoI3's laws though, so see how it goes there, add some depth (different policies for different cultures, religions etc.)
3. Expanded Colonization options
Historically, colonization was handled mostly by private companies with very little governmental input. It's hard for me to say exactly what could be added in this area, but I would strongly urge there be a higher barrier to entry in terms of colonialism, I have a personal vendetta against european minors colonizing, most likely there would be a requisite policy and level of power before a nation got colonists (See Magna Mundi).
Also, I would suggest rethinking what it is to send a colonist. Sending a colonist should represent not 100 pilgrims going forth, but a royal expedition to found a base that pilgrims will then flock to based on other factors like religious persecution, economic hardship and war. Less colonists, more factors influencing natural colony growth.
4. More detailed demographics,
a hard one to do I know, but I found it both odd and contentious how each province was 100% one culture, and as Magna Mundi showed, people could never quite settle for whether Welsh was british or not, or whether this was that... but to change that would probably be too big for an exp and have to wait for EU4
5. Family trees
I always found the absence of royal politicking odd, and it was included in Rome:VV well enough.
Does that mean there will be no improvement in moddability? Not even correcting anomalies (you can check for infantry or galleys in province, but not for other typed, or for total troops/ships?)
I also forgot to mention blockade range, when speaking of blockade efficiency. It'd be great if there were still reason to take closer ports as bases. Again, as late as 1800, Port Mahon was considered important for the RN, vs Toulon, even though they had owned Gib for almost a C.
For the historical setups, IMO, the deployments just don't make sense. I'd have at least 1/2 of all units in the home country, & spread out some. Again, the lack of any French fleet in the Med, in later scenarios, is offputting. At least it'd help if we could define that in homemade scenarios. (But again, I guess that's off the table.)
Last edited:
True, I remember people crying for an historical setup à la EU2. In the end, most people never used it. So you'll know for EU4 not to make that mistake again
Bogus conclusion.
The historical progressions were integral to EU1 and EU2, and a lot of people enjoyed that aspect. They jettisoned it in EU3, and a semi-implementation added later didn't restore the fun of the original design.
So people play EU3 the way it's fun to play; that doesn't mean the loss of historical flavor was irrelevant.
I take this short informations as a sign that our overwhealming cries for a CK-style of dynasticism has been heard
I hope not. That might actually be enough to make me abandon the game. The dynasty was cool in concept but I found boring and tedious to manage.
In general, I hope grafting on concepts from less successful series like CK or Vicky is something they attempt with caution.
If you add a dynasty system of some sort that included dynastic rivalries and expanded on royal marriages that would just be over the top delicious.
Think Hapsburgs.... oooooooooooo.......
Think Hapsburgs.... oooooooooooo.......
Yes, my suggestions.
1. Multiple active missions 3-4
2. More mission types and better or different rewards.
3. Some new National Ideas
4. New Decisions that refine policy within National Ideas. Like shipwrights letting you choose fast hulls for speed, heavy hulls for firepower, or better provisioning. Each NI having 3-6 decisions like that plus a few linked decisons where more than 1 NI is needed.
5. National Institutions like formation of trade companies, national banks, museums, construction of palaces either by decision or by event that are tied to having advisor types, NIs, or certain missions completed. Make it feel like an empire is more than just income, military, and provinces.
6. Differentiation of colony types to allow designation of crown, trade, penal, religious, and semi independent colonies with bonuses and drawbacks for each.
7.Allow release of colonial vassals that give the overlord triggered economic modifiers(merchants, efficiency, tax income, etc.) so the colony can have an ai controlled militia. Think seven years war where the colonies had separate armies from Britain.
8. More adviser slots or let cabinet or another NI give you more.
9. Colonial only wars
10. Anti expansionism wars and events that form a coalition against a rapidly expanding power. Each joiner of the Alliance would have a very high peace threshold(like 50+ warscore for them to white peace) but the alliance would have very specific war aims that once agreed to byt the defender would end the war. France blobs into Italy, Spain, Britain, Austria and HRE attack France but their objective is France releasing it's Italian possesions.
11. Better AI
1. Multiple active missions 3-4
2. More mission types and better or different rewards.
3. Some new National Ideas
4. New Decisions that refine policy within National Ideas. Like shipwrights letting you choose fast hulls for speed, heavy hulls for firepower, or better provisioning. Each NI having 3-6 decisions like that plus a few linked decisons where more than 1 NI is needed.
5. National Institutions like formation of trade companies, national banks, museums, construction of palaces either by decision or by event that are tied to having advisor types, NIs, or certain missions completed. Make it feel like an empire is more than just income, military, and provinces.
6. Differentiation of colony types to allow designation of crown, trade, penal, religious, and semi independent colonies with bonuses and drawbacks for each.
7.Allow release of colonial vassals that give the overlord triggered economic modifiers(merchants, efficiency, tax income, etc.) so the colony can have an ai controlled militia. Think seven years war where the colonies had separate armies from Britain.
8. More adviser slots or let cabinet or another NI give you more.
9. Colonial only wars
10. Anti expansionism wars and events that form a coalition against a rapidly expanding power. Each joiner of the Alliance would have a very high peace threshold(like 50+ warscore for them to white peace) but the alliance would have very specific war aims that once agreed to byt the defender would end the war. France blobs into Italy, Spain, Britain, Austria and HRE attack France but their objective is France releasing it's Italian possesions.
11. Better AI
What I want from new expansion is mostly interface optimisation. Right now it's tuned for plain vanilla, but if we have "some" complex mod with dozens-hundreds modifers applied at a time and dozens of decisions available - it becomes very hard to understand what we have and what we can.
Sure it's a very hard task - some great ideas should be born... But that would be very handy. Maybe some new concept can be introduced like "hierarchical modifiers" - you see one icon with some variations but it represent several modifiers at a time and hovering mouse over it allows to browse through low level modifiers with their effects.
P.S. And of course perfomance optimisation, new triggers, commands and all that..
Sure it's a very hard task - some great ideas should be born... But that would be very handy. Maybe some new concept can be introduced like "hierarchical modifiers" - you see one icon with some variations but it represent several modifiers at a time and hovering mouse over it allows to browse through low level modifiers with their effects.
P.S. And of course perfomance optimisation, new triggers, commands and all that..
back in ages
:rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl:i think that it would be better to go back in time. I would love to have an expansion for it if it covered 900 - 1399 as well. it would be awesome, as to include the vikings, crusades, french anglo relations with the anvegin empire (under Henry II of england), an would include more of the reconquest of iberia by the catholics, an crusades against pagan europe, and more of welsh + scottish wars with england
:rofl::rofl::wacko:
:rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl:i think that it would be better to go back in time. I would love to have an expansion for it if it covered 900 - 1399 as well. it would be awesome, as to include the vikings, crusades, french anglo relations with the anvegin empire (under Henry II of england), an would include more of the reconquest of iberia by the catholics, an crusades against pagan europe, and more of welsh + scottish wars with england
:rofl::rofl::wacko:
oooh, excellent idea. Family trees would be really nice to have.
I also think a game editor would be nice too(just to make modding a little easier)
Like the above poster, extending the timeline backwards would be amazing!!!
I also think a game editor would be nice too
(just to make modding a little easier)Like the above poster, extending the timeline backwards would be amazing!!!
I think the dynastic aspect is very important in the EU3 timeline. imo its one part of the game that is pretty flawed.
the complicated rise and fall of dynasties particularly the habsburgs as well as the earlier luxembourg dynasties shouldnt really be explained by just one royal marriage which finishes when the monarch dies. Someone should have some claim to the throne even if the marriage happened 2 monarchs ago.
I am quite excited that this is being considered. I also would like to shift the game a little towards the past. the 1399 start is a little strange imo, and I still dont really get why it is there. Couldnt the game be extended to the Crusades? imo the engine is built for it and playing as some of the earlier crusader states would be nice. Of course going too far back would probably further upset the way in which the modern world turns out but a few years would be nice.
the complicated rise and fall of dynasties particularly the habsburgs as well as the earlier luxembourg dynasties shouldnt really be explained by just one royal marriage which finishes when the monarch dies. Someone should have some claim to the throne even if the marriage happened 2 monarchs ago.
I am quite excited that this is being considered. I also would like to shift the game a little towards the past. the 1399 start is a little strange imo, and I still dont really get why it is there. Couldnt the game be extended to the Crusades? imo the engine is built for it and playing as some of the earlier crusader states would be nice. Of course going too far back would probably further upset the way in which the modern world turns out but a few years would be nice.
- Status