Do you want more EU3?

[Haftetavenscrap]

I´d like a "diplomatic watchlist", where you could keep a closer eye on neighbours (do they switch allies, guarantees expire, royal marriages etc). The message settings affect all the world, but sometime you just want to pick a target and watch them. Might be a spy mission, or dependant on monarch´s diplo rating, but something like that could give the player more overview.

It would also be nice to know when your own guarantees/warnings expire.

 

[unmerged(485)]

I'm most for a CK2, a new game and add more ideas on the dossier to make a revolutionary EU4 that leaves EU3 as a Child Game (something like the move from EU2 to EU3 and not the little step that was EU to EU2)

Couldn't have said it better myself!

 

[jdrou]

Fix the tech system so that cavalry can be enabled by the appropriate tech level even for countries that had no cavalry unit before that (as it already works for ships and artillery).

Allow unit types to be enabled by event command.

Allow province-scope triggered modifiers.

 

[Haftetavenscrap]

Allow province-scope triggered modifiers.

Definitely!

Here's a couple diplomatic options I think we all want:
Call allies to arms:
It would be nice to be able to get allies part way through a war, and it's always annoying to get pulled into a guarantee/warning war without your vassal's support.
Gift a province to someone for relations and loss of BB:
Instead of selling it for 0 with no bonus at all.

 

[Alex_brunius]

Me, Doomdark, King and other others of the team now have dozens up dozens of cool ideas for Eu3.

That sounds more like EU4.

Expansion packs do lose alot of appeal after they pile up. Don't make the same simple mistake that the Sims did.

IMHO Its time to return to another era (CK, Vicky or unexplored) for a while before going back to EU again.

 

[Garak]

That sounds more like EU4.

Expansion packs do lose alot of appeal after they pile up. Don't make the same simple mistake that the Sims did.

IMHO Its time to return to another era (CK, Vicky or unexplored) for a while before going back to EU again.

Same mistake the Sims did? Last I checked, the Sims is one of the best selling PC games of all time. What "mistake" are you referring to, exactly?

 

[unmerged(67185)]

Oh I would also like to see the Victory point system from eu2 added to Eu3 so you can see if you are the winning country in the end.

 

[unmerged(37485)]

So, would you guys like another expansion pack for EU3 or do you view the game as complete?

Big fan of EU series and other Paradox games, namely CK.

Only yesterday bought complete, still for me is a no brainer to say I would love an expansion pack. Not yet familiar with some of the changes done between vanilla and IN3.1, but it would for me be a lot of fun if you merged the CK dinasty aspect of "genetics" management into EU3, so that succession is not so random ... and to extend EU3 all the way to XI century would be nice, although i can understand that game mechanism would be weird to accomodate feudalism rules into an EU3 engine

 

[finyou2]

Same mistake the Sims did? Last I checked, the Sims is one of the best selling PC games of all time. What "mistake" are you referring to, exactly?

Probably those huge amount of little expansion packs what they released

 

[Earl Uhtred]

Now to be fair I never played it for more than 10 minutes but every expansion to the Sims seemed to be little more than toys for the dollshouse. 'Sims: Cottaging Capers', 'Sims: Hydrotherapy Clinic Hijinx' and so forth. Nothing Real and Substantive, plus the basic concept was gay. Every expansion to EU3 added something meaningful to the experience.

 

[unmerged(78999)]

I say wait for EU4. Like it has been said at least a few times, don't overload us with expansions. They start to jade the gamer - "Yeah, EU3 is good, but if you really want the experience, you are going to have to drop another $60 for three expansions that are going to take up a total 2GB on your harddrive." Give us a few years and then EU4. Mods can keep me going for that long.

As a side note, I quit playing The Sims because I couldn't afford to buy all of the rapid-fire expansions. Why play the game if you can't afford to play the whole thing? It's like going paintballing without goggles. It's fun, but there is a much better way of playing.

 

[berto]

I would favor an expansion that

• Extends the scripting language and API. Listen to the modders. Give them everything they want.
• Makes AI, diplomacy, warfare, trade, etc. more and more scriptable.
• Removes any limitations to modding the game graphically. Dynamic graphics, tied to the geographical area and time period.
• Gives modders better, more comprehensive coding and debugging tools.

Basically, as much as feasible, make all game variables moddable, and all game features scriptable. From a modding standpoint, open up the game completely. Then fixing any game deficiencies becomes "merely" a matter of time and as much effort as modders are willing to put into it.

These sub-surface changes might not be enough to sell the expansion to the general public, admittedly. So add some bells & whistles and surface chrome as necessary.

Then walk away from it. Let the modders have at it for the next several years. Then wow us all with a better-than-ever EUIV.

 

[james24eagle]

I agreee with berto on two of his point above, (1) that modders' desires should be weighted heavily, and (2) that graphics should be made more fluid and tools be made available to players to mod the graphics, sprites and map more easily, etc...

Also, I've thought of another diplomatic ability that I'd like to see included, specifically in regards to the HRE. I would like to see the ability to offer/demand that an electorship be relinquished/resigned or traded to another player as part of a peace deal or diplomatic negotioation. Or if a CK style dynasty system is included, which I hope it is, then I would like to see the title be a linked to a person as opposed to a state.


EDIT: While I'm thinking of it...

We have probably all thought it at one point or another - can you please revise the system used for succession wars?! At a minimum the player should be able to determine whether or not he wants to accept the throne before war is declared. Also, a player should have the ability to chooses if they want to contest the succession rather than forcing them into an undesired war. Afterall, historically, succession wars were often anticiapted long in advance of the monarchs death. This gave states time to lobby powerful neighbors and prevent a crisis. This isn't the case in EU3 and as such it gives the game a very unrealistic feel to it. I hope that this is tied to a CK DYNASTY SYSTEM as well.

 

[jamhaw]

... namely, that some parts of the world are only being available to settle in with higher levels of technological skill and go along with sometimes significant changes to the landscape as well. Which never stopped nations from laying claims (sometimes even overlapping ones) on them, of course.

None of it is currently simulated in EU3.

I don't believe that Australia is available and it was just a settleable as New Zealand, and I would say more discoverable considering it's size. The failure to discover Australia was really just a fluke.

 

[jamhaw]

What I want most is a return of history tags. I just cannot have fun with most non-European naitons becuase I have no idea of their history or motivations. I have difficulty enjoying many of the more obscure European nations for the same reason. Heck a lot of that stuff could be taken off of EUII.

 

[james24eagle]

This has been alluded to before... I would like to have more quasi-supernational organizations.

What I mean by this is essentially that I would like modders too have the ability to create multiple "Holy Roman Empires" These would then be used to represnt historical creations such as the Hansaentic League.

There are a few distinctions and clarifications that I should make to better help conceptualize how I would reccomend that this be implemented.

1. No new interface would be necissary. Instead I reccomend that the HRE "map mode" visually depicting the HRE on the map be used to show these other organizations/associations.

2. The code be very simple, similar to the current "HRE=yes". Also that the code allow these organizations to specify a color for their visual display.

3 This is very different from the concept of regions and the regions map mode. Primarilly because this concept represents fluid dynamic organizations rather than areas of the world "set in stone".

4. This model would allow provinces and countries to be added or removed from membership in these groups, either by province/national decisions or by event.

I'm sure I'm leaving things out, but I think this would be extremely useful.


Also, another interface idea.... have a small area at the bottom of each page of the (national shield) interface devoted to topic appropriate decisions. This would allow government related decisions to be sepperated from military decisions etc..

 

[jdrou]

"Yeah, EU3 is good, but if you really want the experience, you are going to have to drop another $60 for three expansions that are going to take up a total 2GB on your harddrive."

EU3 IN 3.2 takes up only about 60MB more space than EU3 1.3 did. Most of the real changes are in the .exe and text files, not graphics like most expansions. And most likely very few people will be buying the base EU3 these days so if you are just starting out all you will need is EU3 Complete ($10-$28) and the new expansion (probably $20). i.e. roughly what a complete new game would cost.

 

[Peter Ebbesen]

I agreee with berto on two of his point above, (1) that modders' desires should be weighted heavily, and (2) that graphics should be made more fluid and tools be made available to players to mod the graphics, sprites and map more easily, etc...

This is, perhaps, a silly question but just why should modders' desires be weighted heavily?

It is not that I don't like modding Paradox games, for I do, but the vast majority of players of any game do not personally modify their games, nor do they buy games for the modding options.

Surely it makes better better sense to add new modding possibilities primarily as needed to support new areas of game mechanics that come with the expansion (and are the focus of it) and which are thus beneficial to everybody rather than to add modding options for the sake of adding modding options and making modders happy while leaving the expansion itself feeling starved for content.

 

[jdrou]

I don't believe that Australia is available and it was just a settleable as New Zealand.

Australia is certainly available for colonizing in EU3; just not the interior.

What I want most is a return of history tags.

You mean historical events?

I just cannot have fun with most non-European naitons becuase I have no idea of their history or motivations. I have difficulty enjoying many of the more obscure European nations for the same reason.

You mean the countries that had almost no historical events or leaders in EU2 (without mods)? Those are exactly the countries that are more fun to play in EU3.
There is virtually no chance that an EU3 expansion will make the game significantly more like EU2; the 'historical' options added in the NA expansion that people begged for are probably almost never used except by new players that don't know how they work.

 

[PrawnStar]

I'd really wouldn't want effort to be aimed at providing more options on graphics / modding compared with either new gameplay features or improving existing features.

I'm not sure why I should be expected to pay for a modders development environment rather than a game from Paradox. Particularly when it's about stuff like graphics which is basically trivial.