I voted yes, but that answer is definitely conditional. Since I already own Eu3 Complete, any addition should really focus on the core mechanics and not new things that modders could have added themselves.
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
A resounding YES!!!!!!
In case i didn't mention it... YES!! another expansion please.
I couldn't agree more with antracer. Though i certainly wouldn't mind more events and decisions to be sure. Hell, i'd be all in for another expansion if it only added depth and improved diplomacy as well as did something more enjoyable for the gaming experience in regards to Pirates.
In case i didn't mention it... YES!! another expansion please.
An expansion for this great game is always welcome!
I think I have played EU3 more than all the other games combined (EU, EU2, VIC, VIC REV, CK, CK DV, HOI, HOI2, HOI2 DD, HOI2 DDA, ROME, ROME VV).
I think I have played EU3 more than all the other games combined (EU, EU2, VIC, VIC REV, CK, CK DV, HOI, HOI2, HOI2 DD, HOI2 DDA, ROME, ROME VV).
Yes, Yes!
It would be VERY nice if we would be given modding power over War Exhaustion, War Capacity and the way the AI decides when it's time to accept peace.
I think this is one of the weak points in the AI with it's strange peace deals and/or refusal to accept peace. If the AI is a big secret, maybe the way the AI reacts to the scores could be hardcoded but the way of calculating them moddable.
It would be VERY nice if we would be given modding power over War Exhaustion, War Capacity and the way the AI decides when it's time to accept peace.
I think this is one of the weak points in the AI with it's strange peace deals and/or refusal to accept peace. If the AI is a big secret, maybe the way the AI reacts to the scores could be hardcoded but the way of calculating them moddable.
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.
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.
Ok, my post was lost in the jubilation.
Instead of offering suggestions, which are pointless (Johan indicated clearly that they have their own ideas), how about asking for DETAILS? Whether a new expansion is worthwhile or not is entirely dependent on what it contains.
Instead of offering suggestions, which are pointless (Johan indicated clearly that they have their own ideas), how about asking for DETAILS? Whether a new expansion is worthwhile or not is entirely dependent on what it contains.
We did ask for details, but none revealed so far.
Hell, the thing wasn't even announced, its just a random poll on wether they should or not make the expansion.
Well with an 85% Yes, I'd say it'll be announced fairly soon.
Or at least, they will announce the general idea of the expansion.
Cheers;
Nick
I definitely think EU3 with both expansions is a complete game, and to say otherwise would make a mockery of all the time I've spent with it. With that said, however, I voted yes in this poll. That a game is complete doesn't mean it can't get better, and if you have some rather big ideas that you think would make EU3 better, then I'd love to buy another expansion.
Personally I thought EU3 was a "complete" game even without expansions. No game is without bugs and problems, and even then I spent a lot of time with it. Same with NA. IN made it a fantastic game, but for all I know you could make it even better. The poll choice might just be a way of saying "yes", but I would pre-order such an expansion, right away
Personally I thought EU3 was a "complete" game even without expansions. No game is without bugs and problems, and even then I spent a lot of time with it. Same with NA. IN made it a fantastic game, but for all I know you could make it even better. The poll choice might just be a way of saying "yes", but I would pre-order such an expansion, right away
I doubt I'd have the specs to run an EUIV, but EUIII: THIRD EXPANSION would be a worthy purchase. I've fallen away from the game in favor of Civ, having more or less played IN into the dust, and I'm sure a new expansion would get me right back into it.
Of course =).
Whether it would expand backwards (not many seem to suggest this), forwards or to enhance general gameplay to be more realistic, I would still welcome it with open arms.
It's probably too extensive to add dynasties/characters and populations, EU IV will hopefully cover that, if made.
Whether it would expand backwards (not many seem to suggest this), forwards or to enhance general gameplay to be more realistic, I would still welcome it with open arms.
It's probably too extensive to add dynasties/characters and populations, EU IV will hopefully cover that, if made.
How much time passed after the anoucement of In Nomine's developement and it's actual release? It was only a few months, if I recall.
If given the choice between an EU3 expansion or Victoria 2 being released in just a few months, I might choose Victoria 2; but obviously Victoria 2 would take much longer to develop than an EU3 expansion. Besides, lately I think I'm more interested in spending my valuable time playing something that's perfected; rather than something that will be perfected after a while.
The fact that I could possibly be playing EU3 with a new expansion by maybe the end of the year is a wonderful prospect to think of.
And just think back to how much these EU3 expansions can change fundamental gameplay mechanics: with In Nomine, all over-seas production became tarriffs; this is the kind of change you'd only expect to see in a sequel (EU4). Now that I think about it, there were even some major fundamental changes introduced by patches that came after In Nomine.
So I don't really think that an expansion can't make some of the major changes you'd ordinarily only expect from a sequel; if Paradox was just an ordinary company.
If given the choice between an EU3 expansion or Victoria 2 being released in just a few months, I might choose Victoria 2; but obviously Victoria 2 would take much longer to develop than an EU3 expansion. Besides, lately I think I'm more interested in spending my valuable time playing something that's perfected; rather than something that will be perfected after a while.
The fact that I could possibly be playing EU3 with a new expansion by maybe the end of the year is a wonderful prospect to think of.
And just think back to how much these EU3 expansions can change fundamental gameplay mechanics: with In Nomine, all over-seas production became tarriffs; this is the kind of change you'd only expect to see in a sequel (EU4). Now that I think about it, there were even some major fundamental changes introduced by patches that came after In Nomine.
So I don't really think that an expansion can't make some of the major changes you'd ordinarily only expect from a sequel; if Paradox was just an ordinary company.
Last edited:
Im going to hazard a guess and say that what Johan thinks of implementing in a eventual expansion is the improved AI it looks like they have developed for HOI 3, which is looking to shape up to be a very flexible and capable beast. Wild speculation from my part of course
I would love to see that in an expansion. That might be one thing that would justify a whole new game though.Im going to hazard a guess and say that what Johan thinks of implementing in a eventual expansion is the improved AI it looks like they have developed for HOI 3, which is looking to shape up to be a very flexible and capable beast. Wild speculation from my part of course
Abso-frickin'-lutely
Paradox is the only remaining gaming company whose products I buy without question. I have no doubt that any further expansion would build the game up, just as the previous ones have.
I agree with most calling for further development of existing mechanics, i.e. trade, religion, etc., and also a slight extension in time-frame (both ways, although if I had to choose it would be to start earlier rather than finish later).
It would also be nice if the system evolved with the times. There was an old Napoleonic game, whose name I can't remember but it might have been a Koei title, where you started off small, making small decisions, and as you grew more powerful (up to Emperor) you were making the big decsions of state. I think that this is something that could be modeled into the government aspect of EUIII, as opposed to just offering % bonuses to certain things.
For instance, some have called for a bit of a CKII lite experience, an idea I like. Early on, in game terms, this would be heavier because the states were more decentralized and there were more people to deal with (more vassals for the king). As states developed and the power of the royal court grew, there would be less of that, and the people element would be more centered in the capital and less in outlying regions. For instance, the French EU III vassals like Bearn are probably the CK equivalent of the few remaining counts reporting directly to the French king.
So there would be a progression from a CK type system of primary lord-vassal relations to a more Rome type system where it's about the goings on and political intrigue in the capital. And in a republican style of government this sort of system could include elections.
Or maybe this is more EUIV stuff, but anyways.
Paradox is the only remaining gaming company whose products I buy without question. I have no doubt that any further expansion would build the game up, just as the previous ones have.
I agree with most calling for further development of existing mechanics, i.e. trade, religion, etc., and also a slight extension in time-frame (both ways, although if I had to choose it would be to start earlier rather than finish later).
It would also be nice if the system evolved with the times. There was an old Napoleonic game, whose name I can't remember but it might have been a Koei title, where you started off small, making small decisions, and as you grew more powerful (up to Emperor) you were making the big decsions of state. I think that this is something that could be modeled into the government aspect of EUIII, as opposed to just offering % bonuses to certain things.
For instance, some have called for a bit of a CKII lite experience, an idea I like. Early on, in game terms, this would be heavier because the states were more decentralized and there were more people to deal with (more vassals for the king). As states developed and the power of the royal court grew, there would be less of that, and the people element would be more centered in the capital and less in outlying regions. For instance, the French EU III vassals like Bearn are probably the CK equivalent of the few remaining counts reporting directly to the French king.
So there would be a progression from a CK type system of primary lord-vassal relations to a more Rome type system where it's about the goings on and political intrigue in the capital. And in a republican style of government this sort of system could include elections.
Or maybe this is more EUIV stuff, but anyways.
Of course i want more of this wonderful game. Perhaps not as much as id like more material for CK, but i defiantely want it.
Hopefully a lot of the good stuff the modding community idi to make the game better fins its way into the game without being the only improvement. As it was said before: A Dynasty system and more diplomatic, trade and economy options would be great. The diplomacy system should also be improved, MM is surely going a good way here with creating a system of balance of Power.
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.
Hopefully a lot of the good stuff the modding community idi to make the game better fins its way into the game without being the only improvement. As it was said before: A Dynasty system and more diplomatic, trade and economy options would be great. The diplomacy system should also be improved, MM is surely going a good way here with creating a system of balance of Power.
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.
- Status