Does anyone still play EUIII? Maybe even prefers it over EUIV?

[Kaede11]

I always wonder if there's still anybody playing this game because I sometimes find myself missing some of EUIII features when playing EUIV, like sliders and the way techonology works... the point system is okay but it makes for a very different game. I sometimes find myself looking at both games asking myself "Which one should I play today?" so I just wanted to know what others think or do.

 

[kingofeurope]

I play EUIII very regularly , as I dont have EUIV, which i don't like anyway.

 

[Sudertum]

I always wonder if there's still anybody playing this game because I sometimes find myself missing some of EUIII features when playing EUIV, like sliders and the way techonology works... the point system is okay but it makes for a very different game. I sometimes find myself looking at both games asking myself "Which one should I play today?" so I just wanted to know what others think or do.

Prefer myself EU3 over EU4, still spending far more time with EU3. EU4 is missing something can not tell what exactly (charme?).

 

[Kaede11]

Prefer myself EU3 over EU4, still spending far more time with EU3. EU4 is missing something can not tell what exactly (charme?).

I don't exactly know, but I find myself in a similar situation... EUIII has something that EUIV has not and I don't exactly know if it's just me that after so much time in EUIII I can't move forward or what... that's why I was asking, just to know what did people think.

The main differences, after playing both, are sliders and techonology points. The main problem, I think, is that EUIV easy in a bad way. I'm not saying that it is not fun, but the hole points system makes it feel more like a game and less like a... history simulator? I don't know. In EUIII you can improve your stability by spending money in the stability area instead of investing it in techonology, which makes up for a feeling of progression, in EUIV you simply click a button and voila! you've just exchanged 200 points to increase your stability one rank. The same happens with other areas like... war exhaustion or inflation. Like I said, EUIV is fun to play, but EUIII has that little something and I think that I prefer it over the new version.

 

[Jango40]

I play EU3 because EU4 is bad, period. It's more limited, you need to do gamey stuff like vassal feeding so the whole world doesn't make a coalition, Bullshitty 15 year truces where you can do nothing else than wait, fundamental game features being changed every freaking patch, westernising doesn't give you western units, you just get somewhat worse units of your tech, it's buggy, the monarch points system is terrible (That may be subjective.. but it still sucks), and that's just out of the top of my head.

 

[AsdfeZxcas]

I still play EU3, maily because I'm waiting for EU4 to be finished patching/expanding, so I'm sure I'm getting the finished product. (Yeah, I'm cheap like that.) Also, EU3's map looks cooler.

 

[Brent15]

I reluctantly bought EU4 on steam but found the client and required internet connection for Local Area networks a real burden. I really liked some of the concepts behind EU4 but really prefer single national ideas as opposed to idea groups. Also I found the diplomacy a little bit boring - a bit of a waiting game - but maybe that improves as you get further into it.

 

[cotwell]

I actually like HttT a lot more than later versions, but I've been having trouble modding it - it just isn't all that stable I guess. But just as far as how the game works - yes I like EU3 better than EU4. I actually don't even like the map in 4, although a lot of people do.

 

[camppa]

There are some things I miss being able to do from 3, but I think 4 is the better game. I spend more time with the speed on x5 than I did in EU3 previous to 5.2 and I've only managed to hit stability +3 once for a couple years before negative events came crashing down on me. I wouldn't say EU4 railroads you along history, but I miss the earlier start date which meant the colonization game was open to pretty much everyone in Europe.

Also I found the diplomacy a little bit boring - a bit of a waiting game - but maybe that improves as you get further into it.

Maybe it's been longer since I've played EU3 than I thought. How's the diplomacy more of a waiting game in 4 than it was in 3?

 

[J.B.]

I still play Europa Universalis III. It was only last year that I had found out EUIII: Chronicles has been available for the Mac, through the App Store. In my experience, I have had no game crashes that I could recall, and the game is running smoothly. EUIV may be available for Macs, although I doubt that my four year old computer will be able to run it with no upgrade needed. Victoria II is quite slow for my computer, and Hearts of Iron III is even worse, so that largely why I doubt EUIV's performance. For now, I will stick with EUIII, and possibly wait until I've upgraded to something else within a few years.

 

[Brent15]

I actually don't even like the map in 4, although a lot of people do.

Yea, I don't really care for the map either. I find the projection too hard to focus on - height differences in the terrain.

Maybe it's been longer since I've played EU3 than I thought. How's the diplomacy more of a waiting game in 4 than it was in 3?

To be fair I only played EU4 for a couple of weeks because it just took too long to setup a game. But I remember having to cultivate relationships and waiting for monarch points left me a little bored. Maybe that's not a fair assessment.

 

[cotwell]

I wouldn't say EU4 railroads you along history, but I miss the earlier start date which meant the colonization game was open to pretty much everyone in Europe.

One of my main complaints about 4.

 

[Restless Native]

I spent a lot of time on EUIII and bought EUIV straight away but after about 4 or 5 games I went back to EUIII.
EUIV was just too much like bean counting (wait for monarch points to build up, spend here, wait again, spend there), and then take a few provinces and the whole world creates an alliance to get you.
I also did not like the national ideas implementation, especially the unique idea group for each country. It seems to imply some sort of pre-defined national policy instead of you deciding what kind of nation you play and become.
The whole game felt like you were just waiting for the next thing to spend your monarch points on and doing nothing else. I drop back into the EUIV forums from time to time and it looks like it's even worse now. The ideas were good, it just didn’t work for me.
I went back to EUIII and play with Death and Taxes (great mod) with a few changes of my own and still enjoy it. I play a lot of different types of games on PC and console but EUIII is always that deeply immersive yet relaxing long term game which I can always go back to. It feels like home.

 

[Pacius Ferox]

I don't know. I'm a poor man with a poor computer.

 

[1anrs]

I play EU3 because EU4 is bad, period. It's more limited, you need to do gamey stuff like vassal feeding so the whole world doesn't make a coalition, Bullshitty 15 year truces where you can do nothing else than wait, fundamental game features being changed every freaking patch, westernising doesn't give you western units, you just get somewhat worse units of your tech, it's buggy, the monarch points system is terrible (That may be subjective.. but it still sucks), and that's just out of the top of my head.

I'll admit I've never played EU4 but I heard bad things about it and what you say sounds pretty cr@p frankly! Looks like I've been right to avoid it. I love EU3 a lot incidentally, great game!

I still play EU3, maily because I'm waiting for EU4 to be finished patching/expanding, so I'm sure I'm getting the finished product. (Yeah, I'm cheap like that.) ...

That's my attitude exactly, I await the finished product as well!

I don't know. I'm a poor man with a poor computer.

Nothing wrong with that

 

[WeissRaben]

I would go on playing EU3 for years, but...the AI. Just the AI deters me. After having seen a waaay better AI in EU4, going back to bedtable-level AI is difficult.

And it is a shame, because EU3 shines over EU4 in almost all fields. At least for now.

 

[Sudertum]

I would go on playing EU3 for years, but...the AI. Just the AI deters me. After having seen a waaay better AI in EU4, going back to bedtable-level AI is difficult.

And it is a shame, because EU3 shines over EU4 in almost all fields. At least for now.

As AI can not handle severall useless/nonsensial default missions, for their own expansion it is no wonder. Seeing getting Brandenburg a conquer Malakka mission alone makes me ...:rofl:

 

[unmerged(518894)]

EU3 Has a special place in my heart for being the first GS game I ever understood. Good times playing with my good friend Jonathan after college.

 

[awesomenessofme]

I paid full price for the base EU4 because it seemed like a good game and a lot of my favorite YouTubers play it (Arumba, Quill18), only to discover that on my shoddy PC, it ran like a snail covered in cement. My relatively new laptop can run EU3 at 2-3 months a minute, but the game I tried as the Ottomans in EU4 lasted 8 years and took about 2 hours. So EU4 could be the best game ever, and I'd still prefer EU3.
Also, EU4 is a lot more linear, not railroading per se, but still annoying. EU3 is a game where you can rule half the world using vassal states without inexplicably having awful ships (seriously, WTH?) and it's possible to conquer the world without being in the top 1% of players.

 

[cacra]

it's possible to conquer the world without being in the top 1% of players.

Im not sure that is a good thing - conquering the world should be impossible, it did not happen in real life after all. EU3, and almost every Paradox game, as a historical simulator fails because they are far too easy. Surviving as Frankfurt should be a challenge, as it is ruling the world as Frankfurt is relatively easy.