Essentials

[unmerged(53507)]

What would I want?

MORE EXPENSIVE ARMIES AND NAVIES. We should always be cash-strapped.

Either a bigger number of fortified cities or longer sieges (one should not be able to conquer the Low Countries with less than half a dozen sieges).

An economy that allows for dynamic cycles of expansion and recession.

A more realistic inflation model.

A dynastic system (simpler than CK) that allows one to try to forge alliances and perhaps inherit some lands [i.e. play Habsburg-style]. Maybe create a nation by nation case (this country can be totally inherited, this one can become a vassal, this one can only become allied)

 

[unmerged(2456)]

Er...I'm Canadian, so I won't deny that I see it from a very Euro-centric point of view.

That's not to say that other nifty stuff wasn't happening at the time in other parts of the world. It's just that I'm more familiar with the European part.

Let me think for a sec...

- I guess China was in a somewhat less chaotic state than usual, and Han would have been mid-voyage or something (not sure).
- Japan was probably in turmoil (or that's what I vaguely remember from the last time I played EU2 as Japan)
- We're in the run up phases to the whole Babur thingy
- Golden Horde is in the midst of a very serious collapse
- er....

For Japan its not a good time to start out as you miss all the good Ashikaga leaders and have to go your first 100 years though massive RR.

I hope they redo that part to allow for a more dyanmic breakup of Japan during the Onin war and Sengoku Jedai. The RR was bad and why you never really saw any AARs for Japan after the Sengoku Jedai began. For AGCEEP i've had to rewrite the entire series for the Onin War it was so badly done. It was so bad even the person who originally coded it didn't know if it worked. It would be nice if Japan was given similar treatment as HRE since its a similar setup to HRE (not exact), but that's just my hope.

China is in a stable period now, but still has the collapse to come which could be redone to be better and more dynamic. The problem is EU2 engine doesn't really support a system that works well for the rebellions in China. The system was designed for breakaway states for those wishing to form their own nation or civil wars.

For Babur, the main problem was the ai and the lack of some events to spark it and dealing with the collapse of the Timurid Empire, which still must be dealt with, but its now on its downward Spiral. In EU2 under Shah Ruhk you still had a level of stability.

India...well india in eu2 just plain sucks because its too few provinces for an area that should have almost 5 times the number, atleast 3 times, and more states.


The other big problem with Asia is the religions and culture. First, several relgions are used as cultures, most noably is Sihkism. Second, the religions there did not really match things very good, mostly because they had no branches and Asia is pluralistic, especially eastern part. And cultures, its mostly the effects. Those affects did not work right in esepcially a confuscianstic society. However, cultures had a larger problem, similar to cores.

Both cores and cultures overlap on what their effects are too much and they try to be too many things. This means you get really bad situations where you have 20 pages of debate about what cultures and cores "mean multiple times.



Anyway my priorities are:

1. More modding tools
2. Everthing tag, id, etc wise should have extra slots for users. Cultures and relgions did not. We could canabilize cultures, but not relgions. Same with province goods.
3. Somewhat more deferance given to Asia, as it was still a major power in this timeframe. Africa, Austrailla weren't and Americas were only were to th extent they were used for resource mining and the USA formation. The focus can still be europe, i just want a bit more deferance.
4. just more triggers and effects for events. Perhaps different type of events
5. Make the effects and ai chance more like CK. The firing could still be like eu2.
6. No changing tags to change the name of a country and avoid many problem with the engine...unless that's finally been fixed somehow.
7. Different or more relevent technology paths for Asia. Even in 1453, China had signigigant naval power, even though its famed treasure fleet was no more. It would further decline. Tht or make it possible to slide backwards in techs.
8. A setup for Japan similar to HRE special setup, as both are similar in nature.

 

[Yakman]

What I want is a crushing cycle of debt.

I want a CK-inspired event model for the Paradox Product--all events are generic and balanced to happen to anyone [or anyone occupying particular provinces], rather than just a certain country. I just love it when France has been reduced to Paris and yet they get all these wonderful events--let's build Versailles! If modders want to come up with historical ones, then they should do so--but p-dox should focus on generic events.

Players don't build province improvements--save military ones. They are generated via event according to wealth, population, and randomness.

Dynamic trading networks, not centers of trade.

CK-inspired tech-spread.

better Pirates.

 

[Jayavarman]

dsadfsfsdaf

We definitely need more provinces in Asia to do what we need to do.
For me, I want to model the Vietnamese civil wars.

 

[arcorelli]

Players don't build province improvements--save military ones. They are generated via event according to wealth, population, and randomness.

The improvements of EU2 were all the kind of stuff States build: Administrative buildings (the state building their administrative structure after all), military ones and large economic ones. The state spend their funds in their bureocracy, in their military and often in economic things. So, basically, what happened in EU2.

 

[Yakman]

The improvements of EU2 were all the kind of stuff States build: Administrative buildings (the state building their administrative structure after all), military ones and large economic ones. The state spend their funds in their bureocracy, in their military and often in economic things. So, basically, what happened in EU2.

no. the manufacturies? the governors?

 

[George LeS]

The ideas are nice - but that does not make them essential.

So label ideas as ideas, and essentials as essentials.

The only thing I consider essential is that the end product keeps to the spirit of EU1&2, namely being fairly easily accessible considering the scope.

Well, that's just my opinion on what's essential - and what's not. Yours might reasonably differ.

A more "realistic" or "historical" implementation would easily lose some of those good features - or it might not. But it is certainly something to keep in mind. Fun >> Realism, and Game >> Simulation.

Fair enough. Of course, many posts before either your or my 1st in this thread, the "essential" had been discarded, & this became wishlist, beta version. But that's inevitable with the suddenness of the announcement. And it is in the spirit of the period, when 1500 ton ships were called 1200 tonners.

In fact, none of us has any idea what, if any, of our ideas may influence Paradox in EU3. It may be already set in stone.

 

[Falstaff]

Maybe Paradox should consider announcing games, when they have decided to do them, and let the community have time to gather some ideas, whether they be used or not.

 

[Yakman]

Maybe Paradox should consider announcing games, when they have decided to do them, and let the community have time to gather some ideas, whether they be used or not.

where would we get our postcounts from?

 

[Falstaff]

where would we get our postcounts from?

What do you mean? You would get one count for each post in the forum for e.g. EU4.

 

[BiB]

Now, now, it's not about postcounts.

 

[Mad King James]

Hey some of us actually care!

 

[BiB]

Fine, very well then, just don't show so by spaming

 

[Yakman]

Now, now, it's not about postcounts.

of course it's not about post counts [wink wink! nudge nudge!] we all are satisfied with our postcounts [he said knowingly!]

 

[unmerged(36763)]

Players don't build province improvements--save military ones. They are generated via event according to wealth, population, and randomness.

That is a bit too abstracr for my taste. Its nice to have some control of your country beyond the military. This was the age of absolutism.

 

[unmerged(21523)]

As Jinnai said, I would love to see a bit more detail for Asia, even if the focus remains on Europe. Province swapping should be for player nations in MP only, as anyone who has seen AI nations make peace in EU2 knows that the AI has no conception of how province A might be more valuable than province B. Trade routes or a more intricate COT system would be fabulous if it can be implemented correctly. What I'd like to see for trade system would be:
1. Trade routes linking major cities/producing regions laid out at the beginning of the game. To reflect that these routes are largely controlled by private traders, it should be very difficult for the player to change them (i.e. there should be a strong bias in favor of maintaining existing routes instead of pioneering new ones) though not impossible.
2. Specific goods tied to specific routes. If you want to engage if shipbuilding for instance, you need to either a) have timber-producing provinces close to your shipyard or b) have merchants active in a trade center/route where lumber is sold. This would allow commodities to actually become important in their own right
3. Trade infrastructure as a category of domestic investment, allowing players to encourage trade by building courts, warehouses, caravanserais, etc.

Some of that may not be manageable in practical terms, which must, of course, rule the day.

 

[Grosshaus]

Maybe Paradox should consider announcing games, when they have decided to do them, and let the community have time to gather some ideas, whether they be used or not.

I´d be quite surprised if they haven´t read the EU3 wishlist threads. Plus the game is a year away from today, which gives them plenty of time to do also design changes based on, among others, public opinion.

 

[Peter Ebbesen]

Maybe Paradox should consider announcing games, when they have decided to do them, and let the community have time to gather some ideas, whether they be used or not.

There's an 1,874 post long (and counting) EU3 wishlist created over the last few years stuffed with more weird, interesting, intimidating, thoughtless, and great ideas than any one mind can dream up, which amongst its plentitude includes most of the ideas that get posted now (and often with the same author). While the possibility exists that announcing EU3 to the fans long before it makes sense from a traditional financial point of view would lead to a significant improvement in the quality of the wishlist rather than just an enlargement, it doesn't seem very likely.

*ducks and covers*

 

[Falstaff]

Maybe if people knew the game was going to be developed, they would ramble less (hopelessly naive here, I know ), and perhaps make a more concentrated effort to assemble the best ideas in an easy digestable form. Who wants to read a 1874 post long thread?

 

[unmerged(6777)]

One look at the last two days of posts on this forum would give you an idea what things would be like.

Besides...a games company wouldn't say "We've decided to make a game about XXXXX, please give us ideas about how we should do it so we can cobble together some sort of GDD and then start coding it sometime." It would be...(*tries to find the right word*)...insane...suicidal...