EU: another Civ2, Imp2, or AOE?

[unmerged(150)]

Hi

been following this one for a while as well as the other main historical strat game that released this year - shogun. The general impression I get from the reviews of shogun are that its a real time wargame (?) with a (paper) thin strategic wrapper - just read the Gamespot review (hardly the most critical of sites) which said 'The game's research model is very simple, and there is a paltry diplomacy model and limited espionage options'! Not what Id been thinking it was from alot of the previews and rather puts me off buying it. Rather got me thinking as to what EU is going to be like as well. Id be interested hearing from any beta testers to know whether they would put Europa universalis in the same bracket. On a scale from a Civ type game through the Imperialism camp to the other extreme of an age of empires/kings clone, where would you put it? Any advice appreciated as ever

Best Al

 

[unmerged(28)]

This is my personal view of course...

I think it has roughly one part civ2; building and developing your country and colonising the the new world. And one part Imp1/2 with a rather advanced economic system and trade feature. But the third part is IMHO the classical wargame combined with the alliance struggles of Diplomacy.
It is a much more coherent gam than either Civ or Imp. Civ being to dispearsed covering a period of many thousand years portaiting civilisations as odd as americans under Washington and ol'Pericles' Greece. War between archers and attack helicopters is just untasty. Imp, actually I prefered Imp1, had a great economic motor but it forced you down to the extreme corner of micromanagement. And the miliary system felt rather obsolete. You couldn't even afford a decent army to defend you country.biased you ask me.

No I think this is a much better game. Has it everything ? Is it the fullproof 100% game that will stand the test of time until the year 3000 ? Maybe not. Every game as its dark spots, but... This is the best computergame in this class yet.

And the potentials for a EU2 and EU3 are enormous..

 

[unmerged(175)]

Imagine Seven Kingdoms 2 with a bigger map, fewer unit types, deeper and richer gameplay, and a different setting (with no Fryhtans of course) and i think you will get this game.

 

[unmerged(31)]

From what I've heard and the screenshots, it sounds like the best game in the world. Btw, have I seen qwerty before?

 

[Doomdark]

Imagine Seven Kingdoms 2 with a bigger map, fewer unit types, deeper and richer gameplay, and a different setting (with no Fryhtans of course) and i think you will get this game.

Um, AP, this game has very little in common with Seven Kingdoms 2. Oh no, I feel a lecture coming on!

In military language there are three rough levels of planning:

1) Strategic. This is the top level, which concerns the dealings of whole nations. E.g. which countries you intend to declare war on, and the long term goals of entire army groups. Basically you take on the role of dictator.

Strategy Games: Europa Universalis, Civilization, World in Flames, Warlords, ...

2) Operational. This is the middle level, concerning the movements of armies along a large section of a frontline. E.g. very large battles like Stalingrad. Here you play a Field Marshal.

Operational Games: Panzer General, Operational Art of War, ...

3) Tactical. This everything below operational. E.g. Midsize battles down to squad level combat. A tactician is an expert on troop formations, camoflage, terrain etc.

Tactics Games: StarCraft, Command & Conquer, Close Combat, Horse & Musket, Age of Empires, The Settlers, Seven Kingdoms, ...

Strategy Games with Tactical Battles:
Shogun: Total War, Imperialism, Master of Orion, Romance of the Three Kingdoms, ...

While SK2, AoE2 and The Settlers do concern nations they play exactly like tactical games of the Command & Conquer variety. I.e. it is a member of the (misnamed) RTS family of games which took off with Dune 2 but can trace its roots back to Populous, Sim City, Utopia and Megalomania.

EU, on the other hand, is a relative of old computer games like Defender of the Crown, which can trace their ancestry back to some of the very first board games.

I would best describe EU as a cross between Civilization and Romance of the Three Kingdoms, but in real time.

/Professor Doomdark

[This message has been edited by Doomdark (edited 21-06-2000).]

 

[unmerged(175)]

Professor? Well i was comparing it to Seven Kingdoms 2 because you build factorie's, can only raise armie's that are based on the city's (provinces) population, you have to deal with revolts, you have to support your armie's after you intially recruit them, having leaders increases units effectiveness, and it is realtime.


that is why i was comparing it.

 

[unmerged(13)]

A cross between all 3 sub-genres will do be fine for EU 2


Sapura

 

[unmerged(175)]

Question, for combat can we zoom into a more detailed tactical map?

 

[Tacticon]

I had a couple of questions about the game as well. Is their only on settlement/town/city per province? Do they grow or expand and how?

 

[Doomdark]

Professor?

It was intended as a joke, since my post turned into a lecture... Don't be so quick to bite, kid.

Well i was comparing it to Seven Kingdoms 2 because you build factorie's, can only raise armie's that are based on the city's (provinces) population, you have to deal with revolts, you have to support your armie's after you intially recruit them, having leaders increases units effectiveness, and it is realtime.

I am sorry, but none of this changes the fact that the Seven Kingdoms games are basically Dune 2 clones (although very good ones).

If you had ever played Defender of the Crown, Lords of the Realm, Romance of the Three Kingdoms or similar you would see that EU is much closer to their type of gameplay.

/Doomie

 

[unmerged(13)]

ApKicks,

I don't think you can zoom in, I've read a few posts on usenet and they're complaining about this as well. Doesn't really matter, since the actual game sprites aren't anything to write home about. Which is good, because if they were highly detailed, then you'd need a p3+ to get it running smoothly.


Sapura

 

[unmerged(50)]

Originally posted by Tacticon on 06-22-2000 07:14 AM
I had a couple of questions about the game as well. Is their only on settlement/town/city per province? Do they grow or expand and how?

Yes, one City, Trade post or Colony per province.

You can expand only a Colony sending a colonist ...
After having reached a size of 5 000, a city cannot grow any more but by natural way.


------------------
Si vis pacem, para bellum

 

[Tacticon]

Thanks JP,

What's the maximum level of population that can be reached? Do wars, plagues or civil disturbences effect the populations?

- Tacticon

[This message has been edited by Tacticon (edited 26-06-2000).]

 

[unmerged(50)]

Originally posted by Tacticon on 06-26-2000 06:31 AM
Thanks JP,

What's the maximum level of population that can be reached? Do wars, plagues or civil disturbences effect the populations?

- Tacticon

[This message has been edited by Tacticon (edited 26-06-2000).]

The maximum population is 999999.
This population is reached by the large known cities.
Of course, various events can affect the growth of a province, in particular the stability of the country and sometimes the random events as the plague which suddenly halves the population of a province.

Here part of the report of Heiko on a long test made last March after having played during 250 years (in the game of course !) :
'Cities with 999999 inhabitants (west to east):
Rome, Venice, Hamburg, Riga, Isfahan, Delhi, Peking, Wei-hai-wei, Kyoto, Tokio
over 950000 inhabitants: Berlin, Astrakhan'

------------------
Si vis pacem, para bellum


[This message has been edited by JP (edited 26-06-2000).]

 

[unmerged(164)]

Population directly relate to manpower?

The reason I ask is because I was thinking of Venice with a one million people population and lots of money.

Center of Trade question.....If I remember correctly the Ottomans have a center of trade and so do the Malemuks......Is there a restriction on who can access those centers of trade?

 

[unmerged(50)]

Originally posted by Dragon on 06-26-2000 03:36 PM
Population directly relate to manpower?

The reason I ask is because I was thinking of Venice with a one million people

I don't know exactly how is calculated the manpower ...

Center of Trade question.....If I remember correctly the Ottomans have a center of trade and so do the Malemuks......Is there a restriction on who can access those centers of trade?

You can send merchants in any CoT you want if this CoT is known by you. (You can't send merchants in the Manhattan CoT if you don't have discovered America).
But also, more this CoT is far from you, more it will be expensive to send merchants to it.

But you can refuse the access to CoT that you controls with any nation, however that gives to these nations a casus belli against you.


------------------
Si vis pacem, para bellum

 

[unmerged(164)]

That works for the Turks......just let them have the CB since you know that unless you opponents gang up on you they have no chance of defeating you, least in the first half of the game.

 

[unmerged(184)]

Originally posted by Dragon on 06-26-2000 06:59 PM
That works for the Turks......just let them have the CB since you know that unless you opponents gang up on you they have no chance of defeating you, least in the first half of the game.

Well, if that is the case, then we must be quite close to what happened in reality. I was taught at school that the European voyages of exploration during the 15th and early 16th centuries were stimulated by the fact that the Turks had closed the land routes that connected Europe with the East Indies. It is refreshing to see that one can still play the Evil (Turkish) Empire in the game!

Kind regards to all.

Martin

 

[unmerged(150)]

Greven, hey thanks for the info. Sorry to take so long to come back - doing an intensive spanish course at the moment and kinda struggling. Trying to learn vocab most evenings. Anyway know what you mean re civ 2 - I tried designing a Euro map and setting up the great powers so they would expand into their proper national territories but though it worked ok by about 1000-1200 AD - everyone was where they ought to be - I always ended up with serious historicial anomalies (Russia esp). And the turks always folded early - bit of a problem as I like to play Austro-Hungary! Never played Imp 1 - got the demo but it wouldnt run past the intro screen - and Imp 2 could get samey after a while, especially as there was no central European action. Still go back to it because theres not really much competition for it but only once in a while. One question though. Trade sounds great as does empire building but how good is the diplomacy side of things? Always seems seriously undermodelled to me in most stuff that comes out. Only MOO2 compare dto civ.
Read Sapuras AAR but he just seemed to sign marriage deals all over the place (clearly getting more than I am at the moment) How far can you get manipulating other states? And is there negotiation like in Civ 2. Imp's diplo ewas always a major diasapointment. Any info greatly appreciated...

Cheers Al

 

[unmerged(28)]

Originally posted by qwertyuiop on 06-26-2000 09:48 PM
(snip)
One question though. Trade sounds great as does empire building but how good is the diplomacy side of things? Always seems seriously undermodelled to me in most stuff that comes out. Only MOO2 compare dto civ.
Read Sapuras AAR but he just seemed to sign marriage deals all over the place (clearly getting more than I am at the moment) How far can you get manipulating other states? And is there negotiation like in Civ 2. Imp's diplo ewas always a major diasapointment. Any info greatly appreciated...
Cheers Al

Hi Al,

This is again, of course, my personal view. Righthanded I can say that the diplomatic mechanism is much better that IMP-serie, and a little bit better that the Civ's (i.e. all of em). However, you know, we are all different players. Some want this and some want that. Personally I have always had a fancy for diplomacy. Personally I think that in comparison, the economic mechanism and the trade mechanism is much better than the diplomacy mechanism. This is not saying that the diplomacy mechanism isn't good because it is. However, I would have liked a strategical game with say 600 options instead of say 20+ options. Now that would make a hell of a game, but also a hell of a work for the designers. I do not think such diplomatic mechanism is 'costefficient' today. If I am honest I actually think the best diplomatic game would be a play-by-email using an Refree governing the diplomatic interaction between the players but then again. It just wouldn't be a computergame.

Still I believe that you will find the diplomatic mechanism much better than anything you have seen before. Not regarding MOO2. Actuallly I'm not familiar with it.
The important thing to remember with EU is that everything interacts; diplomacy, war,peace, economy, trade, religion, everything. It has a very holistic approach and that is something few games have.

/Greven


[This message has been edited by Greven (edited 27-06-2000).]