EU3 Wishlist

[unmerged(12222)]

Something I think would be very neccessary is showing the estimated time until an army reaches a province. NOt just red/green lines, but some kind of number, so I can manuver my cannons, cavalry and infantry at the right times. It also bugs me when after sending a bunch of troops into a fleet, the fleet moves out of the province before they do.

 

[Jayavarman]

Climate should have more effects besides winter, such as rain...

 

[Alexandre]

Originally posted by berhaven


I see much better (as I already said) a "three based" goods produced model for every province:
1. food: can be either Grain or Fish:feeds the pop in province: creates a surplus/deficit which can be traded/must be imported; grows with infrastructure growth and by events. Needs land and manpower.
2. primary sector commercial commodity: could be anything you grow, dig or skin for trade in CoTs. If agricultural (i.e. sugar) you gonna have a trade-off between land usage with the food. Needs land (not obviously for gold or iron), manpower or slaves, and merchants.
3. proto-industrial commodiity: like chinaware or textile; doesn't need land, needs manpower and merchants.

The other proposals make some sense to me, even if I like better the religious/cultural mix than the miltiple slider concept. [/B]

I agree about multiple commodities.

I'd also like to see:

1) Trading posts founded by merchants, not colonists.
2) Inquisitions as an option for all intollerant countries, not just as a scripted event. An inquisition would require a missionary. It would have the following effects:
a) a small monthly chance of converting the province.
b) a big boost of the provinces revolt rate
c) lead to steady emigration from the province to the closest same-religion provinces outside of your borders.
d) severe decrease in realtions with countries of the same religion as the province that you are trying to convert (say 5 or 10 points/month)
e) a moderate decrease in relations with all countries that don't share your sate religion (lets say 2 or 5 points)
f) before the Edict of Tollerance, a small improvement of relations with countries that share your state religion (let's say 1 point/month). After the edict of tollerance, the same decrease in relations as in e) above.
g) Upon conversion, a chance of channging the target province's state culture -- lets say 5 or 10%.
h) killing the inquisition should have severe diplomatic and stability costs.
i) Any country that has a state religion of the target province as a CB, ending 5 years after the inquisition ends.
j) any other country which doesn't share your state religion has a CB ending one year after the inquisition.
3) If one country is in occupation of another country's province, but there has been no fighting for 3-5 years, a peace is declared in which the aggressor retains control of the occupied provinces. The looser has a 30-year CB against the victor. If possible, I'd like to have this tied to control of the provinces.
4) Some possibility of gaining CB shields on any long-held provinces
5) Some ability to assimilate border provinces.
6) Some ability to gain non-historic national cultures.
7) Right to choose the religion of freed vassals. The Vassal should start with lower stability for every province that isn't of the state religion.
8) When creating a vassal, I should be able to give said vassal any province with his state culture, and any province bordering the vassal.
9) As sovereign, I should be required to defend my vassal or loose stability, relations with my other vassals, and have the undefended vassal gain its freedom.
10) Have vassalage broken into:
a) Vassals (e.g., Poland-Moldavia)
b) Tributory states (e.g., Wallachia-Ottoman Empire)
c) marches (e.g., Transylvania-Hungary)
Each of these relations should give different rights (e.g., no royal mariages for a march, and freedom to ally with the enemy for a tributory state.)

Alexandre

 

[unmerged(485)]

Originally posted by Alexandre
I agree about multiple commodities.

I'd also like to see:

1) Trading posts founded by merchants, not colonists.
........................

Alexandre

This is a good idea - especially if TPs are a little more difficult to establish. For the most part colonist are harder to come by and "wasting" them to set up TPs is a bigger decision than sending the more abundant merchants to set up TPs. So with lowerd % chance of succeeding this sounds like a realistic option.

 

[Kaigon]

Originally posted by Alexandre
i) Any country that has a state religion of the target province as a CB, ending 5 years after the inquisition ends.
j) any other country which doesn't share your state religion has a CB ending one year after the inquisition.

So during the inquisition and at least 12 months afterwards... all non-co-religions will have CB on you... a bit harsh perhaps (decrease it to countries on the same continent as the province)

 

[unmerged(11897)]

not sure if this has already been covered, this is a long thread afterall.

I'd like to see the ability for provinces to span rivers. Places where there were bridges or fords across the rivers of europe were key to wars. For example, have Pest be the only province to span the danube, so going through pest would nullify the movement cost of the river. It would make certain provinces nice defensive choke points, which seems like it would add more reality to the game.

 

[unmerged(485)]

Originally posted by Son of Kong
not sure if this has already been covered, this is a long thread afterall.

I'd like to see the ability for provinces to span rivers. Places where there were bridges or fords across the rivers of europe were key to wars. For example, have Pest be the only province to span the danube, so going through pest would nullify the movement cost of the river. It would make certain provinces nice defensive choke points, which seems like it would add more reality to the game.

With a redesigned combat system this would be possible. As it is now, though, when you are in a province you would not know on which side of the river you are. When someone invaded the province you would not know if you would get the river defense bonus or not. Currently if a province is invaded you can tell if the river defense bonus applies - if the enemy came from a province across a river then you get the bonus - otherwise not.

So if EU III has a re-designed combat system or province system this would be a good idea and would clear up much of the complaints about the location/shape of provinces.

 

[Alexandre]

Originally posted by Sonny
This is a good idea - especially if TPs are a little more difficult to establish. For the most part colonist are harder to come by and "wasting" them to set up TPs is a bigger decision than sending the more abundant merchants to set up TPs. So with lowerd % chance of succeeding this sounds like a realistic option.

I hadn't thought about changing the % chance of succeeding, but on first thoughts, you're probably right -- as long as you eliminate hostile natives, you've got a very good chance of setting up a TP. In any case, it makes far more sense to me to wonder if you should send that merchant to Samarkand or to establish a trading post in Dakar than wondering if you should set up a TP in Dakar, or a colony in Gandar.

Alexandre

 

[Alexandre]

Originally posted by Kaigon
So during the inquisition and at least 12 months afterwards... all non-co-religions will have CB on you... a bit harsh perhaps (decrease it to countries on the same continent as the province)

Would Spain have accepted an Aztec anti-Catholic inquisition in the Yucatan? I'd expect that a major power would have intervened.

Perhaps one could say that overseas powers only have a CB while the inquisition is going on? Or, would different rules apply in the different continents: Moslem inquisitions against Christians in Africa/Middle East have a shorter CB than Moslem inquisitions against Christians in Europe, etc. or Christian inquisitions against Moslems gives a year (or five year) CB while Christian inquisitions against pagans don't? In reality, a lot of this is going to have to be play tested, and just like a lot of my ideas for EU II mutated between my keyboard and the final game, I'm certain that Paradox will adapt my ideas to suit the game, rather than keeping faithful to my suggestions at the cost of game play. I think that I'll live with their choices, so long as the game is fun to play.

Alexandre

 

[unmerged(7012)]

Some things would be nice (if EU3 is ever going to be released):

1. Expanded options for economy, provinces infrastructure, trade etc. (but not too much)

2. More realistic combat system

3. Governments, expanded DP sliders, diplomatic opions

4. Governmental, religion, ideological preferences in provinces

5. Improved navy (especially in early ages)

6. A bit longer game time (half of 14th century for example)

7. Better AI

8. And, of course more provinces! (no terra incognita in some part of Asia for example)

 

[Alexandre]

Originally posted by Phillip V
Shields represent more than claims, and buying claims wouldn;t really be realistic. Also, just because you bought these shields, it would not mean that the inhabitants of the provs would submit to your rule without a fight as one of the things that shields represent.

Agreed. A partial solution would be to split shields in two: one half representing the international community's acceptance of your aggression, and the other half representing the natives' acceptance of your rule. Thus, Byzantium should have an international shield to Bulgaria, but not have a native shield, but would have a native shield to (parts of) Southern Italy, but no international shield.

Alexandre

 

[unmerged(12740)]

i'd like it if when you get a message telling you that one of your merhcants has been competed out of a cot that it also told you who is responsible so you know w/ whom your relations have suffered.

 

[unmerged(15570)]

Trade provinces for vassalization

In EU3, I'd like to see more diplomatic options. I'd like to found a vassal state and give it some more provinces, e.g. give in the GC as France, I'd like to found Brabant as a vassal and give it Holland and Zeeland in addition (when I own them, of course). Second, I'd like to grant some provinces to other countries in exchange for better relations or even vassalization, if the offer is good enough.

 

[Jayavarman]

Originally posted by tpc
i'd like it if when you get a message telling you that one of your merhcants has been competed out of a cot that it also told you who is responsible so you know w/ whom your relations have suffered.

Perhaps this can be implemented now in EUII. I know that when you compete away a foriegn merchants, it says from which country.

 

[unmerged(11002)]

Two types of province shields.

CB shields-
Reason- The people in your country consider it part of your country but the people that live don't
Affects- Your get a CB on the country that owns the province but you get 3% revolt risk if you take over

Patriot Shields-
Reason-The people in your country don't consider it your land but the people living there do
Affects- No CB. No 3% revolt risk.

 

[Aetius]

I am sorry if this has been proposed before but the 28 pages is a bit formidable to read through...
I have two proposals which should be easy to implement with the current game system:

1. Diplomatic time lag depending on distance between you and your vassals (or/and your capital) and the receiving country (or/and receiving country's capital). The further away you are the longer it takes for for diplomatic action to resolve. Obviously this will be quite easy to implement for things like royal marriages and alliance request and trade agreements, but it will be tricky for things like wars and requests for assistance in war. Personally I believe that wars should be possible to declare immediately but the alliance members need to wait until they can respond to a call for help.

2. Merchant time lag. Some time should be needed for the Merchants to arrive at a COT. The time it takes should be calculated from the distance between the sending country's capital or sending country's nearest COT and the COT they are sent to. The mechants are displayed at the target COT, but merchant action doesn't occur until the time has past.

 

[unmerged(485)]

Originally posted by Aetius
I am sorry if this has been proposed before but the 28 pages is a bit formidable to read through...
I have two proposals which should be easy to implement with the current game system:

1. Diplomatic time lag depending on distance between you and your vassals (or/and your capital) and the receiving country (or/and receiving country's capital). The further away you are the longer it takes for for diplomatic action to resolve. Obviously this will be quite easy to implement for things like royal marriages and alliance request and trade agreements, but it will be tricky for things like wars and requests for assistance in war. Personally I believe that wars should be possible to declare immediately but the alliance members need to wait until they can respond to a call for help.

2. Merchant time lag. Some time should be needed for the Merchants to arrive at a COT. The time it takes should be calculated from the distance between the sending country's capital or sending country's nearest COT and the COT they are sent to. The mechants are displayed at the target COT, but merchant action doesn't occur until the time has past.

Those are real good ideas IMHO. After seeing the explaination of the horse icon in the graphics file (it was originally supposed to show the diplomat riding to his destination - like colonists) I can only assume that there was a technical reason this was not put in originally. Sure seems realistic to me.

 

[KaiMaster]

One nationality per province being "ahistorical"

I am sure that addressing this issue would entail a complete code rewrite and probably won't happen. But this is what I was thinking would be more realistic/historical/cooler for EUx in the future... and since I couldn't find a "suggestions" area I guess this is it.

Rather than having the first trader claiming the whole territory for a country, you just add to the population value? The whole territory has a value, but it is split according to the members of the colony. The person/country controlling the majority of colonists/traders in a new territory (first in the case of a tie) controls the new territory. Note that this could very easily change back and forth.

The higher the difference in numbers of nationalities in a colony, the more it would cost to settle there (and/or be more difficult). If England has 4000 colonists and you are trying to settle 100 Danes in there, it'll cost a lot and chances of success are relatively small. But if England has 3000 and the Danes have 1000, then success would be a lot more probable.

You would have 2 or more population bars, one for each "nationality" that is there. Want spanish/french/english influence all in your colony? The country with the most colonists there would get government control. Up to 5000 (that seems to be the magic number) the country is a colony and can have multiple owners. But at 5000 it goes to the country that has max colonists.

Can you imagine a Spanish colony that has english and french settlers in it? When France & England go to war, the colony could erupt with infighting. Up until it hit the magic number of 5000 there would be this special danger.

But if you went to war with a nation that was part of your colony, you could have huge revolt risks and stuff. If Portugal had settlers in your colony and it was annexed by Spain (always happens in my 1.06 games... sigh) then they would change from Portugal to Spain for their "national influence".

And there would have to be something stored in an array or something providing the nationalist progression (e.g. if Portugal was annexed and then declares independence, then there would be some chance that the Spanish colonies that used to be Portuguese would rejoin Portugal).

I hate to use MOO3 as an example, but has anyone here seen the demographics part of the planet menu? The fractions of the planet's population that are one race or another? Having somethign like that would add another element to the whole colonization thing.

Other things like Aboriginals and Native Americans and African tribes could be modelled this way too. And don't forget the welsh and scottish...

 

[unmerged(9945)]

Sounds cool, you should post it in the EU 3 wishlist stickied at the top.

 

[KaiMaster]

On a similar note... of all the colonies in the New World that had full blown colonies, how many had less trade than a fully-dedicated colonist-less territory? I would argue that a 200 person colony should have *more* trade than a 60 person trading post territory would. The colony would have that 60 person "trading core" and then 140 or so colonists doing other things like building shops and infrastructure heh

The trade model probably needs reworked with colonization too then. Rather than having two separate tracks, have just one colonist track for new colonies...

Initial colonies would be trading posts (think about it, you send a couple hundred to the new world, they have to be doing something, so have them trade with the Natives and get lots of furs and stuff heh). Then they would grow into full-blown colonies of town size (trade does not drop, if I have a level 6 trading post and I add 100 additional colonists, the trade value should not evaporate overnight... that infrastructure should remain there. I do understand the number might want to be reworked so that they aren't so large but that's coding and balancing.