EU3 Wishlist
- Thread starter unmerged(5910)
- 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.
I don't want more years. That, IMHO, is for other games (CK, HOI, etc.) What I do want is real fixes to the problems we've been trying to solve ourselves: AI problems, a map with a lot more provinces (seperate Constantinople prov, lots more in Germany and Russia, etc.....), changed cost for maintainance of forts and armies, countries that actually do as well as they did historically (if only once or twice. All I want is to see an AI Ottoman empire besiege Vienna and an AI Russia colonize Siberia. Is that so wrong?), etc.
I'd rather they made the 1419-1820 timeperiod perfect than expand into a mediocre representation of the 19th century (let alone the early 20th).
Overall, many of these problems can be fixed by careful event scripting. Some can only get half measures (there's only so much we can do with AI, it seems). Others will take either a breakthrough (Godspeed Inferis) or someone in Paradox releasing special tools so that the community (at least those of us with a GB of RAM) can start really editing that map. Then again, it may indeed take EU3.
I'd rather they made the 1419-1820 timeperiod perfect than expand into a mediocre representation of the 19th century (let alone the early 20th).
Overall, many of these problems can be fixed by careful event scripting. Some can only get half measures (there's only so much we can do with AI, it seems). Others will take either a breakthrough (Godspeed Inferis) or someone in Paradox releasing special tools so that the community (at least those of us with a GB of RAM) can start really editing that map. Then again, it may indeed take EU3.
The less crap the AI needs to sort through, the better you can make the AI work. Careful event scripting cannot turn a crappy AI into a good one.
In that sense, I think EU3 should have FEWER provinces, FEWER improvements, LESS bean-counting, LESS of everything.
In that sense, I think EU3 should have FEWER provinces, FEWER improvements, LESS bean-counting, LESS of everything.
well you're probably in the minority then besides if we dumb it down too much then it'll become too Civ-like or as I like to call it 'crapesque' the ability to manage your country this much gives EU part of it's flavour
besides if we dumb it down too much then it'll become too Civ-like or as I like to call it 'crapesque' the ability to manage your country this much gives EU part of it's flavour
Oh, I must have miscommunicated. I don't suggest dumbing it down, just removing anything that doesn't significantly add to gameplay in order to make the AI better. From what I remember, this was one of Civ's problems. To much different crap to build (all the city improvements, multiple sets of improvements for each land tile, craploads of units). The civ series AI is nothing to write home about either, plus it cheats like 1000X as much as the EU2 AI.
EUIII should really be an enhancement. Currently the EUII system is pretty much perfect system. All that needs improvement is a coplete map larger span and an easier to use scenario editer and more tags. Also they could use more unit sprites, spice things up, I want to see some guys on horses
EDIT: Do not forget inflation that was done poorly in EUII
EDIT: Do not forget inflation that was done poorly in EUII
Last edited:
already an Imperialism game
I am surprised that not much mention has been made by an old game by SSI called Imperialism. It covered the Industrial Revolution to WW1 very effectively. EU cannot do that. EU does a good job to 1820. btw, Imperialism was great, but VERY buggy. Then Imperialism 2 came out and greatly extended the game play length of the original Imperialism, included new units, new resources, etc. and really butchered the game.
Let us keep EU2 as it is, and as many people suggested, if a new game should be made, make it a new game and not constrain it to be an EU sequel.
A map editor for EU would be very interesting, though, as somebody said.
I am surprised that not much mention has been made by an old game by SSI called Imperialism. It covered the Industrial Revolution to WW1 very effectively. EU cannot do that. EU does a good job to 1820. btw, Imperialism was great, but VERY buggy. Then Imperialism 2 came out and greatly extended the game play length of the original Imperialism, included new units, new resources, etc. and really butchered the game.
Let us keep EU2 as it is, and as many people suggested, if a new game should be made, make it a new game and not constrain it to be an EU sequel.
A map editor for EU would be very interesting, though, as somebody said.
a map editor for any EU engine game is nigh on impossible for the average gamer's computer
The 19th century, and especially the later decades, introduced so many radical changes in terms of technology and politics that I can't see how you could simply extend the time period of EU2.
That said, I do want to see a game using the same engine covering the Age of Imperialism, by which I mean about 1875-1920. You could feasibly extend that period backwards to 1820, and even forwards to WWII.
The irony is that it was only in this period that Europe became truly omnipresent in the world, thus "universal". So it would very much fit the title if you'd call it EU3, but I guess the current fan base is pretty much set on the earlier time period.
1875-1920 is such a fascinating time, and I'm disappointed that Frog City never updated the old Imperialism, which didn't even cover the whole world.
Whatever you call it, Paradox, bring it on!
That said, I do want to see a game using the same engine covering the Age of Imperialism, by which I mean about 1875-1920. You could feasibly extend that period backwards to 1820, and even forwards to WWII.
The irony is that it was only in this period that Europe became truly omnipresent in the world, thus "universal". So it would very much fit the title if you'd call it EU3, but I guess the current fan base is pretty much set on the earlier time period.
1875-1920 is such a fascinating time, and I'm disappointed that Frog City never updated the old Imperialism, which didn't even cover the whole world.
Whatever you call it, Paradox, bring it on!
Just had in Idea.
This is want you see in the game. When you recruit men you could see a screen come up. On the top is the Infantry, Cavarly and Cannons. Then there is three the arrows pointing up and down one for each type of unit. When you click down 1000 more men or ten cannons are added two your army you wish to recruit.
Here is my idea. In the corner of the window there could be a little box with a arrow pointing up above it. Below is another arrow pointing down. When you click up the number of recuitable men goes down. Why? Because you just expanded there lenght of servers by one mounth. This could be a good answer to the problem of those armies lasting for ever.
You can extend thier term of service to 10 years. Except during war then you can expand it to the end of the war.
Once there term of service ends they disband there unit and go home.
This is want you see in the game. When you recruit men you could see a screen come up. On the top is the Infantry, Cavarly and Cannons. Then there is three the arrows pointing up and down one for each type of unit. When you click down 1000 more men or ten cannons are added two your army you wish to recruit.
Here is my idea. In the corner of the window there could be a little box with a arrow pointing up above it. Below is another arrow pointing down. When you click up the number of recuitable men goes down. Why? Because you just expanded there lenght of servers by one mounth. This could be a good answer to the problem of those armies lasting for ever.
You can extend thier term of service to 10 years. Except during war then you can expand it to the end of the war.
Once there term of service ends they disband there unit and go home.
I actually can se no use for it (if I understood ou correctly
. Why not just dispend your army if you not using it?
No to make it more realistic. Those armies standing there for a hundred years just does it make sense.Originally posted by Galadriel
I actually can se no use for it (if I understood ou correctly
did you never hear of a standing army?
Admittedly this was not a common feature in the early EU period, and in of course standing armies are expected to move around now and again.
I must be too easy on my armies. I let them sit down when there is no war going on. Trouble is they just want to sit down when a war staarts up. Gotta talk to the Sgt. Major.
i put 1900-1930,so you can prepare to the WWI and then fight it, until 1930 if you want.
(Like in HOI, you start in 1936 preparing and then you can last until 1948, no more than that)
Originally posted by Arnou
EUIII should really be an enhancement. Currently the EUII system is pretty much perfect system. All that needs improvement is a coplete map larger span and an easier to use scenario editer and more tags. Also they could use more unit sprites, spice things up, I want to see some guys on horses
EDIT: Do not forget inflation that was done poorly in EUII
While I think that EUII is the best game out there, that doesn't mean that it can't have *major* improvements:
1) Navies have to be seriously augmented.
2) There should be a dynastic model within EU -- right now we're using events which is no more than a fix.
3) Conversion/assimilation could be handled better than it is right now.
4) Province population and religion should be identified in percentages rather than identifying the province as completely one group or another. Perfect example for this is Transylvania, with a Romanian and Orthodox majority, as per contemporary Hungarian records, a large (and economically dominant) Saxon minority and a large (and politically dominant) Hungarian minority. Very poorly modeled in EU.
5) Exploration should include a random chance to spontaneously discover any TI bordering one of your colonies/cities.
6) Moral should be more dynamic than it is, based upon the overall war situation, war exhaustion, etc.
7) WE should be province specific, and influenced by such things as war taxes, looting, etc.
8) CB's should be more dynamic based upon culture, religion and history.
Of course, this will all eat up vast amounts of RAM, so are unlikely to be fully implimented until the hardware that most of us own is capable of handling it.
Alexandre
No. Save the dynastic model for CK. EU's events give a whole lot of flavor to the game. Admittedly they need more work - a few more script commands and more refined triggers - but they make the history of the period come alive.
The only thing dynastic I would change in making EU III would be to have far fewer RMs (maybe each monarch could be rated and have a counter like you have now for merchants etc.) and have the RMs mean more in terms of stab hits and relations. Of course the relations model needs improvement too.