Santôka said:That means keeping the risk-style map doesn't it? I'm only against the removal of the risk-style map, not the border modifying thingy...
Yeah, the map look is great for eu3 already, but the modifying of borders sounds cool
Europa Universalis IV
- Thread starter Madmonkey24
- 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.
Yeah, the map look is great for eu3 already, but the modifying of borders sounds cool
I don't think you understand the "risk-style map" concept, and how it's opposed to an "open" map. It's not about looks, it's about mechanics. In the risk-style map, an army stands in a province, you can't move it around the province, thus you can't "evade" an AI army standing-by. That was why I against the removal of the risk-style map.
Modifying borders might be cool, but it's only secondary, almost useless...
Modifying borders might be cool, but it's only secondary, almost useless...
Go back to 2D.
For sure! The map of EU2 was a nice one, and MyMap was even better.
The warfare destroy the history as it is now WHY CAN'T 10'000 CAROLINES BEAT 30'000 RUSSIAN TSAR TROOPS.
Make it possible to improve the training of troops.
Higher the limit of inhabitants in a city.
Medical Revolution.
Improve routes, iron horse.
As some one mentioned not just natural resources, develop them.
Medieval time line to, age of crusades, viking area.
Option for "Historical game"
If a state grow strong then the neighbours should create an anti-nation alliance.
Exploration of all areas.
For explore amazonas you need medical revolution.
Electorable kingdom
Train the rulers put the heirs in school.
Choose one of your children to rule if the first born is out of his mind.
Name your children ( if you are a Kingdom/Empire)
Able to set your troops i defensive positions. For example if you are Sweden and treated by Russia you can set them in defensive positions in Finland. Gives them better defense and more slowly to move, when moved the ability is disabled and things back to normal.
Experienced troops. Generals are found in the regiment when the battle and his abilities improves after numbers of battles.
Ability to send nobles/people to other nations to spy on tech, and be used as generals for the other nations and return back home as general for your nation.
Make it possible to improve the training of troops.
Higher the limit of inhabitants in a city.
Medical Revolution.
Improve routes, iron horse.
As some one mentioned not just natural resources, develop them.
Medieval time line to, age of crusades, viking area.
Option for "Historical game"
If a state grow strong then the neighbours should create an anti-nation alliance.
Exploration of all areas.
For explore amazonas you need medical revolution.
Electorable kingdom
Train the rulers put the heirs in school.
Choose one of your children to rule if the first born is out of his mind.
Name your children ( if you are a Kingdom/Empire)
Able to set your troops i defensive positions. For example if you are Sweden and treated by Russia you can set them in defensive positions in Finland. Gives them better defense and more slowly to move, when moved the ability is disabled and things back to normal.
Experienced troops. Generals are found in the regiment when the battle and his abilities improves after numbers of battles.
Ability to send nobles/people to other nations to spy on tech, and be used as generals for the other nations and return back home as general for your nation.
Maybe a system to automate Royal Marriage requests, like there is with Merchants.
Like others have said, more complex colonization. Being able to form trading posts in certain provinces rather than colonize them outright.
Multiple cultures in a single province, a la Victoria, but simplified.
Multiple religions in a single province.
More religions. Pagans especially could use some more variety, as the basic Shamanistic and Animist categories don't fit a lot of the countries very well.
More attention paid to non-European areas, particularly east Asia and the New World. The representation of Mesoamerican cultures in particular is grossly innaccurate.
The ability to change your country's flag without having to program in a decision or event to change your tag. Lots of countries went through several Coat of Arms/flags in this time period.
Also, DO NOT CHANGE THE MAP STYLE! Having provinces is something I like. If I want an unrealistic, utterly undivided blob of a country, I'll play Civ (which I do, frequently). I play a game like this for more detail offered by this style of map.
Like others have said, more complex colonization. Being able to form trading posts in certain provinces rather than colonize them outright.
Multiple cultures in a single province, a la Victoria, but simplified.
Multiple religions in a single province.
More religions. Pagans especially could use some more variety, as the basic Shamanistic and Animist categories don't fit a lot of the countries very well.
More attention paid to non-European areas, particularly east Asia and the New World. The representation of Mesoamerican cultures in particular is grossly innaccurate.
The ability to change your country's flag without having to program in a decision or event to change your tag. Lots of countries went through several Coat of Arms/flags in this time period.
Also, DO NOT CHANGE THE MAP STYLE! Having provinces is something I like. If I want an unrealistic, utterly undivided blob of a country, I'll play Civ (which I do, frequently). I play a game like this for more detail offered by this style of map.
Holding provinces that aren't of your national culture (not counting colonies) should have a dramatic affect on your stability costs. For example, playing the Ottoman Empire, if I control an islamic Romania with Ottoman cores on it, there's nearly no chance at all that they would become free for any reason, but if I get into a lot of wars and have bad luck which lowers my stabilty, owning them might hurt me more than help me thus leading to releasing them as a satelite. Tying into that, revolts should not consist entirely of rebel regiments popping up in provinces, but just drastically reduced tax/prodiction/tarriff value of the province, and of course an additional stability cost.
Nationalism also needs to be reworked so it is tied to your stability level and doesn't simply fade away after 30 years.
Nationalism also needs to be reworked so it is tied to your stability level and doesn't simply fade away after 30 years.
Is MyMap a map for EU3 that looks like the EU2 map? If so, where can I find it? Thanks
Okay, alot of these ideas have been mentioned in one way or another already, but I'll go through what I would like for EU4 (in no particular order... i apologise about the large amount of txt... rlly shows my passion for the game though ).
1. No real-time battles (Like the Total War series). This distracts from the aim of the game, which is empire management and not tactical warfare. This would also stop alot of people on weaker PC's from playing the game. Besides, any attempts at that is doomed to failure, as PI does not have the budget the TW team has. They will simply be seen as a failed copy. Stick to your strengths. The TW series gives a great battle simulator with a crap campaign. EU gives a great campaign.
Do you really want to slap crap battles on there, at the expense of further development and enhancement of the EU campaign?
2. Stick with 3D. It looks fine, and most laptops and desktops should handle them fine. While a beautiful map is cool, the main thing is a functional, easy to read map. EU3 provides this, as does the Graphic Upgrade in MM. Though it is important to remeber that improvement can always be made. As the game gain popularity you might even start putting in unique grapics for each nation/culture.
3. Perhaps a statehood system, similar to Victoria/HoI3. With a policy of different states having different levels of exploitation. This would enable you to take non-culture territory, and then lower/increase their exploitation, in exchange for changes in stability cost, manpower, tax, pop growth, revolt risk and BB reduction. This system would likely require an increase in the number of provinces, to make all states at least 2-3 provinces big.
4. An improved economic system, where resources are actually consumed/required by your population and building. It could be integrated with the current CoT system so that a country can only buy resources from CoT's he has trade access to and that isn't blocked by hostile countries. If your country does not have access to a CoT, then it can't buy resources from provinces that sell their resources there. This would make each CoT it's own little economic area, with differing prices (depending in supply and demand) at that CoT.
As such, each province should only produce a certain amount of resources a month, to assist in this, with building requiring a certain amount to function (just so everyone got it). Buildings can include those that are required to train land and sea units (so that you might have the manpower, but if you can't supply them with the latest weapons/armour, then you might end up with inferior units or you might not be able to reinforce as rapidly). The economy would require the resources to actually circulate, instead of just dissapearing and appearing (obviously with stockpiles naturally declining if there gets to be too much food/wood/etc building up).
Thats pretty much it for the economic model (besides the inflation).... you get the picture, just more interaction from the player is needed really.
5. A better inflation system. The current one is lame. Saving up money should not cause your economy to inflate. Extreme levels of expenditure, unemployment, etc should. Inflation could be used to balance out research spending, where if too much is being spent on research, unit production (military maintenance), lack of resource for factories/pops, etc... then inflation rises. This would almost make much more sense than one that rewards you for spending all your money on everything but savings.
6. A stability system that doesn't just change when you get to a certain number. A system where it is a slider that moves depending on your countries performance. If your country is doing well, then the slider starts moving to the positive sidel. If your country is not doing so well, then it can start moving to the negative side. Events and the like could still affect it, by increasing/decreasing the stability by a fair bit in one go. Your countries performance can be measured by BB, Revolt Risk, number of cores to number of non-cores, portion of country that is state religion/culture, etc... I believe it would give a much more realistic portrayal, while also giving immediate (yet small benefits) to your country performing well, instead of waiting years and years for that stab increase.
7. An improved character system, with actual familiy lines. Sort of a mix of EU: Rome and CK. Where your royal family can marry and have heirs, etc... Generals and advisors (and other leaders in non-monarchy countries) can then be selected from these characters. There can then be succession wars and the like by actual characters, and you would have more influence over it. Personal Unions could still be formed if a leader dies without a heir, or the heir is a leader of another country, with this eventually leading to a inheritance or the two going to different heirs/chars later on. Different countries can have different succesion laws. Some characters could be restricted to a certain country.
Characters should be hireable by all countries that have that characters culture as an accepted culture (or if their nationality is from that country). All of these characters should have a gender, religion, culture (possibly the mothers culture), nationality (being which country thet where born in, this country being able to hire the character for cheaper) and political outlook (described below). All characters would also have stats (based off their DNA) which would grow with them as they fulfill different task, like being a general or an advisor. A system that is a good mix of the EU:R single country chars and the CK mulitnation chars.
8. A complete culture system overhaul should be done. Each province needs the ability to have more than one culture. This would be reperesented by different statistic and population numbers for each culture. This could be done almost like Victoria, where each pop was seperated depending on it's attributes, except that this can be done only by culture.
So a city may have three cultures, resuklting in three different pops to see and work with. Each of these cultures would then have statistic which show percentages of the cultures happines (revoltrisk), religions (with a higher state religion increasing the odds of a culture flip), language (as a french pop could start learning german when it's intergrated into a germanic country, with the language being the main decider in an eventual culture flip) and political outlook (total monarchist, constitutional monarchy, republican, theocrat, etc... This changing if a specific government is doing okay, with certain outlooks being more predominant in colonies or later in the game).
Populations should be able to migrate (slowly mind you) to neighbouring countries if those countries are doing condirably better than their own country, with the main movement being to provines that border their own cultural areas (adding a sense of cultural expansion). If a certain religion or political outlook does well in a neighbouring country, your pops may start wanting to adopt or convert to that. Rebels can then start adopting the policies of pop that they spawn from.
Pops may also need resources that boost their growth/happiness, with a lack of resources lowering their growth/hapines. This can also be reworked into the colonialism system. As we need migration from countries other than the colonisers to these palces. Not everyone in the British colonies was from England. The current system greatly inflates the population of one culture, over that of another, depending on how quickly it colonises.
9. Make it much more accessable to modders (even though it is already one of the most moddable games ever). I don't mod, so I don't know the limitations myself, but I do know that games like those made by PI can live or die depending on the input from the modding community, which help the game replayability (which is already quite high). Meaning, more modability always helps. I want this game to thrive, as it is 1,000 times better than the TW series. Used to love them, but I can't play them anymore. They just don't engage me as much as EU/HoI/Vicky does.
Anyway, that's my quickly thoiught out suggestions. Any arguments for/against any of these concepts are welcome, and very constructive. Us talking about concepts here, good or bad, could help the developers come up with good ideas of their own.
And I apologise if it seems like I'm trying to make this into a CK-EU3-EU:R-VIC hybrid, it's just that their all really good games on their own. By combining some of their concepts, we might hit gold.
).1. No real-time battles (Like the Total War series). This distracts from the aim of the game, which is empire management and not tactical warfare. This would also stop alot of people on weaker PC's from playing the game. Besides, any attempts at that is doomed to failure, as PI does not have the budget the TW team has. They will simply be seen as a failed copy. Stick to your strengths. The TW series gives a great battle simulator with a crap campaign. EU gives a great campaign.
Do you really want to slap crap battles on there, at the expense of further development and enhancement of the EU campaign?
2. Stick with 3D. It looks fine, and most laptops and desktops should handle them fine. While a beautiful map is cool, the main thing is a functional, easy to read map. EU3 provides this, as does the Graphic Upgrade in MM. Though it is important to remeber that improvement can always be made. As the game gain popularity you might even start putting in unique grapics for each nation/culture.
3. Perhaps a statehood system, similar to Victoria/HoI3. With a policy of different states having different levels of exploitation. This would enable you to take non-culture territory, and then lower/increase their exploitation, in exchange for changes in stability cost, manpower, tax, pop growth, revolt risk and BB reduction. This system would likely require an increase in the number of provinces, to make all states at least 2-3 provinces big.
4. An improved economic system, where resources are actually consumed/required by your population and building. It could be integrated with the current CoT system so that a country can only buy resources from CoT's he has trade access to and that isn't blocked by hostile countries. If your country does not have access to a CoT, then it can't buy resources from provinces that sell their resources there. This would make each CoT it's own little economic area, with differing prices (depending in supply and demand) at that CoT.
As such, each province should only produce a certain amount of resources a month, to assist in this, with building requiring a certain amount to function (just so everyone got it). Buildings can include those that are required to train land and sea units (so that you might have the manpower, but if you can't supply them with the latest weapons/armour, then you might end up with inferior units or you might not be able to reinforce as rapidly). The economy would require the resources to actually circulate, instead of just dissapearing and appearing (obviously with stockpiles naturally declining if there gets to be too much food/wood/etc building up).
Thats pretty much it for the economic model (besides the inflation).... you get the picture, just more interaction from the player is needed really.
5. A better inflation system. The current one is lame. Saving up money should not cause your economy to inflate. Extreme levels of expenditure, unemployment, etc should. Inflation could be used to balance out research spending, where if too much is being spent on research, unit production (military maintenance), lack of resource for factories/pops, etc... then inflation rises. This would almost make much more sense than one that rewards you for spending all your money on everything but savings.
6. A stability system that doesn't just change when you get to a certain number. A system where it is a slider that moves depending on your countries performance. If your country is doing well, then the slider starts moving to the positive sidel. If your country is not doing so well, then it can start moving to the negative side. Events and the like could still affect it, by increasing/decreasing the stability by a fair bit in one go. Your countries performance can be measured by BB, Revolt Risk, number of cores to number of non-cores, portion of country that is state religion/culture, etc... I believe it would give a much more realistic portrayal, while also giving immediate (yet small benefits) to your country performing well, instead of waiting years and years for that stab increase.
7. An improved character system, with actual familiy lines. Sort of a mix of EU: Rome and CK. Where your royal family can marry and have heirs, etc... Generals and advisors (and other leaders in non-monarchy countries) can then be selected from these characters. There can then be succession wars and the like by actual characters, and you would have more influence over it. Personal Unions could still be formed if a leader dies without a heir, or the heir is a leader of another country, with this eventually leading to a inheritance or the two going to different heirs/chars later on. Different countries can have different succesion laws. Some characters could be restricted to a certain country.
Characters should be hireable by all countries that have that characters culture as an accepted culture (or if their nationality is from that country). All of these characters should have a gender, religion, culture (possibly the mothers culture), nationality (being which country thet where born in, this country being able to hire the character for cheaper) and political outlook (described below). All characters would also have stats (based off their DNA) which would grow with them as they fulfill different task, like being a general or an advisor. A system that is a good mix of the EU:R single country chars and the CK mulitnation chars.
8. A complete culture system overhaul should be done. Each province needs the ability to have more than one culture. This would be reperesented by different statistic and population numbers for each culture. This could be done almost like Victoria, where each pop was seperated depending on it's attributes, except that this can be done only by culture.
So a city may have three cultures, resuklting in three different pops to see and work with. Each of these cultures would then have statistic which show percentages of the cultures happines (revoltrisk), religions (with a higher state religion increasing the odds of a culture flip), language (as a french pop could start learning german when it's intergrated into a germanic country, with the language being the main decider in an eventual culture flip) and political outlook (total monarchist, constitutional monarchy, republican, theocrat, etc... This changing if a specific government is doing okay, with certain outlooks being more predominant in colonies or later in the game).
Populations should be able to migrate (slowly mind you) to neighbouring countries if those countries are doing condirably better than their own country, with the main movement being to provines that border their own cultural areas (adding a sense of cultural expansion). If a certain religion or political outlook does well in a neighbouring country, your pops may start wanting to adopt or convert to that. Rebels can then start adopting the policies of pop that they spawn from.
Pops may also need resources that boost their growth/happiness, with a lack of resources lowering their growth/hapines. This can also be reworked into the colonialism system. As we need migration from countries other than the colonisers to these palces. Not everyone in the British colonies was from England. The current system greatly inflates the population of one culture, over that of another, depending on how quickly it colonises.
9. Make it much more accessable to modders (even though it is already one of the most moddable games ever). I don't mod, so I don't know the limitations myself, but I do know that games like those made by PI can live or die depending on the input from the modding community, which help the game replayability (which is already quite high). Meaning, more modability always helps. I want this game to thrive, as it is 1,000 times better than the TW series. Used to love them, but I can't play them anymore. They just don't engage me as much as EU/HoI/Vicky does.
Anyway, that's my quickly thoiught out suggestions. Any arguments for/against any of these concepts are welcome, and very constructive. Us talking about concepts here, good or bad, could help the developers come up with good ideas of their own.
And I apologise if it seems like I'm trying to make this into a CK-EU3-EU:R-VIC hybrid, it's just that their all really good games on their own. By combining some of their concepts, we might hit gold.
Maybe extend the timeline from early thirteenth century to early twentieeth century. So you can industrialise the country (like in Victoria). I think it would be great if the measured CK, EU and victoria together. That's my sentence
I think EU4 may be the next Paradox project.
I believe Johan hinted at it during E3.
This is probably old news but I've not posted here in about a year.
I believe Johan hinted at it during E3.
This is probably old news but I've not posted here in about a year.
Not going to happen. EU3 has a hard enough time modelling the 1399-1820 period. Could maybe start a bit earlier but definitely not end past 1820 or so; that really needs to be a separate game with more focus on technology and industry.
Mabye an expansion for 1820-1899 or something like that after EUIV named indstrial age or somthing.
Paradox should continue to try to portray things historically accurate, and it just isnt possible to accurately portray the 1900's with EU's gameplay. Keep the timeframe 1453-1821.
Personally I don't think 3D has done anything significant for Europa Universalis, (other than making it the only Paradox game that won't run on my laptop *grits teeth and shakes fist*) So I wouldn't mind a return to 2D. Or better yet, a go between 2D/3D map a la Shogun Total War, in which the campaign map is actually a flat map on a 3D table.
I'd like to see different movement modes for armies and navies. For example an Attack mode in which an army/navy will automatically attack any enemies in a province, and a defense mode, in which it does not. This way, one ship in the English Channel will not HAVE to fight another opposing faction's ship that is also in the English Channel. You can just carry on pootling on towards your destination.
As has already been stated, I'd like a balance of power to factor in. For example if France is blobbing (again) I'd expect a good deal of the other European powers to be more inclined to team up and take down the Fuzzy blue monster ravaging their countrysides.
I'd like to see different movement modes for armies and navies. For example an Attack mode in which an army/navy will automatically attack any enemies in a province, and a defense mode, in which it does not. This way, one ship in the English Channel will not HAVE to fight another opposing faction's ship that is also in the English Channel. You can just carry on pootling on towards your destination.
As has already been stated, I'd like a balance of power to factor in. For example if France is blobbing (again
) I'd expect a good deal of the other European powers to be more inclined to team up and take down the Fuzzy blue monster ravaging their countrysides.
One thing I would like is for vassals and junior PU partners to be able to (loosely speaking) play in the politics of their parent countries, so that these positions are as interesting to play as 'real' countries. The sort of stuff I am thinking of is the Duke of Burgundy's war with the Duke of Orleans over who was to rule France while Charles VI was too mad to do so; or Scotland threatening to not choose the same heir to Queen Anne as England had.
Come to that I would like to see EUx continue splitting up the Vassal relationship as it is still, even now PUs have been made their own thing, used for several notably different relationships: the true vassal that is a highly autonomous part of its master's country like Orleans, the tributary that pays money or goods for protection (or 'protection' ) like Wallachia, the puppet government where a ruler or government is imposed by another country like many of the states set up by Republican and Napoleonic France. There are representable differences between these relationships that I believe would add to the game.
Come to that I would like to see EUx continue splitting up the Vassal relationship as it is still, even now PUs have been made their own thing, used for several notably different relationships: the true vassal that is a highly autonomous part of its master's country like Orleans, the tributary that pays money or goods for protection (or 'protection'
) like Wallachia, the puppet government where a ruler or government is imposed by another country like many of the states set up by Republican and Napoleonic France. There are representable differences between these relationships that I believe would add to the game.There really should be some type of coalition system. If France has double the next nations manpowers, Iberia, Germany, Britain, and Italy should feel threatened.
I love this game but there are a few fundamental differences I would like to see in an expansion or the next version.
1) I would like to make a decision to break an alliance if an ally does not answer the call to a war that I am involved. If I decide to attack Algeria as Spain, I do not care if England gets involved or not, England and I are allies to contain France. I really don't care if they declare war when I do and I don't want to have to then send them a bribe so we can renew the alliance after the war is over. It should be my choice, not the computer's.
2) Bad boy needs some revision. There should perhaps be multiple measures based on the religion that you are dealing with. None of the Catholic world, nor the Christian should care if I am annexing pagans or Muslim provinces, as an example.
3) I would like to see more diplomatic options, such as negotiating a peace between two countries; forming an alliance with a country in a war and joining that war as a partner. I would enjoy those options.
I really like this game and am glad I am nearing retirement because I can lose weeks of free time on a good map. I still haven't explored any of the mods as each country offers a different view of the game.
1) I would like to make a decision to break an alliance if an ally does not answer the call to a war that I am involved. If I decide to attack Algeria as Spain, I do not care if England gets involved or not, England and I are allies to contain France. I really don't care if they declare war when I do and I don't want to have to then send them a bribe so we can renew the alliance after the war is over. It should be my choice, not the computer's.
2) Bad boy needs some revision. There should perhaps be multiple measures based on the religion that you are dealing with. None of the Catholic world, nor the Christian should care if I am annexing pagans or Muslim provinces, as an example.
3) I would like to see more diplomatic options, such as negotiating a peace between two countries; forming an alliance with a country in a war and joining that war as a partner. I would enjoy those options.
I really like this game and am glad I am nearing retirement because I can lose weeks of free time on a good map. I still haven't explored any of the mods as each country offers a different view of the game.
I'd really like to see the system from HOI3 for manual CTA for your allies. If I'm fighting some far-off nation, I don't want to test my allies by automatically calling them to assault on a country halfway around the world. And this would be especially useful if one of your allies was recently (or still is) involved in a war, so you don't have to interrupt their reconstruction or war effort for your little war.
That said, the process for Calling your allies To Arms would need to be streamlined, so I don't have to go find all my allies and waste precious time (especially in MP) calling them to arms, I should be able to call them from the DOW screen or manually on some diplomacy screen.
That said, the process for Calling your allies To Arms would need to be streamlined, so I don't have to go find all my allies and waste precious time (especially in MP) calling them to arms, I should be able to call them from the DOW screen or manually on some diplomacy screen.