Europe does need an edge and a very substantial ones; historical results shouldn't be rare to never. What I said about NA and Eastern Europe was just to point out to people that think cyborg Tercios crushed all opposition in the 15th 16th and 17th centuries have a poor eye for military history.
Europe VS the world
- Thread starter maxirage
- 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.
the problem there isn't anything to do with China getting too much attention, it's the lack of a much-needed proper supply/attrition system in EU. I agree China shouldn't be able to project power over long distances but equally it should have the manpower to fight off most foreign invasions, even by technologically superior foes. But I think we aree about that.
yeah, people are asking for depth and accuracy, not an equal playing field. There's differentiation between the unit types of different European countries, it's not necessarily Euro-centric to differentiate between Europe and the others.
This much I can give a +1 to. I just fear Asia becoming so powerful that it would be easy for a player to take over the world from Asia.
pretty low, but as nomads they are a special case. They had a unique society that meant they basically didn't need troop maintenance and they didn't need an economy to support technological growth because they basically operated off China's neighbour bonus. It would be nice to have a unique horde mechanic to properly simulate this but I don't think it's going to happen. Since the discussion has previously been about China's economic tech relative to Europe's rather than military, GDP is relevant.
The player can already dominate the world with a native american tribe. Balancing the game for what is possible for the player shouldn't be necessary, it should be based on what's likely to happen if you let the game run itself. As long as the AI rarely make Asia unhistorically successful, I don't see the issue.
personally I hope EU4 will be suitably balanced that you can't pull off a WC as a native american. Remember we're not talking about EU3, the sequel is not the same game. So many changes are being made that you can't really assume something like that will still be the case.
You are aware that players can do just about anything in a game as long as EU, right? A player has conquered the entire world with Ryukyu in EU3.
A really great player should be able to do so, but the average player should not.
If EU IV sells 10,000,000 copies, 9,500,000 of it's players should be unable to do a WC from Asia.
WC of any kind should be impossible without serious save scumming.
You could say that from anywhere in the world. It is not a problem exclusive to Asia.
this is should be a pain to blob but not to annoying to expand. my biggest issue with EU3(other than some regions being way weaker than they were historically) is that there isnt enough to do in peacetime. hopefully the new trade mecanics will help some
You know, I normally hold you in high regard for your work as a modder and the general intelligence of your posts, but this response was just plain stupid. I never said anything about everyone playing by the same rules or making the game like civ. In fact, I can't even see how you got that from my post. I said that content, such as mechanics, events, and flavor, need not be totally focused on Europe for Europe to succeed. We can improve China without simultaneously weakening Europe.
Sorry if you feel the my reply was stupid, that was the feeling i (so totally subjective) got from couple of your posts. Just to clarify, by civ i meant a game where everyone starts with a single city and then builds up from there (applied to EU game meaning same tech rates and that kind of stuff).
Id just like to repeat that im definitely not against ROTW getting more attention, meaning features or additional content in general (quite contrary, ive spent lots of time doing that in EU3, probably too much time when i think of it). Just against the idea that everyone has the same chance to do everything (sort of like CK2). Personally i prefer EU for what it is, a game where i know in advance which countries will colonize and cover that part of history, with the rest of the world picking roles that build up from that (so in some way Europe drives this development, directly or indirectly).
Still not sure where you picked that up at. I'm terribly against the idea of making everyone "generic", which is probably obvious if you've read my posts in the "determinism" threads. Additionally, if you're familiar with my posts, I don't believe in making everyone perfectly equal. I'm only in opposition to the claim that expanded content outside of Europe is somehow equivalent to weakening Europe or buffing the rest of the world.
I personally don't like how easy it is for Europe to go stomping the rest of the world, when in reality, it was very difficult. I don't think defenders get enough morale bonus when defending their homeland. I also don't like how every battle has to be some sort of pitch battles as if Burmese chose to recreate the battle of Agincourt.
I think giving morale bonus to armies fighting to defend their homeland, and adding the possibility of unconventional warfare, both during war and for rebellion, can really help lesser factions withstand European superpowers a little better.
I think giving morale bonus to armies fighting to defend their homeland, and adding the possibility of unconventional warfare, both during war and for rebellion, can really help lesser factions withstand European superpowers a little better.
And also countries that are basically desert should definitely get a combat bonus against their enemies who come from, say, Europe, who have most likely never fought in desert before. That kind of terrain bonus stuff.
I think European tech shouldn't start to over-shadow everything else until the late 17th century. If anything Muslim tech should be a bit higher at the start of the game, The Ottomans were using far better weaponry than Europe. This would also help simulate the decline of The Ottomans. Not to mention the holy war causus beli goes invalid a few years before European tech begins to skyrocket.
There will probably be a national idea set for the Maghreb nations that does something like this. Like attrition reductions, and desert combat bonuses.