Flaws list (also feature request)

[apsycobear]

I'd just like to clarify that as has been mentioned scorched earth is already in the game, but unlike what I'm seeing is being implied, it is FAR more than enough. Scorched earth is currently very effective in a war in EU3 and quickly burns the enemies manpower pool. The defender in a war already has quite a few advantages, scorched earth being one of the best. There is no reason to further buff this.

If, however, you are asking that when scorched earth be used the buildings in the province be destroyed (or something along those lines), maybe? I'm not sure if that would be an appropriate balance to how effective using it is in a defensive war, but there definitely should be SOMETHING to balance its use, aside for a temporary income loss.

 

[Pitt The Elder]

Technological development is never constant. It took humans a couple hundred years to realize that horses were more usefull than slave labour, a little less longer to realize the usefullness of horses in warfare, and look how long it took to replace them with something better.

Oh you don't have to tell me. The internet's collective darling, Neil DeGrass Tyson, describes it beautifully here: https://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_detailpage&v=P_Um2VdIKmA#t=2391s. And then of course that's only when you view things in the aggregate. In the day to day experience, technology is full of stumbles, strolls and leaping bounds.

My point is simply to stress that the domestication of horses didn't come because some steppe tribe somewhere thought "man, we've got a big war with our enemies soon, we should invest in a technological advantage, maybe utilize these horses that are all over the place". That's simply not how things worked. It's kind of how things work now, but to the small extent that that's true, it's only been that way since the 20th century.

 

[EmmDubya]

4 Scorched Earth has been in since EUIII Napoleon's Ambition I believe? It just never made much sense to use it because it sucked. I think they've changed this to be more significant, especially since one of Russia's Fancy Pants NIs deals with it.

Funnily enough, in my most recent game as a Pan-Scandinavian colonial empire I had armies of 1k cavalry in worthless colonial border provinces ready to scorch earth and retreat to wear down deathstacks to nothing while I plan a counterattack - by doing so and starving stacks of 20k+ enemy soldiers to 5-6000 while a similarly sized stack of my own mop up the remainder not only winning but leisurely strolling through chunks of major nations' colonial empires and their level one forts I managed to create a near monopoly on the coasts of the Americas by the 1800s. In all, it's a wonderful tactic for catching more land-based nations out, especially if you have a strong navy to stop any reinforcements from arriving en masse from Europe.

 

[unmerged(149861)]

Oh you don't have to tell me. The internet's collective darling, Neil DeGrass Tyson, describes it beautifully here: https://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_detailpage&v=P_Um2VdIKmA#t=2391s. And then of course that's only when you view things in the aggregate. In the day to day experience, technology is full of stumbles, strolls and leaping bounds.

My point is simply to stress that the domestication of horses didn't come because some steppe tribe somewhere thought "man, we've got a big war with our enemies soon, we should invest in a technological advantage, maybe utilize these horses that are all over the place". That's simply not how things worked. It's kind of how things work now, but to the small extent that that's true, it's only been that way since the 20th century.

True, but you must consider just how much war actually spreads technology - the same as (if probably not more so) than trade does.

Take my point about horses and the use of the strruip. Due to the near constant waring and raiding going on in modern day Eastern Europe and Russia, this invention spread from China all the way across to India. A simmilar arguement could be made about more obscure things, like the crusaders bringing the knowledge of the Greeks and Romans back from Constantinople.

Another example would be to look at the development of armour, which changes over the period of EU4 from omni-present chain-mail, which due to the improvements in archery, is replaced by plate armour. In turn, the crossbow changed that, and armour gets knocked out of the picture.

 

[Emperor Marcus]

True, but you must consider just how much war actually spreads technology - the same as (if probably not more so) than trade does.

Take my point about horses and the use of the strruip. Due to the near constant waring and raiding going on in modern day Eastern Europe and Russia, this invention spread from China all the way across to India. A simmilar arguement could be made about more obscure things, like the crusaders bringing the knowledge of the Greeks and Romans back from Constantinople.

Another example would be to look at the development of armour, which changes over the period of EU4 from omni-present chain-mail, which due to the improvements in archery, is replaced by plate armour. In turn, the crossbow changed that, and armour gets knocked out of the picture.

Replace crossbow with gun and that sentence is accurate.

 

[Pitt The Elder]

True, but you must consider just how much war actually spreads technology - the same as (if probably not more so) than trade does.

Oh certainly.

But that's not in any way what Hisu suggested in the OP, in that we could take a decision and mobilize the state to create a tech bonus for 70 years. That's all I'm arguing about.

 

[unmerged(149861)]

Replace crossbow with gun and that sentence is accurate.

Correct, brain is in CK2 mode.

Oh certainly.

But that's not in any way what Hisu suggested in the OP, in that we could take a decision and mobilize the state to create a tech bonus for 70 years. That's all I'm arguing about.

Of course, that would be stupid, but a conflict lasting thirty or so years should encourage some innovation somewhat.

 

[17blue17]

Game Log Enhancement Request


It would be nice if Paradox could have game activity written to the game log BEFORE it is implemented by the code so we can see what was happening just before a game crash. Currently in EU3 it appears the game can crash before the action is written into the game log making the log useless in trying to find out why a mod crashes. For example if an event option is picked this should be first written to the log then the effect implemented.

 

[Chieron]

Game Log Enhancement Request


It would be nice if Paradox could have game activity written to the game log BEFORE it is implemented by the code so we can see what was happening just before a game crash. Currently in EU3 it appears the game can crash before the action is written into the game log making the log useless in trying to find out why a mod crashes. For example if an event option is picked this should be first written to the log then the effect implemented.

Sounds good, maybe put it into a separate thread (this one is not very promising, the OP was just too trollish and entitled)

 

[unmerged(80402)]

There are only like 2 things good in this list, but they were already proposed and discussed.

1. I think that ultimatums, should be available before the war - even not immediately(As we got things that come up when you have certain tech, like coalitions, coming up with tech, so then ultimatum should also be possible).
2. You stole my idea, and just changed it a bit, My idea was that wastelands, while propably mostly just uncolonizable(because of having hard life conditions, like deserts, rainforest ect.), should be claim-able - meaning that a nation should be able to own them, but it shouldn't give it anything, and armies shouldn't be able to pass thru it. Claiming the wasteland, could need having acces to most of it (IE. more than 50% of the provinces around it OR more - maybe like 90%), and it would give you some prestige, but would cost you for example money or monarch admin points. Cause as russia, i just want to be able to paint siberia this color!

 

[Vishaing]

I have to say I would be interested in a system whereby you only got 'Hard' National Borders if the province in question actually had an owned and colonized province across that border. Otherwise, your color should 'spill' out into the neighboring provinces and gradually fade to nothing, like in This Map.

This could be paired up with the Wasteland Idea above, if you own several neighboring provinces on the border of an uncolonized or wasteland province, then how far they 'spill' over into that province increases the more neighboring provinces you own. If you own all of the provinces surrounding the province, it is added as your color, but slightly faded out so you can still tell at a glance that you haven't actually settled it.

 

[17blue17]

Sounds good, maybe put it into a separate thread (this one is not very promising, the OP was just too trollish and entitled)

OK reposted in main thread

 

[Pitt The Elder]

I have to say I would be interested in a system whereby you only got 'Hard' National Borders if the province in question actually had an owned and colonized province across that border. Otherwise, your color should 'spill' out into the neighboring provinces and gradually fade to nothing, like in This Map.

That would be pretty sweet.