• 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.
When Eu1 sells X copies, Eu2 sells a small fraction of that and then Eu3 is back up to X copies, it is a kind of indication that a large majority of paradox gamers want an open ended sandbox game.

Interesting line of thinking.
But wasn't, to the casual observer and non-fan, EU2 almost like a paid upgrade. This isn't meant as criticism, I'm not bitter at all about EU2 or it's pricepoint, but I remember various magazine reviews over here writing something along the lines of "Same as EU1 with some minor upgrades, should have been a expansion." And EU1 and EU2 indeed look VERY similar.
I figure a LOT of the folks that bought EU1 and didn't like it enough to become dedicated fans skipped EU2 because of that similarity to EU1.
_____
rezaf
 
Agh! A ghost eighth page!

Anyway, I hope For the Glory meets success, both so that other Paradox games in a similar state may see similar benefit, and because EU2 holds a nice, but very different, place in my heart. :)

EDIT: I should be called the Ghostbuster because of how easily I got rid of that fake Eighth page. :cool:
 
Agh! A ghost eighth page!

EDIT: I should be called the Ghostbuster because of how easily I got rid of that fake Eighth page. :cool:
:rofl:

Anyway, I hope For the Glory meets success, both so that other Paradox games in a similar state may see similar benefit, and because EU2 holds a nice, but very different, place in my heart. :)

Totally agree with you on that.:)

EU2 in its simplicity but complexity out of simplicity can be compared to chess. Easy to grasp rules, but with the right goals (world conversion or conquering the world as Chimu) it can be quite tricky. :eek:

EU3 is a lot more complex, but most of the time you do not have to handle the whole complexity.

My general experience with strategy games is that I only succeed in changing history, because the limits and limitations of politics are not that well represented or existant in games as they are or were in Real Life.
AGCEEP tries to solve this by events, which I like and EU3 tries to do it via AI behaviour.

Playing AGCEEP has the advantage that I actually learn something about history via the events which is nice for me, because there are a lot of countries about whose history I know very little about.:)
 
My general experience with strategy games is that I only succeed in changing history, because the limits and limitations of politics are not that well represented or existant in games as they are or were in Real Life.
AGCEEP tries to solve this by events, which I like and EU3 tries to do it via AI behaviour.


I think AGCEEP handle the historical events and changed history very well. It took some time and a lot of work from the fans, but they developed the events to such a level that if certain historical circumstances were not meant, an alternative history line began. For example, the US war of independance was never inevitable if England picked the right events from 1600-1753, or if England won the HYW, the AGCEEP had loads of events to acomidate that (I have memories of the massive civil war event that takes place in France when Liz comes to the throne!). Not many people seem to mention the dynamism AGCEEP acheived.
 
At the same time, having your Big White Blob dismantled by event because you have _beaten_ rev/napoleunic France was kind of dumb. Okay, there were only about 10 years left, but i stopped playing there after my empire had gone south because I wiped the floor with france.
 
Not many people seem to mention the dynamism AGCEEP acheived.

Sorry if my words gave a false impression. :eek:o I really love AGCEEP and its alternate plotlines. Especially the fact that it is not easy to keep some unhistoric gains for all of eternity. All the German minors are not just eaten by a neighbour or not-so-near great power and stay under foreign rule for all of eternity.:cool:
The development of "history" in AGCEEP is usually along historically plausible paths and that is great and can only get better with FGT.:)
 
Not many people seem to mention the dynamism AGCEEP acheived.
No comment, this is awful determinism anyway... ;)

At the same time, having your Big White Blob dismantled by event because you have _beaten_ rev/napoleunic France was kind of dumb. Okay, there were only about 10 years left, but i stopped playing there after my empire had gone south because I wiped the floor with france.
Always possible to enhance, this is how AGCEEP works, but if you don't report it, not always easy to offer balanced choices. Instead of restoring HRE in the Congress of Vienna (and italy btw), what could then be done?
Obviously Austria was already a badboy for annexing countries in the area... We could have an option for keeping territories but what should it mean?

The development of "history" in AGCEEP is usually along historically plausible paths and that is great and can only get better with FGT.:)
This is indeed one of the goals of the game and the whole AGCEEP one: playing with History.
 
Actually, I was more of a liberator, having nibbled back most of western germany from Spain and Sweden. I had about 40BB from a cap of 70.

What I would have liked was a new HRE, as a national entity, under Austrian rule, with the rest of the world hating me for it, and my slovenian and hungarian parts at least having massive revolt risks and rebellions, if not outright secessions (the focus shifting from a multinational power to a german one).
 
Some sort of "Germany" under Austrian rule with some nasty effects? Why not, it seems plausible but I'm not alone to be able to comment. Better discuss this in the devoted Germany & Austria AGCEEP thread.

And there is still a possible "evil" choice with keeping it all for Austria but, IMHO, effects should be really nasty in this case.
 
As someone who thinks EUIII is better than EUII is almost every conceivable aspect, I'm kinda curious to see if FTG will offer anything to bring me back to the old warhorse. ;)

From the sound of it, this project isn't really 'intended' for folks like me, but I'm still following the news with interest.
 
I am really looking forward to the EUIII expansion as well as to FTG.

About the EUIII i liked the complexity, the sandbox-style and the dynamic gameplay.
Each expansion made it better.

About EUII (+AGCEEP especially) i liked the historical atmosphere, the warfare system and the map.

I play both and sometimes i try to scroll the zoom in EUII or try to unpause with the space key.
Now what i know for a fact is that FTG will let me zoom by mousewheel :D, and i am sure a lot of other improvements made by "players" will probably be to my liking.