- Dec 14, 1999
- 18.409
- 38.945
Heir to the Throne - What do you think?
- Thread starter Johan
- 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.
Love it. EU3 feels incomplete without it.
Wish there were a dynasty tab in the ledger though. As it stands now the only way to follow the rest of your dynasty is to hover over your monarch name.
I also wish your fellow dynasts would be more likely to align with you. Most of the time, you don't see anything resembling the Habsburg or Bourbon alliances.
Wish there were a dynasty tab in the ledger though. As it stands now the only way to follow the rest of your dynasty is to hover over your monarch name.
I also wish your fellow dynasts would be more likely to align with you. Most of the time, you don't see anything resembling the Habsburg or Bourbon alliances.
It's great, but needs tweaking. I just love the new features, especially dynasties and that battles are more decisive, but I feel that games are way too chaotic as it is now (4.0). It feels like warfare is much more important than it used to be, which might be a good thing too, but now I can't enjoy peacefull trading games, since someone is bound to declare war on me, no matter which country I play.
It's really great, most features are particularly innovative and fun at the same time. The game has become deeper without becoming unfocused and thats pretty good. There are only a few features that seem a bit pointless to me (like wastelands and dynasties). However, one cannot deny that it needs balancing. This is not surprising or dissapointing though. A small team can't be expected to fully test and finetune a set of major new features in 3 months.
Last edited:
It's a good upgrade, but EU3IN was already very good so HttT isn't the gap with the previous game like were Vicky Revolution and Deus Vult. And it needs some tweaks (I play the 4.0) especially regencies.
I selected "Its great, makes EU3 even better." because there are a lot of fun new features to play around with and mod, and there is nothing I can say I really dislike about the changes. Sure, some polishing is needed here and there but nothing that makes me regret buying it.
i personally think it's awesome, i personally love the dynasties. It makes it easier for me to "roleplay" during the game, as i can see more than 1 nation as an archnemesis if they are of the same dynasty 
I love it. There's some balancing left to be done I'd say but overall it's very well done
I'm also very impressed with how paradox has been listening to it's fans a lot both before the development and with the patches now after the release. This is a nice change as while the company has never been bad at that I've noticed a significant increase in the interaction with and listening to the userbase here on the forums
This is why I'm also rather sure of the game becoming even better after some patches (and hopefully some more event/decision commands/triggers/etc as the need for them are discovered by modders exploring the new features).
EDIT:
I'd also like to mention that among one of the more discussed features I'm very happy with the decisive battles. While the battles themselves might not be more realistic, the effect that they have on gameplay and the way I think about them seems a lot more historic than before.
Most of the time commanders would avoid pitched battles during this era.
This isn't my favourite new feature (I like them all!) but I thought I should mention it as it's been getting a bit of flack
I'm also very impressed with how paradox has been listening to it's fans a lot both before the development and with the patches now after the release. This is a nice change as while the company has never been bad at that I've noticed a significant increase in the interaction with and listening to the userbase here on the forums
This is why I'm also rather sure of the game becoming even better after some patches (and hopefully some more event/decision commands/triggers/etc as the need for them are discovered by modders exploring the new features).
EDIT:
I'd also like to mention that among one of the more discussed features I'm very happy with the decisive battles. While the battles themselves might not be more realistic, the effect that they have on gameplay and the way I think about them seems a lot more historic than before.
Most of the time commanders would avoid pitched battles during this era.
This isn't my favourite new feature (I like them all!) but I thought I should mention it as it's been getting a bit of flack
Last edited:
Like others are saying, great, but needs a little balancing. Its way too easy to form the HRE as a state, both in that the electors and members give up their privileges too easily; and that the big powers outside the Empire (and the Papacy)don't seem to care about the monster being created.
Its pretty good but could use a few patches.
I keep getting stuck in war with countries i got a PU with, and its annoying. Perhaps its WAD, but i dont think so (wouldnt it be unrealistic?).
I keep getting stuck in war with countries i got a PU with, and its annoying. Perhaps its WAD, but i dont think so (wouldnt it be unrealistic?).
I chose the second option (the first being silly, not even being exclusive to the genre of 'games' ). EU3 is greatly improved and contains features on a level I had hoped for EU4. I'm delighted it has been introduced in this fashion.
). EU3 is greatly improved and contains features on a level I had hoped for EU4. I'm delighted it has been introduced in this fashion. 
It is great, the new features have tons of potential and certainly make it a lot better than vanilla.
However, it needs to be balanced. So far I seem to be caught in the terrible ravages of Regency Councils on far too many occasions, people declare so many wars (not necessarily on myself), the HRE seems incredibly easy to form, France is nerfed but perhaps a little too much I feel it could do with a little tweak to give it a bit more of a chance when AI controlled, but certainly not back to the dark days of the BBB.
However, it needs to be balanced. So far I seem to be caught in the terrible ravages of Regency Councils on far too many occasions, people declare so many wars (not necessarily on myself), the HRE seems incredibly easy to form, France is nerfed but perhaps a little too much I feel it could do with a little tweak to give it a bit more of a chance when AI controlled, but certainly not back to the dark days of the BBB.
[X] Its a good upgrade to EU3.
The general idea is good, but many things still require some balancing and polishing. With the new changes to combat, an improvement for the combat mechanics becomes even more urgent.
However, it is at least well playable, unlike the horrible Arma expansion. Was esp. surprised by the new AI behaviour, one of the best changes for the game - and I totally didn't expect that, esp. looking at the HoI3 *cough* "AI".
Overall it's a good expansion, although a bit costly for my taste. Price aside I would have voted for option #2.
The general idea is good, but many things still require some balancing and polishing. With the new changes to combat, an improvement for the combat mechanics becomes even more urgent.
However, it is at least well playable, unlike the horrible Arma expansion. Was esp. surprised by the new AI behaviour, one of the best changes for the game - and I totally didn't expect that, esp. looking at the HoI3 *cough* "AI".
Overall it's a good expansion, although a bit costly for my taste. Price aside I would have voted for option #2.