• 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.

Duuk

Reformed Badboy
23 Badges
Oct 16, 2001
6.137
1.403
  • Majesty 2
  • Europa Universalis III: Collection
  • Crusader Kings II: Holy Knight (pre-order)
  • Cities: Skylines
  • 500k Club
  • Victoria 2: Heart of Darkness
  • Victoria 2: A House Divided
  • Victoria 2
  • Rome Gold
  • Victoria: Revolutions
  • Europa Universalis III Complete
  • Majesty 2 Collection
  • Hearts of Iron Anthology
  • Europa Universalis III Complete
  • Heir to the Throne
  • Europa Universalis III Complete
  • Europa Universalis III
  • Deus Vult
  • Crusader Kings II: Sword of Islam
  • Crusader Kings II: Sons of Abraham
  • Crusader Kings II: The Republic
  • Crusader Kings II: Legacy of Rome
  • Crusader Kings II
In this thread, I would like to see posts relating ONLY to topics which have a general consensus. This is NOT a debate thread. The topics posted should (if possible) have a LINK to a thread where debate occured, so that should Johan want to see where the idea came from, he can. This is NOT a thread to post "new" ideas, and even I will restrict myself to not posting the ones that don't have wide agreement.

Please, add more, but ONLY those things that most of us have agreed on (I won't say all, because some people hate everything :D ), so those things we, as a community, would most like to see in EU3 get implemented!

This list is maintained on a dynamic basis. If the discussion in the cited thread turns AGAINST an idea through excellent discussion, please let me know so I can edit or remove the link accordingly. Do NOT argue the topic here.

Exploration should be more event driven, rather than "explorer" driven ala EU2.

A "size" penalty should be imposed (ala CK) to slow down very large countries (like China ) without underbalancing trade goods or province income values.

A dynamic joining system should be in place, with the option to "Wait, Let AI Run, or Leave Braindead" for dropped players in multiplayer, thus reducing the frequency of rehosting.

Cores and Claims should be seperated into 2 game mechanics

Religions need more tags for modding. The debate as to what should be included as base religions in the game is ongoing and NOT a consensus.

Most people seem to agree that there should be traderoutes in one form or another. (although no one seems to think CoTs should disappear altogether)

UI: Countries of Interest should be able to be designated, so we don't need to know that China has declared war on Oman if that part of the world isn't interesting to us.

The game host should have some form of control panel to allow them to set passwords, kick or add players, pause, and set AI control of dropped players.

Making some battles decisive for the war

Rework inflation to more realistic

Could we please have an in game clock so we can tell when conquering Russia took an hour too long? :D
 
Last edited:
One of my threads seems to be pretty much agreed on but no one seems to have looked at it lately.

Cores and Claims
 
Markusw7 said:
One of my threads seems to be pretty much agreed on but no one seems to have looked at it lately.

Cores and Claims

An excellent example! I had totally forgotten about that thread, and it's for the same reason: We all pretty much said "Wow, great idea" and then moved on to arguing about the map in the Balkans (again).

That's why I started this thread, so the "signal to noise" ratio here doesn't drown out the actual good ideas that most people agree would make the game great.
 
Please, add more, but ONLY those things that most of us have agreed on (I won't say all, because some people hate everything ),

I can't agree with that :p Paradox shouldn't be forced to listen to a bunch of uneducated hicks (exaggerated :p) about what to put in their games.

They might have some stellar idea they'd like to keep as a surprise, for instance. Or might have a twist on some unpopular (on the forums) idea that would make it great fun.

It's up to the Gods of Thunder & Rock'n'Roll after all :p
 
I'd like to think my ideas have universal appeal, but unfortunately I seem to have several very vhement counterproponents :(
 
Mad King James said:
I'd like to think my ideas have universal appeal, but unfortunately I seem to have several very vhement counterproponents :(

D'uh. You're mad, of course people disagree :p
 
Arilou said:
I can't agree with that :p Paradox shouldn't be forced to listen to a bunch of uneducated hicks (exaggerated :p) about what to put in their games.

They might have some stellar idea they'd like to keep as a surprise, for instance. Or might have a twist on some unpopular (on the forums) idea that would make it great fun.

It's up to the Gods of Thunder & Rock'n'Roll after all :p

Oh I agree. But I'd hate for a "brilliant" simple solution to a possible problem to get lost in the haystack that is this forum, and have us be at 1.03 before someone remembers the original idea.
 
It's my precarious attachment to sanity that allows me to think outside the box. Perhaps too far outside sometimes...
 
Its been pretty much agreed that Religions should be moddable and we should have a good number of extra religious tags. Its been also agreed that Tibet and Mongolia could be made Mahayana and probably SEA by contrast being the other buddhist area Therveda. The real problem is the Far East.
 
Most people seem to agree that there should be traderoutes in one form or another. (although no one seems to think CoTs should disappear altogether)

The exploration thing is still controversial i'd say. Definitely no consensus.

Its been pretty much agreed that Religions should be moddable and we should have a good number of extra religious tags.
I do not think you will find opponents to any kind of extra moddability.
 
3 days ago I started a Great Vote Thread (it's more Vote Thread than Great for now).
I'm collecting ideas there and let people to vote if they want them or not. Every idea there has a link to it's discussion thread and (most of them) a link to EXTRACTION from the thread (very useful if you want to know what is the idea about and don't want to read through many posts in discussion thread). There are only several ideas for now, but it is growing.
 
Mad King James said:
I agree on the lack of consensus regarding explorers. I'm not sold on the event-explorer idea.
There will almost always be a few holdouts, like there are for any type of representation of nomads.
 
Jinnai said:
Its been pretty much agreed that Religions should be moddable and we should have a good number of extra religious tags. Its been also agreed that Tibet and Mongolia could be made Mahayana and probably SEA by contrast being the other buddhist area Therveda. The real problem is the Far East.

I don't think that's been agreed upon.
 
My definition (and since I started the thread I get to make the rules :D ) of general consensus is that a very large number of sane posters have agreed in principle with the idea. They may not agree with all the particulars (such as WHAT should trigger an explorer event, or the PRECISE way that it should be modelled), and that the "con" part of the debate is limited to a handful of people screaming loudly that the sky will fall and the earth will break open and they will never buy EU3 if such-and-such a feature is added.

So, by my definition, event-driven or "non-player-controlled" exploration is a consensus.
 
Hyzhenhok said:
I don't think that's been agreed upon.

Be careful there. He didn't say we all agreed that there needed to be more actual religions in the game, only that it should be highly moddable and their should be significant extra tags. EU2 (and every Pdox game) has seemed to have only X number of religion tags, and adding a religion always meant removing something else.

There is general consensus on that point, so that those who want to have Druze reflected in Syria can do so without dragging the rest of us down with them. :D