It would be nice if we could negotiate region claims for minor allies in peace negotiations.
And of course, more focus outside Europe as well.
And of course, more focus outside Europe as well.
If Paradox made a new, final expansion for EUIII, what would you like to see in it?
- Thread starter UmOceano
- 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.
I think what the poster meant was that a minor partner can't be completely forced out of a war when the alliance leader makes peace with no consultation. As in, they either get consulted when making the peace and can impose their own demands, or can opt to stay in.
Historically, that didn't happen for minors (often, minors weren't even invited to the peace deal). For major powers, that is possible, but generally those would be handled via multi-party negotiations, which I'm guessing would be an absolute nightmare to code.
I've said this before, but I'd like to see some of the peace value (prestige & $, anyway) apportioned by WS attained. So if your ally did 3/4 of the fighting, he'd get 3/4 of the rewards. However, I don't see how to work provinces into this. Even if you made it such that they had to get a % of those claimed, it'd still be too common to just give a crappy & useless one, rather than something good.
So just the fungible rewards would have to do.
Another idea (I'm not sure of this), might be a 1-month ultimatum delay with DOWs. It'd give the target a month to react, although combat & invasion, etc, would not begin until the ultimatum runs out. It would kill some exploits, anyway.
So just the fungible rewards would have to do.
Another idea (I'm not sure of this), might be a 1-month ultimatum delay with DOWs. It'd give the target a month to react, although combat & invasion, etc, would not begin until the ultimatum runs out. It would kill some exploits, anyway.
As far as i'm concerned, this is the simplest solution, at least coding wise.
Firstly, you code some sort of war-screen. This could also be used to faciliate the use of various Casus Belli's for people other than the attacker aswell. On this window, allies could also indicate which provinces they want. So, at the end of a war, each ally will have the warscore they've ammassed, and what they've indicated they want.
When a peace is agreed, the leader can only demand land for his allies that they want. Likewise, that ally takes cost and infamy relative to the CB he's choosing to use. He also has to demand a peace giving them warscore in a certain acceptable range. (So if an ally wants province X and he has the warscore to get it, the leader can't peace out without giving him his dues) If he doesn't do this, then the the disgruntled minor partner will instead be granted his own decision. One of the following:
A) Stay in the war.
B) Leave the war, but show disgust. Relations hit and Casus-Belli on your former alliance leader.
c) Leave the war, and accept the peace.
The other thing is if you're on the losing side, your ally can only suffer proportionatly to their negative warscore. So a leader can't get out of a war by sacrificing an allies territory. If that ally loses ground and is unhappy, they'll also get a choice similar to the above. If they want to regain that territory (for example, if they felt the war was on a turning point), they'll stay in the war and "Regain Territory" CB that allows for 0 cost of those provinces, which they could then select in their CB spot on the War overview screen.
Similarly, for things such as releasing minors or conceding defeat, the Prestige bonus would be spread across allies relative to their warscores.
It's also worth noting that a "Call to Arms" system would be included in all this.
While I didn't think it through as thoroughly as you guys did, I did have something similar in mind. It's just frustrating that a junior party can get forced to accept an unjust deal even though it still has the capability to continue the war. It bugs me that the war leader can use the total warscore for his own benefits while leaving his allies with nothing. If we go to war together we share the profits, doesn't need to be regions specifically. So as a junior that has inflicted say a 20% warscore I should be entitled to that claim when negotiations ensue.
May be that it isn't historically accurate but would definitely give me an incentive to help allies more than I use to.
I really liked your ideas Musthavename.
May be that it isn't historically accurate but would definitely give me an incentive to help allies more than I use to.
I really liked your ideas Musthavename.
I'd like to se a form of "Glorious Army/Navy", every battle is registrated as a win or a loose. Countin' out how victorious an army is, this should give a morale boost, increased manpower, higher forcelimit modifier to armies/navies. But if you are nation that's beaten all the time the opposite modifer should happen.
I mean how cool isn't it to be in Worlds most succesfull army?
I mean how cool isn't it to be in Worlds most succesfull army?
this idea could be improved
1 -when you recruit soldiers , they are inexperienced peasants , their first battles should be hard but after a couple of battles each regiement will get better and become an experienced army
2 - the experience goes down over time
3 - the ability to build things like military schools so newly recruited soldiers wont be crap
A decision to 'Form Greece.'
Por ejemplo, I conquer Greece as a non-orthodox greek state, like Cyprus. Rather than the whole of greece having the label "Cyprus!" there should be a decision to form a greek nation. I notice that the latest beta patch has removed Greece as a possible revolter (no more Greece in the crimea, in other words :/), so this would be a good time to put that country flag to use, eh eh.
Por ejemplo, I conquer Greece as a non-orthodox greek state, like Cyprus. Rather than the whole of greece having the label "Cyprus!" there should be a decision to form a greek nation. I notice that the latest beta patch has removed Greece as a possible revolter (no more Greece in the crimea, in other words :/), so this would be a good time to put that country flag to use, eh eh.
What I would like to see would be bilateral diplomacy- I'll give you 3 trade techs, 10,000 soldiers for 5 years, and 5000 ducats for these 2 provinces; I would also like to have a dynamic alliance leader. The alliance leader is the one with the highest warscore. Or atleast, if that's too complicated to code, then atleast have a list of demands that you present to your ally should you win. If they dishonor more then half of these demands, you gain cores on any province you claimed and a causus beli on the owner, and on your ally, for revenge, who are auto-allied if you declare war on either. Now finally, if I'm at war with half the Muslim world, I should have the Holy War CB on every last damn one of them, whether I declared war on them personally or not. Or atleast, dynamic causus belli. If I conquer Adana, and now border the Mamluks at Alepo, then I should gain the Holy War casus belli and use that as, not only the right to declare, but also as the right to take if I was already at war with them when I received that casus belli. Oh, and I want different levels of road and infrastructure maintainance slider. Whether I fund a simple path, or if I have Roman-style roads across my empire would be a nice distinction, AND SHOULD DECREASE TRAVEL TIME ALA VICTORIA.
Finally, I want POPs and I want the ability to make pre-industrial businesses. If I specialize my entire nation in watchmaking, then that's my choice and I want to receive the full benefits in incredible amounts of moneyz. My ideal game is Victoria's economic and chunks of it's political system+EU3's timeframe+A decent map and interface. Would be a great game.
Finally, I want POPs and I want the ability to make pre-industrial businesses. If I specialize my entire nation in watchmaking, then that's my choice and I want to receive the full benefits in incredible amounts of moneyz. My ideal game is Victoria's economic and chunks of it's political system+EU3's timeframe+A decent map and interface. Would be a great game.
Still new at EU3, but I'd like:
More kids for my rulers (sick of having no heir when my current heir dies).
More HRE-type things (like in Asia, the Middle East (Caliphate perhaps?), the Americas (Iriqouis Confederacy?), etc. Maybe if I'm Poland and the HRE doesn't like me, I can start my own with Eastern Europe...)
How about 'Berlin Conference'-type deals? Where Imperial nations split up uncolonized lands?
Make it more rewarding (ie, easier) to play non-European nations.
More kids for my rulers (sick of having no heir when my current heir dies).
More HRE-type things (like in Asia, the Middle East (Caliphate perhaps?), the Americas (Iriqouis Confederacy?), etc. Maybe if I'm Poland and the HRE doesn't like me, I can start my own with Eastern Europe...)
How about 'Berlin Conference'-type deals? Where Imperial nations split up uncolonized lands?
Make it more rewarding (ie, easier) to play non-European nations.
Muscowy, and whole russia (maybe except novogrod - about them i am not sure), should be dependant's (they paid tribute to them) of Golden Horde khans - until 1492.
The stuff I would want is definately 'Mod'able
such as what MM did with Japan and the Shogun/Daimyo era and constantly bickering clans.
Do that with Asia/NA for a better and more realistic feel . Since the NA tribes just seem to get steam-rolled and so why would people play them..
They need to be made more capable somehow -- thru events, leaders, and such
such as what MM did with Japan and the Shogun/Daimyo era and constantly bickering clans.
Do that with Asia/NA for a better and more realistic feel . Since the NA tribes just seem to get steam-rolled and so why would people play them..
They need to be made more capable somehow -- thru events, leaders, and such
You mean you would want a decision for those nations formation?
I agree i would want it too. Aspecialy greece (i even modded it - about five minutes of work?
).EDIT: Such decision should be not avible for Byzantium - as they would not need for such thing.
You mean you would want a decision for those nations formation?
I agree i would want it too. Aspecialy greece (i even modded it - about five minutes of work?
EDIT: Such decision should be not avible for Byzantium - as they would not need for such thing.
Also i suppose there should be such requirements :
Own and have core on :
Athens
Morea
Achaea
And it should give cores on whole greek region.
Interesting thread.
~ Graphical overhaul, including new/improved sprites (Rome's seem a lot better, judging by the screenshots) and new map icons. As has been mentioned, famous landmarks would be nice.
~ Royal family trees.
~ More decisions and events, naturally.
I can't really think of anything else off the top of my head, which is no doubt a testament to how far the game has come.
Austen.
~ Graphical overhaul, including new/improved sprites (Rome's seem a lot better, judging by the screenshots) and new map icons. As has been mentioned, famous landmarks would be nice.
~ Royal family trees.
~ More decisions and events, naturally.
I can't really think of anything else off the top of my head, which is no doubt a testament to how far the game has come.
Austen.
I agree - you should be able to present army to someone - also choosing, that they or you will pay for them. (anyway they would just use them as their own army...
It would mean making friends, that are not allies worth, even if they are not electors or something.
Also emperor should get some armies from members if he is defending empire.
It would be displayed like this :
Friend flag/Reciver Flag | Name of army etc.
I would like a lot of the things stated earlier.
But i would love that paradox would cover the era betveen eu3 (along with the expancions) and victoria 2. There is a gap between the games (1820?-1836).
But i would love that paradox would cover the era betveen eu3 (along with the expancions) and victoria 2. There is a gap between the games (1820?-1836).