Immersive future of EU and how Third Rome could become the flagman of it but didn't.

[Mortheim]

Ahoy, mateys!
It is your ever b*tthurting russian which now understand his feeling better and want to show the real point of Immersive packs.

So, Third Rome. I think it is the second biggest letdown i felt during my time playing EU4. The first one was "The Biggest Feature" stripped of from another known game. There is number of reasons - lack of interesting mechanics, some misconseptions, no fixes for old events, static gameplay etc. And, when i was washing dishes, i thought: "Wait! That is IT! This is why i don't like the Third Rome and this was the way to make it immersive! And we waited for that for so long...". And, yes, it is about static gameplay and lack of deeper control.
To understand all the parts i need to deepen a little bit in a history of Russia to represent how it went.
Vasiliy II The Blind. For some, failed ruler whos reign was remebered only for losing wars, losing throne and losing eyes. And his skills show it...But was he? He defeated Kazanian invasion, refused to pay tribute and defeted Great Horde, returned his throne, centrilized state even further, lowered autonomy of vassals. Yes, he wasn't strategically gifted or the best administrator, but he wasn't incapable either. Because incapable ruler wouldn't left such a brilliant ruler after him.
And, yes, i'm talking about Ivan III who is 3-4-5, but done things like goddamn 5-5-5. He lived for 65 years and ruled for 43 of them. But, mostly, from his rule started these important things: service for land, serfdom, "Third Rome". During his reign and for one and a half centuries later burghers were forming and had some power. During his reign weaking of boyars continued...

So, those two are real tandem. First left to his son country ready to reforms and with some power. Second took advantage of it. But there were a lot of "if" in this. If Vasiliy II died and was perlaced by Shemiaka. If Ivan III decided to manage army reform another way. If burghers didn't use their power to somewhat force Ivan III to fight against the GH. Maybe he would be more cautious, maybe Vasiliy would die in prison...We have no control over their lifes and deaths, but over their decisions...*at this moment Waldetoft - Voyage started playing in my random playlist* We have contol, but not full. What would happen if serfdom didn't become that harsh cause hypothetic Ivan IV decided to listen to Kurbsky and went for Crimea? What if dvoryans wouldn't be relieved from service during reign of Catherine the Great? Yes, i'm talking about...

Dynamic National Ideas. Where Third Rome could really bring Immersion and base for future DLC. Imagine your actions changing national ideas through centuries? Shaping your country as you see its future? Relying on citizens and merchants rather than dvoryans? Sure, why not? Going "Polish way" and relying more and more on nobility "by birth"? Yeah, sure. Following historical path and shaping Muscovy into Russia with serfdom, pomestjas and tsarism? Hell, you can do that. Pomestja Reform for bigger army, Strengthen the Boyars for some stab cost reduction and lower unrest or, maybe, supporting merchants for %trade_related_bonus%? Sure, why not?
And then you reform you start again shaping your ideas. Better army, bigger army or more manpower? Hell, why not. Going for those fine new glory regiments or staying with streltsy to focus on fire phase? Why the hell not. You make decision and shape your nation.

 

[PAnZuRiEL]

It sounds like you're describing regular idea groups, which are already in the game.

 

[Coffer]

It sounds like you're describing regular idea groups, which are already in the game.

The idea groups are boring and samey by now, owing in large part to how badly balanced they are.

 

[Rocketskates]

this could be for everyone no need to restrict it but i think thats why we have custom nations? my gripe is "tis is not a historically accurate game" but we get historical events out of nowhere changing the game massively

 

[Mortheim]

It sounds like you're describing regular idea groups, which are already in the game.

Well, sure thing if you didn't read the point about how important person is to history. And that static ideas doesn't represent how country would develope. Sometimes ideas even contradict each other and/or history. For both those points i will take two ideas which, first, contradict each other, second, should exist in one form. Pomestnoe Voisko and Strengthen the Boyars. What is pomestnoe voisko? Well, this army was gathered from people who got land for service. And they contoled land as long as they, or their children, controlled it. They were oppostion of boyars, who got land by birthright. Vasiliy II made a trend from lowering boyars power, Ivan III developed it. So, as rulers they had choice - rely on new blood or try to deal with old blood? And, well, there were thin blooded people, on whom they could also relied.

this could be for everyone no need to restrict it but i think thats why we have custom nations? my gripe is "tis is not a historically accurate game" but we get historical events out of nowhere changing the game massively

Again, as i said, Third Rome could be flagman. And custom nations don't represent what i talked about. And my suggestion will make it more sandboxy, cause, i think, EU should have more of it.

 

[Dominion]

The idea groups are boring and samey by now, owing in large part to how badly balanced they are.

If your choices are always the same it's not the idea groups that are bad.

4 out of 18 are worthless, leaving you with 8 out of 14 to choose from, not counting in the order of picking them.

The Russia pack is dirt though, I agree. No need for discussion.
First DLC I didn't buy and I don't plan to.

Biggest complaint is that buying the immersion pack weakens AI Russia. Makes no sense at all, but that's how it is.

 

[PAnZuRiEL]

The Russia pack is dirt though, I agree. First DLC I didn't buy and I don't plan to. Biggest complaint is that buying the immersion pack weakens AI Russia. Makes no sense at all, but that's how it is.

Is it now? You have an awfully well-informed opinion of a product you don't use. Considering the DLC is a straight buff to Russia, forgive me if I find your claim untrustworthy.

But as far as "dynamic national ideas" go, they literally are just regular idea groups. You want to cosy up to the aristocracy? Take Aristocratic Ideas. You want to modernise the army? Take Quality Ideas. You want to strengthen dynastic ties abroad? Take Influence Ideas. They may not have flavour text tying them to the history of your country, but so what? These are the decisions you make during the game about how to shape your country's future. That is literally what they are.

EU4 has a lot of playable nations, and most of those nations have unique national ideas. Suggesting that not only should they have unique national ideas, but that those ideas should change uniquely in response to the gamestate is nothing short of insane. It's an extraordinary amount of developer work for an absolutely minimal improvement over what Idea Groups and many Dynamic Historical Events achieve already.

 

[Calanon]

TBH I was just hoping for a lot more events, especially to have the Muscovite Civil War and something to show that Vasily II was also the Prince of Novgorod.

 

[Roubik]

For me the most annoying thing is that when you form Russia you are forced into a Tsardom, no way for a Novgorod=Republican Russia gameplay. Through and through Tsardom is the best government so not much of a choice there.