unmerged(11600)

bring the game home!
Nov 8, 2002
5.788
1
Visit site
OK, I've watched for about a week to see if anyone would describe these things, but I guess almost everyone here plays a range of Paradox games. So, for the benefit of those of us who have only played EU, could someone please explain the following, which Johan has said will be brought into EU3:

personalities (CK)

leadership (Vicky)

intelligence (HoI2)

Knowing what these things are will help me better understand where Paradox plans on going with the game, which will allow me to better comment on various suggestions. 3 sanity points awarded for the first explanation of each, an even 10 if all three.

-Pat
 

Registered

Procrastinator extraordinaire
40 Badges
Oct 23, 2003
3.516
7
  • Europa Universalis IV: Mare Nostrum
  • 200k Club
  • 500k Club
  • Cities: Skylines
  • Cities: Skylines Deluxe Edition
  • Europa Universalis III: Collection
  • Europa Universalis IV: El Dorado
  • Europa Universalis IV: Pre-order
  • Europa Universalis IV: Common Sense
  • Europa Universalis IV: Cossacks
  • Victoria 2: Heart of Darkness
  • Stellaris
  • Europa Universalis IV: Rights of Man
  • Steel Division: Normandy 44
  • Europa Universalis IV: Mandate of Heaven
  • Europa Universalis IV: Third Rome
  • Europa Universalis IV: Cradle of Civilization
  • Europa Universalis IV: Rule Britannia
  • Europa Universalis IV: Dharma
  • Europa Universalis IV: Golden Century
  • For the Motherland
  • Crusader Kings II
  • East India Company
  • Europa Universalis III
  • Europa Universalis III Complete
  • Divine Wind
  • Europa Universalis IV
  • Europa Universalis IV: Art of War
  • Europa Universalis IV: Wealth of Nations
  • For The Glory
  • Hearts of Iron II: Armageddon
  • Hearts of Iron III
  • Hearts of Iron III: Their Finest Hour
  • Heir to the Throne
  • Europa Universalis III Complete
  • Europa Universalis III Complete
  • Europa Universalis IV: Res Publica
  • Semper Fi
  • Victoria 2
  • Victoria 2: A House Divided
pjcrowe said:
intelligence (HoI2)

-Pat
This will be introduced in the upcoming doomsday scenario and is not part of regular HOI2. So i do not think anyone can give a real explanation as yet.
 

Jayavarman

★ ★ ★ ★ ★
83 Badges
Feb 8, 2002
11.166
1.588
  • Crusader Kings III
  • Surviving Mars
  • Europa Universalis IV
  • Hearts of Iron IV: Expansion Pass
  • Rome: Vae Victis
  • Crusader Kings II: Horse Lords
  • Europa Universalis: Rome Collectors Edition
  • Europa Universalis III: Collection
  • Europa Universalis IV: Pre-order
  • Victoria 2 Beta
  • Elven Legacy Collection
  • Crusader Kings II: Holy Knight (pre-order)
  • Cities: Skylines
  • 500k Club
  • 200k Club
  • Heir to the Throne
  • Europa Universalis III Complete
  • For The Glory
  • Rise of Prussia
  • Victoria 2: Heart of Darkness
  • Victoria 2: A House Divided
  • Achtung Panzer
  • Supreme Ruler 2020
  • Victoria: Revolutions
  • Deus Vult
  • Arsenal of Democracy
  • Imperator: Rome
  • Crusader Kings II: Jade Dragon
  • Crusader Kings II: Monks and Mystics
  • Semper Fi
  • Crusader Kings II: Reapers Due
  • Cities: Skylines - After Dark
  • Europa Universalis IV: Common Sense
  • Crusader Kings II: Way of Life
  • Crusader Kings II: Sunset Invasion
  • East India Company Collection
  • Diplomacy
  • Commander: Conquest of the Americas
  • Divine Wind
  • Crusader Kings II: Sons of Abraham
  • Crusader Kings II: Rajas of India
  • Crusader Kings II
  • Hearts of Iron II: Armageddon
  • Hearts of Iron III: Their Finest Hour
  • Europa Universalis III Complete
  • Lost Empire - Immortals
  • Lead and Gold
  • Hearts of Iron Anthology
  • Hearts of Iron III
  • Europa Universalis IV: Call to arms event

unmerged(11600)

bring the game home!
Nov 8, 2002
5.788
1
Visit site

Sleepyhead

Der Schöpfer
20 Badges
Dec 17, 2003
4.443
1.415
  • Victoria 2: Heart of Darkness
  • Europa Universalis 4: Emperor
  • Europa Universalis IV: Third Rome
  • Europa Universalis IV: Mandate of Heaven
  • Europa Universalis IV: Rights of Man
  • Europa Universalis IV: Cossacks
  • Europa Universalis IV: Common Sense
  • Europa Universalis IV: El Dorado
  • Europa Universalis III: Collection
  • 500k Club
  • Crusader Kings II
  • Victoria 2: A House Divided
  • Victoria 2
  • Europa Universalis IV: Res Publica
  • Europa Universalis IV: Call to arms event
  • Europa Universalis IV: Wealth of Nations
  • Europa Universalis IV: Conquest of Paradise
  • Europa Universalis IV: Art of War
  • Europa Universalis IV
  • Europa Universalis III
M

Mowers

Guest
The idea of POPs from Vicky was good.

Would nice to see a better developed version of it.

Note: I am not suggesting that players get to play "Soviet Union : the game in which you are Stalin and have 1950s style total control of your people to promote and demote as you wish in a 15-18th century backdrop". No, no, definitely not. Please God no.

Rather that POPs form the basis of the social model and you dont really have an awful lot of control over it if much at all.
 

Smirfy

We're not Brazil
5 Badges
May 1, 2002
3.937
1
Visit site
  • Crusader Kings II
  • Europa Universalis IV
  • For The Glory
  • 500k Club
  • Shadowrun: Dragonfall
Mowers said:
The idea of POPs from Vicky was good.

It was, but it just did not work. It took massive effort to define the Pops and half them were wrong. Even more effort was spent trying to get them to behave in a rational way. Me I simply played a game without social reform and it made no difference ;)
 
M

Mowers

Guest
Smirfy said:
It was, but it just did not work. It took massive effort to define the Pops and half them were wrong. Even more effort was spent trying to get them to behave in a rational way. Me I simply played a game without social reform and it made no difference ;)

IMO it screwed up due to two key factors that were fundamental flaws in the design

1) One type of peasant - tribal bedu in central africa or chinese landless peasants were the same as the small hold English farmer. All of whom were just one step away from being office workers........ :wacko:. The effect this had on the game was, imo, disasterous because the rest of the beta time was spent trying to band aid over the problems it caused with one off special rules and prestige *shudder*.

2) Central state control over society with its ability to directly promote and demote was so unrealistic and open and created so many player driven problems that couldnt be corrected.

I share your concerns that it could go wrong and fubar everything up. I would suggest making a simple version of it that players can barely effect so that we can make a model that cant be broken easily.

I would even be happy to see an alternative system, but my primary concern is adding depth, not complexity, to the domestic model to create a more interesting player/ subject "class" relationship and interaction.
 

Smirfy

We're not Brazil
5 Badges
May 1, 2002
3.937
1
Visit site
  • Crusader Kings II
  • Europa Universalis IV
  • For The Glory
  • 500k Club
  • Shadowrun: Dragonfall
Mowers said:
IMO it screwed up due to two key factors that were fundamental flaws in the design

Nope the idea was flawed, it was simply beyond Paradox and her beta's resources.

Mowers said:
1) One type of peasant - tribal bedu in central africa or chinese landless peasants were the same as the small hold English farmer. All of whom were just one step away from being office workers........ :wacko:. The effect this had on the game was, imo, disasterous because the rest of the beta time was spent trying to band aid over the problems it caused with one off special rules and prestige *shudder*..[



2) Central state control over society with its ability to directly promote and demote was so unrealistic and open and created so many player driven problems that couldnt be corrected. .

No change could have saved the system it was too ambitous an idea




Mowers said:
I share your concerns that itI would suggest making a simple version of it that players can barely effect so that we can make a model that cant be broken easily.

I would even be happy to see an alternative system, but my primary concern is adding depth, not complexity, to the domestic model to create a more interesting player/ subject "class" relationship and interaction.

You have Religion, Exploration Trade, Colonization, Warfare, Government, Events, Technology, Infrastructure, Population, Warfare etc etc etc all to model and interact with each other. All with a new engine we aint seen. Thats is plenty of depth to be going on with ;)
 
M

Mowers

Guest
Smirfy said:
Nope the idea was flawed, it was simply beyond Paradox and her beta's resources.

No change could have saved the system it was too ambitous an idea

fair enough.

Smirfy said:
You have Religion, Exploration Trade, Colonization, Warfare, Government, Events, Technology, Infrastructure, Population, Warfare etc etc etc all to model and interact with each other. All with a new engine we aint seen. Thats is plenty of depth to be going on with ;)

Player direct controlled Trade - unrealistic, ahistoric. hassle
Player direct controlled Colonization - unrealistic
Player direct controlled Technology - unrealistic, ahistoric
Player direct controlled Infrastructure - hmm, mowers verdict out.

None of these things add anything to the game and we spent 3 years attempting to patch them up because they were too complex to work with direct player input.

I am suggesting we remove some of these features as "gameplay". I mean, how much fun is it really to add governors to every province or manage technology bars? I cant really see what they add to the core game or the historical plausibility of the game. Plus they contained so many unknowns that the game had to be constantly balanced to keep everything check to stop aspects going out of whack due to the latest exploit involving following the "must have policy" of the month.

In their place I am advocating that we add a domestic model that takes no longer to manage than the system I am suggesting we remove but creates a ruler / population interaction that we have never had before beyond managing what your population rebellion rate was.

I am not advocating a huge block of additional tasks nor am I suggesting massive amounts of new player tedius management but that we replace the functionality that is ahistoric and slightly tedious and add it with a domestic model (of sorts).

I do think we have room for an improved domestic model and I do think we have elements of the game that are weak in the domestic arena and that a rebalance, of sorts, would make the game better.
 
M

Mowers

Guest
I feel I am struggling here to visualise my concept to you.

Here is an example of what I am talking about:

http://www.volny.cz/tom-cat/dictator/eng/dictator.htm#stahovadlo

Its called Dictator and being like me you might just well remember it or have owned it at some point

The name of this horribly addictive and very simple early 1980s game was to run a small banana republic by balancing out

But you were forever running out of money making it difficult to please everyone in your country. Indeed it was impossible to please everyone which ultimately led to ones demise. I am suggesting a style of gameplay like this. (not quite as extreme I might add)

Download and play it for 5 minutes, you'll see what I am talking about.
 

Smirfy

We're not Brazil
5 Badges
May 1, 2002
3.937
1
Visit site
  • Crusader Kings II
  • Europa Universalis IV
  • For The Glory
  • 500k Club
  • Shadowrun: Dragonfall
Mowers said:
Player direct controlled Trade - unrealistic, ahistoric. hassle
.

Yes and there will likely be a new system, several suggestions have been madeand Im sure Paradox have there own ideas.

Mowers said:
Player direct controlled Colonization - unrealistic .

Whether it is realistic or not if it is a practical game mechanic it should be kept, there was nothing really wrong with the actual mechanic in EUII. If a better mechanic comes along I'll be well pleased if not I'll hardly get depressed.

Mowers said:
Player direct controlled Technology - unrealistic, ahistoric.

Because the player could turn money on and off like a tap in all the techs and invest to the extreme making a nonsense of all modifiers the system failed. I dont see Paradox making the same mistake again. But if Henry VIII wants to invest in Navy the player should be allowed to weight his investment in that direction.


Mowers said:
Player direct controlled Infrastructure - hmm, mowers verdict out.
.

I dont know about you but outside day to day things like trade I'm a pretty hands on guy. I dont trust any AI to build my infrastructure. It's my France, My Spain

Mowers said:
None of these things add anything to the game and we spent 3 years attempting to patch them up because they were too complex to work with direct player input..

Mowers to claim that your untried concept will be easier to Balance than Paradox's unseen concept stretches the credulity of your arguement

Hopefully though paradox will make all the features interact like religous type country size government type and whatever method they use to define policy.

Mowers said:
I am suggesting we remove some of these features as "gameplay". I mean, how much fun is it really to add governors to every province or manage technology bars? .

Infinitly more than managing POPs or looking for a wife in CK But there is room for improvement and other games have made strides here.

Mowers said:
I cant really see what they add to the core game or the historical plausibility of the game. Plus they contained so many unknowns that the game had to be constantly balanced to keep everything check to stop aspects going out of whack due to the latest exploit involving following the "must have policy" of the month. .


Every game will have exploits no matter which system is in place




Mowers said:
In their place I am advocating that we add a domestic model that takes no longer to manage than the system I am suggesting we remove but creates a ruler / population interaction that we have never had before beyond managing what your population rebellion rate was.

I am not advocating a huge block of additional tasks nor am I suggesting massive amounts of new player tedius management but that we replace the functionality that is ahistoric and slightly tedious and add it with a domestic model (of sorts).

I do think we have room for an improved domestic model and I do think we have elements of the game that are weak in the domestic arena and that a rebalance, of sorts, would make the game better.

I can't see anything you have said there as within what is practical. There will be new features put in I'm sure of it.If you can't run full Aristocracy with full Free I would be happy. :)
 
Last edited:

Smirfy

We're not Brazil
5 Badges
May 1, 2002
3.937
1
Visit site
  • Crusader Kings II
  • Europa Universalis IV
  • For The Glory
  • 500k Club
  • Shadowrun: Dragonfall
Mowers said:
I feel I am struggling here to visualise my concept to you.

Here is an example of what I am talking about:

http://www.volny.cz/tom-cat/dictator/eng/dictator.htm#stahovadlo

Its called Dictator and being like me you might just well remember it or have owned it at some point

The name of this horribly addictive and very simple early 1980s game was to run a small banana republic by balancing out

But you were forever running out of money making it difficult to please everyone in your country. Indeed it was impossible to please everyone which ultimately led to ones demise. I am suggesting a style of gameplay like this. (not quite as extreme I might add)

Download and play it for 5 minutes, you'll see what I am talking about.


Played it on the speccy before. It is scripted for one nation basically and works on the Russian Roulette principal of riding your luck, with that you will eventullly have a coup

If all the features interact EUIII will be fine.
 
M

Mowers

Guest
Smirfy said:
Whether it is realistic or not if it is a practical game mechanic it should be kept, there was nothing really wrong with the actual mechanic in EUII. If a better mechanic comes along I'll be well pleased if not I'll hardly get depressed.

I agree. I'm not advocating change for change sake and if someone has a better idea or a way of improving an old idea I'm all ears.

Smirfy said:
Because the player could turn money on and off like a tap in all the techs and invest to the extreme making a nonsense of all modifiers the system failed. I dont see Paradox making the same mistake again. But if Henry VIII wants to invest in Navy the player should be allowed to weight his investment in that direction.

Again, I'm with you. I am certainly not advocating no control - just restricted.

Smirfy said:
I dont know about you but outside day to day things like trade I'm a pretty hands on guy. I dont trust any AI to build my infrastructure. It's my France, My Spain

Nor would I trust it, but if we all have the same system we cant go so far wrong?


Smirfy said:
Mowers to claim that your untried concept will be easier to Balance than Paradox's unseen concept stretches the credulity of your arguement

I'd be a fool to disagree :)

Smirfy said:
Hopefully though paradox will make all the features interact like religous type country size government type and whatever method they use to define policy.

Yep.

Smirfy said:
Infinitly more than managing POPs are looking for a wife in CK But there is room for improvement and other games have made strides here.

I like some of the concepts and I'd like to see them developed with out distracting from the core game.

Smirfy said:
I can't see anything you have said there as within what is practical. There will be new features put in I'm sure of it.If you can't run full Aristocracy with full Free I would be happy. :)

I think thats the sort of thing I am talking about combined with a little less player clarity. We'll see, I'm curious as to what is actually on "the table" for dicussion and what is sewn up already.
 

Smirfy

We're not Brazil
5 Badges
May 1, 2002
3.937
1
Visit site
  • Crusader Kings II
  • Europa Universalis IV
  • For The Glory
  • 500k Club
  • Shadowrun: Dragonfall
Mowers said:
I like some of the concepts and I'd like to see them developed with out distracting from the core game. .


Your concepts are fine it's just EU is a sort of concept of its own being based on the board game.


Mowers said:
I think thats the sort of thing I am talking about combined with a little less player clarity. We'll see, I'm curious as to what is actually on "the table" for dicussion and what is sewn up already.


We all would love to see what is on the table at the minute. :)
 
M

Mowers

Guest
Im a big fan of the board game and I am only currently advocating the removal of non board game elements and the addition of a simple domestic model that we already have in one form or another.