Yep. I had Scotland colonize Cuba and the carribean in my game while Venice controls a fair portion of West Africa.
NA - Initial feedback
- Thread starter St Alban
- 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.
You don't understand, this war has been ON-going on for 30 years and it won't END. All of the enemy territories are occupied, all of the armies are annihilated and the game will continue with the same F(*&ing WAR for the next 300 years because the AI WON'T make peace with the occupied AIs. Because the PU leader is my VASSAL it won't make peace and I CAN'T. (Option is greyed out.)lenny said:
i have seen if you put the spreads of discovery 75 years they new world situation looks a little better, in mine its italy(me) has brazil and part of Caribbean, france has part of Caribbean and Columbia, portugal has the eastern usa, england has parts of canada and the tip of south america, very few random colonies out there
People seem to think that just because a nation failed to colonise, didn't mean they didn't try.
Like Scotland, for instance.
Like Scotland, for instance.
Featauril said:
Yes. They tried. And they failed, because they got into the game late, and didn't have the resources to maintain it.
However, In EU3 AI nations get to participate very early, and require _no_ resources to maintain them.
I have to say that this if anything is a gamebreaker for me, this would be it. What I much would have prefered in the options would be to force the AI to pay for colonists, rather than get them myself for free. Same with spies and merchants.
Rio de Janeiro can't be renamed when colonized. You can put the name into the box, but when you press OK nothing happens.
NA alone doesn't give me the ability. I thought It would 
I guess someone else could.
I guess someone else could.
I'll try to replicate your problem tomorrow morning, and then report itThe_Little_Guy said:NA alone doesn't give me the ability. I thought It would
I guess someone else could.
Because they didnt? Their King inherited England and then used their colonizing prowess to "colonize" north America....Darkrenown said:
So yes, if Scotland inherits England then I'm fine with a Nova-Scotish-Cuba but to have, a poor tiny kingdom in 1500 send fleets of settlers to Cuba is ridiculous...almost as bad as Venetian merchants wasting their money to occupy empty African real estate...
Calculus said:
The AI does not get free inflation. Have you ever actually checked the ledger? Most AIs will have more inflation than you.
The_Little_Guy said:NA alone doesn't give me the ability. I thought It would
I guess someone else could.
just register your normal game.
Sadly I must say that it annoys me that I have to pay another 2/3 of the (current) EUIII price to get automated merchants and the ability to queue units for recruiting. Two basic things that *really* should have been included in the original game.
All of the above imo.
All of the above imo.
herm said:
I can understand where you're coming from at first glance, but the developers have X number of hours to put into the game, and I know that they work long-a$$ days (especially for Europeans!) to get things released on time. Those hours are spent putting in elements that they think are most important for the game, for instance, EUIII has a whole new events system, national ideas, advisors, etc., and some things were not included because of the finiteness of time. They had Y number of hours to put into the expansion and judging from most people, seemed to pick out a lot of fun things to include.
Consider it the same price as a bloated XBOX 360 game, but with 100x the replay value?
SirGrotius said:
Dont get me wrong, I'm sure to buy it. But seems to me that some of these improvments are basic enough to be added in a patch. Autosend merchants surely must be seen as one(?), seeing how a variant of it was already in EUII.
As I understood it - auto-send function is a bit more advanced than in EU2, so I guess it could not have been added via patch...herm said:
ZmajOgnjeniVuk said:
I agree. Autosend is a lot more advanced. Now you can specify which COTs to send merchants to and you can give them varying levels of priority, which surprisingly works! I consider it a middle ground, because I didn't want to give up 100% of control over my merchants but I didn't want too much tedium either. It strikes a nice balance in my games, and it seems to be smart enough not to put you in the red financially (i.e., won't put you into debt EOM).
Forget EU2 vanilla then.vertinox said:
As Johan said, EU1 and EU3 sold more without historical events. They "seem" to be very bad for sales.Rompa said:
Anyway, some AGCEEP events have been adapted to EU3 (here) and Magna Mundi is very interested in them...
For sure. There is just only one little thing missing from EU2 one.ubik said:
It will come... maybe one day. Just ask, and ask again but be aware of Literal Genies (see below).ubik said:
With the increased speed in NA, we can maybe hope for better 3D graphics now (and especially map)... or is it only a matter of video memory?ubik said:On MP I cannot talk as I don't like it, but I certainly agree on the uglyness bit!
In graphical terms, we went back to 1995...
Exactly what I asked for, isn't it..?Mrdie said:
Maybe I was not clear enough when I made the same request, and here is the result...Arilou said:
Arilou said:
I get pissed when people assume shit like that. It took weeks upon weeks to get a system in to get historical leaders/monarchs/advisors into the engine, and work at all parts in an engine not designed for it. And then the same guys that shouted so loudly for it six months ago goes.. "no we want both things at the same time". *sigh*.
Last edited: