New Ideas

[unmerged(55078)]

I have a few new ideas for EUIII

1. One country could buy provinces from another. This happened many times in history, i.e. this how Colonization on the NE American coast started, and it opens many new windows for historical development, i.e. the Portuguese might buy Siberia from Muscovy.

2 . PTI can be toggled on and off.

3. There could be a hierarchy of countries, i.e. the Kingdom of England ranks higher, and would be more respected/feared, than the Principality of Kiev.

4. Provinces would have a majority and minority culture/religion. A country with a province that had two conflicting cultures/religions would have a stability penalty, i.e. pre-columbian Haiti would be majorly Taino, and minorly Ciboney, but all Pagan, so not much of a penalty. Romania, however, could be majorly Romanian Catholic, but minorly Hebrew Jewish, so the country would have unrest.

5. If two cultures live together long enough, a mixed breed would pop up.

6. An improved trade model, where you can choose what to buy from which countries, i.e. slaves, spice, cotton, whatever.

7. You can choose who to send to a colony/new province. Combining a few of my ideas, say Romania buys a bit of Siberia from the Golden Horde, Moscovy, whoever. They decide to send only the Jews there to end the unrest in Romania. The Jews learn how to live in Siberia from the natives (Chukchi Inuit) and the colony prospers. Romania solved its *racist* problem and gets a bonus. Many years later the Siberian colonies are populated by a Jewish-Chukchi mix.

8. When you capture a province, You have 4 choices. Occupy-treats settlement as any other one in your realm, Enslave-enslaves all population but sends half to other provinces in your realm, Exterminate-slaughters 3/4 of population, or Deport-sends 100% of population to nearest province, whether it be in your realm or another. All choices would not be instantaneous.

Comments? Questions?


Anybody?!?

 

[unmerged(7811)]

How is that mixed breed feature going to work and what are its applications going to be?

 

[wilcoxchar]

Most of these ideas have been brought up already by other people, please read other posts before making a new thread.

 

[unmerged(11600)]

Most of these ideas have been brought up already by other people, please read other posts before making a new thread.

Or to rephrase, "Please read the "Please read before posting" post before posting."

 

[State Machine]

Or to rephrase, "Please read the "Please read before posting" post before posting."

Yes, but the chap is a newbie to the board. And should be given some indulgence - anyway, we all are purely speculating as is Frita...

 

[Geroshabu]

7. You can choose who to send to a colony/new province. Combining a few of my ideas, say Romania buys a bit of Siberia from the Golden Horde, Moscovy, whoever. They decide to send only the Jews there to end the unrest in Romania. The Jews learn how to live in Siberia from the natives (Chukchi Inuit) and the colony prospers. Romania solved its *racist* problem and gets a bonus. Many years later the Siberian colonies are populated by a Jewish-Chukchi mix.

Sounds more like forced deportation IMO. I see no reason to why any cultural or religious group would freely abandon their homes for some far-off land, especially siberia. And if they did, they would most likely break the connection with their homeland as soon as possible because of the differences.
Furthermore, a bonus would not apply by doing this, since historically a cultural mix added benefits in trading and the creation of a prosperous middle-class. Sending away a certain culture is doing what the spaniards did to the moors, which resulted in financial disaster.

And while territories changed hands peacefully in the period, it would be ludicrous to be able to trade away land-locked territories like Siberia.

 

[iwan_manjak]

Sounds more like forced deportation IMO. I see no reason to why any cultural or religious group would freely abandon their homes for some far-off land, especially siberia. And if they did, they would most likely break the connection with their homeland as soon as possible because of the differences.
Furthermore, a bonus would not apply by doing this, since historically a cultural mix added benefits in trading and the creation of a prosperous middle-class. Sending away a certain culture is doing what the spaniards did to the moors, which resulted in financial disaster.

I like the idea of different cultures/religions living in the same province, and having some control about that (Vicky works this way, don't it?). This is a very good way to simulate religious/cultural conversions (the official religion/culture will use to grow quicky than the others).

In each province, you would be able to adjust (limited by the global sliders) the power/freedom/taxes of the different cultures/religions. This would affect their growing rate, and the possibility of rebelion.
For example, in a province you may have 50% of Iberian population, 40% of Italian population and 10% of Arab population%. Your official culture is Iberian, and as time passes, Iberian population will grow. 100 years after you may have 70%/30%/0%. You could, at some cost, reduce your tolerance to Arab culture, accelerating the process, but this would also increase the possibility of an arab rebelion in this province (that could expand, leading to arab rebelions across the whole reign).
It could work the same way to religions (eliminating EU2 concept of missionaries).

And I like the idea of being able to force deportations (and even genocides, but I gess this could bring legal issues). It would be bad for economy and development, but good for stability. And it's historical (Spain did it with moors and jewish).

 

[unmerged(11600)]

Yes, but the chap is a newbie to the board. And should be given some indulgence - anyway, we all are purely speculating as is Frita...

I know, which is why I gave him a big grin instead of a growl.

-Pat

 

[unmerged(55078)]

How is that mixed breed feature going to work and what are its applications going to be?[/QUOTE

Say a province has a minor and a major culture-Chukchi 68%, jewish 22%, and mixed 10%. The mixed would not be major or minor, but they would be Pagan, because the major culture of their heritage is.

 

[unmerged(55078)]

I like the idea of different cultures/religions living in the same province, and having some control about that (Vicky works this way, don't it?). This is a very good way to simulate religious/cultural conversions (the official religion/culture will use to grow quicky than the others).

In each province, you would be able to adjust (limited by the global sliders) the power/freedom/taxes of the different cultures/religions. This would affect their growing rate, and the possibility of rebelion.
For example, in a province you may have 50% of Iberian population, 40% of Italian population and 10% of Arab population%. Your official culture is Iberian, and as time passes, Iberian population will grow. 100 years after you may have 70%/30%/0%. You could, at some cost, reduce your tolerance to Arab culture, accelerating the process, but this would also increase the possibility of an arab rebelion in this province (that could expand, leading to arab rebelions across the whole reign).
It could work the same way to religions (eliminating EU2 concept of missionaries).

And I like the idea of being able to force deportations (and even genocides, but I gess this could bring legal issues). It would be bad for economy and development, but good for stability. And it's historical (Spain did it with moors and jewish).

Genocides are historical and in EUIII should be handled like in Rome: Total War. I'm half Native American, Half-Jewish, and I have no problem with the genocides in PC Games.

 

[iwan_manjak]

Genocides are historical and in EUIII should be handled like in Rome: Total War. I'm half Native American, Half-Jewish, and I have no problem with the genocides in PC Games.

Neither have I, but I don't know if a game that permits ethnic genocides would be legal in most european countries.

 

[Skarion]

Genocides are historical and in EUIII should be handled like in Rome: Total War. I'm half Native American, Half-Jewish, and I have no problem with the genocides in PC Games.

It's against the law in alot of countries.

I still think though that to be allowed to artificially migrate people within the country to get culture control over a province would be a nice new improvement.

 

[unmerged(55078)]

Really? I haven't heard of RTW being outlawed.

 

[Skarion]

Really? I haven't heard of RTW being outlawed.

I havent played RTW so I dont know, but because of the historical simulation Paradox's games have, they have been banned for the smallest things.

Eu2 and HoI2 are both banned in some Asian nations.

Genocides of minorities in any sort of public media I think is banned at least in Sweden as it is supposed to promote racial hatred, which is against the law in Sweden.

 

[Registered]

Eu2 and HoI2 are both banned in some Asian nations.

If you are talking about the Chinese ban on HOI(2), that was IIRC because Taiwan and Tibet were not shown as a part of China.

 

[unmerged(52957)]

Leaving legal Issues aside, am I the only one who is horrified by the thought to have deportation and genocide included as regular game mechanisms? The historical events are one thing, but making deportation and genocide options the player can choose any time he wants to, is something totally different. I don't want to think about what kind of game EU 3 would be with features like this. Were these proposals really meant to be taken serious?

 

[Owl]

I don't think you can leave the legal issues aside.
But the legal issues are there (at least partly) because of the emotional effect you mention.

 

[Gezz Inti]

Leaving legal Issues aside, am I the only one who is horrified by the thought to have deportation and genocide included as regular game mechanisms? The historical events are one thing, but making deportation and genocide options the player can choose any time he wants to, is something totally different. I don't want to think about what kind of game EU 3 would be with features like this. Were these proposals really meant to be taken serious?

I think it depends on how they are implemented (though P'dox already made über-clear that they won't do that).

1- It's a game and the majority of games include morally/politically unacceptable "elements".

2- These are historical facts and should (IMO) therefore be treated as such. Because not implementing them also creates (or may create for many) an illussion of history, which might have its rough spots as wars (between armies).
[This could be seen as bordering to apologism. I'm only speaking rhetorically, I'm not saying it is. I know very well that this is not the case and intention here.]

I don't want to push it, because P'dox really underlined their stance on the matter.

 

[unmerged(11600)]

I think it depends on how they are implemented (though P'dox already made über-clear that they won't do that).

WRT genocide, yes, they certainly have. But does that also apply to expulsions?

Doing explusions in the game should require that tolerance for that group already be at the minimum, and possibly that one's DP sliders be at least a certain level. Doing it could move the sliders one space further, make stability improvement easier, but hurt the economy.

-Pat

 

[unmerged(55078)]

WRT genocide, yes, they certainly have. But does that also apply to expulsions?

Doing explusions in the game should require that tolerance for that group already be at the minimum, and possibly that one's DP sliders be at least a certain level. Doing it could move the sliders one space further, make stability improvement easier, but hurt the economy.

-Pat

Abso-frickin-lutely!