Will EU III have any interaction with different social classes, like Vic, CoTN, or anything of a similar nature?
POPs or social classes?
- Thread starter unmerged(36763)
- 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 social classes were extraordinarily important in this time. I definitely think it would be best to have them involved somehow.
I have to agree with SecondReich, and not just because we're studying the French Revolution now in world history.
wilcoxchar said:
Yeah, I am taking a seminar on Early Modern France and it is almost all absorbed with social classes.
SecondReich said:
Yes, and in Germany, where in many places your legally-defined social class dictated what laws applied to you, and which clothes you could wear!
I'd certainly like some sort of class-system represented, but I'm not sure if Pops is the best way (it would slow the game down a lot for one thing)
I like the POPs system in Vicky. It would be nice to have something similar in EU3. Only going on the assumption, however, that the tool-tips, tutorials, and manual can properly explain their usage. Lord knows Vicky took me long enough--the game still gives me a headache. But not for lack of workable features, simply lack of documentation. Even the wiki cannot compare to what more tool-tips, and a few immersive tutorials could do for that game.
I´d presume a somewhat streamlined version of the CK social classes might be made to work, but POPs would be way too much.
Arilou said:
To be reasonably accurate, I'd guess you'd need the following broad social classes, which could be abstracted to most societies over the period:
* Nobles/Aristocrats
* Clergy
* Bourgeoisie/Mercantile class
* Artisans
* Peasants
(* Maybe a 'dispossessed/landless' grouping as well...)
So, possibly one way to model this while avoiding the controversial POPs would be to have an extended version of the province-based social classes from CK. However, as well as having their relative 'power' and 'loyalty' being modelled, there could be also stats detailing their population, and percentage culture and religion.
This way, you could take account of the precise culture and religious breakdowns in each province (and following on from that, the whole Empire), keep things localized, and save on processer power.
Grosshaus said:
Aye. I'd rather see that they avoid any extensive micromanagement part of the game besides what we already had in EU2. The "feel" of the game should be the same, and whatever new features should improve on those already existing in EU2.
Only aspect I would like to see more of is how you define the nation you control, politics etc.. similar to the sliders in EU2, but expand upon it, having them influence how you deal with fareign cultured populations and religions.
It looks like there will be more "stuff" to build in provinces, and thats okay...instead of getting richer through conquest, you can focus on developing your lands hopefully.
No POPs! Booo, hiss!
There would be no reason for them, too, as you would never have any reason for converting your population.
There would be no reason for them, too, as you would never have any reason for converting your population.
5678 said:
True, in part. BUT, it would be nice to have specific parts of your population perform specific tasks.
I'm not sure if clergy is needed. Yes in some societies it was quite strong, but maybe. I'd also lump landless/disposses with peasant/commoners. I think some way to define warrior class outside nobility and commoners would be nice as well.Sarmatia1871 said:
However i'd also like to be able to if that were possible define a number of classes say 3-6 that we could use if we wanted instead of having default 4 like in CK, that or have them differ depending on some modifer.
sainte-therese said:
But there is no need for the POP system, which complicates everything immensely. A CKish social system would be fine, but anything more complicated than that and stuff goes crazy.
5678 said:
Doesn't have to be POPs, per se. Even CoTN, primitive as it is, has a more advanced social system than EU II, where your interactions with people are limited to taxing them and crushing their revolted.
sainte-therese said:
CoTN? I don't know what game that is.
And yeah, I think there should be some sort of interaction, but not necessarily on the level that the POP system demands.
Social classes should make their way into EU3, but not in the form of POPs. Something like CK's take on them would be the best way to go.