tey216 said:
The battle screen shows each dice roll so the player can actually see what's happening in the battle, rather than just watching the numbers fall and morale drop until somebody is beaten.
-
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.
The battle screen shows each dice roll so the player can actually see what's happening in the battle, rather than just watching the numbers fall and morale drop until somebody is beaten.
OHgamer said:
Its not just the US mein freund. Last time I was having a little snuffle around 'GAME' in Stirling (one of the major Computer game stores in the UK) the PC shelves were getting smaller and smaller and shoved to the back. Its nothing but X-Box this and PS2 that.
Quite depressing really.
The 3-D map is a big divergence for PI that has got the PI grognards in a bit of a tizzy; I will fully admit I was a huge sceptic of the 3-D map when I heard about it. Even as I became a beta-tester I was sceptical, nevertheless I love it now, it grew on me. The gameplay was more important than eye-candy, and the eye-candy was more than good enough for me. The music and sounds by Andreas Waldetoft virtually plunge you into the game, like being thrown into the sea and the gameplay is mesmeriseing. The modding capability still leaves me stunned.
Its the most stable version 1.00 that PI has ever released (though it does have a few quirks which will be fixed by the patch due out very soon) - but its a fantastic coup for PI.
I have been amused to see some of the posters in the EU3 forum who now have their copy of the game, grinning like idiots and pleased as punch and yet these very same people were burning PI flags not a couple of weeks before
(some people I would consider as friends).I think PI and those wh contributed to its release and development can be mighty proud of EU3, and those forumites who are willing to at least grab the bull by the horns and at least try EU3 before passing comment.
Sure, if you don't like, you don't like; Everyone has an opinion after all. But I feel its like people saying that they wouldn't like to sleep wit Milla Jovovich because some film critic says shes crazy.
Far better to find out for yourself and than at least know you have some authority in which to state your case that indeed she is one crazy bi**h.but I am waffling now.
I love EU2 and will continue to play it; It holds a special place in my heart. But EU3 is that foxy little vixen that so tempts me with her charms. And what fine charms they are indeed.
Ayeshteni
tey216 said:
A random element has existed in EU2 and EU3. The thing with EU3 is that you see what affects the combat resolution (and you get to understand all the issues going on in the combat phase).
EU2 had a WTF!! element as your armies were suddenly defeated or thrown to the winds. EU3 cuts out the WTF!! factor by informing the player of everything that is happening. You get to understand WHY you are losing. You get to understand that you were on a bad draw and you were unlucky. You get to understand how you can minimise the risks.
EU3 informs the player more. Dice played a part of EU2 as much as EU3; its just that you as a player of EU3 understand what is going on, which cuts down on the frustration factor. I know I like to play a game and not be frustrated - EU3 provides that release.
Ayeshteni
Ayeshteni said:
No, EU3 is that fugly girl in the corner booth. It might be a fun ride, but you need to get yer beer goggles on before you can even get close.
And then you wake up with a splitting headache, question what you did last night, look over and see her laying beside you, then gnaw your arm off to escape.
Rocketman said:
(sappy love song plays)
It's what's inside that counts.
Look at pong. Doesn't look pretty but I can't put that game down.
With the dice I wasn't sure about it at first but it is kinda nice to see some of the reasons I am doing well or not (not in most cases). In EU2 I used to think that Cobra Commander was my general as my troops were always in retreat.
I will stick with EU2 for the moment, reasons being graphic incompatibility of my system. Costs of upgrade of graphic card on my old architecture: at least 150 euro. Nearly as expensive as replacing my motherboard/CPU with PCI-e architecture. So quite obviously EU3 makes me finally upgrade my system, something I haven't done since early 2003. But that will have to wait a month at least and so long no EU3 for me.
I would also like to observe that for me EU3 beats EU2 only on one point, which is modability. I don't even include the map in it since the system used here will diminish the level of geographic details as compared to eu2, though I can probably learn to live with it. For the rest EU3 changed mostly things from EU2 that I didn't really care about much or thought it worked quite well (colonization f.e. - I really dislike it that tp's are removed). Still, the difference isn't so great to not be able to adjust myself eventually.
I would also like to observe that for me EU3 beats EU2 only on one point, which is modability. I don't even include the map in it since the system used here will diminish the level of geographic details as compared to eu2, though I can probably learn to live with it. For the rest EU3 changed mostly things from EU2 that I didn't really care about much or thought it worked quite well (colonization f.e. - I really dislike it that tp's are removed). Still, the difference isn't so great to not be able to adjust myself eventually.
Remember that if you don't buy Collectors Edition you won't get full forum access (as I understand it)!
Although I haven't made the order yet so please wait so they won't run out of them.
Although I haven't made the order yet so please wait so they won't run out of them.
I cancelled my order with Play.com (crap service, they've sent me the wrong item before which is why I stopped using them) and pre-ordered the CE off Amazon UK for £39.99.
Can't wait! I don't have any money 'till the first of next month, but the game isn't officially released 'till the second anyway, so I should get it that week.
Can't wait! I don't have any money 'till the first of next month, but the game isn't officially released 'till the second anyway, so I should get it that week.
Vricklund said:Sheesh. I never thought I'd say this but I agree with Judge.
I really liked the national ideas, the dynamic events, mil/naval tradition but all the weak parts of eu2 are still in there - trade, colonisation, game balance. Paradox focused on the wrong aspects and the result is a game that leaves me totally unimpressed.
There you see, I am not a bad guy after all
I plan on staying with EU2 for a while. For me I enjoy modding it. I study history alot and then I can put what I study into a game format in EU2. If I switched to EU3 I would have to settle for being able to convert much less of that history I study into game format.
I'm not ready to give up my hobby here yet. If I switched to EU3 right now, it would probably just be to play it. Ubik asures me with a strong comp and using zoomed out mode that it runs very smoothly.
I'm hoping that Paradox in future patches will consider the interests of us EU2 modders and give us some more features like being able to add historical leaders, historical monarchs, and custom AI files. The diminished significance of historical events I think I can live with.
Modding EU2 is an almost perfect marriage of my two favorite hobbies. I get to study my favorite era in history. Then insert it into the game. I also get to tweak the game to be much better. Something else that fascinates me too. And then I get to play my hardwork over and over. Also others get to enjoy it as well.
Right now EU3 can't capture that for me. Without changes made to EU3 in future patches adding the features I mentioned above, I think I will just keep modding EP for EU2, even if no one ever played it anymore.
I'm not ready to give up my hobby here yet. If I switched to EU3 right now, it would probably just be to play it. Ubik asures me with a strong comp and using zoomed out mode that it runs very smoothly.
I'm hoping that Paradox in future patches will consider the interests of us EU2 modders and give us some more features like being able to add historical leaders, historical monarchs, and custom AI files. The diminished significance of historical events I think I can live with.
Modding EU2 is an almost perfect marriage of my two favorite hobbies. I get to study my favorite era in history. Then insert it into the game. I also get to tweak the game to be much better. Something else that fascinates me too. And then I get to play my hardwork over and over. Also others get to enjoy it as well.
Right now EU3 can't capture that for me. Without changes made to EU3 in future patches adding the features I mentioned above, I think I will just keep modding EP for EU2, even if no one ever played it anymore.
Just to play devil's advocate, I'm not sure your complaint holds, IDLF.
You want to be able to mod the game based on your historical research... can't you?
For example, in your latest EP you talk about adding Portugese leaders. Granted if you start in 1453, you can't guarantee that General X will show up between 1505 and 1515... but if you're willing to start in 1505, you can rig the history files so General X is there.
One of your big concerns was colonization. Well...colonization starting from 1453 will be a new series of AI refinements, but if you start later...1500, 1600 ....you can just tell the history file what provinces you think a given country should own.
The dynamism excites me...and worries me at the same time. For example, in one of the first AARs now the player's gained several cores from a "Disputed Border" event and acquired a new culture. In principle I think this is outstanding.
Then I look at CK's dynamism and how insane that could get, and I worry about Portugal having Baltic culture and colonizing California. That could be intensely painful.
I guess I have time to wait and see. My poor 'puter can't handle EU3, so I'm gonna be here for at least awhile yet unless I win the lottery.
You want to be able to mod the game based on your historical research... can't you?
For example, in your latest EP you talk about adding Portugese leaders. Granted if you start in 1453, you can't guarantee that General X will show up between 1505 and 1515... but if you're willing to start in 1505, you can rig the history files so General X is there.
One of your big concerns was colonization. Well...colonization starting from 1453 will be a new series of AI refinements, but if you start later...1500, 1600 ....you can just tell the history file what provinces you think a given country should own.
The dynamism excites me...and worries me at the same time. For example, in one of the first AARs now the player's gained several cores from a "Disputed Border" event and acquired a new culture. In principle I think this is outstanding.
Then I look at CK's dynamism and how insane that could get, and I worry about Portugal having Baltic culture and colonizing California. That could be intensely painful.
I guess I have time to wait and see. My poor 'puter can't handle EU3, so I'm gonna be here for at least awhile yet unless I win the lottery.
AdmiralNelson said:
Heh, I actually liked it in EU2, because then it took some skill to watch the battle and determine from number changes how it was going. If numbers started to drop sharply retreat was necessary.
Now it's mechanical "retreat if dice are too bad". Not sure if it requires less thinking though because it's more open; you still have to consider if you can afford to retreat or not, or if you should hope for better dice next phase.
To be totally honest with you I don't care for the late start dates. In EU2 I always play a GC. Even the 1453 start date I view as kind of a bummer, though not intolerable. I also very much like the 1820 ending date. My conquest of India has key times chopped off at a 1792 end date. Sure I could probably mod it to be 1419-1820(or can I?), but it's alot of work.CatKnight said:
I think you'll find that as people play EU3 further into the game that it becomes increasingly random. The idea was to make it more historically plausible but as we historical determinists who mod, and participated in the HD/HP debate in the AGCEEP subforum sometime ago, know it's extremely difficult to make anything like EU2 be truly historically plausible. All they have done really is made it less deterministic and more random.CatKnight said:
Randomness is something we EU2 modders try to overcome. Now EU3 has even more of it and many of our modding priviledges we used to use to overcome randomness are being revoked in EU3. So don't count on anything like EP or AGCEEP or any other mod that tries to increase history in EU2 being in EU3. It's not going to happen, not unless they add a number of features for modding in future patches and since they seem so committed to the changes they've made in EU3 from EU2, personally I doubt they'll add enough of them to be worth our while.
Ya I can mod it. Sure. I mean I focus heavily on gameplay in EP. I could do the same in EU3. But I definitely can't make anything LIKE EP in EU3.
You can expect this to happen in EU3. I don't know whether it will be worse than CK or not though as I've never played it.CatKnight said:
You know, I'm pretty sold on EU3 being a good game. But the whole thriving modding community that EU2 has I doubt EU3 will ever have. I just haven't seen enough folks truly interested in modding gameplay here.
I wont be getting it either for the same reasons, i really dont like the map and everything.
idontlikeforms said:
I could almost not agree more with you on this topic. Right now there is a strong wind blowing against EU 2 and people are yelling that “EU is not a historical simulation”. Well EU 2 was never a historical simulation in the first place. It was a game based on historical facts and events but the outcome was never written in stone. Yet the outcome was at least somewhat plausible in the end. When you play CK OTOH almost anything can happen. No outcome is really tied to any historical fact. Moslems turn up in your medieval Christian court and you feel a very desperate urge to turn off your computer after 20 years playing. As I remember the arguments put forward by people closely linked to Paradox (mr T and Havard to name some) this was WAD. EU III is promoted in much the same way as CK so I fear the worst. In the opening you will feel that everything is ok but later the result will be almost totally random (the AI player will act totally random with the kind of event set up you got in EU III) and IMHO absolutely horrible. What we need is AI files in EU 3 to guide nations to a fairly historical outcome. EU III will definitely undermine the reputation Paradox have for making games with a historical feeling to them. Judging by the Paradox courtiers this trend is desired and will probably continue. I guess they want a new CIV or something? To me the best game is a game where 70 % of what actually happened does happen and 30 % is up to the random factor.
Capt Janszoon said:You talking about EU2, abandonware???!!!
Since a large number of this thread's posts have been complaints about EU3's map and appearance, I'm guessing he means that.
He better.
I agree with that ratio. It is a little surprising to see people wanting something open ended, as my impression has always been that most other players want something that has a more historical outcome and that many of the most popular mods for all the games seem to straightjacket the game into something very much like real history (take a look at VIP mod for Victoria). I'd have to see a game of EU III to see how random it is to make a judgement It is also a little surprising to see a trend to move away from being as historical in the unmodded game. Another example from Vic would be the last patch, which made it easier for lands to be colonized by the countries which were their historic colonizers (though they did make that feature optional). Maybe it is isn't so much people desiring any trend on the issue, but rather they accept whichever way things go.
have to reply on that
3d map cant be ugly all the time, i'm sure in some EU5 with all that marketology and 3d mainstream policy of Paradox, the map and graphics will be perfect,... but the ideas of games can be ugly, and for me if paradox sticked with their niche idea of eu kinda games, these games will always be good, but! if their mainstream-us-3d policy developed into policy of making one week or one day games, that will be suxx... i want that they just separate these things,... and if market manager says -"if you wont follow market demands, your buisness is over" he is right, but not that far to convert eu3 into some medieval fps shooter swords muskets killing kings and that upgrading to the laser blaster..., he-he, this manager surely would be glad to see that Europa Universalis Battlefields FPS!!! ta-taan! hehe
3d map cant be ugly all the time, i'm sure in some EU5 with all that marketology and 3d mainstream policy of Paradox, the map and graphics will be perfect,... but the ideas of games can be ugly, and for me if paradox sticked with their niche idea of eu kinda games, these games will always be good, but! if their mainstream-us-3d policy developed into policy of making one week or one day games, that will be suxx... i want that they just separate these things,... and if market manager says -"if you wont follow market demands, your buisness is over" he is right, but not that far to convert eu3 into some medieval fps shooter swords muskets killing kings and that upgrading to the laser blaster..., he-he, this manager surely would be glad to see that Europa Universalis Battlefields FPS!!! ta-taan! hehe