Seconded! I don't like the idea of expert-players, delving into the depths of the script-files, and casual players, who happily commit their blunders. I for one prefer to be a casual player, as stumbling into developments caused by decisions seems to be more fun.
However, in a future iteration of EU, I really hope that they get rid of the whole "scripted" events- and decisions-idea. It's high time that it gets replaced by a proper game-system to represent the much neglected "inner affairs" of our "countries". Not only would this allow us more freedom (there would be more options than A or B), but we would also adjust things because we have reason to do so (we decide when we have reason to make a decision based on a plan, anticipation or a perceived necessity - what could be more satisfying for a player?!), not because the game decides that an event triggers (the game decides when we have to make decisions, i.e. lets us choose between at least two predefined variable-changes).
Moreover, I guess that implementing a single system that is ideally flexible enough to encompass most kinds of "government"-forms would be much more efficient than scripting events for each country individually. Instead of scripting events and decisions, one would just have to make sure that the starting situation, i.e. the variables within the "inner affairs-game-system" are set in a plausible way. So, basically, the mechanisms and rules would apply for all countries in the same way (so you don't need to "learn the ropes" of your country by checking files), but you'd have to deal with different constellations of variables depending on the country you've chosen.
I want to my own "events and decisions" to emerge in my games, depending on how I've been steering my country so far, not just have a historical event pop up from some kind of parallell "real" world (even though there is at least a plausibility-check (i.e. conditions) in oder not to make things too strange). For this, we simply need a DYNAMIC system. Mechanisms and "rules", a game within the game, not events. As it is now, we only have dynamical systems on the "international" sphere (diplomacy, war, trade, colonies). These aspects need an "internal" counter-weight, something to keep us from maximising/power-gaming our countries to fit the international competition. And I don't even speak of how much immersion a more detailed representation of countries would bring. On the international sphere, most countries play the same - it's the inner affairs, the inner structures where the flavour is at. And these structures are represented but in a very rudimentary way in EU. They're only present in so far as they influence the "international" aspects. They are not given a place of their own.
In my signature ("brainstorm") I've tried imagine what such a system could look like:
centralise-able elites (think: high aristocracy, high bureaucrats), and non-centralise-able elites (think: parliaments),
both elites have interests,
there is a power-balance between the elites (determined by rank of "noblemen"-agents),
"court power" as a means to centralise the elite and to shift the powerbalance between the elites,
quality of your personel depends on your management of centralise-able elites (and their interests)
It's perhaps too complex/not abstract enough, I agree, but then again I'm not a game designer!
