Tordesillas?

[celedhring]

Originally posted by Derek Pullem


I don't have to. We can talk till we are blue in the face as to nerits of this and that but Johan et al have to be paid and if something is going to take a lot of work for minimal return, it's not going to get done. The point I was trying to make was don't slag them off for not delivering something that they didn't promise to deliver.

Must reread my posts, I did't know I slagged anything to Paradox. Just trying to give my input. I'm a "always aim for perfection" kind of guy.

You can "accept" this or not, that's your perogative. The hypothetical argument over whether alternative history paths should have been coded (and they would have to be - in the sense that they would need to generate events and leaders and monarchs) is ultimately futile as they are not in the game and such a large change to the game is unlikely to be developed by Paradox as a patch. So I choose not to argue it.

Derek

Well, AFAIK, the story of the EU engine will not stop with EU2, so I don't it's that futile to argue ways to improve the game. Hey! caves were nice in the Stone Age, why didn't we stuck with them?

 

[Derek Pullem]

Originally posted by Petrarca

A fine idea, one which could be used for historical leaders also- simply have their values varied a little, say from 2/2/3/0 to 3/4/4/1. That is how things historically happened, as the Union Army found to its dismay during the Civil War after a string of what would be 2/0/1/0 leaders.

As to the fighting in the backwaters- didn't Wellington start out that way?

Agree 100% - I suggested it in betaland but didn't really get a reaction. Have you ever played the Victory Games board game "The Civil War"? The way they handled the availability and use of commanders was brilliant in that game.

 

[Agelastus]

Originally posted by Derek Pullem
You see this is the problem - if you don't approve of the restricted "choice tree" which is at the heart of EU2, the game will never satisfy you. It's a bit pointless debating your ideas because they should really be in EU 3 discussions.

Hmmm-well if you can be satisfied with an events system like this..........

Shall we call them events 1, 2, 3.
Event 1 gives you choice A or B-pick A and you'll move to event 2 a little later, and then event 3, choose B and something different will happen-you'll not get event 2, but you'll then get event 3.

That sounds almost exactly how the Wars of the Roses for example will affect England in terms of its' monarchs, from information released on the forums. So what on earth was the point of event 1 if you end up in the same place some game years later?

 

[Derek Pullem]

Will you buy the game?

 

[Agelastus]

Originally posted by Derek Pullem
Will you buy the game?

As a matter of fact I will-firstly because I'm desperately hoping to be proved wrong in my criticisms, secondly because it would be cowardly not too considering how "vocal" I am on various matters concerning it on the forums...............

...............and thirdly because Paradox still retains a degree of "customer goodwill" from me thanks to EU!

Although I strongly suspect that it will not enthrall me to the level of EU, where I played nothing else for about four months-and being unemployed at the time left me with a lot of time to play!

 

[unmerged(598)]

Originally posted by Petrarca
As to the fighting in the backwaters- didn't Wellington start out that way?

Wellesly's success in India was not against a few hundred tribesmen with arrows. He faced well disciplined European style armies, possessing far greater numbers of both artillery and cavalry. Had his career ended in India it would have been sufficient to name him a great General.

originally posted by Agelastus
That sounds almost exactly how the Wars of the Roses for example will affect England in terms of its' monarchs, from information released on the forums. So what on earth was the point of event 1 if you end up in the same place some game years later?

I agree, events then would appear to be temporary blips on the otherwise predetermined course of history. Throw a bonus, or a calamity at the nation and see if it can be worked out. Keeping Richard III should ensure that no Stuarts show up, else why bother?

As a matter of fact I will-firstly because I'm desperately hoping to be proved wrong in my criticisms, secondly because it would be cowardly not too considering how "vocal" I am on various matters concerning it on the forums...............

...............and thirdly because Paradox still retains a degree of "customer goodwill" from me thanks to EU

Took the words out of my mouth

 

[Derek Pullem]

Originally posted by Agelastus


As a matter of fact I will-firstly because I'm desperately hoping to be proved wrong in my criticisms, secondly because it would be cowardly not too considering how "vocal" I am on various matters concerning it on the forums...............

...............and thirdly because Paradox still retains a degree of "customer goodwill" from me thanks to EU!

Although I strongly suspect that it will not enthrall me to the level of EU, where I played nothing else for about four months-and being unemployed at the time left me with a lot of time to play!

Good - for one horrible moment I thought you were "trolling".

I appreciate you have a high expectation of EU2 but my stance is that we've got what we've got and we have to make the best of it. From your other posts it's clear that you have a comprehensive knowledge of history and I think that it will be players like yourself who are potentially willing to develop some of the framework for alternative history(s) that will move the game from very good to great.

One thing that you might petition Johan for is a function in the events engine to define the probability of a certain event conditional on another - then alternative histories can really motor

 

[Agelastus]

Originally posted by Derek Pullem
Good - for one horrible moment I thought you were "trolling".

Rather an insult that...............I wouldn't have lasted as long on these forums as I have if I was guilty of that "anti-social" behaviour! Consider my post count!



Anyway, I've still got a few months to wait here in England, so I'll just have to see..................at least I'm pretty sure it'll be a better effort than CIV 2.1-sorry, CIV III!