And what are your thoughts/comments on it. How is it different, is it good, worth looking at. ect. ect.
-
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 actually played the board game once long ago. A francophile friend had picked it up since it apparently was designed by a French game designer.
There were far fewer tech levels (maybe 10?) but each one was important. Teching up was heavily dependent on the (historical) monarch's stats, as that was what the roll was based on. Being roll-dependent, you could put up the (substantial) amount of cash to try to tech - only to fail because of a bad die roll. I was playing England, & I remember being advised to try to tech up during the reign of Elizabeth I, since she had the best stats of any English monarch.
Combat was CRT-driven, & having a tech advantage could make a huge difference - particularly if you were on a higher CRT than your opponent. Wars were expensive & some of us wondered if they would ever actually pay off.
The trade system was driven by CoTs, but all CoTs were in sea zones, so it was impossible to actually own one, as you could in most previous versions of computer EU. But successfully competing in the CoTs was the main source of additional income, so for many of us, this became the main avenue of competition.
Religion was central to the game. I recall that as England, I was already Protestant, which limited my diplomatic & dynastic options. I don't recall if there were options to switch religion in the course of the game - if there were, they must have been so onerous that I dismissed them entirely.
Only the Great Powers were playable. This was true in early versions of computer EU as well. I remember being thrilled the first time I could load up EU & actually select Burgundy, Savoy, or Navarre. The Rest of the World was just that - a playground for the European Great Powers.
Anyway, the original board game took a long time to set up & would have taken an immensely long time to complete a campaign. We never got close to that. But I had fond memories of the scope of the game. When a friend pointed out that a Swedish company had made a computer version of the game, I rushed out to buy it. A bunch of us (quixotically) attempted to play the Grand Campaign in Multiplayer - which was barely supported by Paradox. The painful drops & crashes are my most enduring memory of EU I MP, along with the long waits for the dropped player to reenter the game. Good times!
There were far fewer tech levels (maybe 10?) but each one was important. Teching up was heavily dependent on the (historical) monarch's stats, as that was what the roll was based on. Being roll-dependent, you could put up the (substantial) amount of cash to try to tech - only to fail because of a bad die roll. I was playing England, & I remember being advised to try to tech up during the reign of Elizabeth I, since she had the best stats of any English monarch.
Combat was CRT-driven, & having a tech advantage could make a huge difference - particularly if you were on a higher CRT than your opponent. Wars were expensive & some of us wondered if they would ever actually pay off.
The trade system was driven by CoTs, but all CoTs were in sea zones, so it was impossible to actually own one, as you could in most previous versions of computer EU. But successfully competing in the CoTs was the main source of additional income, so for many of us, this became the main avenue of competition.
Religion was central to the game. I recall that as England, I was already Protestant, which limited my diplomatic & dynastic options. I don't recall if there were options to switch religion in the course of the game - if there were, they must have been so onerous that I dismissed them entirely.
Only the Great Powers were playable. This was true in early versions of computer EU as well. I remember being thrilled the first time I could load up EU & actually select Burgundy, Savoy, or Navarre. The Rest of the World was just that - a playground for the European Great Powers.
Anyway, the original board game took a long time to set up & would have taken an immensely long time to complete a campaign. We never got close to that. But I had fond memories of the scope of the game. When a friend pointed out that a Swedish company had made a computer version of the game, I rushed out to buy it. A bunch of us (quixotically) attempted to play the Grand Campaign in Multiplayer - which was barely supported by Paradox. The painful drops & crashes are my most enduring memory of EU I MP, along with the long waits for the dropped player to reenter the game. Good times!
- 8
- Dec 14, 1999
- 22.085
- 263.912
I bought the boardgame back in jan 96, and it was the reason i moved back to sweden in 98, cause i wanted to work on the pc version.
- 6
- 1
BoardGameGeek usually has a huge collection of board games available, usually used (in good condition) but also new pieces. I haven't searched for EU board game there, but you can try that site.
- 1
Wikipedia says he worked at 'Funcom' whose headquarters is situated in Oslo, Norway.
I remember playing EU1 (PC) and wondering what the bloody awful noise was when in combat. It sounded like a burglar rifling through the silverware drawer for lootable spoons. Still have the boxed original in perfect nick. Happy days.
IIRC the guys who did the boardgame are making wargames for Slitherine/Matrix now. I actually met them at a Home of Wargamers. A bit old school games, but worth cheking.