-
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.
Who wants a traditional tactical interface a la Legion??? There's no need. What might be a solution is to provide a couple of general tactics when armies close to battle or besiege a place. But that should be all.
Originally posted by Wasa
Well, you can´t have it all, can you?
Well, Greenland and America was colonized by free men for themselves, and not by any country or state, so it really doesn't matter.
In Legion you preset formations and orders, then go to battle to watch it, no clickfest at all. The strategy map would be at pause while we are in battle, right now a battle in EU2 can easily last a couple of months, this way it could be solved in 1 day.
I wasn't afraid of a click fest (I know Legion isn't), but bringing in tactic considerations in addition to strategic must make the AI harder to program, and hence give a worse AI...
The way I understand EU battles is that they represent campaigns in the province, not single battles.
However, the AI in EU2 is already hopeless, and I don´t think they can make any decent AI for an strategic game, I would rather rely on a good multiplayer
There are many of us who don't have the bandwidth or time to play any serious multiplayer games.
Originally posted by Sonny
There will be more unit types. Heavy cavalry, light cavalry, heavy infantry, pikemen, archers and siege engines.
Excellent. That will make for pleasure in gaming I think being a warmonger.
It will certainly make you think about which part of your population you want to cater to in order to get a good army composition.
All I wish for is a miracle in that CK is completed months in advance and all in good order.
Originally posted by Caramel
All I wish for is a miracle in that CK is completed months in advance and all in good order.
Sure, we all want that, but those types of posts were not supposed to clutter up this thread.
I wish...
For an indepth political playground. I want it to be ten times more complex then EUII. In my opinion, the deeper a game is, the higher its replayability is.
I hope nothing is dumbed down to make it easier for people to grasp it in a short time. The longer it takes to master something, the longer it will take to burn out.
And I think that given the audience that Paradox is geared to, nothing needs to be dumbed down at all. I don't think any other gaming community quite has the intellectual inclination of this one on average.
I want to take an active hand in the politics of my dynasty.
I'd wish for smart AI, but thats like wishing for Elizabeth Hurley to appear. Ala Bedazzled.
For an indepth political playground. I want it to be ten times more complex then EUII. In my opinion, the deeper a game is, the higher its replayability is.
I hope nothing is dumbed down to make it easier for people to grasp it in a short time. The longer it takes to master something, the longer it will take to burn out.
And I think that given the audience that Paradox is geared to, nothing needs to be dumbed down at all. I don't think any other gaming community quite has the intellectual inclination of this one on average.
I want to take an active hand in the politics of my dynasty.
I'd wish for smart AI, but thats like wishing for Elizabeth Hurley to appear. Ala Bedazzled.
Definitely. Politics and arranging marriages should be a much more viable way to play than just war afer war (although this period sure saw its share of wars - one of them lasted 100 years).
I don't mean that I want war to take a back seat. But in EU if there is no war then there is little to do. CK ought to even things out.
Politics! Politics! Politics!
I hope that the HRE will be modelled properly. That is it's later non-hereditary character for starters. Also, an detailed church hierarchy is needed.
Wars should also exhaust both sides, being prohibitively expensive. Losses should be more moderate, but hits on quality and morale serious consequences of losing a battle, compelling you more often than not to seek refuge in your castles, rather than meeting your enemy in a pitched battle. Mercenaries should be very expensive and decline to fight when left unpaid for long. They might rampage through friendly territory and hand over castles to the enemy, particularly when bribed.
Pillaging should be very destructive, reducing available food (should be modelled), causing famine, depopulation and indirectly diseases. Obviously, pillaging also decreases also your revenue base and your armies supplies.
Given the primitive logistics of the day, it should be very difficult to maintain a siege. Supply lines should also play a greater role than in EU2. If venturing in territory which is void of supplies (for instance by previous pillaging/foraging, refuge and storing of goods in castles, etc) you are highly dependent on keeping supply lines intact.
But politics are most important, of course.
I hope that the HRE will be modelled properly. That is it's later non-hereditary character for starters. Also, an detailed church hierarchy is needed.
Wars should also exhaust both sides, being prohibitively expensive. Losses should be more moderate, but hits on quality and morale serious consequences of losing a battle, compelling you more often than not to seek refuge in your castles, rather than meeting your enemy in a pitched battle. Mercenaries should be very expensive and decline to fight when left unpaid for long. They might rampage through friendly territory and hand over castles to the enemy, particularly when bribed.
Pillaging should be very destructive, reducing available food (should be modelled), causing famine, depopulation and indirectly diseases. Obviously, pillaging also decreases also your revenue base and your armies supplies.
Given the primitive logistics of the day, it should be very difficult to maintain a siege. Supply lines should also play a greater role than in EU2. If venturing in territory which is void of supplies (for instance by previous pillaging/foraging, refuge and storing of goods in castles, etc) you are highly dependent on keeping supply lines intact.
But politics are most important, of course.
Agree on all points. Especially supply lines, which should defintely come into account especially in sieges in the Holy Land. As it did in history, such as at Antioch and Jerusalem.