As someone who played many hours of EU3, It occurred to me that one of the base problems with the game was its ridiculous difficulty curve. Ask anyone to day what is the classic difficulty curve for a videogame, and he will answer that it should rise like a parabola: A slow rise at first, and quickly increasing towards the end. This gives you the most satisfying feeling, because the better you get at the game and the more comfortable you are at your position, the greater the challenges the game throws at you are.
In EU3, however, your difficulty curve is like a rectangular hyperbola: It has a massive drop in difficulty right after the beginning. As a game, this makes EU3 flawed at its base, because the longer you play, the more bored you are with the game, since it gets easier and easier. This IMO is the main reason that most games ended pre-1821, because there was no reason to continue, to due the lack of challenge.
Recently however, this short article (more like newsflash) came out, where it was written:
This is an incredible change, because its exactly the change EU4 needs to become ideal from a game design point of view: Complex and consistently challenging. However, it might be that Paradox might consider nerfing this system (whatever they had in mind) to make its impact less significant:
I think that to truly make EU4 Paradox need to implement this system fully. This new difficulty curve will probably fix every single problem that is caused by it as well, such as the dysfunction of certain game systems, and Paradox's decision is what separates EU4 from good to amazing.
In EU3, however, your difficulty curve is like a rectangular hyperbola: It has a massive drop in difficulty right after the beginning. As a game, this makes EU3 flawed at its base, because the longer you play, the more bored you are with the game, since it gets easier and easier. This IMO is the main reason that most games ended pre-1821, because there was no reason to continue, to due the lack of challenge.
Recently however, this short article (more like newsflash) came out, where it was written:
Thomas was keen to emphasise the game's focus on true history, so as you play the game, if what you happen to be doing at the time relates to a real world event, a popup will provide more information about the historical context beyond your decisions. It's a nice touch and really helps you develop an appreciation of how they're trying to get you to consider these real world issues. Next, he demonstrated Monarch Power. He wanted to avoid situations where you get into a winning streak, he thinks players would find that boring as there's no real challenge. He wanted to prevent a country being so strong that no-one could beat it.
This is an incredible change, because its exactly the change EU4 needs to become ideal from a game design point of view: Complex and consistently challenging. However, it might be that Paradox might consider nerfing this system (whatever they had in mind) to make its impact less significant:
It's easy to solve, just not in a way that most players will agree to. Because most players want to see this happening to others - not to themselves. Then the game/devs are just punishing them.
I think that to truly make EU4 Paradox need to implement this system fully. This new difficulty curve will probably fix every single problem that is caused by it as well, such as the dysfunction of certain game systems, and Paradox's decision is what separates EU4 from good to amazing.