Here is the thing, we have already expended the resources on the Map. To create a more 2-D looking map we would have to spend resources at the expense of gameplay.
-
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.
- Status
Here is the thing, we have already expended the resources on the Map. To create a more 2-D looking map we would have to spend resources at the expense of gameplay.
I think the map from the CKII demo is by far the best balance so far between 3d and 2d.
CKII map is awesome. It will be great to see how this map will turn out if it will be even better than CKII.
I don't understand why people like 2d. THAT is exactly what a cartoon looks like. 3D maps bring so much more immersion to the majority of players, who consequently have already spoken with their money.
I don't understand why people like 2d. THAT is exactly what a cartoon looks like. 3D maps bring so much more immersion to the majority of players, who consequently have already spoken with their money.
Unless you are going to have very small areas (Struggle of Nations map for instance) each area will have two, three or more terrain types. An area can easly have plains, hills, forest, forested hills, river and swamp. What I would like to see is a leadership system that rewards good leaders with the ability to better use the terrain. For example a great commander with an all infantry force might be able to defend in the wooded hills against a heavily cavalary force. Also, seeing that defensive posture, another good leader would decide not to attack, while a poor or foolhardy leader would. Terrain is only important inasmuch as it can be used for something.
- Status