What could EU5 learn/take from recent Pdx games

[grommile]

Because there is a need to have these mechanics as they are all era appropriate and their absence causes the game to go in an ahistorical direction.

You could stuff all of the systems into one game and you'd still always get that ahistoricality.

Like, you could have better dynastic simulation than any CK title, and better economic and demographic simulation than any Vicky title, and it still wouldn't be good enough.

 

[ArtFart]

Because there is a need to have these mechanics as they are all era appropriate and their absence causes the game to go in an ahistorical direction.
Convert all of ireland to protestantism in one generation, never worry about your german duchy falling apart because even women inheriting causes no succession struggle, have personal unions continue for 400 years without any political changes occuring

And that's exactly how EU plays. It's a decentralised game focused on conquest, not a political simulator, not a cultural simulator etc. It's supposed to play like that, that's why it's fun. There isn't a need for these mechanics unless PDX want to make a totally different game that isn't EU.

 

[ArtFart]

You could stuff all of the systems into one game and you'd still always get that ahistoricality.

Like, you could have better dynastic simulation than any CK title, and better economic and demographic simulation than any Vicky title, and it still wouldn't be good enough.

Exactly, there isn't a game that would fit all those mechanics and still be fun. It would be micromanage hell and would take hours to pass even a few years with the amount of things you'd have to manage, talk about making PDX games accessible! EU is supposed to be an arcadey game, it's not supposed to have those super in-depth mechanics all in one for me. I enjoy EU4 because it represents all that, in a abstracted way that's still fun to play with.

 

[ZéMalta]

Everybody wants more character focuses with 6/6/6 superkings. Nobody wants to get a random popup saying "Your new king is incompetent and wasteful. Your country can not declare wars, -85% income, +8 revolt risk in all provinces. Enjoy the next 60 years of his reign, followed by 50 more years by his identical son."

what are you talking about? I'm confused

 

[DominusNovus]

Everybody wants more character focuses with 6/6/6 superkings. Nobody wants to get a random popup saying "Your new king is incompetent and wasteful. Your country can not declare wars, -85% income, +8 revolt risk in all provinces. Enjoy the next 60 years of his reign, followed by 50 more years by his identical son."

On the one hand, yes. On the other hand, a game that represents the ebb and flow of nations and that bad rulers often result in positive change, would be a refreshing change.

For example, lets take the - outside of the game, where the all-knowing player with time horizons measured in centuries governs everything - uncontroversial stance that constitutional governments are superior to autocracies. Nations tend to adopt limitations on monarchial power after having bad monarchs.

 

[Vulkandrache]

Enjoy the next 60 years of his reign, followed by 50 more years by his identical son."

Nations tend to adopt limitations on monarchial power after having bad monarchs.

Well before that you would have the Nobility (and other factions) trying to gain influence
under a less capable King.
Its not like id impossible to make gameplay out of this even if EU5 still ends up being primarily a map painter.
And similar things have been tried before. In Vic2 you gain much more "Reformprogress" if your nation is going to shit.

But right now an event that says "you just lost 3,5% crownland to floped negotiations because of your Ruler's low Dip stat"
would be neither fun nor interesting.

 

[DominusNovus]

Well before that you would have the Nobility (and other factions) trying to gain influence
under a less capable King.
Its not like id impossible to make gameplay out of this even if EU5 still ends up being primarily a map painter.
And similar things have been tried before. In Vic2 you gain much more "Reformprogress" if your nation is going to shit.

But right now an event that says "you just lost 3,5% crownland to floped negotiations because of your Ruler's low Dip stat"
would be neither fun nor interesting.

And yet, we have had Comet Sighted for how long?

 

[grommile]

And yet, we have had Comet Sighted for how long?

It's not Europa Universalis without Comet Sighted.

Like, seriously, its memetic status is such that other Paradox games have tributes to it.

 

[Johan]

Nested tooltips is what i miss the most from the newer games when I play eu4.

 

[Johan]

EU5 will be the same. On release, EU5 will be very barebones and it'll take some time for it to get to the point we all want it at. Hopefully we as fans remain patient.

This is against my philosophy. Maybe some people may have disliked design changes from eu3 to eu4, we included pretty much every content from eu3 included in eu4.

While a fair amount of people were unsatisifed with the amount of content Imperator had compared to other games, it did have all features from EU:Rome that worked, and many more added.

 

[DominusNovus]

This is against my philosophy. Maybe some people may have disliked design changes from eu3 to eu4, we included pretty much every content from eu3 included in eu4.

While a fair amount of people were unsatisifed with the amount of content Imperator had compared to other games, it did have all features from EU:Rome that worked, and many more added.

Excellent. And, honestly, every region could still use more refinement, and always could.

 

[unmerged(565621)]

They tried to make a game which takes from Eruopa Universalis country management and Crusader King character focus already, it's called Imperator Rome. Didn't work

I'd say it was on the way to be working... but then they shut it down

 

[PDXBigBoss]

Honest take here, as a player I like the idea of having a game such as EU4 with very high skill ceiling, that requires real effort to master but at the same time in an ideal world it must also have a very accessible and easy-to-comprehend tutorial around the basics.

What would be the most glaring, long-ongoing, antiquated and/or big problems of EU4?
Things that should be addressed in the future game without fail.

And in the other note, what would be the best features, mechanics and accomplishments of EU4?
That should be updated, improved, and kept in the game.

My most favorite feature for EU4 is probably missions (and flavor in general, such as events and what not) because that's what I have spent my time the most as a modder and as a feature it only reinforced my love for the game. That's not to say that the system cannot be improved, for example I sometimes feel bad having missions being the primary factor of narration / playthrough. I feel like MTs sometimes dictate too much of the pace of the game. They sure are awesome to play with, and clicking the button after completing a mission feels great, I can even say that I love love love reading event rewards, descriptions buuuut there comes a point where I would love to see some more weight being shifted to other gameplay/narrative aspects such as reforms, estate privileges, events etc. And I feel like this is one of the contributing factors to Lions' success, the addition of new reforms etc

 

[DominusNovus]

Honest take here, as a player I like the idea of having a game such as EU4 with very high skill ceiling, that requires real effort to master but at the same time in an ideal world it must also have a very accessible and easy-to-comprehend tutorial around the basics.

My most favorite feature for EU4 is probably missions (and flavor in general, such as events and what not) because that's what I have spent my time the most as a modder and as a feature it only reinforced my love for the game. That's not to say that the system cannot be improved, for example I sometimes feel bad having missions being the primary factor of narration / playthrough. I feel like MTs sometimes dictate too much of the pace of the game. They sure are awesome to play with, and clicking the button after completing a mission feels great, I can even say that I love love love reading event rewards, descriptions buuuut there comes a point where I would love to see some more weight being shifted to other gameplay/narrative aspects such as reforms, estate privileges, events etc. And I feel like this is one of the contributing factors to Lions' success, the addition of new reforms etc

Mission trees could stand to be a bit more dynamic - Imperator was onto something with their system.

 

[FishieFan]

This is against my philosophy. Maybe some people may have disliked design changes from eu3 to eu4, we included pretty much every content from eu3 included in eu4.

While a fair amount of people were unsatisifed with the amount of content Imperator had compared to other games, it did have all features from EU:Rome that worked, and many more added.

Ck3 lost much of ck2s content

 

[Johan]

Ck3 lost much of ck2s content

yes? I was not in charge for that, so its not my philosophy there.

 

[Jarvin]

This is against my philosophy. Maybe some people may have disliked design changes from eu3 to eu4, we included pretty much every content from eu3 included in eu4.

While a fair amount of people were unsatisifed with the amount of content Imperator had compared to other games, it did have all features from EU:Rome that worked, and many more added.

While this is a fantastic philosophy to have I hope to Gods this doesn't mean that mission trees will have to be transplanted to EU5

Mission trees have been the main way of delivering "content" to this game since 1.26 and it's truly insane how much the game suffers for it
(To anyone who enjoys mission trees, my point isn't that they are bad(tho they are) it's that they are much worse than alternative ways of delivering content)

 

[Kyoumen]

Is this vicky 3 or eu4?

Personally I think EU5 could take from the new games is that not porting over a lot of the old mechanics from the previous version makes bland and boring game play. You alienate your old customer base by making a bare bones game. And your new customer base doesn't come because it's not hyped up.

It's simply not reasonable or feasible to port over a decade plus of work on systems and flavour in an old game to a new game built on an entirely new framework. It won't happen. It can't happen. Stop expecting it. EUIV was bare bones at release too.

And that's actually a good thing, because a) freed of that cruft, new things can be tried, and b) the game would be an impossible labyrinthine mess if it tried to include everything the previous game had (also take longer to release than Duke Nukem Forever).

Oh, wait, sorry, I thought this was the thread for what Paradox FANS could stand to learn from recent releases.

 

[FishieFan]

It's simply not reasonable or feasible to port over a decade plus of work on systems and flavour in an old game to a new game built on an entirely new framework. It won't happen. It can't happen. Stop expecting it. EUIV was bare bones at release too.

And that's actually a good thing, because a) freed of that cruft, new things can be tried, and b) the game would be an impossible labyrinthine mess if it tried to include everything the previous game had (also take longer to release than Duke Nukem Forever).

Oh, wait, sorry, I thought this was the thread for what Paradox FANS could stand to learn from recent releases.

What do you get from writing apologia? What do you get from chastising your fellow consumers desiring a product worthy of putting down its predecessor from day 1?

 

[Kyoumen]

What do you get from writing apologia? What do you get from chastising your fellow consumers desiring a product worthy of putting down its predecessor from day 1?

What do people get from complaining about the same damn thing in every game as if it will ever make a difference? What do people get out of getting preemptively outraged that they can't have the impossible?

What, indeed, does anybody get out of posting their opinions on a forum?

What I "get" is I think this commonly held opinion is ridiculous and counterproductive to useful discussion about, say, what features ought to be prioritised in a new iteration of a game series, so I want to post something disagreeing with it. Precisely as you wanted to post something disagreeing with me.

(Oh, and "apologia" is a formal defence of a position; not something I was doing, since I was in fact attacking a position. You're actually closer to doing apologia here, which isn't a good or bad thing in any case.)