What timeline will it be?

[nett40]

Maybe then there should be some Victoria II scenarios then, rather than just tacking them on to the end of a game which isn't really about that era in the first place? Extending EUIV to 1870 would be like adding a racing mode to Crysis: sure, racing is fun in other games, but that's not what Crysis is about. It messes up the narrative and displeases two audience at the same time. Half the customers are disappointed that so much effort has gone into something that EUIV isn't really about (at the expense of the rest of the game) and the other half are disappointed that the end game features aren't nearly as good and accurate as they should be.

The arguments against extending the EU timeline are similar to the arguments against devoting large amounts of resources to RotW countries. Although EU runs for quite a long time, it isn't a sandbox like Civ intended to portray all situations, eras and countries equally. It has a specific subject, a specific narrative to tell.

It is not likely that there will be any other scenarios for Vic2 than 1836 and 1861, because it is extremely difficult and time consuming to make new scenarios in that game. This is not my opinion that is the opinion of Paradox developers on the Vic2 forum...

 

[Fishman786]

It is not likely that there will be any other scenarios for Vic2 than 1836 and 1861, because it is extremely difficult and time consuming to make new scenarios in that game. This is not my opinion that is the opinion of Paradox developers on the Vic2 forum...

What's wrong with the 1861 scenario? Isn't that very close to the expansion you discuss in your sig?

 

[nett40]

There is completely no way to model the the 1789. You may as well just leave it out.

I think EU3 Divine Wind models the 1789-1821 era just as good, as Vic2 depicts the era after 1861. Not perfect but acceptable.

 

[nett40]

What's wrong with the 1861 scenario? Isn't that very close to the expansion you discuss in your sig?

I think the American Civil War could have been depicted nicely in an EU-game. However, 1871 would add the New Imperlism era to Vic2, but there isn't much in the sun and the stars that suggests that Paradox will make such an expansion, as it is very time consuming changing the pops, oobs, etc.

 

[SerialCereal]

I think EU3 Divine Wind models the 1789-1821 era just as good, as Vic2 depicts the era after 1861. Not perfect but acceptable.

I've never really played that far into Divine Wind, but I am talking about how the era was in actual history compared to how it would be in this game. Look at the military for example, unless there is a way for battles to be played out in a day, which should be impossible for the engine, there is no possibility for an accurate representation of Napoleonic warfare. Similarly, with regards to certain political machinations, look at the example of France and Austria who went from total war against each other to allies in a matter of months and then switching back to a hostile stance just as quick as well as aligning themselves with Russia who they had just been fighting against. I have to doubt that EU 4 would find it be able to model such situations.

 

[flame7926]

It is not likely that there will be any other scenarios for Vic2 than 1836 and 1861, because it is extremely difficult and time consuming to make new scenarios in that game. This is not my opinion that is the opinion of Paradox developers on the Vic2 forum...

Its not super difficult, just time consuming. I made a tool that changes the size of all the pops. The only long work would be the OOB's, and making sure events and decisions that have already happened don't happen again.

 

[Fishman786]

I think the American Civil War could have been depicted nicely in an EU-game. However, 1871 would add the New Imperlism era to Vic2, but there isn't much in the sun and the stars that suggests that Paradox will make such an expansion, as it is very time consuming changing the pops, oobs, etc.

Given that EU3 doesn't have slavery, abolitionism (outside a decision or two), most of the American west, race/ethnicity, any mechanised industry beyond wooden cranes, advanced military units like ironclads or rifles, political parties, demographics, constitutions, reforms, a functioning civil war mechanic or a diplomacy system not based on royal marriages and religious bigotry, I don't see how the US civil war could possibly be depicted by it. And adding all that stuff in EUIV just for a few VickyII fans who don't like the start date isn't really an adequate use of resources, is it?

 

[WeissRaben]

I would like for CK2 to expand to 1444 at least, though. There are tons of events and nations that simply will not be playable between both games, and that's a pity.

 

[Grubnessul]

Well, EU4 will start in 1444 http://www.gamespot.com/events/gamescom-2012/video.html?sid=6391927

 

[WeissRaben]

I know. That's why I said I hoped for the devs expanding CK2 starting date up to 1444.

 

[Fishman786]

Johan's voice sounds like Farengar Secret-Fire's...

 

[Purfa]

I know. That's why I said I hoped for the devs expanding CK2 starting date up to 1444.

Where is the problem? If they really, and I absolutely hope so, want to do a savegame converter (JOHAN PLEEEEEEEEASE!!! I'd come to Sweden on my knees to have it) then they'll probably do another dlc for CK2.

 

[WeissRaben]

Eh. 107 years of "no, you can't start here" are quite a bit.

 

[Jokurr]

From that video it looks like the end date will be before 1800 as Johan said "Play from 1444 to the Napoleonic era, or the late 18th century."

 

[SerialCereal]

Why 1444 though?

 

[J0kk3]

From that video it looks like the end date will be before 1800 as Johan said "Play from 1444 to the Napoleonic era, or the late 18th century."

Typo? Or Addon later?

To be fair id rather have the Napoleonic era in Victoria III. Makes for more intresting gameplay there. And I always felt Victoria II was a bit short

 

[guyfawkes5]

Why 1444 though?

In terms of historical events, it marks the Battle of Varna and a truce signed between England and France at Tours which led up to the final stages of the Hundred Years' War. Depending on the exact starting date, it would allow players to join the conclusion of the Holy War between the Ottomans and the Crusader coalition (or to deal with its aftermath) and also to play out the final phase of the Hundred Years' War as England or France with some time to prepare.

I'd imagine another big motivation would be that the Byzantine Empire would be playable from the initial release, especially given what they can see from the Byzantophile fan-base in the EU3 forum. The Battle of Varna being in this year reinforces this, as Ottoman victory historically set the stage for the Fall of Constantinople.

 

[nett40]

Given that EU3 doesn't have slavery, abolitionism (outside a decision or two), most of the American west, race/ethnicity, any mechanised industry beyond wooden cranes, advanced military units like ironclads or rifles, political parties, demographics, constitutions, reforms, a functioning civil war mechanic or a diplomacy system not based on royal marriages and religious bigotry, I don't see how the US civil war could possibly be depicted by it. And adding all that stuff in EUIV just for a few VickyII fans who don't like the start date isn't really an adequate use of resources, is it?

I'm pretty sure that a decent depection of the American Civil War could be made, without turning EU4 into a Vic2 clone. All you basically need is a little imagination and some good scripting. In my book EU1, EU2 and EU3 were all board game like military strategic conquest games, spanning centuries and different eras. I hope Paradox remain true to this vision.

I would also be extremely happy if Paradox only extended the timeline of Europa Universalis IV to the 31st December 1860. So that the Crimean War could be included (1853-1856). But I would be very dissapointed if the playable timeline is shorter than in EU3 DW (420 years). If they move the start date then i think they should move the enddate as well, so that the game remains a very long journey...

 

[1alexey]

Given that EU3 doesn't have slavery, abolitionism (outside a decision or two), most of the American west, race/ethnicity, any mechanised industry beyond wooden cranes, advanced military units like ironclads or rifles, political parties, demographics, constitutions, reforms, a functioning civil war mechanic or a diplomacy system not based on royal marriages and religious bigotry, I don't see how the US civil war could possibly be depicted by it. And adding all that stuff in EUIV just for a few VickyII fans who don't like the start date isn't really an adequate use of resources, is it?

Let me guess, as a revolt agains the humanist tolerance idea?

 

[flame7926]

I'm pretty sure that a decent depection of the American Civil War could be made, without turning EU4 into a Vic2 clone. All you basically need is a little imagination and some good scripting. In my book EU1, EU2 and EU3 were all board game like military strategic conquest games, spanning centuries and different eras. I hope Paradox remain true to this vision.

I would also be extremely happy if Paradox only extended the timeline of Europa Universalis IV to the 31st December 1860. So that the Crimean War could be included (1853-1856). But I would be very dissapointed if the playable timeline is shorter than in EU3 DW (420 years). If they move the start date then i think they should move the enddate as well, so that the game remains a very long journey...

No, it won't happen. I promise you the end date won't be later than 1820. I doubt it will even be 1800.