Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[hexedmagica]

First expansion announced: Conquest of Paradise, focuses on colonies, with the option to play with a randomly generated New World.

http://forum.paradoxplaza.com/forum/showthread.php?733017-Europa-Universalis-IV-Conquest-of-Paradise

[Dutchling]

rad

[Wiles]

Nice. I'm glad colonization is getting another pass, it's definitely an area that could use some expanding. It's nice to see that starting a game in the Americas is going to be more interesting as well.

[Digital Hellhound]

Yes, awesome! There's a must-buy DLC if I've ever seen one. I hope you can define the parameters of the random generation a bit, but it's very welcome in any case.

[Singularity125]

I find it funny how the randomized new world is the most hotly debated addition, with people alternating between "this makes the game" or "this ruins the game forever" even though it's an optional thing.

I'm curious to see how it goes. Personally, from what I've heard I'm a fan of the indepth mechanics of this game, but not so much a fan of the hardcore historical accuracy points. Frankly I'm not up to par on my history and would miss most of the references anyway. The sort of thing I'm looking for is probably some bastard child of Civ IV and EUIV... and if the modders get a hold of the random map generation it just might be a thing. Then I might actually buy the game.

[Catastrophic lolcats]

I see this as a completely positive thing. I like what the possible gameplay that a randomised new world would bring but I would likely play the normal new world much more often. I like the historically weighted aspect of the EU series which had turned me off games like Civ in the past, I dislike seeing stupid stuff like America in 2000 BCE.

So far I'm the most interested in the improved colonial game and improved natives. I think it's great that we'll see decentralised colonial nations forming which should make colonial war and expansion into native areas a lot less bloody. Hopefully we'll see dynamic naming of both these nations and her colonies.
I have to wonder if the native improvements will just be events and other small tweaks. The natives need a lot of fleshing out and a whole bunch of added tags are needed. It would be nice to see mesoamerican hegemony mechanics instead of the Aztecs just rolling over the other nations and making a single unified blob. I'd also like to see a much improved westernisation for native americans.

[Descan]

You mean they're actually doing the thing?!

Someone suggested a colonial-nations instead of directly-controlled nations and I loved it.

All they'd have to do is add in my suggestion and I'd be happy as balls~

[Karlito]

Heh, like a week ago I was thinking that a randomly generated new world would be really cool, and here they are doing just that.

[kingofthescots]

This reminded me of Imperialism 2 when I saw the post. Not a bad idea for a first big DLC. I am quite excited for the revamped motherland-colony mechanics. The natives, not so much. But we'll see, maybe I'll actually want to play them now!

[a1s]

games like Civ in the past, I dislike seeing stupid stuff like America in 2000 BCE.

You should try Rhye's and Fall of Civilization (mod for Civ), Which features ethnogenesis in the middle of the game. This is something that the EU series has too, albeit only for the Americas (and as far as I'm aware only EU, despite the fact that the 1920s (in Vicky) should be filled with new nations forming too).

[Jelle]

Well! I'm not so sure about randomzed americas, but more in depht and involved colonizing sounds promising. Colonizing distant overseas has so far proved lucrative but rather boring, and more engaging native americans is sure to spice things up.

[Jelle]

Spoiler (click to show/hide)

Playing as the papal state! Thought I'd immerse myself in the whole curia and holy roman business. Though truth be told I'm not sure how papal influence really works when your nation is ruled by the pope. 

Couple of things that confuse me so here's some questions. First on the HRE (I joined it, can't be having a roman empire without ol' roma can we?!), I understand the emperor will intervene with any defensive wars by its member nations. Now what if I am allied with the emperor, will they honor the alliance or put their obligation as the emperor first should I start a war with another member nation? Also if I want to become emperor (big ambissions I know) I take it I have to curry favor with the electors?

Next the curia. I half get how the cardinal stuff works, I should be able to figure that out. What boggles me is that relation with the papal states factors in what actions can be taken by the curia controller. Is that my nation? Can I effectively have some control over what the curia controler can do by managing my relation to other nations? Or more so when I am curia controller myself, I pretty much have free reign (as far as I can manipulate my nations opinion on them) to call crusades or excommunicate, provided I have the papal influence? Lastly I see you get papal influence based on relation to papal states, I assume I don't get that...being that I can't have a relation with my own nation.

Other then that, pretty funny to see the pope leading troops into battle when I make a commander out of him. Not so much that I can't change government, always having really old rulers and stability drops, or marry, but I suppose the lastcomes with being chaste.

[Sheb]

Actually, if this work like EUIII, you get the max relation bonus. Also, yes, you can get piss-poor relations with someone to kill their papal influence.

I'm pretty sure you can't become Emperor as a theocracy. You'd have to find a way to turn into a monarchy of some kind. And I don't know if it's possible (rebels maybe?) or what happen to the Pope if you're not a theocracy anymore.

As for war, I'm pretty sure the Emperor only intervene if it's an outside power attacking an HRE member. If you're into the HRE, you should be safe.

[Catastrophic lolcats]

If there is a situation where a nation has to pick between warring two allies it will always pick the defender rather than the aggressor. While having the emperor as an ally is powerful it doesn't mean they'll turn a blind eye to unchecked expansion in the HRE. HRE expansion will always take a lot of diplomacy.
Avignon can drag you into no lack of trouble, particularly if France converts and you haven't had a chance to really consolidate your Italian holdings. I tend to sell it off as soon as France gets a claim on it. 

The Papal State has the special Papal government which is a theocracy. Only monarchies can be elected as the emperor. The papal states cannot change religion or governments, even through rebels (barring a rare religious rebel bug). Joining the HRE as the Papal States is really only for the HRE bonus modifiers and having some breathing space with Austria.

The main thing holding the Papal states from controlling the curia is the fact they have few provinces with mediocre base tax. Base tax is pretty much the main curia point generator though if you managed to unite Italy and declare the kingdom of heaven on earth you'll likely have little to no problem controlling the curia.

Papal States is a fun game but I've always been disappointed that the Kingdom of God isn't a tag switch and maybe even a government change. I want to be the divine emperor of Europe, damn it!
Their national ideas are lacking as well sadly. I would personally argue they had better ideas when they had generic theocracy ideas.

EDIT: slightly ninja'd

[Jelle]

Avignon can drag you into no lack of trouble, particularly if France converts and you haven't had a chance to really consolidate your Italian holdings. I tend to sell it off as soon as France gets a claim on it.

Yeah, I let Bourgogne barter it to France in a peace deal. Those occatain rebels were getting on my nerves anyway.