The Top 14 Things That EU3 Does Better Than EU4 - Part 2
ฝัง
- เผยแพร่เมื่อ 5 ก.ย. 2024
- top 5: • The Top 5 Things That ...
Sometimes it's useful to go back to previous games in a series to see what's changed, whether for the better or for the worse. This is not to say that EU3 is a better game than EU4, but there are some pretty important things that I believe have been taken in a wrong direction.
Europa Universalis 3 is "Copyright © 2010 Paradox Interactive AB. www.paradoxplaza.com"
Europa Universalis 4 is "Copyright © 2015-2016 Paradox Interactive AB. www.paradoxplaza.com"
I got bored with EU4 when it became a game of just managing spending points, and waiting for points to tick up to do stuff. Occasionally you take over a country with a big blob of troops.
Paradox sould make Victoria 3 but make it even more complex 8D
But not too complex, I am having HoI3 flashbacks...
@@stefanking98 nah, go full on the 4D CHESS
@@stefanking98 hoi3 wasn't even that complex, the micromanagement was just on extreme levels, only victoria revolutions was worse in that aspect
Oh boi i have good news for you...
@@yodef6828 OOOOHHH BOY I dont know if this comment aged like wine or milk
Hey, came from the pdox forums. While I don't agree with everything on your list one thing that i don't think you mentioned but i think eu3 does better is the randomness of every game. In eu4 it is always the same nations doing well while in eu3 you more often see some wacky and interesting things happen. Thanks for the video :)
Now that you mention it, I've noticed that as well. It seems like there's always 'that one oddball' AI nation in each campaign, the one that you don't expect to survive but that has somehow grown into a decent-sized empire, but that's about it - meanwhile, the vast majority of nations follow the expected trajectories. Thanks for the comment!
And this is why we need the "historical focus" feature from HoI4.
EU3 infamy also increased stability cost, I believe, and had may have had some other maluses that I forget, which meant that I didn't like having considerable infamy even if it was reliably below the limit.
I believe it also makes competing in trade nodes practically impossible. but yeah, keeping it as low as possible was a good idea.
One more point to diplo annexing in EU3, although you can get around the 10 years by sending mode annex requests, besides teh infamy you also lower your stability by 1 for every vassal you succesfully annex. Considering 5 is the limit (because the limit on number of diplomats) you can lower your stability by 5 and that is really bad for you.
6:50 Biggest system that prevents me from playing EU4. Tech development should not be completely dependent on the monarch.
you also have an artificial increase based on time in EU3 as well hover over the tech cost once you are ahead.
pretty sure I mentioned that. Even so, it doesn't determine the exact moment you unlock each tech, unlike in EU4, because you're constantly investing whether you're ahead or not.
Going through this video, 11 of these 14 have been improved in some measure with MEIOU and Taxes 2.0, and 6 of them (including 2 through 4) have been improved to be equal to or better than EU3.
Yeah, I'm a big fan of M&T, which is specifically why I wasn't comparing mods (otherwise it'd be M&T vs Magna Mundi).
Gakumerasara Maybe you should do a play-through of M&T!
Gakumerasara Going through an MM dev video, there are only a few good features left which haven't been incorporated into either base EU4 or M&T 2.0 (they include the peasant faction, which will be added to M&T shortly). MM would have definitely added more uncertainty than EU4, but it would have been so much that it may have been too much, imo.
I'm way behind on uploading videos, but yeah, we're going to (attempt to) start a multiplayer M&T 1.99 game this Saturday. Assuming it goes well, once I have time, I'll be uploading those as well. unless it just crashes and/or won't run in multiplayer, in which case I guess we won't, but I have high hopes.
I’ve tried getting into EU4 multiple times but I just never could despite sinking thousands of hours into EU3 back in the day. Can’t put my finger on it.
On #7: You can ask several vassals at the same time to become annexed, so you can annex more than one country at a time.
On #6: Clearly the points cap shold be lower and the investments should be higher
I think stability needs to be changed for eu4 and I like your ideas at the end of the video . The conquest e free nature has changed with abulstion mechanics where we now avoid dropping automany or war exhaustion . I have no played eu3 but it seams like the system would end up that being rich is the best way to get better tec?
*McGuffin Points*
OK, that diploannexation point is just silly. EU3 lets you diploannex 5 vassals same day. I was super confused by all that talk about vassals ever saying no, because it never happened to me.
If you spend your excess prestige to build up your sphere, it increases your reputation so much I don't think vassals would ever refuse. So EU3 is actually far more predictable than EU4 here.
Sliders aren't the worst, but that monthly/annual income system and treasury slider/resulting inflation was absolutely awful. Microing that damn treasury slider was about the worst thing in EU3 - if there was a way to lock it at "just autoadjust it so I don't go negative", I'd probably hate it less. Turning inflation off made it somewhat tolerable.
Ok, but in every 01/01 you gain quite a lot of money and this money is what keep your economy alive
Well, the game actually sort of balance the vassal thing quite well.
First, it is true that increasing your sphere makes your vassals a lot more likely to accept annexation, but even then there's always a decent chance of at least one of them simply saying "no", making you wait another 10 years to try again.
Second, you lose a point of stability for EVERY vassal you annex, leading to -2 stability if you manage to annex 5 vassals, which will halt your progress at best (small, homogenous trading country) and severely weaken your nation at worst (big empire), not only because of revolt risk, lower taxes or decreased trading, but because the sudden increase of stability cost due to the new provinces.
And third, even if you annex the five of them successfully and offset the stability issues (which, in the last case, you'll have to deal with it later anyway), you'll still have to deal with the resulting infamy, the consumed diplomats and, moreover, the decrease in relations with all of your non-annexed vassals, all of which will limit your diplomatic actions and strecth the time between annexations.
You can notice all of this especially when you have a lot of vassals. For example, in my last game, i was playing as Aachen (landlocked and sandwiched between Burgundy and the HRE), and in order to expand and grow, i had to vassalize several countries in the HRE and annex them. While the stability was barely an issue because of country size and trade income, i had to manage carefully the infamy to not screw my trade, and the constant increase in relations resulted in a permanent shortage of diplomats, considerably limiting my diplomacy.
On the other hand, i totally agree with the sliders and inflation thing. It's so fucking annoying to keep that treasury slider on place every time, although i'm not a fan of turning off inflation.
Well, i hope someone actually read this, the comment was made 2 years ago, and i doubt anyone keeps playing EU3 anyway xD
It isnt nesasarily possible to annex 2 vassals at once, if you run a deficit in "mcguffin points" as you insist on calling them, it will mess up the timings, it requires a high pool ahead of time meaning preparations and even just still going to 0 diplo points if they are too fast to annec, and if you are doing it at 3 per month, now you accept the cost fallacy, and maintain a diplomat those 30 years until your diplo rep comes back
Joe with the flow sure, you can mess it up. Last I checked it was only 10 years, which isn't that long. It definitely wasn't 30 years.
Gakumerasara Sorry I am inept, I was simply implying (not very well) that you cannot really abuse this with 2 large vassals which would seem to (atleast a bit) make them worse at blobbing, there is a critical mass to vassals. Your view on blobbing is one I share, but I rarely find it useful to exploit multiple large vassals late game
No worries. Yeah, there is a practical limit. The way I normally did it was to annex one mega-vassal and then while completing the decades-long annexation, add 1 or 2 more smaller ones to the mix so they all end at the same time, if conditions permit. or otherwise just keep feeding them until the end of the game.
funny enough this might be a good eu3 tutorial
Eu 3 is better game in my opinion.
Genially I Agree withe "The Thrust of your Premse Sir!! BUTMore HUMOUR would be Appreciated!! Also WHY Are You Playing the 'Slimmey Cowardly Frogz' For World Conquest?? Maybe Itz Eating so many Amphibians Leg'z on Fresh Baguettes makes you Bloatted and Bored in...
"The LATE GAME€ " MONsieur Gak!!
Yeah, not too much humor in this video unfortunately.
At the time, I was still working my way through achievements, and the backdrop of the video was my Big Blue Blob run. It was pretty dull after the first hundred years! I no longer do achievements, in part because I only play MEIOU, and also because achievements are so easy to cheat/game that it defeats the purpose of even putting in the effort. but thanks for the comment!
They should make Stability like Corruption
If your stability is ignored,it decreases and decreases.
You need to invest alot to slowly increase it
MEIOU addresses a lot of the issues that I have with unmodded EU4. If you haven't tried it yet, I highly recommend it.
I played it and it's great
(when monarch power is used to do something i dont like) mguffin points
(when monarch power isnt being used to do something i like) admin points....-_-
just watched rest of the vid the idea of slow filling progress bars dose indeed seam like a good idea i hope its done
It's a bit more nuanced than that.
When monarch power is used to do something i dont like and when monarch power isnt being used to do something i like both mean exactly the same thing...
So in essence you are saying that EU 3 is more deep and complicated and EU 4 is dumbed down... I think that they did that to bring more players to the franchise.. Your reasoning is sound but at the same time its so convenient to be able to throw points on anything to make it works as we want...
ZevooxGAMES! not quite. The big difference is that EU3 didn't reveal every single modifier in the game and lend itself to endless min/maxing the way EU4 does. EU4 has far more 'working parts' but once you understand them, you can endlessly game the system, substantially easier than in EU3.
From what you are saying here i could think that you believe EU 4 to be a better, more robust game but at the same time less exciting.. Even tho it has more things in it, its in some way worse... Its stressfulthat that we cant get the full package ^^ But the fact that we can see every system like in the palm of our hand its easier to learn right?
Basically, yeah. In the videos, I made a point of emphasizing that I don't think EU3 is a better game than EU4, but I do think they've taken a number of things in the wrong direction. At this point, with all the DLC and systems they've added in, I'm honestly not sure if EU4 would be easier to learn than EU3, but I do think that an intermediate level generally-knows-how-all-the-systems-work player will have a much easier time in EU4 than EU3.
I like surprises every once in a while. When I'm going for achievements in EU4, after about 1650, I'm usually bored out of my mind, so much so that I've stopped doing them altogether and now only play MEIOU & Taxes mod. It's a mod that addresses a lot of the problems I have with base game EU4. I'd highly recommend giving it a shot if you haven't already.
So im an old player... I did play EU 1 back in the day and immediately after EU 2... I had a break and after years EU 3 felt too complicated (didnt even try it as i should) and lately i played EU 4. At the begining it was hard (all these systems were complicated at the start) but now its not interesting.. I know that i can be sure of my allies, i know when something will happen til the day... Now and especially after your videos i wonder... Did i make mistake shelling out all those $ on EU4.. Maybe EU 3 would be a better and cheaper investment... =[
I've never played EU1 or EU2, so I'm not sure how those games would compare. EU3 is not perfect by any means; it has some major problems of its own. :P but I think it's definitely worth the money, especially at this point.
How do you only have 1.5k subscribers
I like your videos but your delivery could use some work. It's hard to concentrate on what your saying because your voice is monotone throughout and there's no variation in the speed of delivery or emphasis on any particular words.
Thoughtful videos and insightful discussion, but your delivery makes me want to fall asleep.
I disagree. I found his voice to be very pleasant to listen to, probably because he sounds like the but from King of the Hill. It might be because im not a native speaker
The EU3 taxation system is the reason I don't play it. it's that shit.