New Paradox Tinto Game? EU5?

[Zanza]

It looks like they will go for an earlier start, c.1340. Which is fine, but we can expect little interesting play in the 17th and 18th centuries as a consequence.

I hope that one day they will announce a 1648-1815 or 1688-1815 game so that intersting period is covered properly.

An earlier start date means we never see some of the defining features of the current EU4 time period. It would be even more alt history.

[Sheilbh]

An earlier start date means we never see some of the defining features of the current EU4 time period. It would be even more alt history.

I can only blame the Byzantine lobby for this

[garbon]

I'm not sure what to make of that level of detail on the map.

The only mechanic that I can think of that might use that level of detail is army movement and combat/occupation.

But due to the whack-a-mole style of combat and the necessity to carpet siege this would be very tedious if they keep the general behaviour of armies from EU4.

Yeah, that's my thinking.

[Tamas]

I seem to remember Imperator having a comparable province scale but I can't remember how occupation and sieges work there.

[Solmyr]

IIRC in Imperator you only really need to occupy the capital of each area (and maybe any forts if they are not in the capital).

[Richard Hakluyt]

Very few forts as well. IIRC there was a lot of devastation if an enemy moved through a territory.

[crazy canuck]

I'm not sure what to make of that level of detail on the map.

The only mechanic that I can think of that might use that level of detail is army movement and combat/occupation.

But due to the whack-a-mole style of combat and the necessity to carpet siege this would be very tedious if they keep the general behaviour of armies from EU4.

The diaries indicate they have moved away from a province level abstraction to having a number of locations. Those locations imply that the things that you can build within the location will probably depend on a variety of factors.

But I hope that means is a more in-depth game for building, rather than having the same generic buildings in each province.

[Zanza]

Some promising comments on how population, estates and deliberative assemblies (both EU4 diet and parliament mechanics) will fit together. Also comments on laws and reforms (unclear what the difference is), society value sliders (instead of national ideas?) and cabinets (mix between the EU4 advisors and CK3 councils). The much asked for internal politics?

[The Minsky Moment]

Start date is 1337: https://forum.paradoxplaza.com/forum/threads/why-did-we-pick-1337-for-the-start-year.1642258/

Which is fine, if the end date is mid/late 16th century and they are splitting up the old EU into two games.

Not so fine if the intent is to cover 17th and 18th centuries.

[Josquius]

I read their reasons why and to me many of  these stand out more as challenges in such a start date and reasons why not to choose it.

Though Greenland...hmm...That they specifically mention this makes me wonder how they'll handle colonisation. I have a slim hope that maybe they're going to address the simple paint the map your colour approach of previous games?- Make it so colonies failing and dying is something that happens, money and ships are what you need not 'colonists', colonies aren't automatic profit makers and more usually lose you money (in exchange for prestige amongst nations that care about colonies?- at this star date none)

The HRE state too...really implies there might be a lot more of a political than map focussed angle?

[The Brain]

Start date is 1337: https://forum.paradoxplaza.com/forum/threads/why-did-we-pick-1337-for-the-start-year.1642258/

Which is fine, if the end date is mid/late 16th century and they are splitting up the old EU into two games.

Not so fine if the intent is to cover 17th and 18th centuries.

Picking 1337 is very Muskian.

[Zanza]

If the game design goal is more sandbox with random outcomes, I guess that start date is fine. Maybe have a second start date in 1492 or so for more historical outcomes in the second half of the game?

[Syt]

Johan also said on the forums that the goal is that the game is at release as rich in features and content as EU4 is with all its expansions. 

[Zanza]

Johan also said on the forums that the goal is that the game is at release as rich in features and content as EU4 is with all its expansions. 

Most of the recent expansions were just mission trees, events and graphics assets. Maybe they have a way to migrate that content to the new game with little effort?

[garbon]

Johan also said on the forums that the goal is that the game is at release as rich in features and content as EU4 is with all its expansions. 

I do get vibes of Magna Mundi when I read through that forum and his posts. All like it will solve all the problems that have been baked into the series over time.