All Comments

All Comments
Europa Universalis; World Domination, or Survival Horror for Small Nations?
What version will you be using? DW 5.1b (30th Apr.)? Also, are we confining ourselves to Europe or are some of the more interesting ROTW nations a possibility?
FriendlyAnon
I'll be using Heir To The Throne. Any nation is a possibility (In fact I've been busy describing the different eras in quite exhaustive detail over the past few hours) and any era is a possibility, so bear with me until I have an accurate picture.
GameChainsaw
Correction, any viable nation. We're not going Bar or any of the Irish nations, or if we are, the person suggesting them had better have a darn good reason for thinking I can survive more than a few years.
GameChainsaw
Pick a Tribal Democracy and conquer the whole of Africa.
SavageHeathen
Sorry, we're already under steam.
GameChainsaw
Whew... not a lot of interest. Anyone?
GameChainsaw
I'm following. But I don't have any real opinions for what would be fun. I'd rather you go with something that you like so the liveblog happens :-)

I'm tempted to suggest an early start and try to recreate a new roman empire out of the Ashes of Byzantium. But I think that might be more of a Total War option than a Europa.

Tadeous
Alright, I'm going to try to get something up by the end of today or perhaps tomorrow.
GameChainsaw
Nice, I'm glad you started as a non western country/power!
IanExMachina
Given that my experiences of this game only extend to England, (boring) Byzantium, (rather hard) and Delhi, I'll take the one that isn't based on an island and whose hope doesn't rely on the Seljuks ignoring their navy for inexplicable reasons. (The only way to win as Byzantium is to trap the Seljuks on Asia Minor and then snatch their European provinces off them.)

I actually managed to unify India (just about, with Tibet as an add on to make up for things) on very easy... the infamy limit and war weariness is going to make things much more tricky on normal.

Speaking of which, I should probably get to work on this...
GameChainsaw
More tricky...Or more interesting!

From a watchers point of view definitely more interesting, seeing as you'll win and lose and provide a narrative for all.
IanExMachina
Oops. Sorry I missed the start of this thing, Game, things have gotten kinda crazy for me.

Regardless: do you actually fight on the battlefield a la Total War, or is it all autoresolved? Because this certainly seems rather bewildering.

Anyway, this means I'd better get back to my Moors. Goodness knows they've probably been erased by now. ^^;
IniquitusTheThird
You're using HTTT? Good. While Divine Wind is perfectly fine, it makes playing as Japan realistic, yet very, very hard. Unifying Japan is so stupidly annoying.
Five_X
Sorry about the delay on this. To answer Iniquitus' question, battles aren't exactly auto-resolved, but on the other hand, you don't have any control over them either. The fighting mechanics are quite complicated, but it basically comes down to two armies meeting in the same province and fighting over it in a series of skirmirshes over three days made up of both sides firing at each other, the "Fire" phase, followed by three days of hand-to-hand engagement, the Shock phase. This actually represents the firing and clashes that would occur on each day in each engagement, but its simplified into the form of one big battle. Once one side loses all its morale, it flees, and the victorious army can either just move on, or engage in a (sometimes months long and incredibly frustrating) chase to annihilate the enemy army completely.
GameChainsaw
OH GODS DAMN THIS!

I've set it to Very Easy by mistake and I can't change it... I'll be back when I've edited this... the advisors and everything will be different... SOD IT!
GameChainsaw
Well, thats it changed. I didn't realise units became three times as expensive and your treasury doesn't bring in as much. My strategy hasn't changed; its just going to take me a lot longer to get my army together; a fact I assume goes for the AI too; and my standing army is still bigger. >D
GameChainsaw
So is engaging usually worth it from a tactical point of view?
IanExMachina
Yes, because armies can regrow from nothing very quickly in EUIII. If you don't go after an army you've shattered and annihilate it quickly you will end up fighting it again sometime later when its rested, and it'll force you to interrupt a siege or something, if not come back and thrash you if it was larger than you to begin with (sometimes if your army is better quality, you have the better general, you are on defense either by maneuvering well on the offense (the old stratagem of luring the enemy out by attacking something they can't ignore) or just guarding the border well, or even if you just got lucky, you can win when outnumbered, but never bank on it.)
GameChainsaw (edited by: GameChainsaw)

NoMoreSanity
Dammit, I accidentally clicked enter comment without writing anything! Cursed paper at the bottom of this, you looked so tempting, so I had to know your purpose, through clicking you!

But anyway, looks cool so far man. I've only just recently gotten into Europa myself, and despite the fact that I have less than half an idea how half the shit in the game actually works, I find myself drawn to it all the same. I will definitely be watching this. Can you save screenshots and attach them to the journal? I ask mainly because it'd help me get a better visual idea of what's going on. Either way, I can't wait for more. Till next time.
NoMoreSanity
Oooh, this is sounding like an even bigger clusterfuck than Stainless Steel. Can't wait for the next part!

I love the way you're portraying the leader as a sort of regretful old dog of war. Perhaps the next leader will be more energetic and headstrong?
IniquitusTheThird