Paradox Unveils New Europa Universalis IV Mini Expansion to the Public
- Thread starter VeraVonGunner
- Start date
-
We have updated our Community Code of Conduct. Please read through the new rules for the forum that are an integral part of Paradox Interactive’s User Agreement.
Sorry, I dunno if this is posted somewhere else but:
Does the -50% threshold for accepted culture apply to when you lose them as well as when you gain them? I am assuming it does but just want to be sure before I set up my order of Ideas for my post DLC Burgundy Ironman game.
Does the -50% threshold for accepted culture apply to when you lose them as well as when you gain them? I am assuming it does but just want to be sure before I set up my order of Ideas for my post DLC Burgundy Ironman game.
Worst of all, it still has that point spending BS that ruined the game in the first place...
Agreed, I recently brought the game (Steam sale) but was a avid EU3, Vic2 player. I loved how deep those games were. EU4 decided to dumb things down and almost removed consequence (Just spend your points to get out of trouble).
Its more a casual game than strategy.
Isn't removing the monarch penalties to backward tech groups too generous?
These tech groups are already significantly less penalized than it would be historically accurate as in EUIII. I think the current ratio is fine, it strikes a balance between what is accurate and gaming experience, but de-penalizing backward tech groups any more than now will simply be too much. In a game that I am playing Timuruids are only 5 techs behind the western world and it is 1530. The hordes have techs like 7-7-8 wile the west is like 10-10-10. That is a gap narrow enough.
These tech groups are already significantly less penalized than it would be historically accurate as in EUIII. I think the current ratio is fine, it strikes a balance between what is accurate and gaming experience, but de-penalizing backward tech groups any more than now will simply be too much. In a game that I am playing Timuruids are only 5 techs behind the western world and it is 1530. The hordes have techs like 7-7-8 wile the west is like 10-10-10. That is a gap narrow enough.
I disagree, the penalty is actually extremely exaggerated, those countries were not so primitive.
The Mesoamericans in particular suffers much from the penalties, in spite of historically almost being on par with Asia. They died due to diseases and instability, but technologically they were quite advanced.
Mesoamericans had little of what can be called knowlegde. They had rather certain skills chiselled throughout the millennia, just as beavers can build dams, ants build anthills, and bees build hives, there was a set of things they could do. But they had poor institutional framework for technological progress. If left to their own devices, they would probably be living today in a very similar manner than 600 years ago.
Asians, that one might be argued, but still you take a look at Japan closed to western influences until late XIX century looking and living in ways not much different than those 1000 years ago. During the first opium war the entire Chinese navy had no chance of putting up any decent fight against two East India Company warships.
The difference between the West and the Rest is institutions, that is why you might assign certain generous starting levels to other civilizations, but you should not give them ability to any decent progress without westernisation.
Just please don't make it ten dollars. I want to have the fullest EU IV experience I have, because I love it, but its sometimes hard for the financially challenged among us to justify paying that kind of price when most of the content is really included in the free patch.
I could understand that price for CKII Rajas of India or The Old Gods, but these EU IV expansions are tiny by comparison.
Probably gonna catch a lot of heat for saying that and some insults about my financial status, but I just think it would be too much (as was WoN in my opinion) for what it adds.
I could understand that price for CKII Rajas of India or The Old Gods, but these EU IV expansions are tiny by comparison.
Probably gonna catch a lot of heat for saying that and some insults about my financial status, but I just think it would be too much (as was WoN in my opinion) for what it adds.
Lol. This assertion and the fact that it's using historical accuracy selectively is a fine joke, but nothing more.
I believe they've said it'll be $5. If so, WoN + RP = same price as CoP.
http://www.twitch.tv/paradoxinteractive/c/4533220
Around 2:45 Johan says 4.99 or something, so it doesn't sound like the $5 is definite.
Last edited:
please make sure you actually check your facts before posting. the EU series is notoriously followed by history buffs. Regarding the Opium Wars, that was way beyond the EU4 timeline and the first war had many more british ships than '2 east india company warships'. The very first scuffle was in fact a Qing/Brit battle with another Brit Trade ship. The Qing could not compete with the British steam ships, nor could any other country in the world at that time. The British also were also the most advanced country in the world regarding guns. You also know very little about Japanese history if you think it was the same as 1000 years ago during the time frame. They changed many times and gained great administrative knowledge during the Song and Tang Dynasties of China. Hopefully you will read more into the history of that side of the world so you can have more 'knowledge' of what the world was like. Your comparisons of the mesoamericans borders on offensive and very uninformed. Behind most of the Western conquests there was internal support from rebels, ambitious nobles or enemy factions. We learn more and more each year. So save your assumptions please.
It reads to me that they are trying to resell WoN.... I bought WoN with the assumption it would make trade interesting, now they unveil a new expansion for republics (merchant republics being the most prominent (at least in my games)) I havn't played EU4 much since 1.6 release and I have a bad feeling about this. If it makes republics interesting I'll buy it, if it does to republics what WoN did to trade and to the new world what CoP did then I will pass. First add-on I won't be buying the day it comes out since release but Ive lost some faith in the development of this game. It's in the right direction in that hopefully it will add content rather than tweaking mechanics.
If any devs are reading this please take this message on board- I will gladly pay for more content, I refuse to pay more money so that all the mechanics can yo-yo and I have to relearn how to play a game I have +1000 hours in. By all means fix bugs but just leave the balance where it is, you can't please everyone and I think many people would rather you just stop meddling with it
If any devs are reading this please take this message on board- I will gladly pay for more content, I refuse to pay more money so that all the mechanics can yo-yo and I have to relearn how to play a game I have +1000 hours in. By all means fix bugs but just leave the balance where it is, you can't please everyone and I think many people would rather you just stop meddling with it
Are you joking?? The game constantly moves towards a system where every aspect of the game is powered by monarch points, if they were only used for teching up then perhaps non-western nations should have penalties but doyou have any idea how frustrating it it getting a shitty ruler as a non-western nation??? watch your MP crawl up by 1 per month for 40 years then tell me that.
Have you tried playing actual 'backwards' tech groups? Go play a game in Africa. I don't mean north Africa with Muslim tech group. I mean ACTUAL Africa, with the sub-Saharans. Seriously, go do it. When you finish a game (you don't even have to play it from start to finish really), tell me your feelings about sub-saharan tech group.
Really wish I could be excited for this expansion, as it looks really interesting. It's just that with the current way that PI is balancing gameplay, it just makes the game not very interesting to play.
Your post is less accurate than claiming that Europeans only emerged on top because they were the best butchers of humanity.
Significantly less, though it does depend on the era (in EU IV era, Europe truly was top butcher + bully, far less so in say the 1200's when trying to fight the Mongols would get them their pants pulled down).
They had a unique advantage in the new world though, and that was disease. The interesting thing is the uneven nature by which that's represented; disease killing huge % of the Americas lets Europe roll them easily...but this representation of "tech group" doesn't show in sub-Saharan Africa at all. There, we have Portugal regularly attacking Mali and winning pre-1500 or just after. There wasn't a snowball's chance in **** of that in reality. Terrible firearms still, hostile conditions for European standard armor, disease going the other direction, native populations plenty willing to fight back...Iberians should not be seeing material success there.
But Sub-Saharan in general gets unrealistically screwed every bit as much as Ming and Inca in this game. At 1444 Mali/Songhai were not centuries behind other areas of the world in technology. There is no way these nations shouldn't be able to see Morocco, Algiers, Tunisia, Tripoli, all the way to Mecca. Their populace actually traveled to Mecca before the era FFS.
It's very odd that the tech group is so gimped considering that European conquest of it is outside the EU IV timeline.