• 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.
Welcome to the second dev diary for Europa Universalis 4: Art of War. Today, a look at a new way to handle vassals, how we're changing revolts and a sneak peek at how the Persian map is being transformed.

Marches
Marches are a new type of subject that can be created from existing vassals. By designating your vassal as a March, you are giving that vassal greatly expanded autonomy in exchange for greater military service. A March does not pay taxes to its Overlord and cannot be diplomatically annexed. However, they get a 25% bonus to manpower, a 30% bonus to force limits and have 20% better fort defense, making them useful as military buffers against enemy states, or when you simply need additional soldiers more than you need the income from those territories. March status can be retracted, but doing so results in a stability hit and a very large opinion penalty with the vassal whose autonomy you just revoked.

Unrest & Rebels

The old system of revolt risk, with a chance of rebels spawning in a province by random chance every month has gone the way of the dodo. It was a system that has served us well through many versions of Europa Universalis, but we think we have something better.

The new concept reflecting unhappy subjects is called unrest. Unrest in a province will affect how quickly regiments and ships can be recruited there, but it has no direct impact on your economy, since we've introduced Local Autonomy to cover that side of the ledger.

Every province is aligned with one possible rebel faction. Each month, every province has a chance (depending on its unrest level) to see an increase in the progress of an uprising from the local rebels. When the progress reaches 100%, the faction rises up in revolt with as many stacks it has support for, and the unrest is reduced in those provinces - they have expressed their anger through arms and it's up to you to put them down.

Because unrest can happen anywhere, building courthouses and employing theologians is now a good strategy to reduce general unrest, not to mention adopting a few policies to placate the masses. The old tyrannical standby of Harsh Treatment now targets rebel factions instead of provinces and reduces the progress towards an uprising from that faction at a cost in MIL points, scaled to the size of this particular rebel faction. This change means we should get less micromanagement and more direct control of popular satisfaction in the hands of the player.

There is also no longer a distinction between accepted and enforced demands from successful rebellions. A rebel faction's demands are always the same.

In a more positive change, any Rebels that are friendly to you, either through culture or support will lift Fog of War for you.


Persia
Last week, we dove into the doubling of Indian provinces. Another region that has seen substantial changes in our great map overhaul is Greater Persia and the Caucasus.
In 1444 this region is to a large extent split between the still sort of impressive empire of Timur's descendants in the east and the rising Qara Qoyunlu empire in the west. Just like in the last dev diary, the diversity of the region means that it's perhaps best to go over its various parts in turn.

The Caucasus:

attachment.php


In the time depicted by EU4, the rugged Caucasus will be the border line between the Turkish, Persian and eventually Russian Empires. Throughout all of this, the valleys and the slopes of these mountains are home to a number of different peoples and states attempting to preserve their independence against hungry neighbours.
In order to portray the independent nature and resilience of the area, a new Caucasian culture group has been added to the game. Apart from the familiar Armenian and Georgian cultures, this new group is also made up of the newly introduced Circassian and Dagestani cultures. The tag and province setups have been revised accordingly.

New Tags:
  • Imereti: Small kingdom that can appear in western Georgia (or in late start dates). Historically, this state became part of the Ottoman sphere of influence in Georgia.
  • Circassia: Small Orthodox tribal monarchy in the northern Caucasus representing the various minor states there. This is the primary tag for provinces of Circassian culture.
  • Gazikumukh: A small Shiite kingdom in the northeastern Caucasus. This is the primary tag for provinces of Dagestani culture.


Western Persia:

attachment.php



While entirely locked in the struggle between the Timurid and Qara Qoyunlu empires in 1444, Western Persia is soon going to be the site of the rise of the Qizilbash and the birth of the Safavid Empire. This region is defined by densely populated valleys with a strong urban Persian culture, both of which the map can now portray in a better way in terms of borders and province density.
As in the Caucasus, including more provinces also allows us to include some of the smaller players in the region.

New Tags:
  • Tabaristan: A small kingdom along the southern coast of the Caspian sea. Primary tag for the new Mazandarani culture.
  • Ardalan: A small Kurdish kingdom in the Zagros mountains.


Khorasan and Baluchistan

attachment.php



Where western Persia is dominated by mountain ranges and rich valleys, Eastern Persia is a region of mountain ranges and deserts. Due to the much harsher climate, most of Khorasan would often be incorporated into surrounding empires unless these were too weak to control the vast area. The even more inhospitable Baluchistan would remain independent, divided into various tribal entities, for most of the period covered by the game.
The greater number of provinces here primarily means that conquering and traversing this region isn't going to be as easy as it was prior to AoW and will also mean that the revolts that historically started in this area will be a bit harder to put down.

Afghanistan

attachment.php



Home to thriving cities such as Herat and Kabul, Afghanistan is richer and more influential than the rest of Eastern Persia. During the period covered by EU4, states such as the Mughal or the Durrani empires used this region as a jumping off point to successfully to expand into India or Persia.
The AoW map accentuates the role of Afghanistan as a good base for expansion and a gateway between east and west. In order to show the importance of the Khyber and Bolan passes as routes into India, a wasteland province has also been added to represent the Suleiman mountain range in eastern Afghanistan.
 

Attachments

  • afghanistan.jpg
    0 bytes · Views: 59.163
  • khorasan.jpg
    0 bytes · Views: 57.726
  • westernpersia.jpg
    0 bytes · Views: 59.659
  • caucasus.jpg
    0 bytes · Views: 64.208
I love vassals. The only thing I dislike about them that they stop having any amibition. So long they do not want their independence nothing will happen from them. They no longer desire other provinces (that are not yours), never make claims, do not aggrevate their neighbours or deal with them in any way.

They exist, thats all.
 
Single rebel stacks shouldn't be costly to manpower in the slightest. Right now, if you're not particularly big and you get a massive patriot revolt in one of you recent conquests, then they can eat through your manpower and sometimes even win. Such an event was highly unlikely to say the least. Rebels simply did not have the discipline to be an effective fighting force most of the time.

While true, in game terms it's hard to represent them meaningfully any other way. If rebels were always trivial for your army to roll over, then they simply wouldn't be a factor at all. Making rebels somewhat beefier (but having their demands not wreck your entire nation) is historically how EU4 has made them an issue, given the way the game mechanics work.
 
While true, in game terms it's hard to represent them meaningfully any other way. If rebels were always trivial for your army to roll over, then they simply wouldn't be a factor at all. Making rebels somewhat beefier (but having their demands not wreck your entire nation) is historically how EU4 has made them an issue, given the way the game mechanics work.

Rebels should have lower discipline and higher morale. Being bounced back by a rebel stack without major losses would increase the "whack-a-mole" factor of rebels, but the changes coming in AoW seem to cut down on that factor so it's less of a concern.
 
I love vassals. The only thing I dislike about them that they stop having any amibition. So long they do not want their independence nothing will happen from them. They no longer desire other provinces (that are not yours), never make claims, do not aggrevate their neighbours or deal with them in any way.

They exist, thats all.

You my friend, are a genius. Never thought about that before, but just because they are your @#$%!, doesn't mean that they should get SOME stuff on their own, with YOUR approval. Interesting.
 
While true, in game terms it's hard to represent them meaningfully any other way. If rebels were always trivial for your army to roll over, then they simply wouldn't be a factor at all. Making rebels somewhat beefier (but having their demands not wreck your entire nation) is historically how EU4 has made them an issue, given the way the game mechanics work.

Those types of rebels are still a threat when you are at war or otherwise handcuffed. That's when they historically were a threat, except for the the civil war factor. So zealot rebels that spawn during a time of religious turmoil ought to be well-disciplined and effective, perhaps as effective as your regular army. Also, things like pretender and noble rebels should be well-disciplined as well. It's just the random peasant and similar rebel stacks that are annoyingly efficient.

Edit: If the random peasants are annoyingly efficient, then the pretenders and nobles are non-issues save as a small power. The discipline factor works both ways. So, Prussian pretender rebels might as well not exist, while Munster peasants mean the permanent end of the state (zealot/heretic rebels actually seized control of Munster in the time frame, but they were promptly crushed by others).
 
The only thing that worries me with marches, is about FL. Vassals often have troubles reaching FL, partly due to paying taxes, but how will the AI be able to field another 25% if it doesn't get any discount other units? Even paying 30% to overlord is only a fraction of the effective income (often times, trade, taxes and production are quite balances, so in the end, 30% of taxes should be roughly 10% of total income).

I'm fairly sure it was mentioned that marches don't pay taxes to their overlord.
 
so if i get it right in order to make more provinces in southern persia u made one of the most recognized provinces in there disappear? TADAAAA! NO MORE FARS! lol
i do like the more province thing but persia with no fars is like italy with no rome! other than that it looks nice.
also i think azerbaijani is an accepted culture in persia from way back until even now, so maybe u should add it to persian accepted cultures too? if im not mistaken even the country known az azerbaijan today was part of persia until about 150 years ago when russia took it in persian-russian wars. just saying...
 
so if i get it right in order to make more provinces in southern persia u made one of the most recognized provinces in there disappear? TADAAAA! NO MORE FARS! lol
i do like the more province thing but persia with no fars is like italy with no rome! other than that it looks nice.
also i think azerbaijani is an accepted culture in persia from way back until even now, so maybe u should add it to persian accepted cultures too? if im not mistaken even the country known az azerbaijan today was part of persia until about 150 years ago when russia took it in persian-russian wars. just saying...

As with many provinces, like Fars, they're divided into more 'provinces'. Sarvestan (an important city) and others are the product of Fars, I don't see the problem.

And accepted cultures only work when a certain threshold is reached, so maybe Persia will start with Azerbaijani as accepted, maybe not. It depends on the Persian idea-groups and the basetax of the Azerbaijani provinces.
 
I love an expanded Caucasus.

I mean, it will be finally possible to play Georgia, Armenia or Kurdistan (mod?). The Empire of Georgia was technically possible but anticlimatic with only few Caucasus provinces, while Armenia was basically impossible to play with one province... for a nation which conquered the entire Caucasus/Assyria few times.
 
You clearly didn't read my follow up posts, where I clarified this. I just think ordinary peasant/nationalist/patriot/zealot rebels are usually too disciplined and effective as a fighting force. When the country is in some kind of civil war, that's a different story.
This is true.

The discipline/morale balance of rebels is out of whack. It's not unreasonable that a plucky rebel force can entrench itself in its homeland and drive off a standing army, but it shouldn't be dealing hundreds of casualties of damage each tick.
Those types of rebels are still a threat when you are at war or otherwise handcuffed. That's when they historically were a threat, except for the the civil war factor. So zealot rebels that spawn during a time of religious turmoil ought to be well-disciplined and effective, perhaps as effective as your regular army. Also, things like pretender and noble rebels should be well-disciplined as well. It's just the random peasant and similar rebel stacks that are annoyingly efficient.

Edit: If the random peasants are annoyingly efficient, then the pretenders and nobles are non-issues save as a small power. The discipline factor works both ways. So, Prussian pretender rebels might as well not exist, while Munster peasants mean the permanent end of the state (zealot/heretic rebels actually seized control of Munster in the time frame, but they were promptly crushed by others).
How strong the revolt should be mainly depends on how much will to fight do the rebels have and how much weaponry them managed to get. Firearm Weapons of that time didn`t really allow extended periods of training.

I will say it again, in some cases even pesant rebels managed to masacre proffecional armies in filed, although, not at even numbers.
Single rebel stacks shouldn't be costly to manpower in the slightest. Right now, if you're not particularly big and you get a massive patriot revolt in one of you recent conquests, then they can eat through your manpower and sometimes even win. Such an event was highly unlikely to say the least. Rebels simply did not have the discipline to be an effective fighting force most of the time.
It is not highly unlikely in the slightest, quite contrary, you need a lot of troops to controll the new subject. If you made conquest where the conquered outnumber your own population, why shouldn`t they defeat your armies if they managed to organise?
 
Your new rebel system is going to catch hell if it isn't balanced. If someone gets a rebellion larger than their own FL (which happens pretty often to small nations right now, even just by event) and can't accept demands without losing the territory, there are going to be a ton of angry threads on it. If it plays well though it'll be a big improvement.
When don't people on this forum whine about new expansions?
 
It is not highly unlikely in the slightest, quite contrary, you need a lot of troops to controll the new subject. If you made conquest where the conquered outnumber your own population, why shouldn`t they defeat your armies if they managed to organise?

That's a lot of ifs that are rarely relevant in some of these situations. OK, if Augsburg conquers Munich then it might make sense for the Augsburgian army to be crushed by the hordes of Munichers (or whatever people from Munich are called), but that should be on sheer numbers, not equal discipline. But when Munster conquers East Frisia? Somehow, I don't think so.
 
I love vassals. The only thing I dislike about them that they stop having any amibition. So long they do not want their independence nothing will happen from them. They no longer desire other provinces (that are not yours), never make claims, do not aggrevate their neighbours or deal with them in any way.

They exist, thats all.

True. I'd be fine enough with them not wanting to get diplo-annexed all the time though...and yeah claims would be nice to not have to core some things myself haha :(

But ultimately, a vassal state in its most basic form is a state where its ruler is subordinate to the overlord and provides military service, and that's it. They don't give up all their diplomatic capacity and still are very much independent entities. However - the various vassals and buffer states of the Ottoman empire served a different function (as buffer states etc.) and I guess that period and age what the idea of a vassal is based on in EU4. I'm guessing the marches are an attempt to pretty much introduce exactly this polity into the game (buffer nations like Wallachia etc.)

Ironically, the term "protectorate" of the age of imperialism is defined by the protector to flat-out take over the entire diplomaticy of the protected - in other words, this would be the EU4 vassal state who can't do ANYTHING diplomatic on its own - but then there'd be no difference between the two things. (-> see Korea having been a protectorate of Japan before being "diplo-annexed" by Japan, etc.)

In my eyes, the in-game terminology is just a bit confusing when you have an idea what the words are supposed to mean...so you might expect vassals to do things they just don't ^^
 
Hopefully marches will be able to fabricate claims(not possible to fabricate claims on overlord land)? Otherwise the vassal is pretty useless diplo slot relation since it cannot expand.
 
It makes me think that Local Autonomy and Unrest is a good step toward more interesting mecanisms for internal management.
So AoW is promising from this point of view :)
 
Ironically, the term "protectorate" of the age of imperialism is defined by the protector to flat-out take over the entire diplomaticy of the protected - in other words, this would be the EU4 vassal state who can't do ANYTHING diplomatic on its own - but then there'd be no difference between the two things. (-> see Korea having been a protectorate of Japan before being "diplo-annexed" by Japan, etc.)

A EU4 vassal still has some diplomatic options left, they can only not declare war. For example they are still able to claim provinces (as I did with burgundy after a tagswitch to claim back some of their old territory). The ai however does not use it. As it has lost all desire to live, and patiently wait till you diplo annex them :)
 
A EU4 vassal still has some diplomatic options left, they can only not declare war. For example they are still able to claim provinces (as I did with burgundy after a tagswitch to claim back some of their old territory). The ai however does not use it. As it has lost all desire to live, and patiently wait till you diplo annex them :)

True. If we were talking about buffer states, those are allowed to exist more or less as their own entities precisely because they function as *neutral* zones. If they'd claim stuff for themselves they would essentially devolve to something like a superior form of an alliance since they'll always to what you want, never backstab you, all the while still growing stronger saving you MP in your path of conquest :)
I've got the feeling precisely the former (a form of buffer state) is what Paradox ultimately intends vassals to be - at least the introduction of Marches is a strong push into that direction.
 
Yeah letting them do all the fun stuff can easily make them overpowered. Still a vassal that still can develop and desire can be double edged sword as they may become too powerfull or dislike that you demand too much without throwing them a bone. Still it is more a personal irritation that a vassal will do nothing interesting anymore and can be effectively ignored the rest of the game.
 
As with many provinces, like Fars, they're divided into more 'provinces'. Sarvestan (an important city) and others are the product of Fars, I don't see the problem.

And accepted cultures only work when a certain threshold is reached, so maybe Persia will start with Azerbaijani as accepted, maybe not. It depends on the Persian idea-groups and the basetax of the Azerbaijani provinces.

the most important city in Fars is called Shiraz, and i dont think sarvestan is more important than Shiraz itself! i rly think they have to rename a province as Fars or at least Shiraz. about the Azerbaijani culture, it is accepted in real and paradox always want their games to be realistic. i dont see much Baluchi taxes or anything about Baluchi culture in persian idea group but they r accepted cos in real world they were and still r. so i think both ur answers r irrelevant.
 
Last edited: