I changed my mind. I want dev diaries to stop again.

[EarlKonrad]

The last 3 developer diaries where buffs, buffs, buffs, buffs. Long, overdeveloped mission trees that make the same nation 5 times stronger for the player than the AI.

How is that surprising? Ever since Leviathan that is basically what every single DD boils down to.

I used to look foward to reading DDs weekly, and even took the time to read old DDa from EU3's expansions and Eu4's development, but ever since they became previews on how to play a nation's mission tree they lost me completely.

I find it saddening how the game keeps getting updated with new content that doesn't in any way shape or form improve the overall quality of the game but merely provides more TAG exclusive buffs (gov. Reforms, naval doctrines, missions).

 

[Xephos Demonslayer]

The last 3 developer diaries where buffs, buffs, buffs, buffs. Long, overdeveloped mission trees that make the same nation 5 times stronger for the player than the AI.

Oh, you want to become the HRE as an odd religion? Sorry, its impossible, unless you pick the overbuffed mission TAGs, in which case, hey its free just by clicking the mission button! Congratulations Hussite HRE emperor! Dont forget to click on your mission to spawn free Husite centers of reformation; we wouldn't want playing a heretic in crusade era Europe to feel hard!

Getting PUs is extremnly random and almost impossible? Just pick an overbuffed mission TAG and click the mission button to get 5-6 PU CBs for free, no worries.

Hungary gets crushed by the Ottomans because they are overbuffed? I guess the only solution is to overbuff Hungary too!

I'm only using examples from the last dev diary since its so fresh, but the other 2 feature such old hits as "free mission claims on anything you would ever want to conquer" as well as new ideas like "We might add a Monarch Lifespan modifier to these rewards so your Moctezuma can enjoy his newfound powers for a little bit longer. We also might consider changing his starting situation as a general into an event to further increase his survivability."

Apparently, the next developer diary is about Theodoro. Of course, it goes without saying that this 1 province city state which got conquered 10 years after the game start will get claims from India to France. The only question I have is will it get a mission for a PU on Muscovy or a mission for claims in India incase you want to colonize? And how many great powers will become auto allied to you for completing the mission "prepare for war with the Ottomans"? Also will you get a mission to become a Roman Empire nomad horde?

Uh, Bohemia already had the Hussite CoR in its tree? It also requires you to manually convert all your provinces before you can spawn it, which takes a few years, and will take even longer if you start taking land or integrate your subjects.

Also, and this is just my OCD nitpicking, so take it with a grain of salt, going by the patterns of the previous Dev Diaries, this upcoming one will likely be the Timurids, Mughals, and Hordes, with next week having Trebizond, Theodoro, Hisn Kayfa, Hormuz, and Oman.

 

[Parmelion]

I find it saddening how the game keeps getting updated with new content that doesn't in any way shape or form improve the overall quality of the game but merely provides more TAG exclusive buffs (gov. Reforms, naval doctrines, missions).

Sad? Yes. Surprising? No.

I find it funny how people still expect the DDs to be about something else, when PDX explicitly said like 3 years ago that all future updates would look like this. It's been a common knowledge since after Leviathan that we will never see the addition of any new mechanics or map changes, yet people constantly complain about stuff they know they won't get.

You might dislike the scope of the recent DLCs, I do too, but as I said in my previous reply in this thread, they are adding content that sells. People who complain about it here on forums are a small, loud minority. LotN and KoK were basically TAG exclusive buffs, yet they are the two best rated EU IV DLCs ever.

If anything, the recent DLCs are indicative of the fact that most of team has been for quite some time dedicated to working on Caesar instead of EU IV, which should make people optimistic about the game. Besides that, none of the new DLCs are a must-buy, as they do not improve the game in any way if you are uninterested in the TAG-specific content they add.

 

[Pls fix HRE]

Sad? Yes. Surprising? No.

I find it funny how people still expect the DDs to be about something else, when PDX explicitly said like 3 years ago that all future updates would look like this. It's been a common knowledge since after Leviathan that we will never see the addition of any new mechanics or map changes, yet people constantly complain about stuff they know they won't get.

You might dislike the scope of the recent DLCs, I do too, but as I said in my previous reply in this thread, they are adding content that sells. People who complain about it here on forums are a small, loud minority. LotN and KoK were basically TAG exclusive buffs, yet they are the two best rated EU IV DLCs ever.

If anything, the recent DLCs are indicative of the fact that most of team has been for quite some time dedicated to working on Caesar instead of EU IV, which should make people optimistic about the game. Besides that, none of the new DLCs are a must-buy, as they do not improve the game in any way if you are uninterested in the TAG-specific content they add.

When the argument boils down to "dont like it dont play" you arent leaving any room for discussion cause you yourself just want to shut down any without saying anything.

 

[Parmelion]

When the argument boils down to "dont like it dont play" you arent leaving any room for discussion cause you yourself just want to shut down any without saying anything.

No, it's just that the discussion at this stage of the game's development is pointless because they have made it pretty clear that the design philosophy of post-Leviathan DLCs is set in stone and will not change no matter what people think. If there was room for a change, they would have reverted it after the massive backlash when they announced no further map changes. People should just get over it.

 

[C2troy4]

If you haven't noticed, EU4 isn't exactly at its peak right now. This DLC is almost certainly going to be the last one, and getting major new mechanics ceased years ago at this point, along with map changes. Missions are easy to make, and yes, they aren't great for people that don't enjoy them, but a large portion of the playerbase likes them and so they sell, making them a good enough way to give nations flavor this late into the games lifetime. There will be no major rework to mission trees or the realization of the joke that is the hope for their removal. Don't complain here about them, go to the Tinto Talks dev diaries detailing the creation of what is likely to be EU5 and express your disdain.

 

[Metz]

EU4 is a board game-styled grand strategy game that takes place within a historical context, where the players (the countries) get different bonuses based on their historical achievements/attempts. The last couple DLCs have been aimed at expanding the experience to each country to increase replayability/stimulate interest in a different/new part of the world. If people had the same experience or goals every time they played the great powers because there was nothing else to play then people would have gotten bored and returned to the game every couple of weeks/months.

EU5 is meant to be the opposite, where nothing spawns from thin air but everything works in cohesion with each other in one global system.

 

[strqfzd911]

 

[EUnderhill]

I'm rather split down the whole thing. But if I had to sum up, I prefer the current version to the 2014 version. It has become a better game in a lot of ways.

But there are things I don't like too, how could it not be so in a game like this?

I can't even say if the game is harder or easier now, which some are discussing here. I have more powerful tools now, missions, permanent claims and other things have made me stronger and the player's life easier (remember when we had to manually explore the seas?) whilst other things have made it harder (insane force limits, zone of control)

I can live with all of this and still love the game. If I picked the thing I most dislike it is how the sandbox elements have slowly eroded in to railroaded historical encouragement. For this game to work like I want it to there cannot be a system where AI nations always get the same PUs, claims and so on every run. If mission trees were dynamic, or maybe multiple choice at least (you can take permanent claims in Anatolia, North Africa or the Balkans as an example, but only one) then I wouldn't mind it so much.

Sure mission trees are powerful for the player, but I'd trade that for removing the rewards from the AI and getting back to a more sandbox experience.

I miss the manual exploration and wish that it could be made an optional rule short of not enabling the DLC.

 

[sinisalo]

Don't say that out loud

 

[iClipse]

If you haven't noticed, EU4 isn't exactly at its peak right now. This DLC is almost certainly going to be the last one, and getting major new mechanics ceased years ago at this point, along with map changes. Missions are easy to make, and yes, they aren't great for people that don't enjoy them, but a large portion of the playerbase likes them and so they sell, making them a good enough way to give nations flavor this late into the games lifetime. There will be no major rework to mission trees or the realization of the joke that is the hope for their removal. Don't complain here about them, go to the Tinto Talks dev diaries detailing the creation of what is likely to be EU5 and express your disdain.

When was it at its peak?

People like to forget that in the past in pretty much every patch we've had things that were despised.

Was EU4 at its peak when territorial corruption was a thing? When you couldn't move your capital due to arbitrary rules? When governing capacity didn't exist yet, or when courthouses didn't give a building slot? Or was it when the AI locked itself into alliances blocking themselves from there logical expansion route?

Honestly, I feel like EU4 is in a very good spot right now. Yes the new dev diaries are about buffs, and those don't add a lot to people but who don't like playing with missions. But what has been released, and what has been patched, has been of great quality.

 

[Sharkoman]

t's not that missions make it too easy for you, it's that they make things easy for other people. That's what bothers you, isn't it ? If other people don't struggle as much, you don't get to feel so superior when you do well. And that's what it's all really about for some players - mastering something complex, not for the satisfaction of it but for the feeling of being better than others.

I don't think you could be more right. And what made me laugh was his response where he said

"The last dev diary I remember being excited about was Jewish religion 3 years ago, "

That's all you need to read to understand everything.