EU4 - Development Diary - 12th of May 2016

[Martin_Mortyry]

With unique flavor I mean things like Dutch Republic, Nahuatl Religion, Polish Elective Monarchy, HRE Religious League Wars, Hordes Razing Provinces

Polish Elective Monarchy

Yeah, no. This one needs a redesign as you got the idea behind it entirely wrong.

 

[steve666]

Expand official time-line until end of Franco-Prussia war 1871.
Gives some nice new tech stuff to research without being to modern (ironclad ships, rifled guns, first breachloaded guns etc...) some nice developments in our history american civil war, unification of germany, france again kingdom, etc.

 

[frolix42]

This makes me think will their ever be an EU5 ? is EU4 the ultimate end game in terms of development of the series? I love the EU series and will always continue to play. But im not sure how willing i will be in the future to plow more money into a game that will be ~6 years old judging by this.

I feel this is much more applicable to CK2, for obvious reasons. I don't feel it's a bad thing that they've elongated the lifespan of their games; EU2 was released only a year after EU1, and the improvements made to EU2 over EU1 were relatively humble. If a Paradox fan wants a new experience today, they can play CK2 or Stellaris or soon HoI4.

 

[Arthrodira]

I've been waiting for an East Asian DLC since day 1. At the very least we need advisor portraits for Africa, India, and East Asia - the generic portraits are really immersion breaking.

 

[white army]

The focus that Paradox need now in EU4 does not relate to adding newer countries, but building upon existing mechanics, and a much more interesting in depth game.

The revision of Technology, Reformation HRE wars is good path to go to. Unfortunately unmentioned Government types and rulers revision (wrote this months ago), and how not, more aggressive and interesting Revolutionary era that I believe would add what the game is missing right now.

As a player of EU4, I'm not the one that creates the Roman Empire in 100 years, then quits the game and starting new campaign with Kuba in Cuba, quitting and again, etc.
I usually want to play the game from its start to its end, I used to actually. But I feel the spirit of the EU4 era is missing, the intrigue of Revelation and Tradition, secret occults, the institution of inquisition, Catholic and Protestant churches clash, the Revolutionary era and more. Somehow this spirit exists in CK2 or Victoria 2, or used to be in EU3.
These are my points:

1. Chain events that relate to my own monarch, his decisions of royal marriages and religion in the eve of reformation, a modifier of reputation - if the people adore/despise him. More of that, although it's not CK2, I want to have unexpected events, like a monarch that arises to the throne in the age of religious strife and changes his religion (Ex: Henry VIII, Elisabeth I), adopts an enlightenment Philosophy that influences the realm (Frederick the Great, Joseph I) and more of that. I want not everything will be under the control of player, and stability unimportant and possibly removed, in expense of Realm internal modifiers or Diplomatic relations success/failure.

2. Change Internal values that are part of my realm (Tradition and Absolutism, Liberty and Revolution) that will influence the growth of my educated population and may influence the future of my realm. I want a tutor to my future heir, if I want him to tend to an existing tradition, or adopt Absolutism and Divine right, or new options in the future, like Conscious, Free thought and Enlightenment to avoid Revolution in my realm, or to make one as Colony in the late game. Estates would also play this part and try to make an heir of throne or unexperienced new monarch ascended to rush toward their gains.

3. Evolution of Traditional feudal monarchies towards the more centralized, Absolute state. This would need either a loyal and strong army with Charismatic and powerful monarch that will transfer the state, peacefully as possible, in expense of the estates. In governments with parliament, that would be an almost impossible task, that would develop to a civil war.
Nation that fails to do it, will possibly fall or be couped into the most restricted monarchy or republican dictatorship.


NOTE: The government types are influenced by events and not player's decision or AI choosing of national ideas (that is awkward in my opinion and stayed so from since the game release). It would rely on its monarchs' history of rule and making some national ideas more powerful than others.


4. Enlightenment Philosophy developing in my realm (of course Westernized), making strife among the people, and erupts in the country's darkest hour. New exploration in Science and Arts that will influence my management of realm for good, influence my monarch to adopt more staunch traditional ideals or scientific ones.

5. Clash of the Church with reformed heretics/opposite and making the situation in the country intolerable. If the country tolerates heretics, it would find itself in chaos because of religious motivated population not matter what. And intolerant country would appoint orders of Clergy to fight the heresy in every way (state inquisition).

6. Revolutionary Era! The rise of secret occults, liberty in the nation of that is miserable state and the rise of Enlightenment Philosophers advocating towards Revolution in Absolute realms. Accept it or deny it, the Revolutionaries will transform your country to become the age of new Glory/Horror (or whatever you personally believe) and conquer the world with intrigues within your newly formed Republic, transformed into aggressive, world-conqueror Empire that is able to manage much more territories!


I really hope someone in Paradox will read this message and maybe it will give him new ideas to come. Thank you, for making this game.

 

[jebates]

A simplified pie chart for culture and religion with just a minority and majority (and set percentages like 1/3 or 2/5, so no 77.53) that wouldn't ever fully change except through events would do wonders.

Big picture I'd love for optimal play to not be perfect play, but for it to be a lot easier to conquer and also a lot easier to collapse so that you're riding a roller coaster of history up and down and optimal play would be to steer into the skid occasionally.

 

[Snake Pliskin]

Here's a screenshot of something you've never seen before.

Anyway, next week I’m gone on holidays, but Catalack will talk about units for eu4.

Definitely a map mode which shows civilized nations or the phase / level of civilization in each country
This will be a very cool feature

 

[kamster]

I'd love to see DLC which will bring changes to monarchy and inheritance. I was recently in absurd situation, when I was playing as England (GB to be precise) and I was master of the world, empire tier, best and biggest army, greates fleet, 100 prestige, 100 legitimacy, more than 70 PP. And I had a king (emperor) who, after he became king, got an heir, who was 4 years younger than him. Obviously his brother Biggest stupidity in inheritance system - game didn't think that bringing me new heir, my son for example, would be a wise choice. Even, if son of a king should have more right to the throne than brother. But here's more: my heir died (king was 75, heir 71, they were not of Windsor dynasty, so it was understandable ). And I was in risk of becoming a junior partner in union with Commonwealth, which had less legitimacy (I guess, couldn't have more), less prestige, less PP. And my king died, out of malice, I'm sure. And such ridiculous situations are fairly common. So Paradox, please overhaul monarchies and inheritance. Maybe create a nice system, with it's own screen, which will allow to somehow decide, who will inherit, who will be regent.

 

[zamieo]

I think it makes sense.

Have you ever played Starcraft or other real time strategy games? Managing both your economy and battles simultaneously is extremely demanding. I was absolutely exhausted after every 1v1 ranked game and they only lasted 20-30 minutes.

Now granted it's easy to pause in EU4 in order to deal with multiple things at the same time but I don't think it's desirable to have to pause every 15 seconds in order to play the game. Multiplayer in particular would become extremely impractical.

Sure, but this isn't Starcraft. I haven't played Starcraft, so please, correct me if I'm wrong, but Starcraft is supposed to be won and it's won by destroying your opponents base, no? That's not really comparable to EU4 where sometimes, you can't really do anything for years (in the game). If there were more peace-time activities, it would make playing an OPM from beginning to end more fun and more of a viable thing. It would also make a regency less of a slog and maybe a time where you can sit down and consolidate your gains. I also think that you should be able to decide how active you want to be in the running of your state. Maybe you like it like it is now? There should be that option. Maybe you like a bit more control regarding a few things, that should be an option. Perhaps you want to micro manage everything (now, what "everything" is, I have no idea), that should also be a possibility.

 

[crown_usurper]

May be it's a hint for upcoming expansion about India or china...but nothing is clear to be precise..But next region under limelight is going to be Asia i guess. And hope some Asian power doesn't get huge buff so we may see a game breaking experience. China is already so powerful for Europeans if they westernize..Fingers crossed.

 

[LokiusMaximus]

The English Parliament, added a couple of updates ago. Common Sense I think.

An extremely annoying mechanic in my opinion. At least once your nation becomes large and you have 20+ seats. Especially when you have a 91% chance of success and the debate fails.

 

[Kristupas Z]

EU4 evolved so much compared to EU3 and 2 and I'm very happy for this game's success. But there is one thing that bugs me a lot and were never addressed in EU games, it is that there is no mechanic dealing with country blobs! What I'm saying is that historically when nations began to blob out too much everyone would form some sort of non militaristic coalitions to shrub blob's power. Yes, there is AE but it is way to low and doesn't work the way nations would do in real life.
My recent example: picked Castile and world went crazy for some strange events. It was fun campaign to forcefully integrate Aragon, fight succession war for France involving half of Europe, Claim throne of Austria and Hungary. But after that I found myself in situation where game is just claim-threaten war/fight minor power-wait phases. There were tons of Empires whom could have collaborated with each other and destroyed easily my dominion, but no, they just sit quietly and waited for their turn to be cut. It could have taken only four nations in Europe to stop me but they didn't even considered to do anything.
Same is true if you would look at AI only time-lapses and game commentaries on Youtube. For example: with ET mod Nazi Germany kicks everyone to ground while US ally them because AE doesn't reach them; or w/o any mod France blobs out while scared Spain and Brittany does't even consider future plans. Nope, France is scary now, therefore ally them now and help them in their burning of the Europe.
Historically if any nations power grows to fast everyone reacts. Russia blobed out? Here is GB making plans with Japan; France beheading kings and hiring Napoleon to march thru Europe? All France allies dealing behind their back with former enemies; Ottamans rising up? Austria forgets that Poles are "Barbaric tribe" somewhere in the East and Hungarians pain in the ass when it comes to supporting future Emperors; etc.
So there should be some kind of mechanic which looks how fast nations power grows and thus adjusting other nations opinions about that new player in town.

 

[GiftGruen]

Is that the aftermath of a new "let's gang up on the hordes" CB?

My Dumbass King Henry,
Everyone
has declared the
1st Murder ALL the Nomads war
on
all the hordes.

 

[usul294]

Add pops. Farmers, Aristocrats, Clergymen, Soldiers, and Artisans, and make an educated guess at the country populations in 1444 (we have estimates like that, you know.) Add consciousness that grows very slowly, and tie consciousness of certain pops to important events like the Reformation, or the French Revolution.

What does this solve? Monarch Point dependency and the general arbitrariness of major events in this game. Would it be difficult? Sure. Would I be willing to pay 20-30 dollars to a complete overhaul to the game that introduces pops? In a heartbeat.

In history, movements are almost always caused by two things: A desire in people, and a need for reform. How the hell do you represent a need for reform well without having people asking for it? Instead, you end up with a ticking up rebel meter, a reform desire variable, and development, when all of these are expressions of the same thing: Human behavior.

What do we do with Cossacks? Overhaul the estates mechanic and add more to it. Make the estates tied to the major or accepted pop types and give bonuses accordingly. Why can't I have a despotic monarchy that caters to the farmers? Or the first military monarchy in history? It's time to make a change.

I think that something like Stellaris' Pops would simultaneously make peacetime mechanics more condensed and more enjoyable. Something about customizing it and building up planets is a ton of fun. I've played about 15 hours of Stellaris and rarely want to go to war.

It would be possible to combine: culture, religion, development, manpower, sailors, buildings, unrest, war exhaustion, corruption and maybe a few more into a system largely lifted from Stellaris. You could even let estates act as sector governors.

But ultimately, this sounds more like EU5 than an expansion to me. I, for one, would be on board with it.

 

[KrupPato]

An extremely annoying mechanic in my opinion. At least once your nation becomes large and you have 20+ seats. Especially when you have a 91% chance of success and the debate fails.

Now if you ave 100% it instant success, maybe too OP at game start.

 

[kamster]

So there should be some kind of mechanic which looks how fast nations power grows and thus adjusting other nations opinions about that new player in town.

I think there should be something like Great Powers from Victoria - and they should be rivals, with no chances of normal alliance. It would slow conquest down.

 

[LokiusMaximus]

The game has been out, what, two years? And still regency councils cannot declare war? Nothing more boring than having a monarch die with an heir less than five years old. And the 15 year truce timers are probably bad for the AI. The best way to defeat coalitions is to declare war on them first (no +30 war enthusiam for the leader if they are the defender) before they get too big, peace out, then you have many years (often 15) to beat up on other countries.

I still wish they would kill EUIV and work on EUV instead. The technology system is boring, combat is the same as earlier EUs except maybe generals are new (how about varied unit types like HOI?), naval combat sucks, AI is better but still not good, monarch points is a silly system (map is gaining more provinces, yet no additional points), etc.

*went from AI losing all their ships in a battle to using my 150 ship fleet to Tuscany's 120 ship fleet. I had about 70 heavies, 40 galleys, and 40 transports. They had 20 heavies and about 60 galleys. Test were lights and transports. Tuscany owned almost all of Italy and I chase them port to port. By the time the war was over and I'd captured all their ports, they still had 90 ships left.

 

[Shadowstrike]

Right now, the game is in essence, running an army that eats land, with a bunch of ways to get modifiers to do that better. Gameplay consists of strategic planning about where to expand next, and the tactical decisions of how to move your armies in war. "Running the state" in essence is about getting those modifiers (in terms of tech, ideas or other mechanics), pacifying land (via conversion, etc.), gaining resources to support more armies, and managing diplomacy (i.e. who to eat now vs who to eat later).

Given the era, the real changes that we're talking about is how the modern state evolved out of feudal structures and the political/economic changes therein, and how states that failed to reform (or were unlucky enough to encounter more powerful nations) went under. But efforts to represent that are pretty shallow, and don't have much of a strategic or tactical dimension. You wait for monarch points to fill up, and hit "upgrade tech" or you boost estate loyalty to pump them for ADM points. Until you can add a strategic-level dimension to that state change process (i.e. having multiple high-level directions to move into, i.e. gradually towards an absolutist monarchy, or a confederal republic, etc.), along with tactical level decisions of how to get there with multiple choices at each junction (i.e. need to give concessions to keep the clergy sweet, or bulldose the monestaries), that part of the game remains just a set of modifiers to army strength to pick up.

 

[Metz]

Johan:

We need more provinces specifically in the Low Countries and in other areas.

Ideally, it would be nice to have culture and religion be represented by pie charts. It is not realistic for a province to be totally one single culture and one single religion.

If we had pie charts we can see how provinces slowly transition from one culture to another and what other culture minorities are present, same with religion.

Trade goods should also play a more important role. Expanding on them, maybe the ability to stockpile them and use them as bonuses (specific resources can allow you to get cheaper units, easier to reduce stability, less revolt risk etc.). Also, slaves are underrepresented in game. They were very important during the colonial period.

The colonizing system is also a bit clunky. Perhaps colonial regions should be replaced by colonial areas and if you have two colonial areas within the same region you can merge them into one colony. This could help the strange problem about owning Northeast America and Louisiana and then having them seperate?

Trade Companies should work as client states as well, having their own government and units.

Finally, protectorates should be annexable if they are below a certain development level. This would make the player or the AI slowly ask for provinces one by one until they protectorate is weak and then they swallow them whole.

 

[LokiusMaximus]

Now if you ave 100% it instant success, maybe too OP at game start.

If you ignore it, it penalizes you. So I usually 100% everything. But the cost of doing that often isn't worth the reward. Not that an extra diplomat isn't very valuable sometimes.