• 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.

EU4 - Development Diary - 14th of April 2016

Hello everyone, and welcome to another development diary for Europa Universalis IV. Today we’ll focus a bit on Mare Nostrum, and what was the goal of the features in that expansion and the accompanying patch.


Improve the Naval aspect of the game
The Naval game is something that has received quite a few complaints over the year, so we really wanted to make an expansion on the naval theme.

Some of the features like Sailors and the Combat Tweaks were just too much of a rework of core concepts that they had to go into the free patch.

We’re rather happy with how the naval combat now works, now that quality actually matters, and it is no longer just about who has the most money to maintain the most heavy-ships.

The Naval Missions, and the Repair mechanics was based on our experiences of the Hearts of Iron IV development, and how much more fun it made the naval game, to avoid constant micromanagement. It was one of the main features we built the exoansion around.

The changes to making blockades more visible, and having Admirals that could be good at blockading was a few free features that have proved to be a success as well.


More Peacetime Activities
After Art of War there has been a constant barrage of requests for more peace-time activities. Pretty much every expansion since then have had a large focus on adding more things to do at peace time. El Dorado had exploration related mechanics, Common Sense added Development, Interaction with Subjects & Parliaments, while Cossacks had Estates and Diplomatic Feedback, not to mention all minor actions added for the all.

Mare Nostrum is no exception there, with two major systems to enhance gameplay outside of war. First of all, we reworked how espionage works for the free patch, to make it more of an interactive mechanic, and far more transparent than before. We also made Support Rebels more of a valid option, and added lots of new spy actions.

Secondly, the feature that was the biggest to develop for Mare Nostrum. The Condottieri. We designed and added this because at the end of the day fighting in eu4 is fun. It was also heavily influenced of the fact that HoI4 testing showed us it was great fun helping out in the Spanish Civil War while still building up your own nation. Of course, Eu4 was not really designed to have units checking two sets of allegiances, so the amount of work to get it to the state we have now was enormous.

It is also the only feature that has made the AI able to crush all QA within a few decades, so we had to scale it back a bit when balancing.


Regional Specific Enhacements
Every expansion we try to add unique mechanics to some part of the world, to make for more variation in gameplay.

Besides implementing a detailed map for central and east africa, with lots of new nations and ideas, we added two cool features to make some less popular countries played, while keeping to the naval theme.

There is not much to say about the Slave Raids and Trade Leagues, except that they work, they are fun, and they create diversity.


Community Requested
We also try to add in things that the community requests in each patch, and Mare Nostrum contains two such features..

Unconditional Surrender - This was requested by both SP & MP proponents, and was added to make it possible to get out wars when you have truly lost, without the opponent totally ruining your nation forever.


Timeline Mapmode - I think this feature has been requested since eu1. One of the most

Balance Related
Obviously, these are the features that tend to be not so popular.

Corruption - This solves quite a lot of balance problems, and makes for a more challenging game longterm.

States and Territories - This solves the problems of overseas mechanics which you had to work around and exploit to benefit from. It also gives greater flexibility to the player.


The teams favorites

So, what did the development team like the most from Mare Nostrum?

Condottieri won in a landslide!


0fC0qse.jpg
 
  • 72
  • 53
  • 33
Reactions:
Its needed because player delete forts (since they are broken) and become very rich by the end of the game. Its a money sink.

That doesn't mean it's "needed". Playing without forts has several dangers and downsides that need to be balanced against the extra money. It's certainly not a no risk big reward style of play. And I fail to understand why people get upset when other people beat up the AI in SP. You certainly won't play no forts in MP.
 
  • 6
Reactions:
So the main peacetime mechanic introduced in this patch is the ability to fight in wars whilst at peace, just admit that your team has either no idea or is otherwise unwilling to - due to the nature of EU4 - introduce deep and interesting peacetime mechanics.

Secondly, I fail to see how uneven tech and religious disunity were balance issues that needed to be addressed and even if they were, there was already penalties for religious disunity and of course for being behind on tech. Once again the solution wasn't to make admin and diplo tech more necessary, but simply to fine players for having unbalanced technology. This is problematic further because of the tech costs and maths involved depending on leaders it can be quite impossible for ROTW nations to stay balanced and furthermore, the only solution is to wait around and do basically nothing for large periods of the game - these certainly adds to the game's longevity I grant you, that is if you are enough of a masochist to continue playing. Though perhaps I'm being unfair, if you reward Paradox for introducing this dumb mechanic by buying their DLC you can then use your conduttori to fight in other people's wars whilst you're playing waiting simulator.
Due to neighbor bonus mechanics, taking diplo tech while not westernized is akin to flushing your bird mana down a toilet.
 
  • 10
Reactions:
Corruption - This solves quite a lot of balance problems, and makes for a more challenging game longterm.

Johan, could you please elaborate a bit more on that, because considering the way that the Forums have been on fire for the last week or so [this in itself not being in anyway unexpected, but the fact that it is on fire over THIS SPECIFIC CONCEPT makes it a bit more meaningful], this is a thing that's rather important to discuss.

First, could you please elaborate more on which balance problems corruption is aiming to fix? More specifically, what problems it aims to fix that existing mechanics didn't already cover?
Please, indulge me for a moment here. One line isn't nearly enough.
 
  • 34
  • 1
Reactions:
Hmm .. these are indeed "Piecetime activities", but I believe players are rather asking for "peacetime mechanics", hence mechanics actually making the game fun&challenging also during times of peace, rather than having some additional buttons to press.
Many suggestions have been made in the past: introduce family trees, populations mechanics, a revamped trade system, etc. I'm not advocating a particular mechanic here, but I want to emphasize that the character underlying these suggestions should be understood and taken serious, as it can well serve as a blueprint for the development of peacetime mechanics.

Indeed. Stuff to click during peacetime is all well and good, but I would love to be fully engaged during it and have tall be truly viable and fun.
 
  • 18
Reactions:
Its needed because player delete forts (since they are broken) and become very rich by the end of the game. Its a money sink.
Im considering rolling even further back in the game version, given how tired i am of the fort mechanic. Yesterday i had my army in the province north of Constantinople(sorry, i don't recall the name), and i couldn't head to bessarabia because i was blocked by the fort in Edirne. How does that make any kind of sense??? Since El Dorado, this has been the PDX modus operandi... Add non-sensical mechanics ad eternum.
Common Sense was the last DLC i bought, and im considering rolling back to pre-Common Sense. Im not buying any other DLC, nor updating with the free patches.
 
  • 12
  • 8
Reactions:
Im considering rolling even further back in the game version, given how tired i am of the fort mechanic. Yesterday i had my army in the province north of Constantinople(sorry, i don't recall the name), and i couldn't head to bessarabia because i was blocked by the fort in Edirne. How does that make any kind of sense??? Since El Dorado, this has been the PDX modus operandi... Add non-sensical mechanics ad eternum.
Common Sense was the last DLC i bought, and im considering rolling back to pre-Common Sense. Im not buying any other DLC, nor updating with the free patches.
In your case, the fort system is doing EXACTLY what it is intended to do. You have to siege the fort to get past it.
 
  • 10
  • 6
Reactions:
In your case, the fort system is doing EXACTLY what it is intended to do. You have to siege the fort to get past it.
How is a fort left of Constantinople blocking me to go north, when im already north of it? I have to take a fort that is behind me so i can go forward??? And it was sieged at the time.
 
  • 14
  • 1
Reactions:
How is a fort left of Constantinople blocking me to go north, when im already north of it? I have to take a fort that is behind me so i can go forward??? And it was sieged at the time.
There is no "Behind" as far the fort system is concerned.
Is it under siege or occupied? If the former, then do you have enough troops to siege it sitting there? If the latter, give it a month to update.
 
  • 8
Reactions:
Its possible that he sieged Constantinople, then Edirne could trap his army in since that ZoC takes over.

You should avoid sieging a province which has all adjacent provinces in ZoCs of other forts (its the best way to get your army killed because you get locked in), because paradox clearly thoroughly tested this mechanic.
 
Last edited:
  • 10
Reactions:
There is no "Behind" as far the fort system is concerned.
Is it under siege or occupied? If the former, then do you have enough troops to siege it sitting there? If the latter, give it a month to update.
Was sieged by an ally with more than enough men. I was stranded in that province for about 3 months. Only possible movements was to go to Edirne or Constantinople.
The part where there is no "sides" in the fort system, is what makes it non-sensical. Having an army in Coimbra not being able to move to Porto because there's a fort in Lisbon, is a joke. Just like is joke that 1000 heavies blocking a strait are non-existent if you own/occupy both sides of the strait.
PDX is filling the game with nonsense mechanics.
 
  • 9
  • 1
Reactions:
Improve the Naval aspect of the game
The Naval game is something that has received quite a few complaints over the year, so we really wanted to make an expansion on the naval theme.

Some of the features like Sailors and the Combat Tweaks were just too much of a rework of core concepts that they had to go into the free patch.

We’re rather happy with how the naval combat now works, now that quality actually matters, and it is no longer just about who has the most money to maintain the most heavy-ships.

The Naval Missions, and the Repair mechanics was based on our experiences of the Hearts of Iron IV development, and how much more fun it made the naval game, to avoid constant micromanagement. It was one of the main features we built the exoansion around.

The changes to making blockades more visible, and having Admirals that could be good at blockading was a few free features that have proved to be a success as well.

As an avid naval player, I was extremely happy to hear about Mare Nostrum. But in the end, I was utterly disappointed because navies are still close to completely optional and investing in one cannot be justified except in a few specific cases.

Worse, every patch seems to reduce their use:
  • They cannot block straits if the ennemy controls both sides anymore
  • A few patches ago, raising troops in subjects overseas was made possible
  • From this patch, it is now possible to recruit mercenaries on the other side of the world
If I'm not an island power, why do I need a navy? For the blockades? It clearly is not worth it.

You had an incredible occasion to give fleets some impact when you added siege pips to admirals (sieging coastal provinces) but you didn't. While you may have succeeded in balancing naval battles, you haven't given players a reason to build navies.

The DLC I had been waiting for since I started playing EU4 will be the first one I do not buy.

(By the way, as naval missions do not replace micro management but try to do it for the player (and naturally cannot do it as well as a human), I believe the concept is flawed.)
 
  • 35
  • 2
  • 1
Reactions:
Its possible that he sieged Constantinople, then Edirne could trap his army in since that ZoC takes over.

You should avoid sieging a province which has all adjacent provinces in ZoCs of other forts, because paradox clearly thoroughly tested this mechanic.
I owned Constantinople, and my army was in kirkellese (or something like that). I wanted to continue my way along the coast to Moldavia, but there were some guys with a leach launched from Edirne pinning my army down...
 
What I don't understand is that with so many great suggestions on the fora, corruption is the best they could come up with. I think this mechanic is awful to the point where I have stopped playing with this patch.

Please add an option at the start of the game to turn off Corruption. (While you're at it, please also add the same option for Development)
For single player, there is no reason not to let players play the way they like. For multiplayer, letting the group agree when they start the game is good enough.
I will not play with this mechanic, and it causes me to lose trust in your company to have unfun things shoved down my throat. If I want the fun sucked out of my life I'll go watch a DC movie.
 
  • 7
  • 4
Reactions:
Was sieged by an ally with more than enough men. I was stranded in that province for about 3 months. Only possible movements was to go to Edirne or Constantinople.
The part where there is no "sides" in the fort system, is what makes it non-sensical. Having an army in Coimbra not being able to move to Porto because there's a fort in Lisbon, is a joke. Just like is joke that 1000 heavies blocking a strait are non-existent if you own/occupy both sides of the strait.
PDX is filling the game with nonsense mechanics.
1)Not sure what happened there. Sounds like a bug. Pretty sure it one of those bugs that cannot be fixed without breaking the fort system...
2)So, you're saying fort only points one direction? Pretty sure it is square or circular...
3) You've made your opinion known
4) Yeah... it's not like those troops could take a couple of small fishing boats and sneak right past those 1000 heavies... besides, if you have 1000 heavies, you're already HUGE.
 
  • 5
  • 2
Reactions:
I owned Constantinople, and my army was in kirkellese (or something like that). I wanted to continue my way along the coast to Moldavia, but there were some guys with a leach launched from Edirne pinning my army down...
Then it is definetly doing it's job, you entered Zone of Control to from Constantinople, thus You now have two options: Go back to Constantinople, OR go to the Fort. Pretty sure this was stated on the dev diary about forts...
 
  • 6
  • 2
Reactions:
1)Not sure what happened there. Sounds like a bug. Pretty sure it one of those bugs that cannot be fixed without breaking the fort system...
2)So, you're saying fort only points one direction? Pretty sure it is square or circular...
3) You've made your opinion known
4) Yeah... it's not like those troops could take a couple of small fishing boats and sneak right past those 1000 heavies... besides, if you have 1000 heavies, you're already HUGE.
1. Not buggy. Just non-sensical.
2. Yeah. When an army is within sight of a fort, it can only move torwards it. Makes perfect sense...
4. Thanks for agreeing that there's no justification for a 100k army get through 1000 heavies just because they own/occupy both sides of the strait.
 
  • 9
  • 1
Reactions:
Then it is definetly doing it's job, you entered Zone of Control to from Constantinople, thus You now have two options: Go back to Constantinople, OR go to the Fort. Pretty sure this was stated on the dev diary about forts...
I didn't go there from Constantinople. And i know it WAD. The problem is that the design is non-sensical.
 
  • 3
  • 2
Reactions:
1. Not buggy. Just non-sensical.
2. Yeah. When an army is within sight of a fort, it can only move torwards it. Makes perfect sense...
4. Thanks for agreeing that there's no justification for a 100k army get through 1000 heavies just because they own/occupy both sides of the strait.
4.Umm.. pretty sure I was saying you CANNOT fully blockade a coastline, especially at night.
 
  • 1
Reactions:
My only gripe is that the "Slave Raids" should really work like privateering and can be stopped or limited by ships on patrol in each trade node

I'd prefer a CB or peace option to stop them from raiding.
Alternatively they could not raid my provinces when they want an alliance with me :(.
 
  • 1
Reactions: