EU4 Development Diary - 18th February 2016

[hashinshin]

Well if it makes you feel better Butua's NI set does reference these tactics so you can still have Shaka style armies No outright mention of the still unborn Zulu kingdom though.

Prussia of Africa? Do they get 10% discipline?

 

[TheDungen]

Mostly this will not work because most of africa is already under control of countrys. So unless you create a whole new concept for taking territory in africa this is not going to work.

Another idea i thinked is to give them increased War Score cost.
This way most provinces will cost a lot to take in a war. Enough to slow down wars to a crawl and making more profitable to just protectorade them and take the provinces one by one.

And by no means, while europeans did not taken direct control, they surely had indirect control of the region as they controled the flow of money and the demand of the most profitable resources.

+20% warscore cost and summer atrittion would already slow down europeans a lot.

But nothing can stop a player that wish to paint the world their color. I for instance don´t even care if the provincei s giving a profit or not. I conquer .

And africa today is already more profitable to just take the coast and centrailize the rest of africa in a big protectorade.




You need to buy religious or expansion fully to get nation wide CB there. Its already rare and also set your country for that route.

Spain and portugual get CB by colonizing close to those countrys and fabricating a claim, no way to change this without changing a key concept of the game.

A lot is not enough, in reality it outright prvented them from doing anything but set up a few tradeposts and then bicker over south africa. And yes while a dedicated player always finds a way it should be a non profitable vanity project and the AI should be smart enough not to do it.

How about adding colonial regions to Africa? Such as South Africa and Madagascar?

Atleast south africa should have them consdering it's still made up of colonial provinces. Madagascar... not sure I agree that would send the signal that the europeans are suposed to conquer that.

 

[glaivemaster]

The system I imagine for central Africa would borrow from Cursader Kings 2, where pagan attrition does a good job at stopping people from rampaging all over pagan holdings in the early game. Essentially, anyone who isn't African culture (or perhaps, doesn't accept African culture?) suffers a tremendous amount more attrition. This means that once you have an accepted African culture, you can use your African soldiers to push inland and conquer, but otherwise the cost is huge. Whether or not this would deter the AI is questionable, but it would certainly give the Africans a fighting chance nonetheless.

Obviously, another core issue is the tech groupings, that most colonisation and RotW problems boil down to. It's always questionable whether Europeans should have superior tech, or at least the ability to quickly surpass other nations in tech. The African problem probably wouldn't be a problem if the Europeans didn't significantly outclass them so quickly. But that's just too ingrained into EU4 at this stage, and so unlikely to get fixed.

 

[TheDungen]

The system I imagine for central Africa would borrow from Cursader Kings 2, where pagan attrition does a good job at stopping people from rampaging all over pagan holdings in the early game. Essentially, anyone who isn't African culture (or perhaps, doesn't accept African culture?) suffers a tremendous amount more attrition. This means that once you have an accepted African culture, you can use your African soldiers to push inland and conquer, but otherwise the cost is huge. Whether or not this would deter the AI is questionable, but it would certainly give the Africans a fighting chance nonetheless.

Obviously, another core issue is the tech groupings, that most colonisation and RotW problems boil down to. It's always questionable whether Europeans should have superior tech, or at least the ability to quickly surpass other nations in tech. The African problem probably wouldn't be a problem if the Europeans didn't significantly outclass them so quickly. But that's just too ingrained into EU4 at this stage, and so unlikely to get fixed.

Except you shouldn't be pushign inland for another 30 years when the end date is reached. without the steam engine and the maxim machine gun colonizing africa just wans't possible. perhaps if you're like the united leader of all europe and willing to let millions of oldiers die to do it. But otherwise just no, leave africa to be designed to be played in by africans not the anachronistic imperialism of europe.

 

[hashinshin]

As a serious question: What will stop countries on the horn of Africa from just conquering their way down there? 40% tech costs versus 65% is pretty significant and even the dumb AI will attack inferior heathen countries.

 

[Mengli Giray]

Perhaps that is how it should be, I could accept that at horrendrous losses a imperialist minded player could take perhaps one region in africa before the end of the game but quite frankly are do we really want them to open up africa to be conquered by europeans or do we do it to make the african nations, old and new, more intresting to play. Perhaps the fate of the world in EU4 is not to be conquered by europeans.

I wouldn't like every single game to end up in an partition of Africa, but I want it to be possible in a few scenarios. It's not like there weren't any examples of actual functioning colonies in Africa at this period. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Colonial_history_of_Angola

If Portugal could do it due to it's vital interest in the area, I'm sure other nations could do it as well, given the proper circunstances.

 

[TheDungen]

As a serious question: What will stop countries on the horn of Africa from just conquering their way down there? 40% tech costs versus 65% is pretty significant and even the dumb AI will attack inferior heathen countries.

Perhaps they, in a lesser extent than the europeans though, should also suffer heavy attrition for trying to do so.

 

[Pomeranian]

It would be cool if recruiting from African provinces of our culture now gave us black or arab/berber/whatever units in western uniform.

 

[TheDungen]

I wouldn't like every single game to end up in an partition of Africa, but I want it to be possible in a few scenarios. It's not like there weren't any examples of actual functioning colonies in Africa at this period. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Colonial_history_of_Angola

If Portugal could do it due to it's vital interest in the area, I'm sure other nations could do it as well, given the proper circunstances.

Those are a few cities and tradeposts at the direct coast. These are repsresented by protectorates. And yes as a vanity project to show of how insanely powerful one has become late game I could accept it. But it should be late game and an insane drain on resources to try to actually fight in africa away from the direct coast.

It would be cool if recruiting from African provinces of our culture now gave us black or arab/berber/whatever units in western uniform.

Isn't that kind of what protectorates are supposed to represent.

 

[Artess]

Seeing how resistant the West African countries against European power in my last game (well, I last played about a month ago, but I don't think the game has changed that drastically), I don't think Central African Countries will be easily crushed or colonized by European as most feared...

I think it's just random whether the AI decides if it wants it. In my game, Spain just took all of Mali and Jolof in two wars because they could.

IMO a better way to model it would be to make inland overseas territory worth even less than it is.

A player will still go for it just to paint the map, and the AI simply doesn't know when to stop once they get into a war.

Essentially, anyone who isn't African culture (or perhaps, doesn't accept African culture?) suffers a tremendous amount more attrition. This means that once you have an accepted African culture, you can use your African soldiers to push inland and conquer, but otherwise the cost is huge. Whether or not this would deter the AI is questionable, but it would certainly give the Africans a fighting chance nonetheless.

Walk into Africa -> lose all your manpower to attrition -> get utterly wrecked by France back at home and lose half of your country -> discouraged from colonialism in Africa until the end of the game.

 

[MarkS00N]

As a serious question: What will stop countries on the horn of Africa from just conquering their way down there? 40% tech costs versus 65% is pretty significant and even the dumb AI will attack inferior heathen countries.

If I am to guess, the uncolonized provinces between Central Africa and East Africa...
I rarely see AI attack countries they can't core and I've yet to see East African take Exploration or Expansion...

 

[Mengli Giray]

Those are a few cities and tradeposts at the direct coast. And yes as a vanity project to show of how insanely powerful one has become late game I could accept it. But it should be late game and an insane drain on resources to try to actually fight in africa away from the direct coast.


Isn't that kind of what protectorates are supposed to represent.

It's actually pretty well established by Portuguese Africa historians that Angola was in fact a functioning colony.

 

[Player 2]

I certainly hope not, the byzzies shouldn't even be in EU, it should start later the early era would be better handled by a dynastic game like ck. You have nation designer and the ability to export ck2 games of you want to play byzzies. Any more effort wasted on the byzzies is somethign I'd very much rather not see.
:

But why though? Byzantium fell to the Ottomans in 1453 and the start date for EU4 is 1444? Anyway the game is played for fun not a history sim and If you don't like Byzantium simply don't play it.
It wouldn't take that long to add the decision and it gives us another reason to play Byzantium to reform the empire

 

[Artess]

As a serious question: What will stop countries on the horn of Africa from just conquering their way down there? 40% tech costs versus 65% is pretty significant and even the dumb AI will attack inferior heathen countries.

They'd have to pick up Expansion or Exploration, which they don't usually tend to do.

 

[Sparticulous]

awesome improvements! Good to see Madagascar now has its own nations! Also good to see that as Kilwa, I can exploit more money for a trade empire!

 

[AlleyTheToaster]

btw, Paradox. I have a little problem That's my screen, I have pretty low resolution and I am afraid that new things in top bar will mess up my interface. Can you fix it already? Add something like... Button to hide that thing with your merchants and diplomants, ect? for example.

 

[TheDungen]

But why though? Byzantium fell to the Ottomans in 1453 and the start date for EU4 is 1444? Anyway the game is played for fun not a history sim and If you don't like Byzantium simply don't play it.
It wouldn't take that long to add the decision and it gives us another reason to play Byzantium to reform the empire

The start date is 1444 because people were complaining they couldn't play the byzzies if it was later like EU3. The game would work a lot better if it started in 1453 or even with the discovery of the new world, or the reformation. But sicne they only develop it for the first start date recently this whole let's place the first start date in 1444 becayse byzzies are affecting the whole game.

As for game versus historical simmulator, well fun for me is the historical aspect, trade, disease, failed harvests and so on, soldiers marching around is pretty meh and map painting is utterly boring, at least as soon as it becomes somethign that couldn't have happened in reality.

 

[Pomeranian]

one the Africans weren't so behind the Europeans in tech terms - they were behind, but not "we've never even seen horses or guns" behind like the new worlders.

From what I've read, the new worlders, especially in central America, would have still been miles ahead of the African civilisations in terms of administrative technology due to their understanding of mathematics and astronomy so it's a bit unfair to put the Mesoamericans so far behind the Africans. Also, I think one of the big issues with the African tech group (now groups) is how close they are to the Indians and Chinese (only 10 points lower than the Indians and equal to the Chinese).

 

[WilliamTheIII]

Colonizing will now become extremely easy in that area. Either colonize 1 province in that region and get your cbs or just no CB war that region and suddenly conquest in that region will become extremely easy. Either just take everything for yourself and pay the already cheap coring cost or just protectorate someone and feed them land and steal it from them as time goes on.

 

[Pomeranian]

Isn't that kind of what protectorates are supposed to represent.

Dunno but I think if we complete humanism ideas then we should be able to conscript all citizens under our direct control into our armies, which would include people who are racially different to the population in Europe.