• 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 - 1st of November 2016

Hi everyone, and welcome to another development diary for Europa Universalis IV. This time its rather meaty and is about major gameplay changes for the 1.19 patch.

While we were reasonably happy with how Fort and Zone of Control has played out since introduced over a year ago, it has had one major drawback. The rules have so many cases to keep track of that it was practically impossible to make all cases clear to the player. This causes much confusion amongst players, who also had an experience that was not as great as they had hoped while playing.

So now Zone of Control have changed completely. Instead of affecting a province and sometimes blocking passage in adjacent provinces, Zone of Control rules are now area based.

Areas = The same map division that States/Territories are organsied around. And which 1.19 will show thicker borders around.


A Forts is:
  • hostile if it is controlled by someone you are at war with.
  • friendly if it is controlled by you, or by someone on your side in any war, unless you are at war with them (should not happen).
  • neutral otherwise.


An area is:
  • friendly if it has at least one friendly fort and no hostile fort.
  • hostile if it has at least one hostile fort and no friendly fort.
  • contested if it has at least one hostile fort and at least one friendly fort.
  • neutral otherwise.

Zone of Control blocks an army to move between two adjacent provinces if they belong to different areas, one of which is hostile and the other being either hostile or contested.

(Note that movement within areas is never blocked by Zone of Control)

An occupied province without a fort will flip back to its owner's control if there is in the area at least one non-besieged fort controlled by him but no hostile forts.

To ensure an army can always reach the fort that is blocking it from moving and then come back after sieging it down, all armies can ignore Military Access in all non-neutral areas

Rebels never impact hostile rules, and yes, Capital Forts now work like all other forts.

In order to stop the enemy from reaching the interior of your country, you will often need to have one fort in every area.. Even without that though, forts can force the enemy to make detours unless they first siege down some forts.

While doing this, an average country ends up with more forts than before, so maintenance have been halved.

While doing these changes, we have tweaked the map dramatically, adding in lots of wastelands to give natural borders, and also made a big revision to the area setup, so now areas are pretty much all between 3-5 provinces, giving a more even balance.

eu4_131.png





We have added a new peace treaty as well in 1.19, called “End Rivalry”. This peace option force the enemy to remove one of their Rivals. The removed Rival cannot be added again until 15 years after removed.


We play the game quite a lot every week, and read far more on what issues you as players have. So we keep balancing and changing things to make for a greater player experience. In 1.19 we have some rather important changes to how you play the game.

Combat has been changed a bit as well in this patch, as we removed the combat width penalties from terrain, as it made battles last way too long, and was a double defensive bonus combined with diceroll penalties.

Sieging units will no longer get a rivercrossing penalty if a relieving force engages them, even if they did cross a river a few days, months or years earlier.

We have changed the chance to increase colonysize from colonist being placed to instead being a lower the bigger the colony becomes. Previously it was pretty much a no-brainer to keep it as long as possible, as it became better the bigger the colony is. Now íts more of a choice..

Another complaint was the fixed levels of liberty desire that got applied to vassals and marches as they grew past certain arbitrary limits. Now it is scaling by development of the subject so you can always judge impact of their growth.

For those of you that care about score, Great Powers are now likelier to be getting score each month, as they have a default +5 rating in each category. Also maintaining enough forts is now an impact on your military score gain.

Corruption is now not entirely 100% bad, as a country with 100 corruption will now get -20 unrest in their realm.

Courthouse & Town Halls no longer affect unrest but instead reduce state maintainance by 25% and 50% respectively, while their building costs have been halved.

The Casus Belli from Expansion and Exploration Ideagroups did not really work as great as before with the new technology system, so in 1.19 they are getting changed. The Casus Belli themselves are gone..

Exploration Finisher now allows you to fabricate claim on another continent that is in your capital in a colonial region. (Colonial Subjects can do it everywhere in a colonial region.)

Expansion Finisher now allows you to fabricate claims inside any trade company region that is on another continent than your capital. (Without Wealth of Nations, it is any overseas port not in a colonial region, and not in europe.)

At the same time, distance impact on building spy networks have been dropped to 1/10th of before.

For those of you that have Rights of Man, we are now adding even more things. In 1.19, Trade Goods will have a local impact. A Grain Province gives +0.5 Land Force Limit, Iron gives 20% Faster Building Construction & Ivory gives 20% cheaper state maintenance.

We have also improved the “trading in good” - bonus, where some are almost twice as powerful as before, and some have changed completely.

Next week we'll be back talking about all interface improvements for 1.19.
 
  • 239
  • 57
  • 26
Reactions:
Every increment of MIL tech should give +1% Siege Ability (possibly bunched up into bundles of 5% or something).

I'm tempted to say +2%/level, but that might be overkill.
i would agree that there should be some increase over time. between ideas and other factors, sieging in the mid to late game just takes way too long, especially with level 8 forts.
 
  • 4
Reactions:
Do forts work across ALL of the area, or just adjacent provinces?
Like, if I build my fort in one of the provinces on the border of an area and said area has a province that's not directly adjacent to said fort, will it still be protected due to being in the same area?
Because if not that is going to make a LOT of provinces to not be good candidates... D:


For those of you that care about score

LOL.
 
I used to care a little bit about score (since it had interactions with the diplomacy system). Now they've made the game concept of what constitutes a "Great Power" be a state function (based on your development and tech cost) instead of a path function, there is no reason to care.
 
Yes, you need a second line of forts. That's why maintenance is reduced :)
It's also why there will be a lot more placed forts in 1444.

The important number isn't how many forts you have. The important part is over how many areas your country is spread. Unless you have forts in all areas surrounding your capital area, your enemies can a) walk onto your capital and start sieging and b) stackwipe your army.

The latter is also made much easier, because you might as well stay home if the other guy can afford combat width armies and you don't.

This entire thing makes large countries easier and small countries harder to play. For me that appears to be a very dodgy design decision for a game that already favors size as much as EU4 does.
 
  • 2
Reactions:
Exploration Finisher now allows you to fabricate claim on another continent that is in your capital in a colonial region.
I'm not sure what this means, but it seems to be saying something along the lines of needing to move my capital to a colonial region in order to use the ability to fabricate claims there, which makes no sense.

I asked Johan and "Exploration Finisher now allows you to fabricate claims in colonial regions on different continents from your capital." seems a clearer explanation.
 
  • 18
  • 3
Reactions:
Overall the patch looks nice, great even, but I find changes to forts and combat width... concerning, to say the least. Now I understand why you're giving us BETA before the actual release, these changes require much broader testing. Particularly the new fort system doesn't sound too well thought out - as others have already mentioned, it doesn't aid small(one to two area) countries at all.

I know I shouldn't judge before playing myself but the way you wrote it indicates that you were primarily having in mind huge nations while designing the new ZoCs.

One of the stupidest thing is when you need to take some forts on useless islands that for some reason have very high level fort - you also need to micromanage and transport all those troups... Then to blockade...
I still have flashbacks from the last time I tried to take over the Spice Islands... oh, the horror!
 
  • 5
Reactions:
Unless you have forts in all areas surrounding your capital area, your enemies can a) walk onto your capital and start sieging and b) stackwipe your army.

The latter is also made much easier, because you might as well stay home if the other guy can afford combat width armies and you don't.

a)Which they could already do, unless your capital had no borders with others nations and was not coastal (assuming you built fort in neighboring provinces).

b)A big country would've destroyed a small country with or without the combat width change. And combat width only caused problems for the ai, players can just split stacks.
 
  • 2
Reactions:
For sure. Docks are completely worthless - I have never run across a single situation where I was even tempted to buy them. And I'm playing a Russia game right now where I'm competing with major naval powers without owning much more than St. Petersberg and the White Sea. Sailors simply are not an issue. If they repaired my ships faster, I'd at least build a couple.



I read it three times before posting that.

Just build one fort in every area.
 
  • 3
Reactions:
a)Which they could already do, unless your capital had no borders with others nations and was not coastal (assuming you built fort in neighboring provinces).

b)A big country would've destroyed a small country with or without the combat width change. And combat width only caused problems for the ai, players can just split stacks.

a)Unless they don't get military access, don't have access to the sea themselves or cannot afford the penalty for a naval landing.

b)That may be true in multiplayer. But it isn't in singleplayer.
 
  • 3
Reactions:
This looks like changes which should have been in the earlier patch. All around great changes, but why are they always an afterthought?
 
  • 2
  • 1
Reactions:
I asked Johan and "Exploration Finisher now allows you to fabricate claims in colonial regions on different continents from your capital." seems a clearer explanation.
Helpful clarification, but it's still an underwhelming finisher to an idea group called Exploration in the Age of Discovery.

It should give a free CB on any nation in the New World who is not and never was a CN.
 
  • 4
Reactions:
I asked this on Twitter, but never got a response. How does this make any sense? A corrupt government was far more likely to face unrest and rebellions.
For me it makes sense. Think about who have the power and who corrupt the government. Nationalists can corrupt the government to have some big advantages (like local autonomy) and then give unrest. Same for burghers: we (the government) let them doing some illegal stuff but ask for peace for the counterpart.
My real problem about corruption is more about how it is gained. Why does unbalanced tech increase corruption ?
 
  • 2
  • 1
Reactions:
With the increased amount of forts, are you worried ideas and traits that increase siege times will become "OP"?

Get the feeling of vanilla EU4 when you had to siege down every province.

Just a question if tweaking some of the military ideas, or lower the amount penalty a fort give to siege bonus. Or are you more satisfied with longer, more dragged out wars? A war against Ottomans in year 1750 and they have 20 lvl 8 forts might take the rest of the game to finish.

Personally not sure which one I prefer.
 
My real problem about corruption is more about how it is gained. Why does unbalanced tech increase corruption ?
I would think of it this way: The advance of a category of tech is not only better weapons or better government. It is a buff for an entire faction behind it. Think of dip tech which gives global settler increase, boosting colonies and navies, and military tech which obvious boosts the status of armies. If there is an unbalance in tech, you're essentially giving too much power to one faction in your country.
 
  • 2
Reactions:
With the increased amount of forts, are you worried ideas and traits that increase siege times will become "OP"?

Get the feeling of vanilla EU4 when you had to siege down every province.

Just a question if tweaking some of the military ideas, or lower the amount penalty a fort give to siege bonus. Or are you more satisfied with longer, more dragged out wars? A war against Ottomans in year 1750 and they have 20 lvl 8 forts might take the rest of the game to finish.

Personally not sure which one I prefer.

I'd like to see forts siege modifiers reduced overall since we will have more forts. This would work always for everyone in the world. There are still bonuses in Offensive idea group for those who want even faster sieges.
 
  • 1
Reactions:
Helpful clarification, but it's still an underwhelming finisher to an idea group called Exploration in the Age of Discovery.

It should give a free CB on any nation in the New World who is not and never was a CN.

This change has made Religious ideas a must pick for colonizers now. It's unfortunate.
 
  • 4
Reactions:
No changes to countries still not maintaining their events once Scandinavia is formed?

Not currently but I'd like to look at that in the future :)
For Denmark many of the early ones relate to the union so those at least wouldn't really make sense...
 
  • 5
Reactions: