• 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 - 22th of September

Hey everyone! Today is the last day of us talking about the native americans and the rework they are getting. We’ll be talking about the changes to the Federations and the new world setup. As you’ll see on the pictures for the map, a lot of tags have been split up in order to represent federations properly. A prime example is the Iroquois who will now be several tags and start in a federation at game start.

So let’s start with how to form them. Since we are splitting up the federal tags like the Huron and Iroquois I still wanted to retain some kind of identity for them. As such when you invite the first member to form a federation with you, you get the opportunity to also name the Federation. There are some default options scripted that can be based on Tags and Cultures which it will suggest for you, but you can of course just write whatever you want here.

1600776828277.png


We’ve also redone how leadership of the federation is decided. It is no longer decided on the death of the monarch of the leader in the tribe, instead we measure a cohesion value of the Federation. This value changes each month depending on the composition of the Federation but also some external factors. Keep in mind that any numbers & values are work in progress!

1600778713850.png


If cohesion hits 0% then it will trigger a change in leadership. In order to keep the cohesion high you want to keep similar cultures within your federation, however having one or two of a separate culture group won’t really be problematic. Another source of loss of cohesion is also if there are members that are stronger than the leader. For later in the game to help you keep a large federation together, if you have any colonizers on your border it will help you keep it together by having an external threat increasing your cohesion.

If a leadership change is triggered it will try to pick the strongest member to be the new leader, if the leader is the strongest then the federation will be disbanded. This entire process is 100% done in script, from calculation of members strength to what happens during leadership change. Currently for testing the strength is calculated from the max manpower of members and is done as a scripted function with an effect and looks like this:

Code:
calculate_federation_member_strength = {
    effect = {
        export_to_variable = { which = our_manpower value = max_manpower who = THIS }
        set_variable = { which = federation_strength which = our_manpower }

    }
}

Here’s the current list of values that affect your cohesion
  • -1 For every member not of leaders culture group
  • +1 For every member of leaders culture group
  • -1 For every member stronger than the leader
  • +1 for neighboring hostile Europeans

The aim here is to make Federations more something you can count on, instead of having to try and keep your prestige high or stack diplomatic reputation at all times just in case your leader at some random point dies, you can now count on it instead and try to plan around what you need to do in order to keep the leadership position.


Now I’m going to hand it over to a member of our beta program. @Evie HJ who have done the excellent work of reforming North America’s setup making it a much more vibrant and interesting place.

It's a whole (new) New World we live in

The setup for North America hasn’t really changed much at all since the release of Art of War, almost ix years ago – and, as far as the list of playable countries is concerned, since Conquest of Paradise even earlier. The new changes to the Native game mechanics in this patch provided a perfect opportunity to take a new look at a region that has remained largely untouched for a long time.

In some ways, this overhaul is our most ambitious review of the North American setup to date. The province count does fall short of Art of War (though fifty-three new provinces, not counting wastelands, is nothing to sneeze at), but the list of new tags is more than we ever added to North America at any single time. In fact, with fifty-six new tags, we’re adding more North American tags in this one overhaul than we have in the entire history of the Europa Universalis franchise.

Those tags are not evenly spread out across the continent. Two regions (the South-East United States and the Great Lakes and Saint Lawrence) get the lion’s share of the tags. Others like the Great Plains or Hudson Bay, get a handful of provinces or tags. The West Coast, for its part, where we know almost nothing of Indigenous people before the last century or so of the game, was entirely outside the scope of this overhaul. This applies to the provinces as well as the tags: in broad terms, we tried to add provinces in the same general region we were adding tags, to keep the amount of empty (or tribal land) provinces roughly similar.

With twenty-one new tags, it is the South-East United States that receive the most work in this new overhaul. The reason is simple: up until now, the 1444 setup in the game represented the historical situation around 1600-1650. The first 150 years of the game – a time when the last great cities of the Mississippian civilizations flourished in the region (the more northern city, like Cahokia, were likely abandoned by 1444)– were left out entirely. This was the first thing we set out to fix, and the new setup, as a result, emphasize the situation that early European explorers and archaeologists tell us about – not English colonists two centuries later. By and large, most of those new tags are settled nations, and (except the Cherokee) all belong to the Muskogean culture group. This is a compromise for some of them: while they spoke Siouan languages like Catawba, they were heavily influenced by the Southern Appalachian Mississippian culture, and it’s those cultural ties we chose to emphasize.

1600773970686.png


In the new setup, the Creek Confederacy is no longer available at game start, and the Cherokee are reduced to a one-province statelet in the mountains. In their stead, the Coosa Paramount Chiefdom is now the major power of the region. Though a one-province nation in itself, it rules through a network of subject states (Satapo, an area stretching from the Kentucky border to Alabama along the spine of the Appalachians. Surrounding it are a number of smaller, independent chiefdoms, including both sites visited by the De Soto expedition (Altamaha, Cofitachequi, Joara, Ichisi, Chisca, as well as Atahachi, the future home of Chief Tuscaloosa) and of Muskogean towns that would eventually form the seeds of the future Creek Confederacy, like Coweta and Kasihta. Further west, in the valleys of the Mississippi, they are joined not only by more of the chiefdoms documented by De Soto, (Quizquiz, Anilco, Pacaha and Casqui, the last three corresponding to the Menard-Hodges, Nodena and Parkin Mound archaeological sites), but also by the Natchez people, who would, in later century, become the last tribe to embrace Mississippian culture.

Further north, our other focus region was the Great Lakes of North America. Here, the main concern was nothing to do with our setup representing the wrong date (except along the Saint Lawrence, where the Iroquoians of the sixteenth century were mysteriously missing), and everything to do with the fact that the two most famous (con)federations of natives, the Hurons and Iroquois, were represented as monolithic nations with no use for the in-game Federation mechanism. Once it was decided to represent each of the nations making up those two confederations independently, adding in the other relevant nations in the region was an obvious choice. As with the United States South-East, these are largely settled nations of Iroquoian cultures, although a handful of them are migratory instead.

1600773986832.png


This gives us a sizeable five new nations where the one Iroquois tag used to be: Mohawk, Oneida, Onondaga, Cayuga and Seneca (plus, starting much further south at game start but not forgotten, the Tuscarora). Opposing them are the less well-known member nations of the Huron Confederacy: Tahontaenrat, Arendaronon, Attignawantan and Attigneenongnahac. In addition to them, we have a selection of minor Iroquoian nations that can struggle to strike the right balance to remain neutral between these two powerful Confederacies. This notably include the aptly named Neutral Nation (Attiwandaron), as well as the Tionontate (or Tobacco Indians), the Wenro of far western New York, and the Erie of Northwest Pennsylvania (plus the already existing Susquehannock). As the last two (Erie, Susquehannock) represent nations that claimed large territory but with very little united government, they are represented as migratory nations. You can think of the migration as representing shifting balance of power among the different villages and groups of their respective nations, rather than actual physical relocation. Also represented as migratory are the first two Iroquoian nations ever encountered by European: Stadacona, on the site of present day Quebec City, and Osheaga (Hochelaga), in present Montreal. In their case, leaving them migratory was the simplest way to enable them to potentially vanish from the Saint Lawrence lowlands, as they did in the late sixteenth century.

Our changes didn’t stop at those new areas, though they received the bulk of the changes. Existing tags that represented larger confederations or culture group were split into (some of) their constituent parts: the Illinois are now represented by the Kaskaskia, Cahokia and Peoria, the Shawnee by Chalahgawtha, Kispoko and Hathawekela, and the Puebloan people expanded from Keres and Pueblo to Acoma, Zia, Ohkay Owingeh and Sandiat. In a similar vein, some particularly large groups that used to be represented by a single tag now have additional tags to represent them: this is the case of the Cree, with the addition of the Nehiyaw (Plains Cree) nation, the Ojibwe, who are now additionally represented by the Mississage for their easternmost group and the Nakawe (or Saulteaux) for their western bands, and the Sioux, now expanded to include the Wichiyena (Western Dakota) and Lakota nations. Historical confederations that were lacking some of their members or needing a boost also gained it: the Iron Confederacy gained the Nehiyaw and Nakawe, described above; the Three Fires now add the Mississage to their alliance, and the Wabanaki Confederacy of North-East North America can now count on the help of the Maliseet and Penobscot as well as the pre-existing Abenaki. Finally, three more tags are added on sheer account of their historical importance in the Colonial era, two as allies of New France, one as ally-turned-enemy of New England: the Algonquin of the Ottawa valley, the Innu of the Gulf of Saint Lawrence, and the Wampanoag of Massachusetts Bay.

1600774009748.png


Along with all these changes, we finally introduced Wasteland mountain ranges to North America. Not in the Rockies (where the handful of connections already represent major passes through the mountains), but rather, in the East, along the Appalachian mountains. While they may not seem like much today, they were formidable obstacle to westward expansion in colonial time, when it was said that there were only five paths from the East Coast westward that could be taken by large groups of people: around the mountains to the south in the Piedmont of Georgia, through the Cumberland gap on the border of Virginia and Tennessee, through the Cumberland Narrows of western Maryland, the Allegheny gaps of Pennsylvania, and finally through the valley of the Mohawk river, in New York. In addition, through it didn’t allow for east-west travel per se, the Great Valley of the Appalachians was another significant route through the region, running from Alabama to Pennsylvania. All of them are now represented in the game, along with the mountains that bordered them.

We also tried to adopt a somewhat consistent standard in the naming of provinces, and revise province names accordingly. The new standard prefers the self-given names of a Native group (tribe, nation, band…) who lived in the region where we can find one. If none can be found, other options include a name given to a local people by a neighboring tribe (provided it’s not derogatory), or a geographic name in a local Native language. In all cases, we now tend to favor native spelling where we are able to find it, though symbols that are particularly unusual in the standard Latin Alphabet may be set aside or approximated for our players’ benefit.


That’s it for today, as usual I’ll answer questions in the thread however there’s one I want to address yet again as it keeps getting asked and I can’t answer every single time it gets asked. People have asked if these features will be applied to South America or the Siberian Natives etc. It all depends on time, the main focus is to rework the North Americans and if I have time I will make sure it plays nice with others that can also benefit but it is not a priority. Next week will have it’s development diary written by Johan.
 
  • 153Like
  • 70Love
  • 9
  • 9
  • 9
Reactions:
So... South America, which is the least updated, the least historical and the most boring place to play, will not be receiving an update, while North America will receive everything for this part of the update?
This is just ridiculous at this point. You reworked federations, but with this rework they aren't viable in South America, because you refuse to update the number of tags in there. Even though there were numerous indigenous tribes and even some that managed to fight back the portuguese, like the Tamoyo. Also, just like the Appalachians were troublesome in NA, the Serra do Mar was quite troublesome for early settlers in the south/southeast of Brazil.
Good work on ignoring tribal SA, not that I'm actually surprised at this point, but good work on the favoritism, I guess.

To be clear, the north americans was a passion project I mainly worked on using my own free time. And @Evie HJ who did the setup is not employed by paradox and also spent their free time working on this. There's only so much we can do using that. It's fair criticism including as others said about totemism & flavor like mission trees and events, but I only have so many hours in a day.
 
  • 22
  • 11Like
  • 7Love
  • 2
  • 1
Reactions:
Europeans handled colonialism in a few different ways, which means it's kind of hard to imagine a one-size-fits-all solution. It makes sense for English colonies to culture convert etc, but If Latin American colonies converted culture and not just religion for the most part you'd end up with weird ahistorical outcomes, like Mayans or Nahuatl no longer existing at all despite there being huge numbers of them to this day.

On this note, native treatment policies are already included into the game, maybe they could add modifiers to them dealing with faster cultural/religious conversion and making the ai more/less likely to convert based on the one chosen. It would be a cool way to add some importance to those buttons and it would represent the different approaches towards the natives.
 
  • 3
  • 1Like
Reactions:
To be clear, the north americans was a passion project I mainly worked on using my own free time. And @Evie HJ who did the setup is not employed by paradox and also spent their free time working on this. There's only so much we can do using that. It's fair criticism including as others said about totemism & flavor like mission trees and events, but I only have so many hours in a day.
I mean, I understand that you, as a developer, can only do so much in a set period of time, but we gotta admit that overhauling an entire region of natives while ignoring another that is extremely similar (gameplaywise), is going to leave a sour taste to many people, especialy since there are threads asking for, and sugesting updates in SA dating as far as late 2018 (almost 2 years at this point).
While it's ultimately the developers decision, the way the decision was conveyed to ignore SA will make people bitter about the situation. I honestly think it would have been better to make two small updates, one for SEA and another for the americas, or take some more time and include SA in this update as well.
 
  • 4
  • 4
Reactions:
To be clear, the north americans was a passion project I mainly worked on using my own free time. And @Evie HJ who did the setup is not employed by paradox and also spent their free time working on this. There's only so much we can do using that. It's fair criticism including as others said about totemism & flavor like mission trees and events, but I only have so many hours in a day.
dear Groogy, dear evie - Thank you for pointing that out. As I was writing my concerns I did not know that - now it is in a whole different light. Thank you both for your passion for this game we all love. My concerns also just had the best thoughts for our beloved game in mind.
 
  • 6Like
Reactions:
I like reading the threads for dev diaries without necessarily posting in them and I have to say that everyone here wants something different and they want it soon.

Before these dev diaries began, everyone was demanding the Americas and South-East Asia. Now that the developers decided to hit 2 birds with 1 stone people are demanding South and Central America because it is not covered. Obviously the devs can only do so much at the same time.

I understand peoples' exasperation but I think many here need to take a bit of a break and understand that the devs don't have six arms to work with like some hindu deity.
 
  • 4
  • 2Like
  • 1
Reactions:
I like reading the threads for dev diaries without necessarily posting in them and I have to say that everyone here wants something different and they want it soon.

Before these dev diaries began, everyone was demanding the Americas and South-East Asia. Now that the developers decided to hit 2 birds with 1 stone people are demanding South and Central America because it is not covered. Obviously the devs can only do so much at the same time.

I understand peoples' exasperation but I think many here need to take a bit of a break and understand that the devs don't have six arms to work with like some hindu deity.

Agree. The devs can only focus on one or two places at a time. Central America and South-east Asian where requested aloth. So it would be unfair to start demanding South America or some other place that needs more love from the devs. Thats the same as a child who demands candy and when you give it candy it starts to demand ice cream.
 
  • 5
  • 1Like
  • 1
Reactions:
Can we expect to see Colonial regions reworked to provide more competition among Europeans? Alaska and Cascadia should represent separate colonial regions with missions for Russian colonization. More missions to colonize certain areas would be welcome. It's rare to see the French colonize Canada or Russia to colonize Alaska before Spain gets there.

I'd love to see a rework of the Bering Strait area and trade node.
 
Last edited:
  • 3Like
  • 1
Reactions:
@Groogy @Evie HJ

I understand that the Rockies looks already good, but their outline shape is very 2013. You should probably at least cut it into severvals wastelands to help us in coloring "owned" wasteland.

Overall I was pleasantly surprised by this development diary!
 
  • 3Like
  • 1
Reactions:
To be clear, the north americans was a passion project I mainly worked on using my own free time. And @Evie HJ who did the setup is not employed by paradox and also spent their free time working on this. There's only so much we can do using that. It's fair criticism including as others said about totemism & flavor like mission trees and events, but I only have so many hours in a day.
I see, that's unfortunate but understandable.
Sucks to be us then, I guess.

Hopefully that's something to be thought about in the future, even if it's a small part in a patch focusing elsewhere.
What I really wouldn't want to see is EU4 finishing its development cycle and PDX moving on to an EU5 leaving SA as the single worst region in the world with the least work put into by far.
 
  • 4
Reactions:
I haven't played any NA tribes so far. Is there an event that takes place after NA is 'discovered' by europe that kills off 75% of all of the america's population simulating the exposure to european disease?
There is certainly not "nothing" like some others here have said. There a couple of events that give lasting modifiers, "Rapid collapse of society" gives +33% all power cost, -10% discipline, - 20% morale. Lasts for 25 years after the first european disease events. Other events include smallpox outbreaks which gives -25% tax, -25% manpower, -0,25 local goods produced, -3 unrest, +0,05 monthly autonomy to the affected provinces. I think there are some other events aswell, although some are tag-specific (Aztecs have some unique ones at least). So while not reducing the development directly, it does greatly weaken the natives for some time after the first europeans arrive, making them very vulnurable. AI colonisers are usually too stupid to exploit this though, so for a player playing a native nation you can usually wait out the bad modifiers and recover.
 
  • 2
  • 1
Reactions:
@Groogy : suggestion for how federations should work. (My main knowledge comes form having done a slide show presentation on the Iroquois in AP World History and having read The Years of Rice and Salt, so take this with a grain of salt, no pun intended). Replace that slot where native ideas used to be with 'reforms', like in the HRE. At basic level federations function as they do currently; then you start adding in more cohesion. Tier 1 you can call them in as offensive allies, tier 2 each member transfers 10% tax, .5 prestige, % .5 forcelimit to leader or something, tier 3 they become the leader's vassals, tier 4 the leader annexes the others. You could also make it so that at lower tiers every single nation gets buffs that go away as tier increases, like prestige, diplo rep, dev cost, trade efficiency, morale, etc, to represent how the people of each nation view themselves as part of something greater than themselves. This would create a dynamic were it's not always the optimal strategy to max out centralization and create replayability depending on what you want to do. To change tier up or down the leader has to convince all the other members to vote their way, with stronger members obviously being less inclined to centralize (I remember reading somewhere that the Iroquois council required unanimity to pass major resolutions, though I could be wrong.)
Major IRL confederacies, such as the Huron, Iroqoius, Creek, ETC, could have their own formable tags with special ideas if you manage to unite them.
As pointed out before, it's a good idea to fill the place of the former "native advancements" in with something and putting something there that would represent the unification of federations into one tag would be quite fitting.

I'd suggest then, however, to not tie federations to the native council government type anymore, but to religion or culture (like tributaries are tied to east-asia...), so federations won't be lost upon "reforming government". (The first one to reform government will, however, likely grow stronger and thus be more likely to unify the federation.)

For effects I'd suggest to have a combination of things that make the leader stronger and that make the members stronger. (And please keep it within the realms of plausibility.) I also think, the old advancements can be re-used for the names and the art. So e.g. we would have 3 federation reforms:
  1. Law of Peace (or tribal constitution): +1 monthly federation cohesion, +x government reform progress for all members
  2. Federal Pow-Wow (or Smoke Ceremonies or Sun Dance or Patlatch or...): leader gets +1 dip rep, all members get +x tribal development growth
  3. Midewiwin (or medicine societies): all members get +5% infantry combat ability
  4. (any more ideas?)
I think the previous suggestion in this thread to use "federation cohesion" as a cost for enacting the federal reforms would be most appropriate, so e.g. each reform could cost 50 cohesion. Once all reforms are embraced and federation cohesion is 100, the leader can consolidate the federation into one tag. Probably it's best to just keep the reform effects afterwards as this would be consistent to the mesoamerican religions (and there will not be a general overhaul of these systems in this update).


PS: unrelated to this, but concerning the federation cohesion. It seems there are many (+)modifiers but only 1 single (-)modifier. So what about having -1 monthly cohesion for every member that has an external ally who is a rival of another member of the federation? So say A and B are members of the same federation. Z is not. A allies Z while Z happens to be the rival of B. Gives -1 conhesion. Maybe?
 
  • 2
  • 1Like
Reactions:
While I agree that gameplay supersedes historical nitpick, I would argue that colonies "not looking like garbage" is not really a gameplay concern (it doesn't actually affect what the colony is or what it does in the game, ie, actual game mechanics) so much as an aesthetic one.

And to me at least, history trumps aesthetics/border gore.
A lot of people really care about
As pointed out before, it's a good idea to fill the place of the former "native advancements" in with something and putting something there that would represent the unification of federations into one tag would be quite fitting.

I'd suggest then, however, to not tie federations to the native council government type anymore, but to religion or culture (like tributaries are tied to east-asia...), so federations won't be lost upon "reforming government". (The first one to reform government will, however, likely grow stronger and thus be more likely to unify the federation.)

For effects I'd suggest to have a combination of things that make the leader stronger and that make the members stronger. (And please keep it within the realms of plausibility.) I also think, the old advancements can be re-used for the names and the art. So e.g. we would have 3 federation reforms:
  1. Law of Peace (or tribal constitution): +1 monthly federation cohesion, +x government reform progress for all members
  2. Federal Pow-Wow (or Smoke Ceremonies or Sun Dance or Patlatch or...): leader gets +1 dip rep, all members get +x tribal development growth
  3. Midewiwin (or medicine societies): all members get +5% infantry combat ability
  4. (any more ideas?)
I think the previous suggestion in this thread to use "federation cohesion" as a cost for enacting the federal reforms would be most appropriate, so e.g. each reform could cost 50 cohesion. Once all reforms are embraced and federation cohesion is 100, the leader can consolidate the federation into one tag. Probably it's best to just keep the reform effects afterwards as this would be consistent to the mesoamerican religions (and there will not be a general overhaul of these systems in this update).


PS: unrelated to this, but concerning the federation cohesion. It seems there are many (+)modifiers but only 1 single (-)modifier. So what about having -1 monthly cohesion for every member that has an external ally who is a rival of another member of the federation? So say A and B are members of the same federation. Z is not. A allies Z while Z happens to be the rival of B. Gives -1 conhesion. Maybe?
i still like my proposal better but I agree that federations should be kept when reforming government and that there should be more negative modifiers.
 
Wait a second.
Are you telling us that at the moment there is no dedicated team for the development of Eu4?
The programmers who made 1.30 Austria patch where they went? I'm starting to think that you guys do not have dedicated teams for your games, but around a dozen of programmers who you move around the games when there is a need.
If this is the case then this is utterly outrageous!
You are not a small indie company, you are a collosus of grand strategy games, without even a worthwhile competitor! You are supposed to have dedicated programmers for your games to develop them and fix any kind of bugs. But of course, as we have seen already with the release of 1.30 and that still -3 MONTHS LATER- the bugs and typos are not yet fixed, then yes I truly believe that there is no dedicated team of programmers.

Why not having a dedicated team of programmers for each game is a big issue?
Let me explain. Have you ever tried to continue a project that you have stopped working on it for a few months? I have, and its very confusing and you have no idea how to proceed or what were you supposed to do. That's why is bad to not have dedicated teams of programmers, 'cause they forget what they were doing when they developed a DLC for Eu4 and then they were moved to lets say HOI4 for the development of a brand new DLC.

Lastly, no Groogy I am not feeling grateful that you used your free time, neither that there is a person that's helping you without getting paid. I would feel grateful if I knew that there is team, right now, that tries to fix and develop the game.
Knowing that the game is abandoned and the only person who still care for it is you, AND only during your spare time, no I am not grateful. I am not grateful at all.
A: there’s a difference between content design and programming.
B: groogy did the North Americans on his free time from doing other eu4 content at all.
C: just because this content was done in free time doesn’t mean that no one else is working on it. It just means that they are working on other stuff that the company decided is more important and they told groogy that he had to do this in free time if he wanted to do it.
 
  • 7
  • 2
Reactions:
Wait a second.
Are you telling us that at the moment there is no dedicated team for the development of Eu4?
The programmers who made 1.30 Austria patch where they went? I'm starting to think that you guys do not have dedicated teams for your games, but around a dozen of programmers who you move around the games when there is a need.
If this is the case then this is utterly outrageous!
You are not a small indie company, you are a collosus of grand strategy games, without even a worthwhile competitor! You are supposed to have dedicated programmers for your games to develop them and fix any kind of bugs. But of course, as we have seen already with the release of 1.30 and that still -3 MONTHS LATER- the bugs and typos are not yet fixed, then yes I truly believe that there is no dedicated team of programmers.

Why not having a dedicated team of programmers for each game is a big issue?
Let me explain. Have you ever tried to continue a project that you have stopped working on it for a few months? I have, and its very confusing and you have no idea how to proceed or what were you supposed to do. That's why is bad to not have dedicated teams of programmers, 'cause they forget what they were doing when they developed a DLC for Eu4 and then they were moved to lets say HOI4 for the development of a brand new DLC.

Lastly, no Groogy I am not feeling grateful that you used your free time, neither that there is a person that's helping you without getting paid. I would feel grateful if I knew that there is team, right now, that tries to fix and develop the game.
Knowing that the game is abandoned and the only person who still care for it is you, AND only during your spare time, no I am not grateful. I am not grateful at all.
Just want to add, in addition to what Eruth said above, that you are misunderstanding what Groogy said.

Southeast Asia is the primary focus on the development team, that is the big area that they are working on with this content update, which is why it’s extensive and has meatier content attached to it.

Groogy works on the SEA content at work, goes home from work, and then spends his free time working on this content related to North America with assistance from Evie HJ because he has a passion for it. He’s doing it because he wants to, not because he’d get paid for it. However, because it is not necessarily being done during work hours, and there only so many hours during a day where he is not at work, sleeping, or otherwise living his life, the changes and additions to NA, while much appreciated! are not going to be as in-depth at this time as the primary focus of SEA.

Absolutely nowhere in his post did he imply that there is no development team working on EU4. That’s silly, and even right now Paradox is in the process of setting up a new studio in Barcelona that is going to take point on all EU4 content moving forward. The game has not been abandoned, and obviously more than Groogy is working on it, again evidenced by all the SEA content we learned about prior to this.

On a separate note, considering this is a passion project being done on off-hours, there’s technically nothing stopping Groogy and Evie from continuing to work on this after this content update drops and expand on it even more with the next content update, including suggestions here such as expanding Florida with provinces and tribes, adding the Nootka, redefining the Rockies wasteland, expanding South America (which again, once the Barcelona studio is set up and they have developers on hand that speak Spanish [and possibly Portuguese], the ability to expand SA grows drastically now that the more-numerous and -detailed Spanish [and possibly Portuguese] sources can be utilized), etc. etc.

Just because what we see now is all we see now, doesn’t mean what we see now is all we’ll ever see. I believe Groogy also mentioned in one of the last two dev diaries that another developer currently is doing the same thing but with Australia as their passion project, so we could see similar updates and developments in that area soon too, though most likely not with this content update.
 
  • 7Like
  • 4
  • 1
Reactions:
There is no reason to worry, EU4 is maintained by the studio Paradox Tinto, me wanting to do a thing because I want to versus it being a planned thing are two different things you shouldn't conflate.
 
  • 13Like
  • 9
  • 1
Reactions:
AS for the people asking about Native religion. It is my strong opinion that they do not implement a new religious system. Maybe rename it. But adding mechanics in this game that misrepresent some or all native american tribes religious beliefs could be culturally detrimental to surviving native americans because people take info from this game and apply it as if it was real knowledge. The only way to properly do it would be to flesh out each tribes religion and categorize them from there into about half a dozen different non-related faiths or nominally related faiths.

I know what you're thinking. No that isn't plausible. Historically it would make sense as much as buddhism/hinduism in south asia, but I don't think you will find many reliable and willing sources of information about Sacred native american religoius practices to categorize each tribe with. I would have to speak to my elders before I participated in trying to represent my own tribes religious beliefs and practices into a videogame that could be the sole introduction of potentially millions of people to my tribe's beliefs... There is a reason you can basically not find much of anything about actual native american religious practices online. They aren't esoteric practices of a bygone era, they are still alive and being closely guarded as a part of a cultural heritage that is and has been under assault for centuries.

None of this is to say that totemism is a good system to represent all tribes. It certainly doesn't represent my tribe, and I'll leave it at that. You'd have to go digging into some specialty research books from the 1940s to get a glimpse of our religious practices and even those were guarded and nonspecific, but it is nothing like totemism, I'll say that much. I don't like to talk about my religion online because of cursory similarities to a marvel franchise through sheer coincidence of names. Best to leave the broken cart as it is unless you can dedicate a large ammount of research and effort into fixing it...

Just add a few mechanics to totemism involving choosing a Totem spirit to represent your chiefs or your tribes personality/policy style or something. Just be wary of what animals represent what effects, as this varies from tribe to tribe. There are some commonalities though, such as Coyotes being tricksters.. I'm not really too sure about other tribes feelings on other animals compared to my own though, but I have discussed Coyote with a comanche and a ponca and a cherokee three vastly disparate groups from Osage and all said he was a trickster..

EDIT: (The buddhism hindusm comment was referring to the fact that most native american relgious traditions will have some commonalities with others, across a spectrum much like how Hinduism and Buddhism have lots of commonalities despite being very different and having different versions of each that are more or less popular throughout whichever region you might survey. Same "spirits" but different interpretations of those spirits. A good metaphor for why Totemism is actually not a completely bad title for the general native american religious traditions in the limited scope of this videogame... Not altogether dissimilar. )
 
Last edited:
  • 3Like
  • 2
  • 1
Reactions:
AS for the people asking about Native religion. It is my strong opinion that they do not implement a new religious system. Maybe rename it. But adding mechanics in this game that misrepresent some or all native american tribes religious beliefs could be culturally detrimental to surviving native americans because people take info from this game and apply it as if it was real knowledge. The only way to properly do it would be to flesh out each tribes religion and categorize them from there into about half a dozen different non-related faiths or nominally related faiths.
...
Y'see, now I want a mod that
a) Changes the Totemist religion to give additional bonuses based on the culture-group of the nation and
b) Replaces all the different branches of Christianity with a single "Christian" religion, ditto for Islam, and then puts those two religions in a new "Abrahamic" group.

Just for a change of pace.
 
  • 4Like
  • 3Haha
  • 1
Reactions:
I really want to believe what you say, but I have to ask two things.
1. How do you know?
2. What about the bugs from the release of 1.30?
In every single one of NeonTD's dev diaries for South-East Eurasia he specifically said, "Stop asking me about the bugs from 1.3; I am a content designer, not a programmer. The programming team is working on it. I have nothing to do with it," or other things along those lines. If you read a lot of dev diaries you learn a lot.
EDIT: Also, to the point in your OP: 1.3 dropped immediately before Sweden's long summer break, which is why it took so long for them to get back to fixing the bugs.
 
  • 7
  • 1Like
  • 1
  • 1
Reactions:
I saw a couple people mention it before, but I still didn't see a response to the question of whether CN AI is going to be changed to culturally or religiously convert their provinces. I know there were significant native minorities in certain areas throughout eu4's timeframe (and even to today), but portraying all of Mexico as Nahuatl and all of Peru as Inti and random provinces on the east coast as predominantly "totemist" and native culture just because they were conquered by a CN (instead of historically being pushed westwards) does not sit right with me.
 
  • 4
  • 1
Reactions: