EU4 - Development Diary - 31st March 2016

[Martin_Mortyry]

The required provinces are all sea zones, and thus unownable

What about Britain? It is, after all, the country that rules the seas!

 

[DKM]

Does Rome have its own ideas?

I imagine they would have the same ideas as they do when you restore Rome in CK2 and convert the game.

 

[RobRoy3]

...requiring Christianity or Paganism and ownership of the regions of Italy, France, Iberia, Balkans, Anatolia, Mashriq as well as certain key provinces...

Mashriq?!

Regardless of whether one likes or dislikes this change, I hope you mean just the Syrian portion of the Mashriq region. Including the Mesopotamia portion of the Mashriq region would make zero sense.

Or does this region get modified in the DLC?

 

[grommile]

Regardless of whether one likes or dislikes this change, I hope you mean just the Syrian portion of the Mashriq region. Including the Mesopotamia portion of the Mashriq region would make zero sense.

Er, there was a Roman province of Mesopotamia, y'know.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mesopotamia_(Roman_province)

 

[bbqftw]

Those Desmond ideas are really really good, its a pity the set is so back-loaded.

 

[Promanco]

Roman Religion, or Religion Romana, was completely a different religion from the hellenic one. The fact that in the game exist only "hellenism" for all the classical south european paganisms don't mean that the Romans adopted the greek religion in every moment of their history. The two religions are pretty similar AND the Greeks called the Roman gods with Greek name and vice-versa but were two totally different religions.

Right because changing the names of the Gods and changing minuscule irrelevant details in the stories makes for a completely different Religion
Make it two religions with the exact same Bonuses and exact same Gods just different names and perhaps one or two minor tweaks lol
(I am not being serious, I want a single religion call it Hellenism or Romanism I don't care altho Hellenism has a stronger cultural implication that casual players would be able to identify with more)

 

[Blindbohemian]

we have added one of the longest requested formable nations: The Roman Empire.

Oh for heaven's sake.

 

[Axe99]

Cheers for the DD Dancing Jake . Some quality punnage in those achievement titles, Sailor Mon being my favourite, but that's probably because I like the Jamaican accent. Looking forward to giving Mare Nostrum a whirl . I'm not sure what I think about a formable Roman Empire (bits of my brain say "interesting", other bits say "not entirely sure that's terribly plausible"), but I suspect it's something a player would only ever do, so what I think doesn't really matter, I can do or not do depending on which side my brain ends up!

 

[qwertzuiop]

Hmm in my opinion, adding the Roman Empire to the game could still be regarded as an alternate history thing, but adopting the Roman culture is nothing but pure fantasy content. During the renaissance era, when academics used to give themselves fancy Latin nicknames and talked about restoring antiquity, did they ever have a big effect on the majority of the population? Would Italians or Germans just say "Okay, because the Romans were so cool, we're Romans now. Give us Roman culture."

I mean, adopting "Roman-ness" during that time was only ever meant in a philosophical or idealistic sense. It's impossible to actually adopt the culture of people that lived 1000 years ago. Culture in EU4 is not about academical trends or which ruler of the past the current king would like to imitate, so that makes no sense. Okay, it's just a small detail which won't affect the game (unless you want it to affect the game by - exactly - enacting the decision yourself).

 

[Lemont Elwood]

Hmm in my opinion, adding the Roman Empire to the game could still be regarded as an alternate history thing, but adopting the Roman culture is nothing but pure fantasy content. During the renaissance era, when academics used to give themselves fancy Latin nicknames and talked about restoring antiquity, did they ever have a big effect on the majority of the population? Would Italians or Germans just say "Okay, because the Romans were so cool, we're Romans now. Give us Roman culture."

I mean, adopting "Roman-ness" during that time was only ever meant in a philosophical or idealistic sense. It's impossible to actually adopt the culture of people that lived 1000 years ago. Culture in EU4 is not about academical trends or which ruler of the past the current king would like to imitate, so that makes no sense. Okay, it's just a small detail which won't affect the game (unless you want it to affect the game by - exactly - enacting the decision yourself).

This. I'm not bothered by the inclusion of the tag, but I am by the inclusion of the culture.

 

[DominusNovus]

Yeah, I got side tracked with that. Essentially I was just replying to the point of "since they were a republic give them +RT if they are a republic instead of legitmacy". Then I overthought it and responded with a much more detailed and complex answer than I probably should have when I decided to go on the whole realistically tangent. I was also probably a bit overexcited with the Rome tag since I try to keep the ancient history stuff out of EU4. With the introduction of Rome I started nitpicking the ideas and etc... My bad.



Thanks for the clarification. I feel rather silly now between that and the long tangent I went on.

All in all, I'm just an idiot right now lol

Nah, those were still good ideas.

 

[joe9594]

dms_promote_the_clture_of_service war_exhaustion = -0.02 prestige_from_land = 0.25

Dont know if this has been pointed out yet but you are missing a u from culture of service.

 

[RobRoy3]

Er, there was a Roman province of Mesopotamia, y'know.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mesopotamia_(Roman_province)

Sure. But it only included the very upper regions, barring a few years under Trajan. Most of that area was never Roman, except for that very brief and tenuous occupation. Are we seriously requiring ownership of Tikrit, Baghdad, Basra, and Khuzestan to form the Roman Empire? 'Twould just be silly.

 

[IvanisBest]

View attachment 167031

• The Fezzan Corridors: As Fezzan, control at least 90% of the trade power in Tunis, Katsina, Safi and Timbuktu.

Goddammit Reinhard.

 

[Wagonlitz]

Er, there was a Roman province of Mesopotamia, y'know.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mesopotamia_(Roman_province)

And that was given up under Hadrian (I even think pretty much immediately after he assumed the throne); and it was conquered by his predecessor Trajan. I.e. while it was hold, it in reality wasn't really hold. At least not for any timestretch which would warrant it being a requirement; and even when it was hold the hold of it was quite teneous with rebellions all the time. Though at least it allowed Armenia to be more secured.

 

[Blindbohemian]

Sure. But it only included the very upper regions, barring a few years under Trajan. Most of that area was never Roman, except for that very brief and tenuous occupation. Are we seriously requiring ownership of Tikrit, Baghdad, Basra, and Khuzestan to form the Roman Empire? 'Twould just be silly.

Because, you know, forming the Roman Empire in the early modern period is not at all silly.

 

[grandadmiralbob]

I'm curious if there are any other formable nations, like Atlantis, the USSR or Native American Union. *kidding*
But I would like some formables in SE Asia, Tartar and Altaic cultures, and maaaybe Africa.

 

[TheGhostVII]

I'm curious if there are any other formable nations, like Atlantis, the USSR or Native American Union. *kidding*
But I would like some formables in SE Asia, Tartar and Altaic cultures, and maaaybe Africa.

Tatarstan would be a nice formable tag. Also, the Roman Empire is already in the game. It's just called Byzantium, which is definitely not what it was called during its time.

 

[RobRoy3]

Because, you know, forming the Roman Empire in the early modern period is not at all silly.

LOL. Precisely why I tried to caveat the original statement.

How about "'twould be even sillier"

In fairness, though, most major European states tried to claim some element of Rome's mantle or some descent from Rome, even late in the early modern period, often calling themselves some version of Rome or some type of "Emperor". What's the harm if, for example, my CAS/SPA exceeds Charles V, creating a lasting Universal Empire, and conquering France and Turkey in the process. He wouldn't call it Spain. He wouldn't call it Germany. And he was already crowned...

 

[Blindbohemian]

LOL. Precisely why I tried to caveat the original statement.

How about "'twould be even sillier"

In fairness, though, most major European states tried to claim some element of Rome's mantle or some descent from Rome, even late in the early modern period, often calling themselves some version of Rome or some type of "Emperor". What's the harm if, for example, my CAS/SPA exceeds Charles V, creating a lasting Universal Empire, and conquering France and Turkey in the process. He wouldn't call it Spain. He wouldn't call it Germany. And he was already crowned...

Well, my problem is that the situation you outline is already quite silly. But even if he did start calling himself Emperor of Rome (which I doubt, to be honest), he wouldn't put a big fat SPQR on the flag. And so on. Have you seen those Roman ideas? The whole thing is moronic.