EU4 Development Diary - 3rd March 2016

[Freudia]

Greater control of Mercantilism seems silly when you have no way to lower mercantilism without events. Given that mercantilism adds corruption now, I can see good reason to get rid of it, but no way for the player to do so.

Also, 200 diplo points for 1% of Mercantilism seems extremely overpriced to the point where it won't be used. Keep in mind that lagging behind in tech for a few points of mercantilism isn't desired because lagging behind in tech raises corruption now for some silly reason.

Trade leagues sound like they'd be okay on paper, but then you factor in that the whole union takes just a single diplo slot, so trying to invade an OPM inside a union would bring you to war with the entire union and the other allies the OPM would have. This could potentially result in Denmark declaring on Lubeck and suddenly fighting 9 OPMs and 3 other allies of Lubeck, not counting the ones that'd get pulled in via declaring war on the empire from outside. This doesn't sound sane.

 

[frolix42]

Looks great I was wondering when and how The Hansa would be returning. A little bit more motivation to remain an OPM.

I'm also glad that "Mercantilism" has some drawbacks now in EU4, in the form of "corruption", as it does in real life. Mercantilism did ruin the Spainish Empire.

 

[Sweawm]

Trade Leagues sound awesome, but considering how the leader gets 50% of your trade power, it doesn't sound like a good deal for members.

 

[Krebsig]

Mmhh. Only OPM's. That severely limits things. I get that it should be only small nations, but that's pretty restrictive :/

Maybe a maximum of 3 or 4 provinces?

 

[Phibs]

Mmhh. Only OPM's. That severely limits things. I get that it should be only small nations, but that's pretty restrictive :/

 

[Krebsig]

Thanks for the DD; the actual one this time

A few quick questions:
1. Can Trade Leagues be renamed and will there be a special mapmode for them?
2. Will the Diplo cost for promoting mercantilism change based on the % of mercantilism you ahve or is it a fixed number? 200 DIP sounds like a lot.

 

[Morbad]

Nice, but between Diplomatic idea groups and diplomatic tech, it will be impossible to increase mercantilism for a navy/trading focus country... 200 points... :s

 

[Homusubi]

Is it just me, or is playing as an OPM for the whole game about the most boring playthrough one can imagine?

 

[Maria Theresa]

Trade Leagues are a great idea but very badly executed. How many one province minors are there in game that are relevant to the Trade League system? Novgorod wont have anyone to join their League, Venice and Genoa can maybe muster up 2 at most. Lübeck is situated in a nice spot and should be able to get 7-8 or so. Ragusa? 0! And thats virtually all merchant republics there are in the game. You should greatly increase the max amount of provinces allowed (maybe to 3) or just scrap this feature altogether otherwise it will be yet another useless fluff which only serves as a means for you to crank up DLC price.

 

[Dutchman251]

Did you do anything to the fact that transferring trade power takes a relation slot?

 

[noon261]

Trade Leagues sound awesome, but considering how the leader gets 50% of your trade power, it doesn't sound like a good deal for members.

You get multiple allies for a single relationship slot, a massive boost to production income and your trade ships run at 60/70%(depending on the math) while also boosting trade leaders trade power which in turn boosts your goods produced. Effectively trading trade income for production income and protection. Sounds like a decent trade off to me.

 

[Phibs]

Maybe a maximum of 3 or 4 provinces?

Dunno. Two or three perhaps. Or OPM's and nations below development threshold x.

 

[Chaingun]

So it seems that only Europe will have the trade leagues, and only in the Lubeck region too unless venice/genoa are reduced to OPM

Venice/Genoa usually end up leading Trade Leagues (only non-leaders are required to be OPMs).

 

[MiniaAr]

What's missing for merchant republic even after this DD is the ability to build Kantors in land owned by other countries. This would solve the issue of "Novgorod can't into Hanseatic league", as Novgorod really never was in one, but the Hansa was able to build a Kantor there.
Same thing in London, Bergen, Bruges, Antwerp, Malmö, Kaunas, Pskov, etc...

Novgorod will be able to build it's own trade league though. You ave Russian minors: Yaroslav, Tver, the new country added in the expansion. And Riga might join such a league as well.

But I agree that the OPM restriction in this case is too harsch. Pskov, released Polotsk and Smolensk, Ryazan, ... should be allowed to join a Novgorodian league.

The restrictions should probably look like:

• No kingdom should be part of a trade league -> strong kingdoms is what killed merchant republics. Thus only Duchy-rank countries might join.
• 2PMs or even 3PMs are allowed to join the league, but with developement taken into account in their acceptance conditions.
• Countries leaving the league either on their own or because they grow too big should give the trade dispute CB, which should allow the option to make a country part of the league.
• I thus disagree that the trade CB should block the release of countries/return of cores. There should be a way for a league to force the release of nations so that they can join the league, or return of cores to reduce a country in size to enter the league as well.

 

[kishurki]

Well, isn`t it just bread and games? We are happy that they are introducing trade leagues, but in reality, 99% of players will not use it, cause in the first 50 years most OPMs are gone, and AI will have another feature to be stupid about and make irrational decisions.

This is actually a boost for large nations, cause 2-3 OPM alliance will not be able to conquer trade league member, but blobbers like Poland, Austria, France won`t have any problem to do so.

Sooo, it`s just another nerf for any player that wants to play OPM that does not start as merchant republic. It is as useless as Free Cities feature, at least they are protected by Emperor, which is annoying, and actually does slow down conquest of Free Cities. Trade Leagues? It is just shallow and makes close to zero impact on the game, AND only in Europe(AND only in Italy and Baltic).

Nicely wrapped gift, with an empty can inside.

 

[War_lord]

This seems like the best way Paradox have yet thought up for anti-blobbing against OPMs. Very good work indeed.

I've said it before and I'll say it again, anti-blobbing mechanics are only good if there's interesting non-warring things to do, and right now there isn't.

 

[Torakka]

@Johan In Aliance Actions tab on first screen we can see "Offer Condottieri" option. So, we can transfer part of our army to our allies in 1.16?

That seems to be the case, see https://www.paradoxplaza.com/europa-universalis-iv-mare-nostrum?_ga=1.203509138.362163485.1447162950 and specifically the following screenshots:

 

[Zelius]

200 DIP for 1 mercantilism!

One question: can subjects lead / be part of Trade Leagues? If guessing no, which would mean Revoke the Privilegia would destroy basically all Trade Leagues?

 

[mursolini]

Members of the league having to be OPM is ridiculously restrictive. Why not restrict it by something else, for example, members can`t have enough to progress towards second tier of government? It would be far more organic and reasonable. We have this new shiny government ranking system, why not use it here?