• 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 - 5th of March 2019

Good morning. As was foretold, I am back to talk about our thoughts on overhauling the map of the Balkans for the big end-of-year European update. Once again I’ll begin with a disclaimer that everything here is very much subject to change as we continue to listen to feedback and iterate on our own ideas throughout the year.

balkans_old.jpg


Behold: the Balkans in patch 1.4. And for reference, here are the Balkans as they are now, in patch 1.28:

balkans_new.jpg


The big change here is simply “more provinces”. Albania has been split up substantially, we have more Aegean Islands, and provinces density in Bulgaria is higher.

There is still, in my opinion, plenty of room for new provinces in Greece and Bulgaria. For the mainland we want to achieve a similar level of density as we see in Anatolia. One of the most obvious things we can do is split the Yanya province by adding Arta, one of the last Epirote cities to fall to the Ottomans. The return of the Epirus tag in 1444 heralds another change: the removal of the Corfu tag, at least in 1444. In the game right now, Corfu is a vassal of Venice and ruled by monarchs who were in fact the independent rulers of the Despotate of Epirus. This will change.

Other possibilities include a province that would more accurately reflect the Ottoman-Moldavian border in Silistria/Basarabia, a further split in the Aegean between Scio and Lesbos, and a separate province centered on the city of Tarnovo in Bulgaria.

greece_suggestion.jpg


This suggestion by Mingmung, and others very much like it, show a step in the right direction. Beyond what I’ve already mentioned, I like the idea of splitting Cephalonia from the Corfu province to add a little tactical depth to Epirus, as well as the addition of Corinth in the south. We are however unlikely to add extra provinces on Cyprus or Crete: outside of very large islands like Sardinia and Sicily we prefer to keep such places restrained to single provinces.

Moving north-west, there’s a lot that could be done in Serbia, Bosnia, and the Dalmatian coast. There’s room for a few more provinces of course, though not quite so many as we might need further south.

balkans_suggestion.jpg


This very aesthetically pleasing suggestion by ootats has a lot going for it. Representing Herzegovina/the Duchy of Saint Sava as a Bosnian vassal in 1444 is an interesting possibility. It also puts the province density on a level similar to that of Hungary, which I feel is a good target to aim for in the region. It is however unlikely that we’ll be adding both the Venetian provinces of Scutari and Cataro.

We’ve been reading your comments on the previous dev diary, and they’ve provoked a lot of discussion on Team Content Design. One of the results of these discussions is that we’re more open to a Como province that would split away from the northern part of what is now Milan. When the time comes for implementation it's certainly something we're willing to try out.

And that's all for today! Next week I invite you to join me on a wild ride through the confusing nightmarish mess that was Early Modern Germany. Until then, I look forward to more of your comments and suggestions.
 
Also would like for Albanian ideas to get a rework. The cavalry flanking bonus is beyond useless and can be classified as a placebo. The 20% fort defense is also something the player will never notice in any of his games due to it being a very minor bonus wich will at most delay a siege by 30 days. I would also like to think that Albania should maybe get +2 tolerance of heretics and heathens but that is just wishful thinking. Otherwise Albanias ideas are solid and are a preety good representation of the country.
 
Germany existed in at least some form, so its not completely alien.
Scandinavia is based on something that exists on the map - geography.

Yugoslavia is based on nothing in real life. It comes from a nationalism era movement that happens after EU4.
So I guess culture, language and history are nothing now? Romania shouldn't be a formable nation either, neither should Greece and many other ones.
 
Otherwise Albanias ideas are solid and are a preety good representation of the country.

Yeah? Not bad for a set written by a Serb would you say? :p

So I guess culture, language and history are nothing now? Romania shouldn't be a formable nation either, neither should Greece and many other ones.

Ok so because we have silly things like Scandinavia in game we should just throw any sense out the window and add just about anything that comes to mind? Is that what you actually propose?

Would you also like to add Czechoslovakia and Soviet Union?
 
Isn't giving Ottomans more provinces in 1444 strictly a buff? also AI Ottomans will just conquer any other new provinces added into the game like 50 years into the game anyway. The AI is also inherently flawed in design because Ottomans have the largest army and as a result can control better than lots of smaller stacks of armies even if total armies are similar in number (AI vs AI). I wish there were events for large scale rebellions in the Balkans (which happened IRL) so at least Ottomans have to expend manpower putting them down...
 
What about Scandinavia then, how much worse is it then Yugoslavia realistically? :)
A precedent has been set, there are already nations both made up and those that actually existed outside of the time frame of the game so why are you trying to argue against Yugoslavia being formable?

At Serbias peak the title of tsar was King of Serbs and Greeks, Greeks aren't South Slavs so therefore it would make no sense for a country to call itself Yugo (South) Slavia (Slavic country).


Scandinavia is just bad named. It should be Kalmar Union
 
What about Scandinavia then, how much worse is it then Yugoslavia realistically? :)
A precedent has been set, there are already nations both made up and those that actually existed outside of the time frame of the game so why are you trying to argue against Yugoslavia being formable?

At Serbias peak the title of tsar was King of Serbs and Greeks, Greeks aren't South Slavs so therefore it would make no sense for a country to call itself Yugo (South) Slavia (Slavic country).

The Serb king called himself king of the Greeks, not the actual Greeks. So this was just a nominal title, especially as only the southernmost parts had some greek speaking population. Monarchs doesen't tend to give up their titles easy, you can see plenty of examples of using titles, without any real ground.


So I guess culture, language and history are nothing now? Romania shouldn't be a formable nation either, neither should Greece and many other ones.

Greek wars of independence just made it to the timeframe. Forming Romania, just like Italy or Germany, is a bit ahead of it's time, but not that much. Yugoslavia is with a century... I see you want it, go make a mod. But don't try force your own obsession to a game which tries to be as historical as possible.
 
Last edited:
The Serb king called himself king of the Greeks, not the Greeks. So this was just a nominal title, especially as only the southernmost parts had some greek speaking population. Monarchs doesen't tend to give up their titles easy, you can see plenty of examples of using titles, without any real ground.




Greek wars of independence just made it to the timeframe. Forming Romania, just like Italy or Germany, is a bit ahead of it's time, but not that much. Yugoslavia is with a century... I see you want it, go make a mod. But don't try force your own obsession to a game which tries to be as historical as possible.
If it was trying to be as historical as possible than Golden Century would have never happened
 
If it was trying to be as historical as possible than Golden Century would have never happened

It feels like this thread is losing it's constructiveness. I agree, there were mistakes in the past patches, but I like, lets just say Flagships, colonial cultures, and an updated Spain :)
 
Last edited:
It feels like this thread is losing it's constructiveness. I agree, there were mistakes in the past patches, but I like Flagships, colonial cultures, and new spanish provinces :)
Yet at the same time as adding colonial cultures they made colonies never convert provinces and be full of cultures wich shouldn´t even be there like Moroccans or any other culture a coloniser conquered. Wich is about as historical as Dinosaurs on D-Day.
 
Yet at the same time as adding colonial cultures they made colonies never convert provinces and be full of cultures wich shouldn´t even be there like Moroccans or any other culture a coloniser conquered. Wich is about as historical as Dinosaurs on D-Day.

They declared what are the changes, if you don't want to see moroccans deported to Brazil, why did you chose to get it? Btw after the mandatory years passed, colonies can change culture and religion of the expelled.

You should probably increase the core Bulgarian provinces.

I don't think they will add much more, but if you have an idea, share with the devs ;)
 
In my opinion, perhaps the best thing about this diary is that the dev team seems to have come around on Corfu being independent in 1444. It is ahistorical, it is an unnecessary nerf for Venice and the fact that it was being kept in only because of the achievement was rather frustrating.

And to add my two cents, I certainly like the direction of the other (possible) map changes, new provinces are awesome and I'm very much looking forward to next week's diary.

Yeah, that was sort of my fault waaaay back in the day when they were taking suggestions during the development of EU2 (I think, might have been 3). The game was really limited with provinces and tags at that point, so the tag was supposed to represent the County of Cephalonia (and, by inference, the Despotate of Epirus). But with limited provinces, it got relocated to the only available province to represent the Ionian Islands, Corfu, which, of course, was about the only Ionian Island not part of the county! There were alternative suggestions to use the province of Epirus for the tag, but it was so huge back in those days that it would have been even more ahistorical to use it over Corfu. A remnant of all this is the CEP (for Cephalonia) tag for Corfu (at least it was last time I checked).

I've always been a bit surprised that that particular compromise suggestion has taken so long get corrected...
 
Last edited:
If Byzantium gives up Constantinople, can it form Greece with its Achaean provinces? Or should it have to wait for the age of nationalism?
 
I am from Balkans and I can say this is pretty accurate. I love idea of adding duchy of St. Sava in the game. Also Croatia should be added as junior partner under Hungary. If not Croatia, you can add more Hungarian junior partners of Croatian culture (irl feudatories of Croatian influental families.)
 
Very interesting update!

I would ask you to re-consider or at least experiment with splitting Cyprus and Crete to more provinces before ruling this out.


Even though I would not expect the below items to be implemented due to gameplay side effects, I am voicing them anyway just for the heck of it :)

- The Emperor in Constantinople was Catholic at the time.

- The so-called byzantines were largely influenced by the west at the time, rather than the east, and more so by Italian states rather than the Balkan kingdoms. Being reduced for long time to mostly cities, the percentage of their civic population was quite significant compared to rural population. The Palaiologos Renaissance is a clearly "western" trend by game standards. IMHO a decision could be implemented allowing the player to pay a penalty of stability or whatever and be able to switch to western tech group (a conquered and then released Byzantium or later Greece should remain eastern though). Of course no harm done with the current eastern tech Byzantium which would probably re-focus on eastern traditions if Anatolia was reclaimed.

That is not true Christianity broke up in 1075, previous to that there were 5 major centres of Christianity. Byzantine, Vatican, Sion, Jerusalem and Mouth Athos. In 1075 the Catholic religion was created, by the Vatican breaking away. The Byzantines were strong while the western states were very weak. When the Ottomans started attacking Byzantine slowly lost its influence and power.
 
And that's all for today! Next week I invite you to join me on a wild ride through the confusing nightmarish mess that was Early Modern Germany. Until then, I look forward to more of your comments and suggestions.

I am getting more and more excited for the next patch! And finally the HRE will get some major love. As a fan of the Voltaire's Nightmare mod, this can only make me happy. (please consider giving Liege an attackable neighbor at start by adding Jülich; they start with the Burgundian PU's and a free city as neighbors)

EDIT: and it seems a lot of the forumners are also starting to like the changes. Compare the number of disagrees to previous DD's.
 
Add the Bosnian culture already, I mean there is Transilvanyan culture why not Bosnian? That annoys me a lot... Also if possible add some sort of heresy flavour to Bosnia, in form of events if you already don't want to add the heresy itself. And if you are so much against adding a Bosnian culture, I have no idea why though, but if you are then atleast add the possibility of a Bosnian culture appearing via an event or something. Thank you...

I'd like to see this also - not in 1444 but a bit later, spawning by event at some point in game if Ottomans control Bosnia. Ottomans destroyed original Bosnian kingdom in 1463, Herzegowina (Hum) fell in 1482 and they finished conquering it completely (northern most part) in 1592. They held Bosnia until 1878 when they lost it to Austria-Hungary. Country changed a lot during their rule.
 
That is not true Christianity broke up in 1075, previous to that there were 5 major centres of Christianity. Byzantine, Vatican, Sion, Jerusalem and Mouth Athos. In 1075 the Catholic religion was created, by the Vatican breaking away. The Byzantines were strong while the western states were very weak. When the Ottomans started attacking Byzantine slowly lost its influence and power.
Zion is Jerusalem, two names for the same place. And Mount Athos was not part of the Pentarchy the Pentarchy was
Rome
Constantinople
Alexandria
Antioch
Jerusalem.
 
It makes the endgame a bit too slow
The game is slow because its awfully optimised and the ai is funky with the way it uses its stacks. A couple of extra province will not make much difference.

tedious when you want to conquer large areas of land.
Then dont conquer vast swates of land. I personally dislike playing wide and i belive blobing should be harder and less rewarding. There should be more incentives to playing tall and sticking to historical borders, and more provinces make playing tall and measured expansion much more fun and engaging.
It also serves for realism and tactical importance in combat.


Its one of the reasons why I stop playing many of my games sometime around the year 1600-1700
If you cant play past 1600 then maybe your cpu simply isn't enough for this game anyway, there is no easy way to put this...