EU4 - Development Diary - 6th of February 2018

[Bearjuden]

Part of a possible fix for the tech innovativeness problem I think could be to make innovativeness gain scale to how far ahead of time the tech was when you took it instead of being a flat bonus for whoever was first. So taking a tech 3 years ahead of time gives you more innovativeness than doing so when it's a measly 10% extra, and you still get the bonus even if someone else did it at 50% extra cost (though of course they got a bigger bonus than you). This doesn't solve the problems around having to take an idea first, and I still think the bonuses for being innovative make no sense whatsoever, but at least then there might be some incentive to do so really early if the bonus becomes strong enough. As it stands, the AI's willingness to eat 80% tech penalties means the player will never see a drop of that bonus.

I don't even know why I'm trying to fix this, I have no intention of buying this dlc at this point (I only ever played England once, and I only really care about the mission system which is free anwyay) but anyway, that'd be my fix.

 

[ppigor]

if the bonus becomes strong enough

I'm talking about the same thing. Bonus like "-10% all power cost" is too weak,
bonus like "-1% Army and Navy Tradition decay" no needed at all.

Such bonuses are killing meaning a new update about 90%.
It's a pity, because the idea of updating is good.

 

[ppigor]

A few words about England and its primacy in the industrial revolution of the XVIII century.

Innovations generally appear when there is a social need in them. This explains, for example, why the Aztecs
did not know the iron, despite the presence of enormous reserves of rich and easily accessible iron ore
and fairly high level of metallurgy.

Why Europe? Because Europe was extremely poor, even to massive poverty, even among aristocrats.

Why England? Because England has the only way to enrich - namely the huge increase in sales of goods produced in England.
The English fleet was very weak until the end of the Dutch-English wars, so colonialism was impossible.

It is obvious that sales growth is easiest to achieve by increasing production volumes.
The other is impossible, because English goods are good only for cold regions and are not suitable for the tropics.

All other factors of the English industrial revolution are derived from the primary needs of society.

The most important fact is the independence of the industrial revolution from innovations,
recognized by the international scientific community.

Industrialization does not need innovation and is possible without them at all.
At the same time, innovations are more often born where there is a need to improve new technology.
In other words, industrialization creates the prerequisites for innovation.

But industrialization is primary, and innovations are derived from it.
At the same time, industrialization should be necessary for society.

If there is no need for industrialization, then there will be no innovations.

 

[blueberrypug]

In what timezone, and at what time do Developer Diaries generally release (for future reference)?

 

[raistlin_wizard]

I want a formable tag for Scotland, an alternative to Great Britain called Great Scotland encompassing all the British Isles. I also want dynamic province names in Scottish Lallans (Glesga instead of Glasgow, Lunnon instead of London etc)

A tag for Great Britain with this flag would be more accurate for a Scotland formed UK:

(Great Britain is the name of the island after all, no need for new, unhistorical names.)

 

[ppigor]

A tag for Great Britain with this flag would be more accurate for a Scotland formed UK:

(Great Britain is the name of the island after all, no need for new, unhistorical names.)

1. Politcorrect name is United Kingdom, not a Great Britain.
2. Scottish Gaelic name of Scotland is ALBA; and do you remember such name of UK as ALBION?
3. Scottish flag (gaelic Bratach na h-Alba) is not similar to UK flag, it is a Saint Andrew's Cross.

In summary, it should be pointed out the inconsistency of your statement.
Countries never forget their origins. Division of the USSR confirms it.

 

[raistlin_wizard]

1. Politcorrect name is United Kingdom, not a Great Britain.
2. Scottish Gaelic name of Scotland is ALBA; and do you remember such name of UK as ALBION?
3. Scottish flag (gaelic Bratach na h-Alba) is not similar to UK flag, it is a Saint Andrew's Cross.

In summary, it should be pointed out the inconsistency of your statement.
Countries never forget their origins. Division of the USSR confirms it.

1. Kingdom of Great Britain. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kingdom_of_Great_Britain
2 What does this have to do with anything?
3. The flag I pointed out in that post was an actual Union Jack flag used by Scotland instead of the regular Union Jack, albeit unofficially. It's not unlikely to think that a UK lead by Scotland would use this design instead of the regular one.

 

[Yangus Beef]

Is it really that ridiculous to think maybe you should work on these DLC for a few months more so that they actually have $20 worth of content? This is the only company that thinks it should be priced according to "how much work was put into it by the devs" when that is totally irrelevant to the consumer.

That's a actually a marxist policy.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Labor_theory_of_value

 

[ppigor]

It's not unlikely to think that a UK lead by Scotland would use this design instead of the regular one.

You assure us that the GB created by Scotland will do the same as GB created by England.
This is illogical.
Scotland, which created the GB, will follow its own concepts and traditions, and not at all English.
Scottish culture is different from English.

Therefore, your statement should be regarded as highly controversial due to substitution of concepts.

 

[Rule Britannia]

You assure us that the GB created by Scotland will do the same as GB created by England.
This is illogical.
Scotland, which created the GB, will follow its own concepts and traditions, and not at all English.
Scottish culture is different from English.

Therefore, your statement should be regarded as highly controversial due to substitution of concepts.

The idea of a GB formed by Scotland using English/British ideas is not that strange. In fact, one could argue that this is what happened. Historically, it was Scotland that got a personal union over England, as the Stuarts inherited the thrown on the death of the last Tudor monarch. Yet the dominant political power was always England. Hence the Union between England and Scotland (which James I desired) was initially blocked by the English parliament and only became reality when the prospect of the Hanoverian succession (and the possible end of the union of the crowns) resulted in the English parliament extending an offer to the Scottish parliament that they could not refuse (some Scottish historians have called it economic blackmail, I prefer to see it as a generous offer). It should nevertheless be noted that Scotland did make major contributions to Great Britain in terms of ideas and culture, the Scottish Enlightenment being perhaps the prime example. Hence it makes perfect sense for GB (whether formed by England or Scotland) to be dominated by English ideas, though with certain Scottish influences.

 

[ppigor]

Hence it makes perfect sense for GB (whether formed by England or Scotland) to be dominated by English ideas, though with certain Scottish influences.

You again confuse what happened IRL, and what could have happened, for example,
in the case of Scottish conquest of England.

It is extremely doubtful that the conquerors should behave like conquered ones
and change own scotland culture to english.

 

[ocelot64]

I had my doubts about the gameplay additions in the "Third Rome" immersion pack, but this time with the new "Rule Britannia" additions I'm more optimistic. It seems to add more for every nation and is not exclusive to the namesake region.

 

[NeoMJay]

I'm curious how often the AI will pick the Anglican faith as England or Great Britain.
On the other hand the mission tree is the thing I'm really looking forward to so far.

 

[Geodynamis]

The idea of a GB formed by Scotland using English/British ideas is not that strange. In fact, one could argue that this is what happened. Historically, it was Scotland that got a personal union over England, as the Stuarts inherited the thrown on the death of the last Tudor monarch. Yet the dominant political power was always England. Hence the Union between England and Scotland (which James I desired) was initially blocked by the English parliament and only became reality when the prospect of the Hanoverian succession (and the possible end of the union of the crowns) resulted in the English parliament extending an offer to the Scottish parliament that they could not refuse (some Scottish historians have called it economic blackmail, I prefer to see it as a generous offer). It should nevertheless be noted that Scotland did make major contributions to Great Britain in terms of ideas and culture, the Scottish Enlightenment being perhaps the prime example. Hence it makes perfect sense for GB (whether formed by England or Scotland) to be dominated by English ideas, though with certain Scottish influences.

In that, a Great Britain formed by the Irish should not be able to pick new ideas.

I'm curious how often the AI will pick the Anglican faith as England or Great Britain.
On the other hand the mission tree is the thing I'm really looking forward to so far.

Hopefully more often than Nordic countries go Protestant these days.

 

[Imparfecto]

In that, a Great Britain formed by the Irish should not be able to pick new ideas.

I would find it rather strange if Ireland (Northern or otherwise) was to be able to form Great Britain given that Northern Ireland is not actually included within the Great Britain collection.

"Great Britain" consists of England, Scotland and Wales.
It is also referenced as the "Kingdom of Great Britain" which is yet another reference for England, Scotland and Wales.

The "United Kingdom" is simply short for: "The United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland", which consists of England, Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland.

That is the difference between the two: "Great Britain" and "United Kingdom" indeed mean two different things.

 

[neondt]

I'm curious how often the AI will pick the Anglican faith as England or Great Britain.
On the other hand the mission tree is the thing I'm really looking forward to so far.

It's around a 75% chance. 100% if they get on the Pope's bad side somehow.

 

[NeoMJay]

It's around a 75% chance. 100% if they get on the Pope's bad side somehow.

Thanks for the response. That's interesting, will they still choose the Protestant or Reformed faith from time to time?

 

[Ulmo]

In what timezone, and at what time do Developer Diaries generally release (for future reference)?

They are released every Tuesday approximately between 10:00 am - 14:00 pm CET. That is no changes occur in the schedule of whihxh they try to inform us.

 

[semaphore]

The problem with current EU4 design is that this Innovativeness favors large countries that can afford themselves level 3+ advisors, while small or medium-sized countries that have no access to lucrative trade nodes will struggle maintaining 1-2 lvl advisors.

Are there any plans to make "tall" gameplay for medium-sized nations more or less viable? For example, add some kind of development efficiency for having all territories in states?

The problem with current EU4 design is that they conceive of "tall gameplay" as "a crippled version of playing wide". The game is increasingly completely oriented around playing large global empires doing world conquests, which seems to be how the designers play the games personally, and this is reflected in the kind of mechanics they keep introducing.

Which is ironic considering they introduce the monarch power system ostensibly so that costs can be the same despite empire size.

 

[PrimeYuri]

The problem with current EU4 design is that they conceive of "tall gameplay" as "a crippled version of playing wide". The game is increasingly completely oriented around playing large global empires doing world conquests, which seems to be how the designers play the games personally, and this is reflected in the kind of mechanics they keep introducing.

Which is ironic considering they introduce the monarch power system ostensibly so that costs can be the same despite empire size.

I dont see that as a problem but advantage