EU4 - Development Diary - 7th April 2016

[Kwami]

Misc Complaints Adressed
- When mothballing a fleet, sailors no longer needed are now returned to the country's sailor pool (up to max sailors).

This is why sailors don't make sense as they're currently implemented. Manpower is similarly broken.

If I mothball fleets at maximum sailors, then I get no sailors back. When I unmothball them, I still lose those sailors. They're still mysteriously all suiciding.

It's not hard to make this happen.

 

[Freudia]

No one force you to raze.

Horde unity pretty much forces you to, from what I gather. I admittedly haven't played a horde since pre-Cossacks days, but my understanding of the mechanics makes me think that horde unity is designed in a way to force you to loot and raze constantly.

 

[Philthy]

For people who continue to complain about Regency Councils (I'm looking at you, Arumba) Paradox should just give in to the whining and allow DoW's during RC's. HOWEVER, the AI will decide when and upon whom the DoW is declared. Enjoy!

This idea is ridiculous and I love it. I mean, by all means make it predictable, like they would only DoW in a case where the AI would, and you would still control troops, so you could somewhat game it, but it would be a change-in-kind to the gameplay.

SMH, too funny.

 

[bbqftw]

- Root Out Corruption is now based on your development, not your income.

That is a massive balance change. Like quite possibly the biggest balance shifter that has ever occurred in a post-DLC patch release.

I think the tall players crowd will be extremely happy with this one.

 

[Milith]

Why was the hard and punishing province limit kept at all rather than the numerous suggestions to instead reduce the states available to MR?

This would go against the way they want you to play MRs I think (aka only taking centers of trade and very high value provinces which are spread out across a lot of areas).

 

[Freudia]

That is a massive balance change. Like quite possibly the biggest balance shifter that has ever occurred in a post-DLC patch release.

I think the tall players crowd will be extremely happy with this one.

It could go either way, but yeah, the 'tall players' will be happy with it. We'll need to see how it plays out in regards to wide players though; I feel like there's a point where your state count won't keep up with your development speed and thus you'll hit points where your development count outscales your ability to put down your corruption due to inability to generate enough money from your increase in development.

Which, I mean, might be a good thing in the very long run, but in the current state of the game I refuse to believe that's a good thing since this game isn't exactly interesting or enjoyable to play if you're not blobbing.

 

[Silver Wizard]

- Removed Regicide Event

Awwww.

 

[Milith]

If those 20 provinces could be all centers of trades/estuaries that would be perfectly fine, but it is not going to be the realistical outcome in-game.

Sure you can. Most of the centers of trade are coastal, you can just take them and leave the other ones, or give them to your vassals, you'll still get most of the trade power in the region. I recently lost a multiplayer game where this exact thing happened to me:

Florence won a couple wars against me and took all my centers of trade in Genoa and Sevilia. I was dirt poor to the point where I couldn't field 80% of my force limit without going into debt, while he was quite literally swimming in money with a very limited amount of provinces (you can't see it on the player mapmode but a good chunk of his land was marches). That's how you play successful tall.

 

[unillogical]

Hi Everyone!

Thanks for all support and dedication to the game, and its great to see 1.16 & Mare Nostrum breaking popularity records. There were a few issues that cropped up, that we are fixing or changing for a 1.16.2 patch, which will be released as soon as its ready. I hope tomorrow,...

This is the current changelog, and we're working on a CTD, and a Multiplayer OOS.

Corruption
- Updated corruption tooltip to show what actually effects it.
- Easy Difficulty now reduces your corruption dramatically.
- Root Out Corruption is now based on your development, not your income.
- Halved frequency of good and bad corruption events.

Misc Complaints Adressed
- Fixed Threaten War could be used during Regency.

Better just to remove corruption since there are already multiple often stacked mechanics in place that punish the player for everything corruption does, at the very least stop having unbalanced tech - also known as playing outside of Europe - cause corruption.

Better just to allow declare war during regency with some sort of penalty as I would suggest 80%+ of players would like.

 

[Freudia]

If you want a cool DLC idea paradox, I will happily pay $5 for a regency can declare war DLC.

So long as that's the only thing in the DLC. I don't want a cool feature bundled with a ton of useless garbage and things that hurt the game.

 

[TheGhostVII]

So when will the issue with Tunisian and Algerian units being sub-Sahrans be fixed?

 

[unillogical]

To be fair, the change to corruption cost is in the right direction right now.

It's too little too late ultimately. Patch after patch, DLC after DLC they introduce or reform stacked mechanic after mechanic designed with the sole purpose to discourage the player from expanding, this patch alone has introduced several. Now don't get me wrong I like challenge, but a challenge is fun because it is rewarding but they seem to be doing everything in their power to make stepping up to that challenge as unrewarding as possible. The one thing they have utterly failed to do is create a game where there is anything else interesting to do other than expand for which there were already more than adequate numbers of mechanics to discourage it. It has gotten to the point now that they have stacked so many damn stick mechanics on top of one another that I actually don't want to play the game, not because it is in any real sense more challenging/rewarding than before but because in a very real sense it is a lot less fun/rewarding than it was before.

 

[TolHydra]

I really like the idea of being able to assassinate leaders though. That'd make PU's at least somewhat intuitive. Hopefully it's not gone forever.

 

[Benghi Bon]

No one force you to raze. Raze as much as you can afford.

Increased RR from razing lasts 10 years and recent uprising modifier lasts 10 years too, so you can make them revolt and wipe riots out.

Revolts with such high risks and all will naturally be big. It'll be such a strain on your manpower to both wage wars and quench revolts, which are usually more than one kind of rebel type, and then expand, and deal with corruption, and being on par with technology. I think this is a horrible change and I think it should revert back. I get what you're saying, but always having to deal with huge revolts if you burn down a little tent is absurd.

 

[LordNeidhart]

Actually you DO play as the king. These are still mostly absolute monarchies in this era. The difference is the focus of the game. You aren't focused on your dynasty, like in CK2, you are focused on running a nation. Until you get to Constitutional Monarchy the power structure of these nations are still highly centralized in hands of a single ruler.

What? No.
You play as the guiding spirit of the nation, sometimes as the will of the King, sometimes as a national entity. That's why while in certain events your responses and prompts can be understood as first-person accounts of a ruler [we have great wineries producing great wine? Save me some!], others are far more abstract and arcane in nature, such as events that allow you to choose wether or not economic downturns are causing inflation or other forms of economic setbacks across the nation, or what kind of heir you get. Things that a ruler alone cannot control nor decide.

You're Marianne. You're Britannia. You're Columbia. You're by no means a single mortal man.

Europa Universalis, deepest lore.

 

[grommile]

You are the 0.1%. Congratulations. Want a cookie?

No, I want my thirty years of lost gameplay back.

 

[MrDarcy]

I quite like the shift from income to development as the cause of corruption, which I would have assumed to be the case from the beginning. I feel that certain issues should arise from owning a rapidly expanding empire spanning the globe in a time, in which neither the bureaucracy nor communication technology would be in place to permit it to be administered efficiently. And even in modern times during such a meteoric rise as displayed by most player controlled countries the rate of expansion of the land controlled would far outstrip the ability of the institutions to keep pace.

 

[ZivDero]

Ooohh... Regicide was so cool.

 

[Benghi Bon]

Actually you DO play as the king. These are still mostly absolute monarchies in this era. The difference is the focus of the game. You aren't focused on your dynasty, like in CK2, you are focused on running a nation. Until you get to Constitutional Monarchy the power structure of these nations are still highly centralized in hands of a single ruler.

You play as a guiding hand, not a king, queen or any character. With regency councils, you can still do mostly anything other than warfare. So, who are you controlling then? You're just the nation.

 

[Johan]

@Johan i have a CTD problem that happens since 1.14 i think. error mesage says; "display driver has stopped responding and successfully recovered" and only EUIV causes this error message since 1.14 wass out ...

Have you tried tech-support for help?