• 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 - 7th of July 2020

Good afternoon! I am once again eschewing the traditional Swedish summer vacation, this time because I’d prefer to wait until I can safely travel rather than taking a dull staycation in my Stockholm apartment. What that means for you lovely people is that you get summer content dev diaries! Let’s get right into it!

dd_indochina.png


Those of you who know me even slightly will be aware that I love all things South-East Asia (SEA). After 2.5 years on the project, I finally have the opportunity to create the SEA map rework of my dreams. Shown above is Mainland SEA. Burma/Myanmar is excluded from the map rework as I feel that the treatment I gave it during the development of Dharma still holds up. There will certainly be new content for nations in that region however, including what another dev fondly described as the “Shan mission stick” when we played MP this weekend.

The country setup has not been radically altered. The only new additions to the 1444 setup are the tribes inhabiting what is today the Central Highlands of Vietnam. I have, however, added many new provinces and increased the total development of the region significantly. According to the logs, the indo_china_region now contains 64 provinces with 542 total development. Note that these numbers, like all numbers presented in dev diaries, are not final. I’m especially satisfied with how Lan Na fits into its 5-province state, bordered on its west by impassable terrain. Speaking of impassable terrain, the Annamite Range now separates Vietnam from much of Laos, making Dai Viet a drastically more defensible nation.

A design goal for Mainland SEA nations in the 1.31 update is to emphasize vassal play and the development of capital super-cities. We’ll talk about various ways that this will be achieved another time, but one prerequisite for the goal is having nations to vassalize:


dd_releasables.png


Several releasable nations now have cores on territory held in 1444 by Lan Xang and Dai Viet. These nations actually already exist in the game files, but are very rarely seen in 1.30 due to their lack of cores. Unfortunately there aren’t really any sensible ways that I’ve found to divide Ayutthaya or Khmer, though in Ayutthaya’s case Sukhothai can still serve as a vassal to which you can feed your Thai provinces.


dd_culture.png


I’ve also taken a look at culture groups in the region. Central Thai and Northern Thai are now simply “Thai”, which belongs to the Siamese culture group that it shares with Lao and Shan. Countries in this culture group are able to form Siam, though Ayutthaya can only do so via its new mission tree. The “Indochinese” culture group is admittedly fairly arbitrary, but does serve to encompass regions of “natural” Vietnamese expansion on their “nam tiến” (southward advance). Cham has been moved to this group to reflect that we no longer equate culture and language.


dd_siam.png


Next week we’ll take a similar look at Maritime SEA - modern Indonesia and Malaysia. In terms of scripted content you can expect plenty of historical events, mission trees, disasters, government reforms, estate privileges, and more from the 1.31 update. We’ll get to these in later weeks, but for now that’s all I have to say. Until next time, have a good week!
 
  • 198Like
  • 88Love
  • 22
  • 14
  • 10
Reactions:
Thank you for finally take a look at Indochina region, have been waiting for this since 2018.
However I want to suggest some ideas for better "historical accuracy".
Die Viet in reality was pretty aggressive towards its Indochina neighbor states, since it was a populous nation with higher centralization level, hence it could mass an army larger than Khmer or Lan Xang, so I think you might want to increase Dai Viet dev level. Also, in 1444, King Le Nhan Tong was 2 years old only, and his mother was the one holding real power as a regent.
For Khmer, it was a mighty and prosperous empire before 14th century, when it fell into a long and steady decline until 19th century. I think you should add more rebels for Khmer in the early phase of the game, to represent the situation of the Dark Age in Cambodia.
 
  • 5
  • 1Like
Reactions:
I'm really excited that SE Asia is FINALLY getting it's pass, will be the trigger for my next game in the asian region generally.

BUT I am a little curious, SE Asia is pretty much the last region in the game that needed an update and one is now incoming...I kind of expected an immersion pack for the region. Once it's in place, where does EU4 go next?
 
  • 2
Reactions:
Hey @neondt i have few questions regarding the new content.

1. I have read comments about Ming mission tree and i have a suggestion. Rather than creating unique mission tree for Ming why not creating Chinese generic mission tree that will be shared between Ming, Ming revolter tags, Mongols and Manchus? The reason why am i suggesting this for Mongols and Manchus is because i have noticed that they have acces to some generic mission tree and this way would make them unique.

2. Would you consider revorking Confuciansim? My suggestion here is to allow Confucian nation to culture convert thru harmonized religion. Again this is only me what do you think?

And last thanks for the Emperor, i'm new player to all of this. I'm realy having a blast in my current Jerusalem and Roman (Byzantium) play.

Mongols and Manchu both have unique mission trees. (Well, cultural mission trees, but especially the mongol tree is one of the strongest in the game.)
 
  • 2
Reactions:
@neondt Will There be a Philippines tag?
Unfortunately, the people of the Philippines at this time period didn't even have a national identity to speak of. The name "Philippines" was even given to the islands by Spanish explorers. The people had very regionalistic tendencies even well after the Spaniards consolidated the islands into one colony.

On the topic of the Philippines though, will there be any updates for that region? Whether it be tags, mission trees, events, or provinces? I always found the location of Tondo a bit odd considering that Tondo and Manila are located extremely close to each other in real life.
 
  • 6Like
  • 2
  • 2
Reactions:
Unfortunately, the people of the Philippines at this time period didn't even have a national identity to speak of. The name "Philippines" was even given to the islands by Spanish explorers. The people had very regionalistic tendencies even well after the Spaniards consolidated the islands into one colony.

On the topic of the Philippines though, will there be any updates for that region? Whether it be tags, mission trees, events, or provinces? I always found the location of Tondo a bit odd considering that Tondo and Manila are located extremely close to each other in real life.

It's not really planned but it's vaguely within the scope of the update. It's on my radar but kind of at the bottom of the priority list. Lots to get through before I could justify thinking about the Philippines.
 
  • 11Like
  • 4
  • 1Love
  • 1
Reactions:
How about adding the ability to build the Kra Isthmus Canal? Even though it never happened historically, it could have been built with enough political will and money, just like the Panama Canal.
 
  • 8Like
  • 2
  • 1
Reactions:
@neondt if you intend to adjust the trade nodes could you perhaps make it so they do a bit of back and forth instead of going unidirectionally to Bengal and Malacca? I am specifically thinking of how Alexandria, Aden, Basra, Gujarat and in general the India, Middle-east and East Africa interactions are. Right now Moluccas and Philippines trade nodes feel really out of way even when flowing trade towards Americas and Southeast asia way too one dimensional.

There was a really lively trade network here independent of its also profitable flow into India and Cape. It was still very much active even with Portuguese and later Dutch presence. This only came to an end when the whole area was taken wholesale by British, Dutch and French in 19th century. There should be a lot more interaction of nodes within SEA I think.
 
Last edited:
  • 6
  • 1Like
Reactions:
It will share a mission tree with Ayutthaya, which will have the largest mission tree in Mainland SEA.

Well I guess a Ayutthava game is back on my radar.
 
  • 1
Reactions:
Mongols and Manchu both have unique mission trees. (Well, cultural mission trees, but especially the mongol tree is one of the strongest in the game.)

Yeah i agree. They do have unique mission trees but i'm talking about generic missions that they both share.
 
  • 1
Reactions:
@neondt A few provinces appear to be in the wrong place - the city of Stung Treng is in Preah Vihear, the city of Kratie is so close to Kampom Pous Thom as to be straddling the province boundary (same with Si Thep and Lopburi, as well as Chiang Mai), Roi Et is on the wrong side of the river in KS, and the city of Champasak has somehow migrated across the Thailand-Laos border, as its actual location should be in what you have as Attapeu province.
Also, it appears that there is a province called Bangkok, but this is somewhat questionable as Bangkok was only a small trading post until about 1700. It would be better to call the province Nakhon Pathom, as that city is much older and dates back to something like 500 AD.
 
Last edited:
  • 4
  • 1Like
Reactions:
I see. Just do think that nice vassal system is oftenly way more interesting then huge blobs. Like it worked out well with Japan and Timurids. I have no clue how Ming worked, but just suggested. On that note, I really hope in future, maybe in EU5 you'll make more involved vassal system. I think more involved Government system and vassal system could make eu4 a bit more then Blob game. But I don't complain, I love eu4 tbh xP

Also, thanks for reply

The Ming Empire is a devilishly tricky nation to balance in EU4. It is tremendously powerful, extremely wealthy, relatively centralised... and yet did not conquer most of the nations around it. To properly model the Ming Empire would require Paradox to implement game mechanics that they have so far refused to add: mechanics that would prioritise and strengthen internal mechanics like estates, food production, stability, and regional armies.

It is significantly easier for Paradox to simply treat the Ming as a special case and to specifically nerf them than to add in mechanics that would, in their words, 'punish success'. While I personally would like a game with those mechanics more, I fully understand why they are unwilling to tear apart EU4.
 
Last edited:
  • 8Like
  • 5
  • 1
Reactions:
Ming is a brutally difficult nation to balance in EU4. It is tremendously powerful, extremely wealthy, relatively centralised... and yet did not conquer most of the nations around it. To properly model the Ming Empire would require Paradox to implement game mechanics that they have so far refused to add: mechanics that would prioritise and strengthen internal mechanics like estates, food production, stability, and regional armies.

It is significantly easier for Paradox to simply treat the Ming as a special case and to specifically nerf them then to add in mechanics that would, in their words, 'punishing success'. While I personally would like a game with those mechanics more, I fully understand why they are unwilling to tear apart EU4.

Seems like they try to do it in Imperator. hbut maybe fail a bit? Imperator has regional armies, governors, food, resources. We will see how it'll look in 5 years. I find Imperator interesting despite all the flaws.
 
  • 2Like
  • 1
Reactions:
Please create Southeast Asian technology group, these nations in history didn't have East Asian buildings and East Asian advisors, except Vietnam.
 
  • 10
  • 4Like
Reactions:
Seems like they try to do it in Imperator. hbut maybe fail a bit? Imperator has regional armies, governors, food, resources. We will see how it'll look in 5 years. I find Imperator interesting despite all the flaws.

Indeed! A lot of it isn't particularly in-depth (you can compare it to Vicky 2 or even MEIOU), but it is a very interesting take on the old formula. I hope they make all those mechanics even more important and more tricky to deal with, so players can struggle with more interesting strategic choices.
 
  • 4Like
  • 1
Reactions:
  • 6
Reactions:
Still no plans for a Ming mission tree. During the development of the Manchu patch I considered whether it would be worthwhile to create one, but ultimately decided against it in favour of allocating time for the Korean mission tree. My reasoning was that there's very little design space for Ming missions because they're already so incredibly large and they have Celestial Reforms fulfilling a very similar purpose right from the start. I stand by that reasoning. In addition, it's only me on content design right now and if a Ming mission tree is going to be made it should ideally be made by someone who actually enjoys playing as Ming - I do not.

Are Ming still one of your most played nations? I couldn't find the post, but I remember them being like top 10?

I reckon if you set the task of designing a Ming mission tree to the Modders/Suggestions forum you'd probably get some great responses. It seems strange not to have the most powerful tag and one of the most played tags in the game being mission-less, although I do understand your logic.
 
  • 4
Reactions:
Indeed! A lot of it isn't particularly in-depth (you can compare it to Vicky 2 or even MEIOU), but it is a very interesting take on the old formula. I hope they make all those mechanics even more important and more tricky to deal with, so players can struggle with more interesting strategic choices.

I am interested in reworked rebellion in next patch. Played Maurya and found that you get a lot of unrest in some regions via different reasons (like corruption, low loyalty of governors or just intolerance) but it never triggers revolts. so Curious if next patch gonna shaken it up a bit.
 
  • 2
  • 1Like
Reactions: