• 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.
Welcome to another Europa Universalis IV development diary. Everything is going fine with the development of Leviathan, as we are working on polishing content at the moment.

We have talked about some major improvements to playing tall in previous diaries, with possibilities of stacking manufactories and concentrating development. Today we will talk about something that synergies nicely with both these features.

Centralizing a State

The final new Playing-Tall option is the ability to Centralize a State. This action reduces the administrative cost of a state by as much as the value of 20 development points.

Centralizing States costs 100 Government Reform Progress points and takes five years to complete.

This interaction is available both through the state interface and through the macrobuilder.
eu4_26.png


Never Mothball
A small thing that might make the top 3 of some peoples requested lists, and may be completely ignored by others is a small toggle for individual forts to never mothball.

We are adding a small checkbox in the province interface that if enabled, that fort will never mothball when you mothball every fort in your country from the military screen. This is something you may want to use when you may want to save money on lots of forts, but never risk it with the important forts next to France.
eu4_25.png


Canal changes
With the new monument mechanics, we moved the old great projects system to be using the new monument code internally as well, which gives a few benefits, in that you can upgrade them as well. Each upgrade takes about 10 years further, and about 1000 gold each. We are also making the canals available from an earlier technology as well, from admin tech 26 to admin tech 22.

Previously the canals, besides opening the paths, gave a +20 trade power to the location, now instead they are giving these.

  • Tier 0 +10 Trade Power to Location, and +1% Trade Power to the Controller.
  • Tier 1 +20 Trade Power to Location, and +2% Trade Power to the Controller.
  • Tier 2 +30 Trade Power to Location, and +3% Trade Power to the Controller.
  • Tier 3 +50 Trade Power to Location, and +5% Trade Power to the Controller.




Next week we’ll be back and talk about colonial nations.
 
Government reform progress needs rebalancing, not other uses. It's currently either too easy to burn through the reforms if you don't switch governments, causing you to get reforms at ahistorically quick pace, which breaks immersion and renders the mechanic quite pointless, or you switch government forms and then it's too slow, preventing you from getting reforms during their historically appropriate periods. Providing an extra spender doesn't fix either of those issues.
 
  • 24
  • 4Like
  • 3
Reactions:
Features that boil down to just being a single button introduced with a single script which are just worse versions of existing features (in this case Expand Administration) is not a good basis for intriguing or interesting features. The new "additions" can literally be done by modders on the newer engines/games, if not to a better standard and quality. Your new policy of DLC features is just half-thought out scriptable GUI modding. Just because something can be added, doesn't make it a good idea.

Go back to the drawing board and please rethink your current design direction. Plenty of players here, from both Multiplayer and Singleplayer, have plenty of suggestions and areas of the game we'd like to see addressed. The game does not need more free modifier stacking, it does not need more pointless buttons, it does not need more bloated additions hidden as "new features". The core of the game itself needs serious addressing and multiple mechanics could do with reworks to be more interactive and interesting.
In all fairness,i'm pretty sure that's because of the engine limitations,just like CK2 had before,so what we can hope is that EU5 come sooner than later.
 
  • 7
  • 2
  • 1Like
Reactions:
What do you thing about if cost of centralization is 100 governing capacity and it takes 5 years to complete and after you get back that 100 governing capacity and get reduction of 20 GC.

So you spend now 100 GC to get -20 GC later?
 
  • 10
Reactions:
Instead of money (we already have edicts for that) Could perhaps this be done by assigning missionaries/merchants/colonists/diplomats as governors?
Would give a purpose to idle characters.
Colonists have a way to be used for non colonising. They can be put in a province to increase dev over time. The problem is it is unreliable and unaffected by stuff like settler chance or additional population effects. So taking expansion ideas for a tall country is still bad. If they adjusted that mechanic and gave a similar use for other characters like missionaries it would actually benefit tall play without being a boon for wide. Wide players would continue to use them for colonising and converting but tall would now get something out of them too.
 
  • 7
  • 2Like
  • 1
Reactions:
No you need to change your design philosophy from adding buttoms to adding mechanics.
AKA what Imperator team did after Your departure.
While i agree with that,keep in mind that Imperator is not as old as EU4 is now,maybe the codebase of EU4 is too rickty for supporting adding new mechanics at this stage of the game life.I'd love to be wrong about that,but i highly doubt it.
 
  • 13
  • 1Like
Reactions:
To be honest, I think the game doesn't really need new tall mechanics. I mean, it would definitely be nice, but if it's not possible due to engine limitations it's fine. EU4 is an old game but that shouldn't impact our ability to enjoy it. I'd much rather have new content where it's missing (South America, Africa, Scandinavia and the Baltic, etc.) and AI/bug fixes until EU5 than these half assed mechanic additions.
 
  • 21
  • 5
  • 4Like
Reactions:
So, we need to rebalance some numbers?
If you insist on keeping the mechanic as is and doing the very minimal to fix it, then yes. The biggest issue with this is definitely the fact that a better version of it already exists in the game.

But if you would just take some extra time to put more thought into a proper rework of this idea then it could be so much better.


Please, read through the discussion in the thread and the complaints being made. I made my own post but It is definitely not the only suggestion being offered by the people in this thread. The idea of playing Tall being an option is a good one, you just need to take on board the feedback and adjust your plans to be more than just adding a few extra buttons to press.
 
  • 14
  • 9Like
  • 3
  • 1
Reactions:
While i agree with that,keep in mind that Imperator is not as old as EU4 is now,maybe the codebase of EU4 is too rickty for supporting adding new mechanics at this stage of the game life.I'd love to be wrong about that,but i highly doubt it.
This.

A dramatic design change for eu4 would be insanely risky right now from both a codebase and a player perspective. If you have basically no players, like we did with Imperator after release, you can take huge gambles.
 
  • 40
  • 23
  • 21
  • 8Haha
  • 5Like
Reactions:
Honestly if you made a few changes then all these new buttons would be okay.

Make passing through canals require fleet basing rights from country controlling the canal. If 2 countries control canal then you need it from both (Suez has 2 provinces IIRC).

Make it so the centralize button reduces dev cost or something instead of lowering gov. capacity cost.
 
  • 13
  • 4Like
Reactions:
Honestly if you made a few changes then all these new buttons would be okay.

Make passing through canals require fleet basing rights from country controlling the canal. If 2 countries control canal then you need it from both (Suez has 2 provinces IIRC).

Make it so the centralize button reduces dev cost or something instead of lowering gov. capacity cost.
Yeah, even if we're sticking with just buttons out of necessity, there are some ways to make this a lot more interesting imo. Some of the suggestions in this thread are at least more on the right track.
 
  • 10
  • 3Like
Reactions:
This.

A dramatic design change for eu4 would be insanely risky right now from both a codebase and a player perspective. If you have basically no players, like we did with Imperator after release, you can take huge gambles.

I think many understand this but there is a lot of room between new button with something old and dramatic design change. This looks like you made it just to add something, not to make something fun.
 
  • 24
  • 6Like
  • 1
Reactions:
Welcome to another Europa Universalis IV development diary. Everything is going fine with the development of Leviathan, as we are working on polishing content at the moment.

We have talked about some major improvements to playing tall in previous diaries, with possibilities of stacking manufactories and concentrating development. Today we will talk about something that synergies nicely with both these features.

Centralizing a State

The final new Playing-Tall option is the ability to Centralize a State. This action reduces the administrative cost of a state by as much as the value of 20 development points.

Centralizing States costs 100 Government Reform Progress points and takes five years to complete.

This interaction is available both through the state interface and through the macrobuilder.
View attachment 687779

Never Mothball
A small thing that might make the top 3 of some peoples requested lists, and may be completely ignored by others is a small toggle for individual forts to never mothball.

We are adding a small checkbox in the province interface that if enabled, that fort will never mothball when you mothball every fort in your country from the military screen. This is something you may want to use when you may want to save money on lots of forts, but never risk it with the important forts next to France.
View attachment 687778

Canal changes
With the new monument mechanics, we moved the old great projects system to be using the new monument code internally as well, which gives a few benefits, in that you can upgrade them as well. Each upgrade takes about 10 years further, and about 1000 gold each. We are also making the canals available from an earlier technology as well, from admin tech 26 to admin tech 22.

Previously the canals, besides opening the paths, gave a +20 trade power to the location, now instead they are giving these.

  • Tier 0 +10 Trade Power to Location, and +1% Trade Power to the Controller.
  • Tier 1 +20 Trade Power to Location, and +2% Trade Power to the Controller.
  • Tier 2 +30 Trade Power to Location, and +3% Trade Power to the Controller.
  • Tier 3 +50 Trade Power to Location, and +5% Trade Power to the Controller.




Next week we’ll be back and talk about colonial nations.
How is this a tall option? That just incentivizes somebody playing wide more than anything, as it frees up more GC (governing capacity) to blob. Government reform progress is also incredibly scarce compared to GC. This trade seems like it's actively hurting yourself if you take it. It shouldn't be considered a significant feature whatsoever.

Considering how Imperial Incident AI factors flat out don't work even now, and how absolutely broken the 1.30 launch was (didn't get fixed for several weeks), I worry that this update's only major contribution is going to be game-breaking bugs, and also clickable buttons that barely anybody will use that Paradox somehow considers content. SE Asia and the Americas is nice though, but that's about the only significant change I'm seeing here.

Also removing old mechanics that modders have changed to suit their needs, and adding new ones instead that probably won't work that well considering 1.30. MEIOU pretty much can't update considering Paradox removed estate clicks in favor of privileges, which was the basis behind much of that's mod's mechanics. Mods are the only reason I still play this game, so Paradox messing up mods is high on my importance list. I'm not sure if I consider this update good at all.
 
  • 8
  • 5Like
  • 2
  • 1
Reactions: