Europa Universalis IV - Development Diary 14th of March 2023 - Government Mechanics + Free Content

[Mr.Grizzly]

I don't think Anglois is old French.
We have an old song in French from the 16th century, listen up

And from Wikipedia, the middle French became something in the mid of the 14th, so it seems appropriate for me, even tho it's not written the same, but engloy and Anglois have the same pronunciation

The mid 14th century is 1350s... and the game takes place in 1444, not to mention the game spends time during Modern French, better to go with the name that applies to most of the period. Even if Anglois was used still in 1444, by the time you form the tag and create this culture Anglais would likely be the main spelling and would continue into later versions of French.

 

[Mr.Grizzly]

I don´t understand why people get so mad with the Angevin stuff. The game is not a re-run of what happened in real life, it´s a simulator where different outcomes can happen. Many of the formable tags are long dead countries or just possibilities that did finally not happen in real life.

In my opinion, it´s a new mission tree that adds new stuff/gameplay to the game, so it´s welcome. In the same manner, it´s a shame that Portugal didn´t get this kind of stuff if it conquered Spain and formed a new different nation that would NOT really be Spain.

We can have an argument on wether the AI following this path or not, and how often, is good for the game or not, but I don´t think it´s a bad addition to the game.

What are you talking about? We are not complaining that it's alternate history, we're complaining that it doesn't cover what the conflict was actually about, the French throne. Alternate history is the most fun when it's plausible history, not fantasy. As stated many times already, the wars between England and France were not about creating an empire, but about the English monarchs seizing the title King of France, which was seen as much more rich and developed than poor England. The English path should be about becoming France, delicately balancing internal struggles with duchies and England while fighting off foreign threats that rather claim the throne themselves or are concerned over such a large state forming in Western Europe. It would be a very unique France.

And no, a Portuguese formed Spain would not be very different, people don't realise that Portuguese is quite close to the rest of Spain, much closer than Aragon was with it's large Catalan population. This would be like saying Austria should have a complete different formable version of Germany because historically they are not part of Germany but we know that they are part of the cultural and geographic region of Germany. What would Spain do, it's flag, royal family, etc would all be different obviously. But it would not be the "Lusitanian Empire" or whatever. Heck Iberia used to be called Spain until the 19th century, it only changed to help make the distinction between the peninsula and the Kingdom of Spain, before that the Portuguese were considered one of the many kingdoms of Spain. There was even a close moment in the 15th century during the War of Castilian Succession where Portugual and Castile almost entered union. Does that warrant a new tag? A "Badajoz Kingdom"? No, of course not, that's crazy, it would just be Spain. Too many people like to think of 1444 with our modern visions of ethnicities and nationalism. Today the Portuguese identity is vehemently opposed to being called Spanish, that comes after centuries of fighting with Spain, which the game does not portray. But back then they absolutely were called Spaniards, same as anyone from the Italian peninsula being called Italian, despite Italy as a country not existing and the different sub-cultures.

It's very important to base the sandbox off history, don't railroad the game but don't create fantasy tags for meme trees. Not one of us said to remove any alternate history path for Britain. We are not saying to add missions to lose the Hundred Years' War. Simply that we must look at the game from the 1444 lens and go from there. Angevin Kingdom/Empire was only a historiographical term created in the 1800s for the very specific period between the 12th and 13th century for England, heck it didn't even last a full century. We are saying the tag is ridiculous, not the possibility for England to seize Paris.

 

[Danieri]

Angevin Empire is a historiographical term for English holdings in France. As such, never in a million universes would a victorious England decide to name itself for Angers if the king successfully became the King of France. The Divergences of Darkness mod went with something better based on the same concept. Naming it the Dual Monarchy, ruled from France and French dominated.

Alright that much I can understand. But from the player perspective, you are playing as England, not France, claiming the french throne/lands. You are introducing alien elements into this conquered land (parlament, law, culture, etc.), which would mean lots of turmoil both from local nobility and peasants, meaning that whatever political problems France had in the moment would be altered by the English conquest. I guess that the angevin stuff can be seen as just the "casus belli" for this purpose, but the political, economical and social repercussions of these actions would justify renaming the whole country altogether. I´d go as far as to claim that every country would probably have the same fate, but it´s just not possible for developers to introduce so many alt-history variants.

What I´m trying to say is not that the "Angevin Empire" is a good concept per se, what I´m trying to say is that, for EU4, giving a country that expands significantly a new form/name is a good idea (be it Angevin Empire, Dual Monarchy or whatever suits the case), just as Spain forms from Castile/Aragon. What would have happened if Castile and Portugal formed a Union instead? It´s alt history with a base to it, but this is a simulator game, not a history book.

 

[Futurixta]

Which are the reasons to swap Aragon's main culture to catalan?

Most of the kings were educated/live/reing from Aragon (the main exception is Alfonso V who reing from Naples and was educated in Castille), some from Huesca, others from Zaragoza etc... Indeed aragon was a federal Kingdom, each region has his own laws etc... The Kingdom of Aragon had ones, the Kingdom of Valencia had others, the catalan counties others... But how do you decide the main culture?

You focus this decision in the only king who is excluded from the general lines, but this exception was not catalan, was from Castille and rule from Naples....

If u select it by the culture of the head of state, they were all aragonese, if u decide it by the most develop area as some pdx member has mention, yeah in game catalonia has 46 develop, while valencia has 44. But Valencia has only 4 province while Catalonia 5 so... technically Valencia is more developed, the same goes for Naples, they had 43 develop with only 3 province.

A pdx member stated that "Anyway, as the main seat of the monarchy was still Barcelona, and Catalonia was still the most developed/populated region of the country, we decided upon this change".
This is fake, literally. What was in Barcelona (and move to Naples during the reing of Alfonso V) was the "Cancilleria Real Aragonesa" whose purpose was to elaborate and storage administrative documents.
The "Cortes Generales de Aragón" which was an asembly and the main legislative chamber, were summoned always in Monzón (Aragon) and sometimes in Zaragoza Calatayud or Fraga (all in Aragon).
Finally the "Archivo General de la Corona de Aragon" an official deposit of documents was in Sigena (Huesca) until 1301 when then moved to BCN.

De facto Zaragoza was the political capital of the kingdom (as some historians as Domingo Buesa indicate).

This arbitrary change has no sense. It's like setting that England main culture to welsh or Lithuania's main culture to ruthenian.
Only a political reason or missunderstod of the history of The Kingdom of Aragon could be behind this change. Because it doesnt affect to gameplay reasons as could be including turkish culture in Levantine group. It doesnt stick to historical reasons.

 

[Otawai]

The mid 14th century is 1350s... and the game takes place in 1444, not to mention the game spends time during Modern French, better to go with the name that applies to most of the period. Even if Anglois was used still in 1444, by the time you form the tag and create this culture Anglais would likely be the main spelling and would continue into later versions of French.

1350-60~ is the time that the old French became middle French, then it lasted until early 17th
But since it's a constant evolution we can't tell when the french was more similar to the one spoken now and the old-middle one.


And, ah come on man, understand us, in French the culture name for English is already anglais.

 

[Mr.Grizzly]

1350-60~ is the time that the old French became middle French, then it lasted until early 17th
But since it's a constant evolution we can't tell when the french was more similar to the one spoken now and the old-middle one.


And, ah come on man, understand us, in French the culture name for English is already anglais.

I'm a French Canadian, I know that it's Anglais. You also proved my point, Anglois is an Old French term. Old French stopped in the mid 14th century, which is before the game starts... For Middle French and Modern French the term was Anglais. Considering the whole game takes place in Middle and Modern French, it should be Anglais.

 

[Mr.Grizzly]

Alright that much I can understand. But from the player perspective, you are playing as England, not France, claiming the french throne/lands. You are introducing alien elements into this conquered land (parlament, law, culture, etc.), which would mean lots of turmoil both from local nobility and peasants, meaning that whatever political problems France had in the moment would be altered by the English conquest. I guess that the angevin stuff can be seen as just the "casus belli" for this purpose, but the political, economical and social repercussions of these actions would justify renaming the whole country altogether. I´d go as far as to claim that every country would probably have the same fate, but it´s just not possible for developers to introduce so many alt-history variants.

What I´m trying to say is not that the "Angevin Empire" is a good concept per se, what I´m trying to say is that, for EU4, giving a country that expands significantly a new form/name is a good idea (be it Angevin Empire, Dual Monarchy or whatever suits the case), just as Spain forms from Castile/Aragon. What would have happened if Castile and Portugal formed a Union instead? It´s alt history with a base to it, but this is a simulator game, not a history book.

While I get that sentiment, the reality is the English kings just did not give a single damn about England unless it was squeezing the nation dry to use in war against France. Playing as a country, and transforming into a different tag is not new, there are numerous events that already have this, example Hungary and Teutonic Order. Also, the English kings would not be bringing all their laws, culture, etc to France, that's not how it worked. They would be two separate countries still, the English parliament would only be England, there wouldn't be a French parliament, meanwhile creating an Angevin Empire actually does create that "alien element." Again, we are not saying we want direct 100% copy of history. But we want a historical authentic simulator, the events of the game need to make sense and be plausible, not fantasy.

 

[Traka]

Hello,

Just to remember that no one can be right on that stuff cause it didn't happen, like someone said it's alternativ history, and that's cool.
I'm French, I have no issue with the anglois, it sounds different and it's ok because it will be a different story. Angevin Empire is great also because the outcome is a new country, and yes it's officialize this name for the game. Why not it's logical.

Arguing on this is a no end story. We all love story but no one is right on what didn't happen !

 

[chrispey94]

I don't know why you think I'm disagreeing with you. My position is that if England wins the hundred years war it should be able to form France and have England released as a PU on Britain. I do not think the Angevin tag should exist at all. If there absolutely has to be a formable for marketing, it should maybe take some cues from Victoria 2's Divergences of Darkness mod, and make it the Dual Monarchy.

Sorry I didn't think you were disagreeing with me, I can see how it came across like that. I was just making a point and found your comment relevant. I often write replies in the hope that the devs read our discussions and take them into consideration when developing the game.

 

[Tydeus Cicero]

"For those of you who love painting the map when it comes to forming Japan, I added the ability to adopt your Daimyo Color upon forming Japan, based on a selection of the top 15 most popular Daimyos. Here's how it would look for a handful of them"

I wish this option could be added to Denmark,Sweden and Nörge, when forming scandinavia

Why did you write Norway like that? Ö isnt even part our alphabet. Its Norge

 

[Sete]

Portuguese is quite close to the rest of Spain

While I agree a Portuguese formed Spain might not have been different culturally, and that might be debatable, it certainly would have different interests/ path to follow.

 

[Hildrigg]

I've loved the DDs for this DLC, great work guys!

I have a question, I've seen that for example the Mamluks will get a future update in the next DLC, and sure that will balance things with how much content the Ottomans are getting. And so will Persia.
But what about the non-totemist Native American tags? All the colonizers are getting buffed, and fighting them off is already hard enough. There should be a viable option rather than the current meta of just flipping to totemist.
The missions for Nahuatl, Inti and Mayan countries are totally lackluster, the mission trees are generic and small; the Mission rewards underwhelming, even some with difficult requirements like reforming the religion, driving back the Europeans or actually invading Europe. The rewards should be better for such a feat.
I do like the idea of getting the Tier 1 Government Reform of the country you used to reform (it'll be specially great with the new Government Reforms for the Iberians), but they could also get their specific ones for each of Inti, Mayan and Nahuatl, with a decision popping to either choose the European or your specific religion one. Maybe one for playing tall with dev cost for the Mayans, one military focused for the Nahuatl and one with autonomy decrease for the Inti.
They also suffer from lack of missionaries in a continent with not a single great project that grants either missionaries, missionary strength nor religious unity for non Inti. Any of those 3 modifiers could be implemented by permanent modifier mission rewards, government reforms or great projects.
Also the State and Religion Tier government reform offers nothing if you are Nahuatl, who already get -0.05 MWE (and Aztec get another -0.05 MWE on top) so extra -0.03 gives no reason to ever pick that one.

I would love of you revisited that part of the map and created content as amazing as you have for this DLC.

 

[Mr.Grizzly]

View attachment 959144

While I agree a Portuguese formed Spain might not have been different culturally, and that might be debatable, it certainly would have different interests/ path to follow.

Agreed, like I said, it would have certainly done different things. Ideally there would be alternate mission branches that would unlock at the Castilian Succession Crisis

 

[IndigoRage]

Sorry I didn't think you were disagreeing with me, I can see how it came across like that. I was just making a point and found your comment relevant. I often write replies in the hope that the devs read our discussions and take them into consideration when developing the game.

True true, but as someone with a lot of complaints it can often feel kind of hopeless.

With that in mind, hey devs when are you going to make it so that if a colony is released with all of colonial Louisiana it doesn't form Illinois every single time.

 

[Tercio Soldier]

Zaragoza is still of Aragonese culture, but we changed Aragon's primary culture to Catalan. This might be debatable; it's difficult to think about what's the primary culture when Afons/Alfonso V had his court at that given moment in Naples while having lots of Catalan, Aragonese, and Italian nobles in it, while the Trastámara dynasty was Castilian and the Infantes had close relations with both Castile and Navarra. Anyway, as the main seat of the monarchy was still Barcelona, and Catalonia was still the most developed/populated region of the country, we decided upon this change.

The concept of a primary culture for the Crown of Aragon does not really make sense to begin with. Each territory had their own laws and their own institutions, and common institutions like the Cancillería Real had documnents in Latin, Catalan and Aragonese. With the House of Barcelona the kings spoke all three languages, and spoke Aragonese or Catalan to different members of their own family.

However, the game takes place after the Compromiso de Caspe, after which the kings were Castilian. I would argue that Aragonese makes more sense as the primary culture, as Aragonese was more Castilianised by the begining of the game, and better represents the reality of the kings after the Compromiso de Caspe. While most historians do not support the idea that Caspe set a path towards the Castilianisation of the Crown, it is a fact the the new Trastámara dynasty was a Castilian one.

And there is the fact that shortly after game start (1462) the Catalan Civil War happes (which should be in the game as a disaster by the way). It is an strange decision to make the primary culture of Aragon Catalan when the Catalan part of the Crown is going to rebel in a few years after game start.

 

[IndigoRage]

The concept of a primary culture for the Crown of Aragon does not really make sense to begin with. Each territory had their own laws and their own institutions, and common institutions like the Cancillería Real had documnents in Latin, Catalan and Aragonese. With the House of Barcelona the kings spoke all three languages, and spoke Aragonese or Catalan to different members of their own family.

However, the game takes place after the Compromiso de Caspe, after which the kings were Castilian. I would argue that Aragonese makes more sense as the primary culture, as Aragonese was more Castilianised by the begining of the game, and better represents the reality of the kings after the Compromiso de Caspe. While most historians do not support the idea that Caspe set a path towards the Castilianisation of the Crown, it is a fact the the new Trastámara dynasty was a Castilian one.

And there is the fact that shortly after game start (1462) the Catalan Civil War happes (which should be in the game as a disaster by the way). It is an strange decision to make the primary culture of Aragon Catalan when the Catalan part of the Crown is going to rebel in a few years after game start.

Agreed, and as I expressed elsewhere unless something really fundamental about the way it works has changed, with the way this currently works it would create a bunch of mechanical edge cases and be a slippery slope for tags all over the world.

The game's Assam tag for instance represents the Ahom kingdom which had an ethnically Ahom (they speak a subset of the Tai languages) ruling class. Instances like this are all over the map. But in every case outside of the Crusader States in Greece and the Baltic specifically the culture of the majority of the people is taken into account over the culture of the ruling class.

Really the game's culture system has been abstracted to represent like 4 different things AND facilitate gameplay. EU4's culture system just sucks.

 

[Hildrigg]

Hello
So now the Maghrebi nations will have raid coast as part of their traditions, but also as part of their Tier 1 Government Reform and also as a naval doctrine? Isn't it VERY redundant?
Will they have their traditions updated?
Maybe I didn't see it, but is there a difference between "Raid coast" given by the traditions/government form, and "Slave raid" naval doctrine abilities?

 

[Ex Mudder]

"Expansion & Exploration Ideas:

• Changed the Idea Factories to - > -10% Trade Company Investment Cost & -10% Trade Company Governing Cost. It is now in the 5th slot of Exploration Ideas. Expansion now gets the Viceroys idea, which used to be in Exploration (We have also tweaked Global Tariffs, hopefully they will be a bit more worthwhile now!)
• Additional Diplomats now grants +1 Diplomat and -5% Liberty Desire of Subjects in Other Continents
• The goal of these changes is to turn Expansion into the “Americas” colonization idea whereas Exploration should now be more useful for general exploring and going into and beyond Africa! "

Isn't this backwards? How are you supposed to explore the New World if you can not recruit explorers and conquistadors? Nation specific mission awards? Wait until some else does it first? Share maps? And why would you need conquistadors to go to Africa and beyond?

 

[Kapi96]

I think „Chinese Treasure Fleet“ is a bit odd. It´s intended purpose seems to be a buff to colonialism for chinese tags, but as it stands now „Treasure Fleet Income: +25%“ is largly useless for any nation with theire trade capital in the chinese region. The only colonial gold mines, which would generate treasure fleets, are the few in australia. I would propose to wave the requirment that colonial nations only send treasure fleets, if your trade capital is downstream from theirs. If you can bring colonists to a region, you should be able to bring precious metals back to your own country as well.

Alaska, California and Mexico can all send treasure fleets to China.

Australia actually can't. You'd need to move to Indonesia or India to get treasure fleets from Australia.

 

[Darkrenown]

It's kind of a shame the featured events are full of typos and nonsense. IMO it's a good idea to proofread and fix stuff before showing it in a DD. Gotta do Content Review in general too.

Should be "fallen into disrepair". Line 2 really just repeats line 1 twice. Saying it'll cost administrators is weird because you're mixing game mechanics into the narrative in a clunky way: You should rather say that it'll strain our administration or require the attention of our administrators etc., but the whole line sounds weird since "taking charge on" sounds weird too. "Taking charge of repairing them will strain our administration, but will amend the situation" sounds better. The first option saying "some will have to pay" doesn't make sense either, as you are paying the cost yourself, not offloading it to someone else. I'm not sure if "We have no need for roads!" is meant to be funny, but I'd probably have said something like We need to focus on other things, or We cannot afford this at the moment, rather than declaring roads useless. Event pic doesn't fit the text either, it seems people have decided to go pillaging in anger over the potholes?

"offed" should be "offered". The tooltip could be better too, "Any excess Prestige will be converted into an equal amount of each Monarch Power".

This is by far the worst of the bunch. What's going on with this event and how did it make its way into a game? I hate almost every line. The title is singular despite the event being about your mercenaries as a whole. The first line is very awkward, "lie within our payroll"? Also, "men of war" applies equally to your standing army - could just say mercenaries, or "soldiers of fortune" etc so it's clear it's about them. Line two both contains a typo and is utter nonsense - it should be either "none have" or "no one has", but the idea that none of the mercenaries have engaged in acts of war or caused bloodshed while conquering nations just makes no sense. Should be something about no raping, pillaging, sacking cities, no civilians have been harmed, etc. Line 3 is awkward again and "sternly proud" is an odd turn of phrase. Line 4 is OK but overstated (although sometimes that's fun!) - I'd probably just say they resent us less than they otherwise might. Also the cities aren't foreign anymore, "subjugated cities" might work better. Option would sound better just as "We are gentle conquerors." "are but" is a bit odd in itself, but especially when we see it used twice (body and option) in the above event as well - maybe it's someone's turn of phrase that they don't notice they keep using?