Hello everybody, and welcome to the first development diary for Europa Universalis IV. We've been working on this project for quite a long time, with the first design dicussions starting not long after Divine Wind was released. During last year we spent a lot of time working on the design concepts, and late in 2011, the core team was assembled, and actual development started.

Earlier this month, we announced the game at Gamescom, and showed a minor subset of the features for the game. Today we start a series of weekly development diaries where we'll go into detail about the game. Our goal is to release an entry each friday, with breaks for holidays.

The subject of todays diary is 'Why do Europa Universalis IV and what is our goal with the game?'.

Why are we working on a sequel to Europa Universalis?

Well, first of all, the team we are all major fans of this series, with me personally being the core guy behind the original game, back in the late 90's, and the others being involved for quite a lot of time on it. We are a group who love playing Europa Universalis (EU), both in singleplayer and in multiplayer together, so you could definitely say it is the favorite series for the people working on Europa Universalis IV.

Originally EU1 started development in 1997, EU2 in 2001, EU3 started in 2005, so we were overdue a new take on the genre. During those years we've accumulated quite a lot of ideas, and discarded far more. We've come to understand what Europa Universalis is about for a lot of people, and what it means for ourselves.

One important thing though, is that while we had lots of cool and interesting ideas for EU, we simply couldn't just add them all in, as the game would become an unwieldly mass. EU has a complexity level we do not want to dramatically increase and while improving the interface can reduce it a fair bit, it is a very fine balance when it comes to designing a game.

So we took a step back and looked at what Europa Universalis was and what we wanted to do, and since its a new game, we had quite a large amount of flexibility. We could rewrite entire systems from scratch, and do some paradigm shifts. One such example is the complete removal of the old trade system with centers of trade, which was replaced with a new trade system with dynamic flow of trade. This flexibility has been a great benefit when it comes to designing the game.


So then, what is our goal with Europa Universalis IV?

In all our games we aim to have believable mechanics. When playing a Grand Strategy game it should be about immersion and suspension of disbelief. You should feel like you are playing a country in the time period. This is something all our EU games have managed to achieve, and it is very important that EU4 will have that same feeling.

The game should, as we mentioned earlier, not increase its complexity levels dramatically. We are happy with the level of complexity the Eu-series has, and want to keep it at this level.

One of the most important aspects of EU4 is to make an interface that is both easier to get into, and less hassle for an expert user. This a fine line to balance, and we are rather happy with the interfaces we have done so far for EU4.

We also want to make sure that players feel that this is a new game, that this is worth paying money for, and this comes from new mechanics and better interfaces. With detailed dev-diaries every week until release, we are rather confident that you'll all be excited about it when its finally ready.

So, now we've just talked about history and visions, I'll try to clarify a confusion about sandbox, historical events and plausibility. Europa Universalis have always been about historically plausible outcomes, as I mentioned over six years ago , and EU4 is no different in that regard. No determenism or full sandbox will ever be in the EU series. In EU3 we scrapped historical events and added lots and lots of system and mechanics to create more plausible gameplay. While we are continuing on that concept and keep making more plausible mechanics, we are in EU4 doing something new...

We'e adding in Dynamic Historical Events. We'll have more of those than we had historical in EU2, and together with a fair amount of other planned features, this is creating an even more immersive type of gameplay, where countries feel far more unique than they did in any previous game in the series. A 'dynamic historical event', or DHE for short, is an event that has some rather rigid triggers that they feel plausible to happen with, ie, no Spanish Bankruptcy just because its a certain date, but events that tie into mechanics rather heavily.

The example I want to talk about is War of the Roses for England. At any point of time, before 1500, if England lacks an heir, then the chain for War of the Roses can start, which creates a lot of interesting situations for the player, as well as giving unique historical immersion.

Next week we'll talk more about the map, so enjoy for now!

 

[Tornadoli]

Mechanics increase the complexity of the game and Johan says they try to avoid that. Sure I'd prefer a full scale dynasty mechanics to a War of the Roses event chain but I know that the former is not going to hapen so I conclude that the latter is still better than nothing.

Events are a lazy way to program a game. They are inherently boring. Can you state one game which relies as much on events as EU3? Can you imagine an event-driven Sim City for instance? Or any other game? I am not the game designer, but Paradox should rather work on programming mechanics that work and are not too complex. Simply creating an event chain is the easy, boring way out. Like someone else stated, events should just add some flavor, nothing else. Substituting them for mechanics is not a good prognosis for EU4.

 

[Lord Tywin]

I guess the problem is that Paradox does not sell their products directly in Poland, only through third parties, so they don't care much for that market.

You mean like Steam and Gamersgate? Since I live in Sweden and Paradox doesn't sell their products directly here either but I doubt that means that they doesn't care about the Swedish market.

 

[flame7926]

Events are a lazy way to program a game. They are inherently boring. Can you state one game which relies as much on events as EU3? Can you imagine an event-driven Sim City for instance? Or any other game? I am not the game designer, but Paradox should rather work on programming mechanics that work and are not too complex. Simply creating an event chain is the easy, boring way out. Like someone else stated, events should just add some flavor, nothing else. Substituting them for mechanics is not a good prognosis for EU4.

No its not, its the most interesting way, that takes lots less work. They can take the place of mechanics, while also being individualized for each country. They work for anything which does not need a graphical representation to understand and keep track of. They are the most interesting part, generic mechanics usually lack flavor and a unique, plausible feeling. Not saying generic mechanics aren't important, but I think a dynastic civil war system is a completely unnecessary thing to devote the amount of time it would take to make. Find a game that is a historical grand strategy game that relies less on events and is as interesting and plausible(not that EU3 is very, but its better than E:TW, or Civ).

 

[Me_]

You mean like Steam and Gamersgate? Since I live in Sweden and Paradox doesn't sell their products directly here either but I doubt that means that they doesn't care about the Swedish market.

Steam is quite expensive in Poland, with games quite often more expensive than boxed copies (outside promotions). This makes boxed copies still relevant here.
Kind of like Ikea which in Poland has for a long time been synonymous with expensive furniture (until quite recently).

No its not, its the most interesting way, that takes lots less work. They can take the place of mechanics, while also being individualized for each country. They work for anything which does not need a graphical representation to understand and keep track of. They are the most interesting part, generic mechanics usually lack flavor and a unique, plausible feeling. Not saying generic mechanics aren't important, but I think a dynastic civil war system is a completely unnecessary thing to devote the amount of time it would take to make. Find a game that is a historical grand strategy game that relies less on events and is as interesting and plausible(not that EU3 is very, but its better than E:TW, or Civ).

Event's aren't very interesting since they are to "responsive" in nature. That is you wait for an event to fire and then react rather than taking a decision and then observing results. But that is more of a problem with how they are constructed rather than their nature in itself. DW had quite a few interesting event chains for Daimyos that relide on the player taking a decision first. I hope they add a bit more of those.

 

[Tornadoli]

No its not, its the most interesting way, that takes lots less work. They can take the place of mechanics, while also being individualized for each country. They work for anything which does not need a graphical representation to understand and keep track of. They are the most interesting part, generic mechanics usually lack flavor and a unique, plausible feeling. Not saying generic mechanics aren't important, but I think a dynastic civil war system is a completely unnecessary thing to devote the amount of time it would take to make. Find a game that is a historical grand strategy game that relies less on events and is as interesting and plausible(not that EU3 is very, but its better than E:TW, or Civ).

I can't really argue with that. You SERIOUSLY think events are a better way to model and create a historical game than, you know, HISTORICAL MECHANISMS? Wow. Maybe Paradox should really listen to the minority who want an interactive book rather than, you know, a game.

 

[unmerged(7313)]

That's still not grounds for criticizing his English, let alone being rude about it. If they wanted this post to have perfect grammar, they could have hired some PR person who doesn't work on the game to deliver it. Wouldn't you rather have the developers themselves speaking directly to us and interacting with us, regardless of the slight imperfections of their English? And make no mistake, they speak English very well. You might have something of a point if the person posting this Dev Diary had such minimal English skills that it was actually difficult to comprehend them, but as far as I've seen that doesn't apply to any of the developers at Paradox. Besides, have you ever tried to learn a second language? It's bloody hard to become perfect even when you have a talent for learning languages AND you're learning a closely related, structurally similar language.

• I'm not being rude.
• Paradox already employs PR persons, and they do indeed post on the forum.
• I'm well aware that Paradox developers have absolutely no problem with their English, which possibly makes matters worse - the errors are results of carelessness.
• I'm learning two foreign languages at the moment, one of which is English.

 

[Barnacle Bill]

I guess the problem is that Paradox does not sell their products directly in Poland, only through third parties, so they don't care much for that market.

Yeh, but they sell in the USA and there are lots of Polish-Americans. Enough, in fact, that the US Navy felt motivated to name a nuclear sub after Kazimierz Pułaski (although they spelled it Casimir Pulaski). There is probably a broader group of Americans with no Polish ancestry who could be described as "Polephiles" for some reason or another. I know three such guys (including me) married to women from Poland ("from" as in born there, not just ancestral).

You're probably not going to out-squeak the Byzantophiles, but Prussia seems more than doable.

 

[flame7926]

I can't really argue with that. You SERIOUSLY think events are a better way to model and create a historical game than, you know, HISTORICAL MECHANISMS? Wow. Maybe Paradox should really listen to the minority who want an interactive book rather than, you know, a game.

Did I ever say that it is the best way to model it? If they had unlimited time and resources, I would like them to do as many historical mechanics and systems as they could fit in the interface. Which would still be a logical limit. For the amount of time they have, and what I feel are the biggest flaws in EU3, as well as the fact that events add so much uniqueness to each playthrough, whether they are for your country, or an AI, they are the best way to do numerous things.

 

[Barnacle Bill]

I think that significant decline started earlier, with Khmielnitsky Uprising.

My impression was that the Khmielnitsky Uprising counts as part of "the deluge", along with the Swedish invasion, and even if I'm wrong I used the term in that understanding.

I hope that perhaps Noble Republic would be revamped - with ability to elect foreign monarch leading to personal union while he lives, or huge difficulty for a player to reverse, or even just stop, decentralisation that led to partitions.

I agree, but would suggest that the liberum veto would need to be modelled as well to capture the true difficulty. Perhaps a Poland-specific event with a high likelihood of firing upon a slider change in a direction that the Magnates would tend to dislike (e.g. towards plutocracy, free subjects or centralization), which would (if it fired) reverse the slider change.

I meant exactly that, fanboy is maybe not greatest of terms. I'm sorry if any Byzantium/Prussia fans felt insulted.

I am a fan of BYZ (and Poland and the Jabobites and the CSA and romantic lost causes in general), but I personally didn't take offense.

 

[unmerged(101730)]

Will there be unique events for Ulm?

As much as I support the idea, I have a hard time to think of anything aside from a bunch of low-impact events surrounding the minster.

 

[Sotof]

• I'm not being rude.
• Paradox already employs PR persons, and they do indeed post on the forum.
• I'm well aware that Paradox developers have absolutely no problem with their English, which possibly makes matters worse - the errors are results of carelessness.
• I'm learning two foreign languages at the moment, one of which is English.

Are you serious? I mean really? His English is perfectly understandable, and I would much, much rather have his unfiltered posts than have some PR-guy read them through first. The lack of such speaks of much greater integrity in Paradox, rather than - as you proclaim - a lack of it.

 

[Barnacle Bill]

Are you serious? I mean really? His English is perfectly understandable, and I would much, much rather have his unfiltered posts than have some PR-guy read them through first. The lack of such speaks of much greater integrity in Paradox, rather than - as you proclaim - a lack of it.

Plus, if Johan had to submit all his posts to an English nanny, he wouldn't post as much, and I'd rather have more Johan posts than less.

 

[Gedierond]

I can't really argue with that. You SERIOUSLY think events are a better way to model and create a historical game than, you know, HISTORICAL MECHANISMS? Wow. Maybe Paradox should really listen to the minority who want an interactive book rather than, you know, a game.

The thing is: people do like events. See the mods forums, there lots of mods that add events. And why do people like events? Because they add to the flavour, as you said.
You seem to think that EU3 has no mechanics at all, that absolutely everything relies on events. That may be your assessment, but it´s certainly not mine (maybe I´m alone here, but I don´t think so). The mechanics are there, and the events add flavour to the game.
And even if it´s not like I say, and EU3 does rely a lot on events, maybe people like it better that way. You can´t be certain that the majority of Paradox´s client base think as you do.

 

[Sotof]

The thing is: people do like events. See the mods forums, there lots of mods that add events.

Events are fun, but mechanics are more fun. See? We cannot mod in new mechanics so instead a lot of modders go around and try to use events instead.

 

[Gedierond]

Events are fun, but mechanics are more fun. See? We cannot mod in new mechanics so instead a lot of modders go around and try to use events instead.

I agree with you, that´s why I said that events add to the flavour immediately after that. My points are just that:

a- I don´t think EU3 relies too heavily on events.
b- Even if it does, it is very subjective, and people may like its reliance on events just the way it is.
c- More events, now country-specific and subjected to specific triggers, simply add more flavour and diversity to the game, IMO.

 

[Comrade Chaos]

Will Persia get some love? They're one of the three Gunpowder Empires (Ottomans and Mughals) that is usually overlooked.

 

[Chamboozer]

Will Persia get some love? They're one of the three Gunpowder Empires (Ottomans and Mughals) that is usually overlooked.

The best thing they could do for Persia IMO is to represent the difficult terrain that protected it.

 

[Tornadoli]

The thing is: people do like events. See the mods forums, there lots of mods that add events. And why do people like events? Because they add to the flavour, as you said.
You seem to think that EU3 has no mechanics at all, that absolutely everything relies on events. That may be your assessment, but it´s certainly not mine (maybe I´m alone here, but I don´t think so). The mechanics are there, and the events add flavour to the game.
And even if it´s not like I say, and EU3 does rely a lot on events, maybe people like it better that way. You can´t be certain that the majority of Paradox´s client base think as you do.

I'm not saying EU3 doesn't have the mechanics, I think you misunderstood me there. But we are talking about EU4 now - a totally new game. If they already program a new game, I'd rather that they actually make new mechanics rather than just add events that arbitrarily simulate some historical events. Mods have to do it this way as they cannot mod in mechanics - it's a roundabout way. EU4 should really introduce many new mechanics rather than events.

 

[Chamboozer]

EU4 should really introduce many new mechanics rather than events.

Amen to that. Of all the new features they've announced, the historical events are the ones I'm least excited for, though they still look like a good addition.

 

[polskaGOLA]

Country specific, all the texts are rather country specific, and they are unique for that country.

You know what Johan? This is a great addition!

I just plead that you make it moddable. (Even if the mechanics will remain hard coded, atleast the ability to mod which tags can get what DHE's, and allow DHE's for more than one tag.)