I was really hoping this was going to be fixed with CK2-style war aims so that you can take contested provinces regardless of who controls them... sad to hear that you're still going to be punished for not micromanaging sieges.
Europa Universalis IV Developer diary 17 – Honey, don’t you want to talk about it?
- Thread starter Johan
- Start date
-
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.
I was really hoping this was going to be fixed with CK2-style war aims so that you can take contested provinces regardless of who controls them... sad to hear that you're still going to be punished for not micromanaging sieges.
In EU3 it works that way: you click on Royal Marriage, see a "Likely", send a diplomat and pray to get a yes reply.
What is the "vague answers from the AI" that got removed? AI always replied with yes/no. Or got probabilities removed at all and green arrow means they will definitely accept?
What is the color northeast of Muscovy? PTI? Sibir Khanate?
Interesting DD! I really like the fact that CK2-style relation modifiers are added to diplomacy.
Hmm, for me the main question is, are there modifiers to the rate of relations fade? Will "aggressive expansion" always fade at 1.3/year?
Also, will every nation in the world start hating someone for aggression, or is it applied to neighbours/same faith/same tech group only? Or perhaps plainly modified with distance?
I guess "fought to the end" is connected to "honoured alliance", no more joining war and white-pacing right afterwards, eh?
And it's really nice to see your own relations will finally matter. I wonder whether something like that would be put into CK2 in some patch.
Also, will every nation in the world start hating someone for aggression, or is it applied to neighbours/same faith/same tech group only? Or perhaps plainly modified with distance?
I guess "fought to the end" is connected to "honoured alliance", no more joining war and white-pacing right afterwards, eh?
And it's really nice to see your own relations will finally matter. I wonder whether something like that would be put into CK2 in some patch.
Really cool 
I especially like the fading bit - the CKII system was nice, but it was dumb that after 50 years someone who loved you because of X suddenly decided he didn't care about you, since the modifier was gone. It just felt too abrupt.
I wish you would have gone into more details about what your diplomats can do though.
I am guessing like you are that "honored alliance" meant you accepted to go to war, "fought to the end" means you did not take a separate peace.
I especially like the fading bit - the CKII system was nice, but it was dumb that after 50 years someone who loved you because of X suddenly decided he didn't care about you, since the modifier was gone. It just felt too abrupt. I wish you would have gone into more details about what your diplomats can do though.
I am guessing like you are that "honored alliance" meant you accepted to go to war, "fought to the end" means you did not take a separate peace.
Great Britain in 1471? Not to early for that...? I mean, it should be difficult to form GB in 15th century, even for human player, shouldn't it?
My own guess is that a 100% warscore against France will be much rarer, almost unheard of. Instead of wiping out his armies and then occupying all his provinces you'll be beating his armies, letting him retreat and then laying siege to a few provinces, take them before his morale recovers and then sue for peace. War will be much more costly so you'll want to end them quickly. Throwing lives away hunting down his men just won't be worth it.
The coalition/fleet basing options are just what I hoped for, also the CKII style modifiers promise a lot more interesting relations.
Will there be an "improve relations" option (like the "gift giving" in EU3) and if yes will it be with gold or diplomatic points ?
Will there be an "improve relations" option (like the "gift giving" in EU3) and if yes will it be with gold or diplomatic points ?
Either the decision no longer needs cores or he simply bought them. Keep in mind there's no 50 year wait anymore afaik. There's also Spain that has formed if you missed it.
- Dec 14, 1999
- 19.157
- 77.101
I like these new additions, more political depth will make EU IV a very interesting game.
I dislike the fact that you will now get a straight yes/no instead of impossible, very unlikely, etc but I guess its necessary because of how diplomats work now.
I dislike the fact that you will now get a straight yes/no instead of impossible, very unlikely, etc but I guess its necessary because of how diplomats work now.
I like. If you're particularly aggressive will the AI tend to designate you as a rival? Or what if you're also obscenely powerful (but not necessarily aggressive)?
Also, how do you go about getting countries to stop being your rival? Can you also influence other AI states to designate someone you particularly dislike as a rival?
Also, how do you go about getting countries to stop being your rival? Can you also influence other AI states to designate someone you particularly dislike as a rival?
An idea: would it be a good idea to show which opinion modifiers are temporary and which are permanent by, for example, color coding them?
- Dec 14, 1999
- 19.157
- 77.101
How do the negative conquest relations modifiers work with holy wars? If I'm playing a Christian country and conquer Egypt in an act of aggression, will all of my Christian neighbours gets really angry? You'd think a successful pseudo-crusade would cause them to pat me on the back!
This is probably the one thing that really irked me about the badboy system in EU3. Holy wars should make everyone angry EXCEPT for the countries sharing your religion!
This is probably the one thing that really irked me about the badboy system in EU3. Holy wars should make everyone angry EXCEPT for the countries sharing your religion!
Yes, that is the case with many temporary modifiers (but probably not all cf. CK2?). And of course you will learn which modifiers will go away and which not. I was just thinking that the game might be more accessible, especially for newcomers, if you could see which modifiers are permanent and which not just by glancing the current situation.
But then there's the problem that some modifiers decrease over time, some are fixed for some time and so on... I don't know, maybe the idea would create more confusion than clarification. Anyhow, just an idea
Siege stealing is still in the game? I had to resort to tag-switching at times in EU3 so I could actually get the territory I went to war for :/
On the thread in general I really, really hope that economics and trade will be more connected to diplomacy this time around so that we can have clashes of interest without territorial conquests being the prime motivator. Classical examples - English navigation acts, the Sound toll and such. I want more conflicts and agreements between national and factional interests than ''more land'' which means that balance of power and interest of nations only really matter in regional localities - in EU3, there is no reason for England or Holland to care about a war in the Baltic and vice versa. I hope you've really cooked together something good this time
Yes, that is the case with many temporary modifiers (but probably not all cf. CK2?). And of course you will learn which modifiers will go away and which not. I was just thinking that the game might be more accessible, especially for newcomers, if you could see which modifiers are permanent and which not just by glancing the current situation.
But then there's the problem that some modifiers decrease over time, some are fixed for some time and so on... I don't know, maybe the idea would create more confusion than clarification. Anyhow, just an idea
It already says how much it decreases each year, and I'm sure it will show an end date or something if there isnt a certain decrease value per year, just a negative fixed hit for some years. I think it gives a good explanation as it is.
How are you supposed to be able to get territory from seperate peace deals (when not being alliance leader) if this so called "siege stealing" isnt in? Any good ideas? If not it's better of as it works today.
Last edited:
"Aggressive Expansion -189" .. Huh! So badboy isn't dead after all, it just hired a PR firm to overhaul it's communications and focus it's message
Good stuff. Everything here I like, really. CK2 diplomacy was a step up, and this screenshot suggests the best have been taken from both systems.
I'm curious to know about the 'fought to the end' modifier tho.
Good stuff. Everything here I like, really. CK2 diplomacy was a step up, and this screenshot suggests the best have been taken from both systems.
I'm curious to know about the 'fought to the end' modifier tho.