• 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 - 5th of March 2019

Good morning. As was foretold, I am back to talk about our thoughts on overhauling the map of the Balkans for the big end-of-year European update. Once again I’ll begin with a disclaimer that everything here is very much subject to change as we continue to listen to feedback and iterate on our own ideas throughout the year.

balkans_old.jpg


Behold: the Balkans in patch 1.4. And for reference, here are the Balkans as they are now, in patch 1.28:

balkans_new.jpg


The big change here is simply “more provinces”. Albania has been split up substantially, we have more Aegean Islands, and provinces density in Bulgaria is higher.

There is still, in my opinion, plenty of room for new provinces in Greece and Bulgaria. For the mainland we want to achieve a similar level of density as we see in Anatolia. One of the most obvious things we can do is split the Yanya province by adding Arta, one of the last Epirote cities to fall to the Ottomans. The return of the Epirus tag in 1444 heralds another change: the removal of the Corfu tag, at least in 1444. In the game right now, Corfu is a vassal of Venice and ruled by monarchs who were in fact the independent rulers of the Despotate of Epirus. This will change.

Other possibilities include a province that would more accurately reflect the Ottoman-Moldavian border in Silistria/Basarabia, a further split in the Aegean between Scio and Lesbos, and a separate province centered on the city of Tarnovo in Bulgaria.

greece_suggestion.jpg


This suggestion by Mingmung, and others very much like it, show a step in the right direction. Beyond what I’ve already mentioned, I like the idea of splitting Cephalonia from the Corfu province to add a little tactical depth to Epirus, as well as the addition of Corinth in the south. We are however unlikely to add extra provinces on Cyprus or Crete: outside of very large islands like Sardinia and Sicily we prefer to keep such places restrained to single provinces.

Moving north-west, there’s a lot that could be done in Serbia, Bosnia, and the Dalmatian coast. There’s room for a few more provinces of course, though not quite so many as we might need further south.

balkans_suggestion.jpg


This very aesthetically pleasing suggestion by ootats has a lot going for it. Representing Herzegovina/the Duchy of Saint Sava as a Bosnian vassal in 1444 is an interesting possibility. It also puts the province density on a level similar to that of Hungary, which I feel is a good target to aim for in the region. It is however unlikely that we’ll be adding both the Venetian provinces of Scutari and Cataro.

We’ve been reading your comments on the previous dev diary, and they’ve provoked a lot of discussion on Team Content Design. One of the results of these discussions is that we’re more open to a Como province that would split away from the northern part of what is now Milan. When the time comes for implementation it's certainly something we're willing to try out.

And that's all for today! Next week I invite you to join me on a wild ride through the confusing nightmarish mess that was Early Modern Germany. Until then, I look forward to more of your comments and suggestions.
 
I see you are an expert on Bosnian culture. What makes a culture distinct? Language? Religion? Customs? As far as I know Bosnia has all of those seperate from Serbia and Croatia. Bosnian culture could be more distinct from Croat and Serb than either of those are distinct from eachother, especialy because of the religion itself.

If you mean Muslim religion yea it is distinct, but Islam didn't spread to that part of the world yet. Islam became wide spread in around 1600. Bosnian language is 99.9% intelligible by Croats and Serbs so it is not distinct at all.
I am not denying cultural identity of Bosniaks now i just don't like falsifying history so if fits neatly with today's politics.
 
Bosnian language is 99.9% intelligible by Croats and Serbs so it is not distinct at all.
That isn't necessarily a good argument. A couple years ago there was a documentary here about the aftermath of the Balkan Wars and how the different countries actively had tried to change the languages, phasing out specific words, trying to make them separate from each other.
And allegedly there already was quite a difference happening in a mere 20 years.

If such efforts have been done in the past too, and given it's the Balkans I wouldn't be surprised if they have, then using present say intelligibility doesn't really mean much. Plus even if there wasn't an active effort, then merely being isolated from each other and having time pass will make languages diverge.
 
Latin empire makes sense as a formable tag via the knights or Naples (since the last pretender died in naples only 70 yers ago). plus, it gives Ck2 Latin empire some national ideas :D Plus it would be kind of cool giving a nation two different paths it can go.
 
They are literally spending an entire year just for this single DLC that will be released at the end of the year. I doubt they'd spend so much time just for map updates.
Also, they already listed all their plans for this DLC in an earlier DD.



Funnily enough, people who mock Balkan Nationalism are nowadays are even worse than any Balkan nationalists here :rolleyes:



Europe, Catholicism, and HRE. They talked about it several DDs ago.
As a person who does map modding I can tell you that it definitely would not take a year for a team (even a reduced team) to release a European map update.
 
That isn't necessarily a good argument. A couple years ago there was a documentary here about the aftermath of the Balkan Wars and how the different countries actively had tried to change the languages, phasing out specific words, trying to make them separate from each other.
And allegedly there already was quite a difference happening in a mere 20 years.

If such efforts have been done in the past too, and given it's the Balkans I wouldn't be surprised if they have, then using present say intelligibility doesn't really mean much. Plus even if there wasn't an active effort, then merely being isolated from each other and having time pass will make languages diverge.
Even now Croats and Serb make up almost exactly half of total population of BiH. Generally they gravitate politically economically culturally to Croatia and Serbia respectively so there is no fear of diverging langue to point of not understanding (Especially in this digital age). Efforts were made to change language so it would be more separate but it more then not comes down to changing the word into a descriptive version of the same word. Se even if it is your first time hearing that word you would know meaning.
 
Yeah, the despotate was more Italian than Byzantine at this point.
 
Back then for Art of War they collaborated with the community to improve the map all over the world, and the result was amazing. I trust that the current collaboration will bear even more beautiful fruits. Rock on!
 
Add the Bosnian culture already, I mean there is Transilvanyan culture why not Bosnian? That annoys me a lot... Also if possible add some sort of heresy flavour to Bosnia, in form of events if you already don't want to add the heresy itself. And if you are so much against adding a Bosnian culture, I have no idea why though, but if you are then atleast add the possibility of a Bosnian culture appearing via an event or something. Thank you...
I don't want us to argue back and fort, so I think your proposal on Bosnian culture appearing via an event is fine. This way you don't rewrite history and you represent Bosnian culture in a plausible way. It would be something like Brazilian or Mexican appearing later in a game.
 
We’ve been reading your comments on the previous dev diary, and they’ve provoked a lot of discussion on Team Content Design. One of the results of these discussions is that we’re more open to a Como province that would split away from the northern part of what is now Milan. When the time comes for implementation it's certainly something we're willing to try out.
Ticino and Sondrio/Valtellina would be more appropriate than Como, I think - they were both detached from Milan at different points (Ticino remaining in Swiss hands up to this day), and representing the absolute best passes through the Alps to Milan (enough that whoever controlled Milan, obviously enough, tried to hold on to them - Austria got Valtellina from Switzerland after the Napoleonic wars, because it allowed a direct Wien-Milan connection without passing through Veneto).

842px-Map_of_Italy_%281494%29-en.svg.png


This is how I solved the area, back when I tried my hand at modding: it was before AoW, so a lot of it is obsolete, but the Lombard Alps still could get something like this.

pctlesY.jpg
 
Ticino and Sondrio/Valtellina would be more appropriate than Como, I think - they were both detached from Milan at different points (Ticino remaining in Swiss hands up to this day), and representing the absolute best passes through the Alps to Milan (enough that whoever controlled Milan, obviously enough, tried to hold on to them - Austria got Valtellina from Switzerland after the Napoleonic wars, because it allowed a direct Wien-Milan connection without passing through Veneto).

842px-Map_of_Italy_%281494%29-en.svg.png


This is how I solved the area, back when I tried my hand at modding: it was before AoW, so a lot of it is obsolete, but the Lombard Alps still could get something like this.

pctlesY.jpg
While Valtellina was a pass/valley, Como was actually a city situated behind some of these passes (including Valtellina).
 
While Valtellina was a pass/valley, Como was actually a city situated behind some of these passes (including Valtellina).
Como also remained under control of the same country as Milan at all times, while Ticino actually would allow representation of a historical border shift.
 
Como also remained under control of the same country as Milan at all times, while Ticino actually would allow representation of a historical border shift.
But Ticino wasn't that important on itself and is just a small speck on the map.
 
Como also remained under control of the same country as Milan at all times, while Ticino actually would allow representation of a historical border shift.
Wars were fought to control the Valtellina - and not between Buttbumland and Wheresthatstan, but between Spain (controlling Milan and having close relations with Austria) and France and Venice (propping up their allies in the Gray League in order to keep Spanish Milan isolated).

But Ticino wasn't that important on itself and is just a small speck on the map.
Ticino wouldn't be that small a province - fifty-ish pixels isn't really unclickable. And it still fulfills the same purpose as Como - a mountain province to defend the access to plains Milan.
 
If you mean Muslim religion yea it is distinct, but Islam didn't spread to that part of the world yet. Islam became wide spread in around 1600. Bosnian language is 99.9% intelligible by Croats and Serbs so it is not distinct at all.
I am not denying cultural identity of Bosniaks now i just don't like falsifying history so if fits neatly with today's politics.

You are arguing from different starting points.

To most of the world, Bosniak culture is something that popped out of Islamization and Ottoman conquest, and indeed, there is no understanding of distinct Bosnian culture as being something contemporary, equal and alternative to Serbian and Croatian cultures in the medieval time (and indeed in 1444.).

However, to some Bosniaks, thats not the actual history. They are taught that Bosniaks became a thing that developed from Bosnians (actual name used is "dobri Bosnjani" meaning "good Bosnians"), which were a separate and distinctive tribe, and its Serbo-Chetnik (and probably Croatian as well i would assume) greater hegemonic propaganda that is (somehow?!?!) managing to suppress this great truth and keep them outside of accepted history. I will let you draw your own conclusions here.

Ages (literally years) ago, before EU4 release, there was (i would say) an organized group of people, who tried to push this in a thread on this forum, but luckily, some good people (my most humblest self included) stepped up, and destroyed all that nonsense early and thoroughly, so it never spread, and the devs are made aware of it (and thus, i dare say, IT SHALL NOT PASS).

###########

However.

And this is where things start getting interesting.

The guidelines as to what makes different cultures has changed over the years.

So truth be told, although we can definitely refuse these silly "dobti Bosnjani" claims as, well, silly, and thus deny culture on that front, we definitely, in all fairness, also need to consider that we have a bunch of cultures in game which make even less sense. For example the abominate culture split of Russian culture, which was done, i believe, due to balance concerns (it was too easy to accept Russian culture and thus open a huge area of the map to conquest with reduced penalties).

And so in this day and age when cultures are split more regionally than based on actual cultural merits, it must be said that Bosnian culture, being exactly something that is regional, isnt necessarily something so terrible that it would be worthy of a full forum revolt. The only real argument against it would be the number of provinces, which in 1444. would be basically 1. But if Paradox starts adding cultures like Slovenian, well... I dont know.
 
Last edited:
You are arguing from different starting points.

To most of the world, Bosniak culture is something that popped out of Islamization and Ottoman conquest, and indeed, there is no understanding of distinct Bosnian culture as being something contemporary, equal and alternative to Serbian and Croatian cultures in the medieval time (and indeed in 1444.).

However, to some Bosniaks, thats not the actual history. They are taught that Bosniaks became a thing that developed from Bosnians (actual name used is "dobri Bosnjani" meaning "good Bosnians"), which were a separate and distinctive tribe, and its Serbo-Chetnik (and probably Croatian as well i would assume) greater hegemonic propaganda that is (somehow?!?!) managing to suppress this great truth and keep them outside of accepted history. I will let you draw your own conclusions here.

Ages (literally years) ago, before EU4 release, there was (i would say) an organized group of people, who tried to push this in a thread on this forum, but luckily, some good people (myself most humblest self included) stepped up, and destroyed all that nonsense early and thoroughly, so it never spread, and the devs are made aware of it (and thus, i dare say, IT SHALL NOT PASS).

###########

However.

And this is where things start getting interesting.

The guidelines as to what makes different cultures has changed over the years.

So truth be told, although we can definitely refuse these silly "dobti Bosnjani" claims as, well, silly, and thus deny culture on that front, we definitely, in all fairness, also need to consider that we have a bunch of cultures in game which make even less sense. For example the abominate culture split of Russian culture, which was done, i believe, due to balance concerns (it was too easy to accept Russian culture and thus open a huge area of the map to conquest with reduced penalties).

And so in this day and age when cultures are split more regionally than based on actual cultural merits, it must be said that Bosnian culture, being exactly something that is regional, isnt necessarily something so terrible that it would be worthy of a full forum revolt. The only real argument against it would be the number of provinces, which in 1444. would be basically 1. But if Paradox starts adding cultures like Slovenian, well... I dont know.
While I agree with your post, I think that Slovenian can hardly be compared to the regional Bosnian culture you're describing. Slovenian culture could easily get 3-4 provinces if the HRE is reworked properly.
 
I like the idea about new provinces in Bosnia, but as a Bosnian, I can see something really wrong on that map, Hercegovina hasn't been named Hercegovina in 15th century, it remained named Hum and Travunia. Travunia is the southeastern province marked as red. What's the deal with red province thing? It was all Bosnia at that time.
https://bs.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bosna_i_Hercegovina_u_srednjem_vijeku

It represents the Duchy of Saint Sava (Kosača's Herzegovinian duchy that existed between 1430s and 1480s), surviving both Serbian Despotate and Bosnian Kingdom. It was originally subordinate of Bosnian King, but acted independently, not recognizing Roman Catholic Tomaš as King of Bosnia. In 1448 it became Aragonese vassal and the Serbian ally, waging war against Bosnia for Višegrad and Srebrenica.

For the same reason i suggested the province name to become Hercegovina, since the first traces of this name appeared in 1440s, when Kosača moved his capital to Herceg Novi.