Dev Diary 4th February 2020 - Version II

  • 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.
Statement from Version I stands:
How additional snowball mechanic would make late game more meaningful? To make it meaningful it is something quite opposite needed.
 
Statement from Version I stands:
How additional snowball mechanic would make late game more meaningful? To make it meaningful it is something quite opposite needed.
It is simply to finish it quicker so you can go to more meaningful early game quicker;)
 
So now that the hegemony bonuses tick down over time if the requirements are no longer met, you'll be able to weaken a hegemon by beating them at their own game (having more income than the economic one, since the requirements are now 1000 ducats AND the highest income, and so forth) but you'll still only be able to actually remove their hegemony (and claim it yourself) if you defeat them in a war? I think that, if a hegemon sits at 0 progress for long enough, they should also lose their hegemony that way. Say you set it to 5 years. So if an economic hegemon has reigned supreme for at least 20 years, then they'll have their bonuses maxed, and then if someone else comes and get's a higher income, and managed to maintain that higher income for 25 years, the old hegemon would be able to be stripped of their hegemony without requiring a war (this should naturally be provided as an alert for any existing hegemons, but I assume it already is)
 
This is why I'm planning to mod them to allow hegemonies to have access to tributaries regardless of their religion.

As a historical post-EU4 note regarding tributary and hegemony, Britain, while a naval hegemon and ruling an empire far larger than China at the time, in fact continued tributes to the Chinese empire from Burma when they took it over. What a rich irony. ;)

In 1886, after Britain took over Burma, they maintained the sending of tribute to China, putting themselves in a lower status than in their previous relations.[140] It was agreed in the Burmah convention in 1886 that China would recognize Britain's occupation of Upper Burmah while Britain continued the Burmese payment of tribute every ten years to Beijing.[141]
Source: "Qing" section from Wikipedia entry entitled "List of tributary states of China"
 
Kinda fairer with numbers, but i still don't think trade goods produced ( what does it means ? ) is fine bonus for economical hegemon. Military hegemon is definitely something for big empires, if that's what u were up to then i guess it's fine, it gives some little advatages with attrition and movement which is much better way than the recent proposition.
But still this is not very good concept, 1000 units is as easy to make as 500 infantry, it's not something to distinguish the Hegemon, no matter the numbers. I would rather use some different algorithms like army strength in Skanderbeg.
Goods produced is the best economic modifier in the game. It multiplies your production (more goods are produced) and your trade (produced goods add trade value).
 
If I were cynical i'd almost think the first dev diary was purposely made by paradox to eploit the anchoring cognitive bias.

Before posting in support of this new mechanic, do not compare it to its previous version, consider whether or not adding it would improve the current game.

1.30 RNGesus hates Florry is Groogy on discord for those who are not aware

Turns out my tinfoil hat conspiracy was right:
upload_2020-2-4_17-19-55.png
 
To add to the narrative aspect of the world wanting to resist the rise of any Hegemon, some sort of Hegemon specific coalition type would be good. Maybe any country can join a war against a hegemon.

Basically use the intervene in war thing great powers have, but for everyone. This would both add additional challenge for a Hegemon expanding, but at the same time can be a bonus in itself as if they win, more land will be up for the taking.
 
That's a considerable improvement and now it's something I might just find minimal enjoyment in using... in singleplayer. The whole system still feels extremely off for multiplayer. Hard blocks to alliances do not work. Please keep that in mind when adding more.
 
A strong sign from the team when they react to community feedback this fast and adapt the mechanics.
This makes me very hopeful for the european patch.
 
THIS is what a good game developer looks like. Johan announced a clunky mechanic that was good in theory, but the numbers and implementation were off. Instead of turtling up to criticism and plowing ahead anyways, he took the most constructive critiques and announced changes mere hours after the first dev diary went up. Johan, my hat is off to you :D

Military Hegemon
The Great Power with most Regiments, and at least 1000 Regiments can proclaim this Hegemony

The base bonus is 10% cheaper warscore cost, and the 100% power bonus is +20% Siege Ability

The scaling powers go up to.
+10% Faster Movement of Armies
-20% Less Attrition on land.
-3 Unrest
Beautiful. This is an excellent cleanup feature that will benefit the latter parts of WC runs to make them less tedious. ALL strategy games should have something like this.
 
As a historical post-EU4 note regarding tributary and hegemony, Britain, while a naval hegemon and ruling an empire far larger than China at the time, in fact continued tributes to the Chinese empire from Burma when they took it over. What a rich irony. ;)


Source: "Qing" section from Wikipedia entry entitled "List of tributary states of China"

Good point - I still want to do something akin to it based off US Monroe Doctrine, will give it more thought. :)