EU4 - Development Diary - 7th of September 2021

[Scross93]

That is the reason why this game is always bugged and needs 5 patches to be playable after DLC. Developers don't know their game and how to play in it. Leviathan was complete ruin and PE debuff for Gold is just a proof of that you don't play it at all. I think you need Quality Manager or Beta Testers instead of testing DLCs on final client.

 

[TheSleep3r]

[...]

So far, the big talking points I have seen raised here are;
- Discontent regarding the freeze on map changes
- Concern about the impact of the final mission for Mali (it goes too far and is too severe).
- Highlighted privilege is too powerful - especially combined with virtually unlimited gold mine development and no depletion
- Goods Produced, not Production Efficiency modifier
- Want more bugs fixed / balance changes first
- People want Scandinavia / South America (this was already heard loud and clear from our Twitter poll)

[...]

It's amazing you'll be presenting this list to the devs. I can't stress enough the fact that the game has huge, absolutely enormous balance problems that also result in content being effectively cut. Zaporozhe, for example, is effectively impossible to appear on its own, while it has some very interesting mechanics; same with AI Persia or Prussia. I would love if the devs were aware of the fact that fixing the old, broken content, actually creates content without the work of the artists and designers - it already exists, but the game, in its sorry state, does not use it. If EU4 had a big update that focuses on such forgotten problems, as well as usual bugs and balance problems that make it ridiculous (110 dev provinces galore, for example), then we could start admitting it could be well on its way to a healthy state.

 

[Thorum]

I was expecting a DD that would give us actually useful information like when bug fixes would come out.

Why ? They gave exactly what was promised in the DD two weeks ago, and the answer to your question is in that DD (aka, the quantity of bugs is lower than it "ever" was in current version of 1.31, and will be lowered even further in 1.32 which should arrive before the end of the year).

 

[Pavía]

Hello everyone, back from summertime! I'll be addressing some of your concerns, although I'm 100% with what @Mordred Viking already said, and @Ogele will probably answer some other questions about the mission tree on the next few days.

Is this content pack free? Is solving the disaster going to be locked behind a paid DLC mission tree like in Leviathan?

We will be delivering a big bugfixing and balancing patch in the next version of the game. As Johan already stated, we won't add more new features until we're OK with the state of the game. The new paid content is, then, standalone, as we want to add more flavor to Sub-Saharan Africa, but trying not to affect the core systems of the game until we're OK with the fixing on them.

I mean obviously being rude isn't warranted, but I think people have genuine issues with this company since they keep saying they listen to their players and want to improve the quality of patches but we just don't see that actually happening. And saying there won't be any new provinces is pretty big, since most of the new provinces added in previous patches were high quality and justified and imo was the best thing about both Emperor and Leviathan.

A lot of my friends have quit eu4 lately because of how the latest patches have went, and a lot more will probably quit in the future too if there aren't changes in how paradox releases patches and the quality of them. If people are left with a bad taste from eu4 they are far less likely to purchase other paradox games like vicky 3 as well.

Are people REALLY complaining about that or about bugs and OP game breaking features like concentrating dev? Even merging few provinces in NA and adding some to scandinavia will be much better decision. I am sure most players will handle this last suffering with broken saves if they know why.

We're actually reading and listening to the community, and trying to address all the issues commented. We'll disclose some of the fixes done for the next patch in the next few weeks, as those on Concentrate Development (which, again, Johan already mentioned). Just stay tuned, and keep on with suggestions and bug reporting on your behalf.

Now i agree with the sentiment that some wording here are too harsh, but this part, this part here is just straight up dishonest. For the last years we were presented unchangeable facts in dev diaries. Only questions were answered, concerns never adressed in the same diary. Only when one issue persists through 4-5 diaries we get a "it is too late to change now" comment. The ONLY time in the last years where balance numbers were adressed after community outrage that happened before a release and not in a later patch was the whole desaster where we were presented with intentionally absurd numbers just to manifacture the feeling that we are heard (the evidence of devs admitting to that is still on this forum afaik).

Dev diaries pre release are only here for marketing reasons. Period. You did not listen so far. Community feedback was never implemented before releasing the update since at least rule britannia.

Now either you did a full 180 on your policy after leviathan, which would be appropriate, or you are being intentionally dishonest here.

We're reading feedback, and we'll continue doing that in the next few weeks. As an example, we took into account the community when adding new monuments in 1.31.5, including number balancing for them. And we'll take into account the feedback you gave to us in this DD, and in the following ones regarding new missions trees. Although it's true that a bit less harsh wording would be very welcome.

That is the reason why this game is always bugged and needs 5 patches to be playable after DLC. Developers don't know their game and how to play in it. Leviathan was complete ruin and PE debuff for Gold is just a proof of that you don't play it at all. I think you need Quality Manager or Beta Testers instead of testing DLCs on final client.

We play the game each week to test things and find bugs and issues, both in SP and MP, and even some of us do that in our free time. We're also supported by a QA team, that also play and know the game as well as us. But you've got to take into account that: a) People does mistakes. b) This is early access content, so it's in need of further reviewing and balancing. In this case, about the Production Efficiency/Goods Produced for Gold, it's easy to forget it when you're scripting so much different things. What goes on then is further testing, and QA assistance, so this can be fixed in time. Then, take this kind of things as an opportunity to help us devs with what we're working on, and to try to improve the new content.

 

[voyager25]

Why ? They gave exactly what was promised in the DD two weeks ago, and the answer to your question is in that DD (aka, the quantity of bugs is lower than it "ever" was in current version of 1.31, and will be lowered even further in 1.32 which should arrive before the end of the year).

The problem is that while the number of bugs are lower than they ever were, it's the same for replay-ability of the game - it's lower than it ever was. The major issue is that they are handling it in the wrong way - They are providing content for regions which are not often played (see their own data). They create a DLC, earn a few bucks and then move on, but in the long run is it worth it for a player. I'd love to play as Mali and give it a shot to alter history, BUT how many Mali or Tupinamba runs are you gonna have as a player? Compared to the top ten playable nations, in more fun regions.

The game is 8 years old and most players find it difficult to play past 150 years in a single campaign. It's better to address this kind of stagnation and rework already provided content. For example Indian sultanates already have a government providing tolerance of heathens, yet many of their NIs do the same. Missions of already existing nations can be addressed again - Ottomans, Byzantium etc.

I know this is the first dev diary in a new series and maybe we'll have more addressing Scandinavia (which I rooted for) and South America. However, I don't see the any seriousness from Paradox in addressing the replayability issues. They're on the path to providing just woke and gimmicky content. Look recently at Siam's overpowered ideas. How SEA navies can beat the crap out of any invading power with their NIs. It's great that Siam can now conquer Europe but historical imbalance is getting terrible.
Already the AI is incapable of effective Maritime invasion but with all these populist buffs, they make it even worse. You can expect Europeans to show up in NA or SA but I haven't played a recent game in two years in which a Colonial power invaded Asia successfully in a 1444-1492 starting run. The old 'Westernization' mechanic was bad but nowhere as bad as things are now. All we need now are more superpowers across the world to ruin game play .

Immersive game play and replayability must be maintained by Paradox.

 

[Atomcreator]

I'd like to be able to colonise in North America again. And to see the ai do it. A little tired of seeing the thirteen colonies form in Florida.

 

[The Norman Yoke]

'I want EUV with West Africa flavour! EU4 getting West Africa flavour is bad!'

1: You REALLY think a vanillia EUV would have more for West Africa than EU4 does now? Really? You think new stuff for West Africa in launch EU4 would take priority over Europe and the Middle East? Or colonial nations? Or even Asia? If you acually think this... please look at reality.

2: Why is it bad a region you apparently want to play in is getting content at all? Surely if you want to play in the region, you should be thankful for something over nothing?

3: Of all the regions in a potential EUV you'd be excited to play first... it's Sub-Saharan Africa? Really? I seriously doubt this.

4: EU4 Development is now handled by the Tinto studio. You realize the main studio could be working on a potential EUV separately? Without effecting the development of this update?

5: An announcement of a West Africa update over EUV is worse than a literally non-functional update launch? You... might want to lower the hyperbole.

It's one thing to say 'I want EUV'. It's another to spew contradictory nonsense to pan an update to EU4 just because it's not EUV.

1. Did you see how cack handed the CRUSADER Kings 3 launch was with where they focused on new province density? Whilst forgetting to put flavour in basically everywhere
2. Because mansa musa richest man in world xddddd meme mission trees are useless, especially if theyll be no map updates
4. I hope this is the case considering tintos recent succcesses, or lack therof
5. Announcement of no map updates is worse than leviathan which gave some map updates yes

 

[Thorum]

The problem is th...

My question is more why a repeat of the reply from last DD should be expected, not that I want the complaints that were repeated plenty there to be rehashed again

1. Did you see how cack handed the CRUSADER Kings 3 launch was with where they focused on new province density? Whilst forgetting to put flavour in basically everywhere
2. Because mansa musa richest man in world xddddd meme mission trees are useless, especially if theyll be no map updates
4. I hope this is the case considering tintos recent succcesses, or lack therof
5. Announcement of no map updates is worse than leviathan which gave some map updates yes

So basically you want, in order, "more flavor", "less flavor", "less bugs" and "more bugs". Good luck, mordred

 

[currylambchop]

Why ? They gave exactly what was promised in the DD two weeks ago, and the answer to your question is in that DD (aka, the quantity of bugs is lower than it "ever" was in current version of 1.31, and will be lowered even further in 1.32 which should arrive before the end of the year).

‘Before the end of the year’ is a massive window, and some bugs are urgent enough to warrant a hotfix.

 

[Bshepp]

Now that the DLC will focus on Africa, can we finally get mechanics and flavor for judaism. Its only 2 provinces are in Africa and it is the last religion except animist with no mechanics whatsoever.

 

[MrSnert]

I've written a couple of 'fan dev diaries' last year on an upcoming West Africa update (here's the one on Mali), so needless to say I was very excited to see it was coming!

And don't get me wrong, I'm very glad to see it's getting some attention. I've proposed mission trees, new tags and formables along with national ideas, new estates, cults and government types, global modifiers and mechanics that mimic the slave-trade and the Fulani migrations, but honestly I would have been happy with a West Africa Flavour Pack that would just add some provinces, some tags and some missions. But even that now seems like it might have been to much to have wished for. Here are my concerns:

There's my old pet peeve of us having to pay for missions -a mechanic that we were robbed of and have since paid for many times over. There's the power inflation of nations through insane mission modifiers and other seemingly meme-y stuff, in every region that sees an update, further unbalancing the game. But mainly, I have a gripe with the fact that no map changes will be implemented. Without new provinces and new tags,, I am not certain what we're left with except for some overpowered mission trees, a mechanic that has now been brutally financially milked.

But more importantly:

West Africa was a rich, diverse and dynamic region that was integrally connected to the world of EU4 and the current map simply does not do it justice (which I describe in more detail in the intro to my posts). It means we won't see the diversity of Hausa city-states that could have made Hausaland an interesting region to play in and Hausa a desirable formable. It means we won't see the historical abbaration of Macina gone (as confirmed by the ss in the dd). It means countless diverse trade goods that could have made an appearance in the region to more accurately portray its wealth, won't show up.

What follows may sound a bit heavyhanded, but having extensivelly researched African history and having tried to share its richness and awesomeness with this community and developers, this is the feeling I'm left with. It feels altogether wrong, from a game-development but even on a moral level, that the whole worldmap has now reached a certain level of detail except for South America and Sub-Saharan African, and that the global south remains woefully underdeveloped both in its representation on the map as in a very real level within the game.

 

[Teutonic_Knight_2000]

@Ogele @Pavía


How many Dev Diaries do you expect for this Content Pack?

Hopefully this update would add new provinces for all of Africa (and reduce non-colonized areas).

 

[RussiabaII]

Damn this is quite what I have wanted! wish I knew about West African History though.

 

[Teutonic_Knight_2000]

@Pavía

Can we count on a greater number of provinces in Silesia, Pomerania, the Baltic countries (especially Prussia) and Scandinavia?

It would be good if European countries also received new mission trees - not only generic ones. For example, Poland has a small and boring mission tree.

I hope that Baltic Sea and Carpathians + Silesia will receive some love.

 

[The Norman Yoke]

My question is more why a repeat of the reply from last DD should be expected, not that I want the complaints that were repeated plenty there to be rehashed again


So basically you want, in order, "more flavor", "less flavor", "less bugs" and "more bugs". Good luck, mordred

In order
Crusader kings shouldve focused on christendom and dar al islam, not over 9000 counties in sub saharan africa which never interact with the north or tibet which rarely if ever unifies

Less stupid meme trees more actual flavour and mechanics, have mechanics for the spawn of new tribes like the fulo, funji and ashanti beyond just the simple events, have them interactable with the player like how you can cause pirates to spawn then tag switch to them. Have African empires hard to keep unified and have diseases more accurately represented, so we can't have megalith metropolises in Africa due to pillage capital before the 19th century advances in medicine. They said theres a change to pillage on the way, hopefully it will be better than the current situation, but seeing as mali will get a gold privliege stopping gold mines depleting, i doubt we'll see african cities lose dev via events. High attrition for non african tech groups in African provinces would be nice, as would more expensive horses in african kingdoms

Paradox ck2 devs randomly had Macedonia be non owned in one patch, but their track record whilst ive been playing eu4 is far better than tintos brief reign

How many bugs come from map updates? New provinces always get new province IDs, so normally only a concern for modders. The rhade and other stateless society having switched localisations is the one time I've seen that

 

[The Norman Yoke]

@Pavía

Can we count on a greater number of provinces in Silesia, Pomerania, the Baltic countries (especially Prussia) and Scandinavia?

It would be good if European countries also received new mission trees - not only generic ones. For example, Poland has a small and boring mission tree.

I hope that Baltic Sea and Carpathians + Silesia will receive some love.

Johan said no new provinces, silesia got a recent map update in fairness.
Poland has a decent mission tree and can vassalise danzig for free

 

[Borgratz]

In my opinion sentences like "The most right side of the tree is the one you will focus the most in the early game" should trigger some sort of reflexiv "oh crap" when designing a mission tree.

There should not be objectively correct sides to tackle first in these trees. They are supposed to give newer players a hand in chosing what to do and more experienced players a way to play a tag again in a different style. Both of those positive effects are canceled out, when you give the player "wrong" (and in this case probably game ending?) choices to pick first.

 

[The Norman Yoke]

In my opinion sentences like "The most right side of the tree is the one you will focus the most in the early game" should trigger some sort of reflexiv "oh crap" when designing a mission tree.

There should not be objectively correct sides to tackle first in these trees. They are supposed to give newer players a hand in chosing what to do and more experienced players a way to play a tag again in a different style. Both of those positive effects are canceled out, when you give the player "wrong" (and in this case probably game ending?) choices to pick first.

Mission trees have various placements, some have all economic on one side, some have diplomacy another. Spain has the left as your main one to focus on with the right being periphery until you get the iberian wedding. England has the right as your main one whilst you finish up in France

 

[AirikrStrife]

Now that the DLC will focus on Africa, can we finally get mechanics and flavor for judaism. Its only 2 provinces are in Africa and it is the last religion except animist with no mechanics whatsoever.

I don't know if religions are counted as mechanic and they won't do that in coming patches

 

[Balesir]

I'm curious how this mission tree handles the Malian relations with the forest kingdoms to the south of the sahel that were the source of the gold that Mali traded to the Arab empires north of the Sahara? The European exploration south of Cape Bojador and the subsequent trade directly between these gold-producing kingdoms was a huge feature in the development of the Atlantic economic area and the subsequent trade in enslaved persons. It was a huge issue for the states of the sahel to deal with - Prof Toby Green has written a good account of the history of the period, available here, covering the whole of West and West-Central Africa. Looking at the tree here, it looks as if Mali is assumed to have control of the gold mines, which it never really did (the money was made from tribute from the gold-producing kingdoms and total control of the trade north).

The 'create inflation to crash an economy' thing is fascinating. It's actually pretty much what the European powers did to the West African states through massive imports of their currencies of cloth, iron and shells (using gold as a currency isn't actually very clever when the stuff can be panned from rivers and streams!) The African gold kingdoms acting in unison could quite possibly have done the same to Europe, however.