maybe it was more important from a marketing perspective.
- 6
- 1
EU4, No Mapchanges and Whys.
- 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.
please give ethiopia, mali, kongo a better military idea. and maybe you can give some other way for mali and songhai to get instiuition. they are completly trash in eu4 multiplayer game which is really sad to see a potential fun nation that are basically unplayable without using a mod.
- 15
- 1
- 1
Does this mean mods that change the map will no longer become outdated?
- 1
- 1
- 1
While I appreciate the support, I do not think vanilla should include that 1 for 1. It's a bloated suggestion, but the ideas I used can be still be used for vanilla (buffing Adal and Ajuuraan, etc.).
Johan, is there time to include any suggestions for renaming vanilla provinces, capitals, and dynamic province names for this update?
- 2
- 1
I think you could remove some provinces from North America and Australia and put these 6 provinces in the Nubian region.
- 19
- 2
- 2
I just hope south america can get a little love, now that west africa is being kinda sorted. That and Portugal NI @Johan
- 11
- 3
- 2
Game devs giving up on the game ever since emperor the only way to add useful and quality content to the game is modding now.
- 11
- 6
- 4
Im not angry but sad, knowing this I wish the native update in levisthan hadn't happened, and instead that been focused in africa and some tweaks across eurasia
But I'm grateful Johan has taken the time to properly explain this decision
I'll see if I'd still be motivated to keep getting the new dlc's
But I'm grateful Johan has taken the time to properly explain this decision
I'll see if I'd still be motivated to keep getting the new dlc's
- 19
- 2
- 1
Normally I don't post much but felt I wanted to come out in support of the devs. There's so many people aggressively complaining about the game that it's a bit uncomfortable to read the forums at times. I think the devs do a great job and basically none of us reading these forums have the knowledge of the issues working with and making changes in the game. If the devs say it's not a good idea to add more provinces to the map anymore, then it's just not a good idea. Acceot it or move on to another game.
So big props to the devs for hanging in there despite all the sour comments here. Looking forward to future content, whatever it may be!
So big props to the devs for hanging in there despite all the sour comments here. Looking forward to future content, whatever it may be!
- 24
- 13
- 3
That's a misconception on the player part. All "AI Improvement" mod on the workshop does not actually improve the AI. It's just a set of hidden buff and outright cheat that allow the AI to keep up, because there is no way for a modder to make the AI more competent at using vanilla systems.
- 9
- 3
- 1
So you're saying there is a room for performance improvement in case of engine rework? 5000 provinces in EU5?
- 7
Have you even seen what Xorme AI does? it literally makes the AI smarter at working and gives players a challenge.
It has cheats and non-cheats mode available. With AI cheats, its near impossible to do a 1 culture, without AI cheats, its still insanely hard to pull off (in fact, closest I've come in over a dozen runs in Xorme AI was 7 provinces short).
- 8
- 2
That's completely false, modders can tweak the AI prefence in buildings, debt repayment, forts placement, idea choices etc...
- 6
- 3
- 3
So performance worries werent a concern when you were adding 100 provinces Angolphone America, or dozens of tags to Oceania but now it is? Cant say i'm shocked after Golden Century focused only on Pirates and Texas instead of Spain and its colonies; it was at that point i stopped supporting the game. My expectations for EU4 were low but this is truly something else. Well, call me when EU5 is announced.
Massive threads were made in terms of research, which were either read and then promtply ignored, or just ignored. Paradox games fundamentally dont get Catholicism (still represented under the lens of Protestant propaganda) and Colonialism (portrayed always in the manner of the 13 colonies); EU4 in this case is no exception, albeit i still hold out some hope for Victoria III as their map actually has improvements over its prequel.
Oh, and remember when we were told the ''free time project'' focus on North America was not going to affect the game as a whole?
Massive threads were made in terms of research, which were either read and then promtply ignored, or just ignored. Paradox games fundamentally dont get Catholicism (still represented under the lens of Protestant propaganda) and Colonialism (portrayed always in the manner of the 13 colonies); EU4 in this case is no exception, albeit i still hold out some hope for Victoria III as their map actually has improvements over its prequel.
Oh, and remember when we were told the ''free time project'' focus on North America was not going to affect the game as a whole?
- 37
- 5
- 1
Now that we known the reasons for no more new provinces, I retrospectively wish that the NA rework in Leviathan had been less ambitious, the 50+ new tags and provinces created for NA should have been more well distributed between North America, South America and Sub-Saharan Africa.
But I suppose that it is too late now.
Even if no more new provinces will be created I hope that something like new tags can be created for South America outside of Andes. The current emptiness of the region make it the most unfun place of the world to start a game. In last case scenario, some NA tags could be removed and substituted for some SA tags if it is really necessary.
But I suppose that it is too late now.
Even if no more new provinces will be created I hope that something like new tags can be created for South America outside of Andes. The current emptiness of the region make it the most unfun place of the world to start a game. In last case scenario, some NA tags could be removed and substituted for some SA tags if it is really necessary.
- 17
- 4
- 1
Since most of the areas that lack province density had few clearly defined borders anyway is it possible to model different tribes within one country as different estates with eligibility bound to owning specific provinces? This would allow to represent the vatiety and density better without needing new systems at all. Of course for that system to be worth the effort a quite big workload is needed but it would also play into one of the weakest points of eu4, country management. (I mean i would totally prefer estates being split up more anyway as a compromise towards vic style pops, basically having moltiple nobility estates regarding culture (group), multiple burgher estates regarding tradenodes and one clergy estate for each religion, but that is likely way too much work to design priviliges, agendas and desasters to work in a local way. Although it would model the issues of big empires way better)
- 4
- 2
Oh, and remember when we were told the ''free time project'' focus on North America was not going to affect the game as a whole?
I have negative hopes for anything produced/directed by Johan at this point in time. I'll be extremely cautious of anything that has his name from now on, and it ill take a long time with good results to bring back my faith in him.
- 8
- 6
- 3
Well, I’m very glad that the borders of New Zealand’s South Island got rearranged before “no map changes” was announced, they had been bothering me since at least EU3!
I think this is a good call overall, the density of provinces was beginning to get ludicrous.
I would really like to get assurance that the team are bearing this in mind going into EUV, though. Expansions of the map into central Africa and Oceania were not a good use of the provinces which have turned out to be (and which, realistically, it’s always been clear they were) a finite resource. I hope the team will bear this in mind and develop a future-looking plan for EUV to ensure that 30 provinces don’t get squandered on irrelevant areas like Oceania, Katanga, and deepest Brazil.
More is not always better!
I think this is a good call overall, the density of provinces was beginning to get ludicrous.
I would really like to get assurance that the team are bearing this in mind going into EUV, though. Expansions of the map into central Africa and Oceania were not a good use of the provinces which have turned out to be (and which, realistically, it’s always been clear they were) a finite resource. I hope the team will bear this in mind and develop a future-looking plan for EUV to ensure that 30 provinces don’t get squandered on irrelevant areas like Oceania, Katanga, and deepest Brazil.
More is not always better!
- 20
- 3
The notion that Brazil is anywhere the same level of relevance for the timeframe as Katanga or Oceania is exactly the kind of anglocentrism mentioned earlier in the thread. South America was the source of the wealth of Europe in the modern era, but still hass less tags than a continent not even fully explored by europeans in the timeframe.
- 21
- 18
- 4