Does someone know what the devs changed exactly? Was it just a change of numbers in the defines or did it go beyond that?
New Concentrate Dev is now Mostly Useless
- Thread starter lambda x.x
- 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.
It now buys development on province mana costs instead of simply transfering it. If it is above the cost, the button is grey-out. It is defenitely not a simple defines change.
Imagine in real life a country concentrating development. That'd be ridiculous.
- 2
Thus far I can see subtle differences in the defines values:
For 1.31 NGovernment:
CONCENTRATE_DEVELOPMENT_CAPITAL_PROPORTION = 0.5,
CONCENTRATE_DEVELOPMENT_OTHER_STATE_PROVINCES_PROPORTION = 0.3,
FREE_CONCENTRATE_DEVELOPMENT_CAPITAL_PROPORTION = 0.7,
FREE_CONCENTRATE_DEVELOPMENT_OTHER_STATE_PROVINCES_PROPORTION = 0.3,
For 1.32 NGovernment:
CONCENTRATE_DEVELOPMENT_CAPITAL_PROPORTION = 0.8,
DEVASTATION_PER_DEV_STOLEN = 5,
FREE_CONCENTRATE_DEVELOPMENT_CAPITAL_PROPORTION = 1,
FREE_CONCENTRATE_DEVELOPMENT_OTHER_STATE_PROVINCES_PROPORTION = 0,
For 1.31 NGovernment:
CONCENTRATE_DEVELOPMENT_CAPITAL_PROPORTION = 0.5,
CONCENTRATE_DEVELOPMENT_OTHER_STATE_PROVINCES_PROPORTION = 0.3,
FREE_CONCENTRATE_DEVELOPMENT_CAPITAL_PROPORTION = 0.7,
FREE_CONCENTRATE_DEVELOPMENT_OTHER_STATE_PROVINCES_PROPORTION = 0.3,
For 1.32 NGovernment:
CONCENTRATE_DEVELOPMENT_CAPITAL_PROPORTION = 0.8,
DEVASTATION_PER_DEV_STOLEN = 5,
FREE_CONCENTRATE_DEVELOPMENT_CAPITAL_PROPORTION = 1,
FREE_CONCENTRATE_DEVELOPMENT_OTHER_STATE_PROVINCES_PROPORTION = 0,
- 1
Hehe. Chinese government concentraing development in areas where there would be no development under any other economic or human circumstances.
Or Arab monarchies doing the same in an even more extreme way.
- 1
Or the Soviets taking everything that literally wasn't set in concrete from Eastern Europe after they've 'liberated' it.
- 2
- 1
I wonder if PDX hardcoded the way the pillaging algorithm works. Meaning modders can't alter or revert the cocentrate dev to the 1.31 state. Sad for the people that paid for this DLC.
- 3
I agree. I bought each and every DLC so far (except sunset invasion, which just seemed too annoying) not the least in order to subsidize a company that creates excellent strategy games. After the last 2 expansions I am not so sure any more. Playing native Americans? No fun at all. Leviathan seemed to have an excellent expansion of game mechanics, like playing Tuscany an getting away with it, only to have the whole thing nullified. I don't consider myself greedy, but for fairness' sake the money should be reimbursed. They sold us something, then took it away ... not ok.
- 1
- 1
While I agree that this practice is not okay, it confuses me that you seem to believe it's new to the last two patches, as opposed to something we have observed on and off since game release.
As early as art of war, we were sold the ability to transfer occupation of provinces to subjects. But this only happened after they removed the ability to sell provinces to subjects for 0 gold. Selling something very strong in DLC then nerfing it later is also something that dates back to early in EU 4 development cycle.
None of that makes me happy about effectively patching concentrate development out of the game, but I don't see how this is particularly different (in design philosophy) from having the ability to take land in trade wars removed, for example.
- 3
- 1
- 1
I repeat my question: did you want it to become a Raze button that does nothing? Literally what would you gain from it?
- 1
You can boost stability even when it's a waste of mana. You can take out loans for no reason whatsoever. You can (by design!) maliciously pillage a capital. Arbitrarily, you cannot concentrate development to no increase in cap size.
Compared to numerous options in the game, a "raze button without mana" (which is also constrained by state, so dictates peace deal patterns a little) is more useful. You use less governing capacity on questionable land, have less immediate OE, and spend less mana to core it. Having it still gives value (especially production value) and still improves trade power situation etc, so the alternative of not taking the land is inferior as well.
I was on board with nerfing its ability to create hundreds-to-thousands of development capitals. I am not on board with effectively patching a paid DLC feature out of the game.
- 2
As I said, things like progress bar or moving to another stated province seems to make a lot more sense with the deleted dev.
- 4
Honestly, it was blindingly obvious from the moment that they announced dev concentration that it was a) horribly overpowered and b) going to be nerfed into the ground in the next patch. Anyone who bought the game with it in mind was always going to get screwed.
- 1
Is it till in the game? Yes
Is it still usable for at least some stretch of time? Again, yes.
Therefor it has not been functionally removed from the game. It has just been made significantly less powerful than it was before, i.e. nerfed into the ground.
- 3
- 2
It would make quite a bit of sense to treat Concentrate Development like Pillage, i.e. you can still use it even if it doesn't increase dev in your capital, as a raze button without monarch power gain.
That would be simpler than a progress bar or choosing the target province, and it would give a situational use to the feature.
The fact that this is not a feature for "tall" play at all remains, but that can hardly be fixed without entirely redesigning it.
That would be simpler than a progress bar or choosing the target province, and it would give a situational use to the feature.
The fact that this is not a feature for "tall" play at all remains, but that can hardly be fixed without entirely redesigning it.
I really disliked Concentrate Development on a conceptual basis, but i am sad to see Pillage Capital be weakened so much. I think it would be better to let the dev from pillaging be spread around your own+accepted culture land, instead of insisting it should go to your capital. The mana conversion stuff could even work, if only it got spread out so it wouldn't all get pressed through a giant Dev Cost modifier.
- 2
That's somewhat true, yes, although it's a somewhat arbitrary distinction, as others have pointed out, and Paradox have history with making this kind of nerf (see: Expel Minorities). It's also not immediately obvious how you would fix it, although there are some good ideas floating around.
However, their intention for the mechanic was to boost tall play, whereas the fundamental principle of a mechanic to transfer development from low-value provinces to high-value ones inherently favours wide players, since wide players generally have far more of such provinces due to spending more resources on acquiring new land and fewer resources on improving their existing land. So, given that their intentions are inherently opposed to the actual utility of the mechanic, it was always going to be nerfed to the point of almost total uselessness.
They could do that, yes, but then it would only be useful for people seeking to do world conquest runs and other achievements that are primarily constrained by the ability to conquer and core land quickly (e.g. the "Heir to Timur" achievement). Which is the exact opposite of the intended use, and certainly not something they have any particular desire to encourage. Especially since it would act as a "noob trap" for other players, who would press it expecting it to do something useful and then find that all they'd done was reduce their development.
Last edited:
I said this when the change was announced; it's going to be taken from being crazy OP to completely irrelevant. It's just a side effect of a mechanic being introduced that really had no business being in the game at all, from the beginning. That said, I prefer it now. I hated that it was almost always suboptimal to not create some ghoulish hellscape where all land existed solely to feed a megacity that could be a Great Power in its own right if released with a single province.
- 3
- 1